24/11/2011 Hearts and Minds

Welcome to the programme. Coming up, we ask Peter Robinson if

threatening to resign over Curran and Prince is the right way to woo

Catholic voters? As councils take over animal welfare, are they ready

for the job? Is it up to the nanny state to save

us from our damaging lifestyles? Why the invisible work of women

should form part of global economic calculations.

The DUP is gathering this weekend for its annual conference. Peter

Robinson is with me. Welcome to the programme. Which Peter Robinson do

we have? The all-embracing Mr Robinson looking for Catholic votes

to retain himself as First Minister or the Peter Robinson he would

throw the whole thing up in the air? People are talking about a

split personality. Unfortunately the people talking

about that probably haven't gauge the importance of the issue of what

you refer to as the badge. I spent many years in the run-up to sit

Andrews in ensuring we had a system that was it like the previous one,

the St Andrew's the agreement changed the method by which

decisions were made in Northern Ireland under the Belfast Agreement

ministers could do whatever they wanted in their department, no

accountability, can be changed at the Executive, even in the Assembly

itself. We changed all of that. You didn't need to threaten to

resign, you could have just have made a controversial issue.

The Minister himself has to judge it is a controversial or

significant issue and bring it to the Executive. On this occasion the

minister told the Assembly he didn't consider this was a matter

to be dealt with by politicians battle, it was a matter of

operational importance and will be dealt with by officials.

You had a quiet word in his ear, that would have told him that.

twice stated during the Assembly debate it was very clear he was put

a bit of public record and I was putting it on public record that is

not the way things work. You said you wanted to make it

possible or comfortable for Catholics to vote for the DUP, as

comfortable for them as everybody else. He was stepping on an issue

which many Catholics see as a throwback to the old Peter Robinson.

I was glad one of the people who came out was a Roman Catholic who

indicated peace symbols were reported. This isn't a thing about

Protestant and Catholic, this was a change being made by a minister

behind the backs of the Assembly. This was an issue of whether we

should maintain symbols in Northern Ireland. It sounds like a terribly

old argument. We had it with their PSNI. What is wrong with us having

British symbols in Northern Ireland? We are part of the United

Kingdom. The peer -- the PSNI badge retains that. The Democratic

Unionist Party had been in power at the time when the Patten report was

coming along, you wouldn't have had this kind of changes. There is

nothing wrong with having British symbols in British Ulster.

think you would have had the devolution of police, injustice,

the support for for the police if it had still been the Royal Ulster

Constabulary? We are where we are. It is requested to Sinn Fein, I

cannot answer it. There is appeasement right down the line and

Unionists are fed up. There is a very clear view within the Unionist

community we are not giving up our British heritage and we are

prepared to stand over the decisions we are paid. One man's

appeasement is another man's recognition of identity and

aspiration. I have to say, there was a full

report carried out as a result of the review of the Prison Service.

This was not one of the recommendations. I haven't had any

body until this was raised by David Ford in the Assembly, I haven't had

any body indicating this was an important issue for them. This

wasn't a matter of concern to any section of our community until it

became an issue because of David Ford's remarks. Has he made it a

bigger issue at one which now nationalists and republicans will

not let go of? If you had just had a word in his ear it would have

stayed under the radar. It is over, it is decided. You have been seen

again as the backward-looking Peter Robinson. You have to look at the

commentators. The that is your view. On the basis of what commentators

say, if I was to believe them we wouldn't be winning the last

election. Let's be clear what this issue was about. It was about

standing up for the right of elected representatives to take

decisions, and we would go forward in this province by agreement, not

somebody going by a circuitous route to take decisions which

wouldn't get agreement in the Executive.

Another issue of concern is Jeffrey Donaldson, senior party of remember

rushing to London to complain about changes to the Act of Settlement

which will allow the royal family to marry a Catholic, is there

something you are concerned about? You say it is an issue of concern,

who is concerned? I go round the province every day of the week,

nobody has ever raised the issue with me. It is clearly of interest

to the Orange Order but a Roman Catholic cannot be the monarch, nor

indeed can a Free Presbyterian, nor can a member of the Presbyterian

church or a Methodist, or some of the other denominations. It is not

discrimination against Roman Catholic Church, it is a

recognition that the Queen is the head of the Anglican Church. Do you

think it changed is correct, the 16 heads of state of the Commonwealth

or two was OK? There are a number of state around

the world that have religious leaders as they head, and the two

are combined, the Vatican is another example, nobody is talking

about disestablishment of the Vatican state so that the Pope

would no longer be the head of it. If you start tampering with

constitution, which has served us very well for generations, you get

into real difficulty. David Cameron said it was

discriminatory against Catholics. It is discriminatory against repro

-- Free Presbyterians, Baptists. You don't see it as another kind of

mixed message that is being sent out? In the context of you wanting

to or saying you want to open the DUP up, naked constable for

Catholics, you don't see people look at issues like that and think

there is no way I am voting for that lot -- make comfortable for

Catholics. It is not in issue, why it look at

one denomination. Being on marrying a monarch. Let's be clear, those

are not issues we are meeting with people on the streets, people are

trying to build a society in Northern Ireland and that is

something we are pitted our energy into. We are having to deal with

the day-to-day difficulties of rebuilding our economy, those are

the issues people are talking about. I know you say commentators are not

important, but... I did not say What -- were not important.

Irish News this week has been saying you have refused to do

interview with him, why? I haven't refused to do an interview, if you

want to get into the particular, it is I have refused to do it an

interview with a particular reporter. If they want to bring

their editor along, I would be happy to do an interview at any

time at all. We will not go into individuals.

Looking at the end of this month there will be a major strike of the

public services, members of local government staff, they should make

a net -- extra contribution to their pension contributions, why

have you say your face against that was collared have gone down this

road? Wales haven't and England haven't. It is not an easy issue.

It is whether you pick out one section of the public sector

workers and safe they should have a separate and better deal than

everybody else. There is also the issue of parity with the rest of

the attic kingdom. Anything we do that costs money, obviously has to

come away from public services. They have a separate, fully funded

scheme, but I think there are real dangers if you were to allow the

fully funded scheme to go its own direction. It may not be too long

before they were looking for public sector funds to prop them up.

amongst the lowest paid. Scotland has do give it to do this. Why

would you not follow that model? If you compare local government with

central government, you will find there is no great distinction

amongst, in terms of pay. The issue is a decision, whether you believe

there should be a disparity with public sector workers, and whether

you believe there should be a breach of parity. The argument has

not been successfully made, the Executive was not convinced of the

argument, the argument was made Bishop the preferential treatment

given to one section of public sector workers, it wasn't one

favoured by the Executive. Calls for the resignation of Arlene

Foster over her perceived failure to declare an interest in a piece

of ground which is being opened up for exploration for gas. Do you

support her questions loch of course they do. She has done

absolutely nothing wrong. She has said if at any stage the ground

which isn't owned by her, but by her husband, ever became the

subject of land that was going to be involved in any matter over

which she had a decision she would declare that interest. She hasn't

got such interest at present. former chairman of the

Parliamentary Standards Committee has said she should at least have

told her private secretary. I dismiss anything really that

Alastair Graham says. He was the chairman of the Parliamentary

Standards Committee, Mr Robinson. can understand why it is was, and

not his. He complained about everything, a complete whinger.

Everybody looking at the matter will say there was absolutely no

reason why she should declare an interest. Sinn Fein have lodged a

question. Stephen Agnew would be wanting her to resign over the

issue over supposed to over the fact her husband owns a piece of

land which may or may not in the future become the subject of land

that might be used for that purpose. You will be standing by her

completely? Why wouldn't I? She has done nothing wrong. People would

say she stood up in the Assembly, this matter has been raised, she

discussed it, defended it, condemned people opposed to it but

all the time there was a small part of land in this licensing area she

had any interested. Some people in the interests of transparency, she

should be saying I have an interest. She doesn't. Her husband does.

has never supported anybody having that particular piece of ground

used for that purpose. The issue is whether there is a danger, and she

has a particular view, that is very different from being in a position

where she is trying to push forward any interest her husband might have.

Your message to conference this weekend?

The conference will be in very good form. We have had a very good

election. We have got stability within the Assembly. Things are

looking very positive in terms of us being able to take our agenda

forward, but we recognise we have to deal with, festival, the

rebuilding of our economy. Hopefully the ability to rebalance

our economy, we also have to do with the agenda of an assured

society and that is something we are determined to take the

performance. A meeting with David Cameron in the near future? I met

him on many occasions, when I need to I am sure I will ask for a

meeting but I haven't asked for one so I cannot expect to get one.

So we are big and getting bigger. As if the economic prognosis wasn't

bad enough, we are assured of an epidemic of obesity. And none of us

are going to be able to afford to pay for our own care when we are

old and fat and nodding by the fire, which won't be lit anyway because

the winter fuel allowance has been cut. The conventional jibe against

health promotion is that people don't change their habits. It's a

nanny state that tries to tell them to. The solution a scheming Cameron

probably favours is to privatise as much of the health service as

possible before the masses waddle in and smother the whole system.

The big issue, in standard poltiical thinking, is the question

of individual responsibiity versus the right or power of government to

make us change our ways. So on the one side we have the darker

traditional conservatives telling us all our problems are our own

responsibility, and on the other we have big state liberals who would

imagine the state can do everything for us. Could we not just settle

the old argument by looking at what works? We are surrounded by

evidence that people do change. Martin McGuinness used to be happy

to sleep on the floor in a safe house. Only the best of hotels for

republicans now when they travel. Well, it's a change. I grew up in a

working class area among thousands of people who went on to get jobs

as lawyers and social workers and moved out to the Malone Road. Some

of them even changed the way they spoke. Now they insist on their

skinny lattes as if that is what they were nurtured on. Still, walk

down the Shankill or the Falls and you see people queuing up outside

chippies for their dinner and the chemist for their tranquilisers and

laxatives. And a lot of people stopped smoking. When Brian

Faulkner and Gerry Fitt entered political negotiations, they did so

with ashtrays on the table. Strangely, more women smoke now and

that's a change too, and they have more lung cancers than men have.

And look at the number of bicycles in Belfast now. Cycling to work

used to be a mark of poverty but today we have cycling MLAs. Conor

Murphy cycled the length of Ireland this summer. There are rumours that

Peter Robinson has been spotted in lycra shorts. People change their

ways when motivated by tax cuts, by new circles of friends and

colleagues, improvements in the environment around them.

Imaginative measures by government can change what people do. Tax cuts

are what prompted the new cycling revolution; if you have a job now

you can get your bike for half price under the Cycle to Work

scheme. When they extend it to the civil service, I hope they hire

someone who rides a bike to design the new cycle lanes they'll need on

the Newtownards Road. Our ministers mustn't swallow the cliches about

how intractable and stupid the masses are and how they mustn't

nanny them. Rather they should start with the horrific fact that

the poor die younger and start thinking about what can practically

The thoughts of Malachi O'Doherty. With the public sector facing cuts

some of our councils are accusing Stormont of trying to save money by

dumping legal responsibilities on to them. For example, under the new

Animal Welfare Act the responsibility for dealing with

cruelty to domestic animals will shortly be handed over to the

councils. Are they ready for it? Julia Paul's report contains

pictures that some people may find upsetting.

It was one of the worst cases the USPCA had to deal with last year.

Around 70 horses found in an appalling condition on a farm in

Mullusk. They were rescued and with help from other sanctuaries taken

to shelters or rehomed. But it cost the charity alone more than �15,000.

However, come the spring your rates could be paying for operations like

this. Basically the job that the USPCA was doing for free is now

going to cost the rate payer. would be delighted to employ three

or four extra people in our council, if this was properly organised and

properly financed. But we don't believe that it is. Councils are

seriously concerned by the tactics being employed from central

Government, pushing an awful lot of legislation on to local authorities

because they haven't got the resources to deal with it

themselves. Currently, the police are responsible for animal welfare.

They delegate some powers to the USPCA to help with prosecutions and

to care for and rehome the animals seized. But in February Stormont

passed the Animal welfare Act. The Act has improved protection for

animals, but changed it's way it's enforced. From next April, when it

comes to farmed animals, the Department of Agriculture will be

responsible, while the responsibility for companion

animals or pets will go to Northern Ireland's 26 local councils. But

the Act also designates horses as companion animals, and the funding?

Well, the �760,000 a year to be shared among the 26 councils.

Dungannon council council, like all local authorities, already deals

with dog licensing but animal welfare is an entirely new

challenge. We feel it's been probably underestimated and USPCA,

for example, have indicated that the cost in their view could be one

and a half million over the next 12 months. Set aside is half that

amount for 26 councils, so that's a concern. Alan Burke says the new

responsibility couldn't have come at a worse time. This council have

not increased their rates for the last two years and we'd hope to

continue that trend, but it's proving very difficult when issues

such as this come along. Dungannon is a town that's struggling, all

towns are struggling to keep businesses going and people

employed. That's our driving concern as a council, not to be

taken on issues which we feel should have been dealt with within

other departments. Well, one of those others is the Department of

Agriculture. The Minister was unavailable but we were able to

speak to a senior civil servant. The department has made available

funding based on our best estimate of what the likely costs are going

to be to the council to implement that so there should not be an

impact on rate-payers. However, if there are resourced pressures and

if the councils find that they're taking all best steps to deal with

those resource pressures but finding it difficult, the Minister

will be prepared to meet with them to discuss how best those can be

addressed. But some councillors still feel that they've, well, been

sold a pup. We are talking �750,000 and if we take that at 26 councils,

it's really �29 per council and even with the movement to 11

councils, it's still �68,000 per council. To supply 24-hour cover,

seven days per week would mean at least three employees. An Omagh An.

The executive seem to be happy to dump anything they don't really

want and put the expense on the rate-payer and really it leaves it

that the local councils will be carrying the can, rather than the

executive in Stormont. And he is not the only one. Councils are

seriously concerned by the tactics being employed from central

Government, pushing an awful lot of legislation on to local authorities

because they haven't got the resources to deal with it

themselves. And that is a huge concern to councils. At the last

count there was something like 50- 60 pieces of legislation that are

set to come our way with huge resource implications. Of course,

Stormont doesn't see it like that. And the Northern Ireland Local

Government Association says councils are working together to

find the best way of delivering the new responsibilities. But NILGA

wants the Department of Agriculture to reclassify horses as farm

animals. The PSNI says it's firmly committed to working with a range

of partners to promote the welfare of all animals. Hyped the political

arguments are the animals themselves, this is the USPCA

shelter in Bessbrook. It's purpose- built for all the the animals

they've encountered in the decades they've spent promoting animal

welfare. We are absolutely delighted that 22 years after I

took up the post when no one was responsible for animal welfare,

only the USPCA, we have three Government agencies all charged

legally with looking after animals, plus a budget of �760,000. All we

are saying it's a large amount of money, we don't want it going on

paper clips or water coolers. We want it going on the animals. So

it's nothing to do with the USPCA fighting for their fair share. It's

about what's happening to the money, who is going to do the work and

will the animals be looked after properly?

And that's a key question for animals like these. Is the

Department of Agriculture confident that animal welfare will not suffer

under these new arrangements? are working very closely with the

councils to ensure they're ready for implementation. We have

submitted a spending plan to us, they've appointed a lead council to

develop their plans and we are as confident as we can be that the

councils will be ready to implement from 1st April. Julia Paul

reporting. A cynic said Oscar Wilde is a man

who knows the price of everything and value of nothing. According to

my next guest the same could be said about mainstream economists.

Dr Marilyn Waring is a proponent of feminist economics. She believes

the market economy is distorted by ignoring the value of the invisible

work done predominantly by women. She says time should be the new

currency. And Dr Waring is here to explain more. You are very welcome.

Putting a value on invisible work, I assume we are talking about

household work, chores?. These are things that no one wants to do,

even the people doing them don't want to be doing them. How can they

be said - how can they be given a value in the sense of what we

normally accept to be economic value? Well, we are not talking

about estimating monetary values but I have to say the unpaid

worksphere is far greater, it involves a great deal of voluntary

and community work and there's plenty of that in Northern Ireland.

It involves informal work, which sometimes is reimmunerated, often

not. A lot of subsistence work, which would mean, for example,

somebody - well, children who grow up on a farm and don't get paid for

getting the eggs, feeding calves, looking after the lambs. Of course

that's a range of unpaid work. And then household work, provisioning

the household, unpaid care of 24-7 dependents of the household who may

be elderly, who may be children, who may be kropbically disabled --

chronically disabled. It's the single largest sector usually in

any nation's economy. It is also life, it's things you have to do to

make life work? It's not the thing everybody has to do but it has to

be done for the market to work. And if it weren't there the market

couldn't work at all because of course, the market depends on this

unpaid replenishment of what some people call social capital to keep

operating. And it's a distortion, let me give you something that's

going on in loads of western economies at the moment. So, you

think we have to cut back so we are going to cut back in health and one

of the ways we are going to do that is discharge people from hospitals

earlier on the basis there's a presumption of large numbers of

people sitting about out there with nothing better to do, than to care

for the patients who are being discharged. There's a whole range

of strategic policy that is foregone and the expectation that

the sector of the economy will pick it up. On the health issue, we are

go to go through a major review which will talk about putting

resources into that community care and getting people away from

hospitals, for example. So, is that what you mean by distorting the

economy, that we should be thinking more about how to fund these areas?

No, because that's about service provision in the community as

opposed to Government or local Government. At the very end of that

spectrum the immediate members of families who for centuries have

taken care of those who would otherwise be institutionalised, in

New Zealand I can give you a very good example. If a member of a

family has a brain injury that then requires full-time care, in an

accident because of an accident insurance scheme the immediate

member of the household who needs to care for them is paid, has

respite care, gets holidays, has safe conditions of employment. If

through a disease a member of the household similarly is affected and

needs that care, the immediate family member is just expected to

carry on and at that point has no safe conditions of employment, has

no respite, has no payment. But there's another part of the economy

that I have to talk about here, too. Because the unpaid service work of

the environment has no value at all, either. If you think to yourself

these are constantly left out of strategic policy budget allocations,

strategic policy interventions. Also in a system where anything

that goes into the market actually counts, so drug running, gun-

running, prostitution, all of those things apparently good for growth.

While sustaining the environment, or taking care in our household

doesn't. What different kind of decisions would governments have to

take if these things were given a value? Well, the first thing they'd

have to do is look at different characteristics and assess them

altogether and I have been a member of the New Zealand parliament so I

know that people prefer uni- dimensional growth statistics. But

if you have in front of you time use in terms of where people spend

their time and production that isn't part of the market, if you

have in front of you what is happening to the physical

characteristics of our environment and you also have in front of you

here is what the market is reporting, including some pretty

path logical things that are worth a lot in the market, then you make

decisions across the whole three. But it's always much easier I found

from my colleagues just to go for broke on one. Are you a lone voice

in this wilderness? I was about 20 years ago, but thankfully I am not

any more. Thank you very much indeed.

And that's where we have to leave it this time. We will do it again

next week at the usual time. I hope All right, Noel. Know what I need a

really good discussion about politics. Some carry on this week.

In times of recession we all need to look after the pennies but there

are bargains out there. For �20,000 the head of Northern Ireland water

has agreed to do the job he's already well paid to do. Thanks,

Trevor. But I still might stockpile water just in case and for �50 you

can get the - it will be like going to see Santa. You tell Edwin what

you want for Christmas and he will refer you. The economy is as stable