30/10/2016 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland

Morning folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.

Theresa May says she wants to help people who are

"just about managing" - so should she reverse

George Osborne's cuts to benefits that are supposed to help people

Prominent London Imam Shakeel Begg is an extremist speaker,

says the High Court, after claims made on this programme.

So why is Mr Begg still being allowed to advise the Police?

Hillary Clinton fights back over the FBI's renewed investigation

into her use of a private email server - is this the boost

Donald Trump needed to reignite his chances of winning the White House?

And coming up here - after her first speech as leader

to the DUP Conference, we hear from Arlene Foster

on Brexit, her swipe at the Irish Government,

and her new name for the Opposition. Join me in half an hour.

and her new name for the Opposition. Now it is just a question of

building that runway with the political problems that lie ahead.

And haunting the studio on this Halloween weekend,

the most terrifying political panel in the business -

Tim 'Ghost' Shipman, 'Eerie' Isabel Oakeshott and

First this morning, two new models of car to be built,

securing 7,000 jobs at the car plant in Sunderland and a further 28,000

The news from Nissan on Thursday was seized on by Leave campaigners

as evidence that the British economy is in rude health

This morning, the Business Secretary, Greg Clark, was asked

what assurances were given to the Japanese firm's bosses

Well, it's in no-one's the interest for there to be tariff

barriers to the continent and vice versa.

So, what I said is that our objective would be to ensure that we

have continued access to the markets in Europe and vice versa, without

tariffs and without bureaucratic impediments.

That is how we will approach those negotiations.

We're joined now from Newcastle by the Shadow Business

Welcome to the programme. Labour has been a bit sceptical about this

Nissan decision. Can we begin by making it clear just what a great

achievement this is, above all for the workers of Sunderland who have

some of the highest productivity in the world, have never been on strike

for 30 years, and produce cars of incredible quality. This is their

victory, isn't it? Andrew, you are absolutely right. The Nissan plant

in Sunderland is among the most productive in the world. The workers

of Nissan are amongst the most productive as well. And it's really

a victory for them and for the trade unions and the business

organisations, and everybody who campaigned to make sure that the

government couldn't ignore their future. It's our future. I'm the MP

for Newcastle. It makes a huge difference to the region. We are a

region that still likes to make things that work. It is a huge part

of our advanced manufacturing sector. So it's really something we

welcome as well as the job security. I'm glad we have got that on the

record from the Labour shadow business secretary. But your Shadow

Chancellor, John McDonnell, claims the government is ignoring

manufacturers and cares only about a small banking elite. In what way is

safeguarding 30,000 industrial jobs in the North safeguarding a

financial elite? As I said, we're really pleased that the campaigning

by trade unions and the workforce, and business organisations, meant

the government felt they couldn't ignore Nissan workers. Let's also be

clear that we want that kind of job security for all of those working in

manufacturing and in other sectors as well. And sweetheart deals for

one company, no matter how important they are, that does not an

industrial strategy make. Why'd you say it is a sweetheart deal? Greg

Clark told the BBC this morning that what was assured to Nissan is an

assurance he gives to the whole industrial sector? I was really

pleased to see Greg Clark felt he had to say something, even though

it's sad that we having our industrial strategy, you like, or

our approach to Brexit delivered piecemeal to the media rather than

to the British people and Nissan, actually. But he want published the

letter. He said he has told us what is in the letter and that

reassurances given on training, on science and on supporting the supply

chain for the automated sector. You must be in favour all -- of all of

that? We are in favour of an industrial strategy. Greg Clark,

unlike Sajid Javid, cannot say industrial strategy. I'm still

puzzling to find out what it is you disagree with. Let me put the

question. You said the assurances he has given to Nissan are available to

the car manufacturing sector in general and indeed to industry in

general. What is your problem with that? Two things. Let him publish

the letter so we can see that, let him have the transparency he's

pretending to offer. But also, we need an industrial strategy that

values -- that is values based and joined. He talked about electric

cars and supporting green cars. That was in regard to Nissan. At the same

time the government has slashed support for other areas of green

technology. So what is it? That is not to do with the Nissan deal.

Labour implied at some stage there was some financial inducement, some

secret bribes, that doesn't seem to be the case. You are not claiming

that any more -- any more. Then you claimed it was a sweetheart deal for

one company. That turns out not to be the case. What criticism are you

left with on this Nissan deal? I would be really surprised if all

that Nissan got was the reassurances that Greg Clark is shared with us.

He didn't answer the question of what happens if we can't get

continued tariff free access to the single market, if we are not within

the single market or the Customs Union. Do you really think a

negotiator like Nissan, who are very good at negotiating, they would have

excepted making this significant investment without some further

reassurances? Do you think there is some kind of financial bride and if

so what is the evidence? I would like to see the letter published and

I would also like to understand what would happen... There are 27

countries which need to agree with the deal we have from Brexit. What

will Nissan, how will Nissan remain competitive? How will the automotive

industry remain competitive? Greg Clark says he reassured them on

that. But how will that be so if we do not get access? We haven't heard

anything about that. He talks about reassurances given to Nissan. We

need to make -- to know where we're going to make sure Brexit is in the

interest of all workers, not only those who work for a Nissan and not

only those who can get the attention of Greg Clark. He assured Nissan

that Britain would remain a competitive place to do business.

That was the main assurance he gave them. He would help with skills and

infrastructure and all the rest. Since you are -- intend to repeal

the trade union laws that have made strikes in Britain largely a thing

of the past, and you plan to raise corporation tax, you couldn't give

Nissan the same assurance, could you? We could absolutely give Nissan

the assurance that we will be, our vision of the future of the UK, is

based on having a strong manufacturing sector. Repealing

trade union laws? As we have seen at Nissan, the industrial sector is

dependent on having highly trained, well skilled workers. -- highly

skilled, well-trained. You don't have that by getting -- having an

aggressive policy and trade union laws or by slashing corporation tax

and not supporting manufacturing investment. Remember, the last

government took away the Manufacturing allowances which

supported Manufacturing and slashed corporation tax. That is their

solution. It is a low tax, low skill economy they want.

Thank you. Sorry I had to rush you. I'm grateful for you joining us.

I'm still struggling to see what is left of Labour's criticism? Yeah,

except for this. This was a valid point she just made. What we know

for sure is that Greg Clark could say to Nissan, my aim is to get

tariff free deal. There is no way he could guarantee that. None of us

know that. I don't think that was enough. I think clearly there was a

more detailed package involving training and other things. He has

acknowledged this, albeit we do not know the precise mechanism. What I

think is interesting about this is if you reverse what happened this

week, at a time when the government says Britain is open for business

and it is going to have an industrial strategy, so far it is a

bit vaguely defined. Nissan hadn't made this commitment. Imagine what

would have happened? It is an impossible scenario. The government

seems to me was obliged to make sure this didn't happen. Let's not forget

Nissan has invested hundreds of millions in the north-east. It has

been a huge success story. When I spoke to workers from Nissan, they

were so proud because they went to Japan to teach the Japanese had to

be more productive. The idea that Nissan was just going to walk away

from this given its track record, its importance, wasn't really

credible. The government had some bargaining chips. Absolutely, of

course they weren't going to walk away. The majority of people in the

area in which Nissan is braced -- based, voted for Brexit. Nissan

knows it is in a powerful position because it is an emotive sector.

Clearly the government didn't want to have some big showdown. I

honestly don't think this is a smoking gun. The Labour Shadow

minister really struggled to articulate what exactly she thinks

the government is hiding. I think the reassurances were given were

pretty anodyne, really. They were anodyne and general. And what Greg

Clark was setting out was an objective and he made the right

noises, and Nissan exercised its right to sabre rattle. It does have

a history of doing that. The one thing that would now be clear given

Greg Clark's performance this morning on the BBC, is that if we

were to discover some kind of financial incentive directly linked

to this investment, not more for skills or infrastructure, that is

fine, but some direct financial investment, compensation for

tariffs, which would be illegal under World Trade Organisation

rules, what you might call a financial bride, the sect -- the

business Secretary's position would be untenable? He would be in a very

difficult position indeed. Just released the letter. There is

nothing to hide. Put it out there. The most revealing thing is that

people are getting wildly excited about the fact Greg Clark announced

Britain's negotiating position would be that we would like tariff free

trade with Europe. This is regarded as an insight into what this comment

is doing and it says a great deal about how little we have been told

in Parliament and the media about what they are up. Do you think it is

exciting we are going for tariff free trade? We're easily excited

these days. We don't know. This is where these things are at such a

tentative phase. We don't know how the rest of the European Union is

going to respond to Britain's negotiating hand. We know Britain

once the best of everything, please. It is a starting point. But that is

not how it is going to end up. We are getting wider than that. We have

will have to see. Now, Universal Credit,

a single payment made to welfare claimants that would roll together

a plethora of benefits whilst encouraging people into work

by making work pay. But have cuts to the flagship

welfare scheme reduced work incentives and hit the incomes

of the least well-off? Well, some of the government's

own MPs think so, and, as Mark Lobel reports,

want the cuts reversed. Theresa May says she wants

a country that works for everyone, that's on the side

of ordinary, working people. It means never writing off people

who can work and consigning them to a life on benefits,

but giving them the chance to go out and earn a living and to enjoy

the dignity that comes But now some in her party

are worried that the low earners will be hit by changes

to Universal Credit benefit system originally set up to encourage

more people into work. We also need to focus tax credits

and Universal Credit Concern centred on the Government's

decision in the July 2015 budget to find ?3 billion worth of savings

from the Universal Credit bill. Conservative MP Heidi Allen

is working on a campaign to get MPs in her party to urge

the Prime Minister to think again. I want her to understand for herself

what the outcomes might be if we press ahead

with the Universal Credit, Do you think Theresa May, right now,

understands what you understand? To be fair, unless you really

get into the detail, and I have through my work

on the Work and Pensions Select Committee, I don't

think anybody does. Independent economic analysts

at the IFS agree with Heidi Alan that cuts to Universal Credit weaken

incentives to work. One of the key parts

of the Universal Credit system That is how much you can

earn before your credit As the Government has

sought to save money, both under the Coalition and now

they Conservative Government, both under the Coalition and now

the Conservative Government, that work allowance has been cut,

time and time again. The biggest cuts happened

in the summer budget of 2015. That basically reduces the amount

of earnings you get to keep It weakens the incentive people have

to move into work. What do changes to the Universal

Credit system mean? The Resolution Foundation think-tank

has crunched the numbers. If you compare what would have

happened before the July 2015 summer budget to what will happen by 2020,

even if you take into account gains in the National Living Wage

and income tax cuts, recipients will be hit

by annual deductions. Couples and parents would receive,

on average, ?1000 less. A dual-earning couple with two

children under four, with one partner working full-time

on ?10.50 an hour and the other working part-time on the minimum

wage for around 20 hours a week, they would

receive ?1800 less. Hit most by the changes

would be a single parent with a child under four,

working full-time I think, if I'm honest,

it is unrealistic, given the economic climate,

to expect everything to be reversed. What I would like to see

is an increase in the work allowances to those people

who will be hardest hit. That is single parents and second

earners hoping to return to work, because they are the people we need

to absolutely make The Sunday Politics understands that

about 15 to 20 Conservative MPs are pushing for changes ahead

of the Autumn Statement. A former cabinet minister told us

that they believed further impact analysis should be done to find out

if any mitigation measures Former Work and Pensions Secretary

Iain Duncan Smith, an architect of the system, now says

the cuts should be reversed. But his former department has told

us that it has no plans to revisit the work allowance changes announced

in the budget last year. What I would say to Heidi Allen

and IDS, they got it right the first time and they should stick

to the vote they cast last year, because these reforms actually

do make sense. What interests me is the fact

we are trying to move people off welfare into work,

we are raising the wages people earn by massively increasing

the minimum wage and this People are coming off

welfare and into work. Campaigners are pushing for savings

to come from other areas to relieve The other thing we have to start

looking at is the triple Financially it has been a great

policy, and it was absolutely right that we lifted pensioners

who were significantly behind, for many years, in terms of income

levels, but they have I think it is time for us to look

at that policy again, because is costing us an awful

lot of money. With just over three weeks to wait

until the Conservative leadership's new economic plan is unveiled

in the Autumn Statement, its top team is under pressure

from within its own ranks to use it And I'm joined now by former Work

and Pensions Secretary, Welcome back to the programme.

Theresa May said she is on the side of the just managing, the working

poor. But they are about to be hit from all sides. Their modest living

standards are going to be squeezed as inflation overtakes pay rises,

they will be further squeezed because top-up benefits in work are

frozen. Incentives to work are going to be reduced by the cuts in

universal benefits. So much for being on the side of those just

managing? Theresa was right to focus on this group. The definition has to

be the bottom half, in economic terms, of the social structure. It

doesn't look good for them? This is the point I am making, it is an

opportunity to put some of this right. One of the reasons I resigned

in March is because I felt the direction of travel we had been

going in had been to take far too much money out of that group of

people when there are other areas which, if you need to make some of

those savings, you can. The key bit is that the group needs to be helped

through into work and encouraged to stay in work. There was a report

done with the IFS, when we were there, at Universal Credit. It said

Universal Credit rolled out, as it should have been before the cuts,

people would be much more likely to stay in work longer and earn more

money. It is a net positive, but that is now called into question.

Let's unpick some of the detail, but first, do you accept the words of

David Willets? It says on the basis of the things I read out to you that

the just managing face a significant and painful cut in real terms if we

continue on the way we are going. I do, in essence. That is the reason

why I resigned. I felt Heidi raised that issue as well, that we got the

balance wrong. It is right that pensioners get to a certain point,

when they are on a level par, doing the right thing over five years.

Staying with that process has cost us ?18 billion extra this year, in

total. It will go on costing another 5 billion. Then there is the issue

of tax allowances. I want to remind you and viewers what David Cameron

told the Conservative conference in 2009. If you are a single mother

with two children, earning ?150 a week, the withdrawal of your

benefits and the additional taxes that you pay me on that for every

extra you earn, you keep just 4p. What kind of incentive is that? 30

years ago, this party won and election fighting against 98% tax

rates for the Rex richest. I want us today to show even more anger about

96% tax rates for the very poorest in our country. Real anger, and

effective rate of over 90%. Universal Credit reduces that. Some

will still face, as they lose benefits and pay tax, a marginal

rate of over 75%. That is still too high? Yes, it is the collision

between those going into work at the moment they start paying tax. A

racial Universal Credit is set at 65%. You can call that the base

marginal tax rate. 1.2 million will face 75%? That is the point about

why the allowances are so important. The point about the allowances which

viewers might not fully understand is that it was set, as part of

Universal Credit, to allow you to get certain people, with certain

difficulties, as they cross into work, to retain more benefit before

it is tapered away as they go up in hours. A lone parent, who might have

various issues, you want her to have a bigger incentive than a single

person that does not have the same commitments. It is structured so

that somebody who has difficulty going to work, they all have

slightly different rates. What happened is that last year a

decision was taken to reduce tax credits, and, on the back of that,

to reduce allowances. I believe, given everything that happened now,

we need to restore that to the point where it helps those people crossing

over. You say a decision was taken, it was a decision by the former

Chancellor George Osborne in the summer budget. Other decisions were

taken in successive Budgets to raise the Universal Credit budget, which

resulted in the disincentive being higher than many people wanted. Do

you accept that has been the consequence of his decisions? I was

in the Government, we take collective responsibility. I argued

this was not the right way to go, but when you are in you have to stay

with it if you lose that argument. There was another attempt before the

spending review last year to increase the taper, so the marginal

rate would have gone up. I managed to stop that. I'm Sibley saying,

what we made as a decision last year, given the circumstances and

given that the net effect of all of that, I think it is time for the

Government to ask the question, if we are in this to help that group of

people, Universal Credit is singularly the most powerful tool.

One of the Argentine aid in the paper published on Thursday, we are

set going on doing two more races of the tax threshold, taking more

people out of tax. That has a diminishing effect on the bottom

section. Only 25p in that tax rate will help any of those. Most of it

goes to middle income? You and I will benefit more from that. With

Universal Credit, every pound you put into that will go to the bottom

five tenths. That is why I designed it like that. He pressed the button

and immediately start to changed circumstances. Should the cuts in

Universal Credit that Mr Osborne introduced, against your argument,

should they be reversed? I believe so. I believe you can do it even if

there is concern about spending. I don't believe you need to go through

with the continuing raise the tax threshold. Cost is dependent on

inflation, but give or take. It is in the Tory manifesto? Has more than

doubled. What is in the manifesto, and Lasse Prime Minister made this

clear in conference, we want to improve the life chances of people.

Today's announcement on the Green paper is what I wrote over the last

two and a half years. Big changes necessary to how we deal with

sickness benefit. That can now be done because of Universal Credit,

because people can go back to work and it tapers away their benefits.

It is the most powerful tool to sort our people that live in poverty,

Universal Credit. We need to make sure it lands positively. If Mr

Osborne's cuts were reversed, what you and some of your backbench Tory

colleagues want to do, how would that improve the incentives of the

working poor, as they try to get on in life? They have to pay more tax,

they lose some benefits. How would it improve it? Would many still face

a 75% rate? The key question is, first and foremost, as people move

through income to the point where they are getting taxed, that group

will be enormously benefited by the re-emergence of these allowances at

the right level. That is what the IFS have said, that is what the

Resolution Foundation are saying, and the Centre For Social Justice is

saying. You have to get that group, because they are most likely to be

drifting into poverty and less incomes are right. Would it help

those who face a 75% margin? We don't face that. Exactly right.

People much poorer than us do. I would love to get the marginal rate

down to testify percent, and lower,. -- down to 65%. It is a balance of

how you spend the money. I would prefer to do that rather than

necessarily go ahead with threshold razors. I think the coronation of

the marginal reduction of 65%, getting it down to 60%, plus more

allowances, will allow Universal Credit to get to the group that is

going to be, and the report written by the IFS and ourselves, it shows

it is going to be the most dynamic and direct ability of a Government

to be able to influence the way that people improve their incomes in the

bottom five deciles. Would you take on extra work if you knew you were

going to lose 75% of it? Even 65%? This has been my argument all along.

Universal Credit can help that enormously. One point that goes

missing, 70% of the bottom five deciles will be on Universal Credit.

Whatever change you make to Universal Credit has a dramatic and

immediate effect I am arguing, genuinely, it is time to rethink

this. The Prime Minister wants to make this a priority. I am

completely with her on this. I think she made a really good start. To

deliver this, we need to... You have a lot of work to do to deliver it.

Because it is a manifesto commitment, or because they want to

do it, stopping increasing the personal allowances are not

acceptable, what about bringing to an end, by the end of the

parliament, the pension triple lock that pensioners enjoy to improve and

put more money to the working poor? What about that? Well, you are

absolutely right that there is now the danger, I think, of a mess

balance between the generations. Quite rightly at the beginning, when

we came in, we have a commitment as a Conservative Party in a manifesto

to get pensions back onto earnings. It was moved to a triple lock that

guaranteed a minimum. What about ending up now? I understand it is a

promise through the Parliament, but after 2020? I am in favour of

getting it back to innings and allowing it to rise at reasonable

levels. Moving from earnings to the triple lock has cost ?18 billion

this year. Here was a high, under pressure, as the Government was

scratching around to pay more money out of working age areas, when the

budget was almost out of control on the pension side. I'm in favour of

helping pensioners, but now they are up to a reasonable level, at a

steady rate, that can be afforded by Government, which takes the pressure

off, working age people have to pay for that. In years to come, time to

end the triple lock and use the savings to help these

people we have been talking about? As part of a load of packages, yes.

It would also help with the intergenerational fairness argument.

Thank you for being with us. Now, a prominent London Imam

called Shakeel Begg - who is Chief Imam the Lewisham

Islamic Centre - is an extremist. That was the verdict of the judge

in a libel action that Mr Begg took against the BBC, after we described

him as an Islamic extremist Mr Begg had complained about a short

segment in an interview in November 2013 with Farooq Murad,

the then head of the Muslim Council of Britain, an organisation

which claims to represent British In that interview, we described

Mr Begg as an extremist speaker who had hailed jihad

is the greatest of deeds. From his base of the Lewisham

Islamic Centre, Mr Begg has been involved in a number of community

organisations, including the Police Independent

Advisory Group in Lewisham, Lewisham Council's Advisory Council

on Religious Education and as a volunteer chaplain

at Lewisham Hospital. But in his judgment,

Mr Justice Haddon-Cave called Mr Begg a Jekyll and Hyde character

- a trusted figure in his local community, but when talking

to predominantly Muslim audiences he shed the cloak of respectability

and revealed the horns of extremism. The judge cited one speech made

by Mr Begg at a rally outside Belmarsh Prisonm-

the high security prison that houses terrorists -

as particularly sinister. The judge said the imam

was expressing admiration and praise Following Friday's judgment,

the hospital trust have told us that Mr Begg's status as a voluntary

chaplain has been terminated. We have been told by

Lewisham Council he is no longer on their Religious

Education Committee. The Metropolitan Police

have confirmed that Mr Begg remains a member

of their Independent Advisory Group in Lewisham, as well as

the borough's faith group. I am joined by Haras Rafiq, chief

executive of the Quilliam Foundation. Welcome to the

programme. I have here in my hand a statement from the trustees of the

Lewisham Islamic Centre. They reject the judge's ruling as fanciful and

say they are unequivocal and unwavering in their support of

Shakeel Begg as their head imam. What do you make of that? To be

honest, it doesn't surprise me. At the end of the day he is only the

imam of that mosque because he belongs to the same theological

fundamentalist views that the mosque would portray. If they were to say

he was an extremist, they would be saying in fact that they have

allowed extremist preaching and extremist theology within their

walls. I think this is a very important decision and a very

important judgment by the judge. First of all, these people like to

operate in a linear, under a veneer of respectability. When that veneer

is taken away, there are a number of things that can happen. First of

all, the BBC did very well to stand by their guns and say, we're not

going to be intimidated by somebody who is threatening to taking -- to

take us to court for potential libel. Many other media companies

have done that in the past and people have capitulated. Also, this

has exposed him. Legally now, here's some deal can be classified as an

extremist preacher, somebody who promotes religious violence. I think

the mosque really needs to take a step back and say, how we part of

the problem that we are facing within society? Or are we going to

be part of the solution? It really concerns me. The High Court judge

says that Mr Begg's speeches were consistent with an extremist

Salafist is the most worldview. What is Salafist is and how widespread is

it in UK mosques? -- mosque. It comes from the Middle East. It is

from Saudi Arabia. The enemy for them was the old colonial Ottoman

Empire. There is the quiet Salafist to get some with their lives, lives

outside society. There is a revolutionary who tries to convert

other people to their worldview. And then there is the Salafist jihad

ease. People like Islamic State etc. We have seen of increased in recent

decades because of money that has, growing from the Middle East. When

that is mixed with a political ideology, it becomes potent. Do we

have a political -- particular problem in Britain with this in our

mosques? Absolutely. Without the theology that says hate the other,

hate other Muslims, that excommunicate other people, that

says it is OK to fight and is good to fight when you have got an enemy,

we wouldn't really have a jihadi problem. Really that is something we

have to tackle. The number of mosques and institutions supporting

Salafist and Islam is has been on the increase. Do we have a problem

with what the judge called Jekyll and Hyde characters who hide their

extremism except when they are speaking to specific groups?

Absolutely. One of the things we have focused on in the past, a

number of hate preachers now in prison, people like Anjem Choudary,

and everybody focused on them. But there is a range of people operating

under that level. People who will show one face to the community

because they actually need that for a respectability. They need that for

a legitimacy. They need that to operate. When they are behind closed

doors and talking to their doors and talking to their

constitution, that is when you will see the real face of what these

people believe. It is an increasing phenomenon. We are seeing it more.

And we're going to carry on seeing it. Not just has the Lewisham mosque

stuck by him, but given the clarity of the judge's ruling, are you

surprised that the Metropolitan police would wish to continue with

Mr Begg as an adviser? I'm absolutely shocked that that

decision. What Uzzy going to do? Advise them on how to deal with

extremist preachers and promote religiously motivated violence? I

don't know what he's going to advise them on. Because we now have a judge

that has ruled against him and actually classified him as an

extremist and somebody who promotes religious violence, we actually have

a possibility for the CPS to actually prosecute him. There is a

law that has been in place since 2005 called religiously motivated

violence. If he has been classified as somebody who promotes this, there

is a potential for the CPS to prosecute. I want to called into

question other organisations, interfaith organisations, other

Muslims groups, who say they want to fight extremism, I call on them to

say, this guy is an extremist preacher, we should cut our ties

from him. This was a very high risk strategy by the BBC. The exposure

could have been over ?1.5 million of licence payers money. Will this make

it more difficult for Jekyll and Hyde characters to behave as Mr Begg

has behaved? Absolutely. It will do. One of the things they will now have

to make sure is that they are a lot more careful. Careful with what they

say to their own constituency. It won't solve the theological problem.

But it will actually stop other people from operating in this manner

and allow other media organisations to have the confidence to expose

them when they do. Haras Rafiq, thank you for joining us.

It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.

We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now

Coming up here in 20 minutes, the Week Ahead.

Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics in Northern Ireland.

Arlene Foster felt the love of the DUP party faithful yesterday

as she delivered her first conference speech as leader -

but there was no love lost as she hit out

at the Ulster Unionists, the SDLP and here,

Their representatives are sent out around the world to talk

down our economy and to attempt to poach our investors.

And with their thoughts on all of that and more,

my guests of the day are the News Letter's Political Correspondent,

Sam McBride, and fellow journalist, Suzanne Breen.

So, Arlene Foster's first conference as DUP leader has come and gone.

Predictably there were attacks on the Ulster Unionist

and SDLP leaders - who were re-christened

Less predictably, perhaps, Mrs Foster launched a broadside

But perhaps least surprising of all - no attack in the leader's

speech on Sinn Fein - how times have changed.

Our Political Correspondent, Gareth Gordon, was there

Just a few final touches... This time to claim the ovation. In less

than a year, Arlene Foster has made the DUP her owner. Regarded as the

party's main asset with the voters. She soon find a way of describing

her rival, Mike Nesbitt and his ally, Colin Eastwood. Steptoe and

son were a very odd couple. Actually, the similarities are

amazing. One was an older bitter man, the other was a frustrated

younger man. They had to live together but they never got on. And

they made a life selling junk to the public! There was no mention of our

partners in the Executive, Sinn Fein. But a dig at the Irish

Government. While they seek to take the views from Northern Ireland on

Brexit, their representatives are sent out around the world to talk to

our economy and to attempt to poach our investors. Now, it is clear,

conference, at the one place that a hard border does exist is in the

mind of the Irish Government. Deputy said another election could be

close. The temptation for the Prime Minister to call early general

election is, I have to say, strong and growing. Our party is making

preparations for such an eventuality. The DUP latest recruits

from the Ulster Unionists try to look at home, even if they have not

always been conned an their new party. This time last year, you

treated the picture of the North Korean litre... The cut and thrust

of politics. It is harassing today? I don't think so. Is the DUP not

confining you? The DUP can accommodate Sammy Wilson, so can

accommodate me. What was the verdict on Arlene Foster's press conference

as DPP leader? It's difficult for the DUP to attack their partners in

Government. The Irish Government is an easy target. The irony is that

the Ulster Unionist Party cosying up to the test DUP, that was a line of

attack and yet it is the DUP sharing power with the historic enemy. What

was the verdict from the third? Very good. She will do well. She is

absolutely out of this world. Love her to bits. Very good. They have to

top Ian Paisley. Not as good as Ian Paisley? Format not yet. She is

leading the Ulster people and we thank Doctor Paisley for his

leadership and Peter Robinson. What does she have to do? More

interaction with people. She has been around the country and visiting

all borders. She's not Ian Paisley. It just goes to show, you cannot be

complacent. This was a lap of honour for Arlene Foster but she will no

more hard work lies ahead. Gareth Gordon on the conference

floor with the party faithful. Well I spoke to Arlene Foster

yesterday just after she came off the stage -

and I began by asking her about that attack on the Ulster

Unionists and SDLP. So, are their new close-working

arrangements in Opposition People have rumbled Mike and column.

They now selling what is going on. How can a Unionist leader forming

coalition in the fashion that they are talking about and not weaken

unionism and Northern Ireland's place within the UK? It is a

complete farce. The one and get the other. If you vote for Ireland, you

get Eileen. That's the reality. I think it is quite amusing. You think

it is funny but if you think about it, what you have said is a

nonsense. You asked how it could not weaken Unionism for Mike Nesbitt to

work closely with Colin Eastwood, by that logic, how does not weaken

unions even more for you to be working on Government Martin

McGuinness? Into a completely separate. What Mike and column are

talking about is an election pack. They are going to go forward with

the opposition programme and they're going to ask people to vote for

them. When we stand in an election, we stand on her own two feet and put

forward our agenda. As you well know, we could forbid that agenda in

May under our 5-point plan and people voted for it. They voted for

it in their thousands and we had more votes than ever before and we

came back with 38 seats, despite the fact there are many who came back

with a lot less. I am very content to stand on my own two feet and

said, if you vote for Arlene, you get Eileen. But people also got

Martin. You can't pretend that didn't happen. And it could happen

in an election next week. Would it? I hope people would rally around the

DUP. Whether the nationals people decided to vote for Martin's party

or Colin's party is a matter for them. I am trying to put forward a

positive fish for Northern Ireland. People told me that it didn't matter

who the First Minister was in Northern Ireland. Yet we came back

as the strongest party, which meant that I could be the First Minister

and we could have a majority of unionists in the Executive and the

largest party in the Assembly and we could shape the agenda and that is

exactly what we're doing, as the DUP, we shape the agenda for

Northern Ireland and are moving ahead with the issues that matter.

You mentioned electoral pacts and you made an interesting comment

during a speech. I want to see if I understand this. You said I will not

be watering down Unionism to form an electoral pact or political Alliance

with anyone or any party. Does that mean if there was a snap election

that your deputy would not have the same kind of agreement between the

DUP and Ulster Unionists that made are you one east Belfast and the one

for Fermanagh South. Are you ruling out any arrangement with them in the

future? Let me say two things, first of all, it appears that Mike has

said he wants to do pacts with the SDLP. That is a matter for him. If

there were a Westminster election tomorrow, I would have to ask what

would serve the best interests of Unionism and that would be the way

in which I would decide how to go forward, not looking at anything

else but what is best for Unionism, what strengthens Unionism, in terms

of a Westminster election at Westminster. That is how I will

approach this matter. Interestingly, he did not really make much

reference about some of the controversial issues like fatal

foetal abnormality or same-sex marriage during your speech.

Presumably that was deliberate. Did you consult with your party

colleagues before you said there would be no movement on the DUP's

part on the issue of supporting same-sex marriage before you make

that statement? Because some MLAs in Stormont from other parties are

openly tweeting the members of your party are not at all happy with what

he said. That is just a nonsense. Because of course that was our

position before May, in our manifesto and it is our position

since then. There was no surprise in any of this. I was asked a

question by a huge story. It is no surprise in any of this. When we put

together manifested, we were very clear about delivering on it. The

reason why those issues, which you told me where issues of the

election, of course they went the issue of the election. The issues of

the election were in and around health and education and investment

and those were the issues people voted on. They did not vote on a

narrow agenda. They voted on a broad agenda for Northern Ireland. That is

what I was reflecting on today. A straight answer to this question,

are you clear that every one of the 30th MLAs in the DUP support your

position on same-sex marriage? Because I can think of a few who I

think would take a different line and who would support to same-sex

marriage if given the opportunity. And that is your assessment. And I

have to respect your assessment. But let me say this. I have spoken to

them. That's fine. It is the party policy and the reality and the party

policy was passed to the Executive of the party back in April and it

came to the people in May and people voted for it in May and it is quite

amusing to hear some commentators and others talk about the fact we

need to vote on this issue. We did have on this issue. As recently as

May of this year. Those are the issues that were important at the

time, health, education, investment, jobs and those are the issues that I

am focused on, moving forward because I believe if we focus on

those issues we will deliver a better Northern Ireland for

absolutely everybody. You also spoke about Brexited he had outlined here

approached that in the forthcoming negotiations, which he said will be

tough negotiations. You're pretty clear about how you want handle

that. It wasn't your message on Grexit basically no special status

for Northern Ireland? It is off the agenda? -- it wasn't your message on

breaks it -- Brexit. We have to recognise the geography of Northern

Ireland is different from the UK and we should recognise it in

negotiations and the Prime Minister will recognise this because she has

already in the House of Commons when she said we were different because

of our land border with what will be the European Union. Special status

or different but not different enough to have special status, which

is it? It is in negotiation. It hasn't even started yet. Those of us

who've been to many negotiations are Northern Ireland now it will be an

evolving picture and that we have to get the best deal for the people of

Northern Ireland and that is what I am focused on regardless of whether

people voted remain or to leave, the figure should now be what is

rightfully people of Northern Ireland and that is where I am and

where I hope others will come to as well. I know there are others

struggling with the fact that the UK voted to leave the EU and are having

difficulty with that. They're engaging in court cases are doing

all sorts of things when in fact they

should be concentrating on doing what is right for the people of

Northern Ireland. That is my focus and I hope others will eventually

come to that determination as well. You so clearly the Brexit means

Grexit. The whole of the UK must leave the EU. It seems to suggest

that the idea there might be some special status for Northern Ireland

is of your radar. -- Brexit means Brexit. You have also set... People

might want to know whether there is a possibility that during the

negotiations on pain of special status and Northern Ireland might be

acceptable to Arlene Foster. What I have said to you is that the whole

of the UK's leading the EU. Even the Prime Minister has recognised that

there are specific circumstances which pertain to Northern Ireland

and those have to be dealt with. Whether people want to label that

special circumstance or special starters, I am not that interested.

What I am interested in is doing what's right for the people of

Northern Ireland. Your message to the Irish Government, if I was to

summarise it, having read the speech is, effectively, mind your own

business, stay out of it? No, it's not that at all. I don't know how

you came to that determination and! I said we had the best relationship

we have ever had with the edge Government, we'll continue to have

those negotiations but frankly cannot have it both ways. They are

currently out in America talking to friends that are already in Northern

Ireland, saying they should come south to the Republic and they are

also talking to potential firms we are talking to try to get them to

the Republic of Ireland as well. Is it competition or is a corporation?

Which do they want? They have to make up their mind in relation to. I

know they have a different economy and they will want to sell that but

please don't misrepresent what is happening in Northern Ireland. Our

offering to investors has not changed. We still have the talent,

the value and come April 20 18th we will have a tax offering as well.

And I think the offering for inward investors will be even stronger

after Brexit because there are huge opportunities in relation to

international trade. Arlene Foster speaking to me

straight after her conference speech Let's hear what my studio

guests make of that. I'm joined by the journalists

Sam McBride and Suzanne Breen. Arlene Foster's firepower was

trained on Mike Nesbitt and call me eastward, rather than Republicans.

Not a mention of Sinn Fein at all. There was one reference to not

getting a united Ireland and that was pointed at Anna Lo, but the real

enemy is Mike Nesbitt and the Ulster Unionists for Arlene, and she has

been bothered by this new nickname of Marlene and made remarks about

Steptoe and son team the opposition and remarks about people's

appearance and this was a vicious attack on opposition and she clearly

thinks not very much of them. She dismissed Mike

Nesbitt and Colum Eastwood. The DUP did not attack Sinn Fein but any

attacks were from people marching in a newsreader. They were people

outside the party. The DUP is clearly in love with its leader, she

stands on a honeymoon period and masterful she surveys. What about

the defections? We the people named as coming across from Ulster

Unionists to the DUP. They're not exactly the big beasts of the forest

in political terms but it is significant enough in its own way.

The defections, they are not a game changer but they show the direction

in which Unionist politics is going. The DUP conference claim we are a

family, to welcome the new recruits bear and Greatham Creek, the Belfast

City Council, he had pride of place in the very top row. It was

interesting, he was wearing a 3-piece suit with a pink tie and

remastered waistcoat and he said, I Arlene Foster's first openly gay

councillor and that there are some wiser DUP there a little bit

alarmed. It will be interesting to see how people will handle Greatham

Creek. He has an independent streak. He has been critical in the past. As

have others, making reference to the DUP pings like North Korea. One of

the difficulties for anyone defecting, the internet has a long

memory. Graham Craig was probably one of the most viciously anti-DUP

unionist I could think so I was stunned when I read he had moved

across. It must alarmed unionists because if someone who is openly

savaging the DUP a months ago, he sent us letters regularly which were

so vicious we felt we could not publish them for legal reasons, if

he can move across, perhaps anyone can. And on Brexiter, I am

interested in what she had to say. She said to the Irish Government,

you are trying to poach our investors. If people want to come

shopping in the North, they're very welcome.

Let's talk about the Taoiseach, Enda Kenny's, all-island

conversation on the implications of Brexit in Dublin on Wednesday.

The DUP and the Ulster Unionists have both declined Mr Kenny's

invitation - Arlene Foster insisting she has better things to do

than listen to a lot of "grand-standing remoaners".

Mr Kenny, however, told the Dail it's important that as many voices

It is my intention to convene an all-Ireland conversation about this,

to which business people and members of civic society and political

parties could be inflated. -- invited.

Relations between the Unionist parties, between Northern Ireland

and the Government in the south, very tricky at the moment? Yes. They

are. This issue has always struck me as baffling. It seems an incredibly

pedantic debate, the Enda Kenny is saying we should have this debate in

a new forum specifically to discuss Brexit rather than the existing

North South Ministerial Council. The DUP are saying, no, it seems quite

baffling as to why there might not be able to be a compromise and it is

very odd because on the one hand the DUP have better relations with

Dublin than they had ever had. And yet be raised this chasm -- there is

this chasm with Enda Kenny day. Perhaps southern politics explained

some of it. I think you must be very embarrassing to Sinn Fein that this

is their partners in Government and yet Arlene Foster will not take part

in that forum. It is clear who wears the trousers and too is not Martin

McGuinness. Thank you both for now. Let's pause for a moment

and take a look back at the week in 60 seconds -

with Gareth Gordon... The Health Minister unveiled

a 10-year plan she claims will improve a system at breaking

point. There is no quick fix. We need to

have a sustained plan of action, what I set out.

As devolved leaders talked Brexit in Downing Street the Prime Minister

said Northern Ireland was a special case.

The position of Northern Ireland will be a particular position

because it will be the one part of the UK with a land border with a

country remaining inside the EU. And her Secretary of State denied

he would favour Westminster's I will work alongside the Executive

Committee First Minister and the Deputy First Minister through the

joint... You're not be in force of London? No, it is about how to get

the best deal for Northern Ireland. Naomi Long took over from David Ford

as Alliance leader though he and the woman who replaced him

as Justice Minister had issues - Since it is clearly her decision,

she clearly has a plan is to fund it. It is a personal decision. I am

Minister of justice. Martin McGuinness said on The View

last week it would be shameful and disgraceful if outstanding

legacy issues haven't been resolved by the first anniversary

of the Fresh Start deal. What chance a resolution

any time soon? I think there is no sign of a

revolution. There are people out there who very much need help and

they are not getting it and our politicians need to put their heads

together and get some sort of deal, even an interim deal, on the table.

There are people with serious injuries and they need assistance.

Are you any more optimistic? A little bit. It depends how you

define a resolution. Perhaps we will see some sort of progress but Arlene

Foster was pretty bullish, saying she will not allow the history of

the troubles to be rewritten. Thank you both.

That's it. Back to Andrew in London.

Barely more than a week now until polling day,

and a new revelation rocks the US Presidential election campaign.

If it wasn't bizarre enough, it just got more bizarre.

The FBI have reopened their investigation into Hillary Clinton's

use of private email servers whilst she was Secretary

of State, after the discovery of further emails.

Though not on her laptop or even the State Department.

Donald Trump is saying that it's bigger than Watergate -

so could it swing the election in his favour?

We spoke to top US pollster, Frank Luntz.

The FBI investigation is happening so late in the election process

that it would be very difficult to derail a Clinton victory.

That said, if there is one thing that could keep Hillary Clinton

from the presidency, it's an FBI investigation.

But there's still only four states that really matter, Florida, Ohio,

Right now, Clinton has beyond the margin of error leads

This would have to have a truly significant impact for the election

There is a point about a week ago when I was prepared to say that

Clinton had a 95% chance of winning this election.

Based on what has happened in the last 48 hours,

It is still very likely, but I wouldn't bet on it.

I thought the 2000 election would be the best election of my lifetime,

And then I thought 2008 would be amazing, because we had two

challenger candidates and the first African-American President.

It is ugly, it's painful, it is as negative as anything

The public is angry, the country, overall, is frustrated.

But for entertainment value, these candidates probably should

have charged us money, because it's better than any movie

at ever seen, it's better than any TV show.

That was Frank Luntz. He may be right or wrong about Mrs Clinton

still having an 80% chance of winning. I would bet on an 80%

chance? Yes, absolutely. I spoke to a high-profile American pollster and

strategist last night and he took a rather different view to Frank

Luntz. He thought, and I think some other high-profile commentators

agree, that this is actually much more serious than some people

realise. There are an awful lot of undecided voters out there looking

for an excuse to vote Trump. They do not like what they see in either

candidate. But because this FBI probe is not going to conclude

before the election, the question, the doubt over Hillary Clinton,

gives them an excuse to back Trump. The thing that will play on the

minds of the voters is, could the 100 day honeymoon turning to the 100

day divorce? Which even be impeached? It may give some people

an excuse not to vote for Mrs Clinton. It could provide a problem

in terms of energising her base. The battle ground almost matters more

than the polls. Florida and Pennsylvania have been trending to

Mrs Clinton. Mr Trump needs to win both. He does not get in without

both. He needs both. Just coming up in the latest BBC News, the

Washington Post tracking poll, Mrs Clinton is now only one point ahead

in the national poll. One point. Even given my caveat that the state

battles are most important. That is incredibly close? It is. Polls

yesterday showed Trump nationally closing of. -- up. There is a clear

trend and movement. This has reinforced everything that people

who have a problem with Hillary Clinton know about Hillary Clinton.

Trump is running this insurgent campaign. We have seen at here with

Brexit. If you are running an insurgent campaign, you want to be

against the ultimate establishment insider and that is what Hillary

Clinton is. I suggested it was bizarre. Fathoming the behaviour of

the FBI is interesting as well. This is a separate investigation into a

former congressman, Anthony Wiener, who had done all sorts of things. He

seemed to be sex text thing a minor. A 15-year-old girl. The FBI

investigate. They get his laptop to see what else he has been too. In

the course of that, his wife, now separated, the closest adviser to

Hillary Clinton, they find on the laptop e-mails involving the Clinton

server to her. And yet the FBI cannot, it needs now a separate

warrant to access these e-mails. It hasn't got that yet. It has got a

warrant to do the congressman e-mails. On the basis of not knowing

the content, this has happened. Yeah. Who knows? He is a Republican,

this guy. Earlier this year he was being praised to the hilt by

Democrats. Absolutely. The timing is a nightmare for her. You described

the whole sequence. There is nothing definitive to doubt in this

sequence. All he is saying is he has discovered more e-mails in effect.

They are from the congressman's former wife. On Anthony Wiener's

laptop, which apparently she used sometimes. But what that shows is

that for all the scrutiny of modern politicians, they cannot escape

caricature. And as Tim was just saying, her weakness is perceived to

be secretive, elitism and complacency about that elitism. And

so just the announcement of a reopening of the investigation so

fuels that caricature, you have just revealed a poll giving her a 1%

lead. That must be related to what has happened. It is without a shred

of evidence that she has done anything wrong. You can see how,

because people only see things encourage kids, that is deadly

serious. -- in caricature. An American friend of mine said we have

got our October surprise but we don't know what it is. The FBI must

surely come under massive pressure. It did its -- it did this against

the Justice Department. The difficulty the FBI had was that this

information, for what it's worth, it came to them. Were they not to have

said something and it worked to have come out later, they would have been

accused of a massive cover-up. They are dammed if they do, dammed if

they don't. There is still time for another surprise. And early November

surprise. Who knows if there might still be something that comes out on

Donald Trump? This is the first election where I can remember we

have had two October surprises already. There are is stuff about

tapes knocking around about Donald Trump saying racist things. The

Clintons have got a lot of friends. It would be a big surprise if we did

not see anything else in the next few days.

Just when you think it could not get more interesting, it has. There has

been plenty in the papers lately about the Ukip leadership saying

unpleasant things about each other. But what about Mr Farage himself?

What's he up to? Well, on BBC Two tonight we may

find out the answer. Well, I'm led to believe

she's very experienced. But I don't think Strictly Come

Dancing is for me. That is, unless, of course,

you fancy popping a cheeky zero No, I don't think Strictly

Come Dancing is for me. Well, you tell Mr Balls he has just

lost your programme one viewer. I might have nothing to do these

days but, realistically, Well, that wasn't Nigel Farage. It

is a BBC comedy on tonight. Nigel Farage gets his life back. A number

of runners and riders. Let's come straight down to it. Who would be

the next leader of Ukip? Probably Paul Nuttall. He is the favourite.

The one who has the backing, not very enthusiastic backing, is Rahim

Cassandra. And also Aaron Banks, a big donor. The best of a rather weak

lot. I think Paul Nuttall should squeak through. I interviewed all

three of them this week. Mr Cassandra is a lively character and

he knows how to make a few headlines. With a bit of money

behind him, anything is possible. This is a guy who has been to the

States, who has literally studied what Trump has done. Pees on

secondment for the time being. The guy who is his line manager is one

of Donald Trump's campaign stop. He is extraordinarily right-wing. I am

told he kept a picture of Enoch Powell by his bed. Barry Goldwater

is one of his heroes, for example. There are other candidates. I would

suggest, put out as a hypothesis, Paul Nuttall is Labour's worst

nightmare. They are more vulnerable in the North. Paul Nuttall is from

Merseyside, a working-class background, performs well on

television. He is a really good interviewee. He is one of the best

around in politics at the moment. However, I think whoever gets it has

a massive task. The clip of this Nigel Farage satire partly shows

why. His dominance was overwhelming. He, in many ways, did a brilliant

job at keeping the show on the road. The trouble for all new political

parties is keeping it going is tough. A very different party, the

SDP, with all those glamorous figures in it, lasted eight years,

something like that. I think they are in real trouble at the moment

because of the implosion we have been seeing in front of our eyes and

the ideal -- ideological splits. Whoever gets it will face a tough

tussle. All three of the main contenders want to put Nigel Farage

in the House of Lords. They were falling over themselves to soak up

two farads. That is how you win this election.

Mr Aaron Banks, who is he putting his money on? He said he supports

Rahim. I know Mr Banks is utterly fed with the shenanigans in Ukip. He

thinks it is terribly disorganised, dysfunctional and doesn't want a

great deal to do with it for the foreseeable future.

It is not quite Trump the Clinton but it is interesting. That is it.

The Daily Politics is back tomorrow. And all of next week. Jo Coburn will

be your next Sunday because I am off to the United States to begin to

rehearse presenting the BBC's US election night coverage on the 8th

of November. It will be here on BBC One, BBC

world, BBC News Channel and BBC online.

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

We will be in the Book Of Records as the oldest family in the world.

We grew up together, we played together, we worked together.

Drink was never seen amongst us at all.