09/02/2016 Scotland 2016

No deal for junior doctors means another strike tomorrow in England,

as the Scottish Government says "come and work here."

Another strike by junior doctors will go ahead tomorrow,

We ask a Scot working in England and an English doctor

The rift grows between Westminster and the devolved parliaments

about the timing of the EU referendum.

And living with HIV - two young men tell me

about the stigma and the cost of keeping well.

Last ditch talks have failed to avert a second day of strike

The British Medical Association has accused the Health Secretary Jeremy

He urged them to put patients' interests first.

As the war of words continues, the Scottish Government is -

some say rather cheekily, given the timing -

trying to lure disgruntled junior doctors to Scotland with the promise

In a moment, we'll be speaking to a couple of junior doctors,

I was a junior doctor myself in Scotland and benefited from the

fantastic training that Scotland Office. Are you a junior doctor in

England? Are you fed up of the working conditions? Then Scotland

wants you. That's the message in this new Scottish Government

promotional film. You can understand the strategy. Right now, ministers

and junior doctors are locked in a bitter dispute over the prospect of

a new contract in England. The UK Government says the current deal,

dating back to the 1990s, is outdated. Junior doctors leaders say

the changes will see in on fair pay and working conditions and tomorrow

at 8am will stage their second 24-hour walk-out. The last thing we

want to do is industrial action. We offered the government constructive

talks in December, they turned it down. They finally accepted it, we

pulled out of industrial action in December because wanted to find a

negotiated settlement. The government keeps pushing us each

step of the way to try to impose a contract that is fundamentally

unfair and unsafe. Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt is under pressure from

the doctors union over the new contract. Questions to the Secretary

of State for Health. Today in the Commons, with Labour seeking to

increase that pressure, he stood firm. The party opposite are saying

that if a negotiated settlement can't be reached, we should not

impose a new contract. In other words, we should give up on seven

day care for the most vulnerable patients. There was a time when the

Labour Party used to speak up for vulnerable patients, but now it is

clear that unions matter more than patients. In Scotland, the NHS says

it is sticking with its existing contract and in the process is

hoping to tempt junior doctors in England north of the border. Save

our NHS. Meanwhile, south of the border, the government is preparing

for more scenes like this. Thousands of routine operations have already

been cancelled. It is clear this dispute is far from over.

A short while ago I spoke to two junior doctors working north

From our Cambridge studio, Harry Leitch, and from

Harry in Cambridge, the strike will go ahead now, as plans tomorrow. Is

it the right thing to do? I certainly am supportive of the

strike. As far as I understand, they have tried as hard as they can at

the negotiating table and I am fully supportive of what the BMA are

doing. I am not a BMA member myself, it is simply my opinion. I am

certainly supportive. The main sticking point between these

negotiations seem to be weekend working. Doesn't the Health

Secretary in England have a point, that if patient safety is at risk

here, he should really be firm on this? I think it is a very

conjugated issue. I am working on a rotor at the moment where I work ten

out of 17 weekends. As has been reiterated many times by my

colleagues, we already work at the weekend. There is lots different

about hospitals at weekend, including porters, receptionists,

nursing staff, physios, social care. It is not just a simple fact of

forcing more doctors into the hospital at the weekends. I think

the other major point is that if you want to have more doctors at the

weekends, we need more doctors. I find it really hard to understand

how the Health Secretary thinks that he can have more hours worked by

more doctors without any increase in the total pay packet, because

presumably more people must cover those hours, unless we are all going

to work much harder. Mark in Edinburgh, there is no strike

tomorrow in Scotland. Why not, what is different? The key difference is

we are not being faced with this imposition of a new contract. The

Scottish Government for very sensible reasons are taking a step

back and waiting. We don't have to face this difficult decision, which

I have to say, personally, I fully support my colleagues down South who

are taking the step to strike and I am sure the vast, vast majority are

taking it with a very heavy heart. Maybe the First Minister should be

pushing for these sort of reforms. Maybe it is delayed until after the

election. Perhaps. Perhaps I'm being naive there. I like to think I am

not, I like to think the Scottish Government, who historically have

had some trouble recruiting and training doctors, I thinking this is

a good opportunity to draw a line in the sand and take advantage of not

devolved issue and try to encourage more doctors to stay here ought to

come and work here. Harry, if you are a clinical junior doctor, might

you be tempted north by the government's new recruitment

campaign? As you pointed out, I am an academic trainee, but that means

I do clinical work, as well. Yes, I think I have spoken to a number of

my colleagues at the last few months, and I know a lot of them

already have but Scotland up their list of preferences. There is lots

of great hospitals, great medical schools, our lot of great medical

history north of the border and a lot of people are voting with their

feet. You think it might have an impact? I think it is possible. We

will wait to see. People are applying for jobs and we will wait

to see if Scotland gets more than it's their share. From what I have

heard, the total number of applications are down, but I don't

know if the proportions of Scotland have gone up. From the friends I

have canvassed and things I have heard on the wards, a lot of people

are looking to Scotland as a really good option. If you watch the

Scottish Government video, it sounds idyllic year, Mark. Fantastic

training, great training opportunities, good worklife

balance. Don't they have right here? It is not a bed of roses, we are

faced with similar challenges to those south of the border. Health

care is under pressure. Expectations are rising, the population is

ageing. I cannot pretend it is completely amazing and we don't face

those problems here. However, I have watched that recruitment video and I

agree with lots of it. I am a Londoner who has moved north in

response to the opportunity to study appear and have an excellent

training programme, excellent research. I am also an academic

trainee and what I view as probably a better quality of life. Is it more

collaborative? As the Chief Medical Officer says, is very different

ethos to what you find working in England? I think perhaps the feeling

that what you say is heard more readily here. It is partly because

we are a small country, partly because working in the capital in

Edinburgh. I have always felt training here that my voice is heard

more readily than it was down south. I think the pressures are greater

down south. Relatively, we are better resourced here. We still have

problems. But certainly having worked in London and Edinburgh, I

feel that the quality of training and the quality of health care that

we deliver probably is better up here. Harry, what do you think about

the tone of this dispute between doctors and the government in

England? I think it has obviously got to be a pretty bitter battle. I

think one of the things that comes out of the Scottish Government

announcement is the word valued. I think and speak on behalf of a lot

of trainees, we all feel not very valued at all by the government down

south. At the moment, it is just words coming from Scotland. We would

like to see what extra benefits they will have in terms of all the issues

that come into play with the junior doctor contract. At the very least,

at least they are speaking positively and making doctors feel

valued. All of us very much don't feel that way south of the border.

If Jeremy Hunt's plans do go ahead, hospital doctors in different parts

of the UK will, for the first time, have noticeably different contracts.

Does that concern either of you? It is an international markets more and

more for doctors. It will be new for the UK, but not for medicine

worldwide. If anything, the situation may be a help temporarily

for recruitment this year. I hope for the sake of my colleagues down

south that this is sorted out and we don't have disparity across the

board. Harry, does it concern you? It will be interesting to see what

happens. Hopefully, we will sort things out south of the border, and

then hopefully the Scottish Government will be in a strong

position to learn the lessons of a new contract if and when it comes

out. At the end of the day, we just want a fair contract that is safe

and hopefully both sides of the border it will be easy to do. OK.

Harry, mod, thank you very much for joining me.

The date for the referendum on the UK's membership

of the European Union hasn't yet been set.

But there have been weeks of argument about whether a June

referendum would be too close to May elections in Scotland and other

Opposition parties including the SNP - who want a vote later in the year

- called for more respect for devolved parliaments.

Our Westminster correspondent, Nick Eardley, has more.

Almost everyone you speak to at Westminster is preparing for the

23rd of June as the date for the referendum, but it is opposed by

number of parties, including the SNP. Today the Democratic Unionist

party brought a motion to the Commons, saying that a June

referendum should be ruled out. We need to ensure the government

respects the devolved administrations in Northern Ireland,

Scotland and Wales on an issue of such import. We must put the

national interest above every other consideration. We must respect the

rights of the people who go to the polls in May. We must allow for the

fullest possible debate on the biggest decision to be made by this

country for generations. Another issue that came up was what is known

as purder. That is the period before elections where the parties avoid

making major announcements. The three Administration 's will be in

purder if it is on June 23 for ten out of 13 weeks. I don't know if all

the members opposite have considered that. This is an issue that causes

some anger in the devolved governments across the UK. The clear

choice NICOLA Sturgeon with her counterparts but to her counterparts

calling for a referendum to be ruled out until sometime later in 2016.

Despite that anger, the government seems fairly clear that a six-week

period after the 5th of May in the elections would be enough. The IT is

perfectly feasible to have an overlap providing you accept you

have a six week gap as a minimum between two polls. I would remind

the house that the six week gap is the full length of a general

election campaign. We decide on the basis of a six-week campaign. Labour

indicated again today that they would support an early referendum.

Despite the anger, that may cause, if David Cameron wants a referendum

on the 23rd of June, he will almost certainly get it.

One person a day is diagnosed with HIV in Scotland.

It's thought hundreds more go undiagnosed.

New medicines mean you can live a fairly normal life with the virus,

but the cost means that not everyone globally has access to them.

A group of young people living with HIV are touring the UK,

talking about their campaign to bring affordable

Earlier I caught up with two of them - 22-year-old Brian from Uganda

Tell me, Robbie, while arguing this? What drew me in was the missing

medicine campaign. It is really important because I only have access

to this different kind of medication because of the country I was born in

butterfly was born somewhere like Uganda, they will probably only get

one type of treatment, if they are lucky. If that doesn't work, because

they might be intolerable to the side effects, they might get a

second option. In Ireland's, HIV is so silent, it is so shamed. Is there

still a taboo? Massively! There are still people I talked to on a daily

basis you can tell their parents, their friends. You can imagine how

hard that with me. Obviously issues with relationships. It is all down

to ignorance. In first world countries we have these medications,

we now have tools. If you are undetectable, if you have low virus

in your system or it is dormant, study show that you are not

infectious any more. It is almost down to zero. We have these tools we

don't have to live in a society where there is stigma against HIV.

What was it like when you were diagnosed, was of a shock to you?

Massive shock. For two reasons. First, my childhood dream was to

work with animals in Australia. I studied zoology for four years. I

was saving up to go with my friends. I did my first-ever sexual health

check and they called me back in. The first thing I asked was, can go

to Australia? Although we could go to Australia for a -year-old to I

could not get residents because I was HIV positive. So, everything I

had for my whole life, it was shattered them in the second of my

diagnosis. It had hard. Secondly, my health. Am I going to survive? HIV

is synonymous with AIDS. You always think of an ill, dying person. I

didn't know anyone living with HIV and Ireland. I could not believe it

was happening. I had me want to go to. Even just through the silence,

that was the most difficult. Bringing back by one to do the tour,

it is to create visibility in the UK. People don't even know the

basics. They don't know the difference between HIV and AIDS. I

didn't. We want to be in their face so they don't have to go looking for

it. We want to give them the good information, the right information.

We want to say, you are healthy. You can live a normal, healthy life and

you shouldn't have to live a life with stigma. I wish I was told that.

When I was told I was HIV positive, I kind of laugh. I thought being HIV

positive, it meant something good, positive men did. He didn't realise

what it meant? At the time I didn't. When I laughed, I saw that the

councillors were looking at me concerned. They realise maybe

something was wrong. When they explain to me, that this is when

they realised, maybe it is over for me. Is there stigma in Uganda about

being HIV positive? Yes, very much in Uganda, to the extent that in

Uganda families break up over it. They think it is contagious, so they

can't allow you to share with other children, with other members of the

family, the community. People rarely talk about being HIV positive in my

country. Obviously, the medicines here are much greater. Are you

surprised that people are still dying with HIV in this country? That

people still get diagnosed very late. Access to medication is high,

so yes. This comes back to the stigma around sex in general. People

are scared to go to get sexual health checks. It is a frightening

thing, almost ignorance is bliss. It is still a hot topic. The need to

have sustainable and consistent policies to put in place to combat

HIV. We have the medication to stop AIDS, to stop new HIV instances,

AIDS-related deaths and we should utilise it because we don't

understand the drug market at the moment. I find that inspiring young

people to talk in general that this is a real issue, and other issues

such as TB or breast cancer drugs, which affects the UK as well. I

could be dead if I was born in a different country. It brings to

light what we need to do, to have these conversations. Thank you for

coming in and telling me your stories today.

The Youth Stop Aids speaker tour will be in Scotland until Friday.

Scotland remains a world leader in scientific research,

according to Edinburgh's International Science Festival

which boasts leaders in the fields of climate change,

cloning and astronomy at the top of this year's bill.

Its theme, 'Building Better Worlds'', focuses on how science,

technology and engineering can transform the world and the way

Morag Kinniburgh has been along for a closer look.

Popular science aplenty, there is an interactive exploration of why human

stance. There is serious debate heading for Edinburgh this Easter

fortnight with leaders in the field of climate change, cloning and

astrophysics coming. The festival organisers argue that Scotland leads

the world in all kinds of science. Scotland punches well above its

weight in terms of research output. There is a creative and innovative

spirit but still inhabits the country as a whole. A great tech

start-up sector in Edinburgh, Glasgow was strong in its arts and

some strong research strands across the country. Experiments designed to

entice people into a world of questions and reasons. The science

festival promotes global debate, too, and this first of the big 12

annual festival see it brings on benefits. We look at it as an

investment on several levels. The international profile of the city,

promoting the best of Edinburgh and Scotland abroad. But also the

wonderful educational benefits that the festival brings. Fund used to

inspire innovation at every stage. It is great to have people think

about a serious topic and do something with it. This is

sensational science but on the more serious stuff, the festival insists

it is neutral on scientific advance, providing a platform for debate on

concerns as well as hopes for the future.

Joining me now to discuss some of the day's other news are a couple

of bloggers - businessman Kevin Hague and Law lecturer Andrew

Today is the day the councils to decide on whether they would

continue the council tax freeze. Glasgow, Stirling, they are saying

they are going to reluctantly accept the deal. Accumulation of penalties

that the Deputy First Minister has introduced mean it is just too

expensive to think about raising council tax by anything that would

be electorally or publicly acceptable. Every council not run by

the SNP have criticised the deal. How do you think the public will see

it, Andrew? I am not sure. It depends whether people see an impact

on their services or not. It is not obvious to me how many parts of the

public will feel bad. Looking at how the public experience their services

in Scotland it is a less bleak picture than is often depict did.

The only these things are unpredictable. You might not see it

in time for the Holyrood elections. That is quite unlikely. This could

be 2017 in the council elections, and by then the cuts will have taken

place. A few were cynical you might say that would work with the SNP.

There was of any proposed on income tax to offset the proposed spending

cuts. Could there be SNP voters out there silently scratching their

heads and wondering where the SNP has not come without? It would be

strange if there was. We have had a couple of years being told how

terrible the cuts are, these offal Conservative cuts are affecting life

in Scotland, and then we have a chance to do something about it with

the Scottish rate of income tax, particularly at a time of the SNP

are passing on tax cuts from the Conservative government, the

personal alliance and income tax threshold is being raised, means we

are getting tax cuts and public spending cuts. Surely some of those

SNP supporters must be saying, isn't there another way? Do we need a tax

cut when we are seeing the reality of what that translates in terms of

spending cuts? It is strange. Our councils being asked to shoulder a

disproportionate amount of the spending cuts? Someone is going to

have two. There is no way to avoid that. It is always inevitable that

somebody would have to do it. It is pretty obvious that it would be

difficult for any political party to knock on the door of any individual

in Scotland who is earning ?15,000 a year and say I want to put tax up. I

think the tax powers are pretty blunt. Kevin is right in the longer

run. In 2017 on current estimates, assuming the Scotland Bill passes,

then we will have questions. Moving on your special subject, Kevin, the

fiscal framework. The UK Government and Scottish Government are locked

in negotiations over the Scotland Bill. Nicola Sturgeon has written to

David Cameron to say she is fully committed to reaching a deal but she

is also clear that an agreement will only be possible if we have a shared

understanding of the known detriment principles. Is it possible to design

a framework that act Chile -- actually does not badly affect

Scotland or England. The Institute for Fiscal Studies say no, it is

impossible to satisfy no detriment and fairness. The issue is how you

interpret no detriment. One is no detriment when the powers are

transpired. That is pretty easy, you just adjust the block grant

proportionally. Number two is no detriment to the use of the powers

impacting the other country. There are some tricky example seven you

can deal with them. The third is implicit in the position of Nicola

Sturgeon which to see detriment from the loss of Barnet itself. The

problem with that is that Barnett is unfair in favour of Scotland as the

dynamics work at the moment. The reason is as long as Scotland's

population growth is slower than the rest of the UK we benefit from

Barnet. If the Scottish population does not grow but the UK's does,

there are spent goes up, we get the share of that the Norsemen grows up.

We get an increase in per capita spending on the rest of the UK

doesn't. That is locked into Barnet at the moment. If you take that

await you take away that benefit. So she is right to say that any

solution that involves devolving powers will not benefit Scotland

because Barnet locks in an advantage for Scotland that some of the spent

quite a lot of time arguing in favour of. Will the deal be reached

before the election? I don't know. Difficult to say. It looks that the

Scotland Bill is something that everybody is in favour of, that the

Scottish parliament will vote in favour of. It looks a bit shakier

than it did a few weeks ago. God knows what the political

consequences are of that. But this, the Prime Minister would read Nicola

Sturgeon's letter with interest and it is probably in both of their

interest to come kind of negotiated terms. Hollywood's Justice committee

has said that the not proven verdict might not serve any useful purpose.

Is it on borrowed time? We have a presumption of innocence in this

country. How does not proven verdict that in the dark? Many juries think

that a not proven verdict is somehow different from a not guilty verdict,

there maybe you could be tried again. That is completely rubbish.

Judges in this country have been strongly advised by the Appeal Court

not to try to distinguish the difference between not guilty and

not proven. That seems to me bananas. If you can't explain what

that is to a jury, then I am not sure it is a particularly rational

system. A sentimental old-fashioned nationalism might want to keep it

because you the one country the Globe that does it, but I am not

sure that there's a convincing reason to keep it, to be honest. It

would be easier just to have two different verdict.

Hope you can catch us again tomorrow night, same time.