29/01/2017 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland

Coming up in 20 minutes: on refugees and citizens of seven

I'll be asking the Ulster Unionists

and the SDLP what they want from Theresa May as she prepares

for meetings with the devolved administrations and the Dublin

Should she have spoken out more strongly?

We'll ask former Ukip leader and Trump confidant Nigel Farage

what he makes of the travel ban and the Prime Minister's

In London this week, the mayor, Sadiq Khan,

has been coming under pressure to explain his fares freeze

and why it doesn't apply to everybody.

And with me, the best and brightest political

panel in the business - Steve Richards, Julia

They'll be tweeting throughout the programme.

It was soon after Theresa May left the White House on Friday that

Donald Trump signed the executive order banning citizens from seven

President Trump's 90-day ban covers Iran, Iraq,

Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen and Syria, from

where refugees are banned from until further notice.

Donald Trump's executive order also imposes a complete ban

on all refugees coming to the US for the next 120 days.

Mr Trump said that the ban would keep radical Islamic terrorists out

But the ban has sparked protests across the US,

as people affected and already in the air were detained

US laws have begun legal action to challenge the ban, which many

At a press conference in Ankara, Turkey, Theresa May was asked

about the refugee ban three times before giving this response...

Well, the United States is responsible for the United States'

The United Kingdom is responsible for the United Kingdom's policy

on refugees, and our policy on refugees is to have a number

of voluntary schemes to bring Syrian refugees into the country.

Downing Street later issued a statement saying:

This morning, the Treasury Minister, David Gauke, was asked why

Theresa May had refused to condemn the travel ban at yesterday's

The Prime Minister is not a shoot-from-the-hip

She wants to see the evidence, she wants

to understand precisely what the implications are.

She'd been in a series of very lengthy meetings with

President Erdogan, and she's someone who wants to see the briefing and

understand it, and then will respond to that.

I think there are times where, you know, there's always

pressure to respond within a news cycle and so on.

The important thing is, we are saying we disagree with it

We're joined now from North London by the Conservative

Should the Government in general and Theresa May in particular be more

vocal in their criticism of Donald Trump's travel bans? Well, as David

just said, it is obviously right that Theresa has now said this is an

appropriate and not something we agree with in our Government, but I

wish she had said something at the time, not least because it affects

our own citizens. One of our own MPs, Nadhim, for example, because it

is also a global crisis. She had clearly built an excellent with

Donald Trump -- she had built an excellent relationship with him, but

she could have been firmer. Mrs May hasn't said any word of criticism

about the travel bans. She refused to say anything three times in

Ankara, and it is merely an anonymous Downing Street

spokesperson that has issued the subsequent mild criticism. We have

not heard from the Prime Minister at all on this matter in terms of

criticism. No, but the spokesperson will be speaking with her blessing,

so it is clearly something she has acknowledged. As I said before, I

wish she had said something at the time. The global climate at the

moment is delicate and we need our leaders to work together to address

things like the refugee crisis. Potentially, this plays into the

hands of Daesh. It is absolutely not the right message. What would you

like the Prime Minister to say? As with any new relationship, it is

about testing the boundaries. They had clearly got on well, so she

should have felt braver to say something there and then. I would

have preferred her to say, for example, I need to talk to Donald

Trump about this. It is not something I support and I want to

understand why because I believe there is a better way to deal with

the terrorist threat. I would have liked her to suggest that she would

engage with him to do that. The president has instituted a 90 day

temporary ban on people coming from seven mainly Muslim majority

population countries. The seven were on President Obama's list of the

biggest terrorist threats to the United States. Mr Trump wants this

temporary ban until he puts tougher vetting procedures in place. What is

wrong with that? Because it appeared to me that it wasn't thought through

and it was affecting ordinary citizens and some British citizens.

It can't be right that a president in that position of power can

arbitrarily come up with executive powers like that. It has already

been challenged by his own courts. So it is not the considered approach

I want to see in a global leader. Who do you believe will be hurt by

this, given that there can be exceptions on a case-by-case basis?

I think potentially, our global reputation is going to be hurt by

this. I have been to the refugee camps in Europe myself. There are

desperate people trying to free persecution who will be hurt by

this. We are trying to heal the wounds in this country not only

because of Brexit. This is a time of coming together, not about saying it

is located discriminatory against race and religion in this way. Do

you believe that Mr Trump's state visit should go ahead? Well, he is

the leader of America, so it does need to go ahead and we need to work

with him. I believe Theresa has started in a positive manner was

that she just needs to continue in that vein. If he comes to our

country, he needs to respect the way we feel about things. But yes, he is

the president, so he does need to come to the UK. There is some debate

within Westminster as to where it is appropriate for him to speak to MPs,

but it is right that he comes. But if he does come on a state visit,

should he be granted what this country has always thought of as a

great honour, which is a joint address to both Houses of

Parliament? I haven't been an MP long enough to understand the

protocol of where is the right location for him to do that, but I

believe in the past, it has been the greatest leaders, when they have

achieved great things globally, it is Westminster Hall. But there are a

number of MPs saying that is not the most appropriate place and I am

inclined to agree. You don't think he should be accorded the privilege

of speaking to a joint session of Parliament? I think there are places

where he can do that, but Westminster Hall is not yet the

right place. Thank you for joining us.

Steve, within 24 hours, we have seen the difficulty of becoming Donald

Trump's best friend. On the one hand, it could have huge advantages,

particularly for a Brexit Britain. On the other hand, if you are going

to be his best friend, you don't have to give a running commentary on

every major thing he does. Yeah. We have learned a bit about Theresa

May, that when she has to produce a set piece speech which she has time

to prepare, she can get it totally right and sometimes more than right.

When she is faced with a fast-moving story, she is leaden footed and

can't think quickly on her feet. We know, did she regret not saying

more? Evidently she did, because we got a statement from the Downing

Street spokesperson saying more. So she can't think quickly. She's going

to have to think very quickly in response to some of the things he's

going to be doing, because she will be asked about it all the time. It

does highlight the wider danger that the assumption that the special

relationship is always a safe and fertile place to be has been proven

wrong before and I think it will be proven wrong big-time in this case.

You're shaking your head. I don't see why we are responsible for

American domestic policy. I am as appalled as the next person by what

Donald Trump has done. He said he was going to do this, which was why

I did not want Americans to vote for him. In fact, what he has

implemented is much less than what he said he would do when he was

campaigning. I have always felt that the campaigning Trump was the real

Trump. But what he has done is actually constitutional. He has the

executive power to issue this order. It is within the rules in terms of a

class of aliens deemed to be a risk to the United States. It is a 90 day

limited ban. The last president who did this was a Democrat president,

President Carter. He did it in the aftermath of the Iranian crisis.

Well, given the spate of terror attacks on American territory in

recent years, you could argue that he meant well. I don't agree with

Donald Trump. But have people from these countries that he has banned

been involved in terrorist attacks? That is the absurdity. He has not

included Egypt or Pakistan. But I don't remove everyone getting in

such a state about President Carter. The reality is that it is a legal

thing for him to do. I don't like it. But it is not my territory. It

is illegal, because they have been given a right to remain by a judge

in Brooklyn and another judging Alexandra. That is a different issue

for people who have already gone through the vetting. I don't agree

with this. However, I don't think it's reasonable to say that Theresa

May, because she wants to do a deal with Donald Trump, I don't give is

reasonable to say she have to agree with each of his policies. It is

nonsense. But the issue, Janan, is not whether she needs to agree with

him. The question is that she will be questioned about him all the time

now. And although these are matters of domestic policy, the refugee

policy is international. They speak to issues that affect Britain as

well, and I would suggest that she will not get away with this

anonymous statement from Downing Street. People will demand a she

says something on the record. She would get away with it indefinitely.

These situations will recur every time Donald Trump says or does

something contentious. She will be pressed to this associate her

administration from his. She will probably be in a better logistical

situation to do so. She has spent a big chunk of the past 72 hours in

the air. She flew from Washington to Ankara, than from Ankara to London.

We don't have Air Force One, we don't have those frictionless

communications with the ground. She would have been incommunicado for

large periods of time when this story was breaking. That doesn't

excuse the stiff response when she landed and issued a statement via

Downing Street. But during that delay, she did have a plausible

excuse. She has also got a much more tricky geopolitical situation than

many other world leaders. She has to strike a favourable trade deal with

the new US president. It is all very well people saying Justin Trudeau of

Canada was much more vociferous in his criticism of Donald Trump. He is

already in Nafta, he is not striking a new deal. For how long, we don't

know. Exactly, he's trying to stay in Nafta, but he is in a less tricky

situation than she is. Now, Theresa May's was the first

foreign leader to meet President Trump and the visit

was seen as quite a coup for the Prime Minister,

keen for a new trading relationship with the United States

in the wake of Brexit. The Prime Minister congratulated

the new US President for his "stunning election victory"

but might not have intended to be pictured walking

through the White House with him That picture of Donald Trump helping

Theresa May down the steps through the White House colonnade

will be the enduring image Mrs May said the President

told her he was "100% behind Nato". And for her part, the Prime Minister

said she would work hard to make sure other Nato countries

increased their defence spending It's been announced

that there will be a new trade negotiation agreement,

with high-level talks The hope is that this will lead

to a new trade deal between the two countries as soon as

Britain leaves the EU. Mr Trump said he believed "Brexit's

going to be a wonderful thing". On Russia, Theresa May made clear

to Donald Trump her continued

backing for sanctions. And following the controversy over

the President's support for torture, Mr Trump said he would defer

to his Secretary of Defense, General James Mattis, who argues

that the practice doesn't work. And I'm joined now by the former

Ukip leader, Nigel Farage. Do you agree with Mr Trump's

decision to ban Syrian refugees indefinitely from entering the

United States? I agree with the concept of democracy, a point which

appears to be missed by almost all commentators including the BBC. He

was elected to get tough and say he would do everything in his power to

protect America from infiltration by ISIS terrorists. There are seven

countries on that list. He's entitled to do this. I didn't ask if

he was entitled, I asked if agree with it. I do, because if you just

look at what's happening in France and Germany, if you look at Angela

Merkel's policy which was to allow virtually anyone in from anywhere,

look what it led to. You said in 2013 there's a responsibility on all

of us in the free west to help some of those people fleeing Syria

literally in fear of their lives. That's the Christian community in

virtually all of those country, it is almost too late because many have

been wiped out but if you are looking for a genuine definition of

a refugee, going back to 1951, it is someone in direct fear of

persecution of their life because of their race, religion or beliefs. But

you didn't talk about only Christians, and in January 2014 you

said, I seem to recall it was Ukip who started the debate on allowing

Syrian refugees, you seem to be in favour of allowing proper refugees

into this country. If they can be defined. Mr Trump won't let any in.

He is running American policy, not British policy. Since I made those

comments, we have had the Angela Merkel madness and I think Trump's

policy in many ways has been shaped by what Angela Merkel did. He is

fully entitled to do this, and as far as we are concerned in this

country, I would like to see extreme vetting. Since 9/11 can you name any

terrorist event in the United States that has involved refugees that have

been allowed into the country? No, in fact the terrorist events have

been US citizens radicalised. When you have a problem already, why

would you wish to add to it? I would remind you that of the eight people

that committed those atrocities in Paris, five of them had got into

Europe posing as refugees so there is an issue here. But perhaps not

for America because it has the most rigorous and lengthy screening

process in the world, especially for Syrians. You have to register with

the UN agency for refugees, which then recommend certain names to

America, they then go through biometric screening, database

screening, intelligent screenings, including four separate intelligence

agencies screening you. How more rigorous would you want it to be? It

is much more rigorous than we are or the rest of Europe. This is why we

have elections, so voters can make choices and they voted for Donald

Trump to become president and he said he would put bans in place and

then move towards extreme vetting. As far as the Syrians are concerned

he's made that decision but that's what he was voted in fourth. Since

you know him, you have met him, you are confident of his, I'm testing

you on the logic of it. Not that he's democratically elected, I'm not

asking about that, I'm trying to get the case, particularly since if you

take the seven countries of which the ban applies for 19 days, again,

of these seven countries, its citizens have not been involved in

terrorist attacks in the United States. It would be a mistake to say

it is just Muslim countries because the biggest Muslim countries in the

world have not been included in this. The point is they have made

this assessment, they bought themselves 90 days to think about

the policy. This is exactly what Trump's voters would have wanted him

to do. You said the President's rhetoric on immigrants made even you

feel very uncomfortable. Because he started by saying there was a total

ban, then amended it to say there would be vetting. My guess is that

what he will do is try to genuinely help Syrian people and he will be

talking about the creation of some safe zones. Let's see. He hasn't. We

will see. I suspect something like that is coming down the trap. What

advice did you give to the president and his advisers ahead of Theresa

May's visit? That I wanted us to talk about trade and to give the

Prime Minister the impression that actually... When she has been

surrounded by her whole career by civil servants and politicians who

say that everything takes five years or seven years or ten years, to make

it clear to the Prime Minister that if there is will, these things can

be done quickly. Isn't there a danger of a British Prime Minister

who has to deal with the president of the United States, to Ally

herself so closely with such an unpredictable, controversial

president, banning Muslims in certain ways and refugees, building

a war with Mexico, threatening trade was with other countries, thinking

of ending sanctions against Russia? I missing something here, what is

controversial about defending the Mexican border? Bill Clinton spoke

in tough terms, George Bush built six miles of fence, and because it

is Donald Trump there is uproar. So you think there is no risk of the

British by Minister being the best friend of this type of president? I

think there is no risk in putting together a trade deal and no risk in

her being the bridge between America and the rest of Nato to say to Nato

members if you don't pay your 2% he is serious so on those things there

is no risk at all. It was clear from her Lancaster house speech that the

Brexiteers in the Government had won pretty much every argument in terms

of negotiations to come out. What you want from her? She was very good

as Home Secretary, Tory party conferences, the Tory press saying

this was the new Thatcher and she failed. She even failed to control

immigration from outside the European Union so yes, it was a good

speech and for many on the Eurosceptic side of the argument, I

could scarcely believe that a British Prime Minister was saying

things which I had been roundly abused and vilified for. But I have

a feeling we may be in for a very frustrating 2017. The mood as I can

see it in Brussels is that negotiating with Britain is not a

priority, they are far more worried about Dutch elections, French

elections, German elections and possibly even Italian elections. I

worry that by the end of this year we may not have made much progress

and that's why the Trump visit suddenly things brings into focus.

What if by the middle of June, for argument 's sake, the Americans say

OK we reached this position with the British, compromised on the tough

stuff, food standards and things like that, we are ready to sign a

deal now, and Theresa May is to say actually Mr Juncker says I cannot

sign this until we leave. What will they do? They cannot throw us out,

we are living anyway. But everybody agrees you can talk about the deal,

maybe even do the heads of agreement but you cannot sign a treaty until

we have left the EU. Let me predict that at the end of this year we will

find a European Union who frankly don't want to talk to us and

countries around the world that want to get on and do things and that

will be the big tension for Mrs May over the course of this year. If the

Prime Minister is giving you everything you want on Brexit, you

agree that she's trying to get from your point of view the right things.

If she delivers on that and get Brexit on the terms of which you

approve, what's the point of Ukip? You could argue that about any

political party. If we have achieved the goal that we set out to achieve,

there are right now out there 4 million people who are Ukip

loyalists. They are delighted that by voting Ukip we got a referendum,

they will be even happier if they seek us leave the European Union and

I think there is still a gap in British politics for a party that

says it as it sees it, is not afraid by political correctness and is seen

to be on the side of the little people, and that's why, with the

Labour Party is fundamentally split, and it really is totally split over

this European question, I think Ukip is in good shape. That proposition

will be put to test at the Stoke Central by-election, one of Ukip's

best prospects in the country. Some people call it the capital of

Brexit. Labour is in chaos over Article 50, is picked a candidate to

fight Stoke Central who has described Brexit is a pile of notes.

If your successor, Paul Nuttall, cannot win the Stoke by-election,

there's not much hope for you, is there? I think he will. I've always

been told don't make predictions but I think he will win. If you doesn't

it will be tough, we will still have our 4 million loyalists, but if it

does we can actually see Labour are beatable in their heartlands and

Ukip will be off to the second big stage. Nigel Farage, thank you for

being with us. Hello and welcome

to Sunday Politics. with Donald Trump, Theresa May

is set to meet Enda Kenny tomorrow, where the issue of Brexit

will be top of the agenda. I'll be asking the Ulster Unionists

and the SDLP what they would be saying to the Prime Minister

if they had her ear. Plus - I'll be asking a Fine Gael TD

what Enda Kenny should And with their thoughts throughout,

it's Chris Donnelly MPs will have their say

on the snappily titled The SDLP will back an SNP amendment

which aims to stop the bill Despite campaigning to remain,

the Ulster Unionist Party's MPs Joining me are the SDLP's Claire

Hanna and Philip Smith from the UUP. Philip Smith, your party's

official position on the EU referendum was to remain,

but now you're supporting the Democracy. On the 23rd of June, the

British population voted to leave the EU, by a relatively narrow

margin, but they'll voted to leave nonetheless. -- they voted to leave.

We saw it as a national referendum and result, so we will abide by

democracy, and our challenge now is not to fight the referendum again

but to get prepared for Brexit. That is one of the problems. The previous

executive, DUP and Sinn Fein, could not agree on a plan for Northern

Ireland and we have no executive or assembly and we're doubly impacted,

which is a legacy of the past executive and is appalling.

Your MEPs said that... or region of the UK yet

it is the least prepared. You published a list of 10 key asks

for NI from the government as part of the Brexit debate last September

- and with no guarantee that you've secured any of them,

you're going to back It is back to that word democracy.

What we wanted the executive to do was instead of giving a 2-page

letter, which they produced in August, was to produce a plan for

Northern Ireland, how we're going to mitigate the impact on our

agriculture, how we will improve our economy, how we will deal with the

border, how we will ensure that Northern Ireland doesn't go into

internal exile in the rest of the UK. These are fundamental issues.

But what are you doing about them? You listed ten key points, including

safeguards for the Common travel area, have you just forgotten about

them? We have been pushing in the assembly. We are the opposition,

remember. We have been trying to make sure the executive parties are

focused on the challenges that face Northern Ireland. Are now you have

rolled over? We haven't. People will have an opportunity to vote for us,

put us into Government and implement that plan. Come the 2nd of March,

that is one of the reasons why people need to vote for us and get

some clarification. Claire Hanna, Colum Eastwood has

pledged your party's MPs will use all means possible to defend

the interests of the people Nothing we have seen since the

referendum has given us any assurance that it will not be --

that it will be anything other than damaging. We are working with the

SNP to make sure there will be consultation with devolved

governments. Minor modifications and amendments - to you except that?

Northern Ireland is unprepared. The parties cannot use the RHI issue. It

predated all of this. Sinn Fein did not really lift a finger before the

referendum and have tried to pin everything on the Dublin Government

since then, but there are options and opportunities. You can't stop

the juggernaut. That's the phrase your part the Lido. -- party leader.

You have three MPs out of 650 and you will not stop the juggernaut. We

are collaborating with the SNP. Everybody has accepted that there

will be different manifestations and impacts on this island, and on

Northern Ireland, and we intend to maximise those. There is a lot of

support over special provisions for Ireland. If Nissan can get a special

deal, so can Northern Ireland. Give me some specifics. What shape would

you put on it? We think some access to the single market. She has

already said no. She hasn't said how it will work. Anyone who saw Theresa

May's sycophantic appeasement of Trump will know how desperate the

situation we are in. She has cut off our nose to spite your face on

trade. She might see some value in having at least part of the UK

within the single market, and every some opportunity for that. We have

had a sympathetic ear. Colin eastward has been around Europe and

has found a lot of leaders open to it. Are you not let down by the

Ulster Unionist Party? There are areas where we have worked closely,

and it is no secret that we have different ideologies and

aspirations. The Ulster Unionists are focused on the clearance of the

UK, but we are focused on Northern Ireland and the Northern Ireland

economy. We have common ground around access to funding. There are

clearly areas where you do not agree, and you told us that we need

to think about an alternative Government on the 2nd of March. Here

is a critical issue on which you don't agree. We don't agree on

everything. The SDLP are a Nationalist party and we are a

Unionist party. We're talking about Brexit. Everybody knows about your

disagreements on Northern Ireland, but you don't agree on a lot of this

stuff either. We are focused on getting the best deal for Northern

Ireland. You are accepting Government plans without trying to

put any shape on it, which is not the same approach as the SDLP. The

UK is leaving the European Union. And the SDLP are wrong to reject

that? They have Aeron agenda. Northern Ireland didn't vote to

leave -- they have their own agenda. Northern Ireland, Scotland and

London did not vote to leave. Northern Ireland is in receipt of

?600 million per annum. We will only get 300 million, so there is a mass

of funding gap. Farmers will be impacted, so will businesses and

universities. So, you're way of dealing with it is to back Theresa

May's hard Brexit. A lot of people will watch and wonder how this makes

sense. To get over that, we need to negotiate with the Government to

ensure a package of measures are put in place to ensure that Northern

Ireland is recognised as being most affected but is also most prepared.

That is the difference between our position and that Sinn Fein and the

DUP. One or two might of the former First Minister and Michelle O'Neill

are attending to that. In what capacity, I don't know. We're not

going to agree... So they are representing Northern Ireland in a

capacity we don't understand and they won't agree. We will hear our

plan tomorrow from Wales and Scotland. It is a failing of the

executive that predates the current one. There are areas where there is

commonality, including how we manage some of the repatriated devolved

rules. Jim Smith, if it were your party leaders attending the meeting

in Cardiff tomorrow, you could not speak with one voice either, because

your party leaders take fundamentally different views as

well. You can criticise Sinn Fein and the DNP all you like, but if

there was an Ulster Unionist representatives sitting down

tomorrow to articulate a Northern Ireland position, there would be two

separate positions. Are fundamental difference opposition has shown is

that both parties can work together, come to agreements. You don't agree

on this. You like but we can work together, negotiate and come up with

a solution for Northern Ireland. That is the fundamental difference

between our parties and the DUP. There is no commonality there. There

is. You tell me where the commonality is, on that

specifically. We don't know from day-to-day what is in Theresa May

Boruc Johnson's head. It is evolving. By the 9th of February, we

will have a clearer idea and a clear response to that. -- Boris Johnson's

head. We will collectively work together to get the best deal for

Northern Ireland and the island. We will bear that in mind and

times between now and the 2nd of March.

Let's hear from my guests of the day - Lesley Carroll

Be two parties are as far apart as Sinn Fein and the DUP were apart

when they held the positions of First Minister and Deputy. It stems

back to decisions taken on the referendum and since then how the

Ulster Unionist Party have moved to a position of saying that the

British public voted for it so we have to support Brexit. There could

be ground over a period of time to agree principles around trying to

minimise the impact, but the sense of powerlessness that I think

politicians and the public now have is overwhelming. This is a much

bigger political game being played, at a level of Theresa May and the

EU. Perhaps there is an influence we could wield with the Irish

Government, and I think that somewhere in there... You were an

Ulster Unionist candidate at the last election in May. I want to take

a broader overview with you. How big difficulty is it for Northern

Ireland that it doesn't have a single voice in the Brexit debate at

this stage? We don't have a functioning executive and the two

people at the meeting tomorrow take very different views on this issue.

I think it is a massive issue that we don't have a united voice. Claire

Hanna spoke about Northern Ireland being unprepared. Westminster is

unprepared as well not only for what we face but for taking account of

the regions. Scotland is different because of the massive SNP vote so

there is a united voice, unlike here. We need to get to that voice

urgently, very, very urgently. Claire also spoke about the

coherence of the Ulster Unionist Party, being concerned about the

coherence of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Actually, the

coherence of these islands matters in terms of Brexit. Chris is right,

we need to look to the south. Without that united voice, our

capacity to influence is so limited, and we end up feeling powerless in

it all. We will talk to your bit later in the programme. Thank you

both very much indeed. Now, let's pause and take a look

back at the political week gone past in 60 seconds,

with Gareth Gordon. The terms of the RHI public enquiry

were revealed. To get to the fact of the eye which I -- the RHI scheme,

to identify corruption and abuse. Arlene Foster was confident that one

of her former advisers will be cleared of wrongdoing. It is wrong

that we pursue people on beliefs. What we need to do is get to the

facts. Sinn Fein unveiled its new northern leader. Agreements must be

honoured, commitments must be delivered with partnership

Government must mean exactly that. The Director of Public Prosecutions

rejected allegations of bias in Troubles cases. They are being

insulting and questioning our integrity. The DUP still believes

there is still too much focus on former soldiers. This system at the

moment is not fair, focused almost entirely on what the state does. And

the assembly ended in low-key fashion. The assembly is adjourned.

Gareth Gordon looking back at another busy week.

Theresa May has been doing the rounds this week -

first Washington, then Istanbul, and tomorrow she'll be visiting

She has already declined an invitation to address the Dail,

but there will be no shortage of things to talk about

With me is the Fine Gael TD for Louth, Fergus O'Dowd.

How important is that meeting between the two premiers?

It is hugely important. Brexit is the biggest decision facing these

islands for generations. An important successful outcome of

these discussions will be hugely beneficial to all of us on this

island and in the United Kingdom as well.

Does that suggest Ireland is not a priority for her?

I don't think so. That invitation came indirectly from a member of the

house. I think the invitation is listed and always will stand. It was

not a snub? No. We would love her to address our Parliament. Our

relationship with Britain is hugely important, as are our relations with

the North. Enda Kenny in Theresa May have commonality in keeping peace in

this island. We are joint guarantors of the Good Friday agreement. Our

economies are interlinked. Britain and Ireland for generations, for

centuries, there have been people over and back, we have families, we

have everything in each other's countries, so we must work hard.

Enda Kenny and Theresa May will work to ensure the best outcome in this

difficult position. What do you think the Taoiseach will want to

hear from Theresa May? We have had a conversation about the SDLP

perspective that Theresa May is driving a hard Brexit juggernaut.

That is not the vehicle that Enda Kenny would like her to be behind

the wheel of, but there we are. The island won't benefit from that. Our

economy, North and south, we are interlinked and joined up with

everybody in every way. Farmers in the North export milk down to us,

and we send it back up. Our business, trade, commerce is

interlinked. Do you think he needs to explain that? If we listen to

what the Chambers of commerce are saying, they are interlinked and

intertwined. Huge progress has been made others -- as a result of the

Good Friday agreement and we must continue that. The softer the border

the better. I think we have to use every possible imaginative outcome

we can have. The Irish Government has been planning for a long time,

looking at all the different options, and I think this meeting

with Theresa May is critical to progress on all of these islands.

Are you saying that he will be arguing, the Taoiseach, for a

special arrangement between Ireland, north and south, and the UK when

Brexit happens? The difficulty is that the negotiation at the EU level

is between heads of state and Britain. The only Irish person

speaking at those will be Enda Kenny, so his voice is powerful and

influential, but I think that the relationship between Britain and

Ireland is extremely important and special, and we must take that as

far as we can. We don't have the power to clearly negotiate but we

have to have the agenda agreed between us. If we don't, it will be

bad for everyone. Is he more concerned about the Republic trading

with the UK than he is over the border between the north and South?

I live in a border county and we never want to go back to what

happened before. Clearly, peace in Ireland, the Good Friday agreement,

is absolutely critical to the future of everybody on this island, so I

would say it is number one out there. And our economy, obviously,

and our cooperation between counties. If you look at health

cooperation in terms of cancer services in the North West, all

those things, all our communications, our whole country

together, forgetting our constitutional issues, working

together is where it is at. Which is more important, in your view,

Dublin's relationship with Brussels or with London? I think our

relationships on this island with each other are the priority.

Clearly, we have the influence in Brussels, and Britain as the

influence in the British Government. We have to work together. Peace on

this island is number one. It is a no-brainer. We can't have a Mexican

wall between North and South in this country. Our future is together, and

that's the only place we'll get on, and we must get on. We must overcome

the barriers, we must do it. If we don't, we will ultimately go back to

where we were, when nobody wants to go. Let's talk about the choppy

waters Mr Kenny seems to have got into over a coalition in the future

with Sinn Fein. He has issued a statement of clarification ruling

that out after seeming to suggest that his position was softening

earlier in the week. His position is clear. Now it is, it wasn't earlier

in the week. He has said there will not be a Government between Sinn

Fein and Fine Gael. Earlier in the week, he refused to answer the

question. You have answered in a straightforward way now. Why did he

make such a mess of it? There is a position of absolute clarity. We

absolutely agree that it will not happen. He has made a rod for his

own back. The papers are talking about him maybe not being lead by

Easter. Are you aware of a push to get rid of him because he has been

so clumsily footed? It is up to him whether he should leave the office.

Do you think he should go sooner rather than later? We need a

Taoiseach in place for these Brexit negotiations. So he should not go

until 2018? We have to bring Brexit to its finality. Individual

personalities are not important. What is critical is the cooperation

and the unity of our ideas if we can't unify our politics, we must

work together. It is the only game in town. Thank you for coming in to

join us. A final word with Leslie and Chris. When the Taoiseach ties

himself in knots, is this good news for Sinn Fein? What is clear is

whatever Enda Kenny has been saying this week, flip-flopping over the

issue of coalition with Sinn Fein, in the likely scenario of Sinn Fein

being led by Arlene McDonald or Pearse Doherty, Sinn Fein would find

reasons and find possible -- Fine Gael would find it possible to make

a coalition with Sinn Fein. The problem at the moment is Gerry

Adams. That is interesting, and it is a subject we will return to

repeatedly over the coming months. Leslie, are you planning to sit this

one out? I am sitting it out. Has a candidate been chosen for North

Belfast? Yes. You didn't throw your hat in the ring? No. No regrets? I

think the position are goverment finds itself in is now so difficult

and it is difficult to predict what will happen in this snap election

that I am very happy to sit it out for the time being. Does it look to

you like being the brutal campaign that Arlene Foster predicted? It has

the potential to be that, but if we allow that, we will slip back into

behaviour from before the Good Friday agreement, and we need not to

go there. We need to focus on partnerships and relationships. What

do we need to look out for in the next week? Brexit, over the next

coming days, with Theresa May in Dublin, will be a key issue. After

that, we will see what happens. The reactions to Trump will be

important. That's it from Sunday

Politics for this week. Join me for The View on Thursday

night at 10.40pm on BBC One. But for now, from everyone

in the team, bye-bye. We know you understand the risks

associated with your pregnancy. Because I'm smaller, people think

my hopes are not so great.