:00:38. > :00:41.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:42. > :00:43.The Cabinet is told to end the backbiting and public
:00:44. > :00:46.disagreements following a series of damaging leaks.
:00:47. > :00:50.But can the Prime Minister instil unity and discipline?
:00:51. > :00:52.Australia's Prime Minister says his country is very
:00:53. > :00:55.keen to do a trade deal with the UK after Brexit.
:00:56. > :00:57.But how much will trade increase with countries
:00:58. > :01:04.The Labour Party has backed the idea of a so-called Robin Hood tax
:01:05. > :01:08.to raise money from the financial sector to help alleviate poverty.
:01:09. > :01:13.And Australia's parliament and political traditions look
:01:14. > :01:25.We'll have our very own political slanging match.
:01:26. > :01:32.of the programme today is the Australian High Commissioner
:01:33. > :01:36.In a previous life, he was briefly Leader
:01:37. > :01:39.of the Opposition in Australia, before going on to be his country's
:01:40. > :01:42.longest serving Foreign Minister under Prime Minister John Howard.
:01:43. > :01:55.First today, the UK's headline rate of inflation dropped slightly -
:01:56. > :01:57.down from 2.9% in May to 2.6% in June.
:01:58. > :02:00.Let's get all the details from our business correspondent, Jonty Bloom,
:02:01. > :02:11.Why and what has caused the slight fall? We were expecting a small fall
:02:12. > :02:16.this month but this was much more than expected. Principally it is
:02:17. > :02:19.done to a fall in the international old forests and that has seen the
:02:20. > :02:30.price of petrol and diesel on the garage forecourt full sharply --
:02:31. > :02:35.international oil price. There are still inflationary pressures of
:02:36. > :02:39.course in the system. But this is quite a sharp fall and much sharper
:02:40. > :02:43.than people were predicting. It was unexpected and bigger than people
:02:44. > :02:48.thought, but what about the cost of everyday goods, including food and
:02:49. > :02:53.household products, did they continue to rise? Yes, they have.
:02:54. > :02:57.Food is going up by 0.2% in the last month, not as quickly as it has been
:02:58. > :03:02.rising in the past few months. And also what we are seeing is the price
:03:03. > :03:06.of raw materials for factories and producers does not seem to be
:03:07. > :03:10.increasing as quickly as it has been which could mean inflationary
:03:11. > :03:13.pressures which we were expecting to come through in the next few months
:03:14. > :03:26.will not be quite as large as expected. People are
:03:27. > :03:30.talking that inflation, although it has not peaked quite yet, will peak
:03:31. > :03:32.soon. Do you think it will not get the 3% people had thought might
:03:33. > :03:35.happen? And would therefore put more pressure on the Bank of England who
:03:36. > :03:37.of course have to make the decision about base rates. The bank itself
:03:38. > :03:40.was predicting inflation would reach 3% towards the end of the year. That
:03:41. > :03:43.is still quite possible but it is still unlikely the Bank of England
:03:44. > :03:49.will act. The pound fell in value this morning because people were
:03:50. > :03:54.predicting it means it is far less likely the Bank of England will
:03:55. > :03:57.increase interest rates. It sees it as a temporary inflation problem
:03:58. > :04:00.caused by devaluation of the pound principally and it thinks that will
:04:01. > :04:04.go out of the system, through the system, in a couple of months and
:04:05. > :04:10.prices will come back to a more acceptable level. As inflation has
:04:11. > :04:14.risen, albeit with this drop today, it is obviously eating into people's
:04:15. > :04:19.wages which are rising more slowly. Does this drop take the pressure off
:04:20. > :04:24.the Government which is in the middle of a big row over what to do
:04:25. > :04:29.about public sector pay? I am not sure it will totally reveal pressure
:04:30. > :04:33.or reduce it because you have to remember people in the public sector
:04:34. > :04:38.had a pay freeze for two years in 2010-11 and the vast majority have
:04:39. > :04:41.seen pay frozen at an increase of 1% for the last five years and the
:04:42. > :04:46.Government has committed to keeping that going for another three years
:04:47. > :04:50.at least. When you are increasing wages by only 1% and prices are
:04:51. > :04:55.increasing by 2.6%, you are feeling much worse off every year. I do not
:04:56. > :04:59.see that pressure being reduced very much by just these figures. It has
:05:00. > :05:03.been a long-running issue and lots of people in the public sector are
:05:04. > :05:07.very angry and feeling a lot worse off than they were seven years ago.
:05:08. > :05:13.The noises coming out of the Treasury from the Chancellor in
:05:14. > :05:16.terms of pay for public servants, do you have any update? We had an
:05:17. > :05:21.announcement this morning that the pay rises for top civil servants,
:05:22. > :05:24.judges and top military staff will increase by 1%. That seems to be
:05:25. > :05:31.confirmation the Treasury is sticking to the tough line. Thank
:05:32. > :05:35.you. Cost of living, that is what voters are most concerned about. As
:05:36. > :05:40.an astute observer of British politics, do you think our public
:05:41. > :05:44.servants are in line for a pay rise? I will be careful making judgments
:05:45. > :05:50.because presumably when the analysis is done, you compare private sector
:05:51. > :05:54.wages with public sector wages, you make an over the nation assessment
:05:55. > :05:57.of the situation and there is a relationship between wages and
:05:58. > :06:03.employment. One of the features of the UK since the great recession in
:06:04. > :06:09.2008 is the way you have kept unemployment so low. Your
:06:10. > :06:12.unemployment rate is around 4.6%. You have had through the private
:06:13. > :06:21.sector and public sector, probably both, substantial pay restraint, but
:06:22. > :06:25.the benefit is you have kept unemployment down. What do you make
:06:26. > :06:29.of the conundrum, as you say and the Government likes to point to the
:06:30. > :06:34.jobs miracle and there are high rates of employment, but wages have
:06:35. > :06:39.been either static or rising slowly after the last ten years, yet
:06:40. > :06:44.inflation is on its way out. Usually, inflation is pushed up by
:06:45. > :06:49.rising wage costs and that is not the case. Labour would say it is
:06:50. > :06:54.because of the types of jobs people have, insecure, self-employed, zero
:06:55. > :06:57.hours contracts. The reason you have inflation at the moment, it seems to
:06:58. > :07:02.me, is a function of the depreciation of the pound which was
:07:03. > :07:06.a result of the Brexit folk. The pound, I think, on average must have
:07:07. > :07:11.depreciated by around 15%, making imports more expensive, that does
:07:12. > :07:15.have... It should only be temporary effect on prices, but it will have a
:07:16. > :07:19.temporary effect. In the case of Australia, when we have had
:07:20. > :07:24.substantial declines in the value of our currency, and it has happened in
:07:25. > :07:29.the last three, former careers, 20% depreciation in the currency, that
:07:30. > :07:34.has had a significant effect on the price of imports -- three, four
:07:35. > :07:39.years. You would expect the inflation impact of the devaluation
:07:40. > :07:45.to wash through here in the UK before long and maybe we will see
:07:46. > :07:49.the beginning of the end of that exchange rate effect. We will find
:07:50. > :07:55.out when we get the next set of figures.
:07:56. > :08:00.The Bank of England is unveiling the new ?10
:08:01. > :08:03.note this afternoon which has a picture of Jane Austen on.
:08:04. > :08:06.In September, the Reserve Bank of Australia is putting a new $10
:08:07. > :08:07.note in circulation, but who is on it?
:08:08. > :08:15.At the end of the show, Alexander Downer will give
:08:16. > :08:21.I think you can probably deduce from that.
:08:22. > :08:23.So, after days of briefing and backbiting, Theresa May
:08:24. > :08:25.is attempting to get her class in order.
:08:26. > :08:27.Cabinet met this morning and Theresa May is keen to show
:08:28. > :08:30.that her government is getting on with the job.
:08:31. > :08:32.Yesterday, the Education Secretary, Justine Greening, announced an extra
:08:33. > :08:38.?2.6 billion for schools over the next two years, although Labour
:08:39. > :08:41.points out there's no new money as the cash will come
:08:42. > :08:47.Also yesterday, Transport Secretary Chris Grayling was in the Commons,
:08:48. > :08:50.laying out the proposed route for the next phase of the High Speed
:08:51. > :08:55.2 rail link, connecting Birmingham with cities in the North of England.
:08:56. > :08:59.And of course, Brexit Secretary David Davis was enjoying
:09:00. > :09:01.the delights of Brussels to launch the second round of formal talks
:09:02. > :09:08.He's called for both sides to get down to business
:09:09. > :09:11.Mr Davis has his detractors, however.
:09:12. > :09:13.Yesterday, Dominic Cummings, one of the leading figures
:09:14. > :09:18.in the Vote Leave campaign tweeted that he thought David Davis
:09:19. > :09:22.was "thick as mince, lazy as a toad, and vain as Narcissus."
:09:23. > :09:29.So Theresa May is attempting to get a grip on all the briefings
:09:30. > :09:34.She told a group of Conservative backbenchers last night
:09:35. > :09:37.that there must be "no backbiting, no carping" and that the choice
:09:38. > :09:40.was "me or Jeremy Corbyn, and nobody wants that".
:09:41. > :09:44.And this morning, in their weekly Cabinet meeting, the Prime Minister
:09:45. > :09:46.reinforced the message by reminding her colleagues
:09:47. > :09:51.that their meetings must be kept private.
:09:52. > :09:53.The Cabinet meeting has now finished and our political correspondent,
:09:54. > :10:01.Eleanor Garnier, joins us from outside Number 10.
:10:02. > :10:08.Was that meeting private or have you heard the entire contents of the
:10:09. > :10:13.Cabinet this morning? Not yet, but I would not hold your breath. It is
:10:14. > :10:17.like a really tough school where you have a head teacher who is pretty
:10:18. > :10:20.weak and all of the pupils are kicking off, just tap the last
:10:21. > :10:30.school assembly of the term, so far, none have been expelled -- just had
:10:31. > :10:34.the last school assembly. After the leadership gossip, the leaks from
:10:35. > :10:39.Cabinet and the hostile briefings, Theresa May is trying to get a grip
:10:40. > :10:43.of things, to instil discipline. We know at Cabinet today, she was
:10:44. > :10:48.laying down the law to the senior ministers to keep Stumpf as they go
:10:49. > :10:52.away on the summer holidays. She wants everyone to calm down and come
:10:53. > :10:58.back after the holiday hopefully with a bit of a sense of unity. We
:10:59. > :11:02.can see pictures of members of the Cabinet trooping out of the famous.
:11:03. > :11:07.They do not look too unhappy, maybe she did not shout too much. What
:11:08. > :11:18.about the drinks on the terraces last night at the House of Commons
:11:19. > :11:19.with MPs? She is not only telling her senior ministers they have to
:11:20. > :11:21.behave and stop bleating, but she told Conservative MPs at a summer
:11:22. > :11:25.drinks thing they had last night on the terrace that they needed to stop
:11:26. > :11:30.carping, stop backbiting, to calm down. She said, go away over the
:11:31. > :11:34.summer, have a good break, but let us be ready to get down to serious
:11:35. > :12:09.business when we come back after the summer holiday when Parliament
:12:10. > :12:28.returns in September. Eleanor Garnier outside Number
:12:29. > :12:34.The reality is that you have to deliver. I know from speaking to
:12:35. > :12:38.teachers during the general election that they were hurting and needed
:12:39. > :12:41.extra money put in. So there is a bitter rejigging going on within the
:12:42. > :12:46.department and that was where the 1.3 billion a year is coming from.
:12:47. > :12:47.To use your phrase of the magic money tree, you found a lot of it
:12:48. > :12:59.for the DUP. It is priorities. Let us concentrate
:13:00. > :13:04.on education, you will take that money or make savings from the
:13:05. > :13:07.existing schools budget for England, is it annoying the money was going
:13:08. > :13:13.to be used for more free schools and now it has been taken away? For me
:13:14. > :13:17.who believes in our manifesto promise of getting more grammar
:13:18. > :13:21.schools where they were wanted, I am a bit disappointed, but the brutal
:13:22. > :13:24.reality of a minority government is we cannot get through the policies
:13:25. > :13:29.we originally wanted. That is where we are. The pressure of course is
:13:30. > :13:32.going to continue from the big spending departments. The Institute
:13:33. > :13:39.for Fiscal Studies has pointed out that even with the ?2.6 billion over
:13:40. > :13:43.two years as a real terms freeze, not increase. Is that really
:13:44. > :13:46.addressing the issue? It is going a step in the right direction, it is
:13:47. > :13:55.certainly not stepping backwards. Yes, there is ?1.3 billion extra
:13:56. > :13:59.that will be put into education. Let us say it has been mildly welcomed
:14:00. > :14:04.already by the profession. They want more. Of course, I do not blame
:14:05. > :14:09.them. But it is a step in the right direction. Would you like to see
:14:10. > :14:13.more? Absolutely. But the reality is, where will it come from? We have
:14:14. > :14:18.the budget coming in November and that is probably the appropriate
:14:19. > :14:23.time to find out whether Philip is going to release the firm grip he
:14:24. > :14:30.has got on the Exchequer. Do you think he should? Is he listening to
:14:31. > :14:34.the pleas, not just from the sectors themselves, health and education and
:14:35. > :14:37.others, but also from ministers within the Cabinet? I hope so.
:14:38. > :14:42.Particularly for those who work in teaching at the lower level, those
:14:43. > :14:47.with low levels of money in the National Health Service, not by
:14:48. > :14:52.managers, some of whom are earning over 100,000, 200,000, 300,000, we
:14:53. > :14:55.are talking about the ones on 20000 and less. You are on the side of
:14:56. > :15:03.Boris Johnson rather than Philip Hammond. I am on the side of the
:15:04. > :15:05.National Health Service and education. I am not picking members
:15:06. > :15:10.of the Cabinet as to whether they are supporting a lifting of the
:15:11. > :15:17.restraint or not. That is one of the reasons we heard the reason may at
:15:18. > :15:22.the 1922 drinks last night to ensure we got the message across -- Theresa
:15:23. > :15:27.May. Boris was there, David Davis and Philip Hammond. The last party
:15:28. > :15:32.they were at together, it seems they fuelled the Sunday paper pages
:15:33. > :15:35.completely with their gossip, if not personally, their people. Great to
:15:36. > :15:42.see them there along with half of the Cabinet at the drinks reception.
:15:43. > :15:47.No prosecco. It was chilled champagne, beer and red wine and
:15:48. > :15:52.white wine. Times are hard on the terraces in the House of Commons!
:15:53. > :15:53.Theresa May addressed the 22 and got her point across beautifully, I
:15:54. > :16:04.thought. To get back to the issue of public
:16:05. > :16:09.sector pay, are public servants overpaid? No. So Philip Hammond was
:16:10. > :16:12.wrong? From what I read, it was taken out of context. And I
:16:13. > :16:15.shouldn't really know what Philip Hammond is saying in a cabinet
:16:16. > :16:21.meeting where you should have the freedom to be absolutely frank in
:16:22. > :16:26.what you say and do not expect to see it appearing on the front page
:16:27. > :16:33.of any newspaper. It is being aired publicly and he didn't deny that he
:16:34. > :16:38.said something along those lines. Once you take pensions into account,
:16:39. > :16:44.did he have a point? Again, I don't know exactly what he said and in
:16:45. > :16:48.what context. Well, he didn't deny it, so let's just say he said that
:16:49. > :16:52.public sector workers are paid more than private sector workers, says
:16:53. > :16:59.he, when you take pensions into account. If that is the reality,
:17:00. > :17:02.that is the reality. But part of the problem is when you get partial
:17:03. > :17:08.titbits fed to newspapers by people who are not on your side. It is not
:17:09. > :17:11.helpful. Here is what he said on the Andrew Marr Show. Philip Hammond
:17:12. > :17:15.defended his position, saying public sector pay had raced ahead of the
:17:16. > :17:23.private sector after the economic crash in 2008. Are these the sorts
:17:24. > :17:26.of things you want to hear from the Chancellor? Well, he is the one who
:17:27. > :17:35.has to ensure that the books are balanced. At the last count, we had
:17:36. > :17:40.?1.7 trillion of debt. And who has been in government since 2010? Well,
:17:41. > :17:43.all of this was built up under the Blair and Brown regime. So you are
:17:44. > :17:51.still blaming the former Labour government. I certainly am. The
:17:52. > :17:55.interest we are paying on that is 43 billion a year. Philip Hammond is
:17:56. > :17:58.right to ensure that we are pulling back on how much we are borrowing to
:17:59. > :18:02.get to a situation where we can write off the debt. It will benefit
:18:03. > :18:06.the National Health Service, education and public sector if we
:18:07. > :18:11.can do this. But you said you want him to release his iron grip on the
:18:12. > :18:16.finances. At the lower levels. So you would like to see more money
:18:17. > :18:20.going to the lowest paid? I would prefer some of these managers who
:18:21. > :18:24.are earning eye-watering salaries to get nothing, and the people lower
:18:25. > :18:29.down who do the dirty jobs to get more. Let's talk about the
:18:30. > :18:32.backbiting. Do you think anything Theresa May says now, whether in
:18:33. > :18:37.cabinet or last night when you were there with those ministers, will
:18:38. > :18:43.have an iota of difference? Yeah, because we are angry. People on the
:18:44. > :18:48.backbenches are coming up to me and telling me we should not be having
:18:49. > :18:51.to listen to plotting is going on either directly by Cabinet ministers
:18:52. > :18:56.or by people on their behalf, with or without their permission. You
:18:57. > :18:59.were briefly leading yourself in Australia. How difficult is it to
:19:00. > :19:07.discipline the troops? Pretty difficult. The equivalent of the
:19:08. > :19:10.Conservative Party in Australia is the Liberal party, and these are
:19:11. > :19:14.parties that believe in individual freedom, which seems to me to be
:19:15. > :19:17.freedom of speech and expression. So you can't corral them into some
:19:18. > :19:25.quarters -- sort of Stalinist regime. It is a huge challenge to
:19:26. > :19:28.exercise a degree of discipline. But let's face it, a political party is
:19:29. > :19:32.made up of a large number of people with different views. If only one
:19:33. > :19:39.view counted, there would only be one person who ever spoke or made
:19:40. > :19:46.decisions. Listening to Nigel talking about public sector pay, you
:19:47. > :19:50.get competition about the allocation of scarce resources. And that is
:19:51. > :19:54.fine. Everyone knows there is a difference of opinion. The point is,
:19:55. > :19:57.should it be aired publicly by people who are supposed to be under
:19:58. > :20:04.what is known as collective responsibility? Well, leaking from
:20:05. > :20:09.Cabinet in Australia is regarded as a serious offence. What happens to
:20:10. > :20:16.those who do that? Well, can you prove who did it? In all of my
:20:17. > :20:20.years, I spent nearly a dozen years in cabinet and there were not many
:20:21. > :20:28.leaks. But when there were, I never knew the culprit. I fought hard to
:20:29. > :20:32.ensure that we got back to Cabinet government after the general
:20:33. > :20:36.election would we found out what was going on and people who were not
:20:37. > :20:41.part of the Cabinet had more power and were telling the cabin at what
:20:42. > :20:45.to do. But with that comes a responsibility and they have to
:20:46. > :20:49.ensure that they can be critical, but within Cabinet. But Theresa
:20:50. > :20:53.May's authority has been weakened. She was the one who called a snap
:20:54. > :20:57.election after saying she wouldn't. And then she lost the Tory majority.
:20:58. > :21:05.So you can understand why people might be upset. As you said, you are
:21:06. > :21:12.joint chair of the 1922 Committee. Joint secretary. How many letters
:21:13. > :21:21.have been sent to you? They would be sent to the chairman. How many? I
:21:22. > :21:24.don't know. I wouldn't ask. I would expect -- wouldn't expect Graham to
:21:25. > :21:32.tell me, either. The vast majority of backbenchers are supporting the
:21:33. > :21:34.Prime Minister. Normally, the men in grey suits, as we are called, go up
:21:35. > :21:38.to the Prime Minister and tell them when it is time to go and make way
:21:39. > :21:47.for somebody else. This time, we have gone to the Prime Minister and
:21:48. > :21:51.said to her, we support you 100%. We want you to use the message from the
:21:52. > :21:55.1922 Committee to tell your Cabinet to get in line. Alexander Downer
:21:56. > :22:00.said you never know who is doing the leaking, but if people have a good
:22:01. > :22:03.idea, should ministers be sacked? I believe they should be. If they are
:22:04. > :22:07.found to be briefing against one another and against the Prime
:22:08. > :22:11.Minister, I don't think they should last any longer. The Prime Minister
:22:12. > :22:21.does have the authority to do that. She would of the 1922. Did she seem
:22:22. > :22:26.seem OK? Absolutely superb. There were also members of Parliament who
:22:27. > :22:29.had lost their seats in their -- in the room that night. She made a
:22:30. > :22:37.special point of reflecting on the fact that they were there after they
:22:38. > :22:41.had lost their jobs. I don't want an early general election. The best way
:22:42. > :22:43.to do that is by the Cabinet getting a man and supporting the Prime
:22:44. > :22:45.Minister. Nigel Evans, thank you. Now, on yesterday's show,
:22:46. > :22:48.you may recall we were joined by the Conservative MP,
:22:49. > :22:51.Robert Halfon, and the Labour And there was something of a row
:22:52. > :22:54.about apprentices and pay. The industrial strategy,
:22:55. > :22:57.for example, talked about the Government spending
:22:58. > :23:03.2.5 billion on apprenticeships by 2020 and over 53%
:23:04. > :23:05.of apprentices are women. What is the pay disparity
:23:06. > :23:07.between men and...? Women get paid ?1 less
:23:08. > :23:09.as apprentices than men. The surveys that I saw said,
:23:10. > :23:21.suggested, that women get paid more Surveys suggested,
:23:22. > :23:25.but you don't know for a fact? Maybe that's something
:23:26. > :23:26.we need to check. We said we would look
:23:27. > :23:29.into it, and we have. They have been working away,
:23:30. > :23:32.the Daily Politics research team. Now, there is nothing
:23:33. > :23:34.to support your claim, Robert Halfon, that women earn
:23:35. > :23:37.more than men. The figure that Jess quoted,
:23:38. > :23:42.that's ?5.85 for men, ?4.82 for women, that's
:23:43. > :23:44.from a Young Women's Trust report which does suggest female
:23:45. > :23:46.apprentices are paid ?2,000 a year But women are not necessarily
:23:47. > :23:51.being paid less than men in the same It is to do with sectors men
:23:52. > :23:58.and women tend to go into. So, do you want to revise
:23:59. > :24:00.what you said before? I am very happy to, but let me find
:24:01. > :24:04.where I thought that I had seen this Well, Robert Halfon
:24:05. > :24:10.got in touch with us after the programme and gave us
:24:11. > :24:15.the following figures and sources. He directed our attention to
:24:16. > :24:19.the 2014 Apprenticeship Pay Survey, done by the Department for Business,
:24:20. > :24:27.which estimates that the average hourly pay for level two and three
:24:28. > :24:30.female apprentices across England is higher than for males -
:24:31. > :24:36.?6.38 as opposed to ?6.16 for men. Jess Phillips, however, was quoting
:24:37. > :24:40.from a Young Women's Trust report done in March,
:24:41. > :24:43.2016, which found that female apprentices are paid ?4.82 an hour
:24:44. > :24:49.and men are paid ?5.85. To help provide some
:24:50. > :24:56.clarity, we're joined now by Matt Whittaker,
:24:57. > :24:59.chief economist at the Resolution Foundation, a not-for-profit
:25:00. > :25:01.research and policy organisation, which says its goal is to improve
:25:02. > :25:14.outcomes for people on low Can you clear it up? Who is right
:25:15. > :25:26.when it comes to who is paid more per hour as an apprentice? The great
:25:27. > :25:31.news is that they are both right. I knew you would say that. Looking at
:25:32. > :25:34.the latest figures for apprentices specifically looking at basic hourly
:25:35. > :25:42.pay rates, there is a small gap in favour of female apprentices.
:25:43. > :25:45.However, that gap reverses as you move up the spectrum. So if we are
:25:46. > :25:50.thinking about lower-level apprentices, women tend to earn more
:25:51. > :25:56.than men. But if we look at the high-level apprentices, and those
:25:57. > :25:59.are the ones that we want to drive, then you see men earning more than
:26:00. > :26:05.women. And what is the reason for that? It is because they are very
:26:06. > :26:07.different roles. Nine in ten of those entering and engineering
:26:08. > :26:11.apprenticeship last year were men. Eight in ten of those entering a
:26:12. > :26:15.health and social care apprenticeship last year were women.
:26:16. > :26:17.So in many ways, the gender debate around apprenticeships is something
:26:18. > :26:21.of a red herring. We know a lot about the gender pay gap, and it
:26:22. > :26:26.really starts to kick in later in a person's career around childbirth.
:26:27. > :26:30.When people are entering the labour market, we don't see that going on.
:26:31. > :26:33.There are bigger issues with apprenticeships rather than what is
:26:34. > :26:38.going on between men and women. Although it does feed into a broader
:26:39. > :26:42.debate about equal pay for men and women. But it depends which sector
:26:43. > :26:47.you enter. So it is still the case that women are entering what might
:26:48. > :26:52.be termed as poorer paid professions of a lifetime of working, such as
:26:53. > :26:55.childcare or health, and men are still going into construction and
:26:56. > :27:00.engineering in larger numbers? That's right. Interestingly, when
:27:01. > :27:04.you switch from looking at the hourly pay rate you get in your
:27:05. > :27:07.doctor thinking about what is more important for living standards like
:27:08. > :27:11.what you get over the course of a week, you see the gap opening in
:27:12. > :27:15.favour of men. That is partly because male apprentices are working
:27:16. > :27:19.longer hours than female apprentices, but men also going into
:27:20. > :27:22.roles where they get paid overtime, and female apprentices aren't. Men
:27:23. > :27:27.are getting bonuses and female apprentices are not. So those
:27:28. > :27:32.sectoral choices are then driving what happens. But when you look at
:27:33. > :27:36.like-for-like, if they were a man and woman starting as apprentices in
:27:37. > :27:43.the same profession, would they be paid equally and do the statistics
:27:44. > :27:48.back that up? As far as we can push the statistics. The problem is, and
:27:49. > :27:51.this is a point that the government needs to improve so that the
:27:52. > :27:55.government can monitor what is going on with the policy, the statistics
:27:56. > :27:58.we have are firstly a bit old and secondly do not represent a big
:27:59. > :28:02.sample. And because there is such a big distinction between the roles
:28:03. > :28:06.men and women are going into, it is hard to control for everything else
:28:07. > :28:11.and say, in the same roles, are they getting paid the same? Is there
:28:12. > :28:14.anything that surprises you about these statistics when in the end, it
:28:15. > :28:18.comes down to try to attract women to go into different professions
:28:19. > :28:22.that they have traditionally? Lo, this is the same phenomenon we have
:28:23. > :28:27.in Australia. It is about gender and occupation. It is not about equality
:28:28. > :28:32.of pay for equality of work. But it has been in the past and that has
:28:33. > :28:40.only been rectified recently. Over many years, there has been equal pay
:28:41. > :28:42.for equal work. But the same thing happens in Australia. Female
:28:43. > :28:46.apprentices tend to go into areas like child care and health work, and
:28:47. > :28:52.males focus more on engineering and the like, with everything that has
:28:53. > :29:00.been said about overtime and bonuses applies as well. So the question is,
:29:01. > :29:04.why is it that women into the lower paid occupations? Are there
:29:05. > :29:11.obstacles to them going into the higher paid occupations? These are
:29:12. > :29:18.difficult questions, but that is the central issue. And how do you think
:29:19. > :29:22.that can be addressed? That is a question we do not have answers for
:29:23. > :29:25.right now, but the key thing is in terms of the apprenticeship policy
:29:26. > :29:28.the government has put in place, it is welcomed across the spectrum as
:29:29. > :29:33.being a worthwhile thing to do. But the key is to make sure we get
:29:34. > :29:37.quality as well as quantity of apprenticeships and ensure that we
:29:38. > :29:41.are creating new opportunities for young people and providing a wage
:29:42. > :29:44.boost. At the moment, the bigger statistic is that you few have a
:29:45. > :29:48.higher level apprenticeship, you are getting a wage boost compared to
:29:49. > :29:51.somebody who doesn't get an apprenticeship. But if you are at a
:29:52. > :29:59.lower level apprenticeship, you often don't see a wage boost. And
:30:00. > :30:02.what are the figures now? Is it improving? It has been improving
:30:03. > :30:07.since we have had the apprenticeship levy put in place. We have started
:30:08. > :30:12.to see some improvement, but it is early days. We just don't have good
:30:13. > :30:16.data on this. Alongside introducing a policy which is raising revenue
:30:17. > :30:22.and creating some upheaval for firms and is billed as being a big boost
:30:23. > :30:27.to productivity and skills, we need to have the tools in place to
:30:28. > :30:29.monitor it. And what is the response from companies? As you say, it is a
:30:30. > :30:38.big upheaval. The generally quite supportive but
:30:39. > :30:42.they have had quite a lot coming in at the same time. Increased auto
:30:43. > :30:48.enrolment of pensions and the national living wage. Really, you
:30:49. > :30:52.have Brexit as well. For certain firms, relying on migrant labour,
:30:53. > :30:57.that is an issue as well. Firms generally are feeling hard done by
:30:58. > :31:01.in many ways but there is a genuine support I think for improving the
:31:02. > :31:05.skill base and trying to drive productivity through investing in
:31:06. > :31:07.people. The tricky thing and this is always very difficult with
:31:08. > :31:16.apprenticeships, how do you ensure that firms are not just re-badging?
:31:17. > :31:20.Call it an apprenticeship, thank you very much. That is what the
:31:21. > :31:25.Government needs to stay on top of to make sure the policy does what
:31:26. > :31:28.they wanted to do. Thank you for coming in.
:31:29. > :31:31.After Brexit, Britain will be looking to secure a range of trade
:31:32. > :31:34.Trading more with countries like Australia, Canada
:31:35. > :31:37.But how easy is it to trade with countries that
:31:38. > :31:48.Some say Brexit could mean big opportunities for Britain to expand
:31:49. > :31:53.its business. For consumers, in theory, it could mean there will be
:31:54. > :31:55.new global produce for us to buy at better prices. The think tank open
:31:56. > :31:59.Europe says according to its research at the moment we're not
:32:00. > :32:04.realising the full potential of markets outside of the EU. We found
:32:05. > :32:09.we are under trading in goods and services with lots of countries we
:32:10. > :32:11.should be doing more with. But some experts warn distance makes some
:32:12. > :32:28.trade more difficult. We can always trade with other countries on
:32:29. > :32:31.the other side of the world, but it is costly and expensive and a bit
:32:32. > :32:33.awkward to do so. We do have trade with countries like Australia and
:32:34. > :32:35.New Zealand, but nothing like the amount of trade we have with our
:32:36. > :32:39.neighbours in Europe. Being in the same time zone, having goods tied up
:32:40. > :32:43.in ships is bad news. Before we joined the EU, Britain used to trade
:32:44. > :32:47.more with the Commonwealth. They are being shipped to Australia to
:32:48. > :32:52.improve the strain of cattle there, they will be better beef for your
:32:53. > :32:56.table ban a foreigner can supply. Some argue re-establishing these
:32:57. > :33:00.links will be key post Brexit and because the services industry now
:33:01. > :33:04.plays a bigger role, according to Open Europe, distance does not have
:33:05. > :33:07.to be a drawback. We still may have to get on the plane occasionally to
:33:08. > :33:13.meet someone face-to-face, but a lot can be done online. Digital services
:33:14. > :33:17.change the way companies can trade across the world. And that is
:33:18. > :33:22.something being echoed by trade secretary, Liam Fox. The real game
:33:23. > :33:25.for the UK is to get a global liberalisation in the services
:33:26. > :33:30.sector. He is already laying some of the groundwork for trading further
:33:31. > :33:33.afield and has told an Australian parliamentary committee the UK wants
:33:34. > :33:38.to rapidly establish a free-trade deal with Australia after the UK's
:33:39. > :33:42.exit from the EU. But there are warnings that getting deals with
:33:43. > :33:46.countries further afield may be a slow task and deliver less than some
:33:47. > :33:54.may hope for. We are not being realistic about how long it will
:33:55. > :33:56.take and I think we are probably not being realistic about how much extra
:33:57. > :34:01.trade we will get. Australia is a relatively small economy and a lot
:34:02. > :34:06.of the trade we already have actually is not interfered with by
:34:07. > :34:10.trade barriers. Great, if we can have a trade agreement, but it will
:34:11. > :34:15.not change the world. For all the talk, it is only when the UK really
:34:16. > :34:19.gets down to the business of carving out a new trading position in the
:34:20. > :34:24.world will we find out whether our ambitions can be realised.
:34:25. > :34:31.Let us look at the logistics. The point was made a few times, a
:34:32. > :34:34.commercial flight from London to Australia, 23 hours, time zones,
:34:35. > :34:38.Canberra is nine hours ahead of London, when it comes to the free
:34:39. > :34:43.movement of goods and people, it is a lot easier to do it with
:34:44. > :34:46.geographically close neighbours? It is not a principle of economics we
:34:47. > :34:51.apply. We look for markets where we can sell and some are approximate
:34:52. > :34:56.and some are not. The nearest country to Australia is Papua New
:34:57. > :35:01.Guinea. That is not one of our major trading partners. The next nearest
:35:02. > :35:08.is Indonesia and that was our 12th largest trading partner. Our biggest
:35:09. > :35:13.trading partners, a long way away, China, Korea, Japan, the US. Is that
:35:14. > :35:17.not a symptom of where you are, Australia? We have the continent of
:35:18. > :35:22.Europe right on our doorstep. It is not, in other words, a principle but
:35:23. > :35:26.we trade just with countries near to us. That principle is wrong. It is
:35:27. > :35:30.where you have a comparative advantage that you trade. We used to
:35:31. > :35:38.have a huge amount of agricultural trade with the UK and the distance
:35:39. > :35:42.was exactly the same then, as it is now. A huge amount of agricultural
:35:43. > :35:48.trade. That was cut out when Britain joined the EU. It proves the point
:35:49. > :35:54.that if we had free-trade again with the UK, I don't know what we would
:35:55. > :35:56.export, it is hard to predict, but Australian exporters would be
:35:57. > :36:01.interested in the British market. More than that, Australian importers
:36:02. > :36:05.would be interested in the UK. It is a place you could get things of
:36:06. > :36:11.higher quality at a good price. If you look at even the quantity of
:36:12. > :36:14.trade currently done when it comes to UK trade and Australia, it is a
:36:15. > :36:18.fraction of the trade obviously with the EU and I know one does not have
:36:19. > :36:23.to rule out the other necessary, but you are talking about a massive gap.
:36:24. > :36:32.You will not cut off all trade with the EU. I said that. People often
:36:33. > :36:36.make this point. It is not a zero-sum game. It is fatuous to say
:36:37. > :36:41.all British trade with the EU will end. I am sure an enormous amount of
:36:42. > :36:45.trade will continue. It is also not just to think about Australia alone,
:36:46. > :36:49.but to think about trading relationships with all sorts of
:36:50. > :36:54.countries, China, the second-biggest economy in the world, growing at
:36:55. > :37:00.6.5%, it has a rapidly growing, as you do, through Asia, a rapidly
:37:01. > :37:03.growing middle class. For us, in Australia, we have targeted, not
:37:04. > :37:08.because the countries are close, they are a long way away, Beijing is
:37:09. > :37:12.no closer to Sydney than it is to London. Are we right to looked to
:37:13. > :37:19.Australia and New Zealand and other countries outside of the EU as the
:37:20. > :37:24.great utopia outside of the EU, UK exports to Australia last year were
:37:25. > :37:28.worth ?9 billion, UK exports to the EU were ?240 billion? Even taking
:37:29. > :37:32.your point we will not stop trading with the EU, there would have to be
:37:33. > :37:37.an awful lot of trade done with other countries to justify, if you
:37:38. > :37:41.like, in the words of the Government that it is worthwhile. As an
:37:42. > :37:45.outsider, it might be a bit presumptuous of me to say this, but
:37:46. > :37:49.it seems to make perfect sense for you to retain some kind of free
:37:50. > :37:59.trade arrangement with the EU, but number two, just to make a
:38:00. > :38:02.mathematical point, if 60% of your trade is with the outside world, 60%
:38:03. > :38:07.of your trade is not with the EU, it does make sense to liberalise as
:38:08. > :38:11.much of the 60% as you can as well as maintaining liberal trade with
:38:12. > :38:14.that 40%. That is win- win for the UK, if you can achieve that. The
:38:15. > :38:22.practical arrangements, the free-trade deals cannot be done
:38:23. > :38:25.until the UK actually leaves the EU. March, 2019, the date talked about,
:38:26. > :38:30.but we could have transitional arrangements. That is probably quite
:38:31. > :38:34.likely. Do you think during the transitional period that the UK
:38:35. > :38:39.should be able to negotiate its own free-trade agreements, even if it is
:38:40. > :38:42.part of the customs union? Number one, let me say, we would not have
:38:43. > :38:46.thought transitional arrangements would be very surprising because in
:38:47. > :38:50.our trade negotiations, we inevitably have transitional
:38:51. > :38:56.arrangements before the new trade agreement takes full effect. If you
:38:57. > :38:59.were to do the same, it would not be surprising. Number two, it would
:39:00. > :39:04.depend. If you remain in the customs union, you cannot in the customs
:39:05. > :39:08.union have free-trade agreements with other countries. It could be
:39:09. > :39:13.many years before we have anything like a trade deal with Australia.
:39:14. > :39:17.However, it depends on how long you remained on the customs union and
:39:18. > :39:24.the extent to which the EU would nevertheless be happy you having
:39:25. > :39:27.left the EU, which is an issue of legal competence in relation to
:39:28. > :39:31.trade, having left the EU, you could, I suppose, negotiate a trade
:39:32. > :39:37.agreement with another country which would not come into force until
:39:38. > :39:41.you... You agree with Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, who
:39:42. > :39:44.says you should be able to negotiate in the transitional arrangement
:39:45. > :39:48.which we cannot do now, you can just scope out, as he has called it. I
:39:49. > :39:53.would make an observation about the debate about the towns of you
:39:54. > :39:57.leaving the EU, it is a negotiation. Nobody quite knows how it will turn
:39:58. > :40:04.out -- the terms. There are a lot of quid pro quos. The British public's
:40:05. > :40:07.clay aspiration is to negotiate trade agreements with other
:40:08. > :40:12.countries once it leaves the EU and to retain free trade with the EU. In
:40:13. > :40:15.those circumstances, that would be good for our bilateral relationship
:40:16. > :40:20.and for your relationship with a whole range of countries like Japan,
:40:21. > :40:25.China, India and so on. Will it work out that way? It depends how the
:40:26. > :40:30.negotiations transpire. That will be part of it. What are your views on
:40:31. > :40:37.freedom of movement when it comes to a bilateral trade deal between
:40:38. > :40:41.Australia and the UK? Whenever we leave, when that happens, Amber Rudd
:40:42. > :40:45.said in October last year, she had no plans to increase the UK's intake
:40:46. > :40:51.of Australians. Do you agree with that? Well, we do not believe with
:40:52. > :40:54.any of our trade agreements in negotiating at the same time
:40:55. > :41:00.complete freedom of movement. The only exception we have is with New
:41:01. > :41:04.Zealand. But we have no freedom of movement arrangements with any
:41:05. > :41:09.country in the world other than New Zealand. And we have no plans to do
:41:10. > :41:13.that. We have a non-discriminatory policy in relation to people
:41:14. > :41:17.visiting Australia. As well as migrants. Not everybody, by the way,
:41:18. > :41:23.who comes to Australia would be defined as a migrant. People who
:41:24. > :41:29.come to Australia with the intention of permanently settling migrants. We
:41:30. > :41:36.have a non-discriminatory policy. In a negotiation on trade, we might
:41:37. > :41:40.look at ways of enhancing facilitating people like academics,
:41:41. > :41:45.students, business people, being able to move between our
:41:46. > :41:49.countries... With larger numbers? Possibly, yes. We already have some
:41:50. > :41:58.access to Britain for Australians in certain circumstances and we could
:41:59. > :42:02.perhaps facilitate access for business people in companies that
:42:03. > :42:05.are investing in the UK. To make it better than it currently is. All
:42:06. > :42:12.right, let us leave it there. There were some stormy exchanges
:42:13. > :42:14.in the Commons last night over the scheduling of business
:42:15. > :42:16.in the House. The Commons leader Andrea Leadsom
:42:17. > :42:19.faced pressure over the debates that have been scheduled
:42:20. > :42:20.since the election. So there was a debate
:42:21. > :42:22.about, well, debates! The Government has not
:42:23. > :42:26.provided for an opposition day before the summer recess,
:42:27. > :42:29.making the earliest opposition This means a staggering eight
:42:30. > :42:36.months, nearly as long a time as it takes to have a baby,
:42:37. > :42:38.without a single opposition day, denying vital scrutiny
:42:39. > :42:40.of government business, with the last opposition day,
:42:41. > :42:43.as you know, Mr Speaker, Last week, we had a vital debate
:42:44. > :42:49.on the Grenfell inquiry. Many powerful points were raised
:42:50. > :42:54.from members on all sides of the House and it's right
:42:55. > :42:57.that we have prioritised giving time to such a catastrophic
:42:58. > :43:01.and tragic event. This week, we are having a general
:43:02. > :43:04.debate on what more can be done to eradicate the evil
:43:05. > :43:06.of drug misuse. And today, although now under
:43:07. > :43:09.threat by this debate, we are scheduled to have a debate
:43:10. > :43:12.on the intimidation and abuse of candidates
:43:13. > :43:21.in the general election. Mr Speaker, this urgent debate
:43:22. > :43:23.as a result of party Nearly 30 million people voted
:43:24. > :43:27.for the party opposite to come I don't believe they were voting
:43:28. > :43:31.for petty time wasting by Labour. Perhaps unfavourably,
:43:32. > :43:33.this Parliament has already been dubbed the zombie parliament,
:43:34. > :43:37.but I actually think that comparison gives the flesh-eating
:43:38. > :43:43.undead a bad name. This is turbo-charged
:43:44. > :43:46.political zombiism. But it is a curious type
:43:47. > :43:49.of zombiism, Mr Speaker, because if you look at them,
:43:50. > :43:52.not only are they tearing the flesh from the public, they are starting
:43:53. > :43:55.to consume themselves. If the Government had a programme,
:43:56. > :44:01.I would be happy for us to debate the Government's programme,
:44:02. > :44:05.but there isn't any legislation. The Leader of the House
:44:06. > :44:07.refers to the Air Travel That isn't a bill, that is barely
:44:08. > :44:13.a clause in a bill. That is where I think
:44:14. > :44:19.the opposition has today misfired. To everything there is a season
:44:20. > :44:23.and a time to any purpose under heaven, but this was not the season,
:44:24. > :44:28.this was not the time. There is so much that is going
:44:29. > :44:35.on of general urgency and this strikes me as fiddling whilst
:44:36. > :44:56.Brussels burns. Passions running high in the Commons
:44:57. > :44:58.there. Now, during the general
:44:59. > :45:00.election, the Labour Party announced their support
:45:01. > :45:02.for a so-called Robin Hood Tax, This, they said, would raise
:45:03. > :45:06.?26 billion over five years. Here's Shadow Business
:45:07. > :45:07.Secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey explaining the policy to Andrew
:45:08. > :45:09.on the Sunday Politics to ensure that we have fairness
:45:10. > :45:15.in our financial sector. Ordinary British people
:45:16. > :45:17.are still paying for a banking crisis that they didn't cause,
:45:18. > :45:21.so the aim of this tax is to restore Another important point is the fact
:45:22. > :45:25.that stamp duty reserve tax was actually brought
:45:26. > :45:26.in in the 1600s. There have been little reforms over
:45:27. > :45:29.the years, but certainly, the sector has changed significantly
:45:30. > :45:31.and we have to provide changes With high-frequency trading,
:45:32. > :45:35.we have a state of affairs where a lot of our shares are traded
:45:36. > :45:38.on computers We have to ensure that we have a tax
:45:39. > :45:43.system that keeps up with that. This afternoon, John McDonnell
:45:44. > :45:48.is hosting an event where one of his speakers will be
:45:49. > :45:52.Avinash Persaud, chairman of Intelligence Capital and a former
:45:53. > :45:55.global head of currency research His report on a financial
:45:56. > :46:13.transaction tax formed the basis Stamp duty is already 0.5% on
:46:14. > :46:18.shares. Are you suggesting that that figure should be raised or should
:46:19. > :46:23.apply to more financial products? Not raised. There are two problems
:46:24. > :46:26.with that number. Firstly, we have a market exemption that is being
:46:27. > :46:31.abused. Traditionally, market-making, which is an important
:46:32. > :46:35.activity, used to be ten to 15% of trading on the exchange. It has now
:46:36. > :46:40.become 50 to 60%, and that is because people who are not really
:46:41. > :46:45.market makers like hedge funds and high-frequency traders are saying
:46:46. > :46:49.they will be there. But when the Isas comes, they are not there for
:46:50. > :46:53.the marketplace. So we need to end the market maker abuse and we need
:46:54. > :46:57.to extend the securities from equities towards debt, because the
:46:58. > :47:02.tax system has long favoured debt versus equities, and we need to
:47:03. > :47:07.include derivatives. But if you look at the amount it would raise, Labour
:47:08. > :47:13.said ?26 billion over five years. Currently, stamp duty reserve tax,
:47:14. > :47:20.the tax on buying shares, raised ?3.3 billion a year in 2015-16. So
:47:21. > :47:23.even if you extend that and you closed the loopholes or you removed
:47:24. > :47:27.the exemptions and put it on derivatives, would it raised ?26
:47:28. > :47:30.billion over five years? That is actually a Conservative estimate. We
:47:31. > :47:39.assume that raising attacks would have no impact on behaviour. We all
:47:40. > :47:43.know that raising taxes causes people to think, do we need to do
:47:44. > :47:48.this? Can we change the timing? So we have taken into account a very
:47:49. > :47:54.conservative view of how much behaviour will change. That is where
:47:55. > :47:57.you get the 26. Without behaviour changes, it is 65 billion. But even
:47:58. > :48:01.John McDonnell said it was a gamble and you couldn't rely on those
:48:02. > :48:05.figures. Even if it is a cautious estimate, it sounds like a big
:48:06. > :48:10.amount of money to be raised in an area where people are potentially
:48:11. > :48:15.very mobile and where people could, as you say, either leave or set up
:48:16. > :48:18.somewhere else, and that would mean you would net far less. There is a
:48:19. > :48:26.lot of deliberate confusion about relocation. If you are an American
:48:27. > :48:31.investor today and you are trading a French or Australian stock in
:48:32. > :48:36.London, you don't pay stamp duty. And you will not pay stamp duty in
:48:37. > :48:40.the future, because you are an American resident and you are
:48:41. > :48:43.treading a non-UK instrument. There is no incentive to relocate your
:48:44. > :48:47.trade. If you are a British citizen and you are trading in Frankfurt or
:48:48. > :48:55.Hong Kong, you are still liable for income tax and Capital Gains Tax and
:48:56. > :48:58.you are still liable for taxes on UK insurance. Are you in favour of
:48:59. > :49:02.financial tax? I am not going to get into the British tax system, except
:49:03. > :49:05.to say that one of the reasons why a lot of Australian companies use the
:49:06. > :49:09.City of London is because it not only has the skill set and very
:49:10. > :49:13.strong legal protections, but because it is a competitive market
:49:14. > :49:19.to use. So when you look at these kind of arguments, you might like to
:49:20. > :49:24.take into account the alternative. We could use Singapore or Sydney,
:49:25. > :49:29.New York and so on. If you make London less competitive, inevitably
:49:30. > :49:33.that will have some impact on the amount of business that is done
:49:34. > :49:40.through London. Then it would damage the City? No, because if you are on
:49:41. > :49:45.Australian doing business around the world in London and you are treading
:49:46. > :49:50.American securities etc, you don't pay stamp duty. That is an important
:49:51. > :49:58.point. This is not a tax on where you trade, it is a tax on who is
:49:59. > :50:03.trading and what they are trading. But could it be done unilaterally?
:50:04. > :50:06.If you don't get some sort of international cooperation and we
:50:07. > :50:10.know the EU has talked about this and is still talking about it. They
:50:11. > :50:14.haven't agreed anything. France was supposed to be the lead nation on
:50:15. > :50:19.this, and Emmanuel Macron is apparently shown no sign of making
:50:20. > :50:24.this a priority, which leaves the City vulnerable. Second biggest
:50:25. > :50:31.myth. The first biggest myth is relocation. We have had this tax for
:50:32. > :50:35.322 years. A fair amount of time to innovate and four other countries to
:50:36. > :50:42.lure business away from London. It hasn't happened. In the G20 report,
:50:43. > :50:46.the IMF report to the G20, they found that 20 countries had
:50:47. > :50:52.unilateral FTTs, raising $30 billion a year already, including the
:50:53. > :50:58.fastest-growing countries. India and Hong Kong and Thailand and Singapore
:50:59. > :51:01.have one. To do think it is a myth that it is something that is always
:51:02. > :51:06.used by politicians and businesses alike to say, if you impose a tax
:51:07. > :51:09.and make us less competitive, we will relocate, but there is now
:51:10. > :51:15.evidence to show that it has happened? It doesn't matter what tax
:51:16. > :51:18.was introduced 300 years ago. That is irrelevant, because the City of
:51:19. > :51:25.London has grown in that period in spite of it, not because of the tax.
:51:26. > :51:29.The overall picture is that if you want the City of London to remain
:51:30. > :51:33.the world's greatest financial centre and you think that is
:51:34. > :51:36.virtuous for your economy, I suppose some people in Britain don't think
:51:37. > :51:41.that is a good idea. But if you think it is a good idea, however you
:51:42. > :51:47.taxi system, I am not getting into that, but you need to keep it
:51:48. > :51:56.reasonably competitive. If you don't make it competitive... Look, people
:51:57. > :52:00.might decide they don't want the country to make huge amounts of
:52:01. > :52:04.money out of financial transactions. So if you want to do something else
:52:05. > :52:11.as a country, fair enough, but people will move. Competitiveness is
:52:12. > :52:15.an important point and in our post-Brexit environment, having
:52:16. > :52:19.competitive industry will be vital. Financial services being important.
:52:20. > :52:22.Germany have a competitive economy and if you ask what makes them
:52:23. > :52:28.competitive, they will say long term finance. Our financial sector is
:52:29. > :52:33.obsessed with the short term, not lending to industry. So this tax
:52:34. > :52:40.will rebalance our financial sector and make it more fit for purpose,
:52:41. > :52:43.more lending for industry to be competitive. George Osborne
:52:44. > :52:48.obviously thought it was a bad idea, and Sadiq Khan, the current Labour
:52:49. > :52:54.mayor says it is madness. He was referring to a previous idea some 12
:52:55. > :52:59.months ago. What idea was that? He was talking about general financial
:53:00. > :53:04.transaction taxes, not this design. Has he said anything about this
:53:05. > :53:08.particular idea? I haven't seen anything. But he is of course
:53:09. > :53:12.running London, and he says any taxes that might damage the City of
:53:13. > :53:20.London would be madness. So how are you going to persuade him? The key
:53:21. > :53:24.thing is that this tax will actually increase the stability of our
:53:25. > :53:28.financial sector. We have seen a big increase in flash crashes ever since
:53:29. > :53:32.we have seen an increase in high-frequency trading. The May we
:53:33. > :53:35.make our financial sector more resilient and more attractive is if
:53:36. > :53:39.we don't have these flash crashes. Thank you for coming in.
:53:40. > :53:42.Now, in many respects, the political system in Australia
:53:43. > :53:44.is much like the system here in the UK.
:53:45. > :53:46.A Prime Minister and a Cabinet, responsible to Parliament.
:53:47. > :53:49.They even have red benches in their Senate and green benches
:53:50. > :53:53.proceedings can sometimes get a little heated -
:53:54. > :54:07.There will be a ballot for the leadership and deputy
:54:08. > :54:10.leadership of the Labour Party at 4.30 today.
:54:11. > :54:13.In the meantime, take your best shot.
:54:14. > :54:15.I think I know what my mother would say.
:54:16. > :54:18.She'd look across the dispatch box and she would say
:54:19. > :54:20."Put on a proper suit, do up your tie and sing
:54:21. > :54:24.Madam Speaker, I have a further personal explanation to make.
:54:25. > :54:27.It had better be better than the first two.
:54:28. > :54:35.Madam Speaker, that sort of commentary...
:54:36. > :54:40.Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is the Mr Potato Head
:54:41. > :54:49.I said to him, he didn't write off the mortgage the taxpayers
:54:50. > :54:54.I didn't receive a proper answer then.
:54:55. > :55:04.The Leader of the Opposition slept right through the critical vote.
:55:05. > :55:10.He can disgrace his party, but what is intolerable
:55:11. > :55:15.is that he has cynically raised the hopes of hundreds
:55:16. > :55:26.You're a miserable pipsqueak of a man!
:55:27. > :55:32.Well, Tom Watson, shouting at Michael Gove and ending that film.
:55:33. > :55:36.Did it make you proud to relive those moments in the Australian
:55:37. > :55:43.Parliament, people shouting at each other? I am glad you didn't have a
:55:44. > :55:49.clip of me. We thought about it! It shows you how unbiased the BBC is.
:55:50. > :55:56.It is part of the robust nature of Australian life. People who are
:55:57. > :56:02.members of Parliament enjoy it. The public are forever saying it is
:56:03. > :56:05.childish behaviour. But of course, overall, if we took the life like
:56:06. > :56:10.that out of the Australian Parliament and made it suitably dull
:56:11. > :56:17.to make it look like a university seminar or some such thing, we would
:56:18. > :56:23.lose a lot in our national life. Which Parliament do you think is
:56:24. > :56:28.more rowdy, the Australian order UK? Australians use language...
:56:29. > :56:31.Australians are actually very polite people, but they use language more
:56:32. > :56:36.brutal it. They are incredibly friendly. But in Parliament, the
:56:37. > :56:44.language is pretty tough. The right word is brutal. But you make your
:56:45. > :56:50.point that way. We don't want to leave people unsure about what we
:56:51. > :56:54.think. But you have been very polite and well behaved on this show, and
:56:55. > :57:07.yet we know there are clips of you coming up against Paul Keating. Even
:57:08. > :57:10.you can flare-up. I am not saying this of myself, in case some
:57:11. > :57:16.Australian journalists are watching this. But you do see in politics,
:57:17. > :57:22.and this might be true here as well, a certain amount of what you might
:57:23. > :57:27.call confected anger. When we showed those clips, do you think that is
:57:28. > :57:31.what is going on? It is not true passion? It is, but it is passion
:57:32. > :57:39.for the cameras. In the Australian Parliament, we have Question Time
:57:40. > :57:42.and the Prime Minister is in question Time everyday, unlike here.
:57:43. > :57:48.And the idea is to get a so-called run on the news. If you are in the
:57:49. > :57:52.opposition, if you can while at the Prime Minister and then you get your
:57:53. > :57:55.story on the news, there is a bit of that going on. I don't know if that
:57:56. > :58:01.happens here, because I have never been that involved. I think you will
:58:02. > :58:06.find there was something similar in that sense. But the public don't
:58:07. > :58:10.like it, you say? The public say they don't like it. It is like
:58:11. > :58:15.negative advertising in an election campaign.
:58:16. > :58:24.We have just got time to do the quiz. A new Australian $10 note is
:58:25. > :58:28.being put in circulation. Who is on its? Kylie Minogue, Alexander
:58:29. > :58:34.Downer, the poet Banjo Patterson or Rod Laver? I think it would be Banjo
:58:35. > :58:39.Paterson. You are probably right. It would be nice to think it might be
:58:40. > :58:43.Kylie Minogue all your good self, but it is Banjo Paterson. A great
:58:44. > :58:47.national hero and a beautifully behaved Australian tennis player.
:58:48. > :58:55.I'll be back at 11.30 tomorrow with Andrew for live coverage