07/02/2016 Sunday Politics Wales

Morning, folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics.

We finally know what David Cameron wants

as he attempts to reform our relationship with the EU.

Does it deliver on his promises - and will it be enough to convince

and most of us can't name our MEP.

Is there a democratic crisis in the EU?

Former Respect MP George Galloway and Labour's Stephen Kinnock go

Jeremy Corbyn has plenty of new grassroots support.

But is Labour facing a cash crisis thanks to a loss of money from big

donors, taxpayers and Government plans to restrict union funding?

It is an affront on British democracy.

Later in the programme: agreement which changed the funding

Welsh Lib Dems have had their annual conference in cardiff.

After last year's thumping at the general election,

about his priorities these last two years?

And joining me as always, three journalists who've got more

opinions than the campaign to leave the EU has splinter groups.

Yes, it's Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Janan Ganesh.

We'll see if they're still on speaking terms by the end

Let's start today by talking about what the Government in England

is or isn't going to do about a sugar tax.

Health experts have been calling for one, to tackle

is a crisis in child obesity - but so far ministers

Well, this morning the celebrity chef Jamie Oliver said

to "get ninja" to force the Government to act.

Here's the Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, responding

on The Andrew Marr Show this morning.

It has to be a game changing moment, a robust strategy.

The issue here is, do what it takes to make sure

that children consume less sugar, because we have got

We are the most obese nation in the EU

Well, we are going to be announcing in due course -

David Cameron has said, if it isn't a sugar tax,

it needs to be something that is equally robust.

But he hasn't taken a sugar tax off the table.

Will there be a sugar tax? His instinct is to say no, I do not want

to run the nanny state that Jeremy Hunt says his one-year-old daughter,

by the time she is an adult, one third of the population will be

clinically obese and Public Health England shows if you introduce a

sugar tax, you will reduce that some Jeremy Hunt is in favour but the

Prime Minister is inching towards some decision, whether that is a

sugar tax or not... Regional and devolved governments, Wales has been

very keen on that. I feel I am at liberty to say this but Scotland

also has greater tax-raising powers so he could get outflanked. Or wait

and see how it does in Scotland and Wales and then decide to follow?

Yes. I want to make the liberal case against this but that ship has

sailed decades ago, we tax alcohol and tobacco and this is more like a

revenue raiser because that isn't -- a justifiable cause, we have a

population with a sweet tooth that you can hit the revenue. That is the

reasoning to deal with rather than the more censorious reason of

monitoring behaviour. And junior doctors, scheduled to be back on

strike on Wednesday in England, which means that some of the talks

so far have failed? There is bad feeling but as Andrew Marr was

saying, the turnout on the vote was very high, and the 8%. The

government is really struggling to shake this debate and it is

interesting with that interview, Jeremy Hunt has said until now that

the cost of the new contract would be revenue neutral, he now admits

there would not only be a transitional cost but longer term

and the government is really struggling on this. It is not affect

emergency services this time. It was a big week for

David Cameron's renegotiation He once promised a fundamental

change in that relationship as a condition for backing

the campaign to stay in. Well, there are changes -

but perhaps not quite as fundamental And what he has achieved still needs

to be agreed by EU leaders at a summit in a fortnight's

time, where it could be But Mr Cameron says what he's

achieved is so significant that if Britain was not an EU member,

this would make him want to join. Here he is speaking

earlier in the week. I can say, hand on heart,

I've delivered the commitments that I made in my manifesto,

and I think the whole country knows that if you, for instance,

pay people ?5,000, ?10,000 additional to their wages,

then that is a draw to Britain, and that's one of

the reasons why we've seen such high levels

of migration and movement. So David Cameron says it lives up

to everything that was promised in the Conservative

election manifesto. I'm joined by former Cabinet

minister Eric Pickles. Welcome back. You said this week the

Prime Minister has kept to the letter and spirit of his manifesto

promise. Let us look at what this promise. The manifesto said we will

insist that EU migrants who want to claim tax credits and child benefit

must live here and contribute to the economy for a minimum of four years.

The emergency rig on tax credits does not achieve that? -- brake. You

must bear in mind the things we can do through domestic law, a

job-seeker from Europe who cannot find a job within six months, you

are obliged to leave and that has been achieved through domestic law.

The manifesto promised no in work benefits until you have been here

for four years. The reality is graduated, they rise, and after four

years you get the full benefit? That is not unreasonable. After four

years to get full benefit but we know that the criteria for putting

on the brake for four years has already been passed and the largest

political party in the EU agrees that has happened and we should have

this in place after the next referendum. It will have to be

approved by the European Parliament and the other 27 members and what

constitution, emergency, the cost to migrants is five billion pounds

every year, we are 1.6 5 trillion economy, public spending is 750

billion pounds. Why is ?500 million and emergency, only 1.6% of the

bill? My earlier answer was, we already know the political leader of

the largest political party in the Parliament of Europe has said it is

the fact that we have arrived at those conditions and an emergency

brake will be placed. What emergency? It is an emergency in the

views of the European partners, they have accrued -- agreed to this

emergency brake but in terms have the mechanism of Britain future for

other countries, that will be decided over the next two weeks but

what we do know as far as the UK is concerned, we will get that

emergency brake. If a migrant Eilidh Child lives abroad, they should

receive no child tax credit or benefit, no matter how long they

have worked in the UK or how much tax they have paid. There it is. The

sentiment does not deliver on that either? What it does deliver is

harmonisation of benefits so the level of benefits will be exactly

the same as it would be in their own country. You are going to have 28

different levels of child benefit! In many cases it can be as much as

the quarter. And in some cases, more? Not many people to pay the

same level that we don't but the point I was making is that in Poland

it is a quarter of the level as it is here. You promised no child

benefit for migrants and you're delivering index linked child

benefit for migrants? It is a big improvement on the current

situation. When you go into negotiation, but do precisely that

and I think it is within the spirit of what we said. The manifesto said

that you will control migration from the European Union by reforming

welfare rolls and Mr Cameron at one stage said that reducing immigration

from the European Union would be at the heart of this. Can you give us

an idea of how much these changes will reduce European Union

migration? I am not part of the negotiating team so all I can go

wrong is what I have seen in newspapers and given that we know

that in work benefits, 40% of new arrivals are supported by that and

given that the average is ?6,000 in addition and can be as much as

?10,000, it will have an effect. You said 40% but that is not the figure,

we know from the Freedom of Information release that if there

had been any emergency brake in the last four years it would have

affected 84,000 families. That is it, not 40%. I said that 40% of the

new immigrants that, in, new migrants, claiming in work benefit,

you are comparing apples and pears? I am not. 80,000 families is nowhere

near 40%. Last year, 180,000 net migration from the EU. Do you have

any idea by how much the figure will be reduced as a result of the

settlement? Were not trying to prevent people living inside the

European Union, we are trying to stop people coming for something for

nothing, to claim from our innovative system and secondly, to

ensure there is an equalisation inside the market of people coming

here just because of our in work benefits. Since this will apply only

to new migrants and not those that are already here, is unlikely to be

a rush to come in before these restrictions in? And the figure

could rise? As part of the negotiations we have to ensure that

doesn't happen. We would have two ask as part of the negotiation... To

ensure that there isn't this new influx. In the manifesto you also

said that we want national partners to be able to work together to block

unwanted European legislation. In the Lisbon Treaty there is an orange

card system that does that and we have the red card with Mr Cameron,

is this an improvement? The Orange card has been used twice. That was

yellow, orange has never been used. I beg your pardon. It is confusing!

How many different cards? Three, yellow and orange and this red card.

In what way would the red card be any improvement on the existing

Orange card, which means 51% of national parliaments can make the

commission rethink? We can move much quicker in terms of trying to knock

out any deal between European Parliaments and secondly, national

parliaments are becoming much more assertive in terms of their session

and that is a massively important step in the re-establishment in the

importance of national parliaments. It is not just our Parliament, we

would need to get 56% of national parliaments, at least 15 others, and

in many cases we would only have 12 weeks to ask them to vote against

the policy of their own national government. That is not credible? Of

course it is. I think this is a very important step on the way of

ensuring national parliaments are much more assertive and don't

forget, read this in line of stopping them moving towards ever

closer union and protecting sterling. Let us look at that. It

was meant to be one of the big wins for the Prime Minister, Donald Tusk,

the President of the Council, says we have always had that, it need not

mean integration for Britain, the settlement confirms only the status

quo. It is very interesting for him to

say that but on every programme that I've ever been on, it has been this

drift towards ever closer union, political union, that has been

important. If it means we have now re-established that it is about give

and take and cooperation, that is a great thing. Given how little the

prime and this has achieved -- the Prime Minister has achieved, would

his position not be undermined, or become untenable, if this draft

settlement was further undermined before being finally agreed? I'm

very confident, given that this Prime Minister is the only Prime

Minister ever to take powers back from Europe, that it will be

successful. But could you stomach of further watering down? It would

depend what the overall position is but my position comes not from any

enthusiasm for Europe. It's just a lack of any decent ideas that we

would be better off outside. To come back to this business of the

European Parliament, there are number of areas in which the

European Parliament has to approve this settlement, including the work

benefits, child benefit element, perhaps even the red card. What

guarantees can you give, because the European Parliament won't to do

this, if it does it at all, until after the referendum... So how can

you guarantee that we will vote to stay in and the European Parliament

will not pass the legislation? We've had indications from the European

Parliament that they will do precisely that. What I would hope...

Where? Just a second. The leader of the largest party has said that. I

think what we would want to see over the next couple of weeks are more

codification in terms of how this would come to operate, not just for

us but for other parties. But if the European Parliament doesn't pass

this, it is not legally binding. The Prime Minister has told us that. It

can only be eagerly binding under the existing treaties with

legislation through the European Parliament. You are asking the

British people to vote blind, to vote yes, without really knowing

what the European Parliament might do down the road in the autumn at

the end of the year. I'm very confident that will be the case. --

won't be the case. It will be an appalling abuse of trust and would

undermine the European Union, were it not to do so. But sooner or

later, we are going to have to go on to discuss, what would the

consequences be thus leaving? Because that would not be a

pain-free experience. I really want the guarantees for those that want

us to leave to say that my constituents and my constituents'

children will be materially better off by leaving. Not just the same

but better off by leaving. Eric Pickles, thanks for being with us

this morning. Thank you. In recent weeks we've been debating

some of the big issues at the heart We've covered immigration

and the economy. Today we're going to look

at Britain's sovereignty within the European Union and ask,

is the EU a democratic club There are about 500 million people

across the 28 member states Voters from these countries go

to the polls every five years to elect 751 members

of the European Parliament. The UK currently has

73 MEPs, who have some say over the EU budget

and new legislation. But it's the unelected Commission,

led by President Jean-Claude Juncker, that is responsible

for day-to-day management, plus proposing and

implementing new laws. Later this month, David Cameron

will attend a crucial meeting of the European Council

to press for his draft settlement, the outcome of his

efforts to renegotiate our terms The Council is made up of the 28

heads of state or government of EU members and decides

the Union's overall political But it's not to be confused with

the Council of the European Union, where ministers from each

country meet to discuss, There's always been

concern about a so-called democratic deficit and at the last

elections in 2014, turnout In the UK, where few people can

even name a local MEP, I'm joined now by former Respect

MP George Galloway - he's said this week he'll campaign

for Britain to leave the EU - and by the Labour MP

Stephen Kinnock, who wants Stephen Kinnock, let me come to you

first. Turnout at the last election was under 36%. Only 11% can name

their MEP. Richie Gray the EU has a massive democratic deficit and the

Cameron settlement does nothing to address it, does it? On the

democratic deficit, of course it would be good if more people voted

in democratic elections but let's not forget there is another

democratically elected institution in Brussels and that's the council

of the vistas and the European council. They are ministers. Our

Prime Minister, directly elected by the British people, going to

Brussels to exert influence for Britain. The democratic deficit

sometimes gets tied up with the European Parliament. That's an

element of it but the council is a major part. On the renegotiation, I

think the really important point is that this referendum is not about

David Cameron's renegotiation. This referendum is about the future of

the United Kingdom as a trading nation, as a proud nation in terms

of a diplomatic big player and where we are actually going in terms of

the long-term future of the country. It's not about the precise details

of David Cameron's renegotiation. Mr Cameron think that is important.

George Galloway, you said you believe in a union of the peoples of

Europe but surely the only realistic way to achieve that is to work for a

reformed EU. Anything else is just rhetoric. No, because I think it is

in the Brits of the EU. You pointed to the visibility of the European

Parliament, its credibility and standing but you didn't add that the

European Parliament itself, even if AT the centre people were turning

out to vote for it, has almost no power. The power lies in this

council of ministers and in a bureaucracy well entrenched, very

lavishly funded, which has meant of its own. I could answer your

question in two words - Catherine Ashton. Never heard of her? No. Ever

elected to? No. She was the European Foreign Minister, dictating to other

countries outside the world with no democratic mandate of any kind. I

think we have to be more sensible about the way we talk about these

things. There is a process of co-decision which is enshrined in

the treaties of the European Union. The vast majority of the legislation

which goes through has to be agreed by both the European Parliament and

by the European council on the basis of proposals from the European

Commission. Not necessarily all the council. Politics is the art of the

possible and when you are part of a system of pooled sovereignty is,

when we come together as nation states because we believe our

sovereignty is actually strengthened through cooperation, of course you

have to make compromises. You don't win absolutely 100% of everything

that you go for but actually, I believe that through corporation and

pulling our sovereignty our sovereignty is strengthened. There

has been a lot of talk by the Prime Minister about asserting the

sovereignty of Parliament. It seems to be one of the carrots to attract

Mr Boris Johnson to come onside. But surely you have to accept that in

many areas, the EU and the European Court of Justice, they are sovereign

and Parliament has to recognise that sovereignty or we have to leave. I

think that we have to also look at the likes of Google or the big

multinational companies. They don't recognise the concept of

sovereignty. For people on the left, such as George and myself, the key

point of the European Union is, it's a transnational body that regulating

transnational business. Not very well. It is not regulating them very

well. Much better than we could do them alone. I don't think so. The

bottom line is... And this is to be, on the left. Mr Kinnock senior and I

shared many platforms on this, as well as the late Mr Benn, the late

Mr foot. This was commonplace on the left. We don't want to be dictated

to by other countries. We want our people to choose our government and

thus our direction. And I'd rather take my chance with changing things

in Britain than waiting for a change in Bulgaria or in Poland. But you

are nationalists and doesn't but inevitably involve some kind of

pooling sovereignty? The whole basis of the European Union... As we

always said from 1975 onwards, on the left, the European Community,

now the EU, is actually built on neoliberal economic principles,

which are ironclad and unchangeable. However people want to vote. Are you

comfortable with the manner in which Greece's sovereignty was overturned

by the European institutions and above all by companies -- countries

like Germany? We live in a highly globalised, interdependent world and

the idea that the UK alone can exert influence and regulate the big

multinationals on its own is absurd. The other key point on Greece is,

how would we help the people of Greece by leaving the EU? Our

principles are about solidarity, a key value on which European Union is

founded, which is a value of the left. What was the solidarity that

the EU showed Greece? I think what we need is a Labour Prime Minister

in Brussels arguing against the politics of austerity. We are not

part of the eurozone. This was a eurozone argument. We can still

exert our influence. What many would think is your natural allies on the

European left, so reads the increase, and a party in Spain, want

to stay in the EU. Why are you right and your comrades wrong? The people

of Greece were crushed underfoot by this neoliberal consensus on which

the EU and administrations are built. Portugal actually had an

election and elected a majority of left-wing MPs and we're told by the

European Union, the president of Portugal was told, you mustn't

summon these people to your palace to allow them to form a government.

This is unconscionable. It's not because I love the people of Greece,

though I do, or the people of Spain. I don't want us to face the same

fate as them. Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonell's economic policies, which

I believe in and which are badly needed, are illegal under the EU. If

we were to save our steel industry, for example, we would be acting out

with the European Union's legal framework. You've been closely

involved in the steel industry. What do you say to that? I fail to see

how our principles of solidarity and reaching out to our brothers and

sisters in other parts of the year are helped by the idea that we

suddenly leave. But to me seems to be going against the founding value

of the Labour Party, which is solidarity. On steel, this is a

classic example but it is up to your member state government to play the

game properly. Unfortunately, we have a government that has been

asleep at the wheel on steel for four or five years. An energy

compensation package should have been put in place years ago. The

government has done nothing about it. The massive flooding of Chinese

steel into the British market has only been happening over the last

four years. That could only be done by Europe, not Britain. It took them

for years to get the stated clearance because nobody was

knocking on the door properly in Brussels and because we are cosying

up to Beijing. Cameron and Osborne seem to be putting the interests of

our relationship with China ahead of British industry. We are allowing

them to damp massive amounts of Chinese steel in the market. The

European Court of Justice is preventing us from deporting

Moroccan citizen, the daughter-in-law of Abu Hamza, Abu

Hamza himself convicted of 11 terrorist offences. She has done

time, too, for a terrorist elated offence. We still can't deport her.

That is a pretty serious intrusion of our sovereignty. I don't know the

details of that case but I do know we live in a very interdependent

world... You said that. What people want to know is if we can deport

foreign citizens who have terrorist criminal convictions. We did manage

to do it with Abu Hamza, so there are ways. The EU is a rules -based

organisation. It sets the rules of the game. It's up to the member

states to play that game properly. Unfortunately, we have a government

that has failed to build alliances and coalitions in Brussels. That's

one of the reasons we have a difficult relationship with the EU

now. When you look at this leave site and the various factions of the

time they seem to be spending more time knocking lumps out of each

other, does that make you happy you joined? I campaigned against

breaking up Britain and for a no vote in the Scottish referendum.

That didn't mean I was with the Tories, didn't mean I was with the

Orange order. So are you solo again? There used to be a commonplace view

from the 1970s, and still standing now, for a democratic future for

Britain. We decide how many immigrants we have, who we deport,

what our levels of taxation are and what our foreign policy should be.

We will leave it there. Thank you both.

Labour says it faces losing more than a quarter of its funding,

thanks to Government plans to change the way the party gets money

from trade union members, along with moves to cut state

In a rare TV outing, the party's general secretary

Iain McNicol has told us just how damaging the changes could be.

An audience of around 800 people turning out on a Thursday night

in North London to watch well-known comedians,

artistic and political types talk about, well,

why Jeremy Corbyn ought to be Prime Minister.

He wasn't here and this wasn't a fundraiser but similar nights

to this have raised cash for the party.

Welcome, one and all, you bunch of loony lefties.

I started in my constituency in Brentford.

And then other constituencies asked me to do the same thing

and we've done 165 and raised ?100,000.

And it's just as well, because the Labour Party

says it could be about to lose about ?8 million of funding

if Government plans to change the way it collects

money from trade union members go through.

And they say it's no laughing matter.

It is an affront on British democracy.

If you look at any previous agreement which changed

the funding of a political party, it was done on a consensual,

cross-party basis, an agreement, because of the effect it had.

So is this an existential threat to the Labour Party?

It would be very difficult for the party.

funding would mean that we would not be able to operate in the current

way that we do, holding the Government to account

The cash goes towards staffing, reportedly around

half its costs, and, of course, campaigning.

Things like party election broadcasts, battle buses,

At the moment, trade union members have to actively opt

out of paying towards the Labour Party.

In the future, they would have to opt in, in writing,

within three months - something Labour fear

people just won't get round to doing.

It also coincides with a 19% cut to so-called short money,

cash given to all opposition parties to

help with the costs of Parliamentary business -

a sort of concession for not having the civil service

But the man who used to be in charge of said civil

service says the Government's plans are at best partisan.

It goes to this wider question of what I would see

as a worryingly authoritarian streak in government that finds it

difficult to live with and accept challenge.

I think that's something that people of all parties...

I'm actually a crossbencher, not in any

party, and I think, whichever party are in,

There's nothing authoritarian about having something

clearly flagged in our manifesto, voted for in a majority government

and delivered on, and there's nothing authoritarian about having

That's to say, if you're a Labour Party supporter and you're

a member of a trade union, you actively choose to do it,

rather than having it forced upon you

Frankly, I think the Labour Party needs to get

out and convince union members it's a good use of their money to give

that money to the Labour Party, just as the Conservatives

and Liberal Democrats have to convince people to give

We don't rely on people accidentally giving

Back in Kentish Town, the organisers here say a night

like this is as much about raising awareness and morale as it is cash.

Jeremy Corbyn's leadership campaign relied on grassroots support.

As the party's funding streams start to dry

up, it it could well need to rely on people like this -

people willing to come to a night about Jeremy Corbyn

In fact, Mr Corbyn may prefer the thought of appealing

to the wallets of people like this, rather than the traditional big

donors, and number of whom have already publicly

But fundraising made up just 3% of the

The spotlight will now fall on how Labour pays its way in the future.

And we now say goodbye to viewers in Scotland,

who leave us for Sunday Politics Scotland.

Now, this week in the House of Lords, Labour's peers

will try to fight off the Government's plans to change

the way union members give money to the party.

The shadow leader in the Lords, Angela Smith, joins me now -

and I should add we asked to speak to a Government minister

For a change! Or not! If you join a trade union, why should part of the

membership fee be given to the Labour Party without your explicit

approval? It is a choice you can make and one of the things said

during the House of Lords debate is a Conservative peer said, when was

the evidence that people are forced to opt in? One of the key things is

the government says you must opt in rather than quite but when they gave

businesses two years to bring in the plastic bag levy, they gave trade

unions three months to change them into our system. In three years

would you change your mind? Well, no. It's not really a matter of

time, then? Within three months in writing, the government is making

this as difficult as possible. When this was looked at, it was amenable

of a number of -- context of a number of aspects and they are not

giving any other changes on those affecting themselves, only the

Labour Party. Many members do not vote Labour, why should they have to

opt out? Surely those who want to join Labour should have to opt in?

There does not seem to be any problem with people being asked to

opt out. Look at this in the context of funding for all parties, the

government have picked one recommendation from the committee of

standards in public life, the one that reflects the Labour Party adds

nothing to look at Conservative Party funding, blatantly partisan

and unfair. But is it wrong within its own right? Labour depends on

inertia, people pay the levy but they don't want to and they do not

know about opting out? Isn't it time we stopped tracking nonlabour

voters? Nobody is tracking anybody, that is grossly misrepresenting. In

the context of all of these public life issues, you can do it but they

say themselves, tracking, the Conservatives talk about the burden

on trade unions, this is unfair. It will ensure that in that short space

of time they will not be able to reach everybody. You said that even

in two years you would still be against it. That is not exactly what

I said, over a longer period of time, in the context of all the

other measures that have been addressed on party funding, what is

unfair is this is one measure affecting one party. You understand

the government is picking on you. Not just me! In the United States,

Bernie Sanders, on the left of the party, he has no union backing or

big donors or business backing. He managed to get, not even running

nationwide, over 3 million individual donations. He raised $20

million in January. Jeremy Corbyn is striking a chord with people who

have never been involved before. Why not raise more money from ordinary

sympathisers. Do not think for one moment that trade unionists who

could opt in are not ordinary Labour Party, many of them are and over

longer period you would not see the drop off the Conservative Party is

hoping for. $20 million in one month. That is amazing and I would

like to change how we can fund political parties and that is what

the committee looked at, reducing the cap on donations, reducing the

spending limits and it did look at -- look at trade unionists funding.

How much do you raise from individual members? About two thirds

of funding. Excluding a good donors? I could not give you that figure.

Isn't that the way the Labour should reduce its dependence on the unions,

?8 million from the unions at the moment, and many people in the party

used to think that kind of funding was a disadvantage for the party

because you are more than unions. Would that not be one way of getting

small, individual donations to bring in a lot of money and show that you

are not in the pocket of anybody? Over the course of Parliament it is

about ?8 million every year that is just one third of the money that we

get from all areas, donations from members also. What I am looking at

is the Conservative Party that so dislikes the unions, it wants to cut

their funding to not just us but in the work they do. If they want to do

that, look at parting funding overall but it is ill-conceived to

just look at modelling the opposition. I take your point that

they are not stopping big donors from giving themselves money but

have you not become more dependent on the unions? At one stage we

thought you were becoming less so but more than ever, and the leader

seems to make that dependency even greater? According to a recent

report, Jeremy Corbyn treats big Labour donors with disdain and has

abandoned fundraising. We look at all members and supporters for

donations but I will not apologise for our relationship with trade

unions, we grew out of them and we work together on issues. What I am

asking is, are you not becoming overly dependent on them? And

becoming vulnerable to this time of action from a Conservative

government? Our donations continue to increase, I cannot give you

figures, I do not do those sums. I cannot remember them. I haven't got

a photographic memory! I know the problem! Are you going to block this

in the House of Lords? You may not like this but it was in the Tory

manifesto? This came from cross-party, let us investigate this

properly, let us take not just my word or the word of the Labour

Party, let's have a cross-party look at what the Tory party is trying to

do and I would put store by that. Let's look at the report on the 29th

of the brewery. Thank you very much. -- February.

Coming up here in 20 minutes, we'll be talking to an MP

from the latest Eurosceptic group hoping to be chosen as the official

Hello and welcome to the Sunday Politics Wales.

On today's programme: They took one hell of a beating in last year's

general election, so how are things looking for the Lib Dems

And should Cardiff have its own Boris Johnson?

We look at the arguments for and against directly

The Liberal Democrats or Liberals have been around in one form

for 150 years, but this year's Assembly election sees them

facing their toughest task in decades.

They'll be looking to retain their five seats in Cardiff Bay,

but are under pressure, particularly on the list,

This weekend they gathered for their conference

and were addressed by their UK leader, Tim Farron.

Here's a flavour of what he had to say.

Jeremy Corbyn needs to understand that in this part

of the United Kingdom his party are still in Government

and its legacy to the people of Wales is one of failure.

Under Labour, Welsh patients have longer waiting times for ambulances,

That is truly shocking when you think Wales is governed

by a party that's spent over 60 years pretendling that the NHS

Nye Bevan stood on the shoulders of giants.

They know that if they get into trouble in the May elections

they can rely on the nationalists to prop them up.

I was on Question Time with Leanne Wood a few months ago,

But there is absolutely no point whatsoever in voting for her.

She has made it totally clear if no party has a majority,

So if you vote Labour you get Labour.

If you want to make a difference, you vote for the Welsh Liberal

Well, in her speech, the party's Welsh leader,

Kirsty Williams, launched a scathing attack on the Labour Party's record

Afterwards our political editor, Nick Servini, asked her why,

if the party is so awful, her party does deals

What I was expressing in my speech I think is a strongly held view

by many many people I speak to the length and breadth of Wales

who had high hopes and believed the promises that having

a National Assembly for Wales and a Welsh Government would make

I think their experience is that that hasn't happened.

The basic things that they expect the Government to deliver for them -

a great school for their children, the ability to ring up a doctor

in the morning and get an appointment, to go into hospital

knowing that that ward will have the right number of staff,

to know that we've got an economy that allows them to get

I don't think it is the fault of devolution.

I think it is the fault of the Government that we have.

You talked about the First Minister winging it.

Mark Drakeford, the Health Minister, coming up with vanity projects.

But there's a mismatch here, it seems to me, with the rhetoric

and the political reality of life in Cardiff Bay.

This is a Labour Government that doesn't have an overall majority,

and then you've given a number of speeches like this.

Admittedly you have ramped up the rhetoric

And then we find they get their budgets through and more often

than not, behind closed doors you've done a deal with them.

What the Liberal Democrats have done is said what we would do

when we were returned to the Assembly with a group of five

We would oppose when we thought the Government was doing bad things.

For instance we were the only party to vote against

We were the only party that has consistently voted

against the new social services legislation

which will mean for many people they will not get the care

But where we have an opportunity to deliver policies and inject a bit

of enthusiasm and dynamism and new ideas into the Government,

So when we've had the opportunity to introduce our Welsh Pupil Premium,

so we get extra money to our poorest children in education,

we've used that opportunity, because otherwise to sit

back and simply criticise from the sidelines would have meant

those children wouldn't have got the resources that they need.

Resources that are making a massive difference.

We've seen over many years the gap between our poorest children

and their well-off counterparts grow.

It is because of a Welsh Liberal Democrat policy that we were able

to persuade this tired Labour Government to introduce.

We've seen that it has made a difference.

My job has been to oppose absolutely the failures of this Government,

but use the opportunities also to make a difference.

I can't make all the difference I want to make, because I'm not

But I'm not going to sit back and pass up on an opportunity

to help put more money into education.

I'm not going to sit back and pass up on the opportunity to stop

a project that will see all of our resources being spent

on one road in one part of Wales and let the rest

But it's been a breeze for the Labour Government over

Bearing in mind they don't have an overall majority,

behind the scenes they have got no fear now of going into minority

government after the past five years.

And that tells you all you need to know about the attitude

They think that because they are Labour they have a God-given right

They may be in charge but they've got no dynamism,

no ideas, no determination to make things better.

Now my party here at this conference we've outlined in the fields

of economic development how we are going to grow our Welsh small

businesses to create more jobs, to protect us

We've outlined how we are going to cut class sizes so that teachers

have the time to devote to their pupils.

We've outlined how we are going to invest in primary care

so when people ring up at 8 o'clock on a Monday morning they are not

told it is going to be three weeks before they see their GP.

We've got a Government that currently has run out of ideas,

is not ambitious for Wales, doesn't want to change things,

is quite happy to sit back and let things happen.

We want to change that in this election.

Let's talk about the Assembly campaign.

Have you bottomed out in Wales after that disastrous general

Well, there's nothing more that you can say to describe

Obviously these elections are challenging, but they were

challenging for us five years ago, when people like your colleagues

in the BBC and pollsters said we would be wiped out.

We demonstrated by taking a very strong campaign out

on to the streets into the communities and articulating

very clearly why Welsh Liberal Democrats need to be

in the Assembly, what we would do if we had the opportunity,

we were able to return a strong group, a small group but a strong

group which has punched above its weight.

And used its influence to go good things.

And used its influence to do good things.

The first part of Europe that will have a law that will say

that we will have safe staff levels on our hospital wards.

We've used that influence and that power.

If we can do that with five, imagine what we could do with more.

The nurses is all part of this strategy to keep it simple,

on the doorstep, the question, are people listening?

I think they are listening, because we are honest enough to say

to people look, as people who believe strongly on devolution,

and my party campaigned for it for over 100 years,

we recognise that devolution is not delivering for you,

We recognise that we'll need to change the game

if we are going to have the public services that we deserve

If we are going to have the strong economy that's going to make our

I believe people recognise the honesty in what we are saying

about the failures of devolution, and they are receptive

to the arguments that it doesn't have to be this way,

As Welsh Liberal Democrats we've got the ideas,

smaller class sizes, more nurses on our wards,

Making sure we've got the mobile technology and the broadband

technology to help businesses thrive.

Would you consider doing a deal with Labour?

I'm not here to speculate about what will happen

My job in these coming weeks is to say to the people of Wales

devolution hasn't delivered for you, we understand that.

We are the party with the dynamism and the energy and the new,

fresh ideas that will make a difference to solving the problems

that you and your family are facing, making sure

there are well-paid jobs in Wales, that your children will go

to a great school, in class sizes that are manageable.

That when you go to hospital there'll be the correct number

And when you ring up you will get an appointment with your GP.

What's clear to me is none of those things will happen if we have

another five years of a Labour Government,

who are tired, have run out of ideas.

They think they have a God-given right to govern Wales.

I don't think Wales can afford to have that Government

Kirsty Williams, thank you very much.

Now, would having an elected Mayor where you live

They're launching a petition this week which could lead

to a referendum in the capital on having its own elected Mayor.

Bristol has had its own elected Mayor for four years now.

In a moment, we'll be hearing the arguments for and against.

But first, Cemlyn Davies has been over the Severn Bridge to see how

and whether Cardiff could follow Bristol's example.

Meet George Ferguson, Bristol's Marmite Mayor,

Mr Ferguson was elected in 2012, shortly after the city voted

in favour of having an elected Mayor.

Since then this colourful character has certainly left his mark.

With campaigners in Cardiff now hoping to have their own elected

Mayor, where better to see what that could mean than Bristol.

I think Bristol, I would say it wouldn't I, has benefited in terms

of an awful lot of the things that didn't really get to happen are now

happening as a result of the decision-making processes

I think undoubtedly it does lead to greater action,

but Cardiff should judge as to whether its politics

So how does the system work here in Bristol?

And what kind of response has there been?

Well, the Mayor is elected for a four-year term.

The role has replaced that of council leader,

and the Mayor is responsible for the council's executive functions.

He or she appoints a cabinet, including up to nine of the city's

Each cabinet member can be given an area of responsibility,

All key decisions must be taken by the cabinet as a whole.

Meanwhile the remaining councillors professional a scrutiny role

and have the power to call in a decision taken by the Mayor

But they can't get rid of the Mayor during his or her time in office.

Professor Robin Hambleton has carried out research looking at how

the city has changed under an elected Mayor.

I think we can show that the visibility of the leadership

Many more people, a really large jump in the number of people knowing

who the leader is and being pleased about the visibility of leadership

and projecting the city outside the city internationally

Also a stronger strategic vision for the city.

I think Mayor Ferguson has delivered on that.

There is no doubt Mayor Ferguson has brought Bristol to life.

His efforts to make Sunday special have proved highly successful,

drawing visitors to enjoy cultural events and activities

Originally from Aberystwyth Katherine McDonnell now runs this

She thinks the city has benefited from its elected Mayor.

I think its generally a good thing, because he's an entrepreneur.

He's really put Bristol on the map in Europe and further afield.

He's a good character to have to identify with Bristol I think.

There are always downsides but generally for Bristol

with inward investment and publicity for Bristol it's been a good thing.

What are those downsides? You ask anybody about George Ferguson and

they will go, oh, the parking. Yes, the Mayor's decision to extend

residents parking zones and limit spaces for drivers coming into the

city has been highly controversial, resulting in protests like this one.

Another disgrace and shame for Bristol! Some have accused the Mayor

of making decisions without listening, and that, critics say, is

an obvious flaw in the elected Mayor system. I think there has to be a

set of checks and balances. If you have too much power in the hands of

one individual, firstly that person becomes overloaded, because they

can't take all the decisions that knead to be made in a timely way.

But secondly there's a risk that power corrupts. And that people feel

excluded. Excluded. I'm not accusing Mayors of being corrupt but the

model concentrates power in one place and that can work against

getting legitimacy for decisions. It is important for a Mayor to disperse

some of their pair to other leaders in the City Council. The past four

years have been a steep learning curve for Bristol and its Mayor and

there could be lessons here for Cardiff too, should voters there be

asked if they want an elected Mayor. But there is, of course, still a lot

of water to go under the bridge before that happens.

Here in the studio to talk about whether or not this would be

a good idea for Cardiff are the Conservative MP

Craig Williams, who's in favour, and the Leader of the Opposition

on Cardiff Council, the Lib Dem, Judith Woodman, who's against.

Thank you both for coming in. Craig Williams, you are in favour. What do

you think would be the main benefit of this? First of all I'm in favour

of the campaign we are kicking off this week, and that's a campaign

just for a referendum. All we are asking for at the moment is that the

people of Cardiff get a choice, get an opportunity to say whether they

want a Mayor, or think don't. Why I want a Mayor and a referendum is

that I think it is a shape up of the executive power on the city. There

is no doubt, no matter who you speak to, no matter whatever party, the

public services need that shake-up in our capital city. I think the

executive power and the mayoral modellogical do that. The

referendum, in 2012 there were 10 referenda across cities in England.

Only Bristol voted for it. It doesn't tend to be a popular idea

with the electorate. We've got to ask the people of Cardiff. English

cities are getting this opportunity. Ten, and in England the threshold is

only 5% of the electorate. In Wales they've moved it up to 10%. The

establishment really is kicking back at this. They don't want that

fundamental shake-up of the executive power which really would

refresh public services in our city. Judith Woodman are you part of the

establishment pushing against the chances of the people having a voice

here? Yes, my group have given Mae clear steer on this. Having a

referendum is one thing. Having the knowledge that you are actually

going to vote for or against I think is crucial. At the moment, I don't

think enough information is being given out there for people to make

their decision. What will an elected Mayor cost? How will he be vetoed

and scrutinised? But agree group believe that this is the wrong time

to go for an elected Mayor now, because of the proposed local

government reorganisation. But looking Timor broadly the principle

here, in terms of the visibility of politicians had, Cemlyn touched on

it there, Bristol University said in 2012, 24% of people in Bristol

thought the city had visible leadership. Two years later it went

up to 69%. There is no doubt that having a single figurehead increases

the visibility of politicians. That must be a good thing surely? I do

believe that's a good thing, but if we are being perfectly honest here

the visibility of the elected Mayor is really what they are voting

about. I don't think they are saying the same about the rest of the

council. That again is promoting one person who has too much power, has

those decisions. We heard on the programme earlier that it is the

accountability that they are not particularly happy about. Some

people. Craig Williams, address that point, that you get a lot of power

concentrated in one person's Hans. I think that will be great in Wales to

have power, accountability, to be able to get that vision and do

things. I don't think the Lib Dem Mayor in Watford has too much power

and is not accountable. Judith is in an awkward position, but the Lib

Dems' argument against referendums, that was solid principle. It is. To

give people the say, but I don't think it does that. What businesses

and the residents of Cardiff are calling out for is clear leadership.

Clear vision, and the put Cardiff on the international map. We've just

heard from Bristol how the Mayor's really done that. I think the fact

that all we are asking for is a referendum and to ask people whether

you want a Mayor. We want to impose a Mayor, but just ask the residents

of Cardiff if you want one. Why wouldn't you want a referendum on

the issue I would like the referendum to give people very clear

information what they are voting for. But we are facing now with the

elections in 2017 for councils, councillors not being elected as

think have before. With the local government reorganisation, Cardiff

may not be Cardiff. We may be Cardiff and the Vale or Cardiff and

Caerphilly. If you have an elected Mayor for Cardiff now, what happens

then? Do you have to have another election for a regional Mayor? All

that cost to the taxpayer. That's a good point. What I'm saying is

having a referendum now is not the right time. Again, what you ask

people to vote on, they need to know what it will cost and what their

office costs will be. It is a point of timing is it? I agree with

Judith's logic entirely but not the conclusion. Now is the time for the

referendum. Grab the bull by the horns and tell the Welsh Government

the kind of model that Cardiff wants. The kind of power, I want a

Mayor for Cardiff and direct executive power. I want Cardiff to

have its own entity and I think if we mandate them to a referendum to

have a Mayor they will find it extremely difficult then to

reorganise that. We are talking about Cardiff, because this is where

the campaign is starting. But it could equally apply to Swansea,

Wrexham or Bangor. Isn't there a point that the public would probably

be, rightly, sceptical about an additional tier of Government here?

That's the normal attack on this and it is not an additional tier. I

would never support an additional tier. This is about grabbing the

executive power of the council and giving it to one person directly

accountable and elected who then appoint the cabinet. If if we had an

independent business or independent cultural leader, they can turn to

the council and put together their cabinet from across the political

parties will. From the Independents, the Liberal Democrats and

Conservatives, and deliver for the city. I want to take the tribal

politics that's built up in the City Council. My 8 years there, I was a

parliamentary candidate for some of itened I think I was the least

tribal at times. How will you take out tribal politics by having one

person, presumably related to a political party, to be the

figurehead? Not necessarily. I think if you look at Watford or London,

the one thing Boris did in London, he's appointed people from across

party to lead where they are experts in their field. I think that's what

Mayor does. You get that comfort of four years but I know you are hugely

directly accountable and if you don't deliver, you are voted out.

That's the point on accountability here. Essentially this would mean

the leader of the council rather than being elected by councillors

will be directly elected by the citizens. Why are saying that's a

bad thing As it stands at the moment the leader can be got rid of the

he's not performing. His own group... I did a vote of confidence

in him, I tried, but you can't get rid of him. You could if he was that

bad. When you have an elected Mayor he's there for four years no matter

what, how bad he, is whatever. It is interesting that you say he can pick

a cabinet across all different parties. There is no guarantee that

he would do so. And none tls I come back, you've just said it, the more

people who input into a decision, the better. Rather than one person

directing it. And we'll keep all the councillors and the scrutiny that

that will fulfil on the Mayor would be immense and it would go back to

the old committee system. Sorry we have to leave it there. The campaign

will be launched later on. Don't forget, you can follow

all the latest on Twitter. We're @walespolitics,

but for now, that's all from me. Diolch am wylio,

thanks for watching. If you believe some of the polls -

and we're not much inclined to these days - those arguing for Britain

to leave the EU could be ahead of those who want us

to remain a member. If true, it can't have much to do

with the unity shown by those jostling to be picked

as the official, designated leave campaign, as they've spent all week

fighting like ferrets in a sack. UKIP MP Douglas Carswell

was speaking to Andrew Marr earlier about one of the newer leave groups,

called Grassroots Out or GO for short, which is

hoping to be chosen. I was out at the weekend

and the weekend before We've got a great ground

game in Vote Leave. We've delivered

millions of leaflets. I'm not going to be

disrespectful of any They're led by people

who've done this before. And I think what's important

is that we make sure that people realise that David Cameron's

deal is pretty duff. Well, Peter Bone is one

of the MPs behind GO. Why should you get the official

designation? Were not united and still 37, 43%, but it looks good,

there are 42 grassroot campaigns made up of different people, and I

think who should get designation, it is an establishment view that you

have to have a top-down organisation like BSE, imposed from the top,

there was nobody going out on the February morning is knocking on

doors, there are 42 campaigns so this is from the grassroots up. It

is not another campaigning organisation bringing everyone

together and they still have independence. With this umbrella

stop you from knocking each other? Aaron Banks, he has put money into

Grassroots Out? It is funded by a number of individuals. Conservative

donors... Here's one of them and he said that people in vote leave where

two of the nastiest individuals I ever had the misfortune to leave.

Kate Hoey, voting to quit. She is also voting for Vote Leave. Let us

bring everyone together, this has to stop, last week whenever we had 100

people from all of the different groups and parties working together,

why cannot we get that at the top? One happy family working under the

grassroots movement. You have that bright Grassroots Out tie on. This

picture has more than just a tie on it. One of your colleagues,

launching the campaign with the Union Jack jacket. People might

remember the John Redwood leadership campaign would wonder if politicians

want to be seen on the same platform as that? People are going out across

the country, campaigning to come out of the EU. Not looking like that,

looking like me! No, they don't want to look like me! Is this just

journalist from? The poll has them ahead? The Electoral Commission in

the next few weeks will have to designate one of these groups as the

main out and in group and both sides are fighting like bad. The danger

for the leaving camp is the group to win this referendum will be the

group that wins the argument that it represents the safest option and the

losing group will be portrayed as the riskiest. People like Douglas

Carswell or deeply fearful of Nigel Farage as one of the main figures on

the outside because in a good day he can get 30% of the electorate and

that is why Grassroots Out is established, because the Aaron Banks

group, he is funding the other group which has cross-party support and

that will be important. Vote Leave, the more stable, steady safer option

is now struggling on the cross-party option, particularly in that box.

How do you know all that) it is also quite true. Why are you talking

about the personalities and the policies and that is a reflection

of, when we talk about policies people would enter a coma. Neither

side has key messages, I don't think you could stop 100 people in the

street and one could tell you anything that was in this and that

is why we talk about personalities. We are doing our best! We have

always exaggerated the importance of campaigns on election results and

referendums and last I was told that because of Labour's assiduous work

at ground level they would end up counteracting disadvantages like

leadership and economic credibility so I have never believed that the

internal rivalry would really hold them back and recent opinion polls

have stood up to that. What really goes on their favour is the nature

of the deal that David Cameron extracted last week because it is

less impressive than was instigated in the Bloomberg speech and it will

have to fight the referendum on the existing terms of membership and I

think he can win that but he would have gone into the last four months

of this campaign with something drastically different and not

cosmetically different. That is right, the fundamental issues will

be debated and we are all innovative this Westminster bubble thinking

that Joe Bloggs says this and it matters but on the street, nobody

can name any of these campaigns and the simple question is, in or out

were undecided? That is what we're finding and a lot of people are

undecided who say we have not heard the arguments and we clearly have to

get our message out on leaving and that does concern emigration and

controlling borders but also the fact that we pay 55th -- ?55 million

every week to Europe and get nothing. You get half of that act.

We don't. You do! We get a bit of that back. They decide how we spend

it. You get it back as a rebate and you also get it back in funding from

the EU? The facts will matter. How many billions of pounds each week

goes to the EU that we have no control over? You said the gross

figures... The net figure is about half of that. It is not. If you go

into the detail I can assure you it is. Can you win this without any

front person? Behead Minister of is heading up the game campaign. If he

does not get what he wants he will be heading up the Grassroots Out

campaign. -- I will be. You are not holding your breath. Who should be

heading up your side? I don't want any figurehead. Who would debate

with the Prime Minister? It depends on the issues. In or out, how about

that? If you are talking about dozens, a businessman, trade unions,

somebody from Labour Leave. Belgian rambler that a government... I will

have to stop you expect thanks to all of the guests.

Join us next Sunday at 11, when we'll be taking stock

made by the Conservatives at last year's election and asking

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