24/06/2013 Daily Politics

Daily Politics. The Prime Minister says he's "deeply concerned" by

claims that a former undercover police officer was part of an

operation to smear the family of the murdered black teenager Stephen

Lawrence. Rob it's an extremely important issue for my local

community. To find out the police were withholding information, you do

so on the basis that you are trusting everyone... This was

necessary because of the failings back then. If the allegations are

true, it is really alarming. Having heard Jack Straw talk about this,

were officers really going to provide that information to either

himself, who at the time was the head of the police authority, or the

MacPherson enquiry. This special demonstration squad that this

undercover officer was part of was funded by the Home Office. They were

set up to investigate political activity. Why you would think the

family of the murdered teenager were political activists because they

were campaigning for justice for their dead son is beyond me, but

they were there to investigate political activity. Who sanctioned

it and who with they reporting to? We know that the former commissioner

said he knew nothing of them. If it was funded by the Home Office then

someone quite senior knew about it. I remember this very well. At the

time that the MacPherson report was first written and was about to be

published, lots of it was leaked from within the Home Office. It was

a real scandal at the time. That needs to be looked at again. What do

you want to hear from the Home Secretary? An independent public

enquiry. It cannot go through the IPC sea, but the IPCC will end up

with the police investigating the police. It will not be good enough.

Even -- either it is the MacPherson enquiry again, which I suspect can't

be the case, but the new enquiry needs to look at this. Do you agree

that the level of enquiry we need? do. It's very worrying. It can't be

done internally, unfortunately. Sadly, this happens with a lot of

public bodies, but particularly trusting the police is essential,

particularly where issues of race are concerned. An independent

enquiry is needed. What about reaction from the family? I'm due to

call the trust. My officers made arrangements for me to do that. I

will be speaking to them when I get off the air. I would imagine that

the family are saddened by the fact that their suspicions have been

proven to be true, because they were always suspicious about why the

police were asking about so many details. But also to find out that

the inquiry, which was such a milestone for race relations in this

country, is still being dragged into the gutter by the actions of

Metropolitan Police officers. This is people at senior level. Police

officers must be demoralised if this constantly keeps happening. But the

senior officers who made these decisions, we've got to hold them to

account. People are losing faith in the political process because they

see these people are very senior levels not paying the price for

being dishonest. They may not have been financially corrupt, but this

is a form of corruption, it deserves people to pay a heavy price. Any

organisation is capable of some way of being secretive. We have seen it

at the CQC. Embarrassing reports. People are fed up with this. It is

time when politicians set up enquiries, that these things come

with the full backing and the force of the law, so that people treat

them with respect. That they do not hide information in this way.

Clive Efford, thank you very much. Now let's have a look at the week

ahead: Tomorrow 1,000 members of the National Union of Teachers are

expected to descend on Westminster. Continuing their dispute over pay

and conditions. On Wednesday, the Chancellor takes

centre-stage when he outlines the Government's spending cuts for

15/16. On Thursday, Danny Alexander is outlining plans for

infrastructure and the Office of National Statistics will be

publishing quarrel figures for growth. So joining us from a cloudy

College Green are kem kep kem from the Times and Alliance & Leicester

from the myrrh. Norman Kember, the negotiations are over, and no blood

has been spilled, are you surprised. -- myrrh.

There has been surprise. Vince Cable has said that there has

been a fight over this. The key figure is to remember at this stage,

that this is presented in a harmonious deal. The Treasury looks

like they have acted efficiently and thoroughly. The real test comes on

Wednesday afternoon when George Osborne gives the details to the

House when the officials over Whitehall sit down to try to make it

work. Alliance & Leicester, I was looking

forward to seeing somebody sent to the star chamber but how painful

will the cuts be? -- James Lyons. There is no doubt that the cuts will

be difficult. They will be deep. They come after a string of other

austerity measures. We have seen ministers saying that they have cut

the fat. So precisely where they fall we don't quite know, but they

will genuinely hurt some people. One of the groups we know it will hurt

are the pensioners. The Chancellor was saying yesterday that free TV

licence, bus passes will be up for review after the next elections.

Pensioners could be feeling more of the pain than they recently have

been. And Labour have been looking at that

too, discussing their plans for ending universal benefits, but Billy

Kember, from the outside looking in, was it not as difficult to find the

�11. 5 billion cuts or wr were they even as much as that? We will not

know until we have seen the detail it is difficult to see what has been

cut as James said. We know that some departments have come in at lightly

under the 8 to 10%. So the Home Office have done well in that

respect and others like Eric Pickles and the local government departments

are up there at 10%. We will not know how bad it is. As James has

said, the fat has gone. So it is difficult to see where they can find

9 savings. What about George Osborne's . How

important is that? Well, he is clearly trying to stage something of

a comeback after the disastrous budget last year. What he has to

hope is that if thing things don't start to unravel again. I think that

all eyes are on Wimbledon this week. The Chancellor will want to hope to

play a few strokes of his own in setting out the review early. He

could have set it out next year. He has tried to force Labour's hand.

They are looking at the winter fuel allowance, but there is a feeling in

Labour it is making them face up to difficult choices and that is no bad

thing. James Lyons and Billy Kember, thank

you very much. Robert, it is high time to hear what

Labour are going to do in terms of cuts. They have now signed up to

George Osborne's plans? Well, Ed Miliband said he was worried that

people would start slapping the plans if they announced them too

early, but I find that difficult to listen to. The real problem is when

the cuts hit our society. I am concerned about teaching, for

example, about science. Both of which is are essential for the

health of the future of our society. I fear that we may be in for another

greater austerity still. I think that will be very, very

uncomfortable. Right. You mention education. Vince

Cable is battling over further education, but that is ring-fenced,

a little like health. Do you think it is time to look at the principle

of ring-fencing certain departments to make it a priority? I think that

the health service needs a different review from the one that Lansley

gave it. I think what he did was expensive. Once you start

contracting more into the private sector, the private sector charges

what it thinks that the market will hold, rather than the cost of

treatment. In the health service, a problem is that many treatments, if

not most, are not properly costed. We should look hard at the NHS.

What about pensions? That has been controversial, Ed Miliband's

announcement that they would include pensions in an overall cap on

welfare as pensions makes up a large proportion of it? To hold pensions

still is tricky at the present time. I think that some of the benefits to

pensioners should be looked at more carefully. I am not sure why I need

a free bus pass or a winter fuel benefit it is unreasonable for me to

have those sorts of benefits. So those sorts of things should be

looked at more. What about the Welfare Bill overall?

Do you think Labour must spell out more clearly? Yes, I do.What would

you like to hear them say? It is your party! They have to focus on

the key issues for our society. To see where we can stimulate growth.

One issue, certainly, I don't see George Osborne having a clear vision

of where the society is going. I don't see him having a vision of

where we will be in the future. Even though there are forecasts that

suggest modest growths. It is too little too late. Is is it right for

Ed Balls to admit he would borrow more in 2015/16, despite the fact

that he admits that debt is rising and the deficit is not coming down?

I said he should do that two years ago. I think that we all need to

borrow more. You need to get people working.

But can we afford it? If you have these projects going on, you will

increase the economy. Certainly there is no evidence we are doing

that at the moment. Thank you very much.

We will have the details of that Spending Review on Wednesday.

Now, would you want to access your own GP records online? In two years

you could be able to do that. Provided that the IT project

delivers it on time and it does not have the teething problems

associated with similar big Government projects. Here is David

with more. Computer servers, the machines that

these days make the world tick and could mean for the health service in

England the revolution will be digitised.

The idea is to use IT to revolutionise healthcare in England

it is called the power of information, it should do what it

says on the tin. Using data to give patients knowledge and chase and to

give the professionals speedy access to records so that treatment is

faster, better and more cost effective.

The idea is that information is as important to healthcare as drugs or

doctors or nurses. The idea is that far better transparency of

information on performance, on outcomes, it is going to be

transformational to the health service and to give rise to a range

of digital services where people can Skype their doctor, order

prescription refills and take better control of their health and well

being. Good, but the power of information is not just about being

open and transparent it is about saving NHS England lots of cash. In

the way that bajs have cut costs by dealing with customers online rather

than over the counter, but the officials were unable to confirm a

cost to the project. Will it deliver the promise of saving billions?

cost is lower than four years ago. We have seen in other systems how

cost effective this kind of people-led healthcare can really be.

So we anticipate and we are modelling savings to the NHS as a

whole. Every patient in England could have

access to GP medical records by 2015 and have health and social care

details across the internet by 2018. The NHS has not always hit it off,

but the creators believe that if this information is wired into the

system. It could be different. might have patients carrying their

own smartcards. It might have been a much better idea at the time. But

also the notion of patients getting in touch via Skype with their

doctor, would you do that? It's a slightly surreal idea but you never

know what might happen. Looking at basic IT projects, and we know the

scandals that have occurred in the past, do you think it can work? This

time the technology should be cheaper to deliver. There's a very

real reason for needing better computerisation of records. But we

know there are now sophisticated algorithms that show you can reduce

adverse effects of drugs and so on. The real issue is if you use

computing properly, you can input some of the knowledge we have from

genetic information. That is a big thing for the health service, but so

far we are not tackling that. know if there is a demand from

people to access their information online? What people want is a doctor

who will listen to them, sit there and not look at his watch, he will

be prepared to indulge in a proper conversation. IT will not substitute

for that. What about your bill that will be introduced on labelling

medicine, they've involved animal research in their development.

gone through its first reading. The idea is that every drug which has

been produced as a result of animal research should be labelled as such,

that the drug has been produced as a result of animal research. I want to

have much more transparency. I want people to recognise that animal

research is essential for human health, as it is for animal health.

It will be controversial. What reaction will you get? We will have

a lot of debate. I bet it will go to the House of Lords. I would be

surprised if it didn't go through the House of Lords will stop one of

the issues is whether or not the pharmaceutical industry can see the

benefits of their doing this. I hope they can. What consultation have you

had with them? I've had mixed messages from the people I've spoken

to. On a whole, most of the people are highly positive, because they

feel that this offers protection, recognising that this kind of

research properly done under human circumstances, is a very good way of

proceeding. But they don't want to be in the firing line of any

assaults or attacks. People have known for a long time that people

like myself have been doing animal research and humane conditions. I

think we should be right up there and upfront. If every university

that does research says this, it could be quite helpful. Top up fees.

They've become the norm when it comes to paying for university

education. But could we soon be forking out for our NHS treatment as

well? Senior doctors will use today's British Medical Association

annual meeting to warn that a health care system free at the point of use

can no longer be sustained. So what are they proposing? Well, surgeons,

consultants and GPs want the government to draw up a list of core

services so that patients know what they can expect for free from the

NHS. But the BMA are arguing that treatments and medications outside

this list can no longer be ruled out. Doctors say that the pressure

of making �20 billion in efficiency savings by 2015, combined with

rising patient expectations and increasingly expensive medical

treatments mean the NHS is at crunch point. Currently payment for

dentistry is widespread, and eye tests and prescriptions are

means-tested, while many health trusts have refused to fund weight

loss surgery. But many critics argue top-up charges are contrary to the

ethos of the NHS and could start a slippery slope to privatisation

through the back door. I'm joined now by the Deputy Chair of the BMA's

GP Committee, Dr Richard Vautney, who is at the conference in

Edinburgh. Welcome to the Daily Politics. Is this, our top-up fees

really the future for the NHS? don't believe so. I'm sure that

doctors he will not support that. What doctors are saying is that

politicians are very good at promising lots of things, but not

very good in providing us with the resources to do it. We want the

resources to provide the highest quality care to our patients, and

yet GPs and doctors in hospitals are regularly being told they have to

work harder and longer to provide potentially routine services on a

Saturday and Sunday or on an evening, which could potentially

damage the services we already provide during the working day. We

need to be very clear what the NHS can afford to provide and how good

it needs to be doing that. What in your mind can the NHS in its current

financial situation afford to provide? What are the core services

that you feel must be retained? think everyone would expect to be

able to walk into their general practitioner and be able to get

every service that they get today. And to get the level of care that

they get in their hospitals as well. They do get that urgently, 20 47.

Doctors are working day and night, both in hospitals and out of hours,

to provide good levels of service. But we do need to question things

like cosmetic surgery, whether that is something that can be provided on

the NHS. Whether Barrack is brain surgery is appropriate on the NHS.

What we've seen in recent years is a covert rationing happening invites #

various Primary Care Trusts up and down the country, where in some

areas you can get those services but since America is you can't. We need

an honest debate about those services. You've raised the idea

that those perhaps should be paid for. You've mentioned cosmetic

surgery. What about hair transplants, weight loss surgery -

should be charged? That's why we need to have an debate. What do you

believe? That is something that will be debated. It is one of the

challengers. When you start to look at individual elements, you will

have people who will make a case for that particular service to be

provided. It's important we do that openly and honestly. What is your

response to that? I'm a member of the BMA and his answer is typical of

the BMA. It's all very well to say that varicose vein surgery shouldn't

be on the NHS. They cause significant discomfort and dangerous

to patients. By removing them, you can do something which should be

under the NHS. But there are ways we ought to be looking at the NHS in a

completely different view. For example, to some extent humans don't

value what they don't pay for. I remember my clinic, which was one of

the most popular clinics at Hammersmith Hospital. I still had 15

to 20% of my patients not turning up from the local area because it was

inconvenient, not even that the appointment was made well in

advance. That is shopping. people should be charged. 200 quid a

time is what it cost. What do you think, should people be charged if

they missed GP appointments or hospital appointments? The people

who could be charged could well be the people who could least afford

it. You would end up with an exemption system that would be more

complex and bureaucratic to impose. Whilst the theory may be worth

looking at, the practicalities would make it too expensive. It could

maybe not be the thing to look at. The key thing is to focus on how we

can ensure that the quality of services that we are currently

providing properly resourced, without trying to extend them into

evenings or weekends. I have to say that I did the research on the

patients who didn't turn up. The patients who didn't turn up were

often the most well-heeled patients. The patients who came from poor

backgrounds and depressed areas kept their appointment is much more

regularly. Can I clarify the premise that the NHS can no longer provide

everything for free at a high-quality, it's no longer viable,

is it? I don't know. The question is whether the structure as it is is

right. We talk about increasing privatisation, but increasing

privatisation happened as soon as Lansley introduced his bill and once

that act went through Parliament. That's a very big cost to the health

service. That happened under Labour, too, about some services

being provided from private companies as opposed to people

paying when the NHS is supposed to be free at the point of use. My view

is not a political view entirely. There's a big difference between the

two governments, but you are right, Labour did introduce something and

didn't change their idea, which I think was a mistake. You may be

having a very honest debate about what is viable to be provided by the

NHS in the future, but do you believe, whatever you decide, that

any politician and any government would make a decision to start

charging for cosmetic surgery, IVF, breast reduction and enlargement?

don't think they would do that openly but the reality is that for

the last five to ten years, that has been happening. Primary Care Trusts,

on the behest of the Department of Health, have been making these

decisions and have been limiting what is available in particular

areas. And it saves very little money. It does, but we do need to

ensure that everybody gets fair treatment wherever they live, there

shouldn't be postcode rationing. should think that Matthew think it

should be clear across the board. You don't think it saves much money?

We are in broad agreement. The problem is that any of these

measures don't save the sort of money we need to save if we are

going to make the NHS more efficient. The question is how we

funded on the wider scale. That is a much bigger problem. I agree with

Lord Winston on that. Particularly I agree with him with his concerns

about the cost of the competition agenda, which this government and

the last government have pursued. To have a competition and market, you

need to have surplus supply. That in itself is an expensive commodity

that we can ill afford. Before you go, let's have a look at the Care

Quality Commission and the scandal that has been revealed about that

report. Do you think an overhaul of the CQC is appropriate for now?

think they need, whoever is regulating the health service, need

the resources to be able to do it properly. One of the challengers for

the CQC is that they were brought together from various other

organisations, they were given an almost impossible task to do. What

we've seen is how difficult that task has been and the shocking

stories we've seen from both mid Staffordshire and Morecambe Bay and

elsewhere. It shows we do need a body who can ask the right questions

and get the right answers. Whoever is doing that needs the resources to

be able to do that properly. I can't quite tell if that's a yes or no to

an overhaul. I agree completely. That was debated during the passage

of the health act. But we don't have that in place yet. We need to look

at it carefully, looking at the CQC. And whether it should be completely

overhauled. Thank you for joining us. And the special thank you to

Robert Winston for being our guest of the day. That is it for today. I