`I am a man of the grassroots and I know what the grassroots feel." The Rev Ian Paisley, wearing what looked like a baby's floppy sun-bonnet and white trousers which showed off his ample girth to advantage, had a familiar message.
He was speaking, however, in a distinctly unfamiliar setting, on a hot and sweaty missionary journey through Cameroon. Later, with tropical rain lashing down and insects battering themselves to death against his face and spectacles, the Big Man preached the Bible to thunderous applause.
Dr Paisley, I presume?, Jon Ronson's documentary shown on Channel Four this week, was a gem. It was also very timely. The young Jewish reporter, to whom the DUP leader referred throughout as "the Israelite", was allowed to accompany his subject on condition he didn't mention the Stormont peace talks. But he gave us a portrait of Paisley - compassionate pastor, committed Christian, hugely charismatic preacher - which most of us who have been around the North for any length of time tend to forget.
This programme showed, better than anything filmed in Northern Ireland could have done, why it would be extremely foolish to write off the DUP leader as a political dinosaur. His own followers trust him in a way that no other politician in the North can touch. Questions like "What alternative does he have to the Belfast agreement?" are, quite simply, irrelevant. Paisley's supporters believe that God will provide, to save Ulster as He has done in the past. But the most worrying finding to emerge from the opinion polls is the high percentage of unionist voters who describe themselves as "Don't Knows". They include politicians, churchgoers, and ordinary people who are confused by the different messages on offer.
A recent poll showed that while 70 per cent of DUP voters are opposed to the agreement, 40 per cent of UUP voters are still undecided. David Trimble has spoken of the dangers that lie ahead if the agreement is carried with only a minority from the unionist community voting in favour.
Is there anything the Government of this State can do, even at this late stage, to try to persuade these doubting unionists that the best hope of achieving a secure peace lies in a strong endorsement of the accord. I think there is.
The first, which should be obvious, is for the Government to be seen to campaign vigorously for a Yes vote. As yet, there is very little sign of this happening. A straw poll conducted in the Irish Times office yielded not one single person who had yet received a copy of the agreement at home. One man had made several trips to the local post office without success. Another step towards persuading unionists that people living in this State take parity of esteem seriously would be for politicians and others to think more carefully about how their words and speeches play with both communities in the North. The statement that anyone who is charged and convicted of the murder of Garda Jerry McCabe will be made to serve out his sentence has caused enormous offence to unionists. What they have understood, naturally enough, is that people in this State see it as all right to release a prisoner who has murdered a member of the RUC, because a Northern Irish policeman is a "legitimate target", while a garda iochana is not.
Talking to unionist friends in recent weeks I`ve been very struck by what elements in the agreement they seem to find most objectionable. The large constitutional issues, which loomed so large in the run-up to the deal on Good Friday, seem much less important now. What sticks in the collective unionist craw is another whole set of issues. Some of these will only be eased by time and a gradual process of reconciliation, but there are others where it might be possible to take steps to soften the situation now.
The issue which comes up most frequently as offensive to unionists is the "Gerry Adams in government" shriek, followed closely by the "Gerry Adams in government without any prior decommissioning of IRA weapons". Decommissioning is clearly going to be a problem further down the road, and one can only hope that officials in both governments are working out ways to resolve it sooner rather than later.
Another issue currently causing great anger and heartache is the early release of paramilitary prisoners. Most nationalists, in both parts of Ireland, see this as a problem to be dealt with on a pragmatic basis. The release of prisoners is accepted as an important step towards securing the peace.
But for many unionists, including those who support Dr Paisley, this is a moral issue. They regard convicted prisoners, loyalists as well as republicans, as criminals who should be punished for their heinous crimes against society. In this context the arguments about the killers of Garda McCabe are seen as further evidence of the duplicity that characterises the attitudes of people in the South to Northern Ireland.
There is one area in which the Government of this State might take steps, through persuasion, to reassure Northern unionists that there are immediate benefits from making the agreement work. That is the Orange marches. Both sides are fearful that the marching season this year will be as ugly as in recent years, if not more so.
The debacle over the publication of the Parades Commission report has fuelled suspicions that nobody has a clue as to how to avoid this. The Orange Order has already sought an urgent meeting with Tony Blair to discuss the issue. How they fare will go a long way to determine what recommendation they make to their members on how to vote on the agreement.
But this is one issue where the Government of this State could reasonably seek to influence the nationalist community in its thinking. Last year the Orange Order took a courageous decision to pull back from full-scale confrontation over the most contentious parades, thus averting the threat of widespread violence. Many of its members feel that they got very little thanks for their pains, that the decision was interpreted by nationalists as weakness. It's been noticeable how many prominent Orangemen, among them clergymen and others who helped to broker last year's detente, have grave reservations about the agreement. It might help them to look at the Belfast agreement in a much more positive way if they knew that this year the nationalist community would be prepared to adopt a more conciliatory attitude towards difficult marches. That would probably need Gerry Adams and others in Sinn Fein to take on the issue with residents' groups. And for that reason, looked at realistically, it probably won't happen. But we have seen wonders unfold in recent weeks and must hope for more.