Yes or no answer looking unlikely

Thirteen days from today - that's the deadline for the DUP and Sinn Fein to sign up to the St Andrew's Agreement.

But will we get a firm answer? Don't count on it.

It's very clear that when the DUP say yes they might mean no. If the DUP does say yes - and it looks like the party will - then it will be a qualified, conditional yes, with lots of ifs and buts.

As another DUP figure put it, the answer will be "a signal of intent". So the DUP may promise political marriage with Sinn Fein but only if the partner changes their ways. Sinn Fein no doubt feels the same way.

Neither party wants to say no, and no one wants to get the blame for the deal going badly. Both Sinn Fein and the DUP suspect the other of playing for time.

The DUP will be hoping that the government will accept its conditional yes as a basis for moving forward - and will not therefore impose the threat of plan B.

Along with the other parties, the DUP and Sinn Fein have been deeply engaged in consultation.

Sinn Fein is considering whether it will sign up to policing.

The DUP has distributed a four page brochure seeking grassroots opinion on a deal it says is better than the Good Friday Agreement, but not quite perfect.

The DUP has suggested the St Andrews Agreement is still a work in progress and is demanding changes, including an end to mandatory coalition.

Sinn Fein is unlikely to agree to this a it would no doubt cut them out of future power-sharing coalitions.

The DUP's consultation questionnaire effectively asks grassroots supporters to put its faith in the party leadership to go forward with the St Andrew's Agreement in a bid to change it.

It's not quite a referendum. There's no anonymity with this poll: those ticking the box are asked to provide their name and address.

There have been several power-point presentation evenings this past week including one in Lurgan and one in Galgorm Manor.

Sources have spoken of robust exchanges.

Despite this, one member who attended the Ballymena meeting said the leadership was claiming majority yes votes being recorded from the consultation brochures handed out afterwards.

The source said: "The leadership tried to sell it as a as heavy majority in favour but the mood of the meeting didn't reflect that all."

It's also claimed that a long-standing DUP man made his position clear, with the words: "I am 100 per cent opposed to the St Andrew's Agreement and I will never accept Martin McGuinness in government."

When it was put to Peter Robinson on Inside Politics that several people at the Galgorm meeting said they would rather pay higher water charges than see Martin McGuinness in government, he did not deny it was said.

Instead, he agreed he felt the same way - but that was not the choice on offer.

His party's brochure sums up the choice: devolution with Sinn Fein or more Dublin involvement with perhaps Sinn Fein in the Irish government making decisions.

It is plausible that the DUP is getting big majorities ticking the Yes box, despite angry sentiments.

How many people go to union meetings bitterly complaining about management but vote for a pay deal on the basis they have little choice?

It is possible also that many people may be loathe to tick the no box with their name attached to the ballot.

What is notable is the strength of feeling in the DUP, and the factions that are emerging - with sharp remarks being made about "Trimble blow-ins".

Whether this internal friction is a temporary phenomenon or will lead to deep divisions is difficult to say.

Ian Paisley is a strong leader with remarkable powers of persuasion and his "trust me" approach may yet pay off.

But, as one philosopher once noted, it takes years to build up trust and just a little suspicion to erode it.

The DUP may be forced to put the brake on.

Some believe Jim Allister's publicly expressed concerns have done just that, just as Jeffrey Donaldson became a brake on David Trimble's devolution train.

Indeed, David Trimble and Sinn Fein argued for 18 months over who should jump first before devolution arrived in December 1999 post-Good Friday Agreement.

By the same calculation the March 26 2007 devolution deadline is looking optimistic.

David Trimble and the Ulster Unionist Party and the SDLP ended up the losers in that go-slow battle with Sinn Fein, which only got stronger.

The Ulster Unionist party were effectively "sinnered" - political speak for split, weakened, and demoralised.

With that in mind, the DUP will be treading carefully. It will have to calculate if it is better to play a long game or deliver a swift fait-accompli.

But like Trimble the DUP is putting the onus on Sinn Fein.

So the timeframe may now indeed be up to Gerry Adams. How concerned will he be about the DUP splitting?

Peter Robinson told Inside Politics this week that he would be surprised if there were shadow first and deputy first ministers in place by 24 November - blaming Sinn Fein for any delay.

The spat over the ministerial pledge on policing was initially dismissed by Peter Hain as a glitch, but the secretary of state sounded less confident about that this week when he spoke of potential for a crisis.