28/04/2017

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:00. > :00:00.the nuclear threat that North Korea may pose. We will bring you more

:00:00. > :00:00.details later. We hope to speak to our correspondent in Washington at

:00:00. > :00:14.11 o'clock. Hello and welcome to our look ahead

:00:15. > :00:17.to what the Papers will be With me are Kevin Schofield, Editor

:00:18. > :00:22.of Politics Home and Alex Deane, Tomorrow's front pages,

:00:23. > :00:36.starting with... 'Cover-up let rogue surgeon play

:00:37. > :00:39.God' is the Telegraph's headline after the conviction of Ian

:00:40. > :00:43.Paterson. The Mirror calls Paterson,

:00:44. > :00:45.the butcher surgeon, suggesting at least a thousand women

:00:46. > :00:50.could have affected. Meanwhile, the Mail asks why did

:00:51. > :00:53.the NHS fail to stop him. The paper also has

:00:54. > :01:00.an exclusive interview Sergeant Alexander Blackman,

:01:01. > :01:04.known as Marine A, who left The FT leads on the figures showing

:01:05. > :01:12.the UK economy grew by less than was expected in the first three

:01:13. > :01:14.months of this year. The Independent online

:01:15. > :01:31.focuses on Donald Trump We will start with this case

:01:32. > :01:36.regarding the breast surgeon Ian Paterson. It is in so many of The

:01:37. > :01:40.Papers as you might expect. Here is how the meal is reporting it. I'd

:01:41. > :01:47.had the NHS go to stop the Butcher surgeon? You could have me as many

:01:48. > :01:53.as 1000 women. There was a man who was one of the patients in this case

:01:54. > :01:57.in Nottingham. It is a staggering story when you think that doctors,

:01:58. > :02:05.we are told, are taught to do no harm. Of course, they should seek to

:02:06. > :02:08.do no harm, but surgery often involves doing what would otherwise

:02:09. > :02:13.be sold, or even grievous bodily harm in order to do better for the

:02:14. > :02:19.patient on the table in front of you. If a body of your fellow

:02:20. > :02:23.surgeons thinks that what you do is write, or is at least justifiable,

:02:24. > :02:28.then there is emerging of terror that allows people to continue to do

:02:29. > :02:32.what they do. It is very difficult actually in law to prove that

:02:33. > :02:34.someone did something not just wrong, but to the criminal standard

:02:35. > :02:38.where they are qualified as a doctor where they are qualified as a doctor

:02:39. > :02:42.and they are conducting an operation on a cable and I think that is why,

:02:43. > :02:49.especially with someone who has a forceful personality and has an

:02:50. > :02:52.ability to convince people around him that he is seeking to do the

:02:53. > :02:57.wrong, but this wrong. There are two wrong, but this wrong. There are two

:02:58. > :03:02.things permitted from out of this. The first is that no one is

:03:03. > :03:06.infallible and surgeons should be challenged just like the rest of us

:03:07. > :03:10.and the second, which might be a mundane point, but is behind your

:03:11. > :03:14.introduction, this is not just a woman's issue and if one good thing

:03:15. > :03:18.can come of this is that men often face this kind of breast cancer

:03:19. > :03:25.tissue, or just issue and should be no more shy about than women. Some

:03:26. > :03:30.of these women, obviously in a very fond of state. The patients, we

:03:31. > :03:35.should say. They are desperate to be curate, desperate to be helped. You

:03:36. > :03:40.take the advice you are given. If you put yourself in the position of

:03:41. > :03:44.these per women, they are sitting on the other side of the table having

:03:45. > :03:48.been given this terrific news, the worst news you can get and you are

:03:49. > :03:55.naturally inclined, I would suggest, to believe the surgeon, qualified

:03:56. > :03:59.and experienced, you have got to take at his word. If you're unable

:04:00. > :04:06.to trust someone in that position then who can you trust? Imagine that

:04:07. > :04:11.someone is in that kind of position and genuinely believes that he or

:04:12. > :04:15.she is doing the right thing when he or she is not. It is very difficult

:04:16. > :04:21.to prove to the criminal standard that they meant to do harm in that

:04:22. > :04:25.situation. The Daily Express said the cancer doctor played God. We do

:04:26. > :04:31.not know why he was motivated to do this, that is some suggestion it

:04:32. > :04:33.could have been financial. He maintains that the operations were

:04:34. > :04:38.justified and he did nothing wrong. While we can do is speculate. One of

:04:39. > :04:50.the things he was doing was seeking to preserve a position of power. He

:04:51. > :04:54.was seeking to preserve a cleavage whilst removing the north part of

:04:55. > :04:59.breasts, but seeking to prefers an upper part which, luckily, turned

:05:00. > :05:03.cancerous itself. Even the thing he thought he was doing that was right

:05:04. > :05:05.seemed to be dangerous to the patient, even though he was

:05:06. > :05:10.conducting what was apparently unnecessary operations. He was asked

:05:11. > :05:18.many times by his managers to stop doing that and wouldn't and carried

:05:19. > :05:23.on. The question is, how did it continue, ordered the NHS feel to

:05:24. > :05:27.stop them? If he was being wound up by his superiors on numerous

:05:28. > :05:31.occasions flickering out these unnecessary procedures, why was he

:05:32. > :05:38.allowed to continue practising? The daily Mirror says he had 1000

:05:39. > :05:41.victims, a case which involved under 20 patients, but there are many more

:05:42. > :05:45.are waiting to see the outcome. For the conditions we have spoken to,

:05:46. > :05:48.they have said the checks and balances and the safeguards are so

:05:49. > :05:53.much different now compared to when he was doing his operations. These

:05:54. > :05:58.cases did back sometime. As you rightly applied, it would be crazy

:05:59. > :06:03.to try a case involving hundreds of victims. You choose certain sets of

:06:04. > :06:10.victims, were alerted victims, and he tried the case on those specific

:06:11. > :06:16.examples. It seems to me that, even if the system has moved on from them

:06:17. > :06:20.and these historic cases have a different kind of circumstances now

:06:21. > :06:24.to the ones carried out now, we can still learn something from a culture

:06:25. > :06:29.that allows someone to carry out operations which, on the face of it,

:06:30. > :06:35.seem unnecessary, but positively harmful to the patients concerned.

:06:36. > :06:41.Let's move on. We will be the opposition said Tim Farren, leader

:06:42. > :06:45.of the Liberal Democrats. If you look at page seven, it talks about

:06:46. > :06:48.his hopes, particularly in Scotland, for their success in the forthcoming

:06:49. > :06:54.general election. I cannot find anything he says we will be the

:06:55. > :06:59.opposition though, can you? It is an eye-catching headline. It is quite a

:07:00. > :07:03.bold claim, but I think the closest he comes, when he read the story

:07:04. > :07:07.inside is I want to be the Leader of the Opposition Verstappen is

:07:08. > :07:12.slightly different. That is an understandable ambition for any

:07:13. > :07:15.party of opposition, even one with only nine MPs, but I guess it is

:07:16. > :07:22.looking at the state of the Labour Party, looking at the opinion polls

:07:23. > :07:25.and saying, we could get increased representation. The idea they would

:07:26. > :07:31.be timid opposition is pretty fanciful. Labour is going to be done

:07:32. > :07:35.and the Liberal Democrats will go up, but that does not equal the

:07:36. > :07:43.Liberal Democrats being the party of opposition. My advice to Tim Farren

:07:44. > :07:53.would be to keep your head down. I mean it to be patronising. Every

:07:54. > :07:59.time his personality has emerged on his party brand, but that is his

:08:00. > :08:02.views on sexuality, or is broader political and social views, he has

:08:03. > :08:05.proved less attractive than his party brand. That is why keep your

:08:06. > :08:18.head down. I don't just minutes patronisingly to him, though it is,

:08:19. > :08:23.but I think, furthermore... He ought, properly, to look to the

:08:24. > :08:28.political tide, which is broadly in his favour. He has had a big

:08:29. > :08:34.increase in donations and membership. If you get more than 22

:08:35. > :08:39.MPs he will begin on, but that will not above the Labour Party. If there

:08:40. > :08:45.is anything like this in his rhetoric, he should turn it down.

:08:46. > :08:54.The point is that, even the Labour Party for, if it is in line with the

:08:55. > :08:58.fallen, it would be significant. But reflects well on the liberal

:08:59. > :09:03.Democrats. That was tied up with Jeremy Corbyn, so the tide may not

:09:04. > :09:08.go in Tim Farren's flavour for long. If there is nothing I could in this

:09:09. > :09:33.story, he should not be so hubristic.

:09:34. > :09:44.Let's look at the Telegraph. Germany admitted austerity would destroy

:09:45. > :09:47.Greece says Arafat is. This is the German finance minister suggesting

:09:48. > :09:54.that he would not have agreed to the deal that Greece had to take. The

:09:55. > :09:58.Telegraph has got an interview and extracts from Yanis Varoufakis's

:09:59. > :10:03.memoir, in which it turns out he was secretly recording conversations

:10:04. > :10:09.when he was great finance minister when Greece was at risk of tumbling

:10:10. > :10:13.out of the Euro and had to accept very harsh austerity measures in

:10:14. > :10:22.return for a bailout and he said that the German finance minister

:10:23. > :10:26.admitted at the time privately, not for public discussion, that if I was

:10:27. > :10:29.you I would not sign this day because this is all about national

:10:30. > :10:35.pride as much as I think that you are being asked to sell your country

:10:36. > :10:41.down the river. It is quite an amazing story. It backs up what a

:10:42. > :10:47.lot of people were saying that Greece were made an example of and

:10:48. > :10:52.it shows, the point the Telegraph were making, it shows how Germany

:10:53. > :10:55.will perhaps behave during the Brexit discussions when push comes

:10:56. > :11:01.to shove. They will be holding the whip and as far as the EU are

:11:02. > :11:05.concerned. Germany did make an example of Greece, but on the other

:11:06. > :11:09.hand, they should never have allowed the Greeks in in the first place. In

:11:10. > :11:13.an easy and economic environment, the Greeks should have been able to

:11:14. > :11:16.come out, the value and they can't because they are in a common

:11:17. > :11:19.currency that is not governed by economics, it is governed by

:11:20. > :11:25.politics and that's what this revelation shows. The Financial

:11:26. > :11:34.Times. Speaking of Brexit, we cannot go through a review without it. Work

:11:35. > :11:41.the talk. They pressured for smooth Brexit for Japanese groups. What a

:11:42. > :11:44.seeming like smooth Brexit? It implies the need for a transitional

:11:45. > :11:50.arrangement to lessen uncertainty, Japan really has three major kinds

:11:51. > :11:55.of interest in the UK. The first is financial. There are Japanese banks.

:11:56. > :12:00.The second is automotive. There are many examples of that. It is

:12:01. > :12:05.manufacturing broadly. All of them want a sense that they can't be here

:12:06. > :12:08.in the short to medium term without any real uncertainty. They want not

:12:09. > :12:12.just the two years that we will presumably be negotiating with the

:12:13. > :12:17.European partners, but they want a sense they will be transitional

:12:18. > :12:20.agreements and arrangements of difficulty on the two years they can

:12:21. > :12:25.have certainty about factories and their presence. Whether that be

:12:26. > :12:31.passport for financial institutions or tariffs imposed on manufacturing.

:12:32. > :12:33.That is not just down to Theresa May, the smoothness of how it

:12:34. > :12:39.happens, there are 27 other countries involved. As the promised

:12:40. > :12:43.said last night in Leeds, the other 27 will be ganging up against us

:12:44. > :12:50.because it is not in their interest to give us everything we want. There

:12:51. > :12:54.will have to be give and take. If we decided to be awkward, it takes two

:12:55. > :12:58.to tango. If I decide who's in the wrong direction it would be real. It

:12:59. > :13:01.is not an unreasonable perspective to take. It is a surprise and one

:13:02. > :13:07.from a nation whose diplomacy and the 20th century and onwards has

:13:08. > :13:16.been small target. Let's look at the front of the Independent. Trump's

:13:17. > :13:20.first 100 days. This is a fabulous photograph of him sitting at the

:13:21. > :13:24.desk of the Oval office, which the Independent has always been good at.

:13:25. > :13:27.As he delivered on his promises? He thinks he has and has been speaking

:13:28. > :13:34.to the national rifle Association. They were big supporters of him. His

:13:35. > :13:40.100 days have flown in, it has to be said. For a guy who accuses the

:13:41. > :13:47.media of fake news, which is one of the most horrible terms that have

:13:48. > :13:51.ever entered the political lexicon, for him to say that his first 100

:13:52. > :13:55.days have been a success is fake news. That is not, by any stretch of

:13:56. > :14:00.the imagination, his first 100 days have not been a success. His

:14:01. > :14:07.successors -- his supporters think he has been a success. If you judge

:14:08. > :14:09.it by the economic performance of the United States, there was

:14:10. > :14:14.widespread speculate in the Trump won the election the economy would

:14:15. > :14:18.thank. Instead, after an afternoon of fluctuation on the market, the US

:14:19. > :14:22.economy picked up significantly after Trump won last year and has

:14:23. > :14:31.continued to perform well subscribed to that. He was handed a pretty good

:14:32. > :14:36.economic situation. You can only look at the time frame he has been

:14:37. > :14:41.in. The economy was growing at an atomic comment on when he took over.

:14:42. > :14:49.It had been a remarkable turnaround if he turned around. I was quite at

:14:50. > :14:52.a different point, which is one of the qualities this president has

:14:53. > :14:57.shown, which might surprise people, is his ability to change his mind.

:14:58. > :15:00.He said it was obsolete. Even without the minister and as you

:15:01. > :15:04.convince them otherwise. He said he would pull out of Nafta, the

:15:05. > :15:09.Mexicans and the Canadians made strong representations to him and

:15:10. > :15:13.he, admitted it via a tweet, which might not be presidential, but he

:15:14. > :15:18.indicated he was willing to reconsider his position. I think it

:15:19. > :15:21.is a strong thing to be able to say I was wrong about something and I

:15:22. > :15:34.think that is something that, in leadership, we undervalue. Shelby D

:15:35. > :15:42.sports story? There is a mass of boxing match in Wembley tomorrow

:15:43. > :15:46.night. Klitschko versus Joshua. One is 47, 41, the other is 27 and they

:15:47. > :15:54.are both very big man. I would not want to take a punch from either of

:15:55. > :16:01.them. Klitschko, he is a class act. It is an unpopular view in Britain.

:16:02. > :16:05.Joshua is a national hero, Olympic gold medallist. He is to stone

:16:06. > :16:11.heavier than his normal fighting with and as Lennox Lewis who fought

:16:12. > :16:13.his last fight a lot heavier against Klitschko's elder brother would

:16:14. > :16:17.point out, that is a strange position to go into a fight. My

:16:18. > :16:22.instinct is Klitschko will screw them. I hope not. Of course I cheer

:16:23. > :16:26.for the Brit, but my instinct is Klitschko is a classy act, a

:16:27. > :16:32.Conservative boxer who can stand off. All the pressure is on Joshua.

:16:33. > :16:38.Support Joshua but have a fiver on Klitschko. It is a golden era for

:16:39. > :16:47.Bush boxing for the first time in 20 years. You will be watching? I will

:16:48. > :16:50.be watching, definitely. Don't forget you can see the front

:16:51. > :16:53.pages of the papers online It's all there for you,

:16:54. > :16:57.seven days a week at bbc.c.uk forward slash papers and if you miss

:16:58. > :17:01.the programme any evening you can