:00:39. > :00:44.The Government continues its push for the UK to join air-strikes
:00:45. > :00:51.Is it winning the argument and does it have the votes in Parliament?
:00:52. > :00:55.We'll hear from former Tory defence secretary Liam Fox, and Respect
:00:56. > :01:01.Jeremy Corbyn is struggling to get his way over Syria, as he tries to
:01:02. > :01:04.persuade his Shadow Cabinet to back his opposition to bombing.
:01:05. > :01:08.We'll hear from Shadow Justice Secretary, Charlie Falconer.
:01:09. > :01:10.And the former Conservative chairman Grant Shapps resigns
:01:11. > :01:15.from the Government over allegations he failed to act on bullying claims
:01:16. > :01:19.inside the Tory Party, but is that really the end of the story?
:01:20. > :01:24.Focus on the vote on military action in Syria not Jeremy Corbyn's
:01:25. > :01:28.leadership or next year's Assembly elections says a Welsh Labour MP.
:01:29. > :01:32.Metropolitan Police but his spending decisions will have consequences for
:01:33. > :01:41.transport, housing and councils. So, yesterday,
:01:42. > :01:43.former Conservative Party chairman Grant Shapps resigned from
:01:44. > :01:47.the Government over allegations he failed to act on claims of bullying
:01:48. > :01:50.in the youth wing of the party. It's a complicated story,
:01:51. > :01:53.as Giles Dilnot explains. Grant Shapps, former co-chair
:01:54. > :02:00.of the Conservative Party and now a former minister, must wish
:02:01. > :02:05.as his senior aide Paul Abbot Clarke once tipped for the top
:02:06. > :02:24.by Tatler magazine unsuccessfully As a result of his behaviour
:02:25. > :02:28.during that campaign, about which complaints were made, he
:02:29. > :02:31.was taken off the candidates list. A girlfriend at the time declaring
:02:32. > :02:38.he was "unfit to be an MP". In early 2014,
:02:39. > :02:40.Mr Clarke approached the Conservatives and Grant Shapps
:02:41. > :02:43.in particular with an idea. It was simple, bus loads of young
:02:44. > :02:49.Tory activists to marginal seats during the 2015 general election
:02:50. > :02:52.campaign to doorstep constituents. In the face of of unshifting polls,
:02:53. > :02:58.the idea appealed to Conservative Central Headquarters but they
:02:59. > :03:02.wanted to have some control over it. Grant Shapps decided not only to
:03:03. > :03:06.back the idea, but help pay for it, and put Clarke in charge
:03:07. > :03:10.of the operation. never met are you going to be a part
:03:11. > :03:20.of this? -- are you going to be? Roadtrip 2015,
:03:21. > :03:22.as the plan was called, had another motive for Clarke, to see him back
:03:23. > :03:25.on the Conservative candidate list and perhaps he would have and this
:03:26. > :03:28.story ended if not for the apparent suicide in mid-September
:03:29. > :03:31.of a young activist called Elliot Johnson, who left a note, naming
:03:32. > :03:33.Mark Clarke as someone who'd been bullying him and a secret recording
:03:34. > :03:37.of Clarke challenging him in a pub. In the wake of Elliot Johnson's
:03:38. > :03:39.death, lurid allegations emerged about Clarke, alleging sexual
:03:40. > :03:41.misconduct, drugs, intimidation, blackmail and bullying connected to
:03:42. > :03:52.Roadtrip, all denied by Mark Clarke. But August e-mail exchanges
:03:53. > :03:54.between Mr Clarke and Mr Shapps' aide Paul Abbot show Mr Abbott was
:03:55. > :03:57.aware of complaints Nothing was done and since Mr Shapps
:03:58. > :04:04.gave Clarke an official Party role he has now resigned saying
:04:05. > :04:06."the buck stops with me". The Prime Minister says a full
:04:07. > :04:12.internal investigation is under way. Elliot Johnson's father wants an
:04:13. > :04:17.independent external investigation. The most serious allegations
:04:18. > :04:19.about Clarke were made after Grant Shapps had been moved to
:04:20. > :04:24.a junior ministerial position and Lord Feldman, David Cameron's
:04:25. > :04:27.chief fundraiser and close friend, He says the party cannot find
:04:28. > :04:33.nor was aware of any written If, by falling on his sword,
:04:34. > :04:39.Mr Shapps hoped to stop the scandal spreading,
:04:40. > :04:58.he may actually only have become The Sunday Politics panel is here.
:04:59. > :05:05.Nick, here is the case for Shapps. He has been made a scapegoat. This
:05:06. > :05:09.is not the end of the story. I think it is not the end of the story.
:05:10. > :05:14.Grant Shapps did sign up Mark Clark to do this. I think it is getting
:05:15. > :05:23.awfully close to the door of Andrew Feldman. They went -- he went to
:05:24. > :05:29.college with the Prime Minister and organised some balls. They go back a
:05:30. > :05:31.long way. The road trip was run out of Conservative campaign
:05:32. > :05:35.headquarters in the run-up to the general election. Most significantly
:05:36. > :05:41.for Andrew Feldman, he signed the checks to allow the road trip to
:05:42. > :05:45.take place. We're not talking small cheques, we are talking many
:05:46. > :05:50.hundreds of thousands of pounds. Grant Shapps was in charge of it on
:05:51. > :06:02.a day-to-day basis but Andrew Feldman and his sister helped the
:06:03. > :06:05.running of the road trip. What it does is put the attention onto some
:06:06. > :06:10.of the attention onto summary the attention would be, what did Andrew
:06:11. > :06:17.Feldman do? What did he know and when and what did he do? What we
:06:18. > :06:23.have to remember is Baroness Warsi, who was co-chairman, kicked this guy
:06:24. > :06:28.out of the party. Feldman was Chairman Ben and Shapps brought him
:06:29. > :06:32.back. Feldman was co-chairman and Feldman is still the chairman now.
:06:33. > :06:36.In terms of the party, what some people were saying to me yesterday,
:06:37. > :06:45.actually, it cannot be seen that Cameron is protecting Lord Fellman
:06:46. > :06:50.-- Feldman because he is his friend. He has got questions to answer. I
:06:51. > :06:55.also think that if people who are in the party feel these questions are
:06:56. > :07:01.not being answered, and it is not an open process, loads more leaks will
:07:02. > :07:08.come out and it will get messier and messier and messier. It is a rum do,
:07:09. > :07:13.what was going on inside the Tory Party in its youth wing. Multiple
:07:14. > :07:17.allegations of bullying and sexual harassment. Culminating in this
:07:18. > :07:23.young man taking his life on a railway line. It is an appalling
:07:24. > :07:26.thing. There is a history of unusual behaviour amongst Conservative
:07:27. > :07:29.students going back to the 1980s when Norman Tebbit closed down the
:07:30. > :07:38.Confederation of Conservative students. It is the most extreme
:07:39. > :07:44.incident I have ever encountered. This is about personal behaviour.
:07:45. > :07:48.The parents of Elliott Johnson raised an important question of
:07:49. > :07:52.chronology. Grant Shapps stop being co-chairman in May. Some of the
:07:53. > :08:01.allegations against Mark Clark, some of the complaints surfaced as
:08:02. > :08:06.recently as August. There is a deeper structural problem, which is
:08:07. > :08:11.the Conservative Party does not have activists. They have to find them
:08:12. > :08:15.where they can get them. Or, when summary has a reputation as bad as
:08:16. > :08:21.Mark Clark, they end up going along with them because options are so
:08:22. > :08:22.limited. It will not be the end of the story.
:08:23. > :08:25.David Cameron is expected to ask MPs to approve UK air strikes
:08:26. > :08:29.The Government thinks it now has enough support to risk a vote
:08:30. > :08:32.in the Commons, even though the Labour Party is still unclear.
:08:33. > :08:35.And the PM will almost certainly need Labour votes to get his way.
:08:36. > :08:38.Mr Corbyn is still trying to rally his Shadow Cabinet and Labour MPs
:08:39. > :08:41.He told Andrew Marr they should recognise his direct mandate
:08:42. > :08:45.And so what I've done is what I said I would always do,
:08:46. > :08:48.I would try to democratise the way the party does things.
:08:49. > :08:51.Yes, I have sent an e-mail to party members, and actually,
:08:52. > :08:54.70,000 have already replied with their views.
:08:55. > :08:57.I don't know what all the views are, obviously, I haven't read them all,
:08:58. > :09:06.Surely we must recognise that in a democracy, the Labour Party has
:09:07. > :09:08.a very large membership, nearly 400,000 members, they have a right
:09:09. > :09:12.to express their point of view and MPs have to listen to it and have to
:09:13. > :09:14.try and understand what's going on in the minds
:09:15. > :09:25.I've been joined by Charlie Falconer, Jeremy Corbyn's
:09:26. > :09:38.Are you minded to support government on the subject of Syrian air
:09:39. > :09:41.strikes? I am. Then need to be assurances, given to the House of
:09:42. > :09:47.Commons but I am minded to support air strikes. The reason I am, I
:09:48. > :09:52.think Isil poses a threat to the region and also Europe, including
:09:53. > :09:56.the United Kingdom. I believe air strikes over Iraq and Syria are
:09:57. > :10:01.having an effect on reducing that risk. I think it is wrong that we
:10:02. > :10:06.are participating in Syria when what is going on is we are trying to
:10:07. > :10:10.defend the United Kingdom. I believe the only long-term solution is there
:10:11. > :10:15.needs to be a solution to the Syrian civil war and the bombing of cracker
:10:16. > :10:25.will not significantly contribute to that. -- Raqqa. I believe we do not
:10:26. > :10:32.have a choice. The likelihood is that the Shadow Cabinet will agree a
:10:33. > :10:35.collective position in this matter. There are honourably held collective
:10:36. > :10:41.views. The Shadow Cabinet on Thursday, they were appropriately
:10:42. > :10:46.discussing. Everybody was conscious of the fact we have to reach a
:10:47. > :10:51.conclusion in national interests. With an issue like this where there
:10:52. > :10:59.is agreement on the factual material, international law, the
:11:00. > :11:04.final judgment, there is such a difficult decision to be made, it is
:11:05. > :11:07.not surprising that our disagreements in the Shadow Cabinet.
:11:08. > :11:12.It is unlikely that tomorrow you will be able to agree a collective
:11:13. > :11:19.line. I think that is right. It is unlikely we'll be able to agree a
:11:20. > :11:25.yes or no answer to the question the Government is about to post. If it
:11:26. > :11:34.does not and there is a free vote for this among Labour MPs, it does
:11:35. > :11:41.make it certain that Mr Cameron will win by a convincing majority. I do
:11:42. > :11:45.not know the position. I think everyone is weighing up the merits
:11:46. > :11:47.of the argument. The right thing to do is for mothers of the
:11:48. > :11:50.Parliamentary Labour Party members of the Shadow Cabinet to consider
:11:51. > :11:56.all the arguments and reach a conclusion as to what they think is
:11:57. > :12:00.in the national interest. It is clear that enough Labour MPs will
:12:01. > :12:06.abstain or side with the Government to give Mr Cameron a majority, even
:12:07. > :12:10.if that are some Tory defectors. If the position where it was whipped
:12:11. > :12:14.against by the Labour Party, that with very significantly reduce the
:12:15. > :12:19.chances if it were a free vote. I do not know what the final figures
:12:20. > :12:24.would be. Your figures sound right. Should there be a free vote? What is
:12:25. > :12:29.the alternative given the position you are into a free vote? My own
:12:30. > :12:35.view is I do not think this very important issue should be allowed to
:12:36. > :12:38.be a situation that forces resignations on people. I think the
:12:39. > :12:42.right course is, if the Shadow Cabinet cannot come to a collective
:12:43. > :12:47.view, and I accept that maybe unlikely, probably the best course
:12:48. > :12:52.is a free vote. That is ultimately for the leadership to decide. For an
:12:53. > :12:56.opposition which aspires to government when you're not a
:12:57. > :13:00.debating society. You are the opposition, the alternative
:13:01. > :13:04.government. What would voters think if you cannot agree a collective
:13:05. > :13:16.position on something as important as war? What the Government be
:13:17. > :13:18.seeing is a legitimate debate. The public is like the Parliamentary
:13:19. > :13:22.Labour Party and like the saddo Cabinet, of different views. You
:13:23. > :13:28.need to come to a collective view. We need to know your view on this.
:13:29. > :13:33.The differences with this is I do not think it will be possible. I do
:13:34. > :13:36.not think that is surprising. That reflects the debate that is going on
:13:37. > :13:43.in the country. The debate going on in the country is going on within
:13:44. > :13:47.the Labour Party. If Mr Corbyn was to attempt, and he said this morning
:13:48. > :13:51.it is his decision to whip or not. If there were a decision to whip
:13:52. > :13:58.Labour members to vote against bombing, would that be a resignation
:13:59. > :14:02.matter for you? I do not want to comment on that. I very much hope
:14:03. > :14:06.any sort of resignations will be avoided. I think the position will
:14:07. > :14:10.be we will have a further discussion on Monday and a collective you will
:14:11. > :14:15.be reached as to how we go forward in relation to the progress. One
:14:16. > :14:20.Labour MP told us that Mr Corbyn's and of this vote seems to him like a
:14:21. > :14:26.deliberate search for a fight and he is very disappointed. I do not
:14:27. > :14:30.agree. The key thing about what is happening now is not who sent a
:14:31. > :14:34.letter when. The key thing which the public want us to debate is the
:14:35. > :14:39.question itself. Should we support air strikes or not? I think the
:14:40. > :14:44.important thing about this week will not be who said what to whom but
:14:45. > :14:48.will be where you stood on the issue. It is one of those issues
:14:49. > :14:54.where the judgment about what was right and what was wrong will not
:14:55. > :14:59.come on the basis of the politics of these few days. It will come on what
:15:00. > :15:06.happens going forward. What was the right decision? Let me ask you this.
:15:07. > :15:11.We do not have much time. Because you are a lawyer and an expert on
:15:12. > :15:16.the Labour Party, if Labour MPs sought to unseat Mr Corbyn, and
:15:17. > :15:21.there is some wild talk around on that, witty automatically be on the
:15:22. > :15:27.ballot paper of a new leadership election? I have not addressed that.
:15:28. > :15:30.It is not a moment to talk about any sort of leadership challenge. Jeremy
:15:31. > :15:36.Corbyn is leader. He was elected two months ago with a huge mandate. That
:15:37. > :15:40.is the position within the Labour Party and that is where we have to
:15:41. > :15:44.address it. It can hardly be a stable position to have a Labour
:15:45. > :15:48.leader, in such a key issue has bombing in Syria, at odds with a
:15:49. > :15:54.huge chunk of his Shadow Cabinet rest room at that position is
:15:55. > :15:58.unsustainable over the period. It was absolutely clear when Jeremy was
:15:59. > :16:01.elected, there were significant disagreements between Jeremy and
:16:02. > :16:04.others on policy. What is happening is the Labour Party is holding
:16:05. > :16:11.together. So far. So, once again a British government
:16:12. > :16:16.is gearing up extend military action It's a well-trod road
:16:17. > :16:20.and the outcome has not always been predictable, or pleasant,
:16:21. > :16:23.which is why so many are hesitant. Ellie Price has been looking
:16:24. > :16:25.at the Prime Minister's case for action, and what role the UK
:16:26. > :16:28.military might play. That bomb in Paris,
:16:29. > :16:34.that could have been London. If they had their way,
:16:35. > :16:36.it would be London. I can't stand here
:16:37. > :16:38.and say we're safe I can't stand here either
:16:39. > :16:43.and say we will remove the threat from the action we take, but do I
:16:44. > :16:46.stand here with advice behind me that taking action will degrade
:16:47. > :16:49.and reduce that threat over time? Absolutely,
:16:50. > :16:50.and I've examined my conscience David Cameron says he no longer
:16:51. > :16:58.wants to outsource this sort Britain is currently involved in air
:16:59. > :17:03.strikes against so-called Islamic State, but only in Iraq, shown here
:17:04. > :17:07.in the bottom half of this shot. The border, for British forces
:17:08. > :17:13.at least, is crucial. IS, Isis, Daesh - whatever you want
:17:14. > :17:18.to call it - control or is free to operate in swathes of territory
:17:19. > :17:23.in Iraq and Syria. Its so-called caliphate stretches
:17:24. > :17:25.from Aleppo in Syria to The lines on the map are relatively
:17:26. > :17:31.fluid, it recently lost control That was down to Kurdish forces with
:17:32. > :17:38.the help of US-led air strikes. Currently Australia,
:17:39. > :17:41.Canada and France are also flying bombing missions over both
:17:42. > :17:46.countries, targeting IS. According to the latest figures
:17:47. > :17:50.released on Friday, the US and its allies operating
:17:51. > :17:52.under the banner of Operation Inherent Resolve have conducted more
:17:53. > :17:57.than 8,500 air strikes against Islamic State targets since the
:17:58. > :18:02.start of the campaign last year. That's 5,580 air strikes in Iraq
:18:03. > :18:08.and 2,925 in Syria. More than 16,000 targets have been
:18:09. > :18:12.damaged or destroyed, including more than 4,500 buildings,
:18:13. > :18:17.nearly 5,000 fighting positions, and The vast majority have come from US
:18:18. > :18:25.aircraft, but the RAF has run 376 They've been launched
:18:26. > :18:31.from this base in Cyprus, where The base has also been used to
:18:32. > :18:37.carry out refuelling and The perception out there is
:18:38. > :18:44.the question as to whether or not the UK should be involved
:18:45. > :18:47.in the campaign in Syria or not. The reality is we are involved in
:18:48. > :18:50.that campaign but in an inconsistent Other countries, our allies,
:18:51. > :19:06.the Americans and French in particular, just don't quite
:19:07. > :19:08.understand where we are up to. The PM insists
:19:09. > :19:10.the RAF can provide specific skills that coalition partners are keen to
:19:11. > :19:13.make the most of. The ability to launch highly
:19:14. > :19:15.accurate Brimstone missiles. We are very good
:19:16. > :19:17.at not killing people collaterally, the UK, so in that sense I think us
:19:18. > :19:20.moving into Syria is good. The sad thing is that no matter how
:19:21. > :19:24.good you are, there will be innocent people killed but they are dying
:19:25. > :19:29.anyway because of Isil, and it's coming to the stage where you have
:19:30. > :19:33.to move forward and do things, even though that sort of thing happens,
:19:34. > :19:35.that cannot be Of course Russia is also involved
:19:36. > :19:39.in air strikes in Syria, but its support of President Assad's
:19:40. > :19:42.regime puts it at odds with The scale of these tensions
:19:43. > :19:49.demonstrated when Turkey, which vehemently opposes Assad, shot
:19:50. > :19:55.down a Russian plane last week. Most experts agree that air strikes
:19:56. > :19:59.alone will not destroy the common enemy of IS, that ground forces will
:20:00. > :20:04.be needed, but agreeing on exactly who those forces would be, could
:20:05. > :20:29.prove the biggest obstacle to peace. We are joined now by George
:20:30. > :20:34.Galloway. What should be done to thwart Islamic State, if not British
:20:35. > :20:37.bombing, what should be done to hit it in its heartland? Most of these
:20:38. > :20:42.terrorist attacks were carried out by people living in the countries in
:20:43. > :20:49.which they operated, Tunisia, France, Belgium and so on so you
:20:50. > :20:56.will not physically stop people bombing Raqqa turning up on the
:20:57. > :21:02.streets of Paris. But the planning involved Islamic State. There's not
:21:03. > :21:09.much logistics involved in taking arms into a nightclub and killing
:21:10. > :21:12.innocent people. There are many weapons in Europe, nobody is
:21:13. > :21:17.suggesting these weapons came from Syria. I don't want to dodge your
:21:18. > :21:23.question, I must strongly in favour of destroying Isis and Al-Qaeda as
:21:24. > :21:27.anybody else, more than the David Cameron government or they wouldn't
:21:28. > :21:31.be tolerating a situation where Turkey and Saudi Arabia have been
:21:32. > :21:38.supporting these people for years and until now are supporting them.
:21:39. > :21:44.We are steeped in blog so far but it is bloodier to go on, I promise you.
:21:45. > :21:54.What would you do? I would support the people fighting Isis and
:21:55. > :22:04.Al-Qaeda on the ground. The wide PG militia -- YPG militia. Give them
:22:05. > :22:13.weapons, every kind of support we can. It is a far better way than us
:22:14. > :22:23.joining in. Do you support Russian attacks on the anti-Assad forces in
:22:24. > :22:31.Syria? Yes, if they are coordinated with the Syrian government's army.
:22:32. > :22:34.So do you support British attacks on Islamic State forces in Iraq at
:22:35. > :22:40.their request of the Iraq government? I do, and if they were
:22:41. > :22:46.coordinated with the Government that make sense militarily, and if we
:22:47. > :22:50.coordinated our involvement with Russia and the Syrian government in
:22:51. > :22:54.Syria, I would support that too but it's because I'm pretty sure the
:22:55. > :22:59.British government's real game is regime change and because we have
:23:00. > :23:03.seen regime change before in Iraq and Libya and they ended so
:23:04. > :23:11.disastrously, I am against it. It's not because I'm a pacifist. There
:23:12. > :23:17.was a time when David Cameron's priority was to get rid of a sad's
:23:18. > :23:22.regime but isn't it clear that David Cameron has realised that defeating
:23:23. > :23:27.Islamic State is more important to Britain's national interest than
:23:28. > :23:30.getting rid of Mr Assad? If it were you probably wouldn't have me on
:23:31. > :23:36.because I would be supporting it, but I don't believe that. I pray his
:23:37. > :23:40.utterly farcical claim in the House this week that there were 70,000
:23:41. > :23:47.moderate rebels armed and ready to take over the land liberated by our
:23:48. > :23:53.bombardment. You say that is fantasy? If there were 700 I would
:23:54. > :23:57.be surprised. We will bomb territory which will then be taken by other
:23:58. > :24:06.so-called moderate fanatics, the ones as I said to you before that
:24:07. > :24:11.only cut off half your head. Should we regard the Russians and the Assad
:24:12. > :24:20.regime as our allies in the fight against Islamic State? We had that
:24:21. > :24:25.chance and that was incinerated by our ally on his attack on the
:24:26. > :24:29.Russian air force bombing these people, shot out of the sky
:24:30. > :24:34.provoking a crisis between east and west, between Nato and Russia, which
:24:35. > :24:40.was completely unnecessary and completely contrary to any
:24:41. > :24:48.legitimate war aims. Could it not still be put together? I wish it
:24:49. > :24:53.would, I suspect it won't. If we had time to discuss it I would operate
:24:54. > :24:59.this point. Turkey is the source of this problem, the Turkish border has
:25:00. > :25:04.been open to these people. They have been selling billions of dollars
:25:05. > :25:12.worth of oil. A lot of it is being stolen by Isil and sold in Turkey, I
:25:13. > :25:16.believe to relatives of President Erdogan, which is then sold onwards
:25:17. > :25:21.to neighbouring countries. You cannot be serious about fighting
:25:22. > :25:26.Isil while you're Nato ally is openly collaborating with them. You
:25:27. > :25:31.follow closely what is going on in the Labour Party at the moment, does
:25:32. > :25:38.Jeremy Corbyn have an alternative to a free vote when this comes up for a
:25:39. > :25:54.vote in the Commons? If I were him, I would whip the vote because his
:25:55. > :25:58.enemies in the ... Because our record on intervention is so bad,
:25:59. > :26:05.because the likelihood of it not going well is so high, I would dare
:26:06. > :26:12.these rebels to facilitate David Cameron's court. Is that the
:26:13. > :26:17.intention? It looks to me as if it is ripping itself apart. This is
:26:18. > :26:22.Ramsay MacDonald in reverse, the leader remaining loyal to the party
:26:23. > :26:25.and the MPs joining effectively and national government in terms of War
:26:26. > :26:31.and peace at least so if I were Jeremy Corbyn, I would whip this
:26:32. > :26:35.vote and let the Labour members pass verdict on those that troop into the
:26:36. > :26:41.lobby with Liam Fox and David Cameron because I am pretty sure
:26:42. > :26:47.this is not going to end well. Even at the expense of ripping apart the
:26:48. > :26:52.Shadow Cabinet too? You would be whipping the Shadow Cabinet where
:26:53. > :26:55.there seems to be a majority against Jeremy Corbyn's position. Some of
:26:56. > :27:00.them might surprise you with their fidelity to the party in those
:27:01. > :27:05.circumstances, others might go. They are supporting the elected leader in
:27:06. > :27:12.the way the rope supports a hanging man. What are the chances of Jeremy
:27:13. > :27:15.Corbyn following your advice? Probably not, I would think
:27:16. > :27:22.listening to John McDonald and Ken Livingstone they will go for a free
:27:23. > :27:28.vote, that will merely postponed... And give David Cameron his big
:27:29. > :27:44.majority. Yes. It seems to me time to face that up. Thank you very
:27:45. > :27:47.much. At this point we say goodbye to viewers in Scotland.
:27:48. > :27:48.Party divisions on the issue of air strikes
:27:49. > :27:52.Here's the Conservative MP and chairman of the Defence Select
:27:53. > :27:55.Committee, Julian Lewis, speaking in the Commons debate on Thursday.
:27:56. > :27:56.Air strikes alone will not be effective,
:27:57. > :27:59.they've got to be in coordination with credible ground forces.
:28:00. > :28:01.Now, the suggestion there are 70,000 non-Islamist, moderate, credible
:28:02. > :28:04.ground forces, I have to say, is a revelation to me and I suspect
:28:05. > :28:08.I've been joined by former Conservative Defence
:28:09. > :28:22.Two years ago you want to Britain to bomb the forces of President Assad,
:28:23. > :28:28.who is fighting Islamic State, now you want us to bomb Islamic State,
:28:29. > :28:32.which is fighting President Assad. Doesn't map flip-flop undermine your
:28:33. > :28:37.credibility? The original vote was very different, it was because Assad
:28:38. > :28:42.had used chemical weapons in breach of international law against his
:28:43. > :28:45.civilian population and the question then was worthy international
:28:46. > :28:49.community going to uphold that international law by making a
:28:50. > :28:53.punitive strike to teach the Assad regime and the rebels, who it was
:28:54. > :29:00.suspected might also have chemical weapons, that it would not be
:29:01. > :29:05.acceptable to use them. But it would have created more chaos in Syria and
:29:06. > :29:11.allowed Islamic State to benefit, to exploit that, as it had done
:29:12. > :29:14.previously. I'm not sure I'd buy that because if you have made a
:29:15. > :29:19.relatively small number of punitive strikes from some of the command and
:29:20. > :29:25.control of the regime to send a signal not to use chemical weapons
:29:26. > :29:32.again, that would have upheld the international community's position.
:29:33. > :29:36.Do you accept that extending British bombing into Syria now against
:29:37. > :29:41.Islamic State this time is not a military game changer, that it is --
:29:42. > :29:48.its military impact will be marginal at most? I think its military impact
:29:49. > :29:53.may be moderate at best, I accept that, however within that we have a
:29:54. > :29:56.number of weapons systems that can diminish the chance of civilian
:29:57. > :30:01.casualties, and I think that's important because it denies a
:30:02. > :30:06.propaganda weapon. Obviously anything that reduces civilian
:30:07. > :30:07.casualties is vital, but it won't change things very much on the
:30:08. > :30:19.ground militarily. The fact we have not been there has
:30:20. > :30:24.been an encouragement for other countries. For example, Saudi
:30:25. > :30:29.Arabia, UAE, Jordan, in recent months they have stopped
:30:30. > :30:33.contributing to the air campaigns. It makes it more difficult for us to
:30:34. > :30:40.persuade them to take part if we are not taking part. We have a
:30:41. > :30:46.militarily absurd policy of bombing in Iraq but not in Syria. After we
:30:47. > :30:54.have joined America, France, Bahrain, Syria, Russia, Australia,
:30:55. > :31:01.and recently Saudi Arabia and the UAE in bombing IS in Syria, what
:31:02. > :31:04.then? The question is, our ability to degrade military capability. One
:31:05. > :31:09.of the problems with sorties in Iraq is command and control is coming
:31:10. > :31:16.from Syria. That is where they are drawing strength from. The US has
:31:17. > :31:23.launched 2703 strikes in Syria alone and others have carried out 154. Why
:31:24. > :31:28.is that not doing the degrading? You have to carry out the number of
:31:29. > :31:33.attacks to provide that degradation. We need to continue that. The
:31:34. > :31:38.question you are alluding to is the right question. Even if you have
:31:39. > :31:43.degraded the ices capabilities, which is what we want, what is the
:31:44. > :31:49.next step? How do you hold any territory you may take from them?
:31:50. > :31:52.Part of the reply from the Prime Minister is there are 70,000
:31:53. > :31:57.moderate opposition fighters ready to become the ground force against
:31:58. > :32:05.Islamic State. Who is the leader and what do they want? You have a
:32:06. > :32:09.disparate grouping. Not 70,000 acting together. What the Prime
:32:10. > :32:13.Minister was saying from the joint intelligence committee, what they
:32:14. > :32:18.are saying was, there is a potential force of that size. The longer we
:32:19. > :32:23.wait to do great ices, the smaller that force is likely to be and the
:32:24. > :32:32.less its capabilities are likely to be. -- Isis. It is a fantasy to say
:32:33. > :32:38.there are 70,000 ground troops ready to come in and help on the ground if
:32:39. > :32:43.we extend the bombing to Syria. Let's assume the numbers are
:32:44. > :32:48.correct. To further questions we have to ask. Are they willing to
:32:49. > :32:53.operate together as a single force? The second is, do they have the
:32:54. > :32:58.capability to do so? Over the next few days, part of the debate will be
:32:59. > :33:02.around that. It will be around the fact you may have to supply some of
:33:03. > :33:09.those forces with mentoring and training to enable them to be able
:33:10. > :33:12.to be an effective force against Isis, which they have not
:33:13. > :33:22.necessarily been able to up until now. The wacky experience on that
:33:23. > :33:30.was disastrous. I would say, look at the other side. -- the wacky
:33:31. > :33:37.experience. Look at our ability to mental the Afghan army. Isn't it
:33:38. > :33:41.inevitable that everyone to make progress against Islamic State, in
:33:42. > :33:47.some way, President Assad and the Russians will have to become our
:33:48. > :33:53.allies? This is a very difficult pill to swallow for many people, who
:33:54. > :33:57.think the regime is particularly unpleasant. I would love to see a
:33:58. > :34:02.different regime in place that was not killing its civilian population
:34:03. > :34:07.and gay people in Syria chance to discover their own future. But, as
:34:08. > :34:09.we have done in previous military situations, sometimes we have to
:34:10. > :34:15.recognise these challenges have to be dealt with in series, not in
:34:16. > :34:19.parallel. That is what is very important about the statement by the
:34:20. > :34:31.Prime Minister. It is not an ices only strategy but Aaron -- Raqqa
:34:32. > :34:42.only strategy but and Raqqa first strategy. You are saying you are
:34:43. > :34:47.getting support of factions. The important thing is we bring together
:34:48. > :34:53.all those who want to deal with IS first. They are the threat to
:34:54. > :34:58.national. We need to grasp the size of that threat to national to. They
:34:59. > :35:06.hate us, Andrew. Not because of what we do because of who we are. They
:35:07. > :35:11.will never stop that. Why would we get help from non-IS forces on the
:35:12. > :35:16.ground if we are also seem to be on the side of the Russians? They are
:35:17. > :35:21.also a threat to those people inside Syria. It is in the interests of all
:35:22. > :35:29.parties concerned to deal with what is a highly ideological, dangerous,
:35:30. > :35:32.fascistic threat. They endanger regional security. We must not allow
:35:33. > :35:39.them Hello and welcome to the
:35:40. > :35:41.Sunday Politics Wales. Does Wales win or lose from
:35:42. > :35:46.George Osborne's spending review? We hear from the Welsh Government's
:35:47. > :35:49.finance minister. How sustainable is
:35:50. > :35:52.the current university tuition fee Could a UK Government economic
:35:53. > :35:59.statistics review lead to job But first,
:36:00. > :36:05.as we've been hearing already this morning, next week there's likely to
:36:06. > :36:08.be a vote on whether or not the UK should take part in air strike
:36:09. > :36:12.against so-called IS in Syria. The RAF has already taken part in
:36:13. > :36:16.1,600 missions against the group in Iraq, but doesn't have the authority
:36:17. > :36:19.to widen the attack in the region. Some Conservative MPs have
:36:20. > :36:24.misgivings, so David Cameron really needs as much support as
:36:25. > :36:30.possible from opposition benches. Plaid Cymru and the SNP say
:36:31. > :36:33.the Prime Minister has failed to convince them of the merits
:36:34. > :36:36.of air strikes. Over the weekend, the
:36:37. > :36:38.Defence Secretary Michael Fallon has been phoning Labour MPs trying to
:36:39. > :36:43.get their support for air strikes. The Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has
:36:44. > :36:46.e-mailed party members setting out his opposition
:36:47. > :36:50.and seeking their views. Early this morning,
:36:51. > :36:52.I spoke with one MP who has sought the view of her constituents
:36:53. > :36:55.through social media and says overwhelmingly the response has
:36:56. > :37:00.been against air strikes. I'm almost certain that
:37:01. > :37:04.I'll vote against air strikes. I'd thought about it
:37:05. > :37:07.for a long time, I've been getting correspondence from constituents
:37:08. > :37:11.for a number of weeks about it. I'm pretty certain I'm
:37:12. > :37:13.going to vote against. There was nothing
:37:14. > :37:15.in the statement this week that gave me any more information or any
:37:16. > :37:18.more comfort about the fact this is a coherent and long-term plan
:37:19. > :37:24.for the problem of Isil Daesh. How much of a concern is it for you
:37:25. > :37:27.that there doesn't seem, at the moment, to be a plan for what will
:37:28. > :37:31.happen after the bombing campaign? There could be that power vacuum and
:37:32. > :37:35.everyone is painfully aware of what Do you have actual concerns
:37:36. > :37:40.about what would happen The Prime Minister is talking
:37:41. > :37:47.about air strikes and 70,000 Syrian Free Army that he thinks will
:37:48. > :37:51.fill that vacuum in territory I don't think this figure is
:37:52. > :37:58.plausible or credible and I'm waiting to hear much more
:37:59. > :38:04.about a plan beyond the bombing. We're not hearing anything about
:38:05. > :38:07.that at the moment and I'm very, very concerned we don't learn the
:38:08. > :38:09.lessons of previous interventions in IS it also a difficult
:38:10. > :38:13.issue for the Labour Party specifically considering that it was
:38:14. > :38:17.under Tony Blair's leadership that the Labour Party
:38:18. > :38:19.went to war in Iraq and all Does it make it more difficult for
:38:20. > :38:25.the party to have a clear line I don't think any of the parties
:38:26. > :38:29.have a particularly clear line. If you look at the Conservative
:38:30. > :38:32.Party, there are very senior MPs there who are concerned about it
:38:33. > :38:36.and will probably vote against it, like the chair of the Defence
:38:37. > :38:40.Select Committee, Julian Lewis. There are differences of views
:38:41. > :38:43.in the Labour Party as well. I happen to think it's a matter
:38:44. > :38:45.of conscience. Something like this,
:38:46. > :38:47.it's a matter of individual conscience for individual MPs
:38:48. > :38:50.and we will make our own minds up regardless of what party we are in
:38:51. > :38:54.and who is leading the party. That point you make about
:38:55. > :38:57.down to the individual, the importance of the vote on this,
:38:58. > :39:02.it seems to me to suggest you think there should be a free vote within
:39:03. > :39:05.the Labour Party on that. I would be perfectly happy with
:39:06. > :39:09.a free vote. Clearly, there are great differences
:39:10. > :39:11.between individuals I think a free vote, in my view,
:39:12. > :39:17.would be a good idea. Are you disappointed then
:39:18. > :39:20.when you see your colleagues within the Parliamentary group of
:39:21. > :39:24.Labour MPs, who are making this almost into a larger issue than just
:39:25. > :39:27.Syria itself? It is seen very much now through
:39:28. > :39:30.the lens of, it's an issue of leadership for Jeremy Corbyn.
:39:31. > :39:33.Is that a disappointment to you? I think it is very unfortunate
:39:34. > :39:35.the issues have been conflated. Whether or not we join a war in
:39:36. > :39:41.Syria is a grave and serious issue. To conflate that with internal
:39:42. > :39:45.Labour Party politics by some of my colleagues, maybe by people outside
:39:46. > :39:48.of the Labour Party, I think is trivialising the issue of whether or
:39:49. > :39:54.not we should join a war in Syria and the impact and effact that
:39:55. > :39:57.have, not just on civilians in Syria, but on the
:39:58. > :40:02.risk of a threat here in the UK. Does some of that responsibility
:40:03. > :40:06.lie with Jeremy Corbyn himself? We know there's supposed to be
:40:07. > :40:09.a meeting of Labour MPs to discuss And yet we've already seen
:40:10. > :40:14.from him a letter to MPs and party members saying,
:40:15. > :40:18.I can't support this air strike. It's a problem, to an extent,
:40:19. > :40:22.of his own making. It's no secret that Jeremy
:40:23. > :40:24.is opposed to air strikes. If you'd asked before he even
:40:25. > :40:27.sent the letter people would have Jeremy's has had
:40:28. > :40:30.a long-standing view. But he is a leader
:40:31. > :40:33.and is trying to build a consensus. But also I've been getting letters
:40:34. > :40:36.and e-mails from colleagues So there are a lot of Labour MPs
:40:37. > :40:42.putting forward their views, trying to persuade their colleagues
:40:43. > :40:45.one way or another. Is this the kind
:40:46. > :40:49.of thing that could become a far larger issue for Jeremy Corbyn in
:40:50. > :40:52.terms of splits within the party? If that does happen, how much of
:40:53. > :40:56.a negative impact do you think that will have looking ahead to next
:40:57. > :41:00.May's Assembly elections in Wales? I think the two issues have been
:41:01. > :41:03.conflated, I think we need to separate them and focus needs to be
:41:04. > :41:08.on making the decision about whether That is what we should
:41:09. > :41:12.be concentrating on. The other issues, they can be
:41:13. > :41:15.for another day. The Assembly elections are some way
:41:16. > :41:19.off, clearly we've got to unite as a He's got a clear democratic mandate
:41:20. > :41:24.to lead the party and we need to go out there and persuade people
:41:25. > :41:28.they should vote Labour next year. When you think about the policies
:41:29. > :41:35.of the Welsh Government which have had a greatest direct impact on the
:41:36. > :41:40.pockets of voters here, the tuition In England, students pay around
:41:41. > :41:49.?9,000 a year in tuition fees. In Wales, they pay ?3,500, wherever
:41:50. > :41:53.in the UK they want to study. The Welsh Government picks up
:41:54. > :41:56.the tab for the rest, The policy is very generous to
:41:57. > :42:04.students from Wales but universities They say too much money follows the
:42:05. > :42:10.students out of Wales and into the So, tomorrow,
:42:11. > :42:15.they will call for the current tuition fee grant to be scrapped and
:42:16. > :42:20.replaced by a means tested grant. They say the Welsh Government has
:42:21. > :42:24.a choice, provide a low-cost education for all or invest
:42:25. > :42:29.in high-quality Welsh universities. I spoke with the chair
:42:30. > :42:32.of Universities Wales, the body I think there are
:42:33. > :42:38.a range options here. You could decide to spread
:42:39. > :42:40.the source equally and relatively thinly or you could say, let's focus
:42:41. > :42:46.it on the areas of most need. Those people who come from
:42:47. > :42:49.disadvantaged backgrounds, perhaps. Or areas
:42:50. > :42:52.which need more support such as expensive subjects or areas that
:42:53. > :42:56.are in tune with Welsh Government priorities, such as programmes
:42:57. > :43:02.which support economic development. But, essentially, it would boil down
:43:03. > :43:07.to, a student from a low-income background will still receive
:43:08. > :43:12.the support he or she needs. A well-off student
:43:13. > :43:15.from a well-off family will probably have to find a lot more money to
:43:16. > :43:19.study either in Wales or elsewhere That would depend very much on
:43:20. > :43:24.the outcome of the Diamond review. But means testing would suggest
:43:25. > :43:28.how it is going to happen. Means testing would mean that
:43:29. > :43:32.those students who really need Those who are more able to support
:43:33. > :43:38.themselves would be able to do that. It is a system we have now
:43:39. > :43:43.for maintenance grants. But, equally, with the current
:43:44. > :43:46.tuition free grant the principal the Welsh Government is keen on is of
:43:47. > :43:52.being able to offer it universally, regardless of background, regardless
:43:53. > :43:55.of choice, where want to study. This proposal,
:43:56. > :43:57.what you are suggesting, There is a question
:43:58. > :44:02.of affordability here. Is it actually affordable to offer,
:44:03. > :44:07.as it were, a flat rate tuition fee support to all students of all
:44:08. > :44:13.backgrounds wherever they study? That is the question that
:44:14. > :44:15.needs to be addressed. That is what Sir Ian Diamond
:44:16. > :44:18.is going to be looking at. Not in the sustainable way at
:44:19. > :44:22.the moment because the green paper that has been published now by the
:44:23. > :44:27.UK Government and the universities minister has made it very clear that
:44:28. > :44:31.the teaching excellence framework that is contained within that
:44:32. > :44:34.which will allow English is going to go ahead in some form or
:44:35. > :44:39.other. It is a question of what the details
:44:40. > :44:41.are around that. That would add cost to
:44:42. > :44:46.the tuition fee grant in ways that I think there's a reason why
:44:47. > :44:54.the review panel was set up to look at this system, to ensure it is
:44:55. > :44:57.an affordable system which is fair, that serves the needs of Wales
:44:58. > :45:01.and that supports Welsh students. Yet, I know you don't want to
:45:02. > :45:04.prejudge the outcomes of that panel, that is understandable, but because
:45:05. > :45:07.you say here the choice in future will be either low cost education or
:45:08. > :45:13.investing in high-quality education, should that panel come back and say,
:45:14. > :45:17.the status quo is OK, that is going to be damaging for
:45:18. > :45:20.universities in Wales? There is a range of options
:45:21. > :45:25.between those two poles. Those at the polls on a range
:45:26. > :45:29.of options. You can have something between
:45:30. > :45:36.low-cost and low quality In other words you can have
:45:37. > :45:42.a balance between those things and it is a very complicated set
:45:43. > :45:45.of circumstances this. I imagine that
:45:46. > :45:48.the proposals that eventually come forward to be quite sophisticated,
:45:49. > :45:51.will be quite nuanced and will A union has told this programme that
:45:52. > :46:01.staff at the Office for National Statistics in Newport are
:46:02. > :46:07.anxious that a major UK Government review will lead to jobs leaving
:46:08. > :46:09.south Wales altogether. The former deputy governor
:46:10. > :46:12.of the Bank of England, Sir Charlie Bean, was appointed
:46:13. > :46:15.by the Treasury to look at the way Investment has grown more than twice
:46:16. > :46:24.as fast as consumption, our economy this year is predicted
:46:25. > :46:27.to grow by 2.4%. Today the state accounts for just
:46:28. > :46:31.under 40% of national income and it's forecast to reach 36.5%
:46:32. > :46:35.by the end of the spending review. We were caught in a blizzard of
:46:36. > :46:38.stats this week as the Chancellor Showering us all with fractions,
:46:39. > :46:44.percentages and decimals. It isn't just a comfort people are
:46:45. > :46:51.choosing, it is the look as well. At George Osborne's request
:46:52. > :46:56.that is the question this man Sir Charlie Bean began
:46:57. > :47:00.his review into the production of UK statistics nearly four months ago,
:47:01. > :47:04.and on Wednesday we'll get to read The former deputy governor
:47:05. > :47:10.of the Bank of England says he is trying to ensure the UK's economic
:47:11. > :47:13.statistics are future proofed and suited to the challenges posed
:47:14. > :47:18.by a dynamic economy. As the primary source of UK economic
:47:19. > :47:22.data, Sir Charlie's review will focus on the Office of National
:47:23. > :47:26.Statistics and its Newport base. This is where two thirds of the
:47:27. > :47:30.organisation's staff have been working for the past few years,
:47:31. > :47:33.since the relocation programme was Although, that is a degree
:47:34. > :47:39.of concern here now for the future. We have 2000 people working here
:47:40. > :47:45.at Newport for ONS. 600 working directly
:47:46. > :47:48.on economic statistics. That is what Charlie Bean's
:47:49. > :47:50.review is looking at. We believe we produce high-quality
:47:51. > :47:53.economic statistics, we don't want to see any of our work
:47:54. > :47:57.or jobs moving out of Newport. Do you think that could be
:47:58. > :48:00.a possibility? We welcome any recommendation coming
:48:01. > :48:04.from the Bean review to increase economic expertise in London because
:48:05. > :48:09.they can liaise with Treasury, We would not welcome, and we would
:48:10. > :48:16.strongly oppose, any proposal to In recent times
:48:17. > :48:19.the ONS has been criticised for the quality of its work and some
:48:20. > :48:24.have questioned the decision to take They say the move to Newport saw
:48:25. > :48:30.many experienced statisticians Whilst the relationship
:48:31. > :48:36.between the ONS and institutions like the Treasury and the Bank
:48:37. > :48:40.of England has been weakened by the Sioned Lewis is
:48:41. > :48:44.a research consultant who appreciates the value of data and
:48:45. > :48:50.the importance of getting it right. I've not had cause for concern
:48:51. > :48:56.but there are rumblings about the quality, issues have
:48:57. > :49:00.been raised about errors and so on. Also, at a wider sense, there is
:49:01. > :49:08.the sense that the ONS might not be as innovative as they could be
:49:09. > :49:14.in using all sources available, in There has been a continuous barrage
:49:15. > :49:20.of criticism of the ONS in Newport since it first came and
:49:21. > :49:24.particularly from the establishment of statisticians in London who want
:49:25. > :49:29.everything in the capital city. The ONS has been
:49:30. > :49:33.a brilliant success from the point of jobs, from the point of
:49:34. > :49:37.view of new skills to the area. Sir Charlie Bean has previously
:49:38. > :49:40.suggested he thinks the ONS's performance has deteriorated
:49:41. > :49:44.and the relocation to Newport came at a cost, one that can't be
:49:45. > :49:48.recovered by simply moving Though he will look
:49:49. > :49:52.at the possibility of expanding the London based team
:49:53. > :49:56.he's also said Newport could become Meanwhile,
:49:57. > :50:03.the ONS told us that it welcomed the Bean review as an opportunity
:50:04. > :50:06.to review systems and processes And the organisation looks forward
:50:07. > :50:11.to reading the interim report recommendations
:50:12. > :50:16.when it is published this week. The Welsh Government said the ONS
:50:17. > :50:19.plays a vital role and it is proud the organisation is
:50:20. > :50:23.based in South Wales. We may get a better idea this week
:50:24. > :50:27.what the future could hold for this It's been a big couple of week
:50:28. > :50:34.for Parliament. As well as discussions
:50:35. > :50:37.on air strikes against IS last week, saw the Chancellor outlining
:50:38. > :50:40.his plans for public spending over Well, George Osborne said
:50:41. > :50:49.the block grant of money to be used by the Welsh Government would raise
:50:50. > :50:52.to ?15 billion by 2020. Control of some
:50:53. > :50:55.of the income tax levied here can be devolved to the Welsh Government
:50:56. > :50:58.without a referendum, he said. Mr Osborne also promised that
:50:59. > :51:02.spending per head on devolved services
:51:03. > :51:06.in Wales would not fall below 115% Let's discuss those issues
:51:07. > :51:13.and many others now with the Welsh Government's finance minister,
:51:14. > :51:25.Wales's Chancellor, Jane Hutt. Thank you very much by coming in
:51:26. > :51:30.this morning. I know you've got some concerns about the overall spending
:51:31. > :51:33.block grant coming to Wales. Let's start with a couple of more positive
:51:34. > :51:39.snippets coming out of that statement. The city region for
:51:40. > :51:44.Cardiff, match funding perhaps for that. Is there anything you can tell
:51:45. > :51:50.us about that? The city region for Cardiff isn't it important
:51:51. > :51:54.opportunity, working closely with turn local authorities in south-east
:51:55. > :51:59.Wales. We have said what we would offer and we need to work this. We
:52:00. > :52:05.need to know what the UK Government will offer. Since Glasgow got its
:52:06. > :52:10.city dear, Wales has got to get it steel. It shouldn't just be the
:52:11. > :52:15.Cardiff City Legion. What about Swansea Bay? Huge disappointment
:52:16. > :52:21.about electrification. What about North Wales? That was positive but I
:52:22. > :52:27.have to say let's face it about this spending review announcement on
:52:28. > :52:33.Wednesday, 4.5% cut to our budget. Of times ahead. For all those people
:52:34. > :52:38.who were frightened about what happened with their tax credit, yes,
:52:39. > :52:49.a screeching U-turn but it'll hit them in the Universal Credit.
:52:50. > :52:55.You mentioned a 4.5% cut by 2020 the budget of the most government. It
:52:56. > :52:59.will go up to ?15 billion by 2020 where we account for the UK
:53:00. > :53:04.Government many and the money generated in Wales. If you think
:53:05. > :53:09.that is a 4.5% cut, how many difficult decisions is the Welsh
:53:10. > :53:13.Government going to have to make? Very difficult decisions because as
:53:14. > :53:19.we have said, he gives with one hand and takes to the other. The huge
:53:20. > :53:24.cuts to Whitehall departments, local government in England, 56%, this has
:53:25. > :53:28.to be factored into how we get the consequential is for health and
:53:29. > :53:33.against all the other departments. Very tough times. We have already
:53:34. > :53:39.had an 80% real term cut. Real difficult decisions. This is the
:53:40. > :53:43.late spending review. I have to present a budget in a few days' time
:53:44. > :53:49.which is going to address these issues. Giving you have to work with
:53:50. > :53:53.these that within these constraints, what does it mean for the
:53:54. > :53:59.nonessential services and policies the Welsh Government have
:54:00. > :54:03.introduced? Example, three prescriptions, bus passes and
:54:04. > :54:06.hospital parking. This is mean those kind of policies will have to go out
:54:07. > :54:12.the window because you don't have the money for those kinds of
:54:13. > :54:17.policies? It has always been about priorities. What can we do to
:54:18. > :54:22.mitigate, to safeguard people against cuts. People on low incomes.
:54:23. > :54:25.That has been important to concessionary fares and free
:54:26. > :54:29.prescriptions and stop the priorities have meant I have spent
:54:30. > :54:33.more on health per head and that came out in the figures from the
:54:34. > :54:39.Treasury two weeks ago. I spend more per head, 7% more per head, on
:54:40. > :54:42.Health and Social Care Act. There was Labour government has had to
:54:43. > :54:48.drive its own priorities and a lot of this is about to decisions in a
:54:49. > :54:53.few days' time. So far, you have been able to keep those
:54:54. > :54:56.non-essential policies. Can you give a guarantee those will make it
:54:57. > :55:02.through the next Labour manifesto, for example? I we facing such a
:55:03. > :55:06.difficult economic time in Wales those kind of things can speak
:55:07. > :55:10.Antiguan future? I have managed to balance the budget to make sure we
:55:11. > :55:16.do prioritise those all-important services. We have to look at the
:55:17. > :55:20.detail, such a late spending review, I'm going to present my draft budget
:55:21. > :55:24.on the 8th of December and then we will see how that can pan into our
:55:25. > :55:30.future commitments in our manifesto for next year. This is a time where
:55:31. > :55:35.we need to look to ways in which we can support business and we can also
:55:36. > :55:38.support the most vulnerable and poorest people in our communities.
:55:39. > :55:42.Investing in Health and Social Care Act is vital and we have
:55:43. > :55:46.demonstrated we can do that. But also to our children, young people
:55:47. > :55:53.and business. That is where the challenge comes from the government.
:55:54. > :55:56.One thing that has to be said this government could have come to us
:55:57. > :56:02.with a joint agreement, I am showing you a joint agreement between the HM
:56:03. > :56:06.government and the Welsh Government three years ago about our funding.
:56:07. > :56:11.We still haven't got fair funding. We welcome the fact there is a flaw.
:56:12. > :56:16.We haven't got the detail of the security we know that uptake is
:56:17. > :56:21.forward. A funding floor, for viewers who aren't familiar, it is
:56:22. > :56:26.the minimum spend from the UK Government as will come to Wales
:56:27. > :56:32.which George Osborne has -- set at 115%. For every pound that will be
:56:33. > :56:39.spent in England, one to 50 will be spent in Wales. That is what ifs
:56:40. > :56:48.Gerald Holtham recommended. Everyone in Wales knows what fair funding
:56:49. > :56:53.means. They want to see us in the most government, cross-party of
:56:54. > :56:55.possible, sort this out. We welcome the fact they've come up with a
:56:56. > :57:01.funding floor but they have guaranteed that warranted and 15%.
:57:02. > :57:05.Until I sit down and get an intergovernmental agreement, because
:57:06. > :57:12.at the moment they are saying it is only for this term of Parliament.
:57:13. > :57:15.I'm ready to talk to Ben... Even Carwyn Jones says that to be a
:57:16. > :57:22.short-term measure anyway. Five years seems to address that. In
:57:23. > :57:30.April, it is important we get this device called a Barnett floor. That
:57:31. > :57:35.is according to Carwyn Jones. In Jones, he said, that means the last
:57:36. > :57:40.obstacle for income tax to be decided by the Welsh Government is
:57:41. > :57:47.removed for him. You have got the flooding floor, why aren't you not
:57:48. > :57:53.saying, brilliant' -- funding floor. As I said on the day, we were
:57:54. > :57:58.disappointed that the Chancellor said this is only for this term of
:57:59. > :58:03.Parliament. It is important we sit down, work at the detail. It could
:58:04. > :58:08.be reset for the next Parliament. That means they could get rid of it.
:58:09. > :58:14.We have to output this... The Barnett Formula has been here 1978.
:58:15. > :58:18.We need the permanent funding floor. If we secure that and I am willing
:58:19. > :58:20.to sit down with the UK Government and secure that long-term
:58:21. > :58:25.intergovernmental agreements, I do believe we have made progress in
:58:26. > :58:28.getting fairer funding for Wales. Thank you for coming to less this
:58:29. > :58:29.moniker Don't forget you follow all
:58:30. > :58:31.the latest on Twitter. But for now that's all from me,
:58:32. > :58:39.time to go back to Andrew. officers will be lost?
:58:40. > :58:46.We are going to let that question hang now. Thank you. Andrew.
:58:47. > :58:52.Sadly that is it for today because we have just been told we have been
:58:53. > :58:57.truncated to make way for live coverage of the Davis Cup tennis
:58:58. > :59:02.final here on BBC One. There is always next week!
:59:03. > :59:17.Remember - if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.