14/05/2017 Sunday Politics Wales

Download Subtitles




Andrew Neil and Arwyn Jones with the latest political news, interviews and debate.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 14/05/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



It's Sunday morning and this is the Sunday Politics.


Theresa May unveils plans to build many more affordable homes


in England, but with no price tag, timetable or building targets -


Labour takes aim at the City with what it calls a Robin Hood Tax


to fund public services, but will traders just


Don't look at the polls - Jeremy Corbyn, at least,


insists he can win this election - so which way will


Neil Hamilton joins us for the latest of our interviews.


And one-legged Labour-supporting seagulls.


We look at the Green electoral offer and here, what the parties are


saying about tackling the air pollution problem in London.


And with me, our own scientifically selected focus group


of political pundits - they're not so much


undecided as clueless - Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott


They'll be tweeting throughout the programme.


So, we've got two new policies this morning.


Labour say they will introduce a financial transaction tax


if they win the general election and what they're calling


"the biggest crackdown on tax avoidance in the country's history".


The Conservatives say they'll work with local authorities in England


to build council houses with the right to buy.


Theresa May says the policy "will help thousands of people


get on the first rung of the housing ladder".


Steve, what do you make of them? I have been conditioned after doing


tax and spend debates in pre-election periods for many


decades to treat policy is not as literal but as arguments. In other


words if you look back to 2015 the Tory plan to wipe out the deficit


was never going to happen and yet it framed and large event. In that


sense the Robin Hood tax is a sensible move for Labour to make at


this point because it is part of a narrative of reconfiguring taxation


to be fair. Treating it as an argument rather than something that


would happen in day one of Labour government is sensible. In terms of


building houses Theresa May said right from the beginning when she


was in Number Ten that there is a housing deficit in this country


rather than the economic deficit George Osborne was focusing on, and


this is an example of trying to get house-building going. It seems


entirely sensible, not sure how it works with right to buy but again as


framing of a 90 minute it makes sense. I disagree with Steve on one


front which is how sensible Theresa May's policy is on the housing


announcement. I think more broadly these two announcements have


something in common which is that over the next 24 hours both will


probably unravel in different ways. Ye of little faith! The Mayor of


London has already said he doesn't agree with this, and when people see


the actual impact of what looks like a populist tax will very potentially


affect people's pensions, it might become a lot less popular. On the


Tory housing plans, I think it is difficult to imagine how they are


going to implement this huge, what looks like a huge land and property


grab. Through compulsory purchase orders, which are not a simple


instrument. They say they will change the law but really the idea


of paying people below the market value for their assets is not


something I can see sitting easily with Tory backbenchers or the Tories


in the House of Lords. Tom. Both would appear superficially to be


appealing to traditional left and traditional right bases. What is


more Tory than right to buy, then councils sell on these houses, and


Labour slapping a massive tax on the city. The Tories' plan, I would say


look a bit deeper and all of the Tory narrative from the last six


years which hasn't worked well is talking about the private sector


increasing supply in the market. Now Mrs May is talking about the role


for the state after all so this is the shift creeping in. On the Labour


transaction tax, one of the most interesting things I heard in days


was from Paul Mason, former BBC correspondent, now a cog in Easter


extreme. On Newsnight he said don't worry about whether the Labour


manifesto will add up, I'm promising it will, the bigger Tory attack line


should be what on earth will be the macroeconomic effect of taking so


much tax out of the system. Very well, we shall see. At least we have


some policies to talk about. Now, on Tuesday Labour


will launch its manifesto. But we've already got a pretty good


idea of what's in it - that's because most of its contents


were leaked to the media Labour has a variety of spending


pledges including an extra ?6 billion a year for the NHS,


an additional ?8 billion for social care over the lifetime


of the next parliament, as well as a ?250 billion


in infrastructure over The party will support the renewal


of the Trident submarine system, although any Prime Minister should


be extremely cautious about its use, and the party


will hold a strategic defence and security review immediately


after the election. In terms of immigration,


Labour will seek "reasonable management of migration",


but it will not make "false Elsewhere, university tuition


fees will be abolished, and the public sector pay cap,


which limits pay rises for public sector workers


to 1%, will be scrapped. The party also aims to renationalise


the railways, the Royal Mail and the National Grid,


as well as creating at least one A senior Labour backbencher


described it to the Sunday Politics as a manifesto for a leadership


who don't "give a toss about the wider public",


and several other Labour candidates told us they thought it


had been deliberately leaked by the leadership,


with one suggesting the leak was intended to "bounce


the National Executive" And we're joined now from Salford


by the Shadow Business Secretary, Welcome to the programme. The draft


manifesto proposed to renationalise the number of industry. You will


wait for the franchises to run out rather than buy them out at the


moment so can you confirm the railways will not be wholly


nationalised until 2030, after three Labour governments, and Jeremy


Corbyn will be 80? I'm not going to comment on leaks, you will just have


to be patient and wait to see what is in our manifesto. But you have


already announced you will nationalise the railways, so tell me


about it. We have discussed taking the franchises into public ownership


as they expire, however the detail will be set out in the manifesto so


I'm not prepared to go into detail until that policy is formally laid


out on Tuesday. That doesn't sound very hopeful but let's carry on. You


will also nationalise the National Grid, it has a market capitalisation


of ?40 billion, why do you want to nationalise that? Again, I'm not


going to speculate on leaks, you will just have to be patient. But


you said you will nationalise the National Grid so tell's Y. The leaks


have suggested but you will just have to wait and see what the final


manifesto states on that one. So is it a waste of time me asking you how


you will pay for something that costs 40 billion? Be patient, just


couple of days to go, but what I would say is there is growing


pressure from the public to reform the utilities sector. The


Competition and Markets Authority stated in 2015 that bill payers were


paying over till debt -- ?2 billion in excess of what they should be


paying so there is a clear need for reform. The bills we get are from


the energy companies, you are not going to nationalise them, you are


going to nationalise the distribution company and I wondered


what is the case for nationalising the distribution company? As I said,


our full plans will be set out on Tuesday. In relation to the big six


energy companies, we know in recent years they have been overcharging


customers... There's no point in answering questions I am not asking.


I am asking what is the case for nationalising the National Grid?


There is a case for reforming the energy sector as a whole and that


looks at the activities of the big six companies and it will look at


other aspects too. You will have to be patient and wait until Tuesday.


What about the Royal Mail? Again, you will have to wait until Tuesday.


Why can't you just be honest with the British voter? We know you are


going to do this and you have a duty to explain. I'm not even arguing


whether it is right or wrong. The Royal Mail was sold off and we know


it was sold under value and British taxpayers have a reason to feel


aggrieved about that. There is a long-term strategy that would ensure


the Royal Mail was classified as a key piece of infrastructure but the


details of that will be set out in our manifesto because we want to


ensure businesses and households ensure the best quality of service


when it comes to their postal providers. You plan to borrow an


extra 25 billion per year, John McDonnell has already announced


this, on public investment, on top of the around 50 billion already


being planned for investment. You will borrow it all so that means, if


you can confirm, that many years after the crash by 2021, Labour


government would still be borrowing 75 billion a year. Is that correct?


We have set out ?250 billion of capital investment, and ?250 billion


for a national investment bank. Our financial and fiscal rules dictate


we will leave the Government in a state of less debt than we found it


at the start of the parliament so we won't increase the national debt at


the end of our Parliamentary term. How can you do that if by 2021 you


will still be borrowing around 75 billion a year, which is more than


we borrow at the moment? The 500 billion figure is set out over a


period of ten years, it's a figure that has been suggested by Peter


Helm from Oxford University as a figure that is necessary to bring us


in line with other industrial competitors. Similar figures have


been suggested by groups such as the CBI. By the way I have not included


all 500 billion, just the 250 billion on public spending, not the


extra money. You talk about the fiscal rules. The draft manifesto


said you will leave debt as a proportion of trend GDP law at the


end of each parliament, you have just said a version of that. What is


trend GDP? In clear terms we will ensure the debt we acquire will be


reduced by the end of the parliament. We won't leave the


Government finances in a worse state than we found them. OK, but what is


trend GDP? Our rule is we will ensure public sector net debt is


less than we found it when we came to power in Government on June the


8th. But that is not what your draft manifesto says. I'm not going to


comment on leaks, you are just going to have to wait until Tuesday to


look at the fine detail and perhaps we will have another chat then. You


have published your plans for corporation tax and you will


increase it by a third and your predictions assumed that will get an


extra 20 billion a year by the end of the parliament. But that assumes


the companies don't change their behaviour, that they move money


around, they leave the country or they generate smaller profits. Is


that realistic? You are right to make that point and you will see


when we set out our policies and costings in the manifesto that we


haven't spent all of the tax take. We have allowed for different


differentials and potential changes in market activity because that


would be approved and direction to take. But corporation tax is allowed


to be cut in France and the United States, it's only 12.5% in Dublin.


Many companies based in Britain are already wondering whether they


should relocate because of Brexit, if you increase this tax by a third


couldn't that clinch it for a number of them? No, we will still be one of


the lowest corporation tax rate in the G7. Let's look at what's


important for business. Cutting corporation tax in itself doesn't


improve productivity, or business investment and there's no suggestion


cutting corporation tax in recent years has achieved that. Businesses


need an investment in tools in things they need to thrive and


prosper, they also need to reduce the burden at the lower end of the


tax scale, before we get to the Prophet stage. One key example is


business rates. We have made the proposal to government to in --


exclude machinery so businesses can invest and grow operations in the


future but the Government refused. Corporation tax has been cut since


2010. When it was 28% it brought in ?43 billion a year. Now it is down


to 20%, it brought in ?55 billion a year. By cutting it in the last


year, it brought in 21% more, so what is the problem? It might have


brought in more money, but has it increased business investment in the


long term. It is not just about cutting corporation tax, but it is


on the ability of businesses to thrive and prosper. Business


investment in the UK is below are industrial competitors. Wages are


stagnating which doesn't indicate businesses are not doing well. Let


me get it right, you are arguing if we increase business tax by a third,


that will increase investment? I am not saying that. You just did. Know


I didn't, I said reducing business tax isn't enough, you have to invest


in the things businesses need to thrive and prosper. You have also


got to lessen the burden on business. You have announced a


financial transaction tax. Your own labour Mayor of London said he has


vowed to fight it. He said I do not want a unilateral tax on business in


our city, so why are you proceeding with it? This isn't a new


initiative, there is a growing global pressure to make sure we have


fairness in the financial sector. Ordinary British people are paying


for our banking crisis they didn't cause. Another important point,


stamp duty reserve tax was brought in in the 1600 and there have been


little reforms. The sector has changed and we have do provide


changes to the system for that change. High-frequency trading where


we have a state of affairs where a lot of shares are traded on


computers within milliseconds. We need a tax system that keeps up with


that. What happens if they move the computers to another country? Emily


Thornaby said this morning, other countries had already introduced a


financial transaction tax, what other countries have done that?


There are ten countries looking at introducing a transaction tax. Which


ones have done it so far? They will be later announcing a final package,


going through the finer detail at the moment. But the European


Commission tried to get this done in 2011 and it still hasn't happened in


any of these countries. But you are going to go ahead unilaterally and


risk these businesses, which generate a lot of money, moving to


other jurisdictions. There is not a significant risk of that happening.


The stamp duty reserve tax is levied at either where the person or


company is domiciled or where the instrument is issued rather than


worth the transaction takes place. This tax in itself is not enough to


make people leave this country in terms of financial services because


there is more to keep these businesses here in terms of the


investment we are making, the economy that Labour will build, in


terms of productivity improvement we will see. Thank you very much,


Rebecca Long-Bailey. And listening to that was the Home


Office Minister, Brandon Lewis. Over the years, you have got


corporation tax by 20%, it is lower than international standards, so why


are so many global companies who make money out of Great Britain,


still not paying 20%? It is one of the problems with the point Labour


were making and Rebecca could not answer, these companies can move


around the world. One of the important things is having a low tax


economy but these businesses, it encourages them to come at a rate


they are prepared to pay. People may say they are right, if they were


paying 19, 20% incorporation tax. But they are not. Google runs a


multi-million pound corporation and did not pay anywhere near 20%. There


are companies that are trading internationally and that is why we


have to get this work done with our partners around the world. Has there


been an improvement? It is more than they were paying before. Whether it


is Google or any other company, alongside them being here, apart


from the tax they pay, it is the people they employ. The deal was, if


you cut the business tax, the corporation tax on profits, we would


get more companies coming here and more companies paying their tax. It


seems it doesn't matter how low, a number of companies just pay a


derisory amount and you haven't been able to change that. As you


outlined, the income taken from the changing corporation tax has gone


up. That is from established British companies, not from these


international companies. It is because more companies are coming


here and paying tax. That is a good thing. There is always more to do


and that is why we want to crack down. In the last few weeks in the


Finnish Parliament, Labour refused to put to another ?8.7 billion of


tax take we could have got by cracking down further. You claim to


have made great progress on cracking down on people and companies to pay


the tax they should. But the tax gap is the difference between what HMRC


takes in and what it should take in. It has barely moved in five years,


so where is the progress? He have brought in 150 billion more where we


have cracked down on those tax schemes. The gap is still the same


as it was five years ago. It's gone from 6.8, 26.5. It has gone down.


The Prime Minister and the Chancellor said they want to


continue work on to get more money on these companies while still


having a competitive rate to encourage these companies. While big


business and the wealthy continue to prosper, the Office for Budget


Responsibility tell us those on average earnings in this country


will be earning less in real terms by 2021 than they did in 2008. How


can that be fair? I don't see it that way. I haven't seen the figures


you have got. What I can say to you, Andrew, we have made sure the


minimum wage has gone up, the actual income tax people pay has gone down.


So in their pocket, real terms, people have more money. You are the


self-styled party of work. We keep emphasising work. Under your


government you can work for 13 years and still not earn any more at the


end of it, and you did at the start. Where is the reward for effort in


that? I have not seen those figures. There are 2.8 million more people,


more jobs in economy than there was. 1000 jobs every day and people are


working and developing through their careers. This is what I thought was


odd in what Rebecca was saying, investing in people is what the


apprenticeship levy is about, companies are investing their works


force to take more opportunities that there. We are talking about


fairness, politicians talk about hard-working people and we know the


average earnings are no higher than they were in 2008. We know the pay


and bonuses of senior executives have continued to grow and the


Institute for Fiscal Studies has shown 3 million of the poorest


households will lose an average of ?2500 a year in the next Parliament,


benefits frozen, further sanctions kick in. 3 million of the poorest


losing 2500. Under the Tories, one law for the rich and another for the


poor. It is quite wrong. First of all, we have got to be fair to the


taxpayer who is funding the welfare and benefit system. Which is why the


welfare was right. Get more people in work and then it is important to


get more people upscaling. As that allowance rises, people have more of


the money they earn in their pocket to be able to use in the economy.


People will be worse off. 2500, among the poorest already. They will


have more money in their pocket as we increase the allowance before


people pay tax. We have seen millions of people coming out of tax


altogether. The reason I ask these questions, you and the Prime


Minister go on and on about the just about managing classes. I am talking


about the just about managing and below that. It is all talk, you


haven't done anything for them. We have made sure they have an


increasing minimum wage, it has gone up more under us than any other


previous government. Their wages will be still lower in real terms.


Let me come on to this plan for housing. We have announced a new


plan to increase affordable housing, social housing, some council housing


and social housing built by the associations. How much money is


behind this? It is part of the 1.4 billion announced in the Autumn


Statement. How many homes will you get for 1.4 billion? That depends on


the negotiations with local authorities. It is local


authorities, who know the area best. I will not put a number on that. 1.4


billion, if you price the house at 100,000, which is very low,


particularly for the South, back at you 14,000 new homes. That is it.


What we have seen before, how the local government can leveraged to


build thousands more homes. That is what we want to see across the


country. It is not just about the money, for a lot of local


authorities it is about the expertise and knowledge on how to do


this. That is why support from the housing communities minister will


help. What is the timescale, how many more affordable homes will be


built? I will not put a number on it. You announced it today, so you


cannot tell me how many more or what the target is? It is a matter of


working with the local authorities who know what their local needs are,


what land they have got available. What we saw through the local


elections with the Metro mayors, they want to deliver in their areas,


whether it is the West of England, the north-east, Liverpool,


Manchester and we want to work with them. You have said variations of


this for the past seven years and I want some credibility. When you


cannot tell us how much money, what the target and timescale is, and


this government, under which affordable house building has fallen


to a 24 year low. 1.2 million families are on waiting lists for


social housing to rent. That is your record. Why should we believe a word


you say? This is different to what we have been doing over the last two


years. We want to develop and have a strong and stable economy that can


sustain that 1.4 billion homes. This is important. In 2010, we inherited


the lowest level of house building, 75,000 new homes. That is about


189,000 over the last four years. That is a big step forward after the


crash, getting people back into the industry. More first-time buyers


onto the market. Final question, in 2010, 2011, your first year in


government, there were 60,000 affordable homes built. May not be


enough, but last day it was 30 2000. So why should we trust anything you


say about this? On housing, we have delivered. We have delivered more


social housing. Double what Labour did in 13 years, in just five years.


This is what this policy is about, working with local authorities to


deliver more homes to people in their local areas. Thank you.


Now, they have a deficit of between 15 and 20% in the polls,


but Jeremy Corbyn and those around him insist Labour can win.


If the polls are right they've got three and half weeks to change


voters' minds and persuade those fabled undecided voters


We enlisted the polling organisation YouGov to help us find out how


the performance of party leaders will affect behaviour


Leeds, a city of three quarters of a million people,


eight Parliamentary seats and home to our very own focus group.


Our panel was recruited from a variety of backgrounds


and the majority say they haven't decided who to vote for yet.


Watching behind the glass, two experts on different sides


Giles Cunningham, who headed up political press at Downing Street


under David Cameron and Aaron Bastani, Corbin supporter,


under David Cameron and Aaron Bastani, Corbyn supporter,


I think Theresa May sees herself as a pound shop Thatcher.


Milliband's policies but when it came


about who you want, if you wake up on maybe a 2015,


We found in a couple of focus groups, people saying


we'd be quite relieved, even though some of those same


people have been saying we quite like the Labour policies.


I think the fact that Corbyn's going so hard on his values,


this is a really progressive manifesto, they live


But I think that's a new challenge, that wasn't there in 2015.


Is there anyone here that you don't recognise?


After a little warm up, the first exercise, recognising


I think it's nice to have a strong woman in politics, I do.


But I've got to say, when she comes on the news,


I kind of do think, here we go again.


Tell me about Tim Farron, what are your impressions of Tim Farron?


It isn't going to do anything, it isn't going to change anything.


You'll be surprised to hear it's actually the Greens.


Strong and stable leadership in the national interest.


Yes, Team May, it's the British equivalent of make


What do we think about this one for the many and not the few?


It's not quite as bad as strong and stable,


but it will probably get on our nerves after a while.


We must seize that chance today and every day until June the 8th.


But that's not quite my question, my question is,


if you are Prime Minister, we will leave, come hell or high


water, whatever is on the table at the end of the negotiations?


If we win the election, we'll get a good deal with Europe.


Assertive and in control and he felt comfortable


But the second one, I thought he was very hesitant.


I thought he was kind of, hovering around, skirting around


and that's the second time I've seen a similar


interview with the question being asked regarding Brexit.


I don't think I'd have any confidence with him


You think you are going up against some quite strong people,


how are you going to stand up for us?


When you are in negotiations, you need to be tough.


And actually is right to be tough sometimes,


particularly when you are doing something for the country.


There's a reason for talking about strong and stable leadership.


It's about the future of the country, it's


It's just that people kind of listen to that kind of thing and think


Both on The One Show and in the news.


She attracts the public better than what Corbyn does.


She didn't answer the question in a more articular way than Corbyn


Imagine that Theresa May is an animal.


So, in your minds, what animal is coming to mind


I've done a Pekinese because I think she's all bark and no bite.


Alpaca because she's superior looking and woolly


I don't think his policies are for the modern, real world.


A mouse because they are weak and they can be easily bullied,


but also they can catch you by surprise if you're


What do you take away from what you saw then,


and what message would you send back to the Tories now?


I think what came over is people see Theresa May as a strong politician,


not everyone likes her, but you don't need to be


liked to be elected, because ultimately it's about who do


you trust with your future and your security.


I think what I also take out of that focus group,


was it was a group of floating voters, there was no huge appetite


for the Lib Dems and there was no huge appetite for Ukip.


So my messaged back to CCHQ would be stick to the plan.


I thought the response to the manifesto was excellent.


It's clear that people aren't particularly keen on Theresa May,


There are some associations with her about strength and stability,


which is exactly what the Tory party want of course, but they are not


positive and nobody thinks that she has a vision


So, what I'd say the Jeremy Corbyn, what I'd say to the Labour Party is,


they need to really emphasise the manifesto in


Jeremy Corbyn himself has to perform out of his skin and I think


he has to reemphasise those characteristics which may be have


come to the fore may be over the last 12 months,


resilience, strength and the fact that he's come this far,


why not take that final step and go into ten Downing Street?


We're joined now by the American political consultant


For the sake of this discussion, assume the polls at the moment are


broadly right, is there any hope for Mr Corbyn in the undecided voters?


Know, and this is a very serious collection with serious consequences


to who wins. Nobody cares whether you can draw and what animal they


represent, they want to know where they stand, and I felt that was


frivolous. I come to Britain to watch elections because I learned


from here. Your elections are more substantial, more serious, more


policy and less about personality and that peace was only about


personality. That's partly because Mrs May has decided to make this a


presidential election. You can see on the posters it is all Team May. I


agree with that, and in her language she says not everyone benefits from


a Conservative government, I don't see how using anything Republicans


have used in the past. In fact her campaign is more of a centrist


Democrats but it is a smart strategy because it pushes Corbyn further to


the left. Of course you said Hillary Clinton have won. On election night


the polling was so bad in America, the exit polls that were done, the


BBC told America she had won. No, I was anchoring the programme that


night, I ignored your tweet. The BBC had the same numbers. Yes, but we


did not say she had won, I can assure you of that. Because of


people like you we thought she had but we didn't broadcast it. That was


a smart approach. My point is other than teasing you, maybe there is


hope for Jeremy Corbyn. I think you will have one of the lowest turnout


in modern history and I think Labour will fall to one of the lowest


percentages, not percentage of number of seats they have had, and


this will be a matter of soul-searching for both political


parties. What you do with a sizeable majority, and she has a


responsibility to tell the British people exactly what happens as she


moves forward. He and Labour will have to take a look at whether they


still represent a significant slice of the British population. Do you


see a realignment in British politics taking place? I see a


crumbling of the left and yet there is still a significant percentage of


the British population that once someone who is centre-left. And they


like a lot of Mr Corbyn's policies. I'm listening to Michael foot. I


went to school here in the 1980s and I feel like I'm watching the Labour


Party of 35 years ago, in a population that wants to focus on


the future, not the past. Thank you. It's just gone 11.35,


you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers


in Scotland, who leave us now Hello and welcome once again


to Sunday Politics Wales. Well, this was the week


when the general election We'll have the latest from


the campaign trail in a few minutes. But first the latest in our series


of interviews with the main Welsh The party's leader in the Assembly,


Neil Hamilton, is here with me now. Good morning. I remember a while ago


interviewing you and you said that Ukip is a permanent feature of the


political landscape in Wales now. After those local elections a couple


of weeks ago, that can't be a claim you can make any longer, is it? Yes,


because the big difference between Wales and the rest of the United


Kingdom is that in the Welsh Assembly elections, we have


proportional representation system in voting, unlike in the general


election which is happening now, where there is a binary squeeze on


small parties by the Tories and Labour, squeezing out the smaller


parties. That won't happen in the Assembly elections in four years'


time. This general election has come at a very inopportune time for Ukip.


We have got a new leader who had not had a chance to bed himself in, we


have still got to communicate what unit -- Ukip is foreclosed Brexit,


and we have the time to do that for 20/20. It sounds like you are


preparing the ground for a disappointing set of results. We


don't have any MPs at the moment so we have got nothing to lose. This


election is a work in progress to us. My message to people who voted


Ukip in the past who might now be tempted to vote for Theresa May is


that she doesn't need your vote because she is going to win by a


massive majority anyway. We need Ukip to be able insurers policy to


get the best from Brexit. But when you hear Paul Nuttall say if Theresa


May gets a good deal from Brexit, he is happy for Ukip to lose votes, it


sounds like you are waving the white flag already. But he doesn't believe


she is going to get a good deal. She has been Home Secretary or Prime


Minister for the last seven years, now standing on a programme of


reducing immigration to the tens of thousands, she has added 2 million


people to the British pop -- population. We need to be there to


keep her on track. We would never have had a referendum in the first


place but for Ukip. That is your message but it does seem that the


population, the voters, just aren't lit -- listening. The sense you get


from you get now is that you are a party in search of a purpose and


there is no point to you. That is what the polls tell us but things


can change in the middle of an election campaign. I remember the


1992 election when Neil Kinnock thought it was a done deal and then


we had the Sheffield rally and Labour lost big time. So things can


change. I hope as we move through this election campaign, Ukip voters


from last time we'll see the sense of keeping Ukip in the game to put


pressure on Theresa May to deliver the best Brexit for Britain, which


otherwise she might be tempted to give away. But beyond Brexit, what


did Ukip stand for? We have a full programme for this election which


will be announced in our manifesto launch very shortly. Let me mention


a handful. We would slash the foreign aid budget by ?8 billion to


put the money into health service? --. We would scrap green taxes. We


would take Britain out of the European Commission of human rights


and restore the sovereignty Bill of court. That is Brexit. Which green


taxes would you scrap? We would get rid of charges on people's


electricity bills which are necessary to pay subsidies. Where do


you get the figure from? That is the conventional figure for the


totality. The regulator says ?100 off the average energy Bill. Patrick


O'Flynn, your economic spokesman, says its ?100 of the Bill. Why are


you seeing 300? That is the figure I have used all along. I believe it to


be correct. Is your economic spokesman Ron? There are different


kinds of taxes, environmental charges, which are added to people's


electricity. If you look at your electricity Bill, roughly a fifth is


identified as... But the regulator says it is ?100. Your economic


spokesman says it is ?100. Your average electricity Bill in this


country is ?1500 a year of which 20% is green charges. It is on your


Bill. When we look at migration, the policy from Ukip is one in, one out.


Net immigration down to zero in five years' time. That is the aim. We are


not going to be the government of the country. That is what we think


is achievable. Theresa May says she wants to bring immigration down to


tens of thousands so if she can bring it down from around 300,000,


it is not a great step to bring it down to zero. But presumably you


can't be counting that has anything will happen between now and 2019


because we are still in the EU. We would introduce a points-based


system such as they have in Australia. There would be temporary


permits for people to come and work year for seasonal reasons, fruit


pickers and so on, as needed. But the British government would be able


to decide for itself what its annual target is. Australia has an annual


target. But Australia doesn't have a one in, one out policy. Isn't that


just pushing a potential stranglehold on the economy. If the


economy was growing, we would want more people to fill the jobs being


created. Why are you putting this arbitrary figure of zero net


migration down? We are adding a city the size of Cardiff to our operation


every year at the moment. We think that there needs to be a moratorium


within a reasonable timescale on immigration in order to get the


system under control. Yes, it can vary from year to year and that will


be an annual decision for the Home Secretary and the government to


take. At the moment we can't take that decision because we can't


control EU immigration. But we can control immigration from outside the


EU and the government isn't doing it. But it varies from year to year.


That zero Tadic, does it remain? It will be open to review every single


year. It depends what the needs of the economy are and what are the


pressures on public services which will be influenced if the numbers


are too great. But that is very different from what Paul Nuttall is


saying. Within five years, net immigration down to zero. What you


are saying is different. What we are saying is that our aim should be


stability in the numbers and from there on, it would be an annual


review, which is what happens in all countries. So it is not something


which is difficult. It takes time to set the system up. So that target of


achieving this in five years, it doesn't sound achievable from what


you are saying. Ukip is not going to be the government of the country so


it is a bit like asking how many angels are dancing on the head of a


pin. So why bother having a manifesto? Why make promises? I


could sit here and say we are in the game to win, and indeed we are, but


in reality we are not going to be the government on the 9th of June.


We want to get a good vote out of the election to take us to the next


stage. How likely is it that you can be the man to achieve that? If you


are looking at the polls, the most recent polls we have in Wales have


your personal ratings at the lowest that anybody has ever had in any of


these polls. It is 1.9 out of ten on average for all parties. It is only


three out of ten among Ukip voters. Are you part of the problem? I am


only the leader of Ukip group in the Assembly. I am not seeking to be


Prime Minister of the UK. But you are a leading member of the party. I


have come into this to do a job, to lead the Ukip group in the Assembly,


because I have got a great deal of political experience as a member of


Parliament, as a government minister, and I have been around a


long time and so I have got certain advantages that I have been able to


bring to professionalise Ukip in Wales and to get is the kind of


media attention which is going to enable us to go forward. I don't


have long-term political ambitions beyond this. Thank you very much for


your time this morning. So, no sooner had the local election


ended that the general It's the fifth poll over


the last two years. Spare a thought for those long


suffering party activists. We love it of course,


as does our political He's been in the thick of it


on the campaign trail this week. Oh, look, it's Boris Johnson


visiting Newport market. Well, either that or he just


fancied a cheese sandwich. But there hasn't always


been a welcome They were wiped off the Welsh


electoral map back in 1997. The polls look very promising


for the party this time around but will they translate


into extra seats? The Conservative Party


especially during the Thatcher years was accused of taking


Wales for granted, for imposing Welsh Secretaries


from English constituencies. And we know what happened


in Clwyd South. The Conservative Party wants


to govern for all the people Yes, Theresa May has a very exciting


and different agenda from many Conservative


governments in the past. She wants to reach out


to all communities. You heard what she said


in her speech today. She genuinely wants to reach out


to all sorts of families who have never previously thought


of themselves as Conservatives and I think that's


a fantastic thing to do. If things had gone a little


differently for Boris Johnson, he could have been a Welsh MP


as he stood for the party in Clwyd South in 1997,


but as the Foreign Secretary has repeatedly said,


he fought Clwyd South in what was a landslide victory


for the Labour Party. the shoe is very much


on the other foot these days. Labour-supporting


seagulls, I'm sure. One is a comedian,


the other's Eddie Izzard. What kind of Prime Minister do


you think Jeremy Corbyn would make? What kind of Prime Minister


would Theresa May make? She's obviously for


the few, not the many. I've always said


I'm a radical moderate. I prefer a Labour Party


with Jeremy Corbyn rather than a Tory Party


with Theresa May. And yet there was no mention


of the C word at Welsh Labour's election launch


earlier in the week. I know, but you are still voting


for the Labour Party in Wales. What's the funniest thing that's


happened on the campaign so far? Nothing funny happens to me


because I'm a comedian. I haven't met her but


I'll make sure I will. Well, at least the Lib Dem leader


gave us some light relief. Tim Farron dusted himself off


to give us his party's best Reservoir Dogs impression


on a visit to Cardiff. Last week the party


lost council seats. Not just in the capital


but across Wales. We took the poll in Cardiff Central


and in other parts of Wales and we had great support in many


areas across the country. What I think last Thursday told us


is what we should probably It's obvious to me that Theresa May


call this election knowing the Conservative Party,


not in the interests of the country. And we are going to


head for a landslide. Tim Farron there, unconventionally


calling on voters to make him And given that they have just


nine seats in the Commons, including one in Wales,


even that sounds like a long shot. It's been very lonely,


I don't mind saying that, but yes,


the only one from Wales. I work with other parties


in the House of Commons but I would greatly like to see


more company from Wales They are not in the market


for a new house but these Plaid Cymru candidates


are out for your votes in an election that they think


is primarily about Yes, it is a Brexit election,


no doubt about that. And what we are saying is,


the kind of money coming to Wales through the European Union


in structural funds and money for our


agriculture community, that has to come back


to Wales So this is a very important


debate for us in Wales. Who is going to be arguing


in the next Westminster parliament that that money should be


transferred to Wales? It shouldn't be given


as tax cuts to the rich, it should be given to promote


the Welsh economy and we believe, in that context,


Plaid Cymru is the only party Ironically, Ukip may suffer if this


is seen as a Brexit election. Do the voters want the party


that was created to campaign for Brexit to play


a part in the process? We will know about their


and the other parties' and candidates' fortunes


in just over three weeks' time. Joining me now to talk


about where this week's toings and froings leave the parties


are Jess Blair, the Director of the Electoral Reform Society,


and Rebecca Williams, who's in charge of the Country


Landowners Association Private Secretary to


the Secretary of State for Wales. Looking at what we have seen last


week, highlight or lowlight, that interfere with Theresa May, we


didn't learn very much but I guess that wasn't the point. The point of


the interview was about humanising the Prime Minister that for some


will have seen as quite removed from normal human life. Bringing her


husband and giving some kind of sense of normal family life is


exactly what she needs to do in Wales. But as somebody who campaigns


on the democracy, political side of it, do you think that the tone of


the debate or is it better that more people are engaged? Ultimately, it


is all about engagement but there is an irony in seeing more people can


see what she's like when the Prime Minister and the leader of the


Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, refused to do TV debates, so there is an ink


-- element of engagement but only on their terms. When we see the two


campaigns, the Conservatives versus the Labour campaign, they couldn't


be more different. One very tightly controlled, in charge of what is


happening, and then Jeremy Corbyn's campaign seems to be a lot more


meeting anyone but let's control of what's going on. Maybe that's the


image that they want to get across, that Italy Theresa May. That


controlled approach suggests how she may run the Brexit negotiations if


she is successful in this election. I think she's being very measured in


her approach and even when she does bring her husband along, it's very


much on her terms. I think that control is very important to her.


What about, from the Labour side of things, we saw last week the leaping


of the manifesto. It doesn't look like everything is going very


smoothly and steadily there. But is that part of the charm for Jeremy


Corbyn? This is how Jeremy Corbyn has worked for many years, since he


has become leader. It has been one battle after another and this has


probably been another battle for him. People still voted for him in


his leadership election. Do you think anybody cares about the fact


that the manifesto was leaked? Who would have leaked that? Who benefits


from that? All they will have is wall-to-wall coverage all day of the


content of the manifesto. Do people care if it was leaked? I think Welsh


Labour care very much because we saw from their reaction, Wednesday


morning, that they were not happy at all. Because they could have


prepared for it? Yes, because it goes against the clear red water


that is happening in this election. It could undermine Carwyn Jones'


position. He has created an ocean between Welsh Labour and Labour in


Westminster at least in terms of perception. When you look at the


message from that manifesto, which may or may not change, some of those


policies will strike a chord with the voters. We nationalising


railways, that is a big one. Higher taxes for top earners. Might there


be a problem that it is not the message, it is the messenger. Or


will people look through that? The fact we are talking about it, Labour


achieved what they wanted to do. The leak is irrelevant now. We are


talking about what Labour want is to be talking about and what they have


in their manifesto. We are not talking about the potential


Conservative manifesto because it is not out there. So the league has


played into their hands and raise the profile of some really


interesting ideas. How realistic they are, because we haven't seen


the full manifesto, we can't delve into that detail yet. I am going to


prove you wrong and talk about what might be in the Conservative


manifesto. Are we likely to see a long list of detailed plans of what


they want to see us Chamakh or will it be a very light manifesto and not


promise too much? I think it is more likely to be on the lighter side can


the heavy side. The more you promise, the harder it is to deliver


against all of those. I suspect there will be a lot of high-level


principles in there and maybe some key objectives but the majority of


those will be Brexit focused, I imagine. And that Labour manifesto


that we saw, you were saying about Welsh Labour, a Welsh campaign,


different priorities, do you think that difference, that clear red


water, will help them in Wales? Or will voters in Wales, like


elsewhere, like those promises of renationalising the railways and


electricity companies and so on? I think Arwyn Jones being presented as


the Welsh Labour leader is the best chance Labour have in Wales. At the


local elections they managed to mitigate a lot of losses -- Carwyn


Jones. It is the best shot they have got. We heard from Neil Hamilton,


saying about the squeeze for Ukip, is there a danger for Plaid Cymru,


for the Liberal Democrats, that they could be squeezed out of these


elections? That is the most telling thing in the campaign so far, how


much we are focusing on Labour and the Conservatives at the expense of


the other parties. And the independence as well. They are


really been squeezed out of the media and of conversation and that


is a concern in terms of the long-term trend of politics. Plaid


Cymru, for example, what can they do to reverse that? Leanne Wood, we saw


that, will she stand, will she stand in the Rhondda? Is that the kind of


attention they want? I don't think so. The biggest opportunity Plaid


Cymru have got is the leaders debates and getting Leanne Wood as


the leader of Plaid Cymru in the public but that has got to be


balanced with targeting key seats. There is lots of talk about


potentially the Rhondda and Anglesey, those are the of seeds


they want to be targeting and that national message has to permeate


into those constituencies. How much change will those leader debates


give us? We are not printed at the big-ticket, Jeremy Corbyn against


Theresa May, but could that change the fortunes of the Lib Dems and


Plaid Cymru? Certainly, we saw at the last election that the Lib Dems


did very well with Nick Clegg's approach to those debates and Leanne


Wood did very well. We talk a lot more about Scottish politics because


of the leadership debate and the profile that has, so definitely it


has an impact. People now expect to see and hear from their politicians.


They are more media savvy. We want to see our politicians on the


television and I think it will be interesting to see what impact that


will have in terms of turnout. And in terms of general engagement. When


we are looking at turnout, is it going to be a higher turnout because


people think it is important, Brexit is going on, or lower because people


are assuming Theresa May might get a landslide? We know that when the


elections are perceived as having a foregone conclusion, fewer people


turn out to vote, but the question is, on the back of the EU


referendum, when we saw a lot of people engage in last year, is there


any benefit from that? That is to be determined on June the 8th. I agree.


I am worried that some of the other parties, particularly Plaid Cymru


and the Liberal Democrats would get their voices across. People with it


is a two horse race and that is not good for anybody. We need to hear


different voices. The fact that Ukip are not standing in a few seats this


year, what does that say about what they think their chances are? I


think that is a step backwards. You can follow all the


latest election news on @walespolitics on Twitter.


Tories are saying. It is a very emotive subject and we have run out


of time. On Thursday nominations closed


in the 650 parliamentary seats across the country,


so now we know exactly who's We've been analysing the parties'


candidates to find out what they might tell us


about the make-up of the House Well, we know Theresa May is


committed to delivering Brexit and analysis of Conservative


candidates has shown that in their top 100 target seats,


37 candidates supported leave during last year's referendum


campaign and 20 supported remain; 43


have not made public In the last parliament,


the vast majority of Labour MPs were hostile to Jeremy Corbyn so how


supportive are Labour Well, of 50 of Labour's


top 100 target seats 17 candidates have expressed


support for Mr Corbyn. 20 candidates supported Owen Smith


in last year's leadership contest or have expressed


anti-Corbyn sentiment, and If they won those,


the Labour benches would be marginally more sympathetic


to Mr Corbyn than they are now. What do the figures tell us


about where the other Well, the Lib Dems have decided not


to stand against the Greens in Brighton Pavilion,


and are fielding 629 candidates this year -


that's two fewer than 2015. The number of Ukip candidates has


fallen dramatically. They are standing in 247 fewer


constituencies than 2015, throwing their support behind


solidly pro-Brexit Tories in some areas such as Lewes


and Norfolk North. The Greens are fielding


103 fewer candidates than at the last election,


standing down to help other progressive candidates


in some places. The most liking statistic is the


demise in Ukip candidates, is this their swansong? And I think so. It


is remarkable how few Ukip candidates are standing. It is hard


to see they will suddenly revive in the next couple of years. I think


this is probably the end. Frank Luntz mentioned the fragmentation of


the left was a feature of this election, but also there is the


consolidation of the right, and if you take the things together that


could explain why the polls are where they are. Absolutely, that's


precisely what happened at the start of the 1980s, the right was


incredibly united and that's when we started talking about majorities of


over 100 or so. No matter what the size of Theresa May's majority, it


will be the total collapse of Ukip, but not just because we are now


leaving the EU and that was their only reason for being, but a whole


lot of people voted for Ukip because they felt the Tories were no longer


listening. Theresa May has given the impression that she is listening,


and that is the biggest possible thing that could happen to the Tory


vote. Fragmentation of the left, consolidation of the right? It's one


of the lessons that is never learnt, it happened in the 1980s, it doesn't


take much for the whole thing to fracture so now you have on the


centre-left the SNP, the Labour Party, the Greens, the Liberal


Democrats all competing for the same votes and when you have, fleetingly


perhaps, large numbers coalescing on the right in one party, there is


only going to be one outcome. It happens regularly. It doesn't mean


the Tories haven't got their own fragility. Two years ago, David


Cameron and George Osborne the dominant figures, neither are in


Parliament now which is a symptom of the fragility this election is


disguising. Mrs May's position in a way reminds me of Mrs Thatcher in


the 1980s, I won't be outflanked on the right, Nicolas Sarkozy in


France, I won't be outflanked on the right, so the National Front didn't


get through either timed he ran to the second round on like this time,


and now Mrs May on Brexit won't be outflanked Iver and as a result has


seen off right flank. And also she is looking to the left as well with


some of the state interventions. What was interesting about the


analysis you showed a few minutes ago was the number of Tory


candidates who have apparently not declared which way they voted in the


referendum, and you would have thought if this election was all


about Brexit, as some would claim, that would become an unsustainable


position, and actually more it's about leadership. But the point that


I'm now hearing from a number of Labour candidates that they are


seeing Tory leaflets that don't even have the Tory candidate's name on


them, it is just about Theresa May. I am glad they are keeping to the


law because by law they have to put it on. It has been harder for some


of the smaller parties too because of the speed of the election being


called. We have the manifesto is coming out this week. I think Labour


Forshaw on Tuesday, we are not yet sure when the Tories will bring


bears out. I suggest one thing, it will at least for people like me


bring an end to the question you will have to wait for the manifesto.


And Rebecca Long baby will never have that excuse again, isn't it


wonderful! She is not the only one. When you are trying to take the


north and Midlands from Labour, I would go to one or the other. For


me, I can barely hold back my excitement over the Tory manifesto.


This will be, I think, the most important day for the British


government for the next five years. That wasn't irony there? You


actually meant that? I'm not even being cynical at all on Sunday


Politics! This is a huge day and it's because I think we will see...


I don't think Mrs May will play it safe and I don't think we will get


the broadbrush stuff that she might be advised to do. I think she will


lay out precisely what you want to do over the next five years and take


some big risks. Then finally after a year of this guessing and


theorising, we will finally work out what Mrs May is all about. She will


say she doesn't want the next parliament to be all about Brexit,


though she knows that's the next important thing she has to deliver


in some way, so she gets a mandate for that if the polls are right but


she does have very different ideas from


Mr Cameron about how to run a country. She will I assume one to


mandate for what these different ideas are. Otherwise there is no


point in holding an early election. You will get a majority, but if you


get a mandate to carry on implementing the Cameron and Osborne


manifesto it would be utterly pointless. I agree, it is the


pivotal event of the election and it will be interesting to see the


degree to which she expands on the line which interests me about its


time to look at the good that government can do. Because in a way


this moves the debate on in UK politics from, from 97 the Blair


Brown governments were insecure about arguing about the role of


government. Cameron Osborne government similarly so, so here you


have a Labour Party talking about the role of government and the


state, and Tory leader apparently doing so was well. I think that will


be really interesting to see whether it is fleshed out in any significant


way. And it is not a natural Tory message. Harold Macmillan talked


about the role of the state, Ted Heath Mark two was pretty big on the


state, the industrial policy and so on, and even if it is not thought to


be that Tory, does she get away with it because she deliver such a big


victory if that's what she does deliver? Just inject a little note


of scepticism, I wonder how much of this is authentically Theresa May. I


was interested to and talk to someone who used to sit in cabinet


meetings during which Theresa May never expressed an opinion on


anything outside the Home Office briefs. Other ministers were roving


all over their colleagues' briefs. So where are the ideas coming from?


I think we can point to Nick Timothy. One of her closest advisers


in Downing Street. It will be interesting to see how that evolves.


On Thursday I think we will all be talking about something called


Urdington Toryism. Urdington is the suburb of Birmingham where Nick


Timothy comes from, who is very much Theresa May's policy brain and


leading inspiration. Urdington Toryism is about connecting the


party with traditional working class voters, and their belief to do that


is not just taking away government out of their lives but showing them


that government can actually help their lives. It can be a force for


good to rebuild the trust. A lot of what Mrs May talks about is all...


It is talk and then a lot of it suddenly goes by the wayside. What


happened to worker directors on the boards. It is designed to appeal to


that constituency and then nothing happens. She had an excuse before in


the sense that it wasn't in the 2015 manifesto and she had a small


majority so therefore she arguably had to water down some of the stuff


for example in her Tory conference speech, which had a lot of this


active government material in it. If she puts it in the manifesto, it is


a sign she plans to do it and will have no excuse if she then gets


nervous afterwards because it will be in there. If it wasn't for


Brexit, this great overwhelming issue, I think this election will be


seen as quite a significant development in terms of an argument


around the role of government, much-needed. But Brexit


unfortunately overshadows it all. As much as we like our arguments over


the role of government we will hear strong and stable, stable and strong


ad nauseam, aren't we? Absolutely, and we heard the same old lines from


the Labour Party as well so they are all at it. It will be a fascinating


week, stop talking it down! Thanks to our panel.


The Daily Politics will be back on BBC Two at noon


I'll be back here at the same time on BBC One next Sunday.


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