:00:36. > :00:43.Welfare reform is one of the government's most popular policies.
:00:44. > :00:46.So Labour says it would be even tougher than the Tories.
:00:47. > :00:50.We'll be asking the Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary if she's got
:00:51. > :00:56.Even Labour supporters worry that Ed Miliband hasn't got what it takes
:00:57. > :01:01.Labour grandees are increasingly vocal about their concerns.
:01:02. > :01:12.Over 50% of Labour voters think they'd do better with a new leader.
:01:13. > :01:18.And what of this leader? He's apparently "toxic" on the doorstep.
:01:19. > :01:20.And coming up here - Sammy Wilson and Alex Attwood
:01:21. > :01:25.What impact will it have in stopping racism here?
:01:26. > :01:28.And we look back at the life of Gerry Conlon who died yesterday.
:01:29. > :01:40.promised an electric car revolution, why so little progress?
:01:41. > :01:47.Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh, the toxic tweeters
:01:48. > :01:55.First, the deepening crisis in Iraq, where Sunni Islamists are now
:01:56. > :01:57.largely in control of the Syrian-Iraq border, which means
:01:58. > :02:03.they can now re-supply their forces in Iraq from their Syrian bases.
:02:04. > :02:06.Rather than moving on Baghdad, they are for the moment consolidating
:02:07. > :02:09.their grip on the towns and cities they've already taken.
:02:10. > :02:11.They also seem to be in effective control of Iraq's
:02:12. > :02:15.biggest oil refinery, which supplies the capital.
:02:16. > :02:17.And there are reports they might now have taken the power
:02:18. > :02:26.Iraqi politicians are now admitting that ISIS,
:02:27. > :02:32.far more battle-hardened than the US-trained Iraqi army fighting it.
:02:33. > :02:35.Which leaves the fate of Baghdad increasingly in the hands
:02:36. > :02:52.No good news coming out of there, Janan. No good news and no good
:02:53. > :02:56.options either. The West's best strategy is to decide how much
:02:57. > :03:02.support to give to the Iraqi government. The US is sending over
:03:03. > :03:05.about 275 military personnel. Do they go further and contemplate
:03:06. > :03:11.their support? General Petraeus argued against it as it might be
:03:12. > :03:17.seen as the US serving as the force of Shia Iraqis -- continue their
:03:18. > :03:26.support. Do we contemplate breaking up Iraq? It won't be easy. The Sunni
:03:27. > :03:29.and Shia Muslim populations don't live in clearly bordered areas, but
:03:30. > :03:33.in the longer term, do we deal with it in the same way we dealt with the
:03:34. > :03:37.break-up of the Ottoman empire over 100 years ago? In the short-term and
:03:38. > :03:45.long-term, completely confounding. Quite humiliating. If ISIS take
:03:46. > :03:51.Baghdad I can't think of a bigger ignominy for foreign policy since
:03:52. > :03:55.Suez. If Iraq is partitioned, it won't be up to us. It will be what
:03:56. > :04:00.is happening because of what is happening on the ground. Everything
:04:01. > :04:06.does point to partition, and that border, which ISIS control, between
:04:07. > :04:12.Syria and Iraq, that has been there since it was drawn during the First
:04:13. > :04:15.World War. That is gone as well. An astonishingly humbling situation the
:04:16. > :04:23.West, and you can see the Kurds in the North think this is a charge --
:04:24. > :04:26.chance for authority. They think this is the chance to get the
:04:27. > :04:32.autonomy they felt they deserved a long time. Janan is right. We can't
:04:33. > :04:36.do much in the long term, but we have to decide on the engagement.
:04:37. > :04:39.And the other people wish you'd be talking turkey, because if there is
:04:40. > :04:44.some blowback and the fighters come back, they are likely to come back
:04:45. > :04:49.from Turkey. Where is Iran in all of this? There were reports last week
:04:50. > :04:53.that the Revolutionary guard, the head of it, he was already in
:04:54. > :04:57.Baghdad with 67 advisers and there might have been some brigades that
:04:58. > :05:02.have gone there as well. Where are they? What has happened? I'm pretty
:05:03. > :05:14.sure the Prime Minister of Iraq is putting more faith in Iran than the
:05:15. > :05:18.White House and the British. I think they are running the show, in
:05:19. > :05:22.technical terms. John Kerry is flying into Cairo this morning, and
:05:23. > :05:26.what is his message? It is twofold. One is to Arab countries, do more to
:05:27. > :05:31.encourage an inclusive government in Iraq, mainly Sunni Muslims in the
:05:32. > :05:36.government, and the Arab Gulf states should stop funding insurgents in
:05:37. > :05:41.Iraq. You think, Iraq, it's potentially going to break up, so
:05:42. > :05:44.this sounds a bit late in the day and a bit weak. It gets
:05:45. > :05:48.fundamentally to the problem, what can we do? Niall Ferguson has a big
:05:49. > :05:52.piece in the Sunday Times asking if this is place where we cannot doing
:05:53. > :05:58.anything. He doesn't want to do anything. By the way, that is what
:05:59. > :06:02.most Americans think. That is what opinion polls are showing. You have
:06:03. > :06:07.George Osborne Michael Gold who would love to get involved but they
:06:08. > :06:10.cannot because of the vote in parliament on Syria lasted -- George
:06:11. > :06:14.Osborne and Michael Gove. This government does not have the stomach
:06:15. > :06:18.for military intervention. We will see how events unfold on the ground.
:06:19. > :06:20.All parties are agreed that Britain's 60-year old multi-billion
:06:21. > :06:25.The Tory side of the Coalition think their reforms are necessary
:06:26. > :06:28.and popular, though they haven't always gone to time or to plan.
:06:29. > :06:33.In the eight months she's had since she became Shadow Secretary of State
:06:34. > :06:39.for Work and Pensions, Rachel Reeves has talked the talk about getting
:06:40. > :06:42.people off benefits, into work and lowering the overall welfare bill.
:06:43. > :06:45.her first interview in the job she threatened "We would
:06:46. > :06:48.But Labour has opposed just about every change the Coalition
:06:49. > :06:53.has proposed to cut the cost and change the culture of welfare.
:06:54. > :06:55.Child benefit, housing benefit, the ?26,000 benefit cap -
:06:56. > :07:02.They've been lukewarm about the government's flagship Universal
:07:03. > :07:05.Credit scheme - which rolls six benefit payments into one - and
:07:06. > :07:12.And Labour has set out only two modest welfare cuts.
:07:13. > :07:16.This week, Labour said young people must have skills or be in training
:07:17. > :07:21.That will save ?65 million, says Labour, though the cost
:07:22. > :07:26.And cutting winter fuel payments for richer pensioners which will
:07:27. > :07:34.Not a lot in a total welfare bill of around ?200 billion.
:07:35. > :07:37.And with welfare cuts popular among even Labour voters, they will soon
:07:38. > :07:43.have to start spelling out exactly what Labour welfare reform means.
:07:44. > :07:56.Welcome. Good morning. Why do you want to be tougher than the Tories?
:07:57. > :08:00.We want to be tough in getting the welfare bill down. Under this
:08:01. > :08:04.government, the bill will be ?13 million more than the government set
:08:05. > :08:09.out in 2010 and I don't think that is acceptable. We should try to
:08:10. > :08:12.control the cost of Social Security. But the welfare bill under the next
:08:13. > :08:16.Labour government will fall? It will be smaller when you end the first
:08:17. > :08:21.parliament than when you started? We signed up to the capping welfare but
:08:22. > :08:26.that doesn't see social security costs ball, it sees them go up in
:08:27. > :08:32.line with with inflation or average earnings -- costs fall. So where
:08:33. > :08:36.flair will rise? We have signed up to the cap -- welfare will rise? We
:08:37. > :08:41.have signed up to the cap. We will get the costs under control and they
:08:42. > :08:43.haven't managed to achieve it. The government is spending ?13 billion
:08:44. > :08:49.more on Social Security and the reason they are doing it is because
:08:50. > :08:52.the minimum wage has not kept pace with the cost of living so people
:08:53. > :08:55.are reliant on tax credits. They are not building
:08:56. > :08:57.are reliant on tax credits. They are relying on housing benefit.
:08:58. > :08:58.are reliant on tax credits. They are a record number of people on zero
:08:59. > :09:04.hours contracts. I'm a record number of people on zero
:09:05. > :09:08.if you will cut welfare if you get in power. Nobody is saying that the
:09:09. > :09:12.cost of welfare is going to fall. The welfare cap sees that
:09:13. > :09:18.cost of welfare is going to fall. gradually. That is a Tory cap.
:09:19. > :09:24.you've accepted it. You're being the same as the Tories, not to. If
:09:25. > :09:24.you've accepted it. You're being the had a welfare
:09:25. > :09:29.you've accepted it. You're being the breached it in every year of the
:09:30. > :09:30.parliament. Social Security will be higher than the government set out
:09:31. > :09:35.because higher than the government set out
:09:36. > :09:38.You read the polls, and the party does lots of its own polling,
:09:39. > :09:40.You read the polls, and the party you're scared of being seen as the
:09:41. > :09:47.welfare party. You don't really believe all of this anti-welfare
:09:48. > :09:49.stuff? We are the party of work, not welfare. The Labour Party was set up
:09:50. > :09:52.in the first place because we believe in the dignity of work and
:09:53. > :09:56.we believe that work should pay wages can afford to live on. I make
:09:57. > :10:01.no apologies for being the party of work. We are not the welfare party,
:10:02. > :10:05.we are the party of work. Even your confidential strategy document
:10:06. > :10:09.admits that voters don't trust you on immigration, the economy, this is
:10:10. > :10:14.your own people, and welfare. You are not trusted on it. The most
:10:15. > :10:17.recent poll showed Labour slightly ahead of the Conservative Party on
:10:18. > :10:21.Social Security, probably because they have seen the incompetence and
:10:22. > :10:26.chaos at the Department for Work and Pensions under Iain Duncan Smith.
:10:27. > :10:27.Your own internal document means that
:10:28. > :10:33.Your own internal document means welfare reform. That is why we have
:10:34. > :10:38.shown some of this tough things we will do like the announcement that
:10:39. > :10:41.Ed Miliband made earlier this week, that young people without basic
:10:42. > :10:45.qualifications won't be entitled to just sign on for benefits, they have
:10:46. > :10:48.to sign up for training in order to receive support. That is the right
:10:49. > :10:56.thing to do by that group of young people, because they need skills to
:10:57. > :11:03.progress. We will, once that. -- we will, onto that. You say you
:11:04. > :11:06.criticise the government that it had a cap and wouldn't have met it, but
:11:07. > :11:14.every money-saving welfare reform, you voted against it. How is that
:11:15. > :11:17.being tougher? The most recent bout was the cap on overall welfare
:11:18. > :11:24.expenditure, and we went through the lobbies and voted for the Tories.
:11:25. > :11:26.You voted against the benefit cap, welfare rating, you voted against,
:11:27. > :11:30.child benefit schemes, you voted against. You can't say we voted
:11:31. > :11:35.against everything when we voted with the Conservatives in the most
:11:36. > :11:41.recent bill with a cap on Social Security. It's just not correct to
:11:42. > :11:44.say. The last time we voted, we walked through the lobby with them.
:11:45. > :11:51.You voted on the principle of the cap. You voted on every step that
:11:52. > :11:56.would allow the cap to be met. Every single one. The most recent vote was
:11:57. > :12:00.not on the principle of the cap, it was on a cap of Social Security in
:12:01. > :12:03.the next Parliament and we signed up for that. It was Ed Miliband who
:12:04. > :12:10.called her that earlier on. Which welfare reform did you vote for? We
:12:11. > :12:14.voted for the cap. Other than that? We have supported universal credit.
:12:15. > :12:19.You voted against it in the third reading. We voted against some of
:12:20. > :12:24.the specifics. If you look at universal credit, they have had to
:12:25. > :12:29.write off nearly ?900 million of spending. I'm not on the rights and
:12:30. > :12:33.wrongs, I'm trying to work out what you voted for. Some of the things we
:12:34. > :12:38.are going to go further than the government with. For example,
:12:39. > :12:41.cutting benefits for young people who don't sign of the training. The
:12:42. > :12:45.government had introduced that. For example, saying that the richest
:12:46. > :12:48.pensioners should not get the winter fuel allowance, that is something
:12:49. > :12:51.the government haven't signed up. You would get that under Labour and
:12:52. > :12:55.this government haven't signed up for it. ?100 million on the winter
:12:56. > :13:02.fuel allowance and ?65 million on youth training. ?165 million. How
:13:03. > :13:11.big is the welfare budget? The cap would apply to ?120 billion. And
:13:12. > :13:14.you've saved 125 -- 165 million? Those are cuts that we said we would
:13:15. > :13:19.do in government. If you look at the real prize from the changes Ed
:13:20. > :13:22.Miliband announced in the youth allowance, it's not the short-term
:13:23. > :13:25.savings, it's the fact that each of these young people, who are
:13:26. > :13:29.currently on unemployment benefits without the skills we know they need
:13:30. > :13:35.to succeed in life, they will cost the taxpayer ?2000 per year. I will
:13:36. > :13:39.come onto that. You mentioned universal credit, which the
:13:40. > :13:43.government regards as the flagship reform. It's had lots of troubles
:13:44. > :13:49.with it and it merges six benefits into one. You voted against it in
:13:50. > :13:53.the third reading and given lukewarm support in the past. We have not
:13:54. > :14:00.said he would abandon it, but now you say you are for it. You are all
:14:01. > :14:03.over the place. We set up the rescue committee in autumn of last year
:14:04. > :14:07.because we have seen from the National Audit Office and the Public
:14:08. > :14:12.Accounts Committee, report after report showing that the project is
:14:13. > :14:16.massively overbudget and is not going to be delivered according to
:14:17. > :14:18.the government timetable. We set up the committee because we believe in
:14:19. > :14:22.the principle of universal credit and think it is the right thing to
:14:23. > :14:28.do. Can you tell us now if you will keep it or not? Because there is no
:14:29. > :14:33.transparency and we have no idea. We are awash with information. We are
:14:34. > :14:39.not. The government, in the most recent National audit Forest --
:14:40. > :14:43.National Audit Office statement said it was a reset project. This is
:14:44. > :14:49.really important. This is a flagship government programme, and it's going
:14:50. > :14:53.to cost ?12.8 billion to deliver, and we don't know what sort of state
:14:54. > :14:57.it is in, so we have said that if we win at the next election, we will
:14:58. > :15:04.pause that for three months and calling... Will you stop the pilots?
:15:05. > :15:09.We don't know what status they will have. We would stop the build of the
:15:10. > :15:14.system for three months, calling the National Audit Office to do awards
:15:15. > :15:19.and all report. The government don't need to do this until the next
:15:20. > :15:22.general election, they could do it today. Stop throwing good money
:15:23. > :15:27.after bad and get a grip of this incredibly important programme. You
:15:28. > :15:32.said you don't know enough to a view now. So when you were invited to a
:15:33. > :15:38.job centre where universal credit is being rolled out to see how it was
:15:39. > :15:41.working, you refused to go. Why? We asked were a meeting with Iain
:15:42. > :15:44.Duncan Smith and he cancelled the meeting is three times. I'm talking
:15:45. > :15:48.about the visit when you were offered to go to a job centre and
:15:49. > :15:52.you refused. We had an appointment to meet Iain Duncan Smith at the
:15:53. > :15:56.Department for Work and Pensions and said he cancelled and was not
:15:57. > :15:59.available, but he wanted us to go to the job centre. We wanted to talk to
:16:00. > :16:05.him and his officials, which she did. Would it be more useful to go
:16:06. > :16:06.to the job centre and find out how it was working. He's going to tell
:16:07. > :16:24.you it's working fine. Advice Bureau in Hammersmith, they
:16:25. > :16:29.are working to help the people trying to claim universal credit.
:16:30. > :16:36.Iain Duncan Smith cancelled three meetings. That is another issue, I
:16:37. > :16:42.was asking about the job centre. It is not another issue because Iain
:16:43. > :16:45.Duncan Smith fogged us off. This week you said that jobless
:16:46. > :16:50.youngsters who won't take training will lose their welfare payments.
:16:51. > :16:58.How many young people are not in work training or education? There
:16:59. > :17:05.are 140,000 young people claiming benefits at the moment, but 850,000
:17:06. > :17:13.young people who are not in work at the moment. This applies to around
:17:14. > :17:20.100,000 young people. There are actually 975,000, 16-24 -year-olds,
:17:21. > :17:28.not in work, training or education. Your proposal only applies to
:17:29. > :17:32.100,000 of them, why? This is applying to young people who are
:17:33. > :17:39.signing on for benefits rather than signing up for training. We want to
:17:40. > :17:44.make sure that all young people... Why only 100,000? They
:17:45. > :17:53.currently getting job-seeker's allowance. We are saying you
:17:54. > :17:58.currently getting job-seeker's just sign up to... Can I get you
:17:59. > :18:00.currently getting job-seeker's respond to this, the number of
:18:01. > :18:01.people not in work, training respond to this, the number of
:18:02. > :18:15.than you are respond to this, the number of
:18:16. > :18:24.turn -- long-term unemployment is an entrenched problem... This issue
:18:25. > :18:29.about an entrenched group of young people. Young people who haven't got
:18:30. > :18:34.skills and are not in training we know are much less likely to get a
:18:35. > :18:36.job so there are 140,018-24 -year-olds signing onto benefits at
:18:37. > :18:43.the moment. This is about trying -year-olds signing onto benefits at
:18:44. > :18:47.address that problem to make sure all young people have the skills
:18:48. > :18:52.is to take away part of the dole is to take away part of the dole
:18:53. > :18:58.unless young unemployed people agree to study for level
:18:59. > :19:03.qualifications, the equivalent of an AS-level or an NVQ but 40% of these
:19:04. > :19:09.people have the literary skills of a nine-year-old. After all that failed
:19:10. > :19:17.education, how are you going to train them to a level standard? We
:19:18. > :19:21.are saying that anyone who doesn't have that a level or equivalent
:19:22. > :19:27.qualification will be required to go back to college. We are not saying
:19:28. > :19:31.that within a year they have to get up to that level but these are
:19:32. > :19:35.exactly the sorts of people... These people have been failed by your
:19:36. > :19:38.exactly the sorts of people... These education system. These people are,
:19:39. > :19:43.for the last four years, have been educated under a Conservative
:19:44. > :19:47.government. 18 - 21-year-olds, most of them have their education under a
:19:48. > :19:53.Labour government during which 300,000 people left with no GCSEs
:19:54. > :19:59.whatsoever. I don't understand how training for one year can do what 11
:20:00. > :20:03.years in school did not. We are not saying that within one year
:20:04. > :20:07.everybody will get up to a level three qualifications, but if you are
:20:08. > :20:11.one of those people who enters the Labour market age 18 with the
:20:12. > :20:19.reading skills of a nine-year-old, they are the sorts of people that
:20:20. > :20:25.should not the left languishing. I went to college in Hackney if you
:20:26. > :20:30.you are -- a few weeks ago and there was a dyslexic boy studying painting
:20:31. > :20:34.and decorating. In school they decided he was a troublemaker and
:20:35. > :20:39.that he didn't want to learn. He went back to college because he
:20:40. > :20:44.wanted to get the skills. He said that it wasn't until he went back to
:20:45. > :20:49.college that he could pick up a newspaper and read it, it made a
:20:50. > :20:55.huge difference but too many people are let down by the system. I am
:20:56. > :20:59.wondering how the training will make up for an education system that
:21:00. > :21:04.failed them but let's move on to your leader. Look at this graph of
:21:05. > :21:09.Ed Miliband's popularity. This is the net satisfaction with him, it is
:21:10. > :21:16.dreadful. The trend continues to climb since he became leader of the
:21:17. > :21:19.Labour Party, why? What you have seen is another 2300 Labour
:21:20. > :21:25.councillors since Ed Miliband became the leader of the Labour Party. You
:21:26. > :21:33.saw in the elections a month ago that... Why is the satisfaction rate
:21:34. > :21:38.falling? We can look at polls or actual election results and the fact
:21:39. > :21:42.that we have got another 2000 Labour councillors, more people voting
:21:43. > :21:47.Labour, the opinion polls today show that if there was a general election
:21:48. > :21:54.today we would have a majority of more than 40, he must be doing
:21:55. > :22:00.something right. Why do almost 50% of voters want to replace him as
:22:01. > :22:06.leader? Why do 50% and more think that he is not up to the job? The
:22:07. > :22:13.more people see Ed Miliband, the less impressed they are. The British
:22:14. > :22:17.people seem to like him less. The election strategy I suggest that
:22:18. > :22:22.follows from that is that you should keep Ed Miliband under wraps until
:22:23. > :22:27.the election. Let's look at actually what happens when people get a
:22:28. > :22:31.chance to vote, when they get that opportunity we have seen more Labour
:22:32. > :22:38.councillors, more Labour members of the European Parliament...
:22:39. > :22:45.Oppositions always get more. The opinion polls today, one of them
:22:46. > :22:49.shows Labour four points ahead. You have not done that well in local
:22:50. > :22:55.government elections or European elections. Why don't people like
:22:56. > :23:00.him? I think we have done incredibly well in elections. People must like
:23:01. > :23:04.a lot of the things Labour and Ed Miliband are doing because we are
:23:05. > :23:09.winning back support across the country. We won local councils in
:23:10. > :23:15.places like Hammersmith and Fulham, Crawley, Hastings, key places that
:23:16. > :23:19.Labour need to win back at the general election next year. Even you
:23:20. > :23:25.have said traditional Labour supporters are abandoning the party.
:23:26. > :23:30.That is what Ed Miliband has said as well. We have got this real concern
:23:31. > :23:36.about what has happened. If you look at the elections in May, 60% of
:23:37. > :23:41.people didn't even bother going to vote. That is a profound issue not
:23:42. > :23:46.just for Labour. You said traditional voters who perhaps at
:23:47. > :23:50.times we took for granted are now being offered an alternative. Why
:23:51. > :23:56.did you take them for granted? This is what Ed Miliband said. I am not
:23:57. > :24:02.saying anything Ed Miliband himself has not said. When he ran for the
:24:03. > :24:07.leadership he said that we took too many people for granted and we
:24:08. > :24:11.needed to give people positive reasons to vote Labour, he has been
:24:12. > :24:14.doing that. He has been there for four years and you are saying you
:24:15. > :24:19.still take them for granted. Why? I am saying that for too long we have
:24:20. > :24:23.taken them for granted. We are on track to win the general election
:24:24. > :24:34.next year and that will defy all the odds. You are going to win... Ed
:24:35. > :24:38.Miliband will win next year and make a great Prime Minister.
:24:39. > :24:43.Now to the Liberal Democrats, at the risk of intruding into private
:24:44. > :24:47.grief. The party is still smarting from dire results in the European
:24:48. > :24:50.and Local Elections. The only poll Nick Clegg has won in recent times
:24:51. > :24:55.is to be voted the most unpopular leader of a party in modern British
:24:56. > :24:59.history. No surprise there have been calls for him to go, though that
:25:00. > :24:59.still looks unlikely. Here's Eleanor.
:25:00. > :25:04.Liberal Democrats celebrating, something we haven't seen for a
:25:05. > :25:10.while. This victory back in 1998 led to a decade of power for the Lib
:25:11. > :25:16.Dems in Liverpool. What a contrast to the city's political landscape
:25:17. > :25:21.today. At its height the party had 69 local councillors, now down to
:25:22. > :25:26.just three. The scale of the challenge facing Nick Clegg and the
:25:27. > :25:31.Lib Dems is growing. The party is rock bottom in the polls,
:25:32. > :25:36.consistently in single figures. It was wiped out in the European
:25:37. > :25:41.elections losing all but one of its 12 MEPs and in the local elections
:25:42. > :25:48.it lost 42% of the seats that it was defending. But on Merseyside, Nick
:25:49. > :25:52.Clegg was putting on a brave face. We did badly in Liverpool,
:25:53. > :25:59.Manchester and London in particular, we did well in other places. But you
:26:00. > :26:01.are right, we did badly in some of those big cities and I have
:26:02. > :26:06.initiated a review, those big cities and I have
:26:07. > :26:12.naturally, to understand what went wrong, what went right. As Lib Dems
:26:13. > :26:16.across the country get on with some serious soul-searching, there is an
:26:17. > :26:20.admission that his is the leader of the party who is failing to hit the
:26:21. > :26:25.right notes. Knocking on doors in Liverpool, I have to tell you that
:26:26. > :26:31.Nick Clegg is not a popular person. Some might use the word toxic and I
:26:32. > :26:35.find this very difficult because I know Nick very well and I see a
:26:36. > :26:40.principal person who passionately believes in what he is doing and he
:26:41. > :26:52.is a nice guy. As a result of his popularity, what has happened to the
:26:53. > :26:55.core vote? In parts of the country, we are down to just three
:26:56. > :26:59.councillors like Liverpool for example. You also lose the
:27:00. > :27:03.deliverers and fundraisers and the organisers and the members of course
:27:04. > :27:09.so all of that will have to be rebuilt. As they start fermenting
:27:10. > :27:13.process, local parties across the country and here in Liverpool have
:27:14. > :27:20.been voting on whether there should be a leadership contest. We had two
:27:21. > :27:25.choices to flush out and have a go at Nick Clegg or to positively
:27:26. > :27:29.decide we would sharpen up the campaign and get back on the
:27:30. > :27:34.streets, and by four to one ratio we decided to get back on the streets.
:27:35. > :27:37.We are bruised and battered but we are still here, the orange flag is
:27:38. > :27:42.We are bruised and battered but we still flying and one day it will fly
:27:43. > :27:48.over this building again, Liverpool town hall. But do people want the
:27:49. > :27:52.Lib Dems back in charge in this city? I certainly wouldn't vote for
:27:53. > :27:56.them. Their performance in Government and the way they have
:27:57. > :28:03.left their promises down, I could not vote for them again. I voted Lib
:28:04. > :28:09.Dem in the last election because of the university tuition fees and I
:28:10. > :28:13.would never vote for them again because they broke their promise.
:28:14. > :28:15.The Lib Dems are awful, broken promises and
:28:16. > :28:19.The Lib Dems are awful, broken wouldn't vote for them. This is the
:28:20. > :28:22.declaration of the results for the Northwest... Last month, as other
:28:23. > :28:29.party celebrated in the north-west, the Lib Dems here lost their only
:28:30. > :28:34.MEP, Chris Davies. Now there is concern the party doesn't know how
:28:35. > :28:40.to turn its fortunes around. We don't have an answer to that, if we
:28:41. > :28:47.did we would be grasping it with both hands. We will do our best to
:28:48. > :28:52.hold onto the places where we still have seats but as for the rest of
:28:53. > :28:57.the country where we have been hollowed out, we don't know how to
:28:58. > :29:01.start again until the next general election is out of the way. After
:29:02. > :29:04.their disastrous performance in the European elections, pressure is
:29:05. > :29:15.growing for the party to shift its stance. I think there has to be a
:29:16. > :29:22.lancing of the wound, there should in a referendum and the Liberal
:29:23. > :29:26.Democrats should be calling it. The rest of Europe once this because
:29:27. > :29:32.they are fed up with Britain being unable to make up its mind. The Lib
:29:33. > :29:36.Dems are now suffering the effects of being in Government. The party's
:29:37. > :29:43.problem, choosing the right course to regain political credibility.
:29:44. > :29:48.We can now speak to form a Lib Dems leader Ming Campbell. Welcome back
:29:49. > :29:54.to the Sunday Politics. Even your own activists say that Nick Clegg is
:29:55. > :29:59.toxic. How will that change between now and the election? When you have
:30:00. > :30:04.had disappointing results, but you have to do is to rebuild. You pick
:30:05. > :30:09.yourself up and start all over again, and the reason why the
:30:10. > :30:14.Liberal Democrats got 57, 56 seats in the House of Commons now is
:30:15. > :30:15.because we picked ourselves up, we took every opportunity and we have
:30:16. > :30:28.rebuilt from the bottom up. least popular leader in modern
:30:29. > :30:33.history and more unpopular than your mate Gordon Brown. You are running
:30:34. > :30:37.out of time. No one believes that being the leader of a modern
:30:38. > :30:40.political party in the UK is an easy job. Both Ed Miliband and David
:30:41. > :30:45.Cameron must have had cause to think, over breakfast this morning,
:30:46. > :30:48.when they saw the headlines in some of the Sunday papers. Of course it
:30:49. > :30:53.is a difficult job but it was pointed out a moment or two ago that
:30:54. > :30:56.Nick Clegg is a man of principle and enormous resilience if you consider
:30:57. > :30:59.what he had to put up with, and in my view, he is quite clearly the
:31:00. > :31:03.person best qualified to lead the party between now and the general
:31:04. > :31:08.election and through the election campaign, and beyond. So why don't
:31:09. > :31:12.people like him? We have had to take some pretty difficult decisions,
:31:13. > :31:19.and, of course, people didn't expect that. If you look back to the rather
:31:20. > :31:22.heady days of the rose garden behind ten Downing St, people thought it
:31:23. > :31:27.was all going to be sweetness and light, but the fact is, we didn't
:31:28. > :31:31.know then what we know now, about the extent of the economic crisis we
:31:32. > :31:34.win, and a lot of difficult decisions have had to be taken in
:31:35. > :31:39.order to restore economic stability. Look around you. You will see we are
:31:40. > :31:44.not there yet but we are a long way better off than in 2010. You are not
:31:45. > :31:51.getting the credit for it, the Tories are. We will be a little more
:31:52. > :31:56.assertive about taking the credit. For example, the fact that 23
:31:57. > :31:59.million people have had a tax cut of ?800 per year and we have taken 2
:32:00. > :32:03.million people out of paying tax altogether. Ming Campbell, your
:32:04. > :32:09.people say that on every programme like this. Because it is true. That
:32:10. > :32:14.might be the case, but you are at seven or 8% in the polls, and nobody
:32:15. > :32:22.is listening, or they don't believe it. Once
:32:23. > :32:23.is listening, or they don't believe doubt that what we have achieved
:32:24. > :32:27.will be much more easily recognised, and there is no doubt,
:32:28. > :32:31.for example, in some of the recent polls, like the Ashcroft Pole,
:32:32. > :32:38.something like 30% of those polled said that as a result at the next
:32:39. > :32:41.something like 30% of those polled general election, they would prepare
:32:42. > :32:45.their to be a coalition involving the Liberal Democrats. So there is
:32:46. > :32:49.no question that the whole notion of coalition is still very much a live
:32:50. > :32:54.one, and one which we have made work in the public interest. The problem
:32:55. > :32:58.is people don't think that. People see you trying to have your cake and
:32:59. > :33:01.eat it. On the one hand you want to get your share of the credit for the
:33:02. > :33:04.turnaround in the economy, on the other hand you can't stop yourself
:33:05. > :33:08.from distancing yourself from the Tories and things that you did not
:33:09. > :33:14.like happening. You are trying to face both ways at once. If you
:33:15. > :33:27.remember our fellow Scotsman famously said you cannot ride both
:33:28. > :33:27.remember our fellow Scotsman to the terms -- terms of the
:33:28. > :33:30.remember our fellow Scotsman coalition agreement, which is what
:33:31. > :33:33.we signed up to in 2010. In addition, in furtherance of that
:33:34. > :33:37.agreement, we have created things like the pupil premium and the
:33:38. > :33:41.others I mentioned and you were rather dismissive. I'm not
:33:42. > :33:45.dismissive, I'm just saying they don't make a difference to what
:33:46. > :33:50.people think of you. We will do everything in our power to change
:33:51. > :33:56.that between now and May 2015. The interesting thing is, going back to
:33:57. > :34:01.the Ashcroft result, it demonstrated clearly that in constituencies where
:34:02. > :34:04.we have MPs and we are well dug in, we are doing everything that the
:34:05. > :34:09.public expects of us, and we are doing very well indeed. You aren't
:34:10. > :34:15.sure fellow Lib Dems have been saying this for you -- you and your
:34:16. > :34:19.fellow Liberal Dems have been saying this for a year or 18 months, and
:34:20. > :34:22.since then you have lost all of your MEPs apart from one, you lost your
:34:23. > :34:28.deposit in a by-election, you lost 310 councillor, including everyone
:34:29. > :34:34.in Manchester or Islington. Mr Clegg leading you into the next general
:34:35. > :34:40.election will be the equivalent of the charge of the light Brigade. I
:34:41. > :34:44.doubt that very much. The implication behind that lit you
:34:45. > :34:49.rehearsed is that we should pack our tents in the night and steal away.
:34:50. > :34:52.-- that litany. And if you heard in that piece that preceded the
:34:53. > :34:56.discussion, people were saying, look we have to start from the bottom and
:34:57. > :35:07.have to rebuild. That is exactly what we will do. Nine months is
:35:08. > :35:10.have to rebuild. That is exactly what we will do. Nine months is a
:35:11. > :35:16.period of gestation. As you well know. I wouldn't dismiss it quite so
:35:17. > :35:19.easily as that. I'm not here to say we had a wonderful result or
:35:20. > :35:24.anything like it, but what I do say is that the party is determined to
:35:25. > :35:30.turn it round, and that Nick Clegg is the person best qualified to do
:35:31. > :35:35.it. Should your party adopt a referendum about in or out on
:35:36. > :35:37.Europe? No, we should stick to the coalition agreement. If there is any
:35:38. > :35:43.transfer of power from Westminster to Brussels, that will be subject to
:35:44. > :35:48.a referendum. No change. And finally, as a Lib Dem, you must be
:35:49. > :35:54.glad you are not fighting the next election yourself? I've fought every
:35:55. > :36:00.election since 1974, so I've had a few experiences, some good, some
:36:01. > :36:03.bad, but the one thing I have done and the one thing a lot of other
:36:04. > :36:07.people have done is that they have stuck to the task, and that is what
:36:08. > :36:11.will happen in May 2015. Ming Campbell, thank you for joining us.
:36:12. > :36:13.It's just gone 11.35am, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:36:14. > :36:23.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now
:36:24. > :36:26.Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics in Northern Ireland.
:36:27. > :36:29.After years of delay, the Executive has finally published
:36:30. > :36:32.its Racial Equality Strategy, although it comes at a time
:36:33. > :36:35.when the First Minister finds himself at the centre
:36:36. > :36:40.So will the strategy have any impact in stemming the rising tide
:36:41. > :36:44.We'll hear shortly from the SDLP's Alex Attwood
:36:45. > :36:49.Plus, the marching season is upon us - but now the talking's stopped
:36:50. > :36:57.what chance is there of agreement over parading in North Belfast?
:36:58. > :37:04.The talks have been postponed because people are reassessing their
:37:05. > :37:10.position. and more are the columnist
:37:11. > :37:12.Newton Emerson and Dearbhail McDonnell
:37:13. > :37:15.from the Irish Independent. But first, today,
:37:16. > :37:17.tributes have been paid Mr Conlon was wrongly convicted of
:37:18. > :37:24.the 1974 Guildford IRA pub bombings he became a prominent campaigner
:37:25. > :37:29.for justice. His family said he had
:37:30. > :37:32."forced the world's closed eyes The images were powerful, the motion
:37:33. > :37:47.of a wronged man clearly visible as The images were powerful, the motion
:37:48. > :37:52.Gerry Conlon walked from the Old Bailey in 1989 to address the
:37:53. > :37:57.waiting media. I have been in prison for 15 years. For something I did
:37:58. > :38:02.not do. For something I did not know anything about. Gerry Conlon and
:38:03. > :38:06.three co-accused had been wrong to convicted of the 1974 IRA pub on
:38:07. > :38:10.things in Guildford that killed five people and injured 64 others. It was
:38:11. > :38:18.to be 15 years before those convictions were overturned either
:38:19. > :38:25.Court of Appeal. -- by the Court of Appeal. Who is this? Gerry Conlon.
:38:26. > :38:28.Do you have anything to say? I have cleared my conscience, I advise you
:38:29. > :38:35.to do the same. Their story was the subject of and Oscar-winning film
:38:36. > :38:40.starring Daniel Day-Lewis was a bit of the story of how Giuseppe Conlon
:38:41. > :38:45.had been caught up in it went he tried to help his son. He died while
:38:46. > :38:50.serving his sentence. His conviction was later quashed as well. It still
:38:51. > :38:55.haunts us that the British judiciary could get this so wrong and no for
:38:56. > :39:02.so long that innocent people went to prison. In recent years, Mr Conlon
:39:03. > :39:04.had taken interest in cases both internationally and at home where
:39:05. > :39:09.there have been claims of injustice. Including several involving
:39:10. > :39:12.dissident republicans. He did not cry about his own situation, you
:39:13. > :39:18.opened up the whole public mind in many ways, not just in Northern
:39:19. > :39:22.Ireland but Britain as well to the times when justice is not done.
:39:23. > :39:25.The SDLP leader Alasdair McDonnell on the death of Gerry Conlon.
:39:26. > :39:26.Alex Attwood, you were a friend Mr Conlon's.
:39:27. > :39:29.He'd been a supporter of the SDLP and had addressed the party
:39:30. > :39:45.Yes, he did support Irish democracy and hated injustice anywhere, like
:39:46. > :39:49.anyone who met Gerry Conlon, he was very bright, he was funny, he raged
:39:50. > :39:50.against injustice and miscarriages of justice wherever they were.
:39:51. > :39:53.What was his contribution in the past 25 years?
:39:54. > :40:01.I think that he Guildford case and what Jerry and others did, both
:40:02. > :40:05.inside prison and outside the prison, because a spotlight on the
:40:06. > :40:10.abuses of the state and, having done so, I think they opened up that
:40:11. > :40:14.issue of the many other miscarriages of justice, not just in respect of
:40:15. > :40:20.the conflict here but in other parts of the world. He also never wavered
:40:21. > :40:25.from support for Irish democracy. He raged against injustice and he
:40:26. > :40:27.defended democracy wherever it he thought it needed defending.
:40:28. > :40:31.the British justice system let Gerry Conlon down?
:40:32. > :40:38.I did not know him. I don't know a great deal about his story but it is
:40:39. > :40:42.quite clear that the justice system at the end of the day recognised
:40:43. > :40:48.that he had been wrongly imprisoned and he spent 15 years in prison for
:40:49. > :40:53.something he had not done, that must have a dramatic impact on an
:40:54. > :40:55.individual. Most people watching the programme today will say there has
:40:56. > :41:01.been another injustice and that is where people have been guilty of
:41:02. > :41:09.crimes and victims find no closure or no justice for those crimes.
:41:10. > :41:12.People who had relatives murdered, they will feel the same sense of
:41:13. > :41:19.injustice as Gerry Conlon must have felt.
:41:20. > :41:23.Nobody who has not committed a crime should not be good prison. No, we
:41:24. > :41:30.need to make sure that does not happen. I am sure that anyone who
:41:31. > :41:35.knows the story would accept that for someone to be behind bars for 15
:41:36. > :41:39.years for something they did not do must eat away like a cancer inside
:41:40. > :41:43.them. We will leave it there. We will hear from you again later.
:41:44. > :41:46.It's been seven years in the making, but finally this week
:41:47. > :41:48.the Executive published its Racial Equality Strategy.
:41:49. > :41:50.It came in a week when a Nigerian man, Michael Abiona,
:41:51. > :41:54.had to abandon plans to move into a house in the east of the city
:41:55. > :41:55.after residents staged a protest,
:41:56. > :41:57.demanding what they called "local housing for local people".
:41:58. > :42:00.Peter Robinson suggested the protest hadn't necessarily been motivated
:42:01. > :42:03.by racism, but could have been down to local pressure on housing.
:42:04. > :42:08.Here's what he told our Political Editor, Mark Devenport.
:42:09. > :42:17.I am not sure that this can be described as racism in terms of what
:42:18. > :42:23.the intention of the local people was. There is mass of concern, and
:42:24. > :42:30.local indie stands means very local. You might not have the same reaction
:42:31. > :42:34.if someone upcountry was moving in in regions where they are not able
:42:35. > :42:38.to get houses. Do you really think that will have been the case if they
:42:39. > :42:43.saw someone with white skin moving into the area? I know it has
:42:44. > :42:51.happened elsewhere. This is not a new phenomenon, there are people who
:42:52. > :42:53.have being brought up on housing estates or their lives, their
:42:54. > :42:57.children grew up on that area and they cannot get them housed in that
:42:58. > :43:01.area. There is a resentment that people from outside their local area
:43:02. > :43:06.are getting houses and they cannot get their children housed close to
:43:07. > :43:12.them. That has to be dealt with by the Housing Executive. It is not to
:43:13. > :43:16.do with those who apply and are granted accommodation in an area. I
:43:17. > :43:22.don't seek to have any justification in any way for that because that is
:43:23. > :43:28.what the rules and regulations are. I want to make it very clear that I
:43:29. > :43:31.oppose anything that suggests that people are unwelcome in Northern
:43:32. > :43:33.Ireland because of their racial background or because of the colour
:43:34. > :43:34.of their skin. Peter Robinson talking to
:43:35. > :43:36.Mark Devenport last week. Sammy Wilson
:43:37. > :43:38.and Alex Attwood are still here. Sammy Wilson - why didn't the
:43:39. > :43:40.First Minister come out and condemn the campaign against
:43:41. > :43:54.Mr Abiona as straightforward racism? At the end of the interview, I think
:43:55. > :43:57.that Peter Robinson has been unfairly criticised for this. At the
:43:58. > :44:03.end of the interview, he made it clear, in unequivocal terms that no
:44:04. > :44:07.one should have that kind of treatment meted out to them because
:44:08. > :44:16.of their race or colour. He was also unsure that it was racist. If you
:44:17. > :44:20.look at the full interview, he said that the police came to that case --
:44:21. > :44:26.that if the police came to that conclusion, they should look into it
:44:27. > :44:31.further. As far as he is concerned, no one should be subject to that
:44:32. > :44:36.kind of treatment because of where they come from, because of their
:44:37. > :44:37.ethnic Akram, because of their colour, their creed or anything like
:44:38. > :44:44.that. -- debt ethnic background. Why did he leave
:44:45. > :44:51.room for interpretation I don't think the fact were known at
:44:52. > :44:58.that stage. The next day, once it was clear how the police and Housing
:44:59. > :45:05.Executive were treated, he himself reinforced what he had said on the
:45:06. > :45:12.first day that it happened by the statement that he issued. I think it
:45:13. > :45:19.is unfair to say that he was in any way condoning any racist abuse of
:45:20. > :45:22.the particular individual, he wasn't, he made that clear from the
:45:23. > :45:26.start that that is wrong. It should not happen in Northern Ireland,
:45:27. > :45:33.Northern Ireland wants to be a welcoming place for individuals.
:45:34. > :45:35.In this case and in the Pastor McConnell case,
:45:36. > :45:38.he had to re-visit the issue to clarify what he meant. Why?
:45:39. > :45:45.To a certain extent, what he said and how it was interpreted was maybe
:45:46. > :45:57.sometimes beyond his control. I don't think that... He wrote his own
:45:58. > :46:04.script. At least you shall behold -- you showed the whole interview this
:46:05. > :46:06.time. He made it clear that it was not acceptable behaviour and that is
:46:07. > :46:17.the position that has always been the position and in light of the way
:46:18. > :46:29.it was interpreted, he reinforce that issue. It is the first point
:46:30. > :46:35.that everyone should be making, especially Peter Robinson,
:46:36. > :46:38.especially given the events of the last few weeks. There should be no
:46:39. > :46:43.doubt that is what Peter Robinson should have said first and should
:46:44. > :46:48.have said last. The fact that he left things hanging in the air in
:46:49. > :46:51.that interview and the fact that he had to come back the following day,
:46:52. > :46:55.I think tells the true story of what happened in those interviews. The
:46:56. > :47:01.point is, there is no ambiguity. Has been clarified. You should be happy.
:47:02. > :47:06.If people get on the right side of this argument, however long it
:47:07. > :47:11.takes, I welcome that. Peter Robinson got on the wrong side of
:47:12. > :47:14.the argument in that interview. Given what had happened to that
:47:15. > :47:18.family and given what happened over the last three or four weeks, and
:47:19. > :47:21.nobody should the on the wrong side of this argument, given what has
:47:22. > :47:32.happened over the last three or four weeks. At least Peter got on the
:47:33. > :47:42.right side of the ultimate. -- the right side of the argument. It is
:47:43. > :47:45.more than your party has done, not supporting the National Crime
:47:46. > :47:48.Agency, which would help to deal with some of the worst racial abuse,
:47:49. > :47:55.namely the trafficking of vulnerable people into Northern Ireland for
:47:56. > :47:59.exploitation. You got on the wrong side of the argument and you have
:48:00. > :48:03.never apologised for it. Let us do with one of those issues. I
:48:04. > :48:11.recognise my party recognises that we got on the wrong side of the
:48:12. > :48:15.argument in the respect of Clay Park, we recognise that, but there
:48:16. > :48:18.is a pattern of behaviour from Peter Robinson and I saw it around the
:48:19. > :48:22.executive table where his default position or his first position tends
:48:23. > :48:26.to be one of intolerance. You still can't apologise for it and you still
:48:27. > :48:29.can't apologise to the people who were hurt by it. That is the
:48:30. > :48:39.difference. Peter Robinson did apologise, your party... It is a bit
:48:40. > :48:49.rich. I want to go about the racial equality strategy, with its six
:48:50. > :48:55.approaches to tackling equality. Will it make a difference? It is
:48:56. > :48:58.difficult for any strategy or policy to change mindsets. I suppose it
:48:59. > :49:05.does take a long time through education, through other things that
:49:06. > :49:12.can be done, good to nudity relations programmes and so on --
:49:13. > :49:16.good community relations programmes. I think the executive has to at
:49:17. > :49:23.least respond to some of the issues that exist. Will it make any
:49:24. > :49:27.difference? It will make some difference but everybody knows that
:49:28. > :49:32.this is too little after the events of recent times and it is too late,
:49:33. > :49:37.given that this has come seven years after it was promised. What should
:49:38. > :49:41.we do? We should learn from how we best change behaviour in Northern
:49:42. > :49:45.Ireland over the years and what was that? It was tough law, it was hard
:49:46. > :49:48.enforcement. That is what we did when it came to policing, that is
:49:49. > :49:53.what we did with human rights and equality. Tough law, hard
:49:54. > :49:58.enforcement is the way to deal with these critical issues, including
:49:59. > :50:01.sectarianism and racism. That strategy does not do either of them.
:50:02. > :50:04.Maybe it should have come out quicker, seven years! It is too
:50:05. > :50:09.little, too late. Thank you. Listening to that
:50:10. > :50:11.are commentator Newton Emerson and Dearbhail McDonald
:50:12. > :50:12.from the Irish Independent. Newton, you wrote this week
:50:13. > :50:15.about the "staggering sense "of entitlement this subject
:50:16. > :50:27.provokes in Northern Ireland". Housing and racism, the two issues
:50:28. > :50:31.have been bound inextricably recently. They are in extra to be
:50:32. > :50:45.bound. -- in extremely bound. Immigrants have simply expose the
:50:46. > :50:50.hypocrisy we have all taken on board. Alex Attwood was talking
:50:51. > :50:56.about rights and equality and how outrageous this was, but his party
:50:57. > :50:59.was welcoming a report that called for the building of single identity
:51:00. > :51:05.areas in city centres rather than mixed areas. When you tell people
:51:06. > :51:13.they have a right to housing and that is their to nudity that has the
:51:14. > :51:23.right, of course you will get these -- community, of course you get
:51:24. > :51:31.these attitudes. Seeing Peter Robinson, the most benign
:51:32. > :51:36.interpretation you can have is that he had an extraordinary lapse of
:51:37. > :51:39.judgement on a consistent basis. I think the ambiguity that he promoted
:51:40. > :51:43.was actually to placate or to appease the people of East Belfast.
:51:44. > :51:48.He is on a different message because she is essentially reassuring them
:51:49. > :51:58.-- he is essentially reassuring them. I wonder if that is why he
:51:59. > :52:01.created that ambiguity. He is the First Minister of this entire
:52:02. > :52:04.jurisdiction and there is no room for racism at all.
:52:05. > :52:08.The DUP MP Nigel Dodds has accused the Parades' Commission of being
:52:09. > :52:11.characterised by weakness and caving in to the threat of violence.
:52:12. > :52:13.He made his comments over the continuing row about
:52:14. > :52:15.an Orange Order parade in North Belfast.
:52:16. > :52:17.The Commission has prevented Ligoniel Orangemen from,
:52:18. > :52:19.as they see it, completing last year's Twelfth Of July parade.
:52:20. > :52:22.Even though local talks have been postponed, there are still hopes
:52:23. > :52:24.that a last-minute agreement could be found.
:52:25. > :52:42.Here's our Political Reporter, Stephen Walker.
:52:43. > :52:49.What happens on the streets in the coming weeks may define Northern
:52:50. > :52:53.Ireland's summer. The issue of parading is at the top of the
:52:54. > :53:02.political agenda and the differences between the parties are as wide as
:53:03. > :53:10.ever. For nearly 350 days, there has been a protest at this camp over a
:53:11. > :53:16.ban to allow the order to complete their march. Some loyalists think
:53:17. > :53:24.nationalists are being unreasonable. Although want to do is take and they
:53:25. > :53:28.don't want any Orange feet on that land. We have been here for 37
:53:29. > :53:33.years. I have used those shops on a daily basis. The local discussions
:53:34. > :53:38.have now been put on ice. The talks have been postponed it is
:53:39. > :53:42.have now been put on ice. The talks reassessing their position. When you
:53:43. > :53:48.talk, the Republicans seem to have a veto on the parades. Gerry Kelly was
:53:49. > :53:53.also involved in talks aimed at brokering a deal. What the residents
:53:54. > :54:04.have done is they have presented their view. We have not been able to
:54:05. > :54:13.crack it yet. Have we made progress, yes we have. The best solution would
:54:14. > :54:17.be if the Parades' Commission on the ground that they established last
:54:18. > :54:21.year and the parameters of an acceptable compromise of the
:54:22. > :54:26.afternoon parade not taking place because it has provoked a reaction
:54:27. > :54:30.over a number of years, I think if the Parades' Commission was to stand
:54:31. > :54:35.that ground, they would gain credibility for being consistent.
:54:36. > :54:37.The DUP's Nigel Dodds says worries over violence have clearly
:54:38. > :54:44.influenced the commission's thinking. What happened was we had
:54:45. > :54:50.nationalist and republican politicians predicting a catastrophe
:54:51. > :55:11.and we had people on the public and side -- on the Republican side...
:55:12. > :55:19.That sends a bad message. Whatever the decisions are, the only issue is
:55:20. > :55:29.around the Parades' Commission. I will disagree with at times but
:55:30. > :55:34.there will be nothing else in place before the marching season. 12
:55:35. > :55:45.months on, there are hopes that last year's violent scenes will not be
:55:46. > :55:51.repeated. We have proved that we are for peaceful protest. A year on, the
:55:52. > :55:55.protest camp remains as does the key question, can politicians, the
:55:56. > :55:56.Orange Order and residents find a compromise before the 4th of July?
:55:57. > :56:03.-- the 12th of July. A spokesperson from the Parades'
:56:04. > :56:06.Commission told this programme the Commission "believes that local
:56:07. > :56:09.accommodation is the best way to "resolve complicated parading issues
:56:10. > :56:11.and is mindful of the efforts "being made by many individuals
:56:12. > :56:14.to resolve these matters." Let's hear more now from my guests
:56:15. > :56:35.of the day, Dearbhail and Newton. Is the success of a recent march
:56:36. > :56:45.important in your mind? Yes, but we have to be mindful that Robert --
:56:46. > :56:52.that Republicans will be testing the waters. The hearth process is going
:56:53. > :56:54.nowhere. What is happening? People are talking past each other rather
:56:55. > :56:59.than to each other. If we don't have that leadership at a high level, it
:57:00. > :57:04.does not bode well for the future. Unless you get a Clinton or some
:57:05. > :57:10.other figure or a good local solution for this chip, we won't. --
:57:11. > :57:16.for this year. For those of us watching us, it is the cost of this.
:57:17. > :57:17.?11 million. Imagine if you apply that to housing strategy.
:57:18. > :57:26.and have a look back at the week in 60 seconds, with Gareth Gordon.
:57:27. > :57:40.As a move by a Stormont committee to punish Gerry Kelly over this is
:57:41. > :57:48.blocked by somebody's, there is this reaction. Order! Order! I will
:57:49. > :57:57.remind members of the language they use in the chamber. But all smiles
:57:58. > :58:01.here. There is reputational damage because of our past. We want people
:58:02. > :58:10.to think of Northern Ireland and then think of golf. The police
:58:11. > :58:19.ombudsman say there was no evidence that the police knew of a plot to
:58:20. > :58:25.kill Gerry Adams 30 years ago. It is not Brazil, it is Northern Ireland.
:58:26. > :58:30.They captured the mood for community relations week.
:58:31. > :58:33.A final thought from Dearbhail and Newton.
:58:34. > :58:42.and we know the Queen will meet Martin McGuinness again.
:58:43. > :58:49.These events are really important, they are important but they have to
:58:50. > :58:53.be supplemented by real political leadership because there is no
:58:54. > :59:02.substitute for that. These events with the Queen are important but
:59:03. > :59:11.they are no replacement for proper government. The Queen and Martin
:59:12. > :59:14.McGuinness into getting along. This one will highlight the fact that it
:59:15. > :59:17.is a Unionist gesture. That's it from me -
:59:18. > :59:24.back to Andrew in London. and they will be obliged to tell
:59:25. > :59:41.you. Thanks for joining us. Andrew, back to you.
:59:42. > :59:47.think you'd want to. Labour grandees are not queueing up to sing his
:59:48. > :59:51.praises. Look at this. In my view, he is the leader we have and he is
:59:52. > :59:55.the leader I support and he is somebody capable of leading the
:59:56. > :00:02.party to victory. Ed Miliband will leave this to victory, and I believe
:00:03. > :00:07.he can. If he doesn't, what would happen to the Labour Party? We could
:00:08. > :00:11.be in the wilderness for 15 years. At the moment he has to convince
:00:12. > :00:16.people he has the capacity to lead the country. That's not my view, but
:00:17. > :00:19.people don't believe that. We had a leader of the Labour Party was
:00:20. > :00:26.publicly embarrassed, because whoever was in charge of press
:00:27. > :00:35.letting go through a process where we have councillors in Merseyside
:00:36. > :00:39.resigning. It was a schoolboy error. Having policies without them being
:00:40. > :00:49.drawn together into a convincing and vivid narrative and with what you do
:00:50. > :00:55.the people in the country. You have to draw together, connect the
:00:56. > :01:02.policies, link them back to the leader and give people a real sense
:01:03. > :01:07.of where you are going. Somehow he has never quite managed to be
:01:08. > :01:13.himself and create that identity with the public. And we are joined
:01:14. > :01:24.by the president of you girls, Peter Kellner. Welcome to the Sunday
:01:25. > :01:28.politics. -- YouGov. The Labour Party is six points ahead in your
:01:29. > :01:32.poll this morning. So what is the problem? On this basis he will win
:01:33. > :01:36.the next election. If the election were today and the figures held up,
:01:37. > :01:41.you would have a Labour government with a narrow overall majority. One
:01:42. > :01:47.should not forget that. Let me make three points. The first is, in past
:01:48. > :01:53.parliaments, opposition normally lose ground and governments gain
:01:54. > :01:54.ground in the final few months. The opposition should be further ahead
:01:55. > :01:58.than this. I opposition should be further ahead
:01:59. > :02:02.enough. Secondly, Ed Miliband is opposition should be further ahead
:02:03. > :02:04.behind David Cameron when people are asked who they want as Prime
:02:05. > :02:07.Minister and Labour is asked who they want as Prime
:02:08. > :02:09.Conservatives went people are asked who they trust on the economy. There
:02:10. > :02:13.have been elections when the party has won by being behind on
:02:14. > :02:18.leadership and other elections where they have won by being behind on the
:02:19. > :02:21.economy. No party has ever won an election when it has been clearly
:02:22. > :02:27.behind on both leadership and the economy. Let me have another go. The
:02:28. > :02:30.Labour Party brand is a strong brand. The Tory Bramleys
:02:31. > :02:35.Labour Party brand is a strong Labour brand is stronger. That is a
:02:36. > :02:42.blast -- the Labour -- the Tory Bramleys week. A lot of the
:02:43. > :02:49.blast -- the Labour -- the Tory -- the Tory brand is weak. Cant you
:02:50. > :02:55.win on policies and a strong party brand? If you have those too,
:02:56. > :02:57.win on policies and a strong party need the third factor which
:02:58. > :03:01.win on policies and a strong party have what it
:03:02. > :03:02.win on policies and a strong party skills, determination,
:03:03. > :03:03.win on policies and a strong party determination, whatever makes to
:03:04. > :03:07.carry through. determination, whatever makes to
:03:08. > :03:15.lot of Ed Miliband policies, on determination, whatever makes to
:03:16. > :03:17.banks, energy prices, Brent controls, people like them.
:03:18. > :03:18.banks, energy prices, Brent government, would they carry them
:03:19. > :03:24.banks, energy prices, Brent through? They think they are not up
:03:25. > :03:28.to it. -- rent controls. If people think you won't deliver what you
:03:29. > :03:32.say, even if they like it, they were necessarily vote for you. That is
:03:33. > :03:38.the missing third element. There is a strong Labour brand, but it's not
:03:39. > :03:44.strong enough to overcome the feeling that the Labour leadership
:03:45. > :03:48.is not up to it. Nick, you had some senior Labour figure telling you
:03:49. > :03:51.that if Mr Miliband losing the next election he will have to resign
:03:52. > :03:56.immediately and cannot fight another election the way Neil Kinnock did
:03:57. > :03:59.after 1987. What was remarkable to me was that people were even
:04:00. > :04:02.thinking along these lines, and even more remarkable that they would tell
:04:03. > :04:10.you they were thinking along these lines? What is the problem? The
:04:11. > :04:15.problem is, is that Ed Miliband says it would be unprecedented to win the
:04:16. > :04:19.general election after the second worst result since 1918. They are
:04:20. > :04:22.concerned about is the start of a script that he would say on the day
:04:23. > :04:25.after losing the general election. Essentially what the people are
:04:26. > :04:31.trying to do is get their argument in first and to say, you cannot do
:04:32. > :04:34.what Neil Kinnock did in 1987. Don't forget that Neil Kinnock in 1987 was
:04:35. > :04:40.in the middle of a very brave process of modernisation and had one
:04:41. > :04:43.and fought a very campaign that was professional but he lost again in
:04:44. > :04:50.1992, and they wanted to get their line in first. What some people are
:04:51. > :04:53.saying is that this is an election that the Labour Party should be
:04:54. > :04:56.winning because the coalition is so unpopular. If you don't win, I'm
:04:57. > :05:00.afraid to say, there is something wrong with you. Don't you find it
:05:01. > :05:03.remarkable that people are prepared to think along these lines at this
:05:04. > :05:07.stage, when Labour are ahead in the polls, still the bookies favourite
:05:08. > :05:11.to win, and you start to speak publicly, or in private to the
:05:12. > :05:16.public print, but we might have to get rid of him if he doesn't win.
:05:17. > :05:19.Everything you say about labour in this situation has been said about
:05:20. > :05:23.the Tories. We wondered whether Boris Johnson would tie himself to
:05:24. > :05:28.the mask and he is the next leader in waiting if Cameron goes. It's a
:05:29. > :05:31.mirror image of that. We talk about things being unprecedented. It's
:05:32. > :05:34.unprecedented for a government to gain seats. All the things you say
:05:35. > :05:39.about labour, you could say it the Conservatives. That's what makes the
:05:40. > :05:42.next election so interesting. But in the aftermath of the European
:05:43. > :05:45.elections and the local government elections, in which the
:05:46. > :05:49.Conservatives did not do that well, the issue was not Mr Cameron or the
:05:50. > :05:52.Tories doing well, the issue was the Labour Party and how they had not
:05:53. > :05:56.done as well as they should have done, and that conversation was
:05:57. > :06:01.fuelled by the kind of people who have been speaking to nick from the
:06:02. > :06:05.Labour Party. Rachel Reeves cited their real-life performance in
:06:06. > :06:09.elections as a reason for optimism. When in fact their performance in
:06:10. > :06:12.the Europeans and locals was disappointing for an opposition one
:06:13. > :06:16.year away from a general election. What alarms me about labour is the
:06:17. > :06:21.way they react to criticisms about Ed Miliband. Two years ago when he
:06:22. > :06:24.was attacked, they said they were 15 points ahead, and then a year ago
:06:25. > :06:29.there were saying they were nine or ten ahead, and now they are saying
:06:30. > :06:35.we are still five or six ahead. The trend is alarming. It points to a
:06:36. > :06:39.smaller Labour lead. Am I right in detecting a bit of a class war going
:06:40. > :06:44.on in the Labour Party? There are a lot of northern Labour MPs who think
:06:45. > :06:49.that Ed Miliband is to north London, and there are too many metropolitan
:06:50. > :06:55.cronies around him must I think that is right, Andrew. What I think is,
:06:56. > :07:00.being a pessimist in terms of their prospects, I do think the Labour
:07:01. > :07:04.Party could win the next election. I just don't think they can as they
:07:05. > :07:07.are going at the moment. But the positioning for a possible defeat,
:07:08. > :07:13.what they should be talking about is what do we need to change in the
:07:14. > :07:18.party and the way Ed Miliband performs in order to secure victory.
:07:19. > :07:22.That is a debate they could have, and they could make the changes. I
:07:23. > :07:28.find it odd that they are being so defeatist. Don't go away. Peter is a
:07:29. > :07:32.boffin when it comes to polls. That is why we have a mod for the
:07:33. > :07:36.election prediction swings and roundabouts. He is looking for what
:07:37. > :07:43.he calls the incumbency effect. Don't know what is a back-up -- what
:07:44. > :07:52.that's about question don't worry, here is an. Being in office is bad
:07:53. > :07:57.for your health. Political folk wisdom has it that incumbency
:07:58. > :08:01.favours one party in particular, the Liberal Democrats. That is because
:08:02. > :08:04.their MPs have a reputation as ferociously good local campaigners
:08:05. > :08:09.who do really well at holding on to their seats. However, this time
:08:10. > :08:14.round, several big-name long serving Liberal Democrats like Ming
:08:15. > :08:18.Campbell, David Heath and Don Foster are standing down. Does that mean
:08:19. > :08:23.the incumbency effect disappears like a puff of smoke? Then there is
:08:24. > :08:28.another theory, called the sophomore surge. It might sound like a movie
:08:29. > :08:32.about US college kids, but it goes like this. New MPs tend to do better
:08:33. > :08:36.in their second election than they did in their first. That could
:08:37. > :08:42.favour the Tories because they have lots of first-time MPs. The big
:08:43. > :08:45.question is, what does this mean for the 7th of May 2015, the date of the
:08:46. > :08:56.next general election? The answer is, who knows? I know a man who
:08:57. > :09:01.knows. Peter. What does it all mean? You can go onto your PC now and draw
:09:02. > :09:03.down programmes which say that these are the voting figures from a
:09:04. > :09:08.national poll, so what will the seats look like? This is based on
:09:09. > :09:12.uniform swing. Every seat moving up and down across the country in the
:09:13. > :09:18.same way. Historically, that's been a pretty good guide. I think that's
:09:19. > :09:21.going to completely break down next year, because the Lib Dems will
:09:22. > :09:27.probably hold on to more seats than we predict from the national figures
:09:28. > :09:30.and I think fewer Tory seats will go to the Labour Party than you would
:09:31. > :09:35.predict from the national figures. The precise numbers, I'm not going
:09:36. > :09:41.to be too precise, but I would be surprised, sorry, I would not be
:09:42. > :09:47.surprised if Labour fell 20 or 25 seats short on what we would expect
:09:48. > :09:52.on the uniform swing prediction. Next year's election will be tight.
:09:53. > :09:56.Falling 20 seats short could well mean the difference between victory
:09:57. > :10:01.and defeat. What you make of that, Helen? I think you're right,
:10:02. > :10:05.especially taking into account the UKIP effect. We have no idea about
:10:06. > :10:09.that. The conventional wisdom is that will drain away back to the
:10:10. > :10:13.Conservatives, but nobody knows, and it makes the next election almost
:10:14. > :10:16.impossible to call. It means it is a great target the people like Lord
:10:17. > :10:18.Ashcroft with marginal great target the people like Lord
:10:19. > :10:24.because people have never been so interested. It is for party politics
:10:25. > :10:30.and we all assume that UKIP should be well next year, but their vote
:10:31. > :10:35.went up from 17 up to 27%. Then that 17% went
:10:36. > :10:38.went up from 17 up to 27%. Then that only be five or 6% in the general
:10:39. > :10:41.election, so they might not have the threat of depriving Conservatives of
:10:42. > :10:45.their seats. Where the incumbency thing has an effect
:10:46. > :10:46.their seats. Where the incumbency Democrats. They have fortress
:10:47. > :10:50.their seats. Where the incumbency where between 1992 and 1997 Liberal
:10:51. > :10:55.Democrats seats fell, but their percentage went up. They are losing
:10:56. > :10:58.the local government base though. True, but having people like Ming
:10:59. > :10:59.Campbell standing down means they will struggle.
:11:00. > :11:05.Campbell standing down means they incumbency being an important factor
:11:06. > :11:07.in American politics. It's hard to get rid of an incumbent unless it is
:11:08. > :11:13.a primary election, like get rid of an incumbent unless it is
:11:14. > :11:16.important factor in British politics, that if you own the seat
:11:17. > :11:21.you're more likely to hold on politics, that if you own the seat
:11:22. > :11:25.than not? If it is, that's a remarkable thing. It's hard to be a
:11:26. > :11:26.carpetbagger in America, but it is normal in British Parliamentary
:11:27. > :11:29.constituencies to be represented normal in British Parliamentary
:11:30. > :11:32.someone who did not grow up locally. normal in British Parliamentary
:11:33. > :11:35.It is a special kind of achievement to have an incumbency effect where
:11:36. > :11:39.you don't have deep roots in the constituency. I was going to ask
:11:40. > :11:42.about the Lib Dems. If we are wrong, and they collapse in Parliamentary
:11:43. > :11:47.representation as much as the share in vote collapses, is that not good
:11:48. > :11:49.news is that the Conservatives? They would
:11:50. > :11:51.news is that the Conservatives? They majority of existing Lib Dems seats.
:11:52. > :11:55.For majority of existing Lib Dems seats.
:11:56. > :11:58.second to the Lib Dems, there are two where the Conservatives are
:11:59. > :12:06.second. If the Lib Dem representation collapses, that helps
:12:07. > :12:11.the Conservatives. I'm assuming the Tories will gain about ten seats. If
:12:12. > :12:14.they gain 20, if they'd had 20 more seats last time, they would have had
:12:15. > :12:20.a majority government, just about. So 20 seats off the Lib Dem, do the
:12:21. > :12:24.maths, as they say in America, and they could lose a handful to labour
:12:25. > :12:26.and still be able to run a one party, minority government. The fate
:12:27. > :12:29.of the Lib Dems could party, minority government. The fate
:12:30. > :12:36.the outcome to the politics of light. On the 8th of May, it will be
:12:37. > :12:41.VE Day and victory in election day as well as Europe. The Lib Dems will
:12:42. > :12:46.be apoplectic if they lose all of the seats to their coalition
:12:47. > :12:50.partners. The great quote by Angela Merkel, the little party always gets
:12:51. > :12:54.crushed. It's a well-established idea that coalition politics. They
:12:55. > :12:57.can't take credit for the things people like you may get lumbered
:12:58. > :13:01.with the ones they don't. They have contributed most of this terrible
:13:02. > :13:04.idea that seized politics where you say it, but you don't deliver it.
:13:05. > :13:10.Tuition fees is the classic example of this Parliament. Why should you
:13:11. > :13:14.believe any promise you make? And Ed Miliband is feeling that as well.
:13:15. > :13:19.But in 1974 the liberal Democrats barely had any MPs but there were
:13:20. > :13:21.reporters outside Jeremy Thorpe's home because they potentially held
:13:22. > :13:26.not the balance of power, but were significantly in fourth. Bringing
:13:27. > :13:30.back memories Jeremy Thorpe, and we will leave it there. Thanks to the
:13:31. > :13:34.panel. We are tomorrow on BBC Two. At the earlier time of 11am because
:13:35. > :13:39.of Wimbledon. Yes, it's that time of year again already. I will be back
:13:40. > :13:42.here at 11 o'clock next week. Remember, if it is Sunday, it is the
:13:43. > :13:46.Sunday Politics.