16/07/2017 Sunday Politics Wales

Download Subtitles




Andrew Neil and Arwyn Jones are joined by Liam Fox and Rebecca Long-Bailey. Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards are on the political panel.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 16/07/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



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


With Cabinet divisions over Brexit, spending and leadership spilling


onto the front pages, we'll be talking to international


trade secretary Liam Fox about Britain's future


Jeremy Corbyn's been to Brussels to set out


Labour's vision for Brexit - but with the party suffering its own


divisions on Europe, are they being entirely clear


And as Ukip searches for another leader, will taking an even more


hard-line stance on Islam make the party relevant again,


If Ukip goes down the route of being a party that is anti


the religion of Islam, frankly it's finished.


Carwyn Jones on what he calls the Brexit power grab.


Are we really heading for a constitutional crisis?


And who's been serving political aces?


Yes, all of that to come, and I'm joined for all of it


by three journalists whose every word is as closely followed


And much like the Liberal Democrat leadership contest, they've


won their place on the panel because no-one else wanted the job.


It's Steve Richards, Isabel Oakeshott and Tom Newton Dunn.


First today, for a supposedly private gathering, the meeting


of the Cabinet on Tuesday has generated rather a lot of headlines,


most of them featuring Chancellor Philip Hammond.


Yesterday there were disputed claims in the Sun over what he may or may


not have said about women driving trains, and today the Sunday Times


says colleagues picked him up for describing public sector workers


as overpaid, although some dispute that version of events.


Well, Mr Hammond was on the Andrew Marr Show this morning,


and he took the unusual step of suggesting that the source


of the stories may be people unhappy at his position over Brexit.


If you want my opinion, some of the noise is generated by people


who are not happy with the agenda that I have,


tried to advance of ensuring that we achieve a Brexit


which is focused on protecting our economy, protecting


our jobs, and making sure we can have continued rising living


So what do you make of that, Isabel? The Chancellor thinks he's being


undermined by Cabinet colleagues who don't trust him on Brexit. That's


quite remarkable to say that in public. I also think it's completely


true. That's the least controversial part of it! The briefing is his


position on Brexit and also frustration on his position over


public sector pay then it is over any kind of leadership manoeuvrings.


We saw on the Andrew Marr Show that he was doubling down on the issue of


public sector pay rises. He didn't categorically deny using the words


of overpaid, in fact he reiterated the fact he sees them as whether


they are overpaid or not so I believe he did use that phrase but


clearly he's got the tone wrong and I don't think he's done himself any


favours. He's a pretty wealthy man himself, multimillionaire. He must


have some kind of political deafness if he thinks it's OK for someone in


his position to say, in a number of cases, lowly paid public sector


workers are overpaid? I think he is politically deaf, and not


emotionally intelligent. He has a great head for figures but very poor


at expressing himself. It was a crass remark over women train


drivers. He may be in the right place on some arguments, he's just


extremely poor at expressing and that's what gives his opponents the


chance to rip his head off. He should have worked out by now that


it is clear whatever... Because of the dim munition of Mrs May's


authority that whatever you see in the Cabinet now is likely to become


public in some shape or form. I think this is the profound lesson of


the story, that Cabinet discussion is almost impossible now, and


Hammond will go away this summer thinking I can't engage in a proper


debate in Cabinet because they will leak it. It sounds as if they were


having quite a grown-up conversation about public sector pay with a


spending department ministers putting the case for breaking the


cup and Hammond saying from the Treasury perspective this is what's


happening. Which is what normally happens in Cabinet. He would hope


so, not any more. He won't be able to speak his mind in Cabinet because


he knows it will be leaked and that is another sign of fragility of this


Government, when you cannot have a grown-up discussion about public


sector pay even in Cabinet, and that means Cabinet discussion which is


urgently needed on Brexit and the rest of it cannot happen in an open


way because leaking is happening. Mrs May is not exactly top of the


Pops with her own party at the moment but doesn't help her in the


fact that her Chancellor is even less top of the Pops? The key thing


is that backbenchers don't want a leadership contest at the moment.


There are a number of Cabinet ministers or more senior figures who


have been around longer who may feel this is their last chance of the


leadership and they are urgently wanting it happen now. Backbenchers


don't want it, I don't think it will happen. Will it happen? I don't


think it will. There are egos clashing in the Cabinet and also


many who just want things to stay the way they are, so they will. We


will talk more about this leadership matter later in the programme, but


let's move on. This week the government passed


another Brexit milestone when in introduced the Repeal Bill


to the Commons. It will incorporate all EU law


into the UK's domestic And although a vote on the Bill


isn't due until the autumn, the government still has plenty


on its plate when it Brexit secretary David Davis


and the EU's negotiator Michel Barnier will sit down


for another helping of Brexit negotiations in Brussels


this week. Progress now needs to be made


on some big questions. They include: the rights of EU


citizens living here, How to maintain an open border


between Northern Ireland And the size of the financial


settlement or so-called divorce bill Previous estimates have included a


figure of The British government has put no


figure on it, simply saying it This week, Foreign Secretary


Boris Johnson said the EU could "go whistle" if it was


expecting an extortionate fee Brussels wants this set


of negotiations focusing on the principles of separation


to be done by the end of the year. They can then turn to the main


event, the future trading relationship between the UK


and the EU. While the UK remains a member


of the EU customs union, it cannot But it can hold advanced discussions


with other countries. This week, Australian Prime Minister


Malcolm Turnbull said his country was very keen for a deal


as quickly as possible. And at the G20 summit, Donald Trump


said he wanted to sign a very powerful UK-US trade


deal very quickly. But as trade deals normally


take years to negotiate, So there will be plenty


for both sides to digest, as negotiations continue


over the summer. I'm joined


by the International Trade Your brief is to agree new free


trade deals but you cannot sign any until Brexit is done, can you even


begin proper negotiations this side of Brexit or is that illegal too? We


cannot negotiate and conclude a trade agreement but we can scope


them out. We can get our preparatory work done. We have got ten working


groups established across the world with countries from Korea to the


United States to Australia. I know scoping the out is fine, you can


talk about trade but you cannot begin formal trade negotiations


until after Brexit. No, but we have trade working agreements. Free trade


agreements are not the only thing that are in the mix as it were, they


are what people think about but we also have mutual recognition


agreements where we can reduce some of the barriers to trade, the


technical barriers, in that process. We have a number of other things


going on. We have got to get our trading schedules in Switzerland and


Geneva and the World Trade Organisation organised. We then have


40 EU free trade agreements and we have to get them ready because if we


were not to negotiate those and be ready on the first day of Brexit,


there would be huge market disruption. Although you can clearly


do a lot of technical work and you can talk till the cows come home,


there will be no free trade deals on the shelf ready to sign come March


2019 when we are leaving the EU, that's correct isn't it? Technically


there will be new ones... There will be no free trade deals ready to say


right, we are out, here is a deal I have baked earlier. Not right away


because we are not permitted to do that as part of our membership of


the European Union and one of the things I want to get is greater


freedom to be able to negotiate on behalf of the UK. That's not


possible when you are inside the customs union. There's much talk of


a transition after 2019. You told Bloomberg you didn't mind a few


months, the Chancellor this morning said it would be a couple of years.


What is it? The key thing is why would you have a transitional


arrangements, how long would it be and what would the conditions be.


For me first we have to leave the European Union in March 2019 so


there can be no case of extending EU membership. At that point as a third


country we can have a transition agreement which keeps as little


disruption as possible but it has to have an end date. You said a few


months, the Chancellor said a few years, why the difference? As the


Chancellor said, it is more a technical argument, because for


example how do we get new border equipment in place, how do we get


the arrangements for immigration put in place, but for me, you know, I've


waited a long time and campaigned long time to leave the European


Union. As long as we leave in March 2019 I'm happy, as long as we have a


time-limited transitional period to make it work for business. The


Chancellor doesn't deny the transition could take up four years.


The Brexit Secretary David Davis says it could be a maximum of three


years, you are talking months. Shouldn't you sort this out around


the Cabinet table instead of all three of you sending mixed messages?


We are dependent on for example what HMRC Tal us, how investment is


going. It's also a question of negotiating with our European


partners. We know what's involved, why are you sending out these mixed


messages? I don't have a problem with the transition period as long


as it is time-limited. It is not just the time, it is the conditions.


I want in the transitional period to be able to negotiate agreements at


that point. We cannot have a putting off over the freedom to negotiate


trade agreements. At the moment is it clear you would be able to sign


any free trade deals during a transition period? No, that's to be


negotiated. So if Mr Hammond or Mr Davies is right, up to three or four


years, it could be 2021 before you get to sign a free trade deal. We


don't now how long any would take to negotiate. They don't happen


overnight. Would you even be able to negotiate during a transition


period? I would hope so, that is one of the conditions we might set. It


is certainly something I would want to see because otherwise it makes it


much more difficult to take advantage of the opportunities that


Brexit itself would produce. Your ink will run dry before you get to


sign one of these agreements. We have a huge amount to do and it's


not just at the free trade agreement level. We have for example what we


get at the World Trade Organisation because the real game for the UK is


to get a global liberalisation in the services sector -- the real


gain. And I want to come onto that in a minute but before do, are you


group of the Cabinet ministers that seems to regularly be briefing


against Philip Hammond? No, I deplore leaks from the Cabinet, I


think my colleagues should be quiet, stick to their duties, and I expect


discipline to be effective. The only people smiling that this will be


people in Berlin and Paris. Why are people doing it? The need to have


less prosecco. They don't trust Philip Hammond, do they? I don't


think that is true. I read in the press we have very different views,


in fact our views are very similar on things like transition. I don't


know where it is coming from but I think it should stop.


But it is happening? It is happening and I think it undermines the


position of the government. We do not need an interim leader or an


alternative leader. We have a very good competent leader in Theresa


May. But he thinks it is being done by fellow Brexiteers? I do not know


who is doing it and they should stop. Let's come back to the tariff


free trade. There is much talk about that. The Chancellor says much of


our trade with the world is in services and free trade deals won't


make any particular difference. Do you agree with him? They can make a


difference. It has been estimated with the OECD that free trade deals


with the United States could add ?42 billion to our bilateral trade by


2030. There is a game to be made. In an economy like the UK which is 80%


services, what we would benefit from is a range of global liberalisation.


One example is data. We have an economy where we talk about freedom


of movement of goods and services, but you also have to have the


freedom of movement of data. One thing I would like the UK to lead on


is to look to a global agreement on that. But the talks have come to an


end. There is no great global movement. That is not true. We have


just had a multilateral agreement, the trade facilitation was signed


this year which seeks to diminish friction at customs around the world


and will add 70 billion to the economy. But it leaves plenty of


nontariff barriers in place. The moment you start to talk about these


complicated rules and regulations that hinder services, it does not


make free trade deals impossible, it makes them much more on placated and


prolonged to do. Correct? You need to look at what is happening in the


global economy. According to the OECD, in 2012, the G7 and G20


countries were operating about 300 nontariff barriers. By the end of


2015, they were operating nearly three times that number. The silting


up of growth and global trade is being done by the global economy. We


need to be looking at how we can remove some of those barriers,


because otherwise our prosperity becomes limited. Is it still your


view that no deal would be better than a bad deal? Anyone who goes


into that negotiation without that is foolish. We will not accept any


deal they will give us. That is the problem David Cameron had before the


referendum. I think our partners believed we would accept a bad deal


rather than none. But Philip Hammond has given the game away. He said no


deal would be a very, very bad outcome. The Europeans know that we


have realised no deal would be a very bad outcome. Is he right? I


think you can argue on what the outcome would be. It is very


important as a negotiating tool, and the Prime Minister is 100% right.


Those we are negotiating with, need to believe that we would walk away


rather than accept a bad deal. But if you're going to walk away you did


not say the consequences would be very, very bad. You do not agree


with the key is what is our negotiating position? You simply do


not hand it away. So he is wrong? He says very, very bad. We have to


accept we have a right to walk away and those we are negotiating with


have to understand that. No businessman would go into a deal and


say whatever the outcome, we will accept it. And no business would go


into a major negotiation with six different voices but your government


is. David Davis speaks for the government not the Sunday


newspapers. Not Philip Hammond. Philip Hammond was very clear this


morning on the issue of transition. We are leaving the single the --


market, we are leaving the customs union. Let me just quote to some


other issues. It would be good to get some clarity. Is there a


contingency plan for no deal? Yes, government departments are all


working for their contingency plans for what would happen if we got to


the end of negotiation with no deal. Why did the Foreign Secretary say


there was no plan for no deal. There are contingency plans across


Whitehall. Is he wrong or out of the loop? As dead no. There are


contingency plans and my department and other departments have


specifically been tasked... He said it this week. Well, that is not


correct. We would be foolish not to have such contingency plans. I


understand the argument, you need to bring the Foreign Secretary in. He


is only the Foreign Secretary that you would need to bring him in, I


would have thought. You want is full deal with the EU as possible. Would


you be prepared to pay for that kind of open access? It depends what you


mean by pay. We have to start with where we are with the European Union


at the moment. We already have a tariff free arrangement. I know what


we already have. The only reason why we would not continue with that is


if the politicians on the other side of the channel wanted to put


politics before economics. What they said they want an annual fee? If


they are talking about Britain continuing to pay for those


international arrangements... I am not talking about that and I think


you know I am not. If we get a full access trade deal, that they say you


have to pay an annual fee for this full access, should we pay it? I


would not want to make a public position while our negotiations are


coming on but I think you would find it difficult to square with WTO law.


Has there ever been a free trade deal where you pay the other side


for access? Not that I am aware of. Nor me. It would be unprecedented.


Are you ruling it out? I am not going to say anything. I see say we


should not have a number of different cabinet voices ahead of


our negotiations so I will not do that. We will have a


negotiation. We will try and get as free deal as possible. Let me tell


you why it is important. I know why it is important. I have another


question. You said the EU has trade deals with a number of other


countries at the moment of which we are part of, South Korea and Canada


are two examples. Will they continue to trade with us on the existing


basis, or will we have to do new deals or change these deals after


Brexit? We are negotiating with his third countries so we have something


so that deals are translated into UK law so there is no disruption to


trade. It is not clear. It is break clear. The Canada deal has not yet


been ratified by the European Union. So we do not know if we can carry on


trading with those countries which the EU has a free trade deal with on


the same basis. We have not spoken to a single country and we have


working groups with Switzerland and career which make up 82% by value.


Not a single one of those has indicated they did not want to carry


out this transitional adoption. In the case of Canada, in the case of


Singapore, where that agreement has not yet been reached by the EU, we


will have to think then about a Plan B and how we go into a bilateral


agreement. The EU now regards as may as a lame duck leader. It is true in


Brussels, Berlin and Paris -- the EU now regards Mrs May as a lame duck


leader. There is a hung parliament. Labour will not save your bacon on


Brexit. They want a quick election and they will vote to bring that


about. This election result has severely undermined Britain's


negotiating position. If you are looking at European governments,


they are looking at dealing with minority governments all the time.


They are dealing with coalitions formal and informal. The key is we


have something stronger than that. We have the will of the British


people behind us clearly expressed in the referendum that we are going


to leave the European Union, whatever Tony Blair or anyone else


says. We will leave in March 20 19. Now the job of the government is to


get the best deal and that is best done by my colleagues getting on


with their departmental work, not involving themselves in things they


do not need to be involved in, giving our backbenchers the


reassurance that we have a united Cabinet. Liam Fox, thank you.


Jeremy Corbyn went to Brussels this week to meet with the EU's


chief Brexit negotiator, Michael Barnier.


We're told Mr Corbyn wanted to set out Labour's


But on some of the big questions - like Britain's relationship


with the single market and the customs union -


Here's Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell speaking earlier.


I believe we have to try and maintain the benefits


of the customs union, and that's one of the issues


Does it mean staying inside or leaving?


Keep all the options open, keep all the options...


Under Labour we could stay inside the customs union?


We are concentrating on the objectives rather


than the structures and that seems to have a resonance


I'm joined now by the Shadow Business Secretary


Rebecca Long-Bailey, she's in our Salford studio.


Good morning to you. Good morning. If there is a snap general election


it could well be Labour negotiating Brexit, so let's try and get some


answers to some fundamental questions. Is Labour in favour of


Britain remaining a member of the single market? What we have said it


want to retain the benefits of the single market and the customs union.


We have to be flexible in our approach, we appreciate that. The


end goal is maintaining the current benefits we have because we are


standing on the edge of a cliff, quite frankly, on


that matter. But you would concentrate on remaining a member of


the single market? The machinery we use to maintain those benefits is


open to negotiation. We have got to respect the result of the referendum


and the will of the people, in terms of having greater control over our


laws and the border. If we could negotiate staying in the single


market would be fantastic but whether it is likely have to be


seen. We are looking at all the options on the table and getting


access to the single market is one of those. Everybody wants access, I


am talking about membership. It is still not clear whether you would


negotiate to remain as a member of the single market, with all the


consequences of free movement and the European Court that would follow


from that. What is your position? We want to retain the current benefits


we have is a member of the single market, but we appreciate there will


be free movement and we will lose control over our laws. That was one


of the key positions that were set out in the referendum and people


were extremely concerned about that. That has to be negotiated. If we


could negotiate membership of the single market while dealing with the


other issues, that would be great. I think that would be unlikely. We


have to look at a more flexible approach while not being a member.


Is Labour in favour of remaining a member of the customs union? Again,


the position is similar. We want to retain the benefits we have in the


customs union. We want to have our cake and eat it, as do most parties


in Westminster. So you and Boris Johnson or on the same wavelength?


We need to be flexible, not cut our nose off despite our face. I am


asking for your position. Would you be clear to be prepared to sacrifice


not being able to do free trade deals, as the price for remaining in


the customs union? We have to be extremely flexible. We should be


able to carry out and negotiate our free trade deals. You cannot do that


in the customs union? So are you in or out? That is why it is a point


for negotiation, Andrew. We want to retain the benefits of the customs


union will negotiating trade deals as we see fit. That will form part


of the negotiations themselves. We cannot cut our nose despite our face


without coming out of the customs union without any transitional


arrangements whatsoever and send businesses over the cliff. Since you


do want to keep your cake and eat it. You want to stay in the single


market but not have the obligations that go with it, stay the single


union but not do -- stay in the single market but do your own trade


deals. The opposition is untenable. That is the point of the


negotiations... To be untenable? Not to be untenable. We have


negotiations. The machinery we have whether it is through outside


agreements or whether it is about a negotiated form of an amended


settlement, that is a moot point frankly. We need to make sure we


have the same benefits. John McDonnell, the Shadow Chancellor,


says people would interpret remaining in the single market is


not respecting the referendum but you say it is an option to keep


open, who is right? I think he is right in what he said. It is


automatically assumed that once you leave the EU you leave the single


market and that is generally the case. I would be surprised that we


would be able to negotiate any of the concessions that we want to make


as remaining part of the single market as a member. I am not saying


it is completely off the table because stranger things have


happened, but what we need to focus on is less on the machinery and more


on the outcome. We need to make sure we retain the benefits and we


negotiate some form of agreement to deal with that.


But why would you keep an option open that would not respect the


result of the referendum? People assume that once you leave the EU


you leave the single market. That could be negotiated, but it's


extremely unlikely. I wouldn't rule anything out at this stage because


stranger things have happened and this process so far has been


extremely chaotic. But you would have to decide your negotiating


position. Saying we don't rule anything out is not a negotiating


position. We are clear on our negotiating position, we want to


retain the benefits we currently have as part of the customs union


and the single market, whether that is inside or outside is a moot


point. Rex it means Brexit, we are clear on that. -- Brexit means


Brexit. How can it, if you want to stay inside the single market and


Customs union, and you said access would entail accepting some element


of free movement. That's what you said but your manifesto was


categorical - free movement would end after Brexit, which is currently


Labour policy? The manifesto was clear free movement would end. The


point I was making at the time is there are some areas which are


extremely complex, for example the free movement of scientists. There


is an extreme state of concern regarding that, so the Government


has to look at things like that. There might have to be concession is


made in certain areas like that in order to get an associative


membership for example but the clear position overall is that free


movement would end and we are in favour of reasonable and managed


migration. We are also not in favour of the current undercutting of wages


for example through the Swedish denigration and we want to see that


end immediately because we don't think it is right company cancels


labour overseas and undercut British employees. Let me finish on another


topic. John McDonnell again, the Shadow Chancellor, said this morning


the victims of Grenfell Tower were victims of social murder. What is


social murder? I haven't spoken to John about that but what happened in


Grenfell was absolutely horrific. But were they victims of social


murder? I haven't spoken to John to understand the term but in my


constituency we have a large number of tower blocks that have the same


cladding on and people are living in fear. Following the Lakanal House


fire, the coroner made recommendations the Government


should be installing sprinklers in all housing over 30 metres high and


they haven't done that. I call on than to do that immediately whilst


also making sure the funding is available to carry out necessary


remedial works. One other issue has come light... My question is


important... When John McDonnell says that the people in Grenfell


Tower were murdered, murdered by political decisions, is he right? I


go back to the point I made earlier. I haven't discussed it with John...


Two weeks ago. The Government should have acted on recommendations. Were


they murdered? They should have acted on recommendations to retrofit


sprinklers and they didn't. There was incompetence is no question,


dereliction of duty, some terrible decisions made that resulted in that


appalling event that we saw but does that amount to murder? It is a


simple question. You could look at it case of manslaughter but the fact


is people lost their lives through a failure to conduct adequately a duty


of care. People would assume that is murder if you like, if it was taken


through the courts, and could be classified as corporate


manslaughter. It's not murder? We are going round in circles here. The


point is the Government should have acted on recommendations to retrofit


sprinklers years ago and should have looked at amending building


regulations instead of kicking the issue into the long grass time and


time again. People where I live are living in extreme fear, and we want


the Government to take action immediately. Rebecca Long-Bailey


from Salford, thank you for joining us.


You may not have noticed but Ukip - the party that once promised


and arguably delivered a political earthquake - is having


The last leader, Paul Nuttall, stood down after the party saw its vote


is one anti-Islam candidate threatening to split what's


Forget the warm prosecco, if there is any plotting going on in Ukip


about who should be in charge, it would be going on over a pint. And


there is plotting. This programme understands Ukip's ruling body could


ban one of the candidates from standing, and that is not going to


go down terribly well. Anne Marie Waters, a former Labour activist,


wants to be the next leader. She believes Ukip needs to talk more


about Islam, a religion she has called evil. She says there is


growing support for her views including among the hundreds of new


members who have joined Ukip in recent weeks. Are you anti-Islam? I


don't like the religion, no, and a lot of people get confused on Islam


and all Muslims. The religion, the Scriptures and how it is practised


in most of the world I find quite frankly abhorrent. There are


millions of people in this country who think as I do. They don't


want... And the real extreme right could rise if people are not allowed


to talk about this. Nigel Farage has already said he doesn't want to be


the leader again, but he still has a clear view of what Ukip 's macro


future should and should not hold. Ukip goes down the route of being a


party that is anti the religion of Islam, frankly it's finished. I


don't think there is any public appetite for that but it is timing


and the party would be finished. If there are some within Ukip who say


the party had already moved to the right at the last election with its


integration agenda. Banning


the burka and physically checking children for female


genital mutilation. If we don't really do something


about FGM now, we never will. Anne Marie Waters wants to go


further but also suspects The party chairman says


there will be due process according to Ukip's constitution,


including the screening process


for its leadership candidates conducted


by an external vetting company. But like the old boss,


he doesn't think Ukip should become What we're going through now


is a process where people can I'm talking about the process


we have, which I think is robust enough to protect the party,


its history, and protect its future. We have always been


about being for something, we are not against something,


and hopefully that will come through in this leadership election


so I'm excited about it. I'm not focusing on one


particular candidate. But it has got senior


party figures worried. Several MEPs have told me


the majority of their colleagues in Brussels would walk away


if Anne Marie Waters Another Ukip senior source


said there would be mass The deadline for leadership


nominations is the 28th of July. So far, around seven people have


said they intend to stand. Of course the bigger the field,


the fewer the votes required to win. One senior MEP told me it would be


the most rancorous contest the party had ever had,


amongst the least stellar cast. The man who led Ukip at its most


successful says direction is one thing but the party must also become


more professional on their current


trajectory, then they will on their current


trajectory, then they will And as I say, if Ukip withers


and Brexit is not delivered, something else will replace it


so I'm saying to what is still my party, unless you change radically,


get your act together, Whatever the direction


the new leader takes Ukip, there are already plenty who think


the party is over. We say goodbye to viewers


in Scotland who leave us now Coming up here in 20 minutes,


we'll be talking about what's next Hello and welcome to


the Sunday Politics Wales. In a few minutes,


the Assembly's Presiding Officer tells us what she thinks


about the Repeal Bill. And with Wimbledon in mind,


who's been on form this term and who's crashed out


of the political match? But first, Carwyn Jones went


to Brussels this week to meet the EU's chief negotiator


Michel Barnier on the very same day as the Repeal Bill came out,


that's the legislation that sets out how EU rules will be


transferred after Brexit. The UK Government wants them to be


held temporarily at Westminster, the Welsh Government says it's


a naked power grab. So with that in mind


was Carwyn Jones' visit It's a question I put to him


when I spoke to him in the garden Bear in mind of course that


wasn't the original date Actually, we had organised this


meeting before we knew the date. It may seem like a highly organised


event but it wasn't. What was important was,


we were able to go, explain the position as far as Wales


was concerned, get an idea of how the Commission saw the process


moving forward. That is important in terms of us


being able to see what the way Next week we have got an enormously


important full week of Brexit negotiations and from a UK


perspective, there are mixed That is not good for any


negotiating strategy. I make absolutely no apology


for putting forward Wales's voice. I don't see that in any way


as mischief making, that is my job When I had the meeting


with him we both knew it wasn't negotiation, it was simply us


outlining what qA said so far and I was trying to understand


what they saw process as. We have, for weeks and weeks


and weeks, said to the UK Government we would like to work


with you to develop a Brexit that We have asked them that week


after week after week and they haven't come back to us


with any constructive solutions. They are now, they are now,


but we did say to them we are happy to work with you but bluntly,


if you're not going to work Did you pick up the phone


to David Davis this weekend? David Davies has been


speaking to Mark Drakeford. He spoke to Mark last


on the 3rd of July. I have been speaking


to Alun Cairns as well. Theresa May, where she is,


nobody ever knows. David Davis is the man


representing Wales, representing Welsh farmers, steelworkers in those


Brexit negotiations and you are not Instead, you go to Brussels


and you are speaking to the man who is representing French farmers


and Italian farmers. I don't agree with David Davis,


bluntly, and the position the UK You can talk to David Davis


and it is very useful to have meetings with him


and that is something I very much value but he believes the UK


Government should leave the single market, the customs union


and the jurisdiction of the ECJ. I don't believe in


any of those things. We are not going to


achieve common ground. We have had the Repeal Bill


published this week. A central issue here


is you want all those European powers distributed to


the devolved nations. But the problem is,


there is no time for that. This is an internal


matter for the UK. As things stand at the moment,


those powers come straight here in They don't go to London,


they don't go to fisheries, What the UK Government is trying


to do is stop them coming Basically, to put it bluntly,


England does what it wants, Wales, Scotland


and Northern Ireland can't. I understand we need to make


sure things don't change suddenly overnight,


but we said to the UK Government, the powers come


to us, let's all agree we're not going to change things


until we have all sat down It is an important


principle that it is done through consent


and not by imposition. They have got to take all the risk


out of the situation. You can understand it from the UK


Government's perspective when actually the devolved


nations may not do that. Their priority is the morning


after Brexit, Welsh farmers being able to sell their lamb


to France and other That is the greatest risk Welsh


farmers have is not being able to sell as they do


in the single market. That is by far the greatest


risk that they face. If Welsh farmers face


any kind of barrier, whether it is financial,


in term of regulation to selling into Europe,


that is a massive chunk of That is what the UK


Government needs to focus on. It's not as if any of us have said,


as soon as we get the power we will do something


incredibly different to There is an important


principle here and that is, it is not for Westminster


to try to take back powers from the Assembly once they have


arrived back from Brussels. These are an exceptional


set of circumstances. 20 months left and the morning


after we leave, they have got to be in a position to be able


to trade and strike a deal. You can only do that


with one system. The UK Government is doing the most


logical thing possible which is all the legislation comes


in on a temporary basis and they have said all those powers


will be devolved in time. They have to do this


because the priority Surely, farmers will


agree with that. Trade will trump the constitution


in terms of priorities. As I said, trade is the most


important issue, that is true. But if we don't have access


to the single market on the terms we do now,


farmers will suffer. There has been no


guarantee of subsidies It is possible we might be


forced to go to a badger cull because of something the UK


Government has agreed. These are and not to be


taken lightly, they are not strained constitutional


issues, they are fundamentally The people of Wales voted in 2011


for the powers the Assembly has now and constitutionally the powers


when they leave Brussels come You talk about a power grab,


does it really stack up? You look at all the problems the UK


Government is facing the moment, are they really desperate to get


hold of farm subsidy That is a wing of the


Conservative Party that is centralist, they still haven't come


to grips with devolution. Now, the principle


powers should not be removed from any devolved Assembly


without the consent of We face a situation where we might


want to do something but we are told you can't do it


and Westminster says, This is a partnership of four


nations at the end of the day. If Westminster was to turn around


and say, we will impose a restriction on ourselves as well,


that might be a different argument. You said earlier on this is


temporarily, where in the Bill does Call me old-fashioned but I want


to see it in writing first. The view there of the First


Minister but what about the Assembly's approach


to the Repeal Bill? In her first interview


since it was published the Presiding Officer Elin Jones


joins me now from Aberystwyth. Good morning.


I suppose the first question to you is, whether you agree with the First


Minister that Wales is facing a constitutional crisis. I certainly


think the bill as it is drafted currently is a recipe for


constitutional uncertainty. There is a serious undermining of the


constitutional settlement as we know it come as it has been voted fourth


by the people of Wales. Therefore, powers that we would have expected


as a result of the EU Brexit referendum to return from the EU to


Wales from Brussels to Cardiff, agricultural powers, fisheries,


environmental, the repeal bill as it is drafted will grab or fleas are


whatever word you wish to use, those powers will be frozen by the UK


Government and not returned and not be able to be utilised by the UK


Government. A crisis is going too far? It is uncertainty, it is crisis


because we don't really know what this will mean for the people of


Wales. It seems to me as if it is the path of greatest resistance to


providing the ability of Parliament throughout the UK to work together,


to come up with a solution that will meet the needs of EU negotiation and


also meet the needs of people, businesses, farmers who need a


degree of certainty as to what life will look like the day after Brexit.


It is the greatest resistance to that because it is now a


constitutional issue between both UK Government and Welsh Government, but


also the Scottish Government, Scottish Parliament and for my


purposes, the National Assembly. This is not their week they


committees of the National Assembly that have been doing significant


work over the last year in working towards Brexit, this is not the way


any of that work has visualised wanted to see. The Brexit being


implemented across the countries of the United Kingdom. The trouble is,


the UK Government is the member state and will be leading the


negotiations. That is not much the Assembly can do. Yes, that is much


the Assembly can do. The Assembly has the gift or not its consent to


this bill as it is drafted. It doesn't seem as if there is a


majority from day one to give that consent to this Bill as it is


drafted. But it could be ignored? There is no statutory legal reason


why the UK Government, it is more convention, or how do you see it


panning out? It is not a good way to do Brexit, to give certainty to


businesses and farmers and communities in Wales that one


Parliament is ignoring the view of another Parliament. There are many


ways in which this could be done better than the way the repeal Bill


is putting forward at the moment. I want to use these next few weeks and


months because time is running out, but the National Assembly has done


much work on this already. It is in some underlying principles that


could be there for the four countries on common frameworks can


make use of powers on day one after Brexit. That can give the certainty


that the UK Government is looking for in its negotiations with the EU.


What would you do if it was ignored? If the vote in the legislative


consent motion was passed at the Assembly to reject the fuel bill and


the UK Government ignored it? If we go to that point, and I


seriously hope we won't, I am confident the UK Government will


work with us to redraft clause 11 which is particularly problematic of


the EU withdrawal bill. If we got at that point where the view of the


Assembly, the view of the Scottish Parliament elected bodies that have


been elected and powers are thereby view of referenda that have happened


in those in Scotland, is that he is ignored then we are in a


constitutional crisis because people have voted for the legislative


constitutional framework that we have currently. For that food to be


ignored by any government of any political colour by any house of


parliament is the constitutional crisis. I am hopeful that we won't


get to that point. There are means of achieving the aims of the UK


Government wants to achieve in its deliberations with the EU without


having to have this constitutional showdown between their National


Assembly, the Scottish Parliament and the UK Parliament. We will have


to leave it there. Thank you very much indeed.


Now, as the Assembly and Westminster get ready to shut up


shop for the summer, which of our politicians can say


With today's Wimbledon tennis final in mind


Cemlyn Davies has been assessing their form


to see who's been serving aces and whose efforts have hit the net.


Politics has never been a love all game and it has been another


year of gripping political drama with parties on all sides


doing their very best to serve aces and catch their opponents out.


An unexpected championship was called last month.


As ever, there were winners and losers.


In Cardiff Bay, the political toing and froing saw the


Conservatives climb up the Assembly rankings overtaking Plaid Cymru


as the second-largest group, thanks to a couple of


It has been a good year for the Welsh Conservatives in the Assembly.


We are the official opposition here in the Assembly.


It does give us the ability to put extra scrutiny


The Welsh Conservatives also made significant gains in the


local elections, however the party's results a month later were less


An electoral upset saw the Conservatives lose three Welsh


seats at the general election as a tactical gamble backfired


The overall vote share went up dramatically for us, up to 34%.


Something we have not achieved for nearly 100 years in Wales.


Sadly, we lost three very good colleagues.


Would you have preferred to have greater influence


As I said, it is easy to look back and to say, I told you so.


We're working together with colleagues to make sure we were in


the best place possible for the next set of elections.


We have to learn the lessons of the last campaign.


We had a very successful local government campaign in Wales, that


was a Welsh-led campaign, a Welsh-led campaign that


delivered real results for the Conservatives in Wales.


Plaid Cymru broke serve in Ceredigion to gain a Parliamentary


seat but the party failed to strike a blow into the target areas like


the Rhondda where party leader Leanne Wood umed


and aahed over standing before finally deciding not to.


I am needed here in the National Assembly.


This is where we want to become the biggest party.


We are focusing now on the next set of Assembly elections.


I will be the candidate for Plaid Cymru for First Minister


Leanne Wood says she is disappointed by Plaid's fall


in the Assembly rankings but she thinks there is still


everything to play for and the scores could change again


Strange things are happening in politics.


Strange alliances and allegiances are being made, particularly because


the Brexit question goes across different party divides.


I think possibly the Assembly we have got now may not be


And what about Dafydd Elis-Thomas's defection?


I think the decision on his part was the right one for both of us.


What about the Assembly's wild cards?


Ukip are about to complete their first full year in Cardiff Bay.


I think I have added a bit of colour to the proceedings


as well which hasn't always been to everybody's taste.


However, Ukip double-faulted in the elections this year


and two of the party's once seven strong team in the Assembly


have now called out since they were elected in 2016.


Our big challenge for next year in the year after is


to establish Ukip's purpose in a post-Brexit Britain.


And so, as Westminster and Cardiff Bay head for


a change of ends after some exhausting rallies, the parties will


A chance to iron out the foot faults and prepare for the next volley


So that's where we are, but what can we expect next?


Dr Sam Blaxland from Swansea University is here with me now.


Good morning. A great opportunity to take stock. Another extraordinary


year. Let's kick off with the general election and Jeremy Corbyn's


performance. I got the impression Welsh Labour whereabouts


differentiating themselves from Jeremy Corbyn and lo and behold he


was more popular than people thought. We can't make Windows into


souls what would've happened if Corbyn would've taken the lead in


Wales. It is the Corbyn factor. He is a very good campaigner, much


better out on the streets. For people like me, of people of my


generation, he is a breath of fresh air even though he is an OAP. He is


a world away from the politics my generation grew up with in terms of


Tony Blair. He had a huge impact for a lot of people. What is remarkable


is he was saying a lot of socialist things, he had a very expensive


manifesto and it was remarkable he went out and said all these things


and wasn't challenged by the Conservatives. That was one of the


significant features of the election. Let's talk about the


Conservatives. A disappointing election. A second disappointing


election result in Wales. It interrupted this narrative of


progress and momentum that we have seen from a low base in the last 20


years. What it boils down to is the share of the vote certain party gets


isn't reflective of the seats they win. As Andrew RT Davies said, they


got a high yet share of the vote than they did in 1993 but then


proceeds fell. It is about the way everything aligned. Plaid Cymru, the


share of their vote went down but they got more seats. It is


confusing. The Conservative momentum stalled. If there was any momentum


there. That's what Knutson said fault of the Conservatives. It came


down to the fact that we have returned to this 2-party system. A


great proportion of the vote was given to Labour and the


Conservatives. The huge fault lines like Leanne Wood said, the big fault


lines in politics are within the political parties themselves.


It is a good point. On that, let's look at the party is caught in the


middle. The Liberal Democrats, an obvious example here, expectation as


we move to the future, how would you see the role they are going to


undertake? Is there any way back. There should be a role for the


Liberal Democrats, they represent 48%. Vince Cable is an interesting


politician and I am glad he re-entered. For some reason, that is


an impotence hanging around there. I don't know if that is a hangover


from their coalition ears. Within the Labour Party and the


Conservatives, there are grants of supporters who look far more like


the Lib Dems than their leaderships. You have a socialist leadership for


the Labour Party and the reasonable Conservative leadership for the


Conservative Party. It isn't going to happen with if I made a wild


prediction about the future of British politics there should be a


real -- the realignment of the parties.


Because of Brexit. Brexit has been the fundamental


dividing point. Are we going to see a general election within the next


year? When I came here last time I said,


yes. Nye Bevan said you can't look into the crystal ball if you had the


book. I don't make predictions about the future because it is bad. I


don't think we will because who would want to go into it? We've got


our Parliament. An element of self preservation for Conservative MPs.


They should be able to tackle the line coming from the Labour Party.


If there was another general election, if all of that was


rewritten again, the Conservative should be able to tackle the big


open goals on policy. There is one other element which is anecdotal but


it is interesting. People were voting for Labour because they were


voting against the complacency of the Conservative Party. That needs


to be taken into consideration. In terms of Brexit, the role of the


Assembly in all of this, briefly, what tact you think it'll take?


It is hard to tell. Ultimately it is the second player here, the main


constitutional aspect of it lies with Westminster, lies with people


like David Davis. Thank you very much indeed.


That's it from us for this series, we'll be back in September.


Twitter never rests of course, we're @walespolitics.


But for now that's all from me, time to go back to Andrew.


This is the last Sunday Politics before Parliament breaks up for the


summer recess, and most MPs could definitely do with some time away


from the political hothouse at Westminster.


But when they come back in September, both the Conservatives


and Labour face some big questions over how to win an overall majority


We'll talk about that in a moment, but first let's have a look at


what's been happening to Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn since polling day


And what we are saying is the Conservatives are the largest party.


Note they don't have an overall majority at this stage.


She who dares doesn't always win. Now let's get to work. The party


that has lost in this election is the Conservative Party. The


arguments they put forward in this election have lost. I think we need


a change. That's not quite true, Labour is a party that lost. The


Government failed and her coming over here to try to speak to... Who?


Who do you want to speak to you had your chance. Now everyone will go


angry and crazy. I think the public will want us to


get the broadest possible consensus in looking at those issues. If the


Prime Minister would like it, I am happy to furnish her with a copy of


our election manifesto. You are now playing for Arsenal! The


comments we were getting back that were passed on to me were that we


were going to get a better results than we did. Devastated enough to


shed a tear? Yes, a little tear at that moment, yes.


Let's start with Mrs May. Another day, another leadership rumour,


challenge. She is tired, she wants to fight on, she doesn't. Is this


corrosive to her leadership? Hugely corrosive. My estimation of what's


really going on in the party, and Tory MPs in Westminster, is the vast


majority and by that I mean probably around 300 don't want a contest.


They want her to stay and finish Brexit, see it through, because of


the incredible Pandora's box that would open. Who's putting these


incredible column inches in the papers? They are giant egos, they


have been at this for several years if not decades and they are keen to


manoeuvre themselves into the position to be the leader. In their


own interests? Because most Tories I speak to think the risk of another


leadership election is horrendous for them because they fear it could


lead to a general election and they will lose. The ones you are talking


about, they put their own self-interest above the interest of


their party. Without a doubt. They are funny bunch, we know them very


well, but they are simply incapable of putting their own interests


underneath those of the country. The problem for Mrs May is this won't


stop. They are going to carry on doing this I think unless she says


something about her own leadership and conference is the time to do it.


She needs to spell out a timetable for herself, when she will stay and


go. She almost did that, didn't she, in her interview with you. She came


very close. I agree with almost everything Thomas said, but those on


the backbenches who don't want a leadership contest, it's not purely


for the good of the country, there is self-interest there too and that


is because they are eyeing up the top job and they need a few years to


build up a following. My view is people like Boris Johnson 's and


Amber Rudd for their own reasons think they stand a better chance


once Brexit is done. At the moment Mr Johnson too toxic for the


Remainers, Amber Rudd too toxic for the Leavers. Last time Mrs May went


walking in the hills, in Wales, she came back and called an election.


She's about to go walking in the Swiss mountains I understand in the


weeks ahead for a break. Is there any chance she comes back and says


I'm not going on with this? No because although I think being a


human being she will be deeply traumatised by what's happened, and


it will probably hit her more intensely when she moves away for a


few days from the cocoon drama of the whole situation, you just have


to keep going and she will be walking and thinking what have I


done? But she is clearly trying to hold on and she's built up a new


Number Ten. Almost an entire new personnel in there. She's brought


Damian Green in as a deputy so there's no sign she plans to go in


the short-term but leadership is partly about a spell on us and her


ministers. The fact that her ministers, even in her interview


when she was being robust in two years, they know that she won't


fight part of the next election which means part of the spell has


gone. When Tony Blair gave a date for his departure, you could feel


the power losing away from him. The fact that assumption is there means


this feverish speculation will carry on until she goes. Let me come on to


Mr Corbyn who would seem to be in a much better position after the


election. What does he now do though? Because if you cannot


provoke an election quite quickly, you never know how long your day in


the sun will be. But he does have a mission or he and the people around


him, they want to take control of those parts of the Labour Party they


don't already take control, and they will probably do it. Absolutely, so


Jeremy Corbyn has established he's a very good campaigner. Everybody now


agrees on that. Look at the clip, he now dresses in a white shirt and a


dark suit, and he actually looks I won't say Prime Minister Arial but


like he could possibly lead the whole country. -- prime ministerial.


But the whole thing is built on protests, there isn't a fully


established policy set up where he is ready to take over the Government


if this election comes. The challenge for him is to turn the


huge generation of support he's got over protest into the ability to


govern. You heard from Rebecca Long-Bailey on Brexit alone, the


party now admitting their policy is cake and eat it, that is not


electorally satisfying. Final word from Isabel. The fact is Mr Corbyn


has been a transformative figure for the Labour Party. If and when he


goes, it's not going back to normal. It is transformative for the Labour


Party and the country. I disagree with Tom, they put forward a more


detailed programme than the Conservatives at the election and be


costed it to some extent. I think to be facing two weighs on Brexit is


the only place for a Leader of the Opposition to beat and he has been


smart on that. Tony Blair when he was a leader faced to microwaves on


single currency, outside of Parliament he seemed be more robust,


but he's played it very smart. All I would say is for Brexiteers we want


more Tony Blair saying it won't happen. You think he's such a toxic


figure that whatever side he supports damages that side?


Absolutely, yes. As a leader of an opposition party you cannot advance


things. All right, we will have to leave it there. Enjoy your summer.


That's all for today, and that's all from us until September.


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


unless it's parliament's summer recess.


But for me it is thank you and goodbye.


It was always a very, very deep love affair


When I think of the world we inhabit, everyone will think,


Yeah. And it wasn't, it was done by hand


Andrew Neil and Arwyn Jones are joined by international trade secretary Liam Fox and shadow business secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey for a look at Ukip's future direction. Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards are on the political panel.