13/03/2016 Sunday Politics Wales

Morning, folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics.

begins a new drive urging Scots to support what she calls

"the beautiful dream" of independence.

Tough talk from George Osborne ahead of his Budget on Wednesday.

The Chancellor wants us to live within our means.

Fighting talk too, from the man in his shadow.

John McDonnell wants to revive Labour's economic credibility.

And does Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party have a problem

Labour students at Oxford are already being investigated

Later in the programme: university will also face scrutiny.

Next week Assembly Members and the Senedd shut up shop

We ask, has the government delivered on its promises?

And with me three Fleet Street journos, living the dream.

Nick Watt, Julia Harley-Brewer and Tim Shipman.

For the rest of us, it is a bit of a nightmare!

So, four months ago, George Osborne sounded upbeat

Writing in the Sun on Sunday, ahead of Wednesday's Budget,

the Chancellor says the world is facing its most uncertain period

He says Britain has to act now, rather than pay later,

Let's listen to the Chancellor on the Marr Show a little earlier.

I think the world is a much more difficult and dangerous place.

My message in this Budget is that the world is a more

uncertain place than at any time since the financial crisis.

We need to act now so we don't pay later.

That is why we need to find additional savings,

equivalent to 50p in every ?100 the Government spends by the end

We have got to live within our means to stay secure.

That is the way we make Britain fit for the future.

That was the Chancellor earlier this morning. What did we learn? He is

preparing the ground for a very difficult budget. Why is he talking

about the difficult global economic circumstances? We have a significant

slowdown in China but it helps him in the EU referendum campaign. Why

risk leaving the EU when it is difficult economic circumstances? It

helps him with a budget. You need to expend why he was talking in the

July budget, the Autumn Statement, targeting a 10 billion budget

surplus by 2020 and now he will be talking back calories and ?18

billion hole in the size of the economy. Will he be able to meet

that surplus? He needs an alibi for that. All the global headwinds,

problems in the emerging markets, the slowdown in China, the Eurozone

struggling to be overwhelmed. We knew that back in July. Nothing has

changed. The thing about George Osborne is he is a politician. It is

always about politics. It is not ideal, coming into local elections,

London mayoral elections, to be giving a load of cuts to public

services and possibly tax rises. The reality is he is always looking at

the long game and he does always play a brilliant politicians long

game. He is looking to 2020 and does not care. He also plays a bad shot

game. Will it be a difficult budget or will it be a steady issues

budget? What is striking about back in this morning, at least half of it

was about the European Union and not the budget. The rest of it was about

the Tory leadership and him taking potshots at Boris Johnson. The

subtext of this budget is it has been a difficult and dangerous time

for George Osborne and his teacher. He sat there and said, I am not

going to sit in this chair and mumble away. Who could he be talking

about there? We were told week ago that the subtext of the budget would

be the dangers of Brexit and the Tory leadership. It is not the

subtext, it is the text. There is hardly anything in it in terms of

big stuff. Steady as she goes. Can we just have another shout out for

the brilliant headline, genius political strategist clears up mess

made by genius political strategist. He may be nursing a little rabbit to

surprise as always! Now, if a certain referendum had

gone a bit differently, Scotland, would be an independent

country in just over ten days' time. Those wanting to leave the UK didn't

win that argument in 2014 but that hasn't dented the fortunes

of the SNP, who are riding high It's the party's Spring Conference

in Glasgow this weekend, and we're joined now

from there by the First Minister Good morning. A pleasure to be with

you, Andrew. Had the referendum gone your way, we would be ten days from

independents. You will be taking a massive and unsustainable ?15

billion budget deficit, 10% of Scottish GDP. What would you be

doing to get that down? We would deal with it in the same way the UK

dealt with its deficit in 2009/ when they had 2.2% of the GDP. -- 2009/

2010. They will be building on the underlying fundamental strengths of

the Scottish economy. Our this goal position has been broadly similar to

the rest of the UK and, in some years, better than the rest of the

UK. Onshore revenues are growing at a faster rate than the fall in

offshore revenues. We have higher employment and faster productivity

growth. The economy is fundamentally strong and that would have been a

very good basis on which to become an independent country. Did you not

oppose most efforts of the British government to get the deficit down?

I opposed many measures that George Osborne has taken. I do not say we

should not try to get the deficit down. I have opposed and continue to

oppose the speed at which it is happening in the way in which it is

happening but no one would deny that countries want to get their fiscal

positions into a more stable condition and the UK is in right

now. The point I'm making is the Scottish economy is fundamentally

strong economy. Much of what I have said illustrates that point. Let's

look at some of the things you have said. You have said most countries

have deficits. Can you name another at Fat economy 80s after the

financial crash that has a budget deficit of 10% of GDP. You do not

look at just one year full if I go back to that -- two 2008, 2009, it

was double that of Scotland. Our this goal position has been stronger

but is not right now because of the particular issues. Is it not the

case that Scotland's deficit now is the highest in the European Union?

That is true, isn't it? In the year we had figures published in this

past week, we have a very difficult and challenging set of figures. It

is the highest. No country, whether the UK, Scotland or another EU

country, makes judgments about that this good strength of that country

on the strength of one year's goes. The point I am making is over the

past ten years, our fiscal position has been broadly similar to the UK

and coming summer beiges, has been significantly better. If you project

forward to the next five years, the future is much more important than

the past, onshore revenues are likely to Bath the outstrip the

decline in offshore revenues. -- basked in the outstrip. The North

Sea contains difficulties for those working in the North Sea and

economies on the North East of Scotland. The economy of Scotland is

fundamentally strong. Let's look at more than one year. You have said it

is a snapshot. Without oil revenues, and there are no oil revenues now,

without the revenues, Scotland has run a persistent budget deficit of

over 10% every year for 13 years. You have a systemic deficit problem.

Why should you not look at oil revenues? Oil revenues are there and

have been contributing to the Treasury to the tune of ?300

billion. They are not there now. Without them you have run a

persistent budget deficit and have done for 13 years. I accept it is

the future that matters more than the past. If you look at the

projections for the next five years, our onshore revenues, remember more

than 90% of the Scottish economy comes from onshore and not offshore.

If you look five years ahead, onshore revenues are projected to

grow in the region of ?14 billion. That is many times before in

offshore revenues in that period. I am not denying the challenge of

North Sea and other countries. Norway is facing exactly the same

challenge. Because they are better prepared for it and have Stuart did

oil resources better, Norway, in the last couple of weeks true down on

its massive oil fund. The powers that independence would have given

as and we did not vote yes, we have had -- we would have had ability to

draw down on that faster. Why are onshore revenues growing less

strongly in Scotland than the rest of the UK? That is a long-standing

issue. One issue at the heart of that is growth in the heart of

London. We are seeing a narrowing in some of the long-standing gap there

has been between aspects of the Scottish economy and the UK economy.

If we take productivity, for a long time Scotland lags significantly

behind the rest of the UK. Over the past years we have close that gap is

it that can leave. We still lag behind our European competitors and

that is a problem. I am not standing here denying the challenges that the

Scottish economy has. In the same way you have been talking about the

Chancellor's budget and the same way the UK economy has challenges and

across the European Union, they have challenges. There are real strength

is in the Scottish economy. The real question should be how we build on

and accents are the big strengths. Revenues per person in Scotland

where ?10,700 in the years 2011, 20 12. They are now ?10,000, 700 ( even

with the growth in revenues. The offshore has offset that. We still

have a fundamental deficit problem. I am not denying we have a deficit.

The UK has a deficit. Take revenues per head of population, which is

what you decided to me there. In the most recent year, our revenues per

head of population are broadly similar to the UK. In every one of

the past 35 years, revenues per head of population have been higher than

the rest of the UK. I accept we have a challenge in the North Sea. I

accept that like all oil-producing countries, we have challenges about

how we transition away from oil and gas over the years to come, though

there is a great deal of attention in the North Sea. These are

challenges we should embrace and challenges we should be working out

how we face up to and address. Scotland is doing that and we'll do

that on the basis of fundamental strengths in our economy. -- will do

that. Scotland pays per capita about the same as the UK average. I am

talking about the current year. What I am saying is, you cannot judge the

economy in one year. It is similar in one year in 34 of the past 35

years and has been higher. That is the point I am making. The reason

you are running a deficit, per capita spending is so much higher

than in Scotland it is ?1400 higher public spending per person.

Westminster that is that build it is the difference between tax revenues

and what you spend. -- fits that bill. It is a deficit. The UK is in

deficit in Scotland is in deficit. It is twice as big! In 2008, 2009,

the UK deficit was twice as big as Scotland it will vary from year to

year. In terms of the point about per capita spending, there are very

good reasons why someone who knows Scotland well, we have a country

where one in five of the population lives in a row and remote community.

I was Health Secretary for five years. It cost more to deliver

health services on an island or rural community than it does in

Glasgow. Westminster pays for that, it makes up the difference. If you

are independent you would either have to raise taxes or cut spending.

What would it be? By how much would you raise taxes and cut spending? We

set a budget in devolved Scotland every year. We make choices,

sometimes these are tough choices. If Scotland were independent, we

would do that as well. The point I am making, the economy of an

independent Scotland would face challenges like other economies do.

We're in a fundamentally strong position. Employment is higher than

any other UK nation. Productivity is growing faster. We have a number of

key strengths in the economy. One of the challenges is how we build on

these strengths and get our economy growing faster. We have a number of

world leading sectors in our economy.

The fact is your deficit was ?15 billion, moving with oil revenues at

2 billion last year. This year oil revenues are reckoned to be at zero

so your budget deficit would get even worse. Two cut your deficit to

anything like acceptable levels you would have to increase tax to 16% or

cut spending by 14% or a combination of the two, what would it be? We

would deal with the deficit in the same way the UK is dealing with the

deficit and dealt in the deficit -- with the deficit in 2009/ ten. We

would be in the same position as many other countries but we would be

in a position where we have got a fundamentally strong economy. I wish

Scotland have voted yes in 2014, if it had done we would have spent the

last almost two years preparing for Scotland becoming independent. In a

negotiation around independence, there would have been discussions

about assets, liability, the share of defence spending, so that's what

would have been the case if we voted for independence. Looking ahead, we

have a strong economy and the challenge is how we grow it even

faster. You accept surely that you wouldn't be allowed to join the

European Union with a 10% deficit, you would have to agree to Brussels

programme, correct? We are getting into some ridiculous territory here

and one of the most ridiculous arguments. Scotland wouldn't have

been out of the EU, we wouldn't have been in the position of an accession

state. It is a bit rich for anybody, given where we are right now, with

the prospect of being taken out of the EU ahead of us, for

scaremongering about the prospects of that. With two weeks to go until

independence, instead of increases in public spending which you

announced yesterday... They didn't vote yes. But if it had been, you

would have been looking at the list of hospitals and schools to close,

you would be the austerity party, that's what you would have to do.

That's ridiculous. Countries the world over have deficits and deal

with them. We would also have been taking on the greater powers to grow

our economy, particularly our own short economy. Italy and Greece had

10% deficit and you know the austerity they had to go through. I

think this argument starts to tip over into being incredible, we start

to compare Scotland, with all of the strength of the Scottish economy, to

countries like Greece and Italy. I have spoken about the fundamental

strengths of our economy, not least the fact we have had the longest

period of economic growth since the devolution. You have said all of

that. Yes, we have challenges, but Scotland has a strong economy. Then

why do your revenues like you're spending by ?2400 per person? -- lag

your spending. We have a deficit like many other countries... Nobody

has a deficit like Scotland's. We have a particular issue because of

the fall in North Sea revenues. It is an indictment of Westminster

mismanagement that unlike Norway, we don't have a massive oil fund to

help deal with that. Westminster is paying for your deficit, Westminster

is paying for the difference for the rest of the deficit, would you like

to thank the rest of the people of the United Kingdom for making up for

the deficit you have got? Westminster has a deficit of its

own, it is ?1 trillion in debt. That is not the deficit, that is the

debt. That is why I said debt, I understand the difference between

deficit and debt, but it has accumulated debt of ?1 trillion, it

has an annual deficit just like Scotland and many other countries

do. It is actually 1.5 trillion, even worse than you think. I was

being kind to them, Andrew! You should be kind because they are

saving you quite a bit of money! Does Labour have a problem dealing

with allegations of anti-semitism? The party is worried enough to have

established an inquiry into the Labour Club

at Oxford University where there are accusations that

members used off-colour language And the Sunday Politics has been

told that the investigation will look at new claims

from another university. It comes after an activist

with controversial views was allowed back into the party then promptly

chucked out again last week. Does Jeremy Corbyn's support

for causes like the Palestinians or Stop The War mean he's not tough

enough when there are allegations It's seen that way by some

students at Oxford. Last month the vice-chair

of the Labour club there resigned, claiming some members had a problem

with Jews and used words like Zio, a nickname for Jewish people that

many find offensive. It's now being investigated

by the Labour peer Baroness Royle, who is also looking at the wider

issue of behaviour in We understand she's now

extended her investigation to include students

at the London School of Economics. This week, they have been electing

a new general secretary One of the candidates,

Rayhan Uddin, who's also in the Labour group,

has been criticised for some Facebook posts that emerged

during the campaign. In one, he talked about leading

Zionists wanting to take over the student union to make it right

wing and Zio again. Facebook post:

of language, writing in another He has been referred to Labour's

investigation into student politics by someone

who now works for an MP. We've seen the letter they wrote,

which said: Because it was an older generation

of activists that came up at Prime Minister's

Questions this week. I was completely appalled to see

yesterday that the Labour Party has readmitted someone to their party

who says, and I believe that the 9/11 suicide bombers,

and I quote, must never be condemned and belongs to an organisation that

says "we defend the Islamic State He was referring to Gerry Downing,

who had also blogged about what he called

the Jewish question, after being readmitted to the party

this week he was resuspended. He reckons it's really a battle

between different wings in Labour. You've said there is a conspiracy

of people out to get Jeremy Corbyn, Well, Dan Jarvis and these people

of course, obviously there's the whole Blairite wing of the party

and others, who have been absolutely disgusted at the membership

and the left-wing surge in the membership and can't

believe what happened. And do you think they are using race

and religion as a tool for that? Whereas the Labour MP Wes Streeting

says there is a problem I think in certain parts

of the British left, there has always been a virulent

form of pretty bigoted politics, particularly in terms

of anti-Semitism, which has been an issue in some of our university

campuses There's also a mentality

which I think has been epitomised by the repulsive use of Mr Downing,

which is not so much Stop The War People who seem to hate

their country more than they hate And we have got to start sending

a far stronger message that this is simply not acceptable

in the modern Labour Party. Jeremy Corbyn's supporters,

like those in the grass roots campaign group Momentum,

say none of this is fair on him. Corbyn comes under the most

incredible level of attacks and one of the things that he's attacked

for is his long-standing commitment to anti-war, anti-imperialism,

peace in the Middle East. And I think that's where some

of this comes from. He does absolutely condemn

anti-Semitism, he has time There is not a shred

of anti-Semitism in his personal make-up, in his moral make-up

or in his political make-up. And as for Labour's investigation

into anti-Semitism among students, there's no time frame

for when it will report. Let's speak now to the Labour MP,

John Mann, who's chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group

against Anti-Semitism. He's in Berlin at an

Anti-Semitism Conference. Is there an anti-Semitism problem in

the Labour Party? Of course, that's why these issues have got attention.

It is not a big problem, but a small problem when it comes to racism

needs to be dealt with. We have been here before. I can recall 30 years

ago when there were extremists trying to ban Jewish societies in

some of the universities, and we clamped down on them very hard then

and they weren't in the Labour Party but it is the same kind of people,

the same ideology. Some of that has crept into the Labour Party and it

needs to be removed. Why has it come back? People could write big

academic books on why it has re-surged but what we have seen in

history is that anti-Semitism never seems to go away. But why in the

Labour Party has come back? People have obviously chosen to dissociate

with the Labour Party in the growth of membership, some of those people

have attitudes that are very outdated and prejudiced. There is no

space for them in the Labour Party and the reason that is important is

because I am getting young Jewish activists posturing whether the

Labour Party is the place for them in terms of their support, their

vote and their activity, and we cannot tolerate a situation where

any part of society doesn't feel that a major political party like

the Labour Party is not the place for them, which is why prompt

effective action and vigilance on this is required, including from

Jeremy as the leader of the Labour Party. Is the Labour leader doing

enough? Or the fact he has talked about his friends, Hamas, Hezbollah,

and shared platforms with people who have been very hostile to Israel and

so on, is that a disadvantage? Is it encouraging anti-Semitism or is it

not relevant? I have met Jeremy recently to discuss anti-Semitism in

the Labour Party and it is clear to me that he does not tolerate or

support it but what he has to do is follow that free with actions and

ensure that others in the Labour Party follow it through with actions

because the kind of thing, the atmosphere that is being created in

Oxford University is not a one-off. This has been happening elsewhere as

well. While these can be seen as small incidents, if you are the

young Jewish person who is impacted by it, it is not small for you and

it is magnified in the universities, which are pretty tolerant places and

rightly so, if there is in tolerance to any particular group and to

Jewish students. We are not prepared to have that in the Labour Party,

there has got to be action, it has got to be led from the front and it

has got to be decisive action. There is no space for these people in the

Labour Party or is there space for people in any way excusing their

actions. But there is an inquiry into what has been going on at

Oxford, but is your party doing enough about this? Because I

understand these inquiries may be subsumed into a much bigger inquiry

into bullying and so on. What is your feeling? It is action by

results. If there is a decisive action, there will be an almighty

row which wouldn't be helpful but the idea that those of us who fought

over decades, challenging anti-Semitism and other forms of

racism, are going to accept other than the highest of standards in our

own party, well I can tell you it is going to happen. There are many of

us who will only accept absolutely the highest standards. We are not

prepared to tolerate any form of anti-Semitism or any excuse for it

in the Labour Party or anywhere else in society. But in our own party

absolutely not and therefore there has got to be action, words are not

good enough. Historically the Labour Party has done well from the Jewish

vote. The Jewish vote over time has tended to vote Labour. If this

anti-Semitism continues in your party, are you in danger of losing

the Jewish vote? We prepared a report ten years ago on a

cross-party basis that highlighted anti-Semitism in all of its aspects

including from the right but also what was described by some as the

new anti-Semitism on the left. It is not new but it had been dormant for

a long period of time. People have been accustomed to the Labour Party

and that part of the left being highly tolerant to everybody. That

has got to happen, you cannot have a progressive party of any substance

in politics if it allows any form of intolerance and therefore we are not

prepared to have second-class citizens, second-class form of

racism allowed in the Labour Party. Anti-Semitism has got to be

challenged, including anti-Semitism on the left, and so robustly and put

back in the dustbin again. That is my intention in the Labour Party. I

am looking forward to Jeremy and the National Executive being decisive,

removing the anti-Semites, going into where there is intolerance and

explaining what is anti-Semitism and why we are not prepared to have it

in our party. Thanks for joining us this morning.

Labour's Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell ran Jeremy Corbyn's

leadership campaign on a platform fighting not just austerity,

Now though, he wants to be the new voice of fiscal

responsibility, and says he's going to re-write

In a moment we'll be talking to John McDonnell's number two,

the Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

But first let's hear what Mr McDonnell had to say

It is a wider ambition then just Labour's fiscal credibility.

I want to try to restore credibility to economic policy-making generally,

not just within the Labour Party but across politics too.

We have had too long, for example, the last six

years we have had fiscal rules which have not been met,

I am trying to encourage a better economic debate.

What I have said is quite clearly, when we go back into government,

we will eliminate the deficit, reduce debt, and will

ensure that is supervised independently by the Office

And Labour's Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Seema Malhotra,

Welcome to the Sunday Politics. You would balance current spending with

revenue and borrow to invest. How does that differ from Mr Brown and

Mr balls? You are right about there being two key parts to the new

fiscal credibility were all. In a sense, this builds on very much

where we have been before. It also responds to the criticisms that were

made of Jaws -- George Osborne's this school charter where he was

criticised for tying his own hands and not allowing for investment. --

fiscal charter. There are two key differences. It makes it more

explicit, that there should be independent voices. We have said we

want the OBR to be an independent voice around deficit reduction

targets, and also reporting directly to Parliament. The second area is

that we want to make sure there is the opportunity for investment and

also, if there are difficult times, like we had in 2009, when monetary

policy does not seem to be working, it gives an opportunity for fiscal

policy to work alongside. It builds on but has two key differences. Mr

Brown defended his rules as well when times got bad. It was described

as being austerity light. This must be as well? It has been developed

and the reason... It is not about austerity. It is a framework that

will allow us to make spending and tax decisions in the future. It

responds to the criticisms, the universal criticisms of George

Osborne's this dull charter. -- fiscal charter. It says we need to

invest for the future. I understand all that. Mr Brown and Mr Balls also

wanted to invest and that was criticised by the Shadow Chancellor

as austerity light. If that were austerity light, this is steroid to

-- night as well. We're in a situation where George Osborne is

blaming everyone but himself. -- this is austerity light as well.

George Osborne's Member of Parliament for the Tory Party has

said, what we have seen our warm words. He has talked about

investment and an export led strategy. This is built on debts,

household debt. How much is public investment? Around 30 billion, if

you take into account the difference in spending. It is 34 billion in

public spending at the moment. It should be much higher. How much more

should it be? It should be higher. There is no excuse for what George

Osborne has done. I am not asking about Mr Osborne. I am asking about

your policy. 34 billion at the moment, rising to 40 billion by 20

20. How much more would it be? It focuses on where it needs to be

regarding GDP. You need to have a good level of investment so you are

creating jobs for the future. What I am trying to work out is what this

means in hard cash for investment, how big would investment be under a

Labour government? It is clear that George Osborne has been cutting

investment. It was around 3%, 3.5%, and is now 1.4% in terms of

infrastructure. If you want jobs of the future coming through, if you

want to turn around the situation where young people... By how much

more would public investment increase under this formula? What we

have said is you need to make sure that we have a balance of where the

economy needs investment so we can get tax receipts and growth for the

future. We had economists saying that George Osborne, if you talk

about fairness in the future... I am here to talk about the labour policy

and not that of George Osborne. Nor has there been balanced growth. If

you want a balanced budget, you need to balance growth. Let's talk about

labour. John McDonnell has talked about the difference between

short-term and long-term investment. What is the difference? What we have

said as she want to see investment that will see us having a big stake

in the future. If you want to look at energy investment, you are

talking out about -- about 20, 30 years. It is about supporting

companies, entrepreneurs and supporting the long-term growth for

the country as well. If you're talking about rail, roads and

infrastructure, you will be aware, I am sure, of the reports that showed

recently we have fewer buses than 2010, our rolling stock and trains

are in poor condition, people are taking longer to get to work and the

trains are more crowded. That should be a wake-up call to George Osborne

he is not working in the interests of the British public and people are

asking if the decisions are based on political interest and not on the

country's future. You would balance current spending, day-to-day

spending. At the moment there is a deficit. What would you cut to

balance current spending? There are two things. The first is about

spending decisions and the second about tax receipts. We are arguing

that if you want to see tax receipts grow, George Osborne has seen them

for in regard to productivity growth. What would you cut? We would

want to see that growth increases in that you see an increase in tax

receipts. You cannot spend if it is not within your means. What would

you cut? You cannot spend if it is not within your means. What the

announcement from the Labour Party is about is how we earn our way in

the world and survived in a competitive economy. We will leave

it there. Thank you very much. It's just gone 11:35am,

you're watching the Sunday Politics. Hello and welcome to

the Sunday Politics Wales. Carwyn Jones says he's halfway

through a decade of delivery. But as the curtain falls

on the current Sssembly, And the Conservative leader in Wales

tells us why he cannot protect any spending apart from health

if he becomes First Minister. When politicians make promises,

we expect them to keep them, The First Minister has made

"delivery" a key word Indeed, he says he wants another

five years to complete what he calls Cemlyn Davies has been looking

at what was promised A reliable delivery service

is something we have come to expect. It is so easy these

days to get what we want And when we have been

promised that we will get something we assume it'll

be delivered on time Five years ago the First Minister

made that exact point in a speech to civil servants at

Welsh Government HQ. Delivery is going

to be the watchword. We want to make sure

that we deliver for Wales. To ensure that would be

the case, Carwyn Jones set up a delivery unit to monitor

the performance of Welsh Government Now, with another election

looming he and his ministers believe they have

delivered, fulfilling Welsh Labour's The Welsh Government

has created a young peoples It has also increased

school spending compared to the money it gets

from Westminster and doubles the number of young children

benefiting from the Flying Start Project, setup to help disadvantaged

families. The government has also funded

the employment of 500 extra Community Support Officers

and there is data to back up the claim access to GPs has

improved since 2011. Although opposition

parties dispute that. On the face of it, superficially,

you could say they have delivered. You have to ask how ambitious

they were in the first place. That manifesto was fashioned

at a time when the Labour Party knew that cuts were coming

through in the block grants and therefore the commitments they

made back in 2011 were cautious. There was nothing there

about what might be achieved in terms of outcomes,

about achieving strategic It was a narrowing of the criteria

on which they would And you think that was

completely deliberate? I think it was intelligent

if you like back in 2011. It allows Carwyn Jones

to say in interviews now, And Carwyn Jones is now hoping

for another term to finish In 2011, I promised a decade

of delivery, a ten year focus on the bread and butter issues that

matter to people's everyday lives. We are halfway through that decade

of delivery and we can't afford In the meantime, opposition parties

are unimpressed with the They point to longer

waiting times for treatment They also point out just two GP

surgeries across Wales offer Meanwhile, GCSE results

here continue to lag behind England and the latest stats show

economic growth in Wales Carwyn Jones' term in office has

been abject failure. He claims that Labour

is delivering, but what have his government actually

achieved beyond the disappointment The Welsh Government

was meant to understand Wales's needs better

than Whitehall bureaucrats Meant to deliver Welsh

solutions to our problems, The truth is that creating

the Welsh Government It has been more

like decades of decay. And so with polling

day less than two months away what can we expect

over the coming weeks? What is coming through very

clearly is that Labour have a clear strategy of how

they want to fight the election. It is a defensive election

for them but they have staked out a ground that

goes back five years, it started in that manifesto five

years ago, of a cautious set of objectives which they can say

they have delivered, they are delivering

competent government. The onus is on the other parties

to raise the level of debate and I'm not seeing them

doing it at the moment. But I think they need to go

above simply carping at Labour They need to project a bit

of vision, a bit of imagination into the whole way

the election is contested. Soon enough all the parties

will be showing us their menus and they will be

hoping their slice of Assembly seats after the election will give them

a chance to deliver their policies. So that's the story so far

from the Labour Government. But the main opposition in Wales,

the Conservatives have Their leader, Andrew R T Davies

wants to be the next First Minister, and told his party's conference

in Llangollen that this year But when it comes to his spending

plans the only guarantee he gives Beyond that he says we'll just

have to wait and see. He spoke to our political

editor, Nick Servini. Andrew RT Davies, welcome

to the Sunday Politics Wales. I want to start by

talking about the speech A lot of people I've spoken to have

read into it as something Not only did he barely mention

you, he spent most of the speech talking about how a withdrawal

from Europe would be disastrous for Welsh

farming. And you are a farmer of course.

You want us to leave. The Prime Minister came

here with the intention to promote the Assembly campaign

which is on May the 5th but also, there

is a referendum campaign That referendum campaign

is being fought across the whole He had two messages he needed

to deliver yesterday. The Prime Minister and myself

disagree on the European referendum question but that is why

we have a referendum. It is a big constitutional

question that every man and woman have a chance to vote

in over the age of 18. The key fact for us is the Assembly

election and whether we want to continue with more decline that

Labour has given us for the last 17 years or whether we want

to transform the Welsh economy. We want to reinvigorate the NHS

and deliver excellence in education. You must be disappointed,

though, he barely Together with a load of other people

right at the beginning. You want to be the First

Minister of Wales. speech conference after confidence

that is the way the Prime Minister's I can point you to a number

of speeches, it is the way he deals with these matters when he goes

around the conferences, The fact of the matter is,

we as the Welsh Conservatives are focused on one goal only

up until May the 5th and that is delivering

a Conservative government to the National Assembly for Wales

so you can have investment in the health service,

you can have excellence in education and you can have good quality jobs

with take-home pay rise. I will touch on those

issues but I want to He says you are fundamentally wrong

in your view of what a withdrawal I don't know how long David Cameron

has spent on a farm, What does he know about

farming that you don't? I've got my two sons

and daughter who want to come Before I go to work to do

the politics, I work on that farm I know what is good

for Welsh agriculture and I will tell you this much,

the decline in dairy farmers The decline in family farms in Wales

isn't good for Welsh agriculture. Ultimately, the lack

of opportunities for young people to come into agriculture is not good

for Welsh agriculture. What we need is to make

sure we have a vibrant, thriving Welsh agricultural industry

and we can have that debate, we can have that discussion

after May fifth. But what we need is a Welsh

Government that delivers on bovine TB, delivers on getting support

into Welsh agriculture rather than modulating farming

out of existence. I will finish on this

point if I may, we can either farm for subsidies

or we can farm for food. Ultimately, food security

is the biggest goal that this country has got to securing

the future going forward. Year-on-year, since

the Common Agricultural Policy came into existence,

food security for this country He talked a lot in that

speech yesterday about 40% potential tariff on Welsh lamb

exports, for example. You can't give an assurance

that there won't be a tariff in the event of a

withdrawal, can you? We import 435 million pounds worth

of beef into the United Kingdom. We export about ?120 million out

of the United Kingdom. The bulk of that imported

beef into the UK comes Those countries are going to want

to trade with this country because their market is bigger

coming into these countries If you can tell me the million

jobs in engineering in Germany they are going to turn

their back on this country or the five million jobs across

the European Union that is relying on trading with Britain,

the ?60 billion surplus they trade with the UK

is going to be turned away What we need with Europe

is a good, solid trading relationship that secures economic

prosperity not political union. I go back to my point,

May the 5th is the critical time frame that people can

vote for the first time in five years to reinvigorate the NHS,

get excellence in education and make sure that we have an economy that

gives decent take-home pay. You have been criticised

in the past, particularly at the time of the last Assembly

elections, you as a party, There was a proposed 20% reduction

in the education budget... There was a proposaly

that was set out. It was never proposed

by the Welsh Conservatives. It's proposed by Carwyn Jones time

and time again because of some clip that Nick Bourne gave

to the TV cameras but it was never in a manifesto and

it was never in a policy position. What is going to happen

to the education budget under a future

Conservative government? We want to make sure

we can fund schools directly to free up between ?50

and ?70 million out of the bureaucracy, that

money hits the classroom. What we have announced as well

for tuition fee policies is a ?400 million support package for students

over the five years of the Assembly that will pay students directly

for their living costs. No other party has come clean

on how they will fund Importantly, we see

the importance of vocational FE, as well, needs to stand

shoulder to shoulder with HE so we have a

balanced education system and students and pupils can

reach their full potential. We have said the NHS

is the number one... What is going to happen

to the education budget? The education budget

will have more money freed up to its because we want

to fund schools directly. We will be making sure that money

hits the classroom rather than staying in County Hall

or central bureaucracy. The overall education

budget will increase under a Conservative government

in Cardiff Bay? I just mapped out to you what our

policy is on education, about how we want to

get more money into schools and we have announced

what we will do for HE and funding Does that mean the overall increase

in education budgets will increase? I would like to see as much money

going into public services as possible in Wales,

but what we have to be aware of is our money

is dependent on coming from There are spending reviews,

there are budgets every year and there are consequentials that

flow out of those budgets. We are talking about a five-year

period, where that money comes available we will want to put

it into front-line services. It would be wrong

of me at this stage to say I can guarantee X, Y or Z,

other than the health budget because ultimately we know

the Westminster government has given a protection of the health budget

in England with an extra ?8 billion There will be a direct consequential

coming over from that budget and we can guarantee 500 million

we will receive over the five years of the Assembly

will go into the Welsh NHS. You have two main policies

on this, directly elected health

commissioners and what you call What is that going to

do to waiting lists? How is that going to shorten waiting

times for patients in Wales? It has to be taken in

the round of what we propose, protecting the health

budget so that is investment secured so those commissioners of health

care knowing they will get those In this Assembly,

Welsh Labour along with Plaid Cymru and the Liberal

Democrats cut those budget lines so commissioners couldn't

commission services. Directly elected commissioners

of health in the regions of the health boards will be

directly accountable to those communities and people will be

a power to drive change within those Ultimately, a Keogh-style inquiry

will deliver on people's concerns about poor

standards of care. We have excellence in many areas

of the health service across Wales but where there are concerns such

as the Public Service Ombudsman outlined this week, they need to be

addressed not like Labour's policy of brushing this under the carpet

such as we had in Mid Staffs. Andrew RT Davies,

thank you very much. It's that time of year again

where the Chancellor reveals what's in his red box as he

outlines his budget. But this morning, George Osborne has

been saying he'll have to make further cuts to public spending

because the global economy Joining me now are two people who've

seen many Chancellors come and go. Victoria Winckler from

the Bevan Foundation think tank, and Professor Patrick Minford who's

advised many of them Thank you both are coming in. When

you are here George Osborne saying there is less money about and they

will have to be further savings, what does that make you think?

First of all, the savings are not inevitable. This is a regime he has

imposed on himself. If we still accept he wants to make savings of

cuts as other people might call them, I think that makes me really

quite concerned. We see public services cost very much to the bone

now and we see welfare payments really going down and down to

individuals and making life difficult. I accept the Chancellor's

options are difficult but the prospect of more cuts is not one

that would make me happy. Do you think when we look at welfare cuts,

for example, those Kurds we have already seen has gone down as fat as

they can go. How damaging with any more cuts speakers Mike Weir to

start thinking about what is the innovative -- acceptable? We're not

far off the floor. Groups of people. The cuts to housing benefit, the

macro to disability benefits mean there is no moral fact any more. You

have advised a few Conservative chancellors in your time. If you had

the year of George Osborne what would it be? You have got a separate

George Osborne boss Mike Retallick from what he is delivering. It has

been much slower than the Retallick when implied. We started out in the

beginning of the recession with 10% of national income deficit. We're

down to just under five. Was to get into surplus by 2020. He slipped, he

was originally going to get it balanced by now. Leading figures

with a large pinch of salt. He is trying to put a more disciplined on

the public sector to deliver better solutions, more innovative

solutions. The cuts have succeeded in delivering less government

spending, more efficiency. That is fine. The bee problem is his tax

behaviour has been random. But there's a lot of complexity of the

tax system. He brought in a national living wage which looks like a

tremendous own goals as that will raise wages for the lowest paid by

40% by 2020. That looks like it could be a real problem for him.

This morning he was on the Andrew Marr programme and said further

efficiencies would form part of the savings. If you look at the

Whitehall departments that have seen huge swathes of cuts, they are down

to the bone already. In terms of efficiency savings.

We never really know with public spending. Little servants don't get

serious about changing the way they do things until they are faced with

no alternative. Then they discover better ways of delivering. They

become more efficient. The Treasury is an old hand at this. They say the

only way they can have the public servers to innovate is saying there

is no more money. Politics takes over the do the same thing. We

should take it with a pinch of salt. There are lots of ways in which

governments can be delivered cheaply. We are facing a growing

economy, he has done pretty well, George Osborne, in the performance

of the economy. Looking at what he might be able to play around with.

There was a manifesto commitments last year, a once to increase

personal allowance on tax to 12,000. Would that be something you would be

willing to see jettisoned in order to spend more on something like

welfare? The increase in personal allowance

is no greater benefits for people who are earning less than that

amount. There are a lot of people earning less than that. For people

earning just over that, it doesn't make a huge difference. For me, from

a social justice perspective, raising the tax allowance is not a

significant one. To keep that level and to be able to maintain

expenditure on some aspects of welfare benefits, some aspects of

the health service would be welcome. One of the things he could do, he

was to take the threshold for top earners to 50000 by 2020, if he

ditched that that is saving 6 billion. Is that the type of thing

he will have to look at? Ditching those tax cuts that Willie manifesto

commitment? I agree with Victoria on this business of the personal

allowance. It is a very cost ineffective way of helping lower

income people. This is where Osborne has got real problems. He doesn't

understand why tax credits are deficient to incentivise people into

the labour market. That is where he has got it wrong. The balance

between the national living wage and tax credit and personal allowance

which is a total waste of money. It doesn't affect the tax raise of the

people on low incomes stop it sounds to me like he has backed himself

into a corner because he doesn't have that much money for wiggle

room. What do you expect? What do expect he will pull out of the hat?

Nottingham North. He is going to raise insurance premium tax. He will

tax the banks again. It doesn't make a lot of sense. He has got himself

caught in this abolition of tax credits, through the universal cap

that is coming in. He has got himself into a corner. He had to

adjust, we have to have a new Chancellor to start again and get

this thing right. He has made a terrible mess of this area of

policy. Short of that nuclear, do you think it is something in terms

of fuel duty as the prices of oil has been falling and falling, we are

seeing less than a pound per litre diesel and petrol. My Bass might he

be looking about? I think there are also taxes that

there is a lot of support for. Tax and added sugar in food. Whole areas

of taxing he could be looking at and which could generate income and

reduce the harm. When we saw yesterday, half a million people

with disabilities are going to be effective now because of changes to

personal independence payments, when Osborne is so focused on getting to

grips with welfare bill and payments, you are talking about that

this morning, is a something he needs to do from eight public

spending points of view on visits a philosophical aim he has? It is

philosophical. He has got himself into a twist on this whole issue.

There are problems with welfare, now be reasonable limits. In the whole

structure of this thing we have to stick with tax credits. If he wants

to be a tax reform which he is the opposite, he needs to simplify the

tax system particularly at the top weather is a massive network of high

matter tax rates which he is able to drift in and that is a big problem.

It doesn't raise any revenue. He's got scope for that. If he focused on

that he will be a better Chancellor. Thank you both for coming in this

morning. We will have more on that on Wednesday on the budget on all of

BBC Wales's programme. Thanks for watching,

time to go back to Andrew. for years to come. Thank you very

much indeed. Now it is back to Andrew.

So, what's in store for us this week?

Well, just the small matter of George Osborne's Budget.

Another EU summit and the political diary's jam-packed with

Let's hear more from our Political Panel, and we're also

joined by the Conservative MP, David Davis.

100 days to go. Where are we at the moment in this campaign? Just on

polling, we are balanced with a large number of uncertainty. What

has happened in the last few weeks has been dominated with the flow of

events. Turkey has dominated peoples minds and that is what will happen

for most of the next 100 days. Events like that will force people.

Turkey is about security and immigration and so on. That is a

potential backdrop. If the Turkish deal begins to fall apart and the

migrant crisis continues, which almost certainly it will, that is

the kind of backdrop that is probably more helpful to your side

of the referendum than the other one? It is not an accident, a

structural outcome of the Schengen zone and the weakness of the eastern

border. On other fronts, the financial front, you have the Euro

structurally driving events. It seems to me the balance of

probabilities in the next 100 days will be those sorts of things are

actually going to favour a Brexit. For years and years, Mr Cameron, Mr

Osborne, Mr Hague and so on have been spewing out Eurosceptic

dialogue. Now they praise our membership of the EU! We cannot

survive without the EU. Doesn't that risk jarring a bit with the

electorate? I think it is absurd. We have a situation where the Prime

Minister gave a big speech at Chatham House. He said can if you

could not get the reforms, he would consider the alternative. Everything

was on the table. In two options can he would consider campaigning to

vote to leave. Now we are told if we left Britain, virtually

catastrophic. Plagues of locusts and we will probably all die. You cannot

say in November I will leave if I do not get my reforms and now say our

country will collapse. That cannot be true, otherwise he would have

been willing to leave the EU and risk economic collapse. I think it

is scare tactics by Project Fear and it has been very damaging. People

like me want Brexit but it is very damaging to the Conservative Party

and unity. Howdy you see the campaign going? It has been largely

dominated by the Vote Remain rather than the Vote Leave. Vote Remain

have chucked a lot at Vote Leave. Many reports have been pumped out.

They are in danger of using up all of that arguments for the race has

got going. It does look fairly balanced. Some polling has suggested

it leans a little towards the remaining side. Whenever people like

David or others say it is all Project Fear, for the silent group

of people and families with children who are not paying that much

attention, if you talk about fear at all, there is a slight sense of

maybe there is something to be fearful of after all. It works a

bit, I am sure it does, but for how long question that when the Danes

had their Euro referendum, the same thing happened. Eventually people

were going in for the mockery, as you were, saying we're going to have

a 17 foot high fence between us and Germany. That destroyed the campaign

for the one thing that has happened is the credibility of the Government

are doing has slipped quite a lot in the last few weeks and it is partly

because of the exaggeration. You have two friends getting slightly

nervous of it, slightly afraid of it, worrying about the risks. On the

other hand, they are starting to say, do we really believe all this

nonsense? That is the undetermined fact. It has not been a reasonable

debate about facts. Is it too early to see who has been nudging ahead?

What is significant is that David Davis has a tie in the colours of

Vote Leave. The other one is a green tie with black writing. This is an

issue of taste. I think what we are learning is the Brexit side is

winning skirmishes. The reason they are doing that is because they are

an insurgency. With an insurgency, it has six Cabinet ministers in it

and that is exciting. You will clearly set the news agenda. The

battle in the overall war, you would assume that Remain is nudging ahead

because the polling after the Prime Minister Pozner Diehl said voters

were impressed by that. Vote Leave have an incredibly simple and

incredibly powerful message. Take back control. You may well find that

message is so simple and so clear that that might achieve a cut

through. Is the queen on the Brexit side or not? I do not think anyone

is questioning she is a Eurosceptic. Even at the palace they are not

disputing that and the complaint may have made about the story in the Sun

newspaper last week. People have said she has in making these

comments for some time. Cabinet ministers have told me they do

similar things. This woman puts the mother bubble things -- the

Commonwealth above all things. She defends the laws and traditions of

this country as well. Not Brexit necessarily but Eurosceptic? That

seems incontrovertible. The palace and Number 10 are not disputing that

at all. It is great to have the Queen onside but I would like her to

have one vote. She does not have a vote at all. Is this more within the

Tory family question is it more bitter than you thought? Will it get

more bitter as time goes on? Even if Mr Cameron wins, he may find it hard

to put it together again. I do not think so. It is robust, pretty

robust. To some extent he sets the tone himself if he is rude about

Boris, there is a backlash. Some say he regards Boris in the same way he

regards Ed Balls. A scan and he cannot stop picking at it. This is

outside the house and takes quite a lot of poison out of it. It is

robust and fears. People are taking it incredibly seriously. How is

Boris doing? Pretty well. What is his real value? He draws attention

to the issue and adds credibility to it. He makes the odd mistake and

everyone forgives him for it. On balance, very useful and important.

What about cross-party appeal? The Government began by emphasising the

security implications of staying in, saying we needed to stay because of

security. I think they have found that a tough argument because people

do not associate EU with security. They will move on economic arguments

now. The problem with economic arguments is they are nowhere near

well-defined as clear and cut -- clearly cut as they were in 1975.

They want to make a big picture argument. David Cameron got this

deal on the Friday in Brussels. At 7:30pm, George Osborne was on the

today programme making a massive destiny economic security argument.

They know you cannot focus on the nitty-gritty of that. You have to

make the big picture argument. It is potentially a mixed picture. David

was saying earlier there is a major crisis in the Eurozone in the next

few months, then that could be difficult. You have the opt out full

stop when you are in government, there was an opt out from Britain

having to join the euro. There is a major crisis. Two European summits

in one week. That was not the case when we voted in 1975. The common

market was seen as a successful, economic unit that we needed to

join. The atmospherics are very different. For 20 years, it was the

most successful economic unit, until about the early 90s. Since then we

have got nothing. That is what people are seeing. We are moving on

to the economic arguments. We have the budget which frames it. They're

going to see Barack Obama coming here towards the end of April.

You'll be making the argument and doing several events, as I

understand it. He owes him a favour. Basically, what you're going to get

as a return to the security argument. Returning to where we

started this debate, you have got a situation where events will often

favoured the out side but the control and ability to stage managed

different moments is with the governments. -- the Government. They

published a letter with generals on it and have not signed it. One of

the generals came out this morning and said he was supporting the

Government. It is from the Scottish referendum playbook. That worked. We

saw Nicola Sturgeon struggling an hour ago, to explain basic, fiscal

point about an independent Scotland but that is why Scotland voted to

stay in the UK. You do not know whether the Government will have

that element of certainty. As things stand at the moment, are we in or

out? The last time I was here I cautiously gave numbers. I would

still cautiously stay in. Depressingly I feel we would remain.

In with a suppose so vote. None of you overly enthusiast take. We are

right on a knife edge in terms of public opinions. We live in a world

where the consensus opinion these days is usually wrong.

I'll be back next week, same time same place.

Remember if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.