23/10/2016 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland


Andrew Neil and Mark Carruthers are joined by former Ukip deputy leader Paul Nuttall, international development minister Rory Stewart and shadow defence secretary Nia Griffith.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 23/10/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



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,


Andrew Neil and Mark Carruthers are joined by minister of state for international development Rory Stewart, shadow secretary of state for defence Nia Griffith and Paul Nuttall MEP. Political panellists include The Sun's Tom Newton Dunn, The Guardian's Polly Toynbee and The Spectator's Toby Young.

Download Subtitles