17/06/2012

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:01:43. > :01:44.Hello, good afternoon. You are watching the Sunday Politics for

:01:44. > :01:47.Yorkshire and Lincolnshire. Coming up today:

:01:47. > :01:49.Why a senior Yorkshire Tory is fighting government plans to give

:01:49. > :01:52.the authorities more power to monitor our internet activity.

:01:52. > :02:02.And we find out why two of our councils have dropped costcutting

:02:02. > :02:03.

:02:03. > :28:59.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 1616 seconds

:28:59. > :29:04.Hello, good afternoon. You are watching the Sunday Politics for

:29:04. > :29:08.Yorkshire and Lincolnshire. Coming up today: why a senior Yorkshire

:29:08. > :29:14.Tory is fighting to give the authorities more power to monitor

:29:14. > :29:18.our internet activity. And we find out wide two of our

:29:18. > :29:24.councils have bend cost-cutting measures are to share a chief-

:29:24. > :29:30.executive. Our guest today is Meg Munn and

:29:30. > :29:33.Kris Hawkins. We're going to kick of with this snooping around where

:29:33. > :29:37.it the Government wants to give the authorities more power to keep an

:29:37. > :29:42.eye and as on the internet. Are you in favour of this? It is difficult

:29:42. > :29:47.to tell because they are complex. We need a balance between security

:29:47. > :29:52.and liberty. We know that there are worrying crimes whether it is

:29:52. > :29:55.internet crimes of child abuse or terrorism where we do need powers

:29:55. > :30:00.to be in place but equally, because the Government has not been clear

:30:00. > :30:06.about this, we have people worried about whether their privacy is

:30:06. > :30:11.going to be invaded. Kris, some Conservatives on the right are

:30:11. > :30:16.opposed to this idea, of weirdies stand? I think we have to do

:30:16. > :30:21.something. The last piece of legislation was 2006, it was the

:30:21. > :30:26.year before the iPhone came out. We now have over a billion people on

:30:26. > :30:31.Facebook and a huge increase in information over the internet.

:30:31. > :30:35.There are some really important issues around child-protection,

:30:35. > :30:40.fighting serious crime and defeating terrorism. This

:30:41. > :30:44.potentially adds another arm to the police's resources. Opposition to

:30:44. > :30:51.the bell is being led by the East Yorkshire-based Conservative David

:30:51. > :30:57.Davis. That some kit -- but some police officers say that it will be

:30:57. > :31:03.an important part in tackling online sex offenders.

:31:03. > :31:06.This is discreet and I would rather do it indoors. This raid carried

:31:06. > :31:10.out by Lincolnshire police this week was part of a national

:31:10. > :31:15.operation to crack down on those possessing indecent images of

:31:15. > :31:20.children. The Government wants to make it easier for up officers to

:31:20. > :31:27.monitor suspected offenders. They want to stay one step ahead of

:31:27. > :31:30.paedophiles. From my perspective as a police officer and an operation

:31:30. > :31:36.or reader I'm welcome any greater powers and increased options around

:31:36. > :31:41.this form of horrible criminality. As technology gets more

:31:41. > :31:45.sophisticated, the criminals themselves who shared these

:31:45. > :31:51.horrible images of children actually being abused, as they get

:31:51. > :31:55.better, we need to get better. proposed communications data bill

:31:55. > :31:59.would allow it the police and intelligence agencies to monitor

:31:59. > :32:05.our internet activity including e- mails and social networking as well

:32:05. > :32:10.as phone calls. Details would be stored for up to a year. However,

:32:11. > :32:16.authorities would only be able to access the nature of communication

:32:16. > :32:20.is not the content. Officials here at the Home Office say that

:32:20. > :32:25.accessing communications data is vital, not just for apprehending

:32:25. > :32:30.sex offenders, but also in the vast majority of terrorism cases. They

:32:30. > :32:35.denied these new proposals are snoopers' charter, but others

:32:35. > :32:40.disagree. The former shadow home secretary David Davis is a leading

:32:40. > :32:43.critic of the proposals. He has been taking part in an on-line

:32:43. > :32:50.question and answer section with Web users who are worried about

:32:50. > :32:54.their privacy. This gives a huge picture of people's lives. It is an

:32:54. > :33:00.intrusion of people's privacy and will not actually help catch

:33:00. > :33:06.tourism's -- terrorists at all. If you are at terrorist, you get round

:33:06. > :33:12.it with a pre-paid phone, using internet cafe, you use a proxy

:33:12. > :33:15.server. He used false credentials. This will gathered data on 60

:33:16. > :33:20.million innocent people, not catch criminals, and that is why I am

:33:20. > :33:23.against it. The proposals will be scrutinised by Parliament before

:33:23. > :33:27.legislation is introduced but already the battle lines have been

:33:28. > :33:33.drawn between those who believe any new law would help fight against

:33:33. > :33:38.crime and those who believe it is a licence to snoop.

:33:38. > :33:42.We have also been joined by James Baker from the No 2 IT campaign who

:33:42. > :33:46.is opposed to this bill. You heard that from a senior police officer

:33:46. > :33:52.in Lincolnshire. He says this new Bill will help them catch sex

:33:52. > :33:57.offenders, Heidi who argue against that? If it was just about sex

:33:57. > :34:00.offenders and tourists that would be one thing. If so, why does it

:34:00. > :34:05.allow it provisions for the Government to snoop on us. This

:34:05. > :34:09.isn't just a Bell about fighting crime at this is a Bill that will

:34:09. > :34:12.please millions of law-abiding citizens and the UK it under

:34:12. > :34:16.unprecedented levels of surveillance without a warrant.

:34:16. > :34:21.you heard there that this is not going to affect the content of e-

:34:22. > :34:27.mails. Police officers cannot read the content, it is about the

:34:27. > :34:32.communication and there are going and coming of those messages.

:34:32. > :34:39.can access that through another piece of legislation. What this

:34:39. > :34:43.bill includes is all of your browsing henge and -- history and

:34:43. > :34:48.anything that you've looked up. All of your information that we will be

:34:48. > :34:52.accessible. That will be for hundreds of public bodies including

:34:52. > :34:55.the food standards agency not just the police. Why do the food

:34:55. > :34:59.standards agency need to know what I'm saying on Facebook? The

:34:59. > :35:02.communications data includes all of their location of data. Every time

:35:02. > :35:08.you move about with your mobile phone the Government will be able

:35:08. > :35:12.to track where you are. To suggest that communications data isn't a

:35:12. > :35:19.problem is very misleading. You can tell a huge amount from it. You can

:35:19. > :35:23.build up a huge picture of people's lives. Technology is changing all

:35:23. > :35:30.the time, don't they it crime fighting bodies have to stay one

:35:30. > :35:34.step ahead? Nobody has been able to read every letter that you have

:35:34. > :35:38.sent to someone. So to suggest that any piece of technology requires

:35:38. > :35:43.this legislation is very misleading and what this Bill does his place

:35:43. > :35:46.those forms of communications and a new surveillance powers. So if you

:35:46. > :35:51.send a parcel now the Government will be able to snoop on that

:35:51. > :35:56.information. David Cameron said that we were in danger of living in

:35:56. > :36:00.a controlled state, why has he changed his mind? The Labour Party

:36:00. > :36:04.were talking about her central database where all this information

:36:04. > :36:10.was stored. At the moment most providers retain some of the

:36:10. > :36:13.information that we create. Most of the information it be great. What

:36:13. > :36:18.it there Government is suggesting, it is a draft bill by the way, that

:36:18. > :36:21.the information is retained for 12 months. And if someone wants to see

:36:21. > :36:26.the content of that they must go to the Home Secretary with the warrant

:36:26. > :36:30.and she must then sign that of to get it that access. There is huge

:36:30. > :36:34.amounts of data storage, it is about making sure that that data is

:36:34. > :36:37.secure, not controlled by the Government or the police, it is

:36:37. > :36:42.what the providers and it is at being asked to be retained the for

:36:42. > :36:46.12 months. Meg Munn, the Labour Government was criticised for

:36:47. > :36:51.trying to control many aspects of our lives. People do not want the

:36:51. > :36:55.Big Brother state, do they? No they do not. I think what we're seeing

:36:55. > :36:58.is the Conservative ministers are finding out that when they get into

:36:58. > :37:03.Government and get into these issues it is not quite as simple as

:37:03. > :37:09.David Cameron believed that in at 2009. It is a very complex issue

:37:09. > :37:13.and one that, quite rightly James is setting out, needs to be looked

:37:13. > :37:17.at properly. Parliamentary scrutiny of this is crucial. The key thing

:37:17. > :37:21.that we would all agree on is that people should not just be able to

:37:21. > :37:25.access this information. It should be on the basis of a warrant and

:37:25. > :37:30.that should have the proper judicial oversight. A James, how

:37:30. > :37:37.were you going to convince these MPs to back your campaign? Really

:37:37. > :37:40.why would ask MPs and everyone else is to look at the warrants. Who is

:37:41. > :37:44.signing of the warrants? Is that the Home Secretary or is it someone

:37:44. > :37:48.independent from the Government? What we have said is that you need

:37:48. > :37:52.magistrates and are just three there. The need to see whether it

:37:52. > :37:57.is proportionate and whether it is a terrorist or paedophile case or

:37:57. > :38:01.whether it is someone snooping into our private lives unnecessarily. It

:38:01. > :38:04.is very simple, while money to look at how the access the data and what

:38:04. > :38:14.permissions they have. interesting debate I suspect over

:38:14. > :38:17.the coming months on this one. In order to cope with tighter

:38:17. > :38:24.budgets the Government has been encouraging councils to share

:38:24. > :38:28.services. Many areas serve -- save taxpayers' money but in two

:38:28. > :38:35.councils in our area at the abandoning moves to share a chief-

:38:36. > :38:42.executive saying that the experiment has not worked.

:38:42. > :38:46.These made history years ago when they were operated jointly. They

:38:46. > :38:52.also shared at chief-executive and a team of the most senior and

:38:52. > :38:56.highest paid officers. But that between these two councils and that

:38:56. > :39:01.relationship has fallen apart. That is despite savings of well over a

:39:01. > :39:05.million pounds. The problem according to the leader of Richmond

:39:05. > :39:10.share council is that it was not clearly hammered out how they would

:39:10. > :39:14.do with their neighbours. politicians in our partner

:39:14. > :39:19.authority felt that we were spending -- he was spending along

:39:19. > :39:24.with his senior managers too much time attending to business over

:39:24. > :39:29.here in at Richmond Show. That is at the root of why we are at

:39:29. > :39:33.looking at some other arrangements for a shared services. It has been

:39:33. > :39:38.closely monitored here by think- tanks and pressure groups to seek

:39:38. > :39:44.shared services as a major tool to saving public money. They have to

:39:44. > :39:48.have a clear understanding of the division of hours. How many days as

:39:48. > :39:51.a chief-executive going to spend in each council. I think that has been

:39:51. > :39:54.their problem in North Yorkshire. Other councillors that were

:39:54. > :39:58.entering into these agreements will have to make sure that the

:39:58. > :40:07.necessary arrangements are in place to stop these deals collapsing

:40:07. > :40:12.completely. We started this in April last year. 100 miles south to

:40:12. > :40:17.Chesterfield. Hear those last lessons have been learned. These

:40:17. > :40:19.councils are meeting with the chief executive that they share. After

:40:19. > :40:25.one year of this they cannot understand why more councils are

:40:25. > :40:31.not going down this cost-saving route. I think people are not brave

:40:31. > :40:35.enough. I think they are frightened. It is a big step. It is a difficult

:40:35. > :40:42.decision to make. You have to take people with you and you have to

:40:42. > :40:47.entrust. People are frightened to go the extra mile. After the first

:40:47. > :40:51.year at we have achieved practically �1 million worth of

:40:51. > :40:55.savings. That is a million pounds that we are going to have to take

:40:55. > :40:59.from frontline services. Around two dozen smaller district councils

:40:59. > :41:03.around England and out sharing chief-executive and senior officers.

:41:03. > :41:07.That is fewer than might be expected with public spending so

:41:07. > :41:13.squeezed. Here in Derbyshire it is a move where everybody needs to

:41:13. > :41:18.know exactly what they're getting. Kris Hopkins, you are a former

:41:18. > :41:22.leader of Bradford Council, is it reasonable for more authorities to

:41:23. > :41:26.share back-office services? It is not as reasonable, it is absolutely

:41:27. > :41:30.essential. We should not just limited to councils either. Where

:41:30. > :41:35.it is appropriate I think NHS chief executives should share between

:41:35. > :41:41.councils also. There's a whole range of services that can be

:41:41. > :41:45.utilised with one chief-executive. The �1 million that they have saved

:41:45. > :41:48.that they were talking about there. When you try to restructure her

:41:49. > :41:54.daily services huge amounts of resources and less money is

:41:54. > :41:59.available. It is really important that you find savings there. Being

:41:59. > :42:03.clear about what you want to achieve and making sure that the

:42:03. > :42:06.individuals are accountable is really important. We have to

:42:06. > :42:10.explode those ways and I think it is working in one area and not

:42:10. > :42:16.someone else. I am sure they will explore why it has failed and the

:42:16. > :42:22.Wanderer dead. Cheeks executives earn much more money than most --

:42:22. > :42:29.chief executives. Some more than the Prime Minister. It is

:42:29. > :42:33.reasonable than? A what I think we saw their is whether the

:42:33. > :42:38.politicians at the top can work together. It might just be that

:42:38. > :42:43.those two areas were similar sorts of areas where it worked. I do

:42:43. > :42:49.wonder whether the change of leadership at politically at the

:42:49. > :42:52.top, if that were to happen, would be shared the same views. Or is

:42:52. > :42:55.something major happened in one area at what they council be happy

:42:55. > :42:59.to lose their chief-executive to work for a long time in another

:42:59. > :43:03.area. It is not straight forward but many things can be done. What

:43:03. > :43:07.we really have to look that is where there are proper communities

:43:07. > :43:12.of interest and for you can work together. I think Kris was talking

:43:12. > :43:15.about the NHS. That begs the question of why under the terrible

:43:15. > :43:19.reorganisation we got there we got more bodies with more leaders

:43:19. > :43:24.rather than bringing services together when it does make sense to

:43:24. > :43:34.have one leader. We will have to come back to that on another day.

:43:34. > :43:36.

:43:36. > :43:40.A let us get more news from the rest of the week now.

:43:40. > :43:43.Proposals to axe some of their Yorkshire regiments historic

:43:44. > :43:48.battalions are being described as at done deal by some of the

:43:48. > :43:52.region's MPs. Patrick Mercer says that their it cuts might be

:43:52. > :43:55.confirmed in early July. Calls are coming for a cross-party group to

:43:55. > :44:00.challenge the Defence Secretary over the cuts.

:44:00. > :44:04.More than 60 of his workers could lose their jobs in newly-privatised

:44:04. > :44:10.sections of Lincolnshire police. It comes just two months after 500 of

:44:10. > :44:13.his staff transferred to another area. Over the coming years I would

:44:13. > :44:19.be very surprised if there were not more job losses.

:44:19. > :44:28.And this rail link was politely received through gritted teeth by

:44:28. > :44:33.the Prime Minister. Well they at gut -- Government go-ahead well

:44:33. > :44:37.with the high-speed train? I grip over the enthusiastic endorsement

:44:37. > :44:41.at the that is important to get on board this high-speed rail

:44:41. > :44:47.revolution. A will come back to high-speed rail.

:44:47. > :44:52.First, Kris Hopkins, you are a former member of the army. The army

:44:52. > :44:57.cuts story, potentially a Yorkshire regiment losing its battalion, what

:44:57. > :45:00.you know about that? The Duke of Wellington's Regiment is the third

:45:01. > :45:05.Battalion. It is deployed in Afghanistan and have had some

:45:05. > :45:08.serious casualties. There is a lot of people at home are very

:45:08. > :45:13.concerned at this moment in time about the welfare of their loved

:45:14. > :45:22.ones. I think the speculation and the guesswork that has been picked

:45:22. > :45:27.out by certain individuals this week, I think, is fairly appalling.

:45:27. > :45:30.You mean you Conservative colleague. I think there is a range of can is

:45:30. > :45:33.derivative and other MPs who have spoken out. There are people

:45:33. > :45:37.leaving their lives on the line at the moment. There are people

:45:37. > :45:41.concerned about their loved ones. To put out this work and

:45:41. > :45:46.speculation about hunches about something that might happen in the

:45:46. > :45:50.future, that is not acceptable. I went to the defence secretary and

:45:50. > :45:54.specifically asked him if the third battalion has been targeted it is

:45:54. > :45:58.going to be axed. He said that no decision had been made about any

:45:58. > :46:05.unit in the British Army. So to put this into this arena when people

:46:05. > :46:11.are in such fearful situation for their loved ones at this moment. To

:46:11. > :46:16.talk about speculation, will it go? That is wrong. And I am fairly out

:46:16. > :46:20.raged about what has been said. Patrick Moser is not here to defend

:46:20. > :46:24.himself. Meg Munn, can you understand the need for cutbacks in

:46:24. > :46:29.the army? Of course every area of public service has had to be looked

:46:29. > :46:32.at. As you will know the Labour Party has had lots of concerns

:46:32. > :46:35.about the way the defence review was carried out in the way it is

:46:35. > :46:41.going forward. As Kris Wright be said this is not something that

:46:41. > :46:45.should be subject to speculation. It is not something that we want to

:46:45. > :46:49.make a political party football at all. The defence should come out

:46:49. > :46:53.and say exactly what is happening and what they expect to happen and

:46:53. > :46:56.be clear about it so that people know where they stand. This is a

:46:56. > :47:00.bit of a pattern where the information has not been picked out

:47:00. > :47:04.in the right way in the first place and what you then see is their

:47:04. > :47:07.Government running to catch up. That is not quite right. The

:47:07. > :47:12.Government has said that it will issue in weeks to come clear lines

:47:12. > :47:17.on which units will be removed and the numbers that will actually have

:47:17. > :47:22.to be removed. It is the guesswork now when people at busy fighting

:47:22. > :47:27.for at great cost at this moment in time. Those men are still extremely

:47:27. > :47:33.brave and they are risking their lives. It is wrong to speculate.

:47:33. > :47:38.that time we have left the high- speed train. The Prime Minister

:47:38. > :47:44.gave support this week by duty your question, Kris Hopkins. �32 billion

:47:44. > :47:49.is what we hear it will cost. Is it money well spent? There is a huge

:47:49. > :47:53.dependency on the public sector in the further and North. The way we

:47:53. > :47:58.change that is what better lines of communication and transport is one

:47:58. > :48:01.of those. At the end of the day, there are hundreds of people that

:48:01. > :48:05.are trying to get into a few seats. We're going to increase the

:48:05. > :48:09.capacity and ideally we are going to speed up the process. More to

:48:09. > :48:18.the point, will be spent a lot of money doing it which was under

:48:18. > :48:23.local businesses. Money well spent, neck? -- Meg? The governor needs to

:48:23. > :48:27.set out its overall transport policy. How are we and goods and

:48:27. > :48:30.services going to get around the country. It is not just about one

:48:30. > :48:35.area of Transport it is about looking at all of them is. There in

:48:35. > :48:38.a mess around airports. People need to know so that they can plan their