:00:38. > :00:45.Morning, folks, welcome to the Sunday Politics. And in-out EU
:00:45. > :00:48.referendum before the general election? We talk to the Tory rebel
:00:48. > :00:53.demanding one next year, that is our top story. As government ministers
:00:53. > :00:55.prepare to decide how the press should be regulated, what will be
:00:55. > :00:58.the impact of this week's row should be regulated, what will be
:00:58. > :01:05.between the Daily Mail and Ed Miliband?
:01:05. > :01:15.You are talking about the colour of peoples faces?!
:01:15. > :01:20.And in Northern Ireland, another major international investment
:01:21. > :01:59.conference taking place here this week. We will ask Arlene Foster what
:01:59. > :02:06.He will try to force a vote in the Commons to hold the poll next
:02:06. > :02:11.October. Home Secretary Theresa May was asked about his plans on the BBC
:02:11. > :02:18.earlier this morning. I think he has got it wrong, I think what we need
:02:19. > :02:23.to do is to negotiate the settlement with the European Union and then put
:02:23. > :02:29.that to the people me to decide whether to be in or out. Is this a
:02:29. > :02:34.flea bite or a real threat? I think what is crucial is that we have, at
:02:34. > :02:39.the next election, a Conservative Party that will be offering people
:02:39. > :02:43.that renegotiation, a new settlement with Europe, looking to the future
:02:43. > :02:48.and putting that to the British people in and in or out referendum.
:02:48. > :02:51.And what the amendment possibly could do, as James Wharton, who was
:02:52. > :02:56.putting the Referendum Bill through Parliament has said, is it could
:02:56. > :03:02.jeopardise that bill. Adam Afriyie joins us now from Millbank studio.
:03:02. > :03:06.Good morning. If the referendum would be held next October, it would
:03:06. > :03:13.have to be an in-out question based the status quo? There wouldn't be
:03:13. > :03:18.time for a full renegotiation. I disagree. By having a referendum in
:03:18. > :03:21.2014, it gives us 12 months to renegotiate, but it kick-started
:03:21. > :03:24.negotiations, because the European Union, if they wish us to remain
:03:24. > :03:28.members, would need to accommodate and make changes so that they would
:03:28. > :03:32.persuade the British public to stay, if that is what they want. It
:03:32. > :03:37.strengthens the Prime Minister's hand, and 12 months is ample time
:03:37. > :03:40.for that kind of negotiation. You might think that, but Germany has
:03:40. > :03:44.not even got a government at the moment, why should they meet our
:03:44. > :03:50.timetable? This is going to be incredibly, located renegotiation. I
:03:50. > :03:54.think, basically, 80% of people want a referendum. More than 50% what a
:03:54. > :03:57.referendum this side of the election. British businesses need
:03:57. > :04:01.certainty, and we could carry on taking a scan down the road for
:04:01. > :04:05.ever, but I have struggled with my conscience over this one. I do not
:04:05. > :04:08.want to cause trouble, but it is essential that Parliament and MPs
:04:08. > :04:12.have the opportunity to search their souls and give people a referendum
:04:12. > :04:14.this side of the election. That would also bring certainty and
:04:14. > :04:20.clarity for the future, and like I said, it strengthens the Prime
:04:20. > :04:24.Minister's hand if it is successful. You right in the Mail on Sunday that
:04:24. > :04:28.the people are not convinced there even will be a referendum, so they
:04:28. > :04:32.don't trust David Cameron? I think the headline was not the headline I
:04:32. > :04:36.wrote for that piece. What I am saying is a very calm analysis...
:04:36. > :04:40.You are saying that the British people are not convinced. Look,
:04:40. > :04:44.there are too many uncertainties here - they may not be convinced the
:04:44. > :04:48.Conservatives will win the election, I hope we will, they may not be
:04:48. > :04:53.convinced the renegotiation will be good enough, that there will be a
:04:53. > :04:56.referendum. Do you trust David Cameron to deliver a referendum?
:04:56. > :05:00.That is why we need to bring the referendum forward, there is time to
:05:00. > :05:05.negotiate, and we tidy up the issue that has been hanging around for too
:05:05. > :05:09.long. Do you trust David Cameron to deliver a referendum in 2017? I
:05:09. > :05:12.completely support the Prime Minister, and of course I trust the
:05:12. > :05:17.completely support the Prime Prime Minister. To deliver a
:05:17. > :05:19.referendum? There as only variables in between. What I am doing with
:05:19. > :05:24.referendum? There as only variables this amendment, is to try to be sure
:05:24. > :05:28.is that Parliament and every MP has the opportunity decide whether they
:05:28. > :05:29.want to be sure of a referendum within this parliament, or maybe
:05:29. > :05:34.leave it to the vagaries of what may within this parliament, or maybe
:05:34. > :05:39.happen in 2015. Supposing you got your way, how would you vote? Like
:05:39. > :05:41.Michael Gove, I would vote for us to leave as of today, but there will be
:05:41. > :05:44.Michael Gove, I would vote for us to an enormous amount of pressure on
:05:44. > :05:49.European Union leaders to come forward with proposals. If they were
:05:49. > :05:55.to say, the mandate is not ever closer political union, it is ever
:05:55. > :05:57.closer trading harmony, giving us more border control and control over
:05:57. > :06:03.our legal system, I might change my mind. But this is what needs to
:06:03. > :06:06.happen - if we have a referendum in 2014, 12 months is time for
:06:06. > :06:12.negotiations to be kick-started and people to argue in or out, and the
:06:12. > :06:17.end result is a stronger Prime Minister. Is it true that you have
:06:17. > :06:20.got about 80 MPs supporting this? It is cross-party, that is for
:06:20. > :06:24.certain, and I think we will see it on hold over the next three or five
:06:24. > :06:30.weeks. He will have to ask each individual MP. I am asking you, it
:06:30. > :06:33.is your motion! There will be other motions coming forward, and I know
:06:33. > :06:38.there is widespread support, cross-party, for people who want the
:06:38. > :06:41.British public to have a say in 2014. You know it is not going to
:06:41. > :06:48.get through, the whips will stop this from happening. One of the
:06:48. > :06:50.successes, apparently, of your party's Manchester conference was
:06:50. > :06:51.that you were not divided over Europe anymore, the Europe issue was
:06:51. > :06:56.settled. Here you are bringing it Europe anymore, the Europe issue was
:06:56. > :07:00.back to life and pouring petrol on the flames - are you now the
:07:00. > :07:03.unlicensed troublemaker of the Tories? The only struggle I have had
:07:03. > :07:07.is not a fight with my party but Tories? The only struggle I have had
:07:07. > :07:10.with my conscience as to whether or not I would give Parliament and the
:07:10. > :07:15.British people an opportunity to have a say in 2014. I wrestled with
:07:15. > :07:19.it, and I decided I wanted people to have that opportunity. It is for
:07:19. > :07:22.each individual MP to search their soul, speak to constituents and
:07:22. > :07:28.decide whether they want that. You decided it would get you in the
:07:28. > :07:32.headlines again. Oh, you are so cynical, Andrew! I have no ambition
:07:32. > :07:36.in that direction, I am not a publicity seeker. All I seek is for
:07:36. > :07:39.the British people do have this. I would not be able to sleep at night
:07:39. > :07:44.if I did not bring forward this opportunity for Britain to have its
:07:44. > :07:49.say. We have left it far too long. Nobody under the age of 56 has had a
:07:49. > :07:52.say. Thanks for joining us, good luck with this continuing struggle
:07:52. > :07:56.with your conscience! I will move the seat around and addressed the
:07:56. > :08:01.panel, what do you make of it? The party managers must be furious with
:08:01. > :08:06.him. I think what this confirms is that David Cameron is incredibly
:08:06. > :08:12.lucky in his enemies. His most prolific critics, Nadine Dorries,
:08:12. > :08:16.Peter Bone, Adam Afriyie, even if you are very anti-Cameron, you will
:08:16. > :08:20.not think, man, if only they were in charge of the party! I think the
:08:20. > :08:26.party managers are not too alarmed. They do not take him seriously? No,
:08:26. > :08:29.it is not a frivolous amendment. It is not as if the James Wharton bill
:08:29. > :08:33.is a work of genius, it is riddled with flaws, anomalies and loopholes.
:08:33. > :08:37.It purports to guarantee that a referendum will take place in the
:08:37. > :08:39.next Parliament. My understanding of the constitution is that is
:08:40. > :08:43.theoretically impossible and that all the future government would do
:08:43. > :08:46.is cancel out that bill with another bill. He does have a point that
:08:46. > :08:52.Cameron's plan for a referendum is nothing like as likely to happen...
:08:52. > :08:56.Hung parliaments, frivolous amendments can be immensely
:08:56. > :09:01.dangerous. The problem for David Cameron is twofold. One, if Ed
:09:01. > :09:05.Miliband says he's going to support Adam Afriyie, it will go through.
:09:05. > :09:11.Unlikely that Ed Miliband would do that, but what he might do is say to
:09:11. > :09:14.his MPs, ignore this. It may well be that the Labour payroll and a
:09:14. > :09:17.significant number of Labour MPs do not turn up, and then what you have
:09:17. > :09:21.got is a war between the Conservative payroll and the
:09:21. > :09:25.Conservative backbenchers, and in that war you might well find that
:09:25. > :09:28.Adam Afriyie's amendment goes through, and then the Prime Minister
:09:28. > :09:32.has real trouble, because Adam Afriyie says, the Prime Minister
:09:32. > :09:38.could renegotiate terms of membership, up what basis and with
:09:38. > :09:41.which mandate? He would not be able to get agreement with Nick Clegg or
:09:41. > :09:47.Ed Miliband, so you would be looking at Adam Afriyie voting to leave. I
:09:47. > :09:50.think he is a Labour mole, that is what I have come to, a Daily Mail
:09:50. > :09:53.style conspiracy theory, it could not be more perfect. The prospect of
:09:53. > :09:56.style conspiracy theory, it could a referendum on the EU at the same
:09:56. > :10:02.time as Scottish independence is what no-one once, so that is it. He
:10:02. > :10:05.has told us he could not sleep at night, wrestling with his
:10:05. > :10:10.conscience. We could send him some pills, I suppose. We know he's going
:10:10. > :10:14.to sack all those lieutenants were going around and saying he is the
:10:14. > :10:19.great future and the next leader of the Conservative Party. He denied
:10:19. > :10:24.doing that! He would be amazed to hear you say that, this is a crisis
:10:24. > :10:27.of conscience. Whispered conversations in corridors, quite an
:10:27. > :10:32.operation to get letters into Graham Brady, he said to have letters, not
:10:32. > :10:38.46, but at the moment this campaign is being run by Lieutenant of Adam
:10:38. > :10:44.Afriyie. He has got lieutenants? They are disaffected and not happy
:10:44. > :10:49.under David Cameron's leadership. There is a whole army of them! I am
:10:49. > :10:53.pleased he has outmanoeuvred the awkward squad, and now James Wharton
:10:53. > :10:59.is saying, you're going to kill my bill. I do not think they are very
:10:59. > :11:03.competence lieutenants. The main political consequence of this
:11:04. > :11:06.episode is it will unify a large chunk of the Colin Hendry
:11:06. > :11:12.Conservative Party behind David Cameron. On what they hope is a
:11:12. > :11:16.settled position. We still hope to be talking to John Prescott, who is
:11:16. > :11:21.in hole, if you see him, pointing in the direction of the BBC studios! Do
:11:21. > :11:26.you want to buy a house? Can you afford the mortgage repayments but
:11:26. > :11:30.not the 20% or 30% deposit the mortgage provider is demanding from
:11:30. > :11:33.you? The Government says it has a scheme designed for you which is in
:11:33. > :11:38.launching next week, help to buy, and it should lead to the
:11:38. > :11:43.re-emergence of 95% mortgages, remember them?! But is the policy
:11:43. > :11:47.really good for home-buyers or the British economy? Here is Giles.
:11:47. > :11:50.Never mind who lives in a house like this, who can afford to buy a house
:11:50. > :11:54.these days? The Government would this, who can afford to buy a house
:11:54. > :11:57.like many more people to be able to without putting down a crippling
:11:57. > :12:03.amount of money as a deposit, and in the spirit of rights to buy, the
:12:03. > :12:04.government has launched help to buy, confusingly it is the name for two
:12:04. > :12:18.different schemes. The first scheme, Help to Buy 1, has
:12:18. > :12:21.been running since April. Help to Buy 2 was supposed to come in
:12:21. > :12:25.January next year, but the government are bringing it in early.
:12:25. > :12:29.Let's get in on the inside and take a good look around at what this
:12:29. > :12:34.scheme actually has to offer. And why the Government thinks it really
:12:34. > :12:41.works. Help to Buy 1 was an equity loan scheme. The idea, nice, is that
:12:41. > :12:47.it was for new build only, up to a value of £600,000. But it is Help to
:12:47. > :12:54.Buy 2 that everyone is looking into right now. It is for any property up
:12:54. > :13:00.to a value, again, of £600,000. This time the Government is guaranteeing
:13:00. > :13:04.that it will take on the first losses should the home owner in the
:13:04. > :13:08.future failed to make their mortgage payments. Don't worry about that, if
:13:08. > :13:13.you are a buyer, you are going to be concerned about coming up with the
:13:13. > :13:18.5% deposit and 95% mortgages will be available again in participating
:13:18. > :13:23.banks and building societies. And that, the Prime Minister thinks, is
:13:23. > :13:29.a housing prime mover. You cannot get training to 5% mortgage anymore,
:13:29. > :13:32.90% even, so there are couples in our country who have good jobs,
:13:32. > :13:35.decent incomes, they could afford the mortgage payments but they
:13:35. > :13:39.cannot buy the house. It is a failure in our banking market. So
:13:39. > :13:44.that is the Prime Minister, Jonathan, but I guess for you this
:13:44. > :13:48.is not Homes Under The Hammer, but a scheme which should be hammered. The
:13:48. > :13:52.main impact of this scheme will be to push up prices, who does that
:13:52. > :13:57.benefit? Mostly rich and all the people who own their houses. Plus
:13:57. > :14:02.the banks, of course, because it is a subsidy for them. Who loses?
:14:02. > :14:05.People who want to buy a house in the future. Moreover, it is a bit
:14:05. > :14:11.odd that the Government says it is not OK to borrow to finance schools
:14:11. > :14:16.or roads, but it is fine for the Government to take on more debt,
:14:16. > :14:23.effectively, in order to guarantee 95% mortgages and pump up the
:14:23. > :14:27.housing market. 2.3 million? I do not think Help to Buy covers that.
:14:27. > :14:34.But enter a would-be buyer, will they now be seeing a plethora of
:14:34. > :14:39.help to buy mortgages? In a word, no. David Cameron has brought the
:14:39. > :14:43.announcement forward by three months, and banks were not ready at
:14:43. > :14:46.that stage. Two banks have committed to fund the scheme, the Lloyds group
:14:46. > :14:51.and the RBS group, so lenders like Halifax, RBS and NatWest. They will
:14:51. > :14:55.be doing the scheme, but even once the scheme is up and running you are
:14:55. > :14:59.not going to see Help to Buy mortgages badged up. You will
:14:59. > :15:08.probably find 95% mortgages on the high street because of the guarantee
:15:08. > :15:12.the government is offering. People might say this is how we got into a
:15:12. > :15:19.mess in the first place. Why would the government want to make those
:15:19. > :15:22.products available then now? It was more what investment banks were
:15:22. > :15:28.doing in the background that caused the problems. Mortgages have
:15:28. > :15:35.performed extremely well through the depths of the downturn. Is this a
:15:35. > :15:40.game changer? Yes, I have done my best to save over the last few years
:15:40. > :15:48.but this has enabled me to make that first purchase. How frustrating was
:15:48. > :15:53.it just renting? Very frustrating, you are throwing away money hand
:15:53. > :15:57.over fist, and now I can take that leap to being an owner. His
:15:57. > :16:02.enthusiasm raises a question back at the flat. If you are looking for a
:16:02. > :16:07.95% mortgage, you don't really care what will happen in the wider
:16:07. > :16:14.economy, you are thinking, great, I can buy a house. Yes, if I was a
:16:14. > :16:21.house buyer or a bank, I would be pleased, but it will do longer term
:16:21. > :16:25.economic damage. The tricky steps the government are trying to pull
:16:25. > :16:32.off is that home-buyers might be so grateful for the opportunity to buy
:16:32. > :16:35.their own homes that they reward the Government with the vote, while at
:16:35. > :16:51.the same time the Government tries to sidestep consequences that such a
:16:51. > :16:53.scheme might create. Now Conservative MP Margot James,
:16:53. > :16:57.and Allister Heath, editor of City AM, go head to head.
:16:57. > :17:04.It is said by the critics that this scheme will cause a housing bubble.
:17:04. > :17:18.Where is the evidence? House prices are more varied. Housing not just in
:17:18. > :17:22.London remains overvalued and the problem with this scheme is that it
:17:22. > :17:28.will pump up house prices, it will not increase the supply and
:17:28. > :17:33.therefore houses will become even more overvalued. That is a dangerous
:17:33. > :17:38.territory, last time it ended in tears, and now the Government is
:17:38. > :17:44.taking on the risk of that policy. What do you say to that? We have a
:17:44. > :17:49.real problem, it takes people on average until they are 38 years old
:17:49. > :17:57.until they can buy their own property. The problem is not that
:17:57. > :18:01.they cannot afford it, but they cannot afford the deposit. We have
:18:01. > :18:05.got to do something to allow people to get their feet on the property
:18:05. > :18:10.ladder and I don't agree it will cause a boom in house prices. It
:18:10. > :18:23.would if we were not building any new houses, but we are. Are you? We
:18:23. > :18:34.have had a record this year, 12 months to right now, the record for
:18:34. > :18:41.the last ten years. These are not the statistics I have seen, but the
:18:41. > :18:46.new supply is coming up. It is starting to creep up. We don't see
:18:46. > :18:50.enough house building, need to build more houses and that is a solution
:18:50. > :18:54.to this problem. You are right, people cannot afford to buy homes
:18:54. > :18:58.and the reason is there are not enough good quality homes in the
:18:58. > :19:03.right places. The reason the deposits are so high is because
:19:03. > :19:06.house prices are still too high, and secondly the Government has passed
:19:06. > :19:11.laws to make the banking system more prudent, telling them to put more
:19:11. > :19:16.money aside in case things go wrong. Now suddenly the Government
:19:16. > :19:19.is not happy with the outcome of its own rules and is trying to create
:19:20. > :19:26.these subsidies to circumvent the rules it has put in place. It is not
:19:26. > :19:32.a subsidy. Don't forget banks have to pay a charge in order to take
:19:32. > :19:39.part in this loan scheme and that the... You are guaranteeing the
:19:39. > :19:46.money. Yes, but the fear is worked out on a commercial basis. The
:19:46. > :19:52.taxpayer is protected. Why? You are guaranteeing £12 billion worth of
:19:52. > :19:58.mortgages per year. Yes but the change in the whole mortgage basis
:19:58. > :20:01.has been made a few years ago in response of the crash. They made the
:20:01. > :20:09.distressed test on people applying for mortgages much higher and you
:20:09. > :20:13.have to be able to repay at twice... So it will not be like
:20:13. > :20:19.these self certification mortgages handed out in America that caused
:20:19. > :20:24.the sub-prime crisis? Pigment bit like that but the banks are rightly
:20:24. > :20:29.asking for bigger deposits, they know there is a big chance house
:20:29. > :20:33.prices could fall if interest rates will go up, which they will
:20:33. > :20:37.eventually, so they are demanding bigger deposits. The Government is
:20:37. > :20:39.making sure the risk of circumventing this is being passed
:20:39. > :20:43.making sure the risk of on to the taxpayers which is why it
:20:43. > :20:50.is a dangerous policy. Instead they should be massively accelerating
:20:50. > :20:54.house-building. Which we are. Planning permission is much easier
:20:55. > :20:59.to get now, we have seen a 49% increase in planning permission for
:20:59. > :21:05.a new building over the last year, a huge increase. In the figures I saw
:21:05. > :21:12.recently, they showed new start in the 12 months to the autumn were
:21:12. > :21:17.only about 110,000 which is the figure you inherited, which was at
:21:17. > :21:24.an all-time low in 2010. New house built in the last quarter are third
:21:24. > :21:27.up on the time last year. You have got to give a chance for the
:21:27. > :21:31.relaxation of planning laws and the other policies the Government put
:21:31. > :21:36.into effect last year to take effect and it is coming through now. I
:21:36. > :21:40.agree, if we weren't building more houses, if the construction sector
:21:41. > :21:45.was not really ready to take advantage of the increased demand,
:21:45. > :21:52.there would be a risk. David Cameron says you are snob and it is only
:21:52. > :21:59.snobs who dislike Help To Buy. They don't have the bank of mum and dad,
:21:59. > :22:05.people like that will finally get on the housing ladder. That is complete
:22:05. > :22:10.nonsense. We need a sustainable housing market where there is a
:22:10. > :22:13.large amount of construction, like in the 1930s for example, where
:22:13. > :22:22.large numbers of proper family homes were being built for people. House
:22:22. > :22:28.prices were pushed down and people could afford houses. You are now
:22:28. > :22:34.encouraging people to take out a 95% mortgage, I thought that was a bad
:22:34. > :22:38.idea, so supposing interest rates go up by a lot, I am going to
:22:38. > :22:44.struggle, and supposing house prices fall by more than 5%, I am now faced
:22:44. > :22:51.with negative equity and soaring interest rates that I cannot afford.
:22:51. > :22:57.95% mortgage, if you can afford the repayments, you will be fine. What
:22:58. > :23:03.happens when interest rates rise? They have got to rise a lot before
:23:03. > :23:09.you get into trouble. People are already affording rent which is a
:23:09. > :23:16.lot higher than mortgage payments. You will not be able to get into
:23:16. > :23:20.this scheme unless you can afford repayments double what they are at
:23:21. > :23:24.the moment. The Conservatives should have been enjoying the media
:23:24. > :23:30.limelight last week but there was an unwelcome intruder in the shape of a
:23:31. > :23:34.row between Ed Miliband and the Daily Mail. Just over a week ago the
:23:34. > :23:41.Daily Mail printed an article claiming that Ed Miliband's Father
:23:41. > :23:48.Ralph hated Britain. They showed a picture of his father's gravestone
:23:48. > :23:53.with the caption, grave socialist. They then removed the photo and gave
:23:53. > :23:57.Ed Miliband the right to reply on the Tuesday edition, but also
:23:57. > :24:01.printed an editorial alongside it saying they stood by every word they
:24:01. > :24:06.published an fair headline. It also emerged in the week that the
:24:06. > :24:11.reporter had gate-crashed a private memorial service for Ed Miliband's
:24:11. > :24:15.uncle in a London hospital, for which the paper has now apologised,
:24:15. > :24:21.but Ed Miliband has called on the Daily Mail owner to take a long,
:24:21. > :24:26.hard look at the way his papers are run. This comes a week before a new
:24:26. > :24:31.system of press regulation is considered at the Privy Council.
:24:31. > :24:37.Joining us now from Hull, John Prescott. Does this row between Ed
:24:37. > :24:45.Miliband and the Daily Mail reinforce the case for tough, new
:24:45. > :24:50.regulation of the press? It certainly influences the opinion
:24:50. > :24:54.about that but that is more of Paul Dacre's doing. Ed Miliband rang me
:24:54. > :24:59.while I was in Strasbourg making sure my complaints were nothing to
:24:59. > :25:07.do with press regulation and he is right. This argument is not about
:25:07. > :25:16.politicians and media people, it is about ordinary people that love this
:25:16. > :25:21.and dealt with. All of these cases affected individual people and they
:25:21. > :25:26.are the ones that need to have justice in this matter. Next week we
:25:27. > :25:33.will be hearing whether the Privy Council will be reporting on the
:25:33. > :25:49.proposal to replace it. Are you agreeing then that what the mail did
:25:49. > :25:57.with its Miliband article was a matter of judgement? Yes, and the
:25:57. > :26:02.with its Miliband article was a Leveson inquiry came to the
:26:02. > :26:06.conclusion that the relationship between the press, the police and
:26:06. > :26:09.politicians should be governed, but this is about how you have a
:26:10. > :26:16.framework that can be fair to everyone. If you look at the
:26:16. > :26:20.proposal given by half the press industry that that does not meet the
:26:20. > :26:24.Leveson requirement and I suspect the Privy Council this week will
:26:24. > :26:28.have to reject that, and I hope it will because it is not consistent
:26:28. > :26:34.with the Leveson report which the Prime Minister said he supported.
:26:34. > :26:40.You attacked the mail in your column today but your paper went through
:26:40. > :26:45.the Cameron family bins to see what nappies they used for their disabled
:26:45. > :26:53.son. Isn't that far more offensive than what the Daily Mail wrote about
:26:53. > :27:02.Ralph Miliband? It probably is, I couldn't defend that. I have had
:27:02. > :27:08.reporters going through my bins. Haven't we all? Yes, but we are
:27:08. > :27:15.dealing with the judgement of editors who acts unilaterally. Paul
:27:15. > :27:23.Dacre is running this thing in the Mail. How can we accept their
:27:23. > :27:33.judgement and some accountability which the press have accepted the
:27:33. > :27:37.old PCC is no good. They are playing for time because if they reject it
:27:37. > :27:42.this week there is 12 months until you can consider a parliamentary
:27:42. > :27:45.alternative and then you are near the election and you begin to bully
:27:45. > :27:55.the leaders. That is how they have been successful in putting off
:27:56. > :28:01.recommendations. Maybe my memory is fading but did you or anybody else
:28:01. > :28:07.in the Labour Party object to the Sunday Mirror's behaviour? I didn't
:28:07. > :28:11.know about it. I would just say it is wrong if that is what they did.
:28:11. > :28:17.As you said, you have the same position when they go through your
:28:17. > :28:22.rubbish bins, I think that is wrong. We have Leveson set up by the Prime
:28:22. > :28:25.Minister to look at the cultures and practices and the unilateral action
:28:25. > :28:38.of editors and he came forward with a proposal that was agreed in
:28:38. > :28:40.Parliament under a compromise of the Royal Charter. I don't like a Royal
:28:40. > :28:43.Charter, it is not democratic frankly, but we have agreed to go
:28:43. > :28:48.along with it so why did the Government set up in charge at the
:28:48. > :28:57.same time rushed through the press box? It looks like a fix, like they
:28:57. > :29:01.are using the Royal Charter as a means of delaying everything. They
:29:01. > :29:04.have now said they are going to introduce their own independent
:29:04. > :29:09.charter. This industry does not want to face up to any form of
:29:09. > :29:12.accountability. We know Alistair Campbell and Ed Miliband's officers
:29:12. > :29:20.accountability. We know Alistair are working closely on the assault
:29:20. > :29:25.of the Mail. What is the endgame for this? Is it the head of Paul Dacre?
:29:25. > :29:39.He is not an acceptable character to me, and he needs to be taking
:29:39. > :29:42.account. When Ed Miliband rang me it was to say, don't let these
:29:42. > :29:50.arguments drift into press regulation, he wanted the argument
:29:50. > :29:58.of decency. Are you and Ed Miliband after Paul Dacre's head? No, he can
:29:58. > :30:02.stay there. It is like with Murdoch, after Paul Dacre's head? No, he can
:30:02. > :30:06.we were not attacking him but what is papers were doing. To that
:30:06. > :30:09.extent, what they are doing about ordinary people, not just big
:30:09. > :30:14.politicians who can look after themselves. We know, with the bad
:30:14. > :30:18.cases he had to deal with, they might get libel action, which the
:30:18. > :30:22.press say, but they pretty well destroyed their lives. That is about
:30:22. > :30:27.judgment. If you say, as Paul Dacre got good judgment? I would say no,
:30:27. > :30:32.he will have to live with it. Thank you for joining us, he did not
:30:32. > :30:39.even have to go to the BBC studios, we sent a truck there for him. What
:30:39. > :30:42.is the endgame in this? Whether the Labour Party is trying to make this
:30:42. > :30:47.an issue press regulation are not, this is where it is going. We have
:30:47. > :30:49.the criminal trial involving Andy Coulson coming up, the Privy Council
:30:49. > :30:52.discussing press radiation before the end of the year, and the
:30:52. > :30:56.question is, what is political impact? My hunch, it is an
:30:57. > :31:00.unfashionable view, is that the total at yum elated political impact
:31:00. > :31:04.of the Leveson story over the past several years, hacking and
:31:04. > :31:12.everything, is close to zero, because most voters do not care, and
:31:12. > :31:14.those who do care believe that all parties are roughly complicit in
:31:14. > :31:19.being too close to editors and proprietors. You said that Adam
:31:19. > :31:26.Afriyie was a Labour mould, with a smile. Is the Daily Mail also a
:31:26. > :31:30.Labour mole? This has been a dream for Ed Miliband, I took on Murdoch,
:31:30. > :31:36.I am taking on the energy companies and now the evil Daily Mail! I
:31:36. > :31:40.think... I should say I used to work for the Daily Mail, but when they
:31:40. > :31:42.printed the right of reply, they surrounded it with a big two fingers
:31:42. > :31:46.up at Ed. If they had not done surrounded it with a big two fingers
:31:46. > :31:51.that, they would not be in this position. The poll in the Sunday
:31:51. > :31:56.Times this morning shows 72% think the Daily Mail was wrong and backed
:31:56. > :31:59.Mr Miliband's demand for an apology. If you come to define and your dad,
:31:59. > :32:04.people are naturally going to do this, but it took all the coverage
:32:04. > :32:07.away from the Tory conference, the media loves covering itself, here we
:32:07. > :32:13.are doing it again, this has been a dream for Mr Miliband. The political
:32:13. > :32:17.significance of this is that David Cameron said in the House of Commons
:32:17. > :32:21.that he wanted to try to find some common ground between the three
:32:21. > :32:26.party Royal Charter and the so-called press industry version.
:32:26. > :32:29.What the Daily Mail has done is ensured that the Prime Minister is
:32:29. > :32:33.not going to be able to do that. What is going to happen this week is
:32:33. > :32:36.that the press Royal Charter has to be considered first, and that will
:32:36. > :32:43.probably be rejected. The Privy Council will reject it. Then the
:32:43. > :32:49.three party Royal Charter will come up, but meanwhile the press will set
:32:49. > :32:52.up their own regulatory body because the Royal Charter is not a proper
:32:52. > :32:55.statutory underpinning, they will be able to go ahead with that. There
:32:55. > :32:58.statutory underpinning, they will be will be the legal basis for the
:32:58. > :33:02.oversight of the oversight body, and it will basically just be an
:33:02. > :33:07.ambassador that will not be resolved. As you say, no-one much
:33:07. > :33:10.cares about this outside of the resolved. As you say, no-one much
:33:10. > :33:18.profession and a few media watchers. But this has been great politics for
:33:18. > :33:26.Ed Miliband. It is only great politics if he scores a great
:33:26. > :33:30.victory. I take your view that people are cynical about it. But the
:33:30. > :33:32.narrative is, I am the chap who stands up to vested interests. But
:33:32. > :33:35.all those vested interests are stands up to vested interests. But
:33:35. > :33:41.people that you would expect a left-wing politician to want to take
:33:41. > :33:47.on. It is also more significant about who he has stood up for, and
:33:47. > :33:50.the person he has studied for is his father. Maybe people thought of him
:33:50. > :33:57.as a Marxist, now they think of him as war hero. He gets to the crux of
:33:57. > :34:02.matters, you know! You are watching the Sunday Politics. Coming up in
:34:02. > :34:14.just over 20 minutes, I will be speaking to Godfrey
:34:14. > :34:19.Hello, and welcome to Sunday Politics in Northern Ireland. With
:34:19. > :34:22.another international investment conference coming up this week, what
:34:22. > :34:25.will the Enterprise Minister be hoping it achieves for the economy?
:34:26. > :34:31.I'll be talking live to Arlene Foster from her Fermanagh
:34:31. > :34:33.constituency. Voters in the Republic opt to retain the upper house, the
:34:33. > :34:37.Seanad. So is it a calculated slap in the
:34:37. > :34:40.face for the Taoiseach, or a vote for democracy? And with me
:34:40. > :34:48.throughout, journalist Sam McBride and writer Susan McKay.
:34:48. > :34:52.International investors are coming here this week to be wooed by the
:34:52. > :34:55.Secretary of State, the First and Deputy First Ministers, and even the
:34:55. > :34:59.Prime Minister, in an attempt to encourage them to put their money
:34:59. > :35:02.into Northern Ireland. David Cameron was behind the idea, which he
:35:02. > :35:05.announced at the end of the G8 summit in Fermanagh earlier this
:35:06. > :35:09.year. Overall it's been a good year for inward investment, with a number
:35:09. > :35:12.of major job announcements. Only this week, Stream Global Services, a
:35:12. > :35:17.US-based call centre business, said it's creating 1000 jobs.
:35:17. > :35:22.Unemployment is falling and now stands at just below 7%, which is
:35:22. > :35:25.lower than the UK average. But political divisions still remain at
:35:25. > :35:29.Stormont, with the Maze/Long Kesh development proving a major
:35:29. > :35:32.obstacle. So will there be a united front for the visitors? Joining me
:35:33. > :35:40.from Fivemiletown is the Enterprise Minister, Arlene Foster. Thank you
:35:40. > :35:43.for joining us on the programme. How optimistic are you that this
:35:43. > :35:50.conference will deliver anything substantive for the Northern Ireland
:35:50. > :35:53.economy? I am very optimistic that will happen. This is part of the
:35:53. > :35:58.economic legacy of the G8 and the will happen. This is part of the
:35:58. > :36:02.Prime Minister announced it after the G8 took place in Fermanagh, so
:36:02. > :36:07.we have been working since then to identify potential investors for
:36:08. > :36:10.Northern Ireland and we believe a number of them will come to Belfast
:36:10. > :36:14.and be joined by existing investors number of them will come to Belfast
:36:14. > :36:20.who can advocate for why they came to Northern Ireland and why it is a
:36:20. > :36:26.good place to invest in. Who is coming specifically that we should
:36:26. > :36:30.be impressed by? I will not talk about the tension investors for
:36:30. > :36:35.obvious reasons, that there will be people from the New York Stock
:36:35. > :36:38.Exchange, from Chicago mercantile, and Northern Ireland is now the
:36:38. > :36:42.number one in the world for financial technology investment and
:36:42. > :36:47.I think that is something to be proud of and we will talk about why
:36:47. > :36:53.that is the case. We have the skills and billable and the infrastructure
:36:53. > :36:56.in terms of telecoms infrastructure and this is something people mention
:36:56. > :37:02.a lot, we have accessibility to government, the government can work
:37:02. > :37:05.well with business. Will there be new companies to Northern Ireland
:37:05. > :37:13.with no existing presence here at the table? There will, and that is
:37:13. > :37:14.part of the mix, we have potential investors as well as investors
:37:14. > :37:21.part of the mix, we have potential already here, but those investors
:37:21. > :37:25.who are here, 75% of those reinvest into Northern Ireland, so we're not
:37:25. > :37:30.just looking at new investment but those people already here and how --
:37:30. > :37:33.what more we can do with them. How should we measure it against the
:37:33. > :37:37.last investment conference here in 2008,
:37:37. > :37:47.? Are last conference etc first all as a country which was to do
:37:47. > :37:51.? Are last conference etc first all business on the world stage, so much
:37:51. > :37:56.so that Northern Ireland is just behind Greater London as the largest
:37:56. > :38:01.bringer of investment into the UK, and that is something we should be
:38:01. > :38:04.proud of. We have only 3% of the population of the UK, yet we brought
:38:04. > :38:08.in 7% of foreign investment, and population of the UK, yet we brought
:38:08. > :38:10.that is something we should want to grow after this investment
:38:10. > :38:15.conference, so it is a chance to set grow after this investment
:38:15. > :38:19.out our stall, talk about skills and people we have here. We have a young
:38:19. > :38:25.population and we want to find jobs for them. Twitter made another
:38:25. > :38:33.population and we want to find jobs announcement in Dublin this week. .
:38:33. > :38:37.Is the corporation tax differential still a deciding factor in where
:38:37. > :38:41.investments are made? For the differential remains, big companies
:38:41. > :38:45.continue to choose the Republic over Northern Ireland. It depends what
:38:45. > :38:49.companies want. If they want to look Northern Ireland. It depends what
:38:49. > :38:54.at profits, corporation tax will still be an issue, which is why we
:38:54. > :38:58.will continue to engage with the Prime Minister on that. He has
:38:58. > :39:02.delayed a decision until after the Scottish referendum but we will
:39:02. > :39:05.continue to push on the issue and will have meetings with the Prime
:39:05. > :39:10.Minister while he is here, but there are other things we can do for
:39:10. > :39:14.companies around the world. We are cost competitive, we have the
:39:14. > :39:19.skills, we are a gateway into Europe and the UK, so we had been pushing
:39:19. > :39:26.all those buttons and that is why we continue to do well in relation to
:39:26. > :39:30.foreign direct investment. This is happening against a background of
:39:30. > :39:31.disagreement on political issues, outstanding issues politicians
:39:31. > :39:35.disagreement on political issues, haven't yet found common ground on.
:39:35. > :39:42.I am thinking of the Maze Long Kesh project, and the hangover of issues
:39:42. > :39:47.on flags and parades. We will talk about Twaddell Avenue later.
:39:47. > :39:51.Yesterday, a senior Orangemen called for the protest to be upscaled as
:39:51. > :39:54.far as civil disobedience. That's not going to help persuade investors
:39:54. > :40:01.to choose Northern Ireland next week, is it? We defend the right of
:40:01. > :40:06.people to protest on any issue, but what must happen, and I make this
:40:06. > :40:13.clear, people must remain within the law of the land, what we do not want
:40:13. > :40:17.to see happen, and we are unfortunately did, some people
:40:17. > :40:21.during the flag protest went out to protest and things went further than
:40:21. > :40:22.they should have, and those young people now have a criminal
:40:22. > :40:27.conviction, and I do not want to see people now have a criminal
:40:27. > :40:30.young people in Belfast or anywhere else blighted with a criminal
:40:30. > :40:35.conviction for something they will regret, and people need to step back
:40:35. > :40:41.and look at that when they talk about what they are doing. We have
:40:41. > :40:47.just shown viewers pictures from yesterday to your DUP colleagues,
:40:47. > :40:49.one of them your fellow executive Minister Nelson McCausland, standing
:40:49. > :40:50.behind the Orangemen, flanked by Minister Nelson McCausland, standing
:40:50. > :40:56.comment loyalists, as he called for Minister Nelson McCausland, standing
:40:56. > :41:03.civil disobedience. What kind of message to you think that send it?
:41:03. > :41:06.We are clear in the party that we believe people have a right to
:41:07. > :41:09.protest, we believe the Parades Commission have failed miserably and
:41:09. > :41:11.protest, we believe the Parades we welcome the fact that Secretary
:41:11. > :41:14.protest, we believe the Parades of State has moved to do away with
:41:14. > :41:19.those commissioners who sit on the Parades Commission. We want to see
:41:19. > :41:24.the complete end of the Parades Commission and we're looking at the
:41:24. > :41:28.Richard Haass talks to that about, because we cannot continue with
:41:28. > :41:30.people 's rights being denied by the Parades Commission. We need to look
:41:30. > :41:34.people 's rights being denied by the at the fundamentals of the Parades
:41:34. > :41:39.Commission. The fact we have a commission which negotiates with
:41:39. > :41:42.people then decides, we have a dual role for the Parades Commission, and
:41:43. > :41:45.I have always said right back to when it was created that that was
:41:46. > :41:50.folly and should not have been the case. We have seen the workings of
:41:50. > :41:57.that over time, and we need to see the end of the commission. But do we
:41:57. > :42:02.not also need to see an end to the unrest on the streets, an end to the
:42:02. > :42:07.Twaddell Avenue protest? Is costing £50,000 a day to please. People have
:42:07. > :42:12.rights but they also have responsibilities, and do you think
:42:12. > :42:18.Nelson McCausland standing on that platform, a fellow member of your
:42:18. > :42:23.party, is making your job of bringing investment into Northern
:42:23. > :42:28.Ireland more difficult? I hope Nelson will have been there, and
:42:28. > :42:33.exercising his right, but also his responsibility, as he always does in
:42:33. > :42:36.those occasions. He will have been bringing camp to the area and
:42:36. > :42:42.talking to people to make sure things do not get out of hand, and I
:42:42. > :42:48.defend his right to be there. Do you want to see more civil disobedience
:42:48. > :42:53.on the streets? No, I have said I want people to keep within the law
:42:54. > :42:59.because we do not want people to be recipients of criminal records and
:42:59. > :43:03.that is not where we want to be, but we must see that Northern Ireland
:43:03. > :43:10.has moved forward a great deal since I was a young person, and we have
:43:10. > :43:13.seen that Northern Ireland now receives more inward investment than
:43:13. > :43:19.anywhere else in the UK, apart from Greater London, head of population.
:43:19. > :43:22.I am proud of that and I will make sure we continue to work on that and
:43:22. > :43:25.I am proud of that and I will make continue to say to investors this is
:43:25. > :43:32.a good place to visit, and a good place to set up business. That will
:43:32. > :43:36.be my message in the coming days. Arlene Foster, thank you for joining
:43:36. > :43:40.us. As we heard, the Orange Order is now
:43:40. > :43:43.threatening to intensify the dispute at Twaddell Avenue, taking it to the
:43:43. > :43:46.level of civil disobedience. The dispute is already costing £50,000 a
:43:46. > :43:48.day to police, according to the Chief Constable. Our political
:43:48. > :43:54.correspondent, Gareth Gordon, visited the Twaddell protest camp
:43:54. > :43:57.earlier in the week. Early evening, Woodvale Road, North Belfast, and a
:43:57. > :44:01.earlier in the week. Early evening, few hundred people have braved the
:44:01. > :44:05.rain to protest. They have done it more than 80 times since three
:44:05. > :44:08.Orange lodges were stopped from returning their return -- from
:44:08. > :44:16.completing their return journey past are going in July. Band members are
:44:16. > :44:20.wearing masks to hide their identity since last week's decision that they
:44:20. > :44:25.are breaking the law by playing music along the route, past police
:44:25. > :44:31.lines at the interface. Although it remains peaceful, there are other
:44:31. > :44:36.masks on view. Nearly three months on from the 12th of July, this is
:44:36. > :44:43.the nightly reality in Twaddell Avenue. There is no sign of it
:44:43. > :44:50.ending soon. Not far away, some people on the nationalist side the
:44:51. > :44:55.Koran. -- look on. Myself and other locals have been volunteering to
:44:55. > :45:00.walk the streets on the side to keep young people away from what has been
:45:00. > :45:05.happening, so it has been a strange experience. But in Twaddell, some
:45:05. > :45:13.believe the action should be stepped up. At every stage, it is other
:45:13. > :45:21.people who have escalated it, not us. The time may come when it is up
:45:21. > :45:33.to the people in this area and the people who support us to up the ante
:45:33. > :45:37.and to escalate. Gareth Gordon reporting. Sam McBride
:45:37. > :45:41.and Susan McKay are with me. What do you make of what was said yesterday
:45:42. > :45:48.at Twaddell Avenue? This upscaling to the devil of civil 's obedience.
:45:48. > :45:52.It shows the protest isn't going to end. I think the issue is that the
:45:52. > :45:55.It shows the protest isn't going to language is ambiguous. Arlene Foster
:45:55. > :45:58.is making clear, reading between the lines, that she is not keen to see
:45:58. > :46:02.is making clear, reading between the any upscaling of the protest, but
:46:02. > :46:09.defending the right of people to protest. I think the Orangemen who
:46:10. > :46:14.stood up yesterday, the protest was peaceful and lawful but had some
:46:14. > :46:19.element of disruption to wider committee life. The difficulty is
:46:19. > :46:25.that in the past when Orange leaders said things like this, it has not
:46:25. > :46:28.always been received in that way by people and perhaps they need to be
:46:28. > :46:34.clear what civil disobedience they advocate and what they don't. We had
:46:34. > :46:38.an instance earlier in the year where people talk about blocking
:46:38. > :46:44.roads, but that is illegal and the police made that clear. For a period
:46:44. > :46:49.that please let it go one during the flag protest, then these little to
:46:49. > :46:54.stop it echoes as Arlene Foster said people now have criminal records, so
:46:54. > :46:59.there are consequences. It is not yet clear if the Orange Order is in
:46:59. > :47:04.control of what is happening in Belfast or even if the political
:47:04. > :47:06.parties are. Susan, you visited the camp during the week. What did you
:47:06. > :47:13.parties are. Susan, you visited the make of what you saw and what people
:47:13. > :47:17.said you? It was pathetic, I felt, because it is like a throwback to
:47:18. > :47:23.Drumcree all over again. It is the same old rhetoric, they are getting
:47:23. > :47:27.everything and Unionism gets nothing and that is hatred of unionist
:47:27. > :47:32.culture, and I don't really see what the DUP is playing out in re
:47:32. > :47:38.engaging with that kind of negative pre-agreement politics, because I
:47:38. > :47:43.think Arlene Foster is a very able minister, she speaks very well in
:47:43. > :47:47.terms of investment, but she must know it is a very mixed message that
:47:47. > :47:52.is being sent out where you have a government minister standing,
:47:52. > :47:56.wanting to be seen on TV flanked by loyalists and by the Orange Order,
:47:56. > :48:01.saying they are going to go as far as civil 's obedience, at the same
:48:01. > :48:05.time as she knows investors are coming to Northern Ireland because
:48:05. > :48:11.they know that like they believe we have a stable police here that like
:48:12. > :48:13.a stable PC, the rhetoric that I heard up at that so-called peace
:48:13. > :48:21.a stable PC, the rhetoric that I camp was very belligerent and full
:48:22. > :48:28.of hatred and rage and self-pity. Was that wattage and eight why the
:48:28. > :48:32.eye there and why the annoyed? No, because it all comes back to no
:48:32. > :48:36.surrender and the fact the DUP has gone into power with Sinn Fein and a
:48:36. > :48:39.return to the notion we can go back gone into power with Sinn Fein and a
:48:40. > :48:47.to the past ready Orange Order can marks were wanted, and there is this
:48:47. > :48:53.refusal to accept that nowadays compromise is necessary in all
:48:53. > :48:59.situations and there has been acts of bad faith in relation to talking
:48:59. > :49:05.about talks, which they have been saying since July, but they haven't
:49:05. > :49:10.yet sat down and done so. We should note that if the parade had passed
:49:10. > :49:15.yesterday at 9am, when most of us were in their beds, in a limited
:49:15. > :49:20.form without music, the camp would not be there. Anyway, yes there are
:49:21. > :49:26.serious problems, there is the potential for disorder, but there is
:49:26. > :49:28.intransigent on the part of people like Gerry Kelly who are saying even
:49:28. > :49:31.at a time well after the 12th, when like Gerry Kelly who are saying even
:49:31. > :49:37.the parade has been stopped, they will still not lead it through in
:49:37. > :49:41.any time. It is most disturbing to see young people in masks in that
:49:41. > :49:46.footage, some of them are Halloween masks and people are making light of
:49:46. > :49:49.that, but there are also young people seen with balaclava type
:49:49. > :49:52.masks. That is very menacing, even if it is not intended as anything
:49:52. > :50:11.other than a bit of a show. week gone by in 60 seconds. The
:50:11. > :50:18.Executive's top two agreed on one thing, 1000 new call centre jobs in
:50:18. > :50:26.Belfast. Agreement over the ultra-rare showpiece centre has not
:50:26. > :50:31.been so easy. The refusal to honour a government commitment has been
:50:31. > :50:37.difficult for me. Orangemen were knocked back again over Ardoyne.
:50:37. > :50:43.There was a statement made from all those involved, and I was one, that
:50:43. > :50:48.they would return them no matter what the bridge commission decision
:50:48. > :50:55.was, they would return to dialogue. The SDLP the bike support for naming
:50:56. > :51:02.a new replay Park after an IRA hunger striker. And if you present
:51:02. > :51:03.at the Tory conference after is a prize cabinet reshuffle involving
:51:03. > :51:09.at the Tory conference after is a Theresa Villiers. Please give a warm
:51:09. > :51:14.welcome to the Secretary of State for Scotland.
:51:14. > :51:22.A bit of a nightmare for trees of the leaders there. That factories of
:51:22. > :51:26.years. In the Republic, Enda Kenny has been
:51:26. > :51:28.dealt an embarrassing defeat over the future of the Seanad. The
:51:28. > :51:32.Taoiseach had proposed abolishing the upper house, claiming it would
:51:32. > :51:35.save 20 million euros a year. He was opposed by a small but vocal
:51:35. > :51:39.campaign group, and on Friday, voters decided they wanted to keep
:51:39. > :51:42.their Senators. Let's get more from journalist Diarmaid Fleming in
:51:42. > :51:49.Dublin. Nobody really expected this outcome. What happened? This was a
:51:49. > :51:55.shock. All the polls beforehand indicated a lead of up to 70% for
:51:55. > :52:01.the government side. It seems that a large number of no voters,
:52:01. > :52:04.especially voters from the east of the country and Dublin, decided
:52:04. > :52:09.against backing the government on this. The government fought a really
:52:10. > :52:15.inept campaign. Enda Kenny proposed this in 2009 without any discussion
:52:15. > :52:20.with his own party, yet decided not to take part in a debate on this, so
:52:20. > :52:26.it was a campaign where the leader had decided not to sit in the
:52:26. > :52:33.driver's have and it was derailed. Will it damage Enda Kenny? It will.
:52:33. > :52:37.No one wants to lead a proposal like this and then be rejected, but I
:52:37. > :52:42.think there is a feeling that the Seanad is not that important here.
:52:42. > :52:47.The big issue is the economy. People are under pressure from austerity
:52:47. > :52:54.and next week there is a budget. Coming one after the other, a Seanad
:52:54. > :53:01.defeat and then an unpopular budget, we will see a combination where the
:53:01. > :53:07.effect on Enda Kenny, we will see what that will be. In one of the
:53:07. > :53:11.Kiwis and is for getting rid of the Seanad was that it would save 20
:53:11. > :53:18.million euros a year, the referendum cost 14 million. I don't think the
:53:18. > :53:25.money was that they can issue. Enda Kenny thought this was a populist
:53:25. > :53:30.issue, to have fewer politicians, but it didn't seem to matter to
:53:30. > :53:34.people. 20 million euros is pretty small change in the scheme of
:53:34. > :53:38.things. It is not something people feel in their pay packets but the
:53:38. > :53:45.argument was that the opposition that those sums weren't adding up,
:53:45. > :53:47.and that added to the ineptitude and the feeling this was not a serious
:53:48. > :53:51.and that added to the ineptitude and campaign, that they hadn't done
:53:51. > :53:55.their songs on something basic. There are people who think the
:53:55. > :53:59.Seanad is important for Northern Ireland because significant figures
:54:00. > :54:03.from the North, important voices down the years, have found a
:54:03. > :54:08.platform in the Republic and have fed into political debate then
:54:08. > :54:17.there. Empty can of people like Seamus Mallon, Gordon Wilson. Gordon
:54:17. > :54:20.Wilson had a huge impact here. He was the father of Marie Wilson, who
:54:20. > :54:24.was murdered in Enniskillen. His contribution was major but his
:54:24. > :54:30.effort to reach out to the other side from the point of view, to the
:54:30. > :54:34.unionist little establishment, was never going to grab a foothold
:54:34. > :54:39.because unit would not want to see them what they see as a foreign
:54:39. > :54:46.parliament, so it did have some impact in that way, but the Seanad
:54:46. > :54:48.was seen by most people as a house for political insiders, those who
:54:49. > :54:56.failed at rejection that like collections, and it was used by many
:54:56. > :55:05.political parties as a platform for future political ambition. Thank
:55:05. > :55:12.you, Derek Fleming. Sam McBride and Susan McKay with me still. Would you
:55:12. > :55:17.gobsmacked by the result? I was surprised. I think it is a good sign
:55:17. > :55:21.because sometimes you get the impression people in the Republic
:55:21. > :55:24.are in despair, and they was a much higher turnout than anticipated. A
:55:24. > :55:30.lot of people voted no, including myself, not because we necessarily
:55:31. > :55:34.think the Seanad works well but because the campaign the government
:55:34. > :55:40.ranks was so insultingly simplistic and arrogant, and the decision by
:55:40. > :55:42.the Taoiseach not to even take part in it, I think people were saying
:55:42. > :55:46.the Taoiseach not to even take part don't take us for granted, but this
:55:46. > :55:52.is a chance to make the Seanad a meaningful body because it really
:55:52. > :55:59.isn't. You mentioned some people who were included in the Seanad, a lot
:55:59. > :56:06.of people think of WB Yeats, but in reality it has an performed for many
:56:06. > :56:14.years. Sam, any thoughts on this? I was thrilled, it is not major
:56:14. > :56:20.restriction, but I think it obviously used to be the case, it
:56:20. > :56:24.was a lovely chamber and still exist for committee meetings, but it is a
:56:24. > :56:30.constraint on the absolute power of legislator, and the Lords has been
:56:30. > :56:36.criticised massively in recent years and it should be reformed, but as a
:56:36. > :56:38.principle I think it is good. It worked on the impact for Gerry Adams
:56:38. > :56:40.principle I think it is good. It of the verdict in his brother Liam
:56:40. > :56:47.Adams's case during the week. It is of the verdict in his brother Liam
:56:47. > :56:54.not good for him. It will damage him with some Republicans, but when you
:56:54. > :56:58.have someone who denies that they have been leader of an organisation
:56:58. > :57:03.that ordered people, I am not sure allegations about this will be
:57:03. > :57:06.really damaging. I think in the longer term it will be, because
:57:06. > :57:15.more affordable homes needed, but we have no time. Andrew, back to you.
:57:15. > :57:22.Our next guest is no stranger to controversy, a former UKIP MEP he
:57:23. > :57:43.recently lost his party's whip after a series of outbursts including
:57:43. > :57:46.describing foreign countries receiving aid as 'Bongo Bongo Land'
:57:46. > :57:49.and joking that a group of UKIP women who didn't clean behind their
:57:49. > :57:52.fridges were 'sluts'. Now he sits in the European Parliament as an
:57:52. > :57:55.independent but remains a UKIP party member. Here's a flavour of recent
:57:55. > :58:10.events in the political life of Godfrey Bloom. How you can possibly
:58:10. > :58:16.be giving £1 million a month... Bongo Bongo Land. I got 6000 e-mails
:58:16. > :58:20.within 12 hours, only 47 were not agreeing with me so you are the one
:58:20. > :58:26.that is out of touch. Everybody knows me, a bit like the Marmite
:58:26. > :58:36.joke, they love me or they hate me but I have always told me like it
:58:36. > :58:40.is. I made a joke and said that women who did not clean behind the
:58:40. > :58:46.French were sluts and everybody laughed along, including the women.
:58:46. > :58:51.I have had hundreds of e-mails, saying, God Almighty, can't you make
:58:51. > :58:54.a joke any more? I am long in the tooth now to do political
:58:54. > :59:06.correctness and I understand UKIP have moved on and they are doing
:59:07. > :59:10.well, and I wish them well. This, with no black faces on it. You are
:59:10. > :59:16.picking people out for the colour of with no black faces on it. You are
:59:16. > :59:21.their skin? You disgust me! Perhaps the way they are doing things now is
:59:21. > :59:27.not the way I do things. You disgrace me. We are joined now with
:59:27. > :59:34.a suitable distance between us by the independent MEP for Yorkshire
:59:34. > :59:40.and the Humber, Godfrey Bloom. You said this weekend that you have to
:59:40. > :59:50.be a complete sociopath to be in politics, are you a sociopath? No, I
:59:50. > :59:52.am just an ordinary bloke from the rugby club likes to tell it as it
:59:52. > :59:56.is. I did not come into politics to rugby club likes to tell it as it
:59:56. > :00:02.save my country from the clutches of the awful, evil... That is why I am
:00:02. > :00:06.in politics, and that is why I joined UKIP, and I am still a
:00:06. > :00:14.member, and I will still be voting UKIP. GUI except that your
:00:14. > :00:16.ability... Do you accept that your behaviour spoiled the UKIP
:00:16. > :00:21.conference? We were both born in behaviour spoiled the UKIP
:00:21. > :00:27.same year, we are too old to worry about regrets. Let's look forward
:00:27. > :00:33.and see... Never mind the year I was born, what is the answer to my
:00:33. > :00:37.question? I am in this for my country and intent to do the best I
:00:37. > :00:39.can, sitting at my time as an independent for my country, and that
:00:39. > :00:42.can, sitting at my time as an will involve getting UKIP
:00:43. > :00:48.re-elected. They are the only game in town, the only party that will
:00:48. > :00:54.get as out. Shouldn't you have been more careful and not become a
:00:54. > :00:58.liability? You hijacked the party conference. That is a matter of
:00:58. > :01:03.perception. We have heard nothing in the last two years but it is a
:01:03. > :01:06.one-man band, a Nigel Farage party, and I can make a joke at a fringe
:01:06. > :01:12.meeting and collapse the whole thing. This doesn't say anything
:01:12. > :01:15.about me or anything about UKIP, Andrew. It tells you about your
:01:16. > :01:19.profession, the profession of journalism, it is all about
:01:19. > :01:26.journalism - it is not about UKIP or me, it was the journalists' reaction
:01:26. > :01:30.to a small joke at a meeting. And also Nigel Farage's reaction - is
:01:30. > :01:40.UKIP a one-man party? I do myself, unless I had a commended.
:01:40. > :01:54.Personality, the most unbelievable force of personality to collapse a
:01:54. > :01:58.party conference. Nigel Farage has been a friend of mine for 20 years,
:01:58. > :02:03.and may I remind you that in June and July UK was slipping in the
:02:03. > :02:08.polls, and when I made my statement about overseas aid, we went back to
:02:08. > :02:14.18%? I am not an electoral liability, I never was, I am a vote
:02:14. > :02:17.getter. As you know, there is a difference between cause and
:02:17. > :02:21.correlation, but let me show you what Nigel Farage had to say about
:02:21. > :02:28.you on the BBC. Let's blunder clip of that. We are not here to win
:02:28. > :02:32.friends amongst the liberal elite, and Godfrey's problem was that he
:02:32. > :02:37.was making comments about women, and that is not part of the party
:02:37. > :02:41.manifesto. Don't you need to reflect that you are too outrageous, too
:02:41. > :02:44.politically incorrect even for UKIP? Well, you see, to a certain extent I
:02:44. > :02:49.politically incorrect even for UKIP? have been gagged on other subjects.
:02:49. > :02:53.I am a libertarian, I wanted to talk about flat tax. I thought David
:02:53. > :02:57.Aronowitz wrote a very good piece in the times on drugs, and I have been
:02:57. > :03:01.gagged to speak about any of these things because they are not part of
:03:02. > :03:06.it, so I tend to speak about other things. Maybe they have outgrown
:03:06. > :03:11.you, they want to be a more mainstream professional party
:03:11. > :03:15.machine, and they have to get rid of the Victor Meldrew wing. You might
:03:15. > :03:20.have a point, but I am speaking to you from Hull, and if you look at
:03:20. > :03:23.our results in Rotherham and Barnsley, and very recently in
:03:23. > :03:28.Scarborough and Whitby in the buy legends, 25%, so how you see things
:03:28. > :03:32.in the bubble, it is not like how we see it appear in Yorkshire. You look
:03:32. > :03:38.like the one who was sitting in a bubble! Is UKIP unravelling? Of
:03:38. > :03:42.course it isn't, we are getting 24% of the vote in by-elections, of
:03:42. > :03:48.course it is not. Boy, wouldn't the main parties and the establishment
:03:48. > :03:54.love to see that! But I am sorry, it is not happening. Will you stand as
:03:54. > :04:00.an independence against UKIP in the European elections? Almost certainly
:04:00. > :04:03.not, although by no political support is ephemeral, if the
:04:03. > :04:08.elections were next week, I could assure you I would win the seat. I
:04:08. > :04:13.do not think I will go that route. Will you stand as a UKIP candidate
:04:13. > :04:18.again? We do not know, probably not, but I shall certainly be trying to
:04:18. > :04:21.help UKIP as best I can. You both share a flat, I understand, in
:04:21. > :04:26.Brussels, neither of you clean behind the fridge. Other than the
:04:26. > :04:30.fact that the place is probably quite murky, you have got a chance
:04:30. > :04:34.to talk to each other and get back into his good graces, haven't you? I
:04:34. > :04:39.am sure we will be having a beer before the month is out. So Godfrey
:04:39. > :04:45.Bloom will soon be back in UKIP, we take it? For those of you who were
:04:45. > :04:50.not watching there, he just shrugged! Thank you very much for
:04:50. > :04:56.joining. A great pleasure. I will have to move my own share, you do
:04:56. > :05:00.not have the sea Jeremy Paxman doing that! Nobody votes for UKIP because
:05:00. > :05:05.they think they are a smooth, slick, professional party. If anything, the
:05:05. > :05:09.absence of PR polish is the reason for their popularity, so these are
:05:09. > :05:13.skirmishes are not a problem, and more than that, Godfrey Bloom does
:05:13. > :05:18.make Nigel Farage look better. Even in that clip from Andrew Marr, he
:05:18. > :05:20.looked more statesman-like in juxtaposition with someone like
:05:20. > :05:26.Godfrey Bloom than he has done before. I mean, he did hijacked the
:05:26. > :05:29.conference, it was a disaster, they got tonnes of publicity but not the
:05:29. > :05:35.kind they wanted. But you have to say he does actor for the
:05:35. > :05:38.journalists. I thought he was sexist long before anyone else, he used to
:05:38. > :05:43.have an incredible page on his website entitled Godfrey Bloom:
:05:43. > :05:47.Misogynist, and the proof that he was not was that he was once
:05:47. > :05:51.photographed with a girls' rugby team, and we lived for those
:05:51. > :05:55.characters in politics. He does make Nigel Farage look better, but is sin
:05:55. > :06:01.was to say things you said before but to ruin the party conference. It
:06:01. > :06:07.sounds like he is coming back. A beer in Brussels and he will be back
:06:07. > :06:12.on the UKIP ticket. Sitting having a beer in that built the Chechen, it
:06:12. > :06:16.sounds like it may be what the deal is that he comes back into UKIP but
:06:16. > :06:21.does not stand as an MEP at the European Parliamentary elections. --
:06:21. > :06:23.in that built the kitchen. It is right to say the electorate are
:06:23. > :06:27.sophisticated and they know what this party is for, what characters
:06:27. > :06:31.it has. You did not need what Godfrey Bloom said for people to
:06:31. > :06:35.know he is sexist, and the electorate know what they go using
:06:35. > :06:39.UKIP four. They are using it as the vehicle to beat over the head the
:06:39. > :06:42.three established parties. They will probably do it in the European
:06:42. > :06:53.elections and give them first place. The big question is what happens in
:06:54. > :06:55.the general election, and the problem that Nigel Farage was making
:06:55. > :06:58.the general election, and the an Andrew Marr this morning is that
:06:58. > :07:00.he wants to copy the tactics of Paddy Ashdown, get elected and
:07:00. > :07:02.councils, build up a Parliamentary base, and to do that you do need
:07:02. > :07:04.discipline. MPs return to the Commons next week, and there is a
:07:05. > :07:08.ministerial reshuffle on the cards, that is the rumour in Westminster.
:07:08. > :07:12.David Cameron has spoken of the extraordinary talent pool of women
:07:12. > :07:16.among his ministers, so could he bring more of them into the cabinet?
:07:16. > :07:21.He was talking about it earlier this week. I think we are getting there
:07:21. > :07:25.in Britain, but we have a long way to go. If you look at the top
:07:25. > :07:28.businesses in Britain, there are not nearly enough women in the
:07:28. > :07:32.boardroom. If you look at politics in Britain, there aren't nearly
:07:32. > :07:37.enough women around the Cabinet table. So I think, in every walk of
:07:37. > :07:41.life, whether it is the judiciary, whether it is politics, business,
:07:41. > :07:46.there is a lot further to go. Before the last election, we only had 19
:07:46. > :07:50.women Members of Parliament. We now have around 50, so we have made a
:07:50. > :07:55.big change, but it is still 50 out of 300, not nearly enough. So we
:07:55. > :08:01.need to do more. My wife likes to say, if you don't have women in top
:08:01. > :08:04.places, you're not just missing out on 50% of the talent, you are
:08:04. > :08:06.missing out on a lot more than 50% of the talent, and I think she
:08:06. > :08:12.missing out on a lot more than 50% probably has a point. The prime is
:08:12. > :08:15.that going for the women's vote. Is there going to be a reshuffle? I
:08:15. > :08:19.think you are right to say there there going to be a reshuffle? I
:08:19. > :08:25.will be a lot more women, they need to change the ratio of women to men
:08:25. > :08:38.called Dave who went to maudlin college. So obviously they are not
:08:38. > :08:45.fishing in the biggest talent pool, but there are numbers. Esther McVey
:08:45. > :08:48.has been selling a very difficult brief in work and pensions, you
:08:48. > :08:55.could see people being given bigger roles. Helen is pretty sure. We are
:08:55. > :08:58.told it is not a Cabinet level reshuffle me it is under Secretary
:08:58. > :09:05.level, so maybe you could put Esther McVey into the Cabinet. Margot
:09:05. > :09:09.James, who you had here not that long ago, she is very impressive.
:09:09. > :09:15.What is impressive is that some body like Andrea Leadsom, who is really
:09:15. > :09:18.impressive, worked in the City, very smart, really big on important
:09:18. > :09:22.social issues like early is intervention, she should still be in
:09:22. > :09:25.there, but she fell out with George Osborne when she dared to criticise
:09:26. > :09:33.him a few years ago over Ed Balls and the LIBOR so-called scandal. If
:09:33. > :09:36.you are doing it on talent, Andrea Leadsom should have a senior
:09:36. > :09:41.position in government. So expectation, if he does not do this
:09:41. > :09:48.now, a tonne of bricks will fall on him. He has got no excuse not to
:09:48. > :09:56.promote women, because the 2010 intake was disproportionately female
:09:56. > :10:00.in terms of talent. The question of the Tories and the struggle with
:10:00. > :10:03.women voters is a very deep and historic one. You have to remember
:10:03. > :10:07.that for most of the post-war period they had an advantage electorally
:10:07. > :10:10.amongst women voters. Many times there would not have been a
:10:10. > :10:14.Conservative government without the women of this country. This began to
:10:14. > :10:19.change in the mid-1990s, and the question is, why has that happened?
:10:19. > :10:21.Was it policy change, or the personalities at the top are now
:10:21. > :10:26.much more hostile to women, or less, personalities at the top are now
:10:26. > :10:29.Brent doubled to female voters? It is such a deep historical trend that
:10:29. > :10:38.I do not think one reshuffle will change it. -- or less competent
:10:38. > :10:45.civil. The English party conference season is over, do you share the
:10:45. > :10:52.consensus view that Ed Miliband came out best of the three party leaders?
:10:52. > :10:57.I think I probably do, but his overall approval ratings are still
:10:57. > :10:59.minus 20, whereas Cameron's minus ten. And the more the recovery seems
:10:59. > :11:03.minus 20, whereas Cameron's minus to take place, and some of the
:11:03. > :11:08.latest figures are quite amazing, they certainly surprised me, you
:11:08. > :11:15.wonder whether Labour's tactic is right to put all their eggs into the
:11:15. > :11:19.living standards basket. I was looking at car sales, which are
:11:19. > :11:22.booming. If people start to feel better, and they don't yet, but if
:11:23. > :11:31.they were, it is tougher to go on about living standards. George
:11:31. > :11:34.Osborne's... You have Ed Miliband making a great thing about living
:11:34. > :11:39.standards, but then they say under their breath, this is global forces,
:11:39. > :11:44.which mean that inflation is outstripping wage increases. And
:11:44. > :11:47.you're absolutely right, as the economy improves, presumably that
:11:47. > :11:51.will be dealt with, but Miliband's argument will be that there are
:11:51. > :11:54.people suffering, and even if the economy recovers, they will still
:11:54. > :11:56.struggle. But if it is global forces, it is difficult to blame the
:11:57. > :12:01.struggle. But if it is global government for that. Body being
:12:01. > :12:07.noticed now, there is nothing worse for the leader of the opposition
:12:07. > :12:11.than to be not noticed. -- but he is being noticed now. It seems that he
:12:11. > :12:15.in many ways has set the political weather. Look at the number of
:12:15. > :12:21.references to the Labour leader in Mr Cameron's speech. And in Mr
:12:21. > :12:30.Obama's speech on a similar topic, living standards. Was the mentioning
:12:30. > :12:35.Ed Miliband?! Oh, he was using the same language, he has not gone that
:12:35. > :12:39.far. If I were Ed Miliband, I would be more worried now, because Labour
:12:39. > :12:42.through the kitchen sink at their conference. They came out with the
:12:42. > :12:48.biggest policy announcements they could, compulsory apprenticeships,
:12:48. > :12:51.the energy freeze on prices, and it generated a poll boost which has
:12:51. > :12:57.fizzled away within ten days. I do not know where they go from here.
:12:57. > :13:00.What is significant with Ed Miliband is that in his three party
:13:00. > :13:04.conference beaches, he has set the tone for responsible capitalism, the
:13:04. > :13:08.one nation Britain, and the problem with those speeches is people say,
:13:08. > :13:15.they are fine, they are academic, but what does it mean? What you have
:13:15. > :13:19.now is an intellectual framework that translates into policies. The
:13:19. > :13:22.polls to watch are not the ones after the conferences, but at the
:13:22. > :13:27.end of the month when it has also pulled down. They will tell us where
:13:27. > :13:30.we are going. We will have to go ourselves now. Thank you to our
:13:30. > :13:34.guests. The Daily Politics will be back tomorrow at noon on BBC Two,
:13:34. > :13:37.and I will be back on BBC One this time, same time, next week. If it is
:13:37. > :13:40.Sunday, it is the Sunday Politics.