PAXMAN: Do you believe that an individual can earn too much money?

BLAIR: I don't really - it is not - no, it's not a view I have. Do you mean that we should cap someone's income? Not really, no. Why? What is the point? You can spend ages trying to stop the highest paid earners earning the money but in an international market like today, you probably would drive them abroad. What does that matter? Surely the important thing is to level up those people that don't have opportunity in our society.

PAXMAN: But where is the justice in taxing someone who earns Ł34,000 a year, which is about enough to cover a mortgage on a one-bedroom flat in outer London, at the same rate as someone who earns Ł34 million. Where is the justice?

BLAIR: The person who earns Ł34 million, if they're paying the top rate of tax, will pay far more tax on the Ł34 million than the person on Ł34,000.

PAXMAN: I am asking you about the rate of tax.

BLAIR: I know and what I am saying to you is the rate is less important in this instance than the overall amount of tax that people would pay. You know what would happen, if you go back to the days of high top rates of tax. All that would happen is that those people, who are small in number actually, and you can spend a lot of time getting after the person earning millions of pound a year, and then what you don't do is apply the real energy where it's necessary on things like the children's tax credit, the Working Families Tax Credit, the minimum wage, the New Deal, the things that have helped people on lower incomes.

PAXMAN: But where is the justice in it?

BLAIR: When you say where is the justice in that, the justice for me is concentrated on lifting incomes of those that don't have a decent income. It's not a burning ambition for me to make sure that David Beckham earns less money.

PAXMAN: But Prime Minister, the gap between rich and poor has by widened while you have been in office.

BLAIR: A lot of those figures are based on a couple of years ago before many of the measures we took came into effect. But the lowest income families in this country are benefiting from the government. Their incomes are rising. The fact that you have some people at the top end earning more

PAXMAN: ..Benefiting more!

BLAIR: If they are earning more, fine, they pay their taxes.

PAXMAN: But is it acceptable for gap between rich and poor to widen?

BLAIR: It is acceptable for those people on lower incomes to have their incomes raised. It is unacceptable that they are not given the chances. To me, the key thing is not whether the gap between those who, between the person who earns the most in the country and the person that earns the least, whether that gap is.

PAXMAN: So it is acceptable for gap to widen between rich and poor?

BLAIR: It is not acceptable for poor people not to be given the chances they need in life.

PAXMAN: That is not my question.

BLAIR: I know it's not your question but it's the way I choose to answer it. If you end up going after those people who are the most wealthy in society, what you actually end up doing is in fact not even helping those at the bottom end.

PAXMAN: So the answer to the straight question is it acceptable for gap between rich and poor to get wider, the answer you are saying is yes.

BLAIR: No, it's not what I am saying. What I am saying is that my task is

PAXMAN: You are not saying no.

BLAIR: But I don't think that is the issue

PAXMAN: You may not think it is the issue, but it is the question. Is it OK for the gap to get wider?

BLAIR: It may be the question. The way I choose to answer it is to say the job of government is make sure that those at the bottom get the chances.

PAXMAN: With respect, people see you are asked a straightforward question and they see you not answering it.

BLAIR: Because I choose to answer it in the way that I'm answering it.

PAXMAN: But you are not answering it.

BLAIR: I am answering it. What I am saying is the most important thing is to level up, not level down.

PAXMAN: Is it acceptable for gap between rich and poor to get bigger?

BLAIR: What I am saying is the issue isn't in fact whether the very richest person ends up becoming richer. The issue is whether the poorest person is given the chance that they don't otherwise have.

PAXMAN: I understand what you are saying. The question is about the gap.

BLAIR: Yes, I know what your question is. I am choosing to answer it in my way rather than yours.

PAXMAN: But you're not answering it.

BLAIR: I am.

PAXMAN: You are answering another question.

BLAIR: I am answering actually in the way that I want to answer it. I tell you why I want to answer it in this way. Because if you end up saying no, actually my task is to stop the person earning a lot of money earning a lot of money, you waste all your time and energy, taking money off the people who are very wealthy when in today's world, they probably would move elsewhere and make their money. What you are not asking me about, which would be a more fruitful line of endeavour, is what are you doing for the poorest people to give them a boost.

PAXMAN: Let's talk about tax. You have promised...

BLAIR: Why don't we talk about the poorest of society and what we are doing for them.

PAXMAN: I assume you want to be Prime Minister. I just want to be an interviewer. Can we stick to that arrangement?