11/03/2018 Sunday Politics Wales

Morning, everyone.

I'm Sarah Smith and this

is the Sunday Politics.

I'll be bringing you up to speed

on all the political

comings and goings in

Westminster and beyond.

Coming up in today's programme.

As the investigation into the nerve

agent attack in Salisbury continues,

we'll be taking to the former

Home Secretary Jack Straw

and former Security Minister,

Pauline Neville Jones.

Is there room for more spending?

Ahead of his spring statement this

week, the Chancellor Philip Hammond

has hinted austerity could be over

as he said there was "light

at the end of the tunnel".

We join the Universities minister

Sam Gyimah on what's jokingly been

called a "punishment

tour" of the country -

trying to attract students

to the Conservative Party.

Most of my friends always slander

the Conservative name saying it's

only for middle aged men who want to

benefit from themselves.

At first I

was like, I'm not going

are not Labour, don't talk to me and

I was like OK.

In London, the Liberal Democrat

leader Vince Cable tells us why he's

Later in the programme,

the author of Article 50,

Lord Kerr with his latest views

on Brexit, and a nursing union says

the NHS will come to an end

unless a better way is found

to fund it.

to fund it.

to fund it.

And as usual we've got three

Westminster insiders who will take

And as usual we've got three

what's really going on.

Today I'm joined by Tom Newton Dunn,

Dia Chakravarty and George Eaton.

The unfolding events over the past

week in the cathedral city

of Salisbury could have been taken

straight from the pages

of a spy thriller.

The poisoning of a Russian former

double agent who had passed secrets

to Britain and moved to Salisbury

after a 2010 spy swap, involved

the use of a sinister nerve agent.

It has shocked the country

with the finger of suspicion

pointing firmly at Moscow.

The big story of the week started

in Salisbury after a former

Russian double agent,

Sergei Skripal, and his daughter

Yulia and the policeman who went

to their aid all mysteriously fell

ill because an as yet

unidentified nerve agent.

12 years ago, Alexander Litvinenko

was killed by polonium 210.

Was this more Russian foul play?

Boris Johnson was quick

to retaliate, saying there could be

implications for this summer's

World Cup in Russia.

I think it will be very difficult

to imagine that UK representation

in that event could go ahead

in the normal way.

Did he mean the England team?

The Prime Minister explained.

The point the Foreign Secretary

was making yesterday was that,

depending on what comes out

in relation to the investigation

into the attack on the two

individuals that took place

in Salisbury, that it might be

appropriate for the government

to look at whether ministers

and other dignitaries should attend

the World Cup in Russia.

Russian state TV mocked the Foreign

Secretary for his comments,

but the government's

firm language persisted.

The use of a nerve agent on UK soil

is a brazen and reckless act.

This was attempted murder

in the most cruel and public way.

We still can't get through a week

without mentioning the B word

as the Chancellor delivered

the latest big Brexit speech.

He's determined to get

a good deal for the city.

We still can't get through a week

without mentioning the B word

So I'm clear not only

that it is possible to include

financial services within a trade

deal, but that it is very much

in our mutual interest to do so.

Perhaps unsurprisingly

the EU disagreed.

Also when it comes to financial

services, life will be

different after Brexit.

The EU had other things to worry

about, though, as Donald Trump put

forward his highly controversial

plan to make American steel

and aluminium great again.

Surrounded by metal workers,

the President signed proclamations

to impose a 25% tariff on steel

and a 10% tariff on aluminium

imports into the US.

The European Union has not treated

us well and it's been a very,

very unfair trade situation.

Claims of Parliamentary bullying

and sexual harassment hit

the headlines with some

of the allegations going

all the way to the top.

Back in 2010, a woman called

Kate Emms took up the position

as John Bercow's private secretary.

But she stood down from that post

after less than a year.

Her colleagues told Newsnight

that this is because Mr Bercow's

bullying left her unable to continue

in that job.

Theresa May enthusiastically

welcomed Saudi royalty

to Downing Street this week.

Mohammed bin Salman was even treated

to lunch at the Palace.

Billboards sprung up extolling

in the crown prince's virtues.

Supporters of the man

they call Mr Everything say

he is a great reformer.

But protests surrounding UK arms

sales were also highly visible

and with Saudi's intervention

in Yemen ongoing, the visit

angered Jeremy Corbyn.

British arms sales have sharply

increased and British military

advisers are directing the war.

It cannot be right

that her government...

Mr Speaker, it cannot be right

that her government is colluding

in what the United Nations says

is evidence of war crimes.

Clearly riled, Theresa May

got her own back, calling

Jeremy Corbyn out on the eve

of International Women's Day.

Can I thank the Right

Honourable Gentleman

for telling me that it is

International Women's Day tomorrow.

LAUGHTER.

I think that's what's

called "mansplaining".

Tom, Dia and George

were watching that with me.

Now some insight and analysis into

what's going on behind the

headlines. The big story of the week

is obviously the poisoning of Sergei

Skripal and whether or not Russia

was involved. A lot of people have

been quick to assume that President

Putin sanctioned this and it's a

Russian state operation but can we

be sure of that?

Reasonably sure,

yes, clearly there is no physical

proof to produce at the moment. I

think by the end of last week the

government were in no doubt that

this was ordered by the Russian

state and in particular Vladimir

Putin, who, under Russian state

rules, has to sign of all foreign

assassinations personally since rule

change in 2006. The reason I think

they are almost certain about this

is quite frankly no one else has a

motive to do that. Who would want to

do a better job in spite of analogy

on an old colonel living quietly in

Salisbury? Not the people have the

modes of delivery to do this, to

pass a nerve agent, chemical

weapons, on Britain's streets.

Thirdly, this will be the killer,

the scientific proof it was an

extremely rare nerve agent, used,

not one of the more widely available

once you see in things like Syria,

it's a rare particular type which

has only been known to be produced

in one or two laboratories in the

world, one of them is in Moscow. The

Moscow foreign spy service. What is

fascinating is not just was Vladimir

Putin responsible? It is why he

wanted us to know he was

responsible, because he left such a

massive calling card, and that has

been really bothering cabinet

ministers in the last week.

Dia, we

had from the Chief Medical Officer

who said traces of this nerve agent

has been found in the restaurant

where Sergei Skripal and his

daughter were eating and 500 people

were there at the same time and they

should wash their clothes and clean

their possessions that were with

them. There is a small rescue but

there is a risk. Frightening news

like that is what drives home to

people why it matters this is

happening in the UK.

Absolutely and

there are so many questions about

this, even before we do want to who

was doing this. That's very

important. This also questions about

how the whole thing has been

handled, seven days, and they are

now telling these terrified

residents to wash their clothes and

possessions. Is that going to be

enough? What exactly is this agent?

If we see people in scary laboratory

suits walking around, doing what

they need to do, a quarantine going

on, is it enough to say go and wash

your clothes seven days later? The

communication around it, I

understand it is sensitive, that I

think it has been dire. Really quite

woeful. If I was living in Salisbury

I would be very, very worried.

George, the UK Government, once the

investigation has finished and they

decide whether this was a

state-sponsored assassination, they

need to decide how to respond. All

we have practically heard of so far

is some rubber mats might not go to

the World Cup in Russia, presumably

will have to do come up with

something better than that --

diplomats. What can we do that

Russia will care about?

The pressure

from some Labour Party and

Conservative MPs is to introduce a

version of the Magnitsky Act, which

means it's easier to freeze the

assets of Russians suspected of

human rights abuses or corruption,

and expel them, but Britain is

severely limited and I think it's

worth asking the question why did

Russia choose this moment to target

Britain? We are set to leave the

European Union, huge burdens on

governments, stretching the

government bandwidth to its limits,

and Donald Trump and the USA who we

supposedly have a special

relationship with, is imposing

tariffs on steel and has not made

any robust intervention over this,

despite the fact he normally rushes

to tweet when there is a terrorist

attack on British soil after making

unhelpful remarks. He has not been

standing shoulder to shoulder with

Britain in this instance.

There has

been a suggestion this should come

up at the next Nato summit in

Brussels, and they could be looking

for some kind of coordinated

response from international allies.

Is that likely?

It's difficult to

see at the moment. Russia's strength

here is significant and Vladimir

Putin, such a brazen act, clearly he

does not feel Britain has the

capacity to respond. Last December,

when we were short of gas, the one

country we turn to was Russia.

We

will be back to talk about the other

stories during the programme.

The poisoning of Sergei Skripal

and his daughter carries

echoes of the murder

of Alexander Litvinenko,

the ex KGB officer who died

after drinking tea laced

with radioactive polonium 210

in a London hotel in 2006.

And this morning, his widow,

Marina Litvinenko urged Theresa May

to adopt American-style laws that

are tougher on Russia.

You need to be very selective who

you are friends with. And when you

allow people with money to come to

your country and make a business,

you need to be sure what kind of

money these people try to bring to

your country because very often this

money is stolen from Russian people

and sometimes it is a very serious

crime behind it. I'm

crime behind it. I'm absolutely

asking this question to unite this

action already done in the United

States, in Europe. I think the UK

has to do the same steps.

Joining me now from Edinburgh

is the former Home and Foreign

Secretary, Jack Straw.

Thank you very much for joining us

this morning. Do you agree that the

UK needs to introduce tougher laws,

the likes of which the US has?

I do

think we should do this now. I think

have to take this very careful

step-by-step way, so I think the

approach of Amber Rudd and her

security minister, Ben Wallace, is

the right one. Jumping to

conclusions in this situation is not

a sensible way to proceed. The other

thing we have to think about very

carefully, when it comes to those

who are saying something must be

done and if you are in government,

you get this all the time, in

situations like this, something has

got to be done, is what happens when

you have to get back to normality? I

often reflect on the sanctions were

imposed to Zimbabwe for the

different situation but there are

parallels. In retrospect, Robert

Mugabe was a very bad man, but in

retrospect I often wonder if it was

a sensible thing to do. In the end

we had to get the troops down again.

It was very tricky so people need to

think very carefully indeed. This is

on the assumption the Russian state

was behind this, which has not yet

been approved or announced.

If we do

establish that and work on the

presumption for now and I understand

your reservations, would President

Putin care if we were to try and

institute some kind of sanctions or

punishments or does it just increase

the siege mentality Russia is under

threat from the rest of the world

which in many ways bolstered his

position in advance of the elections

coming up soon?

If we were to do it

unilaterally, just the UK, he

wouldn't careful stop with the EU,

and more other major allies

including the USA, he might take

notice but frankly, I think he

regarded as a medal if we were

simply to do it by ourselves and he

knows that, post the collapse of the

Berlin Wall and the Soviet Union in

the early 1990s, there is a huge

amount of Russian money in the UK,

particularly in London, and a

Magnitsky Act won't make that much

difference to the level of

dependence of some very highly

respectable British London based

financial institutions with Russian

money.

With the Alexander Litvinenko case,

an enquiry two tiers to get to the

bottom of what happened there, and

could only conclude that it was

probably orchestrated by the Russian

state. Can you take any sort of

action on the basis of something

probably being true?

People need to

bear in mind the example of Iraq.

The evidence against Saddam Hussein

having and continuing to have

biological weapons was overwhelming.

The question came up in United

Nations Security Council

resolutions, passed unanimously.

That is what Tony Blair and I used

almost 15 years ago to persuade

people to go to war against Iraq,

and it turned out to be completely

incorrect, so you've got to be

really careful. I have the scars

literally on my back in respect of

this. In the heat of the moment,

with people in the House of Commons

and the newspapers screeching,

something 's got to be done, being

non-explicit about what... Moreover,

we shouldn't descend to the level of

the criminal justice system in the

Russian Federation or other states

like that. There are demands today

from some Conservatives to ban the

Russia Today programme.

The Shadow

Chancellor said today that he

doesn't think Labour MPs will be

appearing on there in the future.

Will you do the same?

I have not

appeared on there for some time, but

I will make a decision on my own

terms. We have to be careful about

doing that in the absence of

evidence. Far better for Britain's

position in the world to have high

standards of probity. It's better to

bear in mind that well intentioned

people who do not lie at all,

including myself, and the House of

Commons by a huge majority, and

public opinion at the time, came to

the wrong decision with respect to

whether or not Saddam Hussein still

had biological weapons on the basis

of probabilities. That is the

difficulty here. People will of

course be very impatient indeed to

have a culprit here, and obviously

stacking it up on the basis of

circumstantial evidence, you can

make a very good case that it is the

Russian state, but we need a bit of

sobriety before we come to that

conclusion. Thank God that Amber

Rudd is the Home Secretary at the

moment. Someone else I could think

of in the British Cabinet, and she

is taking a very measured approach

to this.

Here with me now is Pauline Neville

Jones, who was Security

and Counter Terrorism Minister under

David Cameron, when Theresa May

was Home Secretary.

That was fascinating, listening to

Jack Straw drawing parallels with

Iraq and what was supposedly the

evidence of chemical and biological

weapons there, saying we have to be

very careful about pointing the

finger of blame. With your security

experience, will we ever be able to

establish whether this was

sanctioned by the Russians?

I doubt

the Russian state will admit it was

involved. In order to get absolute

proof, what we needed with

Litvinenko was to have a trial.

There hasn't been a trial because

the Russians wouldn't cooperate. I

think it's right for the government

to be cautious about saying anything

now, because it mustn't be seen to

lead the investigation and therefore

damage it, but once we have

established a degree of probability

about the cause, that is the time

for action. I think the chances of

it not being connected with Russia

in some way are very low.

The means

would point to that, but what is the

motive? This is a retired agent

who's been living here for years.

Came as part of the spy as well. The

unwritten rule of espionage is that

you don't touch spies. What dangers

does he pose to the Russian regime?

I think we simply don't know the

full story. There's plenty of

evidence that the Russian regime is

pretty vicious. Even if he was part

of a swap, I don't think you can

exclude the fact that the Russian

state might decide to take action

against him.

Looking at pictures of

him and his daughter there. It's

difficult to see what threat they

posed to the Russian state. Is it

not worth considering the

possibility that they may have been

involved in something else that

isn't technically state faction --

state sanctioned?

If possible. It is

possible that the Mafia was

involved. The question is, what lay

behind the Mafia and where did the

nerve agent come from? Is it

possible to come from elsewhere than

a state laboratory? It's difficult

to imagine that the threat isn't

going to go back to Russia somehow.

Is it possible to take action

against wealthy Russian oligarchs

living in London, even if we change

the laws and bring in something like

the Magnitsky act? Mrs Litvinenko

got a letter from Theresa May, Home

Secretary at the time, saying that

we want to make sure nothing like

this happens again in the UK, and

now it has.

There are already powers

which the government can use. One of

the reasons why there was an

argument in the Commons the other

day about this so-called Magnitsky

amendment was that the government

said, we've got the powers. You may

say, we need to use these powers,

for example to investigate people

who have unexplained wealth. There

are things we can do.

These are

people who are not necessarily

linked to Putin and the regime, so

these are two distinct things.

They

are. You have to be careful how you

do this, and it requires resources.

This is a complicated job. Jack

Straw put his finger on it when he

said, we need to act in concert with

allies. This is the thing that the

Russians really are going to take

notice of. At the moment, it's fair

to say that although we are Aljaz

overtime, we have gradually

increased the pressure. With

sanctions, and Nato have increased

measures on its borders, but we

still have a great deal of

harassment from the Russians. They

are taking action in people's

politics. They are conducting cyber

attacks. We need to act as an

alliance so that the Russians really

do believe, and they seek positive

evidence of it, that action against

one is an action against all, and

collective action follows. We need

to have a strategy that brings

together what we do militarily, what

we do to protect our citizens in the

cyber sphere, what we do in

broadcasting, so we have an all

encompassing way of dealing with

Russia.

Thank you very much for

coming to talk to us.

The new Universities Minister,

Sam Gyimah, has set himself

a rather ambitious task.

Travelling up and down the country,

he's trying to attract students

to the Conservative Party.

With just one in five voters aged

between 18 and 24 voting Tory

in the 2017 election,

it's been jokingly called

his "punishment tour".

Our reporter Elizabeth Glinka

joined Sam on his visit

to Canterbury Christ Church

University.

And just to warn you,

her report contains flashing images.

Was that a youth quake?

Reports of a massive

increase in young voters at

the last general election may

have been exaggerated.

# I got the big size

12s on my feet...

Nationally, the turnout didn't

really change, but of

the young people that did vote,

a whopping 67% went for Labour.

And in a place like

Canterbury, where there

are more than 30,000 students,

it's thought that their votes played

a big part in the city

electing its first ever Labour MP.

Canterbury.

This has been Conservative

since World War I.

An extraordinary surge

in their share, up 20% here.

In general, everyone just

always seems to think

that the Conservatives are always

doing something wrong,

so even if you don't know

about the Conservatives,

all you hear, you just think

negative things about it.

Most of my friends always slander

the Conservative name, saying,

"It's only for middle-aged men who

want the benefit from themselves."

Do you think you have

to be quite brave to

say, "I am a Conservative?"

Yeah.

At first, I was like,

OK, I'm not going

to say anything to my friends,

because they will just kick off.

One of my flatmates was like,

"If you are not a Labour

voter, don't talk to me."

Labour had a lot of backing.

They had people like

AJ Tracey jumping on.

So once they see that,

everyone kind of runs

to it, like, let's vote Labour.

# Tracksuit grey, black,

blue

# I was just a hope-filled kid

like you...

AJ Tracey is just one of any number

of current music acts who publicly

endorsed the Labour Party

at the last general election,

helping to build a brand

which was apparently three times

more attractive to young voters.

To be fair, it's not

as if there was some sort of golden

era of Conservative hipsters,

but the figures suggest

things are getting worse.

And that's why the new Universities

Minister, Sam Gyimah,

is currently on a nationwide tour,

including here in Canterbury,

where he is attempting to

at least start a conversation

with a generation of voters who see

his party as old, male and stale.

Minister, this seems

a good time to jump in.

This is an incredibly difficult job,

isn't it, convincing young people

to vote Conservative?

We do have our work cut out for us,

but I think the first thing to do

is actually to be on campus.

If we allow Jeremy Corbyn to be

the only one on campus, then we only

have ourselves to blame.

Many students will say to you, well,

it's fine, you're having

a review on student fees

and many other things.

The Labour Party's promising us

they're going to get rid of fees.

We know what happens when you

promised something for free.

Numbers are going to be capped,

which means fewer people

going to university.

It's the well off that

are going to do it.

That's not what we're about.

I'm not really worried

about Jeremy Corbyn's free

for all offer, because it's not

realistic, and he can't deliver it,

and we only need to look

at countries like Scotland to see

that it's not going to work.

And what reaction are you expecting

when you head in there?

Well, I thought it might

be rowdy like PMQs.

I've no idea.

I haven't had the mob treatment

anywhere yet so far.

# Your face ain't big for my boot

# Kick up the yout

# I know that I kick up the yout...

There might not have been

a youth quake nationally,

but there was a bit of a youth quake

in Canterbury, and I want to listen

and I want to understand.

You know, we've had enough

of austerity politics.

We've had enough of student fees,

things like that, and we've seen

the NHS get less and less

funded over time.

And it's hard to

ignore those things.

You know, we are going to take

action against you.

# Bros in my ear saying

"Stormz, don't do it"

# Devil on my shoulder

I don't lack

# Hit 'em

with a crowbar, I don't scrap...

Well, lots of discussion,

some of it a bit feisty,

but did the Minister win any

hearts and minds?

He's really good at talking

to students, and he's

here to talk to everyone.

Would it make you feel differently

about voting Conservative?

I took from your comments that

you were not a Conservative voter.

Definitely not, but I did think

he made some good points,

and he was very measured.

It's quite clear that there

are a number of people here who have

been seduced by Jeremy Corbyn,

but I think the purpose of this

is to let them realise

that there is a Conservative voice,

there is a Conservative point

of view, and that as a minister

I am here to listen.

Clearly a smart man.

I'm not sure it's better

or worse to have a smart

Tory or a stupid Tory,

but he knew what he was

talking about, even though

I disagree with him.

Would it make you think twice

about voting Conservative?

No, I will never vote

Conservative in my life.

So as the sun sets in Canterbury,

there's still a long way to go.

And Universities Minister Sam

Gymiah joins me now.

A smart Tory. That is a compliment

from one of the students! Do you

think you persuaded many of them to

vote Tory?

The point of the exercise

was not to persuade people to vote

Conservative. As Universities

Minister, I'm very conscious that

students are investing a

considerable amount of money in

their education, so they should have

a voice in the corridors of power.

Gone are the days that the

Universities Minister 's spends time

with the chancellors and not the

students. Jeremy Corbyn has a voice

on the campus, and if we allow that

to continue, we only have ourselves

to blame. The starting point in the

process is listening and engaging,

rather than going in there to preach

to them about what their problems

and answers are.

You have a mountain

to climb with young people. Let's

have a look at the numbers. At the

last election, between 18 to

24-year-olds, 67% voted Labour.

Unless you can change those minds,

you have a generational problem with

voters, and you will not see

Conservative governments in the

future, unless people change their

minds.

What I am doing at the moment

is pressing, which is why the party

is beginning to engage with students

at this level. A number of things

have come up as I've travelled

around the country that we can

address. Austerity keeps coming up.

We stopped making the case for why

we had to reduce the deficit from

the extreme levels that we inherited

from the Labour Party. One man said

to me, all I have ever heard the

Conservatives talk

about is austerity. It must be your

ideology. That is clearly not the

case. It is a matter of necessity,

not ideology.

We have the spring

statement coming up next week. The

Chancellor has said this morning

that we are in a much better

financial position at the moment

then we have been, but it doesn't

sound like he's going to end

austerity. Would you encourage him

to do so?

This brings statement is

an update on the public finances.

But he is going to point further

ahead to the budget in the autumn,

and he doesn't seem to be talking

about the increased public spending

you think will attract people to the

Tories.

We are not going to say we

are going to return to discredited

economic policies of 40 years ago.

What he should be saying to young

people is that the balanced approach

that he is pursuing, in a world

where we have technological

challenge and a global market

economy, the Conservatives are

uniquely placed to deliver

prosperity for them. Another issue

that comes up is our motives. When

we talk about economic prosperity,

people feel it is for the few.

Sometimes I have to explain that the

top rate of tax has been higher

under the Conservatives, and that

the top 1% pay 20% of income tax.

They didn't know that. We need to

talk about -- we need to persuade

them that when we talk about

economic prosperity, it is their

future we are talking about.

You addressed tuition fees in the

film but look at maintenance grants

being cut by this government so the

poorer students to go to university

will lead with larger debt than

those from better off backgrounds.

When that is their experience right

now on campus, no wonder they keep

thinking you are looking after the

better off and not the

disadvantaged.

Canterbury has the

best proportion of students went

university for the first time in

their families. Many of those would

not be at university at all had we

pursue the Jeremy Corbyn policy.

Jeremy Corbyn is promising to

abolish tuition fees so that would

make it easier for students to go to

university.

Once you make university

free you can't have a current policy

we have which is that the numbers

who can go to university are capped.

At a time when the numbers were not

capped, our own history, very few

people went to university and mentor

very few poor people went

university. A consequence of the

Conservative policy is a lot of

disadvantaged people are giving to

university for the first time and we

have a student finance scheme where

you do not pay a penny as a first

burner unless you in over £25,000

and after 30 years, whatever you

have managed to pay, is written. I'm

not saying is perfect.

That very

system is replacing grants for

poorer students with loans. Why? If

you are so keen to get disadvantaged

students into universities, wide

takeaway maintenance grants?

There

is a review looking at the whole

system, but when many students

complain about the student finances,

they focus on accommodation.

Somewhere like London, landlords

want to get the years rent in

advance. That is a difficult

situation for them and the cost of

living issues, rather than assuming

we know...

There's an interest rate

on a student loan of over 6% which

is way in excess of what people are

borrowing on mortgages etc.

The cost

of living in University...

They must

be worried about it.

Whatever your

level of earnings, you pay 9% of

your income, which means higher rate

in graduates pay more to the system

but I also think to narrow the

debate on student fees, students

have a lot of interest, not all

students think student fees is their

big issue. Someone to see their

politicians care about making the

world a better place. What kind of

world they are going into, they will

get on the housing ladder, housing

is big issue for them but the

economy prospers, so I think that's

why you have got to listen and not

assume all students have the same

view and there is one answer that

deals with all the problems of every

18-21 -year-old.

Mental health keeps

cropping up. I'm sure the university

's lecturers strike came up as well.

Now students are paying £9,000 in

fees, they are consumers as well as

students, so should they get a

refund for the lessons they have not

been taught?

Universities do not pay

lecturers on the day they strike,

they should not pocket those funds,

but look at compensation for

students and there are real ways of

compensating students.

Would you

compel them to do that?

I'm not in a

position to compel them to do that.

There is the regulator for

university who has a wide-ranging

remit. I'm encouraged some

universities are taking this

seriously. Kings College London will

offer financial compensation. I

think they should look at this very

seriously. I am disappointed I am

seeing lots of petitions out there

from Durham University, a petition

of 5000 students, asking for

compensation. I want to university

to respond constructively, because

we are in the age of the student and

we are there to serve.

One quick

question, talking about Russia on

the programme so far this morning, a

story this morning in the papers

saying over £800 million has been

donated to the Tory party from

Russian link to donors since Theresa

May took over, even notice that you

wanted an arms length relationship.

Is that something that should be

discouraged in the future and should

the money be returned now?

To make a

donation to a political party in

this country you have to be a

citizen Dungannon

citizen Dungannon -- and betting

needs to be taken place. Modern

Britain is made up by people from

all sorts of places. Some groups of

people cannot participate in Aber

Democratic life to the fall, and we

have got to be clear, these are

British citizens from Russia. Not

the Kremlin donating to the

Conservative Party.

Of course not,

but there could be a question of

where those funds came from in the

first place for the wedding end up

on the front page of a Sunday

newspaper saying this much money has

been donated to the Conservative

Party, maybe it would be better to

think again where you receive your

large donations from?

It's not just

the letter of the law but vetting

should be thorough.

Sam Gyimah,

thank you very much for coming in to

talk to us.

It's coming up to 11.40.

You're watching

the Sunday Politics.

Still to come, we'll be

discussing the economy.

Is it time to end austerity?

Hello and welcome to

Sunday Politics Wales.

Later in the programme,

the Conservatives and the main

nursing union say action's needed

to ensure Wales has enough

nurses to meet demand.

And Carwyn Jones says he wants

to make Wales the safest place

to be a woman in Europe.

But how would that work?

But first, he was our most senior

diplomat in Brussels,

and the author of Article

50 to boot.

So as you might expect,

Lord John Kerr has trenchant views

on where the whole Brexit

debate is going.

He was at the University

of South Wales on Friday,

where I began by asking him

what message he wanted to give

to the students there.

The main point I want to discusses

whether we can get away with cherry

picking, whether as Theresa May said

in her speech last week, we can pick

and choose and bits of the single

market that we want to get back into

when we leave or stay in, I and

various agencies that we would like

to be in, the European Union has

said that it doesn't like the sound

of that and thinks we should be

either in or out. There is the

possibility of some compromises and

the European Council later on this

month will start looking at that and

I think myself that probably quite a

lot of what Theresa May asked for is

not obtainable but maybe it was just

an opening shot.

I guess that is the

point. Maybe does not obtainable but

in a negotiation, you need to have

your opening salvo and maybe meet

somewhere in the middle. Is it

almost defeatist to say it will not

be possible to cherry pick. We might

end up somewhere in the middle in

the end?

It will all take a very long time

and we will not know when we leave,

if we leave in March next year, what

the future arrangement with the

European Union will be because you

can't draft that treaty until we are

a third country outside negotiating

with all the others. We will have a

divorce treaty, that will be agreed.

And they are going to try and finish

that one quite soon. But we won't

know what the long-term arrangement

will be and that will take at least

five or six years to negotiate.

Does

that mean you think this

transitional period we have heard so

much about where we will be out of

the European Union but not yet

totally out of it in terms of all

the procedures and so on, you think

that will laugh with her last five

or six years?

No, I don't. The

European Union will insist it lasts

only two years because their lawyers

will say you can't do as part of a

divorce treaty something which has a

very long lasting effect. I'm afraid

there will be another period after

the end of the transition period

when we still don't know where we

are going.

Transition period plus?

I

am afraid that is where we are

heading at the moment, yes.

What are

the elements that you think have

been most difficult? Is it the four

pillars of the free demand the

singles market and the customs union

and so on more are there other

matters concerning trade that could

be more problematic?

I think we made

a mistake backing autumn of 2016

when Theresa May said we would have

no truck with the European Court of

Justice, Freedom of movement and we

want out of this customs union and

the single market and I think it was

a pity to adopt very firm positions

on these straightaway and I think

the problem we now have with the

Irish border results principally

from deciding we don't want to be in

a customs union with the European

Union.

I guess with the customs

union, one of the problems you have

is it limits to a large extent your

ability to trade with the rest of

the world. It prohibits it. It comes

down to, don't we think there are

more opportunities globally than

there are just in our new

neighbours?

Absolutely not. I wish

it were so but it is not. The

economic analysis the government

tried to conceal that has come out

this week in London shows that you

gain in the outside world perhaps

0.2%- 0.7% of GDP. You lose around

0.5% GDP by losing your advantages

in the Castle Market just across the

Channel. It is a myth that the world

out there really wants to trade more

with Britain. Do you think Donald

Trump looks like the sort of guy who

is going to give us a nice

sweetheart deal? America is quite a

protectionist country, always. When

you are in trade negotiations, it is

arm wrestling. Size matters. We at

present have deals with the rest of

the world which are on the basis of

they are wanting access to an

European Union market of 500 million

people, including us. So they have

made concessions to us in the

outside world. 70% of the world now

of our trade is with countries that

are either in a trade agreement with

the EU or ones where one is being

negotiated. And we have good

preferential terms which will be

hard pressed to maintain when we are

just a market of 65 million and less

attractive to them.

Do you think the

tide is turning, not among the

political class, but among the

public who clearly voted to leave?

I

think it may well be that the crunch

comes this autumn when the

government have to explain to the

House of Commons what deal they are

bringing back. And they have

promised that there will be a

meaningful vote in the House of

Commons. I don't know what

meaningful vote means. John Major

said the other day that what it

should mean is Parliament are asked

to accept or reject the deal or send

the negotiators back to try harder

or invite the country to say whether

this is what it had in mind and this

is what we can go ahead with. So the

idea of a People's poll, a check on

the Brexit deal, is it what the

country wanted, that seems to me to

be coming back up the flagpole at

the moment. Whether it reaches the

top of the flagpole Rob, I don't

know.

Would it be desirable?

Wouldn't the accusation be from

those in favour of Brexit, you do

not like the results you are having

another go? And if the British

public decided to reject whatever

was on offer, what happens then?

If the British public rejected the

deal, we would stay in the European

Union. Presumably. I would say, yes,

some people would say that your

playing for a replay. A bad loser.

My answer to that would be, what

about the promises that were made?

What about what the levers were

saying, the battle bus, or that

stuff? More important, what about

the long-term future? When you look

at the way young people, here we are

at a university, young people here

actually do not want to be separated

from continental Europe. So over

time, it seems to me tomography will

come in behind democracy. --

demography.

"You won't have an NHS"

unless politicians work together

to find a better way of financing

it, that's the message

from the Royal College of Nursing.

Welsh Conservatives say

they have figures which show

more nurses are leaving

the profession than joining.

Eleanor Gruffydd Jones reports.

This woman spent nearly 40 years on

the front line as a nurse. It is a

job she loved. Working in hospitals

all over South Wales. Her career

took her from emergency care to

minor injuries. But when the chance

came up to retire, she was ready to

go.

It is the workload and I think

that an awful lot of nurses are

feeling that at the moment. It is

the continuous... You have to get

these patients seen, why are you

going over that time, why haven't

you done this, why haven't you done

that?

Around 1450 nurses in Wales

left the profession last year. That

is according to the Royal College of

Nursing and the nursing and

midwifery Council. Although this is

down to win above reasons including

job change and retirement as usual,

the main nursing union says this

story is a common one.

We know that there has been

unrelenting pressure across the

whole of the UK. And we are

experiencing that in Wales. In the

primary sector, nursing staff have a

duty of care and when you cannot

provide that duty of care because

the resources are not there, either

financially or the infrastructure

support, safe discharge home, that

is constantly reducing morale.

She

also said it is a more deep-seated

problem of a continuing lack of

resources.

We have got to have absolute way of

determining determining how the NHS

across Wales is funded because

without that there will be

insufficient resources to meet

demand and the NHS will not continue

to exist.

The Welsh Conservatives have

obtained figures under the Freedom

of Information Act which they say

show that six out of Wales' seven

health boards aren't replacing staff

at the rate that others leave.

They

sadly show that more nurses are

leaving the NHS, 1000 have left the

NHS in Wales against the people who

have been recruited, and we know

there is increasing demand.

How credible are these figures,

considering they have been

cultivated in different ways by the

health boards?

These figures have come from the

health boards in Wales.

If you work it all through, there is

1000 less nurses now working in the

NHS because they haven't been

replacing the nurses that have left.

That is deeply worrying, considering

the Welsh Labour government have

been rather lax in their recruitment

campaigns, that shows we are not

putting the stuff on the front line

to meet demand.

The Welsh Government

says there are more registered

nurses working in the NHS than ever

before with training places set to

increase by 10% this year. Ministers

say they are investing millions in

supporting staff.

The Health Secretary address the

issue earlier this week. This

continued investment during the past

five years means there has been a

sustained increase in training

places in Wales. This includes over

that time 68% more nurses in

training, health visitor training

numbers have more than doubled. An

increase in midwifery 42%. 51% in

occupational training places.

53% in

physiotherapy training places.

Tina Donnelly says there is no more

time for criticising and cooperation

between political parties and across

borders is now badly needed.

I would

expect the whole of the political

parties to come together

collectively as a UK and say the NHS

is an important part of our social

infrastructure. We have got to have

a better way of financing it. We

have got to have a way of making

sure that the staff that work in it

are not put under relentless

pressure so that they leave because

at the end of the day, the system

will have failed and you won't have

a national health service.

Much as I love being a nurse, and I

am proud of the fact that I was a

nurse and I always will be a nurse,

I will always be proud of that fact,

I just can't do it any more.

Now, the question of respect

and dignity has never been nearer

the top of the political agenda

on a UK level.

But what about here in Wales?

The First Minister says he wants

to bring in laws to make the country

the safest place to be

a woman in Europe.

But will it ever happen,

and how would it work?

Cerys Furlong is the boss

of Chwarae Teg and Catherine Fookes

is in charge of the

Women's Equality Network.

Thank you very much for coming in.

How far are we from that aim from

the First Minister of being the

safest place in Europe to be a

woman?

I think we are making good

progress in Wales. We have the

legislation that was ground-breaking

but I do think there are certainly

areas of improvement that can be

made. I think firstly domestic

violence organisations really need

is to have sustainable long-term

ring fenced funding for women's

refuges. Secondly I think we could

do with some really bold targets for

gender parity in the assembly. We

have had a 50-50 assembly before and

I think we really need that again.

That will help us move forward with

the culture change we need in

politics.

In the past, we have had gender

parity in the assembly, in terms of

men and women, but when it comes to

how to achieve that again in the

future, what are you talking about,

quotas?

Yes, I am talking about

quotas. The expert panel led by

Laura McAllister made three

excellent recommendations that would

go a long way to getting us to

gender parity. That is quotas,

political parties publishing

candidate data, and it is also about

looking at the job of an Assembly

Member itself and looking at job

sharing. I would like to see the

First Minister committing to some of

these things and getting all

political parties behind those

recommendations.

When Carwyn Jones made his speech on

Thursday evening, outlining what he

wants to see and the steps that need

to be taken to make Wales the state

that -- safest place in Europe to be

a woman coming he mentioned your

organisation as being part of a

review looking into that, so what

are the steps that need to be taken

now that you think?

Obviously we are

pleased to see the comments from the

First Minister this week and I think

it is something we need to focus now

on, the actions, not just the words.

In the past, people would have

talked in broad terms not committing

to gender equality. So I think it is

time to think about how we tackle

misogyny and culture in Wales and

across the UK. How we look at things

like the gender pay gap and how we

think about equality legislation,

all the excellent points that have

been made. It is really a positive

approach now, time is needed for

that, but to focus on those big

things and I think over the last

several months, we have talked about

sexual harassment and codes of

conduct and that is part of it but

it is not the whole issue.

We said

before we came on air that Sweden is

held as being one of the best places

in the world. I guess what the First

Minister is saying is we need to

match the best the world when it

comes to this. How far away, how

much of a step change is needed?

It

is a significant step change. The

First Minister in his speech also

talked about Lady Rhondda and what

she was campaigning for in 1921,

childcare, accessed for jobs for

women, we are making the same points

now, generations later. It needs a

significant shift and we welcome the

comments.

One of the things

mentioned there was sexual

harassment in politics and we know

that at the top of the agenda on a

UK wide level and maybe in Wales

there are obviously sensitivities

there but what needs to change

therein terms of how sexual

harassment is dealt with in the

assembly for example?

It is

interesting first of all that in 20

years, there has not been one

complaint made to the Standards

Commissioner.

It is interesting but

what does that show?

Maybe people

don't understand what the processes

and they don't know where to go to

make a complaint. The dignity and

respect statements so far, we are

moving slowly, I would like a

stomach would remove much more

quickly. We need to make sure the

person handling those complaint has

real experience in the field. They

need expertise. At the moment, there

is only a 12 month kind of period

within which you are supposed to

complain. And what happens if the

complaint happened a long time ago?

Sometimes it takes women a long time

to have the confidence to come

forward. I think we need to look at

that as well.

When you said the

person holding the job, there is a

Standards Commissioner, a former

High Court judge, presumably you are

saying that he doesn't necessarily

have the experience necessary to

deal with the kind of cases that

might come before him?

Absolutely

and someone needs to be trained in

order to deal with... With a woman

feel confident going to him and

explaining the problem is that they

have had and so I think it is really

important that you have possibly a

woman in that... Not necessarily in

his role, I am not try to do him out

of a job but you need women involved

will have had experience of dealing

with these kind of cases before and

can support the women making the

complaint is going forward or indeed

men, if there are complaints from

men.

One of the things the Standards

Commissioner is doing at the moment

is scrutinising the policies of the

political parties when it comes to

reporting sexual harassment and so

on. We have a ministerial code.

There is a party code and assembly

code. Are all these different colds

necessarily tied in together? Is

there a confusion residing from

that?

There definitely is confusion

and we can overcomplicate this but

we are talking about what is

appropriate behaviour and conduct.

And I think we all know what that

looks like and so we should be able

to bring those together and some

simple and transparent policies and

I were saying before we came on air

that I did a bit of research

yesterday and how would you go about

making a complaint, it is

horrendously combat. If you look at

the stuff on the website and the

options you have to go through, we

are putting significant barriers in

the way of people who even go to

make that first step into making a

complaint. There is a lot we can do

to improve from where we are now.

Clearly there is a problem about the

initial step. If it is proof that an

Assembly Member has acted

inappropriately, are the penalty is

strong enough at the moment?

At the

moment, it is not clear what those

would be and I have not seen any

evidence of what those would be.

They need to be detailed and

absolutely it needs to be very clear

what the sanctions are. I think it

is absolutely vital that as a member

of the public, you don't care...

Someone working in the assembly, you

do not care if it is a ministerial

code or Assembly Member called, they

should be exactly the same. And the

important thing is people knowing

what number to ring, who did get in

touch with and know which cold this

particular person has broken.

Howard using procurement powers

work?

It is about making sure that

they are held to a higher standard.

This is about the assembly showing

real leadership on the issue of

equality because it can and because

it should. I think that is perfectly

reasonable. We already use our

procurement powers in Wales to

ensure that organisations in Wales

pay the minimum wage, the living

wage, it is the same kind of process

and it is about that kind of

leadership that we need to push on.

We have mentioned a lot here about

how politics can be made safer for

women here. Does that then trickle

down to the general population or

are there different plans and

procedures that need to be put in

place?

Absolutely. I think it all

starts with education in schools. We

really need a real focus on children

in schools getting teaching or

workshops or understanding about

what a healthy relationship is and I

think we also have a real problem in

schools of unconscious bias and we

need teachers to call out sexism

when they see it. For example. And

not unconsciously say things like

you girls are sitting over there

quietly, you are a great role model.

If you do that to girls in primary

school, they will think later on in

life the best thing to do is to sit

there quietly and not speak out. We

need to remove some of those

barriers from a really early age.

There needs to be action across the

board. The media is another key

place to start and I think we are

starting to see that shift. But

every organisation needs to be

looking at itself and saying, what

do we need to do to hold ourselves

up to a higher state of standards

than we have until now? We do not

want to be having this conversation

again in another eight years' time

that Lady Rhondda was having in

1921.

When we are looking at where

we want to be and where we are now,

how long will that take, do you

think?

They say that if the current

progress on the gender pay gap, we

will still have one of 40% in 100

years and we do not want to be

there. I welcome the First Minister

's comments but we really need

action.

A brilliant place to finish

it.

That's it from me!

Don't forget Wales Live will be

here on Wedneday night,

after the news at 10.30.

But for now that's all from me.

Diolch am wylio,

thanks for watching.

Time to go back to Sarah.

That's all we have time for.

My thanks to Susan Kramer, Siobhan

McDonagh and to Bob Blackman.

And with that it's back to Sarah.

Welcome back.

The Chancellor's been out

and about this morning,

setting out his stall ahead

of the Spring Statement on Tuesday.

Here's what he told Andrew Marr.

There is light at the end

of the tunnel because what we are

about to see is debt starting

to fall after it's been growing

for 17 continuous years.

That's a very important moment

for us, but we are still

in the tunnel at the moment.

We have to get debt down.

We have got all sorts of other

things we want to do.

We've taken a balanced approach over

the last couple of fiscal events.

Using flexibility that we had

to continue paying down debt,

but also to provide additional

support to our public services,

to invest in Britain's future

and to reduce taxes for families

and small businesses

who are feeling the pressure.

Also appearing on the Andrew Marr

programme, the Shadow Chancellor

John McDonnell called

on the government to end

its austerity programme.

One thing he has done is he has

shifted the deficit onto the

shoulders of NHS managers, onto

shoulders of head teachers, and onto

the shoulders of local government

leaders and these Conservative

council leaders now are saying that

they are facing a financial crisis

because the government have had

cutbacks. This is not a matter of

celebration. I think he should come

into the real world because the

resolution foundation said in their

report today, 11 million people now,

not just the poorest but those just

about managing, will be hit next

month by the cuts in support they

get to the benefit system, so this

is not a matter for celebration by

any means.

To unpick what we can

expect in the spring statement and

other stories next week, the panel

are still with me. We had the

Chancellor saying there is light at

the end of the tunnel. How much

pressure does is put on him from his

own side let alone from the

opposition to spend some more money?

There's an interesting split in the

Conservatives, those who say now we

have a lemonade of the current

budget deficit on day-to-day

spending, we should take a chance to

invest heavily in infrastructure to

give the NHS more money, to spend

money on schools, and then you have

the fiscal conservatives like Philip

Hammond to say actually debt is

still 84% of GDP, we have got to

start delivering overall surplus is

not borrowing money to get it down

because we face economic economic

risks from Brexit. We know Philip

Hammond does not look optimistically

at that. And an ageing population on

those pressures, so when things

start to seem as if they are

improving, you can't reduce the

momentum.

It was interesting early

on the programme, talking to Sam

Gyimah, he said students thought

austerity was the ideological

position of the Conservative Party,

not a practical necessity. So if now

we are reaching a point where there

is potentially more money to spend,

politically would be wise?

It is

because if the Conservatives failed

to establish this narrative which

they have been trying to form long

time, under Theresa May they have

abandoned it, this idea that living

within 1's means as a country is an

end to itself, I'm not sure what

will separate them from the Labour

ideology. If they absolutely abandon

the point they have to be careful

about how they spend their money,

they could pledge 10 billion to one

sector, and the Labour Party will

pledge 100. If they cannot make that

case it is responsible to be

spending money responsibly because

otherwise if you don't pay off your

debt, it will mean higher taxes on

future generations, these students

and their children have lost that

political argument already.

The

defining political argument of this

premiership of Theresa May for the

many and not for the few, are the

fiscal messages we are hearing from

the Chancellor, do they relate to

that?

Not in the slightest. You

heard on the Andrew Marr programme,

giving a receptacle slap in the

face, the author of the just about

managing speech, Mick Timothy is

going to try to beat up the

Chancellor on behalf of the Prime

Minister's behalf, so those tensions

will remain. I think the Chancellor

is even more anal-retentive on the

purse strings at the moment simply

because of the government, the

Tories don't have a majority. That

means any single minority interest

who can scrape together ten or 12

Tory MPs, you can force the

government to do a U-turn and they

are piling up from defence spending,

a strong Tory bid coming down the

line on Universal Credit, putting

back 3 billion into it. IDS, the

socially conservative touchy-feely

end of the party, to the NHS,

tuition fees, every single one of

those minority interests will want

some sort of salvation. Now the

Chancellor announces bigger that £10

million -- £10 billion a year more

yet to play with.

Now usually at

this point we are talking about the

word Brexit and it does not come up

yet and we can't

yet and we can't ignore it it has

been a big Brexit week.

Yes, we've

heard Philip Hammond tell us

financial services will have to form

the ultimate deal we get from the

EU, and we've also heard the EU's

guidelines. They are,

unsurprisingly, taking a hard line.

Those two things have happened.

Another interesting thing, there was

an interesting appointment that

happened in the EU last

happened in the EU last week,

Jean-Claude Juncker's write man

became secretary-general of the

commission. There is a lot of

disquiet amongst the MPs about this

from across the European Union, but

also political divides within the

EU, and tomorrow they are demanding

some answers in the European

Parliament about this particular

appointment and we, the Brexit

nerds, we'll look at it very

carefully. It raises some

interesting questions and

transparency and accountability

within the European framework.

The

international trade Secretary Liam

Fox is off to Washington at the very

time the US president is threatening

tariffs on steel and aluminium and

it's an interesting one for British

government because Trump has said

allies can come and make their case

to be exempted from this and Canada

and Mexico have been, but we should

not be going separately as the UK

because we are part of the European

Union at the moment, but if we can

cut a deal, how would that go down

in Brussels?

Conservatives like Liam

Fox said for years once we are

outside the EU the advantages is we

can get beneficial trade deals with

major economies like the USA, and

now he has the chance to test Donald

Trump's words, so there's been lots

of rhetoric about Donald Trump about

you guys will get a big trade deal,

but in reality he's always been a

protectionist on trade. Will you

make an exception for Britain? Does

he think we are a significant and

economy to make that case? If Liam

Fox could get something, it would be

a win for the Brexiteers. The

government postponed the boat on a

customs union because they were

worried about losing it on the floor

of the Commons after the Labour

shift full support they can get a

concession, it would help.

A

potential windfall Liam Fox but

fraught with danger. If he gets a

deal, the EU will be furious and

that could affect the Brexit

negotiations. If he doesn't come it

will be rather embarrassing.

He

can't get a deal until 2021, an

awful long time away. We remain

within the EU's tariffs regime until

2021 because that is what we wanted.

New Year's Eve 2020. There ain't a

huge amount the government can do.

If the government could broker a

deal, there's talk of doing this,

not country by country, but the Port

Talbot manufacturers, high-density

steel used to warships, he could try

to broker some sort of exemption

with that, but it will interview

read the EU and give us an

read the EU and give us an even

worse deal. I don't think Liam Fox

I'm afraid we'll win this debate.

The big story with the Labour Party

the moment of course is the election

for their new general secretary. The

founder of momentum standing against

Jennie Formby from Unite. This is

not the left and right battle we

have been used within the Labour

Party the two very strong

significance figures from the left

of the party battling it out to take

over general secretary. Does it

matter which one of them wins and

how this proceeds for the Labour

Party?

It matters because you have

two rival conceptions about the

Labour Party should be. The view of

momentum is you need more power is

transferred to members giving

members greater influence over

policy and the trade unions still

have half of the boat on Labour

Party policy which act as a block

and gives the general secretary huge

power and then you have the Labour

Party founded by the trade unions,

we are nothing without the trade

unions, of course they have to be at

the centre of the Labour Party and

therefore it is entirely appropriate

Jennie Formby should become the new

party general secretary, but this is

a fascinating element and the left

have defeated all of the internal

opponents and it is now the split

within the new party establishment

that is playing out and some will

draw comparisons with the Blairites

and Brown Knights of the past. The

two rival visions of what Corbin is

should mean for Labour.

With policy

and vocations? Will make a

difference to the of the Labour

Party or is it about who it is?

Small policy implications. Momentum

are about as far left as you can

possibly get at the moment in terms

of selling up nationalisation is.

Len McCluskey, unite, not perhaps

quite as hard left as momentum. I

think it is more the culture who

runs the party, who has controls and

what's fascinating is watching the

Labour moderates this week. There's

a few of them around. One of them

described it as predator versus

alien for the two terrible enemies

eating each other as the revolution

always eats its children will be a

great battle my feeling is the union

will win it. They have the muscle

and bigger numbers than momentum at

the moment.

Labour moderates, it's

been suggested Harriet Harman could

be interested in being the next

Speaker of the House of Commons. The

second ever female speaker of

course, but John Bercow has been