03/12/2012 Newsnight


03/12/2012

Are multinationals backing down on tax avoidance? Lord Saatchi on the cancer that killed his wife, and why Libyan women seek asylum in Britain. Presented by Jeremy Paxman.


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 03/12/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

Suppose you sat in cafe, went on- line, and bought a Christmas

:00:12.:00:16.

present, and that neither the company that sold you the coffee,

:00:16.:00:20.

the search engine that found your retailer, or the retailer itself,

:00:20.:00:25.

paid as much tax as many politicians think it should pay,

:00:25.:00:30.

would you mind? In increasingly straightened times,

:00:30.:00:34.

the way some multinationals minimise their taxes has become

:00:34.:00:37.

hugely charged. The Government still aren't doing anything about

:00:37.:00:40.

it. That is their job. It is just ridiculous that they still haven't

:00:40.:00:44.

acted. As the Chancellor talks of

:00:44.:00:49.

crackingdown, is what's legal the same as what's moral, and if not,

:00:49.:00:54.

can the citizen change the corporation?

:00:54.:00:58.

Maurice Saatchi lost his wife to cancer, now he wants to change the

:00:58.:01:01.

law, if recommended treatment doesn't cure, should doctors be

:01:01.:01:07.

free to try something else? The women of the Libyan revolution,

:01:07.:01:12.

now victim to some of the Islamist militias, once on their side.

:01:12.:01:20.

He was hittinging me with his feet and HIStory gun, he was calling me

:01:20.:01:30.
:01:30.:01:32.

an Israeli, an Israeli spy, calling A statement today announced that

:01:32.:01:36.

the Duchess of Cambridge was pregnant. We won't mention it again,

:01:36.:01:40.

promise. We were rather taken with the statement from a Parliamentary

:01:40.:01:43.

Committee that some of the best known multinationals operating in

:01:43.:01:47.

this country were being immoral. In not paying more tax.

:01:47.:01:52.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, meanwhile, talks tough about, as he

:01:52.:01:56.

puts it, going after companies which aggressively avoid tax. The

:01:56.:02:00.

problem with all this blow-Hardtalk, is that the tax officials in this

:02:00.:02:04.

country, seem to have no objections to arrangements which mean that a

:02:04.:02:10.

multinational corporation like Amazon, can make sales of �3.4

:02:10.:02:15.

billion in the UK, but pay just �2 million in corporation tax. But is

:02:15.:02:23.

legal the same as moral? Politicians, bankers, the press,

:02:23.:02:27.

they have all been under the spotlight, now it is the turn of

:02:27.:02:33.

major corporates in the public gaze over their tax apayers. Starbucks,

:02:33.:02:39.

Facebook, Google and Amazon, apart from all being American, they have

:02:39.:02:43.

all created a reputation of legally avoiding tax. In parliament last

:02:44.:02:49.

month, MPs didn't pull any punches, while executives floundered. I will

:02:49.:02:53.

come back to the committee, and it is possible to show that figure,

:02:53.:02:59.

disclose that figure. Can you say that again? I will come back to the

:02:59.:03:02.

committee andly see whether it is possible to disclose that figure.

:03:02.:03:06.

We have not disclosed those figures ever publicly, either on a country

:03:07.:03:10.

basis or website basis. You are either running the business very

:03:10.:03:15.

badly, or there is some fiddle going on. We clearly are not

:03:15.:03:18.

aggressively looking to avoid tax or tax on any structure anywhere,

:03:18.:03:22.

we have had profitability challenges, very sincere ones,

:03:22.:03:26.

unfortunately, that we are not pleased with. It is nothing, I

:03:26.:03:29.

assure you, to do with tax avoidance. The committee said the

:03:29.:03:33.

Government should get a grip and clampdown on multinationals that

:03:33.:03:37.

exploit tax laws. It described the behaviour of large corporations as

:03:37.:03:42.

outrageous and an insult to those who pay their fair share, and said

:03:42.:03:47.

HMRC lacked clarity when trying to explain its approach to enforcing

:03:47.:03:50.

the corporation tax regime. Even before the report was published,

:03:50.:03:53.

Starbucks were signals over the weekend, that all the public

:03:53.:04:03.
:04:03.:04:20.

pressure and negative headlines, So why the change of heart? Weeks

:04:20.:04:25.

of nasty Headlines, and the threat of sit-ins and direct action like

:04:25.:04:29.

this one in Oxford Street, by protest groups like UK Uncut,

:04:29.:04:33.

appear to have galvanised a coffee chain, worried about brand damage.

:04:33.:04:37.

This is the Government's role. It is their job to crackdown on tax

:04:37.:04:40.

avoidance, it is clear that the public are outraged by this.

:04:40.:04:44.

Margaret Hodge and the PAC are outraged by this. The media is

:04:44.:04:47.

brimming with outrage about tax avoidance, and yet the Government

:04:47.:04:50.

still aren't doing anything about it, that is their job, it is

:04:50.:04:55.

ridiculous that they still haven't acted. The problem is, the disabled

:04:55.:05:01.

people, mothers, children, who are bearing the brunt of the cuts, that

:05:01.:05:03.

is outrageous, when there is so much money that could be collected

:05:03.:05:07.

from tax avoidance that could be put into public services.

:05:07.:05:12.

The key to this is something called transfer pricing which allows one

:05:12.:05:15.

part of a company to bill another part for using goods, especially

:05:15.:05:20.

services. In general, the bit of a multinational that controls

:05:20.:05:26.

valuable brand trade marks or patents, bases itself in a low-tax

:05:26.:05:30.

country, lix Luxembourg, Ireland or Switzerland t can bill the sister

:05:30.:05:33.

British company where taxes are higher, for permission to use the

:05:33.:05:37.

trade marks or certain products. That has the effect of magnifying

:05:37.:05:40.

the profits in Luxembourg and minimising them in Britain, thus

:05:40.:05:45.

cutting the amount of tax paid here. Finally the profits left over in

:05:45.:05:49.

Luxembourg or other low-tax country, get sent back to the States where

:05:49.:05:55.

it cannot be taxed a second time. Britain has signed tax treaties

:05:55.:05:58.

with 137 different countries all around the world, meaning companies

:05:58.:06:01.

trading here and British companies trading overseas, can't be taxed

:06:01.:06:05.

twice on the same income. So the Government is in a bind. It cannot

:06:05.:06:11.

ignore the concerns of voters, nor too can it clampdown on the likes

:06:11.:06:16.

of Starbucks, Google and face book, without rufpbing the risk that

:06:16.:06:20.

overseas Governments will clampdown on the likes of RBS and BP or Glaxo.

:06:20.:06:26.

It might be up to consumers to urge companies to pay for tax on their

:06:26.:06:29.

profits. Consumers account for 70% of all spending in the British

:06:29.:06:34.

economy, yet as a lobby group, they are a slumbering giant. When that

:06:34.:06:39.

giant growls, though, big business tends to listen. Think of the

:06:39.:06:43.

backlash when Coca-Cola tried to introduce New Coke in the 1980s,

:06:43.:06:46.

the boycott against South African goods during the apartheid era.

:06:46.:06:51.

More recently there was a campaign to prevent sexualised clothing

:06:51.:06:55.

being marketed to young girls. That was co-ordinate bid one of the most

:06:55.:06:58.

powerful consumer groups in the land, Mumsnet. It is not what I

:06:58.:07:02.

think about things, it is what the collective thinks. Believe me there

:07:02.:07:06.

is a myriad of voices, there is loads of dissent, lots of

:07:06.:07:10.

discussion, and it is healthy. It is the wisdom of a crowd having

:07:10.:07:13.

debated and debated and debated. Are you conscious of the power you

:07:13.:07:18.

could wield against companies? think you know the reason we have

:07:18.:07:24.

done more formal campaigns like Let Girls Be Girls, and another one

:07:24.:07:29.

called We Believe You, getting people to understand the issues

:07:29.:07:33.

around domestic violence and rape, is because we do realise we wield a

:07:33.:07:36.

certain amount of influence. The moment prime ministers start

:07:36.:07:39.

knocking on your door and asking to speak to your users, you realise

:07:39.:07:45.

you have some influence. Despite the poet Tennessee of millions of

:07:45.:07:51.

people thinking -- poetentcy of people discussing on-line, it is

:07:51.:07:57.

only useful if it is acted on in the real worlds. Customers have

:07:57.:08:01.

that effect on brand reputation if they unite together, they need to

:08:01.:08:05.

unite on-line and make sure there is an off-line part to that

:08:05.:08:10.

mobilisation. Only if they connect the on-line mobilisation in off-

:08:10.:08:14.

line action, can they damage the reputation of a brand. Google,

:08:14.:08:18.

Amazon and other multinationals in the spotlight reiterated today that

:08:18.:08:22.

their tax affairs were fully in order, that is true, but because

:08:22.:08:26.

the Government's hands are tied by international tax treaties t will

:08:26.:08:30.

doubtless hope that other firms will follow Starbucks lead, and

:08:30.:08:32.

voluntarily agree to pay for corporation tax.

:08:32.:08:37.

We asked many of the companies accused of immorally minimising

:08:37.:08:41.

their cushion tax bills on to tonight's programme. None of them,

:08:41.:08:46.

includinging Starbucks, Amazon or Google, -- including Starbucks,

:08:46.:08:52.

Amazon or Google would appear. Joining us are my guests now. The

:08:52.:08:56.

former Canon Chancellor of St Paul's Cathedral, Giles Fraser, the

:08:56.:08:59.

tax campaigner, Ellie Mae O'Hagan, and Mark Littlewood of the

:08:59.:09:02.

Institute of Economic Affairs. Mark Littlewood, is there any point in

:09:03.:09:06.

George Osborne blustering about things being outrageous? No point

:09:06.:09:10.

at all. It is as if he was announcing today that he would send

:09:10.:09:13.

more traffic cops on to the motorway, because he doesn't like

:09:13.:09:17.

people driving at 70 miles an hour. If he has a problem with people

:09:17.:09:20.

driving at 70 miles an house he and his Government should cut the speed

:09:20.:09:24.

limit. He has to be clear about what the law is. The problem here

:09:24.:09:28.

is vagaries in the law. We can argue in these studios, and George

:09:28.:09:34.

Osborne and Danny Alexander can release press released as long as

:09:34.:09:38.

they like about the realities, the Government has to have a clear tax

:09:38.:09:42.

code and it doesn't. Enforcement becomes a bit of a joke. As far as

:09:42.:09:45.

you are concerned, there is nothing wrong with what these companies

:09:45.:09:49.

have done, they have merely complied with the law and played --

:09:49.:09:52.

paid what was necessary? They are operating according to the law. To

:09:52.:09:56.

take the point, it is not just the UK tax law, it is the international

:09:56.:10:02.

tax codes that we all need to comply with. So why are you so

:10:02.:10:07.

upset about it? About tax avoidance. There is no tax avoidance, they are

:10:08.:10:10.

paying what they are supposed to pay? That is a red herring to say

:10:10.:10:14.

they are paying what they are supposed to pay. Why? There are

:10:14.:10:17.

loopholes they are exploiting. Should they pay more? They are

:10:17.:10:20.

supposed to pay a rate of corporation tax that they are

:10:20.:10:27.

avoiding. They are manipulating the, as Mark said, the poorly-

:10:27.:10:30.

constructed laws in order to use loopholes to get out of paying what

:10:30.:10:33.

they are supposed to pay. They are not paying what they are supposed

:10:33.:10:36.

to pay. There is a huge difference between what is moral and what is

:10:36.:10:42.

legal. What is going on here, if you have, if you are a company that

:10:42.:10:46.

makes and sells books, the books are printed in the UK, their

:10:46.:10:50.

warehouseed in the UK, they are shipped out in the UK, sent to UK

:10:50.:10:57.

customers, the invoices are printed on UK paper and sent out in the UK

:10:57.:11:01.

but Luxembourg printed on the bottom so you pay the tax in

:11:01.:11:04.

Luxembourg, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out

:11:04.:11:09.

something is fundamentally wrong there. This is nonsense. Which bit

:11:09.:11:16.

is nonsense? When you are talking about Amazon, people don't go to

:11:16.:11:18.

their websites because they are boxed and labelled in the UK. They

:11:18.:11:22.

go to them because they are internationally recognised as a

:11:22.:11:27.

brand. I suggest they are cheaper? It is cheap and convenient.

:11:27.:11:30.

recognised. If you are somebody, think of an on-line bookshop, you

:11:30.:11:34.

can go to, Amazon has great recognition. These are not

:11:34.:11:41.

justifications to avoid tax. People on the screen here have great brand

:11:41.:11:46.

value. How is that an issue about tax avoidance. If you open a cinema

:11:46.:11:51.

in London and show Hollywood blockbuster movies, like Spiderman,

:11:51.:11:55.

what proportion of the ticket price should go to the IP property owner,

:11:55.:12:00.

the person who owns Spiderman in America, clearly more than 0%, as

:12:00.:12:04.

much as 5%, 10%, I'm not sure, it is precisely this argument that

:12:05.:12:09.

Starbucks are in. If the consequence of that, is that small

:12:09.:12:14.

book shops, for example, to take the book analogy, if they go out of

:12:14.:12:23.

business, tough luck? They pay their taxes? There is no question

:12:23.:12:26.

that Amazon and Starbucks are paying their taxes. Small book

:12:26.:12:30.

shops are going out of business. Small coffee shops to the expense

:12:30.:12:34.

of Starbucks? You don't care about that either? The market trend is

:12:34.:12:38.

people are buying books on-line cheaper, and coffee from recognised

:12:38.:12:41.

chains, this is a change in consumer behaviour. The interesting

:12:41.:12:45.

thing now is Starbucks customers decide, we have had enough of you,

:12:45.:12:48.

we will never buy coffee from you again, unless you hand over a

:12:48.:12:52.

billion or two billion to the taxpayer, that is consumer power. A

:12:52.:12:55.

wonderful thing in a free market and free society. We will come to

:12:55.:12:59.

the question of consumer power. Let's explore the moral point

:12:59.:13:04.

further, morally, is a company entitled, I know you are a tax

:13:04.:13:10.

specialist, but is a company entitled to decide to pay more tax

:13:10.:13:13.

regardless of its obligation to its shareholders? Arguably it is not

:13:13.:13:18.

more tax, is it, if it is paying more tax than is legally due, that

:13:18.:13:22.

is arguably not tax. That is the basic question. Are companies free

:13:22.:13:27.

to do that? Well, that's a question that isn't a tax question, at all,

:13:27.:13:33.

that is about the duties of the directors and so on. But arguably,

:13:33.:13:38.

if it is not the legal liable tax it is not tax. The legal liable tax

:13:38.:13:42.

is the corporation tax of Britain, if you are not paying at that rate,

:13:42.:13:47.

you are avoiding tax. That is zero, if you have no profits. What do you

:13:47.:13:51.

want us to do, withdraw from the European Union, is that the idea?

:13:51.:13:56.

think this Government should introduce an anti-avoidance

:13:56.:14:03.

principle. There is research that says you will recoup �5.5 billion

:14:03.:14:07.

in tax, at a time of unprecedented cuts to public services it is

:14:07.:14:10.

incumbent on the Government to do that, morally incumbent as Giles

:14:11.:14:16.

was saying. Could that work? think we are going to get one.

:14:16.:14:22.

we will get an anti-abuse principle, the research shows that won't work,

:14:22.:14:27.

I'm asking for an anti-avoidance principle. We have yet to see the

:14:27.:14:31.

details, none of us know the details. But the key point about

:14:31.:14:34.

this is that most big businesses actually welcome the introduction

:14:34.:14:38.

of such a principle. Because, actually, they are not interested

:14:38.:14:43.

in aggressive tax avoidance. are they participating in it?

:14:43.:14:47.

don't think they would see that is what it is. Hang on a second.

:14:47.:14:51.

is this a moral question? Because it is about your contribution to

:14:51.:14:57.

the common good. And the question is, do these very large

:14:57.:15:00.

multinational companies actually contribute to the good of all. And

:15:00.:15:05.

if they are paying, if they are actually paying very little tax,

:15:05.:15:09.

and they are also putting small businesses out of business, there

:15:09.:15:14.

is a very strong argument to say they don't...There Is an argument

:15:14.:15:17.

to say they employ people and pay national insurance? There is a

:15:17.:15:20.

balance of advantage, there is a balance of advantage, if they are

:15:20.:15:23.

saying they make no profit, I don't know why they are operating here if

:15:23.:15:26.

they make no profit, that seems extraordinary. They say they make

:15:26.:15:30.

no profit, they boast to their shareholders they are making

:15:30.:15:32.

extraordinary profits in their glossy brochures and then they ship

:15:32.:15:36.

all their profits overseas. This country doesn't have the advantage

:15:37.:15:40.

of that. That is a very simple matter. That is a very simple

:15:40.:15:44.

matter, Charles. If there is any fraud going on t needs to be

:15:44.:15:47.

prosecuted. I didn't say there was fraud. If the minutes of their tax

:15:47.:15:51.

holder meetings are different to their returns, this needs to be

:15:51.:15:54.

investigated by the tax authorities, not grandstanded by politician. It

:15:54.:15:58.

needs to be investigated by the tax authorities in the same way that if

:15:58.:16:02.

I claimed I was on the minimum wage, it would be investigated by the tax

:16:02.:16:05.

authorities. The tax authorities are too lenient. Once you mix up

:16:05.:16:08.

the common good and handing money over to the state, they are not

:16:08.:16:12.

exactly the same thing. If Starbucks decides to give money to

:16:12.:16:16.

charitable arms or whatever, I'm sure that would be giving to the

:16:16.:16:20.

common good. I want to the make the point about the moral issue Jeremy

:16:20.:16:23.

has been talking about, we are living in a time of unprecedented

:16:23.:16:27.

cuts to public services, it is irrefutable the damage it is

:16:28.:16:34.

causing to people's lives. Would you ban duty free products. Excuse

:16:34.:16:37.

me, pleat finish my point, George Osborne will be repeating the

:16:37.:16:43.

mantra there is no alternative, here is an alternative. Would you

:16:43.:16:47.

ban people buying duty-free, that is tax avoidance. That is a total

:16:47.:16:51.

red herring, that is a red herring, because duty-free products are

:16:51.:16:57.

designed to relieve people of tax. Are so are these tax codes.

:16:57.:17:00.

Transfer pricing is an incredibly complex thing. Normal people can't

:17:00.:17:04.

take advantage of it, it is not the same as a duty-free. You are

:17:04.:17:08.

distracting from the point I'm making. You want a general anti-

:17:08.:17:12.

avoidance rule, applying to everyone, I assume. Living in a

:17:12.:17:19.

time, let me finish my point, let me finish, we are living in a time

:17:19.:17:22.

unprecedented cuts that is causing damage to people's lives, and

:17:22.:17:26.

women's services which is what being protested about on the

:17:26.:17:31.

weekend. This is about cuts not tax. Tax avoidance corporation, loses

:17:31.:17:35.

�25 billion a year. What about personal tax avoidance. That is a

:17:35.:17:39.

different issue. Hang on, you said earlier you want a general anti-

:17:39.:17:42.

avoidance principle, I'm trying to work out. You can write the

:17:42.:17:48.

principle in such a way. I'm trying to work out why the general anti-

:17:48.:17:53.

avoidance principle you argued for, doesn't apply to duty-free

:17:53.:17:57.

cigarettes. We as a society will write that and exclude that, we

:17:57.:18:00.

will write the general anti- avoidance rule and decide what goes

:18:00.:18:04.

in it. We don't have to include that. OK you two, let someone else

:18:04.:18:10.

have a say. If I behaved, you know, at the moment, extraordinary, these

:18:10.:18:13.

large companies now negotiating their tax with the Government. I

:18:13.:18:17.

would love the tax man to call me up and say come out for a cup of

:18:17.:18:21.

coffee and we will negotiate my tax, that is not how it works. If the

:18:21.:18:24.

Government agrees there is nothing wrong with it? There is a

:18:24.:18:27.

difference between what is legal and what is moral. What is legal

:18:27.:18:32.

must track what is moral. That, if it doesn't track, to some degree,

:18:32.:18:38.

that people recognise, out there, there is a great deal of political,

:18:38.:18:44.

social, unhappiness about this sort of thing. Clearer, simpler tax

:18:44.:18:49.

codes. You have been very restrained, come on? On the moral

:18:49.:18:55.

point. Clearly all human activity has a moral angle to it. I think it

:18:55.:18:58.

is incumbent of all of us in our public lives to think about that.

:18:58.:19:03.

In whatever walk of life we are in. But there is also some pragmatisim

:19:03.:19:07.

to this. The fact of the matter is, we need this economy, we need, for

:19:07.:19:12.

this economy to improve, for more jobs to come, we need inbound

:19:12.:19:15.

investment, we need healthy companies locating here. The

:19:15.:19:18.

Government has done a lot of work to make the UK a more attractive

:19:18.:19:22.

environment, both for people to headquarters. That is an argument

:19:22.:19:27.

for lowering taxes? To attract inbound investment. There is a real

:19:27.:19:30.

danger with this debate. Bear in mind when I talk to my colleagues

:19:30.:19:36.

globally the UK is leading this debate like this. There is a real

:19:36.:19:41.

danger that we are putting off those investors. I'm hearing that.

:19:41.:19:45.

You can't be black mailed by large companies. It is not a question of

:19:45.:19:49.

blackmail. There are 62 million people in this country, they will

:19:49.:19:52.

make profits if they pay their fair share of tax, they will make

:19:52.:19:56.

profits on it, that is why they are here. The idea that we will up

:19:56.:20:00.

sticks and go if you don't like paying the tax. There will be some

:20:00.:20:04.

tax rates the UK could have that would be too high people would go

:20:04.:20:09.

elsewhere. You know, that the levels of taxation that are being

:20:10.:20:14.

paid here are silly low, silly low. Silly high. There is a level, there

:20:14.:20:20.

is a level which is fair, it is fair to business, indigenous

:20:20.:20:24.

businesses that work here, it is fair to those of us who receive the

:20:24.:20:28.

benefit, all of us who receive the benefit of taxation. The idea that

:20:28.:20:32.

you could ship out your responsibilities and warehouse them

:20:32.:20:36.

overseas is clearly morally wrong, and pragmatism is no alibi.

:20:36.:20:40.

would you increase tax revenues? I'm interested in people paying

:20:40.:20:44.

their fair share of that. I think that's what is crucial here.

:20:44.:20:50.

think it should be higher? Yes, if a company like Amazon and Starbucks

:20:50.:20:53.

are paying the minuscule amounts that we have at the moment, then,

:20:53.:20:57.

yes, they should be paying a lot more. How would you change the

:20:57.:21:01.

corporation tax rules? Luckily I'm not an accountant so I can't do

:21:01.:21:06.

that. It is a much harder task than you are saying. We can put a man on

:21:06.:21:10.

the moon we can make this work. Thank you all very much.

:21:10.:21:15.

Now, a cure for cancer is the Holy Grail of medical research, yet is

:21:15.:21:18.

it possible that the law is preventing doctors from making

:21:18.:21:21.

progress? A Private Members Bill introduced

:21:21.:21:24.

in the House of Lords this afternoon, more or less claims it

:21:24.:21:29.

may be. According to Lord Saatchi, the advertising empresary and

:21:29.:21:36.

former chairman of the Conservative Party, the law xels doctors to

:21:36.:21:41.

stick to conventional treatments. He lost his wife to ovarian cancer,

:21:41.:21:46.

the treatment of which is harsh and almost always unsuccessful, why not

:21:46.:21:56.
:21:56.:21:56.

free doctors to try something new? He's with us.

:21:56.:22:00.

There have been incredible advances in the treatment of many cancers,

:22:00.:22:04.

childhood cancers stand out. Broadly, we are doing well in

:22:04.:22:10.

common cancers such as breast and colorectal cancers, but less well

:22:10.:22:15.

with brain and pancreatic cancers. Maurice Saatchi says he wants to

:22:15.:22:23.

help people to treat harder to treat cancers, including ovarian

:22:23.:22:31.

cancers, including the one that his wife died from. He his says goal,

:22:31.:22:34.

introduced through a Private Members Bill in the Lords today, is

:22:34.:22:38.

to create greater innovation in cancer treatment. In the framework,

:22:38.:22:46.

doctors can try new treatment. The idea is to free them from the

:22:46.:22:51.

threat of being sued from departure from the range of conventional

:22:51.:22:57.

treatments, without condoning recklessness.

:22:57.:23:01.

Aren't there other factors, than fear of being sued, like lack of

:23:01.:23:05.

money for research, why the need for a new law. When a doctor thinks

:23:05.:23:09.

about how they are faced with a difficult clinical sin Nair hey,

:23:09.:23:13.

they take all the appropriate measure, that is referrals, --

:23:13.:23:18.

scenario, they take all the appropriates, referrals, talking to

:23:18.:23:21.

patients, giving them the advantages and disadvantages of one

:23:21.:23:24.

treatment or another. There is always the questions in the back of

:23:24.:23:29.

the mind, what happens if something goes wrong. The bill helps clarify

:23:29.:23:34.

the situation, that if something goes wrong, then the doctor will be

:23:34.:23:37.

less liable. Some cancer charities support the

:23:37.:23:41.

move, they say there is a need to challenge the status quo. We would

:23:41.:23:47.

support anything that will improve the survival rates for women with

:23:47.:23:50.

this disease. The treatment for ovarian cancer has hardly changed

:23:50.:23:53.

in the last 30 years, this will give women the opportunity to talk

:23:53.:23:58.

to their doctor and say, what is the right treatment for my disease.

:23:58.:24:02.

Because we know that one size doesn't fit all.

:24:02.:24:06.

This cancer research centre in Cambridge aims to link laboratory

:24:06.:24:10.

research to practical applications in the clinic. James Brenton

:24:10.:24:14.

specialises in ovarian cancers, in particular why treatments work for

:24:14.:24:19.

some women and not others. So does he think fear of being sued is

:24:19.:24:23.

holding back innovation in cancer treatment? No, I don't think it is

:24:23.:24:26.

litigation fears. I think it is really a lack of understanding

:24:26.:24:31.

about what is happening in the cancer when a patient has relapsed

:24:31.:24:35.

with ovarian cancer. If we look at other cancers where survival has

:24:35.:24:39.

changed dramatically over the past 20 years, like breast cancer, we

:24:39.:24:42.

have identified particular changes that mean specific therapies work

:24:42.:24:46.

very well for those women. We don't have that information yet for

:24:46.:24:48.

ovarian cancer, that limits the opportunities for new medicines to

:24:49.:24:51.

come into the treatment of the disease.

:24:51.:24:55.

He says the current survival rates for ovarian cancer are not as good

:24:55.:25:01.

as he or others would like. survival for most women with

:25:01.:25:06.

ovarian cancer is 20-30% of those women still alive in five years,

:25:06.:25:10.

using the medicines we have, the chemotherapy drugs. Even in the

:25:10.:25:14.

most severe cases, 15 out of 100 are still alive. We are not happy

:25:14.:25:18.

about the survival figures, we do know the medicines we have cause

:25:18.:25:22.

great benefit in the short-term, the problem is the patients become

:25:22.:25:26.

resistant to the chemotherapy drugs, that is the reason for the low

:25:26.:25:29.

survival. Ovarian cancer is one of the most intractable of cancers.

:25:29.:25:36.

The majority of women present with late-stage cancer, and survival in

:25:36.:25:40.

these women have not improved significantly in recent years.

:25:40.:25:43.

According to to Cancer Research UK, overall cancer rates of survival

:25:43.:25:47.

have doubled in the last 40 years, with half of people diagnosed with

:25:47.:25:52.

cancer surviving their disease for at least five years. In the 1960s,

:25:52.:25:57.

only around a quarter of children survived cancer, now almost three-

:25:57.:26:00.

quarters will survive for more than ten years, with many of those being

:26:00.:26:05.

cured of their disease. The bill raises concerns about the

:26:05.:26:10.

level of innovation in cancer treatment, but even for ovarian

:26:10.:26:16.

cancers, the future looks more promising. There is good evidence

:26:16.:26:22.

that good research into ovarian cancer will change the outcome,

:26:22.:26:27.

they are medicines called PARP inhibitors, for those with a gene-

:26:27.:26:32.

change in ovarian cancer which will change the outcome and cure more

:26:32.:26:35.

patients. James Brenton says his team is researching other promising

:26:35.:26:38.

avenues, such as a simple blood test to spot changes within a

:26:38.:26:45.

single cancer, by looking for cancer DNA in a patient's blood.

:26:45.:26:49.

While those behind today's bill say they agree with more kept kal

:26:49.:26:53.

colleagues, that some form of clin -- sceptical colleagues, that

:26:53.:26:56.

Transformers of clinical trial must be the basis of deciding to try new

:26:56.:27:00.

treatments, in the future, they say, as gene-based approaches, allow

:27:01.:27:06.

therapies targeted at individual patients, that fine tuning itself,

:27:06.:27:12.

pay mean large-scale clinical trials are not always possible.

:27:12.:27:15.

Lord Saatchi is with us now, you lost your wife to cancer in the

:27:15.:27:18.

summer of last year. Was there a particular point in the treatment

:27:18.:27:28.
:27:28.:27:28.

where you realised that the law needed to be changed. I realised

:27:29.:27:33.

the progress of cancer is relentless, remorseless, and

:27:33.:27:37.

merciless. I also observed that the current treatments, certainly for

:27:37.:27:44.

the kind of women's gynaecological cancer I'm now an expert in, these

:27:44.:27:52.

treatments are medieval, degrading, and ineffective. If I may suggest,

:27:52.:27:55.

the most useful way we could have this conversation, if it is all

:27:55.:27:59.

right with you, is in terms of problem-solution. I will try to

:27:59.:28:03.

describe the problem, I will have to be very stark about it, because

:28:03.:28:08.

otherwise it will be quite possible for somebody to say, well, it is

:28:08.:28:15.

not necessarily for this change in the law. May I do that? Please.

:28:15.:28:20.

the moment women would think of the worst part of cancer treatment as

:28:21.:28:25.

being hair loss. Caused by the drugs. And for a woman, in

:28:25.:28:30.

particular, I think, hair loss is most distressing. But I can assure

:28:30.:28:37.

you that hair loss is the good news. The less good news is that the

:28:37.:28:43.

effects of the drugs, they cause and mimic the disease, with

:28:43.:28:52.

symptoms like nausea, sorry about this, vomiting, fatigue, most

:28:52.:28:57.

distressing, but I'm still in the good news, because the really bad

:28:57.:29:03.

news is that the effect of the drugs on the immune system of the

:29:03.:29:07.

woman, allow fatal infection to enter the body, and then the woman

:29:07.:29:11.

is as likely to die from the infection as from the cancer.

:29:11.:29:17.

That's the problem, if I can put it that way. Then we can come on to

:29:17.:29:23.

the solution to that problem. does your bill propose? The bill

:29:23.:29:28.

starts from the position that the current law is a barrier to

:29:28.:29:32.

progress in solving the problem I have just described. A barrier to

:29:32.:29:40.

progress in curing cancer. This is because any deviation, by a doctor,

:29:40.:29:47.

from what his standard procedure, is liable to lead to a finding of

:29:47.:29:52.

guilt for medal negligence. In other words, this is a deterrent --

:29:53.:29:56.

medical negligence. In other words this is a deterrent. This is so

:29:56.:30:02.

should somebody sue? Yes. Have doctors said that is deterring them

:30:02.:30:05.

from trying other forms of treatment because of this?

:30:05.:30:09.

trafting of this bill, taking place -- drafting of this bill, taking

:30:09.:30:13.

place by some great parliamentary draftmen and great medical figures

:30:13.:30:17.

in this country, has dealt with exactly that question, that the

:30:17.:30:22.

fear in the mind of any doctor, that any departure from standard

:30:23.:30:28.

procedure, will cost them their livelihood, and their reputation.

:30:28.:30:32.

That's very serious what this bill will do is relieve them of that

:30:32.:30:37.

burden, and allow more innovation. What it won't do is to create a

:30:37.:30:42.

situation in which doctors are free to experiment in a reckless manner.

:30:42.:30:48.

In fact, I would say, not to go on, I would say that this bill will do

:30:48.:30:53.

more to deter reckless innovation, than the present law. Because it

:30:53.:30:58.

sets out, after much consultation with the medical profession. It set

:30:58.:31:04.

out a procedure, a process, which constitutes responsible innovation.

:31:04.:31:08.

It contrasts that with reckless experimentation, which puts

:31:08.:31:14.

patients lives at risk. But the reason there is an insistence upon

:31:14.:31:19.

conforming to recognised treatment, is precisely to protect the patient

:31:19.:31:26.

from quickry? Quickry, snake oil salesmen, -- Quackery, snake oil

:31:26.:31:29.

salesman? This bill will protect better than the current low. The

:31:29.:31:36.

bill sets out a hard process for a doctor to follow, if he is to

:31:36.:31:40.

innovate in a responsible manner. Have you any examples of the way in

:31:40.:31:44.

which this fear you say doctors have has got in the way of

:31:44.:31:47.

innovation? The fear I describe is in the mind of all doctors at all

:31:47.:31:52.

times. How would it not be. If you were the patient and I was the

:31:52.:31:55.

doctor, and I could see your situation was grim, there is

:31:55.:32:00.

nothing I can do for you, because my situation, as a doctor, is if I

:32:00.:32:04.

depart from what is standard, my entire family, my livelihood, my

:32:04.:32:09.

reputation, is likely to be destroyed. That's a problem. The

:32:09.:32:15.

current law is case law, if this bill became law, this would become

:32:15.:32:19.

statute law, and the definition of responsible innovation, instead of

:32:19.:32:22.

being uncertain, as it is now, would become certain, because it

:32:22.:32:27.

would be in the law. Can you give me an example of the

:32:27.:32:31.

sort of thing you are thinking of? I'm not thinking that there is over

:32:31.:32:35.

there a cure for cancer, which if only it could be picked up and

:32:35.:32:40.

grout into a patients' hospital room everything would be well. --

:32:40.:32:43.

brought into a patients' hospital room everything would be we will.

:32:43.:32:49.

This bill won't cure cancer, it is to encourage the man or woman who

:32:49.:32:54.

will cure cancer. I assume like all medical discoveries, like the

:32:54.:33:01.

discould havery of pencilian or insulin, it will -- discovery of

:33:01.:33:05.

pencilian or insulin, it will be that one man or woman will have an

:33:05.:33:10.

idea in their head about how to cure Cannes, and they will pursue

:33:10.:33:14.

it with great -- cancer, and they will pursue it with great rigour

:33:14.:33:17.

and encouraged by it. This bill will encourage that. Do you think,

:33:17.:33:22.

because of the advances we have made in mapping the human genome,

:33:22.:33:26.

and all of rest of it, because of that gene therapy, and one thing or

:33:26.:33:29.

another, we may be at the point where there is the possibility of

:33:29.:33:32.

change, and some how the inhibitions on how doctors behave

:33:32.:33:35.

are stopping that? I couldn't have put it better than the way you have

:33:35.:33:43.

just put it. I'm very hopeful, as the oncologist on your film said. I

:33:43.:33:47.

hope he's right. I haven't seen that myself. The survival rates in

:33:47.:33:54.

the kind of cancer I'm familiar with are zero. The mortality rate

:33:54.:33:59.

is 100%. And those rates are, as your film showed, the same as 40

:33:59.:34:04.

years ago. The question one must ask is how is this possible? How

:34:04.:34:08.

could there possibly have been such tremendous technological advance,

:34:08.:34:13.

at a breath-taking rate, in so many fields, but not in cancer. They

:34:13.:34:17.

have in some areas of cancer, haven't they? In some areas. Of

:34:17.:34:24.

this improved considerably, not in this Cannes r cancer. Not owe vair

:34:24.:34:29.

-- Cancer. Not ovarian cancer. should address why that should be.

:34:29.:34:32.

When do you think the bill might become law?. That is a very telling

:34:32.:34:38.

question. The bill will become law when the Government decides it will

:34:38.:34:42.

become law. I have produced the bill in the House of Lords. Have

:34:42.:34:45.

they given you any indication they will support you? No, I imagine

:34:45.:34:52.

what the Government will say, when you ask them, is all is well, the

:34:52.:34:57.

Government are doing a marvellous job investing tremendous sums,

:34:58.:35:01.

great research is taking place everywhere, and no Government could

:35:01.:35:05.

do more. I expect that's what they will say. But that would be very

:35:05.:35:11.

dim of them. So, knowing how intelligent the Prime Minister is,

:35:11.:35:16.

I doubt that will be his response. I'm looking forward to tremendous

:35:16.:35:22.

support. Lord Saatchi, thank you. It's over a year since the end of

:35:22.:35:26.

the war which brought down the dictatorship of Colonel Gaddafi in

:35:26.:35:30.

Libya. What bright hopes there were. The country has now staged

:35:30.:35:34.

elections and a new Prime Minister struggles to chart a new course for

:35:34.:35:37.

his country, including, he says, the promotion of human rights. But

:35:38.:35:42.

Libya is very far from free. Something like seven or eight

:35:42.:35:46.

though people are being held by various militias or gangs, which

:35:46.:35:49.

control many of the streets. Women who took part in the struggle to

:35:49.:35:54.

dump a dictator, now find themselves at the particular mercy

:35:54.:36:00.

of Islamist gangs. Tim Whewell has been speaking to one of them.

:36:00.:36:07.

It was a victory over one of the world's most enduring dictatorships,

:36:07.:36:10.

a victory hastened by British political and military support.

:36:10.:36:16.

is great to be here in free Benghazi, and in free Libya.

:36:16.:36:21.

Your city was an inspiration to the world, as you threw off a dictator

:36:21.:36:31.
:36:31.:36:41.

But one young Libyan, who chose freedom, can't enjoy its fruits. An

:36:41.:36:43.

ardent revolutionly, Magdulien Abaida is facing the cold reality

:36:43.:36:48.

of exile on the epbl of the North Sea. She has been given -- end of

:36:48.:36:51.

the North Sea. She has been given asylum by David Cameron's

:36:51.:37:01.
:37:01.:37:02.

Government, to protect her from some of the forces that are at work

:37:02.:37:05.

in Libya. To have this revolution, and work hard for this revolution,

:37:05.:37:10.

and then, in the end, after that you just have to leave it. Because

:37:10.:37:14.

it is not a safe place for you any more.

:37:14.:37:20.

During the revolution everybody was united, we all were working

:37:20.:37:30.
:37:30.:37:32.

together. But now, it's quite difficult.

:37:32.:37:37.

Sunderland, where she knows no-one, is now her temporary home, at the

:37:37.:37:42.

end of tumultuous year-and-a-half, when she joined protests against

:37:42.:37:45.

Colonel Gaddafi, helped organise medical and food supplies for the

:37:45.:37:49.

rebels, and then, in liberated Libya, began to campaign for

:37:49.:37:52.

women's rights. It was that struggle against

:37:52.:37:58.

discrimination, she believes, that put her life at risk. One of the

:37:58.:38:02.

women's meetings she attended in Benghazi this summer was

:38:02.:38:10.

interrupted by armed men. They came and took me from my room, five men.

:38:10.:38:16.

They were armed. They asked me to go with them. I asked them who they

:38:16.:38:22.

were, they said that I will know. Her captors, she says, were members

:38:22.:38:27.

of the revolutionary militias. The brigades were formed from

:38:27.:38:31.

volunteers, who took up arms against Gaddafi, in the spring of

:38:31.:38:36.

last year. But after his overthrow, many

:38:36.:38:40.

refused to integrate into a national army. And some, that

:38:40.:38:45.

operate as a law unto themselves, particularly in Benghazi, have

:38:45.:38:51.

strongly Islamist views. It was one of those militias, that seized her

:38:51.:38:54.

during the women's rights workshop, she was released, but abducted

:38:54.:39:01.

again the next day and taken to their base. Someone came and he

:39:01.:39:11.
:39:11.:39:14.

started kicking me. And then, he was hitting me with his feet, and

:39:14.:39:22.

with his gun. He was telling me that I he will kill me and bury me

:39:22.:39:28.

here, and nobody knows. He was calling me an Israeli spy, and

:39:28.:39:37.

calling me whore and bitch, and tell me about my morals. You don't

:39:37.:39:45.

have any. He hit me in my face, and he started, he keeps swearing.

:39:45.:39:49.

These are the bruises she was left with. He was telling me he can kill

:39:49.:39:55.

me, right now, and bury me here, and nobody knows about me. I

:39:55.:40:05.
:40:05.:40:07.

thought that I'm not going to, I will be killed in that place.

:40:07.:40:11.

Eventually released, but accused by the militia of working for Israel,

:40:11.:40:15.

which she strongly denies. She fled the country. Her application for

:40:15.:40:21.

asylum here was supported by Amnesty International. This case is

:40:21.:40:24.

really emblematic of the kind of behaviour, as Amnesty International

:40:24.:40:29.

we have documented since the fall of the former Government, our

:40:29.:40:33.

militias are acting completely out of control. There are hundreds of

:40:33.:40:39.

them across the country. People who have been tortured and died under

:40:39.:40:46.

torture and held incommunicado, all of this is happening while the

:40:46.:40:53.

Government is watching and unable to rein them in. Angry crowds

:40:53.:40:57.

stormed military bases, demanding an end to the lawless brigades,

:40:57.:41:00.

that came after accusations that some had been involved in the

:41:00.:41:05.

attack on the US consolate, and the assassination of the US Ambassador.

:41:05.:41:09.

The Libyan Government vowed to bring them under control, so far to

:41:09.:41:13.

no effect. Among those kidnapped and tortured

:41:13.:41:20.

is one of Libya's best-known brain surgeons.

:41:20.:41:24.

Is that embarrassing for Britain, the UK spent hundreds of millions

:41:24.:41:28.

of pounds on the air campaign that helped overthrow Gaddafi, but did

:41:28.:41:34.

it also help unleash forces that can't now be easily controlled.

:41:34.:41:38.

are concerned, we are working with a Government that is also concerned

:41:38.:41:42.

about it. We are trying to make sure we provide advice to

:41:42.:41:45.

particular ministries, the Ministry of Justice, Interior, defence, in

:41:45.:41:52.

human rights issues. We are training people, and spending money

:41:52.:41:54.

on projects so more people are able to understand human rights

:41:55.:41:58.

principles and putting them in action. We are trying to be

:41:58.:42:01.

strategic with our help, practical in terms of assistance, and we are

:42:01.:42:05.

working with people who recognise, that although they are making some

:42:05.:42:10.

progress, clearly they have many challenges after 40 years.

:42:10.:42:13.

The hope is, that Libya's new Government, appointed this month,

:42:13.:42:19.

after a long period of political uncertainty, can end the abuses.

:42:19.:42:24.

The new Justice Minister is a former human rights lawyer. We need

:42:24.:42:30.

to put an immediate end to all human rights abuses, particularly

:42:30.:42:36.

in Libyan prisons and detention centres. This is a problem that we

:42:36.:42:44.

are facing, we are not shying from it, we are not denying it. We know

:42:44.:42:50.

we have a big prob blems and - problem, and we have the will. To

:42:50.:42:56.

put an end to that. Back in Sunderland, Magdulien

:42:56.:43:00.

Abaida thinks it will be a long time before it is safe for her to

:43:00.:43:04.

go back. Grateful to have been given refuge

:43:04.:43:08.

by the UK, she's going now to pick up the papers that will allow her

:43:08.:43:14.

to stay in Britain. She will be campaigning from here,

:43:14.:43:19.

to end, what she sees, as efforts by Islamic fundamentalists in Libya

:43:20.:43:23.

to roll back women's rights. It is like now we have to control women,

:43:23.:43:29.

we have to hide them, so we can improve. Which is like, it is a big

:43:29.:43:33.

shock for us. The revolution would have been

:43:33.:43:37.

impossible without the work of women, who fed the frontline, and

:43:37.:43:45.

performed many other tasks. Afterwards, some set about

:43:45.:43:51.

empowering themselves to demand a bigger political role too. They

:43:51.:43:55.

were horrified that the rebel leader, Mustafa Abdul Jalil, used

:43:55.:43:58.

his Liberation Day speech to suggest making it easier for men to

:43:58.:44:03.

have more than one wife. This is not why we made the revolution, not

:44:03.:44:07.

for men to marry four women, the revolution was made by women and

:44:07.:44:15.

men, and we wanted more rights, and not to destroy the rights of half

:44:15.:44:20.

of the society. And again, when the female compere at the ceremony to

:44:20.:44:23.

transfer power to the new parliament was heckled off stage

:44:23.:44:27.

for not wearing a veil, and replaced by a man.

:44:27.:44:32.

There have been reports too of women harassed by militias, for

:44:32.:44:39.

sitting at cafes on their own at night. But Libya's always been a

:44:39.:44:43.

conservative society, and though she doesn't live in Libya full-time,

:44:43.:44:48.

activists, Sara Maziq, thinks women are achieving far more now than

:44:48.:44:53.

they could ever under Gaddafi. Currently we have 33 women in our

:44:53.:44:58.

Congress, we have two ministers in our previous transitional

:44:58.:45:00.

Government, and now two ministers in this Government. I think there

:45:00.:45:05.

is a lot of positive signs. I do hold a lot of hope in our new Prime

:45:05.:45:09.

Minister. I know previously he was a humam rights activist. I know

:45:09.:45:12.

that he supports fully women's rights. We need to look at the

:45:12.:45:15.

overall picture, and the overall picture what is happening in Libya,

:45:15.:45:21.

as far as I'm concerned, as a Libyan, is really in some ways a

:45:21.:45:24.

miracle. But Magdulien Abaida can't return to the activism that helped

:45:24.:45:31.

make her a target of the Islamists' wrath. If you went back to Libya

:45:31.:45:35.

now, what do you think will happen to you? They will detain me

:45:35.:45:42.

directly. And then? I don't know. Maybe they release me before, now,

:45:42.:45:48.

if they catch me again they wouldn't release me any more.

:45:48.:45:58.
:45:58.:46:16.

There we are. That's it for now the Turner Prize

:46:16.:46:22.

was won tonight by Elizabeth Price, whose video installation, the

:46:22.:46:27.

Woolworth's Choir of 1979, tells the story of a fire that destroyed

:46:27.:46:37.
:46:37.:47:06.

a city centre store and left ten icey start in Scotland, but only a

:47:06.:47:08.

patchy frost in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Further showers

:47:08.:47:13.

coming in on the breeze here. Mostly of rain. And very few

:47:13.:47:16.

showers for the east and south-east of England. Let's take a look at

:47:16.:47:21.

things into the afternoon. Showers in North West England, some filter

:47:21.:47:26.

towards the Midland. Increasing cloud. For East Anglia and the east,

:47:26.:47:31.

sunshine here, temperatures not as high as they were today, as seven

:47:31.:47:34.

or eight degrees. Showers across south-west England, is sunshine

:47:34.:47:37.

inbetween. As there will be to showers in Wales. We don't welcome

:47:37.:47:42.

any more rain to the flood-affected areas, at least it is not a

:47:42.:47:45.

constant rain. For Northern Ireland sunshine and showers, with

:47:45.:47:49.

temperatures around five or six degrees, a few showers brushing the

:47:49.:47:52.

far south-west of Scotland. Elsewhere a cold day in Scotland,

:47:52.:47:58.

cloud around an area of rain, sleet and hill know nudging south across

:47:58.:48:01.

northern Scotland. This is the picture for Tuesday into Wednesday.

:48:01.:48:06.

On Wednesday there will be a lot of sunshine around, the fine day but a

:48:06.:48:10.

cold one, across the bulk of the UK. Make the most of all of that, after

:48:10.:48:16.

In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines, presented by Jeremy Paxman.

Are multinationals backing down on tax avoidance? Lord Saatchi on the cancer that killed his wife, and why Libyan women seek asylum in Britain.


Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS