04/02/2018 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland

Morning, everyone, and welcome

to the Sunday Politics.

I'm Sarah Smith.

And this is the programme that

will provide your essential briefing

on everything that's moving

and shaking in the

world of politics.

Theresa May is back

after her trip to China.

But there's plenty of fire and fury

from within her own party over

Brexit and her ability to lead.

The Conservative

chairman joins me live.

Labour tells demonstrators only

it can save the NHS.

So, do the party's health

spending plans add up?

We'll talk to the Shadow

Health Secretary.

Months on from the sexual harassment

and bullying scandal that

engulfed Westminster,

we'll be asking what's happened

to plans for Parliament

to clean up its act.

And a violent scuffle at a speech

by one Tory MP has been widely

condemned.

But is it symptomatic

of a wider problem in politics?

In London, a Labour council leader

bullied out of power by the left.

That's the allegation that sparked

a civil war in the party.

Roundtable talks are

due to get underway

at Stormont tomorrow,

but with the Secretary

of State playing down

the importance of this week,

I'll be asking the Ulster Unionists,

SDLP and Alliance

All that coming up in the programme.

And, as one newspaper speculates

about a 'dream team' being urged

to take over at Number 10,

we've got our own dream team

of journalists - Tom Newton Dunn,

Julia Hartley-Brewer,

and Steve Richards.

And they've promised not

to plot against me...

At least until the end of the show.

So, the Prime Minister

may have been out

of the country to drum up trade but,

even from 5,000 miles away, it

must have been hard to ignore

the continuing unrest

from some in her party,

and repeated calls to be

clearer about Brexit.

Theresa May was in China this week,

where she gave President Xi Jinping

DVDs of Blue Planet as a reminder

of the dangers of plastic pollution.

Back home, Conservative MPs

gave her some advice on how to lead

the party and the Government.

Some advice was offered

to Cabinet ministers

getting restless on Brexit.

The best way they can

support her is to take a vow

of silence on the subject.

But most was for the

Prime Minister herself.

Some even aired their

thoughts in public.

I do think the window is closed

because politics can be

quite a brutal game.

When is the Government

going to stand up against the hard

Brexiteers who mainly

inhabit these benches?

She does not actually

have a majority for her

policy in her Cabinet.

It was advice of a different kind

that hit the Government

when BuzzFeed published leaked civil

service analysis suggesting that,

under various off-the-shelf trading

models, the UK would be less well

off in 15 years than

if we'd stayed in the EU.

But Brexit Minister Steve Baker

wasn't worried about the forecasts.

I think that they are always wrong,

and wrong for good reasons.

The analysis was grist

to the mill for Brexit critics,

but Theresa May probably didn't

expect one minister to pile in.

Justice Department's Phillip Lee

said the leaked report couldn't just

be dismissed and that,

if anywhere near correct,

it raised a serious question

about current Brexit policy.

But that's thinking 15 years ahead.

One former Brexit Minister George

Bridges took aim at the Government

and the House of Lords for still not

knowing what it wanted.

All we hear day after day

are conflicting, confusing voices.

Theresa May returned from China

saying she had secured £9 billion

of business deals during the trip.

Local media dubbed her Auntie May,

while International Trade Secretary

Liam Fox said her middle name

is 'resilience', claiming foreign

leaders were well aware

of Theresa May's strength.

You look at the Prime Minister

in a different way than some of,

let's say, the internal tea room

discussions in the UK do.

While at home there was speculation

about her ability to lead,

Auntie May herself was clear.

I am not a quitter.

She will be relieved the only

resignation she was offered this

week was from a minister who'd shown

up late to Parliament.

I'm thoroughly ashamed

at not being in my place,

and therefore I shall be

offering my resignation

to the Prime Minister.

But with open warfare in her party,

calls to step up her game,

and a crucial Cabinet meeting

on Brexit within days,

Theresa May knows she needs to do

something special to ensure the next

departure isn't hers.

There is plenty to talk about with

my panel of political insiders. It

feels like Theresa May's worst week

since last week that she began the

show but talking about how difficult

it was with fights within the party.

Is it even worse? It is about the

same. What is interesting, if I can

put this in some context, I am

working in a project with the Prime

Minister at the moment. Many Prime

Minister 's worry about being

deposed but it is rare to happen.

From 1968 Harold Wilson was in

trouble and he survived another

eight years. I'm not predicting...

John Major survived until the

general election. This is a constant

theme in British politics that Prime

Minister 's are rarely deposed at

the moment I work on the assumption

she will be around for some time to

come.

It is highly distracting

though. It cannot help with the

issue of the Government or wrecks it

for that matter.

All of Theresa

May's woes art of her own making. It

is about showing backbone and spine

and having a Brexit policy and

sticking with it. I find it

extraordinary we will have two

meetings with the Brexit War Cabinet

on Wednesday and Thursday of this

week to decide the Brexit policy.

She has been in office for a long

time it is a long time since the

last election. It is a total

travesty of leadership that is going

on. All of her problems are of her

own making. She could be doing with

warring factions in her party, the

opposition and all the other

threats, just to be a strong Prime

Minister. Making it clear to the

likes of Philip Hammond, you are

doubtful that he should have been

out a long time ago if she had the

will and strength to do so.

Is it

not by being ambiguous about her

position on terror, and she has been

able to remain as leader of the

Conservative Party?

Completely. I

disagree with Julia and Steve that

there is a third way in all of this.

I believe all her problems are not

of her own making. Brexit was not of

her own making. She somehow had to

try to get this through parliament

where she has no majority, where she

has eight Cabinet split and it is a

huge problem. The only reason she is

there is because she has not made a

big decision, she has not got off

the fence she is trying to keep the

ship together and compromise. As was

said in the brilliant speech in the

House of Lords, to govern is to

choose. Tony Blair said that this is

the year of choice. The next six

months will be the six months of

choices for Theresa May. User needs

to get the choices on Brexit, market

control, sovereignty, access to

huge, great big decisions. She needs

to get that past four different

hurdles was achieved to get the

Cabinet on board among her own MPs

to stay alive and stay in charge

having made those decisions. Then

she has too persuade the EU to buy

whatever it is she will sell. I find

it very, very hard indeed to think

she will get over all four hurdles

by the end of the year. Therefore I

am afraid I cannot see her as

leading the Tory Party by the end of

it.

I think it would be risky for

anyone to make any predictions. Can

I point out that 2018 was not the

year of choice?

2016 was the year of

choice. I care about what the

British electorate wants. The

British electorate made their choice

in 2016. Theresa May did not

increase her majority of the 85% of

people voted for two major parties

in the Ukip and the other parties

supported Brexit. There is a mandate

we need to get on and do the will of

the British people.

I completely

agree with Tom about these hurdles.

They are almost impossible to get

over. But that would apply to any

Prime Minister. So, you have to ask

the question, what does it solve? In

the longer term, changing leader

might give the more electoral

success, who knows? But it does not

solve getting over those hurdles you

could have Boris Johnson saying,

Britain can rule the waves. Those

hurdles will still be there.

But a

Prime Minister who knew more

about... .Mac will come back to this

later in the programme. In the

meantime we will move on.

The Home Secretary, Amber Rudd,

has been speaking this morning

to the Andrew Marr Show,

and she claimed the Cabinet

isn't as divided over

Brexit as some claim.

I have a surprise for the

Brexiteers, which is the committee

that meets in order to help make

these decisions, is meeting, as you

rightly say, twice this week,

is more united than they think.

We meet in the committee,

we meet privately for discussions.

I think we will arrive

at something which suits us all.

There will be choices to be made

within them but we all want the same

thing, which is to arrive at a deal

that works for the UK, that

looks ahead.

It's not just about protecting trade

behind us, it's about looking ahead

to what kind of country

we want to be afterwards.

We all have those

interests at heart.

And I'm joined now by the chairman

of the Conservative Party,

Brandon Lewis.

Thank you for coming in. Amber Rudd

is saying the Cabinet is more united

than people think. The parties that

he doesn't look that way from some

of the things they have heard this

week. It is your job to get them on

the same page in order to make that

happen, do you need to spell out a

vision of what Brexit will look like

so they can get behind it?

It is

like what Amber said. The Cabinet is

united behind the Prime Minister to

make sure we get a good deal for the

European Union.

We are hearing lots

of noises, complaining. They want to

know more about what the end state

will be otherwise they will row

more.

Where I disagree is all MPs,

certainly in the Conservative Party,

are united in seeing we get a good

deal on leaving the EU for the

United Kingdom.

Bernard Jenkin

saying we need to end confusion in

government. They are complaining

about the present uncertainty.

Working out what is the right deal

for the United Kingdom. In

negotiations we are having with a 27

partners who want to continue to

trade with in the European Union is

a very serious and, located piece of

work. We never said this was an easy

piece of work and it is why there

are meetings of the subcommittee in

the Cabinet going through the

details. We have the deal, the first

stage of the deal, before Christmas.

We must look to the next stage which

is agreeing the situation in the

period of translation after March

2000 and 19. The ultimate deal that

we want, for people in the United

Kingdom, after the transition period

as well.

We're all waiting with

breath. Your backbenchers, whatever

side of the other in they are on the

desperately want to know what the

end state will look like. After the

Cabinet subcommittees meet later in

the week, we get more detail?

There

are a couple of key issues. Within

Brexit we have been very clear.

We're going to leave the European

Union, and the customs union. We

want to make sure we can leave the

control of the Borders to the United

Kingdom, the Government of the

United Kingdom. When I am talking to

residents, across the country, they

also want to know that the Prime

Minister is focused on issues that

matter to people every day. They're

getting good education or housing

opportunities for people. The

knowledge and confidence there will

be growth in the economy and

security in the future as well.

It

is hard for the Dublin to get on

with that whenever such a fight

within the party among backbenchers

and senior influential people,

coming out and criticising the

party, criticising the leadership.

Until there is more clarity on

Brexit you will not be able

Brexit you will not be able to get

on with the other policies because

there is such a row in the party.

We

have a range of views, expertise and

great talent to draw on all stop

people putting their ideas forward.

Jacob is a really good example of

that. We saw what happened the other

night with the hard left doing

everything they can to try to stop

people having their safest we have

to ultimately make decisions about

what we think is right for the

country in the longer run. -- having

their say about what we have to

ultimately make decisions about.

Do

you worry whether there is a hidden

agenda?

My experience has been the

civil service in this country has

been superb. They work hard in the

best interests of the Government. It

is their job to give impartial

views. You think they do? That is

one reason why the world is envious

of our civil service and rightly so.

Our job as ministers and the

Government ultimately is to make

decisions on their behalf as you

give consideration and ultimately we

are the ones who have to make the

decisions.

Jacob Rees Mogg says they

are fiddling the figures and putting

out information that is wrong.

As

Amber Rudd herself said, one of the

most gracious and intelligent people

I know, on this, I slightly

disagree. Perhaps they are doing. In

the leaked reports, which have not

been approved and signed off by

ministers, it is about forecasts. It

does not take into account what the

final negotiation will be nor the

final decisions let alone the

domestic policy, which we are

getting on with. Making sure that

people have opportunities and

businesses can grow.

You mentioned

the scuffle at Jacob Rees Mogg was

involved in earlier in the week,

some fairly ugly scenes which no one

wants to see those that you have

plans to tackle intimidation in

political life?

We cannot allow the hard left to

create a situation where people feel

so intimidated they are not prepared

to come forward and have their say.

What we are seeing, and what we saw

in the report is actually people on

the left giving horrendous abuse to

people across the political

spectrum. I do agree, whether

someone's views are at the centre,

right or left, they should have the

freedom and knowledge they can come

forward and stand as a candidate. We

are going to change the law to make

it against the law for people to

intimidate people. But also from the

Conservative Party point of view,

internally we will have a respect

pledge that all of our candidates

will sign up to. If they breach that

cold, we will suspend them.

It's

often Labour politicians who are the

target of a lot of abuse. It is

Diane Abbott who gets far and away

the most abuse on Twitter. How can

you be sure these aren't members of

your own party or your own

supporters who are abusing left-wing

politicians?

We have to

differentiate. We should be able to

robust we have our debates. I have

debated with Diane Abbott over her

inability to get her numbers right

on police numbers. We have seen the

Shadow Chancellor... However it is

from, it is not acceptable. I will

deal with that. We need to have

good, clear, freedom of speech,

robust debate with respect and I

respect the Labour Party to do the

right thing and condemn what we saw

the other night, and see the

leadership do the right thing.

There's no evidence it had anything

to do the Labour Party.

What we do

know is when you have the Shadow

Chancellor of the country

encouraging abuse of people

individually...

He denies that. He

says he actually argues against that

and says he condemned it.

What

anybody can see, anybody can look up

what John McDonnell said. We have

not seen anyone in the senior

echelons of the Labour Party do

anything to condemn this kind of

action or come out and say they will

sign up to a respect pledge but we

will do that.

Getting back to the

Tory party, it is not just the

ructions that have erupted this

week, there has been a lot of

criticism of Theresa May's

leadership, Heidi Allen saying it

was time to get a grip and lead,

another MP said he had a profound

fear of Jeremy Corbyn becoming

leader if they don't get their act

together. It is difficult to manage

a febrile situation in which a large

number of your MPs don't seem to

want Theresa May to lead the party

into the next election.

I know Heidi

and Johnnie very well. I have heard

him be very clear that Theresa May

is the right person to lead the

country and actually Theresa May as

someone who cares passionately about

getting fairness in society,

opportunity for people...

Why do

your own MPs not appear to

understand that?

We should all be

uniting behind our leader.

Funnily

enough that is what David Lidington

said on the Andrew Marr Show last

week when he said it was time to

come together in a spirit of mutual

respect. Will they listen to you

this week, stop the sniping from the

sidelines?

I have been speaking to

colleagues and myself, what I get

consistently is they want us to be

focused on the job we should be

doing. The job I think most of your

viewers would want us to get on with

is delivering a good Brexit but also

we have a domestic agenda to

deliver, like supporting the NHS,

making sure businesses can grow,

people keeping more money in their

pocket and a country that is growing

and optimistic about its future

opportunities.

One Conservative

council got itself in trouble this

week, they run out of money in

Northamptonshire. The leader of the

council said they had been warning

the Government from about 2014 that

they couldn't cope with the level of

cuts they were facing. Did you not

listen to her?

listen to her?

Across local

government councils hopping -- ... I

do think there are more efficiencies

that can be found.

In

Northamptonshire they say they have

actually run out of money.

District

authorities can look at how they can

do more, about sharing services,

sharing senior management and saving

substantial amounts of money. I

would encourage those local

authorities to look at that

opportunity because it means they

can put more of their time and

effort and the money they do have is

focusing on giving good first-class

services.

You are of course going to

allow them to raise council tax, and

we have had warnings from other Tory

run councils as well saying they are

running out of money. It is a bit

difficult though isn't it when you

have prided yourself on low taxes

that many people are likely to see

pretty big rises in their council

tax.

We have to make difficult

decisions due to the economic legacy

we inherited. Council tax roughly

doubled under Labour, I was a

council leader where the party had

run my counsel at the time with

increases of 16% year-on-year. We

have brought that back down so we

had the council tax freeze, and I

would encourage council leaders to

look at how they spend their money.

But council taxes will be going up,

you reckon?

They will be using the

ability they have to raise it a few

percent to give good local services.

People are looking at how efficient

they are, how they are focused on

their local needs to get good

Conservative governments in May this

year.

Thank you.

Yesterday, thousands of people

marched on the rainy

streets of London to protest

against what organisers described

as a crisis in NHS funding.

The Shadow Health Secretary,

Jonathan Ashworth,

was there and told

the crowds that under Labour

there would be more money

for the NHS, higher pay for staff,

and privatisation would end.

No more PFI hospitals.

No more Carillion outsourcing,

leaving hospitals dirty and unclean,

affecting patient safety.

And we're putting Virgin Care,

and organisations like

that, on notice today.

No more suing of the NHS,

no more privatisation.

Privatisation comes to the end

with a Labour government,

as we get rid of that Lansley Act

and restore, and indeed reinstate,

a public National Health Service.

And Jonathan Ashworth is back

in his constituency in Leicester.

He joins me from there now.

Good morning. On that March you were

demanding the NHS get the funding it

needs but we have been looking back

at Labour's manifesto and you

weren't really promising very much

more money for the NHS than the Tory

government says it will deliver.

We

would be putting in an extra £5

billion into the NHS this year. You

will recall that Simon Stevens, the

head of the NHS, was asking for an

extra four billion this year. They

didn't get that in the November

budget but we would put an extra £5

billion into the NHS this year.

You

were talking about an increase of 2%

per year, more than this Government

is promising which is 1.2% this

year, but historically health

spending usually goes up by about 4%

per year and you were promising half

of that.

Yes, over 62 years it went

up by 4% but we would be increasing

expenditure quite substantially in

the NHS in the early years of the

Parliament.

But to an average of 2%

a year over the Government?

Yes but

we also said we would establish an

OBR for the health service to advise

government on long-term spending

needs of the NHS so we would have an

independent body giving us an

accurate assessment of the

demographic changes, the staffing

needs of the NHS, which would inform

future spending decisions. In the

early years of the parliament we

would be spending substantially more

on the NHS, not just for hospitals

which are overcrowded because we

have lost 14,500 beds since 2010 but

also more investment in community

health service.

It's very difficult

for you to give statistics about how

much trouble the NHS is in when you

were promising a very modest

increase in spending of 2%. Under

the last Labour government, health

spending rose by 6% per year, under

Margaret Thatcher's government it

went up by 3% a year. Your manifesto

pledge was to give the NHS on

average less money than Margaret

Thatcher did.

But we would be

allocating £5 billion for the NHS.

You say it is a modest increase, if

I could say it is substantially more

than this Government is putting into

the NHS and when you have Simon

Stevens saying the NHS needs four

billion this year, we were promising

more than that so you say it is

modest but I suggest it is a

significant level of investment

which would allow us to get waiting

lists down. They could reach 5

million under the Government. It

would allow us to deal with

overcrowded hospitals and allow us

to invest in

to invest in community health

services, stop the cuts to child and

adolescent mental health services,

allow us to recruit so we have the

nurses we need.

That is what you can

buy for £5 billion you say, is

scrapping tuition fees are better

use of the money?

I'm always going

to argue for more money for the NHS,

as someone who aspires to be the

Health Secretary.

And therefore

argue against scrapping tuition

fees?

The tuition fee pledge was a

promise made by Jeremy Corbyn and

John McDonnell when Jeremy Corbyn

run for the leadership of the Labour

Party and proved to be very popular

electorally as a pledge so I can see

why the Labour Party will be

sticking with that, but I'm always

going to be making the case for more

money for the NHS. We have seen £6

billion of cuts and

billion of cuts and other...

It is

not clear the amount of money

offered by Labour will be sufficient

to offer their aspirations in social

care.

I would say it would be.

Across the Parliament we would put

an extra £8 billion but we know we

have to look at better ways of

integrating health and social care.

The NHS was created in 1948, social

care was created as a sister service

but they have never worked together

as closely as they should. We are

older, with various different

conditions, we know the social care

system and the NHS will have to work

more closely together so we would

look at integrating properly health

and social care but that is a medium

to long-term plan, not something a

politician can deliver overnight.

It

was made clear at the rally you work

at yesterday Labour politicians

pledging no more outsourcing in the

NHS, what does that actually mean?

No more private companies of any

kind involved in healthcare at all?

What we would want to bring an end

to is the way in which, because of

the health and social care act from

for years ago, it means community

health contracts have to always be

put out to tender. Millions is

wasted, some even say billions

wasted, on the constant tendering of

contracts. We have just seen a

children's health contracts go to

virgin care in Lancashire. When

virgin care didn't win a contract in

Surrey, they forced the NHS to

settle with them out of court.

Macmillan Cancer Support have one in

Staffordshire, the Red Cross, St

John's ambulance, they all have

contracts provided for under the

very act you say you want to repeal.

You don't want these people involved

in health care delivery?

Macmillan

nurses have had a role since the

1970s. They complement what the NHS

offers so we are not talking about

ending the voluntary sector role.

This isn't just voluntary services.

No, but we are talking about private

firms where a full contract for

service delivery, say a children's

health service, is handed over to

virgin, that means the staff are

handed over, the only way virgin or

whatever that private sector company

is can make a profit is by cutting

down on terms and conditions. It

means the staff are often down

branded, knocked down a level in

terms of their pay, and we don't

believe that delivers the quality of

care children deserve and that's

what we want to end.

You talk about the long waiting

lists. Under the last Labour

government that they came in at a

time in the NHS was and a lot of

pressure and delivery used private

sector companies to work through the

backlog of people who were waiting

for operations in order to get the

waiting lists down quickly. Do you

not think that the NHS as an estate

now where you may be forced to

consider that?

The NHS has always

got extra capacity from private

service providers in that

circumstance. The Labour government

was not handing over the delivery

lock, stock and barrel for the whole

sort of health contract.

That's the

difference. But you might still buy

in services. When you say

outsourcing is finished, it doesn't

mean the whole involvement of

private companies is finished?

The

NHS will not build its own

ambulances. We will still buy from

the private sector. Without capacity

in the NHS we will buy in from the

private sector. If you want to get

the rescheduled by Easter, if you

wanted to do that, the anyway the

NHS could do that is by buying in

from the private sector. There is a

difference between spot buying in

the private sector and handing out a

complete contract. Take a really in

four example with the cleaning

contract.

I will have to leave you

on and ask you about Haringey

Council before we go. Clare Cockburn

was on the Andrew Marr show earlier

and she has been giving interviews,

talking about bullying within the

Labour Party and at council

meetings. -- Kober thought she said

she could not complain to the NEC

because she thought that was in

itself a problem. That is deeply

worrying, isn't it?

I don't know all

the ins and outs I have seen what is

in the newspapers but I used to be a

member of the National Executive

committee until 18 months ago. Clare

Kober, if there were specific

complaints, they do need to go to

the NEC and the NEC would look at

that. Various committees would look

at that very seriously.

You reached

a point when a senior member of the

party does not trust the NEC to sort

this out because she thinks they are

part of the problem and not the

answer.

I would say that the NEC, in

my experience, would look at these

things. The NEC got involved in

mediation talks. I am not a member

of it anymore but what I understand

is a substantial number of Labour

councillors in Haringey asked the

NEC to intervene I don't know the

ins and outs but it is clear there

are two sides of the story. On

specific allegations where there was

a meeting in Haringey where there

was anti-Semitic chanting in things

like that, if those people are

Labour Party members were they need

to be reported. If people are being

anti-Semitic they will be thrown out

of the Labour Party, simple as that.

Thank you.

Allegations of sexual harassment

and bullying rocked Westminster

when they emerged last autumn.

By the end of the year,

two Cabinet ministers had resigned

and several MPs from different

parties had been suspended

pending investigations.

The Government promised action,

and announced a cross-party working

group to decide what it should be.

But, so far, it hasn't

recommended anything.

Ellie Price has been finding

out what's going on.

And, just a warning, her report

includes some flash photography.

It wasn't parliament's finest hour.

Revelations of shady goings-on,

of sexual harassment in the Palace's

bars and back rooms,

of bullying in its offices.

Of course, the vast majority of MPs

and their staff were not implicated.

But it was enough that

all the party leaders agreed

something needed to be done.

We should not rest until everyone

working in Parliament can feel safe,

valued and respected.

We have a chance now to get

this right, for everyone

on the parliamentary estate.

Political leaders agreed

to set up a cross-party

working group in November.

MPs, peers, and other interested

groups have been working

on the proposals ever since.

The Leader of the House had said

she wanted the recommendations to be

voted on by Parliament

and implemented by

the end of January.

But here we are at the beginning

of February and still the report

hasn't been published.

before Christmas and then

its scope was widened.

It was then due to be released

on Thursday but I'm told it

still needs final sign off

from the party leaders.

I've been told there is now broad

consensus among members on the group

that its recommendations

are suitably robust.

Sources close to the talks told me

there's recommendations are likely

to include a new independent

grievance procedure for staff,

consent lessons for MPs,

starting after the next general

election, a new code of conduct,

and the one most likely

to grab the headlines,

tougher sanctions, including making

easier the process to recall -

and potentially fire

- an MP.

The current situation is one

where I would face harsher sanctions

and penalties for being rude

about another MP on the floor

of the House of Commons

than I would if I were bullying

or harassing a member of staff.

I don't think that is a reasonable,

or tenable, situation,

and I think we need to give staff,

and the general public we work for,

the confidence that Parliament

is not just abiding by the law

on employment rights

and workplace rights

but actually setting a standard.

A representative from Unite is also

on the working party.

The union says its members,

who work in Parliament,

have lost faith in the system.

Our members don't have confidence

at the moment that there's

going to be enough change

in Parliament to make

a difference to the bullying

and harassment culture.

There needs to be positive

engagement with staff and encourage

them, and give them confidence that,

if they make a complaint over

bullying and harassment, that there

will be proper investigation.

And the working group

has its work cut out.

As HR experts consulted

during the process point out,

reforming the existing employment

rules in Parliament

is not straightforward.

One of the big challenges,

you've got 650 MPs, who are all

running their own offices and staff.

So, effectively, you've got 650

small firms in effect.

And the extent to which they have

had previous experience in managing

people, and running businesses,

is probably limited

in many instances.

So, that's part of the problem.

But any overhaul of the system

is unnecessary, says this MP

who has been in Parliament

for nearly 35 years.

I think, by and large,

the rules work as they are.

And, if courtesy and common sense

are applied, there is no need

for any change at all.

Yeah, there are bad

apples in the barrel.

But those bad apples tend to get

weeded out pretty fast.

And I think we could create,

if we're not careful,

a whistle-blowers charter,

a witch hunters charter.

Very difficult for a male of any age

to defend against an allegation.

I'm told the report will be

published next week,

possibly on Tuesday,

and MPs will then debate

it in the Commons.

But it may not satisfy everyone that

it's exactly what's required to put

this House in order.

It's coming up to 11:40am.

You're watching the Sunday Politics.

Coming up on the programme,

we'll be talking about the violent

scenes after protestors interrupted

a speech by the Conservative

MP Jacob Rees Mogg, and plenty more.

First though, it's time for

the Sunday Politics where you are.

In new or her

Hello or her and welcome to

Sunday Politics in Northern Ireland.

It's a big week ahead

with roundtable talks planned

for Stormont and pressure mounting

for a budget decision.

So what will the SDLP, Alliance

and Ulster Unionists be bringing

to the table tomorrow?

And what happens next if it proves

impossible to bring devolution back?

And joining me with their

thoughts throughout

the programme are columnist

Brian Feeney

and journalist

Amanda Ferguson.

But first today, Sinn Fein's Gerry

Kelly has found himself

in the middle of a police

investigation after he was filmed

removing a clamp from

the wheel of his car.

A video of Mr Kelly circulated

on social media yesterday

and the police say they're

investigating a report

of criminal damage in

the Cathedral Quarter of Belfast.

A Sinn Fein statement acknowledged

Gerry Kelly had removed the clamp

and that his solicitor is dealing

with the matter.

So is this another

embarrassment for the party?

Brian and Amanda, social media

is awash with the footage.

What do you make of it?

yes, I hardly think it is an

embarrassment for the party. Gerry

Kelly has done a number of

controversial things but we don't

know the details yet. It is possible

that it is one of those occasions

where it is something that is very

small, you don't see that you are

going to be clamped and you don't

know what time of day it was either,

whether it was early morning or

afternoon so I expect it will end up

that he will have to pay the cost of

the clamp.

It seems to indicate that

it happened early in the morning

after a gym session. It was dark.

Yes, I think there will be lots of

questions and it wasn't what I was

expecting to be writing about last

night. It is just another one of

those stories that brings attention

to the unique circumstances of

northern Ireland and its politics.

We will see how it pans out.

We are

assuming it was some sort of by the

contract of the clamped him.

contract of the clamped him. There

are clearly other politicians who

have been expressing their annoyance

and outrage about what happened.

I

have no doubt that a complaint will

be put into the assembly and they

will investigate what Gerry Kelly

was up to and what his behaviour

was.

There have been calls for his

resignation already over the matter.

Will talk a lot sportier over the

programme.

Tomorrow the Secretary of State,

Karen Bradley, will chair her first

roundtable talks at Stormont

since taking up the post,

but she's now playing down

the significance of this week,

which she had previously

described as a "milestone".

While much of the emphasis of recent

months has been on discussions

between Sinn Fein and the DUP,

this is the chance for the smaller

parties to get their

elbows on the table.

Joining me now are the SDLP's

Mark H Durkan, who's in our Foyle

studio, John Stewart

from the Ulster Unionists and the

Alliance Party's Paula Bradshaw.

What are you hoping

for from tomorrow's discussions?

It is interesting to hear that there

hasn't been any down play of the

significance of it and the isn't

much expectation in the public and

we see tomorrow as a huge

opportunity and we have the five

parties finally sitting down at the

start of what is we hope will be a

inclusive and transparent process

and the first test of that

transparency will be weathered the

DUP and Sinn Fein there are

DUP and Sinn Fein there are the

three parties how far they have got

on behind closed doors and the

government has told us as well that

there has been sick that the process

and we are close to a deal but we

need be told that and we can't

address a process that we don't owe

anything about and the public have a

right to know what progress has been

made. They can see that obstacles

remain and we all want to work

together to overcome those obstacles

and get the government up and

running again.

Do you have any

optimism about what might come out

of tomorrow or might this be a

process of windowdressing and it

everything will fall apart?

First of

all, I was keeping an eye on the

media yesterday and you would expect

the DUP and Sinn Fein to come out

and say what they expect but that

didn't happen will stop and the

public are right to expect failure,

but we have seen all parties get on

board and that will unlock

everything here and we need a stable

assembly and that will only happen

if we have the mechanisms and

structured to move forward to

democratic politics.

Is there any

sense of any movement between the

DUP and Sinn Fein to make you

optimistic about tomorrow?

Not that

I have seen. Discussions are

ongoing, but the parties, the DUP

and Alliance have been given no

indication of what progress has been

made. All five parties have sit sat

round the table since June last

year, that is ridiculous, we need

inclusive talks. I have already said

loud and clear to the Secretary of

State that we need to know where the

parties have got to before we can

move forward.

You can understand why

do Sinn Fein and the DUP would not

want to give away their negotiating

positions,.

I can't see how they can

ask for an inclusive process, if

they can't even tell the other

parties what is they have got to we

need transparency and be respectful

of the public and we all need to

know what has been going on since

May of last year. I was involved in

the talks before the general

election last year and they were

transparent. What has changed in

that time, we need to know?

Presumably, if these talks are to be

successful they will require

compromise, particularly on the part

of the DUP and Sinn Fein. If those

two parties reveal no negotiating

hands you will tell the rest of

bursts and that will hold them below

the water line so it doesn't make

sense for them to do that.

I think

it makes perfect sense and the

public have a right to know where we

are. Yes, compromise is required.

Politics is meant to be the art of

the possible and is important that

we all compromise so that we get

what is possible. What we have seen

in the past year is no government,

no decisions have been made. We

haven't seen any progress on the

issues that have been proposed,

there has been no progress. We need

a legislative assembly and that is

why it is extremely important that

we focus our energies on redesigning

the petition of concern so that it

can remain as a means of protecting

or be used for abuse the rights of

man or a tease.

So is that what you

think will be the factor that will

bring an end to the logjam? Yellow

macro it's not a view,.

However you

want to look at it, after the

assembly election last March, we

have brought plenty more to the

table and it is important that we

move forward on the Irish language

rights or equal marriage rights, and

we have gone backwards and all those

things have been compromised.

Do you

believe that reform of the petition

of concern could be the key?

There's

going to have to be some sort of

agreement this week in terms of some

issues around how that is going to

be informed. But there will be some

things that can be accommodated in

advance of that, like the Irish

language. But we have thought very

much at politically but about the

Irish language act and we would like

to see some agreement about same-sex

marriage. But even the issue about

Gerry Kelly, there isn't a standards

commissioner at the minute,. So the

reform of the petition of concern is

not just about the issues, the

big-ticket issues, it cuts right

across the whole workings of the

assembly.

Before I ask you about

Gerry Kelly, is the DUP prepared to

compromise to get a deal?

We are

open to the process and I don't know

what the stumbling blocks are. The

Good Friday Agreement, the spirit of

Northern Ireland pro takes is based

on compromise.

on compromise.

Why are members of

your party saying that it is

becoming clearer that the campaign

has been hijacked by Sinn Fein to

promote cultural supremacy. It

doesn't look like he's getting ready

to compromise.

We believe very

strongly that there should be strong

protection for the Irish language

and we see no need for an Irish

language act. And it is not for us

at this stage, we believe strongly

that the place to do this is before

the assembly in a spirit of

transparency.

But you are not making

it easy for the DUP to compromise.

We are standing by the belief that

we have set down everything as a

party.

What do you make of that?

That doesn't help anybody towards

moving towards compromise.

No, he

said that this could be dealt with

and we have now seen an interim

report and there is no reference to

it. He has boxed himself into a

corner and he needs to get on board

with a set of proposals and

legislation and they have been left

behind by much on this.

And what

about the SDLP on the Irish language

act? Does that have to be one?

We

are entirely supportive of an Irish

language act and in the last

assembly, my party asked for a bill

on that.

I know that, but will it

that....? Yellow macro I believe we

do need a devolved institution.

We

need a Irish language act in the

legislation.

Let's move on to the

story that we have been talking

about at the beginning of the

programme which is the footage that

has appeared a Gerry Kelly removing

a clamp from his car apparently on

Friday. What do you make of that?

What you think of the implications

of it for the political process?

The

fact that Gerry Kelly is a

spokesperson for Sinn Fein,

obviously the police have now been

involved and the parties have legal

representation, so we will see how

that pans out. But this is the sort

of stuff that reflects on the

behaviour of MPs and we need to get

the assembly back up and running so

that we can address this matter.

Are

there any circumstances where there

is possible for someone to remove a

wheel clamp with a set of bolts

cutters? Yellow macro I don't

believe the rears.

Who carries bolt

cutters in their boots? I don't

think it is acceptable to be seen to

be doing that. Not only is he a

police spokesperson but he is on the

police board. There has

police board. There has to be. If

the unacceptable to remove it and

say that's because I had meetings to

go to. People don't like being wheel

clamped, getting fined or getting

fined for speeding, but if you break

the law, then you have to face the

consequences. It's not acceptable to

say that you have somewhere to go

and so I removed the clamp.

OK, Sinn

Fein have made it very clear that

she Gerry Kelly has passed this

matter on to his solicitor and his

solicitor will be dealing with the

interim. And Mr Kelly will not be

making any further comment. Mark,

what you make of the footage using?

I'm not sure how this will proceed

legally but what I do think is very

important is that politicians are

not seem to be be owned or above the

law. The first thing I saw up --

what was in Derry, it is still pitch

black eight o'clock in the morning,

so was it a typo in that statement?

A bit they will clarify that. I do

think, Mark, you started our

conversation today about the really

important issues today which is the

talks. And we shouldn't be

distracted by things like this.

Let's hear more from Brian and

Amanda. In terms of these three

smaller parties, all five parties

will be sitting round the table

discussing the rest Aleutian of

devolution since last June. -- the

restitution of devolution.

It will

become quickly apparent to the SDLP

weather is a process they are part

of. I have found it difficult to

become energised by the current

phase of talks.

Brian, is it a

genuine process and does the import

roll Blunt of the smaller parties

matter?

No, tomorrow at the DUP and

Sinn Fein will not say tomorrow

where they stand and one of the

reasons is because the last time the

talks were open, confidential

documents were given to loyalist

protesters, so they just don't trust

the fact that anything they say

confidentially will be kept

confidential. But I think it is also

the stage we have reached where

opinion

opinion polls, makes it clear that

they cannot give an Irish act and

the position of Sinn Fein as they

cannot go back in without an Irish

language act so there is a complete

impasse not just on the Irish

language, polar's point. Paulus

point. At any stage the assembly

could collapse. If the First

Minister resigns, that is it.

I

wonder whether you think Karen

Bradley is the person to break the

logjam. We have had calls for

independent talks, she says it is

not of the table. Lord Eames macro

said he'd we need to get involved.

There is no sign of that happening.

I don't think Karen Bradley whizzed

brought here to inject any new

thinking.

thinking. One of the interesting

things about the Irish language act,

others party support that.

The

spectre of another assembly election

was raised during the week, is that

a serious runner?

I don't think it

is, if you have the say another

election with the same result,, the

actual campaign will mean there will

be no movement afterwards.

The boundary commission officially

would least its review of the 17

cars are Jewish in constituencies

for Northern Ireland.

for Northern Ireland. -- review of

the 17 constituencies within

Northern Ireland.

That was a mistake

and people related realise it was a

mistake.

mistake.

Sorry there has been

misunderstanding but there have been

to bait or questions about whether

that will be the right point to make

a statement about seeing where we

are on the talks.

Enda McClafferty reporting.

Gerry Adams is

beginning his last week

as Sinn Fein President before

he makes way for Mary Lou McDonald.

Speaking on the Andrew Marr show,

he was asked if Brexit

means his goal of a united

Ireland is now more likely.

I think we need to be very careful

that we don't see Brexit as

something which can be exploited.

Brexit is a disaster for the people

of Ireland. The British government

are not at all clear what the

relationship between the European

union is going to be and they are

arguing that they are going to leave

the customs union and they are going

to lead the single market and that

will end up a complete disaster for

the people here on the island of

Ireland. The negotiations have moved

into the second phase, and it is a

fudge and is full of contradictions

and business people are totally

dependent on the flow of back and

forth of business and commerce but

across the border. The harder you

get the border that will done that.

Brian, Mr Adams steps down after 35

years of the helm. Has his time in

charge brought a united Ireland

closer to a reality?

His presence

and role in the last 35 years

certainly hasn't, as things like

Brexit, demographic change and

economic change, but the 35 years of

the IRA campaign under Gerry Adams

leadership certainly hasn't.

Do you

agree with that?

Yes, I think the

time is now right for the

Republicans to set out what Ireland

should look like.

But it is going to

be a different Sinn Fein without

Gerry Adams.

Of course. Their

ambition is to get

Welcome back. Our expert panel is

still with us to talk through the

week's events and what we expected,

in the near future. One thing that

made the news was a scuffle at a

university in Bristol where Jacob

Rees Mogg was interrupted by some

protesters. Let's take a quick look

before we talk about it.

Jacob Rees Mogg, who always seems to

be the centre of any story these

days but Steve, are those unusual

scenes at the University political

meeting or is that happening around

the country are not being caught on

camera and therefore we do not know

about it?

It is not that unusual and

it happens at times when politics is

at the forefront. There is nothing

exceptional about the highly charged

atmosphere of politics and students

have always chosen controversial

speakers to go to university and get

a hard time like that. Jacob Rees

Mogg is brilliant at dealing with

people like that. I have seen him at

meetings where people have come in

and he is fantastic. Very polite and

courteous. That is the way of doing

it. It is an absolute myth that

something is happening and there is

a lot going on in politics at the

moment that is disturbing. People

doing this is not justifiable and

has always happened.

The idea that

someone would come to speak at the

union and someone did not like their

views and you would put on a

balaclava and shout, fascist some at

them, and think that was acceptable.

That did not happen. I'd tell you

what also did not happen, he was not

condoned by the Shadow Chancellor.

Not condone the behaviour in

Bristol.

Apart from the fact that

John McDonnell, not Jeremy Corbyn,

has repeatedly encouraged laughter

from audiences, talking about a

violent insurrection against

politicians. He said he thinks no

Tory MP should be able to speak

publicly without having this sort of

behaviour. Condoned by a mainstream

party, effectively Deputy Leader.

I

think you meant condemns all

violence.

He says that he has not

specifically condemned this. Correct

me if I am wrong. He has not

specifically condemned this.

Brandon

Lewis was trying to say these are

elements of the hard left and trying

to make this a bit of a party

political movement. There is no

evidence that they are associated

with the Labour Party.

There is a

little bit of evidence. A lot of

these infiltrators are members of

Momentum and they consider it to

Jeremy Corbyn. It is now an official

Labour Party campaign group. Brandon

Lewis is going to jump all over this

to try to claim huge political

capital in a bit of a naughty way.

Labour frontbenchers are not

encouraging their members. There is

wider truth going on, which is

politics is basically getting more

ideological. The centre ground is

weak and has a very poor voice. The

louder are on the far left and the

far right. That is why the centre

ground have to speak up.

There is

only one party conference where your

political editor needs security

guards. There is only one another is

the Labour Party confidence. When

Brandon Lewis was here earlier and

he said the Labour Party wants to

stop intimidation in politics, it is

arguable the public order act allows

for that anyway from that nobody

wants to see people putting

themselves forward in public life

being intimidated. Is this a way of

getting political capital out of the

situation?

It is. I remember Keith

Joseph, a real innocent right-winger

going to universities and getting

worse treatment than this. I am not

justifying this treatment was it has

always gone on amongst students.

There is anger that it manifests

itself in these stupid ways but has

always gone on. He is trying to make

political capital. Linked to

Momentum, it is not clear. People

are struggling in the media to make

sense of it. It is different in

different places and its influence

is different in different places. He

is trying to make political capital

out of things that have always gone

on.

Jacob Rees Mogg is at the centre

of every story this week. He is

deeply critical of Treasury

forecasts and having a go at the

civil servants. He actually accused

civil servants in the Treasury of

fiddling the figures. It was a

remarkable thing for a senior

politician to say when they

generally pride ourselves on the

impartiality of the civil service in

this country. A former head of the

civil service, Gus O'Donnell, said

this to say.

We look at the evidence

and we go where it is.

Of course, if you are selling snake

oil, you don't like the idea

of experts testing your product.

That's what we've got,

this backlash of evidence among

experts is because they know

where the experts will go.

Julia, that is him criticising

Brexiteers who have been criticising

Treasury figures.

What do you make

of it? What is that an ageing is we

are forgetting why the Office for

Budget Responsibility was set up. It

was about the fact the Treasury and

civil servants were politicising

these budget predictions and all of

these growth predictions and it

would take the politics out of it

and set up the OBR. Why it was

accepted it was a good idea, we know

the civil service, it is ingrained

in them to be against change it has

been ingrained since time in

memorial. Everyone working for them

says they have to work against the

sluggish view of the civil service.

Brexit is the biggest change their

will take on. They go with the

facts. The same civil servants from

the Treasury are working on those

predictions. It was politicised and

utterly wrong. After the vote to

leave, they predicted there would be

5000 job losses and a recession. The

people who worked on and on this

Treasury report, they are either

completely politicised, in which

case they should go, or they are

really bad at their jobs, in which

case they should go.

It is quite

astonishing to save the Treasury has

its own political agenda.

That is

total bunkum. Civil servants have

views. They are voters that they

properly came into the civil service

because they are

because they are interested in

politics. Civil servants will and

have carried out brilliant bits of

change was that they were behind the

creation of the NHS and welfare

reforms. Everything like that was

done by civil servants. To think

civil servants do things people

disapprove of and an ideological

perspective that Julia will not like

is because they are not being given

direction by ministers for the if

ministers run civil servants

properly they will get results that

they want. Civil servants have had a

woeful leadership from the

Government about Brexit because the

Government will not get off the

fence.

They may well have to this

week. They have two meetings this

week. Will we have any further

clarity by the end of that what the

Government wants the end state to

be?

It will be what it appears to be

now, which is, you have your cake

and eat its strategy. Theresa May

will emerge from these two important

meetings and will say that we want

some kind of continued free trade

relationship with Europe but we want

to be free to make our own trade

deals. B want a soft border with

Ireland and so did be you and now we

will go in and negotiate. It seems

to me that is where the problem

begins. -- the EU. She will

begins. -- the EU. She will not a

have your cake and eat it option.

There are tensions about the

relationship with the customs union.

You mentioned her speech about an

associate membership with the

customs union.

There has been a huge

row about whether we are leaving the

customs union but could be being our

customs union question that she had

said I want is to have a customs

agreement. Why is this such a fault

line within the party?

It comes down

to the absolute epicentre all now up

of Brexit if there is such a thing.

-- nub. A senior Cabinet minister,

they said, the customs union is the

fault line driving right through the

Cabinet on Brexit. It always was and

always will be full to the customs

union is the one thing that will

either stop the Brexiteers getting

what they want out of Brexit, which

is trade deals with the rest of the

world. They remain as corrupt or

soft Brexiteers with what they want,

which is closer links with the EU.

That is why there is such strong

disagreement. There will be yet

another fudge in Cabinet because it

is too hard to make a binary

decision. That will go to the EU.

The EU will look at it and say, this

is cake and eat it verge, decide.

That is the key moment.

It is

extraordinary. -- fudge. It

certainly should not be decided now

that the idea they will decided in a

four our debate is rather unlikely.

Also if you end up with a situation

which does not explain with much

clarity, it will not stop the noises

from the rest of the party, will it?

That has been unstoppable for 30

years. That will be the constant

background hum. It is the fate of

every Tory leader to try to navigate

around that noise. Of course, Europe

has brought down the last three Tory

Prime Minister. Although earlier I

cautious about saying whether she

would fall over the next few months,

Europe is the thing that torment is

Tory leaders.

The alternative, could

a non-Brexiteer come through and

become Tory leader and then Prime

Minister have another election?

Jeremy Corbyn is in favour of

Brexit.

That's all for today.

Join me again next Sunday

at 11 here on BBC One.

Until then, bye-bye.