04/02/2013 Newsnight

Mistreatment, misdiagnosis, and management failings may have led to

as many as a thousand needless deaths at Stafford General Hospital.

How did it happen, and how do we make sure it doesn't happen again.

We both believed that hospitals were safe, we didn't know anything

else. As soon as we got in the hospital we knew that something was

terribly wrong. This is the hospital that's been under the

spotlight, but the questions are now much wider. How can patient

safety best be protected in the NHS?

I speak to one woman whose mother died there, she met the Prime

Minister tonight. The lie that destroyed Chris Huhne,

what a difference a year makes. innocent of these charges and I

intend to fight this in the courts, I'm confident a jury will agree.

I have pleaded guiltied today. Until very recent days, still

talked about as a possible future Deputy Prime Minister, today Chris

Huhne faces the possibility of prison.

He was Shakespeare's number one villain. Now is the winter of our

discontent, made glorious summer by this son of York. Richard III,

exhumed and now identified, should he be rehabilitated. I will ask the

direct to Richard Eyre, and Tudor historian, Suzannah Lipscomb.

Good evening, the devastating events at Stafford General Hospital,

which may have contributed to the unnecessary deaths of hundreds of

patients in the hospital's care, between 2005-2009, reveals

something rotten in the NHS. The public inquiry into the NHS

foundation Trust will report on Wednesday. It is likely to have

far-reaching implications for the management and nursing in the NHS,

in relation to candour, transparency, training and

responsibility. Ahead of the report, the Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt,

blamed a culture of targets and performance management, which

defined the NHS under Labour. Why of the culture so especially bad at

Stafford General Hospital, who will accept responsibility, and could

anything like it ever happen again? The stories from Stafford Hospital

have proved shocking. Described as horrific and haunting for patients

and their families. Hundreds are alleged to have died needlessly,

through lack of care and fundamental deficiencies. There

have already been a string of investigations. Robert Francis QC

led a public inquiry back in 2010, his full inquiry reports back this

week. In his first report he described his shock at hearing

about suffering to patients, that included being left in unwashed

sheets, unable to reach food and drink, or without adequate pain

relief. He said it was failure on a scale that cannot be adequately

expressed in statistics. Julie Bailey's 86-year-old mother,

Bella, was admitted to Stafford Hospital in 2007, for what should

have been a routine hernia operation. We believed that she was

going into somewhere safe. We both believed that hospitals were safe,

we didn't know anything else. As soon as we got in the hospital we

knew that something was terribly wrong. It was just really out of

control. Just going on to the wards, there was just screaming and

shouting. She says she saw chaos on the wards, and decided she was not

going to leave her mother there alone. So she and other members of

the family stayed, 24-hours a day, for eight week, to care for Bella

themselves. They used to tell us off, and there was no clean sheets

to change the bed with. There was another woman that had fallen

opposite, there was just blood everywhere. They had to go and pick

patients off the floor and try to patch them up, and then hunt for

staff. It wouldn't have marred some days, because the staff, I would

say 60% of them shouldn't have been on the wards. They weren't nursing.

A succession of Labour health secretaries was encouraging NHS

managers to seek Foundation Trust status for hospitals, with emphasis

on targets to bring down waiting times and tighter financial control.

In 2009 one regulator did attempt to find out what was going on at

Mid Staffs. Dr Heather Wood was sent in by the Healthcare

Commission, because mortality rates appeared to be higher than expected.

What does she think went wrong at Stafford? A struggle Trust,

completely lost its way, had the wrong priorities, and pursued

Foundation Trust status, really at the expense of its core business of

looking after patients safely. Relatives of patients say it was

not just lack of care, but a lack of openness when things went wrong,

that let people down. Frank and Janet Robinson's 20-year-

old son, John, was injured in an accident on his mountain bike in

2006, he was taken 0 Stafford A&E Department, but was discharged and

told he had bruised ribs. couldn't walk out, he was pushed

out in a wheelchair and given a container to be sick in. They had

to ask for painkillers because he was still in a lot of pain. John

died a few hours later with a ruptured spleen, his parents blame

the hospital for not identifying the injury. In 2006 a report

prepared by an A&E consultant in at the hospital, not present on the

day of the accident, concluded that John's unfortunate and untimely

death may have been avoided had he been more proper low assessed.

had an accident, and we appreciate he had an accident and was badly

injured. Had John have died as a result of that accident it would

have been hard to accept, but you accept them sort of things. John

needed care, and the A&E Department at Stafford was in meltdown.

Robinsons are seeking a new inquest, because the A&E's consultant

internal report was sent to the Trust lawyers, but did not reach

the coroner or the family. The lawyers from that time told us

there was never any attempt to cover up the facts of John's death.

And their first duty was to the Trust, and not to patients. Legal

regulators have agreed. Today the hospital is under new

management. In response to the family's concerns over the care of

Bella Bailey and John Robinson, the She also gave her sincere apologies

to Mr and Mrs Robinson, and said the Trust has apologise today Julie

Bailey. She said today Stafford is a very different place. In his

second report, Robert Francis looks more widely at NHS management, at

questions he says constantly went through his mind. Why did those in

charge not detect that something so serious was going on, and why was

nothing done about it? I think Mid Staffs was a perfect

storm, where everything came together. I think at that time it

was a target culture and it was very prevalent. People, doctors,

were pushed into situations, and I don't think they were always

comfortable with that. Elective cases were prioritised. I would

hope that has been altered, and changed. But I do think there are

pockets around the country where that may still be a problem.

expectation is that the report will be highly critical of NHS

structures, the plethora of regulating bodies and the

individuals in management at the time. That may include the chief

executive of the NHS in England, Sir David Nicholson, who cases

calls to resign. He was chief executive -- who faces calls to

resign. He was chief executive of the two strategic health

authorities from 2005-2006, before taking up his current role. He has

evidently been at the heart of the development of the command and

control structure in the NHS. I don't think I'm alone in thinking

that he, and the cadre of people that he has appointed and also have

very senior positions, that those people are not the right leaders to

change that culture. But Sir David has a pivitol role in

the Government's full-scale reorganisation of the NHS in

England. It ordered this full public inquiry after pledging to go

beyond Labour's first independent inquiry. So it will want to show it

has done all it can to avoid a repeat of Mid Staffs. Sir David

himself has said he has not seen anything yet that would make him

think he should resign. Last week he apologised for those affected on

behalf of the NHS. He said patients will be given a bigger say. There

is also renewed interest in a concept known as "zero harm", based

on Florence Nightingale's edict, that the hospital should the sick

no harm. Antony Sumara was parachuted in to fix Mid Staffs. He

said there must be a wholesale change in culture, removing targets

where say 95% of patients remain free of hospital-acquired

infections. The concept of "zero harm" greatly appeals to him.

zero harm, airlines use it, the building construction industry use

it, but the NHS has an idea that it is OK to harm people. What would he

do? I would be tougher to make sure that those who work in the NHS are

held directly to account for patient safety and care. And we

don't have this idea that it is OK to harm some people and compared to

other Trusts we are not that bad. After her experiences at Stafford

Julyy Bailey founded Curet The NHS, with other families. They will be

the toughest judges of the response on Wednesday, for them apologise

will not be enough, they want nothing less than a new world of

health cautious breaking the concept that harm is inevitable.

Just before we came on air I spoke to Deb Hazeldine, whose mother was

treated at Stafford General Hospital, and who spoke to the

Prime Minister about the public inquiry earlier today.

What happened to your mother when she went into hospital? Mum was 67,

she was admitted into Mid Staffs in July of 2006. She had a fall at

home, not sustained any injuries, but we were told that she would

need on going physiotherapy to get back on her feet after the

physiotherapy she had. She was put straight on to an open ward, even

though we asked she be put in an isolation ward. She quickly

contracted C-diff and MRSA. Then what happened to her general health

and care? The care was appalling. There was some very kind nurses,

but lots of nurse and doctors who weren't kind and didn't support --

nurses and doctors who weren't kind and didn't support mum. You work in

the NHS and you know about the atmosphere. What kind of things

happened to your mum? Entering the ward one day, I could hear my mum

screaming at the top of her voice, she was in so much pain. I dropped

my bag and ran into her. She was half on a komode, half on the floor.

That is when she grabbed my hand and said "please don't let me die

in here". I fed my mum, I cleaned my mum. My mum had ulcers on her

leg because she was left in a wet bed for such a long time. She had

pain in her back, she would constantly say she was in pain.

there any sense of embarrassment or worry from the general staff there?

Yes, the nurse that is were really caring. There were a couple on the

ward would try 0 do their very best. There were some nurses that were

very dismissive as well, they didn't try to help. I tried to be

there as much as I can. I had to say to my mum's consultant could

you please write in the notes that I can visit, because of the abuse I

got off staff members when I went in. You didn't make a complaint?

a family we couldn't be there 24/7, I was worried because mum would be

in there. We decided when mum came home we would complain.

Unfortunately she never came home. She didn't come home and you have

been part of the big campaign. You saw David Cameron earlier this

evening. I did. What was the general demeanor of

the meeting? It was very respectful, I think, to our loved ones. It was

very respectful. What did you ask from him? Accountability, that is

the main thing to me. There were hundreds of people who died

horrifically, and nobody, at this point, has been held accountable.

What concrete changes do you want to see happen now, and presumably

you spoke to David Cameron about those? Yes, I did. We need

accountability to come back into the NHS. Poor care is insulting to

all of the caring and compassionate staff, as well as all the patients.

We need the recommendations of the Francis Report to be implemented,

and a complaints system fit for purpose, it currently isn't, the

patients don't have a voice if something goes wrong. Who should

resign over this, you say nobody has gone yet. Who should? If you

look it public inquiry, anybody found to be failing, that starts

with David Nicholson. Now head of the NHS in England? Yes, there is

no accountability, we cannot let this one continue to run the NHS.

Thank you very much indeed. We invited Sir David Nicholson on

to the programme tonight, but he didn't want to speak ahead of the

inquiry report on Wednesday. We also contacted mid-Staffordshire

Foundation Trust for a comment. They said they have apologised to

Miss Hazeldine for the poor care given to her mother in 2006, and it

is suffering cause today her and her family. There were systemic

problems at Stafford Hospital at that time, which meant that the

care provided to these patients and others in some areas of the

hospital was inadequate. Such a poor standard of care is

inexcusable and indefensible, today Stafford is a very different place.

External regulators have verified and acknowledged the improvements

that have been made, is what they said.

Joining me is Mike Farrer, chief executive of the NHS Confederation.

And Peter Walsh, from the group who campaign for patient safety. He has

helped some of those involved in the Mid Staffs case.

Peter Walsh, do you think the NHS in England has lost its way?

Something has gone very wrong with the NHS. That is obvious. Obviously

the inquiry started to be all about what happened at Stafford, but it

is much wider than that now. I would love to say this was a

totally isolated incident, but as a national charity, we see pockets of

what happened at Stafford in hospitals around the country.

Farrer, I was struck by something Debbie Hazeldine said, talking

about the nurses, they weren't nursing. What's happened to

compassion and care? Jeremy Hunt seems keen that is put at the heart

of the NHS again, clearly that was lacking? I think the evidence from

Mid Staffs is absolutely horrendous, speaking as one who came into

National Health Service to do good for people, I feel ashamed of what

happened there. What I can say is we absolutely use this as an

opportunity to learn every single lesson we can and make sure it

doesn't happen again. I think what we do to guarantee to the public

that these horrendous issues are dealt with, requires us to take a

fundamental look at everything, from the nursing on the wards,

through to the ways in which the NHS organisations judge themselves

and they are accountable to the public, and how they operate in the

wider system. This is a moment in time to get this right. You heard

Deb Hazeldine saying they didn't want to complain while their mother

was in hospital, in case it affected her mother adversely.

There has clearly been a breakdown in trust between patients and

nursing staff. Whether they be auction sillies, doctors or porters,

there is a complete breakdown of trust? Yes, and I think that is

inexcusable that the people who need us at that great time of

problem can't trust us. Whether that is the nursing staff, the

management of hospitals, or indeed, the way in which we account for

ourselves. We have to do better, we have to rebuild trust. That starts

by being much more open. We have to listen to patients. It is

inexcusable in today's environment that we're not listening to

patients as part of the whole process of care. But there can't be

just tinkering. Let's talk about zero harm, something like C-diff,

it might be we don't want more than 5% of patients to get that, now it

is 0 per cent, there should never be a -- 0%, there should never be a

presumption that anyone should get this in hospital? We gave evidence

to the inquiry about vitally important patient safety alerts,

life and death matters, where trusts around the country were

failing to implement. Mortality rates, strong indicators of

something going wrong. Duty of candour, are you really saying that

a nurse auction silly could actually call out a consultant for

doing something wrong, it is such a hierarchical organisation, I

couldn't imagine that ever happening? There is lots of

platitudes to be spoken about Stafford, and the recommendations.

Change of culture and openness, the challenge for Jeremy Hunt will be,

will he fully implement the recommendations, which I'm sure

will include a statutory, meaningful duty of candour. What

kind of health service would not guarantee as an essential standard

openness with patients and family when things go wrong. A duty of

candour, should that be implemented if recommended on Wednesday? I do,

and Peter is absolutely right. I would say that resource to a legal

duty, to be open and honest with patients, is really an indictment

to the fact that the culture we have at the moment doesn't honestly

share with patients and their families what is going on in terms

of their care. And the first thing that happens, of course, if there

is a complaint, it seems to be in mid-Stafford, that rather than

dealing with the complaint, you hire an army of lawyers to defend

you. That the lawyers' obligation is to the Trust and not the

patients. How could things be as skewed as that, Mike Farrer? If we

were getting this right, and now we must, we can't fail this time. We

would have a situation where staff on the wards were reviewing care,

with the families, the families know their loved one is well and

making sure we could do everything we comfortable it would be a

culture where you didn't have to recourse a lot or whistle blow,

because we would be learning what we need to as we went along. That

is the critical bit. You look down the list of different organisations

involved in patient care, there must be 20 or 30 or 40. There is a

myriad organisations which dilute the idea of accountability? Yes,

things are being made more complex. When you make things more complex

and fragmented, you introduce more risk. What we need is a tough

regulator, rather than more regulation, we need better

regulation. A regulator, like the aviation industry, that would act

on single indicators of a lack of safety. Mortality rates, patient

safety alerts, but fundamental is openness and transparency.

Protecting whistleblowers, and ensuring that patients are

empowered, not just by information, by honesty about what then goes on,

but independent support with their complaints. It looks a if there is

going to be, Mike Farrer, an absolute recommendation, and

presumably it will be statutory soon, that the ratio of nursing

staff to patients will have to change, and are we even having

enough nurses to do that? There is a very important point here that

builds off Peter's point. We can look externally at the regulation

levels, and setting standards for nursing levels, but it is people in

the hopts that have to take the responsibility. They are the ones

there 24/7, 365 days a year. It is their responsibility to know what

is safe care. If you have a difficult patient on a ward you

might need to increase staffing. It is their responsibility, they are

the ones, not the regulators, who need to make sure the buck stops

with them, and management. Then we need a regulatory system that gives

confidence that what is happening in the NHS is open and transparent.

Where we need to step in we K the responsibility of quality of care

lies with the hospital and all of us in the National Health Service.

That is where we should look first. We await the report on Wednesday.

It still seems some what incredible, but there now may be a royal

funeral, Richard III, the last King of England to die in battle may be

interned somewhere, maybe Westminster Abbey, after a deformed

skeleton with battle wounds has been identified as king after lying

under a car park in Leicester for many years. He was Shakespeare's

arch villain, accused of killing his brother's soon. We will talk to

our guests in a moment. First this. Now is the winter of our discontent.

Made glorious summer by this son of York. They found Richard III! In

the absence of any other broadcaster willing to hammer this

story to death, it falls to us, soberly and gravely, to train the

spotlight of Newsnight scholarship on this subject.

Hidden under a car park in Leicester, one of the most

notorious kings in our history. A ruthless power-snatcher, and

alleged child killer, the only thing Richard III hasn't been

accused of is failing to pay-and- display. The pith and marrow of

this story concerns a swab in the mouth of a blameless Canadian. But

how can it be? Now here is the science part. Richard III had an

older sister, Anne of York, skip forward a few generations and her

17th great-grand nephew is a Canadian carpenter living in London,

Michael Ibsen. The Leicester university team took his DNA, and

that of another distant descendant of Anne as, and compared that with

the car park skeleton. The scans matched, and the team announced,

alongside all the other evidence, this put the identity of the

skeleton beyond reasonable doubt. The skeleton exhumed at Greyfriars

in 2012, is indeed Richard III the last Plantagenet King of England.

It is exciting in terms of methodology, DNA put together with

archaeology, research and desk- based research, that is impressive.

It is exciting, I'm not sure how much it means beyond the excitement

of the process, but yes, today is a thrilling day to be a medieval

historian. A horse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse. So now we know

it was him under the car park, why are we so fascinated by Richard any

way? Some historians insist he wasn't so much worse than other

Monarchs. Maybe it is Shakespeare, the gap between the black

propaganda put about in the 16th century, and crystalised in

Shakespeare. The gap between that and the truth of Richard's regin,

which is he didn't do a lot of bad things, just one or two extremely

bad things. Someone who should know all about

this is actor Jonjo O'Neil, who has given his Richard III at Stratford.

Immediate instinct of probably towards humour, finding the glee in

it. There is a lot of humour in Richard, he's a very funny

character. I immediately started to find parallels in characters in

South Park and other modern stuff that I have enjoyed and that I saw

in Richard. When it comes to the canon, most

good judges give props to Richard III. Is it he is most enjoyed

villain, possibly? One of the most celebrated villains, certainly, in

Shakespeare. It is the second- biggest part to hamlet, in terms of

the sheer -- Hamlet, in terms of sheer volume and the amount he has,

the second-largest amount of lines in all Shakespeare, second to

Hamlet. It also emerged today that this car lot isn't just a dig of

world historical interest. This is CSI boss worth! In the case of the

larger wound, if the blade had penetrated seven sent meeters into

the braifpb, -- centimeters into the brain, which we can't determine,

death would have been instant. didn't have his hands bound, he was

stabbed through the heart with a knife. This is obviously a burial

designed to humiliate. Richard's remains may end up here at St

Martin's, and Leicester will share with Paris the unlikely distinction

of boating a Cathedral with a famous hunchback.

Sir Richard Eyre is an award- winning theatre director, drink

bringing Richard III to life on the age. Suzannah Lipscomb is an expert

in the Tudor period. Good king bad king, does it make a difference to

how we view him? It doesn't make a difference. Richard has this

reputation from Sir Thomas Moore and Shakespeare of being a crooked

man with a crooked back. There is this thing about his physical

deformties and his character. We are beyond that now. We discovered

he did have a curved spine. So they weren't just doing him down? No, I

think the slightly surprising thing coming out today is the Tudor

propaganda wasn't just an invention, there was something in it.

exciting day, or overplayed, the arrival of Richard III in the scene

again? An exciting day for the University of Leicester, and the

car park attendants. I would have been much more excited if they had

exhumed another draft of Shakespeare's play. I think the

reason we are having this conversation at all is because

Shakespeare's done Richard III a huge favour. This is terribly bad

news for Richard III Society, they have said he's a man who is

absolutely blameless. What's more, that he had had a perfectly

straight spine. I think this revelation actually does, at least

allow Shakespeare something more than mere poetic license. When you

directed Richard III, how did you, you directed Ian McKellan in it,

what were your lines on how to play Shakespeare's Richard III. Do you

think there is a lot of fun in it? There is a lot of fun. Of course

he's a soldier. His first speech is telling you how terrible it is for

him that peace has broken out, and grim visage to all has vanished, to

be replayed by all the efeninecy of peace. He will tell you he will do

terrible things and he does do terrible things. It is interesting

seeing Chris Huhne saying he was innocent today, and Richard III

does that in the first seen. He convinced Lady Anne that he is

uncorrupt and uncorruptible. He turns to the audience, having

seduced her and convinced her of an innocence, and says "was ever woman

in this humour wooed, was ever woman in this humour won". He he is

an utterly beguiling villain. The great defenders of Richard III

traduced the play, because the play is actually an extraordinary

complex play about politic. It is a handbook for tyranny. He was a

complex man, we now know there were certain enlightened aspects of

things, the first man to give bail. But he died a horrific and

humiliating death. And henry VII had to establish himself and give

him a humiliating death? He was the last king to die on the battlefield

in England, quite fairly, Henry the Tudor, I will upset a lot of

Ricardians, but henry the Tudor won, the problem for that is that

Richard III had the reputation as a Great War yo, we discover he was

probably attacked from behind, and then humiliating wounds. That was

necessary to demonstrate he was dead. He was carried through

Leicester to say he hasn't gone into hiding, he actually is dead,

and Henry Tudor is now Henry VII, king. That has to be the way it

worked out. The big debate is where will his bones be buried? The Queen

has to give her permission for Westminster Abbey. Leicester?

have been buried in all sorts of places. Canterbury, Reading,

Gloucester, not necessarily Westminster Abbey. I suppose it

might be wise to consider putting him somewhere where he knew success.

Somewhere like Richmond, maybe York, perhaps not Leicester. I'm sure the

University oflessor would be very sad if he went -- University

oflessor would be sad if he went elsewhere. Who are the best lines,

in terms of actors that you have seen play it and the best lines,

you have directed Ian McKellan, what are the best actors and best

lines? My favourite line is when Elizabeth says to the old Queen

Margaret, I'll misquote the line, but it is "teach me how to curse my

enemies". This is the unrevealed part of the play is that it has

some of the most powerful parts for women in the whole of the

Shakespearian canon. And far from being glorification of revelling in

the Godfather-like revelling in the villainy and viciousness, it shows

you the consequences of it. The most devastating scene is the scene

with three women who have all lost people. What is your favourite bit

of Richard III, or as a Tudor you don't have any bits? I suppose

everybody is struck by the opening. Nobody can walk away from that play

and forget that dramatic opening, I would have to go with the classic

lines about the winter of our discontent. Thank you very much.

As Richard Eyre was saying, now for a very modern tragedy, Chris Huhne

once a cabinet high flyer, today fell to the ground with a

resounding crash, exposed as a liar. He announced he would resign as MP

for Eastleigh. After years of lying he admitted a speeding offence, and

now faces the prospect of a jail sentence. In the course of today's

events, texts between his son and himself were admitted into evidence.

Chris Huhne is the kind of politician to not just cross the

road to pick up a fight but get in a car and race to it. The ambitious

Lib Dem was accused of being in such a hurry to get on he would

frequently speed there. Chris Huhne didn't rush to the position he

found himself today, after a year of saying he didn't ask his wife to

accept points on her driving license on his behalf, today the

former cabinet minister pleaded guilty. I have pleaded guilty today,

I'm unable to say more, while there is an outstanding trial. But having

taken responsibility for something which happened ten years ago, the

only proper course of action for me is now to resign my Eastleigh seat

in parliament, which I will do very shortly. If all political careers

end in failure, few end in court. At some point in the last seven

days Chris Huhne made a decision that wraps up seven-and-a-half

years as an MP. A one-time contend Tory lead his party, and until very

recent days, still talked about as a possible future Deputy Prime

Minister, today Chris Huhne faces the possibility of prison.

That quote about all political lives ending in failure goes on to

say that they do so because of human affairs. In the last two

years, the Huhne family have been all too human. Huhne admitted

having an affair in June 2010. His marriage to the respected economist,

Vicky Pryce, broke down, and a year later allegations were published in

the newspaper. In 2003, now a decade ago, when the then Lib Dem

MP was trying to fast and furiously win election to Westminster, he was

alleged to have been in such a hurry, his car had been caught by

cameras speeding between Stanstead Airport and London. The prosecution

alleged that Huhne had bust the speed limit so frequently, he was

facing political ruin before his career started, he asked his wife

to take the point, but the cabinet minister denied this. I want to say

simply that these allegations are simply incorrect. They have been

made before and they have been shown to be untrue. I very much

welcome the referral to the police as it will draw a line under the

matter. Throughout he would see a funny side. Philip Hammond, the

Transport Secretary, said people who break the speed limit are

perfectly decent people. Apparently Philip had broken the speed limit

and got some points. I put my haunds and lost my license from

speeding so I'm in a good position to say. Huhne had to eventually

stand down from cabinet, he vowed to fight the charge and believing

he would eventually return to political life. Today the judge

revealed that Huhne's lawyer fought hard to have the case dismissed,

not once but twice, and the judge overruled this, and he published

fresh evidence, text messages between Huhne and his 18-year-old

I'm shocked and saddened by what's happened, but I believe that Chris

Huhne has taken the right decision in resigning as an MP.

Why does it matter? He was central to the coalition negotiations with

the Conservative Party after the hung parliament election of May

2010, clearly one of the leading Lib Dems in the cabinet. Many

people would have assumed that if he had been found not guilty or

acquitted, for some reason over these charges, he would have

returned to the fray. Either to the cabinet, quite quickly, or even

potentially as a future leader of the Lib Dem party, were Nick Clegg

to step down at some point. Suddenly all of that is over.

Instead of racing down the M11, the strategists of Westminster will

right now be familiarising themselves to another motorway, the

M3 to Eastleigh, where they will spend the days and weeks ahead. As

fits the cabinet minister most agrossive to Tory colleagues in

Government, the battle for Eastleigh will be bitter. It is the

first time in this parliament where the coalition partners go up

against each other. Newsnight hit the road to see how quickly the

Tories had hit the road, not very, up past Strawberryfields, the Tory

HQ had not a leaflet ready. It came as a surprise to you, we weren't

expecting a by-election, as it is better to be prepared and not miss

a opportunity, but we have spoken about it, but no hotel rooms have

been booked. Eastleigh is one of 20 Lib Dem seats targeted by the

Tories, if they can't win here, a majority in 2015 is tricky. UKIP is

a problem for them. UKIP take votes from all parties. It is amazing,

people will vote liberal locally, but UKIP nationally. They take from

everybody. That will be shared out amongst us. The Lib Dems are road

testing a strategy, that they think will help them outperform

competitors. Elbow grease. Chris Huhne hadn't given you a signal of

what he was going to do, do you have a candidate? We have a

candidate. We will go through democratic processes to get a

candidate, we have a good pool of talent waiting to be considered as

a potential MP for Eastleigh. another high-profile politician

admitted telling an untruth, with such unauspicious settings, the

scene is set for a bloody battle. David Cameron face as revolt of

over 100 MPs tomorrow as the Commons votes on the same-sex

Marriage Bill, which he has championed.

Tonight, in an effort to win over colleagues, George Osborne, William

Hague and Theresa May published a joint letter to the Telegraph, in

which they questioned whether it was any longer acceptable to

exclude people from marriage simply because they love someone of the

same sex. We talk to two Conservative MPs who plan to vote

differently on gay marriage tomorrow.

Anne McIntosh, why shouldn't gai people get married? I think there

is confusion here between rights for gay people and religious

freedoms. What saddens me mostly about the debate, I have worked

very closely with Nick and I have high regard for him and the

arguments that the other side are putting forward. I think in the

countryside the church plays a very special role. It is not necessarily

just getting married in church, it is getting married full stop?

you can't redefine marriage in this way. I would have no problem, if

for example, civil partnership could be blessed in urge ch, that I

think would be already -- church, that would be already a great step

forward. We were specifically told when we voted on civil partnerships

this wouldn't lead to marriage. This is a breakdown in trust.

is nothing Nick Herbert would say to change your mind? No, I have

made a public promise to my electorate. It wasn't something

raised at the election, this has come out of the blue. But my

electorate understand exactly where I stand on this issue. What about

your electorate? It is a free vote and people are entitled to their

view, it is an issue of conscience. All of the independently conducted

opinion polls are showing a majority of the public are in

favour of this change. That is a majority that is growing very fast

in this country, as it has in others. We know that particularly

amongst younger people there is very strong support indeed. What

you are doing is looking ahead. Because ComRes poll for ITN news

suggests today that as a result of this going through, if it does go

through, which we expect, you are likely lose more votes than you

will gain at the moment. That particular poll has been quite

criticised by other pollsters for asking leading questions, and

excluding all the other things people will vote on. There are

bigger issues. Does it sadden you that Anne McIntosh doesn't believe

that you should get married in church, or get married full stop?

Of course I would like as many members in parliament to vote for

it, I think it will pass tomorrow with a substantial majority. I'm

happy about that. I'm happy because I don't think it is right any

longer to exclude two people who love each other from an institution.

Religious freedom is protected. The churches that don't want to do this

won't have to. You say religious freedom is not protected. Churches

don't have to agree to it? I don't think that will stand up in law, as

a Scottish advocate I would argue that. Can I also say, this is the

narrow step along, the first step along a long road, in France they

are redefining how you describe wives and husbands and parents can

no longer be described as mothers and fathers. Are you really saying

that is the outcome of this? It is happening in France and other

countries where this law has been passed. It is the law of unintended

consequences. I personally believe a loving relationship is one thing,

I don't dispute that. But you don't want people to have the same

rights? Marriage is very special, you can't rewrite the law.

special for you. That it is one man and one woman. Today two eminent

QCs told the Times that it was inconceivable to have a legal

challenge, because the European Court on human rights protects

marriage. Gay marriage has been in the netherlands for over ten years

and Spain for seven years, there is no legal challenge successful. It

is important for people to understand that the Church of

England, the Catholic Church that don't want to do this won't have to.

Why shouldn't other religious organisations, like the quakers,

liberal Jews, Unitarians do it. concerned are you about a split in

the party over this. If it gets through, it won't get through

because of Conservative support, it will be because of Liberal Democrat

and Labour members support it. Are you disappointed that David Cameron

wasn't managed to convince you. He has shown leadership in as much as

he has championed sh, but he has not convinced -- championed it, but

he has not convinced you? The whole way it is raised is unfortunate. If

it was in the general election and we had the opportunity to debate it,

if I had the opportunity to explain my view to the electorate, to

explain why I stood, then I could have said this is what I was going

to do. Is this damaging? David Cameron has made it clear. We did

not stand on this in the manifesto, it wasn't in the coalition

agreement either, I stood my campaign on the coalition agreement.

David Cameron's first speech as party leader to the conference, he

made it clear and won applause. He's reflecting the fact that

attitudes have changed. These laws do come accepted, Ann voted against

civil partnerships when proposed, and now says they are a good thing.

Attitudes have changed. Look what Maria Miller said today, she

likened this to attitudes, prosive attitudes that her party stands d

progressive attitude that is her party stand for, do you accept

that? That is completely different. I don't think you can have a

marriage physically between anything other than a man and a

woman. This could be handled so much better. There is reason to

delay. To delay or not do it at all? I stood on the manifesto, we

were committed, Nick and I, to introduce tax allowances for

married couples, that hasn't gone through, this is proceeding apace,

and if there are court cases they will come before the next election.

How big a landmark will it be for gay people? It will be incredibly

important, it is immensely meaningful, and tomorrow, millions

of people will be watching this vote, and asking themselves whether

actually Members of Parliament are understanding that we are accepting

the place in society. That is all we have time tonight, until

we have time tonight, until tomorrow, a very good night.

The break from the winter weather was all too short, it is back a

cold, icey windy start to Tuesday, some disruptive snow across parts

of northern England. The band of snow across the Pennines, an amber

warning from the Met Office, be prepared for disruption. For south-

east England it is a dry start. Despite the sunshine, colder than

recent mornings. Rain and sleet elsewhere, and stormy in Cornwall,

gusts overnight of 70 miles an hour. Strengthening again during Tuesday.

Watching this area of showers in shout Wales, the valleys with

accumulating snow could cause problems in the morning. Icey in

Wales. Northern Ireland with fresh snow on the ground, after the

showers overnight. Heavy snow showers in Scotland. Blizzards on

the hills. The met thofs amber warning here, particularly across -

- Met Office amber warning here, particularly across the Highland.

No snow settling in the London area it will come later in the day and

will fizzle out, it will feel bitterly cold in the strong winds.

As for Wednesday, it is an Arctic wind, snow showers more to the east

than anywhere else, sunshine on offer. Thursday and Friday, the