09/07/2017 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland


A look at the political developments of the week with Mark Carruthers.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 09/07/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



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


Donald Trump says he wants to do a "powerful" trade deal


Theresa May says other countries are ready to talk too.


But could the transitional deal with the EU that some are pushing


for scupper the Prime Minister's plans?


Having defied expectation in last month's general election,


are Jeremy Corbyn and his allies about to purge the party


The deadliest fire in London since the Second World War has


devastated a community and shocked Britain, but will the political


storm that's blown up in its aftermath help uncover


And coming up here: Deadlock at Stormont.


What will it take to get the institutions back?


We'll hear from the former Secretary of State, Peter Hain.


Plus - is all the political uncertainty


impacting on economic growth? on breaking away from the capital.


If we are darking today we apoll jierks it could be a power cut or


the BBC is trying to save money with its fuel bill! Assuming you can see


them... And with me - as always -


for TV's second most keenly watched on-screen relationships


after Love Island, the Sunday Politics panel -


Steve Richards, Julia Hartley-Brewer They'll be tweeting


throughout the programme. So - Donald Trump says a trade


deal with UK could be Theresa May says that


other world leaders, including those of China,


India and Japan, are also keen to do President and PM were speaking at


the G20 summit of the world's major President and PM were speaking at


the G20 summit of the world's major But could the transitional


deal that some want, that would keep the UK in the EU's


single market and Customs Union for several years after exit,


put paid to those plans? Here's what the man likely to be


the next Lib Dem leader - Vince Cable - told the Marr show


earlier. I'm beginning to think that


Brexit may never happen, The problems are so enormous,


the divisions within the two major parties are so enormous,


I can see a scenario We're joined now from


Shropshire by the former Conservative Cabinet Minister


and leading Brexit Ogise, it could be a power cut or


the BBC is trying to save money with its fuel bill! Assuming you can see


them... Good morning to you, Vince Cable says that he thinks Brexit may


now not happen, what do you say to that? What is new? Vince Cable


always wanted to stay in the European Union, he is chucking


buckets of water round, we had a huge vote last year, we had an


enormous vote in the House of Commons, 494 votes to trigger


Article 50, we had an election campaign in which the two main


parties took 85% of the vote they back the speech and leaving the


customs union and the single market and the ECJ and Vince Cable's party


went down in votes as did the other parties that want to stay in the


European Union. So Vince is behind history, we are going to leave, we


are on target, Michael Gove triggered leaving the 1964 London


convention so we can take back control of the seas and bring back a


sane fishing policy and more important getting environmental


gained in our marine environment, so... You think we are still heading


for the exit but Mrs May called the election because she wanted a


mandate for her version of Brexit. She didn't get it. Surely you can't


just continue with business as usual? Well, we have been over the


election, we did not get the number of sees we wanted but on votes, we


got 13.7 million, that is more than the great Blair landslide. You had


an overall majority and you lost it. That is a fact. I said that. We know


that. So you didn't get the mandate. We got the vote! We got a lot votes


and so did the Labour Party. You know we are in a Parliamentary


system where what matters is the number of seats you get in the


Commons, you know enough about the British constitution to know a that


is what determines the mandate. Not the number of votes, we are not a


Presidential system. I am First Minister throughly wear


of that. 85% of the election voted for parties that wanted to leave. If


you take votes in the Commons last week on the Queen's Speech not a


single Conservative MP abstained or voted against and the Labour Party


unwisely, Chuka Umunna triggered and amendment wanting us to stay in the


customs union and got hammered. So, I am clear that we have to deliver


this, much the most important point in all this, is if we do not deliver


a proper Brexit which means leaving the single market, leaving the


customs union and the jurisdiction of the ECJ, there will be appalling


damage to the integrity of the whole establishment. Not just political,


you, the media, and the judicial establishment. Some would say that


damage has already been done in other area, let us look at the


detail. Under Article 50 Britain leaves the EU in 20 months which


means the deal will have to be done in 15 or 16 months to allow for


people to approve it in the various Parliaments and so son. Progress has


the been glacial. We have only just begun. Why should there not be a


transitional deal that keep some of the current arrangements in place to


mitigate this falling off a cliff? As Liam said in the Commons, Liam


who? Liam Fox, this should be one of the easiest ever deals to conclude,


because already, we have zero tariffs, already we have complete


conformty on standards and already, those who are negotiating with us


have an enormous surplus, the Germans sold an enormous number of


cars, so that is the basis on which, if you look at Nafta... We haven't


even started talking about free trade yet. That is not on the agenda


yet. Let me finish. If you look at Nafta, that took 14 months, we are


starting on a basis of mutual recognition of all our standard and


zero tariffs so yes, there will be an implementation period but it is


very very important politically this is concluded fast, as a huge


economic imperative as well, because it is uncertainty about this that


will damage future investment and job, the quicker we get on with it


and we know where we are going and we can reach out to the world, we


can take advantage of the fact stated on the European Commission


website that 9 a 5% of the world's growth is going to come from outside


European Union, which is what we are seeing, we have seen sales go from


61% to 43% and it is tumbling to 43%. We cannot take advantage of


these wonderful opportunities in the wider world... Why not? Why not?


Germany does. Because they can't conclude free trade deals. Germany


runs a balance of payment surplus, it finds it possible to trade with


the rest of the EU and with the rest of the world. It has a bigger


surplus than China, if Germany can do both why can't we? They can't.


They can't conclude deal, we Trump wants to do a deal with us. You saw


Theresa May sitting down with the economies of the future, India,


China, South Korea, these are all longing to do more business with us,


we can only do that once we are out of the customs union, that is vital


for the future of this country, that is where the future growth is. The


business in this country says we should stay in the single market and


the customs union, at least through a transition period. Does that count


for nothing, is Tory party now so antebusiness it ignores the wealth


creators? I think what you are saying is that the CBI which


represents very large organisations has made that statement, but talking


to business widely, and smaller private businesses which dominate


the economy, what is vital on this is to have a rapid implementation


period. That is what is important. And there has to be clarity of where


we are going, if we are in permanent limbo which will take a enormous


amount of negotiation and will take ratification by the 27 countries and


the European Parliament as well as our own, that will drag things out.


What we need to do is a clean Claire statement of reciprocal free trade


which should be really pretty easy to negotiate because we have that,


we have conformty of standard, we have an implementation period. That


needs to be done rapidly. Latest by the next election. OK, we shall see


how simple it turns out to be. Thank you for joining us here.


What do you make of this increasing talk of transition period in which


it is not clear, we remain full members of the single market, full


members of the customs union? Which came we cannot conclude very


quickly, in Mr Trump's word a free trade deal? This is where the battle


is now heading, between Brexiteer, levers, re-levers and the lot of it.


This will be really what the only thing we could achieve in the next


negotiations, what has changed since the general election which you were


touching on there, is of course Brussels in the year 2017 are no


longer negotiating with Theresa May, they are negotiating with the House


of Commons and the you know majority for a softer Brexit, so this will


begin, the transition deal will define the rest of deal, the rest of


the final relationship, so getting the transition on the right


trajectory is crucial, hence why you have Philip Hammond making a major


play to try and keep one foot in the EU, if not necessarily in the custom


union and the single market and everyone else says get out. These


are the opening skirmishes on what will certainly be the nettle that


will will be grasped round about some time between October and spring


next year. Are you worried that the election result, the fact that she


didn't get this mandate that she had looked for and she has ended up in a


weaker position than she was before the election, is going to make


Brexit more difficult, it is going to muddy the water, it means her


idea of Brexit is not necessarily the one that become Brexit? Yes I am


worried are about as a Brexiteer, the same remain yaks would have been


trying to scupper the will of the British people as expressed in June


2016. Now they might succeed. I don't think any will succeed. We


have to stop this nonsense and the media included, of this talk of soft


Brexit an transition period. We have a transition period once we are out


when we are leading to the next process, with have to be out of the


single market, and not under the European Court of Justice. All


within the two years, all by March... That happens automatically,


then we can agree for a two, three year max, three year period we will


have a position as we move to the new deal, but I don't think there


many Leave voters, most Remain voters accept that result, unlike


the people like the CBI who are fighting against it still, they will


accept anything more than that. I think Owen Paterson is right. We are


in a situation where we will face some serious disflus the


establishment, the political world, the Melissa Reidia if we don't obey


the will of the people. What do you make of the reports in the Sunday


papers, it was only ten days ago, two weeks' ago Mr Hammond was going


to be the caretaker leader, that is a story that didn't seem to last


48-hour, but what do you make of the remain MPs on both sides of the


House, plus peers, are going to try to derail this repeal act, that the


Government needs to push EU law on to the UK statute book. I I think


they will use it to at certain key points to attempt to defeat the


Government, not over the whole thing, this summer reminds me so


much of the summer of 92 who the Maastricht Treaty coming into a


fragile John Major Government, and people then were plotting, in the


opposite direction, Eurosceptics to try and stop that. He won with a


huge percentage of the vote. Tiny majority, 23, bigger than she would


have died for that. A shock victory. The The summer was full of talk and


plotting, some which came to fruition in the sessions after and


some will come into fruition from this autumn on ward where you will


see alliances across the Commons manned the Lords, there will be


moments of high Parliamentary drama, I think. Sounds like a long hot


autumn. An a long hot autumn, and winter.


Winter too? I thought it was all global warming. This will add to the


temperature! Now, Jeremy Corbyn may not


have won the election, but by confounding almost everyone's


expectations he is unassailable as Labour leader for


the foreseeable future. So what does that mean for his MPs,


most of whom - just a year ago - Labour's new chairman and key


cupping Ally said last week the party may be too broad church. He


also seemed to endorse the idea of deselecting labour MPs critical of


the leadership by saying if you get deselected there must be a reason.


But he has since wrote back from his comments in another interview. Chris


Williamson, the newly appointed labour frontbencher said some of his


colleagues in the Parliamentary party think they have a God-given


right to rule. He also said that if MPs don't support the leadership's


programme, local constituency parties should find someone else who


will. And in the seat of liveable waiver treats this week, left wing


supporters of Jeremy Corbyn won several positions on the committee.


One said she must get on board quite quickly now, and also publicly


apologise for not supporting Mr Corbyn in the past. Some Labour MPs


rushed to Luciano Berger's defends. Elsewhere, a list of 49 Labour MPs


was published, and they said these usual suspects should join the


Liberals. The list included prominent former frontbencher is


like Chris Leslie, Chuka Umunna and tidying -- Heidi Alexander.


And this is what the Shadow Education Secretary


and Jeremy Corbyn ally, Angela Rayner, had to say earlier.


Anyone that talks of deselecting any of my colleagues,


frankly they need to think about actually, who are


Who are making the problems for our communities at the moment?


Who have made those disastrous policies that are hurting the people


It doesn't help them if we're fighting each other.


We're joined now from Sheffield by former


Labour Cabinet Minister, Caroline Flint.


Welcome to the programme. Labour frontbencher Chris Williamson has


said, where Labour MPs don't support the leadership's programme it's


incumbent on local members to find someone else who will. What do you


make of that? I think it's very sad that talk of deselection is the line


people are taking. We had an election where 262 Labour MPs, very


different ones, have all won a mandate from their electorate and


our job is, as Angela Rayner said this morning, is to focus on a


government that is in disarray and how we can learn from the general


election to broaden our appeal but also develop our policy is ready in


time for the next election whenever that is called so I think all talk


of deselection is misplaced and doesn't help Labour. But do you feel


a purge of what is often referred to as the moderates in your party is


now inevitable? No, because we have been here before in the 1980s when


talk of deselection was suggested, it didn't happen in the way people


thought it would, and I do believe, hearing how Ian Lee very, and I have


worked with him in the 2010, 2015 government and I have worked with


Chris Williamson, Ian has already refined what he said, and what he's


clearly was this deselection talk and the way to go ahead on it is not


the right way forward. We to focus on looking outwards to understand


that we have across the party hard-working Labour MPs with maybe


different views across the Labour political spectrum, and I would have


to say that Luciana is one of the most hard-working MPs in Parliament


and homework on mental health is outstanding. That may be true, let's


look at Luciana Berger's constituency. One of the committee


members on her committee says she now has to get on board quite


quickly. And even publicly apologise for past disloyalty. The direction


of travel is clear, isn't it? That is one person on a committee in one


constituency... Where there is a majority for that point of view now.


I don't think there is, and the truth is... They took nine seat. Her


constituency is all of the members in that constituency and what I


would say, and I don't know this individual, look at the track record


of Luciana and what she has done. Jeremy, in the 20 years I have been


an MP under both Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, voted against the


Labour whip on numerous occasions, he has been very upfront and honest


about this, do you know in those 20 years I never heard anybody say


about Jeremy or anybody else who didn't vote with the Labour whip


that they should face deselection or apologise. I think that represents


the broad church of the Labour Party and we should look at what brings us


together rather than differences on policy point of view and we should


be looking outwards and dealing with that and working on it. You have


said that three times but it has not happened and it may be that the


people around Mr Corbyn, they think moderates like you, your day is


over. You lost the 2015 election badly, you allowed Jeremy Corbyn to


stand as leader, you failed to stop him twice, you thought he would make


a mess of the June election and he didn't. Can you blame his supporters


for wanting a career out of people who took these positions? I think


there are some people who supported and still support Jeremy who feel


that way but I don't believe they represent the people who supported


Jeremy, and I don't believe Jeremy thinks this is in the best interests


of the party. Only a few weeks ago John McDonnell praised my work on


tax transparency. Since my election I have bumped into Jeremy and we


have had a chat about what happened in the election and Jeremy


recognises that we were up against an arrogant Tory party and has said


to me he does understand this and said to the broader Parliamentary


Labour Party... If I could just finish... What has he said about


deselection? For example he said to me that he recognised that we have


won in numerous places in outstanding circumstances but he's


also said to me that he recognises that we need to broaden our reach


and understand why we were working-class voters. That says to


me that that is a leader who is up for and open to looking at the


reasons why we were successful and the reasons we weren't and he wasn't


closing down conversation on that. I take him on his word on that. He has


not said that publicly. What we need from a leader is to challenge our


party about where to go next and he has said that, Diane Abbott has said


at a conference I was at a few weeks ago that we need now to look at our


manifesto and look more clearly issues around tax and spend policies


because obviously clearly now we have more time to look at those


issues and also we may be facing a very different election when the


time comes. That's what I want from the leadership team, talk about how


we improve our message and reach, and by doing that get away from what


song, a minority I have to say, are saying about deselection.


Corbynistas like Paul Mason think moderates like you were to blame for


the defeat. He said moderates were always attacking Mr Corbyn, that is


quite popular view in the Jeremy Corbyn wing. I think that is Paul


Mason's view and he is fundamentally wrong. When we look at the results


of the last election, we can see a continuing from 2015 where Labour is


losing support among older voters and what we see is in this election


in 2017 Labour has... I think we are at our highest point amongst the


middle-class voters compared to where we were in 1979 but the Tories


are highest among working-class voters since 1979 as well. Those


working-class voters weren't voting for a more left alternative to


Labour and sadly they were voting Tory and we have to address that


because our party is this broad church and representing


working-class people is at the heart of what the Labour Party is about


and that's a discussion we need to have. That is the depth of


discussion we need to get into. That would put's with a fighting chance


of taking on a Tory party that is in disarray. Caroline Flint, thank you


for joining us. This week it was announced


that the Grenfell Tower inquiry would hold its first public hearings


in September, as it prepares to begin to examine


what caused the tragedy. But some have warned


that the situation now needs to be de-politicised,


or it will damage In a moment we'll hear from the MP


for Kensington and Chelsea where the Grenfell Tower


fire took place. But first Emma Vardy looks at how


political arguments have played a significant part in the aftermath


of this terrible event. When you come here and you actually


see it, your immediate thoughts are about the people,


not about the politics. What happened up there is just


so difficult to comprehend. But in the days after this tragedy,


there was such outrage at governments and authorities,


it became a political storm that those


in power struggled to respond to. We want justice, we want


justice, we want justice... People vented their anger outside


Kensington town Hall. A visit to the Grenfell site


by Theresa May saw her forced At Prime Minister's Questions,


Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn linked What the tragedy of Grenfell Tower


has exposed is a disastrous And speaking at Glastonbury,


Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell Those families, those individuals,


79 so far and there will be more, were murdered by political decisions


that were taken over recent decades. I can't remember a major national


tragedy that has been politicised I think using terms like murder


is completely reckless The key thing is that we try


to ascertain the facts this tragedy occurred to ensure


it can never be repeated. And as soon as you introduce emotive


phrases or emotive accusations or emotive allegations of that


nature, then the discourse The whole debate around the tragedy


becomes politicised and it makes it Some argue the political language


that was used was wrong and helped to ramp up the vitriol


in an unhelpful way, but for others, it was


entirely justified. That's what an opposition party


is for, it's to challenge the Government and to ask the right


questions and I think people round here would say thank goodness,


there's somebody in politics Pilgrim Tucker had helped


Grenfell Tower residents campaign for building improvements


in previous years, and returned I've been to meetings before


the fire and I've been to meetings since the fire,


attended by ordinary residents with no involvement in politics


and they are saying very political things about land in London


and property ownership in London, Had we campaigned harder,


would we have prevented this? Fire safety campaigners say


they were trying to draw attention to certain issues long before


what happened at Grenfell Tower, and say it's no one political party


but the whole system has failed. It's easy to say, "You've got


an inquiry, let's wait for that." We already know two


very clear things. Had the people there been


protected by sprinklers, People don't die in homes


protected by sprinklers. The second thing is the outrage


that the building regulations had They should be done


year in, year out. Generally people in house


fires die in ones, twos or threes, which doesn't make


a political statement. So the political parties


haven't really needed They weren't prepared for 70 or more


people to die at once The public inquiry, which will


address some of those issues, has already faced calls


for its newly appointed And that was a view


echoed by the Labour MP You would call on him,


would you, to stand down? I don't think there will be any


credibility and some people are saying they won't cooperate


with it so it's not going to work. I will look into this matter


to the very best of my ability... I think the attacks on the chair


have to cease, I think the attacks It actually makes it harder to get


to the facts and get to the truth and that's the most


important thing now. Some said it was unavoidable


that this tragedy became political, but will the politics help get


to the truth? I'm joined now by the Labour


MP for Kensington - who we heard at the end of that film


- Emma Dent Coad. Now this judge, leading the Grenfell


inquiry, have you met him? I haven't met him, no. So what evidence do you


have that he doesn't in your words understand human beings? Well, I am


reflecting what people are telling me out there, that they as soon as


his name was announced everybody looked up his credentials, they


found a particular case he had been involved in, the very issue that


people are most worried about, post Grenfell is they will be moved out


of the borough somewhere else. This issue about social cleansing. It was


insensitive to have chosen somebody with that on his record. Whether he


made that decision according to the rules. It is one judgment in a long


career, he may be able to defend what he did. You have said he


doesn't understand human beings but you have told us you have never met


him? It is nothing to do with meeting him. It is the system where


people have to be friends in order to work together, judged by the


evidence, judge by what people have done that, judge by merit and


whether or not you can be friendly. What has he done wrong in his


career? It is symbolic the issue he made a decision about, it is


symbolic for everybody. I am reflecting the community who are


been betrayed. You don't think in your often view you don't take the


view he doesn't understand human beings. Personally I do. I do


actually but I am reflecting what people are saying, the people who


elected me, who have been badly betrayed by the authority, they are


seeing it that way, they have been betrayed and now they see you know,


they worst fear is this will be used top socially cleanse north


Kensington. What is the evidence for that? About social cleansing? No,


this will be used to do so. Whether or not there is ever, there is no


trust in somebody who has been part of that process. He has been chosen


by the Lord Chief Justice, not as the Prime Minister as some have


said. He has a long ex perness of commercial contracts and disaster,


both of which will be vital. It is a lot to do with overlapping


commercial contract, he is a specialist in that area, what bit


doesn't make his qualified and and doesn't he reflect the independence


of the judiciary? Well, we certainly need somebody who can do the detail.


This is a human disaster as much as anything else. We need somebody who,


we saw in the meeting there, there is a lot of anger and people aren't


trusting. . That would be true, we all understand the anger, of course,


but that would be true whoever was chosen. Are you really after... Do


you want someone to head up this inquiry that will give you a show


trial rather than an independent inquiry. It is exactly the opposite.


. Woe won't give us a show trial, is he? If there is no trust, people


won't co-operate with him. A lot of people will need to co-operate with


him. Some of the groups are not involved, they are protest groups


who are not representing the victims, or the survivors, we have


very little evidence that those who directly affected by this are saying


they are not going to co-operate. Well, everybody who lives round


there is a victim to some extent, they have all been affected, myself


as well, I live three blocksia from it and a lot of the groups are very


much involved in that community, not only the people who lived there who


survived, but some of the campaign groups have been campaigning for


years about social housing in area. What sort of person to you think


should head up the inquiry is this If it has to be Martin, we need an


advisory panel with representatives from different groups who can at


least advise and feed in information, at least if we have no


choice, we need at least that. But rather than him, what sort of


person? I am not sure, are you saying he should remain but he needs


to be assisted by a panel or he should be replaced? If we have no


choice, then we should have an advisory panel to back it up.


Something that people trust in. At the moment they don't trust the


process, which is understandable, and his name was announced the same


day as the Hillsborough disaster, the criminal investigation and so


on, that after 28 year, this is what people, how people see it. They


want, they don't trust the process s it won't work proppism it is not


just what I think, it is what people who are directly involved thing.


John McDonnell the Shadow Chancellor says people who died at Grenfell


were murdered by political decision do you agree? That is a strong way


of putting it. I know a lot of people feel like that. There is


massive failure of political decision, I have seen that


happening. But murder? That is an active verb. It means you intended


to kill. So for Mr McDonnell to be right, these were political


decisions taken intended to kill. I don't share his view on that


particular issue, there has been a failure of care, for many, many


years and a failure of investment for many year, as I have seen


myself. But part of the problem has been investment. They had nine


million spent on this block I was looking at it today, the other tower


blocks round it have not been clad. Of course if they had gone on fire,


the disaster would not have been on the same scale. Nine million helped


to produce this. In indeed. The process of how that building was


refurbished. It says it is to make it look better, half a mile down the


road, the tower blocks have been clad, they were clad in mineral


wool. I spent a day at a seminar by chance understanding, it is


non-combustible. Who made that decision to use rain cladding rather


than mineral wool. You were on the the board of who took that decision.


The council had no say about the specification, we didn't have any


involvement at all. It didn't come before you, because it has tenants


on it too. The TMO does, The advisory committee to the TMO. There


is the TMO. I was not there at the time. As far as I understand a sub


group decided or reviewed the specifications of that. The housing


and property committee is part of the council. Obviously you a say,


but whether or not, we don't have any say at all over specification, I


want to say somebody because I have been accused of... That because my


predecessor said I should take responsibility, a clueing colleague


of mine got beaten up for that, there is no foundation for that


allegation. I thank you for clearing that up. Thank you for joining us


too. It's just gone 11.35,


you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers


in Scotland who leave us now Coming up here in 20


minutes, The Week Ahead. First though, the Sunday


Politics where you are. Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics


in Northern Ireland. After all the talk of


deals and deadlines, negotiations at Stormont have


ended without agreement. So what next for the


devolved institutions? We'll hear from a former Secretary


of State who was involved in getting power-sharing up and running


ten years ago. Plus, with the Department of Finance


left holding the purse strings, how long before uncertainty starts


to impact on our economic growth? We'll hear from an economist


and from the past president of the Construction Employers'


Federation. And with their thoughts


on all of that, my guests of the day MLAs should be looking forward


to the start of their summer break, but after months of talking


and several missed deadlines, any chance of them returning


to the Assembly chamber But the parties have been in this


situation before and managed to negotiate a way through it -


so will the summer break help or hinder the process


of getting a deal? I'm joined by the former Secretary


of State, Lord Hain, who was involved in the negotiations


that led to the re-establishment No-one seems to be quite sure where


we are with this at the moment. There seem to be more


questions than answers. Everybody is in the same place and


that's the problem. My position would be to support my successor as


so set -- Secretary of State and the government of Northern Ireland, but


the truth is there has been a shocking dereliction of


responsibility by both governments, British and Irish, there is nobody


at the helm, nobody is taking any initiatives to drive this board,


there is a sense of drift and the Secretary of State last week said it


would all be sorted by the end of the week, he has been making those


noises for months and it never was and nobody last week believed it


would be. There has to be a sense of change and Northern Ireland deserves


better than this. You and I spoke last week just before the deadline


happened and you were a tad more diplomatic and what you had to say.


This is strong language from you today, suggesting the government has


failed, James Brokenshire has failed. Do you think it goes up to


the steps of Number 10? Michelle O'Neill says a monumental failure on


behalf of Theresa May, do you share that view? I'm not backing any


party's view but telling it as I see it, and my successor, Paul Murphy,


and I both warned in the House of Lords six months ago that unless


there was a summit of the Taoiseach and the Prime Minister, a high event


to sort this out, we could get into trouble and it gives me no pleasure


to say that has happened. I do not believe the whole problem in


Northern Ireland has been properly gripped, either in London or Dublin


four years, and especially over the past year and we have got into this


terrible impasse and it's very serious, the last time the Assembly


was suspended it took five years to get it up and running again and now


we are over six months and drifting further into the autumn and winter,


who knows when? And this is a critical time for Northern Ireland,


not because of the Troubles but because Brexit, whereas Wales is


making its input, Scotland and England is having it say directly in


negotiations, in Wales and Scotland's case through the


government, in London's case to the mayor yet the voice of Northern


Ireland through its politicians is silent and that is a terrible


dereliction of responsibility. You say there needs to be a high-level


summit, are you saying the situation cannot be resolved satisfactorily


without the personal engagement of the Prime Minister and Taoiseach?


Has it got that far? Yes, unquestionably, it should have


happened earlier and it should happen now. It's no good hoping to


get an agreement within days when everyone knows that is moonshine, no


good saying it may happen in such timbre. September will come and go


and there will be no agreement because there is no sense of anybody


driving this and I blame those at the top, especially of the British


government, the Prime Minister especially and the Taoiseach, the


card the government of Britain and Ireland from the Good Friday process


on Word have both taken responsibility for this issue and


Northern Ireland deserves a lot better than a Prime Minister or


Taoiseach who have taken their eye off the ball and a Secretary of


State and others who may be paddling furiously under the water but there


is no sense of any drive and no sense of any consequences for


Northern Ireland's politicians of not doing their jobs. It's


interesting that you should use this language, markedly different from


the language used by the Shadow Secretary of State, Owen Smith, and


Jeremy Corbyn has not been criticising Theresa May on this


particular issue, failing to deal with the impasse in Northern


Ireland, so are you alone voice and are you implicitly criticising the


leadership of your own party? Not at all. Owen Smith and Jeremy Corbyn


are taking their traditional stance of trying to be as supportive as


possible in Parliament. But supporting a strategy that you have


told me cannot work. As a former Secretary of State, I think I'm in a


different position, I'm not involved in the parliamentary front line


situation as I was, and I can tell it straight as I see it and it's not


just to me, it's my predecessor Paul Murphy, who said much the same,


columnists like Alex Kane who you have on the programme, who was


saying much the same and he was a former Ulster unionist director of


communications. What would you do now if you were James Brokenshire


are? He talked about profound and serious implications if the deadline


was not met, it wasn't met and none of us are wiser as to what those


implications are. What would you do if you were back here as Secretary


of State? Would you cut MLAs' salaries or threatened to introduce


water charges? I would have the Prime Minister at my side as I did


under Tony Blair and the Irish Foreign Minister did with Bertie R


Hearn, those two word gripping this on a daily basis over years so I


would be in a different position but I did take editions, and it's not


for me to do -- to say to the current Secretary of State what he


should do, but I took the view that unless there was progress of a


systematic kind which eventually succeeded, I would take away MLA


expenses which meant their staff would have to be given notice and


also the party funding, the parties together with their expenses and


direct party funding at Stormont, they are getting millions of pounds


and yet they are the only group of Northern Ireland workers who are not


going to work and earning their salaries. So far there is a lot of


character... That has to be on the agenda. We have a lot of carrot and


no stick, you are saying James Brokenshire need to think seriously


about an inventory of sanctions if he is going to cajole politicians to


coming to an agreement, or he will set more deadlines and we will drive


a coach through them as well. Clearly deadlines mean nothing and


that means you have no credibility as a government if you set deadlines


that are not met. That was the position I took on the consequences


of no deal, I also introduced water charges and a ban on academic


selection and when those proved unpopular I said to the politicians,


OK, if you don't like them, you take responsibility, negotiate a deal


with the others and get on with the jobs you are supposed to do but the


buck should stop at Number 10 and in Dublin and they have not taken


charge, that is were the main problem lies. Briefly, Lord came, as


things stand, do you think we are inevitably looking at the


reintroduction of direct rule? I do, I cannot see where else we are going


and that would be a tragedy. I thought I was the last direct rule


Secretary of State in 2007, it would be an absolute tragedy and a


dangerous time for Northern Ireland with the broader question the


elephant in the room, Brexit having enormous consequences for Northern


Ireland. Very interesting to hear your thoughts, thank you for joining


us from Wales. Let's hear from my guests of


the day, Alex Kane and Anna Mercer. Not pulling any punches. He is not,


although when Peter was Secretary of State, Sinn Fein and the DUP had


just eclipsed the UUP and SDLP, they wanted to do a deal, they both had


something to prove and that has gone, neither has anything to prove


and he's right about direct rule, these parties want to govern but not


together. How do you see it? There is a lack of experience


across-the-board, we have two new leaders, our Secretary of State is


pretty new in the job, previous crises we may have had bigger


figures, Martin McGuinness and Peter Robinson and Paisley, who had that


experience of trying to push things went it didn't seem like anyone was


moving. At the moment we want to create a winner and a loser and we


need a win for everyone. What about the notion that Prime Minister and


Taoiseach need to be personally engaged or there is no chance of


momentum? I don't see where else the leadership will come from.


Westminster goes into recess on the 20th of July, we have heard there


will not be budget legislation before then, do we go to another


election? What will change, I'm not sure, and Sinn Fein and the DUP are


seeing strong results on both sides so why should they move? Interesting


Sinn Fein has not called for another election. They know it will bring


them back with the same figures and they don't need a summit, Theresa


May and the Taoiseach have no particular interest, just lock them


in a room and say you have three months and if you don't do a deal,


everything is closed. Well, while we are without


an Assembly and an Executive, government departments must


still continue to provide public services and spend


their money accordingly. But how long can we continue


without either local or hands-on direct rule ministers


and what impact is it In a moment we'll hear


from the economist Paul MacFlynn and Rhona Quinn, who's a former


president of the Construction But first here's our business


correspondent, Julian O'Neill. Stormont collapsed without having


set a budget for this year, leaving senior civil servants in control of


the departmental spending but the cash flow is constrained in the


circumstances, the civil servants got only 75% of the block grant


allocation to begin with and by the end of this month it will move to


95%. In theory this leaves a ?500 million shortfall but a budget and


access to all the block grant is very likely in the autumn. If there


is no political agreement allowing Stormont to do it, Westminster will


add, a bit like how it sorted out rates bills earlier this year.


Meantime, Blix services are largely ticking over the James Brokenshire


is likely to step in soon and make some spending decisions. A sum of


around ?120 million needs to be freed up and allocated to


departments with health and education likely beneficiaries. It


will be a bit like the Secretary of State doing the kind of monitoring


round which usually happens around the Executive table.


Joining me now are Rhona Quinn and Paul MacFlynn.


Paul, it looks like we won't have a budget until the autumn,


although James Brokenshire looks set to step in and distribute that ?120


million in end-of-year monitoring, but who makes the decisions on how


In the absence of an executive, it will have to be a minister of some


kind and unfortunately the only minister at present is the Secretary


of State. He can do that in conjunction with parties but it is


his decent vision and the ?120 million is significant but


notwithstanding the election result, the block grant for Northern Ireland


was outlined in the April budget, it is flat until 2020 and with


inflation that means large cuts, so decisions around where that money


will be spent will become difficult and too makes those decisions will


be even worse. The rule of thumb is if there is an existing project


under way, civil servants can continue to feed the money into that


that of a new strategy is to be put in place for a decision taken about


a major capital projects, that requires a minister and if we don't


have direct rule ministers were locally elected ministers, those


projects will go into abeyance. Even projects that have been given


initial ministerial direction, if they run into trouble that require


policy decisions, there has to be some ministerial responsibility.


Civil servants will not take those decisions and that goes to somewhere


in London or in Whitehall discussions, who knows how long the


delay could be? Rhona, what are the implications for your company and


the people you represented at the absence of that decision-making


capability? First of all Peter Hain is right, this is a serious


situation and any uncertainty for business is not good regardless what


secretary you are in. Our difficulties are a lack of


decision-making on projects due to the lack of ministerial approval. In


our industry there are in-built delays to the planning and


procurement processes so this will add further delays so the lack of


spent on infrastructure is not good for our industry or the wider


economy because it prevents inward investment, attracting tourism, so


overall it is not good for the economy. What is your message to


politicians who do not seem capable of coming together and reaching


agreement? I would like to think our politicians are working for the good


of the economy. First we need a functioning administration up and


going but we needed in the context of a fair and inclusive society, I


would also like to say the infrastructure of spent should be


spread evenly across the province, the West should not be forgotten


about. Paul, I wonder what to think the implications might be for an


extra money the DUP got out the Conservative Party to keep in


government? ?1.5 billion, is it possible that money will not be able


to be spent while we continue in this limbo? That's a political deal


outside ordinary government accounts so what's the deal between the DUP


and the Conservatives how that will be spent. There are maybe a


structure that we see it spent in the absence of an executive from the


UK Government's point of view, they gave the least amount of money they


could, the Treasury always does, so the idea of having local politicians


is they make decisions for the benefit of Northern Ireland, if the


Treasury makes decisions, they will make decisions that benefit the


Treasury and that means keeping as much as they can. But it requires


politicians at some level, whether direct rule ministers were locally


elected, someone has to take responsibility for divvying up that


money. The Secretary of State already intervened with respect of


regional rates, he indicated what his budget would look like and if


that comes in the autumn in the absence of an executive but whether


direct rule ministers are appointed is a relevant, where decisions are


taken is what matters and they are either being taken in Stormont or


Westminster and there doesn't seem to be an option in between. Are we


in the worst possible situation, neither devolution nor direct rule,


does that provide uncertainty for RE, may? Absolutely, we are in a


perfect storm, not only facing a lack of administration but all the


uncertainty around Brexit so it is a serious situation, OK, direct rule


is maybe something we have to do if it is the only option but I would


like to think that as a temporary measure because we need local


politicians making local decisions about how we spend our money, if we


have a London-based politicians deciding about a much-needed school


in County Tyrone, it would be harder for him to make that case than a


local politician so it is critical we have local people making these


decisions. Not just Tyrone, the West is a big place but old politics is


local. A final note about the York Street Interchange project, do you


know how that stands? We know there has been initial ministerial


direction for it but they can run into difficulties which require a


policy decision and that that is a priority in Westminster, all well


and good but if not it will model on for years. Interesting to hear your


perspectives. Now, let's pause and have a look


back at the week in 60 seconds After months of talks


no deal was reached It has been hugely damaging in


respect of public confidence in the institutions and we need to build up


that confidence. This constitutes an monumental failure on behalf of


Theresa May. And the other parties forecast


problems ahead for Northern Ireland. People across Northern Ireland are


facing weeks of further political paralysis. And a general loss of


trust and respect for politicians in Northern Ireland.


With the talks process unsuccessful, the focus shifted


I intend to bring forward legislation that will provide for


the publication of all donations and loans received by Northern Ireland


parties after July 2017. The Alliance Party are unhappy


the figures won't be backdated. Failure to address that issue


properly can only enhance suspicion and cynicism.


Enda and Rory pair up at the Irish Open.


Let's have a final word with Alex and Anna.


Alex, we have been hearing about the legal challenge mounted by a Green


Party member here questioning the legality of the deal between the


Tories and the DUP in that it allegedly breaches the Good Friday


Agreement. I'm not sure it does breach the terms, I don't think the


deal has compromised the neutrality of the British government. That is


what Ciaran McClean once a court to decide. I think it will go nowhere,


parties make deals in these circumstances, the Tories had to


make a deal, you cannot turn around and say ignore the will of


Parliament and two big parties. Ciaran McClean's case is that it


preaches the rigorous impartiality required by the Good Friday


Agreement. And the British and Irish governments are supposed to be


custodians of the Good Friday Agreement. I think Alex has a point,


it may be the perception that is more damaging than the legal out


workings, I'm not a lawyer but I think with the challenges we have


seen an Brexit, politicians is a land apart. I think what will be


difficult is as we go forward, what happens to this money, how is it


allocated without an executive and with only the DUP with Lady Sylvia


Hermon in Westminster and no nationalist representatives, how can


we ensure the British government remain that neutral arbiter? That is


a big Now just under a year ago,


Theresa May was making her way back from Buckingham Palace having been


asked by the Queen To say it's been a tumultuous twelve


months would be an understatement - here's a reminder of


the highs and lows. I have just been to Buckingham


Palace, where Her Majesty the Queen has asked me to form


a new Government and I accepted. If you're just managing,


I want to address you directly. I know you're working


around-the-clock, I know you're doing your best,


and I know that sometimes When future generations


look back at this time, they will judge us not only


by the decision that we made, but by I have just chaired a meeting


of the Cabinet, where we agreed that the Government should call


a general election to The Conservative Party


has won the most seats and probably the most votes,


then it will be incumbent on us to ensure we have that period


of stability and that is exactly So 12 months in the life of Theresa


May, and the rest of us too. I am exhausted. I don't know what she


feels like! How weak or strong is her position and this constant


reporting, more on the Sunday paper today about groups of Tory MPs


manoeuvring to bring her down in the autumn, before the autumn after the


autumn, name a month between now and the end of the year. Is that, that


has to be corrosive as well. Absolutely. Every week there will be


another story. The reality is the stronger Jeremy Corbyn and the


Labour Party look the stronger her position is because it is what are


the alternative, Theresa May or... It is depending on the polls where


it is Theresa May herself who is helping to cause that boost for


Jeremy Corbyn, if she is the toxic part of the Tory party brand, and if


they get rid of her the Tories would spring back up and the Labour Party


would go down or is it best for her to soak it, literally draw out the


toxins and then, I don't know, two money, six months a year, she stands


down and next leader takes the over, next generation or David Davis and


they start again, start afresh, and she takes all the badness, the


toxins with her this is thing, there must be a hell of a lot of detailed


polls right now find that out. I don't know the answer. Can she


relaunch herself? No, she will make a big speech on Tuesday, ex tracts


are being briefed into tomorrow's papers, I have seen them. . What is


the subject matter? Me. Not me, her. There has been enough movement from


BBC... It is going to be her, it will be the relaunch. I have a


purpose, still here and allow me to stay, but the problem is, Julia is


right, there is a feeling among Tory MPs it would be ideal for her to


last at least two years, suck in the bad bit, and to have a referendum or


not, and the miscalculations and bring in a new person, untarnished.


The problem over that is events dear boy as someone once said. Brexit may


go well, it may not. Talks may produce something or she may get


stuck down a hole. She is the sticking plaster over the two side


of the Tory party. She is there, because they want her to be there


and that Palacester is stilled holding, if that seismic divide goes


any further, the plaster breaks she will go down the hole with it. David


Davis said she doesn't want a leadership election, the papers are


full of briefings from what are claimed to be from his people saying


she faces abject misery, that it is time she will have to go sooner


rather than later, they clearly haven't got the memo from DD as he


is called. Publicly they have, to declare loyalty until the moment


when they feel the time has come to be disloyal. The problem she has got


is that context determines 95% of how a leader is perceived. She can


make a brilliant speech this week about how she plans to be bold but


the context is that lost majority in the election, a hung parliament with


Brexit looming. It makes it hard to be bold, hung Parliaments are not


bold. You will have to manoeuvre all the time and it be exhausting and


transparent in the scheming, a like with the arrangement with the DUP,


some of the vote it is a have happened and it will be utterly


draining, now Julia is is right. The key question for the Tories will be


if they get someone else in, does that transform their prospects?


While that is not clear, I agree she will probably cling on, but there


will be no glorious summer for her again, the pre-election context was


fantastic for her, it is really dark now, and tough. The key thing is


what you said, who would have thunk it. You have said the Tories are


frightened to call to provoke us another election because they fear,


they think Jeremy Corbyn will win. Who would have thought we would get


into that position? In the same argument who would have thought


Theresa May been so popular. Who would have thought Jeremy Corbyn


would get where he is now? That shows there is still hope for not


maybe, maybe not Theresa May, I think that she has holed below the


water line, what goes up can also come down, but in Theresa May's


defence, and I don't think she will last very long, and I think she has


been exposed, during the election campaign for just not having enough


of depth, of the fight, but to be fair she must have a backbone of


steel, a lesser man or holed below the water line, what goes up can


also come down, but in Theresa May's defence, and I don't think she will


last very long, and I think she has been exposed, during the election


campaign for just not having enough of depth, of the fight, but to be


fair she must have a backbone of steel, a lesser man or woman holed


below the water line, what goes up can also come down, but in Theresa


May's defence, and I don't think she will last very long, and I think she


has been exposed, during the election campaign for just not


having enough of depth, of the fight, but to be fair she must have


a backbone of steel, a lesser man or woman who have gone, "I'm off now."


To take the flak she is get, she is steely as they come. It is almost a


form of penance she is doing, having brought her party to this less than


glorious position, she's having to try and kind of restore things a


bit, knowing in her heart of hearts and perhaps not as deep at that,


that she will not be the beneficiary. Absolutely not. That is


what she said to the 1922 Committee that Monday after the general


election, I got us into this mess, I am going to get us out of it. Talks


to MPs this week, it is interesting, there is pretty hard feeling


settling that the new person should come from the 2010 intake, skip a


generation. The Boris, the Teresa, the Hammonds. Bye Amber Rudd? She


has a tiny minority -- majority. There was one minister in your foyer


an hour ago. Did we have a foyer? I think about 30 of them, all of them


believe it or not fancy their chance, and for any of those to


expose themselves and to lay out their agenda they will need


two-years to make these sort of Sport Reliefs Let us turn to Labour.


Well, earlier we talked to Caroline Flint about the threat


Here's what Shadow Minister and Corbyn ally, Chris Williamson,


MPs need to reflect the political programme that is overwhelmingly


supported by Labour members and Labour supporters,


and if people aren't prepared to do that,


then it will be up to members in their local constituencies


How big a change is Labour going to undergo? To what extent will Labour


now be recast in the mould of Mr Corbyn and his wing of the party?


Well in policy terms it already has been largely recast into the Corbyn


McDonnell view, although with lots of examples of them being pretty


expedient, Trident being an example. Where they went into the election


backing retention, even though personally they are totally


committed to nuclear disarmament. He might be able to move to that


position? They might but that example of expend yen sip leads me


to this. . I suspect Corbyn and McDonnell will be thinking we are


close to power do we really want 18 months of Civil War, which is what


deelection battles would become, and terrible publicity, and an imflowing


a party on the verge possibly of an election win. -- implosion. My guess


is they won't and they will go out of their way to try and stop it.


John McDonnell said many times divide a party lose elections, I


don't think they will want this. There are power battles in party, we


have been talking about it in the Tory party, and there will be


moments of heightened tension between the Labour MPs and their


memberships but I don't think that this is going to happen. If Steve is


right we should be looking for signs of them looking for signs of them


hosing things down. Although, I don't think they need to do this.


The moderate wing of the party, they are not standing up to Jeremy Corbyn


any more, they are trying to get a few Select Committee Chairmanships


and survive and hope something happens. The extraordinary thing is,


given that no-one expected Jeremy Corbyn, no-one tried to deselect him


and no-one accused him of disloyalty. We are in Soviet style


show trial, you know, repent territory. We haven't had a show


trial yet. Matter of time. Apart from Brexit. The Labour Party are


united until it comes to votes on the House of Commons on what to do


about Europe. So, Brexit goes well, that 49 will wither away a bit and


start getting... If Brexit goes badly. Vince Cable saying we need a


mud referendum, huge temptation then among Labour MPs to recalibrate and


a oar gue for staying in and that would split the partyty down the


middle. You heard Owen Paterson say 85% of people voted for parties that


wanted Brexit, meaning Labour and Conservative. It is true that Jeremy


Corbyn and Mr McDonnell are more Eurosceptic than people realise.


They want another election quickly, because they don't know how, this


maybe as good as it gets. None of us know, so get an election quick


because we think we might win it. That means that they could well play


game, why would they just bolster the store Tories if a big defeat on


Brexit could provoke an election. I am guessing they will play games, if


there is chance of undermining the Government perhaps fatally to get


this early election which would be massively in their interest, theyry


ahead in the poll, I think that will do it. They have displayed


expediency on Europe in the past, possibly arguing for it why having


doubts about it in the referendum, for Remain, sorely. So yes, I think


there will be, as I said earlier, in this Parliament there will be going


to be moments where it looks as if the Government could be defeat and I


think they will move towards defeating the Government. Any


remainor should be more worried about the economics of a Corbyn left


On that point we better leave it there.


I'll be back here on BBC One at the same time next week


And Jo Co's back tomorrow with the Daily Politics on BBC Two


at the earlier time of 11am - that's because of Wimbledon.


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


Download Subtitles