03/03/2017 Daily Politics

Theresa May tells Nicola Sturgeon, stop obsessing with independence

and focus on improving health and education in Scotland.

We'll hear from the Secretary of State for Scotland

and the SNP on the tussle over a second independence referendum.

Vote counting is underway in Northern Ireland in the snap

election called after the collapse of the power-sharing administration.

Plaid Cymru hold their spring conference in Newport,

with a call to "rebalance Wales" as we head for Brexit.

The party's leader, Leanne Wood, joins us live.

There are over a hundred of them in the UK government,

We've got the lowdown on what makes an effective government minister.

All that in the next hour, and with us for the whole

of the programme today, the Political Editor

of the Financial Times, George Parker, and Claire Fox

Let's kick off with the latest twist in the story of

Donald Trump's Attorney General, and conversations he had

with the Russian ambassador to Washington last year.

Yesterday Jeff Sessions announced he would excuse himself from an FBI

probe into alleged Russian meddling in the US election after mounting

pressure from all sides over allegations he'd lied on oath

about his contacts with Russian officials.

I have now decided to recuse myself from any existing or future

investigations of any matter relating in any way to the campaigns

Mr Sessions went on to describe the nature of his meeting

We talked a little bit about terrorism, as I recall.

And somehow the subject of the Ukraine came up.

I had had the Ukrainian ambassador in my office the day before

and to listen to him, Russia had done nothing

that was wrong in any area and everybody else was wrong

It got to be a little bit of a testy conversation at that point.

That is the US Attorney General under some pressure at the moment.

What exactly is wrong with him having met the Russian ambassador?

The context is everything, which is that it seems extraordinary that is

so much hysteria about the fact that somebody has met the Russian

ambassador and it would seem to be, that seems to be what diplomacy is

about but the context is a toxic, nasty, vicious atmosphere of almost

McCarthy read under the bed and the Russian sentiment. This time being

led by the left whereas McCarthy was on the right. And also it is not the

soviet Union, it is a different regime. But if you ever say you have

talked to anyone from Russia now in America, presumably you are a bad

guy will stop and it is not just that, the fact of the meeting but

the cover-up. It is always the cover-up that get you in American

politics and the fact that he appeared before Congress and said he

did not have them. He was asked a convoluted question, not a clear

question, in the cause of the campaign did you meet the Russian

ambassador? It was a more complicated... His answer was still

not convincing but it is open to nuance. He would have expected

questioned about his contact with the Russians and it would have

helped if he was frank and upfront about it but the question of perjury

which has a vision is a hard charge to make stick in America. -- which

has arisen. The cover-up is one thing but because the atmosphere is

so the pro in relation to this issue, the indication is that Putin

is pulling the strings of American politics which I think is the thing

which is dangerously conspiratorial and a very defensive way of trying

to explain why Tom got elected rather than the fact that he did

because he won the election -- white Trump got elected. Do you think it

is conspiratorial, you think the Russians were not hacking? I am sure

the Russians wanted to interfere in the political process but I think

that the reason why Donald Trump won is because, for example, Hillary

Clinton led the most uninspiring campaign. The issue is not if the

Russians were trying to interfere in the campaign, the intelligence

agencies are sure that they were, the toxic issue is if the

Republicans were complicit in this attempt to interfere. That is why

the Attorney General's, to put it lightly, nuanced answer to Alf

Rankin's question is now such a big issue. That is the trouble, he has

already lost his national security adviser. And Toulouse two... And

this is the tip of the iceberg because reducing himself might draw

a line under this for now but Congress had got their teeth into it

-- and to lose two. He has rightly said and others have said, he was on

the armed services committee and members that meet ambassadors, that

is what they do. We have a former Republican congressman saying that,

Senator Claire McCaskill has tweeted as well and she said that she hadn't

and then it turned out she had met several times with Russian

ambassadors. If you watched the performance of the Attorney General,

all of it, I would suggest it does not engender confidence. If doesn't

but not because of the relationship with the Russians. But you wonder

why he is Attorney General. That is a different point. There might be

queries about the statesman-like, judicious choices of the Trump

administration and if you want to talk about that, it's fine but doing

it all through the prism of this Russian question... The only reason

I refer to that, there is this idea that is being put about that the

Russians have also altered the result of the Brexit vote and we are

all being brainwashed. That is a bit of a stretch. I'm concerned there is

a broader thing which would mean that if anybody said to you in a

position of authority in America, have you ever met a Russian

ambassador, that you go, no, possibly... That is not healthy. The

French political elite is in no doubt they are trying to implement

the French presidential election. There are stories on the website of

Mr Macron that it has been hacked 4000 times. What would you expect

the Russian intelligence services to be doing? If there is an American

election where one of the candidates is pro-Russian in the case of Trump,

of course you try to include it and the same with the French elections,

Fillon is pro Russian. It is not just a straightforward, we like the

Russians, it doesn't even have depth in relation to Trump's relationship

with it, there is a big admiration, critical of Nato. We have to move

on, Mr Trump has treated in favour of it as general, probably in favour

of the reasons you give. We will see if it helps.

announced plans to recruit new staff with a tap on the shoulder

to try to help them avoid a workforce dominated by white,

or d) The Department for Exiting the European Union?

Or the BBC?! I just add about myself!

At the end of the show Claire and George will about

So, the Prime Minister, Theresa May, was in Glasgow this morning,

telling the Scottish Conservatives' spring conference that the SNP

should stop obsessing with independence and concentrate

on improving Scotland's public services.

The PM's speech comes as the First Minister of Scotland,

Nicola Sturgeon, continues to suggest she will demand a second

Earlier this week, Nicola Sturgeon said a second referendum would be

a "legitimate" and "almost necessary" step, unless Scotland

is able to secure its own special relationship with the EU.

She added that it would be a "gross betrayal" if Theresa May does not

devolve powers over fishing and farming that will be

repatriated to the UK as part of the Brexit process.

And in a newspaper article, she said that if there is a second

independence referendum, it will be the result of "sheer

intransigence" on behalf of the Conservative government.

And it's not just pro-independence politicians.

Tony Blair said in a speech last month that the case for Scottish

independence is now "much more credible" after the Brexit vote.

But the Scottish Conservative leader, Ruth Davidson,

accused the SNP and Nicola Sturgeon of manufacturing a "synthetic

And in her speech this morning, Theresa May has hit out at the SNP

She also said that public services in Scotland are being "neglected"

by the SNP government, because of their "obsession with

Here's some of what the Prime Minister had to say.

As Britain leaves the European Union and we forge a new role

for ourselves in the world, the strength and stability

of our union will become ever more important.

We must take this opportunity to bring our United Kingdom

Because the union which we all care about is not simply

It is a union of people, affections and loyalties.

It is characterised by sharing together as a country

the challenges which we all face, and freely pooling the resources

The existence of the union rests on some simple

but powerful principles - solidarity, unity, family.

The Secretary of State for Scotland, David Mundell, joins

Nicola Sturgeon says that you are showing intransigence in the UK

Government's attitude towards Scotland's relationship with Europe.

I know you have talked a lot but what policy concessions made to the

Scottish Government? We have been very clear with the Scottish

Government that we take the document they produced seriously and that is

why we are engaged in such detailed discussions with them all stop but

the Prime Minister, for example, when she made her Lancaster House

speech, highlighted the fact that education and research was one of

the issues that became a priority in her speech because of

representations that had been made from Scotland. As you know, that is

a really important area here in Scotland. So we are listening, we

want to engage with the Scottish Government, we want them to work

with us so that we can get the best possible deal for Scotland and the

whole of the UK as we leave the EU. You say you are listening, that you

are engaged with the Scottish Government so that we ask again, in

this process, what concessions have you made to the Scottish Government

in policy terms? It is not a case of making concessions, it is a case of

understanding the very large areas of common ground we already have in

terms of workers' rights, in terms of security and criminal justice

issues, and looking at what the end point that both sides want rather

than focusing on the means. The Scottish Government wants to the

access to the European single market, we want easy access... They

want to remain members... Let me just ask again... You are dancing

around this, you have listened and listened but you can't give me one

example in which you have acted, one example which you have met a policy

position of the Scottish Government. I think I said in my opening

remarks, Andrew, that education and research and the importance to be

placed on that in the European negotiations with a direct result of

representations made from Scotland. I have also set out areas like

workers' rights and criminal Justice and security where we are in

absolute agreement with the position that the Scottish Government has. We

are also clear that we both want to see businesses from Scotland trading

in the European single market, we both want to see people still being

able to come to Scotland to take up job opportunities here. It is just

how you go about doing that that is the important thing. So you would

not have made education and research a major priority in the negotiations

it had not been the Scottish Government? What we have recognised

is that it's a priority and vital area here in Scotland. One of the

areas where representation, of course we didn't need the Scottish

Government... So it's not a concession... What we wanted to do

was to work with them to take on broad issues and concerned that they

have raised and that is what officials are in a very detailed

dialogue. But do we believe that Scotland should have a separate and

different arrangement? No, we have not been convinced of that. We are

still open to that argument but we don't see the issues around access

to the market or migration as being a particularly Scottish issues,

these are issues that affect the whole of the UK and we believe that

still working on a United Kingdom -based is it the best way forward.

So let me get this clear, as things stand at the moment, you are not

minded to look at the possibility of Scotland remaining a member of the

single market as the rest of the UK leaves? Is that correct?

I don't see a basis in which Scotland can remain a member but I

see a basis in which Scotland can achieve the sort of access

businesses in Scotland want to that single market. That is what I think

ourselves and the Scottish Government should focus on. The S NP

manifesto, which won them the Scottish Parliamentary elections,

says, should there be significant and material change in

circumstances, which of course, the EU referendum was, we have the right

to hold another referendum. She says it's a cast iron man date. Why is

she wrong? I have always said there could be another independence

referendum. The debate and the argument is, should there be another

independence referendum? The people of Scotland are quite clear at this

time they do not want another divisive referendum. We had one less

than three years ago. It had a decisive outcome. What we need to do

is seek independence taken off the table at this time as we go forward

in the Brexit negotiations and ensure we work together to get the

best possible deal for Scotland and the whole of the UK. If the Scottish

Government does call for another referendum, what will the

Westminster government say? We know what the process is for a

referendum. There would have to be the equivalent of the previous

Edinburgh Agreement. That is not on the table. What proposition is not

on the table? Another referendum. The proposition for a request for

another referendum. It could be by the end of this month. Nicola

Sturgeon says it is very likely, very, very likely. What if that

happens? She has not made a formal approach to the UK Government. If

she does, what with the attitude of the British Gutmann B? Our attitude

is very clear. We do not think there should be another referendum. --

government be. You would say to the Scottish Government, it could not

have a second referendum? That is not what I said. You are perfectly

aware of that. As I said in my earlier remarks, that could be

another referendum between do not believe there should be. We will

continue to make the case there should not be won and Nicola

Sturgeon should not bring forward a case for another referendum. Things

may be moving on on this. We will find out from Nicola Sturgeon later

this month. What I want to ask you is this... If Nicola Sturgeon says

we will have a second referendum, would the Westminster government be

prepared to allow that to happen before the Brexit negotiations have

concluded? We are going to continue focusing our argument in line with

what the people of Scotland want. That is the independence issue is

taken off the table and we are not subjected to a request for another

independence referendum. That is an interesting answer but it does not

relate to the question I asked. Let me try once again. With the

Westminster government contemplated Green to a second referendum before

the Brexit negotiations are concluded or would you tell the

Scottish Government they could not have one macro until Brexit was

concluded? We're in a position where there was a process for requesting

another independence referendum. That would be a matter for the

Scottish Government to determine whether they make that request. We

will continue as the Prime Minister has today to focus our efforts on

making the case there should not be such a request and there should not

be a second independence referendum. The people in Scotland are quite

clear, they do not want another referendum. Thank you very much for

joining us live from Glasgow. Let's get some reaction now from Angus

Robertson. I do not think he could hear the interview but let me go

straight into this. If the Scottish Government, the British government,

sorry, as was indicated, does not think that Scotland can remain a

member of the single market in the Brexit negotiations, does that

trigger a second referendum in your mind? Thank you very much for having

me on the programme. My reaction to the Prime Minister's beach is one of

disappointment. We are running at the time to get an agreement between

the gods -- Scottish Gutmann and the British government before Article 50

is triggered. Scotland voted to remain in the European Union and

they are well aware we have a government in Scotland elected with

more votes than the Labour Party. What is the answer? We have limited

time. You're asking me to get ahead of the triggering of Article 50. Be

in no doubt. If the UK Government does not negotiate with the UK

Government to try to protect the interests of Scotland and Europe,

the Scottish Government will have to look very seriously at using its

cast mandate it got in the Parliamentary elections to hold a

referendum to protect our place in Europe? The major issue is the

Scottish Government's request, demand, policy, that even if the

United Kingdom leads the single market, Scotland should remain a

member of the single market. All the mood music, you're based in

Westminster for a big chunk of the week, is the British government will

not agree to that. It is a key SNP demand. If they do not, does that

trigger a second referendum? You have been reporting on the Prime

Minister's beach was she was talking about how important the union was.

How important it is we respect different nations the UK. If she

does not give you the single market, will there be a second referendum?

If the Prime Minister is to be taken at her word, as a Democrat, surely

she will recognise that she has a problem given that Scotland has

voted to remain in European Union. We will respect the fact the rest of

the UK voted to leave. The Scottish Government has put forward a

compromise paper and the UK Government has come back with

absolutely nothing to deal with the challenge of how to protect

Scotland's plays in the single market. If there is no compromise,

will you call a second referendum? If the UK Gutmann cannot reach an

agreement to protect Scotland's interests, there will be another

referendum. The UK Government want Scotland to remain a member of the

single market, even if the United Kingdom is leaving the European

Union. What major EU figure agrees with your position? This is an issue

that needs to be negotiated between the member states. That would need

to be the UK Government and other partners we have not heard a single

member state of the European Union saying this is not possible. They

have not said it is impossible for Scotland. The Secretary of State

said if the UK leaves the single market, the whole UK will leave the

single market. There is only one negotiator. If the UK negotiates on

behalf of Scotland in Europe it is an outcome that can be pursued if

the UK leaves Scotland, that is true. You were saying leaves the

single market for the back is why we are trying to persuade the UK

Government to argue Scotland's case to protect interests in Europe. If

the UK Government says that Scotland is a partnership of equals who

respect one another, that is great. Do it. The people who are being

intransigent on this question are the UK Government. They have not

agreed to a single thing in the negotiations. I'm moving on now to

find out who supports the Scottish position within the EU. Has anybody

in the commission supported your position? Has anybody in the council

of ministers supported you? Nobody has said it is possible for Scotland

to remain within the single market. The head of the Spanish delegation

of MEPs in the majority EEP party has said it is not possible. He has

said it is not possible. Scotland, while part of the United Kingdom, is

to be the same as the UK. We are not going to accept Scotland in the

single market without the rest of the UK.

It is clear. Which head of state or government has said that? Not an

MEP. The Spanish Prime Minister has also made it clear he does not think

you should have a special single market status. Which government has

ruled out a possible at is gotten remaining in the single market? I

ask the questions. You said an MEP has said. The head of a Spanish

delegation of MEPs, the Spanish Secretary of State for the European

Union has said so, the Spanish Prime Minister has said if the United

Kingdom leads, Scotland leaves Square he has said that in the

context... Any number of quotes from the previous European president has

said... He is not that any more. You cannot name a single head of

government. You are the one with the policy. Tell me a single ally you

have in trying to get Scotland to remain a member of the single

market. Not a single government has said this is not possible to do.

That is why it is imperative on the UK Government to work with the

Scottish Gutmann to make our case in Europe. If they are not prepared to

do it, we will have to get on with it ourselves. What would you do, Mr

Robertson, if a referendum is called. All right, you can have the

second referendum but you cannot have it until the Brexit initiations

are concluded. I do not think that would be fair, would it question if

the intention is to try to find a way for Scotland to remain in the

single market before the UK finalises and leaves the EU, that

would obviously will allow Scotland's position of having

continuity in a European context. That would not be fair with what the

majority of people of Scotland have voted for. If it believes the UK is

a partnership of equals and we respect them, if that is true, the

UK Government will respect the cast-iron mandate the Scottish

Government has and respect the 62% vote in Scotland of remaining in a

European context, and will, as Democrats agree, as they did in the

run-up to the 2014 referendum, that it should take place on the mandate

that was approved by the Scottish parliament. Still a lot to go on

this story. Thank you for having me on. What do you make of all of this?

You can tell the British government does not want to have this

referendum and I'm not sure the -- the SNP are all that sure. Activists

want a referendum. They have cause for a second referendum and that is

Brexit. The circumstances for winning a referendum could become a

lot harder. When out of the European Union, Scotland may be forced to

adopt the euro. There could be an external border. They may have to

say at some stage they would accept the euro. Sweden still has not got

the euro and so on. There is a problem here for both the British

government, which does not want a second referendum, and the Scottish

Nationalists, who do. If the British government says, no... It will not

say you cannot have one but the Scottish people need to know what

Brexit looks like before they can make a choice of staying in the UK

or trying to get back into the EU. The danger is that Nicola Sturgeon

would then have a referendum in which it would take Scotland out of

the UK but could not guarantee it would go back into the EU. I thought

the argument, oh, no, that wouldn't be fair, we must have it before we

know the Brexit vote. What we would be discussing in the referendum

period would be the single market. This is hardly Braveheart. Suddenly

the whole issue around Scottish independence has become quite narrow

and technical and about the market in that way. I do not think that was

a very inspiring answer on his part stop Scotland want to go it alone,

which I completely disagree with. It is galling to keep hearing this

Scotland voted to remain. There is something disingenuous about that.

The UK had a referendum. On the figures, it is still less

numerically. It did vote differently. It voted differently in

the sense it was a different place but it is not a constitutional

mandate. We will move onto the SNP conference

on what the minister will say. The Scottish Conservatives aren't

the only party to be holding In Wales, Plaid Cymru members

are gathering in Newport to hear their leader's keynote

speech this afternoon. Like the Scottish Nationalists, you

also want Wales to remain in the single market as a member, not just

access. It looks like that ship has left the harbour and you will not

get that. You may be right, but that doesn't stop us advocating the best

interest of Wales and it is in our best interests, we firmly believe,

and the Welsh government agrees with us, for our relationship with the

single market to continue. There are 200,000 plus jobs reliant on our

relationship with the single market and that is why we are saying very

strongly that we should remain a member. And countries like Norway

are outside the EU and in the single market so it doesn't mean that we

cannot see through Brexit, but it is the way in which we see through it

and I am certainly determined to try to put the case for Wales as

strongly as I possibly can. I understand, but isn't your position

weaker than the Scottish Nationalists' because, unlike

Scotland, Wales did vote to leave the EU? You are right. It is more

difficult for us in Wales because of that but there are reasons for

people voting to leave the EU. I have been knocking on doors ahead of

the local elections where we expect to make some gains in May but people

on the doorsteps are talking about their concerns and they feel left

behind under the Labour government here. We have an imbalanced country,

and an equal country, where the capital, Cardiff, is over congested

in the city centre, and we want to see investment and prosperity

throughout the country and I don't think that is too much to ask. Let

them onto some of the issues you have been raising in the local

elections coming up in early May in Wales. You have talked about

rebalancing Wales, which would seem to mean moving to economic activity

and jobs away from Cardiff so how is that going down in Cardiff? Cardiff

is very important to us, of course, it is the capital city and we want

to see it thrive. But we want to see other parts of Wales thrive as well.

We have in the pipeline big Cardiff City deal which is excellent

investment for Cardiff and the surrounding areas. What would you

like to move away? We want to see the work start the furthest point

away from the city centre and work back in so that those places that

have been left behind for such a long time now feel some benefit from

the investment coming to Cardiff. One of your assembly colleagues said

it was shameful that was government based on new tax office near

Cardiff. Is that your attitude as well? The new Welsh revenue

authority will be based ten miles north of Cardiff and for that

community it is very good and other communities have lost out of course

but when I asked the First Minister about the availability of local

labour to fill those posts, he told me that we don't have the skills in

Wales to fill them from Wales and we will be looking to recruit expertise

from London. From the First Minister who is responsible for skills, I

think that sells a lot about their ambition for Wales, don't you? I

don't know, we're only talking about 40 jobs is hardly an existential

crisis. At the moment. It is 40 jobs at the moment but we are expecting

that to expand with time and of course, 40 jobs in a town like

Porthmadog or another rural town would have a much bigger impact than

a town close to Cardiff but the point is that jobs are coming from

London anyway and that is the problem. We will see. The

rebalancing, that would suggest you take something from one area and

give it to an area that doesn't have as much. I would say again, what do

you want to take from Cardiff to put elsewhere? I'm not about splitting

up and dividing communities and having different areas fighting

amongst each other for different developments. But in the future, in

future capital investment, when you have 21% of the population in the

north of Wales for example, the only see 17% of the capital investment

and that is what has got to change. You are pretty much in local

elections a distant second to Labour in terms of the number of

councillors you have, you don't have an overall control of a single

council in Wales. After these elections, will you? We are

currently leading four local authorities in Wales and we are

looking to increase the number of councillors after that election. It

is very difficult to say at this point because we don't know who else

will be elected and in all likelihood we will have to work with

others to take control of councils. But there are opportunities for us

in many places in these local elections and I'm looking forward to

maximising those opportunities. We will see how you do. Thank you for

joining us. Counting is under way

in Northern Ireland's assembly election

which was called after the power-sharing administration

fell apart following It's the second time voters

in Northern Ireland have gone to the polls to choose a government

in ten months. We'll get the latest

from Belfast in just a moment. First though, Ellie Price profiles

the new leader of Sinn Fein, Michelle O'Neill, who

could soon be running Northern Ireland in partnership

with her Unionist opponents. If anyone had ever said to me that,

at some stage in the future, you'll be leading Sinn Fein

in the North, I probably For me, being a Republican

is a way of life. It's truly the biggest honour

and privilege of my life. I feel an enormous responsibility

on my shoulders and while I don't underestimate my task,

given the changing political world, locally, nationally

and internationally, Martin McGuinness said

Michelle O'Neill's appointment was part of a generational change

within his party and, unlike her predecessor,

the 40-year-old has no past But that doesn't mean

she is immune from controversy. Speaking to the BBC

during the election campaign, Michelle O'Neill defended her

decision to speak at I attended the commemoration

of four young fellas who I knew and grew up with,

four young fellas who found themselves

in extraordinary circumstances. But they were also four young men

who were involved in an IRA attack And we'll always have a different

narrative on the past but that's where we need to get to in society,

where we actually understand So is Sinn Fein's first female

leader, who has already been a minister for agriculture

and for health, really In a sense she is a fresher,

maybe happier face of Sinn Fein that other people can

actually engage with. On the other hand, the guys in dark

suits are still around and the rest of the party hasn't quite changed

so she is sort of leading from the front but whether or not

she has the power... There will be a worry

that she is perhaps a puppet and she doesn't actually

have the authority that goes with her role and that she will

receive instructions and it may take time for her to kind

of get her elbows out and actually become the leader rather than just

the spokesperson at the front. Michelle O'Neill's leadership

will be tested from the outset. Her first challenge will be to find

some solution to the deadlock with the DUP that led

to the election in the first place. There is nothing like being thrown

in at the deep end. Let's get the latest from Belfast

now and speak to the BBC's political correspondent,

Enda McClafferty. He is at the count. We here at the

turnout has been relatively high, 60% compared to 55% last time. Does

that higher turnout did any particular group and advantage? It

does feel as if we have turned the clock back here in Northern Ireland

some ten or 15 years, looking at the level of interest in this particular

election this time round. In some constituencies, Michelle O'Neill for

example, the turnout is up 13 percentage point and the average is

ten percentage points. There are two factors for the botched energy

scheme which has brought us to this situation and triggered the

circumstances that led to the election. This is the first time

voters are getting a chance to have their say and give their verdict on

how everything has unravelled and how that botched energy scheme was

managed by our politicians. The second and most significant factor

is that this campaign was fought along tribal lines, very much the

two larger parties using fear tactics are people to get them out

and we know in the past in Northern Ireland, nothing motivate voters

more than the fear of the other side. It looks like those are the

buttons that were pushed and they have worked for the DUP and Sinn

Fein in terms of getting people out. We are waiting on the result, we can

see the people counting behind you but if the result, it may be

different but not materially different from the assembly that

went to the polls. Talk us through what happened next. When we know the

result, what happens next in Belfast? Before I do that, the

crucial factor here is that there are 18 fewer seats to go around in

this election so it means business about damage limitation for the

politicians, not about making gains but managing their losses because

they know at the other end of this that their parties are going to be

smaller in Stormont and they will not be able to wield as much power.

In terms of how they restore the institutions here, we have a

three-week period before we decide if we need another election or if we

have put... Another election?! That is the option available. If there is

no agreement after three weeks and no government in place and no thirst

or debit the first Mr, they can trigger another election. -- Deputy

First Minister. They might pass some emergency legislation to cut the

Stormont institutions into cold storage and bring back direct rule.

The parties know that the language they have been using was asked to

change radically in the three weeks after the election if they are to

find some kind of common ground and be able to come together and cobble

some kind of agreement to allow the institutions to be restored but we

are a long way off that and the indication seems to be that we are

heading for a long period of stalemate here after the election.

And part of the stalemate as I understand it is that Sinn Fein has

been saying that they want -- they won't work with Arlene Foster as

First Minister who was at the centre of the renewable energy scandal.

Will they stick to that now the election is out of the way? Is it

really a deal-breaker that they simply will not work with Arlene

Foster of the DUP? Sinn Fein have backed themselves into a corner on

that because they have been explicit in saying they will not work with

her while there is a cloud over her harassment in the botched energy

scheme. We know there is an enquiry to set up and look at that and Sinn

Fein seem to indicate that until that inquiry returns it findings and

there is a clean bill of health for Arlene Foster, they will not do

business with her. Although it has been suggested in the final weeks of

the election that there is some talk of a caretaker First Minister being

brought in to allow us to get over this difficult phase. One thing is

for sure, Sinn Fein will be in a difficult position because they have

to decide if they want Arlene Foster in charge or if they want the

Conservative government in Westminster in charge through direct

rule and that does not sit easily with their voters. You better tell

them not to be tabled away even after the count, they might need

them again! Talking is through what might happen. This is the issue of

what is on the British government's lap, which is Brexit, which is

enormous on its own, and now the possibility that some would say the

probability, of a second Scottish referendum which would be enormous

on its own. And a potential political crisis in Northern Ireland

continuing, coupled with the issue of how open will be with the Irish

Republic. These are three huge things to have on any government's

plate. And the Northern Ireland situation is vexing people in

government and in Brussels. It is one issue people have been unable to

resolve. I was speaking to a minister and asked if it had any

idea about the border. Trying to sort that out is a big problem and I

think we will end up with the reintroduction of direct rule. We

had that dilemma facing Sinn Fein, if they go in with the DUP or back

to direct rule and in some respects they could get more of what they

want by going back to direct rule because there is disagreement about

same-sex marriage with the DUP, the status of the Irish language and

there is a view that Sinn Fein could get more out of Westminster than out

of the DUP. The broader issue, does the Theresa May government have the

breadth and depth to deal with three major got additional issues at once?

There is a query on that and we should be wary of seeing it also

negatively -- major constitutional issues. No doubt that Brexit has

created this but in some ways it is the implosion of a political

alliances of old that were unravelling anyway both the innate

-- power-sharing has always been under the factory and has

consolidated sectarianism in some ways. Best unsatisfactory. There is

no identity politics thrown in and it is a bit gruesome. I don't think

direct rule would be the same as in the past even though it would be

feared by many in the nationalist community. There is a generational

thing. I have been to Derry and I know many people see Michelle

O'Neill in a different way. It was interesting in the package you

showed that somebody said that she is a puppet which is a bit

patronising. But a puppet of whom? She is her own woman as well. She

won the position but also, you can see they are tired with the old

parties, people want a new arrangement. And on your question

about if the government can handle several constitutional crises at the

same time, I have been asking that myself and I looked at how Theresa

May when the government which is a centralised operation and big

decisions have to go through the centre and so far has been fined

because they have dealt with Brexit but I have always wondered how they

will be able to cope in a centralised operation if you have to

or three big things happening at the same time.

Speaking of whether they are competent or not to handle the

issues... There are over a hundred of them,

and they're responsible for driving the machinery of Whitehall

to deliver the But Government ministers are not

like normal managers. They're hired and fired

at the discretion of So, what makes someone good

at being a minister? The Institute of Government has been

beavering away at this subject and this week produced a report,

including a handy six-point guide First on the list,

the IFG recommends having The former Conservative Climate

Change Minister, Greg Barker, told researchers, "you are there to drive

a political agenda". Chris Huhne, former Secretary of

State for Energy and Climate Change, recommends identifying a "very

limited number" of priorities - Even when limited information

is available, decisions must be made Fourth, they recommend encouraging

teamwork and being prepared Former Minister of State

for Pensions Steve Webb says Fifth, it is important to win public

support for your actions and be As Mark Prisk, former Minister

of State for Communities And last, but not least,

earn the respect of Parliament - That is the tips. Nicola Hughes is

the author of the report. Let me be unkind and say, you could file all

six of these points just under a file called the bleeding obvious. I

think one of the things is it is remarkable with ministers, they do

these incredibly difficult busy jobs. They are thrown straight into

them. You get a call from Number 10 and a car ride down to a Department

and then that is it. You are in charge of a big department.

Ministers do not have a lot of time to pause and think, how could I be

good at this job and what does it involve? One thing we are saying is

it is worth ministers listening to people who have done the job before,

to get some advice, think about what they will do. Are there any training

programmes for prospective ministers? Politicians are pretty

resistant to anything that looks like corporate H R. If we compare

that to CEOs of a big company. You would not expect a chief executive

in the corporate world not to do any training or induction. There are

ways that ministers can, if not to fall on HR training, at least take

some time out. That is one thing we do at the Institute, to think about

roles and learn how Whitehall works. If you were a backbench MP, we would

go, you have got ambitions. Damian Green, the Work and Pensions

Secretary, he said, ministers should be treated like company managers and

subjected to corporate appraisals and hired or fired according to

achievement levels. Doesn't that make the classic mistake to think of

a minister as a corporate chief executive? They may need executive

responsibilities... Competence. They may need to know how to run things

being the chief executive of the company is very different from being

a government minister. Absolutely. Ministers are pulled in all sorts of

different directions. To be a good minister you do not just have to be

a good policymaker and executive leader, you also have to be good on

the media and come on to programmes like this and not make gaffes. You

are still a politician when you are a minister. You still have your

constituency to think about and work political networks. You are held to

much more account than chief executives. Chief executive is of

companies hardly ever give interviews. I cannot remember the

last one was that they made do the odd business niche programme but

they are never subjected to the kind of interviewing that politicians

are. Some interesting interviews we have done have been business people

who have come into the Government as ministers. They said about the

pressure of the 24/7 operation and being in government is quite

overwhelming. What are you take of the IOT advice? Great anecdotes.

Well worth reading. I have read it. Thank you. What makes me nervous is

we are already dominated by technocratic elite in politics.

Anybody who is kind of suggesting that our corporate appraisals and

goals. If they have ever worked in the corporate world, they will know

what a load of smoke and mirrors that is in the corporate world. I

have a dread of well-trained, very smooth people who do not believe

anything when you say about a clear sense of purpose, knowing and

believing in your brief. Politically. The worst ministers are

the ones who think they do not want this job. There are a few where you

think, they did not want this job but they got it as the minister. You

want them to get into it but they also need a broader, political

vision. That cannot be trained into someone and is the problem is

slightly with the emphasis... I understand where you're coming from.

One of the things we tried to reflect in our work is, as I was

saying before, these are not managers elsewhere. The political

instincts is developed from opposition MPs and on campaign trail

without all very good skills. But you can learn about some of these.

If you are a minister you might be a really effective opposition MP, a

really effective campaigner. Going into a huge bummer when you are

overseeing big operations, huge amounts of people, it does help to

know how Whitehall works. Whatever we think about the

policies, Michael Gove and George Osborne, they all had a clear vision

and got on with it. I wonder how important the much fabled special at

Pfizer is to be able to deliver that political vision. They are much

criticised. -- special visions. Special advisers have a bit of a bad

reputation in the media. We'll think of The Thick Of It. There have been

incidents of bad behaviour by special advisers but the secretaries

of state we interviewed found special advisers as a helpful way of

getting political advice in these big department is full of civil

servants. It is an ear to the ground and away to stay connected to the

party. They can be challenged by ideas. Often when special advisers

are appointed, it is summer may have a good, trusting relationship with

and they can say, that is a terrible idea. Gerald Kaufman wrote a book

about how to be a good minister. How have things changed since the days

when he wrote that book? One thing is what you alluded to before. Media

scrutiny has always been part of the role. To say we have a 24/7 media

operation, a gaffe on telly or misplaced tweet could ruin a

ministerial career pretty quickly. Aren't the most successful ministers

those who have clear policy objectives and a clear road path to

achieving them, and they leave the management of the Department to the

civil service? That is not the job of the ministers. Civil servants are

paid to manage. It is a minister prospect job to determine the

policy. I remember Peter Walker, when he became the first Secretary

of State for the environment when he began every morning meeting his

political advisers. Civil servants were not allowed in. That is where

he established the political priorities and then expected the

civil servants to do that. Civil servants who are decisive and will

set out a vision, or make the decisions and the calls and the

civil servants will follow that. A minister who get involved in the

micromanagement of the executive side of the department is not

focusing on the right things. They are often not equipped to do it

either. Y. If you've been too busy

this week to stay up to speed with political

developments, stay tuned. We've got our handy Daily Politics

recap of the political A voice from the past

was worried about the future. A little more charm and a lot less

cheap rhetoric would do much to protect the interests

of the United Kingdom. Critics derided Sir John

Major as a bitter man. The Shadow Chancellor identified

a new form of insurrection, a soft coup, and said there was one

afoot to unseat Jeremy Corbyn. Nothing soft about the machinations

within Ukip as ex-leader Nigel Farage turned on the party's

only MP, Douglas Carswell. He has tried to undermine

everything we have stood Retail tycoon Sir Philip Green

is to spend ?363 million filling Good news for the pensioners

but will it be enough And the Lords inflicted their first

defeat on Government plans Ministers will resist the changes

when the bill ping-pongs We are now entering the famous

ping-pong period between the Lords and Commons over Article 50. Do you

think that because Labour's heart is not quite in it, there will only be

one round of ping-pong thing? I would suspect the Lords would amend

the bill to protect the rights were nationals and get a vote for

Parliament over EU negotiation stop it will go back to the House of

Lords and that will be it. That is why we have heard so John Major

speaking out, almost to despair at the lack of Parliamentary opposition

going on. On the issue of EU nationals, I agree with the Lords on

this but I do not think the Lords have any right to amend the bill. I

might agree with them back, who the hell are they? How many more people

are saying things like, who are the Lords? They are undemocratic. BBC

documentary was an eye opener. One of the good things is people are now

talking about democracy the whole time, partly because so many people

have been anti-democratic in response to the vote. I must

interrupt you. I must give you the answer to the quiz.

Which Government agency has announced plans

to recruit new staff with a tap on the shoulder -

to try to help them avoid a workforce dominated by white,

Thanks to Claire, George and all my guests.

I'll be back on Sunday at 11am on BBC One with the Sunday Politics.