11/09/2014 The View

Hello and welcome to a new series of the View.

Tonight, stand-off in stalemate have been the hallmarks of Stormont as

last year, but things could be coming to a head. Peter Robinson

wants to renegotiate the structures of government. We have an issue

which cannot be left on the shelf. It has to be dealt with. So, might

welfare reform break Stormont? I will be talking to two ministers.

Also on the programme:A lack of harmony in the Scottish referendum

campaign, but what might the political consequences be here? Plus

one expat Scot gives us his musical take on independence.

And backing commentators, for the new term, you can join the debate on

Twitter as ever. Good evening. By this time next

week, the polls will have closed and we will all but know the result of

the Scottish referendum. The last few days have been a roller-coaster

ride of us conferences and opinion polls, with the Mercury rising as

politicians argue the toss over greater devolution versus all-out

independence. More on that later in the programme. But on this side of

the Irish Sea, devolution is causing huge difficulties for our

politicians. No longer fit for purpose was how Peter Robinson

described it, and Gerry Adams warned that the political process is in

serious difficulty. So what does the future hold for our devolved

institutions? Joining me Simon Hamilton and John O'Dowd. We have

something we can work out over the next couple of weeks, but what Peter

is indicated this week, he has been open and calm and has pointed out

something that has becoming creasing the obvious to many people here in

Northern Ireland, that, despite the successes that we have had over the

last few years in respect of devolution, we have hit a hurdle in

the shape of Welfare Reform Bill more which is shining a spotlight on

the fact that the institutions at Stormont are no longer fit for

purpose, and they do need reform. What we have at the minute is only a

staging post, along the road that we were travelling, and it is in need

of change. You haven't really got a plan? We will get into the detail of

how it works, but what Peter is outlining is something that I think

most people in Northern Ireland will agree with. He has got it absolutely

right. The structures are no longer fit for purpose. We have a situation

now with welfare if where, if we do not get to grips with it, we have a

serious situation where up to ?1 billion per year, up to 10% of our

budget, could be going to pay for IT systems and penalties. That is a

hurdle that we can't get over. John O'Dowd, is Sinn Fein at these

proposed new talks? We were up for the last talks, we were up for the

Haass Talks. We were involved in talks in July. We remained in the

negotiating room when the others walked out. So it is not a question

of whether we are up for talks or not, the question is is Unionism up

talks. With their partners in government and with their partners

in this society. In relation to whether the institutions are fit for

purpose or not, I believe they are. What concerns me the more this

debate goes on during the week is that negotiations with the DUP are

not about improving how we deliver government. They are about how we

deliver welfare cuts, and that is a serious matter. Can we be clear

before we go any further, as far as these talks are concerned, and Simon

Hamilton says he doesn't have the details yet, but apparently we are

moving towards talks, are Sinn Fein in the tent or outside the tent? We

are always up for discussions. But discussions on how we move forward,

not how we go back. Anyone who has a notion that we are going to go back

to a 1-party state... Nobody is saying that. We are putting on the

table, if there is going to be talks about moving forward, not about

moving back. Is this about moving forward, or about recreating the

Orange state? Peter Robinson, one of the first things he said in this

article in the Belfast Telegraph was that we need the smaller parties to

be there. Why? Why not deal is just the executive parties? There is

nothing wrong with broadening the amount of participants in talks

processes. But it makes it more difficult. It is something that has

happened in the past and it hasn't invented things. Do think Jim

Allister would help? It is absolutely about moving forward. I

heard this yesterday from Gerry Adams, that this was a Unionist

attempted to re-establishing a Norwich state. Gerry Adams is a

voice from a different era, and coming up with answers like that

only reflects poorly on Sinn Fein's position. This is not about

breaching any issues around anything or advancing a political agenda.

This is about making the institutions at storm at work

better. I welcome what John said about Sinn Fein participating in

talks. That is progress. This is about getting over the issues we

have had. We now have a serious problem with which does threaten the

very existence of Stormont and devolution here in Northern Ireland.

It affects his own department in terms of restructuring education.

There have been issues in the last seven or eight years which we have

all come across which haven't reflected well on the institutions.

Have you given up on Sinn Fein doing a deal on welfare reform? Have you

set that to one side? All you have to do is listen to Gerry Adams or

Martin McGuinness, and it is clear that there is no apparent move on

Welfare Reform Bill and that is deeply troubling. We are facing

penalties this year of ?100 million, and that ramps up. You also have a

situation where, and this has been indicated by Government in London

who says there is no more scope for negotiation, but that we ourselves

will then have to take responsibility for the eye systems

-- the IT systems. 10% off all block grant, ?1 billion a year, is what

they say the cost would be. Is Welfare Reform Bill the agenda, or

is there any wriggle room that would allow you to do a deal is that we

could all move on? It is not the case of Sinn Fein and the DUP doing

the deal on the welfare cuts. It is a case, in our opinion, the

executive parties doing a deal the British government. But what has

happened is that the British -- the DUP have stopped negotiating with

the government. The British government has made it clear time

and again in public states once and letters, and you know because you

have read them, it has reached its bottom line. There are no further

negotiations. This is the British Government only for this week told

the Scottish people that if they stayed with Britain that they will

give them greater fax ability around welfare. So the rebellious Scots

have got more than the Unionists on that point. They are only offering

what we have already. The welfare system in England is not working.

The fines being imposed upon the executive require further

interrogation, and political and perhaps legal challenge as well,

because they don't stack up. They have a system in England which is

not working. The new computer system which we keep being told will cost

us ?1 billion to take over isn't even anywhere near operational. The

reforms which they are bringing in England have been stalled. Are you

just sticking your head in the sand? Let's look at the fact. Iain

Duncan Smith's job was on the line during the last Cabinet reshuffle

because they are that frustrated about the pace and cost of what is

going on. John is living in cloud cuckoo land. You can't dismiss the

penalties that are already coming off, ?13 million lost already. We

are losing another ?87 million this year, 114 next year. It goes up, it

goes up, it goes up even further. That is all money that I can't give

to the education minister, the health Minister, to spend on

much-needed Blick services here in Northern Ireland. That is not

something that can be easily dismissed. As for the idea of going

back to Downing Street and knocking on the door of number ten, that has

been done, and the message has been received loudly and clearly from

everybody from the Secretary of State Deputy Prime Minister to the

Prime Minister himself. The Scots have put the frighteners on Downing

Street, and all of a sudden, lots of things are up for grabs that weren't

up for grabs ten days ago. What the Scots are being offered on welfare

is what we have already. But they weren't being offered Devo Max, and

now they are. The narrowing of the polls, it has advanced that it was

inevitably go to happen, the transfer of more powers to Scotland.

It was always going to happen after the referendum. So we can get

distracted with this sort of talk about going off to Downing Street

and knocking on the door, but it won't get anything more for Northern

Ireland in respect of welfare reform. So can need ready to agree a

budget for 2015/2016? That is something that is going to be

incredibly challenging, but we do still have to agree a budget. We

have nothing in place at the minute. Given the pressures that we are

already under, the pressures added to by ?140 million of penalties, and

repairing for taking on an IT system, it will be challenging. What

you think the chances are a the Budget been agreed for the next

financial year? In 2014, it is ?10 billion. So right away, the

executive is facing a very strained budget because we are dealing with a

Tory Government his economic strategy is concentrated on the

south-east of England and has left every body else behind. And that is

the realpolitik that you have to live with. In terms of where we are

now, decisions need to be made on the 2015/2016 budget. We need to

watch very carefully what happens in Scotland, and need to make sure that

we campaigned strongly to ensure that the rights and financial rights

of citizens here are prioritised. Can budget be agreed? I believe can

be. If it can't be, will store Mont fall? We all want to agree. I

actually went disagree with John. The budget has in effect been flat

over the last number of years from 2010. That has proved very

difficult. It will get much worse. We are only four years into at least

nine years of austerity coming from London will stop it is already

difficult, but the problem is compounded when you are shooting

yourself in the foot by handing back this year alone ?100 million, next

year over 100 million. We need to draw things to a close. Tens of

thousands viewers watching this programme tonight to rely on working

family tax credits, child benefit, other benefits. They will face

severe personal financial crisis, and that is not the job of the

equity. No meeting of minds. Thank you both very much indeed for

explaining your respective positions.

Is the United Kingdom as we know it about change for ever? With the

narrowing of the polls in Scotland, David Cameron, Ed Miliband at Nick

Clegg raced north this week in a move that Alex Salmond dismissed as

desperation. One of the test has told the View that an offer of help

was spurned by the Better Together campaign two years ago. Gareth

Gordon has more. we know it, hangs by a thread. But

in east the flag hangs from dozens of homes

and lamp post. For many in Northern Ireland, this is as much a part of

their make-up as the union flag or the Ulster flag. That will not

change whichever way the people of Scotland vote next week. The. They

are not merely a good neighbour, it is part of their very being. It

doesn't get more Scottish than this. It looks like Scotland, and it

sounds like Scotland, but in the words of the pipe band, it is notes

not votes that matter the most. Playing in the bands the 25 years,

that is heritage. That won't change forever? I don't think so. It's not

going to affect me. To break the United Kingdom up, it just doesn't

seem right or feel right. Do you care one way or not if they go or

stay? Not really. Even though you are a member of a pipe band. I'm a

member of a pipe band in Northern Ireland, so it doesn't really affect

me. But this man says that a yes vote would frighten Unionists. I

think it would be a no vote, and that is the way it should be. Once

you start splitting the union, that is where problems arise, and I don't

think it should happen. On Saturday, the Orange order will parade through

Edinburgh in support of the union. Although some in the better together

campaign believe that could be counter-productive. I don't think it

should have a detrimental impact. The message is that people believe

Scotland is better in the union, it doesn't matter what background,

colour, class or creed, the union is better moving into the future, and

as an organisation, I think they are entitled to show their support for

the union and to do it in a way that is very, very traditional for the

Orange order institution. In nationalist west Belfast they are

also flying the flag, but through a different reason. If Scotland come

out of it with the thumbs up, ten or 16 years at the line, we might get

the same thing. I'm just hoping that it goes yes. I don't think it's

anything to do with us. It is up for the Scottish people to decide what

they want to do. I think it is always better to control yourself,

so I think Scotland would do better to say yes and have their own power.

It is written on the hills up there, did you see it? Free Scotland. The

message on the Belfast Hills is clear enough, but from Sinn Fein, we

have heard very little. I don't think they want to give ammunition

to the Unionists in Scotland, and of course the Unionists in Britain by

using the Republic as something that has a vested interest. A yes vote

might give impetus to Sinn Fein's call for a poll in Northern

Ireland. White does their former director of publicity think it would

go that way question --. I think the majority would be against

unification so there is a lot of work to be done, politically,

socially and economically and the Republicans have to argue the case.

Yar Sinn Fein so keen on a vote that you think they would loose heavily

-- yar Sinn Fein so keen on a vote that they would lose heavily? The

Unionists have also been quiet. They said they were given little option.

We did approach the main parties in the UK a couple of years ago at the

conferences. That was for two main reasons, firstly, was there anything

we could do to help with the Better Together campaign, because we think

we are better together, and also to discuss and build contacts or the

possible devolution settlement that might come out even with a strong no

vote. We had made contact, and on the Better Together issue it was

made clear that the English and Welsh colleagues had asked the same

question, but as we agree it is a matter for the Scottish people, they

thought it would be better for Scottish people to be in the middle

of whatever debates they would have and not distract other colleagues

and friends. Mark Cosgrove thinks there is still time for the Northern

Irish Unionists could to get involved. I hope any conversations

that take place for any media that the Unionists might do would give a

clear and unequivocal response that on a nonsectarian and fully embrace

of way, we want to stay part of the UK and that the economic future and

that of your children and the future of the National Health Service, all

of those things are at stake here. And I cannot believe that we are as

close as the polls are saying, given the strength of the prounion

argument. In just over a week we will know how close it has really

been. Well the Scottish First Minister,

Alex Salmond, has said that "whatever way this

goes" he will "remain a true friend So have our politicians

anything to worry about? With me now are the leader of the

Ulster Unionist Party, Mike Nesbitt, the SDLP's Alban Maginness and from

Dundee, David Clegg, the Political Just picking up on the report, would

the Better Together campaign have elevated from Ulster Unionist

involvement? I don't think so. We brought an agreement forward in 1998

that said that the constitutional future of Northern Ireland is in the

hands exclusively of the people of Northern Ireland, so to be

consistent, Scotland's constitutional future belongs

entirely in the hands of the people of Scotland. I of course hope that

they recognise that the proven benefits of the union far outweigh

the gross uncertainties of independence and they stick with

this. What do you think is the best outcome next Thursday from the SDLP

point of view? That is a matter from -- for the people of Scotland to

decide if they want independence or not. We have stayed out of that

debate. I think that in terms of the effect of the result, whether the

result be for or against independence, I think it will have a

significant impact here in Northern Ireland, because it will mean that

the powers, if, for example, Scotland remains part of the UK, the

powers of the Scottish Parliament will be enhanced, and that will mean

that we will also have an opportunity of asking Westminster to

enhance our powers as well and also the Barnett Formula is likely to be

affected, and also the distribution of EU funding through the UK will be

affected as well, so there are many, many significant features to a no

vote, and of course, there is a yes vote, I think that would profoundly

affect politics in Northern Ireland. It will impact, I think, adversely,

on the Unionist psyche. David Clegg, how tight is it with one week to go?

Very, very tight. There was a major meltdown in Unionist circles at the

beginning of the week when the Yes campaign went ahead for the first

time. They have been working very hard to turn the situation around

and since then we have seen David Cameron and Ed Miliband and Nick

Clegg there on a love bombing mission and more significantly we

have seen a lot of firms and major financial institutions warning of

the risks to their business and how it could cost jobs and prosperity.

The impact has been there have been new polls since then which have

showed the no campaign back in the lead, but only slightly. The daily

record had a poll yesterday which showed it was 5248, and there was

one that was 5248 today, so it is really, really narrow. Presumably in

the next week it is all about winning over the undecided voters

and that could be 10% to make all the difference. When it is that

tight, those can make all the difference, so and the no side have

had a relentless focus on the risks and the fact that if you vote for

this, we cannot guarantee that your financial well-being will be saved,

and we expect to see that continued because there is a feeling that if

you are still undecided at this stage, you are tempted by the yes

vote that you are concerned that it might impact negatively on your

quality of life. There is a big Orange order parade on Saturday

supporting the Better Together campaign. Will that help undecided

voters? Or could it backfire? I don't know how it will play. I am

still optimistic that Better Together will win out, but even if

they do, there will be a recalibration of the United Kingdom.

My message to Unionists in Northern Ireland is to not be afraid. We have

a devolution process which is not working and there will be an

opportunity to do things better. There will also be an opportunity to

look at the grant of ?10 billion and it is still only ?10 billion. It is

not sustainable for them to be so dependent on the Treasury and we

could get new levers to rebalance the economy on the back of Scottish

independence and we should not be afraid of that. We should go in and

argue for change for the better. Whatever happens, does it bring the

possibility of a border poll here. Are we likely to see it sooner

rather than later? I'm not sure it does, but it provides a model for

democratic discourse, democratic debate, in relation to the

constitutional position. We see in Scotland a debate carried out in a

very robust fashion, but a very decorous fashion where people

entered into a civilised debate about something that was extremely

important, which was the national sovereignty. That provides us with a

model to get on with our politics on a more rational basis, and I think

we owe the Scots a debt of gratitude for that. Let's take from the

Scottish example and letters infuse that into our own politics here. Do

you think David Clegg made a big mistake by leaving the TiVo max

option off the ballot paper. That is what Alex Salmond wanted when it was

first discussed and David Cameron was clear it was not going to

happen, and now look what has happened. I guess time will tell

whether it was a mistake or not, but I would point out that I heard a

discussion about welfare reform and it was clear that Devo Max is being

offered to Scotland and it is absolutely not being. More powers

are being offered, but the understanding of Devo Max is

everything short of foreign affairs and defence, that is not what is

over. The reason that it did not appear on the ballot paper is that

none of the Unionist parties, neither Labour nor the Liberal

Democrats are interested in giving them Devo Max. It seems clear that

if there is a no vote, particularly as narrow as it seems it would be

that there would be significantly more powers devolved to Scotland,

and that will have an impact on Northern Ireland and Wales but it is

not Devo Max. Just briefly, you can see people here have a keen interest

in what is happening in Scotland. 4 million people over there have the

capacity to determine the future shape of the UK. How where are

people in Scotland of the fact that everyone is looking on to see what

the future of the UK will look like. 4 million out of 65 million cannot

get to decide. I think the realisation of that was seen in the

last week. There was a feeling that maybe the rest of the UK had not

been that interested until there was the little jolt the poll that so --

showed the Yes campaign ahead and we have seen a lot of interest from

England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and people are aware. I'm not sure

of the figures particularly heavy on how people are deciding to vote. One

of the interesting aspects of the campaign to keep Scotland in the UK

is that it has barely made an emotional argument to the United

Kingdom. Their strategists would say that it is because if you are likely

to be moved by the argument, you are already voting no, so they are

focusing on the undecideds, but it's not really featured in the rhetoric.

They have just relentlessly focused on the economics of the setup. Mike

Nesbitt, what do you think is the best outcome for the Unionists next

week? Even a no vote looks like a vote for big change. Maybe not Devo

Max, but nonetheless change. And don't be afraid of it. I don't know

if it will be a formal constitutional convention or a less

formal constitutional conversation, but there will be changes. We need

changes. We are the party who said, give us the power to set our own

rate of corporation tax because we suffer having the land border with

the Republic of Ireland. There is a lever where we can break parity and

do our own thing. There are other levers, so economic levers, just to

name one area where we could change things for the better, and redefine

and recalibrate the union and don't be afraid of it, embrace it, because

it will be good for all the people of Northern Ireland. You head still

bet a little earlier on, but as an Irish nationalist, in all honesty

would you be disappointed to see a yes vote next Thursday. I believe

the people of Scotland should decide. I am asking you what you

think. I have a romantic notion in relation to Scotland. I think the

Scottish people should determine their own future and we should leave

it up to them. I don't think it is helpful for people like myself to

interfere in the process. Thank you all very much.

Let's hear what our commentators have to say in our first programme

Cathy Gormley-Heenan and Newton Emerson have been listening

Nice to see you both. Newton, let's talk about storm on, is it fit for

purpose? There is no alternative to meaningful power share. We are in

the process of setting up mini super councils, so anything they negotiate

will look fairly similar. What is going on is more than a budget

negotiation, but to talk about the end of Stormont is overblown. Why do

you think Peter Robinson chose to say what he said this week? I think

it is true to form for Peter Robinson. He has veiled threats for

about the close of the union which he did with the on the runs and the

published letter in the covenant parade. He has done it again now, so

these things tend to amount to not much and it sometimes seems he is

the boy who cried wolf. You have an interesting theory, and I don't know

if people at home will agree, but you don't think Peter Robinson meant

it to be as dramatic as interpreted? I do think he meant the article to

have the impact it had. There is the crisis down onto the DUP, whereas

before it was a vague sense. He can't have meant that, and he said

most of what he said in the article before, and when you look at the

detail, it's not controversial. He might just have failed to realise

the extent of it. No, I think he meant it. I think they were caught

they were down a blind alley and he wanted to do something that would

tie the structural problem with the issue of welfare reform. There are

two issues. There are the structural problems as defined in the assembly

and they have been looked at by the executive committee, and that was a

very long consultation paper and nothing much came about. He is

saying the same things again now. I suspect nothing much will come of it

now either. Do you think much will come of it? He said himself quite a

task. I think that the British government has made it quite clear

that it wants and that has been the consistent position all along, and

there will be talks, but how much can meaningfully come out of them?

If the litmus test is passing welfare reform, and one of the two

top parties doesn't want to do it, what form of meaningful

power-sharing would allow it to go through? Let's talk about the

Scottish referendum. Does it matter to people here? It manned -- matters

to unionists and nationalists in different ways. The Unionists are

looking at the constitutional question in Northern Ireland which

Unionists think is a settled matter, but for the nationalists they want

it to open the constitutional question of Northern Ireland in that

we can have a border poll at some point down the road. There is a

remarkably little comment about this in Northern Ireland, I think,

because it's hard to get your head around the enormity of the country

breaking up, but when you think what it would mean and the psychological

blow to unionism, there would be no mechanism to reflect that. We would

be in the same situation. It is the psychological blow that is

important. What would British must look like? What would the flag look

like question at all of the things Unionists hold dear would be up for

discussion. Those other fascinating issues to discuss next week. Thanks

both very much -- those are the fascinating issues.

That's it from The View for this week.

I'll be back with Sunday Politics at 11.35 here on BBC1.

There's no View next week - though we will be contributing to

the coverage of the referendum result, live from

And with just seven days to go, we'll leave you with another view

on that Scottish question, courtesy of Hugh Jordan.

# land of their parent Heather, Scotland the Brave. # land of the

rotten diet, deep-fried food, why don't you try, heart attacks and

football riots. Scotland the Brave. # the union has over soaked its

feet. # Charlie the first got beheaded. # the second got seceded.

# Charlie the third might not be needed. # Land where the shares are

falling. We have independence falling. Scotland the Brave.

Referendum day is nearing. All Scotch mist will soon be clearing.

Don't believe all your hearing about Scotland the Brave. # # Tame the

rampant lion. The union has over soaked its feet. # Jaidee the first

he got beheaded. # Charlie the second he got seceded. Charlie the

third will not be needed. In Scotland the Brave.