13/04/2014 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland

Aternoon folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics. As MPs head off for

their Easter break, campaigning for the European elections in six weeks'

time gets underway. In a Sunday Politics special, we'll debate

time gets underway. In a Sunday issues at stake on May 22nd with

senior party figures from the Conservatives, Labour, Liberal

Democrats, and UKIP. And as ever we'll be discussing the week ahead

And coming up here: New jobs, commentators.

And coming up here: New jobs, economic growth and the Giro - we'll

hear from the Enterprise minister, Arlene Foster.

And we discuss the symbolism of Martin McGuinness in Windsor with

the Victims' Commissioner, Kathryn Stone.

the Victims' Commissioner, Kathryn newspapers which some claim are

politically slanted and not impartial about informing people of

local services. So all that to come between now and

quarter to four and for the next thirty minutes or so we'll be

debating the European elections. Here in the studio we have Syed

Kamall, leader of the Conservatives in the European Parliament, Richard

Howitt, chair of the Labour group of MEPs, Sarah Ludford, deputy leader

of the Lib Dems in Europe, and Patrick O'Flynn, UKIP's director of

communications. Welcome to you all. In a moment, all four will give us

their opening pitch for the elections. A little earlier they

drew lots to decide who'll go first. And that privilege goes to Syed.

Before that, though, here's a quick reminder of what all the fuss is

about. The vote to choose members of the

European Parliament takes place on Thursday the 22nd of May. The same

day as local elections are held in England and Northern Ireland. The UK

sends 73 England and Northern Ireland. The UK

sends NTP is to Brussels. And the vote is a form of proportional

representation. In total, there are 751 MEPs from the 28 member states.

What do they do all day? The European Parliament's power has

grown. A vet of the EU commissioners and they can amend, approve or

reject nearly all EU legislation and the EU budget. Some laws MEPs have

been responsible for include price caps on mobile phone chargers,

banking regulation and cover food regulation two -- labelling.

Syed Kamall, you have 30 seconds. Europe cannot go on as it is. Europe

needs to change. And our relationship with Europe needs to

change. Only the Conservatives have a plan to deliver that change and of

the British people and in-out referendum. Labour and the Lib Dems

will not and UKIP simply cannot. Only the Conservatives will offer

the three yards, with Conservative MEPs working alongside a

conservative Prime Minister. For, really is and above all a

referendum. Sarah Ludford is next. Your choice is simple. If you think

Britain is better off in Europe, vote for the Liberal Democrats. The

Lib Dems are the only party of Ian, fighting to keep Britain in Europe

and in work. There is nothing patriotic about UKIP's desire to

pull-out. That is playing Russian roulette with Britain's economy and

jobs. The Conservatives are flirting with exit and Labour lacks the

courage to speak up. Thought Liberal Democrat on May the 22nd to say in

Europe for jobs and security. Sarah Ludford. Next, Richard Howitt from

Labour. The European Ludford. Next, Richard Howitt from

about who represents you. They are not a referendum on a referendum.

Labour MEPs believe in putting jobs and growth first. A guarantee to

help young people into work, reforming energy markets so that

bills are brought down for good. Labour believes in reform in Europe,

but within. It is David Cameron who is risking your job and Britain's

prosperity because of divisions in his own party. Labour MEPs put

British interests first. Our fourth opening statement from Patrick

O'Flynn. The EU is old hat. It is a declining regional trade bloc in an

era of global trade. It is a 20th-century political project

designed to prevent conflict in Europe that is now reawakening old

hostilities. It is an attempt to force on the European people

European this as their primary collective identity. It has hollowed

out British democracy and now we do not even control our own borders.

That is why you should vote UKIP. That is the opening statements.

Let's get on with the debate. Why should people vote in the

selections? If you vote UKIP, we can deliver an earthquake that will rock

the foundations of British politics and the European political class. We

can send a signal to Europe that Britain has had enough, that Britain

wants to retain its nation state status and regain political power

and the ability to forge trading deals across the world. Britain

leading Europe to freedom twice in the last century through bloodshed.

We feel that a UKIP win in those elections could help Britain

We feel that a UKIP win in those example to lead European nation

states back to free assembly again. Syed Kamall, isn't it the case that

many Tory voters will vote you clip to keep you honest, to keep your

feet to the fire? Whatever you think of the European Parliament or the

EU, the fact is that the European Parliament as equal power with the

28 governments of the EU. When David Cameron delivered the first cut to

the EU budget, the first ever cut, he needed a strong team of

Conservative MEPs working alongside him. But many of your supporters

will vote for UKIP for the reasons I gave. Many will vote Liberal

Democrat. Not very many. Many of our supporters will vote for us because

we are the only party trying to change the EU

we are the only party trying to have offered renegotiation and a

referendum. And how would you vote in such a referendum? We have no

idea whether he would vote yes or no. Let him answer. I will answer

that question. If the EU continues on this road, towards a United

States of Europe, and if there was no change at the time of the

referendum, then I would probably vote to leave. You have no

confidence in David Cameron? We Javier Culson opportunity to read

negotiate our relationship with Europe and the Conservatives are at

the forefront of that agenda. David Cameron have not given a list of

demands. He said that if things do not change, he will probably vote to

leave, is that right? If at the time of the referendum, things had not

changed, I would vote to leave and we have a golden opportunity to

perform the agenda. Richard, the last time the British people had a

say on this was over 40 years ago. Under a Labour government. Which was

deeply divided on the issue. And that was a say on the common market.

Today's EU is a very different animal from the common market. Why

can we not, under another Labour government, have another vote? First

of all, we want it to be more than a free trading area. We make no

apologies about that. But in the elections because this is half of

Britain's exports and investment. If you care about your job and

business, you cannot hear from the party of government that they

probably want you to leave because the CBI, the engineering employees

in Federation and the chimp of commerce, 80% of them say it is

necessary to stay in. So why not give us a vote? When David Cameron

says he wants to repatriate social powers, he means takeaway maternity

rights and holidays. If the case is so strong, why not give us an in-out

vote? David Miliband has said that there will be a referendum if there

was a proposal to change powers. Why wait? This is based on a series of

reforms. Labour has a set of reforms. David Cameron is silent

about what they would be. That is because he knows that if he put them

forward, they would either be unsatisfactory to his Eurosceptic

backbenchers and he would be out of a job, or they would be unacceptable

to European leaders. Why is your leader missing in action? Ed

Miliband is unable to say even the positive things that you are saying.

He has run away from the argument. He actually said there would not be

a referendum in his time. For a conservative to say they will

have a referendum but not give the reforms, it is a mistake. Nick Clegg

gave Nigel Farage a huge opportunity in that debate. He said that the

Eurosceptic view was to leave Britain like Billy no mates. I can

say that he is the best qualified person to say that. Sarah Ludford,

you have said that lots of people are going to vote Lib Dem but that

is not what the polls are saying. You are 7% in two polls this

morning. Eclectic's decision to champion Europe has been a disaster

for you. You face wet out. We swayed a lot of people our way with Nick

Clegg's debate. Where is the evidence? We are the only party that

is completely united, saying that we are wanting to stay in. It is

essential because formally and jobs are supported by our trade with the

EU. Linked to the EU. We are finding a lot of moderate conservative

voters are actually fed up with the Tories being split and divided all

over the place. Syed Kamall saying that we might vote in rout. -- in or

out. We are consistent. A poll in London showed that 18% would vote

for us. I am delighted about that. London is not the whole country, it

may surprise you. We need to move on to immigration, an important issue.

We are a member of the EU and to immigration, an important issue.

rules say that with a few caveats, our fellow EU citizens are free to

come here if they want. Why can we not just accept that? Britain has a

proud record when it comes to immigration. We have been open to

people across the world for centuries. But we welcome people who

come to our country to contribute to pay taxes and two wards are a

society positively. But there are three real concerns that we have to

address. The first one is numbers, and secondly people who may come

here not to work but for benefits, and thirdly, getting a hang of the

numbers. I think it is shameful that only this week the office for

National said that they did not collect sufficient figures under a

Labour government. 350,000 extra people came in and they did not

count the numbers. That is the size of a city like Cardiff. That is

shameful. 350,000 came from all over the place. Do you accept the free

movement of peoples within the EU? I accept and am open to people who

want to come here and contribute. In the same way... Do you accept the

free movement of peoples within the EU? In our manifesto, we have said

it is an issue for reform. We have to make sure that people are coming

here to work and contribute positively, not simply to come here

and take advantage of the system. I will tell you what else is

shameful. What is shameful is David Cameron making a pledge to the

British people on an issue that they really care about, to bring net

immigration down to the tens of thousands a year, having no means of

fulfilling that pledge. And we see now it is back up to 212,000 a year

because we have no volume control and no quality control from

immigration from our neighbours. And that is a disgrace. How could UKIP

address that issue? Because we would leave the EU. How? Tell me how. You

do not have a single member of Parliament. He will not get a single

member of Parliament. How are you... ? TUC are hoping to get an

MEP. What do you say? -- he is here today hoping to get an MEP. All of

-- almost 2 million Brits live and work in the rest of the EU. Is that

worth having? The majority are wealthy, retired people. Why do not

object to bilateral agreements with wealthy, retired people. Why do not

countries with similar living standards to us. France, the

Netherlands, that works fine. But these three people want Turkey to

join the EU, 75 Na Li and people running our country, only 10% of

which... Syed Kamall is Michael year to say whether they are in favour of

free movement for work, not for benefits... That is what I'm

saying. You said you were unable to be clear. That leaves 2 million

British people absolutely unsure as to whether they would have a right

to continue to live in other countries. It is a two-way street.

You are putting those people in a state of uncertainty. EU migrants

have been good for the British economy and contribute far more than

they take out in services and benefits. One in seven businesses

were founded in -- by migrants. And they cannot just turn up and claim

benefits. The coalition government has legislated to make sure that

they cannot claim for three months. They will not be able to claim for

more than six months. Richard Howitt, Jack Straw said it was "A

spectacular mistake for Labour to allow EU migrants from Poland and

Hungary to work in the UK from 2004." Why should we trust a party

that makes spectacular mistakes and hasn't apologised for it? We accept

it is a mistake and I apologise. We make a firm commitment for new EU

states we will put down transitional controls. When I listen to the

Conservatives and UKIP trying to re-write history, saying immigration

was out of control, uncontrolled, open door, we hear it over and over

again. It is not true. Anyone who was around at the time... Come on,

Richard. Hold on, you undercounted by 350,000. You were letting 2

million in over the years, an under-counted by 350,000 people you

didn't know came in. You should have tightened the benefit rules. The

Conservative MEP today has, in four years in government in Britain, is

trying it blame the previous Labour Government over the fact they won't

count people in or people out. Yvette Cooper - it is not easy for

people to come to the country and benefits are changing, changing the

habitual residence test and we are going to say that migrants can't

come and claim child benefit if their children are outside the

country. Labour a has shown they have listened to concerns but we say

it is a stronger, better, country because it is diverse and

multicultural snoo.d this is fantasy politics from all the Peters. They

are committed to a system with no volume control and no quality

control. You talk about benefits as if it is only out of work benefits.

In work benefits cost a lot of money for the British taxpayer. Big

businesses bring in minimum wage workers. It is ?5,000 per perschool

place What are you going to do? Have all the pensioners come back to

Britain? How will will you fund the health care? Do you really think

Spain and pour tu ghal health care? Do you really think

situation, are going to turn their backs on British property owners

with wealth? -- Portugal. They might not wanting pensioners to use their

health service. Pensioners often come back to Britain to use the

health service. You have shown it represents wealthy people's

interests. A second Conservative Party. Hang on a minute... Blue

collar wages were down. They want it character for the National Health

Service, have cuts that go farther and comprehensive education. This is

a debate on the wider politics between Conservatives and UKIP and

Labour will... You can't both talk time. UKIP - they haven't thought it

through, thousand they will have trade access in the EU, hasn't

thought how they will have trade deals that the Liberal Democrats

support, like with the United States: Would you have a cap on

non-EU immigrants? We are not in favour of a cap. No cap on either.

No. Well it is a target. It is a moving feast, as it were. Would you

have a limit on non-EU limits? We have limits on quality. We have

people who are skilled migrants coming in. Lip its? . By quality,

not by quantity. -- Limits. How do you do that? We need to move

on to foreign affairs. Should we pool more sovereignty to

give the European Union more clout in foreign and defence matters? I'm

Labour's defence and foreign affairs spokesperson. No we don't need to

pull more powers into Europe. As we undertake this live debate there are

guns being fired in Ukraine as we speak. Europe is facing, for the

first time, since the speak. Europe is facing, for the

Second World War, Armies crossing national borders and floatening

peace. Doesn't it -- threatening peace. Doesn't it need to come

together of the We don't need more powers. We need political will. With

Vladimir Putin, in my view, he has -- we have fallen short in the

sanctions. But it is Europe, not Britain. Remember Putin calling

Britain little England a small island with no influence. Labour

doesn't agree with that. But if that's the mindset that allows

someone like Vladimir Putin to send troops across borders threatening

peace, it is worrying. And when we have, in UKIP a party that say they

admire Putin and support his policies, that is no recipe for how

Europe should be wrong. I was waiting for that. Let me ask him. We

don't admire Putin as a leader... Oh. No we don't. What Nigel Farage

said, was he admired him as a political operator. Testifies

Franklin D Roosevelt who said a good foreign policy was speaking softly

but carrying a big stick. The EU shouts its mouthed off while

carrying a matchstick. It is fantasy that you wiebl it stand up to Putin

over the Ukraine. -- that you would be able to stand up. Do you admire

what Putin is doing in the Ukraine? No. What matters in foreign policy

is the outcould. We have a terrible outcome in the Ukraine, like Syria,

and Georgia... What would UKIP do? What u skip would do, would be to

keep our people safe -- UKIP. How? And not commit our Foreign

Office and troops Foreign wars. Patrick O'Flynn. You brought up this

issue of foreign wars. Now Nigel Farage said in previous debates that

Britain should leave the EU because, "We have had enough of endless

foreign wars." Which wars has the EU taken us into? The EU has ban very

important factor in the push towards trying to get military intervention

in Syria, for example. What wars has the etch U taken us into it -- EU.

Fortunately the EU doesn't have its own army yet. It has wanted to sign

up to an expansionist agenda. Did it want Iraq? No, that was Labour. UKIP

opposed Iraq, so did most of the mainline Europeans. Germany was

against Syria and Libya. No EU policy. We had an Anglo French deal

on Syria. A by lateral deal. A European dimension. No, buy lateral.

We have a European Union that wants to expand ever-more into other

people's spheres of influence. If we are going to stand up to what Putin

is do, which obviously Nigel Farage has no intentions of doing, you have

to get your act together on economic sanctions and diplomatic force and

in trade matters, in supporting eastern European countries. Sayeria,

who and whose army? And NATO and working transatlanticically, is

important through NATO. I will come to you in a moment. Nick Clegg said

that the idea of an EU Army was, "A dangerous fantasy that is simply not

true ""Why then, are we already working on etch U-owned and

controlled drones -- EU-owned and the President of the European

Parliament has said that the the President of the European

majority of MEPs want the EU to have "deployable troops." He is not

speaking for me or Liberal Democrats. The EU does not and will

not have an army. Our defence is mainly shaped through NATO. He is

President of the Parliament What we must do is to get equipment which

can operate together. We waste an awful lot of our spending in Europe

because we duplicate equipment. We don't get the bang for our bucks

that we should. It is a useful role for the EU, to get equipment working

together. That doesn't make sense. You say military equipment, a NATO

job. No, the EU, there is a kind of dimension of the EU members of NATO,

in working together on a common quument o o so they can talk to each

other -- on common equipment, so they can talk to each other. The EU

has a role but not an army. So a European defence agency, that helps

our defence industries and those jobs are extremely important and

would be threatened if the Conservatives and UKIP took us out

of Europe but it is 100 years since the start of the fist world war.

Remember that Europe was set up to try to get a secure peace within

Europe T succeeded. Now look on Ukraine but also on the southern

borders to the Arab Spring countries in North Africa. It is more

important than ever that we work to keep keep peace and stability on our

borders. Can I say to Syed and the Conservative MEPs. You talk about

the three Rs, I have a fourth, retreat. If you take us out of the

European Union, it will be the worse retreat by Britain since Gallipoli.

Let him answer If he wants answers -- the British Parliament is the

right place with a -- the British Parliament is the

Secretary to decide our foreign policy. You say that, but can I

quote David Cameron, this is germain to what you are saying, David

Cameron said "There is no doubt that we are more powerful than

Washington, Beijing and Delhi, because we are a powerful player in

the European Union." Do you agree? He is saying that there are times

when it comes to international foreign affairs when you have to

cooperate with partners. Often they are EU partners but often they are

not. The problem we have... Washington have made it very clear

that it wants Britain to talk through Brussels. No, not at all.

Talk through the French and Italians, come on, wake up? Through

the EU collective. I'm vice chair of the EU delegation. I hear it from

the American counterparts. They want the EU to get itself together and

not least on Ukraine. Why should our sovereignty be at the behest of... ?

I want to hear from Syed calm amplgts the British Parliament is

the right place to decide our foreign poll sinchts sometimes we

work with our European partners, sometimes we work with our

non-European partners. It is our choice to pull sovereign trito work

together. G, we move on to our foirt area. We hear a lot in this country

about MPs expenses. Snted the real scan dalt MEPs gravy train. -- isn't

the real scandal, the MEPs gravy train? You all have your snouts? The

trough? I don't think so. There is transpancy. The way we use our

expenses is online and anyone can ask to examine those. We have

actually voted to reform MEPs' allowances. We regularly vote but

unfortunately the majority in Parliament don't. Have you voted to

cut them? Yes. By how much? About 5%. A 5% We hoped to have economies

I never fly except across the Atlantic. Difficult to do it any

other way. I didn't swim. But we voted for economy flutes. We

voted for European Parliament policy of transparency which other groups

haven't. UKIP don't turn up to vote. They don't earn their salaries.

Dhoent do anything. They should hand their salaries and allowances back.

You can't ause UKIP of being on the gravy train and the other that we

don't claim our attendance allowance because our MEPs are not there. Your

attendance allowance because our MEPs are not there. Your

there, you are saying we don't turn up You are in the building and claim

the allowances. You are not an MEP, UKIP are so ashamed of what their

MEPs have done in Brussels, they didn't field a sitting MEP for

today's debate. I think each party decides who it wishes to field. I

have the honour of being the UKIP representative. I would say by going

in the past few weeks, xeeming to me saying - we are sick of the others.

-- people saying to me. : We are quite excited. Can I ask Patrick

O'Flynn. He says he touched a chord and his party is strong in the polls

today, between 18% and 20%. Haven't you also struck a chord with hip

crasscy. Two of your MEPs were jailed for expenses and benefits'

fraud. Two more asked to pay back ?37,000 for using European funds.

Nigel Farage has boosted about getting ?2 million in expenses and

he went on to employ his wife as a secretarial allowance after telling

other members not to People who do wrong and break the law, go to ja. I

have no time. -- go to jail. People who spend money they are not

entitled to should pay it back and that's right. But what UKIP does and

the good UKIP MEPs do, is use the allowances they are given to pursue

the political agenda they put up when elected which is to get Britain

out of this superstate. Instead of using it for parliamentary work.

Very interesting. Richard Howitt. We were the first British political

party to have independent audits of our MEPs' expenses, from 1990, way

before the expenses crisis blew up. The Maria Miller scandal has of

before the expenses crisis blew up. course hit David Cameron and the

Conservative Party hard as it should do. But you are right, even in my

own region you have UKIP candidates and councillors who have been

charged with fraudulently filling out election papers and other shot

lifting. Another independent inquiry found he made racist comments. We

had a European candidate last week in Hertfordshire who got a parking

ticket from the police and called the police fascists. These people

aren't here. I'll let you have a quick reply. We

can bring up parochial cases. Let him answer. Not so long ago a

Liberal Democrat councillor was sent down for firebombing, I don't say

they are a bunch of arsonists, but now I think, Nick Clegg might have

burnt some cactuses, once. I'm glad you pronounced that word carefully.

Syed Kemal, the EU's auditors, they are strongly critical of the EU's

financials saying "Errors permist in all main spending areas", the

financials are poorly managed. It is a shambles And that's something that

all parties agree on. As we agree on expenses, the British parties are at

the forefront of transpancy. Every year when we vote for the discharge

of the budget, the Conservatives also vote for it but we don't get

enough MEPs from other countries to investigate in favour. The Liberal

Democrats have put forward to make each Finance Minister, George

Osborne and his counterpart to sign a declaration to say all EU money is

properly spent in my country. Funnily enough they don't want to do

that but I look forward to you confirming that George Osborne will

sign it. All the time we hear it is about the money we pay in, about

?150 per family per year. What about the money that comes back? ?1. 5

billion that comes to Britain's regions because of being in Europe.

I myself helped to negotiate a fund to help Britain's food banks to

ensure so. Poorest and most destitute people... Isn't it our

money that went there first. Can I tell you the Conservative-led

Government have blocked us from claiming that money. If you want to

have the clearest choice at these European elections, it is between...

Tell us why. It affects our rebate. Tony Blair gave away our rebate. He

is quite right. Lib Dems fought to make sure that we apply for money to

help with flooding. That is what the Tories were blocking. If you want

the clearest example at the European elections, the Conservative Party

and MEPs blocked the cap on bankers bonuses, and then blocked a Labour

victory to get money for free banks. We need to move on to the

future. It is important and people are watching. The EU's Justice

Minister says that we need to build a United States of Europe with the

commission as its government. Is she right? Not at all. But the future,

if we take the next ten years, thinks about climate change and the

fact that we are not going to hit of the two degrees target. Europe has

led and needs to lead towards getting a new sustainable world. It

is the political will to use these powers, so she is wrong. It is about

the threats from abroad. Labour reforms like getting a commissioner

for growth and rebalancing the budget, reforming the common

agricultural policy, all of those things will need to happen to make

Europe more democratic and open. But against the rise of Brazil and

China... We do not need more treaties and powers. We need more

action with more Labour MEPs. Sarah Ludford, you would sign up to that?

No. Unless they do not think that should concentrate on institutional

matters. What we need to do is concentrate on making Europe

progrowth and competitive and create more jobs in a competitive world. We

need more trade deals to open up our exports, we need to streamline the

EU. We need less red tape and Liberal Democrats have done a lot on

that. We need better scrutiny of EU legislation at West Munster because

the national parties... More powers or less for the EU government? In

some areas, I would like to see it slimmed down. Including, I am not

sure whether the EU should be funding food banks. I think that is

a national responsibility. Dearie me. The EU have to concentrate on

the economy and climate change. This is the coalition talking. If we want

to fritter away political capital on things which are interfering in

national matters, then we do not have the support to tackle those big

challenges. Would you still want to join the Euro one-day? Now is not a

good idea. We wanted the Eurozone to still be sound, which is why... Did

not ask you that. Do you want to join the Euro one-day? If it is a

success and it did the economy. Now is not the time but in principle,

the idea of a single currency has advantages. That was a yes. We are

not ruling it out for ever but not in the foreseeable future. It is not

on the horizon. What would our relationship be with Europe in the

future if UKIP got its way and we left? We would be trading partners

with Europe and we would seek partnership in specific serious. I'd

tell you what, can I just say... Would we be Norway? We would be

stronger than Norway because we are the biggest export market in the

Eurozone. We can negotiate a bespoke trading agreement reflecting our

enormous importance. Not on services, which make up 80% of the

economy. We are the biggest export market in the Eurozone. Our biggest

exports are services and they would have to agree to free trade and

services. They still have not. Can I read you something? Let me read you

something. There would be a free trade agreement in place the day

after our exit. Germany would demand no less. Who said that? Not somebody

from UKIP, but Digby Jones. Mr business. He is talking about

goods, not services. Norway has that and they have no say. You would have

to accept the EU rules without any say. No MEPs are commissioners. Let

me give you another. Enough. One is enough. Syed Kamall, is it not

looking forward pretty much Mission: Impossible for Mr Cameron to get

anything like the repatriations of powers that would satisfy your

irreconcilables? My father was a bus driver in the 50s and one of the

reasons I am here today is because he told me that you can achieve

anything if you work hard. He said to me, do not listen to the

doubters. When people tell you that something cannot be done, it is a

sign of their limitations, not yours. They said that we could not

pull Britain out of the bailout mechanism but we did it. He said we

could not be to a -- veto European treaty and we did that. They said we

would never cut the budget and we did that. The first ever. But

overall, we are paying more into the European budget. And they are not

sticking to it. More, not less. They say that we cannot achieve reform

but we have achieved reform and we are at the forefront of that.

Science's father came to Britain because Britain was open and looking

outward. What the Conservatives now have, with leaderless Cameron, is an

inward looking attitude. They are allowing the rise of UKIP. They are

putting so much at risk. People should vote Labour. We are going to

have to stop now. No point talking because we are about to finish. I

think you all for a spirited debate. I'm sure Nigel Fries and Mr Clegg

will have learned a lot about how to debate. -- Nigel Farage.

It's just gone 3pm, and you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say

goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now for Sunday Politics

Scotland. Coming up here in twenty minutes,

Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics in Northern Ireland. After the gloom

and doom of austerity, is the Northern Ireland economy finally on

the turn? The biggest ever job creation project, backed by Invest

NI, was announced on Thursday. The Enterprise minister Arlene

Foster joins me live from her constituency.

And a right royal affair - with the focus on Sinn Fein's participation

in the state visit of President Higgins to Britain, victims of IRA

violence say they feel forgotten. -- some victims.

The Victims' Commissioner Kathryn Stone is with me.

And joining me to discuss all of that and more are commentators Paul

McFadden and Professor Rick Wilford. Creating a vibrant economy was the

number one priority of the Executive, now it looks like the

strategy could be paying dividends. How do we sustain the recovery? The

enterprise minister Arlene Foster joins me now. 1000 jobs announced

for Belfast last week. Nobody would suggest that is not good news, but

are these the high end well-paid positions we need to be securing for

the local economy in future? I think what you see through the jobs

announced last week is the continuation of our desire to create

more jobs for people in Northern Ireland, and they came out of the

jobs fund, which was created at the start of the recession to make sure

that we had an appropriate level of jobs available. The jobs fund was to

try and help companies create jobs, they didn't necessarily have to be

high-value jobs, but you will see us now moving to a situation of higher

end jobs and indeed we have been bringing in those higher end jobs as

well in the jobs fund, because our priority as well as building a

vibrant economy is to rebalance the economy and bring a higher level of

job creation into Northern Ireland. We saw an interesting contribution

from the new chairman of the CBI, he said our higher energy costs are

undermining our competitiveness. I do except that the higher energy

costs are very much a challenge, and the are a number of things we need

to do to tackle them. the are a number of things we need

huge amber -- huge constraint on our energy system caused by the fact

that we are not able to have the North-South interconnector. That

costs the consumer in Northern Ireland ?7 million per animal, and

overall it costs ?30 million on the island. -- per annum. At present we

have occurred straight on our system, and religiously it taken off

our system. -- we need to see that constraint taken of our system. That

ties in with what the new chairman of the CBI was saying, he says the

CBI wants to see that second North-South interconnector is

happening as soon as possible. When can we expect it? As I understand it

planning has been -- a planning application has been put into our

system, and then there is a similar one going into the Republic of

Ireland's planning process, so we want to make sure we can assist in

any way to make sure that that goes through as quickly as possible,

because the sooner we have the North-South interconnector, the

faster that those savings can be passed onto consumers, both and

business. Are you satisfied that all parties in the Executive are

committed to making that happen? There is some dispute as I

understand it as to whether or not the interconnector should be

overground or underground, and underground is more expensive of

course. I do understand that those living close to the root of the

interconnector will have concerns, that some of

interconnector will have concerns, that they want the interconnector

pot underground but that again would add to costs. Some estimates believe

it would be as much as three to five times as expensive to put in place,

and any cost, and this is something I don't think that people understand

fully, any cost that is incurred in relation to the North-South

interconnector is then passed on to the consumer, so if that were to

happen it would be passed onto the consumer, and as well as that there

is some technical problems aligned with the underground laying of

cables for such a long distance as well. So we believe the best way is

to get on with this North-South interconnector and certainly we

would hope all of the parties in the Executive support that view. Any

further delay of course could simply compound the situation that we are

in, it could work of further investment. What some commentators

have been saying is that data centres are hugely dependent for

example on energy and energy use. And the price of energy matters a

lot to them. That is why at Microsoft and Google, high tech

employers, simply cannot make the numbers add up. That is why we not

seeing investment companies like that. They are more likely to be

looking at the corporation tax issue as opposed to the energy costs

issue. We believe that is why we have seen them locate in places like

Dublin, and indeed an enterprise zone has now been allocated as a

pilot enterprise zone in Coleraine, and we're hopeful, in fact we know

there is going to be a data centre in Coleraine, the cause we invested

in the transatlantic link between America and Northern Ireland. So we

have invested very heavily in our telecommunications links, it is

important we also have the appropriate electricity support as

well, and we're working hard with the regulator and the systems

operator to make sure that we do have the appropriate level in days.

What about the challenge facing you and your Executive colleagues as far

as East versus West in terms of invest that? We know that the

difference between unemployment East and West of the Bann is huge. This

must be an issue you are sensitive to, but how do you encourage

companies to come to Northern Ireland and secondly encourage them

to invest West of the Bann? That is about partnership, working with a

particular regions involved, and if you take my own region for example,

we have developed what is called a smart region proposal, whereby we

are putting ourselves between the public sector, the private sector,

the south-west colleges, hospitals, we are all working together to have

a proposition to try and draw in inward investor that, but also

supporting our indigenous companies as well, and I think that is

important because I think some of our best examples of growth have

been our indigenous companies. When you say there has been little or no

investment in the west of the province, I think for example of

weather has been. We're trying to draw in more inward investment, but

also really support our indigenous companies because they have given us

a lot of growth. You have got a pretty big brief in enterprise trade

and investment, including tourism, and I know that is something you are

passionate about. The Giro d'Italia is on its way, and we have seen the

build up to that of the expectations. But there are still

challenges as far as tourism is concerned, like for example securing

a greater breadth of direct flights into and out of Northern Ireland.

That remains something in your inbox, doesn't it? Very much so, and

the Giro d'Italia's coming very soon, we have the circuit of Ireland

Rally, the Northwest 200 happening. We have been concentrating

Rally, the Northwest 200 happening. bringing large-scale events to

Northern Ireland. Delighted that the Irish open is coming back to

Northern Ireland next year, with Royal County Down, so we have been

spending a lot of time building up our events strategy over this past

period of time, but of course we need direct flights in? I spent a

lot of time also talking to tourism sector and indeed I will be wishing

the number one priority in that respect, and that is Canada. We

believe there should be a Canadian leg. There has not been for some

time, and it is one I am very strongly of the view that we will be

able to see over the line in the next period of time. Finally, Peter

Robinson's speech yesterday afternoon, he talked about reaching

out to non-core Unionists. Looking for converts to Unionism. Who is he

thinking about? He is talking about those who traditionally from their

background may not have seen themselves as Unionists in the

past, but increasingly are seeing themselves as such in the future

because they see Northern Ireland's place in the union as being of

benefit to them personally and of benefit to the whole of Northern

Ireland in general. We will continue to reach out, we will be positive

about Northern Ireland's place in the union, it is what we will enter

the next period of election saying, because we believe it is best for

all of the people of Northern Ireland.

Arlene Foster, thank you for joining us.

Thank you. Let's see what my guests of the day

make of that. Paul McFadden and Rick Wilford are with me.

make of that. Paul McFadden and Rick Rick, the whole issue of securing

investment, securing jobs. But not just any jobs. File U-boat jobs.

Some have been critical that this is about achieving targets, more than

achieving quality investment. -- valuable -- valuable jobs. Arlene

mentioned the jobs fund, but they are not the sort of high end jobs

you were talking about. I was away for a few days last week but when I

came back and look at the Belfast Telegraph poll of young people, two

out of three say they see their future out of Northern Ireland. Our

greatest strength is the human capital and the skills and

intelligence that young people have. capital and the skills and

We cannot afford for two out of three people to move out of Northern

Ireland. We have two market jobs that are attractive to them. -- a

jobs market that is valuable and attractive to them. I don't think

these kinds of announcements like we heard last week guarantee that, they

are relatively low-paid, yes, they are jobs and they are welcome, but

it is not really the kind of platform we need to retain our best

and our brightest. So it is a valuable investment on one level,

Paul, ?18 million in salaries and wages per annum, but at the same

time not the kind of high end jobs we need to be attracting? I think we

need to upscale the available workforce here, and the minister

mentioned reasons why Company is like Microsoft and Google might move

to Dublin and places over the border. -- we need to up-skill. In

terms of doing something about it, the minister mentioned the

enterprise zone, the pilot enterprise zone, which was for

Coleraine, and we will see what the outcome of that is, whether it

delivers jobs of the quality and quantity we would like to see, and

whether that can be rolled out to other areas which are in greater

need. You live and work in the North West, what about that East versus

West debate? Two Martin McGuinness mentioned the possibility of other

announcements coming in the future, and we will wait to see what is

delivered. I wanted to say something about the enterprise zones. She's

been tried for many years -- these have been tried. Their record is

patchy at best. They tend to suck in investment from the immediate area

rather than creating new jobs. It's been a right royal week for

some. Gareth Gordon looks back at the week in 60 seconds.

All eyes on Britain this week for the first Irish presidential state

visit. We have a fresh canvas on which to sketch our fresh hopes and

to advance our overlapping ambitions. We will remember our

past, but we shall no longer allow our past two inch near -- in snare

our future. Leading figures attended a banquet at Windsor Castle, but

must focus was on this man. I will observe the protocols. Lord Tebbit,

injured in the writing bombing, -- Brighton bombing. It is highly

dangerous for Lord Tebbit to make those kinds of remarks given the

security situation. Could the era of free prescriptions be over? Many of

us who receive free prescriptions can well afford them, and at the

same time there are many out there who require drugs and specialist

drugs and drugs for cancer, and we cannot afford to buy them.

Loyal toasts, state banquets and another handshake with the Queen.

Martin another handshake with the Queen.

state visit by Michael D Higgins "will be noted for its spirit of

generosity and peace-making". But for all the pageantry and symbolism,

not everyone was happy at the Deputy First Minister's presence at

Windsor. Relatives of people murdered by republicans demonstrated

outside the castle, including a group representing victims of the

Birmingham pub bombings. Who is thinking about us? As it seems to

us, it appears that our politicians wish that they had buried ours

alongside our dead. Julie Hambleton, whose sister Maxine was one of 21

people killed in the Birmingham pub bombings in 1974.

With me now is the Victims' Commissioner Kathryn Stone.

With me now is the Victims' talk about Lord Tebbit's comments.

He appeared to invite or say that he would support an attack on Martin

McGuinness. But at a time like this week, do victims feel forgotten in

the bigger debate? I don't think victims should ever be historical --

ahistorical postscript to any of this, we need to think very

carefully about how we can support victims through these frugal times.

Last week was a very important, historic, culture is significant

since -- culturally significant week. It demonstrates how the past

and present collide, as Julie Hambleton was protesting outside

Windsor Castle and feeling left out of everything going on. Another

historic and significant thing was Seamus Daly being taken into

Dungannon court charged with offences in relation to the Omagh

bomb. So there was another example of how the past is colliding again

with the present and how we need to think about supporting victims

through all of that. That is a case we cannot discuss, but clearly the

point that you make is correct. To what extent you feel that Lord

Tebbit's comments were representative of how victims might

feel and how victims may then have felt about the reaction that I got

on Thursday night from Theresa Villiers who said what he had said,

was shocking and unacceptable and highly dangerous?

There is much to celebrate about what happened this week, many people

are very congratulatory and celebratory about it, and that is

proper, but there is not a great deal to celebrate or beacon

structure later read about is paralysed or indeed if your child

was shot by a stray black -- plastic bullet fired by somebody in the

British Army. These are very difficult times for victims. There

will be victims who said that despite the pain they continue to

feel, they cannot hold the process back. You hear such a huge range of

opinion from the victims that you meet some who would perhaps feel

that Lord Tebbit was speaking for them, some who would feel that they

absolutely was not speaking for them. If we think about some of the

groups in England, justice for the 21 who Julie Hambleton represents,

groups in England, justice for the and Colin and Wendy Parry, their

views are diametrically opposite. Collett and Wendy Parry do an

enormous amount of work in trying to counter extremism and terrorism.

--: And Wendy Parry. -- Colin and Wendy Parry. We have people who say,

let's move forward, let's put all this behind us, and others who say,

absolutely not. What we want is acknowledgement, truth, justice, and

some people also want reparation for what happened to them? --

reparation. It is impossible to achieve both

those desires, that is the difficulty presumably for you as the

Victims' Commissioner. I don't think that moving forward in terms of

society and peace and reconciliation that moving forward in terms of

the needs and the wants of victims. I think we can do an awful lot, and

I think there have been a number of very serious attempts to put on the

table things that could support Vic Thames, for example -- and it is

very frustrating for victims to know that politicians are wanting to hear

their views and taking their views in in forming processes, but then

nothing happens in that. We had a range of politicians who wanted to

meet with us, after the process we have not seen any that are major

differences of opinion within the offices of this First Minister and

Deputy First Minister on a huge range of issues. The thing that has

affected their unanimity of voice, unanimity of purpose on the victim

affected their unanimity of voice, 's pupils issue? For our experience

we have had a very positive experience. The First Minister

Deputy First Minister accepted the 55 recommendations made about the

victim 's pupils and survivors' service within a week, and have

committed to giving Vic and the very best services they can.

Thank you for joining us. A few final thoughts from my guest

commentators. Rick, let us talk about the lessons

that we should take out of the experience of the past week, with a

presidential visit to the UK, and Martin McGuinness's part in it. What

for you are the key point is we need to take on board? It is another

success for statecraft on behalf of both the British and Irish States,

that they pulled this off, both the British and Irish States,

another sign a few like that we are beginning to move forward, we are

taking relatively small steps, symbolically very important.

Relating that to the victim 's pupils issue, I don't say there is

any necessary contradiction, I don't think that the two unnecessarily

contradictory. There is statecraft on the once -- and and on the other

hand -- there is the low politics in terms of meeting the needs of

survivors, and that is the priority. I think it is a case of both and

rather than either or. You take the fact that for example there is still

controversy about who constitutes a victim exactly. There is this kind

of kernel of anxiety and conflict over this issue. But we can model

on, and -- I think, -- model on. The idea of a republican leader going to

Windsor Castle dressed in white tie and tails, standing for the national

anthem would have been anathema not just to Republicans but nationalists

a few years ago, but I was struck by a line of the Queen saying we are

entering a period of historical resonance. I think we are living in

a time of political resonance, and the things we saw happening, words

back up by deeds, I think we kind of guide us through maybe the next few

weeks, months and years. I thought it was a very interesting and

significant week. We're taking a break for a couple of weeks for

Easter, but we'll be back on Sunday May fourth. For now, bye-bye

particular candidates. Back to you, Andrew.

The sun's out, Ed Balls has run the London Marathon, and MPs leave

Westminster for their Easter break. Let's discuss what's coming up in

the Week Ahead. We will get more of what we have

just seen. Let's look back on the debate. What did we learn from the

argument is? That it is going to bore and irritate whole lot of

people, this election campaign. Four parties shouting at each other about

things that most people do not know much about. They know very

things that most people do not know about how the European Parliament

works, what an MEP is supposed to do. A lot of heat and not a lot of

light. I've updated well, all of them, but the net effect is not

going to encourage people to go out and vote and not many do. One thing

that struck me was that on Europe, the Labour and Lib Dem positions are

not that far apart. They are pretty much the same. And yet the knocks

lots of each other. I suppose they feel that they had to do that

because that is the format. I'd agree with Polly. Their word UKIP

and the Tories to attack two we try to make it exciting, and we know the

issues are important. But people out there have not heard of these

individuals. It is there have not heard of these

exciting. That is worrying because these are huge national questions

for us. We need to find a way of making it more fun. People may not

know these MEPs, they may not know the detail of the debate, but it is

an issue on which people have strong opinions. It is a visceral thing for

many people. Especially on the immigration issue. The debate took

off and became more vociferous at that point. To a large extent, you

wonder whether not only this European election but the eventual

referendum will be a referendum on the issue of immigration and free

movement. If we did not learn much from the argument, the thing we did

learn is that the structure of these televised debate influences the

outcome. One of the reasons that Nigel Farage did well in the debate

is that in a two-man debate, each man has as good a chance as the

other. If it is four people, one man can be ganged up on. Patrick O'Flynn

did well for a man who is not an elected politician yet. At times, 40

came under attack and did not hold the line as well as you would

expect. Does that create a perverse incentive for the main parties to

agree to a four way debate before the general election? I do not think

the David Cameron has nearly as much to worry about from a televised

debate in the run-up to the elections than his spin doctors

believe. When you put him up against Ed Miliband, and we have not

actually seen Ed Miliband in that format, I think he will come off all

right. This is an election which the polls would have us believe that the

battle for first place is between UKIP and labour. It certainly is.

Obviously, it is neck and neck and we will not know until we are

closer. And it matters a lot to both of them. If Mr Miliband does not

come first, that is not good news for the main opposition at this

stage. Except to some extent all of the people will put it to one side

and say that this is a bizarre election. A plague on both your

houses, let's vote UKIP. It is not clear how much that translates into

the next election. It is not too disastrous for Labour. It would be

better if they came first. If Mr Miliband comes first, not a problem,

but it becomes second and UKIP soars away, what are the consequences? I

think there is a widespread expectation already at Westminster

that UKIP is very likely to come first. If Ed Miliband fails to come

first, there will not be a great deal of shock in the West Mr

village. Else think what is remarkable about Ed Miliband is that

despite consistently poor personal leadership approval ratings, the

overall Labour poll is consistently very high. We have seen that budget

blip, it seems to have taken us back to where we were before. Leadership

is not everything. Mrs Thatcher was miles behind James Callaghan but in

the end, it was the party politics that mattered more. If Mr Cameron

comes third and the Tories come third, maybe a poor third, is it

headless chicken time on the Tory backbenchers? It has often been said

that the Tory Party has two modes, complacency and panic. You will see

them shift into panic mode. By June, I think. Many of the stories in the

sun will be about David Cameron's personal leadership and his grip on

the party. There will be pressure on conference by the time that comes

around. It is a natural consequence of being the incumbent party. The

Lib Dems are 7% in two of the polls today. It was widely thought that in

the first and second debates, Nigel Farage won both. In retrospect, was

the challenge strategy a disaster for Mr Clegg? I do not think it was

because he had nothing to lose. But he is lower in the polls than when

he started. He has not lost a great deal. The polls were quite often

that low. I think deal. The polls were quite often

thing to do. It raised his profile. It made him the leading party in.

That may be a difficult place to be. That is how you end up with 7%

in the polls. The reason he is fighting with Labour is that he

knows very well that all he has to do is to get his votes back that

have gone to Labour and labour have to fight hard to make sure that they

do not go back. Every party looks to where it is going to get it

support. If it is a wipe-out for the Lib Dems, and they lose all their

MEPs, not saying that is going to happen but you could not rule it out

for, are we back in Nick Clegg leadership crisis territory? One of

the astonishing things about this Parliament is the relative absence

of leadership speculation about Nick Clegg will stop at the first couple

of years, his position seems Clegg will stop at the first couple

tricky, but maybe that is because Chris Hughton is gone and he was the

only plausible candidate. This cable is not getting any younger, to put

it delicately. That was not delegate at all! And we have reached a

desperate stage where Danny Alexander is talked about as a

candidate. That was not delegate either! Maybe he is holding onto

power the lack of alternatives. If they ended up with no MEPs at all,

and a less than double digits score... With Danny Alexander, it is

clear that Scotland, one way or another, will be moving further

away. You could not have the leader of a national party be a Scot. But

he does not have the following in the party. I'm glad you're liberal

attitudes to immigration extends to me. I would not have been here for

43 years. There will be leadership talk after that holes. It has been

bubbling in the background, but you have to talk to the grass roots

activists. -- after the polls. The grass roots activists are

despairing. If things are bad, they lose their network of activists, who

they need to fight the next election. I think you mean, not that

you could have a Scot, but that it would be more difficult to have a

Scot from a Scottish constituency. Absolutely. I think a Scottish

constituency, so many things will be different. Or to hold the great

offices of state. Let's come onto the Crown Prosecution Service is. It

is an English institution. Where does the CPS and after losing yet

another high-profile case come this time Nigel Evans? They had nine

counts against him and they did not win on one. It is obviously very

embarrassing. They will have a bit of explain to do but I guess the

threshold for bringing these cases is high. There has to be considered

at least a 50-50 chance of actually winning the case. We do not know

what went on behind the scenes when they weighed up whether to bring the

case. Nigel Evans makes an interesting point about whether it

is legitimate to bundle together a number of stand-alone relatively

weak accusations, and when you put them together to militantly, the CPS

uses that to make a case. Is that a legitimate thing to do? He was a

high-profile figure, not just because he was a Tory MP. He was the

deputy speaker of the House. And yet the CPS are certainly the police, to

begin with they did not have that many people to testify against him.

begin with they did not have that And then they trawled for more. You

wonder if they would have done that if it was not for the fact that he

was a public figure. The trouble is, they are dammed if they do and

dammed if they do not. Particularly with politicians and the reputation

they have these days, if there is any suggestion that they let

somebody off because they are a high-profile politician, and they

are saying that about Cyril Smith, that is the accusation. A strange

story. Most unlikely and very bizarre. But that is the accusation.

If there is any with of that, I can see why the CPS says, we better let

the courts try this one. Also, they are in trouble overrated cases

because their success rate on bringing people to court for rape is

so thin. When it looked as if his accusers were not really accusing

him, it looks quite weak. You cannot help but

him, it looks quite weak. You cannot falling over backwards now in

high-profile cases because of their abject and total failure over Jimmy

Savile. I think this is exactly the kind of case that happens when you

are trying to make a point or redeem a reputation or change a culture.

All of these big things. As opposed to what criminal justice is supposed

to be about, which is specific crimes and specific evidence

matching those crimes. The CPS has no copper a fleet joined in this

list of public and situations that has taken a fall over the past five

or six years. We have had Parliament, the newspapers, the

police will stop I think this is as bad a humiliation as any of those

because it is Innocent people suffering. You are the most recent,

being a lobby correspondent in Westminster, and we now see on

Channel 4 News that basically, Westminster is twinned with Sodom

and Gomorrah. Yes. I know. Is this Westminster is twinned with Sodom

true? It is all rather the red. I do not move in those circles. And you

were in the lobby at one stage? Not that long ago. Is it right. Is it

right to be twinned with Sodom and Gomorrah? I'll ask him for his

opinion. Being technically a member of the lobby, I can observe some of

this stuff. And what surprises me is that journalists, when the complain

about Sodom and Gomorrah, write themselves out of it. It is as if it

is just MPs. We are unalloyed and unvarnished. Actually, the fact is

it has always been a bit like Sodom and tomorrow. Of course it has.

Think about how we have had wave after wave of stories and scandals.

But less of it recently. It was I think that attitudes have slightly

changed. I'll also think that if you get 650 people in any organisation

changed. I'll also think that if you and you put that much scrutiny on

them, you will find an awful lot going on in most people's officers

of a scurrilous nature. Even in the BBC

In 2013, the public voted for a portrait of