09/02/2014 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland

morning, folks, welcome to the Sunday Politics. Rising flood water,

a battered coastline, the winter storms forced the Government to take

control. Is it hanging the Environment Agency out to dry?

Embarrassment for the Government is the Immigration Minister resigns

after he discovered he was employing a cleaner with no right to work here

for seven years. Ed Miliband promised an end to what he called

the machine politics of union fixes in the Labour Party,

And coming up here. We report from Sinn Fein's ard fheis in Wexford and

speak to party President, Gerry Adams. I'll also be talking to the

Shadow Secretary of State, Ivan Lewis. Join me in half an hour.

In London after two days of disruption in the capital the Mayor

Boris Johnson will be talking to ask about strife on the Underground. All

of that and after a week of very public coalition spats can David

Cameron and Nick Clegg keep the coalition show on the road? Two

senior party figures will go head to head. And with me, Helen Lewis, Nick

Watt and Iain Martin who would not know they Somerset Levels from their

Norfolk Broads, but that will not stop them tweeting their thoughts.

We start with the strange Case of the Immigration Minister, his

cleaner and some lost documents. Yesterday Mark Harper tendered his

resignation, telling the media he had discovered the cleaner who

worked for him for seven years did not have the right to work in the

UK. The Communities Secretary Eric Pickles said he had done the

honourable thing. I was sad to see him go, he was a strong minister.

Had he been a member of the public he would not have done anything

wrong, but he set himself a very high standard and he felt that

standard and honourably stood down. This would seem like a good

resignation, maybe unlike the Baroness Scotland one years ago on a

similar issue, but have we been told the full story? We wait to see that.

Labour have picked up saying he is an honourable man, that the reason

why he resigned is these very owners checks that landlords and employers

will have to perform on employees over their documentation. The most

interesting line is that, we do not require them to be experts or spot

anything other than an obvious forgery. The suggestion that there

is the document he was presented with originality, which he lost, was

on home office paper and was perhaps not entirely accurate. That is the

embarrassment. He is the minister putting through a bill that will

demand tougher checks on people and he himself did not do enough checks

to discover she was illegal. There is an odd bit where he involves the

home office later to check her out as well. He writes a resignation

letter and he has to hold himself to pay higher standard. He has done the

David Laws approach to this, resign quickly and he can come back. David

Cameron wants him to return swiftly to the frontbenchers. He is a state

school educated lad. He is the kind of Tory that the Tories are in short

supply of. He is a rising star. I would caution on this idea that it

is customary that whenever anyone resigns, it is always thought they

will come straight back into office. If only the outside world worked

like that. It is not, in a company if the HR person resigns, he is such

a great chap he will be back next week. There is a silver lining for

David Cameron is he has been able to move Harriet Bond up as he moves

everyone up. But nobody will see her in the whips office because she is

not allowed to appear on television. And if you three want to resign? Do

not hate you are coming back next week. But we will do it with honour.

It has been a hellish week for residents of coastal areas with more

storms bringing more flooding and after Prince Charles visited the

Somerset Levels on Tuesday the Government has been keen to show it

has got a grip on the situation at last.

For last weekend's Sunday Politics I made the watery journey to the

village of Muchelney, cut off for a whole month. Now everyone has been

dropping in. First it was Prince Charles on a park bench pulled by a

tractor. He waded into the row about how the floods have been handled.

Next it was the chair of the Environment Agency, Lord Smith, who

faced angry residents. Sought the river is out. That is precisely what

we are going to do. Where he faced, a resident, he did not need that

many. David Cameron went for a look as well and gave the region what it

wanted, more pumps, more money and in the long-term the return of

dredging. There are lessons to learn. The pause in bridging that

took place from the late 1990s was wrong and we need to get dredging

again. When the water levels come down and it is safe to dredge, we

will dredging to make sure these rivers and stitches can carry a

better capacity. The Environment Secretary Owen Paterson has not been

seen again because he is recovering from emergency eye surgery. In the

meantime the floodwaters rose ever higher. Some residents were told to

evacuate. In Devon the railway was washed away by the waves leaving a

big gap in the network. Look at the weather this weekend. If you can

believe it, the storms keep rolling in. What is the long-term solution

for flood prone areas of the country? I am joined from Oxford by

the editor of The Ecologist magazine, Oliver Tickell, and by

local MP Tessa Munt. Tessa, let me come to you first. What do you now

want the Government to do? I want it to make sure it does exactly as it

promises and delivers what every farmer and landowner around here

knows should have been done for years. First, to solve the problems

we have right now, but to make sure there is money in the bank for us to

carry on doing the maintenance that is necessary. Was it a mistake not

to do the dredging? When the waters start to subside does dredging

become a key part of this? Yes, of course. It is something the farmers

have been asking for four years. When you wander along a footpath by

a river and you see trees growing and there is 60% of the capacity

only because there is silt, it needs to have a pretty dramatic action

right now and then we need to make sure the maintenance is ongoing.

Oliver Tickell, was it a mistake to stop the dredging? If the dredging

had happened, the land would not be covered in water for so long?

Clearly it is necessary to do at least some dredging on these rivers

and in particular because these rivers are well above ground level.

They are carrying water that comes down off the hills well above the

level of the flood plain on the Somerset Levels. They naturally tend

to silt up. But the key thing is that is only a small part of the

overall solution. What we need is a catchment wide approach to improve

infiltration upstream and you also need to manage the flood plain on

the levels and upstream so as to have active flood plain that can

store water. This idea it is just about dredging is erroneous.

Dredging is a part of it, but it is a catchment wide solution. Dredging

is only a small part of the solution he says. Yes, of course it is. But

look here. With the farmer is locally, the landowners, they know

this land will carry water for a few weeks of the year, that is not a

problem. But this water has to be taken away and there is a very good

system of drainage and it works perfectly well. In my area there are

serious problems because the dredging has not taken place. There

are lunatic regulations around were when they do do some of dredging,

the Environment Agency is asked to take it away because it is

considered toxic waste. This is barmy. We need to take the stuff out

of the rivers and build the banks up so we create protection in the

future. We have to make sure the dredging is done but make sure the

drainage works well and we have pumps in places and we have

floodgates put onto the rivers. We need to make sure repairs are done

more quickly. All right, let me go back to Oliver Tickell. Is it not

the case a lot of people on your side of the argument would like to

see lands like the Somerset Levels return to natural habitat? Looe I

would like a degree of that, but that does not mean the whole place

needs to turn into wilderness so it will remain agricultural landscape.

Everybody, all the interested parties who signed up to a document

called vision 2034 the Somerset Levels envisages most of the area of

the Somerset Levels being turned over to extensive grassland and that

is what it is best suited for. Let me put that to Tessa Munt. Have you

signed up to this where you will end up with extensive grassland? I have

seen it, but grass does not grow if water is sitting on this land for

weeks and weeks. What you have to remember is a lot of the levels are

managed very carefully and they are conservation land and that means

cattle are allowed to go out at certain times of the year and in

certain numbers. It is well managed. Do you accept it should return to

grassland? Grassland, fine, but you cannot call land grassland in the

flipping water is on it so long that nothing grows. It is no good at

doing that. You have got to make sure it is managed properly.

Drainage has been taking place on this land for centuries. It is the

case the system is there, but it needs to be maintained properly and

we have to have fewer ridiculous regulations that stop action. Last

year the flooding minister agreed dredging should take place and

everything stopped. Now we have got the promise from the Prime Minister

and I thank Prince Charles for that. Is it not time to let the local

people run their land rather than being told what to do by the

Environment Agency, central Government and the European Union?

The internal drainage boards have considerable power in all of this.

They wanted to dredge and they were not allowed to. The farmers want to

dredge that is what is going to happen, but they have signed up to a

comprehensive vision of catchment management and of environmental

improvement turning the Somerset Levels into a world-class haven for

wildlife. It is not much good if your house is underwater. The

farmers themselves, the RSPB, the drainage boards, they have all

signed up to this. The real question now is how do we implement that

vision? You give the money to the drainage boards. At the moment they

pay 27% of their money and have been doing so for years and years and

this is farmers' money and it has been going to the drainage boards

and they pay the Environment Agency who are meant to be dredging and

that has not happened. We have to leave it there. We have run out of

time. Last week saw the Labour Party

adopts an historic change with its relationship with the unions.

Changes to the rules that propelled Ed Miliband to the top. Ed Miliband

was elected Labour leader in 2010 by the electoral college system which

gives unions, party members and MPs one third of votes each. This would

be changed into a simpler one member, one vote system. A union

member would have to become an affiliated member of the party. They

would have to opt in and pay ?3 a year. But the unions would have 50%

of the vote at the conference and around one third of the seats on the

National executive committee. The proposals are a financial gamble as

well. It is estimated the party could face a drop in funding of up

to ?5 million a year when the changes are fully implemented in

five years. The leader of the Unite trade union has welcomed the report

saying it is music to his ears. The package will be voted on at a

special one of conference in March. And the Shadow Business Secretary

Chuka Umunna joins me now for the Sunday Interview. Welcome back. In

what way will the unions have less power and influence in the Labour

Party? This is about ensuring individual trade union members have

a direct relationship with the Labour Party. At the moment the

monies that come to us are decided at a top level, the general

secretaries determine this, whether the individual members want us to be

in receipt of those monies or not so we are going to change that so that

affiliation fees follow the consent of individual members. Secondly, we

want to make sure the individual trade union members, people who

teach our children, power via -- fantastic British businesses, we

want them to make an active choice, and we are also recognising that in

this day and age not everybody wants to become a member of a political

party. We haven't got much time. The unions still have 50% of the vote at

Labour conferences, there will be the single most important vote, more

member -- union members will vote than nonunion members, their power

has not diminished at all, has it? In relation to the other parts of

the group of people who will be voting in a future leadership

contest, we are seeking to move towards more of a one member, one

vote process. At the moment we have the absurd situation where I, as a

member of Parliament, my vote will count for 1000. MPs are losing...

They still have a lot of power. I am a member of the GMB union and the

Unite union, also a member of the Fabians as well so I get free votes

on top of my vote as a member of Parliament. We are moving to a

system where I will have one vote and that is an important part of

this. You asked how many people would be casting their votes. The

old system, up to 2.8 million ballot papers were sent out with prepaid

envelopes for people to return their papers were sent out with prepaid

turnout. The idea that you are going to see a big change... Even if

your individual party members. In one vital way, your purse strings,

your individual party members. In the unions will be more powerful

than ever because at the moment they have to hand over 8 million to

than ever because at the moment they fraction of that now. They will get

to keep that money, but then come the election you go to them and give

them a lot of money -- and they will have you then. They won't have us,

as you put it! The idea that individual trade union members don't

have their own view, their own voice, and just do what their

general secretaries do is absurd. They will make their own decision,

and we want them to make that and not have their leadership decide

that for them. Let me go to the money. The Labour Party manifesto

will be reflecting the interests of Britain, and the idea that somehow

people can say we are not going to give you this money unless you do

this or that, we will give you a policy agenda which is appropriate

for the British people, regardless of what implications that may have

financially. They will have more seats than anybody else in the NEC

and they will hold the purse strings. They will be the

determining factor. They won't be. Unite is advocating a 70% rate of

income tax, there is no way we will have that in our manifesto. Unite is

advocating taking back contracts and no compensation basis, we would not

-- there is no way we would do that. How many chief executives of the

FTSE 100 are backing Labour? We have lots of chief executives backing

Labour. I don't know the exact number. Ed Miliband has just placed

an important business person in the House of Lords, the former chief

executive of the ITV, Bill Grimsey. How many? You can only name one?

Bill Grimsey, there is also John Mills. Anyone who is currently

chairman of the chief executive? With the greatest respect, you are

talking about less than half the percent of business leaders in our

country, we have almost 5 million businesses, not all FTSE 100

businesses, not all listed, and we are trying to get people from across

the country of all different shapes and sizes. Let's widen it to the

FTSE 250. That is 250 out of 5 million companies. The largest ones,

they make the profits and provide the jobs. Two thirds of private

sector jobs in this country come from small and medium-sized

businesses, and small and medium-sized businesses are an

important part of a large companies supply chains. So you cannot name a

single chairman from the FTSE 250, correct? I don't know all the

chairman. Are you going to fight the next election without a single boss

of a FTSE 250 company? I have named some important business people, but

the most important thing is that we are not coming out with a manifesto

for particular interests, but for broader interest. Let me show you,

Digby Jones says Labour's policy is, "if it creates wealth, let's kick

it" . Another quote, that it borders on predatory taxation. They think

you are anti-business. I don't agree with them. One of the interesting

things about Sir Stuart's comments on the predatory taxation and I

think he was referring to the 50p rate of tax is that he made some

comments arguing against the reduction of the top rate of tax

from 50p. He is saying something different now. Digby of course has

his own opinions, he has never been a member of the Labour Party. Let me

come onto this business of the top rate of tax, do you accept or don't

you that there is a point when higher rates of income tax become

counter-productive? Ultimately you want to have the lowest tax rates

possible. Do you accept there is a certain level you actually get less

money? I think ultimately there is a level beyond you could go which

would be counter-productive, for example the 75% rate of tax I

mentioned earlier, being advocated by Unite in France. Most French

higher earners will pay less tax than under your plans. I beg your

pardon, with the 50p? Under your proposals, people here will pay more

tax than French higher earners. If you are asking if in terms of the

level, you asked the question and I answered it, do I think if you reach

a level beyond which the tax burden becomes counter-productive, can I

give you a number what that would be, I cannot but let me explain -

the reason we have sought to increase its two 50p is that we can

get in revenue to reduce the deficit. In an ideal world you

wouldn't need a 50p rate of tax which is why during our time in

office we didn't have one, because we didn't have those issues. Sure,

though you cannot tell me how much the 50p will raise. In the three

years of operation we think it raised ?10 billion. You think. That

was based on extrapolation from the British library. It is at least

possible I would suggest, for the sake of argument, that when you

promise to take over half people's income, which is what you will do if

you get your way, the richest 1% currently account for 70 5% of all

tax revenues. -- 75%. Is it not a danger that if you take more out of

them, they will just go? I don't think so, we are talking about the

top 1% here. If you look at the directors of sub 5 million turnover

companies, the average managing director of that gets around

?87,000. Let me narrow it down to something else. Let's take the 0.1%

of top taxpayers, down to fewer than 30,000 people. They account for over

14% of all of the income tax revenues. Only 29,000 people. If

they go because you are going to take over half their income, you

have lost a huge chunk of your tax base. They could easily go, at

tipping point they could go. What we are advocating here is not

controversial. Those with the broadest shoulders, it is not

unreasonable to ask them to share the heavier burden. Can you name one

other major economy that subscribes to this? Across Europe, for example

in Sweden they have higher tax rates than us. Can you name one major

economy? I couldn't pluck one out of the air, I can see where you are

coming from, I don't agree with it. I think most people subscribe to the

fact that those with wider shoulders should carry the heavy a burden. We

have run out of time but thank you for being here.

Over the past week it seems that Nick Clegg has activated a new Lib

Dem strategy - 'Get Gove'. After a very public spat over who should

head up the schools inspection service Ofsted, Lib Dem sources have

continued to needle away at the Education Secretary. And other

senior Lib Dems have also taken aim at their coalition partners. Here's

Giles Dilnot. It's unlikely the polite welcome of these school

children to Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg and his party colleague

schools minister David Laws would be so forthcoming right now from the

man in charge of schools Conservative Michael Gove. Mr Laws

is said to have been furious with The Education secretary over the

decision to remove Sally Morgan as chair of Ofsted. But those who know

the inner working of the Lib Dems say that's just understandable. When

you have the department not being consulted, it would be possible for

him to not publicly comment. The remarkable thing would be if he

hadn't said anything at all. We should be careful to understand this

is not always part of a preplanned decision. There is a growing sense

that inside Number Ten this is a concerted Lib Dem strategy, we also

understand there is no love lost between Nick Clegg and Michael Gove

to say the least, and a growing frustration that if the Lib Dems

think such so-called yellow and blue attacks can help them with the

election, they can also damage the long-term prospects of the Coalition

post 2015. One spat does not a divorce make but perhaps even more

significant has been Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander's

recent newspaper interview firmly spiking any room for George Osborne

to manoeuvre on lowering the highest income tax rate to 40p. All this

builds on the inclusion in Government at the reshuffle of

people like Norman Baker at the Home Office and Simon Hughes at Justice

people who are happier to publically express doubt on Conservative

policy, unlike say Jeremy Browne who was removed and who has made plain

his views on Coalition. It is difficult for us to demonstrate that

we are more socialist than an Ed Miliband Labour led party. Even if

we did wish to demonstrate it, doing it in coalition with the

Conservatives would be harder still. Nonetheless a differentiation

strategy was always likely as 2015 approached, so is there evidence it

works? Or of the work we publish shows the Lib Dems have a huge

problem in terms of their distinctiveness, so attacking their

coalition partners or the Labour Party is helpful in showing what

they are against, but there are bigger problem is showing what they

are for. And one Conservative MP with access to Number Ten as part of

the PM's policy board says yellow on blue attacks are misplaced and

irresponsible. At this stage when all the hard work is being done and

the country is back on its feet, the Lib Dems are choosing the time to

step away from the coalition. That is your position, but do you suspect

coming up to the next election we will see more of this? I think the

Lib Dems are about as hard to pin down as a weasel in Vaseline. And

with the public's view of politicians right now, and wants to

be seen as slicker than a well oiled weasel? And we have Lib Dem peer

Matthew Oakeshott and senior Conservative backbencher Bernard

Jenkin. Matthew, the Lib Dems are now picking fights with the Tories

on a range of issues, some of them trivial. Is this a Pirelli used to

Lib Dem withdrawal from the coalition? I do not know, I am not

privy to Nick Clegg's in strategy. Some of us have been independent for

some time. I resigned over treatment of the banks. That is now being

sorted out. But what is significant is we have seen a string of attacks,

almost an enemy within strategy. When you have Nick Clegg, David Laws

and Danny Alexander, the three key people closest to the Conservatives,

when you see all of them attacking, and this morning Nick Clegg has had

a go at the Conservatives over drug policy. There is a string of

policies where something is going on. It is difficult to do an enemy

within strategy. I believe as many Lib Dems do that we should withdraw

from the coalition six months to one year before the election so we can

put our positive policies across rather than having this tricky

strategy of trying to do it from within. Why does David Cameron need

the Lib Dems? He probably does not. The country generally favoured the

coalition to start with. Voters like to see politicians are working

together and far more of that goes on in Westminster then we see. Most

of my committee reports are unanimous reports from all parties.

Why does he need them? I do not think he does. You would be happy to

see the Lib Dems go? I would always be happy to see a single minority

Government because it would be easier for legislation. The

legislation you could not get through would not get through

whether we were in coalition or not. The 40p tax rate, there

probably is not a majority in the House of Commons at the moment,

despite what Nick Clegg originally said. It does not make much

difference. What makes a difference from the perspective of the

committee I chair is historically we have had single party Government

that have collective responsibility and clarity. The reason that is

important is because nothing gets done if everybody is at sixes and

sevens in the Government. Everything stops, there is paralysis as the row

goes on. Civil servants do not know who they are working for. If it

carries on getting fractures, there is a bigger argument to get out. If

it continues at this level of intensity of the enemy within

strategy as you have described it, can the coalition survived another

16 months of this? It is also a question should they. I never

thought I would say this, I agree with Bernard. Interestingly earlier

Chuka Umunna missed the point talking about business support.

Business is worried about this anti-European rhetoric and that is a

deep split between the Liberal Democrats and the UKIP wing of the

Tory party. That is really damaging and that is something we need to

make our own case separately on. Do you get fed up when you hear

constant Lib Dem attacks on you? What makes me fed up is my own party

cannot respond in kind because we are in coalition. I would love to

have this much more open debate. I would like to see my own party

leader, for example as he did in the House of Commons, it was the Liberal

Democrats who blocked the referendum on the house of lords and if we want

to get this bill through it should be a Government bill. We know we can

get it through the Commons, but we need to get the Liberals out of the

Government so they stop blocking the Government putting forward a

referendum bill. And put millions of jobs at risk? I am not going down

the European road today. It strikes me that given that the attacks from

the Lib Dems are now coming from the left attacking the Tories, is this a

representative of the failure of Nick Clegg's strategy to rebuild a

centrist Liberal party and he now accepts the only way he can save as

many seats as he can do is to get the disillusioned left Lib Dem

voters to come back to the fold? The site is we have lost over half our

vote at the last election and at the moment there is no sign in the polls

of it coming back and we are getting very close to the next election. I

welcome it if Nick Clegg is starting to address that problem, but talking

about the centre is not the answer. Most Liberal Democrat voters at the

last election are radical, progressive people who want to see a

much fairer Britain and a much less divided society and we must make

sure we maximise our vote from there. We know what both of you

want, but what do you think will happen? Do you think this coalition

will survive all the way to the election or will it break up

beforehand? I think it will break up beforehand. Our long-term economic

plan is working. The further changes in policies we want to implement to

sustain that plan are being held back by the Liberal Democrats. When

will they break up? It has lasted longer than I thought it would, but

it must break up at least six months before the election. Do you think it

will survive or not? The coalition has delivered a great deal in many

ways, but it is running out of steam. It depends what happens in

the May elections. If the Liberal Democrats do not do better than we

have done in the last three, there will be very strong pressure from

the inside. You both agree. Television history has been made.

You are watching the Sunday Politics. Coming up: I will be

looking Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics

in Northern Ireland. A magnificent opera house, a cast of hundreds and

plenty of standing ovations. No, it wasn't the last night at the Proms,

it was the Sinn Fein Ard Fheis. He's led the party for more than 30 years

and despite a difficult year for Gerry Adams, there's no doubting his

popularity as Sinn Fein's leader. But is it time to think about who

will succeed him? There is no contest for the party leadership at

the moment. It is entirely hypothetical. When it comes to the

time when the party has to choose another party President, they will

do so and what they will have is what they did not have in my day is

a range of people. Plus, he's the Labour spokesman on Northern Ireland

and he's not happy with the Tory approach to sorting our local

difficulties. Ivan Lewis will join us live from Dublin. And joining me

to share their thoughts on all of that are the author and commentator

Susan McKay and the BBC's former Ireland correspondent, Denis

Murray... With elections on both sides of the border just months

away, Sinn Fein's annual conference was well-timed to rally the party

faithful. But despite the upbeat mood in the conference hall, the

problems facing the party in Northern Ireland were never far

away. Martin McGuinness called on those he described as "sensible

people within Unionism" to use their influence to secure a deal on flags,

parades and the past. Our Dublin Correspondent, Shane Harrison,

reports from the ard fheis in Wexford... Welcome to Wexford and

the sunny south-east, but not very often this weekend. The rain was so

persistent at one stage that there was concern that the river might

flood, so pardon the unintended pun, but at the ard fheis, Sinn Fein was

hoping to persuade floating voters in advance of the elections in May I

have is of the elections. There was an orange alert for the weather.

Orange alert was another theme throughout the conference

proceedings. The ard fheis took place in the Wexford Opera house and

delegates heard the Deputy First Minister criticised the Unionist

parties for their failure to reach an agreement with nationalists on

the Haass proposals. He said the Unionist parties were dancing to the

Orange Order's tune. The current difficulties are real and they are

not insurmountable. My commitment and the commitment of Sinn Fein to

the process and to the institutions is absolute. The ard fheis heard

Martin McGuiness say that the issues could not be drawn out until after

the May elections, while Gerry Adams offered to meet the Orange Order to

discuss their concerns. Delegates were optimistic that there would be

an agreement with the DUP. We can all agree it would be better if the

Executive were working in a coordinated fashion in terms of

addressing the issues they are failing to address at the moment.

The DUP need to realise that communities are moving on without

them. They are moving ahead of the Executive in terms of delivering on

cross-border issues, communities working together and the DUP need to

catch up. Grassroots unionism understand that there is a situation

in government and that some point somebody will have to blink and I

think the DUP will have to realise from their own grassroots that the

ordinary people in the six counties want a government to do the work.

Gerry Adams has been President for over 30 years and a leading

republican for over four decades. In the last 12 months he has been

criticised in the media and by politicians, mainly in the Republic,

following a programme on the Disappeared and questions about

passing on information about his brother, a convicted child rapist.

The ard fheis rallied around him. A relentless campaign of vilification

against Gerry Adams in this State is a disgrace and it shoots stop

immediately. Of those who were not even born when Gerry Adams became

leader, want him to stay on. When Gerry Adams puts his name forward,

they will elect him President. Will you make him President for life? I

am not sure that the rules will allow for that, but I am certain

that each time it Gerry Adams contests for the position, we will

vote him in. The ard fheis ended without a song from the fat lady,

but with lots of applause for the tall, slim, bearded man. Shane

Harrison reporting from Wexford. Our Political Editor, Mark Devenport,

has been speaking to the Sinn Fein President, Gerry Adams. He began by

asking him about Sinn Fein ruling out re-negotiation of the Haass

proposals when surely that's precisely what's going on at

Stormont? We should be doing our best as political leaders, who ever

we represent, to serve all of the people and the fact is these issues

are not going away. We have to deal with the past, we have to deal with

issues of identity and contentious parades and we will deal with them.

There is a process of change underway and sometimes it strikes me

that it is quite difficult to be a Unionist leader, because they come

from a history of no, never, no surrender and now they have to

embrace equality and embrace other qualities which are almost foreign

to the Unionist philosophy. All they can do is delay, but they cannot

stop a process of change, the political landscape, the 1-party

state has gone, the 2.5 parties state in this state has gone, so

changes happening. If there is not a dealer by the time of the elections,

have you got any other alternative? We will continue to make process and

engage with all sectors of society, I actually think that the Unionist

leaders are well behind were popular opinion, including popular Unionist

opinion, while they may reflect the elitist or committed political core

that we all work with, you but you have to see beyond that and Martin

McGuiness said quite wisely to Michael Nesbit, if you have got 90%

of A.D. , then close the deal. We are uncomfortable with aspects of

this, we would argue that it could be strengthened in certain aspects,

but you cannot in this negotiation get it the way you want. This will

not be the Ulster, Don't, it is going to be a compromised --

covenant. The British Government needs to make it clear, the Irish

government has said it wants to see this implemented, the British

Government needs to do the same. Do you think it David Cameron was wise

to big that speech calling for people in England, Wales and

Northern Ireland to make their voices known in relation to Scottish

independence? That is his business. We decided to stay out of the debate

on Scotland because that is a matter for the people of Scotland. The

affairs of this island are matter for the people here. He is the

British Prime Minister, he will say whatever he says. I made a point to

one of your colleagues, and I will make a broader point, the use to be

a British Empire, now we are it. That is what it has been reduced to,

almost from ruling the globe, they are now reduced to this,

thankfully. There used to be a certainty for those who would

support the union that it would be there for ever, the North was

described as being as British as Finchley, but that has gone. People

need to wake up, it has gone. The union is now conditional, one of the

big achievements of the Good Friday Agreement is that it is a matter for

the people to decide and we want to urge that debate here, whatever the

people of Scotland do, that is a matter for them, but the debate

here, we want to encourage that. You said that the UK is hanging by a

thread, if Irish republicans were two to -- to take some encouragement

from Scotland, is the reverse true, if there is a no vote, it may have a

negative impact on your campaign for border poll. No, there is an

integrity to the awful negative impact of British Government rule on

our island. I say that with respect to people from the Unionist

tradition who have a sense of Britishness, or whatever, about

their right to that and their identity, no one can argue that

British Government involvement in our affairs on partition or the

development of sectarianism or all of the divisions, we talk about the

last 30 years of conflict, which thankfully is behind us, but think

back over the centuries. It has never been good for us. Those people

within unionism who are sitting back now and saying, will we have another

summer like last year? Will we have idiots running around the city

centre with union flags around them, besmirching their own flag and

breaking the law and inflicting sectarian pressure upon small

communities or can we not just be like people everywhere, that we

welcome this summer, or we can all relax and have a good time? Martin

McGuiness made clear that he has no intention of putting himself forward

to succeed you as party President, will the next leader be based in the

Dail rather than an MLA? That is up to the party. When I first stood as

party President, I did so reluctantly. At that time, I did say

that I thought that the party President should come from the

south. We have such a range of talented people. Do you still think

the party President should come from the South? Yes, but I am mindful

that there is no contest for the party leadership at the moment. It

is entirely hypothetical. When it comes to the time when the party has

to choose another party President, they will do so and what they will

have, it which they did not have in my day, is a range of people, both

men and women from Donegal to Wexford, across the country, of

bright intelligent, smart and very energetic people and what we all

share, all the different ages that we have, we still share and idealism

and have an energy and commitment. Thank you. Gerry Adams talking to

Mark Devenport in Wexford. Joining me now are the BBC's former Ireland

Correspondent, Denis Murray, and the commentator Susan McKay... You're

both welcome. Sinn Fein made the point repeatedly over the weekend

that it is an all island party, but this was a speech for two quite

different electorates. It was almost like two speeches and the vast bulk

of it was for the audience in the Irish Republic. I covered in ard

fheis for years and the bulk of the speech was always about the

struggle, about the North, about that question. Now, it is almost

despite Gerry Adams's insistence on an all island party, it is almost

like you do not have to talk about Northern Ireland, it is resolved.

The Republic is where Sinn Fein can increase the vote. There was that

line in the speech, offering to reach out to the Orange Order and

meet the leadership to discuss identity, but over and above that,

there was not a huge amount about unionism. There are other quite

significant things. A lying about the Orange tradition, been an

important part of our history. He is making the right noises, but when he

says about idiots in his speech. The people who are doing that, you may

see them as that, but that passion goes very deep with them. Is it

about setting out his stall for further growth in the Republic? Sinn

Fein is on the rise in the Republic and they will do better and better

for the meantime, but they underestimate the resilience of

Fianna Fail. They have the biggest appeal of those least likely to

vote. They are popular with young men, working-class young men, they

are unpopular with women and middle-class voters. They are going

to have to work on that constituency and obviously Mary Lou McDonald

would make a huge difference if she was leader. Is that looking more

likely? Gerry Adams is terribly damaged. He has looked damaged.

Because he is there among the faithful, but certainly he is

damaged. If he talks about a toxic culture in relation to issues like

child abuse, it will not wash because the party has been shown to

have a toxic culture itself in that regard. He does need to go for the

party to have a wider appeal. He is hopeless on economic issues in the

Republic. Mary Lou McDonald has performed strongly on that. It must

be said that the party did back the disastrous Fianna Fail bank

guarantee which underlies so much of the economic crisis in the Republic.

Thank you both for now. The Shadow Secretary of State, Ivan Lewis, is

meeting the Tanaiste, Eamonn Gilmore, in Dublin today. On a

recent trip to Belfast, Mr Lewis warned that three years of

consecutive elections could lead to a period of 'timidity or political

paralysis' in Northern Ireland. Reacting to the failure of the Haass

talks to break the deadlock over parades, flags and the past, he said

that 'standing still' over the challenges that remain would 'mean

going backwards'. Ivan Lewis joins me now from Dublin... Thank you for

joining us. You are due to meet Eamon Gilmore later today, you were

at the ard fheis over the weekend. You have been critical of the

Tories's handling of politics here, what would you do differently if you

were in charge? Flags parades and the past are issues which are

outstanding issues connected with the peace process. If you looked at

the evolution of the peace process, every stage of that process, the UK

and Irish governments have been heavily engaged, directly meeting

the parties, trying to help find common ground. The parties must

maintain leadership but that lack of engagement we have seen,

particularly from the UK Government has come home to roost with the

failure to reach agreement in relation to Haass. Theresa Villiers

disputes that, she says she is engaged and waiting to step in if

requested to do so. Eamon Gilmore made a similar point. I have been in

this job for five months and every Northern Irish politician I have met

has talked about, clearly, the sense of the Secretary of State who is

disengaged. When have we seen David Cameron make any comments about the

Haass talks? In the end, of course it is right that we must allow

devolution to work, we must encourage Northern Ireland parties

to take responsibility, but the issues we are focused on our

directly, issues connected with the peace process and if you look at the

past, the UK Government is massively central to dealing with the past in

Northern Ireland, as is the Irish government. If you look at any

outcome from Haass, there will be financial implications, in terms of

any new infrastructure required to deal with the past, there will be

legislative issues, in terms of devolving -- getting rid of the

Parades Commission. The British and Irish government have direct

involvement. Are you saying that you would have called all of the parties

around the table and you would be chairing further Haass

negotiations? That sounds very paternalistic that we would be

calling in the parties, we would have been having over a long period

of time intensive discussions. They would have been private and

discreet. We would be trying to identify the common ground. Last

week, the Secretary of State did an interview where she said there would

be some resources potentially available to make any agreement on

the past work. Prior to that, she said there would be no resources.

Subsequently she said she had been misquoted and would still be no

resources. There is even a lack of clarity. The Prime Minister has been

absent entirely from the discussions. What is perhaps not

helpful to moving forward is to have an end to the bipartisan approach,

to have a shadow Secretary of State sniping at the Secretary of State

who says she is doing her best? It is not me who arrived in Northern

Ireland and talked about the disengagement of the UK Government,

it is all the political parties who feel the same. If they all feel the

same, they are either involved in a conspiracy or telling the truth. Of

course on questions of security and many other issues, not welfare and

jobs and growth, but on security, we will maintain our bipartisan

approach. Can I ask you about the Ballymurphy families who have had

their demand for an independent panel backed by the Taoiseach in

Dublin? The families are waiting for a meeting with David Cameron, where

do you stand on that demand? I shall certainly be meeting them for the

first time next week in Belfast. There are questions to answer, I

will certainly meet with them and engage with them and clarifying our

position on the nature of any enquiry, but of course, David

Cameron should meet with the families. Ivan Lewis, thank you.

Now, let's pause for a look back at the week in politics in sixty

seconds, with Gareth Gordon... Could the row over a new chief constable

calls political fallout? If you do not get your way, is this a

resignation matter? I think you are straying beyond the remit. Should

Protestants learn the Irish language? I believe it is part of a

republican agenda. Eventually they will try and make it the same as

English. In a free country, people are entitled to learn whatever

language they wish and to practice whatever language they wish. Has the

GAA done enough to calm fears over the new Casement Park? There are

things we could have done better. I take responsible a day for that.

Does the Education Minister O one of his critics an apology? Because I

would not write to him, because I wrote to the permanent Secretary,

that he should punish me. There are many injustices throughout the world

and meeting him on the latter is not one of them. Gareth Gordon

reporting. Denis Murray and Susan McKay are still with me... Picking

up there, what is the perspective from Dublin on this spat between the

Secretary of State and Ivan Lewis about how much the British

Government and Irish government should or should not be involved in

the political dialogue regarding Haass at the moment? The Irish

government is nervous about dealing with criticising unionism and since

that unionism is clearly responsible for the failure of the Haass talks

to be agreed at this point, that is difficult for them. Eamon Gilmore

has indicated that he will support trying to get the proposals

implemented, but in a timid way. I think it will be seen as welcome

that the shadow Secretary of State is saying things, pointing out the

dithering that Theresa Villiers has done. She has been a week Secretary

of State. Your thoughts, Dennis? The way the talks ended was not

pleasant. Richard Haass meant his deadline. Tony Blair kept moving the

deadline back. Those talks were about ending the conflict, these

talks are about trying to deal with the post-conflict situation and the

problems. I do not see how you revive those in any meaningful way

until after the elections and then you're into the marching season. It

remains a challenge. Thank you for joining us. That's it for

Londoners who otherwise may not have a voice. Both of you, thank you so

much. Andrew, it is back to you. Can David Cameron get a grip on the

floods? Can UKIP push the Conservatives into third place in

the Wythenshawe by-election on Thursday? Is the speaker in the

House of Commons in danger of overheating? All questions over the

weekend. Let's look at the politics of the flooding. Let me show you a

clip from Eric Pickles, the Communities Secretary, earlier on

the BBC this morning. We perhaps relied too much on the Environment

Agency's advice. I apologise. I apologise unreservedly and I am

really sorry we took the advice of what we thought we were doing was

the best. The Environment Agency is being hung out to dry by the

Government and the Government has taken over the running of the

environmental mess in the Somerset Levels. It is turning into a serious

crisis by the Government and even more so for the people who are

dealing with the flooding. There is no doubt that what has been revealed

is it is not just about what the Government did or did not do six

months ago. What is being exposed is an entire culture within the

Environment Agency, fuelled often by European directives about dredging

and all manner of other things, a culture grew up in which plants were

put ahead of people if you like. All of that is collapsing in very

difficult circumstances by the Government and it is difficult for

them to manage. Chris Smith would save the Environment Agency is

acting under a law set by this Government and previous governments

and the first priority is the protection of life, second property

and third agricultural land and he is saying we are working within that

framework. It is an edifying spectacle, they are setting up Lord

Smith to be the fall guy. His term of office comes at the end of the

summer and they will find something new. But the point Lord Smith is

making is that dredging is important and it was a mistake not to dredge,

but it is a bigger picture than that. I am no expert, but you need a

whole skill solution that is looking not just bad dredging, but at the

whole catchment area looking at the production of maize. It is harvested

in autumn and then the water runs off the topsoil. You see the

pictures of the flooding, it is all topsoil flooding through those

towns. What you have got to have in the uplands is some land that can

absorb that water and there are really big questions about the way

we carry out farming. Chris Smith was meant to appear on the Andrew

Marr show this morning, but pulled back at the last minute. There must

be doubts as to whether he can survive to the summer. Where is the

chief executive of the Environment Agency? I agree with Nick that Chris

Smith has been setup in this situation. David Cameron went to the

Somerset Levels on Friday for about half an hour, in and out, with no

angry people shouting at him. You to a farm. It is agreed he has had good

crisis. But we are seen as being a London media class who does not

understand the countryside. You can imagine David Cameron in a pair of

wellies. If this was happening in Guildford, it would not have dragged

on for so long. Looe it is interesting how they are saying the

Environment Agency has put words in front of everything else. The

great-great-grandson of Queen Victoria thinks people should be

sacked at the whim. He is talking about how the Environment Agency

spent ?31 million on a bird sanctuary. It turns out the bird

sanctuary was an attempt to put up a flood defence system for a village

which has worked. That village has been saved. They compensated some

farmers for the farmland they were not going to be able to farm and put

a flood defence system further back to protect this village and then

they built a bird sanctuary. It was not ?31 million to create a bird

sanctuary, it was to save a village and it worked. But in 2008 the

Environment Agency was talking about dynamiting every pumping agency.

There was a metropolitan mindset on the part of that agency. If it does

what Owen Paterson, who is now off in an eye operation, suggested a

plan to fix this, they will find a lot of what they want or need to do

will be in contravention of European directives. The Wythenshawe

by-election. There is no question Labour is going to win, probably

incredibly convincingly, one poll showing 60% plus of the vote. It

would be surprising if Labour was in any threat up there. The issue is,

does UKIP beat the Tories and if so, by how much? The latest poll was

showing it in second place as nip and tuck, but the feeling I have is

UKIP will do better. And they have got a great local candidate. The

Tories have not parachuted somebody in and they have got a local man in

and that will help them. We have all been waiting to see if the Tories

lose their head, but they might go chicken earlier than that. Will UKIP

come second? It looks like that. A poll this week showed that Labour is

way ahead and UKIP possibly second. But it is an important by-election

for UKIP. If they do well in the European elections, they should

still be on a roll. They did really well in by-elections last year. If

they do not do well, is it because they are not on payroll? Or in

Manchester they have a fantastic leader of the council? Will UKIP

come a good second? I think they will and if they do not, it might

suggest Nigel Farage is losing its slightly. One thing to look out for

is how little Labour are attacking UKIP. Their election strategy relies

a lot on UKIP taking Tory votes. But it could also take Labour votes.

Particularly in the north and we shall see. The results will be out

on Thursday night. The Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bird: ,

his interventions have become more frequent and something was strange.

Have a look. I am grateful to the honourable gentleman. Order, the

Government Chief Whip has absolutely no business whatsoever shouting from

a sedentary position. Order, the honourable gentleman will remain in

the chamber. If we could tackle this problem. I say to the honourable

member for Bridgwater, be quiet, if you cannot be quiet, get out, it is

rude, stupid and pompous and it needs to stop. Michael Gove. Order.

You really... Order. You are a very over excitable individual. You need

to write out 1000 times, I will behave myself at Prime Minister 's

questions. He was talking to the Education Secretary and it is not

1000 lines, it is 100 lines, at least it was in my day. Is he

beginning to make a fool of himself? There was only one over excitable

person there and that was the speaker and he is losing the

confidence of the Conservative MPs, but he never had that in the first

place. But he is an incredibly reforming speaker. He has this

strange idea that Parliament should hold the Government to account. It

will never catch on. It means very frequently there are urgent

questions. The other day he called a backbench amendment on the

deportation of foreign criminals. He could have found a way not to call

that. He is a real reformer and the executive do not like that. That is

true and he has allowed Parliament to flourish which has given us room

to breathe at a time of a coalition Government when Parliament has more

power. That is all that Government when Parliament has more

power. That is all that enough to overcome these increasingly mannered

and some of them may be preplanned interventions? The last one was last

week, and last week the speaker had a rather stressful week with the

tabloids. Something is clearly up. I think it is a real shame. I think

many of us when he was elected did not think he would make a great

speaker and there are people like Douglas Carswell and Tory rebels who

have said he is a fantastic speaker. He has given the Commons room to

breathe and he has called on ministers to be held to account when

they do not want to be. What do you think? He is seen as anti-government

and he is pro-backbencher and that is what people do not like. People

like Douglas Carswell are actually very strongly in support of him. We

carry the interventions every week on Prime Minister 's questions and

we see them every week and they are getting a bit more eccentric. If I

was having to keep that under control, I would be driven slowly

mad. But his job is easier than mine. But if you look at his

deputy, Eleanor Laing, she is very robust, but she is calm. Chap who

does the budget is excellent. We are on throughout the week at midday on

BBC Two. We will be back next Sunday at 11. If it is Sunday, it is the

Sunday Politics.