08/07/2013 Stormont Today


08/07/2013

A political programme focusing on the day's events at the Assembly and Northern Ireland Executive. Mark Carruthers is the guide through the corridors of power at Stormont.


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 08/07/2013. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

edition of Stormont Today. As temperatures soared to their highest

:00:27.:00:31.

this year under a blazing summer sun, things were just as hot, if not

:00:31.:00:35.

hotter, in the chamber. In a specially recalled sitting, MLAs

:00:35.:00:38.

clashed repeatedly as they debated last week's Spotlight programme on

:00:38.:00:47.

Nelson McCausland and the Housing Executive. There is no place for

:00:47.:00:51.

brown envelope culture anywhere on this island. The BBC have been

:00:51.:00:57.

absolutely scandalous in the way they have treated this issue.

:00:57.:01:02.

have to say to the Democratic Unionist party, have you no shame?

:01:02.:01:05.

We'll get a comprehensive view of that often bad-tempered two and a

:01:05.:01:14.

special sitting today and when the Assembly meets, Stormont Today is

:01:14.:01:18.

there to cover it. So with the sun splitting the stones and

:01:18.:01:21.

temperatures soaring, members delayed their break and made their

:01:21.:01:25.

way to the hill to discuss last week's BBC Spotlight claims. The

:01:25.:01:27.

programme raised issues of political interference in the workings of the

:01:27.:01:29.

Housing Executive by the Social Development Minister, Nelson

:01:29.:01:36.

McCausland. With me throughout, our Political Reporter, Stephen Walker.

:01:36.:01:40.

Stormont was meant to be in recess today. Just remind us of how we came

:01:40.:01:49.

to be back here again. You are right, we didn't expect to be here.

:01:49.:01:52.

MLAs and their staff didn't expect to be here. This all came about

:01:52.:01:56.

because of last week 's programme and the general thrust of the

:01:56.:02:00.

programme, it concerned allegations of political interference in the

:02:00.:02:05.

Housing Executive. We've made a number of key allegations. The

:02:05.:02:08.

programme looked at the behaviour of Stephen Brimstone, the special

:02:08.:02:12.

adviser of the Housing Minister, Nelson McCausland. There was an

:02:13.:02:16.

allegation that Stephen Brimstone had tried to pressurise the DUP

:02:16.:02:19.

councillor by phoning her, to try and pressure right to change her

:02:19.:02:24.

vote at a key Housing Executive meeting. He disputes that, although

:02:24.:02:29.

the councillor, Jenny Palma, is standing by her version of events.

:02:29.:02:34.

Another part of the investigation looked at Nelson McCausland

:02:34.:02:40.

attending a meeting with the red sky, these were a contract who work

:02:40.:02:44.

with the Housing Executive. The programme looked at red sky in great

:02:44.:02:49.

detail. Another part of the programme raised questions about the

:02:49.:02:53.

way Nelson McCausland had handled a meeting involving a double glazing

:02:53.:02:57.

firm. And there were allegations he could possibly have given a wrong

:02:57.:03:01.

impression when he presented evidence to the assembly. Those were

:03:01.:03:05.

the allegations that were looked at after last week Spotlight programme.

:03:05.:03:10.

What happened today was those probe -- migrations were put forward in a

:03:10.:03:14.

motion, it was supported by the UUP, the SDLP and Sinn Fein

:03:14.:03:21.

alliance. That was the substantive motion that was today. Thank you.

:03:21.:03:28.

There were two amendments tabled to today's motion. But first, here's

:03:28.:03:34.

Caitriona Ruane leading off the debate on the main motion.

:03:34.:03:40.

Spotlight programme aired serious allegations of corruption, financial

:03:40.:03:44.

corruption and political corruption. Those allegations in the public mind

:03:44.:03:50.

call into question two of our major institutions. The Housing Executive

:03:50.:03:53.

and our political institutions. The public is rightly asking questions

:03:53.:03:58.

about whether or not political influence can ensure the awarding of

:03:58.:04:02.

public contracts, or even if it can ensure that business competitors

:04:02.:04:09.

will not be awarded them. They are asking if political influence can

:04:09.:04:12.

ensure political favours. There is a perception that Minister McCausland

:04:12.:04:16.

has raised issues around other contractors to muddy the waters

:04:16.:04:21.

around red sky, when in fact there was no comparison. I am calling on

:04:21.:04:27.

the Minister to do the honourable thing and step aside from his role

:04:27.:04:32.

as Minister, upon completion of an inquiry and investigative processes.

:04:32.:04:36.

The precedent for setting aside and allowing an investigation to take

:04:36.:04:40.

place has already been set by the Minister's party leader. The

:04:40.:04:47.

programme reminded people of the Minister's desired approach to

:04:47.:04:51.

retain red sky, despite the overwhelming evidence of its

:04:51.:04:56.

wrongdoing. Such an approach was a clear demonstration at best of the

:04:56.:05:03.

Minister 's poor political judgment, or, at worst, as some might suggest

:05:03.:05:13.
:05:13.:05:13.

of boxing of party supporters. The DUP and Nelson McCausland have major

:05:13.:05:17.

questions to answer. Teddington Holdings is owned by Trevor

:05:17.:05:23.

Turkington. A public supporter of the DUP. He nominated Stephen in

:05:23.:05:30.

2011. Is Trevor Turkington or his company a DUP donor? I will give the

:05:30.:05:40.
:05:40.:05:43.

floor to the DUP if they would like to answer this question. Do Red Sky

:05:43.:05:50.

or any of their directors donate to the DUP, and is Trevor Turkington or

:05:50.:05:59.

his company a DUP donor dashing yes or no? The honourable member made an

:05:59.:06:05.

allegation which I believe is factually incorrect, that the

:06:05.:06:09.

Minister was summoned to the committee. Is it not the case that

:06:10.:06:15.

the Minister volunteer to come to the committee? Can she tell us how

:06:15.:06:22.

big the brown envelope it was for the �26 million from the IRA?

:06:22.:06:27.

deeply disappointed that the DUP approach to the debate. The use of a

:06:27.:06:33.

Petition of Concern in this instance is wrong and inappropriate. It sends

:06:33.:06:36.

out a message to the public that the DUP think they can abuse these

:06:36.:06:40.

institutions instead of answering the questions that need to be

:06:40.:06:44.

answered. So there were two amendments tabled to that main

:06:44.:06:48.

motion, the first from the DUP. Stephen, why did the DUP put its own

:06:48.:06:51.

amendment to the motion? They were unhappy with the wording, they felt

:06:52.:06:56.

it was far too narrow. They put forward an amendment that said any

:06:56.:07:00.

investigation must include Brian Rowntree, who was involved in the

:07:00.:07:03.

Housing Executive. They said an inquiry should look at allegations

:07:03.:07:07.

that have been made by politicians in recent days since the broadcast.

:07:07.:07:12.

They wanted the investigation to include an inquiry into other

:07:12.:07:16.

companies. And also the role of the Housing ministers. So they really

:07:16.:07:21.

wanted to widen the whole remit. DUP then tabled a Petition of

:07:22.:07:24.

Concern today, which had implications for the vote, whenever

:07:25.:07:29.

it came. That was flagged up last week, it caused quite a lot of

:07:29.:07:33.

controversy. A lot of other politicians felt that was an attempt

:07:33.:07:37.

to squeeze down the debate. They placed this Petition of Concern, and

:07:37.:07:42.

that basically meant, despite what happened in the vote, unless it had

:07:42.:07:45.

DUP support, that motion wouldn't go through. Here's Gregory Campbell

:07:45.:07:48.

proposing that amendment, and he had strong criticism of both the Housing

:07:48.:07:52.

Executive and the BBC. Last Thursday, the minister came before

:07:52.:08:00.

the committee and the quote that I have on Hansard was, I confirmed to

:08:00.:08:04.

the then chairman, Brian Rowntree, that the Housing Executive should

:08:04.:08:12.

proceed with the termination of the red sky group contracts. Those who

:08:12.:08:16.

allege that the Minister for social development actually wanted to keep

:08:16.:08:21.

Red Sky doing what they were doing, keep them in the position that they

:08:21.:08:26.

were in our inaccurate. The next day after the Minister was with the

:08:26.:08:35.

committee, the controller general's report was issued. I have a number

:08:35.:08:40.

of quotes I want to make. They said, I have previously reported my

:08:40.:08:43.

concerns relating to the executive's management of

:08:43.:08:50.

contractors. Plural. Carrying out response based on -- in on. These

:08:50.:08:55.

related to issues such as quality of workmanship and overcharging by

:08:55.:09:00.

contractors. Plural. Initially problems were identified in relation

:09:00.:09:05.

to one contractor, Red Sky, who have eyed response and internet services

:09:05.:09:09.

across a number of districts. Further examination was then carried

:09:09.:09:15.

out, both by my staff and the Department, who commissioned a firm

:09:15.:09:21.

of accountants to report to the Minister. Both of these examinations

:09:21.:09:25.

have identified significant and systemic issues relating to the

:09:25.:09:31.

management of contractors. Plural. I'm very concerned that the Housing

:09:31.:09:36.

Executive appearing to luck controls results in this. I'm also

:09:36.:09:39.

disappointed that these issues were not addressed earlier. Either when

:09:39.:09:44.

they were first identified by the scheme's inspection unit in 2010.

:09:44.:09:54.
:09:54.:09:56.

2010! Or when the issues were raised again in the corporate assurance

:09:56.:10:00.

unit review in November 2011. Unfortunately there was a

:10:00.:10:07.

considerable degree of challenge by Housing Executive management to the

:10:07.:10:12.

findings of the corporate assurance unit. Who was in position in 2010?

:10:12.:10:19.

Who was the Minister? Minister Atwood was the Minister. Sometimes

:10:19.:10:29.

people in public life accused the media in a very broad sense of being

:10:29.:10:35.

partisan. I'm not going to accuse the media of being partisan. But I'm

:10:35.:10:43.

going to say that the BBC have been absolutely scandalous in the way

:10:43.:10:48.

they have treated this issue. Both in their programme and in their

:10:48.:10:53.

interview subsequently. We, in this party, stand over what our Minister

:10:53.:10:59.

has done to try and expose corruption rather than assist it. We

:10:59.:11:04.

stand over his integrity. Let us see if others, both inside this assembly

:11:05.:11:08.

and outside, can do likewise. let's talk about the second

:11:08.:11:13.

amendment which was tabled by the TUV MLA, Jim Allister. He supported

:11:13.:11:19.

the main motion that was put together. However, what Jim Allister

:11:19.:11:23.

wanted was an amendment to that motion, where he was calling for

:11:23.:11:27.

Nelson McCausland to resign. He feels the Minister basically has to

:11:27.:11:32.

go. As we are about to see shortly, when Jim Allister spoke in the

:11:32.:11:36.

chamber, it sparked some of the fiercest exchanges we saw during the

:11:36.:11:38.

entire debate. Jim Allister's speech proposing that amendment produced

:11:38.:11:46.

one of the most bruising encounters of the day. It is the Minister that

:11:46.:11:51.

this House can hold to account. And that is why that is the focus, and

:11:51.:11:57.

should be the focus, of this debate. But true to form, of course, the DUP

:11:57.:12:03.

has tabled an amendment. An attempt to divert and divide attention away

:12:03.:12:08.

from the issue. A desperate attempt to muddy the waters as much as they

:12:08.:12:17.

can. We heard Mr Campbell today, as we heard him on BBC last week. I

:12:17.:12:25.

think anyone can see through it. Me thinks he does protest too much. In

:12:25.:12:30.

the desperate attempts to muddy the waters in these issues. In holding a

:12:30.:12:36.

Minister to account, let us remind ourselves of the requirements of the

:12:36.:12:46.

Ministerial Code of conduct. It requires a minister to observe the

:12:46.:12:51.

highest standards of propriety and regularity involving impartiality,

:12:51.:12:53.

integrity and objectivity in relation to the stewardship of

:12:53.:12:59.

public funds. It records reference to the seven principles of public

:12:59.:13:06.

life. One of those is integrity and another of which is openness. It is

:13:06.:13:11.

against those standards that I invite the House to judge the

:13:11.:13:18.

Minister today. Mr Speaker, the member has drawn attention to the

:13:18.:13:23.

Ministerial Code Of Conduct. Would you like to ask the member, is he

:13:23.:13:33.

aware of the Members Code Of Conduct and that there is a requirement of

:13:33.:13:36.

transparency and openness? Would he like to take this opportunity to

:13:36.:13:40.

declare any interest that he might have had in terms of any of those

:13:40.:13:44.

who were mentioned in the Spotlight programme?

:13:44.:13:53.

THE ALL GASP Mr Speaker, I have no such interest

:13:53.:14:01.

to declare, except, that when, as a practising barrister, I gave advice

:14:01.:14:07.

to Mr Turkington, in respect of matters. Absolutely nothing to do

:14:07.:14:13.

with this case or anything else. I thought when the First Minister rose

:14:13.:14:16.

to his feet to talk about transparency that he might have been

:14:16.:14:22.

going to tell us about the details of his relationship with various

:14:22.:14:31.

people. Order!I have to see to the Democratic Unionist Party, have you

:14:31.:14:39.

no shame? You would use your position and office, abuse it, to

:14:39.:14:45.

press your own member who dared to stand in your way to stop to promote

:14:45.:14:50.

a commercial interest -- in your way. To promote a commercial

:14:50.:14:54.

interest of someone who was a political body. Did you win nothing

:14:54.:14:58.

-- learn nothing from the �5 land deals and the various property

:14:58.:15:02.

scandals of a few years ago? Israel are against such that you think you

:15:02.:15:09.

can still above our -- is your add against such that you think you can

:15:09.:15:16.

still abuse power? Point of order, would the member like to acquaint

:15:16.:15:23.

the House with his own begging for funds from developers? I have not

:15:23.:15:33.
:15:33.:15:34.

begged for funds from anyone! I may have learnt order! The member's time

:15:34.:15:44.
:15:44.:15:46.

has gone. I may have been exposed to such tricks but I learnt no such

:15:46.:15:52.

tricks. My integrity stands. I must insist. The members should take his

:15:52.:16:02.
:16:02.:16:04.

seat. I have -- they have no shame. Order! The member's time is up.

:16:04.:16:08.

testing afternoon and the temperature did not drop there.

:16:08.:16:15.

There were contributions from across the House, including Alex Attwood, a

:16:15.:16:18.

one-time social Development Minister. First, Stewart Dickson

:16:18.:16:24.

from the Alliance Party. Transparency is the most effective

:16:24.:16:28.

public inoculation against corruption that any country can

:16:28.:16:34.

have. What is at stake is the eyes of -- is, and eyes of the public,

:16:34.:16:39.

the integrity of the House. We are alternate by these events and will

:16:39.:16:42.

remain so unless, and until, there is an independent, full and

:16:42.:16:48.

transparent investigation. The consequentialism of what are brought

:16:48.:16:52.

to life should be -- the consequences must be faced. This

:16:52.:16:58.

comes down to a fundamental issue. It is a fundamental issue of a few

:16:58.:17:00.

relationship between one party and business and commercial and

:17:00.:17:05.

development interests. That is what this debate is about. Let's look at

:17:05.:17:14.

what the responsibility is. This is a quote, it is important but there

:17:14.:17:17.

is public confidence in the individuals who are appointed.

:17:17.:17:24.

Otherwise, there is a risk of repetition or damage. Special

:17:24.:17:28.

advisers subject to general cause, including, and relation to, the

:17:28.:17:32.

standards of relation of conduct and codes of ethics. It says, quote,

:17:32.:17:36.

special advisers must not take part in the work of their party's

:17:36.:17:43.

national organisation. Quote, must not take part in the work of their

:17:43.:17:49.

party's national organisation. The question, Mr Speaker, is this, did

:17:49.:17:56.

the act unilaterally? Was this man out of control or very much under

:17:56.:18:03.

control, is not of the DFT administer, of who, in those ranks,

:18:03.:18:08.

are those who are not sitting in those ranks? He was either out of

:18:08.:18:12.

control, in which case he should be dismissed, or he was under the

:18:12.:18:15.

control and direction of individuals inside this chamber, or otherwise,

:18:15.:18:21.

and we need to know. During my time and the time of my predecessor,

:18:21.:18:25.

there was never like it, in terms of interrogation of the affairs of the

:18:25.:18:30.

Housing Executive, and that was reported to the committee and this

:18:30.:18:38.

chamber. What does the DUP do? They rush to protect those who were

:18:38.:18:42.

indicted. Indicted by the Housing Executive board and by independent

:18:42.:18:48.

inquiry. The First Minister, as an Executive meeting, says, quote, this

:18:48.:18:56.

decision around the Housing Executive, quote, this decision had

:18:56.:18:59.

a sectarian background with a Nationalist minister and a national

:18:59.:19:03.

gear. -- Nationalist gear. Does that not tell you all you need to know

:19:03.:19:09.

about the view of some but not many in this chamber?

:19:09.:19:12.

Nelson McCausland also got his chance to have his seat. He told the

:19:12.:19:18.

House that he had always carried out his duties with integrity. His

:19:18.:19:27.

special adviser, Stewart Brimstone, said this in a phone call that --

:19:27.:19:35.

phone call. I want to pick up on a phone call made in 2000 oven. It

:19:35.:19:38.

would have been wrong, I believe, and the miss of the special

:19:38.:19:44.

adviser, if he had not sought to explain to a member of the board,

:19:44.:19:50.

with whom he had contact and it was a short, eight minute conversation,

:19:50.:19:55.

some understanding of the broader context of all this. Because,

:19:55.:20:03.

already at that point, it was abundantly clear that wrongdoing was

:20:03.:20:06.

not restricted to one contract or indeed to one Housing Executive

:20:06.:20:13.

district. We know that. Because already, one year previously, under

:20:13.:20:18.

the SDLP, it was becoming clear that there were concerns within the

:20:18.:20:26.

Housing Executive at 32nd contract. -- about a second contract. You do

:20:26.:20:31.

not need to be a genius to work out that if you have more than one

:20:31.:20:36.

contract involved, and there were concerns about that, and if you have

:20:36.:20:40.

more than one Housing Executive district involved, it starts to

:20:40.:20:46.

become clear that this was something endemic, something systemic, within

:20:46.:20:54.

the whole process in relation to contracts. And yet, when I spoke to

:20:54.:20:57.

the chairman of the Housing Executive at a meeting, and when he

:20:57.:21:03.

responded them subsequently in writing, he was assuring me that we

:21:03.:21:09.

have robust systems in the Housing Executive. "We can stand over

:21:09.:21:13.

things, we are robust." In fact, at an earlier meeting mentioned in the

:21:14.:21:17.

report, the then acting chief Executive, Mr Stewart Cuddy, as

:21:17.:21:24.

surely those at the meeting that the Housing Executive closely monitors

:21:24.:21:30.

all of its contractors. -- ensured those at the meeting. The monitor

:21:30.:21:36.

them so closely that the current chairman has to come before the

:21:36.:21:40.

media and say, " well, actually, we have located a review and there may

:21:40.:21:47.

be as much as �18 million of work that was overpaid."

:21:47.:21:51.

When it came to closing speeches, Jim Allister was back in a speech,

:21:51.:21:54.

followed by Sammy Wilson and the Ulster Unionist leader, Mike

:21:54.:21:57.

Nesbitt. Esther Wilson made it clear the Minister has his party's

:21:57.:22:07.

backing. Let's just look and see what members have said today. Mr

:22:07.:22:12.

Durkin wants to make sure that we do not award a full investigation. Mr

:22:12.:22:15.

Alistair wants to make sure we do not divert attention from the real

:22:15.:22:22.

issues. Another wants fundamental questions answered. Mr Copeland

:22:22.:22:31.

wants a full inquiry. Another wants an intervention -- who thinks an

:22:31.:22:34.

intervention means that you believe him, wants to make sure that no

:22:34.:22:37.

investigation is bullied. Mr McRae wants to make sure that we agree to

:22:38.:22:42.

a full review. Well, what is the only motion which is on the order

:22:42.:22:48.

paper? It fulfils all that criteria. The only motion is the motion and

:22:48.:22:54.

the amendment down in the name of the DUP. Why have you put down a

:22:54.:22:59.

petition? That is themselves. We put down a Petition of Concern two

:22:59.:23:04.

reasons. First of all, we want a full inquiry. Secondly, we are not

:23:04.:23:08.

going to allow this to be kicked around and some political game.

:23:08.:23:13.

Petition of Concern, Mr Speaker, is a projection of politics, not a

:23:13.:23:19.

political party. -- a projection. It was designed as a safeguard against

:23:19.:23:26.

sectarian politics. Interest, -- interestingly, David Campbell, much

:23:26.:23:30.

maligned by certain members of the House, was an offer of the Belfast

:23:30.:23:39.

agreement while you went a order! The member... Order! The member must

:23:39.:23:49.
:23:49.:23:51.

be heard. Order. Mr Campbell, an architect and author of the Belfast

:23:51.:23:55.

agreement, something that was signed while the DUP stood rattling the

:23:55.:24:01.

grapes Dom aggregates and marching their trips up and down principal

:24:01.:24:06.

avenue said it was a safeguard. -- rattling the gates and marching

:24:06.:24:16.
:24:16.:24:18.

their troops. Order. The member must be heard. Let us have remarks.

:24:18.:24:22.

Campbell has written to the Secretary of State to say that since

:24:22.:24:24.

the Assembly first sat, I believe the Petition of Concern has largely

:24:24.:24:30.

worked as intended. It is a safeguard. However, the recent years

:24:30.:24:35.

by the DUP, over a potential vote on the alleged actions of DST Minister

:24:35.:24:41.

Nelson McCausland, is a blatant abuse of the procedure. The petition

:24:41.:24:50.

is to prevent... Order. Point of order. The member has accused user

:24:50.:24:53.

of being in a position where you have allowed an abuse of the rules

:24:53.:24:57.

of this Assembly. I think that is a challenge to your role and position.

:24:57.:25:04.

You need to make it clear that the Petition of Concern is in order and

:25:04.:25:10.

legitimately has been placed before the House. Let me say at the outset

:25:10.:25:17.

of this debate this afternoon and get it clear, the petition before us

:25:17.:25:23.

was accurate and within standing orders of the size.

:25:23.:25:27.

I was with Minister McCausland in Cardiff for two days. We all signed

:25:27.:25:32.

up to a statement. Consequences for communities and individuals for

:25:32.:25:36.

breaking the law. The same applies to the ministerial code. He should

:25:36.:25:41.

stand aside. I asked the DUP, what comes first? The integrity of

:25:41.:25:48.

politics of Stormont or the party? With the debate at an end, the only

:25:48.:25:54.

thing left was to vote, three Bolton. First came the DUP

:25:54.:25:56.

Amendment, followed by Jim Allister's and then the actual

:25:56.:26:00.

motion itself. Gossipy Petition of Concern, it needed crossed amenities

:26:00.:26:08.

support to succeed. -- because of the Petition of Concern.

:26:08.:26:14.

amendment falls. The amendment falls. We now move to amendment

:26:14.:26:24.
:26:24.:26:28.

number two. All those in favour say. All those to the contrary noes.

:26:28.:26:37.

The nose habit. -- noes habit. Can I ask members to please take their

:26:37.:26:43.

seats and can I ask for the result to be read?

:26:43.:26:51.

88 members voted, of which 54 voted yes, 61.4%. 32 nationalists sported

:26:51.:27:00.

of which 100% voted yes. 32% of Unionists voted yes. The motion is

:27:00.:27:06.

negative. A day of high drama at Stormont.

:27:06.:27:12.

Stephen Walker is still with me. Put today into context for us. I think,

:27:12.:27:16.

Mark, you and I have watched many debates and that is one of the most

:27:16.:27:23.

robust debates I think we have seen in the past few months. Very frank

:27:23.:27:27.

exchanges were heard tonight between politicians. Very tense exchanges.

:27:28.:27:31.

Particularly the exchange between the First Minister and Jim Allister.

:27:31.:27:39.

Lots of pressure being heaped on the DUP. Other parties demanding answers

:27:39.:27:44.

from Nelson McCausland. The DUP coming back very robust, basically

:27:44.:27:48.

saying that that nothing untoward has been done. Politics laid bare.

:27:48.:27:55.

Particularly, the divisions within Unionism laid bare because somebody

:27:55.:28:02.

heated exchanges between the UUP and the DUP. Do we know what happens

:28:02.:28:04.

next? We are going into a summer recess.

:28:04.:28:08.

Abel will draw breath for the moment but in terms of the story goes, the

:28:08.:28:11.

next big thing will be the deliberations of the social

:28:11.:28:15.

development committee. They have launched an inquiry and with the

:28:15.:28:20.

summer recess, it is highly likely that we won't get answers to those

:28:20.:28:22.

questions until Stormont comes back in the autumn.

:28:22.:28:28.

A political programme focusing on the day's events at the Assembly and Northern Ireland Executive. Mark Carruthers is the guide through the corridors of power at Stormont, and is joined by key people from decision makers to opinion formers to make the experience enlightening and entertaining.


Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS