11/02/2016 Victoria Derbyshire

Hello it's Thursday, it's 9.15, I'm Victoria Derbyshire,

Junior Doctors in England face having new working contracts forced

upon them after they reject the Government's 'take it

Plus, the most senior police officer in this country says police should

change their approach to allegations of rape and sexual abuse and not

automatically believe the complainant.

There is a grave danger at the moment with the advice around that

perhaps there is a tendency to think that we always believe the

complainant. That's not good for any officer.

We'll get reaction from rape campaigners.

Also on the programme, parents whose children have cancer

tell us about the devastating impact a delay in diagnosis can have.

You lose not just a part of you and them, but their future as well. It's

the life that they haven't had. You know, the chances in life that they

haven't had. They maybe didn't have the chance to go to school, to have

a boyfriend, girlfriend, to get married, to do anything in life.

over their controverisal ?130 million tax deal.

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

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

and developing stories and as always we really want to hear from you...do

get in touch in the usual ways; texts will be charged

And of course you can watch the programme online wherever

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

When it comes to claims of sexual abuse and rape,

should the alleged victim always be believed when they make

their initial complaint to their police?

After historical sex abuse cases like Jimmy Savile and more recent

cases of child sexual grooming where the treatment of victims

was widely criticised, the criminal justice system had

In 2014 a report for Her Majesty's Inspector of Constabulary said:

"The presumption that a victim should always be believed

In other words, believing alleged victims should be the norm.

Now though Britain's top police officer, the head

of the Metropolitan police, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe is saying

detectives investigating sex crimes should not believe

After announcing a review of such cases, he says officers should

investigate allegations with an open mind.

I think we have really got hung up on this word of belief. It's

confused officers. My point would be, we have to be empathetic, we

want people to believe we are going to listen to them. We have to be

open minded, then we have to listen to what they say, what the suspect

tells us. There is a grave Daning we are the advice around that perhaps

there is a tendency to think we'll always believe any complaint made

and that's not wise for any good investigator.

Also, calling for anonymity of public figures accused of sex

crimes unless and until they are charged.

Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe is under increasing criticism over the way

he and his force have handled historical sex abuse cases,

particularly those of Lord Bramall, the former head of the army

and a widely respected war hero, and Lord Brittan, a former Home

92-year-old Lord Bramall found out last month he wouldn't face any

charges; he says it took detectives ten months before they spoke

to witnesses who cast doubt on the allegations.

Lord Brittan was being investigated over a rape allegation

from the 1960s, died last year without being told the case

Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe is facing mounting pressure to apologise

to Lord Bramall and the Lord Brittan's widow over

the way his force handled her husband's case.

There are also questions over whether his contract with the Met

which is up in September this year should be extended.

He told us last year he wanted it to be.

Whatever he meant to suggest, the way it's being report suicide that

police officers should take a degree of scepticism about what it is that

complainants say to them which some might say is an unfortunate message

to those who believe they have been victims of serious sexual offences

who may be put off reporting as a result of this. Whether he intended

that or not. I have to say, I'm slightly baffled by his response

because, in a way, what police officers believe or don't believe is

completely irrelevant. They are not therapists, judges and juries, they

are not expected to be, they are investigators. When we did the CPS

report into the failures to prosecute Jimmy Savile back in 2013,

the conclusion that I reached in relation to that was that what had

gone wrong was that the investigations of serious sexual

offences were applying a different standard for sexual offences than

those that would apply to other offences. I can give you an analogy.

I would not expect the police to get on with things. If I walked into my

local police station and said I was burglared 30 years ago, before they

went around arresting people, I would expect them to check whether I

was living in that house 30 years ago and the point about this is

that, although we have an enormous amount of respect for the retired

High Court judge. The judge who Sir Bernard is putting in charge of

reviewing in particular Operation Midland, an historical sexual case

involving establishment figures from decades ago? Quite so. For which Sir

Bernard and the force have been roundly criticised? We are in danger

of getting into a situation where we are going to have inquiries into

inquiries, there are lots running already. How should society approach

allegations of serious sexual offences, particularly when it's

said they took place a long time ago. We are trying to achieve a

balance of fairness, fairness to the complainants because we'd not want

to put them off. If people have been Tim Timms of crimes, it should be

investigated, also fair tonnes the accused because if they are never

going to a court, how can it be right that their reputations and

names are put all over the press. And, although, it may be that Sir

Richard's inquiry takes evidence and maybe very thorough and rigorous,

there are, it seems to me, some practical steps that the police can

take that would seek to achieve that balance. The first one is, in these

very old allegations, they should make the arrest or the interview or

the search of the suspect's home pretty much the last thing they do,

rather than the first thing they do. What are they expecting to achieve

by interviewing somebody about an allegation about something that

happened 30 years ago? Whether that person is guilty or whether they are

innocent, all they can say is "I didn't do it. " That doesn't move

the investigation forward enough. 20 officers turning up at Lord

Bramall's house to investigate it, what did they think they were going

to find after 30 years? If they started the other end and

investigated the allegation before they got to dealing with the suspect

then that might have led them to a different conclusion at an earlier

stage that some say might have been fair tore the suspect. But it might

not. Yes. Given that these are sensitive cases, as a general rule,

you can always depart from it, but as a general rule, it may be that is

the fairer way of going about it. Was Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe right? We

asked him to come on the programme and he declined, so we are going off

his article. In the first instance and he's quoting from a report in

2014, in the first instance, is officers should proceed on the basis

that the allegation is truthful. I agree and would add that a good

investigator would test the accuracy of the allegations and the evidence

with an open mind, supporting the complainant through the process.

This is a more neutral way to begin than saying we should believe

victims and better describes our impartial mindset. On a cold

objective reading, that would seem to be perfectly sensible. And it

doesn't seem to need saying, it's extraordinary that they ever took a

different view. You may be right there and people may agree with you,

but the message that might get reported to alleged victims is, we

are going to be a bit more sceptical of you in the future. And you are

going to have to demonstrate to us that this did happen to you, which

is impossible in many cases. One of the reasons that there is a concern

about, not putting too high a threshold for sexual offences, is

that by the very nature of these things, they tend to happen in

private between two people without any witnesses there. They very

rarely result in any scientific or medical evidence, so it's going to

be one person's word against another's. If you say, we are never

going to prosecute in that situation, there are going to be an

awful lot of serious offences that go unpunished and that cannot be

right. And it can only proceed to charge if they think there's a

realistic prospect of conviction? Yes, meaning it's more on an

objective evaluation of the evidence it's more likely than not that a

jury will convict. Yes. Your point that you made about suspects is also

raised by Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe in his article. He's saying, I think

for the first time, I believe the time is right for suspects facing

allegations of sexual offences to be offered anonymity prior to any

charge. I'm not clear whether he's just talking about famous people or

all suspects when it comes to sexual offences. You think that's right? I

think it's right. Just for public figures or for everybody? For

everybody. Even if you are not a well-known person, if you are known

in your local community, it can be damaging for you. How do you assess

who is a public figure and who isn't. When names are released to

the media, that's led to other alleged victims coming forward and

cases being taken to Saux Cescful conviction? In some cases and it's a

very important point -- taken to a successful conviction. The point

about charge is, at that stage, the lawyer has assessed the evidence and

said there is sufficient evidence for the case to proceed. That seems

to be a reasonable point at which the names can be released. Trying to

hold this balance, but there shouldth should always be an

exception pre-charge for the police to apply, for example, to a judge to

say krks we actually have permission to release the name because we are

able to demonstrate that there is a reasonable prospect that, if the

name is out in the public domain, that will assist the investigation.

What about the media applying to have the name released because they

may have been contacted by alleged victims? This is something about

which the Government has to legislate. It seems extraordinary

that they haven't done so already because, broadly speaking, this very

modest proposal has broad support from all sides. I say modest but

constitutionally, it's quite important because it's a departure

from the normal rule of, if you like, open justice. But it is a

matter for the Government because I it needs to be properly debate.

Debated. Also Sir Bernard Cannes enforce that across the country.

There are 43 police forces, he is only in charge of the Metropolitan

Police force. If another police force takes a different view, he

can't make it happen, although he is influential.

We'll bring you more reaction to what Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe has been

suggesting. Now some breaking news. Norman Smith is at Westminster. It's

to do with the junior doctor's strike and a potential imposition of

the contracts from Jeremy Hunt, England's Health Secretary? Yes.

Here is the letter sent by Mr Hunt's chief negotiator, Sir David Dalton,

to Mr Hunt this morning, saying time to impose the contract, no deal is

possible. In other words, end of negotiations, the Government should

impose the contract. Now, in the negotiations, the Government should

letter, Sir David said he warned the BMA yesterday that if they did not

accept the offer by 3pm, he'd assume there was no point in negotiating.

He says "everyone's first preference has always been for a negotiated

outcome. Unfortunately, this no longer seems possible. On this

basis, I therefore advise the Government to do whatever it deems

necessary to end uncertainty for the service and to make sure that new

contract is in place. " In other words, forget about negotiations,

there isn't going to be a deal, you need to impose the contract. Now,

the critical question from that is, what on earth do the doctors do now?

Do the BMA pack up their bags, two home and accept it's game over, or

do they seek to carry on with industrial action and seek to

escalate it? Remember, they did have this option of having an all-out

strike, on pulling the plug on emergency cover too. They were

planning action where which would be no junior doctors at work. Will they

return to that given the fact Jeremy Hunt has decided to call their bluff

and say forget it, I'm going to impose the deal. Do you know what

was in the final offer? Well, I know what was the breaking point and the

breaking point was Saturdays. They must be treated as a normal working

day because Mr Hunt says that is part of making the NHS a seven-day a

week Health Service. He does not want Saturdays to be a special day

when junior doctors get paid more. The junior doctors are adamant that

Saturday is not part of the normal working week and it was a sort of

issue of principle for both sides. Mr Hunt was not prepared to back

down, the doctors were not prepared to back down, and on that basis, I

think Mr Hunt's decided OK, let's just see what happens if I impose

it. I mentioned the reaction of the doctors, the other critical factor

is the reaction of the public and, when you look at the opinion polls,

so far, they have been overwhelmingly supportive of the

doctors, something like two thirds support the doctors' action. I know

talking to ministers, they think beneath the figures, actually, the

support for the doctors is much less solid because many, many people

actually rather like the idea of moving to a seven-day NHS so I think

the view in Government is it's not game over when it comes to public

opinion. I know you will be back with us if

there is any more development. We will bring the any reaction from

doctors and the BMA. If you have any appeal on what is happening in the

NHS and the fact that we are being told, from Norman, that, having had

the final offer rejected, this contract will now be imposed on

junior doctors, let us know what you think, get in touch in the usual

ways. The public's reaction is crucial, let's hear what you think

about the fact that these contracts will be imposed.

Let's go back to our conversation about how the police deal with

allegations of rape and sexual assault. The boss of the Met today

suggesting that the police should change their approach to

complainants and not automatically believe them when they make their

initial complaint. Comments from you, Matt on Facebook says, the

police have a duty to believe anyone who alleges a crime has happened to

them. Then they can do their job and investigate to see if those

allegations stand up. Mark on Facebook says, no, police

should be objective and professional. Some allegations will

be true, some false. Andrea on Facebook, the police

should treat any complainant with sympathy butchered neither believe

nor disbelieve what they are told. They should follow the evidence it

is evidence that forms the basis of court proceedings, not police

belief. Another on Facebook, it is

ridiculous they should believe the accuser or the accused, the evidence

is the only thing they should follow.

A tweet, the police should work in a professional, timely and unbiased

manner. Lisa Long stuff is from the charity

Women Against Rape. How do you react to what Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe has

suggested? Those comments are well-informed and I think Alison

Levitt, who spoke earlier, had a good point when she said that if you

reported a burglary you would not expect to be to be a liar. I think

women and children reporting rape have to assume, in order to come

forward, that they will be taken seriously and that their crime is

going to be investigated impartially, to see if there is

enough evidence to take it to court. That is what Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe

is saying, it will be taken seriously, and investigated

impartially. He is suggesting they will not all unconditionally be

believed, which you could argue the pendulum has swung towards that in

recent years after the saddle failures. I don't think the pendulum

has swung towards that, I think there is an outcry from the

establishment who have not screamed about what happened since Savile,

they have now screamed because some of their people have been

investigated, like the rest of the population. It is unpleasant to be

accused of a crime but you have not heard them shout when 20 officers

have dawn raided other people's houses, only when it is high in the

establishment. What your viewers don't know if there have been a

number of important convictions over the last few years, but the media

has only focused on celebrities. But actually there have been heads of

children's homes, parents of children, people in care homes who

have been convicted of very serious serial rape and sexual assault of

young children, and there are now a number of campaigns across the

country of survivors who have got together, coming to groups like

ours, campaigning for justice, and I think it is time that the pendulum

swinging argument was put to bed. Do you think what he is saying today

will deter some alleged victims from coming forward? It certainly will

have deterred already some victims from coming forward, some people who

have not yet come forward who are in touch with us, and there are many

more people who have yet to be reported to need to face justice.

The NSPCC have released this statement in reaction to what Sir

Bernard Hogan-Howe has said: We are deeply disturbed that the proposed

change of police approach to sexual abuse victims could be a serious

part of them coming forward at a time and

people have found the confidence and courage to report these crimes.

It would be a tragedy to bring this progress to a juddering cold. You

clearly agree with that. Can I ask about his other proposal, I'm not

sure whether he means all people with these allegations against them

or just high profile ones, but that they should all have anonymity until

they are charged? We should see this in the context of war crimes, either

all people accused of crimes should be given anonymity until charged, or

none of them. There is no reason to make rape a special case because the

only thing that implies is that a lot of these women are lying. Why

doesn't that apply in other crimes? Thank you very much, Lisa Long stuff

from that crow too. Your views welcome, as always.

Thanks for joining us today, still to come:

We speak to a leading children's charity that says nearly half

of parents of kids diagnosed with cancer felt their concerns

about their child's health were ignored.

Junior doctors across England return to work after a 24-hour walkout,

but reject what's been described as a "final offer"

from the Government on weekend working.

It's expected that ministers will announce they'll impose

a new contract on the junior doctors.

We are expecting a statement from England's Health Secretary Jeremy

Hunt at some point this morning. The head of the Metropolitan Police

suggests officers investigating sexual abuse claims should keep

an open mind, and not automatically Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe has ordered

a review into claims of historical Over 40% of parents whose children

have cancer feel their concerns about their child's health

are ignored by GPs, that's according It's calling for the Government

provide better training for the professionals who deal

with young people Liverpool football club have dropped

plans in increase the price of its most expensive ticket to ?77,

and apologised to fans Other top clubs are being urged

to rethink their ticket pricing. A large fire has broken out at the

tata still planned in Port Talbot. Emergency services are at the scene,

there are no reports of casualties. Let's catch up with all

the sport now and join Hugh. The Liverpool fans did it?

Yes, they will not have to pay the ?77 ticket presses that were looted

by the club. The club owner said they did not want to be perceived as

greedy, it was quite the opposite. But what about Spain? Less than a

third of the stadium in Valencia was for last night after Gary Neville

try to salvage some respect after losing the first leg of his final

7-0. It has been a torturous time in his first managerial post. Closer to

home, it was so close, but so far to Peterborough, they took their

fourth-round FA Cup replay to penalties but were beaten by Premier

League side West Brom. And the second round of games in the six

Nations, we will look ahead at Scotland's team, which will be

announced shortly. And news of Alun Watkins, the Olympic rowing champion

with Katherine Grainger in 2012, who has given up her hopes of reaching

the Rio Olympics later this year after taking a three-year break from

the sport to start a family. We will look at those stories just

after 10am. We will speak to Liverpool fans

later as well, so pleased for you. Really keen to hear from you this

morning if your child has experienced a delay

in diagnosis of cancer. One charity tells this programme

that over 40% of parents whose children have cancer felt

their concerns about their child's Not just the first time but also the

second visit, and potentially the third and fourth visit.

The charity Clic Sargent is now calling for the Government

to ensure better training and guidance for the professionals

who care for children and young people in this situation.

Here are the stories of two people whose lives have been changed

All my friends and family were telling me that

I was a hypocondriac and joking, and like I'd get a headache

and I would be like, "Oh, my God, I've got a brain tumour,"

and everyone was taking the mick, basically.

I found the lymph nodes, went to the doctor and he told me

that it was probably because I had an infection.

In all, we actually went to the GP five times,

but that was seeing three different doctors.

I think it was on the second visit that the doctor referred us

We went to the local hospital, had an in-patient stay

for a few days, but they again just

assumed it was constipation and gave her treatment for that.

They didn't do any other tests or scans.

The specialist, obviously I don't know what they saw,

but was obviously very concerned and booked her in for an MRI

I kept going back probably around six or seven months to the same

doctor at the same surgery and he kept telling me

there was nothing wrong, I was fine, it wasn't cancer

and I was being too worried about it.

It was sort of a relief more than anything.

Obviously I was upset but I knew that something was wrong and now

it was getting dealt with so it was more of a relief

They took us into a room and basically said that it was

a malignant tumour, which just completely floored us.

We hadn't even considered cancer as being a possible option.

I think I likened it at the time to being hit by a freight train.

Just completely out of the blue, hadn't even considered it

as an option and it just, your world is just turned upside

Your mind is on overdrive, you don't know what to do,

The chemotherapy obviously does the trick but it has a massive

Not only the tiredness, but problems with her muscles,

to the point where she had difficulty walking.

Obviously having to go around in a wheelchair,

it was very difficult for her, very difficult for any young person

She did start to feel better, her hair was growing back

so she wasn't having the sort of poorly feelings

We thought we were doing really well.

That was probably more upsetting this time than it was last time,

but I had the feeling that the cancer had come back

already so I'd spent a lot of time upset obviously...

I'd gone abroad and lived my life and done OK and then coming back

to the UK it sort of, like, all the emotions I'd ignored in 2011

I think this time it was losing my hair, because it had grown back

and I didn't look like I'd ever had cancer.

It's always in the back of your mind - relapse.

Certainly having been through this journey and having met a lot

of other parents of children with cancer, it's one of the things

that's always there, always that fear of relapse.

So when we found out, it was devastating.

I never thought that I would die from cancer or anything like that,

It's more the fact that I feel like I'll never get to go abroad

again or travel again or it's never going to have an end.

She didn't have any hair so she'd always wear a head scarf,

she had a selection of different head scarfs, depending on which mood

of the day would depend which head scarf she wore.

She got pneumonia so she had a five-day stay in QMC in hospital

and it was during that time that I think they realised

that there was nothing really more that could be done, treatment-wise.

They'd tried pretty much everything and she was

So on the Friday she was brought home by ambulance

We had the community nursing team visit once or twice a day just

to make sure her medication was OK and she was comfortable

She was with us for another six days.

So finally we lost her on 18th September, 2014.

And you lose, not just a part of you and them,

And it's the life that they haven't had, you know, the chances in life

that they haven't had, you know, maybe didn't have the chance to go

to school, haven't had the chance to have a boyfriend,

girlfriend, haven't had the chance to get married,

Now that all the treatment's over and I'm not back for another three

months for a scan, I can just like focus on getting my health back

on track and just getting back to normality.

I think one of the biggest things about childhood cancer is the fact

that there's just not enough awareness.

I mean, I know I'm guilty of it because before Hannah was diagnosed

You occasionally see it in magazines or on the TV or things like that,

but you just don't take any notice of it.

So yes, you do question yourself sometimes and you think back,

maybe if I'd known or been maybe a little bit more aware,

if I'd known the sort of symptoms to look for,

Looking back on it now, I can understand that you're not

meant to know everything, doctors can't possibly know

everything and maybe this certain doctor hadn't dealt with any

childhood cancers or young adults with cancer so he just thought

it was something innocent and wasn't sinister,

so I don't look back with hatred or anything,

Keep going back and pestering them until you get referred to hospital

because the doctors' surgeries don't have the means necessary to diagnose

cancer, the hospitals do, so you need to get referred

But it's just have that awareness that it could be,

you know, might not be but it could be, and if it is,

then getting it caught a lot earlier is going to mean

22-year-old Gemma Hakner there and Simon Cross,

We can speak now to Emily King Dutton, who's 17 and was diagnosed

with cancer a year after first going to her GP with symptoms.

Kate Lee, from the children's cancer charity Clic Sargent.

Also Dr Anthony Cunliffe, a south London GP, who spends a day

a week with the cancer charity Macmillan to improve cancer care.

You spend more time with Macmillan so you can find out more? One thing

we'll talk about today is education. We feel strongly about GP education

and that's part of my role. OK. What is it like when you keep going to

the GP to say, look, I don't know what it is but there's smog wrong

with me and you go back and back and back and still you get nowhere? You

feel like they are not listening to you, you feel frustrated that you

know there's something wrong but they don't realise it. Not only are

you feeling physically ill, is that stressful? Yes, emotionally, you

feel like no-one is listening and you want someone to listen to you.

Eventually when you got your diagnosis, how did you react? It was

a big shock. I never thought it would be cancer but it was nice to

know that I knew what I had and it could be dealt with. Did you think

about the delay in that diagnosis and what could have been done had

you been taken more seriously earlier? Definitely. I thought if

I'd been seen earlier, maybe I could have been dealt with earlier and it

would have made a big difference. Kate, how typical is Emily's

experience or Simon talking about Hannah or Gemma's experience?

Luckily, thankfully, childhood cancer in the UK remains incredibly

rare so what we know is that in the terms of how common sit, thankfully

not that common but when it happens unfortunately the story is all too

common, so our Clic Sergeant survey has recently shown 50% of parents

and young people who've been to the doctors with a concern have been on

average, three, four visits before they are taken seriously. For me,

it's the reality of what that means. I've got two young children myself

and when I first read the report, I was trying to put myself in the

picture of going back to the GP surgery three or four times worried

that I was going to be viewed as a neurotic mother but I know my child

and I know something is wrong and if the GP isn't listening to me, if the

worst happens, what we found is that actually, the reality is when a

child is diagnosed with cancer, at a time when the family should be

rallying round, supporting the child, the young person, that

actually they are feeling angry, they are not trusting doctors, not

trusting that they'll be listened to now, you know and they are feeling

guilty. And blaming themselves? Yes, really guilty. Exactly as we heard

in the story, should I have pushed harder, should I have said earlier,

camped out at the surgery until the doctor done the tests. As a GP Dr

Cunliffe, what advice would you give to parents. Emily is now 17, you are

in remission aren't you thank goodness, that is brilliant to hear.

Yes. But say a 16 or 17-year-old who goes to the GP without their

parents, what can you do to get them to listen? One thing we feel

strongly about, it's imperative that any young person or adult presenting

themselveses to the GP, they must feel listened to. Of course they

must but it's not always happening? No, but I feel they must be taken

seriously and one of the things that this pole has highlighted is that

GPs themselves feel they need more education around this subject -- the

poll. It's not just around the signs of cancer, but education around

being able to communicate and thereon young people effectively and

to their parents and very much so listening to the concern of the

young person or the parents. Because sometimes an individual is not

necessarily going to reveal to the GP straightaway, you know what, I've

been constipated for three weeks and a GP has to have that skill to draw

that information out? Absolutely, you are 18, living at university for

the first time, it's maybe you have been to the GP for the first time

without your mum there and you have got to sit there and talk about some

personal symptoms. The likelihood is that unless you have a good GP and

one in five said they don't feel overly confident in talking to young

people in a way that draw out their concerns in our poll, we spoke to

over 1,000 GPs, the truth is that they are not getting to the bottom

of the problem and it leaves the young person feeling like no-one's

really listening, no-one's helping me explain what I'm going through.

From your point of view, in your career, you might only diagnose

cancer in a child or young person once, maybe twice. It is rare, as

Kate said, thankfully, we does make it hard from a GP's point of view?

Absolute lift an average GP may be involved in a new diagnosis of

cancer in a child or young person maybe once or twice in their career

and the other thing to highlight is, childhood cancer isn't a single

entity, it can represent multiple different cancers, what that

diversity means is that the challenges are quite wide-ranging

and more often than not will represent a benign disease and we

need to make sure GPs are educated, not only on the signs and symptoms

they see regularly but on the importance of listening when it's a

small presentation -- real presentation and it's persistent.

There is plenty of relatively simple tests GPs can do to rule some things

out to show parents that they are listening and trying. We know if a

parent feels like their GP has been trying their best, they won't

necessarily think their diagnosis was delayed, they won't be as angry

because they felt they were listened to. Even if that takes some time.

There are relatively simple tests and GPs need access to specialists.

They need to be able to pick up the phone, speak to someone and ask, can

I talk this through with you. Great to hear that you are in remission.

Thank you very much. Thank you all very much. Sean Duffy, the national

Thank you very much. Thank you all clinical director for NHS England

told us, early diagnosis must be of the highest priority for cancer

patients with all ages: Google's bosses will face questions

this morning from MPs. We'll bring you some of the answers live. Back

to the breaking news. Ministers are expected to impose a contract on

junior doctors later. It comes after the Government's chief negotiator,

Sir David Dalton, advised the Government to do whatever it seems

necessary to end the deadlock. In a letter published in the last hour,

he says, everyone's first preference has always been for a negotiated

outcome. Unfortunately, this no longer seems possible. I therefore

advise the Government to do whatever it deems necessary to end the

uncertainty for the service and to make sure that a new contract is in

place as close as possible to the final position put forward to the

BMA yesterday. Dr Jonathan Barnes in an

anaesthetist in London who took part in yesterday's strike and Dr Dagan

Lonsdale is a registrar in the intensive care unit of St George's

Hospital in South London. Welcome back of you. Dr Lonsdale, what are

you going to do now? We need toe wait and see what Jeremy Hunt has to

say in the House of Parliaments today. The first thing I would say

is that it's quite a shock to me that they have decided to take this

stance. I don't understand what the rush is to gets a contract imposed

and I think the concept of imposition just shows a complete

failure on behalf of the Department of Health to engage with the

professionals who look after patients day in day out and forcing

a contract on doctors, doctors who have concerns about that contract,

is taking a huge gamble, a huge gamble with patients in the NHS

because if it leads to dangerous working practises, the only people

who'll suffer are patients. Dr Jonathan Barnes, what will you do?

From the outset when Jeremy Hunt talked about medicine lacking

vocation and professionalism, we knew which way the negotiations were

going to go and it's been aggressive and derisory the whole time. It's

very sad we have not reached agreement and for a lot of doctors,

if the contract is imposed, they'll be in a position where they may be

working in unsafe practise, they may not be able to afford their daily

cost-of-living and they'll be looking, like I will, whether you

need to look at a career outside medicine or, as a massive amount of

people are doing now, whether they need to look abroad, which would be

terrible for the NHS. Would you consider withdrawing emergency care

cover? I think ultimately, what doctors do in terms of industrial

action will be dictated by the BMA. If the BMA chose the option of full

withdrawal of care on the proviso there was still consultant cover and

patients would be safe, I think I like most other doctors would only

support Bull it but only on the provie doe that they would be safe.

Do you think that would stop Jeremy Hunt imposing this contract on you

Dr Lonsdale? Look, I think it's too early to start talking about further

industrial action. We need to hear what Jeremy Hunt has to say and we

need to hear the response from the BMA. But my view is that the only

way we can look after the patients safely within the NHS is if doctors,

the people who work looking after patients day-to-day are involved in

the discussions about rotas and working terms and conditions. If we

are not involved in those discussions, it's simply people who

don't know anything about the job taking a huge gamble with people's

lives quite frankly. You asked why now, why this rush, well it's

because apparently senior NHS officials are advising the

Government that they need to start making plans if a new contract is to

be brought in this summer in terms of rotas, detailed review of rotas,

staffing before contract offices are made in May in time for the August

start date? But why do we need a contract for that August start date.

Doctors rotate around hospitals on a four or six monthly basis. There is

absolutely no practical reason why the contract needs to be in place by

August 2016. Perhaps because the conversations, the negotiations have

been going on for years now, perhaps that's why? Well, the negotiations

have been taking part for some time with the BMA, but the Government

position for the negotiations has changed consistently, particularly

with this concept of Jeremy Hunt deciding that he wants to stretch

the service over seven days which again doctors view as a potentially

dangerous thing to do because we can't stretch the service over seven

days without either making doctors work longer hours or taking them

from working in the weekworking at weekends. Either of those are going

to leave gaps and leave situations where doctors are working in unsafe

conditions and that's not acceptable. Simply just to say I've

had enough of negotiating, we need to get something done let's do it,

doesn't seem to me to have much logic and the most sensible thing to

me is for a sensible, negotiated settlement. If that takes time, we

just have to accept that. Thank you both very much for your time. Thank

you. Dr Dagan Lonsdale said he's shocked and Dr Jonathan Barnes says

he will consider leaving the profession or moving abroad if the

contracts are imposed. It's coming up 2010 o'clock, here is the latest

weather with Carol. It's been a particularly cold start

to the day. That will be replaced by sunshine and showers as we go

through the day. Some of the showers are wintry, particularly so in the

north. Through the course of the morning we'll continue to see the

cloud break up and the sun will come out where we don't already have it.

Showers in the west and the south-west and we have a weak

weather front crossing Scotland that's been producing rain, sleet

and snow. Through the afternoon, we could see a wee bit of snow coming

out of that at lower levels, but nothing significant. In south-west

England, more frequent showers through the afternoon intersporesed

with sunshine. The same across Wales, sunshine and showers, wintry

with height, and for Northern Ireland, again bright spells or

sunny skies. Moving into Scotland, still some

showers through the afternoon but there will be some sunshine, wintry

again. You can see how that front is fizzling out as it heads south.

Northern England, sunshine, a few showers and across the Midlands,

East Anglia, Kent, down to the Isle of Wight, again back into sunny

skies. Through the evening and overnight still a few showers around

and then this area of low pressure brings rain across south-west

England and the Channel Islands, but through this central and northern

suede of the UK it will be cold enough for some frost and of course

the risk of ice. We could see some patchy fog first thing in the

morning, which will be slow to lift if you get it. Tomorrow is similar

to today, bright spells, sunny spells, showers, some of them

wintry. The dragon on a cold easterly wind across Scotland,

temperatures between five and nine -- being dragged in.

Hello, I'm Victoria Derbyshire, welcome to the programme if you've

It looks like junior doctors in England will have new working

It comes after the Government's cheap adviser said they should do

whatever is necessary. The most senior police officer

in this country says police should change their approach to allegations

of rape and sexual abuse - and not automatically

believe the complainant. It is a grave danger at the moment

with the advice around that there is a tendency to think we will always

believe any complaint made, and that is not good for an investigator.

Many people getting in touch about that this morning, I will read some

comments in the next hour or so. And bosses at Google face questions

from MPs this morning over their controversial

?130 million tax deal. And a 22-year-old man

will be sentenced today for killing his unborn baby

by kicking and stamping We'll speak to another woman

who suffered a similar attack. The Government's chief negotiator in

the junior doctors dispute has told the Health Secretary there is no

realistic prospect of a deal. Doctors leaders have turned down

what is described as a final offer from the Government. Ministers are

now expected to impose a new contract on them.

The head of the Metropolitan Police suggests officers investigating

sexual abuse claims should keep an open mind, and not automatically

Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe has ordered a review into claims of historical

Over 40% of parents whose children have cancer feel their concerns

about their child's health are ignored by GPs, that's according

It's calling for the Government provide better training

for the professionals who deal with young people

Liverpool FC has dropped plans in increase the price

of its most expensive ticket to ?77, and apologised to fans

Other top clubs are being urged to rethink their ticket pricing.

Let's catch up with all the sport now and join Hugh.

Yes, fans staying away due to ticket prices, but how about Gary Neville's

Valencia? They played in the Copa

Del Rey last night against Barcelona,

but only 16,000 fans went to the 55,000-seater

stadium to watch. Ticket prices aren't their issue -

it's the team itself. They were knocked out

of the competition, and haven't won a game in the league since Neville

took charge in December. Tough times for the former

Manchester United and England defender, in his first

attempt at management. I thought, what a football club,

what an opportunity, what a challenge. The time has come for me

to stand up, if I had turned down this job I could have said goodbye

to my credibility. Gary Neville's managerial debut ended in defeat as

his side exited the Champions League. Have we got time to ask out

Spain is going? It is going well, Valencia is a wonderful city, I'm

learning the language, my family settled and now my big brother my

boss! A dreadful night for Gary Neville last night as his side were

beaten 7-0 by Barcelona. I didn't like what I thought. Valencia fans

did not deserve that tonight. I have got for belief in myself,

full belief in the players, and, from my point of view, the only

thing you can do now to turn this around for the club and the fund is

win football matches. -- for the club and the fans.

So nervous times for Neville, and West Brom head coach Tony Pulis

would have been sweating too last night - his Premier League side

were taken to penalties in their FA Cup reply by Peterborough of League

The match ended 1-1 after an impressive

performance by the home side, but this penalty

by Peterborough's Lee Angol was the crucial kick.

Saved by Ben Foster, the second one he stopped

And West Brom go through, to face Reading in the fifth round.

Smaller teams from the lower leagues pushing Premier League clubs to the

limit, they did that today. Absolutely fantastic, credit to

them, to the league they play in and to British football, to have this

sort of game, and to be involved in it, yes, it is nerve wracking. It is

brilliant that we have come through but Peterborough should take a lot

of credit. The London 2012 Olympic rowing gold

medallist Anna Watkins has given up in her bid to qualify for the Rio

games later this year. Watkins, who won gold in the double

sculls with Katharine Grainger in London, returned to the sport

last summer after taking a three-year break

to have two children. But after recent training

with the GB squad the 32-year-old feels she's not at a high enough

level to compete in Brazil. And this Scotland and Wales teams

for their six Nations meeting this weekend will be announced later this

afternoon. I will be back with the headline at about half an hour. See

you then. Hello, thank you for

joining us this morning - welcome to the programme

if you've just joined us. We're on BBC Two and the BBC News

Channel until 11am this morning. Quite a lot of you getting in touch

about our conversation about how the police deal with allegations of rape

and sexual assault. The boss of the Met has suggested police should

change their approach to allegations of sexual abuse and not

automatically believe the complainant. This tweet, rather

concerning that in a time of apparent increased sexual crimes

against women Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe is voicing disbelief. Another tweet,

it is simple, the police should act as if sexual crime complaints are

true whilst keeping an open mind. As easy as that.

Do keep those 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. Bosses of Google and senior

tax office officials are facing questions from MPs right

now over the controversial deal under which Google agreed to pay

?130 million to the We'll bring you some of it live,

but first here's a reminder of why the amount of tax Google pays has

faced criticism from almost everyone Google is one of the biggest

companies in the world. Every second, 40,000

Google searches are made, which adds up to 3.5 billion

searches every single day and 1.2 trillion

worldwide every year. The UK is one of Google's

biggest markets. It makes most of its UK profits

through online advertising, but it

has come under increasing criticism In 2013, the value of its sales

in Britain was ?3.8 billion. The independent Tax Justice Network

estimates Google should in fact be paying ?200 million every

year in corporation tax. It is that kind of maths that has

led to comments like this They do evil in the sense

that they do not pay their fair amount of tax for the common good

out of economic activity they undertake here in the UK

and the profits they earn I think that is

reprehensible and wrong. So how does Google manage to pay

the amount of tax it does legally? Essentially it says its European

headquarters are in Ireland and that the UK operation,

which employs 2300 people, is simply an agency

of its Dublin office. It means Google can pay corporation

tax in Ireland at the lower rate of 12.5%, compared

with 20% in the UK. Last month's agreement

between Google and the UK tax authorities to pay ?130 million

in back taxes in Britain has been widely criticised,

but the search giant insists they have

always played fair. We have followed the rules

as they were and we are now going to be following the rules

of the change. We want to move fast

because we want to ensure Really as a company we want to focus

on investing and hiring This is a real vindication of this

Government's approach. The Chancellor George Osborne

described the deal as a victory while Labour's John McDonnell said

the sums were trivial. Most people find it unacceptable

and I think we need to know why. Meanwhile it is reported some

European tax authorities are chasing It is even more important for us

as Google to do the hard work. This week we also learned

that the tech giant's chief exec Sundar Pichai has been awarded

?138 million in shares, 8 million more than it has agreed

to pay in tax for the last ten That makes him the highest-paid

chief exec in the world. The head of Google, Matt Britton, is

being quizzed now let's dip in and have a watch.

Further questions on how we were established in 2002 and 2003, which

is before I started here so I was unaware. But the information was

passed to the HMRC and considered... We will be talking to HMRC shortly,

but you are already taxing my patience and the patience of

hard-working taxpayers. You were a convincing win is in 2012, but let's

remember that the National Audit Office have told us that they were

not able to demonstrably prove that the evidence you gave in 2012 wasn't

materially inaccurate, and I would draw your attention in particular to

evidence that subsequently appeared after the 2012 hearing, which showed

that UK staff carried out a substance of work leading to

contracts with major UK clients and that there was evidence around

payslips showing sales related bonus payments and that is something that

you did not admit in the course of a very rigorous and robust questioning

in 2012. My point is, you will forgive us if we are slightly less

than convinced by the evidence. The HMRC, in their six-year process, we

provided for transparency so that they could see details of contracts,

interview staff, they could see details of contracts,

customers, understand how our systems work and address all those

questions that you raise, including the payment of commission and what

exactly staff were doing in all aspects of the process. The detail

was extremely rigorous and we provided for transparency to them. I

should mention at this point in the interest of being fully covered,

HMRC asked us for permission to doubles more information than they

would normally in respect of the hearing today and we have given that

permission. That is the president of Google

Europe. Let me introduce our guests, who are sitting here patiently.

Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury Seema

Malhotra, Barney Jones, a former Google employee who handed

over tens of thousands of emails to investigators,

Mark Littlewood, Director General of the Institute of Economic Affairs,

who says Google hasn't done anything wrong,

and David Babbs, Executive Director of 38 Degrees, who created

a petition calling on the EU Competition Commissioner

to investigate the Google-HMRC deal.

I just want to play a clip from when Matt Britton was questioned earlier

by MPs about his salary. Let's look at this. ?130 million? That's

correct. We will get into what that involves later, but we're here for

taxpayers in Britain. Do you hear the anger and frustration out there

that with those huge figures you settle for a figure of ?130 million?

Absolutely, and I worked with the Chancellor to come and talk to you

about this. I understand the anger. Do you really understand the anger?

What did you get paid? If it is relevant I will happily disclose

that the committee. I'm asking what you get paid. I will disclose that

if it is relevant. I am asking you, so it is relevant. I do not have the

figure... So you don't know what you are paid?

Is it relevant what the Google president of Europe gets paid? If we

know what the chief exec of Google is getting in share options this

week, which is more than Google were paying in the UK the ten years of

corporation tax, I think we have a right to have some transparency. He

also was talking about how HMRC have finally asked for permission to

share some more details about Google's corporation tax details,

and said they have given permission. Why not talk about what you are

getting? People will want to know. It is an issue of transparency and

openness. What Google has been doing is legal.

That is the bottom line? We want to know on what legal basis the inquiry

took place with HMRC, what was the process by which the conclusion was

reached that ?130 million was a fair deal. We believe this is an issue of

fairness,' a really important issue, that if Google paid what we

understand should have been their tax liability in one year alone, in

2014, that would have paid for 4,000 police officers. Sure, but... The

Chancellor's not stood up to deal with this. This deal goes back ten

years to when Labour was last in power. You had the chance to change

the law to make sure Google paid the corporation tax in the UK that other

companies paid? I think what's important to also note is that this

inquiry... Could you just address that point? It started under the

Labour Government, but also that the tax avoidance measures that Labour

brought in have been shown recently by independent analysis to be likely

to bring in ten times more in tax than the Government... Completely

ignoring what I've said to you. You had five years to make Google pay

corporation tax. The profits will have been growing as well in the

last five or six years. What we are saying is that we need transparency

and openness. We need to see country by country reporting. The last

Labour Government didn't make them pay the taxes? Look, I think we were

bringing in measures, we were recognising the problem and that's

why also the investigation was started. But you make a fair point,

which is that this is not an issue that Governments have been taking

seriously. Companies have also been changing, multinational companies,

inter-Nat-based multinational companies particularly have now

started calling the shots. It's vital the tax system catches up with

that internationally as well. OK, let me bring in... If I can make the

last point. We have asked the Chancellor why the Government asked

the Tory MEPs to vote against the tax avoidance measures last year and

we are still waiting for an answer. You don't think Google have anything

to apologise for? No, I don't. The entire tax rule book of the UK is

ridiculously complicated. I think about 21,000 pages in length now. By

way of comparison, the rules of association football which are

controversial in their own right, are about 140 pages in length. It's

a point that political parties always make in opposition and say,

if we get into Government, we'll simplify it? It's the point George

Osborne made and he's added to the tax code. When you get a rule book

that complicated you get political arguments about what people feel in

their bones is a fair level of cash to pay. I thought that exchange was

ridiculous. Whatever you think Google's tax corporation liability

is, it has no bearing at all on what they pay their executives. You don't

pay corporation tax in a ratio to what you are paying your staff. It's

an irrelevant question and it's not reasonable under a country that

wants to live under the rule of law that any individual or company

should pay becomes a matter of a political debate. You need a clear

rule book, people working for the tax authorities with a clear

calculator and you need to be able to work out what should be paid.

When we look at a company like Google, I think we see a problem

both with Google and HMRC. We see a problem with HMRC because we are

concerned the deal is being done in secret, that we perceive a lot of

cosiness to be happening between the multinational companies and the

likes of HMRC. At the same time, we see on Google's side, an aggressive

approach to this from a company which operates in the UK if they

have a fire in their office they'll expect the Fire Brigade to come and

put it out, if staff are ill, they'll go to an NHS hospital, if

there is a burglarly the police will come. If everybody did what Google

did, this country would be in a mess. Is that a message to the MPs

who set the rules or the company? The pressure should be on both to

behave themselves, they should be held to account. Barney, you left

the company ten years ago, what is the issue for you, how do they

manage to avoid tax in the way they do and it's legal? I think it's

absolutely incredible, you know, I know a lot of businesses and Google

is one of the only businesses I know that spends most of its time trying

to belittle the contribution of its British MPs. That quickly came to my

attention because I thought, why are they saying things like, we don't

sell in the UK, there are no sales staff, and obviously I then realised

it's to do with the tax position and how much tax people might perceive

they owe. It's like most Google employees. I would like to see more

clarity. I would like to see HMRC really spell out which rules they

are applying to Google and why is it a company that has 4,000 staff in

the UK that's had the staff build some of the major products is such

little account to Google that they pay virtually no tax on it. That's a

really important point. There's been a debate about whether or not Google

has a permanent base in the UK, what economic activity is done here.

There is been quite an issue, not just about the law but

interpretation of the law. That is why we have been calling. We had our

debate in Parliament that Labour led. For the Chancellor to come

clean, how much has he been involved, has he asked questions

about this as well. He's been at the Super Bowl more than he's been in

Parliament talking about this issue over the last ten days so the

British people will be wanting answers, we believe it needs much

more transparency and it's a big issue of fairness. Doesn't the fact

that Google has paid back taxes for the last ten years show something

wasn't right? Clearly. They have paid ?130 million in back taxes

correct but the problem is that, especially over corporation tax, you

get into an area where essentially contestable. How much of Google's

work is the number of Brit going to Google, how much is it the brilliant

algorithm designed in America, how much is it the brilliant campaign

designed somewhere else and we are going to find when companies operate

across borders, it will be a matter of opinion where their profits come

from. When tax becomes a matter of opinion, you get into this mess an

it will apply to lots more companies than Google in the future. Thank you

very much all of you. Before 11 we'll bring

you more on that story about Liverpool Football Club

scrapping plans to put up ticket Kevin Wilson was found guilty of

child destruction. It's the crime of killing an unborn but viable foetus

and it carries a maximum life sentence in prison. Convictions in

England and Wales are rare with around a dozen cases in the last

decade. We can talk now to 27-year-old Lauren Oliver, she was

stabbed five times in the stomach by her ex-boyfriend when she was seven

months pregnant I think weren't you Lauren? Thank you very much for

coming on the programme and for talking about this really difficult

issue. I do appreciate your time. When you found out you were

pregnant, your relationship with your ex-boyfriend was already over.

And he told you that you should have an abortion didn't he? Yes, he told

me I had to get rid of her, it wasn't negotiable. How did you

react? I told him I wouldn't do it. You were absolutely determined? Yes.

It was after that that he took a decision to assault you. What

happened? On the 11th June, 2014, I arrived back home after taking my

other daughter to school and as I got to my door, I noticed he was

stood behind me. I felt a blow to my stomach. I thought I'd been punched

but it turns out I'd been stabbed. I fell into my door and he kicked my

on to my back and stabbed me another four times. It was as blatant and

brazen as that? Yes. And you are clear that's because he didn't want

you to have this child? Yes, he were adamant I had to get rid of her.

When you arrived at the hospital I think I'm right in saying that they

couldn't detect a heartbeat. What happened after that? They moved it

around for a bit and they managed to pick one up but she was in the

breach position, on the opposite side. Did you think they are going

to be able to save my daughter at that point? What were you thinking?

I'd kind of already convinced myself that she'd died, so to hear that

they'd picked a heartbeat up, it were obviously the best feeling. You

gave birth to a gorgeous baby girl, she was premature? Yes. In terms of

the treatment after that, what were the medical tofessionals able to do?

-- medical professionals able to do? She was in the NCU because she

couldn't breathe but they were really good. Nicholas is serving at

least ten years, could be longer, for attempted child destruction and

assault. How did you react to that sentence? He initially got sentenced

to 29 years and he got told they'd run concurrent which he had to serve

19. He's been told he can apply for parole after ten, so it seems to get

less and less. How do you respond to the fact that he can apply for

parole after ten years after what he tried to do to you? I'm not happy

that he'll be out after ten years because she'll only be ten, she'll

only be a child herself but there's nothing I can do about it.

You must have thought about this. Will you talk to your daughter about

what happened? I will when she gets older, I'm going to have to try to

explain it to her but I've kept all the articles from the newspaper and

magazines soshe can have a read through them herself to try and

understand what happened. And why is it important for you to

reveal that to her? She's going to find out and I don't want her to

hear it from other people if I haven't told her myself. I would

rather be the one to let her know what happened. How old is she now?

20 months. What's she like? A madam. She's good though. OK. Well, thank

you very much. Thank you. Thank you for talking to us and coming on the

programme, we really appreciate it. Thank you. Still to come before 11:

That U-turn by look Football Club scrapping plans to put up ticket

prices following pressure from fans, it doesn't happen very often but

when it does it's a good feeling for football supporters. We'll bring you

reaction from the fans and a former FA executive. And Baroness Williams,

one of the first MPs to sit in Cabinet, retires, one of the first

female MPs I should say. We'll talk to her live about her five decades

of political life. The main news so far this morning:

The Government's chief negotiator in the junior doctor dispute has told

England's Health Secretary there is no realistic prospect of a deal. He

said the Government must now do whatever it thinks necessary to end

the deadlock after the body representing doctors turned down

what's been described as a final offer from the Government.

The Metropolitan Police commissioner says detectives should change their

approach to sexual abuse and rape claims. Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe has

ordered a review into this. He says officers shouldn't automatically

believe the alleged victim. Over 40% of parents whose children have

cancer feel their concerns about their child's health were ignored

initially by GPs. That is according to the charity Clic Sergeant, which

is calling on the Government to provide better training for

professionals who deal with children with cancer. A large fire has broken

out at Tata Steel plant in Port Talbot. It's believed to have

started in an oven. It's now been contained. Emergency services are at

the scene but there are no reports of any casualties. Bosses of Google

and senior tax office officials are facing questions from MPs right now

over the controversial deal under which Google agreed to pay ?130

million to the Government in back taxes.

Those are the headlines. Here is all the sport now with Hugh.

Only 16,000 Valencia fans attended the 55,000 capacity stadium as Gary

Neville's side earned themselves at least a shred of respect with a 1-1

cup draw against Barcelona having lost the first leg 7-0. Closer to

home, League One side Peterborough came close to an FA Cup shock but

were ultimately beaten on penalties as the Premier League's West Brom

went through to the fifth round. Athletics' world governing body has

lost another commercial partner. This time food and drink giant

Nestle have ended their association with the IAAF because of

the 'negative publicity' around And Olympic rowing gold medallist

Anna Watkins has given up hope of defending her title

in Rio later this year, after her return from a three-year

break in which she had two children. And that's all for now,

but I will be back with more sport Let's go back to Norman Smith more

details on the fact that a new contract will be imposed on junior

doctors. I guess the key question is, what do

the BMA do now, the British Medical Association, how do they respond?

They said they will wait and hear exactly what Jeremy Hunt has to say

before they come out with a formal response, but talking to people here

at Westminster who have conversations with the BMA, they

fully expect them to continue with the campaign of industrial action.

That raises the question of more operations being shelved and, in the

background, the nuclear option, because you remember a fortnight or

so ago they cancelled the threat of an all out strike, that is to say

not providing any emergency cover at all. That really is the nuclear

option, and I guess there will be a lot of tossing and turning within

the BMA as to whether they put that back on the table, because that

really is a massive, massive step for them to decide, actually, we

will withdraw all cover. But certainly Labour and

other people I have spoken to take the view that the BMA are not going

to back down, they will not just pack up their tent and accept what

Jeremy Hunt has done, which means we have the prospect of rolling

industrial action in the health service, which I imagine nobody, not

patients, not doctors, not politicians, once, but it could be

what we now face. Thank you, Norman. More from Norman

should there be anything to report. Before 11am we will talk to

Liverpool football fans who are really happy that the club has

scrapped plans for a big rise in ticket prices after a walk-out last

week. Completely changed their minds, that doesn't happen often, we

will talk about that before 11am. But first, one of Britain's most

colourful politicians is retiring She's Baroness Shirley Williams,

she's spent 50 years in British politics and was one of the first

female MPs to sit in Cabinet. Now let's talk to

Baroness Shirley Williams Bah only 85, White are you

retiring?! There are lots of other things I would like to do X back row

I want to talk to you about the fact that it looks like this contract

will be imposed on junior doctors by Jeremy Hunt, the Health Secretary.

The NHS was your last speech in Parliament, what do you think junior

doctors should do now, continue with industrial action, withdraw

emergency cover? A nuclear option could blow up the thing that is a

threat to it, and there is a danger the NHS might be broken by this. It

means two things, on one side the junior doctors have got to be clear

about what is their minimum requirement, and let it be known to

the public, not just a small groups of conciliators and so forth.

Secondly, I think the select Committee in Parliament, which is a

joint committee of different parties, has got to think carefully

about putting forward a proposal that would lift some of the endless

financial pressure on the NHS, because the NHS runs at the lower

share of national income than virtually any other country in the

world, it is remarkable it has held together. Even though health

spending is protected? That just means they don't add more to it. We

are pushing people all the time for more productivity, so what we need

to do is have more party agreement to some solid additional financing

for the NHS, and if it means another 1p on income tax, so be it, we have

to get out of the mess we are in now. But you think this stalemate

between the Health Secretary and junior doctors could break the NHS?

It could break the NHS. According to the BMA, more than half of the young

doctors being trained say they want to work abroad. That means we are

spending something like ?200,000 on training them, then they go

someplace else. It doesn't be exempt. We have got to have a

different approach, and what that means is solid expectation that the

NHS can look to additional money, not huge amounts, maybe 1%

or 2% of taxation, but we needed to give doctors the certainty that they

have a career within the NHS. Many think they haven't and many are

talking about giving away. Let me read this from the NHS Chief

Executive, he has said: Drawn-out industrial action would cause

disruption to patients relying on NHS care, and the NHS is right to

say a contract should now be implemented for junior doctors.

More reaction will keep coming in, I have got so many questions about

your career and personal life. When you became an MP it took four goes,

ten years? Three. Three goes. But that was not unusual, it was hard to

become a female MP. You said that was because you were female and

Catholic, is it any easier now? It is, we were regarded them as people

who should be patronised, I remember being patronised by all sorts of

aldermen in the House of Commons. Silly things, like the toilets were

called members only, but when you opened the door they were used

rhinos, not female toilets, we were expected not to be there. There were

a few exceptional females, Margaret Thatcher and so on, even if I did

not agree with her policies, who made people change their opinion on

what female MPs could do, but it was a long struggle and it is

continuing. You said you were patronised, but for female MPs now

the level of abuse they receive from members of the public on social

media, whatever, you would not have had that. They get that now on a

daily basis. That is social media, and it means the more extraordinary

members of the public are using female MPs as a target of their ire.

They directed at the MPs as a sort of symbol. I'm very brightened up

the social media, I think it is high time that the social media insisted

upon people being not anonymous, even if they don't reveal the names,

it is important that the servers actually have those names, because

at the moment what we are all doing is giving franchise to some of the

most horrible, cruel members of society, without them even having to

be responsible for what they say. We do it with newspapers, you don't get

a letter to the editor of a newspaper unless you supply your

name and address. Isn't it about time we did it with social media?

Bay in many cases behave in the most irresponsible way and drive many

people close to suicide with horror at what is said about them. Do you

think that people, whether it is voters all the media, still

pigeonhole female politicians when it comes to certain areas of

expertise? Yes, they do a bit. I have spent a lot of my life dealing

with the issue of nuclear proliferation and I'm on a board in

America, I have been on it for ten years, discussing ways in which, for

example, if you take the Iranian peace deal, you can actually start

pushing people away from developing nuclear weapons and beginning to

move towards a more peaceful outcome. It is wonderful that

happened, it is the best thing that has happened all year. Having said

that, women are not normally expected to be interested in things

like nuclear proliferation, but if they want their kids and

grandchildren to live, they had better address the issue. People

need to see that, but women are often seem to be interested in a

small number of women subjects. Can I read the messages from people who

are watching this morning? This tweet, you say you don't like social

media but you may like these comments! One says, Baroness

Williams, thank you for the doors you have opened for the women coming

behind you and for your hard work. Very nice! One says, though, Shirley

Williams! Not go as in retire, but as in, good for you! Another says,

Baroness Williams is an inspiring figure, you do not need to be a Lib

Dem to have regard for her. Very sweet of him but we would like to be

a Lib Dem as well! But there are fewer and fewer of you! But we have

got some more new members. As have Labour. Can I ask you what

got some more new members. you would do right now if you were a

member of the Labour Party? Would you leave? Let me jump back for a

minute, I would begin by taking those babies and youngsters who are

abandoned, we should take at least 3000 or four dozen of them because

we have a good structure of child care and child concern in this

country -- 4000 of them. We are in a good position to help these

youngsters who would otherwise be thrown away. I was asking a slightly

different question, but actually let's talk about what you did in the

70s, you'll support for Ugandan refugees coming to Britain and

whether you see some parallels with the Syrian refugee crisis? We agreed

to take the people that had opted to live in England, they were being

threatened among other things with death and complete removal

threatened among other things with property by India mean, the

president of Uganda. With promised they would have a vote in Britain if

they needed it, and I have to say that we fought for that, I promised

I would resign from the Labour Government if we didn't get it. We

then had the courageous support of a brave Conservative, who came out and

said, we made this promise, we have got to keep it. It was amid screams

of anger from his own members and activists but he stuck by the

promise that we made. And the public, actually. And the public. We

then set up a brief settlement body, found them housing and education.

Why don't we do it this time? We did it then and it was one of the most

successful immigration into it then and it was one of the most

we have ever seen. They have contributed in particular to

business and entrepreneurship. There were about 50 4000, 50 8000? You are

right. Britain, over five years, will take 20,000 Syrian... Over five

years, that was in one year. Is 20,000 over five years not enough?

Clearly not enough, something like twice that each year, and I will get

in trouble for it but I think Syrian refugees are likely to be a useful

group in society, as long as we keep the families. That was understood by

the Pope and it is crucial. With a family, you won't get young men

pushing off to fight Syria, on their own anything that happened. They

could be a very serious group in terms of upsetting society. Why do

you say you will get in trouble for saying that? There will be people in

Ukip and so on saying I am flooding the country with Syrians, which is

silly. Most of them want to go home when they can. But what is happening

now, I have to say this one thing, what is happening now is because of

the colossal Russian flying activities, Russia is beating the

hell out of places like Aleppo at the moment, including lots of

civilians, and we are watching it happen and doing nothing much about

it. Somebody has got to stop that happening otherwise you will see

more and more refugees coming out of Syria, beginning to disturb and

upset the whole of Europe as well, and it has got to be something we

address, and we have to address it seriously. Back to the question I

thought I was asking a few moments ago bug sorry! No, it is fine! You

thought it was right when the Labour Party split and joined the SDLP,

what would you do if you were a member of the Labour Party today? I

think there will be a crisis for Jeremy Corbyn from the International

questions of today and whether they face that or not. You mean looking

at the EU, Nato? Particularly Nato, I think it is crucial, and I think

he seems unwilling to accept that. But if you don't have a country luck

Britain, a reasonably stable democracy, supporting some of the

work that Nato does, especially given the extreme rise in aggression

from Russia at the present time, you really are asking for trouble, and

that is the kind of thing which I think Jeremy Corbyn, up to now, has

not had to face but he will have to face it soon. If he does not, what

do you feel will happen? I think some people will leave the Labour

Party, some will come to us, some probably to the Conservatives, but

it will be fragmented, so it is a really serious problem. He's a

decent man, much more like Michael foot than he is like one of the

earlier trots and so forth, but what he has coming in with him to the

Labour Party, and I don't think he has asked them to come, are some

extreme left-wing ideologues and they are riding piggyback on him and

I think it will be a problem for him to get rid of them. Can I ask some

personal questions, if I may? You talked about something that happened

to you when you were 13 and when I heard it I was taken aback. You and

your friend coming back from America after the Second World War on a

boat, evacuated for three years, and you had to fight off a group of

sailors who effectively burst into your cabin As they were attempting

to a salt you? They were, they came in with the excuse that they had a

curable seasickness, because we had gone through cyclones, huge storms.

About six of them came in, the only people in the cabin were my best

friend, a young woman called Rosemary, and me, we were 13. We

fought them off, mostly scratching and jabbing their eyes and so on.

Managed to get out the door, ran down the corridor, this was a

Portuguese ship, by the way, and piled into a gents, and the funny

thing was those sailors could not imagine any decent woman would go

into a gents for safety so we locked ourselves in one of the stalls and

stayed there while they funded by, then spent the rest of the voyage,

another four days, believe it or not, in a lifeboat on top, covered

with sea water, and just stayed under a tarpaulin and stayed there

for the next three days and nights. Goodness me!

Did that have a lasting effect on you, or is that 234 a long life just

another thing that happened to you? More or less another thing that

happened. It was the war. I got locked up for three months in a

Portuguese hotel detained because we couldn't get to Britain so we got

stuck in Portugal. You got very independent in the war, I was only

13 but you learnt to look after yourself and to fight for yourself.

Often with other children the same age. So it was a great growing up

experience and it didn't leave me with desperate psychological

problems. Fair enough. I still like men. OK. I want to ask you about a

man you like very much, you married him, he left you sadly for another

woman in 1970, you've talked about it before. Again it shows your

resilience I think. What did you do to get through that period? Two

things really; he was a wonderful, clever brilliant man. The first

thing you have to do is to say what did I contribute to this. Why do you

have toe say that? Because you mustn't just easily blame the other

person. There are always reasons and usually both contribute to it. What

I felt was that he was so fed up with people coming up to him saying

this is Mr Shirley Williams I presume, he was so fed up as being

treatmented as baggage. People are very cruel and much crueller than

they are now outside the social media, they were very cruel to you

directly. I think he found it, as young aspiring very clever man,

quite hard to be treated as an add-on to me. So I didn't blame him

for that, I think it's the price of politics, politics has a very high

price, particularly for women and it's quite difficult to manage a

good marriage and make it work. It's happening more and more I'm pleased

to say and people are beginning to accept women at work but don't

forget this is 40 years ago and people didn't accept that. You did

two things, one was to look at yourself? The other was to work like

hell. Work is a great healer in many ways and it compels you to work with

other people, men and women alike. I think the culmination of both

thinking about myself, what had I got wrong and also thinking about

what could I get right which was essentially at that time moving into

the professional area to become better at it, these were the two

things that made it possible. Then years later, I married into the

second marriage which was happy as you could ever make it. You oversaw

the move from grammar schools to comprehensive systems. Correct. You

faced a lot of the criticism? Yes. In terms of the political

significance of your career, where does that rank? Pretty high. The

other one would be the nuclear proliferation. I was the only

British person on that committee. Going to what you asked me, people

forgot two things, possibly only about 12% of youngsters only ever

got to grammar school, there was another 88% that didn't go anywhere.

Secondary schools, you couldn't take A-levels, you couldn't have a sixth

form, you had no prospect of going on to further education which meant

that we threw a great deal of talent away. One of the great things for me

about the comprehensive school is that it did open the doors to

everybody. You got very few transfers from secondary modern to

grammar, 1% or 1.5% a year and I got the feeling and had it time and

again now that people come up to me saying thanks I'm now the director

of whatever it may be or I now work in a small business I'm so grateful

that I went to a comprehensive school and was able to take A-levels

and O-levels. You put a ceiling on the age of about 13 and 14 and they

couldn't climb out of that. It was completely wrong for a country like

Britain that needed more and more skilled people. The one weakness

that is still there is that we don't treat vocational education seriously

and we need far more people who're good at skills and capable of

and we need far more people who're their hands to produce outcomes, new

products, all the rest of it. I think that's all changed for the

better so I have no feeling to apologise on that one at all. No

regrets at all about anything? Oh no, no, no, no, just on

comprehensive schools. I regret some other things, I suppose some of the

main ones are to do with, well to be quite blunt I'm a strong European, I

think the future lies with bringing people together to deal with really

difficult issues and I think looking back, that we didn't ever take a

sufficiently initiative lead in Europe. The result is today that

Britain sits half on the outside and half on the inside and therefore

reduces the influence and ways in which I think is unnecessary. How do

you think which I think is unnecessary. How do

you lived through the first one? The first one got through. I don't know,

I think it will be close. A couple more comments from viewers who've

texted or e-mailed. Emily says, I barely knew anything about Shirley

Williams before watching her on your programme this morning but my

goodness what a wonderful woman. Thank you very much. And this from a

texter who doesn't leave their name, Shirley Williams is the role model

everyone should follow, especially politicians, she's honest, doesn't

divert from questions and is a wonderful lady who I admire

immensely. Thank you very much to everyone. Is it true you have had 12

marriage proposals in your life? Yes, about ten of them when I was

about20. I thought you were saying #20rks not

12! There aren't that many recent ones, I have to say, the charming

older man still has to come along! Thank you so much and good luck with

your retirement. Pleasure. Thank you very much, nice to see you.

Liverpool football club has scrapped plans to put up the price

of its most expensive ticket to ?77 and apologised to fans

Thousands of supporters walked out in the 77th minute of the club's

match against Sunderland last weekend in protest

In an open letter explaining the decision, the club's owners

Fenway Sports Group said 'message received'.

John Gibbons broadcast the podcast and he's in our Merseyside studio.

We are joined by a fan and also in the studio the former Chief

Executive of the FA, Mark Palios, also chairman and owner of Tranmere.

Is that right? Right?! I didn't know that actually. How are you? Good,

thank you. Let's talk to our guests in Radio

Merseyside first of all. Well, what an amazing turn around, well done!

Thank you very much. Well done to all the Liverpool fans, I mean it's

a remarkable turn around as you say, quite unprecedented for it to happen

and for it to happen so quickly. I expected them to try to buy some

time to go away and hope it would blow over and announce a bit of a

comedown. What they have done so quickly and to apologise to fans as

well and to recognise that they didn't really understand the feeling

in Liverpool, it's huge and huge going forward for Liverpool fans to

know that they have a stronger voice going forward, also for football

fans around the country who can hopefully see they don't have to

just sit there and accept the price increases. We all have the power to

do something to change it. But it happened so quickly. That's

what's taken me aback, to be honest? It did happen quickly. That showed

they weren't expecting what happened on Saturday. I'm sure they'd heard

there would be a walkout, they were probably expecting 1,000, 2,000

people to join in, the fact it was 10,000 to 15,000, depending on the

estimates yew go on, I think that really, really surprised them so I'm

sure they were working very, very quickly on Saturday night to try to

re-Seoul it and probably listening to people within the club who maybe

warned them that something like this might happen. Mark Palios, as

chairman of Tranmere Rovers, I don't know that you are as wealthy as the

Fennelway Sports Group, I'm guessing not, but I might be wrong -- Fenway.

This feels unprecedented, foreign owners listening to their fans? Yes.

In terms of perspective, if our players walked out, it would be

after 17 minutes. It's a different animal. From my days of watching the

game, I think you have always felt the fans have had less of a voice in

the game than they should have had and people took a ride on the fact

that they were fans, as a consequence they have been taken for

granted. It's great the owners of Liverpool have listened to their

fans, but the thing that's changed here is I think you have got to a

point, a tipping point, the figures are so large now. You mean what they

are going to earn from the next deal, over ?8 billion for the

Premier League? Yes, so if you can bottom the Premier League, the

television money alone is about ?100 million and if you have got a gate

of about 30,000 and took ?5 off your season ticket prices, you would

probably lose something like ?5.7 million. I can bet you, you could

probably go into all of the clubs and almost take that out of the cost

base which they waste, so you're at the point now where it really stands

out and there is really no argument to not look after the fans. James,

how do you react? It's such an amazing triumph, I'm just so pleased

for you, but it kind of, they have said sorry, they have frozen the

ticket prices for a few years, it's trebles all around isn't it? Yes,