31/01/2016 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland

Morning folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.

George Osborne called it a "major success".

Google say they're paying what's due.

But Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell's not impressed -

we'll ask him how he'd get big business to pay more tax.

David Cameron says he wants an emergency brake on access

to welfare benefits for EU migrants to be applied immediately

But will that be enough for the PM to clinch a deal and head

And coming up here... if we stay in or we get out?

As MLAs prepare to vote to make changes

at the Assembly, not everyone's happy.

We'll hear from the man behind the Opposition Bill,

plus the Alliance Party and the SDLP.

And taking time out from their protracted negotiations

with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs over how much tax

they should pay on their enormous fees - the best and the brightest

political panel in the business - Nick Watt, Polly Toynbee

and Janan Ganesh who'll be tweeting throughout the programme.

First this morning, George Osborne hailed Google's back tax bill

Since then the settlement's been condemned as too lenient by -

among others - Boris Johnson, The Sun, Rupert Murdoch

and the Labour Party, which has accused the Chancellor

of offering the internet giant "mates' rates".

In a moment, I'll be talking to Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell.

First here's Google executive, Peter Barron, defending the company

on the Andrew Marr Show this morning.

What I would say is that in the UK we pay corporation tax at 20%.

It's absolutely the same corporation tax rate as everybody else,

Yes, but you keep coming back to this point about sales.

We are taxed as corporation tax dictates on the activities,

the economic activities of Google UK.

So, we pay corporation tax in the UK at 20%,

and, actually, globally, our effective tax rate over the last

five years or so is round about 20%, which is very close to the UK rate,

And I'm joined now by the Shadow Chancellor,

Welcome. What single step would you take to make sure that companies

like Google, Apple, Amazon, pay a fair and appropriate level of tax?

Openness and transparency. I want the information about how this deal

has been arrived at and I want them to publish in the future there tax

records. So that we can have openness and transparency, see what

is fair. The Chancellor said this was a major success. But we cannot

tell because we have not got the information. Would you extend that

to British major companies publishing their tax? Six out of ten

of the UK's biggest companies are not paying any corporation tax. Yes,

I would. The suggestion has been put forward about the FTSE 100. That is

a good idea. There would be no commercial disadvantage. Do you

think that transparency would be a major step forward? It is one step

forward. We want country by country reporting as well. I supported

George Osborne on as negotiations in Europe with that. We're not going to

get enough. I found quite angry making this morning that we have

allegation -- allegations that their Conservatives were voting their MEPs

to vote against this. I find that frustrating. I want HMRC to be

properly resourced so they can do the job. There are too many job

cuts. We have lost too much expertise. There is time now to

start thinking about how we review our tax system. The Treasury select

committee has undertaken a review. Corporation tax is levied on

profits. Even if you got your transparency, you would quickly find

that the concept of profits that can be moved around geographically, they

can be manipulated depending on costs, would you consider replacing

corporation tax with, for example, a tax on corporate sales? Revenues are

less malleable than profits. That is one of the issues to be addressed.

Nigel Lawson has done an article to that effect. One of the most

important things is to secure international agreement. We cannot

have the situation where companies are shopping around the world to

find the lowest tax regime and inventing company structures to

enable that to happen. But if you had a tax on the revenues, it would

not happen what they moved around. Revenues are revenues. You would

levy a tax on the revenues in the UK. That is why it is worth looking

at. It might be a combination of that and economic activity as well.

One professor said if you raise corporate taxes too high, companies

may move to island macro or elsewhere. Do you accept there has

to be a limit? There has to be a limit, there has to be some

reasonableness. If we can get international cooperation, you can

avoid this development of virtual tax havens taking place. Would you

want a common rate of corporation tax? Not necessarily. You would like

to make sure that what you charge is reasonable and fair and you would

expect those companies to abide by that. I listened to the Google

representative this morning. The reputational damage to Google is

immense. The savings they have made in taxes not worth the reputational

damage. Let's move on to the other big issue, Europe. And membership.

How did you vote in the 1975 referendum? Against. In the 1983

Labour manifesto it claimed that a commitment to radical socialist

policies was incompatible with membership of the European Union. It

proposed withdrawal. Did you agree with that at the time? I did at the

time. That is long gone. We're within Europe. We are working within

Europe with other parties to see how we can make Europe fair,

particularly with regard to the rights of workers. Take this tax

issue. We need to be in Europe to ensure we can secure fair agreement

on tax. That is why, by remaining within, we have got to remain within

with their own reform agenda, that is one of the issues we need to

reform. To take that phrase radical socialist policies, you are

committed to radical socialist policies. How is that now compatible

with remaining in the EU when it was not in 1983? Because we have

demonstrated with the work we have undertaken within the EU that we

have secured some benefits. Employment rights. In addition,

there are real opportunities now where we can work with others to

secure that radical change. Withdrawal from Europe at the moment

would not be beneficial. It would lose jobs. It would undermine the

benefits we have gained in terms of employment. That is why we want to

work to reform it. The issue that I have got with the Prime Minister, we

will see what he comes back with... On the social Europe issue, you want

a more social Europe. In France you have got a socialist government that

has moved to the right. In Germany, a centre-right government. Other

countries have either the hard right in power or the hard right at the

top of the polls. Where is your social Europe in that? That is why

we will work with socialist and social Democrats. I think you will

see in the coming years that a wider debate is taking place. In some way

the referendum debate will enable us to then look at those ideas.

Wouldn't it be fair to say that like Jeremy Corbyn, you are pretty

lukewarm about our membership of the European Union? I signed up to

remain within the EU. That does not mean to say that we accepted as a

perfect institution. We want to see reform. I come back to the tax

issue. Unless we get international cooperation, particularly across

Europe, we will not solve this problem. You have got a Eurosceptic

track record. Kate Hoey, a leader -- leading Labour Eurosceptic, she said

that you and Jeremy Corbyn consistently voted with Eurosceptic

MPs on the EU. That is true, isn't it? On a number of issues, because

we were frustrated with the slow pace of reform. That does not mean

we are in favour of coming out. It is better to argue from within to

secure a commonality of agreement. Do you broadly support the changes

that David Cameron is trying to renegotiate? I don't know what they

are yet. Let's see what he comes back with. My fear is if he does not

treat this issue seriously and it is just about party management, he

could blow it. We could be outside of Europe and have the economic

penalties as a result. Even if he comes back with something you do not

regard as satisfactory, you will campaign to stay in? We will

campaign for our own agenda. The government wants to get this done by

the end of June. Will you cooperate with that timetable? We will see

what he comes back with. Let's have it as soon as possible. We want the

debate to take place. Delaying it would not help. We want the debate

to start now. It would be better for him to come back fairly soon. Get

the debate going. Even if the campaign overlaps with important

elections in Scotland, England, Northern Ireland, Wales? That is the

problem but it will overlap with something. Immigration is good to be

a huge issue. The IMF says that almost 4 million immigrants will

arrive in the EU between 2015 and 2017. Almost 4 million. Should

Britain take a fair share of that? I think is important we cooperate with

our European partners to make that we can accommodate those that need

to come to this country. In addition, that we have systems in

place that protect wages, so that immigration is not used to undermine

wages. But should we take a fair share of the 4 million? I think we

should. We should cooperate with others and carry the burden. The

majority of Britons want us to rise to it and ensure we assist others

and that others are not suffering, and that we do not stand on one side

when people suffer. Could you give an indication of how many? Young not

at this stage. That would be a matter to negotiate with our

European partners. Should we volunteered to be part of the EU

quotas system? Mrs Merkel and others want 160,000 to be relocated through

Schengen. Should we be part of Schengen? Should we be part of the

160,000? We should be doing more in terms of assisting refugees coming

from Syria. We should be doing more to help those in desperate need.

People are drowning in the Mediterranean. We cannot stand

aside. This country has a history of receiving refugees. People watching

this would want some sort of idea of numbers because numbers are

important. It is important. That is why we need to get into these

negotiations quickly and come back with practical proposals. In 2013

you told a gathering of the people's assembly at a rally on immigration

that they should be open borders? I was arguing then... There was

re-search looking at the long-term structure of the globe. Inevitably

in this century we will have open borders. The movement of peoples

across the globe will mean that borders will almost become

irrelevant by the end of the century. We should be preparing for

that and explaining why people move. Conflicts, poverty and destitution,

and also climate change. In our policy-making we should be working

now to see how we address that. It will mean that we need to look at

how we resolve conflicts, how we make the world more equal and also

how we tackle climate change. In that way we can deal with the

reality of the world, which means that people are not forced to move

but there will be movement. Total open borders? At the end of this

century that is what will occur. People are ignoring borders already

as they fly from Syria. We should be making sure that if there is no

forced movement, we look at the push and pull factors. Conflict

prevention, the tackling of inequality and policies that tackle

climate change. In that way we can cope with the global pressures with

regard to population movement. To do that, for a Labour government to

prepare for that, would be loosening controls as you move towards that?

No. What I am saying is if you look at the analysis of what is happening

over the next 75 years, the movement of people is such that borders are

very difficult to maintain. That will happen by the end of the

century. We should be opening up the debate of how we handle that. One of

the issues we have to tackle is why people are moving. It is about

conflict and climate change. It is about poverty as well. That means

greater equality not just in our country but across the globe. I

wanted to talk to you about Google and the EU. I hope you will come

back and give me an interview on economic policy. Let me finish with

a taster? Back to Professor Blanchflower, he said about you and

Mr Corbyn that you have to accept the realities of capitalism and

modern markets, like it or not. No more silly stuff about companies not

being able to pay dividends if they do not do X or Y. Do you accept

that? That is why I appointed him as an advisor. I wanted objective

advice. I have established the architecture for the future

development of economic policy. Are you going to accept his advice

on that? We will listen to his advice and take it on board. But we

will also listen to other advisers. But those advisers, what's the point

of them if you will not listen? We will test every policy we put

forward. On that one, we are hoping that we would avoid any need for

that by introducing as we come into covenant a real living wage. In the

meantime, we want to campaign with shareholders so they pressurise

their companies to abide by a real living wage. I think there is an

alliance to be built there. Is it party policy that if companies don't

pay what you regard as a living wage, until it's made mandatory,

that they shouldn't be allowed to pay dividends? it's one of ideas we

have floated for discussion. We have put it to the economic advisers to

get their view. Angela Eagle said it's unworkable. That's why it's

open for discussion. It's a really good campaigning tool for us to work

with shareholders to make sure they exert their influence to ensure

their companies, on things like the living wage and paying their taxes

as well, to make sure their companies are acting appropriately.

John McDonnell, I hope you come back to continue the debate with us. I

certainly well. So, David Cameron once dismissed

the idea of an emergency This morning, Downing Street

is indicating that a brake on welfare benefits for EU

migrants might be acceptable if it was applied immediately,

but only as a stop-gap measure. This evening, the Prime Minister

meets EU Council President Donald Tusk as he tries to broker a deal

ahead of a crunch summit of European leaders next month -

but will the fractious leave campaigns be in any position to take

advantage if he's seen to fail? Right now the future of Britain

inside or outside the European Union You might think it started here

in Brussels, or that the media's massed ranks are awaiting

the outcome in the European Parliament in Strasbourg,

or that we are hovering with baited breath for a decision

in our own Parliament, but no. This week the decision was made

in Havering, in Essex. In this chamber right now,

Havering councillors are debating If they do, of course nothing

will change, because the smart among you know, no council,

not even the British Parliament, Nevertheless Havering Council

deliberately didn't deliberate on the leisure centre

or meals on wheels. However the Prime Minister meanwhile

was hurrying for a deal on wheels - not with councillors,

but with 27 EU member states. It's his plan to block in-work

benefits for EU migrants for four years that's getting

the bumpiest ride. The EU counter proposal

of an an "emergency brake" on access to benefits - if a country can prove

it's welfare system's under strain - has not gone down well

with Eurosceptics back home. They are saying we are

allowed to go to Brussels, and ask their permission

to change the benefit rules, David Cameron still wants that

benefit ban, and knows accepting the emergency brake as is would only

accelerate any campaign to leave. We want to end the idea

of something for nothing. It's not good enough,

it needs more work, I believe we've got to put

country before party, country before personality, vote

for freedom, and vote for leave. In Havering they aren't waiting

for a date or a settlement. The Prime Minster knows Brexit

supporters are eyeing his own Cabinet to see who might be tempted

do the same. Michael Gove might come

out for leave. Boris Johnson, though

it's rather doubtful, might just possibly come out

for leave, to vote for leave. Theresa May, who almost

certainly is preoccupied And finally, Sajid Javid,

the Business Secretary, who has the most

Eurosceptic record of all. But it's very difficult,

when you are a government minister, and you've got real feelings

of loyalty to your party and your Prime Minister,

to depart from the line. And a lot of pressure,

moral pressure, if you like, A Havering Borough MP thinks that

kind of pressure is wrong. I think that this is a decision

that we all have to make And it shouldn't impede

on people's political careers. People should be able

to make up their own minds, and not worry about whether they are

going to be sidelined or punished Those who do out themselves for out,

will need campaign wizards who can Which, of two battling groups,

that is yet undecided, but so far both have seen a bad

spell of personality clashes and darkening moods way over

the heads of most grassroots The chance of winning over

undeclared MPs is the magic What we did discover,

it's like the dementors slowly sucking the people up out

of the air, body I do think that there will be

a coming together now, probably for very good reasons,

there have been divisions But I think this campaign will not

be just politicians. It's about the people

versus the elite in many ways. In fact, you have a referendum

really in many ways when politicians Meanwhile back in Havering...

is they want to do. party motion is therefore

carried by 30 votes to 15. So, councillors in Havering have

voted for a motion that says Now, there are plenty of councillors

who said they don't have any business debating this,

they have far more important things But what it might show

is that for some people - and in this case,

an official elected body - never mind what the date is,

and never mind the renegotiation, they would like to make

clear their views right now. I'm joined now by the Conservative

MP, Steve Baker, co-chairman of Conservatives for Britain

and a director of the Vote Leave If the Prime Minister can get an

agreement that there will be a break in welfare payments for migrants the

day after the referendum, isn't that a powerful thing to take to the

country? It's not powerful at all. Bernard Jenkin is the Conservative

director of Vote Leave, but we have been told by the OBR that it

wouldn't make much difference even if the Prime Minister got this

break. They would only take one case brought forward by activist lawyers,

and we would expect the European Court of Justice to strike down such

a measure. We think it's a red herring, and as John Redwood said, a

bad joke. They have ended up trying to manufacture the appearance of

success out of very little. As things stand at the moment, there's

nothing the Prime Minister would bring back that would make you want

to stay in? I've been clear through the whole period that most of us

want to end the supremacy of the EU in the UK. Make our own laws in

Parliament. The prime ministers had something similar about the European

Court of Human Rights. Demanding an opt out from the charter is subbing

the Prime Minister has had to give up. So money inconsistencies. The

answer is no. I expect a good number of colleagues to join me and

campaign to leave at this stage. How many Tory MPs will campaign for out?

Of the 150 on the list who have expressed interest, and about a

fifth have made up their minds, I think about 50-70. No more than 50

or 70 Tory MPs campaigning on your side of the referendum to leave?

That would be my expectation at this stage. John McDonnell said he wanted

to get this out of the wear it, the referendum. Didn't sound to me like

Labour would join with the SNP on delaying tactics for the referendum.

Would you like the referendum to be later? Realistically we are

campaigning out to leave the EU and we have secured our objectives for

the campaign. But there is a good case to be made that a June date

would trust us. There are elections in neigh, and I think there's a good

case for a delay until September. I would prefer the government brought

forward a measure that went through the Commons without a row, but if

Labour and the SNP and conservative colleagues wish to put something

through, then we will be able to what's the biggest beach from the --

beast on the cabinet you would like to get? I haven't ruled anybody out.

But I'm happy to go into the campaign without any Cabinet big

beasts. It would be surprised this point if Chris Grayling didn't join

us. He would count as a big beast, leader of the house. People know

which Cabinet members are discussed. Theresa May? She made a speech on

immigration which would be difficult to recalibrate with the EU. It's a

matter for her. You've given up on Bryce Johnson? He occasionally

flirts with it in the press. But he's a typical conservative, he

loves Europe, he would like Europe to be different, but we'll see what

he does when the comes. The different leave campaigns, it's

flawed with blood, when will you stop knocking lumps out of each

other? I'm not knocking lumps out of anybody and I regret this week that

we've had distractions from the core aim of leaving the EU and I regret

they have got their way to the press. Everybody involved needs to

reach a resolution, everybody involved wants to move on and I hope

we do so quickly, let's fight a winning campaign. You are not the

director of Vote Leave but you are on the Parliamentary planning

committee for Vote Leave, so you are associated. Did you agree with the

attempts to get rid of the two full-time people running it, Dominic

Cummings and Matthew Elliott? This is a matter for the board. Do you

agree with whether they should have gone? At this stage it's very late

in the day to make such a profound change. But given the severe

concerns of my colleagues, it is clear there will have to be material

changes in Vote Leave in order to carry parliamentarians with the

campaign. What this material change mean? There has to be a greater

degree of involvement with planetary and so they think they are shaping

the campaign to win over those voters we need. Will there be a

merger in the end? Surely that's what all of you need, you are up

against the government, is huge machine, don't you need to be

united? It's a David and Goliath battle and we need to be united. The

process of unity will come through designation. Realistically, leave.

EU is looking at the Courville, where as Vote Leave knows we need

the swing vote. -- looking at the core vote. I'm confident that Vote

Leave can and will win the referendum. I wouldn't give away the

mop in case there is more blood to wipe up.

One of David Cameron's four key demands in his EU

renegotiation concerns competitiveness.

The Prime Minister says the burden of regulation on businesses is too

high, and that the EU needs to strengthen the single market

and accelerate trade agreements with America and China.

Arguments about the economic costs or benefits of membership will form

a large part of the referendum campaign, with both sides keen

Those campaigning to remain within the EU say our membership

is worth ?3000 to every household in Britain.

It's based on a CBI claim that the UK's economy is 5% bigger

They also claim that 3 million jobs are linked

to trade within the EU, that 45% of UK exports of goods

and services go to the EU, and that the value of

trade with the EU is ?133 billion higher than it would be if we left.

Those who argue we would be better off if we left claim that

regulations imposed on business by the EU cost over

They say the 3 million figure on jobs is

dependent on trade with the EU, not membership.

They argue that the trade would continue if we voted to leave,

because we currently import more than we export from the EU.

So its members would want free trade to remain.

They further point out that the importance of UK trade

They cite ONS figures showing that the proportion

of UK exports heading for the EU fell from 54.8% in 1999

But an analysis by the House of Commons Library in 2013

of numerous studies into the economic

impact of EU membership found no consensus either way,

So, which side will manage to convince voters?

I'm joined now by the former trade minister Digby Jones

and Richard Reed, who founded Innocent Smoothies,

who is campaigning for Britain to stay in the EU.

Welcome. Digby Jones, the EU accounts for 45% of our exports. Why

would you risk any of that? That will not change. Because in the

morning after any referendum result, Germany, it is pivotal on Germany,

would immediately want some form of tariff free arrangement with

Britain. They make a million cars they sell in Britain a year. 75 to

80% of all the trains in this country are built in Dusseldorf. We

do not know for sure? No. Germany does it and the others follow. There

are many arguments to stay in. But the one thing we should kill now is

that not one job in Britain is at risk because of EU membership. Not

one. There would be a free-trade agreement because we are so

important to Europe. And by the way that does not mean there are not

other reasons why not -- why we might not want to be in or out. I

get so frustrated when people talk about jobs at risk. It is rubbish.

That is very easy thing to call total nonsense. It is clear that if

your biggest market is suddenly interfered with, that it will not

somehow affect trade, does not make sense. You know more than most

people that businesses need certainty. What we have right now is

unfettered access to the largest market in the world. The fact that

we want to start playing around with this and that is good for business,

it does not make sense. I do not see the added value in belonging to a

club that fetters small businesses in this country every day.

I am a small business. I have done it for years. This is a colossal

opportunity. If you are an entrepreneur in the UK. You're

making it sound like it makes it more difficult. It makes it much

easier because it is one set of regulations and 500 million

consumers. If you have a shop, would you want 60 million people walk by

our 500 million people walk by? You can achieve that through a

free-trade agreement. You get the sales prevention team in Brussels

marching valiantly towards 1970, trying to save this is how you will

lead your small business in Hartlepool. But we all know that

Sutherland Europe, compliance is a voluntary event. We all know that

the French do not obey these rules. Then we and northern Europe, we are

by no means the best, we obey this stuff. And a small business who

doesn't have lobbyists in Brussels, and you know this... I know this.

Britain loves a bit of regulation. You are absolutely right. If we come

out and you say we will still trade, we will still have to comply with

the regulation. That is the condition of free trade. We will not

avoid regulation. The regulation is there whether we are in or out. If

we are in, we get to influence the regulation. We get to have the voice

heard. You tell that to the money men in the City who have seen

legislation come down from Brussels. You see what happens when we're not

there when the big decisions are made. You think we have no

influence? We're one of the three big forces in Europe. We are one of

the three biggest economies in Europe. Digby Jones, I want to ask

you this. You assume we will still have unfettered access to the single

market. But it has been pointed out by Richard Reid that that means we

would have to meet by Richard Reid that that means we

would have to meet the conditions of getting into the single market.

Could there be other costs? Free movement of people may be a cost.

That is a price Switzerland and Norway pay. Let's Explorer that. I'm

concerned this referendum is going to become a referendum purely on a

migration on the street, when we ought to be discussing how can

European Union reform and improve the life of an unemployed

25-year-old in Madrid and a single mother in Athens? How can the power

of Britain, economic and otherwise, how can it be seen as a driver to

get the standard of living up? If you base your economy on exporting

our lives and importing BMWs, you will go bust. They are asking Europe

to subsidise the growth of our lives, in the hope that for some

reason on skilled people in Europe will do this. You are going to get

on skilled people in Europe coming to rich countries instead of

actually getting skilled people in Europe being marketable in northern

Europe. You can only pull that off with reform. We should not be

campaigning to stop these people coming. We should be campaigning to

get the skills base of Europe up so they get wealthy, but more

importantly, they are more marketable in our market. The

British government has enough trouble getting the skills base

right in Britain without trying to get it right in southern Europe.

Richard Reid, you say that we are in the club that we can influence the

rules. Let me put the question. The British have been on the wrong end

of EU majorities on these rules more than any other country that is a

member of the EU. We really get away on these things. You are joking. We

have got the best possible setup. We are part of the EU. We said no to

the euro, no to Schengen, no to force migratory bird it is. Why so

many majority votes? This is a macro decision. Once in a generation. We

have got to get it right. The big picture is it is a colossal

opportunity and we have got the best version of the deal. When you and I

were arguing cases about whether we should join the euro years ago, I

can remember sitting in television studios and being told the world was

going to end and we were going to go to Armageddon and back if we did not

join the euro. We made the right decision about the euro. This

interview has come to an end. I thank you both.

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, we'll be hearing from our political panel.

Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics in Northern Ireland.

It's all change on the hill as MLAs vote to cut their numbers,

reform their departments and perhaps establish an official opposition.

So, will it create a new super-efficient Stormont?

Or will we scarcely notice the difference?

We'll hear from the independent MLA who's behind the push for change

Plus - there's still no official date for polling day,

but election fever is catching in the Republic.

All things are on the top. I think people are a little bit more

positive about everything. And with their thoughts on that

and more, my guests of the day are Felicity Huston and Chris

Donnelly. Not fit for purpose

and in urgent need of reform - just some of the criticisms that

politicians themselves have directed MLAs have been busying themselves

with a number of bills which will reduce the number

of Assembly members, merge Executive departments

and establish a formal opposition. So, will it be enough to improve

Stormont's image and create With me are the Independent Unionist

MLA John McCallister and councillors Nichola Mallon from the SDLP

and Nuala McAllister Welcome to the programme. John

McCallister. Private members bill has its consideration stage on

Tuesday, do you think it will ultimately steal the established of

an effective opposition at Stormont Guzman I certainly hope so. I think

that broader package you mentioned at the start of the programme of

changing the departments, ultimately the reduction of MLAs to 2021 and

the opposition bill. All that is about how would you start to create

this idea of a collective government with an agreed programme for

government, moving in one direction and held to account by a robust

opposition that ultimately gives voters a choice and the ability of

toys and change for a future elections. There are a lot of

amendments from other parties. Sinn Fein is opposing every cause of the

deal Lyman stage. Sinn Fein ride back from November told me they were

likely to oppose every clause on the grounds that they had agreed fresh

start and they were certainly pushing Bible had in England's first

start that had improved the provision for opposition from -- it

is there and it is being debated. All of the parties and I say this

including Sinn Fein, they have engaged with me on the bill, it has

been very useful. Michael Allen. Sinn Fein is opposed, will be SDLP

-- Michael Allen. The SDLP has worked quite closely. John has to be

commended for bringing this bill forward. If you look at the glaring

weakness in the system, there is a lack of openness and transparency

with the budget process in particular. The bill with the

amendments make good inroads into trying to address that. You're not

happy with the notion of it petition of concern, what changes do you

think needed? We think it is worth quite considerably from what it was

intended to be. We have tabled an amendment. If someone has a petition

of concern and will be scrutinised to see weather it has adverse impact

on human rights and equality. So, you think it has been abused but you

don't want to get rid of it altogether? Know because

unfortunately we believe we won't be in a place where there won't be a

misuse of power, or domination of sectarianism so unfortunately we

have two retained the safeguards for minority rights and we believe we

are doing is the right way and the right and effectively. As far as

opposition is concerned, your current party before he was bodied

said there was no place called opposition but he made a speech yet

last week in which he seemed to suggest opposition would be a good

idea, does that mean the SDLP is moving in that direction? I think he

was clear that after this they should be an official opposition but

we are fighting this election to be in government. With caster, what is

your position on this? We have been quite constructive, working along

side him and we will be supporting him. On the hell out of the bill

is... By party would have major concerns about the petition of

concern. I would not like to see that mechanism being used to

actually slapped down the bill. It would be a great embarrassment to

the party who do use it and I hope the petition of concern is not used

because something that creates more accountability and scrutiny is a

good thing for the public. And is it a possibility that the Alliance

Party could opt if the bid is successful to take an opposition

stance in the next mandate rather than seek to be in the Executive

they currently are? No party fight an election to go into opposition.

They fight going to government and to govern for the best the people.

Whenever that happens after the election then Alliance will say what

the position is then. But you do support the notion of an effective

opposition even if you might opt for hope that you are not out

yourselves? Of course. As I said, something that creates more

accountability to hold politicians to account and then making decisions

in the Executive is nothing but a good thing. The other piece of

legislation that I talked about in the introduction of the reduction of

members bill, your party has tabled an amendment wanting the reduction

in numbers to come into effect this year 's election, rather than adding

21. But there is not any real prospect of that happening, do you

accept that? We are in a bizarre situation here. Politicians have

agreed to reduce the numbers from six to five per constituency but

they have agreed to hold off until 2021 or the next Assembly election.

We are pushing three the final stage of the departments but which reduces

the number of departments, so Eddie single -- decision that affects the

public, they could save ?11 million in five years, 90 new police

officers, 90 new nurses, I think the public would like that. We need to

make sure that MLAs are held accountable. John McCallister, is

that the kind of issue that leaves members of the public watching the

comings and goings, that the left hand doesn't know what the right

hand is doing. It is an open debate. The agreement in fresh start but

like I would have much preferred to see after beating this under the new

Assembly mandate, time to work out whether 90 is the right number

because changes at Westminster might also affect numbers. And that is not

self-interest? Independents like yourself are very often individuals

who tend to pick up the sixth seed. If it goes from six seats to five,

someone Microsoft could struggle to be returned. Absolutely. It is

important to have independent voices. Also we are still grappling

ride throughout the committee stage of my bill, it is always debating

this idea of how we continue to address the historic problems and

once you reduce and change the size of constituencies it can change the

make-up of those constituencies or indeed reduce somewhat the spread of

candidates across it, for example you might have more constituencies

with no nationalist representatives or no unionist representatives and

we have to ask ourselves is that a good thing, are we ready for that

and that is why I think most of the parties are reluctant to go too

fast, too soon on this issue. You are not in, Nichola Allen. Your

party touched on this. We agreed reduction in numbers, but marketing

departments, we want to set up an official opposition, changing number

of constituencies, changing Westminster. I think we need to be

cautious. We need change but we don't want to rush it too far to be

end up causing damage. You looked as if you were shaking your head, Naula

MCallister, do you not agree? The change we are opposing is what

affects politicians, it is the change in the numbers. John

mentioned the Westminster boundaries might change but... Why get a power

and an wide five years to do something. It sells itself interest

the parties and I think a lot of people can get on board with that.

We're talking about ensuring there is better inclusion because there

are members of other parties who have just one MLA and their

supporters on this issue because they know we can ensure greater

accountability and we can look alongside the departments and we can

ensure that we provide better value for money at Stormont. Forgive me

for saying, it will work quite well, this tactic, the Alliance on the

door so casually. You actually say to people who are potential voters,

we think this should change and beginning of your colours to the

mast at the zero will not change the order to do so because something

shouldn't change you shouldn't do it? Alliance have been calling this

for a number of years and just because the bike there are parties

that do this all the time and we appeal for people to get on board

with us. We're not talking about something that will create a massive

change. You can still feel the number of candidates as you wish, in

each constituency. That will not stop it but what we're talking about

is on election day it will be five, not six. John McCallister, your bill

has consideration said on Tuesday. It may go through but do you accept

if it goes through it is going to be a hugely changed version of what you

initially authored? I would suspect I can't entirely predictable, of the

land. When I the bill and worked on the bill, even as you agreed at the

time of second stage, a pretty ambitious programme of reform of

both the Assembly and official opposition of the way the Executive

worked, collective responsibility, all of those things were very

ambitious but even I don't get up on -- all of what I would like in the

bill to set. It has certainly fired up a conversation with parties,

academics and commentators in saying, this is the sort of change

we might need over a period of time and I will continue to campaign for

the change. Thank you very much. Stay with us.

Let's see what my guests of the day make of that.

Chris Donnelly and Felicity Huston are with me.

Welcome to you both. Chris, Sinn Fein sportsperson said to us this

morning the bill, John McCallister's bill is unnecessary because the

fresh start agreement has provision for an opposition in line with the

Good Friday Agreement, so that is an explanation for why republicans have

opposed each and every one of the 24 clauses in the bill. What you think

will happen on Tuesday? First of all I think John should be commended for

ensuring the issue of constitutional reform is kept through the member 's

bill on the agenda. We do know because we have a coalition with the

five parties in the Executive which is necessary because of the legacy

of the conflict but we know the consequence of that is no unifying

discerning agenda through the Executive. That is at a situation

where departments run by different parties have own agenda and that

leads to protracted deadlock the Executive table which goes on for

years over issues on education, health, local government reform. But

I think crucially and this is why I think Sinn Fein can be quite relaxed

about this, that system benefits since then and the DUP at the Leeds

parties within unionism and nationalism and therefore it will

have to be driven not by them because it is in their interests to

be able to move of the Executive to ensure that like I just wanted to

bring felicity in on the overall issue of reform. That is a package

of measures. Do they brought the make sense? Broadly, yes. Our

current political structure is one of dampest circles of hell for both

politicians. You can pinpoint a policy because you're stuck in this

horrendous... Anything that breaks add up and starts to turn us into a

normal political state, functioning state with opposition policies

implemented and people electing politicians on the basis of policy

sale breadboard, that has to be welcome and I think we will be

delighted. We will talk you later. Thank you.

Now, they haven't called it officially yet, but the Irish

election will take place in the coming weeks.

Will Enda Kenny be returned as Taoiseach?

Will there be a shift to Micheal Martin's Fianna Fail?

Can the party make the gains that put it into government in the Dail?

One area being targeted by Sinn Fein is Donegal where the party

currently holds two seats, but hopes to gain a third.

Our Political Correspondent Stephen Walker has been to the county

Over 200 commenters from Dublin, some regard this as a place apart.

... Kilometres. Elections here are also different and even before a

vote has been cast, headlines have been created. It's a case of all

teams here in Donegal. Once there to constituencies, they have now been

merged to create one. Once six TDs were elected, this time it will be

five. It fixes election race very tight and the final outcome

difficult to predict. -- makes this election race. Sinn Fein have two

TDs here at the moment. Patrick McLoughlin and Pearse Doherty. They

hope local councillor Gary Doherty can win a third seed. Old management

will be key. It is a risky strategy. Very ambitious to take these seats.

It is one that me and public have been instigators of because we

believe it is important to be in a position to lead the next

government. Why do you say it is risky? Because when you stand three

candidates and your two hours without, it is the other sitting TDs

in jeopardy. Reporter Kieran O'Donnell says Sinn Fein are in a

strong position and could take a third seed in Donegal. Anything is

possible in the selection. Guaranteed to seats. Whether Gary

Gardai makes enough for Patrick to stainless that race remains to be

seen. It is unlikely but possible. Fine Gael are running sitting TDs

Jeroen Dijsselbloem which you and they have also selected a fresh face

with a well-known name. Paddy Harte's father was a Fine Gael TD.

He says Donegal needs to be better connected and that includes

improving the a five in Northern Ireland. The last major said in that

city in the ad has not got a motorway, which is dairy. It is

essentially our capital wasn't a border. -- Barry. It is important

for the island that it Afive as a connection. The Aberfoyle...

Post-election, the Aberfoyle have made it clear who they will go into

coalition with. We will not be going into government with Fine Gael. Our

objective is to become the largest party and ensure their recovery that

Donegal can benefit from. And it brings about a fair approach to

governing the country. Voters in Donegal will have a number of

independent candidates to choose from. In other constituencies,

independents find it hard to get elected because they are up against

a party machine. But in Donegal there is an independent tradition.

Thomas Pringle became an independent TD in 2011. If he is returned he is

prepared to talk to other parties. I would bag all the things that

Donegal requires but all things old legacy in a national level. If the

party of Fine Gael or attempt to do business on with me then I would

talk to them but I support anyone would not be guaranteed. So far

there are three other independent candidates in this race. There is a

Green Party candidate. It means Donegal voters have plenty of

choice. It's a mass of elections. I think the left will do well this

time. There are just squeezing us try. Far too many of them got in

last time. All over the place. Things are on the up. I think people

are more positive about everything. The current government configuring a

job. The boundary changes and the mother of candidates makes it

difficult to predict how all the seats will fall. There are so many

things at the minute. The field will be so wide and varied. It will go

down to the wire. A lot before the last two candidates are elected in

Donegal. The boundaries may have changed here and it may look

different but when the election is finally called, the fight for seats

in Donegal will be as competitive as ever.

Stephen Walker reporting from Donegal, and two more

Independent candidates have now entered the fray -

Let's hear more from Chris Donnelly and Felicity Huston.

Chris, if the battle for seats in Donegal likely to be A microcosm of

the broader General Election campaign? I don't think so. Donegal

is unique, Sinn Fein are particularly strong there. One of

the things for republicans along the border, Dublin as well. They're

getting stronger. A three and week long campaign. Enda Kenny will be

the first Fine Gael Taoiseach to gain real action. Enough Labour TDs

for it give the coalition were Willie need a third party? The

fascinating what ifs. As Chris says, a really short, sharp campaign?

Absolutely and more of it please. I think everybody should have three

weeks. That is the way you like it? Even if political anorak like me,

that is plenty. Some real political anoraks are saying we might have a

second election to sort this out. Some are I keep praying for that.

The waiter it looks at the moment, if Labour are only said on nine or

10%, that would be enough, as happened in the early 80s, there had

to be a second election a few months it. We will see. Some people will be

happy and some will not be happy. Wheels the key again later.

Now, let's pause and take a look back at the week in 60 seconds

In or out? In London the Taoiseach made clear his hopes in the dregs of

debate. I want Britain to remain a central member of the EU and from

our island point of view, this is a really critical issue. But back in

Belfast the First Minister suggested Mr Kenny should keep it up so

himself. He is entitled to an opinion and if you are that the end

of the day it is a matter for the people of the UK. With the Assembly

election coming up in a veteran decided to bow out. After eight

years, some tough years as were the long, off with the old, on with the

new. Or not so new as a familiar face re-entered the political arena.

I am not someone who could possibly go off and have a nice life because

I would find myself shouting at the television and getting frustrated.

But what were the chances all parties doing away with election

posters? I think the chances of that happening are slim. And a warning,

always someone is listening. Mr Jim Allister... Chris Page reporting.

Just time for a quick look ahead with Felicity and Chris.

Naomi Long's turn has certainly been made pretty clear. She wants to come

back to the Assembly. She was my MP and East Belfast and one that thinks

it is great that is covering a lot of issues. She is strong on animal

welfare, a massive issue in Northern Ireland. She gets back into the

Assembly I think it will be a real plus for that and it should make

sure David Ford's performance as he is in obvious new leader. She is a

formidable politicians. It's to keep United candidate to defeat in East

Belfast so it'll be interesting to see Alliance perform with her on the

ticket in East Belfast. Arlene Foster has said Terry Wogan is a

legend of broadcasting. It is part of my life. He has been broadcasting

for so long. That is talk about themselves and the

mayoral budget. Back to Andrew. Welcome back. Let's return to the

issue of Google's tax bill. It is not just Google. Earlier I spoke to

John McDonnell and asked him what he would do to make sure that companies

like Google pay a fair and appropriate level of tax. First of

all, I want the information about how the deal was arrived at and I

want them in future to publish their tax records, the British part. So we

can have openness and transparency, we can see what is fair. The

Chancellor said this was a major success, but we cannot tell because

we have not got the information. I would suggest that the Google row

rumbles on by Google appearing with Andrew Marr this morning. There are

other companies in the frame like Amazon, Apple, big investigation by

the European Commission -- commission. And we discover that a

lot of major British multinationals do not pay any are very small

amounts of corporation tax. This issue has got a long way to go, I

would suggest? Yes, and it could end up in a transatlantic almost cold

war between the EU and the US and in particular US companies. Each side

thinks the other is trying to exploit its site disproportionately.

I wonder if eventually the people who ultimately lobby for

International corporate tax reform and clarity will be corporations

themselves. At the moment they are getting into trouble of what is

ultimately observing the letter of the law, and certainly observing

their duty to pay the legal minimum of tax, the duty they have to their

shareholders. If that is getting them into trouble, I think they have

an incentive in the long run to press for a clarity and reform

internationally, even if it means their aggregate tax payment goes

slightly upwards. The irony is that this row comes after there has been

major changes at the OECD level, at EU level, on trying to simplify and

get multinationals to pay their due tax. And yet we seem to be no

further forward than before. I wonder if people start looking

harder at corporation tax and whether that is the right way to

proceed? S there are other ways of doing it. You can do it on turnover,

sales. These large companies that are taking bigger and bigger slabs

of the British markets are not paying their tax. Think of the

people competing against Amazon. Argos, the local book shop... It is

not fair. Their sense of indignation... Then to discover that

the Conservative Party, while talking about how they are trying to

clean this up and they are doing more than Labour, which possibly

they are, meanwhile instructing their MEPs to vote against moves in

Europe, to try to get a proper European agreement on this, it will

not work unless we get a European agreement, and to find out that the

Government says one thing speaking here but secretly in the European

Parliament does something else. There are a lot of legs on this. A

lot of trouble for the Conservative Party because it plays to their

weakness, sick -- just a security and defence place to be Labour

weakness. They are in bed with the big corporations. Do you think they

are in bed with them? Politicians love meeting cutting edge companies.

They do not spend that much time with steel companies. It is a bit of

a stretch to then think that they were ever doing anything about

Google's tax returns. I think it is quite a stretch. The Google top

executive right at the heart of Downing Street, just as Andy Coulson

from the Murdoch empire was right at the heart of Downing Street. You

have got Seamus Milne at the heart of the Corbyn Empire. There is quite

a difference! It is ironic, the International rules were meant to be

cleaned up. They were meant to have done something about the double

Irish and Dutch sandwich. I speak in tongues because that is how you have

to do it these days. Unless there is a major radical change, I would

suggest, if they carry on the current way, it will be another ten

years before there are further changes? Yass and not only were the

international rules meant to have been cleared up, George Osborne

talked about how reprehensible aggressive tax avoidance is. Then

last week he said the deal with Google is a special deal. The

problem with George Osborne is he has forgotten the second part of

Peter Mandelson's famous sentence about being relaxed about people

getting rich... As long as they pay their tax. The problem for George

Osborne is that he sees everything through a 2010 lens. This deal is

much better than anything that happened under new Labour. That is

six years ago. We have moved on. People are now judging this

government on what they have done. It has been a long slow burning

campaign. The tax Justice campaign has been brilliant. UK uncut Ren

fantastic demonstrations against top shop, Vodafone, boots, people

avoiding their taxes in elaborate ways. Witty campaigns the public

saw. I think it is at the centre of it now. With other cases coming up,

Apple and Amazon, Vodafone always in the frame... Just finally, I thought

it was fascinating that Peter Borren of Google explained in effect that

the money made in Britain and other places is then sent to Bermuda,

essentially warehoused in Bermuda. It is a tax haven. If they

repatriated back to California headquarters, they would pay

corporation tax in America and they think that is too high. America

corporate tax is run about 40%. Apple has about 200 billion US

dollars in cash reserves internationally. Let's move on to

the referendum. I got the impression from listening to John McDonnell and

other Labour shadow ministers I have interviewed that there is no

appetite on the Labour front bench to delay this referendum. I think

they would like to get on with it? S they want to get on with it, then

wanted to succeed. They want the yes campaign to win. At the moment

Labour is not doing very well with it. It ought to be a great hallmark

for them. Labour is almost unequivocally pro-EU. They should be

making a lot of capital against every split Tory party and they are

not, really. It is not clear why. Maybe their hearts are not in it. It

is led by two people who voted to come out into -- 19 75. Alan Johnson

woman who is leading the campaign, does not appear to be making much

headway. Maybe they are waiting until Cameron comes back with a

package. I think they are missing a trick. The Eurosceptics want more

time. They fear if it is rushed, they will definitely lose. But for a

June referendum in the Commons, it would need Labour as well. It is

clearly not going to happen. The only thing that could stop it,

because the numbers are now not in the Commons, is if the electoral

commission, bearing in mind you have the leaders of the three devolved

administrations saying they're not happy, that is the only thing that

could potentially stop it. Now that the Labour Party is saying we should

get on with it, it looks like that will happen. People like Steve Baker

needs to be careful. They have been saying for 20 years we need a

referendum. Here it is coming down the stream and they say, we are not

sure about it. That potentially shows they are nervous about the

case. One of the most telling thing is Steve Baker said was the number

of Tory MPs who would vote to leave would be no more than 70, which is

clearly expectations management on his party that's my part. What you

have seen in the past 72 hours is expectations management on all

sides. Downing Street is dampening down expectations. We are all

massively impressed. I hope you are right that he is that clever. What

worries me is that he has been reckless. He has put things out

there that he could never get. He has not put everybody square. If not

clever, certainly cynical. Steve Baker and the sceptics are playing

down their expected numbers, even Cabinet ministers. The area where

George Osborne thinks he will make the most fundamental and important

changes as the exceptions for those countries not in the eurozone. That

gets very little coverage. George Osborne says that is the most

important thing we could get because it will play for decades to come.

The territory they are fighting on is the area where they are quite

weak, benefits reform. We will have another referendum in 2021 when

treaty change takes place and the eurozone becomes a proper monetary

union. I don't think anybody is go to do a treaty change for a long

time. The mood across Europe, particularly about immigration and

refugee is, I think nobody will want a treaty. It is all talk. I do not

see it. I don't think anybody will trust their own electorate

sufficiently at any particular point. They will look at hours with

great interest. And they will say, don't go there. Before we go, a sad

morning today. We learned that veteran broadcaster Terry Wogan has

died at the age of 77 after a short battle with cancer. Over his many

years in broadcasting, he interviewed a great number of

people, including politicians. He really is talking to Margaret

Thatcher. What do the next ten years hold for

us and for our Prime Minister? Mrs Margaret Thatcher. You ever

apprehensive? Are you ever nervous before you get up and speak? Always.

And you would not speak well if you were not. I have been answering

questions in the House every Tuesday and Thursday for ten years. And I am

still just as nervous as I was at the beginning. It requires immense

preparation. You have seen your share of trouble and strife and

success. What have been your worst moments? The worst moment on totally

was when the Argentinians invaded the Falkland Islands. I will never

forget it. With the worries and some of the terrible problems you have

had, do you have any time for personal worries? We have been very

lucky. You know Dennis very well. You both belong to Lord's Tavern is.

Everyone knows Dennis. He is marvellous! Why did your audience

laugh when you mentioned him? He is held in great affection by everyone

because he has the tremendous knack for saying things people would love

to say but they're not. Terry Wogan, one of the most

accomplished and professional, charming broadcasters in modern

times. Sadly died this morning. We learn from his family. Terry Wogan.

That is it for today. I thank all of my guests. The daily politics will

be on BBC Two from noon tomorrow and every day next week, including Prime

Minister's Questions on Wednesday. I am back your macro same time, same

place next week. We will know more about the American election campaign

by them. If it is Sunday, it is the Sunday Politics.