:00:37. > :00:40.It's Sunday morning and this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:41. > :00:44.Was Fidel Castro a revolutionary hero or a murderous dictator?
:00:45. > :00:49.After the Cuban leader's death, politicians divide over his legacy.
:00:50. > :00:53.Can the NHS in England find billions of pounds' worth of efficiency
:00:54. > :00:59.The Shadow Health Secretary joins me live.
:01:00. > :01:01.Should we have a second Brexit referendum on the terms
:01:02. > :01:06.of the eventual withdrawal deal that's struck with the EU?
:01:07. > :01:09.Former Lib Dem leader Paddy Ashdown and former Conservative cabinet
:01:10. > :01:12.And in Northern Ireland: go head-to-head.
:01:13. > :01:14.As environmentalists lose their attempt to stop
:01:15. > :01:16.dredging in Lough Neagh, I'll be asking the former
:01:17. > :01:19.Environment Minister they took to court if he made a mistake.
:01:20. > :01:34.And with me, Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards.
:01:35. > :01:37.They'll be tweeting throughout the programme
:01:38. > :01:44.Political leaders around the world have been reacting to the news
:01:45. > :01:46.of the death of Fidel Castro, the Cuban revolutionary who came
:01:47. > :01:50.to power in 1959 and ushered in a Marxist revolution.
:01:51. > :01:55.Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson described the former leader
:01:56. > :01:58.as an "historic if controversial figure" and said his death marked
:01:59. > :02:02.Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said Castro was "a champion of social
:02:03. > :02:05.justice" who had "seen off a lot of US presidents"
:02:06. > :02:09.President-elect Donald Trump described the former Cuban leader
:02:10. > :02:12.as a "brutal dictator", adding that he hoped his death
:02:13. > :02:16.would begin a new era "in which the wonderful Cuban people
:02:17. > :02:21.finally live in the freedom they so richly deserve".
:02:22. > :02:22.Meanwhile, the President of the European Commission,
:02:23. > :02:25.Jean-Claude Juncker, said the controversial leader
:02:26. > :02:28.was "a hero for many" but "his legacy will be judged
:02:29. > :02:43.I guess we had worked that out ourselves. What do you make of the
:02:44. > :02:48.reactions so far across the political divide? Predictable. And I
:02:49. > :02:55.noticed that Jeremy Corbyn has come in for criticism for his tribute to
:02:56. > :02:59.Castro. But I think it was the right thing for him to do. We all know he
:03:00. > :03:03.was an admirer. He could have sat there for eight hours in his house,
:03:04. > :03:06.agonising over some bland statement which didn't alienate the many
:03:07. > :03:10.people who want to wade into attacked Castro. It would have been
:03:11. > :03:15.inauthentic and would have just added to the sort of mainstream
:03:16. > :03:19.consensus, and I think he was right to say what he believed in this
:03:20. > :03:24.respect. Elsewhere, it has been wholly predictable that there would
:03:25. > :03:30.be this device, because he divided opinion in such an emotive way.
:03:31. > :03:33.Steve, I take your point about authenticity and it might have
:03:34. > :03:39.looked a bit lame for Jeremy Corbyn to pretend that he had no affection
:03:40. > :03:44.for Fidel Castro at all, but do you think he made a bit of an error
:03:45. > :03:48.dismissing Castro's record, the negative side of it as just a floor?
:03:49. > :03:55.He could have acknowledged in more elaborate terms the huge costs. He
:03:56. > :03:58.wanted to go on about the health and education, which if you actually
:03:59. > :04:00.look up the indices on that, they are good relative to other
:04:01. > :04:08.countries. But they have come at such a huge cost. He was not a
:04:09. > :04:11.champion of criminal justice. If he had done that, it would have been
:04:12. > :04:17.utterly inauthentic. He doesn't believe it. And he would have
:04:18. > :04:21.thought there would be many other people focusing on all the epic
:04:22. > :04:28.failings. So he focused on what he believed. There are times when
:04:29. > :04:33.Corbyn's prominence in the media world now as leader widens the
:04:34. > :04:40.debate in an interesting and important way. I am not aware of any
:04:41. > :04:51.criticisms that Mr Corbyn has ever announced about Mr Castro. There
:04:52. > :04:54.were four words in his statement yesterday which is spin doctor would
:04:55. > :05:04.have forced him to say, for all his flaws. He was on this Cuban
:05:05. > :05:08.solidarity committee, which didn't exist to criticise Castro. It
:05:09. > :05:12.existed to help protect Castro from those, particularly the Americans,
:05:13. > :05:16.who were trying to undermine him. And Corbyn made a big deal yesterday
:05:17. > :05:22.saying he has always called out human rights abuses all over the
:05:23. > :05:27.world. But he said that in general, I call out human rights abuses. He
:05:28. > :05:34.never said, I have called out human rights abuses in Cuba. In the weeks
:05:35. > :05:41.ahead, more will come out about what these human rights abuses were. The
:05:42. > :05:47.lid will come off what was actually happening. Some well authenticated
:05:48. > :05:53.stories are pretty horrendous. I was speaking to a journalist who was
:05:54. > :06:00.working there in the 1990s, who gave me vivid examples of that, and there
:06:01. > :06:05.will be more to come. I still go back to, when a major figure diet
:06:06. > :06:11.and you are a leader who has admired but major figure, you have to say
:06:12. > :06:27.it. That is the trap he has fallen into. He has proved every criticism
:06:28. > :06:33.that he is a duck old ideologue. But he is not the only one. Prime
:06:34. > :06:40.Minister Trudeau was so if uses that I wondered if they were going to
:06:41. > :06:44.open up a book of condolences. I think it reinforces Corbyn's failing
:06:45. > :06:48.brand. It may be authentic, but authentic isn't working for him.
:06:49. > :06:55.When I was driving, I heard Trevor Phillips, who is a Blairite, saying
:06:56. > :07:00.the record was mixed and there were a lot of things to admire as well as
:07:01. > :07:03.all the terrible things. So it is quite nuanced. But if you are a
:07:04. > :07:08.leader issuing a sound bite, there is no space for new ones. You either
:07:09. > :07:14.decide to go for the consensus, which is to set up on the whole, it
:07:15. > :07:18.was a brutal dictatorship. Or you say, here is an extraordinary figure
:07:19. > :07:23.worthy of admiration. In my view, he was right to say what he believed.
:07:24. > :07:27.There was still a dilemma for the British government over who they
:07:28. > :07:34.sent to the funeral. Do they sent nobody, do they say and Boris
:07:35. > :07:42.Johnson as a post-ironic statement? There is now a post-Castro Cuba to
:07:43. > :07:45.deal with. Trump was quite diplomatic about post-Castro Cuba.
:07:46. > :07:54.And Boris Johnson's statement was restrained. The thing about Mr
:07:55. > :07:57.Castro was the longevity, 50 years of keeping Marxism on the island.
:07:58. > :07:59.That was what made it so fascinating.
:08:00. > :08:02.Before the last election, George Osborne promised the NHS
:08:03. > :08:06.in England a real-terms funding boost of ?8 billion per year by 2020
:08:07. > :08:09.on the understanding that NHS bosses would also find ?22 billion worth
:08:10. > :08:16.Since last autumn, NHS managers have been drawing up what they're calling
:08:17. > :08:19."Sustainability and Transformation Plans" to make these savings,
:08:20. > :08:25.but some of the proposals are already running into local
:08:26. > :08:28.opposition, while Labour say they amount to huge cuts to the NHS.
:08:29. > :08:34.Help is on the way for an elderly person in need in Hertfordshire.
:08:35. > :08:37.But east of England ambulance call operators
:08:38. > :08:42.they're sending an early intervention vehicle
:08:43. > :08:49.with a council-employed occupational therapist on board.
:08:50. > :08:51.It's being piloted here for over 65s with
:08:52. > :08:57.When they arrive, a paramedic judges if the patient can be
:08:58. > :09:00.treated immediately at home without a trip to hospital.
:09:01. > :09:02.Around 80% of patients have been treated this way,
:09:03. > :09:05.taking the strain off urgently-needed hospital beds,
:09:06. > :09:11.So the early intervention team has assessed the patient and decided
:09:12. > :09:24.The key to successful integration for Hertfordshire being able
:09:25. > :09:26.to collaboratively look at how we use our resources,
:09:27. > :09:29.to have pooled budgets, to allow us to understand
:09:30. > :09:32.where spend is, and to let us make conscientious decisions about how
:09:33. > :09:37.best to use that money, to come up with ideas to problems
:09:38. > :09:39.that sit between our organisations, to look at things collaboratively.
:09:40. > :09:41.This Hertfordshire hospital is also a good example of how
:09:42. > :09:49.You won't find an A unit or overnight beds here any more.
:09:50. > :09:55.The closest ones are 20 minutes down the road.
:09:56. > :09:56.What's left is nurse-led care in an NHS-built hospital.
:09:57. > :10:00.Despite a politically toxic change, this reconfiguration went
:10:01. > :10:02.through after broad public and political consultation
:10:03. > :10:06.with hospital clinicians and GPs on board.
:10:07. > :10:10.It's a notable achievement that's surely of interest to 60% of NHS
:10:11. > :10:16.trusts in England that reported a deficit at the end of September.
:10:17. > :10:19.It's not just here that the NHS needs to save money and provide
:10:20. > :10:26.The Government is going to pour in an extra ?8 billion into the NHS
:10:27. > :10:32.in England, but it has demanded ?22 billion
:10:33. > :10:34.worth of efficiencies across the country.
:10:35. > :10:37.In order to deliver that, the NHS has created 44 health
:10:38. > :10:39.and care partnerships, and each one will provide
:10:40. > :10:43.a sustainability and transformation plan, or STP, to integrate care,
:10:44. > :10:47.provide better services and save money.
:10:48. > :10:52.So far, 33 of these 44 regional plans, drawn up by senior people
:10:53. > :10:54.in the health service and local government,
:10:55. > :11:01.The NHS has been through five years of severely constrained spending
:11:02. > :11:04.growth, and there are another 4-5 years on the way at least.
:11:05. > :11:11.STPs themselves are an attempt to deal in a planned way
:11:12. > :11:17.But with plans to close some A units and reduce the number
:11:18. > :11:22.of hospital beds, there's likely to be a tough political battle
:11:23. > :11:26.ahead, with many MPs already up in arms about proposed
:11:27. > :11:29.This Tory backbencher is concerned about the local plans for his
:11:30. > :11:37.I wouldn't call it an efficiency if you are proposing to close
:11:38. > :11:41.all of the beds which are currently provided for those coming out
:11:42. > :11:43.of the acute sector who are elderly and looking
:11:44. > :11:47.That's not a cut, it's not an efficiency saving,
:11:48. > :11:55.All 44 STPs should be published in a month's time,
:11:56. > :12:01.But even before that, they dominated this week's PMQs.
:12:02. > :12:03.The Government's sustainability and transformation plans
:12:04. > :12:09.for the National Health Service hide ?22 billion of cuts.
:12:10. > :12:12.The National Health Service is indeed looking for savings
:12:13. > :12:16.within the NHS, which will be reinvested in the NHS.
:12:17. > :12:20.There will be no escape from angry MPs for the Health Secretary either.
:12:21. > :12:23.Well, I have spoken to the Secretary of State just this week
:12:24. > :12:28.about the importance of community hospitals in general,
:12:29. > :12:34.These are proposals out to consultation.
:12:35. > :12:39.What could happen if these plans get blocked?
:12:40. > :12:42.If STPs cannot be made to work, the planned changes don't come
:12:43. > :12:47.to pass, then the NHS will see over time a sort of unplanned
:12:48. > :12:49.deterioration and services becoming unstable and service
:12:50. > :12:56.The NHS barely featured in this week's Autumn Statement
:12:57. > :13:03.but the Prime Minister insisted beforehand that STPs
:13:04. > :13:04.are in the interests of local people.
:13:05. > :13:07.Her Government's support will now be critical for NHS England
:13:08. > :13:08.to push through these controversial regional plans,
:13:09. > :13:15.which will soon face public scrutiny.
:13:16. > :13:20.We did ask the Department of Health for an interview,
:13:21. > :13:23.I've been joined by the Shadow Health Secretary,
:13:24. > :13:40.Do you accept that the NHS is capable of making ?22 billion of
:13:41. > :13:44.efficiency savings? Well, we are very sceptical, as are number of
:13:45. > :13:49.independent organisations about the ability of the NHS to find 22
:13:50. > :13:53.billion of efficiencies without that affecting front line care. When you
:13:54. > :13:56.drill down into the 22 billion, based on the information we have
:13:57. > :14:00.been given, and there hasn't been much information, we can see that
:14:01. > :14:04.some of it will come from cutting the budget which go to community
:14:05. > :14:07.pharmacies, which could lead, according to ministers, to 3000
:14:08. > :14:12.pharmacies closing, which we believe will increase demands on A and
:14:13. > :14:17.GPs, and also that a lot of these changes which are being proposed,
:14:18. > :14:24.which was the focus of the package, we think will mean service cuts at a
:14:25. > :14:30.local level. Do they? The chief executive of NHS England says these
:14:31. > :14:33.efficiency plans are "Incredibly important". He used to work from
:14:34. > :14:41.Labour. The independent King's Fund calls them "The best hope to improve
:14:42. > :14:47.health and care services. There is no plan B". On the sustainable
:14:48. > :14:51.transformation plans, which will be across England to link up physical
:14:52. > :14:55.health, mental health and social care, for those services to
:14:56. > :14:57.collaborate more closely together and move beyond the fragmented
:14:58. > :15:04.system we have at the moment is important. It seems that the ground
:15:05. > :15:08.has shifted. It has moved into filling financial gaps. As we know,
:15:09. > :15:13.the NHS is going through the biggest financial squeeze in its history. By
:15:14. > :15:17.2018, per head spending on the NHS will be falling. If you want to
:15:18. > :15:23.redesign services for the long term in a local area, you need to put the
:15:24. > :15:25.money in. So of course, getting these services working better
:15:26. > :15:29.together and having a greater strategic oversight, which we would
:15:30. > :15:34.have had if we had not got rid of strategic health authority is in the
:15:35. > :15:39.last Parliament. But this is not an attempt to save 22 billion, this is
:15:40. > :15:46.an attempt to spend 22 billion more successfully, don't you accept that?
:15:47. > :15:53.Simon Stevens said we need 8 billion, and we need to find 22
:15:54. > :15:58.billion of savings. You have to spend 22 billion more efficiently.
:15:59. > :16:03.But the Government have not given that 8 billion to the NHS which they
:16:04. > :16:09.said they would. They said they would do it by 2020. But they have
:16:10. > :16:14.changed the definitions of spending so NHS England will get 8 billion by
:16:15. > :16:20.2020, but they have cut the public health budgets by about 4 million by
:16:21. > :16:24.20 20. The budget that going to initiatives to tackle sexually
:16:25. > :16:29.transmitted diseases, to tackle smoking have been cut back but the
:16:30. > :16:33.commissioning of things like school nurses and health visitors have been
:16:34. > :16:38.cut back as well. Simon Stevens said he can only deliver that five-year
:16:39. > :16:41.project if there is a radical upgrade in public health, which the
:16:42. > :16:47.Government have failed on, and if we deal with social care, and this week
:16:48. > :16:53.there was an... I understand that, but if you don't think the
:16:54. > :16:59.efficiency drive can free up 22 billion to take us to 30 billion by
:17:00. > :17:03.2020, where would you get the money from? I have been in this post now
:17:04. > :17:07.for five or six weeks and I want to have a big consultation with
:17:08. > :17:12.everybody who works in the health sector, as well as patients, carers
:17:13. > :17:19.and families. Though you don't know? I think it would be surprised if I
:17:20. > :17:26.had an arbitrary figure this soon into the job. Your party said they
:17:27. > :17:30.expected election of spring by this year, you need to have some idea by
:17:31. > :17:35.now, you inherited a portfolio from Diane Abbott, did she have no idea?
:17:36. > :17:40.To govern is to make choices and we would make different choices. The
:17:41. > :17:47.budget last year scored billions of giveaways in things like
:17:48. > :17:58.co-operating -- corporation tax. What I do want to do... Is work on a
:17:59. > :18:04.plan and the general election, whenever it comes, next year or in
:18:05. > :18:08.2020 or in between, to have costed plan for the NHS. But your party is
:18:09. > :18:14.committed to balancing the books on current spending, that is currently
:18:15. > :18:19.John McDonnell, the Shadow Chancellor's position. What we are
:18:20. > :18:24.talking about, this extra 30 billion, that is essentially current
:18:25. > :18:27.spending so if it doesn't come from efficiency savings, where does the
:18:28. > :18:35.money come from? Some of it is also capital. Mainly current spending. If
:18:36. > :18:46.you look at the details of the OBR, they have switched a million from
:18:47. > :18:50.the capital into revenue. Why -- how do you balance spending?
:18:51. > :18:58.That is why we need to have a debate. Every time we ask for
:18:59. > :19:03.Labour's policy, we are always told me a debate. Surely it is time to
:19:04. > :19:06.give some idea of what you stand for? There's huge doubts about the
:19:07. > :19:11.Government 's policy on this. You are the opposition, how would you do
:19:12. > :19:15.it? I want to work with John McDonnell to find a package to give
:19:16. > :19:19.the NHS the money it needs, but of course our Shadow Chancellor, like
:19:20. > :19:23.any Shadow Chancellor at this stage in the cycle, will want to see what
:19:24. > :19:29.the books look like a head of an election before making commitments.
:19:30. > :19:32.I am clear that the Labour Party has to go into the next general election
:19:33. > :19:35.with a clear policy to give the NHS the funding it needs because it has
:19:36. > :19:40.been going through the largest financial squeeze in its history.
:19:41. > :19:45.You say Labour will always give the NHS the money it needs, that is not
:19:46. > :19:50.a policy, it is a blank cheque. It is an indication of our commitment
:19:51. > :19:54.to the NHS. Under this Conservative government, the NHS has been getting
:19:55. > :19:59.a 1% increase. Throughout its history it has usually have about
:20:00. > :20:04.4%. Under the last Labour government it was getting 4%, before that
:20:05. > :20:07.substantially more. We think the NHS should get more but I don't have
:20:08. > :20:16.access to the NHS books in front of me. The public thinks there needs to
:20:17. > :20:21.be more money spent on health but they also think that should go cap
:20:22. > :20:27.in hand with the money being more efficiently spent, which is what
:20:28. > :20:32.this efficiency drive is designed to release 22 billion. Do you have an
:20:33. > :20:37.efficiency drive if it is not the Government's one? Of course we
:20:38. > :20:42.agree. We agree the NHS should be more efficient, we want to see
:20:43. > :20:49.productivity increased. Do know how to do that? One way is through
:20:50. > :20:55.investments, maintenance, but there is a 5 million maintenance backlog.
:20:56. > :21:02.One of the most high risk backlogs is something like 730 million. They
:21:03. > :21:06.are going to switch the capital spend into revenue spend. I believe
:21:07. > :21:10.that when you invest in maintenance and capital in the NHS, that
:21:11. > :21:14.contribute to increasing its productivity. You are now talking
:21:15. > :21:20.about 5 billion the maintenance, the chief executive says it needs 30
:21:21. > :21:27.billion more by 2020 as a minimum so that 35 billion. You want to spend
:21:28. > :21:31.more on social care, another for 5 billion on that so we have proper
:21:32. > :21:34.care in the community. By that calculation I'm up to about 40
:21:35. > :21:39.billion, which is fine, except where do you get the and balance the
:21:40. > :21:44.account at the same time? We will have to come up with a plan for that
:21:45. > :21:47.and that's why I will work with our Shadow Treasury team to come up with
:21:48. > :21:52.that plan when they head into the general election. At the moment we
:21:53. > :21:55.are saying to the NHS, sorry, we are not going to give you the
:21:56. > :22:03.investment, which is why we are seeing patient care deteriorating.
:22:04. > :22:09.The staff are doing incredible things but 180,000 are waiting in
:22:10. > :22:12.A beyond four hours, record levels of people delayed in beds in
:22:13. > :22:16.hospitals because there are not the beds in the community to go to save
:22:17. > :22:20.the NHS needs the investment. We know that and we know the
:22:21. > :22:24.Government's response to that and many think it is inadequate. What
:22:25. > :22:27.I'm trying to get from you is what your response would be and what your
:22:28. > :22:32.reaction will be to these efficiency plans. Your colleague Heidi
:22:33. > :22:39.Alexander, she had your job earlier this year, she warned of the danger
:22:40. > :22:46.of knee jerk blanket opposition to local efficiency plans. Do you agree
:22:47. > :22:52.with that? Yes. So every time a hospital is going to close as a
:22:53. > :22:56.result of this, and some will, it is Labour default position not just
:22:57. > :23:00.going to be we are against it? That is why we are going to judge each of
:23:01. > :23:05.these sustainability plans by a number of yardsticks. We want to see
:23:06. > :23:08.if they have the support of local clinicians, we want to see if they
:23:09. > :23:11.have the support of local authorities because they now have a
:23:12. > :23:15.role in the delivery of health care. We want to see if they make the
:23:16. > :23:19.right decisions for the long-term trends in population for local area.
:23:20. > :23:23.We want to see if they integrate social care and health. If they
:23:24. > :23:29.don't and therefore you will not bank that as an efficiency saving,
:23:30. > :23:33.you will say no, that's not the way to go, you are left then with
:23:34. > :23:39.finding the alternative funding to keep the NHS going. If you are
:23:40. > :23:45.cutting beds, for example the proposal is to cut something like
:23:46. > :23:49.5000 beds in Derbyshire and if there is the space in the community sector
:23:50. > :23:53.in Derbyshire, that will cause big problems for the NHS in the long
:23:54. > :23:58.term so it is a false economy. An example like that, we would be very
:23:59. > :24:02.sceptical the plans could work. Would it not be honest, given the
:24:03. > :24:07.sums of money involved and your doubts about the efficiency plan,
:24:08. > :24:13.which are shared by many people, to just say, look, among the wealthy
:24:14. > :24:18.nations, we spend a lower proportion of our GDP on health than most of
:24:19. > :24:23.the other countries, European countries included, we need to put
:24:24. > :24:29.up tax if we want a proper NHS. Wouldn't that be honest? I'm not the
:24:30. > :24:35.Shadow Chancellor, I don't make taxation policy. You are tempting me
:24:36. > :24:39.down a particular road by you or I smile. John McDonnell will come up
:24:40. > :24:43.with our taxation policy. We have had an ambition to meet the European
:24:44. > :24:46.average, the way these things are measured have changed since then,
:24:47. > :24:53.but we did have that ambition and for a few years we met it. We need
:24:54. > :24:55.substantial investment in the NHS. Everyone accepts it was
:24:56. > :25:00.extraordinary that there wasn't an extra penny for the NHS in the
:25:01. > :25:05.Autumn Statement this week. And as we go into the general election,
:25:06. > :25:09.whenever it is, we will have a plan for the NHS. Come back and speak to
:25:10. > :25:11.us when you know what you are going to do. Thank you.
:25:12. > :25:14.Theresa May has promised to trigger formal Brexit negotiations
:25:15. > :25:16.before the end of March, but the Prime Minister must wait
:25:17. > :25:19.for the Supreme Court to decide whether parliament must vote
:25:20. > :25:22.If that is the Supreme Court's conclusion, the Liberal Democrats
:25:23. > :25:25.and others in parliament have said they'll demand a second EU
:25:26. > :25:27.referendum on the terms of the eventual Brexit deal before
:25:28. > :25:30.And last week, two former Prime Ministers suggested
:25:31. > :25:33.that the referendum result could be reversed.
:25:34. > :25:37.In an interview with the New Statesman on Thursday,
:25:38. > :25:40.Tony Blair said, "It can be stopped if the British people decide that,
:25:41. > :25:42.having seen what it means, the pain-gain cost-benefit analysis
:25:43. > :25:49.John Major also weighed in, telling a meeting
:25:50. > :25:51.of the National Liberal Club that the terms of Brexit
:25:52. > :25:53.were being dictated by the "tyranny of the majority".
:25:54. > :25:55.He also said there is a "perfectly credible case"
:25:56. > :25:59.That prompted the former Conservative leader
:26:00. > :26:03.Iain Duncan Smith to criticise John Major.
:26:04. > :26:05.He told the BBC, "The idea we delay everything simply
:26:06. > :26:07.because they disagree with the original result does
:26:08. > :26:13.seem to me an absolute dismissal of democracy."
:26:14. > :26:16.So, is there a realistic chance of a second referendum on the terms
:26:17. > :26:20.of whatever Brexit deal Theresa May manages to secure?
:26:21. > :26:24.Lib Dem party leader Tim Farron has said, "We want to respect
:26:25. > :26:27.the will of the people and that means they must have their say
:26:28. > :26:30.in a referendum on the terms of the deal."
:26:31. > :26:34.But the Lib Dems have just eight MPs - they'll need Labour support
:26:35. > :26:39.One ally is former Labour leadership candidate Owen Smith.
:26:40. > :26:43.He backs the idea of a second referendum.
:26:44. > :26:46.But yesterday the party's deputy leader, Tom Watson, said that,
:26:47. > :26:48."Unlike the Lib Dem Brexit Deniers, we believe in respecting
:26:49. > :26:56.To discuss whether or not there should be a second referendum
:26:57. > :26:59.on the terms of the Brexit deal, I've been joined by two
:27:00. > :27:03.In Somerset is the former Lib Dem leader Paddy Ashdown,
:27:04. > :27:05.and in Shropshire is the former Conservative cabinet minister
:27:06. > :27:17.Paddy Ashdown, let me come to you first. When the British people have
:27:18. > :27:22.spoken, you do what they command, either you believe in democracy or
:27:23. > :27:29.you don't. When democracy speaks, we obey. Your words on the night of the
:27:30. > :27:32.referendum, what's changed? Nothing has changed, Andrew, that's what I
:27:33. > :27:37.said and what I still believe in. The British people have spoken, we
:27:38. > :27:43.will not block Parliament debating the Brexit decision, Article 50, but
:27:44. > :27:50.we will introduce an amendment to say that we need to consult the
:27:51. > :27:57.British people, not about if we go out but what destination we would
:27:58. > :28:01.then achieve. There is a vast difference in ordinary people's
:28:02. > :28:06.lives between the so-called hard Brexit and soft Brexit. Soft Brexit,
:28:07. > :28:10.you remain in the single market, you have to accept and agree on
:28:11. > :28:18.immigration. Hard Brexit you are out of the single market, we have many
:28:19. > :28:24.fewer jobs... Why didn't you say before the referendum there would be
:28:25. > :28:28.a second referendum on the terms? Forgive me, I said it on many
:28:29. > :28:33.occasions, you may not have covered it, Andrew, but that's a different
:28:34. > :28:38.thing. In every speech I gave I said this, and this has proved to be
:28:39. > :28:41.true, since those who recommended Brexit refused to tell us the
:28:42. > :28:46.destination they were recommending, they refuse to give any detail about
:28:47. > :28:50.the destination, if we did vote to go out, it would probably be
:28:51. > :28:55.appropriate to decide which destination, hard Brexit or soft
:28:56. > :28:59.Brexit we go to. They deliberately obscure that because it made it more
:29:00. > :29:05.difficult to argue the case. It wasn't part of the official campaign
:29:06. > :29:09.but let me come to Owen Paterson. What's wrong with a referendum on
:29:10. > :29:13.the terms of the deal? We voted to leave but we don't really know on
:29:14. > :29:16.what conditions we leave so what's wrong with negotiating the deal and
:29:17. > :29:25.putting that deal to the British people? This would be a ridiculous
:29:26. > :29:29.idea, it would be a complete gift to the EU negotiators to go for an
:29:30. > :29:33.impossibly difficult deal because they want to do everything to make
:29:34. > :29:38.sure that Brexit does not go through. This nonsense idea of hard
:29:39. > :29:42.Brexit and soft Brexit, it was never discussed during the referendum
:29:43. > :29:48.campaign. We made it clear we wanted to take back control, that means
:29:49. > :29:52.making our own laws, raising and spending the money agreed by elected
:29:53. > :29:56.politicians, getting control of our own borders back, and getting
:29:57. > :29:59.control of our ability to do trade deals around the world. That was
:30:00. > :30:05.clear at all stages of the referendum. We got 17.4 million
:30:06. > :30:11.votes, the biggest vote in history for any issue, that 52%, 10% more
:30:12. > :30:15.than John Major got and he was happy with his record number of 14
:30:16. > :30:20.million, more than Tony Blair got, which was 43%, so we have a very
:30:21. > :30:24.clear mandate. Time and again people come up to me and say when are we
:30:25. > :30:28.going to get on with this. The big problem is uncertainty. We want to
:30:29. > :30:30.trigger Article 50, have the negotiation and get to a better
:30:31. > :30:40.place. OK, I need to get a debate going.
:30:41. > :30:44.Paddy Ashdown, the EU doesn't want us to leave. If they knew there was
:30:45. > :30:46.going to be a second referendum, surely there was going to be a
:30:47. > :30:49.second referendum, surely their incentive would be to give us the
:30:50. > :30:54.worst possible deal would vote against it would put us in a
:30:55. > :30:58.ridiculous negotiating position. On the contrary, the government could
:30:59. > :31:01.go and negotiate with the European Union and anyway, the opinion of the
:31:02. > :31:05.European Union is less important than the opinion of the British
:31:06. > :31:09.people. It seems to me that Owen Paterson made the case for me
:31:10. > :31:16.precisely. They refuse to discuss what kind of destination. Britain
:31:17. > :31:18.voted for departure, but not a destination. Because Owen Paterson
:31:19. > :31:24.and his colleagues refused to discuss what their model was. So the
:31:25. > :31:27.range of options here and the impact on the people of Britain is huge.
:31:28. > :31:30.There is nothing to stop the government going to negotiate,
:31:31. > :31:36.getting the best deal it can and go into the British people and saying,
:31:37. > :31:43.this is the deal, guys, do you agree? Owen Paterson? It is simple.
:31:44. > :31:50.The British people voted to leave. We voted to take back control of our
:31:51. > :31:53.laws, our money, our borders. But most people don't know the shape of
:31:54. > :32:00.what the deal would be. So why not have a vote on it? Because it would
:32:01. > :32:06.be a gift to the EU negotiators to drive the worst possible deal in the
:32:07. > :32:09.hope that it might be chucked out with a second referendum. The
:32:10. > :32:16.biggest danger is the uncertainty. We have the biggest vote in British
:32:17. > :32:20.history. You have said all that. It was your side that originally
:32:21. > :32:25.proposed a second referendum. The director of Leave said, there is a
:32:26. > :32:31.strong democratic case for a referendum on what the deal looks
:32:32. > :32:42.like. Your side. Come on, you are digging up a blog from June of 2015.
:32:43. > :32:50.He said he had not come to a conclusion. He said it is a distinct
:32:51. > :32:55.possibility. No senior members of the campaign said we would have a
:32:56. > :32:59.second referendum. It is worth chucking Paddy the quote he gave on
:33:00. > :33:02.ITV news, whether it is a majority of 1% or 20%, when the British
:33:03. > :33:09.people have spoken, you do what they command. People come up to me and
:33:10. > :33:19.keep asking, when are you going to get on with it? What do you say to
:33:20. > :33:22.that, Paddy Ashdown? Owen Paterson has obviously not been paying
:33:23. > :33:32.attention. You ask me that question at the start. Owen and his kind have
:33:33. > :33:36.to stick to the same argument. During the referendum, when we said
:33:37. > :33:42.that the Europeans have it in their interest to picket tough for us,
:33:43. > :33:46.they would suffer as well. And that has proved to be right. The European
:33:47. > :33:51.Union does not wish to hand as a bad deal, because they may suffer in the
:33:52. > :34:03.process. We need the best deal for both sides. I can't understand why
:34:04. > :34:07.Owen is now reversing that argument. Here is the question I am going to
:34:08. > :34:16.ask you. If we have a second referendum on the deal and we vote
:34:17. > :34:27.by a very small amount, by a sliver, to stay in, can we then make it
:34:28. > :34:32.best-of-3? No, Andrew! Vince Cable says he thinks if you won, he would
:34:33. > :34:36.have to have a decider. You will have to put that income tax, because
:34:37. > :34:44.I don't remember when he said that. -- you have to put that in context.
:34:45. > :34:51.Independent, 19th of September. That is a decision on the outcome. The
:34:52. > :34:55.central point is that the British people voted for departure, not a
:34:56. > :35:00.destination. In response to the claim that this is undemocratic, if
:35:01. > :35:06.it is democratic to have one referendum, how can it be
:35:07. > :35:09.undemocratic to have two? Owen Paterson, the British government, on
:35:10. > :35:13.the brink of triggering article 50, cannot tell us if we will remain
:35:14. > :35:19.members of the single market, if we will remain members of the customs
:35:20. > :35:24.union. From that flows our ability to make trade deals, our attitude
:35:25. > :35:26.towards freedom of movement and the rest of it. Given that the
:35:27. > :35:30.government can't tell us, it is clear that the British people have
:35:31. > :35:36.no idea what the eventual shape will be. That is surely the fundamental
:35:37. > :35:42.case for a second referendum. Emphatically not. They have given a
:35:43. > :35:50.clear vote. That vote was to take back control. What the establishment
:35:51. > :35:53.figures like Paddy should recognise is the shattering damage it would do
:35:54. > :36:00.to the integrity of the whole political process if this was not
:36:01. > :36:03.delivered. People come up to me, as I have said for the third time now,
:36:04. > :36:09.wanting to know when we will get article 50 triggered. Both people
:36:10. > :36:13.who have voted to Remain and to Leave. If we do not deliver this, it
:36:14. > :36:17.will be disastrous for the reputation and integrity of the
:36:18. > :36:26.whole political establishment. Let me put that you Paddy Ashdown. It is
:36:27. > :36:29.very Brussels elite - were ask your question but if we don't like the
:36:30. > :36:38.answer, we will keep asking the question. Did it with the Irish and
:36:39. > :36:44.French. It is... It would really anger the British people, would it
:36:45. > :36:49.not? That is an interesting question, Andrew. I don't think it
:36:50. > :36:52.would. All the evidence I see in public meetings I attended, and I
:36:53. > :36:55.think it is beginning to show in the opinion polls, although there hasn't
:36:56. > :36:59.been a proper one on this yet, I suspect there is a majority in
:37:00. > :37:02.Britain who would wish to see a second referendum on the outcome.
:37:03. > :37:07.They take the same view as I do. What began with an open democratic
:37:08. > :37:11.process cannot end with a government stitch up. Contrary to what Owen
:37:12. > :37:18.suggests, there is public support for this. And far from damaging the
:37:19. > :37:22.government and the political class, it showed that we are prepared to
:37:23. > :37:32.listen. We shall see. Paddy Ashdown, have you eaten your hat yet? Andrew,
:37:33. > :37:37.as you well know, I have eaten five hats. You cannot have a second
:37:38. > :37:40.referendum until you eat your hat on my programme. We will leave it
:37:41. > :37:48.there. Paddy Ashdown and Owen Paterson, thank you much. I have
:37:49. > :37:51.eaten a hat on your programme. I don't remember!
:37:52. > :37:53.It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:37:54. > :38:03.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now
:38:04. > :38:08.Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics in Northern Ireland.
:38:09. > :38:11.As environmentalists lose a case against sand
:38:12. > :38:14.dredging in Lough Neagh, I'll be asking the former
:38:15. > :38:16.Minister Mark H Durkan, and the Green MLA Steven Agnew
:38:17. > :38:22.Jim Allister vows to go on as TUV leader despite falling numbers
:38:23. > :38:25.And with me throughout with their thoughts,
:38:26. > :38:37.The environmental group Friends of the Earth has failed in its legal
:38:38. > :38:40.attempt to end sand dredging in Lough Neagh, after taking
:38:41. > :38:46.The group had argued the Department of the Environment should have
:38:47. > :38:49.stopped the dredging, rather than allow it to continue
:38:50. > :38:52.while the companies involved applied for planning permission.
:38:53. > :38:56.However, that was rejected in court on Friday.
:38:57. > :38:59.Joining me now are the Green MLA Steven Agnew, and from our Foyle
:39:00. > :39:05.studio, the former Environment Minister Mark H Durkan.
:39:06. > :39:08.Mark, you must be relieved at this ruling?
:39:09. > :39:21.I very much welcome the ruling, not only did they make the right
:39:22. > :39:27.decision but they made it correctly as a -- I made it correctly as well.
:39:28. > :39:30.But the judges face -- realised the difficulties facing me, and the
:39:31. > :39:34.pragmatic steps that I did take to have this activity on the lough
:39:35. > :39:37.regular realised. Why did you ignore the advice
:39:38. > :39:46.of your officials who urged I don't think it's fair to say I
:39:47. > :39:53.ignored them, I considered the advice, as I did on any decision I
:39:54. > :39:58.had to make, and I balanced it against other factors. In this
:39:59. > :40:03.instance I balanced the potential or possible environmental damage that
:40:04. > :40:07.was being caused by the sand dredging against the definite
:40:08. > :40:11.economic consequences of issuing a stock that is there and then, and
:40:12. > :40:15.those consequences would have been devastating. We are talking about a
:40:16. > :40:19.few hundred people losing their jobs overnight through no fault of their
:40:20. > :40:23.own, they are doing something that may their fathers and grandfathers
:40:24. > :40:29.did, activity that's been going on in the region of 90 years, and
:40:30. > :40:32.nobody batted an eye about it until a couple of years ago. But
:40:33. > :40:40.environmental damage would have been very serious. Are you prepared to
:40:41. > :40:49.take that risk. The problem was the lack of information around the
:40:50. > :40:53.lough. I'm the only minister who had taken any action to address this
:40:54. > :40:59.issue, as soon as I became aware of it. I issued an enforcement notice,
:41:00. > :41:04.which Stephen Agnew welcomed me doing at the time. I came under
:41:05. > :41:08.serious criticism from industry at the time I did that. So it was a
:41:09. > :41:15.difficult situation. I appreciate the concerns that have been raised
:41:16. > :41:20.by Friends of the Earth and others about possible environmental damage,
:41:21. > :41:24.however, a desktop study commissioned by myself and others
:41:25. > :41:37.found that the environmental damage is more than likely negligible. You
:41:38. > :41:41.welcomed what he did at the time. The court has vindicated him by
:41:42. > :41:46.saying he handled the situation in an acceptable way. His decision was
:41:47. > :41:50.within his remit. What I would say is that the court said he was
:41:51. > :41:55.entitled to make the decision, they didn't say it was the right
:41:56. > :41:59.decision. As you pointed out, he was twice advised by his department to
:42:00. > :42:09.call for a stop notice. He chose not to do so. He said he was receiving
:42:10. > :42:13.other advice, he had to weigh it up. It is a special protection area,
:42:14. > :42:17.development should not be allowed on the site is a can be shown there is
:42:18. > :42:26.no risk. What about the potential economic consequences? I think there
:42:27. > :42:29.should be a level playing field and every developer should have to
:42:30. > :42:37.follow the rules. This sand dredging has been going on for decades. There
:42:38. > :42:41.was an opportunity to draw the line in the sand and say no more, and I
:42:42. > :42:52.think he should have done that until we get the evidence this is so.
:42:53. > :42:58.Friends of the Earth said the effect of dredging was overestimated. Until
:42:59. > :43:04.we can gather the evidence as to why -- the sand dredgers have not and
:43:05. > :43:07.cannot prove that they are not at least in part responsible, and I
:43:08. > :43:13.think we need to get the evidence. It is very difficult to collect that
:43:14. > :43:17.evidence when ?1.5 million -- 1.5 million tonnes of sand are still
:43:18. > :43:21.being extracted every year without authorisation. We've been promised
:43:22. > :43:27.for years there would be a planning application. We are yet to see
:43:28. > :43:31.planning approval. But we are now seeing an application, had it not
:43:32. > :43:36.been for my action we wouldn't have seen that. We are working through
:43:37. > :43:39.that. The information that has been missing is being assimilated as we
:43:40. > :43:48.speak. I think that is very important. But good evidence is hard
:43:49. > :43:52.to gather when the sand dredging is still continuing. I do welcome your
:43:53. > :43:57.action, as you know, when you are minister I raised at a number of
:43:58. > :44:01.times, and in that sense we worked together. But I do think you need to
:44:02. > :44:06.go that stepfather and stop the dredging so that we can get the
:44:07. > :44:11.evidence as to whether or not this is causing the environmental damage.
:44:12. > :44:18.-- go that stepfather. I know you wouldn't have had reason to be
:44:19. > :44:22.overly critical of me, I took it is maybe a slight rebuke that I had
:44:23. > :44:26.maybe ignored the advice of my officials on two occasions on this
:44:27. > :44:32.matter, but you will concede it was OK for me to ignore advice from the
:44:33. > :44:36.same officials when they came to locking. That is a different issue.
:44:37. > :44:54.-- locking. He was environment minister, and
:44:55. > :45:04.he's just said he made a decision that was good for the economy. It is
:45:05. > :45:09.about balancing all of those competing interests. That is the job
:45:10. > :45:18.of the environment minister. I find it bizarre that -- we have decided
:45:19. > :45:21.as a society that environmental protection is something that is
:45:22. > :45:25.important, and I don't think we can just cherry pick as and when we
:45:26. > :45:31.reinforce our regulations. Are you not concerned about the removal of
:45:32. > :45:37.1.5 million tonnes of sand each year from the bottom of Lough Neagh? We
:45:38. > :45:42.do not know what the environmental consequences of that are. We've
:45:43. > :45:49.already referred to wintering birds, we need to find out what impact that
:45:50. > :45:54.is happening -- having. I am proud of the role I have played in
:45:55. > :45:57.protecting the environment. Of course I am concerned there might be
:45:58. > :46:02.environmental damage being done here, that is why these studies are
:46:03. > :46:07.now being tried out, and a planning application was sought and has
:46:08. > :46:11.subsequently been made. That is why the implement -- information has now
:46:12. > :46:18.been acquired, and it has been missing. For decades and decades and
:46:19. > :46:21.decades. There are not many factors at play in the bird population. I
:46:22. > :46:28.have discussed it with Friends of the Earth, in private. I've had an
:46:29. > :46:34.acknowledgement from them that if the sand dredging is a factor in
:46:35. > :46:37.this, it is a small one. You are tapping the microphone with your
:46:38. > :46:42.hand, making a little bit of a noise which may be difficult for our
:46:43. > :46:45.viewers to hear what you are saying. What is your advice to your
:46:46. > :46:49.successor who is now responsible for this, the infrastructure Minister?
:46:50. > :46:55.What you think he needs to do next to chart the best way for the? I
:46:56. > :47:01.think it is important that Chris works with the industry to make sure
:47:02. > :47:06.that their application comes forward in a timely manner, but it is
:47:07. > :47:08.important that he also works with Friends of the Earth and
:47:09. > :47:13.environmental groups who are opposed to this practice in general. It is
:47:14. > :47:18.like you rightly outlined, Mark, about striking a balance. It is not
:47:19. > :47:22.always easy to do so. However, when I came to the role of environment
:47:23. > :47:26.minister said it was my vision to create a better environment and a
:47:27. > :47:30.stronger economy. For too long those things have been pitched against
:47:31. > :47:33.each other and we have had the mindset that what is good for the
:47:34. > :47:38.economy has been bad for the environment. That doesn't have to be
:47:39. > :47:43.the case. I think it is possible to have a thriving economy and to make
:47:44. > :47:49.sure -- ensure robust environment up to. I will be trying to ensure as a
:47:50. > :47:56.member of the opposition that the new minister does that as well. What
:47:57. > :48:06.do you think Chris Hazard should do next? We had the report, lack of
:48:07. > :48:11.enforcement has said we have up to ?250 million Bill for cleaning up
:48:12. > :48:15.sites that have been used for unauthorised waste. If we do not
:48:16. > :48:16.enforce our environmental laws it will damage the economy as well as
:48:17. > :48:20.our environment. The TUV leader Jim Allister has
:48:21. > :48:24.insisted he has no plans to retire, as he addressed his eighth
:48:25. > :48:26.conference. He told delegates in Cookstown
:48:27. > :48:28.he is already looking forward to the council elections,
:48:29. > :48:30.when he hopes the party But the attendance at the gathering
:48:31. > :48:34.was well down on last year, with some blaming
:48:35. > :48:36.the party poor performance Our political correspondent
:48:37. > :48:47.Enda McClafferty was there. His political opponents may believe
:48:48. > :48:50.he is heading for retirement, but there was no hint yesterday that Jim
:48:51. > :49:03.Allister is about to exit the political stage. So it seems it is
:49:04. > :49:08.not yet time for Jexit, but for Brexit. As he addressed his eighth
:49:09. > :49:13.party conference, he already had his sights on the next council election,
:49:14. > :49:18.and he had a defiant message for those at Stormont rushing him out of
:49:19. > :49:22.the door. I will continue to shine the spotlight of exposure into the
:49:23. > :49:31.dark corners of Stormont. I will continue to be the thorn in the
:49:32. > :49:36.flesh of Sinn Fein, DUP misrule. And I will rub salt in as well when I
:49:37. > :49:41.get the and I hope the salt may never lose its savour. The attack
:49:42. > :49:46.the first and Deputy First Ministers for using a spin doctor to try and
:49:47. > :49:58.cover uncomfortable truths. We need you to go down to Ulster carpets.
:49:59. > :50:04.But I am here as a spin doctor, not to measure carpets! Are, but you
:50:05. > :50:11.see, David, we have a major problem. There is no more room left under our
:50:12. > :50:15.carpets to sweep away all the dirty business.
:50:16. > :50:19.But make no mistake about it, Jim Allister is facing the biggest test
:50:20. > :50:24.of his political career. After the party's poor showing in the Assembly
:50:25. > :50:28.election, when only one of their 15 candidates was elected, he has got
:50:29. > :50:34.to convince unionist voters got -- that the TV is more than just a
:50:35. > :50:39.one-man band. It is not a one-man band in the province at-large, there
:50:40. > :50:46.are lots of people supporting them, lots of people wishing them well. As
:50:47. > :50:52.for the party faithful, who turned out in fewer numbers than last year,
:50:53. > :50:58.how did they assess the state of the TV? At how different people saying
:50:59. > :51:06.they don't vote for TV, but I hope Jim stays there to expose all that
:51:07. > :51:11.is going on. -- TUV. If they went out and joined the various branches,
:51:12. > :51:15.we would get stronger. But people tend to sit on their backsides and
:51:16. > :51:19.do nothing about it. Jim Allister will be back at Stormont on Monday,
:51:20. > :51:24.on what has become a crowded opposition bench. There is no doubt
:51:25. > :51:29.his traditional Unionist voiced will still be heard, but will his call
:51:30. > :51:32.for more voters to back his brand of unionism be heard beyond the
:51:33. > :51:34.conference centre? He has four years to make sure it is.
:51:35. > :51:37.Let's hear from my guests of the day, Sam McBride
:51:38. > :51:41.Sam, a familiar message from Jim Allister, but fewer people
:51:42. > :51:51.I think it's very obvious, I think the party was refreshingly upfront
:51:52. > :51:56.about it yesterday, there was no attempt yesterday to pretend it was
:51:57. > :52:04.a good year, they did appallingly in the Assembly election. They lost
:52:05. > :52:09.them both high-profile councillor, Henry Reilly, just over a year after
:52:10. > :52:13.he joined, and with no election for several years they are facing a
:52:14. > :52:16.period in the wilderness as it were. They have been there before with Jim
:52:17. > :52:21.Allister when he first came into the Assembly. He managed to confound the
:52:22. > :52:24.critics at that point, came back with 75,000 votes in the European
:52:25. > :52:26.elections, but at the moment it looks pretty grim.
:52:27. > :52:29.Deirdre, the challenge for the TUV has always been to not to look
:52:30. > :52:37.like a one man band, cast in the image of its leader.
:52:38. > :52:43.That problem is as big now if not bigger than ever. There is no clear
:52:44. > :52:48.successor, I don't think anyone could name somebody they feel would
:52:49. > :52:52.be the successor, and Jim is very much a one-man band. I think it
:52:53. > :52:56.seems his moment in the sun has come and gone, there is a new
:52:57. > :53:00.dispensation in politics, and the media focus has turned to the
:53:01. > :53:04.official opposition so he doesn't have the spotlight he once had, and
:53:05. > :53:11.he is clearly not a comedian. His message does not resonate in
:53:12. > :53:14.Northern Ireland, the corruption, the behind-the-scenes dealing. He
:53:15. > :53:19.doesn't have a positive message to put forward. What would his
:53:20. > :53:23.alternative be? It is ironic he is so anti-the European Union that he
:53:24. > :53:25.absolutely wants to leave as soon as possible and yet the European
:53:26. > :53:28.elections is where he did quite well.
:53:29. > :53:30.The opposition benches are now more crowded than before,
:53:31. > :53:33.and that has arguably eclipsed the part played by Jim Allister
:53:34. > :53:49.You would think there would be some traction for the TUV. The DUP and
:53:50. > :53:59.Sinn Fein are caught in this warm embrace on the hill. I think the
:54:00. > :54:03.difficulty for Jim Allister's been all the baggage that has gone along
:54:04. > :54:08.with his brand of unionism, and I think yes, there is an opposition,
:54:09. > :54:12.Mike Nesbitt is the leader as he calls himself, but the difficulty
:54:13. > :54:17.for those parties is I think they haven't been massive -- massively
:54:18. > :54:21.effective, and I think Jim Allister has been arguably better as exposing
:54:22. > :54:26.things that they have. The Mr Gove the vegan thing he said yesterday
:54:27. > :54:29.was that he is going to keep going. -- the most significant thing. There
:54:30. > :54:34.is nobody that comes close to his calibre within the party. But I
:54:35. > :54:38.think people want a positive alternative. He is saying we will go
:54:39. > :54:42.back to direct rule, is that his solution to this? He doesn't like
:54:43. > :54:44.the cosy consensus he talks about, but I think all that negativity does
:54:45. > :54:47.not appeal to the public. Let's have a word about Friday,
:54:48. > :54:50.when the First and Deputy First Ministers met with their Scottish
:54:51. > :54:52.and Welsh counterparts at And no surprise that top
:54:53. > :54:56.of the agenda was Brexit. Martin McGuinness had some strong
:54:57. > :54:58.criticism for Theresa May and in a separate development,
:54:59. > :55:00.the Fianna Fail leader Micheal Martin also had a go
:55:01. > :55:14.at the Prime Minister but first, I think the British Prime Minister
:55:15. > :55:19.should have been here today. This was her first opportunity to attend
:55:20. > :55:23.the meeting and to meet with the devolved institutions, and I think
:55:24. > :55:33.it was a missed opportunity on her behalf. It is with dismay that I
:55:34. > :55:37.view her absence. There is some evidence the British Government is
:55:38. > :55:41.not engaging enough with the devolved administrations. And
:55:42. > :55:44.particularly when you consider that in Northern Ireland a substantial
:55:45. > :55:49.majority have voted to remain, likewise in Scotland, I think there
:55:50. > :55:52.is a need for the UK Government to engage. Also we know the Secretary
:55:53. > :55:56.of State for Northern Ireland is not on the main negotiating Cabinet
:55:57. > :56:02.committee, which is worrying. And I think overall there has been a lack
:56:03. > :56:05.of proactive engagement with the devolved administrations. And today
:56:06. > :56:11.was a wonderful opportunity that could have facilitated such
:56:12. > :56:22.engagement, and also providing badly needed reassurances.
:56:23. > :56:27.There is an irony in Scottish and Irish nationalists criticising the
:56:28. > :56:31.British by Minister for not attending an event. Fundamentally
:56:32. > :56:33.the honest answer is that neither Westminster nor the devolved
:56:34. > :56:37.administrations really know what they want out of this. Scotland has
:56:38. > :56:43.a bit more of a clear picture in terms of what the SNP wants, but in
:56:44. > :56:47.terms of Scott -- Stormont, one half is arguing for one thing and one for
:56:48. > :56:50.another. On some issues like the border they think it should be as
:56:51. > :56:54.low-key as possible, but if you push it to whether they should be British
:56:55. > :56:58.passport control at Dublin airport, Sinn Fein are against that the DUP
:56:59. > :57:06.are possibly open to it, so it is difficult. I don't think the Prime
:57:07. > :57:10.Minister will be quaking in her boots at the criticism, nor will
:57:11. > :57:16.this -- she see it as a missed opportunity to talk about Brexit. It
:57:17. > :57:21.is clear that she does treat the devolved administrations with
:57:22. > :57:26.contempt. She has topped about wanting a grown-up relationship with
:57:27. > :57:30.the devolved administrations. That is patronising and insulting. --
:57:31. > :57:33.talked about. She has had the shortest political honeymoon in
:57:34. > :57:39.political history, and she does seem to her go out of her way. I think
:57:40. > :57:45.she should have been there symbolically, she should have said I
:57:46. > :57:57.am listing, I understand your concerns. We hope the Maltese Prime
:57:58. > :58:00.Minister saying sorting out the Irish border, what happens between
:58:01. > :58:03.Northern Ireland and the Republic needs to be the first thing to be
:58:04. > :58:06.sorted out before the Brexit negotiations. The other macro to a
:58:07. > :58:17.certain extent it has been sorted out in a sense, the question is
:58:18. > :58:22.where does the border and then go? Does go to Dublin airport, ports in
:58:23. > :58:25.the south of Ireland? That is a difficult issue. At this point there
:58:26. > :58:28.is no clear message from Stormont, other than the British Government
:58:29. > :58:33.line about there being no return to the borders of the past. There is no
:58:34. > :58:41.real clear sense of where it is going, otherwise --. No return to
:58:42. > :58:46.the borders of the past is meaningless. This whole ministerial
:58:47. > :58:48.Council was sold as an opportunity to cast some light on this. We are
:58:49. > :58:49.no clearer. Let's have a look back
:58:50. > :58:51.at the political week gone past in 60 seconds -
:58:52. > :59:04.with Stephen Walker. The Finance Minister outlined his
:59:05. > :59:10.grand designs to raise more money from rates.
:59:11. > :59:13.If you live in a house valued over ?400,000, I don't think it
:59:14. > :59:19.unreasonable to say you should pay more according to the value of the
:59:20. > :59:23.home. The Chancellor said we are to get an extra ?277 million. In
:59:24. > :59:29.another chamber, the Stormont speaker said sorry for not revealing
:59:30. > :59:35.his connection to loyalist group -- eight loyalist group. I apologise to
:59:36. > :59:38.the house for not having done so. The tug-of-war between local
:59:39. > :59:45.councils and the Executive over regeneration rumbles on. The
:59:46. > :59:51.distribution of power, allowing other people to take the lead on
:59:52. > :59:54.things, is sneered at. And political football: the DUP communities
:59:55. > :59:59.Minister made a promising debut. I've never kicked a Gaelic football,
:00:00. > :00:01.so that was a first for me. I was glad I was able to get a point for
:00:02. > :00:03.putting a ball over the bar! And let's have a final word
:00:04. > :00:07.with Deirdre and Sam. That was an entertaining sequence
:00:08. > :00:09.with Paul Givan playing Gaelic football there -
:00:10. > :00:24.but what's the real I think it is welcome, he is perhaps
:00:25. > :00:29.illustrating the new accommodation between the two main parties. He is
:00:30. > :00:33.a younger minister, we may see things moving on. Progress here is
:00:34. > :00:36.slow. We are saying the sports minister should be a minister for
:00:37. > :00:43.all sports at this stage of devolution. He really adopted Ian
:00:44. > :00:48.Paisley's approach, throwing himself into it. He is a keen footballer,
:00:49. > :00:56.this is a line that Gregory Campbell crossed for the DUP. On the sporting
:00:57. > :00:57.aspect they are quite comfortable, not on the
:00:58. > :00:57.have got to make sure London is open.
:00:58. > :00:58.have got to make sure London is not on the other aspects. That's it
:00:59. > :00:59.from us, open. Thank you. Andrew, back to
:01:00. > :01:06.you. Is Theresa May serious
:01:07. > :01:08.about curbing executive pay? Who will be crowned Nigel Farage's
:01:09. > :01:11.successor as Ukip leader? And can the Lib Dems pull off
:01:12. > :01:39.a by-election upset in Richmond? So,,, on pay talk about the
:01:40. > :01:42.executive of what executives get compared to the average worker in
:01:43. > :01:46.the company, giving shareholders real power to vote down pay rises if
:01:47. > :01:49.they don't like them, which is pretty much what Ed Miliband
:01:50. > :01:59.proposed in the general election in 2015. Is she serious about this? She
:02:00. > :02:02.is very serious, and the Tory party probably does owe Ed Miliband an
:02:03. > :02:07.apology for trashing his ideas and 2015 and then putting them all up
:02:08. > :02:10.for votes in November 20 16. She is very serious, and this all comes
:02:11. > :02:13.back to her desperate fear that unless capitalism reforms itself and
:02:14. > :02:20.becomes more acceptable to the just about managing or even 78% of the
:02:21. > :02:23.country who are not earning vast wealth at anywhere near the figures
:02:24. > :02:29.you see in the City, serious things will happen and the political sense
:02:30. > :02:33.of trust will implode. She has already been bartered down by her
:02:34. > :02:36.own Cabinet on this. She wanted to go further and make workers on the
:02:37. > :02:43.board mandatory. They have managed to stop that. What will her fallback
:02:44. > :02:51.position be on workers on the board if she is not able to get it into
:02:52. > :02:55.some claw? We would like to have workers on the board, but whatever
:02:56. > :02:59.they do on the board there will have no voting powers on the board. When
:03:00. > :03:04.you look at what was leaked out over the weekend, that we should know the
:03:05. > :03:09.ratio of the top to the average and that shareholders who own the
:03:10. > :03:15.company should determine, in the end, the highest-paid salaries, you
:03:16. > :03:21.kind of think, what could the possible objection be to any of
:03:22. > :03:26.that? Two things. One, I agree with Tom that she is deadly serious about
:03:27. > :03:30.this agenda and it comes under the banner, that sentence in the party
:03:31. > :03:35.conference speech about "It's time to focus on the good that government
:03:36. > :03:40.can do". She is by instinct more of an interventionist than Cameron and
:03:41. > :03:42.Osborne. But she is incredibly cautious, whether it is through the
:03:43. > :03:50.internal constraints of opposition within Cabinet, or her own small C
:03:51. > :03:53.Conservative caution in implementing this stuff. Part of the problem is
:03:54. > :03:58.the practicalities. George Osborne commission will Hutton to do a
:03:59. > :04:01.report which came out with similar proposals, which were never
:04:02. > :04:07.implemented. It is quite hard to enforce. It will antagonise business
:04:08. > :04:11.leaders when she's to woo them again in this Brexit furore. So there are
:04:12. > :04:16.problems with it. And judging by what has happened so far, my guess
:04:17. > :04:19.is that the aim will be genuinely bold and interesting, and the
:04:20. > :04:24.implementation incredibly cautious. Does it matter if she annoys some
:04:25. > :04:30.business leaders? Isn't that part of her brand? Will there be problems on
:04:31. > :04:34.the Tory backbenches with it? I think there will be and I think it
:04:35. > :04:36.does matter at this sensitive time for when we are positioning
:04:37. > :04:41.ourselves as a country and whether we are going to brand ourselves as a
:04:42. > :04:44.great city of business, implementing quite interventionist policies. Any
:04:45. > :04:49.suggestion that the government can control how much the top earners
:04:50. > :04:53.get, I think would be received in a hostile way. What would be wrong
:04:54. > :04:58.with the shareholders, who own the company, determining the pay of the
:04:59. > :05:01.higher hands, the executives? Morally, you can absolutely make
:05:02. > :05:06.that argument but to business leaders, they will not like it.
:05:07. > :05:09.Ultimately, this will not come down to more than a row of beans. There
:05:10. > :05:13.was a huge debate about whether there should be quotas of women on
:05:14. > :05:19.boards. In the end, that never happened. All we get is figures. But
:05:20. > :05:26.quotas of women, for which there is a case and a case against too, that
:05:27. > :05:28.was a government mandate. This is not, this is simply empowering
:05:29. > :05:35.shareholders who own the company to determine the pay of the people they
:05:36. > :05:39.hire. There is a strong moral argument for it. Strong economic
:05:40. > :05:45.argument. But the Tory backbenchers will not like this. The downside is
:05:46. > :05:50.that this is a world where companies are thinking about upping sticks to
:05:51. > :05:55.Europe. No, they say they are thinking of that. Not one has done
:05:56. > :06:00.it yet. Others have made massive investments in this country. But is
:06:01. > :06:06.it not an incentive for those making these threats to actually do it? In
:06:07. > :06:11.Europe, bankers' pay is now mandated by Brussels. It is a vivid way of
:06:12. > :06:20.showing you are addressing the issue of inequality. I think she will go
:06:21. > :06:25.with it, but let's move on to Ukip. I think we will get the result
:06:26. > :06:32.tomorrow. There are the top three candidates. Paul Nuttall, Suzanne
:06:33. > :06:36.Evans and on my right, John Reid Evans. One of them will be the next
:06:37. > :06:41.leader. Who is going to win? It is widely predicted to be Paul Nuttall
:06:42. > :06:45.and is probably the outcome that the Labour Party fears most. Paul
:06:46. > :06:49.Nuttall is a very effective communicator. He is not a household
:06:50. > :06:55.name, far from it, but people will begin to learn more about him and
:06:56. > :07:00.find that he is actually quite a strong leader. Can people Ukip
:07:01. > :07:08.together again after this shambolic period since the referendum? If
:07:09. > :07:13.anyone can, he can. And his brand of working collar, Northern Ukip is the
:07:14. > :07:18.thing that will work for them. Do you think he is the favourite? It
:07:19. > :07:22.would be amazing if he doesn't win. His greatest problem will be getting
:07:23. > :07:29.Nigel Farage off his back. He is going on a speaking tour of North
:07:30. > :07:33.America. A long speaking tour. Ukip won this EU referendum. They had the
:07:34. > :07:37.chance to hoover up these discontented Labour voters in the
:07:38. > :07:41.north, and all he has done is associated with Ukip with Farage.
:07:42. > :07:48.But Nigel Farage is fed up of Ukip and will be glad to be hands of it.
:07:49. > :07:53.The bigger problem is money. If it is Paul Nuttall, and we don't know
:07:54. > :07:56.the results yet, but he is the favourite, if it is him, I would
:07:57. > :08:00.suggest that that is the result Labour is frightened of most. To be
:08:01. > :08:05.honest, I think they are frightened of Ukip whatever the result.
:08:06. > :08:11.Possibly with good cause. The reason I qualify that is that what you call
:08:12. > :08:14.a shambles over the summer has been something that goes beyond Monty
:08:15. > :08:20.Python in its absurdity and madness. That calls into question whether it
:08:21. > :08:25.can function as a political party when you have what has gone on. The
:08:26. > :08:33.number of leaders itself has been an act of madness. In a context which
:08:34. > :08:36.should be fantastic for them. They have won a referendum. There is a
:08:37. > :08:40.debate about what form Brexit should take, it is a dream for them, and
:08:41. > :08:44.they have gone bonkers. If he can turn it around, I agree that he is a
:08:45. > :08:48.powerful media communicator, and then it is a threat to Labour. But
:08:49. > :08:53.he has got to show that first. Indeed. The by-election in Richmond
:08:54. > :08:58.in south-west London, called by Zac Goldsmith over Heathrow. Has it
:08:59. > :09:02.turned out to be a by-election about Heathrow, or has it turned into a
:09:03. > :09:08.by-election, which is what the Lib Dems wanted, about Brexit? We will
:09:09. > :09:12.know on Thursday. If the Lib Dems win, they will turn it into an EU
:09:13. > :09:17.referendum. It seems incredibly close now. The Lib Dems are swamping
:09:18. > :09:20.Richmond. They had 1000 activists there yesterday. That is getting on
:09:21. > :09:26.for 100th of the population of the place! If the Lib Dems don't manage
:09:27. > :09:29.to win on Thursday and don't manage to turn it into an EU referendum
:09:30. > :09:37.despite all their efforts, it will probably be a disaster for the
:09:38. > :09:41.party. What do you hear, Isabel? I hear that the Lib Dems have
:09:42. > :09:45.absolutely swamped the constituency, but this may backfire. I saw a bit
:09:46. > :09:50.of this myself, living in Witney, when the Lib Dems also swamped and
:09:51. > :09:56.people began to get fed up of their aggressive tactics. I understand
:09:57. > :10:03.that Zac Goldsmith is cautiously optimistic that he will pull this
:10:04. > :10:11.one off. Quick stab at the result? I don't know. But we are entering a
:10:12. > :10:14.period when by-elections are acquiring significant again. If the
:10:15. > :10:20.Lib Dems were to make a game, it would breathe life into that near
:10:21. > :10:24.moribund party like nothing else. Similarly, other by-elections in
:10:25. > :10:28.this shapeless political world we are in are going to become
:10:29. > :10:31.significant. We don't know if we are covering it live on Thursday night
:10:32. > :10:37.yet because we have to find at the time they are going to declare.
:10:38. > :10:41.Richmond are quite late in declaring, but if it is in the early
:10:42. > :10:46.hours, that is fine. If it is on breakfast television, they be not. I
:10:47. > :10:52.want to show you this. Michael Gove was on the Andrew Marr Show this
:10:53. > :10:55.morning. In the now notorious comment that I made, I was actually
:10:56. > :10:57.cut off in midstream, as politicians often. The point I made was not that
:10:58. > :11:08.all experts are that is nonsense. Expert engineers, doctors and
:11:09. > :11:11.physicists are not wrong. But there is a subclass of experts,
:11:12. > :11:16.particularly social scientists, who have to reflect on some of the
:11:17. > :11:19.mistakes they have made. And the recession, which was predicted that
:11:20. > :11:26.we would have if we voted to leave, has gone like a puff of smoke. So
:11:27. > :11:29.economic experts, he talks about. The Chancellor has based all of his
:11:30. > :11:37.forward predictions in this Autumn Statement on the economic expert
:11:38. > :11:42.forecasters. The Office for Budget Responsibility has said it is 50-50,
:11:43. > :11:46.which is the toss of a coin. But what was he supposed to do? You
:11:47. > :11:52.would ideally have to have a Budget that had several sets of scenarios,
:11:53. > :11:59.and that is impossible. Crystal ball territory. But you do wonder if
:12:00. > :12:02.governments are right to do so much of their fiscal projections on the
:12:03. > :12:08.basis of forecasts which turn out to be wrong. They have nothing else to
:12:09. > :12:13.go on. The Treasury forecast is to be wrong. No doubt the OBR forecast
:12:14. > :12:16.will prove not to be exact. As you say, they admitted that they are
:12:17. > :12:21.navigating through fog at the moment. But he also added that it
:12:22. > :12:25.was fog caused by Brexit. So Brexit, even if you accept that these
:12:26. > :12:32.forecasts might be wrong, is causing such a level of uncertainty. He put
:12:33. > :12:36.the figure at 60 billion. That could come to haunt him. He hasn't got a
:12:37. > :12:43.clue. He admitted it. come to haunt him. He hasn't got a
:12:44. > :12:46.clue. He admitted it. He said, Parliament mandates me to come up
:12:47. > :12:50.with something, so I am going to give you a number. But I wouldn't
:12:51. > :12:55.trust it if I were you, he basically said. I agree with you. The man who
:12:56. > :12:58.borrowed 122 billion more off the back of a coin toss was Philip
:12:59. > :13:03.Hammond. It begs the question, what does that say about the confidence
:13:04. > :13:09.Philip Hammond has in his own government's renegotiation? Not a
:13:10. > :13:13.huge amount. I agree. Philip Hammond quoted the OBR figures. He basically
:13:14. > :13:19.said, this is uncertain and it looks bad, and on we go with it. It is a
:13:20. > :13:24.very interesting situation, he said. He was for Remain and he works in a
:13:25. > :13:28.department which regards it as a disaster, whatever everyone else
:13:29. > :13:32.thinks. I have just been told we are covering the by-election. We are
:13:33. > :13:34.part of the constitution. Jo Coburn will have more
:13:35. > :13:36.Daily Politics tomorrow And I'll be back here on BBC One
:13:37. > :13:40.next Sunday at 11. Remember - if it's Sunday,
:13:41. > :13:50.it's the Sunday Politics.