04/03/2018 Sunday Politics Wales

Morning, everyone, and welcome

to the Sunday Politics.

I'm Sarah Smith.

And this is the programme that

will provide your essential briefing

on everything that's moving

and shaking in the

world of politics.

Theresa May's big Brexit speech

appears to have done the impossible

and united both sides

of her party for the time being

but is the devil in the detail?

We'll get the verdicts of former

Tory leader and Brexit supporter

Lord Howard and leading backbencher

and Remain campaigner Nicky Morgan,

and ask if they can

really both be happy.

Away from Brexit, the Government yet

again promises to take on the Nimbys

and build more houses

where we need them most.

Later in the programme:

Carwyn Jones on his visit

to North America and questions

about his leadership,

and would this programme

and others be any different

if broadcasting was devolved?

All that coming up in the programme.

And with me today, I've got three

hardy souls who've struggled

through the harsh conditions

to help me to make sense of all

the big stories - Isabel Oakeshott,

Steve Richards and Anushka Asthana.

Well, it was as week where politics

was often given second billing

to the weather, with people up

and down the country battling

the Beast from the East.

But snow or not, Theresa May had her

crucial Brexit speech to give,

and she had a few big beasts herself

to contend with.

Forget the weather, the UK faced

a Brexit blizzard this week.

On Monday, Jeremy Corbyn offered up

a clear dividing line between Labour

and the Conservatives.

in a customs union with the EU.

Labour would seek to negotiate

a new, comprehensive UK EU customs

union to ensure there are no

tariffs with Europe.

On Tuesday, international

trade secretary Liam Fox

immediately hit back.

It would be a complete sell-out

of Britain's national interest

and a betrayal of the voters

in the referendum.

But his speech was overshadowed

by a warning shot from the former

boss of his own department -

Sir Martin Donnelly said leaving

the single market and the customs

union would risk the UK

going from feast to famine.

It's like giving up a three course

meal for a packet of crisps.

Also on Tuesday, Foreign Secretary

Boris Johnson took to the radio

waves to try to ease tensions

on Northern Ireland after Brexit.

He wasn't entirely persuasive.

There's no border between

Camden and Westminster.

You can't compare two boroughs

of London with the kind

of difference in the arrangements

that would be in place after Brexit

between the UK and the EU.

I think it's a very

On Wednesday, former

Prime Minister Sir John Major said

MPs should be given a free vote

on the final Brexit deal.

So let Parliament decide or put

the issue back to the people.

And the EU Commission published

the first legal draft

of the UK's exit treaty.

The proposals were controversial.

in the customs union

if all else fails.

Theresa May was having none of it.

No UK Prime Minister

could ever agree to it.

On Thursday, diplomatic niceties

with the European Council

President Donald Tusk,

as he got a preview of the Prime

Minister's big Brexit speech.

But the real test would come later,

when she would need a lot

of grit to keep all members

of her own party onside.

The big day arrived,

and with it some hard truths.

We are leaving the single market.

We are leaving the single market.

In certain ways, our access to each

other's markets will be

less than it is now.

left the jurisdiction

of the European Court of Justice,

EU law and the decisions of the ECJ

will continue to affect us.

This was also a pitch

for a pick and mix Brexit.

She said all EU trade deals

are tailor-made and what Britain

wants is no different.

If this is cherry picking,

then every trade arrangement

is cherry picking.

He was happy, and so was he.

Despite being stranded

and left out in the cold.

So, has the Prime Minister managed

between her Cabinet on Brexit?

between her Cabinet on Brexit?

There is more than enough to chew

over with our expert panel who will

tell us what's been going on behind

tell us what's been going on behind

the scenes this week. Anushka, we

asked the question, has she

the scenes this week. Anushka, we

the impossible and

the scenes this week. Anushka, we

factions of the Conservative Party

over Brexit? It looks that way,

factions of the Conservative Party

it stay that way?

It is impressive

politically that your guests will

both have some praise for the

politically that your guests will

but it doesn't mean

politically that your guests will

each other when it comes to Brexit.

politically that your guests will

I'm sure there's a lot they continue

politically that your guests will

to disagree about. She managed to do

politically that your guests will

that by doubling down on the red

lines she already had but saying

that by doubling down on the red

beyond that we will try to

that by doubling down on the red

close as we can to the EU. I don't

think the Brexiteers are totally

think the Brexiteers are totally

happy, they see this as a staging

post and happy that what she said

future parliaments can change it.

She has done a magic trick now but

future parliaments can change it.

trouble ahead still.

Isabel, a lot

of it was how in the

trouble ahead still.

Isabel, a lot

future we will stay tangibly similar

to EU rules and regulations, that

future we will stay tangibly similar

won't hold with the

future we will stay tangibly similar

will it?

Only an idiot would predict

future we will stay tangibly similar

peace and harmony within the Tory

party for more than a few days.

party for more than a few days. I

think they recognise the immense

party for more than a few days. I

discipline the Prime Minister

injected into the speech, in some

ways that means bits of it don't

please everybody. There was

ways that means bits of it don't

frustration at the way she handled

some of the questions afterwards.

frustration at the way she handled

Some would have liked her, for

frustration at the way she handled

example Nigel Farage, outside of the

party of course, would have

example Nigel Farage, outside of the

her to be more explicit that no deal

remains an

her to be more explicit that no deal

hand, had she said that, that is

provocative. I think

hand, had she said that, that is

she struck a balance and a great

feeling of positivity this weekend,

maybe not next.

Steve, did it tell

us a huge amount about what Brexit

maybe not next.

Steve, did it tell

deal might look like? Or is Theresa

maybe not next.

Steve, did it tell

May sitting on the fence about what

May sitting on the fence about what

the future deal will be?

I don't

think she is sitting on the fence.

think she is sitting on the fence.

She gave a clear idea of what she

envisages it to be. Watching it, and

reading it several times, I have

reached the conclusion that she is

reading it several times, I have

the only person that can lead this

party.

You have Michael Howard on in a

minute, you knows how difficult

You have Michael Howard on in a

is to do. She can do it and I think

they would be

is to do. She can do it and I think

her. However, having read the

is to do. She can do it and I think

bombs metaphorically

is to do. She can do it and I think

the budgets that go down well on the

day and then turn out to have hidden

bombs, I think this one does. In

day and then turn out to have hidden

admission we are giving up things,

we won't have the same market

access, in saying we have given up

passporting

access, in saying we have given up

services already. She did it to show

access, in saying we have given up

we weren't having our cake and

access, in saying we have given up

eating it, she was honest, but it is

depressing to have that candour

eating it, she was honest, but it is

explained so clearly. And in

explaining we will be fully aligned

with the EU in many ways but have

the right to diverged even if it is

against our interest. And the all of

the right to diverged even if it is

this, to have the right to

the right to diverged even if it is

at a future date seems fraught with

the right to diverged even if it is

difficulty. I see problems down

road.

Steve's point about only this

Prime Minister can lead the party is

a very astute one and that's what

a very astute one and that's what

I'm picking up this weekend, even

from those who have been her

I'm picking up this weekend, even

harshest critics, at her ability not

to say too much which makes her seem

to say too much which makes her seem

rather boring at times is precisely

the reason she can manage these

delicate factions. I definitely feel

time has run out now for those who

would like to have seen her gone

well before Brexit next year. I feel

would like to have seen her gone

that has evaporated milk. We might

be in a different place in a few

months but I would suspect not.

Anushka bitchy answer the question

about the border between the

Republic and Northern Ireland? Simon

Coveney said he's not sure the

Republic and Northern Ireland? Simon

can support

Republic and Northern Ireland? Simon

with.

Both sides can smile and say

they don't want a border, the

question is how you achieve that.

they don't want a border, the

The Government have put forward

these options, a customs partnership

The Government have put forward

which is a slightly weird system

The Government have put forward

under which there would be checks on

the UK border that would then be

under which there would be checks on

acceptable for the rest of the

under which there would be checks on

The problem is the rest of the EU

have suggested that won't be

acceptable to them, and even very

senior figures in Government around

acceptable to them, and even very

the Cabinet table have told me they

acceptable to them, and even very

think it is a completely unrealistic

option. The second option is to use

technology to make it flow freely,

perhaps not quite as Boris Johnson

was suggesting, it happens in the

perhaps not quite as Boris Johnson

congestion charge in London. He was

slightly mocked for those

but can there be a way to make it

softer in that way?

but can there be a way to make it

can but there is no evidence

but can there be a way to make it

would end up with no border. Then

would end up with no border. Then

there's that tricky situation of the

EU saying the backstop is Northern

Ireland stays in the customs union,

and the Prime Minister says that is

unacceptable.

Thank you for that,

stay with

Theresa May was on the

Andrew Marr Show this

morning, and she was asked how

the UK's rules and regulations

might move away from

the EU's in the future.

Parliament will be able to take

decisions about the rules that

are set, so in the circumstances

in which the EU

change a particular rule,

there'd be a decision

for us to take.

Did we accept it

in the future or not?

But if we didn't accept it,

there'd be an arbitration mechanism,

an independent arbitration

mechanism, so people

would look at it and say,

actually, you know what,

if the UK doesn't accept that,

does it make any difference

to the trading relationship?

so there's no consequence.

They might say yes, it does,

and so there would be a consequence.

So you're saying we might

lose market access -

the more we diverge,

the more market access

we might lose in the future.

There'd be a decision to be taken.

Joining me now from

Loughborough is the former

Education Secretary Nicky Morgan,

who put her name down on a Commons

amendment that calls for the UK

to participate in a customs union

with the EU after Brexit.

Good morning. So you heard

Good morning. So you heard the Prime

Minister ruling out a customs

Good morning. So you heard the Prime

which is what you say you want, and

Good morning. So you heard the Prime

they will be less access to EU

markets in future, you cannot be

very happy with this speech, can

you?

I thought it was a very

very happy with this speech, can

realistic speech that set out the

compromises and hard facts we have

to face, and I think it was a

to face, and I think it was a

welcome dose of realism. That's why

to face, and I think it was a

I think it has been welcomed

to face, and I think it was a

people on all sides of the debate

people on all sides of the debate

because we can get

people on all sides of the debate

pretending things will stay the

same, that we can have the same

benefits, and be

same, that we can have the same

ourselves and our constituents about

what that means. The reason MPs put

down amendments is to get ministers

to explain their position is more

fully and that's what we began to

see in the Prime Minister's speech

on this issue of the border between

Northern Ireland, the

on this issue of the border between

Ireland on Friday. The Prime

Ireland on Friday. The Prime

Minister could not have been more

clear this morning and last week

that she does not want to see a hard

border between them, and that's

that she does not want to see a hard

where we are as well. I think there

are more discussions to come about

the two options, as Anushka was

are more discussions to come about

setting out, that the Prime Minister

outlined, and we will have to see

outlined, and we will have to see

what happens when the bill comes

back to the

what happens when the bill comes

amendment wasn't just about Northern

Ireland, it said you want the UK to

stay in the customs union with the

EU. Now you say you want to talk to

stay in the customs union with the

the Prime Minister about this. Talk

about what? We are either in the

customs union or knots and her

speech made it clear she didn't want

a customs union.

I can speak for

myself and my colleagues, many of

myself and my colleagues, many of

whom put their name down, it was

about the Irish border issue because

many of us got to the stage of

thinking how can this be resolved

without being in a customs union. I

think many of us don't care what

without being in a customs union. I

is called, it's a question of what

without being in a customs union. I

it does. Does it avoid a hard border

and small traders having to make

declarations each time they crossed

and small traders having to make

the border? I was a Treasury duties

and small traders having to make

minister, I visited the Irish border

and it is 300 miles of incredibly

porous countryside basically. People

are crossing it everyday for work,

for trading, and it's not just about

the economics, it's about the

cultural and political significance

of not a hard border.

The Irish

government and Irish Foreign

government and Irish Foreign

Minister Simon Coveney were

government and Irish Foreign

this morning he didn't think EU

would accept this. Theresa May said

a long she doesn't want a hard

border, just saying that doesn't

mean it won't happen and the EU

don't seem satisfied with what she

mean it won't happen and the EU

laid out as a possible solution.

The

mean it won't happen and the EU

first point is, as I said in a tweet

on Friday, the EU cannot say and

Simon Coveney recognise that this

morning, the EU cannot say it

doesn't know what the UK Government

wants. Simon Coveney also agreed, as

the Prime Minister rightly set out,

wants. Simon Coveney also agreed, as

this is a problem that has been

created by Brexit and it's up to the

UK Government, the EU and Irish

government to work together to find

a solution. I think it

government to work together to find

talks will continue in one of those

areas where it is best for the Irish

areas where it is best for the Irish

government and UK Government to be

talking directly because at

government and UK Government to be

moment what's been remarkable is how

cohesive the 27 have been in

cohesive the 27 have been

negotiating through the commission

but there may be ways to speed up

discussions, particularly on the

Irish border issue. What we

discussions, particularly on the

Friday is the Prime Minister saying

there's difficult things ahead.

Friday is the Prime Minister saying

People won't remember ultimately the

negotiations, they will remember the

enduring deal that's struck, that

puts livelihoods and economic

One of the hard

One of the hard

One of the hard

laid out is we will have less access

laid out is we will have less access

to EU markets. That is

things that you as a Remainer have

been worried about. Maybe she is

being pragmatic and you're welcome

being pragmatic and you're welcome

that, but is that pragmatism not

being pragmatic and you're welcome

admitting were going to be worse off

being pragmatic and you're welcome

in future as a result of this?

I

think it probably is. Actually,

while the speech was well come in

while the speech was well come in

its towns, it did set out some of

these hard truths. Some people have

said, nothing will change, it will

have exactly the same benefits but

said, nothing will change, it will

that is not the case. I am

said, nothing will change, it will

the Treasury Select Committee, we

said, nothing will change, it will

look at financial services. That

look at financial services. That

industry understands that things are

industry understands that things are

going to change. The Prime Minister

was clear, no more passporting.

going to change. The Prime Minister

People have reconciled themselves to

this in the city. What next? The

Prime Minister is talking about

this in the city. What next? The

mutual recognition of

this in the city. What next? The

that is the way to go, that is

this in the city. What next? The

achievable, but this is the start of

negotiations and it is a long way to

achievable, but this is the start of

go. At least we are now on the

starting blocks. Your right to say

that many of us have been concerned

about the prosperity and livelihoods

of people in our constituencies and

our businesses. We welcome this

speech but we will continue to watch

out for any drifting backwards

towards some kind of idea logically

out for any drifting backwards

driven hard Brexit. That does not

benefit anybody. As the Prime

driven hard Brexit. That does not

Minister said on Friday, reverting

to WTO is not a good outcome that

will benefit people in this country.

The Prime Minister made clear that

The Prime Minister made clear that

the UK after Brexit can choose

The Prime Minister made clear that

stay aligned with the rules and

regulations of the EU or future

regulations of the EU or future

parliaments to choose to diverged.

In those circumstances you will be

fighting every step of

In those circumstances you will be

try to stay aligned with the EU, I

take it?

Not necessarily. That was a

really well come statement from the

Prime Minister. It is for the

sovereign parliament to be making

these decisions in future, which is

why we had the debate

these decisions in future, which is

amendment in December because

ultimately it should be sovereign

amendment in December because

Parliament that makes these key

decisions in the future. In terms of

divergences regulation, there may

well be good arguments in the future

by businesses and industry say, we

do not need to be aligned with that

by businesses and industry say, we

regulation, because there is a

by businesses and industry say, we

higher international standard that

higher international standard that

we can all get around and following

that will benefit our businesses.

The point is, at the moment,

Parliament will take decisions about

things on the basis of listening to

constituents, and that is what will

happen in the future. That is

welcome. Financial services, that is

happen in the future. That is

the message we're getting by, there

are some international standards,

the message we're getting by, there

which is what business already

comply with, higher standards than

the EU, and that is what businesses

want to on complying with.

Nicky

the EU, and that is what businesses

Morgan, thank you

Listening to that is the former

Conservative leader Lord Howard,

who campaigned for Britain

to leave the EU.

You were nodding away

You were nodding away

You were nodding away

with

You were nodding away

through that interview. Not

something we thought we were going

through that interview. Not

to see happen in the studio.

You

agree with her? I agree with very

much of what she said and I am

agree with her? I agree with very

delighted to be able

agree with her? I agree with very

her. Can I just say this about the

speech on Friday, I thought

her. Can I just say this about the

should the Prime Minister at her

best, cam, patient, disciplined.

should the Prime Minister at her

That is exactly the kind of approach

should the Prime Minister at her

we need in these negotiations. I

should the Prime Minister at her

think Steve Richards was right when

think Steve Richards was right when

he said she is the only person who

can lead the country through these

negotiations, and she showed her

negotiations, and she showed her

qualities on Friday, and I think it

qualities on Friday, and I think it

was an excellent speech, and it

qualities on Friday, and I think it

something, of course it is a good

thing from my point of view that it

seems to have united the

Conservative Party, but more

importantly, I think it has united

the country. I think everyone in the

country, except perhaps those few

people are neither extreme, can

rally round. People like John Major

and Tony Blair? I fear that on this

rally round. People like John Major

issue John Major and Tony Blair are

to make love the

issue John Major and Tony Blair are

never been able to reconcile

themselves to the results of the

never been able to reconcile

referendum. I think a large majority

never been able to reconcile

of people in the country, even of

those who voted Remain, they now

say, let's get on with it and see

what we can get out of these

negotiations. Nicky Morgan

what we can get out of these

absolutely right when she said

what we can get out of these

in years to come people will not be

looking back at the negotiations.

They will be looking back at the

outcome.

The negotiations matter

because they determine the outcome.

outcome.

The negotiations matter

You like the tone of the speech.

When you look at the detail, does it

When you look at the detail, does it

really amounted taking back control

When you look at the detail, does it

when the Prime Minister says the UK

will need to make a strong

commitment that regulatory standards

will remain as high as the EU and in

practice they will remain similar in

the future?

That is not what you

campaign for. In many respects they

will be similar. As

campaign for. In many respects they

Minister said this morning, on the

Andrew Marr programme, these

regulations are not EU

Andrew Marr programme, these

the international regulations. The

crucial thing is that our sovereign

the international regulations. The

parliament, in future, will be able

parliament, in future, will be able

to decide whether we remain in a

layman, which in many cases would be

a sensible thing to do, or whether

layman, which in many cases would be

we diverged, which could also be

we diverged, which could also be

sensible. That is what taking back

control means.

The sovereign

parliament will decide. Look at

where we do remain in alignment and

where we do remain in alignment and

a hard fact that Theresa May picked

out

a hard fact that Theresa May picked

access we may have to maintain a

layman. The EU will change their

rules over the next few deals --

over the next few years. We will end

up having to mirror rules that we

over the next few years. We will end

had no say at all in making if we

had no say at all in making if we

want to maintain access.

That is not

control. We will be able to decide.

In some cases it may be sensible to

change rules to remain in alignment

with the European Union's rules but

in other cases it will not be, and

we will be able to decide. That is

in other cases it will not be, and

what taking back control means.

You're perfectly happy with

associated membership of some of the

EU agencies, medicine, chemicals,

the aviation safety agency, and with

paying a fee to be -- to be a

the aviation safety agency, and with

member. Very sensible. A year ago

you would not have

member. Very sensible. A year ago

that you wanted to stay a member of

any of these agents is a tall.

You

never ask me. You would have been

never ask me. You would have been

surprised by the answer. These are

sensible, practical arrangements

that we benefit from, and the EU

benefits.

It is sensible. We were

promised famously by David Davis

promised famously by David Davis

benefits of being in the customs

union and the single market after

Brexit. The Prime Minister herself

said something similar. Now she's

telling us we will have less access.

When people were told we could leave

the EU and maintain the same

benefits, were they being lied to?

the EU and maintain the same

Not at all. I think it is a

consequence of what the Prime

Minister has said, that in all

important respects, we will have the

access we need. There may be some

areas where that will not be

access we need. There may be some

case, but she dealt with the most

access we need. There may be some

important aspect in her speech on

Friday and should have in the most

Friday and should have in the most

important areas

Friday and should have in the most

have access. I think that will be

the outcome. It is in the interests

of the European Union as well as

of the European Union as well as

ourselves that that should be

of the European Union as well as

They want access to our large

market. We are one of

They want access to our large

biggest economies in the world. They

want access to our markets. It will

biggest economies in the world. They

be on both our interest to reach

that sort of agreement.

Both wings

of the Tory party might be happy

with this. The speech was received

less enthusiastically in Brussels.

The EU will publish their draft

guidelines on how they see a future

deal on Tuesday. If they do not

accept the approach that Theresa May

accept the approach that Theresa May

has laid out, what should she do

accept the approach that Theresa May

next?

Let's concentrate on the

positives. We are in a negotiation.

There will inevitably be posturing

by the European Union in the course

of these negotiations. That is what

negotiations always bring with them.

But I think, as I say, it is in

negotiations always bring with them.

our interest that we should have a

good deal. At the end of the day,

they want our money. They will not

get our money unless there is a good

deal.

It has been said that a trade

deal cannot be said by putting up a

few extra cherries in the Brexit

cake. This speech did not persuade

him that is a deal to be done.

He

cake. This speech did not persuade

not in charge of the negotiations.

Michel Barnier did not seem terribly

impressed. Are they going to accept

the Prime Minister's view that you

can accept

the Prime Minister's view that you

different sectors?

Let's wait and

the Prime Minister's view that you

see. Michel Barnier welcome the

speech. There is lots of posturing.

It is invading tress and hours to

arrive at a

It is invading tress and hours to

similar to that which the Prime

Minister set on Friday.

You're being

very positive about with the EU is

likely to do. They may well not do

likely to do. They may well not do

that. Is there a point at which the

likely to do. They may well not do

Prime Minister may be forced to walk

Prime Minister may be forced to walk

away because they will not meet

halfway?

I hope not but if you go

into any negotiations in, I want to

deal at any price, you will be taken

to the cleaners. That is true of

every negotiation. I agree with the

to the cleaners. That is true of

Prime Minister when she says that in

the ultimate circumstance, no deal

is better than a bad deal,

the ultimate circumstance, no deal

not think we're going to have a bad

not think we're going to have a bad

deal, I think we're going to have a

deal along the lines the Prime

deal, I think we're going to have a

Minister set out on Friday.

She

deal, I think we're going to have a

we are going to have to

deal, I think we're going to have a

and we are not going to get what we

want. We will have to meet someone

in

want. We will have to meet someone

response from the EU has not been to

say, we agree, let's talk about

say, we agree, let's talk about

to maintain a lot of

say, we agree, let's talk about

lines about cherry picking.

That

say, we agree, let's talk about

will change. Their approach to the

negotiations on the

will change. Their approach to the

changed. All sorts of figures were

bandied about about the

changed. All sorts of figures were

would have to pay and they bore no

reality to the ultimate outcome.

would have to pay and they bore no

have to take these initial

negotiating positions with a pinch

negotiating positions with a pinch

of salt.

When the EU was negotiating

negotiating positions with a pinch

with Greece during its financial

crisis, they were absolutely

insistent, they did not soften their

lines.

No disrespect to Greece, but

we are not Greece. The European

Union needs access to our markets.

The European Union needs our money.

Union needs access to our markets.

The situation is very, very

Union needs access to our markets.

different from that which happened

between the EU and Greece.

Lord

Howard, thank you for talking to us

this morning.

As we've heard, Jeremy Corbyn

made his own big speech on Brexit

earlier in the week and he backed

a customs union.

So how would it work?

With me from Salford

is the Shadow Communities

Secretary, Andrew Gwynne.

Thank you very much for coming in

speak to us today. We have got to

make a very different approaches.

Jeremy Corbyn at

make a very different approaches.

the week saying he wanted to stay in

the week saying he wanted to stay in

a customs union, Theresa May on

Friday pretty much ruling it out. Is

it not Theresa May who is being

honest with the voters by laying out

honest with the voters by laying out

the hard fact, as she puts it, that

we will have to accept we have less

access to the EU market?

Absolutely

not. That we are leaving the

European Union is decided. We had

not. That we are leaving the

referendum, but the Thames by

not. That we are leaving the

we leave the European Union is what

the negotiations are all about

we leave the European Union is what

the Labour Party has always said it

would seek to maintain the benefits

of a customs union. In

would seek to maintain the benefits

we have set out our proposals for

would seek to maintain the benefits

what we think that new arrangement

should be, I bespoke agreement

should be, I bespoke agreement

between the EU in the UK that would

between the EU in the UK that would

maintain the benefits

between the EU in the UK that would

trade between the UK and the

European Union going forward. But

one in which we are equal partners,

so we have a say on those new trade

deals that are being made and a half

of the new arrangements between our

two trading blocs.

That has never

happened with any other country that

two trading blocs.

That has never

has entered into a customs union

has entered into a customs union

with the EU. Why do you think they

would give us an equal say, one of

with the EU. Why do you think they

us against 27 of them,

with the EU. Why do you think they

to a negotiating a trade deal with

someone else somewhere else in the

world?

The EU is different trading

world?

The EU is different trading

arrangements with different

countries.

It does and none of them

have a say in outside

countries.

It does and none of them

The difference here, as Lord Howard

said, we are the largest economy the

said, we are the largest economy the

world. The European Union has

said, we are the largest economy the

important trading

United Kingdom, it is a two-way

process, and therefore it is in

United Kingdom, it is a two-way

of interest that we strike a deal

United Kingdom, it is a two-way

that benefits both of us.

I do not

know what is happening on this

programme. You are agreeing with

Laura Taarabt, he's agreeing with

Laura Taarabt, he's agreeing with

Nicky Morgan. It is a very unusual

Nicky Morgan. It is a very unusual

morning.

You're all in the same

side. The

morning.

You're all in the same

Conservatives have ruled out a

customs union, and we are saying

that a customs

customs union, and we are saying

least that we can give real

least that we can give real

assurances that the Good Friday

Agreement and our treaty obligations

in the Good Friday Agreement are not

torn up. We do

in the Good Friday Agreement are not

advantage is that we have seen of 20

years of peace between Northern

Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

If

Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

customs union but you do not get a

large say in future trade deals with

countries outside of the EU and

large say in future trade deals with

just have to accept what is

negotiated by the EU 27, would you

negotiated by the EU 27, would you

still want to be in that customs

union?

We would have to look at that

carefully. We want to be a rule

maker and not a real taker.

carefully. We want to be a rule

hard to do that if you

carefully. We want to be a rule

customs union. Unless you have a

carefully. We want to be a rule

arrangement whereby the

carefully. We want to be a rule

Kingdom sits at the table when those

Kingdom sits at the table when those

trade deals are being made. That is

trade deals are being made. That is

make. We believe we would be in

trade deals are being made. That is

better position to make those

better position to make those

arrangements with the European Union

because we have approached the

Brexit negotiations in an entirely

different manner. We have said what

different manner. We have said what

we would like to see in terms of

transitional

we would like to see in terms of

government subsequently followed on

a number of those issues, but all

along we have said that we want to

along we have said that we want to

maintain the benefits of tariff free

custom free trade, and that is

absolutely crucial, not least for

the Northern Ireland issue.

One

absolutely crucial, not least for

the things the Labour Party was

looking forward to have to Brexit,

and that Jeremy Corbyn has stressed,

was the freedom from

and that Jeremy Corbyn has stressed,

rules, where the EU stops the UK

Government from giving

rules, where the EU stops the UK

assistance to any particular sector

of industry. Theresa May spoke about

that on Friday and said it

of industry. Theresa May spoke about

necessary to sign up to the

of industry. Theresa May spoke about

directives on state aid and

procurement rules, to keep those EU

rules. Do you accept that will have

to

No, and we have a different view

anyway. When it came to our

arguments the Government

anyway. When it came to our

in to assist the steel industry in

anyway. When it came to our

Britain, the Government used these

anyway. When it came to our

fallacies about state aid rules to

excuse themselves for not giving

fallacies about state aid rules to

adequate support to that industry.

We didn't believe in the

adequate support to that industry.

interpretation the Government made

adequate support to that industry.

because other European countries

have got round the so-called state

aid rules. We have said as part of

our negotiations, that is a red line

for us. We would want to make sure

we could facilitate state aid in a

number of areas where Labour Party

policies have been clearer about

number of areas where Labour Party

supporting our industries.

If that

is a red line, is it more important

staying in the customs union, if

is a red line, is it more important

have to make the choice? The EU

could say no customs union if you

have to make the choice? The EU

insist on state aid.

We believe we

could get a bespoke arrangement for

a new customs relationship, a new

customs union.

I think there's a

name for that, isn't it called

cherry picking?

No because

name for that, isn't it called

believe this is in the interests of

believe this is in the interests of

the UK and in the interests of the

European Union. 44% of our trade is

with the European Union, 53% of the

EU's trade is with the UK so it is

with the European Union, 53% of the

in both our interests that we sort

this out and get the best deal not

in both our interests that we sort

for the European

in both our interests that we sort

Britain outside of the European

Union.

You seem to be saying

Britain outside of the European

Tory government are asking for

Britain outside of the European

impossible in their negotiations and

Britain outside of the European

won't get what they are looking for

Britain outside of the European

but somehow if there was a Labour

government negotiating this deal,

all doors would open

government negotiating this deal,

be able to select which bit of the

government negotiating this deal,

customs union you did

government negotiating this deal,

like and could have a bespoke deal

government negotiating this deal,

that is not available for some

reason to Theresa May.

They ruled

out a customs union, I think that is

a bad decision because I believe a

customs union, negotiated between

the UK and the European Union 27 is

in the best

the UK and the European Union 27 is

customs free tariff-free trade going

the UK and the European Union 27 is

forward but also sorting

the UK and the European Union 27 is

issue of the border between Ireland,

north and south.

Labour set out six

north and south.

Labour set out six

tests as to whether

north and south.

Labour set out six

for the Brexit deal in the end and

north and south.

Labour set out six

one of those was that it had to

one of those was that it had to

deliver the same benefits we get

from being in the single market and

customs union. That was a quote from

David Davis, but Theresa May

customs union. That was a quote from

been clear we are not going to get

the same benefits. Does this mean

Labour under

the same benefits. Does this mean

be able to vote for any Brexit deal

be able to vote for any Brexit deal

that's been negotiated?

Let's see

what Brexit deal comes back before

we have a hypothetical vote on this.

You don't think there's

we have a hypothetical vote on this.

circumstances in which it could come

back...

I believe if the Government

wanted to enter into negotiations to

do that, they could do that. The

fact the Prime Minister has conceded

is probably because they

fact the Prime Minister has conceded

out a customs union. We believe that

fact the Prime Minister has conceded

is the wrong decision, we believe

that arrangement is

is the wrong decision, we believe

let's see what the Government comes

back with and then we will decide

how we vote in parliament.

Parliament has got a meaningful vote

how we vote in parliament.

and that was something that had to

be secured through the parliamentary

processes. The Government weren't

going to give

processes. The Government weren't

think it is right it is ultimately

processes. The Government weren't

Parliament that decides.

Thank you.

It's coming up to 11.40,

you're watching the Sunday Politics.

Still to come...

As the government promises to cut

red tape to get more houses built,

we'll ask the Cabinet Office

minister David Lidington

whether they're finally prepared

to take on the nimbys.

First though, it's

time for the Sunday Politics

where you are.

Hello and welcome to

Sunday Politics Wales.

In a few minutes' time,

the American Ambassador on what kind

of Brexit deal would suit US firms

in Wales, and should

broadcasting be devolved

from Westminster to Cardiff Bay?

If so, how could it work?

But first, Carwyn Jones has spent

St David's Day in North America,

drumming up business

and making contacts.

Here at home, questions over

Labour's policy on Brexit

and his own future have continued.

When my colleague Daniel Davies

caught up with him a few days ago

in New York,

he put it to the First Minister

that it was difficult to show real

benefits to Wales from

overseas visits such as these.

People appreciate that I'm here.

Yesterday I was in Philadelphia,

I met with two companies there

with plans to expand in Wales

and they value the fact you take

the time to come and see

them, they want to show

you their facilities in the States.

It's a competitive world and we have

to be out there flying the flag

for Wales to make sure the flow

of jobs continues.

Let's look at exports

to North America from Wales -

between 2012 and 2016 they fell

by £1 billion so it shows

those visits you've been making

over those four years,

it's not having much

impact in that department.

Far from it.

We're seeing more jobs

being created in Wales,

I'm confident that at the end

of this visit we'll see

more being announced

in the future as well.

We want to help exporters look

at the US market and I met some

in Washington on Monday to help them

to understand the US,

its regulations and licensing,

and that's why we have offices

around North America and soon

one in Canada as well.

While you're here, back home

the opposition are saying your

position on trade after Brexit

is complete chaos.

You have been sending out mixed

signals, haven't you,

on what sort of trading

arrangements you want?

Stay in the Customs Union,

full and unfettered access

to the Single Market,

if there is some kind of free trade

agreement between Europe and the US

that works in the future then fine.

We talk of chaos -

the other parties, come on!

The mess they are in,

the Conservative Party

have an extremist wing

who want to cut us off

from Europe completely,

a pragmatic wing who are kicking

us all over the place.

I've no idea what the UK

Government's endgame is here.

We have been clear over

the past year as to what

we would like to see.

You have said consistently you want

to stay in the Customs Union

but you said before coming here that

you would press the case

for a free trade agreement

between the UK and the US.

It's inconsistent.

It's a backstop.

Absolutely we want to stay

in the Customs Union and get full

access to the Single Market.

The UK Government says it

doesn't want to do that

so you explore your options,

any rational government would do

that but the preferred option has

to be to stay

within the Customs Union.

So it does sound a bit that you want

to have your cake and eat it,

the very thing you have been

accusing the Brexiteers are doing.

You want to stay in the Customs

Union, you also want to talk

about free trade with America.

You keep your options open.

Let's be clear, I think the UK

should stay in the Customs Union.

There is no evidence to suggest

we would be better off

outside the Customs Union.

The UK Government could decide

to take us out of the Customs Union,

so then it makes sense to explore

less palatable options

but options nevertheless.

You have to cover all your bases

when involved in politics

but let me be clear,

staying in the Customs Union

is the best way forward for Wales.

How many more trips like this

do you think you'll make

as First Minister?

It's difficult to tell.

It's as and when.

With the US, being here on St

David's Day is hugely important.

We hosted a reception

on Capitol Hill on Monday night,

very well attended, creating

those political connections.

It's important for us to know what's

happening in US politics in terms

of what might happen as far

as market access for the future.

We have more than 20 congressmen

who are part of a Welsh caucus

who work with us to understand

what's happening in US politics.

In terms of other visits

it's as and when.

What I'm getting at is for how much

longer are you going to be

as First Minister able to come here?

Why don't you set a timetable

for your time in office,

as your predecessor did?

I know that was what you were

asking, carefully, you may come out

and ask the question.

What you have to do is carry on,

from my perspective of course

there comes a point where somebody

else would step into the role

of First Minister, of course that's

natural but for the moment

I'm focused on getting jobs.

The opposition parties haven't been

talking about jobs or business

or getting investment to Wales

in the last few weeks,

this is what I'm here to do.

What we care about is can you get

skilled, well-paid jobs into Wales

from the US and Canada?

That's what this trip is about.

And you're not tempted

to lay out a timetable,

as Rhodri Morgan did,

for when you might stand down?

No, I think from my perspective it's

a question of looking

forward to the future.

I think it is hugely important

with all the enquiries we have,

it is hugely important

to see those through.

I think it would be quite wrong

for anybody to disappear

in the middle of that process

and that is hugely important.

And we'll stick with

the US for a moment,

because overnight Donald Trump has

taken to Twitter to step up

a row over trade tariffs.

Last week, before this row

escalated, the US ambassador

was in Wales for St David's Day.

Robert Johnson -

Woody to his friends -

is a wealthy businessman,

so when Nick Servini spoke to him

he obviously asked him about trade

after Brexit and what kind

of deal his country would favour.

We want to sell and we want to buy,

so the best way to do

that is what we will

be interested in.

This is the big debate here and now

I'm spending a lot of time on that

but that's the way America

look at it.

There are tens of thousands

of Welsh workers working

for American companies.

When you speak to US

firms are they concerned

about the impact of Brexit?

Business doesn't like uncertainty

so as a businessman myself,

you're always trying to get rid

of uncertainty or go into

environments which are more certain.

Our jobs are analysing risk

and reward so uncertainty raises

the risks and you don't know how

it's going to turn out,

so as this rolls through,

as Brexit rolls through,

clarity will become more clear.

And many of those companies came

to the UK, came to Wales primarily

because it offered a gateway

to the rest of the EU.

Do you think in future

if there are trading barriers

between the UK and the rest

of the EU, that will affect future

investment decisions?

I think rather than speculate

you will have to see.

It will always be a gateway

for somewhere, Europe as well,

it will always be that,

because of the language

and because of the culture,

the historical relationships

and the legal system,

it's very important,

and that has to do with

certainty and uncertainty.

People talk about the special

relationship between

the UK and the States.

When you look at Brexit, I wonder,

does it make sense to leave

the EU and not be able

to strike your own trade deals

with the rest of the world,

which is what would happen

if we stayed in the Customs Union?

I think the Americans have quite

a large investment in the UK,

trillions of dollars and millions

of jobs on both sides of the pond,

so we would like, our preference

as stated by Wilbur Ross,

Secretary of Commerce,

was leave room for the US,

leave room for relationships outside

of the EU and so what he meant

by that is there's

a big world out there.

It's a fascinating time

for you in the job.

With such an unspoken president do

you find yourself firefighting

diplomatically all the time?

Not really, because I think

the citizens of the UK are starting

to understand the President a little

better because he now been

in for a little over a year

and the market has gone up from,

probably at 20%, up to, what...

It started about 19,000 and now it's

about 26,000, a good jump.

What do you think we need

to understand about him?

I think that what you have

to understand about this President

is understand what he's doing,

what he's done and what he's

accomplished in one year.

People have said in his first year

he's already accomplished

close to 70% of his objectives.

That's pretty amazing,

especially since it was very hard

for him to get people appointed

and all the obstacles

that were thrown up,

some self-inflicted you might say,

but whatever way you look at him,

I think you have to look

at the accomplishments,

the taxes, the employment levels,

the customer confidence

levels and all that,

the changes in the military

which he said he wanted to do

and that's started in a major way

and just the optimism of Americans

right now in terms of making sure

the middle class is growing

and people are feeling more

optimistic finally about leaving

the place better than they found it

which was starting to disappear.

Mr Johnson...

One year!

Mr Johnson, thank you very much.

Thank you.

Now, should programmes broadcast

in Wales be controlled from here?

One leading academic says that

could mean less money

to spend on services.

This week the Welsh Government

said the time wasn't

right for such a move.

So how practical could it be

and what might be the benefits?

Eleanor Gruffydd Jones reports.

This is BBC Radio Wales.

Welcome to the program.

Wales is waking up to

another day of disruption.

Heavy snowfall and strong

winds overnight...

When Wales turns white,

people reach for their radios,

turn on their TVs and hit the web.

Without thinking, broadcasting comes

into its own as people tune

in and get online for the latest

info, so does it matter

who controls this?

This week Elfed Wyn Jones

ended his seven-day hunger strike

to push for transferring powers over

Welsh language broadcasting

from Westminster to Cardiff Bay.

Plaid also held a debate

on the topic in the Senedd.

The devolution of broadcasting

is more important than ever in order

to ensure that Wales has a voice.

This isn't the time to start to talk

about devolving broadcasting

partially or to consider devolution

of any part of broadcasting to Wales

as part of the development

of the devolution settlement.

So we asked two experts, Dr Jamie

Midhurst and Dr Ruth McIlroy,

what difference having control

would make and why we should care.

It's how we hear ourselves

represented or how we learn

something about parts of the world

that we've never visited.

The late Dr John Davies,

fantastic Welsh historian,

argued that Wales was an artefact

created by broadcasting

in some senses.

Yes, we know that Wales

existed geographically

but if you like as an entity.

Ofcom regulate all the public

service broadcasters serving Wales,

including the BBC, ITV and S4C.

Crucially both the BBC and ITV

are UK-wide broadcasters but have

certain requirements in serving

Welsh audiences, the BBC

with a wider remit in terms

of the services

it's meant to provide.

S4C is mainly funded by the UK

government and the BBC licence fee

but that arrangement

is under independent review.

There are some issues

about what Wales understands

about itself, particularly

devolution, but also what the rest

of the UK understands by devolution

so it's natural that we would expect

to hear these campaigns coming

forward from time to time to time.

So when we say the devolution

of broadcasting, what do we mean?

It's unclear what the methodology

would be for raising funding

so if we take the BBC as one

example, currently that's

paid for by the licence

fee that we all pay.

One way of doing that

would be to cut that

appropriately to the populations

of the different nations.

That could mean we end

up with less money.

At the moment one could argue

that the DCMS funding

in London is ring-fenced,

it's safe, it's not

battling anything else.

If it were to come to Cardiff,

then you have the other devolved

areas such as education -

large areas, education, health,

transport, economy and broadcasting.

Since BBC Wales began in the 1960s,

one of the main arguments is that

devolving broadcasting would help

the understanding of

specifically Welsh issues.

I think there would be no point

going through the process

of devolving broadcasting

without also trying to get improved

representation on screen.

I'm sure many of us have had

the experience of watching the news

and hearing a reporter tell us

that this is the case in England

and we never then find out

what is the case in Wales,

Scotland or Northern Ireland.

How would Welsh language

programming be helped?

One member of S4C's governing body

says it wouldn't be.

Wales tends to vote Labour

and Labour, understandably

like all political parties,

looks after its base and its base

arguably is not the Welsh speaking

communities that are particularly

grateful for the existence of S4C,

so the idea that there would be more

money for it if controls moved

from Whitehall to Cardiff Bay

is a bit of a fantasy.

You're watching BBC 1 Wales.

Now it's time for the

Six O'Clock News...

But ultimately how

relevant is this debate?

With the growth of digital TV,

the ability to watch it

from the other side of the world

online and social media,

what control can any government hope

to have over the media we consume?

Now, after hearing from

the Prime Minister and Labour

leader about their latest views

on Brexit, this week

Plaid Cymru has a debate

in the Commons on the issue.

It will use the debate to make

the argument for UK citizens

being able to retain EU

citizenship after Brexit.

But how could that work?

The party's Economy Spokesman,

Adam Price, is with me now.

How would that work?

There is a

legal dimension to this and a more

personal perspective. Legally,

people in Wales and the rest of the

UK are currently EU citizens and

that has conferred valuable rights,

the ability to work and study in

Europe and enjoy free health care

and that will continue after Brexit

because of EU law.

There will be a

transitional period and it's unclear

what will after that.

People like

me, we will all under this

differently but people like me feel

passionately European and to a

certain extent might Welshness and

might European this are connected.

We come from our civilisation of

Celts that were known as the fathers

of Europe.

Let's bring it forward a

few centuries to where we are now,

and how would it work, read

containing European citizenship

after Brexit? Once the UK has left,

what will that mean?

It will mean

that everyone who was an EU citizen

before Brexit will continue to enjoy

those rights.

Freedom of movement.

Yes, and free health care which is

important in terms of travel and

studying. There is the question

about what could happen to associate

citizenship as well which is a

matter for discussion but it is

accepted by most legal observers

under the Treaty of Lisbon but you

cannot remove from an individual the

right of citizenship.

But would you

then accept that EU citizens would

be free to travel to the UK?

That is

a different question, it is

reciprocity.

But it is essential as

the EU Commission would have to

agree to this and they will not

agree unless there's a dozens the

same rights.

No, and Steve Hoss cat

-- guy for hot start accepts that in

that rights for individuals will

continue, and if you want to look

back at other examples in

international law, the Irish

Republic and its citizens continue

to have rights within the UK.

But

what about in future if young people

want to go and study in the EU, they

wouldn't have the same rights as

their parents.

Though, and this is

then the issue of associate

citizenship, which would be a matter

of negotiation because it will not

exist as a legal right but could be

a future option.

But if you want

that enhanced write for future

generations to travel in the EU, the

EU will want something back, they

will say if you want to come and

have free health care in the EU and

free travel, our citizens have to

have the same thing.

I can see the

argument.

Is it something that

voters in the UK would accept as we

have voted to leave the EU?

The

option of an associate citizenship

model could be something for

consideration. The key point is that

rights that are there in law for

current EU citizens cannot be taken

away, valuable rights need to be

protected.

One of the reasons the UK

voted to leave was because of

immigration, it seems you are

proposing something that does not

get to grips with the problem is

that threw up.

I think the issue of

migration was largely to do with the

politics of it and a feeling of

economic distress in communities

that have been neglected for

generations and I think the

responsibility for that largely lies

with the political establishment

that has not invested sufficiently.

What is the answer? People voted to

leave, you seem to be saying there

will be no change on immigration in

future and that's not what people

voted for.

The solution to economic

distress that communities like

myself have felt that expressed

itself in that vote does not lie

with migration but in economic

justice.

It seems to me you were

ignoring the will of the people who

voted because of concerns on

immigration.

People voted for a

variety of reasons but they did vote

because of economic distress that

some of them associated with

migration policy but the answer to

that is economic justice. It is

conservative and Labour governments

that haven't invested in

communities, that is the answer to

the problem, the answer is to take

back control. We have a Westminster

government engaging in a power grab.

He was talking about the sovereignty

of the UK and is now taking back

sovereignty from Wales so we cannot

address our economic problems.

You

are now talking about the EU

Withdrawal Bill, a different issue,

and the UK Government says there

will be more parents coming to Wales

after Brexit, clearly you don't

believe that but I want to come back

to things like freedom of movement,

if you had that it would make it

easier to remain in the Customs

Union and the single market if that

was what you wanted to do. Is that

what this is part of?

Wales has been

shafted politically for it

generations, you could say for

centuries and we are being shafted

again and we have to demand a future

for our nation.

And that is a

historical side but what about the

future?

We're moving from a European

Common Market to a UK Common Market

and we accept the need for common

rules but we are being offered a

system for the English Parliament,

that is what Westminster is, we need

a UK Common Market for each of the

four Nations has an equal voice but

instead we are being given a system

where

where England has a supermajority

through a Westminster parliament

dominated by English MPs. We want to

see our White Paper for each of the

four nations has an equal voice so

they UK Common Market is a Common

Market of four nations.

Thank you

for your time.

That's it for this week.

Don't forget about Wales Live

on Wednesday night at 10:30pm.

You can also follow all