12/03/2017

:00:34. > :00:38.It's Sunday morning and this is the Sunday Politics.

:00:39. > :00:43.David Davis tells MPs to leave the Brexit bill untouched,

:00:44. > :00:45.ahead of a week which could see Britain begin the process

:00:46. > :00:50.We'll talk to a Tory rebel and Ukip's Nigel Farage.

:00:51. > :00:53.Phillip Hammond's first budget hit the rocks thanks to a tax rise

:00:54. > :01:01.But how should we tax those who work for themselves?

:01:02. > :01:04.And remember Donald Trump's claim that Barack Obama had ordered

:01:05. > :01:11.We'll talk to the former Tory MP who set the whole story rolling.

:01:12. > :01:13.Later in the programme: Where next for the LibDems?

:01:14. > :01:16.Their leader in Wales tells me they have a bright future.

:01:17. > :01:19.And, with little extra money, what else can be done

:01:20. > :01:31.And joining me for all of that, three self-employed journalists

:01:32. > :01:35.who definitely don't deserve a tax break.

:01:36. > :01:36.It's Steve Richards, Julia Hartley-Brewer

:01:37. > :01:41.They'll be tweeting throughout the programme with all the carefree

:01:42. > :01:48.abandon of Katie Hopkins before a libel trial.

:01:49. > :01:51.BBC lawyers have suddenly got nervous!

:01:52. > :01:54.So first today, the government is gearing up to trigger Article 50,

:01:55. > :01:56.perhaps in the next 48 hours, and start negotiating Britain's

:01:57. > :02:00.Much has been written about the prospect of the Commons

:02:01. > :02:02.getting a "meaningful vote" on the deal Britain negotiates.

:02:03. > :02:04.Brexit Secretary David Davis was on the Andrew Marr programme

:02:05. > :02:07.earlier this morning and he was asked what happens

:02:08. > :02:17.Well, that is what is called the most favoured nation status deal

:02:18. > :02:22.There we go out, as it were, on WTO rules.

:02:23. > :02:25.That is why of course we do the contingency planning, to make

:02:26. > :02:32.The British people decided on June the 23rd last year

:02:33. > :02:37.My job, and the job of the government, is to make

:02:38. > :02:47.the terms on which that happens as beneficial as possible.

:02:48. > :02:55.There we have it, clearly, either Parliament votes for the deal when

:02:56. > :02:58.it is done or it out on World Trade Organisation rules. That's what the

:02:59. > :03:01.government means by a meaningful vote.

:03:02. > :03:07.I think we get over obsessed about whether there will be a legal right

:03:08. > :03:11.for Parliament to have a vote. If there is no deal or a bad deal, I

:03:12. > :03:14.think it would be politically impossible for the government to

:03:15. > :03:17.reject Parliament's desire for a vote because the atmosphere of

:03:18. > :03:20.politics will be completely different by then. I take David

:03:21. > :03:25.Davies seriously. Within Whitehall he has acquired a reputation as

:03:26. > :03:29.being the most conscientious and details sadly... And well briefed.

:03:30. > :03:32.Absolutely and well travelled in terms of European capitals of the

:03:33. > :03:36.three Brexit ministers. It is quite telling he said what he did and it

:03:37. > :03:41.is quite telling that within cabinet, two weeks ago he was

:03:42. > :03:44.floating the idea of no deal at all. Being if not the central estimate

:03:45. > :03:48.than a completely plausible eventuality. It is interesting. I

:03:49. > :03:53.would suggest the prospect of no deal is moving up the agenda. It is

:03:54. > :03:59.still less likely than more likely to happen. But it's no longer a kind

:04:00. > :04:02.of long tail way out there in the distance. Planning for no deal is

:04:03. > :04:04.the same as having contents insurance or travel insurance, plan

:04:05. > :04:09.for the worse case scenarios are prepared it happens. Even the worst

:04:10. > :04:13.case scenario, it's not that bad. Think of the Jeep 20, apart from the

:04:14. > :04:18.EU, four members of the G20 economies are successful members of

:04:19. > :04:21.the EU. The rest aren't and don't have trade deals but somehow these

:04:22. > :04:26.countries are prospering. They are growing at a higher rate. You are

:04:27. > :04:30.not frightened? Not remotely. We are obsessed with what we get from the

:04:31. > :04:33.EU and the key thing we get from leaving the EU is not the deal but

:04:34. > :04:37.the other deals we can finally make with other trading partners. They

:04:38. > :04:40.have higher growth than virtually every other EU country apart from

:04:41. > :04:45.Germany. It is sensible as a negotiating position for the

:04:46. > :04:48.government to say if there is no deal, we will accept there is no

:04:49. > :04:53.deal. We're not frightened of no deal. It was clear from what David

:04:54. > :04:56.Davies was saying that there will be a vote in parliament at the end of

:04:57. > :05:01.the process but there won't be a third option to send the government

:05:02. > :05:06.back to try to get a better deal. It is either the deal or we leave

:05:07. > :05:09.without a deal. In reality, that third option will be there. We don't

:05:10. > :05:14.know yet whether there will be a majority for the deal if they get

:05:15. > :05:20.one. What we do know now is that there isn't a majority in the

:05:21. > :05:24.Commons for no deal. Labour MPs are absolutely clear that no deal is

:05:25. > :05:28.worth then a bad deal. I've heard enough Tory MPs say the same thing.

:05:29. > :05:37.But they wouldn't get no deal through. When it comes to this vote,

:05:38. > :05:40.if whatever deal is rejected, there will then be, one way or another,

:05:41. > :05:44.the third option raised of go back again. But who gets to decide what

:05:45. > :05:48.is a bad deal? The British people will have a different idea than the

:05:49. > :05:55.two thirds of the Remain supporting MPs in the Commons. In terms of the

:05:56. > :05:59.vote, the Commons. Surely, if the Commons, which is what matters here,

:06:00. > :06:05.if the Commons were to vote against the deal as negotiated by the

:06:06. > :06:09.government, surely that would trigger a general election? If the

:06:10. > :06:12.government had recommended the deal, surely the government would then, if

:06:13. > :06:18.it still felt strongly about the deal, if the other 27 had said,

:06:19. > :06:22.we're not negotiating, extending it, it would in effect become a second

:06:23. > :06:25.referendum on the deal. In effect it would be a no-confidence vote in the

:06:26. > :06:29.government. You've got to assume that unless something massively

:06:30. > :06:32.changes in the opposition before then, the government would feel

:06:33. > :06:37.fairly confident about a general election on those terms. Unless the

:06:38. > :06:41.deal is hideously bad and obviously basso every vote in the country...

:06:42. > :06:45.The prior minister said if it is that bad she would have rather no

:06:46. > :06:50.deal. So that eventuality arrives. -- the Prime Minister has said. Not

:06:51. > :06:55.a second referendum general election in two years' time. Don't put any

:06:56. > :06:58.holidays for! LAUGHTER -- don't look any.

:06:59. > :07:00.So the Brexit bill looks likely to clear Parliament this week.

:07:01. > :07:04.That depends on the number of Conservative MPs who are prepared

:07:05. > :07:06.to vote against their government on two key issues.

:07:07. > :07:10.Theresa May could be in negotiations with our European

:07:11. > :07:12.partners within days, but there may be some

:07:13. > :07:14.wheeler-dealings she has to do with her own MPs, too.

:07:15. > :07:19.Cast your mind back to the beginning of month.

:07:20. > :07:20.The bill to trigger Article 50 passed comfortably

:07:21. > :07:29.But three Conservatives voted for Labour's amendments to ensure

:07:30. > :07:33.the rights of EU citizens already in the UK.

:07:34. > :07:36.Seven Tory MPs voted to force the government to give Parliament

:07:37. > :07:41.a say on the deal struck with the EU before it's finalised.

:07:42. > :07:45.But remember those numbers, they're important.

:07:46. > :07:49.On the issue of a meaningful vote on a deal, I'm told there might have

:07:50. > :07:51.been more rebels had it not been for this assurance from

:07:52. > :07:57.I can confirm that the government will bring forward a motion

:07:58. > :07:59.on the final agreement to be approved by both Houses

:08:00. > :08:04.And we expect, and intend, that this will happen before

:08:05. > :08:11.the European Parliament debates and votes on the final agreement.

:08:12. > :08:16.When the government was criticised for reeling back

:08:17. > :08:20.from when and what it would offer a vote on.

:08:21. > :08:22.The bill then moved into the Lords, where peers passed it

:08:23. > :08:30.And the second, that Parliament be given a meaningful vote on the terms

:08:31. > :08:33.of the deal or indeed a vote in the event of there

:08:34. > :08:37.The so-called Brexit bill will return to Commons

:08:38. > :08:41.Ministers insist that both amendments would weaken

:08:42. > :08:44.the government's negotiating hand and are seeking to overturn them.

:08:45. > :08:50.But, as ever, politics is a numbers game.

:08:51. > :08:52.Theresa May has a working majority of 17.

:08:53. > :08:56.On Brexit, though, it's probably higher.

:08:57. > :08:58.At least six Labour MPs generally vote with

:08:59. > :09:02.Plus, eight DUP MPs, two from the Ulster Unionist party

:09:03. > :09:08.If all Conservatives vote with the government as well,

:09:09. > :09:14.Therefore, 26 Conservative rebels are needed for the government to be

:09:15. > :09:21.So, are there rough waters ahead for Theresa May?

:09:22. > :09:24.What numbers are we looking at, in terms of a potential rebellion?

:09:25. > :09:27.I think we're looking at a large number of people who are interested

:09:28. > :09:29.This building is a really important building.

:09:30. > :09:31.It's symbolic of a huge amount of history.

:09:32. > :09:35.And for it not to be involved in this momentous time would,

:09:36. > :09:42.But he says a clear verbal statement from the government on a meaningful

:09:43. > :09:48.vote on any deal would be enough to get most Tory MPs onside.

:09:49. > :09:50.It was already said about David Jones.

:09:51. > :09:52.It's slightly unravelled a little bit during

:09:53. > :09:57.I think this is an opportunity to really get that clarity

:09:58. > :10:00.through so that we can all vote for Article 50 and get

:10:01. > :10:04.We've have spoken to several Tory MPs who say they are minded to vote

:10:05. > :10:08.One said the situation was sad and depressing.

:10:09. > :10:11.The other said that the whips must be worried because they don't

:10:12. > :10:18.A minister told me Downing Street was looking again at the possibility

:10:19. > :10:22.of offering a vote in the event of no deal being reached.

:10:23. > :10:24.But that its position was unlikely to change.

:10:25. > :10:27.And, anyway, government sources have told the Sunday Politics they're not

:10:28. > :10:34.That those Tory MPs who didn't back either amendment the first time

:10:35. > :10:37.round would look silly if they did, this time.

:10:38. > :10:41.It would have to be a pretty hefty lot of people changing their minds

:10:42. > :10:44.about things that have already been discussed in quite a lot of detail,

:10:45. > :10:48.last time it was in the Commons, for things to be reversed this time.

:10:49. > :10:51.There's no doubt that a number of Tory MPs are very concerned.

:10:52. > :10:53.Labour are pessimistic about the chances of enough Tory

:10:54. > :10:57.rebels backing either of the amendments in the Commons.

:10:58. > :10:59.The important thing, I think, is to focus on the fact

:11:00. > :11:02.that this is the last chance to have a say on this.

:11:03. > :11:06.If they're going to vote with us, Monday is the time to do it.

:11:07. > :11:08.Assuming the bill does pass the Commons unamended,

:11:09. > :11:11.it will go back to the Lord's on Monday night where Labour peers

:11:12. > :11:15.have already indicated they won't block it again.

:11:16. > :11:18.It means that the Brexit bill would become law and Theresa May

:11:19. > :11:22.would be free to trigger Article 50 within days.

:11:23. > :11:24.Her own deadline was the end of this month.

:11:25. > :11:30.But one minister told me there were advantages to doing it early.

:11:31. > :11:33.We're joined now from Nottingham by the Conservative MP Anna Soubry.

:11:34. > :11:35.She's previously voted against the government on the question

:11:36. > :11:42.of whether Parliament should have a final say over the EU deal.

:11:43. > :11:48.Anna Soubry, I think it was clear this morning from David Davies that

:11:49. > :11:51.what he means by meaningful vote is not what you mean by a meaningful

:11:52. > :11:56.vote. He thinks the choice for Parliament would be to either vote

:11:57. > :12:00.for the deal and if Parliament doesn't, we leave on World Trade

:12:01. > :12:06.Organisation rules, on a bare-bones structure. In the end, will he

:12:07. > :12:10.accept that in the Commons tomorrow? No, because my problem and I don't

:12:11. > :12:14.think it is a problem, but my problem, the government's problem is

:12:15. > :12:18.that what I want is then to answer this question. What happens in the

:12:19. > :12:23.event of their not being any deal? David Davies made it very clear that

:12:24. > :12:27.in the event of there being no deal, Parliament would have no say. It

:12:28. > :12:31.means through your elected representatives, the people of this

:12:32. > :12:36.country would have no say on what happens if the government doesn't

:12:37. > :12:38.get a deal. I think the request that Parliament should have a say on

:12:39. > :12:43.Parliamentary sovereignty, is perfectly reasonable. That is what I

:12:44. > :12:50.want David to say. If he says that, I won't be rebelling. If he does...

:12:51. > :12:54.They have refused to say that. Sorry. If he continues to say what

:12:55. > :13:00.he said the BBC this morning, which means that the vote will be either

:13:01. > :13:07.to accept the as negotiated or to leave on WTO rules, will you rebel

:13:08. > :13:11.on that question but no, no, sorry, if there's a deal, Parliament will

:13:12. > :13:14.have a say. So that's fine. And we will see what the deal is and we

:13:15. > :13:19.will look at the options two years down the road. When who knows

:13:20. > :13:22.what'll happen in our economy and world economy. That is one matter

:13:23. > :13:26.which I am content on. The Prime Minister, a woman of her word has

:13:27. > :13:32.said that in the event of a deal, Parliament will vote on any deal. I

:13:33. > :13:36.don't difficulty. To clarify, I will come onto that. These are important

:13:37. > :13:40.matters. I want to clarify, not argue with you. You are content that

:13:41. > :13:43.if there is a deal, we will come under no deal in a second, but if

:13:44. > :13:50.there is a deal, you are content with the choice of being able to

:13:51. > :13:52.vote for that deal or leaving on WTO terms? No, you're speculating as to

:13:53. > :13:59.what might happen in two years' time. What the options might be.

:14:00. > :14:01.Personally I find it inconceivable that the government will come back

:14:02. > :14:05.with a rubbish deal. They will either come back with a good deal,

:14:06. > :14:09.which I won't have a problem with or they will come back with no deal. To

:14:10. > :14:14.speculate about coming back with a deal, there is a variety of options.

:14:15. > :14:17.I understand that that is what the Lord amendments are about. They are

:14:18. > :14:25.about a vote at the end of the process. Do forgive me, the Lords

:14:26. > :14:27.amendment is not the same that I've voted for in Parliament. What we

:14:28. > :14:30.call the Chris Leslie amendment, which was talking about whatever the

:14:31. > :14:33.agreement is, whatever happens at the end of the negotiations,

:14:34. > :14:36.Parliament will have a vote. Parliament will have a say. The

:14:37. > :14:42.Lords amendment is a bit more technical. It is the principle of no

:14:43. > :14:46.deal that is agitating us. Let's clarify on this. They are

:14:47. > :14:50.complicated matters. What do you want the government to say? What do

:14:51. > :14:55.you want David Davis to say tomorrow on what should the Parliamentary

:14:56. > :14:59.process should be if there is no deal? Quite. I want a commitment

:15:00. > :15:03.from him that in the event of no deal, it will come into Parliament

:15:04. > :15:10.and Parliament will determine what happens next. It could be that in

:15:11. > :15:14.the event of no deal, the best thing is for us to jump off the cliff into

:15:15. > :15:17.WTO tariff is. I find it unlikely but that might be the reality. There

:15:18. > :15:22.might be other alternatives. Most importantly, including saying to the

:15:23. > :15:24.government, go back, carry on. The question that everybody has to ask

:15:25. > :15:35.is, why won't the government give My fear is what this is about is

:15:36. > :15:40.asked deliberately, not the Prime Minister, but others deliberately

:15:41. > :15:45.ensuring we have no deal and no deal pretty soon and in that event, we

:15:46. > :15:50.jumped off the cliff onto WTO tariffs and nobody in this country

:15:51. > :15:56.and the people of this country do not have a say. My constituents did

:15:57. > :16:00.not vote for hard Brexit. You do not want the government to

:16:01. > :16:07.have the ability if there is no deal to automatically fall back on the

:16:08. > :16:11.WTO rules? Quite. It is as simple as that. We are now speculating about

:16:12. > :16:17.what will happen in two years. I want to find out what happens

:16:18. > :16:22.tomorrow. What will you do if you don't get that assurance? I will

:16:23. > :16:26.either abstain, or I will vote to keep this amendment within the Bill.

:16:27. > :16:31.I will either vote against my government, which I do not do

:16:32. > :16:34.likely, I have never voted against my government until the Chris Leslie

:16:35. > :16:38.clause when the Bill was going through, or I will abstain, which

:16:39. > :16:42.has pretty much the same effect because it comes into the Commons

:16:43. > :16:48.with both amendments so you have positively to vote to take the map.

:16:49. > :16:54.Can you give us an idea of how many like-minded conservative colleagues

:16:55. > :16:59.there are. I genuinely do not know. You must talk to each other. I do

:17:00. > :17:06.not talk to every member of my party. You know people who are

:17:07. > :17:10.like-minded. I do. I am not doing numbers games. I know you want that

:17:11. > :17:16.but I genuinely do not know the figure. I think this is an

:17:17. > :17:22.uncomfortable truth. People have to understand what has happened in our

:17:23. > :17:26.country, two particular newspapers, creating an atmosphere and setting

:17:27. > :17:29.an agenda and I think many people are rather concerned, some

:17:30. > :17:35.frightened, to put their head over the parapet. There are many millions

:17:36. > :17:40.of people who feel totally excluded from this process. Many of them

:17:41. > :17:43.voted to remain. And they have lost their voice. We have covered the

:17:44. > :17:45.ground I wanted to. We're joined now by the Ukip MEP

:17:46. > :17:57.and former leader Nigel Farage. Article 50 triggered, we are leaving

:17:58. > :18:02.the EU, the single market and the customs union. What is left you to

:18:03. > :18:05.complain about? All of that will happen and hopefully we will get the

:18:06. > :18:09.triggered this week which is good news. What worries me a little I'm

:18:10. > :18:14.not sure the government recognises how strong their handers. At the

:18:15. > :18:17.summit in Brussels, the word in the corridors is that we are prepared to

:18:18. > :18:22.give away fishing waters as a bargaining chip and the worry is

:18:23. > :18:26.what deal we get. Are we leaving, yes I am pleased about that. You are

:18:27. > :18:31.under relevant voice in the deal because the deal will be voted on in

:18:32. > :18:36.Parliament and you have one MP. You are missing the point, the real vote

:18:37. > :18:40.in parliament is not in London but Strasbourg. This is perhaps the

:18:41. > :18:44.biggest obstacle the British Government faces. Not what happens

:18:45. > :18:49.in the Commons that the end of the two years, the European Parliament

:18:50. > :18:54.could veto the deal. What that means is people need to adopt a different

:18:55. > :18:56.approach. We do not need to be lobbying in the corridors of

:18:57. > :19:02.Brussels to get a good deal, we need is a country to be out there talking

:19:03. > :19:06.to the German car workers and Belgian chocolate makers, putting as

:19:07. > :19:10.much pressure as we can on politicians from across Europe to

:19:11. > :19:15.come to a sensible arrangement. It is in their interests more than

:19:16. > :19:22.ours. In what way is the vision of Brexit set out by David Davis any

:19:23. > :19:25.different from your own? I am delighted there are people now

:19:26. > :19:33.adopting the position I argued for many years. Good. But now... Like

:19:34. > :19:39.Douglas Carswell, he said he found David Davis' performers this morning

:19:40. > :19:44.reassuring. It is. And just as when Theresa May was Home Secretary every

:19:45. > :19:47.performance she gave was hugely reassuring. She was seen to be a

:19:48. > :19:54.heroine after her conference speeches and then did not deliver. I

:19:55. > :20:00.am concerned that even before we start we are making concessions. You

:20:01. > :20:04.described in the EU's divorce bill demands, 60 billion euros is floated

:20:05. > :20:10.around. You said it is laughable and I understand that. Do you maintain

:20:11. > :20:18.that we will not have to pay a penny to leave? It is nine months since we

:20:19. > :20:24.voted exit and assuming the trigger of Article 50, we would have paid 30

:20:25. > :20:28.billion in since we had a vote. We are still members. But honestly, I

:20:29. > :20:32.do not think there is an appetite for us to pay a massive divorce

:20:33. > :20:40.Bill. There are assets also. Not a penny? There will be some ongoing

:20:41. > :20:46.commitments, but the numbers talked about our 50, ?60 billion, they are

:20:47. > :20:51.frankly laughable. I am trying to find out if you are prepared to

:20:52. > :20:56.accept some kind of exit cost, it may be nowhere near 60 billion. We

:20:57. > :20:59.have to do a net agreement, the government briefed about our share

:21:00. > :21:05.of the European Union investment bank. Would you accept a

:21:06. > :21:10.transitional arrangement, deal, five, ten billion, as part of the

:21:11. > :21:15.divorce settlement? We are painted net ?30 million every single day at

:21:16. > :21:20.the moment, ?10 billion plus every year. That is just our contribution.

:21:21. > :21:27.We are going to make a massive saving on this. What do you make of

:21:28. > :21:32.what Anna Soubry said, that if there is no deal, and it is being talked

:21:33. > :21:36.about more. Maybe the government managing expectations. There is an

:21:37. > :21:41.expectation we will have a deal, but if there is no deal, that the

:21:42. > :21:46.government cannot just go to WTO rules, but it has to have a vote in

:21:47. > :21:49.parliament? By the time we get to that there will be a general

:21:50. > :21:55.election coming down the tracks and I suspect that if at the end of the

:21:56. > :21:59.two-year process there is no deal and by the way, no deal is a lot

:22:00. > :22:04.better for the nation than where we currently are, because we freed of

:22:05. > :22:07.regulations and able to make our own deals in the world. I think what

:22:08. > :22:14.would happen, and if Parliament said it did not back, at the end of the

:22:15. > :22:21.negotiation a general election would happen quickly. According to reports

:22:22. > :22:26.this morning, one of your most senior aides has passed a dossier to

:22:27. > :22:30.police claiming Tories committed electoral fraud in Thanet South, the

:22:31. > :22:36.seat contested in the election. What evidence to you have? I read that in

:22:37. > :22:39.the newspapers as you have. I am not going to comment on it. Will you not

:22:40. > :22:46.aware of the contents of the dossier? I am not aware of the

:22:47. > :22:52.dossier. He was your election strategists. I am dubious as to

:22:53. > :22:58.whether this dossier exists at all. Perhaps the newspapers have got this

:22:59. > :23:05.wrong. Concerns about the downloading of data the took place

:23:06. > :23:12.in that constituency, there are. Allegedly, he has refuted it, was it

:23:13. > :23:17.done by your MP to give information to the Tories, do you have evidence

:23:18. > :23:24.about? We have evidence Mr Carswell downloaded information, we have no

:23:25. > :23:28.evidence what he did with it. It is not just your aide who has been

:23:29. > :23:34.making allegations against the Conservatives in Thanet South and

:23:35. > :23:41.other seats, if the evidence was to be substantial, and if it was to

:23:42. > :23:45.result in another by-election being called an Thanet South had to be

:23:46. > :23:50.fought again, would you be the Ukip candidate? I probably would. You

:23:51. > :23:56.probably would? Yes. Just probably? Just probably. It would be your

:23:57. > :24:00.eighth attempt. Winning seats in parliament under first past the post

:24:01. > :24:03.is not the only way to change politics in Britain and I would like

:24:04. > :24:09.to think I proved that. Let's go back to Anna Soubry. The implication

:24:10. > :24:13.of what we were saying on the panel at the start of the show and what

:24:14. > :24:18.Nigel Farage was saying there would be that if at the end of the process

:24:19. > :24:22.whatever the vote, if the government were to lose it, it would provoke a

:24:23. > :24:27.general election properly. I think that would be right. Let's get real.

:24:28. > :24:31.The government is not going to come to Parliament with anything other

:24:32. > :24:39.than something it believes is a good deal and if it rejected it, would be

:24:40. > :24:43.unlikely, there would be a de facto vote of no confidence and it would

:24:44. > :24:48.be within the fixed term Parliaments act and that be it. The problem is,

:24:49. > :24:54.more likely, because of the story put up about the 50 billion, 60

:24:55. > :24:57.billion and you look at the way things are flagged up that both the

:24:58. > :25:02.Prime Minister and Boris Johnson saying, we should be asking them for

:25:03. > :25:07.money back, I think the big fear and the fear I have is we will be

:25:08. > :25:12.crashing out in six months. You think we could leave as quickly as

:25:13. > :25:18.six months. Explain that. I think they will stoke up the demand from

:25:19. > :25:22.the EU for 50, 60 billion back and my real concern is that within six

:25:23. > :25:27.months, where we're not making much progress, maybe nine months, and

:25:28. > :25:32.people are getting increasingly fed up with the EU because they are told

:25:33. > :25:35.it wants unreasonable demands, and then the crash. I think what is

:25:36. > :25:40.happening is the government is putting in place scaffolding at the

:25:41. > :25:45.bottom of the cliff to break our fall when we come to fall off that

:25:46. > :25:50.cliff and I think many in government are preparing not for a two-year

:25:51. > :25:56.process, but six, to nine months, off the cliff, out we go. That is my

:25:57. > :26:00.fear. That is interesting. I have not heard that express before by

:26:01. > :26:07.someone in your position. I suspect you have made Nigel Farage's date.

:26:08. > :26:13.It is a lovely thought. I would say to Anna Soubry she is out of date

:26:14. > :26:16.with this. 40 years ago there was a good argument for joining the common

:26:17. > :26:21.market because tariffs around the world was so high. That has changed

:26:22. > :26:25.with the World Trade Organisation. We are leaving the EU and rejoining

:26:26. > :26:34.a great big world and it is exciting. She was giving an

:26:35. > :26:35.interesting perspective on what could happen in nine months rather

:26:36. > :26:40.than two years. I thank you both. It was Philip Hammond's first

:26:41. > :26:42.budget on Wednesday - billed as a steady-as-she-goes

:26:43. > :26:48.affair, but turned out to cause uproar after the Chancellor appeared

:26:49. > :26:50.to contradict a Tory manifesto commitment with an increase

:26:51. > :26:52.in national insurance contributions. The aim was to address what some see

:26:53. > :27:01.as an imbalance in the tax system, where employees pay

:27:02. > :27:03.more National Insurance The controversy centres

:27:04. > :27:06.on increasing the so-called class 4 rate for the self-employed who make

:27:07. > :27:09.a profit of more than ?8,060 a year. It will go up in stages

:27:10. > :27:16.from 9% to 11% in 2019. The changes mean that over one

:27:17. > :27:20.and a half million will pay on average ?240 a year

:27:21. > :27:24.more in contributions. Some Conservative MPs were unhappy,

:27:25. > :27:30.with even the Wales Minister saying: "I will apologise to every

:27:31. > :27:33.voter in Wales that read the Conservative manifesto

:27:34. > :27:34.in the 2015 election." The Sun labelled Philip

:27:35. > :27:40.Hammond "spite van man". The Daily Mail called the budget

:27:41. > :27:43."no laughing matter". By Thursday, Theresa May

:27:44. > :27:45.said the government One of the first things I did

:27:46. > :27:51.as Prime Minister was to commission Matthew Taylor to review the rights

:27:52. > :27:55.and protections that were available to self-employed workers

:27:56. > :27:58.and whether they should be enhanced. People will be able to look

:27:59. > :28:00.at the government paper when we produce it, showing

:28:01. > :28:03.all our changes, and take And, of course, the Chancellor will

:28:04. > :28:08.be speaking, as will his ministers, to MPs, businesspeople and others

:28:09. > :28:12.to listen to the concerns. Well, the man you heard mentioned

:28:13. > :28:14.there, Matthew Taylor, has the job of producing

:28:15. > :28:28.a report into the future Welcome. The Chancellor has decided

:28:29. > :28:33.the self-employed should pay almost the same in National Insurance, not

:28:34. > :28:37.the same but almost, as the employed will stop what is left of your

:28:38. > :28:41.commission? The commission has a broader frame of reference and we

:28:42. > :28:47.are interested in the quality of work in the economy at the heart of

:28:48. > :28:52.what I hope will be proposing is a set of shifts that will improve the

:28:53. > :28:56.quality of that work so we have an economy where all work is fair and

:28:57. > :28:59.decent and all jobs give people scope for development and

:29:00. > :29:08.fulfilment. The issue of taxes a small part. You will cover that? We

:29:09. > :29:10.will, because the tax system and employment regulation system drive

:29:11. > :29:17.particular behaviours in our labour market. You approve I think of the

:29:18. > :29:22.general direction of this policy of raising National Insurance on the

:29:23. > :29:27.self-employed. Taxing them in return perhaps for more state benefits. Why

:29:28. > :29:31.are so many others on the left against it from Tim Farron to John

:29:32. > :29:36.McDonnell? Tax rises are unpopular and it is the role of the opposition

:29:37. > :29:40.parties to make capital from unpopular tax rises. I think as tax

:29:41. > :29:44.rises go this is broadly progressive. There are self-employed

:29:45. > :29:49.people on low incomes and they will be better off. It is economic league

:29:50. > :29:52.rational because the reason for the difference in National Insurance --

:29:53. > :29:57.economically. It was to do with state entitlements. The government

:29:58. > :30:02.is consulting about paid parental leave. A series of governments have

:30:03. > :30:07.not been good about thinking about medium sustainability of the tax

:30:08. > :30:11.base. Self-employment is growing. But it is eroding the tax base. It

:30:12. > :30:18.is important to address those issues. A number of think tanks have

:30:19. > :30:23.said this is a progressive move. Yet, a number of left-wing

:30:24. > :30:29.politicians have been against it. And a number of Tories have said

:30:30. > :30:32.this is a progressive move and not a Tory government move, the balance of

:30:33. > :30:37.you will pay more tax, but you will get more state benefits is not a

:30:38. > :30:41.Tory approach to things. That a Tory approach will be you will pay less

:30:42. > :30:44.tax but entitled to fewer benefits as well.

:30:45. > :30:54.I preferred in and policies to politics -- I prefer policies. When

:30:55. > :30:58.people look at the policy and when they look the fact that there is no

:30:59. > :31:00.real historical basis for that big national insurance differential,

:31:01. > :31:05.they see it is a sensible policy. I don't have to deal with the

:31:06. > :31:08.politics. There has been a huge growth in self-employment from the

:31:09. > :31:10.turn of the millennium. It's been strongest amongst older workers,

:31:11. > :31:18.women part-timers. Do you have any idea, do you have

:31:19. > :31:22.the data in your commission that could tell us how many are taking

:31:23. > :31:26.self-employment because they like the flexibility and they like the

:31:27. > :31:31.tax advantages that come with it, too, or they are being forced into

:31:32. > :31:36.it by employers who don't want the extra costs of employment? Do we

:31:37. > :31:43.know the difference? We do, broadly. Most surveys on self-employment and

:31:44. > :31:45.flexible forms of employment suggest about two thirds to three quarters

:31:46. > :31:49.enjoy it, they like the flexibility, they like the autonomy and about a

:31:50. > :31:54.third to one quarter are less happy. That tends to be because they would

:31:55. > :31:56.like to have a full-time permanent job. It is not necessary that they

:31:57. > :32:01.don't enjoy what they are doing, they would like to do other things.

:32:02. > :32:05.And some of the protections that come with it? Yes. There are some

:32:06. > :32:09.people who are forced into southern employees by high-risk but also some

:32:10. > :32:13.people feel like they can't get a proper job as it were. --

:32:14. > :32:19.self-employment by people who hire them. It is on the narrow matter of

:32:20. > :32:23.tax revenues but if you are employed on ?32,000 the state will take over

:32:24. > :32:27.?6,000 in national insurance contributions, that is quite chunky.

:32:28. > :32:31.If you are self-employed it is ?2300. But the big difference

:32:32. > :32:38.between those figures isn't what the employee is paying, it's the

:32:39. > :32:42.employer's contributions up to almost 14%, and cupped for as much

:32:43. > :32:51.as you are paid. What do you do about employers' contributions for

:32:52. > :32:55.the self employed? -- it is uncapped for as much. What I recommend is

:32:56. > :32:59.that we should probably move from taxing employment to taxing labour.

:33:00. > :33:03.We should probably have a more level playing field so it doesn't really

:33:04. > :33:07.matter... Explained that I thought it was the same thing. If you are a

:33:08. > :33:12.self-employed gardener, you are a different tax regime to a gardener

:33:13. > :33:20.who works for a gardening firm. On the individual side and on the firm

:33:21. > :33:23.side. As we see new business models, so-called gig working, partly with

:33:24. > :33:28.technology, we need a more level playing field saying that we're

:33:29. > :33:33.taxing people's work, not the form in which they deliver that. That is

:33:34. > :33:35.part of the reason we have seen the growth of particular business

:33:36. > :33:40.models. They are innovative and creative and partly driven by the

:33:41. > :33:44.fact that if you can describe yourself as self-employed there are

:33:45. > :33:46.tax advantages. Coming out in June? Will you come back and talk to us?

:33:47. > :33:48.Yes. We say goodbye to viewers

:33:49. > :33:53.in Scotland, who leave us now Coming up here in 20 minutes,

:33:54. > :33:58.we'll be talking to the former Tory MP who was the root

:33:59. > :34:13.of Donald Trump's allegation Hello and welcome to

:34:14. > :34:16.the Sunday Politics Wales. In a few minutes: Will there ever be

:34:17. > :34:24.enough cash spent on social Money's going to be tight

:34:25. > :34:28.for the next few years. We'll be asking what

:34:29. > :34:30.else can be done. But first, Welsh Liberal Democrats

:34:31. > :34:32.say they're on the way back The last two elections has seen them

:34:33. > :34:39.down to just one MP in Wales, But, with membership on the up,

:34:40. > :34:43.they're looking to make gains I met the party's leader in Wales,

:34:44. > :34:46.Mark Williams, at the party conference in Swansea,

:34:47. > :34:48.and asked about Mark Williams, I guess

:34:49. > :34:52.the big challenge for you, you are down to one MP,

:34:53. > :34:54.one AM, defending council seats, is how do you make sure

:34:55. > :34:58.that the party is still relevant as you go towards

:34:59. > :35:03.the elections in May? Well, you are right,

:35:04. > :35:05.it is not about defending seats, I think all the anecdotal evidence

:35:06. > :35:09.at the very least suggests We have had gains in Cardiff

:35:10. > :35:13.and Newport since the Assembly elections, so be in no doubt,

:35:14. > :35:15.yes, defending those 72 seats across the country,

:35:16. > :35:18.but it is about gaining more. That does mean issues

:35:19. > :35:20.about being relevant to the debate that the country is now having

:35:21. > :35:23.on issues such as housing, health and social care,

:35:24. > :35:25.issues about education. We have heard at this conference

:35:26. > :35:28.from some of the aspirations of Kirsty Williams, and,

:35:29. > :35:32.of course, against the backdrop We come back to that in a moment,

:35:33. > :35:42.just looking at the council elections, it is not that long ago

:35:43. > :35:45.that Cardiff, Swansea, Wrexham, Newport, all Lib Dem councils,

:35:46. > :35:47.do you think you'll ever get back Well, we have gained a seat

:35:48. > :35:53.in Cardiff since the calamitous loss No one will escape from the fact

:35:54. > :35:58.that we have had a bad two years. When you lose two of your three

:35:59. > :36:01.parliamentary colleagues in Wales, and I'm the only one surviving,

:36:02. > :36:04.when you lose four of your Assembly seats and you are left with one,

:36:05. > :36:07.of course it is a traumatic experience but the party

:36:08. > :36:09.needs to learn from that, look at why that happened

:36:10. > :36:11.and move forward. The one thing people can never

:36:12. > :36:14.charge the Liberal party or the Liberal Democrats

:36:15. > :36:17.for are running away from a fight. You say you need to learn

:36:18. > :36:24.the lessons, what are those I think the lesson is about staying

:36:25. > :36:30.clear to your principles and your convictions,

:36:31. > :36:32.and in your first question you used the word relevant,

:36:33. > :36:35.being relevant to the debate that the country is now having,

:36:36. > :36:37.and I think what Liberal Democrats have been saying, for instance,

:36:38. > :36:40.on Europe and the threats to the Welsh economy are very

:36:41. > :36:42.relevant to the debate You said you had to stay true

:36:43. > :36:46.to your convictions and principles, as if that hasn't happened

:36:47. > :36:48.in the past? I think in a coalition

:36:49. > :36:50.government inevitably, coalition governments

:36:51. > :36:51.by their nature are compromises, and there were good achievements

:36:52. > :36:54.by the UK coalition government on things like tax, pension locks

:36:55. > :36:56.and things of that nature, but there were also some pretty

:36:57. > :36:58.disastrous decisions We need to look at those

:36:59. > :37:03.and reinsert Liberal values, Liberal values about public

:37:04. > :37:06.services, internationalism, We need to get the green

:37:07. > :37:10.agenda across to people. These are the things that matter

:37:11. > :37:13.to people in their lives. And it's a job of work, and it will,

:37:14. > :37:17.as I have said in my speech, it will take time for that message

:37:18. > :37:21.to get across to people and resonate but I think the seeds

:37:22. > :37:23.are there for the continued growth How long do you think it will take

:37:24. > :37:28.until you can get back to sort of having more MPs and more AMs

:37:29. > :37:30.and more councils? I have always said all targets

:37:31. > :37:34.are to be broken and there Well, they are, the party

:37:35. > :37:45.moving forward, you know, be in no doubt has a target

:37:46. > :37:48.of gaining more councillors I am not going to put a number

:37:49. > :37:52.on that, we are two months away from the election

:37:53. > :37:55.and we are still selecting candidates in some parts

:37:56. > :37:57.of the country, but certainly we aspire, and I, as leader,

:37:58. > :37:59.look forward to more Liberal Democrat councillors

:38:00. > :38:01.than we currently have. And, yes, the work will then follow

:38:02. > :38:04.on in terms of getting our Assembly group re-established

:38:05. > :38:06.in the National Assembly and hopefully getting some more

:38:07. > :38:08.colleagues elected to join me on the benches in

:38:09. > :38:10.the House of Commons. I guess one of the challenges

:38:11. > :38:13.you are facing is making your voice heard, and I just wonder if that's

:38:14. > :38:16.more difficult, and do you think it has been more difficult over

:38:17. > :38:19.the last ten months or so, having Kirsty Williams in the Labour

:38:20. > :38:21.cabinet, in the Assembly, and therefore not having that voice,

:38:22. > :38:24.that independent voice in the Assembly scrutinising

:38:25. > :38:26.and calling for a different Well, you are right to highlight

:38:27. > :38:29.that, and we have a special conference that authorised Kirsty

:38:30. > :38:31.to take that important seat in the Cabinet

:38:32. > :38:34.after the invitation of Carwyn I think she was right to do so,

:38:35. > :38:38.but the party did have to weigh up one person sitting

:38:39. > :38:40.on the backbenches, in effect an independent,

:38:41. > :38:42.because she was the only one, or being at the heart

:38:43. > :38:45.of decision-making in the National Assembly,

:38:46. > :38:47.pushing our agenda on reduced class sizes, on a fair regime

:38:48. > :38:50.of funding for students. I think on balance we got that

:38:51. > :38:54.judgment right and I think Kirsty is achieving things and pushing

:38:55. > :38:56.the education agenda, something which Liberal Democrats,

:38:57. > :38:58.it is part of our DNA and she is there addressing those

:38:59. > :39:01.issues, addressing those concerns. So, yes, it has been a challenge,

:39:02. > :39:04.it always was going to be a challenge when you have one

:39:05. > :39:07.member, it is a challenge for me in the House of Commons,

:39:08. > :39:10.for the nine of us in the House of Commons out of 650 MPs

:39:11. > :39:13.to get the voice heard, If your convictions are right,

:39:14. > :39:18.you have got to keep pushing them Well, looking at convictions,

:39:19. > :39:22.Lib Dems probably considered on a UK wide level are the most pro-European

:39:23. > :39:25.party, and you were talking a lot in your speech there about Brexit

:39:26. > :39:28.and what needs to happen now on Brexit, and you have also been

:39:29. > :39:31.sent there needs to be that second referendum to ratify whatever

:39:32. > :39:33.proposals come back. Just talk to me a little

:39:34. > :39:35.bit about that. Well, it is not a second referendum,

:39:36. > :39:41.it is a ratification referendum. The decision was made on June

:39:42. > :39:44.23rd and I said it twice in my speech and I say it again,

:39:45. > :39:47.we respect the outcome The country decided the direction

:39:48. > :39:50.of travel, but what it didn't And as that detail rolls out

:39:51. > :39:54.in terms of the issues about the single market,

:39:55. > :39:56.above almost anything else, the single market, and also

:39:57. > :39:59.for instance the issue of the 50,000 EU nationals that live in Wales,

:40:00. > :40:02.we need clarity on those issues and I think that warrants,

:40:03. > :40:05.if we had a Democratic vote at the start of the process,

:40:06. > :40:10.a Democratic vote at the end of it because people are right,

:40:11. > :40:13.as a country we have to move forward, but we can't slip out

:40:14. > :40:15.of Europe on the basis Is there perhaps an opportunity

:40:16. > :40:21.for Liberal Democrats here for being the voice,

:40:22. > :40:24.if you like, of the 48% of people Do you see that as part

:40:25. > :40:28.of the rebuilding of the Lib Dems? I think Tim Farron has

:40:29. > :40:32.been incredibly clear on the party's position on Europe,

:40:33. > :40:34.calling for the ratification referendum, calling also,

:40:35. > :40:36.as the Assembly government and other parties have in the National

:40:37. > :40:39.Assembly for our membership, or our unfettered access

:40:40. > :40:41.to the single market, the party has been clear on that

:40:42. > :40:45.but it's not sufficient for us to restrict ourselves

:40:46. > :40:48.to the 48% of Remainers. We can't ignore the majority opinion

:40:49. > :40:54.but we do need to talk to people and address the concerns that people

:40:55. > :40:57.have raised, and that is why I believe that, as this debate rolls

:40:58. > :41:00.out, and it will take years to achieve, people will look

:41:01. > :41:02.to the second referendum as What will be in that

:41:03. > :41:07.second referendum? What you could have then is that

:41:08. > :41:09.if people reject that second referendum is that process starts

:41:10. > :41:13.all over again and then Well, I think the process

:41:14. > :41:19.would remain that we would remain within the European Union,

:41:20. > :41:23.if that were the will of the people. I think that is far preferable

:41:24. > :41:27.to having a situation at the moment when Theresa May has said

:41:28. > :41:30.that there will be a vote on the deal she achieves,

:41:31. > :41:32.or no deal at all, which means those World Trade Organisation

:41:33. > :41:34.tariffs slip in very, very inconveniently to many farming

:41:35. > :41:36.businesses or the industries of Wales right across the board,

:41:37. > :41:39.so I think we need to The other key thing I should say

:41:40. > :41:44.I think we need to achieve is to have a meaningful voice

:41:45. > :41:47.for the Welsh Assembly government, who had gone to great pains to draw

:41:48. > :41:51.up an excellent White Paper, but I question the extent

:41:52. > :41:55.to which they are being listened Wales' voice needs to be very clear,

:41:56. > :41:59.but at the end of that process, the end of a negotiated settlement,

:42:00. > :42:05.there should be a vote. Wales' voice being listened to,

:42:06. > :42:08.the Lib Dem's voice being listened to, is there enough

:42:09. > :42:09.of that happening? What I am getting at,

:42:10. > :42:12.as the leader of the Welsh Lib Dems, Are you out there often

:42:13. > :42:15.enough, making sure Well, you know, you can only do

:42:16. > :42:20.what is humanly possible. I am a member of Parliament

:42:21. > :42:23.for Ceredigion and I am the leader of this party and there obviously

:42:24. > :42:27.has to be a balance between the two I don't have the privilege of a seat

:42:28. > :42:31.in the National Assembly, So you're right to to highlight

:42:32. > :42:35.the issue but I think this is why I rely on people in the party,

:42:36. > :42:39.I have got a team of spokespeople here, my colleagues in the House

:42:40. > :42:41.of Lords are working very hard. I can assure you, every media

:42:42. > :42:44.opportunity that is ever offered to us by the BBC and others,

:42:45. > :42:47.we take advantage of. But, of course, when you have

:42:48. > :42:49.lost a sizeable chunk of your central team,

:42:50. > :42:52.it is a huge responsibility for the individuals that remain

:42:53. > :42:54.and the individuals are determined to remain on the basis that we have

:42:55. > :42:58.more people elected to carry the message forward,

:42:59. > :43:00.and that is the challenge What can be done to meet increasing

:43:01. > :43:14.demand for social care? Extra money isn't going to solve

:43:15. > :43:19.the issue, so is root One AM has told us the problem

:43:20. > :43:28.could provide an opportunity. In a moment I'll be asking two

:43:29. > :43:32.leading AMs what they'd do, but first Bethan Lewis explains

:43:33. > :43:36.the issues involved. Jonathan Parker and his family

:43:37. > :43:47.are amongst the thousands that Support workers provide 17

:43:48. > :43:51.hours a week of care and support for Jonathan,

:43:52. > :43:55.tailored for his interests. I go swimming, go swimming,

:43:56. > :44:00.and I go for walks. The council pays an organisation

:44:01. > :44:17.called Cartrefi Cymru to provide support for Jonathan so he can live

:44:18. > :44:23.at home and be independent. With Jonathan, obviously

:44:24. > :44:25.all of our services, and all of the provisions we provide

:44:26. > :44:30.are tailored to what Jonathan actually wants to do so instead

:44:31. > :44:33.of just coming in and saying, right, we are doing this,

:44:34. > :44:35.this and this, we take time to sit down and say,

:44:36. > :44:37.right, Jonathan, what What are the type of people that

:44:38. > :44:44.you actually get on with, Interests for Jonathan obviously

:44:45. > :44:48.are swimming and things as well so we have got that on board

:44:49. > :44:51.so the staff that actually work with him enjoy swimming,

:44:52. > :44:53.so it is about making a tailored, person-centred sort of plan

:44:54. > :44:57.around his support. Social care and how it is paid

:44:58. > :45:00.for has shot to the top of the political agenda

:45:01. > :45:03.because of concerns about a system Here in Wales decisions to protect

:45:04. > :45:12.funding over the last few years have meant fewer warnings of crisis,

:45:13. > :45:17.but still, huge challenges. Social care is complex,

:45:18. > :45:20.expensive, and covers a whole range of services,

:45:21. > :45:23.like help for adults with disabilities and help

:45:24. > :45:26.for looked-after children. But the main focus recently has

:45:27. > :45:29.been the help people may And though funding for older

:45:30. > :45:34.adult social care has remained stable in Wales,

:45:35. > :45:36.the problem is the population A report this week calculated that

:45:37. > :45:44.funding per head for over-65s has At the moment around one fifth

:45:45. > :45:53.of the Welsh population is over 65, but that is projected to rise

:45:54. > :45:56.to a quarter by 2030. In the Budget the Chancellor

:45:57. > :46:00.announced an extra ?2 billion As a result of that and other

:46:01. > :46:07.spending announcements, the UK Government says over four

:46:08. > :46:10.years there will be around ?50 million a year

:46:11. > :46:12.for the Welsh government. It is not clear yet how

:46:13. > :46:16.much of that, if any, will go to social care,

:46:17. > :46:18.but Welsh councils say there is an urgent need

:46:19. > :46:22.for a substantial injection of cash. You can't solve that just by dealing

:46:23. > :46:26.with an efficiency agenda, We've got a ?90 million

:46:27. > :46:32.pressure on an annual basis on Welsh social care so,

:46:33. > :46:35.you know, even if the whole ?50 million goes in

:46:36. > :46:37.from Welsh government, from their consequential,

:46:38. > :46:40.it still doesn't meet the entirety of that pressure,

:46:41. > :46:43.so we have got to think about social And this Labour Assembly Member,

:46:44. > :46:50.as well, is calling for new ways I think there is potential for us

:46:51. > :46:55.to marry here economic development with the care service,

:46:56. > :46:59.in the sense that we could be starting to build homes for examples

:47:00. > :47:01.that are adequate for a longer term That is something where

:47:02. > :47:10.we could build an economic I think that is something

:47:11. > :47:14.we could start to be creative with. What are your plans for going

:47:15. > :47:17.with Dawn on Saturday? You like going to Cardiff market,

:47:18. > :47:23.don't you? Yeah. Providing care at home is the main

:47:24. > :47:31.theme of a plan published this week by a new organisation,

:47:32. > :47:34.Social Care Wales. It launches officially next

:47:35. > :47:37.month and takes over from the Care Council,

:47:38. > :47:44.but with beefed-up responsibilities. Its chair says there are big

:47:45. > :47:46.challenges, but Wales has These are not simple issues,

:47:47. > :47:50.they are very complex issues, and a growing situation,

:47:51. > :47:52.but I am confident that we have here in Wales the tools now to get

:47:53. > :47:56.to grips with the challenge The Welsh government will have

:47:57. > :48:01.to balance competing demands on the extra cash from the budget

:48:02. > :48:04.but whatever the decision, it is certain more money

:48:05. > :48:09.won't provide all of the answers. Joining me now to look at what can

:48:10. > :48:14.be done is Plaid Cymru's Spokesman for Health and Social Care,

:48:15. > :48:17.Rhun ap Iorwerth, and the Chair of the Assembly's Public

:48:18. > :48:30.Accounts Committee, Thank you both for coming in.

:48:31. > :48:34.Starting with you, Nick, is it fair to say that we look at the spending

:48:35. > :48:38.and the attention given to health and education, and you compare that

:48:39. > :48:43.with the attention given to social care, you see why some people are

:48:44. > :48:46.calling it a Cinderella service? Yes, it has been neglected for far

:48:47. > :48:50.too long. When you look at the number of people supported by our

:48:51. > :48:51.social care services and the number of people working in it hasn't had

:48:52. > :49:08.enough attention. That is not the fault of any one

:49:09. > :49:11.particular party or the Welsh government, it is politicians as a

:49:12. > :49:14.whole who haven't kept the focus on it and I am glad it is getting the

:49:15. > :49:17.focus it deserves. Rhun ap Iorwerth, we know the problems there, we have

:49:18. > :49:20.heard about them in the peace there. To what extent do you think there is

:49:21. > :49:22.a recognition of the problem by the parties grappling with it? I

:49:23. > :49:24.questioned the supposition that we are not talking about this enough, I

:49:25. > :49:28.spend a lot of time talking about what we can do the social care in

:49:29. > :49:31.the future. We know that there is a financial problem that we face but

:49:32. > :49:33.there was a policy question as well, we need to start thinking

:49:34. > :49:36.innovatively about how to tackle social care in future. We know the

:49:37. > :49:48.population is getting older, let's celebrate that, it is a great thing.

:49:49. > :49:51.We need to realise that it will inevitably lead to a different way

:49:52. > :49:53.of doing things. We can talk about it at a basic level, that we need to

:49:54. > :49:56.treat more people in their community, in their homes rather

:49:57. > :49:59.than hospitals, but we need to find ways of actually making it happen.

:50:00. > :50:05.Like what? Give me an innovation that you would like to see? Several

:50:06. > :50:08.things could be done, one experiment going on in my constituency is where

:50:09. > :50:16.the health board is co-investing with a local authority in a care

:50:17. > :50:18.home which will bring, it doesn't integrate health and social care

:50:19. > :50:22.completely in terms of their structures, but it does mean that

:50:23. > :50:26.both of them are working together. I am excited about it and I think it

:50:27. > :50:29.can work and it is the kind of model I think could be replicated

:50:30. > :50:33.elsewhere. We need to see good practice and replicated. We can also

:50:34. > :50:37.look abroad, there are very good examples on continental Europe and

:50:38. > :50:48.Italy, for example, of whether third sector is playing an increased role

:50:49. > :50:51.in the delivery of social care. It the kind of direction I think we

:50:52. > :50:54.need to move into, looking into new ideas and facing up to the problems

:50:55. > :50:56.that will be coming our way in the not too distant future. I don't want

:50:57. > :50:59.this to be about putting more money because it will never solve the

:51:00. > :51:02.problem but is there an issue here? In England they are spending a lot

:51:03. > :51:06.less per head than we are spending in Wales. More money isn't the

:51:07. > :51:10.problem, but a lack of funding will certainly make the problem worse. It

:51:11. > :51:14.is a bit of a red herring to say they spend less per head in England.

:51:15. > :51:19.Traditionally more has been spent in Wales because of our heritage and

:51:20. > :51:22.our industrial heritage and the fact that there have been illnesses

:51:23. > :51:26.related to those old industries. It is not about where we are starting

:51:27. > :51:32.from, it is about where we want to get to and the money required. It is

:51:33. > :51:36.true that money won't solve this overnight but money is a part of the

:51:37. > :51:41.answer so it is very important that the UK Government funding that goes

:51:42. > :51:44.into social care in England, the chunk of that money that goes to

:51:45. > :51:48.Wales is used by the Welsh government to fund social care here

:51:49. > :51:51.as well. That would be ?50 million a year and we have heard Steve Thomas

:51:52. > :51:54.in the report they're saying that they are already facing a ?90

:51:55. > :52:00.million a year shortfall, so even the money, as much as it is, coming

:52:01. > :52:05.from UK Government, it will barely touch the sides, will it? I know my

:52:06. > :52:08.party had been banging on about this for years, we have had an

:52:09. > :52:12.underfunding of the NHS overall for the last five years and that means

:52:13. > :52:15.we are starting from a poor position. We are where we are and

:52:16. > :52:19.local authorities are looking about funding hole, even as we are at the

:52:20. > :52:23.moment. As Rhun ap Iorwerth said we are an ageing population and that

:52:24. > :52:29.will only get worse so we need to grapple with these issues now. We

:52:30. > :52:33.know the matter of nonresidential services, in Wales there is a cap of

:52:34. > :52:36.?70 per week on what you would have to pay for that. Do you think has

:52:37. > :52:41.more and more of the population become older and we are seeing their

:52:42. > :52:45.0.25 by 20 30 will be over the age of 65, doesn't need to be looked at

:52:46. > :52:50.again? Should people contribute more towards the non-residential element

:52:51. > :52:54.of social care? We need to continuously look at the situation

:52:55. > :52:58.and it will always be a fine balance between delivering through the

:52:59. > :53:02.public sector, through public services, the services and the care

:53:03. > :53:06.that people require and deserve, and looking at how all of us as

:53:07. > :53:14.individuals contribute towards that. We also need to be looking at the

:53:15. > :53:18.model. We should recognise that the way we have been doing things is on

:53:19. > :53:21.the way we can do things in 15 or 20 years' time. We could put all of our

:53:22. > :53:26.money into health and social care and it probably wouldn't be enough.

:53:27. > :53:31.That is one realisation. They made a crazy decision in England, social --

:53:32. > :53:35.that the Conservative government, to starve social can put more money

:53:36. > :53:38.into hospitals and that is not the way it works and they have seen the

:53:39. > :54:00.problems that has arisen in emergency departments in hospital

:54:01. > :54:04.because of that. In England they are trying to readdress that balance but

:54:05. > :54:06.we have our own issues in Wales, where we have seen spending per

:54:07. > :54:10.capita shrink by about 13% in the last five years. We need to get it

:54:11. > :54:12.back to where we were but we need to be looking at ways of making our

:54:13. > :54:15.pound go much further, including possible contributions from people

:54:16. > :54:17.like me and you to make that Perry. It will be a whole different system

:54:18. > :54:20.and now is the time to make that work. This is Plaid Cymru talking

:54:21. > :54:23.about increasing the basic rate of income tax to pay for health and

:54:24. > :54:25.social care and education is it? No, this is a recognition we cannot

:54:26. > :54:28.spend the money in the way that we are now. There is a parliamentary

:54:29. > :54:30.review underway that Plaid Cymru asked for and labour agreed to give

:54:31. > :54:32.to us after the election last year. It is a review of how things will

:54:33. > :54:49.have to change. If we change the care that we deliver we

:54:50. > :54:52.have to always be looking at how we pay for that care. Everything is

:54:53. > :54:55.going to be very different in ten or 15 or 20 years' time but we cannot

:54:56. > :54:58.wait 15 or 20 years to decide how we need to move forward. We need to

:54:59. > :55:00.make those decisions now and hopefully that parliamentary review

:55:01. > :55:02.can be a kick-start for that. We have heard in the piece from Bethan

:55:03. > :55:05.that there are opportunities to look at this as a form of economic

:55:06. > :55:07.development, due go along with that? Maybe not the exact model of

:55:08. > :55:11.building more homes for social care, but there could be opportunities

:55:12. > :55:14.here? I certainly wouldn't be going down the line assembly to increase

:55:15. > :55:17.taxes at this point. We need to look at the efficiencies would get from

:55:18. > :55:21.the services. There are opportunities and we can look at new

:55:22. > :55:39.models of delivering care. In my area there is a project

:55:40. > :55:42.in Monmouthshire talks about developing communities far more. We

:55:43. > :55:45.had to look at this across-the-board amanita make sure there are greater

:55:46. > :55:47.efficiencies and new ways of thinking. We need to tackle this

:55:48. > :55:49.because in a few years' time it could be too late to solve the

:55:50. > :55:52.problem. Is enough attention given to Wales wide approach to this? We

:55:53. > :55:54.have heard you both discussing local projects but is there enough to

:55:55. > :55:57.coordinate it nationally? I don't think there is. That is not to say

:55:58. > :56:00.it isn't a very difficult problem to deal with so you would expect that

:56:01. > :56:03.position not to be as it should be at the moment, but I think we

:56:04. > :56:06.certainly need to be renewing ourselves. This is a cross-party and

:56:07. > :56:09.across generation, it cannot be solved overnight so we need to five

:56:10. > :56:17.or ten years down the line make sure we have the right procedures in

:56:18. > :56:19.place so that people in the future can be reassured that they will get

:56:20. > :56:23.the social care that they need and that they have paid for. How hopeful

:56:24. > :56:28.are you that an answer can be found? We haven't got a choice, we have got

:56:29. > :56:31.to find the answer. What I am rather frustrated about is that things have

:56:32. > :56:35.been far too slow in terms of recognition of where we need to go.

:56:36. > :56:39.The parliamentary review I hope those kick-start that, as I say, but

:56:40. > :56:41.we need action from government now, looking for best practice here in

:56:42. > :56:46.Wales, across the UK, and across Europe and beyond, to make sure that

:56:47. > :56:49.we are able to make those finances are stretching away that we have

:56:50. > :56:53.been asking them to stretch so far. Everything is going to be done in a

:56:54. > :56:55.different way. Thank you for your time this morning.

:56:56. > :56:59.I look forward to your company next Sunday.

:57:00. > :57:02.We're on Twitter @walespolitics, but for now, diolch am wylio,

:57:03. > :57:19.Now the government plans for new grammar schools.

:57:20. > :57:21.The Education Secretary Justine Greening was

:57:22. > :57:23.speaking to a conference of headteachers on Friday.

:57:24. > :57:25.They're normally a pretty polite bunch, but they didn't

:57:26. > :57:32.Broadcasters weren't allowed into the speech,

:57:33. > :57:37.but this was captured on a camera phone.

:57:38. > :57:40.And we have to recognise actually for grammars, in terms of

:57:41. > :57:43.disadvantaged children, that they have, they really

:57:44. > :57:46.do help them close the attainment gap.

:57:47. > :57:48.And at the same time we should recognise that

:57:49. > :57:55...That parents also want choice for their children and that

:57:56. > :58:03.those schools are often very oversubscribed.

:58:04. > :58:11.I suppose it is a rite of passage for and education secretaries to

:58:12. > :58:16.have this at a head teachers conference book the head are usually

:58:17. > :58:20.more polite. Isn't part of the problem, whether one is for or

:58:21. > :58:26.against the expansion of grammar schools, the government plans are

:58:27. > :58:30.complicated, you cannot sum them up in a sentence. The proof of that is

:58:31. > :58:34.they can still get away with denying they are expanding grammar schools.

:58:35. > :58:37.They will find an alternative formulation because it is not as

:58:38. > :58:41.simple as a brute creation of what we used to know is grammar schools

:58:42. > :58:49.with the absolute cut-off of the 11 plus. I am surprised how easy they

:58:50. > :58:53.found it politically. We saw the clip of Justine Greening being

:58:54. > :58:56.jeered a little bit but in the grand scheme, compared to another

:58:57. > :59:01.government trying this idea a decade ago they have got away with it

:59:02. > :59:04.easily and I think what is happening is a perverse consequence of Brexit

:59:05. > :59:09.and the media attention on Brexit, the government of the day can just

:59:10. > :59:13.about get away with slightly more contentious domestic policies on the

:59:14. > :59:19.correct assumption we will be too busy investing our attention in

:59:20. > :59:23.Article 50 and two years of negotiations, WTO terms at

:59:24. > :59:27.everything we have been discussing. I wonder if after grammar schools

:59:28. > :59:31.there will be examples of contentious domestic policies

:59:32. > :59:39.Theresa May can slide in stock because Brexit sucks the life out,

:59:40. > :59:44.takes the attention away. You are a supporter. Broadly. Are you happy

:59:45. > :59:50.with the government approach? They need to have more gumption and stop

:59:51. > :59:53.being apologetic. It is a bazaar area of public policy where we judge

:59:54. > :59:58.the policy on grammar schools based on what it does for children whose

:59:59. > :00:03.parents are unemployed, living on sink estates in Liverpool. It is

:00:04. > :00:07.absurd, we don't judge any other policy like that. It is simple, not

:00:08. > :00:12.contentious, people who are not sure, ask them if they would apply

:00:13. > :00:19.to send their child there, six out of ten said they would. Parents want

:00:20. > :00:21.good schools for their children, we should have appropriate education

:00:22. > :00:25.and they should be straightforward, this is about the future of the

:00:26. > :00:28.economy and we need bright children to get education at the highest

:00:29. > :00:35.level, education for academically bright children. It is supposed to

:00:36. > :00:37.be a signature policy of the Theresa May administration that marks a

:00:38. > :00:42.government different from David Cameron's government who did not go

:00:43. > :00:46.down this road. The signature is pretty blurred, it is hard to read.

:00:47. > :00:54.It is. She is trying to address concerns about those who fail to get

:00:55. > :00:57.into these selective schools and tried to targeted in poorer areas

:00:58. > :01:01.and the rest of it. She will probably come across so many

:01:02. > :01:05.obstacles. It is not clear what form it will take in the end. It is

:01:06. > :01:08.really an example of a signature policy not fully thought through. I

:01:09. > :01:13.think it was one of her first announcements. It was. It surprised

:01:14. > :01:18.everybody. Surprised at the speed and pace at which they were planning

:01:19. > :01:22.to go. Ever since, there have been qualifications and hesitations en

:01:23. > :01:26.route with good cause, in my view. I disagree with Juliet that this is...

:01:27. > :01:30.We all want good schools but if you don't get in there and you end up in

:01:31. > :01:33.a less good school. They already do that. We have selection based on the

:01:34. > :01:37.income of parents getting into a good catchment area, based on the

:01:38. > :01:44.faith of the parents. That becomes very attainable! I might been too

:01:45. > :01:46.shot run christenings for these. -- I have been.

:01:47. > :01:49.Now, you may remember this time last week we were talking

:01:50. > :01:51.about the extraordinary claims by US President Donald Trump,

:01:52. > :01:53.on Twitter of course, that Barack Obama had ordered

:01:54. > :01:57.And there was me thinking that wiretaps went out

:01:58. > :02:02.Is it legal for a sitting President to do so, he asked,

:02:03. > :02:10.concluding it was a "new low", and later comparing it to Watergate.

:02:11. > :02:14.Since then, the White House has been pressed to provide evidence for this

:02:15. > :02:20.It hasn't, but it seems it may have initially come from a report on a US

:02:21. > :02:23.website by the former Conservative MP Louise Mensch.

:02:24. > :02:26.She wrote that the FBI had been granted a warrant to intercept

:02:27. > :02:33.communications between Trump's campaign and Russia.

:02:34. > :02:41.Well, Louise Mensch joins us now from New York.

:02:42. > :02:48.Louise, you claimed in early November that the FBI had secured a

:02:49. > :02:53.court warrants to monitor communications between trump Tower

:02:54. > :02:56.in New York at two Russian banks. It's now four months later. Isn't it

:02:57. > :03:01.the case that nobody has proved the existence of this warrant?

:03:02. > :03:07.First of all, forgive me Andrew, one takes 1's life in one's hand when it

:03:08. > :03:11.is you but I have to correct your characterisation of my reporting. It

:03:12. > :03:16.is very important. I did not report that the FBI had a warrant to

:03:17. > :03:20.intercept anything or that Trump tower was any part of it. What I

:03:21. > :03:25.reported was that the FBI obtained a warrant is targeted on all

:03:26. > :03:28.communications between two Russian banks and were, therefore, allowed

:03:29. > :03:35.to examine US persons in the context of their investigation. What the

:03:36. > :03:40.Americans call legally incidental collection. I certainly didn't

:03:41. > :03:44.report that the warrant was able to intercept or that it had location

:03:45. > :03:49.basis, for example Trump tower. I just didn't report that. The reason

:03:50. > :03:54.that matters so much is that I now believe based on the President's

:03:55. > :03:59.reaction, there may well be a wiretap act Trump Tower. If so,

:04:00. > :04:01.Donald Trump has just tweeted out evidence in an ongoing criminal case

:04:02. > :04:05.that neither I nor anybody else reported. He is right about

:04:06. > :04:10.Watergate because he will have committed obstruction of justice

:04:11. > :04:13.directly from his Twitter account. Let me come back as thank you for

:04:14. > :04:21.clarifying. Let me come back to the question. -- and thank you. We have

:04:22. > :04:25.not yet got proof that this warrant exists, do we? No and we are most

:04:26. > :04:29.unlikely to get it because it would be a heinous crime for Donald Trump

:04:30. > :04:33.to reveal its existence. In America they call it a Glomar response. I

:04:34. > :04:37.can neither confirm nor deny. That is what all American officials will

:04:38. > :04:41.have to say legally. If you are looking for proof, you won't get it

:04:42. > :04:46.until and unless a court cases brought. But that doesn't mean it

:04:47. > :04:50.doesn't exist. The BBC validated this two months after me in their

:04:51. > :04:55.reporting by the journalist Paul Wood. The Guardian, they also

:04:56. > :04:58.separately from their own sources validated the existence of the

:04:59. > :05:01.warrant. If you are in America, you would know that CNN and others are

:05:02. > :05:05.reporting that the investigation in ongoing. Let me come onto the wider

:05:06. > :05:11.point. You believe the Trump campaign including the president

:05:12. > :05:14.were complicit with the Russians during the 2016 election campaign to

:05:15. > :05:15.such an extent that Mr Trump should be impeached. What evidence did you

:05:16. > :05:25.have? That is an enormous amount of

:05:26. > :05:28.evidence. You could start with him saying, hey, Russia, if you are

:05:29. > :05:33.listening, please release all the Hillary Clinton's e-mails. That's

:05:34. > :05:36.not evidence. I think it rather is, actually. Especially if you look at

:05:37. > :05:41.some of the evidence that exists on Twitter and elsewhere of people

:05:42. > :05:44.talking directly to his social media manager, Dan should be no and

:05:45. > :05:49.telling him to do that before it happened. There is a bit out there.

:05:50. > :05:54.The BBC itself reported that in April of last year, a six agency

:05:55. > :05:57.task force, not just the FBI, but the Treasury Department, was looking

:05:58. > :06:01.at this. I believe there is an enormous amount of evidence. And

:06:02. > :06:03.then there is the steel dossier which was included in an official

:06:04. > :06:12.report of the US intelligence committee. You've also ... Just to

:06:13. > :06:17.be clear, we don't have hard evidence yet whether this warrant

:06:18. > :06:20.exists. It may or may not. There is doubt about... There are claims

:06:21. > :06:23.about whether there is evidence about Mr Trump and the Russians.

:06:24. > :06:30.That is another matter. You claimed that President Putin had Andrew

:06:31. > :06:35.Breitbart murdered to pave the way for Steve Bannon to play a key role

:06:36. > :06:40.in the Trump administration. I haven't. You said that Steve Bannon

:06:41. > :06:45.is behind bomb threats to Jewish community centres. Aren't you in

:06:46. > :06:49.danger of just peddling wild conspiracy theories? No. Festival, I

:06:50. > :06:53.haven't. No matter how many times people say this, it's not going to

:06:54. > :06:56.be true -- first of all. I said in twitter I believe that to be the

:06:57. > :07:03.case about the murder of Andrew Breitbart. You believe President

:07:04. > :07:07.Putin murdered him. I didn't! You said I reported it, but I believed

:07:08. > :07:13.it. You put it on twitter that you believed it but you don't have a

:07:14. > :07:17.shred of evidence. I do. Indeed, I know made assertions. What is the

:07:18. > :07:23.evidence that Mr Putin murdered Andrew Breitbart? I said I believe

:07:24. > :07:26.it. You may believe there are fairies at the bottom of your

:07:27. > :07:32.garden, it doesn't make it true. I may indeed. And if I say so, that's

:07:33. > :07:39.my belief. If I say I am reporting, as I did with the Fisa warrant

:07:40. > :07:46.exists, I have a basis in fact. They believe is just a belief. I know you

:07:47. > :07:52.are relatively new to journalism. Let me get the rules right. Andrew,

:07:53. > :07:56.jealousy is not your colour... If it is twitter, we don't believe it but

:07:57. > :08:01.if it is on your website, we should believe it? If I report something

:08:02. > :08:05.and I say this happened, then I am making an assertion. If I describe a

:08:06. > :08:11.belief, I am describing a belief. Subtlety may be a little difficult

:08:12. > :08:17.for you... No, no. If you want to be a journalist, beliefs have to be

:08:18. > :08:21.backed up with evidence. Really? Do you have a faith? It's not a matter

:08:22. > :08:27.of faith, maybe in your case, that President Putin murdered Andrew

:08:28. > :08:30.Breitbart. A belief and a report at two different things and no matter

:08:31. > :08:35.how often you say that they are the same, they will never be the same.

:08:36. > :08:43.You've said in today's Sunday Times here in London that you've turned

:08:44. > :08:49.into" a temporary superpower" where you "See things really clearly".

:08:50. > :08:54.Have you become delusional? No. I am describing a biological basis for

:08:55. > :08:57.ADHD, which I have. As any of your viewers who are doctors will know.

:08:58. > :09:01.It provides people with unfortunately a lot of scattered

:09:02. > :09:04.focus, they are very messy and absent-minded but when they are

:09:05. > :09:08.interested in things and they have ADHD they can have a condition which

:09:09. > :09:11.is hyper focus. You concentrate very hard on a given subject and you can

:09:12. > :09:18.see patterns and connections. That is biological. Thank you for

:09:19. > :09:23.explaining that. And for getting up early in New York. The first time

:09:24. > :09:27.ever I have interviewed a temporary superpower. Thank you. You are so

:09:28. > :09:31.lucky! You are so lucky! I don't think it's going to happen again.

:09:32. > :09:35.Please don't ask us to comment on that interview! I will not ask you,

:09:36. > :09:40.viewers will make up their own minds. Let's come back to be more

:09:41. > :09:44.mundane world of Article 50. Stop the killing!

:09:45. > :09:49.Will it get through at the government wanted it? Without the

:09:50. > :09:53.Lords amendment falling by the way that? I am sure the Lord will not

:09:54. > :09:56.try to ping-pong this back and forth. So we are at the end of this

:09:57. > :10:00.particular legislative phase. The fact that all three Brexit Cabinet

:10:01. > :10:04.ministers, number ten often don't like one of them going out on a

:10:05. > :10:08.broadcast interview on a Sunday, they've all been out and about. That

:10:09. > :10:12.suggests to me they are working on the assumption it will be triggered

:10:13. > :10:17.this week. This week. The negotiations will begin or at least

:10:18. > :10:20.the process begins. The negotiation process may be difficult, given all

:10:21. > :10:26.of the European elections. The Dutch this week. And then the French and

:10:27. > :10:29.maybe the Italians and certainly the Germans by the end of September,

:10:30. > :10:34.which is less predictable than it was. Given all that, what did you

:10:35. > :10:38.make of Anna Soubry's claim, Viacom on her part, that we may just end up

:10:39. > :10:44.crashing out in six months question -- fear on her part. It was not just

:10:45. > :10:46.that that we made that deliberately organising. I want us to get on with

:10:47. > :10:54.the deals. Everyone knows a good deal is the

:10:55. > :10:58.best option. Who knows what is going to be on the table when we finally

:10:59. > :11:04.go out? Fascinatingly, the demand for some money back, given the

:11:05. > :11:07.amount of money... Net gains and net costs in terms of us leaving for the

:11:08. > :11:14.EU. It is all to play for. That will be a possible early grounds for a

:11:15. > :11:20.confrontation between the UK and the EU. My understanding is that they

:11:21. > :11:23.expect to do a deal on reciprocal rights of EU nationals, EU nationals

:11:24. > :11:27.here, UK citizens there, quite quickly. They want to clear that up

:11:28. > :11:31.and that will be done. Then they will hit this problem that the EU

:11:32. > :11:36.will be saying you've got to agree the divorce Bill first before we

:11:37. > :11:39.talk about the free trade bill. David Davis saying quite clearly,

:11:40. > :11:44.no, they go together because of the size of the bill. It will be

:11:45. > :11:48.determined, in our part, by how good the access will be. The mutual

:11:49. > :11:52.recognition of EU residents' rights is no trouble. A huge amount of fuss

:11:53. > :11:56.is attracted to that subject but it is the easiest thing to deal with,

:11:57. > :11:59.as is free movement for tourists. Money is what will make it

:12:00. > :12:02.incredibly acrimonious. Incredibly quickly. I imagine the dominant

:12:03. > :12:06.story in the summer will be all about that. This was Anna Soubry's

:12:07. > :12:11.implication, members of the governors could strongly argue,

:12:12. > :12:14.things are so poisonous and so unpleasant at the moment, the

:12:15. > :12:18.dealers are advancing -- members of the government. Why not call it a

:12:19. > :12:22.day and go out on WTO terms while public opinion is still in that

:12:23. > :12:26.direction in that Eurosceptic direction? No buyers' remorse about

:12:27. > :12:30.last year's referendum. The longer they leave it, view more opportunity

:12:31. > :12:34.there is for some kind of public resistance and change of mind to

:12:35. > :12:38.take place. The longer believe it, the more people who voted for Brexit

:12:39. > :12:42.and people who voted Remain and think we didn't get world War three

:12:43. > :12:46.will start being quite angry with the EU for not agreeing a deal. In

:12:47. > :12:52.terms of the rights of EU nationals he and Brits abroad, by all

:12:53. > :12:55.accounts, 26 of the 27 have agreed individually. Angela Merkel is the

:12:56. > :12:59.only person who has held that up. That will be dealt with in a matter

:13:00. > :13:05.of days. The chances of a deal being done is likely but in ten seconds...

:13:06. > :13:08.It would not be a bad bet to protect your on something not happening, you

:13:09. > :13:13.might get pretty good odds? The odds are going up that a deal doesn't

:13:14. > :13:19.happen. But, as I said earlier, the House of Commons will not endorse no

:13:20. > :13:24.deal. We are either in an early election or she has to go back

:13:25. > :13:28.again. Either way, you will need us! We will be back at noon tomorrow on

:13:29. > :13:31.BBC Two ahead of what looks like being a big week in politics. We

:13:32. > :13:34.will be back here same time, same place.

:13:35. > :13:39.Remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics.