03/08/2017 Newsnight

Guilty: the top family court judge hands out an excoriating criticism

of mental health support for the young.

The particular case concerns a suicidal 17-year-old,

but it's a worrying sign that many others in a dangerous

And when they leave hospital, when they're at their greatest need,

at their highest risk of suicide, they don't get the support

We'll ask if the judge is right, and if so,

Despite the prospect of Brexit, or because of it.

Britain's economy is sluggish according to the Bank of England.

Is it right to be so pessimistic about the prospects?

We may have lost tonight, but everyone's talking

The amazing hockey win in Rio, the women's cricket last week,

women's rugby just off to the World Cup.

We feel that this is a watershed moment for women's sport, really.

Every now and then, a judge wants to use the power of the bench

to make a point that perhaps goes well beyond the specifics

Such is the case today, with Sir James Munby,

the president of Family Division of the High Court who uttered

scathing words about the treatment options for a suicidal 17

If this is the best we can do for her, and others in similar

crisis, what right do we, what right do the system,

our society and indeed the state itself, have

The honest answer to this question should make us

The girl has been in custody for six months, but is due to be released

Staff at the unit where she is being held think she will be dead

within days of release if supervised care is not found,

but no appropriate secure place is available.

What right does our society have to call itself civilised given the poor

mental health services we provide for young people, that is the

question posed by a senior judge, reflecting on the fate of a

17-year-old woman known only as X who needs a place in the so-called

low secure psychiatric unit, a place that so far can't be found. Sir

James Munby's criticism of the government is unusually fierce and

he had it sent to the relevant secretaries of state, but facing a

case where a young woman was being let down by our mental health

services he felt he had no choice but to speak truth to power.

Sir James Munby said restraints have to be used on 117 occasions and

there have been 102 significant acts of self harm or

NHS England hopes tonight that a suitable care package might be found

at one of three facilities, but there is a general problem with

mental health care for young people. The young people and parents tell us

that they have to navigate the gaps in the system themselves and they

have to wait ridiculously long periods of time before receiving

that treatment, that might even be six months. There is a particular

problem for people with eating disorders. Some young people are

told their weight is too high to receive care right now, and when

they leave hospital at a time of great need them when they are at

their highest risk of suicidal but they don't get the support they

need. A royal college psych I survey confirms this picture. 89% said they

knew of young people being placed into care which is not local, a

challenge from local government and families, and 62% reported young

people being put into inappropriate settings like adult wards or police

cells and 14% reported patients had attempted suicide while awaiting a

bed. Respondents also save money has been a problem. The government

pledged new money to transform children's mental health and that is

welcome but our research last year showed that money was not reaching

the front line and in fact half of all commissioners were spending it

on other priorities. There is a particular problem around young

adults who have left the young People's system and joined the back

the adult queue. When you turn 18, literally at midnight you are taken

off their system and not given any further support and to be put into

adult services counselling you have two self referred to a different

system. And there are new queues? Yes, eight months waiting list for

them Harriet was admitted to and adult ward which struggled with her

needs. I saw the age gap between me and the other patients can quite

some distance, 25 years, I would say, and also the gender difference,

I was in a ward with around 12 men and three other women. It was gender

inappropriate and there were no appropriate activities. Harriet was

diagnosed with bipolar disorder and she said there was a lack of nurses.

There were not enough of them to look after us individually and when

I was attacked by a schizophrenic man on Christmas Day it was another

patient who saved me, if you like, before the shift nurse. And there

weren't many psychiatrists question up I waited 11 days before I was

seen by a psychiatrist and when they see you, they see you for ten

minutes. Mental health has had a higher profile in recent years but

this is still an area where there are serious systematic problems for

children and adults alike. Interestingly, last week,

the New York Times carried a long item on mental health provision

in England, describing it as "the world's most ambitious

effort to treat common mental illnesses", implying that the rest

of the world is watching Well, I am joined by the former

Minister for Children and Families Tim Loughton and mental

health activist Nikki Mattocks. You had many problems going right

back to childhood. We have heard one case in that film, how bad was it

for you? I became ill when I was about 14 and I struggled to get the

help I needed, and I was going to A repeatedly in a state of crisis,

I was taking overdoses and self harming and I was struggling with my

mental health. I was desperately trying to get help and my family was

on my behalf, as welcomer but there was a massive barrier and I could

access the help I needed -- the help. Until I took numerous

overdoses and I was finally listened to for the what happens when you go

to A? What is the spirits? You go there, the staff are generally

physical health trained and they don't understand the support and the

support you get is it necessarily helpful as you get judged a lot, but

you get seen by someone. I sometimes waited 18 hours, sitting there not

knowing what was going on, it is not appropriate for a person to go there

in crisis but that is where often we are sent to go. Did you ever get a

regular, stable consistent therapy of some kind that you needed? I did

manage, but from the start when I asked for help until the time when I

got the help I needed it took a long time, far too long. If more focus

was put into preventative services rather than crisis services it would

never have got to the point where it did. Tim is nodding his head. You

are trading to be a mental health nurse, so you see the service from

the other side stop better or worse now? I think people are trying their

best but because the resources are not bear from the government and

things, it is a massive struggle for everyone. Thanks for that. Tim, do

you agree with what the judge had to say today? I do, I'm afraid. Sir

James Munby is a senior and well respected judge, and am afraid what

he said is nothing new. And it is one aspect of the shortcomings of

mental health services in this country especially for children and

young people and vulnerable people, and I agree with everything that was

just said, and it is right that she has come forward and will speak up

about it. This is a severe wake-up call we have got do much better for

children in our country who are suffering these kind of mental

illnesses. What will happen to X, the woman involved in the case the

judge was talking about. He wants her in a low secure unit where she

is not held to stop other -- attacking other people, although she

is clearly a danger to herself, but there aren't many beds. What is

going to happen if there isn't one of those beds? It looks as though in

this case NHS England has come forward and identified the places

that might be able to offer her a bed when she needs it and hopefully

offer her the support and care and protection that she needs for as

long as it takes, but this is a high-profile problem today but I'm

afraid it is something which happens all too often, there is a shortage

of beds generally certainly at the severe end. The shortage of beds for

those people who need help because they are a harm to themselves

potentially but also in some cases they are a harm to others if they

are out at large. But also we have got to do much better as was just

so, not just crisis management, but early detection and prevention and

that means getting more staff in at an earlier stage, early detection

and earlier support an effective support and this is not happening in

too many cases at the moment. Did you see the piece in the New York

Times last week, it was a long piece about England as this pioneering

nation in mental health, is that right? Are we doing something? It

read a bit strangely with what we know about the treatment here. I did

not see that article, and I was surprised by it when you said it,

but there are some very good services in this country in all

parts of the NHS and in mental health, as well, but the problem is

there is not enough of it. To give the government credit, more money

has been an ounce, ?1.3 billion and earlier this week Jeremy Hunt said

we will be recruiting 23,000, a lot of people, and that will be a big

challenge in mental health in the next five years, with the five-year

plan. I want to see that come to fruition, but the problem is, there

are too many young people now who is mental illness is not picked up

early enough. Half of people who have a mental illness problem, that

will develop before they reach the age of 14, and if you don't do

something about it early, then of course it festers and continues and

becomes a much worse illness later on. We have got to detect early and

have the people there who can offer all sorts of appropriate therapies

inappropriate settings and quickly, and it would be a national scandal

if we expected people who have symptoms of cancer to wait six or 12

months before they got specialist treatment and why should it be

anything different for someone suffering a mental illness. Everyone

agrees with this, but there is a parallel to what we were discussing

last night regarding prisons, and we had a Tory former minister saying

last night we have not dealt with prisons properly, and now you are

saying we have not dealt with children's mental health services

properly, so what is the country supposed to do? You have been in

government for the last seven years. What is the countrymen to do? We

look to you to get this right -- the country meant to do. We don't need

to make this a particle -- party political issue, because we have not

got this right for many years and this case is not a one-off case by

any means. The thing that links the interview last night and this one is

mental health because that is a big problem in prisons. There is a

mindset still amongst NHS management that mental health is a secondary

issue and is not a priority and for all the good words about parity of

esteem it is not there in practice and that is why the extra money that

is going into mental health, not enough, but at least it is extra

money going into mental health, is not getting to the sharp end where

is needed and it is being diverted into repairing the hospital roof and

other crisis management in other parts of the health service and that

has got to stop. We need proper practitioners giving the service at

the sharp end when it is needed. Thank you very much to both of you.

It's never a quiet day in Washington, and in the last hour

news has broken that the special counsel investigating the Trump

team's ties to Russia, Robert Mueller, has put together

a grand jury that has the right to compel people to give evidence.

John Sopel's here to tell us what this all means.

Is this a significant development in this special Counsel's actions? Yes,

it is significant, but let me add a couple of caveats, does not mean

that any prosecution or indictment is imminent, it doesn't mean that

there will be any, but a prosecution could not happen without a grand

jury being sworn in. If you like, it is the next logical step in the

investigation. That said, as you point out, they will be able to take

sworn statements from witnesses, subpoena people and documents to the

investigation, and to the simple question, does this mean the

investigation is winding down... Or ramping up...? Only one conclusion,

it is ramping up. Are the proceedings all in public, the grand

jury proceedings? Now, a lot of this is going to take place behind closed

doors, what will happen is, they are going to follow the evidence

wherever it takes them, it means they have great investigative

powers, they can compel people to give evidence. Speaking about one of

the first meetings they want to look at is the meeting that Donald Trump

junior had with the then campaign manager, and Jared Kushner, with the

Russians, to get dirt on Hillary Clinton. I should say there has been

some reaction from Donald Trump's legal team, the President's legal

team have said, the White House favours any that would excel rate

the conclusion of this work fairly, the White House is committed to

fully cooperating with Robert Mueller, that is very conciliatory.

Will those be the sentiments of Donald Trump tonight? I would guess

not, I would imagine he is spitting tacks about it!

The Bank of England didn't raise interest rates today.

And it also published its latest quarterly inflation report,

which gave a somewhat Brexit-sceptic view of the economy.

The bank's not predicting doom and gloom, but it IS predicting

The bank governor didn't use the words "despite Brexit,

because of Brexit the economy is not doing so well.

Three reasons: in the short term, it's all about us, the consumer.

We've already been hit by an effective pay cut thanks

to a lower exchange rate, pushing up prices.

Households looked through Brexit related uncertainties

as the consequences of sterling's fall have shown up in the shops

they've cut back on spending, slowing the economy.

In the medium term, it's about business investment.

Because if consumers spend less, we'd like companies to spend more.

they've invested much less aggressively than usual

in response to an otherwise very favourable environment.

less investment now means less productive capacity into the future.

Moreover, prolonged low investment will restrain growth in the capital

Indeed, if the MPC's current forecast comes to pass,

the level of investment in 2020 is expected to be 20 points

below the level which the MPC had projected just

That is the banks expert view, but who knows if they are right,

or trapped in a Remainer mindset and sticking to an old script?

With me now, Gerard Lyons, one of the most prominent Brexit

supporting economists, who has worked or works

And Ann Pettifor, who is author of the book "The Production

of Money" and a member of Labour's economic advisory committee.

Do you agree with my interpretation that the bank is taking a Brexit

sceptic view? Certainly, clearly one needs to be realistic, because there

are challenges, what struck me today was that in his opening statement,

the governor was cautious, blamed Brexit for everything, then in the

one-hour press conference, in terms of the short-term, he came out with

four positives, in my view, if he was balanced, he should have

mentioned them at the beginning. Inflation is falling, consumers

bending will grow in line with income, therefore there will not be

a rise in debt, he said the balance of the economy is going to improve,

exports and investment picking up. And also he talked about the fact

that the world economy will improve. Why Frankie, even though he was

cautious, in the one-hour press conference, you had to squeeze out

of ten reasons to be optimistic. Clearly there are challenges, no one

denies that. -- well, frankly. The bank has been optimistic for a long

time, about wage rights, investment, all kinds of things, and proven

wrong. It was pessimistic about Brexit, there was a lot more going

to go wrong band did go wrong. This time last year, Mark Carney said,

plan is better than no plans. Fully a year later, no plans. -- there was

a lot more going to go wrong than did go wrong. Lets remember that one

year ago, the Bank of England and the Treasury said that by now, we

would have half a mini and people unemployed because of the leave

vote, what has happened, unemployment is at a 42 yellow.

There are challenges, wages are not picking up, the governor seemed to

suggest that was because of Brexit. -- unemployment is at a 42 year low.

That is what is scary, the global economy, despite what Gerrit says

about the positive aspects, the global economy is weakening.

Inflation is falling. Everyone has been warning about rises in

inflation, and members of the Bank of England, they are willing to put

up interest rates, at a time when the consumer is quite vulnerable. --

Gerard. We are very dependent upon consumers. And high levels of debt.

I don't think it is half as positive. Is it your view that there

is a groupthink, a confirmation bias, some kind of cognitive process

that is gripping the economic establishment and the Bank of

England in particular? Economic has been gripped by groupthink for ages,

when I said the Lawson boom was going to become a bust, I was told I

was wrong, I was told I was wrong that if we left the way it is a good

thing. There is groupthink. Today what is interesting, over and above

groupthink, something and has touched upon, it is about longer

term deep-rooted structural problems, what was underlying the

bank's pessimism was not Brexit, it was a lack of investment and low

productivity. Add Brexit to that, lack of planning, a government that

is paranoid, and... They certainly should plan more, no doubt. Do you

buy this figure, in 2020, 20% dollar investment, then there would be. --

20% lull investments. That is very possible, deep lack of confidence,

the big thing that is missing is that the private sector is over

indebted, worried, lacking in confidence. -- 20% lower

investments. The government should be stepping in but instead, it is

opposed to investment, that will not even move the needle. -- proposed.

More infrastructure, things like that. The government has to step in

because the private sector is so weak, despite interest rates. Do you

buy this figure, do you accept that by 2020, investment may be 20%

lower. Yes. Today, the governor said, the supply is down to one and

three quarters percent, but in the press conference, he said they have

been cutting it for the last nine yes, what we need is investment,

infrastructure spending and more innovation. The three Is. If we have

Brexit and we do it properly, we will not only protect workers'

rights, we will have more innovation from the small medium-sized business

sector. This is far too delusional, honestly, you cannot... There are

challenges, I agree. Brexit is going to be utterly destructive and we

have no plan for it, short-term, medium-term, long-term plan, for

what will happen to this complex network of relationships, trading

relationships we have with European partners, we have no plan, no proper

transitional plan. And that is terrifying. And that is why we have

low-level is of investment, low-level is... Why we will continue

to have... You must accept that Brexit has at least put a lot of

company's decisions on hold, so maybe there will be a spurt when...

At the moment they are saying, we had better wait and see. A year ago

I was on this programme and I thought the economy would do well

over the last year, it did do, I called it a Nike swoosh, that there

might be an impact on uncertainty, there is a reaction between policy

and competence, the most difficult to predict is confidence, if the

leaders start to talk us into an unnecessary downturn, then those

people, those companies, the ability to spend or not spend, what I'm

saying is, we need more balance in the debate, Brexit has challenges

but great opportunities. If we have a unplanned Brexit and a weakening

economy, that is the worst of all worlds, that is terrifying for most

people involved, both in the public and private sector. The debate

remains unresolved. Paul Kagame has been the President

of Rwanda since 2000, but has had a dominant role

in running the country right back to the time

of the civil war of the 90s, when his rebels brought

an end to the genocide. he faces the voters again tomorrow

in a national election. Although pundits have

got a lot of electoral predictions wrong recently,

no-one has much doubt that Kagame will still be

in power after the ballot. For one thing, at the last election

in 2010, he got 93 % of the vote. And anyway, three potential

opponents were disqualified from standing by the electoral

commission there. But Kagame is a complex

character, and arouses very

different reactions. Here he is speaking

in 1999 about the genocide Well, you can imagine,

somebody, an orphan, no father, the mother,

no sisters, no relatives. We need to get together,

we need to understand our history, we need to educate our people

how to overcome that, but those who were responsible

for the genocide For some, he's just another African

dictator, albeit a smooth talker. For others, he's a force

for stability despite any flaws. a former aide to President Kagame

who is now in exile in Canada. What was it that made you leave?

Well, my issue, actually, was more about statistical manipulations, he

always wanted... He would basically dictate the percentages that

economic growth had achieved. I was always uncomfortable, and I started

to oppose him, and that would have been 2009. As we were getting closer

to the elections, that we just mentioned, the place started to get

a lot more violence... I decided that was not for me. I fled and I

went to South Africa. There will be an election tomorrow, you obviously

will not be voting, you are in ex-aisle. We are certain he wins, is

it a free and fair election? No, it cannot be a fair election because

the people who could have challenged him have been blocked from

competing. Almost all the political parties are behind him. And he

himself announced a few days ago that he will win by 100%. So that is

exact to what will happen, the opposition, in early elections, some

of the opposition leaders were imprisoned. They remain in prison.

One of them was killed. And others have fled into ex-aisle. I would be

surprised indeed if he does not get 100%. He seems to have a way with a

lot of foreign leaders, Bill Clinton called him one of the great leaders

of our time. What is it that you think makes him so impressive to

many others? Basically, he has developed a brand about himself, he

has branded himself as kind of a equivalent to the premiere of

Singapore, developing reminder, and he has argued there is a trade-off.

What has to be done now is economic development, human rights and

democracy can wait. A lot of people have bought into that. Plus, there

was a bit of sympathy, given to the way that the UN moralists abandoned

reminder during the genocide. So people have turned a blind eye. --

abandoned Rwanda. The price isn't too high, when you look at the total

suppression of the population. Despite this economic miracle. The

UK aid programme, we give aid to Rwanda and you think it is wrong to

do that. Yes, the British aid is the worst age, because basically,

Britain dumps taxpayer money into Paul Kagame's budget, and he is the

only one that decides what happens. What happens to British aid? You

will never know, at least other countries... Yes? I need to move

onto Andrew Mitchell, but your point has been well made.

And joining me now is former International Development

Do you buy this criticism of aid, we were suspending aid, you were the

Secretary of State who came in and said, turn on the tap, give him the

cash. I suspended it and then restored it, and indeed, it has been

restored not as general budget support, David is wrong on that

point, but as specific support to agriculture and education. We know

that in Rwanda, the quality of the way our money is spent is yielding

quite remarkable results, for example, in the last three or four

is, Rwanda has managed to lift more than 1 million people out of

poverty, remarkable success story. -- in the last three or four years.

David says that the statistics have been made up, so we know that from

our own statistics. It is followed very carefully by that department,

and it is in Rwanda. David says that a lot of people take the view,

trample over human rights if you can get the economy right, is that your

view of how develop and sometimes work? It is not, because I think we

are right to press with reminder that they open up the political

space more, open of the media space more. -- with Rwanda. But they have

made remarkable progress since this terrible genocide took place and the

country was destroyed. The truth is, president Paul Kagame rescued his

country while the world looked the other way and has built a stable and

strong state, and if you are a waitress, working there tonight, you

can walk home safely, for people like that, that is the first and

most important human rights, that the terrible violence in Rwanda was

ended. Will the election be free and fair? Yes.

I suspect he will win, although the numbers will go down because the

space has opened up, but the previous elections were marred by

violence and that hasn't happened this time for the day last two

elections were over 90%, was that a true reflection of public support? I

think it is, this is a country that was destroyed by Buydens but he has

stopped that and he has built an economy that is strong -- destroyed

by violence. We have got to be careful in the West, not judging

ways to a Westminster lens, and I say this, although previous

elections were marred by elements of violence, this election so far has

been entirely peaceful and it has been more peaceful than the British

election which took place a few months ago. But the Electoral

Commission has banned some of the most credible opponents. There was

one opponent who did not have the correct number of supporters on her

nomination paper and in Britain, if we stand in an election we have to

have a certain number of supporters who are on the register in our

constituencies, and she was in breach of that. If I had been in

breach of that at the last election I would not STUDIO: -- I would

have been struck off the register, as well. I am listening to your

critic but I hear these criticisms of the Labour Party regarding

Venezuelan politics at the moment, but you seem to be taking a rather

ambivalent view of Paul Kagame. Are you starry eye? I have been there

before, I will be taking a project there, we know the country very

well, and we know what is happening there, and I have not said anything

about the Labour Party and Venezuela, but I would say that they

are completely different, Rwanada and byes. Rwanda is much better run.

Thanks for joining us. So in the women's European

football championships tonight, England lost

to the Netherlands, 3-0. Sadly failing to make their way

to the final of the tournament. The viewing figures for the match

are not in yet, obviously, but the audience for Sunday's

quarter final game on Channel 4 In fact, that England France game

was even watched by a million The money for womens' football may

be small, the entire revenue for the tournament is probably

a tenth of Neymar's transfer fee, but as everybody keeps saying,

there is unprecedented interest Our culture editor, Stephen Smith

has jumped on the bandwagon. COMMENTATOR: Three

in the penalty area. It was a decisive win

for the Lionesses. But alas, for fans of

England's women, that turned out to be the nickname

of the Dutch team as well as ours. But even though England have been

dumped out of the semis, the consolation for the losers

is that their run in the tournament has put the game

in the spotlight at home. ARCHIVE VOICOVER: Girls

will be girls, and as football is a man's game,

girls have to play it. And take a look at the way these

Darlington girls dress for the game. The women's game hasn't always

basked in the unalloyed respect of the men who attended to report

on it and administered it. You never saw such fast

girls in your life. At least the 10,000

spectators think so. Altogether there is

a lot of pretty play. Despite the sizeable crowd drawn

to this fixture, the FA frowned on women's football

for a while as unladylike. I think if you talk to these

players, of course they want to earn a living, and so they should,

playing the game they love, but what makes them special

and what is very visible when you work with them,

is they haven't lost the feeling Someone who had to battle through

life to be the best you could be. And I think we want that

sort of Olympian spirit, Shot-stopping practice

for the London Bees, putting in some preseason

training this evening. They are semiprofessional

players, earning several They are linked to the second

division men's side Barnet. The women play to crowds

of up to 700 supporters. There is clearly not as much money

in the game so you probably have more female players who are just

in it for the love of the game. I think there's a few of the girls

already who are full-time in the top women's league but I think it needs

to progress throughout the top couple of women's leagues for it

to really push on and progress. Because if we have our full-time

jobs and then we're coming to training until 1030 at night,

then we have got to be in our jobs the next day

it is quite hard mentally. Are there still misconceptions,

things that people say to you that Yes, there will always be people

who compare men's and women's football but to be honest

they are two completely Yes, I wouldn't compare them,

there is different skill sets You don't have to choose to support

a men's team or a woman's team. I can imagine some football fans

spit died on the Wall St, if it's a choice between a good men's game and

a good women's game, I would go for the former -- died in the wall.

Football is a game of opinions and everyone is entitled to their

opinion and I know everyone who comes to watch a women's game gets

full value and more. The ticket prices in the men's game have gone

up and up and if you want to take your family and friends to a game it

is increasingly more difficult, but you can guarantee value for money

when you do come to a women's football game, whether it is

international or the national teams. And there is the whistle. Back in

the Netherlands, the sad truth for England is that the Dutch were very

good value for their win. It wasn't Alan Knight, things did not go our

way, and they are a good team. -- it wasn't our night. Tough crowd to

play in front of and we are disappointed but it wasn't Alan

Knight. The rude health of women's football will not be on the other

minds of England's players who are as sick as a parrot tonight.

We can have a quick look at the papers, the Financial Times is

leading on that Bank of England and Brexit, Mark Carney warning Brexit

uncertainty is choking business investment. The Times, NHS must cut

waste if it wants more cash. There is a picture of someone who stole

?1000 of goods from Harrods and was given a conditional discharge by a

magistrate who praised her considerable talents and there will

be follow up to that. Daily Mail front page, get to the airport three

hours early, advice for British holiday-makers returning from

Europe, to do with them imposing border controls of some kind.

Before we go, today came the sad news of the death

He was best known as Siegfried in All Creatures Great and Small, or -

to a younger audience - as Cornelius Fudge in

But it may well be his acclaimed portrayal of Winston Churchill -

a part he played in five different films - that will be

Here's a taste from 1981's The Wilderness Years,

I don't suppose that this is the end.

This is only the beginning of the reckoning.

This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup.

It will be proffered to us year by year unless...

Unless, by a supreme recovery of martial vigour we arise again

More downpour dodging to be done over the next few days, sunshine and

showers again