20/03/2014 The View

Tonight: Anna Lo provokes a storm of criticism from unionists as she

announces support for a united Ireland and brands Northern Ireland

as 'artificial'. But what does her party leader make of it? I'll be

asking David Ford for his views and hearing from two very different

shades of unionism. Also on the programme: Gleaming

civic monuments or white elephants? Why have so many councils splashed

out on top-notch headquarters ahead of major reforms that could render

them redundant? Plus find out what's got Arlene Foster dancing in the

streets. And two new faces in Commentators'

Corner - academic Cathy Gormley Heenan and columnist and satirist

Newton Emerson. And you can, of course, follow the debate on Twitter

during, and after, the programme - that's @BBCtheview.

Good evening. The Alliance Party might have been hoping to grab a few

headlines this weekend with its annual conference, but no-one would

have predicted the political firestorm that's threatening to

overshadow proceedings. Comments by the party's Euro candidate and South

Belfast MLA, Anna Lo, supporting a united Ireland have provoked fury

among unionists. Traditionally agnostic on the constitutional

question, Alliance dislikes being pigeon-holed as either unionist or

nationalist. In an interview with the Irish News today, however, Anna

Lo says she would ultimately like to see a united Ireland. She describes

partition and the creation of Northern Ireland as "artificial",

and says a united Ireland would be "better placed economically,

socially and politically". So, how has that gone down with the party

leadership? David Ford joins me now. The evening. Thanks very much for

joining us. Some people might be surprised that you are sitting here

tonight rather than Anna Lo. I was invited.

That was the message I got. We were delighted to have you here but we

did first of all ask for another blow to be on the programme and told

she wasn't available. -- for Anna Lo.

She has spent the last two days in the Assembly chamber, effectively

leading on three of the six sections because of her role and she spent

today working on the half of her constituents so she has had a busy

week. If you look at Eric? Her record, she has had a successful

time. -- if you look at her record. I am sure you have been busy as

well, as Justice Minister. This perhaps is a reflection on the

seriousness of the situation for your party?

I find this bizarre because two years ago in a conference speech I

talked about the diversity of backgrounds the Alliance party. I

said some purpose in -- some people would have long-term nationalist

views. Nobody batted an eyelid. I would prefer to talk about work we

are doing an Alliance proposals. Have you spoken to Anna Lo?

Yes. She spoke to me this evening and she was concerned about the way

she was being described as a nationalist, expressing a view about

a long-term potential future. People have described her as nationalist

but she sits on Assembly the same as the rest of us because that is their

primary focus, like the rest of the Alliance group. So it is a very

personal view. Yes.

And we have made it clear there are a range of personal views and there

is a commitment to building a united community which is the defining

point for Alliance. We don't define ourselves by the lines on a map, we

define ourselves by the type of society we want.

But she did say she supports the idea of a united Ireland and she

thinks of the creation of Northern Ireland as artificial. She made a

comment about being anti-colonial. Whether you like it or not, that has

provoked quite a ruckus on the Unionist benches. There was a

statement released today saying that Anna Lo needs to apologise and

withdraw her comments, making it clear she made a mistake.

Talk about apology, this last time I was sitting in this chair it was

discussing on the runs and I was accused by one DUP member around and

issues relating to the police report which came up around the same sort

of time as being" a little Nero" . There have been no apology on that.

A reference to colonialism is considered more serious by the DUP

than equating the Democratic politician with a mass murderer. You

can for inferences from all sorts of things.

You might comment on your former deputy leader who is a commentator,

he said that the comments of Anna Lo were damaging to the party. Is that

right? He says lots of things as a paid commentator for the BBC.

He's not particularly in touch with party thinking and to the best of my

knowledge, he hasn't been with the team for many years. I don't know

how he would know how people are reacting because I would not have

thought we have had an opposition damaged by recent events. The issue

might be this - the Alliance party has come under witticisms from

Unionists over the flag issue. You are aware of that.

Most of it is incorrect and ill informed. Your critics say that it

wants to water down the petitioners and the comments of Anna Lo play

into their hands. -- the Britishness. That was nothing

to do with Naomi Long and it was an issue where Alliance produced a

balanced arrangement for a divided city as part of the United kingdom.

So, yes, our critics will attack us. That is what happens when you are a

significant political party and we are achieving things. Naomi Long is

achieving things at Westminster. We are achieving things in the Assembly

as well. What I want to know is if you think Anna Lo has created a

stick to beat her own back with the comments she made?

She is your European candidate and she is going to have a tough fight

on her hands. I wonder if she has kissed goodbye to a knot of soft

Unionist transfers because she is not sitting on the fence any more

and she is supporting the idea of a united Ireland.

She said she supported the principle of consent, which is party policy.

She said she didn't think any change will likely in the short and medium

term and I'm not sure she even thought it was likely at all.

To be clear, if the Alliance party policy a united Ireland with

consent? No, it is the principle of consent

based on the good Friday agreement. That could be a long-term aspiration

for some people won't way or another but we want Northern Ireland to work

as a successful community and economy. You don't think it will

damage your campaign is a Europe candidate?

I see no evidence for that. Might it damage the Naomi Long

campaign? Given that we have said we are a

diverse party, why would the individual view of one person affect

the electoral chances of another? A storm in a teacup?

I think it has given the media a 24-hour wonder.

It illustrates the diversity of opinions within Alliance but it did

strictly commitment to build a united community.

She retains your full support, does she, as an MLA for South Belfast,

chair of the environment committee and your European candidate?

Nobody is more important than anybody else but she has my full

support because her views are within the Alliance party and she went into

a longer term aspiration which not everybody would share that the key

policy about consent was within party policy.

We are also joined by the DUP MP for North Antrim, Ian Paisley, and John

McCallister of NI21. Storm in a teacup? The comments were shocking.

Anna Lo is a paid elected representative and that is language

Unionists have always been insulted by and felt it was very damaging to

us. The question isn't where Anna Lo is tonight. She has been transparent

about her position but where is the Alliance party? It has a policy

based on confusion. It is a house divided against itself cannot stand.

If there was a border poll tomorrow, where would it stand? But there

isn't going to be. But it is a question, it doesn't

know what it stands for on this key issue which, whether people are

moving on or not in Northern Ireland, it is still an important

issue and it goes to the heart of being honest with people.

The party should be taking a position. David in the past have

said he was sick in his stomach when he was in the divine in 2001. -- the

pantomime. Now Anna Lo has a Republican aspiration and I think

the question is where is Naomi Long? Is cheap pro-or anti-quiz-mac

-- is she pro-or anti-quiz-mac a house divided is a house in severe

difficulty. It is united on the key issue that

divides the Alliance party. We want to build a united community.

But it is confusing. As you just said, there isn't going

to be a border poll was that not the case? The Alliance party campaigned

for Northern Ireland to stay in the United Kingdom but now a leader has

said she supports united Ireland. What would you do?

Since 1921 and 1973, position has changed significantly. We are not

talking about a choice. We are actually talking about a complex set

of relationships within Northern Ireland and the relationships

between people within these islands. But you are not sending out a clear

message to people so they can understand way things stand.

We are committed to building a community for the people of Northern

Ireland, regardless of the Constitution, because that is the

issue which creates faculties and it bites the development of our

children's lives and the opportunity for them to build up in today's

society. John McCallister, where do you stand on this? One of our key

things is that we need the Northern Ireland to build a sense of the Wii

instead of us and them and I think a key way of doing that is to build on

a Northern Arras identity. If you describe it as artificial, that

brings into question that whole question of a Northern Irish

identity. The remarks Anna Lo made a road in the artificial I think

belong to a different era. It has nothing to do with where we are from

the Good Friday Agreement and in the debate on local government reform

and the red flags we would have supported some of the Alliance

amendments that that type of language is not representative of

what the Good Friday Agreement was about. It is quite a complex issue

and maybe we shouldn't over civil Fayette. I did an interview with

Anna Lo last year about identity and she said, my identity would be

Northern Irish. I don't see myself as Irish at all. How does that

square with seeing Northern Ireland as an artificial state? Don't ask me

but you have to take on board other comments. I do believe in a Northern

Irish identity. You were standing up in the chamber last night telling us

all how Irish you are, how proud you were of the Irish rugby team and win

you were good but valid DUP you to get your British passport and said

you were absolutely an Irishman. You have no difficulty seeing that. I am

as good an Irishman as anyone in that chamber, and Northern Irish and

British identity is more complex. My difficulty with other's comment is

that to suggest Northern Ireland is an artificial state gives away from

the original settlement in 1998 and at the moment I feel NI21 is the

only party standing up or the Good Friday Agreement. The DUP and UUP,

Sinn Fein are moving away from it, all wanting to reinforce us and them

politics. Alliance cannot be the halfway point between two extremes

and call that the centre ground. Ian Paisley, you were laughing but that

needed to you you were being a bit mischievous with this because you

yourself have said you are Irish and your father has also said he would

never deny he was Irish. You were talking about identity, and that is

separate from policy, which is where we are and what we want to cheap in

politics. The issue for people today is, do they have strong Unionist

representation will be have representation that will take away

their union? The union represents all the things and says she is

trying to achieve in her beaded Ireland policy, a strong economy,

strong social background, and thinks Northern Ireland citizens would be

better off in the Republic of Ireland, which we yelled out. That

is the critical point, she is not talking about next year. There are

all those things which she says she is supporting for a state which

frankly she does not hold a candle to in terms of the policies endorsed

by that state. People out there want to know if they have strong positive

Unionists representing them or a mishmash of nationalism,

republicanism and something we do not know what it means is a halfway

house. That is the point, you have made a problem or there was not a

problem and Anna Lo has made life difficult, especially for Naomi Long

in East Belfast because people don't know who you are or what we would --

or what you represent. People know what we represent. John said we were

a halfway house. That is not what the Alliance Party is. It is a party

with commit and to its principles. We did set ourselves halfway between

other people but by what we believe is right to develop this economy

come to develop a shared future and provide a better chance for all our

people, and that often puts us in disagreement with both of them. If

someone happens to make a remark about a long-term issue that doesn't

over it from where the party is united and what we are seeking to do

to build up immunity. Ian Paisley. It is a 2-page interview and a play

a politician I think to become representative. She talks about

other issues as well. You are hopping mad tonight, we have seen

statements from other members of your party. You've been very quick

to condemn Anna Lo. You have not been so quick, and a lot of people

have pointed this out on social media, you've not been so quick to

condemn the PUP leader Billy Hutchinson's comments, where he said

he had no regrets in terms of his past because he believed he

contributed to preventing a united Ireland. Let's not forget, that in

the context of the fact that he pleaded guilty to killing two

Catholic men in 1974. Murdering in a disgraceful and evil way. Why isn't

the DUP demanding an apology from him? I was asked to come on to talk

about Anna Lo. The Lee Hutchinson comment is disgraceful and it shows

the Lee Hutchinson thinks killing Catholics is the best way to

preserve the union, it is the way to destroy the union and I am happy to

condemn it. Members of my party in South Antrim issued statements to

the local press. Hard to find. I don't think you will find any water

in that argument with me. Billy Hutchinson's remarks were a pulse

of, appalling remarks to make -- reports of -- propulsive and they

should not be in any form of political thinking. There was never

a place for that type of thinking in Northern Ireland and there is none

in the future. We need to leave it there. I suspect it is a subject we

will return to in the future. Interesting to see if it covers your

party conference on Saturday. I'm sure it will be raised. Thank you

all very much. RPA, the Reform of Public

Administration, was meant to save ratepayers money. Yesterday MLAs

approved a large increase in the money paid to councillors elected to

the 11 new "super councils". Now a former boundary commissioner has

told The View that ratepayers could be paying for several opulent new

council headquarters for generations, buildings erected

before members of the new bodies have even decided where they'll sit.

Maurice Hayes says he fears some of them could become white elephants,

as Gareth Gordon now reports. This is mostly male in Newtownabbey.

Council officers don't come more opulent nonetheless I smack Mossley

mill. This is the equally opulent Antrim Civic Centre, opened in 2006

at a cost of almost ?10 million. These two gleaming examples of civic

pride are no more than 15 miles apart. Metaphorically they are about

to get even closer. And from an Newtownabbey will join to become one

super council which means one of these buildings will be surplus to

requirements. Right? Wrong. Both buildings are community buildings

that are used for front line services and for that unity to come

in and see. They will have to be a decision on where meetings are held.

We are fortunate that we are only a few miles apart and travelling

distance is not significant but for others there are significant

travelling distances, so I would say with buildings will be maintained.

It is important for ratepayers to note these are significant to

military assets. But for two Antrim. Impressive not on the scale of its

Big Brother, so do councillors fear for its future? This building is

used daily. Even today you would have space getting a room inside

this building because it is being used by all kinds of organisations,

it is well used. But it was used as a council headquarters. But the sign

says Civic Centre. Do you think the Civic Centre is built recently

should not have been built given we knew the RPA was coming and the

councils were becoming 11. In some cases maybe not. It is not just

ratepayers in Newtownabbey and Antrim who have new council offices.

Lisburn's was the costliest at ?22 million, Coleraine's cost nearly 7

million, and Castlereagh's was opened with a ?7 million by stag and

the newest at Downpatrick at a cost of ?11 million. This Downpatrick

resident, a former boundary commission for Northern Ireland, is

suspicious of the motives for building such opulent headquarters.

A lot of this, and we sort in 1973, was people making a pre-emptive bid

for a headquarters and thinking if they put up a great building someone

would have to fill it, but that is not a universal rail -- rule. There

are white elephants around the country. These things will saddle

the rate fears for generations if they are not required. This area

stretching from Kevin she across two South Armagh, one would say

logically, the centre of that is Newry, and still there is no

commonality of interest. People around here do not look towards

Newry for anything, so maybe they are right to think in terms of a two

headed organisation, but these are questions I think should have been

settled by consensus between the parties who will actually be running

the place. Down is not done yet. It is about to spend more money,

although less than ?30,000 getting its council chamber ready for

meetings of the new shadow body. Newry and more fans to spent almost

?350,000 on its new headquarters so it can hold meetings of the same

super council. The minister responsible for local government

reform says he is not concerned about the numbers of new

headquarters which have been built. This will be in a season for the new

councils, how they use their assets or how they choose to dispose of

their assets. What I do have to do is make sure they do so in a way

that represents best value for ratepayers. Others believe it could

have been handled differently. Perhaps there could have been

oversight of what was proposed and expenditure a bar of after configure

should have been cleared by a minister looking at a more holistic

view. Starting in May, councils will have less than a year to decide how

they operate. The last thing they will want to do is give the

impression that the new system is in danger of being milked.

Gareth Gordon reporting. But what about that announcement of an

increase of almost 50% in allowances for local government councillors?

That's a rise of almost ?4500. So are they worth it? I'm joined now by

the independent North Down councillor, Brian Wilson, and

Belfast SDLP councillor, Claire Hanna. You are both welcome. Brent

Wilson, why is this increase wrong? I can see no justification for the

increase. At the moment, councillors here are paying -- paid just over

?9,000. They will get just over 14,000. That is ?280 per week. What

do councillors do for a ?280 a week? You tell me. When I listen to

the rest of them on the radio, they say they do a 60 are weak. It is

only a part-time job. Most councillors, a large number have

other jobs, so it is only part-time, a supplement to their normal income.

Secondly, the actual work they do is attending on council meeting a week

and answering two or three queries. You have a situation now since the

Assembly was set up that each constituency, each assembly person

has their own office. That office was manned by professional workers

who have actually much more experience than councillors and they

have taken all the work away from the local councillors. Claire

Hanna, you haven't got a job there, according to Brian. I might try

running North Down. I can understand that this is -- the cynicism, but

the people who team up with this report, having plucked this figure

from nowhere, they benchmarked against other councillors, it is

effectively an on-call job and you work anti-social hours. Brian says

it is part-time. It is, like others I have a job outside politics but I

work-out time -- I heard other councillors saying it is at least 60

hours a week, seven days a week, a full-time job and is underpaid. It

is a very intense job. But it cannot be both full-time and part-time.

People have a passion for it and are doing it in the voluntary capacity.

If you went into local government to make money you would be disappointed

but we need to attract more people into local government and most

people are either retired or work for their parties or have an

independent income. They all have something to give but if you want to

bring more people into local politics we need to make it viable.

People will go win with a passion for their area but there needs to be

some remuneration. They have established it is 50% of a full-time

job and 50% of the median wage and I think that is fair.

What about the idea that we will get a better quality of councillor in

future? I would say 90% of the councillors we are getting will be

old councillors with the same habits and the same background as the old

councils. There is no improvement because basically there is no

improvement in the services they are providing. We talked about the new

service is coming to the council but they never came. If you look at

England, Harrogate, for example. That is a council which is bigger

than most of our local councils. It is a second tier council that has

more powers. 4100 is the allowance. It is going to be 14,000 plus in

Belfast. If your cancer is answering two queries and attending one, take

them out at the next election. Plenty to talk about this week in

their first foray into Commentators' Corner, we say a big, warm welcome

to Newton Emerson and Cathy Gormley Heenan. Let's talk about Anna Lo

first of all. The discussion we had in the defence of her position.

Comments? Accidental or deliberate? She made too many remarks of a

pointed nature. This is a party whose voters, even though they have

a broad mix of backgrounds, are almost all in Unionist majority

constituencies so they will see a hitch to their votes. They will lose

soft Unionist and they won't gain enough nationalists to make up for

it. The Euros are a single constituency election so any vote

will count towards her total. She might have a solo run and go for

broke at the end because this is her last election and she is stepping

down. A beaded news for her as far as the Euro elections are concerned

but not good news for Naomi Long in the Westminster election? I think

today was a storm in a teacup. David was right, in the heart of her

remarks was the principle of consent at at the heart of that is

everything enshrined in the Good Friday agreement and what it does is

allow people to be aspirational. You can be British, Irish, both. You can

have aspirations for other things. But it is hard for voters to know

what you are full top The Alliance party will want to grow beyond this

soft perspective. Possibly but I think the remarks are a point well

made. I'm not sure why Ian Paisley Jr was incensed because they are not

going to lose anything as a consequence. They might pick up soft

votes as a result of this and the diversity of the party is in

important thing for new voters and who don't necessarily want to go

Unionist or nationalist and are looking for something more diverse.

The possibility of white elephants in the terms of these new buildings

thrown up all over southern Ireland and this 50% or thereabouts

allowance increase. The 50% increase looks bad but it is missing the

point. The councillors are on 15,000 but the Chief Executive is on

150,000 plus. I would rather people we elect paid a substantial wage and

their bureaucrats paid less. I would pay them more and make this a proper

job for them and I would make the people running the council behind

the scenes less important and certainly less well rewarded. I'm

with him. Pay them more. It probably shouldn't be a part-time job and the

responsibilities the councillors will have with the establishment of

the new councils will be increased with community planning and so on so

I think in order to get the right people into those jobs, you have to

pay a fair wage. These are bureaucrats who want to maintain

their well-paid jobs. They would say that this is a civic centre and it

is for the whole community. It will be used by the whole community

wherever the council meets for top We have too many amateur councillors

rubber-stamping. We need councillors who are engaged. Can I ask you to

comment on the comments in the newspaper about no regrets about

comment on the comments in the murder of two Catholic men. Yes. I

against that. The comments were an acceptable. Why should it be any

different coming from wireless? Billy Hutchinson said he wouldn't

expect middle-class Unionist to understand that I would like to tell

him not to patronise me. Don't tell me we should accept that murder is

right. The DUP condemned it in the chamber. Thanks. That's it from The

View for this week. I'll have live coverage of David Ford's speech to

the Alliance Party faithful on Saturday at 12 noon on BBC Two. For

now, though, I'll leave you with a few familiar faces from Fermanagh -

with thanks to the Impartial Reporter. Bye-bye.