06/09/2017 Daily Politics

Good morning, welcome to the Daily Politics and Westminster,

where a leaked document has given us the first real insight

into how the government plans to cut immigration after Brexit.

The plan hasn't been signed off by ministers. It puts British workers

first. Labour has ordered its MPs to vote

against the EU withdrawal bill. So is the party now singing

from the same hymn sheet It's the first Prime

Minister's Questions There's plenty to discuss and we'll

have all the action live at noon. It was last year's must-have

among fashionable festivalgoers. Now a T-shirt bearing

Jeremy Corbyn's name guaranteed to banish any

back-to-work blues you may be experiencing after

the end of summer. Andrew's not quite come to terms

with the arrival of autumn. He'll be back from his summer break

in a couple of weeks. But I'm joined by two MPs who've

been desperate to get back to Westminster and, more importantly

into the Daily Politics studio. It's the Brexit Minister,

Robin Walker and the Shadow Northern First, today, let's talk

about the big story of the morning, the leaked Home Office plan

for immigration post-Brexit. The government says it's not been

signed off by ministers, but there's plenty of detail

in the 82-page document A new more selective approach. This

would focus on the UK's social and economic needs as determined by the

Government to make existing residents better

Work permits can be granted to low-skilled migrants for two years,

residents better migrants for two years,

and to high-skilled ones for five years.

Employers will be encouraged to focus on the "resident

while EU nationals may need permission to take up a job.

So, as we said, the government is making it clear

this isn't its final plan, and Defence Secretary Michael Fallon

was asked about the leak this morning.

off. I can't comment on the leaked document. I've not seen it. We're

working on a whole series of documents which will set out what

the future partnership with the rest of Europe will look like. Freedom of

movement will no longer aplea. We will not be able to receive people

from an unlime theed basis from the rest of Europe. Freedom of movement

has to end when we leave. We need to set out the new arrangements. If you

live in Europe and want to come and work here, how long you can stay,

whether you can bring your family and so on. How much of this leaked

immigration document do you agree with? As you know, ministers from

the Government never comment on leaked documents. It was clear in

the Conservative manifesto freedom of movement would be ending when we

leave the EU. What we now need to do ask work on sensible policies to

make sure what the needs of our economy is. Which the Home Office is

doing by commissioning work from the advisory committee and we need to

control migration in the future. You're not distancing yourself from

the document or its proposals? You have goals you need to achieve.

Let's go through it. One proposal says we should prioritise in the UK

by giving preference in the job market to resident workers? Do you

agree with that? I'm not getting into the detail. It is not a detail.

It is a broad sentiment. Should preference in the job market be

given to resident workers? Yes or no? We need to make sure we have the

skills policy, the workers to work in our industries and support our

economy. We have the immigration policy designed to meet the needs of

our economy and demand from the British people to see greater

control. That's what the Home Office is working on. When they present

their policies later this year's we'll see thinky on both of those

objectives. That's compatible with a preference in the job market to

resident workers. British jobs for British workers? What I'm saying is

we need to have a policy that he meets both those objectives. We need

to continue to grow our economy, make the economic success story the

UK has been. It is one of the greatest job creating economies in

the Western World. We need to also deliver on this issue people are

concerned that uncontrolled migration has led to pressure on

public services, on wages. That's something there used to be consensus

between the Conservative Party and Labour Party on. It appears Labour

have moved away from that position. Should EU citizens who come to work

here be able to bring their family members here too? We've been clear

we want to take a generous approach when it comes to families. We want

to make sure families can continue with their lives. So they should be

able to? We're engaged in discussions with the EU on resip

rock Calais rangements which protect both citizens. We need to address

thattishure for people already here, the four million, a million living

in Europe and 3 million in the UK. We need to look at how to go

forward. I'm asking you a straightforward question. People

watching this programme will think this document has been leaked. It

has an awful lot of detail. The Government is not prepared to take

ownership of it or reject it. We're talking broad principles here. In

order to bring the numbers down to under 100,000 which this Government

has failed to do since 2010, should EU citizens who come to work here be

able to bring family members? If they can, you admit it will be more

difficult to bring the numbers down? It will be as part of the policy set

out, for the Home Office to set out the broad range of policies. One of

the key areas people are concerned about is people who are coming to

the country to look for work rather than having work. We will treat

people fairly. It is very important we have to remember whatever

decisions we take about EU nationals here, decisions will be taken about

UK Nash nags living in the EU as well. Should there be a cap on

overall number of low skilled workers which come in each yoer?

This is again, something the Government will set out in its

policy. We are looking at the impact on immigration on every area of the

economy and every part of the UK. We need evidence-based policy on this.

It is something on the table? I'm not commenting on leak dock the

ofments -- leaked documents. Which sectors of the economy would have to

carry on with fewer EU workers? I I think it is very important we are

getting evidence from all sectors of the economy. Free movement as it

existed today will come to an end once we've left the EU. That's a

challenge for the Government, those seconders of the economy that may

need to train more people up domestically and change they're

prove. We have to ensure we have an approach which delivers for our

economy and demand from the British people to see control. Do you think

it is a good or bad idea the things we've talked about? ? Which once in

particular? Having a cap on low skilled workers, on the numbers

coming from the EU. Saying which family members can be brought over.

British jobs for British workers. Gordon Brown coined that phrase?

British jobs for British workers, I've no issue with that. It is our

job to look after British citizens and British residents. I don't know

why Robyn is so reticent about aCopting that as Pi significance. It

is an aspiration not a policy? It is a policy I wouldn't have a

difficulty. In terms of some of the other things you mention, do I think

it is a good idea to have a specific cap on low-wage migrant workers?

Truthfully, caps don't work. It hasn't worked getting it down to

tens of thousands. We've seen some reduction in migration into this

country from EU workers over the last 12 months. That's proving

problematic in some industries. What do we he mean by low skilled, low

wage workers? Nurses? Low skilled low watch workers is talked about

having a wage of less than ?35,000 a year. That would catch nurses in the

NHS on whom we are reliant. It would be really foolish of the Government

to restrict the number of vital workers we bring in. It would be

equally foolish if any restrictions were to damage our economy and jobs

in this country. Do you agree some element of freedom of movement will

be needed to get good access to the single market? It is possible. The

reality of document seems to concede the promise made to the Brexiteers

we would stop immigration into this country, all immigration was the

implication, non-EU... They didn't say stop but reducing? Many people

were left with the idea that immigration would stop into Britain.

You don't want to end freedom of movement? What people want to see is

a controlled system of immigration. It is not stopping immigration.

We've been clear wep still want to attract the brightest and best. For

up to five years? We want O'Attract people from around the EU and

beyond. The point I was making was during the Brexit debate, many

people were left with the impression that the primary objective of Brexit

was to stop immigration. To get it down to dramatically low numbers.

But that isn't stopping immigration. This document's getting more

realistic. Yesterday, the Labour Party

confirmed that it will instruct its MPs to vote against the government's

EU withdrawal bill in the Commons That's the legislation which

transfers existing European law And Labour says it amounts to a

power grab that puts workers' rights and consumer and environmental

protection at risk. So, is Labour's position

on Brexit now clear? Let's take a look at what some

of the party's senior figures have said about the single market

since the referendum. The damage that would be done

to our economy by pulling out of the single market at this time

could be substantial. We wouldn't want to leave membership

of the single market. Our aim is to have tariff-free

trade access to Europe. I think we should put it

in those terms, rather I think people will interpret

membership of the single market You want to end up

with the same benefits What we've said is,

it's an open question. So the Labour position is this -

we leave the European Union. As leaving the European Union

means we need to leave We want to retain the benefits

that we currently have as part of the customs union

and the single market. Now, whether that inside

or outside, that's a moot point. To be absolutely crystal clear,

we leave the single European market No, the two things are

inextricably linked. So we have to leave

the single market? What we've said is,

the transitional period, ie from March 2019 until we get

to a new and final deal, will be within the customs union

and with the single market. We think that being part

of the customs union and the single market is important in those

transitional times, because that's the way you protect jobs

and the economy, and it might be a permanent outcome

of the negotiations. It is not a U-turn,

it is the development of our policy. Well, I hope that was all completely

crystal clear. Owen Smith how long before Labour's Brexits Poings

changes again? I think our Brexit position, it was slightly unfair.

What was unfair? It was mixing up talking about the transitional

period post March 2019 and through to the point of there being a final

agreement. And the point after the final agreement. The clear policy

from us right now is that between March 2019 and the final agreement

on what the relationship with the EU is post-Brexit which would want to

retain membership of the single market and a customs union. That's

the least disadvantageous most certain thing from British industry

and jobs. It is a changing position. Lots of noises after Labour after

the referendum about remaining in the single market. Then Labour said

we'll have to leave the single market to respect the referendum

result. Some of the Shadow Cabinet suggested you could still be

members. Jeremy Corbyn said you have to leave. Then Tom Watson said that

could be permanent. You've gone full circle? Well, I've been consistent

throughout this period. But your party hasn't? No, the Labour Party

collectively voted to invoke Article 50. Thereby accepting we are leaving

the EU in March 2019. You're saying we'll stay in the single market and

in the customs union? No, in the single market and customs union in

the transitional period from March 2019 through to the point of a final

agreement. That's the sensible grown up thing to do. Where the Tories are

making a problem for the country, industry, jobs, people who rely on a

decent economy here, is the uncertainty that now pertains.

They're trying to get a guaranteed bespoke transitional set of

arrangements in place. Everybody can see who's been watching these

negotiations there's no prospects of that What should happen after the

transitional period? You have to see what the best possible deal is. That

gives us the benefits of being in the single market. Do you agree

Labour might suggest permanently remaining in the single market? It

could be that what we end up with is a deal with looks exactly like

staying in the single market. Or having... Let's be clear to people,

it's confusing listening to all the various scenarios that could unfold

You're making it more confusing than it is. Keir starnler says you want

to stay in the single market during the transitional period. Tom Watson

is consistent about a permanent position within the single market

beyond the transition. Does that include retaining freedom of

movement? To be clear, Keir said last week we

still won the same benefits the government has promised us. That

might mean that the deal we negotiate with the EU is tantamount

to remaining in the single market. Good freedom of movement continue

past March 2019? I think the Government has conceded in this

league report today that there is going to be a degree of freedom of

movement, that we're not going to shift to ending all move between the

EU and the UK but there may be extra elements to it. Is that what is

being said? What we're seen from the Labour Party... What about what is a

document, and exactly what is freedom of movement? I'm not talking

about what is the document but it is clear that freedom of movement well

end when we beat the EU. What we need to do is design a new policy.

On this issue of transition, we've accepted that there will be interim

arrangements and we will look at putting in place. It is not for the

Labour Party, as a party of opposition, to dictate the outcome

of his negotiation is. They should be engaging with making this process

a success. The extraordinary thing is the U-turn ear, which you owe and

can say he has been consistent on, having voted for notification of

withdrawal... His concession weblog is -- his position seems to be

inconsistent. We have to move on. Now, when Parliament broke up

for the summer recess, Theresa May's end of term exam performance

was decidedly less than stellar. We're not exactly sure what losing

the Conservative majority equates to under the new examination

guidelines, but we're pretty sure for the Tories

it's far from an A-star. But as she's now said she wants

to lead the party into the next election she's keen to show

there's more to life than Brexit. Yes, as MPs return for a new term,

and the Prime Minister prepares can she turn herself

into the comeback kid? Her government is certainly keen

to ensure Brexit negotiations don't squeeze out all the

other subjects on the timetable. Theresa May says she still wants

to remedy some of those 'burning back when she was a

fresh-faced Head Girl. The school sick bay

could get a revamp. Today, she's talking about ensuring

equal treatment for mental Schools around the country

should get spruced up. An additional ?1.3 billion has been

announced over the next two years. But the younger crowd

haven't shown much love And, to that end, Theresa May

is planning to free up public sector land to build thousands

of new homes. It's been suggested that her broad

plan to make everyone better off will involve lifting

the public sector pay cap. Making changes to public services

after her audit on how they treat racial minorities

is finally published. And reforming corporate

governance to give workers But will all that amount

to a significant domestic agenda, or does she still have plenty

of homework to do? Thank you. Let's speak to the media

strategic strategist Joe Tanner, who used to work the Conservatives.

Welcome to the Daily Politics. Theresa May has been in office for

over a year and came into Downing Street with a big pitch for a

different kind of conservatism. Catchy, in your mind, really

delivered on that bold agenda? No, and that is clearly whether workers

to do. Some of the groundwork has been put in place, such as the audit

that your colleague mentioned but I think the really important work now

is not only about the domestic agenda she's got a real job to shore

up the Conservative Party ahead of the conferences to it Isn't it true

that Brexiters going to influence and shape everything that is done,

even on the domestic agenda? That is the huge challenge that Theresa May

faced in the minute she took over as Prime Minister because we knew that

this period was going to be dominated by Brexit and I think part

of the problem is that because of potentially a domestic void in terms

of the domestic policy agenda, we have seen Brexit completely

dominate. There is the question that everything will be viewed through

the prism of Brexit and what it could mean but I think that

shouldn't stop her from trying to get on with some of the things she

talked about when she made her first speech on the steps of Downing

Street. But we all know from the result of the election that there

were a lot of voters who like the offer from Labour and Jeremy Corbyn,

so do you think there will be moved by the Conservatives under Theresa

May to park their tanks on Labour's lawn? You probably stole the phrase

I was going to use because I think that is exactly what not only

activists and donors and potentially her Parliamentary colleagues are

going to be looking for from her now... Because there is clearly a

great fear amongst the Conservatives about how much ground Labour managed

to make in the election and, they be speak to a lot of Conservatives by

surprise. So there is a huge amount to do now, not just about delivering

on that domestic agenda but actually coming up with some stuff that is

going to capture people's imagination. Going to show the

Conservatives can stand for something more than austerity, some

kind of hope, and that is what Theresa May needs to deliver now. Do

you think she has done enough to see off critics and opponents from

within the Conservative Party? I don't mean she has really started

yet, if I'm honest. The period post the election, one of the

difficulties was that very awkward speech made after the result, which

a lot of people felt she should have been far more respect for the people

that had lost their seats and she should have acknowledged that more

and she didn't, and there was a lot of catching up to do around that

period, and I think that has upset quite a lot of Conservatives. But

the party conferences going to be about healing wounds, about looking

inwards and seeing what went wrong. We're already seeing the start of

some of that narrative beginning, and I think she really started on

that journey to not only repair the damage but to ensure she's got a

group of people fully supportive and behind her. Thank you very much.

That is from a friend of the Conservative Party, Jo Tanner. We

have got to deliver on a broad domestic agenda. When the Prime

Minister entered Downing Street she was clear that there had to be a

programme for a fairer Britain that works for everyone and that is

something that I think with some of the announcements you covered in

your piece around improving investment in schools, the enormous

expansion of investment into the NHS and hiring more staff... We are

seeing elements of that but of course there is more to do and it is

important that we get on with setting up the positive view of the

opportunities. You say there is more to do but you have not really

started. Can you give me any examples in that first year where

Theresa May's government has demonstrably improve the lives of

British people? Absolutely, the investments in mental health, the

commitment to a living wage and increasing payments to the lowest

paid, these are substantial investments that the government has

made. I have been campaigning for years for fairer funding for our

schools under fair of allocating that. Why did so many Tory MPs rebel

against the idea of that funding formula? Any change to the

allocation formula is going to be controversial but this is something

that parts... There were more losers than winners. We have come up with a

policy that really benefits us and increases opportunity. If you have

done so much in the way you have just set up, why do so few people

trust you on issues like housing and the NHS? We shouldn't forget the

fact that we did actually win the election. There were more people who

voted Conservative in the last general election... You lost your

majority. I kept my majority, thank you. The Tories lost the majority.

Nationally, what we saw as the two major part is getting a far greater

share than they had had before but the reality is that the Conservative

Party has a strong mandate to take this country forward. We will use

that mandate to deliver the fairer Britain that Theresa May set out in

her Downing Street speech and it is very important we get right, of

course it is, we need to make sure we take the right approach. It is

not just about it being important, it is going to be the deciding

factor. Of course it is usually important and working in the

department for exiting the European Union you wouldn't examine to say

anything else. But one of the reasons our department was set up is

so we could focus on some of those challenges, coordinate with other

departments but let those departments get on with doing their

own jobs and that is equally important. We need to make progress

on health, education, making our country competitive. On all of these

issues we want to be able to get out there and set out a positive agenda.

We will speak more during and after PMQs.

Not long to go until Prime Minister's Questions,

when you'll get to see two leaders who definitely aren't

But can politicians from opposing parties ever strike up

Over the summer you might have missed the comments

by the Labour MP Laura Piddock, who told the website Squawkbox

that she had no intention of being friends with any

"I feel disgusted at the way they're running this country.

Well, on this show, we like to try and bring people together,

and what better way to show your friendship than by sharing a nice

In this case, I'm afraid it's tap water.

We'll be watching to make sure they're using them.

We have this mug for you with hope written on it and we hope we will --

you will enjoy drinking from Matt. And this, it says, a country that

works for everyone. I'm sure you can sign up for that.

Now, of course, as it's a Wednesday you've got the chance

to win a mug of your own, the far superior Daily Politics mug,

And just a warning - there are flashing

MUSIC: ...Baby One More Time by Britney Spears

MUSIC: When You Say Nothing At All by Ronan Keating

Obviously, he's misunderstood exactly what I've said or

he's gone back and the paper have misconstrued what I've said.

MUSIC: Pretty Fly (For A White Guy) by the Offspring

MUSIC: Genie In A Bottle by Christina Aguilera

# Though I try to hide it, it's clear

# My world crumbles when you are not near

# Though I try to hide it, it's clear

# My world crumbles when you are not near #.

To be in with a chance of winning a Daily Politics mug,

send your answer to our special quiz e-mail address - that's

Entries must arrive by 12.30 today, and you can see the full terms

and conditions for Guess The Year on our website - that's

It's coming up to midday - there's Big Ben to prove it.

It may not be bonging but it is still telling the time

with the help of an electric motor, while the mechanism

It's almost as reliable is our political editor

I feel quite out of sorts with no bongs! Is a disorientating you? Yes,

I used to going around the Square mile and hearing Big Ben from all

corners of Westminster. That has changed but everything written so

PMQs. I think although Westminster has been abuzz with chat of a sleek

immigration paper from the Home Office, I think on Jeremy Corbyn is

more likely to other public sector pay cap. As we were discussing

yesterday, one of the things that has been an abuzz since Westminster

came back is speculation about whether or not the Treasury will

finally released the purse strings a little bit and allow the lifting of

the 1% pay cut for public sector workers. Labour's obviously made a

lot of this issue, particularly over the question of nurses' pay.

Yesterday Nicola Sturgeon announced plans to lift it in Scotland. And

there have been hints from ministers but the guidance has to come from

the Treasury first. There will be discussion, I presume, about who

would get their pay cap lifted and whether it would be targeted. That's

right, and this is not an issue that has suddenly bubbled up. There has

been chat about this, crucially for the Tories, since the election. MPs

know on the doorstep that was one of the things that have quite hard in

various parts of the country, public sector workers, whether teachers,

doctors, nurses or anyone else, felt aggrieved that for such a long time

they hadn't seen what many of them would consider to be a decent pay

rise. What about the state of the leaders themselves? That is an

interesting question, because how things turn. This time last year

Theresa May arrived for the first PMQs as the Queen in ascendance and

it felt as if she couldn't put a foot wrong. I remember how she was

cheered to the rafters by backbenchers at exactly this point

last year. In reverse, Jeremy Corbyn had just... He was absolutely riding

high on support from Labour members but at that stage, the PLP, as Owen

will no doubt remember very clearly, was in a very, very different place.

They were in the last couple of weeks of the leadership contest

before the conclusion of that and, really, at that point, he was the

one who was vulnerable. Theresa May but completely unstoppable. And now

things seem to have changed. Theresa May now tells us she is not a

quitter and wants to lead the party into the next election. I think that

came as a surprise to many people, including those who will be on her

backbenchers, at least some of them. Yesterday on this programme, the

chairman of the 1922 committee reminded us that a PM's authority is

always subject as a board of colleagues. And he also used the

phrase very carefully "At the moment". So in terms of the

temperature of support, shall we say, whether that was scalding hot,

too hot to handle, I think it was rather tepid. Theresa May after the

election went to the 1922, limiting of Tory backbenchers and told them

very carefully, "I am here as you want me". Basically, I so that your

pleasure. On a trip to Japan she told reporters of the rather

different and said she would be there in the long term and was not a

quitter. That it did Debbie irritates other MPs who felt that

was not quite the deal she struggled them after the election and there

aren't many people in the Tory party you speak to who actually really

believe that. The backdrop of course everything is Brexit, it seems, so

however much Theresa May would like to talk about a domestic agenda, it

is going to shape everything, isn't it? It is, and not least because in

terms of the act of business of government, the things that happen

in the chamber, it is going to take up so much of the time. It is just

going to dominate the programme and that does mean, therefore, that MPs,

ministers, whether they like it or not, will be sucked into this but he

must, and not least because the work is not just going across in the

Brexit department it up leaving the EU doesn't just mean how do we

extricate ourselves from that relationship, it means with these

immigration proposals, every single department and government having to

come up with basically a reworking of how it currently works because EU

law has spread into every corner of our lives. Unlikely to be something

greater PMQs by Jeremy Corbyn? I would be surprised if he does and I

would be surprised if he raises the immigration paper because just as on

the Tory benches, on the Labour benches there is a difference of

opinion on this two subject so if he mentions Brexit, Theresa May has

plenty of fodder to throw back at him with Labour's slightly unclear

or ever-changing position. With that, let's go over to the House of

Commons for Prime Minister's Questions.

As we return from the summer recess, I'm shower thoughts of the House

will be the Vic tempts of the Barcelona terror attack. Mr Speaker,

awant to reassure the house the UK has ensured assistance in the form

of military and humanitarian resources are in place including in

the overseas territories who are preparing for Hurricane Irma. In

addition to my duties in this house, I will have meets later today.

Everyone agrees with my right honourable friend and the thoughts

she shares with those in the terror attack

Bears lone in a. As part of the process, it is imperative we

transfer there are many serious concerns about the means not the

ends of the EU withdrawal Bill. So, could my Right Honourable Friend

assure me she will look in particular at those amendments that

seek to change the EU withdrawal Bill so that it doesn't become an

unprecedented and unnecessary Government power grab? I'm grateful

to my Right Honourable Friend for raising this issue. I know, like me,

she wants to see an orderly exit from the EU and will be supporting

this bill which enables us not just to leave the EU but to do so in an

orderly manner with a functioning statute book. We will require

certain powers to make corrections to the statute book after the bill

becomes law because negotiations are ongoing. We'll do if through

secondary legislation. An approach that has been endorsed by the House

of Lords constitution committee. I would like to reassure my Right

Honourable Friend that as the bill goes through its scrutiny in this

House and the debate continues, we will listen very carefully to that

debate. I will be very happy to meet my right honourable friend to

discuss this further. THE SPEAKER: Jeremy Corbyn Mr

Speaker, I agree with the moment on what she just said about Barcelona.

The attack was appalling. We should think of the victims but also thank

the people of Barcelona for their wonderful community response to what

was a threat to all of them. I hope the whole House will join me of

thinking of the Vic tiffs of the terrible floods in Bangladesh,

Nepal, searer a Lee Yoann, and in Texas and our thoughts with those

facing Hurricane Irma in the United States. Every member of this house

should be concerned inflation is once again running ahead of people's

pay. This week, workers at McDonald's took strikes action for

the first time. The boss of McDonald's is sported to have earned

8. ?1.8 million does the Prime Minister back the McDonald's

workers' case for an end to zero hours contracts and decent pay? The

issue that has taken place in McDonald's is a matter for

McDonald's to deal with. The questions... Let's focus. Let's

focus on what the right honourable gentleman has raised which is, let's

focus on what he's raised on zero hours contracts. The number of

people on zero hours contracts is very small. There are people who

genuinely say as a proportion of the workforce who say it is a benefit to

them being on those contracts. For 13 years, the Labour Party was in

Government and did nothing about zero hours contracts. It is this

Conservative Government that has put the workers first and band exclusive

zero hours contracts. Mr Speaker, my question was about McDonald's and

the Chief Executive is paid 1,300 times as much as his staffment there

are 800,000 people approximately in Britain on zero hours contracts.

When she became leader, the Prime Minister pledged "I want to make

shareholder votes on corporate pay not just advisory but binding" and

she put it into her manifesto. That manifesto's been dumped or arc

I'veed. Like so much else in her manifesto, where was the tough talk

on corporate greed? Was it just for the election campaign? Or is it

going to be... Or is it going to be put into law? Well, I suggest to the

right honourable gentleman he looks at the action Conservative have

taken on this Irish you. We recently published our proposals on corporate

governance. It is Conservative who force companies to disclose board

pay. That's been done not by a Labour Government but the

Conservative Party who's been putting workers first. I note she

uses the worse advisory. Page 18 of the dumped manifesto says... The

next, says, Mr Speaker, the next to help

people struggling, Mr Speaker, to help people struggling to make ends

meet, many politicians have become convinced we need to cap energy

prices. Even the Prime Minister was briefly converted to this policy.

Last week, the profit margins of the big six energy companies hit their

highest ever level. I wonder if I could prevail on the Prime Minister

to stick to her own manifesto pledges on this matter as well?

Well, first of all, on the question of what we were doing on corporate

governance, I didn't use the word advisory. He needs to listen to my

answer and not just read out the statement... He's raised an

important issue. He's raised an important issue about energy prices.

We are concerned about the way that particular market is operating. We

expect the companies to treat customers fairly. That's why we've

been looking at the action that can be taken. Why the Business Secretary

has been doing that. He wrote to Ofgem in June asking them to advise

on what action they could take to safeguard customers. We're

particularly concerned about those who are the poorest customers who

are kept on these tariffs that do not give them value for money. So, I

agree, it's the Government that's doing something about it. Well, Mr

Speaker, if only that were the case. Ofgem's plans only will benefit 2.6

million customers. 17 million customers are short changed by the

big six energy companies. She could and should take action on it. Mr

Speaker, she's not the only one going back on her word...

When the members opposite have #k5u78ed down a little, I'd like to

say this, at last year's Sports Direct annual meeting, Mike Ashley

personally pledged to ban the use of zero hours contracts in his company.

A year on, they're still exploiting insecure hours workers with zero

hours contracts. Will the Prime Minister join me in now demanding

that Mr Ashley honour his words and ends zero hours contract in all of

his companies? I've said it is this Government that's taken action in

relation to zero hours contracts unlike the Labour Party. The right

honourable gentleman talks about manifestos and people going back on

their word. I might remind him in the Labour Party manifesto there was

a commitment to support Trident, our independent nuclear deterrent.

Shortly after the election, in private, he told people he didn't

agree with that. For years, the right honourable gentleman sat on

the Labour Party benches and didn't support Labour policy. Now he's

Labour Leader and he still doesn't support Labour policy. Mr Speaker, I

listened really carefully to what the Prime Minister said on this

occasion. I'm struggling to see the connection between what she just

said, Mike Ashley, Sports Direct and McDonald's! So, maybe she could now

answer the question, will she condemn what Sports Direct and

McDonald's are doing to their staff? It is quite straightforward. Yes or

no? Mr Speaker, today, thousands of nursing and other health care staff

are outside Parliament. They're demanding this Government scrap the

1% pay cap. Poor pay means experienced staff are leaving and

fewer people are training to become nurses. There's already a shortage

of 40,000 nurses across the UK. Will the Prime Minister please see sense

and end the public sector pay cap and ensure our NHS staff are

properly paid. We absolutely value the work of all

those working in the public sector, nurses, teachers and others who are

doing a good job for us day in, day out in what are often difficult and

harrowing circumstances. It might be helpful if I remind the House on

where we are on the issue of pay review bodies in public sector pay.

There are two reports still to be published and for the Government to

respond to for police and prison officers. Later, as always happens

every year, later in the autumn we'll publish the frame work for

2018/19 and continue to balance the need to protect jobs, public sector

workers and the need to ensure we're also protecting and being fair to

those who are paying for it, including public sector workers. I

say to the right honourable gentleman, what we have seen, what

he does in this House and outside this House is consistently stand up

and ask for more money to be spent on this that and the other. He can

do that in opposition. He asks consistently for more money

to be spent jockey can do that in opposition because he knows he

doesn't have to pay for it. The problem with Labour is that they do

it in government as well and when... As a result of the decisions the

Labour Party took in government... As a result of decisions the Labour

Party took in government, we now have to pay more on debt interest

ban on NHS paid. That's the result of Labour. The Prime Minister had no

problems finding ?1 billion to please the DUP, no problems

whatsoever. And NHS staff are 14% worse off than they were seven years

ago. Is she really happy that NHS staff use food banks? Warm words

don't pay food bills. Pay rises will help to do that. She must end the

public sector pay cap. The reality for working people is lower wages

and less job security, within work poverty now at record levels. So

will the Prime Minister clarifies and she evaded during the election

campaign? For those struggling to get by, whether employed,

self-employed, permanent or temporary, can the Prime Minister

categorically state today they will not see rises in the basic rate of

income tax, national insurance contributions or VAT? I can tell the

right honourable gentleman the help we have been giving to those who are

just about managing. We've taken 4 million B but out of paying income

tax altogether. We've given a tax cut to over 30 million people. We

see record numbers of people in employment in this country. We're

given the lowest earners the highest pay rise for 20 years by introducing

the national living wage. But you only get that with a strong economy.

We believe in sound money, he believes in higher debts. We believe

in making our economy strong so we can invest in our public services.

Labour's approaches reckless, ours is balanced. Our approach delivers a

strong economy, more money for public services, more jobs for

people and families, but you only get a strong economy and a better

future with the Conservatives. Thank you, Mr Speaker. As the Prime

Minister said, this Government has an outstanding record of job

creation with 3 million more people in work than seven years ago. It is

perfectly true that wage rises have not been as high as we would have

hoped but I'm proud that we gave that big boost to people at the low

end with a rise in the national living wage. What the right

honourable gentleman opposite does not understand, you can only have

sustainable rises in pay with increases in productivity. My

question to the Prime Minister is, will she instruct all of her

ministers to bring forward proposals for productivity rises in time for

the Chancellor to announce them at the budget? I thank my right Rory

Bourke friend and he has absolutely put his finger on its. Productivity

is absolutely crucial for the strength of our economy going

forward and improving that productivity. That is why we have

introduced our modern industrial strategy, which will boost

productivity and is also why we are introducing really good quality tech

Loughgall -- technical education in this country for the first time, to

ensure that young people have the skills they need to take the higher

paid jobs that will be created as a result of our industrial strategy.

Does the Prime Minister agree with me that immigration is essential to

the strength of the UK economy, as well as enhancing our diversity and

cultural fabric? As I have said on many occasions before, overall

immigration has been good for the UK. But what people want to see is

control of that immigration. That is what people wanted to see as a

result of coming out of the European Union. We're already able to

exercise controls in relation to those who come to this country from

outside the countries within the European Union and we continue to

believe as a Government that it is important to have net migration and

sustainable levels, which we believe to be in the tens of thousands,

because of the impact particularly on people on the lower end of the

income scale in depressing their wages. Mr Speaker, last October the

Prime Minister was forced into a humiliating U-turn on prose Poles --

proposals to force companies to disclose any foreign workers

employed. During the summer, 100 EU nationals resident in the UK

received to deportation notices in error, causing alarm to them and

many others. We need to cherish those who are here and not chase

them away. The Prime Minister must stop dancing to the tune of her

right-wing backbenchers and apologise for the disgraceful

treatment her Government has shown migrants in the UK. In the first

instance, will she pledged that international students will no

longer be included in the net migration figures? Can I just say to

the honourable gentleman back in relation to the error that was made

by the Home Office, every single one of those individuals was telephoned

with an apology. It shouldn't have happened in the first place but the

Government did telephone with an apology. Let me just say this to the

honourable gentleman. As I explain to my first answer to him, there is

a reason for wanting to ensure we can control migration. It is because

of the impact that that migration can have on people, on access to

services, on access to infrastructure but crucially, it

often hits those at the lower end of the income scale hardest and I

suggest that the honourable gentleman thinks about that impact,

rather than just standing up here and saying what he has done. Is

important we bring in controls, we want to want to continue to welcome

the brightest and the best here to the UK, and we continue to do so. I

know that my right honourable friend will be as alarmed and angered as

many at the decision of the Northern Ireland judicial authority to open

the so-called legacy cases involving past and present members of the

Armed Forces. These cases have been meticulously investigated and

represent just 10% of deaths in the troubles. A line really does need to

be drawn here. Does my right honourable friend agree that it is

wrong to single out any group for this kind of investigation, and that

the hundreds of thousands of people who served in Northern Ireland

should feel appreciated for the difficult job they did, not being

hounded into old age by investigations of this kind? Can I

first of all say to my right honourable friend that we are

unstinting in our admiration for the role that our Armed Forces played in

ensuring Northern Ireland's future would only ever be decided by

democracy and consent, and the overwhelming majority serve with

great distinction and we owe them a great debt of gratitude. But as part

of our work to implement the Stormont House agreement, we will

ensure that new supporters will be under obligations to be fair,

balanced and proportionate, which will make sure our veterans are not

unfairly treated or disproportionately investigated and

indeed reflect the fact that 90% of deaths in the troubles were caused

by terrorist and not the Armed Forces. But as he will appreciate,

the investigations by PSNI are, of course, a matter for them, as they

are independent of government. Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister

will be aware of the death of my constituent Kim Briggs, who was

knocked over last year by a cyclist on an illegal fixed wheel bike with

no front brake. Does the Prime Minister agree with me that the law

on dangerous driving should be extended to include offences by

cyclists, and does she also agree with me that the 1861 offence of

wanton and furious driving, which the prosecution had to rely upon in

this case, is hopelessly outdated and wholly inadequate? Can I first

of all extend our sympathies to the family and friends of the honourable

lady's constituent who died in this tragic circumstances, and she has

raised an important issue. I think we should welcome the fact that they

were able to find legislation under which to make a prosecution but the

point is a general one about ensuring our legislation gives up to

date with events that take place ensure this is something the

Secretary of State for transport will look at. Living near a natural

green space is good for your physical and mental health but those

in the most deprived areas of the country are the least likely to do

so. My right honourable friend is committed to reducing inequality and

improving mental health. Can I ask her to read the new report published

by the Conservative environment network, masterminded by my

honourable friend, the Member for Taunton Deane, and ask to take on

board its recommendation to consider the environment across government

policy? The whole question of mental health is one that I know she has

campaigned on and has a particular interest in and it is interesting

that she has raised, and I welcome the fact she has raised this issue

of the health benefits of green space, which is becoming ever more

recognised and certainly, I know this is something that the

Conservatives network highlights in its report it up Defra will be

producing a 25 year environment plan. It will look at the evidence

in that report and it will focus on what can be done to ensure that the

benefits provided by access to green space are available to all segments

of society. Thank you, Mr Speaker. This summer, a third of all parents

across the country went without a meal to ensure that they can feed

their children during the school holidays. In Stoke-on-Trent, amazing

volunteers came together to provide over 10,000 meals for local kids.

I'm very proud of my constituents but I'm disgusted that this

Government, who have done nothing and turned a blind eye. How many

kids have to go hungry, how many parents have to go without food,

before this Prime Minister will do her job and act? Well, I have to say

to the honourable lady, I recognise an issue that she has raised about

children, particularly those who are normally able to access free school

meals during term time and the impact this has during the holidays,

is a matter that her writer Robert friend the Member for Birkenhead has

been taking up, together with colleagues in the APPG for hunger.

From the Government's point of view our focus remains on tackling the

root causes of poverty. This is what is important, not just the symptoms.

Nearly three quarters of children from workless families moved out of

poverty when their parents entered into full-time work and we see

record levels of employment under this government. That's why this is

so important. Ensuring that we get a strong economy and those jobs. But

I'm sure that ministers at the Department for Work and Pensions on

the Department for Education will be looking at the proposals the right

honourable member for Birkenhead has brought forward. The reductions in

unemployment, poverty and income inequality are some of our proudest

achievements in recent years. What more is the Government planning to

do to further the one nation principal and ensure a fairer

society still? Under this Government, we have seen income

inequality fall to its lowest level since 1986. The number of people in

absolute poverty is at a record low and we've got the lowest

unemployment rate since 1975. But he's right, there is more to do, and

that's why yesterday we announced a ?40 million for youth organisations

to boost the skills and life chances for young people who are living in

disadvantaged areas. I think that will have a transformational effect

on the lives of some of our most disadvantaged young people and will

help to achieve the fairer society that my honourable friend has

rightly referred to. Thank you, Mr Speaker. A few weeks ago, the

utterly shaming lack of mental health provision in this country was

condemned by our most senior family court judge, as he sought a bed for

a desperately ill teenage girl. The 17-year-old had been restrained no

fewer than 117 times in a place not fit to care for her. Does the Prime

Minister agree with me, in echoing the words of Sir James Mumby, that

the continued failure to tackle our nation's mental health crisis means

the state will have blood on its hands? I'm sure everybody across

this House was concerned to read of the circumstances of the individual

that she has referred to and the treatment that she had received. I

accept that we need to do more in relation to our mental health

services. That's precisely why the Government is putting more money

into mental health, it is why we have introduced a number of

programmes, particularly focusing on the mental health of young people,

it is why we have reduced by 80% the numbers of people being detained in

police cells because of their mental ill-health and, as I say, we've

increased the funding. But of course we need to do more. That's why we

are pushing forward on further change. We are pledged to reforming

outdated mental health laws and we've created targets to improve

standards of care. I agree mental-health is important. This

Government is focusing on it and putting more resources into it.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Given the importance of the fishing industry

around the whole of the UK and in particular in Banff and Buchan, can

I ask what discussions the government has had with

representatives of fishing in the north-east of Scotland as heart of

the ongoing EU negotiations? I recognise the importance of the

fishing industry to a number of parts of the UK, including my

honourable friend's constituency, and he is right to raise this point.

The Government is engaging with a range of fishing stakeholders,

including a meeting with the Scottish Fishermen's Federation,

which took place in July. We do value our fishing communities and

supporting them will be an important part of the action we will take as

part of the EU. We are working closely with the fishing industry. I

have met some fishermen and spoken to them over the summer about the

industry and we are working with fishermen and others who have a

stake in the industry to make sure we get this right when we leave the

EU. The Prime Minister will be aware of

our initiative last week to have devolution running immediately in

parallel with the talks process, an initiative welcomed by the opinion

in Northern Ireland. If, however, despite our best efforts and

agreement with all the other parties, Sinn Fein continues to

block the restoration of Government in Northern Ireland, will she

confirm to the House what her Government spokesperson said

yesterday evening about the future governance arrangements for Northern

Ireland, in particular, a welcome statement there will be no question

of joint authority or a role for Dublin? The right honourable

gentleman is right about the importance of the talks we have to

restore devolved administration in Northern Ireland. I'm happy to

confirm we'd not be looking at a joint authority. He will be aware...

In relation to the Government of the Republic of Ireland in north/south

co-ordination. The focus should be in trying to ensure we resolve the

current differences and see that devolved administration reasserted

in Northern Ireland. That is what would be best for the people of

Northern Ireland. Thank you Mr Speaker, by refusing to discuss free

trade, does the Prime Minister agree that the European Commission is

damaging the employment and economic interests of their own member

states? For ex-ample endangerings jobs in the German car industry?

Will the Prime Minister call on other heads of European Government

to prevail on the European Commission to end this act of wanton

economic self-harm and start free trade talks which are so clearly in

the interests of everybody? My Right Honourable Friend, the Secretary of

State for exiting the EU was back in Brussels for the further rounds of

negotiations. Those have been productive. We do want to see the

discussions moving on to the future relationship. What this Government

has done and will continue to do is publish a set of position papers

setting out options and ideas for how that deep and special parter

inship can be taken forward in the future. This isn't just a question

of what suits the UK. It is in the interests of the European Union to

have that good, deep and special partnership. What action is the

Prime Minister taking to ensure that my constituents, many of whom are

paying in excess of ?5,000 to travel to London every year, get better

service, not the service the new plans under our Government

introduced. And under these plans, the people of Bedford will lose the

Intercity rail service?s Can I say to the honourable gentleman, if you

look at the record of this Government, we recognise the

importance of rail services. Oh, he says, no we don't. I suggest he

looks at the funding we are putting in to improving rail services across

this country. That is a sign of recognition we have of the

importance of those services. One person sleeping rough is one too

many. Our party's manifesto set out to end rough sleeping by the end of

this Parliament. Given the important role that charities play in this

task, will the Prime Minister join me in paying tribute to the

excellent charity Crisis, which is marking its 5th anniversary? Can I

first of all pay tribute to my honourable friend. This had is an

issue he cares about deeply and he co-chairs the APPG on ending

homelessness. He's right, we had a commitment to reduce rough leaping,

eliminating by 2027. ?50 million has been allocated to 2020 to tackle

homelessness and rough sleeping. I'm also happy to join with him in

paying tribute to Crisis as they mark their 5th anniversary. They've

been doing, over those 50 years, a very important job. I will be

hosting a reception for them to mark their 5th anniversary in Downing

Street later today. The University of Bradford makes a compelling case

for a medical school teaching all types of health professionals. Can

the Prime Minister confirm those universities where the need is the

most will be given the opportunity to set up medical schools? We are

pleased we'll be increasing the number of training places. That does

mean the Department of Health is looking at the whole question of

what places are available where and what new medical schools should be

set up. I'm sure the Secretary of State for Health will be interested

in hearing her pitch for Bradford to have a medical school. In the 1960

and 70s thousands of women were described a pregnancy test which

resulted in profound effects for the babies that followed, including my

constituent Charlotte Fensom who cares as a sister alongside elderly

parents of her brother Steve enwho was pro frownedly affected. Those

families now deserve justice and there should be a chance to launch a

public inquiry into this terrible scandal? My honourable friend has

raised an important issue. She's right to do so. We should recognise

the impact this had on those women who took this hormone pregnancy test

from the late 1950s into 1978. There is an expert working group set up

which is looking into this issue which is due to publish its findings

in the autumn. I would be happy to meet my honourable friend to discuss

this issue with her. Parents in my constituency are disappointed. Over

the summer, they sought to take advantage

THE SPEAKER: Order! An unseemly response. The honourable lady ask a

new member. She's highly articulate and she will be heard! The

honourable lady will be heard! Parents any my constituency are

disappointed. They sought to take advantage of the 30 hours childcare

but due to underfunding found it was not available and not free. Will the

Prime Minister apologise to parents across the country for false

advertising on what over wise would have been a welcome policy? What I

can tell the honourable lady is we are investing ?1 billion of extra

funding every year in early years entitlement. That includes 3 million

a year. This investment is based on work that was done, a plan by the

Department for Education which was described by the National Audit

Office as thorough and wide-ranging. There are important ways that

childcare providers can get more from their funding. The DFE is

offering to support them to do that. Our hourly funding rate is

significantly higher than the average cost of providing a place to

a three or four-year-old. I hope the honourable lady thinks this is

something this Government is delivering on. For the second year

running, planning the festival of engineering, this time with the

honourable member for South West Wiltshire. We hope to inspire 3,000

children to help challenge stereotypes of engineering careers

to help combat the local skills gap and in addition, to highlight

Wiltshire is a hub of engineerings design and technology. Would the

Prime Minister consider attending this wonderful event? Can I

congratulate my honourable friend for her initiative. She does raise

an important point. It is important we see more young people moving into

engineering. Pursuing careers in engineering and describes more

generally. The steps she's taking with our honourable friend is an

important part of this. We need to address those stereotypes. I'm

particularly keen to address women in engineering. We should see more

women. If my diary allows, I will be very happy to attend. Clinicians

don't believe it will be safe, commissioners and providers don't

believe it would be feasible. Isn't it now the time for ministers to

reverse the decision they took in 2011 to close the A department at

King George hospital? Can I say, we have been very clear that where

decisions are taken, we want those decisions to be taken at a local

level with clinical advice. That is what the Department of Health is

doing. As home sectsry, the Prime Minister was one of the first to

appreciate the alarming extent of child sexual exploitation and

respond to calls to set up the historic abuse inquiry. Does she

agree those who expose to root out the criminal perpetrators for the

horrific crimes they commit especially in the face of cultural

sensitivities should be encouraged and promoted not gagged? My

honourable friend has raised a very sensitive and important issue. As he

says, was an issue I took a particular interest in when I was

Home Secretary. Anyone who abuses a child must be stopped regardless of

race, age or gender. Child exploiltation happens in all areas

of the country. It can take many different forms. I'm clear and the

Government is clear political or cultural sensitivities must not get

in the way of pro venting and uncovering child abuse. The freedom

to speak out must apply to those in positions of responsibility,

including ministers and shadow ministers on both sides of this

House. If we turn a blind eye to this abuse, as has happened too much

in the past, then more crimes will be committed and more children will

be suffering in silence. Thank you. Glenfield's children's heart surgery

unit has some of the best outcomes in the country, including mortality

rates lower than the national average. One of the Professor'S says

proposals to Church of England children's heart surgery are

embarrassing and plucked out of thin air. Can I ask the Prime Minister to

ensure the final decision is made on the basis of sound clinical evidence

and when this House is sitting so MPs can question ministers about NHS

England's plans? The honourable lady is aware there are many ways MPs can

question ministers about plans. As I said in answer to one of her

honourable friends earlier. The decisions about the future structure

of the NHS, Sir veries and provision are being taken on the basis of

clinical needs and clinical evidence. Britain is among the

world's leading digital economies. As we leave the EU, technology will

be crucial to a successful Brexit from the Northern Irish border to

customs controls. Does the Prime Minister agree that Brexit can

kick-start a further wave of ding stall investment and working with

the industry, a Brexit technology task force could help her do that?

My honourable friend is right about the position the UK holds in

relation to science and innovation. We're already a leading destination.

We've some of the world's top universities, three of which are in

the world's top ten. We've more Nobel Prize winners than any country

outside of the United States. We've proud history of cutting edge rest

search, science and took nothingy. Brexit gives us an opportunity to

give a further kick-start to our position in relation to the digital

economy. We'll want to attract investment from all over the world

in relation to this and work with industry to ensure that can be done.

In her conference speech last year, the Prime Minister said existing

workers legal right will continue to be guaranteed in law as long Asim

aPrime Minister. Can the Prime Minister tell the House how long

that will be? Can I say to the honourable gentleman, that is a

commitment that I'm happy to stand by in relation to improving workers'

rights. That's something we've den doing as a Conservative Party and

something I'll continue to do as Prime Minister. Mr Speaker, tomorrow

is world awareness day which highlights this devastating muscle

wasting condition which affects young men. If as anticipated the

current development of a more reliable newborn screening test goes

ahead, psychological support must be readily available to any affected

families. Will the Prime Minister provide assurance to families that

NHS England will develop such a vital psychological support? This is

an important aspect of this terrible condition. I recognise the

importance of ensuring people can access appropriate psychological

support when they have a young family member diagnosed with this

serious health problem. In relation to the new screening test, I

understand muscular Diss fie UK is working with NHS England's advisory

groups to understand how best to meet the needs of parents and

careers following the diagnosis of this. I'm grateful to my Right

Honourable Friend for raising Well, it started late and it

finished late, although probably in line with previous PMQs. As

predicted by everybody here, or certainly Laura and myself, Jeremy

Corbyn didn't go on but sit or the leaked immigration paper. You

focused instead on workers' rights and conditions including pay. You

referenced the McDonald's strike and John McDonnell the Shadow Chancellor

joined the strikers and Jeremy Corbyn called on Theresa May to take

action on things like C Rowe hours contracts and cited the actions of

Sports Direct and asked the Prime Minister condemned the chief

executive. He moved onto corporate governance and accused the Prime

Minister of watering down manifesto commitments to legislate for new

rules to give workers more say. And finally he talked about the nurses'

protest outside the Houses of Parliament and called on the

Government to lift the 1% pay cap on public sector workers. At the very

end there was a question about the Prime Minister's leadership, to

which Theresa May said that the Government is doing a lot of work on

workers' rights. Make of that what you will. As we expected, Jeremy

Corbyn stayed away from the two big issues of the day but in terms of

those issues, McDonald's on the public sector pay cap, he wasn't

just raising them one after the other. What was significant was, he

was raising those issues where many people perceive Theresa May made

promises and has had to go back on them, so on the energy pay cap all

on cracking down on big bosses' pay and if that gives a signal but that

is the kind of area that Jeremy Corbyn wants to explore this autumn,

the issues around people who are having a hard time making ends meet

and how Theresa May promised on the steps of Downing Street to look

after people who are finding it hard to get on, but some of the things

according to Labour that she suggested just have come to naught.

So I think that tells us something about where he believes the

Government is vulnerable but I think as ever, when we've seen these two

clash at the dispatch box, there is always a sense that they are sort of

talking at cross purposes, sort of holding back from really locking

more than getting into the issues. I also think it was telling not just

because of that cheeky question at the end from the Labour MP Phil

Wilson from Sedgefield about how long Theresa May would-be Prime

Minister... Throughout that session, she was surrounded by Damian Green,

her de facto deputy, on one side and Philip Hammond on the other, who

couldn't help but stifle a very big yawn. It looked to me like she has

these posh bouncers in grey suits flanking her, which is a bit of a

visual metaphor for how ministers and with her souped up Number Ten

operation, they are trying to hold things together at a time they know

is going to be very, very difficult indeed. Did she appear nervous to

you? Adamant she appeared nervous. She's spent years of the dispatch

box and didn't appear to be particularly rattled by any of it.

-- I don't think she appeared nervous. Were either of them trading

zingers and on top on? No, they weren't but I think that every of

attack from Jeremy Corbyn could be quite fruitful. There was something

of a news story sneaked in, that Theresa May confirmed the Transport

Secretary will look at extending the law on dangerous driving to cover

cyclists in response to a question by Heidi Alexander after a terrible

court case over a constituent who was killed. Robin Walker, when it

comes to public sector pay, do workers deserve a pay rise? As the

Prime Minister said, we value enormously the contribution of

public sector workers and we want to make sure we get the proper advice

on this so we can move forward and take the right action. You are the

ones that give the advice. The Treasury sets the reader to terms of

what pay bodies actually do. We want the public sector pay bodies to look

at this. Are you getting advice? We want to have better retention of

full-time staff and not too many agency workers. It is very important

we take... But it is also important that we set out the context for

this, which is that with public spending facing constrained, because

we inherited a very large deficit, we have to make sure we can also

maintain the investment in public sector staff, the numbers of staff,

and we're seeing a huge recruitment campaign for the NHS to address some

of the issues raised in that session, like mental health, so we

need to strike a careful balance to this right it Should nurses get a

pay rise? Nurses will get a pay rise. Beyond 1%? We have to take

into account all the evidence and take the right decision for the

long-term interests of our public services. Jeremy Corbyn says, quite

rightly, that wages are falling behind prices because of rising

inflation. How much beyond 1% would you give to public sector workers?

They should be getting at least inflation. 2.6%, around that? Making

up for the fact that they had depressed wages for a long time, it

should be more than that in the first instance. We were clear at the

election that we would be finding an extra ?4 billion to scrap the 1% cap

and what I think we saw from the Prime Minister today and from Robin,

they failed to learn the lessons they ought to have learned of the

election. The country was very clear, I think, that they do believe

that the Tories have made a mess of our economy, that we've seen rising

GDP, 12% increase since they came in, but wages have only gone up by

6% and that means in real terms, for most people, ordinary workers, they

are worse off now than they were in 2010. Jeremy has been absolutely

clear that we can do something about that and unless the Tories catch on

with that, all the relaunch as she wants to have she can have, it will

make no difference. They refused to say today that they would increase

public sector pay, she refused to acknowledge we've seen cuts in

education spending, she is backtracking on her election

promises and the public will see it. Isn't that what happened in the

election result? Wasn't that the message that came out loud and

clear, that since 2010 this idea that we are all in it together has

actually meant that the burden of wages falling behind prices has

fallen on the lowest paid? What we've seen is rising wages, the

movement for a national living wage, and that means the lowest paid

getting paid substantially more. What we also need to see is reforms

to tax to take more people out of income tax. That is something that

Labour never supported or put in their manifesto. We need to ensure

people keep more of the money that they earn but of course we need to

look across our public services at how we invest in and retain staff

and that process that the Government is doing. Working people are worse

off in this country today than they were when you came to power in 2010.

I disagree. You cannot disagree with the plain facts. All of the

increases, the personal allowance you talked about, do not offset the

fact that because of things like increasing VAT, which Theresa May

again today failed to rule out doing in the next Parliament, in this

current Parliament, all of those changes are not offset... There are

other changes. There are other changes we have made, such as the

introduction of a national living wage, substantial increases for the

people who are lowest paid, such as looking at zero hours contracts.

We've got hundreds of thousands more people in work. There are more than

a million people on zero hours contracts. It is not a million

people. It is 850,000. It was higher. Why didn't you do anything

about it when you were in power? The reality is, zero hours contracts

were not a feature of the economic landscape of this country when

Labour left office. It is now. It is the biggest symbol of the gross and

security that most working people currently face and the things Jeremy

Corbyn raised today, McDonald's workers, are absolutely prime

examples. One final thing, when it comes to Brexit... Owen Smith, I

didn't get a chance to ask you earlier, are you still in favour of

a second referendum? Well, I think that leaving the European Union is

going to be about our economy and the only way in which we could ever

overturn that is if were a further public vote. But I don't see any

real public appetite for that, although I do see some change in

people's perception of how they were lied to during the Brexit

referendum. I think more and more people, even those who voted Brexit,

realise they were told a pack of its. We have to leave it there and

say thank you very much. Jeremy Corbyn turned up at GQ

magazine's Men Of The Year awards He was there to present the grime

artist Stormzy with the award for solo artist of the year -

there they are together - and Stormzy apparently took

the opportunity of calling the Prime The Labour leader didn't win the

prize for the politician of the year but he is, it seems, hot cultural

property at the moment, because London's Victoria and Albert museum

has announced that it has acquired a new T-shirt bearing his name.

Let's find out more from our reporter Elizabeth Glinka -

If there is one thing you thought Jeremy Corbyn wouldn't become it is

probably a fashion icon but apparently we have all been wrong

and here is that T-shirt, bearing his name. I'm joined by the curator

of this display at the V and it. Why this T-shirt? We've acquired this

T-shirt is part of our rapid response collecting activities.

Design is very much a means to understand the world around us and

this is an object that enables us to ask questions and think about design

in terms of the recent general election. Thinking about that idea

of design, we have seen loads of Corbyn T-shirts over the last couple

of years, bootleg T-shirts. Why in particular this one? There are a

variety of reasons as to why this is of interest to. The NICE swoosh logo

is extremely well-known and turning these brand identities around for

effect is some builders is well-established. We have a

president in the collection. But it is about streetwear and contemporary

fashion. This object was the most popular of that type for this

general election. How common is it to get a transferable between

politics and fashion? It happens all the time. Design, fashion, it is all

inherently political and this is an object that enables us to think

about what role did social media play, and why is digital now analog?

Here we have a T-shirt that you and I might wear in our daily lives.

Thank you. We might put in the cause a political balance, I have to tell

you that T-shirts for other political parties are available.

Thank you that equalling out on product placement.

So, that's the one in the V, and I've got one here.

It's made by a company called Bristol Street Wear and we thought

Owen might like to pop it on to show the new spirit of unity

We don't just do mugs, we give... Our generosity knows no bounds! We

haven't actually got time, luckily for you, to ask you to put it on.

There's just time to put you out of your misery and give

And we have a winner... Well done! Don't break the table!

Michael is the winner of that Daily Politics mug.

Thanks to all my guests, especially Robin and Owen.

The one o'clock news is starting over on BBC One now.

I'll be back at noon tomorrow with all the big

Owen Quine - he's a very famous and good novelist.

He's gone off before, only this time it's been ten days.

I'm an investigator. His wife's very worried for him.

Owen has written a very thinly disguised slandering

of the people who've tried to help him.

Quine knew a lot of damaging stuff...