05/06/2016 Sunday Politics Wales

Just over a fortnight to go, and the referendum debate is getting

serious, with Boris Johnson and John Major the latest senior

We'll be discussing all the week's big developments,

We've hit the road with both campaigns, and we've got two big

I'll be joined by Labour's John Prescott,

And, if you haven't decided how to vote yet,

One MP who's only now finally reached a decision will reveal live

With the EU referendum just around the corner, we have got a special

programme in Brussels looking at what people will mean for the money

in your pocket, services in Wales and for industry.

And, in a week in which one poll showed the public are three times

more likely to trust the word of a random stranger

And, in a week in which one poll showed the public are three times

I'm joined by a political panel with the full authority

It's Sam Coates, Isabel Oakeshott, and Janan Ganesh.

We'll try and find some random strangers to replace

them next week, and see if you notice the difference!

So, in case you weren't sure just how high the stakes were in this

referendum campaign, you only have to look at this

morning's papers, and listen to former Prime Minister John Major

taking aim at his fellow Tories in the Leave campaign.

The current Prime Minister David Cameron tried to get his party

to avoid so-called blue-on-blue attacks, in the hope of keeping

It seems like John Major didn't get the message,

as he accused the Leave campaign of squalid deceit,

and called Boris Johnson a court jester.

Here he is, talking to Andrew Marr earlier.

This is going to affect people, their livelihoods, their future,

for a very long time to come, and if they are given honest,

straightforward facts and they decide to leave,

then that is the decision the British people take.

But if they decide to leave on the basis of inaccurate

information, inaccurate information known to be inaccurate,

Now, I may be wrong, but that is how I see their campaign.

And this is so important, for once, I'm not prepared to give the benefit

of the doubt to other people, I'm going to say

And I think this is a deceitful campaign, and in terms

of what they are saying about immigration, a really

They are misleading people to an extraordinary extent.

So, that was former Prime Minister John Major, but,

when Boris Johnson took to the same sofa, he studiously declined

to return fire when asked if those words were part of an attempt

by the Remain campaign to "take him out".

Whether it is or not, this morning I think that...

I'm rather with John McDonnell this morning...

He says that there's too much of this sort of blue-on-blue action,

and what he wants to hear is the arguments,

Boris failing to take the bait. As I said, John major hadn't got the

memo from down the street, that was a joke.

The fact was John Major was sent into the show by Downing Street to

beat up on Boris. Is that an example, a testament to have rattled

they are? My own evidence is they are very

rattled, they got extremely twitchy about something I tweeted on Friday

night where I suggested a prominent Remain person was appearing on sky.

This shows the level of nerves in Downing Street. The kind of language

being exchanged between senior figures in the party raises very

serious questions about how the party comes together.

We had Michael Gove this morning saying he thinks the party can come

together on June the 24th. Of course they can, but I doubt it will be on

June the 24th. It is quite remarkable for a

Conservative Downing Street to get a former Conservative prime ministers

to come onto the BBC, the main Sunday morning news show, Andrew

Maher, and to beat up on the man who is currently favourite to be the

Tory leader. That is almost unprecedented.

John Major put his credibility on the line with phrases like squalid,

depressing. He was going for Boris Johnson.

There is a clear, strategic imperative behind what John Major

was saying, he is trying to reduce Boris Johnson's credibility,

currently the most popular and trusted figure in the EU debate.

They are worried and trying to harm that.

So, they are going for the man. The Big Questions this morning for

Downing Street, and it is right to point fingers at Downing Street for

pushing this kind of intervention, stiffening John Major's spines when

it turned out Boris was going to be on the programme I think he had a

bubble. That is my understanding. The danger

is that Downing Street are encouraging this, to send this

debate into a Tory blue-on-blue battle.

The effect may well be to deter Labour voters.

The people who want Britain to stay inside you need to do two things, to

make sure Tory voters vote for Remain, and turn out the Remain vote

against Labour and SNB voters. The question is whether having all

the headlines dominated by this blue-on-blue fight -- SNP.

It means people shrug and give up. It is more than just blue-on-blue.

From what John Major said this morning, it seems Downing Street is

prepared to trash the Tory brand, their own brand, in desperation to

win on June the 23rd. John Major describing one of the

likely people to be the ex-Tory leader -- next Tory leader as a

court jester. Saying, if you put Michael Gove,

Boris Johnson comic Iain Duncan Smith in charge of the NHS, is like

giving your pet hamster to a buy them. A second Tory poster. How can

you not conclude they are so desperate about June the 23rd they

are prepared to trash their own party's brand.

Short of using the B word when he thought the Microsoft when talking

to Michael Brunson, it was very vociferous.

It is true Boris Johnson did not retaliate in the interview. John

Major and number ten would argue that retaliation was made very

early, over the past few weeks, the Prime Minister's integrity on some

questions had been brought into doubt by people in his own party.

Without defending number ten's instructions to John Major if they

exist, they feel aggrieved because of attacks during the campaign.

Looking at the footage of John Major, I detect sincere emotion on

his part, rather than being a mouthpiece.

I did argue that he didn't mean what he said.

As Sam was saying, he didn't want to come on.

This is such an important development, it tells us about the

remain camped. Now, staying with the EU referendum,

today we're going to try Two well-informed campaigners,

the Conservative MEP Dan Hannan and the Labour MP Emma Reynolds,

will be interrogating each other I'll mostly just be sitting

back to watch. A short while ago in our green room,

they tossed a coin to see Emma is the winner, or loser,

depending on your point of view, so they'll be the first

to be cross-examined. They took a break in campaigning

to make their pitch I'm Daniel Hannan, Conservative

Member of the European Parliament, and I'm inviting you to fire me

on the 23rd of June. First, because leaving

is the modern choice. The European Union

is a relic of the 1950s, when regional blocs

looked like the future, but that world has been overtaken

by technological change. Second, because it's

the cheaper choice. Instead of handing Brussels

?20 billion a year gross, 10 billion net, we'll have our money

to spend on our priorities. We will take back the sublime right

to hire and fire our own lawmakers. In a necessarily uncertain world,

we will have taken back control to mitigate any risks ourselves

instead of passing power to people who may not

have our interests at heart. And fifth, because it's

the confident choice. We are a merchant,

maritime, global nation, the fifth largest economy

on the planet, one of five permanent seat-holders

on the UN Security Council. We have the world's most

widely studied language, before we are able to run our own

affairs in our own interests? Trading and cooperating with friends

and allies on every continent, including Europe,

but living under our own laws. So, here are Dan Hannan

and Emma Reynolds. And, just to explain the rules,

you've just five You can only ask questions,

or only give answers. Nine out of ten economists and a

string of organisations say leaving the EU would damage the economy,

make families worse off, cause a recession, could you name an

independent economic force -- economic forecaster who has said the

opposite? Five former chancellors are

campaigning to leave, plenty of economists, ...

Gerard Lyons has said, although in favour of leaving, if we were to

vote to leave, the two years, it would cause great uncertainty and

depress the economy. He hasn't said that. He said that in

a report. He hasn't. You will have to do

better than that. He is strongly of the view leaving means walking away

from a declining trade bloc and being able to leap up... And the

uncertainty? All these international bodies...

Hang on. The IMF, these are people who shared the outlook,

international bureaucrats, they share the lifestyle, the tax-free

lifestyle, they shared the basic outlook. Through euros, because that

is the kind of circles they live in. The Institute for Fiscal Studies is

widely respected, they have said by leaving we could blow a black hole

of up to ?40 billion in our public finances, meaning less money for

public services. They were feeding in the same basic

data they got from these IMF, OECD organisations.

They are independent. If I didn't think we would be better off as a

whole, I would not be inviting viewers to make me redundant. The

reason I am confident I will have a job in the private sector doing

something more productive than regulating everyone else is we

shouldn't be linked to the world is Oates only collapsing trade bloc.

There are huge opportunity -- the world's. We are the only one that

hasn't grown. Another question, you have described

the NHS as the biggest 60 year mistake, why can the public trust

the Leave campaign when they don't want the NHS to be in public hands?

I said the mistake was having a nationalised system rather than a

pluralist one as they have in almost every other industrialised country.

The referendum is an instruction to the Government to get us out.

It does not mean you are electing the boat Leave campaign, but giving

a mandate to get us out on terms and in a timescale said to our allies

across the control -- the channel but in our interests.

We are really looking at a decision to leave and asking people not to

trust any other politician but the British electorate.

The weight of economic evidence is on the remain camped, you would

admit that at least. Can you name a country that has

access to the single market but does not accept free movement?

The EU side free trade agreements with Colombia...

You said access to the single market, every country in Europe has

access to the single market. There is a free trade area from

non-EU Iceland... Why therefore does Ireland and

Norway faced agricultural tariffs of over 13%?

Ireland and Norway? Icelands and Norway.

Yes, they have wisely chosen to stay out of the Common Agricultural

Policy. Their farmers are strongly in favour of staying out of the CIP.

If we did the same thing, instead of being doubly penalised as a net food

importer with efficient farms, paying more in, getting less out, we

can have a British farming policy tailored to suit our needs.

In Northern Ireland, you suggested the border would remain open between

the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. How can you therefore

guarantee that if you want to stop free movement, that European

migrants would not come through that border? You are leaving the back

door open. Illegal migrants could come through that border today but

do not. They could come through legally. We have an agreement which

includes the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands, which are not in

the, it long predates the EU. The point is it is possible now, don't

take anyone's word for it, we have a common travel area with EU and

non-EU states, no-one in Dublin or Westminster is suggesting that is a

problem. We have only three seconds to go, tough and time in the

interests of fairness! It is the dunnock Emma to be cross-examined,

let's look at her pitch to undecided voters.

We are stronger, safer and better off in Europe.

Families benefit from lower prices, more jobs,

Businesses benefit from a European single market

Workers benefit from employment protection.

We trade more with the EU than any other country.

from companies like Jaguar Land Rover here in the West Midlands.

And by staying in the EU, we will attract even more investment

and create more jobs for the next generation.

In the 21st century, the challenges that our country face

no longer stop at the White Cliffs of Dover.

Cross-border crime and terrorism, climate change -

by working with our European partners,

we can meet these challenges successfully.

predicts that damage will be done to our economy if we leave.

And the Bank of England Governor, Mark Carney,

It would create a black hole in our public finances,

meaning less money for our public services, like schools and the NHS.

for more jobs, prosperity and security.

As before, Dan, you now have five minutes

to put your questions. Off you go.

Thank you. As you know, the EU is not a settled dispensation, it is

undergoing the Euro crisis, the Schengen crisis, migration problems,

and it is evolving - what are the greatest risks of Remain? Well, you

would keep your job! You seem to want to lose your job. I don't think

that there are great risks of as remaining, because we have the best

of both worlds. We are not in the eurozone, we have the pound as our

currency, like eight other member states retain their currency, but we

have unfettered access to the single market, and no other country... What

can you tell us about budget contributions in ten or 15 years'

time? I know what our budget contributions are today, not what is

on the side of your bus. How many migrants might be resettled here?

More came from outside of the EU than inside. Can you tell us how

many bailouts we might be dragged into? Zero. So if we vote to stay

in, even though we had a written guarantee in 2014 that which would

not be dragged into a bailout, you trust them this time? You say that

but you are a MEP. I am asking the questions. I think the ministers go

to the Council of Ministers meetings, 97% of the votes won, we

are not run by Eurocrats. You cannot answer any of the questions about

how it might look if we stay in, so there are risks both ways. Is it

safer to take back control to mitigate risks ourselves, or save a

passing control to people who may not have our interests at heart? I

do not know why you mistrust our European partners to such a great

extent, because the challenges we face in the 21st century, climate

change, cross-border crime, terrorism, those are challenges we

share with our partners. Let me ask another question, in our country we

have an example of a very high-minded, radical tradition that

has been very good at dispersing power from oligarchs to the general

population. As an heiress to the suffragettes and the chartists, do

you feel comfortable backing an elitist, anti-democratic project

where supreme power is wielded by people immune to the ballot box,

where we pay more to wealthy French farmers than poor African farmers,

and where we have inflicted joblessness and misery on tens of

millions of people around the Mediterranean while Eurocrats like

around in private jets? Does that seem comfortable as a person on the

centre-left? I feel comfortable because I feel the EU has been a

force for good in terms of employment protection, in a way a

Conservative governments never has, comfortable because we elect our

MEPs, and we elect a government that sends ministers to Brussels to have

the final say on European regulations, and I feel comfortable

as a British MP that over the vast majority of policy areas, whether

health, housing, education, policing, we have confidence in

those areas. So Lord Rose, the leader of the remainder campaign

says Vote Leave for higher wages, Paddy Ashdown says we will get

cheaper food, don't you think there are benefits to the majority of low

and medium income people from having that boosting household income? On

the contrary. So they are wrong? I think they are wrong, people in my

constituency, low and middle incomes, they will suffer the most

if manufacturing is eliminated, according to the Brexit Economist,

the Bank of England governor has predicted a recession, and it will

be people I reserve present who will be worse after macro, not people

earning high income jobs. -- worse off. What is the strongest argument

for voting Leave? I don't think there is one. None at all? This is

one of the things that puzzles a lot of people trying to make up their

mind. You do not think there are any benefits of staying in the EU. It is

not my job to tell you them, but I can see them! People make an issue

out of being so broad-minded and reasonable, but they struggle to see

the other point of view at all. They cannot put themselves in the shoes

of the people that the EU is not benefiting, which is the vast

majority. There is a lot of scaremongering on your side about

what might happen, because if we stay in, we will pretty much have

the status quo, access to a market where we trade more than with the

rest of the world, 44% of our exports go to the rest of the EU.

Our trade unions represent four million people who think we should

stay. I would rather this on to them than you. Do you think the European

Union is a growing, successful scheme that people would join today

if we were not already a member? Yes no? Yes. We ended there, I thank you

both for that. So, this week both sides of this

referendum have really The big set-piece TV

grillings have begun. Senior Conservatives have been

knocking lumps out of each other. And the Labour machine seems finally

to have creaked into life. We'll be talking about

all of that today. But, first, our Adam's been

on the buses to see where this

campaign is heading. There's livestock,

there's Boris Johnson, and there's a man

with a stuffed animal. Well, I suppose I could have

accidentally bought the cow This was the week the referendum

started to feel a bit more like a general election

campaign, and not just because of

the photo op. Vote Leave unveiled

a spending commitment, cutting the VAT on domestic fuel,

and a whole new immigration system - And here Boris told farmers

that their subsidies would be safe, even if the UK left the EU -

not everyone was convinced. There's no authority, no power,

he's just a person that's walked in here

and said what he's got to say. You could say it, I could

say it, I can promise. First of all,

where are your wellies? Are you getting a bit

of grief from the farmers? No, there's a lot of

support, a lot of support, and a lot of people

coming up to me and saying, "We are with you,

we want to come out." Some people, obviously, need

reassurance about the subsidies, He left - without offering me

a lift, so I caught the train, to Birmingham,

and the Labour in campaign. But this week Jeremy Corbyn

made a big speech after it emerged many Labour supporters didn't know

the party was in favour of the EU. Do you think that was

a great speech from JC? Jeremy's journey, if you like,

which mirrors the journeys that many have made on this,

he was a Eurosceptic in '75, and I think he's more powerful

for that. Our journey took us to a building

site to see investment from abroad that the Remain campaign claim

is linked to our EU membership. Of course, with foreign

money comes foreigners. How are you going to vote?

No, come out. Why's that? Because of all the immigrants

and things like that. Too many of them now

coming into this country. Well, inevitably,

I've ended up in one of these This week, the Remain campaign

got some high visibility backing from foreign leaders -

in Spain, the Netherlands, the former Foreign Secretary

David Miliband. Some people might say

that you live in America now, you are one of these high-profile

foreigners coming over and lecturing us on what to do,

what do you say to that? I'm a British voter,

and I'm able to speak with passion about my own country,

this is my home country, and although it's not where I live

and work at the moment, I still feel that there is

a real obligation to speak not just to the economic issues

and the security issues, but also the foreign-policy

issues, frankly. to ride on Britain Stronger

in Europe's luxury coach, or hop onto Nigel Farage's

double-decker. You wait ages for a referendum

battle bus to come along, So, you heard Alan Johnson there

defending Jeremy Corbyn's latest intervention in the referendum

campaign, despite critics claiming that Labour hasn't exactly been

full-throated in its campaign Well, the former Deputy Prime

Minister and veteran Labour campaigner John Prescott

seems to agree. He says in his newspaper column

today that his party's message

hasn't been getting through. John Prescott, good morning to you.

Good morning. You say in your column that the Conservatives have hijacked

the campaign, why has Labour allowed that to happen? It is a good point,

I suggested in the paper that it seems almost to have been the

strategy, blue on blue destroying the Tory party, hopefully, we will

have to wait and see! We saw that in the broadcasts this morning, but

where is Labour? It seems as if we are just enjoying the fight between

them, but that is not putting our position. Labour maybe in the

European Union, I support being in it, but we're not putting the

arguments, and so when you see on a bus there, for example, on Boris's

bus, ?350 million a week to put into the health service, this is from a

government that reduced from 9% of GDP the average in Europe to 7%, and

when they go on with a Labour politician in this way, Gisela, the

Tories get the publicity, and they are in the background. We are not

putting down the record of the Tories, they cannot do it because

they are in a joint agreement on a bus about Europe. Let me just get

another question in, as a result of everything you say, are you worried

that you are failing to galvanise the Labour vote, do get it out to

vote for Remain on the 23rd? Absolutely! Labour people want to

hear Labour people talking about this government's record, whether

they are four in or out, they carried out a record that is

basically destroying our health service, housing was halved in

billions, and now they say they will bring it. Michael Gove says all

these terrible bankers, why didn't the vote with Labour to stop the

bonuses for them? He didn't, he doesn't, they are hypocritical, we

must show that Labour has strong values, we believe in social

justice. When you have heard Tories talking about being social justice?!

Look Labour, at Labour. Maybe Labour voters are confused, when you look

at Jeremy Corbyn's pro EU speech, he spent as much time attacking the

Tories and EU policies. Good on Jeremy! By Sea said the bad things

predicted by Vote Leave work addicted by those who say we should

remain, that all the scare stories were just myth-making and prophecies

of doom. Is it any surprise that Labour voters are confused? Yes, but

I do not think we should talk too much about what we should do, Jeremy

is not a passionate man, he does not scream and shout like me, does he?!

But to that extent, our people want to see, and this is what has

happened to politics, people speak and do believe what they are saying!

On both sides, Cameron's side, Boris Johnson, they are saying things that

they did not do in government, which Labour oppose, and they are against

social justice. We want a Labour Europe, different to them, not, we

all believe in Europe, let's travel on the same bus! No wonder people

are confused, get a strong Labour voice, and glad Jeremy said what he

said, but point out what these beggars did in government!

What about the confusion, even Damian McBride caught on Twitter

offering policy tips to the Brexit campaign.

Labour voters seem to be confused. I don't say that the Europe they

want is the one I want. I took part in the last referendum. Despite the

Tories not giving us a referendum and taking us in 1975 into the

common market. I do believe, I was against a political Europe. In fact,

I turned down a job with Jim Callaghan to be commissioner. On

that ground, I thought that is where they were heading.

I can't say it has stopped. What we argued then was for a wider Europe

so we didn't move along the federal Europe case. That is still an

argument to be fought for, I feel strongly, Labour does. I'm not sure

the Tories pursued it. Sadiq Khan, tested Jarrell, Harriet

Harman, they have appeared with Tories, including the Prime

Minister. You refused, but last night you were appearing on Russia

Today, a Putin propaganda channel, with Ken Livingstone, he has been

suspended from your party, have you thought this through?

Of course. I don't go in joint party operations, I never have. I didn't

when I fought the Labour in 1975. I am the same. I am not saying they

can't or shouldn't. We are saying the Labour vote is crucial and there

is confusion as to the Labour position.

Standing alongside Tory politicians, the survey has recently shown most

of the speeches that come out of that are Tory spokesmen. 48% Tory,

8% Labour. Why are we confused? Like in Scotland, if you appear alongside

them bring on Europe, you better start telling people what you

disagree about. Jeremy is trying to do that. I

wouldn't do it, it adds to the confusion. If you can't get the

Labour vote out in big numbers, are you worried you could lose this

referendum? Yes. I want every Labour person in

to vote. I fought on the last one thinking we would win on the

referendum, and we lost, mainly it was particularly women, they get

concerned about the long-term, their children, security, I think that is

what defeated as in 1975. Seriously, I think it will go the other way. We

need to be talking about the big powers. It is not Britain on its

own, it is global powers, America, India, China, who will decide the

issue about crime, immigration, security. We will be a little island

shouting out, don't you recognise we are a big power. But we will have no

say in a global decision. Jeremy Corbyn has hinted he might

bring Ed Miliband into the Shadow Cabinet. What about you, are you

available? I have done my bit for the Labour

Party, except shouting on the side as I do. That is his decision. I

want to see a united party. One of the things is people are confused

because of these changes. Where does Labour stand? Start talking about it

and be clearer on immigration. We have been cowards, the whole

political establishment has avoided the argument. That is a global

solution. There will be more migration coming from African

countries which have no water or food because of climate change. This

is not a temporary problem but a global problem and needs a global

solution and not a little country on the side shouting and staying out of

it. Thank you.

Now, even if plenty folks are still undecided,

you might think most Mps will have made their mind up as to how they'll

It's only two-and-a-half weeks to go, after all.

But, according to our research, there at still 26 undecided Tory

Well, we're going to reduce that number by one today,

as the Conservative MP Johnny Mercer is here to reveal for the first time

What is your decision? The first thing to say is, like a lot of

people, being out on the doors of Plymouth, we are disappointed by the

level of debate. Even today.

What is your decision? It is important to get this across.

But tell me, leave or remain? Two Government ministers saying the

Government is not telling the truth about the economy which has upset

people. In terms of this referendum, it is

clear we should remain, not a single economic expert has come out and

said this will do things for our economy, our jobs.

If you look at what this garment has delivered in places like Plymouth

around jobs, the single biggest factor in improving people's life

chances, it has done good things. It is the economic case.

And a security case. Why do the people of Plymouth seem not

convinced quite a recent polls say they were largely for Leave.

A poll I have been running has come out and said that.

When this debate started, I said this was an issue, not the issue. It

has become clear. I did not think we would vote to leave the EU. This is

a vote of singular importance to this country. People have begun to

forget we need to get on with Government on June 24.

That may be the case. But do you think you can win on the economic

arguments? With the economic arguments, there are single clear

points. On the economy, the people who

always feel the worst affected, it is always the most vulnerable.

Always those who file like a desperate struggle. My area of

Plymouth is still categorised by the EU as a deprived area in parts. They

cannot take that shock. It is OK for others to say we can go to this

nirvana. The truth is the same people are affected.

Why do 74% in your constituency say...

That is a very small poll. But it is indicative of the mood,

74%. People will feel more passionate

about leaving because for some people this is a single issue. They

have been looking for a reason to come out and leave the EU. I think

the vast majority do not want to leave. You are looking at where we

are now it is not perfect. We are on this trajectory. Do we throw it away

for a nirvana no one can quite lay their hands on. Could the most

vulnerable in the UK who rely on a job, on the NHS, public service

funding, could they withstand that shock? I can look them in the eye

and say, I went this based on something that sounded like a great

idea but I could not go for it. It has loads of problems.

Why take so long? Thinking about Europe is not something I got into

politics today about. I have spoken to a lot of people. It

would be naive to suggest there are reasons why people want to leave. On

balance, it is a clear case. Society is judged by how it looks after its

vulnerable. We have to remain part of the EU to continue to do that. It

isn't perfect. Thank you for coming on and telling

us how you will vote on June 23. We say goodbye to viewers

in Scotland who leave us now Coming up here in 20 minutes,

the Week Ahead, when we'll be talking about the referendum

and the TV debates with the veteran Conservative backbencher David

Davis. First, though, the Sunday

Politics where you are. Hello and welcome to the Sunday

Politics Wales. This week we've got

a special edition the closest thing the

European Union has to a home - and we're going to be looking

at what the vote on June the 23rd will mean to the money in your

pocket, to services in Wales, All of which, we hope, will help you

to decide whether or not the UK and Wales should remain

or leave the European Union. MUSIC: Ode To Joy

by Beethoven The European Parliament,

a huge rabbit warren of a building, full of deals being struck

and promises made - It's one of the main institutions

of the EU, alongside the Commission,

the Council, In the Parliament,

they vote in seconds, sometimes hundreds of times

in each session, MEPs have power over all

sorts of issues, from human rights

to the environment, Tara Palmeri knows all the ins

and outs of how the EU works. As a journalist for a specialist

political magazine in Brussels, she says EU leaders resent there's

a referendum in the UK at all. There's a lot of frustration

in general, just because of the fact that, oh,

we had to go through this huge UK settlement,

we're trying to beg them to stay, in the UK press, they don't

realise how much we help them. This is the chitter-chatter

I hear all the time. And then there's also talk of,

"Well, if they leave, "we're going to make it

hard for them, "and to teach the other

member states a lesson So, yeah, of course there's

resentment, it's politics, But what would happen to the EU

project if the UK left? Some say it could speed up

closer integration between those countries

who are left, as a dissenting British voice

would have gone - shared by people like this

MEP from Sweden, Peter Lundgren. so is excited by what's

happening in the UK right now. Quite recently we had a poll

that showed that we are still having a majority

for staying in the European Union, that then the Eurosceptical ones

in Sweden would increase - but...if it was 10, 12%, and would

actually have a majority by then. So I often say to my voters

home in Sweden, they don't believe it's

possible to leave this place, Back in Wales, I meet the UK's man

in Brussels. Lord Jonathan Hill is

one of the 28 commissioners charged with coming up

with new EU policies. He thinks that Wales and Britain

get a better deal out of the EU underestimate the influence that the

UK has in the EU with its voice. I think if you look at the agenda

that's being pursued in the EU, in terms of the single market,

free trade, better regulation, those are all agendas that the Brits

have argued for, for as long as you and I

can remember. And that is now

the mainstream agenda. Aren't you underestimating

the influence the UK has globally in its ability to talk with America,

with China, with India, Isn't it you that's underestimating

what the UK can achieve? No. As I've said, I think

that being in the EU gives us clout

in these negotiations. There are a whole load of other

business relationships Back in Brussels,

things are livening up. Well, it's just gone past 11:20 here

in the European Parliament. A bell has just gone off to tell

the 751 MEPs so they're all streaming

down this corridor into the main chamber session

just behind me there, some European legislation

is going to be passed. I caught up with two of Wales' MEPs

to discuss the referendum. Looking at the issue of the economy

in Wales specifically, regional aid, you'll have

read recently that says, in Wales,

a net beneficiary of EU funds. What did you make of that report

when you saw it? Well, are we saying

that our democracy and our freedom is worth ?1.50 per

person, per week? Because that's basically

what that research is telling us. Because that's quite a cheap price,

I think, for selling our ability...

It's ?80 million a year overall. There's been an awful lot of talk

about how worthwhile it is and what this research shows is

that in Wales, just on the economy, just on regional funding

coming to Wales, actually, there's

an economic benefit there. The reality is, it's our money

coming back to us. An awful lot of it.

More of it coming back. There's no such thing as EU money,

and the rest of the United Kingdom is paying ?3 a week

so that in Wales we benefit ?1.50. Great, brilliant,

we're benefiting in Wales, let's stay in the European Union,

surely? Absolutely not, because ?10.1 billion a year net

is what we're paying to the EU. We could use that much better

ourselves without the EU actually telling us

how to spend that money, where to spend it,

and flying the EU flag to say, thank you very much.

That's a fair point, Kay Swinburne - OK, more of it comes back,

but at the end of the day, it's that point of there's no such

thing as European money - Wales or elsewhere. I think we have

to come back to the economy, and where we started on this,

that actually the economic impact and therefore it is my absolute

belief that if we leave the EU, there will be such a significant

impact on our economy overall, as the United Kingdom,

not just in Wales, but across the whole

of the United Kingdom. and therefore we will lose that cost

of the EU very quickly in our lack of productivity

as a result of leaving. So if you're taking

two, three, four, five - and worse scenarios beyond that -

hit on your GDP as a percentage, then actually the cost of the EU

is less than 1% of our GDP. So there's a real significant

mismatch here for the opportunity we are

giving people as part of the EU. And the risk of us coming out,

and the impact, there will be no spare money

for Wales, Is there a concern maybe

that the whole debate about the EU referendum,

in Wales specifically, has centred around this

issue of regional funding, and that's been too much

of a focus of the debate, rather than, as you're talking about

there, the wider economic benefits? I talked to all the companies

around Wales right now and I've certainly prioritised

going to visit as many of them as possible to find out what they

see the value of the EU as being, and we've had those

long discussions. that this is a hugely beneficial

union for them to be part of. Access to those 500 million

people in terms of consumers and actually, many of those

are foreign companies who are invested in the UK

and invested in Wales, specifically, So there is no certainty,

in the longer term, whether or not that investment would

continue if we were to leave the EU. All these risks are really,

really big, and, actually, for what? That is all we are hearing,

is fear, fear, fear. when Switzerland and Norway

had their referendum... Aren't they

well-placed fears? No, not at all. Doesn't it

highlight what the issues would be? We don't know

what's going to happen. Norway and Switzerland were told

the exact same thing. Fear, doom and gloom,

we're going to lose jobs, we're going to lose money, and look

how they are booming as nations within Europe but outside of the EU.

Why would we be any different? And are you seriously saying

that the Germans are going to stop selling us their BMWs and Mercedes?

Of course they're not. But there are issues here

about trade deals, which would take years and years to

complete, and the uncertainty there. And it's a huge leap in the dark.

This is ridiculous. No, a leap in

the dark is an absolute misnomer. It's disgraceful to say that, as the

fifth largest economy in the world, we cannot set up our own

unilateral trade deals with whoever we want

for the benefit our nation. We just need to look at Iceland.

They set up a trade deal with China. That's an absurd comparison.

300,000 people... Why is it absurd? A tiny country in the middle

of the North Atlantic, compared to, as you've just said there, the fifth

largest economy... There we go. As you've said, if a tiny country

can set up a trade deal with China, the fifth biggest trading company

in the world? But there are trade deals

and trade deals. I would not want the Icelandic deal

for the United Kingdom - with China - because it is not

a good deal. So, why... Can I bring this back to

something very specific here? In terms of Wales. If we were

to come out of the EU tomorrow, our Welsh farmers wouldn't get

the CAP payments they get right now. Yes, they would.

No, they wouldn't. Yes, they would. Because the economy would be

in difficulty. Absolute rubbish. Since when were you in government,

Nathan? 10.5... Can I finish what I was saying?

10.5... We'll finish that point,

then come back to you. That actually the direct

payments are really important particularly West Wales,

where I come from. But the other side of that is,

Welsh lamb is my biggest export. Over 50% of lamb,

Welsh lamb, goes to the EU. a 60% tariff would be the standard

tariff on most lamb. Where's our market gone?

Our lamb is 60% more expensive for the French, the Belgians to buy.

It's not going to happen. So we're going to bring

tariffs on the French selling us their cheese

and champagne? Of course we're not. But they're luxury items,

with all fairness. And it's really important.

Lamb is a luxury item to a lot of people, as well.

I don't know about your household, but I only have it usually once a

month because it's fairly expensive. Now, with regards to trade deals

and all these kinds of things, and you've said,

if we leave tomorrow, the farmers will not get the CAP.

What a load of rubbish. Are you telling me that the

government in Westminster wouldn't be able to find

a piffling ?220 million... David Cameron said there'd

be no guarantee. That's because he's

in the middle of scaremongering, trying to make people vote to stay

in. The reality is, ?10.1 billion... You've said that already.

..is the net benefit of us leaving. Let's move on.

We will find ?220 million. This is a trade deal

with America, essentially, and there's been an awful

lot of talk from Ukip members, it could mean the end,

the privatisation, of the NHS. That's scaremongering

of the worst kind, when you know that the European

Parliament has a majority of members who would not allow that to happen.

No, absolutely not. The majority of members here will

vote for TTIP to go through. But with a provision it would not

include social services, Let's hope that has that in it,

but we cannot guarantee it. How many nations in Europe

have an NHS, Four, five, six,

seven other countries. ..from opening up

to the private sector. Well... Are we going to allow 27 other

nations to decide Or are we going to ourselves

set up our own free trade deals with America for the benefit solely

of Britain and the British people? And that's the reality.

That's a good point. If it wasn't... If we weren't in the EU,

we could set up that trade deal with America and make sure

the NHS is safe. and I've spent a lot of time

with my US counterparts - the real issue is that as a block

of 500 million plus people, we have huge waits in those

negotiations, which means that we

can exclude our public sector And therefore there will be no

risk to the NHS or any other health care system.

You cannot guarantee that. But that is the deal,

and I will not vote - nor will anybody

in this house vote - for anything that doesn't put

that level of protection in. as a population of just over

60 million people, we will not have the ability

to actually negotiate that type of caveat

within a trade deal. So, 60 million people

versus three... Didn't Obama himself say we'd be

at the back of the queue? The queue, yes. How many Americans

use the word "queue"? They don't even know what it means.

It's "the back of the line". That was something that the

Prime Minister asked him to say, more scaremongering.

And that's all it is. This is the leader

of the free world. Who's been asked to do it

as a favour. The Prime Minister asked him

to do us a favour. Let's scare the British people

into voting to stay in something we actually don't want to

be a part of. But ultimately, it's not about

the ?55 million a day, it's not about not being able

to control our borders. It's about - do we believe

that the British people are good enough to make

all of our own laws in Westminster, or do we need bureaucrats,

unelected, here in this building, I'll say first, Barack Obama

isn't here to defend himself, but I'm sure he'd dispute that fact.

But there is a point there. Making your own

laws for your own country, But we actually do make

our own laws. We are actually

part of the legislation here. I certainly take

part in co-decision processes. I genuinely have an

impact on law here. not only do the elected members

of the house here have a say, they're the government ministers

of each country. If they don't want a rule or a law,

it doesn't happen, it's a case of actually

finding those rules that work. So when the British government...

..you need one set of rules, and on 95% of those rules

over the last seven years, It is a tiny number that we have not

actually wanted in their entirety. And we opposed them, and the rest

of Europe said "tough luck", and we've had to impose them.

But on almost every important... 79 laws that our government said

was not beneficial or good for the British people,

and the rest of Europe said, "Well, "tough luck, you've got to

have them." This vote is about who rules

and governs Britain. Is it us, the British people,

or is it this place? My issue is, what is sovereignty?

Ultimately... I mean, I'm Welsh,

so is my sovereignty the same Is it the same as somebody

in Scotland? I suspect not. So sovereignty is a strange word

to be using in the first place, in the context

of the United Kingdom. But leaving that aside,

we give up our sovereignty when we actually

participate in NATO missions. Where our soldiers

are sent to fight. We are actually giving

up our sovereignty in that. The World Trade Organisation

is a trade organisation We give up sovereignty,

as does any member of the WTO. Therefore, our sovereignty

is always shared. there is no such thing as a

sovereign nation. I would love for this to continue

for longer, but we have run out of time.

Nathan Gill, Kay Swinburne, thank you much for your time.

You're welcome. With the fate of the Welsh steel

industry still uncertain, the head of the body which

represents steelmakers has told this programme

the industry won't survive if China is allowed unfettered

access to European markets. The steel crisis continues

to cast a long shadow. and both sides of the campaign have

a different take on Brussels' role. The city saw Welsh steelworkers

protesting in harmony with their European colleagues

back in February, demanding EU action

to save their industry. Under threat, as they see it,

from Chinese steel, which is accused of being

dumped on the European market. In other words,

sold below the cost of production. In response,

the EU has imposed taxes 'The devastating effects

of Chinese dumping 'are why the European steel industry

is calling for China 'to be denied market

economy status.' As it stands, China is

regarded as a nonmarket economy because its government is seen

to interfere in the market. If, in due course, China is granted

market economy status by the EU, the country's exports

would face lower tariffs. So, do you believe that if China

is granted market economy status, it would make the

steel crisis worse? The dimension of the Chinese

steel industry, excess steel capacity

is such that... the non-survival of the

European steel industry. While Tata Steel is in the process

of looking for a buyer Italy's Ilva group is also looking

to off-load its Taranto site It is the biggest in Europe,

employing some 14,000 people. Some of Italy's MEPs are also

worried about what will happen next. TRANSLATION: We need to put policies

in place to challenge China and avoid destroying

our own industry. There needs to be space for everyone

in the global market, but we also need to be able

to defend our home interest. it's reason enough for the UK

to get out of the EU. I think it's a very,

very serious concern, but it also shows that the

European Commission, which has been investigating

Chinese steel dumping for the last ten years

without taking any action, is clearly not acting

in our best interests. But back in Port Talbot,

Welsh Labour's MEP, a Remain campaigner,

says the European Parliament is opposed to giving China

the special trade status. Well, I think we've got

a much better chance of protecting the steel industry

at a EU level So, for example, currently, the

European Parliament's position is, we would not accept

market economy status for China, which says China will get

it automatically But also, there many people,

including myself, who think China have not met

the five criteria they need to meet before getting

that economy status. And therefore they won't get

granted market economy status two big questions soon to be

answered that will shape Wales' future

for years to come. Europol is the EU's law

enforcement agency and coordinates the sharing

of EU countries' intelligence It's Carmarthenshire-born

director told me why he thinks the UK is safer

staying in the EU. We're looking at the issue

of whether or not Wales, whether the UK, should remain

part of the European Union. From a security point of view,

policing point of view, were the UK to leave

the European Union? Well, in the last ten years,

especially, the UK has become more

and more dependent to share intelligence and to

coordinate joint operations against organised crime

and terrorism right across Europe, so I think we would be

losing potential access to something from the way in which the UK

protects itself from these threats. But what would really change

were the UK to leave, in terms of sharing

that information, sharing that intelligence?

Because, presumably, just whether or not the UK's

part of the European Union. It does, and the UK has really

important relationships with the Americans,

and also intelligence community, but there are some unique parts

of the way the EU does the business. You know, sharing information

through Europol, for example, which is an EU law enforcement

agency that I run - and I give you a very

current example, on child sexual exploitation,

we've had some great success responsible for that

operating online. that Europol has coordinated across

Europe that have involved the UK. Police forces running

important operations, and we can connect, for them,

intelligence across Europe. But would that information

really stop at Dover, at the border with the UK just

because the UK would leave the EU? I mean, that just

doesn't seem credible. It does depend, then, on how the UK

would negotiate this withdrawal, and I'm sure Britain, because it's

such an important security partner in the world, would negotiate access

to some of these systems. But I can tell you in

the case of Europol, it would become a

second-tier member, like Norway and Iceland

is at the moment. It wouldn't have direct access

to our database. There are other very important

systems in Europe for a country, which UK

would find itself being in, about whether you can continue

to have these systems with the most highly

sought-after intelligence, the relationships across the globe

in terms of intelligence, wouldn't be a second order

country in terms of Europol, with MI5 and all the security

services that go with it. Surely you wouldn't demote the UK

to a second-class country? Well, the United States are

currently a very important member of Europol as well,

but they're in a second-tier in terms of what access

they've been granted. So what I'm saying is, there are

legal and political things if you were to continue to negotiate

your access to these systems. And I'm not saying the sky is going

to fall in - I think the UK will get a pretty

good deal - and my point is,

it definitely won't be as good as it is now, and that therefore

has potential consequences You mentioned earlier that

point about the UK becoming in terms of security and

in terms of intelligence. What would that entail, then? What

would be the consequences of that? When I was growing up

in Carmarthenshire we didn't really have a problem

with international drug traffickers We didn't have child sexual

exploiters working on the internet. That has changed.

I think you have to see security in terms of how

they affect their communities, In terms of it being now a global

dimension requiring, therefore, the closest possible international

partnerships for our police forces. And that moment the EU, through

Europol and other mechanisms, gives that capability

to police forces in Wales and around the UK,

and what I'm saying is, the UK will still be

a strong partner, will still be able to

protect itself, it just won't be as effective,

that's the point. And I think, therefore...

My view, therefore, why you'd want to vote out

on June 23, I really don't think

security should be one of them. Lastly, just as a young man born

and raised in Pontyberem, maybe some of our viewers

will be thinking, "How do you end up

being the head of Europol?" It is, but there are many

people from Wales that have gone on to do

different things in life, and I just got a few lucky

breaks along the way. I went to London as a student

and then found myself doing... I never forget

my Welsh roots, though. My mammy is still living there,

and my family as well, so I'm a regular visitor

back to Gwendraeth Valley. Robin Wainwright, thank you very

much for your time. Thank you. Hopefully we've helped you

a little bit to decide how you'll cast your vote

on June 23 - and if not, well, you've still

got a little bit of time but whether or not the UK leaves

or remains in the European Union is very much down to you.

See you next time. David Davis will talk to is about

the snoopers' charter, but that interview with John Major on the

Andrew Marr Show, earlier we showed you in talking about the deceit of

the Leave campaign, this is in talking about Boris Johnson's

prospect of leading the party. If they continued to divide the

Conservative Party, as they are doing at the present time, and if

Boris has the laudable ambition, because it is laudable to become

Prime Minister, he will find, if he achieves that, that he will not have

the loyalty of the party he divided. Iain Duncan Smith was serially

disloyal in the 1990s. When he became leader, he was surprised that

no-one was loyal to him. Boris should learn from that.

What was the purpose of his interview this morning?

I guess number ten asked him to do it, and being a loyal supporter of a

Tory party, he would do that. I guess he was trying to reduce the

credibility of the Leave campaign's claim. Some irony when you consider

the most incredible claim has been from George Osborne, the Treasury,

in terms of his forecasts, and even what John Major said, I was his last

defender in the Commons, the numbers bandying around.

He said for example this controversial ?350 million was one

third of that. That is half the net contribution. He said industries

would face 10% levies. The car industry would, but most of

the others would be up to 5%. He was not being very

straightforward with the numbers. Were you surprised how personal the

attacks on Boris well. We know he has long hated Iain

Duncan Smith. Understandable. But saying in the

hands of Michael Gove, Boris Johnson, IDS, the NHS would be like

a hamster in a room with a pattern. He was trashing the Tory brand.

A harsh attack. I don't think it was very wise.

One of the problems both sides of this campaign have had is it is too

personalised. The public don't like it. After the

23rd, we had to pull the party together.

With that sort of attack, it is a bad idea.

Sam. Let me put it this way. Whatever the result, things for the

Tories will never be the same again for the rest of this Parliament.

It will be very hard. Clearly with a working majority of about 18, hard

to get contentious the station through, the biggest area of danger

for David Cameron. He will be a zombie Prime Minister, he can't get

it through the Commons, and the Lords is a different matter where

legislation will get stuck. You saw the kinds of things in the

Queen's Speech. With the exception of the data Bill, I can't see any of

the bills will be that radical when they get passed into law. So I think

there will be a successful coup after June the 23rd, that seems

unlikely. Even if it is a vote to Leave.

That could change things. I think David Cameron would go within his

own time. In the case of a remain vote, there are up to 20 MPs who

bitterly disliked David Cameron. I don't think that number has

dramatically increased solely as a result of the referendum campaign.

There is a safety valve, the leadership election which will

happen possibly sooner than you think.

There may not be an immediate coup even if the vote is to Remain.

The keyword or words, zombie parliaments, there are anything

between 20-50 MPs deeply disillusioned with the Prime

Minister. They have a taste for revolt. The

Government majority is derisory. This Government could now find it

very difficult to get anything major through this potential zombie

parliament. That is absolutely true. On the

matter of a coup, there are a number of mischief makers within the Tory

ranks who don't mind if a coup succeeds or fails, they feel the

Labour opposition is so weak, they have the luxury of doing this.

I think the numbers are lower than you think. I would say 20, not more

than that. That is enough, given the Government

majority. These are the ones that hate the

regime as it were. You have another group. The problem

is not if there is a Brexit victory, but if there is a very narrow Remain

victory. A lot of those wanting Brexit will

feel they have been cheated. The ?9 million spent on the

leaflets, all of that, they will be difficult to manage.

This is a Government that has found it hard to get its budget through.

Almost unprecedented, it lost most of the major parts of the budget

unveiled in March. Would it not be even more difficult if it is a vote

to Remain, but small, to get its business through except the

noncontroversial. To say it is difficult for the

future is a description of the past ten months, they had two H a great

answer their planned pensions reform amongst other things.

The potential American trade deal. Most recently, and prior to the

referendum. Things will become difficult

afterwards. David Cameron will end up leading my kind of Government, it

won't do very much. The basic strategic stuff. What the founders

in America intended. The one bit of optimism for the Tories, it picks up

on David's point, I wouldn't underestimate how many Tory MPs want

is referendum done with, that includes absolutely committed

leaders who don't think much of David Cameron.

Interviewing Johnny Mercer, he wants it over, you can tell from his

demeanour. And he wouldn't look at me but there

may be another reason! We don't need to go that!

Let me ask you. Given the kind of Government our panel are talking

about, it is already difficult for the Government to get things done.

Even more difficult after the referendum I would suggest if it is

Remain by a small majority. Does that give you hope for your

continued opposition to the investigatory Powers act for the

police and intelligence services? Taking up on the American view, look

what happened with tax credits. There were about 40 people opposing

it, only two voting against it. It went to the House of Lords, got

knocked back. The Government knew there was a looming rebellion.

That will be the message of the future.

A lot of that pressure play. The investigative powers act, large

parts of it will be flayed by the House of Lords, the Government will

concede. That is the way it will happen.

Whether it is the approval mechanisms or the data gathered or

who has access, those will be challenged.

All those things will now be more at risk at least after the referendum.

Maybe why they are brushing it through in the next few days.

I would suggest looking at the campaign, two and a half weeks to

go, in the week up to the Whitsun bank holiday, Remain one that, and

overwhelming economic amount of stuff coming out.

In the weeks since leading up to this weekend, Leave have probably

done better. The interviews on Sky.

Still all to play for. Leave goes into this week probably with a

spring in its step. I think that is right. One of the

mistakes of the Remain campaign was at two different points, to feel

like they were heading for victory. Once in the aftermath of the visit

by President Barack Obama. They thought it was a big moment that

would produce a push. A couple of weeks ago, they sensed

that polls were going their way, in private conversations they thought

they had got it in the bag. That created hubris and a problem.

They did not see coming the Australian style points system

attacked by Vote Leave last weekend, setting out plans. They thought it

would be a policy freak referendum campaign. That pulled the debate

back into the Leave side. Is Leave thinking it can win?

Privately, I think they are beginning to think they have a 50-50

chance, maybe more. Previously, privately, a lot would admit they

felt pessimistic. I definitely sense a shift. If you

look at what happened in Scotland, it was around this time use saw

polls saw an advantage -- seeing an advantage for independence.

Still three weeks to go, nobody is counting their chickens.

I am reliably informed Leave is ahead but that is embargoed so I

didn't mention it. But they still don't think they are

losing? How big a victory do they need in

order to put the question to bed and preserve the Prime Minister.

At least 55-45? That would do it. The fact they

deployed John Major shows they are worried.

John Major was the nuclear weapons. Lose or win, yes or no?

Brexit, a small margin. You heard it here first. Just to

mention, as well as the debate we have been discussing, I will be

interviewing leading figures from both sides of

Starting tomorrow at 7.30 on BBC One, with Shadow Foreign

Followed on Wednesday by Chancellor George Osborne.

And then it's the turn of Leave campaigners Nigel Farage

I hope you can join me, it should be fun.

And, of course, we're back here next week as usual at 11 o'clock

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

It's home to a million people at any one time,