23/09/2012 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland

And the new leader of the Ulster Unionists wants it to be a party

for everyone. I will be asking him if it is enough to reverse his

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 1995 seconds

party's fortunes. Joined me in Hello and welcome to Sunday

Politics in Northern Ireland. The Ulster Unionist Party gathered

at Titanic Belfast for its annual conference this weekend. But

despite a series of election failures in recent years, there was

no talk of sinking ships. All eyes were on the helm and Mike Nesbitt's

plans to turn the fortunes of the party around. He made me realise

what a great future we had and that we have made a great decision.

fresh from his conference performance, I'll be joined by Mike

Nesbitt. Also on the programme, nationalists

have no confidence in the Social Development Minister. Will a debate

in the Assembly achieve anything? Here to discuss that, the deputy

leader of the SDLP, Dolores Kelly, and the News Letter'spolitical

correspondent, Sam McBride. Ending sectarianism, pledges on the

economy, reducing the number of government departments and

educational reform - just some of the themes Mike Nesbitt focussed on

in his 45-minute speech to the party faithful yesterday. We'll

talk to Mr Nesbitt in just a moment, but first, Chris Page reports on

the mood of those who turned up to hear from their new leader.

The choice of venue might have provoked an armada of maritime

analogies but the Ulster Unionist Party hope holding the conference

in Belfast's new iconic building would put them forward as a party

looking forward with big ideas. As everybody said hello on the ground

floor in the splendour of the banqueting suite, Mike Nesbitt was

preparing for his crucial first conference speech as leader. A long

shadow has been cast over the party as he spent his first six months

restructuring and undisciplined. Now he's limbering up to talk

action and policies. And he was being talked up by his colleagues.

I think it's been very good so far and we will see a very good

reaction to the leader's speech today, and it will move things on

for our party's fortunes. We are anticipating some planned for the

way forward and I am sure it will be exciting. So, would you live up

to expectations? It was not just his own party members he was trying

to connect with. Everyone who lives here, and I mean everyone, I am

appealing to Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Muslims, everybody. Chinese,

Indian, Eastern European. This appeal is to everybody. Not all of

those groups were represented in the hall. This time, at least.

Several hundred were listening to some familiar faces from the

party's cast were absent. But he did look at how the issues from

Northern Ireland's past were being looked at. And he was critical.

say, no to painting if them as villains. That is a red line for us.

I say the Ulster Unionist Party has no problems saying thank you to the

RUC and to the UDR. Looking further back, he said his vision was the

same as that of the first leader. That was Sir Edward Carson. A

government for all. He has just made the most important speech of

his political career. Do they now believe today marks a turning-point

of a party and that this is a man who can generate electoral success?

I think it was exhilarating! I really enjoyed that. I thought it

was very good. Great hope for the future. He made me realise what a

great future we have and that we have made the right decision.

really pleased because I came away and thought, at last! It has been a

tough century so far for the party that has run Northern Ireland for

more than 50 years. Mike Nesbitt's task is Titanic and he hopes this

party conference will be remembered as the one where the tide turned.

Mike Nesbitt is with me now. The party faithful clearly enjoyed the

speech but was it really for them or was it for people outside the

party watching on TV? Well, it was for a bit of both, Mark. The key

target audience has to be the some 200,000 people who would largely be

pro-Union and who used to vote but are no longer voting. They have to

have something and someone to align themselves to, so it was a direct

appeal to that block of current no- voters. You want it to be a party

for all - Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, people of all faith

and none. Chinese, Indian, Eastern European. That's a big challenge!

With respect, most of those groups were not represented in the Titanic

sweep yesterday. Absolutely and that is a huge challenge. We do

have members but by no means enough, and that is the challenge. A nobody

is arguing the Ulster Unionist Party is a big beast of politics!

That is the challenge, to get ourselves back up. Up in the

process. There was a tweet yesterday saying, ask Mike if he

thinks the Union Jack flag to his left to is alienating some of

voters? We don't have to get into some kind of bland and come out in

some kind of a more fierce human form of a major! I'm talking about

mutual human respect. It may be one thing to say what is wrong with

respecting the Union Flag, but if you want those people to join and

vote for your party, they might be uncomfortable with the Union Flag

and feel they could be Unionists but they don't need that other

Association and it is a step too far. Is that not something you need

to look at? We don't believe that because the United Kingdom has the

Union Flag as it's black, and the same way the Republic of Ireland

has its flag. But you could find another way of doing it so you

don't defend the people who don't like the Union Flag and what it

represents, and perhaps using some other representation that brings

other people in. -- so you don't offenders the people. I don't see

it like this. Why is it an issue? The issues to me are about the

economy, health, education. And that is what we were doing

yesterday when we published our five policy papers for discussion.

I know you naturally have an interest in my speech but we have

five key speeches from spokespeople yesterday. $WHITE You say social

deprivation is a key policy area. "We'd agree an absolute income

level that we don't want a family falling below. We would add two

specific deprivation measures and attack that sector. It's not the

whole answer, it does not help everyone, but it tackles those most

in need. What will that cost? Who'll pay for it? What does it

mean in reality? The reports coming back have no targets in them and

there is a whole range of targets you could set in terms of tackling

child poverty. You can have their relative income or absolute income,

so we are saying, let's figure wrapped an absolute income level

below which we do not want things to drop. -- figure out. In terms of

hot meals, clothing, meals with meat involved, let's Dick two of

those so we have an absolute, nailed on black-and-white target. -

- let's pick two of those. We haven't costed it because we are

not in government in that department. What we are saying is,

wouldn't it be great if the Executive agreed something that is

black and white so you know whether you have achieved something you set

out to achieve or not. But we haven't costed it. The but you have

a clear policy that you can table to the Executive and say, these are

the figures. What I am saying is, there are five papers for policy

discussion. We are not at the end of the road yet. An interesting

point that you are not in government yourself. Is it not time

you sate yourself at the Executive table and showed people what you

are capable of, and demonstrated another side of your leadership?

Firstly, I have said as a matter of principle I think it would be good

for the Ulster Unionist leader to be poignant at the next election.

And that would be me. We do not know how long the mandate will be.

It was supposed to end in 2015 but now which will go to 2016. But I

won some certainty on that. Because I might think twice and have more

time. So I can't tell you until somebody tells me how long the

mandate will be. And I don't think it is right to extend the mandate

until the electorate has had its say. And you want to cut after the

next election the number of departments to eight but not using

civil servants. Our I never said wait. I say, get on with it! That

is an internal working and you don't need a mandate to we just a

putt government departments. We have a mandate for all the devolved

issues. -- we don't need a mandate to readjust government departments.

But the Cabinet is, don't panic, civil servants, you are not going

to lose your jobs. -- the caviar at. What we're talking about his

efficiency. What we did in 1988 was created government that was

inclusive but not necessarily efficient. The next stage is

inclusive and efficient. The big theme of the speech was lost

opportunities. Why would you want to put thousands of people on the

dole and give them a life of lost opportunities because you want to

cut things. Which departments would you want to cut? We have been in

discussion with all the party leaders and you have to negotiate

this through. But the ones we would be looking at would be decamped,

but the big single thing to do to kick-start the economy is to have a

single department for the economy and it would include some of the

functions of Del. All of that is for negotiation with the other

party leaders. What about the Mid Ulster by-election? In the autumn?

Would you stand aside to let it unified candidate run? It is

speculation at the moment. The by- election has not been moved. It

could be moved very soon. I will give you a guarantee - the people,

the Ulster Unionist people of Mid- Ulster, will have the opportunity

to vote for somebody with Ulster Unionist values in that by-election.

Why it happens? Yes. And finally, you set out your stall in

opposition but is that what you were saying to people - vote for me

next time around and put me into opposition? And no. I want to get

to a normalised society and for that, we need for an efficient

opposition to stand. A coalition, cross-community government. Which

you would be leader of? Well, no... May be look at the next time and we

will be closer to defending everything. Thank you very much

indeed. Do stay with us for a little while longer. Let's move on.

The SDLP and Sinn Fein claim the Social Development Minister, Nelson

McCausland, has broken the Ministerial Code by failing to

condemn loyalist bands who breached Parades' Commission rulings in

North Belfast last month. The party has tabled a motion of no

confidence in Mr McCausland which will be debated in the Chamber

tomorrow. The SDLP's deputy leader, Dolores Kelly, and the News

Letter's political correspondent, Sam McBride, are with me.

Dolores, why are you bringing this? Explain your thinking. Well, I

think many people across the North were dismayed at the behaviour of

Nelson McCausland over recent weeks and people want to see high

standards in public office. And surely as a government minister, he

must be held to account for his failure to condemn the behaviour of

the young Conway band and his duty within the pledge of office to

promote community relations. I don't think his behaviour and

admissions have done anything to improve community relations. Peter

Robinson says Mr McCausland has no case to answer? It's a delicate

situation. Why up the ante in the week of the Covenant Parade? Don't

accept that. Our party believes the issue is much wider than that. We

are dealing with community divisions in the North and we are

seeing a failure of leadership by the DUP in particular. We are

dealing with sectarianism. I don't think anywhere else a Western

democracy would a government minister be able to behave like

Nelson McCausland. He says he has been crystal clear on the matter

and he doesn't support the breaking of the law. He is fully in support

of the rule of law. It need cross- community support so it won't

happen. You don't have that. think it is putting down standards

in public office. And then we have to hold ministers to account. Let's

wait and see. Our party is meeting tomorrow with the Alliance Party.

Let's wait and see what happens. it possible you might support this?

Sinn Fein is going to support the SDLP. With have broad concerns

about the actions of many government ministers. We have

concerns and we put in an urgent question... This motion of no

confidence? We think a debate being run is timely within the bubble of

Stormont but we are coming up to more support in decades for

unionism. And we don't want anything that is going to upset

people on the ground because there is tension out there. I will meet

with Alastair McGonnell tomorrow morning. Is there air any support -

- possibility you will support the motion? -- is there any possibility

you will support the motion? I were to talk to him tomorrow. I think,

where do you draw the line? Who has to condemn what a what sort of

standard is he setting? It is vague and it will be interesting to see

how it is set out in the debate tomorrow. But it is unusual to have

the discussion about somebody not condemning something when he says

he did. And on the wider issue of the bigger political picture, what

are you hearing about how difficult the motion will be tomorrow and the

debate around it and how hard it will make things for the parade?

This one flashpoint area around St Patrick's Church, there have been

attempts to broker things and perhaps there will be some more

action this week. But it is not something that is not going to do

anything to defuse that. Nelson McCausland is a representative and

is central to some of the discussions. It will not make the

loyalist side any more likely to back down in any of the demands.

Dolores Kelly, are you concerned you will give a platform tomorrow

for some heated exchanges, when what people really require is the

opposite and you need people to be making conciliatory comments? And

forcing a debate like this will not do that? I agree that timing is

unfortunate because Nelson McCausland's behaviour has been

pretty poor by anyone's standards. But we are working hard on the

ground towards compromise. And we want to support a motion to engage

in direct dialogue with residents. For and you. -- thank you to you

all. Dolores and Sam, stay with me. We'll hear more from you both in a

moment. Let's take a look now at the political week in 60 seconds,

with our political correspondent, Martina Purdy.

The Speaker's patience snapped. He vowed to name and shame those who

didn't turn up to ask questions. Dolores Kelly, she is not in her

place. And launching his road safety campaign, the minister was

in no mood for any nonsense either. The air are no excuses for bad

driving. It's so what is the excuse for probing into the conduct of

Peter and Iris Robinson taking more than two years? -- so what is the

excuse? This was not down after Stormont forced owners to sell up

for redevelopment but the debts are still standing. Bets for MLAs.

Don't assume your party is behind you. Trevor, you will never walk

alone while Mike Nesbitt is around! Now has try!

-- nice try. Dolores Kelly, you were named and

shamed by the Speaker on Monday and we just saw it there. For not being

there to deal with your question that had been asked to their

minister. What happened? I was at a meeting on the third floor of

Stormont and I looked at the time and I had five minutes, so I

thought, I will go down. I made a run for the stairs and ended up

being two minutes late. Unfortunately, the question before

Andy had two supplementary is where there are normally three. -- only

had. Will you embarrassed? To do apologise? Eyes certainly did. I

never did it before and I will certainly not do it again.

McBride, you were at the Ulster Unionist conference party yesterday.

What did you make of the way Mike Nesbitt handled his speech as

leader? It was very polished and you would expect that from here.

Reading an autocue, the inarticulate, being good with words

and able to sell things. -- been articulate. That is his background.

A lot of content and policies and he had been criticised for not

having policies. A lot to other issues were touched upon but was

there enough of the detail and costings people want to see? Is it

was 45 minutes and I think if he had gone into any more detail

people would have been nodding off! But he has made a start and, quite

significantly, the DUP have released a statement attacking him.

He will be pleased with that because for a while, the DUP had

not even been responding to some of what he said. Peter Robinson, in

the meantime, pates Civic dinner. - - at a civic dinner. If everything

was settled back in 1998, why do so many people refuse to use the term

"Northern Ireland"? For some, it is interchangeable but a good

agreement could settle who chose to regard the North as part of Ireland

and could work towards reunification legitimately. But

there it is a separate issue. is about the names we use and the

words we use. You are a member of the Northern Ireland Assembly. Do

you say Northern Ireland? Summed times. Sometimes it is the North. -

- sometimes. I think many people who aspire to the reunification...

The common and celebrates a rebellion by loyalists Against the