16/07/2017 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland


Andrew Neil and Mark Carruthers are joined by Liam Fox and Rebecca Long-Bailey. Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards are on the political panel.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 16/07/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



It's Sunday morning and this is the Sunday Politics.


With Cabinet divisions over Brexit, spending and leadership spilling


onto the front pages, we'll be talking to international


trade secretary Liam Fox about Britain's future


Jeremy Corbyn's been to Brussels to set out


Labour's vision for Brexit - but with the party suffering its own


divisions on Europe, are they being entirely clear


And as Ukip searches for another leader, will taking an even more


hard-line stance on Islam make the party relevant again,


If Ukip goes down the route of being a party that is anti


the religion of Islam, frankly it's finished.


The First Ministers of Scotland and Wales met


Michel Barnier this week - so is Northern Ireland missing out


when it comes to influencing the Brexit negotiations?


Yes, all of that to come, and I'm joined for all of it


by three journalists whose every word is as closely followed


And much like the Liberal Democrat leadership contest, they've


won their place on the panel because no-one else wanted the job.


It's Steve Richards, Isabel Oakeshott and Tom Newton Dunn.


First today, for a supposedly private gathering, the meeting


of the Cabinet on Tuesday has generated rather a lot of headlines,


most of them featuring Chancellor Philip Hammond.


Yesterday there were disputed claims in the Sun over what he may or may


not have said about women driving trains, and today the Sunday Times


says colleagues picked him up for describing public sector workers


as overpaid, although some dispute that version of events.


Well, Mr Hammond was on the Andrew Marr Show this morning,


and he took the unusual step of suggesting that the source


of the stories may be people unhappy at his position over Brexit.


If you want my opinion, some of the noise is generated by people


who are not happy with the agenda that I have,


tried to advance of ensuring that we achieve a Brexit


which is focused on protecting our economy, protecting


our jobs, and making sure we can have continued rising living


So what do you make of that, Isabel? The Chancellor thinks he's being


undermined by Cabinet colleagues who don't trust him on Brexit. That's


quite remarkable to say that in public. I also think it's completely


true. That's the least controversial part of it! The briefing is his


position on Brexit and also frustration on his position over


public sector pay then it is over any kind of leadership manoeuvrings.


We saw on the Andrew Marr Show that he was doubling down on the issue of


public sector pay rises. He didn't categorically deny using the words


of overpaid, in fact he reiterated the fact he sees them as whether


they are overpaid or not so I believe he did use that phrase but


clearly he's got the tone wrong and I don't think he's done himself any


favours. He's a pretty wealthy man himself, multimillionaire. He must


have some kind of political deafness if he thinks it's OK for someone in


his position to say, in a number of cases, lowly paid public sector


workers are overpaid? I think he is politically deaf, and not


emotionally intelligent. He has a great head for figures but very poor


at expressing himself. It was a crass remark over women train


drivers. He may be in the right place on some arguments, he's just


extremely poor at expressing and that's what gives his opponents the


chance to rip his head off. He should have worked out by now that


it is clear whatever... Because of the dim munition of Mrs May's


authority that whatever you see in the Cabinet now is likely to become


public in some shape or form. I think this is the profound lesson of


the story, that Cabinet discussion is almost impossible now, and


Hammond will go away this summer thinking I can't engage in a proper


debate in Cabinet because they will leak it. It sounds as if they were


having quite a grown-up conversation about public sector pay with a


spending department ministers putting the case for breaking the


cup and Hammond saying from the Treasury perspective this is what's


happening. Which is what normally happens in Cabinet. He would hope


so, not any more. He won't be able to speak his mind in Cabinet because


he knows it will be leaked and that is another sign of fragility of this


Government, when you cannot have a grown-up discussion about public


sector pay even in Cabinet, and that means Cabinet discussion which is


urgently needed on Brexit and the rest of it cannot happen in an open


way because leaking is happening. Mrs May is not exactly top of the


Pops with her own party at the moment but doesn't help her in the


fact that her Chancellor is even less top of the Pops? The key thing


is that backbenchers don't want a leadership contest at the moment.


There are a number of Cabinet ministers or more senior figures who


have been around longer who may feel this is their last chance of the


leadership and they are urgently wanting it happen now. Backbenchers


don't want it, I don't think it will happen. Will it happen? I don't


think it will. There are egos clashing in the Cabinet and also


many who just want things to stay the way they are, so they will. We


will talk more about this leadership matter later in the programme, but


let's move on. This week the government passed


another Brexit milestone when in introduced the Repeal Bill


to the Commons. It will incorporate all EU law


into the UK's domestic And although a vote on the Bill


isn't due until the autumn, the government still has plenty


on its plate when it Brexit secretary David Davis


and the EU's negotiator Michel Barnier will sit down


for another helping of Brexit negotiations in Brussels


this week. Progress now needs to be made


on some big questions. They include: the rights of EU


citizens living here, How to maintain an open border


between Northern Ireland And the size of the financial


settlement or so-called divorce bill Previous estimates have included a


figure of The British government has put no


figure on it, simply saying it This week, Foreign Secretary


Boris Johnson said the EU could "go whistle" if it was


expecting an extortionate fee Brussels wants this set


of negotiations focusing on the principles of separation


to be done by the end of the year. They can then turn to the main


event, the future trading relationship between the UK


and the EU. While the UK remains a member


of the EU customs union, it cannot But it can hold advanced discussions


with other countries. This week, Australian Prime Minister


Malcolm Turnbull said his country was very keen for a deal


as quickly as possible. And at the G20 summit, Donald Trump


said he wanted to sign a very powerful UK-US trade


deal very quickly. But as trade deals normally


take years to negotiate, it is unclear when the first ones


will be ready for post-Brexit So there will be plenty


for both sides to digest, as negotiations continue


over the summer. I'm joined


by the International Trade Your brief is to agree new free


trade deals but you cannot sign any until Brexit is done, can you even


begin proper negotiations this side of Brexit or is that illegal too? We


cannot negotiate and conclude a trade agreement but we can scope


them out. We can get our preparatory work done. We have got ten working


groups established across the world with countries from Korea to the


United States to Australia. I know scoping the out is fine, you can


talk about trade but you cannot begin formal trade negotiations


until after Brexit. No, but we have trade working agreements. Free trade


agreements are not the only thing that are in the mix as it were, they


are what people think about but we also have mutual recognition


agreements where we can reduce some of the barriers to trade, the


technical barriers, in that process. We have a number of other things


going on. We have got to get our trading schedules in Switzerland and


Geneva and the World Trade Organisation organised. We then have


40 EU free trade agreements and we have to get them ready because if we


were not to negotiate those and be ready on the first day of Brexit,


there would be huge market disruption. Although you can clearly


do a lot of technical work and you can talk till the cows come home,


there will be no free trade deals on the shelf ready to sign come March


2019 when we are leaving the EU, that's correct isn't it? Technically


there will be new ones... There will be no free trade deals ready to say


right, we are out, here is a deal I have baked earlier. Not right away


because we are not permitted to do that as part of our membership of


the European Union and one of the things I want to get is greater


freedom to be able to negotiate on behalf of the UK. That's not


possible when you are inside the customs union. There's much talk of


a transition after 2019. You told Bloomberg you didn't mind a few


months, the Chancellor this morning said it would be a couple of years.


What is it? The key thing is why would you have a transitional


arrangements, how long would it be and what would the conditions be.


For me first we have to leave the European Union in March 2019 so


there can be no case of extending EU membership. At that point as a third


country we can have a transition agreement which keeps as little


disruption as possible but it has to have an end date. You said a few


months, the Chancellor said a few years, why the difference? As the


Chancellor said, it is more a technical argument, because for


example how do we get new border equipment in place, how do we get


the arrangements for immigration put in place, but for me, you know, I've


waited a long time and campaigned long time to leave the European


Union. As long as we leave in March 2019 I'm happy, as long as we have a


time-limited transitional period to make it work for business. The


Chancellor doesn't deny the transition could take up four years.


The Brexit Secretary David Davis says it could be a maximum of three


years, you are talking months. Shouldn't you sort this out around


the Cabinet table instead of all three of you sending mixed messages?


We are dependent on for example what HMRC Tal us, how investment is


going. It's also a question of negotiating with our European


partners. We know what's involved, why are you sending out these mixed


messages? I don't have a problem with the transition period as long


as it is time-limited. It is not just the time, it is the conditions.


I want in the transitional period to be able to negotiate agreements at


that point. We cannot have a putting off over the freedom to negotiate


trade agreements. At the moment is it clear you would be able to sign


any free trade deals during a transition period? No, that's to be


negotiated. So if Mr Hammond or Mr Davies is right, up to three or four


years, it could be 2021 before you get to sign a free trade deal. We


don't now how long any would take to negotiate. They don't happen


overnight. Would you even be able to negotiate during a transition


period? I would hope so, that is one of the conditions we might set. It


is certainly something I would want to see because otherwise it makes it


much more difficult to take advantage of the opportunities that


Brexit itself would produce. Your ink will run dry before you get to


sign one of these agreements. We have a huge amount to do and it's


not just at the free trade agreement level. We have for example what we


get at the World Trade Organisation because the real game for the UK is


to get a global liberalisation in the services sector -- the real


gain. And I want to come onto that in a minute but before do, are you


group of the Cabinet ministers that seems to regularly be briefing


against Philip Hammond? No, I deplore leaks from the Cabinet, I


think my colleagues should be quiet, stick to their duties, and I expect


discipline to be effective. The only people smiling that this will be


people in Berlin and Paris. Why are people doing it? The need to have


less prosecco. They don't trust Philip Hammond, do they? I don't


think that is true. I read in the press we have very different views,


in fact our views are very similar on things like transition. I don't


know where it is coming from but I think it should stop.


But it is happening? It is happening and I think it undermines the


position of the government. We do not need an interim leader or an


alternative leader. We have a very good competent leader in Theresa


May. But he thinks it is being done by fellow Brexiteers? I do not know


who is doing it and they should stop. Let's come back to the tariff


free trade. There is much talk about that. The Chancellor says much of


our trade with the world is in services and free trade deals won't


make any particular difference. Do you agree with him? They can make a


difference. It has been estimated with the OECD that free trade deals


with the United States could add ?42 billion to our bilateral trade by


2030. There is a game to be made. In an economy like the UK which is 80%


services, what we would benefit from is a range of global liberalisation.


One example is data. We have an economy where we talk about freedom


of movement of goods and services, but you also have to have the


freedom of movement of data. One thing I would like the UK to lead on


is to look to a global agreement on that. But the talks have come to an


end. There is no great global movement. That is not true. We have


just had a multilateral agreement, the trade facilitation was signed


this year which seeks to diminish friction at customs around the world


and will add 70 billion to the economy. But it leaves plenty of


nontariff barriers in place. The moment you start to talk about these


complicated rules and regulations that hinder services, it does not


make free trade deals impossible, it makes them much more on placated and


prolonged to do. Correct? You need to look at what is happening in the


global economy. According to the OECD, in 2012, the G7 and G20


countries were operating about 300 nontariff barriers. By the end of


2015, they were operating nearly three times that number. The silting


up of growth and global trade is being done by the global economy. We


need to be looking at how we can remove some of those barriers,


because otherwise our prosperity becomes limited. Is it still your


view that no deal would be better than a bad deal? Anyone who goes


into that negotiation without that is foolish. We will not accept any


deal they will give us. That is the problem David Cameron had before the


referendum. I think our partners believed we would accept a bad deal


rather than none. But Philip Hammond has given the game away. He said no


deal would be a very, very bad outcome. The Europeans know that we


have realised no deal would be a very bad outcome. Is he right? I


think you can argue on what the outcome would be. It is very


important as a negotiating tool, and the Prime Minister is 100% right.


Those we are negotiating with, need to believe that we would walk away


rather than accept a bad deal. But if you're going to walk away you did


not say the consequences would be very, very bad. You do not agree


with the key is what is our negotiating position? You simply do


not hand it away. So he is wrong? He says very, very bad. We have to


accept we have a right to walk away and those we are negotiating with


have to understand that. No businessman would go into a deal and


say whatever the outcome, we will accept it. And no business would go


into a major negotiation with six different voices but your government


is. David Davis speaks for the government not the Sunday


newspapers. Not Philip Hammond. Philip Hammond was very clear this


morning on the issue of transition. We are leaving the single the --


market, we are leaving the customs union. Let me just quote to some


other issues. It would be good to get some clarity. Is there a


contingency plan for no deal? Yes, government departments are all


working for their contingency plans for what would happen if we got to


the end of negotiation with no deal. Why did the Foreign Secretary say


there was no plan for no deal. There are contingency plans across


Whitehall. Is he wrong or out of the loop? As dead no. There are


contingency plans and my department and other departments have


specifically been tasked... He said it this week. Well, that is not


correct. We would be foolish not to have such contingency plans. I


understand the argument, you need to bring the Foreign Secretary in. He


is only the Foreign Secretary that you would need to bring him in, I


would have thought. You want is full deal with the EU as possible. Would


you be prepared to pay for that kind of open access? It depends what you


mean by pay. We have to start with where we are with the European Union


at the moment. We already have a tariff free arrangement. I know what


we already have. The only reason why we would not continue with that is


if the politicians on the other side of the channel wanted to put


politics before economics. What they said they want an annual fee? If


they are talking about Britain continuing to pay for those


international arrangements... I am not talking about that and I think


you know I am not. If we get a full access trade deal, that they say you


have to pay an annual fee for this full access, should we pay it? I


would not want to make a public position while our negotiations are


coming on but I think you would find it difficult to square with WTO law.


Has there ever been a free trade deal where you pay the other side


for access? Not that I am aware of. Nor me. It would be unprecedented.


Are you ruling it out? I am not going to say anything. I see say we


should not have a number of different cabinet voices ahead of


our negotiations so I will not do that. We will have a


negotiation. We will try and get as free deal as possible. Let me tell


you why it is important. I know why it is important. I have another


question. You said the EU has trade deals with a number of other


countries at the moment of which we are part of, South Korea and Canada


are two examples. Will they continue to trade with us on the existing


basis, or will we have to do new deals or change these deals after


Brexit? We are negotiating with his third countries so we have something


so that deals are translated into UK law so there is no disruption to


trade. It is not clear. It is break clear. The Canada deal has not yet


been ratified by the European Union. So we do not know if we can carry on


trading with those countries which the EU has a free trade deal with on


the same basis. We have not spoken to a single country and we have


working groups with Switzerland and career which make up 82% by value.


Not a single one of those has indicated they did not want to carry


out this transitional adoption. In the case of Canada, in the case of


Singapore, where that agreement has not yet been reached by the EU, we


will have to think then about a Plan B and how we go into a bilateral


agreement. The EU now regards as may as a lame duck leader. It is true in


Brussels, Berlin and Paris -- the EU now regards Mrs May as a lame duck


leader. There is a hung parliament. Labour will not save your bacon on


Brexit. They want a quick election and they will vote to bring that


about. This election result has severely undermined Britain's


negotiating position. If you are looking at European governments,


they are looking at dealing with minority governments all the time.


They are dealing with coalitions formal and informal. The key is we


have something stronger than that. We have the will of the British


people behind us clearly expressed in the referendum that we are going


to leave the European Union, whatever Tony Blair or anyone else


says. We will leave in March 20 19. Now the job of the government is to


get the best deal and that is best done by my colleagues getting on


with their departmental work, not involving themselves in things they


do not need to be involved in, giving our backbenchers the


reassurance that we have a united Cabinet. Liam Fox, thank you.


Jeremy Corbyn went to Brussels this week to meet with the EU's


chief Brexit negotiator, Michael Barnier.


We're told Mr Corbyn wanted to set out Labour's


But on some of the big questions - like Britain's relationship


with the single market and the customs union -


Here's Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell speaking earlier.


I believe we have to try and maintain the benefits


of the customs union, and that's one of the issues


Does it mean staying inside or leaving?


Keep all the options open, keep all the options...


Under Labour we could stay inside the customs union?


We are concentrating on the objectives rather


than the structures and that seems to have a resonance


I'm joined now by the Shadow Business Secretary


Rebecca Long-Bailey, she's in our Salford studio.


Good morning to you. Good morning. If there is a snap general election


it could well be Labour negotiating Brexit, so let's try and get some


answers to some fundamental questions. Is Labour in favour of


Britain remaining a member of the single market? What we have said it


want to retain the benefits of the single market and the customs union.


We have to be flexible in our approach, we appreciate that. The


end goal is maintaining the current benefits we have because we are


standing on the edge of a cliff, quite frankly, on


that matter. But you would concentrate on remaining a member of


the single market? The machinery we use to maintain those benefits is


open to negotiation. We have got to respect the result of the referendum


and the will of the people, in terms of having greater control over our


laws and the border. If we could negotiate staying in the single


market would be fantastic but whether it is likely have to be


seen. We are looking at all the options on the table and getting


access to the single market is one of those. Everybody wants access, I


am talking about membership. It is still not clear whether you would


negotiate to remain as a member of the single market, with all the


consequences of free movement and the European Court that would follow


from that. What is your position? We want to retain the current benefits


we have is a member of the single market, but we appreciate there will


be free movement and we will lose control over our laws. That was one


of the key positions that were set out in the referendum and people


were extremely concerned about that. That has to be negotiated. If we


could negotiate membership of the single market while dealing with the


other issues, that would be great. I think that would be unlikely. We


have to look at a more flexible approach while not being a member.


Is Labour in favour of remaining a member of the customs union? Again,


the position is similar. We want to retain the benefits we have in the


customs union. We want to have our cake and eat it, as do most parties


in Westminster. So you and Boris Johnson or on the same wavelength?


We need to be flexible, not cut our nose off despite our face. I am


asking for your position. Would you be clear to be prepared to sacrifice


not being able to do free trade deals, as the price for remaining in


the customs union? We have to be extremely flexible. We should be


able to carry out and negotiate our free trade deals. You cannot do that


in the customs union? So are you in or out? That is why it is a point


for negotiation, Andrew. We want to retain the benefits of the customs


union will negotiating trade deals as we see fit. That will form part


of the negotiations themselves. We cannot cut our nose despite our face


without coming out of the customs union without any transitional


arrangements whatsoever and send businesses over the cliff. Since you


do want to keep your cake and eat it. You want to stay in the single


market but not have the obligations that go with it, stay the single


union but not do -- stay in the single market but do your own trade


deals. The opposition is untenable. That is the point of the


negotiations... To be untenable? Not to be untenable. We have


negotiations. The machinery we have whether it is through outside


agreements or whether it is about a negotiated form of an amended


settlement, that is a moot point frankly. We need to make sure we


have the same benefits. John McDonnell, the Shadow Chancellor,


says people would interpret remaining in the single market is


not respecting the referendum but you say it is an option to keep


open, who is right? I think he is right in what he said. It is


automatically assumed that once you leave the EU you leave the single


market and that is generally the case. I would be surprised that we


would be able to negotiate any of the concessions that we want to make


as remaining part of the single market as a member. I am not saying


it is completely off the table because stranger things have


happened, but what we need to focus on is less on the machinery and more


on the outcome. We need to make sure we retain the benefits and we


negotiate some form of agreement to deal with that.


But why would you keep an option open that would not respect the


result of the referendum? People assume that once you leave the EU


you leave the single market. That could be negotiated, but it's


extremely unlikely. I wouldn't rule anything out at this stage because


stranger things have happened and this process so far has been


extremely chaotic. But you would have to decide your negotiating


position. Saying we don't rule anything out is not a negotiating


position. We are clear on our negotiating position, we want to


retain the benefits we currently have as part of the customs union


and the single market, whether that is inside or outside is a moot


point. Rex it means Brexit, we are clear on that. -- Brexit means


Brexit. How can it, if you want to stay inside the single market and


Customs union, and you said access would entail accepting some element


of free movement. That's what you said but your manifesto was


categorical - free movement would end after Brexit, which is currently


Labour policy? The manifesto was clear free movement would end. The


point I was making at the time is there are some areas which are


extremely complex, for example the free movement of scientists. There


is an extreme state of concern regarding that, so the Government


has to look at things like that. There might have to be concession is


made in certain areas like that in order to get an associative


membership for example but the clear position overall is that free


movement would end and we are in favour of reasonable and managed


migration. We are also not in favour of the current undercutting of wages


for example through the Swedish denigration and we want to see that


end immediately because we don't think it is right company cancels


labour overseas and undercut British employees. Let me finish on another


topic. John McDonnell again, the Shadow Chancellor, said this morning


the victims of Grenfell Tower were victims of social murder. What is


social murder? I haven't spoken to John about that but what happened in


Grenfell was absolutely horrific. But were they victims of social


murder? I haven't spoken to John to understand the term but in my


constituency we have a large number of tower blocks that have the same


cladding on and people are living in fear. Following the Lakanal House


fire, the coroner made recommendations the Government


should be installing sprinklers in all housing over 30 metres high and


they haven't done that. I call on than to do that immediately whilst


also making sure the funding is available to carry out necessary


remedial works. One other issue has come light... My question is


important... When John McDonnell says that the people in Grenfell


Tower were murdered, murdered by political decisions, is he right? I


go back to the point I made earlier. I haven't discussed it with John...


Two weeks ago. The Government should have acted on recommendations. Were


they murdered? They should have acted on recommendations to retrofit


sprinklers and they didn't. There was incompetence is no question,


dereliction of duty, some terrible decisions made that resulted in that


appalling event that we saw but does that amount to murder? It is a


simple question. You could look at it case of manslaughter but the fact


is people lost their lives through a failure to conduct adequately a duty


of care. People would assume that is murder if you like, if it was taken


through the courts, and could be classified as corporate


manslaughter. It's not murder? We are going round in circles here. The


point is the Government should have acted on recommendations to retrofit


sprinklers years ago and should have looked at amending building


regulations instead of kicking the issue into the long grass time and


time again. People where I live are living in extreme fear, and we want


the Government to take action immediately. Rebecca Long-Bailey


from Salford, thank you for joining us.


You may not have noticed but Ukip - the party that once promised


and arguably delivered a political earthquake - is having


The last leader, Paul Nuttall, stood down after the party saw its vote


is one anti-Islam candidate threatening to split what's


Forget the warm prosecco, if there is any plotting going on in Ukip


about who should be in charge, it would be going on over a pint. And


there is plotting. This programme understands Ukip's ruling body could


ban one of the candidates from standing, and that is not going to


go down terribly well. Anne Marie Waters, a former Labour activist,


wants to be the next leader. She believes Ukip needs to talk more


about Islam, a religion she has called evil. She says there is


growing support for her views including among the hundreds of new


members who have joined Ukip in recent weeks. Are you anti-Islam? I


don't like the religion, no, and a lot of people get confused on Islam


and all Muslims. The religion, the Scriptures and how it is practised


in most of the world I find quite frankly abhorrent. There are


millions of people in this country who think as I do. They don't


want... And the real extreme right could rise if people are not allowed


to talk about this. Nigel Farage has already said he doesn't want to be


the leader again, but he still has a clear view of what Ukip 's macro


future should and should not hold. Ukip goes down the route of being a


party that is anti the religion of Islam, frankly it's finished. I


don't think there is any public appetite for that but it is timing


and the party would be finished. If there are some within Ukip who say


the party had already moved to the right at the last election with its


integration agenda. Banning


the burka and physically checking children for female


genital mutilation. If we don't really do something


about FGM now, we never will. Anne Marie Waters wants to go


further but also suspects The party chairman says


there will be due process according to Ukip's constitution,


including the screening process


for its leadership candidates conducted


by an external vetting company. But like the old boss,


he doesn't think Ukip should become What we're going through now


is a process where people can I'm talking about the process


we have, which I think is robust enough to protect the party,


its history, and protect its future. We have always been


about being for something, we are not against something,


and hopefully that will come through in this leadership election


so I'm excited about it. I'm not focusing on one


particular candidate. But it has got senior


party figures worried. Several MEPs have told me


the majority of their colleagues in Brussels would walk away


if Anne Marie Waters Another Ukip senior source


said there would be mass The deadline for leadership


nominations is the 28th of July. So far, around seven people have


said they intend to stand. Of course the bigger the field,


the fewer the votes required to win. One senior MEP told me it would be


the most rancorous contest the party had ever had,


amongst the least stellar cast. The man who led Ukip at its most


successful says direction is one thing but the party must also become


more professional on their current


trajectory, then they will on their current


trajectory, then they will And as I say, if Ukip withers


and Brexit is not delivered, something else will replace it


so I'm saying to what is still my party, unless you change radically,


get your act together, Whatever the direction


the new leader takes Ukip, there are already plenty who think


the party is over. We say goodbye to viewers


in Scotland who leave us now Coming up here in 20 minutes,


we'll be talking about what's next Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics


in Northern Ireland. The First Ministers of Wales


and Scotland meet the EU negotiator Michel Barnier -


but who speaks for this I'll be asking the Sinn Fein MEP,


Martina Anderson, if the absence of Stormont has reduced our Brexit


influence. And after what's been


described as the most successful Twelfth for years,


has parading finally been That's what I'll be asking


Professor Peter Shirlow It's been called the "most


peaceful" Twelfth of July Thousands of Orangemen


took part in 18 parades across Northern Ireland on the main


day in the marching calendar. The Grand Master of Ireland said it


was the "biggest in a generation". There was no trouble at any


of the traditional flash points and police praised Orangemen


and those watching the parades. However, it was a different story


at several eleventh night bonfires with the Fire and Rescue Service


describing it Firefighters prevented a blaze


spreading to an apartment block in South Belfast,


though the heat cracked The police are also investigating


reports of "distasteful material" And Pete Shirlow and Patricia


MacBride are with me now. Welcome to you both. To the last is


on the politics of the series. It's been judged to have


been a successful and From all points of view that has to


be good. This is a bigger issue. Why was this the case? Why did it not


has become in the Liu what it has becoming recent years? Because I


know some of the people who work behind the scenes to resolve, some


people who would be involved in the holy cross dispute which was also


resolve which tells us of a bigger problem about some of the issues


with the conflict in Northern Ireland. When we have the type of


positivity, this type of engagement we know very little about it, and


doesn't scream from the headlines, it's not the first item, the first


item is something else, you are honourable to do this for the


headline of your programme. The services are constantly overburdened


by people putting a racist blacks or writing offensive things on the


wall, you're constantly looking at crises but the other side, there is


plenty of tasteful negotiation. Do you get a sense from people you talk


to that the parading has a large extent been solved? Peter is right


in the sense that there have been many years of quiet diplomacy which


has brought us to this stage. Certainly Derry City set the model


in that, in negotiations that took part with the parades, with the


apprentice boys, and it is only to be welcomed that we have a series of


parades on the 12th of July this year weather has known major


confrontation. -- weather has been no confrontations. How do we deal


with the bonfires on the 11th which are causing a public danger? It is a


matter of public safety, and anyone who thinks that they are attacking


cultural expression in exciting concerns about bonfires, that is


wrong, the bonfires in and of themselves are the problem, in terms


of the issues that they pose. A lot of people would agree with that,


Pete, not to say that new flash point as far as parading are


concerned might not emerging feature but the bonfire issue is the issue


of the moment. It is a divisive issue part of a broader problem in


the society, if you look at the social media around the bonfires in


the week and you see a tit-for-tat argument between Unionism and


republicanism. Some people posts horrible Chris Langridge around


Glasgow Celtic footballers, and other people respond with names of


people describing black people as inferior and being involved with the


slave trade, all involving homophobia can be Unionism, Castro,


homophobia, there is a issue in our society which we can't resolve,


which is expecting tit-for-tat. A lot of people from this part


of the world might have been on holidays this week,


but in London and Brussels it was business as usual -


and top of the agenda, Theresa May unveiled


the Brexit Repeal Bill, the Scottish and Welsh First Ministers held


meetings with Michel Barnier, while a European committee heard


that Ireland should get more MEPs to represent Irish passport holders


on this side of the border. Here's Guy Verhofstadt


with his proposal. There will be in the future 500


600,000 people, Northern Irish people with an Irish passport. These


people are still EU citizens, these people normally should still have


the possibility in my opinion to participate in our European actions.


Even when they are not living in the European Union but living in


Northern Ireland but with an Irish passport. And with an EU


citizenship. So any allegation of the seats, that problem should be


tackled will stop -- in the allocation.


Joining me now from our Foyle studio is the Sinn Fein


We did ask the two main unionist parties to take


part in the programme, but we were told no-one


Martina Anderson - Do you like the sound of extra MEPs


to represent Northern Ireland citizens who are Irish passport


I wasn't surprised that Guy Verhofstadt said that, because


following a meeting I had with him on Tuesday and building on the case


of special designated status for the north, I presented him with what was


called an essential principle paper, a paper about designated special


status and how all of the elements need to be achieved. He was very


aware and taken by the fact that given that the Parliament has


already seen a preservation of the Good Friday Agreement in all of its


parts, with 1500 MEPs, all of its parts mean that those elements of


the agreement that has afforded us to be Irish passport holders for


example opens up the passport into EU citizenship and EU citizens


rights, and what we had in Article ten it is quite clearly stating that


direct representation is required for those people who have in our


case whether you hold an Irish passport or not that the 1.8 million


people here, that is one the access to the Good Friday Agreement in


shrines for all of us, and Guy Verhofstadt got that will stop in


practical terms, remember of course, there was a rejection of the special


status, it seems your fellow MEPs don't like the idea that. Practical


terms, how would MEPs elected by people in Northern Ireland but


representing the Republic of Ireland actually work, do you think? Let me


explain to you to programme and was took place in the Parliament last


week was really it was a battle, eight resolutions, all resolutions


rejected, each of the groups voted for their own resolution, and no one


else's. It wasn't a resolution to do with designated status or a


resolution to deal with Brexit, the Parliament has a clear position on


Brexit, and 516 MEPs voted to preserve all of the parts of the


Good Friday Agreement. I don't want to go back over that. In practical


terms, how would Guy Verhofstadt's ideal work? Could it work? As I have


said before there are 25 overseas countries and territories that have


a relationship with the EU that have a special relationships are what we


are asking for is not new. North Cyprus, Turkey end of it was the Liu


is not in the EU, but Cypriots can vote in European elections. There


are nearly 100,000 Cypriots Turks oared Turkish Cypriots, however you


want to refer to them as, but they can vote in the European elections


even though the north end of Cyprus is under Turkey occupation. Said


that is the sort of precedent you would quote you think it is


eminently doable? It is deliverable without doubt. The point is that


having an Irish passport means that you have acquired rights and


acquired rights that are absolute rights, and an absolute right under


Article ten is to participate in democratic representation within the


union. It means that you will be treated by EU institutions equally,


so there are a number of acquired rights that people have by virtue of


the fact of the Good Friday Agreement hence the reason they need


to be protected in all of its parts. I want to ask you about the Brexit


repeal Bill, as Theresa May unveiled it would need consent from devolved


assemblies. Where does that leave us here? At the moment we don't have an


assembly, and we don't have a voice at the table. We had yesterday from


Michelle O'Neill, she was very clear that we are obviously up for having


an assembly established on an assembly predicated on good


governance, one predicated on equality and rights. We have heard


this before! Over the past six months, Northern Ireland has


singularly failed in its parties to get anything up and running again.


Part of the responsibility for the rest was Sinn Fein, because Martin


McGuinness Portadown in January. We know about that, we know that Sinn


Fein said that you think that you wanted to get running again as


possible. It is easy to say that but it has been difficult to deliver


that. Where does that leave us? Is has not of course been easy to


deliver but that does not fall upon Sinn Fein. We heard from Michelle


O'Neill yesterday that jazz been in contact with all of the leaders of


all of the parties do try to make that happen. We do know that the


obstacles that we have a leave had been put in the way have been


brought about by the DUP and by the British Government. You know very


well of course that the DUP and Ulster Unionists and the British


Government see it very differently and the Unionist parties say it as


the reason of the bread line that Sinn Fein has -- red line that Sinn


Fein has refused to budge on. I don't want to rehearse that. Martin


McGuinness was right on his expression, exposing himself in a


way that every else has ever done before. He brought the assembly down


based upon all of the allegations that we were facing and because of


how the Unionists in government work treating some sections of the


people. We have researched the Liu rehearsed visage at a lot. We are up


for an assembly. So you are in full agreement with Michelle O'Neill


yesterday? Without is Emily due except we are voiceless? No, because


I think we can see that for instance with the largest delegation in the


European Parliament, Sinn Fein has a severe believe every significant


influence. I will be meeting with Michel Barnier in September and we


will be working and meeting with all of the key players in the European


Parliament. We are looking to the negotiations to start tomorrow,


there are three priorities for the Parliament, one being BAC we have


just been talking about, acquired rights, citizens rights of which we


have got to make sure that they are protected for us here in the north.


The second is the divorce settlement, the prices are going to


be hacked to be paid by Britain to leave the EU and then the third is


Ireland, so we have been talking to Brussels and to the Irish government


because that scenario where negotiations are taking place. We


also know the damage of the Great Repeal Bill, and it is proper that


the legislation be sought, it certainly went begetting legislative


consent by the majority of the people in the assembly, that by the


majority of the parties in assembly. You are in Brussels and Strasbourg a


lot and you are talking to people with the ear to the ground. Is it


your view that the Irish border continues to be one of the issues


right at the top of the agenda as far as Europe is concerned?


Absolutely. It is something that we heard from them last week, from


Michel Barnier, who actually put to bed those that have been told,


farmers, SMEs, universities or others, that there is such a thing


as frictionless trade. He actually said there is no such thing as


frictionless trade so the case that Sinn Fein has made for designated


special status for the north to remain within the EU has been


presented, we have been told how it could be secured, we have presented


a central principles, we are getting legal advice to demonstrate how that


can be achieved. The UK Government doesn't want that whether you like


it or not, and they are the body negotiating with the European Union.


It isn't Sinn Fein, it's not down to Martina Anderson to make this called


it is down Theresa May and David Davis. They see a very differently


from you. It is down to myself, the Sinn Fein delegation and are parties


to make deliveries for the people, particularly the 52% of people,


across tradition, across our society, who have been arrogantly


described as Remoaners. We rendered all those people who voted to


remain, and we leave that the people who didn't vote to remain are now


seeing the devastation and damaged that can be caused by a Brexit to


the north and a lot of people are now reflecting how they feel.


Interesting to hear your thoughts, Martina Anderson. Thanks very much


for joining us from Derry this morning.


Let's get reaction to that from Patricia and Pete.


It is interesting to hear her perspective on that are clearly not


giving up on the status designation for Northern Ireland. You heard her


say right at the end to remain within the EU, Northern Ireland,


even though nobody from the UK perspective is talking about that.


If you saw the newspapers this morning, a former cabinet secretary


is talking about how the British Government's response to Brexit is


disorganised, and there was no agreement internally. They don't


have the resources to drive this programme forward. The British


Government not wanting special designated status for the north is


probably more a case of the British Government not really having thought


that far ahead because they don't appear to be well planned. It is


very far down their list of priorities, isn't it? The very huge


issues they had to grapple with as far as Europe is concerned, Northern


Ireland is not probably in the top ten issues for Theresa May. There is


so much disagreement with the Conservative Party internally so


they don't even know what the top ten issues are. We had to play some


hope in terms of people in the north around two issues. First of all what


was said about the vote within the Parliament to support the Good


Friday Agreement and that secondly the very clear direction of the


travel of the Irish government, ensuring there is no negative impact


on Ireland and in order to do that, that is the entire island of


Ireland. People I think are jumping ahead of themselves here. First of


all you see British politics being galvanised by the referendum. There


is greater commitment to reducing the impact of this decision was one


thing we will see and the argument Lib Dems are taking, this is going


to be softer than we think. It is nobody's interest in being outside


the trading unions, or that Tizer partnerships, for financial reasons


with Europe. If you look at the impact for universities and stuff,


Northern Ireland is in the top ten list of issues here, there is no


hard border being desired. The relationship between two states,


Ireland and Britain is not at the best, despite this friction over


Brexit, so we need to be careful here not to rattle issues that


haven't come to the fore yet. Before decisions are made. Let's park that


one. With the Stormont discussions now


parked for several weeks, the Prime Minister has been urged


by two Northern Ireland Office veterans to get more


personally involved. They made the comments


in the House of Lords this week. Every single agreement in northern


Ireland has been successful because of the direct involvement of the


Prime Minister and the Taoiseach. Isn't it about time the Prime


Minister goes to Belfast and talk directly with the parties and the


Irish government, and until that happens I feel we will make little


progress. The noble Lord raised this point in a statement ten days ago or


so and indeed the noble Lord he raised it as well but can I reassure


him that the Prime Minister is taking a close interest close


involvement in this. Should she see fit she will indeed travel to


Northern Ireland. The Prime Minister clearly has a close interest, nobody


would suggest that she hasn't, but there is no substitute for a visit


full stop to go to Northern Ireland to talk on the spot in Hillsborough


with the various parties involved, and when she's talking to them


bearing in mind the most Avril suggestion of my friend Lord Trimble


who has made Tyneside that -- many times has said that the delay in


sets in at the assembly that the assembly cannot meet.


Lord Cormack and before that Lord Murphy, the former


Northern Ireland Secretary, speaking in the Lords on Thursday.


Is that what it will take? This is around the engagement of the British


Government in the north, a great test of the DUP confidence and


supply agreement, the DUP are serious about getting power-sharing


running at all and then they need to insist the bar minister comes here.


Look at the challenges that Theresa May has in her injury at the moment.


Dealing with the whole Brexit issue is a nightmare, holding onto her own


job seemed like a real challenge of you read today by the papers. What


chance her coming to Northern Ireland, taking an interest that she


Frankie hasn't shown before? The leaders are essentially exhausted,


like in the 70s, government is falling apart. Theresa May coming


here when shift the dynamic was a bit is clear where the issues are,


this isn't like the peace process with Tony Blair, we know where the


issues are, they can be resolved by imaginative thinking and the removal


of hostile behaviour and deadlines, between each other. It's a fairly


simple problem. Simple perhaps but intractable to.


Let's pause there for a moment and take a look back


at the political week gone past, with Mark Devenport.


The annual 12th of July celebrations passed off without major incident.


There is a huge change of atmosphere. There is a communication


across the lines. We are seeing that the downward trajectory in terms of


trouble and disorder has continued downwards today. There were problems


on the 11th night, particularly in south Belfast. Cruise saw one


appliance come under attack, very disappointing. The majority of these


have passed peacefully, I have attended one myself. James


Brokenshire announced he is ready to make financial decisions here.


Scotland and Wales raised concerns with Michel Barnier. It is crucial


that Brexit works for Wales, not just the city or some parts of the


UK. Mark Devenport there -


and let's have a final word Pizza, an awful lot of what happens


next depends on what James Brokenshire does next. How would you


rate his performance so far? I feel sympathetic for the Secretary of


State, the idea of devolution was out of their hands. RHI, Irish actor


and should -- Irish language, etc, the victim is the state. Broken shy


had a joints when the talks collapsed -- broken shy had a choice


between legislating and extending the deadline, and he did none of


those things was that this week he will allocate funding. Let's see


where it goes. We're back in mid-September,


see you then. This is the last Sunday Politics


before Parliament breaks up for the summer recess, and most MPs could


definitely do with some time away from the political hothouse at


Westminster. But when they come back


in September, both the Conservatives and Labour face some big questions


over how to win an overall majority We'll talk about that in a moment,


but first let's have a look at what's been happening to Theresa May


and Jeremy Corbyn since polling day And what we are saying is the


Conservatives are the largest party. Note they don't have an overall


majority at this stage. She who dares doesn't always win.


Now let's get to work. The party that has lost in this election is


the Conservative Party. The arguments they put forward in this


election have lost. I think we need a change. That's not quite true,


Labour is a party that lost. The Government failed and her coming


over here to try to speak to... Who? Who do you want to speak to you had


your chance. Now everyone will go angry and crazy.


I think the public will want us to get the broadest possible consensus


in looking at those issues. If the Prime Minister would like it, I am


happy to furnish her with a copy of our election manifesto.


You are now playing for Arsenal! The comments we were getting back that


were passed on to me were that we were going to get a better results


than we did. Devastated enough to shed a tear? Yes, a little tear at


that moment, yes. Let's start with Mrs May. Another


day, another leadership rumour, challenge. She is tired, she wants


to fight on, she doesn't. Is this corrosive to her leadership? Hugely


corrosive. My estimation of what's really going on in the party, and


Tory MPs in Westminster, is the vast majority and by that I mean probably


around 300 don't want a contest. They want her to stay and finish


Brexit, see it through, because of the incredible Pandora's box that


would open. Who's putting these incredible column inches in the


papers? They are giant egos, they have been at this for several years


if not decades and they are keen to manoeuvre themselves into the


position to be the leader. In their own interests? Because most Tories I


speak to think the risk of another leadership election is horrendous


for them because they fear it could lead to a general election and they


will lose. The ones you are talking about, they put their own


self-interest above the interest of their party. Without a doubt. They


are funny bunch, we know them very well, but they are simply incapable


of putting their own interests underneath those of the country. The


problem for Mrs May is this won't stop. They are going to carry on


doing this I think unless she says something about her own leadership


and conference is the time to do it. She needs to spell out a timetable


for herself, when she will stay and go. She almost did that, didn't she,


in her interview with you. She came very close. I agree with almost


everything Thomas said, but those on the backbenches who don't want a


leadership contest, it's not purely for the good of the country, there


is self-interest there too and that is because they are eyeing up the


top job and they need a few years to build up a following. My view is


people like Boris Johnson 's and Amber Rudd for their own reasons


think they stand a better chance once Brexit is done. At the moment


Mr Johnson too toxic for the Remainers, Amber Rudd too toxic for


the Leavers. Last time Mrs May went walking in the hills, in Wales, she


came back and called an election. She's about to go walking in the


Swiss mountains I understand in the weeks ahead for a break. Is there


any chance she comes back and says I'm not going on with this? No


because although I think being a human being she will be deeply


traumatised by what's happened, and it will probably hit her more


intensely when she moves away for a few days from the cocoon drama of


the whole situation, you just have to keep going and she will be


walking and thinking what have I done? But she is clearly trying to


hold on and she's built up a new Number Ten. Almost an entire new


personnel in there. She's brought Damian Green in as a deputy so


there's no sign she plans to go in the short-term but leadership is


partly about a spell on us and her ministers. The fact that her


ministers, even in her interview when she was being robust in two


years, they know that she won't fight part of the next election


which means part of the spell has gone. When Tony Blair gave a date


for his departure, you could feel the power losing away from him. The


fact that assumption is there means this feverish speculation will carry


on until she goes. Let me come on to Mr Corbyn who would seem to be in a


much better position after the election. What does he now do


though? Because if you cannot provoke an election quite quickly,


you never know how long your day in the sun will be. But he does have a


mission or he and the people around him, they want to take control of


those parts of the Labour Party they don't already take control, and they


will probably do it. Absolutely, so Jeremy Corbyn has established he's a


very good campaigner. Everybody now agrees on that. Look at the clip, he


now dresses in a white shirt and a dark suit, and he actually looks I


won't say Prime Minister Arial but like he could possibly lead the


whole country. -- prime ministerial. But the whole thing is built on


protests, there isn't a fully established policy set up where he


is ready to take over the Government if this election comes. The


challenge for him is to turn the huge generation of support he's got


over protest into the ability to govern. You heard from Rebecca


Long-Bailey on Brexit alone, the party now admitting their policy is


cake and eat it, that is not electorally satisfying. Final word


from Isabel. The fact is Mr Corbyn has been a transformative figure for


the Labour Party. If and when he goes, it's not going back to normal.


It is transformative for the Labour Party and the country. I disagree


with Tom, they put forward a more detailed programme than the


Conservatives at the election and be costed it to some extent. I think to


be facing two weighs on Brexit is the only place for a Leader of the


Opposition to beat and he has been smart on that. Tony Blair when he


was a leader faced to microwaves on single currency, outside of


Parliament he single currency, outside of


Parliament he seemed be more robust, but he's played it very smart. All I


would say is for Brexiteers we want more Tony Blair saying it won't


happen. You think he's such a toxic figure that whatever side he


supports damages that side? Absolutely, yes. As a leader of an


opposition party you cannot advance things. All right, we will have to


leave it there. Enjoy your summer. That's all for today, and that's


all from us until September. Remember if it's Sunday,


it's the Sunday Politics - unless it's parliament's summer


recess. But for me it is thank you and


goodbye. When I think of the world


we inhabit, everyone will think,


Andrew Neil and Mark Carruthers are joined by international trade secretary Liam Fox and shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey for a look at Ukip's future direction. Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards are on the political panel.

Download Subtitles