06/11/2011 The Politics Show West

A in the West: a protest over plans to change the parliamentary

boundaries - will it mean MPs won't know where they are? And the latest

wheeze from health and safety. Ramblers are being given advice on

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 2225 seconds

Good afternoon. Welcome to the part of the show which brings you the

politics from the West Country. This week, do you know where you

are? Well, hold tight because you may be about to move! The

parliamentary boundaries are changing. Even Gloucester Cathedral

will now be in part of the Forest of Dean of the plans go ahead.

And, have politicians let red tape go mad? How the risk of being sued

is forcing ramblers do full at -- to fill out a form before going for

a walk. A would be terribly sad if it affected people going for a walk.

Hello. There are plans to get rid of 50 MPs to slim down the House of

Commons. But hang on a second before you start cheering, there

may be some unlikely consequences because protesters are claiming

that it is West Country voters that will lose out. Let's look at the

proposals. Wiltshire and Dorset will end up with one of few MP

between them, and controversially, the plans include a seat which

crosses the county line. The old Avon and Somerset area could have

lots of changes, and more seats would struggle council boundaries

so MPs could be caught in the middle -- straddle. The biggest

change is in Gloucester, where an area around the cathedral would be

moved into the Forest of Dean. For once, all the main parties are

agreed that they don't like it. People from across the political

spectrum were there, even the Monster Raving Loony Party think it

is mad. On Friday, they marched in protest. After 700 years of having

a Gloucester MP, the city's historic heart could be torn out

and given to the Forest of Dean. The Boundary Commission's ideas

drops like a bombshell two months ago. A I was aghast. Our city

centre has been here over 2000 years, and being class does not in

Gloucester any more? It does does not make sense. I represent the

area of west gate on the county council. It has been here for 2000

years. It is the area we defended during the English Civil War, and

it is a ridiculous proposition. Ladies and gentlemen... For weeks,

they have been building a campaign. Our protest against the ridiculous

boundary commission's decision. whole of the west side of the city

is actually going to go over to the Forest of Dean, which is crazy.

Leading it has been this local businessman, who is adamant that

one voice must be for the city's commercial district. It is not a

physical move, but psychologically it will be a move. You cannot have

an MP that represents the Forest of Dean actually representing business

and commerce and the general public here in the city itself. We want

our own way of doing things. will be hunting wild boar in the

forest. We have got a few wild boars on the Boundary Commission!

Everyone seems to agree, but few understand why this has come about.

One reason the Boundary Commission want to move the very heart of

Gloucester, including the cathedral, into the Forest of Dean

constituency, is its simplicity. Around here there are too many

voters, but on the other side of the river in the forest, there are

too few. One ward between them, and it is job done.

Ironically, the Forest's own MP is a government minister helping steer

the changes through Parliament. He does not want to become the target

for local anger. I can see the concerns that people have expressed,

but the difficulty is you cannot just say you don't like it, but you

must set out what the alternative could be. It will take a wide --

while to work out what the alternatives might be to see if

they are practical. Backing Gloucester, the Conservative MP

tries to work a -- what a careful line, supporting the wider changes,

but not be lost a proposals. So, he has drawn up an alternative. I will

be giving it verbally on Monday to the boundaries Commission in

Bristol. I hope you will be there. It is a great case and a good

proposal, and I hope the Boundary Commission buys it. As somebody

said once, the MP for Tewkesbury would disagree, wouldn't he? Other

options for levelling out constituencies would also caused

controversy. Some reckon that the new rules are too restricting.

think the legislation is just too mathematical. It is not taking into

account local feeling and local sentiment. Tomorrow they will have

the chance to go face-to-face in this row, and the Boundary

Commission come West. Two days of hearings will be held in Bristol,

and it could be pretty lively. I'm joined by the Conservative MP

for South Swindon, Robert Buckland, and former member MP for Stroud,

David Drew. First of all, what is the Government doing tried to get

rid of 50 MPs? The rationale is to equalise the number of people

represented by each MP. At the moment, you have MPs representing

as many as 80,000 or even more people in one part of the country,

and then you have MPs representing under 60,000 in another part.

it matter? I don't think it is fair. You represent Swindon South and

Swindon North. Why do we need to MPs? Swindon is a large town. I

represent nearly 74,000 people and Justin Thomas and represents 78,000

people, and yet other MPs in other parts of the country represent

substantially fewer numbers, particularly in Wales where their

MPs representing 50,000. In America they represent hundreds of

thousands. I am not advocating that we simply -- suddenly go to super

sized constituencies. I think that the numbers we have in Swindon are

about right. MPs can be sufficiently local, sufficiently

tied into their constituency and in touch to represent a number of

people. I think it is all about fairness. David, you are hoping to

get back in in Stroud. How would these changes affect that

constituency? My voters go from Stroud in to the Cotswolds, so it

is not a great change. But the real issue is what happens to Westgate

ward in Gloucester where you get the nonsense that the cathedral,

the centre of the city, the rugby club and so one, are all being

moved into the Forest of Dean, and that has caused huge resentment.

The city is really important as an entity, and you cannot just

suddenly pick up the centre and drop it into another constituency.

The issue for the Boundary Commission is that there are going

to be difficult decisions to be made, and I accept that there will

be some local examples where people will feel rather bemused, to say

the least, about some of these decisions. But there is a chance

for people to make representations. They are not set in stone, so some

of these glitches can be ironed out. Is there an answer? Other ideas

have been put forward, but the problem is that if it is just a

numbers game, I don't mind equalising at some of the nonsense

where you have got very small constituencies and very large

numbers of electors being represented by one MP, but the

problem is that place does matter in politics. People associate with

Gloucester, they associate with Stroud. If you put a line through

part of it and tell people that they are moving to another

constituency, this happened last time in the Stroud consistency and

those voters resent to this day... Well, it gets confusing, doesn't

it? Bristol East was at the last Boundary Change, and now it has

been moved out. People don't know whether they are coming or going.

You need a system that is responsible -- responsive to

population change. The current system will respond every 10 or 15

years, and it would lead to substantial anomalies. You would

end up with seas but very low populations, returning MPs who then

have an equal say with MPs who have very large numbers, and I do not

think that is fair. One of the big concerns is that it straddles

county boundaries, in one case. So, you could have an MP who needs to

fight for one area on one hand, and then fight for another as well. How

does that work? You have got to compare it with MPs who, for

example, have different councils and different layers of government.

Having to deal with one body and then another body at a different

level. I don't think that is too much of a problem. There are plenty

of examples where County Band -- county boundaries are already

crossed. It is a good MP who makes sure they are reflecting a swathe

of the constituency, wherever they are. I would love to be at the

Boundary Commission inquiry hearing for Devon and Cornwall. The MP

there is going to be in an impossible position. Interestingly,

though, the boundary changes will benefit the Conservatives.

knows. You must be very pleased. There are a couple of Conservative

seats that will disappear, and I am sure that some of my colleagues

will have to fight each other to get nominations. I'm not sure it

favours anyone particularly. Well, don't fight because it is against

health and safety rules. More on that in a moment or two.

There has been good news for councils and the West that had

money tied up in collapsed Icelandic banks. I stand's Supreme

Court has ruled they to be almost entirely repaid. Local councils

including Bristol, Somerset and Gloucester had �60 million invested

in banks which failed three years ago. Some money has already been

repaid, but councils will now get priority over other creditors for

the rest. A protester campaigning for a fair

economy has set up camp in a Somerset churchyard. Here's the

latest member of the occupy campaign, who have also set up

camps in Bristol, on College Green, and in Bath in Queen's Square. The

59-year-old Company Directors said he was compelled by what he saw at

St Paul's Cathedral in London and said he wanted to do something. He

has been at St Mary's churchyard in Taunton since Thursday evening,

although he popped home when we went to film him.

If you're thinking for -- of going for a nice relaxing afternoon

stroll, have you considered reading the official health and safety

guidelines from the Ramblers Association? Crews from youth club

disco also the blame and claim culture is stopping us taking part

in simple activities. Now the Government is promising to Tasha --

tackle the issue. Life is very different from

yesteryear. Those idyllic childhoods of football in the

street, climbing trees, and being able to roam free. Roll on 50 years,

and whether it be at work or at play, there are more rules and

regulations than ever before. In some schools, playing football with

a leather ball is outlawed. Conkers - the once great playtime activity,

but for some head teachers, it is just too risky. So, they forced the

kit to wear safety goggles. And, Hamid times have you seen people

wearing high-visibility jackets and hard hats? And is it really

necessary, or is it the fear of being sued the reason for the

caution? The independent body responsible for looking after us in

the workplace is the Health and Safety Executive. We are concerned

with real risks in the workplace. That is why they want to stop

people using health and safety as their excuse when it is actually

something else. Have you had an accident at work that was not your

fault? Did you trip or slip? Or, have you been in a road traffic

collision? But, as we all know through the adverts, where there is

a blame, there is a claim. Unless we win your case, you won't pay a

penny... Almost everyone is affected. Organisations like the

BBC ensure their staff fill in risk assessment forms to protect the

employer and the employee. But that is no great surprise. But the red

tape is also affecting organisations like the Ramblers,

too. Somehow it started and it has gathered its own momentum. You know,

because there is a slight risk, people are terrified of not doing

it in case they get sued if something goes wrong. It would be

terribly sad if it affected people just going for a walk. You know,

you might get stung by a bee and you have got to watch out for

what's underfoot and not trouble over things and so on. Walking is

about the safety is activity there is. If you do the risk assessment

and conclude the workplace is low risk, then carry on doing what

you're doing and keep paperwork to a minimum. Paperwork does not save

lives, it protects bottoms. Even in a protective environment of a youth

club, there are now more roles than ever before. Forms have to be

filled in, even if you want a game of table tennis. The more risky the

stock -- sport is classed as, the longer the risk assessment is. We

have got one that are two pages long. Something like table tennis?

We have to think about the surrounding area. Whether there are

any tripping hazards on the floor, or spillages that people could fall

over on. We all have to cover our backs because otherwise somebody

could come and see you. We are all into the searing culture, the

American think where if you can get money for something because little

Jimmy has fallen over and cut himself and somebody is negligent,

then they will do it. From eight youth club in

Gloucestershire to Whitehall, it seems the message has got through

but there is far too much red tape. I have decided to reform a no-win

no-fee arrangements to stop the perverse situation where fear of

excess costs sometimes forces defendants to settle, even when

they know they are in the right. I can therefore announced that the

Government will seek legislation to return the no win no fee system to

the first principles on which it was first set up. So, can

legislation really reclaim the freedoms we once enjoyed, or will

it take more than the Government to keep the claims culture -- kick the

claims culture into touch? Still here, safely buckled on to

their chairs, a Conservative MP for South Swindon Robert Buckland, and

former Labour MP for Stroud, David Drew. David, all this seemed to

grow up under Labour. None of us want to see the ambulance-chasing

that is going on, particularly at these law firms that seem to spend

the whole of their daytime television sticking their adverts

in. But the nanny state. It is partly eight rural myth. I would be

very worried if ramblers really do fill in lots of forms. It is

interesting that the countryside way acted reduce the level of risk

in the way that landowners up until that time were responsible for

people were killed -- walking on their land. But volunteers now are

terrified of organising any event. Some are, and we have got to be

very careful about this mythology that has grown up. It does actually

do more damage. In your other life, you are a barrister -- barrister,

aren't you? That's right. So, no win any -- no-win no-fee deals.

What do you think of that? The system was brought in in 1995, but

it was Tweet by the last Labour government, and I think that the

change they made it did open the door to more aggressive claims by

claimants and solicitors, because it allowed solicitors to claim a

success fees from the cost, and also to claim the value of

insurance. What the Government is doing is said -- saying there needs

to be a rebalancing of the system back to the way it was before

Labour changed it. There is a tradition of lawyers working for

nothing and helping people to get into court and so on. How are

people going to take on big corporations if they fear huge

costs? There will still be a system. It will be the system we brought in

in 1995. In fact, there will be an uplifting in the value of damages

to allow for recovery of various costs. Without being too technical,

I think the system will be read balanced so that we don't end up

with this rather aggressive culture that has grown up, and that is

causing the sort of fear that is resulting in a vast increase in

paperwork that organisations have seen. But there is not easy access

to legal aid, is there? No, and that is one of the bad things that

his coalition government has done. What I don't want to see is the

risk of people have got a genuine claim, for example someone who may

have suffered from asbestosis from the impact of asbestos at work, not

being able to go to court to get a vindication of the fact that they

have been badly treated. Legal aid for civil cases, apart from a good

-- medical rate -- medical negligence, went out years ago.

This is not an issue can start bashing the coalition over the head

about. You have to look at the litigation, and also the health and

safety culture, which is why the Government's review, which is

coming out in a week or so's time, will be looking at issues to do

with health and safety regulations and how we'd make them simpler and

more co-ordinated. The lady on the film made a good point when she

said that the Health and Safety Executive is effectively fed up as

being used as an excuse for individuals to say we can't do that

because of health and safety. What changes other government planning

to make? There is an independent review being conducted by an

academic from King's College and it will report in a week's time. He's

talking about things like gold plating of Euro regulations - why

do we do that? Should we stop at practice? How do we make

accessibility to the regulations easier? They are all over the place.

Try and consolidate them. And also, focus upon, as the lady said,

serious risk. The HSE has resources but it cannot cover everything, and

an should only look at the very serious cases. We have to leave it

there. Thank you for coming in. Mind how you go!

That's it from the West. The Politics Show will continue with