23/04/2017 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland

It's Sunday afternoon - this is the Sunday Politics.

Jeremy Corbyn wants to give everyone in Britain four

extra bank holidays - but is the Labour leader up

to being Prime Minister if he wins the election in just

Theresa May says she wants a stronger hand to deliver Brexit -

how will the Conservatives go about getting the bigger

I'll be asking Party Chairman, Patrick McLoughlin.

And I've been in Paris where voters are going to the polls in first

And in Northern Ireland: election - what could be the impact

We talk pacts and polls with the political parties here,

as they prepare for the third election in just over a year.

And how does that affect the negotiations at Stormont?

Will the Remain majority punish the Tories for the decision?

Or feel they may not like it but the Tories

And with me has always ready for the marathon task of covering a snap

general election, even working on bank holidays, the best and

brightest political panel in the business. David Wooding, Polly

Toynbee and Toby Young. So Labour's big announcement this

morning was a crowd pleaser. Four more rainy bank

holidays to enjoy - one for each of the patron saints

of England, Scotland, But Mr Corbyn probably won't be

getting the time off work if he wins And on The Andrew Marr Show this

morning he was asked what he would do as Prime Minister

if the security services asked him to authorise a drone strike

on the leader of Islamic State. What I'd tell them is,

give me the information you've got, tell me how accurate that is,

tell me what you I'm asking you about decisions you

would take as Prime Minister. Can I take you back

to the whole point? Is the objective

to start more strikes that may kill many innocent

people, as has happened? Do you think killing

the leader of Isis would be I think the leader of Isis not

being around would be helpful, and I'm no supporter or defender

in any way of Isis. But I would also argue that

the bombing campaign has killed a of whom were virtually prisoners of

Isis. So you've got to think

about these things. Mr Corbyn earlier. David, is his

reply refreshing damaging? It is damaging. He has clearly been

freaked to the fire already in the first week, there will be lots of

questions on his suitability as a leader and the damage it could cause

to our national security over the weeks ahead and Andrew Marr has cut

straight to the chase here. The other thing, of course, is the

letters of last resort, one of the first duties of a Prime Minister

when he walks into No 10 is to sign these letters on his own, on or --

or on her own in a room, a very lonely moment, to decide whether he

should press the nuclear button and that goes in the Vanguard submarines

and is opened in the event of a strike and he has dodged a question

so many times. One must wonder what he would do that. He has to make

these decisions as Prime Minister. On the Isis point, refreshing or

damaging? It sure is his base, the people who support him, that's the

sort of thing they support info and maybe his tactic is that's all he's

going to get, that is what the polls seem to suggest, in which case they

will be pleased, and say yes, the man is a man for these who doesn't

press buttons and shoot people down. But if you want to win you have to

deal with your own weaknesses and reach out to other people. I think

most people would say that's not somebody who could defend the

country. I wonder if he was being totally honest in saying he would

consider it he would ask for more information. He has previously been

on the record as being against drone strikes in principle, he's

campaigned against them, he wants to abolish drones. I think Andrew Marr

let him off saying it was a drone strike rather than a Navy SEAL or

SAS operation and he had the fact that they could be collateral

damage. We that's not his position because he condemned the

assassination of Osama Bin Laden even though there was no collateral

damage. David is right on the Trident point, he fetched the

question. We heard Niall Griffiths on this very show saying Trident,

the renewal of Trident, would be in the next Labour Party manifesto. It

turns out now we don't know and when he was asked he said that remains to

be seen, his re-opened a can of worms. What he has said about

Trident which was extraordinary was, we will rebuild the submarines but

not have any nukes on them which is expensive and useless. And of course

the Labour Party were forced soon after that interview to put out a

statement saying it is Labour Party policy to renew Trident. So where

are we? Do we know what the party's policy is? It is to renew Trident

but he has started this review which involves looking at it all again. We

know he is a unilateralist to start with but whether he can force this

through is dubious. Does it matter, though, if the party policy is in

favour of Trident, if the leader is not? The potential Prime Minister is

not? They split three ways when they went to vote on it in the Commons.

The party agreed they were pro-Trident and when it came to the

vote they split three ways. I think it's difficult for them, it's always

been a really difficult issue for Labour. The question is whether you

want to seal off your negatives, whether you really want to try and

reach out to people. There are an awful lot of people who will like

what he said, there are an awful lot of people that think we have been

involved in terrible wars, we have wasted a lot of money and blood and

let's just get back from the whole thing, let's retreat from the world

and not try punching above our weight. There is something to be

said for that and it is a reasonable argument. He's been true to himself

on this. I think he is and Polly is right, lots of people will agree

with him, not enough to win a general election, the latest ComRes

poll shows Tories on 50% and Labour on 25 and as my colleague James

Forsyth in the Spectator said if this was a boxing match it would

have been stopped by now by the revelry. We are not stopping, we are

going on. So the political parties have had

to move into election mode Stand by for battle buses,

mail shots and your social media timeline being bombarded

by political propoganda. But none of this comes cheap -

Adam's been doing his sums. Democracy is priceless but those

planes, trains and automobiles used in the last election cost money

and we know exactly how much, thanks to the Electoral

Commission database. The Conservatives flew David Cameron

to every part of the UK in one day on a private plane costing ?29,000,

in-flight meals extra. They shelled out ?1.2 million

for adverts on Facebook. The most expensive item was their

election guru Lynton Crosby. They bought ?2.4 million worth

of advice and research from his firm Labour's biggest expenditure

was on good old-fashioned leaflets, costing ?7.4 million

to print and deliver. Hope they didn't go straight

into the recycling. Cheap for all the

enjoyment it gave us. To turn a normal minibus

into Harriet Harman's pink bus Nick Clegg toured the country doing

all manner of stunts transported although the party got a grand's

discount when it broke down. Ukip's then leader Nigel Farage

was accompanied by bodyguards Nicola Sturgeon's chopper

cost the SNP ?35,450. Plaid Cymru spent just over

?1,000 on media training And the Greens spent ?6,912

promoting their tweets. It adds up to a grand total

for all the parties of ?37,560,039. Jabbing at my calculator that works

out at less than ?1 per voter. Adam Fleming there -

and joining me now is the man responsible for the Conservative

election campaigns - for the locals next month

and the general election in June - Welcome to the programme. The Crown

Prosecution Service is reviewing evidence from 14 police forces that

your party breached election spending rules on multiple occasions

in the last election. What are you going to do differently this time?

Well, the battle buses are part of the National campaign spend. You saw

them just on the shot that you did, all three parties had those battle

buses so that's why we believe they were part of the national spend and

it was declared that way. At least 30 people in your party, MPs and

agents, being investigated because they may not have been right to

include it in the national spend. Are you saying you are going to do

nothing differently this time? You asked me about last time and the way

the position is... Was. I asked you about this time. We will take a

careful count and make sure that everything that we do is within the

law. But as I say, the last election, all three parties had

battle buses. It is your party that above all has been investigated by

14 police forces. You must surely be taking stock of that and working out

how to do some things differently. You are being investigated because

you put stuff on the National Ledger which should have been on the local

constituency ledger. Are you looking at that again? All of the parties

had battle buses and they all put them on their national spend. I

don't think any of the parties put them on the local spend. The other

battle buses were not full of their party activists. Your party stuffed

these battle buses with activists and took them to constituencies.

That's the difference. And I ask again, what is different this time?

Are you going to run the risk of being investigated yet again? We

believe that we fully compliant with the electoral law as it was. What

will happen if one of these, or two or three or four or five of these 30

people, Tory MPs, or agents running campaigns are charged during the

campaign? As I say I believe we properly declared our election

expenses. What happens if they are charged? You asking me a

hypothetical question, the importance of this election is about

who is in Downing Street in seven weeks' time. Let me clarify this,

you maintain that in 2015 you did nothing wrong with how you allocated

the cost and the activities of the battle buses and you would do

exactly the same this time round? What we did at the last election we

believe fully complied with the law. So the battle buses this time,

stocked full of activists, will still be charged to the national

campaign even when they go to local constituencies? Will they? We will

be looking at the way we do it, there is new guidance from the

Electoral Commission out and we will look at that guidance. It is not the

guidance, it is the lawful stop the Electoral Commission said that, if

you look at the report they did on us, they said there was one area

where we had over claimed, over declared, and another area we had

and declared. We haven't worked out what to do

yet, have you? We will get on with the campaign and

start the campaign and I'm looking forward to the campaign.

I'm trying to work out of the campaign is going to be legal or not

because last time it seems it could have been illegal.

I am sure the campaign will be legal.

You started the campaign warning about the prospect of, the coalition

of chaos. Mr Corbyn has ruled out a post-election coalition with the SNP

and so have the Lib Dems so who is going to be in this coalition?

Vince Cable said he was looking towards a possible coalition trying

to stop a Conservative government. Is not the leader of the Lib Dems.

He's an important voice in the Lib Dems. Who will be in it? Let's see

because of the Conservative Party is not re-elected with a strong

majority, what will happen? There will be a coalition stopping us

doing the things we need to do. Who will be in it? It will be a

coalition of the Labour Party, the SNP and the Liberal party. They have

ruled it out. I think they would not rule it out if that was the

situation. Like Theresa May not ruling out an election and then

changing her mind? The things the Prime Minister said were very clear,

once she had served Article 50 there was an opportunity, as we know

today, there is going to be the start of a new government formed in

France and in September we have the German elections. So it was quite

right that we didn't get ourselves boxed into a timetable. That is why

the Prime Minister took the view that they should be a general

election to give her full strength of an electoral mandate when it

comes to those negotiations. What about Mr Corbyn's plan for four new

bank holidays, good idea? I'm not... If we get Corbyn in No 10 Downing St

we will have a permanent bank holiday of the United Kingdom. We

will have fewer bank holidays of most other major nations, most about

major wealthy nations. What about at least one more? Well, look, he's

talked about four bank holidays. Today would be a bank holiday and

next Monday would be a bank holiday and the other week was a bank

holiday too. I don't think it's very well thought out. It sounded more to

me something like you get in school mock elections rather than proper

elections. Your party is the self-styled party of the workers and

you have no plans to give the workers even one extra bank holiday?

What we want to do is ensure Britain is a strong economy and building on

the jobs that we have created since 2010. We were told that by reducing

public expenditure unemployment in this country would go up,

unemployment has gone down and the number of jobs have gone up

substantially. But no more bank holidays? Well, we will make our

manifesto in due course but I don't think four bank holidays held in

April, March and November are very attractive to people. When Ed

Miliband as leader of the Labour Party suggested the government

should control energy prices by capping them, the Conservatives

described that as almost Communist and central planning. Do still take

that view? You'll see what we have to say on energy prices. I didn't

you about that, I asked you if you take the view... The Prime Minister

made a speech at the Conservative Spring conference in which she

outlined her dissatisfaction about people who are kept locked on a

standard tariff and those are the issues we will address in the next

few weeks when the manifesto was published.

Would that be an act of communism? You will need to see what we say

when we set out the policies. It could be. You could put a Communist

act into your manifesto? I don't think you'll find a Communist

manifesto in a Conservative manifesto which will be launched...

You are planning to control prices? We will address what we think is

unfairness in the energy market. Mr Jeremy Corbyn was reluctant this

morning to sanction a drone strike. You heard us talking about it

earlier against the leader of Islamic State if our intelligence

services identified him. What would it achieve? When the Prime Minister

gets certain advice in the national interests, she has to act been that.

We've seen with Theresa May in her time as Home Secretary and Prime

Minister, she's not afraid to take those very difficult decisions. What

we say this morning from Jeremy Corbyn was a his tans, a reluctance.

I don't think that serves the country well. What would it achieve

if we take out the head of Islamic State he's replaced by somebody

else. It brings their organisation into difficulties. It undermines

their organisation. It shows we'll take every measure to undo an

organisation which has organised terrorism in different parts of

Europe, the UK. I think it is absolutely right the Prime Minister

is prepared to take those kind of measures. Jeremy Corbyn said he

wasn't prepared to take that. Because he wasn't sure what it would

achieve. The Obama administration launched hundreds of drone strikes

in various war zones and we in the west are still under attack on a

regular basis. Mr Corbyn's basis was what would it achieve? It would

achieve a safer position for the UK overall. The war on terrorists. But

the Westminster attack, Paris has just been attacked again? There's

been attacks which have been stopped by the intelligence services. We

must do all we can to support them. The question was about drone

strikes. Whether it is drone strikes or other action, we have to be

prepared to act. Let's move on to Brexit. It is the major reason the

Prime Minister's called the election? Not the only within but

the main reason? It is one of the reasons. Now we start the two-year

negotiations and then a year afterwards. Also the way in which

certain people said they would try to use in the House of Lords or

House of Commons to prevent us making progress. I think you'll put

in your manifesto, it is the Government's policy, the Brexit

negotiating position will be no more freedom of movement. Leave the

single market and no longer under the jurisdiction Europe. You expect

every Tory MP to fight on that manifesto. What will you do with Ken

Clarke and Anna? They will have fought on their manifesto. They will

understand the Prime Minister has the authority of the ballot box

behind them. Will they fight the election on these positions? I'm

sure they'll fight the election supporting the election of a

Conservative Government and it's manifesto will quite clearly set

out... You know they're against these positions. Ken Clarke has a

prod tradition of expressing a certain view. Overall, the party's

manifesto, it is not just individuals like Ken Clarke, it is

what happens as far as the House of Lords are concerned, people said

they'd use the House of Lords to prevent certain measures. You're the

party chairman, will it be possible for people like Ken Clarke to fight

this election under the Conservative ticket without sub describing to all

-- subscribing to all of these Brexit conditions? Ken Clarke will

fight as Conservative candidates. That wasn't my question. I know

that. Will they be allowed to fight it on their own ticket and not

subscribe to what is in your manifesto? The manifesto will be

what the Conservative Party fights the General Election on. There will

always be cases where people have had different views on different

parts of the manifesto. That will be the guiding principles for the

party. Philip Hammond says your election promises in 2015, in your

manifesto not to raise taxes tied his hands when it came to managing

the economy. Do you agree with him? No. The simple fact is we have to do

the best things for the economy. We'll set out in our manifesto in a

few weeks' time, what the policies will be for the next Parliament. Can

I clarify, you don't agree with your Chancellor? What Philip was saying

was some of the areas we wants to address as Chancellor, what the

party will do, it will set out all the issues we're fighting on. It

will set out clearly the choice we have in this country. That's the

important thing. Let me put the question to you again. Philip

Hammond said this week your election promise in 2015 not to raise taxes

had tied his hands when it came to managing the economy. I ask you, do

you agree with him? You said no. Philip expressed his view as to what

he would like. What I'm saying is in a few weeks' time we'll set the

manifesto which will set the policies, agreed with the the

Cabinet. He's Chancellor. Doesn't he determine what the economic part of

the manifesto is? We'll talk about that in due course. Will you have a

lock on the taxes that you locked in 2015 on income tax, VAT, national

insurance? That will be decided. You'll see that when we publish the

manifesto in a few weeks' time. Will you rule out the possibility taxes

may have to rise under a future Conservative Party? Conservative

Government. We've taken four million people out of tax. Now, on average,

people are paying ?1200 less tax than they were on the same salaries

in 2010. I'm very provide of that. I can assure you, the Conservative

Party will want to see taxes reduced. It is the Labour Party

which will put up taxes. We have the evidence where this he did so.

Council tax went up by over 100%. You haven't reduced the tax burden

as a percentage of the GDP is now going to reach its highest level

since the mid-180s which was when Conservatives were in power. The tax

burden in this country under your Government is rising? We've more

people paying taxes which is something, because we've a growing

economy and more people... What about the tax band? You said you

reduced the tax burden on your own Government's figures is rising? We

have reduced the tax burden. The threshold at which people start

paying. These are tax rates not the tax burden. It is rising. The tax

rates have been reduced. You said tax burden. Perhaps I misspoke. Tax

rates have been reduced. We'll leave it there. No doubt we'll speak again

between now and June Is France now about to make it

a hat-trick of shocks The prospect terrifies

the governing elite in Paris. But they're no less scared

in Brussels and Berlin, given what it could mean

for the whole EU project, never mind the huge potential impact

on our own Brexit negotiations. 11 candidates are contesting

the first round of the presidential Only the top two will go forward

to the run-off on May 7th. For the first time since General De

Gaulle created the fifth Republic in 1958, it's perfectly possible that

no candidate from the ruling parties of the centre-left or the

centre-right will even make it The election has been dominated by

the hard right in the shape of the who's never been elected

to anything and only started his own party

a few months ago. And the far left in the form

of Jean-Luc Melenchon, a former Trotskyite who has surged

in the final weeks of the campaign. The only candidate left from the

traditional governing parties is the centre-right's

Francois Fillon and he's been struggling to stay in

the race ever since it was revealed that his Welsh wife was being paid

at generous public expense for a job I've just come across

this magazine cover and it kind of sums up the mood

of the French people. It's got the five main candidates

for President here but it calls them the biggest liar, the biggest cheat,

the biggest traitor, the most paranoid, the biggest demagogue,

and it says they are the winners The four leading candidates,

Le Pen, Melenchon, Macron and Fillon, or in with a chance

of making it to the second round. Only a couple of points separates

them in the polls, Frankly, no one has a clue what's

going to happen. Of the four, there is a feeling that

two of them may be President But the two of them may not find

themselves in the second round. Somebody said to me that the man or

woman on the Paris Metro has as much a chance of knowing

who will win as the greatest experts Because the more expert you are

the more you may be wrong. The country has largely

stagnated for over a decade. One in ten are unemployed,

one in four if you are unlucky Like Britain in the '70s there is

the pervasive stench There are three keywords that come

to mind. Anger, anger at the elite, and in

particular the political elite. And an element of

nostalgia for the past. These three words were decisive

in the Brexit referendum. They are decisive in

the French election. Identity and security has been

as important in this election France is a proud nation, it worries

about its future in Europe It seems bereft of ideas about how

to deal with its largely Muslim migrant population, huge chunks of

which are increasingly divorced It is quite simply exhausted by

the never-ending Islamist terrorist attacks, the latest only days before

voting in the iconic heart of this If Fillon or Macron emerge

victorious then there will be continuity of sorts, though Fillon

will struggle to implement his Thatcherite agenda and Macron will

not be able to count on the support of the French parliament, the

National Assembly, for his reforms. But if it's Le Pen or Jean-Luc

Melenchon then all bets are off. Both are hardline French

nationalists, anti the euro, anti the European Union, anti-fiscal

discipline, anti the market, Either in the Elysee Palace

would represent an existential Brexit would simply become

a sideshow, the negotiations could just peter out as Brussels

and Berlin had bigger fish to fry. We're joined now from

Paris by the journalist 8th Welcome to the programme.

Overshadowing the voting today was yet another appalling terrorist

attack in Paris on Thursday night. Do we have any indications of how

that's playing into the election? That initially people thought this

has been almost foiled in that the police were there as a ramp up. One

policeman was killed. But the terrorist did not spray the crowd

with bullets. It was seen as not having much of an effect on the

election. This has changed. We now know the policeman who was killed, a

young man about to the promoted, he was at the Bataclan the night of the

terror attack. He was a fighter for LGBT rights. The fact he was

promoted, happy within his job, he has this fresh face. Sudden, he's

one of us. It took perhaps 48 hours for the French to process this. But

now they're angry and this may actually change the game, at least

at the margins. To whose advantage? I would say the two who might

benefit from this are Marine Le Pen, she's been absolutely

anti-immigration, anti-anything. And made no bones about it as she

immediately made rather strange announcement in which she'd said if

she'd been president none of the terror attacks which happened in

France would have happened. Francois Fillon has written a book two years

ago called Combating Islamic Terrorism he's has an organised plan

in his manifesto. Unlike Emmanuel Macron who stumbled when he was

asked the evening this happened what he thought, he said, I can't dream

up an anti-terror programme overnight. The question, of course,

that arrows was this is not the sort of thing that's just happened

overnight. It's been unfortunately the fate of France for many years.

Let me ask you this finally, what ever the outcome on May 7th in the

second round, who ever wins, would it be fair to say French politics

will never be the same again? Yes. Absolutely it's a very strange

thing. People have no become really excited about this. You cannot go

anywhere without people discussing heatedly this election. The anger

that was described is very accurate. Very true. There was this feeling as

for the Brexit voters and the Trump voters, vast parts of the people

were being talked down to by people who despised them. This has to

change. If it doesn't change, we cannot predict what the future will

be. We'll know the results or at least the ex-the Poll London time

tonight at 8.00pm. Thank for joining us from the glorious heart of your

city. Now, the Green Party currently has

one MP and they'll be contesting many more seats in June

as well as hoping to increase their presence on councils in

the local elections on 4th May. Launching their campaign

on Thursday, co-leader Caroline Lucas made

a pitch to younger voters. When it comes to young

people they've been But one crucial way they've been

betrayed is by what this generation and this government and the previous

ones have been doing when it comes We know we had the hottest year

on record last year, you know, you almost think what else does

the environment need to be doing All the signs are there

and it is young people who are going to be bearing

the brunt of a wrecked environment and that's why it's so important

that when we come to making that pitch to, yes, the country at large

but to young people in particular, I think climate change,

the environment, looking after our precious resources,

has to be up there. And I'm joined now by the Green

MEP, Molly Scott Cato. Welcome back to the programme.

Promised to scrap university tuition fees, increase NHS funding, rollback

cuts to local councils spending, how much would that cost and how would

you pay for it? Like the other parties we haven't got a costed

manifesto yet, it's only a few days since the election was announced so

I will come back and explain the figures. You don't know? Like every

party we have not produced accosted manifesto yet, we produced one last

time but public spending figures have changed so we're not in a

position to do that but we will be in a week or so. What taxes would

you like to consider raising? We would consider having higher taxes

for the better off in society. I think we need to increase the amount

of tax wealthier people pay. think we need to increase the amount

of tax wealthier people pay. How do you define better off? I'm not

entirely clear what the precise number would be but I think 100,000

people would pay a bit more, 150,000 quite considerably more but the real

focus needs to be on companies avoiding paying taxes. I work on

that a lot in my role in the European Parliament, we see an

enormous amount of tax avoidance by companies moving profits from

country to country and we need European corporation to make that

successful. It has not made much difference yet. We have made lots of

changes. Google turned over $1 billion and only paid 25 million in

taxes last year. There was a significant fine introduced by the

competition commission on Apple and in the case of Google we must change

the laws so that people cannot move profits from country to country.

Everybody wants to do it. But you couldn't face a big spending

programme on the ability to do that. You'd have to increase other taxes.

If you look at the cost of free student tuition, tuition fees and

also maintenance grants to students, that would come in at about 10

billion a year. One way of paying for that would be to remove the

upper threshold on National Insurance, bringing in 20 billion a

year, that's the order of magnitude we are talking about. It is not

vast, and some of the proposals we have... That would be an increase on

the better of tax? National Insurance on people earning...

People earning above 42,000. You would have another 10% tax above

42,000? I can't remember exactly how much the National Insurance rate

changes by. But in government figures it would be 28 billion

raised. I think it is up to 45, a bit more you pay a marginal rate of

40%, you would have them pay a marginal rate of over 50%? We would

put the National Insurance rate on higher incomes the same as it is on

lower incomes. If you are a school head of an English department on 50,

60,000 a year you would face a marginal rate under U of over 50%?

It is not useful to do this as a mental maths exercise but if you

look at other proposals would could have a landlord licensing system,

longer term leases on properties, so young people particularly, but also

older people who rent, could have more security which needn't cost

anything. We could insist on landlords paying for that. The

mental arithmetic seems clear but we will come back to that. How is the

Progressive Alliance coming? It is going well, I have heard of a lot of

interest at local level. Winterset this in contest, context, lots of

progressives are concerned about the crisis in public services, prisons,

social care system, and also about the Tories' hard extreme Brexit they

are threatening. You want the left to come together? Theresa May has

given us opportunity, she has taken a risk because she has problems with

backbenchers, she doesn't think she can get through Brexit with a small

majority so there is an opportunity and we are saying progressives must

come together to corporate, Conservatives are effective at using

the first-past-the-post system and we have to become effective as well.

Do you accept this Progressive Alliance cannot become the

government and Mr Corbyn is the Prime Minister? How could it happen

otherwise? I think that is a secondary question. For me the

primary question is who do people choose to vote for? Aluminium

government afterwards comes after the election. In most countries that

is the case. I understand that but we have the system we have and you

accept this Progressive Alliance cannot be in power and thus mystical

Burmese Prime Minister? Personally I think Mr Corbyn is less of a threat

to the country than Theresa May, she has shown herself to be an

authoritarian leader and she has said she doesn't want to have

dissidents, which I would say is reasonable opposition, and what we

are suggesting at the moment is there is a way of avoiding that very

hard Brexit and damage to public services. You'd be happy to pay the

price of having Mr Corbyn as Prime Minister? I do not see that as a

price. People have the choice of Jeremy Corbyn or Theresa May as

Prime Minister, that's the system that works. You would prefer Mr

Corbyn? I would but votes are translated into seats and the

Progressive Alliance is a step towards that.

Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics in Northern Ireland.

And here we go again with our second trip to the polls this year,

And throw in a new talks deadline set for the end of that month,

and we could be looking at yet another Assembly vote before

I'll be asking the five main parties how Theresa May's decision to call

a snap general election is affecting the negotiations here.

And we'll be talking pacts, party policies and Brexit.

With another snap election coming, a new talks deadline looming

and Brexit overshadowing everything, the world of politics

The Assembly election posters are no sooner down than they're about to be

replaced by the next wave of smiling faces and party colours.

But while some parties here have welcomed the forthcoming

vote, others have been much less enthusiastic.

In a moment, I'll be asking representatives of the five main

parties to set out their stalls in the first television debate

But first, a reminder of how we got to where we are.

I have just chaired a meeting of the Cabinet where we agreed that the

Government should call a general election to be held on June 8th. I

think it is almost arguing there is too much democracy. This is the

democratic process. We need people to come out and cast their vote and

not to complain about the results afterwards. So my appeal to everyone

is, make sure you are registered and usual vote wisely. And we are as

keen people to vote for the Unionist Party you can trust and the party of

strength in this Parliament. This is now the centre of British and Irish

politics and we must make sure that we take this place by storm. It is

disappointing that an election is taking place, but the SDLP is up for

the election and we will be fighting that election not on the premise

that Mrs May wants to fight this election on the premise of a hard

Brexit, we have always been a strong pro-European party and we have

fought on that stance. There will be discussions over where we can come

to the best agreements around some constituencies, that should not be a

shock. We want to make sure that we have representation in Westminster

for the people of Northern Ireland and there is no point electing

people that will not take their seats in Westminster and give the

people a voice. Sinn Fein will fight the election on an anti-Brexit

ticket and we will vote with the public who voted in the majority to

stay within the union. We will ask them to vote and anti-austerity Tory

policy and we will fight the election campaign on that basis in

the next six weeks. We're not interested in doing pacts with

anyone and it will reduce the selection into yet another sectarian

headcount. If people want a Progressive Alliance, they will get

it by voting for the Alliance Party, we are the progressive Alliance in

Northern Ireland, we do not need to form a pact with anyone else to do

that. Joining me now from our Foyle studio

is the SDLP MP Mark Durkan. And with me in studio

are the East Belfast MP Gavin Robinson, from the DUP,

Sinn Fein's Chris Hazzard. The UUP's MP for Fermanagh

and South Tyrone, Tom Elliott. And the Alliance Party's deputy

leader, Stephen Farry. Tom Elliott, you've been confirmed

as your party's candidate Are you confident you'll be

an agreed unionist candidate again, That is a matter of discussions over

the next number of days, but I don't see why not, I would hope so, but

that is a matter for the party leaders to discuss within the

Unionist parties. Clearly, it was successful the last time and we had

arrangements in other areas as well that were also successful. For other

parties. Yes, I don't see why not and the key is to give more

representation of Westminster than we actually can. What is confusing

for some people is that... Robin Swann is meeting Arlene Foster

this week to discuss the election, but your party has already stepped

aside in three constituencies - Why have you given away some

of your key bargaining chips before you've even

entered into negotiations? We have been proactive, Robbyn Swan

has been proactive to this -- and we have taken the decision to do that

so why would we not? Why would you give up bargaining chips before you

begin the negotiations? What we have said is we would put the Dutch

prefer to see representatives going to Westminster and for those seats

under pressure from those parties who may not go to Westminster and

represent their constituents. But also people in what -- Northern

Ireland, that is key and we want people to go to Westminster and

represent their constituencies. Why give up a place like North Belfast

without trying to secure something in return? Because we have taken a

proactive decision of the party. You have given something away without

getting anything in return, that is not normally a good bargaining

tactic. What we have been as very strategic and proactive. I don't see

how people in the wider community could blame us for being proactive

in that way. Do you understand why the Ulster Unionist Party done what

they have done? They did not give any rationale is today for doing it.

Has Tom Elliott explained it to your satisfaction now? The Ulster

Unionists would likely lose a deposit if they stood in a

Westminster election, but it is strange when you consider the gambit

of Northern Ireland seats available. For example, in Foyle, you're Steve

Unionist are giving the SDLP a step up and for many years, Mark Durkan

has relied on votes for unionists in that constituency. And the same

SDLP, six weeks ago, they said the vote for Ulster Unionists and get

SDLP and himself in Belfast, it is about getting the SDLP out. And the

SDLP appeared to be getting into discussions that will go after Tom

in Fermanagh and South Tyrone, so I don't understand it. Would you agree

to be a candidate in East Belfast? Quite relaxed about the political

landscape. There has been analysis to suggest it would not be much

different than 2015. Most notably by Bill White, a well-respected

electoral analysis in Northern Ireland. Since 2010, there have been

eight elections in Northern Ireland and in East Belfast, the DUP have

become the largest party in each of those elections and only one of

which was that a pact. If there is a Brexit fight, and quite relaxed. So

you fancy your chances perfectly well if there is an Ulster Unionist

candidate in East Belfast against Naomi Long? I'm quite relaxed, the

party which it will have a discussion this week with the Ulster

Unionist Party and we will see what happens. Do you accept Tom Elliott

realistically only has a chance of voting Fermanagh and South Tyrone,

and there is a lot of pressure on the DUP to meet him halfway? I work

with Tom every week and he is doing a first-class job for his

constituents and his victory was Unionist Corporation and that is

something unionists across Northern Ireland have been asking for two

years. I would rather have Tom Elliott as the returned Member of

Parliament for Fermanagh and South Tyrone rather than an abstention is

the Sinn Fein MP who might howl in the wind about what goes on in

Westminster, but will never take their seat and have their voice and

never speak up for their people in Westminster. What you make of that?

If Tom Elliott is the agreed Unionist candidate, that is not good

news for whoever the Sinn Fein candidate is in Fermanagh and South

Tyrone, and presumably there is every possibility that it could be

Michelle Gilder? Could you shed any light? No doubt like plenty of

constituents across the North of the discussion will continue to take

place ahead of selection. One thing is clear, if March's election was

about the RHI scandal and the arrogance of the DUP, this is going

to be very much about the Brexit and let's live in the real world. There

can be plenty of howling at Westminster benches but the centre

of gravity is Brussels, and looking for special designated status, it is

stubborn. A key factor is lost in this, the British Governor Taft two

years to agree a Brexit deal and they only need a majority of states,

27 states. If it takes longer, which will likely happen, they need

agreement of every single one of the other 27 states which means Dublin

will play a key role. It is the biggest party in Ireland and Sinn

Fein stands ready to be the main opposition to Brexit. Would you like

a coalition of remain as in somewhere like Fermanagh and South

Tyrone to get rid of Tom Elliott because he is at happy and

enthusiastic about Brexit? I think this election presents an

opportunity for a nonsectarian Progressive Alliance which has been

talked about in Britain and here, especially in opposition to what I

view as a regressive prosperity and probe recs it Alliance of the DUP

and the UUP and the Tories. I think there is a desire in the community

and of that plays another constituencies as it may well do, I

have every faith in Sinn Fein. Would you like to see something like that

happening in a place like East Belfast, Gavin Robinson? Without

getting into specifics, I think there is an appetite for it across

the board. Some constituencies will go for it and some will not. I think

we now have an historic opportunity for a nonsectarian, cross community,

Progressive Alliance. If we were to protect the democratic wishes of the

56% in the North, it is a chance for progressives to stand up. There is

speculation in at least one newspaper today that your party

would be keen to see no SDLP Commission fine or a Green candidate

in East Belfast to give the Alliance Party and Naomi Long the best chance

of taking that seat, is that correct, Mark Durkan? No, people

will do all sorts of speculation to reflect the conversations that I

have not been party to. But Colum Eastwood has set out early on as

soon as the reason I called the election that there was a case for

saying when she was calling the election about giving her a stronger

hand in terms of Brexit, but it is also a free hand in welfare cuts

that affect working families as well as lining up behind Donald Trump on

various military misadventures. In those circumstances, Colum Eastwood

said we have a duty to maximise that pro-remain vote that those people

who want to mitigate the impact of Brexit in terms of the economy here

and also to safeguard the institutions of the Good Friday

Agreement, that is what we are trying to do. But that would have to

be done clearly on a nonsectarian basis and across the parties and

that could take forward nonparty voices as well. But your party

leader is quoted in the Sunday Times today as saying you will give Naomi

Long the time and space to reconsider her opposition to the

idea of an anti-Brexit packed and she wants no part of any pact. I

would regret the fact that Naomi has described the move in the term she

has. The fact is the Alliance Party in the past have seen fit to step

aside in different constituencies as people needed to be selective about

where we stood in elections when the wider issues at stake. Only a couple

of days ago, Naomi said if the talks at Stormont do not succeed, we could

be in danger of direct rule for years. The idea of a heart Brexit

and possible direct rule if we are to believe what Naomi said about the

risk of direct rule, in those circumstances, people would need to

think about how we use the opportunity in what is the

difficulty of a first past the post election of giving people a more

feasible choice. Because in a first past the post election, people are

just reduce the tactical voting and all sorts of considerations. Very

candid people a higher and better choice, let's try. I do not believe

it will be easy to do so and it may not prove feasible, but we should

give that consideration to it and reflect on what we have done in the

past because we have not all run in every constituency in the past.

Let's put that is now to Stephen Ferry, does that not make sense for

your party not to be facing opposition from the SDLP, Sinn Fein

and the Green Party in East Belfast on June 8th? If they macro is

serious about taking that seat from Gavin Robinson, she needs a tight

field to do so -- of Naomi Long is serious. Elections are about choice

and people were what it out for themselves. Is it about choice or

winning seats, it is not the same thing? The choices will be framed

between Naomi and the Alliance Party and Gavin and the DUP and voters

will respond in kind, but parties have a duty to put their manifestos

before the electorate in every constituency. Pacts do not work,

they are anti-democratic about restricting choice rather than

facilitating a different type of choice. And there is a very big

mistake, if we are trying to conflate what is happening around

Brexit with what is essentially a cross Nationalist pact to combat

across Unionist pact, reducing Northern Ireland back to the

politics of the sectarian headcount which is contrary to where we are

trying to get the society, it would stand in contrast with a large vote

we received back in the March Assembly elections. Brexit is

something that affects people across the community, unionists and

Nationalists alike. We make a fundamental mistake if we conflate

opposing Brexit without a portion of nationalism. There is a perception

that some people are using the danger of a heart Brexit is a cause

to destabilise Northern Ireland and pursue wider political objectives

and we do not want to be part of that agenda. You do presumably want

to win East Belfast? The track 2015 combined vote of Sinn Fein and the

Green candidates was 2008, that is a lot of votes and could make all the

difference with a tight race with Gavin Robinson. People will draw the

conclusions from that if they vote for other parties but that is the

choice they have to make. People that vote for those parties will

vote irrespective of who else is on the ticket and we make an error if

we assume people are there to respond to the cues from party

leaders and shift their vote when they are told to do so, that is not

how people vote in most democracies, they think for themselves and draw

their own conclusions. Some people may reckon this is a two horse race

and others do not. Tony, what about the speculation that Mike Nesbitt

may be a candidate in South Belfast for the Ulster Unionist Party, can

you confirm that? It took me by surprise yesterday in the Telegraph.

Does it make sense? It is an option some people are considering but I do

not know where it came from and if the association had mooted at

themselves in South Belfast. He was an agreed candidate in South

Belfast, in these discussions between Robin Swann and Arlene

Foster, if you could persuade the DUP not to run in South Belfast, he

might have a good shout. He may well do and the parties will have a

discussion about that over the coming week. Would you like to see

that happening and would you throw your weight behind that suggestion?

I am throwing my weight behind them having discussions and if that is an

issue that comes out of it, so be it. Just touching Brexit, I know

that Chris and Mark have talked about Brexit and their opposition to

it and at least mocks somewhat is more realistic about it when he says

to mitigate about the difficulties it may pose, and Chris is saying his

outright opposition to Brexit. May I remind people of the vote is taken

place by the UK and we will have Brexit and we need to have the best

deal possible in Westminster and that is relevant in my constituency

in Fermanagh and South Tyrone. You have confirmed there will be

conversations between Robin Swann and Arlene Foster to maximise the

unionist representation and those discussions will take place this

week. But two months ago, you're third-party leader Mike Nesbitt

stood up and said, vote Mike and get Colum Eastwood, has that been

replaced by vote Robin, get Arlene? No, I am not sure where that comes

from. Vote Robin and get Arlene is not the way of it. That is what the

discussions will be about this week. The reality is if we can maximise

the number of representatives in Westminster, so much the better.

That would be very important. I know even prior to this, Stephen himself

stood down in 2001 to facilitate another candidate. So agreements

have been ongoing for years and I can still remember the Bobby Sands

election when Sinn Fein and the SDLP agreed they would not run and

support Bobby Sands. So this has been going on for years and is still

going on. Chris has not been written off as the possibility of a packed

between his party and a number of others.

I'd word is that Stav Danaos Westminster election? Is your

relationship with the Ulster Unionists has changed dramatically.

This is the difficulty of the first past the post system. We were

negotiating the Good Friday Agreement we tried to get the first

past the post system on the table. Unfortunately, Tony Blair would not

move even though he clearly have the majority of us in the position where

he could have done it, because he said that the kind of sectarian

impulses that are thrown up by that system would confound the sort of

ethic they were trying to create with the power-sharing agenda. That

will not change. We have to accept that. I recognise, what is going on

and the fact is that we are seeing a two party packed in terms of certain

constituencies coming forward in relation to unionism and I do not

believe the answer to that is a two party national is packed. It was

quite clear at the terms that Colum Eastwood set out the agenda for it

the access to try and reflect the broad will of the people here to

remain and that is to avoid a hard Brexit and that is to use the

institutions of the Good Friday Agreement to answer a lot of the

challenges that brags that would throw up. That is a legitimate

offer, but we don't have a lot of time to spend on it and let's

consider that and if it is not going to happen, then move on and fight

the campaign on the issues, not just Brexit but also welfare reform, that

we will see even more of now, because the Tories were only

committed to not doing you welfare cuts in the current Parliament.

There will be free to come forward with cuts of the future and that is

why the people need a strong representation and a voice in

Westminster at least to speak up. We will not be able to stop Tory cuts

that they have a swingeing majority, but we will say it does not matter.

Gavin Robinson, are you fundamentally in the selection,

which is only six and a half weeks away, taking on that progress of

access that several of our contributors have already referred

to in our discussion today? Is that what this election is about as far

as the DUP is concerned? We have set out our stall. Is that with the

election will be about? That is the way it has been framed. It is an

anti-unionist Alliance, we can see that clearly and I think Alliance

are almost scared. How is it that when there are a Unionist candidates

are pro-remain-macro? Danny Kinahan is in support. Danny Kinahan is

backing Brexit. He voted for Article 50 and understands the will of the

United Kingdom people and is getting on with the process. Where he has

come from is a different place from where you and Tom Elliott have come

from? He is progressing Brexit. I would imagine he would be a target

for an anti-Brexit access. There is hard and soft Brexit and probably

something in between. It is called clean Brexit. Chris said that the

only people who would be talking for Ireland would -- for Northern

Ireland would be Ireland. They do not take their seats, they will not

have a say in Westminster. They can have a say in Northern Ireland

Executive, which we would love to see restored. We would love to see

local devolved government and we would like to see an agreed position

on the needs of Northern Ireland. Sinn Fein says that is their

position as well. They pulled it down! For selfish reasons. For

selfish party political reasons, they have pulled the Northern

Ireland government down, they have not allow the restoration of the

institutions and we do not have a budget, we have public services in

chaos and if they want to have a voice on Brexit, we need to restore

our Assembly. Martin McGuiness spelt out clearly why he was resigning.

The electric came out in numbers not seen since the days of the Good

Friday Agreement to support Martin McGuiness and support the Sinn Fein

stance -- the electorate came out. Sinn Fein is the biggest political

party on this island, we have more in EP 's than any other party so

when the European Council's guidelines are published,... When

they supported our position of special designated starters, it was

because we brought to bear. Mark Durkan just said that you cannot

stop anything in Westminster, but you can speak up about it. Sinn Fein

are about more than speaking up about things, we want to stop

Brexit. You cannot speak about it in Westminster, you do not take your

seats. This is an historic opportunity to stand up. There is a

great opportunity and get special designated staters is on the agenda

because Sinn Fein put it there, about people coming out... Let me

bring in Mark Durkan. Just on the question of special status, Cynthia

and jeered at that whenever Colum Eastwood and the SDLP talked about

it after the referendum campaign -- Sinn Fein. Let us be clear, I am

being honest with people, I do not pretend that we can stop things.

Sinn Fein fought the last election telling people to stop the Tory

welfare cuts and then they handed power so that the Tories would

introduce them. They put in a legislated consent motion which

meant that Westminster put in welfare cuts which came into place

last week. That is in terms of employment and work related

activity. The recent cuts that have come in because of that motion that

you were part of last year, there is no mitigation on those that is

particular to Northern Ireland whatsoever and there will not be

until we get our own institutions up and running again. I want to bring

in Stephen Farry. There is a real danger of us missing the boat around

the special deal. The parties are talking about but we have heard from

the European Commission in terms of their negotiating timescale. I want

to address -- they want to address the Irish issues. For all the talk

about Westminster and Dail, unless there is an Executive and we have a

commitment to a special deal and an agreed negotiating position, we will

not be able to do anything for Northern Ireland and we will see a

hard Brexit on our local situation. There is a real danger fund -- off a

tragedy until we get an Executive in place. Time is running out and we

need the civil service to work with us. A lot of people are saying that

this general election is an timely and is a sideshow. Where does that

leave the devolution project? The talks are in cold storage. In

theory, the talks are proceeding but there is no momentum. They may well

peter out before the election. We will then have three weeks after the

Westminster election until this new deadline comes to pass. Already we

have no budget or plan for Brexit and we are in danger of governance

falling apart, our health service is in crisis and issues are stacking

up. This becomes a further distraction with the election. We

have a timescale around Brexit that needs to be addressed. If we do not

get this right, we are facing a real tragedy. Where are we on the wider

devolution project? You were the chief spokesperson for your

party during the stocks. Have we forgotten completely about Stormont

until we deal with this issue. It appears to be that it is in cold

storage. There has been little momentum from the elections. Sinn

Fein have been putting red lines down saying we will not cross that

unless this is agreed. All the other parties have been saying we are here

to negotiate and try and get A.D. And try and manage the process and

get devolution back up and running. -- try and get a deal. The DUP have

put down red line as well, no Irish language act. At least they are

discussing it. They are discussing Irish language but as far as I know

they had not accepted an Irish language act. That is a red line.

The issue with Sinn Fein, they have said they are not going to restore

the Executive over and -- and Arda Turan which act. Is that still a red

line? -- and Irish language act. Are we seriously suggesting... The

vacuum last night that saw upon being placed outside a primary

school to kill police officers, that is continuing because of the Sinn

Fein desire for an Irish language act. They said this was about

honouring previous agreements, they never had an agreement with us.

Restore devolution, get the Executive back up and running. It is

not about negotiating a new deal, all these things have been agreed,

it is about implementing what was agreed previously. The demand for an

Irish language act, it is not the demand from Sinn Fein, we are asking

for it, but there is an Irish language community who have said

that enough is enough. Is that enough to hold up the restoration of

devolution in Northern Ireland? Whim we are in this pickle? That is a

question for the DUP and the British Government to ponder. I don't think

it is, I think we need to implement this right away. In the meantime,

you're determined that you are not moving and that remains a red line.

This has already been agreed and I welcome some of the movement. I want

to bring in Mark Durcan. Can you square the circle? -- Mark Durkan.

It is important to make sure our institutions are up and running if

we are going to address the issues. The best answer to the Brexit

challenge is to use the Strand which allows us to work on a north and

South basis in many sectors with areas of co-operation which Europe

would want to support. We cannot have strand to as the answer to the

Brexit challenge unless we have strand one working as well. Thank

you. Now, with a look at a particularly

busy week in the political world, here's Stephen Walker with

Sixty Seconds. Only one place to start, as Theresa

May caught everyone out. There should be unity here in Westminster,

but instead, there is division. The country is coming together, but

Westminster is not. Not everyone was happy with the impact on Northern

Ireland. The British Government do not want a power-sharing Executive

to work here because they do not want an Executive that will take a

firm stand against Brexit. This leaves Northern Ireland in the lurch

particularly with respect to the ongoing talks process. There was

talk about voting packs. There are discussions that are important

because there is a request from unionism to have greater

collaboration. We will not do a packed with one party to keep out

other parties from other communities. There was annoyance

over one talks deadline passing. I am disappointed that deadlines that

were placed for the 2nd of May are now unlikely to be met. Another one

came along soon enough, June the 29th.

And let's hear now from my Guests of the Day -

Allison Morris, of the Irish News, and the columnist Newton Emerson.

I asked Mark Durkan, any optimism he could give people watching the

programme who perhaps had not taken anything terribly optimistic out of

the conversation. Are there are reasons to be positive about the

campaign. Going on that discussion, very little reason. Regardless of

what has been said, it is clear this is another referendum on Brexit and

you can see that from what the politicians are saying. We are

dividing into two camps. I think this will be the election or you may

see some floating voters changing and going towards other pro-or

anti-Brexit parties. There will be interesting, for the likes of Tom

Elliott in the border constituencies, it will be

interesting to see which way the soft unionist vote goes because

there were no real answers given to what the definitive role, especially

the Ulster Unionist Party, if they do not manage to retain their seats,

they are more or less finished. We know in the run-up to the last

Assembly election, we said their message was confused and the voters

did not react well, and it still seems confused. When we get into

this, do you think we will still be talking about Brexit will we be

talking about those issues that we always talk about in Northern

Ireland elections? I think there will be a determined effort to keep

the focus on Brexit, that is what is different about this election and

that is the for nationalism. DUP and Sinn Fein are now drawing level and

that has been seen coming for decades but it was always assumed

that the group in the middle, Alliance and the Green Party would

be the meat in that Sam Wood and they would moderate between them.

Brexit enables Nationalists to make a bid for going into the middle

territory and that is wide Naomi Long is so determined, I believe, to

keep clear of that, because if she ends up on what will be seen by

unionist as the nationalist side, the centre ground is gone. I wanted

to ask you about the unilateral move by Robin Swann and the Ulster

Unionists to not stand in three constituencies. Gavin Robinson said

he is still a bit bewildering as to why that has happened outside the

negotiations that will happen this week.

It is because both parties are still very much competing with each other

and unionism's great gift or cursed, it seems to be able to organise to

pact without organising a pact between the two parties. They seem

to be able to slot themselves into a de facto pact without being on

speaking terms. What about a closer working relationship between the

SDLP and Sinn Fein? It would be more beneficial to Sinn Fein and the SDLP

and the SDLP know that. That is why they are talking about pacts with

pro-opposition parties, rather than going into a pact with Sinn Fein,

because if you look at the marginal seats in places where the SDLP are

in trouble, I do not think that packs with Sinn Fein would do them

much good at this stage, it would generally benefit Sinn Fein in

places like north Belfast. There was still a bit of animosity between

Chris Hazard and Mark Durkan. It is very tetchy. We came from an

election that was quite savage and Sinn Fein did well. At this point in

time they do not really need the help of the SDLP whereas clearly the

SDLP would clearly need the help of Sinn Fein. I am still intrigued,

vote Mike, get Colum, has that been replaced by get -- vote Robin, get

Arlene. It is not necessarily confusing, because Mike Nesbitt are

organised the last unionist pact and he made a clear distinction between

Westminster and Stormont elections. It took him six months to do that

and it still was not completely satisfactory. The reason they might

be some confusion over what the UUP is up to because Mike Nesbitt like

to be a unionist pact builder in Westminster elections and then

portray himself as a moderate. I don't think that Robin Swann will be

as squeamish as that. How do you see this developing over the next few

weeks and the talks which are meant to still be happening in parallel,

but everyone seems to agree, frankly nothing will happen on that front?

If those talks were not going anywhere, whether the result of an

election or not. There was little momentum in them before there was an

extension given and I realise that they are more structured but they

are not talks that have achieved anything in regards to those red

lives. Those are the big ticket things, the legacy issues, things to

do with the Irish language act and other issues that are an result they

will not be resolved before this election or the next talks deadline

and not resolved as we go into the marching season. James Brokenshire

becomes a candidate more than anything else. We have to leave it

there. That's it from Sunday

Politics for today. Join me on Thursday, when I'll be

back with The View on BBC1 at 10:40. Until then, from all

the team, bye-bye. There'll be a couple of hours of

just fantastic music, really, all the Ella classics, as well as

some very special guests,