10/04/2016 Sunday Politics Wales

Morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.

After a week of damaging questions over his financial affairs,

David Cameron tries to get on the front foot

by publishing details of his tax bills.

but no evidence he's avoided or evaded any tax.

Will it silence his critics or just spur them on?

We've got the details and the analysis.

The Prime Minister's bigger challenge

is still winning the EU referendum, and one of his key arguments

is that membership helps keep us safe.

We'll be talking to Defence Minister Penny Mordaunt,

And this should be Ukip's big moment, so why is the party

fighting among itself and facing an uncertain future?

We'll bring you the full account of what's going wrong inside Ukip.

Later in the programme: Where next for the Welsh economy?

As Tata waits to hear its fate, and doubts over the Circuit

of Wales, what would the political parties do to help?

All that and more coming up in the next hour and a quarter.

And when it comes to embarrassing admissions, PR blunders and having

we've decided to bring in the real experts.

Yes, it's Sam Coates, Beth Rigby and Isabel Oakeshott.

Luckily, their tax affairs are pretty simple,

but that's mainly because we pay them so badly.

Without a doubt, it's been a pretty miserable time

He's been on the defensive since Monday, when his father

was linked to the so-called Panama Papers, leaked documents

which showed how the rich and powerful use

It's led to thousands protesting outside Downing Street

For the first time, his approval ratings

Yesterday, Mr Cameron acknowledged he'd handled the affair badly,

and overnight Number 10 published the headlines of his personal income

tax returns for the past six years, including the tax he's paid.

So what, if anything, has he done wrong?

Well, we'll attempt to answer that question this morning,

but first here's a reminder of how the story unfolded.

The Panama Papers contain links to 12 current or former heads of state

and government. In the UK, attention has focused on David Cameron and an

offshore investment fund which is late father, Ian Cameron, set up in

the early 1980s. Blairmore was incorporated in one tax saving,

Panama, but based in another, the Bahamas. He used a financial

instrument to protect investors per' privacy, then legal, but since

outlawed in the UK. At on Monday whether the Prime Minister had

personally benefited from the company, Downing Street said it was

a private matter. On Tuesday, Mr Cameron tried to draw a line under

it all, saying I have no shares, no offshore trusts, no offshore funds,

nothing like that. Later that day, Downing Street

sent a clarification - to be clear, the Prime Minister,

his wife and their children do not benefit from

any offshore funds. On Wednesday, a fourth statement

was issued by Downing Street - there are no offshore funds,

trusts which the Prime Minister, Mrs Cameron or their children

will benefit from in future. Under increasing pressure,

David Cameron gave an interview to ITV on Thursday in which he

revealed that he had sold his shares in Blairmore in 2010

for just over ?30,000. The Prime Minister said the profits

and dividends he and his wife Samantha made from the investment

were subject to all UK taxes in normal ways,

and legal opinion suggests Mr Cameron has done

nothing illegal. But he has faced intense criticism

over his handling of the story. says this has undermined the trust

that we have in him. Mr Cameron has now published

the headlines of his tax returns, They show that in addition

to ?300,000 that he received after his father's death

in September 2010, his mother gave him two gifts

of ?100,000 each in 2011. Downing Street has

vigorously denied suggestions that this was done

to minimise tax paid on the estate. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn

and Energy Secretary Amber Rudd have both been talking about this

on the Marr show this morning, we need to know what he has

actually returned as a tax return. We need to know why he put this

money overseas in the first place and whether he made anything out

of it or not before 2010, These are questions

that he must answer. is that the Prime Minister and

his family have done nothing wrong. I mean, the independent tax expert

at the start of this programme confirmed that,

lots of independent tax experts We're joined now by our economics

editor Kamal Ahmed, he's been You have been a busy man! For the

first time ever we have seen a Prime Minister's tax returns, at least the

headlines, what have we led? Well, it is interesting, isn't it? David

Cameron has gone from suggesting a mere six days ago that this was a

private matter to a sort of tax shock and awe, I will put it all out

there, people can make decisions on the details. I have been scribbling

down the details, and there is a lot there. It shows that he has earned

over ?1 million since he has been Prime Minister, not just from his

prime ministerial salary, but from other income, rental income. He has

paid tax of about ?400,000, an effective rate of about 37%, which

would be pretty normal. As we said at the top of the programme, he has

revealed these two payments from his mother of ?100,000 each, which were

gifted to him after his father died. And in the previous year he had

300,000 from his father, as an inheritance. Downing Street said

that his mother made the payments to the Prime Minister because his older

brother had inherited the house, and she was trying to even up the sort

of inheritance as it was shared out. As you look at that, the experts

saying there was any kind of tax dodge involved in this, either from

the estate or with the Prime Minister? I think the whole issue is

what is avoidance and what is sensible tax planning. If you think

that putting your savings into an Isa is tax avoidance, because it is

tax free in terms of your investments, then you will probably

think that this type of gifting is some form of tax avoidance. The only

time it would become tax avoidance is it David Cameron's mother dies,

this is a horrible way to have a conversation, but this is how the

tax law works. If she dies before 2018, there is a seven year limit on

gifts to your children. Her estate would pay the tax, and her children

would have a share of a smaller pot of money. But the tax was put in

place there two when sure that any gifts that are given, if they are

given within seven years of the parents dying, still become liable

for inheritance tax. So I think that the one big point is that David

Cameron, as do nearly everybody, particularly if they are wealthy,

has planned his tax affairs so that he pays no more tax than is

necessary. Now, people might think that is morally wrong, but... He

once said it was morally wrong, did he not? He was talking about

aggressive tax avoidance. This is currently! This is very simple, very

vanilla, things that would be available to anybody. I think what

he was trying to say, all the difference that Downing Street would

argue, was that it is different from the pop stars and the people in

entertainment who used complicated funding mechanisms to avoid tax. And

this, which is normal tax planning, in terms of what your tax adviser,

if you are wealthy, would say to you. It is a watershed in British

politics, two CDs tax returns, but are we not in danger of making too

much out of them? -- to see these tax returns. I do not suggest the

prime and has -- the minister has done anything wrong, but if you

have, it would not be in your tax return. There is no suggestion that

he has done anything wrong, but the watershed issue is around the

long-held belief in law that your tax affairs are private. And what

this has done is opened up, I would suggest, every Cabinet minister,

every member of the government to the notion that they will have to

publish not just this year's tax returns but six years of tax

returns. And if they do not, the question will be, why are you not

doing that? The Cabinet will be over the moon about that(!) Let's cut to

the chase, it is almost did the Chancellor will have to publish his

tax returns. I think so. There was an attempt to shut down the story

once and for all by saying, here are his tax returns, the Prime Minister

has done nothing wrong, but they have let the genie out of the

bottle. The Chancellor will now be under pressure, other Cabinet

ministers will be under pressure. Jeremy Corbyn was suggesting that

people in public life more broadly should have to publish their tax

returns. So it is a big moment in terms of transparency and demand is

from the public for transparency, but if you think about it, this

began with the MPs expenses, I would argue, and ever since then the

public trust in politicians and in the way they behave has been on the

slide, and this is a continuation of that, a continuation of the demand

for transparency. John McDonnell has told the BBC, we will ensure that

any donor linked to the Labour Party will not be using devices to evade

tax. Good luck on that(!) HMRC have trouble figuring that out. This has

a wider political significance, we are running up to the European

referendum, the Prime Minister is mainly seen as the main asset in the

Remain campaign, it is not great news when he is being dragged

through the news like this. Luff, this is as bad a week of headlines I

can remember since the Prime Minister entered office. -- no. It

has not resulted in anyone being able to level an accusation that the

Prime Minister that would stand up in a court of law. There is no

suggestion that anyone is credibly making that he aggressively avoided

tax. The question is, if that is the case, how has it ended up getting

quite so bad for David Cameron? And I think at the heart of it has been

an inability of Downing Street really to explain properly to people

what is going on here, and I think that they are still, even morning,

struggled to explain why, if he was doing nothing wrong, his father

needed to set up a company in the Bahamas that used this anonymous

form of company liability. That was the weakest part of the Prime

Minister's statement in the week, that this investment vehicle,

Blairmore, had not been set up to mitigate or avoid tax. I mean, if

you register in Panama and operate out of the Bahamas, I mean, what

else are you doing?! That is paid of the absurd, and we know that Ian

Cameron made a living out of offering this sort of advice to very

wealthy clients, and there was nothing wrong with that. When he set

up his business, the political climate was absolutely different to

what it is today. There was nothing wrong with what he was doing then.

It was simply absurd of David Cameron to suggest that it was not

set up for those reasons. I disagree about the weakest point, I think

that was the private matter, you know, when David Cameron's

spokeswoman suggested that this was a private matter, it all went

downhill from there. I think today the headlines about inheritance tax

and whether this is some kind of dodgy avoidance or evasion is

something of a red herring. He has not, as Kamal said, done anything

wrong, it is very standard practice, and there is a world of difference

between evasion and avoidance. There is nothing fishy about this in

particular. Kamal, you have been following this, the political

ramifications still huge in that even if he loses the referendum, he

is going, this will encourage, but even if he wins, the Tory party may

see him, although we has done nothing wrong, as part of the

walking wounded. On this issue, which has been interesting, the

Conservative Party has lined up behind him. He has not been

attacked, as he has over other issues, like George Osborne's Budget

or Tata Steel, so this has been quite a unifying moment for the

Conservative Party, interestingly. What it does that is dangerous is it

makes the referendum much more of a vote about David Cameron, which is

the last thing that people in Number Ten want it to be. Another busy

weekend of you! Now is the UK safer in or out

of the European Union? It's one of the central questions

in the referendum debate Does membership help protect

us against terrorist attacks, And are the big foreign policy

challenges, like those posed by Russia or Iran,

better tackled through the EU or with our other

international partners alone? giving his view

earlier in the week. We draw our strength

as a country from the fact we are the fifth-biggest economy

in the world, we have a special relationship with the United States,

we are members of Nato, the G7, but we also get

some strength from being in the European Union,

the organisation for our continent that actually helps us,

whether it is confronting Iran and making sure we don't have

Iranian nuclear weapons, whether it is standing up

to Vladimir Putin and his aggression in Ukraine, we are stronger

by being part of this organisation. I'm joined now by a member

of the Cameron government, the Armed Forces Minister

Penny Mordaunt. She's campaigning for Britain

to vote to leave the EU. The Prime Minister, the Defence

Secretary, 12 former British defence chiefs all say our security is

enhanced by remaining in. Those job titles, baked not

arguments. I am very clear, having worn a uniform, three years on the

House of Commons defence committee, being an aid worker in the former

Eastern Bloc, we would be safer outside the EU. They are responsible

for our security. One of them is your boss, that is his title. They

think we are safer in. There is a lot of things we agree on. We agree

that Nato is the cornerstone of our defence, but that the EU defence

structures condiment that. If we were outside the EU, we would not

lose anything from those structures. The common European defence policy

and the procurement opportunities, the opportunities to partake in

missions, they are open to non-EU member states and Nato, so we don't

lose anything by leaving. We would gain massively the ability to take

that control of our borders, just one example, if we were outside.

Let's take the issue of what we would lose. Michael Fallon, you are

in his department, he is a Eurosceptic, he says, if we left, it

would be smaller and weaker, which is precisely what Vladimir Putin

wants. He wants the EU to be smaller and weaker. You cannot deny that.

The key issue is, what is the operational benefit that being in

the EU or taking part in any of the defence structures and security

structures that it plans on setting up, like a pan European intelligence

agency, what is the benefit of that? I would argue there is none, and it

frustrates our ability to share intelligence. We don't share

intelligence with pan-European agencies, we share it with other

nations are. I did not ask about that. I asked a geopolitical

question, your boss says the EU would be smaller and weaker if we

left, and that is precisely what the Kremlin wants. Do you deny that? In

a time of austerity, when we are facing massive terror threats, if we

are spending time, money and energy on anything that does not give as an

operational advantage and a benefit in tackling those threats, that is

crazy. Do you deny that it would leave us smaller and weaker and that

is what Vladimir Putin wants? No. The thing that. Any malicious

ambitions that anybody has against us, the Ukraine, other member states

of the European Union is the success, the economic prosperity,

the National security of those nation states. That is what will

hold the threat that we are facing from Vladimir Putin and elsewhere.

Philip Hammond says, it is only our enemies who want us to leave. Can

you name a single ally that want us to leave? I can. People have

different views in different nations. That is take our strongest

ally, the United States. They want us to stay. That is what Barack

Obama has said, but I would argue strongly, and there are many people

there that would agree with me, the former head of the CIA is one,

thinks that the EU is requiring of us of restricting our alliance with

the United States. The official policy of America under Republican

and Democratic presidents has been that we should stay in. That is a

fact. That is their view, but it is not an argument. I asked if you

could name a major or minor ally that we have that want us to leave.

I have mentioned the United States. They want us to stay. Give me an

ally that want us to leave. Australia, New Zealand, Canada,

France, Germany? Our key relationships, they fully

understand... Our relationship with them is threatened by legislation

and requirements of the EU. The most sophisticated intelligence alliance

in the world involves Britain, America, Australia, New Zealand,

Canada, they want us to stay. I think they are wrong. The

relationship that we have with them would be jeopardised and would be

further jeopardised when we set up... That is their view. You have

mentioned Nato, the general secretary says a strong EU with a

strong Britain is good for Nato. The head of the US Army in Europe says

leaving could weaken Nato. There are people that will argue that Nato is

undermined by the EU structures. Not the head of Nato. The EU defence

structures that we have complemented. But they are not

closed off to us by leaving. The key issue about the threats we are

facing, the threats that come with free movement of people and also

with civil unrest on the continent, will be resolved by us leaving, by

taking back control of our borders, our laws and money. And

kick-starting reform in the EU. All of the parties that want us to

leave, they are protectionist, xenophobic, authoritarian, against

the single market, and they hope by us leaving, there will be chaos in

Europe. Is that the chaos that would be good for our security? Vladimir

Putin, you have mentioned, the rise of far right organisations in

Europe, as a consequence of the forced harmonisation of the euro and

the austerity and the problems that is bringing to member states, they

have their arguments. They are not on my side, they are mistaken. What

will ensure that those malicious ambitions against us are thwarted is

if we have strong nation states. That is not what Europe is currently

delivering. It is delivering weak states, states that don't have the

money to put into their defence. The Prime Minister, the Defence

Secretary, the Foreign Secretary, the head of Nato, the head of the US

Army in Europe, all of our major allies, starting with America, think

we are more secure and they would be more secure if we stay in, and you,

a junior minister in the defence Department, say they are wrong. If

they were all lined up in front of me, I would say freedom is never a

gamble. We have gambled a huge amount in the past to preserve our

freedom, we risk nothing by trying to take it back. If we take back

control of our borders, we have got free movement of people, with the

risk that brings... We are running out of time. In what way with being

outside the EU make it easier for us to stop terrorists coming in?

Europol estimate we have 5000 Daesh fighters that have returned to

Europe. Unless we have concrete intelligence, we cannot turn them

back. Are you saying that other Europeans would now need a visa to

come to this country? How would you stop somebody with a European

passport to come in? We could have control. We don't have those options

now. If we had suspicions, we would stop them coming in. That is not

correct. We stopped about 6000 people from the EU. On matters of

security issues of public danger, we stopped around 500 a year, we can do

that now, whether they have an EU passport or not. If we have sketchy

intelligence, we cannot prevent them from coming in. Unless you have a

Visa system from France and Germany, you could not direct. We risk

nothing by taking back control of our borders and our laws that

underpin this framework. It is not a gamble, staying in is a gamble,

because it will only get worse. We have to take back control, that is

what is required to keep our nation safe. Has the controversy around the

Prime Minister damaged his credibility as leader of the Remain

campaign? I don't think so. I don't have any other inside scoop, but I

don't think he has done anything wrong. What this is about is trust

and he has two now demonstrate and builder up that trust and report

with the general public. This will raise questions, as your panel said,

about politicians publishing further information about themselves, and

although I understand argument around privacy and security, if that

is what the electorate require of their officials, that is what will

have to happen. We're now well into the campaign

period for local and national elections

across the UK on May 5th. With the Conservatives and Labour

not exactly united at the moment you might think it's a perfect

opportunity for Ukip, the party that won four million

votes at last year's Even more so when the elections

are being fought during an EU referendum campaign

Nigel Farage helped bring about. So why instead are the men and women

of his party so bitterly divided? All political parties have ups

and downs, but mostly Ukip has been climbing the ladder

of British politics. It's poised on the verge

of a referendum it helped secure, offering the very thing the party

was set up for. So why is it so short of funds

and riven with in-fighting? Once-dominant Nigel Farage has lost

control of parts of his party. The clearest example is being foiled

by the party's ruling body over his prefered candidates

for May elections in Wales. In particular, his desire to stop

the selection of Neil Hamilton, Electoral concerns about Mr Hamilton

are not new in Ukip. The Sunday Politics has

been given a series In January 2015, Mr Hamilton

complained to Nigel Farage he'd been branded as toxic by some

inside the party. Michael McGough, a general-election

candidate, emailed Mr Hamilton In every article that you feature,

your name has the appendage "disgraced former Tory MP",

and sadly this will continue. And on the same day an email

from the then-party treasurer Andrew Reid accused Mr Hamilton,

by then a longstanding Ukip-er, of behaving exactly

as he'd been portrayed.. If you looked at the Welsh assembly

elections, those are a great example of their tendency to shoot itself in

the foot. You have some very Eurosceptic areas, but yet Ukip has

become embroiled in a dispute over which of its candidates should stand

where and whether it should be standing former Conservatives in

mainly industrial parts of the country.

The infighting didn't stop with Neil Hamilton,

with 16 candidates signing a letter demanding that another candidate,

Gareth Bennett, be deselected because he had expressed a negative

view of other candidates, undermined the party

and our own ability to campaign through his offensive

and borderline-racist comments about immigrants to Wales.

The party's National Executive Council did not deselect him and two

other candidates have since stood down.

Nigel Farage has been repeatedly outvoted by the NEC,

leading Mr Farage to consider abolishing it.

However, the Sunday Politics has learned just this week

a representative of the NEC hostile to Nigel Farage angrily accosted

a Welsh Ukip staffer in the Cardiff office,

saying, "I've come to find which faction you are in,

And Neil isn't the only colleague Nigel has fallen out with.

Just two weeks ago, Suzanne Evans, seen by many as one of the party's

best performers, ended up in the extraordinary position

of taking the party to the High Court to overturn

a suspension that also barred her from standing

If people cannot come together and unite behind the main principles of

the party, maybe they are in the wrong party and they should take

their personal career ambitions to another party.

On top of this, insiders have told the Sunday Politics Ukip's in severe

Staff have been laid off, or unpaid for months,

membership is down and candidates are expected to contribute

in the thousands to their own campaigns.

Stuart Wheeler, a donor who's given Ukip over 600K in the past six

years, told us he hasn't donated to the party since last year and has

Paul Sykes, who contributed to Ukip's 2014 European elections

campaign, is no longer funding the party.

Ukip doesn't control the funding Parliament gives to an opposition

Currently 212K a year, that's controlled by the party's

one MP, Douglas Carswell, who turned down the original sum

of 670K and as a result fell out with Nigel Farage.

We've learned that until recently the security bill for Mr Farage

around a third of all monthly membership fees.

The sum may now be lower, and is not now funded by the party.

The party also paid Facebook ?90,000 in the year of the general election.

Senior figures are split, supporting rival campaigns

for leaving the European Union, both vying to be

Nigel Farage is determined that it will be Grassroots Out rather

than rivals Vote Leave that wins that designation, to be

One donor who is still giving to Ukip, ?50,000 to the Welsh

campaign last week, is Arron Banks, a key figure in Grassroots Out.

We have been told by numerous sources that Nigel Farage wants

to restructure and revamp Ukip after the referendum,

and that they think Arron Banks would be chairman

I did not say rebranded as much, but I have watched the five Star

Movement in Italy, basically, an online party, where people can join

for modest sums of money, but have a say in choosing the direction of the

party, a sense that the old membership models are a bit

outdated. His critics think he extends

that view to the NEC. His supporters say such

a digital model would also make this troublesome body for Mr Farage

redunant and let him take back control of a party that right now

is far from at ease with itself. And we're joined in the studio

now by Neil Hamilton, he's a former deputy chairman

of Ukip, and he's hoping to become one of the party's first members

of the Welsh Assembly. Welcome to the programme. Ukip was

created to bring about a referendum on the EU, you have got one, why is

the party in such chaos? It is a fantastic achievement for Ukip to

have brought this referendum to the people of Britain, but Ukip has

grown up very rapidly in the last few years. It is only in the last

four or five years that it has become a mainstream political party,

and I suppose... These are the growing pains of such a party. It is

basically about jockeying for position, and you get these personal

feuds in all parties. I lived through the Major government and the

Thatcher government, where we saw it in spades, this is nothing compared

to the Conservative Party. A crucial issue that has exposed the visions

within the party, which of the rival campaign should get the official

designation from the Electoral Commission, which one do you want to

get it? Well, I have taken a neutral position all along, because we have

to work with whoever gets the designation, and I am a great

admirer of Arron Banks, he has made a fantastic contribution. There can

only be one. Years Nigel's preferred vehicle. I am asking your view. I am

ambivalent, I will unite behind whoever gets the designation, the

Electoral Commission will announce the decision in the coming weeks, so

this will be an argument in the past. How much trouble is there

between Mr Farage and the party's ruling national executive committee?

Well, Nigel is a member of and a frequent at tender at the NEC.

Because he is the party leader and a strong and dominant individual,

without whom Ukip is -- would not be where it is today, it does not mean

he get his way on everything, we are a Democratic Party. The NEC is a

vigorous forum for debate, that is a healthy situation. Will he try to

change that after the referendum, will there be a Farage coup? Just

because you read it in the newspapers does not mean it is true,

of course! I have no window into Nigel's mind on this. Should he? I

am not seeing anybody who knows anything about this, apart from

whoever wrote the piece in the having done post. Should he continue

as leader? He was elected just two years ago, he can go on for three

years before going for re-elections. I am asking for your view. I think

he will continue as leader beyond the referendum. The world after the

referendum will be a very different kettle of fish... I am asking your

view, should he continue as leader after the referendum? I think there

will be a widespread re-evaluation of work Ukip is after the

referendum. We are going to win seats in the Welsh Assembly, the

Scottish Government and the Northern Ireland Assembly, and we will then

have various representatives... Let me try one more time, after the

referendum, should he step down? Should there be a new leader, in

your view? I am not going to call for Nigel to stand down, I am

perfectly certain that if there were an election for leader, party

members would vote for Nigel overwhelmingly. This is a nonissue.

When was the last time you spoke to him? Several weeks ago, when he came

to the NEC meeting last month. You used to be great mates. We still

are, it is like a married couple who have been together quite a long

time, you have ups and downs, he throws China at me, I figured up and

put it on the mantelpiece. He blocked you from standing in the

general election, you were removed as deputy chairman in February, he

wanted you off the list in Wales, all part of the division and chaos

that Farage and Hamilton dynamic. Ukip is a life political

institution, people have... There are personality feuds and

difficulties. I do not think we lose anything by saying that we are

normal red-blooded individuals and have the same kind of tips that

other parties have. Ukip is strengthened by these kinds of

scraps, I think. We heard some of the e-mails about you, does it

disturb you that some members regard you as a controversial, even a toxic

vigour in the party? Well, this is all exaggerated. It is just tittle

tattle. That was one e-mail amongst many thousands of e-mails I have

had. There were several e-mails, articles said that your name has the

appendage disgraced former Tory MP. Hearty members do not seem to be too

bothered about that, because they voted for me in overwhelming numbers

to be the candidate in the Welsh assembly in my region. -- party

members. I topped the poll in the national executive elections with

the highest number of votes anybody has ever got in an NEC election. I

would have thought it may be a lesson learned, expenses. That was a

misrepresentation, and the innuendo was entirely dismissed after an

internal investigation. So you did not claim for staying at your wife's

place? I am not going to go into what I did or did not claim for in

my expenses when I was the Ukip campaign director. I had a pay

package which was agreed, and all my pay and expenses were legitimate.

You know, the key point here is that Ukip is now a major player in the

land, we will elect ten members to the Welsh assembly... You have said

that, and you hope to be one of them. Would you ever see yourself as

the future leader of Ukip? At my age, your age? We are

contemporaries! I do not see myself as a future leader. That is be

enough, Neil Hamilton. It's just gone 11:35,

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

edition of Sunday Politics Wales. The old political adage goes,

"it's the economy, stupid." It's certainly dominated debate

so far in the Assembly election There are big questions

about the fate of one of our biggest industries,

steel, along with continuing arguments over the M4 relief road

and the Circuit of Wales scheme. In a moment I'll be asking the main

parties what they would do to help, It has been a very tough couple

of weeks for the Welsh economy. The problems of the steel industry

have been known for months but

the decision of Tata to sell off its British plants, including

Port Talbot, was a body blow. How much help is needed

from the UK and Welsh And what will these plants be

producing in future? The answers to those

questions are vital to the thousands who work

in steel in Wales. Last week there was more bad news

for job prospects in the The Circuit of Wales was supposed

to create 6,000 jobs in Ebbw Vale and the surrounding area but

the Welsh government's decision not to underwrite the entire ?350

million private initiative means it These are just too albeit

important elements -- two of the Welsh economy but there are

other causes for concern. Back in December,

official statistics showed that not only less

is produced for every person working in Wales

but also the economy here has grown less

than the UK average. The sad truth is that Wales

punches well below its weight, with 5% of the UK

population, it produces only 3.4% of Joining me now to discuss all that

are five party stalwarts all brimming with ideas

to improve the situation. Eluned Morgan speaks for Labour,

David Melding for the Conservatives and Eluned Parrott for

the Liberal Democrats. Thank you all for coming in this

morning. I will start with just a quick pitch, 30 seconds. What would

you do to turn around the Welsh economy?

Starting with Eluned Parrott? If we are to catch up with the other UK

nations, we have to do something different. We can't copy what

everyone else is doing and expected to have a different result. We want

a Welsh develop the bank that has the aim is to help small businesses

to grow, bring together funding and advice. Secondly, to provide an

export advice service, an office that would help pitch for business

for Wales outside in the world. Thirdly, an investment bank on that

would bring in investment for infrastructure projects. Then to

make sure everyone has an opportunity to get involved in our

economy. We want to double the number of apprenticeships so people

have an opportunity for the future. Sam Gould, what about Ukip? We want

to devolve economic development to local councils so that local people

can have a say in what they want done in their local areas. By doing

that we would have more local influence over business rates and

see competitiveness on those rates for small businesses. Also, I feel

that we need to scrap the Severn Bridge tolls, which is a massive

deterrent for trade in South Wales in particular and by doing so, that

will encourage more trade between England and Wales.

David Melding, what about the Conservatives? Our economy needs

more enterprise and infrastructure. The small and medium-sized sector,

we need to look at it and reduce the cost for businesses such as business

rates, better training and support. Inward investment- looking after

those that come in better and also marketing Wales more effectively so

we can draw more inward investment. Taking the London and south-east

market seriously as well. A good presence in London would help so

that we can market Wales effectively. The M4 needs to be

sorted and we need to move quickly on that and electrification and

other major infrastructure. Adam Price, what is Plaid Cymru 's

point? The challenge to the Welsh economy

is that the wealth creating of the economy is too small, only 40% of

jobs in the private sector and 60% in the public sector so we have to

reverse that ratio, by identifying the growth markets and the growth

businesses we can support in terms of creating jobs. We do that through

taking it out of the hands of civil servants who are risk averse and

clueless, often, and giving it to a specialist agency. Thank you. And

Eluned Morgan for Labour? We have to build on some of the

successes. We have record inward investment, the best since records

began. We have got youth unemployment dropping faster than

the rest of the UK but we do need to go further and build the skills base

and that is why we are hoping to create an extra 100,000 traineeships

for young people but on top of that, I think it is important we focus on

the small and medium-sized enterprises, releasing them. Three

quarters of them will be released from paying business rates and that

has been promised in the Labour manifesto. We have to focus on the

city regions, building them with links from the valleys into the

cities. The same thing in Swansea. Let's not forget North Wales and

West Wales. There is a development plan for North Wales and we need to

also focus on the west. We will come onto North and West

Wales in a moment but first, the dominating economic problem for

Wales at the moment, Tata steel. Where do you see the problem and the

solution is? It is extremely worrying for

everyone involved in the steel industry and communities around them

but the first thing we have to do is make sure we stop the Chinese from

dumping steel. How? First of all, the Tory government have been

blocking initiatives in Brussels so we have to go much further on that.

Make sure we can do something about the cost of energy, releasing them

from that. We need to stand by them and make sure that we can go as far

as possible but let's be realistic. I would like to see, if nobody steps

in, a temporary nationalisation if necessary. Let's be clear. The Welsh

government does not have the kind of money necessary. It would have to be

the UK Government. That accusation Eluned Morgan meant

about Conservatives blocking initiatives. Is the more the

government could have done? The UK Government has but you need

to be selective in what you aim for because you could spark a more

general trade war with a big impact in lots of other industries so these

are very difficult things to juggle. It is right that we are taking a

serious look at this, especially on the Chinese steel products. All the

solutions need to be looked at but we need a buyer that can come in and

take on the whole process and that needs to be the concentration for

the next month or six weeks. Is there a problem with saying that

all options have to be considered, apart from the people saying but not

nationalisation. I think those of us suggesting some form of

nationalisation see it as a temporary factor. I am not going to

take a stance that says if we could get a buyer within a year that the

particular approach should be used but I take a lot of convincing that

nationalisation should be the right way forward because if you are

certain you are going to get a buyer, you can just work that

forward. Sam Gould, part of the problem is

the import of cheap Chinese steel. What we don't want to get into is a

huge trade war with the Chinese when the amount of steel we send to China

isn't all that much. The US put a massive tariffs on

steel from China and they have been able to protect the dumping of

Chinese steel so what we need is the European Parliament in Brussels and

EU commission to protect Welsh steel and protect it from Chinese dumping.

It is a major concern but we also need to look at business rates,

which have been devolved for over a year to the Welsh government. Carter

is paying ?10 million in business rates every year, a phenomenal

amount. It is very difficult for those business rates to be cut

specifically for Tata because of the trade laws. The UK Government can

then look at energy prices. Plaid Cymru said a few months ago

that part nationalisation should be considered but as we have been

hearing, the money isn't in the hands of the worst government. Is it

something he would be pushing for? We were calling for a contingency

plan and the only political party doing that. We could foresee the

potential of Tata walking away. Other governments have been

sluggish. Now isn't the time for making party political points

because we need to work together but I would like to see the Welsh

government laying a more proactive role. It is good they have sat down

with Liberty Stadium but they should be talking to the other buyers, the

group from Switzerland that they know from the deal they looked at in

Milford Haven. Particularly the management buyout, the local

management input target that drew up the McKinsey plan that they believe

shows a credible path to profitability, let's depth behind --

get behind them. And also, possibly, taking a stake as part of a

long-term sustainable plan for the steel industry in Wales.

Eluned Parrott, what do you think would be the Liberal Democrat

response to the way forward on this? We need a long-term strategy. The

steel workers in Wales don't want to be lurching from crisis to crisis so

it isn't just about the immediate short-term, though it is crucial we

don't let the fires go out in Port Talbot but we have to look at the.

In terms of the of the steel industry, they have drawn up a

5-point plan that they drew up with the governments but not a single one

of those points has been completed by either government. I am not

impressed by the ?60 million promotion by Carwyn Jones because

?30 million of that is a loan with no cash up front and the rest of it

was a business rates scheme but it was applying to an enterprise zone

in Port Talbot which may not even include the sight of the steelworks

so it is possible that half of that money, ?30 million, actually went

benefit steelworks in Wales. We need proactive action to avoid those laws

that you are concerned about. We need to take a benefit to the whole

of the Welsh economy and it provides more markets and opportunities for

Welsh steel. It is one thing the Welsh government could and should

have done and they should have done it a year ago.

I know we were discussing it in terms of Tata, business rates, but

enjoyed something the worst government does control, David

Melding, do you think it should be used as a weapon to give a boost to

the economy? I think the worst government and UK

Government can do some things to help ameliorate the situation and

make it a bit more competitive but there are big market forces and the

fact the world economy is suffering. Beyond Tata? You can't change the

fundamentals necessarily but you can equip business with better skills,

power generation, perhaps. There are things you can do but you need to

target your help effectively so that it is really going to change things

in the long-term. Where would you target your help?

Helping with business rates is something. At the minute, the more

they invest, the higher the business rates will be. Energy generation and

greener energy is a real challenge and I think the state could help

there. More effective procurement. I think that is really important and

if we are getting on the, there could be local markets forced

products as well. Part of some of the issues that in

an apparent -- Eluned Parrott raises is important. We have a ministerial

cheque-book and it isn't used with any logical consistency so we have

an ?80 million deal for a conference Centre in Newport, which is fine,

but only ?30 million put on the table to save our biggest company...

What would you be your plan? I want to hear about party plans rather

than... We need a coherent approach and we need to look at getting an

equity stake so the taxpayer gets a return and we are a proper partner

to business. We seem to be using the same strategy of the 1970s and 1980s

where it is governments giving out grant aid rather than working

alongside companies and management and workforce together to create a

sustainable, long-term strategy for the Welsh economy.

What kind of support do you think small and medium businesses and

Wales need? The market to be more competitive

and to do that, we need a review in terms of the way business rates are

managed and in terms of EU state rules, limiting the amount that can

be intervened in. In terms of procurement, EU procurement rules

limit us from having a preference for Welsh and British steel and many

of the purchases for Army personnel vehicles are using foreign steel so

I think that is a limitation wherein under EU law, we can't buy from our

businesses. What about the suggestion the

government is going to tighten up rules so we can have a preference

for British steel? We can't do that under the EU so we

are so limited by what we can do while we are members of the European

Union. Managing business rates we will do a lot more. Then we will

have more competitiveness in Wales. Eluned Morgan, on the support that

the parties can give to small and medium businesses, he said it would

be a central part of the Labour pitch.

What will it be? We are going to reduce business rates for three

quarters of small businesses in Wales, and the response has been

fantastic. People will breathe a sigh of relief. I think we have to

be clear that Tata is losing ?1 million a day. We have a

responsibility to look after taxpayers many and what we have to

do is be more realistic about procurement -- taxpayers money.

There are laws within the EU, of course, but if you take it within

the life cycle of a plant, there are ways around this. Italy does it very

creatively and we can be creative as well. I don't think the UK

Government has... How can you be more creative? In

your procurement rules, rather than having an immediate, how much does

this cost? You look at it over the long term of the whole cycle of the

investment planned. If you are looking at ropes, how long will it

take and how long will that investment last? That is what they

have done in Italy and it has been highly successful so we could be

more creative in our procurement. Wales has taken a lead in terms of

procurement, securing from Welsh companies. We need to be creative

and that means investment. The Conservative government have cut-off

investment for a number of years now. We haven't done that in Wales.

We have been investing almost ?2 billion in our infrastructure in

Wales and we have got to remember that what we have done is to use

procurement as a tool to really build the top unease within Wales.

We have to be more creative -- the world companies.

What about the M4 relief road, if it does go ahead? David Melding, you

mentioned infrastructure the earlier on. ?1 billion on the M4 relief road

is using all the government borrowing. Is it the best use of

money? It is the main route into the Welsh

economy. There is also a key road in North Wales but so much of the Welsh

economy is concentrated close to the M4. So we really need to sort this

out and greedy route and start work. And use all the money on it? Not

giving any other money to any other road?

We need to sort out the M4 relief road and we need wider

infrastructure development as well but this is a key project and the

most important one. Eluned Parrott? I don't agree with

spending ?1 billion on just one small corner of Wales. We need to

make sure the infrastructure investment goes across Wales and

many of our most deprived communities are not in the

south-east of Wales. I want to see us taking a more broad stance

towards infrastructure investment and ask ourselves is not how we can

build a road but how can we make sure that people and goods can move

freely around our own area and into and out of various? Then you start

thinking more about investment that we should be making in our public

transport, investment we should be making in things like ports and

infrastructure, supporting those. We should also be making investment in

rail hubs so that more goes on freight.

Is it too much money to be spent on one project?

It is indeed. We don't favour the most expensive route but we favour

the alternative view route, which would cost around ?300 million to

instruct. It is a significant amount of money and there is need for

development in terms of that road but the entire rates network across

Wales is in desperate need of investment. We need to share it out

and we need to see it now. By scrapping the Severn Bridge tolls we

were also further infrastructure and commerce across Wales and also into

England, which is our biggest trading partner within Wales. In

terms of that, we need to ensure that there is massive development

and also in terms of waste, we will come to grips soon but there was a

massive overspend on foreign aid, enough to keep Tata open for seven

months. When it comes to these expending

projects, is there too much emphasis on the south and south-east of

Wales? Absolutely. We are in danger of

Wales becoming a microcosm of the core problem of the UK economy,

which is the overheated corner in the south-east that is relatively

prosperous and the rest of Wales unfortunately sees itself declining.

If we are going to solve our economic problems, we need balanced

development. We can point at bottlenecks. Look at the A55, the M4

further west. You are right, Sam, in terms of our strategic road network.

It is crying out for investment and concentrating on 16 miles of a new

three lane motorway is not going to help prize is out of the economic

rut we are in as a nation. If you are talking about an overall

spending on infrastructure throughout Wales, that is a huge

undertaking in terms of finance. So you have to prioritise like any

other proper national government does and unfortunately, there seems

to be only one priority- the needs of the most prosperous part of

Wales. I would love to see my capital city doing well but we need

to spread that was pretty westwards and north as well.

The last word on this issue for you, Eluned Morgan. Where does the

government needs to prioritise spending?

We need to recognise there is a problem and a bottleneck in Newport

that clogs up and stops the economy from flowing and you can't get to

West Wales unless you go via that route. Let's be realistic- you need

to resolve that problem. Of course we look to the cheapest viable

option on delivering the M4 corridor. It is right, we have to

spread the wealth. We have a strategy for North Wales, a

transport policy that is going to be investing in that but we also need

to look at the other areas. One of the poorest areas is also the

valleys and in order to get wealth into those areas, we have to keep

the traffic flowing. Unless we correct the M4 problem, there will

be problems that we will never develop the valleys. Very poor

communities. Of course there is a loss of wealth in parts of Cardiff

but there are huge problems in parts of our valleys communities and we

cannot ignore them so we need to make sure the M4 route is corrected.

If all of the money is spent on the relief road, with all of the best

will in the world, there won't be enough money for all the other

infrastructure projects that we have got.

Exactly. That is part of the reason I don't think spending it all on it

is wise but we also need a structured development bank. We need

to have more money than we have on the table at the moment. We have

public transport needs, not just in the south-east but also Swansea and

anyone who has been sat on a Fabian Way, watching the life pass before

their eyes as they are sat in traffic the... Anyone who has tried

to cross from one side of Wales to the other realise that lots of Wales

need capital investment and we need to find more creative ways of

winning it in. It is quite wrong to say all our

capital investment will be going into...

Borrowing element. We will have a much wider infrastructure programme.

Two thirds of the Welsh economy are directly served by the M4. To

minimise it to 60 miles around Newport is to lack insight that it

is important to the whole of the South and West...

We could discuss this for another half an hour that time is beating

us. Thank you all for coming in. Well, with less than a month to go,

has anyone knocked your front door Cemlyn Davies now with a look back

at the campaign so far, including one or two bits

you may have missed. The Welsh Lib Dems teed off

with a campaign launch at this And Kirsty Williams praised

the contribution made by the party's small band of AMs

in the last assembly. Size does not matter,

it's what you do with it Plaid Cymru gave us the first

manifesto, a 200 page tome. And the man who wrote it said

he felt compelled to stand in the election after encountering

a force few could resist. There are two reasons that I agreed

to stand for One because my mother asked me

to and that was a tough one. Meanwhile, a certain Tory MP posed

for pictures and misheard a rather personal

question during his visit to Boris Johnson then headed

to Newport for more Pleidleisiwch!

More or less. Welsh Labour leader Carwyn Jones

appeared to delete this tweet, perhaps after realising

the name above this shop window wouldn't necessarily give

the right impression. Mr Jones also visited a research

centre in St Asaph to announce Labour would create

an ?80 million drugs fund, and he was quick

to point out how his party proposal is different to the Cancer Drugs

Fund the Welsh Conservatives have The two important differences

with this fund are firstly - it is available to people

with life-threatening conditions whatever they are, not just cancer,

and secondly - the money is made available once the drugs

have been approved. As for Ukip, most of

the news coverage has focused on the decision not

to deselect Gareth Bennett for his However, candidates have been busy

putting the distracting selection process behind

them as they set it up I wish we had got it

completed rather earlier than we did but in the end

we had an election for all the members across Wales

and they ranked candidates in order so there has

been a democratic choice. With all the candidates

now in place, Ukip and the other parties will be

backing players to come out on top. The finish line is less

than four weeks away. The Welsh Green Party

is looking for a breakthrough They have a couple of MSPs

in Scotland, but there's Amelia Womack is their deputy UK

leader and a candidate Good afternoon and thank you for

coming in. We have just been hearing about the economy in Wales and the

problems it is facing, Tata in particular. What would be the Green

party answer to that? Steel is a fundamental part of the

Green vision, whether it is renewable energy, rail

infrastructure, buildings. We need our steel. Steel demand is looking

to go up a 15% by 2050 as a result of investment in green technology so

we need to make sure we are keeping jobs in Tata and make sure that we

are in securing people's position here in Wales because we know what

it is like when an industry is removed from a community and it can

hit generations. What are the answers? You have given

the problem will what are the answers?

We want a long-term industrial plan with tariffs on Chinese still coming

in, much as they did in the US and India, to protect steel in Wales but

also ensure we have a procurement strategy that means we are bringing

local steel into local business, especially in local authorities and

the Welsh assembly project. We were cutting it with the other

parties there. One major element of the economy in Wales will be an M4

relief road and I was looking through your manifesto for the

people and you won't be borrowing because you don't want one. You

won't be borrowing the ?1 billion for it. What will you be doing in

order to give that beast that a government can sometimes do for the

Welsh economy in infrastructure? Making sure that we have investment

into the Metro system that will connect South Wales. Even connecting

up those areas of the valleys we were discussing. The tram options

are the most viable to make sure they are future proofed. Making sure

we are investing into railways that connect Wales because it isn't just

the connection between England and Wales that isn't perfect. We are not

connected north to South or mate and West. And is this a deliberate idea

that you are trying to get away from what is the traditional image of the

Green party of being obsessed with environmental issues and very little

else? Is it important you are seen as covering a more broad spectrum of

policy? The founding principles of the Green party are social justice

and environmental justice and they go hand-in-hand. Everything is

interlinked. You have got the environment, which provides things

for people and people turned that environment into goods and services

that create the economy so unless you are looking at this as a huge

structure, you are not going to work for people and protect the

environment. Looking at health, which overheard numbingly dominates

the Welsh government -- overwhelmingly dominates the Welsh

government budget, what are the green policies about hospitals? We

want more community driven the hospitals and working around patient

centred hospital strategies. For example, we want to make sure our

NHS and social services are interlinked so somebody who has

mental health problems will have it cared for in an interconnected way.

Also we want to put in preventative measures around air pollution and

protecting people's health. When it comes to spending on the NHS, we are

always hearing about spending more or less. Does the Bean party think

that spending on the NHS in Wales is roughly where Richard Reid was like

are the savings that could be made? We both know that politics is about

priorities and having those priorities for people and the planet

and jobs and workers and for housing. That is where our

priorities lie and we would like to see more devolution, which means

that we can have investment and change that dynamic. We do think

that we need to be getting better investment into Wales. The EU

referendum is coming up and a lot of the investment that comes in from

the EU I did see it being buffered by the government if we leave. That

is why I want to remain in the EU. Looking at the manifesto, there is

an unhealthy food tax. ?300 million a year in Wales. What would be taxed

under that? So this is taken from the older People's manifesto that

was put out back in January, I believe. That was before the budget

from the month which has now introduced a sugar tax. In fact,

sugar taxes have become a popular idea because of the impact on health

and diabetes and the impact it has on the cost of the NHS. Is that no

longer an element you would be looking at? It has been taken on by

government. Tuition fees, then. There has been talk about how

students from Wales should be helped. You are saying no tuition

fees for Welsh students studying in Wales, so what about courses in

Northern Ireland and elsewhere? We need to be looking at next steps and

a lot of the discussion about free education takes out of account the

fact that when you get a degree there isn't always a job at the end

of it so we need to be focusing on apprenticeships and bringing people

back to Wales through a printer ships. Let's take it back for those

people who do want to go to university and thinks the cause for

them is in Bristol or Oxford or Cambridge or London, wherever. Are

you saying there would be no help for those people? It would be

fantastic to help them but the reality is if we could push it on

from a Westminster perspective of free education and it is something

we stood for from the general election. You need that taxed to

protect it. We are keeping the focus in Welsh universities which is

easier to maintain if we have more of a green voice and more

opportunity to campaign for that. We are aware we are and there are

tuition fees. Labour said they will be three and a half thousand

wherever you want to study in the UK. I don't get a sense of what you

are proposing. Is it that there will be no fees for students in Wales for

Welsh students and elsewhere, you are on your own? In our pledges for

the future of Wales being part of that, we want to give the free

education out there but the reality is we can't do that in a five-year

process so although there are those ambitions, we realise the

constraints of not being able to invest in that part. It is a future

ambition but this is about what we can achieve in the first five years.

For Welsh students studying in Wales, there won't be tuition fees?

S transitioning to zero, yes. What is the cost of that? We manifesto is

out on Tuesday and we are promoting education for all, not just

universities but for everybody so that is further education and

apprenticeships. And the reality is that when the Greens in the Welsh

assembly, maybe a handful of greens, so we will have a key role in

shaking up the Senate and holding people to account and so that is

going to be a key aspect. Who do you want to have scrutinising? Do you

want that to be Tories and Ukip or do you want it to be the Greens?

That's it for this week, but don't forget you can see

the Welsh party leaders being questioned in a series of "Ask

the Leader" programmes all next week, beginning tomorrow night

Diolch am wylio, thanks for watching.