24/06/2012 Sunday Politics West

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.