FEEDING frenzy in the cage that surrounds the multi party peace talks at Stormont begins punctually in the half hour preceding the transmission times of national news broadcasts on the main television networks.

It is a delicately timed and carefully controlled ritual, each party approaching the gates of the cage in turn to ingest its nourishing soundbite sandwiches.

Occasionally, the unwritten rules of the ritual break down - as when the DUP's Willie McCrea earlier this week approached the feed bowl at the same time as the UUP's David Trimble and there was a certain loss of dignity in front of the cameras.

But mostly the parties restrain themselves for the sake of image and order. They either discreetly eye from a distance the portions of air time being dished out to their opponents, or send a single scout to hover on the fringes and eavesdrop for useful tidbits.

The media, excluded from the talks venue, are constantly starved of information and must attempt to assuage their hunger every time a cage denizen approaches the gates. This can make for an unseemly scramble. The dining is a hurried hand to mouth (or rather mouth to camera) affair.

This extraordinary arrangement not only flouts the confidentiality rules of the talks in cavalier fashion but also draws the media into the party in fighting and rivalry that surrounds the proceedings inside the cage.

It is not conducive to the task of assembling a coherent picture for the public on what is happening at the talks. For example, a Democratic Unionist Party or UK Unionist spokesman emerges and gives one version of what is going on then an Ulster Unionist Party spokesman comes out to give a contrary account; someone else brings out the electrifying information that most of the delegates inside are lounging around watching the football.

The ground rules for negotiations set out in the British government's Command Paper specify that the participants "will maintain confidentiality on all aspects of the negotiations except where they may from time to time agree to publicity".

Nobody appears to feel bound by this stipulation, except perhaps the Minister for Political Development, Michael Ancram. He agreed to an interview at the gates when departing one evening this week. But when the questions became too probing he said: "I'm going to respect the confidentiality of this process."

So what is actually happening, beneath the surface veneer of a wrangle about procedures? The fringe loyalist parties are in no doubt: they see the essence of this long drawn out preliminary wrangle as a struggle for the very survival of the talks as a viable process.

"I think some unionists are trying to remove sensible power from an objective chairman into their own hands - and of course those hands are hardly objective," said one loyalist source.

The loyalist parties believe that only somebody like Senator George Mitchell can bring a detached and objective approach to the vital and emotive decommissioning issue, and thereby perhaps prevent it sinking the whole process.

"Unless we can have some sense of objectivity and some sense of commonsense in moving forward - which hopefully an independent chairman will be able to create - then I think we're doomed to failure," said one of their leading delegates.

They are gravely disturbed by the antics of Mr Robert McCartney of the UK Unionist Party who, they are convinced, is solely concerned with contriving the exclusion of the loyalists and the continued non inclusion of Sinn Fein - a recipe, they believe, for the failure of the peace talks and a return to war.

Loyalist delegates, not usually given to praise for the mainstream Unionists, say that it is Mr Trimble who has held the process together thus far. While the Paisleys and McCartneys are dominating the propaganda war outside, Trimble has beaten them hands down in the real battle inside.

Mr Trimble is happy that his laborious, fine combing of the procedural rules has kept the balance of control over these negotiations fairly divided, and he is happy to be judged on the outcome of his extended negotiations with the two governments.

He is also sanguine about the role of Senator Mitchell: "Mr Mitchell is a man of some character and integrity and independence, and is not the sort of person who is going to behave in the way the Irish Government, in particular, thought he was going to behave."

It appears, however, that this phase of "talks about talks" and procedural wrangling about procedures could be extended. The main players involved in it assert that it is important to take time to settle these basic rules before beginning to address real or "substantive" issues.

Unless a sense of urgency is maintained, however, events generated by the volatile political and security situation outside the Stormont cage could take over the initiative and push the tortuous negotiations into a stagnant backwater.