with me are the journalist and author yasmin alibhai—brown and kate andrews, director of news at the institute of economic affairsf tomorrow's front pages are already in. the observer reports that a new political party with up to £50m in funding is secretly in development. the mail on sunday claims the prime minister has been forced into a u—turn over police stop and search powers following several weeks of violence on the capital's streets. the telegraph also leads with crime levels — home secretary amber rudd has written an article for the paper claiming that cuts are not to blame for the rise in violence. the sunday times says sergei and yulia skripal could be offered new identities and given the opportunity to resettle in the united states. the sunday express has a story about the number of patients flying overseas for private medical treatment quadrupling in four years — apparently in response to long waits on the nhs. a variety of stories making the front pages, with the recent violence in london claiming several of the sunday headlines. let's see what our reviewers make of it all. starting with the mail on

our guests joining me tonight are the journalist and author yasmin alibhai—brown and kate andrews, director of news at the institute of economic affairss the police should feel confident to "stop and search" people, to combat the recent spike in violent crime. he said such powers could help make london safer, if used in a targeted way. 300 extra officers have now been deployed, after six people were killed in shootings and stabbings in the last seven days. here's simonjones. lives lost, families grieving, some living in fear. and the growing question, what can be done to tackle violent crime. with calls for the police to make more use of controversial powers to stop and search suspects for weapons. the number of searches has fallen dramatically in recent years amid fears that poorer areas and ethnic minority groups were being disproportionately targeted. when stop and search is used properly, it's an invaluable tool to the police. we want more targeted, intelligence—led stop and search. hundreds of extra officers are on the streets of london this weekend. but some academics question whether using stop and search significantly reduces

the public understanding of economics at the cato institute. he was have of public policy at the institute of economic affairs and have of economic research both of which are located in the united kingdom. he will share his insights and the broader global context. i recently returned from switzerland where i have the honor of meeting with the economist at this the swiss government that administer the debt break. i can't wait to share with you the incredible success of this fiscal rule and the potential it offers for the united states think you so much for joining us. and also on c-span. is with great pleasure that i now invite fester storm to share his presentation with us. thank you. i think you a lot. i thank you for give me the opportunity to spend some time with you trying to first of all explain the swiss debt break and how does it work. and if time allows also look with you what the current discussions are in switzerland with respect to that debt break. were actually way ahead. we are considering the situation as to how to deal with it. let's first look at that sweet -- this was debt break. here i show you the general government growth de

the public understanding of economics at the kato institute. he was head of public policy at the institute of economic affairs and at the center of policy studies located in the united kingdom. bourne completed a review of fiscal rules and sharing his insights in the broader complex. >> i recently returned from switzerland where i had the honor of meeting with the economist at the swiss government that administered the swiss debt break. i can't wait to share the incredible success of the fiscal rule and the potential it offers for the united states. so thank you so much for joining us here online and always on c-span and it is with great pleasure that i now invite professor sturm to share his presentation with us. [ applause ] >>> thank you. thank you for giving me the opportunity to spend some time with you trying to first of all, explain the swiss debt break and how does it work and perhaps if time allows, if time allows to look with you what the current discussions are in switzerland with respect to the debt break. you will notice that we're actually, way ahead as compared to other countries where discussing what i would consider a problem a

the frictionless trade say many of our manufacturing jobs depend on. so let's get the other side of the arguing from julian jessup who is from the institute of economic affairs and you are firmly fault for leaving the customs union and she what was that there are some advantages in remaining within a customs union it would mean tariff free trade would make it easier for us to replicate the free trade deals that the e.u. has with the rest of the world and it would be a partial solution to the irish problem but against that i think those benefits could be achieved in other ways we can get a comprehensive free trade deal that eliminates tariffs and reduces non-tariff barriers we have streamlined customs arrangements that minimize the problems of custom checks anyway and of course if we remain within a customs union we missed that big prize of being able to our own free trade deals with the rest of the work for for which sorts of businesses would this be a benefit because other people we've asked on the television today have said they can't really think of any apart from perhaps some very high end things a bentley cars or expensive whisky that gets sold in japan

the guardian columnist, polly toynbee and kate andrews from the institute of economic affairs join usask you. this time last week, the news was unfolding about the missile attack on syria, which of course we now know british forces were involved in. how do you think that has played out as the week has progressed? and so much else has happened this week, that oddly it seems something important hasn't had that importance. putin is not the sort of man who takes something like that on the chin and and says, fine. we wait to see still whether there may be some kind of comeback in terms of cyber attacks or anything else. maybe she would get away with it, in which case it might be forgotten is not important incident, but it was important in terms of not consulting parliament, and that is where parliament, and that is where parliament as a whole would have voted against had they had the chance. kate, it is an interesting point the polly makes, there is no greater decision a prime minister ever makes that that of sending military personnel into some kind of action. and yet the moment feels lik

the i.e. institute of economic affairs he's written a critic this week saying the gender pay gap reporting isn't fit for purpose i asked him why he isn't the supporter two problems first of all the data themselves are not accurately reported so we often read that men are paid differently from women as if it paid differently for doing different for doing the same job when in fact it's other differences for example where they're working full time or part time or or a type of occupation that they're doing so the data are misrepresented but what i hear say is that here is a comeback that one's very own forgive me i was just going over just point with supporters of the law to say well the data did put people into court files whether they're management or below management so there was some attempt to take into consideration the difference in jobs how do you respond to that well not enough i mean one of the biggest most important differences between full time and part time incomes which isn't reflected in these data at all but also even to the extent we do find out that men are overrepresented in some

the gender pay gap is as much as 67%. many of the highest paid employees at airlines are pilots— and the majority of pilots are men. kate andrews is from the institute of economic affairsence does it make for business? why should we put it right now? it is important to give women the opportunity to advance, to reward them for their success, to give them the same trajectory at if they wanted as men. organisations should work on that. if you break down the official statistics, that includes full—time workers and part—time workers. part—time work tends to be less well paid. if you break it down in the uk, the full—time pay gap is 9.1%. the part—time pay gap is negative 1.5%. in favour of women. that is more flattering for women. when we start to break down comparisons like for like, we find that a lot of this goes out the window. we need to be honest about the fact that a lot of these pay gap figures, do not in a nyway these pay gap figures, do not in anyway give the full picture of a quality in the workplace. and that is the issue. it is notoriously difficult to work out on a like—for—like basis what is actually happening, because there are so many reasons why it might b

who is the party's equality spokesperson, and to kate andrews from a think tank called the institute of economic affairshe gender pay gap is more or less meaningful depending upon whether you are comparing men and women in like—for—like circumstances, u nfortu nately like—for—like circumstances, unfortunately these pay gap measures do that in no capacity, they do not breakdown drops, or age, do that in no capacity, they do not breakdown drops, orage, or experience, or time taken out of the workforce, so you might as well say that you are comparing senior managers to junior managers, people with blue eyes to people with brown eyes, it would have the same level of legitimacy, which is to say, no legitimacy at all. there are issues in regard to the data but what is clear is that there is disparity between... there is a gender pay gap and what is more important is how we close the gender pay gap, what actions will be taken by organisations to close the gender pay gap and i think that is the key... if you acknowledge there is issues with the data, the second conversation is not strictly releva nt conversatio

christopher snowden is from the free market think tank the institute of economic affairs — who opposesnd no longer able to buy the original recipes and quite a few of the most iconic soft drink brands because they have had the sugar ripped out of them under pressure from government. the public health minister says that our teenagers consume nearly a bathtub of sugary drinksa yearon consume nearly a bathtub of sugary drinks a year on average and that fuels are worrying obesity trend. and we know that obesity is one of the things that the national health service are really struggling to deal with, costing the nhs many many millions every year. so surely even if this helps a bit it is worth doing? but it won't help a bit. it is all negative and no positive as far as is all negative and no positive as farasi is all negative and no positive as faras i can is all negative and no positive as far as i can see. we have seen what sugary drink taxes do in other taxes, they have been tried before and have not had an effect on the obesity. but the real outcomes will be undeniable. there be some deb

the understanding of economics at the cato institute. before joining cato bourne was head of public policy at the economic affairs and had an economic researchat the center for policy studies, both of which are located in the united kingdom. board recently completed a review of fiscal rules and he will share his insights in the broader global contacts. my name is remina boccia here at the heritage foundation and i recently returned from switzerland where i had the honor of meeting with the economist that administer the swiss debt break. i cannot wait to share with you the incredible success of this fiscal role and the potential it offers for the united states. thank you so much for joining us here, online and also in c-span. it is with great pleasure that i now invite the professor to share his presentation with us. professor storck. [applause] >> thank you. thank you allow for giving me the opportunity to spend sometime with you you tried to first of all explain the swiss debt break, how does that work and perhaps if time allows, also what the current discussions are in switzerland with the sector outbreak. you know that we are way ahead co

the hudson institute. what is its positioning? >> we're dedicated to promoting u.s. international leadership. we are center right. we do a lot of work on international affairs, on u.s. national security. and economics as well. >> when it comes to mike pompeo specifically, you had an op-ed. >> i think he has a chance to be a transformative secretary of state. he has the full confidence of the president. this is a man if you know him, he's a strategic thinker. he has got a very impressive background. he graduated first in his class at west point. went to harvard. was a successful businessman. served three terms in congress as -- in the house of representatives. served on the intelligence committee. has an amazing grasp of public policy. he has an ability to connect with people. he's great listener. has strong convictions, but knows that the president is the one who is largely calling the shots. he's there to advise the president. they've developed a terrific relationship as cia director. they didn't know each other terribly well. they spent a lot of time together in the briefings. the president trusted him with the most sensitive dossier yet, the secret trip to pyongyang to meet with kim jong-un. and

the hudson institute. what is its positioning? >> we're dedicated to promoting u.s. international leadership. we are center right. we do a lot of work on international affairs, on u.s. national security. and economics as well. >> when it comes to mike pompeo specifically, you had an

the affairs of the imf and how they link and america's debt and deficit. adam posen is with us from the peterson institute. he has been wonderful and providing perspective on monetary economicsl on it in this hour. infirst, we need to bring kevin cirilli. let me bring up a morning must-read. this is how fast the new cycle is. a wonderful essay over at "the washington post." 11 senators are about to make a big mistake could there ar. there are no ethical questions hanging over mr. pompeo. it would breach two centuries of president in which the committee has carefully examined the credentials and qualifications of the president's nominee. i guess it's good news with the democrat coming over late last night, but why is this occurring? why are we going after a guy who is squeaky clean? kevin: two things -- it's because you have democrats now just a couple months out from the midterms. a lot of 2020 posturing going on. coupley, as i told you weeks ago i believe, mr. pompeo is safe. support, atkamp's centrist democrat of for reelection. tom: she's got to get reelected and republican dakotas. kevin: it's going to be safe. what is more interesting is gina haspel for cia director tha