:00:37. > :00:41.It's Sunday Morning, and this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:42. > :00:43.Labour attacks Conservative plans for social care and to means-test
:00:44. > :00:46.So can Jeremy Corbyn eat into the Tory lead
:00:47. > :00:52.Theresa May says her party's manifesto is all about fairness.
:00:53. > :00:56.We'll be speaking to a Conservative cabinet minister about the plans.
:00:57. > :00:59.The polls have always shown healthy leads for the Conservatives.
:01:00. > :01:02.But, now we've seen the manifestos, is Labour narrowing the gap?
:01:03. > :01:05.In the week where the political world
:01:06. > :01:08.was shocked by the sudden death of Rhodri Morgan,
:01:09. > :01:21.we'll be speaking to two of his closest friends about his legacy.
:01:22. > :01:24.And with me - as always - the best and the brightest political
:01:25. > :01:26.panel in the business: Sam Coates, Isabel Oakeshott
:01:27. > :01:28.and Steve Richards - they'll be tweeting throughout
:01:29. > :01:30.the programme, and you can get involved by using
:01:31. > :01:39.Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn says pensioners will be up to ?330 a year
:01:40. > :01:50.worse off under plans outlined in the Conservative manifesto.
:01:51. > :01:56.The Work Pensions Secretary Damian Green has said his party will not
:01:57. > :02:01.rethink their plans to fund social care in England. Under the plans in
:02:02. > :02:07.the Conservative manifesto, nobody with assets of less than ?100,000,
:02:08. > :02:12.would have to pay for care. Labour has attacked the proposal, and John
:02:13. > :02:15.McDonnell, Labour's Shadow Chancellor, said this morning that
:02:16. > :02:18.there needs to be more cross-party consensus.
:02:19. > :02:20.That's why we supported Dilnot, but we also supported
:02:21. > :02:24.Because we've got to have something sustainable over generations,
:02:25. > :02:26.so that's why we've said to the Conservative Party,
:02:27. > :02:29.Let's go back to that cross-party approach that actually
:02:30. > :02:32.I just feel we've all been let down by what's come
:02:33. > :02:43.Sam, is Labour beginning to get their argument across? What we had
:02:44. > :02:47.last week was bluntly what felt like not very Lynton Crosby approved
:02:48. > :02:51.Conservative manifesto. What I mean by that is that it looks like there
:02:52. > :02:56.are things that will cause political difficulties for the party over this
:02:57. > :03:00.campaign. I've been talking to MPs and ministers who acknowledge that
:03:01. > :03:06.the social care plan is coming up on the doorstep. It has cut through
:03:07. > :03:10.very quickly, and it is worrying and deterring some voters. Not just
:03:11. > :03:22.pensioners, that people who are looking to inherit in the future.
:03:23. > :03:24.They are all asking how much they could lose that they wouldn't have
:03:25. > :03:26.lost before. A difficult question for the party to answer, given that
:03:27. > :03:32.they don't want to give too much away now. Was this a mistake, or a
:03:33. > :03:39.sign of the Conservatives' confidence? It has the hallmarks of
:03:40. > :03:43.something that has been cobbled together in a very unnaturally short
:03:44. > :03:48.time frame for putting a manifesto together. We have had mixed messages
:03:49. > :03:51.from the Tory MPs who have been out on the airwaves this morning as to
:03:52. > :03:57.whether they will consult on it whether it is just a starting point.
:03:58. > :04:03.That said, there is still three weeks to go, and most of the Tory
:04:04. > :04:06.party this morning feel this is a little light turbulence rather than
:04:07. > :04:10.anything that leaves the destination of victory in doubt. It it flips the
:04:11. > :04:14.normal politics. The Tories are going to make people who have a
:04:15. > :04:21.reasonable amount of assets pay for their social care. What is wrong
:04:22. > :04:24.with that? First, total credit for them for not pretending that all
:04:25. > :04:29.this can be done by magic, which is what normally happens in an
:04:30. > :04:34.election. The party will say, we will review this for the 95th time
:04:35. > :04:38.in the following Parliament, so they have no mandate to do anything and
:04:39. > :04:42.so do not do anything. It is courageous to do it. It is
:04:43. > :04:48.electorally risky, for the reasons that you suggest, that they pass the
:04:49. > :04:54.target their own natural supporter. And there is a sense that this is
:04:55. > :04:59.rushed through, in the frenzy to get it done in time. I think the ending
:05:00. > :05:05.of the pooling of risk and putting the entire burden on in inverted
:05:06. > :05:13.commas the victim, because you cannot insure Fritz, is against the
:05:14. > :05:17.spirit of a lot of the rest of the manifesto, and will give them huge
:05:18. > :05:26.problems if they try to implement it in the next Parliament. Let's have a
:05:27. > :05:30.look at the polls. Nearly five weeks ago, on Tuesday the 18th of April,
:05:31. > :05:35.Theresa May called the election. At that point, this was the median
:05:36. > :05:41.average of the recent polls. The Conservatives had an 18 point lead
:05:42. > :05:50.over Labour on 25%. Ukip and the Liberal Democrats were both on 18%.
:05:51. > :05:54.A draft of Labour's manifesto was leaked to the press. In the
:05:55. > :05:57.intervening weeks, support for the Conservatives and Labour had
:05:58. > :06:03.increased, that it had decreased for the Lib Dems and Ukip. Last Tuesday
:06:04. > :06:09.came the launch of the official Labour manifesto. By that time,
:06:10. > :06:14.Labour support had gone up by another 2%. The Lib Dems and Ukip
:06:15. > :06:19.had slipped back slightly. Later in the week came the manifestos from
:06:20. > :06:23.the Lib Dems and the Conservatives. This morning, for more polls. This
:06:24. > :06:31.is how the parties currently stand on average. Labour are now on 34%,
:06:32. > :06:35.up 4% since the launch of their manifesto. The Conservatives are
:06:36. > :06:42.down two points since last Tuesday. Ukip and the Lib Dems are both
:06:43. > :06:47.unchanged on 8% and 5%. You can find this poll tracker on the BBC
:06:48. > :06:52.website, see how it was calculated, and see the results of national
:06:53. > :06:56.polls over the last two years. So Isabel, is this the Tories' wobbly
:06:57. > :07:00.weekend or the start of the narrowing? This is still an
:07:01. > :07:07.extremely healthy lead for the Tories. At the start of this
:07:08. > :07:13.campaign, most commentators expected to things to happen. First, the Lib
:07:14. > :07:18.Dems would have a significant surge. That hasn't happened. Second, Labour
:07:19. > :07:23.would crash and plummet. Instead they are in the health of the low
:07:24. > :07:29.30s. I wonder if that tells you something about the tribal nature of
:07:30. > :07:34.the Labour vote, and the continuing problems with the Tory brand. I
:07:35. > :07:39.would say that a lot of Tory MPs wouldn't be too unhappy if Labour's
:07:40. > :07:46.result isn't quite as bad as has been anticipated. They don't want
:07:47. > :07:52.Corbyn to go anywhere. If the latest polls were to be the result on June
:07:53. > :07:57.the 8th, Mr Corbyn may not be in a rush to go anywhere. I still think
:07:58. > :08:02.it depends on the number of seats. If there is a landslide win, I
:08:03. > :08:08.think, one way or another, he will not stay. If it is much narrower, he
:08:09. > :08:13.has grounds for arguing he has done better than anticipated. The polls
:08:14. > :08:19.are very interesting. People compare this with 83. In 83, the Tory lead
:08:20. > :08:31.widened consistently throughout the campaign. There was the SDP -
:08:32. > :08:34.Liberal Alliance doing well in the polls. Here, the Lib Dems don't seem
:08:35. > :08:36.to be doing that. So the parallels with 83 don't really stack up. But
:08:37. > :08:40.let's see what happens. Still early days for the a lot of people are
:08:41. > :08:44.saying this is the result of the social care policy. We don't really
:08:45. > :08:48.know that. How do you beat them? In the last week or so, there's been
:08:49. > :08:53.the decision by some to hold their nose and vote Labour, who haven't
:08:54. > :08:57.done so before. Probably the biggest thing in this election is how the
:08:58. > :09:04.Right has reunited behind Theresa May. That figure for Ukip is
:09:05. > :09:10.incredibly small. She has brought those Ukip voters behind her, and
:09:11. > :09:14.that could be the decisive factor in many seats, rather than the Labour
:09:15. > :09:19.share of the boat picking up a bit or down a bit, depending on how
:09:20. > :09:22.turbulent the Tory manifesto makes it. Thank you for that.
:09:23. > :09:25.We've finally got our hands on the manifestos of the two main
:09:26. > :09:27.parties and, for once, voters can hardly complain that
:09:28. > :09:31.So, just how big is the choice on offer to the public?
:09:32. > :09:33.Since the Liberal Democrats and SNP have ruled out
:09:34. > :09:35.coalitions after June 8th, Adam Fleming compares the Labour
:09:36. > :09:39.Welcome to the BBC's election centre.
:09:40. > :09:42.Four minutes from now, when Big Ben strikes 10.00,
:09:43. > :09:46.we can legally reveal the contents of this, our exit poll.
:09:47. > :09:49.18 days to go, and the BBC's election night studio
:09:50. > :09:58.This is where David Dimbleby will sit, although there is no chair yet.
:09:59. > :10:02.The parties' policies are now the finished product.
:10:03. > :10:04.In Bradford, Jeremy Corbyn vowed a bigger state,
:10:05. > :10:07.the end of austerity, no more tuition fees.
:10:08. > :10:16.The Tory campaign, by contrast, is built on one word - fear.
:10:17. > :10:23.Down the road in Halifax, Theresa May kept a promise to get
:10:24. > :10:26.immigration down to the tens of thousands, and talked
:10:27. > :10:30.of leadership and tough choices in uncertain times.
:10:31. > :10:36.Strengthen my hand as I fight for Britain, and stand with me
:10:37. > :10:42.And, with confidence in ourselves and a unity
:10:43. > :10:49.of purpose in our country, let us go forward together.
:10:50. > :10:52.Let's look at the Labour and Conservative
:10:53. > :10:58.On tax, Labour would introduce a 50p rate for top earners.
:10:59. > :11:22.The Conservatives ditched their triple lock, giving them
:11:23. > :11:24.freedom to put up income tax and national insurance,
:11:25. > :11:27.although they want to keep the overall tax burden the same.
:11:28. > :11:29.Labour offered a major overhaul of the country's wiring,
:11:30. > :11:31.with a pledge to renationalise infrastructure, like power,
:11:32. > :11:34.The Conservatives said that would cost a fortune,
:11:35. > :11:36.but provided few details for the cost of their policies.
:11:37. > :11:38.Labour have simply become a shambles, and, as yesterday's
:11:39. > :11:41.manifesto showed, their numbers simply do not add up.
:11:42. > :11:43.What have they got planned for health and social care?
:11:44. > :11:47.The Conservatives offered more cash for the NHS,
:11:48. > :11:50.reaching an extra ?8 billion a year by the end of the parliament.
:11:51. > :11:54.Labour promised an extra ?30 billion over the course of the same period,
:11:55. > :12:00.plus free hospital parking and more pay for staff.
:12:01. > :12:07.The Conservatives would increase the value of assets you could
:12:08. > :12:11.protect from the cost of social care to ?100,000, but your home would be
:12:12. > :12:12.added to the assessment of your wealth,
:12:13. > :12:16.There was a focus on one group of voters in particular
:12:17. > :12:22.Labour would keep the triple lock, which guarantees that pensions go up
:12:23. > :12:28.The Tories would keep the increase in line
:12:29. > :12:31.with inflation or earnings, a double lock.
:12:32. > :12:34.The Conservatives would end of winter fuel payments
:12:35. > :12:37.for the richest, although we don't know exactly who that would be,
:12:38. > :12:45.This is a savage attack on vulnerable pensioners,
:12:46. > :12:50.particularly those who are just about managing.
:12:51. > :12:53.It is disgraceful, and we are calling upon the Conservative Party
:12:54. > :13:00.When it comes to leaving the European Union, Labour say
:13:01. > :13:03.they'd sweep away the government's negotiating strategy,
:13:04. > :13:06.secure a better deal and straightaway guaranteed the rights
:13:07. > :13:12.The Tories say a big majority would remove political uncertainty
:13:13. > :13:24.Jeremy Vine's due here in two and a half weeks.
:13:25. > :13:30.I'm joined now by David Gauke, who is Chief Secretary to the Treasury.
:13:31. > :13:37.Welcome back to the programme. The Tories once promised a cap on social
:13:38. > :13:44.care costs. Why have you abandoned that? We've looked at it, and there
:13:45. > :13:49.are couple of proposals with the Dilnot proposal. Much of the benefit
:13:50. > :13:53.would go to those inheriting larger estates. The second point was it was
:13:54. > :13:59.hoped that a cap would stimulate the larger insurance products that would
:14:00. > :14:05.fill the gap, but there is no sign that those products are emerging.
:14:06. > :14:09.Without a cap, you will not get one. We have come forward with a new
:14:10. > :14:13.proposal which we think is fairer, provide more money for social care,
:14:14. > :14:18.which is very important and is one of the big issues we face as a
:14:19. > :14:24.country. It is right that we face those big issues. Social care is
:14:25. > :14:31.one, getting a good Brexit deal is another. This demonstrates that
:14:32. > :14:34.Theresa May has an ambition to lead a government that addresses those
:14:35. > :14:40.big long-term issues. Looking at social care. If you have assets,
:14:41. > :14:44.including your home, of over ?100,000, you have to pay for all
:14:45. > :14:48.your social care costs. Is that fair? It is right that for the
:14:49. > :14:54.services that are provided to you, that that is paid out of your
:14:55. > :14:58.assets, subject to two really important qualifications. First, you
:14:59. > :15:05.shouldn't have your entire estate wiped out. At the moment, if you are
:15:06. > :15:10.in residential care, it can be wiped out ?223,000. If you are in
:15:11. > :15:17.domiciliary care, it can be out to ?23,000, plus you're domiciliary.
:15:18. > :15:21.Nobody should be forced to sell their house in their lifetime if
:15:22. > :15:23.they or their spouse needs long-term care. Again, we have protected that
:15:24. > :15:33.in the proposals we set out. But the state will basically take a
:15:34. > :15:38.chunk of your house when you die and they sell. In an essence it is a
:15:39. > :15:42.stealth inheritance tax on everything above ?100,000. But we
:15:43. > :15:46.have those two important protections. I am including that. It
:15:47. > :15:51.is a stealth inheritance tax. We have to face up to the fact that
:15:52. > :15:55.there are significant costs that we face as a country in terms of health
:15:56. > :15:59.and social careful. Traditionally, politicians don't address those
:16:00. > :16:05.issues, particularly during election campaigns. I think it is too Theresa
:16:06. > :16:08.May's credit that we are being straightforward with the British
:16:09. > :16:11.people and saying that we face this long-term challenge. Our manifesto
:16:12. > :16:15.was about the big challenges that we face, one of which was
:16:16. > :16:19.intergenerational fairness and one of which was delivering a strong
:16:20. > :16:26.economy and making sure that we can do that. But in the end, someone is
:16:27. > :16:29.going to have to pay for this. It is going to have to be a balance
:16:30. > :16:32.between the general taxpayer and those receiving the services. We
:16:33. > :16:36.think we have struck the right balance with this proposal. But it
:16:37. > :16:40.is entirely on the individual. People watching this programme, if
:16:41. > :16:47.they have a fair amount of assets, not massive, including the home,
:16:48. > :16:51.they will need to pay for everything themselves until their assets are
:16:52. > :16:56.reduced to ?100,000. It is not a balance, you're putting everything
:16:57. > :17:02.on the original two individual. At the moment, for those in residential
:17:03. > :17:07.care, they have to pay everything until 20 3000. -- everything on the
:17:08. > :17:11.individual. But now they will face more. Those in individual care are
:17:12. > :17:14.seeing their protection going up by four times as much, so that is
:17:15. > :17:18.eliminating unfairness. Why should those in residential care be in a
:17:19. > :17:24.worse position than those receiving domiciliary care? But as I say, that
:17:25. > :17:27.money has to come from somewhere and we are sitting at a proper plan for
:17:28. > :17:31.it. While also made the point that we are more likely to be able to
:17:32. > :17:35.have a properly functioning social care market if we have a strong
:17:36. > :17:38.economy, and to have a strong economy we need to deliver a good
:17:39. > :17:43.deal on Brexit and I think Theresa May is capable of doing that. You
:17:44. > :17:48.have said that before. But if you have a heart attack in old age, the
:17:49. > :17:51.NHS will take care of you. If you have dementia, you now have to pay
:17:52. > :17:56.for the care of yourself. Is that they are? It is already the case
:17:57. > :18:00.that if you have long-term care costs come up as I say, if you are
:18:01. > :18:05.in residential care you pay for all of it until the last ?23,000, but if
:18:06. > :18:09.you are in domiciliary care, excluding your housing assets, but
:18:10. > :18:15.all of your other assets get used up until you are down to ?23,000 a
:18:16. > :18:22.year. And I think it is right at this point that a party that aspires
:18:23. > :18:26.to run this country for the long-term, to address the long-term
:18:27. > :18:30.challenges we have is a country, for us to be clear that we need to
:18:31. > :18:37.deliver this. Because if it is not paid for it this way, if it goes and
:18:38. > :18:41.falls on the general taxpayer, the people who feel hard pressed by the
:18:42. > :18:45.amount of income tax and VAT they pay, frankly we have to say to them,
:18:46. > :18:49.those taxes will go up if we do not address it. But they might go up
:18:50. > :18:55.anyway. The average house price in your part of the country is just shy
:18:56. > :18:59.of ?430,000, so if you told your own constituents that they might have to
:19:00. > :19:04.spend ?300,000 of their assets on social care before the state steps
:19:05. > :19:09.in to help...? As I said earlier, nobody will be forced to pay during
:19:10. > :19:15.their lifetime. Nobody will be forced to sell their houses. We are
:19:16. > :19:19.providing that protection because of the third premium. Which makes it a
:19:20. > :19:25.kind of death tax, doesn't it? Which is what you use to rail against.
:19:26. > :19:30.What it is people paying for the services they have paid out of their
:19:31. > :19:33.assets. But with that very important protection that nobody is going to
:19:34. > :19:38.be wiped out in the way that has happened up until now, down to the
:19:39. > :19:42.last three years. But when Labour propose this, George Osborne called
:19:43. > :19:46.it a death tax and you are now proposing a stealth death tax
:19:47. > :19:52.inheritance tax. Labour's proposals were very different. It is the same
:19:53. > :19:59.effect. Labour's were hitting everyone with an inheritance tax. We
:20:00. > :20:02.are saying that there are -- that there is a state contribution but
:20:03. > :20:08.the public receiving the services will have to pay for it out of
:20:09. > :20:12.assets, which have grown substantially. And which they might
:20:13. > :20:16.now lose to social care. But I would say that people in Hertfordshire pay
:20:17. > :20:21.a lot in income tracks, national insurance and VAT, and this is my
:20:22. > :20:25.bet is going to have to come from somewhere. Well, they are now going
:20:26. > :20:30.to pay a lot of tax and pay for social care. Turning to immigration,
:20:31. > :20:35.you promised to get net migration down to 100,020 ten. You failed. You
:20:36. > :20:39.promised again in 2015 and you are feeling again. Why should voters
:20:40. > :20:44.trust you a third time? It is very clear that only the Conservative
:20:45. > :20:49.Party has an ambition to control immigration and to bring it down. An
:20:50. > :20:52.ambition you have failed to deliver. There are, of course, factors that
:20:53. > :20:57.come into play. For example a couple of years ago we were going through a
:20:58. > :21:00.period when the UK was creating huge numbers of jobs but none of our
:21:01. > :21:03.European neighbours were doing anything like it. Not surprisingly,
:21:04. > :21:10.that feeds through into the immigration numbers that we see. But
:21:11. > :21:16.it is right that we have that ambition because I do not believe it
:21:17. > :21:19.is sustainable to have hundreds of thousands net migration, you're
:21:20. > :21:23.after year after year, and only Theresa May of the Conservative
:21:24. > :21:27.Party is willing to address that. It has gone from being a target to an
:21:28. > :21:31.ambition, and I am pretty sure in a couple of years it will become an
:21:32. > :21:37.untimed aspiration. Is net migration now higher or lower than when you
:21:38. > :21:42.came to power in 2010? I think it is higher at the moment. Let's look at
:21:43. > :21:47.the figures. And there they are. You are right, it is higher, so after
:21:48. > :21:54.six years in power, promising to get it down to 100,000, it is higher. So
:21:55. > :21:58.if that is an ambition and you have not succeeded. We have to accept
:21:59. > :22:03.that there are a number of factors. It continues to be the case that the
:22:04. > :22:07.UK economy is growing and creating a lot of jobs, which is undoubtedly
:22:08. > :22:10.drawing people. But you made the promise on the basis that would not
:22:11. > :22:13.happen? We are certainly outperforming other countries in a
:22:14. > :22:19.way that we could not have predicted in 2010. That is one of the factors.
:22:20. > :22:21.But if you look at a lot of the steps that we have taken over the
:22:22. > :22:27.course of the last seven years, dealing with bogus students, for
:22:28. > :22:31.example, tightening up a lot of the rules. You can say all that but it
:22:32. > :22:34.has made no difference to the headline figure. Clearly it would
:22:35. > :22:40.have gone up by much more and we not taken the steps. But as I say, we
:22:41. > :22:45.cannot for ever, it seems to me, have net migration numbers in the
:22:46. > :22:49.hundreds of thousands. If we get that good Brexit deal, one of the
:22:50. > :22:54.things we can do is tighten up in terms of access here. You say that
:22:55. > :22:58.but you have always had control of non-EU migration. You cannot blame
:22:59. > :23:01.the EU for that. You control immigration from outside the EU.
:23:02. > :23:08.Have you ever managed to get even that below 100,000? Well, no doubt
:23:09. > :23:14.you will present the numbers now. You haven't. You have got down a bit
:23:15. > :23:18.from 2010, I will give you that, but even non-EU migration is still a lot
:23:19. > :23:23.more than 100000 and that is the thing you control. It is 164,000 on
:23:24. > :23:26.the latest figures. There is no point in saying to the voters that
:23:27. > :23:29.when we get control of the EU migration you will get it down when
:23:30. > :23:35.the bit you have control over, you have failed to get that down into
:23:36. > :23:39.the tens of thousands. The general trend has gone up. Non-EU migration
:23:40. > :23:45.we have brought down over the last few years. Not by much, not by
:23:46. > :23:50.anywhere near your 100,000 target. But we clearly have more tools
:23:51. > :23:55.available to us, following Brexit. At this rate it will be around 2030
:23:56. > :23:58.before you get non-EU migration down to 100,000. We clearly have more
:23:59. > :24:02.tools available to us and I return to the point I made. In the last six
:24:03. > :24:06.or seven years, particularly the last four or five, we have seen the
:24:07. > :24:11.UK jobs market growing substantially. It is extraordinary
:24:12. > :24:13.how many more jobs we have. So you'll only promised the migration
:24:14. > :24:18.target because you did not think you were going to run the economy well?
:24:19. > :24:21.That is what you are telling me. I don't think anyone expected us to
:24:22. > :24:26.create quite a number of jobs that we have done over the last six or
:24:27. > :24:29.seven years. At the time when other European countries have not been.
:24:30. > :24:34.George Osborne says your target is economically illiterate. I disagree
:24:35. > :24:41.with George on that. He is my old boss but I disagree with him on that
:24:42. > :24:44.point. And the reason I say that is looking at the economics and the
:24:45. > :24:50.wider social impact, I don't think it is sustainable for us to have
:24:51. > :24:53.hundreds of thousands, year after year after year. Let me ask you one
:24:54. > :24:57.other thing because you are the chief secretary. Your promising that
:24:58. > :25:02.spending on health will be ?8 billion higher in five use time than
:25:03. > :25:05.it is now. How do you pay for that? From a strong economy, two years ago
:25:06. > :25:11.we had a similar conversation because at that point we said that
:25:12. > :25:15.we would increase spending by ?8 billion. And we are more than on
:25:16. > :25:20.track to deliver it, because it is a priority area for us. Where will the
:25:21. > :25:24.money come from? It will be a priority area for us. We will find
:25:25. > :25:29.the money. So you have not been able to show us a revenue line where this
:25:30. > :25:34.?8 billion will come from. We have a record of making promises to spend
:25:35. > :25:38.more on the NHS and delivering. One thing I would say is that the only
:25:39. > :25:43.way you can spend more money on the NHS is if you have a strong economy,
:25:44. > :25:47.and the biggest risk... But that is true of anything. I am trying to
:25:48. > :25:51.find out where the ?8 billion come from, where will it come from? Know
:25:52. > :25:55.you were saying that perhaps you might increase taxes, ticking off
:25:56. > :26:01.the lock, so people are right to be suspicious. But you will not tell us
:26:02. > :26:06.where the ?8 billion will come from. Andrew, a strong economy is key to
:26:07. > :26:10.delivering more NHS money. That does not tell us where the money is
:26:11. > :26:13.coming from. The biggest risk to a strong economy would be a bad
:26:14. > :26:18.Brexit, which Jeremy Corbyn would deliver. And we have a record of
:26:19. > :26:21.putting more money into the NHS. I think that past performance we can
:26:22. > :26:23.take forward. Thank you for joining us.
:26:24. > :26:26.So, the Conservatives have been taking a bit of flak
:26:27. > :26:30.But Conservative big guns have been out and about this morning taking
:26:31. > :26:33.Here's Boris Johnson on ITV's Peston programme earlier today:
:26:34. > :26:38.What we're trying to do is to address what I think
:26:39. > :26:40.everybody, all serious demographers acknowledge will be the massive
:26:41. > :26:44.problem of the cost of social care long-term.
:26:45. > :26:48.This is a responsible, grown-up, conservative approach,
:26:49. > :26:51.trying to deal with a long-term problem in a way that is equitable,
:26:52. > :26:53.allows people to pass on a very substantial sum,
:26:54. > :26:55.still, to their kids, and takes away the fear
:26:56. > :27:02.Joining me now from Liverpool is Labour's Shadow Chief Secretary
:27:03. > :27:13.Petered out, welcome to the programme. Let's start with social
:27:14. > :27:17.care. The Tories are saying that if you have ?100,000 or more in assets,
:27:18. > :27:23.you should pay for your own social care. What is wrong with that? Well,
:27:24. > :27:27.I think the issue at the end of the day is the question of fairness. Is
:27:28. > :27:32.it fair? And what we're trying to do is to get to a situation where we
:27:33. > :27:37.have, for example, the Dilnot report, which identified that you
:27:38. > :27:40.actually have cap on your spending on social care. We are trying to get
:27:41. > :27:47.to a position where it is a reasonable and fair approach to
:27:48. > :27:51.expenditure. But you will know that a lot of people, particularly in the
:27:52. > :27:56.south of country, London and the south-east, and the adjacent areas
:27:57. > :27:58.around it, they have benefited from huge house price inflation. They
:27:59. > :28:03.have seen their homes go up in value, if and when they sell, they
:28:04. > :28:10.are not taxed on that increase. Why should these people not pay for
:28:11. > :28:13.their own social care if they have the assets to do so? They will be
:28:14. > :28:18.paying for some of their social care but you cannot take social care and
:28:19. > :28:21.health care separately. It has to be an integrated approach. So for
:28:22. > :28:25.example if you do have dementia, you're more likely to be in an
:28:26. > :28:29.elderly person's home for longer and you most probably have been in care
:28:30. > :28:33.for a longer period of time. On the other hand, you might have, if you
:28:34. > :28:36.have had a stroke, there may be continuing care needs paid for by
:28:37. > :28:40.the NHS. So at the end of the date it is trying to get a reasonable
:28:41. > :28:49.balance and just to pluck a figure of ?100,000 out of thin air is not
:28:50. > :28:54.sensible. You will have heard me say about David Gold that the house
:28:55. > :28:58.prices in his area, about 450,000 or so, not quite that, and that people
:28:59. > :29:04.may have to spend quite a lot of that on social care to get down to
:29:05. > :29:08.?100,000. But in your area, the average house price is only
:29:09. > :29:13.?149,000, so your people would not have to pay anything like as much
:29:14. > :29:19.before they hit the ?100,000 minimum. I hesitate to say that but
:29:20. > :29:22.is that not almost a socialist approach to social care that if you
:29:23. > :29:27.are in the affluent Home Counties with a big asset, you pay more, and
:29:28. > :29:31.if you are in an area that is not so affluent and your house is not worth
:29:32. > :29:35.very much, you pay a lot less. What is wrong with that principle? I
:29:36. > :29:40.think the problem I am trying to get to is this issue about equity across
:29:41. > :29:46.the piece. At the end of the day, what we want is a system whereby it
:29:47. > :29:49.is capped at a particular level, and the Dilnot report, after much
:29:50. > :29:54.examination, said we should have a cap on care costs at ?72,000. The
:29:55. > :29:57.Conservatives decided to ditch that and come up with another policy
:29:58. > :30:02.which by all accounts seems to be even more Draconian. At the end of
:30:03. > :30:11.the day it is trying to get social care and an NHS care in a much more
:30:12. > :30:13.fluid way. We had offered the Conservatives to have a bipartisan
:30:14. > :30:18.approach to this. David just said that this is a long term. You do not
:30:19. > :30:24.pick a figure out of thin air and use that as a long-term strategy.
:30:25. > :30:29.The Conservatives are now saying they will increase health spending
:30:30. > :30:34.over the next five years in real terms. You will increase health
:30:35. > :30:40.spending. In what way is your approach to health spending better
:30:41. > :30:46.than the Tories' now? We are contributing an extra 7.2 billion to
:30:47. > :30:51.the NHS and social care over the next few years. But you just don't
:30:52. > :30:56.put money into the NHS or social care. It has to be an integrated
:30:57. > :31:00.approach to social and health care. What we've got is just more of the
:31:01. > :31:06.same. What we don't want to do is just say, we ring-fenced an out for
:31:07. > :31:14.here or there. What you have to do is try to get that... Let me ask you
:31:15. > :31:18.again. In terms of the amount of resource that is going to be devoted
:31:19. > :31:25.in the next five years, and resource does matter for the NHS, in what way
:31:26. > :31:28.are your plans different now from the Conservative plans? The key is
:31:29. > :31:34.how you use that resource. By just putting money in, you've got to say,
:31:35. > :31:40.if we are going to put that money on, how do we use it? As somebody
:31:41. > :31:44.who has worked in social care for 40 years, you have to have a different
:31:45. > :31:50.approach to how you use that money. The money we are putting in, 7.7,
:31:51. > :31:54.may be similar in cash terms to what the Tories claim they are putting
:31:55. > :32:08.in, but it's not how much you put in per se, it is how you use it. You
:32:09. > :32:11.are going to get rid of car parking charges in hospital, and you are
:32:12. > :32:13.going to increase pay by taking the cap on pay off. So it doesn't
:32:14. > :32:16.necessarily follow that the money, under your way of doing it, will
:32:17. > :32:20.follow the front line. What you need in the NHS is a system that is
:32:21. > :32:27.capable of dealing with the patience you have. What we have now is on at
:32:28. > :32:37.five Asian of the NHS. Staff leaving, not being paid properly. So
:32:38. > :32:41.pay and the NHS go hand in hand. Let's move onto another area of
:32:42. > :32:46.policy where there is some confusion. Who speaks for the Labour
:32:47. > :32:53.Party on nuclear weapons? Is it Emily Thornbury, or Nia Griffith,
:32:54. > :32:58.defence spokesperson? The Labour manifesto. It is clear. We are
:32:59. > :33:08.committed to the nuclear deterrent, and that is the definitive... Is it?
:33:09. > :33:12.Emily Thornbury said that Trident could be scrapped in the defence
:33:13. > :33:17.review you would have immediately after taking power. On LBC on Friday
:33:18. > :33:23.night. She didn't, actually. I listened to that. What she actually
:33:24. > :33:28.said is, as part of a Labour government coming in, a new
:33:29. > :33:32.government, there is always a defence review. But not the concept
:33:33. > :33:39.of Trident in its substance. She said there would be a review in
:33:40. > :33:43.terms of, and this is in our manifesto. When you reduce
:33:44. > :33:49.something, you review how it is operated. The review could scrap
:33:50. > :33:54.Trident. It won't scrap Trident. The review is in the context of how you
:33:55. > :34:00.protect it from cyber attacks. This will issue was seized upon that she
:34:01. > :34:05.was saying that we would have another review of Trident or Labour
:34:06. > :34:12.would ditch it. That is nonsense. You will have seen some reports that
:34:13. > :34:16.MI5 opened a file on Jeremy Corbyn in the early 90s because of his
:34:17. > :34:25.links to Irish republicanism. This has caused some people, his links to
:34:26. > :34:31.the IRA and Sinn Fein, it has caused some concern. Could you just listen
:34:32. > :34:38.to this clip and react. Do you condemn what the IRA did? I condemn
:34:39. > :34:43.all bombing. But do you condemn what the IRA did? I condemn what was done
:34:44. > :34:48.with the British Army as well as both sides as well. What happened in
:34:49. > :34:54.Derry in 1972 was pretty devastating as well. Do you distinguish between
:34:55. > :35:00.state forces, what the British Army did and the IRA? Well, in a sense,
:35:01. > :35:06.the treatment of IRA prisoners which made them into virtual political
:35:07. > :35:10.prisoners suggested that the British government and the state saw some
:35:11. > :35:17.kind of almost equivalent in it. My point is that the whole violence if
:35:18. > :35:24.you was terrible, was appalling, and came out of a process that had been
:35:25. > :35:29.allowed to fester in Northern Ireland for a very long time. That
:35:30. > :35:33.was from about two years ago. Can you explain why the Leader of the
:35:34. > :35:37.Labour Party, Her Majesty 's opposition, the man who would be our
:35:38. > :35:44.next Prime Minister, finds it so hard to condemn IRA arming? I think
:35:45. > :35:47.it has to be within the context that Jeremy Corbyn for many years trying
:35:48. > :35:57.to move the peace protest... Process along. So why wouldn't you condemn
:35:58. > :36:04.IRA bombing? Again, that was an issue, a traumatic event in Irish -
:36:05. > :36:09.British relations that went on for 30 years. It is a complicated
:36:10. > :36:14.matter. Bombing is not that complicated. If you are a man of
:36:15. > :36:19.peace, surely you would condemn the bomb and the bullet? Let me say
:36:20. > :36:25.this, I condemn the bomb and the bullet. Why can't your leader? You
:36:26. > :36:30.would have to ask Jeremy Corbyn, but that is in the context of what he
:36:31. > :36:31.was trying to do over a 25 year period to move the priest process
:36:32. > :36:42.along. Thank you for joining us. Hello and welcome to
:36:43. > :36:44.the Sunday Politics Wales. There were tributes
:36:45. > :36:48.from across the political spectrum but we'll be speaking to two
:36:49. > :36:51.of Rhodri Morgan's closest friends, Mark Drakeford,
:36:52. > :36:54.who succeeded him as AM, and his former Special Adviser,
:36:55. > :36:57.Jo Kiernan. But first, the general election
:36:58. > :37:00.campaign continues and we're carrying on with
:37:01. > :37:03.our series of interviews We've already heard
:37:04. > :37:07.from Ukip and Plaid Cymru. Labour and the Conservatives
:37:08. > :37:10.will follow in the next two weeks. But today it's the turn
:37:11. > :37:13.of the Liberal Democrats. They'll be looking to increase
:37:14. > :37:15.their numbers in Parliament and trying to win more
:37:16. > :37:19.than the single seat they won Eluned Parrott from the Lib Dems
:37:20. > :37:35.is here with me now. As I said, two years ago was a very
:37:36. > :37:40.difficult night. How confident are you that it would be yet another
:37:41. > :37:44.difficult evening for the Lib Dems? We are looking forward with real
:37:45. > :37:48.positivity. We have doubled our membership across the UK but also in
:37:49. > :37:54.Wales. We have reached historic highs there. And the political
:37:55. > :37:57.rhetoric has changed a lot. We have had the Brexit referendum and people
:37:58. > :38:02.are looking for positivity and hope. People are looking for something
:38:03. > :38:06.different. Politics is very volatile at the moment and I think there is
:38:07. > :38:09.an opportunity for a party like the Liberal Democrats to make gains by
:38:10. > :38:14.putting forward a positive image of the future. Every party is putting a
:38:15. > :38:19.positive case for the future but one of the things you are offering is
:38:20. > :38:26.this second, or another referendum on the deal of Brexit. How will that
:38:27. > :38:31.work? It is really important that people have a chance to scrutinise
:38:32. > :38:36.properly the deal that is made. We were offered a referendum choice
:38:37. > :38:41.which was to remain as the status quo or a black box that no one could
:38:42. > :38:45.see inside. On this programme a year ago I was debating with someone from
:38:46. > :38:48.the leave campaign who refused to say what that Brexit would actually
:38:49. > :38:51.look like. They didn't want to tell people that we might leave the
:38:52. > :38:55.single market because people understand that would be very
:38:56. > :38:59.dangerous for our economy. They didn't want to talk about leaving
:39:00. > :39:03.the common agricultural policy and what that might mean for farmers in
:39:04. > :39:06.Wales. All that needs to be properly scrutinised. We believe that
:39:07. > :39:11.decision on the deal should not be in the hands of the Prime Minister
:39:12. > :39:16.and a couple of Tory ministers, it should be in the hands of the
:39:17. > :39:22.electorate. But you would then have, here is the deal, another
:39:23. > :39:27.referendum, except the deal all refuse it. If people refuse it, do
:39:28. > :39:32.we just returned to how it was before the referendum? We think they
:39:33. > :39:39.should be an option to refuse the deal and remain. But do we keep on
:39:40. > :39:44.negotiating with the rest of the EU? Does that process continue? The
:39:45. > :39:49.referendum last year was clear, that people want to leave the European
:39:50. > :39:55.Union. You seem to be saying, if they don't like the deal, it is all
:39:56. > :39:58.off. We are seeing people have too have the opportunity to vote on the
:39:59. > :40:02.basis of what the deal looks like and if it is not in the best
:40:03. > :40:08.interests of the UK and Wales, they should have an opportunity to reject
:40:09. > :40:12.it and to say, remain. The idea that if Theresa May can't negotiate a
:40:13. > :40:17.decent deal we just fall catastrophically out of the European
:40:18. > :40:22.Union with no safety net at all, go to Wales -- World Trade Organisation
:40:23. > :40:26.rules, that would be a disaster for Wales. We need to make sure that the
:40:27. > :40:32.safety net is not to collapse, it is to remain. But we know that the rest
:40:33. > :40:36.of the EU wants the UK to stay, so what's to stop them giving us a
:40:37. > :40:43.terrible deal, they will never back that, they will remain. We want
:40:44. > :40:47.people to have an honest opportunity to choose between positive
:40:48. > :40:49.alternatives. I believe that means treating our European colleagues
:40:50. > :40:55.with respect and dignity and to deal with them in a respectful and honest
:40:56. > :41:00.way. The kind of rhetoric we have had from the Conservative Party
:41:01. > :41:04.about Europe, about this combative language we have heard from Theresa
:41:05. > :41:07.May has damaged our relations with the world. We need to be able to
:41:08. > :41:12.negotiate openly and we need to keep our options open. But in the
:41:13. > :41:15.manifesto you say you want to remain as a member of the single market,
:41:16. > :41:21.you want to protect freedom of movement. Those two things together
:41:22. > :41:27.would essentially negate the result of the referendum last year,
:41:28. > :41:31.wouldn't it? No. But don't you accept that one of the main reasons
:41:32. > :41:35.people voted to leave the EU was to try and get some more control over
:41:36. > :41:42.borders and membership of the single market, keeping freedom of movement,
:41:43. > :41:47.would bypass that? Not at all. Talking to people, they voted to
:41:48. > :41:52.leave for a very complex variety of reasons so forth some of them, yes,
:41:53. > :41:56.it was freedom of movement, but for others it was bureaucracy and
:41:57. > :42:02.paperwork. Freedom of movement is something that is worth protecting.
:42:03. > :42:07.We cannot use our EU national based in Britain as bargaining chips. They
:42:08. > :42:12.are people with families, futures, and children who need stability in
:42:13. > :42:18.their lives. Similarly, we could be using citizens in Europe as
:42:19. > :42:23.bargaining chips. We need to fight for their rights. A quarter of our
:42:24. > :42:26.doctors and nurses in our NHS, a quarter of our university professors
:42:27. > :42:33.and very senior people in those professions are foreign nationals. A
:42:34. > :42:36.sudden catastrophic fall out of the European Union, which means sending
:42:37. > :42:40.people like that back to Europe or making them feel they are unwelcome
:42:41. > :42:46.so they wish to go back to Europe, that would be devastating for
:42:47. > :42:50.services in Wales. Tim Farron has been saying that he wants to be the
:42:51. > :42:55.next opposition. We will set aside the lack of ambition about wanting
:42:56. > :42:59.to be Prime Minister but he is a realist, I guess. But why wouldn't
:43:00. > :43:03.he then entertain the possibility of forming a coalition and getting into
:43:04. > :43:08.power that way? Isn't that a wasted vote to vote for the Lib Dems?
:43:09. > :43:13.Absolutely not. Good position improved government. If you don't
:43:14. > :43:15.have a good opposition, you have a government that can get away with
:43:16. > :43:22.anything without any kind of challenge. The Labour Party has been
:43:23. > :43:27.too busy fighting within itself. They allowed the Tories to pass a
:43:28. > :43:32.budget that took away housing benefit from 18-21 -year-olds. There
:43:33. > :43:37.wasn't a murmur of opposition. But in power you could prevent that.
:43:38. > :43:44.Nick Clegg vetoed policies with which he didn't agree. You could do
:43:45. > :43:47.that if you were in power. But the Conservatives under Theresa May and
:43:48. > :43:50.the Labour Party and the Jeremy Corbyn have said they will go
:43:51. > :43:54.forward with a hard Brexit. They will go forward with a plan which
:43:55. > :43:58.isn't in our interests as far as the Liberal Democrats believe it. There
:43:59. > :44:02.is no possibility of forming a coalition with parties who believe a
:44:03. > :44:06.hard Brexit is in the best interest of this country. We have to have a
:44:07. > :44:11.vocal opposition fighting for the rights of the people of Britain, our
:44:12. > :44:14.farmers and agricultural payments, our businesses and making sure we
:44:15. > :44:19.can still trade without tariffs and taxes with the rest of Europe. We
:44:20. > :44:24.need to fight for those European citizens and British citizens
:44:25. > :44:28.overseas to. Looking at other promises in the manifesto, an
:44:29. > :44:38.increase of 1p in the pound in income tax. End the 1% public sector
:44:39. > :44:42.pay gap. More investment for education. Borrowing ?1 billion for
:44:43. > :44:49.investment. That is almost taken word for word out of the Labour
:44:50. > :44:52.Party manifesto. No, it's not. We have produced a fully costed
:44:53. > :44:57.manifesto. For example, we have agreed that we want to reverse the
:44:58. > :45:02.welfare cuts of the last two years. That is not in the Labour manifesto.
:45:03. > :45:06.We have fully costed it, we have been honest about where the money is
:45:07. > :45:11.going to come from, and if you want to save the NHS, you may have to pay
:45:12. > :45:15.more tax. A penny on income tax to make sure we can save the NHS and
:45:16. > :45:21.deliver the services people need. Services like social care which
:45:22. > :45:26.people are so anxious about. We have to be honest with people. Money
:45:27. > :45:30.doesn't grow on trees. We are not building an orchard of money trees
:45:31. > :45:34.anywhere, unlike the Labour Party, who have some serious gaps in their
:45:35. > :45:40.costings. You have to be honest and upfront about it. A friend in
:45:41. > :45:44.England will raise ?6 billion for the NHS and will make sure that
:45:45. > :45:49.things like mental health will be treated with real equality there but
:45:50. > :45:52.what it means for Wales is a ?3 million a year boost for the Welsh
:45:53. > :45:57.Government to invest in the health service here. And yet when we look
:45:58. > :46:02.at where the Liberal Democrats are in the opinion polls, it must be
:46:03. > :46:07.disheartening. Use only, during the course of an election campaign, Lib
:46:08. > :46:12.Dems go up and up. You are flat-lining in the polls. Is that a
:46:13. > :46:16.concern? At the moment politics is so volatile, opinion polls are
:46:17. > :46:21.swinging very wildly. Previous modelling is to try and waited for
:46:22. > :46:28.Turner, I don't think we can rely on any of that this time. This is a new
:46:29. > :46:33.age. We have some very strong peelings -- strong feelings that
:46:34. > :46:37.people have about Brexit, about the taxes, and I am confident that we
:46:38. > :46:41.are going out on the doorstep and talking to people about the positive
:46:42. > :46:46.agenda for change and how we want to make sure that the future rhetoric
:46:47. > :46:49.of British politics doesn't have to be the negative, nasty rhetoric we
:46:50. > :46:53.have had in that last year. We have an opportunity to say this doesn't
:46:54. > :46:56.have to be the future. Thank you for joining me this morning.
:46:57. > :46:58.Now, the Welsh Green Party is fielding ten candidates
:46:59. > :47:03.A short while ago I spoke to their leader, Grenville Ham,
:47:04. > :47:06.and I began by asking him what his main pitch was
:47:07. > :47:10.This year, we're looking at it, the two analyses.
:47:11. > :47:13.You've got the Progressive Alliance, so part of it is, we're encouraging
:47:14. > :47:16.people to vote tactically, to ensure that we don't have a very strong
:47:17. > :47:20.But then from the green perspective, I was watching
:47:21. > :47:23.the leaders debated just this week, nobody mentioned climate change.
:47:24. > :47:29.I think what we're actually seeing is the
:47:30. > :47:33.From our perspective, the climate change
:47:34. > :47:36.issue is our biggest economic failure.
:47:37. > :47:38.Even the Bank of England have said that, so we're pushing
:47:39. > :47:42.Equally, we are very deeply concerned about the future for our
:47:43. > :47:45.Our young people are increasingly saddled with debt.
:47:46. > :47:48.Houses they can't afford and they haven't got career
:47:49. > :47:51.so it's placing them at the centre of our policies.
:47:52. > :47:56.there that people aren't mentioning, green issues, the environment now.
:47:57. > :48:04.Isn't that the problem for the Green party,
:48:05. > :48:06.which is maybe in a time of plenty, that people will say,
:48:07. > :48:08.OK let's look at the environment, but
:48:09. > :48:11.when there's such a squeeze on public spending, maybe people's
:48:12. > :48:13.priorities will change and that's why the environment is being
:48:14. > :48:18.Potentially, but the issue is still there, that the issues are going to
:48:19. > :48:21.get worse so we look at it and go, this is a major industrial
:48:22. > :48:25.I look at cities around the world, Beijing, Shanghai, Rio de
:48:26. > :48:30.London, their breathing air that is poisonous.
:48:31. > :48:38.So, whichever comes up with a saleable technology, you
:48:39. > :48:46.A lot of tech firms in America investing
:48:47. > :48:50.in that because they know they can sell that to the rest of the world
:48:51. > :48:52.From the Welsh perspective, the tidal energy,
:48:53. > :48:56.wind, hydro and all of the housing stock that we can retrofit, we can
:48:57. > :48:59.actually create a lot of jobs and create a lot of income.
:49:00. > :49:03.When you are looking at cities like Beijing,
:49:04. > :49:06.Rio de Janeiro all around the world, isn't there a danger that
:49:07. > :49:08.people look at that and say, it's such a problem.
:49:09. > :49:11.Whatever Wales does, or even whatever the UK does, is
:49:12. > :49:16.It's a problem that's not going to go away and it's a huge
:49:17. > :49:24.I do genuinely believe that we can actually become the forefront
:49:25. > :49:28.It's where the education for young people.
:49:29. > :49:30.We've got a serious lack in engineering.
:49:31. > :49:32.Let's have the policies that deliver that.
:49:33. > :49:34.What would be your policy on improving engineering?
:49:35. > :49:37.Look at the German model, energy change.
:49:38. > :49:38.They've invested huge amounts of money in their
:49:39. > :49:44.I would look to establishing engineering facilities in places
:49:45. > :49:47.like Port Talbot, we've got the potential for using industry and
:49:48. > :49:52.going, let's create RNZ tech institutes.
:49:53. > :49:55.When you're talking about the Swansea Bay tidal lagoon,
:49:56. > :49:58.is the difficulty there, if you've got a
:49:59. > :50:02.balance, you welcome the fact that it might be going ahead
:50:03. > :50:04.now and yet you know that there are
:50:05. > :50:08.environmental concerns to deal with, how the fish species will be moving
:50:09. > :50:12.out and how it will affect the reverse round there.
:50:13. > :50:17.It's always going to be a tricky balance
:50:18. > :50:20.and that's why we have to trust in the expertise of our statutory
:50:21. > :50:25.Ultimately, they are the people that can advise and there will always be
:50:26. > :50:27.certain schemes that the environmental impact is too
:50:28. > :50:33.Therefore, if Natural Resources Wales, the guardians, the official
:50:34. > :50:36.Welsh Government guardians make sure it doesn't have a negative
:50:37. > :50:39.impact on the environment, if they say, actually,
:50:40. > :50:42.we're not keen on this, you would say it shouldn't go ahead.
:50:43. > :50:50.If the scientists turned round and say the impact is too
:50:51. > :50:53.I will always accept the evidence -based approach
:50:54. > :50:57.Even though it could offer such a massive and overwhelming boost?
:50:58. > :51:00.I believe there will be away any impact can be mitigated.
:51:01. > :51:05.You mention the Progressive Alliance.
:51:06. > :51:07.Tell me how you think that should work.
:51:08. > :51:10.Ultimately, some of the parties have said it's too late.
:51:11. > :51:12.We've been talking about it for over a year
:51:13. > :51:20.We are acutely aware that politics is changing rapidly.
:51:21. > :51:24.As a party we want to work with other parties.
:51:25. > :51:27.What we want delivered is proportional representation.
:51:28. > :51:37.It's unfair that those people aren't being represented, we want to get
:51:38. > :51:41.To deliver that, we have to work with other parties and at the moment
:51:42. > :51:44.the Lib Dems and Labour aren't there yet that I think it
:51:45. > :51:51.How do the Progressive Alliance work if nobody else is interested?
:51:52. > :51:54.There's a number of ways it can happen.
:51:55. > :51:57.What we have called for is when candidate from a number
:51:58. > :52:05.We have had a number of instances with other parties have withdrawn.
:52:06. > :52:07.But the other mechanism is on the street, there's a lot
:52:08. > :52:11.They going, I'm going to do my own version
:52:12. > :52:16.We're going to find this is the most practical election.
:52:17. > :52:28.We're going to find this is the most tactical election.
:52:29. > :52:30.Is the problem for Green Party, going from being a single issue
:52:31. > :52:32.party, just concentrating on the environment, to be
:52:33. > :52:34.the alternative left party and more left-wing policies.
:52:35. > :52:38.But then Jeremy Corbyn has come along and shot your fox for you.
:52:39. > :52:43.See what I mean, he's pitched to the left-wing policies
:52:44. > :52:55.I think it's heading is on the right direction.
:52:56. > :52:57.The difference between us, is we are bottom up
:52:58. > :53:01.So I think, and also the Greens are all over the world.
:53:02. > :53:04.But I'd welcome working with like-minded
:53:05. > :53:13.If they're not interested, and Labour aren't interested
:53:14. > :53:17.in a Progressive Alliance, they are taking the voters that
:53:18. > :53:19.might otherwise have considered voting Green.
:53:20. > :53:23.But equally, a lot of the people are still going,
:53:24. > :53:32.So it's a crowded political landscape in Wales.
:53:33. > :53:35.We are aware of that and politics is going to change.
:53:36. > :53:40.In the past, the Greens have worked with Plaid Cymru.
:53:41. > :53:49.Would you consider that kind of joint ticket?
:53:50. > :53:52.I go OK, Plaid Cymru and I have differences on certain key issues.
:53:53. > :53:55.Am I going to beat them over the head or am I going to work
:53:56. > :53:57.with them over the issues that we share?
:53:58. > :54:00.I think by working together, you can create more change.
:54:01. > :54:04.Do you think, in all of the parties there is some talk of green schemes,
:54:05. > :54:15.Or do you see it as people turning away from the Greens?
:54:16. > :54:21.Is it some comfort that people are discussing it?
:54:22. > :54:23.Would that have been there without us?
:54:24. > :54:26.I don't know. It's a step in the right direction.
:54:27. > :54:29.It's not necessarily a big step and not necessarily
:54:30. > :54:32.in the right direction but they are getting there.
:54:33. > :54:35.Why do you think the Greens haven't taken off?
:54:36. > :54:37.In Wales in the way that they have elsewhere.
:54:38. > :54:40.For example, in Scotland, you have a number of green MPs there.
:54:41. > :54:44.In Wales it doesn't seem to have been...
:54:45. > :54:48.And the Green party has more of its roots in West Wales than it
:54:49. > :54:51.does in other parts but it's never taken off.
:54:52. > :55:06.One of the key issues we're going to work face
:55:07. > :55:11.We don't accept donations from corporations.
:55:12. > :55:13.So we are reliant on funding from our members and because Wales
:55:14. > :55:17.is the poorer of all of the UK, we haven't got the money to compete
:55:18. > :55:21.We won a seat in Powys and got six second places.
:55:22. > :55:23.That is definite progress being made.
:55:24. > :55:33.What would be a good night for you on June the 8th?
:55:34. > :55:36.Retaining our deposits, ultimately, the Tory majority being reduced.
:55:37. > :55:40.But on a human level, I've got friends, my best friend's
:55:41. > :55:46.She's from Spain and she was crying, and said, I don't know
:55:47. > :55:51.So a good night for me is knowing that my friends like that actually
:55:52. > :56:01.Now, all this week on BBC One Wales there will be a special series
:56:02. > :56:02.of programmes where the main political leaders
:56:03. > :56:06.It begins tomorrow evening when Andrew Neil will interview
:56:07. > :56:10.That will be followed by a live programme from Rhos near Wrexham,
:56:11. > :56:13.where Bethan Rhys Roberts and voters will question the leader
:56:14. > :56:14.of the Welsh Conservatives, Andrew RT Davies.
:56:15. > :56:16.That's Ask the Leader all this week at 7pm,
:56:17. > :56:30.Few politicians are known merely by their first name,
:56:31. > :56:33.politicians are known for their first name.
:56:34. > :56:37.The former First Minister died suddenly this week,
:56:38. > :56:39.leading to tributes from political friend and foe alike.
:56:40. > :56:42.In a moment, I'll be speaking to two people who knew him better
:56:43. > :56:45.than almost anyone - the man who succeeded him as AM
:56:46. > :56:47.for Cardiff West, Mark Drakeford, and his former Special Adviser,
:56:48. > :56:51.But first Gareth Evans looks at the mark Rhodri Morgan left
:56:52. > :57:06.I declare Rhodri Morgan is duly elected as first secretary and
:57:07. > :57:11.invite him to address the Assembly. I do have to record the fact of how
:57:12. > :57:14.privileged I do feel that it has come to me as a labour first
:57:15. > :57:19.secretary in the very month when the Labour Party is celebrating its own
:57:20. > :57:23.centenary as a political party. Most politicians leave a legacy of
:57:24. > :57:31.the end of their time in prayer power. Rhodri Morgan's legacy
:57:32. > :57:34.started on day one. But coming First Minister after a shaky start of the
:57:35. > :57:38.new institution, his supporters say he was central to making the idea of
:57:39. > :57:41.the Assembly acceptable to a population which should only
:57:42. > :57:46.narrowly voted for it. Rhodri Morgan along with some other leading
:57:47. > :57:51.politicians at the time, we'll really committed to making sure that
:57:52. > :57:56.the future of devolution was stable and was on the right footing and of
:57:57. > :58:01.course, Rhodri including people like Dafydd Elis-Thomas did reshape the
:58:02. > :58:09.devolution settlement is to make it more operationally sound. With
:58:10. > :58:15.Labour in power, Westminster... Rhodri Morgan embraced the spirit of
:58:16. > :58:20.devolution but in clear water between Labour and Cardiff Bay. He
:58:21. > :58:23.opted out of reforms and introduced free prescriptions and free bus
:58:24. > :58:26.passes to Wales. Political revival is remembered how he helps the idea
:58:27. > :58:35.of devolution to flourish behind-the-scenes. He knew what was
:58:36. > :58:40.right in terms of the Constitution. How you should have in any country
:58:41. > :58:44.in a separate government, separate from the National Assembly and the
:58:45. > :58:47.Parliamentary body and how both those bodies should be independent
:58:48. > :58:53.of each other so that they could scrutinise and he wanted to be
:58:54. > :58:57.scrutinised as First Minister by an independent Assembly and that's what
:58:58. > :59:02.he helped me to develop alongside his work of developing Welsh
:59:03. > :59:05.Government. He managed to change the legislation of devolution way beyond
:59:06. > :59:10.what we had to begin with and that would be his contribution because he
:59:11. > :59:15.was such a deep Democrat, write to the fibre of his being. With Labour
:59:16. > :59:18.by far the largest bit party in December but lacking a strong
:59:19. > :59:22.overall majority, he formed coalition to both the Liberal
:59:23. > :59:25.Democrats and Plaid Cymru and is remembered for reaching out to
:59:26. > :59:28.opponents to get his programme through. I think Rhodri Morgan
:59:29. > :59:32.didn't suffer fools gladly and that's an important point to make
:59:33. > :59:36.but on the other hand, he recognised that the talent that we have in
:59:37. > :59:41.Welsh politics doesn't reside exclusively in the Welsh Labour
:59:42. > :59:44.Party. He saw people who had constitutional vision, who shared
:59:45. > :59:53.his commitments to the future of devolution in the other parties as
:59:54. > :00:00.well. His legacy has continued in the past for
:00:01. > :00:05.He has left us with a strong National Assembly in Wales. An
:00:06. > :00:09.Assembly where there is a recognition that we do things
:00:10. > :00:13.differently, that what is right for the rest of the UK is not
:00:14. > :00:18.necessarily right for Wales and that we need to provide our own solutions
:00:19. > :00:22.to our own problems. He made that happen, he has done things
:00:23. > :00:26.differently, and I think he has also saved the Labour Party in Wales.
:00:27. > :00:31.Unlike most political leaders, Rhodri Morgan left office when he
:00:32. > :00:34.wanted to go. No politician gets everything they wanted to accomplish
:00:35. > :00:37.while in power but the firm foundations he left for Wales' new
:00:38. > :00:45.democracy means he will be well remembered.
:00:46. > :00:50.Thank you for coming in at the end of a very difficult week. One of the
:00:51. > :00:54.things I have always wondered is when you started advising Rhodri
:00:55. > :00:58.Morgan, did you ever tried to change the image that he had or was it
:00:59. > :01:05.anything that was honed by you at all? I would have been a brave woman
:01:06. > :01:10.and, if I'm being really honest, I thought I could put him in some nice
:01:11. > :01:13.suits, but he was what you saw. He was exactly the same whether he was
:01:14. > :01:18.sat at home around his kitchen table, digging in his garden,
:01:19. > :01:23.meeting the Queen or other heads of state. He was exactly as you saw
:01:24. > :01:28.him. I might have taken him on the odd shopping trip now and again but
:01:29. > :01:34.Rhodri was Rhodri. That is why there has been so much warmth and lovely
:01:35. > :01:40.tributes paid to him in the last few days, because people did think he
:01:41. > :01:43.was authentic, he wasn't an identikit politician. So did you
:01:44. > :01:51.make a virtue out of necessity, almost? He was what he was. Image
:01:52. > :01:55.aside, he had a phenomenal brain, really strategic in terms of
:01:56. > :02:01.political planning. Marco remembered this but I remember quite soon after
:02:02. > :02:06.starting, there was an issue of some kind and I asked Rhodri what he
:02:07. > :02:12.thought, we needed to come up with a solution, and he was taking a long
:02:13. > :02:15.time, probably a couple of days. I said to Mark, this is getting
:02:16. > :02:22.frustrating now. I need an answer for the media. Mark just said, wait,
:02:23. > :02:27.you will come back, and invariably the decision he has made will be the
:02:28. > :02:31.right one. You work with him probably longer than anyone else in
:02:32. > :02:38.politics. What are your earliest memory of working with him? I
:02:39. > :02:43.arrived to work in the Assembly in the year 2000 but I had no Rhodri
:02:44. > :02:47.for a long time before that. Julie Morgan and I were elected to South
:02:48. > :02:52.Glamorgan county council on the same day in 1985 and we used to joke and
:02:53. > :02:58.say, we were elected before you because he was first elected in
:02:59. > :03:02.1987. I knew him before the Assembly started. All of that was very
:03:03. > :03:07.important to me in working in his team, being part of his advisory
:03:08. > :03:11.team, because you begin to have an understanding of the way that
:03:12. > :03:14.someone is going to be thinking about something. And then to be able
:03:15. > :03:19.to work with them to try and help them to do things in a way that is
:03:20. > :03:25.right for them. In the early days, we have heard about how he worked
:03:26. > :03:30.when he became First Minister, but was there ever an exasperation that
:03:31. > :03:34.he couldn't do more? He was putting in place the building blocks, the
:03:35. > :03:38.foundations, so that the Assembly would not sure, but did he ever want
:03:39. > :03:44.to get on with it and move on to bigger things? One of the things I
:03:45. > :03:48.think is worth saying, everything we have heard about how fantastic
:03:49. > :03:55.Rhodri was with people is absolutely true. Sometimes that disguised his
:03:56. > :03:59.public image, the fact that he was a deeply serious politician with a
:04:00. > :04:04.deeply serious idea from the very beginning about what he wanted to do
:04:05. > :04:10.too much or devolution, to settle devolution. When I arrived in the
:04:11. > :04:14.year 2000, I remember thinking this was an organisation right on the
:04:15. > :04:19.brink. That first year had been absolutely draining for everybody
:04:20. > :04:23.involved. And I think in those very first weeks and months, he really
:04:24. > :04:27.did think that what he was doing was trying to claw our way to some sort
:04:28. > :04:33.of stability that would allow him to begin the work of setting devolution
:04:34. > :04:37.on a proper footing. When you say on the brink, what do you mean?
:04:38. > :04:42.Politically, or the whole organisation? One is that the
:04:43. > :04:46.referendum was very narrowly won and there was still an awful lot of
:04:47. > :04:51.people in 2000 who thought that devolution simply would not succeed.
:04:52. > :04:54.In that very first year, they were gathering quite a lot of evidence to
:04:55. > :04:59.demonstrate to them that they were right about that. So there was an
:05:00. > :05:03.institutional issue. And there was a personal issue as well. People who
:05:04. > :05:09.had been elected to the Assembly were exhausted by that experience of
:05:10. > :05:12.winning a referendum, setting up a place, getting yourself selected,
:05:13. > :05:16.getting yourself elected, trying to get through the first year without a
:05:17. > :05:22.majority. That was absolutely about trying to find your way to a place
:05:23. > :05:29.where you could begin the business of settling devolution into the
:05:30. > :05:35.place that it is today. I joined later in 2006 and even then it was
:05:36. > :05:39.eight, ten months ahead of the Assembly elections. In the debates
:05:40. > :05:43.at that point, you still had the people on the panel saying abolish
:05:44. > :05:47.the Assembly. So the amount of time and effort he put into that can't be
:05:48. > :05:53.underestimated and he never took it for granted. You told me this
:05:54. > :05:57.morning about how it was you that was asked to form that Lib Dem
:05:58. > :06:03.coalition, which stabilised everything in those early days. In
:06:04. > :06:09.May 2000, Labour formed a minority administration. They were 28 votes
:06:10. > :06:14.and that meant every single decision was being negotiated as he went
:06:15. > :06:18.along. Rhodri said to me, go away and find out whether there is still
:06:19. > :06:24.an appetite in the Liberal Democrats to form a coalition. In the way that
:06:25. > :06:28.politics is, he said to me, if it doesn't work, you will be on your
:06:29. > :06:33.own, and if it begins to succeed, let me know. Throughout the summer,
:06:34. > :06:38.I would do the legwork, I would report back to him, he and Mike
:06:39. > :06:41.German would get together at strategic points, and by the time we
:06:42. > :06:47.got to September, we felt there was a deal to be done and that, in my
:06:48. > :06:52.mind, is what provided at first Assembly with that platform, without
:06:53. > :06:56.stability, and from there on Rhodri was absolutely serious in creating a
:06:57. > :07:00.government, separating it from the Assembly, giving people confidence
:07:01. > :07:05.in Wales that when things went wrong, that was the place to go to.
:07:06. > :07:11.Over that winter there was flooding, there was foot and mouth, there was
:07:12. > :07:13.the fuel crisis, and as those things happened, people began to look to
:07:14. > :07:19.the Assembly for the political leadership that was necessary in
:07:20. > :07:24.Wales. I believe, and I think Rhodri believed, that over that autumn and
:07:25. > :07:27.winter, that is when the corner was turned and that is when the Assembly
:07:28. > :07:35.began to be the organisation it has begun today. When you came on board
:07:36. > :07:40.in 2006, he had been First Minister for six years. Did he have any
:07:41. > :07:43.regrets? Was he frustrated when he looked back at the time when the
:07:44. > :07:46.money was coming in and yet they were still grumblings about
:07:47. > :07:52.services, education and hospitals and so on? I think he realised it
:07:53. > :08:00.was going to be a long haul. Making the institution is something that
:08:01. > :08:03.people actually felt warmth towards. And he was always looking to the
:08:04. > :08:11.future. He was always planning the next step. One of the really big
:08:12. > :08:16.issues straight after the 2007 election was the coalition with
:08:17. > :08:21.Plaid Cymru. The amount of strategic foresight that he showed in that,
:08:22. > :08:25.such a difficult time, but it provided stability for the next four
:08:26. > :08:29.years and much-needed stability because you could easily have seen
:08:30. > :08:36.it slipped back if that had not been the case. 2007, Labour did not have
:08:37. > :08:40.the majority and it was the rainbow coalition, the Tories, Lib Dems and
:08:41. > :08:47.Plaid Cymru, which seemed to be on the verge of happening. Did you feel
:08:48. > :08:54.for him at that point? No, you are in politics to play the game to the
:08:55. > :08:59.conclusion. Taking him home from the count at about 4:30am and saying,
:09:00. > :09:04.tomorrow, you are still First Minister and we will go and sit in
:09:05. > :09:10.the First Minister 's office and we will see where things go from there.
:09:11. > :09:14.His belief always was that if you were a Labour politician with things
:09:15. > :09:17.you wanted to achieve, with all the frustrations that come with it and
:09:18. > :09:21.the compromises you sometimes have to make, being in office is how you
:09:22. > :09:25.get things done for people who depend on you. What was the main
:09:26. > :09:30.compromise he felt he had to make, do you think? He had to work with
:09:31. > :09:37.other parties and the Labour Party in its DNA has not always been a
:09:38. > :09:41.party that has found that easy. But he recognised straightaway, he made
:09:42. > :09:45.a phone call to the Prime Minister of New Zealand first thing that
:09:46. > :09:50.morning, Helen Clark, because the New Zealand system is very close to
:09:51. > :09:54.ours, and she said to him, Rhodri, if you want to be in government, you
:09:55. > :09:59.have got to get on the dance floor and dance. You have got to get out
:10:00. > :10:04.there and he did that from the very beginning. As a former education
:10:05. > :10:06.journalist, I was always interested when he said his greatest
:10:07. > :10:13.achievement was the foundation phase. What was it about it? A
:10:14. > :10:17.belief that every child deserves the best start. Economic development was
:10:18. > :10:22.one of his absolute passions but unless you get the building blocks
:10:23. > :10:25.there right at the very beginning. He believed passionately that we
:10:26. > :10:32.started formal education of children far too soon. He travelled around
:10:33. > :10:37.looking at different models. And so it was the very big and very
:10:38. > :10:43.expensive policy that he was determined to see through from a
:10:44. > :10:47.very early age -- very early point. He hated the fact that you could
:10:48. > :10:51.come across children in his own constituency who by the age of seven
:10:52. > :10:57.felt that school was not for them. They already felt left behind. And
:10:58. > :11:01.learn through play, that ability for children to enjoy learning and a
:11:02. > :11:08.real love of learning was awake he thought you could overcome an
:11:09. > :11:12.historical deficit. It was Jane Davidson was Education Minister at
:11:13. > :11:18.the time. Was it a collaboration or something that came from himself?
:11:19. > :11:21.Bringing on women in politics is one of the great achievements of Rhodri
:11:22. > :11:27.which we have not heard enough about. How important was it? He came
:11:28. > :11:37.from a household where women were very important. His mother lived to
:11:38. > :11:42.100. Julie, his wife, herself. Women mattered to him in politics.
:11:43. > :11:46.Bringing Sue Essex and Jane Davidson into the first Cabinet he really
:11:47. > :11:49.formed is a sign of the way that he promoted women to the most serious
:11:50. > :11:54.positions in Welsh politics and always thought that was something he
:11:55. > :11:59.was determined to do. And absolutely serious about gender balance in the
:12:00. > :12:04.group. He had a really good idea. He was able to meet someone who was
:12:05. > :12:07.quite new to politics but he would say afterwards, she is going to
:12:08. > :12:16.stand in politics. He was very supportive. Finally, a fondest
:12:17. > :12:22.memory? There are so many. I think just chilling in his garden, him and
:12:23. > :12:26.his worse for wear clothes, giving you a bag full of vegetables to take
:12:27. > :12:32.home and just having a good crack with him. There are far too many but
:12:33. > :12:36.I will give you just one, walking down the hill in Aberystwyth in the
:12:37. > :12:42.election campaign of 2003. My job was to get into the radio Stadium
:12:43. > :12:47.for a live studio. He said, we will just walk down. Could we get there?
:12:48. > :12:52.People crossed the road to speak to him, to shake his hand. We knew they
:12:53. > :12:56.were not going to vote Labour but it was a Welsh speaking heartland,
:12:57. > :12:59.everybody wanted to say they had met him. Thank you very much.