06/07/2014 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland


Mark Carruthers looks at the political developments of the week and questions policy makers on the key issues.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 06/07/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Up to a million public sector workers will strike this week.


It's one of the biggest walk-outs since 2010.


The country's top trade unionist Frances O'Grady and


The Tour de France seems to have cheered him up - just as well


for the Deputy Prime Minister hasn't got much else to smile about.


Nick Clegg joins me live from Sheffield to discuss the


Just over ten weeks until Scotland determines its future.


The man leading the campaign AGAINST independence, Alistair Darling,


The executive business offer as a result of Unionist action. I will be


discussing that with Danny Kennedy and Stephen very.


journalists always ahead of the peleton - Nick Watt,


They'll be tweeting faster than Tour de France cyclists can pedal.


The news is dominated this morning by stories swirling


around allegations of an historic Westminster paedophile ring.


Concern has grown because of the disappearance of a dossier


handed over to the Home Office in 1983, along with over 100 official


files related to it and possibly containing details of historic child


Labour is calling for a public inquiry led by a child protection


But speaking earlier on The Andrew Marr Show this morning


the Education Secretary Michael Gove ruled that out.


The most important thing that we need to do is ensure that the due


process of law pursues those who may be guilty of individual crimes and


we also learn lessons about what may or may not have gone wrong in the


past, but it is also important to emphasise that many of the


allegations that are being made are historic. And what we do now in


order to keep children safer is better and stronger than was the


case when 20 or 30 years ago. Without getting into a boring


tit-for-tat, public inquiry, "yes" or "no"? No. Helen, can the


Government go on resisting calls for a full-scale inquiry? It is very


hard. There are cynical and non-cynical reasons for calling for


an inquiry. The cynical one allows you to say I can't comment on this.


The non-cynical is it manages to get people to air allegations in a way


that is safe. What we saw at the Leveson Inquiry was helpful, people


who felt they had been shut out from justice getting a chance to tell


their side of the story. A public inquiry in this case is a good idea.


Labour have called for a lot of public inquiries. A list was made in


2012 of how many they called for. Not only Savile, but the West Coast


Main Line and breast implants. On this particular issue, the people


don't trust the politicians, they don't trust the police either


because they may have been complicit in a cover-up. They may not trust


the Home Office who we are told some of their officials were mentioned in


the dossier? That is what David Cameron is hanging on to. This is a


matter now because they are alleged criminal activity, it is for the


police to investigate. In that big piece in the Sunday Times, Tim


Shipman reports one of the people making the allegations lives in the


United States making the allegations lives in the


been out to the United States to interview him. The Prime Minister


would say that is how serious the police are taking it. The problem


for the Prime Minister - he police are taking it. The problem


allergic to big public inquiry. His finest moment was his response to


the Bloody Sunday inquiry shortly after he became Prime


inrequest -- that inquiry took 12 years to report. The problem is the


dossier has gone missing, the files have gone missing, more allegations


keep coming out either directly or indirectly. It doesn't look like it


is going to go away? The fact the dossiers are missing means it is


inappropriate for the Home Office to be investigating this. There is


inappropriate for the Home Office to a police investigation. If after


that, there are questions unanswered which can only be answered by


that, there are questions unanswered public inquiry, or which require


resources that can only be commanded by a public inquiry, I could see the


case for going down that road. I fear that sometimes in this country


we invest almost supernatural powers in what a public inquiry can do. I


wonder whether there is another example of a country that goes


through this stale ritual every few years of a scandal emerging, the


opposition calling for an inquiry, the Government saying no and then


holding the line or giving in. I don't know what we think this


inquiries can do. It comes back to your point, Helen, you should be


careful what you call an inquiry on so it doesn't devalue the concept.


On Thursday up to a million public sector workers - including teachers,


firemen and council workers - will go on strike.


Their unions have differing gripes but the fact they're all striking


on the same day is designed to send a strong message to the government.


As the economy picks up again they're demanding an end


Growth has returned strongly to the UK economy


and unemployment is at its lowest level for more than five years.


So why is there still talk of austerity


The deficit is coming down but much more slowly than the government


And accumulated deficits - the national debt -


The UK is now in hock to the tune of ?1.3 trillion - and rising.


In fact, we're only 40% of the way through George Osborne's planned


austerity, with the chancellor now saying he won't manage to balance


Unions are now rebelling against tight pay controls.


Since 2010, average public sector pay, which goes to about 1 in 5


Over the same period, prices increased by 16% -


meaning the average public sector worker saw their pay squeezed


Going head-to-head on the public sector strikes and austerity -


the general secretary of the TUC Frances O'Grady, and Conservative


We have seen it, public sector pay squeezed by 9% under the Coalition


Government. Isn't it time to take your foot off the brake a bit? I


don't think it is the right time to let go of the public finances at


all. We were always clear that this is what's called a structural


deficit, it doesn't go away just because the growth is returning and


the economy is coming back. We have protected and are protecting the


lowest paid public sector workers who weren't part of the pay freeze


and now pay going up by 1%. These are difficult decisions. We have had


that discussion many times. They are necessary in order to keep that plan


on track and as we can see in the wider economy, it is working.


People's living standards will have to continue to fall if you are in


the public sector? We need to keep public spending under control and


pay restraint is one of the main ways of being able... The answer is


yes? The answer is this is necessary. The answer is yes, this


is necessary. It isn't because we want to. We have to. This strike


isn't going to change the Government's mind, is it? It does


seem like the Government isn't listening. We have had years... They


are listening, they just don't agree. Ordinary people, including


those in the public sector, are finding it really tough. What really


sticks in the throat is the idea that money can


sticks in the throat is the idea cuts to billionaires, to


millionaires and to cuts to billionaires, to


corporations. But it can't cuts to billionaires, to


to help 500,000 workers in local government, dinner ladies, school


meal workers, lollipop men and women who are earning less than the


meal workers, lollipop men and women wage. What do you say to that? We


have protected those who are the least well-paid in the public


sector. But this is about a long-term... How can you? Hold on.


You have said you long-term... How can you? Hold on.


them. This long-term... How can you? Hold on.


many watching this programme, they long-term... How can you? Hold on.


have had a 1% pay rise in some cases since 2010. The average gas bill is


up 57%, electric bill up 22%, food costs up 16%, running a car 11%, in


what way have you protected people from spending they have to make?


Firstly, you read out the average increases in public sector pay. That


has had the biggest impact at the top end and those at the bottom end


have been best protected, as best we could. Of course, we have also taken


two million people out of income tax and increased the income tax


threshold which has a big positive impact. We have frozen and then cut


fuel duty, which would have been 20 pence higher. I wanted to take on


this point about priorities. We have got to make sure that we get the


economy going at the same time and we raised more money from those at


the top than we did before 2010, partly because we have encouraged


them to invest. And this is a really important balance of making sure we


get the books back in order, we have stability for family finances and we


get the economy going. Why not spread the living wage? We know you


could pay for that pay increase itself if you spread the living wage


through the private sector and guarantee... The living wage being


above the minimum wage? Absolutely. ?7.65 in the rest of the country,


?8.80 in London. What is the answer? I'm a fan of the minimum wage. But


not for public sector workers. Being able to pay low-paid workers as much


as possible within the constraints of the public finances is something


I have pushed very hard. The evidence we can increase the minimum


wage has to be balanced which the Low Pay Commission do with the


impact on the number of jobs... Even after a pay freeze for quite a while


among public sector workers, they are still paid 15% on average more


than those in the private sector? That is not true. It is, according


to the ONS figures. I read that report this morning. If you look at


the whole package, what they are saying is public service workers are


worse off. Average earnings in the public sector are ?16.28 an hour


compared to ?14.16 private. You are comparing apples and pears. It's the


kind of jobs and the size of the workplace that people work in. They


are still overall on average better off? Lower paid workers tend to be


better off because unions negotiate better deals for lower paid workers.


They are more unionised in the pry private sector. The public sector is


worse off. This is a political strike, isn't it? There is a whole


disparate range of reasons. The strike is saying that you are


against this Government, that is what this is about? I this I what


firefighters, local government workers and health workers who are


protesting, too, alongside teachers are saying is that this Government


is not listening, it is out of touch, people can't carry on having


cuts in their living standards depending on benefits. When will the


public sector worker ever get a real increase in their pay under a


Conservative Government? Well, we certainly hope to have the books


balanced by 2018. Not before then? 2018 is when we hope to be able to


be in surplus. It is testament... So, no real pay increase for public


sector workers before 2018? Interestingly, this isn't just about


the Conservatives and the Lib Dems, the Labour Party leadership have


said it is a test of their credibility that they support the


squeeze on public sector pay. I look forward to them, they ought to come


out and say very clearly that these strikes are wrong and they are


against the strikes and stop taking union money. It is a democratic


right. Hold on. They are - they think the policy of pay restraint is


necessary. Alright. On this point about democracy... Ask yourself why


so many ordinary decent public service workers are so fed up. They


have seen so many billions of pounds wasted through outsourcing to


organisations like G4 S. In Unite and UNISON the turnout in this vote


was under 20%. Alright. OK. One final question... Hold on. You said


millions and millions voted on this... I want to ask you this


question. Is the story in the Mail on Sunday today that Mr Cameron's


planning a big crackdown on the unions over balloting, is that true?


Well, strikes like this... I know the cases, is it true you are going


to dhang the law? Strikes like this make that argument stronger. The


Conservative Party is in Government on the basis of 23% of the


electorate... We have run out of time. Thank you very much.


"Should Scotland be an independent country?"


That's the question the people of Scotland will answer in a referendum


If the polls are to be believed, the voters will answer "no".


But in 2011 - ten weeks before the Holyrood elections - the polls


told us that Labour was going to win and look what happened there - a


Alistair Darling is leading the campaign against independnence.


is one that puts the matter of independence to bed for a


generation. In numerical terms, what would that be? We need a decisive


result in September, I think we will get that provided we get our


arguments across in the next couple of months. What would it be in


figures? I am not going to put a number on it. People will look at it


and say, OK, you have had two and a half years of debate and Scotland


has now decided. The polls may be encouraging at the moment but I am


not complacent, there is still a long way to go. Speculating... If


you don't want to answer that, that is fair enough. Your side claims


that a vote for independence is a vote for massive uncertainty but if


it is a no vote there is lots of uncertainty too. All of the


Westminster parties are promising devolution but there is no


timetable, no certainty. Yes, there is. For the first time I can


remember, all three parties are more or less on the same page in terms of


additional powers, we already have powers in terms of policing and


transport, now more powers are planned in relation to tax and


welfare. But you are all saying different things. Between 2009 and


2012, the three parties have slightly different proposals but


they came together and there was an agreed series of reforms in relation


to tax which are now on the statute book. If you go back to the


devolutionary settlement in 1998, people unified around a single


proposition so there is history here and these three parties have


delivered and they will deliver in the event of people saying we will


stay part of the UK. If Scotland vote no to independence, when will


Scotland get these extra powers? I would imagine that in the general


election all three parties will have something in their manifesto and you


would expect to see legislation in the session of Parliament that


follows that. Imagining is not certainty. Because the three parties


have said this is what they will do, and it is important having said that


they stick to it. If you look in the past when the Nationalists said the


same thing, when they cast doubt over what would happen in 2012, we


delivered. The only party that walked out of both of these


discussions were the Nationalists because they are not interested in


more powers, they want a because they are not interested in


break. You cannot because they are not interested in


Edinburgh gets more devolution that wouldn't mean fewer Scottish MPs in


Westminster, can you? Nobody has any plans to reduce the number of MPs.


If you step back from this moment, what people have been asked to do in


September is to vote on the future of their country, Scotland, and


whether we should be part of the UK. When I say part of the UK, full


members of the UK with representation in the House of


Commons and the institutions that affect our lives. This is a


critically important vote. We want to see more decentralisation of


power to Scotland, and to local authorities within Scotland, but we


don't want a complete break with the uncertainties, the risks and the


downright disadvantages that would throw Scotland's away if we were to


make that break. The economic arguments are dominating people's


thinking, the polls show, that is what is dominating at the moment.


You cannot guarantee continued membership of the European Union


given all the talk now about an in-out UK referendum. Firstly I


don't think anyone has ever argued Scotland wouldn't get back in. The


big question is the terms and conditions we would have to meet and


we are applying to get into something that is established, it


wouldn't be a negotiation. What we have said is there is no way Europe


would let Scotland keep the rebate which Scotland has, there would be


big questions over whether we have to join the euro, and other terms


and conditions. The European Union does not act with any great speed,


on average it takes eight and a half years to get into Europe. I don't


want that uncertainty or the disadvantages that would come


Scotland's away that come with losing clout in the European Union.


The second point you asked me about is in relation to the UK's


membership of the European Union, and if you look at polls, the


majority of people still want to stay in the UK. Frankly, a lot of


people on my side didn't make the argument against independence for a


long time, we have been doing that over the last two and a half years


and we are making progress and that is why I can say I think we will win


provided we continue to get our arguments across. Similarly with the


European Union, the case needs to be made because it is a powerful case.


Isn't it true that the Nationalists win either way? They win if it is a


yes vote, and they win if it is a no vote. They wanted devolution max so


they win either way. There is a world of difference between


devolution and further devolution where you remain part of the UK.


There is a world of difference between that and making a break,


where Scotland becomes a foreign country to the rest of the UK. You


lose that security and those opportunities. You lose the same


currency, the opportunity with pensions and so on. They are


entitled to argue this case with passion, they want a break, but the


two things are worlds apart. Gordon Brown said that the no campaign was


too negative, have you adjusted to take that criticism into account?


Ever since I launched this campaign over two years ago I said we would


make a strong powerful case for remaining part of the UK. Look at


our research, where we have had warnings from people to say that if


we do well with research in Scotland we get more than our population


share of the grand and we gain from that. There is a positive case but


equally nobody will stop me from saying to the Nationalists, look at


the assertions you make which are collapsing like skittles at the


moment. Their assertions don't stand up. They assert that somehow milk


and honey will be flowing. It is perfectly healthy within a


referendum campaign to say that what you are saying simply isn't true.


You have been negative, we all know about the so-called Cyber Nats book


you compared Alex Salmond to the leader of North Korea. On! The


context was that Alex Salmond was being asked why it was that UKIP had


additional seat and he appeared to blame television being been doing


from another country, from BBC South of the border. If you cannot have


humour in a debate, heaven help us. I think it is important in this


debate that people from outside politics should be allowed to have


their say whatever side they are on because that will make for a far


better, healthier debate. Nobody should be put in a state of fear and


alarm by worrying about what will happen if they stand up. Despite the


nastiness, more and more people are making a stand. We have run out of


time. Thank you. I will be talking to the SNP's


hippity leader, Nicola Sturgeon, next week on Sunday Politics.


Scotland: For Richer or Poorer will be on BBC Two at 9pm tomorrow.


Disastrous results in the European elections, it is fair to say the Lib


Dems are down in the doldrums. In a moment I will be speaking to Nick


Clegg, but first Emily has been asking what Lib Dems would say to


the Prime -- Deputy Prime Minister on Call Clegg. Our phone in this


week is the challenges facing the Liberal Democrats. They are rock


bottom in the polls and have dire results in the local and European


elections so what can the party do to turn things around? Get in


touch, we are going straight to line one and Gareth. How much is a


problem of that loss of local support? It is a massive problem


because those are the building blocks of our success. The


councillors who gets the case work done are also the people who go out


and deliver the leaflets and knock on doors. Interesting, and it is not


just local support the party has lost, is it? In the next general


election there are some big-name Liberal Democrat MPs standing down


like Malcolm Bruce and Ming Campbell, how much of a problem will


that be? That is a real challenge and we have some of our brightest


and best reaching an age of maturity at the same moment so that is quite


an additional test in what will be a difficult election anyway. So how


does the party need to position itself to win back support? Let's go


to Chris online free, has the party got its strategy right? There is


always a danger of appearing to be a party that merely dilutes Labour or


dilutes the Conservatives. We have a of is serious, positive messages and


we need to get those across in the next election because


we need to get those across in the people will vote for the Tories.


Nick, what do you think of the party's message at the moment? I


have had a look at early draft of our manifesto and there is some good


stuff in there but the authors are probably too interested in what may


think we have achieved in the last five years and not really focusing


on what the voters will want to be hearing about the next five years.


Perhaps they should get out more and test some of these messages on the


doorstep. So you want to see the top ranks of the party on the doorstep.


Gareth online one also wants to make a point about the manifesto. There


is clearly a problem somewhere near the top and there are some people


who seem to be obsessed with power for power's sake, and happy with a


timid offer but the Liberal Democrats want to change things. We


are running out of time so let's try to squeeze one more call in. What


are your thoughts on the long-term future of the party? I think serious


long-term danger is that the party could be relegated to the fringes of


the UK and no longer being a national party. We have gone back


decades if that happens because for many years we have been represented


in every part of the country at some level and we have got to rescue


ourselves from that. Some interesting views but we are going


to have to wait until the general election next year to find out how


well the Lib Dems face up to these challenges. Thanks for listening, we


are going to finish with an old classic now.


# I'm sorry, I'm sorry... #. Nick Clegg, welcome to the


programme. I want to come onto your situation in a minute but as you


will have seen in the papers, there is mounting concern over and


historic Westminster paedophile ring, and files relating to it


mysteriously disappearing. Why are you against a full public enquiry


into this? I wouldn't rule anything out. I think we should do anything


it takes to uncover this and achieve justice.


delivered, even all these many years later. How do you do it? There is an


inquiry in the Home Office about what's happened to these documents,


serious questions need to be asked about what happened in the Home


Office and those questions need to be answered. There are inquiries in


the BBC, in the NHS and most importantly of all the police are


looking into the places where this abuse was alleged to have taken


place. All I would say is, let's make sure that justice is delivered,


truth is uncovered and I think that the way to do that, as we have seen,


is by allowing the police to get on with their work. You say that, but


there are only seven police involved in this inquiry. There are 195


involved in the hacking investigations. We can both agree


that child abuse is more important and serious than hacking. The Home


Office, there are reports that Home Office officials may have been


mentioned in the dossier, people don't trust people to investigate


themselves, Mr Clegg? No, I accept that we need to make sure that - and


the police need to make sure that the police investigations are


thorough, well resourced. I can't think of anything more horrendous, I


can't, than powerful people organising themselves and worse


still, this is what is alleged, covering up for each other to abuse


the most vulnerable people in society's care - children. But at


the end of the day, the only way you can get people in the dock, the only


way you can get people charged, is by allowing the prosecuting


authorities and the police to do their job. I have an open mind about


what other inquiries take place. A number of other inquiries are taking


place. I assume any additional inquiries wouldn't be able to second


guess or look into the matters which the police are looking into already.


All I would say is that people who have information, who want to


provide information which they think is relevant to this, please get in


touch with the police. Alright. Let's come on to our own inquiry


into the state of the Lib Dems. You have attempted to distance yourself


and the party from the Tories, but still stay in Government - it is


called aggressive differentiation. Why isn't it working? It's not


called aggressive differentiation. It is called "coalition". It is two


parties who retain different identities, different values, have


different aspirations for the future. But during this Parliament


have come together because we were facing a unique national emergency


back in 2010, the economy was teetering on the edge of a


precipice. I'm immensely proud, notwithstanding our political


challenges, which are real, I'm immensely proud that the Liberal


Democrats, we stepped up to the plate, held our nerve and without


the Liberal Democrats, there wouldn't now be that economic


recovery which is helping many people across the country. Why


aren't you getting any credit for it? Well, we won't get credit if we


spend all our time staring at our navals. If it wasn't for the Liberal


Democrats, there wouldn't be more jobs now available to people. They


don't believe you, they are giving the Tories the credit for the


recovery? Well, you might assert that, we will assert and I will


shout it from the rooftops that if we had not created the stability by


forming this Coalition Government and then hard-wired into the


Government's plans, not only the gory job of fixing the public


finances, but doing so much more fairly than would have been the


case, if the Conservatives had been in Government on their own, they


wouldn't have delivered these tax cuts. They wouldn't have delivered


the triple lock guarantee for pensions or the pupil premium. OK.


Why are you 8% in the polls? Well, because I think where we get our


message across - and I am here in my own constituency - this is a


constituency where I am a campaigning MP - we can dispel a lot


of the information and say we have done a decent thing by going into


Government and we have delivered big changes, big reforms which you can


touch and see in your school, in your pensions, in your taxes and


then people do support us and, in our areas of strength, we were


winning against both the Conservative and Labour parties. It


is a big effort. Of course, there are lots of people from both left


and right who want to shout us down and want to vilify our role in


Government. What we also need to do - and Nick Harvey was quite right -


having been proud of our record of delivery, we also need to set out in


our manifesto as we are and as we will our promise of more, of more


support in schools. So why is it then... Why is it then that a Lib


Dem MP in our own film says you are in danger of no longer becoming a


National Party. That could be the Clegg legacy, you cease to be a


National Party? I'm a practical man. I believe passionately in what we


have done in politics. I am so proud of my party. I don't spend that much


time speculating that the end might be nigh. There is no point in doing


that. Let's get out there, which is what I do in my own constituency, in


challenges circumstances and say we are proud of what we have done, we


have done a good thing for the country, we have delivered more


Liberal Democrat policies than the party has ever dreamed delivering


before. We have a programme of change, of reform, of liberal


reform, which is very exciting. Just over the last few weeks, I have been


setting out our plans to provide more help to carers, to make sure


teachers in every classroom are properly qualified, that all kids in


school are being taught a proper core curriculum. That parts company


from the ideological rigidities with which the Conservatives deal with


education policy. Those are thing which speak to many of the values


that people who support us... Alright. When Mike Storey gets out


and about, he told this programme two weeks' ago that he finds that


you "are toxic on the doorstep". Look, as everybody knows, being the


leader of a party, which for the first time in its history goes into


Government, which is already a controversial thing to do because


you are governing with our enemies, the Conservatives, and on top of


that, doing all the difficult and unpopular things to fix the broken


economy which was left to us by Labour, of course as leader of that


party I get a lot of incoming fire from right and left. The right say


that I'm stopping the Conservatives doing what they want. There is a


good reason for that. They didn't win the election. The left say that


somehow we have lost our soul when we haven't. That happens day in, day


out. Of course that will have some effect. My answer to that is not to


buckle to those criticisms, those misplaced Chris -- criticisms from


left and right, but to stand up proudly. Is it your intention to


fight the next election against an in-out referendum on Europe? Yes.


Unless there is major treaty change? Our position hasn't waivered, it


won't waiver, we are not going to flip-flop on the issue of the


referendum like the Conservatives did. We want an in-out referendum.


With ve legislated for the trigger when that will happen, when in u


powers are transferred to the European Union. That is what we have


said for years. We legislated for that... So no change? No change.


Alright. We are expecting a reshuffle shortly. Will you keep


Vince Cable as Business Secretary to the election? I'm immensely proud of


what Vince has done. Yes, I intend to make sure that Vince continues to


serve in the Government in his present capacity Look what he has


done on apprenticeships, he's done more than many people for many years


to make sure we build-up manufacturing, the north here, not


just the south. I'm proud of what he's done. We have talked about some


heavy things. We know you have got into kickboxing. Is there any danger


of you becoming a mammal - you know what I mean - a middle-aged man in


Lycra! Will the Tour de France influence you? Absolutely no risk of


that whatsoever having seen the Tour de France start yesterday near


Leeds. I have the yellow Yorkshire sign on my pullover. I will see them


later whisk through my constituency. I will not try to emulate them. I'm


sure that is to the relief of a grateful nation. Thank you.


It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.


We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now


for Sunday Politics Scotland. Coming up here in 20 minutes,


the Week Ahead. First


Welcome to Sunday Politics in Northern Ireland. Talks are dead in


the water, we ask if executive business will be a casual list of


Unionist protest. Joining me on ministers from the Ulster Unionists


and Alliance Party 's. John McAllister takes his leave of 921,


we look back at the political romance that went sour. He joins me


alive. My guests are two journalists.


The talks collapsed after 24 hours, the North-South ministerial meetings


where respond. The fallout so far from the Parades Commission


determination. They wanted to what past the Ardoyne shops on the 4th of


July. -- the 12th of July. It is unclear if that will happen. Are the


basic functions of government going to fall victim to these latest wave


of protests? Danny Kennedy and Stephen Ferry join me this morning.


There is obviously crucial work to be done this week for all the people


of Northern Ireland. Can you reassure people watching this


programme that unlike the talks at the ministerial Council, that will


not be impacted by this new pan you nursed action? I have ministers in


the executive. We were working on issues last week. I had a meeting


with the Transport Minister discussing issues of mutual


concern. The work of the executive ministers and the work of everything


related to the governance of the country is continuing. I hope the


executive will proceed to deal with the normal business. It will also


deal with the issue of today, the Ardoyne parade. We have got to read


as an executive with those issues. I would ask for that matter to be


fully discussed around the executive table. Why is that an executive


issue? Because it is of vital importance to the stability and


public order and all the issues we are aware of. Why wouldn't the


executive what to discuss the issue of the day that is dominating


discussion at the moment. I think there is an opportunity. I am


interested to see how the other parties react. What happens if your


executive colleagues do not want to discuss this? I would be astonished.


That those at the top of government level would not


That those at the top of government these issues. Danny is free to break


it up. If he does there will be a discussion about that. We had talks


last week where Danny's party walked out and the DUP. Over a


last week where Danny's party walked one particular parade, people will


walk away from the table rather than discuss the future of parades. We


have to bear in mind that there are established procedures to deal


have to bear in mind that there are Commission. People may not like


that, Commission. People may not like


that there has to be a referee like in the World Cup. We


that there has to be a referee like agreement. They are the only sure in


town, they are the only law, we have to respect their decisions. Can we


discussed this issue. You were pressed on this on Thursday, but she


walked out. Now you want to put this on the agenda on Tuesday for the


executive meeting. There is a difference between all-party


negotiations and executive business. I think we do have to deal with the


here and now. It is very interesting that Stephen seems to be indicating


that he doesn't want to talk about this specific case of Ardoyne and


the way we are approaching it. People will find that astonishing


from senior parties and senior politicians because it is one thing


to be in discussions and negotiations about longer-term


solutions, and those talks are about longer-term solutions for that, but


we are in the here and now. We are at a difficult and challenging


point. Why cannot politicians at the highest level working in Northern


Ireland now want to engage? I am happy to have a discussion. We have


to give their place and give them... They have not been given


their place now and they are now off the agenda. You going to take that


on Tuesday? Let's make a linkage between the economic and financial


costs on what is happening with parades on a wider policies. It is


costing towers -- is ?10 million on police. Who knows what will happen


in the next week with what will happen on the streets, what will be


the direct financial costs? What are the political consequences


potentially of this graduated response that the joint Unionist


statement that was issued on Thursday? What can we expect to see


happen in the next couple of weeks? It will depend on progress of the


lack of it. It will be a graduated response. Not necessarily an


accelerated response. Is there a template or are you just making this


up on the roof? No, we're not making this up on the hoof. We want to see


progress on all these issues, that is important. It will be interesting


to see who is against it. Who wants to see progress on resolving the


Ardoyne issue. Before I go back to Stephen Ferry, in the meantime, is


the message from you as a senior member of the Ulster Unionist Party,


that you do not want to see this issue brought up in the streets? Our


preference is that Google is not brought up in the streets, that it


is resolved. The graduated response is creating stability --


instability. People do not know what it means. There is a danger here. We


have to establish that are executive collectively can work, ministers


individually may be doing a good job, there is the image of


dysfunction. That has not been challenged. You see the institutions


are imperilled by what you have heard in the past? It is premature


to say. There is signs in terms of the rhetoric that has been used,


there is a degree of uncertainty out there. It is not just a case of


whether the institutions will stay, we need to change gears and the


executive has to be seen to be delivering. The institutions have


been put under threat by the behaviour of the Parades Commission


and those who threaten the Parades Commission, do you agree with that?


It is completely wrong. Peter Robinson said this, do you agree?


What I am more interested in is finding a resolution around the


executive tables and is -- at executive level. As part of the


graduated response, you will wrap things up and that could mean


bringing people out onto the streets. Maybe your preference will


come to be? I am not going to predict forthcoming events. What I


want to do is deal with the here and now and the best way of dealing that


in my view and in the view of my party is to have these discussions


fully heard, there is accessed through the Unionist party, they


would have opinions through the Orange Order, accessed through Sinn


Fein. I think those issues need to be seriously challenged and


explored. We will leave it there. Let's get some response from my


guests of the day. Leon, do you get a sense that we are heading down a


one way street with this? I do not think it is for certain yet. Peter


Robinson has threatened the collapse of the institutions before. When we


get into this territory, eventually you could topple it. I think it is


unlikely we will have a resolution to this issue. You would like to


thank the executive could put out of joint statement calling for peace.


That is not going to be forthcoming. Suzanne, do you think it is


reasonable that the executive discuss this as part of the agenda


on Tuesday? Yes, of course it is reasonable. It is this is that


looking at other political debates over recent days, our politicians do


not look like they are members of government. They look like critters


of government. They look like participants way they have been


fighting. There is disappointment -- disagreements within parties. I


could not picture Nick Clegg by David Cameron arguing over what is


such a minor matter, a six minute walk down a road. Really, it is the


politics of the playground, they really need to grow up. Do you think


there are unionists who want to call at the institutions to trigger new


elections? I think that is something they are contemplating but I am not


sure it would be a good outcome for the DUP if they were collapsed. I


would think they would want to hold back on that for a while. Thank you


very much. There was one party that lost its whole group. John


McAllister finally quit. It was described as the most toxic


experience of his life. With a possible investigation by the


assembly standards commission for alleged inappropriate sexual


behaviour hanging over him. In a moment we will hear from John


McAllister. First we look at how the fledgling party imploded so


spectacularly and asks if it has any future at all. It began well.


It promised the politics of change. What are they about?


Now they are together now more. For lights and spectacular not even John


McAllister and the former party the Ulster Unionists ever match that.


How did it happen? Even early on there were differences over how N121


would operate. John McAllister said he's it is a political party. But


the wheels came off when this former N121 employee made allegations of


sexually inappropriate behaviour against Basil McAfee in, allegations


he denies. John McAllister instigated an investigation. That


investigation has now been halted instigated an investigation. That


disappointed about how her complaint was handled. They are in the


disappointed about how her complaint of sanding them into the


Commissioner for standards. She is confident this is the correct route


to follow. It is for Mr Bean to decide if Mr McRae has committed a


breach of the members code of conduct. So how is all of this going


down with those who still believe in the N121 dream? The only candidate


to get elected at the recent council elections was asked. I stood for


election for N121. I believe in the dream of N121. There is no other


place for me before the election. Does the party have a future? Of


course, there is a band of people working with the core of the party


to build it up. I am not going to lie to you and say to you there has


not been series issues over the past month. There are a core of people


working hard to build this party up to be weighed it should be. Others


have given up. This council candidate was part of the Queen's


Birthday University N121 party which recently folded. We thought it was


unacceptable for them to be reacting in such a way. We at them to leave.


Have you left? Yes. Has it that the mob politics? The ice behind --


ideas behind N121 were good. I might join another political party. For


Johnny McCarthy, the dream leaves on. -- lives on. There are so many


people convinced by a strong Northern Ireland state. Whatever


person, whatever brand is behind that, doesn't really matter. That


dream is still there. N121 have not just lost an MLA, John McAllister's


going means goodbye to almost ?30,000 in assembly funding. One


thing that is remarkable about N121 is when a party that has only been


around for one year, it has had a remarkable impact for all the wrong


reasons. If you take a look at what has happened is recently in the last


few months, they have managed to tarnish the brand, they have managed


to tarnish any prospect of coming back. That is a more -- remarkable


feat for a party. As for Basil McCrea, he is considering legal


action, but against two it is unclear. We asked for an interview


but he declined saying he had a story to tell, but now was not the


time. As for John McAllister, is he the man who put principle before a


promising political career? I am pleased that you think I had a


promising political career. I can certainly live with that comment.


promising political career. I can people said I put principle before


my career, I do not think it is a bad thing. For now the party goes on


but with vastly reduced expectations. It is our intention as


onstage to form the government of Northern Ireland. You could say it


will be Alister McRae for first Minister? You could say that. He has


possibly restart that for now. Until his beaks for himself, we can only


guess. John McAllister joins me now. N121,


in government for Northern Ireland. Basil saying that he could be the


tension lay the first Minister. There are so many things that went


on in N121. The organisation stuff wasn't there, it wasn't good, though


but the key bit was how do you deal and has N121 the capacity to deal


with the allegations made against Basil McCrea? That has to work


through. That is going to take time. There was no organisation, no


political party can ignore those kinds of allegations being levelled


of any member of the party. That was perhaps the straw that broke the


camel's back. There were other disagreements between you both


before that happened. After so much hope, it has ended in tears. I agree


that it is part of... There were other problems. The seriousness of


allegations like that, any party, any organisation has to find a


mechanism to deal with that. That has moved to the commission for


standards. You cannot ignore those kinds of allegations and I would


suggest at any time, never mind in the era that we live in today. Do


you regret having taken so much on with your relationship with Basil


McCrea? Yes, I regret that because the messages of N121, the principles


and values I wrote for N121, the road that I set out for N121, to


build a new society with a new government and opposition. If you


change the structure is in Stormont and how that starts to deliver. That


is what N121 would have been about. If Basil did the style off two, I


did the substance. We never built a party, but the final implosion was


not about these structures are what we built, it was about how do you


deal with allegations against a party leader in that term? The N121


does not have the capacity to deal with that. That is why we had to go


out. Does N121 have a future? That is not now for me to comment on. Do


you think it might have a future's I do not think it has a future


personally. Do you think Basil is clinging to the wreckage? Yes, I


think he is. What is your comment as you sit in the backbench's do not


start a party with Basil McCrea. If you asked me how do you build around


the ideas of that and the structure and move on from that. It is about


promoting ideas and putting our party in opposition to the


government. Will you stand for election again? Yes. In South so we


have election again? Yes. In South so we


McAllister? No. We will have some final thoughts. Suzanne,


McAllister? No. We will have some think there is a future


McAllister? No. We will have some No. The story is not over. We need


be told and he has to clear his name. That will be interesting and


that is part of the jigsaw that is missing. It is not about who is


right or wrong. So much damage has been done to N121 that it it is


over. What is amusing is that the backstabbing and gossip that has


been going on, is that it is not women, it is men. It is not waving,


it is groaning at the moment. We will see every Basil McCrea talks in


before that started. I wish we had longer for that. It is all over to


you. What will Thursday's mass


public sector strike achieve? Has David Cameron's anti-Juncker


attacks clawed back support And is Alan Johnson really thinking


about challenging Ed Miliband We will start with the strikes, Matt


Hancock was hardline in the head-to-head that he did with the


TUC. I guess that the Tory internal polling and focus groups must be


telling them that there are votes in taking a tough line? There is that


and there is the fact that they are now much more confident on any


economic policy two or three years ago. They shied away from it because


the economy was shrinking, there was still a danger that public sector


job losses would lead to higher unemployment overall. Now, the


economy is growing, they have a good story to sell about employment so


they are much more bolshy and brazen than they were two or three years


ago. They know that it always causes problems for Labour. Labour is


naturally sympathetic to the public sector workers, pay being squeezed,


they are striking to make an issue of it. And yet they can't quite come


out and give the unions 100% Labour support? Exactly. You saw Tristram


Hunt on the Marr Show this morning squirming to support the idea of


strikes, but not this particular strike. It was always the question


that gets asked to Labour - who funds you? That is a real problem.


The bit that gets me is they trail this ef are I time there is a --


every time there is a strike, this idea of cutting it to ballots and


local election turnout was a third. Boris Johnson was elected Mayor of


London with 38% turnout. We need to talk about-turnout across our


democracy. That is an easy rebuttal for Labour to make. Matt Hancock was


hardline about changing the strike law. When you asked him the


question, if you are not going to stabilise the public finances till


2018, does this mean the pay freeze or no real term pay increase in the


public sector will increase till 2018, h e was inner vous on that


one. -- he was nervous on that one. This strike is different to those


strikes that took place in 2010. At that time, the TUC and the Labour


Leadership thought there was going to be a great movement out there,


not a kind of 1926 movement, but a great movement out there. This time


round, I think the climate is different. Ed Miliband talking about


wage increases being outstripped by inflation and people not seeing the


recovery coming through into their pay packets. Slightly more tricky


territory for the Tories. If The Labour machine cannot make something


out of Matt Hancock telling this programme there will be no increase


in pay for workers in the public sector till 2018, they have a


problem? They do have a problem. They have to say always that they


would not just turn the money taps on. That is the dance that you are


locked in all the time. Can we all agree that Alan Johnson is not going


to stand against Ed Miliband this side of the election? Some


politicians are cynical enough. I don't think Alan Johnson is one. Do


we agree? There is nothing in it for Labour and certainly not for Alan


Johnson. No way. It is the last thing he would want to do. There are


some desperate members going around trying to find a stalking horse.


Alan Johnson will not be their man. He has more important things to do


on a Thursday night on BBC One! Isn't it something about the febrile


state of the Labour Party that Labour, some Labour backbenchers or


in the Shadow Cabinet, can float the idea of this nonsense? If there was


a time to do it, maybe it was in the middle of the Parliament. With ten


months left, you are stuck with the leader you chose in 2010. I remember


them failing to understand this in January of 2010 when there was that


last push against Gordon Brown. Five months before an election, they were


trying to do something. The deputy Leader of the Labour Party had


something to do with it. There is deep unease about Ed Miliband. There


are problems but Alan Johnson is not the man. I think there is no chance


of it! If the most recent polls are to be


believed, David Cameron appears to have enjoyed a 'Juncker bounce' -


clawing back some support from UKIP after he very publicly opposed the


appointment of Jean-Claude Juncker to the post of EU Commission


president. Last week Nigel Farage took his newly enlarged UKIP


contingent to Strasbourg for the first session


of the new European Parliament. These two gentlemen have nothing to


say today. It was the usual dull, looking back to a model invented 50


years ago and we are the ones that want democracy, we are the ones that


want nation state, we are the ones that want a global future for our


countries, not to be trapped inside this museum. Thank you. I can see we


will be covering more of the European Parliament at last!


It's rumoured he's likely to stand in the next general election in the


Kent constituency of Thanet South, currently held by the Conservatives.


Last week the Conservatives selected their candidate for the seat -


Craig McKinlay - a former deputy leader of UKIP.


Did you get the short straw, you have got a seat that Nigel Farage is


probably going to fight? Not in the slightest. It is a seat that I know


well. It is a seat that there's obvious euro scepticism there and my


qualities are right for that seat. UKIP got some very good... What are


your qualities? Deep-seated conservatism, I was a founder of


UKIP, I wrote the script back in 1992. My heart is Conservative


values. They are best put out to the public by me in South Thanet. It


would be ridiculous if Nigel chose that seat. We need a building block


of people like myself to form a Government if we are going to have


that referendum that is long overdue. I don't think he's got the


luxury of losing somebody who is very similar in views to him. He


would be best look looking elsewhere. You wouldn't like him to


stand in your seat, would you? It would seem to make very little


sense. People would say what is UKIP all about if it's fighting people


who have got a similar view to them? We do need to build a majority


Government for the Conservatives next year because only us are


offering that clear in-out referendum. I want to be one of


those building blocks that is part of that renegotiation that we will


put to public in a referendum. Sounds to me like if the choice is


between you and Nigel Farage next May in Thanet South, it is Tweedle


Dum and Tweedle Dee? Not at all. The danger to this country is another


Labour Government. That is one of the main reasons that I left UKIP in


2005 because that last five years of the Labour Government was the most


dangerous to the fundamentals of Britain that we have ever seen. I'm


happy with the Conservatives. I have full Conservative values. I am a


Euro-sceptic. Thank you for joining us. The Westminster bubble yet


again, which has a herd mentality, a bubble with a herd mentality, it got


it wrong yet again. Mr Cameron's isolated, he is useless at


diplomacy, all of which may be true, but the British people liked it and


his backbenchers liked it? True. Although some of us would say it is


possible... You are speaking for the bubble? I'm speaking for my segment


of the bubble. Some of us argued that he got it wrong diplomatically


and it would be wrong politically. It will be the passage of time. We


saw UKIP decline between the 2004 European elections and the 2005


General. You would expect something similar to happen this time round.


The question is how far low do they fall? They are still registering


12-15% in the opinion polls. They are. When Mr Cameron wielded his


veto which again the Westminster bubble said it's terrible, it is


embarrassing, he overtook Labour in the polls for a while doing that.


He's had a Juncker bounce. If you were a strategist, would you not


conclude the more Euro-sceptic I am, the better it is for me in the


polls? In the short-term, yes. This is the short-term thinking we are


supposed to despise. The electricion is very clever for a different --


the selection is very clever for a different reason. It is this


anti-London feeling in Thanet South. He is a councillor, he grew up in


the constituency. He is a chartered accountant. He is somebody who can


be seen to be a champion of local people. If they had parachuted in a


special adviser, they would be in real trouble. He wants to get out...


This is the third representative of the bubble? He wants to get out of


the European Union which David Cameron doesn't want to do. It was


interesting for that statement to MPs on Monday, there were mild


Euro-sceptics who said, "I can't take this." The Speaker said can the


baying mob, the Conservative MPs, quieten down, please. Ben Bradshaw,


the former Minister made it, he said, "I'm reminded when the leader


of the Labour Party before Harold Wilson made that famous Euro-sceptic


speech and Mrs Gaitskell said darling, the wrong people are


cheering." That is the challenge. Thank you, bubbles!


The Daily Politics is back at its usual Noon time every day


And I'll be back here on BBC One next Sunday at 11pm for the last


Sunday Politics of the summer - I'll be talking to Scotland's Deputy


Remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.


One, two, three, four, here they come.


Patton strikes, it's there! Oh, what a goal!


Download Subtitles