:00:42. > :00:45.It's Sunday morning, this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:46. > :00:47.The police believe the Westminster attacker Khalid Masood acted alone,
:00:48. > :00:50.but do the security services have the resources and
:00:51. > :00:53.We'll ask the leader of the House of Commons.
:00:54. > :00:56.As Theresa May prepares to trigger Brexit, details of
:00:57. > :01:02.Will a so-called Henry VIII clause give the Government too much power
:01:03. > :01:06.Ukip's only MP, Douglas Carswell, quits the party saying it's "job
:01:07. > :01:09.done" - we'll speak to him and the party's
:01:10. > :01:12.And coming up here - as the deadline for a Stormont deal
:01:13. > :01:16.looms large, we talk to an upbeat Alliance leader about her party's
:01:17. > :01:19.election performance and a possible place at the Executive table.
:01:20. > :01:30.And with me - as always - the best and the brightest political
:01:31. > :01:33.panel in the business - Toby Young, Polly Toynbee
:01:34. > :01:39.and Janan Ganesh, who'll be tweeting throughout the programme.
:01:40. > :01:41.First, it was the most deadly terrorist attack
:01:42. > :01:45.The attacker was shot dead trying to storm Parliament,
:01:46. > :01:47.but not before he'd murdered four people and injured 50 -
:01:48. > :01:51.one of those is still in a critical condition in hospital.
:01:52. > :01:53.His target was the very heart of our democracy,
:01:54. > :01:56.the Palace of Westminster, and he came within metres
:01:57. > :01:59.of the Prime Minister and senior Cabinet ministers.
:02:00. > :02:03.Without the quick actions of the Defence Secretary's
:02:04. > :02:04.close protection detail, fortuitously in the vicinity
:02:05. > :02:13.at the time, the outcome could have been even worse.
:02:14. > :02:21.Janan Ganesh it is four days now, getting on. What thoughts should we
:02:22. > :02:25.be having this weekend? First of all, Theresa May's Parliamentary
:02:26. > :02:28.response was exemplary. In many ways, the moment she arrived as
:02:29. > :02:33.prime minister and her six years as Home Secretary showed a positive
:02:34. > :02:35.way. No other serving politician is as steeped in counterterror and
:02:36. > :02:40.national security experience as she is and I think it showed. As to
:02:41. > :02:44.whether politics is going now, it looks like the Government will put
:02:45. > :02:50.more pressure on companies like Google and Facebook to monitor
:02:51. > :02:54.sensor radical content that flows through their channels, and I wonder
:02:55. > :02:58.whether beyond that the Government, not just our Government but around
:02:59. > :03:03.the world, will start to open this question of, during a terror attack,
:03:04. > :03:07.as it is unfolding, should there be restrictions on what can appear on
:03:08. > :03:10.social media? I was on Twitter at the time last week, during the
:03:11. > :03:17.attack, and people were posting things which may have been useful to
:03:18. > :03:20.the perpetrators, not on that occasion but future occasions.
:03:21. > :03:25.Should there be restrictions on what and how much people can post while
:03:26. > :03:29.an attack is unfolding? I think we have learned that this is like the
:03:30. > :03:32.weather, it is going to happen, it is going to happen all over the
:03:33. > :03:38.world and in every country and we deal with it well, we deal with it
:03:39. > :03:43.stoically, perhaps we are more used to it than some. We had the IRA for
:03:44. > :03:47.years, we know how to make personal risk assessments, how to know the
:03:48. > :03:52.chances of being in the wrong place at the wrong time are infinitesimal,
:03:53. > :03:56.so people in London didn't say, I'm not going to go to the centre of
:03:57. > :04:01.London today, everything carried on just the same. Because we know that
:04:02. > :04:07.the odds of it, being unlucky, are very small. Life is dangerous, this
:04:08. > :04:13.is another very small risk and it is the danger of being alive. I think
:04:14. > :04:17.from an Isis Islamist propaganda point of view, it showed just what a
:04:18. > :04:22.poor target London and the House of Commons is, and it is hard to
:04:23. > :04:25.imagine the emergency services and local people, international
:04:26. > :04:32.visitors, reacting much better than they did. And the fact that our
:04:33. > :04:36.Muslim mayor was able to make an appearance so quickly afterwards
:04:37. > :04:40.shows, I think, that we are not city riddled with anti-Islamic prejudice.
:04:41. > :04:44.It couldn't really have been a better advertisement for the values
:04:45. > :04:47.that is attacking. OK, thank you for that.
:04:48. > :04:49.So, four days after the attack, what more do we know
:04:50. > :04:53.The police have made 11 arrests, but only one remains
:04:54. > :04:58.Here's Adam with the latest on the investigation.
:04:59. > :05:03.According to a police timeline, that's how long it took
:05:04. > :05:05.Khalid Masood to drive through a crowd on Westminster
:05:06. > :05:12.to crash his car into Parliament's perimeter...
:05:13. > :05:16.to fatally stab PC Keith Palmer, before being shot by a bodyguard
:05:17. > :05:27.The public are leaving tributes to the dead at Westminster.
:05:28. > :05:32.The family of PC Palmer released a statement saying:
:05:33. > :05:34."We would like to express our gratitude to the people
:05:35. > :05:36.who were with Keith in his last moments and who were
:05:37. > :05:40.There was nothing more you could have done,
:05:41. > :05:42.you did your best and we are just grateful he was not alone."
:05:43. > :05:46.Investigators say Masood's motive may have gone to the grave with him.
:05:47. > :05:49.Officers think he acted alone, despite reports he spent a WhatsApp
:05:50. > :05:56.The Home Secretary now has such encrypted messaging
:05:57. > :06:02.There should be no place for terrorists to hide.
:06:03. > :06:04.We need to make sure that organisations like WhatsApp,
:06:05. > :06:07.and there are plenty of others like that, don't provide a secret
:06:08. > :06:10.place for terrorists to communicate with each other.
:06:11. > :06:14.It used to be that people would steam open envelopes or just
:06:15. > :06:23.listen in on phones when they wanted to find out what people were doing,
:06:24. > :06:25.legally, through warrantry, but in this situation
:06:26. > :06:27.we need to make sure that our intelligence services
:06:28. > :06:29.have the ability to get into situations like encrypted
:06:30. > :06:33.She will ask the tech industry to suggest solutions
:06:34. > :06:35.at a meeting this week, although she didn't rule out
:06:36. > :06:39.But for those caught up in the attack, perhaps it will be
:06:40. > :06:47...not the policy implications that will echo the loudest.
:06:48. > :06:49.We're joined now from the Hague by the Director of Europol,
:06:50. > :06:55.the European Police Agency, Rob Wainwright.
:06:56. > :07:03.What role has Europol played in the aftermath of Wednesday's attacks? I
:07:04. > :07:06.can tell you we are actively supporting the investigation,
:07:07. > :07:10.because it is a live case I cannot of course go into the details, but
:07:11. > :07:14.to give you some context, Andrew, this is one of about 80
:07:15. > :07:18.counterterrorist cases we have been supporting across Europe this year,
:07:19. > :07:22.using a platform to shed thousands of intelligence messages between the
:07:23. > :07:26.very large counterterrorist community in Europe, and also
:07:27. > :07:29.tracking flows of terrorist finance, illegal firearms, and monitoring
:07:30. > :07:38.this terrible propaganda online as well. All of that is being made
:07:39. > :07:40.available now to the Metropolitan Police in London for this case. Do
:07:41. > :07:45.we know if there is any European link to those who may have inspired
:07:46. > :07:48.or directed Khalid Massoud? That is an active part of the inquiry being
:07:49. > :07:52.led by Metropolitan Police and it is not for me to comment or speculate
:07:53. > :07:58.on that. There are links of course in terms of the profile of the
:07:59. > :08:02.attacker and the way in which he launched these terrible events in
:08:03. > :08:05.Westminster, and those that we've seen, for example, in the Berlin
:08:06. > :08:11.Christmas market last year and the attack in Nice in the summer of last
:08:12. > :08:16.year, clear similarities between the fact that the attackers involved
:08:17. > :08:22.have criminal background, somewhat dislocated from society, each of
:08:23. > :08:26.them using a hired or stolen vehicle to deliberately aim at pedestrians
:08:27. > :08:30.in a crowded place and using a secondary weapon, whether it is a
:08:31. > :08:33.gun or a knife. So we are seeing a trend, I think, of the kind of
:08:34. > :08:37.attacks across Europe in the last couple of years and some of that at
:08:38. > :08:41.least was played out unfortunately in Westminster this week as well.
:08:42. > :08:45.Mass and was known to the emergency services, so were many of those
:08:46. > :08:49.involved in the Brussels, Paris and Berlin attacks, so something is
:08:50. > :08:54.going wrong here, we are not completely across this, are we?
:08:55. > :08:59.Actually most attacks are being stopped. This was I think at least
:09:00. > :09:04.the 14th terrorist plot or attempted attack in Britain since 2013 and the
:09:05. > :09:09.only one that has got through, and that fits a picture of what we see
:09:10. > :09:14.in France last year, 17 attempted attacks that were stopped, for
:09:15. > :09:19.example. Unfortunately some of them get through. But people on the
:09:20. > :09:22.security services' Radar getting through, in Westminster, Brussels,
:09:23. > :09:28.Paris and Berlin. There is clearly something we are not doing that
:09:29. > :09:33.could stop that. Again, if you look at what happened in Berlin and at
:09:34. > :09:37.least the first indications from what police are saying in London,
:09:38. > :09:42.these are people that haven't really appeared on Baha'i target list of
:09:43. > :09:46.the authorities, they are on the edge at best of radicalised
:09:47. > :09:51.community -- on the high target list. When you are dealing with a
:09:52. > :09:55.dispersed community of thousands of radicalised, Senate radicalised
:09:56. > :09:59.individuals, it is very difficult to monitor them 24/7, very difficult
:10:00. > :10:03.when these people, almost out of the blue and carry out the attacks that
:10:04. > :10:08.they did. I think you have to find a sense of perspective here around the
:10:09. > :10:11.work and the pressures of the work and the difficult target choices
:10:12. > :10:16.that police and security authorities have to make around Europe. The Home
:10:17. > :10:21.Secretary here in London said this morning it is time to tackle apps
:10:22. > :10:25.like WhatsApp, which we believe Massoud was using, because they
:10:26. > :10:28.encrypt from end to end and it is difficult for the security services
:10:29. > :10:34.to know what is happening there. What do you say, are you up for
:10:35. > :10:39.that? Across the hundreds of cases we have supported in recent years
:10:40. > :10:43.there is no doubt that encryption, encrypted communications are
:10:44. > :10:47.becoming more and more prominent in the way terrorists communicate, more
:10:48. > :10:50.and more of a problem, therefore, a real challenge for investigators,
:10:51. > :10:54.and that the heart of this is a stark inconsistency between the
:10:55. > :10:58.ability of the police to lawfully intercept telephone calls, but not
:10:59. > :11:03.when those messages are exchanged via a social media messaging board,
:11:04. > :11:07.for example, and that is an inconsistency in society and we have
:11:08. > :11:10.to find a solution through appropriate legislation perhaps of
:11:11. > :11:13.these technologies and law enforcement agencies working in a
:11:14. > :11:20.more constructive way. So you back that? I agree that there is
:11:21. > :11:26.certainly a problem, absolutely. We know there was a problem, I'm trying
:11:27. > :11:34.to find out if you agree with the Home Secretary's solution? I agree
:11:35. > :11:37.certainly with her calls for changes to be made. What the legislative
:11:38. > :11:41.solution for that is of course for her and other lawmakers to decide
:11:42. > :11:46.but from my point of view, yes, I would agree something has to be done
:11:47. > :11:48.to make sure we can apply more consistent interception of
:11:49. > :11:54.communication in all parts of the way in which terrorists invade our
:11:55. > :11:56.lives. Rob Wainwright of Europol, thank you very much.
:11:57. > :11:59.Here with me in the studio now is the Leader of the House
:12:00. > :12:06.What did last week's attack tell us about the security of the Palace of
:12:07. > :12:09.Westminster? It told us that we are looked after by some very
:12:10. > :12:18.courageous, very professional police officers. There is clearly going to
:12:19. > :12:23.be a lessons learned with you, as you would expect after any incident
:12:24. > :12:26.of this kind. That will look very carefully at what worked well but
:12:27. > :12:32.also whether there are changes that need to be made, that is already
:12:33. > :12:38.under way. And that is being run by professionals, by the police and
:12:39. > :12:47.security director at Parliament... Palace authorities, we will get
:12:48. > :12:50.reports from the professionals, particularly our own Parliamentary
:12:51. > :12:53.security director, and just as security matters in parliament are
:12:54. > :12:57.kept under constant review, if there are changes that need to be made as
:12:58. > :13:02.a result, then they will need to be made. Let's look at some of the
:13:03. > :13:06.issues it has thrown up, as we get some distance from these appalling
:13:07. > :13:09.events when our first reaction was always the people who lose their
:13:10. > :13:15.lives and suffer, and then we start to become a bit more analytical. Is
:13:16. > :13:18.it true that the authorities removed armed guards from Cowbridge gate,
:13:19. > :13:24.where the attacker made his entry, because they looked to threatening
:13:25. > :13:29.for tourists? -- carriage gate. No, the idea that a protest from MPs led
:13:30. > :13:36.to operational changes simply not the case. What happened in the last
:13:37. > :13:39.couple of years is that the security arrangements in new Palace Yard have
:13:40. > :13:44.actually been strengthened, but I don't think your view was would
:13:45. > :13:48.expect me to go into a detailed commentary upon operational security
:13:49. > :13:53.matters. Why were the armed guards removed? There are armed guards at
:13:54. > :13:59.all times in the Palace of Westminster, it is a matter for the
:14:00. > :14:03.security authorities and in particular for the police and direct
:14:04. > :14:09.command of those officers to decide how they are best deployed. Is it
:14:10. > :14:14.because, as some from Scotland Yard sources have reported to the papers
:14:15. > :14:18.this morning, was it done because of staffing shortages? I'm in no
:14:19. > :14:21.position to comment on the details of the operation but my
:14:22. > :14:27.understanding is that the number of people available is what the police
:14:28. > :14:30.and the security authorities working together have decided to deploy and
:14:31. > :14:36.that they think was commensurate with the threat that we faced. Is it
:14:37. > :14:42.not of concern that as the incident unfolded the gates were left
:14:43. > :14:46.unguarded by armed and unarmed, they were just unguarded, so much so
:14:47. > :14:53.that, as it was going on, a career with a parcel on a moped at was able
:14:54. > :14:58.to drive through? -- up career. I think we will need to examine that
:14:59. > :15:03.case as part of looking into any lessons learned, but what I don't
:15:04. > :15:05.yet know, because the police are still interviewing everybody
:15:06. > :15:11.involved, witnesses and police officers involved, was exactly who
:15:12. > :15:17.was standing where in the vicinity of the murder at a particular time.
:15:18. > :15:21.We have seen pictures, the gates were unguarded as people were
:15:22. > :15:27.concentrating on what was happening to the police man and to the
:15:28. > :15:31.attacker, but the delivery man was able to come through the gates with
:15:32. > :15:35.a parcel?! You have seen a particular camera angle, I think it
:15:36. > :15:40.is important before we rush to judgment, and we shouldn't be
:15:41. > :15:44.pointing fingers, we need... We are trying to get to the bottom of it.
:15:45. > :15:48.To get to the bottom of it means we have to look at what all the
:15:49. > :15:52.witnesses and all the police officers involved say about what
:15:53. > :15:56.happened, and then there needs to be a decision taken about what if any
:15:57. > :16:00.changes need to be made in light of that.
:16:01. > :16:09.We know the attacker was stopped in his tracks by the Defence
:16:10. > :16:13.Secretary's bodyguard, where was the armed roving unit that had replaced
:16:14. > :16:18.the armed guard at the gate? I cannot comment on operation details
:16:19. > :16:21.but my understanding is there were other armed officers who would have
:16:22. > :16:27.been able to prevent the attacker from getting to the chamber, as has
:16:28. > :16:32.been alleged it would be possible for him to do. Were you aware that a
:16:33. > :16:37.so-called table top simulation, carried out by Scotland Yard and the
:16:38. > :16:46.Parliamentary authorities, ended with four terrorists in this
:16:47. > :16:51.simulation able to storm parliament and killed dozens of MPs? No, that
:16:52. > :16:59.is the first time that has been mentioned to me. You are the leader
:17:00. > :17:05.of the house. These matters are dealt with by security professionals
:17:06. > :17:11.who are involved, they are advised by a security committee, chaired by
:17:12. > :17:15.the Deputy Speaker, but we do not debate operational details in
:17:16. > :17:20.public. I'm not asking for a debate, I raise this because it's been
:17:21. > :17:23.reported because it's quite clear that after this simulation, it
:17:24. > :17:30.raised serious questions about the security of the palace. Actions
:17:31. > :17:37.should have followed. What I've said to you is that these matters are
:17:38. > :17:41.kept under constant review and that there are always changes made both
:17:42. > :17:47.in the deployment of individual officers and security guards of the
:17:48. > :17:51.palace staff and other plans to strengthen the hard security of the
:17:52. > :17:57.perimeter. If you look back at Hansard December last year, they was
:17:58. > :18:02.a plan already been brought forward to strengthen the security at
:18:03. > :18:14.carriage Gates, looking at questions of access. Will there be armed
:18:15. > :18:20.guards now? You need to look not just at armed guards, you need to
:18:21. > :18:23.look at the entirety of the security engagements including fencing.
:18:24. > :18:27.There's lots about the security we don't need to know and shouldn't
:18:28. > :18:31.know, but whether or not there are armed guards is something we will
:18:32. > :18:37.find out quite soon and I'm asking you if you think there should be. If
:18:38. > :18:41.you think the judgment is by our security experts that there need to
:18:42. > :18:46.be more armed guards in certain places, then they will be deployed
:18:47. > :18:51.accordingly, but I think before we rush to make conclusions about
:18:52. > :18:55.lessons to be learned from Wednesday's appalling attack, it is
:18:56. > :18:59.important the police are allowed to get on with completing the interview
:19:00. > :19:04.of witnesses and their own officers, and then that there is considered
:19:05. > :19:09.view taken about what changes might need to be made and then they will
:19:10. > :19:13.be implemented. Let me come onto the triggering of Article 50 that begins
:19:14. > :19:19.our negotiations to exit the European Union. It will happen on
:19:20. > :19:22.Wednesday. John Claude Juncker told Germany's most popular newspaper
:19:23. > :19:28.that he wants to make an example of the UK to make everyone realise it's
:19:29. > :19:35.not worth leaving the EU. What do you make of that? I think all sorts
:19:36. > :19:39.of things are said in advance of negotiations beginning. Clearly the
:19:40. > :19:45.commission will want to ensure the EU 27 holds together. As the Prime
:19:46. > :19:51.Minister has said, that is a British national interest as well. She has
:19:52. > :19:55.been very clear... What do you make of President Juncker's remark? It
:19:56. > :20:03.doesn't surprise me ahead of negotiations but I think if rational
:20:04. > :20:07.mutual interest is to the fore that it's perfectly possible for an
:20:08. > :20:13.agreement to be negotiated between the UK and our 27 friends and allies
:20:14. > :20:16.that addresses all of the issues from trade to security, police
:20:17. > :20:22.cooperation, foreign policy co-operation, works for all
:20:23. > :20:26.countries. The EU wants to agree a substantial divorce bill before it
:20:27. > :20:33.will even discuss any future UK EU relations, what do you make of that?
:20:34. > :20:37.Article 50 says the terms of exit need to be negotiated in the context
:20:38. > :20:42.of the kind of future relationship that's going to exist between the
:20:43. > :20:47.departing country and the remaining member states. It seems it is simply
:20:48. > :20:52.not possible to separate those two. Clearly there will need to be a
:20:53. > :20:55.discussion about joint assets and join liabilities but I think if we
:20:56. > :21:00.all keep to the fore the fact we will continue to be neighbours, we
:21:01. > :21:02.will continue to be essential allies and trading partners, then it is
:21:03. > :21:19.possible to come to a deal that works for all size. The
:21:20. > :21:22.question is do you agree the divorce bill first and then look at the
:21:23. > :21:24.subsequent relations we will have or do you do them both in parallel?
:21:25. > :21:30.Article 50 itself says they have to run together. Do you think they have
:21:31. > :21:34.to be done together or sequentially? I think it is impossible to separate
:21:35. > :21:39.the two but we will get into negotiations very soon and then once
:21:40. > :21:45.David Davis is sitting down with Michel Barnier and others and the
:21:46. > :21:49.national governments become involved too, then I hope we can make steady
:21:50. > :21:54.progress. An early deal about each other's citizens would be a good
:21:55. > :22:02.piece of low hanging fruit. Is the Government willing to pay a
:22:03. > :22:07.substantial divorce bill? The Prime Minister has said we don't rule out
:22:08. > :22:12.some kind of continuing payments, for example there may be EU
:22:13. > :22:18.programmes in the future in which we want to continue to participate. 50
:22:19. > :22:24.billion? We don't envisage long-term payments of vast sums of money. So
:22:25. > :22:30.50 billion isn't even the Government ballpark? You are tempting me to get
:22:31. > :22:34.into the detail of negotiation, that is something that will be starting
:22:35. > :22:42.very soon and let's leave it to the negotiations. During the referendum
:22:43. > :22:47.there was no talk from the Leave side about any question of
:22:48. > :22:50.separation bill, now the talk is of 50 billion and I'm trying to find
:22:51. > :23:01.out if the British government thinks that of amount is on your radar. The
:23:02. > :23:07.Government is addressing the situation in which we now are, which
:23:08. > :23:11.is that we have a democratic obligation to implement the decision
:23:12. > :23:15.of the people in the referendum last year, and that we need to do that in
:23:16. > :23:20.a way that maximises the opportunity, the future prosperity
:23:21. > :23:24.and security of everybody in the UK. Let me try one more thing on the
:23:25. > :23:29.Great Repeal Bill, the white Paper will be published I think on
:23:30. > :23:34.Thursday, is that right? We haven't announced an exact date but you will
:23:35. > :23:39.see the white Paper very soon. Let's say it is Thursday, it will enshrine
:23:40. > :23:44.thousands of EU laws into UK law, it will use what's called Henry VIII
:23:45. > :23:50.powers, who of course was a dictator. Is this an attempt to
:23:51. > :23:57.avoid proper Parliamentary scrutiny? No, we are repealing the Communities
:23:58. > :24:02.Act 1972, then put existing EU legal obligations on the UK statutory
:24:03. > :24:08.footing, so business know where they stand. Then, because a lot of those
:24:09. > :24:15.EU regulations will for example refer to the commission or another
:24:16. > :24:20.regulator, you need to substitute a UK authority in place so we need to
:24:21. > :24:31.have a power under secondary legislation to tweak the European
:24:32. > :24:36.regulators so it is coherent. This is weather Henry VIII powers come
:24:37. > :24:41.in. It is secondary legislation and the scope, the definition of those
:24:42. > :24:44.powers and when they can be used in what circumstances is something the
:24:45. > :24:50.parliament will have to approve in voting through the bill itself. And
:24:51. > :24:55.if it is as innocuous as you say, will you accept the proposal of the
:24:56. > :24:58.Lords for an enhanced scrutiny process on the secondary
:24:59. > :25:03.legislation? Neither the relevant committee of the House of Lords, the
:25:04. > :25:09.constitution committee, nor anyone else has seen the text of the bill
:25:10. > :25:12.and I think when it comes out, I hope that those members of the House
:25:13. > :25:18.of Lords will find that reassuring, but as I say the definition of those
:25:19. > :25:23.powers are something the parliament itself will take the final decision.
:25:24. > :25:25.David Lidington, thank you for being with us.
:25:26. > :25:28.So, Ukip has lost its only MP - Douglas Carswell.
:25:29. > :25:29.He defected to Ukip from the Conservative Party
:25:30. > :25:31.almost three years ago, but yesterday announced
:25:32. > :25:33.that he was quitting to sit as an independent.
:25:34. > :25:35.His surprise defection came in August 2014 saying,
:25:36. > :25:38."Only Ukip can shake up that cosy little clique called Westminster".
:25:39. > :25:42.But his bromance with Nigel Farage turned sour when Mr Carswell
:25:43. > :25:44.criticised the so-called "shock and awful" strategy as
:25:45. > :25:49.Then, during the EU referendum campaign last year, Nigel Farage
:25:50. > :25:52.was part of the unofficial Leave.EU campaign, whereas Douglas Carswell
:25:53. > :25:58.opted to support the official Vote Leave campaign.
:25:59. > :26:00.Just last month, former Ukip leader Nigel Farage
:26:01. > :26:02.accused Douglas Carswell of thwarting his chances
:26:03. > :26:04.of being awarded a knighthood, writing that,
:26:05. > :26:11.Announcing his resignation on his website yesterday,
:26:12. > :26:14.Mr Carswell said, "I desperately wanted us to leave the EU.
:26:15. > :26:17.Now we can be certain that that is going to happen, I have
:26:18. > :26:20.decided that I will be leaving Ukip."
:26:21. > :26:22.When Mr Carswell left the Conservative Party in 2014
:26:23. > :26:25.he resigned as an MP, triggering a by-election.
:26:26. > :26:28."I must seek permission from my boss," he said referring
:26:29. > :26:36.This time, though, Mr Carswell has said there will be no by-election.
:26:37. > :26:43.We're joined now from Salford by Ukip leader, Paul Nuttall.
:26:44. > :26:52.Welcome back to the programme. Are you happy to see the back of your
:26:53. > :26:58.only MP? Well, do you know, I'm always sad when people leave Ukip at
:26:59. > :27:04.a grass roots level or Parliamentary level, but I'm sad but I'm not
:27:05. > :27:08.surprised by this. There has been adrift by Douglas and Ukip over the
:27:09. > :27:12.past couple of years, his relationship with Nigel Farage
:27:13. > :27:16.certainly hasn't helped, and it is a hangover from the former regime
:27:17. > :27:19.which I inherited. I try to bring the party together, I thought I had
:27:20. > :27:24.done that for a few months but it seems now as if I was only papering
:27:25. > :27:31.over the cracks. Douglas has gone and I think we will move on and be a
:27:32. > :27:34.more unified party as a result. Did Douglas Carswell jump because he
:27:35. > :27:38.expected to be pushed out your national executive committee
:27:39. > :27:40.tomorrow? He came before the National executive committee to
:27:41. > :27:45.answer questions regarding issues that have come to the fore over the
:27:46. > :27:52.last couple of months. There was the knighthood issue, the issue
:27:53. > :27:56.surrounding the Thanet election and his comments in a book which came
:27:57. > :28:01.out regarding Brexit. So was he under suspicion? He was coming to
:28:02. > :28:09.answer these questions and they would have been difficult. So he did
:28:10. > :28:13.jump in your view? No, I'm not saying he would have been pushed out
:28:14. > :28:21.of the party but he would have faced difficult questions. What is clear
:28:22. > :28:26.is that a fissure had developed and I'm not surprised by him leaving the
:28:27. > :28:31.party. You have also lost Diane James, Stephen Wolf, Arron Banks,
:28:32. > :28:36.you failed to win the Stoke by election, Mr Carswell is now a
:28:37. > :28:44.pundit on US television, Ukip now stands for the UK irrelevance party,
:28:45. > :29:00.doesn't it? Paul's hard us yesterday on 12%, membership continues to
:29:01. > :29:04.rise. -- the polls had us on 12%. 4 million people voted for Ukip. Over
:29:05. > :29:07.the summer exciting things will be happening in the party, we will
:29:08. > :29:11.rewrite the constitution, restructure the party, it will have
:29:12. > :29:17.a new feel to it and we will be launching pretty much the post
:29:18. > :29:21.Brexit Ukip. Arron Banks, who used to pay quite a lot of your bills, he
:29:22. > :29:25.said the current leadership, that would be you, couldn't knock the
:29:26. > :29:31.skin off a rice pudding, another way of saying you are relevant, isn't
:29:32. > :29:37.it? I don't think that's fair. I've only been in the job since November
:29:38. > :29:40.the 28th, we have taken steps to restructure the party already, the
:29:41. > :29:44.party is on a sound financial footing, we won't have a problem
:29:45. > :29:50.money wise going forward. It is a party which can really unified, look
:29:51. > :29:54.forward to the post Brexit Iraq, tomorrow we are launching our Brexit
:29:55. > :30:01.test for the Prime Minister. If it wasn't for Ukip there wouldn't have
:30:02. > :30:04.been a referendum and we wouldn't have Brexit. Every time you say you
:30:05. > :30:10.will unified, someone else leaves. Is Arron Banks still a member? No,
:30:11. > :30:15.not at this moment in time. He has been a generous donor in the past,
:30:16. > :30:20.he's done a great job of ensuring we get Brexit and I'm thankful for that
:30:21. > :30:24.but he isn't a member. He has just submitted an invoice of ?2000 for
:30:25. > :30:34.the use of call centres, will you pay that? No. That should be
:30:35. > :30:39.interesting to watch. In the aftermath of the Westminster
:30:40. > :30:43.attack, Nigel Farage told Fox News that it vindicates Donald Trump's
:30:44. > :30:49.extreme vetting of migrants. Since the attacker was born in Kent, like
:30:50. > :30:53.Nigel Farage, can you explain the relevance of the remark? I
:30:54. > :30:57.personally haven't supported Donald Trump's position on this, but what I
:30:58. > :31:02.will say, this is what Nigel has said as well, we have a problem
:31:03. > :31:07.within the Muslim community, it is a small number of people who hate the
:31:08. > :31:10.way we live... Can you explain the relevance of Mr Farage's remark? Mr
:31:11. > :31:27.Farage also made the point about multiculturalism being the
:31:28. > :31:28.problem as well and he is correct on that because we cannot have separate
:31:29. > :31:31.communities living separate lives and never integrating. How would
:31:32. > :31:34.extreme vetting of migrants help you track down a man who was born in
:31:35. > :31:37.Kent? In this case it wouldn't. Maybe in other cases it would. But,
:31:38. > :31:40.as I say, I'm not a supporter of Donald Trump's position on extreme
:31:41. > :31:44.vetting, never have been, so I'm the wrong person to ask the question
:31:45. > :31:48.too, Andrew. That has probably become clear in my efforts to get
:31:49. > :31:52.you to answer it. Let me as too, should there be a by-election in
:31:53. > :31:56.Clacton now? Douglas has called by-elections in the past when he has
:31:57. > :32:03.left a political party, I know certain people in Ukip are keen to
:32:04. > :32:05.go down this line, Douglas is always keen on recall and if 20% of people
:32:06. > :32:09.in his constituency want a by-election then maybe we should
:32:10. > :32:15.have won. Ukip will be opening nominations for Clacton very soon.
:32:16. > :32:22.Hold on with us, Mr Nuttall, I have Douglas Carswell here in the studio.
:32:23. > :32:29.Why not call a by-election? I'm not switching parties. You are, you are
:32:30. > :32:32.becoming independent. There is a difference, I've not submitted
:32:33. > :32:37.myself to the whip up a new party, if I was, I would be obliged to
:32:38. > :32:41.trigger a by-election. If every time an MP in the House of Commons
:32:42. > :32:44.resigned the whip or lost the whip, far from actually strengthening the
:32:45. > :32:49.democracy against the party bosses, that would give those who ran
:32:50. > :32:54.parties and enormous power, so I'm being absolutely consistent here,
:32:55. > :32:58.I'm not joining a party. It is a change of status and Nigel Farage
:32:59. > :33:06.has just said he will write to every constituent in Clacton and he wants
:33:07. > :33:11.to try and get 20% of constituents to older by-election. We are going
:33:12. > :33:16.to testing, he says, write to every house in Clacton, find out if his
:33:17. > :33:19.constituents want a by-election, if 20% do we will find out if Mr
:33:20. > :33:26.Carswell is honourable. I'm sure they will be delighted to hear from
:33:27. > :33:28.Nigel. There have been several by-elections when Nigel has had the
:33:29. > :33:35.opportunity to contact the electorate we did -- which did not
:33:36. > :33:39.always go to plan. If you got 20%, would you? Yesterday I sent an
:33:40. > :33:44.e-mail to 20,000 constituents, I have had a lot of responses back,
:33:45. > :33:51.overwhelmingly supported. Recently you said you were 100% Ukip, now you
:33:52. > :33:53.are 0%. What happened? I saw Theresa May triggering article 50, we won,
:33:54. > :33:58.are 0%. What happened? I saw Theresa Andrew. You knew a few months ago
:33:59. > :34:02.she was going to do that. On June the 24th I had serious thought about
:34:03. > :34:06.making the move but I wanted to be absolutely certain that Article 50
:34:07. > :34:11.would be triggered and I think it is right. This is why ultimately Ukip
:34:12. > :34:14.exists, to get us out of the European Union. We should be
:34:15. > :34:19.cheerful instead of attacking one another, this is our moment, we made
:34:20. > :34:24.it happen. Did you try to sideline the former Ukip leader during the
:34:25. > :34:28.referendum campaign? Not at all, I have been open about this, the idea
:34:29. > :34:34.I have been involved in subterfuge. You try to sideline him openly
:34:35. > :34:38.rather than by subterfuge? I made the point we needed to be open,
:34:39. > :34:41.broad and progressive to win. I made it clear in my acceptance speech in
:34:42. > :34:44.Clacton and when I said that Vote Leave should get designation that
:34:45. > :34:49.the only way Euroscepticism would win was by being more than just
:34:50. > :34:56.angry natives. What do you make of that? I am over the moon that we
:34:57. > :35:02.have achieved Brexit, unlike Douglas I rarely have that much confidence
:35:03. > :35:05.in Theresa May because history proves that she is good at talking
:35:06. > :35:10.the talk but in walking the walk often fails, and I'm disappointed
:35:11. > :35:13.because I wanted Douglas to be part of the post Brexit Ukip where we
:35:14. > :35:18.move forward with a raft of domestic policies and go on to take seat at
:35:19. > :35:23.Westminster. Do you think you try to sideline Mr Farage during the
:35:24. > :35:27.referendum campaign? Vote Leave certainly didn't want Nigel Farage
:35:28. > :35:34.front of house, we know that. They freely admit that, they admitted it
:35:35. > :35:38.on media over the past year. Nigel still was front of house because he
:35:39. > :35:42.is Nigel Farage and if it wasn't for Nigel, as I said earlier, we
:35:43. > :35:47.wouldn't have at the referendum and we wouldn't have achieved Brexit
:35:48. > :35:52.because Nigel Farage appeals, like Ukip to a certain section of the
:35:53. > :35:55.population. If our primary motive is to get us out of the European Union,
:35:56. > :35:59.why are we having this row, why can't we just celebrate what is
:36:00. > :36:02.happening on Wednesday? We can, but you are far more confident that
:36:03. > :36:07.Theresa May will deliver on this than I am. Ukip may have been a
:36:08. > :36:11.single issue pressure group ten years ago, it wasn't a single issue
:36:12. > :36:15.pressure group that you joined in 2014, it wasn't a single issue
:36:16. > :36:19.pressure group that you stood for in 2015 at the general election, and
:36:20. > :36:23.I'm disappointed that you have left us when we are moving onto an
:36:24. > :36:29.exciting era. What specifically gives you a lack of confidence in
:36:30. > :36:32.Mrs May's ability deliver? Her record as Home Secretary, she said
:36:33. > :36:37.she would deal with radical Islam, nothing happened, she said she would
:36:38. > :36:41.get immigration down to the tens of thousands, last year in her last
:36:42. > :36:44.year as Home Secretary as city the size of Newcastle came to this
:36:45. > :36:48.country, that is not tens of thousands. I think we need to take
:36:49. > :36:52.yes for an answer eventually. The problem with some Eurosceptics is
:36:53. > :36:57.they never accept they have won the argument. We have one, Theresa May
:36:58. > :37:01.is going to do what we have wanted her to do, let's be happy, let's
:37:02. > :37:06.celebrate that. But let's wait until she starts bartering things away,
:37:07. > :37:09.until she betrays our fishermen, just as other Conservative prime
:37:10. > :37:13.ministers have done in the past. Let's wait until we end up still
:37:14. > :37:17.paying some sort of membership fee into the European Union or a large
:37:18. > :37:20.divorce bill. That is not what people voted for on June the 23rd
:37:21. > :37:29.and if you want to align yourself with that, you are clearly not a
:37:30. > :37:33.Ukipper in my opinion. So for Ukip to have relevance, it has to go
:37:34. > :37:38.wrong? I'm confident politics will come back to our terms but -- our
:37:39. > :37:42.turf but there will be a post Brexit Ukip that will stand for veterans,
:37:43. > :37:48.book slashing the foreign aid bill and becoming the party of law and
:37:49. > :37:51.order. Finally, to you, Douglas Carswell, you say you have
:37:52. > :37:55.confidence in Mrs May to deliver in the way that Paul Nuttall doesn't.
:37:56. > :38:01.You backed her, you were Conservative, you believe that
:38:02. > :38:06.Brexit will be delivered under a Conservative Government. Why would
:38:07. > :38:10.you not bite the 2020 election as a Conservative? I feel comfortable
:38:11. > :38:14.being independent. If you join a party you have to agree to a bunch
:38:15. > :38:21.of stuff I would not want to agree with. I am comfortable being
:38:22. > :38:25.independent. So you will go into 2020 as an independent? If you look
:38:26. > :38:30.at the raising of funds, what Vote Leave did as a pop-up party... We
:38:31. > :38:32.only have five seconds, will you fight as an independent in the next
:38:33. > :38:36.general election? Let's wait and see. Very well! Thank you both very
:38:37. > :38:51.much. Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics
:38:52. > :38:53.in Northern Ireland. In the week that one of the biggest
:38:54. > :38:57.figures in Irish politics was laid to rest, the talks to restore
:38:58. > :39:00.devolution at Stormont continued. But with only hours left before
:39:01. > :39:02.the deadline expires, We put that to Naomi
:39:03. > :39:09.Long, the leader of Alliance, the only party to both
:39:10. > :39:14.hold its seats and increase its share of the vote in
:39:15. > :39:16.the recent election. And we will ask, if there was indeed
:39:17. > :39:19.an 11th hour agreement, what role might Alliance take up
:39:20. > :39:21.in the new devolved arrangements? And guiding us through the past week
:39:22. > :39:24.and a critical next few days, Professor Deirdre Heenan
:39:25. > :39:32.and columnist Newton Emerson. The Alliance Party had
:39:33. > :39:34.its best election in years, Yesterday in her first
:39:35. > :39:39.conference speech as leader, Naomi Long said it's now time to get
:39:40. > :39:42.a functioning Executive in place and claimed another
:39:43. > :39:43.Assembly Election This report from our political
:39:44. > :39:59.correspondent Gareth Gordon. This man knows how to take a small
:40:00. > :40:03.team to big success. Lars Lagerback managed Iceland to the quarterfinals
:40:04. > :40:09.of the European Championships. Now he is in charge of Norway. Staying
:40:10. > :40:15.at the same hotel, the Alliance Party chose to stage its annual
:40:16. > :40:21.conference. An omen? This woman will certainly hope so. Naomi Long now
:40:22. > :40:26.performs the manager's role for Alliance and the early signs are
:40:27. > :40:30.good. So good, this former elected representative has decided to come
:40:31. > :40:35.back after leaving the party many years ago. I think we can see from
:40:36. > :40:41.the election results, we can see new membership that the party has got,
:40:42. > :40:46.the revitalisation, the increased number of Emma Lanes over the number
:40:47. > :40:50.of years, the fact that the party is getting votes in places like South
:40:51. > :40:57.down and in others across Northern Ireland, reconnecting outside
:40:58. > :41:02.Belfast. This is Patrick Brown, who came close to delivering the party's
:41:03. > :41:08.first ever assembly seat in South down. So what is the secret? Knock
:41:09. > :41:13.some more doors, when in some or elections, talk to as many people as
:41:14. > :41:16.possible. The alliance does register, South down is an alliance
:41:17. > :41:19.constituency waiting to happen and there are others like it across
:41:20. > :41:25.Northern Ireland, like Wester run. North Belfast, had a fantastic
:41:26. > :41:33.result. So many places, places you never expected Alliance to do well,
:41:34. > :41:35.the vote increasing dramatically, like Upper Bann. Michael and
:41:36. > :41:39.Christine Barker as councillors after their home in Bangor was
:41:40. > :41:45.attacked two years ago during the flight protests. Has it been worth
:41:46. > :41:49.all of the tough times? Definitely. We are still members, as well. We
:41:50. > :41:53.feel very strongly that the Alliance Party has a position here and there
:41:54. > :42:01.is a lot of work to be done. It is a very diverse country. If there is a
:42:02. > :42:06.deal to restore the Stormont institutions, should Alliance go
:42:07. > :42:10.back into the executive? If it is back to the same on Sinn Fein and
:42:11. > :42:16.DUP doing a deal and not giving the other parties in executive respect
:42:17. > :42:19.then I don't think the party be there, but our electorate, the
:42:20. > :42:23.broader nonsectarian electorate needs to be treated properly. It
:42:24. > :42:28.cannot be a game between the hardline nationalists and hardline
:42:29. > :42:33.unionist parties. Alliance has had its best election result in decades.
:42:34. > :42:35.But political negotiations going on not far from here will determine
:42:36. > :42:38.soon if it was all in vain. You're the new captain of the ship,
:42:39. > :42:50.and so far, so good. But the Alliance Party is a small
:42:51. > :42:58.vessel in heavy seas. If you know where you are headed and
:42:59. > :43:01.you have a strong vessel and strong direction you will still get to
:43:02. > :43:05.where you are going. That is better than being a rudderless ship without
:43:06. > :43:10.the captain. We know what we are about, what we stand for and what we
:43:11. > :43:14.want to achieve. And we are very determined. I think the future is
:43:15. > :43:18.very bright for Alliance and through the work that we are doing, trying
:43:19. > :43:20.to create a better future for Northern Ireland, because ultimately
:43:21. > :43:25.politics is not about the parties but the people they represent. If
:43:26. > :43:29.there is another election in a few weeks, you could find the rug pulled
:43:30. > :43:32.from under your feet. There is no room for complacency. There is no
:43:33. > :43:36.complacency at Alliance. Elections are about getting out there went
:43:37. > :43:39.knocking on doors. I was clear to tell people yesterday that whether
:43:40. > :43:43.there was an election or not there will be won in two years' time and
:43:44. > :43:47.that there's two years we need to spend out talking to people and
:43:48. > :43:52.getting the message across. There is no room for laziness or complacency
:43:53. > :44:00.in politics. Whether there is an election in a number of weeks or in
:44:01. > :44:04.two years' time, Alliance will still be on the doorsteps. You kept your
:44:05. > :44:07.vote share up as was your first preference total, but there is a
:44:08. > :44:11.sense that the middle ground is under serious pressure at the moment
:44:12. > :44:15.and the parties at opposite ends of the spectrum are digging in. They
:44:16. > :44:20.are certainly digging in but we don't feel under pressure. Talking
:44:21. > :44:23.to people, the fact that we are offering a positive alternative to
:44:24. > :44:29.that digging in his resonating with the public. The other parties that
:44:30. > :44:33.occupy the centre ground are feeling and under pressure and that might
:44:34. > :44:36.because there are offering is less contrasted and clear with those who
:44:37. > :44:42.are digging in. That is something they need to address, but in terms
:44:43. > :44:46.of Alliance, people see us as an alternative to that and our position
:44:47. > :44:49.is in some way strengthened when people harden their line. I don't
:44:50. > :44:54.want to see people digging in. We have a role as a party in creating
:44:55. > :44:57.space for people to come out of those entrenched positions. That is
:44:58. > :45:01.what we have been doing in talks and that is what we will continue to do
:45:02. > :45:08.over the next 24 hours. Is your mandate to be in opposition or in
:45:09. > :45:12.government, holding the government to account? It is to make sure that
:45:13. > :45:16.the good services and good relations, good prospects and that
:45:17. > :45:19.we showed good leadership. That is our mandate. That is what we go to
:45:20. > :45:23.the public with and that is what we want to do. Is that for others to do
:45:24. > :45:29.all for you to be part of delivering it? We will be part of delivering it
:45:30. > :45:34.anyway. If there is agreement, much of that agreement will have our
:45:35. > :45:38.fingerprints on it. If there is an agreement, we have contributed to it
:45:39. > :45:42.and we will continue to do so over the next 24 hours. Whether we end up
:45:43. > :45:47.in government or opposition, we still want to facilitate government,
:45:48. > :45:50.we want it to happen. If we end up in opposition will take the same
:45:51. > :45:54.approach we did last time round. We will be constructive on government
:45:55. > :46:01.delivering, we will support them on that, and we were clear about that
:46:02. > :46:04.yesterday on health, we believe that political posturing around health is
:46:05. > :46:09.detrimental. When they are failing, we will hold them to account. And if
:46:10. > :46:11.we are in government it will be to raise the standards of that
:46:12. > :46:16.government and to ensure that we deliver for the people. We have a
:46:17. > :46:20.mandate to do either. What we now need to see is whether we have the
:46:21. > :46:25.opportunity and quality of government and that we are part of
:46:26. > :46:28.that. Would you like to be part of government if the situation arises
:46:29. > :46:32.that the devolution project gets back up and running again? The
:46:33. > :46:36.Alliance Party isn't entitled as of right to a position in the
:46:37. > :46:41.executive. You could be part of the official opposition but you could,
:46:42. > :46:47.because of the twists and turns of the system, you could be offered
:46:48. > :46:51.Justice. Would you take it this time round? You've asked two questions.
:46:52. > :46:55.You asked who would like to be in government, and the answer is yes.
:46:56. > :47:00.If any party doesn't want to be in government there is something wrong
:47:01. > :47:04.with their ambitions. The other is a different question. If there is a
:47:05. > :47:08.government formed on Monday and I think that is a receding prospect,
:47:09. > :47:12.will it be the kind of government that we can be part of? That is a
:47:13. > :47:17.separate conversation. We are not willing to go into any government, a
:47:18. > :47:20.government that is a patch up and repair and when it hits a bump in
:47:21. > :47:24.the road in some months, the wheels will come off and we are back in
:47:25. > :47:28.another crisis. We will not go into a government that is a carve up
:47:29. > :47:31.between two communities, not recognising the diversity of
:47:32. > :47:35.Northern Ireland. We have been clear about that. If other parties want is
:47:36. > :47:39.to join them in government, we know that we are willing to be in there
:47:40. > :47:44.making a difference and if they want us to be in there, there are issues
:47:45. > :47:48.to address and we will facilitate that. We are not sitting back and
:47:49. > :47:52.resting on our laurels, regardless. Talks will continue and we are being
:47:53. > :47:56.constructive in that process. You have a 5-point plan and it was not
:47:57. > :48:01.met last time round which is why did not take the Justice ministry. Will
:48:02. > :48:05.you hold fast to that this time? Critics would say that's a case of
:48:06. > :48:11.the tail-wagging the dog. You cannot dictate to the other parties on
:48:12. > :48:16.legacy paramilitary issues, you can have an opinion but they do not have
:48:17. > :48:20.to take on board your opinion. But we don't have to go into government
:48:21. > :48:24.with them, if they don't. I'll you're setting the bar too high for
:48:25. > :48:28.yourselves. If anyone thinks we are setting the bar high by saying that
:48:29. > :48:31.paramilitaries has two end and government must be transparent, we
:48:32. > :48:35.have to deal with division in society, people see that as a high
:48:36. > :48:40.bar... And where did they end up eight months later? Do you think
:48:41. > :48:43.they have learned that lesson? I am not sure that people learn lessons
:48:44. > :48:46.and politics in Northern Ireland, because we seem to keep repeating
:48:47. > :48:51.the same mistakes. The reality is that if that is a high bar, then the
:48:52. > :48:55.executive will not work for Northern Ireland. What we asked for was
:48:56. > :48:58.respect from other parties in government, we ask that they would
:48:59. > :49:04.deliver around are more tourism and legacy. We are 18 years past the
:49:05. > :49:07.Good Friday agreement, still talking about active paramilitaries in our
:49:08. > :49:11.communities. I can't understand why people would not want to deal with
:49:12. > :49:16.that. If people are willing to work on these issues we are willing to
:49:17. > :49:19.work with them. These are not demands, these are necessities for
:49:20. > :49:26.government to function well. What about that or studying party led by
:49:27. > :49:28.Robin Swann? He might be seen as morally traditional Unionist than
:49:29. > :49:35.the outgoing leader, Mike Nesbitt? I am not going to prejudge the
:49:36. > :49:39.leadership of Robin Swann but I will say this, the problem with the
:49:40. > :49:44.Ulster Unionist Party is not who reads it, it is that it is
:49:45. > :49:49.increasingly seen as unliveable. And the party, is under some challenge
:49:50. > :49:53.event terms of trying to find some coherence. They should find some
:49:54. > :49:58.coherence around direction. They seem to be an extremely loose
:49:59. > :50:02.coalition of people. Would you like to see that party broken with the
:50:03. > :50:08.hardliners going to the DUP, and the soft underbelly moving to Alliance?
:50:09. > :50:12.Is that what you're saying? I would not like Alliance to be seen as the
:50:13. > :50:15.soft underbelly of anything. One minute we are told we're being too
:50:16. > :50:21.ambitious, the next minute, we are soft, and he cannot be both. We are
:50:22. > :50:24.ambitious to see reform in Northern Ireland. There are people among the
:50:25. > :50:29.Ulster Unionist Party who might find a more comfortable home for them
:50:30. > :50:33.would be a more liberal, progressive vehicle. We have seen many people
:50:34. > :50:38.who were in the Ulster Unionist Party move to Alliance and we have
:50:39. > :50:42.seen people who were in the STL PA and became disillusioned moving to
:50:43. > :50:46.Alliance because what they wanted to see was a more progressive and
:50:47. > :50:49.stronger leadership and direction. Let me ask you about the funeral of
:50:50. > :50:55.Martin McGuinness on Thursday. You were there, representing your party.
:50:56. > :51:00.We know about the reception that Arlene Foster got when she entered
:51:01. > :51:04.the church and when Bill Clinton mentioned her in his speech. Did you
:51:05. > :51:08.feel comfortable there are? I would have felt uncomfortable not being
:51:09. > :51:14.there. I grew up in the 70s and 80s. I have no illusions about what the
:51:15. > :51:18.IRA campaign did in our community. And I have no illusions about the
:51:19. > :51:22.broken society that he was born into. It doesn't justify it but I
:51:23. > :51:26.understand it. But I have to look at the man I knew who was in the
:51:27. > :51:30.assembly, who held the line with what you could not describe as
:51:31. > :51:36.pushover unionism and made the SMB work for ten years. I was glad I was
:51:37. > :51:40.able to attend and pay my respects to the family. What is more
:51:41. > :51:44.important now is that we listen to what Bill Clinton said. He was very
:51:45. > :51:45.clear when he said finish the work, and that is what we need to do,
:51:46. > :51:51.beginning this weekend. Let's now turn to our guests
:51:52. > :52:00.for their thoughts. Deirdre, what is your reaction to
:52:01. > :52:04.what Naomi Long had to say about the position of the Alliance Party and
:52:05. > :52:10.whether or not it would wish to go back into the executive? What is
:52:11. > :52:13.clear from what she has said is that we know little about what is going
:52:14. > :52:17.on in terms of the talks, we don't know whether they are going to be in
:52:18. > :52:23.government or opposition. I don't think she is playing her chest. It
:52:24. > :52:26.is a position of no-man's-land where we don't know what is going on in
:52:27. > :52:32.terms of the talks. That does not appear to be any momentum around the
:52:33. > :52:37.talks, any real push towards getting the government up and running again.
:52:38. > :52:40.Although that might be wrong. I think the issue for Naomi Long is
:52:41. > :52:44.that she's in the middle ground and it is beginning to be cluttered, and
:52:45. > :52:48.she has to work out what her particular ideology is and how she
:52:49. > :52:52.can things different. It is possible that they could take -- overtake the
:52:53. > :52:56.Ulster Unionists in terms of size and proportion, and that is good
:52:57. > :53:01.news, but they have to set out what their underlying political
:53:02. > :53:06.ideologies. It has all been an issue for the Alliance Party to move out
:53:07. > :53:12.beyond the leafy suburbs of Belfast and make themselves relevant, West
:53:13. > :53:19.of the Bann. If they are to be a political force it has to be outside
:53:20. > :53:24.of the greater Belfast area. In terms of the Alliance Party setting
:53:25. > :53:28.out its stall and Naomi Long redefining what the party stands for
:53:29. > :53:34.and where it is going, so far, is it fair to say job well done? Yes, in
:53:35. > :53:40.terms of positioning but that is not going to work with Sinn Fein and the
:53:41. > :53:44.DUP this time around. It was quite surprising after last year was my
:53:45. > :53:50.collection, we assumed that they would be offered the Justice role,
:53:51. > :53:55.they seem suitable for it,... Did they overplay their hand? They were
:53:56. > :53:59.almost laughed out of court by the DUP and Sinn Fein and that was quite
:54:00. > :54:02.surprising, especially as Sinn Fein and the DUP were committed and keen
:54:03. > :54:06.to work together to form these could ever that point. This time around
:54:07. > :54:14.Sinn Fein seems quite ambivalent about it. There is very little
:54:15. > :54:18.leveraged therefore Alliance to use. I think they garnered some respect
:54:19. > :54:23.by not taking the Justice ministry. It would be the easy option to take
:54:24. > :54:28.it, but you said we are not taking it, we're not happy with what is
:54:29. > :54:37.being proposed. That is exactly what happened. We actually turned it
:54:38. > :54:41.down. I have to correct that. We walked out of the talks and said
:54:42. > :54:45.that we would not be returning unless they were willing to do the
:54:46. > :54:49.deal. It was our decision, not theirs. I agree with what you said.
:54:50. > :54:52.They probably did overplay their hand and they didn't have the
:54:53. > :54:57.mandate to ask for the things they asked for, but they were right in
:54:58. > :55:01.saying, we will turn this down. There has to be a point at which you
:55:02. > :55:07.say, no, I did want to be part of this. I want to move on and talk
:55:08. > :55:11.about Robin Swann. Looks like he's about to be crowned the new leader
:55:12. > :55:14.of the Ulster Unionist Party, the only candidate ahead of April the
:55:15. > :55:18.8th when that decision will be taken. Can you turn around the
:55:19. > :55:21.Ulster Unionist? It is a huge challenge for him. It probably is
:55:22. > :55:28.good news for the Alliance. He is more of a traditionalist. He would
:55:29. > :55:31.not be a progressive. He says it's about promoting positive unionism,
:55:32. > :55:34.he once a nonthreatening unionism that can move forward and be
:55:35. > :55:41.progressive. Going back to my earlier point, that middle ground is
:55:42. > :55:44.now a crowded space. Why would you vote for one and not the other? He
:55:45. > :55:50.has a difficult job to put together the Ulster Unionist Party. The
:55:51. > :55:58.Ulster Unionist Party needs to pick a direction and go down it. As the
:55:59. > :56:01.deadline to do a deal at Stormont approaches, the negotiators at
:56:02. > :56:07.Stormont Castle now have some words of encouragement to mull over. The
:56:08. > :56:10.former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern had a message for them, as did Bill
:56:11. > :56:16.Clinton. I managed to get a few moments with both men at Mark
:56:17. > :56:21.McGuinness' funeral on Thursday. This is what they had to say. Why
:56:22. > :56:26.was it important to be here today? We spent a lot of time together when
:56:27. > :56:33.I was president. And I wanted to honour him for what he did. The
:56:34. > :56:44.changes from war to peace. And to emphasise that it is one thing to
:56:45. > :56:51.make peace, another to it work. You have to nurture it all the time and
:56:52. > :56:56.care for it. And I think, always, people who justifiably respect the
:56:57. > :56:59.fact that he changed from war to peace need to recommit themselves to
:57:00. > :57:03.finish the work that needs to be done. Are you optimistic that
:57:04. > :57:11.outstanding issues can be resolved? I am, actually. I'm not directly
:57:12. > :57:18.involved, but I do understand these issues inside out. To be frank,
:57:19. > :57:25.there are not many issues to be resolved. I think what is necessary
:57:26. > :57:27.is to resolve is that everyone is committed wholeheartedly, 100%
:57:28. > :57:39.committed to the implementation of all those points. There are maybe
:57:40. > :57:44.one or two issues around current issues, but in the scale of things,
:57:45. > :57:52.these are not insurmountable. So I am positive. What are the
:57:53. > :58:02.alternatives? Direct rule? Another election?
:58:03. > :58:13.The next thing is, do it. Bill Clinton and Bertie Ahern talking to
:58:14. > :58:21.me on Thursday. We heard Bertie Ahern saying, just do it. Can they?
:58:22. > :58:26.If they could have an agreement to disagree or schedule for agreement
:58:27. > :58:30.at Sinn Fein says it is not prepared to do business like that any more so
:58:31. > :58:35.the type of deal laid one certainly isn't possible by tomorrow. It means
:58:36. > :58:39.to be by lunchtime tomorrow to allow everything else to happen by four
:58:40. > :58:44.o'clock. The chances are possibly rather than probably. I would say,
:58:45. > :58:46.slim. What she said in her speech is important. It is not just about
:58:47. > :58:52.getting institutions up and running and going back to devolution. Most
:58:53. > :58:56.people say, we need devolution that works, we cannot have this stop -
:58:57. > :59:00.start. That means addressing the issues, like the issue of legacy.
:59:01. > :59:09.What has become clear this week if it was not clear before is that many
:59:10. > :59:12.victims and survivors are living with pain on a daily basis. It is
:59:13. > :59:15.not historic for them. We have a duty to try and address it in some
:59:16. > :59:18.way. Different people have different ideas about what truth looks like.
:59:19. > :59:23.We have to have some agreement about how to address the past. You get the
:59:24. > :59:28.sense that while Sinn Fein might have the whip hand over the DUP at
:59:29. > :59:32.the moment, there is always a danger of that hand being applied? I don't
:59:33. > :59:36.see how Sinn Fein can get everything at once. It is a very strong
:59:37. > :59:40.negotiating position but to ask for the delivery of every loose end and
:59:41. > :59:45.for that all to be tied up immediately just seems like an
:59:46. > :59:48.impossible task. The detailed work could not be done in time available
:59:49. > :59:53.so there was going to have to be some give. Sinn Fein has put itself
:59:54. > :59:57.in a position of such absolutism in delivery that it is going to look
:59:58. > :00:04.like a climb-down, whatever it does. We would discussing on Thursday
:00:05. > :00:09.night whether the appearance of Arlene Foster at the funeral was a
:00:10. > :00:14.game changer, or maybe more of a mood changer. The reaction to Arlene
:00:15. > :00:17.Foster was incredible. And it should change the mood. You would hope
:00:18. > :00:21.after that, and the handshake, that both woman would be able to get into
:00:22. > :00:25.the room and have a discussion about what the future looks like. All the
:00:26. > :00:29.DUP seem to be asking for is for devolution to be back up and running
:00:30. > :00:34.whereas Sinn Fein have this list that they have put forward and said
:00:35. > :00:38.that these things have to happen. It is hugely unlikely that all of those
:00:39. > :00:42.ends could be tied up. But I think we could get some form of agreement,
:00:43. > :00:48.that they need more room to talk and we could have a period of talks, and
:00:49. > :00:52.then go back and do those deals. That is possible because James
:00:53. > :00:55.Brokenshire has theoretically set on the tracks for another election if
:00:56. > :00:59.we don't hit the deadline 4pm on Monday. He has to call an election
:01:00. > :01:04.within a reasonable time period. That could be anything between four
:01:05. > :01:09.and eight weeks. It can take a reasonable length of time to the
:01:10. > :01:12.call. That is what the case now requires. So he does have
:01:13. > :01:19.flexibility but it is a legal requirement. Sinn Fein has said no
:01:20. > :01:23.wriggling on it is acceptable. And we must add the point of Conor
:01:24. > :01:30.Murphy after the funeral. Direction to Arlene Foster's attenders, it was
:01:31. > :01:33.perfectly reasonable to expect someone who worked with Mark
:01:34. > :01:38.McGuinness for ten years to pay her respects, it might have changed the
:01:39. > :01:42.mood in the church but maybe not the talks because it is a far bigger
:01:43. > :01:46.deal than that. Thank you very much indeed for joining us today.
:01:47. > :01:53.you both for coming in, Andrew, back to you.
:01:54. > :02:10.So yesterday the European Union celebrated its 60th birthday
:02:11. > :02:13.at a party in Rome, the city where the founding document
:02:14. > :02:17.Leaders of 27 EU countries were there to mark the occasion -
:02:18. > :02:19.overshadowing it, though, the continued terrorist threat,
:02:20. > :02:22.And on Wednesday Theresa May, who wasn't in Rome yesterday,
:02:23. > :02:24.will trigger Article 50, formally starting
:02:25. > :02:27.The President of the European Council, Donald Tusk,
:02:28. > :02:33.made an appeal for unity at the gathering.
:02:34. > :02:38.Today in Rome, we are renewing the unique alliance of free nations
:02:39. > :02:46.that was initiated 60 years ago by our great predecessors.
:02:47. > :02:49.At that time, they did not discuss multiple speeds,
:02:50. > :02:53.they did not devise exits, but despite all the tragic
:02:54. > :02:56.circumstances of the recent history they placed all their faith
:02:57. > :03:15.Mr Tusk, he is Polish, the man that has the Council of ministers, and on
:03:16. > :03:19.that council where every member of the EU sits he is an important
:03:20. > :03:23.figure in what is now about to happen. We have got to negotiate our
:03:24. > :03:29.divorce terms, we've got to agree a new free trade deal, new
:03:30. > :03:33.crime-fighting arrangements, we've got to repatriate 50 international
:03:34. > :03:38.trade agreements, and all of that has to be ratified within two years,
:03:39. > :03:45.by 27 other countries. Can that really happen?! I don't think it is
:03:46. > :03:49.inconceivable because it is in the interests of those 27 EU member
:03:50. > :03:52.states to try and negotiate a deal that we can all live with, because
:03:53. > :03:57.that would be preferable to Britain crashing out within two years. But I
:03:58. > :04:00.think this is why Labour's position is becoming increasingly incoherent.
:04:01. > :04:06.Keir Starmer has briefed today that he will be making a speech tomorrow
:04:07. > :04:09.setting out six conditions which he wants the deal to meet, otherwise
:04:10. > :04:27.Labour won't vote for it, but if Labour doesn't vote for it that
:04:28. > :04:31.doesn't mean we will be able to negotiate an extension, that would
:04:32. > :04:33.be incredibly difficult and require the consent of each of the 27 member
:04:34. > :04:36.states, so if Labour votes against it we will just crash out, it is
:04:37. > :04:39.effectively Labour saying no deal is better than a poor deal, which is
:04:40. > :04:41.not supposed to be their position. Labour's position may be incoherent
:04:42. > :04:43.but I was not asking about their position, I was asking about the
:04:44. > :04:46.Government's position. The man heading the Badila said he wants it
:04:47. > :04:48.ready by October next year so that it can go through the ratification
:04:49. > :04:52.process, people looking at this would think it is Mission:
:04:53. > :04:58.Impossible. It seems impossible to me to be done in that time. The fact
:04:59. > :05:02.that it is 27 countries, the whole of the European Parliament as well,
:05:03. > :05:07.there will be too many people throbbing spanners in the works and
:05:08. > :05:12.quite rightly. We have embarked on something that is truly terrible and
:05:13. > :05:17.disastrous, and the imagery we can have of those 27 countries
:05:18. > :05:21.celebrating together 60 years of the most extraordinary successful
:05:22. > :05:27.movement for peace, for shared European values, and others not
:05:28. > :05:31.there... We were not there at the start either, and we are not there
:05:32. > :05:38.now! And we have been bad partners while we were inside, but now that
:05:39. > :05:43.we are leaving... They did not look like it was a birthday party to me!
:05:44. > :05:49.I think it was, there was a sense of renewal, Europe exists as a place
:05:50. > :05:52.envied in the world for its values, for its peacefulness, that is why
:05:53. > :05:58.people flocked to its borders, that is why they come here. Can you look
:05:59. > :06:03.at the agenda that faces the UK Government and EU 27, is it not
:06:04. > :06:10.possible, in fact even likely, that as the process comes to an end they
:06:11. > :06:14.will have to agree on a number of areas of transitional arrangements?
:06:15. > :06:18.I think they will and they will have to agree that soon, I would not be
:06:19. > :06:21.surprised if sometime soon there is an understanding is not a formal
:06:22. > :06:26.decision that this is a process that will extend over something closer to
:06:27. > :06:30.buy or seven than two years. On Wednesday article 50 will be filed
:06:31. > :06:33.and there will be lots of excitement and hubbub but nothing concrete can
:06:34. > :06:37.happen for a while. Elections in France in May, elections in Germany
:06:38. > :06:50.which could really result in a change of Government... That is the
:06:51. > :06:53.big change, Mrs Merkel might not be there by October. And who foresaw
:06:54. > :06:55.that a few months ago? So you might be into 28 Dean before you are into
:06:56. > :06:58.the substantive discussions about how much market access or regulatory
:06:59. > :07:01.observance. I cannot see it being completed in two years. I could see,
:07:02. > :07:05.if negotiations are not too acrimonious, that transitional
:07:06. > :07:09.agreement taking place. Let's look at the timetable again. The council
:07:10. > :07:12.doesn't meet until the end of April, it meets in the middle of the French
:07:13. > :07:16.elections, the first round will have taken place, they will need a second
:07:17. > :07:23.round so not much can happen. President Hollande will be
:07:24. > :07:27.representing France, then the new French government, if it is Marine
:07:28. > :07:31.le Pen all bets are off, but even if it is Mr Mac run, he does not have a
:07:32. > :07:35.party, he will not have a majority, the French will take a long while to
:07:36. > :07:40.sort out themselves. Then it is summer, we are off to the Cote
:07:41. > :07:43.d'Azur, particularly the Bolivian elite, then we come back from that
:07:44. > :07:49.and the Germans are in an election, it may be very messy, Mrs Merkel no
:07:50. > :08:02.longer a shoo-in, it could be Mr Schultz, he may have to try to form
:08:03. > :08:05.a difficult green red coalition, that would take a while. Before you
:08:06. > :08:08.know it, it is Guy Fawkes' Day and no substance has taken place, yet we
:08:09. > :08:11.are then less than a year before this has to be decided. It is a big
:08:12. > :08:13.task and I'm sure Jana is right that there will be transitional
:08:14. > :08:17.arrangements and not everything will be concluded in that two year
:08:18. > :08:21.timetable, but in some respects what you have described helps those of us
:08:22. > :08:25.on the Eurosceptic site because it means they cannot really be a
:08:26. > :08:28.meaningful parliamentary vote on the terms of the deal because nothing is
:08:29. > :08:32.going to be agreed quickly enough for them to be able to go back and
:08:33. > :08:36.agree something else if Parliament rejects it, so when the Government
:08:37. > :08:40.eventually have something ready to bring before Parliament it will be a
:08:41. > :08:45.take it or leave it boat. How extraordinary that people who have
:08:46. > :08:48.campaigned. Indeed give us our country back and say, isn't it
:08:49. > :08:52.wonderful, we won't have a meaningful boat for our
:08:53. > :08:57.parliamentarians of the most important... We don't know what the
:08:58. > :09:01.negotiation, the package is, day by day we see more and more complicated
:09:02. > :09:04.areas nobody ever thought about, nobody mentioned during the
:09:05. > :09:10.campaign, all of which has to be resolved and the European Council
:09:11. > :09:16.and the negotiators say nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.
:09:17. > :09:21.You lead us into a catastrophe. There will be plenty of opportunity
:09:22. > :09:23.for Parliament to have its say following the introduction of the
:09:24. > :09:27.Great Repeal Bill, it is not as if there will be no Parliamentary time
:09:28. > :09:31.devoted. The final package is what counts. We have two years to blog
:09:32. > :09:43.about this! There was a big Proview -- pro-EU
:09:44. > :09:47.march yesterday... I was there! Polly Toynbee was there, down to
:09:48. > :09:52.Parliament Square, lots of people there marching in favour of the
:09:53. > :09:57.European Union. We can see the EU flags there on flags, lots of
:09:58. > :10:06.national flags as well, the British one. Polly, is it the aim of people
:10:07. > :10:11.like you still to stop Brexit, or to soften Brexit? I think the aim is
:10:12. > :10:16.for the best you can possibly do to limit the damage. Of course, if it
:10:17. > :10:20.happens that once people have had a chance to see how much they were
:10:21. > :10:24.lied to during the campaign and how dreadful the deal is likely to be,
:10:25. > :10:28.if it happens that enough people in the population have changed their
:10:29. > :10:33.minds, then maybe... There is no sign up yet. But we have not even
:10:34. > :10:37.begun, people have not begun to confront what it is going to mean.
:10:38. > :10:42.Wait and see. I think it is just being as close as we can. Is that
:10:43. > :10:47.credible, do you think, to stop it or to ameliorate it in terms of the
:10:48. > :10:52.Remainers? I think it is far more credible to try and stop it but even
:10:53. > :10:55.then the scope is limited. It is fairly apparent Theresa May's
:10:56. > :11:14.interpretation of the referendum is the country wants an end to free
:11:15. > :11:17.movement, there is probably no way of doing that inside the single
:11:18. > :11:20.market. She also wants external trade deals, no way of doing that
:11:21. > :11:23.outside the customs unit, said the only night you can depend if you are
:11:24. > :11:25.pro-European is, let's not leave without any trade pact, at least
:11:26. > :11:28.let's meet Canada and have a formalised trade agreement. The idea
:11:29. > :11:31.of ace -- of a very soft exit is gone now because the public really
:11:32. > :11:33.did want an end to free movement and the Government really does want
:11:34. > :11:40.external trade deals. It depends what changes in Europe. I think the
:11:41. > :11:44.momentum behind the Remoaning movement will move away. One of the
:11:45. > :11:48.banners I saw being held up yesterday by a young boy on the news
:11:49. > :11:53.was, don't put my daddy on a boat. It gets a lot of its moral force
:11:54. > :11:58.from the uncertainty surrounding the fate of EU nationals here and our
:11:59. > :12:02.resident in the remainder of the EU and I think David Lidington is right
:12:03. > :12:05.that it will be concluded quite quickly once negotiations start and
:12:06. > :12:09.that will take a lot of the heat and momentum out of the remaining
:12:10. > :12:16.movement. Why didn't Theresa May allow that amendment that said, we
:12:17. > :12:18.will do that, as an act of generosity, we will say, of course
:12:19. > :12:23.those European citizens here are welcome to stay? It would have been
:12:24. > :12:27.such a good opening move in the negotiations, instead of which she
:12:28. > :12:33.blocked it. It does not augur well. I have interviewed many Tories about
:12:34. > :12:40.this and put that point to them but they often say the Prime minister's
:12:41. > :12:44.job is to look after UK citizen in the EU... Bargaining chips, I think
:12:45. > :12:48.you have to be generous and you have to wish you people in Spain and
:12:49. > :12:51.everywhere else where there are British citizens would have
:12:52. > :12:54.responded. The British Government did try and raise that with their EU
:12:55. > :12:58.counterparts and were told, we cannot begin to talk about that
:12:59. > :13:02.until article 50 has been triggered. Next week we will be able to talk
:13:03. > :13:07.about it. How generous it would have been, we would have started on a
:13:08. > :13:11.better note. Didn't happen, we will see what happens next with EU
:13:12. > :13:15.citizens. That is it for today, the Daily Politics will be back tomorrow
:13:16. > :13:18.at midday and every day next week on BBC Two as always.
:13:19. > :13:20.And there's also a Question Time special live tomorrow
:13:21. > :13:22.night from Birmingham - with guests including
:13:23. > :13:24.the Brexit Secretary David Davis, Labour's Keir Starmer,
:13:25. > :13:26.former Ukip leader Nigel Farage and the SNP's Alex Salmond -
:13:27. > :13:32.I'll be back next week at 11am here on BBC One.
:13:33. > :13:36.Until then, remember - if it's Sunday, it's