:00:17. > :00:18.Hello and welcome to Monday in Parliament, our look
:00:19. > :00:23.Labour asks for reassurances over the troubled child
:00:24. > :00:35.Where is the Home Secretary? Why is it that nobody from the Govdrnment
:00:36. > :00:36.has sought to proactively come to this house?
:00:37. > :00:39.The Government insists no ftrther changes will be made for wolen born
:00:40. > :00:42.in the 1950s, whose state pdnsion comes later than they'd expdcted.
:00:43. > :00:45.And a grim assessment on the state of the modern world
:00:46. > :00:56.As far as I am concerned, I think we are living in the most troublesome
:00:57. > :00:58.times of my lifetime. Having lived both through the wall and dtring the
:00:59. > :01:04.complications Russia. -- thd war. MPs have been told to "get behind"
:01:05. > :01:06.the troubled independent inpuiry A Labour MP asked an urgent question
:01:07. > :01:11.of the Home Secretary after a group representing survivors walkdd away
:01:12. > :01:12.from the process, criticising the leadership
:01:13. > :01:14.of Professor Alexis Jay, who was appointed after
:01:15. > :01:16.the resignation of a New Ze`land When a Home Office Minister
:01:17. > :01:20.responded for the government, the questioner, Lisa Nandy,
:01:21. > :01:23.was unimpressed. And why is it that nobody
:01:24. > :01:29.from the Government is going to proactively come to this House
:01:30. > :01:31.and provide reassurance about the seriots events
:01:32. > :01:33.that have unfolded As this enquiry has unravelled
:01:34. > :01:38.in front of our eyes. Has the Home Secretary met
:01:39. > :01:39.survivors' groups And what steps has she taken
:01:40. > :01:43.to establish that the chair and the panel
:01:44. > :01:46.have the expertise and the working Has anybody from the Home Office
:01:47. > :01:52.investigated why so many lawyers have cited concerns
:01:53. > :01:56.about competency and leadership Does she expect
:01:57. > :01:59.further resignations? And has a new chief legal
:02:00. > :02:03.counsel been appointed? I am absolutely delighted as the
:02:04. > :02:13.minister responsible for probability -- vulnerability safeguarding
:02:14. > :02:15.and counter extremism to be It is absolutely at the cord of this
:02:16. > :02:19.Government's priority to The Home Secretary,
:02:20. > :02:26.who is in this House as recdntly as October the 17th answering
:02:27. > :02:39.questions in detail. The Home Affairs Select Comlittee
:02:40. > :02:41.has asked detailed questions of a permanence of the secretary
:02:42. > :02:43.of the Home Office. really quite wrong in
:02:44. > :02:46.asserting that there is somd sort of smoke screen
:02:47. > :02:48.in hiding behind independence. It is absolutely essential that this
:02:49. > :02:52.enquiry is an independent enquiry. The terms of reference for this
:02:53. > :02:56.enquiry were shaped with thd voices and the opinions of the victims
:02:57. > :02:59.and it is important that thhs I've acted in a number
:03:00. > :03:07.of criminal cases in which I have seen with mx own
:03:08. > :03:10.eyes the terrible consequences for adults of what happened
:03:11. > :03:12.to them as children. But I want to ask her a question
:03:13. > :03:15.from a slightly I have a keen constituent who,
:03:16. > :03:19.since the early part of this century, has been left
:03:20. > :03:23.in a hideous, Kafkaesque lilbo. He does not know whether he is
:03:24. > :03:27.an accused person, whether he is a witness,
:03:28. > :03:30.what is his status in He does not know whether he is
:03:31. > :04:00.an accused person, And he, like the victims, ndeds
:04:01. > :04:03.to be told when this is all But for him and for the victims
:04:04. > :04:07.would my honourable friend please make some enquiries
:04:08. > :04:08.of the enquiry to ensure that this man can
:04:09. > :04:12.either be prosecuted or set free? Every time ministers have come
:04:13. > :04:16.to the House and asserted that the current chair is the right person
:04:17. > :04:19.to take the enquiry forward. For the fourth time of saying that,
:04:20. > :04:21.why do they expect this House, the public
:04:22. > :04:24.and above all the survivors to be Of course, as the Minister has said,
:04:25. > :04:31.this is an independent enquhry. In particular as to its conduct
:04:32. > :04:34.and its findings, but that doesn't mean the Home Officd can
:04:35. > :04:54.take no responsibility at all. Can she tell as when a suit`ble
:04:55. > :04:57.legal counsel will be appointed Following the resignation of the
:04:58. > :05:06.previous chair in August, doesn t she know whether internal procedures
:05:07. > :05:12.have been established? This is not an operational manner, what does the
:05:13. > :05:15.Minister plan to do to restore trust in the proceedings for survhvors of
:05:16. > :05:19.sexual abuse and regain thehr support?
:05:20. > :05:22.To take the last point first, in terms of confidence, I
:05:23. > :05:25.think there is a huge amount we can do in this House.
:05:26. > :05:27.And that is actually to get behind the enquiry.
:05:28. > :05:32.I think it is worth getting in perspective
:05:33. > :05:38.that, while I'm disappointed that one victims group has deciddd not to
:05:39. > :05:40.engage with the enquiry, at the current time, that is really
:05:41. > :05:43.But I am hopeful they will be engaging
:05:44. > :05:49.We must remember it is one, and the enquiry is open for
:05:50. > :05:56.The Government has told the Commons that women born in the 1950s
:05:57. > :05:58.who find themselves caught short by changes to the state pension
:05:59. > :06:03.scheme can always rely on the benefit system.
:06:04. > :06:05.The group - called WASPI - or Women Against State
:06:06. > :06:07.Pension Inequality - says there wasn't enough tile
:06:08. > :06:11.or notice given before raising their state retiremdnt age.
:06:12. > :06:16.With the Autumn Statement in sight - Mps who've campaigned on thd issue
:06:17. > :06:18.looked for a change in tone from the ministers at the Ddpartment
:06:19. > :06:25.The Government will not be introducing further transithonal
:06:26. > :06:28.protection beyond the ?1.1 billion already in place.
:06:29. > :06:30.Going any further could not be justified given the
:06:31. > :06:33.underlining imperative must be to focus public resources
:06:34. > :06:41.That is a very disappointing response from the
:06:42. > :06:47.And with 4100 names, Hull had the largest Waspi
:06:48. > :06:49.petition presented to this House last month.
:06:50. > :06:53.Labour has suggested changes to pension credit, which
:06:54. > :06:56.could be financed by clawing back hand-outs to the wealthiest to help
:06:57. > :07:00.Isn't it about time the Minhster understood that these Waspi
:07:01. > :07:03.women are not going to go away until justice is done
:07:04. > :07:12.As the honourable Lady has mentioned, Labour proposed tsing
:07:13. > :07:14.pension credit as a transitional mechanism.
:07:15. > :07:20.This was discussed extensivdly in the course of the Bill that went
:07:21. > :07:27.And it was decided that ?1.0 billion alternatively would be used as
:07:28. > :07:33.As long as I have got women like my constituent
:07:34. > :07:37.Gillian who comes to me and says, at 60, I have worked all my life
:07:38. > :07:41.but my body is telling me I can t do it any
:07:42. > :07:42.more. Without a pension.
:07:43. > :07:44.When will this Government to the honourable
:07:45. > :07:50.thing and start looking after the Waspi women?
:07:51. > :07:53.The cost of reversing the changes varies depending on who
:07:54. > :08:07.The different political routes have come up with
:08:08. > :08:09.different amounts, which actually vary between 7 billion and ?30
:08:10. > :08:13.I recently spoke to a consthtuent who was working in a
:08:14. > :08:16.Who is incredibly distressed at the thought of having
:08:17. > :08:19.to work another seven years in what is an increasingly physically
:08:20. > :08:22.Especially after having made her retirement plans to
:08:23. > :08:24.look after her daughter's children so that her
:08:25. > :08:26.look after her daughter's children so that her daughter
:08:27. > :08:29.What assessment has his Dep`rtment made on the implications
:08:30. > :08:35.not only for the women affected but for their families, too?
:08:36. > :08:39.Well, as the honourable Ladx has implied, the
:08:40. > :08:44.Department has considered this long and hard.
:08:45. > :08:46.And the current average age of exit from the Labour Party
:08:47. > :08:51.Well above the previous women's SPA of 60.
:08:52. > :08:53.I just wanted to make it clear, it is not
:08:54. > :08:57.just on that side of the Hotse that there are concerns abott this.
:08:58. > :09:00.Of course, we don't know wh`t's the
:09:01. > :09:04.Autumn Statement will say tomorrow, but I do think we ought to `t least
:09:05. > :09:07.keep options open to look at this, because it's not very satisfactory,
:09:08. > :09:16.As my honourable friend knows, public
:09:17. > :09:21.I know he intends to wait until Wednesday
:09:22. > :09:24.to hear what the Chancellor has decided, but I can tell him that
:09:25. > :09:26.this has been looked at long and hard,
:09:27. > :09:27.transitional arrangements of
:09:28. > :09:34.more than ?1.1 billion have been put in place.
:09:35. > :09:37.And the state pension age was discussed and then acted in 1995
:09:38. > :09:41.There have been further acts of Parliament, and always h`s
:09:42. > :09:45.I understand that reverting to the 1995
:09:46. > :09:47.state pension timetable would
:09:48. > :09:50.cost something in the region of something like ?39 billion.
:09:51. > :09:53.Does the Minister agree with me that it is
:09:54. > :09:55.easy to criticise the Government over this policy but more dhfficult
:09:56. > :09:59.to explain where the money will come from for any policy changes?
:10:00. > :10:01.And I thank my honourable friend for that
:10:02. > :10:11.Does my honourable friend agree with me
:10:12. > :10:12.that's the difficulty with the
:10:13. > :10:15.Labour proposal on pension credit is that that is actually not what is
:10:16. > :10:24.What is sought by them goes right back to
:10:25. > :10:28.the 1995 act, would almost certainly be a legal under the rules of fair
:10:29. > :10:31.progress for both sexes on pensions, and would cost an absolute fortune.
:10:32. > :10:33.I thank my honourable friend for that question
:10:34. > :10:38.Someone of the honourable gdntleman on the other side was shouthng out,
:10:39. > :10:42.We have got a good benefits system in this
:10:43. > :10:44.country, and those people who are destitute I'm
:10:45. > :10:50.A former head of the Nation`l Union of Students -
:10:51. > :10:52.the Labour MP Wes Streeting - has accused Ministers
:10:53. > :10:57.The original plan was to regularly increase the repayment threshold,
:10:58. > :11:02.currently set at earnings of ?21,000 a year.
:11:03. > :11:04.But last year, the Government announced that the threshold
:11:05. > :11:08.Attempting to amend the Higher Education and Research Bill,
:11:09. > :11:10.Wes Streeting said banks wotld not get away with making
:11:11. > :11:26.Students and their families where sold loans on the bashs of a
:11:27. > :11:27.series of simple promises by Government ministers.
:11:28. > :11:30.They are only be repaid oncd you leave university.
:11:31. > :11:32.They are be repaid once you start earning over ?21,000 per ye`r.
:11:33. > :11:39.You will repay 9% of everything and above 21,000 per year.
:11:40. > :11:41.The good news is that from @pril 2017, the
:11:42. > :11:43.?21,000 figure will be upgr`ded each year in line with average e`rnings.
:11:44. > :11:47.But around this time last ydar, in the fine print of the prdvious
:11:48. > :11:49.Chancellor's Autumn Statement, was buried an announcement that the
:11:50. > :11:52.repayment threshold will in fact be frozen at ?21,000.
:11:53. > :11:54.As a result, graduates will end up paying more
:11:55. > :11:59.each month and thousands of pounds more over
:12:00. > :12:05.It was under the last Labour Government that Parliament was
:12:06. > :12:08.invited to confirm, as it dhd, that student loans were exelpt from
:12:09. > :12:13.regulation under the consumer credit act.
:12:14. > :12:16.When the then Labour Governlent passed the sale of student loans
:12:17. > :12:20.So the honourable member should look back at his own party's record
:12:21. > :12:24.A Lib Dem MP referred to the financial journalist
:12:25. > :12:28.Martin Lewis, who's campaigned on this issue.
:12:29. > :12:30.What we have currently is nothing short of a
:12:31. > :12:33.scandal with the raising of the threshold.
:12:34. > :12:40.A one-sided redefinition of the terms of the loan.
:12:41. > :12:43.And in any other context, as Martin Lewis has quite
:12:44. > :12:47.correctly said, this would lead to legal action.
:12:48. > :12:56.possible is because of the small print, which as far as most
:12:57. > :13:02.undergraduates are concerned, was very, very small indeed.
:13:03. > :13:05.In the end, the amendment was defeated by 98 votes.
:13:06. > :13:06.You're watching Monday in Parliament.
:13:07. > :13:09.The government has defended the independent child sex abuse
:13:10. > :13:14.inquiry, after one of the groups representing victims
:13:15. > :13:16.-- inquiry, after one of thd groups representing survivors
:13:17. > :13:20.A Labour MP is calling on the government to set up
:13:21. > :13:22.a Royal Commission to look into the provision of early years
:13:23. > :13:27.Helen Jones was opening a ddbate following an e-petition, whhch
:13:28. > :13:29.objected to what the petitioners called inequality in the system
:13:30. > :13:34.The government currently paxs for 15 hours of free care
:13:35. > :13:36.for all three and four year olds, and wants to increase
:13:37. > :13:40.that to 30 hours a week for most from next autumn.
:13:41. > :13:42.It also provides free child care to two year olds
:13:43. > :13:48.Helen Jones said many parents were angry at the costs thex had
:13:49. > :13:51.to pay, which had risen by 30% between 2010 and 2015 -
:13:52. > :13:53.an increase five times highdr than the rise in wages.
:13:54. > :13:57.One lady who contacted me from the North West said
:13:58. > :14:00.that her family are paying ?840 a month
:14:01. > :14:07.Now, they are not highly pahd and, to put it into context,
:14:08. > :14:12.that is exactly the same amount as their mortgage payment.
:14:13. > :14:15.She reckoned, without proper funding, nurseries would struggle
:14:16. > :14:18.to provide the 30 hours of free care the government wanted.
:14:19. > :14:24.At the moment, if a parent has, say, 40 hours' childcare wedk,
:14:25. > :14:27.At the moment, if a parent has, say, 40 hours' childcare a week,
:14:28. > :14:31.15 hours are paid by the local authority, but at a fairly low rate.
:14:32. > :14:34.The hours that a parent takds are paid at a higher rate,
:14:35. > :14:39.Now, if the government does not fund the extra hours properly,
:14:40. > :14:41.there are several things that could happen.
:14:42. > :14:44.First of all, the quality can reduce.
:14:45. > :14:49.Or many providers may not t`ke part in the scheme at all.
:14:50. > :14:55.Or there will be a further cost on parents, because providers decide
:14:56. > :15:00.to charge more for other types of childcare
:15:01. > :15:07.that the parent buys them - childcare for under twos, holiday
:15:08. > :15:09.holiday provision, out of hours provision -
:15:10. > :15:14.should look very seriously `t this and should set up an enquirx,
:15:15. > :15:17.perhaps under Royal Commisshon terms, staffed by experts.
:15:18. > :15:19.I know some members of the government don't
:15:20. > :15:22.like experts, but you reallx do need experts in this.
:15:23. > :15:25.They are experts, because they know something about it.
:15:26. > :15:29.That enquiry should do several things.
:15:30. > :15:33.It should chart a path to, if not free early years provision,
:15:34. > :15:42.at least heavily subsidised early years provision.
:15:43. > :15:44.Nursersies have been very clear both in the conversations I've had,
:15:45. > :15:47.but in writing to all members of the House, that this cocktail
:15:48. > :15:49.of funding pressures will ultimately push them
:15:50. > :15:51.into an unsustainable financial situation.
:15:52. > :15:53.The honourable member for Warrington North has referred
:15:54. > :15:57.to this very eloquently in her own speech.
:15:58. > :16:00.I hope the Minister today whll put an end to this uncertainty
:16:01. > :16:02.and immediately commit to ftnding to guarantee that nursery schools
:16:03. > :16:08.In the Labour Party, we believe that working pardnts
:16:09. > :16:16.are bearing the burden of the government demanding
:16:17. > :16:18.unachievable expansion in provision, at the same thme
:16:19. > :16:21.While welcoming the honourable lady to her place, I know
:16:22. > :16:26.I would very gently like to say to her that there is
:16:27. > :16:28.absolutely nothing positive, there was nothing constructhve,
:16:29. > :16:32.I didn't get, at any point, the sense that she wants to work
:16:33. > :16:36.All she wanted to do was make cheap political points
:16:37. > :16:41.She may as well have been wearing...been dressed as
:16:42. > :16:48.In addition to various other policies which help,
:16:49. > :16:51.many of the issues that havd been described today,
:16:52. > :16:53.such as the flexible working, allowing people to access flexible
:16:54. > :16:56.working, the shared parental leave, which was never introduced
:16:57. > :17:02.and that the former Labour government, and, Mr Paisley,
:17:03. > :17:04.over 6 billion on childcare by 2019-20 in cash
:17:05. > :17:10.I know she's not listening to this, but that is more than any other
:17:11. > :17:14.government ever has spent on this issue.
:17:15. > :17:17.?6 billion a year on childc`re by 2020, including an extra
:17:18. > :17:20.billion into the free early years entitlement.
:17:21. > :17:22.The government, she insisted, was taking action to
:17:23. > :17:30.Now, it was only a year ago that the government produced
:17:31. > :17:32.a National Security Strategx, setting out the threats fachng
:17:33. > :17:37.But in the light of the votd to leave the EU and Russian
:17:38. > :17:39.aggression, several peers argued today that the strategy
:17:40. > :17:46.Russia is growing in intent and capability.
:17:47. > :17:50.We are not only not matching that, we are shrinking.
:17:51. > :17:53.We do not have enough numbers in the RN and the RAF
:17:54. > :17:56.to man properly the equipment we have today.
:17:57. > :17:58.Brexit is surely going to ddmand that we are prepared
:17:59. > :18:05.Surely the Government must realise that SDSR '15
:18:06. > :18:12.The question is whether the concept that we set out in the SDSR,
:18:13. > :18:15.the Joint Force 2025 concept, is the right choice
:18:16. > :18:21.for the current strategic context. We are clear that it is.
:18:22. > :18:24.It is a concept that is abott making more effective use of our armed
:18:25. > :18:27.forces, because it both invdsts in new capabilities and makds better
:18:28. > :18:36.is the Strategic Defence and Security Review.
:18:37. > :18:39.Another peer took an equally grim view.
:18:40. > :18:47.It's only a year, but we thhnk what has happened has changdd.
:18:48. > :18:49.As far as I'm concerned, I think we're living in
:18:50. > :18:54.the most troublesome time I can think of in my lifetile,
:18:55. > :18:56.having lived both through the war and also during
:18:57. > :19:00.I would suggest, and I have asked for permission to have a full
:19:01. > :19:04.defence debate in this Housd - to have permission to have one
:19:05. > :19:07.because I think this is a most serious, serious subject.
:19:08. > :19:09.I think the demands on our `rmed services as to what's
:19:10. > :19:13.happening in Europe, and what is happening as well
:19:14. > :19:16.with the United States of Alerica, is such that I would ask
:19:17. > :19:19.my noble friend, the Ministdr, whether he would agree
:19:20. > :19:22.that the situation has changed and the demand could be gre`ter
:19:23. > :19:25.in the years to come? OTHERS: Hear, hear!
:19:26. > :19:29.My Lords, I am sure that my noble friend's request will not h`ve
:19:30. > :19:33.fallen on deaf ears as regards the usual channels and I'd be happy
:19:34. > :19:35.to speak to him after this about the possibility
:19:36. > :19:41.We are not complacent about Russian capabilities,
:19:42. > :19:45.the political changes in the United States or Brexit.
:19:46. > :19:50.We remain, however, fully committed to Nato and our European partners,
:19:51. > :19:52.with whom we will deter thrdats across a wide spectrum in order
:19:53. > :19:59.Our defence is supported by a skilled civil service.
:20:00. > :20:05.So would the Minister confirm whether the SDSR commitment
:20:06. > :20:08.to reduce MoD staff by 30% by 2020 is still on track
:20:09. > :20:10.and what proportion does the government anticipate whll be
:20:11. > :20:16.carrying out the same role, but with a new employer?
:20:17. > :20:18.It's too early for me to answer the last part
:20:19. > :20:22.of the Noble Baroness's question, but I would acknowledge
:20:23. > :20:25.that the last few percentagd points in that 30% target are challenging.
:20:26. > :20:32.But at the same time, what we are impressing on otr people
:20:33. > :20:35.is that, to the extent that they are able to save loney
:20:36. > :20:38.from a reduction in the civhl service headcount, all that money
:20:39. > :20:40.is ploughed back into the ddfence budget under the efficiency
:20:41. > :20:45.The comfortable words about our defence forces
:20:46. > :20:51.What I'm delighted about, within this chamber
:20:52. > :20:55.and in the Other Place, is there is a growing ground-swell
:20:56. > :20:57.of people who understand that we have not got suffichently
:20:58. > :21:02.That awareness actually is now growing in the public at large.
:21:03. > :21:04.I recognise the concerns that the Noble Lord has
:21:05. > :21:07.and it's no use denying that we live in a more dangerous
:21:08. > :21:13.I come back to the Joint Force 2025 concept.
:21:14. > :21:16.It is a long-term programme, but it is designed to enabld our
:21:17. > :21:20.armed forces to respond to ` wider range of more sophisticated
:21:21. > :21:24.potential adversaries and complex real-world challenges,
:21:25. > :21:32.And I believe that that is the right direction in which to go.
:21:33. > :21:35.Senior figures from the Health Department in England have been
:21:36. > :21:37.questioned by MPs over the failure to recover ?500 million
:21:38. > :21:41.from overseas visitors who use the NHS.
:21:42. > :21:45.The financial watchdog, the National Audit Office,
:21:46. > :21:47.has said the amount charged is likely to fall short
:21:48. > :21:56.The top civil servant at the department was challdnged
:21:57. > :21:58.in particular over the failtre to recharge for treatment ghven
:21:59. > :22:00.to citizens of the European Economic Area, the EEA,
:22:01. > :22:04.which covers the European Union plus countries such as Norw`y.
:22:05. > :22:07.We are light years away frol achieving 200 million, aren't we?
:22:08. > :22:08.Yes. Yes, we are.
:22:09. > :22:15.Um, well, as I'll say, um, if we do the changes
:22:16. > :22:18.that we want to make, and we have not been running this
:22:19. > :22:23.programme for very long, we do believe that we can
:22:24. > :22:26.get our current trajectory, which has been said is around
:22:27. > :22:28.about 350 million, up towards that 500 million.
:22:29. > :22:31.Are we going to make the 200 million from EEA, yes or no?
:22:32. > :22:33.I'm not going to guarantee you that we will make that
:22:34. > :22:36.200 million, because it's ddpendent on a whole range of factors.
:22:37. > :22:40.If you're not going to guarantee it...
:22:41. > :22:42.Sorry, I mean, yes as a statement... That's fine.
:22:43. > :22:46.But the point I am making is it seems that, basically,
:22:47. > :22:48.no progress has been made and the whole thing
:22:49. > :22:52.Sorry, we are talking about a situation where we've gone,
:22:53. > :22:55.overall, from collecting about 80 million a year to
:22:56. > :22:59.But on the EEA, we are not laking any progress at all.
:23:00. > :23:02.Um, well, with the bit we h`ve targeted, because actually,
:23:03. > :23:07.Some of it is numbers driven the other schemes.
:23:08. > :23:11.Some of it is numbers driven around the other schemes.
:23:12. > :23:14.The actual EHIC bit has gond up from us identifying about 5000
:23:15. > :23:16.treatments a year to us identifying about 18,000 treatments a ydar
:23:17. > :23:21.Now, we haven't seen that showed through in the cash amounts yet
:23:22. > :23:31.Well, as you have said, that is clearly out of ask,
:23:32. > :23:34.-- Well, as you have said, that is clearly a tough ask,
:23:35. > :23:37.given where we are right now, but we are going to keep at it.
:23:38. > :23:40.I took a French cousin of mhne to my local hospital last Christmas.
:23:41. > :23:43.They were not on the NHS system because they are not resident
:23:44. > :23:46.here and therefore not going to be in it and my hospital asked
:23:47. > :23:47.them for identification, which was provided.
:23:48. > :23:51.Yeah. The broken a bone was fixed.
:23:52. > :23:54.I assume that my hospital were then able to bill France
:23:55. > :23:59.But are you telling me that that actually is not standard procedure
:24:00. > :24:04.That, if you turn up and yot're not, because you're not a local person
:24:05. > :24:07.in the NHS register on that system, this is a difficult thing
:24:08. > :24:09.to follow through on? Is that what you're telling me?
:24:10. > :24:11.That this is not absolutely standard practice?
:24:12. > :24:13.I'm not saying anyone is going to be charged,
:24:14. > :24:16.but you don't find it possible to identify that individual?
:24:17. > :24:21.I mean, the numbers, as various people around
:24:22. > :24:24.So we are treating patients who we have
:24:25. > :24:26.not identified? Yes.
:24:27. > :24:36.Um, it is clear from the nulbers and the expectations we've set,
:24:37. > :24:41.and the research we did in 2013 that there are patients who should
:24:42. > :24:43.be charged who are not currently being identified.
:24:44. > :24:45.But they are not identified at the point of arrival
:24:46. > :24:48.at the hospital in order for us to follow that through?
:24:49. > :24:50.Yeah, they are not identifidd as being a patient
:24:51. > :24:54.But if he's not on the NHS system, with the British NHS number,
:24:55. > :24:57.by definition that patient probably should be in that category?
:24:58. > :25:04.No, well, those ones, those individuals, um,
:25:05. > :25:07.may well are the most likely to be identified,
:25:08. > :25:09.but an NHS number does not prove eligibility,
:25:10. > :25:13.No, but then, you follow th`t through, you haven't identified
:25:14. > :25:15.a marker attached to that cost, that treatment cost?
:25:16. > :25:17.Yeah, this is the IT change we were describing earlier.
:25:18. > :25:20.We can now track that in thd system, so it should become easier.
:25:21. > :25:22.But has it been standard pr`ctice? No, it hasn't.
:25:23. > :25:27.Keith McDougall's here for the rest of the week.