03/11/2013 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland

Morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. It began as

Plebgate, now it is Plodgate. The evidence of three police officers to

MPs is branded a great work of fiction. They tried to intimidate

the Grangemouth bosses, but in the end it was the union that

capitulated. I will ask Len McCluskey about Unite union's strong

arm tactics at Grangemouth and Falkirk. They preach women should be

sidelined and confined to the private sphere. They argued they

should be covered up. And she'll: We talked to some of

those who have been at the table this week and ask what the chances

investing thousands of pounds in a GPS tracking system to keep tabs on

its staff. With me as always, the best and the

brightest political panel, Helen Lewis, Janan Ganesh and Nick Watt

who will be tweeting their humiliating climb-down is what they

got wrong last week in the programme. If this can happen it to

a Cabinet minister, what hope is there for anyone else? Thus the Home

Affairs Select Committee concluded what many already thought about the

treatment of Andrew Mitchell by three self-styled PC plebs. They met

him to clear the air over what did or did not happen when he was

prevented from ramming his bike through the Downing Street gates.

But the officers gave the media and inaccurate account of that meeting.

Two of them are even accused of misleading the Commons committee.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission will now reopen there

enquiry. This is not a story about Andrew Mitchell, it is about the

police. Keith Vaz is often in high dudgeon and this is the highest dad

and I have seen him in for some time. They could be held for

contempt of Parliament and technically they could be sent to

prison. It has blown up into an enormous story. I do not know what

is worse, the police trying to stitch up a Cabinet member and try

to mislead the media or the incompetence they have done it from

day one. That is quite good. I would sleep more soundly at night if I

knew the pleas were good at this. It is the incompetence that shocks me.

And this is just a sideshow. We are still waiting on the main report as

to what exactly happened outside Downing Street gates. But that not

will be good for the police either. The file has gone from the

Metropolitan police to the CPS, so we are limited about what we can

say. This is about the police Federation. They were set up under

statute in 1990 as a deal in which a police would not go on strike. This

is a political campaign to get a Cabinet minister out and the legacy

of this is the police Federation will have to be reformed. We will

keep an eye on it. They were Ed Miliband's union backers, they swung

the Labour leadership for him in 2010. Now the Unite union looks like

his biggest headache. The Sunday Times has seen extracts of the

report into the alleged vote rigging to select a Labour candidate in

Falkirk. There was evidence of coercion and Gregory as well as

deliberate attempt to frustrate the enquiry. We will be speaking to Len

McCluskey, the Unite union's General Secretary, in a moment. First out

the saga began an almost ended up with the loss of 800 jobs at a

petrochemical plant in Grangemouth. Unite were key players in the

Grangemouth dispute and the union headed by Len McCluskey has come

under fire for its intimidator Tariq tactics. In one instance

demonstrators complete with an inflatable rat picketed the home of

a INEOS director. The police were called. It was part of a strategy

the union called leverage. But turning up at people's houses seems

to represent an escalation. At the centre of the rout was Steve in

deals -- Stephen Denes. INEOS launched an investigation into him

as he was suspected of using company time to engineer the selection of

labour's candidate in Falkirk. That candidate was Karie Murphy, a friend

of Len McCluskey. Stevie Deans resigned last week and denies any

wrongdoing, but it capped a dramatic climb-down by Unite union. Len

McCluskey joins me now. Thanks to the Sunday Times we now know what is

in this labour report on the Falkirk vote rigging. Forgery, coercion,

trickery, manipulation. You must be ashamed of how Unite union behaved

in Falkirk. The Sunday Times article is lazy journalism. There is nothing

new in the article. This was all dealt with by the Labour Party in

the summer. We rejected those allegations then and we said we had

done nothing wrong and both the Labour Party and the police in

Scotland indicated there had been no wrongdoing. The report itself says

you were trying to thwart the investigation. First you tried to

fix the selection of a candidate to get your woman in and then you

thwarted the investigation into the dirty deeds. The reality is the

Labour Party report was deeply flawed. The Labour Party then

instructed a solicitor, a lawyer, to do an in-depth investigation and

during that investigation they got to the bottom of what had happened

and they decided there was no wrongdoing whatsoever. At the time I

was so confident we had done nothing, I called for an independent

enquiry. They were forced to conclude there was no wrongdoing

because the people who originally complained changed their evidence

and we now know they did so because Unite union officials helped them to

rewrite their retraction and Stevie Deans approved it. That is not true.

We have had 1000 e-mails thrown into the public arena and what is that

all about? Who is leaking this? They showed the Unite union was rewriting

the retractions. This interview would go a lot better if you are

allowed me to finish the question that you asked. These e-mails were

put into the public arena by the PR company from INEOS. Why are they

doing this? The truth of the matter is that all of the investigations

that took place demonstrate there was nothing to answer. This idea

that the Unite union has rewritten and the evidence from the families

has been withdrawn, the families are a part of Stevie deems' family. They

clarified the position. Do you deny that union officials were involved

in the retractions? I deny it completely. This is important.

Independent solicitors to witness statements from the family and they

are the ones that were influencing the Labour Party with the position

is clarified and there is no case to answer. Do you deny Stevie deems saw

their retractions? It is his family. So you do not deny it? It is his

family. This is an ordinary, decent family who were faced with the full

weight of the pleas, a forensic solicitor. Of course they spoke to

Stevie Deans. This whole thing is a cesspit. Does it not need an

independent investigation? This is a trap being laid by Tory Central

office. They are making all the demands. The media, the Daily Mail,

the Sunday Times, the Conservative mouthpiece, they are laying tracks

for Ed Miliband and Ed Miliband should not fall into them. Since

when did it become part of an industrial dispute to send mobs to

the home of company families. This is a legitimate form of protest and

it is a silent protest. We believe if faceless directors are making

decisions that cripple communities, they cannot expect to simply drift

back to their own leafy suburbia and not be countable. This is silent

protest. It is lawful. It may be silent in Grangemouth, but it was

not silent elsewhere. You went with a giant rat, loud-hailers telling

everybody the neighbour was evil. No, we did not. You had

loud-hailers, you even encouraged passing children in Grangemouth to

join in. That is nonsense. Look at the rat. The reality is the

Grangemouth community was going to be decimated, Grangemouth was going

to become a ghost town. I reject totally this idea there were

loud-hailers and children involved. That is a lie perpetrated by the

Daily Mail. But you have used these tactics in other disputes. We have

used the tactics in other disputes, but we have not used loud-hailers at

people's homes. Because the labour laws are so restrictive we have to

look at every available means that we can protest. It is an outrage, an

absolute outrage, that this is happening to British workers in the

21st-century. It could not happen elsewhere. Is not intimidation the

wider hallmark of your union? You were quoted as saying to do whatever

it takes during your attempts to take over the Labour Falkirk

constituency. You were instructing to dig out the nasty stuff on your

opponents. That is not true. Let's see these e-mails? This is a con

trick. Nobody is looking to dig out... This is the words of your

legal services advisor. Unite has tried to instigate a revival of

trade union values within the Labour Party. That is what Ed Miliband

wanted us to do. As soon as we started to be in any way

ineffective, there were screams and howls of derision. When the company

started to investigate Stevie Deans, your friend, your campaign manager,

that he was using company time to moonlight on the job, you called

INEOS and said unless you stop the investigation we will bring

Grangemouth to a standstill. I never said that at all. You brought it to

a standstill. We never brought it to a standstill, the company did. Who

says that I said that we would bring it to a standstill? You have read it

in the newspapers. You should not believe everything. I did not make

that threat to the management. You carried the threat out. You

instigated an overtime ban and a work to rule. And that is what

Grangemouth to a standstill because the company decided to close the

petrochemical site down. Because Stevie Deans was suspended due

introduced industrial action? Our members in Grangemouth felt he was

being unfairly treated. In the end you're grandstanding almost cost

Scotland is most important industrial facility. The day was

saved by your total capitulation. Grandstanding, capitulation and

humiliation are grand phrases. There is nothing about capitulation. Len

McCluskey did not wake up one day and decide to have a dispute with

INEOS. The workers in that factory democratically elect their shop

stewards to represent them and to express to management their concerns

and their views. That is what happened with INEOS. Jack Straw has

condemned your union's handling of Grangemouth as a catastrophe. Have

you considered your position? Jack Straw and others in the Labour

Party, you have to ask them what their agenda is. I am not interested

in what he says. The truth of the matter is we responded to the

requirements and needs of our members. At a mass meeting last

Monday 100% supported their shop stewards and their union. We will

continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with our members when they

are faced with difficult situations. You have lost all the union rights.

You have had to agree to a no strike rule, you have lost pension rights.

We have not lost rights at all, we are still working with the company

to implement its survival plan. The Prime Minister is always attacking

unions and just lately he has taken to praising the automotive

industry. Jaguar Land Rover, Foxhall, BMW at Cowley, they are all

Unite union members were the shop stewards are engaged positively to

implement survival plans and to make a success for the company. That is

what we do, but by the same token we stand shoulder to shoulder with our

members who are in struggle and we will always do that and we will not

be cowed by media attacks on us. Is your leadership not proving to be as

disastrous for the members as Arthur Scargill was for the NUM? My

membership is growing. I am accountable to my members, two are

executive, and the one thing they will know is that when they want me

standing shoulder to shoulder with them when they have a problem, I

will be there, despite the disgraceful attacks launched on us

by the media. "A country ready to welcome your

investment which values your friendship and will never exclude

anyone because of their race, religion, colour or creed." The

words of the Prime minister at the World Islamic Economic Forum which

was hosted for the first time in London this week. The PM's warm

words are sure to be welcomed by British Muslims who have endured a

spate of negative headlines. There's been the controversy over the

wearing of the veil, attitudes to women, and the radicalisation of

some young British Muslims. In a moment I'll be talking to the

Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain, Farooq Murad.

First - here's Giles Dilnot. The call to Friday prayers at the east

London Mosque which has strong links with the Muslim Council of Britain,

one of the more vocal groups amongst British Muslims. Despite the fact it

frequently happens, it is neither helpful nor accurate to describe the

British Muslim community. There are so many different sects,

traditions, cultures and nationalities, it is more accurate

to describe the British Muslim communities, but there is one

question being put to them - are they doing enough internally to

address some challenging issues? Are they willing to confront

radicalisation, attitudes to non-muslins, two women, and cases of

sexual exploitation in a meaningful way? A number of them say no, not

nearly enough. This former jihad de has spent ten years telling young

Muslim teenagers how they can reject extremist radicalisation, using

Outward Bound courses and community work, but he and others doing this

work thing -- think some elders are failing the youngsters. This has

been going on for decades, one figures -- thing is said in public

to please people but in private something very different is being

said and the messages are being confused. Some of the young people,

it pushes them further into a space where they are vulnerable for

radical recruiters. For many Muslim youngsters, life is about living 1's

faith within an increasingly secular society, a struggle not helped if

rigid interpretations of the Koran are being preached, say some

sectors. Some practices often don't make sense in 21st-century Britain,

and you are perhaps creating obstacles if you stick to those and

it is perhaps better to let go of those cultural problems, especially

when they need to clear injustices like forced marriage, reticence to

talk about grooming for example, or discrimination against women. There

is a long list but I am very clear that in fact the bad Muslim is the

one who sticks to unflinching, narrow dogmatic fundamentalist

perception of religion. One issue often focused on is the wearing of

minicab. Polling suggests 80% of Britons would favour a ban in public

places. -- the niqab. Many people don't seem to recognise the legacy

of the niqab. Many people preach that women should be sidelined and

that they are sexual objects that should be covered up and the

preservation of morality falls on their shoulders. The Muslim Council

of Britain recently got praise for holding a conference on combating

sexual exploitation. In the wake of abuse cases that had involved

predominantly Pakistani men. For one man who has followed the story for

some years, the Muslim Council of Britain needs to do much more. We

need to get along together and if things like attitudes towards the

normal slim girl in stark contrast to the expression of honour and

chastity of the Muslim girl, your sister or daughter, are such that

actions that would be an fought off with a slim girl becomes permissible

with a white girl, then we are all in trouble. To some, attitudes to

women are not limited to sexual interactions at the very structures

of life in Muslim communities and indeed the Muslim Council of Britain

itself. I would like to ask the Muslim Council of Britain what they

are doing about the fact that very few mosques give voices to

are doing about the fact that very the fact that someone women are

experiencing female genital mutilation and forced marriages,

what about the women who are getting married and their marriages are not

being registered and they are being left homeless and denied maintenance

rights, what about the fact there are sharia rights that have been

found to be discriminating against women, and the fact there are men in

this country who continue to hold misogynistic views about women, what

are you doing? The occasional press release will not solve this problem

of a deeply patriarchal community. That all of these issues can be

exploited to the point of Islam phobia is not doubted, but many

Muslims feel that unless the communities do tackle this openly, a

big cultural gap will exist between the two.

And the Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain, Farooq

Murad, joins me now. One visible sign that sets muslins aside is the

veils that cover women's faces. Do you think it makes them impossible

to be part of mainstream society? The niqab is not an obligatory

requirement. But do you accept that those who wear it are cutting

themselves off from mainstream society? Some people do, and whilst

wearing niqab, some of them are working in various walks of life

successfully and it is seen as a faith requirement, but it is a red

herring in the sense that it applies to such a small number of Muslim

girls. For many Muslim preachers, isn't separation precisely the point

of the niqab? Certainly not, if you look at the Muslim women in the

public sphere, we have many very successful women. But not the ones

who are veiled. Not in the public arena as such, but the veil is a

practice which is practised by a very small number. Do you favour

it? I personally think it is not a requirement. But do you think women

should wear the veil? I think it is wrong to force women to wear the

veil. I asked if in your opinion women should wear the veil? It is

important not to force women to wear the veil. Should they of their free

choice where the veil? A lot of individuals do things out of their

free choice which I do not approve of, I don't think it is conducive it

helps their cause, but I do not have the right to take their choice away

from them. I am still unsure if you think it is a good thing or a bad

thing. Are not many Muslim women in this country being forced by Muslim

preachers and often their male relations who want to keep Muslim

women their place? As I said, it is wrong for anyone to force Muslim

women. But how would we ever know in a family if a woman was being

forced? Exactly, we don't know what is going on in people 's homes and

what pressure is being applied. I want you to look at this picture,

very popular on Islamic websites, and it shows the women who is

wearing the niqab having a straight route to heaven, and the other

Muslim woman dressed in western gear condemned to hell. Do you consider

that a proper message for Muslim women? Not at all, I don't. So any

Islamic websites in Britain... The Muslim Council of Britain is an

organisation of five affiliates from across the country and this is not

coming from any of them. As I said, those minority views propagated by

individuals should not be used to represent Muslim community. So that

would not have the support of the Muslim Council of Britain? It would

not have the support. What about the Muslim free school that requires

children as young as 11 to wear a black veil outside of school? Do you

agree with that? I am not sure exactly what the policy is... I have

just told you, do you agree that girls as young as 11 should wear a

black burka outside of school? I don't think it should be imposed on

anybody. But this is the desired dress School of the Muslim females.

I am asking for your view. I said it at the beginning that I do not think

it should be imposed. Would you send your daughter to a school that would

wear a black burka at the age of 11? Would you? No. It seems that some

muslins are determined to segregate young Muslim girls right from the

start to very early from society. It is not their segregation as such, I

would say that there are faith schools, if you look at an Islamic

girls school in Blackburn in a traditional setting, it has come the

top of the league table this year in the secondary school league tables.

But it doesn't make 11-year-olds wear black burkas. Many of those

girls go on to have a successful career. Not wearing black burkas. I

am sure there are examples of women who do have successful careers.

There is a very conservative movement from the continent on

Islam, and the issue supposedly based on Islamic law on their

website. Here is one of their recent judgements. The female is encouraged

to remain within the confines of her home as much as possible, she should

not come out of the home without need and necessity. What do you

think of that? We need to say the whole context of that quote. They

are saying they should stay at home as much as possible, do you agree

with that? I see many Muslim women who are walking about... But this is

what the mosque is recommending women should do. The practice is

quite the contrary. Let me show you another one. Another Fatwa. Do you

agree with that? These have been picked out from material dating back

to different cultural settings and in practice they are not applied.

This is advice being given as we speak. This is not being practised.

Do you agree with it? No, not at all. These are from the DL Monday

mosques, how come 72 of these mosques are affiliated to your

counsel? There may be publications from one of their scholars, but they

have been written in countries abroad and translated. This is

advice being given to young women now. They are affiliated to the

Muslim Council of Britain. Do you ever speak to them about that? The

Muslim Council is a very broad organisation. We are working on lots

of common issues to create a community which positively

integrates. Did you ever speak to them to say this is not appropriate

for British Muslims? There may be certain ad buys and publications

available, but people make their choices. So it is OK for your

organisation to issue things like that? Many of these things will fall

under scrutiny and we need to create that. Why do only 26% of British

mosques have facilities for women? If you go back to the requirement of

prayer, it was not obligatory for women to come to the masks to

prayer. When a poorer community began putting up mosques at the very

beginning in terraced houses... Did you have a policy to encourage them?

Is it on your website? It is in our practices that 20% of the council

have to be female. Coming out of this movement there is a conscious

stream of superiority between Muslims and non-Muslims. Look at

this quote. He is a well-known picture in this country.

That is what he wants to stop. I disagree with that. We believe we

live in this society and Muslims in any society of the world, and they

have historically lived as minorities in many countries... You

would this associate yourself from that? Why do you allow people like

that to be affiliated to you? The requirement is for any organisation

to be affiliated is that they are bound by the Charity commission's

rules and regulations. We only accept those who are under the law

of this country. This is a matter of taste. Let me move on to a bigger

issue. In 2009 you signed the Istanbul dash-mac the Istanbul

declaration was signed. Do you still support it? No, we never signed it

or supported it. One of your leading lights signed it. In the media

mainstream he defended his position. You have this associated yourself

from it? What is wrong with that? I am not sure about the declaration

because we disassociated ourselves. Before reading it? We did not sign

it. You have not read it? I do not know all the aspects of the

declaration, but at the time in the national newspapers and media there

was a discussion and a debate and it was highlighted that that was not

what was meant by the declaration. When did you decide so is the

yourself from the declaration? From day one. We never signed it. The

East London Mosque which you are personally closely associated with

is the venue for a number of extremist speakers, who espoused

extremist positions. In 2009 the mosque posted a video and

presentation by somebody described by the UN Security Council as an

Al-Qaeda leader supporter. Another speaker described Christians and

Jews as Phil. You have had a jihad is supporter of the Taliban there.

Why do you do nothing to stop extremists like that at this mask

with which you are associated with? We do not have anything to do with

any rhetoric that condones or supported violence. We issue

guidelines and the mosque itself is a registered charity which has its

own rules and regulations, but it is a very large mosques and lots of

organisations book and come and told their gatherings. We rent out the

facilities. You were prepared to speak alongside a man who saluted

suicide bombers, and said 9/11 was a Zionist conspiracy. Why would you

share a platform like that? I did not share a platform like that.

Different organisations come and have conferences here. Why did you

agree? I did not agree with that. I completely reject that. When you add

all this up the attitude to women, the alliance with the most

fundamentalist Islamic mosques, the toleration of intolerant views, a

willingness for you to be counted among them, why should anybody of

goodwill, either a Muslim or a non-Muslim, regard the MCB as a good

force? It is an organisation which embraces different organisations

which are affiliated in the Muslim community. You have taken snippets

of certain individual views which are not the views of our affiliates.

It would be unfair to represent our view based on those which you have

highlighted in this programme. The work that we do is quite clear and

is on our website. They are all associated with you, but we will

have to leave it there. You are watching the Sunday Politics. Coming

up: I will be talking to joke Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics

in Northern Ireland. Time to break the deadlock in parades and the

past, it is picking up pace. Is in decade about to announce a

referendum on same-sex marriage in the Republic? I will reflect on all

that. I am joined by two newspaper editors. So, Richard Harris was by

in Northern Ireland this week to break the impasse on flags and the

leading in the past. This week he has been meeting some of the smaller

parties. John McAllister and Stephen Agnew are with us. Also with us is a

woman who helped draft the report on dealing with the past. What was your

engagement with the team like on Monday? Very encouraging. There were

a few key messages. The Good Friday Agreement, it is about getting

people back to basics. Northern Ireland does exist, let us break at

work. -- let us make it work. It is a crisis we have entirely managed to

create with the DUP and Sinn Fein. Were you able to get anything back?

Without breaking any confidences of the discussion there were some very

probing questions. He was keen to know what we were standing for, what

we thought on the three main issues of flags. He was interested that we

were supportive of designated days and tackling flags being left for

whether to bring down and the demarcation of territory on other

issues. We have been supportive and still are supportive of some kind of

police committee. It needs to be regulated and he accepted that. What

was the Green party pitch? We talked about success, are detox helpful, we

believe they are. Something that is key for us. -- the talks. The Good

Friday Agreement was the people's agreement. Whatever happened at St

Andrews they did so without the people, it took place after an

election. I welcome this week that it has been said there will be a

mechanism to involve the people. We welcome that the cause we believe

that politicians have taken the peace process and made it veers but

actually it needs to involve wider society. The protests and troubles

we have seen on our streets. Did you get a sense that there is a great

understanding of what is happening here? I certainly think the gravity

of the role is recognised. It is for politicians to find the solutions

but it is for this man to find the encouragement for them. The past is

likely to be the most difficult part of the remake, what is the main

thrust of your argument? We do see this very much as a people 's

process, something where the public and the academics of society can

participate. We were generally uneasy about the way the current

debate has been framed. It is a very narrow once more to the South

African model. We do not think that would work for our variety of

reasons. The main reason is that the truth recovery minimises the grief

and injury experienced here over the last 40 years and longer. We would

argue that are much more rigorous evidence -based look at the past

that can be gleaned through the political archives and the

government archives and through the marked and unmarked graves of this

country and beyond. That would provide us with the opportunity to

recover truth but also respect and acknowledge the suffering that has

come before the Good Friday Agreement. You were talking about a

commission of historic recognition. That sounds very academic. It is

academic. Consulting with the archives gives an opportunity to

bring together at much more robust and Regulus and principled approach

to the past. -- rigorous. Does that mean reducing the role of the

politicians? It means opening the archives held in London, Belfast and

Dublin. Opening those archives and allowing investigation, assessment

and analysis. It means then bringing that analysis or in a much more

rigorous way than it has been used. It sounds like a robust academic

approach rather than an emotional approach, might that be a good idea?

We certainly have to find some way of drawing the elliptical line under

hot we were dealing with in the past. -- drawing at political line

under what we were dealing with in the past. Has that been helpful in

the healing process? I would suggest not. We need to look at what we can

do on the ground to help people, to make it there until -- personalised

and individual. That is what I would like to see. My concern is that when

you look at the archives in London, Belfast and Dublin, what do you do

with other main participants in the Troubles, the IRA, the Loyalist

paramilitaries. You are still in this 2-tier approach. I still do not

see how you get round drawing a political line but carrying on the

good work on the ground with victims. How would that work? Other

archives would either not be open or do not exist. We would speak to

people and have word of mouth. Is there something of interest to you

in what we are hearing? I certainly think the academic view is important

but we need to move away from a controlled narrative at the top. It

needs to be a democratic history and it is not one narrative will stop it

needs to come from how people experienced it. We need all of those

rather than trying to narrow it down will stop thank you all very much

indeed. The editor of the Ballymena Guardian and the Irish News are with

me. The notion of opening archives and approaching this in at different

way, the past is likely to be the most difficult challenge. What you

think? Some of the material in the archives might not be suitable. We

have to recognise that we have official government security files

which are not necessarily connected to the paramilitary organisations so

there will be talk of collusion. There are going to be notifying of

any worth which will move the whole process or. It is a very difficult

and complex area. It is clearly determined to be an inclusive

process. People have different ideas about the past and how it should be

dealt with. I would be optimistic that it will be teased out with this

current process. What about the smaller parties, there have been 400

submissions from civil society and other interest groups. Is that part

of the solution or does it ultimately come down to the two key

parties? We have to hear from as many voices as possible. The two

main parties made a mess of the process. It does come down to the

two main groups but there has been some talk about a referendum. We

need to be cautious about that. Unless it was worded very carefully

there is a danger of a circadian headcount which could be damaging in

terms of community relations. Politicians have not behaved well

over flags, parades and the past. At wider engagement has to be a

prospect. It would be great if a sense of mature ditty -- mid surety

descends on Stormont. The more views that are on the table the better. I

am not quite sure what the endgame is here. Well there be deals with

flags, parades and the cast? Is it all or nothing or will progress be

made on each aspect? Do you get a sense at all that there will be some

resolution by Christmas? It is possible but these issues have been

with us forever. There was a good solution which did not down so well

at City Hall but surely there is a way of coming round? We could get

over parade but the past might take longer. Now, their grandfather was

one of the most famous men in Northern Ireland, Edward Carson 's

granddaughters were special guests at Stormont. We have always known he

was responsible for Northern Ireland existing at all. Every one goes, in

places like South Africa, the say grandfather could have been shot as

a traitor. This was not really what he wanted? He was eight union man

and he wanted Ireland as a whole, that was not how it was to be. I

have heard your father was a product of Lord Carson's first marriage. He

described them as a wrong lot. I read that too. There were four of

them, two girls and two boys. We never knew him. You don't think he

directed that comment at your own father, do you? He could have done.

He was very much at practical joker. Have you found today overwhelming?

Very interesting. Saying we have seen things we have only read about.

Edward Carson's granddaughters speaking to our reporter on their

first visit to Northern Ireland. It was said there are hopes for a

referendum to be held in 2014. I am joined now by the Irish affairs

editor. This seems to be a key policy in the government. It is a

key policy along with the abortion legislation. Same-sex marriage has

been described as a human rights issue. It is very much the key

message for Labour. A referendum will be held. What we are less

likely to get next week is the dominant party in the quality and

telling us where they stand in general. What we are even less

likely to get is a potential date for the referendum. We have heard it

denied that the Labour Party is split on the matter. How big a job

might he have keeping his party together? He may try to get himself

personally out of any difficulty. It has been very difficult because he

lost seven Parliamentary members when he pushed through abortion

legislation. It was very divisive. He was bruised by the fact he has

already lost two referendum in the life of this government. What he may

do, even if he decides to hold a referendum, he has been very coy

about where he stands on the issue but what he may do is hold a neutral

position within the party and allowed people within the party to

hold the own views. The women who are being discussed, whose lives

were being affected, were not very vocal but there are several members

of the Parliamentary party who are openly gay and it would be much more

difficult for able to oppose that. We have had some important steps.

Three years ago we introduced civil partnership which granted marriage

style rights on issues such as tax and social welfare but what it left

out was the legal start is, the legal relationship for same-sex

couples and their children. The government may attempt to resolve

that by producing legislation in advance of the referendum. Perhaps

politically to see themselves the type of advice on abortion

legislation they might agree to hold a referendum. What about the

timescale in terms of clarifying what might or might not happen? If

there were to be a referendum when would that be? Some wanted to be run

with next year's local and European elections when you might have a

better chance of a turnout. If it is pushed out into late 2015 you are

then running into a general election. I think we would be

unforgiving if the decision to have the referendum was held but not

until a general election. Now let us pause the fleet. -- let us pause

briefly. I carried a thermometer with me to calculate the mood. A

ball and was sent to the secretary of state. For me the fact it had my

name on it was not a significant issue. I was just doing my job. And

civil servants. We must not worry that civil servants do not take sick

days. And Tony Blair's spin doctor. Pushing and one below. -- pushing

and envelope. Now a final few thoughts from my guests. That letter

bomb addressed to the secretary of state was the latest device of its

kind to be made safe. There was a pipe bomb sent to the police. The

security situation obviously remains a big concern. A threat remains

high. Politicians have been in the firing line on the number of

occasions. In fairness to them, they have stood firm and are determined

to get on with their own jobs and attending to democracy. It has not

gone away, that is for sure. Now it has not what it is no coherent

elliptical strategy again. There is a danger that these devices could

come through. As we look ahead to what could be a very difficult

business period they are worried if one get through. The security cost

has to be taken into consideration, people being forced away from the

city centre. Some of the figures have been discussed and they are

substantially different. At the end of the day it is a survey but if you

take into account the security costs, it is a massive development.

You had mentioned a figure with a reference to the flags. What is your

opinion on what should happen during a busy business season? Many are

literally keeping the wolf from the door at the minute. Some businesses

did go to the wall last time. I think it is important that the

traders do get the normal Christmas this year.

traders do get the normal Christmas Thank you for coming,

traders do get the normal Christmas this year. Thank

traders do get the normal Christmas Thank you for coming, great to see

you. Andrew, back to you. Labour 's relationship with Unite and other

issues all to be discussed in the Week Ahead and we're joined now by

the shadow business secretary Chuka Umunna. First I would like to get

your reaction to the interview I did earlier with the General Secretary

of the union Unite - Len McCluskey. Let's look at what he said. This is

a trap being laid by Tory Central office. They are making all of the

demands and the Daily Mail, the Sunday Times, are you telling me

they are not the conservative mouthpiece in the media? They are

laying traps for Ed Miliband and he should not fall into them. Though it

is all a Tory plot. Len McCluskey denies a lot of the allegations put,

but let me be clear in an industrial dispute, the use of aggressive or

intimidatory tactics by either side is totally unacceptable. Do you

think it is wrong for Unite to send its members to the homes of

managers? I don't know what happened in that particular case, but I think

you should keep people 's families out of these things and if you are

doing something that can upset particularly children, that is a bad

thing. I know he denied a number of things you put to him. We now know

some of the content of Labour 's own report into what happened at Falkirk

and they found all sorts of things - forgery, coercion, trickery and even

that their own investigation was being thwarted by Unite. What should

Labour do next? I have not read the report. We are told that the latest

allegations that have been made is something that the police are

looking into so that is not something I think would be

appropriate for me to comment on. We learned Labour Party members in the

Falkirk constituency have complained to the leader of the Scottish party

about a lack of action by the Labour Party on what happened in Falkirk. I

am not part of the Scottish party and that is news to me. But the

police have indicated they are looking at the new information that

has come to light. It is a bit like the 1980s and there was an

electrifying moment when Neil Kinnock took on the militant

tendency in Bournemouth in 1985. Ed Miliband has sort of tried to take

on the Unite union, but it has not worked. Does then not need to be an

electrifying moment for Ed Miliband? Your own paper has praised him for

seeking to address the issues we have in politics and the

disconnection from people. In many respects the situation in Falkirk

categorises the process of further ongoing change where we are trying

to establish a better relationship with individual trade union members.

In parts of my constituency, some of the most deprived parts, we had

people queueing round the block to vote. I do not think the issue is

that people are not political, but they have never felt so far from

party politics as they do now and that is why Ed Miliband announced

this big chains about how we do things in the Labour Party, so we

change structures in the Labour Party that were set up in the 20th

century. The reform of the way in which we connect and our

relationship with the union puts us in a good position because we have

this relationship between the 3 million working people who ensure

our public services function. At Grangemouth INEOS stood up to

unite. At Grangemouth and Falkirk Labour rolled over to the Unite

union. I do not agree with that. I'd just explained the reason. I do not

think it is fair to ask people to give evidence in an enquiry on the

basis of the report will be confidential and then to publish it

after. But if somebody is trying to take over a Labour constituency to

send an MP of their choice to our Parliament, that should not be

secret, that should be public. Ed Miliband acted very decisively. That

constituency party is still in special measures as I understand it.

This idea that somehow the Unite union runs the Labour Party, they do

not. The special measures mean according to Eric Joyce, that an

ally of Stevie Deans is chairing the meeting. I am interested in the Tory

suggestion that they would offer free Tory party membership to union

members. I then moving onto your turf? We do not know exactly all the

facts and the truth of the allegations that have been made. On

your point I think it is healthy the Conservatives are looking to recruit

trade union members. A lot of their rhetoric is very negative in respect

of trade unions. If you look at Unison a third of the members vote

Conservative. In Unite union some of their members vote Tory. I think

trade unions have a lot to bring to our country. It is one of the things

many up and down the country will find very frustrating, a lot of the

good work that unions do if it gets tarnished with all the negative

stuff you see... Unite are working in partnership with GM and the

senior management in Ellesmere Port and the government ensured that we

kept that plant open. That gets overlooked by all of this. Do you

not think the bolshie behaviour from unions are motivated not by

strength, but by weakness. Unite know they cannot paralyse the

country in the way their forebears used to be able to do. Their

penetration rates in the private sector is 11%. The union movement is

weaker than it was before I was born. Some of that truck killers and

bad behaviour either death spasms of their movement rather than something

that is motivated by the fact they can't paralyse the country. You have

two increase the membership. But there is an issue about the public

perception of trade unions. It is right they should be a voice of

protest and anger and stand up for their members when it is necessary.

But people join unions for their aspiration. The unions do a lot so

that people can move up in their workplace. That profile needs to

come across as strongly as the protest part. I want to move on to

business. The head of the CBI has said that Labour's pro-enterprise

credentials have suffered a setback. He said that in relation to Ed

Miliband's speech. I was on the radio earlier. If you look at the

things in the speech, some of that was going to be uncomfortable for

some of the countries and they tend to be companies represented by the

CBI, like energy companies, like land developers, a lot of the big

business lose out from is not doing the corporate tax cut. The energy

freeze is going to help over 2.4 million businesses that have been

hit by high energy bills. The business community has said we had

to bring the public sector finances back into balance. That is why we

decided to switch the money being used to reduce corporation tax and

use that to help a much greater variety of businesses by doing a

business rate cut. It is all pro enterprise. They also seem to be

critical of your new idea of a living wage. They are not critical.

It would not be compulsory, but there would be a tax credit if they

paid it. It is good for business because if people are earning more

than they are more productive. It is good for the employee and good for

us as well because it means we are not having to subsidise people to be

paid to the extent we have with tax credits and benefits. Everybody

benefits from this. We all know after 2009 we need to have bold

change. Does Labour paid a living wage? We have got over 20 of our

councils signed up to doing so and we have made commitments in respect

to Whitehall. Does the Labour Party pay it? I believe so. Would it not

be worth checking? Do you get a living wage? Yes, of course I do. I

understand we paid a living wage. What does it feel like for Tristram

Hunt who has taken over your mantle as Labour's next leader? Is that a

relieved or are you angry? He is one of my best friends and at the end of

the day if we got obsessed with this soap opera stuff we would never get

anything done and we are working together to make sure we have got

the right skills in our workforce. That is all for today. The daily

politics is on all week. I will be here again next weekend at 12:25pm

after the Remembrance Day service at the Cenotaph. Remember if it is

Sunday, it is the Sunday Politics.