:00:17. > :00:23.11 hospital trusts are placed in special measure. Whose fault is
:00:23. > :00:28.that then? The front benchers blame each other. If the NHS is
:00:28. > :00:31.considered Labour's proudest achievement, today is their darkest
:00:31. > :00:36.moment. This report is about his Government and failings happening
:00:36. > :00:43.now. We will hear from the Health Secretary now. After the rows and
:00:43. > :00:51.expose says, making political lobbying transparent rather than
:00:51. > :00:56.plain packaged plans are expected on MPs' desk tomorrow. We are
:00:56. > :01:00.obsessed with lobbying. The man who invented modern lobbying takes on
:01:00. > :01:06.his citiblgs. Capitalism north vet niece style.
:01:06. > :01:11.Is this what it is to plan your business? No!How a communist
:01:11. > :01:17.dictatorship got itself a market economy. And...Is It terrible?The
:01:17. > :01:27.sex stays but the mumbling has to go. I don't know why, but no.How
:01:27. > :01:29.
:01:29. > :01:34.the BBC Director General has declared war on this kind of thing.
:01:34. > :01:40.The lurid headlines of the weekend suggested 13,000 preventable NHS
:01:40. > :01:45.deaths, but the truth of the Keogh Report today suggested something
:01:45. > :01:51.far more anodyne but just as dismaying. Trapped by mediocrity
:01:51. > :01:56.said the report. It uncovers long standing problems at the trusts,
:01:56. > :02:02.mediocrity known about but never addressed. The Government and
:02:02. > :02:07.Labour were understandably furious, mostly at each other.
:02:07. > :02:13.Today was supposed to be about making our hospitals safe for
:02:13. > :02:16.patients. Instead as the Keogh Report was presented to MPs, it
:02:16. > :02:21.became a political blame game rapidly. The Health Secretary,
:02:21. > :02:26.Jeremy Hunt, said problems had begun under Labour. If founding the
:02:26. > :02:31.NHS is considered Labour's proudest achievement, today is their darkest
:02:31. > :02:37.moment. As a Labour Government is exposed as caring more about its
:02:37. > :02:40.own reputation than our most vulnerable citizens in the NHS.
:02:40. > :02:45.Shadow Health Secretary Andy Burnham hit back. Accusing the
:02:45. > :02:50.Health Secretary of playing politics with people's lives.
:02:50. > :02:54.report is about his Government and failings happening now on this
:02:54. > :03:00.Government's watch. He then referred to decades of neglect in
:03:00. > :03:03.the NHS in the 1980 and 1990s and the challenges of long waiting
:03:03. > :03:09.lists? The last Labour Government dealt with that issue, I'm proud of
:03:09. > :03:13.it and we are proud of our record on the NHS. It is depressing that
:03:13. > :03:20.issues that ought to be about quality and safety of patient care
:03:20. > :03:22.then descend into a political argument between Labour and the
:03:22. > :03:25.Government. We should be reaching to the higher ground asking the
:03:25. > :03:29.kinds of questions Sir Bruce has done in his report, understanding
:03:29. > :03:34.what causes failures of patient care. I hope politicians will move
:03:34. > :03:39.beyond today's discussion and to have that more plaiture discussion
:03:39. > :03:49.that the NHS -- mature discussion that the NHS itself is looking for.
:03:49. > :03:52.
:03:52. > :03:56.The review found 14 hospital trusts There is absence of a culture of
:03:56. > :04:01.openness, a lack of willingness to learn from mistakes and lack of
:04:01. > :04:05.ambition and ineffectual governance. 11 of the 14 hospital trusts were
:04:05. > :04:10.put on perb measures today. One criticised for out of hours care
:04:10. > :04:15.and poor track record on bed sores, and for shifting patients from
:04:15. > :04:19.ward-to-ward, sometimes multiple time, was the George Eliot Hospital
:04:19. > :04:22.Trust near Birmingham. It was making sure patients got to the
:04:22. > :04:26.right ward at the right time, we are increasing beds in the hospital
:04:26. > :04:30.and look to go see if we can put additional nurses and doctors into
:04:30. > :04:35.the hospital out of hours. So there are some really good and positive
:04:35. > :04:41.stuff we can take forward. Each trust met the Keogh team at a risk
:04:41. > :04:44.summit to discuss their future. The Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust
:04:44. > :04:47.was not singled out for special measures, but its management team
:04:47. > :04:52.has been told to make improvements in talking to patients and other
:04:52. > :04:56.areas. We let patients down in terms of not getting good flow
:04:56. > :05:01.through the organisation so patients waiting for longer than
:05:01. > :05:04.they should have. In making some of our discharge processes not being
:05:05. > :05:09.as slick as they should be so patients are waiting for long
:05:09. > :05:12.periods to go at the end of their stay with us. Most of the trusts
:05:12. > :05:15.accepted the findings of today's report. Many were saying they were
:05:15. > :05:20.looking to increase nursing levels and would be talking more to
:05:20. > :05:25.patients. Should people feel more reassured about the NHS tonight?
:05:25. > :05:30.think they should be thinking that despite some of the findings that
:05:30. > :05:35.we made that we have a fantastic NHS, it is a big organisation,
:05:35. > :05:38.there are some areas which do less well an others, but in the
:05:39. > :05:42.hospitals we have visited and we have found serious cause for
:05:42. > :05:46.concern we have dealt with them quickly. The issues that these
:05:46. > :05:56.hospitals have to address now are about improvement, not immediate
:05:56. > :06:11.
:06:11. > :06:14.The 14 Hospital Trusts were put under scrutiny because they had
:06:14. > :06:18.higher than expected death rates over the last two years, but the
:06:19. > :06:25.review team is sceptical about such data. Statistic kal estimate of
:06:25. > :06:30.unexpected deaths can't be described as needlessly lost lives.
:06:30. > :06:33.Personally I don't set much store about the hospital mortality
:06:33. > :06:36.standardised ratio. The good news is we need to look at mortality,
:06:37. > :06:42.and there is a way of doing it, that is by case note review. We
:06:42. > :06:46.look in great depth at each and every death in a hospital. We get
:06:46. > :06:50.clinicians, physicians to do this who have been specially trained,
:06:50. > :06:55.using all the standardised techniques. From that we can
:06:55. > :06:59.determine what proportion of deaths are avoidable. Isn't that a very
:06:59. > :07:02.time-consuming process? It is a time-consuming process, but there
:07:02. > :07:06.is immediate benefits to the clinicians because they learn
:07:06. > :07:09.things about their own hospital and care. The author of today's report
:07:09. > :07:14.described this as a difficult day, but one he hoped would be a turning
:07:14. > :07:19.point for patient. It may well be a turning point for politics too, as
:07:19. > :07:25.the battle over who loves the NHS the most begins a new chapter.
:07:25. > :07:31.A little earlier I spoke to the Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt. This
:07:31. > :07:36.is a major report today into an issue of major concern for the
:07:36. > :07:41.entire country. Why would you choose to make such blatant
:07:41. > :07:45.political capital out of it? not. Actually as Health Secretary
:07:45. > :07:51.it is a very difficult day for me today, it is very difficult for any
:07:51. > :07:55.serving Health Secretary to come to the House of Commons and to say you
:07:55. > :07:59.are putting 11 hospitals into special measures that is nearly 10%
:07:59. > :08:04.of all acute trusts. The last thing you want to be responsible for is a
:08:04. > :08:08.service where there are failures. But the difference about today and
:08:08. > :08:12.it is a very big moment for the NHS. The difference is that because we
:08:12. > :08:18.are now being completely transparent about where there are
:08:18. > :08:21.problems, that means that people like me are now going to be held to
:08:21. > :08:26.account for turning round those failing hospitals. Why would you go
:08:26. > :08:29.to the Commons and accuse Andy Burnham of silencing
:08:29. > :08:34.whistleblowerers, and being to blame, and tweets from backbenchers
:08:34. > :08:37.all over the weekend pointing the finger at Burnham saying he should
:08:37. > :08:41.lose his job, where does that get you on this? The fact is one of the
:08:41. > :08:45.big changes we have had to make is overhaul the entire regulatory
:08:45. > :08:50.system that was set up by Labour. So you think he was to blame for
:08:50. > :08:55.this? Well the issue about not confronting failure, I absolutely
:08:55. > :08:58.do think that Labour are squarely to blame. David Cameron, your own
:08:58. > :09:02.leader, quoting the Francis Report said that they were not to blame,
:09:02. > :09:05.he did not want to see scapegoats and it was not the fault of the
:09:05. > :09:09.previous Secretary of State. Why is this different and why are you
:09:09. > :09:13.different to your leader? Well, what David Cameron was reflecting
:09:13. > :09:18.was what was in the Francis Report about the specific issues at Mid
:09:18. > :09:22.Staffs. What we are talking about here is a whole series of problems
:09:22. > :09:25.in hospitals that the NHS tried to solve behind closed doors and they
:09:25. > :09:30.weren't fixed. And the way that we are going to restore confidence and
:09:30. > :09:33.for me as Health Secretary, what I have to do now, is to deliver
:09:34. > :09:38.improved hospitals. Where these were failing hospitals I have to
:09:38. > :09:41.make sure they are now improved. How many more people died as a
:09:41. > :09:46.result of these failings in care do you think? It is very difficult to
:09:46. > :09:49.put an exact number on T it is hotly debated by academics.
:09:49. > :09:54.think it is thousands, that is what you said today, you said thousands
:09:54. > :09:57.more people may have died? I said they may have died. What happened
:09:57. > :10:03.with Mid Staffs was that excess mortality rates. What does that
:10:03. > :10:07.mean? You must let me answer the question. What does "may" have died,
:10:07. > :10:10.did they die as a result of these failings? I think people did die
:10:10. > :10:15.avoidably, yes. There is an argument between academics about
:10:15. > :10:21.precisely how many, but what we do know is that excess mortality rates
:10:21. > :10:26.are a lead indicator for problems in care. What Bruce Keogh looked at
:10:26. > :10:31.was the 14 hospitals can excess mortality rates, and in all 14 he
:10:31. > :10:35.found serious problems in care. Those sorts of figures people are
:10:35. > :10:39.saying are clinically meaningless and academically reckless.
:10:39. > :10:44.Academically reckless, you have said thousands may have died as a
:10:44. > :10:47.result? You are putting words into my mouth. You said that, you said
:10:47. > :10:53.thousands may have died as a result of this? You said may have died, we
:10:53. > :10:56.don't know how many. Let me say this, they may have died. Why isn't
:10:56. > :10:59.that academically reckless, why isn't it clinically meaningless?
:10:59. > :11:03.said to put a number on it. I didn't put a number on it. But he
:11:03. > :11:08.would agree with me that there may be thousands of people who died.
:11:08. > :11:12.But many people living in these areas particularly, and more widely
:11:12. > :11:16.afield, will be very concerned at what they found. When do you think
:11:16. > :11:21.they can rest easy that things rup to scratch, that things are
:11:21. > :11:25.medically safe. Let me make a general point about
:11:25. > :11:28.confidence in the NHS. Give me a time frame? All the hospitals will
:11:28. > :11:33.be inspected within the next 12 months by the new Chief Inspector
:11:33. > :11:37.of hospitals, who starts work today. This is a brand-new Ofsted-style
:11:37. > :11:40.regime. We will be able to see. You can invite me back and we will see
:11:40. > :11:44.the progress that has been made. How long do you think that will be?
:11:44. > :11:50.I would expect to see progress by the time of the first inspection
:11:50. > :11:54.they do. But. Which is?Within the next year. I don't want to give the
:11:54. > :11:58.time scale for every single problem to be pointed out. Within a year
:11:58. > :12:01.would that be too long if they were still in special measures in a
:12:01. > :12:04.year's time, pick a time frame? want to answer, it is very
:12:04. > :12:08.important, the point about confidence is you don't restore
:12:08. > :12:11.confidence for the people who use these hospitals and live near these
:12:11. > :12:15.hospitals by minimising the problem. You restore confidence by showing
:12:15. > :12:19.them that you are doing something to sort it out. We need a system
:12:19. > :12:22.whereby people like me can't get off the hook. It is so public, we
:12:22. > :12:25.have 1 hospitals in special measures. If we don't get the
:12:25. > :12:28.hospitals out of special measures soon. You will be the person coming
:12:28. > :12:35.to me and saying why haven't you succeeded in turning this around
:12:35. > :12:40.and I will be accountable for it. When? I want it as soon as possible,
:12:40. > :12:42.but some of these problems are deeply entrenched. Are you
:12:42. > :12:48.comfortable as Health Secretary that the PM spokesman has a company
:12:48. > :12:52.that lobbies on behalf of big tobacco? Are you talking about
:12:52. > :12:58.Lynton Crosby. Lynton Crosby's work is for the Conservative Party and
:12:58. > :13:06....He Has a company that also lobbies on behalf of Big Toe bab
:13:06. > :13:09.co-? He hasn't lobbied me or the Prime Minister on issues to do with
:13:09. > :13:13.public health. There is also transparency. Does he never help
:13:13. > :13:19.the PM or advice on issues of policy and public health? No.So
:13:19. > :13:22.that is a whole area he's not allowed to touch? Yes. Are there
:13:22. > :13:25.any other issues he's not allowed to touch? I have given you a
:13:25. > :13:28.straight answer to the question you asked about public health, I don't
:13:28. > :13:31.know where you want to take it. Don't you think it is odd to have
:13:31. > :13:35.somebody who is your election co- ordinator that can't touch a whole
:13:35. > :13:41.area of issues? It is right that he shouldn't. His company has clients
:13:41. > :13:45.in that area. Would you like to bring in this plain packaging for
:13:45. > :13:50.cigarettes now? I want to wait and see what the evidence says, but I'm
:13:50. > :13:54.very sympathetic to measures that stop young people taking up smoking,
:13:54. > :13:58.it is our number one killer. not be brave and just do it.
:13:58. > :14:02.Ireland has set the pace, why not do it? These are very hot low-
:14:02. > :14:06.fought legal issues and we need it make sure if we are doing it that -
:14:06. > :14:09.- hotly fought legal issues and we need to make sure we have the ducks
:14:09. > :14:12.in the row. Why not be a world leader? We have to have the
:14:12. > :14:16.evidence there. When you have a country like Australia that
:14:16. > :14:19.introduced it in January, it won't be too long before we know the
:14:19. > :14:22.impact in terms of the amount of young people it has stopped taking
:14:23. > :14:26.up smoking. And when you have that evidence that's the time, it is a
:14:26. > :14:32.big decision, but that's the time to make your decision. Jeremy Hunt
:14:32. > :14:35.thank you. So there you go, clarification from the Health
:14:35. > :14:38.Secretary that Lynton Crosby, the Conservative election co-ordinator
:14:38. > :14:42.never advises on issues of policy in public health, it is a whole
:14:42. > :14:47.area that he's not allowed to touch. Well tomorrow that question of, if
:14:47. > :14:50.you like, undue influence in lobbying comes to a head, or may do.
:14:50. > :14:57.Proposed reforms to the lobbying industry will attempt to do what
:14:57. > :15:00.Leveson tried to do with the press and Ipsa is trying to do for MPs'
:15:00. > :15:05.expenses. Will it be more successful, or does influence flow
:15:05. > :15:14.where money is happy to pay. In a moment we will hear from James
:15:14. > :15:16.Woolsey and Tim Bell. Central Lobby can be an
:15:16. > :15:20.intimidating place, with queens, prime ministers and saints. Yet it
:15:20. > :15:27.is meant to be for the common man, a place to drop in and lobby your
:15:28. > :15:33.MP. Lobbying doesn't have to be a dirty word. But it is. It is the
:15:33. > :15:37.next big scandal waiting to happen. David Cameron almost got it right,
:15:37. > :15:41.first came phone hacking then lobbying. The latest furore over
:15:41. > :15:45.why the Government decided not to introduce plain packaging for
:15:45. > :15:48.cigarettes and whether that might have something to do with the fact
:15:48. > :15:52.that their Aussie election strategist, Lynton Crosby's
:15:52. > :15:56.lobbying firm is employed by the tobacco industry. Labour certainly
:15:56. > :16:01.sees a connection. Now we know that Lynton Crosby's company had a
:16:01. > :16:04.contract with Big Tobacco. And at the same time Lynton Crosby was
:16:04. > :16:08.advising the Prime Minister on what should be in his Queen's Speech and
:16:08. > :16:11.we know that the Prime Minister dropped his bill on tobacco
:16:12. > :16:15.packaging, I think that is a clear conflict of interest. David Cameron
:16:15. > :16:22.has to come clean and explain why once again he's standing up for the
:16:22. > :16:27.wrong people. It was this footage of Conservative MP, Patrick Mercier,
:16:27. > :16:30.apparently offering Fiji to reenter the Commonwealth in exchange for
:16:30. > :16:40.�4,000 that brought "cash for questions" back into the headlines.
:16:40. > :16:43.I don't charge a great deal of money for these things.
:16:43. > :16:48.The story came as no surprise to many in Westminster. The Central
:16:48. > :16:52.Lobby of the House of Commons and this place is infested with
:16:52. > :16:57.lobbyists, and their tentacles stretch in every corner of the
:16:57. > :17:01.building, every area of life in the House of Commons is full of
:17:01. > :17:05.lobbyists. And they are there lurking, ready to persuade, ready
:17:05. > :17:11.to corrupt politicians to do their bidding. And what they will do is
:17:11. > :17:14.to bribe and bully and bamboozle politicians in the interests of
:17:14. > :17:18.their rich paymasters. Tomorrow the Government is expected to try to
:17:18. > :17:23.tighten the rules on lobbying by proposing a register of
:17:23. > :17:26.professional lobbyists. For faith to be restored in this place people
:17:26. > :17:32.need to believe that politicians are making decisions based on what
:17:32. > :17:38.they think is right for the country, rather than on-lineing their own
:17:38. > :17:40.pockets. A register of professional - on lining their own pockets. A
:17:40. > :17:46.register of professional interests sounds like a good idea. The only
:17:46. > :17:49.problem is only a fraction of people paid to meet MPs around
:17:49. > :17:53.policy will end up signing up to it. What is the problem with the
:17:53. > :17:58.register, is it that you don't want to be on it? I absolutely want to
:17:58. > :18:05.be on a register, bring it on. The problem is I think it will just
:18:05. > :18:09.include consultancies. We looked at Biz department figures, last year
:18:09. > :18:15.988 departmental meetings were had with ministers, special advisers,
:18:15. > :18:20.and a permanent secretary. Just two of those 988 meetings were with
:18:20. > :18:25.people like me, the rest were with trade groups and in-house lobbyists
:18:25. > :18:30.and lawyers. The Government's bill is expected to set up a register of
:18:30. > :18:33.professional lobbyists. It is also likely to try to limit the amount
:18:33. > :18:37.third-party organisations can spend on campaigning for political
:18:37. > :18:43.parties. That will affect trade unions. But Labour's got other
:18:43. > :18:47.ideas and has tabled amendments. It wants all paid lobbyists to end up
:18:47. > :18:51.on the register, and it wants any lobbyist doing a senior job for
:18:51. > :18:55.Government to be declared. Perhaps unsurprisingly people think that is
:18:55. > :19:01.aimed at exposing the business affairs of Lynton Crosby. Forget
:19:01. > :19:07.any idea that the political parties will reach consensus on this. Some
:19:07. > :19:11.fear what will get lost is campaigning to make things better.
:19:11. > :19:16.Lobby is not all bad. We exist to lob hey, I'm an MP and not an
:19:17. > :19:21.expert in all fields, I rely on talking to others, NGOs, charities,
:19:21. > :19:24.local businesses talking to me. You have to be open to lobbying. The
:19:24. > :19:30.issue is it has to be transparent and no money should change hands.
:19:30. > :19:35.If you dole with those two aspects lobbying doesn't have to be
:19:35. > :19:39.negative. The Government's proposals is meant to decontaminate
:19:39. > :19:42.lobbying, as long as they are points scoring against each other,
:19:42. > :19:50.it is hard to see that happening soon.
:19:50. > :19:54.Lord Bellamy bell is a Conservative peer and P -- Lord Tim Bell is a
:19:54. > :19:58.Conservative peer, and runs one of the most successful lobbying
:19:58. > :20:01.outfits. And Dr James Woolsey repeatedly has spoken out against
:20:01. > :20:05.lobbying. Welcome both. I want to go back to the question of Lynton
:20:05. > :20:10.Crosby, would that be usual to have whole policy areas completely off
:20:10. > :20:14.limit like that? In my experience of advising political parties on
:20:14. > :20:19.election campaigns is it is not about policy but how you get votes
:20:19. > :20:25.and who you tafrgt your messages to, and how you deliver those drg
:20:25. > :20:28.target your messages and now you different -- how you target your
:20:28. > :20:32.messages and how you get them out. I worked for Margaret Thatcher for
:20:32. > :20:36.15 years if I told her what policies to decide on she would
:20:36. > :20:40.have thrown me out of the room. Jeremy Hunt was certain that those
:20:40. > :20:44.lines should not be crossed? Jeremy Hunt speaks for himself, I don't
:20:44. > :20:48.speak for him. I do know Lynton Crosby extremely well, I can
:20:48. > :20:53.guarantee you that he did not persuade the Prime Minister to
:20:53. > :20:56.change his position on plain packages. Are you convinced own
:20:56. > :21:01.that? If you come in and say you want to scrape the barnacles off
:21:01. > :21:05.the boat and one of those barnacles is entire public health policy you
:21:05. > :21:09.don't need to have a conversation about smoking and tobacco because
:21:09. > :21:13.it is disappeared. In the report we were hearing about...What Do you
:21:13. > :21:17.mean the importance of disappeared? I think it has been removed. Two
:21:17. > :21:21.very key public health measures are being removed. Just to reflect back
:21:21. > :21:25.on today's events, NHS doctors and nurses all the time are being told
:21:25. > :21:28.about the importance of reducing avoidable mortality. We have the
:21:28. > :21:33.really big win in avoidable mortalties in public health, and
:21:33. > :21:37.yet the two areas which could have made a real difference and the real
:21:37. > :21:41.tools that could have been used to reduce smoking and reduce alcohol
:21:41. > :21:47.abuse, they have been removed by the politicians for short-term
:21:47. > :21:51.political expediency, in my view. By lobbyists? You could argue this
:21:51. > :21:58.is one of the most spectacular examples of hidden lobbying. We
:21:58. > :22:02.don't know. I think the point is that actually if you are also being
:22:02. > :22:08.paid by major tobacco companies and internationally, but the point is
:22:08. > :22:12.we don't know, by big alcohol, then of course, to make a statement that
:22:12. > :22:17.can't influence the kind of advice you are giving is wrong. The public
:22:17. > :22:20.have a right to know. It doesn't smell right? I don't care what it
:22:20. > :22:27.smells like? You don't care what it smells like, extraordinary.
:22:27. > :22:31.type around Big Tobacco and Big Alcohol, the same as small alcohol
:22:31. > :22:35.and small tobacco. As it happens I'm a smoker and happy smoking, all
:22:35. > :22:40.the stuff that Sarah talks about and the health Tsars and fascists
:22:40. > :22:44.have gone on and on about smoking hasn't affected me. I did the very
:22:44. > :22:48.first anti-smoking campaigns in this country when The Royal College
:22:48. > :22:52.of Physician report came across with the linking of smoking with
:22:52. > :22:58.cancer, and emphysema. We did all the anti-smoking advertising, later
:22:58. > :23:02.on we took on a cigarette brand called Silk Cut, I don't take issue
:23:02. > :23:05.with that I believe it should be free. I'm a real Conservative
:23:05. > :23:11.Conservative I believe in the continued...If It doesn't work then
:23:11. > :23:14.fine? The point is if it didn't work why would people pay vast sums
:23:14. > :23:18.for it. It should include people giving high-level political advice
:23:18. > :23:22.at the heart of Government. I think that's something that the public
:23:22. > :23:25.would welcome. What position are you in at the moment, do you feel
:23:25. > :23:28.comfortable with Lynton Crosby and the position he's in for your Prime
:23:28. > :23:33.Minister? I would like to know who else is paying him. The public have
:23:33. > :23:37.a right to know that as well. To see public health completely
:23:38. > :23:41.removed from the political agenda at the same time as somebody is
:23:41. > :23:47.advising about what policy should be in the lead up to the election.
:23:47. > :23:52.I'm afraid it isn't the case to say these things are unconnect. What
:23:52. > :23:56.reforms do we need tomorrow? don't need any reforms. None at all,
:23:56. > :24:01.you are happy with the position of Government? I have never known a
:24:01. > :24:05.lobbyist that gave a politician money or gifts or took them on to
:24:05. > :24:07.events to persuade them to change policies. If you want to define a
:24:07. > :24:10.lobbyist, which the Government define as wishing to influence
:24:10. > :24:15.public policy then every MP is a lobbyist, every journalist,
:24:15. > :24:20.everybody who talks about politics is a lobbyist, every constituent
:24:20. > :24:23.that comes to your surgery is a lobbyist. For God's sake this is
:24:23. > :24:29.smearing a small group of people. You have no evidence for it
:24:29. > :24:35.whatsoever apart from a few fraudulent activities. You don't
:24:35. > :24:41.have the faintest idea what lobbyist gets paid. What does it
:24:41. > :24:44.matter if they get big money or not? The public want transparency
:24:44. > :24:48.about that. The public has never asked me for transparency. Jo it
:24:48. > :24:52.should also be around things like think-tanks, for example, anybody
:24:52. > :24:57.who lobbies for money. It couldn't do that. So everyone should sign up
:24:57. > :25:01.to this register? I I think they would want to. You heard the guy in
:25:01. > :25:05.the film there are only two people on it because they are transparent
:25:05. > :25:08.about what they do? The APCC has every single one of the companies
:25:09. > :25:11.to be named tomorrow, as I understand it, which is what you
:25:11. > :25:15.call the professional lobbying companies, they are already members
:25:15. > :25:18.of it. They already publish their client lists and how much they are
:25:18. > :25:23.paid. It is published on a publicly available website. It is already
:25:23. > :25:26.there. The head of the PRCA, the head of APPC have all said to the
:25:26. > :25:31.Government you don't need to do this, but they completely ignore
:25:31. > :25:33.you and what they are doing is smearing a lot of people who make a
:25:33. > :25:37.considerable contribution to this life. All of us do things that make
:25:37. > :25:40.a difference. They make a difference to people's lives. I
:25:40. > :25:44.happen to to be a real Conservative, I believe people should be paid for
:25:44. > :25:48.what they do. I don't believe there is anything wrong with being paid,
:25:49. > :25:52.nor do I think everybody is corrupt. Do you find if big money changes
:25:52. > :25:56.policy? That is where we are going to. Does it matter if that happens?
:25:56. > :26:01.Not if the policy out of it is good. If somebody has a lot of money they
:26:01. > :26:08.should be able to influence policy? That is not how it work, if you
:26:08. > :26:12.look at what lobbyists get paid. The financial takeover company
:26:12. > :26:17.decided to make financial companies pay fees in order to discover if
:26:17. > :26:20.they were being overpaid for doing takeover bids. Lo and behold it
:26:20. > :26:23.turned out they weren't paid millions but tens of thousands of
:26:23. > :26:27.pounds. Are the public sophisticated enough to see through
:26:27. > :26:30.the people that are trying too hard, if you like. Do we really need
:26:30. > :26:33.regulation to sort this out? point is the public have an
:26:33. > :26:36.absolute right to know who is behind, what is the big money
:26:36. > :26:41.behind organisations that are advising at the heart of Government.
:26:41. > :26:46.Isn't the worry that you paint the political classes as grubby,
:26:46. > :26:49.corrupt, when we have one of the cleanest systems in the world?
:26:49. > :26:55.do because people challenge, we should continue to challenge. It is
:26:55. > :26:59.not unreasonable in my opinion. introduce absurd regulations that
:26:59. > :27:04.have made no difference anywhere else. We are going to have to leave
:27:04. > :27:10.that here. How do you get capitalism to work
:27:10. > :27:13.in a communist state. Now 25 years ago the entire economy of Vietnam
:27:13. > :27:18.was Government-controlled. The debate continues here. Today just a
:27:18. > :27:22.third of it is, the country still calls itself commune is, but this
:27:22. > :27:28.process of liberalisation is reckoned to be key to Vietnam's
:27:28. > :27:32.rapid growth. We have gone in search of Vietnamese milk, bun of
:27:32. > :27:42.the burgeoning industries flourishing in a country not used
:27:42. > :27:45.
:27:45. > :27:50.to' free market. They still preserve a few remnants of war. But
:27:50. > :27:54.Ho Chi Minh, the city normally known as Saigon, is almost
:27:54. > :28:02.unrecoginsable as the place the Americans withdrew troops from 40
:28:02. > :28:06.years ago. Vietnam's commercial centre sports all the Gaudi
:28:06. > :28:10.accessories you would expect from a booming economy. The high class
:28:10. > :28:15.hotels and cafe lifestyles. Just like this city, the communists who
:28:15. > :28:21.won the American war, as the Vietnam War is known here, have had
:28:21. > :28:24.a makover. One bonders what the communist hero,
:28:24. > :28:28.Ho Chi Minh would make of the fact that the Stock Exchange is named
:28:28. > :28:32.after him. This place is still run by the Communist Party, but
:28:32. > :28:36.apparently Vietnam is now a socialist-orientated market economy.
:28:36. > :28:41.What that really seems to mean is capitalist powerhouse. Over the
:28:41. > :28:48.last 15 years the Communist Party has overseen a spectacular economic
:28:48. > :28:51.boom. But now growth is lagging, in large
:28:51. > :29:01.part because the boom has been based not on wealth, but on the
:29:01. > :29:01.
:29:01. > :29:11.country's poverty. Look at the scale of this place? There must be
:29:11. > :29:16.hundreds of people working here. It is like those dark Satanic mills,
:29:16. > :29:21.and these guys make garments and clothes for all the big western
:29:21. > :29:27.countries. It really is amazing. Vast workshops like this making
:29:27. > :29:30.clothes and other manufactured goods for the west are the engine
:29:30. > :29:34.driving Vietnam's boom, they flourished because they are so
:29:34. > :29:44.cheap. And they are cheap because the workers get paid so little.
:29:44. > :29:44.
:29:44. > :29:47.This is definitely not for the local market. Hi is pretty typical
:29:47. > :29:50.of Vietnam's new urban work force, he has migrated from the
:29:50. > :29:58.countryside and works long hours for what is, by international
:29:58. > :30:08.standards, very low pay. So how hard is it working here? Not hard
:30:08. > :30:20.
:30:20. > :30:30.He heads home as soon as his long day shift is over. This is your
:30:30. > :30:33.
:30:33. > :30:43.place? But almost immediately's back in front of a sewing machine.
:30:43. > :31:05.
:31:05. > :31:09.What time do you think you will It is a long day for you Hi. The
:31:09. > :31:12.Vietnamese Government recognises that piece work is never going to
:31:12. > :31:15.make people like Hi or Vietnam rich. So it has been encouraging the
:31:15. > :31:22.development of new industries, which generate higher profits and
:31:22. > :31:32.can pay workers more. Dairy products have never been a big part
:31:32. > :31:38.
:31:38. > :31:43.of the Vietnamese diet. Vinamilk is hoping to change that. It has grown
:31:43. > :31:47.rapidly to become one of the biggest companies listed on the Ho
:31:47. > :31:52.Chi Minh Stock Exchange, valued at over $5 million. The architect of
:31:52. > :31:57.Vinamilk as success is its formidable former communist boss,
:31:57. > :32:07.Madame Lien. Do you like cows? So what are your plans for the
:32:07. > :32:33.
:32:33. > :32:38.A multinational, an ambitious woman, very ambitious? Yes.Vinamilk is a
:32:38. > :32:41.poster child for the success of the communist Government's
:32:41. > :32:48.privatisation programme. Just over 25 years ago the entire economy was
:32:48. > :32:53.controlled by the state. Now it is just a third. So this factory is
:32:53. > :33:00.all powered milk products? children. That process of
:33:00. > :33:04.liberalisation is reckoned to be the key to Vietnam's rapid growth.
:33:04. > :33:14.Madame Lien says she sees no contradiction between the country's
:33:14. > :33:14.
:33:14. > :33:57.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 43 seconds
:33:57. > :34:01.growing private sector and its Which sounds rather like capitalism.
:34:01. > :34:10.And the problem with capitalism is that capitalists tend to do what's
:34:10. > :34:16.best for the bottom line. Not what is best for workers. Despite the
:34:16. > :34:19.boss's -- bosses' minimalist sympathies, just a few people can
:34:19. > :34:26.run this vast milk powder factory and the dairy in the Highlands has
:34:26. > :34:30.the latest labour-saving equipment. The state still keeps a very tight
:34:30. > :34:36.grip on other aspects of society, here is the minder who accompanied
:34:36. > :34:44.the Newsnight team wherever we went. Can innovations and enterprise
:34:44. > :34:48.thrive while the state keeps such a close watch. Many investors seem to
:34:48. > :34:52.think so, this is a software engineer who works for a country
:34:52. > :34:57.that looks to borrow ideas from leading companies in the best like
:34:57. > :35:06.Google and Ebay, and tailor them for the Vietnamese market. Once
:35:06. > :35:10.again this is not labour-intensive work. Do you think this is a bit
:35:10. > :35:20.like business? Man, you are a tough competitor. Is this what you feel
:35:20. > :35:23.like when you are planning your business? No!He lives the kind of
:35:23. > :35:28.modern urban lifestyle that many young Vietnamese aspire to, he's
:35:28. > :35:37.optimistic about the future. Actually I'm lucky now because I
:35:37. > :35:42.was born in the peaceful town -- peaceful time, not only me but many
:35:42. > :35:49.students have the space to study and work, not only in our country
:35:49. > :35:55.but in developed countries like the US and Europe. Not everyone shares
:35:55. > :35:59.his optimisim. Hoong is one of Vietnam's army of new graduates,
:35:59. > :36:03.Vietnam's universities have almost two million students, a seven-fold
:36:03. > :36:08.increase in just 15 years. It is another arm of the Government's
:36:08. > :36:13.strategy to upgrade the economy. You are selling these mobile
:36:13. > :36:22.phones? Yes.You are not working in what you want to do? Yeah. I really
:36:22. > :36:32.want to have a job in suitable with my degree. But I can't find a job
:36:32. > :36:32.
:36:32. > :36:35.like that. But Hoong's experience is typical. She graduated two years
:36:35. > :36:42.ago with a degree in hotel management. But she can't find work
:36:42. > :36:52.in the hotel industry. Are there many of your friend from university
:36:52. > :37:16.
:37:16. > :37:26.What do your parents think of the situation. It must be quite
:37:26. > :37:39.
:37:39. > :37:43.difficult for them? The problem is that in vet nam it is not -- is
:37:43. > :37:47.that if Vietnam is not using its brightest and best it will find
:37:47. > :37:50.itself in the middle income trap. Rising wages will price it out of
:37:50. > :37:58.bottom end manufacturing, yet it doesn't seem ready to break into
:37:58. > :38:03.the more lucrative higher value markets quite yet.
:38:03. > :38:07.I think that the BBC chief Tony Hall remarked today "muttering is
:38:07. > :38:12.something we could look at". If you are in any way hard of hearing
:38:12. > :38:19.muttering is something you you have to look at. The announcement was
:38:19. > :38:29.greeted with more whoops of joy than a reduction in the license fee.
:38:29. > :38:35.Has the quiet man had his time? Or have we a mix of kitchen sink
:38:35. > :38:45.realisim. (quietly) it is very beautiful here. Yet all around such
:38:45. > :38:45.
:38:45. > :38:53.decay. The children are starving. Did you think this was just a
:38:53. > :39:00.fairness dispute, a little bit of nothing. A wife did she hang?No
:39:00. > :39:08.Jeggers was for her. Perhaps he should. He must want more.
:39:08. > :39:16.(quietly) then what? Then, picnics. So now that he's started. It is
:39:16. > :39:26.hard to stop even if he wanted to. He thinks they are weak and all day
:39:26. > :39:29.
:39:29. > :39:33.he is making table legs and side boards. (inaudible) with my dresses.
:39:33. > :39:37.You turn it down to the bank tomorrow, we don't want any
:39:37. > :39:41.criminals thieving off you. Nothing like making a point with a
:39:41. > :39:46.bit of choice editing, but to discuss the mumable is Michael
:39:46. > :39:50.Simkins a RADA-trained actor who has performed on the stage and TV
:39:51. > :39:59.dramas and big screen and the Sunday Mirror's TV critic is with
:39:59. > :40:02.us. Is it about not wanting to be ham, is that the biggest worry?
:40:02. > :40:07.can blame the bloke behind me, Marlon brand dough, before him
:40:07. > :40:12.whether it was actors who were positively sup pine like Gary
:40:12. > :40:16.Cooper, who people who delivered it stucatto like Edward Robinson, you
:40:17. > :40:22.could always hear what they said. Brand dough broke the mould and
:40:22. > :40:28.started the trend for a more realistic style. That has been
:40:28. > :40:31.exemplfied by the cultural change, everything is spartan and dialogue
:40:31. > :40:35.understated. That is how a lot of people communicate. Like the
:40:35. > :40:38.younger generation today. We are not goinging to lose that are we?
:40:38. > :40:42.don't recognise this as a prevalent problem. Tony Hall was honest
:40:42. > :40:51.enough to admit he's 62 and was perhaps talking to his own
:40:51. > :40:56.generation. I think a lot of the complaints are actually, we saw
:40:56. > :41:00.Eddy Redmain there, and an absurd example. You have soundtrack,
:41:00. > :41:03.actors speaking perfectly normally against the backdrop of pounding
:41:03. > :41:09.rock music because that is groovy and MoD he were, and people of a
:41:09. > :41:11.certain age can't hear what is being said. It is this kind of urge
:41:11. > :41:17.towards modernism that possibly gets in the way of clarity. When
:41:17. > :41:24.you are training and you are a RADA man, is the emphasis on projection
:41:25. > :41:29.and on the kind of acting that speaks to a 1,000-seat theatre?
:41:29. > :41:35.emphasis is less now. When I was training back in the primevil days
:41:35. > :41:42.back in the 1970s, actors cut their teeth in great big theetures where
:41:42. > :41:47.you were playing to 800 seats. When Donald Syndon opened his mouth on
:41:47. > :41:53.the first night he blew me into the orchestra pit, I couldn't believe
:41:53. > :41:57.anyone could deliver 70-80 yards without raising his voice. That has
:41:57. > :42:03.changed. Following on from your point the poor old beleaguered
:42:03. > :42:07.actor, however well they do it on set it is overlaid often with
:42:07. > :42:13.soundtracks and ambient noises which gives it a nice theme.
:42:13. > :42:19.are not told to mumable? No actor it is told to mumable. If you are
:42:19. > :42:29.trying to do the love scene with the royal Philharmonic orchestra
:42:29. > :42:32.
:42:32. > :42:36.behind you, I defy Brian Blessed to do that. The actors are being
:42:36. > :42:40.unfairly accused, they might deliver the line well and they turn
:42:40. > :42:45.the music down to make it moody. What about the rest of the
:42:45. > :42:48.technology, flat-screen TVs, this is mooted as one reason why you
:42:48. > :42:53.can't hear anything, there is no sound bar? I hadn't thought of that,
:42:53. > :42:58.but I think Michael and I agree we don't see this as a prevalent
:42:58. > :43:02.problem. It may be, as Tony said I'm sorry if I sound like a grumpy
:43:02. > :43:06.old man, it may be a grumpy old man complaining about something he
:43:06. > :43:11.personally find irritating. Programmes like The Wire are cool
:43:11. > :43:15.because you can't quite understand them? There is a lot of copying of
:43:15. > :43:22.the Wire, that could have done with subtitles. I thought you could get
:43:22. > :43:25.it? Hi to get subtitles watching it. Follow on from that technology has
:43:25. > :43:31.moved on hugely, when you are filming, the boom operator, the
:43:31. > :43:37.sound man, they can pick up the tick of your wristwatch but also
:43:37. > :43:41.your gurgling digestive system doing last night's curry. The actor
:43:41. > :43:45.sometimes inadvertantly hands over the mechanics of his performance to
:43:45. > :43:50.technology. You are often in the thrall of people who are expert,
:43:50. > :43:56.however much they may be, it is not you judging the performance I in
:43:56. > :44:03.more. That must make you feel impotent? As an actor. A lot of
:44:03. > :44:05.things make me pole impotent! It does mean there is so much
:44:06. > :44:08.technology around the actor can forget they are the person
:44:08. > :44:13.delivering the part. Thank you very much indeed. We hope you heard
:44:13. > :44:23.every word of that, we will take you through a mumbled paper review
:44:23. > :44:23.
:44:23. > :45:06.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 43 seconds
:45:06. > :45:10.now. The Times has a picture of a That's all from us tonight, it is
:45:10. > :45:20.not just the mumbling that is going, it is also the pesky squished up
:45:20. > :45:29.
:45:29. > :45:39.credits at the BBC programme, you (continuity announcement mumble
:45:39. > :45:43.
:45:43. > :45:47.about the next programme). Good evening, more sunshine and more
:45:47. > :45:51.heat, just about sums up the forecast for the British Isles in
:45:51. > :45:55.the next few days. Today we still have some cloud across Northern
:45:55. > :45:58.Ireland and Scotland, a bit more cloud for northern England than
:45:58. > :46:01.early on in the week. For Northern Ireland with sunny spells through
:46:01. > :46:06.the afternoon, a few spot temperatures will get close to the
:46:06. > :46:11.mid-20s, the same can be said for southern and eastern Scotland. The
:46:11. > :46:15.North West plaged with the remnants of a weather front. Shetland should
:46:15. > :46:19.brighten through the afternoon. Northern England should have long
:46:19. > :46:24.spells of sunshine in the mid-20s, across the south-east of England we
:46:24. > :46:28.may get close to 30 degrees. With that kind of heat we may spark off
:46:28. > :46:31.a very isolated thunderstorm. If we see any showers developing they
:46:31. > :46:37.could be lively, but they will be few and far between. Further west
:46:37. > :46:42.more sunshine, of course, and again widely in the 20s. Very little
:46:42. > :46:47.changes in that story as we look at the later part of the week. Just
:46:47. > :46:51.ever so slightly subtle changes, temperatures coming down on
:46:51. > :46:55.Thursday and Friday picking up a more Eastleigh fetch to our weather.