25/06/2017 Sunday Politics Wales

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

After the Grenfell Tower disaster, 34 tower blocks in 17 council areas

every building that fails will be evacuated.

The government promises Britain will be a strong global

trading power after Brexit, as negotiations get under way,

we'll ask the international trade minister how.

As Jeremy Corbyn celebrates his new rock-star status

Later will the Labour leader

of terror attacks - what can be done to restore

And with me throughout, our own supergroup of political

pundits who'll be wowing the crowds throughout the programme,

Helen Lewis, Tim Shipman and Isabel Oakeshott.

They'll also be tweeting using the hashtag bbcsp.

First, though, the government has confirmed that over 30 tower blocks

across England have now failed an emergency fire safety test,

following the Grenfall Tower disaster in which 79 people

According to the government the cladding from 34 tower blocks

has been tested and all of them have failed the combustibility test.

The government plans to examine up to

600 blocks and claim they can test 100 a day.

The areas affected so far include Manchester, Plymouth and Portsmouth

as well as the London boroughs of Barnet, Brent, Camden

and Hounslow; all the relevant landlords and fire services

Camden has already evacuated residents from

650 flats whilst other councils have introduced interim measures such

as 24-hour fire warden patrols to mitigate the risk before

When you look at the national scale of this, this goes beyond austerity

and finger-pointing at individual councils, this is a clear national

system failure for the country. I'm surprised the response has been as

muted as it has been, and initially there was a huge response. It is

striking how every single building they test seems to fail these

regulations, so people are slightly confused about whether this is the

regulations at fault or the cladding that is at fault and I think what is

most alarming to people, the insecurity. Some people have been

told to evacuate and that is what happened in Camden and they were

told until late at night. It is difficult for people to take pets

outcome and other people have been told to stay in the commendation

that may or may not be flammable. They have put fire wardens in

instead. There is a problem that people feel this is a problem about

social housing but not all of these are about social housing, but about

the neglect to people that several successive governments have shown.

People will wonder why the building regulations allow or the building

regulations were flouted in a way that allowed so much inflammable

material to clad our buildings. If you look in other countries,

America, Germany, some of this is banned, and some people said some of

the stuff has been put up in this country has also been banned and

this shows what a disaster housing policy has been in this country for

a generation. Neither party has been able to get a grip on it. There are

several failures of the Tory council but Labour was in charge of putting

this stuff into housing associations, where the controls

have not been very good over long period, and what we need to do is

build more homes and every government announces they are going

to build more homes. Hopefully using the right material. Yes, but none of

these governors have been able to build enough homes and we have a

crisis of stock where people are put into houses like battery hens,

frankly, in places where most people would not want to take a second

look. Looking at Grenfell Tower, if that had not been clad, if they had

kept the old concrete facade committee would not have gone up in

fire. This has been a failure of government with a small G, national

and local, Labour and Conservatives. Absolutely. It is not just about

residential accommodation, hospitals might have this material, I'm

hearing, and schools. Politically the challenge for the government,

there is a huge logistical and humanitarian challenge but also the

politics of it, as you rightly say, that this isn't just something which

is linked directly to Tory austerity. The government now, the

initial shock has worn off, and the challenge for the government is to

make it clear that this is not just their direct responsibility and the

result of the Tory cuts agenda and there are plenty of Labour councils

who also have responsibility. Given the national crisis and the national

failure, the government needs to be seen to get a grip on this.

Absolutely. Most MPs would say they... Their response has been

slightly more convincing than it was early on, but there are still huge

potential for this to snowball especially if we have other

buildings, not just residential, affected. There has been a change in

the national mood, you see this in the Conservative Party. The word

austerity was barely mentioned. Philip Hammond has relaxed his

targets. Local councils bore the brunt of the cuts and they won't

take any more, there is that sense, the people are tired of that.

Indeed. OK. The Government says it will deliver

a Brexit deal which will allow the UK to become a powerful global

trading nation with the EU This morning the Brexit Secretary,

David Davis, told the BBC he was certain he'd be able to get

a good trade deal with Brussels, in part because of pressure

from businesses within the EU. I mean it's not just

the German car industry, it's Bavarian farmers,

French farmers, Italian white goods manufacturers,

you name it. The balance of trade basically

is 230 billion from us to them, They have a very strong interest

in getting a good deal, at the end of the day,

on all sides on trade. And I've been joined

by the Trade Minister Mark Price. Welcome to the programme. There are

five main national business organisations in Britain and all of

them want minimal custom checks after Brexit between the UK and the

EU, how can you do that if we are leaving the customs union? There's a

difference between the customs union and the customs arrangements. It is

not that binary, you are not either in or out, you can work which with

ever party you want, you have customs arrangements, which work to

the benefit of business. That would need to cover all of the EU? You

can't do that in bilateral business with members of the EU, it needs to

be all of them? The negotiations will be with the commission and they

will work on behalf of all EU members. I attend the trade

ministers meeting and I've been four times since Brexit, and the mood is

very positive about the relationship they want with the UK going forward.

We have frictionless trade by being in the customs union at the moment,

you can import into this country, and then they go seamlessly to the

rest of the EU because everything coming into the EU comes in on the

same terms, but if we are not in the customs union any more, how can you

have that frictionless trade? You look at Harris first of all, and at

the moment we are tariff free, but if you look at the arrangement like

the Canadian trade Guild, it is 98% tariff free, -- the trade deal. The

Canadian deal is not a customs deal. What I'm asking you is about the

stuff coming into Britain which at the moment can then go seamlessly to

the rest of the EU, and will not be able to do so if we are not in the

customs union. I'm trying to explain the preconditions for having a

customs arrangements, the first is, can tariff the parable of the -- the

first is tariff, and then at the moment we take 56% of our goods from

outside the EU. We have electronic passing of documentation and I'm

told that 96% will go through within six seconds, and so we are not a

novice to this and we all be do this with countries all over the world.

We trade with 163 countries around the world, we are not building from

no experience and no base. We have a place that we are working from. To

do it sector by sector could take a long wire which is maybe why the

Chancellor is now talking about a transitional period for single

market access may be membership, and the customs union, how long a

transition period are we looking at? Who knows. We will see how we get

on. One year, two years? Who knows. From the European and UK perspective

we want a smooth transition and this is what trade ministers are saying

across Europe, this is not just a British desire. I have heard

interviews with several European parliamentarians who say they want

to move to a smooth transition and they would like a period of time to

do that if we can't do that inside the initial period. Will we be able

to make free trade deals with countries outside the EU in this

transition period? We have a host of arrangements at the moment, but it

is not that simple. With the EU we are party to about 40 trade deals by

the time we go, and we will work with those countries to transition

them. But in the transition period, can we make a free-trade deal with

America or China? Can we do that? We have set up nine working groups at

the moment with 15 different countries and what we are working

through is how do we make sure when we leave the EU that the current

arrangements that we have are carried forward, Liam Fox last week

was in America and there are 20 agreements with America. We can talk

about the current trading relationship, how do we make things

better for our businesses in those countries in the way that customs

work and the way their businesses are handled and then we can start

thinking about how do we shape a future deal. In a transition period,

can we strike a free-trade deal with a third party? No, we can't. We

can't sign or negotiate. During the transition period? This is during

the two-year period, but in the transition period that depends what

we agree with the EU. Businesses want tariff free trade to continue

between the EU and the UK. What indications have you had that the EU

will agree to this? Businesses who want tariff free trade to continue.

Between the UK and the EU. In all the discussion that I've had with

trade ministers, and I've spoken to them all over the last year, there

is a great appetite to impose tariffs where none exist today and

as I've mentioned, the Canadian deal is 98% tariff free but also today,

what we have said, we will make sure that for the least developed

country, 48 of them, we give them preferential access to the UK, no

tariffs or rotors, and there's another group of countries that we

give reduced access to as well. What about tariff free trade between the

EU and the UK? I think they will be keen to give us that. But no yes,

despite all these meetings. We have got to sit down and negotiate, but

the spirit is a good one. People in Europe want to get into a good place

with us, why? Because the trade surplus with the UK is... I know all

the reasons. Euro France only runs a surplus with four countries and we

are one of them. So the indications are good? Yes, around the world,

since Brexit, I visited 31 countries and I've met with 70 ministers and I

have seen this. Let me come onto immigration. Businesses have also

called for a flexible system of skills and Labour, so what system do

you imagine? You have heard from the government that we don't want to

harm our economy, and in Europe we have heard very loud and clear that

people want to be able to source the right people for their businesses.

What will the system be? Tomorrow the Prime Minister is going to make

an announcement. That is about EU citizens already here, but what will

the broad principles be under which people from the EU can come here to

work? That will be in the paper that will be set up, we have the

immigration bill coming forward, but we don't want to harm the UK

economy. What is the priority? In your manifesto you had a policy of

reducing net migration to the tens of thousands, so what is the

priority, hitting Matt Targett or a system that meets the flexible needs

of the economy? -- that target. It is a difficult call. I would say

meeting the needs of the economy are hugely important. What is more

important? The part of the jigsaw that is missing is what happens to

the shape of the Labour force in the UK as we move into the digital

error. The British consortium have said they will need 900,000 fewer

workers in retail in ten years' time in every industry is being reshaped,

and to take a point in time and say this is right... I'm asking for a

general principle, what is more important, hitting the target or

keeping immigration that is flexible to the economy? If you asked me as a

businessman, for 30 years, I would say it is through the success of

business and the success of our economy that we can afford the

social services that we want. As a government minister we need to work

through over the course of the next 2-3 years, but Bill through

Parliament and decide where we get to, we have said there is a target

of tens of thousands, and my personal view, given the digital

changes, that is a perfectly reasonable target for us.

Business says what they really need is clarity. One year after we voted

to leave, what clarity have you brought to these issues this

morning? That is a very good question. I think we have set out

the principles. You cannot tell me the principles of immigration, the

principles on which the customs union will operate, or the economy

or hitting a target will be more important for immigration. The Prime

Minister has set out what we intend to achieve. Through the Queen's

speech will bring a different bills that address these issues. They will

be there for Parliament to discuss, there will be consultation papers

and business can be involved with that. We will be consulting and

there will be a vote. That is process. I'm afraid we have run out

of time, but that is processed. What you want us to do is to be able to

say this is definitively what we will be able to get, but there are

two site. If I was buying a business in Waitrose, I couldn't tell you

what the outcome would be. I was simply asking what the Government's

aim was. That has clearly been set out by the Prime Minister. Thank

you. Jeremy Corbyn confounded his critics

in the general election, increasing Labour's share

of the vote and securing So will the Corbynistas use

the result to strengthen Our reporter Emma Vardy

has been finding out. Enjoying superstar

status at Glastonbury. Since when did being

a politician become this cool? Do you know, politics is actually

about everyday life. It's about all of us

and what we dream and what we want and what we achieve and what we want

for everybody else. # Staying out for the summer,

playing games in the rain It's looking like the summer

of love for Jeremy Corbyn. As he basks in his post-election

glow, well, as much as you can bask So, is all that bitter infighting

in the party a distant memory Jeremy will stay the Labour leader

now as long as he wants to do so. He's come back from the dead

in terms of the predictions and so he will remain Labour leader

for as long as he wants. Let's recognise that another world

is possible if we come together. Former Corbyn critics like John Mann

MP have been eating humble pie. The big issue for Jeremy now is,

is he going to hold his people in and stop any factional battling

in the Labour Party, and there are people on both

sides of the old divide in the Labour Party who love nothing

better than internal wrangling. Or is he going to consolidate his

position and bring the Labour Party together and be a potential

Prime Minister in waiting? The centrist Labour group Progress

which had been associated with some of Corbyn's harshest critics says

now the party is more In the general election,

the Labour Party worked together, Labour MPs put their strongest foot

forward in getting re-elected in their seats the national campaign

pulled through and party staff We have shown that when we pull

together we are a strong force. # Staying out for the summer,

staying up for the summer #. Before the election,

a number of party rule changes had been up for debate as pro and

anti-Corbyn factions looked for ways So has all that now being kicked

into the long grass? Any attempts to try and undermine

Tom Watson as deputy leader, appoint a second deputy leader,

attack the party staff, change the party rules,

will show the public out there that the Labour Party is more

interested in itself rather But will also put at risk that

unity, that is fragile and quite frankly now,

is led from the top. The way in which internal

hostilities would recommend The way in which internal

hostilities would recommence would be if there was a return

to some of the sectarianism that we So if there were attempts

to deselect MPs and councillors, those MPs and councillors

are going to fight If there are attempts to cross

a limited number of policy red lines on things like Trident renewal,

again that would cause And if there are attempts to change

the rule book of the party in a way that just gives blatant partisan

advantage, then again it would cause divisions to re-emerge,

but there's no need for them to do On policy and personnel, the ball

is in Jeremy Corbyn's court. There will be a debate

at conference, though, on what some are calling

the McDonnell Amendment. A rule change that would lower

the number of nominations needed Those on the left of the party have

been accused of plotting to make it easier for a left-wing candidate

to stand for leadership to succeed I think that opinion at conference

is finely balanced on that. Because the elections

for constituency delegates seem to be on a knife edge

between the left and the right. We will know the outcome of those

around the 9th of July And then it all depends

on the attitude taken by a couple of the big unions like

the GMB and Unison, about this proposal than Unite

and the more left-wing unions are. Meanwhile, here at the Jeremy Corbyn

supporting Momentum HQ, they believe there could be another

general election within six months and are remaining

in full campaign mode. We're going to be targeting

new marginals and we're going to be training thousands of activists

in those marginal constituencies and we going to be developing

new technological platforms to make it easy for people to get

involved in the election. Safe to say, they're

feeling rather vindicated. Many of those who were bitterly

opposed to Jeremy Corbyn have eaten their words

and have apologised. Look, in the general election

campaign, we campaigned for all Labour candidates

in our target seats and marginal seats, irrespective of where they

stood in the past on Jeremy Corbyn. We helped win seats for candidates

who supported Progress, just as hard as we helped win seats

for those who had always supported Jeremy and that's the way

we are going to carry on. Well, I think that will last

till the next election because we all want to

win the next election. # Staying out for the summer,

staying out for the summer #. For now, he's the man of the moment,

but is this performance the peak of his popularity, or the precursor

to Labour winning power? Before the general election

was called, a proxy-battle for the future of the Labour party

was played out in the election of the general secretary

of Unite, the union, The incumbent, Len McClusky,

who had put his weight behind Jeremy Corbyn,

faced a challenge from Gerard Coyne, who was seen to be the Labour

moderates' choice. Gerard Coyne narrowly lost,

and this week he was sacked from his Unite position

as a regional secretary. Good morning. You say you have been

the victim of a kangaroo court and a short trial, what do you mean by

that? After 29 years' service with the union I found myself dismissed

for a trumped up charge that related to the election but was about

nothing that relates directly to my role as a regional secretary so it

showed to me that defence now cannot be tolerated inside Unite and that's

a very concerning situation. The union says you were sacked for

misuse of data during the leadership election campaign. You say it's

because you have the audacity to challenge Len McCluskey. What's the

evidence to support your side? The independent body appointed by the

union to oversee the election this week produced a report that said in

relation to the data issue there was no evidence I breached any rules and

no evidence I breached the election guidance so actually the union's own

independent body has exonerated me this week. You said "It's beyond

parody that I is a 30 year member of the Labour Party should be accused

of harming Unite Labour relations by Len McCluskey's chief of staff..."

What do you mean by that? The investigation and the decision

reached actually shows a much more concerning element about the

involvement in the campaign and election that reflects badly in

terms of his position as a member of the Communist Party and the sort of

quite frankly Stalinist approach to the treatment I have received. So

actually it was a show trial I endured recently and I don't believe

I have received a fair process at all. And in this, in your words show

trial, did this Unite leadership regard you as an enemy of the

proletariat? The truth is they were very keen to see the descent and the

different vision I have got for Unite which was focused on our

members and protecting them in a difficult set of circumstances. They

wanted to stamp out that voice which was one which was articulated in a

different way for the union to go in the future. But you had lost. Yes

but on a very small majority, and there were thousands of Unite voters

that didn't have a chance to vote, which is why I'm now mounting a

legal challenge to the election results and we are going to make

sure it is rerun and given the opportunity to those members. So you

think you have a claim in law? To put a ten point claim into the

certification Officer, that has already gone in challenging the

result on ten individual counts as to how it was not properly run in

the first place. Do you have confidence in the certification

Officer in that process or do you think you might end up in the High

Court? If the certification Officer doesn't rule in favour of what I

think is a strong case coming have to ask the question what is this

certification Officer for, in that case I will be considering the High

Court. If you are right about the way you were treated, what does it

say about British trade unionism in the 21st-century that you can be

sacked by your union for standing up to the boss? I expect to have a

robust debate in a democratic election and not to be punished for

it. I did engage in what was quite an interesting debate through the

election campaign, but I've also served the union the 29 years and

for most employees if they have had that length of service, some

consideration would have been given to that. But Len McCluskey has been

re-elected leader, Jeremy Corbyn now rules the Labour Party unchallenged.

Andrew Murray, who you say mounted the show trial against you, was a

key part of Jeremy Corbyn's election campaign. It does look like you've

lost on all fronts. Jeremy did exceptionally well in the general

election campaign, he got young people involved, and it's not about

a left or right issue in terms of the party, it's about where the

party goes. My fear is that the way I've treated will start to give an

influence in the Labour movement or generally in the Labour Party that

starts to look like purges are acceptable. If Labour does that, the

electorate will never forgive them for an internal battle rather than

being the effective opposition they need to be. Are you saying that what

you believe happened to you could happen to other people now in the

Labour Party itself? I think there is a real danger of that. The

reality is the very people involved at the top of Unite, involved in the

disciplinary process with myself, they are influential figures in

Labour and part of my campaign is that Unite is too intrinsically

linked with the top of the Labour Party and ready to be focusing on a

much stronger industrial agenda for the future. If you have been a

member of the Labour Party for 30 years. We have now been dismissed

from your job is regional secretary I think in the West Midlands area?

That's right. Have you heard from the Labour leadership on this issue?

I haven't, and in terms of the leadership it would be nice to hear

from them because we lost seats in the West Midlands, we should have

felt onto, where working-class vote did not stay with Labour and it's

important we reach out to and engage with those communities and make sure

they support Labour in the future. Gerard Coyne, thank you for being

with us. I've been joined now from Leeds

by Labour's Jon Trickett, Welcome to the programme. Jeremy

Corbyn says he wants to unite the party behind him, so why didn't he

use the Shadow Cabinet reshuffle to do just that? First of all, why

would he change a winning team? We did a very good election campaign,

if we did not -- even if we did not quite get over the line. The Shadow

Cabinet worked very hard to get their result, but there are

vacancies and they were used to reach out and we have brought in the

man who stood against Jeremy not that long ago in a tough battle for

the leadership. I think that shows a leader who is reaching out, but also

wanting to make sure that he keeps a winning team. That is a reasonable

decision for him to make. What do you say to Gerard Coyne, Labour

member 30 years, who believes he has been purged from the Unite union and

that could be about to happen to Labour moderates in the party? There

will be no purge. We want everyone together, what is remarkable is,

when the so-called coup happened last year, when the PLP turned

against Jeremy, our poll rating collapsed and as soon as the party

reunited for the election the poll rating began to increase and that is

a lesson for everyone. The lesson has been learned by all of us and we

will work together as United party moving forward, but what should be

clear to everyone, we cannot go back to the Labour Party as it was

previously. He had got to move forward with Jeremy in the direction

in which he has laid out for the party and the country. What do you

say to Paul Mason, former journalists. -- former journalist.

He said to Blair writes that if you want a centrist party, this is not

going to be it for the next ten years -- Blairites. He said you have

got to form your own party. He did look a bit excitable when I saw a

piece by him on the internet, but the centre of gravity, it has

changed in politics, and what was the centre is no longer the centre.

The idea that a country should be run for a few at the expense of the

many is one which I think has been largely destroyed in this election

campaign. The centre has moved and the party has recognised with the

new centre is and we now need to unite and begin to roll out the

changes. There are many which need to be done on Jeremy's agenda. I say

this to the party committee of Jeremy and the leadership the tools

and he will finish the job -- the party, give Jeremy and the

leadership the tours. If they want a more centre-left party, they are not

going to get it? They should follow Paul Mason's advice? If they want

that. We have heard many of them repenting on their sins in the last

couple of days. That is another matter! LAUGHTER

They have recognised there are new ways of campaigning we have got to

listen to young people and see how they organise, but also our politics

has changed as a party and it has resonated with the country. Gerard

Coyne spoke about working class voters. I began writing about the

problem with working class voters in 2005 at the height of the Tony Blair

years and the party has more work to do in those communities and across

the country to win the trust of everybody's so that we can serve

them in government. Working-class voters swung to the Tories in the

last election, middle-class voters went your way. There has been a

problem with manual workers for some time, I don't need to be told about

that, I'd been writing about it for ten years. I was a building worker

for a while and we have got more work to do to regain the trust of

these people, but some of the proposals will work for those people

and we have got to bring them back in. Do you back the left wing move

to lower the threshold of MPs needed to stand for the leadership? We will

see where we get to, I'm in favour of democratising the Labour Party.

Are you in favour or not? We will see where we get to. It has been a

long-running debate. Do you think the threshold for anyone who wants

to run for leadership should be cut to 5% of MPs? I'm not going to

express my view at the moment, but when there is a leadership election

it is important that every tendency within the party is represented on

the ballot paper. And the rule that prevents a section of the right or

the left or the centre from being on the ballot paper is a bad rule. That

is an argument for lowering the threshold. We have got to look

carefully at how we conduct leadership elections and that debate

will be had. That far left figure we had in that film there, he said the

Corbyn way of doing things is a successful way, and that is

suggesting that you join the Corbyn bandwagon, you don't try to change

it, that's the way forward the Labour Party? All parties have

different points of view, and so is the Labour Party. You test ideas in

action and what happened in the general election showed the idea

that Jeremy has had and are successful, we have more than

doubled our size. Over 600,000 members. You lost the third election

in a row. We got the highest share of the vote, the largest number of

votes. No, you didn't. The Tories did. I haven't finished my sentence.

Labour has received since 1997. You lost. Of course, and that is why I

have said you we have got to work harder to build confidence in people

especially working people in our politics and the way we are going.

Can I clarify the Labour position on Brexit? Jeremy Corbyn and John

McDonnell has said the Labour position is to leave membership of

the single market, so why have over 50 Labour politicians signed a

letter to the Guardian in favour of membership of the single market?

That is not exactly where we are. We are taking the view that we need to

have access to all of the tariff rearrangements which exist within

the customs union and the single market. What is the policy on

membership? Let me finish. It is important to answer the question. I

will give you a full answer, and the answer is, we are not wedded to any

particular institutional framework, we are pragmatic about it. We will

see how the negotiations go. We do not have to do one thing or another

in terms of institutional relationships but we need a Brexit

which works for jobs and growth and also for the protections which

working people have also how that comes remains to be seen. I was

asking for clarification. Is the Labour policy to remain members of

the single market or not? Alp policy Labour policy to remain members of

is to secure all of the rights which exist, tariff free access, within

the single market and the customs union, and we are not saying that a

particular institutional form is something we've always ourselves to

at this stage. Are you for or against remaining members of the

single market? It is not a question of four it is about securing the

best possible arrangement for our economy and working people -- it is

not a question of for or against. The labour MP Clive Lewis said

Thatcher economic dogma was to blame for Grenfell Tower, but we know many

tower blocks have been clad in the same material by Labour councils,

was that also the fault of Thatcherite economic dogma? It is

very difficult to say exactly what happened, and I worked in the

building industry for many years and I know the regulations were very

tight. It now looks as though something happened with the building

regulations. And apart from that, we can't say exactly what lies behind

this. By Tory and Labour councils, that is my point, both parties have

questions to answer. Yes, but the government have sat on the

recommendations, like the recommendation of this printer

systems, they have sat on those documents for years. -- sprinkler

systems. Do you think all parties should stop trying to make political

capital out of what is effectively a national disaster? And tried to get

to the bottom of a system explained the and try to do better regardless

of the party? Yes, everyone should do the same. The sooner we get the

results of the inquiry the better, but if there are decisions which can

be made sooner than the public inquiry they should be made and

implemented. Jon Trickett, thanks for joining us.

It's just gone 1140, you're watching the Sunday Politics.

Hello and welcome to Sunday Politics Wales.

In a few minutes, we speak to someone who knows more

than most about Article 50 - the man who wrote it.

And the Welsh Conservative leader will be here to explain how

he thinks his own party should be making Brexit work for Wales.

But first, are education targets really important?

One leading expert says they're critical for economic success.

Professor David Reynolds, who used to advise the Welsh Government,

has told this programme Wales risks becoming an economic backwater

if the international ranking Pisa test results don't improve.

His comments came at the end of a week when ministers seemed to

disagree about whether they remained a target at all.

Hit it, and after congratulating ourselves, we can think

about setting a new, more ambitious goal.

Miss it, and we need to ask ourselves what went wrong.

But what if the target changes whilst we're trying to reach it?

In 2014, the then education minister replaced the Welsh Government's Pisa

target with a new one - for Wales to obtain a score of 500

in each of the subjects assessed by the Pisa education tests by 2021.

At the time, Kirsty Williams said the move showed an "absolute

The most recent results showed we've made progress in maths,

but we'd fallen back in science and reading.

We remain behind the rest of the UK in all three areas,

But at least we knew how far we have still had to go.

Then, last week, the new Education Secretary distanced

And so it's a much more complex picture than just

saying we're going to have this individual target.

OK, so the target now isn't the stated aim of 500,

But a few days later, the First Minister insisted

the Government's aim hadn't changed, much to the amusement

Achieving 500 by 2021 remains the Welsh Government's target.

The Cabinet Secretary was correct when she said

she didn't set the target, because she wasn't the minister

at the time, but she is part of the government that is adhering

So, we've got you saying one thing - that the target exists -

and you've got the Cabinet Secretary confirming in front of a scrutiny

committee of this Assembly that it is not her target.

Who's taking ownership of education here in Wales?

Is it any wonder it is such a complete shambles

Kirsty Williams has now confirmed that the Welsh Government

target hasn't changed, but there remains concern

and confusion over the events of the past ten days,

with the issue of collective responsibility being raised.

Kirsty Williams is the sole Lib Dem in Carwyn Jones'

It does now leave them to ask the question,

Should we be aiming for targets at all?

And if so, what merits are we being judged on?

Are we being judged on the performance as set out

by the Education Cabinet Secretary or by the Welsh Government itself,

and if we don't have clarity on that, then it becomes even more

meaningless, really, to put weight on Pisa results.

This may be a little bit awkward in next week's Cabinet meeting,

but it's probably quite a sensible move by Kirsty Williams.

The Pisa targets have tripped up several successive Welsh Government

As a Liberal Democrat, Kirsty Williams has got

a little bit of wiggle room, and I think she's used it quite well

this week to put some distance between herself

In the meantime, how likely is it that Wales

I asked a former Welsh Government adviser for his assessment.

We can meet it if teacher training improves, if we get

the knowledge base out there, and if we make our teachers master

craftsmen and women of teaching, which many countries have done.

If we did that, then we could be very, very

close to those targets, but I fear, at the moment,

we're not doing it, so it ain't going to happen.

You say that this is an ambitious target, to reach the score of 500,

and yet when you look at many other countries around the world,

their scores are higher than that score of 500.

500 is merely the average, really, so that just shows

how far off the pace we are, doesn't it?

The Welsh Government says Pisa is just one yardstick for measuring

But according to Professor Reynolds...

In a globalised world, Pisa is the most important

Pisa is about how different countries are doing,

and I think probably the important thing to say is that industrially,

there is some evidence to look at Pisa tests, too.

If you look back at 2010, when Shanghai, China,

suddenly came from nowhere to be top, if you look at foreign

If industrialists are looking at Pisa, and they are,

the answer is to get those scores up, to get industry in,

or we risk becoming just a kind of theme park here without industry.

The Education Secretary wasn't available to be

However, a spokesman said the Welsh Government has introduced

a number of initiatives to attract new teachers and raise standards,

and Kirsty Williams expects to see an improvement in Wales's Pisa

and Kirsty Williams expects to see an improvement in Wales's Pisa

Now, a tremendous amount has been said and written about the ins

and outs of Article 50, the process by which the UK

leaves the European Union, but what does the man

Lord Kerr was our man in Washington and Brussels before turning his hand

to writing the article which has dominated politics

But he now says it could and should be reversed, so when I spoke to him,

I began by asking how and why that could ever be possible.

We are members of the European Union until the moment we leave,

and since we triggered the procedure in March 2017, we leave in March

You will know that UK Government ministers,

David Davis, even Theresa May, have been saying that actually,

once we have triggered that Article 50 process,

No, no, no, no - it is perfectly possible for us to change our mind.

Look at what the President of the European Council has said,

look at what president Macron has said, look at what the German

finance minister, Dr Schauble, said the other day.

Look at what all the lawyers, all the EU lawyers, say.

It is open to the member state to change its intention.

The first part of the article, Article 50, says that "according

to your own constitutional requirements," you decide

that you want to leave, and you notify your intention,

and then after two years you are out, unless the period is extended.

But during the two years or its extension, it is open

to you to say, "Actually, we've now changed our mind,

Whether they agreed would be a political question, of course,

We would be entirely within our rights, but they might

try to extract some sort of price from us if we'd wasted

So, you are saying we could change our mind, we could return,

but not necessarily to as things were before Article 50

I'm not quite sure why we triggered it in March,

and then did nothing for three months, because we called

I'm not sure what the point of that was.

And of course, there has been no negotiation of any

kind until this week, so one year has passed

since the referendum, and we have said nothing

But isn't it a wise cause of action for the UK Government ministers not

to reveal their hands, as it were, considering this

Well, I mean, the idea that you can negotiate in secret

The commission are negotiating on behalf of 27 member states,

and everything they do, they will report to their clients,

So it will all be available on the internet, and you can see

today, 50 pages of documents, which have been agreed by the other

You won't find a single page of British documents,

Now, this is a point which I think is a great mistake.

I think it would be better to play at home, we'd be better to negotiate

on the basis of documents that we've put forward rather than the basis

But as also the man who was for a time the UK's man

in Brussels, if you like, as UK ambassador to the EU,

how do you rate the chances of the UK getting a good deal

working with those other EU member states?

I think everybody wants a decent working relationship

with a Britain that has left and the European Union.

I think nobody wants to punish the European Union for going.

We will have to pay a price, and our economy will grow less fast

than it would have if we'd stayed inside, but nobody wants to pile

I do think that the issues that are being discussed in the first

round of the negotiation, and particularly the money,

are particularly difficult, because money negotiation

The EU doesn't want to let us off our bill.

If we do a runner and refuse to pay the bill, then you can forget that

close relationship that all sides, I think, want.

We've discussed how the negotiations are going from Brussels point

I wonder what you make of how the UK Government has discussed and taken

on board the views of devolved administrations in the UK,

the Welsh Government, Scottish Government,

do you think they've been engaging enough

with the constituent parts of the UK?

There doesn't appear to have been much details discussion

There doesn't appear to have been much detailed discussion

with the Welsh Government or the Scottish Government

about the negotiating positions we should take up.

I think it's probably more worrying that I don't think there's been any

discussion at all yet about the Repeal Bill

which is about to be tabled in Parliament.

The Repeal Bill lays down what should happen

in areas like agriculture, where at present, policy

is run from Brussels - the Common Agricultural Policy.

Where these decision should be taken when we've left Brussels.

Should they be taken by central government or should they be taken

Yes, but the Secretary of State for Wales, Alun Cairns,

has said recently that the UK Government wants as much

as possible to devolve those powers back to Cardiff.

But I just wonder, do you think that an unhappy Welsh Government,

Scottish Government, could derail the process of these

Well, I very much hope that won't happen.

As I say, I'm not an insider, but I do think it will be very

important that the Whitehall government, the London government,

makes sure that it has the consent of the Welsh Government and Assembly

and the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament

for what it is proposing to do with the powers that it proposes

I myself, going back to where you started,

I would like to believe that it is still possible

for the country to change its mind when it sees that it was,

in the referendum campaign, told a lot of things that weren't

actually true by those campaigning to leave.

When it sees that the economy is slowing down as a result

of the referendum decision, I would hope that the country

feel that this question needs to be...

But by which mechanism could that be decided?

Because you are saying within the two years we can reverse

this Article 50 and halt the process, if you like,

but there wouldn't be a second referendum.

We just had an election with the Liberal Democrats

are offering a second referendum, and they were roundly defeated,

so how would you bring about that reversal?

I'm fairly expert on the legal position in Brussels

and what would happen in Brussels if we did change our mind.

The process, in this country, of getting a change of mind,

I think it is probably the case that it would need a general

election or another referendum, or both, in order to be

clear that the country had changed its mind.

But David Davis, who is a serious political thinker

as well as a negotiator - David Davis is on record as saying

that the democracy that cannot change its mind has ceased to be

a democracy, and it seems to me that as the facts become clear,

we are entitled to consider whether we want to change our mind.

There we are, Lord Kerr, thank you very much for your time.

Now, the leader of the Welsh Conservatives is a leading

Brexiteer, even tweeting, "Happy Independence Day"

on the anniversary of the Brexit vote on Friday.

So why is Andrew RT Davies apparently challenging his party's

Maybe we can talk a little about it. Thanks for coming in. We just heard

the man who wrote Article 50 saying the process should be reversed. I

probably know what your answer will be but are there any circumstances

under which you could go along with that? I did find it a little

bizarre, he said your guess is as good as mine how we do it. We had a

democratic process last year where we had the biggest participation of

voters in the referendum on the die was cast and a mandate was given to

the government. Both sides in the referendum is will be binding. So

instead of all this energy and focus about trying to reverse the

referendum result, why don't we put more effort in a cross-party

approach to come to a consensus about Wales and the UK and how we

want them to be after the negotiations have concluded. So

cross-party is fine once negotiations are concluded but not

before then? On the 24th of June I may be offered to Carwyn Jones, I

said, we will put different sides of the debate but the die has been

cast, let's work together to ensure we get a successful outcome for

Wales and the UK. Sadly he never took that offer up. I said from day

one... On the UK Government side as well, Tejerizo may have very much

said this is down to me and nobody else, I am the Prime Minister -- the

Prime Minister has said. Not much role for Parliament according to

hurt there. I disagree. Ultimately the Prime Minister has to make the

final call, but right the way along the line from the devolved nations

and governments, right the way through, there have been talks,

discussions, about shaping the agenda for these negotiations, and

some have walked away from them, some change their position, but one

thing to say about the Prime Minister from her Lancaster house

speech, she put 12 key principles down to guide the negotiations, but

discussions continue with the devolved administrations and in

Parliament, and the more those discussions include and have

clarity at their part the better of -- heart -- at their heart the

better the outcome for the United Kingdom and Europe. You wrote an

article at the end of last week saying the joint ministerial

committee, this forum whereby the ministers... I see people's eyes

glazing over! Stick with me. Where all the governments come together to

discuss the issues of the day. Carwyn Jones has said Wales and

Scotland have been ignored and the UK Government is not listening to

them. Your article seems to go along with that, saying this is in the

1950s, we need to establish better ways to engage as the United

Kingdom. Is that the fault of the UK Government? Do you feel they

are not listening to Wales? It is listening but the point I made back

in November, December, was that agricultural, for example, we need

UK frameworks. At that point I was saying I was anti-devolution -- that

people were saying I was anti-devolution. Now it is

mainstream thinking we need UK frameworks. When we come out,

whether they're our transitional arrangements or not they will have

to be a body that will arbitrate whether our disputes between the

nations and the UK. We can't have a 1950s, 60s government. We need one

that works... What you mean by that? We were very centralist state in the

50s and 60s. I believe Theresa May and the Westminster government has

worked tirelessly to bring those administrations along but let's face

it, we have a nationalist government in Scotland, a Labour government in

Wales, and the political dynamics make it challenging with a

Conservative government in Westminster and suspended executive

in Northern Ireland, that is why from a Welsh perspective it is

important rather than Carwyn Jones and Welsh Labour taking the lead,

burqas most people seem to be saying we should look to Carwyn Jones and

the Welsh Labour recipe book for the solution, it is the Assembly itself

that should take the lead. And by that logic the UK Parliament rather

than UK Government should be discussing with other parties Hywel

post Brexit we should move forward because we haven't seen any of that.

You seem to say one thing for Wales, the Assembly should be a cross-party

approach, but what we are seeing with your colleagues in London is

very much not a cross-party approach. Again I disagree. If you

look at the evidence the Prime Minister and the government have

reached out repeatedly. We have the joint ministerial committee in

Cardiff, the Prime Minister brought it to Cardiff for the discussion.

What I am looking at is post-Brexit and what we can do from a

legislative point of view in the Assembly is lead the discussions in

Wales where we can reach consensus amongst parties. Surely when we

speak with one voice... It is for colleagues... That is the political

dynamic that will have to be taken into consideration, but if you have

discussions... You have made that point, but how confident are you

that your colleagues in London will listen to your call now that it will

be the small consensus approach post-Brexit, or are they falling on

deaf ears? I believe that discussion will continue and ultimately

succeed. Have you spoken to anybody in the UK Government about it? I

have spoken to several politicians and advisers in the UK Government.

What I am trying to get at is will this happen? If you look at my

position, whether on Brexit, I voted for it in a positive way... You are

trying to lead a discussion before we have had negotiations. If you

look at the record of what we talked about from the Welsh Conservative

point of view, whether Brexit, UK frameworks, leading the multiparty

discussion from the Assembly rather than thinking Labour have the

solutions when they don't, in London for example they have changed their

position. I believe to have a successful UK Government we need

plurality and we will get that. Another thing you said during and

since the referendum is you don't want Wales to be a penny worse off

because we are leaving the EU. Now, from structural funding, European

grant money for Wales, it has ?83 per person. In England it is ?13,

Scotland ?18, Northern Ireland, ?13. If Wales gets less than ?83 per

person, whatever money after that, will that be a disappointment to

you? There are two sides of the coin. What we need to do is wait

shall -- make sure Wales generates more wealth than empower communities

to make more wealth and get on. The reason we have so much objective one

funding is because our communities have been kept dirt poor by Whaley

opossum -- label's failures since devolution. The money isn't about...

You said that money should still... What we need to do is make sure that

in tandem with security... We need to make sure Wales is worse off, let

me take this further, we need to build economic capacity so

ultimately we generate more wealth. I welcome Carl Sargeant's move away

from that dependency culture on the communities first project to a

project to generate wealth in communities, but I do not believe

Labour are able to do that because they don't understand the dynamics

of the economy. We have seen repeatedly... Time is tight. We

didn't see that promise of a Shared Prosperity Fund in the Queen's

speech. Are you confident that is still there? That is the principle

underpinning the government economy post Brexit. We need to make sure

funding is in place for agriculture, structural funds and higher

education which are vital ingredients for the economy in Wales

and we will work with Westminster colleagues to ensure Wales isn't at

a disadvantage. Thank you for your time.

You can follow us on Twitter of course - we're @walespolitics

Diolch am wylio, thanks for watching.

We will be responding further in the weeks and months to come.

And with that it's back to you, Andrew.

What deal will Theresa May strike with the DUP to give

Will the Prime Minister get her programme for government,

the Queen's Speech, over the first hurdle in a House

A number of stories in the papers this morning about Philip Hammond

becoming a caretaker Tory leader with the support of David Davis.

What did you make of them? I was dismayed to hear that Tim was coming

on the story because I was prepared to rubbish his story. I will go for

it. This is great sport, and if I was in Tim's position I would also

be cooking up stories, but Tim will say it is based on several very good

sources, but my sense from the Tory backbenchers, they are in no way

manoeuvring to get someone else installed in number ten, and I'm not

saying that Theresa May is secure long-term but I don't sense that

there is any immediate threat to her at the moment. I agree partly, but

there is a shadow leadership battle. If you look at the fact that

ministers have been out on the airwaves, people who I thought might

have gone to a retirement home have popped up after the election

campaign and are doing media again. People are jockeying, but the

feeling of instability is such that they know it looks incredibly

self-indulgent focus internally. We have started the Brexit clock by

triggering Article 50 Mbits a hard time limit on that. We are in a

world where it changes week by week, is it not incredible that there is a

plan, to put Phil Hammond in as a caretaker for two years, then he

will step down, and then I forget who will take over? Possibly Amber

Rudd. The younger generation. This will all be done with David Davis's

support, that is rather incredible. I thought it was incredible, as

well, but the more calls I put in, there was a lot of chatter about

this. What persuaded me that it was interesting, there were Brexit

supporting MPs who felt they could stand Philip Hammond in charge. But

everyone is taking the view that Theresa May is not going to lead

them into the next election, so at what point do they installed the new

leader? The sensible time would be in the late summer to get something

in place by the party conference. With David Davis and Philip Hammond,

pretty well everyone agrees they are the two grown-ups in the Cabinet and

if they can come to arrangement with one of them at the top, that might

be the way to have a smooth transition. Some of the stories have

David Davis to be the caretaker and Phil Hammond to be the number two.

David Davis was on the BBC this morning and he reacted to this.

Let me be absolutely plain about this.

Number one, I happen to think we've got a very good Prime Minister.

I know she's coming under a lot of pressure at the moment,

I've seen a number of prime ministers in

Going right back to Margaret Thatcher.

She makes good decisions, she's bold.

There's no crisis about this government.

It's very very clear that she's a good Prime Minister.

Point number two, I want a stable backdrop to this Brexit negotiation.

What is your message to those Tories who are already ruffling around

in the rhododendrons muttering about leadership

Don't be so self-indulgent is my message to those.

Of course, he would say that, to an extent. I thought that was quite

sincere. I've observed him long enough to know that he is always on

manoeuvres of some sort but if he is on manoeuvres now, they involve not

being manoeuvres for the time being. If there was credibility to this, if

they were really thinking they would have a caretaker and then replace

the caretaker with someone else, and then we may do something different,

what with the voters make, at a time of national crisis, of huge

difficulty, that the Tory party is just playing musical chairs? That is

why you have MPs like Ken Clarke who say that this looks very

self-indulgent. If anything we have learned from the last 20 years, it

is that if you try to have a cooked up thing where everyone knows they

are going to be the front man and you are the real brains of the

operation, that is a recipe for huge falling out, and people need to know

who they are voting for. You didn't say the bit when David Davis was

asked if he would go for the leadership, and he said I'm not

getting into that. -- you didn't show the bit. Let's move on. He is

on quantum manoeuvres. To the more immediate. Tim, where are we with

this attempt with the Conservatives to get a deal with the DUP? It is in

a mess, but effectively done. People say the confidence side of it was

sorted a few weeks ago, but then the fire happened and they weren't keen

to do a big announcement and they are still arguing over, not so much

the amount of money, but the mechanisms and how it works. I've

spoken to DUP sources who say there is no circumstance in which they

would vote down this Queen's Speech and the other thing that is

happening, the time is meant to be running out on the next stage of the

Stormont arrangements and the threat that is coming from the Tory Chief

Whip Gavin Williamson to the DUP and one they take very seriously, if you

don't vote for the Queen's Speech on Thursday you could effectively have

Jeremy Corbyn taking direct rule of Northern Ireland with his old pals

from Sinn Fein. That is the threat the Tories hang over the DUP, but

the DUP are tough negotiators and if they haven't agreed to an

arrangement by the Queen's Speech and they simply abstain, the

government will probably still get it through, but the margin will be

slight. It's a strange situation. Whether government has greater

priorities than forming a government, than forming a majority

government, I think they feel fairly confident that they can get over the

hurdle next week. And it might be rather marginal, but as long as they

can get through it. Simply wresting back on the assurance that there are

no circumstances in which the DUP will bring them crashing down. That

is enough for now. The long-term situation for Northern Ireland

politics is very interesting. This will come under pressure if there is

a vote in which the Sinn Fein votes would have made a difference, that

is how they squeezed the SDLP and at the same time there is a pressure

for them to come back to the Stormont talks, because there will

be money flowing into Northern Ireland and they will be acute focus

on the areas to which that is going. Labour will put down the memory

which will highlight a number of things in the Labour manifesto and

-- will put down the manifesto. They may well lose, probably, but at the

moment Labour really thinks, if they could cause another election, they

think they could win. So there will be all sorts of pressure, lots of

votes which will go down to the wire. It is very important, Labour

think they can win and fable but votes that can go down to the wire

and we will see what the next couple of years will look like -- they will

put votes. This is not a world that the Tory MPs like the look of, they

have been told they can't take time off, they will be kept late at the

House of Commons and that will put stress on the Tory party. The poor

dears. The important thing, that they accept the view that the Labour

Party has, because Tory MPs also believe Labour will win the election

if it will -- if it were to happen any time soon. And so anyone who

shares the Labour view on the customs union and things like that.

If the government loses a crucial vote, this doesn't trigger an

election, but it means the Queen would ask Jeremy Corbyn to form a

government. He would say, yes. He might well. What remains to be seen,

how effective Labour are now as a machine, Parliamentary machine,

because what we saw from the machine, Parliamentary machine,

election, Jeremy Corbyn exceeded any expectations in his talents as a

campaigner but the fundamentals, if you talk to labour MPs who have been

sceptical about him, haven't changed in terms of his ability to manage

the Parliamentary party. Nothing that has happened so far in terms of

the rhetoric coming out from Labour on Brexit gives any cause for

confidence that there is a strategy or even a tone that has been set

that is coherent. You heard the Unite union man Gerard Coyne who

believes he has been purged from the organisation and he believed that

could happen in the party, as well. But if you have achieved what Jeremy

Corbyn has achieved, and he is now ahead in the polls, even if they

don't matter much will stop he has better ratings than Theresa May now.

Why would you not say, this is a winning formula and I will rebuild

the party in my image? It is a legitimate thing to do, but Europe

is crucial. That is why Labour was like another election sooner rather

than later before any crucial votes on things like the customs union and

freedom of movement because they held together a much bigger

coalition than anybody thought but they did that on the back of angry

Remainers. This could factor again for them. When we talk about

remaking the Labour Party in the image of Jeremy Corbyn, the question

is, is that someone who is sceptical about Europe, and you will see some

Labour MPs rebelling on Europe because they know that's the thing

the members agree with them on, and not with Mr Corbyn. A week really is

a long time in politics, as Harold Wilson said.

Jo Coburn will be on BBC Two at noon tomorrow with the Daily Politics,

and I'll be back here on BBC One next Sunday at 11am with

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

then we have to treat only patients with very early stages of