06/10/2013 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland

Morning, folks, welcome to the Sunday Politics. And in-out EU

referendum before the general election? We talk to the Tory rebel

demanding one next year, that is our top story. As government ministers

prepare to decide how the press should be regulated, what will be

the impact of this week's row should be regulated, what will be

between the Daily Mail and Ed Miliband?

You are talking about the colour of peoples faces?!

And in Northern Ireland, another major international investment

conference taking place here this week. We will ask Arlene Foster what

He will try to force a vote in the Commons to hold the poll next

October. Home Secretary Theresa May was asked about his plans on the BBC

earlier this morning. I think he has got it wrong, I think what we need

to do is to negotiate the settlement with the European Union and then put

that to the people me to decide whether to be in or out. Is this a

flea bite or a real threat? I think what is crucial is that we have, at

the next election, a Conservative Party that will be offering people

that renegotiation, a new settlement with Europe, looking to the future

and putting that to the British people in and in or out referendum.

And what the amendment possibly could do, as James Wharton, who was

putting the Referendum Bill through Parliament has said, is it could

jeopardise that bill. Adam Afriyie joins us now from Millbank studio.

Good morning. If the referendum would be held next October, it would

have to be an in-out question based the status quo? There wouldn't be

time for a full renegotiation. I disagree. By having a referendum in

2014, it gives us 12 months to renegotiate, but it kick-started

negotiations, because the European Union, if they wish us to remain

members, would need to accommodate and make changes so that they would

persuade the British public to stay, if that is what they want. It

strengthens the Prime Minister's hand, and 12 months is ample time

for that kind of negotiation. You might think that, but Germany has

not even got a government at the moment, why should they meet our

timetable? This is going to be incredibly, located renegotiation. I

think, basically, 80% of people want a referendum. More than 50% what a

referendum this side of the election. British businesses need

certainty, and we could carry on taking a scan down the road for

ever, but I have struggled with my conscience over this one. I do not

want to cause trouble, but it is essential that Parliament and MPs

have the opportunity to search their souls and give people a referendum

this side of the election. That would also bring certainty and

clarity for the future, and like I said, it strengthens the Prime

Minister's hand if it is successful. You right in the Mail on Sunday that

the people are not convinced there even will be a referendum, so they

don't trust David Cameron? I think the headline was not the headline I

wrote for that piece. What I am saying is a very calm analysis...

You are saying that the British people are not convinced. Look,

there are too many uncertainties here - they may not be convinced the

Conservatives will win the election, I hope we will, they may not be

convinced the renegotiation will be good enough, that there will be a

referendum. Do you trust David Cameron to deliver a referendum?

That is why we need to bring the referendum forward, there is time to

negotiate, and we tidy up the issue that has been hanging around for too

long. Do you trust David Cameron to deliver a referendum in 2017? I

completely support the Prime Minister, and of course I trust the

completely support the Prime Prime Minister. To deliver a

referendum? There as only variables in between. What I am doing with

referendum? There as only variables this amendment, is to try to be sure

is that Parliament and every MP has the opportunity decide whether they

want to be sure of a referendum within this parliament, or maybe

leave it to the vagaries of what may within this parliament, or maybe

happen in 2015. Supposing you got your way, how would you vote? Like

Michael Gove, I would vote for us to leave as of today, but there will be

Michael Gove, I would vote for us to an enormous amount of pressure on

European Union leaders to come forward with proposals. If they were

to say, the mandate is not ever closer political union, it is ever

closer trading harmony, giving us more border control and control over

our legal system, I might change my mind. But this is what needs to

happen - if we have a referendum in 2014, 12 months is time for

negotiations to be kick-started and people to argue in or out, and the

end result is a stronger Prime Minister. Is it true that you have

got about 80 MPs supporting this? It is cross-party, that is for

certain, and I think we will see it on hold over the next three or five

weeks. He will have to ask each individual MP. I am asking you, it

is your motion! There will be other motions coming forward, and I know

there is widespread support, cross-party, for people who want the

British public to have a say in 2014. You know it is not going to

get through, the whips will stop this from happening. One of the

successes, apparently, of your party's Manchester conference was

that you were not divided over Europe anymore, the Europe issue was

settled. Here you are bringing it Europe anymore, the Europe issue was

back to life and pouring petrol on the flames - are you now the

unlicensed troublemaker of the Tories? The only struggle I have had

is not a fight with my party but Tories? The only struggle I have had

with my conscience as to whether or not I would give Parliament and the

British people an opportunity to have a say in 2014. I wrestled with

it, and I decided I wanted people to have that opportunity. It is for

each individual MP to search their soul, speak to constituents and

decide whether they want that. You decided it would get you in the

headlines again. Oh, you are so cynical, Andrew! I have no ambition

in that direction, I am not a publicity seeker. All I seek is for

the British people do have this. I would not be able to sleep at night

if I did not bring forward this opportunity for Britain to have its

say. We have left it far too long. Nobody under the age of 56 has had a

say. Thanks for joining us, good luck with this continuing struggle

with your conscience! I will move the seat around and addressed the

panel, what do you make of it? The party managers must be furious with

him. I think what this confirms is that David Cameron is incredibly

lucky in his enemies. His most prolific critics, Nadine Dorries,

Peter Bone, Adam Afriyie, even if you are very anti-Cameron, you will

not think, man, if only they were in charge of the party! I think the

party managers are not too alarmed. They do not take him seriously? No,

it is not a frivolous amendment. It is not as if the James Wharton bill

is a work of genius, it is riddled with flaws, anomalies and loopholes.

It purports to guarantee that a referendum will take place in the

next Parliament. My understanding of the constitution is that is

theoretically impossible and that all the future government would do

is cancel out that bill with another bill. He does have a point that

Cameron's plan for a referendum is nothing like as likely to happen...

Hung parliaments, frivolous amendments can be immensely

dangerous. The problem for David Cameron is twofold. One, if Ed

Miliband says he's going to support Adam Afriyie, it will go through.

Unlikely that Ed Miliband would do that, but what he might do is say to

his MPs, ignore this. It may well be that the Labour payroll and a

significant number of Labour MPs do not turn up, and then what you have

got is a war between the Conservative payroll and the

Conservative backbenchers, and in that war you might well find that

Adam Afriyie's amendment goes through, and then the Prime Minister

has real trouble, because Adam Afriyie says, the Prime Minister

could renegotiate terms of membership, up what basis and with

which mandate? He would not be able to get agreement with Nick Clegg or

Ed Miliband, so you would be looking at Adam Afriyie voting to leave. I

think he is a Labour mole, that is what I have come to, a Daily Mail

style conspiracy theory, it could not be more perfect. The prospect of

style conspiracy theory, it could a referendum on the EU at the same

time as Scottish independence is what no-one once, so that is it. He

has told us he could not sleep at night, wrestling with his

conscience. We could send him some pills, I suppose. We know he's going

to sack all those lieutenants were going around and saying he is the

great future and the next leader of the Conservative Party. He denied

doing that! He would be amazed to hear you say that, this is a crisis

of conscience. Whispered conversations in corridors, quite an

operation to get letters into Graham Brady, he said to have letters, not

46, but at the moment this campaign is being run by Lieutenant of Adam

Afriyie. He has got lieutenants? They are disaffected and not happy

under David Cameron's leadership. There is a whole army of them! I am

pleased he has outmanoeuvred the awkward squad, and now James Wharton

is saying, you're going to kill my bill. I do not think they are very

competence lieutenants. The main political consequence of this

episode is it will unify a large chunk of the Colin Hendry

Conservative Party behind David Cameron. On what they hope is a

settled position. We still hope to be talking to John Prescott, who is

in hole, if you see him, pointing in the direction of the BBC studios! Do

you want to buy a house? Can you afford the mortgage repayments but

not the 20% or 30% deposit the mortgage provider is demanding from

you? The Government says it has a scheme designed for you which is in

launching next week, help to buy, and it should lead to the

re-emergence of 95% mortgages, remember them?! But is the policy

really good for home-buyers or the British economy? Here is Giles.

Never mind who lives in a house like this, who can afford to buy a house

these days? The Government would this, who can afford to buy a house

like many more people to be able to without putting down a crippling

amount of money as a deposit, and in the spirit of rights to buy, the

government has launched help to buy, confusingly it is the name for two

different schemes. The first scheme, Help to Buy 1, has

been running since April. Help to Buy 2 was supposed to come in

January next year, but the government are bringing it in early.

Let's get in on the inside and take a good look around at what this

scheme actually has to offer. And why the Government thinks it really

works. Help to Buy 1 was an equity loan scheme. The idea, nice, is that

it was for new build only, up to a value of £600,000. But it is Help to

Buy 2 that everyone is looking into right now. It is for any property up

to a value, again, of £600,000. This time the Government is guaranteeing

that it will take on the first losses should the home owner in the

future failed to make their mortgage payments. Don't worry about that, if

you are a buyer, you are going to be concerned about coming up with the

5% deposit and 95% mortgages will be available again in participating

banks and building societies. And that, the Prime Minister thinks, is

a housing prime mover. You cannot get training to 5% mortgage anymore,

90% even, so there are couples in our country who have good jobs,

decent incomes, they could afford the mortgage payments but they

cannot buy the house. It is a failure in our banking market. So

that is the Prime Minister, Jonathan, but I guess for you this

is not Homes Under The Hammer, but a scheme which should be hammered. The

main impact of this scheme will be to push up prices, who does that

benefit? Mostly rich and all the people who own their houses. Plus

the banks, of course, because it is a subsidy for them. Who loses?

People who want to buy a house in the future. Moreover, it is a bit

odd that the Government says it is not OK to borrow to finance schools

or roads, but it is fine for the Government to take on more debt,

effectively, in order to guarantee 95% mortgages and pump up the

housing market. 2.3 million? I do not think Help to Buy covers that.

But enter a would-be buyer, will they now be seeing a plethora of

help to buy mortgages? In a word, no. David Cameron has brought the

announcement forward by three months, and banks were not ready at

that stage. Two banks have committed to fund the scheme, the Lloyds group

and the RBS group, so lenders like Halifax, RBS and NatWest. They will

be doing the scheme, but even once the scheme is up and running you are

not going to see Help to Buy mortgages badged up. You will

probably find 95% mortgages on the high street because of the guarantee

the government is offering. People might say this is how we got into a

mess in the first place. Why would the government want to make those

products available then now? It was more what investment banks were

doing in the background that caused the problems. Mortgages have

performed extremely well through the depths of the downturn. Is this a

game changer? Yes, I have done my best to save over the last few years

but this has enabled me to make that first purchase. How frustrating was

it just renting? Very frustrating, you are throwing away money hand

over fist, and now I can take that leap to being an owner. His

enthusiasm raises a question back at the flat. If you are looking for a

95% mortgage, you don't really care what will happen in the wider

economy, you are thinking, great, I can buy a house. Yes, if I was a

house buyer or a bank, I would be pleased, but it will do longer term

economic damage. The tricky steps the government are trying to pull

off is that home-buyers might be so grateful for the opportunity to buy

their own homes that they reward the Government with the vote, while at

the same time the Government tries to sidestep consequences that such a

scheme might create. Now Conservative MP Margot James,

and Allister Heath, editor of City AM, go head to head.

It is said by the critics that this scheme will cause a housing bubble.

Where is the evidence? House prices are more varied. Housing not just in

London remains overvalued and the problem with this scheme is that it

will pump up house prices, it will not increase the supply and

therefore houses will become even more overvalued. That is a dangerous

territory, last time it ended in tears, and now the Government is

taking on the risk of that policy. What do you say to that? We have a

real problem, it takes people on average until they are 38 years old

until they can buy their own property. The problem is not that

they cannot afford it, but they cannot afford the deposit. We have

got to do something to allow people to get their feet on the property

ladder and I don't agree it will cause a boom in house prices. It

would if we were not building any new houses, but we are. Are you? We

have had a record this year, 12 months to right now, the record for

the last ten years. These are not the statistics I have seen, but the

new supply is coming up. It is starting to creep up. We don't see

enough house building, need to build more houses and that is a solution

to this problem. You are right, people cannot afford to buy homes

and the reason is there are not enough good quality homes in the

right places. The reason the deposits are so high is because

house prices are still too high, and secondly the Government has passed

laws to make the banking system more prudent, telling them to put more

money aside in case things go wrong. Now suddenly the Government

is not happy with the outcome of its own rules and is trying to create

these subsidies to circumvent the rules it has put in place. It is not

a subsidy. Don't forget banks have to pay a charge in order to take

part in this loan scheme and that the... You are guaranteeing the

money. Yes, but the fear is worked out on a commercial basis. The

taxpayer is protected. Why? You are guaranteeing £12 billion worth of

mortgages per year. Yes but the change in the whole mortgage basis

has been made a few years ago in response of the crash. They made the

distressed test on people applying for mortgages much higher and you

have to be able to repay at twice... So it will not be like

these self certification mortgages handed out in America that caused

the sub-prime crisis? Pigment bit like that but the banks are rightly

asking for bigger deposits, they know there is a big chance house

prices could fall if interest rates will go up, which they will

eventually, so they are demanding bigger deposits. The Government is

making sure the risk of circumventing this is being passed

making sure the risk of on to the taxpayers which is why it

is a dangerous policy. Instead they should be massively accelerating

house-building. Which we are. Planning permission is much easier

to get now, we have seen a 49% increase in planning permission for

a new building over the last year, a huge increase. In the figures I saw

recently, they showed new start in the 12 months to the autumn were

only about 110,000 which is the figure you inherited, which was at

an all-time low in 2010. New house built in the last quarter are third

up on the time last year. You have got to give a chance for the

relaxation of planning laws and the other policies the Government put

into effect last year to take effect and it is coming through now. I

agree, if we weren't building more houses, if the construction sector

was not really ready to take advantage of the increased demand,

there would be a risk. David Cameron says you are snob and it is only

snobs who dislike Help To Buy. They don't have the bank of mum and dad,

people like that will finally get on the housing ladder. That is complete

nonsense. We need a sustainable housing market where there is a

large amount of construction, like in the 1930s for example, where

large numbers of proper family homes were being built for people. House

prices were pushed down and people could afford houses. You are now

encouraging people to take out a 95% mortgage, I thought that was a bad

idea, so supposing interest rates go up by a lot, I am going to

struggle, and supposing house prices fall by more than 5%, I am now faced

with negative equity and soaring interest rates that I cannot afford.

95% mortgage, if you can afford the repayments, you will be fine. What

happens when interest rates rise? They have got to rise a lot before

you get into trouble. People are already affording rent which is a

lot higher than mortgage payments. You will not be able to get into

this scheme unless you can afford repayments double what they are at

the moment. The Conservatives should have been enjoying the media

limelight last week but there was an unwelcome intruder in the shape of a

row between Ed Miliband and the Daily Mail. Just over a week ago the

Daily Mail printed an article claiming that Ed Miliband's Father

Ralph hated Britain. They showed a picture of his father's gravestone

with the caption, grave socialist. They then removed the photo and gave

Ed Miliband the right to reply on the Tuesday edition, but also

printed an editorial alongside it saying they stood by every word they

published an fair headline. It also emerged in the week that the

reporter had gate-crashed a private memorial service for Ed Miliband's

uncle in a London hospital, for which the paper has now apologised,

but Ed Miliband has called on the Daily Mail owner to take a long,

hard look at the way his papers are run. This comes a week before a new

system of press regulation is considered at the Privy Council.

Joining us now from Hull, John Prescott. Does this row between Ed

Miliband and the Daily Mail reinforce the case for tough, new

regulation of the press? It certainly influences the opinion

about that but that is more of Paul Dacre's doing. Ed Miliband rang me

while I was in Strasbourg making sure my complaints were nothing to

do with press regulation and he is right. This argument is not about

politicians and media people, it is about ordinary people that love this

and dealt with. All of these cases affected individual people and they

are the ones that need to have justice in this matter. Next week we

will be hearing whether the Privy Council will be reporting on the

proposal to replace it. Are you agreeing then that what the mail did

with its Miliband article was a matter of judgement? Yes, and the

with its Miliband article was a Leveson inquiry came to the

conclusion that the relationship between the press, the police and

politicians should be governed, but this is about how you have a

framework that can be fair to everyone. If you look at the

proposal given by half the press industry that that does not meet the

Leveson requirement and I suspect the Privy Council this week will

have to reject that, and I hope it will because it is not consistent

with the Leveson report which the Prime Minister said he supported.

You attacked the mail in your column today but your paper went through

the Cameron family bins to see what nappies they used for their disabled

son. Isn't that far more offensive than what the Daily Mail wrote about

Ralph Miliband? It probably is, I couldn't defend that. I have had

reporters going through my bins. Haven't we all? Yes, but we are

dealing with the judgement of editors who acts unilaterally. Paul

Dacre is running this thing in the Mail. How can we accept their

judgement and some accountability which the press have accepted the

old PCC is no good. They are playing for time because if they reject it

this week there is 12 months until you can consider a parliamentary

alternative and then you are near the election and you begin to bully

the leaders. That is how they have been successful in putting off

recommendations. Maybe my memory is fading but did you or anybody else

in the Labour Party object to the Sunday Mirror's behaviour? I didn't

know about it. I would just say it is wrong if that is what they did.

As you said, you have the same position when they go through your

rubbish bins, I think that is wrong. We have Leveson set up by the Prime

Minister to look at the cultures and practices and the unilateral action

of editors and he came forward with a proposal that was agreed in

Parliament under a compromise of the Royal Charter. I don't like a Royal

Charter, it is not democratic frankly, but we have agreed to go

along with it so why did the Government set up in charge at the

same time rushed through the press box? It looks like a fix, like they

are using the Royal Charter as a means of delaying everything. They

have now said they are going to introduce their own independent

charter. This industry does not want to face up to any form of

accountability. We know Alistair Campbell and Ed Miliband's officers

accountability. We know Alistair are working closely on the assault

of the Mail. What is the endgame for this? Is it the head of Paul Dacre?

He is not an acceptable character to me, and he needs to be taking

account. When Ed Miliband rang me it was to say, don't let these

arguments drift into press regulation, he wanted the argument

of decency. Are you and Ed Miliband after Paul Dacre's head? No, he can

stay there. It is like with Murdoch, after Paul Dacre's head? No, he can

we were not attacking him but what is papers were doing. To that

extent, what they are doing about ordinary people, not just big

politicians who can look after themselves. We know, with the bad

cases he had to deal with, they might get libel action, which the

press say, but they pretty well destroyed their lives. That is about

judgment. If you say, as Paul Dacre got good judgment? I would say no,

he will have to live with it. Thank you for joining us, he did not

even have to go to the BBC studios, we sent a truck there for him. What

is the endgame in this? Whether the Labour Party is trying to make this

an issue press regulation are not, this is where it is going. We have

the criminal trial involving Andy Coulson coming up, the Privy Council

discussing press radiation before the end of the year, and the

question is, what is political impact? My hunch, it is an

unfashionable view, is that the total at yum elated political impact

of the Leveson story over the past several years, hacking and

everything, is close to zero, because most voters do not care, and

those who do care believe that all parties are roughly complicit in

being too close to editors and proprietors. You said that Adam

Afriyie was a Labour mould, with a smile. Is the Daily Mail also a

Labour mole? This has been a dream for Ed Miliband, I took on Murdoch,

I am taking on the energy companies and now the evil Daily Mail! I

think... I should say I used to work for the Daily Mail, but when they

printed the right of reply, they surrounded it with a big two fingers

up at Ed. If they had not done surrounded it with a big two fingers

that, they would not be in this position. The poll in the Sunday

Times this morning shows 72% think the Daily Mail was wrong and backed

Mr Miliband's demand for an apology. If you come to define and your dad,

people are naturally going to do this, but it took all the coverage

away from the Tory conference, the media loves covering itself, here we

are doing it again, this has been a dream for Mr Miliband. The political

significance of this is that David Cameron said in the House of Commons

that he wanted to try to find some common ground between the three

party Royal Charter and the so-called press industry version.

What the Daily Mail has done is ensured that the Prime Minister is

not going to be able to do that. What is going to happen this week is

that the press Royal Charter has to be considered first, and that will

probably be rejected. The Privy Council will reject it. Then the

three party Royal Charter will come up, but meanwhile the press will set

up their own regulatory body because the Royal Charter is not a proper

statutory underpinning, they will be able to go ahead with that. There

statutory underpinning, they will be will be the legal basis for the

oversight of the oversight body, and it will basically just be an

ambassador that will not be resolved. As you say, no-one much

cares about this outside of the resolved. As you say, no-one much

profession and a few media watchers. But this has been great politics for

Ed Miliband. It is only great politics if he scores a great

victory. I take your view that people are cynical about it. But the

narrative is, I am the chap who stands up to vested interests. But

all those vested interests are stands up to vested interests. But

people that you would expect a left-wing politician to want to take

on. It is also more significant about who he has stood up for, and

the person he has studied for is his father. Maybe people thought of him

as a Marxist, now they think of him as war hero. He gets to the crux of

matters, you know! You are watching the Sunday Politics. Coming up in

just over 20 minutes, I will be speaking to Godfrey

Hello, and welcome to Sunday Politics in Northern Ireland. With

another international investment conference coming up this week, what

will the Enterprise Minister be hoping it achieves for the economy?

I'll be talking live to Arlene Foster from her Fermanagh

constituency. Voters in the Republic opt to retain the upper house, the

Seanad. So is it a calculated slap in the

face for the Taoiseach, or a vote for democracy? And with me

throughout, journalist Sam McBride and writer Susan McKay.

International investors are coming here this week to be wooed by the

Secretary of State, the First and Deputy First Ministers, and even the

Prime Minister, in an attempt to encourage them to put their money

into Northern Ireland. David Cameron was behind the idea, which he

announced at the end of the G8 summit in Fermanagh earlier this

year. Overall it's been a good year for inward investment, with a number

of major job announcements. Only this week, Stream Global Services, a

US-based call centre business, said it's creating 1000 jobs.

Unemployment is falling and now stands at just below 7%, which is

lower than the UK average. But political divisions still remain at

Stormont, with the Maze/Long Kesh development proving a major

obstacle. So will there be a united front for the visitors? Joining me

from Fivemiletown is the Enterprise Minister, Arlene Foster. Thank you

for joining us on the programme. How optimistic are you that this

conference will deliver anything substantive for the Northern Ireland

economy? I am very optimistic that will happen. This is part of the

economic legacy of the G8 and the will happen. This is part of the

Prime Minister announced it after the G8 took place in Fermanagh, so

we have been working since then to identify potential investors for

Northern Ireland and we believe a number of them will come to Belfast

and be joined by existing investors number of them will come to Belfast

who can advocate for why they came to Northern Ireland and why it is a

good place to invest in. Who is coming specifically that we should

be impressed by? I will not talk about the tension investors for

obvious reasons, that there will be people from the New York Stock

Exchange, from Chicago mercantile, and Northern Ireland is now the

number one in the world for financial technology investment and

I think that is something to be proud of and we will talk about why

that is the case. We have the skills and billable and the infrastructure

in terms of telecoms infrastructure and this is something people mention

a lot, we have accessibility to government, the government can work

well with business. Will there be new companies to Northern Ireland

with no existing presence here at the table? There will, and that is

part of the mix, we have potential investors as well as investors

part of the mix, we have potential already here, but those investors

who are here, 75% of those reinvest into Northern Ireland, so we're not

just looking at new investment but those people already here and how --

what more we can do with them. How should we measure it against the

last investment conference here in 2008,

? Are last conference etc first all as a country which was to do

? Are last conference etc first all business on the world stage, so much

so that Northern Ireland is just behind Greater London as the largest

bringer of investment into the UK, and that is something we should be

proud of. We have only 3% of the population of the UK, yet we brought

in 7% of foreign investment, and population of the UK, yet we brought

that is something we should want to grow after this investment

conference, so it is a chance to set grow after this investment

out our stall, talk about skills and people we have here. We have a young

population and we want to find jobs for them. Twitter made another

population and we want to find jobs announcement in Dublin this week. .

Is the corporation tax differential still a deciding factor in where

investments are made? For the differential remains, big companies

continue to choose the Republic over Northern Ireland. It depends what

companies want. If they want to look Northern Ireland. It depends what

at profits, corporation tax will still be an issue, which is why we

will continue to engage with the Prime Minister on that. He has

delayed a decision until after the Scottish referendum but we will

continue to push on the issue and will have meetings with the Prime

Minister while he is here, but there are other things we can do for

companies around the world. We are cost competitive, we have the

skills, we are a gateway into Europe and the UK, so we had been pushing

all those buttons and that is why we continue to do well in relation to

foreign direct investment. This is happening against a background of

disagreement on political issues, outstanding issues politicians

disagreement on political issues, haven't yet found common ground on.

I am thinking of the Maze Long Kesh project, and the hangover of issues

on flags and parades. We will talk about Twaddell Avenue later.

Yesterday, a senior Orangemen called for the protest to be upscaled as

far as civil disobedience. That's not going to help persuade investors

to choose Northern Ireland next week, is it? We defend the right of

people to protest on any issue, but what must happen, and I make this

clear, people must remain within the law of the land, what we do not want

to see happen, and we are unfortunately did, some people

during the flag protest went out to protest and things went further than

they should have, and those young people now have a criminal

conviction, and I do not want to see people now have a criminal

young people in Belfast or anywhere else blighted with a criminal

conviction for something they will regret, and people need to step back

and look at that when they talk about what they are doing. We have

just shown viewers pictures from yesterday to your DUP colleagues,

one of them your fellow executive Minister Nelson McCausland, standing

behind the Orangemen, flanked by Minister Nelson McCausland, standing

comment loyalists, as he called for Minister Nelson McCausland, standing

civil disobedience. What kind of message to you think that send it?

We are clear in the party that we believe people have a right to

protest, we believe the Parades Commission have failed miserably and

protest, we believe the Parades we welcome the fact that Secretary

protest, we believe the Parades of State has moved to do away with

those commissioners who sit on the Parades Commission. We want to see

the complete end of the Parades Commission and we're looking at the

Richard Haass talks to that about, because we cannot continue with

people 's rights being denied by the Parades Commission. We need to look

people 's rights being denied by the at the fundamentals of the Parades

Commission. The fact we have a commission which negotiates with

people then decides, we have a dual role for the Parades Commission, and

I have always said right back to when it was created that that was

folly and should not have been the case. We have seen the workings of

that over time, and we need to see the end of the commission. But do we

not also need to see an end to the unrest on the streets, an end to the

Twaddell Avenue protest? Is costing £50,000 a day to please. People have

rights but they also have responsibilities, and do you think

Nelson McCausland standing on that platform, a fellow member of your

party, is making your job of bringing investment into Northern

Ireland more difficult? I hope Nelson will have been there, and

exercising his right, but also his responsibility, as he always does in

those occasions. He will have been bringing camp to the area and

talking to people to make sure things do not get out of hand, and I

defend his right to be there. Do you want to see more civil disobedience

on the streets? No, I have said I want people to keep within the law

because we do not want people to be recipients of criminal records and

that is not where we want to be, but we must see that Northern Ireland

has moved forward a great deal since I was a young person, and we have

seen that Northern Ireland now receives more inward investment than

anywhere else in the UK, apart from Greater London, head of population.

I am proud of that and I will make sure we continue to work on that and

I am proud of that and I will make continue to say to investors this is

a good place to visit, and a good place to set up business. That will

be my message in the coming days. Arlene Foster, thank you for joining

us. As we heard, the Orange Order is now

threatening to intensify the dispute at Twaddell Avenue, taking it to the

level of civil disobedience. The dispute is already costing £50,000 a

day to police, according to the Chief Constable. Our political

correspondent, Gareth Gordon, visited the Twaddell protest camp

earlier in the week. Early evening, Woodvale Road, North Belfast, and a

earlier in the week. Early evening, few hundred people have braved the

rain to protest. They have done it more than 80 times since three

Orange lodges were stopped from returning their return -- from

completing their return journey past are going in July. Band members are

wearing masks to hide their identity since last week's decision that they

are breaking the law by playing music along the route, past police

lines at the interface. Although it remains peaceful, there are other

masks on view. Nearly three months on from the 12th of July, this is

the nightly reality in Twaddell Avenue. There is no sign of it

ending soon. Not far away, some people on the nationalist side the

Koran. -- look on. Myself and other locals have been volunteering to

walk the streets on the side to keep young people away from what has been

happening, so it has been a strange experience. But in Twaddell, some

believe the action should be stepped up. At every stage, it is other

people who have escalated it, not us. The time may come when it is up

to the people in this area and the people who support us to up the ante

and to escalate. Gareth Gordon reporting. Sam McBride

and Susan McKay are with me. What do you make of what was said yesterday

at Twaddell Avenue? This upscaling to the devil of civil 's obedience.

It shows the protest isn't going to end. I think the issue is that the

It shows the protest isn't going to language is ambiguous. Arlene Foster

is making clear, reading between the lines, that she is not keen to see

is making clear, reading between the any upscaling of the protest, but

defending the right of people to protest. I think the Orangemen who

stood up yesterday, the protest was peaceful and lawful but had some

element of disruption to wider committee life. The difficulty is

that in the past when Orange leaders said things like this, it has not

always been received in that way by people and perhaps they need to be

clear what civil disobedience they advocate and what they don't. We had

an instance earlier in the year where people talk about blocking

roads, but that is illegal and the police made that clear. For a period

that please let it go one during the flag protest, then these little to

stop it echoes as Arlene Foster said people now have criminal records, so

there are consequences. It is not yet clear if the Orange Order is in

control of what is happening in Belfast or even if the political

parties are. Susan, you visited the camp during the week. What did you

parties are. Susan, you visited the make of what you saw and what people

said you? It was pathetic, I felt, because it is like a throwback to

Drumcree all over again. It is the same old rhetoric, they are getting

everything and Unionism gets nothing and that is hatred of unionist

culture, and I don't really see what the DUP is playing out in re

engaging with that kind of negative pre-agreement politics, because I

think Arlene Foster is a very able minister, she speaks very well in

terms of investment, but she must know it is a very mixed message that

is being sent out where you have a government minister standing,

wanting to be seen on TV flanked by loyalists and by the Orange Order,

saying they are going to go as far as civil 's obedience, at the same

time as she knows investors are coming to Northern Ireland because

they know that like they believe we have a stable police here that like

a stable PC, the rhetoric that I heard up at that so-called peace

a stable PC, the rhetoric that I camp was very belligerent and full

of hatred and rage and self-pity. Was that wattage and eight why the

eye there and why the annoyed? No, because it all comes back to no

surrender and the fact the DUP has gone into power with Sinn Fein and a

return to the notion we can go back gone into power with Sinn Fein and a

to the past ready Orange Order can marks were wanted, and there is this

refusal to accept that nowadays compromise is necessary in all

situations and there has been acts of bad faith in relation to talking

about talks, which they have been saying since July, but they haven't

yet sat down and done so. We should note that if the parade had passed

yesterday at 9am, when most of us were in their beds, in a limited

form without music, the camp would not be there. Anyway, yes there are

serious problems, there is the potential for disorder, but there is

intransigent on the part of people like Gerry Kelly who are saying even

at a time well after the 12th, when like Gerry Kelly who are saying even

the parade has been stopped, they will still not lead it through in

any time. It is most disturbing to see young people in masks in that

footage, some of them are Halloween masks and people are making light of

that, but there are also young people seen with balaclava type

masks. That is very menacing, even if it is not intended as anything

other than a bit of a show. week gone by in 60 seconds. The

Executive's top two agreed on one thing, 1000 new call centre jobs in

Belfast. Agreement over the ultra-rare showpiece centre has not

been so easy. The refusal to honour a government commitment has been

difficult for me. Orangemen were knocked back again over Ardoyne.

There was a statement made from all those involved, and I was one, that

they would return them no matter what the bridge commission decision

was, they would return to dialogue. The SDLP the bike support for naming

a new replay Park after an IRA hunger striker. And if you present

at the Tory conference after is a prize cabinet reshuffle involving

at the Tory conference after is a Theresa Villiers. Please give a warm

welcome to the Secretary of State for Scotland.

A bit of a nightmare for trees of the leaders there. That factories of

years. In the Republic, Enda Kenny has been

dealt an embarrassing defeat over the future of the Seanad. The

Taoiseach had proposed abolishing the upper house, claiming it would

save 20 million euros a year. He was opposed by a small but vocal

campaign group, and on Friday, voters decided they wanted to keep

their Senators. Let's get more from journalist Diarmaid Fleming in

Dublin. Nobody really expected this outcome. What happened? This was a

shock. All the polls beforehand indicated a lead of up to 70% for

the government side. It seems that a large number of no voters,

especially voters from the east of the country and Dublin, decided

against backing the government on this. The government fought a really

inept campaign. Enda Kenny proposed this in 2009 without any discussion

with his own party, yet decided not to take part in a debate on this, so

it was a campaign where the leader had decided not to sit in the

driver's have and it was derailed. Will it damage Enda Kenny? It will.

No one wants to lead a proposal like this and then be rejected, but I

think there is a feeling that the Seanad is not that important here.

The big issue is the economy. People are under pressure from austerity

and next week there is a budget. Coming one after the other, a Seanad

defeat and then an unpopular budget, we will see a combination where the

effect on Enda Kenny, we will see what that will be. In one of the

Kiwis and is for getting rid of the Seanad was that it would save 20

million euros a year, the referendum cost 14 million. I don't think the

money was that they can issue. Enda Kenny thought this was a populist

issue, to have fewer politicians, but it didn't seem to matter to

people. 20 million euros is pretty small change in the scheme of

things. It is not something people feel in their pay packets but the

argument was that the opposition that those sums weren't adding up,

and that added to the ineptitude and the feeling this was not a serious

and that added to the ineptitude and campaign, that they hadn't done

their songs on something basic. There are people who think the

Seanad is important for Northern Ireland because significant figures

from the North, important voices down the years, have found a

platform in the Republic and have fed into political debate then

there. Empty can of people like Seamus Mallon, Gordon Wilson. Gordon

Wilson had a huge impact here. He was the father of Marie Wilson, who

was murdered in Enniskillen. His contribution was major but his

effort to reach out to the other side from the point of view, to the

unionist little establishment, was never going to grab a foothold

because unit would not want to see them what they see as a foreign

parliament, so it did have some impact in that way, but the Seanad

was seen by most people as a house for political insiders, those who

failed at rejection that like collections, and it was used by many

political parties as a platform for future political ambition. Thank

you, Derek Fleming. Sam McBride and Susan McKay with me still. Would you

gobsmacked by the result? I was surprised. I think it is a good sign

because sometimes you get the impression people in the Republic

are in despair, and they was a much higher turnout than anticipated. A

lot of people voted no, including myself, not because we necessarily

think the Seanad works well but because the campaign the government

ranks was so insultingly simplistic and arrogant, and the decision by

the Taoiseach not to even take part in it, I think people were saying

the Taoiseach not to even take part don't take us for granted, but this

is a chance to make the Seanad a meaningful body because it really

isn't. You mentioned some people who were included in the Seanad, a lot

of people think of WB Yeats, but in reality it has an performed for many

years. Sam, any thoughts on this? I was thrilled, it is not major

restriction, but I think it obviously used to be the case, it

was a lovely chamber and still exist for committee meetings, but it is a

constraint on the absolute power of legislator, and the Lords has been

criticised massively in recent years and it should be reformed, but as a

principle I think it is good. It worked on the impact for Gerry Adams

principle I think it is good. It of the verdict in his brother Liam

Adams's case during the week. It is of the verdict in his brother Liam

not good for him. It will damage him with some Republicans, but when you

have someone who denies that they have been leader of an organisation

that ordered people, I am not sure allegations about this will be

really damaging. I think in the longer term it will be, because

more affordable homes needed, but we have no time. Andrew, back to you.

Our next guest is no stranger to controversy, a former UKIP MEP he

recently lost his party's whip after a series of outbursts including

describing foreign countries receiving aid as 'Bongo Bongo Land'

and joking that a group of UKIP women who didn't clean behind their

fridges were 'sluts'. Now he sits in the European Parliament as an

independent but remains a UKIP party member. Here's a flavour of recent

events in the political life of Godfrey Bloom. How you can possibly

be giving £1 million a month... Bongo Bongo Land. I got 6000 e-mails

within 12 hours, only 47 were not agreeing with me so you are the one

that is out of touch. Everybody knows me, a bit like the Marmite

joke, they love me or they hate me but I have always told me like it

is. I made a joke and said that women who did not clean behind the

French were sluts and everybody laughed along, including the women.

I have had hundreds of e-mails, saying, God Almighty, can't you make

a joke any more? I am long in the tooth now to do political

correctness and I understand UKIP have moved on and they are doing

well, and I wish them well. This, with no black faces on it. You are

picking people out for the colour of with no black faces on it. You are

their skin? You disgust me! Perhaps the way they are doing things now is

not the way I do things. You disgrace me. We are joined now with

a suitable distance between us by the independent MEP for Yorkshire

and the Humber, Godfrey Bloom. You said this weekend that you have to

be a complete sociopath to be in politics, are you a sociopath? No, I

am just an ordinary bloke from the rugby club likes to tell it as it

is. I did not come into politics to rugby club likes to tell it as it

save my country from the clutches of the awful, evil... That is why I am

in politics, and that is why I joined UKIP, and I am still a

member, and I will still be voting UKIP. GUI except that your

ability... Do you accept that your behaviour spoiled the UKIP

conference? We were both born in behaviour spoiled the UKIP

same year, we are too old to worry about regrets. Let's look forward

and see... Never mind the year I was born, what is the answer to my

question? I am in this for my country and intent to do the best I

can, sitting at my time as an independent for my country, and that

can, sitting at my time as an will involve getting UKIP

re-elected. They are the only game in town, the only party that will

get as out. Shouldn't you have been more careful and not become a

liability? You hijacked the party conference. That is a matter of

perception. We have heard nothing in the last two years but it is a

one-man band, a Nigel Farage party, and I can make a joke at a fringe

meeting and collapse the whole thing. This doesn't say anything

about me or anything about UKIP, Andrew. It tells you about your

profession, the profession of journalism, it is all about

journalism - it is not about UKIP or me, it was the journalists' reaction

to a small joke at a meeting. And also Nigel Farage's reaction - is

UKIP a one-man party? I do myself, unless I had a commended.

Personality, the most unbelievable force of personality to collapse a

party conference. Nigel Farage has been a friend of mine for 20 years,

and may I remind you that in June and July UK was slipping in the

polls, and when I made my statement about overseas aid, we went back to

18%? I am not an electoral liability, I never was, I am a vote

getter. As you know, there is a difference between cause and

correlation, but let me show you what Nigel Farage had to say about

you on the BBC. Let's blunder clip of that. We are not here to win

friends amongst the liberal elite, and Godfrey's problem was that he

was making comments about women, and that is not part of the party

manifesto. Don't you need to reflect that you are too outrageous, too

politically incorrect even for UKIP? Well, you see, to a certain extent I

politically incorrect even for UKIP? have been gagged on other subjects.

I am a libertarian, I wanted to talk about flat tax. I thought David

Aronowitz wrote a very good piece in the times on drugs, and I have been

gagged to speak about any of these things because they are not part of

it, so I tend to speak about other things. Maybe they have outgrown

you, they want to be a more mainstream professional party

machine, and they have to get rid of the Victor Meldrew wing. You might

have a point, but I am speaking to you from Hull, and if you look at

our results in Rotherham and Barnsley, and very recently in

Scarborough and Whitby in the buy legends, 25%, so how you see things

in the bubble, it is not like how we see it appear in Yorkshire. You look

like the one who was sitting in a bubble! Is UKIP unravelling? Of

course it isn't, we are getting 24% of the vote in by-elections, of

course it is not. Boy, wouldn't the main parties and the establishment

love to see that! But I am sorry, it is not happening. Will you stand as

an independence against UKIP in the European elections? Almost certainly

not, although by no political support is ephemeral, if the

elections were next week, I could assure you I would win the seat. I

do not think I will go that route. Will you stand as a UKIP candidate

again? We do not know, probably not, but I shall certainly be trying to

help UKIP as best I can. You both share a flat, I understand, in

Brussels, neither of you clean behind the fridge. Other than the

fact that the place is probably quite murky, you have got a chance

to talk to each other and get back into his good graces, haven't you? I

am sure we will be having a beer before the month is out. So Godfrey

Bloom will soon be back in UKIP, we take it? For those of you who were

not watching there, he just shrugged! Thank you very much for

joining. A great pleasure. I will have to move my own share, you do

not have the sea Jeremy Paxman doing that! Nobody votes for UKIP because

they think they are a smooth, slick, professional party. If anything, the

absence of PR polish is the reason for their popularity, so these are

skirmishes are not a problem, and more than that, Godfrey Bloom does

make Nigel Farage look better. Even in that clip from Andrew Marr, he

looked more statesman-like in juxtaposition with someone like

Godfrey Bloom than he has done before. I mean, he did hijacked the

conference, it was a disaster, they got tonnes of publicity but not the

kind they wanted. But you have to say he does actor for the

journalists. I thought he was sexist long before anyone else, he used to

have an incredible page on his website entitled Godfrey Bloom:

Misogynist, and the proof that he was not was that he was once

photographed with a girls' rugby team, and we lived for those

characters in politics. He does make Nigel Farage look better, but is sin

was to say things you said before but to ruin the party conference. It

sounds like he is coming back. A beer in Brussels and he will be back

on the UKIP ticket. Sitting having a beer in that built the Chechen, it

sounds like it may be what the deal is that he comes back into UKIP but

does not stand as an MEP at the European Parliamentary elections. --

in that built the kitchen. It is right to say the electorate are

sophisticated and they know what this party is for, what characters

it has. You did not need what Godfrey Bloom said for people to

know he is sexist, and the electorate know what they go using

UKIP four. They are using it as the vehicle to beat over the head the

three established parties. They will probably do it in the European

elections and give them first place. The big question is what happens in

the general election, and the problem that Nigel Farage was making

the general election, and the an Andrew Marr this morning is that

he wants to copy the tactics of Paddy Ashdown, get elected and

councils, build up a Parliamentary base, and to do that you do need

discipline. MPs return to the Commons next week, and there is a

ministerial reshuffle on the cards, that is the rumour in Westminster.

David Cameron has spoken of the extraordinary talent pool of women

among his ministers, so could he bring more of them into the cabinet?

He was talking about it earlier this week. I think we are getting there

in Britain, but we have a long way to go. If you look at the top

businesses in Britain, there are not nearly enough women in the

boardroom. If you look at politics in Britain, there aren't nearly

enough women around the Cabinet table. So I think, in every walk of

life, whether it is the judiciary, whether it is politics, business,

there is a lot further to go. Before the last election, we only had 19

women Members of Parliament. We now have around 50, so we have made a

big change, but it is still 50 out of 300, not nearly enough. So we

need to do more. My wife likes to say, if you don't have women in top

places, you're not just missing out on 50% of the talent, you are

missing out on a lot more than 50% of the talent, and I think she

missing out on a lot more than 50% probably has a point. The prime is

that going for the women's vote. Is there going to be a reshuffle? I

think you are right to say there there going to be a reshuffle? I

will be a lot more women, they need to change the ratio of women to men

called Dave who went to maudlin college. So obviously they are not

fishing in the biggest talent pool, but there are numbers. Esther McVey

has been selling a very difficult brief in work and pensions, you

could see people being given bigger roles. Helen is pretty sure. We are

told it is not a Cabinet level reshuffle me it is under Secretary

level, so maybe you could put Esther McVey into the Cabinet. Margot

James, who you had here not that long ago, she is very impressive.

What is impressive is that some body like Andrea Leadsom, who is really

impressive, worked in the City, very smart, really big on important

social issues like early is intervention, she should still be in

there, but she fell out with George Osborne when she dared to criticise

him a few years ago over Ed Balls and the LIBOR so-called scandal. If

you are doing it on talent, Andrea Leadsom should have a senior

position in government. So expectation, if he does not do this

now, a tonne of bricks will fall on him. He has got no excuse not to

promote women, because the 2010 intake was disproportionately female

in terms of talent. The question of the Tories and the struggle with

women voters is a very deep and historic one. You have to remember

that for most of the post-war period they had an advantage electorally

amongst women voters. Many times there would not have been a

Conservative government without the women of this country. This began to

change in the mid-1990s, and the question is, why has that happened?

Was it policy change, or the personalities at the top are now

much more hostile to women, or less, personalities at the top are now

Brent doubled to female voters? It is such a deep historical trend that

I do not think one reshuffle will change it. -- or less competent

civil. The English party conference season is over, do you share the

consensus view that Ed Miliband came out best of the three party leaders?

I think I probably do, but his overall approval ratings are still

minus 20, whereas Cameron's minus ten. And the more the recovery seems

minus 20, whereas Cameron's minus to take place, and some of the

latest figures are quite amazing, they certainly surprised me, you

wonder whether Labour's tactic is right to put all their eggs into the

living standards basket. I was looking at car sales, which are

booming. If people start to feel better, and they don't yet, but if

they were, it is tougher to go on about living standards. George

Osborne's... You have Ed Miliband making a great thing about living

standards, but then they say under their breath, this is global forces,

which mean that inflation is outstripping wage increases. And

you're absolutely right, as the economy improves, presumably that

will be dealt with, but Miliband's argument will be that there are

people suffering, and even if the economy recovers, they will still

struggle. But if it is global forces, it is difficult to blame the

struggle. But if it is global government for that. Body being

noticed now, there is nothing worse for the leader of the opposition

than to be not noticed. -- but he is being noticed now. It seems that he

in many ways has set the political weather. Look at the number of

references to the Labour leader in Mr Cameron's speech. And in Mr

Obama's speech on a similar topic, living standards. Was the mentioning

Ed Miliband?! Oh, he was using the same language, he has not gone that

far. If I were Ed Miliband, I would be more worried now, because Labour

through the kitchen sink at their conference. They came out with the

biggest policy announcements they could, compulsory apprenticeships,

the energy freeze on prices, and it generated a poll boost which has

fizzled away within ten days. I do not know where they go from here.

What is significant with Ed Miliband is that in his three party

conference beaches, he has set the tone for responsible capitalism, the

one nation Britain, and the problem with those speeches is people say,

they are fine, they are academic, but what does it mean? What you have

now is an intellectual framework that translates into policies. The

polls to watch are not the ones after the conferences, but at the

end of the month when it has also pulled down. They will tell us where

we are going. We will have to go ourselves now. Thank you to our

guests. The Daily Politics will be back tomorrow at noon on BBC Two,

and I will be back on BBC One this time, same time, next week. If it is

Sunday, it is the Sunday Politics.