Andrew Neil and David Garmston with political news, including an interview with Danny Alexander. George Galloway and Bob Stewart go head-to-head on the future of the Falklands.
Browse content similar to 24/06/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Welcome to the Sunday politics. In the West, please help me to dive.
That's that we from Tony Nicklen son, paralysed after a stroke. He's
Apology for the loss of subtitles for 2005 seconds
Welcome to the Sunday politics in the West. Coming up, one man's
fight to die. Tony Nicklinson was left paralysed after a massive
stock. He can't move any of his body and he cannot speak but his
mind is unaffected. He has gone to the High Court to ask for a man --
the rate for someone to kill him. We're joined this week in the
studio by the Conservative MP John Penrose. He is the Minister in
charge of tourism and a big fan of staycations. We're also joined by
the shadow minister in the Foreign Office. This week, Michael Gove and
making rather a fury with talk of abolishing the GCSEs. Where do you
stand on that? -- furore. We want to ensure that everyone is leaving
school with some qualifications and that that solid quality is still
there. What Michael Gold is worried about is that over time, things
could get worse. Pupils can only take the exam in front of them at
the time but you have to make sure you maintain standards over time.
Back to the 1950s? I was one of the last of people to take all levels.
-- O levels. The schools then were very segregated and making that
decision about how much a child can achieve at an early age is totally
wrong. I think there should be just one example stop it is also wrong
to Marline the pupils taking GCSEs now. Standards have improved and
pupils are better than in my day. Now tour top story. The Wiltshire
man has taken his fight to have a doctor lawfully tell him to the
High Court. Tony Nicklinson is paralysed from the neck down after
a stroke. His mind is unaffected but he cannot move and he is unable
to take his own life as he wishes to do without the help of a doctor.
The case raises huge ethical and social issues which will spark a
huge debate in the weeks to come. Like most people, I did not give
suicide are thought. It certainly is true that you do not know what
you had an tell you no longer have it. He was the life and soul of the
party take. He was a rugby player and a real alpha male. He went
skydiving and did all sorts of beat -- crazy things. A a time more come
when he says enough is enough at his only option is Switzerland
which he might consider eventually. That is if our legal case does not
panic. The alternative is starvation, a nasty way to go. With
a I be able to do it? I do not know until the time comes. It is what he
wants. If you love someone, you will do anything to help them. What
more can I do? There is nothing I can do. I do not think people can
realise what a novel thing it is to see the person you love and there
and you cannot believe their pain. It is wrong that I should be
discriminated against because I am disabled so that I cannot take my
own life. The decision on how and where to end one's life as a basic
human right. We're joined by Tony Nicklinson's daughter. Thank you
for joining us. You said it is pure torture for your dad. What is it
like for you and your family? horrible to see him like that. He
was allowed an outgoing person before, who loved his life, and he
is now effectively trapped in a dead body. It is tough for us to
see him in such anguish day in and day out and to face another 30
years of that. It makes me sick to my stomach. Essentially, what
you're asking for a somebody to tell your dad. If anyone were to
help him die now, they could face a murder charge. -- kill your dad. We
are looking for a doctor to have the legal right to end someone's
life. You're asking for what would amount to a massive change in the
law. We want a system to be put in place and the very heavily
regulated, a very stringent system put in place, whereby he would have
to be unsound mind. You would have to request it, to protect the
vulnerable. You would have to go through court systems and
psychiatric testing and it would only be available to people who
cannot kill themselves. Only a very small minority would be in that
situation. None of us can put ourselves in that situation but is
it something the Government is putting its head in the sand about
because it cannot come up with a viable solution? This is really
hard because it is a heartbreaking case. While everybody's heart goes
out in this case, the danger is a different kind of case somewhere in
future way up if you get the legal changes wrong, you could end up
with all sorts of dangerous precedents being set. You have to
try really carefully, and I am not saying you should not try and we
have a parliamentary debate on this, but it is difficult stuff to get
right. He says he is discriminated against. Should he have the right
to die? What more fundamental right could there be than the right to be
able to have a say in that sort of matter. I 100% support him and his
family. How far should that goal? Should adopt a repeat in a position
where he can legally kill somebody? Their need to be the safeguards we
have spoken about. -- they're. Opponents some up stories where
they make doctor seemed almost like Harold Shipman that there helping
people shuffle off this mortal coil. That is not the scenario at all.
Courts will be involved, psychiatrists will be involved,
other people will be involved. I have had pumped -- family members
with long and slow deaths and we know that sometimes doctors
increase the morphine doses to ease their pain and that brings forward
their death. That is the humane thing to do. You talk about
parliamentary debates on this. There something like 3000
euthanasia cases in this country that have gone unreported.
Government after government speak about this but we never get any
further? That is what is so difficult. There is a degree of
consensus around this but if you take it more broadly across society,
there are huge objections and people with strong moral objections,
and whether we disagree with them or not, we have to respect them.
There are regular churchgoers who feel strongly that this is wrong. I
would hope that everyone has huge sympathy with this. Is it a matter
of Loch awe of religion or of ethics? There does tend to be our
faith lobby in Parliament and they have the right to their religious
beliefs but when it interferes with people's fundamental human rights,
there is an imbalance. There is an imbalance with policy being
dictated to some extent by people from certain sections and it is
important we listen to people like Tony Nicklinson's family. You live
with us the very day and this is one of the biggest ethical dilemmas
anyone could have but it is you're father and your family? For a lot
of people, they see it on the newspaper or on television but this
is my dad and someone that I love and have to see him go through hell
every day. Although we have to look get used across society as a whole,
we're talking about a case here that should be judged on its own,
on its own merits. This only affects a very small on specific
part of society, and that is my dad, so that means more to me than
anything. We need to talk about this and we need that to happen.
Thank you for coming in. �100 million a year, tens of
thousands of cows slaughtered. Everyone agrees something must be
done to tackle bovine tuberculosis. The government plans to start
culling badgers across the West Country. The High Court has told
them the call must be stopped because the signs does not stack up.
-- cull. This lot are of cattle affected by
bovine tuberculosis is put it -- becoming more common particularly
in the West Country. The farm is now under strict controls. This
farmer has been given the all-clear after several like bricks. As an
organic farmer he cares for Nature but believes badgers must be culled.
There are things we can do in terms of management of the farm but
disease coming on -- coming in that we do not have any control over his
frustrating. After a ten-year scientific trial, it was found that
Carling was not worth it. The Coalition proposed a large culls
paid for by farmers to reduce bovine tuberculosis by up to 16%.
The badger caught -- the badger cull is going to the High Court.
Many groups up mounting strong legal challenges. Here in Wales, we
know the government called off its call. Not a popular decision. --
cull. People have said to me time and again that the decision has to
be made unscientific evidence. That is what the chief scientific
officer did for us. It found that a mass Kohl was not needed in this
situation. In Westminster it has become
partisan. The scourge has been exacerbated by the fact the
Government did nothing about it. This week, this you seemed popular
across both benches but some true- blue Tories do not see it that way.
This senior Bristol Conservative offer a paper on the subject and
concluded that badger culling could be a costly failure. It is the
wrong approach and it has been shown by the science. All of the
scientists involved in the last trial are opposed to it now and we
need a new approach. Badger culling does not work so let's focus on
vaccination. All agreed it vaccinating badgers is an important
step forward. There is a long way to go yet. The blight of bovine
tuberculosis the man's a urgent action.
Joining the debate today is the head of the secret world animal
rescue centre in Somerset. The cause have luck, badgers, don't
they? Should maybe colt? -- they be culled? I take issue with the work,
have luck. We have done the experiment which has told us that
killing badgers is not the answer. To get a 16% reduction over 10
years, I think we should be concentrating on vaccination. There
are so many things still to do with cattle and it is a cattle disease.
That is the point. It has been a long and highly expensive trial and
the badger culling and the conclusion is that makes very
little difference. We're putting �50 million a year into this. We
have to do something about it. I take issue with saying badger
culling does not work. Back in the 1950s, there was any idea from
where Port -- bovine tuberculosis was removed for 40 years. The
current results are that where the badger culling areas where, one
trial did nothing, and one was clear culled. We do not want to see
badgers killed and Mrs Ali but we have a situation now with bovine
tuberculosis but we are testing cows now once a year and nothing is
happening. We will get on to the political side and a second or two,
but what you're talking about here is taking the badger culling into
your own hands and paying for it? In times gone by, a different
organisation supported it but with the pressure and the economy, it is
coming down to the producers. We have studied the costs of the
methodology of doing it very minutely and have got it down to
manageable costs, far less than what the Government were doing.
Labour throughout badger culling. They realised with the 10 you test
it was simply not working. Why are you in favour of it? If you look at
what happened after the ban on badger culling was introduced many
years ago, this was back in the 1980s, when the original ban was
imposed, bovine tuberculosis started to rise the following year.
We had less than 1000 cows being paid Nationwide -- killed it
nationwide. That is to say nothing of many badgers dying horrible
deaths from tuberculosis. Badger culling is not the only part of the
answer and many other things are needed, which we are already doing.
But we cannot just pretend there is no problem. Nobody is pretending
there is no problem. Even your own grip came up with the idea that
badger culling is a costly mistake. At what stage do you say the
science tells us badger culling is not a good idea? I would take issue
with that grip's conclusions. group's. As we are doing it at the
moment, tuberculosis cannot be eradicated. Just carrying on as we
are is not working. This will help. What is the answer? Vaccination is
highly expensive? It is expensive but it is effective. Badger culling
is expensive and ineffective. Reducing cattle to cattle
transmission, introducing P movement testing as well as post
movement testing. And we still doing nothing as John Penrose is
suggesting? There have been very effective vaccination programmes
and the need to be rolled out because they are a long-term
solution. Without getting too technical, the evidence is that the
consequences of badger culling can to help spread the disease.
vaccination is only -- the testing is only 60% accurate. We have less
farms that are working as dairy farms now but the number of cattle
and the dairy industry remains the same.
I have to take issue with you. I have been testing my cows for the
last 10 years on a 60 day basis. To say that the test is ineffective,
when it is carried out five times a year, you get a pretty good measure
of what is going on. What we have to do is get on top of this disease.
We will have to leave it there. Time now for a look at some of the
other political stories making the headlines and a 62nd round up.
The legal case against nine former directors of the Christmas hamper
business their pack has collapsed. The company folded six years ago.
The Business Secretary Vince Cable says he is deeply disappointed.
Conservative councillors in Bath and Somerset have failed in their
attempt to stop a consultation about plans for traveller sets in
the district. Local people against the proposals protesters outside
the Guildhall and Bath will stop a week of elections as the political
parties ramp up their campaigns towards the November elections.
Labour chose Bob Ashford who stood for the party the foreign
parliamentary elections. I am not satisfied with mediocrity. I do not
want us to underperform any more work and to be all that we can be.
Andrew Neil and David Garmston with the latest political news, including an interview with the chief secretary to the treasury, Danny Alexander. Also in the programme, Respect MP, George Galloway and defence select committee member, Bob Stewart, go head-to-head on the future of the Falklands.