:00:00. > :00:09.Tonight on the Wales Report, as business in the Assembly gets
:00:10. > :00:11.underway after the election, what are the challenges
:00:12. > :00:16.ahead for the new Cabinet Secretary for Health?
:00:17. > :00:26.With just a month to go until the referendum on the UK's
:00:27. > :00:28.membership of the EU, we look at the impact of European
:00:29. > :00:41.Good evening and welcome to The Wales Report.
:00:42. > :00:47.After the high drama of the first few weeks of the Assembly, it is
:00:48. > :00:53.down to business. Wales have a First Minister and a government in place.
:00:54. > :00:56.There are plenty of challenges ahead for the new government - not least
:00:57. > :01:00.for the new Cabinet Secretary for Health, Vaughan Gething.
:01:01. > :01:03.He will be in charge of spending nearly half the Welsh government
:01:04. > :01:06.budget. So what does Mr Gething's
:01:07. > :01:08.in-tray look like? And how will the Government tackle
:01:09. > :01:22.a radically altered chamber? With fewer AMs and an opposition
:01:23. > :01:25.flexing its muscles, the Welsh Labour government is having to find
:01:26. > :01:29.new ways of working. I think everyone recognises that it is
:01:30. > :01:32.certainly not a case of business as usual, not just because of the
:01:33. > :01:38.electoral arithmetic. But also because we have seen a significant
:01:39. > :01:43.intervention by the main opposition party, Plaid Cymru, in terms of the
:01:44. > :01:47.challenge they pose to Carwyn Jones' election as First Minister and also
:01:48. > :01:51.what has happened behind-the-scenes since then, the agreement struck by
:01:52. > :01:55.the Liberal Democrats, Kirsty Williams, to come into the cabinet,
:01:56. > :01:59.which is a coalition in all but name. There will have to be greater
:02:00. > :02:03.occultation before proposals are brought forward. So I think we are
:02:04. > :02:08.seeing a spirit of more communication, consultation and
:02:09. > :02:13.possibly some brie legislative approaches that are very different
:02:14. > :02:17.to those which have existed in the last Assembly. Some of the faces may
:02:18. > :02:21.be different but most of the issues are the same. Securing the future of
:02:22. > :02:27.the Welsh NHS is still a huge challenge and a man who has to
:02:28. > :02:31.tackle it is the new Cabinet Secretary for health, Vaughan
:02:32. > :02:35.Gething. Like his predecessors, he faces plenty of pressing and complex
:02:36. > :02:41.problems. We note that the health service and our bailout in the last
:02:42. > :02:45.Assembly term, and I suspect that will not be the last time it comes
:02:46. > :02:50.back with the begging bowl. There are challenges facing the finances
:02:51. > :02:56.of health and that is one issue. The second issue is the pace of change.
:02:57. > :03:00.The health service, broccoli, knows how it has to change. We need to get
:03:01. > :03:05.more care into the community, more preventative work and so on. That is
:03:06. > :03:10.not a mystery. The mystery is how the change happens quick enough. The
:03:11. > :03:14.third bit is how health and social care works together. Because we know
:03:15. > :03:17.that for a lot of people, particularly older people who use
:03:18. > :03:22.the health service a lot, they heavily reliant on social care. It
:03:23. > :03:26.is about meeting the complete needs of people. Now local government and
:03:27. > :03:29.health services are working together, but unfortunately local
:03:30. > :03:34.government will go through reorganisation. So that is a big
:03:35. > :03:38.challenge, how do we handle that? Earlier, I caught up with the new
:03:39. > :03:43.Cabinet Secretary for health, Vaughan Gething, in the Senate. You
:03:44. > :03:46.were the Deputy under Mark Drakeford, how will your approach be
:03:47. > :03:56.different now that you are in charge. We have a range of different
:03:57. > :04:01.challenges confronting us. Every year we need to treat more people in
:04:02. > :04:04.the system and every year, the outcomes improve overall. But the
:04:05. > :04:09.challenges are not going away, so the pressure is still there. We need
:04:10. > :04:13.to decide how best to make use of the system and we need to decide
:04:14. > :04:17.what we are doing with the changing context. We have spoken about an
:04:18. > :04:21.ageing population and that is still with us. For many years we have
:04:22. > :04:25.spoken about the reduction in public finance and that will happen again
:04:26. > :04:30.in these next five years. So the way we use our financial resources and
:04:31. > :04:35.staffing. But crucially, how we use the resources of the population
:04:36. > :04:39.itself, with people making different choices for their own health care,
:04:40. > :04:44.being more engaged in discussions with clinicians. And also, we need
:04:45. > :04:48.to persuade people to make different choices with eating, drinking and
:04:49. > :04:52.exercise. That was prudent health care with Mark Drakeford, taking
:04:53. > :04:57.responsibility for your own health. Are you saying that it is more of
:04:58. > :05:01.the same or is it a Vaughan Gething vision when it comes to this? We
:05:02. > :05:06.have to continue the journey. It has real purchase a cross the service
:05:07. > :05:11.but I do not think it is embedded as consistently as it could or should
:05:12. > :05:14.be, and that is not surprising. Equally, the public buying into
:05:15. > :05:21.that, I am really interested in making sure there is grit in our
:05:22. > :05:26.performance. And also we have challenges without the service is
:05:27. > :05:30.managed. We have long held ambitions for primary care, and to do more
:05:31. > :05:35.locally. But I am really keen to do that over the next few years. What
:05:36. > :05:39.I'm trying to get at, will patients notice a difference now that you are
:05:40. > :05:45.in charge? Is there something that he wanted to change but you could
:05:46. > :05:50.not before as they get -- as a deputy. I am interested in getting
:05:51. > :05:52.the best outcome is possible, and understanding the challenges within
:05:53. > :06:00.the system, and how we bring staff and the public with us. The
:06:01. > :06:03.conversation is always different with health care. Everyone has an
:06:04. > :06:07.attitude and an individual experience. That does not
:06:08. > :06:12.necessarily reflect their concerns about the service. I have to have
:06:13. > :06:17.honesty about the way that we confront those challenges, and then
:06:18. > :06:20.I have to make sure that we do not just described the challenges, that
:06:21. > :06:23.we have a way of improving the service. I think that is what
:06:24. > :06:27.everyone wants us to do. The one thing we know is different is that
:06:28. > :06:33.Plaid Cymru have an input into the running of the NHS in Wales. There
:06:34. > :06:38.is a compact. How does that work? Well, it is still being worked
:06:39. > :06:44.through. There has been an agreement to allow governments to be formed.
:06:45. > :06:48.And there are areas of joint work. We have shared priorities, including
:06:49. > :06:54.the manifesto agreement for shared treatment, that is something that
:06:55. > :06:57.Plaid Cymru agree with. As a way of making sure that new and emerging
:06:58. > :07:01.treatments can be provided in a way that is consistent. Where there is
:07:02. > :07:04.evidence that treatment is effective, we want to make sure that
:07:05. > :07:10.it is provided immediately across Wales. But you rubbished the Plaid
:07:11. > :07:15.Cymru idea during the campaign, didn't you? And that is fine because
:07:16. > :07:21.you need the numbers. It is about access to the fund, that is where
:07:22. > :07:24.the agreement is. And on that, you said there was no need to change
:07:25. > :07:29.things and suddenly, after the election, you need Plaid Cymru
:07:30. > :07:32.on-board, so let's change it. You are confusing two things. With the
:07:33. > :07:35.new treatment fund, where there is new treatment available, we are
:07:36. > :07:44.making sure that is available across the country. Then there is the
:07:45. > :07:49.review in the IFPR process, and we have agreed in the past two renewed
:07:50. > :07:54.this. We need to see if there is a better way of running the IFPR
:07:55. > :07:58.process. But let's be clear, you have a Lib Dem running education,
:07:59. > :08:05.Plaid Cymru with some input on health, and you have weekly meetings
:08:06. > :08:09.with Plaid Cymru. What is the influence of Plaid Cymru in the
:08:10. > :08:17.health service in Wales, or is it limited to that one issue with the
:08:18. > :08:21.access to treatment? Within the contract, we set out areas in our
:08:22. > :08:25.initial period of engagement. We have five years to run this. Do you
:08:26. > :08:30.meet them everyday? How does it work? We will have a series of
:08:31. > :08:34.meetings over time and it is about what works. We're looking at having
:08:35. > :08:36.a forward-looking Parliamentary review on the National Health
:08:37. > :08:41.Service, to look at the future of the service and what it might look
:08:42. > :08:48.like in two or decades time. That is about a stocking to Plaid Cymru. It
:08:49. > :08:52.is about an ongoing conversation, not just saying that there are only
:08:53. > :08:58.two areas where we will talk or discuss. So you will be delivering a
:08:59. > :09:02.Labour manifesto with little bits of the Plaid Cymru manifesto? No, we
:09:03. > :09:07.have to have an honest conversation. When we have gone through the
:09:08. > :09:11.election, we need to talk about what a service really needs in the here
:09:12. > :09:13.and now and what we can do with the budgetary pressures that we have got
:09:14. > :09:17.and the resources we have got, and how do we make sure that we have a
:09:18. > :09:23.properly funded, properly staffed situation that meets the needs of
:09:24. > :09:27.our changing population. Let's look at the challenges ahead of you.
:09:28. > :09:33.Reorganisation, will it speed up or slow down on you? Any reorganisation
:09:34. > :09:37.will have to be about improving the outcomes, improving the service so
:09:38. > :09:41.we have better outcomes. We know that these choices are always
:09:42. > :09:45.difficult and controversial. And are you going to accelerate it or slow
:09:46. > :09:49.it down? I am always going to be guided by the best interests of
:09:50. > :09:53.patients. If that means speeding it up, I will do that. The decisions
:09:54. > :09:56.were parked by the previous government, when it came to
:09:57. > :10:00.sometimes causing a hospital or a ward. I do a man who wants to
:10:01. > :10:04.deliver that come what may because you believe it is in the greater
:10:05. > :10:07.interest of the patients in Wales? I am interested in doing the right
:10:08. > :10:11.thing for the health service and the people. That will mean difficult
:10:12. > :10:15.choices. We are spending nearly half of the government's money so it is
:10:16. > :10:20.not an easy decision. There are always imperfect choices to make.
:10:21. > :10:24.And do you intend to reorganise hospitals in Wales? I will always
:10:25. > :10:29.look at what the evidence tells me. I do not feel that a yes or no
:10:30. > :10:35.answer is very helpful. But is that not abort doctors and patients want
:10:36. > :10:40.to know? But it is not very honest. -- but is that not what doctors and
:10:41. > :10:43.patients want to know. Some resources will be reorganised
:10:44. > :10:48.because they need to do more in the community. Nobody is saying that is
:10:49. > :10:50.a bad thing. The way we describe reorganisation is not always
:10:51. > :10:57.controversial. We have reorganised stroke services in some areas, and
:10:58. > :11:00.that has not been controversial. There has been a conversation with
:11:01. > :11:06.community health leaders and clinical leadership and support. The
:11:07. > :11:11.conclusion was that that would benefit outcomes. The service cannot
:11:12. > :11:17.look the same in five years' time or ten years' time, so I am prepared to
:11:18. > :11:20.make choices to improve the service. Improving the service, your
:11:21. > :11:24.counterpart in England, Jeremy Hunt, is in bother with trying to deliver
:11:25. > :11:28.what he would say was a seven-day national health service. We have the
:11:29. > :11:31.doctors strike but the GPs are not keen. The doctors are not keen
:11:32. > :11:36.either. Would you like a seven-day NHS in Wales? We already have a
:11:37. > :11:42.seven-day service. People go in and out of health care to receive
:11:43. > :11:45.treatment on the weekend as well. The challenge always is to provide a
:11:46. > :11:49.better service with the resources we have and the key resources people.
:11:50. > :11:52.The challenge in England has been running a seven-day service with the
:11:53. > :11:55.same numbers of staff. I am interested in seeing a resolution to
:11:56. > :12:00.the junior doctors strike in England. It is not in our interest
:12:01. > :12:04.in Wales to see that the dispute continue. I look forward with
:12:05. > :12:07.interest to the BMA ballot of the members and then we will have
:12:08. > :12:13.choices to make here in Wales about how we want to run our own services,
:12:14. > :12:17.and the choice of attracting and retaining staff in Wales as well,
:12:18. > :12:20.not just doctors and nurses but a range of health care professionals.
:12:21. > :12:24.When you look at the challenges facing you, they are massive. An
:12:25. > :12:28.ageing population, as you have mentioned a lot, we are expecting
:12:29. > :12:33.more over-65s, the number will double in Wales over the next 20
:12:34. > :12:38.years, and how do you tackle that? Is there a panacea? Would return to
:12:39. > :12:41.the private sector for example, as a consideration, or are you
:12:42. > :12:46.ideological the opposed to that? I'm interested in what the challenges
:12:47. > :12:49.mean to us. It is not about just living longer, it is our day
:12:50. > :12:53.healthier when they are living longer? There are challenges with
:12:54. > :12:58.emergency admissions, the number of over 85 is coming into hospitals
:12:59. > :13:03.after emergency treatments. In the private sector, would we see a
:13:04. > :13:07.growing influence of the private sector under Vaughan Gething? Or are
:13:08. > :13:11.you ruling that out? I do not see the need for a growing influence
:13:12. > :13:17.because it is about what works best for the patients. But if that works
:13:18. > :13:20.best, would you consider it? I am not persuaded that the private model
:13:21. > :13:25.works in the best interest of patients. I am interested, for
:13:26. > :13:30.example, in making sure that there are different choices available in
:13:31. > :13:34.housing, health and public services to make sure that people do not need
:13:35. > :13:38.to go into hospital. That is almost always a better experience and
:13:39. > :13:42.normally a better outcome for the individual. Can we ever get on top
:13:43. > :13:51.of the problem? Will supply ever meet demand or is your job just like
:13:52. > :13:57.rolling a block up a hill with no real answer? Part of the challenge
:13:58. > :14:03.is how we meet demand in a different place, instead of simply putting
:14:04. > :14:07.more capacity into the system. That will not work in terms of the
:14:08. > :14:10.financial or human resources. There has to be remodelling and that is
:14:11. > :14:15.why the shift into primary care matters and also why the health has
:14:16. > :14:18.to work more progressively and persistently with other partners,
:14:19. > :14:21.housing in particular, as well as integrating with social care. We
:14:22. > :14:25.need to change the nature of demand and a number of demand, and not
:14:26. > :14:28.simply look at capacity measures. That is consistent with what
:14:29. > :14:33.happened last time around. It is about making sure that those models
:14:34. > :14:36.are delivered at a consistent basis around the country. And I am
:14:37. > :14:41.encouraged that there is huge goodwill within the service, and
:14:42. > :14:44.real passion from the staff. I think we can approach a difficult
:14:45. > :14:47.challenges with optimism about the future. Thank you.
:14:48. > :14:49.There's just a month to go to the referendum on the
:14:50. > :14:54.Here on the Wales Report we'll spend the next few weeks looking at
:14:55. > :14:56.Tonight , we're looking at the impact of European
:14:57. > :14:59.Structural funding is Brussels' way of trying to boost
:15:00. > :15:01.the poorest parts of the EU, so Wales which has
:15:02. > :15:03.some of the most deprived areas in Western Europe
:15:04. > :15:06.has been a big recipient; between 2000 and 2020
:15:07. > :15:08.we'll have received over ?5 billion, which has been
:15:09. > :15:12.distributed in three tranches of funding.
:15:13. > :15:14.Felicity Evans has been to Blaenau Ffestiniog,
:15:15. > :15:16.which received funding between 2000 and 2013, to
:15:17. > :15:24.find out how effective it's been in the area.
:15:25. > :15:36.The drug and tens of beautiful but not necessarily restful. -- the
:15:37. > :15:40.rugged Snowdonia. In fact, they provide a bracing challenge from
:15:41. > :15:43.mountain bikers who want to test their skills against some of the
:15:44. > :15:48.best downhill trails in Europe. Riders come to enjoy the bike tracks
:15:49. > :15:54.from all over the UK. Without aid money from the EU, these courses
:15:55. > :15:58.might never have been built. The EU gives a financial aid to some of its
:15:59. > :16:03.poorest areas, called structural funding. Qualify the GDP of the
:16:04. > :16:09.area, the economic value everything it produces, must be three quarters
:16:10. > :16:14.or less of the EU average. Wales has qualified for this structural
:16:15. > :16:20.funding three times. Between 2000 and 2020 it will have received more
:16:21. > :16:24.than ?5 billion worth. When mountain bikers come here to enjoy the
:16:25. > :16:28.thrills of the annual courses, they might not notice the signs that note
:16:29. > :16:33.the EU financial contribution, but it's not lost on those who helped
:16:34. > :16:41.develop the project, like Simon Williams. Without the money which we
:16:42. > :16:45.got with would never have got off the ground, I believe that it was a
:16:46. > :16:51.considerable amount of money, ?1.2 million, and from that we have these
:16:52. > :16:55.five trails, a visitors centre, car parking etc, it's been a great
:16:56. > :17:02.success. Testament to this would be that we've had the British downhill
:17:03. > :17:06.championships here on two occasions. Two years back-to-back, we have our
:17:07. > :17:10.own event annually calls downhill fast that draws people from all over
:17:11. > :17:16.the UK. Simon believes the success also gives a boost the local
:17:17. > :17:20.economy. We employ full-time and part-time staff, 17 members of
:17:21. > :17:23.staff, and the accommodation providers down in the town as well
:17:24. > :17:31.obviously benefit from the numbers that come here. On any given weekend
:17:32. > :17:36.we have hundreds of people from all over the UK. Attracting tourists to
:17:37. > :17:41.enjoy the mountain biking is not the same as getting them into it to
:17:42. > :17:45.visit the restaurants and shops. Here Arnie has been spent on making
:17:46. > :17:48.the town centre more attractive so the tourists already visiting other
:17:49. > :17:55.nearby attractions like the Mountain bike trails will be tempted to come
:17:56. > :17:59.into town and spend. The town centre still isn't a thriving economy.
:18:00. > :18:03.Shawn Roberts has been running his family's shop for decades and
:18:04. > :18:07.successfully applied for some of the EU funding for repairs had a
:18:08. > :18:11.face-lift for the shop front. He is in courage by the money that has
:18:12. > :18:15.been spent on the area but says getting people who visit places like
:18:16. > :18:21.this into town to splash the cash is still a challenge. People are more
:18:22. > :18:25.positive about the future, the problem is the major tourism
:18:26. > :18:32.sections are outside the town, so trying to get them into town and
:18:33. > :18:36.stay in town is that there is global. Even with the EU funded
:18:37. > :18:40.project has been a magnet for tourism, spreading the wealth to the
:18:41. > :18:44.town remains problematic. The aim of this EU aid money is to haul
:18:45. > :18:50.struggling economies out of the doldrums. The economists Calvin
:18:51. > :18:56.Jones is sceptical about how effective it can be. It's probably
:18:57. > :19:01.true is made a difference in the Pacific places and would have been
:19:02. > :19:05.worse without structural funds? In the short-term, yes. The answer in
:19:06. > :19:12.the long-term is to change the structure of the economy. In the
:19:13. > :19:15.short-term, I think we need to change our reels -- emotional
:19:16. > :19:23.listenership, need to start thinking about how we can encourage activity
:19:24. > :19:27.in rails that will affect the subsidy, much like the things that
:19:28. > :19:32.have been attempted in the past. These are imposed from the top down
:19:33. > :19:37.and the Welsh economy will transform when you come from the ground up.
:19:38. > :19:41.Vast areas of Wales qualify for structural funding. If you keep your
:19:42. > :19:45.eyes peeled in West Wales and the valleys you will probably notice
:19:46. > :19:48.lots of signs marking the EU contribution to new buildings and
:19:49. > :19:53.committee projects. Arguably, these plaques were not intended to
:19:54. > :19:58.proliferate the way they have. Structural funding is not supposed
:19:59. > :20:02.to be running tap. After all, everyone's ideal would be for Wales
:20:03. > :20:06.to be prosperous enough not to qualify for any of these aid money.
:20:07. > :20:11.When we first qualify for this level of funding back in 2000 the First
:20:12. > :20:14.Minister Rhodri Morgan called it a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
:20:15. > :20:19.Clearly he wasn't expecting Wales qualify for a second set of funding
:20:20. > :20:24.and certainly not a third. Calvin Jones argues the age could never be
:20:25. > :20:27.significant enough to trigger the metamorphosis the Welsh economy that
:20:28. > :20:32.some hope for. Problems in Wales are so intractable, so long for
:20:33. > :20:37.generations, that this level of talking, a few hundred million
:20:38. > :20:42.pounds a year is not much in the context of a 50 billion economy, it
:20:43. > :20:45.is not enough to make the fundamental transformative changes
:20:46. > :20:48.that will push wolves are part of a more prosperous future. Close rotors
:20:49. > :20:55.will think about the economy when they vote on the 23rd of June. --
:20:56. > :20:57.Welsh voters. But there are unresolved questions, how important
:20:58. > :21:03.are the funds to the future of the Welsh economy? If Britain votes out
:21:04. > :21:09.with extra support be divided by the UK Government? If Britain votes in,
:21:10. > :21:11.will will still receive the same levels of funding if new, poorer
:21:12. > :21:13.countries join the EU? I'm joined now by Dr Mark Lang -
:21:14. > :21:26.a regeneration expert and economics Thank you for coming in. Doctor
:21:27. > :21:32.line, you are at remainder, but the fact with us qualify to three times
:21:33. > :21:37.shows they are not working? No, it is symptomatic of the nature of Isle
:21:38. > :21:42.economy, thing we've been pursuing a questionable economic policy in
:21:43. > :21:46.Wales. And we have done so, it's not necessarily because of devolution,
:21:47. > :21:50.we've done so for 35 years and it's the same economic policy we have
:21:51. > :21:54.pursued across the UK in that time and it is neoliberalism. That fight
:21:55. > :21:57.against the principle of redistribution. Let's focus on
:21:58. > :22:01.Brussels on the money coming from there, is that a good thing for
:22:02. > :22:04.Wales? Definitely, the structural funding body redistribution. You
:22:05. > :22:09.could argue about if we spend them on the right things, I think clearly
:22:10. > :22:12.in the case of the film, there are some very good examples of how we
:22:13. > :22:18.spend the money, but some of those for things that we spent are not
:22:19. > :22:26.necessary. So the money coming in is good but you would argue the way it
:22:27. > :22:31.spent. A reporter yesterday suggested that Wales is a
:22:32. > :22:40.beneficiary to the tune of about ?79 per head. ?151 per head across the
:22:41. > :22:43.UK is the amount, we lose. It is a different story in Wales, do
:22:44. > :22:48.acknowledge that as someone who wants to withdraw from the EU? The
:22:49. > :22:53.difficulty is trying to figure out what the counterfactual is? If we
:22:54. > :22:58.were not in the EU at all, what kind of support would Westminster and
:22:59. > :23:03.Cardiff Bay gift to Wales in terms of the funds they get? What we don't
:23:04. > :23:06.know is what we would have got then? Circulate Wales is a net
:23:07. > :23:11.beneficiary, but that beneficiary comes in terms of the cost for the
:23:12. > :23:22.rest of the UK. When you look at something
:23:23. > :23:27.like Blaenau Ffestiniog with that have happened anyway, we don't know,
:23:28. > :23:31.was based on regional development grants and each of those would be
:23:32. > :23:35.them trying to get the funds from the Westminster Government and that
:23:36. > :23:40.would be based on a cost benefit, we heard about neoliberalism. I think
:23:41. > :23:46.there is a lack of liberalism in here that is insufficient use of
:23:47. > :23:51.market forces, much more use of top-down, as the Calvin Jones say.
:23:52. > :23:56.Are you suggesting these grants coming from Europe are causing a
:23:57. > :24:01.culture of dependency? That is what I'm saying. Any kind of Grant leads
:24:02. > :24:06.to a sense of dependency and the fact we are getting it three times
:24:07. > :24:12.in a row is only representing that. Is that a fair point? No, ultimately
:24:13. > :24:15.if you look at where UK in the structural funds have been spent,
:24:16. > :24:19.they are predominantly over the last 35 years in London and the
:24:20. > :24:23.south-east, building things like this seven tunnel, high-speed one,
:24:24. > :24:26.Crosswell, etc. That is enormous amount of money being concentrated
:24:27. > :24:30.in London and the south-east that is not fair and not democratic. I would
:24:31. > :24:34.also say it is clear in this neoliberal mantra that actually what
:24:35. > :24:41.we really want to speak about is drawing regional aid completely,
:24:42. > :24:45.whether it is European or any other because it interrupts the market.
:24:46. > :24:49.Could it be stifling the private sector? If you know you're getting
:24:50. > :24:54.the grant, does it stifle enterprise? Were not playing a level
:24:55. > :24:57.playing field. What you effectively have its public service subsidy of
:24:58. > :25:00.large businesses in London and the south-east. One would argue that in
:25:01. > :25:07.fact if there is a public sector fund that has got to be done on a
:25:08. > :25:11.cost benefit basis, where there aren't political constraints, we are
:25:12. > :25:15.in a UK, we are one country and democracy and it has to be some
:25:16. > :25:18.disbursement of funds, but there has to be a balance in terms of what the
:25:19. > :25:24.returns are. You don't want to throw money places that won't have any
:25:25. > :25:29.return just to sustain them. Let's say that the vote goes your way in
:25:30. > :25:35.Brexit, the money stops for Wales and the Welsh tournament says that
:25:36. > :25:39.37,000 jobs have been created in Wales since 2007 and 12,000
:25:40. > :25:43.enterprises have benefited from that money, can you guarantee the UK
:25:44. > :25:47.Government would step in and fill that gap? Hold on, I don't think any
:25:48. > :25:53.Government will stop the money as soon as we leave the U. The way the
:25:54. > :25:58.monies disbursed is the way that order exists. It would go in 2020.
:25:59. > :26:03.No one can guarantee where it will be in 2020 but we know that in the
:26:04. > :26:07.short-term funding will continue for our agriculture for the regions in
:26:08. > :26:11.the way that it has been disbursed. There is a formula that works. We
:26:12. > :26:15.cannot be outside of the EU and still take the money, that what you
:26:16. > :26:19.want? No, you leave Europe you can keep the money, there is a
:26:20. > :26:27.well-known precept in economics were if the losers are compensated by the
:26:28. > :26:32.gainers, that will be a net benefit. That is possible. What I'm saying is
:26:33. > :26:37.it might be that Wales will get more under a new regime, what we don't
:26:38. > :26:42.know is how it will be spent. Doctor line, the argument is this is Welsh
:26:43. > :26:47.money anyway and UK money, just going via Brussels for what about
:26:48. > :26:51.that argument? To be honest, I care more fundamentally about the
:26:52. > :26:56.principle of redistribution. Kent has spoken about... Does it need go
:26:57. > :27:00.via Brussels? Just now, going via London is not helping. We have this
:27:01. > :27:05.notion that the principle that we should be putting money into areas
:27:06. > :27:09.of opportunity not need, why? We have huge poverty? What motivates me
:27:10. > :27:12.is to best tackle that poverty from what I'm asking is the current
:27:13. > :27:18.formula where money goes from the UK to Brussels and is redistributed,
:27:19. > :27:22.much of it to Wales, is that a good system? Well, yes. Because clearly
:27:23. > :27:26.we benefit from it. And if Brussels were taken out of the equation you
:27:27. > :27:32.don't trust Westminster of whatever colour to step in? No, we've seen
:27:33. > :27:35.it. We live in a democracy it in a democracy if you don't like the
:27:36. > :27:39.Government you have as you don't like the benefits you get from it,
:27:40. > :27:44.change the Government. Two economists, this debate will rage
:27:45. > :27:47.for a month, what do you make of the tour of the debate? Lots of
:27:48. > :27:53.criticism and scaremongering, Boris Johnson ranting about the none is
:27:54. > :27:57.and the remainder is predicting all sorts of doom and gloom. What you
:27:58. > :28:01.make of it on? Are people getting the facts they need? I think the
:28:02. > :28:05.facts are there but they are hidden because of the motion of the debate.
:28:06. > :28:09.The temperature is rising a lot and people need to be dispassionate and
:28:10. > :28:13.step back. There is a very good economic argument for leaving the U
:28:14. > :28:21.but it's one of a long-term and a lot of the stuff we hear from the
:28:22. > :28:24.remain camped -- Remain camp is short-term. How is it going? There
:28:25. > :28:29.is far too much raw emotion just now. It is easy to lower the level
:28:30. > :28:35.of debate ultimately, economically it is good for us to sit Remain. We
:28:36. > :28:39.have a report today that says that the ISS is now saying it will be bad
:28:40. > :28:45.for Britain, the OECD previously etc, the economic orthodoxy actually
:28:46. > :28:49.says this would be bad. Both agreed the head has to really hard on this
:28:50. > :28:54.one? Indeed. Indeed. Thank you both for joining us.
:28:55. > :28:59.We will hold a special debatably before the vote and if you want to
:29:00. > :29:07.be new orders or have a question you can e-mail us or follow us on social
:29:08. > :29:08.media. We will be back next week, thank you for joining us. Good
:29:09. > :29:11.night.