:00:36. > :00:41.The leave campaign deploys Boris Johnson to defeat
:00:42. > :00:43.what they call Project Fear, but are the remain campaign
:00:44. > :00:49.George Osborne hoped taxing pensions would help him fill the black hole
:00:50. > :00:52.in the public finances, so why has he abandoned his plans
:00:53. > :00:59.And four more states have voted - is Trump a step closer
:01:00. > :01:14.Alan Johnson tells us why it wasn't fair to expect EU money
:01:15. > :01:17.to solve Wales' problems, and should we stick or twist?
:01:18. > :01:20.What do the Unions make of the EU debate?
:01:21. > :01:21.What do the Unions if this development could be the
:01:22. > :01:30.answer to London's housing problems. And talking of Project Fear,
:01:31. > :01:34.with us for the duration this morning, a terrifying political
:01:35. > :01:38.panel whose incisive insights strike fear into the hearts
:01:39. > :01:43.of politicians everywhere. Toby Young, Helen Lewis
:01:44. > :01:48.and Janan Ganesh. So, he took a while to make his mind
:01:49. > :01:51.up which way to swing, but those campaigning for the UK
:01:52. > :01:54.to leave the European Union will hope the deployment
:01:55. > :01:56.of their most charismatic performer - Boris Johnson -
:01:57. > :01:58.on the Marr Show this morning The Mayor of London took a swing
:01:59. > :02:12.at the deal the David Cameron the stated Government policy
:02:13. > :02:17.was that we should have a reformed EU, fundamentally reformed,
:02:18. > :02:19.wholesale change in Britain's relationship with
:02:20. > :02:20.the EU was promised. That has obviously
:02:21. > :02:22.not been delivered. We were told at the time that
:02:23. > :02:25.Britain would be perfectly safe to walk away, by the Government,
:02:26. > :02:27.by the Prime Minister. That has now, that rhetoric has now
:02:28. > :02:30.very much been changed, I think, by the way,
:02:31. > :02:37.the policy was right then. We should be absolutely confident
:02:38. > :02:46.about the future of this country. What do you make of his performance?
:02:47. > :02:51.David Lloyd George said negotiating with devil are was like trying to
:02:52. > :02:58.pick up mercury with a fog, and I imagine Andrew Marr feels similarly
:02:59. > :02:59.after trying to pin down Boris Johnson over questions of the
:03:00. > :03:16.Brexit. If these leaves campaign don't have
:03:17. > :03:19.an agreement on something that fundamental, you can see them
:03:20. > :03:23.struggling with the real harsh light of scrutiny getting applied in the
:03:24. > :03:28.later weeks of this referendum campaign, I think what will end up
:03:29. > :03:32.happening is there will be a division of Labour whereby Michael
:03:33. > :03:37.Gove leads on the hard detail and interviews such as this, Boris
:03:38. > :03:42.Johnson does what he's good at such is the retail politics, and we don't
:03:43. > :03:46.have incidents like that worrying level of confusion. Was it an
:03:47. > :03:53.assured level of performance? I think the way that interview will be
:03:54. > :03:57.seen is as Boris not being able to get a wording edgeways, being
:03:58. > :04:01.constantly interrupted, not being allowed to develop his points, and
:04:02. > :04:05.that will add to a sense of grievance which is emerging as one
:04:06. > :04:16.of the features of this campaign. The leaves campaign already
:04:17. > :04:19.complaining about George Osborne lining up the G20, David Cameron
:04:20. > :04:24.getting these European leaders to weigh in on the remaining side. That
:04:25. > :04:30.grievance narrative will probably be powerful when it comes to mobilising
:04:31. > :04:33.the debate. Wasn't he being interrupted because Andrew Marr was
:04:34. > :04:39.trying to get him to address the point? When you interview Boris, you
:04:40. > :04:42.have got to come not just Boris, but when you interview him you have got
:04:43. > :04:49.to interrupt because quite often politicians just play for time in
:04:50. > :04:52.these interviews. Often he was developing a particular point, and
:04:53. > :04:56.while he was trying to develop a point and answer what Andrew Marr
:04:57. > :05:02.had asked him, he got interrupted, but I think the general sense of
:05:03. > :05:06.grievance emerging on the leave site will help mobilise the levers when
:05:07. > :05:13.it comes to the actual referendum. The fact the levers feel more
:05:14. > :05:17.passionately than the remainders do about remaining will help the leave
:05:18. > :05:27.cause. I think that is the best defence you can give Boris this
:05:28. > :05:32.morning, it is worrying. There is a moment of extreme danger for Boris.
:05:33. > :05:38.What happens after the referendum, particularly if we stay in? Should
:05:39. > :05:43.he take a Cabinet job, in which he affects people's lives, or does he
:05:44. > :05:48.stay on the backbenches not making his move? He is in real danger. A
:05:49. > :05:53.lot of his popularity comes from the fact he doesn't do politics. He
:05:54. > :05:57.hasn't got an enormous track record to his name as London mayor, and
:05:58. > :06:04.people don't have a huge amount of tolerance for that hail fellow well
:06:05. > :06:10.met act. Is there a lot of grievance, as Toby says? Yes, you
:06:11. > :06:24.can imagine how much worse it will be later on. Things like Scheuble's
:06:25. > :06:28.interview, where he said Britain would have to pay in to have access
:06:29. > :06:35.to the EU market, that could be seen as bullying. If you are on the other
:06:36. > :06:42.side of the argument, of course you will see it as provocative. My worry
:06:43. > :06:48.is the campaign will get poisonous, and the opening two weeks is
:06:49. > :06:52.reflective of something much worse. If this grievance narrative begins
:06:53. > :06:57.to gain traction over the course of that campaign, won't it help
:06:58. > :07:02.mobilise the leave side? We have seen how it can motivate voters in
:07:03. > :07:09.America with Donald Trump. But there was grievance in the Scottish
:07:10. > :07:15.referendum, I think it helps, but to win plurality you need to go beyond
:07:16. > :07:19.grievance. That partly depends on turnout and if the public are turned
:07:20. > :07:24.off by the negative tone of the debate, you will have a low turnout
:07:25. > :07:30.and that will probably favour leaving rather than remaining. We
:07:31. > :07:33.will see. It is a long time until July the 23rd.
:07:34. > :07:37.It's been branded Project Fear by opponents and in a moment I'll be
:07:38. > :07:39.talking to one of the remain campaign's chief protagonists.
:07:40. > :07:42.First, here's a reminder of how they've been making their case over
:07:43. > :07:49.Tell us what the model is that they believe
:07:50. > :07:51.the European Union would negotiate with Britain.
:07:52. > :07:53.Remember, this is going to be a divorce if we
:07:54. > :08:00.decide to leave, and as with any divorce it is likely to get messy.
:08:01. > :08:03.In many ways, I am a Eurosceptic, absolutely, and I'm still a Brussels
:08:04. > :08:15.basher in many ways and will always remain so.
:08:16. > :08:17.I think the answer to the concerns that people have, and these
:08:18. > :08:19.concerns of course are not completely absent in Scotland,
:08:20. > :08:28.isn't to clamp down on free movement.
:08:29. > :08:31.If we leave, the people who are advising us to leave,
:08:32. > :08:33.they cannot at the moment answer the question about what arrangements
:08:34. > :08:50.So Project Fact is about saying stay and you know what we get.
:08:51. > :08:53.And I'm joined now by Nick Herbert who is leading the Conservatives'
:08:54. > :09:06.Let's go through a number of things your site has been saying. Firstly
:09:07. > :09:22.let's take the Calais camp, the Prime Minister 's office has said if
:09:23. > :09:26.we move the camp -- if we leave the camp will move to the south-east of
:09:27. > :09:32.England. They would be little interest in remaining the agreement
:09:33. > :09:37.we have that people stay on the French side. That will result in
:09:38. > :09:42.people coming over to this side, and we having to deal with them rather
:09:43. > :09:46.than the French, which means they can claim asylum in this country.
:09:47. > :09:51.And what was interesting about this claim, which I think is about a
:09:52. > :09:55.common-sense that is how the French would respond if we were outside of
:09:56. > :09:59.the EU and they no longer have the same set of incentives to cooperate,
:10:00. > :10:02.is that it was dismissed as scaremongering and now we have the
:10:03. > :10:06.most senior politicians in France confirming that this would probably
:10:07. > :10:11.be the case so this isn't scaremongering at all. What I'm
:10:12. > :10:14.wondering is why you would move the camp overnight to the south of
:10:15. > :10:20.England. Explain why they would form a camp if they have made it to
:10:21. > :10:25.Britain. The point is that we would have to deal with them on the
:10:26. > :10:31.British side. That would require us to send them back. One of the things
:10:32. > :10:35.we have in this debate that many to do is to remind ourselves that we
:10:36. > :10:40.have border controls in Britain, we are not part of the passport free
:10:41. > :10:45.area, the Schengen Agreement in the rest of Europe, and we can and do
:10:46. > :10:51.check EU citizens when they come in. We indeed turn them away. Thousands
:10:52. > :10:55.of EU citizens are turned away from our borders and it is too are
:10:56. > :10:59.advantage that the controls that prevent people from coming in are on
:11:00. > :11:04.the French side. Let's assume the French do what you are claiming. If
:11:05. > :11:10.they come here, if they make it here, either they will apply for
:11:11. > :11:15.asylum, in which case they will don't to official reception centres
:11:16. > :11:21.until it is sorted out, or they will disappear into the labour market.
:11:22. > :11:26.Neither involves creation of a camp in England. I don't know what was
:11:27. > :11:30.meant about a camp, what I do know is that at the moment we have
:11:31. > :11:36.arrangements where people can be stopped on the French side, the
:11:37. > :11:41.French would have little incentive to keep that if we walk out of the
:11:42. > :11:44.EU. It was initially dismissed on this site by Brexit campaigners as
:11:45. > :11:50.scaremongering, I think it is a very good example of an issue that we
:11:51. > :11:55.will have to deal with if we leave. You keep on mentioning these French
:11:56. > :12:01.politicians, only one has said this, that the economics minister. Would
:12:02. > :12:08.you like to tell our viewers what the interior minister has said?
:12:09. > :12:13.Right up to President Hollande... He didn't say anything about that.
:12:14. > :12:18.President Hollande and his ministers have said this will be on the
:12:19. > :12:26.agenda. There is a raft of French politicians who have made this
:12:27. > :12:33.clear. Name one. Common sense would tell us that if there is an
:12:34. > :12:36.arrangement, because it is a part of the cooperation and partnership we
:12:37. > :12:39.have with the French that they would no longer have that same arrangement
:12:40. > :12:44.if we were out of the EU. I will tell you what the French interior
:12:45. > :12:50.minister says, he says ending the treaties which govern the Calais
:12:51. > :12:54.camp would not be responsible solution, we will not do it, we
:12:55. > :13:00.would like to go on building a good immigration policy with the UK,
:13:01. > :13:09.especially at Calais. Other French ministers have said different
:13:10. > :13:29.things. One. Let's just look at what governs the Calais camp. The 1991
:13:30. > :13:34.protocol governs the tunnel, another treaty... Wires are EU membership
:13:35. > :13:40.critical factor? I have already made that point, that this a separate
:13:41. > :13:44.issue legally to our EU membership of the question is what incentive
:13:45. > :13:51.would the French have to continue with those arrangements if we were
:13:52. > :13:53.outside of the EU, and it is as I say senior French politicians
:13:54. > :13:57.themselves and local French politicians who are raising these
:13:58. > :14:04.questions. What I think is a reminder of... But these are EU
:14:05. > :14:09.treaties, Anglo-French treaties, the French could stop them tomorrow
:14:10. > :14:13.whether we are in or out. I said that before you did that it is
:14:14. > :14:16.legally a separate matter, but politically I think there is little
:14:17. > :14:20.doubt that the French would not have the same set of incentives to stand
:14:21. > :14:25.by this issue. That was made clear at the highest level last year. All
:14:26. > :14:30.of this is a reminder that Britain is in a different position than the
:14:31. > :14:34.rest of our EU partners. We are not in the Schengen arrangement, we do
:14:35. > :14:40.have border controls. It is in our interests that some of those border
:14:41. > :14:43.controls operate on the other side of the Channel Tunnel, and in our
:14:44. > :14:46.interest that we continue to remain outside of the Schengen area. It is
:14:47. > :14:50.one of the things that gives Britain the best of both worlds, we are able
:14:51. > :14:55.to access the market but outside of the passport free area. The protocol
:14:56. > :14:58.that governs the tunnel is a protocol to the Treaty of Canterbury
:14:59. > :15:05.which sets up the tunnel, there is no way you can change it without
:15:06. > :15:09.reneging on the treaty. To close down the existing situation would
:15:10. > :15:13.effectively close the tunnel. The French government owns 55% of the
:15:14. > :15:23.operation of the tunnel, why would they do that in or out of the EU?
:15:24. > :15:30.Ask the French politicians. You confirmed it was the senior French
:15:31. > :15:33.minister. He said he was implicitly confirmed by the President. He hopes
:15:34. > :15:38.to be running for President next year. None of this has come out of
:15:39. > :15:43.thin air. It has come because it would very obviously be one of the
:15:44. > :15:46.ways in which we would lose out, potentially, from withdrawing from
:15:47. > :15:51.the EU. That is because the same sort of arrangements that means that
:15:52. > :15:56.we cooperate with our partners would no longer exist. Let's move onto the
:15:57. > :16:01.benefits of membership. Your side of the campaign has said that we
:16:02. > :16:06.benefit ?3000 per household has accumulated over our time in the EU.
:16:07. > :16:10.Do you stand by that figure? It was a CBI figure and it was not actually
:16:11. > :16:15.their own calculation. What they did was look at a range of studies that
:16:16. > :16:19.show the economic benefits of the single market. They range from some
:16:20. > :16:22.saying that there was not a benefit, to some saying there was a very
:16:23. > :16:25.substantial benefit. They have updated this research just last
:16:26. > :16:31.month and they said that the majority of the studies showed there
:16:32. > :16:39.was a substantial benefit. About 10% of JD chilly GDP. They calculate it
:16:40. > :16:45.as ?10,000 per head. You are using it, Britain is stronger in Europe,
:16:46. > :16:50.do you stand by it? It is the CBI's figure. Do you stand by it? It is a
:16:51. > :16:55.average figure that has been done by the studies that have been done, not
:16:56. > :17:03.just the CBI's own studies. It shows there is a net benefit to us being
:17:04. > :17:08.in the single market. Do you stand by the ?3000 figure? It is not a
:17:09. > :17:14.figure I have used. Your campaign has used it, look down there,
:17:15. > :17:17.Britain Is Stronger In Europe. It is a perfectly reasonable figure for
:17:18. > :17:19.them to use because it is a study that has been done, not their
:17:20. > :17:24.studies. The majority of those studies that have been done, they
:17:25. > :17:30.show that there is a benefit to being in the single market. The CBI
:17:31. > :17:35.stays of its study of 12 research papers, originally beginning with
:17:36. > :17:41.five, all of which were pro-EU, it has widened that to 12, some of
:17:42. > :17:51.which are more hostile. It there is an and avoidable degree of
:17:52. > :17:57.uncertainty. But you have to caveat that? We need to weigh up the costs
:17:58. > :18:02.and benefits. The majority of the studies showed that there would be a
:18:03. > :18:06.benefit. That could be more substantial. In terms of the
:18:07. > :18:09.increase in GDP, the domestic product, that has been gained as a
:18:10. > :18:15.result of being in the single market. It comes back to the single
:18:16. > :18:17.market, because it gives us easier trade and facilitates business,
:18:18. > :18:23.because it benefits the huge number of companies that trade with the
:18:24. > :18:26.European Union, there is a benefit to the whole economy. The big
:18:27. > :18:31.question is, if we were to leave the European Union, what alternative
:18:32. > :18:34.arrangement would we have? That is the question the opponents will not
:18:35. > :18:38.answer. They will not say if we would be in the single market or
:18:39. > :18:44.not. The risk is that we would lose those benefits. As a consequence,
:18:45. > :18:47.there would be an impact on businesses and, therefore, on the
:18:48. > :18:52.economic benefit coming to the country. On the research paper, you
:18:53. > :18:56.are right that the CBI did not do its own research, the latest one was
:18:57. > :19:02.12 research papers with 14 estimates. Out of those, it took
:19:03. > :19:07.seven. It did not include some of them. It happens that the seven they
:19:08. > :19:13.took out showed far fewer benefits. So we are right to be sceptical. The
:19:14. > :19:18.sample is down to a largely pro-EU sample. To be fair, I think you need
:19:19. > :19:20.to ask the CBI about its calculation. But what was striking
:19:21. > :19:27.was that the range of benefit and the majority of studies that they
:19:28. > :19:35.tuck it down to, the seven... Took it down to. Yes, was up to 10% of
:19:36. > :19:39.GDP. Most serious economic analysis shows there was a benefit to being
:19:40. > :19:43.in the single market for the economy. That is why businesses
:19:44. > :19:47.themselves, the majority of members of the British chamber of commerce,
:19:48. > :19:54.the majority of members of the Institute of Directors, the FTSE 100
:19:55. > :19:57.companies, a full third of the FTSE 100 companies said it would be
:19:58. > :20:04.damaging to leave the EU. The other two thirds were not saying the
:20:05. > :20:07.opposite. This claim of a decade of uncertainty, a vote to leave the EU
:20:08. > :20:11.would be the start, not the end of the process and could lead to a
:20:12. > :20:15.decade or more of uncertainty. Why would it take twice as long to
:20:16. > :20:19.withdraw from Europe as it took to win the Second World War? Because of
:20:20. > :20:23.the length of time it takes to do trade deals and make alternative
:20:24. > :20:29.arrangements. If you look at the average trade deal that is done,
:20:30. > :20:35.they take years. Canada's trade is still not fully signed off. It took
:20:36. > :20:38.seven years. We would have had to negotiate alternative arrangements,
:20:39. > :20:42.not just with the EU, that would be problematic enough, and the other
:20:43. > :20:45.side has not told us what arrangement that would be, but the
:20:46. > :20:47.one thing that is becoming increasingly clear is that it would
:20:48. > :20:54.not give us the benefits of the single market we currently have.
:20:55. > :21:01.With the 35 other trade deals that the EU has done, those arrangements
:21:02. > :21:07.would fall as well. Would we not just say, put the need to negotiate
:21:08. > :21:10.a single market agreement to one side, why would we not say to other
:21:11. > :21:14.countries, Morocco, South Korea and so on, we will continue with
:21:15. > :21:19.existing trading relationships. Why would they not agree? Because,
:21:20. > :21:24.automatically, all of these deals fall. But why would Morocco not
:21:25. > :21:28.continue to trade with us on the same basis as it does at the moment?
:21:29. > :21:33.The question is not whether people would continue to trade, it is what
:21:34. > :21:40.it terms the trade would be. On the same basis? We would have to
:21:41. > :21:43.renegotiate with the EU, which would be hugely problematic and we would
:21:44. > :21:47.be disadvantaged by the process that would be triggered. Stick with
:21:48. > :21:53.non-EU countries, why would a country that happily trades with us
:21:54. > :21:57.under the EU rules, why would they not continue to trade on the same
:21:58. > :22:02.basis out of the EU? It depends on the kind of deal that we are doing
:22:03. > :22:07.with the EU. If we are unable to do a deal with the EU, we would fall
:22:08. > :22:10.out altogether and then into the World Trade Organisation rules,
:22:11. > :22:14.meaning we trade with tariffs, which would be immensely damaging to
:22:15. > :22:22.British business and to jobs. Hold on, you mentioned tariffs. In your
:22:23. > :22:27.Project Fear scenario, sterling is down by 20%. The average tariff on
:22:28. > :22:32.cars would be ten. Overall we would be more competitive, we would face a
:22:33. > :22:38.tariff wall of 10%, but we would be 20% more competitive? What is wrong
:22:39. > :22:43.with that? What is wrong with all of this is that we have, at the moment,
:22:44. > :22:48.a situation of certainty, where businesses know they have access not
:22:49. > :22:53.just to the single market, but also to the 50 or more countries that
:22:54. > :22:58.have done deals with the EU, and more in the pipeline. That gives
:22:59. > :23:02.certainty. We face the prospect of huge uncertainty because the other
:23:03. > :23:06.side will not say what kind of deal would be on offer. They don't know
:23:07. > :23:09.whether it would be like Norway, like Switzerland, these are
:23:10. > :23:14.countries that have the benefits, some benefits of access to the
:23:15. > :23:18.market. It is essentially an open market from Iceland through to
:23:19. > :23:24.Turkey. There is not a single arrangement. But essentially open.
:23:25. > :23:29.Why would the European Union pick on us and not include us in that
:23:30. > :23:33.largely open market from Iceland to Turkey? Because, as the German
:23:34. > :23:37.finance minister said today, we cannot have access to the single
:23:38. > :23:44.market without accepting certain things. Those include freedom of
:23:45. > :23:48.movement and paying in. Overall, the single market gives us much greater
:23:49. > :23:50.benefits to the businesses than alternative arrangements. That is
:23:51. > :23:54.why it would be economically damaging to leave, in the view of
:23:55. > :24:01.most businesses. The important point is this. It is not just a question
:24:02. > :24:09.of the deals we would do, have to do with the EU, it would also be with
:24:10. > :24:12.the 35 other countries, more than 50 other deals, leading to a period of
:24:13. > :24:15.huge uncertainty that is damaging for British businesses and jobs. We
:24:16. > :24:20.have discussed that already. The director-general of the British
:24:21. > :24:23.chamber of commerce, suspended for coming out in favour of Leave. Did
:24:24. > :24:27.anybody involved in Downing Street have something to do with this? I
:24:28. > :24:33.think that is a ridiculous suggestion. I am not surprised there
:24:34. > :24:36.is unhappiness in the British chamber of commerce. They were meant
:24:37. > :24:40.to have a neutral position. The majority of their businesses, in a
:24:41. > :24:46.recent survey, said they wanted to remain. So, no Downing Street hand?
:24:47. > :24:49.Absolutely not. Why would they? Thank you very much.
:24:50. > :24:51.Now, the scenes of hundreds of thousands of desperate migrants
:24:52. > :24:54.that fill our TV screens provide powerful images for those arguing
:24:55. > :24:57.that we should turn our backs on the crisis-hit European Union.
:24:58. > :24:59.In a moment I'll be asking Ukip's only MP, Douglas Carswell,
:25:00. > :25:03.First let's have a look at what Leave campaigners have
:25:04. > :25:12.They need a free-trade deal with us and it will be a central part
:25:13. > :25:15.of the negotiations when we leave the European Union, an important
:25:16. > :25:17.part, but one where they have a commercial imperative
:25:18. > :25:29.Once we have control of our own borders, we can send back
:25:30. > :25:32.whoever we want so if somebody comes in and they are not appropriate,
:25:33. > :25:34.they shouldn't be here, they should've stopped in France
:25:35. > :25:36.or Germany or wherever, we will send them back.
:25:37. > :25:41.So the threat is both wrong, inappropriate, and won't work.
:25:42. > :25:43.Come on, donnez-moi un break, as we say in Brussels.
:25:44. > :25:56.It's sad but perhaps unsurprising that those who want
:25:57. > :25:59.the British people to be kept in the European Union have launched
:26:00. > :26:15.This is designed to make the British people afraid of change.
:26:16. > :26:21.Douglas Carswell joins me now. Let's look at some of the things your side
:26:22. > :26:27.have been complaining about. The cost of membership. We will stop
:26:28. > :26:32.sending ?350 million every week to Brussels. Do you stand by that
:26:33. > :26:38.figure? Absolutely. The reason I do is because every year we make a
:26:39. > :26:44.gross contribution of 19.2 billion, if you divide that by the weeks in a
:26:45. > :26:49.year, 350. We're talking about what we send to Brussels. Let's look in
:26:50. > :26:55.little more detail. This is from Office for Budget Responsibility.
:26:56. > :27:03.These are the 2014 figures. The column on the left-hand side, we
:27:04. > :27:10.have 18.3 billion. It is 19.2 now, but I will let that go. It gives you
:27:11. > :27:17.350 million. But before we send that, we deduct the rebate of 5
:27:18. > :27:23.billion. We don't send the rebate, we take the ?5 billion off. The
:27:24. > :27:34.contribution we send is ?13.5 billion and that is 260 billion --
:27:35. > :27:39.million per week. The figure is very vulnerable to the machinations of
:27:40. > :27:43.ministers. Look at what Tony Blair did with the rebate. They were fast
:27:44. > :27:49.and loose with it at the blink of an eye. What I am trying to point out,
:27:50. > :27:52.because the phrase here was we are sending ?350 million, we don't send
:27:53. > :27:58.the rebate and we send it back. We take the rebate off and then we send
:27:59. > :28:02.them 13.5. The rebate is very vulnerable, as we discovered when
:28:03. > :28:06.Tony Blair gave away a large section of it. It is very vulnerable to
:28:07. > :28:10.change. I think it's fair that we include a figure. But we don't send
:28:11. > :28:18.it. In addition to that, having not sent the rebate and sent 13.5, we
:28:19. > :28:22.then get 4.4, almost ?4.5 billion back to spend in ways that will be
:28:23. > :28:27.guided, sometimes dictated by the EU, but it is money that comes back.
:28:28. > :28:34.Our net contribution, as you can see from the table, is 9 billion. That
:28:35. > :28:40.is ?175 million each week. It is not 350 million. The reason I think it
:28:41. > :28:47.is vertical about the gross contribution of ?19.3 billion a
:28:48. > :28:50.year, you don't deduct the services you get from the government, you
:28:51. > :28:56.don't say your tax bill is zero because of the mended potholes and
:28:57. > :29:01.the streetlights and things you get. It is appropriate that we talk about
:29:02. > :29:06.the 19.2 billion we send every year. But I just explained that we don't
:29:07. > :29:13.send that. The actual saving, because the original quote was about
:29:14. > :29:17.saving to spend elsewhere, is 175 million each week. You can say it is
:29:18. > :29:24.too much, not enough, I don't want to stay in, but it's not 350 million
:29:25. > :29:27.a week. 350 million on the table, some of that is highly vulnerable
:29:28. > :29:31.because it is part of the rebate. I think it is right and proper we talk
:29:32. > :29:35.about that. It is enough money to build a new hospital every week. It
:29:36. > :29:39.would not be a saving, even out of the EU we would continue to have
:29:40. > :29:44.some form of farm subsidies and forms of regional aid? We would
:29:45. > :29:48.spend some of the money we currently send to Brussels for ourselves. I
:29:49. > :29:52.think instead of sending 350 million each week to Brussels, we would be
:29:53. > :29:56.better spending that money improving the NHS, giving a better deal to
:29:57. > :30:00.farmers, maybe even tax cuts. I think it is fair we talk about ?350
:30:01. > :30:02.million we have to send every week to Brussels. People will make their
:30:03. > :30:14.minds up on that. Let's move onto another issue. Nigel
:30:15. > :30:19.Farage has said 75% of UK law is made in Brussels. Do you with that?
:30:20. > :30:22.I asked the Parliamentary authorities when I first became an
:30:23. > :30:33.MP and they were not able to tell me. Some claim it is as little as
:30:34. > :30:38.15%, on our side some claim 70%. The German legislature in Berlin have a
:30:39. > :30:47.figure of 80%. Do you agree with the 75% figure? It is probably about
:30:48. > :30:51.right. What is the source? The question was talking about the
:30:52. > :30:55.amount of legislation that is emanating from member state versus
:30:56. > :31:03.that coming from Brussels. What is the source of the 75% figure? You
:31:04. > :31:07.just cited Nigel. He is not a source, he is a messenger. We have
:31:08. > :31:13.looked carefully at the research, we can find no credible study. Even by
:31:14. > :31:24.pro-Brexit groups that puts the figure at 75%. I have seen studies
:31:25. > :31:29.that show 25%, but I can find nothing that gives me 75%. I don't
:31:30. > :31:34.think this morning you can help on that. I have raised questions in
:31:35. > :31:40.Parliament and I am happy to forward on the answers I have got, but there
:31:41. > :31:44.is a question raised... The German parliament has produced a figure of
:31:45. > :31:55.80 something. For the German parliament. Talking about the ratio
:31:56. > :31:58.coming from Brussels. Vote Leave says if we Vote Leave we can take
:31:59. > :32:03.back control of our immigration policy. No country has full access
:32:04. > :32:16.to the single market without first agreeing to the free movement of
:32:17. > :32:21.people. As you demonstrated earlier this week when you quizzed Matthew
:32:22. > :32:29.Hancock, you can have free trade from Iceland to Ireland to Russia,
:32:30. > :32:33.so you can leave the EU and have tariff free access. Canada have
:32:34. > :32:43.recently negotiated a deal to give them free market access. The
:32:44. > :32:50.Canadian deal includes tariffs, even tariffs on some manufacture
:32:51. > :32:55.products, it includes tariffs on products and does not include
:32:56. > :32:59.anything to do with services and we are 80% service economy. But we
:33:00. > :33:01.would benefit, as a service economy. But we would benefit, as every
:33:02. > :33:10.country in Europe does apart from Belarus, for tariff free access. But
:33:11. > :33:15.how do you know that? The Council of the European Union is unequivocal.
:33:16. > :33:19.Two years ago, the internal market and its freedoms, one of which is
:33:20. > :33:23.freedom of movement, are indivisible, you cannot have one
:33:24. > :33:29.without the other. We know that last year we had a trade deficit with the
:33:30. > :33:33.other EU member states, about 60 billion. The idea they would
:33:34. > :33:37.introduce tariffs seems to me absurd. On the point of regulation,
:33:38. > :33:47.sometimes it is said we need to be part of the single market for
:33:48. > :33:51.regulatory reasons, but in many ways it is possible to have market access
:33:52. > :33:55.from a regulatory perspective without being part of the single
:33:56. > :34:03.market. If you are selling into Europe you have got to meet Europe's
:34:04. > :34:09.regulations... But do I take it that you are indicating that if we leave,
:34:10. > :34:14.we would not seek total access to the single market as we have at the
:34:15. > :34:20.moment? We would seek instead of free trade agreement which is less
:34:21. > :34:26.than a single market? We would see access to the single market but we
:34:27. > :34:32.would not want to be bound up. We would not initially seek full access
:34:33. > :34:36.to the single market? I think if we had tariff free access and wouldn't
:34:37. > :34:41.have regulatory obstacles put in our way, it would be free access. But
:34:42. > :34:46.the trade agreements you have specified, particularly the one with
:34:47. > :34:50.Canada, it is not a single market agreement, it includes tariffs, it
:34:51. > :34:58.includes... It does not include services. Look at Switzerland for
:34:59. > :35:03.example. Switzerland at the moment has 4.5 times trade ahead the EU
:35:04. > :35:10.from outside of the single market than we manage from within. But it
:35:11. > :35:22.does not have full access for its services. You accept that a free
:35:23. > :35:26.trade agreement... They have also moved huge chunks of their financial
:35:27. > :35:31.services to London so that they are inside the EU and can trade. Another
:35:32. > :35:38.confidence within the City of London. On Friday Suzanne Evans and
:35:39. > :35:42.your fellow Vote Leave supporters were sacked from their roles as UK
:35:43. > :35:49.speakers. Miss Evans has now been sacked twice, are you next for the
:35:50. > :35:54.job? Suzanne Evans is brilliant at this sort of stuff, we will hear a
:35:55. > :36:00.lot more from her. Are you next for the chop? Nigel described me as
:36:01. > :36:06.irrelevant, I have been called far worse in the elections I have
:36:07. > :36:11.stored, but in four of those five Parliamentary elections are won.
:36:12. > :36:16.That is the beauty of democracy. There is being a member of Vote
:36:17. > :36:23.Leave, and being a Ukip MP, are these things becoming mutually
:36:24. > :36:26.exclusive? Absolutely not, Vote Leave is now garnering support from
:36:27. > :36:35.the political left, the political centre right, and people... So why
:36:36. > :36:39.doesn't Nigel Farage? You need to address that question to him. He is
:36:40. > :36:47.your leader. There are differences of opinion. There is a strategic
:36:48. > :36:55.difference, I'm the think we need to win this election with an upbeat,
:36:56. > :36:58.positive campaign. Your leader says you are relevant, could you not
:36:59. > :37:05.resign the whip and become an independent? It is the voters who
:37:06. > :37:13.decide who is and who isn't relevant. Thank you for joining us.
:37:14. > :37:16.If you want more facts about the EU referendum, you can check the BBC
:37:17. > :37:17.News website. It is excellent. It's just gone 11.35,
:37:18. > :37:20.you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers
:37:21. > :37:22.in Scotland who leave us now Coming up here in 20 minutes -
:37:23. > :37:26.will Donald Trump win the Republican Hello and welcome to
:37:27. > :37:36.the Sunday Politics Wales. Alan Johnson makes the case for us
:37:37. > :37:42.to remain in the EU but admits And ahead of that crucial referendum
:37:43. > :37:50.we'll find out why many unions still haven't decided
:37:51. > :37:55.if they'll stick or twist. But first, the leader of Labour's
:37:56. > :37:59.campaign to stay in the EU has told this programme it was "unfair"
:38:00. > :38:02.to expect European money to solve the problems of Wales'
:38:03. > :38:06.poorest areas. In an exclusive TV interview,
:38:07. > :38:11.Alan Johnson said it wasn't realistic to expect EU funding
:38:12. > :38:13.would create "a land He was speaking during a visit
:38:14. > :38:19.to a new research facility Our correspondent, Arwyn Jones,
:38:20. > :38:25.began by asking the former Home Secretary what the EU has
:38:26. > :38:28.to offer the higher education You can always desire cooperation
:38:29. > :38:35.between different universities You can desire that and it's a nice
:38:36. > :38:39.thing to talk about. But you can't actually do it
:38:40. > :38:42.unless you've got a framework and structure in place
:38:43. > :38:44.to do it through. That's what the European Union
:38:45. > :38:46.provides, and European structural funds provide the money
:38:47. > :38:49.to draw down to help, as well, ?5 million
:38:50. > :38:55.in relation to this project. What I've learned is
:38:56. > :38:57.that countries that are separate compete
:38:58. > :39:00.against each other on these kind Countries that are united
:39:01. > :39:06.through the European Union collaborate, and because they can
:39:07. > :39:10.bring much more expertise, much more money in,
:39:11. > :39:12.and they can go for much We saw a piece of equipment
:39:13. > :39:16.that doesn't exist anywhere else in Europe,
:39:17. > :39:30.apart from here. How difficult would it be
:39:31. > :39:32.were the UK to leave I mean, if you think
:39:33. > :39:36.of British universities, 11 of the top 20 in Europe
:39:37. > :39:39.of universities are in the UK. You would just think that reasonable
:39:40. > :39:42.people acting through common-sense would still work out
:39:43. > :39:43.a way of cooperating. You would think that,
:39:44. > :39:46.and you can think it with trade. There's lots of different capacity
:39:47. > :39:49.for trade, but could you managed to struggle your way back
:39:50. > :39:51.to what you've got already? I don't think so, but if you did,
:39:52. > :39:55.why have you gone through all this They were telling me
:39:56. > :39:58.here that the European Union referendum has put a big question
:39:59. > :40:01.mark over all of this. They've got the building
:40:02. > :40:05.up and running. Would they be able to use it
:40:06. > :40:07.effectively if outside Something you'll undoubtedly
:40:08. > :40:11.know of is Tata Steel, Port Talbot, recently announcing
:40:12. > :40:13.the loss of 750 jobs within the steel
:40:14. > :40:15.industry within Wales, which is generally
:40:16. > :40:17.accepted it's on its knees The Assembly Committee
:40:18. > :40:22.in Cardiff Bay last week took evidence from UK steel,
:40:23. > :40:27.the umbrella body, that the EU is doing nothing to stop
:40:28. > :40:29.Chinese dumping their They said in America they had
:40:30. > :40:36.a 266% tariff on imports It's 16% here.
:40:37. > :40:41.They are killing it. The way the European Union works
:40:42. > :40:48.is a little slow in this regard. You've got have a
:40:49. > :40:54.complaint lodged, then they have to investigated to prove
:40:55. > :40:56.that it's happening. All of that is taking
:40:57. > :40:58.time, but at the end of that the European
:40:59. > :41:01.Union can stand up to China much better
:41:02. > :41:02.than Britain could. It's too late for those
:41:03. > :41:05.750 workers, isn't it? I hear from steel workers,
:41:06. > :41:11.including Steelworkers in Scunthorpe, very need
:41:12. > :41:13.to my constituency. They kind of blame Europe for it,
:41:14. > :41:17.which is I suppose mantra from people in certain
:41:18. > :41:19.political parties. It's a much more complex
:41:20. > :41:23.issue than that. You say that the people making
:41:24. > :41:25.the complaints tend to be One of them is Edwina
:41:26. > :41:40.Hart, the economic development Minister
:41:41. > :41:41.for the Labour Party, She says Europe's got to wake up --
:41:42. > :41:48.and smell the coffee. We've got to have an industry
:41:49. > :41:50.in Europe that produces for Europe, but they
:41:51. > :41:52.are not doing enough. I mean this is your
:41:53. > :41:54.own party's stance. That is part of the
:41:55. > :41:56.point I was making. No one in the remains side is saying
:41:57. > :42:02.that the European Union is perfect. Assembly, including
:42:03. > :42:05.the Houses of Parliament. Including the United Nations,
:42:06. > :42:06.including Nato, all the organisations
:42:07. > :42:08.that we are part of. But the answer to that is not
:42:09. > :42:11.to leave and lose all those advantages of working
:42:12. > :42:12.together with other countries that we are seeing
:42:13. > :42:15.an example of here. You'll know that parts of Wales
:42:16. > :42:17.have been in receipt of these EU structural
:42:18. > :42:19.funds, state aid funds. Wales is a net beneficiary
:42:20. > :42:21.of the European Union. There's a debate to be
:42:22. > :42:32.had on that one, but this certainly more money coming
:42:33. > :42:35.in from the EU than from other parts of the UK, and yet
:42:36. > :42:38.West Wales and the valleys have only just been able
:42:39. > :42:41.to apply and receive a third The money doesn't seem to be
:42:42. > :42:44.making all that much Well, there's two things
:42:45. > :42:47.to be said about that. How it's spent is down
:42:48. > :42:50.to national governments, So it's the fault of
:42:51. > :42:55.the Labour Welsh Government? No, but I'll make the point
:42:56. > :42:57.that this argument... There's this strange argument
:42:58. > :42:59.about the Leave side argument is where they
:43:00. > :43:00.say Brussels dictates everything to us, and then they say,
:43:01. > :43:04.but Britain is a strong country and has the fifth strongest
:43:05. > :43:06.economy in the world. Well, may be it's got nothing to do
:43:07. > :43:09.with us being members But, as the Yes pamphlet said
:43:10. > :43:12.incidentally in 1975, probably before you were born
:43:13. > :43:15.when we took the last referendum on this, it said,
:43:16. > :43:17.and these words are as effective now, Europe's not
:43:18. > :43:20.going to solve all our problems. Europe's not going to
:43:21. > :43:22.take away the necessity for us to work towards our own
:43:23. > :43:24.destiny, whether that's But it's the best framework
:43:25. > :43:33.for success on our continent. But as recent as 1999-
:43:34. > :43:36.2000, I was born there , as the then First Minister of Wales
:43:37. > :43:38.said there an opportunity All these billions
:43:39. > :43:41.of pounds going into the valleys, into West Wales
:43:42. > :43:44.and they will rejuvenate them and we will see prosperity
:43:45. > :43:53.coming to those parts of Wales and it hasn't
:43:54. > :43:56.happened, though even its failure of the way the money
:43:57. > :43:58.was used, or that it was tied to much in red tape,
:43:59. > :44:01.but it hasn't done what everyone I look at parts of Wales and I've
:44:02. > :44:06.been coming here for a long time, I've seen parts
:44:07. > :44:07.of Wales transformed. In terms of investment,
:44:08. > :44:09.there's more investment They are still as poor
:44:10. > :44:14.as they were, but they are still Would they have been better
:44:15. > :44:17.off without that money? The way it's used, the overarching
:44:18. > :44:30.governance of this country. But I think to argue
:44:31. > :44:32.that, yes, Europe has this ambition that all parts
:44:33. > :44:35.of Europe should come up to the same level of prosperity,
:44:36. > :44:37.and that you've seen that money comes you in Wales,
:44:38. > :44:39.but to somehow grudgingly say, oh, but it hasn't
:44:40. > :44:41.created a land of milk I think the way that money
:44:42. > :44:47.is allocated, particularly for facilities like
:44:48. > :44:49.this, would be sadly Are there other factors
:44:50. > :44:51.that contribute Now, the leader of Plaid Cymru,
:44:52. > :44:57.Leanne Wood, has ruled out any kind of coalition deal with Labour
:44:58. > :44:59.if Carwyn Jones' party continues to push ahead with plans
:45:00. > :45:01.for a billion pound relief It's the first so-called red line
:45:02. > :45:12.set out by Plaid ahead of any possible
:45:13. > :45:14.post-election negotiations. Leanne Wood's comments came
:45:15. > :45:16.as she spoke to us from her party's In a wide-ranging interview,
:45:17. > :45:26.our political editor Nick Servini began
:45:27. > :45:28.with the NHS, and put it of reorganising health services
:45:29. > :45:32.was the last thing it needed We have several of
:45:33. > :45:53.them at the moment. There are seven chief executives,
:45:54. > :45:56.seven finance officers and if organisation organising
:45:57. > :45:58.all of the hospitals in Wales, we could cut the cost
:45:59. > :46:00.of the bureaucracy in our health line services which people
:46:01. > :46:08.are crying out for. We've been up this route
:46:09. > :46:11.for a number of years Restructuring is expensive as well
:46:12. > :46:14.and it's hugely disruptive for people working
:46:15. > :46:16.in the organisation. Well, there was a health
:46:17. > :46:18.reorganisation and number of years ago, and I don't recall
:46:19. > :46:20.at that time a big debate But there's not the pressure
:46:21. > :46:24.there is now, is there? The point of reorganising
:46:25. > :46:26.is to create and shape services We don't have a service
:46:27. > :46:31.that is responding to people It needs to change and we are going
:46:32. > :46:37.to crack on and do that job. Let's face it, all the parties have
:46:38. > :46:40.talked about the need to merge We are the only ones
:46:41. > :46:44.with a plan to do it. You have talked about how you're
:46:45. > :46:48.going to pay for it. One interesting area was that
:46:49. > :46:51.you were going to have a look at is the anti-poverty agenda
:46:52. > :46:53.and what is spent on that, which is interesting coming
:46:54. > :46:55.from you coming from the left of the parties when it
:46:56. > :46:57.comes to politics. What we want to do is tackle
:46:58. > :47:05.poverty through education. The best way, the route out
:47:06. > :47:08.of poverty is to help people to increase their skills,
:47:09. > :47:11.up their education and get to the point where they are able
:47:12. > :47:16.to earn more money, and when people We want to focus our anti-poverty
:47:17. > :47:23.strategies through the education For people who don't know
:47:24. > :47:30.what that is, it's one of the central schemes of this
:47:31. > :47:34.government which looks at trying to help families
:47:35. > :47:36.in economically deprived What that program does is intervene
:47:37. > :47:51.in those early years, and enables those families
:47:52. > :47:53.who are having difficulties to ensure that those children
:47:54. > :47:55.have the best possible So if they can start school at three
:47:56. > :47:59.where they've had some input We want to look at all the existing
:48:00. > :48:09.programmes and we want to make sure our policies are evidence-based
:48:10. > :48:14.and that the outcomes for these programmes are actually
:48:15. > :48:23.achieving something. I don't think that can be said
:48:24. > :48:26.for every single one of the existing We want to look at them
:48:27. > :48:31.all and invest in the ones that have the outcomes
:48:32. > :48:32.that we want to see. And just to be clear,
:48:33. > :48:35.in terms of saving money and making cuts, it's the anti-poverty
:48:36. > :48:37.agenda which is top Look, there's a budget
:48:38. > :48:42.of ?15 billion that the assembly Look, there's a budget
:48:43. > :48:44.of ?15 billion that the Assembly has, and our spending limits come
:48:45. > :48:47.to under 5% of that entire budget I don't accept that
:48:48. > :48:52.all of that ?15 billion that is being spent currently
:48:53. > :48:55.is being spent to the best effect. A Plaid Cymru Government
:48:56. > :48:57.would spend that money better, and we would prioritise
:48:58. > :48:59.the nine politics that Health has to be the top
:49:00. > :49:02.priority in that. That's what people have
:49:03. > :49:04.told us is their chief So much is wrong in the health
:49:05. > :49:08.service at the moment, and that's not the
:49:09. > :49:10.fault of the staff, because they are working under very
:49:11. > :49:12.difficult conditions, and of course we know many
:49:13. > :49:14.staff are being forced to leave the service altogether,
:49:15. > :49:16.which puts more pressure on the staff that
:49:17. > :49:19.are left, which is why this investment in staff in our NHS
:49:20. > :49:21.such an important policy. Moving on, much of
:49:22. > :49:23.the weekend has been appealing to disillusioned
:49:24. > :49:25.Labour voters. Let's take a scenario that I'm
:49:26. > :49:27.a disillusioned Labour supporter living in North Wales and I'm
:49:28. > :49:45.considering a vote for light can living in North Wales and I'm
:49:46. > :49:48.considering a vote for Plaid because I fundamentally disagree
:49:49. > :49:51.with Labour's planned to spend ?1 billion on the new
:49:52. > :49:52.motorway at Newport. Can you give me an assurance that
:49:53. > :49:55.you will not support any Government that
:49:56. > :49:56.wants to introduce that? And I'll give you some
:49:57. > :49:59.examples, a reason, because when we had an opportunity
:50:00. > :50:02.to influence the budget, last year, we opted not to support
:50:03. > :50:05.the Government to get their budget through because there was money
:50:06. > :50:07.allocated in that budget for the improvement
:50:08. > :50:09.in the M4, and I've said, and I've been very clear
:50:10. > :50:12.since I've been leader of this party, that we have
:50:13. > :50:15.two spread wealth and prosperity throughout the nation,
:50:16. > :50:17.and and focusing spending like that on one small corner of the nation
:50:18. > :50:20.is completely unacceptable to Plaid that wanted to go ahead
:50:21. > :50:34.with that project. So, this is important,
:50:35. > :50:36.so I can understand exactly Do I take it from that that
:50:37. > :50:40.you will not support any Labour Government, be it formally
:50:41. > :50:43.or informally, on any kind of arrangement so long
:50:44. > :50:45.as they are going ahead with plans Now, the Labour-bashing
:50:46. > :50:49.elements of this weekend has been right
:50:50. > :50:51.the way through it. Are we reading this correctly
:50:52. > :50:53.when we come to the conclusion that it is you basically saying
:50:54. > :50:56.that this party is not interested in a formal
:50:57. > :50:59.coalition with Labour? What I want is for there to be
:51:00. > :51:03.a Plaid Cymru Government after the election in May
:51:04. > :51:17.and so we put together an excellent You're going to have to do a deal
:51:18. > :51:21.with someone, aren't you? I accept that it's difficult for one party to
:51:22. > :51:26.get a majority, but a minority Government could be possible, but
:51:27. > :51:35.not a single person has voted yet. Let's have the election. Let's get
:51:36. > :51:42.the people voting. I want to get our party's policies into operation. But
:51:43. > :51:48.it's up to the people to decide there's talk of a political
:51:49. > :51:55.earthquake in terms of Plaid Cymru. Let's be honest, we haven't seen so
:51:56. > :51:59.much as a tremor from you in recent years in terms of the electoral
:52:00. > :52:04.gains, or lack of those games. What do you know that we don't? I'm not
:52:05. > :52:12.sure that I know anything that you don't. We've got 61 days. I believe
:52:13. > :52:17.we've convince most people that we can't carry on as we are. 17 years
:52:18. > :52:22.of a Labour Government and we are where we are. Things are great in
:52:23. > :52:27.Wales, and it we carry on doing what we've always done there were going
:52:28. > :52:31.to get the same results. We got 61 days to speak to as many people as
:52:32. > :52:36.possible. We got the policies, the personnel and what we need now is
:52:37. > :52:42.the boats and I'll be going all-out to get as many as we can so we
:52:43. > :52:47.implement our programme. I want to see our full manifesto implemented
:52:48. > :52:52.with eight Plaid Cymru Government but let's give people that chance to
:52:53. > :52:55.vote. Will have two lead it there will stop thank you very much. -- we
:52:56. > :52:58.will have to leave it there. Now where do the trade unions stand
:52:59. > :53:01.on the EU referendum debate? Many of our biggest unions
:53:02. > :53:03.still haven't said one way or the other how
:53:04. > :53:05.they'll be campaigning. James Williams has been looking
:53:06. > :53:10.at how the cards may fall. Our economic future. The security of
:53:11. > :53:16.the nation. Fundamental questions about the UK's role in the world.
:53:17. > :53:21.The stakes couldn't be higher. While some of the biggest political
:53:22. > :53:26.players have shown their cards, others are keeping them close to
:53:27. > :53:31.their chests. In 1975, the last time we were asked to decide on the UK's
:53:32. > :53:35.relationship with Europe, the trade union movement were hostile to the
:53:36. > :53:40.European economic community as it was then. It was seen by them as no
:53:41. > :53:45.more than a capitalist club, and their opposition would continue long
:53:46. > :53:55.after the UK resounded Lee voted 41 years ago to remain a member of the
:53:56. > :53:58.E EEC. But things changed as the 80s progressed and Margaret Thatcher's
:53:59. > :54:02.Conservatives landed devastating blows on the Labour Party. Labour
:54:03. > :54:08.and the European Ashraf unions turned to Brussels. And this man's
:54:09. > :54:15.proposals to place a social dimension at the heart of Europe in
:54:16. > :54:18.order to advance workers' writes. The president at the time, the
:54:19. > :54:23.villain of the peaceful so long far as the unions were concerned, all of
:54:24. > :54:34.a sudden became their night in shining armour. The only card game
:54:35. > :54:37.in town as -- at the moment is in a town called Brussels and it's a game
:54:38. > :54:42.of poker where we got to learn the rules learn fast. Another referendum
:54:43. > :54:48.on the horizon, where did the unions now stand? Well, Unite has an
:54:49. > :54:53.established pro-European policy but has yet to decide how it will
:54:54. > :54:58.campaign. Unison is currently consulting its members. The PCS
:54:59. > :55:03.union will debate in May but could remain neutral as it did in a
:55:04. > :55:10.Scottish Referendum. Community have decided to support the remain
:55:11. > :55:13.campaign. It gave us access to paid holidays for the first time in the
:55:14. > :55:21.UK's history, so there are lots of positives. Workers have benefited --
:55:22. > :55:23.benefited from being members of the EU, and it's difficult to get that
:55:24. > :55:28.message in a positive way, because if you give any slump that seems
:55:29. > :55:39.that you are using an element of fear -- supplant. I believe that
:55:40. > :55:49.being honest with people. The trance bought unions are backing wrecks it.
:55:50. > :55:56.Grassroots members are concerned. I believe our rights are being
:55:57. > :55:59.overlooked by these people. I think if we want to show solidarity with
:56:00. > :56:05.anybody then we do it with the working classes across Europe, and I
:56:06. > :56:12.think the only way we can do it now is by us coming out of the EU and
:56:13. > :56:16.with the fifth strongest economy in the world, I'm sure we can
:56:17. > :56:21.strengthen the working classes across Europe by showing there is
:56:22. > :56:30.life outside of these political super states. Do you think you are
:56:31. > :56:33.outside? At the end of the day, minorities have a voice and I
:56:34. > :56:37.believe my argument should be listened to. If we'd just decided we
:56:38. > :56:43.couldn't change anything then there is no role for trade unions in the
:56:44. > :56:47.first place. With the British steel industry reeling and hundreds of
:56:48. > :56:53.jobs to go in Wales, people believe the cheap dumping of Chinese steel
:56:54. > :57:00.in Europe is part of the problem. The very thought that the UK, Wales
:57:01. > :57:05.as part of the UK could just shut up shop and deal with the steel crisis
:57:06. > :57:11.on their own would be laughable if it wasn't so serious. The reality is
:57:12. > :57:15.that these are massive issues. We need to be part of the EU to
:57:16. > :57:19.influence these issues going forward. It's been called the
:57:20. > :57:26.biggest gamble of David Cameron's political life. With many members in
:57:27. > :57:28.Wales, unions will play a part in how the chips will fall.
:57:29. > :57:32.Now as part of our coverage of the Assembly election and the run
:57:33. > :57:35.up to polling day, BBC Wales has recruited 50 young people
:57:36. > :57:38.to give their opinions on what they've seen and heard.
:57:39. > :57:45.Marc Tilley is one of Generation 2016 and he joins me now...
:57:46. > :57:48.So Mark, with less than 2 months to go now until the Assembly
:57:49. > :57:54.election, what do you make of the debate so far...
:57:55. > :58:03.I'm personally excited. Unfortunately, I think the election
:58:04. > :58:07.is suffering from timing and it's been dwarfed by the EU referendum
:58:08. > :58:15.and the post-general election as well, so the views you as is a
:58:16. > :58:19.little bit lacking. -- the interviews he has.
:58:20. > :58:23.Only 35% of 18-24 year olds voted at the last Assembly election -
:58:24. > :58:25.do you think enough's being done to address that this time around
:58:26. > :58:27.and get younger voters interested in what's going.
:58:28. > :58:30.We know that health and education are key battlegrounds heading
:58:31. > :58:33.What in particular are the important issues for young voters?
:58:34. > :58:43.This is an issue that can be and all levels. In 2012 is we saw there was
:58:44. > :58:48.a 15 cents turnout, so I'd like to... I think it's important for
:58:49. > :58:52.politicians to work on communication strategies so they can appeal to
:58:53. > :58:55.young people in a fair and democratic society. Do you think
:58:56. > :59:01.they aren't doing that at the moment? Not at all. But I think they
:59:02. > :59:06.are accountable to young people and to really engage and make them feel
:59:07. > :59:11.valued, it's important to show that you are doing things to represent
:59:12. > :59:16.their interests, and until you do, you will struggle to infuse that
:59:17. > :59:18.demographic. What can they do? How can they show they are interested in
:59:19. > :59:32.getting young people involved? There should be a landmark policy to
:59:33. > :59:39.really kind of open up the conversation to young people. But if
:59:40. > :59:43.we are seeing that 18-24 year olds aren't voting, how is lowering the
:59:44. > :59:49.voting age game to get the 16-18 -year-olds interested? I don't think
:59:50. > :59:59.18-year-olds need to answer for motivating stats -- low voting
:00:00. > :00:04.turnout. I think it's indicative of a system that doesn't engage people.
:00:05. > :00:09.I think in order for those people to buy, you need to get them something
:00:10. > :00:15.to vote for. In a democratic society, 18-year-old had the right
:00:16. > :00:19.to withhold their boat, feel disengaged and disenfranchised. I
:00:20. > :00:22.think it's a reflection of society I think it's the parties' issue to
:00:23. > :00:25.address that. Don't forget you can follow
:00:26. > :00:28.all the latest on Twitter. We're @walespolitics,
:00:29. > :00:29.but for now that's all from me. We're @walespolitics,
:00:30. > :00:38.happening on our doorstep. Thanks very much for joining's.
:00:39. > :00:42.Welcome back - and with the Budget coming up in just 10 days time,
:00:43. > :00:44.George Osborne was hoping taxing pensions would help him fill
:00:45. > :00:55.the black hole in the public finances.
:00:56. > :00:57.Tax relief on pensions costs the Treasury ?34 billion a year,
:00:58. > :01:00.but yesterday an ally of the Chancellor let it be known
:01:01. > :01:03.that there would be no changes to the way retirement savings
:01:04. > :01:07.So why has the George Osborne abandoned the idea?
:01:08. > :01:10.Here's Ellie - and I should warn you that her report contains
:01:11. > :01:23.For lots of people, retirement looks a little bit like this.
:01:24. > :01:27.The Government's drive to encourage us to save for ourselves,
:01:28. > :01:29.but is the current way we save for our pensions
:01:30. > :01:36.an effective and fair way of doing things?
:01:37. > :01:39.Well, in last year's Budget, the Chancellor seemed to tee up yet
:01:40. > :01:45.Pensions could be treated like ISAs, you pay in from taxed income
:01:46. > :01:48.and it's tax-free when you take it out, and in-between it receives
:01:49. > :01:54.This idea and others like it need careful and public consideration.
:01:55. > :01:56.At the moment, pensions contributions are tax-exempt
:01:57. > :01:59.because earners get tax relief on what they put in.
:02:00. > :02:02.As the fund grows they aren't taxed, so again exempt, but you pay income
:02:03. > :02:08.tax when you come to take the money out.
:02:09. > :02:10.It's a principle known as exempt exempt taxed.
:02:11. > :02:14.One of the proposals was to turn that on its head by stopping all tax
:02:15. > :02:16.relief on the way in, so taxing contributions,
:02:17. > :02:19.but exempting the fund as it grows, and allowing pensioners to take out
:02:20. > :02:28.That was described as a pensions ISA.
:02:29. > :02:30.The other option was to introduce a flat rate of tax relief
:02:31. > :02:36.That would have meant higher-rate taxpayers would lose out.
:02:37. > :02:38.The pensions industry estimate the changes could earn the Treasury
:02:39. > :02:40.an extra ?10 billion a year, essentially bringing forward tax
:02:41. > :02:49.But ?10 billion is, you know, a lot of money but money
:02:50. > :02:52.that the Chancellor himself could do with.
:02:53. > :02:55.It is, but it's needed for people's pension savings and really this
:02:56. > :02:58.is just a short-term tax raid on people's pension funds.
:02:59. > :03:01.They didn't go down terribly well with the Pensions Minister either,
:03:02. > :03:07.who made clear the pensions ISA idea would be a big mistake.
:03:08. > :03:11.And when I spoke on Friday to a Tory backbencher opposed to the single
:03:12. > :03:13.rate of tax relief idea, he said his Chancellor's of politics
:03:14. > :03:19.It seems to me it is unreasonable, bordering on socialism,
:03:20. > :03:24.to give people tax relief from other people's tax, and it undermines
:03:25. > :03:27.the certainty which people have had with their pension saving.
:03:28. > :03:30.Tricky political territory for the Chancellor.
:03:31. > :03:33.At a time when he really needs your support.
:03:34. > :03:36.At a point when he is otherwise so popular because of his stance
:03:37. > :03:43.So, was it because of concern of a backlash from Tory voters -
:03:44. > :03:46.the people the Government needs on-side ahead of the EU referendum?
:03:47. > :03:54.The Treasury says it was nothing so cynical.
:03:55. > :03:57.The Chancellor's eyes are on the prize one
:03:58. > :04:00.day of being leader, and he's keen to avoid a repeat
:04:01. > :04:02.of a raft of unpopular measures in 2012.
:04:03. > :04:03.Even people within Downing Street are calling
:04:04. > :04:10.He's no stranger to climb-downs either, remember tax
:04:11. > :04:13.I've listened to the concerns, I hear and understand them.
:04:14. > :04:16.The simplest thing to do is not to phase these changes
:04:17. > :04:21.The Chancellor is unlikely to avoid altogether any further
:04:22. > :04:23.rows with his own party, but dumping these pension proposals
:04:24. > :04:31.Of course, supporters of the changes say he has missed an opportunity.
:04:32. > :04:34.He may have read the lay of the land for now,
:04:35. > :04:51.but one Tory MP told me he doubted this would be the end of it.
:04:52. > :04:58.Helen, there is a lot of politics in this. The Chancellor has been under
:04:59. > :05:02.pressure from Tory MPs, his changes he suggested will run popular, I
:05:03. > :05:06.would also suggest the referendum plays into this. It would mainly
:05:07. > :05:11.affect older people, who are likely to vote no to leaving the European
:05:12. > :05:15.Union, and who doesn't want to give them another reason to do so. I
:05:16. > :05:24.think you will also be looking at this through the prism of tax
:05:25. > :05:28.credits where he did a U-turn. Voters simply don't remember things
:05:29. > :05:33.that didn't happen in the way they do remember things did happen.
:05:34. > :05:38.Pensions is particularly tricky territory. Labour and the SNP
:05:39. > :05:41.together have managed to get an interesting coalition opposition,
:05:42. > :05:45.it's one of the few times Labour have looks like an effective
:05:46. > :05:51.opposition. Pensioners who are close to retirement age vote and this was
:05:52. > :05:56.potentially a huge landmine for him. There were reasons for unifying the
:05:57. > :06:02.tax relief, making it lower for those who were better off, he would
:06:03. > :06:05.have saved money by doing so, but has he bottled it because he has
:06:06. > :06:12.realised it could get in the way of his leadership ambitions? At the
:06:13. > :06:15.very least it would make the next four months before the referendum
:06:16. > :06:19.more tricky than they need to be. It is interesting that when he
:06:20. > :06:24.capitulates, he capitulates entirely. With tax credits he ended
:06:25. > :06:29.up doing none of them. He has pretty much abandoned all of it. Were you
:06:30. > :06:33.to tax people going into the pension rather than when they come out, all
:06:34. > :06:37.of the political losers are in the here and now rather than in 20
:06:38. > :06:43.years. The political cost outweighs the benefit in revenue. All of the
:06:44. > :06:51.obvious tax increases and all of the obvious spending cuts happen in the
:06:52. > :06:55.first parliament. What he's left now with is a list of equally
:06:56. > :07:00.provocative options. If you try to do tax credits it is unpopular,
:07:01. > :07:04.pensions is unpopular, logically he should be putting more on petrol
:07:05. > :07:10.duty given where the oil price is but you can imagine how provocative
:07:11. > :07:15.that would be among Tory voters. If his deficit reduction plans are in a
:07:16. > :07:20.bit of trouble and he may not hit this year's financial target, where
:07:21. > :07:25.does he get the money from? One possibility is cutting the top rate
:07:26. > :07:31.of tax. He said in the House of Commons it had raised 8 billion in
:07:32. > :07:36.the financial year 13/14 so maybe he is preparing the case for that. The
:07:37. > :07:46.figure is pretty suspect because people knew the tax rate was falling
:07:47. > :07:53.so in the year 12/13, they held back. We won't know until we get the
:07:54. > :07:57.14/15 to know if the cut generated extra tax rather than displacing tax
:07:58. > :08:04.year from year. That's right but his already claiming it. It doesn't mean
:08:05. > :08:08.he is right. No, but he needs to throw some red meat to
:08:09. > :08:11.Conservatives. At the moment George Osborne makes it look as though the
:08:12. > :08:15.only point in winning general elections is to put yourself in a
:08:16. > :08:20.stronger position to win the next general election, even if that means
:08:21. > :08:30.embracing Labour policies. He wants to give the impression there is some
:08:31. > :08:32.vision there, some substance. If he has got serious ambitions, doesn't
:08:33. > :08:39.he have to do something more for Middle Britain? That's why it is
:08:40. > :08:44.interesting to see Labour's response on this, which hasn't been on the
:08:45. > :08:51.why are they letting rich people off vibe. He won't achieve his targets,
:08:52. > :08:55.he has consistently done that and faced almost zero political come
:08:56. > :09:00.back for doing so. It is an artificial target he has created.
:09:01. > :09:07.And he still gets to borrow at record low interest rates.
:09:08. > :09:10.So, five more states voted last night in the race for the Democrat
:09:11. > :09:15.On the Republican side Donald Trump and Ted Cruz won two states each.
:09:16. > :09:18.Before voting Trump asked his supporters at a rally in Florida
:09:19. > :09:20.to pledge their primary votes to him.
:09:21. > :09:31.That I, no matter how I feel, no matter what
:09:32. > :09:35.the conditions, if there's hurricanes or whatever...
:09:36. > :09:44...Will vote on or before the 12th for Donald J Trump for president!
:09:45. > :10:10.He then went on to give a three-hour lecture on health reform. Trump is
:10:11. > :10:16.still the clear front runner. Mr Rubio is almost out of it, will be
:10:17. > :10:21.if he loses his home state on March 15 and Ted Cruz is probably hated
:10:22. > :10:26.even more by the Republican establishment than Mr Trump.
:10:27. > :10:36.Discuss. Rubio isn't even number two any more. As shocking as all of this
:10:37. > :10:42.is, I find Rubio's failure in many ways more interesting than Trump's
:10:43. > :10:47.success. He has all of the raw materials of a top-level politician.
:10:48. > :10:51.He is young and attractive, sensible enough, with a compelling life
:10:52. > :10:56.story. To fail to translate any of that into any degree of momentum at
:10:57. > :11:00.all during this primary campaign, to the point where the only people who
:11:01. > :11:07.think he should be the nominee are people in my profession really... He
:11:08. > :11:15.won the Minister of caucuses, let's not forget that. Jeb Bush went into
:11:16. > :11:19.this having raised the most amount of money and completely tanked.
:11:20. > :11:23.There is one argument which is that money controls politics, that is
:11:24. > :11:30.proving quite challenging in this election. The second thing is that
:11:31. > :11:34.media controls politics, but people say Jeremy Corbyn would do better if
:11:35. > :11:42.only the media stopped attacking them, but the media has relentlessly
:11:43. > :11:45.attacked Donald Trump. It is a nightmare for the mainstream
:11:46. > :11:53.Republicans now. Their choice is down to Trump and Cruz, but not a
:11:54. > :12:03.single senator has come out and endorsed Cruz. Trump's popularity is
:12:04. > :12:06.a disaster for Conservatives around the world because he is associated
:12:07. > :12:12.with the Conservative brand, and in particular it is a disaster for
:12:13. > :12:19.those who want Western democracy to triumph in the battle of ideas.
:12:20. > :12:24.Trump is like a villain in a Marvel superhero Hollywood blockbuster
:12:25. > :12:28.written by the Islamic State's propaganda mastermind. What better
:12:29. > :12:35.recruiting Sergeant could you have for the Islamic State than a parody
:12:36. > :12:41.of a kind of capitalist billionaire, sexist, racist, Islamophobic ogre?
:12:42. > :12:46.But other than that, he is very good! The establishment are not
:12:47. > :12:52.hoping for a broken convention, we haven't had one for 60 years, it is
:12:53. > :13:00.a pretty long shot. Yes, I think their nightmare must be that Trump
:13:01. > :13:05.is elected as the candidate, and you think fine, the worst comes to the
:13:06. > :13:12.worst, Hillary Clinton winds, but what if something happens to her
:13:13. > :13:20.between now and November? She gets indicted or is forced to withdraw?
:13:21. > :13:25.That is why Joe Biden is vice president, still tarnishing his
:13:26. > :13:28.credentials. Or Bloomberg. It should be fun.
:13:29. > :13:31.We're back same time next week here on BBC One.
:13:32. > :13:35.The Daily Politics is back on BBC Two at midday
:13:36. > :13:45.Remember - if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.