10/02/2013 Sunday Politics East

In the East, health care failures, damning reports an investigation of

the region's hospitals. And time is running out for of disabled workers

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 2472 seconds

Hello and a very warm welcome to your local part of the program.

Coming up: Financial problems at two hospitals not many miles apart

but down to complete lack of strategic oversight according to a

damning new report. It was decided after the establishment of a

private finance initiative which the report describes as

catastrophically bad value for taxpayers. On top of that to

establish the franchise to hospital used by a private provider just 24

miles away. And the end of the line for disabled workers at Remploy

unless an 11th hour buyer can be found. I don't know what to think.

I just have to hope for the best, that's all, and that I'm not going

to be on benefits for years like I was before I went to work at

Remploy. With me are the Labour peer and former Basildon MP

Baroness Angela Smith. And Dr Dan Poulter, the Health Minister and

Conservative MP for Central Suffolk and Ipswich North. Let's start with

the news this week that a key investor has pulled out of plans to

build a new nuclear reactor at Sizewell. Centrica had teamed up

with EDF and were planning to take a 20% share in the multibillion

pound project. Something that was raised by Baroness Smith this week.

If the Government has lost three companies out of the nuclear

program, what is plan B to ensure we keep the lights on? So, Angela

Smith, did you get an answer to your question? Will the lights stay

on? The minister assured me we would. I think we have to have good

energy security. That is the third company that has pulled out of the

UK nuclear program. E d f say they are continuing with Sizewell C.

There is real concerns about why the companies are pulling out.

Secondly, we've got to make sure we've got the high-value skills we

need in engineering, in construction, which means getting

apprenticeships in place, working with employers and industry. But

all those need to step up a gear. Can we rely on the private sector

to solve the energy problems? know we need Sizewell in Suffolk.

We need it in terms of our energy security, we need it in terms of

the jobs and investment that will bring to Eastern Suffolk. We have...

It is disappointing what has happened this week but there are

other companies that have shown interest in taking this over.

Hitachi has been involved in similar projects elsewhere. I am

very confident we will get to the right solution and we will have

Sizewell built. Now, it's been a bad week for the

NHS in the East with four of our hospitals in the spotlight. Health

trusts in Basildon and Colchester are under investigation for having

higher than average death rates. In the last year, the number of

patients dying at Basildon was 14% more than expected. While in

Colchester, the figure was 16%. The local MPs there met with the Chief

Executive on Friday. We've been so impressed by the strength of the

management here. It's better than it's ever been in the 20 years I've

been a member of Parliament. Very open and transparent, ready to

learn what has happened at Mid Staffs. But there is no comparison

between what happened at Mid Staffs and what is happening here. This

hospital is safer than it's ever been.

Meanwhile, a damning report from the Public Accounts Committee

fiercely criticised decisions to build a new PFI hospital at

Peterborough and to award a franchise to run the nearby

Hinchingbrooke Hospital as a complete lack of strategic

oversight. The private company Circle has been brought in to run

Hinchingbrooke but so far it's been unable to meet its savings targets.

While Peterborough hospital was built 24 miles away which has left

the Trust with a �50 million deficit. We've really lost and got

the worst of both worlds. It's simply the case that the Department

of Health cannot afford to sub Peterborough hospital �50 million

to pay off its deficit every year. It's not sustainable now and both

the Department of Health and the Treasury need to pick up the pieces

of the decisions made by the previous government.

So, where do we stand? Hinchingbrooke is the first

hospital to be run by a private company. It's a political football,

and Peterborough has a 30 year PFI contract. Something's got to give.

What? One of the points that was made in the clip you played is the

point about good management, having good people running hospitals and

that makes a huge difference. visited Peterborough Hospital.

There is massive PFI debt which was completely unsustainable, that deal

and arrangement should never have been signed. Almost 19% of the

Trust's annual income is going on paying PFI repayments which is

unsustainable. It was a bad decision to do it. The point now is

we've got to help and the Government has already helped with

some bailout funds to support Peterborough Hospital. There's lots

of things that can be done locally. For example, the old hospital site

could be sold off and that is something that the local council

needs to do a bit more to support the hospital in in selling that. It

is also about making good managers and getting to grips with its

finances. That is something we've been supportive with to make sure

the local patients continue to get high-quality healthcare. Angela

Smith, that PFI contract happened under Labour. It did and we have to

look and learn lessons from this. The first thing to do is to say

what are the lessons that can be learned? Get the problem sorted out

first of all. Get the players around the table, the Department of

Health, the Treasury, the local health authority. And where do we

go from here to resolve the problem. Then we have to reflect on where

the problems were and looking at the Audit Commission report, what

is very clear is when the board and the strategic health authority

submitted their plans to the Government back in 2004, they were

vastly overoptimistic about the kind of work they'd be doing at the

hospital. That should have been picked up, they shouldn't have put

that in. The Strategic Health Authority should not have been

supporting that bid. The problem is that the Department of Health

didn't pick it up but now even if they did, because of the way the

law is, they couldn't stop it. is the way forward? What is the

Treasury going to do? And the Department of Health? One thing

we've already done and I'm personally involved in overseeing

is making sure we've got a task force going into Peterborough with

big PFI debts to help those Trusts work out how to minimise... It is a

huge debt, what can happen? We've already worked out we can reduce

some of the PFI repayments by better structuring the debt. We've

got a task force helping hospitals and the Trust to do that. Isn't the

significance here, what I don't understand is why was a nearby

hospital given a 10 year contract for a private company whilst we

knew there were these problems in Peterborough Hospital? That has to

be the second part of any investigation. Why are they locked

into these contracts? Do you think these hospitals will have to close?

We will make sure local patients continue to be treated and we have

a guarantee about that, they will continue to have high-quality

healthcare. The previous government on Hinchingbrooke looked at

tendering out to a private company. And to the NHS. To running

Hinchingbrooke and that was the idea. A group of doctors came

together with Circle healthcare with clinical knowledge about how

to reduce costs. That company has made good strides in reducing some

of the debt burden. It does show how having clinical leadership,

doctors and nurses in charge is not perfect because they had a

difficult situation to start from, but it has made a difference in

reducing the debt because they are prioritising services. The priority

has to be patients and resolving the problem but those two issues

have to be looked at. One is about having the kind of bid that was

made by the hospital was overoptimistic and should not have

been allowed. But, secondly, you really shouldn't be giving private

contracts to hospitals who are then competing with the NHS. The NHS

should be running the hospitals, not the private sector.

Well, now to the future of the workers in the region's remaining

Remploy factory. It is the last Government factory especially set

up for disabled workers in the East. In December, workers heard the

plant was not commercially viable and was threatened with closure if

private investors can't be found. The deadline for buyers to express

an interest is at the end of March an interest is at the end of March

Between them, Susan Wright and Harvey Ken have worked the Remploy

Norwich for 38 years. Susan has autism and Harvey has learning and

mobility difficulties. The whole country is in a massive mess.

You've got millions out of work. It is hard for anybody to find a job.

In May, their cardboard packaging factory will close unless private

investors can be found to take it over. Susan and Harvey want to show

us what they do but we've had to speak to them at a nearby hotel

because Remploy's head office, which comes under Government

control, won't allow us into the factory. However, in 1999, when

Remploy's future was assured, we were given access. I'm devastated

because it's not myself, it's my friends, including Susan, we will

never work again. Because people won't give us a chance. They don't

think we've got skills to offer. We're put on a rubbish tip. It is

difficult for me to get another job in spite of the fact I've got

skills because there's so many other young people and other people

you're competing against, against these younger students and that.

is devastating to think that when you're young, you will never work

again. It is weeks and months, and you are not good enough for what

they want. Remploy was set up after the Second World War for those

who'd been disabled during the conflict. Of Remploy's 54 factories,

36 of them are set to close including Remploy in Norwich which

has 46 employees, 28 of whom are disabled. Like most things, it

comes down to money. The average Remploy wage is �14,000 a year. The

Government also pays �11,000 per employee for extra assistance for

the employees to be kept in the work. That's a total of �25,000 per

worker. Instead of specialist factories for disabled people, the

government wants Remploy workers to get jobs alongside everyone else.

At a time when the economy is struggling, at a time when there is

no economic growth on the horizon whatsoever, to essentially turf

people out of Remploy, to remove the Remploy support network, which

is what it is as much as anything else, and to say to say good luck

getting a job, I think it is wrong. Nearby in Norwich, there's a county

council factory with eight employees five of which are

disabled. Next year they hope to make a profit so that they can do

without the Council's support. can provide for three little ones

and the good lady at home. The best thing about it is the teamwork,

really, how everybody pulls together. We are not in a position

to take on Remploy workers, unfortunately. But there are so few

places around like us that actively discriminate for disabled people.

In that when we do recruit, we try to recruit people with disabilities

where we can. There is a last-ditch attempt to encourage private

investors to take the Remploy factory on as part of a final

three-month consultation. I would encourage any firms who are able to

do that to follow the process as set out on the Remploy website for

making an expression of interest in the Norwich factory because that

could be a good solution all-round to keep that interest and that

packaging business going in Norwich. I haven't had any contact from the

company as part of the existing consultation. How do you expect to

retrieve the situation and compound business plans which will save

millions of pounds and these people's jobs if you're not having

any consultation? There are plans to subsidise Remploy workers in

mainstream jobs for three years. After that, there are no promises.

I don't know what to think. I just have to hope for the best, that's

all. That I'm not going to be benefits for years like I was

before I went to work at Remploy. Well, the Government is arguing the

budget for employment services for disabled people could be used more

effectively than spending �25,000 supporting each worker in Remploy

factories. I met up with Esther McVey, Minister for Disabled People,

and I put it to her the Government support scheme had found very few

former Remploy workers new jobs. When it first started, you were

quite right in October last year, we had only got 35 people into work.

We have reshaped it, we have been working with former workers to do

that, we have got 220 people into work, 250 people on to schemes,

training schemes, so actually we have come on significantly which

they think is positive and there is more we can do. We have taken

positive steps. Isn't it true that some people have said they may find

it difficult being in a mainstream work place? Well, I am not sure I

see what you're saying, but what we are looking to do is to get people

into mainstream work, disability experts, and disabled people

themselves say that that is what their aim should be, not to keep

them separated but actually put them in the mainstream. That said,

if Remploy factories will to continue, which several bomb to, if

people want to buy the assets and take that forward, because we have

had company buyouts, people will choose where they want to work and

I am a third choice. Does this make financial sense? Has subsidised job

could be cheaper than the hidden costs of supporting someone who was

not in work. It makes financial sense. What we've got the 2,200

workers who are in Remploy factories, the 5th of the budget

goes their. We now know we've got 6.9 million people who are disabled

and we've got to help all of them. Last year alone, we found 50,000

people jobs through employment services with similar disabilities.

We've got a look at the future because Remploy has had an

uncertain future for a very long period of time.

The reality is the majority of these people will not be able to

find new jobs. 85% of former workers have yet to find work.

the clip we had, we did talk about a transitional scheme to help

people into new jobs. The point that was made there it was

important. Many millions of people have disabilities. And they need

help and support and training, education and getting into the

workplace. The scheme third only helps disabled people, just 2000

people, that is not good money. It is about giving transitional help

to those employees. What do you think about that? Spreading money

thinly to help more people. If it was happening yes. If you look at

the number of Room for You workers and even with the numbers given

there, higher than the figures I understand and have seen, there are

still 750 of the 1,000 that have lost jobs that do not have work. I

think it is only for three years is the transition from doing. A lot of

people have to have support through their whole employment which is

going to be withdrawn after three years. What we want to do is to

give people support in their employment every day in they

implement how people cope with the work place. You don't do that at a

time when there are fewer full-time permanent jobs for people. People

find it hard to find jobs. That man and woman, they are bred

pessimistic about finding jobs. -- they are both. Remploy workers may

find they have even more to worry about as people with disabilities

are finding huge welfare changes. One in six people in the East is

disabled according to the ONS and the Tendring District -- district

of Essex has the highest proportion of disabled people at 26%.

Disability living allowance is to be replaced by personal

independence payments and the Government hopes that will save �2

billion. The disability element of child tax credit worth �57 a week

will become a disability addition within household benefit

entitlement. The severe disability payment will be replaced by the

Universal Credit and adults could lose �58 a week. General welfare

cuts will hit disabled people must according to the Government's own

impact assessment. There's also the bedroom tax were council tenants

over occupying homes will lose some of their benefit. This month gave

up his work to look after his wife. She had two brain haemorrhages and

sleeps in a special bird which is too small for them both. He sleeps

in another bedroom which will now cost them �60 a month. That is

something disabled people are more affected by it. The department had

said they have set aside �155 million for councils to help people

in a discretionary case, so that is good, isn't it? Nobody is going to

be in need of. I wish that is going to be the case but I fear that will

not be. If you are looking at a couple who do not really have a

spare bedroom, they either have a choice - moved to a smaller

property or pay the extra �14 a week. How will they be able to

move? You properties are not available for them to move to.

you say to people who say that the Government have made an arbitrary

cut. They wanted to take 500,000 people of disability allowance and

cut 2 billion Homs of the bill. First of all, there is some

discretionary relief to support any sort of bizarre cases they come up

or cases where there is real human need, for example the one you have

raised. Secondly, we him courage as much as possible to be engaged, to

be better off if they are in work than not in work. And it is also

important we make sure people who can participate in work, sometimes

part-time work... There is more and more people requiring help. We have

put in place all these changes and I have been involved in some of the

health care changes, making sure we have transitory support for the

rest deserving cases. It is important as well we don't get to a

state where people are written off as they have been in the past as

been disabled for the rest of their lives and we need to do what we can

to make sure people are helped back into workwear they can and this is

what it is about. Making sure everybody who can work does work.

Thank you. Now, for our political round-up of

the week. It is true for politicians, too - you use some,

you win some. -- you lose some. Norfolk council has lost its leader,

Derek Murphy resigned after being found guilty of bringing the Office

of lead into disrepute. News this week the disreputable practice of

discarding fish because of European quotas is to end. Our fishermen at

Aldeburgh and Lowestoft will actually get more flexibility, more

autonomy over what they do. improving the rest of the A120 is

what Essex MP would like to do. the importance of this road to the

economic well-being of the region and the county of Essex cannot be

understated. But parliamentary debate was the winner this week as

many of our MPs spoke passionately on the issue of gay marriage, none

more so than Ian Stewart. It's not just about a ceremony. It's about

being with them for the rest of their live. Richer and poorer,

sickness and In Health. That can apply as much to me as to straight

couples. Now, you will support us because

you voted for gay marriage. Were you prepared for that? I think one

county councillor only. The situation is as a matter of

conscience, I did what I thought was the right thing which was to

vote for equality and to give people who Ardgay the same rights

and freedoms everybody else has but we must respect everybody's opinion

and move on. It was a matter of conscience and I will do the same

thing again. Now, when it comes to the Lords, do you think it'll be

such a good debate? I think it will be very good. It was a measure

debate in the Commons but people want to show a lifetime commitment