03/11/2015 Victoria Derbyshire

Good morning. A review of whether more formal tests should be taken in

England. Some changes will be announced by Nicky Morgan today.

Reaction from parents and teachers. Plus, how much do young adults

understand about sexual consent? It can be your friends, people you

trust. That is the main thing which I really think I've learnt because

it's a worry that it's every day people who can end up doing what is

classed as rape. And South African judges ask whether

Oscar Pistorius should have been convicted of murder rather than

manslaughter. We'll bring you the latest.

Hello, welcome to the programme, we're on BBC 2 and the BBC News

Throughout the programme we'll bring you the latest breaking news

A little later we'll hear about life for some

of the people who've defected from North Korea to South Korea.

And we'll discuss what the Government's new surveillance

As always really keen to hear from you on all the subjects we're

Texts will be charged at the standard network rate.

And of course you can watch the programme online wherever you

Nicky Morgan will announce our website bbc.co.uk/Victoria.

Nicky Morgan will announce recruit 1500 teachers to

Nicky Morgan will announce introduced to under-achieving

schools. Here is what she told Newsnight. Let me be clear.

schools. Here is what she told absolutely no change. We want to

know the progress students are making from the reception baseline

test that we have introduced this year when they start primary school,

all the way through to Key Stage two tests at the age of 11. We want to

make sure that we are able to monitor that progress so the tests

that children take at the age of seven, we are confident that they

are identifying where children are making progress and where they are

not. So anybody who has in the last 48-hours printed a story saying

somehow there's some sort of change, they have been led on a merry dance.

After another set of pledges, let's take a look at how many changes

there have been over the last 20 years or so.

So after another set of pledges from another Education Secretary,

let's take a look back at just how many changes there have

When the Labour Party swept to power at the 1997 General Election,

one of their main mantras was "Education, Education,

Education" and Tony Blair appointed David Blunkett to the top job.

In 2000, he introduced the City Academies programme

which created state schools free of local education authority control.

Blunkett also abolished the Assisted Places Scheme

which paid the independent schools fees of bright pupils whose parents

In 2006 the Labour Education Secretary Alan Johnson announced

that the school leaving age would be raised from 16 to 18.

This was then bought in by the coalition Government in 2013.

When Labour's Ed Balls took the job in 2007 he announced that

a move broadly welcomed by teachers and parents.

When the coalition Government came to

power in 2010 one of Conservative's Michael Gove's first measures was to

allow any existing state schools turn themselves into academies.

He went onto to introduce a new national curriculum for both

He reinstated authors like Charles Dickens and Jane Austen to

reading lists, made it compulsory to study a foreign language up to

the age of 16 and gave the league-tables a shake-up.

Mr Gove also wanted a longer school day and shorter holidays

but these plans were firmly rejected and caused backlash from teachers.

Enter the current Education Secretary, Nicky Morgan.

Not too much has changed policy wise but there's been a big change

She appeared to criticize Mr Gove's way of working saying she wanted

a partnership with teachers not a war of ideas.

In January this year she dropped international GCSE's

And in February, she ended the policy of giving universities

Let's talk now to parents Janey Holliday and Arnie Krogh and

also here is Kathryn James, Deputy General Secretary of the National

And from their schools, Olivia Bradford is a Primary School

What Nicky Morgan is going to annoyance is a consultation at

whether tests at the age of seven should be marked externally and made

much more formal and that most teenagers will be expected to study

maths, English, science, a foreign language and history or geography to

GCSE. What do you think of the ideas? Let's start with the primary

tests. What I'm most disappointed about is that this is yet again

Tinkering around the edges. We have another test being looked at, we

have had a baseline check introduced, a phonics check

introduced, spelling, punctuation and grammar introduced, different

stages at Key Stage two and we have not had a coherent approach or

coherent look at primary assessment and we really need to get there.

What would be the big deal with tests that seven-year-olds are

already doing being marked by external assessors? I think what we

don't recognise is the fact that actually the tests have strong

limitations, they cause anxiety anyway and some children don't

perform well in tests. What we want to do is see the professionals, the

teachers here, who actually understand that what the children

are going through, we want to see them. All teachers are assessing

every minute of the day that they are teaching and they use tests

happily within their lessons. Formalising them puts a different

structure completely on the way that they use them, raising the levels of

anxiety. We want to value the professional judgment and we ought

to be using that. What Nicky Morgan says is, if you

don't track primary schools properly, then if a child slips

through the net, it's really, really difficult for that child to then

catch up. As a parent, do you accept that? I just want my children and in

fact all children for that matter to be happy and relaxed at school, to

focus on their strengths, not weaknesses, have good self-esteem

and to not be labelled by any tests or standards or levels. I want my

children to be relaxed and their teachers to do a really, really good

job. So that's my opinion on that. Happy children are happy students.

When you are happy, you will learn your subjects much more easily. Is

there any evidence that seven-year-olds are unhappy because

of this short, not very rigorous test that they take at seven when

they, most of the time, won't even know they are taking a test? 100%.

As well as being a parent to seven-year-old twins, I'm a

lifestyle coach and I coach mums. The pressure that mums feel, the

conversations that go on in the playground, conversations between

teachers, the amount of primary school tutoring is on the increase

all over the country. That's down to the parents though? Bhueptly, but

children are aware of the tests and the pressures they are under --

absolutely. I coach parents who've got stressed, anxious five, six and

seven-year-olds and I just think it's absolutely awful. Education

should be a thrill. Olivia, as a primary schoolteacher, do you

recognise this picture that our two parents here are describing? I think

I sympathise with it, I agree that that definitely can happen. I taught

year two, which is the year they are talking about, last year and I'm

teaching year six now. The final year of primary school? Exactly,

yes. My feeling is that, I think a lot of the stress does get put on to

children by teachers and parents. For example, my children last year

did not know they took their SATs, they sat down and did a paper that

day and off it went, we didn't tell the parents when the SATs were

happening. And that is a good thing? We just did it. So what you are

saying, from a teacher's point of view, it can be done, there doesn't

need to be pressure because you don't describe it as a test, don't

talk about it particularly, don't let the parents know and the child

turns up that day and they are just doing something lightly different

from a normal lesson? As someone said earlier, of course as teachers

we assess all the time so they will have all experienced some kind of

test at some point so we say, we are going to do this today and we sit

down and do it. They'll all have done maths and spelling and grammar

before so it's not something we throw on them and they are going to

think, I've never done this before in my life. Equally, it's not

something we make a huge deal of. I totally accept there are a lot of

places where that does happen but that is 100% down to teachers and

parents putting that pressure on children, it doesn't need to happen.

Teachers and parents have got a bit to chew over here, it's their fault?

I think Olivia is right that between teachers and parents, that is where

it is. If we start about a formal externally marked assessment or test

rather, that changes the whole structure and it does change the

baseline and that I think will encourage more stress because what

we are doing is actually testing children and putting seven-year-olds

through a test to hold the schools accountable. That can't be rightment

Or as Nicky might say, to see what progress is made with children

between the age of reception and seven. Absolutely. You need to look

at the progress they are making and I think the biggest disappointment

is the fact that what we are not doing is looking at the way the

assessment system building together. You have got older children. I want

to ask you about the core subjects that I think the education second

secretary is looking at. 90% taking history, geography, English, maths,

science. Is that a good idea or not, 60% do them currently? I think core

sub jokes do need to be caught. At the same time, we must remember not

all children are academic and not all will do well in maths and

sciences. But they are still going to have the take them? Yes, but we

shouldn't take away the Mickey Mouse courses because maybe going to get

the tops will Can you think of one that is Mickey Mouse? I can't. My

issue with the EBacc is the fact that what we are doing is penalising

children who're on a very strong academic stream, but actually may

not, for example, be doing history or geography or they may be doing

RE, music, they could be doing astrophysics for goodness sake, but

actually if they don't fit into "this" prescribed structure, the

pupils and schools will be penalised.

Is that what you think? Yes. You have got the progress eight measure,

use that. If only we had time to go into that!

Maybe another day but thank you very much. Olivia, thank you very much to

you as well from your primary school.

The Prime Minister's under pressure to drop plans for a Commons vote

on air strikes in Syria, after an influential committee

of MPs rejected further military intervention, at the moment.

Let's talk to our Political Correspondent Norman Smith at

Westminster. What's happening here, what's changing, what's shifting? We

have this report which is a real zinger of a report because the MPs

on the Foreign Affairs Committee do not mince their words, they say

bluntly that mill tar action by Britain in Syria wouldn't make much

difference. -- military. They also warn if we did join in, that could

add to the chaos on the ground. They question whether it would be even

legal for Britain to join in and they suggest it could undermine the

diplomatic clout if we were seen to be militarily involved. They also

question as to whether the desire of Mr Cameron for military action is

because he wants to be seen to be doing something, so their message is

pretty clear. They do not believe we should be involved. Let me give you

the conclusions of their report. They say, we believe there should be

no extension of British military action in Syria unless there is a

coherent international strategy that has a realistic chance of defeating

Isil and ending the Civil War in Syria. A clear message to David

Cameron, don't go there, forget it. This is a Conservative dominated

committee don't forget so you would think naturally sympathetic to Mr

Cameron. The chairman of the committee, Crispin Blunt, said it

would be unfair to the military to ask them to get involved when there

was no clear commit strategy. This is what he said. This is not about

answering the instinct that something must be done because it's

awful. This is about answering the question what needs to be done to

achieve our objectives. We owe it to our military, only to employ them

when there is a clear plan that is achievable. One report very

obviously isn't going to change everything. But when you put it

together with a lot of other thing going on at Westminster, you get the

sense that the prospect of Britain getting involved in military action

in Syria is now receding almost into never never land. One of the

arguments from the Defence Secretary Michael Fallon was that it

arguments from the Defence Secretary ill logical that Britain was

involved in bombing Isil in so-called Iraq but not in

neighbouring Syria. so-called Iraq but not in

stands doesn't it? Yes, there is no doubt that David

stands doesn't it? Yes, there is no Fallon, the Foreign Secretary,

stands doesn't it? Yes, there is no border and turning around, it just

makes border and turning around, it just

simply cannot win border and turning around, it just

in Syria. Let me show you some of the front-pages which are worth

looking at. The Times; Cameron backs down over plans to bomb Syria. The

Guardian similarly, Cameron, UK won't bomb Syria. FT similar story.

They are saying Downing Street's taken a formal decision to aBonn Don

the idea of military strikes in Syria. Talking to folk at Number

Ten, they say absolutely not true, we have not abandoned the plan.

In a funny sort of way, both these stories are true. The political

reality is there is no chance of Mr Cameron being able to win such a

vote. There is no sign of masses of rebels rallying to the side of him.

The Russian involvement has usually, the gated the argument. The

sense is there is no appetite in Westminster to engage in military

action. Realistically it is off the agenda. We will speak later to the

Conservative MP who led the rebellion and a Syrian political

activist. And what's life like

for those who manage to escape Do teenagers really

understand what sexual consent is? We'll be talking to a group

of young people Seven year olds may once again have

to sit national tests - as part of the Government's plans to improve

school standards in England. The exams for Year Two pupils were

scrapped when Labour was in power, but now the Education Secretary

Nicky Morgan will consult on It's one of several measures she'll

outline today including recruiting a pool of elite teachers to work

in areas with low exam results. Teachers are assessing every minute

of the day. They used tests within lessons. Formalising and puts a

different structure completely on the way they are used. Levels of

anxiety are increased and people are teaching for the test, which is what

we want to do away with. The British government is coming

under increased pressure to abandon plans to seek parliamentary approval

to launch air strikes in Syria. The Foreign Affairs Committee of MPs

has come out strongly against Downing Street has rejected several

reports from newspapers saying he's failed to convince enough Labour MPs

to support British bombing raids against Islamic State targets there,

as well as in Iraq. A South African appeal court has

begun considering whether Oscar Pistorius should have been

convicted of murder - not manslaughter - for shooting his

girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp in 2013. The athlete is currently under house

arrest having served one year A murder conviction could see him

sent back to prison for 15 years. The first nine bodies of the victims

of Saturday's Russian plane crash Investigators are still trying to

piece together what happened to the airliner carrying 224 people

when it came down, Yesterday airline officials said

an "external influence" Fog is continuing to cause travel

disruption in parts of the UK The Met Office says it could affect

parts of England and Wales Heathrow Airport cancelled

129 flights yesterday. Other airports

across the country were also facing Let's catch up with all the sport

now. I am delighted to say we will have a

world champion joining us at 10am. Max Whitlock is the

1st British man to win the World Gym He beat teammate Louis Smith

by a 10th of a point! His success reflected what

a brilliant GB team performance it was. How did they

become so successful? Cricket... Day 3 of the third and final

Test betweem England amd Pakistan is under way. England were 306 all

out 1st innings. A few moments ago, they were 3-0.

Ben Stokes has a confirmed collar bone injury. He did bat and managed

ten balls then was bowled out. Next, a rare insight into life

for people who manage to escape the secretive state of North Korea,

a country whose leader is accused of being a dictator, presiding over

systematic human rights abuses and whose people are subject to

strict controls and poverty. So perhaps it's no wonder then that

over the last 60 years around 25,000 North Koreans have

taken huge risk to defect to South We'll find out a little more about

their new lives in just a minute but first, here's this guide to the life

they're escaping in North Korea. To China, what happened to her there

was in many ways much worse than Yeon-mi has written

an autobiography called "In Order To Live", which she hopes will

help people to understand what life is really like for the millions of

people in North Korea and the danger We will speak to her in a moment,

but first this report What is life like for those who

managed to defect from North Korea to South Korea. They come in hope.

In the capital of the South, North Korean defectors get married in a

mass ceremony. They arrive with virtually nothing. The Government

pays for a grand wedding for 100 defect to couples. He says, it has

been a really hard journey to get here. Everything is unfamiliar. We

are grateful our wedding is being paid for. But the honeymoon may not

last long. Reality for defectors is tough. This is him Songiil second

line of business. He is selling chicken pieces he hopes this is the

1 that works. It has been a hard slog. When my earlier businesses

failed, I tried to Gil myself three times. I kept remembering how I'm

risked my life just to get here. South Korea is one of the most

competitive countries in the world. People trying to get ahead of each

other. The suicide rate is the highest in the developed world. The

suicide rate for defectors is three times the national average. This

woman is 45 years old and from North Korea. She defected to the South

four years ago. Now she wants to go back. She says the materialism of

the South is not as precious as back. She says the materialism of

family. She wants to go back to the north, even if it means she starves.

But there are successes. North Koreans who have made the dangerous

journey south and succeeded. This North Korean defector makes burritos

and profits in South Korea. She has enterprise written right through

her. In an all she had never heard of this classic, Mexican dish. When

she reached South Korea, she got the job selling kebabs, meet in a role,

and thought Rice would suit Korean taste. She had invented a Korean

style burrito and it sold like hot cakes. When I first arrived, the

South seemed so different. It could have been in America. In order to

succeed, I had to learn everything from scratch. This school for

defectors addresses that need for a job. It is run by a church but the

nonreligious message is, learn the skills that will make you employable

in the capitalist South, where there is discrimination against North

in the capitalist South, where there Koreans. Skills like making Coffey

to get a job in a restaurant. Grand dreams do not pay

to get a job in a restaurant. Grand philosophy, wages do. On South

Korean TV, there is a show for defectors who tell their harrowing

stories. The programme has changing attitudes towards North Koreans

among South Koreans. We will be able to see the North Koreans as

ordinary, like themselves. They have the same basic concerns and be

relatable. That the same basic concerns and be

Korean refugees arriving here and will help interaction between the

north and south the future as well. Defecting from tyranny is not easy.

It can also mean defecting from your friends and family. But still they

come, 1400 last year. The pain of uncertainty and change to a

different world does not put defectors.

Should Oscar Pistorius have been convicted

The former Labour Home Secretary, Jack Straw, has contradicted

his party's leadership by telling this programme there's no need for

There are huge safeguards about this. I know of no case where any

Home Secretary or Foreign Secretary has abused the process. The process

is so tight I think it would be impossible to abuse it. A Home

Secretary cannot think, I want to put a tap on to this person's

telephone. You can only do that if there is an application by law

enforcement agency. Tomorrow,

the Government's introducing the latest in a series of attempts

to update the law to grant police and intelligence officers new powers

to monitor suspects online. At the moment, those warrants are

signed off by the Home or Foreign Secretary, but Labour and some

Conservative backbenchers, want the What exactly are the changes and why

are they needed? The Conservatives have been trying

to reform the way the police and security services access

communications data - that's on the internet,

phones and messages since 2012. Then, though, they were

in coalition with the Lib Dems, Under the original idea, telecoms

and internet service providers like BT or Virgin would have been

paid to log their customers' e-mails, internet use and other

correspondence so it could be easily It was known as the Draft

Communications Data Bill or the Here's what the then Lib Dem leader

Nick Clegg said What people have dubbed

the snooper's charter, I have to be clear with you, that

will not happen. In other words,

the idea that the government will pass a law that means there would be

a record kept of every website you who you communicate with on social

media sites, that will not happen. But as you know the Lib Dems aren't

in power anymore, so there's no The Home Secretary, Theresa May,

told BBC 1's Andrew Marr the current plans aren't the same

as the ones she tried to introduce We won't give powers to go through

people's history. That's not what the investigatory powers bill is

about. What are the differences then?

The new bill won't let police call up your browsing history page

by page, but they will be able to find out which sites you visited.

Type in this, for example, and they'd know you'd been to the

It's thought the new law will say this data must be kept for a year.

To find out more than that, police and spies would need a warrant.

If judges aren't involved in awarding those warrants then

Labour will fight the plans, as will some Conservatives.

The security services say a change in the law is essential

because advances in technology are allowing terrorists to communicate

The head of MI5 Andrew Parker told the Today programme last month

that it was becoming more difficult to obtain online information.

We need to be able to do in the modern age what we have always done

through our history in being able to find and stop people who threaten

the UK and mean harm to the public. That means that we need to be able

to monitor the communications of terrorists, spies and others, we

need to be able to obtain data about their communications and other

information about them, but through all this, I think the important

thing to say is that we are focussed on the people who mean us harm, we

are not about browsing through the private lives of the citizens of

this country. We do not have population scale monitoring or

anything like that. We are focussed on behalf of the public against

those who mean us harm and the powers that the Government is

considering and are being drafted now will be discussed and decided by

Parliament, not by me, will be powers that are about doing that in

the modern age. For me, perhaps the most important thing is that there

is clear and transparent explanations of the sort of things

we do. The Government says the changes are

needed because terrorists and criminals are communicating more and

more online rather than on phones. Earlier, I spoke to the former

Labour Home Secretary, Jack Straw, who was responsible for the

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, the law that currently dictates

how the police and security services He told me why he thought

the new legislation was needed. Yes, I do. The reason for this is

that the current legislation, which I introduced 16 years ago, was

analogue legislation, this was in 1999 when the Internet was

absolutely in its infancy and indeed had only been established a couple

of years before. Nobody had interactive computers in their

pockets in the way they do now. We did our best to modernise the

legislation and to make it durable for the future. 15, 16, 17 years

after the ideas in what is the regulation investigatory powers act

were formed, the world has completely changed because of the

Internet and you need new legislation to cope with this. Are

you happy about the oversight that warrants will be required for the

authorities to look at a person's web browsing history and should a

politician sign off that warrant or a judge? There are certain

circumstances where at the moment the Home Secretary or the Foreign

Secretary who signs off warrants for telephone intercepts, not for

anything else so far as the police are concerned and for surveillance

intercepts, also for the intelligence and security agencies,

but there's a lot of mists about this. These warrants which are

signed off you say by a politician, are signed off in very controlled

circumstances and are subject judicial scrutiny which is

retrospective. A lot of myths about this. I want to see what the shock

proposing but one thing I want to reassure people about is that the

current system where the majority of warrants are in any event signed off

for example for surveillance by the police signed off in a judicial

process and much else besides, but telephone intercepts and one or two

other areas are controlled initially by the Home Secretary or the Foreign

Secretary, that there are huge safeguards about this and I know of

no case where any Home Secretary or Foreign Secretary, of whatever

party, has abused the process. Indeed, the process is so tight that

I think that it would be imfootball abuse it. The Home Secretary can't

wake up in the morning and think, I want to put a tap on this person's

telephone. You can only put a tap on a phone if there's an application by

a law enforcement agency. The law requires that the officials and the

Home Secretary or the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs are

personally satisfied that it's not only proportionate but necessary to

do this and there's no alternative way of gaining that information. And

then, to concentrate the mind, you have got a senior retired normally

Court of Appeal judge who scrutinises every warrant

application that you have signed to check whether you have done it

properly. So it's a system which has worked pretty effectively. I

understand some of the ostensible concerns about this, but it also has

the advantage of speed and there's another area which is national

security where even David Anderson, the Government's adviser on

Counter-Terrorism and things like that in his report, although he

recommends that the main judges should do this, he accepts when it

comes to national security, the contentious area, it should in

practice be the Secretary of State who makes the application with a

judge, so far as I can tell just having a role of ticking the box.

This is a complicated area but no-one should believe that the

present system has been abused or is open to abuse because it is not.

It's judicially supervisedment supervise -- super vied.

Does this not put you at odds with your party leader who wants

authorisation from a judge, not just a politician? What my party does in

Parliament is a matter for them and I'm not telling them what to do, all

right, and I'm not seeing the detail of the legislation so I can't

comment in detail on precisely what is in this Bill and I'm not a

politician any more. is in this Bill and I'm not a

saying is that what needs to be taken into account here is

saying is that what needs to be current system of

saying is that what needs to be Secretary or the Foreign Secretary

and, for example, the Northern Secretary or the Foreign Secretary

Ireland secretary, but in controlled circumstances and with

retrospective judicial supervision which is tough, by the way, works

and has worked very successfully in this country.

and has worked very successfully in known case of abuse that I can think

Nigel, to British citizens have who's a former Assistant Chief

Nigel, to British citizens have anything to worry about from this

new legislation? I think probably not. If you look at what is

happening, essentially it's a rationalisation of different pieces

of legislation that have been around for several years and evolved. The

idea is to bring these all together into one simple easily understood

piece of law. They are not asking for any additional powers. I think

the one thing that is being asked for is this access to Internet

browsing records for one year. But what we are looking at here is

essentially no more than giving the police the online equivalent

essentially no more than giving the bill. Do you agree with that? Of

course, we bill. Do you agree with that? Of

and the Home Office have been burning the Midnight oil working on

the detail of this bill because it's a very complex and challenging area,

even for lawyers and legislators, it's hard to understand the current

legislation. One of the functions of the new draft bill is to consolidate

the legislation and make it more readily accessible. I'm not so sure

that we can be confident that there won't be challenges for civil

liberties issues in this Bill. Of course it's the first duty of the

state to protect citizens and make sure they are secure from terrorism

and serious crime. But we have to balance that with the state's duty

to protect people's civil liberties, human rights and rights to privacy.

OK. Mark? There is a lot in that. My concern I guess is that I think it's

clear that there are going to be more powers required and part of

that is down to changes in technology. Nigel is right, there is

also a demand that there should be a consolidating bit of legislation,

partly because public confidence has been slightly shaken, even in this

country and certainly in other parts of the world by a lot of revelations

that Kim out with the so-called Snowdon revelations in the Guardian.

-- that came out. You are all making it sound like

it's just a formality, just updating the legislation to keep up with

technology? There is an element of that. Right to consolidate it

because there is a risk that the Security Services could arbitrate

the legislation to go in a particular direction. We have an

exceptionalist approach in the UK in relation to politicians deciding,

the idea that a minister, the Home Office Minister or Foreign Secretary

Philip Hammond essentially being able to have that authorisation,

rather than going through it at a judge-led system. Almost all of our

Western intelligence countries, the US, New Zealand, Australia and

America, they look at the approach -- and Canada. Theresa May is going

to have to go some way in the direction, having a two-stage

process as suggested by David Anderson whereby ministers in an

urgent situation will make a decision about whether someone

should be under surveillance and that gets judicial consent.

Retrospectively, yes. Why is it any more difficult to wake up a judge in

the middle of the night to get something moving quickly than to

wake up the Home Secretary? Well, it isn't and what I would say is that

this legislation is far more than just a formality. There have been a

number of reviews preceding it and David Anderson QC, the Government's

independent reviewer of terrorism legislation has made key

recommendations, one was that there should be judicial oversight of the

granting of warrants. He said it was one of the easiest conclusions to

him to reach and he pointed to the fact that that's what most other

countries in the world do, particularly the other countries in

the five Is. Nige Elle, you used to work for MI6, does it matter to your

colleagues if the Prime Minister signs off a warrant to look at

website history or browsing history? Ultimately it doesn't make that much

difference provided they can be confident of getting the speed of

access they need when they need it. It's about being able to get hold of

somebody to make that decision rapidly. A lot of this is being

driven by the global communication service providers, the cosy

relationship they have had with Security Services and Governments

was very much exposed with what happened by Snowdon and they are

driving to a large extent this push for a global protocol. Their

cooperation is essential. Let's go back to first principles here, the

reason we have the powers is for protection of national security,

protecting the individuals out there and I don't think we should forget

that. That isn't to say we want widespread powers for politicians or

even for a judiciary, we need to have more transparency on this,

ultimately a lot of change with this particular legislation is being

driven by desires of Internet service providers. Let me read you

some comments from people watching: A texter says keep politicians out

of any decision on whether a warrant should be signed. Another texter,

it's wrong to be snooping on my Internet use, it takes away my

privacy. Peter says politicians must be kept out of this and zombie

Tweets bogus argument by politicians, anyone can buy a

pay-as-you-go phone with Broadband access without ID.

Thank you all very much for coming on the programme.

Still to come; they made a triumphant comeback in 2012.

Now the Stone Roses release more dates; we'll be finding out more.

Time for the weather, here is Stav. In

Wales we soared 22 Celsius. Underneath that cloud and fog

temperatures struggled to get above eight, nine. The reason we do not

have so much fog around this morning is there is more of a breeze. There

is low-pressure meeting up from the south. There will also be rain to

seven and South West counties which will spread north through the day.

Further north we are dry and we have fog pockets around. By mid afternoon

and will be few glimmers of brightness. In most of England and

southern Wales it will be cloudy with outbreaks of rain. In the North

of England some patchy fog around. A few glimmers of brightness. The best

of the sunshine for Scotland is the north east corner. This evening and

overnight the rain band continues to march northwards into central and

southern Scotland. Further south, apart from some low cloud, it looks

like it will stay relatively mild. There could be a rumble of thunder.

The rain band will continue northwards across Scotland on

Wednesday. We are looking at a cloudy day with further rain and

showers across England and Wales. Sunshine will be limited. We could

see the odd glimmer here and now. Wherever you are, whether in the

sunshine or the cloud, it will feel mild again. I think continues for

the rest of the week. We will start to see some rain and increasing wind

as the week wears on. This is the first area of low pressure. You can

see tightly packed isobars and an active weather front bringing wind

and rain to most parts of the country. In the north there may be

glimmers of brightness. It will feel very mild with temperatures of 12,

16. It looks like it will stay unsettled and on the downside for

bonfire night. More on that tomorrow. -- damp side.

I'm Victoria Derbyshire, welcome to the programme if you've just

Has the Government given up hope of building support

It should be crystal clear that no means no - yet many young people are

It can be your friends and people you trust. That is what I have

learned. It is a worry that everyday people can end up doing what is

classed as rape. And should Oscar Pistorius should

have his conviction for shooting his girlfriend changed

from manslaughter to murder? It's being discussed

by judges this morning. The main BBC news so far this

morning. Seven year olds may once again have

to sit national tests - as part of the Government's plans to improve

school standards in England. The exams for Year Two pupils were

scrapped when Labour was in power, but now the Education Secretary

Nicky Morgan will consult on The National Association of

Head Teachers says it's added All teachers are assessing, every

minute of the day. They use tests within lessons. Formalising and puts

a different structure completely on the way they are used. It raises

anxiety levels and people are looking to teach for the tests. We

are looking to move away from that. The British Government is coming

under increased pressure to abandon plans to seek parliamentary approval

to launch air strikes in Syria. The Foreign Affairs Committee of MPs

has come out strongly against Downing Street has rejected several

reports from newspapers saying he's failed to convince enough Labour MPs

to support British bombing raids against Islamic State targets there,

as well as in Iraq. A South African Appeal Court has

begun considering whether Oscar Pistorius should have been

convicted of murder - not manslaughter - for shooting his

girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp in 2013. The athlete is currently under house

arrest having served one year A murder conviction could see him

sent back to prison for 15 years. Prosecutors told the court

the original trial had failed to Let's watch a little bit of the

court proceedings right now. The case is being set out.

Perhaps... I am sorry if I am a bit weak.

The first paragraph starts on page 32. That is numbered 32 or the top

32? The printed page, 32. Perhaps on the fact it might have

been less controversial finding circumstances that it was for of

death. This was the court's to all finding and the accused would have

been acquitted even on the findings, he would have still had a

punitive defence under the mistaken belief he was acting in unlawful

self defence. He would act on knowledge of unlawfulness. We say,

even if that is the finding, and even if that finding where to be

wrong, let's look at the principal findings. Once the finding of the

fact was that he genuinely believed he fired the shots because he was in

danger. It excludes dolus. He is representing Oscar Pistorius. We

will talk to an expert in South African law who will explain some of

what he was talking about in the next 20 minutes or so of the

programme. Let's catch up with all the sport

now. We'll start with the cricket. James

Taylor could only add to to his overnight score. Patel looked really

confident as he passed for two. The England tail did not last much

longer. Ben Stokes the last man out, batting with a

On to gymnastics, where Britain's men's and women's

team enjoyed great success at the World Championships last week.

Max Whitlock stole the headlines when he became the

first British man to become a world champion, beating team mate Louis

And you have brought your medals. What a week it was that you

personally. You have your two silver medal. What a year when you consider

you had glandular fever at the beginning of the year. It has been a

long journey. Team GB has had an historic week. The World

Championship have been fantastic. What do you put this success down

to? Did you envision becoming a world champion? You need to set your

ambitions high. I have had support from friends, family and girlfriend.

It is the support network that will help me get to where I am. It was

the best performance by a team at the World Championships. You managed

to break the Chinese stronghold. They have won that team event for

many a year. How has Team GB come so good? Strength in our team is very

strong and can only get stronger. At the moment it is hard to make the

team. This is a six-man team. At the Olympics it will go down to five. It

is that that keeps pushing out. Do you expect more medals at Rio next

summer? Can I expect to see the British Olympic champion? We hope

so. It has given us so much confidence going forward. Hopefully

it can be another confidence boost on the road to Rio. Hopefully we can

do a similar job. What is next? Rest and recovery. I want to have a good

Christmas and then the Europeans. That is the main aim. Rio has been

the goal for four years ever since London 2012 and we are all looking

forward to it. Thank you for coming in and bringing in your medals. This

is news from Australia. Michelle Payne has become

the first woman to win The Australian rode outsider Prince

of Penzance to victory at Flemington, ahead of

Frankie Dettori on Max Dynamite. I laid in bed last night and was

dreaming about it. I imagined talking to you after this race.

Unbelievable. The dream come true. This horse is awesome. Believes and

achieve, the power of visualisation. More at 10:30am.

Thank you for joining us this morning.

Welcome to the programme if you've just joined us.

We're on BBC 2 and the BBC News Channel until 11 this morning.

Lots of you getting in just about the education changes. Teachers will

not sometimes admit they have failed children and it do not get the

education they need. Philippa says, I believe tests are important and we

are too concerned about hurting feelings of children and we should

be able to distinguish between those who are more academic than others.

Tests are hyped up. Children should be prepared for real life. Do keep

your contributions coming in. Texts will be charged

at the standard network rate. And of course you can watch

the programme online wherever you are - via the bbc news app or

our website bbc.co.uk/victoria - and you can also subscribe to all

our features on the news app, by going to add topics

and searching Victoria Derbyshire. How much do teenagers and young

adults know about sexual consent? Viewers had to vote last night on a

programme about whether they thought it was a rape or not. This contains

graphic images you may not want children to see.

Everyone left. Did you fall asleep in the kitchen or something?

Jen, I am freezing, can you budge up?

This guy I know, he did something to me.

The two of you had a previous relationship, is that correct?

Yes, we went out for about three months or something.

Honestly, when I got the text I thought she was still interested.

You were very happy when Mr Morris came out of the kitchen, you were

Why did you not put a stop to it? All you needed to say was no.

You could have called out to your friend in

We had slept in the same bed loads before, so I climbed up

She did not do anything to indicate that she wanted you to continue?

She would definitely have said if she was not into it.

Did she respond in any way at all? Yes,

After that film was shown viewers were asked to vote. This subject has

been discussed before on this programme. We gave the Director of

Public Prosecutions scenarios to answer. People are really drunk,

they are not unconscious. Both think the other consented. In the

morning, for example, the woman wakes up, has no recollection of

consenting and think she might have raped. That is difficult. Consent

has to be given but there has to be an offence. If they cannot remember

what has happened, in that case, if I were the women I might go to a

support group and talk it through with someone. We have someone who is

so incapacitated they cannot give consent. The law is clear and there

has been case law that that would be an offence. If the woman is not sure

if she consented, she might have done or might not, you think she

should not make a complaint to the police. She should think about and

talk to support groups is she thinks there may have

talk to support groups is she thinks should talk to police. It is not as

simple as what happened if people cannot remember. It is each

circumstance of each case we would look at. How much do people

understand about young consent? We have a group of young people to talk

about us. You may not want children to hear some things we are

discussing. Rosie is 19 and starts university next year, Frankie is 18

and already at university, as is Darren who thinks there are blurred

issues when it comes to consent. Beth is a 27-year-old mum who says

she was raped back in 2009 and has waived her

she was raped back in 2009 and has Kyodi was cleared of rape after a

woman accused him of rape. Can I ask Kyodi was cleared of rape after a

all of you if you are clear on Kyodi was cleared of rape after a

sexual consent is and means. What would you say, Rosie? I

sexual consent is and means. What it's not just

sexual consent is and means. What definite yes and a definite

sexual consent is and means. What acceptance from both parties. So an

enthusiastic Overt acceptance from both parties. So an

just no, you acceptance from both parties. So an

have to say something, rather than... If you don't say no, it

doesn't mean you have consented. And you? Enthusiasm, willingness and

wanting to partake in any and or sexual activity between both

parties, in my opinion, anyway. Does that mean people have to say yes, do

they have to use that word or is it just about actions? I think it's a

mixture of everything. Yes in some aspects, actions, you know, helping

you do something that they enjoy and they would like and, you know,

helping you sort of understand what turns them on and turns them off.

There could be an issue of miscommunication and that could be

misconstrued on both parts. I felt she said yes or I felt he said no,

you know, whatever it is. For me, enthusiasm, willingness and wants

and communication as well. What about you Beth? It's definitely not

100% clear to most people. It wasn't to me. It's getting clearer now. But

definitely, I agree can with Kayode and Rosie that there has to be an

obvious willingness to take part, it doesn't have to be the exact word

yes because nobody says, shall we get undressed and move to the bed,

no-one does that, so it has to be obviously that you are both willing

and able to consent. If you are worried the other person is too

drunk, don't go there. I think from what we have discussed

backstage and everything, there is a general consensus that no-one ever

asks, are you willing to have sex, it's always in the heat of the

moment, it's not very sexy to come out with, would you like to have sex

now. You couldn't just say those words, you could say, "do you want

this". But that can come across in body language as well. Isn't that

where problems might occur the next day, the man or woman could say, he

seemed like he was willing or she seemed like he was willing or she

didn't have a conversation, he or she didn't say no, so I assumed

because she took her clothes off, she was willing. Which is why I

think as a generation, as a society, we need to discuss this more openly.

It's not discussed at all. I wasn't caught about consent at school.

Would you expect school to teach you about consent? Absolutely. Sex and

relationship education needs fundamental root and Branch reform.

Frankie, do you understand what it meant? Yes, the issue is, you can be

in a club with someone, dancing and go home with them, but in the taxi

on the way, you can sober up and think, what am I doing. At that time

though, that person could have decided that they are going to

engage in sexual contact. Just because you are showing attention

and flirting, even though you might have said you want to have sex with

them, doesn't mean that's the final decision. It's not just with women

and men, but everyone in general. Yes, you can change your mind, you

could say yes at one point, literally five minutes later, you

can change your mind. I suppose you have to communicate the fact that

you have. There is a really good animation which involves a cup of

tea which I'm going to show you now. You may have seen it which makes

everything so clear. Let's have a look now.

Just imagine about initiating sex. You say, do you want a cup of tea,

and they say, I would love a cup of tea. That's consent. If they say,

I'm not really sure. You could make them a cup of tea or not, but be

aware they might not drink it and if they don't drink it, and this is

important par, don't make them drink it.

Just because you made it, doesn't mean you are entitled to watch them

drink it. If they say no thank you, don't make them tea at all. Just

don't make them tea. Don't make them drink tea, don't get annoyed at them

for not wanting tea, they just don't want tea, OK. They might say yes

please, that's kind of you and then when the tea arrives, they actually

don't want the tea at all. Sure that's kind of annoying as you have

gone to all the effort of making the tea but they remain under no

obligation to make the tea. They did want tea, now they don't, some

people children their mind in the time it takes to brew the tea, boil

the kettle and add the milk and it's OK to change their mind and you are

still not entitled to watch them drink it. If they are unconscious,

don't make them tea. Unconscious people don't want tea and they can't

answer the question do you want tea because they are unconscious.

OK, maybe they were conscious when you asked them if they wanted tea

and they said yes, but in the time it took you to boil the kettle, brew

the tea and add the milk, they are now unconscious. You should just put

the tea down, make sure the unconscious person is safe. This is

the important part again. Don't make them drink the tea. They said yes

then, sure, but unconscious people don't want tea.

If someone said yes to tea, started drinking it, then passed out and

finished it, don't keep pouring it down their throat. Take the tea

away. Make sure they are safe because unconscious people don't

want tea. Trust me on this. If someone said yes to tea round your

place last Saturday, doesn't mean they want tea all the time, they

don't want you to come around at their place unexpectedly, you wanted

tea last week or to wake up to find you pouring tea down their throat

going, but you wanted tea last night. If you can understand how

completely lewd ludicrous it is to force people to have tea when they

don't want it, how difficult is it to understand whether they want tea.

Whether it's tea or sex, consent is everything, on that note, I'm going

to make myself a cup of tea. I wonder if you think that every

class of 16-year-olds saw that, it would be absolutely clear, don't you

reckon? Definitely. A lot clearer. Kayode, you were falsely accused of

raping a woman who had sex with you. How difficult was it for you to show

she had consented? It was a challenge. If I can go back to the

tea video, my situation for the viewers watching, was very simple. I

was asked for a cup of tea, I made a cup of tea, drunk the cup of tea,

woke up, had more tea and then when I'd left, she then decided that she

didn't want the tea. OK. Actually, the burden is not on you

to show that she consented? It was on the prosecutors? One of the

fundamental rules of law is, it's on somebody to prove your guilt. In my

situation, it was the other way around, I had to prove my innocence,

which was 100 times worse than that because I had to, you know, track

back and try and gather my own evidence and gather my own

information and present it and say, well actually, we had the tea

together, she wanted the tea, I wanted the tea, you know, there was

no denying of that, I shouldn't, my life shouldn't have been ruined, you

know, my name shouldn't have been out there and I shouldn't be paying

the price for something I didn't do. Beth, can I ask what happened to

you? So when I was 21, I was attacked by someone that I knew. I'd

been out at a pub drinking with a friend because I'd had an argument

with my boyfriend and she was trying to cheer me up. This guy came over.

I'd seen him before on student nights out and stuff and he got

chatting to us, I told him about the argument and he spent the evening

comforting me, buying me trunks and being friendly and generally

cheering me up. And you were fine with that? Yes, it was a nice

evening. He was aware I had a boyfriend so I didn't think he had

an ulterior motive. But when my friend left, he said, do you want to

come back to mine, we'll watch a movie, I said yes sure, I rang my

boyfriend, said who I was going with and where I was going. Then I

started to get quite hazy because I was very drunk, I'd had about two or

three bottles of wine at this point. I remember being in his room on his

bed watching a movie and he kept trying to kiss me and I kept saying,

no, I've got a boyfriend. Then I passed out. When I came to, he was

on top of me and I kind of tried to say no and turn away, but I was in

and out of consciousness, I wasn't strong enough or anything, so I just

kind of gave up and let it happen, and in the morning... There was no

way you had given consent, enthusiastic consent, willing

consent? Definitely not. You were in and out of consciousness, you didn't

even have the capacity to consent? Exactly. The point was, when you

left the next morning, you felt bad, you didn't realise effectively that

you would be raped? I thought I cheated on my boyfriend because I

thought that I'd brought it on myself. I believed at the time that

if a girl has accepted drinks, she's been friendly with him, she's

willingly gone back to his that she was asking for it and she should

accept what happened. Why did do you think that, where has that come from

in your head? I think society. Jokes in lad culture, it's definitely a

big, big thing. One of the jokes in uni that a lot of my very nice male

friends would say is, if she still has sex with you in the morning, you

know it wasn't rape the night before. They start off at jokes and

everyone says, it's just a laugh, it's just funny, but it ends up

being what people actually believe. OK. Thank you all very much. Thank

you for being so open and honest, thank you.

Still to come, David Cameron has warned against action in Syria. One

MP says it would be wrong to get involved. The latest news and sport

in a second but first Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have been talking

about her decision to have a double mastectomy to try to stop her

getting cancer. She had surgery after a gene test predicted she had

an 87% chance of developing breast cancer. She later had her ovaries

removed after a blood test suggested she could have early stage ovarian

cancer. Brad Pitt told MBC how he reacted when she told him the

results of the blood test. I was out in France and she called

me and I got straight on the plane to return. Seeing my wife have to be

at her strongest and knowing it was the scariest news is terribly

moving. Together they faced the crisis,

although it ended up she did not have a full blown tumour, she had

her ovaries and fallopian tubes removed. For Brad, Angelina's

surgery is a medical challenge. They have been inspirational. How did you

see your role in all of that? Support. Whatever needs to be done

to keep the family together. She was doing it for her kids and family. He

made it very, very clear to me that what he loved and what was a woman

to him was someone who was smart and capable of looking after our family.

It's not about a physical body. Still to come: We'll hear from some

of the Police and Crime Commissioners threatening legal

action over cuts to their budgets. A day of intense speculation about a

Stone Roses comeback ends as the band announces new dates.

Seven-year-olds may once again have to sit national tests as part of

government plans to improve school standards in England.

The exams for Year Two pupils were scrapped when Labour was in power,

but now the Education Secretary Nicky Morgan will consult on

You just say, this is what we are going to do today. It is not

something we throw on them saying, I have never done this before in my

life. Equally, it is not something we make a huge deal. I totally

accept there are a lot of places where that does happen.

The British Government is coming under increased pressure to abandon

plans to seek parliamentary approval to launch air strikes in Syria.

The Foreign Affairs Committee of MPs has come out strongly against

Downing Street has rejected several reports from newspapers saying he's

failed to convince enough Labour MPs to support British bombing raids

against Islamic State targets there, as well as in Iraq.

German police have raided the football federation headquarters

about the 2006 World Cup. The statement said they were

investigating the transfer of more than 6.7 million euros from the

German football Association to Fifa. There had been allegations that fund

was set up to secure Germany hosted the World Cup which they deny.

The first nine bodies of the victims of Saturday's Russian plane crash

Investigators are still trying to piece together what happened to

the airliner carrying 224 people when it came down,

Yesterday airline officials said an "external influence"

Standard Chartered is cutting 15,000 jobs worldwide because of slump in

profits. This morning they posted a loss of ?90 million for the third

quarter. The bank is planning to raise more than ?3 billion in

capital to overhaul the business. Let's catch up with all the sport

now. Pakistani trail England by 31 runs.

England posted 306 all out in their first innings.

Cesc Fabregas has taken to Twitter to proclaim his support for Chelsea

manager Jose Mourinho, denying claims by The Secret

Footballer blog that he's the leader of rumoured dressing room unrest.

New manager Remi Garde watched from the stands as Aston Villa lost

Harry Kane rounding off Spurs' win, to take them up to fifth

And Michelle Payne has become the first woman to win

The Australian rode outsider Prince of Penzance to victory

That's all the sport this morning, Victoria.

South Africa's Supreme Court of Appeal is considering whether Oscar

Pistorius should have been convicted of murder - not manslaughter - for

The athlete is currently under house arrest having served a year

A murder conviction could see him sent back to prison for 15 years.

Let's dip into the proceedings. This is the factual matrix. There was an

area of law. It is about the drawing of the inference and during the

correct inference. I tried to make it plain that we have difficulty

with the interpretation. I hear you, I understand the

interpretation. What is more complicated is the previous

decisions of this court indicating it is the only thing that can happen

but it is open. If I may just come back to one point. Before that, it

is interesting... In commentary, 31-39... Those are the proceedings

live in South Africa now. Thank you for talking to us. Tell our viewers

here in Britain exactly what is happening in court today. This is

the appeal. What is happening is the prosecution has taken the matter to

the supreme court of appeal. The judge, it is stated, the original

trial judge made an error in law about finding Oscar Pistorius is

guilty of Cobb for homicide. In what way will they argue that she made an

error? -- culpable. They were basing the argument on the issue of

contempt. They are saying it is about negligence. He said he would

not be focusing specifically on the facts in this particular instance

that much rather on the interpretation of the facts as

relates to the law. I see that Barry grew, the defence advocate for Oscar

Pistorius, is arguing to the contrary. -- Roux. White little more

insight on the idea of contempt. -- a little more inside. He should have

seen shooting four times through the toilet door would Gil somebody. The

concept of Roux is difficult to get your head around. Murder is a crime

of intent. It is about being intent of causing the death to another

person. Culpable homicide acquires negligence. It means you are acting

in a negligent manner and not in the way a responsible person would. The

judge found Oscar Pistorius negligent as opposed to contempt.

They are arguing that Oscar the story is intended to Gil whoever was

behind the toilet door in a cubicle at that moment. It is a very strong

case. That is a really good explanation for us in Britain. If

the state manages to convince the panel of judges they are right and

Oscar this story should have been found guilty of murder, what could

that mean? -- Oscar Pistorius. As far as I understand, I was listening

to the argument being put forward by Barry Roux, the defence advocate.

What they are debating now is whether a retrial would be required,

bringing into question the issue of double jeopardy. To be honest with

you, it is a bit of a curve ball to me as well. As far as I know, the

Supreme Court of appeal is asking the question on whether the judge

had made the correct binding in law, had she given the correct

conviction? Is she had not, they will overturn the conviction from

culpable homicide to murder. That is the point of argument at the

moment. I'm interested in hearing what the outcome is. Thank you for

talking to us. I appreciate your time. But from a journalist in

Johannesburg who has been explaining that.

Six police and crime commissioners are threatening to bring legal

action against the Home Office over further police funding cuts.

The PCCs who were elected in 2012 have written to the policing

minister Mike Penning urging him to delay a decision on how much

They're warning the changes are unfair and unjustified.

In July, the new head told us that hard choices needed to be made about

which crimes were investigated. Our budgets have been cut

significantly, 25% over the last four years. Listening to what the

Chancellor had to say in the budget, we are anticipating those sorts of

cuts again. Over ten years we will have lost 70,000 posts. I do not

think it is possible for us to carry on doing up we have always done,

because we would fail the public. It would cause unacceptable stress

among officers and staff. It is like if your iPad has been nicked from

your home, and will not be coming round to help you. Exactly. We are a

public service. What do they want us to deal with? Theresa May insists

the forces can be more efficient. This has really significant

consequences. It is separate as an issue to the changes to the court

overall. We have been through a situation where we have already seen

?74 million taken out by the end of this financial year in Lancashire,

which represents 25% of our budgets. This is on top of that a change to

the funding formula which changes the distribution of funding to all

police forces in the country. In Lancashire, we face an additional

?25 million in cuts from the funding formula. Then we face is on top of

that further cuts with the changes to the spending review which will be

announced next month. White at what will that mean to policing across

Lancashire? It will be devastating. -- what will that mean? We will not

be able to deliver a service which is recognisable to the public. All

the decisions we have taken so far have meant we have taken out all the

savings from the back office. We have gone down from six divisions to

three divisions. We have made a number of changes to make sure the

officers on the front line can try to deliver a service to the public.

All those decisions have now been taken. Last week the Government

announced with the inspection on efficiency that Lancashire was one

of the most efficient forces in the country. They recognise we have made

the right decisions so far. We are making the right decisions. The way

we have been rewarded is further cuts of ?21 million to our budget.

It means we face decisions about neighbourhood policing and all the

work we are doing with partners on early action and prevention work

which is being put at risk. I'd agree you have already saved ?74

million, you say. As that money was being cut and you are reorganising

things, at the same time, you're also saying this will impact on the

way we please Lancashire. You have done it. We have so far. The service

has not been delivered in the way it has been in the past. We have made

decisions to push officers out. There are less of them. We have lost

so far 700 police officers in Lancashire, but we are making the

best of what we have. If you accept that as an argument saying, we have

done it so far, so far, so good. That is all it is. You cannot say

you can go on cutting ad Info night and will not have an impact. It

will. -- add infinitum. When you say it will be a service not

recognisable to the public if you have to cut another 24.5 million or

even more, what differences will tax payers see? At the moment, when

people call out the police, they are not getting the service they use to

get. The police will say, can they not have a look and try to deal with

the immediate threat? We are now policing to threat armour risks.

What we will face with the additional cuts being. On Earth is

the neighbourhood approach, the early action, working with the other

partner agencies, we face threats to that or the front counties where the

police interact with the public. They would go. -- the front

counters. The whole way we investigate crime will change and

that will put people's lives at risk. That is significant of the

changes being put upon us now. Just to be clear on that. Sorry to

interrupt you. However put people's lives at risk? When people call out

the police, they expect a service. With neighbourhood policing, people

think it is nice to do thing. A lot of the intelligence and information

dealing with serious and organised crime, a lot of the intelligence

dealing with counterterrorism, it is given to us by having interaction

with the public. That trust and confidence that you gain from being

a part of the community. Once you lose that, once you lose that

connection with the public, you lose all that information and

intelligence that comes from that. What we need to do is build up that

support and that connection we have with the public. That is a large

part of what we have been doing over the last three to four years. We

have been really successful in that and have been given plaudits from

the Government for what we have done. Now they are going beyond that

and saying they have to take further cuts. That is what is at risk. Thank

you for making that clear. Let me speak to your colleague in Cumbria,

Richard Rhodes. How much more do you face in terms of that it cuts and

what impact will have when it comes to policing the course -- across

Cumbria? The latest suggestions require us to save nearly 10

million, nearly 16%, of our budget. Cumbria is hit harder than anyone

else in the country in percentage terms. If we then prepare ourselves

for the comprehensive spending review later this month, we are

looking at around 25%. If we add all of that together plus an

inflationary increase, we believe we are looking to find another ?26

million by 2020 on top of the 20 million has already been saved. Can

you do it? Only with extreme difficulty. Up until now we have

been able to preserve the front line but we have to look seriously at

that. In Cumbria, 85% of expenditure is wages and salaries. If we're

going to come anywhere near those figures, we will have to look at

that. There is a lot of other stuff we can do. We have also been working

at back office and those sorts of things over the last four years. It

will be extremely difficult and it is quite clear that whatever police

force emerges income at the end of this, it will be very different from

the 1 we have at the moment. Are you really going to take legal action?

At the moment we are going to take legal advice over the strength of

any case. There are aspects in the consultation we believe are flawed

and we want to test that make final decision.

You would consider legal action against the Government would you?

Absolutely. We believe the consultation is fundamentally

flawed. The consultation itself that run over the summer months didn't

give us any of the technical detail we would have needed to Schmidt a

proper response and understand that the impact it would have had. None

of that was given to us. It's been given to us at the latest stage.

It's only a week ago they gave us the proper detail and it's just a

nonsense that something as significant and important as this,

that they have withheld that information so clearly we'll take

whatever means necessary to defend the safety of the public.

Thank you both very much. We have had a statement from the

police minister about the funding reforms; he says further changes are

needed and that the current model for allocating

As we have been reporting, the Prime Minister is under pressure to drop

plan force a Commons vote on a vote for military intervention on Syria.

Let's talk to John Barren who sits on the Foreign Affairs Select

Committee. Explain to our audience why you think it wouldn't be worth

British planes bombing Syria at the moment to attack IS tarts when they

are bombing IS targets next door in Iraq? Very simply, I think most

experts, military anyway, accept that air strikes alone will not

defeat Isil or diesh as they are called locally, and that the British

contribution would be very marginal indeed. What is needed is fresh

thinking instead of just more force and we have got to learn from the

mistakes of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya and ask ourselves one very

simple straightforward question, which presents the greatest threat

to the West, President Assad or Isil? If it is Isil, which most of

us think it is, what we should be doing instead is forging some sort

of regional alliance if we are going to get involved at all to make sure

that we stand the best chance of defeating this evil organisation,

otherwise we might as well not intervene at all. OK, I'll come back

to the regional alliance point you made. Why are they bombing in Iraq?

I question that logic as well as an individual MP. What we need to make

sure we do or try at the very least is forge some sort of regional

alliance. There is a lot of regional powers in the area who want to see

Isil defeated. We need to focus on mobilising that force, including the

Kurds in the north-east of Iraq, and put some form of coordinated plan on

the ground. At the moment, air strikes may stall Isil, if you like,

but they are certainly not going to defeat them and we need bigger

thinking, otherwise we may not get involved at all, certainly from

Syria's point of view in this vicious war that's been going on for

several years. Indeed. Are you embarrassed by politicians here and

across the region about the lack of big thinking? Well, some of us have

been making the point that what we need to do is learn from our

mistakes over the last ten years and our interventions, look at the big

picture. For example, why are we still calling for the overthrow or

replacement of President Assad when Isil is the bigger enemy. We have

got to speak to regional powers that perhaps we would not normally want

to speak with, whether it's the Russians or Iranians, speak to some

friend leer neighbours in the region as well and think about putting a

form of strategy together, not our own ground troops but local ground

troops in perhaps as part of a wider strategy to ultimately defeat Isil.

It's not just the military side of things we have got to look at, but

the none-military side. For example, why aren't we disrupting Isil's

financial flows, their business interests and why aren't we doing

more to disrupt their prominence on social media. They are great

questions, please answer them, why? These are some of the questions that

the Foreign Affairs Select Committee are asking the Government to answer.

I think that is part of the reason why you are covering the story today

because we have released the report, a series of questions which we hope

the Government will come forward and answer. Are you telling me the

Defence Secretary, it's not occurred to them to try to disrupt Isil's

money-making efforts? No, I'm saying it's probably occurred to them but

we are not seeing much evidence of that on the ground so we are saying

what more can we do, please come and talk to us.

Can you imagine a scenario of Russians, Iranians, Iraq, maybe

Brits, maybe if we were invited, President Assad himself sitting

around a table to it is can yous how to end the Civil War in Syria? Well,

at the end of the day, it's a cliche, but it's true all the same,

you know, you Makepeace with your enemies, not with your friends. At

the end of the day, it requires a diplomatic and political sluetion,

rather than just more force which, as we have seen with previous

interventions doesn't always achieve the aims of which it originally

intended. So yes is the short answer. At the end of the day,

there's got to be a political solution if there is going to be a

solution at all. I wonder how long that will take, do

you think? I think it could take a little why but what I do know is

that air strikes alone, and we'd only be talking about two or four

British War planes in the air at any one time above Syria, I think it

would have a marginal effect and would not defeat Isil as I think all

military experts acknowledge. But also, it risks escalating the

problem with the Russians now involved supporting Assad and with

the Americans in particular supporting the Free Syrian Army, the

two Air Forces, there's a remote chance that, unless there's some

very clear talking at higher levels, we could have accidents happen in

the air which could escalate the conflict even further. Would you

call for British planes to stop their military action over Iraq?

Well, we had that vote and we lost that debate and it's a fact that all

British War planes are participating in air strikes. The debate today

centres around the Foreign Affairs Committee report about intervention

in Syria and I certainly, and I'm not alone, would suggest caution to

the Government before proceeding. As I say, we need fresh thinking, not

just more force. Thank you very much. Let me bring

you some breaking news. We brought you coverage from the Supreme Court

of Appeal in South Africa which has begun considering whether Oscar

Pistorius should have his conviction for shooting his girlfriend Reeva

Steenkamp changed from manslaughter to murder. It looks like the Supreme

Court is saying it's going to give its ruling at a much later date. We

are potentially expecting a steer from them, but now they are saying

they'll give their ruling on Oscar Pistorius at a later date, they'll

make their ruling public as to whether it should be changed from

manslaughter to murder at a later date, not exactly clear when.

This news as well. Officers investigating a series of possibly

linked sexual assaults in the Clapham and Brixton Hill areas of

London have arrested a 24-year-old man in connection with the

incidents. He was arrested on suspicion of sexual assault last

night in the Brixton Hill area. He remains in custody at a South London

police station. The Stone Roses have announced

concerts in Manchester next summer. It's their first for three years.

Tickets go on sale on Friday, but will they follow up the gig with new

material? Let's talk to Colin Paterson, is it good news? It's not

the news all fans were hoping for yesterday. An exciting day in

Manchester, around 8 o'clock in the morning, the posters started

appearing in the northern quarter area of the city, a very

old-fashioned tactic, they put them up in record shops, hairdressers,

cafes and the word started all going around, the Stone Roses are coming

back, it must be the third album, because they have not released an

album since 1994, 21 years, so when the announcement was made last

night, fans were happy that there are three gigs but there was a

slight sense of anticlimax that it was not the new material that people

had been waiting for. Is that going to happen do you reckon or not, I

mean can they start writing new material, I'm trying to remember

them all. Remind us of the names of the band members. I don't think

their work ethic was massive? Ian Brown, John Squire, Rennie and

Mannie are the four piece. I met one of the members of the band at the

Dynamo magic gig. He said the four are back in the studio and working

on new material so I really do believe there will be a new album.

They are going to announce it between now and the gigs. I imagine

the gigs will tie in with new material. If not, I think some

people will start to lose patience with that. Very interestingly as

well, the dates of the gigs, 17th and 18th June, that is a week before

Glastonbury! There has to be a really good chance they'll be

headlining Glastonbury next year. So if you have ticket force

Glastonbury, you could be in for a treat. What about the comeback they

had a few years ago? Three nights at Heaton Park sold out within hours. I

very sadly spent my summer holidays following them to Barcelona for

their first comeback gig. The warm-up one for that, spending my

own money, not the BBC's to go for that! So maybe not the most

objective view when it comes to the Stone Roses but you can't keep

coming back and playing the old hits. At some point they have to

bring out new material. Thank you very much. A couple of

messages from you on the subject of sexual consent. Thank you for all

the messages. Toby says rape is rape but becomes a difficult issue when

alcohol is involved. If one party can be too drunk to consent, then if

the other party is in a similar state, they'll be surely too out of

it to seek consent or understand that consent hasn't been freely

given. Again, Max says, no-one's talked about alcohol as a problem,

if you drink less there would be fewer rapes. Lots commenting on the

tea video which we showed earlier. We posted it on social media if you

want to watch it. Ross says, I love the tea sexual consent analogy, it

should be shown in every school. One more for now, a balance in the

discussion of rape should include for the purposes of education of

youngsters that rape can take place within a relationship. That should

also be taught too. That is it for today. Join us again today when

Joanna will be here as I'm having more treatment for breast cancer.

Have a good day.