:00:44. > :00:47.Here: Councils under fire for closing down their residential care
:00:47. > :00:49.homes. After Southern Cross, should they step in to protect older
:00:49. > :00:52.people? Fluff and respected Teesside MP who
:00:52. > :01:02.wants to ban parents of young children from smoking in the car.
:01:02. > :01:02.
:01:02. > :42:55.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 2512 seconds
:42:55. > :42:59.Hello and a very warm welcome to your local part of the show. Coming
:42:59. > :43:03.up: Should parents travelling with young children in the car be banned
:43:03. > :43:06.from smoking? We talk to the North East MP who wants to change the law.
:43:06. > :43:10.But we start with an issue that has been dominating the headlines -
:43:10. > :43:13.care of the elderly. It was not long ago that many residential care
:43:13. > :43:15.homes in Cumbria and the North East were owned and run by local
:43:16. > :43:18.councils. But in recent years they have
:43:19. > :43:22.mostly been closed down or sold off, the residents moved into privately
:43:22. > :43:25.run homes. At the time, some relatives
:43:25. > :43:35.protested it - amid warnings of what might go wrong. So after
:43:35. > :43:36.
:43:36. > :43:39.events at Southern Cross, have the critics been proved right?
:43:39. > :43:45.Protesters taken Durham County Council as it decides to close care
:43:45. > :43:50.homes. They decided to move the mother of Ann Dryden who is in will
:43:50. > :43:54.stop the day she left - it was awful. The staff were in tears and
:43:54. > :43:59.she was in tears. Not just for her but for other people as well who
:43:59. > :44:03.were leaving. We pick the care home she is in now because her friends
:44:03. > :44:08.were going. A year on the is fresh uncertainty because the home she
:44:08. > :44:14.has been moved to it belongs to Southern Cross. I must stress that
:44:14. > :44:20.the home she is in, she's taken very good care of. But it is a
:44:20. > :44:26.private business and it is for profits. Once the profits go, how
:44:26. > :44:30.do they manage the care? Would it be the same? It is just worrying
:44:30. > :44:34.and it is worrying for all the other people who have relatives in
:44:34. > :44:40.the care home. I cannot think what will happen if she has to move
:44:40. > :44:45.again, she is 93 and quite frail. The council home she loved is now
:44:45. > :44:49.boarded up husk. She believes the council has let older people down
:44:49. > :44:54.by leaving residential care to the private sector but councils claim
:44:54. > :44:59.they have no choice. It. Two harsh economics. Durham County Council
:44:59. > :45:04.says it cost up to �1,000 a week to house an older person in one of
:45:04. > :45:09.their own homes. Contrast that with the private sector who only charged
:45:09. > :45:16.up to 480p a week for the same order Pehrson. That is a powerful
:45:16. > :45:20.incentive for councils to close homes. -- older person. Most
:45:20. > :45:26.councils are now concentrating on centres like this one at Newcastle
:45:26. > :45:31.which provides emergency care and short stays. The council here
:45:31. > :45:35.believes the fewer homes should be in hands of the profit-driven.
:45:36. > :45:40.Local authorities have not been in the care home business for 20 years
:45:40. > :45:44.now. I do not see local authorities directly to in that in the future.
:45:44. > :45:50.However, I think they have a key role to stimulate the development
:45:50. > :45:55.of new kinds of provision, working with third sector organisations,
:45:55. > :45:59.social enterprise and co-operatives to develop not for profit models
:45:59. > :46:03.which achieve the objectives of providing good quality care but do
:46:03. > :46:07.not syphon off large amounts of profit. The council still has a
:46:07. > :46:14.problem - even in a privately run care home like this one, they pay
:46:14. > :46:18.the fees. Private operators say the Hague -- the council refuses to pay
:46:18. > :46:24.the full cost of care, they are freezing payments and causing
:46:24. > :46:29.problems. Councils are setting a fee rate which is picked up out of
:46:29. > :46:34.the ear. It matches their budget and does not relate to real cost
:46:34. > :46:42.and the margin necessary to do the cost -- do the job property --
:46:42. > :46:46.properly. The underpayment can be into six figures. Over 100,000 and
:46:46. > :46:52.that is a lot of money for one individual home to be short of.
:46:52. > :46:55.Where does that leave the future? The charity which represents old
:46:55. > :47:03.people believes we are heading for more crisis unless the government
:47:03. > :47:08.finds more extra money. Certainly, Age UK reckons that in 2014, the
:47:08. > :47:14.government will be spending two and an �50 million less than they spent
:47:14. > :47:19.in 2004 on care for older people. We as the government to commit up
:47:19. > :47:22.to �3 billion to prevent the covers system from collapsing. That threat
:47:22. > :47:30.of collapse has prompted calls for local authorities and the
:47:30. > :47:33.government to take action to protect older people.
:47:33. > :47:36.Let us talk now to the Labour MP for Washington and Sunderland West,
:47:36. > :47:43.Sharon Hodgson and the Conservative Euro-MP for the North East, Martin
:47:43. > :47:51.Callanan. Was it a mistake to allow the private sector to care for
:47:51. > :47:55.older people? I have a five care homes caring for people in my
:47:55. > :48:03.constituency. What matters is what happens now. We are where we are
:48:03. > :48:08.and we need to look to the future. We need to look at new models...
:48:08. > :48:13.Was it a mistake? We are looking at relying on the private-sector - for
:48:13. > :48:18.councils to get out of this situation and all the risks for
:48:18. > :48:24.people like Southern Cross. If you want to look back, you have to go
:48:24. > :48:29.back to the 1990s when compulsory tendering was brought in. 85 % of
:48:29. > :48:34.government money that was sent from the government to local councils
:48:34. > :48:38.had to be spent in the private sector. When we came in in 1997 we
:48:39. > :48:44.scrap this mandate and said there had to be a more level playing
:48:44. > :48:49.field. In 2000, we scrapped their compulsory tendering... You did
:48:49. > :48:55.nothing to prevent the closure of homes. We brought in best-value so
:48:56. > :49:02.it was not about going for the cheapest option but for best value.
:49:02. > :49:06.OK, I accept you. But what about the future? Andy Burnham in the
:49:06. > :49:13.last government tried to work across parties with the Lib Dems
:49:13. > :49:19.and the Conservatives on a National Care Service. I think we still need
:49:19. > :49:25.to look at that. We need to work together. We cannot. Score on this.
:49:25. > :49:29.The care over elderly is far too important for this. We need to work
:49:29. > :49:33.together and find a way which works for all of us. What it
:49:33. > :49:39.Conservatives think? A lot of people say profit should not play a
:49:39. > :49:44.part in providing care for older people, what do you think? I do not
:49:44. > :49:49.agree with that. The reality is they are good homes and the private
:49:49. > :49:53.sector and their bad homes and the public sector, we all know examples
:49:54. > :50:00.of that. It is about getting the right Regulation, the right here
:50:00. > :50:05.and the appropriate regulation in place and enforcing those standards.
:50:05. > :50:15.Isn't the end result being driven by profit meaning more Southern
:50:15. > :50:15.
:50:15. > :50:18.Cross and more crisis? I do not accept this logic. There are some
:50:18. > :50:23.very good privately owned care homes. I know a lot of them in the
:50:23. > :50:28.North East. It is about putting the appropriate regulation in place. We
:50:28. > :50:34.have to look at the cost of things and get best value for the money we
:50:34. > :50:38.spend as taxpayers because these places are expenses -- expensive.
:50:38. > :50:44.Our all people deserve good quality care and that can be put in place
:50:44. > :50:48.by the appropriate register -- legislation. Councils are not
:50:48. > :50:52.providing the full cost of care here, they are cutting funding to
:50:52. > :50:59.some of the Most Honourable people in the community. The councils have
:50:59. > :51:05.had their funding cut by central government. But they have choices.
:51:05. > :51:10.What we have to do is make sure no Southern Cross can happen again.
:51:10. > :51:15.When you hear that at private US equity company could come in and
:51:15. > :51:19.buy up the whole of Southern Cross 462 million and then sell it for
:51:19. > :51:23.the three years later for a four times that, the reason they could
:51:23. > :51:30.make a profit was because the sold off follow homes and were renting
:51:30. > :51:33.them back. This has led to where we are now. The government has a
:51:33. > :51:38.responsibility to legislate against that and not allow private
:51:38. > :51:42.companies to do things like that in the future. He did not regulate
:51:42. > :51:47.when he had the chance in government. Where we are aware that
:51:47. > :51:51.was happening? Private companies always find ways to maximise
:51:51. > :51:55.profits. Who would have believed that the company would sell off
:51:55. > :52:00.their care homes and assets and rent them back? That is such a
:52:00. > :52:06.strange model, how would you know to regulate against that? But now
:52:06. > :52:13.we know, we can do something about it now. As Age UK said, you're not
:52:13. > :52:20.putting enough money in the system. The budget for the NHS has been
:52:20. > :52:25.ring-fenced and the budget for care. The care home provider said that
:52:25. > :52:30.the money that was supposed to be handed over to help out with
:52:30. > :52:34.elderly here, actually they could not find any trace of it. It had
:52:34. > :52:38.not reached down to providers. money is ring-fenced from
:52:38. > :52:43.government to local authorities and how they spend that for public or
:52:43. > :52:50.private sector is up to them. I accept your central point that
:52:50. > :52:54.funding will be restricted. The cut -- we are borrowing billions of
:52:54. > :52:59.pounds every day and we have to make savings where appropriate.
:52:59. > :53:02.care for elderly people - is that not important? We were left in this
:53:02. > :53:09.mess by the policies of the government she supported who
:53:09. > :53:13.bankrupted the country. We have to sort out the mess. The care of all
:53:13. > :53:17.people is a priority and we need to find the appropriate resources but
:53:17. > :53:22.we have to look at terms of best value and bringing in the
:53:22. > :53:27.appropriate quality of care and the proper legislation. Shall I tell
:53:27. > :53:31.you it that clients are not founded by councils But funded privately
:53:31. > :53:38.are being charged more to subsidise the fact that councils are not
:53:38. > :53:41.paying their full amount, that is not right, is it? People are means-
:53:41. > :53:45.tested and have to contribute to their care but that is a problem in
:53:45. > :53:49.the system. It provides incentives to people to dispose of their
:53:49. > :53:54.assets knowing that the state will pick up the bill. This is a problem
:53:54. > :53:58.that the last government looked at without coming up with a solution.
:53:58. > :54:02.An independent commission needs to be set-up and will report next
:54:02. > :54:05.month to put in a long-term framework for care which provides
:54:06. > :54:12.for a state contribution element, the state should not be all the
:54:12. > :54:16.bills. Hopefully, this will be done on a cross-party basis because it
:54:16. > :54:21.is important to have a long-term framework which provides a proper
:54:21. > :54:27.framework to go forward for the future. We jigger the that the
:54:27. > :54:31.records of politicians is pretty awful. Labour had 13 years.
:54:31. > :54:37.Commission reports on long-term care but nothing was done about it.
:54:37. > :54:41.That was something which grew gradually... In 1999 Dec you
:54:41. > :54:47.commissioned a report but did not take any action on it. We can look
:54:47. > :54:53.back at the mistakes on the past. That is what I am saying. Or we can
:54:53. > :54:58.look at the future. As Martin said, we need to work together. Retried
:54:58. > :55:03.this in the last days of the last government. We looked at and
:55:03. > :55:10.national care system. -- we tried this. There has to be a form of
:55:10. > :55:13.contribution. Thank you both very much indeed.
:55:13. > :55:16.Smoking in many public places - whether pubs, restaurants or
:55:16. > :55:19.football grounds - was banned 4 years ago. This week a North East
:55:19. > :55:21.MP proposed a Commons Bill that would go much further. Stockton's
:55:21. > :55:24.Alex Cunningham wants parents travelling with young children to
:55:24. > :55:28.be banned from smoking in their cars. But is such a ban enforceable
:55:28. > :55:38.and is legislating over what people do in private really a good idea?
:55:38. > :55:39.
:55:39. > :55:43.The suggestion has certainly triggered a lively debate. Alex
:55:43. > :55:50.Cunningham wants to outlaw smoking in cars where children are
:55:50. > :55:54.passengers, Sarah is on the line. Should it be out lot? I think it
:55:54. > :56:00.should be. My sister used to smoke a lot in the car with her small
:56:00. > :56:05.children. If children are in your car, should you be forced to stop
:56:05. > :56:10.smoking? Would it be too difficult to enforce? The subject which has
:56:10. > :56:17.been talked about all week. Should or should you not light up when
:56:17. > :56:23.children are in the car? Are they going to police smokers in their
:56:23. > :56:31.own houses? This debate is close to the heart of Louise Morris and her
:56:31. > :56:36.daughter. I used to smoke in the car all the time. I have given up
:56:36. > :56:41.smoking for three years so she is six now. She was a toddler when I
:56:41. > :56:47.was smoking. Louise now thinks her daughter's health is better since
:56:47. > :56:53.she has stopped smoking. She would have quite a few runny noses and
:56:53. > :56:57.coughs and colds when I was smoking. When you give up, you see that they
:56:57. > :57:04.disappear. Your child is better. Louise supports a ban on smoking in
:57:04. > :57:08.cars with children. I think it is a good idea. It is the health of
:57:08. > :57:12.their child that they're not thinking about as well as their own
:57:12. > :57:21.health. Smoking rates have reduced in the North East - they dropped
:57:21. > :57:27.from 29 % down to 22 % in 2009. This is held by the smoking ban in
:57:27. > :57:31.pars and cafes and other public places. Here at this market in
:57:31. > :57:35.Newcastle they are running a drop- in session to help people quit
:57:35. > :57:40.smoking. What do shoppers make of banning smoking in cars with
:57:40. > :57:46.children? Personally, I do not think uses smoke in front of
:57:46. > :57:51.children any way. If you have kids and the car, it should be banned.
:57:51. > :57:57.Just using common sense. Whether it is a good idea to make legislation
:57:57. > :58:02.about it, I do not know. Wood stopping people smoking in cars
:58:02. > :58:08.actually work? Some experts are convinced that making it illegal as
:58:08. > :58:14.the best that solution. I think it is a really good idea to raise this
:58:14. > :58:17.issue and I support Mr Cunningham for raising this in Parliament.
:58:17. > :58:23.84,000 children in the North East are being exposed every year in
:58:23. > :58:29.cars to second-hand smoke. We know this is a toxic cocktail of over
:58:29. > :58:34.4,000 chemicals. The reality is about a 13,000 of those children
:58:34. > :58:37.every year have to go and see their doctor. It might not feel that
:58:37. > :58:43.significant with coughs and colds but second-hand smoke exposure
:58:43. > :58:47.causes things like a middle ear infections and meningitis and
:58:47. > :58:52.serious of all things like cot death. There is a long way to go to
:58:52. > :58:56.persuade people to give up cigarettes and pro-smoking groups
:58:56. > :59:02.see further restrictions as being another attack on people enjoying
:59:02. > :59:04.what is a legal product. The Stockton North MP Alex
:59:04. > :59:12.Cunningham, who put forward that Bill in the Commons on Wednesday,
:59:12. > :59:17.joins me from a Teesside studio now. Most people we spoke to agree with
:59:17. > :59:21.you that people should not smoke in the car. Is using the log the best
:59:21. > :59:26.we to stop them? I believe it is because people in this country do
:59:26. > :59:33.or be the log and that was true in when we had the seat belt
:59:34. > :59:39.legislation. Up to 90 % of people now use their seatbelts. 15 % of
:59:39. > :59:43.people who smoke do actually smoke in cars with children present which
:59:43. > :59:50.put them into an environment of heavy smoking which is not good for
:59:50. > :59:55.their health so the law is the right idea. They had some qualms
:59:55. > :59:59.about this and thought persuasion might be better than an extra law.
:59:59. > :00:04.Persuasion is one thing but we need to invest more money in education.
:00:04. > :00:07.I know the chance of his becoming law is slim. The important thing is
:00:07. > :00:12.people across the country is that people had been talking about this
:00:12. > :00:19.issue, raising the issue means it is in the minds of people and
:00:19. > :00:24.perhaps they will respond to it. You have proposed legislation so we
:00:24. > :00:27.have to look at that. How could you enforce this? You do not expect the
:00:27. > :00:33.police to see if people are lighting up the car when it is a
:00:33. > :00:39.child seat in it? That will be very difficult and I acknowledge that.
:00:39. > :00:43.When there are laws, people of a them. I would like to think if we
:00:43. > :00:46.introduce such a log, the 50 % of people who think it is acceptable
:00:46. > :00:51.to smoke in cars with children present will stop doing it. Would
:00:51. > :00:58.it be a good use of the legal system to prosecute people smoking
:00:58. > :01:03.in cars with children present? it is the ultimate situation. It is
:01:03. > :01:08.similar to being caught speeding, it have a finer points on their
:01:08. > :01:18.licence or the King go on education course. It would be great if we can
:01:18. > :01:25.encourage people to go on an education course. For people who
:01:26. > :01:33.are smokers, they feel besieged. If you dictate what people can do but
:01:33. > :01:37.-- in their private lives, where does it end? It is the
:01:37. > :01:42.concentration of smoke in a car which is the issue here. You may as
:01:42. > :01:46.well invite the child to smoke it themselves in some cases. There is
:01:46. > :01:50.a marvellous advert for the British Lung Foundation at the moment with
:01:50. > :01:54.a child sitting in the back of the car with a cigarette in their hands
:01:54. > :02:00.which illustrates how horrible it says. Can you ever transgress into
:02:00. > :02:05.the private spaces of people? think the child's private space is
:02:05. > :02:08.the important element here. The child does not have the choice.
:02:08. > :02:13.More than 50 % of children say they do not like the fact that people
:02:13. > :02:18.smoke in cars and they do not like shaving that smoke. They want them
:02:18. > :02:21.to smoke. It is this private space of the child as well as the adult.
:02:21. > :02:23.Alex Cunningham thank you. And that's about all from us.
:02:23. > :02:26.There's much more on my blog - including the government's decision
:02:26. > :02:31.to scrap plans for "shadow mayors" in 11 English cities including
:02:31. > :02:38.Newcastle. Just log onto bbc.co.uk/richardmoss - and you can
:02:38. > :02:41.also follow me on Twitter - just look for richardpolshow.