:00:39. > :00:44.Was former London Mayor Ken Livingstone booted off
:00:45. > :00:50.Or, as Mr Livingstone claims, did he step down
:00:51. > :00:53.because he is at one on all defence matters with this lady,
:00:54. > :00:55.Labour's new Shadow Defence Secretary, Emily Thornberry.
:00:56. > :00:57.Like Mr Livingstone she's not a fan of Britain's
:00:58. > :01:03.David Cameron has a plan to deliver some "rabbits from the hat"
:01:04. > :01:11.Another campaign group has entered the fray on his side,
:01:12. > :01:17.As the battle hots up we'll be talking to a man who wants out,
:01:18. > :01:20.UKIP leader Nigel Farage, and a man who wants to stay in,
:01:21. > :01:24.Donald Trump and his former chum Alex Salmond have spent
:01:25. > :01:28.The wannabe American President thinks Mr Salmond's
:01:29. > :01:46.an embarrassement to his country. pledged to demolish sink estates.
:01:47. > :01:52.What will it mean to communities in the capital?
:01:53. > :01:55.And with me, as always, the best and the brightest political
:01:56. > :01:58.I won't have a nasty word said against them.
:01:59. > :02:00.Nick Watt, Isabel Oakeshott and Janan Ganesh who'll be tweeting
:02:01. > :02:12.So first today let's talk about Jeremy Corbyn,
:02:13. > :02:15.who gave a wide-ranging interview on the Marr show a little earlier.
:02:16. > :02:17.My question, with respect, was about sympathy action
:02:18. > :02:18.and whether you would remove that legislation.
:02:19. > :02:21.Sympathy action is legal in most other countries and I think it
:02:22. > :02:23.should also be legal here. But remember this...
:02:24. > :02:25.So you would repeal those Tory laws?
:02:26. > :02:27.Yes, of course. Nobody willingly goes on strike.
:02:28. > :02:29.They go on strike as an ultimate weapon.
:02:30. > :02:31.The number of strikes is actually very small.
:02:32. > :02:32.It's an ultimate weapon that is used.
:02:33. > :02:35.Anyone that is going on strike is making an enormous sacrifice.
:02:36. > :02:38.They don't get paid, they suffer a great deal as a result
:02:39. > :02:41.of it, so let's look at the causes of people being upset rather
:02:42. > :02:58.A policy packed interview with Andrew Marr on the Falklands,
:02:59. > :03:04.Islamic State, secondary striking, even on the idea maybe we could keep
:03:05. > :03:11.Trident but not any missile warheads on the missiles. I felt nostalgic. I
:03:12. > :03:16.was back to a teenager in the 1980s, I remember these arguments in the
:03:17. > :03:22.1980s and Michael foot put them in the manifesto for the 1983 election.
:03:23. > :03:31.He was robust on the Falkland Islands. He was. The point for
:03:32. > :03:36.Jeremy Corbyn is he has a mandate from the party to put forward these
:03:37. > :03:43.arguments. He had a 60% vote and it is clear what he thinks of nuclear
:03:44. > :03:47.weapons. He has been a member of CND since 1966. The challenge for Jeremy
:03:48. > :03:52.Corbyn is to put forward ideas in a way that appeals beyond new members
:03:53. > :03:58.of the Labour Party to the electorate as a whole who have
:03:59. > :04:01.concerns about security of the nation, for example, possibly having
:04:02. > :04:06.successor submarines of the Trident system without nuclear weapons. That
:04:07. > :04:12.is the Japanese system, they talk in Japan how they have what is known as
:04:13. > :04:15.the bomb in the basement. They are a non-declared nuclear state but could
:04:16. > :04:18.arm themselves with nuclear weapons within minutes if needed. That is
:04:19. > :04:22.what he is talking about. Sounds good in the leg party but he needs
:04:23. > :04:29.to sell it to the country as a whole. It is clear a lot of what
:04:30. > :04:33.Jeremy Corbyn says has the support of the grassroots, particularly the
:04:34. > :04:37.new ones who have joined the party. It is clear a lot of this does not
:04:38. > :04:41.have the support of the Parliamentary Labour Party. That is
:04:42. > :04:47.the constant problem yet to be squared. I cannot see a way it will
:04:48. > :04:53.be squared. I do not think many Labour MPs can either. His problem
:04:54. > :04:57.is admirable, it is he is determined not to remove himself from things
:04:58. > :05:03.said in the past. On the Falklands he is consistent with what he said
:05:04. > :05:08.in 2013, when it did not matter, and how he is now repeating those views.
:05:09. > :05:12.The problem is now Jeremy Corbyn matters and if you look at the
:05:13. > :05:17.Falklands, the last time there was a vote of those on the Falkland
:05:18. > :05:20.Islands, only three voted to change the system of administration, so he
:05:21. > :05:28.is out of step with people living there. He sets out his left-wing
:05:29. > :05:34.stall on these issues. Bit by bit, he is taking his time, doing it
:05:35. > :05:36.astutely. He is taking the lead party in his direction, part of the
:05:37. > :05:47.purpose I would suggest of the interview will stop no one could
:05:48. > :05:50.question that. If you go into a general election with a leader who
:05:51. > :05:57.says something like, let's have the return of secondary picketing, and
:05:58. > :06:01.that is not the worst idea in the manifesto, also talking about
:06:02. > :06:04.renewing the vanguard submarines without warheads and I think he
:06:05. > :06:07.floated the idea of reasonable accommodation with Argentina on the
:06:08. > :06:12.Falklands, he would go to the election knowing you have a white,
:06:13. > :06:19.working-class base, which is already flirting with Ukip. How low can
:06:20. > :06:23.Labour Singh? Technically it is impossible to get rid of him but
:06:24. > :06:27.maybe politics is like water and finds a way to go around obstacles.
:06:28. > :06:33.And if his ideas turn out to be popular? I think they will be
:06:34. > :06:38.popular with the membership at every general election since 1983 would
:06:39. > :06:42.suggest to us these ideas are outside the mainstream. Jeremy
:06:43. > :06:46.Corbyn says there is a new world out there, I tapped into that in the
:06:47. > :06:51.campaign, with thousands packing up meetings. We have the electoral test
:06:52. > :06:58.in May, let's see how the ideas go down outside the party. Should
:06:59. > :07:02.written keep its nuclear deterrent? -- Great Britain.
:07:03. > :07:03.Jeremy Corbyn doesn't think so and neither
:07:04. > :07:05.does his new Shadow Defence Secretary, Emily Thornberry,
:07:06. > :07:07.who we'll be talking to in just a minute.
:07:08. > :07:10.But first here's Adam on a multi-billion-pound question.
:07:11. > :07:16.The Imperial War Museum is showing the work of artist Peter Kennard,
:07:17. > :07:19.the creator of some of the starkest images of the campaign
:07:20. > :07:31.This was in 1980, this is when cruise missiles were coming
:07:32. > :07:34.to Britain and the idea was they were going to circulate
:07:35. > :07:37.It's coming back into fashion because some time this year
:07:38. > :07:41.the Government is expected to hold a Parliamentary vote
:07:42. > :07:44.on whether to build a new generation of submarines to carry
:07:45. > :07:51.The issue is dogging Labour, as Jeremy Corbyn made his first
:07:52. > :07:54.speech of the year at the Fabian's campaign group conference.
:07:55. > :07:56.I thank you very much for inviting me here today.
:07:57. > :08:03.Jeremy Corbyn's speech focused on energy, Europe, rail prices...
:08:04. > :08:05.no mention of Trident, which he has campaigned
:08:06. > :08:12.The issue is - not all of his MPs agree with him.
:08:13. > :08:14.My view at the moment is that the case in favour
:08:15. > :08:17.of retaining is stronger than the case against,
:08:18. > :08:21.but I think it's important we review this and look at all the options.
:08:22. > :08:23.I'm in favour of keeping our nuclear deterrent.
:08:24. > :08:25.I think it's important for keeping our country safe.
:08:26. > :08:27.It's Labour Party policy, I hope it will stay that way.
:08:28. > :08:30.Have you had an argument with Jeremy about it yet?
:08:31. > :08:33.Definitely arguing with Jeremy this week, the boss of the GMB union,
:08:34. > :08:36.who says building new subs will safeguard thousands of jobs
:08:37. > :08:41.in places like Barrow, where they're built.
:08:42. > :08:44.If anybody thinks that unions like the GMB are going to go quietly
:08:45. > :08:48.into the night while tens of thousands of our members' jobs
:08:49. > :08:50.are literally swaneed away by rhetoric, then they have
:08:51. > :08:58.Meet the woman who's got to reconcile the two tribes,
:08:59. > :09:01.the Shadow Defence Secretary, Emily Thornberry, a critic
:09:02. > :09:05.of Trident who's doing the party's defence review.
:09:06. > :09:10.But it's turning into a row about how Labour makes policy.
:09:11. > :09:13.On one side, the people who feel the decision should be made by
:09:14. > :09:20.We have a national policy forum, we have a process where the papers
:09:21. > :09:23.go to our conference and are voted on.
:09:24. > :09:28.They involve trade unionists, they involve affiliated
:09:29. > :09:35.John Landsman, who campaigns for a bigger role for party
:09:36. > :09:37.activists and founded the Corbynite group Momentum,
:09:38. > :09:44.I'm not convinced the Government has to have a vote at all,
:09:45. > :09:48.but if it decides to have a vote we obviously need to have taken some
:09:49. > :09:50.soundings among party members and affiliates about what they think
:09:51. > :09:54.So, Labour Party policy on Trident could change by the summer?
:09:55. > :09:57.We will have had some process to consider our policy
:09:58. > :10:02.before the summer, yes, obviously, we have to.
:10:03. > :10:06.So Labour Party policy, when it comes to a vote,
:10:07. > :10:11.by the summer could be voting against the renewal of Trident?
:10:12. > :10:16.Look, I know that you're trying to get me to say very briefly,
:10:17. > :10:20.you know, something very quick about how policy is made
:10:21. > :10:24.in our party, the trouble is it's quite a complex process.
:10:25. > :10:26.Policy is ultimately decided by party conference
:10:27. > :10:29.in Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party but if we have to take quicker
:10:30. > :10:40.decisions, we have to do it by other methods.
:10:41. > :10:43.That might drive some Labour people into meltdown.
:10:44. > :10:45.It could be war, not just over whether Labour supports the renewal
:10:46. > :10:53.of Trident, but also who gets to make the decision.
:10:54. > :10:56.And with me now, the Shadow Defence Secretary, Emily Thornberry.
:10:57. > :11:08.Welcome. Did you drop Ken Livingstone from the defence review?
:11:09. > :11:13.No, it was going to be my review and when I spoke to Jeremy about it I
:11:14. > :11:16.said it was an honour to take an extraordinary job, to be able to
:11:17. > :11:21.shadow a department where people are prepared to put their lives on the
:11:22. > :11:26.line. Was he part of the defence review already? I said I would lead
:11:27. > :11:31.the review and it will be my review, and it will feed into international
:11:32. > :11:41.policy commission, co-chaired by Ken Livingstone, which will feed into
:11:42. > :11:43.the national policy forum which will then feed into party conference. Mr
:11:44. > :11:46.Livingstone said on defence matters he had lunch with you and you agree
:11:47. > :11:51.on everything on the defence side and so voluntarily stepped aside, is
:11:52. > :11:56.that true? I am a big fan of Ken Livingstone, that is not a secret, I
:11:57. > :12:01.am also against Trident. I come in as a sceptic and also with the
:12:02. > :12:05.ambition to listen to what people say, to be not afraid to ask
:12:06. > :12:13.difficult questions and to come to a view on policy on the basis of
:12:14. > :12:16.evidence. Did he step aside because you broadly agreed on defence
:12:17. > :12:20.matters? Jeremy Corbyn put me in charge of the review and that is
:12:21. > :12:26.what happened. Did Mr Livingstone step aside as he said? He is chair
:12:27. > :12:31.of the commission I will be feeding my review into. I understand. Do you
:12:32. > :12:36.agree on everything when it comes to defence? I agree with a lot Ken
:12:37. > :12:41.Livingstone says but I do not agree we should pull out of Nato and I
:12:42. > :12:45.will not review this on the basis of us changing any international
:12:46. > :12:50.agreements or organisations we are signed up to. The review will take
:12:51. > :12:55.place within the context of our continued membership of Nato? That
:12:56. > :13:01.is right. On Trident? Ken Livingstone is against renewing
:13:02. > :13:05.Trident. That has been your position. I think the days of
:13:06. > :13:11.unilateral, multilateral, all of this sort of thing is from the
:13:12. > :13:14.1980s. We should look at what are the 21st-century threats to Britain
:13:15. > :13:18.and how should we best address them? It seems that is the best way to do
:13:19. > :13:24.it, look at the threats and what is the best way of addressing that.
:13:25. > :13:31.What I am more than anything is a moderniser. You voted against
:13:32. > :13:36.renewal of Trident in 2007. Do you know what, in the 80s, I was in
:13:37. > :13:41.favour of Trident because there were two macro sides, life was different,
:13:42. > :13:46.but life has moved on since 2007. Certainly since the 1980s, and I
:13:47. > :13:50.think the time has come for us to have a debate about what the
:13:51. > :13:56.21st-century threats are, which includes whether or not it is the
:13:57. > :14:00.appropriate response. What would change your mind? What could you be
:14:01. > :14:07.told about Trident that would make you think we should keep it? Good
:14:08. > :14:14.try. I have had this job a couple of days and want to go into it with an
:14:15. > :14:18.open mind and look at evidence. You are against Trident? I am in favour
:14:19. > :14:23.of making policy on the basis of evidence put before me and I have
:14:24. > :14:26.had a large number of invitations to talk to people and pick their
:14:27. > :14:34.brains. I want to be able to do that and bring the party with me. Are you
:14:35. > :14:41.against drone strikes? No, I think in the future the role of drones is
:14:42. > :14:49.likely to increase, under the sea and for air strikes. When you were
:14:50. > :14:52.shadow Attorney General, did you question the legality under
:14:53. > :14:56.international law? This is quite difficult, because the advice I gave
:14:57. > :15:05.to the leaders... You have got that wrong. I was asking a question.
:15:06. > :15:12.Have you questioned their legality or not? There is a difference
:15:13. > :15:16.between their use and bare existence so therefore... I'm so sorry but
:15:17. > :15:21.it's legally privileged and I cannot talk about advice I gave to the
:15:22. > :15:29.leader. All right but you can talk to the electorate. Would you support
:15:30. > :15:32.the use of drone strikes? I would support the use of whatever means
:15:33. > :15:38.are necessary to keep the British people safe. Including drone
:15:39. > :15:44.strikes? Yes, within the confines of the law. Do you have an end date
:15:45. > :15:50.when you think you have got to have the review done by? No, I don't want
:15:51. > :15:55.the strategic review to be anything like the Tories' which was very
:15:56. > :16:00.short. They opened a website and only allowed people to put 200 words
:16:01. > :16:07.in and in my view didn't look at it properly so it will take as long as
:16:08. > :16:11.it takes. I have a lot to look at. I understand, we have a lot of ground
:16:12. > :16:16.to cover and we don't have a lot of time this morning. In the meantime
:16:17. > :16:20.it's almost certain there will be a major vote on Trident, which begins
:16:21. > :16:26.the real spending on the renewal some time in the spring. What will
:16:27. > :16:31.happen to Labour? Will you be whipped to vote in favour of current
:16:32. > :16:40.party policy, which is pro-Trident? Will you be encouraging to -- people
:16:41. > :16:45.to vote against it? The first question is, are they going to have
:16:46. > :16:50.a vote, are they going to have a vote in the spring, and what will
:16:51. > :16:58.the vote be? Will we have the Treasury and the MoD agreeing? If
:16:59. > :17:03.there is a main gate proposal, comes forward to the Commons, how will you
:17:04. > :17:07.vote? The rumour is they are not going to have anything more than
:17:08. > :17:11.another vote in principle on whether or not we should renew Trident.
:17:12. > :17:16.Pro-Trident people should be angry about that because we had a vote
:17:17. > :17:21.about that in 2007, what have they been doing all this time? Labour
:17:22. > :17:25.policy is to have a continual artsy deterrent but to have a review. We
:17:26. > :17:36.are in the process of having a review, we need to look at when the
:17:37. > :17:39.vote is, what it is about, then I will have a discussion with Jeremy
:17:40. > :17:41.and the Chief Whip and did -- decision will be made. Jeremy has
:17:42. > :17:45.said he wants macro to accommodate differences in views and I have said
:17:46. > :17:51.my review has got to be done in an atmosphere of trust and respect. So
:17:52. > :17:55.it will be a free vote. What do you say to those who say when it comes
:17:56. > :18:01.to the Trident part of the defence review that it is a sham, that you
:18:02. > :18:06.have replaced Maria Eagle who was pro-Trident. Your leader is a
:18:07. > :18:10.lifelong unilateral disarmament. The party grass roots is increasingly
:18:11. > :18:16.hostile to Trident, so the chances of this recommending anything other
:18:17. > :18:20.than don't renew Trident is pretty impossible. I will begin this review
:18:21. > :18:27.by looking at the threat to Britain because my overriding responsibility
:18:28. > :18:33.is to make sure it is in line with what keeps Britain safe. We will
:18:34. > :18:37.take it as the evidence takes us. That is how we will approach it.
:18:38. > :18:41.Jeremy has already said, he said in the last few days that it may be
:18:42. > :18:46.this won't be a binary decision, things are not must rarely black and
:18:47. > :18:51.white any more, we are not going to the 1980s. What do you make of this
:18:52. > :18:56.idea that he floated on the Andrew Marr Show this morning that we could
:18:57. > :19:00.maybe renew Trident but not put warheads on the missiles? The
:19:01. > :19:07.Japanese option, that is certainly one thing that needs to be looked
:19:08. > :19:11.at. What would be the point? I'm not saying this is what we are going to
:19:12. > :19:15.do, but the way that it works is that the Japanese have got the
:19:16. > :19:24.capability to build a nuclear bomb if they need to, but you can then
:19:25. > :19:29.use them in various delivery forms. That's a possibility, it is an
:19:30. > :19:36.option. So you put the eventual warheads onto Trident submarines?
:19:37. > :19:41.Trident missiles? I appreciate that you want me to speculate and I
:19:42. > :19:49.understand that. Your leader spoke about it this morning. I have said
:19:50. > :19:53.there are of options. When you file a ballistic missile at a country,
:19:54. > :19:57.every early warning ballistic missile system will assume that is
:19:58. > :20:02.an attack because ballistic missile is only carry nuclear weapons so we
:20:03. > :20:10.will risk retaliation for something that is not using nuclear weapons,
:20:11. > :20:17.isn't that very dangerous? You are welcome to take part in my review. I
:20:18. > :20:23.am a kind of busy on the day job. Do you think the party membership
:20:24. > :20:26.should determine Trident policy, not just be consulting on it, which I
:20:27. > :20:31.know you'll want to do, but should they determined in the end such
:20:32. > :20:36.important issue? Party conference will decide what our policy is. I
:20:37. > :20:40.would like to have a review that will have party members feeding into
:20:41. > :20:45.it, feeding into their views in a way we have not had before and I
:20:46. > :20:49.will encourage that. You weren't in the end have a vote among party
:20:50. > :20:55.members to determine your policy? Our rules are that party conference
:20:56. > :21:04.decides our policy. Do you think you will have your ducks in a row by the
:21:05. > :21:10.time of this year's party conference? If I can help the
:21:11. > :21:14.national policy Forum by doing an interim report, I will do so. What
:21:15. > :21:17.do you say to the trade union leaders who say you will put
:21:18. > :21:23.thousands of jobs at risk if you don't renew Trident? I say I will
:21:24. > :21:29.listen to what they say and I will look at whether there are other
:21:30. > :21:34.alternatives. I understand, and I fully respect the concerns that have
:21:35. > :21:39.been raised so we need to look at whether there are solutions to that.
:21:40. > :21:43.You have taken substantial donations from a law firm that support clients
:21:44. > :21:50.that took the British Army to court on what turned out to be deliberate
:21:51. > :21:54.and miscalculated lies, holy and entirely without merit, where the
:21:55. > :22:05.accusations against the army. Should you return that? What happened was
:22:06. > :22:08.that Lee Day seconded people to my office because when your shadow
:22:09. > :22:19.Attorney General you don't have any resources at all. You didn't get
:22:20. > :22:22.?14,500 in donations? No, so I got very good bright lawyers and I have
:22:23. > :22:28.returned all of them and they were very good and they helped us be a
:22:29. > :22:33.good opposition. So there is no money to return? There is no money
:22:34. > :22:37.to return and it was a pleasure to have them in my office, they were
:22:38. > :22:41.very helpful to the Labour Party and interned to the country. We were
:22:42. > :22:48.summarising legislation, helping with clauses, giving advice to the
:22:49. > :22:59.leaders' office. Unfortunately the Government will now even cut the
:23:00. > :23:03.money. Will you come back when your review is complete? Any time. We
:23:04. > :23:05.will hold you to that. Now to the European Union
:23:06. > :23:08.and Britain's membership of it. George Osborne appeared
:23:09. > :23:09.quietly confident this week about the Government's chances
:23:10. > :23:12.of impressing voters with the deal it gets from Brussels,
:23:13. > :23:14.and even the European President, Jean-Claude Junker, appeared more
:23:15. > :23:16.upbeat about the prospects Not good news for
:23:17. > :23:19.those who want out? But they'll be buoyed by one poll
:23:20. > :23:23.this morning that puts the "out" This morning there's news of another
:23:24. > :23:27.group on the pro-EU campaign trail. The question may be fairly simple
:23:28. > :23:37.but there are rather a lot of different campaigns
:23:38. > :23:39.trying to bend our ears. On the side of those
:23:40. > :23:42.who want us out of the EU, there's the Vote Leave campaign
:23:43. > :23:48.headed by Dominic Cummings and Matthew Elliott,
:23:49. > :23:49.who ran the successful They're also linked
:23:50. > :23:53.to Business For Britain, which has the support of a number
:23:54. > :23:57.of leading business figures, and to the groups Labour Leave
:23:58. > :24:00.and Conservatives For Britain, Also campaigning for Brexit
:24:01. > :24:05.is Leave.EU, which has links to Ukip and is funded by the Ukip donor
:24:06. > :24:10.Arron Banks. They're vying with the Vote Leave
:24:11. > :24:12.campaign to be the officially And to top it all, there is now Go,
:24:13. > :24:26.a new grass-roots group made up of MPs including Kate Hoey
:24:27. > :24:29.and David Davis which is designed to coordinate campaigning
:24:30. > :24:30.on the ground. On the other side, the main group
:24:31. > :24:33.is the Britain Stronger In Europe, headed by the former Marks
:24:34. > :24:36.Spencer's boss Sir Stuart Rose. Then there's Business
:24:37. > :24:39.For New Europe, led by Roland Rudd, Labour Yes, led by Alan Johnson,
:24:40. > :24:42.and now there's a new group set up by the Tory MP Nick Herbert,
:24:43. > :24:44.called Conservatives Even though some of the members
:24:45. > :24:51.are Eurosceptics, they say they will support David Cameron's
:24:52. > :24:54.renegotiation and will vote to remain inside the EU
:24:55. > :24:57.if he's successful. Expect a few leaflets
:24:58. > :25:00.through your door in the next And with us now is the Ukip
:25:01. > :25:18.leader, Nigel Farage. With even staunch Eurosceptic MPs
:25:19. > :25:24.like Nick Herbert campaigning to stay in, don't you worry the tide of
:25:25. > :25:28.opinion is moving away from you and tour was David Cameron? I would
:25:29. > :25:37.never regard Nick Herbert as a staunch Eurosceptic. He campaigned
:25:38. > :25:47.to keep the pound, he was paid to do it. He has never once advocated
:25:48. > :25:52.Britain should leave the EU so he is doing a job bolstering the Prime
:25:53. > :25:56.Minister. There was lots of speculation, will Boris Johnson back
:25:57. > :26:05.the outcome pain? What do you think? I don't know. Not Michael Gove, we
:26:06. > :26:10.know now. I suspect lots of senior politicians will put their careers
:26:11. > :26:16.before their conscience and back the Prime Minister. I am beginning to
:26:17. > :26:21.see this referendum as the people versus the politicians, it might not
:26:22. > :26:26.matter. Except your own side continues to be riven by
:26:27. > :26:29.factionalism. We have vote to leave, Leave.EU, and they seem to be
:26:30. > :26:36.spending more time attacking each other than the common enemy. You
:26:37. > :26:40.have these groups vying to be the official bumbler group. I've been
:26:41. > :26:43.trying to support both of the organisations, though I have to say
:26:44. > :26:52.when I listen to Dominic Cummings on Friday... Who is on Vote Leave I
:26:53. > :26:56.believe. Yes, and suddenly they are talking about a two referendum
:26:57. > :27:05.strategy which I don't like the look of one little bit. Why not? The
:27:06. > :27:11.argue was, we can vote to come out and then Europe will panic and make
:27:12. > :27:15.us an offer which will be effectively associated membership
:27:16. > :27:20.and we could vote on that. We effectively have that now, we had
:27:21. > :27:22.that since the euro was created. Dan Harmon has criticised every
:27:23. > :27:32.government that has lost a referendum. After the interview I
:27:33. > :27:40.saw the other day I wasn't sure. There is now a third group called
:27:41. > :27:47.Go. It does lend itself to jokes about the Judaean people's struggle.
:27:48. > :27:52.The point about Go is that it is there to break the deadlock, and
:27:53. > :27:56.next Saturday there will be Conservatives, Labour, Ukip and DUP
:27:57. > :28:01.sharing a public platform. There's a big auditorium with 2000 people
:28:02. > :28:08.coming and we will start the ground campaign in earnest. Should Vote
:28:09. > :28:14.Leave and Leave.EU amalgamate? Of course. Leave.EU are brilliant at
:28:15. > :28:18.mass-marketing. Vote Leave are Westminster -based group of people
:28:19. > :28:22.with some fantastic links to the business community, some great
:28:23. > :28:26.academic back-up. They would be complimentary, not contradictory.
:28:27. > :28:31.Meanwhile, as you still struggle to get a united front, if I can put it
:28:32. > :28:39.like that, perhaps the United front of the Judaean people's struggle...
:28:40. > :28:47.I would suggest from the better together project, which proved so
:28:48. > :29:05.effective in the Scottish referendum, shouldn't you fear
:29:06. > :29:13.Project Fear? Even Project Fear has a problem because a Scottish
:29:14. > :29:18.minister said all of the big businesses would leave Britain, but
:29:19. > :29:24.we would maintain our manufacturing bases. Even though if we stay in
:29:25. > :29:27.there will be some uncertainty as the euro zone becomes more united
:29:28. > :29:33.and we are likely to be part of that, so you cannot be sure of the
:29:34. > :29:38.future, no one on your side can tell us if we come out what will our
:29:39. > :29:42.status beach? What will our relationship be? Because you have
:29:43. > :29:46.lots of differences. We have a whole range of options. There are
:29:47. > :29:50.countries all over the world with different relationships, the Swiss
:29:51. > :29:54.have bilateral relationships the Norwegians have a relationship with
:29:55. > :29:59.the economic area. We are the biggest trading partner the has in
:30:00. > :30:03.the world, trading at a vast trading deficit. We want a British deal
:30:04. > :30:08.based on trade, cooperation and nothing more.
:30:09. > :30:15.There is still the uncertainty as to whether you can deliver. Every
:30:16. > :30:20.German car manufacturer, every producer, will insist we do that
:30:21. > :30:27.deal as quickly as possible. You hold that but it is uncertain. Under
:30:28. > :30:33.the terms of the treaties, on day one nothing would change, we would
:30:34. > :30:37.have access to markets during the time we renegotiate the British
:30:38. > :30:43.deal. Do you feel the ground moving on to you as the forces of the
:30:44. > :30:47.British state, Alex Salmond felt the same with the Scottish referendum,
:30:48. > :30:52.it is a formidable force and you are up against it? In terms of our
:30:53. > :30:58.political class, yes, I think the chances of many people currently in
:30:59. > :31:02.senior positions in politics, perhaps they diminish, inevitably,
:31:03. > :31:06.but you cannot take away from ordinary folk scene such as Cologne
:31:07. > :31:11.and saying to themselves, in three years, all of these people will have
:31:12. > :31:15.EU passports and be able to come to Britain. This campaign will be the
:31:16. > :31:18.people against the politicians and the more the politicians clubbed
:31:19. > :31:24.together, perhaps more the people will choose to vote against them. In
:31:25. > :31:27.any possibility of a relationship with the EU out, will almost
:31:28. > :31:31.certainly involve continued free movement and these people may well
:31:32. > :31:35.still be able to come to this country under any deal you reach? We
:31:36. > :31:40.have free trade deals all over the world that don't involve the free
:31:41. > :31:48.movement of people, it is only in Europe we have the free -- pretence
:31:49. > :31:52.that we have to have free movement of people. I want to control our
:31:53. > :31:56.borders and have an Australian style points system where we can judge
:31:57. > :32:01.whether people will make a positive contribution to society and I cannot
:32:02. > :32:09.do that as a member of the EU. You have not had the best of times,
:32:10. > :32:16.since the election. It culminated in what you designated a car breakdown
:32:17. > :32:23.as an assassination attempt. Has that undermined, as the most famous
:32:24. > :32:26.person on the outcome paying, has it undermined your credibility? I do
:32:27. > :32:33.not think it does. To say we have had a tough time, it is interesting,
:32:34. > :32:41.Ukip has been written off by every commentator in Fleet Street but the
:32:42. > :32:46.latest poll had us at 17%. The most important issue, immigration, we are
:32:47. > :32:52.the most trusted party on 29% and we go into this year with the
:32:53. > :32:55.expectation of winning seats in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland
:32:56. > :32:57.and playing a big role in this referendum.
:32:58. > :32:58.Let's talk now to former Conservative Chancellor,
:32:59. > :33:10.Are you in any doubt the Prime Minister is going to be the
:33:11. > :33:18.enthusiastic leader of the campaign to remain in the EU? I think you
:33:19. > :33:22.will, because all the news, although it is not really news, a lot of it
:33:23. > :33:25.is rumoured, is he will come back with a reasonable deal. He has
:33:26. > :33:29.already got the things he first talked about in the bag when he
:33:30. > :33:35.first announced he was going to have a referendum and seek reforms. He
:33:36. > :33:38.has added one or two more. Nobody knows the final deal but they are
:33:39. > :33:44.close to getting one and the debate is getting more serious and I think
:33:45. > :33:49.David will advocate staying in. He will put it, a reformed European
:33:50. > :33:55.union. Given this was the predictable outcome, is the
:33:56. > :34:03.referendum process, promoted by David Cameron, worth the candle? We
:34:04. > :34:08.shall see. You can see now, is it or not? Wait for the outcome, which
:34:09. > :34:13.will determine the effect of the referendum on British politics and
:34:14. > :34:20.the economy. All politicians of my generation did not think a
:34:21. > :34:25.referendum was a good way to run a modern, sophisticated country. You
:34:26. > :34:31.wish she had not done it? I do not think anybody thinks... I was in
:34:32. > :34:34.favour of calling a referendum. Margaret Thatcher denounced
:34:35. > :34:40.referendums in stronger terms than I have and they are a gamble and I do
:34:41. > :34:44.not think the Scottish one has resolved the Scottish independence
:34:45. > :34:48.issue. Let me come on to Scotland. It seems clear that the in campaign
:34:49. > :35:03.will draw heavily on the better together project. We have been
:35:04. > :35:07.briefed on fear of Russian aggression. Who will be happy if
:35:08. > :35:13.they leave? President Putin will be happy. It will put the positive case
:35:14. > :35:17.of Britain in Europe? I shall try to put the positive case, I hope Damian
:35:18. > :35:21.Greene will put the positive case. We are in the EU because we think it
:35:22. > :35:28.strengthens our voice in the modern world and it is good for the economy
:35:29. > :35:35.and we think that this is the right place, in what is a complicated
:35:36. > :35:41.world, with nations interdependent. We will be a modern and more modern
:35:42. > :35:47.and more successful if we are in. The campaign exaggerates things.
:35:48. > :35:52.Nigel Farage is a parody of a right-wing nationalists. People are
:35:53. > :35:56.inclined to say there will be calamity if we stay in or calamity
:35:57. > :36:01.if we leave. They will be huge uncertainty if we leave. I believe
:36:02. > :36:09.that my children and grandchildren will discover that we would be
:36:10. > :36:14.losing political influence. We know you want to stay in. If we vote to
:36:15. > :36:20.remain, should membership of the euro come back onto the agenda? I do
:36:21. > :36:24.not think it will in my lifetime. The British have decided not to join
:36:25. > :36:30.the euro. The euro has to be reformed. The eurozone still has not
:36:31. > :36:36.sorted out its crisis. Should it come back onto the British agenda? I
:36:37. > :36:40.am not going to forecast the future when we are fighting this
:36:41. > :36:47.referendum. I was asking for an opinion. I believe that if you have
:36:48. > :36:52.the single market, not a trade deal, a single market, usually you have a
:36:53. > :36:56.single means of exchange, but they made a mess of the euro and did not
:36:57. > :37:02.run it properly. I would not join at the moment. You don't rule it out?
:37:03. > :37:07.Maybe one day the next generation of politicians find we do want to have
:37:08. > :37:12.the same currency, but I cannot tell. You are pro-European, you know
:37:13. > :37:19.its failings. You can be critical of it. Do you worry, the future, even
:37:20. > :37:24.if we stay in, the future of the EU will be on what takes place inside
:37:25. > :37:28.the eurozone and we will be on the periphery, increasingly a country
:37:29. > :37:33.club member, does it worry you? It worried me when we started. With
:37:34. > :37:36.great respect you are talking about one of the most serious issues,
:37:37. > :37:43.there was an issue that needed to be addressed. We are almost there, what
:37:44. > :37:47.we did not want is the decision of the British and some others, who
:37:48. > :37:52.will not join in the foreseeable future, not to join the single
:37:53. > :37:56.currency, that it would make a second-class citizens and the
:37:57. > :37:59.eurozone group should not decide things that adversely affected us.
:38:00. > :38:04.We negotiated that before the referendum came up. I think George
:38:05. > :38:09.is almost there. My understanding is, but I am not directly involved.
:38:10. > :38:17.I think that is the most important point and it will not feature in
:38:18. > :38:24.this campaign. Deregulation, and other important things, reforms even
:38:25. > :38:28.a pro-European like me wanted. Thank you for your short interview and we
:38:29. > :38:31.will come back to you as the debate and referendum progresses.
:38:32. > :38:33.It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:38:34. > :38:35.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now
:38:36. > :39:32.After two the main English exam board announced they will no longer
:39:33. > :39:38.offer GCSE courses here in Northern Ireland. He claims what he called
:39:39. > :39:42.the folly of the ministers in flexibility could put schools and
:39:43. > :39:45.pupils at a disadvantage. The Education Minister John O'Dowd is
:39:46. > :39:50.with me now. Thank you for joining us. You decided not to change the
:39:51. > :39:54.grading system back in November. And now two of the biggest exam boards
:39:55. > :39:59.are pulling out. You were once that would happen. Head teachers are not
:40:00. > :40:01.heavy. Some of the unions are not happy.
:40:02. > :40:05.It looks like you got this wrong. Some headteachers were not happy.
:40:06. > :40:10.Some teachers are not happy. There are a mixed views around the trade
:40:11. > :40:15.unions. It is worth pointing out what is known as the English exams
:40:16. > :40:18.body is irrelevant. In this regard. They are following changes made in
:40:19. > :40:22.the Department for Education, England, to change their curriculum
:40:23. > :40:26.in England to upgrade or change their examination system in England
:40:27. > :40:31.so English are following those changes, changes to suit the English
:40:32. > :40:42.education system. I consulted on this matter. I believe that the
:40:43. > :40:45.changes are staying. No one will be disadvantaged as a result of staying
:40:46. > :40:51.with the system we currently have. Except that it makes it more
:40:52. > :40:57.difficult for our schoolchildren to transfer those grades across to the
:40:58. > :41:01.UK system. It is a confusing system because we are staying as we are and
:41:02. > :41:05.it is changing across the water. There was no evidence to support
:41:06. > :41:08.that. What is the UK system? Scotland has its own examination is
:41:09. > :41:14.body so therefore Scottish tutors that Scottish exams. England now
:41:15. > :41:22.sits a different type of GCSE but GCSEs all the same. Wales have
:41:23. > :41:27.followed staying with a start. So what is the UK system? We're dealing
:41:28. > :41:32.now with changes that a devolved level. I can assure your viewers
:41:33. > :41:36.that I've made changes only after careful consideration and
:41:37. > :41:39.consultation and at each have ensure that our examinations will remain
:41:40. > :41:43.and portable. The concern that some people have is
:41:44. > :41:48.that the Northern Ireland exams body will now have a monopoly in the
:41:49. > :41:52.system currently providing 75% of GCSEs but the point is that 25% are
:41:53. > :41:56.provided by these other bodies. There will be a monopoly. If it
:41:57. > :41:59.doesn't do a particular course then it is going to be virtually
:42:00. > :42:03.impossible for schools to teach that in future.
:42:04. > :42:10.I can assure schools that we will ensure that whatever courses are not
:42:11. > :42:14.available currently, are to the Welsh examination body. We will
:42:15. > :42:18.allow a period of transition for exams were there is no equivalent
:42:19. > :42:21.currently on our curriculum and I will be setting out advice and
:42:22. > :42:25.information to schools in the week ahead to ensure they have full
:42:26. > :42:28.information and will be a translation period for a small
:42:29. > :42:31.number of exams which currently we do not provide.
:42:32. > :42:35.It is confusing. We will have another bet the system sitting side
:42:36. > :42:38.by side with a numerical system. I have been dealing with schools and
:42:39. > :42:42.principles and boards are governments of the last five years
:42:43. > :42:45.and they are not as easily confuse some of the media may suggest they
:42:46. > :42:48.are. Your point for staying with this
:42:49. > :42:52.system is to keep it simple because you do not want to confuse people by
:42:53. > :42:55.bringing in a numerical system. Now you are telling you that everyone is
:42:56. > :42:58.big enough and able enough to understand what could be at a
:42:59. > :43:01.confusing system. I'm talking about a very small
:43:02. > :43:09.minority of subjects, perhaps in terms of some of the minority
:43:10. > :43:16.languages. There was a very small range of subjects which may not be
:43:17. > :43:20.provided immediately by us. It is going to be a bureaucratic
:43:21. > :43:27.nightmare to sort this one out. It will not. It is not expensive. It is
:43:28. > :43:32.not a bureaucratic nightmare. Exam boards including those referred to
:43:33. > :43:36.as English exam boards over the next three years were changing the
:43:37. > :43:40.specifications of their exams. We're changing the content of exams.
:43:41. > :43:45.Schools were going through a period of change of the next three years
:43:46. > :43:49.regardless of my decision. Examination bodies on a regular
:43:50. > :43:54.basis will change content to ensure their exams are up to date and
:43:55. > :43:58.robust. So programmes of change such as this, schools have went through
:43:59. > :44:03.in the past. Peter where, who chairs the education committee, has called
:44:04. > :44:06.on you to show common sense and make the necessary changes to help rescue
:44:07. > :44:09.the situation. Why are you impervious to those
:44:10. > :44:14.things that come from some of your political opponents and others?
:44:15. > :44:18.Colourful language news we backed up. If Peter has evidence as to why
:44:19. > :44:21.we should simply follow what is happening in the Department for
:44:22. > :44:25.Education in England then he needs to produce it. I am concerned that
:44:26. > :44:28.some are suggesting simply follow the changes in the Department for
:44:29. > :44:32.Education in England because that is the way it has always happen.
:44:33. > :44:34.You had you don't think the Department for England is thought
:44:35. > :44:37.this through? They can their system if they
:44:38. > :44:42.choose. I made changes and stayed with certain aspects of GCSEs in our
:44:43. > :44:46.own system after cable consideration, after consultation
:44:47. > :44:50.and ensuring that are exam system is robust and portable. Our GCSEs are
:44:51. > :44:55.as worthwhile as any other part of England or Wales.
:44:56. > :45:00.Are you in fact privately quite relaxed that saying the relaxing the
:45:01. > :45:04.departure of the Bush boards from the stage?
:45:05. > :45:10.No. The geographical location of what is known as the English wadding
:45:11. > :45:14.borrowed these is immaterial. They could be located anywhere, the fact
:45:15. > :45:17.of the matter is that for commercial reasons, they have decided to leave
:45:18. > :45:21.our system because it no longer commercially suits them. That is
:45:22. > :45:24.regrettable but it is not a disaster. They have not got us on
:45:25. > :45:28.the hop and plans are in place. We will leave it there.
:45:29. > :45:38.Thank you very much for joining us. Let's take a look at the political
:45:39. > :45:41.week in 60 seconds. It was musical ministerial chairs at
:45:42. > :45:45.Stormont this week as Peter Robinson stepped aside.
:45:46. > :45:50.I hear Barry resigned the office of First Minister.
:45:51. > :45:53.To make way for Arlene Foster who chaired an executive meeting with
:45:54. > :45:58.ministers anxious to find solutions to the flooding problems.
:45:59. > :46:01.I suggest that we should extend the hardship payments to nondomestic
:46:02. > :46:04.properties. Martin McGuinness played the name
:46:05. > :46:08.game. And is wondering what is coming
:46:09. > :46:11.next. The First Minister says people have other concerns.
:46:12. > :46:14.I don't think anybody is focused on what my relationship is with Martin
:46:15. > :46:21.McGuinness. I think of August on what I'm doing people for Northern
:46:22. > :46:27.Ireland. Join with me in helping that history
:46:28. > :46:32.reflects that was the peak of the DUP's electoral successes.
:46:33. > :46:44.The speaker had the last word. Wishful thinking.
:46:45. > :46:48.Peter Robinson going out on a big laugh there. Let's hear the thoughts
:46:49. > :46:52.of my guests, Patricia MacBride and Alex Kane. Let's talk about Arlene
:46:53. > :46:57.Foster. She's had almost one week on the job of First Minister. Early
:46:58. > :47:00.days obviously but how would you rate her performance so far?
:47:01. > :47:05.It is worth bearing in mind she is entirely different to Ian Paisley
:47:06. > :47:09.and Peter Robinson. I think that will help the DUP and make it easier
:47:10. > :47:13.on the election campaign against the Ulster Unionists. But how big
:47:14. > :47:18.problem remains the same problem that Paisley and Robinson had. It is
:47:19. > :47:23.turning the better let -- turning the rhetoric into hard reality. They
:47:24. > :47:27.failed to do that. Her opening speech and McGuinness's response to
:47:28. > :47:31.that was we will work together if the people want us to work together.
:47:32. > :47:35.We are but one to tetchy moment since then. That is what everyone is
:47:36. > :47:38.now looking for. Can she make the difference that Robinson and Paisley
:47:39. > :47:41.could not? It is interesting because never you
:47:42. > :47:44.speak to her, she wants to play down the importance of that relationship
:47:45. > :47:48.with Martin McGuinness at her success as First Minister will have
:47:49. > :47:52.an off a lot to do with the success of that relationship.
:47:53. > :47:55.That is a fact. The success of the relationship between the two parties
:47:56. > :47:58.in terms of managing Government needs to be continued but the
:47:59. > :48:03.dynamic of the relationship will change. In her interviews this week
:48:04. > :48:12.she mentioned on a number of occasions the fact that she has
:48:13. > :48:18.infinite patience and those traits that she will need. The other thing
:48:19. > :48:22.about an Irish mother, as patient as she may be, she will also be fierce
:48:23. > :48:26.when her patience is tried so it will be interesting to see who or
:48:27. > :48:30.what drives her patience and how she reacts to it.
:48:31. > :48:36.Do you think she can pick our way through the difficult territory that
:48:37. > :48:44.is the decade I think it is a slightly stupid
:48:45. > :48:50.response. The willingness to say she will talk about it. She has to put
:48:51. > :48:52.good election results. If she does not nothing else matters.
:48:53. > :48:59.We will talk to you later. Thanks very much indeed.
:49:00. > :49:06.It is meant to be a flagship project to tackle unemployment. Now there is
:49:07. > :49:13.confusion this week over which department is going to take charge
:49:14. > :49:20.of it. You are both welcome to the programme. This programme is a
:49:21. > :49:23.programme for Government commitment and you were a special adviser at
:49:24. > :49:26.the time it was set up. You are one of its biggest champions. What has
:49:27. > :49:30.gone wrong? I think there has been a lot of
:49:31. > :49:35.negativity and criticism will stop I don't know if that is actually fair.
:49:36. > :49:38.There is a lot of good news to be told about the social investment
:49:39. > :49:41.fund programme. It has taken longer. The first thing to be clear about is
:49:42. > :49:44.that it has taken longer than what politicians would have hoped for and
:49:45. > :49:48.the First Minister would have hoped for but there is a good news story
:49:49. > :49:53.in there. Whenever we were developing the fund we looked to
:49:54. > :49:56.other countries for the types of programmes that can bring about
:49:57. > :49:59.social change and one of the big things coming across was around
:50:00. > :50:04.using programmes that were entirely community led and for the first time
:50:05. > :50:07.it has not been done in Scotland or Ireland or England, Northern Ireland
:50:08. > :50:11.is leading the way with this innovative programme which is
:50:12. > :50:15.entirely community led. The problems identified with the community and
:50:16. > :50:17.solutions are identified by the community.
:50:18. > :50:21.It is fine in theory but the reality is very different. This is an ?80
:50:22. > :50:28.million bun. It is all supposed to have been spent by now but you have
:50:29. > :50:31.spent only 4 million. By the end of March you will spend 7 million so in
:50:32. > :50:33.five years you will have spent less than 10% of what you should have
:50:34. > :50:39.spent. That headline doesn't reveal the
:50:40. > :50:42.true picture. ?60 million has been committed. What we need to
:50:43. > :50:46.understand dot-mac it is a contractual commitment. At least
:50:47. > :50:53.have the programme, runs over two to three years so at least have the
:50:54. > :50:55.programme is funded. In my own constituency, employability south,
:50:56. > :50:59.that is not a one-year programme. We don't want all that money spent
:51:00. > :51:05.Ayrshire so it is a three-year programme. But that money is cool
:51:06. > :51:08.fractionally committed. That is what community organisations want and
:51:09. > :51:11.people on the ground want. It should've been spent on three
:51:12. > :51:15.years up to now. It should not be starting to be spent at this point.
:51:16. > :51:17.That is the whole thing. We talked to community workers on the ground
:51:18. > :51:20.and they are pretty disenchanted with the whole system and feel like
:51:21. > :51:24.they have been forced through hoops time and time again and the money is
:51:25. > :51:28.in filtering through to them. It is an ambitious project and I
:51:29. > :51:31.worked week on week talking to community organisations and talking
:51:32. > :51:34.to people on the ground and I understand their frustration.
:51:35. > :51:37.Politicians are being frustrated about the length of time it takes
:51:38. > :51:40.but unfortunately there are a number of mechanisms that we need to go
:51:41. > :51:43.through. There were 69 projects that came forward in terms of social
:51:44. > :51:50.investment fund, and of those the writ huge clusters. One single
:51:51. > :51:53.project have 13 different capital elements to that. I know you
:51:54. > :51:56.yourself in terms of your charitable work have worked on some of those
:51:57. > :52:00.big introduction cabinet projects and it takes a lot of time put up
:52:01. > :52:04.how to go through design briefs, procurement, economists, it is very
:52:05. > :52:08.challenging. But what I do know is it will be worth it at the end. What
:52:09. > :52:11.communities will see is that those projects have fidelity to the
:52:12. > :52:14.original concept that they came up with several years ago but they will
:52:15. > :52:17.see that working and because of those safeguards, cause of the work
:52:18. > :52:21.we are in and the good design of those projects I know they will
:52:22. > :52:24.bring about tangible benefits on the ground reached outcomes we
:52:25. > :52:30.originally wanted. Chris, do you accept that is the
:52:31. > :52:33.case? OK, delivery has been badly. It actually broadly speaking, the
:52:34. > :52:37.right things are being done and they are going to benefit the correct
:52:38. > :52:42.people on the ground? I think the aims of tackling social
:52:43. > :52:48.deprivation and dereliction in the community are reasonable aims. The
:52:49. > :52:52.administration of the fund has been shambolic. The targets dot-mac the
:52:53. > :52:59.pro-government targets was to spend ?80 million between 2011 and 2015.
:53:00. > :53:04.And they made 2015 and ?1 million had been spent. That raises serious
:53:05. > :53:07.questions at a time when families, businesses, public services, are
:53:08. > :53:12.under real pressure. Why that money was not properly utilise other time
:53:13. > :53:15.when the DUP and Sinn Fein have constantly talked about helping the
:53:16. > :53:20.most abominable. Peter Robinson said the really is the main target broke
:53:21. > :53:22.OFMDFM. That raises real questions as to why that has not been
:53:23. > :53:27.achieved. Do you see this as nothing much more
:53:28. > :53:33.than ?80 million experiment? I think it raises serious questions.
:53:34. > :53:36.There have been Gateway reviews that have not been published so it not be
:53:37. > :53:41.to see the full details of what went wrong in order to reflect on that.
:53:42. > :53:47.There been some projects delivered but there have been people waiting
:53:48. > :53:50.to deliver education programmes, childcare programmes, advice
:53:51. > :53:53.centres, all of whom could use that money extremely effectively but they
:53:54. > :53:58.have not had access to it. It is an interesting point that
:53:59. > :54:01.Chris raises, Emma. We spoke to some of those groups that had been
:54:02. > :54:06.bidding for this money over the last few years and they raised for those
:54:07. > :54:09.issues like complaints from funding decisions being influenced by
:54:10. > :54:14.paramilitaries, which they have grave concerns about. Driscoll horse
:54:15. > :54:18.trading. Decisions made based on Sinn Fein and the DUP being kept
:54:19. > :54:22.happy rather than need on the ground. Mystification as to why
:54:23. > :54:24.money wasn't given to the DST when it has an neighbourhood renewal
:54:25. > :54:31.strategy that could deliver this type of project. Judge that there's
:54:32. > :54:36.a fair issue is a fair issues for groups and individuals to raise?
:54:37. > :54:39.Absolutely no truth to the allegations around horse trading or
:54:40. > :54:43.any kind of malignant influence. None at all. And what I would say
:54:44. > :54:46.that we have a really good team of people working on this post just
:54:47. > :54:51.this week we have at the chair of the OFMDFM clinging around very
:54:52. > :54:55.insulting terms. Very good officials and working very hard. They're
:54:56. > :54:59.working with the community. The easy route would have been to fire this
:55:00. > :55:04.into an existing scheme but what we have done dot-mac would we have
:55:05. > :55:09.achieved anything? If we're going to achieve better outcomes need to do
:55:10. > :55:11.things differently. Even if it takes longer it is worth it. Better to
:55:12. > :55:19.have the right project. How's that the case that originally
:55:20. > :55:22.responsibilities were going to be transferred to the project of social
:55:23. > :55:25.response Bertie there was announced by a senior official in your
:55:26. > :55:31.department it was not happening any more? Why such a U-turn on that
:55:32. > :55:36.issue? That comes down to one of the many
:55:37. > :55:41.differences. This is a cross departmental skin. It does not fit
:55:42. > :55:45.into the neat box of one department and that is why OFMDFM was behind it
:55:46. > :55:49.in the first place. It deals with unity services, Chard and education,
:55:50. > :55:58.these are not think that that within one department. This is a very much
:55:59. > :56:02.a central scheme. It is not just in OFMDFM project and I believe it will
:56:03. > :56:05.bring about changes to many more communities will stop what you make
:56:06. > :56:10.but that policy change? My understanding was that the
:56:11. > :56:13.delivery of social investment fund was supposed to be transferred to
:56:14. > :56:17.the new Department of communities, the Department for social relevant
:56:18. > :56:20.with experience in the delivery of the Stauber projects, there are
:56:21. > :56:27.other programmes that have delivered in ways that the social investment
:56:28. > :56:31.fund has not. The Department for employment has delivered 1300 new
:56:32. > :56:36.university places, 40,000 young people into employment, and 4000
:56:37. > :56:39.jobs to the assured skills programme as well. So there are other
:56:40. > :56:45.departments using funds effectively to deliver positive outcomes for
:56:46. > :56:48.people in Northern Ireland. The record on their social investment
:56:49. > :56:52.fund is to be scrutinised. What do you say about what needs to
:56:53. > :56:55.be done so that your confidence can the restored in the confidence of
:56:56. > :56:58.community groups? I know you are involved in one group in particular
:56:59. > :57:01.that is actually bidding for some of this funding so maybe you have a
:57:02. > :57:04.feel of what it's like on the ground and stop what these redundant store
:57:05. > :57:09.confidence? We need to see progress as soon as
:57:10. > :57:12.possible in terms of clear communication to the community
:57:13. > :57:16.groups who are involved in bidding for the fans, and we need to see
:57:17. > :57:19.fund released to people on the ground start using them as
:57:20. > :57:25.effectively as possible. Can that happen? It is happening.
:57:26. > :57:29.Almost 700 people employed through our schemes and since I became
:57:30. > :57:33.junior minister I have announced over ?16 million projects going out.
:57:34. > :57:38.Delivery is ramping up and will be out there on the ground and it is
:57:39. > :57:41.already happening within certain constituencies. I am absolutely
:57:42. > :57:44.confident that in the course of the next few months all of the funding
:57:45. > :57:47.will be committed. Many tens of thousands of people are going to
:57:48. > :57:52.benefit from the scheme and whenever people setback they will say, this
:57:53. > :57:55.was a good idea. The OFMDFM did something different and it was the
:57:56. > :57:56.right thing to do because it is actually change things on the
:57:57. > :58:00.ground. The cottages between it has been a
:58:01. > :58:04.disaster and you clearly don't think there's been a disaster. Therefore
:58:05. > :58:07.the only conclusion I can reach is that your role over optimistic about
:58:08. > :58:11.what you could deliver within the timescale. Do you accept that as a
:58:12. > :58:15.fair criticism? If the scheme are still bidding you can deliver the
:58:16. > :58:18.money quickly to the people are needed you were hopelessly naive
:58:19. > :58:21.about the time it was going to take you to do that.
:58:22. > :58:26.We were overambitious by the done thing that is a bad thing. It will
:58:27. > :58:30.happen, it is happening and I do think it will bring about benefits.
:58:31. > :58:33.I think unfortunately it has clouded the success is within the scheme and
:58:34. > :58:36.innovation within this team but think that these projects are out of
:58:37. > :58:40.the ground people have the time to reflect and saved was a good thing.
:58:41. > :58:42.It is different on what to do it again and I believe other
:58:43. > :58:47.jurisdictions across the UK others will look to this to say, there are
:58:48. > :58:56.some very good principles and here. Wider benefits.
:58:57. > :58:59.Until all of the money is delivered there is a serious credibility issue
:59:00. > :59:03.for the fund and for someone like yourself who has invested so much of
:59:04. > :59:07.your personal time and effort in it. Part of that is the likes of myself
:59:08. > :59:10.going out there and saying to people what this fund is about. People who
:59:11. > :59:13.will be operating the skin will be saying to others about the success
:59:14. > :59:17.of that but the best thing about this will be the people who benefit
:59:18. > :59:19.from it and those people will notice a good thing and those people will
:59:20. > :59:23.talk about is and monster schemes get up and running on the ground and
:59:24. > :59:27.a lot of them are doing that. More will do that this year. All of those
:59:28. > :59:32.tens of thousands of people will be selling this project saying it is as
:59:33. > :59:37.excess and using it as an example moving forward.
:59:38. > :59:42.We need to leave it there. We will continue to keep a close eye in the
:59:43. > :59:46.months ahead. Let's take a final word with Patricia and Alex. Let's
:59:47. > :59:50.talk about the social investment fund. There may have been a few
:59:51. > :59:52.bumps on the road effectively is what MSN. At the end the day the
:59:53. > :59:56.money will be delivered to the people who need it most.
:59:57. > :00:01.The social investment fund was the peace dividend and the dividend
:00:02. > :00:05.double not paid. This was announced in 2010 and a two to 2013 until we
:00:06. > :00:10.had any idea about what schemes would be funded. There was huge
:00:11. > :00:14.delay and that was the result of deciding how we going to fund
:00:15. > :00:18.projects in Unionist areas or Nationalist areas that are most
:00:19. > :00:21.deprived. There is no doubt that there was political disagreement on
:00:22. > :00:25.the types of projects that were going to be funded and the knock-on
:00:26. > :00:29.effect in community and voluntary sector organisations who have bid
:00:30. > :00:32.for the standard was a loss of expertise. Projects tell by the
:00:33. > :00:35.wayside because they were dependent on match funding. And when the
:00:36. > :00:39.social investment did not come through then the other match funding
:00:40. > :00:43.was withdrawn. Abel moved onto other roles. The key thing now is, if the
:00:44. > :00:46.money is going to be committed in the next number of months as Emma
:00:47. > :00:51.has said that it will be, that it is committed in such a way that the
:00:52. > :00:56.expertise is not lost. That those projects can continue to deliver for
:00:57. > :00:58.the benefit of the community but fundamentally, in the evaluation,
:00:59. > :01:05.there needs to be some looks at where it has all gone wrong.
:01:06. > :01:07.Alex, what is your investment and opinion on the success of the
:01:08. > :01:15.scheme? Patricia is right. I've talked to
:01:16. > :01:19.books on -- groups on both side. The funding has not be made available
:01:20. > :01:22.and are no Emma says it is not a matter of horse trading but it is
:01:23. > :01:25.hard to avoid the conclusion that somewhere between the DUP and Shin
:01:26. > :01:28.Bender is disagreement about whether is money should go and I think they
:01:29. > :01:31.need dot-mac we're talking a matter of weeks before an election when it
:01:32. > :01:36.should be actually trumpeting the success of this money, they're still
:01:37. > :01:39.saying, we're not quite sure when. Interesting discussion today. Thank
:01:40. > :06:35.you very much indeed. That is it from all
:06:36. > :06:40.Donald Trump is net damaging for the Scottish economy, but that is not
:06:41. > :06:45.why I am saying he should be considered on the same basis as
:06:46. > :06:52.everybody else. We have banned American shock jocks and MPs, not
:06:53. > :06:58.necessarily on terrorism, Donald Trump is not on any of these things,
:06:59. > :07:03.but making statements, in the words of the formulation, are not
:07:04. > :07:07.conducive to the public interest. What did you get wrong, your
:07:08. > :07:12.assessment of Donald Trump, or the size of an independent Scotland's
:07:13. > :07:18.oil revenue? Eight years ago I would have found it difficult to know that
:07:19. > :07:22.Donald Trump was going to run for president of the US. Most people
:07:23. > :07:27.would have found that an incredible proposition. I was not to know he
:07:28. > :07:31.would make a range of statements that are deeply offensive and deeply
:07:32. > :07:37.not acceptable whether they apply to Mexicans all Muslims. Nor did I
:07:38. > :07:45.anticipate he would only go forward with a 10th of the investment
:07:46. > :07:50.promised. It is a yes or no, which? I did not anticipate any of these
:07:51. > :07:55.things, Andrew. Thanks for joining us. You have won the prize for the
:07:56. > :08:00.best ever backdrop to an interview down the line I have done. Alex
:08:01. > :08:11.Salmond, thank you for joining us. Back to Europe, we are told I think
:08:12. > :08:15.the Sunday Times and other papers that the Prime Minister is not going
:08:16. > :08:22.to just get what he wants, he is going to pull rabbits out of a hat
:08:23. > :08:26.and get more than we expect. We spent 2015 playing down
:08:27. > :08:30.expectations. I remember number 10 enjoying it in November and December
:08:31. > :08:34.when the Conservative leaning press was talking down the renegotiation
:08:35. > :08:38.Cameron would achieve, they wanted to go into February with Tory
:08:39. > :08:43.backbenchers and voters and members expecting really quite a paltry deal
:08:44. > :08:47.from Brussels and Berlin. The rabbits he pulls out of his hat do
:08:48. > :08:52.not have to be big, they can be medium-sized. They can still clear
:08:53. > :08:59.the low hurdle that has been set for him. He has raised the bar by
:09:00. > :09:03.talking about rabbits. So far this has gone exactly as I and many
:09:04. > :09:07.others predicted. Cameron was always going to orchestrate it so it
:09:08. > :09:11.sounded like it would be difficult and then he managed to get
:09:12. > :09:17.concessions and then he gets something fantastic at the last
:09:18. > :09:24.crucial moment! I think that leave, out campaign, the various campaigns,
:09:25. > :09:28.have a challenge. Not to allow Tisch boaters to fall for these ruses and
:09:29. > :09:43.there should be real scrutiny of what Cameron comes back with. --
:09:44. > :09:48.allow voters. If you are the Prime Minister on the European project,
:09:49. > :09:52.which I expect privately he wishes he did not kick off in the first
:09:53. > :10:00.those, it looks good, it looks like he will get a deal. The potential
:10:01. > :10:04.major deserters, we are told Michael Gove will stay, Nick Herbert forms a
:10:05. > :10:12.Eurosceptic group to stay inside, and we see no sign of Boris Johnson,
:10:13. > :10:19.Theresa May leading the out camp. If they do not do it, that is job done
:10:20. > :10:24.for the Prime Minister. Yes, it is dangerous to predict, but the stars
:10:25. > :10:29.seem to be coming together in a favourable way. I picked this up on
:10:30. > :10:33.Thursday last week, essentially the Prime Minister would get something
:10:34. > :10:39.on welfare that would be better on the four-year ban on in work
:10:40. > :10:44.benefits. You could say pressure on public services is too great and we
:10:45. > :10:48.need to limit migration. What is interesting is that potentially
:10:49. > :10:52.means the four girls he wants, he could do better than that. It is
:10:53. > :10:58.interesting because it now appears according to an opinion poll in the
:10:59. > :11:02.Times newspaper, voters have clocked onto the negotiations and believed
:11:03. > :11:06.they are for real and believe if the Prime Minister gets a good package,
:11:07. > :11:16.there is a greater chance they will vote to stay in. All the detriment
:11:17. > :11:21.-- diplomats who said he could not do this, he appears to have proved
:11:22. > :11:25.them wrong. If it is going well for the Prime Minister, there are
:11:26. > :11:33.opinion polls showing a majority to come out, today. I have learned my
:11:34. > :11:37.lesson from the general election, which is not to believe polls and so
:11:38. > :11:42.I do not think they are correct. They were right on the Scottish
:11:43. > :11:47.referendum. You think the campaign is starting from behind? I do and I
:11:48. > :11:52.think there is a danger as Nigel Farage touched upon, that voters
:11:53. > :11:57.will think it is a giant stitch up if the political establishment, the
:11:58. > :12:00.big figures we have talked about, are on one side, it does not look
:12:01. > :12:09.like a balanced debate and it may backfire. Tomorrow, the equity
:12:10. > :12:13.markets have had their worst start to the year since the crash. All
:12:14. > :12:16.eyes will be on London and New York tomorrow. Should the government
:12:17. > :12:22.prepare for a potential financial crisis? It is politically preparing
:12:23. > :12:27.because George Osborne gave a speech ten days ago that was more negative
:12:28. > :12:32.about the economic picture than the Autumn Statement in November. That I
:12:33. > :12:39.think is laying the political ground if not for recession or crisis, then
:12:40. > :12:44.slower growth than we were expecting. It looks worrying, the
:12:45. > :12:49.Dow was down almost 500 points at one stage. That would be very bad
:12:50. > :12:54.for George Osborne but there is an argument people will cling to him as
:12:55. > :12:58.a future leader if times are tough. Some people saw that speech as the
:12:59. > :13:02.beginning of Project Fear on the European referendum. Maybe he
:13:03. > :13:10.believed it and he was telling us the warning lights were flashing. We
:13:11. > :13:11.will see if there is a flight to British bonds. Keep your eye on the
:13:12. > :13:14.markets tomorrow. The Daily Politics is back tomorrow
:13:15. > :13:20.at midday over on BBC Two, and I'll be back here,
:13:21. > :13:27.same time, same place, Remember if it's Sunday,
:13:28. > :13:31.it's the Sunday Politics.