:00:07. > :00:14.The man in charge of children's welfare in Rotherham faces calls for
:00:15. > :00:18.him to quit. Are we all in denial of how many young people are brutally
:00:19. > :00:22.exploited for sex in other towns too. We knew that she had absconded
:00:23. > :00:27.before and she was having relationships with older men who
:00:28. > :00:33.threatened violence. We knew all this and for seven days we did
:00:34. > :00:37.nothing. This is unbelievably ?3,000 worth of drugs that I take every
:00:38. > :00:42.morning. Has the Government had enough of paying for those expensive
:00:43. > :00:47.drugs. Newsnight learns some pricey medicines could be axed. Does
:00:48. > :00:54.America's right to bear arms include nine-year-olds. We speak to someone
:00:55. > :01:00.who believes it does. Ever feel lost and unconnected? In a broadband
:01:01. > :01:05.wilderness. The wireless revolution is just beginning, so TV white space
:01:06. > :01:15.is giving us more spectrum and more availability to communicate. Good
:01:16. > :01:20.evening, stubborn doesn't really begin to cover it. The man who was
:01:21. > :01:24.in charge of Children's Services in Rotherham while warnings of abuse
:01:25. > :01:28.were ignored refuses to leave his current post. That's despite the
:01:29. > :01:33.Home Secretary and his own party, Labour, calling on him to go. It
:01:34. > :01:37.says now they will suspend him if he hasn't gone by the morning. But
:01:38. > :01:40.tonight Shaun Wright is still responsible for
:01:41. > :01:41.tonight Shaun Wright is still Yorkshire. Whatever his future, or
:01:42. > :01:46.those of other Yorkshire. Whatever his future, or
:01:47. > :01:49.politicians still in senior positions elsewhere, the more
:01:50. > :01:54.politicians still in senior similar abuse may still be happening
:01:55. > :02:04.to other children. From Rotherham here is Jim Reed.
:02:05. > :02:09.Shaun Wright out! ! And still he won't go, everyone from the English
:02:10. > :02:12.Defence League to the Home Secretary was calling for his resignation
:02:13. > :02:16.today. But the man in charge of Children's Services for much of the
:02:17. > :02:21.last decade is tonight refusing to quit. I'm not resigning as South
:02:22. > :02:25.Yorkshire Police commissioner because I'm proud... REPORTER: How
:02:26. > :02:29.can people have confidence you in you? People can have confidence if
:02:30. > :02:32.you allow me to answer the question, because I can evidence all the
:02:33. > :02:36.actions I have taken since I came into this office. It is the scale I
:02:37. > :02:42.have a Bews in Rotherham that has shocked this town. 1400 girls over
:02:43. > :02:45.16 years. Children as young as 11, raped, traffiked, beaten and
:02:46. > :02:50.intimidated. Newsnight has spoken to one man, who until recently worked
:02:51. > :02:54.in a child protection role, covering parts of Rotherham. They are without
:02:55. > :02:57.doubt, without any shadow of a doubt the most vulnerable people we have
:02:58. > :03:00.got in society. When they came forward to contact the authorities,
:03:01. > :03:07.whether it is the police or local council, with Tories of sexual abuse
:03:08. > :03:12.or evidence of sexual abuse, how seriously were the stories taken?
:03:13. > :03:17.There was almost a resigned acceptance that these were the kind
:03:18. > :03:21.of issues that were inevitable, given the background, given the
:03:22. > :03:24.individual circumstances and the personalities of the children
:03:25. > :03:29.involved. But yesterday's report was not the first the authorities had
:03:30. > :03:32.heard about street grooming. Three separate reports dating back over
:03:33. > :03:43.ten years had already highlighted the problem to council officials and
:03:44. > :03:46.the police. In 2003 a drug analyst wrote a report for the council about
:03:47. > :03:50.substance abuse, it describes a significant number of girls and some
:03:51. > :03:55.boys who were being sexually exploited. Including the case of a
:03:56. > :03:59.young girl dowsed in petrol as a thread if she went to the police.
:04:00. > :04:02.Three years later a second report from the doctor this time talking
:04:03. > :04:05.about an established sexual exploitation scene which was very
:04:06. > :04:11.organised and involved systematic physical and sexual violence. I had
:04:12. > :04:15.a child who had been missing, a 14-year-old girl, she had been
:04:16. > :04:19.missing for seven days, we knew that she was at risk of sexual
:04:20. > :04:24.exploitation, that was a given, and we knew that she had absconded
:04:25. > :04:28.before and that she was having relationships with older men who had
:04:29. > :04:33.threatened violence, we knew all this and for seven days we did
:04:34. > :04:39.nothing. But perhaps the most serious example came earlier in
:04:40. > :04:43.2001, a young Home Office researcher was told to write a profile of sex
:04:44. > :04:46.offenders in Rotherham. This week's independent report talk about how
:04:47. > :04:50.that researcher spoke to young women in the town. She described mounting
:04:51. > :04:54.frustration at the lack of action by the authorities. One girl had tried
:04:55. > :04:58.to escape from the gang abusing her, the researcher took her to the
:04:59. > :05:04.police station, where she was too scared to give evidence saying
:05:05. > :05:07.simply "you can't protect me", that researcher with permission from her
:05:08. > :05:11.manager wrote two letters to senior figures in the police force, she was
:05:12. > :05:15.called in for a meeting and simply told never to do this again. The
:05:16. > :05:18.contents of the letters were never discussed. When senior council
:05:19. > :05:22.officials and police officers saw a draft of that report the researcher
:05:23. > :05:26.was immediately suspended for gross misconduct. From that point on she
:05:27. > :05:29.was not allowed to contact any of the girls involved and funding for
:05:30. > :05:34.the project was simply stopped before it could be completed. The
:05:35. > :05:37.leader of Rotherham council quit this week as a result of the
:05:38. > :05:39.scandal, saying he takes responsibility for what has
:05:40. > :05:44.happened. But no other head has rolled and no police or council
:05:45. > :05:48.officer has been disciplined. So the spotlight has fallen on one of the
:05:49. > :05:51.most visible of those in charge, police and crime commissioners
:05:52. > :05:55.cannot be sacked only voted out by the electorate. But Labour have
:05:56. > :05:57.raised the stakes this evening saying they will suspend Shaun
:05:58. > :06:01.Wright's membership of the party if he hasn't resigned by the morning.
:06:02. > :06:05.When the report says the information was there and action should have
:06:06. > :06:08.been taken, when leadership fails it is important people take
:06:09. > :06:12.responsibility. This evening Shaun Wright is thought to be at home
:06:13. > :06:17.consulting with his family about his future. That future looks
:06:18. > :06:23.increasingly uncertain. In a moment we will speak to Amjad
:06:24. > :06:28.Bashir, the UKIP MEP for Yorkshire and Sheila Taylor of the NWG charity
:06:29. > :06:31.which advises professionals on working on child sexual
:06:32. > :06:34.exploitation. With us first of all is Jack Dromey the Labour shadow
:06:35. > :06:38.minister for policing. Thank you for being with us. As things stand
:06:39. > :06:42.tonight Shaun Wright is still a member of your party. Your calls for
:06:43. > :06:46.him to go have failed. You are pretty powerless aren't you? He
:06:47. > :06:52.should resign, he had are the power to act but he did not use that power
:06:53. > :06:56.to defend the powerless, he needs, therefore, to accept responsibility.
:06:57. > :07:00.If he does not resign then he will be suspended tomorrow morning. But
:07:01. > :07:03.for people watching this in Rotherham, being thrown out,
:07:04. > :07:07.temporarily from a political party, it is not exactly tough action on
:07:08. > :07:12.him is it? We in the Labour Party will act, but the problem about the
:07:13. > :07:16.legislation that was introduced by Theresa May, there is no mechanism
:07:17. > :07:20.to force him to stand down. Now that does raise questions for the future.
:07:21. > :07:25.But in the here and now we are absolutely clear he has to accept
:07:26. > :07:28.responsibility for his abject failure to defend those who were
:07:29. > :07:33.being abused by evil men. And we will come on to that in a more
:07:34. > :07:37.detail in a second. In future, if you were in Government, would you
:07:38. > :07:41.change the rules to make Police Commissioners a new role more
:07:42. > :07:44.accountable. In just this circumstance they could be gotten
:07:45. > :07:47.rid of if appropriate? What is clear beyond any doubt is the current
:07:48. > :07:51.arrangements don't make any sense. I think there will be complete dismay
:07:52. > :07:54.in south Yorkshire, he has lost the confidence of the people of south
:07:55. > :08:00.Yorkshire, above all he has lost the confidence of the victim. Would you
:08:01. > :08:04.change the rules? Necessarily so. Isn't he, however, a proxy in a
:08:05. > :08:08.sense of a problem that was clearly admitted today by one of your former
:08:09. > :08:12.colleagues, Dennis McShane, the MP for Rotherham for many years. He
:08:13. > :08:17.told the BBC that when he was working in the town he didn't want
:08:18. > :08:23.to rock the multicultural boat too hard. He said as a true Guardian
:08:24. > :08:27.leader and liberal lefty he didn't want to raise it too hard? It is
:08:28. > :08:33.important to stress that the great majority of men who abuse children
:08:34. > :08:38.are actually white, having said that, were there particular problems
:08:39. > :08:45.in Rotherham? Yes there were. And it cannot be right that you ever allow
:08:46. > :08:48.the fact that there is an ethnic grouping, an ethnic identity to the
:08:49. > :08:52.nature of some of that abuse, not all of it, it cannot get in the way
:08:53. > :08:55.of proper investigation, defending the powerless and calling those
:08:56. > :09:00.responsible to account. But what is important here is that a formerly
:09:01. > :09:03.prominent Labour politician is fessing up and saying we had a
:09:04. > :09:06.problem in the Labour Party, we turned a blind eye because we didn't
:09:07. > :09:10.want to rock the boat. Do you accept that? Lessons need to be learned of
:09:11. > :09:16.the past. Of that there is no doubt. After the immediate, which is Shaun
:09:17. > :09:19.needing to resign, crucially support for the victims and bringing the
:09:20. > :09:29.perpetrators before the courts. There has been an announcement for
:09:30. > :09:34.Take That that -- that, we pressed for that at the time, that all those
:09:35. > :09:39.with responsibility have a duty to react. Lessons to be learned may be
:09:40. > :09:44.overused in these circumstances. Can you be confident that the problem
:09:45. > :09:48.identified today by your colleagues that looking the other way to
:09:49. > :09:52.protect multiculturalism has disappeared in the Labour Party? We
:09:53. > :09:55.should never allow multiculturalism or any other factor to get in the
:09:56. > :09:59.way of the investigation of wrongdoing. Has it changed? We need
:10:00. > :10:03.to learn lessons from the past because the idea that this is a
:10:04. > :10:07.problem of the past, it is an on going problem, on a massive scale of
:10:08. > :10:11.the abuse by men of children. Amjad Bashir, you are the MEP from the
:10:12. > :10:15.area and you are Pakistani in origin, we have just lost him, we
:10:16. > :10:24.will hope to come back to him shortly. Let's put this to you, this
:10:25. > :10:27.specific problem in the Pakistani community in this one town is much
:10:28. > :10:32.discussed, do you accept that this was in some sense a racial crime? I
:10:33. > :10:38.think there may be elements of racial crime in there, but to me
:10:39. > :10:44.anybody who thinks it is OK to have sex with children within our society
:10:45. > :10:50.is committing an offence. We need to focus on the criminal activity,
:10:51. > :10:56.there is an awful lot of focus on the victims and actually we're not
:10:57. > :11:01.looking at how we are going to tackle the perpetrators within our
:11:02. > :11:06.society. Is this picture painted so eloquently by Professor Jay in her
:11:07. > :11:10.report yesterday of this specific problem in the Pakistani community,
:11:11. > :11:15.is that familiar to you? It is familiar to me, but it is not the
:11:16. > :11:19.only model that we see. We see lots and lots of ways that sexual
:11:20. > :11:25.exploitation manifests itself within society. And there is a very
:11:26. > :11:29.specific media focus on the Pakistani Muslim community. That
:11:30. > :11:36.doesn't mean to say there isn't an issue there that needs tackling. But
:11:37. > :11:40.there is at the same time we can't let that be the only thing we
:11:41. > :11:43.tackle. Amjad Bashir I hope can hear us from Leeds now, thank you for
:11:44. > :11:50.joining us. You are Pakistani in origin, but a proud Yorkshireman to
:11:51. > :11:54.boot, do you acknowledge and your community acknowledge the extent of
:11:55. > :12:01.this problem? I think the community does acknowledge that there is a
:12:02. > :12:05.problem. 1400 young, vulnerable girls, over 16 years have been
:12:06. > :12:13.exploited, largely by Asian men. It is not acceptable. The community has
:12:14. > :12:18.to come forward and accept this and try and make sure this is prevented
:12:19. > :12:22.in the future. I have just come away from a meeting with the religious
:12:23. > :12:28.leaders who have all condemned this. I think there is a problem out there
:12:29. > :12:33.and we have to admit there is a problem and prevent it from ever
:12:34. > :12:39.happening again. And do you think that turning a blind eye and that
:12:40. > :12:43.this sensitivity around ethnicity essentially let people off the hook
:12:44. > :12:46.in Rotherham? I do believe that and I think the deputy leader of
:12:47. > :12:51.Rotherham council has been implicated in this. He has been a
:12:52. > :12:54.barrier preventing messages from the police getting to the community.
:12:55. > :13:00.That's not, that should not be the case. He should be a facilitator
:13:01. > :13:04.trying to get communication between the community and preventing these
:13:05. > :13:09.paedophiles, these people that were responsible for gang raping and
:13:10. > :13:14.taking these girls across the country and selling them on. This is
:13:15. > :13:20.not acceptable. He is of course not here tonight to defend himself. But
:13:21. > :13:23.Sheila Taylor isn't this precisely part of the problem. You said this
:13:24. > :13:27.is only one thing we should consider and there are lots of other factors,
:13:28. > :13:32.but clearly as Amjad Bashir suggests, in this situation,
:13:33. > :13:36.professionals were just too nervous and professionals maybe with the
:13:37. > :13:39.best of intentions were reluctant to look properly at what was going on
:13:40. > :13:43.because of the sensitivities around race? Historically we have looked
:13:44. > :13:48.back at child sexual exploitation since I have been involved in 1999
:13:49. > :13:53.when I got involved that you see professionals really not responding
:13:54. > :13:56.appropriately to children that are telling you it is happening to them,
:13:57. > :14:00.but they are not being believed, they are not being heard properly
:14:01. > :14:05.and they are certainly not being responded to properly. If you think
:14:06. > :14:10.about those 1400 children that we have talked about that have been,
:14:11. > :14:15.for want of a better word, serially raped over a number of years, what
:14:16. > :14:21.have we done to help them to repair and recover from that and they are
:14:22. > :14:25.now in society and if we're not careful we are going to have a
:14:26. > :14:29.cohort of people who don't know what a healthy sexual relationship is.
:14:30. > :14:30.And on precisely the point of what should happen next, Jack Dromey
:14:31. > :14:33.And on precisely the point of what you have confidence as the shadow
:14:34. > :14:37.Policing Minister you have confidence as the shadow
:14:38. > :14:40.Yorkshire Police to look back at these crimes properly to investigate
:14:41. > :14:45.them now properly? That is why there needs to be an independent
:14:46. > :14:49.investigation by the IPCC, because all those who fail to act deserve to
:14:50. > :14:52.be called to account. Including those in the Police Service, those
:14:53. > :14:56.who previously worked for the council as well as of course the
:14:57. > :14:59.police and crime commission. Briefly, South Yorkshire Police have
:15:00. > :15:03.intimated they will investigate some of these crimes historically, do you
:15:04. > :15:06.have confidence in them to do that, particularly as some of the victims
:15:07. > :15:10.are considering taking legal action against them. That is a conflict of
:15:11. > :15:12.interest isn't it? There will be no confidence in any investigation
:15:13. > :15:19.other than it is seen to be independent. Thank you all of you.
:15:20. > :15:23.other than it is seen to be The NHS budget is insulated
:15:24. > :15:28.to other Government department, but it is still under significant
:15:29. > :15:33.pressure. Not least from drugs whose prices climb and climb and climb.
:15:34. > :15:38.Newsnight has learned that officials plan to threaten to stop buying some
:15:39. > :15:41.of the most expensive high-tech cancer treatments if the companies
:15:42. > :15:45.that produce them won't cut their prices. The proposals will be
:15:46. > :15:50.revealed tomorrow and they affect the cancer drug fund, a scheme set
:15:51. > :15:57.up in 2010 by David Cameron. With the details we have our policy
:15:58. > :16:01.editor Chris Cook. Concern about the NHS's unwillingness to spend money
:16:02. > :16:06.on expensive cancer drugs is a long-running theme. That is why
:16:07. > :16:11.David Cameron announced the Cancer Drugs Fund back in 2010, an
:16:12. > :16:15.England-only, ?200 million a year specialist pot to pay for drugs that
:16:16. > :16:19.otherwise would be refused for costing too much. Just ask Clive
:16:20. > :16:25.Stone, I met him years ago when we were in opposition. He had cancer
:16:26. > :16:29.and he is said to me the drug he needed was out there but they
:16:30. > :16:33.wouldn't give it to him because it is too expensive. Please, if I get
:16:34. > :16:38.in could I do something about it. We have, a new Cancer Drug Fund that
:16:39. > :16:42.has got the latest drugs to more than 21,000 people and counting.
:16:43. > :16:47.Newsnight has learned that the fund is running overbudget, and officials
:16:48. > :16:52.are expected to announce tomorrow it will be increased from ?200 million
:16:53. > :16:56.a year to ?280 million a year, starting this year. The fund will be
:16:57. > :17:00.subjected to a new cost benefit regime, that will mean the least
:17:01. > :17:03.effective drugs stop being funded and the most expensive drugs will
:17:04. > :17:07.have to prove their worth if they are continued to be funded. Some
:17:08. > :17:10.pharmaceutical companies should expect that they will be told their
:17:11. > :17:16.drugs are too expensive for the drugs fund set up just to payer to
:17:17. > :17:21.the most expensive drugs. This issue all revolves around NICE, the body
:17:22. > :17:29.that decides whether or not the drugs are cost effective enough to
:17:30. > :17:36.be bought by the NHS. They should cost no more than ?30,000 a year for
:17:37. > :17:39.a year of life in good health. The amount they will pay for that is
:17:40. > :17:46.sometimes more when dealing with end of life drugs, even so cancer drugs
:17:47. > :17:49.often just cost way too much. NICE struggles in cancer, that is
:17:50. > :17:53.publicly acknowledged hence the fund, the issue there really is the
:17:54. > :18:01.advent of the new science means we have highly targeted medicines
:18:02. > :18:05.within smaller patient cohorts but fixed R cost, so a drug costing ?1
:18:06. > :18:09.million over a small amount of patients. You have higher headline
:18:10. > :18:13.prices per patient, that is what happened over the course of recent
:18:14. > :18:18.years. This is almost ?3,000 worth of tablets. That is why there is
:18:19. > :18:23.demand for the fund, and some of these medicines really do make big
:18:24. > :18:28.differences. In 2008 I was diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer, I was
:18:29. > :18:31.put on to the hormone therapy treatments which are usual in that
:18:32. > :18:37.situation, they carried on through until my levels changed and I was
:18:38. > :18:41.advised by my consultant to go on to something called a new drug at the
:18:42. > :18:46.time. This has allowed me to continue my professional and family
:18:47. > :18:50.life to the full and has allowed me to avoid chemotherapy and any of its
:18:51. > :18:56.effects. This was only possible because of the Cancer Drugs Fund.
:18:57. > :18:59.You if you if the fund lacks rules on cost effectiveness, drug
:19:00. > :19:07.companies can just charge very high prices. And, when you discuss that
:19:08. > :19:12.problem one company comes up a lot. Roche, the Swiss pharmagiant
:19:13. > :19:17.accounts for one quarter of spending. It produces the latest
:19:18. > :19:23.high cost cancer treatment rejected by NICE. It costs ?90,000 a throw
:19:24. > :19:29.for six months of extra life. That gives you a cost per QALY of
:19:30. > :19:34.?166,000, that is several times more than the most generous of NICE
:19:35. > :19:39.limits. Now officials really don't want to delist effective drugs, nor
:19:40. > :19:43.do they want to undermine what is a flagship policy for NHS England. But
:19:44. > :19:47.if they don't have the power to say to drug companies we won't buy at
:19:48. > :19:51.that price, they don't have a negotiating position at all. And
:19:52. > :19:55.with rising numbers of cancer patients, the inability to keep the
:19:56. > :20:03.cost of cancer drugs down is a major concern.
:20:04. > :20:06.This is a tough issue, Roche say NICE's methods aren't fit for
:20:07. > :20:12.Europes, other Companies point pharma out the prices for QALY have
:20:13. > :20:16.not moved with inflation. Many are asking if we should he can empt
:20:17. > :20:25.cancer patients from the NHS cost systems at all.
:20:26. > :20:31.I'm joined by my guests this afternoon. Why is cancer special?
:20:32. > :20:36.Because it affects one in three of us, soon to affect one in two of us.
:20:37. > :20:41.It is something, a disease that has awful implications but in fact we
:20:42. > :20:44.can do a lot, more than 50% of cancer patients are now cured. We
:20:45. > :20:49.have seen a breakthrough in the number of new drugs in the last two
:20:50. > :20:53.years, 25 new drugs, new drugs, all expensive registered for cancer care
:20:54. > :20:57.in Europe. For sufferers, patients and the families of those with other
:20:58. > :21:02.appalling diseases why should they accept that cancer sufferers get
:21:03. > :21:07.prefer relation financial treatment. Do you accept that is what happens?
:21:08. > :21:11.That is what is happening. The NHS pot is limited, however you look at
:21:12. > :21:15.it, the politicians try to bend it but it is limited. If you give more
:21:16. > :21:20.to cancer you are taking it from somewhere else. Nurses don't syringe
:21:21. > :21:24.ears any more simply because there is not the funding for their time to
:21:25. > :21:31.do that. Do you accept that is what we should do? I think the cancer
:21:32. > :21:37.drugs fund is a political stunt in response to shroud-waving by the big
:21:38. > :21:40.response to shroud-waving by thebig big pharma companies. Is it only
:21:41. > :21:46.motivated by political pressure on David Cameron? Yes and the pressure
:21:47. > :21:50.is enormous, it is brought by the companies themselves but also the
:21:51. > :21:56.patient organisations which are often fronts for the companies. It
:21:57. > :21:59.has been alleged that it costs a billion to develop the drug but it
:22:00. > :22:04.has certainly been suggested only a tenth of that is actually the drug
:22:05. > :22:07.development cost, the rest is PR, advertising and marketing. These are
:22:08. > :22:10.big global companies they have clout, they have more power than the
:22:11. > :22:16.Government in lots of ways and the Government has to stand up to it. Is
:22:17. > :22:21.this now the Government standing up to big pharma, what do you make of
:22:22. > :22:28.the idea, why don't they say if you don't lower the prices we won't pay
:22:29. > :22:32.any more? The cancer drug is a great example, they were asked to come
:22:33. > :22:35.back with a lower price and they haven't done so. They are in the
:22:36. > :22:39.press beating each other around the head. The sadness for me as a doctor
:22:40. > :22:48.is when you see the emotional effect on a patient today. A woman maybe
:22:49. > :22:51.who has failed on herceptin and a good candidate for that drug and
:22:52. > :22:55.they have to go through a funding request. To be clear on the
:22:56. > :22:58.proposal, you back the idea of the Government saying unless you put the
:22:59. > :23:01.price down, big powerful drug company, we will not fund this drug
:23:02. > :23:06.at all? I back that, but I think that one has to have an escape
:23:07. > :23:08.clause, so doctors can prescribe a drug that they think will be the
:23:09. > :23:13.best thing for their patient. That is the conflict. And David's right,
:23:14. > :23:17.it is a political stunt. You have got NICE, that is assessor, if the
:23:18. > :23:24.assessor turns it down how can you have a back door in. That is to
:23:25. > :23:27.prevent the politicians losing faith coming up, losing face coming up to
:23:28. > :23:31.an location. Is that the right way to go? It is the only way to go, you
:23:32. > :23:34.have to stick up to to go? It is the only way to go, you
:23:35. > :23:39.companies, they will probably back down in the end. They won't do it
:23:40. > :23:44.easily. It is terrible for patients, of course. But you have to be clear
:23:45. > :23:46.easily. It is terrible for patients, that although cancer survival has
:23:47. > :23:54.improved, many of these new drugs are very marginal improvements.
:23:55. > :23:57.Katsyla the extra life you get compared with standard treatments is
:23:58. > :24:03.an extra six months, that is not very much for ?100,000. The hope is
:24:04. > :24:07.that by understanding the molecular targets of their
:24:08. > :24:09.that by understanding the molecular predict which patients can respond
:24:10. > :24:12.and then everyone will be happy. If the drugs were expensive
:24:13. > :24:14.and then everyone will be happy. If used in patients that would
:24:15. > :24:14.and then everyone will be happy. If I have a patient with lung cancer
:24:15. > :24:18.that has I have a patient with lung cancer
:24:19. > :24:21.years now on a drug that costs ?120,000 a year, but he's in
:24:22. > :24:25.years now on a drug that costs group that will benefit from that
:24:26. > :24:30.drug. We can predict that. Isn't the bigger problem as David suggests
:24:31. > :24:35.that with enormous respect medical professionals like you, the research
:24:36. > :24:37.industry is enormously reliant on the big pharmaceutical companies,
:24:38. > :24:40.unless tax-payers suddenly want to pay an awful
:24:41. > :24:41.unless tax-payers suddenly want to going to have power over
:24:42. > :24:52.Governments? They are, there is no. going to have power over
:24:53. > :24:57.They do, but I think what has happened with Kancycla is an example
:24:58. > :25:00.of standing up to it. They can't sell it half the price in France and
:25:01. > :25:04.twice the price to the NHS, sell it half the price in France and
:25:05. > :25:08.would ship over in Europe, there has to be a way of coming to an
:25:09. > :25:16.agreement, there will be in the next few months. Roche made ?7. 7 billion
:25:17. > :25:19.profit last year, they can afford to reduce the price, they won't,
:25:20. > :25:22.because once they have done it they will be expected to do it again, of
:25:23. > :25:28.course. But they cannot go on living in this style for drugs which don't
:25:29. > :25:36.actually work at all well very many of them. If I was terminally ill and
:25:37. > :25:39.they said if you have this drug for ?100,000, it is difficult to say
:25:40. > :25:44.what you will feel when you are terminally ill, but you can have
:25:45. > :25:49.four months of uncomfortable live extray, I'm not sure that I would
:25:50. > :25:53.say that I was, it was my duty not to bother with it. It is easy to
:25:54. > :25:57.intellectualise when you haven't got cancer, if you have got cancer and I
:25:58. > :26:01.see people every day that have the disease, they want everything, they
:26:02. > :26:04.are desperate, especially younger people with families, two months to
:26:05. > :26:08.them is worth having. And studies have shown that for 1% benefit
:26:09. > :26:11.people will take the drug. If you haven't got cancer it is not so
:26:12. > :26:15.important. But I do take your point about the balance within the health
:26:16. > :26:19.service and drugs. How do we prioritise? Various politicians go
:26:20. > :26:22.with the voters and the voters vote for the NHS and they vote for cancer
:26:23. > :26:28.as the most important worry they have about the NHS. So politicians
:26:29. > :26:33.follow that. Cabs Cancer is terrifying that is the target for
:26:34. > :26:39.the companies. It is also the target for a lot of quacks who immediately
:26:40. > :26:45.surround anyone with cancer wishing to poke them with pins and all sorts
:26:46. > :26:47.of concoctions. We will leave it there thank you very much for
:26:48. > :26:52.joining us. In this country we tend to assume
:26:53. > :26:57.that guns and children don't really mix very well. That seemingly
:26:58. > :27:00.responsible assumption would be regarded pretty strangely by many
:27:01. > :27:04.people across the Atlantic where firearms can be part of family fun.
:27:05. > :27:09.This particular part of the eternal debate over the right to bear arms
:27:10. > :27:14.is back. After a nine-year-old in Arizona shot her instructor dead
:27:15. > :27:20.while she was having a shooting lesson at a firing range, learning
:27:21. > :27:24.how to use an Uzi, a sub-machine gun almost as big as her. We have to
:27:25. > :27:28.keep that held in, otherwise the gun won't fire. A regular day out. For
:27:29. > :27:33.many American families there is nothing unusual to see here. But
:27:34. > :27:40.seconds later this nine-year-old girl lost control of the Uzi
:27:41. > :27:44.sub-machine gun killing her instructor, Charles Vacca. When a
:27:45. > :27:49.nine-year-old gets an Uzi in her hand, the criteria is eight-year-old
:27:50. > :27:54.to shoot firearms, we instruct kids as young as five on 22 rifles they
:27:55. > :28:01.don't get to handle the firearms but they are under supervision of their
:28:02. > :28:06.parents and professional range masters. Six years old! And shooting
:28:07. > :28:10.a fully automatic. For many parents the right to bear arms isn't just
:28:11. > :28:16.important, introducing their children to guns they can barely
:28:17. > :28:22.lift is a rite of passage too. Did you shoot the Uzi? Yeah. That's my
:28:23. > :28:26.boy. These home videos recorded from shooting ranges across the US
:28:27. > :28:32.proudly uploaded by parents for the world to see. But America's less
:28:33. > :28:35.proud of the record of firearms incidents that kill and injure
:28:36. > :28:43.hundreds of children every single year. 100 children were killed in
:28:44. > :28:49.accidental shootings in 2013. More than 800 children under 14 are hurt
:28:50. > :28:55.in nonfatal incidents every year. And 31% of children live in a home
:28:56. > :28:59.with a gun. Will this latest accident and new focus on the
:29:00. > :29:06.thousands of others make any difference in a country where for
:29:07. > :29:13.many owning a gun is a way of life. Finger off the trigger, how did that
:29:14. > :29:20.feel? Pretty good. From Washington we're joined by Gary Pratt from Gun
:29:21. > :29:24.Owners of America, and the President of Washington Ceasefire. Thanks for
:29:25. > :29:28.being with us, can you explain to us in the UK why it is acceptable for a
:29:29. > :29:35.nine-year-old to be given a lesson in how to use an Uzi sub-machine-gun
:29:36. > :29:42.which can fire five bullets a second? I'm sure what preceded that
:29:43. > :29:46.situation, I know that when I have taken my children and they in turn
:29:47. > :29:51.have taken their children shooting we start with the. 22, as the
:29:52. > :29:56.gentleman you interviewed had pointed out. And we point have them
:29:57. > :30:01.graduate to anything until they are ready for it. And that's something
:30:02. > :30:06.that we can determine, they are under our supervision. This goes on
:30:07. > :30:10.not only with individual families but their clubs, some scouting
:30:11. > :30:16.groups provide shooting instruction for young Scouts. So when done
:30:17. > :30:22.properly I think most Americans say that is a good thing. But in
:30:23. > :30:27.principle, whatever the type of gun, how young, at what age is it OK? A
:30:28. > :30:31.seven-year-old, a six-year-old a five-year-old? How young should
:30:32. > :30:38.children be before they are allowed to handle a gun? In my own family's
:30:39. > :30:42.case we have made the determination based on their physical capability,
:30:43. > :30:47.their judgment. It was something that was the parents' call. How old
:30:48. > :30:53.was your youngest child when you gave them a gun for the first time,
:30:54. > :31:00.and your grandchildren even? I would imagine eight or nine years old,
:31:01. > :31:04.same as the girl in this video. Why is that acceptable, it is pretty
:31:05. > :31:12.hard for many people in the UK to understand that Well you are
:31:13. > :31:15.starting with a. 22 which has no recoil, they become familiar
:31:16. > :31:24.whenever they touch the gun, they get ternly lectured about how to use
:31:25. > :31:28.it safely, and we, I think in America, understand that firearms
:31:29. > :31:33.ultimately are nothing personal but why we are no longer British. What
:31:34. > :31:38.do you say to that, it was a tragic accident was it not? It is a tragic
:31:39. > :31:41.but another unnecessarily accident. I think the key thing on this is
:31:42. > :31:47.that this is a military assault weapon, it is an automatic weapon
:31:48. > :31:52.where if you hold your finger on the trigger, bullets will fly, you know
:31:53. > :31:57.at an incredible rate. So it makes absolutely no sense at all, and I
:31:58. > :32:01.think it is indicative that mainstream America is disconnected
:32:02. > :32:06.from the dangers of a gun. Disconnected from the danger of a
:32:07. > :32:11.gun in the home. We know when there is a gun in the home you are
:32:12. > :32:16.22-times more likely to kill family member or friend than an intruder.
:32:17. > :32:20.We have a cultural defect in this country where we can't find that
:32:21. > :32:24.balance between personal freedoms and public safety. Are you
:32:25. > :32:31.suggesting that no child should ever be allowed to handle a firearm, even
:32:32. > :32:37.under supervision? No child should ever be allowed to fire an Uzi with
:32:38. > :32:42.that type of killing power and that type of immediate catastrophe
:32:43. > :32:48.waiting to happen. This is not the first event of its kind, in 2008 an
:32:49. > :32:51.eight-year-old boy in a similar situation in Massachusetts, lost
:32:52. > :32:56.control of an Uzi and he was the one who was killed in it. This weapon is
:32:57. > :33:01.almost eight pounds and can fire in some case, some model, over 1,000
:33:02. > :33:03.bullet as minute. This should just not have happened under any
:33:04. > :33:08.circumstances, what do you make of that? Let's put it into some more
:33:09. > :33:12.perspective, the victim in this episode was at greater risk while he
:33:13. > :33:18.was driving to that range than he was at the range. But cars don't
:33:19. > :33:23.fire bullets, five bullets a second? More people are killed in
:33:24. > :33:29.automobiles, including children. Than by firearms, firearms are not
:33:30. > :33:34.the greatest device connected with people dying. But people need to
:33:35. > :33:40.drive to get to work, they don't need to allow their nine-year-olds
:33:41. > :33:44.to use a gun? We will have our disagreement. People need to have
:33:45. > :33:49.their guns, they are part of our political control of our Government,
:33:50. > :33:56.they are part of our keeping ourselves safe, some 16-times a day
:33:57. > :34:01.more defensive gun use occurs than any kind of death resulting from a
:34:02. > :34:07.firearm. And it is even when you lock at just accidental deaths from
:34:08. > :34:12.firearms compared to automobiles, than defensive gun use something
:34:13. > :34:18.like 32-times. Larry see it is from a different perspective. First of
:34:19. > :34:22.all. That is an understatement. In Washington state now we have more
:34:23. > :34:28.death from gun violence than car accidents. So right now we have
:34:29. > :34:34.about a similar number nationwide of 30,000 from guns and 30,000 deaths
:34:35. > :34:39.from cars, a rate that is about 20-times higher than the average
:34:40. > :34:44.industrialised nation. Here in Washington state we 600 deaths.
:34:45. > :34:49.Every time this kind of accident takes place the debate takes place
:34:50. > :34:53.too, will there ever be a day when the antigun lobby will have to
:34:54. > :34:57.accept that the American way of life requires access to firearms and you
:34:58. > :35:02.don't like it, will you ever have to accept it do you believe? No, I
:35:03. > :35:08.think change is on the way. Mainstream America is being educated
:35:09. > :35:14.and the risk of having guns. Larry's comment of a gun being used to
:35:15. > :35:21.deflect a crime 1600 times a day is based on bogus research. Research
:35:22. > :35:27.that is refuted by the director of prevention from the Harvard school
:35:28. > :35:36.of public health. They send out false research, we have the mayor
:35:37. > :35:43.spending $50 million to rebutt this. Larry and his groups have prevent
:35:44. > :35:49.the researchers to look into gun violence. Thank you for making time
:35:50. > :35:52.for Newsnight this evening. Eurowoes are back, if they ever
:35:53. > :35:56.truly disappeared. After the Government fell apart on manoeuvre
:35:57. > :35:58.truly disappeared. After the how to rescue its economy, France
:35:59. > :36:04.today announced record unemployment. Italy has fallen into a triple-dip
:36:05. > :36:07.recession, investors are now so nervous about where to put their
:36:08. > :36:11.euros, they are paying the German Government to look after their cash.
:36:12. > :36:17.That is the curious economic quirk of the negative interest rates
:36:18. > :36:21.charged on German bonds these days. Our economics correspondent Duncan
:36:22. > :36:26.Weldon has been working out why. How bad is it? The only word to use what
:36:27. > :36:29.is happening in Europe at the moment is "disaster". What is happening
:36:30. > :36:34.with the German interest rates today, the German Government can
:36:35. > :36:38.borrow at record interest rates, after two years the German
:36:39. > :36:42.Government can borrow at a negative interest rate. People are paying the
:36:43. > :36:46.German Government to take their money. That is not meant to happen,
:36:47. > :36:49.that is a sign something is terribly wrong in the economy. If we look at
:36:50. > :36:54.unemployment and just for context if we look at UK and US unemployment
:36:55. > :36:58.over the last two years, now it rose during the recession, and since then
:36:59. > :37:02.as our economies have recovered unemployment starts to fall. But if
:37:03. > :37:07.we look at Europe you get quite a different picture, so the eurozone
:37:08. > :37:10.unemployment rose but look what has happened since 2011 it has gone
:37:11. > :37:15.higher and stayed up there. The UK and the US have had their weakest
:37:16. > :37:18.recoveries in 100 years but Europe hasn't really had a recovery at all.
:37:19. > :37:22.Those fundamentals have been the case for some time what are the
:37:23. > :37:25.markets so worried about today? What the real concern is about at the
:37:26. > :37:29.moment in Europe is inflation, or rather the lack of inflation. I mean
:37:30. > :37:34.again if we take a look at the numbers, this is the change in
:37:35. > :37:38.prices in the European economy. You have 2010, 2011, inflation is going
:37:39. > :37:41.up, but against 2012 inflation has been collapsing t has been down to
:37:42. > :37:45.less than half a per cent. What is really concerning people today is in
:37:46. > :37:49.the coming months prices in Europe, across Europe as a whole might
:37:50. > :37:54.actually start to fall. Stuff getting cheaper doesn't sound like
:37:55. > :37:58.the biggest economic problem. But what economists will tell you is it
:37:59. > :38:01.is terrible consequence, it sucks spending out of the economy and
:38:02. > :38:04.pushes down pages and making debt harder to pay. That is the last
:38:05. > :38:08.thing particularly southern Europe needs at the moment. The situation
:38:09. > :38:13.is quite worrying. I suspect I can guess the depressing answer to this
:38:14. > :38:18.question, is there any end in sight, any prospect of eurozone politicians
:38:19. > :38:22.gripping this in a long-term radical way? I think you know the answer and
:38:23. > :38:26.the answer is depressing, this seems to be a neverending economic crisis
:38:27. > :38:29.and there is no end in sight at the moment. The real problem is
:38:30. > :38:32.politics. There is lots the European Central Bank could be doing to get
:38:33. > :38:36.Europe out of this state. But it has been held back by the Germans who
:38:37. > :38:39.are very uncomfortable with it. At the moment the French and Italians
:38:40. > :38:42.are pushing very hard for a deal. They are saying we will carry out
:38:43. > :38:45.reforms in our economy but you have to give us more breathing space. The
:38:46. > :38:49.Germans are not budging. They are stuck in this cycle. The really
:38:50. > :38:52.worrying thing is if this continues for a little while longer and down
:38:53. > :38:56.the road you will hear more and more voices in countries like Italy who
:38:57. > :39:01.are starting to say is it worth the pain of being a euro member.
:39:02. > :39:05.Promises that the Internet can revolutionise your life are rather
:39:06. > :39:13.hollow if like millions fortunate to live outside our great Metropolis,
:39:14. > :39:16.your broadband is slow and maybe non-existent. There could be a
:39:17. > :39:21.solution, it might be in the space all around us. It is being
:39:22. > :39:27.developed, where else, but where Marconi set up the first wireless
:39:28. > :39:31.telegraph station, we sent Mark Grossman there, to the Isle of
:39:32. > :39:39.Wight. Battling the waves and not just in the sea. One of the biggest
:39:40. > :39:42.changes for the fresh water independent lifeboat is
:39:43. > :39:47.communication. Radio waves often struggle to get past the spectacular
:39:48. > :40:01.cliffs at the Isle of Wight coastline. Back in the 1890s Marconi
:40:02. > :40:04.came here to test his wireless invention, since then radio has
:40:05. > :40:08.saved thousands of lives, but it is still pretty limited. How dependable
:40:09. > :40:19.is the radio communication? Essentially we are using the same as
:40:20. > :40:23.Mar rconi first invented, we are still limited by line of sight and
:40:24. > :40:26.we can only have one way communication at a time. If somebody
:40:27. > :40:33.else is talking on the radio that will drown us out. If they have got
:40:34. > :40:36.a stronger signal. This is particularly frustrating for Jeremy
:40:37. > :40:40.and the crew, because this lifeboat is otherwise fitted out with the
:40:41. > :40:45.latest technology, including cameras that could stream real-time rescue
:40:46. > :40:49.pictures back to base. What the lifeboat desperately need is a
:40:50. > :40:54.reliable way of getting two-way communication between here and
:40:55. > :41:00.shore. That's exactly what this little boat has been testing as part
:41:01. > :41:06.of a UK-wide series of trials and new technology called TV White
:41:07. > :41:13.Space. Here with the help of a stick and fresh water beach is the
:41:14. > :41:16.technical bit. What is this white space technology? It is technology
:41:17. > :41:21.that takes advantage of unused spectrum, that you can utilise for
:41:22. > :41:25.broadband connectivity. If you think of a spectrum as moving from low
:41:26. > :41:28.freakies down the long wave, up to the high freakies, which is visible
:41:29. > :41:33.light, you have a couple of key points. You have your home-based
:41:34. > :41:37.Wi-Fi that sits here, then the TV broadcasts which are sitting down
:41:38. > :41:41.here, this is prime real estate spectrum, the broadcasters weren't
:41:42. > :41:45.stupid, they put their transmissions in the place that gives them best
:41:46. > :41:50.coverage for the lowest possible power to reach the maximum number of
:41:51. > :41:54.viewers. If we zoom in on the bits where the television transmissions
:41:55. > :41:59.are, it looks like this. This is BBC One, this is BBC Two, this is ITV,
:42:00. > :42:03.you get the idea, and look at this, you have got space here, you have
:42:04. > :42:06.got space there, you have space inbetween the different
:42:07. > :42:11.transmissions? What are the spaces there? These spaces stop the
:42:12. > :42:15.transmissions interfering with each other. That suggests the spaces
:42:16. > :42:20.can't be used because it would interview with the TV signal? Not
:42:21. > :42:24.the case you can use them to deliver broadband. One of the problems with
:42:25. > :42:28.Wi-Fi is how to get it through to the back bedroom and the kitchen. It
:42:29. > :42:32.is not easy to do now. The reason it doesn't reach these places is
:42:33. > :42:42.because the frequency is so high. If you lower the frequency to 600, 700
:42:43. > :42:47.MHz, then had goes much further. Using the TV freakies to send and
:42:48. > :42:53.receive the Internet it means the signal will go much further than the
:42:54. > :42:58.Wi-Fi. You can then connect up a whole village with one Wi-Fi hub,
:42:59. > :43:02.bringing the Internet to the thousands of households currently
:43:03. > :43:05.off line. This man runs an internet provider on the Isle of Wight and
:43:06. > :43:10.can't wait to shift his operation into white space. One of the biggest
:43:11. > :43:14.problems growing that we become approached with are people
:43:15. > :43:19.struggling to sell their houses in the rural area where the broadband
:43:20. > :43:22.connection is not good enough. Everyone who knows if you have a
:43:23. > :43:27.super yacht you can have broadband in the middle of the Atlantic. But
:43:28. > :43:30.systems like that are out of reach of domestic homes and offices and
:43:31. > :43:34.independent lifeboats and the RNLI who have to fund their own
:43:35. > :43:38.purchases. White space allows connectivity to go much longer
:43:39. > :43:46.through much more challenging conditions, but at a really
:43:47. > :43:51.affordable price. There is no confusing the centre of Glasgow with
:43:52. > :43:55.the Isle of Wight what could help rural Britain, could, it is argued,
:43:56. > :43:57.be equally transformative for cities. Strathclyde University has
:43:58. > :44:01.been running a pilot to link their cities. Strathclyde University has
:44:02. > :44:06.campus up with TV white space technology. I can get the
:44:07. > :44:12.Strathclyde network here, and here, and here and here. Of course the
:44:13. > :44:15.university could have used conventional technology to
:44:16. > :44:17.university could have used in and around all these buildings of
:44:18. > :44:21.their in and around all these buildings of
:44:22. > :44:25.laying miles of big, fat, expensive cable. Beyond their budget, instead
:44:26. > :44:30.what have they done? Have a look up there, you see the
:44:31. > :44:34.what have they done? Have a look up bring me the Internet. The wireless
:44:35. > :44:39.revolution is just beginning, we have set up a number of nodes on
:44:40. > :44:44.campus and we have a white space network here so students can pick up
:44:45. > :44:48.on their phone with a Wi-Fi to a white space connected basestation.
:44:49. > :44:52.You wait a few years you will have a white space chip in your mobile
:44:53. > :44:56.device and you can do mobile or Wi-Fi or white space, so as a
:44:57. > :44:58.research organisation we are looking into
:44:59. > :45:02.research organisation we are looking designs. This is something that will
:45:03. > :45:06.happen. It is absolutely going to be a great opportunity for people to be
:45:07. > :45:13.more connected. Because it really will be wireless everything soon.
:45:14. > :45:16.White space technology is possible partly because of advances in GPS,
:45:17. > :45:19.the geographical partly because of advances in GPS,
:45:20. > :45:22.device wanting partly because of advances in GPS,
:45:23. > :45:27.of the spectrum has to be established. This is then fed into a
:45:28. > :45:33.constantly updated database to work out which white spaces are free to
:45:34. > :45:38.use. Ofcom, who control the TV spectrum are white space
:45:39. > :45:42.enthusiasts. When might we see it coming in for real? That is what we
:45:43. > :45:47.are busy working with people at the moment. Rural broadband with
:45:48. > :45:50.workshops taking place last week to see how people can use it, it is
:45:51. > :45:54.being used in America and Singapore, the UK is one of the leaders. We
:45:55. > :45:59.expect people to be able to use it from next year onwards. And speeds
:46:00. > :46:03.that they can only dream of at the moment, I suppose? Definitely. It
:46:04. > :46:06.depends how much white space is available and how many channels you
:46:07. > :46:09.can use in those space, but people will
:46:10. > :46:14.can use in those space, but people use this application. Bar a few rock
:46:15. > :46:19.falls the cliffs haven't changed too much since Marconi stood here and
:46:20. > :46:23.brought radio to the world. Even he would be surely amazed with how far
:46:24. > :46:28.wireless communication has come since then. Some people we barely
:46:29. > :46:32.got started. A clarification, earlier one of our guests referred
:46:33. > :46:36.to the deputy leader of Rotherham council, to be quite clear he was
:46:37. > :46:39.referring to the former deputy leader, just in the last minute some
:46:40. > :46:43.breaking news on that story. The Police Commissioner, Shaun Wright,
:46:44. > :46:46.in south Yorkshire, who was head of Children's Services, during some of
:46:47. > :46:50.the time when abuse was committed on such a scale in Rotherham, has just
:46:51. > :46:56.announced that he is resigning from the Labour Party but has said he
:46:57. > :46:59.remains committed to staying on in his role as Police Commissioner with
:47:00. > :47:03.responsibility for the police in that area. And a very brief look at
:47:04. > :47:09.one of tomorrow's papers that is on the front page of the Sun. One of
:47:10. > :47:13.the victims of that scandal taking an unusual step, waving her
:47:14. > :47:20.anonymity to tell her story and say how angry she is with Shaun Wright.
:47:21. > :47:21.That is all we have time for to tonight, good night and thanks for
:47:22. > :47:47.watching. Another area of low pressure coming
:47:48. > :47:49.lose close to the UKover night, spreading rain northwards, still
:47:50. > :47:51.around in Scotland. It