17/01/2016 Sunday Politics Wales

Was former London Mayor Ken Livingstone booted off

Or, as Mr Livingstone claims, did he step down

because he is at one on all defence matters with this lady,

Labour's new Shadow Defence Secretary, Emily Thornberry.

Like Mr Livingstone she's not a fan of Britain's

David Cameron has a plan to deliver some "rabbits from the hat"

Another campaign group has entered the fray on his side,

As the battle hots up we'll be talking to a man who wants out,

UKIP leader Nigel Farage, and a man who wants to stay in,

Donald Trump and his former chum Alex Salmond have spent

The wannabe American President thinks Mr Salmond's

With hundreds of Welsh steel industry jobs under threat,

Carwyn Jones says the UK government needs to be ready

to step in to help. pledged to demolish sink estates.

What will it mean to communities in the capital?

And with me, as always, the best and the brightest political

I won't have a nasty word said against them.

Nick Watt, Isabel Oakeshott and Janan Ganesh who'll be tweeting

So first today let's talk about Jeremy Corbyn,

who gave a wide-ranging interview on the Marr show a little earlier.

My question, with respect, was about sympathy action

and whether you would remove that legislation.

Sympathy action is legal in most other countries and I think it

should also be legal here. But remember this...

So you would repeal those Tory laws?

Yes, of course. Nobody willingly goes on strike.

They go on strike as an ultimate weapon.

The number of strikes is actually very small.

It's an ultimate weapon that is used.

Anyone that is going on strike is making an enormous sacrifice.

They don't get paid, they suffer a great deal as a result

of it, so let's look at the causes of people being upset rather

A policy packed interview with Andrew Marr on the Falklands,

Islamic State, secondary striking, even on the idea maybe we could keep

Trident but not any missile warheads on the missiles. I felt nostalgic. I

was back to a teenager in the 1980s, I remember these arguments in the

1980s and Michael foot put them in the manifesto for the 1983 election.

He was robust on the Falkland Islands. He was. The point for

Jeremy Corbyn is he has a mandate from the party to put forward these

arguments. He had a 60% vote and it is clear what he thinks of nuclear

weapons. He has been a member of CND since 1966. The challenge for Jeremy

Corbyn is to put forward ideas in a way that appeals beyond new members

of the Labour Party to the electorate as a whole who have

concerns about security of the nation, for example, possibly having

successor submarines of the Trident system without nuclear weapons. That

is the Japanese system, they talk in Japan how they have what is known as

the bomb in the basement. They are a non-declared nuclear state but could

arm themselves with nuclear weapons within minutes if needed. That is

what he is talking about. Sounds good in the leg party but he needs

to sell it to the country as a whole. It is clear a lot of what

Jeremy Corbyn says has the support of the grassroots, particularly the

new ones who have joined the party. It is clear a lot of this does not

have the support of the Parliamentary Labour Party. That is

the constant problem yet to be squared. I cannot see a way it will

be squared. I do not think many Labour MPs can either. His problem

is admirable, it is he is determined not to remove himself from things

said in the past. On the Falklands he is consistent with what he said

in 2013, when it did not matter, and how he is now repeating those views.

The problem is now Jeremy Corbyn matters and if you look at the

Falklands, the last time there was a vote of those on the Falkland

Islands, only three voted to change the system of administration, so he

is out of step with people living there. He sets out his left-wing

stall on these issues. Bit by bit, he is taking his time, doing it

astutely. He is taking the lead party in his direction, part of the

purpose I would suggest of the interview will stop no one could

question that. If you go into a general election with a leader who

says something like, let's have the return of secondary picketing, and

that is not the worst idea in the manifesto, also talking about

renewing the vanguard submarines without warheads and I think he

floated the idea of reasonable accommodation with Argentina on the

Falklands, he would go to the election knowing you have a white,

working-class base, which is already flirting with Ukip. How low can

Labour Singh? Technically it is impossible to get rid of him but

maybe politics is like water and finds a way to go around obstacles.

And if his ideas turn out to be popular? I think they will be

popular with the membership at every general election since 1983 would

suggest to us these ideas are outside the mainstream. Jeremy

Corbyn says there is a new world out there, I tapped into that in the

campaign, with thousands packing up meetings. We have the electoral test

in May, let's see how the ideas go down outside the party. Should

written keep its nuclear deterrent? -- Great Britain.

Jeremy Corbyn doesn't think so and neither

does his new Shadow Defence Secretary, Emily Thornberry,

who we'll be talking to in just a minute.

But first here's Adam on a multi-billion-pound question.

The Imperial War Museum is showing the work of artist Peter Kennard,

the creator of some of the starkest images of the campaign

This was in 1980, this is when cruise missiles were coming

to Britain and the idea was they were going to circulate

It's coming back into fashion because some time this year

the Government is expected to hold a Parliamentary vote

on whether to build a new generation of submarines to carry

The issue is dogging Labour, as Jeremy Corbyn made his first

speech of the year at the Fabian's campaign group conference.

I thank you very much for inviting me here today.

Jeremy Corbyn's speech focused on energy, Europe, rail prices...

no mention of Trident, which he has campaigned

The issue is - not all of his MPs agree with him.

My view at the moment is that the case in favour

of retaining is stronger than the case against,

but I think it's important we review this and look at all the options.

I'm in favour of keeping our nuclear deterrent.

I think it's important for keeping our country safe.

It's Labour Party policy, I hope it will stay that way.

Have you had an argument with Jeremy about it yet?

Definitely arguing with Jeremy this week, the boss of the GMB union,

who says building new subs will safeguard thousands of jobs

in places like Barrow, where they're built.

If anybody thinks that unions like the GMB are going to go quietly

into the night while tens of thousands of our members' jobs

are literally swaneed away by rhetoric, then they have

Meet the woman who's got to reconcile the two tribes,

the Shadow Defence Secretary, Emily Thornberry, a critic

of Trident who's doing the party's defence review.

But it's turning into a row about how Labour makes policy.

On one side, the people who feel the decision should be made by

We have a national policy forum, we have a process where the papers

go to our conference and are voted on.

They involve trade unionists, they involve affiliated

John Landsman, who campaigns for a bigger role for party

activists and founded the Corbynite group Momentum,

I'm not convinced the Government has to have a vote at all,

but if it decides to have a vote we obviously need to have taken some

soundings among party members and affiliates about what they think

So, Labour Party policy on Trident could change by the summer?

We will have had some process to consider our policy

before the summer, yes, obviously, we have to.

So Labour Party policy, when it comes to a vote,

by the summer could be voting against the renewal of Trident?

Look, I know that you're trying to get me to say very briefly,

you know, something very quick about how policy is made

in our party, the trouble is it's quite a complex process.

Policy is ultimately decided by party conference

in Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party but if we have to take quicker

decisions, we have to do it by other methods.

That might drive some Labour people into meltdown.

It could be war, not just over whether Labour supports the renewal

of Trident, but also who gets to make the decision.

And with me now, the Shadow Defence Secretary, Emily Thornberry.

Welcome. Did you drop Ken Livingstone from the defence review?

No, it was going to be my review and when I spoke to Jeremy about it I

said it was an honour to take an extraordinary job, to be able to

shadow a department where people are prepared to put their lives on the

line. Was he part of the defence review already? I said I would lead

the review and it will be my review, and it will feed into international

policy commission, co-chaired by Ken Livingstone, which will feed into

the national policy forum which will then feed into party conference. Mr

Livingstone said on defence matters he had lunch with you and you agree

on everything on the defence side and so voluntarily stepped aside, is

that true? I am a big fan of Ken Livingstone, that is not a secret, I

am also against Trident. I come in as a sceptic and also with the

ambition to listen to what people say, to be not afraid to ask

difficult questions and to come to a view on policy on the basis of

evidence. Did he step aside because you broadly agreed on defence

matters? Jeremy Corbyn put me in charge of the review and that is

what happened. Did Mr Livingstone step aside as he said? He is chair

of the commission I will be feeding my review into. I understand. Do you

agree on everything when it comes to defence? I agree with a lot Ken

Livingstone says but I do not agree we should pull out of Nato and I

will not review this on the basis of us changing any international

agreements or organisations we are signed up to. The review will take

place within the context of our continued membership of Nato? That

is right. On Trident? Ken Livingstone is against renewing

Trident. That has been your position. I think the days of

unilateral, multilateral, all of this sort of thing is from the

1980s. We should look at what are the 21st-century threats to Britain

and how should we best address them? It seems that is the best way to do

it, look at the threats and what is the best way of addressing that.

What I am more than anything is a moderniser. You voted against

renewal of Trident in 2007. Do you know what, in the 80s, I was in

favour of Trident because there were two macro sides, life was different,

but life has moved on since 2007. Certainly since the 1980s, and I

think the time has come for us to have a debate about what the

21st-century threats are, which includes whether or not it is the

appropriate response. What would change your mind? What could you be

told about Trident that would make you think we should keep it? Good

try. I have had this job a couple of days and want to go into it with an

open mind and look at evidence. You are against Trident? I am in favour

of making policy on the basis of evidence put before me and I have

had a large number of invitations to talk to people and pick their

brains. I want to be able to do that and bring the party with me. Are you

against drone strikes? No, I think in the future the role of drones is

likely to increase, under the sea and for air strikes. When you were

shadow Attorney General, did you question the legality under

international law? This is quite difficult, because the advice I gave

to the leaders... You have got that wrong. I was asking a question.

Have you questioned their legality or not? There is a difference

between their use and bare existence so therefore... I'm so sorry but

it's legally privileged and I cannot talk about advice I gave to the

leader. All right but you can talk to the electorate. Would you support

the use of drone strikes? I would support the use of whatever means

are necessary to keep the British people safe. Including drone

strikes? Yes, within the confines of the law. Do you have an end date

when you think you have got to have the review done by? No, I don't want

the strategic review to be anything like the Tories' which was very

short. They opened a website and only allowed people to put 200 words

in and in my view didn't look at it properly so it will take as long as

it takes. I have a lot to look at. I understand, we have a lot of ground

to cover and we don't have a lot of time this morning. In the meantime

it's almost certain there will be a major vote on Trident, which begins

the real spending on the renewal some time in the spring. What will

happen to Labour? Will you be whipped to vote in favour of current

party policy, which is pro-Trident? Will you be encouraging to -- people

to vote against it? The first question is, are they going to have

a vote, are they going to have a vote in the spring, and what will

the vote be? Will we have the Treasury and the MoD agreeing? If

there is a main gate proposal, comes forward to the Commons, how will you

vote? The rumour is they are not going to have anything more than

another vote in principle on whether or not we should renew Trident.

Pro-Trident people should be angry about that because we had a vote

about that in 2007, what have they been doing all this time? Labour

policy is to have a continual artsy deterrent but to have a review. We

are in the process of having a review, we need to look at when the

vote is, what it is about, then I will have a discussion with Jeremy

and the Chief Whip and did -- decision will be made. Jeremy has

said he wants macro to accommodate differences in views and I have said

my review has got to be done in an atmosphere of trust and respect. So

it will be a free vote. What do you say to those who say when it comes

to the Trident part of the defence review that it is a sham, that you

have replaced Maria Eagle who was pro-Trident. Your leader is a

lifelong unilateral disarmament. The party grass roots is increasingly

hostile to Trident, so the chances of this recommending anything other

than don't renew Trident is pretty impossible. I will begin this review

by looking at the threat to Britain because my overriding responsibility

is to make sure it is in line with what keeps Britain safe. We will

take it as the evidence takes us. That is how we will approach it.

Jeremy has already said, he said in the last few days that it may be

this won't be a binary decision, things are not must rarely black and

white any more, we are not going to the 1980s. What do you make of this

idea that he floated on the Andrew Marr Show this morning that we could

maybe renew Trident but not put warheads on the missiles? The

Japanese option, that is certainly one thing that needs to be looked

at. What would be the point? I'm not saying this is what we are going to

do, but the way that it works is that the Japanese have got the

capability to build a nuclear bomb if they need to, but you can then

use them in various delivery forms. That's a possibility, it is an

option. So you put the eventual warheads onto Trident submarines?

Trident missiles? I appreciate that you want me to speculate and I

understand that. Your leader spoke about it this morning. I have said

there are of options. When you file a ballistic missile at a country,

every early warning ballistic missile system will assume that is

an attack because ballistic missile is only carry nuclear weapons so we

will risk retaliation for something that is not using nuclear weapons,

isn't that very dangerous? You are welcome to take part in my review. I

am a kind of busy on the day job. Do you think the party membership

should determine Trident policy, not just be consulting on it, which I

know you'll want to do, but should they determined in the end such

important issue? Party conference will decide what our policy is. I

would like to have a review that will have party members feeding into

it, feeding into their views in a way we have not had before and I

will encourage that. You weren't in the end have a vote among party

members to determine your policy? Our rules are that party conference

decides our policy. Do you think you will have your ducks in a row by the

time of this year's party conference? If I can help the

national policy Forum by doing an interim report, I will do so. What

do you say to the trade union leaders who say you will put

thousands of jobs at risk if you don't renew Trident? I say I will

listen to what they say and I will look at whether there are other

alternatives. I understand, and I fully respect the concerns that have

been raised so we need to look at whether there are solutions to that.

You have taken substantial donations from a law firm that support clients

that took the British Army to court on what turned out to be deliberate

and miscalculated lies, holy and entirely without merit, where the

accusations against the army. Should you return that? What happened was

that Lee Day seconded people to my office because when your shadow

Attorney General you don't have any resources at all. You didn't get

?14,500 in donations? No, so I got very good bright lawyers and I have

returned all of them and they were very good and they helped us be a

good opposition. So there is no money to return? There is no money

to return and it was a pleasure to have them in my office, they were

very helpful to the Labour Party and interned to the country. We were

summarising legislation, helping with clauses, giving advice to the

leaders' office. Unfortunately the Government will now even cut the

money. Will you come back when your review is complete? Any time. We

will hold you to that. Now to the European Union

and Britain's membership of it. George Osborne appeared

quietly confident this week about the Government's chances

of impressing voters with the deal it gets from Brussels,

and even the European President, Jean-Claude Junker, appeared more

upbeat about the prospects Not good news for

those who want out? But they'll be buoyed by one poll

this morning that puts the "out" This morning there's news of another

group on the pro-EU campaign trail. The question may be fairly simple

but there are rather a lot of different campaigns

trying to bend our ears. On the side of those

who want us out of the EU, there's the Vote Leave campaign

headed by Dominic Cummings and Matthew Elliott,

who ran the successful They're also linked

to Business For Britain, which has the support of a number

of leading business figures, and to the groups Labour Leave

and Conservatives For Britain, Also campaigning for Brexit

is Leave.EU, which has links to Ukip and is funded by the Ukip donor

Arron Banks. They're vying with the Vote Leave

campaign to be the officially And to top it all, there is now Go,

a new grass-roots group made up of MPs including Kate Hoey

and David Davis which is designed to coordinate campaigning

on the ground. On the other side, the main group

is the Britain Stronger In Europe, headed by the former Marks

Spencer's boss Sir Stuart Rose. Then there's Business

For New Europe, led by Roland Rudd, Labour Yes, led by Alan Johnson,

and now there's a new group set up by the Tory MP Nick Herbert,

called Conservatives Even though some of the members

are Eurosceptics, they say they will support David Cameron's

renegotiation and will vote to remain inside the EU

if he's successful. Expect a few leaflets

through your door in the next And with us now is the Ukip

leader, Nigel Farage. With even staunch Eurosceptic MPs

like Nick Herbert campaigning to stay in, don't you worry the tide of

opinion is moving away from you and tour was David Cameron? I would

never regard Nick Herbert as a staunch Eurosceptic. He campaigned

to keep the pound, he was paid to do it. He has never once advocated

Britain should leave the EU so he is doing a job bolstering the Prime

Minister. There was lots of speculation, will Boris Johnson back

the outcome pain? What do you think? I don't know. Not Michael Gove, we

know now. I suspect lots of senior politicians will put their careers

before their conscience and back the Prime Minister. I am beginning to

see this referendum as the people versus the politicians, it might not

matter. Except your own side continues to be riven by

factionalism. We have vote to leave, Leave.EU, and they seem to be

spending more time attacking each other than the common enemy. You

have these groups vying to be the official bumbler group. I've been

trying to support both of the organisations, though I have to say

when I listen to Dominic Cummings on Friday... Who is on Vote Leave I

believe. Yes, and suddenly they are talking about a two referendum

strategy which I don't like the look of one little bit. Why not? The

argue was, we can vote to come out and then Europe will panic and make

us an offer which will be effectively associated membership

and we could vote on that. We effectively have that now, we had

that since the euro was created. Dan Harmon has criticised every

government that has lost a referendum. After the interview I

saw the other day I wasn't sure. There is now a third group called

Go. It does lend itself to jokes about the Judaean people's struggle.

The point about Go is that it is there to break the deadlock, and

next Saturday there will be Conservatives, Labour, Ukip and DUP

sharing a public platform. There's a big auditorium with 2000 people

coming and we will start the ground campaign in earnest. Should Vote

Leave and Leave.EU amalgamate? Of course. Leave.EU are brilliant at

mass-marketing. Vote Leave are Westminster -based group of people

with some fantastic links to the business community, some great

academic back-up. They would be complimentary, not contradictory.

Meanwhile, as you still struggle to get a united front, if I can put it

like that, perhaps the United front of the Judaean people's struggle...

I would suggest from the better together project, which proved so

effective in the Scottish referendum, shouldn't you fear

Project Fear? Even Project Fear has a problem because a Scottish

minister said all of the big businesses would leave Britain, but

we would maintain our manufacturing bases. Even though if we stay in

there will be some uncertainty as the euro zone becomes more united

and we are likely to be part of that, so you cannot be sure of the

future, no one on your side can tell us if we come out what will our

status beach? What will our relationship be? Because you have

lots of differences. We have a whole range of options. There are

countries all over the world with different relationships, the Swiss

have bilateral relationships the Norwegians have a relationship with

the economic area. We are the biggest trading partner the has in

the world, trading at a vast trading deficit. We want a British deal

based on trade, cooperation and nothing more.

There is still the uncertainty as to whether you can deliver. Every

German car manufacturer, every producer, will insist we do that

deal as quickly as possible. You hold that but it is uncertain. Under

the terms of the treaties, on day one nothing would change, we would

have access to markets during the time we renegotiate the British

deal. Do you feel the ground moving on to you as the forces of the

British state, Alex Salmond felt the same with the Scottish referendum,

it is a formidable force and you are up against it? In terms of our

political class, yes, I think the chances of many people currently in

senior positions in politics, perhaps they diminish, inevitably,

but you cannot take away from ordinary folk scene such as Cologne

and saying to themselves, in three years, all of these people will have

EU passports and be able to come to Britain. This campaign will be the

people against the politicians and the more the politicians clubbed

together, perhaps more the people will choose to vote against them. In

any possibility of a relationship with the EU out, will almost

certainly involve continued free movement and these people may well

still be able to come to this country under any deal you reach? We

have free trade deals all over the world that don't involve the free

movement of people, it is only in Europe we have the free -- pretence

that we have to have free movement of people. I want to control our

borders and have an Australian style points system where we can judge

whether people will make a positive contribution to society and I cannot

do that as a member of the EU. You have not had the best of times,

since the election. It culminated in what you designated a car breakdown

as an assassination attempt. Has that undermined, as the most famous

person on the outcome paying, has it undermined your credibility? I do

not think it does. To say we have had a tough time, it is interesting,

Ukip has been written off by every commentator in Fleet Street but the

latest poll had us at 17%. The most important issue, immigration, we are

the most trusted party on 29% and we go into this year with the

expectation of winning seats in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland

and playing a big role in this referendum.

Let's talk now to former Conservative Chancellor,

Are you in any doubt the Prime Minister is going to be the

enthusiastic leader of the campaign to remain in the EU? I think you

will, because all the news, although it is not really news, a lot of it

is rumoured, is he will come back with a reasonable deal. He has

already got the things he first talked about in the bag when he

first announced he was going to have a referendum and seek reforms. He

has added one or two more. Nobody knows the final deal but they are

close to getting one and the debate is getting more serious and I think

David will advocate staying in. He will put it, a reformed European

union. Given this was the predictable outcome, is the

referendum process, promoted by David Cameron, worth the candle? We

shall see. You can see now, is it or not? Wait for the outcome, which

will determine the effect of the referendum on British politics and

the economy. All politicians of my generation did not think a

referendum was a good way to run a modern, sophisticated country. You

wish she had not done it? I do not think anybody thinks... I was in

favour of calling a referendum. Margaret Thatcher denounced

referendums in stronger terms than I have and they are a gamble and I do

not think the Scottish one has resolved the Scottish independence

issue. Let me come on to Scotland. It seems clear that the in campaign

will draw heavily on the better together project. We have been

briefed on fear of Russian aggression. Who will be happy if

they leave? President Putin will be happy. It will put the positive case

of Britain in Europe? I shall try to put the positive case, I hope Damian

Greene will put the positive case. We are in the EU because we think it

strengthens our voice in the modern world and it is good for the economy

and we think that this is the right place, in what is a complicated

world, with nations interdependent. We will be a modern and more modern

and more successful if we are in. The campaign exaggerates things.

Nigel Farage is a parody of a right-wing nationalists. People are

inclined to say there will be calamity if we stay in or calamity

if we leave. They will be huge uncertainty if we leave. I believe

that my children and grandchildren will discover that we would be

losing political influence. We know you want to stay in. If we vote to

remain, should membership of the euro come back onto the agenda? I do

not think it will in my lifetime. The British have decided not to join

the euro. The euro has to be reformed. The eurozone still has not

sorted out its crisis. Should it come back onto the British agenda? I

am not going to forecast the future when we are fighting this

referendum. I was asking for an opinion. I believe that if you have

the single market, not a trade deal, a single market, usually you have a

single means of exchange, but they made a mess of the euro and did not

run it properly. I would not join at the moment. You don't rule it out?

Maybe one day the next generation of politicians find we do want to have

the same currency, but I cannot tell. You are pro-European, you know

its failings. You can be critical of it. Do you worry, the future, even

if we stay in, the future of the EU will be on what takes place inside

the eurozone and we will be on the periphery, increasingly a country

club member, does it worry you? It worried me when we started. With

great respect you are talking about one of the most serious issues,

there was an issue that needed to be addressed. We are almost there, what

we did not want is the decision of the British and some others, who

will not join in the foreseeable future, not to join the single

currency, that it would make a second-class citizens and the

eurozone group should not decide things that adversely affected us.

We negotiated that before the referendum came up. I think George

is almost there. My understanding is, but I am not directly involved.

I think that is the most important point and it will not feature in

this campaign. Deregulation, and other important things, reforms even

a pro-European like me wanted. Thank you for your short interview and we

will come back to you as the debate and referendum progresses.

It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.

We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now

Hello, and welcome to the sunday politics wales.

In a week where hundreds of jobs are expected to be lost

from the Welsh steel industry, we'll be in Port Talbot asking

The five main Welsh party leaders cross swords in their first debate

Steel workers are bracing themselves for the news,

which could come as early as tomorrow, that hundreds of them

This programme has been told that the Tata plant in Port Talbot

will be worse affected, but other plants could see losses too.

So what's going wrong with steel, and what can be done to help?

Cemlyn Davies now, on an industry central to the Welsh economy.

It's been part of the Welsh industrial landscape for decades.

In the 1960s the Port Talbot steel plant was the biggest in Europe,

That was then, things are very different now.

Last year about half of the world steel was made in China.

But as the Chinese economy slows and demand falls,

much of that steel has been expoted cheaply the EU,

Thousands of steel jobs in Scotland and the North of England have

already gone, now this programme has been told that hundreds of Welsh

jobs could be axed as early as this week with most of those

going in Port Talbot where Tata employs around 4000 people.

Tata told us the company's workforce would be the first to hear any

significant names, but already there are real concerns

Communities always recover from this situation,

It doesn't happen overnight and they will be hardships.

We are working to achieve that doesn't happen.

We need to keep the stability of the plant and continue

From his office Professor David Blackerby can see

He believes downgrading the plant would have serious implications

Port Talbot is massively important to the British economy,

probably in 2014 it accounted for one third of all steel

So we've seen a number of job losses since then.

If we want a manufacturing base and we want steel,

Port Talbot is the jewel in the crown not just in Wales,

We are watching the industry that we love, and that we have been

so much a part of in terms of Welsh industrial history,

To the point where it's so serious it could be going over cliff,

I'm not entirely sure that Westminster see it in

If it was a bank they'd be intervening.

However, because it's not in the heart of London,

it's not part of the city, they don't seem to take it

Taking part of the steel industry into public ownership was an idea

put forward by Rhun ap Iorwerth during Plaid Cymru's

He wants a task force to look at every possible option.

I have no doubt at all about the Welsh steel industry can

flourish in years to come, but we have a situation right

If this task force decided that there was merit in the Welsh

government taking a stake in the Welsh steel industry,

temporarily, I'm confident that we take a step back

from that in years to come, but that would bring profit

But the minister says that simply wouldn't be possible.

People seem to think steel is like everything else.

The commission watches what goes on across Europe

because there are rules in place about state aid for steel.

Matters about intervention, nationalisation, that's a matter

In terms of what we can do in Wales we are limited.

If you stick to any of the steel companies they will know

about the close relationship they've got with us,

and how we are trying to help in every way we've been able to.

The UK Government say they have been proactive in helping the steel

and she, they have cut energy costs and taken action on imports,

procurements and EU admissions regulations.

But it seems that simply hasn't been enough to protect Welsh steel

workers whose future is now more uncertain than ever.

Not surprisingly, steel was one of the themes which came up this

morning when the 5 main party leaders in Wales got together

for a BBC Wales radio debate ahead of the Assembly election.

More of that debate in a moment, but this is what the First Minister

If you look at what Italy has done they have taken the industry into

public ownership. I hope we don't get to that position in the UK, but

if we do, the UK Government must be ready to make sure that it supports

the steel industry and wheels can get through this difficult patch.

We heard in the debate about governments in Europe taking

a stake in their steel industries, but is that the way forward,

Joining me is the Labour MEP Derek Vaughan and Caroline Jones

who's a member of UKIP's National Executive.

Thank you for coming in. We heard Carwyn Jones saying that if it was

needed, they need some sort of government aid and the Government

should step in what is he talking about their?

I think he's referring to nationalisation. The Italian

government nationalised one of their plants. There is more that the UK

Government could do short of mass motivation. They could provide

emergency assistance, investment for environmental products, training,

and all those things wouldn't affect state aid rules. The UK Government

should be going ahead and doing those things.

But it's worth bearing in mind that the Italian government has been

investigated into the way it stepped in and stop its not so clear cut to

save going to sell a on so there's no need to worry?

The complaint against the Italian government came from the industry

not the EU. They decided it was an emergency and the top action. In

addition to re-nationalising the agency -- industry be putting

millions of viewers to invest in the industry. In Germany they put in

?380 million a year for investment. The UK Government could invest in

the steel industry if they wanted, they've chosen not to.

What do you make of all this Caroline Jones?

There are strict rules prohibiting any government from intervening

regarding state aid, or indeed providing any financial package

underwriting a financial package why reconstruction takes place to

salvage jobs. There are many jobs and many people really concerned at

the moment. This is decimating the Welsh economy. We know that one

tenth of the output of Wales comes from steel.

Therefore, we are on our last plant with Mark steel works. We lost the

others,... But what more can we do?

Cheap Chinese steel, we need to put a block on it. Obviously, we need

energy costs to be looked at. We need a level playing field with the

rest of the world. We can't compete at the moment because of high energy

costs and taxes. We need strongly to look at the

coal, the hundred million tonnes of coal that infrastructure, the

motorway, the ports. That would delete the transportation costs from

halfway around the world. That point of coal, there's an awful

lot of coal they are bad it's very difficult because of problems with

plants directive so it can't be accessed. In a way the EU laws are

getting in the way of something that could help the industry?

Certainly not in terms of the steel industry. The UK Government could do

things that wouldn't impact on EU state aid. One more example, if

there is an announcement tomorrow of large-scale job losses in Port

Talbot, the UK Government could apply to globalisation fund and

access ?5 million. The fund is there to help workers.

The UK Government has not accessed a single penny from that fund.

They should be that many. That's a fair point, isn't it?

Yes, carbon emissions from the UK prevent the extraction of coal.

They've had permission to extract the cold but they cannot because of

EU will and directives. Carbon emissions, you know, make that

obsolete, really. What about the point that when we

look at cheap coal coming in from China, in America they've

implemented tariffs on imported, is that something that the UK could be

doing? Absolutely. One thing that Labour

MEPs are pressing for is an anti-dumping tariff. Unfortunately,

the UK Government has not supported that.

They've called for investigations to see whether or not China is actually

done thing low-cost steel. We don't know that's happening. I

was at a discussion in Brussels last week and I know that despite the UK

Government not supporting the tariffs, now there are four cases of

steel going to the European Commission. Sometime in the near

future I hope those tariffs will be put in place. That will help the

industry. I'd like to see the Welsh

government, and the UK Government being in harmony. They are blaming

one another. Get their heads together, put aside their

differences and put the Welsh steel workers first. This is what we must

concentrate on all the sake of our economy and these people.

In the report their people are saying that the Welsh government

should buy a stake in the Port Talbot plant.

Is that feasible? No, I'm looking at coal extraction, I have to be

honest. But that's just one part of it.

I think that the two governments should get together and look, and

talk to one another, for once instead of being against each other,

put your differences aside and work collaboratively with the people of

Wales. I know from discussions at Tata last

week that the unions and management they are pretty impressed with what

the Welsh government has tried to do concerning business rates and

investment. But they've is so much more that the UK Government should

be doing, they just haven't done it. They've got no strategy, no policy.

Dot. But they've given tens of millions

of pounds as compensation for higher energy costs. From a Labour Party

point of view, we've heard Jeremy Corbyn said let's re-nationalise the

railways, you think it's on the cards that you start saying we

should look at re-nationalising steel as well?

As a last resort, it may be something we look at. The steel

industry across the UK is in serious trouble. Something needs to be done.

Before we get to the stage I'm saying there is more the UK

Government could be doing, supporting anti-dumping tariffs,

putting in place investment, research, development and

environmental centres. There is more the UK Government should be doing

but opened her mouth a point-blank refused to do anything.

You live in the area, we are expecting these hundreds of jobs to

go tomorrow, perhaps next week what effect will that have?

It will have a terrible effect on the lives of the people who are made

redundant. Also, on the economy as a whole.

We are looking to bring on the Welsh economy, we can't, historically,

we've been a world leader in heavy manufacturing industry. It's all

been decimated in the last 15 years. I really, really think it's

important that the Government, the two governments, the Welsh and UK

governments have urgent talks with one another and to fight, if needed,

the European rules and regulations. I am sorry, we are going to have to

leave it there. Thank you very much both.

On now to the first big set piece debate with the 5 main Welsh party

Our sister programme, Sunday Supplement on BBC Radio Wales

And perhaps not surprisingly, there were many disagreements

on issues including health, education and the economy.

In around 100 days the five political leaders will be asking for

your vote at the Assembly elections. This morning the arguments were

rehearsed in a BBC radio studio. They debated the economy, health and

education. They agreed more jobs were needed, but how? Plaid Cymru

says Wales needs more inward investments and wants to bring back

the Welsh development agency as a body to promote Wales abroad.

We are not selling Wales abroad as well as we could. There is a great

brand here. There are some fantastic businesses here in Wales and the

WDA, as was, is known internationally. That was ditched.

We are saying that we could do better in terms of economic Forum on

a global scale if there was an organisation acting for Wales. It's

not working at the moment. How else will undoubtedly be a

central issue company's elections. The Conservatives and Ukip wants

directly elected health commissions. It's been a long term policy that we

bring accountability to the health boards. They are not just somewhere

where people can be rewarded. We want to make them fully accountable

by making the entire health board electable. So not just a commission

about the entire board? The entire board. When we have

issues like in North Wales the entire board would be done away with

through democracy. Plaid Cymru want a reorganisation,

but Labour and the Liberal Democrats say that would be too much upheaval.

What the NHS needs is more politics. We need to take the politics out of

the NHS. I put on the table, many months ago, a nonparty commission to

put the long-term strategic challenges of the NHS, the Labour

Party saw the potential in that. The other parties walked away. We need

to work together to overcome the challenges of an ageing population.

There were debates over whether England spends more money on health

than Wales. Some robust exchanges took place about education

standards. We said that we would -- protect

schools. We did. We said that GCSEs would improve, they did. Literacy,

numeracy frameworks, we got tests that parents can see. We've done

that. We've invested money to bring the worst up to the level of the

best. We believe that every child deserves a good education.

Bride and the Liberal Democrats said standards weren't where they should

be and change was needed. -- party macro and the Liberal Democrats.

What we've got to do is have greater choice in the education system we've

got to appreciate this strength of the pew bills. Vocational courses at

our best for some individuals and are promoted by the vocational

route. We've got to make sure that we raise the esteem of further

education so that where people come out with qualifications from

colleges they can generally have a part to play in the economy.

This was the first big set piece debate ahead of the elections, there

are plenty more still to come. Well, the man trying

to keep everyone in check, chairing that debate was our Welsh

Affairs Editor Vaughan Roderick You've recovered Ben! It was a

lively debate, wasn't it? It was interesting. The one thing

I've noticed, one word continually came up, that was changed.

When you have a government that's been in power for 16, 17 years as

Labour have been in Cardiff Bay you would expect this to be a change in

action. What you had was all the opposition parties pushing this

change message and competing with each other for the change wrote. The

difficulty is this, there are quirks in the Welsh election system that

make it difficult for Wales to lose. They can win half the seats with

roughly one third of the votes because of the way the system works.

All the opposition parties feel that there is a big change out there.

And the one leader not talking about change was Carwyn Jones, how

difficult is it after 16 or 17 years of Labour rule here to try and

appear to be fresh and not have that change wrote against them?

I think it is immensely difficult. The question that Labour face is

that they have changed radically at a UK level, but is that to their

advantage in terms of Wales? Carwyn Jones had little choice, really, but

to defend his record. Politicians love to be able to blame the last

government. The last government and the one before that, and the one

before that, were led by Labour in Wales so he can't do that. It was a

tough job up against four. He handled it pretty well.

He was trying to convey a sense of steady as she goes, we are moving in

the right direction. All elections, at the end of the day, two into a

battle between hope and there. What Carwyn Jones is saying that there

are risks in changing direction. I think we'll find a lot of

mudslinging, comparing and contracting Wales and England,

especially on health. We had that allotment between Andrew RT Davies

and Carwyn Jones, it generates more heat than light.

And the problem is, is there a fracture on this, what you will

find, is they are both correct. These stats they are using are

different statistics. One of those statistics didn't take age of the

population into account, the other did. You know, they were cherry

picking statistics. As I think the campaign goes on, we

will get a better picture of those sort of arguments. I noticed Andrew

RT Davies didn't put a figure on education spending, he won't get

away with that. I think he's perfectly entitled to do today, but

he will be able to do that before the election. He'll have to come up

with those figures. But even at this relatively early

stage there were plenty of differences in terms of policies on

health organisation, what kind of schools do want to see in Wales, it

was clear that there are separate at and policies emerging.

-- separate agendas and policies emerging. There are sharp

differentiations between the parties now in terms of policies. I remember

the second election was incredibly boring, basically the argument came

down to should it be pensioners or kids who get free access to is

wrinkles. -- swimming pools. Do you foresee it, these possible

new powers for the Assembly, with the power to vary in gum tax by

2018, might there be talk about taxes and the manifestos to?

I think the Conservatives will paint this picture of wanting to create a

low tax Wales. Other powers, its more uncertain because Wales Bill

hasn't gone through Parliament yet. In a sense all the parties are

writing the manifestos a bit blind in terms of that.

And in the last couple of days the education minister, Huw Lewis, is

not standing for election this time, what you make of that?

The surprises that he announced it so late. We have a number of people

elected in 1999 who say that they don't want to do 20, 21 years. I

think it's a little bit surprising that it's been announced so late in

the day. I don't think we should read too much into it in terms of

of the politics of it. the politics of it.

Don't forget you follow all the latest on twitter,

Donald Trump is net damaging for the Scottish economy, but that is not

why I am saying he should be considered on the same basis as

everybody else. We have banned American shock jocks and MPs, not

necessarily on terrorism, Donald Trump is not on any of these things,

but making statements, in the words of the formulation, are not

conducive to the public interest. What did you get wrong, your

assessment of Donald Trump, or the size of an independent Scotland's

oil revenue? Eight years ago I would have found it difficult to know that

Donald Trump was going to run for president of the US. Most people

would have found that an incredible proposition. I was not to know he

would make a range of statements that are deeply offensive and deeply

not acceptable whether they apply to Mexicans all Muslims. Nor did I

anticipate he would only go forward with a 10th of the investment

promised. It is a yes or no, which? I did not anticipate any of these

things, Andrew. Thanks for joining us. You have won the prize for the

best ever backdrop to an interview down the line I have done. Alex

Salmond, thank you for joining us. Back to Europe, we are told I think

the Sunday Times and other papers that the Prime Minister is not going

to just get what he wants, he is going to pull rabbits out of a hat

and get more than we expect. We spent 2015 playing down

expectations. I remember number 10 enjoying it in November and December

when the Conservative leaning press was talking down the renegotiation

Cameron would achieve, they wanted to go into February with Tory

backbenchers and voters and members expecting really quite a paltry deal

from Brussels and Berlin. The rabbits he pulls out of his hat do

not have to be big, they can be medium-sized. They can still clear

the low hurdle that has been set for him. He has raised the bar by

talking about rabbits. So far this has gone exactly as I and many

others predicted. Cameron was always going to orchestrate it so it

sounded like it would be difficult and then he managed to get

concessions and then he gets something fantastic at the last

crucial moment! I think that leave, out campaign, the various campaigns,

have a challenge. Not to allow Tisch boaters to fall for these ruses and

there should be real scrutiny of what Cameron comes back with. --

allow voters. If you are the Prime Minister on the European project,

which I expect privately he wishes he did not kick off in the first

those, it looks good, it looks like he will get a deal. The potential

major deserters, we are told Michael Gove will stay, Nick Herbert forms a

Eurosceptic group to stay inside, and we see no sign of Boris Johnson,

Theresa May leading the out camp. If they do not do it, that is job done

for the Prime Minister. Yes, it is dangerous to predict, but the stars

seem to be coming together in a favourable way. I picked this up on

Thursday last week, essentially the Prime Minister would get something

on welfare that would be better on the four-year ban on in work

benefits. You could say pressure on public services is too great and we

need to limit migration. What is interesting is that potentially

means the four girls he wants, he could do better than that. It is

interesting because it now appears according to an opinion poll in the

Times newspaper, voters have clocked onto the negotiations and believed

they are for real and believe if the Prime Minister gets a good package,

there is a greater chance they will vote to stay in. All the detriment

-- diplomats who said he could not do this, he appears to have proved

them wrong. If it is going well for the Prime Minister, there are

opinion polls showing a majority to come out, today. I have learned my

lesson from the general election, which is not to believe polls and so

I do not think they are correct. They were right on the Scottish

referendum. You think the campaign is starting from behind? I do and I

think there is a danger as Nigel Farage touched upon, that voters

will think it is a giant stitch up if the political establishment, the

big figures we have talked about, are on one side, it does not look

like a balanced debate and it may backfire. Tomorrow, the equity

markets have had their worst start to the year since the crash. All

eyes will be on London and New York tomorrow. Should the government

prepare for a potential financial crisis? It is politically preparing

because George Osborne gave a speech ten days ago that was more negative

about the economic picture than the Autumn Statement in November. That I

think is laying the political ground if not for recession or crisis, then

slower growth than we were expecting. It looks worrying, the

Dow was down almost 500 points at one stage. That would be very bad

for George Osborne but there is an argument people will cling to him as

a future leader if times are tough. Some people saw that speech as the

beginning of Project Fear on the European referendum. Maybe he

believed it and he was telling us the warning lights were flashing. We

will see if there is a flight to British bonds. Keep your eye on the

markets tomorrow. The Daily Politics is back tomorrow

at midday over on BBC Two, and I'll be back here,

same time, same place, Remember if it's Sunday,

it's the Sunday Politics.