:00:37. > :00:43.Afternoon, folks, welcome to the Daily Politics. Whatever you're up
:00:43. > :00:46.to: Doing the dishes, hanging out the washing, or even lying down
:00:46. > :00:50.trying to recover from morning sickness, this is what we've got
:00:50. > :00:53.today. The man with the trickiest maths problem in Britain. George
:00:53. > :00:59.Osborne's got to balance the Budget, cut the deficit, and somehow
:00:59. > :01:09.promote economic growth. So what are his chances? Newspaper editors
:01:09. > :01:17.
:01:17. > :01:22.We were hear from someone who has come hotfoot from the Treasury.
:01:22. > :01:26.And we will find out why sports stars like Usain Bolt are reluctant
:01:26. > :01:35.to compete in Great Britain. Do we treat people who sell things
:01:35. > :01:41.for her living as a national joke? Kate Walsh says things must change.
:01:41. > :01:45.All that in the next hour. With us is the editor of the Conservative
:01:45. > :01:53.Home website, regularly described as one of the most influential
:01:53. > :01:58.Tories outside of the Cabinet. But first: Tomorrow's Autumn Statement.
:01:59. > :02:01.Six months ago, George Osborne had a terrible time with the Budget.
:02:01. > :02:07.The word omnishambles ended up attached with pretty much
:02:07. > :02:11.everything to do with it. This time at a Royal bump has kicked a load
:02:11. > :02:21.of headlines about big companies not paying taxes of of the front
:02:21. > :02:22.
:02:22. > :02:26.page. So it is the Chancellor in One of the things, a week ago, he
:02:26. > :02:32.announced the new governor of the Bank of England, which he managed
:02:32. > :02:37.to keep secret. They were very disappointed with how everything
:02:37. > :02:41.leaked in advance of the Budget. There was a dummy run last week
:02:41. > :02:46.with the Bank of England announcement. We have had some
:02:46. > :02:53.briefing, but not too much. I don't know whether we will have any
:02:53. > :03:00.surprises. George Osborne likes delivering surprises. The maths is
:03:00. > :03:05.so difficult, he has little money to play with. He will miss his own
:03:05. > :03:13.self imposed target that debt will be falling as a proportion of the
:03:13. > :03:20.economy by 2016. What was worse, setting the target, or missing it?
:03:20. > :03:24.He would have preferred the royal baby news to be announced tomorrow.
:03:24. > :03:28.This will not be a good news day for the coalition. It is pretty
:03:28. > :03:36.clear if he doesn't find some way of bending the money coming from
:03:36. > :03:40.the Bank of England, he will miss those targets. It won't be easy.
:03:40. > :03:46.How damaging it isn't politically to miss that target, he made a big
:03:46. > :03:51.thing about debt falling and they were going to fix the debt crisis.
:03:51. > :03:55.One is the economic environment which is much worse than we thought.
:03:55. > :04:01.He will be able to say it almost every country in Europe and the
:04:01. > :04:06.world is struggling to meet its targets. Barack Obama has just been
:04:06. > :04:12.re-elected having missed almost every target he set when he was
:04:13. > :04:17.first elected four years ago. will blame everyone else? Barack
:04:17. > :04:24.Obama could not hit employment targets because of the
:04:25. > :04:31.deterioration in the international situation. Ed Balls will try not to
:04:31. > :04:36.let the Chancellor get away with it. What are you thinking George
:04:36. > :04:41.Osborne should do, bearing in mind the coalition will borrow more next
:04:41. > :04:45.year than Labour would be borrowing under the Alistair Darling plan.
:04:45. > :04:55.How do you explain a deficit reduction as tragic end up with the
:04:55. > :05:01.coalition spending more than Labour, borrowing more than Labour? What I
:05:01. > :05:05.think is the failure, from the beginning, there should have been
:05:05. > :05:11.much more on growth, much more about getting rid of some of the
:05:11. > :05:14.green policies which have increased energy costs for manufacturers,
:05:14. > :05:20.allowing banks to build up capital more slowly to lend to small
:05:21. > :05:28.businesses. I would not have had the tax rises, that George Osborne
:05:28. > :05:37.has had. He has not had the growth agenda that would have meant he
:05:37. > :05:40.would have tax revenues of. It's time for our daily quiz. Four weeks
:05:40. > :05:44.ago today, President Barack Obama was re-elected President of the
:05:44. > :05:53.United States. Hard to believe it, but in some states they are still
:05:53. > :05:56.actually counting the votes! But today's question is this: If Barack
:05:56. > :06:00.Obama came first, and Mitt Romney came second, which famous actress
:06:00. > :06:04.is currently coming sixth with just over 60,000 votes?
:06:04. > :06:08.A) Susan Sarandon? B) Madonna?
:06:08. > :06:18.C) Roseanne Barr? Or d) Jane Fonda?
:06:18. > :06:19.
:06:19. > :06:22.At the end of the show, Tim will give us the correct answer.
:06:22. > :06:25.The big political event of the week, of course, is tomorrow's Autumn
:06:25. > :06:28.Statement from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne. The
:06:29. > :06:31.Chancellor has quite a job on his hands. He admitted at the weekend
:06:31. > :06:34.that weaker growth and lower tax receipts means austerity will
:06:34. > :06:38.continue until 2018 at least. So, what immediate problems is he
:06:38. > :06:41.grappling with? For a start, the deficit for 2013-14 is expected to
:06:41. > :06:45.total some �126 billion, �7 billion more than the Government expected
:06:45. > :06:48.back in March. This is partly as a result of weaker than expected
:06:48. > :06:52.economic growth. Just this week, the British Chambers of Commerce
:06:52. > :06:55.said that, instead of growing by 2.2% in 2014, the British economy
:06:55. > :07:01.might only grow by 1.8%. As a result, the Chancellor has little
:07:01. > :07:04.money to spend. And we learned today that he will ask most
:07:04. > :07:07.government departments to cut spending even further over the next
:07:07. > :07:10.two years. Things don't look any rosier on the High Street either,
:07:10. > :07:13.with month-on-month retail sales in October down 0.8%. Tax receipts
:07:14. > :07:16.have been lower than expected too. As a result, George Osborne will
:07:16. > :07:20.come under considerable pressure to close tax loopholes, with one
:07:20. > :07:24.report today saying that a VAT loophole on companies costs us all
:07:24. > :07:27.�10 billion a year, or more than the cost of the Olympic Games. The
:07:27. > :07:30.Chancellor will also be expected to do something to help squeezed
:07:30. > :07:33.family budgets. Today, in a survey of what we're spending our money on,
:07:33. > :07:36.the Office of National Statistics said our personal finances are
:07:36. > :07:42.being pressured like never before, with the average household spending
:07:42. > :07:45.�483.60 a week in 2011, compared The survey found transport was the
:07:45. > :07:49.greatest cost, with the average family spending �65.70 a week
:07:49. > :07:57.getting from A to B. We're also spending �54.80 a week on food,
:07:57. > :08:00.which costs 27% more today than at Earlier, I spoke to Giles
:08:00. > :08:03.Horsefield from the Office of National Statistic, and asked him
:08:03. > :08:10.to explain what his report has found about the pressures on
:08:10. > :08:14.household spending. We have seen from our figures which
:08:14. > :08:20.show the average household expenditure quickly in 2011 has
:08:20. > :08:25.come through as being higher than 2010. Increases in transport, the
:08:25. > :08:34.biggest category. Within that category, people are spending more
:08:34. > :08:42.on diesel and petrol, a significant increase from �22 a week up to �25.
:08:43. > :08:52.You mentioned food, expenditure has gone up a little bit, �52 in 2010,
:08:52. > :08:56.up to �55 in 2011. Housing, an increase in �3. We have seen
:08:56. > :09:03.decreases in other categories. In expenditure on clothing and
:09:03. > :09:13.footwear which has gone down �1.70. And also in some types of household
:09:13. > :09:18.goods and services, significantly for furniture, down �3. Down to �14.
:09:18. > :09:26.Recreation and culture has been interesting, that has held steady,
:09:26. > :09:32.for audio-visual equipment. Also, games, newspapers and books. An
:09:32. > :09:39.interesting increase in expenditure on leisure classes, cinema and
:09:39. > :09:44.theatre, an increase from �18 up to �20 a week. If the decrease is in
:09:44. > :09:49.clothing and household goods which are not essential, does it indicate
:09:49. > :09:53.people have less money to spend on things that aren't completely
:09:53. > :09:57.necessary like food and fuel? it is difficult to say but
:09:58. > :10:07.increases have been in those categories where expenditure can be
:10:08. > :10:08.
:10:08. > :10:16.considered except -- essential. The decreases have been in items were
:10:16. > :10:21.you might expenditure to be put off. Like furniture, clothing. There are
:10:21. > :10:26.quirky results, people are willing to spend more on going out, to the
:10:26. > :10:29.theatre and sporting events. A mixed picture. With us now are
:10:29. > :10:31.three MPs who will be watching tomorrow's Autumn Statement very
:10:31. > :10:39.closely indeed. Conservative, Harriet Baldwin. Labour's Teresa
:10:39. > :10:49.Pearce. And the Liberal Democrat, Lorely Burt.
:10:49. > :10:53.Welcome to all you. Generally, the Chancellor will not meet his
:10:53. > :10:59.targets for 2016. Should he now has he is going to announce those
:10:59. > :11:03.targets. Or should hear now has more spending cuts and tax rises to
:11:03. > :11:09.meet it? What I will be looking for are
:11:09. > :11:17.measures to help families with the cost of living. What should he do,
:11:17. > :11:22.politically it is an important statement? Well, we have got to
:11:22. > :11:27.focus on what is in a family pocket today. Things like making sure the
:11:27. > :11:34.cost of fuel is kept under control. Things like council-tax been frozen
:11:34. > :11:38.for another here. Lifting people are from low-income us out of
:11:38. > :11:45.income tax. This will do an awful lot to help sustain the rate of
:11:45. > :11:50.growth. I am sceptical you can forecast what will happen in 2014.
:11:50. > :11:55.We have to focus on what is happening day-to-day in people's
:11:55. > :12:04.pockets and jobs. Economic forecasts are worse, austerity is
:12:04. > :12:14.set to last beyond 2015, why should we trust George Osborne? I just
:12:14. > :12:16.
:12:16. > :12:19.think we do not know that. We know that there are going to be more
:12:19. > :12:25.cuts and possibly tax rises. The economic forecast from all of the
:12:25. > :12:29.think-tanks will be worse and growth weaker. We know what the
:12:29. > :12:35.forecasters are saying. We have to trust the Chancellor to focus on
:12:35. > :12:41.keeping interest rates down, so mortgage rates are low so people
:12:41. > :12:45.can spend more. Keeping the cost of living down, a growth strategy the
:12:46. > :12:52.Chancellor can adopt tomorrow. can we keep the cost of living
:12:52. > :12:59.down? We are on a very difficult and rocky road, more difficult than
:12:59. > :13:07.we imagined when the first to Cover from the biggest debt assist --
:13:07. > :13:12.took over from the biggest deficit. We have to invest in capital
:13:12. > :13:19.projects which will generate wealth. Why did the government cut all of
:13:19. > :13:25.those projects, school building programmes, in 2010? The government
:13:26. > :13:30.did a full review of the cost of some of these schools, they were
:13:30. > :13:34.spending �6 million on a standard school, that amount has been
:13:34. > :13:43.brought down considerably. We have committed to infrastructure
:13:43. > :13:50.spending. In my constituency, on flood defences. I want more of that.
:13:50. > :13:55.Two years after you cut many of those to jobs. We heard today you
:13:55. > :14:02.will have �5 billion released to be spent on capital projects. Why did
:14:02. > :14:08.you cut all of those jobs that were ready to go in 2010? I am not sure
:14:08. > :14:15.I recognise the picture you are painting. We cut buildings calls,
:14:15. > :14:18.but it was a cost in effective way. We put in �4 billion into new
:14:18. > :14:24.schools. A new announcement today about more investment into schools
:14:24. > :14:32.which will make a big difference. You are going to have to make
:14:32. > :14:34.further cuts. How can those other depend at -- departments there more
:14:35. > :14:41.cuts to ring-fence education and international development and
:14:41. > :14:47.health? I think they should be doing that. I am delighted that, in
:14:47. > :14:53.most departments, they have grasped the nettle, and they have made
:14:53. > :14:56.their targets for making savings. If it was a choice between a
:14:56. > :15:02.Whitehall department having less to spend, and releasing money for
:15:02. > :15:06.capital projects to generate wealth, we need to do that as well. We will
:15:06. > :15:14.come back to whether we should be ring-fencing departments. Labour
:15:14. > :15:19.has accused the coalition of blaming the eurozone for the fact
:15:19. > :15:25.there has been very little growth. Under Labour's plans, and the
:15:25. > :15:35.suggestions you put forward for cutting VAT, how much growth would
:15:35. > :15:40.
:15:40. > :15:46.Some growth is better than none. The medicine has not worked so we
:15:46. > :15:55.even need to change the medicine or the doctored or both. Do you think
:15:55. > :15:57.there would have been significant improvement in the growth figures?
:15:57. > :16:01.If we had not cut the amount of public spending than we did, yes.
:16:01. > :16:11.Public Department spent in the private sector. Lots of private
:16:11. > :16:12.
:16:12. > :16:17.companies lost their investment... This is a fantasy! One at a time.
:16:17. > :16:22.Labour proposed every single spending cut we have put forward.
:16:22. > :16:27.Labour have put us in a position, if they had followed their plans by
:16:27. > :16:32.opposing every spending cut, of its debt crisis. His is a myth to say
:16:32. > :16:36.that debt is falling. But the interest rate has been kept very
:16:36. > :16:43.low because of the Bob le Brocq my constituents cannot get a mortgage
:16:43. > :16:47.so that does not matter! You can now get a two your mortgage
:16:47. > :16:53.for under 2%. These are as are the sorts of things you can do to keep
:16:53. > :16:58.spending under control and stop family budgets from rising. This is
:16:58. > :17:05.Labour all-over. They have not articulated any plan. Double
:17:05. > :17:10.recession! They say, and not yet. They don't say how far and how fast.
:17:10. > :17:17.If we had carried on with Labour's happy meandering we would be in the
:17:17. > :17:22.same situation now as Spain and Greece. That is ridiculous. It is
:17:22. > :17:30.not! George Osborne said in every Budget that if we did not do what
:17:30. > :17:34.he said, we would be like Greece. We would be! That is ridiculous.
:17:34. > :17:39.George Osborne right to continue on this path? You said there should
:17:39. > :17:44.not have been tax rises. The Institute for Fiscal Studies said
:17:44. > :17:50.there will be a �22 billion hole in the fiscal envelope. How should he
:17:50. > :17:55.feel that? The most important thing, if we had not cut the deficit
:17:55. > :18:00.reduction plan, we would not have low interest rates and they are the
:18:00. > :18:05.most important thing that business and want. We need to start with
:18:05. > :18:08.that. The idea is that there is an alternative to this central
:18:08. > :18:15.strategy is nonsense. George Osborne needs to think of every
:18:15. > :18:20.single way to get the economy going. Capital and infrastructure is
:18:20. > :18:24.incredibly important. We should cancel a lot of these very
:18:24. > :18:28.expensive green policies that are adding to the burden of
:18:28. > :18:33.manufacturing industry. One of the reasons American growth has picked
:18:33. > :18:37.up is because of the shale gas revolution. That is one of the
:18:37. > :18:42.things I will be looking for from the Chancellor tomorrow's. Do you
:18:42. > :18:47.think that would have made such a big difference? He every job
:18:47. > :18:51.matters at the moment. Paying taxes matters at the moment. We need lots
:18:51. > :18:56.of things like that but that is the kind of policy we need in a
:18:56. > :19:00.statement. The public are not behind it. There is the money. We
:19:00. > :19:03.have just launched the Green Investment Bank. There are
:19:03. > :19:08.thousands and thousands of jobs waiting to go all the energy
:19:08. > :19:13.strategy. But they will be subsidised and we cannot afford
:19:13. > :19:17.that. We need to bring energy costs down. It is bringing jobs. The
:19:17. > :19:20.announcement today will talk about the energy mix and acknowledge the
:19:20. > :19:27.fact that we need different types of energy in order to keep the
:19:27. > :19:30.lights on. The greenest government ever? If we were going to make a
:19:30. > :19:35.difference to climate change, perhaps it would be worthwhile but
:19:35. > :19:40.we are not. China and India continued to expand their climate
:19:40. > :19:45.footprint. All we are doing is hurting jobs in this country by
:19:45. > :19:50.pursuing the Liberal green policy. We need to have Dowsett --
:19:50. > :19:56.diversification in terms of energy sources. But we also should not
:19:56. > :20:00.abandon solar energy, wind power in particular, where it makes sense in
:20:00. > :20:06.terms of diversification of the UK and making it more resilient in
:20:06. > :20:12.terms of end it is security. hear the word of fairness endlessly
:20:12. > :20:16.bandied about and lots of discussion about a benefits freeze.
:20:16. > :20:22.Should pensioners continue to be excluded from any benefit cuts and
:20:22. > :20:27.freeze? The key thing about pensioners is they no longer have
:20:27. > :20:32.the option of going out and working, so they don't have that choice is
:20:32. > :20:36.that we of working age population have in terms of changing our jobs
:20:36. > :20:41.and working more hours that could potentially improved income. That
:20:41. > :20:45.is why pensioners are treated in a special way. So you think they
:20:45. > :20:52.should be left alone as David Cameron has pledged? The Prime
:20:52. > :20:56.Minister has a made that clear. you agree with that? It was in our
:20:56. > :20:59.manifestos. I personally have said in the past that if you are a
:20:59. > :21:05.higher rate pensioner and you are getting the winter fuel allowance,
:21:05. > :21:08.we ought to look at that, but the price Minister has made that clear.
:21:08. > :21:13.Are you happy with the fact that benefits will be hit to try to help
:21:13. > :21:20.pay for the fiscal Blackhall? What do you want to see on the other
:21:20. > :21:27.side? -- fiscal black hole? Will this help to balance out pfennigs?
:21:27. > :21:34.It is fair to raise the threshold. -- balance out fairness? Is it
:21:34. > :21:39.enough? Probably not. There will be a raft of measures. There seems to
:21:39. > :21:43.be one group of individuals who seem to be getting hit now from
:21:43. > :21:50.cuts in different types of areas. I would not want to see them hit any
:21:50. > :21:55.more. We should be more spread out in our spreading the pain between
:21:55. > :22:01.different groups. We really want to see the highest earners paying
:22:01. > :22:06.their fair share a little bit more, not the savings on the backs of the
:22:06. > :22:12.poor. More tax increases there. Nick Clegg did something fairly
:22:12. > :22:16.unusual in his response to Leveson and gave a different response.
:22:17. > :22:23.Would you like him to do something similar and say the bits he does
:22:23. > :22:27.like and the bits he doesn't in the Autumn Statement? No. Why not? You
:22:27. > :22:34.don't agree on quite basic things within the Autumn Statement, like
:22:34. > :22:37.welfare. Two different parties came together in a time of real economic
:22:37. > :22:42.difficulty and we are pulling together and pulling this country
:22:43. > :22:46.out of the economic mire that we were left in by the previous
:22:46. > :22:50.government. Obviously they are going to be points of conflict and
:22:50. > :22:58.tension and you will see when the Budget comes out which bits when
:22:58. > :23:01.Lib Dem bits. Some bits may not be in there. Thank you very much.
:23:01. > :23:05.Walk down any high street and the pavements are packed with people
:23:05. > :23:10.out Christmas shopping. And if you are in sales, it is the busiest
:23:10. > :23:13.time of the year. But the millions of people who spend their lives
:23:13. > :23:16.selling goods and services to us are a bit of a forgotten profession
:23:16. > :23:20.according to Kate Walsh - who you may remember from BBC One's
:23:20. > :23:30.programme The Apprentice a couple of years ago. She wants that to
:23:30. > :23:39.
:23:39. > :23:42.I am releasing my inner rock As a former finalist on The
:23:42. > :23:47.Apprentice, I know the value of sales skills and how they can help
:23:47. > :23:57.to get you a head, but I bet when you think of the sales person you
:23:57. > :24:05.
:24:05. > :24:10.think of a dodgy car salesman. We What size? 13 amps.
:24:11. > :24:20.Yet sales is vital for the development of the economy. How
:24:21. > :24:23.
:24:23. > :24:30.important our scales -- sales 1.2 5 million sales people in the
:24:30. > :24:40.UK, that is �1.1 million worth of goods that they sell per person on
:24:40. > :24:46.
:24:46. > :24:50.average. So it is about time to My belief is that the sales
:24:50. > :24:55.function is the lifeblood of any business and up until now, it has
:24:55. > :25:01.not been a very well respected profession. It has not even been
:25:01. > :25:05.presented to young people as a job prospect. Despite gaining a first-
:25:05. > :25:09.class honours business degree, the first mention of developing any
:25:09. > :25:13.sales skills was when I was lucky enough to secure a place on a
:25:13. > :25:19.graduate training scheme. I have had the opportunity to deliver a
:25:19. > :25:24.number of enterprise days at schools like this one. There are
:25:25. > :25:30.only three goals out of 30 business studies students at this school in
:25:30. > :25:35.Hull -- three girls. We invited girls from other schools. The
:25:35. > :25:41.government needs to start doing more. Sales has been the Cinderella
:25:41. > :25:47.profession for wait too long. I completely disagree with Michael
:25:47. > :25:51.Gove's decision to abolish work- related training. It was my first
:25:51. > :25:56.work experience training at 15 that gave me that people skills and
:25:56. > :26:02.confidence to succeed. With the apprenticeship scheme is available,
:26:02. > :26:07.sales are drastically and represented. -- under-represented.
:26:07. > :26:11.If we are to get the UK back onto growth, we need to get work
:26:11. > :26:15.experience back on the curriculum, we need to create apprenticeship
:26:15. > :26:17.schemes and help for the sales superstars of tomorrow's.
:26:17. > :26:23.And Kate Walsh is here now. Alongside the Shadow Business
:26:23. > :26:28.Minister, Toby Perkins. Welcome. Do you still feel that sales and
:26:28. > :26:33.people who sell for a living have such a bad reputation? There is
:26:33. > :26:37.still that perception out there. It was ten years ago that I graduated
:26:37. > :26:41.but I know a lot of people that have studied business studies
:26:41. > :26:46.lately and there must be a reason that it is just not mentioned as
:26:46. > :26:52.part of so many business courses. Is that because you can't teach it
:26:52. > :26:59.in an academic framework? This is the work that the Labour Party is
:26:59. > :27:03.doing, and that is so important. It is not all about exams. It is about
:27:03. > :27:08.vocational training, developing presentation skills and listening
:27:08. > :27:12.skills. Anything from going to the interview in the first place to any
:27:12. > :27:17.job function that you are going to do, you can become a better sales
:27:17. > :27:19.person but it is more vocational they are academic. So is it
:27:20. > :27:25.something that the companies should do rather than asking the
:27:25. > :27:29.government? I think that is too late! It should not just be up to
:27:29. > :27:33.accompany, especially small businesses. They have not got the
:27:33. > :27:37.resources to send people on this negotiation and sales training
:27:37. > :27:42.courses that can equip their employees to compete in what is a
:27:42. > :27:50.very tough market place. So Poppins, I believe it needs to start in
:27:50. > :27:55.education and not at university, in school -- so no. We agree. We are
:27:55. > :28:00.grateful Kate Walsh is heading up this work. We recognise that sales
:28:00. > :28:05.is that the heart of the economic recovery. We need to get more young
:28:05. > :28:10.people to aspire to a career in sales. Sales is incredibly
:28:10. > :28:15.meritocratic. You can start at 16 in a call centre and N-Dubz selling
:28:15. > :28:21.aeroplanes to the Saudi government. -- and you can end up selling. It
:28:21. > :28:27.is also one of those things people do who have not necessarily had
:28:28. > :28:34.academics at excess. But do you need qualifications? Many people do
:28:34. > :28:38.recognise the power of sales. Do you need qualifications for it?
:28:38. > :28:43.That is an interesting point. In the business studies AS-level
:28:43. > :28:49.syllabuses, there of 36 mentions of the word production, 37 of
:28:49. > :28:55.marketing, and one mention of sales. We have no academic respect for it.
:28:55. > :28:59.As a result, most people you speak to who have been successful in
:28:59. > :29:05.sales fell into its. You said the government had withdrawn work-
:29:05. > :29:10.related training. What is that? can only talk about my perceptions.
:29:10. > :29:13.I go into schools to deliver enterprise days, and I go into a
:29:13. > :29:17.mix of schools, and it seems that the schools are left to their own
:29:17. > :29:22.devices about whether they offer their students' work experience
:29:22. > :29:28.placements. Sometimes it is up to the parents who might not be
:29:29. > :29:34.equipped to help them do that. not know about that scheme. One of
:29:34. > :29:38.the things the government is doing that is incredibly important for
:29:38. > :29:41.sales is our relationship with overseas, selling British goods to
:29:41. > :29:46.overseas people, and one of the things the government is doing is
:29:46. > :29:50.trying to restore modern languages at the heart of the curriculum.
:29:50. > :29:55.Although a lot of universities are getting rid of those sort of
:29:55. > :30:01.courses because there is not the demand. But in the court he
:30:01. > :30:05.Baccalaureate, but we are trying to restore the status of modern
:30:05. > :30:11.languages. The general principle is that we should not focus just on
:30:12. > :30:17.academic qualifications. We should be taking other up softer skills
:30:17. > :30:21.seriously and I am sympathetic to what has been said. The this
:30:21. > :30:24.government has gone on about championing small businesses
:30:24. > :30:28.endlessly. Why doesn't the government commit more money
:30:28. > :30:33.specifically for this sort of training? A huge amount of extra
:30:33. > :30:38.money is going to apprenticeships. How much should sales be a big a
:30:38. > :30:41.part of those? For Vocational qualifications, the government is
:30:41. > :30:51.incredibly serious, despite the austerity we have been talking
:30:51. > :30:58.about. It is pretty much more money Do you think The Apprentice helps
:30:58. > :31:04.the image of a selling? Unfortunately, we do live in a
:31:04. > :31:08.celebrity culture, kids watch TV. I use The Apprentice as a vehicle
:31:08. > :31:16.when I go into schools, it is something they can relate to, the
:31:16. > :31:22.kids. It encourages healthy competition. Then again, we love
:31:22. > :31:28.watching The Apprentice when things go terribly wrong. You can take it
:31:28. > :31:34.in its entirety, let us watch an episode, this is a good example of
:31:34. > :31:40.selling, this is a bad example. is great to watch it on TV, great
:31:40. > :31:50.entertainment, but does it take away from making it a serious
:31:50. > :31:53.
:31:53. > :32:00.profession? Ultimately, there was a job on offer, so it wasn't
:32:00. > :32:06.something where it had no outcome. The prize was a job with Lord Sugar.
:32:06. > :32:14.I think it is unfortunate so many of our students want to be
:32:14. > :32:19.celebrities. But I think The Apprentice was positive. There have
:32:19. > :32:25.been high profile cases of miss selling. Some people will have the
:32:25. > :32:33.experience of, for example, being this old life insurance. For that
:32:33. > :32:39.reason, we want to focus on the professional aspect of selling. It
:32:39. > :32:49.is in the best interest of sales, to show examples where it did not
:32:49. > :32:51.
:32:51. > :32:56.go right, but it isn't typical. The vast majority of people will be
:32:56. > :32:59.entering an honourable profession. Newspaper editors have been meeting
:32:59. > :33:03.the Prime Minister in Downing Street this morning, trying to
:33:03. > :33:07.persuade him he doesn't need to introduce new laws to make them put
:33:07. > :33:11.their House in order. We'll hear from one of them in just a moment.
:33:11. > :33:19.But first, let's get a flavour of the mood of the House of Commons
:33:19. > :33:24.when MPs debated all this yesterday. We all agree the suffering of the
:33:24. > :33:31.victims and their families cannot be allowed to happen again. And we
:33:31. > :33:36.all agree that this do to us quote is not an option. -- status quo. It
:33:36. > :33:42.is our responsibility whatever is put in place is effective. This is
:33:42. > :33:47.common ground. Let us put to one side politics and let us turn our
:33:47. > :33:53.focus on the principles. We live in one of the least corrupt societies
:33:53. > :34:00.on earth, we are doing everything possible to avoid statutory
:34:00. > :34:06.regulation of the press. Freedom is defined by this things we don't
:34:06. > :34:12.approve of. Having a statute to guarantee this is not some
:34:12. > :34:17.incidental added on to the Leveson Report, and optional extra. It is a
:34:17. > :34:22.complete contradiction in turns for people to say, I wanted to
:34:22. > :34:26.implement Leveson but without statute. Never since says statute
:34:26. > :34:33.is essential. If the Prime Minster deserves credit for setting up
:34:33. > :34:37.Leveson, it is undermined by his extraordinary decision within 24
:34:37. > :34:41.hours of the seat of the report to rubbish the key recommendations
:34:41. > :34:47.that there would have to be some statutory underpinning of an
:34:48. > :34:54.enhanced system of independent self regulation. Having picked up a 2000
:34:54. > :34:59.page document, the Leader of the Opposition wholeheartedly accepts
:34:59. > :35:09.all of that in one go within a couple of hours. That is not a
:35:09. > :35:10.
:35:10. > :35:14.considered approach to a document. The ConservativeHome website is
:35:14. > :35:20.vociferously opposed to any kind of the decision, it wrote before the
:35:20. > :35:26.report, what is needed is a settlement to help ordinary victims,
:35:26. > :35:32.a body with a power to fine, which is independent of the state. I
:35:32. > :35:38.agree with that absolutely. But, can we achieve that without
:35:38. > :35:45.legislation? I do not think we can. So, not much sign of agreement
:35:45. > :35:49.between the politicians in the House of Commons.
:35:49. > :35:54.What was said in a meeting? understand the meeting went on for
:35:54. > :35:58.half an hour and the outcome is the newspapers have agreed to go away.
:35:58. > :36:04.They will meet again tomorrow to begin the process of coming up with
:36:05. > :36:11.an alternative to the Leveson package. Maria Miller is expected
:36:11. > :36:15.to report back by Thursday with a time frame, a timetable by which
:36:15. > :36:19.they think they can agree. The expectation within government is
:36:19. > :36:24.that newspapers will have to come forward with a coherent package by
:36:24. > :36:29.Christmas. The pressure is on them to put aside their differences
:36:29. > :36:38.among them over how Independent this new regulatory body should be,
:36:38. > :36:42.who will be appointed, also, these efficiency of a contract based
:36:42. > :36:49.system. To put aside those differences, and come up with the
:36:49. > :36:54.basis of a blueprint to be on the table by Christmas. So the Prime
:36:54. > :36:59.Minster can say, look, the press is put in together a coherent package,
:36:59. > :37:05.we don't need to go down the road of legislation. When the editors
:37:05. > :37:10.came up, how did they look? Remarkably, monosyllabic and
:37:10. > :37:18.reticent! We'd got very few words. I expect they will mull over what
:37:18. > :37:23.they heard, they have got to move quickly. The status quo is not
:37:23. > :37:29.acceptable. They have to come up with something which convinces the
:37:29. > :37:34.public they are serious about changing their ways. It was not a
:37:34. > :37:44.convivial fireside chat. It was a blunt warning to them to get their
:37:44. > :37:46.
:37:46. > :37:48.act together. The editor of the Independent is
:37:48. > :37:51.Chris Blackhurst, hot-foot from this morning's Downing Street
:37:51. > :37:56.meeting. Did you get a dressing-down from
:37:56. > :38:05.David Cameron as a group? wouldn't say that. He impressed
:38:05. > :38:10.upon us we have to come up with a solution, both David Cameron and
:38:10. > :38:17.Maria Mellor, that we have to stop arguing and move quickly, to come
:38:17. > :38:27.up with a strong, coherent package for independent self regulation.
:38:27. > :38:28.
:38:28. > :38:36.What was the tone? Was it, you do this, or else? It wasn't like that.
:38:36. > :38:39.There is not a million miles between us really. The Prime
:38:39. > :38:46.Minister made a few good points. I don't think anyone in the room
:38:46. > :38:53.disagreed with him. On what? On our need to move quickly, up on our
:38:53. > :39:00.need to come up with a form of independent self regulation which
:39:00. > :39:04.can be sold to Parliament. He is probably in the minority, the
:39:04. > :39:09.Liberal Democrats and some of his own backbenchers, it has to be sold
:39:09. > :39:15.to them and the country at large. The timetable is clear, a tight
:39:15. > :39:21.timetable. Is it possible? Will there be agreement amongst
:39:21. > :39:26.yourselves? There are disagreements and differences. There are some
:39:26. > :39:33.differences. They are not as great as all that. We are dealing with
:39:33. > :39:39.fairly major things. The can you do it? I would hope so. We can agree
:39:39. > :39:44.principles, the detail might have to be sorted later. But we know the
:39:44. > :39:48.principles, you have got to have something which will be credible,
:39:48. > :39:54.something independent. Is there agreement this independent
:39:54. > :39:59.regulator which you will pay for, will have people on it who are not
:39:59. > :40:08.current editors or politicians? Are you happy for a judge to make the
:40:08. > :40:17.appointments? That is a sticking point. That is a major sticking
:40:17. > :40:23.point. It is whether there is a majority, and I think it is moving
:40:23. > :40:29.the other way. For this to be sold to the public, I don't think the
:40:29. > :40:35.public will buy a majority of serving editors on the panel, that
:40:35. > :40:40.is recognised. I think we can deal with that. I agree, I don't think
:40:40. > :40:47.the public would agree with that. Do you think it has to go further,
:40:47. > :40:53.no serving editors on this new regulator, and no politicians,
:40:53. > :40:58.serving politicians, it should be completely independent? Whether
:40:58. > :41:05.there are some people who understand the newspaper industry,
:41:05. > :41:13.that might be helpful. We are moving into a new age, with the
:41:13. > :41:19.internet. I think the public are interested in if we will have a
:41:19. > :41:24.system where, when they make a mistake, the apologies are not
:41:24. > :41:31.buried in page 9. This is a contractual obligation to deliver
:41:31. > :41:36.apologies. I think the public cares more about that, not whether it is
:41:36. > :41:43.statutory. As it stands, you have been given a last chance to be non
:41:43. > :41:48.statutory. Have you got agreement on that? The regulator would wield
:41:49. > :41:57.�1 million of fines, that victims would not need redress in courts.
:41:57. > :42:04.It would happen quickly, and you would abide by it? I must stress,
:42:04. > :42:07.we have not sat down and signed things in blood yet. What I can say
:42:07. > :42:17.it is a have not detected any disagreement on the following
:42:17. > :42:19.
:42:19. > :42:24.points, fines of up to �1 million, also, the use of fast Track
:42:24. > :42:30.Arbitration for ordinary people. We are very conscious, not so much of
:42:30. > :42:34.the celebrities, although they have good cases, but people like Chris
:42:34. > :42:39.Jefferies, the parents of milly downer, it is those people who have
:42:39. > :42:45.real complaints against newspapers, who are not wealthy. We are very
:42:45. > :42:50.aware how our industry has been portrayed for the past three years.
:42:50. > :42:56.We are conscious we have to do something about it. Are there
:42:56. > :43:02.enough carrots to reassure people that everyone will side up to it
:43:02. > :43:07.and stay signed up to it? We talk about these contracts for five
:43:07. > :43:12.years. Is there enough to ensure that certain people who are absent
:43:12. > :43:20.from the Press Complaints Commission will be part of this?
:43:20. > :43:27.think, if you are outside the system, and you're not able to call
:43:27. > :43:31.upon a much cheaper, more efficient arbitration service, you are very
:43:32. > :43:41.handicapped. That is quite different from the system we have
:43:41. > :43:51.now. Very briefly, the internet, the big hole in the Leveson Report.
:43:51. > :43:56.
:43:56. > :44:00.It was one of the real holes, he did not address the internet. I
:44:01. > :44:08.think, if certain internet groups are willing to sign up to a
:44:08. > :44:12.standard, we, unlike Lord Leveson, I think this could be a system
:44:12. > :44:17.which we wouldn't consider joining if it was statutory, it could
:44:17. > :44:24.spread good standards right across the media. So you might be there on
:44:24. > :44:28.Thursday? There are growing demands for the
:44:28. > :44:31.taxman to go easy on international sports stars. Tax rules were waved
:44:31. > :44:34.for the Olympics this summer, but not for other sporting events, and
:44:34. > :44:37.organisers want the rules changed. Our political reporter in the West
:44:37. > :44:47.Midlands, Elizabeth Glinka, asked whether those tax laws were for the
:44:47. > :44:52.high jump. This is Birmingham's Alexander
:44:52. > :44:58.Stadium, home to UK Athletics, weeks after the Olympic Games, the
:44:58. > :45:04.venue to play host to Mo Farah and Greg rutherford but not the world's
:45:04. > :45:09.most famous athlete, Usain Bolt. COMMENTATOR: Usain Bolt is going to
:45:09. > :45:14.do it again! After training hear it in the run-up to the Olympics, he
:45:14. > :45:19.made no secret of his affection for Birmingham. It was not enough to
:45:19. > :45:26.get him racing here, because of tax. When are we likely to see you in
:45:26. > :45:36.Britain, maybe only when the tax laws change? Exactly. I love coming
:45:36. > :45:41.
:45:41. > :45:51.This isn't about one man or even one sport. Here at the Belfry, the
:45:51. > :45:54.
:45:55. > :46:00.Unlike many other countries, in the UK the Treasury taxes international
:46:00. > :46:04.sports stars on their global earnings, even if they perform he
:46:04. > :46:10.just once. Tax experts say they are not surprised that some top
:46:10. > :46:15.performers choose to stay away. you are a boxer or sprinter, you
:46:15. > :46:23.might participate in 10 events a year, in which case the Inland
:46:23. > :46:25.Revenue would want revenue on one tenth of your endorsement Revenue.
:46:25. > :46:29.A new �12 million international tennis centre is currently under
:46:29. > :46:34.construction in Edgbaston, home to one of the warm-up tournaments for
:46:34. > :46:39.Wimbledon, but what chance of attracting the biggest names? Only
:46:39. > :46:43.this year, Rafael Nadal said it actually cost him money to play in
:46:43. > :46:49.the UK. In the past, this man has organised numerous high-profile
:46:49. > :46:52.sporting events, including international indoor athletics at
:46:52. > :46:57.the National Indoor Arena in Birmingham. We want the best
:46:57. > :47:01.because the best brings tickets and tickets means income. If those
:47:01. > :47:09.people don't participate, then by definition it is not a top-quality
:47:09. > :47:14.sporting event. It is a secondary event. In a statement to this
:47:14. > :47:18.programme, the taxman told us that the UK taxes international sports
:47:18. > :47:25.stars in a similar way to the US and New Zealand, and that it tends
:47:25. > :47:28.to collect more tax because of stronger avoidance legislation.
:47:28. > :47:33.Sports governing bodies are continuing to lobby the government
:47:33. > :47:43.so that summers like the one we have just had are not once in a
:47:43. > :47:43.
:47:43. > :47:51.lifetime. 9.64! The champion! The champion becomes a legend!
:47:51. > :47:55.Happy memories, as we were saying. That was the Sunday Politics
:47:55. > :47:58.reporter there. Joining us now from Salford is Pete Hackleton who is a
:47:58. > :48:04.lawyer who campaigns to get rid of what he sees as a tax anomoly.
:48:04. > :48:09.Welcome to the programme. What is the tax problem exactly?
:48:09. > :48:13.problem is, as was described in the V T, Usain Bolt is probably the
:48:13. > :48:19.best examples. The athletes are tax wherever they compete around the
:48:19. > :48:24.World's and that is fine, that is the same everywhere. But the UK and
:48:24. > :48:29.the US also tax a proportion of the global endorsement income. Usain
:48:29. > :48:34.Bolt was going to be paid �100,000 to run in Birmingham. His global
:48:34. > :48:39.endorsement deal is worth �6 million. Therefore he is taxed in
:48:40. > :48:44.the UK on the basis of a number of appearances. He was going to run
:48:44. > :48:51.once in the UK and 10 times globally, so a 10th of that 6
:48:51. > :49:01.million, it says �600,000. So he would end up playing 320,000 in UK
:49:01. > :49:08.tax. He would own 100,000 and pay 320,000 in tax. -- he would earn at
:49:08. > :49:13.100,000. It does not make any sense. Oh dear. People will not shed tears
:49:13. > :49:16.over million dollar endorsement deals, having to pay a bit more tax.
:49:16. > :49:21.Absolutely and many people understand that but the sports
:49:21. > :49:26.people can choose where they go and compete. Given the choice of coming
:49:26. > :49:30.to the UK and the US, where a proportion of their income is taxed,
:49:30. > :49:35.or to compete somewhere else, they are choosing to compete elsewhere.
:49:35. > :49:41.On the back of the health agenda, and the Olympics, it is a shame
:49:41. > :49:47.that the tax rules are pushing these people outside of the UK.
:49:47. > :49:52.Montgomerie, should the tax rules changed? This is another argument
:49:52. > :49:56.for simplifying the tax system. We have a tax system that nobody can
:49:56. > :50:02.understand, that causes anomalies. We are all in this together,
:50:02. > :50:05.remember. We may find that some of the Monday these business people in
:50:05. > :50:11.the City and the sports stars obscene, but we have to make a
:50:11. > :50:16.choice -- some of the money. Do we want their obscene earnings are
:50:16. > :50:19.brought? Is it about obscene earnings or is it we think they
:50:19. > :50:24.should perhaps just pay a proportion of that to the treasure
:50:24. > :50:28.rate. I am not saying they are obscene, many people think they are.
:50:28. > :50:34.But I am not sure that is the reason, many people are happy for
:50:34. > :50:40.them to earn this money, but why should be escaper Ian tax? Not any
:50:40. > :50:45.tax, but low and simple tax. -- why should they escape paying tax?
:50:45. > :50:50.might end up with more revenue because people like Usain Bolt will
:50:50. > :50:54.want to run here. A do you think that is true? That if you change
:50:54. > :50:59.the rules, they will come and compete and we would get the
:50:59. > :51:03.Revenue's anyway? Absolutely. I know that is the case. The
:51:03. > :51:08.important distinction is that this is not wealthy sports people saying,
:51:08. > :51:12.give us a tax break. This is what the sports people saying, we are
:51:12. > :51:17.more than happy to pay the top rate of tax but we will end up paying
:51:18. > :51:22.well in excess of 50% and in some cases more than they actually
:51:22. > :51:29.earned in the UK. Three years ago we had a goth client who played in
:51:29. > :51:37.the Scottish Open, but did not finish top 20 -- it golfing client.
:51:37. > :51:42.His effective rate of tax was a 523 %. That cannot be right. Which
:51:42. > :51:47.sports are affected them most? Primarily individual sports, where
:51:47. > :51:53.the guys travel around the world, they are self-employed, so golf,
:51:53. > :51:56.tennis, athletics, boxing, motorsport. It is not the wealthy
:51:56. > :52:01.sports people not wanting to pay tax, it is wanting to pay tax in
:52:01. > :52:05.line with every other country in the world. The endorsement fees are
:52:05. > :52:11.being taxed separately. Are you saying they should not be taxed at
:52:11. > :52:16.all? It depends, it varies from Attlee to afflict, but many of the
:52:16. > :52:21.athletes will have their own company in their country where they
:52:21. > :52:28.are from -- it varies from athlete to athlete. That Africa will be
:52:28. > :52:32.taxed compared to the rules on that country. -- that athlete. That
:52:32. > :52:35.country will own their image. For something like an Usain Bolt from
:52:35. > :52:40.Jamaica, his company is based in Jamaica and the income should be
:52:40. > :52:43.taxed there. Thank you very much. When the worldwide Scouting
:52:43. > :52:47.movement was founded more than 100 years ago, Lord Baden Powell was
:52:47. > :52:51.having no truck with atheists. His famous Scout promise pledged a
:52:51. > :52:54."duty to God" and that has never changed. In fact, the good Lord,
:52:54. > :52:56.Lord Powell that is, even wrote that atheism ranked alongside
:52:56. > :53:01.gambling, excessive drinking, smoking and even syphilis as a
:53:01. > :53:05.danger to young boys. Versions of the promise have existed for other
:53:05. > :53:07.faith groups for 40 years but both the Scouts and the Guides are
:53:07. > :53:13.exempt from equality laws which means they are allowed to insist
:53:13. > :53:16.their members declare a belief in God. But today we hear that for the
:53:16. > :53:25.first time, this might change and that modern recruits will be
:53:25. > :53:29.allowed to admit that they are non- believers. I am joined by the Chief
:53:29. > :53:34.Commissioner of the Scouts Association. What has brought this
:53:34. > :53:38.on? It is interesting listening to some of Lord Baden Powell's
:53:38. > :53:42.writings but he also said scouting is a movement and not an
:53:42. > :53:47.organisation and it is by remaining relevant that we ensure that we are
:53:47. > :53:51.growing. For the UK in the last seven years, as part of growing
:53:51. > :53:56.perhaps now is that time to take a look and see if we should welcome
:53:56. > :54:02.atheists into the movement. What do you think was mad I think it is the
:54:02. > :54:06.time to change to be honest. -- what do you think? I think it is
:54:06. > :54:11.time to change to be honest but to do so in a way that ensures we
:54:11. > :54:14.remain true to our values. It's we can help youngsters understand
:54:14. > :54:19.their beliefs whilst at the same time ensuring we are inclusive, I
:54:19. > :54:24.think that is a good the Dudu. at evidence to show you could
:54:24. > :54:30.increase the numbers of the Scout organisation if you did not have
:54:30. > :54:35.people have and to swear to God? that is the simple answer. If this
:54:35. > :54:40.was about increasing numbers, I would say, actually we are grubbing
:54:40. > :54:45.already. It is not about being politically correct either -- we
:54:45. > :54:51.are growing already. It is about wanting to be inclusive and making
:54:51. > :54:56.sure more young adults can benefit from what scouting has to offer.
:54:56. > :55:02.Many people are scouts who are atheists already. They swear that
:55:02. > :55:07.allegiance to God and to the Queen who are not in support of the
:55:07. > :55:11.monarchy and just enjoy the scouting movement. I am aware! A
:55:11. > :55:16.number of our members have told me they are atheists and they would
:55:16. > :55:22.like to be part of a more inclusive movement and that is why we are
:55:22. > :55:27.opposing the questions for the first time in our 105 years history.
:55:27. > :55:33.Tim Montgomerie, are you surprised there is still that requirement to
:55:33. > :55:37.swear allegiance to God every week? Slightly surprised. I would be very
:55:37. > :55:42.happy to make that commitment but an atheist should not be included
:55:42. > :55:46.that the wonderful thing that the Scouts movement is. I wonder if
:55:46. > :55:52.they are looking at it for Republicans as well? We you abandon
:55:52. > :55:57.the commitment to her Majesty? definitely not. We are very proud
:55:57. > :56:02.of the Queen's patron edge of scouting and the involvement of The
:56:02. > :56:07.Duchess of Cambridge as a volunteer for us. We have been listening to
:56:07. > :56:11.our members. They are not asking us to change the duty to the Queen.
:56:11. > :56:17.But if you are going for full implicity, surely that is the
:56:17. > :56:21.logical next step? I don't agree. It is about being relevant and
:56:21. > :56:26.listening but being true to our values. That is one for me this is
:56:26. > :56:30.a key part of the question we are asking members. In listening to
:56:30. > :56:35.them, they are not telling us they have a problem in a swearing our
:56:35. > :56:43.allegiance and duty to the Queen. Atheist Monarch guests are welcome?
:56:43. > :56:46.But atheist Republicans still may have to wait for another review?
:56:46. > :56:54.Isn't it a case that the Scouts Association needs to modernise in
:56:54. > :56:58.more than just swearing allegiance? Jo, we are very good at having
:56:58. > :57:03.modernised. Against the trend for Voluntary organisations, adult
:57:03. > :57:08.volunteering, a uniformed organisations, we are growing. We
:57:08. > :57:13.have twice as many teenagers as we did ten years ago. We are a good
:57:13. > :57:18.example of how you can modernise but also remain true to your values
:57:18. > :57:25.and that, for me, is just as important as growing. Has anybody
:57:25. > :57:31.ever said anything about the uniform? Would there be any
:57:31. > :57:35.discussion a about scrapping that? We already have flexibility. I am
:57:35. > :57:41.wearing a neckerchief. For me it is a very simple identification of
:57:41. > :57:44.being a member of scouting. Our uniform today is very much more
:57:44. > :57:50.flexible and modern and young people enjoy some of the options
:57:50. > :57:53.that we have, such as I am where were now. But what we are also told
:57:53. > :57:58.by young people is that they enjoy the sense of identity and we are
:57:58. > :58:03.very happy to find that balance for them. Thank you. Did you say you
:58:03. > :58:06.had been a member of the Scouts? had been a member of the Scouts?
:58:06. > :58:10.had been a member of the Scouts? was a cub scout, not a full one.
:58:10. > :58:12.There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.
:58:12. > :58:21.The question was which actress stood in the US Presidential
:58:21. > :58:27.election and is currently coming in I don't think it is Madonna. It is
:58:27. > :58:34.not. I would have guessed Jane Fonda but it is not, I think it is
:58:34. > :58:40.Roseanne Barr. It is Roseanne Barr. Very good powers of deduction. The
:58:40. > :58:44.she is signing for the Peace and Freedom Party. She didn't quite