01/11/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 01/11/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



brighter on Thursday. Have a good day.


We look at a new app designed to shine a light


All that in the next hour, and with us for the whole programme


otherwise known as the Money Saving Expert.


First today, the Chancellor Philip Hammond,


says the UK will "strike back"


if it comes under cyber attack, as he details


the Government's new cyber-defence strategy.


The plan, which is underpinned by nearly ?2 billion of funding,


is aimed at bolstering existing defences,


but also involves significant investment


in "taking the fight to those who threaten Britain".


It comes as the head of MI5, Andrew Parker, tells the Guardian


newspaper of the growing threat posed by Russia


Should we be treating this as seriously as terrace, cyber attacks?


Well, not because of the loss of life, but terrorism is often about


making people panic and causing things to shut down and economic


attack. And cyber terror is and does exactly that and can be incredibly


damaging. ?2 billion is relatively small potatoes on the potential


impact. A decade ago, I had our first simulation on the website and


we were shut down for three days. We were waiting for a ransom, because


this is common. When people get a virus on their computer, that virus


may not be looking to damage you, it may be used so that it can then


freeze a website or country. So be prepared for this is important. And


there is more going on than people expect. When you suffer a big attack


my run a top 100 UK website and when you suffer an attack, you have a


decision to make. Do you tell users, which is good for transparency? That


is the way I operate. But you are admitting there was a hole in your


differences and people are coming in to try and suck the dater or leak


out your payment details, which we don't have, but if you had them,


trying to keep it quiet can be damage prevention. So a lot of these


things go on in the background that people never hear about. So you


think it is more widespread? The head of TalkTalk admitted that it


happened to her, which was welcomed. But she did that quite late and I


think she got caught between a rock and a hard place. She was not early


enough to appease the public, and she was a bit too late. This is


really big, and it is going to continue. It is not just about


terrorism. There are teenagers thinking this is interesting. Isn't


that the point? The head of MI5 and Philip Hammond are implying that the


threat is Russia and that that is where the big threat to our cyber


security comes from but actually, a lot of cyber attacks are done by


individuals in their bedrooms. Individuals or organised crimes. The


first time we were attacked, this was early days. Nobody can access


your website. You end up paying large amounts of money. Thankfully,


we have better defences these days. Don't attack is, we are a consumer


service website. But there is not much you can do unless your national


infrastructure works, so to protect our economy and to protect the big


in situations of state and to protect our military, you need


people who are good at this. When it happens to you, as it happened to


me, the institutions and the police were useless. They didn't have the


resources in place, so it needs to be looked at. ?1.9 billion is being


dedicated to it. We will see if it is enough.


playwright Alistair Beaton has teamed up


with Yes Minister creator Jonathan Lynn to write a new play.


But which political relationship does it explore?


Was it a) Nigel Farage and Douglas Carswell


b) The Three Brexiteers - Liam Fox, David Davies


c) Jeremy Corbyn and Diane Abbott


or d) Larry and Palmerston the cat.


Martin Lewis will give us the correct answer.


Now, if you'd taken a pound out of your pocket


on the eve of the EU referendum, it would have bought you


But almost as soon as the first results were in,


the value of sterling plunged -


and it has continued declining since.


It's now down by roughly 17% since 23rd June.


But who are the winners and losers from a cheaper pound?


of all 150 currencies tracked by Bloomberg in October.


At 10am this morning, the pound was 1.22 against the dollar


The falling pound has been a boost in the short term for UK firms


The FTSE 100 reached a record high in October,


as the profits of many international companies


are worth more when converted into sterling.


A cheaper pound has also made UK goods more competitive -


export volumes grew at their fastest pace for two and a half years


It also makes it more expensive, however, for British consumers


buying imported goods, which could push up prices.


Inflation is rising at its highest rate for two years,


The Office of National Statistics, however, cautioned against


linking this too explicitly with the fall in sterling.


The supermarket Morrisons has already increased the cost of a jar


while the chief executive of Typhoo Tea suggested last week


that the price of a cuppa could also go up.


And what are the prospects for tourism?


a more attractive holiday destination for visitors


from overseas, but British tourists will find breaks to Europe and


Here with me to discuss this further with Martin Lewis


are the Labour MP Stephen Kinnock and Gerard Lyons,


chief economic advisor at the Policy Exchange think tank.


Gerard Lyons, a good thing or a bad thing, the fall in sterling? It is a


good thing, but there are winners and losers. It should be stressed


that at some stage, the pound was going to fall whatever the outcome


of the referendum. The UK has a large current account deficit. We


also need to remember that this is not the first time the pound has


fallen. After the financial crisis, the pound fell by almost a quarter.


So we have seen it before, and it is good in the sense that it is a


competitive boost to the economy. The downside is that it will feed a


pick-up in inflation which is likely to be temporary over the next year.


But is there an issue about the speed at which the pound has fallen?


I take your point that it can be a good thing and that it was


overvalued, but the speed of that decline, is that something to be


worried about? Last month, it fell by 6% overnight to a 31 year low.


Doesn't that suggest a lack of faith in the British economy? It could


suggest that, but it is more likely to reflect the fact that the pound


was overvalued for some time. Even the International Monetary Fund,


often cited as an independent group even though they were too


pessimistic, they have said that the pound is overvalued by ten to 20%.


The thing about the pace of the decline, in the past when


governments have intervened to stop a falling currency, that has created


problems. This time, it has been sensible for the authorities to


stand back and let the currency fund its true level. At some stage, this


will help the rebalancing of the economy in terms of interest rates


eventually going higher even though for the moment, given where the


economy is, interest rates need to stay low. Do you agree that the


pound was overvalued and that the result of the referendum may have


played a part but it was not the whole story? What is worrying is


where the pound has fallen off the edge of a cliff. If you look at


Black Wednesday in 1992, the pound only devalued 4%. Since the 23rd of


June, the pound has devalued 15%. But was that because it was


overvalued? We need to ensure we have the pound valued at one level,


in a managed sense. I am also concerned about inflation hitting


the poorest in our society hardest. They are the people spending on


goods that are most affected by inflation. This will contribute even


more to the deeply unfair nature of the British economy. But do you


think the fall in the pound has been the trigger to higher inflation?


There is no doubt that there is a connection between the fall in the


pound and high inflation, because British companies are having to pay


more to bring goods in. That is particularly the case with the


Marmite. Do you agree that there is a link between the two? The pick-up


with inflation recently is because of events before the pound fell, but


the weaker pound will lead to higher inflation in the next six to 12


months. But we have seen this before. In 2008, the pound fell


sharply and inflation picked up and profit margins were squeezed. Some


of that hit people across society, and then we saw inflation subdued


again. We need to put this in perspective. It is not a permanent


pick-up in inflation. But because we have had this before, that does not


mean it is a good thing. It means prices will rise, particularly the


prices of basic goods, which will hit those who are less well off. We


do live in a world economy. Food and energy prices have been relatively


low. Even without the pound falling, we would have seen a pick-up in


energy prices because of higher oil prices. We need to put into context


that mark Carney, the Governor of the Bank of England, has accepted


that this will be a one-off increase in inflation. In 18 months, one


might expect inflation to be low again. We need to not panic too


much. The economy has still done quite well in terms of economic


growth. What has been the response to people who sign up to your


website in terms of prices going up? This is about future prices, as


opposed to now. We have not seen it coming that heavily, and it worked.


We overcomplicate this. If the pound drops, when we buy stuff from


abroad, that gets more expensive and that feed through into inflation. No


one would deny that. The euro rate is about the same as it was three


summers ago. It is against the dollar that there has been a real


hit. This is of course Brexit. The markets don't like it. So the euro


and the pound had gone down and the dollar hasn't to the same extent. In


terms of factoring through to prices, there is a big political


issue coming. I strongly suspect that this winter, for the first time


since 2013, we will see the big six energy price rises, both because of


wholesale prices, and because of the pound's weakness. I guess we will


have announcements by the end of January 5% or more rises on energy.


That is a big political issue because it focuses the debate


heavily on this. It is a solid bill going up in peoples homes, and


nobody will like it. That is a big hit. But there are positives from a


weaker pound. The UK is incredibly competitive. We are interesting for


people looking to put inward investment here like the Chinese.


But what about Martin's point about energy prices? When you are talking


about the positives, that benefits a certain group. But energy costs


rising will hit most people. The issue is, one is a direct hit, and


telling people the economy may be indirectly boosted does not help


people on the ground. Profit margins in the economy are very high. Profit


margins before the pound fell five years ago were very high. It depends


on the competitive element in those sectors and whether they take


advantage of the opportunity to pass on higher prices. There is no doubt


that a weaker pound does feeding to higher inflation, but you should not


attribute the temporary pick-up in inflation only to the weaker pound.


I think we are seeing the tremors. Remember, we haven't even triggered


article 50 yet. This is deeply political not just in the UK, but


also in the EU. Donald Tusk has said there will be no soft Brexit, there


is either a hard Brexit or no Brexit. And that spooks the markets,


from the pound to the export markets to our financial services industry,


which is already talking about moving thousands of jobs overseas.


They have talked about it, and Nissan has just announced that it is


actually going to stay. Who knows what the basis of the deal was. The


devil is in the detail. But when you talk to people in the financial


markets, they have been reassured by the relative political stability we


have in the UK. We now need to put those policies into effect, both


domestically and terms of the domestic reach and our industrial


policy, but also in terms of article 50. Being outside the single market


is pretty good for big chunks of this economy.


Chevening We delivered a political earthquake on 23rd June. So there is


no relative... Let's look at the political stability. You said it is


good, Gerard Lyons that there hasn't been Government interference in


terms of the value of the pound but you could argue that Theresa May's


speech at the Conservative Party conference, that Britain was heading


Forestieri a so-called are hard Greggs it, no longer being under the


court of justice s that would have... Talking about international


investors, the thing that has worried them more than anything else


is the comments by the Home Secretary about migration. Even


though though whoa need migration, international investments want


migration. It is not politic #k8 stability. That issue needs to be


clarified. In terms of other things. Because you don't want to see limits


on immigration. Looking back to June, the worry was, if we voted to


leave we would have three or four months of political inable state. We


now have relative political stability, we now have the


Chancellor, set in late November to provide an Autumn Statement, to give


a boost to the economy. We need to look at the whole context here.


There is clearly, as has been mentioned a big change post June


23rd, you are trying to imply lots is negative, there are lots of


positives. You are putting those positives. But the difference here


is who is being affected by what? The broader economy, as Martin Lewis


said is not the same as the direct economy to people in their pockets.


And people will take a view. Let's look at the City of London, you


raise the City of London, saying they are fairly sanguine about what


is going on s that your experience? The Chief Executive of the British


Bankers' Association, I'm sure who knows what he is talking about, said


the finger issing quivering over the relocate button. UBS said they are


going to relocate thousands of jobs. This is not just about big bankers


in the City of London, there are 1.1 million people employed in the


financial services industry, from Edinburgh to Glasgow, to Cardiff, to


Leeds. This has systemic impact on the British economy. And you've got


Paris and Frankfurt waiting in the wings. We've got to find a deal


which gives an equivalence on passporting, if we don't I fear an


exodus. I support equivalence on passporting. I think it is


important. What the BBA says, I wouldn't hold much weight in that,


they tend to talk nonsense in my experience most of the time. We've


had enough of experts. They are not experts. They are a trade


organisation that tries to talk to all their members... And they are


lobbying We can argue that. I think the financial services is a big


sweep, investment bank something a small sweep and is a small number of


people. They are a big threat to investment banking in the UK but it


is not going to go to Europe, it is going to go to New York and that is


the real competition out there. But we need to try to protect that


industry that's what brings in big tax money. The one thing we have at


the moment, I will come to you. We now have the certainty of


uncertainty. That's the troou. Nothing has happened. We have had a


vote. Sentiment has changed that's T But uncertainty will lead to aing


have couple being created, as people will say Inevitably. We know there


is going to be change which gives you something you can work on but we


don't know what it is. Let's look at the City of London and financial


services, would you be prepared to negotiate, you know, access in way


to the single market, tariff-free access, a very good deal for certain


sectors like the City of London, if it means that those rights are going


to be secured? I think, look, how we view the City needs to be seen in


context of the whole UK economy, as well as also the fact of the wider


European economy. I was at dinner last night with the British bhankers


association UPS and others were there. They have been out Chatham


House rules, but the gist was a far more positive discussion to the


outlook to the sti. One size does not fit all in the City. Are they


threatening to pull out, and relocate it Paris, Frankfurt and New


York? Financial is glevenlt the competition is London is New York


aSingapore. You have not answered my question, would you be prepared for


a special deal, would you be prepared for a special deal in erms


to have the single market and retaining the sort of access we have


now for certain industries? The UK needs to have a clean bricts in


terms of sovereignty and migration. So, no And on top, as has been


articulated, bespoke deal that suits the EU and UK and out of that, there


is no doubt in my mind that London will remain the financial centre.


Why are you not more confident about it? I have spent 20 years working in


and around the European Union. I'm also looking closely at things like


Donald tusk says when he says there'll only be a hard wrecks it.


It is not - Brexit. It is not because countries want to punish the


UK it is because they have their own realities. We have not to have a


gung-ho hubrus and casual approach which seems it fail zwropd stand how


the rest of the EU is having to deal with this very complex issue, so the


fact of the matter is - you cannot have your cake and eat T we have to


find a bespoke deal, yes, but it is not going to be a full continuation


of the passporting rights that we currently have which also gives you


a seat at the table to shape future regulations. That's the reality. And


the banking and financial services industry, 1.1 million jobs across


the entire country will take decisions based on strategic


importance. To come back to the original question, will the value of


the pound fall further? I think eventually the pound will be much


stronger. Is it going to fall further now? It depends what happens


in the US next week. But the found is firmly valued on many measures.


We shouldn't speculate, should we? The pound will either go down, go up


or stay the same. All right, we can put a bet on that. Thank you very


much. Failing to keep your garden tidy


or having a dog who barks excessively could land


you with a criminal record under powers introduced by Theresa May


when she was Home Secretary. Thousands of so-called


Community Protection Notices have been issued by local authorities


since they were introduced in 2014. But the campaign group,


The Manifesto Club, claims the powers are being abused in some


instances and amount We'll speak to them in a moment but,


first, here's Theresa May explaining the thinking behind the law


change back in 2012. Earlier today I launched our white


paper on anti-social behaviour. This new approach he empowers local


communities and puts victims' needs at its heart and puts more trust in


professionals than ever before. It perfectly compliments our approach


to wider, local policing. A lot of what is called anti-social


behaviour, of course is actually crime and it should be taken


seriously and it should be dealt with. Yet, more than 3 million


incidents of anti-social behaviour are still being reported to the


police each and every year with many more, doubtless, going unreported.


It's clear that the old topdown approach to the problem hasn't


worked. It was too bureaucratic, too complex and too time consuming. So


we will make powers simpler, I can question, easier to enforce, more


flexible and more effective. That was Theresa May as Home Secretary.


I'm joined now by Josephine Appleton from the Manifesto Club,


and by the Conservative MP Royston Smith, who used to be leader


Welcome to both of you. Josephine, first of all, a lot of people would


say anti-social behave area blights their lives and councils need more


powers to tackle them. Whats' wrong with that? I think it depends what


you define as anti-social behaviour. The test for introducing one of


these CPNs is incredibly low. It only requires a council official to


judge your activity has a detrimental effect on the quality of


life in your area and they can write you out a document telling you you


must or must not do something, if you break it, it is a criminal


offence. It takes the criminal law into unpress departmented areas and


really makes the question of what is a crime and what is not a crime


extremely subjective. Right. Can you actually paint a picture for us. How


many of these community protection notices are being issued and how


many are inappropriate, in your view? I mean, the first research we


have done is within the first year, there were 4,000 notices issued. And


bus the Home Office doesn't actually cope stats on it, it is difficult to


work out what they are. But - keep stwats.


But the majority seems to be more messy gardens and we received the


text of some of the notices and included things dr you must not


sleep in bin stores. You must not bus income this town centre. They


are really quite broad ranging. Within the home, you must not shout


or argue or put your he there vision on, such that can be overheard. I


think that the problem is not necessarily councils, but really,


the existence of these extremely broad powers in the first place. And


where anything is actually serious, there are existing powers that can


deal with it. Let me put that to Royston Smith. Those examples,


having a messy guard yes, shouting or arguing in your own home, surely


they can't come under community protection notice that is should be


regarded as a crime. I think she should. Why? When constituents come


to see me it is not because someone is hafg a loud conversation at


3.00pm it is because they are shouting and screaming at 4.00am,


keeping people awake and caution havoc in the area. The bushes are a


prime example. Where they are allowed to encroach on to the


highway. Partially sighted people walk into them. Mothers with babies


can't get past. Council enforce that to make sure they can't do it. The


CNN are a tool to enforce that. Is it too heavy handed a tool. One can


understand what people complain about in your constituency but is it


too heavy handed? I don't think it is. It doesn't first happen that you


get a notice. First you get a letter saying you are encroaching on to the


highway with your trees or you are shouting or swearing or whatever it


is. You get a warning and are told to do something about that. It is


not unreasonable. It is checked by environmental health officers and


you will at rest. You then have 21 days, to appeal to a magistrate F it


was just a child crying, I don't think any magistrate in the country


would enforce that. I think there is a mechanism. CPNs. We have spoken to


the Local Government Association and they say CPNs offer a quick way, a


quick redress, if you like for local residents' concerns and this is


ahead, before you get to any criminal prosecution. I think that,


these powers are seen as quick, it is not always a good thing, for


councils to be able it use powers easily and quickly. It is not a good


thing, in my view for an officer to have a bit of paper where they can


write in what thing you have to do and if you don't do t then it is a


criminal offence. What if you have been disrupting neighbours and the


local area where people are living for a long period of time and


actually the complapt in the past has been that councils haven't had


enough power to deal with people making snois ever Friday and


Saturday night, for example. - complaints. Would you not find that


disruptive? Of course. Most people have had experience of problems with


neighbours. There are statutory nuisance powers, but they set a high


test and it is an objective text the definition of statutory nuisance.


Detrimental effect, I spoke to people in councils when it was


coming through, they said what did it mean, they znth didn't know. I


think it is a subjective test that hasn't been through the course. Yes,


people have a right to appeal but really the council should have to go


to the court before they impose a law on you, rather than require you


employ your lawyer to defend yourself after the order has been


imposed. You can see a situation where some councils abuse this


power. There is a resident in Rotherham who was apparently ordered


to clean their windows inside and outside the house this. Would be an


extreme, I presume But they were also told to clean up their garden


and shrubs, it wasn't one thing in isolation. You think it is


appropriate? If they encroach into the high wane partially sighted


people are walking into them or mothers with babies have to walk on


to the road to get past, yes I think it should. Should they end up with a


criminal record, as a result? They would in anyway. So even though, you


say Josephine amton there are things in place to deal with them they have


been infecty. And Theresa May apparently brought these in because


the mechanism under the Labour Government has already too heavy


handed. So there are already protections in mranchts I wouldn't


say they have been ineffective. I think they are harder to use. Not


bad thinking. The example given, obstructing the highway, it is an


offence It is an offence to create a statutory nuisance to your


neighbours enjoyment of their property. It is an offence. And


noise abatement notices. But detrimental effect, has no legal


definition, nobody knows what it means. So you have orders, such as


currently in an Essex village there are free roaming peacocks, the owner


has been issued with an order to remove them within the next two


weeks or receive a criminal record. The villagers have set up a petition


defending her because they love them. It is not about empowering


communities, it is about empowering certain council officers to write on


a form what you have to do and what the penalty will be, and that


becomes the law. Do you think know need reform in that instance to


avoid the case described by Josephine Appleton? I think this


piece of work is helpful and helpful to Government. I think Government


should look at it and take notice F the process needs to be reformed


going forward, these things are helpful. If you tell people they


have to get rid of peacocks, it is not what it was set up for. If


people are arguing at 4 O'Clockam, night after night, this is what this


was for. Do you think it has the usceptibility of being abused, toop


blupt an issue, what are the real issues being brought by


constituents? This is one of the problems we have in all forms of


Government, that this sounds like there is a certain looseness,


subjectivity Government, that this sounds like


there is a certain looseness, subjectivity and inconsistency that


drives people the wall on both sides. Those who want action from it


and those on the receiving end T sounds to me, the process doesn't


sound right, you have one of these orders and you have effectively have


to fight it and you have no way of going through. The problem is we


have a breakdown in community and the way people behave that means we


have warring factions within different areas and now we are


starting where the state is intervening in, that which is a


shame but probably necessary. But I think the issue is that there needs


to be much stronger and stricter guidelines, listening - I support


some of the points you are making about protecting communities but I'm


list enning there, and saying, what we have is something that's too


loose. -- listening. There needs to be stronger guidelines to what can


be enagented when and what counts. Are you saying you want to get rid


of them altogether or would you be happy for them to be reformed and


guidelines tightened up? I can't see any need for these


notices. They replaced litter notices, but if it is serious, there


is already another power that would deal with that. This is being used


to supplant other powers, even in some cases, criminal offences.


People have received them for smoking drugs in their home. There


is a drugs law to deal with that. However, the Home Office is


currently revising the guidance, and that is a positive step to improve


people's rights. But I think they need to be scrapped. Thank you for


coming in. Now, are unpaid internships


a valuable form of work experience allowing young people a way


into the world of work? Or are they just a form


of exploitation which actually


reduce social mobility by allowing


posh kids to push their way ahead in the race for the


best-paid careers? At the weekend, the employment


minister confirmed that the government was looking at changing


the law. There is a story in the Mail


on Sunday this morning, that the Government is looking


at outlawing unpaid internships, Well, Rob, I think it is


important that young One of the big barriers


to getting a job is not having And so there is a role for work


experience but I think, particularly in the media,


in fashion, in these very sought-after occupations,


there is a concern... Well, they tend to go to middle


class kids, don't they? ...with unpaid internships,


those aren't actually accessible to everybody,


so I think it is right So it is part of Theresa May's


attack on the poshies. It is part of making sure


that we are fair to everybody and, you know, for social


mobility, it is important. for unpaid interns staffing


the photocopier and running the tea? Conservative MP Alec Shelbrooke


thinks it should be, and Kate Andrews of the IEA thinks


that the Government should butt out. Alec Shelbrooke, what is wrong with


a bit of unpaid work experience? It is not a bit of unpaid work


experience. It is months on end that effectively, unless you have the


wealth behind you to be able to live in London on a meme of ?900 a month


-- a minimum, you need friends and relatives living around London. I


say London because roughly 80% of internships are in the capital city.


For everybody who says it would reduce opportunity, where does that


opportunity like? It lies with those wealthy enough to exploit it. Isn't


that true? If you can't afford to be unpaid for months on end or the bank


of mum and dad aren't putting you up in a flat, you cannot afford to take


unpaid internship. There is no doubt that paid internships are a


fantastic thing and I would encourage big companies who have the


ability to pay therein terms. If you go to glass door .co .uk, it looks


like companies like Google and Facebook are paying their interns


thousands of pounds a month. So those internships do exist. My


concern is for small businesses and the charity sector. I work at the


Institute of Economic Affairs and we bring 100 interns into the building


over a year. We are a charity, for nonprofit. And if all of a sudden,


we have to pay those 100 interns the minimum wage, we would have to cut


the programme. So you would stop offering internships, or could you


just offer a few? We would try to offer a few and we do have bursary


schemes where we try to offer them to those from working class


backgrounds, but the opportunity would be lost. You are a charity and


you can have volunteers work for a charity. I think you are confusing


that with internships. I am not, because they are different things


that happen over the course of a programme. One of the complaint is


that it is just cheap labour, you get someone to do your photocopying.


If you think you are in an internship that you think should be


classified as a job and you are getting long term projects for


months on end, you need to report that. The law allows that. That is


where I come in. This is the specific point. It is all very well


saying you can report it. That is not the reality we live in. The bill


is an adjustment of the minimum wage act. The issue here is, how do you


make sure that the government intervenes to make sure people are


protected in the workplace? As Theresa May said in her conference


speech, some government intervention is sometimes the right thing to do.


The bill itself precludes people of compulsory school age because work


experience is an important thing, and it also precludes people on


accredited degree courses. And what about size of businesses? No. So in


the media and charity and fashion industries, where there is very


little money to go around often, you would prefer to take those


internships off-the-shelf, because those businesses could not afford to


pay them? Are you seriously telling me that the fashion industry is a


pauper industry? If it is at the top that are making a loss of profits,


yes, they can pay. But you saw the Mail on Sunday story, which was one


I researched, about Vivienne Westwood. This is hardly a small


company. Vivienne Westwood does not represent most people in the fashion


industry. But you do admit that actually only those who could afford


to, even in small think tanks or businesses or charities, it would


only be the rich that could benefit from those? You admit that they are


only an option for people who can afford them? This is such an


important point, the cost of living. The fact that London rent prices are


so high that most people, even if they are working in London, can't


afford to pay them for a month, is a huge issue. If the government could


get behind planning liberation to allow rents to go down, these issues


would be helped. This is a good idea. Even when I was a small


company, we paid the London living wage to our interns. And that is a


real living wage, not the George Osborne rebrand of the living wage.


So you could afford that? Well, there was a slight difference.


Coming in for a week or two for work experience is different, but someone


coming in on a three-month internship programme, I think you


can afford to pay for. My charity does the same. We pay internship


programmes. Volunteering is different. This corporation we are


talking in is one of the worst for doing this. I know many people who


started at the BBC because they were able to do six months of unpaid


work, and that was how they got in. They came from affluent families. I


am a boy who would not have had that opportunity. I could not have done a


three-month internship when I graduated from university. I


couldn't have afforded to. It does hit social mobility. Yes, we have to


help charities but ultimately we already have nepotism that helps the


children of the rich and powerful and connected people, and then if


you add in a financial element, it is an interesting issue, the way you


are arguing it. Is your bill going to happen? Martin supports it and


Kate doesn't, but the point is that there have been a lot of politicians


giving the rhetoric about doing something on issues like this in


terms of promoting social mobility, and nothing happens. David Cameron


vetoed the idea from Nick Clegg in the coalition government, so the


government doesn't have a good record. I was told I would have to


resign if I put this private member's bill forward. I am a


backbench MP. I have been pushing on this issue for over two and a half


years now. You chip away and raise it up the agenda. In the last week


or so, what I have achieved has hugely pushed this forward. What


have you achieved? We are talking about it now, and you heard the


employment minister. He was equivocal. You have to keep pushing


it. Will this bill becomes law? I hope so. It is harder than ever for


young people to get on the career ladder and if the government were to


bring this in and we were to see the opportunity for internships and work


placements dropped off significantly because people couldn't afford to be


paid on that small business level... I don't accept that. YouGov said


that over 40% of people offered an internship have two then turned down


because they financially can't afford it. That is a huge number.


This isn't just a minor issue. Even if it is unpaid, a lot of those


unpaid internships come through family, friends and contacts. So


actually, there is still an in-built disadvantage. So making them paid


would put it on a level playing field. The real issues of the day


are issues of nepotism and education not enabling people to get to these


opportunities. We have heard about the cost of living, but what you are


advocating is the idea that if you force small businesses who cannot


pay for 100 people a year to be on the minimum wage for a period of


time at their company, you seem to believe that they will continue to


do that. You have not rebutted that. Companies should be able to pay


staff. They are not staffed, they are interns. If you are a staff


member... That is the problem. They are being used to provide real work.


We know this goes on. They do genuine work in institutions, and


you are saying that business doesn't have to pay them minimum wage. Some


of us have been campaigning for real rights for people who go into


employment and do real work for a long time, and I think it is a bit


rich to come and use the charity excuse, which is a different sector.


In small businesses have to pay their staff as well. If anybody out


there believe that they as a staff member are actually a staff member


and not an intern... Come to the Institute of economic affairs, we


will give you an internship. Bring your niece or nephew and see that it


is a learning process. They get events, discussions, lectures. But


if there is a value of the work they are doing, why not pay for it? If a


company has the money to do it, I would encourage them to do so. But a


lot of companies don't. We heard these arguments before when we were


banning the slave trade. What? Do you compare it to that? That is


insulting to the history of slavery. To compare it to the slave trade


colour isn't that a bit of a leap? It is a form of slavery. We have


just had the Modern Slavery Act. Voluntary work is slavery? Kate, you


respond. People who are desperate to get on the career ladder who want to


go into sectors that do not necessarily have a lot of money, who


are volunteering their time and to meet the right people, you're


comparing to slaves. That is though deeply insulting to anybody who has


been forced to do something. On that note, I am going to finally ask you


about student debt. Students are paying back all this money, what is


a few months of unpaid work experience going to do? Well, we


have big problems in the student finance system at the moment. In


Britain, when you sign a contract, that contact is locked into law.


When you get a loan, those conditions are locked into law. The


exception is student loans, or whether government has


retrospectively changed the conditions after students signed up


to those contracts. That is a big issue going on right now. The one


advantage of doing an internship is that you don't earn enough to start


repaying back your student loan, but I would still want people to earn


more money. It is not slavery, and that is a dangerous route to start


pushing it. Having said that, you keep fluffing about small businesses


who can't afford to get people to work for them, and I am asking you,


what about people who come from non-privileged backgrounds who have


no income? What do they do? You ruin social mobility. We have to finish


it there. Thank you both very much. Now, a thinktank which campaigns


for lower taxes has developed an app which puts local councils


in the spotlight. The Taxpayers' Alliance


says its new app, which pulls


together different sets of data on council spending,


will help people in England see what's happened to their council tax


bills over the past 20 years or how much the head


of their council is paid. Some local authorities


have welcomed the idea - but not everyone is convinced it


gives a full and fair picture. Ever thought - gosh,


I wonder what the council tax Or, hmm, what are councillors'


allowances in this local authority. Now the answer is even easier


to find out, apparently. You go on to the app,


pop your postcode in and instantly nine different reports come up


that we have done over the last It really gives tax payers


lots of information from the amount paid to staff, the amount


of Government art that is on show, trade union office space,


lots of different information that arms the taxpayer with the data


that they need to hold their local This is all information that's


already available, though, isn't it? A lot of them make the data


available, what they don't do is make it easy to digest for tax


payers. So, I think the problem is that


you'd have to go on, download the spread sheet,


download all the PDFs try and look through them all to see


the information that you need. What we wanted to do was make it


as simple as possible for tax payers to be able to grab the data


they need instantly. The Taxpayers' Alliance say


transparency and efficiency go They're particularly


impressed with Hammersmith and Fulham a Labour Council,


whose leader seems to agree. I think transparency does make


for an efficient council but the fact is that we have had


successive Labour and Conservative administrations that have taken


council tax very seriously. The difference is, this year


the Government have told us that at the fully expect us to put


council tax up by 3.75% and they've removed the incentive for freezing


or cutting council tax but we are still one of the handful


of councils in the country who have Last year we were the only


council in London The reason for that,


we are taking a ruthless approach to stripping out waste


and putting money back in people's pockets and rebuilding


front line services. Hammersmith and Fulham council say


engagement with their They recently launched


a Disabled People's This campaigner welcomes the efforts


here, but warns that judging any council on headline figures


could be misleading. If you are in a low council


tax local authority, if behind that there are huge cuts


affecting services, then a low council tax isn't the be all and end


all of the information that local The Local Government Association


insists councils are the most efficient part of the public sector


and say the new app is unnecessary, because it replicates information


that is already available. But if you do want to


have a look Your TPA I'm joined now by Dia Chakravarty,


the political director of the Taxpayers' Alliance,


and the MP Tristram Hunt, who chairs the Labour Party's


committee on local government. Welcome to both of you. Dia, first


of all, data on council allowances and how much people get paid, it is


out there already. You are not adding anything to the sum knowledge


of constituents? You would have thought so. Some councils are much


better than putting their data out than others. It is also about how


the data is presented. Our focus here was to make sure it is


presented in a which which is easily accessible, people can understand.


Spreads sheets are a beautiful thing... You may say that. But all


the data can be difficult to navigate. It is difficult they are,


and they have an obligation to put that information out there, even if


you are arguing it is slightly difficult to access. Is this not


more a political point than it is actual lay point about being easier


and accessible it people sn.s it is about transparency. It is about


everybodiry single council behaving in a way which makes it ease canny


for every resident to access the information. . What's not to like


I'm in favour of transpan sane using technology and platforms and apps to


engage with local and central government, it is brilliant. So I'm


for the technology. I think the app itself is reductive, because what


you see is the salaries, fines, contributions, fine, what you don't


see, for example, is, as it, were how much a council has invested in


local parks, which has saved money in public health. How much a council


has supported music lessons which has transformed the life


expectancies of young people. So you can be more creative about how you


think about local authority expenditure, so you can drive


efficiencies, I'm all for, that but you can also think - we have


wonderful local authorities doing interesting creative things, why


don't we have that, as well as the PEPs contributions. What do you say


to that Dia? It is an app, a civil app we have created in house. It is


one-sided. All we are doing is getting the informing out there. So


your reporter chose to speak to Hammersmith because with the


information available it her t seems like a suitable... Because they have


reduced costs overall and managed to bring down council tax. On one of


your things is a link to Government art fund. Now lots of local


authorities have local museums which are under terrible pressure at the


moment in temples allowing access to these great collections. . - in


terms of allowing. But many people will be surprised local authorities


have art. I think they should have art and young people should go and


see it and what your apps suggests is it is a bit of a west of money I


think it is coloured because what the app or paper suggested is if,


say, I don't know, Hammersmith has X number of art works which is


people's property there should be an onus on the council to make that


available to the people. And that's a basic point of that paper that a


lot of councils sit on a lot of art which is wonderful but we just don't


get to see it. That was the point in that particular paper. That was the


point. Why not have nice pictures of that on your app so you can go to


Hammersmith and say - I wanted to see this wonderful mural. I don't


like your taste in art. It is a celebration of the cultural


impainting oppeople's life. But it is the conversation we are having.


It is putting the information out there for the public to access. You


need more in there. Get Tristan to do the app for you. You know It was


a very basic app to get a conversation started. We think it is


important people can access the information, which, as you say, it


should be out in the public anyway. I think, as you say, it is there if


you try hard but back to Tristan's initial point, it is slightly


one-sided. If you are not presenting a case of added value, if you are


only presenting a list of figures, which is where your spread sheet


argument slightly falls down, in the sense it doesn't offer the full


picture. Because, I presume the point of it is you want to see


councils reduce their costs further. That's the sort of result? We often


find that councils just tend to forget that they are spend other


people's money. Spending tax payers' money. That's a fair nunchts for


example, if we look at some -- that's fir enough If we look for


Kent, I think the council tax there has gone up almost every single year


over 20 years, there was one single tax cut. We know that the Chief


Executive of that council earns the high nest this council trif all


council leaders. - highest in this country of all counsellors leaders.


They went on a fact-finding trip to Disneyland. How How would that


enhance the local people If that informs how they use Dreamland in


Margate to regenerate coastal resorts as a credible use of money,


fine. But my point is that local authorities arep spending 22% less


today than they were in 200910. I think #24er he - 2009-10. So I think


they are well aware. It is communities like Stoke-on-Trent


which have teaken the harest hit It is a decrease of 22%. Councils say


they have been stripped to the bone. Surely you welcome something like


this, about trans pansy, people can make up their own mind and as Dia


said it is all about spending money. Now, I am a biassed journalist. It


is not a phrase you hear on the BBC often. I am a biassed journalist


because the top of my site says we are here to cut your bills and fight


your corner. We are pro-consumer. #50i78' biassed I declare T the tax


payers' allowance is a biassed organisation with a stated aim. It


is not biassed in the state. You want to reduce the amount of tax


payers' money being spent. As long as your app is clearest about your


bias and stance and what you are doing it, and approximate people


read in that context, it'll provide good, transparent information and I


support T if it is being used and being seen as a neutral platform


that isn't steering, then I think you have the problem. Do you have


your stated aim on it? We very clearly state we exist to cut out


waste in the public sector and of course, to bring down tax as a


condition sequence of that. I don't think it is a surprise to everybody


The challenge is this sh do when an organisation there to, as you put


it, strip out waste, implicitly suggests that having art galleries


and libraries and museums within local authorities should be viewed


within the context of waste, then it is problematic. It is It is a waste


if it is not available to the people, and it is then true. It


hasn't been a waste having you on. Snr now, it is back to our quiz.


There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.


The question was, playwright Alistair Beaton has teamed up


with Yes Minister creator Jonathan Lynn to write a new play.


But which political relationship does it explore?


Was it a) Nigel Farage and Douglas Carswell,


Liam Fox, David Davies and Boris Johnson,


c) Jeremy Corbyn and Diane Abbott


So Martin, what's the correct answer?


At least give us an answer? My stint would be that it would be the three


Brexiteers. - my instinct The Ukip one we have


just had the programme which was very funny about Nigel Farage. Did


you watch that? I z I found it very amusing. What about the others? I


think Diane Abbott and Corbyn, there are better relationship was Corbyn


you would want to explore. That's too nice. You want friction. I would


go for the Brexiteers. You are right. ! Yeah. You don't anything


for it by the way. ! Not even a mug. Maybe. We are cutting costs. The two


writers were inspired by the prospect of David Daviser Orgreave,


Orgreave, Boris Johnson and Liam Fox, sharing the mansion, at


Chevening. The PM's decision to make


the three Brexiteers - Boris Johnson, Liam Fox


and David Davis - share the stately home of Chevening in Kent


is unlikely to turn out to become a picture of loved-up


hippy communal bliss, especially as the three are rumoured


not to be the best of friends. But given that the Jacobean


mansion has 3,500 acres of land and 115 rooms,


they are unlikely to be living on top on each other


or even find each other. Nevertheless, the Yes Minister


co-creator, Jonathan Lynn, instantly declared the "house-share"


comedy gold saying that Theresa May And now Lynn has teamed up


with our next guest It is tru, you couldn't make it up.


Three ministers sharing a grace and favour home. A gift to political


satire? Very kind of our Prime Minister. Not renowned for her sense


of humour but she has given us a gi. Congratulations Martin for being


brilliant and getting it right. If you would like to invest in the


show, I know you have a lot of money, come back to us. No, it is


great. These three people, who are going to have to share this rather


lovely building, they are not the ideal sharers, they are not the most


flexible and gentle of people. Plait mates You can't imagine them rubbing


along nicely in a friendly way together. So the idea is, really, it


is a great comic premise, but also will let us put the boot in just a


little bit. Just a little bit. Who will you put it in or what? Well I'm


in the hugely enthusiastic about Brexit, neither is Jonathan Lynne.


It is not very well-organised. We have a Prime Minister who says


Brexit means Brexit and the reason she says Brexit means Brexit is


doesn't know what Brexit means. Nobody does. We are with a


Government that doesn't really know where it is going to be going. Are


you going to follow current events and track it closely? We'll probably


do a lot of last-minute writing and have a very stressed cast learning


new lines at the last minute. You are not new to that? . Do youville a


quoshging title? Well the Three Brexiteers but it might change. Will


it be a lit it bit like Yes Minister, meets the Manor Born.


Well, it will be funny. And perhaps a little savage in places. I do hope


So these three people will be probably dealing with the probably


the biggest constitutional change for 100 years or something and it is


very hard not to relish the prospect of having Boris on stage. Who is


going to play Boris? The theatre is his proper residence. Is that where


he should be? Do you think he has missed his vocation? He is wasting


his time in politics. He is our very first comedy Foreign Minister. Have


you asked him about a change of career? We will ask him along. But


not to star? We'll let him come to the first night. I think you should


ask viewers for a suggested title. I was going with Grace Favour and


Boris. On that note, thank you very much for coming N we look forward to


T thank you for being our Guesting of today.


I'll be back at 11.30 tomorrow with Andrew for live coverage


of Prime Minister's Questions.


He's a scientist, brilliant apparently.


Download Subtitles