24/01/2016 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland

Jeremy Corbyn calls on Britain to accept more refugees and economic

migrants, as the Port of Calais is forced to close overnight

after migrants attempted to force their way onto a Channel ferry.

David Cameron appears increasingly confident he'll bag a deal on EU

reform next month, including new measures to reduce EU migration

In the first of three Sunday Politics debates,

the leave and remain campaigns go head-to-head on immigration.

And speaking exclusively to this programme, Ed Miliband's former

pollster Deborah Mattinson criticises Labour's official report

into why the party lost the general election for failing to face up

I think it was a whitewash and a massive missed opportunity.

And in Northern Ireland: Despite welfare mitigations,

it seems some benefits claimants will lose out

So have our politicians abandoned those most in need?

-- the conservative's Mayor candidate has now launched his

action plan. And with me, as always,

the best and the brightest political panel in the business -

Nick Watt, Beth Rigby and Janan They'll be tweeting

throughout the programme So, the Port of Calais was forced

to close for a while yesterday after migrants managed to breach

security and board a ferry. Amateur footage captured

the moment a group managed to break through security fences and head

towards the P ferry. The incident happened

during a protest at the port, The head of the Road Haulage

Association here in Britain has renewed demands for the French

military to intervene. As it happens,

the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, was in northern France yesterday,

visiting the migrant camps While he was there,

he reiterated his calls for the British Government to do

more to help migrants. I talk to people all over

the country and not everyone is that cold-hearted, not everyone

else has a stony heart. They are prepared to reach out,

and I think we need a response And indeed Germany has

done an enormous amount, other countries have

done varying amounts, and I think we should

be part of helping to bring a European-wide support

to people, and that's what I'm Jeremy Corbyn yesterday. Beth, what

we make of the story, the government will allow unaccompanied children

refugees, already in Europe, to come into Britain? Some of my government

sources have suggested that is not what David Cameron would like to do,

if you think about how he dealt with the crisis in August, he said we

will take some Syrian refugees but we will take them from the camps in

Syria and around Syria, we will not take them from Calais, because he

thinks this is a push factor and it makes people come over. What the

government might end up doing, they might agree to take refugee children

unaccompanied, but only from Syria and the Middle East, not from

Calais. What about the kids who have made it here? They could be bad way.

Nick? The signals on government, they have not made any decisions yet

and the announcement is not imminent, but Beth makes a very

important point, the Prime Minister said you do not want to encourage

people to make that journey, therefore the instinct is to take

people from the neighbouring countries. Apart from unaccompanied

kids, they have come across in terrible conditions, and they are in

Calais and Dunkirk. The call to take these children, from that report,

that says that is a fair proportion of the 26,000 unaccompanied children

that have come to Europe. The figures in that report are

terrifying, in 2014, of the 13,000 unaccompanied children that ended up

in Italy, 3000 went missing, and of the African children that went to

Italy, half of them had been subject to some form of sexual abuse, it is

the most horrific figures. That 3000 figure, endorsed by Jeremy Corbyn,

also endorsed by the cross-party International Development Select

Committee, said there is edible pressure on the Prime Minister on

this one. -- formidable. The humanitarian case has been strongly

but by Jeremy Corbyn and others, but it is marginal. 3000 children, that

would be great for them, but 37,000 migrants have come to Greece in

January alone, and the mud has not even ended, ten times the number

that came in last January -- the month. The problem is getting bigger

and bigger, and the response has been wholly inadequate. It has, it

looks marginal, but that is about as much as you can expect, until there

is EU wide agreement about how to distribute what you might call the

burden of the influx, but there is nothing close to that agreement and

there's not even a deal between the EU and Turkey about ceiling borders

and dealing with human traffickers let alone a deal within the EU about

which country bears how much of the burden. Until then, you just have

these improvised solutions, 3000 here, France taking a bit more, and

there is no certainty that the unaccompanied children are

overwhelmingly Syrian, there is the suspicion that Syrians travel as

complete families and the unaccompanied children are

disproportionately from Somalia, for example, similarly distress, but not

the problem that they think they are dealing with. This plays into the

referendum question, there is the nervousness in the in campaign, that

a referendum in September, after a summer of large sums of migrants

coming in, kids or otherwise, would affect the result one way or

another. That is a big story, and we will come back to that at the end of

the show. Last week, the long-awaited autopsy

into Labour's defeat at the general The report by Margaret Beckett

concluded that Ed Miliband wasn't judged to be as strong a leader

as David Cameron, and that Labour had failed to shake off the myth

that Labour was responsible But parallel research was also

commissioned to inform the Beckett Report,

and despite being completed in July, The former Labour pollster

Deborah Mattinson carried out this research, and has spoken exclusively

to the Sunday Politics. We are saying the Conservatives

are the largest party. We all know what happened

on election night. Instead of a hung parliament,

David Cameron walked back into Downing Street

with a majority of 12. Labour got it wrong, as well,

suffering a net loss of 26 Friends, this is not the speech

I wanted to give today. Ed Miliband resigned

within hours, but it has taken eight and a half

months for the party to publish its own inquiry

into what went wrong. Margaret Beckett's report is called

Learning The Lessons From Defeat. It doesn't, says one pollster,

who has worked for several former I think it was a whitewash

and a massive missed opportunity. Just a few weeks after the election

defeat, Deborah Mattinson was commissioned

by the acting leader Harriet Harman to research

why Labour lost. She says the evidence was meant

to feed into the Beckett I did brief Margaret

Beckett so I was somewhat disappointed not to see some

of that reflected back. Yes, I think she picked up

on the economy but there was actually no analysis,

it is reduced effectively to one And there is a lot of quite

defensive stuff about the fact this does not necessarily

mean that anti-austerity is wrong. "Of course we had a great business

strategy, what a pity the voters "That was probably

the fault of the media". Quite apologetic,

lots of defensive stuff in there, but nothing that actually

really shone a light on what had Do you accept that when Labour

was last in power it No, I don't, and I know

you might not agree with that Margaret Beckett's report

acknowledges that Labour failed to shake what she

describes as the myth that the party caused

the financial crisis. But she concludes that Labour

was not seen as anti-aspiration Deborah Mattinson says that

for people in her focus groups Frankly, they did not trust Labour

to manage the economy effectively, they were very

concerned about that. In their minds, they

are seeing a conflation between the financial crisis,

which they do blame Labour for, rightly or wrongly,

and their sense that Labour would waste money,

their money, and run the economy Voters could not see

him as Prime Minister. But Margaret Beckett

concluded that Ed Miliband faced an exceptionally

vitriolic and personal attack People looked at Ed Miliband

and did not see him And if you look at every

election since the 70s, what we see, the party that has

the leader with the best ratings is the party that wins,

there is no exception to that. I get it, that people weren't

prejudiced against immigration, I get it and I understand

the need to change. The Beckett Report acknowledges that

Labour did not quite get it on issues like immigration

and benefits, and that the fear of the SNP propping up a minority

government scared off many voters. But Deborah Mattinson says Labour

was losing support in Scotland well before the independence referendum

and the surge in SNP support. Put simply, she said

voters did not feel that Labour was on their side,

and the party still does not I feel very concerned

that the lessons will be learned and I can't see how

they will be learned, because that was the vehicle,

that was the moment, and if this report does not address

those issues then I'm not No political party has a divine

right to exist and unless Labour really listens to those voters,

that it must persuade, it stands no chance

of winning the next election. And we've been joined by the former

Shadow Cabinet minister Michael Dugher - you might remember

he was sacked by Jeremy Corbyn Deborah Mattinson says the better

report is a whitewash, is she right? -- Beckett Report. That is a bit

harsh, does it have all the answers, though, of course not, and I think

Deborah Mattinson make some very fair observations in that piece, but

what Margaret concludes in her report, it is not a massive shock to

those of us that were knocking on doors last May and have thought long

and hard about it since, we were not trusted enough on the economy, and

that was the big issue, but also on immigration and welfare, we were

seen as out of touch, and also leadership being the most important

thing in any race. She makes those conclusions, in the report, and I

think the key thing now, is to listen to the issues that she

raises, but also listen to Debra and many others who have made a

contribution since the report came out. We have got to face up to the

difficult issues as to why we lost, if we are going to win again. Voters

found Ed Miliband the personification of the Labour brand,

that was the problem, well-meaning but ineffectual. I'm likely to

deliver -- and likely to deliver on promises. Did you detect that at the

time? I was very close to Ed Miliband and I gave him some advice,

some of which he took and some of which he didn't. I wanted him to be

a success, I saw him in private and you have strong he did beat, and

often he got very unfair coverage in the media and often he did not do

himself justice in his performances -- I saw him in private and how

strong he did beat. The real lesson here, for any lead at the Labour

Party can you have got to play to your strengths and you have got a

fundamentally address your perceived weaknesses. The private polling

showed the Tories were in the late, was that not a warning that things

were going wrong? -- in the lead. I'm not sure how much private

polling I was shown. You did not see this? The year before the election,

I was appointed Shadow Secretary of State for Transport, I was not so

much part of the central operations and I did not see private polling.

Many of us thought that we were getting difficult conversations on

the doorstep, but we were told consistently, including by the

pollsters, that we were neck and neck and there was a perception that

we were doing better in the marginals, as well. That turned out

to be catastrophically wrong, but one of the things that is not in

Margaret's report is about the organisational lessons, that does

speak, if you have a million conversations, what are you doing

with the data? I remember in the last two days of the campaign, I was

sent to Derbyshire, Amber Valley, and in Yorkshire, to Rothwell, but I

should have been sent to Morley to help Ed Balls, and Derby North to

help Chris Wood this. The campaign has got to base what they do on the

information, and in 2010 we took very hard decisions, six months away

from polling day, based on the information we had about prioritise

in resources, but are not sure that happens this time. -- I'm not sure.

Deborah Mattinson looks at the boundary changes before the next

election, and she thinks the Beckett Report made a failure to confront

why you lost enough. Her conclusion is this, Labour's future is in

profound jeopardy - is it? I think we have a massive challenge at the

next election. I don't think any political party has a right to be

successful in the future. I am an optimistic person. Labour, when we

have got our act together, when we have been in touch with the public

we have shown we can win. Is Labour's continued existence a

question mark? We have got to start getting in touch with the public.

One thing the report did slightly skirt around, the question over

politics as an identity. People like myself have been banging on about

this, not just in the weeks before the election but for months and

years before, and we need to face up to that. No political party has a

right to exist, but I think if Labour gets our act together, if we

stop picking fights with ourselves, if we face up to the difficult

issues in this report and elsewhere, we can be successful in the future.

In what ways, as things stand at the moment, what ways will Labour be

better, in better shape, under Jeremy Corbyn heading into the 2020

election than it was in the 2015 election? What is one of the main

conclusions from the Beckett Report, it said we did make some gains,

1.5%, but we were stacking up area -- support in areas where we were

already strong. If they think you are out of touch on immigration and

welfare, you had better start talking about immigration and

welfare. Jeremy Corbyn seems to want almost no limit on immigration, it

is hard to detect if he would have any limits, and he is rather against

welfare reforms. I'm not sure that is an election winning strategy. On

immigration, I made this point to him, you have got to understand this

is the second biggest issue nationally, it is the biggest issue

in many constituencies including mine, and I said that many of the

answers are about stopping pressure on wages and conditions. There are

good centre-left solutions to these problems, about Europe dividing more

help for communities facing these changes. I made the point to him, on

welfare he is right to say we should be standing up to help the most

vulnerable, but in my experience you only get heard on those issues if

the public think you are for real in terms of wanting to be tough on

people who are frankly making decisions not to go into work so you

have got to get the balance right. Do you accept, given his huge

support among party members, that Jeremy Corbyn will lead you into the

next election? He faces a big test in May. We have seen the polls and

the ratings, any big test is a real election. He faces a big test

because he was clear that a left-wing agenda is the key to

transforming our fortunes in Scotland, I hope he's right. We need

to win in London but we have got to show we can make big gains in the

rest of London as well and we have got to hold onto power in Wales as

well. But even if he fails these tests, do you think there will be an

attempt to remove him? We have got to get behind Jeremy and he has got

to show us that he can deliver and turn things around. We need to get

behind him. People are very clear about what Jeremy stands for. He has

achieved remarkable cut throughs. Over the next few months we will see

more of that so he has got to be given a chance because he has a huge

mandate by the party members but he has got to show he can turn that

into real support from the public. That means also winning the support

of people who voted Conservative last time. It is not an easy

challenge, we are behind him in that but he has got to show he can learn

the lessons that Margaret Beckett has talked about and Debra and

others as well. We have got to stop it there, thank you.

The hole Labour is in is deepest in Scotland, where the once-mighty

party now holds just one Westminster seat.

If Jeremy Corbyn is to win the general election in 2020,

he needs to claw back support from the SNP,

and the first test of his appeal north of the border is coming up

fast in elections to the Scottish parliament in May.

Speaking to Andrew Marr this morning, the leader of the SNP took

aim at Mr Corbyn, criticising a plan he's floated

to keep Britain's Trident submarines minus their nuclear warheads.

I wonder what you made of Jeremy Corbyn's suggestion that

you could keep the Trident submarines, therefore keep the jobs

in Scotland, but not have nuclear missiles on them.

I think it was ridiculous and I think it's a sign of just how

tortured these debates are becoming within the Labour Party.

On Trident, I agree with Jeremy Corbyn.

I'm not in favour of the renewal of Trident, and we might have a vote

on that in the House of Commons sooner rather than later.

I think the real challenge for Jeremy Corbyn is,

can he get his party into the position he wants it to be

in so we can have any chance at all of stopping

For Labour to sit on the fence on this issue or have a free vote

on this issue will leave them without a shred of credibility.

And I've been joined now by the Shadow Scottish Secretary,

Let's pick up on the point from Nicola Sturgeon about Trident. In

Scotland the electoral choice on this is clear, if you are unilateral

disarmament, you vote SNP. You couldn't vote Labour on this issue

because people don't know what you stand for. The Labour Party has been

clear, a motion was passed almost unanimously to reject the renewal of

Trident on that policy basis. But it is not party policy. There is a

policy review happening at the moment so the Scottish Labour

Party's policy on this is clear. It is a Scottish election don't forget.

These Trident issues are diverting us away from big issues of policy in

terms of public services. The Deborah Mattinson research found

Scottish voters felt abandoned by the Labour Party. When did Labour

start taking Scottish voters for granted? It has been clear from a

number of reports that have been done that there has been a process

in the party where we have not devolved the party as much as

Scotland. The Scottish party, in 1999 it was a tremendous opportunity

for the Scottish Labour Party but I don't think we have caught up with

that. I think under Kesia's leadership she is refreshing that.

You face further electoral disasters in Holyrood in May. No one is under

any illusion this will be a difficult election, but what Kesia

is trying to do is get a positive policy platform together, reconnect

with Scottish people, respond to what Scottish people have been

saying on the doorsteps, and she's doing that on the basis of

responding to what the Scottish people want. That's what people want

to have. What the Shadow Cabinet was told by your own election director

is that he expects you to lose all of your constituency MSPs, just as

you lost all of your constituency MPs bar you last May. What can you

do to avoid that? The important thing is to go back to Kezia

Dugdale's policy. She wants to change the policies of the Scottish

Labour Party in order for us to have a policy platform that is incredibly

positive. What is the most distinctive Scottish policy

initiative since Jeremy Corbyn became leader? This isn't about

Jeremy Corbyn, it is about Kezia Dugdale. We have helped to buy

scheme for first time buyers, we want to build 60,000 affordable

homes, we want to put the 50p tax rate back in to close the

educational attainment gap, they are just a few of the policies she has

announced already. She is one of the few people in this election campaign

actually talking about the policy issues of Scotland. Nobody is

talking about these kinds of issues. Do you think that collection

policies you have outlined are enough to stave off a further

electoral humiliation? It is just the start of a policy platform she

will be announcing in the run-up to the elections. Help to buy is a Tory

policy. This is about resolving a housing crisis that has been created

by an SNP government. We are not holding them to account because

people are obsessing over things like polls. The transport system is

creaking at the seams. This has got to be dealt with and there is a real

opportunity to talk about the powers the Scottish Government currently

has and new powers. Let's talk about tomorrow's Scotland. How much would

a top rate 50p tax for Scotland raised? Up to 10 million, depending

where you would have any change but every single penny would go into

educational attainment. When the Conservatives cut the tax rate to

45p, the Treasury were projecting it would cost ?3 billion a year to

satisfy. That was for the whole of the UK, so 60-110,000,000 is a lot

of money we can use to cut the educational attainment gap. Why is

Jeremy Corbyn not cutting much ice north of the border? He has won a

significant mandate within the party, he needs to win that now

within the country but what we are concentrating on now is Kezia

Dugdale as a new leader. I am interesting that you stress all the

time Kezia Dugdale, is Jeremy Corbyn and asset or a liability in May? He

is an asset because she wants us to invest in public services, he wants

to use the powers in the Scottish bill to transform the Scottish

Parliament... So why are the polls, if you have got Kezia Dugdale and

Jeremy Corbyn doing all the right things, why are the polls so dire

for you in Scotland? We will fight for every single vote and seat, we

fight to win every election but whilst we are talking about polls

and not holding the Scottish Government to account for a dreadful

record in Government for eight years and not talking about positive

policies being put forward, we will not get any traction in the polls.

Let's get this campaign onto real issues that ordinary Scots want to

talk about on the doorsteps, which is about holding the Government to

account for a dreadful track record, and get some policies on there that

says to the people the Scottish Labour Party has changed and we can

talk about tomorrow's Scotland and how we can transform people's lives.

Thank you. The huge influx of migrants

into the EU from Syria and elsewhere is putting the future

of the EU in "grave danger", that was the stark warning

from the French Prime Minister Tomorrow, EU interior ministers

will discuss a possible two-year suspension of the Schengen system

of passport-free travel. It all comes as David Cameron seeks

to put the finishing touches to a new deal for the UK

inside the EU before But how is the migrant crisis

affecting his renegotiation? Since January 2015, nearly 1.1

million migrants have arrived in Europe, the vast

majority coming by sea. The International Monetary Fund

estimates that nearly 4 million migrants will have reached

the EU by the end of 2017. Tomorrow, EU interior ministers

will discuss a possible suspension of the passport-free Schengen area

and the re-introduction of border The EU is also considering tearing

up the so-called Dublin Convention and introducing a new dispersal

scheme to distribute migrants more It's an extra headache

for David Cameron as he seeks to renegotiate the terms

of our membership of the EU. The Prime Minister's preferred

option is a four-year ban on new EU migrant workers claiming

in-work benefits. But that's unlikely to satisfy many

Conservative backbenchers. Former Cabinet minister Liam Fox,

who has already said he will campaign to leave the EU,

said yesterday that he "didn't expect a British prime minister

to have to take the political begging bowl around the capitals

of Europe just to change our own Over the next three weekends

we will be staging three debates Joining me now to discuss

immigration and the EU are the Ukip MEP Diane James, who's campaigning

for Britain to leave the EU, and the Conservative MP

Damian Green, who supports The French prime ministers as the

future the EU is in grave danger, so why would we want to stay in it? --

Prime Minister says. It is useful to as, it makes us safer and more

secure and more prosperous and therefore it is worth saving, from

our perspective and to the other member countries. Why does it make

us more secure? The way that we cooperate with other European

countries, the European institutions, things like the

European arrest warrant, data share, these are very useful to our police

and security services. We share data with the United States, as well. But

not on the same automatic basis as we do with Europe. There is

automatic sharing of intelligence between Britain and the United

States. There is can we have a separate treaty with them, it is not

as automatic and quick. -- there is, we have a separate treaty. We can

change information within minutes with other European countries, and

it takes days and weeks with other countries, and that means in cases

of terrorism and sadly we live in a dangerous world, with global

terrorism, that kind of European cooperation is increasingly

important. Diane, we face a migration crisis, what is your

solution, to turn Britain into a fortress Britain? No, it isn't, but

it is to regain border control for the United Kingdom, and that is a

position endorsed by a number of countries, and number of member

states across the EU, you have five countries which every imposed border

controls to some extent. There is still free movement of people.

France said last week they will extend their border control, their

passport control as an emergency measure because of the terrorist

attacks in Paris. Border control is needed because under the current

system freedom of movement, people, services, transport, that also means

freedom of movement for terrorists and weapons, that come from the

Balkan states. We don't have border controls? Yes, but not sufficient,

if someone comes in from the Mediterranean states or from the

Balkan states, they have gained entry into the European member zone.

They can't then move around. If they get their passport, ultimately...

That can take ten years. It is five years in Germany, it can be granted

sooner if the Dublin agreement is changed and asylum seekers get a

faster processing, they can then come to the United Kingdom. It is

not five years in Germany, it is a comment if you have a criminal

record, you can't get one, and the things that Niger Farage was saying

about the scenes in Cologne, that was wrong. -- Nigel. The out

campaign is saying that border controls are what we need, strong

border controls, and pulling out of Europe would have the practical

effect, our border controls which act have a, thanks to the treaty

with the French government, they would certainly come back to Dover

-- our border controls which we have at Calais. Migrants would find it

much easier to get to this country and claim asylum here. But if they

couldn't get in, they did not qualify, we would have the power to

deport them? We were, after a legal process, but they would be stopped

not at Calais, it would be at Dover, when they are in Britain, and once

they are here they can claim asylum and because we have proper legal

processes it takes a lot of time and expense to deal with that. He has

all the accused me of getting my facts wrong, but he has got his

facts wrong. The agreement in terms of stationing our teams and our

support staff and control, in the French ports, that is a France UK

agreement, it has nothing to do with the European Union. If you are

suggesting that the agreement between France and the United

Kingdom gets torn up because we leave the EU, that is fanciful and

misleading and I don't agree with you. France signed the treatment

with us as a fellow member of the EU and the French interior minister has

said that they would look at the treaty, of course it would be at

risk, do you think the people of Calais want that camp on their

doorstep? Of course not. The French are doing us a favour. How would the

renegotiation by the Prime Minister help address any of this? The area

of renegotiation and this is about the extra pull factor that comes

from the perception that the British benefits system is easier to access

compared with other countries, and therefore there are people coming

here simply to make the benefits system and I think what many people

think about immigration, they are moral axed about people coming here

to work and pay taxes but they don't like people coming to use the

welfare system -- they are more relaxed. But it has been said this

will not have a big impact, you might marginalise one pull factor,

but with rises in the national minimum wage, you have increased the

pull factor on the other hand. It's a boiler fairness, that is what --

that is a boiler fairness, that is what people want... It is unlikely

to have a big impact. This will have very little impact on the numbers. I

think people can make a distinction between those who are coming here to

work, who benefit our economy and benefit all of us. But we have

agreed it is unlikely, even if it is fair, it is unlikely to have any

impact on the numbers. We don't know. The OBR has had a good guess.

They are guessing, it is a guess. Nigel Farage said he would cut

immigration even if that meant lower economic growth, do you agree? There

are two parts to your question, George Osborne has predicated his

fiscal strategy on high numbers of immigration, but we have done this

on individuals who come here on a points system to deliver real value

to this country, who are not subsidised by the tax credit option

and who actually meet the needs that we have in the United Kingdom, and

currently, as we know, we want engineers and medics and nurses and

lawyers. Ukip strategy has never been to stop those individuals

coming, but what we are saying, the impact of low skilled immigration on

this country is negative. That is our position. Even if it meant slow

economic growth, you would still cut the numbers? It would not mean

slower economic growth. We have made our position very clear in terms of

the value of the money that we would not be paying in terms of membership

of the EU, coming back to the United Kingdom's economy, and balancing the

whole position, that would be a positive for us as a country. The

Prime Minister has refused to leave a group of 40 Eurosceptic

backbenchers in the Conservative Party, who want to asking to do much

more. Should he not make them? The Prime Minister meets backbenchers

all the time. He has not meant this group, they wrote to him in November

and he has not met them. -- he has not met this group. Anyone who would

like to meet the Prime Minister has ample opportunities to do so, I'm a

backbencher, I can speak to the Prime Minister, and all of these

points have been raised. It is possible that this story is slightly

overblown. Thank you very much. We will be coming back to these stories

in the weeks ahead. And next week we'll be debating

the economic effects of leaving It's just gone 11.35,

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

in Scotland who leave us now Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics

in Northern Ireland. With the welfare mitigation

issue seemingly resolved, Or have politicians

abandoned the vulnerable? That's what I'll be asking

Sinn Fein and the SDLP. Plus, as Presbyterians discuss

the 1916 anniversaries, the Republic's Minister responsible

for the commemorations reveals her plans for

this landmark year. And with their thoughts

on all of that and more - Fionnuala O'Connor

and Paul Gosling... It once threatened the existence

of Stormont itself, but now the welfare issue has apparently

been put to bed with the publication of a report this week outlining how

mitigations will work. While the report was broadly

welcomed, it's clear some benefit recipients could lose out under

planned welfare changes. With me now is Sinn Fein's John

O'Dowd and the SDLP's Alex Sinn Fein's line was always that no

benefit recipient would be allowed It's clear people are going to lose

out despite those pledges... We were faced with a scenario. The

British government were going to take over welfare reform, the role

of the executive, it would have collapsed, so Sinn Fein have made a

correct decision. Concluding the peace process, should we collapse

the executive? You don't see that you were going to do that at one

point. Passing the legislation, more to do with timing than policy. In

terms of the journey, it is better balance with local politicians,

boundaries of appeals, and the report has set out it the measures,

existing nowhere else. You over promised.

Gerry Adams said in January 2015, one year ago...

"No one will have any benefit reduced which is under the authority

That was our key point on this issue."

Conor Murphy, December 2014: "What we've done is ensure

that those who suffer will be picked up by a system devised by us -

What we wanted to achieve, it has to be against the political reality. We

were involved in negotiation, with other parties, few of them committed

to bringing forward proposals, the issue has become so toxic, it was on

the day job collapsing political institutions. In the broader sense,

protecting public services, to maintain institutions. Did Sinn Fein

overpromise? If every person said that nobody was going to be losing

out, but now people are going to be, they overpromised. But it is the

preposterous idea, to travel, it is not a matter of policy, because of

that decision Sinn Fein, signing up to these benefit freezers, the Mike

-- freezes and this week, charity groups have been arguing against the

proposals, so not only as a bizarre place, in the year of 1916,

Republicans giving power back to London, it was the technicality, and

it has impact on citizens, when we could have control. The more

interesting question, what did the SDLP deliver? Nothing. Welcoming the

report. SDLP voted against the fresh start, and last week, against the

budget. Spending half ?1 billion, protecting citizens. Those measures,

scaremongering, it rests with the assembly. All powers rest with the

assembly. It is difficult to argue against what has been said, you want

your cake and eat it. You did not vote for the budget? I support the

work. I support what she did. Put meat on proposals. Last year, and

the welfare reform discussions, the DUP and Sinn Fein voted them down.

That included the abolition of the bedroom tax. So on. It is not the

case, to pretend that what Sinn Fein agreed, is about timelines, it is

about reductions, taking money out of the pockets. But be have tried to

mitigate those difficulties, and the best possible way, with as much

money as is available? It is easy to sit on the sidelines. They are

having to deal with the issues. We welcome what has been said. How

would you fund it? You voted against the budget. No alternative. Out of

the current budget. You didn't vote for it! We produce an alternative.

That does not mean, they oppose every measure. If you want to see

what we have produced, looked at the documents, in the recent

negotiations, the most extensive, unlike Sinn Fein, handing over now

documents. Do not be misled. Sinn Fein are trying to sell the past on

welfare, surrendering to London, creating a fog around the fact that

when it comes to people in Northern Ireland, not as much mitigation as

promised. It does nothing about the proposals that they have signed up

to, going to Westminster, impacting on policy. At no time during that

lengthy contribution, as he outlined how the SDLP would treat the

situation. Why is this happening? Sinn Fein step forward, how are they

being funded? Let's broaden this. You promised people, a great deal.

You have deliver less. You could be punished for that. It is a lot less

than people thought they were going to be. The deal that people are

going to get, it is good to last 12 months. The electorate is going to

make decisions. Based on informed debate. That is what democracy is

about. Sinn Fein will defend the position. The mitigations, set out

for 12 months, but the most important part, that the sanctions

being imposed, in England, having the most devastating impact. What we

have introduced, it is a support package, to have an appeals process,

laptop, -- backed up... It buys people time. You also, within the

SDLP, could be punished. In out approach to welfare. No. All of what

has just been opened, Intel's mitigation, it has no impact upon

the welfare changes coming across, because of the bill. Falsehood.

Secondly, a lot of the principles of the proposals, established in the

chamber, one years ago, when we said we should have protection for people

on benefit conflicts, changes in the benefit caps, all of those... DUP

and Sinn Fein voted them down. So when people make the choice, they

will have to remember who flip flopped. And those who brought

forward crafted proposals. Those who protect the devolution settlement.

Those opposed to benefit freezes and those who endorsed them. That is why

Martin McGuinness, going back to Derry. That is a different issue.

You can fool some people some time, not all the people all the time.

People are going to make up their own mind.

Do you think the recommendations make sense? She is a good socialist,

producing reports, in 1981, on single parents, battered women. Both

of them, the most deprived sections, that long ago. She produced a solid

piece of work, a woman in a male dominated world. And she has done

this well. But this question, it is a distraction. Gerry Adams used that

world. In that heated discussion, as John's voice got louder, Alex Atwood

struggled, that the proposals, related to those documents, neither

of them can make the case that is going to matter on the doorsteps.

Especially if people are already feeling hit by cuts. It is

describing efforts, to mitigate the situation, that the administration

can do little about. Do you get a sense, it is going to become an

issue on the doorsteps, and that people understand precisely what it

is, Eileen Evason? Eileen Evason's report this excellent, but it does

not achieve, the impossible, if you promised the impossible you cannot

deliver. That is going to be a political issue. It is a

distraction, from unionism, that is what they should be concentrating

on. Unionists said that we have no choice, Tory policy, we ought to

stay in line with Britain. They have moved, the bedroom tax has gone,

this is the sort of thing that Sinn Fein should be concentrating on, but

these conservative policies, accepted to a degree, by all of them

because they had to. But also mitigated, DUP moved from defending

that. It is going to make for some interesting battles. A new

constituency, west Belfast as well? Absolutely. Interesting political

battles. Large levels of poverty. I think people are going to be angry,

about these unfathomable promises. Next to the Easter Rising

and the Somme - part of 'our shared narrative across this shared land' -

the words of Fine Gael Minister Heather Humphreys on a visit

to Belfast this week. The Minister, who's overseeing

the centenary of the 1916 Rising, has a few shared narratives herself,

with a grand-father who signed Nevertheless, I asked her if her

notion of a 'shared history' isn't a little idealistic when there

are so many competing I live on the border. I am conscious

of sensitivities. But it's 100 years ago. We should hear the stories. The

historical facts. We have a lot of misinformation. A lot of people came

forward. They didn't realise great grand uncles were in the war. It is

about the personal stories. Impact. 1916. And we have the chance, to

look back. Can you see why some people are uncomfortable, with

anything that looks like a celebration of rebuilding, against

the British presence? That is one thing I want to be freed about. This

is not a celebration. It is not triumphalism. It is a commemoration.

Remembering, listening to the stories. There's going to be a wall.

With all the names, of people who lost lives in the Easter Rising.

Many civilians, members of the British Army, a lot of those were

Irish. Stories to be told. And I think when people reflect, you get a

better understanding. Northern Ireland's new First Minister has

expressed reservations, about taking part in formal name originates, of

1916. She is going to attend an event, to discuss historical

context, but will not formally commemorate what has happened, can

you see how she has come to that view? I respect that, but I am glad

that she said that she will be coming, having a debate, I am

pleased and I'm sure we will have many events that she will be able to

attend. Comfortable in attending. If a teacher comes up with the right

invitation, she will accept. There is that going to happen? The two

Bishops... They have come together. They are going to have an event,

bringing the children, both sides of the border, together. It is an

event, involving art, music, and they are going to be telling the

stories, starting from 1916. It goes to the Good Friday agreement. That

is going to involve children. That, for example, is one event that both

of us would love to be attending. The battle of the Somme centenary.

July. Do you see that being commemorated? By weight

cross-sections. So many Irishmen, died in that battle. Perhaps that

could be another event, that people could come with us, and joint, to

commemorate those who most lights. -- lives. The Irish state failed

when they returned from the trenches? Are you having to correct

mistakes by predecessors? They came home, to a different Ireland. I was

agonising, two years ago, and this man I knew... His name was Kevin. He

said that was a fantastic day. It means so much to me. Tears down his

face. means so much to me. Tears down his

came back from the world war, and never spoke about it. He said a

wrong had been made right. That is what is important. You seem to

personify the complexity of identity, you described yourself as

a pro-Irish republican, attending orange order parades, that this

complex? I attend cultural events, in my constituency, bands come and

play. From Northern Ireland, Monaghan, it is a cultural event

that I absolutely enjoyed. People come from all traditions, that is

inclusive. How do you think politicians are doing, in Northern

Ireland? Do you think the meeting enough of an effort? It takes time.

We are making progress all the time. It is by going to these events, GAA

matches, dispelling myths. I would encourage people to come together,

go to different events. We have a lot more in common than we have that

separates us. Heather Humphreys flying the flag

for cross-community encounter. Now, let's take a look back

at the political week in 60 seconds Martin McGuinness on the move. He

will be running, as Sinn Fein target more assembly seats. DUP made it

clear Northern Ireland must be leaving the European Union. We would

be better outside. The budget has been voted through for the next

year. This represents a balanced budget, no level of overcommitment,

for many years. Changes to the welfare system moving closer. This

would mean Northern Ireland is better prepared, to enable

vulnerable people to avoid hardship. Firefighters came to Stormont, to

protest against cuts, and the finance minister was reminded of his

roots. The financial prudence, except when it comes to considering

projects themselves. And let's have a final word

from Fionnuala and Paul... candidate in the hot seat, until

then, back to you, Andrew. Can David Cameron keep his party

together in the run-up Will the SNP stymie the PM's

plans for a summer vote? And who will go along to

John McDonnell's economics roadshow? Nick, Damian Green downplayed the 40

Eurosceptics who have written to the Prime Minister, asking for a

meeting. Is he right? Is there a serious division for the Tories? It

was a very diplomatic response from Damian Green, but what Downing

Street would say about the letter from John Barron, what is the point

of meeting him and his 40 merry friends, because I want to get

Britain out and they have always wanted to do so and the demands they

are tabling in that letter, to have primacy of the UK Parliament over EU

law is not in the negotiation and is not going to happen, but there is a

port in point. David Cameron was dismissive of John Barron in the

House of Commons and he needs to maybe occasionally show a bit more

charm and listening to those kind of people. -- important point. They are

on the other side of the prime Minster, but he has got to manage

the process carefully and he needs to avoid a civil war, and he can

avoid that if all sides are respected in this debate. Presumably

the 40 that signed our hard-core Eurosceptic but there are more

Eurosceptics. Even if David Cameron gets all of what he is asking for,

how many Conservative MPs will still want to come out? Going back to the

John Barenboim, the 40 that have signed that letter, Downing Street

have put them to one side -- John Barron point. The battle for the

party, what do you do with those, maybe a third of the party, that

would be minded to leave, maybe 100-100 and 50 MPs, George Osborne

was talking about emergency brakes on legislation, if things are coming

through from Brussels which the British don't want. They still think

that the negotiation really is in play and what we have to do is try

and pick off moderate Eurosceptics and give them a package which they

can get behind and then we need to accept that there will be 40

hard-core people that we could never placate. In the David Cameron

nightmare, that is the potential backdrop to the referendum, the

French Prime Minister has said Europe is in grave danger and we

have had President task of the council say that we have only got a

couple of months to sort out the immigration issue -- Donald Tusk.

The Dutch Prime Minister has given warnings, as well. If there's a

sense that Europe is falling especially regarding migration,

Schengen is swept away, as it might be tomorrow, that is not a way to

win a referendum. It is a huge advantage for the Brexit campaign

and it distinguishes them from their predecessors of 20 years ago,

leaving the EU back then was seen as a pessimistic thing to do, but now

you can almost support Brexit because you think, why chain

yourself to a continent which is losing, when there's so much

dynamism in the world elsewhere? The characteristic of the Brexit

campaign is the challenge David Cameron has got to summer, it cannot

say they are entirely insular any more. -- has got to surmount. I

thought the internal Tory problem with the explosive, if not a big

split, but like a rolling crisis from the 1990s, but I no longer

think that is true, the fact they know they can expect to be in

government until at least 2025, they can maintain basic adhesion because

of the weakness of the Labour Party and that is a contrast with the 90s

-- basic cohesion. Cameron will look like he is losing control, but there

will not be anything existential going on for the party. We believe

the government is anxious to get it out of the way by the end of June,

may be the first week of July. Nicola Sturgeon said some

interesting things on the Andrew Marr show, about the timetable for

the referendum. We had a negative feeling campaign from the no

campaign and they almost lost, in the referendum for Europe, the

campaigns are much closer to start with, and if the in campaign falls

into the trap of the no campaign I fear it will lose. Nicola Sturgeon

has said that she does not want a June referendum and she feels that

is too soon. You can say, that is the view of the First Minister, she

doesn't have a vote in parliament, but it have more significance. I was

briefed last week by senior Scottish Nationalist who said this, "Many

conservatives will not want a June referendum and the risk epics want

more time to layout their case -- Eurosceptics want more time to

layout their case". The Scottish Nationalists will not help to vote

by voting for a June referendum. The SNP could try and turn this into a

vote in the house and then it depends on what Labour do, do they

want to have it in June or later? I think the Eurosceptics are so

focused on trying to get this referendum through, I don't think

them as long as they feel they have the campaign in time that they want,

the four-month period, I think they will go for it. I'm not sure that is

true. Given the divisions in the Eurosceptics side at the moment, and

the out campaign, I think they need longer to get there ducks in a row

and they feel the best time for them to fight is after there has been

another major migration crisis in the summer, people will not on their

side of the ardent when that happens. That might be true. -- of

the argument. But they cannot argue for a delay in some ways, but I do

feel that Nicola Sturgeon's intervention is significant and the

pressure on the Prime Minister to listen to what she is saying, will

not so much come in parliament, it could come from the electoral

commission, which has already said they cannot have the referendum in

May as the same time as the devolved elections, and if you have Nicola

Sturgeon, Arlene Foster, the First Minister of Northern Ireland, and

Karen Jones can be First Minister of Wales Coulibaly said they think this

is over complicating -- First Minister of Wales, if they all said

they think this is over, catering, because it would happen at the same

time as the devolved elections -- if they all said this is

overcompensated. That would be significant, we could be bouncing

into September. They have said they do not want the overlap, there

should be a clear gap between the referendum campaign and the local

elections, the assembly come and the Parliamentary elections in Scotland.

They have a low view of the ability of the electorate to distinguish

between elections, I do think Nicolas -- Nicola Sturgeon is an

obstacle, but the biggest obstacle will be David Cameron and what he

can get from the EU. You don't think it will be a done deal pretty much

they are putting a lot of weight white -- you don't think it will be

a done deal? They are putting a lot of weight on one summit, but the

next summit that matters, it only takes one delay for us to move

beyond June and then into September. I thought 2017 would be more likely,

I have slightly revised that view, but I don't think June is possible.

We have leave, and several out campaigns, and we have got one which

is called grassroots out. Liam Fox, Conservative, Nigel Farage, Kate

Hoey from Labour was there, it was launched yesterday. At some stage

they have got to consult them if they want to be serious and marshal

their resources, they have got to have a single campaign? And by law

they have got through, the electoral commission is going to have two

designate a campaign on either side. It is pretty clear that the inside

are coalescing around the Britain stronger in Europe group, but on the

outside there is not that agreement and there is feuding between these

groups and they're going to have to reach agreement. The problem they

have, who is going to lead them? Nigel Lawson is a key figure and he

says they will get a senior Cabinet minister, but I said the most senior

Cabinet minister who will go for Brexit, in Duncan Smith, do his own

thing, which leaves you with Chris Grayling -- Iain Duncan Smith. And

also Theresa Villiers. They will go up against the leader of the in

campaign who is someone called David Cameron, and so they really do need

to get unity. Vote Labour say they are more grown-up, -- vote leave say

they are more grown-up, for example. Some are said to me the other day

that Chris Grayling's view is that many senior figures in the party

should be voices. In other words he was suggesting he did not want to

leave and they would not be one senior Cabinet minister that was

going to champion it which gives them another problem. The

organisational, factional differences make much less

difference in who you have as your voice, it could be a very prominent

businessperson, for example, the head of a major company. Who knows

how to bend opinion. That is not true of many business people. They

could talk about the economic risk. The state in campaign was launched

by Stuart Rose. And it was a disaster. It was a disastrous launch

will stop you going to John McDonnell's economic seminar? I'm

washing my hair. He was to get out of the -- he says he would like to

get out of the Westminster bubble, he has only

get out of the Westminster bubble, he has only got to the West End, but

he has got out there. You don't want to come? There are many people

worried about Jeremy Corbyn's leadership in the Labour Party, but

they are encouraged about the seminars, the economics panel, he

has got an incredibly serious group of people, is opening up these

seminars and they are encouraged. There was a good piece in the Sunday

Times about whether there is a good deal with Google and whether this is

such a good deal for the British taxpayer. I can feel I'm going to be

on my own. Anyway, it has sold out, there is no room for you.

Jo Coburn will be back with the Daily Politics

And I'll be back here on BBC One next Sunday

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

bought on the streets of east Belfast,

How can it be credible leadership did not know?

The mistakes made in this case would have enormous consequences.