09/07/2017 Sunday Politics Wales

Download Subtitles




Andrew Neil and Arwyn Jones are joined by Labour MPs Caroline Flint and Emma Dent Coad, as well as the Conservatives' Owen Paterson MP.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 09/07/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



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


Donald Trump says he wants to do a "powerful" trade deal


Theresa May says other countries are ready to talk too.


But could the transitional deal with the EU that some are pushing


for scupper the Prime Minister's plans?


Having defied expectation in last month's general election,


are Jeremy Corbyn and his allies about to purge the party


The deadliest fire in London since the Second World War has


devastated a community and shocked Britain, but will the political


storm that's blown up in its aftermath help uncover


If the pay cap is lifted, who should pay for it,


And the Education Secretary tells us why she's expecting


a fall in GCSE results. Havering council are about to vote


on breaking away from the capital. If we are darking today we apoll


jierks it could be a power cut or the BBC is trying to save money with


its fuel bill! Assuming you can see them...


And with me - as always - for TV's second most keenly watched


on-screen relationships after Love Island,


the Sunday Politics panel - Steve Richards, Julia Hartley-Brewer


They'll be tweeting throughout the programme.


So - Donald Trump says a trade deal with UK could be


Theresa May says that other world leaders,


including those of China, India and Japan, are also keen to do


President and PM were speaking at the G20 summit of the world's major


President and PM were speaking at the G20 summit of the world's major


But could the transitional deal that some want,


that would keep the UK in the EU's single market and Customs Union


for several years after exit, put paid to those plans?


Here's what the man likely to be the next Lib Dem leader -


Vince Cable - told the Marr show earlier.


I'm beginning to think that Brexit may never happen,


The problems are so enormous, the divisions within the two major


parties are so enormous, I can see a scenario


We're joined now from Shropshire by the former


Conservative Cabinet Minister and leading Brexit


Ogise, it could be a power cut or the BBC is trying to save money with


its fuel bill! Assuming you can see them... Good morning to you, Vince


Cable says that he thinks Brexit may now not happen, what do you say to


that? What is new? Vince Cable always wanted to stay in the


European Union, he is chucking buckets of water round, we had a


huge vote last year, we had an enormous vote in the House of


Commons, 494 votes to trigger Article 50, we had an election


campaign in which the two main parties took 85% of the vote they


back the speech and leaving the customs union and the single market


and the ECJ and Vince Cable's party went down in votes as did the other


parties that want to stay in the European Union. So Vince is behind


history, we are going to leave, we are on target, Michael Gove


triggered leaving the 1964 London convention so we can take back


control of the seas and bring back a sane fishing policy and more


important getting environmental gained in our marine environment,


so... You think we are still heading for the exit but Mrs May called the


election because she wanted a mandate for her version of Brexit.


She didn't get it. Surely you can't just continue with business as


usual? Well, we have been over the election, we did not get the number


of sees we wanted but on votes, we got 13.7 million, that is more than


the great Blair landslide. You had an overall majority and you lost it.


That is a fact. I said that. We know that. So you didn't get the mandate.


We got the vote! We got a lot votes and so did the Labour Party. You


know we are in a Parliamentary system where what matters is the


number of seats you get in the Commons, you know enough about the


British constitution to know a that is what determines the mandate. Not


the number of votes, we are not a Presidential system.


I am First Minister throughly wear of that. 85% of the election voted


for parties that wanted to leave. If you take votes in the Commons last


week on the Queen's Speech not a single Conservative MP abstained or


voted against and the Labour Party unwisely, Chuka Umunna triggered and


amendment wanting us to stay in the customs union and got hammered. So,


I am clear that we have to deliver this, much the most important point


in all this, is if we do not deliver a proper Brexit which means leaving


the single market, leaving the customs union and the jurisdiction


of the ECJ, there will be appalling damage to the integrity of the whole


establishment. Not just political, you, the media, and the judicial


establishment. Some would say that damage has already been done in


other area, let us look at the detail. Under Article 50 Britain


leaves the EU in 20 months which means the deal will have to be done


in 15 or 16 months to allow for people to approve it in the various


Parliaments and so son. Progress has the been glacial. We have only just


begun. Why should there not be a transitional deal that keep some of


the current arrangements in place to mitigate this falling off a cliff?


As Liam said in the Commons, Liam who? Liam Fox, this should be one of


the easiest ever deals to conclude, because already, we have zero


tariffs, already we have complete conformty on standards and already,


those who are negotiating with us have an enormous surplus, the


Germans sold an enormous number of cars, so that is the basis on which,


if you look at Nafta... We haven't even started talking about free


trade yet. That is not on the agenda yet. Let me finish. If you look at


Nafta, that took 14 months, we are starting on a basis of mutual


recognition of all our standard and zero tariffs so yes, there will be


an implementation period but it is very very important politically this


is concluded fast, as a huge economic imperative as well, because


it is uncertainty about this that will damage future investment and


job, the quicker we get on with it and we know where we are going and


we can reach out to the world, we can take advantage of the fact


stated on the European Commission website that 9 a 5% of the world's


growth is going to come from outside European Union, which is what we are


seeing, we have seen sales go from 61% to 43% and it is tumbling to


43%. We cannot take advantage of these wonderful opportunities in the


wider world... Why not? Why not? Germany does. Because they can't


conclude free trade deals. Germany runs a balance of payment surplus,


it finds it possible to trade with the rest of the EU and with the rest


of the world. It has a bigger surplus than China, if Germany can


do both why can't we? They can't. They can't conclude deal, we Trump


wants to do a deal with us. You saw Theresa May sitting down with the


economies of the future, India, China, South Korea, these are all


longing to do more business with us, we can only do that once we are out


of the customs union, that is vital for the future of this country, that


is where the future growth is. The business in this country says we


should stay in the single market and the customs union, at least through


a transition period. Does that count for nothing, is Tory party now so


antebusiness it ignores the wealth creators? I think what you are


saying is that the CBI which represents very large organisations


has made that statement, but talking to business widely, and smaller


private businesses which dominate the economy, what is vital on this


is to have a rapid implementation period. That is what is important.


And there has to be clarity of where we are going, if we are in permanent


limbo which will take a enormous amount of negotiation and will take


ratification by the 27 countries and the European Parliament as well as


our own, that will drag things out. What we need to do is a clean Claire


statement of reciprocal free trade which should be really pretty easy


to negotiate because we have that, we have conformty of standard, we


have an implementation period. That needs to be done rapidly. Latest by


the next election. OK, we shall see how simple it turns out to be. Thank


you for joining us here. What do you make of this increasing


talk of transition period in which it is not clear, we remain full


members of the single market, full members of the customs union? Which


came we cannot conclude very quickly, in Mr Trump's word a free


trade deal? This is where the battle is now heading, between Brexiteer,


levers, re-levers and the lot of it. This will be really what the only


thing we could achieve in the next negotiations, what has changed since


the general election which you were touching on there, is of course


Brussels in the year 2017 are no longer negotiating with Theresa May,


they are negotiating with the House of Commons and the you know majority


for a softer Brexit, so this will begin, the transition deal will


define the rest of deal, the rest of the final relationship, so getting


the transition on the right trajectory is crucial, hence why you


have Philip Hammond making a major play to try and keep one foot in the


EU, if not necessarily in the custom union and the single market and


everyone else says get out. These are the opening skirmishes on what


will certainly be the nettle that will will be grasped round about


some time between October and spring next year. Are you worried that the


election result, the fact that she didn't get this mandate that she had


looked for and she has ended up in a weaker position than she was before


the election, is going to make Brexit more difficult, it is going


to muddy the water, it means her idea of Brexit is not necessarily


the one that become Brexit? Yes I am worried are about as a Brexiteer,


the same remain yaks would have been trying to scupper the will of the


British people as expressed in June 2016. Now they might succeed. I


don't think any will succeed. We have to stop this nonsense and the


media included, of this talk of soft Brexit an transition period. We have


a transition period once we are out when we are leading to the next


process, with have to be out of the single market, and not under the


European Court of Justice. All within the two years, all by


March... That happens automatically, then we can agree for a two, three


year max, three year period we will have a position as we move to the


new deal, but I don't think there many Leave voters, most Remain


voters accept that result, unlike the people like the CBI who are


fighting against it still, they will accept anything more than that. I


think Owen Paterson is right. We are in a situation where we will face


some serious disflus the establishment, the political world,


the Melissa Reidia if we don't obey the will of the people. What do you


make of the reports in the Sunday papers, it was only ten days ago,


two weeks' ago Mr Hammond was going to be the caretaker leader, that is


a story that didn't seem to last 48-hour, but what do you make of the


remain MPs on both sides of the House, plus peers, are going to try


to derail this repeal act, that the Government needs to push EU law on


to the UK statute book. I I think they will use it to at certain key


points to attempt to defeat the Government, not over the whole


thing, this summer reminds me so much of the summer of 92 who the


Maastricht Treaty coming into a fragile John Major Government, and


people then were plotting, in the opposite direction, Eurosceptics to


try and stop that. He won with a huge percentage of the vote. Tiny


majority, 23, bigger than she would have died for that. A shock victory.


The The summer was full of talk and plotting, some which came to


fruition in the sessions after and some will come into fruition from


this autumn on ward where you will see alliances across the Commons


manned the Lords, there will be moments of high Parliamentary drama,


I think. Sounds like a long hot autumn.


An a long hot autumn, and winter. Winter too? I thought it was all


global warming. This will add to the temperature!


Now, Jeremy Corbyn may not have won the election,


but by confounding almost everyone's expectations he is unassailable


as Labour leader for the foreseeable future.


So what does that mean for his MPs, most of whom - just a year ago -


Labour's new chairman and key cupping Ally said last week the


party may be too broad church. He also seemed to endorse the idea of


deselecting labour MPs critical of the leadership by saying if you get


deselected there must be a reason. But he has since wrote back from his


comments in another interview. Chris Williamson, the newly appointed


labour frontbencher said some of his colleagues in the Parliamentary


party think they have a God-given right to rule. He also said that if


MPs don't support the leadership's programme, local constituency


parties should find someone else who will. And in the seat of liveable


waiver treats this week, left wing supporters of Jeremy Corbyn won


several positions on the committee. One said she must get on board quite


quickly now, and also publicly apologise for not supporting Mr


Corbyn in the past. Some Labour MPs rushed to Luciano Berger's defends.


Elsewhere, a list of 49 Labour MPs was published, and they said these


usual suspects should join the Liberals. The list included


prominent former frontbencher is like Chris Leslie, Chuka Umunna and


tidying -- Heidi Alexander. And this is what the Shadow


Education Secretary and Jeremy Corbyn ally,


Angela Rayner, had to say earlier. Anyone that talks of deselecting


any of my colleagues, frankly they need to think


about actually, who are Who are making the problems


for our communities at the moment? Who have made those disastrous


policies that are hurting the people It doesn't help them if we're


fighting each other. We're joined now from


Sheffield by former Labour Cabinet Minister,


Caroline Flint. Welcome to the programme. Labour


frontbencher Chris Williamson has said, where Labour MPs don't support


the leadership's programme it's incumbent on local members to find


someone else who will. What do you make of that? I think it's very sad


that talk of deselection is the line people are taking. We had an


election where 262 Labour MPs, very different ones, have all won a


mandate from their electorate and our job is, as Angela Rayner said


this morning, is to focus on a government that is in disarray and


how we can learn from the general election to broaden our appeal but


also develop our policy is ready in time for the next election whenever


that is called so I think all talk of deselection is misplaced and


doesn't help Labour. But do you feel a purge of what is often referred to


as the moderates in your party is now inevitable? No, because we have


been here before in the 1980s when talk of deselection was suggested,


it didn't happen in the way people thought it would, and I do believe,


hearing how Ian Lee very, and I have worked with him in the 2010, 2015


government and I have worked with Chris Williamson, Ian has already


refined what he said, and what he's clearly was this deselection talk


and the way to go ahead on it is not the right way forward. We to focus


on looking outwards to understand that we have across the party


hard-working Labour MPs with maybe different views across the Labour


political spectrum, and I would have to say that Luciana is one of the


most hard-working MPs in Parliament and homework on mental health is


outstanding. That may be true, let's look at Luciana Berger's


constituency. One of the committee members on her committee says she


now has to get on board quite quickly. And even publicly apologise


for past disloyalty. The direction of travel is clear, isn't it? That


is one person on a committee in one constituency... Where there is a


majority for that point of view now. I don't think there is, and the


truth is... They took nine seat. Her constituency is all of the members


in that constituency and what I would say, and I don't know this


individual, look at the track record of Luciana and what she has done.


Jeremy, in the 20 years I have been an MP under both Tony Blair and


Gordon Brown, voted against the Labour whip on numerous occasions,


he has been very upfront and honest about this, do you know in those 20


years I never heard anybody say about Jeremy or anybody else who


didn't vote with the Labour whip that they should face deselection or


apologise. I think that represents the broad church of the Labour Party


and we should look at what brings us together rather than differences on


policy point of view and we should be looking outwards and dealing with


that and working on it. You have said that three times but it has not


happened and it may be that the people around Mr Corbyn, they think


moderates like you, your day is over. You lost the 2015 election


badly, you allowed Jeremy Corbyn to stand as leader, you failed to stop


him twice, you thought he would make a mess of the June election and he


didn't. Can you blame his supporters for wanting a career out of people


who took these positions? I think there are some people who supported


and still support Jeremy who feel that way but I don't believe they


represent the people who supported Jeremy, and I don't believe Jeremy


thinks this is in the best interests of the party. Only a few weeks ago


John McDonnell praised my work on tax transparency. Since my election


I have bumped into Jeremy and we have had a chat about what happened


in the election and Jeremy recognises that we were up against


an arrogant Tory party and has said to me he does understand this and


said to the broader Parliamentary Labour Party... If I could just


finish... What has he said about deselection? For example he said to


me that he recognised that we have won in numerous places in


outstanding circumstances but he's also said to me that he recognises


that we need to broaden our reach and understand why we were


working-class voters. That says to me that that is a leader who is up


for and open to looking at the reasons why we were successful and


the reasons we weren't and he wasn't closing down conversation on that. I


take him on his word on that. He has not said that publicly. What we need


from a leader is to challenge our party about where to go next and he


has said that, Diane Abbott has said at a conference I was at a few weeks


ago that we need now to look at our manifesto and look more clearly


issues around tax and spend policies because obviously clearly now we


have more time to look at those issues and also we may be facing a


very different election when the time comes. That's what I want from


the leadership team, talk about how we improve our message and reach,


and by doing that get away from what song, a minority I have to say, are


saying about deselection. Corbynistas like Paul Mason think


moderates like you were to blame for the defeat. He said moderates were


always attacking Mr Corbyn, that is quite popular view in the Jeremy


Corbyn wing. I think that is Paul Mason's view and he is fundamentally


wrong. When we look at the results of the last election, we can see a


continuing from 2015 where Labour is losing support among older voters


and what we see is in this election in 2017 Labour has... I think we are


at our highest point amongst the middle-class voters compared to


where we were in 1979 but the Tories are highest among working-class


voters since 1979 as well. Those working-class voters weren't voting


for a more left alternative to Labour and sadly they were voting


Tory and we have to address that because our party is this broad


church and representing working-class people is at the heart


of what the Labour Party is about and that's a discussion we need to


have. That is the depth of discussion we need to get into. That


would put's with a fighting chance of taking on a Tory party that is in


disarray. Caroline Flint, thank you for joining us.


This week it was announced that the Grenfell Tower inquiry


would hold its first public hearings in September, as it prepares


to begin to examine what caused the tragedy.


But some have warned that the situation now needs


to be de-politicised, or it will damage


In a moment we'll hear from the MP for Kensington and Chelsea


where the Grenfell Tower fire took place.


But first Emma Vardy looks at how political arguments have played


a significant part in the aftermath of this terrible event.


When you come here and you actually see it, your immediate thoughts


are about the people, not about the politics.


What happened up there is just so difficult to comprehend.


storm that those in power struggled to respond to.


We want justice, we want justice, we want justice...


People vented their anger outside Kensington town Hall.


A visit to the Grenfell site by Theresa May saw her forced


At Prime Minister's Questions, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn linked


What the tragedy of Grenfell Tower has exposed is a disastrous


And speaking at Glastonbury, Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell


Those families, those individuals, 79 so far and there will be more,


were murdered by political decisions that were taken over recent decades.


I can't remember a major national tragedy that has been politicised


I think using terms like murder is completely reckless


The key thing is that we try to ascertain the facts


this tragedy occurred to ensure it can never be repeated.


And as soon as you introduce emotive phrases or emotive accusations


or emotive allegations of that nature, then the discourse


The whole debate around the tragedy becomes politicised and it makes it


Some argue the political language that was used was wrong and helped


to ramp up the vitriol in an unhelpful way, but


for others, it was entirely justified.


That's what an opposition party is for, it's to challenge


the Government and to ask the right questions and I think people


round here would say thank goodness, there's somebody in politics


Pilgrim Tucker had helped Grenfell Tower residents campaign


for building improvements in previous years, and returned


I've been to meetings before the fire and I've been


to meetings since the fire, attended by ordinary residents


with no involvement in politics and they are saying very political


things about land in London and property ownership in London,


Had we campaigned harder, would we have prevented this?


Fire safety campaigners say they were trying to draw attention


to certain issues long before what happened at Grenfell Tower,


and say it's no one political party but the whole system has failed.


It's easy to say, "You've got an inquiry, let's wait for that."


We already know two very clear things.


Had the people there been protected by sprinklers,


People don't die in homes protected by sprinklers.


The second thing is the outrage that the building regulations had


They should be done year in, year out.


Generally people in house fires die in ones, twos


or threes, which doesn't make a political statement.


So the political parties haven't really needed


They weren't prepared for 70 or more people to die at once


The public inquiry, which will address some of those issues,


has already faced calls for its newly appointed


And that was a view echoed by the Labour MP


You would call on him, would you, to stand down?


I don't think there will be any credibility and some people


are saying they won't cooperate with it so it's not going to work.


I will look into this matter to the very best of my ability...


I think the attacks on the chair have to cease, I think the attacks


It actually makes it harder to get to the facts and get


to the truth and that's the most important thing now.


Some said it was unavoidable that this tragedy became political,


but will the politics help get to the truth?


I'm joined now by the Labour MP for Kensington -


who we heard at the end of that film - Emma Dent Coad.


Now this judge, leading the Grenfell inquiry, have you met him? I haven't


met him, no. So what evidence do you have that he doesn't in your words


understand human beings? Well, I am reflecting what people are telling


me out there, that they as soon as his name was announced everybody


looked up his credentials, they found a particular case he had been


involved in, the very issue that people are most worried about, post


Grenfell is they will be moved out of the borough somewhere else. This


issue about social cleansing. It was insensitive to have chosen somebody


with that on his record. Whether he made that decision according to the


rules. It is one judgment in a long career, he may be able to defend


what he did. You have said he doesn't understand human beings but


you have told us you have never met him? It is nothing to do with


meeting him. It is the system where people have to be friends in order


to work together, judged by the evidence, judge by what people have


done that, judge by merit and whether or not you can be friendly.


What has he done wrong in his career? It is symbolic the issue he


made a decision about, it is symbolic for everybody. I am


reflecting the community who are been betrayed. You don't think in


your often view you don't take the view he doesn't understand human


beings. Personally I do. I do actually but I am reflecting what


people are saying, the people who elected me, who have been badly


betrayed by the authority, they are seeing it that way, they have been


betrayed and now they see you know, they worst fear is this will be used


top socially cleanse north Kensington. What is the evidence for


that? About social cleansing? No, this will be used to do so. Whether


or not there is ever, there is no trust in somebody who has been part


of that process. He has been chosen by the Lord Chief Justice, not as


the Prime Minister as some have said. He has a long ex perness of


commercial contracts and disaster, both of which will be vital. It is a


lot to do with overlapping commercial contract, he is a


specialist in that area, what bit doesn't make his qualified and and


doesn't he reflect the independence of the judiciary? Well, we certainly


need somebody who can do the detail. This is a human disaster as much as


anything else. We need somebody who, we saw in the meeting there, there


is a lot of anger and people aren't trusting. . That would be true, we


all understand the anger, of course, but that would be true whoever was


chosen. Are you really after... Do you want someone to head up this


inquiry that will give you a show trial rather than an independent


inquiry. It is exactly the opposite. . Woe won't give us a show trial, is


he? If there is no trust, people won't co-operate with him. A lot of


people will need to co-operate with him. Some of the groups are not


involved, they are protest groups who are not representing the


victims, or the survivors, we have very little evidence that those who


directly affected by this are saying they are not going to co-operate.


Well, everybody who lives round there is a victim to some extent,


they have all been affected, myself as well, I live three blocksia from


it and a lot of the groups are very much involved in that community, not


only the people who lived there who survived, but some of the campaign


groups have been campaigning for years about social housing in area.


What sort of person to you think should head up the inquiry is this


If it has to be Martin, we need an advisory panel with representatives


from different groups who can at least advise and feed in


information, at least if we have no choice, we need at least that. But


rather than him, what sort of person? I am not sure, are you


saying he should remain but he needs to be assisted by a panel or he


should be replaced? If we have no choice, then we should have an


advisory panel to back it up. Something that people trust in. At


the moment they don't trust the process, which is understandable,


and his name was announced the same day as the Hillsborough disaster,


the criminal investigation and so on, that after 28 year, this is what


people, how people see it. They want, they don't trust the process s


it won't work proppism it is not just what I think, it is what people


who are directly involved thing. John McDonnell the Shadow Chancellor


says people who died at Grenfell were murdered by political decision


do you agree? That is a strong way of putting it. I know a lot of


people feel like that. There is massive failure of political


decision, I have seen that happening. But murder? That is an


active verb. It means you intended to kill. So for Mr McDonnell to be


right, these were political decisions taken intended to kill. I


don't share his view on that particular issue, there has been a


failure of care, for many, many years and a failure of investment


for many year, as I have seen myself. But part of the problem has


been investment. They had nine million spent on this block I was


looking at it today, the other tower blocks round it have not been clad.


Of course if they had gone on fire, the disaster would not have been on


the same scale. Nine million helped to produce this. In indeed. The


process of how that building was refurbished. It says it is to make


it look better, half a mile down the road, the tower blocks have been


clad, they were clad in mineral wool. I spent a day at a seminar by


chance understanding, it is non-combustible. Who made that


decision to use rain cladding rather than mineral wool. You were on the


the board of who took that decision. The council had no say about the


specification, we didn't have any involvement at all. It didn't come


before you, because it has tenants on it too. The TMO does, The


advisory committee to the TMO. There is the TMO. I was not there at the


time. As far as I understand a sub group decided or reviewed the


specifications of that. The housing and property committee is part of


the council. Obviously you a say, but whether or not, we don't have


any say at all over specification, I want to say somebody because I have


been accused of... That because my predecessor said I should take


responsibility, a clueing colleague of mine got beaten up for that,


there is no foundation for that allegation. I thank you for clearing


that up. Thank you for joining us too.


It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.


We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now


Coming up here in 20 minutes, The Week Ahead.


First though, the Sunday Politics where you are.


Hello, and welcome to Sunday Politics Wales.


In a few minutes, the Education Secretary tells us what she's


going to do about an expected fall in GCSE results this year.


But first the main political row of the week has been about the pay


Should it be abandoned and if so, who should cough up the extra money?


Ministers here say it's down to Westminster to pay,


and guess what, ministers there say the opposite!


How much should public sector workers be paid?


Or rather, how much more should they be paid?


It's a question that's dominated the headlines in recent weeks amidst


increasing pressure on the UK Government to scrap its 1% cap


Neil Evans is an A nurse with 16 years experience at the Princess


He'd like to sit more exams and gain extra qualifications,


but he says the pay cap has made him consider leaving the job altogether.


I've taken a second job with a health care bank,


with another health board as well as my own.


That's what I'm finding a lot of my colleagues are doing.


What we call health care bank, they are doing agency,


they are doing what they can to survive every month.


They work full time, come out of university with degrees,


and a lot of us have been in the job a long time.


I have, seriously considered packing it in.


Taking a job in a supermarket, or somewhere less stressful.


Unless nurses are offered a better deal, the Royal College of Nursing


says it is prepared to do something it's never done before,


and ballot its members for industrial action.


Why are we putting our nurses in that position?


Why are the politicians not removing the cap?


It's forcing public sector workers into poverty.


And we are a rich country, it's possible to find money


from areas to do things, why isn't it possible to find money


The UK Government makes its decisions on public pay


after receiving recommendations from eight independent pay review


bodies, who consider the needs to recruit,


They also consider the government's financial circumstances,


and since 2010 public sector pay has either been frozen or


Despite inflation, currently merging 3%.


The Welsh government could deviate from the policy,


and scrap the cap year for public sector staff working


If Westminster, through the Treasury, isn't giving


additional resources to the Welsh government to go beyond the 1% pay


cap that is provided for in the settlement,


then that will come from the Welsh government's own resources,


and will be taken from other areas of the budget, front


So it comes down to the basic political question about


where the priorities on in the Welsh government budget.


The Welsh government says it would cost around ?110 million


to give public sector workers in Wales an extra 1%


With around ?60 million needed for the 76,000


Plaid Cymru leader, Leanne Wood, believes that is affordable.


If it is a priority for Labour UK wide, it should be a priority


We are calling upon the Welsh government to commit


We've estimated the cost of this to be around 60 odd million pounds,


in a budget of ?15 billion, that can be found, if it's


It's not a sensible course of action for me to spend Welsh money


So, no, the way we will do it is to put pressure on the UK


Government to add our voices to voices in the UK Cabinet


and to say to the UK Government, now is the time to do this.


Lift the cap and give us the money so we can do that in Wales.


Are there any circumstances in which you would be prepared


to use Welsh government finances to ease the burden on public


We try and use the money we have with the best possible way,


that includes creating jobs in the Welsh public sector.


What we can't do is put ourselves in a position that


others need to be in, responsibilities that lie at the UK


level must be answered by the UK Government.


The Scottish Government claim that they are introducing a policy


to scrap the cap in Scotland that will benefit public sector


Why are they able to do that, and you're not?


Well, the Barnett Formula has always treated Scotland far more


They've always had more money at their disposal than we do.


I have to say it's not entirely clear to me what the Scottish


This week the BMA doctors' union backed Leanne Wood's call,


but the Royal College of Nursing supports the Government's stance.


It's not for devolved administrations to say


It's the Treasury increased to public sector pay we require,


Let's have it delivered to the public sector workforce.


The UK Treasury told us the Welsh government is responsible for public


sector pay covering most devolved services in Wales.


And its own pay policy is designed to be fair.


Now in a few weeks time students here will be


getting their GCSE results, but this year the marks in English,


Welsh and Maths are expected to be down on previous years.


That's being blamed on schools entering more year 10


pupils to sit exams, a year earlier than is intended.


When I spoke to the Education Secretary during a school visit this


week, I asked Kirsty Williams about that dropoff.


I do think we have to acknowledge there


are a combination of factors here that could see a drop


First of all, we have are more rigorous GCSE exams


We are seeing a change in the cohort of students


who are taking science GCSEs, for instance, whereas before


you would have seen significant numbers take BTEC science,


we've recognised that qualification is not as rigorous


as we would like it, so we are going to have more


Most worrying of all for me, is a big change in the way


in which students are being entered for exams.


We are seeing significant numbers of students being entered


earlier for qualifications, and I think those combination


of factors could well see a drop in the overall points


In terms of the new qualifications, there's a new English


and a new Welsh GCSE, unique to Wales being sat


If it's more rigorous, OK, fine, but surely,


there should have been, built into the system,


this comparative outcomes where qualifications in Wales


were telling schools no child should be advantaged or disadvantaged


Does that mean something has gone wrong then?


No, I don't think anything has gone wrong.


Obviously, qualifications Wales is an arms length


from the Welsh government, and the Welsh government


don't interfere in the examination process.


But there is a well known and well understood phenomena that


when you introduce new exams, new qualifications, you can


reasonably expect a drop because teachers may not be quite


so familiar, and, as teachers and the course becomes


bedded in you'll see those grades rise again.


But, more importantly than that, the exam is fundamentally different,


how we examine English and are examining mathematics


means that it's not fair to make direct comparisons.


What's more, I welcome that, we need rigorous exams.


What I'm concerned about is this phenomena that we've


seen in significant numbers this summer...


Will come back to that in a second, but is it fair for the pupils


sitting on the exam this year that it's more rigorous, that they might


have got a B last year, but they might get a C,


or a D, this year because it is a more rigorous system?


I want to be in the system, I want to be in charge


of a system that demands rigger from that system.


Well, it's fair that we are ensuring our children are leaving school


with the skills and qualifications they will need to be


Whether that's going on to further education,


The individual marking is not a matter for me,


it's a matter for qualifications Wales and the WJ EC.


They will want to ensure that there is famous, of course,


but we cannot move away from a system that demands rigger


of our students, of our teachers, of me as education minister,


Moving on them to that other element, more pupils


They've been studying for a year, a two-year course, but for some


reason schools want to put them in early.


You could say, you're not allowed to have resits.


Like they did in England four years ago.


I am concerned to see the large numbers of early entry we have


I've always said that if it's in the interests of an individual


student to sit that exam early, then that should be


What I'm concerned about is that we are seeing entire cohorts


of students being entered into exams for qualifications that are designed


That is putting pressure on students.


Putting pressure on teachers, potentially compromising what that


Qualifications Wales are doing a report into early entry,


I expect to receive that in the autumn.


I will look very carefully at the evidence before I make


I could decide to stop early entry altogether.


Better then that might have the side-effect


of disadvantage in some children, but we could also change the way


we hold schools accountable for their performance.


We could say to schools it is the grades the child gets


the first time they sit the exam that will count towards your


There is a range of options I am prepared to look at once


I receive the expert evidence from qualifications Wales.


And that last option you mentioned is what they did in England,


Your predecessor in the education Minister's office, Huw Lewis,


said we are going to try and stop schools from gaming the system,


You are talking about gaming the system in May this year.


The problem is still there, it's just not being addressed, is it?


But I need to do that on the basis of evidence.


From experts who are there to independently advise the Welsh


government and myself on our systems.


I'm clear that where an entire cohorts of children are being


entered, then that's not the policy of looking at the interests


of individual children, and if necessary, on the advice,


there is a range of options I am prepared to take this autumn.


Do you think it is that schools are just trying to game the system


Put a child in early, get a C grade, that counts towards their school


performance targets, therefore, they move on.


I am concerned that may be happening in some schools.


Some schools may be entering children because they want to give


them a test, they want to show them what an exam looks like.


Those children will go on to sit the exam again.


What I'm concerned about is that children who, perhaps,


had the potential to get an A*, A or B at the end of a two-year


course end up having to settle for a C because they do it early


I want children to fulfil their potential in school.


I want early entry to be for those children who will benefit from it.


When I see such large numbers as being reported that


I've asked for independent advice, that will come to me in the autumn.


It's been a busy year in terms of education.


It's also been a very busy year in terms of politics, generally,


since you've been in post we've had, not that it's your fault,


but we've had a referendum on leaving the European Union,


Both of which, I guess, wouldn't have gone the way that


you would have liked to have gone, how does it feel, for example,


to be the last Liberal Democrat in national office in Wales,


the most senior Lib Dem, I guess, in government


Obviously, the referendum result is extremely disappointing.


We are seeing the consequences of that decision already


in the education system in Wales, particularly in higher education.


The effect it's having on universities.


I, and the Welsh government, and working very hard to ensure that


all the promises that were made by those who campaigned for a leave


People in Wales didn't vote to leave the European Union to be worse off.


People in Wales didn't vote to leave the European Union


As for being the last Lib Dem standing, again,


We've seen internationally Liberal parties, over the years, potentially


They've gone on to rebuild themselves and look at fresh


approaches and new ways of doing things.


I'm confident that the Welsh Liberal Democrats will go on to do that.


But what I am enjoying is having the opportunity of being able


to bring Liberal Democrat ideas and Liberal Democrat


values into government and into our education


Well, here with me now to talk about all this are Gareth Evans


who's Director of Education Policy at University of Wales Trinity Saint


David and the senior Conservative AM and Chair


of the Public Accounts Committee, Nick Ramsay.


Thank you for coming in this morning. In a previous life you were


an education journalist. This has been around for a long time. This


element of schools putting in their pupils a year early. It's been


having an effect for a long time. But maybe not as dramatic an impact


it seems to be having now. That's right. Pupils in Wales have


been entered in year ten rather than your 11 for some time now. Numbers


have grown significantly. We've got to ask why that has happened. It


could be perfectly legitimate reasons, pupils who are excelling in


certain subjects, or who want to ban gay qualification to look at


studying something else in the second year of GCSE -- banked a


qualification. The Cabinet Secretary has just mentioned they are judged


so heavily on GCSE grades, what is known as the level two plus


criteria, but five good a start to G grades, and English or Welsh, and


maths. The difficulty you have is that schools are under such pressure


to hit those targets they are potentially entering pupils slightly


earlier than they should be, clearly not all pupils will be doing that.


Some will be well within their rights to sit early. Others may be


pushing through so schools can hit targets. We need to shift that


accountability mechanism to reflect the needs of pupils.


That point about schools and Kirsty Williams made it in the interview,


maybe pupils who could get a A*, a or B are getting a C grade after one


year and not being put back in to reset. Something has gone wrong way


that is happening, is it? It's not acceptable if pupils are


not being stretched to the maximum. If they are capable of an a grade


and end up with a C grade, that's not right. Early engineers a


valuable mechanism for some pupils. You would expect an element of that.


Schools should be able to employ an early entry but the numbers being


seen at the moment, that's not right. It's not right we are letting


so many pupils down. The numbers are stark.


English-language GCSE, two thirds of all year ten pupils have been


entered early. In England, four years ago, I think, Michael Gove


said, only your first set of results count towards your performance, your


accountability targets. Firstly, should be Welsh government have


followed suit back then, should they do it now?


Yes, and yes. In a lot of what Kirsty Williams said, actually, I


would tend to agree with. We are talking for years down the line from


when England looked at this. Words are fine but let's get on with the


job. I guess after that switch was flicked in England, there was a


massive drop off in the number of schools entering pupils early. Has


that had been required effect? Is that the way we should go in Wales?


You've got to be careful if you wish to switch to wrap mechanism. You


then set the bar so high it is a high state exam. If you only get one


chance that an A* you might struggle to get better grades in the future.


I think you have to be very careful if you go down the England route


that you don't penalised schools and put more pressure on. We have to


find a balance. What the Welsh government has moved to do with the


right thing, look at accountability more generally and try to support


schools to improve rather than bash them over the head.


There is such high stakes, these exams, so much rides on this for


pupils. Should parents be worried? Watcher parents do? I think it is


heartening that the new regulatory body, qualifications Wales, has said


they are confident that exams this summer will be compatible with those


before. So a student who will get a A* this year will have done so last


year and in previous years. That is comforting. But what we've got to do


is look at how we can, perhaps, change the system. The way in which


we monitor and regulate schools. We need to give pupils the best chance


with no perverse incentives for schools to game the system. We


really supported them to achieve the best they possibly can for pupils to


get the grades they deserve. As was mentioned there, these are


brand-new qualifications, GCSEs in English and Welsh being sat in


Wales. They are unique to Wales. We've been told all along they are


more rigorous more difficult. That may count for some of the drop-off


in the expected results. Now, Kirsty Williams was happy that more


rigorous exams are good, but is there a danger that they could be


collateral damage. Some pupils not getting the result they might have


got? We've been concerned from the start about the inherent dangers of


a new system like this. I'm not saying that there is the potential


they are to have a good system long term, but there are big question


marks at the moment about not just early entry, but the system... You


would welcome a more rigorous system in Wales? You've already seen acting


England. They had bad drop-off because the system was more rigorous


there. There definitely needs to be a more rigorous system. Employers


within Wales and across the border in England need to know that the


system is as rigorous and, at the same time, our pupils, if they are


capable of getting a grades, then they need to be in a position where


they are able to get them and the gaming of the system which we looked


at in the Public Accounts Committee, and it is going on, that is really


failing so many of our pupils who could be doing better. It certainly


needs to be looked at pretty soon. This is a life chance for our young


people we are talking about. There is an element here, perhaps,


this is the first time we have had Wales only qualifications. This is


the first time England have results by numbers, so you're A* will be a


one, down to nine or ten. How important is it that the Welsh


government get that message out to parents, I'll be doing it? I've been


surprised that the amount of people that don't know what's going on in


terms of qualifications. Do you mean parents or schools? All sorts.


Teachers, schools, parents. If our teachers aren't abreast of the


changes what chance do we have of getting pupils and teachers well


informed. We've got to come as a sector, we've got to pull together


some sort of communication strategy that allows us to get messages out


there. We need to improve and show divergences qualifications,


curriculum reform, initial teacher training even. There are so many


differences now between the Welsh education system and the English


education system, I think we've got to do a far better job as a system


of coordinating and communicating. Do you think that is happening to


the extent it should be? To reassure parents and schools, but actually


the gold standard is still here in Wales? No, it's not happening. That


is why we are having this discussion now. That's why the Public Accounts


Committee was concerned. These are not simple issues to deal with. Many


are media man long-term. But these are going to affect pupils this


year, next year and the year after. We need to prove that the system is


rigorous, as has been said. This isn't a question of the Welsh


government is telling schools, telling NEA is what to do. The Welsh


government needs a much better dialogue with schools, with the


educational institutions in Wales and come to a conclusion that will


ultimately give our pupils the best life chances. Thank you very much


for coming in this morning. Join us next week for our last


programme of the series. Meantime we're on Twitter,


we're @walespolitics Diolch am wylio, thanks for


watching, time to go back to Andrew. Now just under a year ago,


Theresa May was making her way back from Buckingham Palace having been


asked by the Queen To say it's been a tumultuous twelve


months would be an understatement - here's a reminder of


the highs and lows. I have just been to Buckingham


Palace, where Her Majesty the Queen has asked me to form


a new Government and I accepted. If you're just managing,


I want to address you directly. I know you're working


around-the-clock, I know you're doing your best,


and I know that sometimes When future generations


look back at this time, they will judge us not only


by the decision that we made, but by I have just chaired a meeting


of the Cabinet, where we agreed that the Government should call


a general election to The Conservative Party


has won the most seats and probably the most votes,


then it will be incumbent on us to ensure we have that period


of stability and that is exactly So 12 months in the life of Theresa


May, and the rest of us too. I am exhausted. I don't know what she


feels like! How weak or strong is her position and this constant


reporting, more on the Sunday paper today about groups of Tory MPs


manoeuvring to bring her down in the autumn, before the autumn after the


autumn, name a month between now and the end of the year. Is that, that


has to be corrosive as well. Absolutely. Every week there will be


another story. The reality is the stronger Jeremy Corbyn and the


Labour Party look the stronger her position is because it is what are


the alternative, Theresa May or... It is depending on the polls where


it is Theresa May herself who is helping to cause that boost for


Jeremy Corbyn, if she is the toxic part of the Tory party brand, and if


they get rid of her the Tories would spring back up and the Labour Party


would go down or is it best for her to soak it, literally draw out the


toxins and then, I don't know, two money, six months a year, she stands


down and next leader takes the over, next generation or David Davis and


they start again, start afresh, and she takes all the badness, the


toxins with her this is thing, there must be a hell of a lot of detailed


polls right now find that out. I don't know the answer. Can she


relaunch herself? No, she will make a big speech on Tuesday, ex tracts


are being briefed into tomorrow's papers, I have seen them. . What is


the subject matter? Me. Not me, her. There has been enough movement from


BBC... It is going to be her, it will be the relaunch. I have a


purpose, still here and allow me to stay, but the problem is, Julia is


right, there is a feeling among Tory MPs it would be ideal for her to


last at least two years, suck in the bad bit, and to have a referendum or


not, and the miscalculations and bring in a new person, untarnished.


The problem over that is events dear boy as someone once said. Brexit may


go well, it may not. Talks may produce something or she may get


stuck down a hole. She is the sticking plaster over the two side


of the Tory party. She is there, because they want her to be there


and that Palacester is stilled holding, if that seismic divide goes


any further, the plaster breaks she will go down the hole with it. David


Davis said she doesn't want a leadership election, the papers are


full of briefings from what are claimed to be from his people saying


she faces abject misery, that it is time she will have to go sooner


rather than later, they clearly haven't got the memo from DD as he


is called. Publicly they have, to declare loyalty until the moment


when they feel the time has come to be disloyal. The problem she has got


is that context determines 95% of how a leader is perceived. She can


make a brilliant speech this week about how she plans to be bold but


the context is that lost majority in the election, a hung parliament with


Brexit looming. It makes it hard to be bold, hung Parliaments are not


bold. You will have to manoeuvre all the time and it be exhausting and


transparent in the scheming, a like with the arrangement with the DUP,


some of the vote it is a have happened and it will be utterly


draining, now Julia is is right. The key question for the Tories will be


if they get someone else in, does that transform their prospects?


While that is not clear, I agree she will probably cling on, but there


will be no glorious summer for her again, the pre-election context was


fantastic for her, it is really dark now, and tough. The key thing is


what you said, who would have thunk it. You have said the Tories are


frightened to call to provoke us another election because they fear,


they think Jeremy Corbyn will win. Who would have thought we would get


into that position? In the same argument who would have thought


Theresa May been so popular. Who would have thought Jeremy Corbyn


would get where he is now? That shows there is still hope for not


maybe, maybe not Theresa May, I think that she has holed below the


water line, what goes up can also come down, but in Theresa May's


defence, and I don't think she will last very long, and I think she has


been exposed, during the election campaign for just not having enough


of depth, of the fight, but to be fair she must have a backbone of


steel, a lesser man or holed below the water line, what goes up can


also come down, but in Theresa May's defence, and I don't think she will


last very long, and I think she has been exposed, during the election


campaign for just not having enough of depth, of the fight, but to be


fair she must have a backbone of steel, a lesser man or woman holed


below the water line, what goes up can also come down, but in Theresa


May's defence, and I don't think she will last very long, and I think she


has been exposed, during the election campaign for just not


having enough of depth, of the fight, but to be fair she must have


a backbone of steel, a lesser man or woman who have gone, "I'm off now."


To take the flak she is get, she is steely as they come. It is almost a


form of penance she is doing, having brought her party to this less than


glorious position, she's having to try and kind of restore things a


bit, knowing in her heart of hearts and perhaps not as deep at that,


that she will not be the beneficiary. Absolutely not. That is


what she said to the 1922 Committee that Monday after the general


election, I got us into this mess, I am going to get us out of it. Talks


to MPs this week, it is interesting, there is pretty hard feeling


settling that the new person should come from the 2010 intake, skip a


generation. The Boris, the Teresa, the Hammonds. Bye Amber Rudd? She


has a tiny minority -- majority. There was one minister in your foyer


an hour ago. Did we have a foyer? I think about 30 of them, all of them


believe it or not fancy their chance, and for any of those to


expose themselves and to lay out their agenda they will need


two-years to make these sort of Sport Reliefs Let us turn to Labour.


Well, earlier we talked to Caroline Flint about the threat


Here's what Shadow Minister and Corbyn ally, Chris Williamson,


MPs need to reflect the political programme that is overwhelmingly


supported by Labour members and Labour supporters,


and if people aren't prepared to do that,


then it will be up to members in their local constituencies


How big a change is Labour going to undergo? To what extent will Labour


now be recast in the mould of Mr Corbyn and his wing of the party?


Well in policy terms it already has been largely recast into the Corbyn


McDonnell view, although with lots of examples of them being pretty


expedient, Trident being an example. Where they went into the election


backing retention, even though personally they are totally


committed to nuclear disarmament. He might be able to move to that


position? They might but that example of expend yen sip leads me


to this. . I suspect Corbyn and McDonnell will be thinking we are


close to power do we really want 18 months of Civil War, which is what


deelection battles would become, and terrible publicity, and an imflowing


a party on the verge possibly of an election win. -- implosion. My guess


is they won't and they will go out of their way to try and stop it.


John McDonnell said many times divide a party lose elections, I


don't think they will want this. There are power battles in party, we


have been talking about it in the Tory party, and there will be


moments of heightened tension between the Labour MPs and their


memberships but I don't think that this is going to happen. If Steve is


right we should be looking for signs of them looking for signs of them


hosing things down. Although, I don't think they need to do this.


The moderate wing of the party, they are not standing up to Jeremy Corbyn


any more, they are trying to get a few Select Committee Chairmanships


and survive and hope something happens. The extraordinary thing is,


given that no-one expected Jeremy Corbyn, no-one tried to deselect him


and no-one accused him of disloyalty. We are in Soviet style


show trial, you know, repent territory. We haven't had a show


trial yet. Matter of time. Apart from Brexit. The Labour Party are


united until it comes to votes on the House of Commons on what to do


about Europe. So, Brexit goes well, that 49 will wither away a bit and


start getting... If Brexit goes badly. Vince Cable saying we need a


mud referendum, huge temptation then among Labour MPs to recalibrate and


a oar gue for staying in and that would split the partyty down the


middle. You heard Owen Paterson say 85% of people voted for parties that


wanted Brexit, meaning Labour and Conservative. It is true that Jeremy


Corbyn and Mr McDonnell are more Eurosceptic than people realise.


They want another election quickly, because they don't know how, this


maybe as good as it gets. None of us know, so get an election quick


because we think we might win it. That means that they could well play


game, why would they just bolster the store Tories if a big defeat on


Brexit could provoke an election. I am guessing they will play games, if


there is chance of undermining the Government perhaps fatally to get


this early election which would be massively in their interest, theyry


ahead in the poll, I think that will do it. They have displayed


expediency on Europe in the past, possibly arguing for it why having


doubts about it in the referendum, for Remain, sorely. So yes, I think


there will be, as I said earlier, in this Parliament there will be going


to be moments where it looks as if the Government could be defeat and I


think they will move towards defeating the Government. Any


remainor should be more worried about the economics of a Corbyn left


On that point we better leave it there.


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


And Jo Co's back tomorrow with the Daily Politics on BBC Two


at the earlier time of 11am - that's because of Wimbledon.


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


This is what it takes to get her to come home, you know?


Andrew Neil and Arwyn Jones with the latest political news, interviews and debate. Andrew asks Owen Paterson whether remainers are taking advantage of Theresa May's weakness to scupper Brexit, asks Caroline Flint if Labour MPs should be worried about Jeremy Corbyn strengthening his grip on the Labour Party and discusses the Grenfell Tower fire disaster with newly-elected Labour MP for Kensington Emma Dent Coad. The political panel consists of Julia Hartley-Brewer, Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards.