13/06/2011

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:09. > :00:14.One of the world's richest men gave away a billion dollars today to

:00:14. > :00:17.save children in the developing world from death by diarrhoea or

:00:18. > :00:20.pneumonia, with vaccines we take advantage. What is not to admire.

:00:20. > :00:25.Yet decades of aid money from western Governments have now gone

:00:25. > :00:31.to poor countries. Indeed today, David Cameron promised another �800

:00:31. > :00:37.million, and the poor and the sick are still with us. Can philanthropy

:00:37. > :00:44.really change the world. Bill Gates is here, as is the boss of

:00:44. > :00:49.GlaxoSmithKline, one of the world's wealthy drug companies, in in the

:00:49. > :00:51.next half hour they will face their critics. After that I will talk to

:00:51. > :00:55.the International Development Secretary, Andrew Mitchell who is

:00:55. > :01:01.spending �8 billion a year of our taxs in aid for the developing

:01:01. > :01:04.world. Also tonight, the mystery of the A Gay Girl In Damascus blogger

:01:04. > :01:09.solved, it wasn't the woman you saw last week on here, it wasn't a

:01:09. > :01:15.woman at all, she wasn't in Damascus and she wasn't gay, does

:01:15. > :01:20.that mean everything written was a lie.

:01:20. > :01:23.The setting was a hotel in the Square Mile of the City of London,

:01:23. > :01:28.in the four hours in which some of the richest people in the world,

:01:28. > :01:31.and some of the most powerful Governments talked, 700 children

:01:31. > :01:35.are stated to have died of diarrhoea and pneumonia. The

:01:35. > :01:38.conference at the global alliance for vaccines and immunisation, aims

:01:38. > :01:45.to put an end to - Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation, aims

:01:45. > :01:49.to put an end to it, by combining the money of philanthropists and

:01:49. > :01:53.Governments and drug companies, what happens when individual

:01:53. > :02:00.donations overcomes those of states, and how can we account for the

:02:00. > :02:04.mistakes they made along the way. He made megabucks by monopolising

:02:04. > :02:09.an entire industry, he drove competitors to the wall, crushed

:02:09. > :02:18.dissent, and then gave it all away. That was Andrew Carnegie, the

:02:18. > :02:25.modern grandee of philanthropic capitalism is Gates. Today, the

:02:25. > :02:30.former Microsoft mogul was faithed, as world leaders - feted as world

:02:30. > :02:36.leaders cued up to give to his organisation, Global Alliance for

:02:36. > :02:41.Vaccines and Immunisation. I like to think of it in terms of

:02:41. > :02:45.equity. This is the first time that we can say that poor children will

:02:45. > :02:52.not be refused the vaccines that the children in the rich countries

:02:53. > :02:59.get, because there is not enough money. Since the launch of the Bill

:02:59. > :03:04.and Melinda Gates Foundation, in 1984, Gates has given away $24

:03:04. > :03:09.billion, more than half on health projects. He linked up with Warren

:03:09. > :03:13.Buffet, who has pledged to giveaway 99% of his $62 billion, to launch a

:03:14. > :03:17.spate of giving pledges by the American rich. Gates famously

:03:17. > :03:20.brings business discipline to the projects he chooses to help,

:03:20. > :03:27.demanding clear accountability from Governments and imposing strict

:03:27. > :03:31.performance targets on aid agencies. But he has his critics. If we rely

:03:31. > :03:33.on philanthropists for this clairt and this type of aid, what you lose

:03:33. > :03:36.is any kind of democratic accountability. The people in

:03:36. > :03:39.developing countries on the receiving end of this aid, they

:03:39. > :03:45.have no structures through which they can challenge whether it is

:03:45. > :03:48.going to the right thing or not. 2007, Gates' spending on health was

:03:48. > :03:52.bigger than the annual budget of the World Health Organisation. In

:03:52. > :03:56.fact, the foundation is now recognised as one of eight big

:03:56. > :04:00.agencies which informally determine global health policy. A status,

:04:00. > :04:04.which, said a study in the Lancet, confers power and influence on a

:04:04. > :04:13.selected number of organisations, and establishs leverage over the

:04:13. > :04:19.voice of civil society. Gates' detractors say by focusing

:04:19. > :04:22.on top-down technical solutions to specific diseases, you may limited

:04:22. > :04:26.long-term sustainable health services in these countries. The

:04:26. > :04:30.sheer dependance of charities, universities, research institutions

:04:30. > :04:34.on foundation money means it is a lot easier to find critics in the

:04:34. > :04:38.world of computing, than it is in development. They are accountable,

:04:38. > :04:42.there is nowhere to hide in the world, the media, all of you guys

:04:42. > :04:45.keep us all under the spotlight. In way Bill Gates is probably more

:04:45. > :04:48.under the spotlight than other people. There is other ways of

:04:49. > :04:52.holding him to account. We had a mass phone call with the British

:04:52. > :04:57.public the other day, people could ring in and send questions that he

:04:57. > :05:00.had to answer F they want to they it put him under the spotlight.

:05:01. > :05:07.Most people believe that Bill Gates has made a massive difference.

:05:07. > :05:10.Bill Gates has done, is to cede the market for a new kind of

:05:10. > :05:14.philanthropy, over the next ten years Governments will take over

:05:15. > :05:18.the vaccination project, their upfront cash will measure in much

:05:18. > :05:23.more bang for bucks. At the same time Governments too have adopted

:05:23. > :05:26.the Gates' approach, the private sector for the channel for

:05:26. > :05:31.philanthropic funds, the global agencies not currently the flavour

:05:31. > :05:35.of the month. The UK Government has cut its funding to the

:05:35. > :05:38.International Labour Organisation, and the United Nations Industrial

:05:38. > :05:42.Development organisation, which is trying to build up developing

:05:42. > :05:45.countries' industrial state. It has cut its funding to grassroots

:05:45. > :05:49.groups in developing countries and in Britain trying to build the

:05:49. > :05:53.campaigns against tax dodging and injustice and trade and all of

:05:53. > :05:56.those things. That means you will get a short-term focus on aid, but

:05:56. > :06:00.none of the long-term results of global justice trying to bring

:06:00. > :06:04.development to the poor in that long-term benefit.

:06:05. > :06:09.When it comes to dealing with global poverty, Bill Gates has, in

:06:09. > :06:14.the space of a decade, changed the game. But the challenge remain,

:06:14. > :06:18.tonight, one person in seven, on the planet, will go to sleep hungry,

:06:18. > :06:28.one in four live in absolute poverty. Two-and-a-half though

:06:28. > :06:33.people will die today of Malaria. We are joined now by Bill Gates of

:06:33. > :06:37.the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. By Andrew Witty of the

:06:37. > :06:41.drug gind, GlaxoSmithKline, and Richard Sezibera, until recently

:06:41. > :06:44.the Rwanda Health Minister, and on the board for the Global Alliance

:06:44. > :06:49.for Vaccines and Immunisation. In a moment we will talk to some critics,

:06:49. > :06:53.for the moment let's talk about what you are trying to do, Gates.

:06:53. > :06:58.Aid agencies have been at this, Governments at it, what can you do

:06:58. > :07:02.as a philanthropist that they can't do? Aid agencies have had great

:07:02. > :07:09.result, over 20 million children a year under the age of five died

:07:09. > :07:11.back in 1960, now it is under nine million. What we can do is

:07:11. > :07:16.accelerate that improvement by getting the very latest vaccine

:07:16. > :07:20.that is the rich countries take for granted and getting them out to the

:07:20. > :07:24.poor kids. That will save millions of additional lives. Why do you

:07:24. > :07:29.want to spend your money in that way? I want to spend my money to

:07:29. > :07:35.take the greatest inequity, the fact that these children die, and

:07:35. > :07:43.get rid of that. Vaccines are the miracle intervention that allows

:07:43. > :07:51.that to happen. Why is this our problem? It's the world's problem.

:07:51. > :07:58.Every death anywhere in the world is a death unhumanity. There has

:07:58. > :08:02.been a lot of success, immunisation rates are up across the African

:08:02. > :08:09.continent, infant mortality rates are down, fewer children are dying,

:08:09. > :08:12.because of the intervention of an alliance like the Global Alliance

:08:13. > :08:19.for Vaccines and Immunisation. It is amazing what has happened now,

:08:19. > :08:24.we have access to more vaccines against pneumonia, against

:08:24. > :08:31.diarrhoea, against now cancer, certificate value cancer. Countries

:08:31. > :08:35.in Africa that are unable to vaccinate against pneumonia are now

:08:35. > :08:38.able to do so. You were quoted yesterday saying the drug companies

:08:38. > :08:43.had not been responsible citizens in the past, but there is a change

:08:43. > :08:48.of heart occurring. In what way were they not responsible citizens?

:08:48. > :08:52.During the 1980 and 1990s and the industry was growing and forming

:08:52. > :08:56.itself into what it became people weren't focused on this agenda. I

:08:56. > :08:59.think it was wrong, it is late getting focused on the agenda, but

:08:59. > :09:04.it has done. Over the last eight years you have seen a tremendous

:09:04. > :09:09.shift in where the industry was. You have even the Gavi Alliance

:09:09. > :09:13.come into place 1 years ago, the industry has come - 11 years a the

:09:13. > :09:16.industry has recognised that. It is in all our interest. It is public

:09:16. > :09:21.relations isn't it? People expect in the west, whether in America or

:09:21. > :09:23.Europe, people expect to see pharmaceutical industries

:09:23. > :09:28.contribute to societies less well off, people expect to see that.

:09:28. > :09:32.Within my organisation the majority of the people who work for us, the

:09:32. > :09:36.single biggest reason they would quote for why they work for us is a

:09:36. > :09:39.contribution to human health, not just rich people's human health,

:09:39. > :09:44.but everybody. Those are the drivers that make us look for ways

:09:44. > :09:50.to contribute to this agenda. everyone in the aid community

:09:50. > :09:55.agrees with the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation aims and

:09:55. > :09:59.methods. The organisation, Medecins sans frontier, or Doctors Without

:09:59. > :10:04.Borders, as they call themselves in mark, they believe it can be done

:10:04. > :10:10.better. Daniel Berman speaks for them on access for medicine. What

:10:10. > :10:14.do you worry about here? What I worry about is that, although we

:10:14. > :10:19.really appreciate the involvement of GlaxoSmithKline, we have to be

:10:19. > :10:26.honest, because of a relationship that we feel is a little bit too

:10:26. > :10:30.close between the Gates Foundation and donors and companies, we feel

:10:30. > :10:33.we are paying too much. The pneumococcal vaccine, you haven't

:10:33. > :10:37.talked about, that you have mentioned a little bit about how it

:10:37. > :10:44.is financed. This is a product widely available in the wealthy

:10:44. > :10:49.countries, there is the market there. In fact, the problem is

:10:49. > :10:54.there is a $225 million subsidy that is going to Glaxo Smith clean

:10:54. > :10:58.and Pfizer, I would like to Mr - GlaxoSmithKline, and Pfizer, I

:10:58. > :11:03.would like to ask Mr Gates where do you do it that way. They were told

:11:03. > :11:06.that it was blocked by patents and if there was help in overcoming

:11:06. > :11:09.patents the pneumococcal vaccine would be on the market. I know IP

:11:09. > :11:15.has been very important in your business, I guess that puts you in

:11:15. > :11:18.a difficult situation. Intellectual Property, you mean? When I'm giving

:11:18. > :11:23.money away, I bring a strong business sense to make sure it is

:11:23. > :11:28.very well strength. When we created the group that helps purchase this

:11:28. > :11:33.mum know cock kal vaccine, we researched what does it d number

:11:33. > :11:36.cock kal vaccine, we researched what does it cost to produce, there

:11:36. > :11:41.was not the capacity to serve the world. By getting people together

:11:41. > :11:46.to make a commitment, it allowed companies, including GSK, to spend

:11:46. > :11:50.a lot of money. What we are getting in terms of saving lives, in any

:11:50. > :11:54.organisation should celebrate what happened today, and what's going to

:11:54. > :11:58.happen with these lives saved. You would think it would be MSF. This

:11:58. > :12:02.is medicine at work, this is medicine at its best, we are saving

:12:02. > :12:06.millions of lives. There is no foolishness about the costs here.

:12:06. > :12:11.Mr Gates I think that we totally agree on the mission, I think we

:12:11. > :12:14.agree with GSK, we vaccinate ten million children a year, we're with

:12:14. > :12:20.you there, we believe the more vaccines out there the better, we

:12:20. > :12:27.are talking about how the money is used. In fact, this scheme with the

:12:27. > :12:30.subsidy was actually created to stimulate development when there

:12:30. > :12:33.weren't vaccines. I don't think it is right to use the vaccine in this

:12:33. > :12:40.scheme. Can I specifically address that, on

:12:40. > :12:48.a couple of points you raise. In terms of intellectual property or

:12:48. > :12:53.patents getting in the way, as far as GSK is concerned are there any

:12:53. > :12:56.material patents in pneumococcal vaccines, nobody has asked us about

:12:56. > :13:03.that. You have a number of other companies developing their own

:13:03. > :13:08.version of products, it is straight, just a second, it is wrong to say

:13:08. > :13:14.IP is a problem. In terms of incentivisation, it is interesting

:13:14. > :13:19.to look back, the first pneumococcal vaccine was in the

:13:19. > :13:22.1990s, there was a limit of capacity production, the Gavi

:13:22. > :13:25.Alliance saw this as a major opportunity in the developing world

:13:26. > :13:32.and aimed to stimulate the activity. What this incentive is, the first

:13:32. > :13:35.few years the vaccine is on the market, we achieve a price of $7 a

:13:35. > :13:38.dose, that is very substantially lower than people are paying in the

:13:38. > :13:42.west, then this drops. People in the west are paying more, so people

:13:42. > :13:47.in the poorer world pay less? make no apology for that.

:13:47. > :13:50.accept that is what's happening? are very transparent about teir

:13:50. > :13:55.price, people in the richest countries pay most, and the middle,

:13:55. > :14:00.the middle, and the poorest less. Some lives are more valuable than

:14:00. > :14:05.others? It is unreasonable to expect somebody in the poorest

:14:05. > :14:08.countries to contribute to share profits and R & D in the future.

:14:08. > :14:12.But the National Health Service? is to try to make access is

:14:12. > :14:16.achieved. That story you just said needs to be researched. I was

:14:16. > :14:22.directly involved in the process with the GAVI board, I was part of

:14:22. > :14:25.a committee, I resigned from that committee, Mr Gates, because you

:14:25. > :14:30.loaned five McKinsey consultants to that committee, it was to lower

:14:30. > :14:34.price force the GAVI committee. How can the consultants help us lower

:14:34. > :14:39.prices when they cult with companies like Mr Witty's. I'm

:14:39. > :14:43.worried about the relationship between GAVI. Answer that question?

:14:44. > :14:46.The reason I give to GAVI and I feel so great about the pricing

:14:46. > :14:51.they achieve, is the experts understand what these things cost.

:14:51. > :14:57.We have spent the money to understand that, and yes, it is

:14:57. > :15:01.very smart people from all over from McKinsey, I have spent time on

:15:01. > :15:05.these things, these prices are coming down because we want to save

:15:05. > :15:09.more lives. Time is on our side in innovation. I want to ask one

:15:09. > :15:14.question, Mr Sezibera, why don't your Governments buy these drugs

:15:14. > :15:18.direct? Because we can't afford them. That is the simple answer. I

:15:18. > :15:22.would like to welcome industry, what industry is actually doing

:15:22. > :15:27.with teir pricing is exactly what Governments across the world and in

:15:27. > :15:31.the developing world do. Through social health insurance schemes you

:15:31. > :15:36.make sure the more well off pay relatively for more their health

:15:36. > :15:40.than the poorests, what they are doing is absolutely right, it is

:15:40. > :15:44.the thing that makes the vaccines available to the poorest in the

:15:44. > :15:49.world and makes Governments able to deliver the vaccines to the world,

:15:49. > :15:53.it is the right thing to do. Our second critic is Doane from the

:15:53. > :15:57.World Development Movement, they believe that much of GAVI's work

:15:57. > :16:02.doesn't get at the real underlying problems in the world today. What

:16:02. > :16:05.is your anxiety today? Few would disagree with vaccinating millions

:16:05. > :16:10.of children, you can't disagree with that, I think the issue we

:16:10. > :16:16.have is it is a bit of a distraction, so these sorts of top-

:16:16. > :16:20.down, business-led philanthropic solutions, distract from the bigger

:16:20. > :16:24.picture, that is this, it is all well and good to be vaccinated

:16:24. > :16:28.against preventable disease, but if you send those families back out

:16:28. > :16:31.and they don't have land on which to farm because it is grabbed by

:16:31. > :16:35.big corporates, because of land grabbing, or they can't feed their

:16:35. > :16:39.families because of speculation on food price, on food commodity

:16:39. > :16:42.prices because they are spending 90% of their income on every day

:16:42. > :16:48.food stuffs and they can't educate their children. All of these things

:16:48. > :16:53.will be lost, we will have the same discussion in 20 years time. The

:16:53. > :16:57.reason the biggest issues aren't dealt with, one more point, is you

:16:57. > :16:59.could look at progressive taxation could be far more important,

:16:59. > :17:03.dealing with global monoplies could be far more important, enabling

:17:03. > :17:09.people to have the policies to feed themselves would be a much more

:17:09. > :17:14.effective solution for dealing with poverty than vaccination programmes.

:17:14. > :17:18.This is about the children and the mothers of those children, and

:17:18. > :17:21.whether we take the technology that every rich child takes for granted

:17:22. > :17:25.and make it available. If she has a scheme to change the economic world

:17:26. > :17:29.order, that's all well and good. In the meantime let's not the millions

:17:29. > :17:33.of children die. That's why you choose health as

:17:33. > :17:38.opposed to any other aspect of development? I'm involved in many

:17:38. > :17:43.aspects of development. This is the priority of the moment? We do

:17:43. > :17:46.things at the same time, we do agriculture, sanitation. You don't

:17:46. > :17:51.think you get in the way of Governments? I think children dying

:17:51. > :17:55.is not a good thing. I don't think any mother wants to see her

:17:55. > :17:59.children die. These vaccines are about saving those lives.

:17:59. > :18:03.accusations not you think it is a good thing, no-one thinks it is a

:18:03. > :18:06.good thing that children die. have been dying, only with the

:18:06. > :18:12.generosity we saw today, only by getting the prices down will their

:18:12. > :18:15.lives be saved. If we spent more of our time, in developing public

:18:15. > :18:20.health programmes. One of the concerns we have, much like MSF, is

:18:20. > :18:24.we are seeing public health and public interests sidelined, over

:18:24. > :18:27.these technocratic solution, in the instance of vaccinations they

:18:27. > :18:32.favour big pharma, in the interests of when we are looking at another

:18:32. > :18:40.development which I know you look in, we are looking at solution that

:18:40. > :18:43.is favours big agri solutions rather than small. There is a bid

:18:43. > :18:46.price, lowest price for vaccines comes in, vaccines are public

:18:46. > :18:49.health, they are the centre of public health, they are the

:18:49. > :18:53.greatest victory of public health in awful history, that is why we

:18:53. > :18:57.are down from 20 million dying a year. There is a question here of

:18:57. > :19:01.accountability too, Governments are accountable to their citizens, they

:19:01. > :19:06.win power, they lose power by the judgments they make. Who are you

:19:06. > :19:12.accountable to when you decide to make these, what everyone agrees

:19:12. > :19:18.are well meant interventions? Anyone who buys a product, if you

:19:18. > :19:23.buy a car, if you buy a house, you're exercising, you are taking

:19:23. > :19:28.your success and expressing your values. My values are that all the

:19:28. > :19:32.wealth I have should go back to society, and it should help the

:19:32. > :19:36.very poorest. And as I looked at all the ways to help out the

:19:36. > :19:41.poorest, vaccinations rose to the top of the list as the way to

:19:41. > :19:47.change their lives. The kids who live, if they don't get sick, their

:19:47. > :19:53.brains fully develop and they can achieve their potential. This is a

:19:53. > :19:58.pretty clear win and the fact that yes, Malaria research is being done

:19:58. > :20:03.now, and vaccines are being delivered, that's a great thing.

:20:03. > :20:07.you worry that, why the western Governments or western

:20:07. > :20:11.philanthropists like Bill Gates are making judgments on your behalf?

:20:11. > :20:16.They are not making judgments on behalf of the developing world. The

:20:16. > :20:21.developing world countries are co- financing these vaccines, the price

:20:21. > :20:25.of these vaccines. The health budgets are up, they have targets

:20:25. > :20:30.of 15%, Rwanda is past 15%, other Governments are coming up. And yes

:20:30. > :20:35.it is true that we must invest in roads and agriculture, and in food

:20:35. > :20:38.security, and Governments are doing that, but our people must be alive,

:20:38. > :20:42.the children must be alive to enjoy these fruits, that is the

:20:42. > :20:45.importance of vaccination. I want to ask you one further question,

:20:46. > :20:51.Andrew Witty, it is about a potential conflict of interest here,

:20:51. > :20:55.drug companies such as yourselves, which are both supplying medicines

:20:55. > :20:59.or vaccines and sitting on the board which makes judgments about

:20:59. > :21:03.whether they should be supplied, that is a conflict of interest

:21:03. > :21:08.isn't it? No, GSK used to have a seat on the GAVI board, we have

:21:08. > :21:12.rotated off it, there are two industry seats on the GAVI board,

:21:12. > :21:16.we have come off somebody else is on. The GAVI board, when you look

:21:16. > :21:19.around the table, almost everyone has a vested interest, you are

:21:19. > :21:23.either a potential supplier or recipient or potential delivery

:21:23. > :21:27.agency. Everybody around that table, more or less has a vested interest.

:21:27. > :21:31.What is clear with the gay the GAVI board operates, is if anything spe

:21:31. > :21:36.- the way the GAVI board operates, if anything comes up the member

:21:36. > :21:40.leaves the meet, of course. The balance here is we don't end up in

:21:40. > :21:43.a situation where you don't have any expertise around the table. If

:21:43. > :21:47.people are talking about the art of the impossible without any

:21:47. > :21:50.knowledge of what actually goes on. Having somebody there is important,

:21:50. > :21:56.I think this would pass any scrutiny over whether or not these

:21:56. > :22:00.people can assert any undue influence, I'm sure they do not.

:22:00. > :22:03.Thank you Deborah Doane. Finally a journalist and former speech

:22:03. > :22:07.writing for David Cameron, the question does aid work, is it worth

:22:07. > :22:12.all this time and money, and in the long run does it help those in need,

:22:12. > :22:16.what is your pitch? I do agree with Mr Gates that vaccination is

:22:16. > :22:22.probably about the best use of aid and Malaria research, that is right.

:22:22. > :22:27.I have a more fundamentalish problem with the whole issue of aid

:22:27. > :22:30.- fundamental issue with the whole issue of aid. Countries getting

:22:30. > :22:34.their aid needs, and not having a need to respond to the needs with

:22:34. > :22:38.the people there. We are breaching accountability. Harvard Medical

:22:38. > :22:42.School have shone when you put money into health services health

:22:42. > :22:46.spending declines, in places like Rwanda and Ethiopia, British aid is

:22:46. > :22:51.fund ago Government that is sending hit men here, on top of that,

:22:51. > :22:53.British aid fund add media council that bans independent newspapers

:22:54. > :22:57.and an Electoral Commission that stopped independent challenges, all

:22:57. > :23:01.these self-appointed saviours are a problem and the reason why we keep

:23:01. > :23:05.hearing western voices always the voices for aid, not African voices,

:23:05. > :23:09.unless they are involved in the industry, because the image of calf

:23:09. > :23:13.is being destroyed by aid, people see Africa as a supplicant, rather

:23:13. > :23:16.than in the fast-growing and changing place where six of the

:23:16. > :23:22.fastest-growing economies are there. Let's deal with the last point

:23:22. > :23:28.freshest in our mind first, do you worry about who is driving this

:23:28. > :23:33.whole aid enterprise? politically elected Governments are

:23:33. > :23:38.by far the biggest donors here. And so politicians like David Cameron,

:23:38. > :23:42.they make a choice, based on what they think the policies should be

:23:42. > :23:47.in, the voters will eventually get to weigh in, just like in many

:23:47. > :23:54.other countries. What about this question of helping to support

:23:54. > :23:58.repressive regimes? Certainly vaccination, it is quite a stretch

:23:58. > :24:02.to say it supports repressive regimes, or maybe they should

:24:02. > :24:07.refuse the aid. That isn't what I was saying, I was saying British

:24:07. > :24:10.aid, not your aid, British aid has directly gone to repressive regimes,

:24:10. > :24:16.that is very different from the sort of things you are doing, there

:24:16. > :24:19.is an issue about that fact. When we decide to save children in a

:24:19. > :24:22.country, we don't look at what the Government has done and say they

:24:22. > :24:26.are not a nice Government. We are willing to fund vaccination for all

:24:26. > :24:31.the children of the world, independent of what is going on

:24:31. > :24:37.with that Government. Richard Sezibera, you are Rwandan, aren't

:24:37. > :24:41.you? You stand accused in all of this to a degree? It is not true

:24:41. > :24:46.that the Rwandan Government sent hit squads all over the world.

:24:46. > :24:51.was Scotland Yard that said they were. I find the discourse a bit

:24:51. > :24:55.dispier iting, on the one hand, rb disspiriting, on the one hand, the

:24:55. > :24:58.British Government, on the other hand regime, the discourse of

:24:58. > :25:03.people who look at Africa and the developing world as if we do not

:25:03. > :25:09.have universal values. And of course, if there is a repressive

:25:09. > :25:14.regime, the people in that country, will rise up against their leaders,

:25:14. > :25:18.through a democratic process. if your Government is, the entire

:25:18. > :25:23.edifice of your country is being supported by western aid, there is

:25:23. > :25:27.less income bancy on you as a Government to render yourself

:25:27. > :25:31.accountable to our citizens. It is not correct that a Government

:25:31. > :25:40.should be supported entire by the western world. My own belief and

:25:40. > :25:43.the belief of many African is we should use aid to get and win our

:25:44. > :25:49.wean ourselves off aid. It is the quality of the aid, the aid must

:25:49. > :25:52.come in to fund a country-owned, country-designed-country-run

:25:52. > :25:56.programme, the more you do that the better. The accountability for

:25:56. > :26:01.delivery must be put where it belongs, on the shoulders of the

:26:01. > :26:05.leaders of these countries. If they can't, then they have to answer for

:26:05. > :26:11.it. You are entirely comfortable with the way this whole thing

:26:11. > :26:14.operates are you? I share Bill's view to a large degree. You have

:26:14. > :26:20.never had anxieties about the dependency culture or the image of

:26:20. > :26:23.Africa? On aid as a general concept I would share some of the questions.

:26:23. > :26:27.It is important when you talk about aid in the bigger sense. When you

:26:27. > :26:32.focus on vaccine, next to washing your hands, it is the single

:26:32. > :26:36.biggest health care intervention in history. When you go to villages,

:26:36. > :26:41.who have only just received their first solar-powered fridge, and as

:26:41. > :26:44.a result for the first time people have been vaccinated against basic

:26:44. > :26:47.illnesses and diseases that are killing children all the time. When

:26:47. > :26:51.you see that happen on the ground it is really difficult to walk away

:26:51. > :26:55.interest that and say we shouldn't be trying to do this more often

:26:55. > :26:59.than in the past. Can I finish with you Bill Gates, on a personal note,

:26:59. > :27:03.everyone in the world knows who you are, and everyone in the world

:27:03. > :27:07.almost uses your products in some way or another. Do you hope this

:27:07. > :27:11.sort of initiative is what you will be remembered for? I don't care to

:27:12. > :27:15.be remembered at all. I do hope that we can get that number of nine

:27:15. > :27:18.million children a year who die down to seven million then five

:27:18. > :27:23.million then three million. There is some wonderful things in the

:27:24. > :27:29.world, today was a big day, the pledging to buy these two new

:27:29. > :27:34.vaccines. We're partnered with GSK on Malaria vaccine with luck, in

:27:34. > :27:38.three years, will be in a position to start delivering that. The

:27:38. > :27:43.advances in technology should not just be for the richest, they, in

:27:43. > :27:47.fact, we should tilt our work to help the poorest. And that's why

:27:47. > :27:53.I'm excited about this second career that I have got.

:27:53. > :27:57.Thank you all very much indeed. Quite apart from the Gates' money,

:27:57. > :28:00.the British Government today committed another �800 million of

:28:00. > :28:04.tax-payers' money to be spent on aid or vaccines specifically. The

:28:04. > :28:09.Prime Minister said that although just be every other area of

:28:09. > :28:11.spending is being cut, it was morally right to spend more on

:28:11. > :28:14.international development. The International Development Secretary,

:28:14. > :28:24.Andrew Mitchell, is here. First a few facts and figure about the UK

:28:24. > :28:33.

:28:33. > :28:43.Almost every Government department is seeing cuts.

:28:43. > :29:02.

:29:02. > :29:07.The biggest recipients of British The International Development

:29:07. > :29:12.Secretary is, as I mentioned here. David Cameron said today that it

:29:12. > :29:15.was right to increase your budget, the international development

:29:15. > :29:20.budget, at the time that other budgets were being cut, it was

:29:20. > :29:24.morally the right thing to do, why? There are two key arguments, it is

:29:24. > :29:27.morally the right thing to do. We live in a world where there are

:29:27. > :29:30.these extraordinary discrepencies of opportunity, and our generations

:29:30. > :29:34.have a chance to really do something about it. The pledging

:29:34. > :29:37.conference today is, I think, a very good example of that. It is

:29:38. > :29:43.not just it is morally right, it is very much in our national interest.

:29:43. > :29:47.This is �300 or more from every household in the country, at a time,

:29:47. > :29:52.when the services they need are being cut, and when they themselves

:29:52. > :29:57.are finding life very often very tough? I don't pretend this is an

:29:57. > :30:03.easy issue, as a proportion of our expenditure, it is relatively small,

:30:03. > :30:07.it is under 1% of national income, I think a country like our's can

:30:07. > :30:11.afford that. If you look at the generosity of people in Britain.

:30:11. > :30:14.For example, in Comic Relief, which over the last two times is against

:30:14. > :30:17.a background of much more serious economic situation, people have

:30:17. > :30:21.been more generous each time. Absolutely, they have a choice in

:30:21. > :30:25.the matter. They have no choice about whether they pay their taxes,

:30:25. > :30:27.they pay their taxes, convention has it, in order to be defended by

:30:27. > :30:31.the Armed Forces, educated in the schools and universities, and all

:30:31. > :30:36.the rest of it. Instead of which they see all of those being cut,

:30:36. > :30:39.and you, by force of law, taking more money to spend in places like

:30:39. > :30:43.Africa? I think the national development budget does have a huge

:30:43. > :30:49.impact. It also impacts on people's security. The point you have just

:30:49. > :30:56.made about defending the state. Our security is not only defend bid

:30:56. > :31:02.guns and tanks, but also training the police in Afghanistan and

:31:02. > :31:06.building up glofrpbance structures in the Middle East, and getting

:31:06. > :31:11.girls into school. It is not just a moral issue, but also very much in

:31:11. > :31:17.our national interest. How much money are we giving to Uganda?

:31:17. > :31:21.Something like �70 million. Is it true the President of Uganda spent

:31:21. > :31:25.�30 million on an executive jet? That happened under the last

:31:25. > :31:29.Government. I don't agree with that, it is the wrong use of the money.

:31:29. > :31:35.Why do we keep on giving it to them? If Governments under us spend

:31:35. > :31:39.money in that way, then we will take action to seek to stop it, in

:31:39. > :31:43.doing, that of course, we want to try to make sure we don't end up

:31:43. > :31:47.afflicting the poorest people in the countries. You want to make the

:31:47. > :31:52.Government more accountable, more transparent. What are we doing

:31:52. > :32:00.giving money to India when it can afford a space programme? India is

:32:00. > :32:04.a development paradox, there are more poor people in India than the

:32:04. > :32:07.whole sub-Saharan continent. For the first time India is not the

:32:07. > :32:12.largest programme. The money is spent in the poorest areas, up to

:32:12. > :32:16.half of it will be on pro--poor, private sector development. Yet the

:32:16. > :32:21.Government of industry chooses to spend money on a space programme?

:32:21. > :32:25.The British development efforts in India, which is a tiny proportion

:32:25. > :32:32.of what the Indians themselves, under 1%, what they themselves

:32:32. > :32:36.spend on education and health care, has a colossal effect and benefit

:32:36. > :32:40.for India. As part of Britain's programme and partnership with

:32:40. > :32:43.india, which was greatly rejuvinated by the Prime Minister

:32:43. > :32:50.last year, the development programme play as small but

:32:50. > :32:54.important part. We give them less than they give to other countries

:32:54. > :32:58.in assistance? That is not true, the Indian, what you would refer to

:32:58. > :33:02.the Indian aid programme is not the aim as what we would call an aid

:33:02. > :33:07.programme, it is a credit system for business. You are spliting

:33:07. > :33:12.hairs? You can't compare them, they are not the same. Isn't it true,

:33:12. > :33:18.people like you belong to a generation that look back on Live

:33:18. > :33:21.Aid as being a marvellous thing and the Gleneagles conference as a

:33:21. > :33:25.marvellous thing and you are out of step with the public, it might have

:33:25. > :33:28.been true eight years ago but not any more? I don't think that is

:33:28. > :33:34.true, the point is our generation have the ability to make a real

:33:34. > :33:39.change in the world. There is a new state start anything Sudan, south

:33:40. > :33:45.Sudan, the girl born today in south Sudan has more chance of dying

:33:45. > :33:49.having a baby than completing primary school. We can do something

:33:49. > :33:54.about this, I'm so glad that the conference today on Global Alliance

:33:54. > :33:57.for Vaccines and Immunisation can have a real impact on children

:33:57. > :34:00.overseas. You have talked about this country becoming an aid

:34:00. > :34:03.superpower, some would characterise it as you would used to

:34:03. > :34:07.characterise the Labour Party as being very generous with other

:34:07. > :34:11.people's money, why is it we have decided to do that, and yet the

:34:11. > :34:17.Italians, the Germans and the Japanese have not decided to go

:34:17. > :34:22.that route? When I say the we were a development superpower. In just

:34:22. > :34:25.the same way as America is a military superpower, but because of

:34:25. > :34:30.the brilliant leadership of Britain around the world in development, we

:34:30. > :34:33.have a huge impact on tackling these dreadful diseases and

:34:33. > :34:38.difficulties, saving lives which we have been talking about. I think it

:34:38. > :34:41.is part of the British DNA to be generous to those who are much less

:34:41. > :34:44.fortunate than we are, the extraordinary discrepencies of

:34:45. > :34:49.wealth which we used earlier, and opportunity. We can do something

:34:49. > :34:53.about that, and we will. Andrew Mitchell thank you very much.

:34:53. > :34:56.Now if you were watching last week you perhaps saw an interview with a

:34:56. > :35:01.London woman who has been presented, completely without her knowledge,

:35:01. > :35:05.to the world as a lesbian living in Damascus. She was pretty cross

:35:05. > :35:12.about her picture being used, it was said to be skaurt measure to

:35:12. > :35:15.protect a Syrian dissident. It turns out not was she not the real

:35:15. > :35:20.author of A Gay Girl In Damascus, the real author was not gay or in

:35:20. > :35:27.Damascus. Nor a girl.

:35:27. > :35:37.Out of a closed country, racked by revolt, came out what sounded like

:35:37. > :35:42.

:35:42. > :35:50.Amina Abdallah Araf al Omari reported in her blog the brutal

:35:50. > :36:00.supression of pro-democracy As the violence continued, she also

:36:00. > :36:04.

:36:04. > :36:14.She was apparently forced into hiding, and then a week ago

:36:14. > :36:18.

:36:18. > :36:22.Thousands joined a Facebook site, demanding her release. As newt

:36:22. > :36:26.night discovered last week, the picture she used of herself

:36:26. > :36:33.actually belonged to a London woman, who is now thinking of suing over

:36:33. > :36:38.the theft of her identity. I never met Amina I'm not part of her blog,

:36:38. > :36:42.not friends with her. It's absolutely astonishing that

:36:42. > :36:50.somebody has been using my pictures and obviously campaigning with my

:36:50. > :36:53.face on it. Today, a married American student

:36:53. > :36:58.at Edinburgh University admitted he was the A Gay Girl In Damascus all

:36:58. > :37:03.along. There are a lot of people who would

:37:03. > :37:08.be perfectly within their rights punching me in the jaw. He's a

:37:08. > :37:14.Middle East activist who began blogging as Amina several years ago,

:37:14. > :37:21.long before the Arab uprisings? intention was never to hurt anyone,

:37:21. > :37:27.in fact, the only intentions I had, besides my own vanity was to draw

:37:27. > :37:33.attention to what I believe are important issues, and second, I

:37:33. > :37:37.amsomebody who feels guilt a lot. I'm feeling incredibly guilty about

:37:37. > :37:45.hurting people and harming causes that I personally, as a human being,

:37:45. > :37:50.believe in. This photo, used by Amina, that

:37:51. > :37:55.previously appeared on a site belonging to McMaster's wife, was a

:37:55. > :38:01.trail of clue that led other bloggers to the truth. The real

:38:01. > :38:05.clue there was the photo on Amina's blog had a wider field of view than

:38:05. > :38:11.the photo on Britta's website, that suggested to us that the person who

:38:11. > :38:17.put it on Amina's blog had access to the original image.

:38:17. > :38:27.Evidence of popular anger in Syria, from where foren reporters are

:38:27. > :38:29.

:38:29. > :38:34.banned comes, in - where foren reporters are banned, some think

:38:34. > :38:40.that hoaxers like McMaster has brought a wider audience. It has

:38:40. > :38:44.pointed out certain social issues that the majority of Syrian

:38:44. > :38:53.bloggers wouldn't touch on, like homosexuality, for obvious social

:38:53. > :38:59.and religious reasons. I don't think there is any bad motives

:38:59. > :39:01.behind the bloggers and the events he has given are daily events that

:39:01. > :39:08.political dissidents and homosexuals go through and face

:39:08. > :39:13.under the regime of Bashar al-Assad. But among those deceived was this

:39:13. > :39:18.Canadian woman who said she was Amin's girlfriend and couldn't

:39:18. > :39:23.sleep for worrying about her. difficult to know where she is, and

:39:23. > :39:30.who took her. Something the hoaxer has done -

:39:30. > :39:34.some think the hoaxer has done wider harm too? This hoax has

:39:34. > :39:39.brought damage to the credibility that people who need to use a cloak

:39:39. > :39:43.of anonymity and pseudonyms to communicate publicly. That has cast

:39:43. > :39:47.a doubt on their ability to be heard when they are really in need.

:39:47. > :39:52.When real Syrian people, or real Arab individuals are expressing

:39:52. > :39:58.themselves, and not somebody who is, in a sense, adopting that as drag

:39:58. > :40:04.for his own purposes. Today, refugees continued to arrive

:40:04. > :40:11.in neighbouring Turkey, after the army retook the rebellious town of

:40:11. > :40:14.Al-Shughour. As for the Gay Girl in Damascus, what began as a possible

:40:14. > :40:17.well-meaning attempt to highlight oppression, has ended up

:40:17. > :40:21.distracting attention from the real horror of Syria now.

:40:21. > :40:26.Details of concessions in the Government's health bill have been

:40:26. > :40:29.announced today, and our political editor is with us.

:40:29. > :40:34.What are they? Strictly speaking we have to wait until tomorrow to get

:40:35. > :40:38.the Government's response. What happened today was that Professor

:40:38. > :40:41.Steve Field, the senior GP, asked by the Government eight weeks ago

:40:41. > :40:45.to go around the country with a team of health exports to work out

:40:45. > :40:49.what to do about the bill, came back and delivered his report. Much

:40:49. > :40:55.of it is long and complicated and very difficult to understand.

:40:55. > :40:59.Essentially, what he is saying is there will probably be some delay

:40:59. > :41:03.in certain places to the implementation of the GP-led

:41:03. > :41:07.consortia, that will be commissions health care in future. Perhaps the

:41:07. > :41:11.most fundamental change that he's recommending is there should be a

:41:11. > :41:16.lot less emphasis on competition in the health service in future, and

:41:16. > :41:23.in the health and social care Bill and in particular, that it should

:41:23. > :41:28.not be the primary purpose of the new Healthwatch dog, Monitor, to

:41:28. > :41:34.consider competition, competition is important, but it shunting of

:41:34. > :41:43.overriding importance. Has this done the trick? It has, there is

:41:43. > :41:46.nothing like the huge rift within the coalition we had a month ago.

:41:46. > :41:49.The Liberal Democrats have had a successful neating with Nick Clegg,

:41:49. > :41:53.they believe there is a Vic auto- meeting with Nick Clegg, they

:41:53. > :41:57.believe there is a victory here. The Health Secretary is

:41:57. > :42:00.sufficiently happy not to resign. He will play a role in explaining

:42:00. > :42:04.what the Government will do. Tomorrow we will also be hearing

:42:04. > :42:07.from groups of health service professionals, some of whom will be

:42:07. > :42:13.expressing their satisfaction. Where David Cameron has so far

:42:13. > :42:16.failed, though, politically, is in public opinion, an opinion poll for

:42:16. > :42:21.ITN tonight shows more than half the British public don't trust

:42:21. > :42:25.Cameron on the NHS. Was this ever a real issue, is it about substantive

:42:26. > :42:30.matters in the NHS, or is there some tension between the Liberal

:42:30. > :42:34.Democrats and the Tories? There are substantive matters in the NHS. My

:42:34. > :42:36.own view of the proposal that is have come up from Steve Field today,

:42:36. > :42:40.I was at the briefing s basically where the Government went wrong on

:42:40. > :42:45.the bill is in presentation and communication, that indeed was a

:42:45. > :42:49.lot of what Professor Field was saying. In the language they used,

:42:49. > :42:53.he argues that actually they frightened them who didn't need to

:42:53. > :42:57.be frightened. A lot of what he's recommending is the language should

:42:57. > :43:01.be changed, that certain emphasis should be applied here and less

:43:01. > :43:06.there, and that was much more likely to satisfy the people in the

:43:06. > :43:10.health service who were deeply worried about all these proposals.

:43:10. > :43:15.That sounds like ineptness? To a degree. Some people in Downing

:43:15. > :43:19.Street would argue in terms of presenting this bill, Andrew

:43:19. > :43:22.Lansley has shown a certain ineptness in terms of communicating

:43:22. > :43:26.it. Interestingly, where the Liberal Democrats won't be able to

:43:26. > :43:30.claim a victory is what happens to the bill next. Nick Clegg was

:43:30. > :43:34.arguing it ought now to go back to the Commons committee, where it was

:43:34. > :43:38.before, the Government is not going to do that, it is going to say, no,

:43:38. > :43:44.proceed as before, to report stage, even though that report stage may

:43:44. > :43:54.take up to a couple of weeks. have lost the public now! Tomorrow

:43:54. > :44:17.

:44:17. > :44:27.That's all from Newsnight tonight. That's all from Newsnight tonight.

:44:27. > :44:50.

:44:50. > :44:54.Goodnight. More rain coming in for the week.

:44:54. > :45:02.Tomorrow is said to be a belter after a chilty start, a lot of

:45:02. > :45:08.sunshine to look forward to. There will be sudden cloud building

:45:08. > :45:14.up. It won't threaten rain for the most part.

:45:14. > :45:19.The low 20s widely and the winds light. A feel-good day. Down across

:45:19. > :45:22.the far South-West of England, it will cloud up with drizzle by the

:45:22. > :45:27.end of the afternoon, principally across Cornwall. Elsewhere across

:45:28. > :45:30.the UK, no such threat. Dry across Wales, with well-broken cloud and

:45:30. > :45:35.sunny spells, and for Northern Ireland as well. Temperatures here

:45:35. > :45:38.up to 16-17. Up across Scotland, the north of Scotland, winds will

:45:38. > :45:41.be lighter than they were today. And the worst of the wet weather

:45:41. > :45:46.will have cleared away from the Northern Isles, things settling

:45:47. > :45:50.down across the northern parts. A fine prospect then, for most of us

:45:50. > :45:55.across northern areas fine. More cloud across the west of the UK,

:45:55. > :45:59.maybe the odd shower, the theme is for it to stay predominantly dry on

:45:59. > :46:03.Wednesday, although cloudier than Tuesday. Wednesday's probably the