13/10/2011 Newsnight


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 13/10/2011. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Good evening. It's not much to look forward to, because we can all


expect to get old and when that happens, there is apparently no


guarantee we will be treated well. Four and nine, 49. This, it seems,


can be as good as it gets. In half the hospitals of England, might not


even be fed properly does this reflect a broader culture of


contempt for older people in Britain.


How do you think older people are treated these days? They are


forgotten, once you reach retirement and you retire, that's


it, you are more or less forgotten. Is the best to hope for to be


laughed at? Oh, I do not believe it. Look at this.


The Labour MP who went to jail for fiddling his expenses believes he


was scapegoated. In his first television interview, I will be


asking if he really expects public sympathy.


Are you any less likely to put this sort of stuff in your mouth if


someone in authority tells you that you need to think about your health.


The Defence Secretary says it is back to business as normal, is it?


The figures, the scenes described the testimony of families all add


up to a hugely - hospitals breaking the law in their so-called their.


There is much talk of improved training and better monitoring. Is


the real problem a question of our changed attitudes to old age. It


will come to all of us, as the Israeli Prime Minister, Golda Meir,


once commented, it is like a plane going through a storm, once you are


aboard, there is nothing much you can do.


Four and nine, 49. If life really is a lottery, then what kind of a


result is it for you when 65 and 70, and even higher numbers start


coming around. On the one hand we are living longer. On the other, it


is no thanks to the way some hospitals have been treating the


elderly. Today's Care Quality Commission


survey found that 40% of the hospitals in England didn't offer


what they called dignified care. One incontinent patient was left


unwashed for 90 minutes, despite calling for help. Doctors were


having to prescribe drinking water to make sure patients got a drink.


And food was being delivered while patients were asleep, taken away


before they woke up. People expect, quite rightly, that when they go


into hospital, they are treated with dignity, and the very basic


things of food and water are available to them, in an


appropriate way. It is fundamental to getting well again. One of the


hospitals that came out worst from the survey was this one in Sandwell,


in the West Midlands. Managers have now closed the worst ward. They


claim close to blaming the problem on the wrong kind of patients.


are quite clear that in the end, that we found that the combination


of patients that the nurses, particularly on the ward, were


being required to deal with, wasn't working. That was why, in the end,


we decided to split the ward. I'm not making excuses for the failings


the CQC have found, you have to look at it more deeply, that is why


we have taken the radical action we have. Most of us probably look


forward to pottering about in retirement, doing a few odd jobs,


but on the basis of what we have been hearing today about the lot of


the elderly in our society, there is clearly something nasty in the


wood shed. Half of the population aged over 75


now live on their own, and half of those aged over 65 think of the


television as their main companion. One in ten in that age group says


they feel lonely. Are we just packing the elderly off out of


sight? Sometimes that is just what they want. Hello chaps.


The men in sheds are a bunch of retired chaps in South-East London


who like nothing better than getting out of the house and into


this workshop, set up by the charity Age UK. It is the banter,


the innuendo, the little jokes, tongue-in-cheek, that is what you


miss from when you pack up work. You miss your colleagues, the


banter, what happened yesterday and the football match, the wife's not


interested in that. How are older people treated these days? You are


forgotten, once you reach retirement and you retire, that is


it, you are more or less forgotten. The women have the Women's


Institute, there is not a lot for men, then you go down the working


mens' club, but you finish up as an alcoholic. John Jones, who is 72,


says he's the first here and the last to leave. He lives on his own


since his partner died last Christmas. This is a life saver for


me, without it I don't know what I would have done. A life saver. Do


you miss work? Yes, I would go to work tomorrow. A proper full-time


job? Roofing I used to. Do I would go roofing tomorrow, but they won't


let me. Could you still roof, if that is the verb? Yeah. The trouble


s when you are past 65 you can't get the insurance. Too often we


ignore what older people can contribute to society, even if they


are not active or at work. That is not recognised. You think about the


millions of people who are providing care to a loved one or


relative, not getting paid, doing it out of love and compassion and


kindness. If we think about the hundreds of thousands of older


people who are volunteering day in and day out, and keeping a lot of


our services and community groups going. What happened to respecting


our elders? Yes, Bruce Forsyth is still on television with Strictly.


Nice to see, to see you. Nice. Other famous senior, like the


former Liberal Democrat leader don't get off lightly. I'm Menzies


Campbell, the only politician with "do not resus say the" on the soles


of his slippers. We wish these south London pensioners a hearty


retirement, but more and more of us have a long time to go before our


numbers are up. How we are going to spend it, and how we will be


treated, has become an unswervable dilemma. With us now are the


Conservative minister, David Willetts MP, who recently wrote a


book about the babyboomer generation, and also Baroness


Warner, a moral philosopher, who falls comfortably into the category


of an older citizen, and Emma Soames, editor of Saga Magazine,


and right on the cusp. What do you think has happened to the way we


treat our older people? All sorts of things. It is partly to do with


the falling apart of the traditional family. Some families


work their grandparents to death, practically, looking after their


grandchildren. And involve them enormously. But I fear for the


grandparents of those families, for instance, in that recent report,


where they said that parents are chucking toys at their children


because they don't want to spend time with them. If they can't spend


time with their children, God help their parents. Do you get a sense


in some cases families are effectively dumping old people on


the state? I think that actually within the family there is quite a


lot of exchange that goes on between the generations. In a way


what's happened to the society, is the family is the remaining place


where the different generations mix up. In general, our society is


increasingly divided by age. We tend to work with people of the


same age group, the housing tends to be with people of the same age


group, the family is the only space where the intergenerational


exchanges survive. How did we get to this point, there used to be a


time when wisdom was prized and age of venerated, and now it is


completely the reverse, youth is venerated? I think wisdom was


prized, it was a bit of a myth really that. I know in ancient


Greece wisdom was supposed to be prized, I don't know it was prized


all that much later than that. But, there was a different social


surrounding in the family. So that the aged could usually, often be


taken in and taken on as part of the family. And had a role to play.


I think the lonely people that we hear about, are people who don't


have anything to do, and nothing to think about, and have no role.


grandfather, Winston Churchill, became Prime Minister for the first


time at the age of 65, it is inconceivable nowadays? Well, yes,


sadly, it is a reflection on the ageism of our society, rather more


than the ability of an enormous number of 65-year-olds. The other


that is happening, is old people are increasingly fiercely


independent. And then they get slightly hoist on their own pretard


when they centre their fourth age rather than their third age. They


don't want to be a burden and want to look after themselves. Suddenly


they find themselves in hospital, on their own, and needing support.


There are going to be more and more old people around, we're all going


to get old and hang around, and you will be around another 20 year, but


a lot of old people around. How does society begin to adjust to


this big change, David Willetts? Sorry, one thing I think is that at


a superficial level, and agreeable level, people are extremely kind


and nice to the old. I now recognise myself as old, at last,


but going around London, for instance, I find people enormously


helpful, and always offering to carry a suitcase or do I want help


up the stairs, and what not. I'm absolutely amazed by how agreeable


young people are. And also, how they like to talk. So going around


London, where I now live for the first time, find myself surrounded


by people I don't know, who are extremely nice to me. And I love


them and get on with them. But I think there is a huge difference


between that and caring for them in the serious sense, then they are


really helpless. There is a huge gulf between respecting and liking


the old and caring for them. think we should remember a lot of


older people want to contribute, that was one of the main things


that came across in the quick report earlier. We know that old


people care about the future, they care about their kids and grand


kids. Sometimes we get in the way. There is a charity that tries to


link up older people with spare ruem rooms and younger people


looking for housing. What is one of the biggest problems they face,


they say the older people are vulnerable adults and they should


only have a younger tenant after they have a Social Services check.


It is these things that get in the way of these connections, when


older people want to give something and receive something in exchange.


Have you any further practical suggestions? What we should do is


try to find places where different people miss. In education, the FE


college, where you have an older person and a younger person in


class together, that works better. We should look at wherever there is


an assumption where you have to keep different age groups apart


because one is a threat to the other, we should challenge that.


need a fundamental shift don't we? We need intelligent social design.


There are pockets of it. We need incredibly good local networks. I


should know, I live on a treat with about 50 houses in it, it is not


huge, I should know every single person over 80 in that treat. I


should be informed so if - in that street, I should be informed so I


could hold out a friendly hand and have them to tea. They are amongst


us but hidden. I'm sorry to be brutal about this, the reason


people don't do that, is because they don't find old people, either


easy, or congeejal. That's the base - congenial, that is the basis of


it. People are very busy, both parents tend to work, they are


extremely occupied. Old people, you know, in the eyes of many people,


they hang around, cluttering up the place and you all have to get on


with your lives? Who would be running the Oxfam clothes shop if


it wasn't for older people. Who would be doing what's left of Meals


on Wheels. If it wasn't for the WVS, which is womaned by ladies in tweed


skirts. It is fantastic. You know what I'm getting at? I would say


even the simplest and narrowest form of selfishness, how we treat


older people today is how we will be treated in the future. All the


things will come back to us. Just as we have an obligation to young


people, and the obligation we discharge to young people will be


how we, in turn, will be treated. Once people think through those


obligations in the generations, behaviour improves. There are


intergenerational tensions too, young people are having a very hard


time of it now, are they really going to welcome the idea that more


resources be diverted to caring for older people, who have had it


consistently improving throughout their lives? I don't think they


should or they will. I think that fundamentally we ought to be much


more open about dying, because I think old people ought to be used


to the fact that they are approaching death. I particularly


think that the medical profession is add fault here. Because doctors


really aren't interested in dying, once you know somebody is either


very old or terminally ill or something, doctors rather stand


back. But actually I think their role ought to be to talk to aged


people and make them realise that there is a difference between a


good death and lingering on. Encourage people to say, to make a


living will, for instance, and say if I get pneumonia, please don't


give me antibiotics. If more people did that I think there would be far


fewer of these wretched people in hospital, with which we started.


There is a difference between the problem of people being shamefully


neglected in hospital, and people being lonely in their own houses.


Loot of people will find that idea pretty tricky and offensive,


frankly? Yes, the word that most, I find most offensive in what lady


Warner said was the word - Lady Warner said was the word "ought",


it is an option, we all know it is there. We don't. Well, gof has had


an awful lot of, Dignitas has had an awful lot of publicity. I don't


think there there should be an "ought" in it. We need compassion,


and compassion can be taught. You can't just say we have a lot of old


people we better get rid of some of them. That is absolutely right.


Compassion very often means allowing somebody to die, rather


than struggling to keep them alive. But I think, in way, this is the


fundamental question, that so many old people in hospital are being


kept alive against their will. Emma Soames's point is crucial,


compassion can be taught. We should not allow the wider points to


exclude these cases that staff in hospitals should have been doing


better. It is now two-and-a-half years


since the Telegraph started publishing details of the claims


some politicians were making against the taxpayer. The


prosecutions aren't over, but four former MPs and two members of the


House of Lords have been sent to prise son. One of the convicted


politicians, the Labour member for Barnsley Central, Eric Illsley, was


sentenced to a year in prison, but was released early. He was


Barnsley's Labour MP for 23 years, he became a prison inmate in


February this year. Not a moment too soon for some of his


constituents. I think it is disgusting, I really do. He


deserves everything he gets. Yet he had stood for parliament and


within returned with an 11,000 majority, after committing the


offences to which he would plead guilty. Mr Illsley claimed that he


had been unfairly singled out for criminal investigation. When


charges were laid, after he had retained his seat, the Labour Party


expelled him. But he clung on, as an independent MP, and only


resigned from the Commons two days before he entered jail. His


offence? Fiddling his bills, falsely claiming for insurance,


repairs and council tax for years. He admitted stealing over �14,000


from the taxpayer. In May this year, he was released from prison, three


months into a year-long sentence, to live at home under curfew.


The judge at his trial said he had tarnished the reputation of both


the politicians and of parliament. Eric Illsley, you accept that it


was right that you were tried and it was right that you were


punished? I pleaded guilty, I accepted what was coming to me. I


pleaded guilty and got on with it. I'm not expected public sympathy,


as you questioned in the introduction. I have never sought


that. The point I want to make when I accepted your invitation to do


this interview, is to try to explain to the public just how few


MPs were actually investigated by Scotland Yard. Let alone prosecuted.


Only a handful of MPs were investigated, hundreds of MPs were


allowed to repay quite large sums of money secretly. Do you think


everyone should have been allowed to do that? I think there should


have been some fairness within the system, either parliament should


have been allowed to deal with everyone, including me, and other


colleagues who were prosecuted, or Scotland Yard and the Crown


Prosecution Service should have dealt with everyone. They only


looked at a few cases. Just because they didn't try and convict


everyone who committed the crime, doesn't mean some shouldn't have


been tryed and convicted? general public could easily think


that those of us who were prosecuted were the worst offenders,


clearly we weren't. �1.5 million was repaid by MPs by the May 2010


general election, by hundreds, only a handful of cases were prosecute.


You have conceded you were wrong and were right to have been tried


and right to have been punished. You are saying not enough MPs were


punished? If you like, or looked at or investigated by the same


authorities that investigated me. Do you feel shame? Of course. Of


course I do. Why did you do it? at the time, and when I say "we", a


lot of MPs claimed the allowance as an allowance, as an annual amount


for the upkeep of a second home and living in London, and claimed


towards the maximum. You knew it was dodgy? I think everybody knew


it was dodgy. The system had been discredited time and time again,


and there were...That Is no excuse? I'm not looking for an excuse, I'm


not saying what I did wasn't wrong. I pleaded guilty, I put my hand up


and said what I did was wrong. My point is, if hi done that, surely


Scotland Yard or the Crown Prosecution Service should have


looked at every other case of those MPs who did exactly the same as me.


Why do you think they decided to act against you and only handful of


others? I have no idea, I have never been told that. I have no


idea why or what criteria they used for selection. I have no idea why I


don't know the handful of MPs were investigated that were investigated.


For every MP prosecuted there is a parallel case of another MP or a


few MPs, who have been allowed to repay in secret and carry on with


their careers. How many MPs were on the take? I went through the


expenses claims of all 650 or so MPs. I checked every one. And I


listed 120 who had claimed in exactly the same way as I had.


think there should have been over 100 prosecuted? Or investigated at


the very least, by the authorities who investigated, in the thorough


way I was investigated. Do you feel the experience of going to prison


did you good? No. Why not? I don't think it achieved anything. It


punished me, obviously, I was deprived of my liberty and sent to


prison. How were you treated in jail? Reasonably well, quite well.


I wasn't treated any differently from anyone else, I have not been


leased early as such, I have been released in the same way as any


other prisoner would have been in the same category and the same


circumstances as I was. As far as your current financial arrangements


concerned, are you getting the MPs' pension? I'm ecomomically inactive


at the moment. It will be hard to find work or employment in the


future. Are you looking? Not at the moment, no. But I'm not testing the


water yet. What is your pension worth? That is for me and the


pensions authorities. It is not great. The taxpayer is paying you a


pension despite what happened? much reduced pension because of my


age and circumstances. But not all of that pension was achieved during


my employment as a member of Parliament. Listen up you fatties,


if the Newsnight audience are prepentive as a whole, then we are


over 50% of us obese. In some European countries Governments are


tackling what everyone recognises is a health timebomb by regulating


or taxing food manufacturers, as we do with cigarettes. But the British


Government announced today it believes instead of asking us all


to have a little think about what we eat and to stop guzzling so much


junk. Our science editor is here. Talk us through this?


Government is saying we should, essentially, eat less, quite a lot


less. Five billion calories aday across England. Which is the -


calories a day across England. Which is 500 million cheese burgers.


Few people would disagree with that as a health message. But there is a


strong reaction that in tackling obesity it is not enough in the


scale of the problem. If we look at That's the scale of the problem.


This strategy is designed to deal with it. The emphasis is very much


on personal responsibility, and the contentious bit is that the food


industry is being asked only, well encouraged to take action, to


reduce fat, sugar, calorie content from food. Very much in emphasis on


voluntary action rather than legislation. That is not wholly


surprising, the Government has always said it wanted to work with


industry. Back in March the Health Secretary said let's have these


responsibility deals on public health. He set up five networks


dealing with food, alcohol, physical activity, health at work,


behaviour change. He's working with companies, who have to make pledges


that they will take action. Some of The Government argues we need those


people, they have the expertise, the power to make changes. Critics


are worried that they shouldn't be anywhere near health policy.


Government should set policy because the policies could end up


hitting their profits. What has been the reaction to this strategy,


as such it is? It hasn't been wholly supportive today. Quite a


lot of critical voices saying it is all very well to ask people to take


personal responsibility, but you are ignoring how difficult it is to


do that. We are bombarded with adverts for food all the time, fast


food is everywhere. We are all seeding sedintary lifestyles. They


pointed back - living sedintary lifestyles. They pointed back to


policy, they said you needed sufficient intervention by


Government, so you are looking at taxes on fatties and sweet food,


you are looking at retructions and marketing.


Professor Philip James is President of the Interational Association for


the studio of obesity, and Dr Susan Jebb is a nutrition scientists at


the medical research group. Is this approach going to work?


Almost certainly not on the basis of the evidence and all the


analysis. Apart from what we have just heard from the Lancet, the


OECD, the inter-governmental think- tank in Paris, they did very


meticulous an allies of the economics of the disaster that is


to - analysis of the economics of the disaster to come, and it


required fundamental changes in the food supply, as well as physical


activity. What is gained by not adopting a more agrossive strategy?


We may well - Aggressive strategy? We may well make progress faster.


Food companies find a lot of time finding loopholes and getting round


it, if we can get them constructively engaging with the it


of it, we can make quicker and further progress by regulation.


There you have? They have been sabotaging every single public


health initiative for the last 30 years. If you talk to the top food


companies, and you ask them how they increased their profits, it is


by marketing, manipulating the price and getting their food


absolutely everywhere. Therefore, they are very worried, that if you


tackle those key things, that is going to affect the bottom line.


They are much better off in this sort of vague interaction and so on.


Are you thinking of adopting a similar strategy with cigarette


manufacturers? I'm responsible for food, not smoking. You believe in


it as far as obesity goes, why not believe it as far as cigarettes go?


Let's clarify what I do, I'm the independent chair of the Food


Network, which brings industry and public health officials together.


My job as the chair is to try to get the best possible deal out of


that structure for public health. It doesn't preclude regulation, but


that is the strategy which is in place, and we need, for the sake of


public health, to try to make as much progress as we can. As an


acknowledged expert in this field, do you really believe that Kraft,


McDonalds, KFC and business za hut r they qualified to - Pizza Hut,


are they qualified to advise on the subject? We are not asking them to


advise, we are asking them to reduce the calorie content, by


reducing portion size and fat content. I can't do that, the food


industry has to change their products. It is have difficult to


think how to regulate to make - it is very difficult to think how to


regulate to make that happen. are difficult cash-strapped types,


people are already having - times, people are already having


difficulty making ends meet, to put tax on fat and sugars and the like,


is simply going to increase the cost of food, why should should


people be expected pay for more it? That is the key point in the


current financial crisis. It is very clear that everybody, except


the rich, change their food purchases when you change prices.


You actual lie don't have to increase or de- actually don't have


to increase or decrease the price. Analysis done in Denmark shows you


have marked changes in food intake with very small changes in price.


But actually if you want to tackle this properly, and we went into


this with the Health Select Committee, years ago. You actually


need to, as with alcohol, and tobacco, and those are used more by


the poorer people, it is regressive. Taxes are regressive, but you have


to compensate that with an economic strategy, and that is exactly what


they are doing in Denmark. How long are you prepared to give


it? It is not that question, my job is to get the best out of it we


possibly K what is important in all the pledges we have in the food


network, it is a commitment to monitoring and evaluation. We have


to be able to see that progress is being made. I really welcome the


fact that. Within what time? takes time. We are monitoring these


things on an annual basis, we will see the progress. What is important


is there is a plan B. It is interesting that ministers have


indicated they are very viewing the international evidence to consider


what it is. If I was to say it is clear from the strategy that what


has happened sensible health- conscious people, advising the


Government, have been nobbled by the food companies what do you say?


I don't think there is any evidence for that. No evidence at all, you


really believe that? I do. I sit on that Food Network Panel, we have


half-a-dozen people from the food industry, five or six people from


the public health sector, we have the faculty of public health and


the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition. What we have today is


the Government setting out a clear mandate to set out clear action.


They are setting the policy but asking industry to do the delivery.


Susan is trying to cope. We, my team saw Andrew Lansley before the


election, he understood all we were talking about. Who comes in


somebody we haven't heard about called David Cameron, saying forget


about it, this is all personal responsibility, I will have nothing


done that in any way impairs the British food industry. We better


hope that you are wrong and voluntary measures will work.


remarkable initiative if it is true, it hasn't happened anywhere else.


This isn't just about regulation, we need better treatment. We have


60% of adults already obese. This strategy is absolutely set out, not


only to prevent more people getting fat, but to encourage us to take


some real action to actually help those who have got established


obesity problems. Thank you very much. With the


nights drawing in, it is time to get a woolie sweater, it is


available to the 93 high street branches of Edinburgh Woollen Mill.


It says "designed in Scotland 100% cashmere". What the label doesn't


say is it wasn't actually made in Scotland, but approximately 4,000


though-odd miles away, in among goalia, by North Korean workers -


Mongolia, by North Korean workers. Edinburgh, tradition, the castle,


the little craft shops where tourists can buy quality products,


woven in Scotland, like cashmere sweaters. Then there is Edinburgh


Woollen Mill, one of the UK's largest clothing chains, with 500


locations around Britain. I have picked up one of their popular


sweaters for �70, marked down from �140. The label says James Pringle,


100% cashmere, designed in Scotland. What it doesn't say on the label or


on the website, is where it was made. If you thought it was woven


by skilled Scottish craftsman, you are in for - craftsmen, you are in


for a surprise. They come from a little further away.


# I would walk 1,000 miles # Just to be that man that walked


# A thousand miles # Just to fall down at your door


I have come to the other side of the world to find out exactly what


EWM's cashmere sweaters are made. It turns out it is here, in


Mongolia, in an industrial zone on the outskirts of the capital.


They are very happy and proud to be working with Edinburgh Woollen Mill.


They have joined us about five years ago. We have worked together


to develop the prok ducts and the quality, and to - products, and the


quality, and to teach us how to be good export manufacturers.


Mongolian shepherds are some of the most prolific producers of cashmere.


It is no surprise that the wool is sourced here. What is rather


unexpected is that many of the workers at the cashmere factory in


Mongolia come from North Korea. The North Korean workers fill in


very well with Mongolian people, they are hard workers, they don't


complain and get stuck in, they are quite skill. They are looked after


by the company, they have a dormitary, food, showers,


television. They fit in very, very well.


They get food and board, but there is a mystery about what happens to


their wages. At the factory, we were told that the company paid the


North Korean Government, not the workers directly. This is the final


process, the section where all the cleaning, pressing, ironing,


quality control. Then the labelling. Can you show me one of the ones


that might be going to the UK? can have a look over here and we


can see one already packed. This is a James Pringle EWM sweater,


machine washable. Exactly the same as the one we bought in Edinburgh,


even down to the labelling. Designed in Scotland, but made in


Mongolia, by North Koreans. Which is strange, because North


Korea isn't exactly known for its stylish knitwear. North Korea is


better known for making missiles and testing nuclear weapons, in the


face of United Nations sanctions. It is the most regimented and


repressive regime on earth. 200,000 are held in concentration camps for


incurring the wrath of the leader. And North Korean citizens aren't


allowed to leave the country without permission, and can be


executed if they are caught fleeing. There is an exception, though, the


labour brigades. In 2009, I revealed on Newsnight, a


British-owned company that was using North Korean labour gangs to


cut timber in Russia. The money for the wages was paid directly to the


North Korean Government. They are earning up to $7 million a year,


that is going to the North Korean Government, are you concerned about


how the North Korean Government use that is money? As far as the


agreements we have in place, the money is going through to the


Ministry of Forestry of North Korea. As for what it is use the for in


North Korea is not - used for in North Korea is not of our interest.


While I was in Mongolia, visiting the factory that makes sweaters for


Edinburgh Woollen Mill, I came across this construction site.


There are about 50 North Korean construction workers in the pit


below me. It is where they eat, sleep and work. Because the


Mongolian security guards have instructions not to let them out


beyond the fence. Thousands of North Koreans have been brought to


Mongolia over the last few years, in an arrangement that has been


very profitable for the private companies that are exploiting their


ultra cheap labour. The question is, how much are the North Korean


workers benefiting themselves? A Mongolian running a kiosk next


door to the construction site, told me he initially thought the North


Koreans were prisoners because they were never let off the site. When I


went back to the factory where they make sweaters for Edinburgh Woollen


Mill. The director of exports told me that their North Korean workers


were treated much better, they were allowed to leave the factory. What


about their wages? He said they paid the North Korean Government,


it was up to them to decide how much they gave the workers. I


understand that usually with North Koreans you pay the Government and


the Government pays them, is that correct? We are transfering the


So North Korea was effectively exporting its work force to raise


money for the regime. So is this factory which makes EWM sweaters


effectively subsidising the lead he, I'm back in Scotland - the leader.


I'm back in Scotland to see if they are happy about the North Korean


connection. They agreed the factory in Mongolia supplies them with


jumpers, and said they were made by a work force, including North


Koreans. To my surprise, Edinburgh Woollen Mill, did not confirm what


we had been told about how the North Koreans were paid. They said


they were told to fund were paid to North Korea or any North Korean


agency. That is in stark contrast to what we were told on the ground


which was the North Korean Government was getting money from


there. They say all the wages are paid


into the workers' bank accounts, again, that's difficult to square


with what we have been told in Mongolia. The company says the


North Koreans are people who freely left the country who-to-look for


Again, that's difficult to reconcile with a nation which


executes people for trying to flee the country. I wanted to talk to


the North Koreans at the cashmere factory, but the embassy said no.


I wanted to ask how much they earned personally from the


arrangement. Then factory officials stopped us filming and escorted us


outside. Edinburgh Woollen Mill told us


labelling garments made in Mongolia as designed in Scotland is


factually correct. Although there is no longer a legal requirement to


label clothes with their country of origin. It is an offence to mislead


customers about where a product is made. The Trading Standards


Now the Defence Secretary, Liam Fox, was unable to turn out for the


keel-laying ceremony for one of the most powerful submarines built in


Britain today. Logistical reasons, he said, had he been there he would


have trailed the claque that has followed him after questions were


raised about the precise relationship he had with friend,


Adam Werritty, who described him self - himself as an "advisor", his


charity is now defunct. The doctor was out and about today,


brisk on his rounds, saying all was well. We are at the end stage,


possibly, of the Libyan conflict. I have just had a discussion with the


Foreign Secretary. The conflict that is far from ended is the one


over the special relationship with Dr Fox's best friend. We have been


examining their involvement in a controversial charity.


Atlantic Bridge was set up by Liam Fox to promote another special


relationship, that between the UK and the US. Four years ago Fox


installed Adam Werritty to run the Bridge. By the time the charity was


wound up this year, he had been paid some �0,000.


Atlantic Bridge ran into trouble with its activities during


America's health care debate. The charity, in the eyes of a Labour


Party blogger, were breaking the rules. I first came across the


Atlantic scam bridge in the summer of 200 - Atlantic Bridge, in the


summer of 2009, when President Obama was campaigning. They used


the NHS as a test case of what can go wrong with health care. This was


buyia, and when Lady Thatcher attended a dinner by Atlantic scam


bridge for a medal. One of the former trustees denies it had a


political tilt. Not true, there was plenty across the spectrum. We were


very concerned about that. wasn't politically right-wing?


not an expert on American politics, but, yes, there are plenty. And


there are plenty in Britain, and on the left is Lord Asquith, not very


left-wing and one of my colleagues. He is a Tory peer and Conservative


ministers. I was just very surprised to discover they were a


charity. I was aware that charities aren't allowed to be party


political. And so I started thinking, and the more I dug on,


the more obvious it was to me they were a charity and political


organisation. They described their aim to bring the special


relationship back to where it was under Thatcher and Reagan. All of


their advisory board members were Conservative MPs, and closely


linked with the Conservative Party. So I wrote to the Charity


Commission, to alert them to my concerns.


On the advisory board of Atlantic Bridge was George Osborne, William


Hague, Chris Grayling, Michael Gove and Liam Fox. In America, too, the


Bridge people were overwhelmingly Conservative and Republican. The


Charity Commission investigated. While these investigations were


going on, Atlantic Bridge Inc, the American operation, was mindful the


whole show was under threat. When the chief executive extoled the


wonders of David Cameron, before the UK election last year, she


stressed she was speaking in a private, personal capacity, the


Bridge couldn't be party political. Other leading Tory ministers have


come over and have made a point of seeing Democrats as well as


Republicans. As indeed they should. Are they making any headway there?


Think so. But who funded Werritty's trips with the doctor. When he


stayed in Dubai, he reportedly cited his company as Atlantic


Bridge. Atlantic Bridge is transnational thing, there is


another organisation in the US that continues to this day called


Atlantic Bridge. One former Atlantic Bridger in America said


they had paid not one time for Werritty's travels, and described


the situation as a "bloody mess". Amanda Bowman who we met last year,


is running Transatlantic Bridge, and refused to speak on camera. But


did talk about the happy amateurism of the Werritty era. He's closer to


Liam than anyone in the world, except his wife. It is hard to


characterise their relationship, if you want to smell test Mr Fox on


any situation, Werritty was the go- to guy.


Liam Fox was still single minded in his job today, and is still holding


on to his job. I'm doing what is needed today, the Defence Secretary


focuses on defence. The Times tomorrow claims that Mr Werritty


was funded by a private was funded by a private


intelligence group. The Telegraph has news Dr Fox and


Adam Werritty attended a $500 dinner, which was not declared.


The Mirror has an extraordinary story about Oliver Letwin, the


Cabinet Office minister, he seems to be dumping a confidential and


secret documents, torn up, into a rubbish bin in the park. He has


given us a statement tonight, apparently in which he says, or a


spokesperson says he does some of his parliamentary and constituency


course dense in the park before going to work. - correspondence in


the park before going to work. They are not documents of a sensitive


Hello, we should have more sunshine around tomorrow. The cloud already


breaking early in the morning across the south-east of England.


Some sunny spells here. Brightening up across England and Wales. The


bulk of Northern Ireland rainy. A much better afternoon across the


north of England, 16. Sunny spells in the Midland, and the best of the


sunshine maybe in the south-east of England, not as warm as today. 21


in Southampton. Improving all the while across the south west, a grey,


misty start, sunshine breaking through in the afternoon. Sunshine


in Wales, particularly the east. The west still cloudy. More cloud


as you cross the Irish Sea towards Northern Ireland. A little rain or


drizzle not far away. Especially later in the afternoon. The north


Download Subtitles