:01:22. > :01:28.Here, what impact will changes to legal aid have? And the plan to
:01:28. > :01:38.make pubs and clubs pay towards the cost of policing late-night
:01:38. > :01:38.
:01:38. > :42:16.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 2438 seconds
:42:16. > :42:19.A seasonal welcome to your local part of the show for the North-East
:42:19. > :42:23.and Cumbria. We are talking about changes to legal aid. Will it make
:42:23. > :42:27.it harder to get access to justice? And a new plan to make pubs and
:42:27. > :42:32.clubs in Newcastle paid towards the cost of policing late-night
:42:32. > :42:37.drinking. It could drive them out of business? Our MPs have either
:42:37. > :42:41.been on holiday or back in their constituencies. The Commons has
:42:41. > :42:51.only SAT for around 150 days in the last 12 months. Is that too much
:42:51. > :42:52.
:42:52. > :42:55.time spent away from the Westminster world? I can't remember
:42:55. > :42:58.any government, including a Labour one, wanting to keep MPs that
:42:58. > :43:04.Parliament. The longer they can keep us of Parliament, the better
:43:04. > :43:08.for them. It's hard for the public to understand. You are there, then
:43:08. > :43:13.you are back in the constituency. Should you be spending more time in
:43:13. > :43:17.Parliament? Yes, I think we should be there more that we are. It's
:43:17. > :43:21.nice to be back in your constituency, but we can now, it's
:43:21. > :43:24.more relaxed than it was when I first work in politics, we were
:43:24. > :43:29.there until Friday, but now we usually get away on the Thursday.
:43:29. > :43:34.In your constituency on a Friday doing your best work in your
:43:34. > :43:37.constituency. As I said before, I think it is a case of trying to
:43:37. > :43:43.keep members of parliament away from Parliament, so they can get on
:43:43. > :43:49.with business. Were MPs less trouble to you in Westminster or
:43:49. > :43:55.kicking about the constituency? public might give an interesting
:43:55. > :43:59.view on whether the MPs of the strivers or the skivers and this
:43:59. > :44:03.debate. I would probably want them away from Parliament. There's a
:44:03. > :44:06.parallel for councillors, where Newcastle City Council, the civic
:44:06. > :44:08.centre, it's a bit of a ghost town these days compared to the days
:44:08. > :44:12.when I first started. There seems to be less opportunity for people
:44:12. > :44:20.to come together and debate policy, and that is what politicians are
:44:20. > :44:23.there for. Our top story this week, Newcastle may be among the first
:44:23. > :44:27.cities in the country to start charging pubs and clubs that supply
:44:28. > :44:30.alcohol after midnight. The money raised from the late night levy
:44:30. > :44:34.would be spent on the cost of city centre policing and keeping the
:44:34. > :44:37.streets clean. Other councils, including York and Durham, are also
:44:37. > :44:40.considering the idea. But the owners of licensed premises say
:44:41. > :44:46.they already pay their taxes and the new charge could put them out
:44:46. > :44:51.of business. It's almost opening time at Newcastle's head of steam
:44:51. > :44:56.pub. But being open almost all hours could soon mean it paying the
:44:56. > :45:02.late night Levy, a charge was serving alcohol after midnight.
:45:02. > :45:09.late night levy, as we and other operators see it, is an extra cost
:45:09. > :45:12.on our rates, or business rates, which we already pay. Under plans
:45:12. > :45:17.by Newcastle City Council, many licensed premises opening after
:45:17. > :45:21.midnight could be charged between �300 to �4,400 a year depending on
:45:21. > :45:26.their size. This money, an estimated �400,000 a year, would be
:45:26. > :45:29.split, with 70 % going to the police and 30 % to the council. The
:45:29. > :45:33.money would be used to meet the cost of policing, cleaning up and
:45:33. > :45:36.taking measures to cut down on problem drinking. So far no
:45:36. > :45:40.councils in England and Wales have adopted a late-night levy, but
:45:40. > :45:46.Newcastle could be among the first to do so. Something that could mean
:45:46. > :45:49.some bars, pubs and clubs closing their doors forever. A at the head
:45:49. > :45:54.of steam, we have a 3am licence and are basically a nightclub. What
:45:54. > :45:59.would happen as a result, if we were to say, well, we can't afford
:45:59. > :46:04.to pay that, we will take it back to 12 o'clock. This pub is not
:46:04. > :46:07.profitable at all. It's not a case of being able to look for the levy,
:46:07. > :46:12.it becomes unprofitable because the majority of our trade is in the
:46:12. > :46:18.late night economy. Late night being after 11pm. We couldn't
:46:18. > :46:21.sustain the business. Newcastle has a reputation as a party city, with
:46:22. > :46:25.tens of thousands of revellers flocking to it on many nights.
:46:25. > :46:28.While that means the police have to be out on the streets and the
:46:28. > :46:32.cancer has to spend money to clean them, it also brings in millions of
:46:32. > :46:39.pounds to the economy. So is the council just after a slice of that
:46:39. > :46:42.cash, and is in danger of bringing the party to an end in party city?
:46:42. > :46:47.The business rates are not necessarily returned to the council.
:46:47. > :46:51.We have massive budget reductions come and we need to maintain the
:46:52. > :46:56.environment. It's important that many people still want to invest in
:46:56. > :46:59.the city because of its reputation of being safe. We want this money
:46:59. > :47:04.to be used for maintaining that. There's no suggestion that this
:47:05. > :47:08.money will be used for anything else. If the levy is introduced, it
:47:08. > :47:12.is the police who will get the largest slice of it. Now many club
:47:12. > :47:19.and bar owners are asking how one where that money would be spent and
:47:19. > :47:22.who would benefit from it? Stopping crime and disorder, trying to limit
:47:22. > :47:25.alcohol-related crime. There is a bit of a peak in the hours after
:47:25. > :47:29.midnight of some alcohol-related offending. We would probably want
:47:29. > :47:35.to tackle that, as they were themselves. That, I guess, is how
:47:35. > :47:41.the levy would be used if it is executed. I can absolutely
:47:41. > :47:46.guarantee that it's going to come back to Newcastle if it comes out.
:47:46. > :47:48.A good night out doesn't come cheap. Newcastle city council argues a
:47:48. > :47:52.late-night levy, but could be introduced in November if given the
:47:52. > :47:56.go-ahead, would help to pay for it. But some bar owners say it would
:47:56. > :48:00.simply squeeze them dry. The manner represents many of the pubs and
:48:00. > :48:04.clubs in Newcastle who will have to pay this charges Damian Conway, and
:48:04. > :48:08.he's here now. Anyone who's been in city centres at night know there's
:48:08. > :48:15.a huge policing operation needed, a Mr Kinnock afterwards. Why not
:48:15. > :48:19.contribute a small amount towards those costs? Firstly, there are
:48:19. > :48:26.very high rates being paid by pretty much every business in the
:48:26. > :48:29.city centre. The business rates are very high. But you are creating a
:48:29. > :48:36.particular problem with the policing that is needed and the
:48:36. > :48:41.clean-up, which isn't caused, for instance, by a department store.
:48:41. > :48:45.That's true, but one of our managers said recently, we pay
:48:45. > :48:50.�130,000 a year in rates and we don't even get our Vincenti to. I
:48:50. > :48:56.can see where that pub manager is, object into paying more money in
:48:56. > :49:00.towards the council. Some of this money will go to the police to
:49:00. > :49:07.anti-crime initiatives, to ameliorate the impact of crimes
:49:07. > :49:10.related to alcohol, that is a good thing to contribute to. Yes, but
:49:10. > :49:14.there are already good relationships that most responsible
:49:14. > :49:18.licensees have with the police in the city centre. Our head dormant
:49:18. > :49:21.meet with the police every week to try and work with them to work out
:49:21. > :49:24.how we can reduce crime and disorder, who should be barred from
:49:25. > :49:33.the premises and general initiatives to do with many things
:49:34. > :49:37.are. Secondly, every two months... I accept you are making efforts to
:49:37. > :49:42.be good citizens, but you are trying to say it will drive you out
:49:42. > :49:49.of business. This is �13 a night. If a pub is operating on that sort
:49:49. > :49:56.of margin, it's going to go out of business anyway. We are trying hard
:49:56. > :50:03.to keep our operations are open. We employed a lot of people...
:50:03. > :50:06.really be closed by this? They may not be closed but staff will have
:50:06. > :50:10.their hours reduced or we will have less staff. We employ a lot of
:50:10. > :50:16.people at other industries won't employee, because young people and
:50:16. > :50:22.youth unemployment is a problem. David Faulkner, you are a Newcastle
:50:22. > :50:28.councillor, is this a good idea or not? It's a finely balanced
:50:28. > :50:34.argument. The night-time economy supplies about 7000 jobs in the
:50:34. > :50:37.city. We are getting a promotion of Newcastle as a party city that we
:50:37. > :50:41.were trying to put behind us. It is putting the emphasis on what
:50:41. > :50:47.happens after midnight and what happens as a result of alcohol and
:50:47. > :50:54.clubs and pubs. My board of Newcastle is a more balanced city,
:50:54. > :50:58.a more diverse offer than that. It bothers me a bit that we might be
:50:58. > :51:01.on the one hand putting too much emphasis on party city. On the
:51:01. > :51:05.other hand, I think there's an argument that if you are a member
:51:05. > :51:10.of the public and in your neighbourhood your bins are being
:51:10. > :51:13.emptied less frequently, you pass - - grass is being cut Les Bikubi
:51:13. > :51:15.because it's hard times for the council, and the public purse
:51:15. > :51:18.generally is having to pay extra for the consequences of late-night
:51:18. > :51:28.drinking, that people might reasonably say, yes, I'm in favour
:51:28. > :51:34.of it. That might be my view, on balance. Is this a tax or a
:51:34. > :51:39.sensible idea? I'm on the side of the pubs. We've seen many closing
:51:39. > :51:43.at a rate of knots. Although Newcastle has a good reputation for
:51:43. > :51:46.a city, I hear London people talking about going up for a
:51:46. > :51:50.weekend in Newcastle, so we've got to keep that reputation, it's good
:51:50. > :51:55.for the area to keep people coming in. Whether this levy will do what
:51:55. > :51:58.it says it will do is another matter. Newcastle United Football
:51:59. > :52:03.Club have to pay for policing or towards policing, I don't think
:52:03. > :52:11.they paid all, but they do have to pay towards policing. That could be
:52:11. > :52:15.a point. I do realise they do pay a lot of rates. Labour introduced 24
:52:15. > :52:21.hour drinking, it is supposed to be a cafe culture. Do you see much
:52:21. > :52:28.evidence of that in Blyth or beyond? I think the pubs have had a
:52:28. > :52:33.rough ride in recent years. We should have had the minimum price.
:52:33. > :52:39.I think it's the wrong target. The problem is with pre-loading. I take
:52:39. > :52:42.the point that the bars have had a rough time, but I think the pre-
:52:42. > :52:45.loading issue and minimum pricing is something that's got come back
:52:45. > :52:52.onto the agenda quickly, because that's one of the real reasons why
:52:52. > :53:02.our towns... In the meantime, this is a charge that is being put in.
:53:02. > :53:03.
:53:03. > :53:06.Is the coalition to blame for this? My view is the 2003 Licensing Act
:53:06. > :53:11.has proved, in retrospect, to be wrong. Everything that councils
:53:11. > :53:15.have done since is to try and claw back back somehow, to deal with and
:53:15. > :53:22.mitigate the consequences of not quite 24 hour but almost 24 hour
:53:22. > :53:29.drinking, and what is happening in our streets. For people to want a
:53:29. > :53:33.drink outside the hours of 11pm, is that unreasonable? No, it's not,
:53:33. > :53:43.but it can sometimes be quite unpleasant and intimidating after
:53:43. > :53:46.
:53:46. > :53:49.11pm in city centres. I understand the cost of the police, just like
:53:49. > :53:56.Newcastle United, they have to pay as well. It's the same argument
:53:56. > :54:04.with the pubs. Are they going to put the levy back into the drink,
:54:04. > :54:10.is that where it is going? Where does this stop? You could accuse
:54:10. > :54:14.pizza places and Tiger Webb places of littering the city centre.
:54:14. > :54:17.should be using this kind of thing to encourage best practice. The
:54:17. > :54:21.legislation allows exemptions and reductions. Reductions could take
:54:21. > :54:25.place if we have a new Best Practice Scheme that we get
:54:25. > :54:31.everybody, not just a few pubs and clubs, to sign up double stop them
:54:31. > :54:34.they can be reductions and it is something where everybody benefits.
:54:34. > :54:38.His access to justice been put under threat by government changes
:54:38. > :54:41.to legal aid? That is the claim from the Law Society and some
:54:41. > :54:44.Labour MPs in the region. Under the plans, defendants will lose the
:54:44. > :54:47.chance to have the solicitor of their choice represent them at a
:54:47. > :54:52.police station or in court. But ministers say representation will
:54:52. > :54:57.be available, but there is definitely a need to reduce the
:54:57. > :55:00.legal aid bill, which costs more than �1 billion a year. This is a
:55:00. > :55:03.relieved young woman. Last year she was wrongly accused of assault, an
:55:03. > :55:06.accusation which threatened to enter hopes of becoming a nurse.
:55:06. > :55:14.She came to this local firm in Middlesbrough for Health, secured
:55:14. > :55:18.legal aid and last week was cleared. It was horrendous. I wouldn't wish
:55:18. > :55:25.it on my worst enemy. The anxiety and stress, and it's not just for
:55:25. > :55:30.myself, it was for my family. The firm really put everything into the
:55:30. > :55:37.court case to make sure that the truth did come out, so that I could
:55:37. > :55:40.go and be a nurse and finish my degree. But under the new plans,
:55:40. > :55:45.people like this will not be able to choose who represents them.
:55:45. > :55:48.Instead, they will be allocated a solicitor who has had to compete a
:55:48. > :55:53.new legal-aid contract. Those contracts will cut lawyers legal-
:55:53. > :56:00.aid fees by at least 17.5 %, and in some cases by 30 %. This firm
:56:00. > :56:03.believes that will kill off the traditional local solicitor. If it
:56:03. > :56:09.goes, I'll be going, as will most of my colleagues, I'm certain.
:56:09. > :56:13.These proposals are not survivable for the vast majority of the legal
:56:13. > :56:20.profession in this country. If these proposals come in, our
:56:20. > :56:27.position at the forefront of regal reputation will disappear overnight.
:56:27. > :56:31.Who might fill that gap? Amongst possible bidders are supposed --
:56:31. > :56:33.G4S and Eddie Stobart. That is worrying existing lawyers, has a
:56:33. > :56:39.place in private at the centre of legal-aid could undermine the
:56:39. > :56:42.justice system. You have entities which will be coming into this from
:56:42. > :56:48.the direction of wanting to make money out of it, and purely for
:56:48. > :56:52.that reason. We know that the costs and the levels of remuneration will
:56:52. > :56:56.be driven so low, that people would be able to spend the time that they
:56:56. > :57:02.are currently spending. Even now, often without renumeration, to go
:57:02. > :57:05.that extra length to make sure people are properly represented.
:57:05. > :57:08.The government has said it is consulting on proposals and will
:57:08. > :57:14.listen to concerns. But it says the legal aid bill of �1 billion a year
:57:14. > :57:18.is far too high and needs to be cut. I have to find the right balance
:57:18. > :57:22.between delivering Justice, delivering a system where everyone
:57:22. > :57:26.has lawyers to defend them, but at the same time making sure we bring
:57:26. > :57:29.down costs to spend money elsewhere. If it's a choice of spending more
:57:29. > :57:36.on the health service or more on the legal system, most people would
:57:36. > :57:38.say they want the health service. Middlesbrough MP Andy Macdonald
:57:38. > :57:44.sits on that just a select committee, which is about to
:57:44. > :57:48.examine the government plans. proposals will transform the
:57:48. > :57:52.provision of criminal legal aid. There are concerns about freedom of
:57:52. > :57:55.choice, access issues. It seems peculiar that we seem to be so
:57:55. > :57:59.insistent about choice in health and education but here we are doing
:57:59. > :58:04.away with toys. There are grave concerns about the future of
:58:04. > :58:07.justice in this country. government insists the legal-aid
:58:07. > :58:10.bill must come down. But while cutting the cost of justice will
:58:10. > :58:15.certainly had lawyers, is every chance that innocent people could
:58:15. > :58:18.pay the heaviest price? Ronnie Campbell, of the government is
:58:18. > :58:24.right, this legal-aid bill is far too high and its right to make
:58:24. > :58:27.changes to save money. If this government did put as much in as to
:58:28. > :58:35.what we are putting in the legal aid thing and get companies and
:58:35. > :58:39.multinationals to pay their tax, you wouldn't need the �1 billion.
:58:39. > :58:46.What do you make of the changes to legal aid? Should they cut the
:58:46. > :58:56.budget? Of course not. You'll have a big company, it's got a tender,
:58:56. > :59:00.and they are going to give you a solicitor. I've got one, two in
:59:00. > :59:04.Berrett, four in Blyth, none in Cramlington. I can see them, when
:59:04. > :59:08.these big companies come in and get the tender in, I can see the local
:59:08. > :59:14.solicitors, who are not fat cats, disappearing, because they won't
:59:14. > :59:21.get the business, the business will go to the fat cats, who will make a
:59:21. > :59:28.killing. Presumably, if its cuts to the bill, you would rather see
:59:28. > :59:31.money spent on the health service and on legal aid. It one of my
:59:31. > :59:35.constituents and - not once a solicitor and has to go to Durham,
:59:35. > :59:39.Sunderland or even Middlesbrough, how is he going to get to see his
:59:39. > :59:46.solicitor, the one he's been allocated to under this system? It
:59:46. > :59:52.is stupidity. Should Liberal Democrats in government oppose
:59:52. > :59:58.this? We should aim to change it. The way it is is unsatisfactory in
:59:58. > :00:01.my view. To remove choice is disadvantageous. People will build
:00:01. > :00:05.up a relationship between lawyers, solicitors and clients, and that
:00:05. > :00:12.would be lost because it would just be whoever you get allocated. That
:00:12. > :00:16.is a disadvantage. But I do understand, of course, this point
:00:17. > :00:25.about legal-aid in this country, it costs far more than other countries
:00:25. > :00:30.with comparative systems. What is the alternative? I support some of
:00:30. > :00:35.the proposals. For example, the whole idea that anybody who has
:00:35. > :00:39.disposable income of over �37,500 should not get legal aid is quite
:00:39. > :00:42.right. They shouldn't. That's one of the reasons why the money is
:00:42. > :00:47.being sucked out of the system so much in past times. There's also an
:00:47. > :00:50.issue around while legal cases go on for so long, and therefore the
:00:50. > :00:54.cost of legal-aid gets clocked up and clocked up. Something must be
:00:54. > :01:01.done about that. I don't know if the answer is to deal with the
:01:01. > :01:08.client. It needs to be changed. What is so bad about someone being
:01:08. > :01:15.allocated a lawyer? It's the access to their lawyer. If the little
:01:15. > :01:20.lawyers in Blyth or anywhere else in Northumberland go bust, then
:01:20. > :01:27.that client has to go to wherever that law years. He may be miles
:01:27. > :01:31.away. He might not be able to afford... The government have said,
:01:31. > :01:37.this is the way it has to be structured, perhaps they need to be
:01:37. > :01:41.fewer firms to make the money saved. There has been a lot of people
:01:41. > :01:46.getting legal-aid who could afford to pay for themselves. They could
:01:46. > :01:50.look at that one again, certainly. But what about the people who can't
:01:50. > :01:54.afford to pay? You are stopping them from getting their justice.
:01:54. > :02:00.They will be working with a solicitor, they don't know who he
:02:00. > :02:04.is, they may have to travel miles to see him. It's just not on.
:02:04. > :02:10.would like to see this piloted in a region, because it is a big change
:02:10. > :02:13.and we need to see the consequences. Isn't this far too typical of
:02:13. > :02:16.coalition policy? You think of something that will save money but
:02:16. > :02:22.you don't listen to the people telling you it is a mistake and you
:02:22. > :02:27.don't put it on trial. You would expect the legal profession to say
:02:27. > :02:31.it is a mistake. You understand their position. But the response to
:02:31. > :02:36.the consultation hasn't finished. The Desta Select Committee are
:02:36. > :02:42.looking at it. They will have a view, which I hope will be taken
:02:42. > :02:45.account of. All parties agree, Jack Straw as Lord Chancellor in 2009
:02:45. > :02:51.agreed that they had to be some change to the system. It doesn't
:02:51. > :02:54.guarantee quality now. It just doesn't mean because you've got
:02:54. > :03:01.1600 firms of solicitors involved instead of 400 that your quality is
:03:01. > :03:07.going to be better. What about Eddie Stobart making money out of
:03:07. > :03:11.it? When you've got a town of Bardon Mill, you have a few
:03:11. > :03:16.solicitors competing for what they need to do. They keep competing on
:03:16. > :03:22.their prices are competitive. These solicitors are not fat cats. They
:03:22. > :03:32.are just trying to make a living. No parliament this week, but
:03:32. > :03:33.
:03:33. > :03:37.there's still plenty going on. A plan to turn a private school into
:03:37. > :03:40.an Academy has hit trouble. King's School in Tynemouth says staff
:03:40. > :03:44.support the idea, but North Tyneside council says the impact
:03:44. > :03:47.upon other schools in the area must be more fully considered. North-
:03:47. > :03:53.East suffragette Emily Davison was knocked down by the King's horse at
:03:53. > :03:57.the Epsom Derby, 100 years ago. She later died of her injuries and is
:03:58. > :04:03.buried in Morpeth. Penny Pryce- Jones is helping to organise events
:04:03. > :04:09.and says her influence is still strongly felt. She highlighted that
:04:09. > :04:14.women were highly intelligent. It was society and not them that were
:04:14. > :04:18.limiting what was possible. Councillors in Carlisle have been
:04:18. > :04:22.paying tribute to Joe Hendry, who died on Thursday following a heart
:04:22. > :04:24.attack. He was also leader of Carlisle's Labour group will start
:04:24. > :04:27.a campaign group which aims to put cycling at the heart of the
:04:27. > :04:30.Government's transport agenda is meeting in Newcastle this weekend.
:04:31. > :04:37.The Cycling Embassy of Great Britain wants new investment to
:04:37. > :04:42.improve road safety. Finally, our tweet of the week comes from
:04:42. > :04:46.Carlisle MP John Stephenson. He had this message for his Twitter
:04:46. > :04:51.followers on Wednesday. Legs strapped, pills pop, only 300 miles
:04:51. > :04:55.to go. He actually spent the week Cycling 1000 miles from Land's End
:04:55. > :05:00.to John o'Groats for charity. I'll be treating this week, but strictly