Browse content similar to 16/07/2013. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Line | From | To | |
---|---|---|---|
Politics. Labour and the Tories argue over who is to blame for | :00:44. | :00:48. | |
unnecessary deaths in NHS hospitals as a critical report slams the | :00:49. | :00:54. | |
standard of care at 14 hospital trusts in England. The Government | :00:54. | :00:57. | |
outlines options for replacing Britain's Trident nuclear deterrent | :00:57. | :01:01. | |
programme, but the Lib Dems and Conservatives cannot agree on a | :01:01. | :01:06. | |
plan, we talk to both. What would Britain look like if we leave the | :01:06. | :01:12. | |
EU? Nigel Lawson will explain why he is backing a 100,000 euros prize to | :01:12. | :01:15. | |
find the best route map out of Europe. Tony Blair likes them, | :01:15. | :01:20. | |
Gordon Brown loves them. As the UK swelters, should ice cream vans be | :01:20. | :01:24. | |
allowed to play their chimes more often? We have the inside scoop, | :01:24. | :01:34. | |
:01:34. | :01:35. | ||
And an hour full of puns, no doubt. With us for the whole programme is | :01:35. | :01:39. | |
Richard Lloyd, executive director of the consumer organisation Which, | :01:39. | :01:47. | |
welcome to the programme. Hundreds and thousands of pounds, even! | :01:47. | :01:50. | |
report from Which says that Britain's big six energy firms | :01:50. | :01:54. | |
should be forced to separate their generation businesses from their | :01:54. | :01:59. | |
retail arms to ensure customers are not overcharged. Are you suggesting, | :01:59. | :02:03. | |
like the banks, that we break up the big six? Exactly what you should do | :02:03. | :02:10. | |
is but a ringfenced between the part of the energy companies that have a | :02:10. | :02:14. | |
generation business and that sell it to us in the retail market. They are | :02:14. | :02:18. | |
able to sell themselves power and then sell it on to us, and that part | :02:18. | :02:22. | |
of the business is completely not transparent, it is impossible to see | :02:22. | :02:25. | |
whether they are competing properly with each other. They are very often | :02:25. | :02:32. | |
hiding behind trades of huge volumes of gas and electricity, and that is | :02:32. | :02:36. | |
a massive chunk of our bills at the end of the day. So what we want a | :02:37. | :02:40. | |
disease is a clear division between those two parts of unified | :02:41. | :02:45. | |
businesses that do generation and retail, and proper transparency, | :02:45. | :02:50. | |
proper competition. Would it actually bring down bills? Npower | :02:50. | :02:55. | |
has said it is the government's predictions on savings with more | :02:55. | :02:58. | |
investment in green technologies that has pushed up the bills, not | :02:58. | :03:02. | |
their profits, not from cycling a bit from generation to retail, but | :03:02. | :03:07. | |
that is what is pushing up the bills on the Government was over | :03:07. | :03:12. | |
estimating what can be saved. have got a blame game going on. The | :03:12. | :03:16. | |
suppliers are saying it is the Government's fault because of the | :03:16. | :03:18. | |
cost of taking Harman out of electricity generation, in | :03:18. | :03:25. | |
particular. -- carbon. There is a bit of truth in what both sides are | :03:25. | :03:29. | |
saying. We what we want now is to see wheelchair and by the | :03:29. | :03:35. | |
across-the-board. If the Government is going to negotiate for a new | :03:35. | :03:40. | |
nuclear power station, let's make sure there is transparency. We pay | :03:40. | :03:44. | |
for that through our bills, and at the same time we have this problem | :03:44. | :03:47. | |
in the wholesale market, where generators probably are not being | :03:47. | :03:51. | |
forced to compete with each other really strongly, and that, we | :03:51. | :03:56. | |
think, would keep prices in check, too. Across-the-board we need to see | :03:56. | :04:02. | |
these costs kept under control, much more honesty about what is driving | :04:02. | :04:07. | |
prices and bills. At the moment it is all done behind closed doors, it | :04:07. | :04:10. | |
is not transparent, the Government needs to ensure consumers we are | :04:10. | :04:15. | |
getting a good deal. I think they are starting to see that you cannot | :04:15. | :04:17. | |
persuade consumers to pay for this stuff unless you are honest about | :04:17. | :04:20. | |
how much it is going to cost and that they are fighting our corner | :04:20. | :04:24. | |
for a good price. It remains to be seen how much of the new legislation | :04:24. | :04:29. | |
that is about to go through Parliament is going to bring about | :04:29. | :04:36. | |
the transparency we are calling for. Well, it is time for our daily quiz. | :04:36. | :04:40. | |
Vladimir Putin is famous for photos done is showing off his virility, so | :04:41. | :04:45. | |
the question for today is, what's daredevil escapade has the Russian | :04:45. | :04:50. | |
president got up to now? Was it wrestling a giant squid? Skydiving | :04:50. | :04:56. | |
from a fighter jet? Travelling 50 metres under the sea in a high-tech | :04:56. | :05:03. | |
submersible? Or serving one of the world's largest waves in Hawaii? At | :05:03. | :05:07. | |
the end of the show, Richard will hopefully give us the correct | :05:07. | :05:12. | |
answer! Britain's Trident nuclear system is coming to the end of its | :05:12. | :05:16. | |
life. Ministers will have to decide if and how to replace it. Chief | :05:16. | :05:20. | |
Secretary Danny Alexander has been tasked with answering the question, | :05:21. | :05:26. | |
what type of deterrence does the UK need? As we have the head of Which | :05:26. | :05:29. | |
on the show, we thought we would review the options, although it will | :05:29. | :05:34. | |
be for the Government in 2016 to decide which is the best. Investors | :05:34. | :05:39. | |
could decide on a like-for-like replacement, that is expensive. -- | :05:39. | :05:45. | |
ministers. Building four new submarines could cost �25 billion. | :05:45. | :05:49. | |
But it will allow the UK to operate a continuous deterrent, as we have | :05:49. | :05:55. | |
done since the 1960s. This will get the stamp of approval from the | :05:55. | :05:58. | |
Conservatives. David Cameron has said he is crystal clear that it has | :05:58. | :06:02. | |
to continue in its current form. We could downgrade Trident, cutting the | :06:02. | :06:08. | |
number of submarines down to either two three. The Lib Dems say this | :06:08. | :06:12. | |
would save billions, money that could shore up conventional military | :06:12. | :06:16. | |
budgets. But it would mean the end of the round-the-clock deterrent, | :06:16. | :06:19. | |
something that Philip Hammond says is a reckless gamble with national | :06:19. | :06:23. | |
security. It is the option favoured by the Lib Dems, arguing the current | :06:23. | :06:28. | |
Cold War system is out of date. The UK could of course get rid of | :06:28. | :06:32. | |
Trident entirely, but with Labour saying it supports a nuclear | :06:32. | :06:37. | |
deterrent, that looks like the one option that will not prove popular. | :06:37. | :06:40. | |
The Defence Secretary said any talk of cutting back on Trident was | :06:40. | :06:44. | |
naive. Moving away from a tried and tested system which has protected us | :06:44. | :06:52. | |
for over 45 years now to try something different, potentially | :06:52. | :06:59. | |
more costly, certainly more risky, at a time when Russia is spending | :06:59. | :07:01. | |
$150 billion rebuilding its armed forces, including its nuclear | :07:01. | :07:07. | |
forces, Iran is attempting to attain nuclear warheads to put on its | :07:07. | :07:13. | |
existing ballistic missile Isles, I think this would be an extremely | :07:13. | :07:18. | |
foolhardy thing to do at this stage. -- ballistic missiles. I have been | :07:18. | :07:24. | |
joined by Penny Mordaunt and Nick Harvey, welcome to you both. Nick | :07:24. | :07:29. | |
Harvey, we have seen this morning two former chiefs of defence staff, | :07:29. | :07:32. | |
people of all political colours lining up to say this review is | :07:32. | :07:38. | |
wrong. I think they are wrong. We have had the first serious look at | :07:38. | :07:42. | |
this question for several decades, coming at it with an open mind, | :07:42. | :07:46. | |
looking at what we need in the 21st century, rather than what we needed | :07:46. | :07:50. | |
at the height of the Cold War, and I think now is the opportunity to take | :07:50. | :07:54. | |
a few steps down the nuclear ladder, to come off continuous at | :07:54. | :07:59. | |
sea deterrent. It might have made sense at the height of the Cold War | :07:59. | :08:04. | |
when we had a known nuclear anniversary, the Soviet Union, | :08:04. | :08:11. | |
patrolling as 24-7. But that ended 25 years ago, and it does not make | :08:11. | :08:16. | |
any sense in this day and age. the report does not make any clear | :08:16. | :08:20. | |
recommendations, does it? The review does produce options, but it does | :08:20. | :08:24. | |
not tell us anything we did not know. It does not back up your | :08:24. | :08:29. | |
political case. It never set out to make recommendations. It set out to | :08:29. | :08:35. | |
inform a political debate, and I can see that debate running from now | :08:35. | :08:39. | |
until the 2015 general election, when I think the nuclear deterrent | :08:39. | :08:42. | |
will be an issue for the first time since 1983. I think public attitudes | :08:42. | :08:46. | |
have shifted a great deal since 1983, and when people look at the | :08:46. | :08:51. | |
opportunity cost of putting all this money into a Cold War scale nuclear | :08:51. | :08:54. | |
deterrent, they will question the wisdom of that when there are so | :08:54. | :08:58. | |
many other competing demands, not least in the military, not least in | :08:58. | :09:03. | |
the surface navy, which is dear to Penny's hard in Portsmouth. You are | :09:03. | :09:10. | |
a former Royal Navy reserve cadet, looking at this review and the | :09:10. | :09:13. | |
options set out, is there anything that changes your mind about having | :09:13. | :09:19. | |
a continuous deterrent? No, it backs up what we knew all along, which is | :09:19. | :09:22. | |
that if you are going to have this, you needed all year round, and the | :09:23. | :09:26. | |
best value and most effective deterrent is what we are currently | :09:26. | :09:31. | |
got. The tragedy about this is that the two - boat option, which is what | :09:31. | :09:35. | |
the Liberals seem to be moving towards, was not part of the review. | :09:35. | :09:41. | |
It is such a nutty option, because it relies on is basically persuading | :09:41. | :09:50. | |
malign regimes and state-sponsored terrorists not to attack us on | :09:50. | :09:53. | |
months of the year which do not have the letter A in the name. Danny | :09:53. | :09:56. | |
Alexander ruled it out. He said it would be a crazy option. It is not | :09:56. | :09:58. | |
in the detailed costings. The three-boat option, which the | :09:58. | :10:02. | |
Liberals were going for, has now been shown to yield so little | :10:02. | :10:07. | |
savings, and not until 2025, that they are reverting to the two-boat | :10:07. | :10:14. | |
idea. It is good news, it backs up what we have been saying all along. | :10:14. | :10:18. | |
Do you accept the world has changed? We do not live in the Cold War | :10:18. | :10:23. | |
anymore, we do not face those same dangers. We face difference dangers, | :10:23. | :10:30. | |
but not the same ones, so it maybe that would provide cover, but do we | :10:30. | :10:38. | |
need it? We do need it. This is not a capability that would be used in | :10:38. | :10:41. | |
all scenarios, so some terrorist activity, Somali pirates, it is of | :10:41. | :10:46. | |
no use, but that is not an argument for not having it, because it will | :10:46. | :10:50. | |
cover us for a whole variety of scenarios. Your viewers will know | :10:50. | :10:54. | |
about North Korea and Iran. Russia, which might seem like a very | :10:54. | :10:58. | |
friendly country towards us at the moment, just last year was talking | :10:58. | :11:02. | |
about a first strike against US missile bases in Poland. The really | :11:02. | :11:06. | |
important fact is we have not got to just plan for what is happening | :11:06. | :11:09. | |
today with the deterrent, but what will happen over the course of its | :11:09. | :11:16. | |
life. But we have no known nuclear anniversary. Not at the moment.The | :11:16. | :11:19. | |
national-security strategy has downgraded the nuclear threat to a | :11:19. | :11:23. | |
second tier. There is no other part of our military capability that we | :11:23. | :11:28. | |
keep on constant patrol. We keep the skills, the equipment, and we have a | :11:28. | :11:31. | |
contingency basis, and we deploy them when we need them. There is no | :11:31. | :11:34. | |
reason why the nuclear deterrent should not be operated on that | :11:34. | :11:41. | |
basis. This is a threat we face, it is a threat that we will face over | :11:41. | :11:45. | |
the life of the next deterrent, and when you are looking at... This is | :11:45. | :11:54. | |
coming down to money, and to run the four-boat solution is 1% of the | :11:54. | :12:02. | |
welfare budget. �25 billion is a lot of money. But what it gives us, as | :12:02. | :12:05. | |
long as there are nuclear weapons in the world, our public want us to | :12:05. | :12:09. | |
have systems that will protect us from them being used against us, and | :12:09. | :12:13. | |
that is what this does very effectively. Would you feel less | :12:13. | :12:17. | |
secure without this deterrent? think most people will be thinking | :12:17. | :12:21. | |
it is right to look hard at the cost of all of this, is it still the | :12:21. | :12:25. | |
right thing to be doing? Have things changed so much that we should be | :12:25. | :12:29. | |
thinking again? I think, for most people in the run-up to the next | :12:29. | :12:32. | |
election, they will be thinking about where money is being cut from | :12:32. | :12:36. | |
many other budgets, pressure on public spending across-the-board. | :12:36. | :12:42. | |
This hypothetical defence question, it is going to be very hard for | :12:42. | :12:47. | |
voters to engage in it, but the numbers are enormous. You cannot | :12:47. | :12:50. | |
escape the track record of the Ministry of Defence in procuring | :12:50. | :12:54. | |
equipment, it is appalling. Absolutely right to be having a hard | :12:54. | :12:57. | |
look at this, exploring all the options, and are there more cost | :12:57. | :13:02. | |
effective ways of doing this? have to build two boats anyway, | :13:02. | :13:06. | |
because of the state of the current submarines, we need two to continue | :13:06. | :13:11. | |
the policy as it currently stands. So we are talking in the difference | :13:11. | :13:15. | |
in cost between two submarines, three and four, and the more you | :13:15. | :13:20. | |
build, the cost drops. So what are the savings? If we are talking about | :13:20. | :13:30. | |
:13:30. | :13:31. | ||
�1,000,000,000... This is nonsense. Those figures... Villa Pam and is | :13:32. | :13:36. | |
making its figures up as he goes along. -- Philip Hammond. If you | :13:36. | :13:41. | |
look at the Vanguard submarines, the first one cost 40% of the total | :13:41. | :13:47. | |
project, the subsequent ones cost 20%. I am not asserting that you | :13:48. | :13:52. | |
would say 40% by reducing from four to two, but you would certainly save | :13:52. | :13:56. | |
substantial sums, and if you went down to two, you could save as much | :13:57. | :14:02. | |
as 8 billion, and if you went down to three, as much as four billion. | :14:02. | :14:06. | |
And then crewing two three for 40 years, you are racking up savings of | :14:07. | :14:13. | |
possibly half a billion or more. bring us back to where we started in | :14:13. | :14:18. | |
all of this. If you are going to have a nuclear deterrent, you need | :14:18. | :14:23. | |
it available all year round. You cannot do that on less than four | :14:23. | :14:28. | |
submarines. The idea that things only work if you are using them the | :14:28. | :14:33. | |
whole time is self-evidently nonsense. The only other way to do | :14:33. | :14:37. | |
it is wait until London has been taken out or things are escalating, | :14:37. | :14:42. | |
and then send your submarines out with warheads. What would happen in | :14:42. | :14:46. | |
a prolonged stand-off? That is a more likely scenario than the idea | :14:46. | :14:50. | |
Penny is proposing that it will come out of nowhere. Even the current | :14:50. | :14:54. | |
nuclear deterrent would take three or four days to be ready to fire, so | :14:54. | :14:58. | |
we are not ready at a moment's notice, as we were at the height of | :14:58. | :15:05. | |
the Cold War. That.You would not get into a situation where a new | :15:05. | :15:07. | |
adversarial has popped up from nowhere and is threatening to | :15:07. | :15:12. | |
obliterate the United Kingdom overnight. You would be sensitive to | :15:12. | :15:16. | |
the situation and crack capacity up to something far more acting to this | :15:16. | :15:21. | |
as you felt it coming. If we were in a 1939 situation where the future of | :15:21. | :15:25. | |
the state was seriously at risk, we would have to have enormous | :15:25. | :15:34. | |
rearmament right across the board, nuclear and non-nuclear. I would | :15:34. | :15:38. | |
throw the gauntlet down to the Lib Dems and say, if you are really for | :15:38. | :15:42. | |
some kind of nuclear deterrent and are prepared to pay hell of a lot | :15:42. | :15:48. | |
more money for two boats, why don't we get a move on and sign up to two | :15:48. | :15:53. | |
now this side of the general election? We don't need to and it | :15:53. | :15:56. | |
wouldn't be right for the public purse to make contracts before they | :15:56. | :16:01. | |
need to. This contract will be signed in 2016. We now have the | :16:01. | :16:08. | |
opportunity for a national debate. Is it a red line in the sand for | :16:08. | :16:14. | |
post-2015 coalition politics? If they principle you will stand by? | :16:14. | :16:19. | |
is something to put on the table and discuss in a coalition. This is | :16:19. | :16:24. | |
critical to protect the UK. We should commit ourselves to replacing | :16:24. | :16:27. | |
this deterrent. It has stood us in good stead and we don't know what | :16:27. | :16:32. | |
world we will be facing in 20 years time and we have to have that back | :16:32. | :16:37. | |
up. The public wanted, and we should get on and sign for it. We will have | :16:37. | :16:41. | |
two ended there but no doubt we will have to do have this discussion | :16:41. | :16:44. | |
again. Fancy entering a competition which could net you 100,000 euros? | :16:44. | :16:48. | |
It's quite a prize, and all you have to do is write a 2,000-word essay | :16:48. | :16:51. | |
explaining how Britain would thrive if we leave the European Union. | :16:51. | :16:54. | |
We'll talk to the former Conservative Chancellor Nigel Lawson | :16:54. | :16:58. | |
about this in just a moment. He is chairing the panel that will decide | :16:58. | :17:01. | |
the winner. First though, here's a flavour of the debate amongst | :17:01. | :17:03. | |
British and world leaders about Britain's place in Europe that's | :17:03. | :17:13. | |
:17:13. | :17:20. | ||
know... If we don't address these challenges, the danger is Europe | :17:20. | :17:24. | |
will fail, and the British people will drift towards the exit. I do | :17:24. | :17:31. | |
not want that to happen. I want the EU to be a success. And I want the | :17:31. | :17:36. | |
relationship between Britain and the European Union that keeps us in it. | :17:36. | :17:43. | |
My priority will always remain yes, reform it, a referendum whether | :17:43. | :17:47. | |
circumstances are right, as we set out in law, but above and beyond | :17:47. | :17:51. | |
everything else, promoting growth and jobs and building a stronger | :17:51. | :17:56. | |
economy in a fairer society. Labour 's position has been consistent and | :17:56. | :18:01. | |
that's the right thing to do. We've said is not right now to have a | :18:01. | :18:04. | |
referendum in four years time because we think this bigger issues | :18:04. | :18:08. | |
the country faces at the moment. would ask the inhabitants of this | :18:08. | :18:12. | |
wonderful island that you can be very happy but you won't be happy if | :18:12. | :18:18. | |
you are alone in this world. can't do Europe a la carte. Imagine | :18:18. | :18:22. | |
Europe as a football club and you join. You can't then say let's play | :18:22. | :18:30. | |
rugby. Everything must be decided in Brussels and by Brussels. We do | :18:30. | :18:39. | |
indeed differentiate, but cherry picking is not an option. | :18:39. | :18:44. | |
probably want to see if you can fix what is broken. In a very important | :18:44. | :18:49. | |
relationship before you break it off. It makes some sense to me. | :18:50. | :18:52. | |
we've been joined by the former Conservative Chancellor Nigel | :18:52. | :18:59. | |
Lawson. Just explain to us exactly, there isn't a further stage before | :18:59. | :19:06. | |
you win that 100,000 euro prize? Everyone is asked to do a 2000 word | :19:06. | :19:13. | |
essay. The top 20 will then be invited to do a more substantial | :19:13. | :19:19. | |
piece of work between 10000 and 20,000 words, more thorough job and | :19:19. | :19:25. | |
come on the basis of that, we will award prizes. What is the point of | :19:25. | :19:29. | |
it? Why do you need a prize for someone to set out a blueprint for | :19:29. | :19:33. | |
Britain leaving the EU? It encourages people to do it, no bad | :19:33. | :19:37. | |
thing, and has been done over the centuries to get things going on. | :19:38. | :19:42. | |
The purpose is that there's going to be an in out referendum at least. | :19:42. | :19:52. | |
:19:52. | :19:53. | ||
What people have on their minds is, OK, we realise that the European | :19:53. | :19:57. | |
union is very unattractive in various ways. But what will be the | :19:57. | :20:04. | |
consequences of leaving? And this will be an exercise in looking at | :20:04. | :20:08. | |
what the economic consequences are, the legal consequences and political | :20:08. | :20:12. | |
consequences are, and how we would handle those. I think it's something | :20:12. | :20:16. | |
people will want to be informed about. Then they can cast their vote | :20:16. | :20:22. | |
in the referendum. You would like to set out what has not been debated in | :20:22. | :20:26. | |
full to encourage more people to perhaps make that choice in favour | :20:26. | :20:33. | |
of Britain leaving the EU? I have come to the conclusion we should | :20:33. | :20:40. | |
leave the EU and I have written at length the reasons. And I think a | :20:40. | :20:44. | |
number of people are concerned about all the bureaucracy, the fact the | :20:44. | :20:49. | |
regulation has become a bit of a bureaucratic monstrosity, the | :20:49. | :20:53. | |
interference when none is needed and so on, but they are concerned, so | :20:53. | :21:00. | |
they don't love the EU. But they fear leaving. They fear the unknown | :21:00. | :21:08. | |
so it's important that, although the future is unknown, we need to make | :21:08. | :21:12. | |
it slightly more mapped out. But we don't know what would happen. It's | :21:12. | :21:16. | |
all theoretical so that fear, to some extent, is well founded. Do you | :21:16. | :21:21. | |
think Britain is drifting, even though David Cameron has said he is | :21:21. | :21:27. | |
negotiating to stay and eventually? I think what most people think is | :21:27. | :21:32. | |
there's a few good things coming from Brussels, lower mobile roaming | :21:32. | :21:36. | |
charges in time for the summer holidays, things which matter to | :21:36. | :21:39. | |
people in their daily lives, and squeezed budgets, being helped by | :21:39. | :21:42. | |
the decisions made in Brussels. Other things people can't stand | :21:42. | :21:48. | |
about it but, in the end, it does feel as if the views of consumers | :21:48. | :21:51. | |
and businesses are being rather swept aside by a very intense | :21:51. | :21:55. | |
political debate. I'm not sure that will be helped by your prize. I'm | :21:55. | :22:03. | |
sure people will be willing to write about it. There's huge issues at | :22:03. | :22:08. | |
stake here and to talk just about lower mobile roaming charges is | :22:08. | :22:13. | |
trivialising it. That's important to many numbers of the public. | :22:13. | :22:19. | |
goodness sake, you have to decide where the balance of advantage lies. | :22:19. | :22:24. | |
I'm not saying members of the EU are wrong but it's a question of whether | :22:24. | :22:29. | |
it brings more good than harm. You have to judge where the balance is, | :22:29. | :22:33. | |
where it's going and the fact of the matter is, the European Union has | :22:33. | :22:36. | |
changed. There's been a fundamental change since the coming of the | :22:36. | :22:42. | |
common currency and the Eurozone which, quite rightly, we are not a | :22:42. | :22:46. | |
member of, and that is change the whole nature of the European Union, | :22:46. | :22:49. | |
and Britain's relationship with it and therefore it's time to take | :22:49. | :22:54. | |
stock. What I think you could usefully do with your prize is to | :22:54. | :22:56. | |
get people to focus on what matters to people in their daily lives about | :22:57. | :23:00. | |
Europe, good and bad. There are some very practical changes that affect | :23:00. | :23:06. | |
us all, as a result of the barriers between countries coming down, as a | :23:06. | :23:09. | |
result of the EU, and I think he should get people to concentrate on | :23:09. | :23:13. | |
that as much as the risks and what might happen if we exit. There's got | :23:13. | :23:16. | |
to be a debate about this, absolutely but, frankly, it seems to | :23:16. | :23:21. | |
be the debate is already happening without your prize. What do think in | :23:21. | :23:24. | |
terms of those Conservative MPs who going along at the moment with the | :23:24. | :23:29. | |
idea of renegotiating our relationship with Europe? Will they | :23:29. | :23:35. | |
be disappointed? I think so. I think it's clear from the interviews you | :23:35. | :23:44. | |
had before this discussion, that the European Union is not prepared to | :23:44. | :23:47. | |
make any significant changes. Any changes which David Cameron is able | :23:47. | :23:52. | |
to negotiate with Ed Miliband, will be, in my judgement, and I have | :23:52. | :23:56. | |
known the EU very well and have many, many friends there for many | :23:56. | :24:00. | |
years, I think they will be inconsequential. Do you agree with | :24:00. | :24:04. | |
that? David Cameron is campaigning for a new relationship with Europe | :24:04. | :24:07. | |
and then, when it comes to the referendum, if he still Prime | :24:07. | :24:11. | |
Minister, he will campaign to stay in, not what many of his | :24:11. | :24:14. | |
backbenchers would like to hear. He's got a problem keeping his | :24:14. | :24:20. | |
backbenchers and his party onside, and I think for most people looking | :24:20. | :24:24. | |
on, it does seem a bit odd to be having a referendum and, at the same | :24:24. | :24:27. | |
time, to be saying is Prime Minister, I want to stay in if | :24:27. | :24:32. | |
that's what you believe. Then you should stay in and promote the | :24:32. | :24:35. | |
benefits to businesses and consumers. If you want to get out, | :24:35. | :24:40. | |
take further steps faster towards getting out. Why does he think he | :24:40. | :24:46. | |
can renegotiate successfully a different relationship? Maybe he's | :24:46. | :24:52. | |
an optimist and I certainly wish the best of luck my own judgement is | :24:52. | :24:57. | |
that he is not going to get anything of any significance whatsoever. The | :24:57. | :25:01. | |
same with Harold Wilson, we've been through this before, in the 1970s. | :25:01. | :25:07. | |
He said he will renegotiate the terms and he got absolutely nothing | :25:07. | :25:11. | |
and there was a 1975 referendum where he got nothing but the | :25:11. | :25:17. | |
majority of people, it is a different setup, and we voted in | :25:17. | :25:20. | |
favour of it. What's interesting is that you're asking for people to | :25:20. | :25:24. | |
write a blueprint as to what happens to Britain if it leaves the EU. We | :25:24. | :25:27. | |
heard from European leaders saying you can't cherry pick, we're not | :25:27. | :25:31. | |
going to give up everything but we also heard from Barack Obama who | :25:31. | :25:36. | |
said it would be better to fix it and leave. Of course, Barack Obama | :25:36. | :25:43. | |
is not the president of Britain but the USA. The United States once as | :25:43. | :25:47. | |
in, why? Because they're afraid of anti-Americanism the European Union. | :25:48. | :25:55. | |
That they want a spinner. They want us to remain in for their interests. | :25:55. | :25:59. | |
If I was an American, I would be the same, but that's not the question | :25:59. | :26:03. | |
before the British people. It is about spheres of influence. Have | :26:03. | :26:07. | |
they got a lot to be frightened of about leaving as perhaps some people | :26:07. | :26:12. | |
think? Maybe we will shed some light on this through the essays Lord | :26:12. | :26:16. | |
Lawson will generate but for most people, they aren't much more | :26:16. | :26:22. | |
relaxed about the prospect of staying in for the long term. -- and | :26:22. | :26:28. | |
they are. Hoping the poem to get successions bashed hoping the Prime | :26:28. | :26:35. | |
Minister get some successes in his renegotiations. We must give credit | :26:35. | :26:38. | |
to the economic Institute of economic affairs. They just asked me | :26:38. | :26:44. | |
to do this and judge it. Will the winning peace be presented to | :26:44. | :26:50. | |
anyone? Will we see it in lights? Of course, it will be prominently | :26:50. | :26:53. | |
published. I will take it to number ten and I'm sure they will be | :26:53. | :26:58. | |
anxious to read it. I'm sure they will. You need to get your entry, | :26:58. | :27:08. | |
:27:08. | :27:08. | ||
it be your neighbours' loud music? Don't get me started! People putting | :27:08. | :27:12. | |
their feet on the train seats? Or even apostrophes put in the wrong | :27:12. | :27:15. | |
place? Well, for our next guest, the Lib Dem MP Mike Crockart, the most | :27:15. | :27:18. | |
irritating thing is none of these. It's nuisance calls. Unwanted phone | :27:18. | :27:22. | |
calls from firms trying to sell you anything from insurance to double | :27:22. | :27:31. | |
glazing. And he's got a plan to deal with them. Here's his soapbox. | :27:31. | :27:36. | |
Excuse me, is this a good time to talk? Have you considered a | :27:36. | :27:40. | |
stairlift? I'm calling in regard to your property. We are a country | :27:40. | :27:46. | |
under siege. 90% of the people I speak you don't realise it's on | :27:46. | :27:49. | |
their policy. I'm fed up with nuisance calls to my mobile phone | :27:49. | :27:54. | |
and landline and I mean unwanted marketing calls. Silent calls, | :27:54. | :28:00. | |
abandoned calls, text messages and recorded messages. Being pestered | :28:00. | :28:06. | |
day in and day out by these calls. And I know I'm not alone. If you | :28:06. | :28:10. | |
have this done you will notice a difference in your energy bills. | :28:10. | :28:15. | |
It's absolutely free. constituents have contacted me in | :28:15. | :28:20. | |
great numbers for stories about complaints about companies who | :28:20. | :28:29. | |
pester them. You may be entitled to payment protection insurance. | :28:29. | :28:33. | |
single month last, the independent regulator of Com recorded 10,000 | :28:33. | :28:40. | |
complaints about nuisance calls. Payment protection insurance and | :28:40. | :28:43. | |
insurance Company is where responsible for more than half | :28:43. | :28:46. | |
unwanted calls and are frequently blamed for this rise. They are an | :28:46. | :28:50. | |
annoyance for most people but, for many elderly people, they are also a | :28:51. | :28:55. | |
menace and one which puts them at risk of fraud, just as much as if a | :28:55. | :29:01. | |
pushy salesman turned up at their doorstep. Many of my constituents | :29:01. | :29:05. | |
complain about receiving nuisance calls despite being registered with | :29:05. | :29:09. | |
the Telephone preference service. A scheme designed to block cold calls | :29:09. | :29:13. | |
from telemarketing firms. The problem is, the calls just keep | :29:13. | :29:19. | |
coming and coming. Is this a good time to talk? With 19 million | :29:19. | :29:22. | |
members registered with a telecom preference service, around three | :29:22. | :29:28. | |
quarters of all landlines in the UK, something clearly isn't working. I | :29:28. | :29:33. | |
want one single point of contact, one regulator who takes in all forms | :29:33. | :29:36. | |
of unsolicited contact and one single simple process for any | :29:36. | :29:40. | |
individual who wants to protect the privacy but, for now, I will settle | :29:40. | :29:45. | |
for changes in the laws around how personal data is used and more | :29:45. | :29:47. | |
powers for the regulators to tackle companies which break the law. And | :29:47. | :29:51. | |
Mike Crockart is here now. And from Glasgow, we're joined by Anne Marie | :29:51. | :29:53. | |
Forsyth, Chief Executive of the Customer Contact Association, which | :29:53. | :29:56. | |
is a professional body for contact centres. And still with us is | :29:56. | :30:06. | |
Richard lloyd of Which? You can understand how frustrating and | :30:06. | :30:12. | |
irritating nuisance calls are. Absolutely, we are living in a 24-7, | :30:12. | :30:16. | |
always on world, and about 1 million people work in customer contact | :30:16. | :30:20. | |
centres across the UK, just about all of them dealing with 3.5 billion | :30:20. | :30:27. | |
inbounds transactions, lots of them very complex. Every time we do a | :30:27. | :30:31. | |
transaction, whether financial or anything, any interaction we do, we | :30:31. | :30:34. | |
tend to leave trails, and of course the whole thing becomes appealing to | :30:34. | :30:38. | |
organisations who want to contact us. So I can understand the | :30:38. | :30:43. | |
frustration. I think the most recent statistics I heard was a average of | :30:43. | :30:48. | |
two nuisance calls per week, and this has been hugely exacerbated by | :30:48. | :30:52. | |
the recent PPI thing. The news there is that once PPI is out of the road, | :30:52. | :30:57. | |
if it ever is, there will be other things, we live in a compensation | :30:57. | :31:02. | |
culture. It is not just small businesses doing this, it is also | :31:02. | :31:06. | |
big companies and big corporations, who are using and may be abusing the | :31:06. | :31:11. | |
idea of cold calling. The air. As you point out, there are two very | :31:11. | :31:14. | |
separate things going on, large organisations which, in some cases, | :31:15. | :31:19. | |
can be helpful, they called to tell you you are overdrawn, for example, | :31:19. | :31:24. | |
a text to say your shopping will be late or something of that nature, | :31:24. | :31:29. | |
perhaps your security has been threatened through fraud. All of | :31:29. | :31:32. | |
these calls are being drowned out somewhat by the nuisance and the | :31:32. | :31:39. | |
random, less targeted, and for larger organisations, the | :31:39. | :31:45. | |
reputational risk in doing these things is absolutely huge. The work | :31:45. | :31:53. | |
we do, we work between organisations and consumers, and our advice always | :31:53. | :31:57. | |
to organisations is, K, it is a very small percentage of the overall | :31:57. | :32:03. | |
customer service world, tiny, less than 5%, but it is huge in | :32:03. | :32:06. | |
reputational risk, and it is rather silly organisations who think they | :32:07. | :32:10. | |
can flout the law or just be careless in not checking the | :32:10. | :32:17. | |
processes. OK, let me come to Mike Crockart, because on that basis | :32:17. | :32:21. | |
nuisance calls are a pain, but there are legitimate reasons. Larger | :32:21. | :32:25. | |
organisations to make those goals, as we heard, and there is | :32:25. | :32:32. | |
legislation in place, is it not being applied very well? There are | :32:32. | :32:35. | |
two aspects here. Some of the legislation is not being applied | :32:35. | :32:40. | |
stringently enough, but also there are gaps, huge, yawning gaps in the | :32:40. | :32:44. | |
legislation. If we look at the level of annoyance this is causing people, | :32:44. | :32:51. | |
you know, we have 10,000 calls, 10,000 complaints per month to Ofcom | :32:51. | :32:55. | |
about silent and abandoned calls, 4000 about TPS, and we have no idea | :32:55. | :33:01. | |
how many are going to others about this. This is a huge problem, not | :33:01. | :33:05. | |
just a few calls being made by legitimate companies, it is | :33:05. | :33:10. | |
enormous. So there is the Telephone Preference Service in place, but who | :33:10. | :33:14. | |
is in charge of regulating nuisance calls? This is part of the problem, | :33:14. | :33:18. | |
too many people are in charge, at least five regulators have something | :33:18. | :33:22. | |
to do with it. That is because there are so money different parts of the | :33:22. | :33:25. | |
law that go towards dealing with nuisance calls, so there is a claims | :33:25. | :33:33. | |
management regulator that deals with PPI claims companies, there is Ofcom | :33:33. | :33:35. | |
that deals with silent calls, and there is the Information | :33:35. | :33:37. | |
Commissioner, that deals with nuisance calls and texts that are | :33:37. | :33:42. | |
unsolicited, laws of data than not allowed. We want the government to | :33:42. | :33:48. | |
get all those regulators to work together properly, we have started | :33:48. | :33:52. | |
having conversations, interrupted by a spam text the other day, with the | :33:52. | :33:55. | |
Minister and the regulators about how they can work together better. | :33:55. | :34:00. | |
Why not have one regulator? That would make things much clearer, one | :34:01. | :34:04. | |
organisation accountable, but they have all said the law is not clear | :34:04. | :34:08. | |
enough. It requires a lot of distress to be proved before the | :34:08. | :34:13. | |
regulators can find companies for using these techniques for getting | :34:13. | :34:17. | |
in touch with people. But companies are fined, and they? The current | :34:17. | :34:22. | |
fine is up to �500,000, a lot of money, that would break quite a lot | :34:22. | :34:31. | |
of businesses. It would not break some of the major companies that are | :34:31. | :34:34. | |
involved. The powers that the Information Commissioner's office | :34:34. | :34:38. | |
has to chase up those fines is not strong enough, so if someone ignores | :34:38. | :34:42. | |
the Information Commissioner for a month, the powers that they have to | :34:42. | :34:46. | |
force them to pay that fine are actually quite limited. What we need | :34:46. | :34:53. | |
to do, actually, is to massively change the whole way that consent is | :34:53. | :34:57. | |
organised around this. Because it is all about whether people want to | :34:57. | :35:02. | |
receive these calls, and clearly they don't. I was slightly worried, | :35:02. | :35:05. | |
reading the background to this, that consumers who tick the box that | :35:05. | :35:10. | |
say, yes, please send my details to a third party, for all those people, | :35:10. | :35:14. | |
including myself, who do not take that box, yet that information is | :35:14. | :35:20. | |
somehow sold on, that is illegal, isn't it? There is a massive issue | :35:20. | :35:26. | |
here around complexity, and as consumers I don't think we often | :35:26. | :35:32. | |
realised that we are doing this. Sometimes we are desperate to get to | :35:32. | :35:38. | |
the end of a script without reading it. I completely agree with that | :35:38. | :35:44. | |
piece. One of the reasons the regulator is an issue, we need a | :35:44. | :35:48. | |
stronger and better working of what we have got. We have recently seen | :35:48. | :35:52. | |
some of these large and well publicised fines, but perhaps they | :35:52. | :35:56. | |
are not big enough. Your point by breaking companies, we want to make | :35:56. | :36:00. | |
sure that legislation works and people do not -- who do not wish to | :36:00. | :36:03. | |
recall not called, and also those organisations which are dragging | :36:03. | :36:07. | |
down the whole customer services industry are properly dealt with, | :36:08. | :36:11. | |
you know, and a good example is the recent BBC Three documentary about | :36:11. | :36:16. | |
the company in Wales, the rather opportunistic company who ended up | :36:16. | :36:21. | |
with a very large fine. More of these, I think, will help with that. | :36:21. | :36:28. | |
Can I make a separate point? Very quickly! Regulation is one half, and | :36:28. | :36:32. | |
the other half is standards. The reputational risk to large brands, | :36:32. | :36:35. | |
if they are not seen to be staying within the law or annoying | :36:35. | :36:39. | |
customers, is huge. There are standards, we need to have more | :36:39. | :36:43. | |
adoption of standards that are well recognised, there is a global | :36:43. | :36:46. | |
standard. We need to have more of this, and we need to make it a | :36:46. | :36:51. | |
boardroom issue. Too often we see on the cover of stories, people are | :36:51. | :36:57. | |
shock are about things... Very briefly. Standards will not fix | :36:57. | :37:04. | |
this. Over half of nuisance calls come from PPI claim companies that | :37:04. | :37:08. | |
will disappear overnight if they are fine. Only proper regulation will | :37:08. | :37:11. | |
fix this and proper powers for a single regulator. Thank you very | :37:11. | :37:16. | |
much. Later this afternoon, the Health Secretary will make a | :37:16. | :37:19. | |
statement about a critical report into care at 14 hospital trusts in | :37:19. | :37:24. | |
England. The report, led by NHS England medical director Professor | :37:24. | :37:28. | |
Bruce Keogh, was commissioned after the Stafford Hospital scandal. | :37:29. | :37:33. | |
Jeremy Hunt has been answering help questions in the Commons, including | :37:33. | :37:38. | |
this from Andy Burnham. Seven of the 14 hospitals in the review have, | :37:38. | :37:47. | |
between them, cut a shocking 1117 nursing jobs on this government's | :37:47. | :37:51. | |
watch. Unsurprisingly, A&E performance has plummeted at all | :37:51. | :37:57. | |
seven. All 14 hospitals were meeting the A&E target in my time in office. | :37:57. | :38:00. | |
None of them are meeting at under him. Surely the right response to | :38:00. | :38:09. | |
this review is to stop dithering and act now on safe staffing levels. | :38:09. | :38:13. | |
Well, I am surprised that he wants to talk about the Keogh review | :38:13. | :38:17. | |
before we have our statement, but I'm particularly surprised because | :38:17. | :38:24. | |
it is the review that Labour never wanted to have. In all those | :38:24. | :38:27. | |
hospitals, stretching right their way back to 2005, a record of | :38:27. | :38:33. | |
inaction by Labour. I think the house might be interested. As a | :38:33. | :38:37. | |
former Labour councillor, a Mid Staffs campaigner, Ken Lowndes said | :38:37. | :38:42. | |
today, can you imagine this review and Andy Burnham or any Labour | :38:42. | :38:48. | |
Health Secretary? Not a chance! can talk to Vicki Young, who joins | :38:48. | :38:52. | |
us from outside Parliament. We have not had the report yet, but already | :38:52. | :38:55. | |
the politicians are lining up to blame each other for failings in a | :38:55. | :38:59. | |
number of NHS hospitals. What is interesting is that you have the NHS | :38:59. | :39:03. | |
leaders in England, if you like, trying to move on, to go into these | :39:03. | :39:08. | |
hospitals, which is what Sir Bruce Keogh's team did, going to speak to | :39:08. | :39:13. | |
patients and staff about what is going on, to see what improvements | :39:13. | :39:17. | |
can be made, DC the regulatory system is robust enough, to see if | :39:17. | :39:21. | |
people are taking responsibility for what is going on. Whereas, as you | :39:21. | :39:24. | |
saw there, the Conservatives wanting to go back to the past, and there | :39:24. | :39:27. | |
has been a huge political Barney about this going back to the big | :39:27. | :39:32. | |
debate, the big row about Mid Staffs. The Tories have Andy Burnham | :39:32. | :39:35. | |
in their sights, the man who was the Labour Health Secretary for just 11 | :39:35. | :39:40. | |
months, and he has come out and given his works to robust defence of | :39:40. | :39:46. | |
Labour's record in office. He says there is no evidence of a cover-up | :39:46. | :39:49. | |
by him, no evidence he was ignoring the warnings. He says completely the | :39:49. | :39:52. | |
opposite, that some of these hospitals, about five of these 14, | :39:52. | :39:56. | |
when he left office, he left a health warning on them, so this had | :39:56. | :40:01. | |
been flagged up by him and he said, going back to Mid Staffordshire, he | :40:01. | :40:04. | |
organised the first inquiry into that, even as civil servants did not | :40:04. | :40:07. | |
want him to. What the politicians at the end of this want to be able to | :40:08. | :40:13. | |
say is that the NHS is not safe in their opponents' hands. What period | :40:13. | :40:17. | |
of time was Sir Bruce Keogh covering? Did it include the time | :40:17. | :40:20. | |
that Andy Burnham was Health Secretary in the last government, or | :40:20. | :40:26. | |
is it solely looking at the years under the coalition? It has been | :40:26. | :40:29. | |
triggered because these 14 trusts had a higher than normal mortality | :40:29. | :40:32. | |
rate over the last two years, but it is certainly the case that in some | :40:32. | :40:36. | |
of these hospitals there were problems before, and I think that is | :40:36. | :40:41. | |
Andy Burnham's defends here. He is saying, look, I didn't like this up | :40:41. | :40:46. | |
when he was Health Secretary. But of course it is a much bigger debate | :40:46. | :40:49. | |
about the NHS, how will it cope in the future with higher demand, all | :40:49. | :40:54. | |
of us getting older, not much more money to go around? A lot of people | :40:54. | :40:57. | |
think some hospitals will have to close. The Labour I commit is that | :40:57. | :41:01. | |
the coalition has tried to paint the NHS in a bad light in order to | :41:01. | :41:09. | |
soften the public for changes. -- We are joined by Priti Patel, one of a | :41:09. | :41:18. | |
group of Labour MPs who have accused Andy Burnham of ignoring... Welcome | :41:18. | :41:26. | |
to both of you. Priti Patel, he went out of his way to sound bipartisan, | :41:26. | :41:29. | |
why has the Conservative Party and you decided to take the gloves off | :41:29. | :41:35. | |
now? From my own point of view, in the county of Essex, there are two | :41:35. | :41:39. | |
hospitals on the list of 14 hospitals, and I have just found and | :41:39. | :41:42. | |
my colleagues have discovered that the culture in the NHS around these | :41:42. | :41:46. | |
hospitals and some of the questions we have been asking have actually, | :41:46. | :41:50. | |
we have uncovered a range of not just failures but institutional | :41:51. | :41:53. | |
defensiveness, basically, where there has been a degree of denial | :41:53. | :41:57. | |
about what has happened in the past, and that's just fails patients | :41:57. | :42:02. | |
and does not mean we can move on in an adequate way to address the wider | :42:02. | :42:05. | |
concerns around patient care and the neglect of patients and | :42:05. | :42:10. | |
constituents. And you are blaming Labour for the institutionalised | :42:11. | :42:15. | |
objection and not helping or listening to patients? Well, if you | :42:15. | :42:22. | |
go back and listen to those who were around under the previous Labour | :42:22. | :42:24. | |
government, some of the independent experts, like Brian Jarman as well | :42:24. | :42:27. | |
and Baroness young, who was heading up the CQC, they have said there was | :42:27. | :42:31. | |
a culture at the time, the denial machine is how it is referred to by | :42:31. | :42:35. | |
Brian Jarman, but also Baroness Ye Yang has said there was a focus on | :42:35. | :42:39. | |
talking about good news, as opposed to dealing with things such as the | :42:39. | :42:44. | |
high death rates at these hospitals. Many of the challenges associated | :42:44. | :42:51. | |
with were patient care that the CQC has been trying to expose. That get | :42:51. | :42:55. | |
a response to that from Andrew Gwynne. That is not the full | :42:55. | :42:59. | |
picture, because it was under the last Labour government that | :42:59. | :43:01. | |
regulation of hospitals was introduced. It was under the last | :43:01. | :43:07. | |
Labour government that all these death rates were published on the | :43:08. | :43:11. | |
website. And of course if you were trying to cover these issues up, you | :43:11. | :43:16. | |
certainly wouldn't be going fully for transparency by publishing all | :43:16. | :43:21. | |
the mortality data online. Now, what about the patients in this, Richard | :43:21. | :43:25. | |
Lloyd? One of the biggest complaint is that they were not listened to, | :43:25. | :43:30. | |
they will not listened to by medical staff in many cases. This is why it | :43:30. | :43:34. | |
is so disappointing to see this being used as a political football, | :43:34. | :43:38. | |
and we want all the politicians to focus on why it was that patients | :43:38. | :43:42. | |
and their families, who time after time ran out the red flag and said | :43:42. | :43:47. | |
things were going horribly wrong, were ignored. How can we make the | :43:47. | :43:52. | |
regulator, the inspectors be made to respond to the patient voice? How | :43:52. | :43:56. | |
can we create a stronger patient voice? As well is getting data out, | :43:56. | :44:00. | |
the information out about how hospitals are performing, right down | :44:00. | :44:03. | |
to the individual consultant level. We need to see more transparency, | :44:03. | :44:08. | |
more honesty about what is going on, but also that responsiveness to | :44:08. | :44:12. | |
patients and their families when they do say, hang on, look how I | :44:12. | :44:16. | |
have been treated, this is not right. Is it fair to play politics | :44:16. | :44:21. | |
over deaths in hospitals? I do not think this is about politics at all. | :44:21. | :44:26. | |
You said that Andy Burnham's job was not sustainable. This is about | :44:26. | :44:30. | |
patients, and we have discovered there is this culture where they | :44:30. | :44:34. | |
have not been listened to, and to be fair, as the Parliamentary questions | :44:34. | :44:38. | |
I have been asking have demonstrated, 1500 red flags went | :44:38. | :44:41. | |
into the Department of Health, raising concerns about these | :44:41. | :44:45. | |
hospitals, and this comes back to the lack of transparency within the | :44:45. | :44:49. | |
NHS in terms of what just happened. We have to learn lessons of the back | :44:49. | :44:53. | |
of this review, when we hear the statement later, and not just for | :44:53. | :44:57. | |
hospitals to learn, but for them to engage with patients and their | :44:57. | :45:01. | |
families and the public to work with them in terms of managing | :45:01. | :45:07. | |
expectations and providing good clinical care. 1500 warnings about | :45:07. | :45:12. | |
the trusts but why were they not acted upon? They were acted upon and | :45:12. | :45:19. | |
that's where I take issue with what Priti Patel has said. In 2009, I | :45:19. | :45:23. | |
went to see Andy Burnham when he was the Health Secretary and I was a | :45:23. | :45:27. | |
backbencher at the time, along with my two colleagues who also | :45:27. | :45:33. | |
represented Tyneside and repainted the complete picture of what was | :45:33. | :45:38. | |
going on at a Tyneside. His officials told him he couldn't act, | :45:38. | :45:43. | |
as Secretary of State because it was a foundation trust and these words | :45:43. | :45:49. | |
were that there was no place in our NHS for substandard care and he | :45:50. | :45:56. | |
ordered the sea QC to go in and announced to Tyneside Hospital which | :45:56. | :46:02. | |
has happened right up to the review. Do you know what is the most | :46:02. | :46:08. | |
scandalous thing? For the last three years, there were still problems at | :46:08. | :46:12. | |
Tyneside except, up until March this year, when they gave it a clean bill | :46:12. | :46:17. | |
of health. That's battling to people. Shouldn't you be more | :46:17. | :46:21. | |
worried about conditions in these hospitals now? It's all very well | :46:22. | :46:24. | |
getting people to take responsibility for what happened in | :46:24. | :46:30. | |
the last government but Andy Burnham has been saying all of 14 are | :46:30. | :46:34. | |
missing their AMD targets and it is understood, the report will point to | :46:34. | :46:38. | |
the concerns over nurse staffing levels in the hospitals under | :46:38. | :46:46. | |
investigation. We are missing the point. Nurse staffing levels are too | :46:46. | :46:53. | |
low in these hospitals and it's led to poor standards of care. Bruce | :46:53. | :46:56. | |
Keogh has referred to that but that is not the full answer to the actual | :46:56. | :47:03. | |
challenges faced by these hospitals. We are talking about quality of care | :47:03. | :47:06. | |
and transparency. Actually, this is about the culture in these hospitals | :47:06. | :47:12. | |
and the NHS. I am convinced this is just the tip of the iceberg right | :47:12. | :47:17. | |
now. Some of these hospitals will go to special measures today and we | :47:17. | :47:20. | |
should be deeply concerned about that but as I have said this is | :47:20. | :47:27. | |
about transparency in the NHS, learning lessons and ensuring | :47:27. | :47:31. | |
patients are listened to and they and their families get the care | :47:31. | :47:37. | |
required. Andrew Gwynne and Priti Patel, thank you very much. Now, | :47:37. | :47:45. | |
remember this? The number of votes recorded for the candidates at each | :47:45. | :47:55. | |
:47:55. | :48:11. | ||
election is as follows. Martin Bell, Neil Hamilton, 18,000. | :48:11. | :48:21. | |
:48:21. | :48:33. | ||
scandal back in 1997. Or a surprise for me! Counts still provide much of | :48:33. | :48:38. | |
the drama of election night. But a report out today from the Electoral | :48:38. | :48:40. | |
Commission says that, despite a generally successful set of | :48:40. | :48:43. | |
elections in May of this year, provision of information at some | :48:43. | :48:46. | |
counts was patchy and in some cases announcements were infrequent or | :48:46. | :48:52. | |
inaudible. Goodness. We've been joined by Tom Hawthorn, head of | :48:52. | :48:54. | |
electoral policy at the Electoral Commission. And Mike More, Chief | :48:54. | :49:00. | |
Executive and Returning Officer at Westminster City Council. Can I | :49:00. | :49:04. | |
start with you, Michael. Were you happy with the way the elections | :49:04. | :49:10. | |
were done in May? I, personally, was not responsible for the elections in | :49:10. | :49:15. | |
May but I was very happy with them. We have them coming up in London | :49:15. | :49:18. | |
next summer aligned with the European elections, but yes, I think | :49:18. | :49:23. | |
what has happened across the country in the last couple of years has been | :49:23. | :49:28. | |
a good story. Do you agree? Apart from picking up on this patchiness, | :49:28. | :49:35. | |
what do you mean by that? Where were they patchy? What we found overall | :49:35. | :49:40. | |
weight the elections were run, backed up by what the voters were | :49:40. | :49:45. | |
told, 90% said it was well run. In a couple of places we saw on election | :49:45. | :49:49. | |
night there were some places where the communication wasn't as good as | :49:49. | :49:55. | |
it could've been and maybe it was good and bad in parts. Does this | :49:55. | :49:58. | |
concern of voters, how local elections and national elections are | :49:59. | :50:03. | |
run? Remember big queues when people couldn't actually getting beyond the | :50:03. | :50:09. | |
ten o'clock cut-off point? I think in the 2010 example, when it goes | :50:09. | :50:13. | |
wrong, people are up in arms and rightly so. What we should be | :50:13. | :50:17. | |
thinking about is how to make elections engaging, encouraging | :50:17. | :50:21. | |
people to get involved, people to maybe stay up late and watch it all | :50:21. | :50:26. | |
night and see the results, helpfully audibly. There's a need to keep the | :50:26. | :50:30. | |
excitement about elections and the results going. Otherwise, more and | :50:30. | :50:35. | |
more people will drift away from the process and won't engage with it. So | :50:35. | :50:40. | |
how we do does matter. What about the idea some returning officers are | :50:40. | :50:46. | |
inaudible? It's not good if you can't hear the result. We saw | :50:46. | :50:50. | |
announcements which are really good but the PA system in place wasn't | :50:50. | :50:53. | |
good enough. Probably, it's all right for some candidates have been | :50:53. | :50:57. | |
doing this for lots of years, they've been around a bit and they | :50:57. | :51:00. | |
understand what's going on but if you are a new candidate, you don't | :51:00. | :51:04. | |
understand and you need to know what's happening so you can provide | :51:04. | :51:12. | |
that essential element of transparency. What is your response? | :51:12. | :51:17. | |
Maybe this has not come across terribly well. Some colleagues don't | :51:17. | :51:21. | |
come across well but they should do. Surely they should be able to speak | :51:21. | :51:26. | |
loudly enough? My role is to talk to all the players, front of House, | :51:26. | :51:30. | |
this is what's going to happen next, no surprises, the result will | :51:30. | :51:34. | |
be a surprise but they're not surprised by the process, so keeping | :51:34. | :51:38. | |
communication going all the way through that, culminating in the | :51:38. | :51:42. | |
very clear, positive presentation. You're not going to sack the ones | :51:42. | :51:48. | |
who don't speak clearly or hold some sort of poll to find out? We are | :51:48. | :51:53. | |
front of House agent and we can agree that's what we are there for. | :51:53. | :51:57. | |
We have some good examples of excellent practice and will work | :51:57. | :52:02. | |
with colleagues and returning officers to explain a best practice | :52:02. | :52:06. | |
model for people to use for next year 's elections. How worried are | :52:06. | :52:11. | |
you about the next two years because there's a lot on your plate? | :52:11. | :52:15. | |
London, we have the European and council elections at the same time, | :52:15. | :52:19. | |
the third week of May, individual electoral registration, new process, | :52:19. | :52:24. | |
and then the general election. you, gentlemen, very much, and I | :52:24. | :52:29. | |
heard you perfectly, both of you. Now, in case you hadn't noticed, | :52:29. | :52:33. | |
it's rather hot outside. Time for an ice cream you might think. Well, in | :52:33. | :52:37. | |
a seasonal slashing of red tape, ice cream van drivers will be allowed to | :52:37. | :52:40. | |
sound their chimes for a whole 12 seconds, up from the current four. | :52:40. | :52:44. | |
But not until this autumn. But what will really freeze your brains is | :52:44. | :52:46. | |
noise campaigners think the Government has been wasting its | :52:46. | :52:56. | |
:52:56. | :52:57. | ||
time. Our very own Mr Whippy, Giles Dilnot, is finding out why. I've | :52:57. | :53:01. | |
come to the conclusion I'm rapidly becoming a Daily Politics culinary | :53:01. | :53:05. | |
correspondence having done a burger tasting last week, following a tub | :53:05. | :53:09. | |
of ice cream but weirdly, it's not about how ice cream tastes, but how | :53:09. | :53:16. | |
it sounds. Confused? Meet Leander. Tell me why we are discussing the | :53:16. | :53:21. | |
sound of ice cream? The law used to be it was the four seconds you were | :53:21. | :53:26. | |
allowed to play it, but now it is changed to 12 seconds. What would be | :53:26. | :53:32. | |
the difference of seconds for us? What difference does that make? | :53:32. | :53:36. | |
Apparently it can affect your business. We had a lot of customers | :53:36. | :53:39. | |
complaining that we weren't coming down their streets but of course, | :53:39. | :53:44. | |
they weren't hearing is because the times were not chiming for long | :53:44. | :53:50. | |
enough. They are complaining they don't get to hear you at all? | :53:50. | :53:53. | |
love the chiming, that's what British summer is all about. | :53:53. | :53:58. | |
would we have the noise abatement Society with us, because it's not | :53:58. | :54:03. | |
about the fact we don't like this, but about the fact that this was an | :54:03. | :54:10. | |
exercise in government cutbacks and you tell me why it didn't work. | :54:10. | :54:15. | |
code of practice was put in place to protect the mobile food industry and | :54:15. | :54:21. | |
by local agreement, vendors could have chimed for as long as they | :54:21. | :54:26. | |
wanted to anyway. The four second guidance was put in place 30 years | :54:26. | :54:31. | |
ago for worst-case scenarios, never to not allow the industry to China. | :54:31. | :54:36. | |
It was the consultation, the wait was carried out and put forward, | :54:36. | :54:39. | |
actually could potentially endanger the industry and set a dangerous | :54:39. | :54:45. | |
precedent for noise pollution in general. The government says it | :54:45. | :54:50. | |
spoke to noise stakeholders, I'm not sure what that is, but I would have | :54:50. | :54:56. | |
thought it would include your society. So would I. We worked on | :54:56. | :54:59. | |
the original code of practice I don't understand who they spoke to | :54:59. | :55:03. | |
but they did not speak to us. We could've had a chat, and ice cream | :55:03. | :55:11. | |
together, and worked out ourselves. Is there a push for you, soon there | :55:11. | :55:18. | |
was a relaxed, we can do 12 seconds now? We were surprised that there | :55:18. | :55:21. | |
was a fuss in the first place because ice cream is one of the | :55:21. | :55:25. | |
things Britain does best in the world. You'll never see an ice cream | :55:25. | :55:30. | |
van as good as ours. To be honest, for us, it's a lot better 12 seconds | :55:30. | :55:36. | |
because it's what people want to hear. I've not show sure about the | :55:36. | :55:42. | |
parents when the children ask for ice cream. It's good for us. | :55:42. | :55:47. | |
there any suggestion people don't like it? There's occasions when | :55:47. | :55:52. | |
certain times of day when children are sleeping, or elderly people, who | :55:52. | :55:56. | |
might be ill, sometimes people with special needs, can react strongly to | :55:56. | :56:01. | |
certain types of noises, so there is a need to have a legislation and | :56:01. | :56:06. | |
guidance in place, but it was never about stopping mobile food vendors. | :56:06. | :56:11. | |
It's about striking a balance. you regulate yourselves and think, | :56:11. | :56:16. | |
we tend not to go down there because not many customers want us and as a | :56:16. | :56:21. | |
residential area? People wouldn't come out if they didn't want it. We | :56:21. | :56:25. | |
would waste our time otherwise. can't think of any other industry | :56:25. | :56:29. | |
that is allowed to use sound to advertise in this way and | :56:29. | :56:32. | |
presumably, we wouldn't want to go back to Victorian times when people | :56:32. | :56:38. | |
are shouting in the streets? Absolutely not. It's important to | :56:38. | :56:42. | |
understand why the code was put in place to protect the industry as an | :56:42. | :56:46. | |
exceptional case against the control of pollution act, and the | :56:46. | :56:50. | |
regulations which would normally apply. Essentially, the government, | :56:50. | :56:55. | |
to cut red tape, has made more work for itself and didn't need to do | :56:55. | :57:00. | |
this? It was a completely pointless exercise but at least we still have | :57:00. | :57:03. | |
the mobile food vending industry chiming in the streets for those who | :57:03. | :57:09. | |
want ice cream. We may as well taste some of it so let's have an ice | :57:09. | :57:14. | |
cream. There's no point doing this unless you get to eat the food. Come | :57:14. | :57:24. | |
:57:24. | :57:24. | ||
on. Thank you. Thank you. enjoyed your ice cream is because | :57:24. | :57:29. | |
Richard and I will suffer without. I did like it when they said the best | :57:29. | :57:35. | |
ice cream vans in the world, but not at the best ice cream is. Do you | :57:35. | :57:41. | |
have a view on the times? I think it will wrap up a storm of protest who | :57:41. | :57:43. | |
will be pestered even more by their children but I think we should | :57:43. | :57:48. | |
relax. I think we can probably live with it. There's just time before we | :57:48. | :57:52. | |
go to find out the answer to our quiz. If you can remember what it | :57:52. | :57:55. | |
was. Let me remind you. So what daredevil escapade has the Russian | :57:55. | :57:59. | |
President got up to now? Was it: Wrestling a giant sea squid? | :57:59. | :58:04. | |
Sky-diving from a fighter jet? Going under the sea in a submarine? Or | :58:04. | :58:14. | |
:58:14. | :58:15. | ||
surfing in Hawaii? Richard, what's the answer? My choice is that he | :58:15. | :58:24. | |
went in a submersible. I think we might be able to show that picture. | :58:24. | :58:28. | |
This may not be very politically correct but I think he could be a | :58:28. | :58:33. | |
good James Bond villain. Do you think, Vladimir Putin and a | :58:33. | :58:39. | |
submersible? Was that a cat sitting with him? He's obviously a he-man. | :58:39. | :58:43. | |
That's all for today. Thanks to Richard Lloyd and all my guests. The | :58:43. | :58:47. |