:00:12. > :00:16.Westminster's Centre Court, as we try and get some of that Murray
:00:16. > :00:19.feel-good factor. As our political leaders jump on the Wimbledon
:00:19. > :00:26.bandwagon, the temperatures rose to near boiling point on the Common's
:00:26. > :00:28.show court, as the top seeds clashed over party funding. Watching from
:00:28. > :00:38.the refreshment tent, stand-up comedian and former Labour Party
:00:38. > :00:39.
:00:39. > :00:43.worker Matt Forde. Ed Miliband and Len McCluskey have been thrashing it
:00:43. > :00:46.out all week. But is it going to end love all?
:00:46. > :00:49.As Andy Murray celebrates on the court, his off-court earnings could
:00:49. > :00:59.double or treble. But what should we be paying our MPs? Broadcaster,
:00:59. > :01:00.
:01:00. > :01:03.Matthew Wright, is soaking up the rays. The word on the beach is that
:01:03. > :01:05.MPs are already creaming it and now they want to stick a flake in it.
:01:05. > :01:08.And accusations of sexism at Wimbledon, as the Ladies' Champion
:01:08. > :01:18.is described as not "a looker". Former model and entrepreneur
:01:18. > :01:23.Myleene Klass, serves an ace. not be standing for any sexism on
:01:23. > :01:27.tonight's show, Andrew. New balls, please.
:01:27. > :01:31.Evenin' all. Welcome to This Week, the show that pays salty peanuts and
:01:31. > :01:33.is still surprised when all it gets are cheeky monkeys in return. But
:01:33. > :01:36.when it comes to under-performing public servants who consider
:01:36. > :01:38.themselves undervalued, even though they're in a job that requires no
:01:38. > :01:43.training, qualifications or experience, it's hard to compete
:01:43. > :01:45.with your average Member of Parliament. Yet this week the wee
:01:45. > :01:48.darlings were forced onto the defensive, following the proposal to
:01:48. > :01:51.bump up their pay by almost 10%, with outraged MPs lining up to
:01:51. > :02:01.denounce the increase, while throwing their hands up and claiming
:02:01. > :02:01.
:02:01. > :02:04.they're powerless to prevent it reaching their bank accounts. Of
:02:05. > :02:08.course, the logic for a pay rise is undeniable. First, we need to pay
:02:08. > :02:11.them more or they'll start fiddling their expenses again. Second,
:02:11. > :02:16.without better pay, the best and brightest will skedaddle to more
:02:16. > :02:19.lucrative jobs in the better paid Japanese parliament! Third,
:02:19. > :02:24.well-paid people are woefully under-represented in Parliament! We
:02:24. > :02:26.clearly need more. And most important of all, paying well-paid
:02:26. > :02:32.people even more money obviously means improved performance and
:02:32. > :02:42.better results! After all, it worked for bankers, G4S executives and BBC
:02:42. > :02:43.
:02:43. > :02:46.bosses. So why wouldn't it work for Gordon Brown? Speaking of those
:02:47. > :02:49.whose attendance is patchy at best, I'm joined on the sofa by the former
:02:49. > :02:53.London Mayor, and the present wardrobe nightmare of late-night
:02:53. > :03:03.political chat. I speak, of course, of #newtlabour "Red" Ken
:03:03. > :03:04.
:03:04. > :03:11.Livingstone, and #sadmanonatrain Michael "Choo Choo" Portillo. Your
:03:11. > :03:15.moment of the week. It is good fun being chairman of the select
:03:15. > :03:18.committee and Margaret Hodge milked it this week as chairman of the
:03:18. > :03:23.Public accounts committee. She interviewed Lord Patten, chairman of
:03:23. > :03:27.the trustees of the BBC. And it occurred to one, as the interview
:03:27. > :03:31.went along, as to whether there was anything that had happened in the
:03:31. > :03:36.BBC in recent years of which Lord Patten had any knowledge whatsoever,
:03:36. > :03:40.or whether there was anything within the BBC for which he claimed any
:03:40. > :03:44.responsibility. Now, if it is true that the trustees knew nothing and
:03:44. > :03:48.had no cause to know anything about remuneration, then they cannot
:03:48. > :03:57.possibly do their job and the system of trustees who know nothing and
:03:57. > :04:02.cannot defend the licence payers interest is, cannot possibly go on.
:04:02. > :04:06.But Mark Thomson has said, I told them everything. That is what he
:04:06. > :04:09.said but I choose for the moment to believe Lord Patten. Just in case
:04:09. > :04:15.one thinks this is a trivial amount, the amount they paid off is one
:04:15. > :04:21.third of the annual budget of BBC Radio 4, and BBC Radio 4, I speak as
:04:21. > :04:26.one who takes money from them, is a fine institution. They should have a
:04:26. > :04:34.bigger budget, so you can buy more shirts. You do not need them on the
:04:34. > :04:40.radio. They look good on the radio, unlike TV. Another privatisation.
:04:40. > :04:45.High priest of capitalism, Adam Smith, wrote that you should never
:04:45. > :04:49.allow a monopoly to be in private hands. It is easy to say it would
:04:49. > :04:53.have been worse if we had not privatised it, but we know from
:04:53. > :04:57.looking at America, where one American in eight look -- lives in a
:04:57. > :05:03.city that did not privatised their energy, on average they pay 11%
:05:03. > :05:07.less, year-on-year. We are going to be ripped off. They say, we will not
:05:07. > :05:12.let them move away from the six-day delivery and five or ten years down
:05:12. > :05:19.the road there are huge pressures. assume you are talking about the
:05:19. > :05:26.Royal Mail? Absolutely right.Was there any privatisation you
:05:26. > :05:34.favoured? British Airways was the only one. If services had got worse,
:05:34. > :05:38.we would have switched. With the telephones, it was because the
:05:38. > :05:42.Treasury would not allow them to borrow. Because the Treasury is
:05:42. > :05:45.filled with mandarins who hate the idea of public ownership. Nothing
:05:45. > :05:47.like the battles of the 1980s to get you going.
:05:47. > :05:50.Now, ever since their votes helped secure Ed Miliband's position, his
:05:50. > :05:53.relationship with the trade unions has been a potential fault line for
:05:53. > :05:56.the Labour leader. This week he called for a "big and historic"
:05:56. > :05:59.change, which would see individual trade unionists given the choice to
:05:59. > :06:04.join the Labour Party rather than be automatically affiliated via their
:06:04. > :06:07.union. But is this really such a radical move? Has Miliband gone far
:06:07. > :06:12.enough to take on the power of the unions? We turned to former stand up
:06:12. > :06:22.comedian and former Labour party worker Matt Forde. This is his Take
:06:22. > :06:41.
:06:41. > :06:44.unions go together like beer and sandwiches, which Harold Wilson used
:06:44. > :06:50.to serve to the unions when they visited him in Downing Street. Much
:06:50. > :06:54.has changed since then. Beer comes from fashionable breweries, and
:06:54. > :07:02.sandwiches are no longer ham and cheese. One thing has not changed,
:07:02. > :07:05.the trade union stranglehold over the Labour Party. I have been a
:07:05. > :07:10.Labour Party supporter all of my life, and before I became a
:07:10. > :07:12.comedian, I used to work for the Labour Party. One of my jobs was to
:07:12. > :07:17.look after the selection process the Labour Party candidates. Take it
:07:17. > :07:22.from me, the level of influence unions have over the Labour Party
:07:22. > :07:29.goes deeper than most people think. You would be amazed at the power
:07:29. > :07:33.they have behind closed doors. Ed Miliband was caught on the hop when
:07:33. > :07:37.Unite tried to rig a selection process in Falkirk. He says he wants
:07:37. > :07:42.to change the relationship with the unions but has not given any pledges
:07:42. > :07:46.or a timescale. Not only is it all froth. Ed Miliband is not a strong
:07:46. > :07:56.enough leader to deliver real change. You just know he is going to
:07:56. > :08:10.
:08:10. > :08:15.The Labour Party is financially dependent on the unions. Tony Blair
:08:15. > :08:19.was the only Labour leader to try to bypass that vested interest by
:08:19. > :08:23.bringing in wealthy donors. As much as it pains me to say it, as a fan
:08:23. > :08:30.of his, that did not end in glory either. Although no charges were
:08:30. > :08:34.ever brought. I will take those two, please. All of the parties have had
:08:34. > :08:37.problems with funding. The Tories cashing in from friends in high
:08:37. > :08:41.places, labour with the unions, and the Lib Dems taking money from a man
:08:41. > :08:46.who turned out to be a common law. Until we have the courage to take on
:08:46. > :08:51.the issue of party funding, we will lurch from scandal to scandal, or in
:08:51. > :08:54.the case of the Lib Dems, from sandal to sandal. Asking the
:08:54. > :08:57.taxpayer to pick up the bill might leave a bitter taste in the mouth,
:08:57. > :09:07.but it is vital if we are going to put people back in charge and
:09:07. > :09:09.
:09:09. > :09:19.clean-up X. I will drink to that. Cheers! -- clean up politics.
:09:19. > :09:22.And joining us here, Matt Ford. You are tough on Mr Miliband, but even
:09:22. > :09:28.Tony Blair says that he is doing what he should have done when he was
:09:28. > :09:31.leader of the Labour Party. It is a step in the right direction. For
:09:31. > :09:35.those of us who have been Labour Party members for a long time, the
:09:35. > :09:38.relationship with the unions has always been difficult. But there is
:09:38. > :09:43.not a lot of detail and I do not have enough faith in him as a leader
:09:43. > :09:46.to believe he will see it out. If he is doing it, he has to do it quick.
:09:46. > :09:52.If this goes into conference week, he will have the Labour Party
:09:52. > :09:56.conference we have not seen the like of since the 1980s. Dominated by
:09:56. > :10:00.internal affairs when they should be speaking to the country. Is Mr
:10:00. > :10:07.Miliband right to want to change the relationship between the unions and
:10:07. > :10:12.the Labour Party? I think it is right... The tragedy of the Blair
:10:12. > :10:15.years is that 60% of members left in disgust. Falkirk did not have more
:10:15. > :10:19.than about 100 members. If you can get the trade unions to sign up
:10:19. > :10:25.people and be involved, this will eat great. I have supported the
:10:25. > :10:28.things he has said, as Len McCluskey has. The current relationship is not
:10:28. > :10:34.particularly good because you do not get the real active involvement. I
:10:34. > :10:37.want local trade unionist is coming into local Labour Party meetings. At
:10:37. > :10:45.my local Labour Party meeting six months ago, there were only about
:10:45. > :10:49.six people in the room. That is true of all parties. Cameron is making
:10:49. > :10:54.the same mistake that Blair did, alienating the core members. When
:10:54. > :10:58.Tony Blair first came in, membership rocketed, amongst ordinary people
:10:58. > :11:05.who said, finally, a party leader who does not feel entrenched in the
:11:06. > :11:12.old union or not down trees, Labour versus Tories. -- boundaries. That
:11:12. > :11:15.is something we want to emulate. Cast the net wider. Try to get
:11:16. > :11:21.everybody in. Tony Blair had that wonderful glow of popularity for a
:11:21. > :11:26.short while. 60% of Labour Party members left under Tony Blair and
:11:26. > :11:34.Gordon Brown. When I ran against Frank Dobson in 2000, there were
:11:34. > :11:37.80,000 members in London. In 2010, we were down to 30,000. Even
:11:37. > :11:42.Unite's internal polling shows that a big chunk of the union membership
:11:42. > :11:47.does not vote Labour, but they vote Conservative, Lib Dem, UKIP, green
:11:48. > :11:53.or whatever. Why do you think, if they have the choice of contributing
:11:53. > :11:59.to the Labour Party, they will take it? Instead of taking that for
:11:59. > :12:03.granted, Labour leaders and trade union leaders had to work and
:12:03. > :12:06.interviews. Where I disagree with you, is that you pretty much guess
:12:06. > :12:13.Ed Miliband. I have dealt with every Labour leader since Callaghan. With
:12:13. > :12:16.the exception of John Smith, Ed Miliband is the strongest. I spent
:12:16. > :12:20.hours with Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. We will get back to you on
:12:20. > :12:26.that. You never hear anything. Ed Miliband will say straight to your
:12:26. > :12:30.face, that is wrong and we are not going to do that. There was a line
:12:30. > :12:33.from Winston Churchill about Clement Attlee. An empty taxi arrived at
:12:33. > :12:37.Westminster and Clement Attlee got out. Just because he is not addicted
:12:37. > :12:43.to soundbites and this personality guff that dominated the Tony Blair
:12:44. > :12:47.years, do not underestimate his determination to change written.
:12:47. > :12:51.you sure this will lead to a reduction in the power of what we
:12:51. > :12:57.used to call union barons? As I am the standard, the way it works is
:12:57. > :13:02.that if you decide not to opt in, a chunk of the political levy does not
:13:02. > :13:06.go to the Labour Party. But it does not go back to you. It stays with
:13:06. > :13:10.the union, which gives them a bigger political fund. These are the
:13:10. > :13:14.details which need to be fleshed out. What happens to the political
:13:14. > :13:20.levy, and to the block vote at conference. How much power do unions
:13:20. > :13:23.have? Ken Livingstone talked about meetings with only six people. That
:13:23. > :13:27.is where the unions are most powerful because they have a couple
:13:27. > :13:31.of affiliate members and they get the candidates they want that do not
:13:31. > :13:36.reflect wider membership. The Tories are having a field day with this at
:13:36. > :13:39.the moment but the fact is, as Ed Miliband pointed out that prime
:13:39. > :13:44.ministers questions, financing of the Tory party is not a pretty
:13:45. > :13:53.sight. I agree. I think you are right that this will end up with
:13:53. > :13:59.state funding. White road do you think that would be right? I think,
:13:59. > :14:04.like democracy, it is the best option out of all the others. The
:14:04. > :14:08.public will not stand for big donors, and the fact that they get
:14:08. > :14:12.titles and dominate Conservative party policy. We cannot do democracy
:14:12. > :14:16.without parties, and the public has a responsibility. The other thing
:14:16. > :14:22.the public has decided is not to join parties as members, so there is
:14:22. > :14:25.no source of money from there. I am in favour of privatisation and
:14:25. > :14:31.against nationalisation, so why would I be in favour of the
:14:31. > :14:35.nationalisation of parties? I am not really. I predict two problems. One,
:14:36. > :14:38.state funding will go to parties already established. And the second
:14:39. > :14:44.thing is that parties, when they have state funding, would behave
:14:44. > :14:47.like the BBC. The money will not be their own and so they will spend it
:14:47. > :14:51.lavishly on salaries and severance payments. Every time you have a
:14:51. > :14:57.change of mood, or a change of leadership and they will pay off the
:14:57. > :15:02.old guard on public money. However, I think these scandals might be less
:15:02. > :15:06.bad than the scandals we are suffering at the moment. Do you
:15:06. > :15:13.think there is a group of people around Mr Miliband urging him to be
:15:13. > :15:17.tough with the unions, so that it is a defining moment for them? We had
:15:17. > :15:22.Lord Mandelson Ellison, David Blunkett. But they are not close to
:15:22. > :15:27.him. I think the people close to him recognise that you've got to keep
:15:27. > :15:32.that link but you need to reform it. I found that Ed Miliband is really
:15:32. > :15:37.open to new ideas, and he is actually interested in that. But he
:15:37. > :15:43.didn't intend to do this, Ken. He's rushed into this. Let's not forget
:15:43. > :15:48.the mistake Neil Kinnock made. He spent his first term as leader
:15:48. > :15:53.dealing with Arthur Scargill and then had no economic policy.
:15:53. > :15:58.change then! We've got Ed Balls and Ed Miliband, moving in the right
:15:58. > :16:02.direction on economic policy, which is why the trade unionists complain.
:16:02. > :16:09.They complain they don't get the control they want over the Labour
:16:10. > :16:16.Party, whereas what did we see? Hedge funds have given the Tory
:16:16. > :16:20.Party �25 million. You are right, the hedge funds benefitted from that
:16:21. > :16:26.tax break, for all asset fund management, including the old
:16:26. > :16:31.Scottish one ones. What has to happen between now and 2015 and the
:16:31. > :16:36.day of the election on this front? The one thing she right about is
:16:36. > :16:40.opening up cross-party talks again. They need to come back into play and
:16:40. > :16:45.all parties need to take the hit on it. I agree with Michael, it is
:16:45. > :16:51.going to be a bit painful, the public at first will be against it
:16:51. > :16:58.but you will get rid of cash for honours and the rest of it. You are
:16:58. > :17:02.against that? Absolutely. Adverts in the papers on billboards, people
:17:02. > :17:10.don't agree with a word of it any how. It is an important part of
:17:10. > :17:18.democracy. The barriers go up. Mrs Thatcher won the argument about the
:17:18. > :17:22.economy before the election in '79. People I think when you hit the four
:17:22. > :17:27.weeks selection campaign disregard everything in the papers. It is not
:17:28. > :17:34.just the election campaign. The parties have a -- the public have a
:17:34. > :17:39.right to be informed. ? Advertising Standards Agency has no
:17:39. > :17:43.control. Political advertising is exempt from their legislation.
:17:43. > :17:48.as well. There wouldn't be any adverts, they would be all lies.
:17:48. > :17:55.open primaries in London, are you going to stand again? No, I made it
:17:55. > :18:03.clear. Due really want me to stand? I do. I'll raise the money. And I
:18:03. > :18:06.will do the fundraising. Welcome to the Ken Livingstone mayoral bid.
:18:06. > :18:10.Now, it's a little bit late, just like our pregnant producer's baby.
:18:10. > :18:13.Good luck, Charlotte! Don't forget the gas and air, and the Blue Nun!
:18:13. > :18:17.We're also expecting our own bundle of joy here in the studio, because
:18:17. > :18:21.Myleene Klass is here to talk about "everyday sexism" and why we still
:18:21. > :18:23.put up with it. Which reminds me - you can find all kinds of
:18:23. > :18:33.knuckle-dragging attitudes on The Twitter, The Fleecebook, and the
:18:33. > :18:36.
:18:36. > :18:39.as the mercury rises, we Brits do what we do best, turn an attractive
:18:39. > :18:41.shade of lobster. And Westminster's been dealing with some heat of its
:18:41. > :18:44.own. Call-me-Dave, Not-so-red Ed and Wee Eck, a.k.a. Alex Salmond, spent
:18:44. > :18:48.most of the week basking in the reflected glory of Andy Murray's
:18:48. > :18:51.Wimbledon victory. Whilst the Commons saw some seriously heated
:18:51. > :18:55.exchanges too. So, where to go? Matthew Wright donned his shorts and
:18:55. > :19:05.shades and headed to the beach. This is his round-up of the political
:19:05. > :19:30.
:19:30. > :19:38.beach? I will give you three guesses where I am. Come on, hurry up. No,
:19:38. > :19:41.the it is not Barbados. No, it is not the Copacabana, it is not own
:19:41. > :19:46.Blackpool Pleasure Beach. I will tell you where I am - right here in
:19:46. > :19:52.the middle of London, on the banks of the river Thames, summer is well
:19:52. > :19:56.and truly here. We've got sun. We've got sand - kind of. We've got the
:19:56. > :20:06.sea - it's a river. The only thing missing this week is a Brit losing
:20:06. > :20:12.in the final rounds of Wimbledon. The waiting is over! Andy Murray is
:20:12. > :20:21.the Wimbledon champion. fashionistas have a lot of advice
:20:21. > :20:24.about not what to wear this summer. Short shorts, strapless dresses,
:20:24. > :20:31.socks and sandals. This is what you should be wearing, although there's
:20:31. > :20:38.not much fashion advice about ahead wear I find. -- about head wear I
:20:38. > :20:43.find. There was a bit of fuss over whether Andy should have been
:20:43. > :20:46.wearing a cap during his first set. Should he or shouldn't he? In the
:20:46. > :20:51.end, Murray survived scorching temperatures on the Centre Court to
:20:51. > :20:55.become the first British man to win Wimbledon in almost 80 years. And
:20:55. > :20:59.almost before you could say first Championship point, he had the PM,
:20:59. > :21:03.the First Minister of Scotland and hordes of other politicians all
:21:03. > :21:06.trying to be his friend. Who would have thought it? He lifted the
:21:06. > :21:10.spirits of the whole country. We were wondering yesterday morning do
:21:10. > :21:18.we dare to dream that this is possible? And he proved absolutely
:21:18. > :21:23.that it was. Just a stone's through from here David Cameron loomed
:21:23. > :21:33.behind our hero on the steps of Number Ten. There's even talk of a
:21:33. > :21:43.
:21:43. > :21:47.claiming to be making all the political weather over party funding
:21:47. > :21:53.it was left to Ed Miliband to raise the temperature and strike back
:21:53. > :21:58.hotly on Labour's relationship with the unions Let me be clear, I do not
:21:58. > :22:04.want any destroyed be paying money to the Labour Party in affiliation
:22:04. > :22:09.fees unless they have deliberately chosen to do so. Even Len McCluskey
:22:09. > :22:14.and Tony Blair agree on this. Odd that. But while the controversy in
:22:14. > :22:21.Falkirk may have started all of this, Ed's handling of the unions
:22:21. > :22:29.may turn out to be his Clause IV moment. Is some of that Blairesque
:22:29. > :22:34.perma tan starting to rub off on him? Ah, as our MPs dream of yet
:22:34. > :22:38.another long holiday, it didn't take long for the feel-good factor
:22:38. > :22:42.sweeping the country to run out in the Commons. If you thought it was
:22:42. > :22:47.hot during Wimbledon, would have needed something stronger than sun
:22:47. > :22:52.cream to withstand the heat generated across the dispatch box
:22:52. > :22:57.during PMQs. Sometimes, children behave badly in the sun. It's the
:22:57. > :23:05.heat. It gets to their little brains. I want party funding reform,
:23:05. > :23:08.he doesn't. I am proud that we have links with ordinary working people.
:23:08. > :23:11.He is bankrolled by a few millionaires. The party of the
:23:11. > :23:16.people, the party of privilege. the unions still have the biggest
:23:16. > :23:22.vote at the conference? Yes. Will they still be able to determine the
:23:22. > :23:28.party's policy? Yes. Will they still have the decisive vote in voting for
:23:28. > :23:33.the Labour leader? Yes, that's the fact. They own it, lock, stock and
:23:33. > :23:37.bloc vote. But are they talking about this beyond the Westminster
:23:37. > :23:42.bubble? Only, I haven't heard anyone discussing it on my beach. I will
:23:42. > :23:49.tell you what they are talking about down the pub though, and that's the
:23:49. > :23:55.obscene payouts to ex-BBC bosses. Why did you not put your foot down?
:23:55. > :24:02.You're head of HR there. You are head of HR. I think the overwhelming
:24:02. > :24:06.focus was to get numbers out of the door as quickly as possible. It is a
:24:06. > :24:13.licence fee, it is the licence fee payers' money. It is not your money.
:24:13. > :24:17.It is our money. I understand that, madam chairman, and I accept that,
:24:17. > :24:23.the BBC has accepted many of the criticisms that were in the report,
:24:23. > :24:28.and too often we were too generous. Hm, and once they've licked that, my
:24:28. > :24:37.guess is the talk down the pub will switch to the inflation-busting pay
:24:37. > :24:41.rise that could be coming to MPs. �6,000 extra? Are you kidding? I
:24:42. > :24:48.will tell you something, it's hot work on this political weather
:24:48. > :24:58.malarkey. Time for me to do a spot more chillaxing. Andrew, Michael,
:24:58. > :24:59.
:24:59. > :25:03.Ken, wish you were here, guys. That was Matthew Wright topping up
:25:03. > :25:12.his tan on the Sandy beaches of the South Bank Centre in London. Our
:25:12. > :25:15.Miranda is with us. MPs' pay. One MP described that IPSA, the regulatory
:25:15. > :25:20.proposals, is completely crackers. Yes, it is interesting this isn't
:25:20. > :25:25.it, because the set of proposals, particularly cutting back on the
:25:25. > :25:32.golden goodbyes, ending the free dinners, much of the stuff that
:25:32. > :25:39.would regularise how MPs are paid are investigate good ideas, but as a
:25:39. > :25:42.package with an 8% plus pay rise is unrealistic in the current climate.
:25:42. > :25:47.The fact that the rise has been postponed until after the election
:25:47. > :25:52.makes it worse. It will make it an issue in the election. There's never
:25:52. > :25:56.a good time to raise MPs' pay, that's obvious, but I would suggest
:25:56. > :26:00.that probably just about the worst time is when you've frozen public
:26:00. > :26:05.sector pay everywhere else. Yes, although as Miranda says, it is a
:26:05. > :26:08.package, not just a pay rise. It is reductions in some of these
:26:08. > :26:13.allowances. Ken and I were discussing this before we came on.
:26:13. > :26:16.He and I for instance don't remember this �15 for dinner that. Didn't
:26:16. > :26:24.exist in those days, so some extraordinary new additions have
:26:24. > :26:27.been made. It was 2001. After that election, they had this big increase
:26:27. > :26:33.in the expenses. Obviously that's when they brought in meals allowance
:26:33. > :26:38.in. When you and I were an MP you could just about afford to employ
:26:38. > :26:42.one-and-a-half people, and it went to four. I have MPs trying to
:26:42. > :26:46.persuade me that they are hard done by. I'm quite prepared to take over
:26:47. > :26:53.the Chancellor's job or the Prime Minister's job tomorrow for the
:26:53. > :26:58.basic state pension. That couldn't cure the deficit. I want to change
:26:58. > :27:03.things. If you came into politics to make money, you have made the wrong
:27:03. > :27:08.choice. They were paid less than chief Superintendents and the Mayor
:27:08. > :27:13.of London, so the comparators published today favour the MPs
:27:13. > :27:17.getting more. If they are not going to get more, I've always argued if
:27:17. > :27:22.some MPs are skillful they should be paid more, allow them to make money
:27:22. > :27:27.outside Parliament. What I think is very dangerous is what Ed Miliband
:27:27. > :27:32.is proposing, a cap, hinge he is saying of 15%, on what people can
:27:33. > :27:38.make outside Parliament. As an example, an MP who is also a
:27:38. > :27:42.journalist, can make a multiple of his MP's salary for a very few
:27:42. > :27:48.hours' work a week, so it doesn't distract him from doing his MP's
:27:48. > :27:53.job. Is it part of the argument over MPs' pay, is it part of a process
:27:53. > :27:58.that's making politics less attractive for people to go into?
:27:58. > :28:02.think the problem is that at the moment there's this vast gulf
:28:02. > :28:07.between the world of politics and the general public. Almost every
:28:07. > :28:11.story that comes up makes it wider, and that is one of them. Even those
:28:11. > :28:16.politicians who have been rushing to take a sort of virtuous position and
:28:16. > :28:20.say, I couldn't possibly take a penny of it, they are still talking
:28:21. > :28:26.about themselves. It is endlessly dull to the general public and they
:28:26. > :28:30.don't like it. They know that average earnings are �26,000.
:28:30. > :28:36.are in the top 5% of earners. Absolutely. It may not be enough,
:28:36. > :28:41.but... The issue of an MP taking a couple of hours once a week to write
:28:41. > :28:48.a newspaper column, that isn't going to undermine what you do. But I was
:28:48. > :28:58.really shocked to discover this. David Blunkett is now employed by
:28:58. > :28:58.
:28:58. > :29:06.Rupert Murdoch on �90,000 a year. Wow! He pops up with the same lines
:29:06. > :29:12.as in the papers. We saw William Hague get upset when somebody put
:29:12. > :29:18.out... There is no doubt Mr Blunkett if he was here would say he can
:29:18. > :29:24.think for himself. If Ed Miliband's policy were to be pursued, nobody
:29:24. > :29:29.could be paid more than 15% of an MP's salary to be a Minister. A
:29:29. > :29:33.senior Minister of a Prime Minister. People on the whole don't say we
:29:33. > :29:38.can't have MPs being Prime Minister. Supposing there wasn't the
:29:38. > :29:48.constraint of public opinion or the current age of austerity, in your
:29:48. > :29:52.view what would a decent salary for an MP be? We appointed an
:29:52. > :29:59.independent committee to decide this, and the answer is, �6,000 more
:29:59. > :30:03.than they are getting now. It is one of the most amazing job is. I would
:30:03. > :30:11.have done it for half the money. You are embedded in the constituency,
:30:11. > :30:15.which I really enjoyed. You did not take half the money, did you?
:30:15. > :30:22.is the danger, at the next election we will get a Dutch auction of
:30:22. > :30:26.people saying, I will only take half the salary. That is very dangerous.
:30:26. > :30:32.Is Lord Patten is watching tonight, I am not doing this for half the
:30:32. > :30:40.money. I can tell you that three of us would not get out of bed for what
:30:40. > :30:45.an MP gets now. I think you have hit on an important point. For a lot of
:30:45. > :30:49.MPs, their peer group that they were at university with, they go into the
:30:49. > :30:55.media, into law, into the city, and they see their peer group make a
:30:56. > :31:00.tonne of money. A fairer tax system would deal with that, but I don't
:31:00. > :31:08.think you want to go down there. your campaign manager, we will go
:31:08. > :31:11.down that road together. We had a row the Prime Minister 's questions.
:31:11. > :31:19.Does it play outside the bubble that we are on? Does it cut through to
:31:19. > :31:22.the public? As PMQ 's was about to start, I was talking to a group of
:31:22. > :31:26.secondary school children about politics and why they should care,
:31:26. > :31:30.and how it was relevant to their lives and important for them to get
:31:30. > :31:37.involved. I encouraged them to watch, and then I left and I
:31:37. > :31:39.watched, and I was horrified at what I had exposed them to. But it was
:31:39. > :31:46.about recovering them around the leader of the opposition who took a
:31:46. > :31:51.pasting in the previous week and I suspect it did help him. We saw the
:31:51. > :31:55.first ripped winning a major Wimbledon title since Virginia Wade.
:31:55. > :32:01.-- the first Briton. It was a great thing to see Andy Murray do it,
:32:01. > :32:10.Scottish and British, as he has made clear. But is there not something
:32:10. > :32:14.that at the way the politicians try to hang on to his shorts? I got
:32:14. > :32:18.invited to go to Wimbledon when I was mayor, but I did not want to sit
:32:18. > :32:26.in the blazing heat for five or six hours, when I can watch at home with
:32:26. > :32:29.a nice glass of wine. And not a glass of wine? Miranda, we have two
:32:29. > :32:31.leave it there. Thank you. Now, John Inverdale's comments about new
:32:31. > :32:37.Wimbledon champion Marion Bartoli not being a looker got me thinking
:32:37. > :32:40.this week. I'm told Michael was told the very same as a young lad by his
:32:40. > :32:44.mum, but it didn't hold him back and today he's the nation's leading
:32:44. > :32:49.trainspotter. So just you carry on, Marion, inspired by Michael's
:32:49. > :32:59.example. Anyway, tonight we put casual everyday sexism in this
:32:59. > :33:08.
:33:08. > :33:15.controversy this week and the BBC found itself apologising after his
:33:16. > :33:21.remark that Wimbledon champion Marion Bartoli was not a looker. It
:33:21. > :33:26.resulted in a volley of criticism. wonder if her dad said to her when
:33:26. > :33:31.she was 12, 13, 14, you are never going to be a lookalike Sharapova,
:33:31. > :33:37.you are never going to be five foot 11 with long legs is, so to
:33:37. > :33:41.compensate for that, you have to be the most determined fighter. There
:33:41. > :33:46.may be parity in money at Wimbledon, but the glory is not shared so
:33:46. > :33:49.equally. After the Prime Minister ignored Virginia Wade's
:33:49. > :33:55.achievements, while revelling in Andy Murray's Centre Court Vic
:33:55. > :34:01.three. To become the first British player to win Wimbledon for 77 years
:34:01. > :34:04.will write the go down in our history books. Mr Speaker, let me
:34:04. > :34:13.join the Prime Minister in paying tribute to Andy Murray for his
:34:13. > :34:18.fantastic entry, following Virginia Wade's big tree in 1977. Boris
:34:18. > :34:23.Johnson was always -- also pulled up for suggesting women go to
:34:23. > :34:31.university to get a husband. And William Hague was accused of calling
:34:31. > :34:40.an MPA stupid woman. So, is society still prepared to put up with
:34:40. > :34:48.casual, everyday sexism? Tell me, to what extent is there still a problem
:34:48. > :34:53.with what is referred to as everyday sexism? I think the key word, as we
:34:53. > :34:56.were looking at the footage, is the word casual. There has been so much
:34:56. > :35:01.confusion, if you have been on the receiving end, you cannot take a
:35:01. > :35:05.joke. When people are judged, is it because of their sex or because they
:35:05. > :35:10.are useless at the job they have given? At the same time, we do not
:35:10. > :35:15.do ourselves any favours. You only have two log onto a social network
:35:15. > :35:20.to see a huge circle drawn around a woman's bottom or her belly, and the
:35:20. > :35:25.question, is she good enough to do her job? I do not see anybody
:35:25. > :35:31.drawing circles around you and questioning your capability.
:35:31. > :35:35.circles are not big enough. Have you been a victim of casual sexism?
:35:35. > :35:40.would not save victim, but I have been on the receiving end. Possibly
:35:40. > :35:44.because people wonder if I have the capability to do the job that I do.
:35:44. > :35:48.Maybe the expectation is low because they think I have come from a pop
:35:48. > :35:52.band, and surprise is high if I can play a piano Concerto. I must appear
:35:52. > :35:57.to be some kind of dichotomy, one minute in a bikini and the next
:35:57. > :36:01.minute at a piano. But I am fortunate. I got the opportunity to
:36:01. > :36:04.go to university, not to find a husband, but to give myself the
:36:04. > :36:09.freedom of choice, to be able to give myself the tools to make those
:36:10. > :36:12.choices as to where I would like to go in business. Given your
:36:12. > :36:22.confidence and your achievements, when you are faced with casual
:36:22. > :36:27.sexism, what is the proper reaction? Is it to ignore it? Definitely not.
:36:27. > :36:30.John Inverdale's comments are completely unacceptable, and that is
:36:30. > :36:35.evidently sexism in play. You cannot say those comments because you are
:36:35. > :36:41.questioning if she can do a job that she does not look a certain way. The
:36:41. > :36:45.comment from Boris, that is a better example of casual sexism at play,
:36:45. > :36:50.because we do bat it off as a joke. Women are very good at taking those
:36:50. > :36:57.jokes, and sometimes we are a bit nervous about appearing unable to
:36:57. > :37:03.take the joke. I like Boris, on the whole. I like him as a buffoon, but
:37:03. > :37:10.at the same time, you cannot make a sweeping statement, especially when
:37:10. > :37:13.you are on a trip as an ambassador. In this day, when the majority of
:37:13. > :37:18.students are female, and the majority of officers of student
:37:18. > :37:23.unions are female, it was a bizarre comment. It was not bizarre, it was
:37:23. > :37:28.downright rude and ill informed. That is a snapshot that the people
:37:28. > :37:32.of Malaysia will see of our country and our leaders. It is rude. Also,
:37:32. > :37:36.it does not show him supporting women. Women, especially in
:37:36. > :37:41.developing countries, go to get education to give them that freedom
:37:41. > :37:44.and opportunities they do not get the chance to have. When people in
:37:44. > :37:48.power show that level of disrespect for what women are trying to go
:37:48. > :37:54.through, it is no surprise that the inequality is there. That respect
:37:54. > :38:01.has to be shown by male leaders. I could ask what school you MPs go to
:38:01. > :38:05.to find your mistresses. Good question. Sadly, we have no MPs here
:38:05. > :38:08.tonight or else I would ask that question. Some people have been
:38:09. > :38:15.tweeting about this. Twitter is not always the best place for sensible
:38:15. > :38:21.opinion. But are we making too much of it? We are not. This has been one
:38:21. > :38:28.of our best subjects and I agree with everything you have said.
:38:28. > :38:32.about MPs and mistresses? The John Inverdale on the Boris Johnson
:38:32. > :38:36.comment, the William Hague comment and even to some extent David
:38:36. > :38:41.Cameron. Going back to David Cameron saying, calm down, to a woman member
:38:41. > :38:46.of Parliament, these are extraordinary examples. These people
:38:46. > :38:50.are on their toes stay and night to say the right thing, trained to give
:38:51. > :38:55.100 interviews and not make a slip. If they are slipping into casual
:38:55. > :38:59.sexism, it shows that the problem is pretty deep. When we were in the
:38:59. > :39:05.House of Commons it was much worse. There was a smaller number of women
:39:05. > :39:09.and generally to rocketry comments when women got up on either side.
:39:09. > :39:15.Getting more women in is really going to help. They have to be able
:39:15. > :39:18.to do the job. We do not just get them in because we want to have a
:39:18. > :39:24.positive discrimination. I want women to be able to do the job, and
:39:24. > :39:28.they can do the job. We get many more men applying for a
:39:28. > :39:34.Parliamentary seat than women. Part of the reason is the scenes that you
:39:34. > :39:41.see, week after week people shouting at each other. I hated it. This is
:39:41. > :39:48.an extraordinary discussion 34 years after Britain produced a woman Prime
:39:48. > :39:56.Minister. We used to have casual racism in this country. That has
:39:56. > :40:02.substantially reduced. And rightly so. So why do we still have this
:40:02. > :40:07.kind of casual sexism? There is a huge lack of respect for what women
:40:07. > :40:12.bring to the table. There is Page 3, and so much of the depiction of
:40:12. > :40:18.women in the media. I have to disagree on that level. I am a
:40:18. > :40:22.feminist and many people misunderstand what feminism stands
:40:22. > :40:26.for. Those images are everywhere, whether you are in a bikini, whether
:40:26. > :40:34.you are walking down the street. You see those images yourself. But I
:40:34. > :40:39.think that women have to be shown in a positive light, in their
:40:39. > :40:43.universities, in their choices to be a stay at home mum, in their choices
:40:43. > :40:48.to not go to work and not be berated for how they choose childcare. All
:40:48. > :40:54.of the onus lands on them. They are decision-makers within the home.
:40:54. > :40:58.However, that respect is not given back to those women. One answer to
:40:58. > :41:04.the question is that the law has been brought to bear in the case of
:41:04. > :41:09.homophobia and racism, but not in the realm of sexism. John Inverdale
:41:09. > :41:18.was on TV the next day still commenting. Had he been racist, or
:41:18. > :41:22.even ageist, we would have been up in arms. It is a different country.
:41:22. > :41:29.In the 80s, when you were coming to national prominence, a big part of
:41:29. > :41:34.your agenda was race and gender, and you won most of the arguments.
:41:34. > :41:37.have moved an incredible way. In 87, the Tory party was pushing a bill
:41:37. > :41:41.through parliament saying you could not discuss homosexuality in
:41:41. > :41:47.schools. Now you have a Tory Prime Minister almost making it
:41:47. > :41:51.compulsory. But we have not made as much progress with women. But it has
:41:51. > :41:59.been failed. Why can't she take a joke? I just said she had a big
:41:59. > :42:03.farm. It is not accept the ball. also have the media, which likes to
:42:03. > :42:08.build up celebrities. It is easy to blame the media, but who are they
:42:08. > :42:12.trying to do it for? You only have to read comments where women are
:42:12. > :42:16.commenting on other women. We do not help ourselves, often, but it is
:42:16. > :42:21.easy to point the finger and say, it was the press that did it. The
:42:21. > :42:25.appetite is there. You only have to stand in the women's toilets and
:42:25. > :42:29.this in two women bringing down other women. She does not deserve
:42:29. > :42:36.the job, she married her husband for the money, different comments about
:42:36. > :42:39.other women. What do you do about that? Women have to support each
:42:39. > :42:43.other. They have to have confidence in themselves, and not feel that
:42:43. > :42:50.until they find another half, or fine job satisfaction, they are half
:42:50. > :42:53.a person. I am raising two little girls, and I want to raise two
:42:53. > :42:58.little civilians who will feel confident that whether they become a
:42:58. > :43:01.baker or a banker they have the capability and the choice to do it,
:43:01. > :43:05.and that somebody, a man or a woman in a position of power will not ring
:43:05. > :43:10.their choices down, especially when they pay into a tax system that pays
:43:10. > :43:13.for their everything. I think they are going to be all right. Thank you
:43:13. > :43:17.very much. That's your lot for tonight, folks.
:43:17. > :43:21.But not for us, because with a report claiming half of us fall in
:43:21. > :43:23.love on a first date, Ken is now on a promise with Barbie Portillo. I'm
:43:23. > :43:28.feeling left out. Myleene's feeling physically sick. But we leave you
:43:28. > :43:31.tonight with news of a brand new political grouping. They've even had