25/01/2016 Victoria Derbyshire

Hello it's Monday, it's 9.15am, I'm Joanna Gosling in for Victoria,

Put your house in order and prove you're not hounding

That's the warning to charities from MPs this morning.

Also on the programme, criticism is growing over the Google

tax deal described by some as "derisory".

Labour are calling for the chancellor George Osborne

to explain the deal to the House of Commons today.

We'll talk to the MP who said this to google a couple of years ago:

You're a company that says you do no evil,

And millions of people across the eastern US are clearing

up after the weekend's massive snowstorm, which virtually

We'll be speaking to some of those affected.

It's probably about six feet tall with snow on top of it.

I am pretty sure there is a car under there.

The streets are pretty clear throughout

In the outer parts of the town, they haven't ploughed,

everybody is walking, not a lot of driving going on.

Hello, welcome to the programme, we're on BBC 2 and the BBC

News Channel until 11am this morning.

Throughout the programme, we'll bring you the latest breaking

news and developing stories, plus we'll keep you up to date

with Andy Murray's latest match in the Australian Open,

Plus, we'll bring you more reaction to the news that the sportswear

giant Adidas is cutting its ties with athletics' world governing body

As always, we want to hear from you on all the stories we're

Do get in touch in the ususal ways, your thougts and insight really

Texts will be charged at the standard network rate.

And of course you can watch the programme online wherever

you are via the bbc news app or our website.

Charities have come under fire again this morning

over their "aggressive" fund-raising techniques.

A committee of MPs has raised big concerns about the tactics

being used to target elderly and vulnerable donors.

The Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee

has warned that this is their last chance to put their house in order,

otherwise they may have to be regulated by the law.

Fundraising methods have come under scrutiny since the death

of 92-year-old Olive Cooke last year.

She was one of Britain's oldest and longest-serving poppy-sellers.

Her friends said she was donating to more than 20 charities

This was Olive speaking to the BBC in 2014.

It is important, like, to care for others, I think.

We shouldn't just be thinking inwards, all the time,

Because there is so much need in this world.

And, you know, we can, at least, offer some help.

The inquest into Olive's death heard she'd received more than 250 charity

It was suggested that this hounding may have pushed her into taking her

life, although her family insisted the charities were not to blame.

Now lots of these calls and letters, that many of us get asking for us

to donate, come from fundraising agencies,

A staggering 444 million items were sent in the post

by charities in 2013, the latest year for which

There's also been a big increase in the number of calls asking

for money, from 11 million in 2010 to more than 14 million

90%of these were carried out by agencies.

Today's report is very critical of the practices used by some

of the biggest name charities to bring in money, including

Great Ormond Street Hospital, Oxfam and Macmillan Cancer Support.

The report says some charities have made it impossible for donors

to block communication from them or other charities.

Some charities have sold on personal information which has ended up

And vulnerable and elderly people are seen as "fair targets"

The report says charity bosses who allowed these scandalous methods

were either "incompetent or wilfully blind".

Since this investigation started, the Government has created a new,

tougher regulator for the sector, but MPs are warning this doesn't

They say the buck stops with charities to change

their behaviour, and the public needs to be encouraged to report

We invited a number of charities mentioned in the report

onto our programme this morning, but all of them declined including

Oxfam, Macmillan Cancer, Great Ormand Street.

And apologies to the viewers of the BBC News channel who've only

just been able to join us due to an earluer interference.

Let's introduce you to the guests we will talk about on charities.

His father has dementia and his father was inundated with charity

information. Peter Lewis is Chief Executive

of the Institute of Fundraising We will try to speak to Bernard

Jenkin MP. Tell us about your dad, Samuel, he has dementia and has been

inundated? My father's story, he was quite a generous donor to charities.

His data was essentially sold within and outside the sector. His data was

gathered by people who are essentially fraudsters. He lost

about ?33,000 in the end. And you are sure that the starter of his

data being sent on to others was the fact that he was donating to

charity? INAUDIBLE We managed to prove that his data

was sold by the charities on the open market, which included

fraudsters. How did that make you feel? Edit sad. Are you angry. -- a

bit sad. I'm not really angry. What happened to my father has happened

to my father. Fortunately, he is an ex-army officer, ex-civil servants,

he has a good pension and we will recover but a lot of people are

getting caught in this who just don't have the money in the first

place and it is destroying their lives. How vulnerable was your dad?

It's difficult to say. I think one of the things with the report is

that we have an ageing, generous and vulnerable population.

We have an industry... Not only fundraising for charities but

general marketing, which is getting more and more sophisticated. As

such, it is something that will collide with a massive problem.

Let's bring in Peter Lewis, chief executive of the Institute of

Fundraising, it is not the first time we have heard a story like

that. How much do charities make on from selling on personal

information? Firstly, based on the sad case, we have banned the selling

of data, that came into force at the end of last year, charities are no

longer able to sell personal data. We have also banned them sharing it

with other charities unless they have explicit consent of the donor.

Based on the lessons of last year, we have heard the practices that

were brought to light which were unacceptable and we have made

changes to try and make sure that cases like that don't happen in the

future. Why did it take cases like that to shine a light on this? Was

it ever ethical for charities to be doing it? The standards we set in

the codes of fundraising practice are higher standards set by law.

Normal businesses, local authorities, government can share

and sell people's data, that is within data protection law. Based on

what came to light last year, we have taken action and set higher

standards for charities, as they should be. We were shocked with what

had happened with Mr Rae. And the tragic case of Olive Cooke. Is it

right that anyone should ever feel that a generous gesture is seen by

the recipient as being a prey used to potentially more? And then being

repeatedly asked for more -- as a prelude. You are absolutely right.

When a charity benefits from the generosity of a member of the

public, they have to respect that donor and supporter's preferences.

That reflects the moves we have made over the last few months to make

sure that charities do listen to donor preferences and if they donor

says I no longer wants to support you or I no longer want to hear from

you, those charities are obliged to act and listen to those donor's

concerns. Have charities abused that trust? I don't think they

deliberately abused the trust. One of the problems that came to light

is that each individual charity can know exactly the number of times it

is contacting a supporter. You might write to say thank you for your

donation, this is what we have done with your donation, each charity

knows how many times they have contacted a donor. What they don't

know is what other charities are doing. Somebody like Mr Rae or Olive

Cooke, supporting 28 charities on a regular basis, none of those

charities know what other charities are doing. You can get this

cumulative effect where what has been a pleasure, people being able

to give to causes that been a pleasure, people being able

about, turns into a displeasure and becomes overwhelming. At that point,

the donor needs to be very easily able to say and simply say I no

longer want to hear from you, please stop contacting me and the charity

should stop. Is that inevitable when charities lose control by passing on

information to others? I know you say it won't be sold any more but it

still could be passed on if the right box isn't ticked. The MPs

report has said that at times on this issue, trustees have been

incompetent or wilfully blind. They just haven't looked at it enough.

The report is very balanced and the select committee have taken a very

balanced approach. Saying that despite the unacceptable practices

being brought to light and the buzz majority of fundraising practice is

done to a high standard. This morass majority. We must seize on that, it

is generally done to a high standard. -- the vast majority.

Without the generosity of the British public, without charities

asking for support, we wouldn't be looking for clues for cancer. We

wouldn't be supporting older people in their homes, responding to

emergencies like earthquakes in Nepal. Charities need to be able to

ask, but they have to do it in the right way. The other inside from the

select committee is that charities should be fundraising in the same

way with the same values that they approach their service delivery --

the other insight. Perhaps the circumstances came to light last

year means they weren't embedding their value systems in their fund

raising. Is it the only a to do that, to stop charities outsourcing

fundraising completely and stop passing on details completely? -- is

it the only way. Whether it is for money or otherwise. I don't think

there is anything intrinsically wrong with charities working with

agencies with agencies. Agencies can provide an effective and efficient

way of speaking with donors. Often, they have taken risks with their own

commercial money to do innovative things that have driven change and

new approaches. What is absolutely essential is that those charities

work with the agencies in close partnership to make sure the value

systems and charities have at embedded within the practices of the

agencies. They clearly haven't done it in the past. Last year there were

examples where that wasn't true, the practice within the agency wasn't

complying with our code of practice. Some of those charities, which have

accepted this, were not monitoring the work of those agencies as

strongly as they should. One of the things at the Institute that we are

doing is putting in -- in place calls being made to people are made

in the right way and not breaching the standards we have set. Chris,

you are listening, what do you make of what you are hearing here, is it

enough? I don't think it is enough but it is a good first step. It is

quite a complicated issue. I don't think we can expect a perfect

solution delivered immediately. This is something to probably build upon.

The outside agencies are also working in a much more free

environment. I wonder about Chinese rules, like

they call it in the stock exchange. In fairness, the charities have

quite a difficult task but I think they should do more farming and less

hunting, if you follow what I mean. Do you want to respond to that,

Peter? Mr Rae is right, it is the first step. The next thing we are

doing, we will speak to Stephen Dunmore later, we have supported the

set up a new fundraising regulator which we hope will be more robust.

We have asked the fundraising communities. They should have

stronger sanctions, they should be able to ban charities from

undertaking certain activities if they are not doing them to the

highest standards that we expect of charities. For example, if there is

evidence that a call centre, on behalf of a certain charity, is not

hitting those high standards, we want the regulator to be able to

step in and say we are no longer letting you do telephone

fundraising. We want to give confidence back to the public that

the charities are doing the great work they do, daily income diary

out, working generally on behalf of vulnerable people.

The damage is already done. What are they doing about this. Margaret

said, "I no longer donate to charities who have been found to use

dubious practises. If people boycott these charities, they will have to

re-think." Another viewer says, "Desperate time for charities now."

If as a result of everything that has gone on in the past, the new

regulation means that charity donations fall or charity donations

have fallen anyway because, is there any evidence that charity donations

have fallen because of what has gone on? Not at the moment, no. At the

moment as far as I understand donations from individuals are still

rising and it shows there is a huge mark of respect to the British

people who care deeply about things in society. They are still giving at

the moment which is fantastic. If changes were brought in that meant

that fewer donations were received because there want the aggressive

pursuing of people out there to keep on donating, would that be a problem

or would that be the right thing? Charities have to fund-raise in the

right way in the accordance with their value systems and some of the

practises that were exposed last year were clearly unacceptable. We

need to make sure that charities still are able to ask and ask in

effective ways so they can get money for their vital causes and make the

changes in the world that those charities do whether it is

responding to emergencies in Nepal because of the earthquake or whether

it is helping older people in their home or giving a roof for the night

to a homeless person, we have to get the balance right so donors are

treated with respect and that charities are able to deliver the

services that they need to deliver for people in our communities. Peter

Lewis and Chris Ray, thank you very much. I mentioned we were hoping

that Bernard Generalingen would join our sfrtion, unfortunately he has

not been able to yet, but we will be talking to the Stephen Dunmore after

10am. Still to come: Google is to pay ?130

million in UK back taxes, We'll have details and hear

from a politician who once called Millions of people in the US

are clearing up after We'll be speaking to

some of those affected. The sportswear giant Adidas has

told the BBC that it's ending its sponsorship of world

athletics' governing body, It's over the doping scandal

which has engulfed the sport. It could cost world athletics

more than ?20 million. After the deluge, snow

sports on the East Coast of the US, but chaos for schools

and the transport system. The region saw one three-feet

of snow in some places, one of the biggest ever snow

dumps affecting around 85 million Government buildings and schools

will stay closed today and travel is still badly affected.

It's the "last chance" for charities facing fundraising criticisms,

If they don't crack down on unscrupulous fundraising

practices themselves, then Parliament will.

The MPs want to crackdown on those who target old and vulnerable

people. Forced to wear coloured wristbands -

that's the claim by some asylum seekers in Cardiff -

who say they're not allowed their meals at one refuge centre

in the city unless they wear them The BBC is considering plans to ask

over 75s to start paying for their TV licence fees

which are currently free to them It's after a funding deal

with the government which will see the BBC become responsible

for the ?650 million cost And trouble at Twitter,

the social media giant is losing four of its key people after around

8% of its workforce were told they'd The site has mostly failed

to impress investors lately. Twitter's boss Jack Dorsey says

the latest departures Let's catch up with

all the sport now. Chris. I'm trying to watch two games

of tennis at once. It is a very exciting Monday morning. It is about

the Australian Open tennis. Andy and Murray Joanna Konta are in action.

If Konta does it, she will become the first British woman to reach a

Grand Slam final since 1984. I can tell you right now, in Melbourne,

Konta is serving for the match. She is one set all at the moment, but

serving for the match on the Margaret Court Arena. We could get

some history in the making here. She is playing the Russian, the

20-year-old. She took a medical time out during this third set, trying to

play a few mind games perhaps with the British tennis player. It hasn't

worked. Konta is totally focussed and serving to get into the last

eight. Murray is on a packed arena. On the Margaret Court Arena it is

empty. Unbelievable. Murray is playing the Aussie and he is going

really well, Murray. He took the first set. It is even Stephens in

the second. Murray has a really good record against Tomic. Tomic has

never taken a set off Murray in their three meetings. You might

remember these two met in the Davis Cup in Glasgow last year and Murray

beat him comfortably. Konta in Melbourne right now, serving for

this. Remember, she came to light last year. And since then she

defeated five or maybe more 20 top players and she is on the cusp of

doing the greatest thing she has done so far in her career, getting

through to the quarterfinals of the Australian Open. We will keep you

updated. Thank you very much.

Cities along the east coast of the United States are slowly

recovering from one of the most severe winter storms ever recorded.

At least 28 deaths have been linked to the blizzard.

Government buildings in Washington and many schools will be closed

today and flights and public transport remain severely disrupted.

In Washington DC, more than 22 inches of snow fell

This time-lapse footage shows how the city was changed

Let's get the latest and speak to some of those people affected.

She had to be pulled out of a snow drift she sank into.

She's been stuck inside her house for most of the weekend

and Idil Ozer is in Arlington, Virginia.

She's been too scared to go outside the snow is so bad.

Thank you you had to be pulled out of a

snowdrift, what happened? Well, I was walking to Central Park and I

decided to stray from the normal path that was paved because there

were a lot of people there and I ended up going to a spot of snow

that hasn't been touched before and I just sunk in knee-deep and a

stranger pulled me out and we waddled a little and it was just a

really fun morning. Not unlike a normal typical day in New York City.

Fun, normal typical day in New York City.

problems too, isn't it? What is the situation in New York City? It is.

Well, 11 States were situation in New York City? It is.

of emergency including New situation in New York City? It is.

is considered the second situation in New York City? It is.

1869. There are some people affected. However, the majority are

keeping a good spirit. Remember, this is the land of 9/11. People are

used to overcoming tragedy and so this was actually

used to overcoming tragedy and so chill compared to the other things

they have had to deal with. You have been stuck, haven't you? Yeah, I

have been stuck here for three days I would say and cabin fever is

totally real right now. How bad is it? I would say it is 23 inches. It

stopped snowing like 24 hours ago, but then again, it is really hard to

take the snow off the roads. Would you have wanted to venture out if

you could? I kind of tried for food. It failed miserably because it was

right in middle of the storm too. After the storm it wasn't as bad,

but I would not recommend going out there. Mary, you didn't want to go

out at all, did you? Tell you what it is like where you are? We're

pretty buried here. It is hard to get out. Luckily there is a wine bar

and tapas restaurant across the street which opened up and I saw it

and the chef was creating paella for the neighbourhood. We have had a

good time. That's a short distance away from my front door, but it has

been fun. Have you encountered any things that caused you difficulties?

Yeah, it is hard. You can't get the public transportation. The metro has

been closed. My dog isn't tall enough for the snow. She has been

having trouble bouncing around and getting from place to place. So we

have had our struggles, definitely. 24 inches is a lot. What about work?

I think you're in charge at your work, are you for deciding whether

others get to work. Do you think many others will be getting to work

today? Everyone is working from home today like the Government. The

Government is closed so I have sent out the e-mail to tell people that

they can work from home today. We're all at home. Are you going to be

able to get to work? I work in the Government so I'm off for today.

Fortunately. Jasmine, you have been out and about, haven't you? You said

you got caught in a snowdrift and you went out in Central Park, are

you going to be able to carry on where business as normal today? Yes,

I'm working remotely today. Jasmine, you have only lived in New York City

for a few years. You're from Saudi Arabia. Yes. Have you ever seen

anything like this, could you comprehend snow like this? No. It

felt like Jonas was a procastnator and gave us winter all in one day. I

have never seen snow this massive before and a lot of New Yorkers

haven't either especially those who use the city as their new home. We

are watching someone snowboarding. What did you see when you were out

and about, anything on a par with that?

Well, yes, Central Park was amazing. The team did a great job this year.

It is the first time that Central Park is measuring the official snow

measurements this year and we had a travel ban so vehicles, non

emergency vehicles weren't allowed on the road until 7am on Sunday. So

during that time, while we were indoors sleeping or eating or binge

watching TV, the team at Central Park were shovelling and clearing

the roads. It was extremely safe. People were just really having a

really fun day out and I was pleasantly surprised at how

wonderfully organised it was. They even cleared park benches and dried

them so that when you would go into the park you had a safe place to sit

down. People were sledding, people were skiing, people were just

walking around. A loft dogs. A lot of children. And a lot of big kids

walking around in snowball fights! It was a lot of fun. It sounds it.

Thank you very much for joining us. Good luck with getting on with work

the other two of you who have been a bit more housebound. Thank you.

Still to come today: We'll be live at the inquests into the deaths

of 96 Liverpool fans at Hillsborough.

The coroner is due to start summing up the evidence.

It's emerged that a company working for the Home Office has been making

asylum seekers wear red wristbands in order to receive food

at their temporary accommodation in Cardiff.

Some residents say the wristbands marked them out and they'd been

It follows the news we reported last week that asylum seekers

in Middlesbrough had complained their houses

were targeted after people realised all front doors were painted red.

Jo Stevens is the MP for Cardiff Central.

She's been told this morning that the wristbands

Joining us from Cardiff is Eric Ngalle.

He stayed at Lynx House before he was granted refugee

He says he was abused in the street for wearing the wristband.

Thank you both very much for joining us. Eric, tell us about the

wristband. It was issued between meals. So you go there on a

particular day and you don't know whether it is going to be pink,

silver, plaque or blue. So that was just standard procedure. Explain

that. It wasn't always a particular colour, it was, how did it work? It

fluctuated on a daily basis. In fact, so you go for meal time at

lunch and they will give you silver band and when you go for dinner,

they will give you a red one. However, the system was so bad, if

for some reason or the other, the wristband was not on your wrist when

you came back, you had to justify whether you've lost it and you had

to spend time in reception, not only were they issuing wristbands, we

were told that failure to wear the wristband would affect your case

with the Home Office negatively. That and the fact that without a

wristband you wouldn't be given food to eat and without a wristband some

people went without food all day. You were abused as a result of

wearing the wristband? That is correct. Working from the Lynx Hotel

where we had food, it was normally at traffic time. People who noticed

the wristbands would honk their car horns shouting for us to go back

home. I could deal with this situation, but Mr Abdul carrying

from Saddam could not speak a single word of English and he was always

reminded of the fact that losing his wristband was tantamount to losing

his case with the Home Office. They were depressed. People were crying

because they lost their wristband and they knew that they would go

without food. They didn't have any other means of sustenance. If you

don't have lunch and dinner, you go without food. Did you feel

absolutely sure that the wristbands were marking you and others out as

asylum seekers and that you were being abused as a direct result of

that? That is correct. There was a direct link. If the idea was that

people would wear wristbands during the meal and took them off after,

that would have been reasonable. But the fact that they stipulated

whether you are within the confines of Lynx Hotel or outside Lynx Hotel

you had to wear the wristbands at all time. That is selective

discrimination. How buzz visible were they. -- how visible. You say

people were targeting you because of the wristbands, it sounds like they

were prominent. Could they not be hidden under a sleeve? Remember, I

was there between June- July, summertime, this is not something

you could easily conceal. MP for Cardiff Central, Jo what do

you think of this. I read the reports over the weekend over the

issue of the wristbands. I was concerned as a member people

contacted me from Cardiff. I spoke to the company yesterday and they

assured me yesterday that they would be abandoning the wristbands and

replacing them with a different system. I suggested photo ID cards

which people could keep in their pockets and would not identify them

outside of Lynx House. I have had confirmation from the company and

they will be removing the wristbands with effect from today. What about

the fact that they were used in the first place? I just think that... If

you think about the context of people being asked to wear these

wristbands. They fled from war-torn countries. Most of these people who

are in Lynx have come from Syria, they don't want to be readily

identifiable. They are fleeing persecution, fleeing warl. And these

wristbands made them identifiable outside the confines of Lynx House.

This seems like a crass and unnecessary and insensitive scheme

when much better schemes would be available. Eric, you said about not

wanting to always wear the wristbands. Where many of you having

to wear the wristbands were using it as an issue? If so, where you

listened to? That is a complete negative, I took it up with

management at Lynx Hotel but their standpoint was Yu Liu bill where the

wristbands or you go without food. I took it up a couple of times. -- was

that you either wear. I could cope with the situation, I understood

English but other people were there, Sudanese, Eritrea and, Syrians, they

did not know the left and right hands when it came to English. They

were being mentally tortured. I tried to help them. I am happy that

Jo Stevens has highlighted this situation and they decided to stop

it, Clearsprings and they have decided to stop it. They deserve

some sort of human dignity, they are human beings. They are traumatised

enough, segregating them with this wristband policy is not good. Jo,

Eric is saying he and others were raising this as an issue but it

wasn't listened to, it went on for some time. You put in a call, it was

dealt with swiftly. It doesn't seem difficult, it is going for so long

when clearly they were causing it seems concerned and unhappiness? I

am very surprised and that is one of the things I will be raising

hopefully later today in the House of Commons. When representations

being made, why Clearsprings nor the Home Office took any action to stop

this procedure. I would like Home Office took any action to stop

to Eric on behalf of many people Home Office took any action to stop

Cardiff who have contacted me, we are very sorry for anybody

Cardiff who have contacted me, we suffered abuse as a result of being

identified as and asylum suffered abuse as a result of being

Cardiff has always been a welcoming city full of generous and

Cardiff has always been a welcoming people who have welcomed people from

all over the world people who have welcomed people from

want people outside people who have welcomed people from

think they are not Cardiff because they certainly are.

Thank you both. We asked the private company

that runs Lynx House, Clearsprings Ready Homes, for

an interview which they declined. A Home Office spokesperson told this

programme this morning that Clearsprings were withdrawing

the wristbands from use. It went on to say it expects

the highest standards from all of its contractors -

and that includes not endangering If there is any evidence that this

wasn't the case, it would be dealt A couple of e-mails. Why was it

considered necessary for these wristbands to be issued in the first

incidents? Presumably the super prize in company had a logical

reason, what was it? John on Facebook, what is the problem with

asylum seekers wearing wristbands for food, we do it on holidays, they

should not be complaining, homeless people don't get food. They should

be grateful. Get in contact with us. Every year a staggering 20 men

are killed at the hands of partner. Now an Inside Out report has

revealed that Cornwall has become the focus of some of the most

serious domestic abuse against men Four of the five people killed

by a partner over the past five Bill Buckley spoke to some of those

who've been affected. I remember sitting there,

holding the telephone I said, "oh God,

what's he done now?" Peter's brother, Alan,

was killed by his wife. When the full story came out,

it transpired there had been some kind of domestic argument,

early in the morning. And she stabbed him in the chest

with a pair of scissors. The violence was triggered by a row

about cleaning the house. Peter had no idea how volatile

the relationship was. You feel powerless,

because you think I should have done something, but of course,

if you didn't know, Sandra Clinch was jailed

for nine years for manslaughter on the grounds

of diminished responsibility. During the court case,

it was revealed throughout her life,

she was prone to violent mood swings, thought to be due

to a personality disorder. Sitting for two weeks in the court

room, listening to this litany of past events was

absolutely hellish. Three of her previous partners

were called as witnesses. At least one of them

had been hospitalised, But, of course, nobody

ever told you about anything like this and I hadn't met

these people before, If, like me, you'd only thought

about women being the victims of domestic violence,

you might think the story of Peter's brother, Alan is just a tragic one

off, but that isn't the case. And it seems that Cornwall has

become the focus for some of the most serious domestic abuse

against men anywhere I stood up for myself

in the beginning. It was with the threat of violence

that I started to back down Which, I suppose, was

the wrong thing to do. Mark, a name we have

given him to hide his identity, wasn't seeing his

girlfriend for long before Three months into the relationship,

the rows started getting toxic. And then six months in,

that was the first bit of violence that

she threw my way. I had to have reconstructive

surgery on my thumb. The level of violence was getting

more and more intense. Men are physically

stronger than women. In my family, I was always told,

you never hit a woman. Because I had never seen

someone as violent as that, it had never occurred to me

that you can hit back. I think the fear of,

if I had, I had opened up, It took a public humiliation

to force Mark to get out. One day outside Tesco

she attacked me outside Tesco. The thing that brought

it home to me was if I had attacked her outside Tesco,

people would have stepped But because she attacked me

outside Tesco, people stood I could see them from

the corner of my eye, whilst trying to stop

her from hitting me, I knew from then on that this is how

it's going to be until she either I knew that would be

my life from then on. At that point, I knew I had

to leave, I had to get out. Thankfully, Mark did get away,

he left Wales and ended up at one of the only refugees in the country

dedicated to male victims of domestic abuse,

located here in Cornwall. People can sometimes come down

to Cornwall like they are escaping, But what I would say is that men,

generally, anywhere they are, find it hard to

disclose, hard to make contact with services,

the fear of being disbelieved. The fear of being seen

as the perpetrator, not the victim, the stigma that is attached

to being a victim makes it very hard Celebrity-backed campaigns have

helped to widely publicise violence However, comparatively

little is said about Nationally, about 20 men a year

are killed by their partners. Here in Cornwall, five people have

died as a result of domestic It's difficult to draw

conclusions from these cases, nonetheless, one of the deaths

has prompted action. This is an independent review

into the death of Alan Clinch, It was drawn up a year ago to help

local agencies learn lessons. It chillingly suggests

the county may have a worrying trend of men dying

from domestic abuse. It goes on to say that too

many local health care professionals do not possess

the knowledge to spot It's Michelle Davies' job

to try to reduce domestic violence Well, this review a year ago said,

didn't it, that there might be chinks in the chain of specifically

male victims, what work have you done since

that report came out? There were a number

of recommendations and they have been completed or are in the process

of being completed. Are we going to get on top

of this if you and I meet Will you be giving me very

different statistics, There are always

lessons to be learned. But what I don't want to do

and what myself and many other people do is make sure

we are not repeating ourselves and not making the same

mistakes down the line. That would be our pledge

to people that have a Whether Cornwall's authorities

can put a stop to this worrying trend of men dying

from domestic abuse remains For Mark, he's just thankful

there was help on offer in the county when

he needed it most. With the support of the refuge,

I can see that I have got some traits that

are likeable by other people. I'm not this horrible

man she turned me into. He has a message for

other men who feel trapped in similarly

destructive relationships. Let it be known it's happening

to you if it is happening to you. Let it be known it is happening

to that person, because it kills. It kills people either

by the perpetrator or the person If you've been affected by domestic

abuse, you can phone the BBC Action Line, open 24 hours

and calls are free. You can watch the full Inside Out

report tonight at 7:30pm Let's get the latest weather update.

Incredible snow in the United States. Let me show them to you,

Shepherdstown, West Virginia, 103 centimetres, more than a metre and

getting on for about 3.5 feet. In 24 hours? More less. Most of it fell on

Friday or Saturday, a new record in JFK, the biggest snowstorm on

record. It almost hit that in Central Park it was the second one.

Did you see the pictures of the pandas making snow angels in

Washington zoo? Lovely. More so potentially for Georgia and the

Carolina states. But the system potentially for Georgia and the

producing this snow is now coming our way and it is in the Atlantic.

It will bring us heavy rain and strong winds but no snow. More

extremes. In the UK, we have had our own.

Bottom Look at that, 24 Celsius. Gravesend, 14 Celsius.

I'm Joanna Gosling in for Victoria Derbyshire.

Welcome to the programme if you've just joined us.

Charities are warned to crack down on unscrupulous fund-raisers

Charities should be fund-raising the elderly and vulnerable donors.

Charities should be fund-raising with the same values that they

approach their service delivery and perhaps some of the circumstances

that came to light last year showed they weren't embedding their value

systems. We will be talking to the man who

has been asked by the Government to regulate the system.

In her first TV interview since the death of toddler

Poppi Worthington, the children's commissioner tells us that the law

surrounding allegations of family abuse, may need to change.

Google faces mounting criticism over its tax deal with the UK,

some say it's derisory, and Labour wants the chancellor

George Osborne to explain it to the House of Commons today.

We'll talk to the MP who said this to Google a couple of years ago:

The sportswear giant Adidas has told the BBC it will end its sponsorship

of world athletics' governing body four years early.

The decision follows the doping scandal that's engulfed the sport,

and could cost world athletics more than ?20 million.

Fun for some, along the snow hit US East Coast,

but residents face more massive disruption today

The region saw three-feet of snow in some places, affecting

Government buildings and schools will stay closed,

The back end of the storm will hit the UK this week.

The coroner at the inquests into the Hillsborough Disaster

is due to begin summing up for the jury.

He'll recap nearly two years of evidence on how 96 Liverpool fans

It's the longest-running inquest in English legal history.

Ben Schofield has been covering the hearings from the start

and is at the coroner's court in Warrington for us now.

Ben, what are you expecting today? Well, this is the beginning of the

end of these hearings. Inquests that began back in March 2014 and it has

been an emotional journey just getting to this point. Many of the

bereaved families coming too as many of the days of evidence as they

could face, as they learned more about how their loved ones came to

lose their lives on 15th April 1989 and emotional as well for the

members of the jury. Let's not forget, seven women and three men

have sat across all of that evidence, listening to what is often

been distressing testimony from the witness box in court and I have to

say I remember seeing some members of the jury visibly upset as they

took in what was being said in court. Today, the coroner, Sir John

will start what is expected to be a three week speech, sum rising

evidence that's been heard over the past 21 months. It has been a long

time coming. These new inquests were ordered by the High Court at the end

of 2012. More than three years ago. They ordered those new hearings and

today, we're taking a step close tore hearing what the new jury make

of the case that's put in front of them. Ben, as you say, it has been

an incredibly long inquest. A huge amount of evidence to be summed-up.

Three weeks of summing-up is extraordinary. Just take us through

some of the facts and the figures of that.

Yes, of course, it is a long summing-up. Hillsborough is still

Britain's worst sports stadium disaster. 96 dead, hundreds of other

Liverpool fans injured and many of those needing hospital treatment.

The evidence here has been extensive. More than 500 witnesses

called to speak in court. The jury has been taken to around 4,000

documents including things like police officers statements, maps and

plans of the ground, photographs from the day of the disaster. The

evidence here has been split up into sections. Some dating back to the

late 1970s when Hillsborough was first given its safety certificate.

The jury looked at the design of the stadium, the planning for the FA Cup

semifinal in 1989, what happened on the day itself, how the emergency

services responded and also how South Yorkshire Police gathered

evidence about the disaster from their own police officers

afterwards. Painstaking work has been done by investigators as

they've tracked the movements of the 96 through the stadium from the

moment they arrived at Hillsborough ground to the moment a doctor

confirmed they had died. Any of those faces of evidence and details

from the faces could form part of the summing-up. What is the

timetable from here? The coroner is due to start talking today and isn't

due to finish for the next 15 days. There is a half term break when the

jury have been told they won't be required. They're due to be sent out

to retire on 22nd February, on or around that date and they will be

given a set of written questions that they have been told will be

laid out clearly or them and it is through answering those questions

that we'll hear the jury's conclusions. Clearly, we don't know

the content of that questionnaire just yet, we are expecting that will

be made public sometime over the next three weeks. The coroner said,

of course, he can't forecast how long the jury will take in coming up

with those answers to those questions.

Thanks, Ben. It's the last chance for charities

facing fundraising criticisms, If they don't crack down

on unscrupulous fundraising practices themselves,

then Parliament will. The MPs want to crack down on those

who target old and A company that provides meals

to asylum-seekers is said to be dropping the requirement

that they wear coloured wristbands. The asylum seekers said they had

to wear the wristbands at one refuge centre in Cardiff if

they wanted to get fed. Let's go to our correspondent. They

deserve some kind of human dignity. Segregating them with this wristband

policy is a no, no. Our correspondent is outside Lynx House

in Cardiff. Hywel, they are changing the policy now. Talk us through what

has gone on here. Well, I have been speaking to some

of the current residents at Lynx House behind me. Several of them had

to wear the red wristband and they have told me about their feelings of

how they said they had been treated as less than humans, branded as

animals. An asylum seeker who I spoke to and came from Afghanistan

complained to me how he has been given abuse on the street, things I

couldn't repeat on camera, but as people drive past on this busy area

of Cardiff, he says he is unable to take it off when he goes to the

shower and when he prays. He said the red wristband is only one of the

issues that they have about the conditions and they allege that

people are being crowded into rooms and they think the welcome they have

been promised isn't materialising. They will be pleased the policy is

being changed, but they want to see the other issues being addressed as

well. Thank you, Hywel. The BBC is considering whether to

ask over 75 year olds to start paying for or contributing

to their TV licence fees. At the moment they don't pay

at all but the BBC agreed a deal with the government which will see

it take on responsibility for the ?650 million cost

of free licences from 2020. Trouble at Twitte, the social

media giant is losing four of its key people,

after around 8% of its workforce were told

they'd have to leave. The site has mostly failed

to impress investors lately. Twitter's boss Jack Dorsey says

the latest departures Let's catch up with all the tennis

now and join Chris Mitchell. Bring us right up-to-date then? It

has been a great morning for British tennis. Joanna Konta made it to the

last eight. She made the quarterfinals of a Grand Slam is a

rare thing for British women's tennis. Jo Jury was the last to do

it in 1984. tennis. Jo Jury was the last to do

there? She fought back from a set down to beat the Russian 21 seed

there? She fought back from a set 2-1 in a match that lasted over

three hours. Konta started the game 2-1 in a match that lasted over

really well. She took a 3-1 lead, but ended up losing 6-4. She showed

great determination to come out and win the next one and the final set

went to a nailbiting climax. She came out and won it and afterwards

said, "I'm going to eat and sleep, eat and sleep and repeat." Who will

she face next? Madison Keys or the Chinese qualifier. The match is on

after Andy Murray. Andy Murray is in action right now. A fantastic start

to the week for British tennis, Andy Murray is playing the local

favourite, Tomic. It is a packed arena and Murray is enjoying this.

He took the first set 6-4. He has taken the set 6-4. He has 100%

record against Tomic and it looks like he is going to keep that on

track as they start the third set. Murray, of course, having to visit

his father-in-law Nigel Sears in hospital last week after he

collapsed, but he looks like he has refocussed and could go really well,

so we could have a man and woman in the quarterfinals.

England's cricketers remain on the back foot though. The hosts are

building a commanding lead in back foot though. The hosts are

second innings. It started well for England. James Anderson taking two

wickets in three balls. Including that of the captain Ab deviliers.

Duminy settled the innings down to a 50 partnership. Duminy has gone, but

South Africa in a good position, 111-4. That's a lead of 244.

Did Chelsea's Diego Costa get an arsenal player sent off at the

Emirates? It put a nasty dent in the Gunners title bid. Costa made the

most of the challenge according to Arsene Wenger. You may have seen it

on Match Of The Day, he said that's the game of the striker. Costa is

good at that. He felt that Costa was making the most of it. The red card

changing it the complexion of that game.

More speculation about Manchester United manager Louis van Gaal,

admitting his side hasn't United manager Louis van Gaal,

to expectations. United supporters were mutinous after the 1-0 defeat

to Southampton. Van Gaal said they were right to boo. I cannot deny

that, I saw the match. I will be back with the headlines just after

10:30am with an update on the Murray match.

Thank you for joining us this morning, welcome to the programme

if you've just joined us, we're on BBC 2 and the BBC

News Channel until 11am this morning.

Throughout the progrmame, we'll bring you the latest breaking

news and developing stories and, as always, keen to hear

from you on all the stories we've been talking about this morning.

Lots of you getting in touch about that story we bought you 20

minutes ago about asylum seekers in Cardiff wearing wristbands

The Home Office have now told us the private contractor

One anonymous text, ridiculous, many people in Caribbean resorts have

well and wristbands to say whether they are on full board

accommodation, they paid for the privilege, ID is essential, what do

they suggest? Wristband is hardly noticeable, get real. Anonymous

text, I wish I was so lucky, everything had to them on a plate.

Another anonymous text... Someone on Twitter, companies moaning about a

food wristband, they supposedly fled from their lives from war, shut up

and eat free food. The Nazis made the Jews wear yellow stars and

painted their doors yellow, displacing the locals and forcing

them into errors, done to specifically generate hatred against

the Jews and make it easier to deport them -- into areas. Anonymous

text, if I was given food and shelter, I would be glad to wear a

wristband. Keep your reviews coming in.

Texts will be charged at the standard network rate.

Wherever you are you can watch our programme online -

via the bbc news app or our website bbc.co.uk/victoria.

Charities have been told they have one last chance to clean

up their act over the way they've been fundraising.

MPs say they need to demonstrate they're not hounding people

for money, particularly the old and vulnerable.

If they don't, then MPs will bring in new laws to control the sector.

They accuse charity bosses of being either "incompetent

or wilfully blind" to what was being done in their name.

This whole scandal centres round cases where elderly people

have been bombarded with many thousands of appeals,

after their names and addresses were sold or passed on.

The Government has already taken action to try and improve

It's set up a new regulator, which should come into

We can talk now to its chief executive Stephen Dunmore.

Thank you for joining us. Good morning. Tell us, first of all, what

you have seen going on before. What has happened is that there has been

a disconnect in some charities between fundraising practices and

their social values. There is no doubt, looking at the evidence and

review in the autumn, the Olive Cooke report last week, that

particularly sad case, and, indeed, the select committee report today,

there is no doubt that there has been a lot of public confidence in

fundraising. And that charities need to do something about that. Why do

you think that disconnect happened? Just given too much free rein? It is

hard to say. In some cases, there has clearly been a lot of the fun

raising put out to contract is, fundraising agencies. And the MPs

say, on that, they were either wilfully not knowing what was going

on... They basically want scrutinising what was being done by

others in their name. That is absolutely right. One thing that

certainly needs to happen now is for charity trustees in particular and

senior management to exercise a greater degree of control over those

contracts, to make sure they are in accordance with best practice. You

enter the stage, you are the man to oversee all of this, why will it be

any different under you? Well, there have been previous attempts at

voluntary regulation, which had been to a greater or lesser extent

successful. The Everington review made it very clear that it is time

for a new approach. And a new regulator to give a signal to the

sector that things will be different. Do you have any more

powers? We don't. But we have more independence. Because we will have

control over the code of guidance which previously sat with the

Institute of Fundraising. We will have more clout because we have more

recent losses, we will be basing a levy on charities rather than on the

membership arrangements. What does that translate to in financial

terms? What level of resources have you got now that wasn't there

before? We are aiming and the Etherington Review said this was

necessary, we are aiming for something up to ?2 million in times

of resources and a staff of 20, compared to the six that the

fundraising standards board had, that is more clout in that respect.

Also, we want to... I think, put in place rather stronger sanctions. If

charities don't improve their fundraising practice we will

adjudicate complaints from the public. According to the results of

the adjudication, we will strengthen the code of guidance where we need

to do that. If charities are unwilling to make the changes we

suggest, then we may, for example, ordered them to desist from a

particular campaign that they are carrying out -- order them. Can you

force them? No. I will come to that in a moment. There might be orders

to desist. Also, we can name and shame, which is a pretty effective

thing, I think, for charities. Is that a new thing? They live on their

public reputation. The public standards board on a whole has not

gone for that approach of naming and shaming. How swiftly would you

decide to name and shame a charity? If a complaint comes in from a

member of the public that they are being put under undue pressure from

a charity, we would investigate the complaint, adjudicate it, produce a

report and say to the charity, please can you implement the changes

that the report recommends. If they didn't do that, we might well name

and shame. Also move onto an order to desist from those particular

activities. What you said some moments ago about stronger

sanctions, is that the most powerful weapon in your armoury? The threat

of naming and shaming? And ordered to desist. But that is not backed up

by any other punishment, is it? Not act up by strategy regulation. This

is a continuation of the voluntary system -- not backed up by

strategic. The Etherington Review said we should have one more go at

the voluntary system before a statutory system. The Charity

commission also has powers. They are consulting on guidance on

fundraising at the moment. If cases come to a standstill, cases and we

have adjudicated, and changes in practice and we wish the sector to

carry out that they resist, particular charities resisting,

Willie Wood referred those cases, ultimately, to the Charity

commission. -- we would refer. Because they have the powers. Some

will be listening and thinking, hang on, what the charities did, some of

them, was absolutely unacceptable. We MPs have ripped added, saying it

is unacceptable, they are in the last chance saloon -- the MPs have

looked at it. Why not statutory regulation and it would mean that

charities would have no choice but to comply with operating in the

correct way? I do think... I don't think that... I would use the

language of last chance saloon. My experience, over the past three

weeks, talking to charities, is that there is now a realisation that

things are wrong and that they are up for change. I am quite optimistic

that charities over the next six months, as we develop the new

fundraising regulator, and incidentally, we are not fully

operational until the early summer... That charities will work

with us. They were corporate with us. That we can bring about

necessary changes. Ultimately, if that doesn't happen, ministers have

made it very clear, with reserve powers in the charities Bill at the

moment in Parliament, that they will... They will introduce

legislation to move to a statutory system which will presumably involve

the Charity commission. Have any charities that behaved badly in the

past been punished for it? I'm really not aware of the details of

that. I don't particularly want to dwell on the past. Certainly, the

Charity commission takes enforcement action from time to time against

individual charities. I would rather look to the future. We are now

working with charities and working closely with the Charity commission

and hopefully we will now get things right and bring about a sea change

in fundraising practice. At the end of the day, this is about public

confidence in charities. And protecting the interest of donors,

potential donors and the public, not least those who are vulnerable.

Thank you. Thanks for joining us.

Still to come before 11am: Criticism of Google's tax deal.

Labour wants Chancellor George Osborne to explain himself to

Parliament. We will hear from a panel of guests and we would love to

get your thoughts, get in touch. All of the usual ways of getting in

touch. Should there be a different level of proof required in family

abuse? It is the suggestions after a court case. On the balance of

probabilities, Poppy Worthington had been sexually assaulted by her

father before she died at her home in 2012. He was arrested but never

charged. The Crown Prosecution Service had previously said there

was insufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect

Her father denies any wrongdoing. And Longfield, the children's

Commissioner for England is joining us to explain what she thinks needs

to change. -- Anne. What needs to change? This is a terrible case.

Three years since a little girl has died. Three years and we are not

much closer in knowing died. Three years and we are not

happened. It illustrates how problematic the whole notion of

beyond reasonable doubt is for many of the cat uses around child sexual

abuse. There was evidence in this case but

abuse. There was evidence in this back to the place that so many of

the cases are. Where children are unable to give firm details. Often

they won't come forward until many months or even years after the

incident happened. M6 evidence is almost nonexistent, very often. And

the child can often become muddled about recalling dates and the like.

the child can often become muddled The burden of absolute proof is

something which many children struggle with. It means most cases

don't get to court and are not successful. To be clear, are you

saying that incremental courts there should be a lower threshold for

cases of child abuse? There needs to be a debate. Beyond reasonable doubt

at the moment is not fit for purpose for the majority of child sexual

abuse cases that are being reported. It means that very few can actually

get to the courts at all because they can't bring forward that

evidence. In this case we have seen a ruling by the charge on the basis

of probability that it probably happened. Although acknowledging

that the father he denied all claims. I am not saying we should

die the legal process or mad that we should embrace the probability

rating at all. But it just means at this stage, we are serious about

tackling child abuse, we want to protect children as much as we can

and bring those to justice that have harmed children, we need to look at

different ways of getting evidence. That means the police, judiciary and

social services need a serious conversation about what can be the

best evidence. If we know that many of the traditional forms of evidence

aren't just going to be there. When you say beyond reasonable doubt is

not fit for purpose, the same time as saying you want in there to be a

debate on how that is is treated in courts in the future, it sounds like

you have already decided. You think it should be the balance of

probability rather than beyond reasonable doubt. At the moment, the

need to prove beyond reasonable doubt is just a very, very

problematic for the majority of cases. If you have an eight-year-old

or a nine-year-old who has maybe suffered a number of incidences over

the last five years, they will be telling a story, they won't be able

to remember dates, they won't have friends that evidence. At the

moment, that will mean that all of their evidence will be discounted.

We need to really look at how we can best replace that or enhance bat,

which gives more children protection for justice and going forward --

enhance that. When you are talking about denying

somebody their liberty and our justice system is predicated on

beyond reasonable doubt? Of course. That's why I say no way must we

dilute the legal system. That's very important. That must remain, but

knowing what we do, it does demand that we have the conversation, I

think and what it also demands is that the social services and the

police themselves have greater levels of involvement, they talk and

are more in touch about this, they work together in a greater way than

they have been before. It is not easy. It is complicated, it is

hidden. We are not talking here about diluting the legal process,

but knowing we can't bring convictions on the experience of

child sexual abuse then something has to change. I'm not clear what

you think could change without diluting the Criminal Justice System

as it is? It is about the level of evidence and how the evidence is

gathered. The police have a really clear role in ensuring the best

evidence is brought forward. Now, they are committed to doing that,

but sometimes it depends on when evidence is gathered, how it is

gathered and the like. This That is a matter for policing and every

individual investigation? It is. But sometimes the level of evidence

beyond reasonable doubt, the forensic evidence for instance, just

isn't there. Now, it maybe that we can't improve it and we will have to

look at remaining where we are, but knowing it doesn't work. So very

often for children the thing I'm going to be doing with the police

and with social services over the next six months. Does it make a

mockery of the legal system when we have got something like we have now

which is that the father denies the allegations. He has not faced

criminal charges and yet a family judge is saying that he did sexually

abuse the child? It makes it confusing. And very problematic. So

we are in a situation where we know little more than we did. In legal

terms, there has been no conviction. We're told there can be no more

criminal investigations until there is further evidence, but clearly

there are concerns. Now, again, social services and the police must

work together in this to make sure that other children are safeguarded.

Thank you very much. The Labour MP who described Google

as evil tells us their tax deal, described by some as der risry,

needs to be explained. We will talk to Margaret Hodge and others

shortly. And what caused four sperm whales to

be washed up on beaches in Lincolnshire and Norfolk? We will

have the latest. The sportswear giant Adidas

is understood to have told world athletics' governing body that it

wants to end its sponsorship deal The decision follows the doping

scandal that's engulfed the sport, and could cost world athletics

more than ?20 million. Residents along the snow-hit

East Coast of the US face more massive disruption today

after the record weekend storm. Government buildings

and schools will stay closed, The back end of the storm will hit

the western UK this week, bringing torrential downpours

and more flood risks. The coroner at the inquests

into the Hillsborough disaster is due to begin summing

up for the jury. He'll recap nearly two years

of evidence on how 96 Liverpool fans It's the longest-running inquest

in English legal history. The Duke of Cambridge has paid

tribute to a former Army officer, Henry Worsley, who has died

of exhaustion and dehydration after trying to cross

the Antarctic unsupported. He was just 30 miles

short of his goal. A company that provides meals

to asylum-seekers in Cardiff is dropping the rule that they have

to wear coloured wristbands. A Home Office spokesman told us

here on Derbyshire that the highest standards were expected

from contractors including not endangering the safety

of those in its care. These are human beings. They deserve

some human dignity. Segregating them with the wristband policy is a no

no. Let's get the latest on the Australian Open. Chris has the

latest sports news. Andy Murray is going very well. Joanna Konta said

I'm going to eat and sleep and repeat after she made the last eight

at the Australian Open. She is throwing her racket, she doesn't

care about that anymore. She beat the Russian in a game that lasted

over three hours. She was exhausted afterwards and emegsly, physically

and mentally, she left everything on the court, but she is there. The

first time since Jo Jury in 1984 that we have had a woman in the

quarterfinals. Andy Murray is playing Tomic, the local favourite.

Look at his touch. He never lost to the Australian and he's not going to

do it. He's going well in the third set. Not all good news for you.

England's cricketers are on the back foot. This is JP Duminy. They are

building up a big second innings lead in that Test Match. JP Duminy

giving it to the England's bowlers. Did Chelsea's Costa get the Arsenal

player sent off? This is what he did next. He scored the goal that won

the game. Arsene Wenger not happy and this possibly a big story for

you, Louis van Gaal. They are saying he could be on his

way out. He had to endure boos and cackles from the Manchester United

crowd as Manchester United lost to Southampton. There is rumours over

the newspapers and in social media that he could be, he could be on his

way out from Old Trafford any time soon. We will keep you updated. No

official news at the moment, but his future at Manchester United is under

real scrutiny. Thank you very much, Chris. See you

later. How much will it cost us if we leave

the EU. Let's go to Norman Smith. What's the figure? The figure from

the people who want us to stay in the EU is a huge one. They have done

all the sums. They say look, we do half our trade with Europe,

something like 50% of or more of our trade is with Europe and they have

come up with a figure, they say ?133 billion will be lost to the UK if we

pulled out of Britain. That works out at around ?650,000 for every

business, around ?3,000 for every family, but that is the numbers

they've come up with and the guy leading their campaign, Sir Stewart

Rhodes was insistent that business was really, really worried about the

prospect of pulling out of the EU. This is what he said.

Of course, trade will continue, but will it continue at the same level?

Will there be job losses? Will there be difficult negotiations to be had?

China said they are not keen in us coming out of the EU. The EU said

they are not keen on us coming out of the EU. If you listen to

business, business said the same thing. If you ask medium sized

business and they tell you the same and if you ask small businesses,

they tell you the same. There is a lot of voices saying hang on a

minute, we don't think it is a good idea. However, if only life was that

simple. Those who want to stay have come out with a huge number, ?133

billion, but when you talk to those who want to leave, they say that's

nonsense. In fact, we would save ?77 billion if we pulled out of the EU.

They have got this clock, let me show you this. They have been

totting up what they say is the cost to Britain staying in the EU and

they reckon since we joined in 1975, it cost us ?500 billion. Where does

that leave you and me? Where does it leave the poor old viewer in working

out what on earth is going on? I think what we're learning today is

this referendum campaign, which could kick off very, very soon,

within weeks, we are going to see a blizzard of figures flying this way

and that way, try not to get too confused by the figures. At the end

of the day, I think, for many people it will come down to their gut

instinct. It won't be a matter they have come up with this sum and they

have come up with that sum, people would probably form a gut instinct

whether they on balance think yeah, perhaps, things will be a little bit

better outside or oh no, I don't want to risk it, but it does

suggest, you know, that this campaign will be hard going for

viewers and voters if the two sides are just sort of trading numbers

with each other because it will be very, very difficult to bottom those

numbers out. Norman, thank you. We will always

have you to guide us through them, thank you.

Derisory, pitiful, cosy, a PR stunt, just some

of the reaction to the Google tax deal which will see them paying back

just ?130 million in taxes spanning a ten-year period.

This morning Labour are trying to ask an urgent question

in the Commons today calling for Chancellor George Osborne

The payment covers money owed since 2005 and follows a six-year

inquiry by Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs.

The Tax Justice Network estimates Google should ordinarily be paying

more than ?200 million every year rather than ?130m for a decade

Effectively it means the US firm had paid a rate of around 2.77%

when companies normally pay corporation tax at 20%.

Here's a reminder of how the story has unfolded.

We pay the tax we are required to pay in every country

It depends where you choose to put the business.

This is what all this afternoon is about.

A very clear message today, most people pay

their taxes, a few don't and those few, we are coming after.

You are a company that say you do no evil and

Tax is not a matter of choice, it is a matter of following the laws

We have all heard today, how you define it.

Today we announce we will pay more tax in the UK, the rules

are changing internationally and the UK

Government is taking the lead in applying those rules,

we will be changing what we are doing.

When the rules change, you should change with

This is a real vindication of this Government's approach.

When I became Chancellor, some companies paid

little or no tax and rightly that caused public anger.

Now we have companies like Google paying tax.

I want the message to go out that in Britain taxes are low,

but they have to be paid and I expect more

This is too little, too late but at least we have something.

To be frank, it looks as though what independent

assessors have said, this is only paying about 3% of tax.

Individuals are paying much more than that.

Most people would think it is just unfair.

Google isn't the only company to have been named for avoiding

Starbucks, which runs more than 800 coffee shops in the UK,

came under fire after it was revealed the company paid ?8.6

million in corporation tax in its 14 years

despite sales worth billions of pounds.

In 2014 it paid more than ?8 million in tax on the back of record profits

Facebook paid around ?4,000 in corporation tax in 2014,

It showed the company as making a pre-tax loss but they did

pay their staff in more than ?34 million of share bonuses.

It means Facebook's UK tax bill was less than the average tax paid

Amazon attracted anger after it emerged that the UK arm

of the business paid ?11.9 million in tax in 2014,

despite taking ?5.3bn in sales from British shoppers.

We asked Google and Her Majesty's Revenue and Custom to appear

on our programme this morning but they both declined.

So let's talk about this now with Dame Margaret Hodge,

who has grilled Google bosses before when she was the chair

of the Public Accounts Committee and said this about them.

You're a cup that says you do no evil and I do think that you are a

company that does do evil. Also with us - Anne-Marie Trevelyan,

a conservative MP who is currently on the committee, Lucien Bartram,

a small business owner and Steve Lewis who runs

a coffee shop in Crickhowell Margaret, we have seen you grilling

the bosses of Google, what do you think about the ?130 million? Well,

I agree it is a step in the right direction and I hope it is an

admission that they got things wrong in the past. Last year, this is ?130

million over ten years, last year Google earned ?6.4 billion from

addresses in the UK, ?6.4 billion. Now, we have no idea the profit they

made on that. And all we're really asking that on the profits they

make, they should pay a fair amount of tax and the real answer to this

and I hope the debate will move into this area, we have got to stop

hiding behind the confidentiality of taxpayers interests so that none of

us really understand what the assets are that Google own, what the

turnover is they make and what the profits are they make. That's got to

be open, particularly for big companies that are quoted anywhere

on the Stock Exchange and once they're open we can the profits they

make and then we can tax the profits in a fair way.

Would you want to hazard a guess at what you think would be a fair share

for Google to be paying? 2.7% is what this amount equates to. I

haven't a clue, none of us have a clue and that is what is so

frustrating. What we know from having delved into Google's global

accounts, outside America, the UK is their biggest market. About 11% of

the money they earn outside America is made here. And we know what they

do, they don't fill it here in the UK, they built it in Ireland. --

bill it. When we did that enquiry two or three years ago, when the

first time Google came to see us, they said we do business in here,

not -- in Ireland, not here. I was inundated with whistle-blowers who

were people who had worked for Google, who work for Google. They

said we are selling advertising here in the UK. They said we are closing

deals in the UK. Journalists have looked at LinkedIn profiles of

Google employees and they are all sales people in the UK. But because

of this secrecy that surrounds the tax system, we are not allowed to

know. For most of us, 85%, I get no if you do, we pay our taxes through

the PAYE system, you will as well. We pay it unquestioningly. For us to

find that the big multinational corporations established this

artificial company structures which have no other purpose other than to

avoid tax is basically unfair. It is unjust. We are not being treated

equally by the taxman. ?130 million, is that a good deal for the

taxpayer? It is a starting point. I am pleased this has been a focus and

that the Chancellor has set in motion. Margaret's efforts on the

PAC in the last parliament helped to focus the Treasury on making sure

that dealing with international tax rules was something that was

actually done, rather than talked about. There is more work going on

with the OECD to improve the position with this base erosion and

profit shifting that we see. International tax rules are as they

are and the only way Britain can improve how we do that is to change

our laws locally and the transparency Margaret talks about is

important. Do you fully backward Margaret is saying about

transparency? I am a chartered accountant, before that a

politician, looking after small businesses. I trained in London with

a big organisation dealing with big companies. The frustration is this

narrative that goes on, they make six only in pounds, that is their

turnover. Corporation tax is charged on profit. -- ?6 billion. We're not

looking to tax turnover. There is a media narrative which is wrong,

which completely warps the conversation. Starbucks is a

franchise, that is different. Starbucks' turnover is built up of

individual businesses as franchises. We need to understand that to make

real progress. You are saying potentially this is a completely

fair and correct...? It is a good start. We have completely failed to

monitor exactly as Margaret says, that if they are UK based virus,

they are not using international rules would allow them to move that.

-- UK based sales. We are tightening up the rules slowly. Of course it is

on profit. But we don't know the profit. Indeed. We only know the

turnover. We only discovered during this enquiry that Google said they

make ?9 billion worth of profit in Ireland. That is where they

accounted for the UK sales. One other ingredient is the secrecy that

makes this difficult. In France, they are pursuing Google for

makes this difficult. In France, billion of unpaid tax.

makes this difficult. In France, market for Google isn't as big as

the British market. If the French authorities... That is right. This

first deal which is reached is a step. HMRC is actually starting to

do what it is there to do, challenge big organisations. Can you explain

that discrepancy? This is HMRC's first attempt at a deal, it is not

enough, they must carry on. It is not as far as concerned. It is not a

done deal? This one is the deal arranged on a historic basis. That

is where they have got to but we will get HMRC in to talk to them and

try to understand more clearly exactly how they propose to keep

going. To improve the tax take that they get. HMRC won't tell you

anything! We had them in, time again. Every time you asked them

about the individual tax affairs of any company, Google is not alone in

this, they say we can't tell you, it is confidentiality of taxpayers

interest. I would not have HMRC in, I would have Google in. Google will

they were being clever on Friday night, I think they thought we will

put out this figure, a heck of a lot of money to all of us, ?130 million.

It is only when you see the extent of their business that it is trivial

in relation to their overall business. They thought they could

get away with a sort of PR stunt to convince the British public they

were paying a fair share of tax in the same way as all of us around

this table do. They got it wrong. Don't bother with HMRC, they won't

tell you anything, get in Google. Both, Margaret. And the other

enormous multinationals to move around the money to make it best for

them. The challenge for HMRC, driving forwards. I would like to

meet the lawyers who do this work. It is a bunch of secret lawyers who

I have never met. I would like to talk to them about how they intend

to do the best for the British taxpayer. Google pay VAT, PAYE, the

employee taxes, there is lots of tax paid by these multinationals but

corporation tax is for profit. If they are genuinely making profits on

their sales and I imagine they are because they are successful, a

proportion should be British sales and that is what we should focus on.

Steve Lewis joining us on Skype. Small business owner taking part in

the documentary, the town that took on the taxman, what do you think

about this? I am a fair tax town person that has just sat aghast

listening to two politicians who had created the most complex tax regime

in the world. With the lowest tax rate in the G20. Yet we are dealing

with philosophies of big companies that are only interested in a 0%-3%

tax rate. No matter what you have as the standard rate, they get out of

bed in the morning to try to get down to 0%. It is a race to the

bottom. Or do you blame, the politicians? I blame both the

politicians and the accountants. And the accountants who make a fortune

and tax lawyers. To not contribute a reasonable part to our high street.

The national well-being, citizens, directly affected. ?20 billion not

paid by tax bill is. They negotiate their way out of trouble every

single time. This latest one has been created six years ago. I agree.

120 million is a good deal?! I agree with you, Steve. The work that you

have been doing to defend small businesses is really important. I

agree that some of the problem is with us, the politicians. We got the

most ridiculously complex tax system. We have over 1100 tax

reliefs. Everything from gift aid... Everyone becomes a loophole. Don't

blame the civil servants, it is not HMRC's fault. I agree. You gave the

tools to these companies were them to use against you. I agree. Public

opinion, or I have a change.org petition to sit on the HMRC board.

-- to sit on. I agree. This is not a party political point. Every

Chancellor use of the budget to introduce yet another tax relief. We

should care up a lot of the tax code and make it simple. Let's put it in

the hands of the viewers. They will make companies be accountable. You

won't. I agree. Let me say this, what we are dealing with, with

multinationals is different. They are setting up artificial companies

all over the world in low tax or no tax jurisdictions. The UK has 4500.

Dot. UK brands that are listed as

aggressive tax avoided. -- 4500... I want to bring in Lucien, he

desperately wants to come in. You are a small business owner, do you

think there is a level playing field? I don't think so. I don't

think you can blame a business for taking advantage of the rules put in

place by successive governments that have not changed. You cannot blame

Google for doing what it is supposed to do. We are a country that are

trying to attract international investment. We need a competitive

tax regime. At the moment, what is being said is it is perhaps too

competitive and it needs to be changed. But you can't vilify Google

for doing what it can to mitigate its tax. If I commit to get my tax,

I will. Do you think the politicians are vilifying Google? I think the

public are vilifying Google. I think the reporting, the sound bite

reporting, that doesn't look into the whole ballistic how much tax

overall is Google paying, they are the Lavine Google. I think... HMRC,

Margaret, have investigated Google for six years. You say it is not

transparent! What the hell are we paying HMRC to do?! They must know!

Can I just come back to you on they only abide by the law, very rich

accountants, I'm afraid, and lawyers who make money out of it said to me

it is your fault, it is the law. Parliament makes the law to a

certain purpose. What you then get is a purpose behind Parliament

bringing in any tax relief or tax offer. What happens is that the

accountants and lawyers go off and deliberately find a loophole, so

they are interpreting Parliament's law for a purpose it was never

intended. I think it is a moral and ethical dimension. I think Google

make money here in the UK. And make money here. If you get money out of

people, you also have a duty to put something back into the common pot

for the common good. I don't buy this argument that they pay other

taxes, VAT and PAYE, we all pay a range of taxes. I pay council tax,

VAT, that does not mean... It doesn't mean that is a profit. We

are all making money. Thank you all very much for a lively debate. Let

us know what you think at home. The coroner at the Hillsborough

inquests has just begun In the last few minutes,

John Goldring has told the jurors that the question of how

the 96 victims died is "the most important, difficult

and controversial" one. He's said each juror will be given

a general questionnaire with 14 sections, including

whether opportunities were lost The coroner's also said it

wasn't their decision to find blame they can't find any person guilty

of a criminal offence or find Postmortem examinations are being

carried out on three dead sperm whales washed up on a beach in

Skegness in Lincolnshire. They are believed to be

from the same pod as a whale that We can now speak to Nigel Croasdale,

manager of The Sea Life Sanctuary Terribly sad to see these wails like

this, what has been going on? -- these whales. INTERFERENCEzilla

very sad occasion. We went out to have a look to investigate. We took

at least four individual sperm whales. We encountered difficulties.

Some swam back off to deeper water but that left one behind Court on

the rocks. Passed away late Friday night. Three others were washed up

on Skegness on Sunday morning. Thank you for joining us, trouble hearing

with the line but thank you, we appreciate your time and your

company as well. Thank you for your company today,

and for all your messages which really do help to

inform our conversations. Victoria is back tomorrow, I will

see you soon, thank you for your company. Have a good afternoon.

Goodbye. 500 Words is back - the Radio 2

writing competition for kids with our new judge,

the Duchess of Cornwall! And the final will be held

at Shakespeare's Globe.