23/10/2016 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland

There's another candidate in the race to become Ukip's next

leader: Suzanne Evans, the party's former deputy chairman,

This man might have something to say about that.

Paul Nuttal was Nigel Farage's deputy for many years.

So is he now ready to throw his hat in the ring?

The battle for Mosul: the Iraqi army and its allies advane

on the country's second city which has been in the hands of

And coming up here: from this key clash?

One party conference; two leaders' speeches.

We reflect on yesterday's Ulster Unionist gathering

which heard from Mike Nesbitt and the SDLP's Colum Eastwood.

one of the richest cities in the world. Should all private landlords

be licensed to help tackle the squalor?

And with me - as always - the best and the brightest political

panel in the business: Toby Young, Polly Toynbee and Tom Newton Dunn -

The last leader was in the job a mere 18 days before she decided

The favourite to succeed her then quit the party after a now infamous

Ukip's biggest donor says the party is at "breaking point".

This morning, the former Deputy Chairman, Suzanne Evans,

announced that she would be running for the leadership.

I've thought long and hard about this leadership bid,

and one of the reasons I've perhaps delayed announcing it is

because I wanted to be absolutely sure that I had the support

And I can confirm that I have more than enough signatures

on the nomination form already to be able to go forward.

Let's not forget that 3,000 people signed a petition in support of me

I know head office was besieged with letters in support.

I would not be doing this if I didn't have the backing

of our members, because our members are the most important

Well, Paul Nuttall was Nigel Farage's deputy for many years

and plenty of people saw him as a leader-in-waiting.

Let's ask the man himself - Paul Nuttall joins me now.

Yes. I've made the decision that I'm going to put my name forward to be

the next leader of Ukip. I have huge support across the country, not only

amongst people at the top of the party in Westminster and with the

MEPs, but also the grassroots. I want to be the unity candidate. Ukip

needs to come together. I'm not going to gild the lily. Ukip is

looking over a political cliff at the moment. It will either step four

step back, and I want to tell us to step backwards. You say it faces an

ex-distension or threat, which means it's possible it has no future at

all. Students of political history know that political parties take a

long time to get going. They can disappear pretty quickly. Ukip is

facing an existential crisis. What happened over the summer has put us

on a... We could be on a spiral that we can't get off. But I believe I am

the man to bring the factions together, to create unity within the

party, and to build on the structure and get us ready for the common

challenges. Why didn't you stand last time? Because I have spent the

last four or five years of my life travelling around the country. I

have done more Ukip meetings than anybody else, spending a lot of time

away from home. With Brexit, I felt that my job and Nigel's job was done

and we could hand over to the next generation. That doesn't seem to be

the case, and maybe it's time for someone who is an old hand. I'm very

experienced and I know the party inside out. Maybe it's time to step

in and bring the party together. You told the Liverpool Echo on the night

of July that you didn't wish to take on Nigel Farage, you didn't want

that to happen to your family and friends. What has changed? The party

is facing an existential crisis, and I want to make sure that Ukip is on

the pitch to keep the ball into the open net we have in politics. We

have a Conservative Party who is moving toward Brexit, but we have to

be there too. Why would you be better than Suzanne Evans? Suzanne

would be an excellent candidate. I thought the 2015 manifesto was the

best out of all the political parties. I would be the best

candidate because of my experience. I am not part of any faction within

the party. Is she? I get on well with everybody, and I believe I

could be the man to bring the party together. Do you get on with Iain

Banks, -- Aaron Banks, who is supporting one of your rivals? Yes,

I get on well with him. He is able to choose whoever he wants to be the

next leader of the party. After November 28, the leadership

election, we all say, the past the past. It becomes Daisy row for the

new leader. We forget all that has before and move on. You won the

referendum. Mrs May is adopting some of your policies, like grammar

schools. What is the point of Ukip these days? Twofold. We don't have

Brexit. Mrs May said she would not invoke Article 50 until the end of

March, and we don't know if that will happen. We need to ensure a

strong Ukip to make sure that Brexit really does mean Brexit. We have a

huge opportunity in working class communities where the Labour Party

no longer represents them. I believe Ukip can become the voice of working

people. If you were the leader, would Ukip be a bigger threat to

Labour in the north or the Tories in the South? You save Labour in the

north, and people often to make that mistake. There's working class

communities right across the country is. There are working-class

communities in Bristol just as in Newcastle. We are second in a

number of northern seats, and southern seats as well, and I

believe the party can move into these communities. It can only do so

if Ukip is on the pitch, and I intend to make sure that's the case.

I don't think we have portrayed a good image over the summer. Is that

called British understatement? A bit. It is dysfunctional. We have to

move on beyond Nigel Farage. We have to build a strong national Executive

Committee. We need to ensure our branches are ready for the fight and

concentrate on local elections. I've got the experience. I'm now throwing

my hat into the ring, and I'm the only person who can keep Ukip in the

game. What role would you give Nigel Farage, if any? I will be the

candidate of compromise. I would see what Nigel wanted to do. Would you

keep in the leader of the freedom and democracy group in the European

Parliament? There would have to be compromise on both sides, and we

would need to talk about it. I don't know what Nigel wants to do. Do you

think his support, his association with Donald Trump, helps Ukip win

female votes in this country? Personally, I would not have gone

out and campaigned or said anything about Donald Trump, but I don't

think Ukip has come out and backed Donald Trump 100%. Personally, I

wouldn't have even spoken about the American election, because I think

the two candidates are quite appalling. Some up for us. If you

win, what would be the hallmark of your Ukip leadership? The first

couple of months would be ensuring that Ukip unifies. Saying no to

factions, bringing people together. Suzanne Evans, Nigel Farage, all of

the MEPs, and ensuring that Ukip can move forward. If we don't unify,

Ukip will not be around for much longer. Thanks for being with us

this morning. We won't have to wait too long

to find out who Ukip's new leader will be -

the winner will be announced Who would be the best leader for

Ukip? I think the difference between the field a few weeks ago and today

is that this field is a lot stronger. Whether it's Paul or

Suzanne, I think... It is hard to say, with Aaron Banks and apparently

Nigel Farage hacking another candidate, Raheem, but I want Ukip

to be a strong force in British politics. I think the fact there is

a stronger field now is good news for Ukip. Is it a Labour's worst

nightmare in the north of England? It is. I think the personality

difference and presentational difference is interesting. Suzanne

Evans is going for the Conservative county vote. There's a lot to be

taken there by Ukip. He would probably be more appealing to the

Labour vote. It is interesting. At the moment, pollsters say that the

Ukip vote splits pretty easily between Labour and Tory. But things

always collapse. When they have made inroads into Tower Hamlets and

Barking, they collapse, because they fight amongst each other so much.

But not always with fists! Does Ukip have a future? And who would best

secure that future? It does for at least two years, until we Brexit. We

have to believe that that will happen. That was an impressive pitch

there from Paul, certainly as the unity candidate, after the car crash

we have seen on TV screens this morning. But it doesn't go beyond

May 20 19. What then? There is no point being called the United

Kingdom Independence party any longer. What will happen after May

2019? If you want to hoover up votes of the back of Brexit, you need to

start looking further ahead than two years. The person who wins that

leadership contest is the person who will sum that up the best. We shall

see. In June 2014, the group which calls

itself the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant captured Iraq's

second city, Mosul. Later that month the group announced

it was establishing a 'caliphate', or an Islamic state,

on the territories it This week 30,000 Iraqi troops, aided

by Iranian-backed Shia fighters, Kurdish Peshmerga and Western air

support, began the assault Then they spot a truck bomb

from so-called Islamic State. They destroy it before

it destroys them. These are the first steps

in the battle for Mosul, the Northern Iraqi city IS has

made its stronghold since 2014. Controlling the city of around

2 million people means that they established governance,

they establish a territorial base. This is what has obsessed everyone,

because with a territorial base you are capable of doing more

than if you are simply an insurgency movement in the fabric

of another society. It's being billed as the biggest

military operation in Iraq since the war in 2003, the biggest

moment in the international effort Here is how the various forces

are approaching the city. Heading to Mosul from the south,

the elite troops of the Iraqi army. Known as the Golden division,

trained and accompanied From the North, a force made up

of Kurds, known as the Peshmerga, Also from the South,

a militia made up of Shia fighters who have been accused

of human rights abuses. British planes have bombed outlying

villages, reportedly guided in by British personnel

on the ground. To the North West, a corridor

has been left for some of the 3000 plus IS fighters,

in theory an escape route which could limit the bloodshed

when fighting starts in the city. We've had 4-5 days of battle

and it's taking place in the outlying villages

and there have been some successes and some failures,

but the momentum is building. And the real question will be

when the attackers get towards the city itself,

how strong are the defences? It will crack but it might crack

within 48 hours or 2-3 weeks. IS has fought back,

on Friday they attack sites in the city of Kirkuk,

including a power station. The United Nations believes hundreds

of thousands of families have been rounded up

as potential human shields. The battle could be bloody,

but what about when it's over? The Shia militias, the Iraqi army,

the Peshmerga guerrillas, some of the Turkish elements,

they all want a share of the action. They are in Mosul, not

for altruistic reasons. They are there because they want

to be part of whatever happens next. The biggest issue is how the Sunni

majority in Mosul reacts to the Shia militias which have

helped to liberate them. ARCHIVE FOOTAGE: When Sir Francis

Humphrey went to Mosul If it all seems like something

from the archive, when the Middle East went up in flames

and was then carved up, it is because that is what is

happening in Iraq right now. National identity has been cut

across by other identities such And that means that putting together

a so-called nation state again Almost certainly there will be

a new form of Kurdish state, almost certainly in northern Iraq

at the end of this crisis, and what is happening in Mosul

is a microcosm of what is happening elsewhere across the Levant

which is that it is melting down. Big questions, questions that

come after the battle. The coalition forces are advancing

but this is just the beginning. I'm joined now by the International

Development Minister Rory Stewart. In a former life he was

the coalition Deputy-Governor of two provinces in Southern Iraq following

the Iraq intervention of 2003. Is there any doubt that at some

stage Mosul will fall to the forces of Iraq and its allies? The first

thing is that war is very uncertain and there are cliches about it being

the graveyard of predictions and we don't want to make confident

predictions but the basic structure is that there are 30,000 Iraqi

forces outside and only a few thousand Daesh fighters inside and I

would say it is overwhelmingly likely that the batter will one

STUDIO: -- the battle the won by the Iraqi forces.

June 2014 was a great success, they took a city of over in people and

they created what they tried to create a million state of 7 million

people, stretching across the Iraqi Syrian border, but since then they

have lost territory quite rapidly. Now they are losing the outskirts of

Mosul, and that is a fundamental blow. Islamic State is all about

territory and holding state, that is what makes it different from

Al-Qaeda. If they lose Mosul that will be a cynic -- significant blow

to their credibility. Hillary Clinton said on Wednesday's

presidential debate that when Iraqi forces with their allies including

the United Kingdom gain control of Mosul they should continue to press

into Syria to take back Raqqa which is the de facto capital of the

caliphate, what is left of it, do we want Iraqi forces to pursue IS into

Syria? Very important question. Delayed in Raqqa needs to come from

people on the Syrian side of the border and that is an important

principle -- the lead. In the end of that enemy, Islamic State, is a

common enemy for odd members of the coalition including the Iraqi

government. -- all members. There is likely to be a humanitarian crisis

especially if it ends up with street to street fighting and IS are

difficult to dislodge what are we doing about that? We are doing very

detailed scenario planning. It is very uncertain what the scenario

will be but much investment has gone into creating a network of camps,

refugees STUDIO: Refugee camps around cash refugee camps, and that

is where money, British money, ?40 million has gone recently into

supporting that, especially in terms of medical support to people. The

United nation's emergency response budget is ?196 million but only one

third funded which sounds like we are putting up a big chunk of what

is already being funded. Why is that? The international committee

can't say they haven't seen this assault coming, and the humanitarian

fallout they may see from it. You are absolutely right. We have seen

it coming and we have been planning since debris and we have put in

about ?167 million into this -- planning since February. There has

been a change in the nature of the appeal, and if there is a lag in the

accounting of it, but the money we need at this stage is in place and

we do have the support structure in place for those refugees. You are

right the United Nations is continuing with its appeal and is

asking for more money at the moment. The converse magazine wrote this

week that preparations for a big exodus of people leaving the city

have been made -- Economist magazine. But confidence is not high

in the preparations, is that a unfair conclusion? If you can

imagine the different scenarios, it could be a few thousand and it could

be a few hundred thousand coming out of the city through a front line

where the war is going on, that is very difficult. You have to screen

those people and disarm them, and keep families together, and

transport them and you have to bring them into the refugee camps. The

people working on this have been working on this for long time, we

have mapped the different routes we have good camp infrastructure in

place and we have people who have worked in south to dam and other

areas who are putting their structures in place -- South Sudan.

It is never easy but I think we have done everything we can in the

preparation for this. What is the British role in what will probably

be an even bigger issue, assuming that Mosul is liberated and retaken,

the humanitarian crisis is dealt with, what role will we play in the

rebuilding of Mosul? That will be crucial to the future of Iraq, the

second-biggest city and it will need to be rebuilt. It will need to be

rebuilt as a community as well as bricks and mortar. And eight Sunni

community that is not harassed by the Shia. -- and eight. You are

right. One of the core drivers is that the Sunni community felt

excluded and they did not feel they have the trust from the Baghdad

government. A lasting solution is stopping some of Islamic State

coming back, that involves making sure the Sunni community have a

stake in their future. That is making sure that the governing

structures are in place. The UK's response is twofold, we have got to

get the humanitarian aid right, that is the short term, people who might

be malnourished, coming out of the front line. The second thing is

working with the Iraqi government to make sure that as we rebuild Mosul

we do so in a way that that population feels a connection to the

Iraqi state. Islamic State is losing territory everywhere in the Levant,

it is almost finished in Iraq, we think. It is down to one district in

Libya, as well, just one small part of the town. I suppose the risk is,

if life is becoming more difficult across these areas, it can start to

look more in Europe and the United Kingdom as a place to continue its

terrorist attacks? That is a real danger. You are right. This is a

group which has proved over the last five years very unpredictable and it

changes for it quickly full stop often it does unexpected things. In

2009 its predecessor had been largely wiped out in Iraq and when

it was under pressure in Syria it went back into Iraq, and in the past

it didn't hold territory but now it holds territory, so you are right.

There is a serious risk that as it gets squeezed in the middle East it

will try to pop up somewhere else and Mac could include Europe and the

United States -- that could. They say that is something they have

focused on full stop we also have a big focus on counterterrorism

security and making sure that we keep the United Kingdom and Europe

say. One final question. -- say. -- safe. Maybe events in Mosul could

add to the migration crisis in Europe, is that a possibility?

Again, you are right, we have seen in Syria it can push migration, the

biggest push the migration was the conflict in Syria, and that's the

reason why we have but so much energy into getting those refugee

camps in place and getting the humanitarian response in place --

put so much energy. People will want to remain in their homes, this is

their country, but we have got to make it possible for them and that

means in the short term looking after their shelter and in the

medium to long-term making sure they have livelihoods, jobs and an

economic development which is why our support in Iraq is in the UK

National interests because it deals with these issues of migration and

terrorists. Thanks for joining us. I'm joined now by the Shadow Defence

Secretary. Does Labour support British

participation in this offensive? We fully support the participation in

this offensive, extremely important move forward and we voted for this

back in 2014. We are asking the government question is, of course, I

was asking the Secretary of State this week about this very offensive

but we are fully behind our RAF pilots out there and be trading that

has been going on to help the forces on the ground. -- the training full

stop that is very clear. I wonder if you'll lead it shares that clarity

and that position. -- is your leader. This is what Jeremy Corbyn

has said. What's been done in Iraq

is done by the Iraqi government, and currently

supported by the British government. I did not support it

when it came up. Well, I'm not sure how successful

it's been, because most of the action now appears to be

moving in to Syria, so I think we He doesn't sound very supportive.

The issue about Mosul, it has been very carefully prepared as Rory

Stewart said and I hope we have learned the lessons from previous

offensives where we haven't learnt sufficiently, and that is going to

be crucial in this context. How the aftermath is going to be dealt with.

Of course will stop that clip was from November last year, and things

have changed. Two weeks ago he told the BBC" I'm not sure it is

working", in reference to air strikes in Iraq, but it is working.

We have got to see what happens in Mosul, it is a very high-risk

operation, but we also have to face the fact that the people there are

living under tyranny at the moment. We have to ask very cirrus question

shall stop he says he's not sure it is working, when Mosul is the last

major target be cleared of Islamic State in Iraq. The combination of

Allied air power has worked, why is he not sure it is working? Because

we have seen difficulties in the past. But this was two weeks ago. It

is essential that the work is done, both planning for the refugees as

Rory Stewart referred to, but also in terms of reconstruction of the

city and its community as you mentioned. These are vital. This was

about the ability to make progress with Allied air power, special

forces in Iraq, on the ground, do you accept so far that has a

strategy that seems to be working to read Iraq of Islamic -- to read Iraq

of Islamic State the question of the car began placement. Ulloa -- we

can't be complacent. The problems they are creating where ever they

are urged that we must continue to pursue them. This is the first time

we have spoken to since you have become the Shadow Defence Secretary.

I hope we will have a longer interview. Will Labour's next

manifesto include a commitment to the renewal of Trident? It will. We

made that commitment in 2007, that is a firm commitment and we will

honour that to our coalition allies and our industrial partners and that

is the vote which was taken democratically and repeatedly has

been reaffirmed by Labour conference and we are a democratic party vote

up you have squared that with Jeremy Corbyn? He's in favour of democracy

and he understands the situation, but we also want to push for the UK

to play a much bigger role on the international stage on multilateral

disarmament talks. You were very clear there, I thank you for that.

Support for Trident will be in the next Labour manifesto. What has

happened to Labour's review of Trident policy? That review has been

taking place over the year, we had a very clear reaffirmation in the

conference boat this year, we are reaffirming our commitment to

Trident -- vote. The review can't change that? There is a process of

review and a fair number of issues related to defence, all parties do

this. Of course. The review can't change the commitment to Trident? We

are not changing the commitment to Trident. Russia is now the main

strategic threat to this country? It is a major strategic threat and we

have got to work with our Nato allies very closely and make sure

that we respond and that we do not let things pass. For example, we

should be calling out Russia for the way it has been a bombing

humanitarian aid and we should be taking them to international court

over this, but we should also be strengthening sanctions, somewhat

imposed over Ukraine. We try to do that, but the Italians wouldn't let

us. The Italians did not want to participate in the European

initiative but that doesn't stop individual countries for the Britain

should step up? Yes, we should look at what is practical to impose.

Thanks for joining us. Mosul is not the only major battle

being waged in the Middle East. The city of Aleppo in northern Syria

has seen some of the heaviest bombardment since Syria's

five-year-long civil war began. This week Russian warships,

in a deliberate show of power, sailed west through the English

channel en route to Syria. Nato says it's Russia's "largest

surface deployment" since the end of the Cold War in what is thought

to be preparation for a final assault

on the besieged city of Aleppo. In the city itself fighting

resumed overnight - following a 3-day ceasefire -

with more air strikes and heavy clashes in the city's

rebel-held eastern districts. Almost 500 people have been

killed and 2,000 injured since Syrian government forces,

backed by Russian air strikes, This week Theresa May condemned

Vladimir Putin's involvement in Syria, accusing Moscow

of being behind "sickening atrocities" in support

of President Assad's regime. But European leaders are divided

on how to respond and, with the United States preoccupied

with domestic politics, President Putin senses this

is his moment to bring the Syrian I'm joined now by the BBC's former

Diplomatic and Moscow Correspondent, Bridget Kendall, who is now Master

of Peterhouse College in Cambridge. Welcome. Good to see you in the BBC

studio again. Let me put up this satellite image of Aleppo here, to

get an idea of the scale. It was the biggest city in Syria. It was the

commercial capital and a huge cultural hub as well. Almost the New

York of Syria, to give you an idea of its significance to the country.

Let me show you now how it's been divided. The rebels are now in

control of the eastern part, about eight miles long and three miles

wide there, they're in purple. They are under great attacks still. Is it

inevitable that that purple part falls to the regime? That is what

President as Saad, the Russians and the Iranians hope. The fierce

bombardments we have seen is part of that. I'm reminded very much in the

Russian tactics of what happened in grudgingly in Chechnya in 2000, when

the Russians said, a warning for all civilians to lead, and then they

went ahead and they basically raised it to the ground. They are talking

about Al Nusrah as being one of the rebel groups. They got rid of all of

the terrorists. They talk about it being an Al-Qaeda offshoot. The

purpose of going being an Al-Qaeda offshoot. The

purpose of going in is to get rid of them. You get the civilians out and

then you take it. But this isn't like Chechnya. It is much more

complex. We have seen an attempt to take Aleppo before, and then there

was a rebel counter offensive. It's not so certain. And there are so

many different parties involved. We have seen the alarm in the west of

the extent of the civilian casualties. There have been

rumblings in the west of, shouldn't the United States do something?

Shouldn't they stop the Syrian air force? This Russian aircraft carrier

steaming its way towards the Eastern Mediterranean is a symbolic gesture,

both to its own people, but also to the West, to say, don't get involved

in Aleppo if we go ahead. Don't try and stop us because we could up the

ante. They have not been great visual pictures, because the

aircraft carrier looks a bit clapped out, belching out smoke! If the

rebel controlled area does fall, it would be seen as a great victory for

President as Saad and his Russian allies. What is the aim of Russia

here? What would they then do, if Aleppo Falls? It is part of a plan

that President Putin set out in his UN speech in 2014, before Russia

went into Syria. The aim is to put President Assad back in charge.

President Putin said this weekend that either is Assad in Damascus, or

its Al Nusrah. There is nothing in between. They want to eliminate the

argument for a moderate opposition. They want to make it plain that the

only way to get a stable Syria is to have Assad back in charge. Even sue

argue for a rump steak lit, leaving aside what is happening with IAS.

They have already said they want to have an enlarged military presence

at their bases. And they have a big naval base. It is. It is a chance to

push for this when he sees the West is being distracted and divided.

Europe and America, by elections and so on. Just before the US elections.

The Americans are worried about that, Europeans are being distracted

by Brexit. He can push to his maximum advantage now, before there

is a new US president. If they do take that part of Aleppo, and that

part of northern Syria, does Mr Putin want us to recognise, to

admit, that that is now his sphere of influence? I think the rhetoric

from the Russians is that they want the West to recognise that they are

an equal powerful partner. It's not just the US that runs the writ in

the Middle East. Russia is as important as it is. It is engaging

with Saudi Arabia and has mended fences with Turkey. Syria is the

place from which it can launch its message that it is a big player in

the Middle East. Russia wants the West to understand that this isn't a

country that was dismembered after the end of the Soviet Union and is

now a week. It is back, and it is strong. That is an important

message. Looking at the economy. It is in recession. GDP has been

falling, partly because of the price of oil. It is highly dependent on

hydrocarbons, and is expected to fall again. Its people are falling

again. People don't realise how small the Russian economy is. Its

GDP is about the size of Italy's. It is smaller than the UK economy.

Bigger than it was 15 or 20 years ago. But so is Britain's does it

help to take people's mind of this? A huge shock to the Russian economy

was a drop in the price of oil and a price of gas. A drop in the price of

the ruble as well. This is hurting the people of Russia. On the one

hand, it is the war in Syria, which is very important for Russia to sort

out that part of the world and dispensed terrorists who might be

danger to -- is dangerous to Russia. But he had also has presidential

election is going up. They are supposed to be 2018, but some feel

he will bring them forward to 2017, because the economy is not doing so

well. But you need a good story for the Russian people. Thank you very

much. We say goodbye to viewers

in Scotland who leave us now Hello, and welcome to

Sunday Politics in Northern Ireland. This time last year Mike Nesbitt

saw his party conference pumped up off the back of winning two seats

at the general election. We hear from Mr Nesbitt about the

challenges and opportunities that lie ahead for the party.

Our commentators, Professor Rick Wilford and Patricia MacBride,

The Ulster Unionist and SDLP leaders say they won't be pushed around

by the Executive parties as they seek to open up a new middle

That was the message Mike Nesbitt and Colum Eastwood delivered

at the Ulster Unionist Party conference yesterday.

They also pledged to work constructively

Colum Eastwood, the first SDLP leader to address the conference

received a standing ovation after his speech.

Our Political Correspondent, Enda McClafferty, was there.

His report contains some flash photography. Four weeks their

parties have been flirting behind the scenes, now, at last, they step

out together in public. A political partnership between two men who want

was agreed, but have committed to work together in picking and

choosing their battles. There's been plenty of interest as

to whether the SDLP and Unionist party will work together in

opposition. The answer is simple. Of course we will -- the Ulster

Unionist party. Our nationalism under your unionism will not

seamlessly fit any time soon, however, this difference does not

diminish our ability to pursue the commonality of an immediate cause,

both the SDLP and the Ulster Unionists share the common ground of

wanting to make Northern Ireland work.

And it helps when you have a common enemy.

The DUP and Sinn Fein have no such ambition or aspiration for our

people this place. They never have. They believe the symbolism of the

coalition suffices, and nothing more. They are all gas and no

government. Even with 55 press officers, and a new press secretary

they struggled to fabricate the illusion of progress.

Now they've made a commitment publicly next question is will they

sell themselves as an alternative government? The Government in

waiting? All will be bullish begin and end on benches?

We need to convince the electorate we are a viable alternative. That

means working in partnership with the SDLP. I welcome the appearance

of their leader. Vote me you get Colum Eastwood. Vote Colum Eastwood

you get me. Vote both of us and we make Northern Ireland work whatever

our motivations. They have a new slogan, but it may take time before

both parties are fully programmed for opposition, when that happens,

will it mean the end of pacts with the DUP?

We are on a very fluid political situation nationally and

internationally. I've been in politics long enough to understand

that you don't rule anything out. You certainly don't rule anything

in. Pact or no part Mike Nesbitt addressed the poor performance in

the Assembly election, but he had this to say.

To anybody looking to press the panic button, for the very few who

have jumped ship and the occasional whisper and malcontent. I say this.

Are you so weak you want to unravel for use of work? Just because we

didn't get all we wanted first time around?

It seemed his message did get through.

We took a big step forward with Colum Eastwood coming. I enjoyed his

speech. Mike spoke well. We look forward to the next elections and

use in opposition. We can successfully scrutinise the

executive. I enjoyed what Colum Eastwood had to say. I'm pleased to

say we're working together in opposition.

Like any blossoming relationship they will be awkward moments, he

blushes were spread rumours came to the anthem. The opposition had

already left the hall. The opposition had already

left the hall. Enda McClafferty reporting there,

and just after he came off stage, I spoke to Mike Nesbitt,

and I began by asking him if accepts he's now well and truly

hitched his party's wagon to that I think I do. The DUP and Sinn Fein

have very clearly hitched their wagons to each other, Arlene Foster

and Martin McGuinness are clearly joined at the hip. Look at how

difficult it is to get a DUP or Sinn Fein spokesman into the same studio

or radio studio. They are cooperating. In a way we've never

seen before. More importantly, I consider myself to be a centre

ground politician, I think Colum Eastwood is as well, so it's not as

if we are being forced into this position by the DUP and Sinn Fein.

This is a position I would have wanted to adopt. We are the two

parties who did most to bring on the Belfast agreement, without which we

wouldn't have institutions up the hill at Stormont. We are the parties

who can offer hope in terms of delivery, we've done everything we

need to do in terms of creating inclusive political institutions. We

are near the start of the journey in terms of delivering institutions

that deliver for the people on the economy, education, health and

housing. You actually said during your speech

today, vote me you get Colum Eastwood vote Colum Eastwood you get

me. Do you think everyone will be entirely happy about that?

I think everybody will be entirely happy that that is the logic in the

same way the DUP have pretty mercilessly run around the Unionist

community in the last couple of assembly elections saying, if you

vote for the Ulster Unionist you are effectively voting for Martin

McGuinness as First Minister. They did spin is a little bit to say keep

Arlene as First Minister last May. It's the same fundamental message

which, ultimately, is a message we are still a sectarian society. My

vision is of us moving to a post-sectarian society where people

vote, not because of where they deliver whether they are orange or

green, but because of what you are done or are promising to do.

We talked about establishing a shadow executive, is that happening?

Is that something yesterday appears keen on?

That was a speculative use of phrasing. Deliberately so, Mark, we

are still at very early stages of this. The DUP and Sinn Fein agreed

to go into government together back in very early 2007. They've had

nearly ten years, nobody argues that they've got their act together, even

after a decade. We've only had a few short months, and weeks, and I

think, behind-the-scenes, we're doing OK. Not denying the fact that

Brexit is an issue for as just as it is for Sinn Fein and the DUP. Today

was about showing something, because the behind-the-scenes stuff, by

definition, is not visible. It was important that the population saw

something tangible, which they got today. I'm saying that in my view, a

measure of success, much nearer 2021 when we next looking for a vote

could be defined in terms of how many joint policies do we have? Do

we have spokespeople working well together? Do we have spokespeople

who have made up a shadow executive? It may not happen, it may not be

something the SDLP year by into over the next four or five years. It's

something I think has a logic to it that might appeal to voters.

It's interesting that you say it speculative. The way you brought it

up was speculative. If a shadow executive is speculative then surely

an alternative government is even more speculative? Yet you are

seriously putting that forward as something that voters need to be

thinking about for 2021? It's a misleading concept, isn't as? No

prospect of the Ulster Unionists or SDLP being the government in 2021.

There is every possibility the DUP and Sinn Fein will be the bigger

parties, and if they aren't, they will be in a position to choose to

be the executive anyway. I see your point. It is a valid

point. All I can say is this, if after 21, we at the SDLP are the big

parties of government in the executive office, in Stormont

Castle, we will not treat these smaller parties the way the DUP and

Sinn Fein have cheated the SDLP and the Ulster Unionist party over the

last nine and a half years. -- treated the SDLP.

He said he is frankly disappointed, not terribly happy at the position

the Ulster Unionists have adopted after the referendum. You said you

were in support of remaining but have accepted the road to leave. You

think Brexit means Brexit. Surely that subject, which is all embracing

at the moment, could seriously undermine your working relationship

with the SDLP in the months and years ahead? If that was the case

Colum Eastwood would not have felt it possible for him to come to

conference, never mind stand on the platform, confidently articulating

his position in the full knowledge it contrasts in a significant way

with the position we, and the Ulster Unionist party are taking. It showed

great strength and maturity that he is able to do that and we are unable

to listen to him. In my speech I accepted the shark and the anger

felt by many nationalists on the 24th of June when they woke up to

news that the referendum result was to Brexit. I understand that people

who were reasonably comfortable, as nationalists, living in Northern

Ireland as part of the United Kingdom but the fact that there will

had to give precedence to the will of the British people and was

contrary to the spirit of the Belfast agreement was not something

they had ever envisaged happening. It is something that we must be

mindful of, and respectful of, even though we do not accept the position

of the SDLP and are arguing that the days of remainders are over. We need

to move on to identifying opportunities in the new era for all

of the people of Northern Ireland, Unionist, nationalist and other.

Some people might think you did a strange thing today. You mentioned

people who might be thinking about pressing the panic button. The

occasional whisper and malcontent does you put it. Why did you raise

the spectre of those individuals? There has been wild speculation

coming from the DUP that we are in some sort of meltdown, that there is

a long list of high-profile defectors. That is simply not the

case. A couple of people have jumped ship. A couple of people are

nervous. That is understandable. But I also said, for example, that the

Queen's freshers fair we picked up 72 new signatories. The young

Unionists are the youngest Unionist party at Queen's University. I

signed letters of work on a weekly basis for new members of the party.

Our numbers are still at around 2000, and growing. In fact, we are

doing research which will be available until next calendar year,

which I think will be very good for the state of the Ulster Unionist

party. I'm confident we are growing. Indeed, surprisingly about some of

the policies people want to protect. That was Mike Nesbitt yesterday.

Patricia MacBride and Rick Wilford are with me.

We watched those proceedings together yesterday. First of all,

Colum Eastwood, it's easy to overplay the significance of him

being there in the wall but it is significant.

It is. I think both eastward and Nesbitt made it clear that they will

creating a corporation as opposition parties. Even though there is not

that divides them, not least of all Brexit. They were getting into bed

together, but twin beds rather than a double bed. I suspect that what

they need to do is not simply go for shifting tactical coalitions in the

Assembly, they need, if they are serious about this, they need to

develop a well worked out strategic alternative to the policies and

programme for government which is going to appeal, we'll see some

flesh on those bones. It's not enough to sit back and wait for

things to go wrong between Sinn Fein and the DUP. If they are serious

they need to articulate a very clear set of policy options that are

different from those of the DUP and Sinn Fein.

Patricia, did the public love in yesterday between the Ulster

Unionist and Colum Eastwood ring true?

It's difficult to look at where the dues of the whole matter lies? If

you look at the history of the Ulster Unionist party over the last

couple of years they were partners in the graduated response, they were

in an electoral pact with the DUP. Now they are in an opposition with

the SDLP. They are reminiscent of the drunken sailor stumbling and

trying every door, never quite finding home. You have the situation

with the SDLP are looking at a way of creating a new dynamism within

the party. Part of that is a strong, trying to create a strong coalition

in opposition to Sinn Fein and the DUP alongside the Ulster Unionists.

It's not sitting comfortably for either of the parties at this point.

Precisely because of what has just been said. There is no measure of

what opposition is. There is no set of policy, no clear alternative to

the programme for government which would measure opposition. Until that

is down there is no effectiveness. I agree. It's not a case of making a

virtue out of a necessity. If they are committing to this they need to

get really serious about it. They had nowhere else to go. They were

both elected to go into opposition. They need to make that meaningful.

They need to produce very clear, articulated and fully costed

alternatives and ideas. With a identify what they both believe to

be the common ground. There was a lot of convergence between the

parties back in May, all of them, actually. I think there is

sufficient scope for both the DUP and the SDLP to identify how they

can push on in terms of housing, education, certainly the skills

agenda with a very closely converged. I think there is prospect

there, but they need to get a move on.

What did you make of Mike Nesbitt raising the issue of those

malcontents who might be thinking of pressing the panic button, was that

an odd thing to bring up? I thought it was a strange thing to

directly address that rumbling within his own party at such an open

and public forum. But we know it's there. You know it's there from the

fact that, you know, even in the comments of Danny Kennedy there

which was very much lets wait and see. Its underlying as well in

comments about, this might be one way we could do things. They might

be another. There needs to be building of consensus within the

Unionist party. We hear from both of you again

shortly. Let's just pause for a moment

for a look back at the week gone past in Sixty Seconds,

with Stephen Walker. Brexit continued to dominate the

political landscape, it's even affecting traffic in Belfast. This

is the implication of Brexit. Brexit would be bad news for the people of

Ireland, this is the implication of that decision.

Correspondence from the Prime Minister court controversy. She

confirmed that we got the letter, we were going to publish the letter in

any event. The deputy first means is that

confident about the Brexit negotiations. The decision to hold

the referendum was basically because of infighting within the Tory party.

Neither is the SDLP leader. We should be kicking the door of the

British Prime Minister to ensure that the interests of the people of

Northern Ireland are protected. And the former MP reminded the

current one of his behaviour. When I raised issues around the issue of

exit... Ian, manners, please. Tomorrow Arlene Foster and Martin

engineers go to Downing Street for a meeting with the Prime Minister and

first ministers of Scotland and Wales to see how they can work

together to maximise Brexit. The difficulties are obvious. First,

here are some thoughts from last week about how Northern Ireland's

interests may be best protected. And whether or not Dublin should be

involved. Most of the negotiations will take place between the United

Kingdom. There is a substantive grounds for there to be, in some

areas, direct negotiations between the Irish government and the British

government. I think the issues that affect the movement on this island,

a fact a lot of the money that has helped companies initiatives from

Europe, and how we continue to build and develop the economy and Northern

Ireland. Great Britain and Northern Ireland, it's not about the whole of

Ireland. It's not about the Empire. It's about north and south? That

conversation needs to be had within a formal operators. It's been agreed

and signed up to buy parties. Would you not be a confident Unionist

going and have that conversation? This is about as making sure we put

the best pressure in the best places. That's done at Westminster,

not overly dinner table in Dublin. That's nonsense. There is an

opportunity for us to have two voices on the table, one on the

inside in terms of the Irish government and one speaking formally

in the British government. All would choose one voice over two?

When things are so crucial? 'S So where is Northern Ireland's place

'S in any forthcoming discussions it's almost two years since the last

meeting was held, do you think anything substantial come out of the

talks? I think it's interesting that Theresa May this morning said that

she once a grown-up relationship with Scotland, Wales and the North.

That type of relationship, for a grown-up relationship you have to

have respect. I don't know that she's necessarily going to respect

the views of Nicola Sturgeon and Martin McGuinness. They'll with a

anti-Brexit agenda. When you look at the statement everything is couched

in terms of protecting the union and that busy last thing that Nicola

Sturgeon and Martin McGuinness want to be part of. In the case of Nicola

Sturgeon it depends, she is prepared to remain in the union in Scotland

is protected in the single market. That can't be ensured. I take my

only long's point that the more voices you have at the table the

better. But, of course, we haven't got one voice in Northern Ireland.

The Irish government, Dublin, it in the course of Brexit negotiations

will help with what follow in its wake once we are right. We need

those trade deals. It is a signal to JNC tomorrow, up-to-date it has been

a damp squib. I think what Theresa May is trying to do is invigorate

them to provide a forum within which all four nations can engage

meaningfully. In that sense, is welcome, but I have no doubt she is

committed to getting out. That is not going to play well with

Scotland. What do you make of the decision on

part of the Unionists not to take part? Maybe not surprise, but is it

a serious error? I think it is. I don't agree that

the Irish are an ally in our discussions. The Irish government is

a co-guarantor of the Good Friday agreement, what Brexit means is that

they will be a delegation from an international treaty. The Irish

government has a responsibility to negotiate for Irish citizens

wherever they are resident, including those in the north. I

think it is somewhat short-sighted, especially in terms of the benefits

that may flow. especially in terms of the benefits

go ahead with this policy, I know. And now back to

go ahead with this policy, I know. that may flow. We

go ahead with this policy, I know. And now back to Andrew.

go ahead with this policy, I know. that may flow. We will watch

tomorrow with interest. It's back to Andrew in London.

With what Rory Stewart was saying there, it is clear that Islamic

State is losing territory in Iraq now, and could come under pressure

in Syria as well. It used to control a whole swathe of the coast of

Libya, and is now down to a small area of Sirte in Libya. But

curiously, it could make them more dangerous here if they are being

driven out of the Maghreb and the Levant, they could be more dangerous

here. Discuss. That was a very interesting admission from a

government minister, of all people, and a well-informed one. Chasing

Isis around the Middle East is about... Like chasing Al-Qaeda

around Afghanistan and Pakistan. You smash them somewhere, and they pop

up somewhere else. He is right to warn that these guys will go

somewhere. And it may well be, in Sirte, for example, across the magic

oration -- across the Mediterranean into Italy. A lot of the foreign

fighters in Mosul have already gone, we heard, which raises the question,

to where? I think it is quite right for government ministers to warn

that it might have repercussions here. We have been involved in this,

with full public consent, as far as we can tell. If it doesn't happen,

if there are horrors and outrages here and in the rest of Europe,

that's fine. If it does happen, at least the government is prepared. We

knew surprised about how categorical Nia Griffith was? She was

categorical about support for the Allied action in Iraq, and

categorical about Russia. So much so that perhaps written should take

tougher sanctions on its own, even if it can't get the Europeans to

fall in line. I found that interesting. I was surprised by

that. Tom may be right that Rory said more than perhaps he was

intending, but I thought that some of what she said sounded politically

imprudent in the current context of the Labour Party. I'm not sure she

cleared those lines with the Labour office. I'm not sure she and Jeremy

are in the same place about it. I'm not sure there is that much

leadership. People at the moment get out there and say what they think

it's right for the party. She sounded dead right to me. Whether it

is ill-advised or not, people should answer... I want to move on, because

Brexit never goes away. This week we saw Hilary Benn, former Shadow

Foreign Secretary. He is going to be the chair of the select committee in

the Commons which will monitor the Department for Brexit. All sorts of

people will be coming to give testimony and so one. Let's hear

what he told Andrew Marr. I think it will be very important

for the government to indicate that if it is not possible within the two

years provided for by Article 50 to negotiate both our withdrawal

agreement and a new trading relationship, market access,

including for services, 80% of our economy, million jobs,

in financial services, that it should tell the House

of Commons that it will seek a transitional arrangement

with the European Union. If the deal is not done at the end

of the two-year Article 50 process, would the government go for an

interim agreement, or would it fall back on WTO, World Trade

Organisation, Rawls? My understanding is the article 15

negotiation doesn't specifically include what Britain's future

trading relationship with the EU would be. It is perfectly possible

that Article 50 could be triggered, and after two years we don't have a

trade deal, but the trade deal negotiations are ongoing when we are

outside the EU. But the trade deal negotiations are the most important

thing. If Article 50 doesn't cover it, what is it about? Absolutely

essential. The trade deal with Canada has taken nine years, and now

it looks like it is fading, because of the Walloons. Just one small part

of the country. If you cannot do a free-trade deal with Canada, a

progressive, social Democratic Canada, who can the EU do a trade

deal with? You would think it would be easy with us, because we have all

of the level playing field agreements in place. You would hope

it would be easier, but it may not be, because in the end, it will

hinge on the single market and if we are in or out. If we are in, can we

have a small break on immigration? It looks like not. What is

interesting about the opinion polls is, in the last two opinion polls

there was a significant change in public opinion, where people are now

saying they think that actually trade, the economy, the single

market is more important than immigration. If it is really true,

as the observer is reporting today, that banks are on the move, and in a

year's time there could be a significant collapse in the income

we get from finance, the income that the Treasury gets, then public

opinion might change. They may say, we don't want more immigration, but

this isn't a price worth paying. Everything tends to be seen through

the Brexit lens at the moment. Things are not always as they seem.

The Canadian- EU free trade agreement was about increasing free

trade between the EU and Canada, and therefore subject to the

ratification of all members. Any deal we do will not give us the same

access we have at the moment. The question is, how much will it be

diminished? It may not be subject to the same ratification process.

Absolutely right. Another unbelievably technical point that we

still don't know is, if we can get this free-trade deal with the EU at

the same time as our Brexit talks and deal, the divorce deal as well

as the remarriage deal, then one gets signed off by QM V. The trade

deal may still need all 28, all 27, including the people from the

Walloons. And the MEPs. The majority of parliament. This is exactly why

Theresa May would like the transitional deal to push this one

deeper. I was surprised to hear Hilary Benn pushing this line this

morning. The remainers have been all over the place. They wanted a vote

after Article 50 had been triggered about the deal. Then they wanted a

vote before Article 50. Now they are talking about a vote before article

Article 50 is triggered about a trade deal. They need to make up

their minds about what it is they are pushing for, and what their best

hope of obstructing Brexit is, and stick with it. Something else we see

through the Brexit lens, which isn't always helpful, is Calais. The

French bulldozers will move in tomorrow. We will see some pretty

disturbing scenes on the TV. We will see some horrible scenes. The

government has handled this very badly. Having passed an amendment in

April saying we would take something like 3000 children, a lot of those

children have disappeared. Save the Children, one of the charities

there, are very worried that people traffickers have been in there, and

a lot of those children have vanished. We haven't sent social

workers in. No preparations have been made what ever. You are raising

an interesting point. We don't know how many we are meant to be taking.

The huge argument has arisen over what the age is of some of the ones

coming in. Is this another problem for the Home Office? To some extent.

Didn't Theresa May 's too well to survive six weeks of this? Amber

Rudd has been there for three months. It is clear that the Home

Office didn't prepare for this. They didn't prepare for the age

verification or when it will go. It needs to be an perfect. We don't

know how many we will take, because the Home Office will not say. I want

to talk about airport capacity, but I won't, because I don't think we

have anything to say about it until the statement on Tuesday from

Transport Minister Grayling. When you look at the polls and see the

decision on airport runway expansion being kicked into the long grass for

a year, are we heading for an early election next year or not? I think

Theresa May will do everything she can to avoid it. If there is an

election before 2020, it is bound to be about Europe, and that is a much

harder case for her to win than just a question of who is the best Prime

Minister. She will have a tough time, because it will be a general

election about in or out of the single market. Half of her party

will peel away. How do she conduct a general election when the likes of

Anna Soubry will not stand on the same platform? It will be difficult.

But she may reach such a stalemate that she just calls one. No general

election next year because it will split the Tory party. There will be

won in 2019 when she cannot get Brexit through the House of Commons.

You really can have too much of a good thing. I

You really can have too much of a good thing. I just want to show a

little clip of the former Shadow Chancellor, Ed Balls, from Strictly

last night. Let's just watch this. There he is.

Where is the hand? That is the worrying bit! We will no longer be

saying that Ed Balls is a safe pair of hands! Can we agree on that?

Remarkable that he was once the man most feared by David Cameron! Labour

leader 2021. He has hit popular culture in the way that many few

politicians do. Charm, gusto, bravery, no worries about being

embarrassed. All the things that you don't like about being a politician.

We have run out of time. You can get it on social media.

Jo Coburn will be back with the Daily Politics tomorrow

And I'll be back here next Sunday at the same time.

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

Everyone's living these amazing lives,