21/11/2016 Victoria Derbyshire

This morning: Why would a parent turn their child against their ex?

It's called parental alienation and leading experts say it's time

the courts recognised it and starting punishing

Throughout the programme this morning we'll hear

I felt like a leper. I used to walk into the playground and feel like a

leper. What mother doesn't have the children? She must have done

something awful. A terrible experience. And I tell other

children to follow what your mind says, not what you are made to

believe. If it's happened to you after

you split up from your partner, Also on the programme: Should

cannabis be legalised? It's a question that's asked

regularly and now a group of MPs has described the UK's drugs policy

as an embarrassment. They want us to follow America's

lead where in several states, Andy Murray ends the year as world

number one in quite some style. We'll get reaction throughout

the programme and speak to one Throughout the morning we'll bring

you the latest breaking news and developing stories and as always

we want to hear from you, particularly if you've experienced

parental alienation. And a little later we'll talk

about whether Gareth Southgate is the best man to lead

the England team. Do get in touch on all the stories

we're talking about this morning. If you text, you will be charged

at the standard network rate. Theresa May will pledge to keep

Britain's corporation tax the lowest In her first speech to business

leaders at the CBI, the Prime Minister will also

announce ?2 billion of new investment every year

in science and technology. Our political correspondent

Tom Bateman has more. At the cutting edge of science,

this DNA lab in Oxford is the kind of place Theresa May has in mind

as she promises extra cash The Prime Minister has been courting

business leaders lately. Today's announcement of a further

?2 billion a year for science and technology is an attempt

to create a thriving environment amid what her Chancellor has called

the uncertainty of Brexit. She also wants to put

a spotlight on what she thinks is Britain's

competitive advantage - The Prime Minister will say she aims

to maintain the lowest corporation tax rate in the G20,

the group of 20 major economies. The levy here is due to fall

from its current 20% In the US, Donald Trump

said during his election campaign he would seek

to cut the federal rate to 15%. The Treasury still

thinks the UK would In reality, lifting the US rate.

because of extra state taxes. The Prime Minister will say

she believes in free markets but wants businesses to act

responsibly, saying the Brexit vote showed people also want the wealth

spread more evenly across the UK. Labour has criticised the focus

on bringing down corporation Jeremy Corbyn will tell business

leaders today that future growth is being threatened

by a chaotic and mishandled Brexit. Let's speak to Norman Smith who's

at the CBI conference Theresa May is setting out her

industrial strategy. How different will it be from the David Cameron

and George Osborne there? She sees it as a big moment. If you say

national industrial strategy to most people they don't think it sounds

very interesting, but for her it is about the change of direction.

Conventional Tory wisdom is that you don't intervene, you leave it to the

markets to decide. Mrs May is saying there will now be a different

approach and they will put money into helping high-tech developing

companies, and they will try and help them go from the good idea

stage to the big business stage. There will be more work on trying to

ensure tax breaks for RND, and that is about trying to come up with some

kind of forward plan for the British economy. -- R The issues are

these. We have been here so many times before. So many politicians

have talked about an industrial strategy, going all the way back to

Harold Wilson in the 1960s talking about the white heat of technology.

The other thing that strikes me about it, we know Mrs May wants to

help those who are unattractively referred to as the jams, just about

managing. And the difficulty with high-tech specialised companies,

they don't employ lots of people, they don't Barolo skilled people, by

and large they only employ very highly paid, very highly skilled

often migrant Labour. There it is not clear how this will help those

they want to help. Businesses would like clarity when it comes to Brexit

and they will not get that for a while. No. There is an almighty

elephant sitting on the stage called Mr Brexit. Business people want to

know what will happen because uncertainty is the kiss of death for

business and they like to know where things are going. They will not get

any clear indication from Mrs May today because that has been her

default position. She will not disclose any details because she

doesn't want to reveal her negotiating position. Already

business leaders are saying, come on. We have got to know. Will we

have tariff free access to the single market? Can we recruit from

outside Britain the kind of people we want? We need a plan. It will be

interesting to see what sort of response she gets from bosses here.

Thank you. And we'll bring you Theresa May's

speech live later in the programme. We're expecting her to

start at about 9.45. Joanna Gosling is in the BBC

newsroom with a summary There's been a surprise result

in one of the battles to decide who'll be the next

President of France. The former President Nicolas Sarkozy

was unexpectedly eliminated in the first round of voting

to select a candidate for The former Prime Minister,

Francois Fillon, topped the poll. As a former President, you can jump

to the top of the queue when it comes to the voting. Not when it

comes to the counting though. The first nationwide ballot next year's

presidential race has ruled that Nicolas Sarkozy is out. Within hours

of polls closing, he broke the news to his supporters. I wasn't able to

convince a majority of voters. I respect and understand their will to

choose other political leaders than me. But I want to congratulate

Francois Fillon and Alain Juppe who qualify for the second round. They

are two people of great quality who honour the French right wing. The

way this primary has been organised means it is open to tactical voting.

Supporters of the left or the far right can come here and vote for the

candidate they would like to see run against Marine Le Pen next year. The

surprise winner in this first test of voter mood was Francois Fillon.

Once Mr Sarkozy's Prime Minister, now his nemesis. His nearest rival,

the moderate centrist Alain Juppe, once tipped as the favourite, now

facing an uphill battle for his party's nomination. The first round

result was a surprise, he said. France has now delivered the first

of its own election surprises. How many more will follow? Lucy

Williamson, BBC News, Paris. There are calls for parents

who deliberately turn a child against their other parent

during divorce or separation proceedings to face a fine

or even imprisonment. Judges say they often see

what it known as parental alienation but have no power

to punish those involved. Victoria will have more

on that just after 09:15. The Home Office is disregarding

and mistreating medical evidence of torture in UK asylum claims,

according to a new report by the Asylum seekers in the UK who claim

they are torture victims can have medical assessments

to verify their claims. But the charity has told this

programme officials of the these assessments and judges are

correcting poor judgment at considerable cost to taxpayers.

The Home Office said an exceptionally small sample

was used in the report and all evidence is considered.

Britain's defences are at risk because the number of warships

available to the Royal Navy is woefully low,

that's according to MPs on the House of Commons Defence Select Committee.

They say the UK could lack the maritime strength to deal

with potential threats and warn that the size of the fleet

could shrink even further unless there is a clear timetable

The government insists it is spending billions on

One of the professional dancers from Strictly Come Dancing has been

assaulted in the street after taking part in the show's

Gorka Marquez, who was partnered with EastEnders actress

Tameka Empson, is reported to have been attacked by a group of young

He is due to have dental surgery after two of his teeth were knocked

out, but the BBC says he will appear in this week's programme.

President Obama says he won't publicly criticise

the President-elect Donald Trump after he leaves office

but will speak out if he believes American values are threatened.

By convention, former presidents avoid commenting

President Obama said he reserved the right to speak out

on certain issues as a private citizen.

And there was controversy at the American Music Awards

in Los Angeles last night, after performers mocked

Co-host Gigi Hadid was heavily criticised on social

media for impersonating Mr Trump's wife Melania,

while the band Green Day turned their song Bang Bang

into an anti-Trump anthem at the ceremony broadcast

Lead singer Billy Joe Armstrong repeatedly chanted "No Trump!

That's a summary of the latest BBC News.

Thank you. We are already getting messages about parental alienation.

This tweet says it is often due to a narcissistic personality disorder.

Mike says he has lost years with his daughter and we shouldn't forget the

dads. And this one says too many people will restrict visiting rights

in the mistaken belief that child will love them more but they destroy

their child's ability to forge close relationships in the future and they

often resent the child that chose to go it alone. It is crucial the

parents at the best interests of the child and not themselves. Tim

reveals he hasn't seen his kids since 2012 and the reason why

doesn't exist as far as the is concerned. Great to see this topic

being covered today. And Brenda said she hasn't seen her oldest child in

six years and are two children have never met each other because of

this. Parental alienation should be criminalised. We will discuss that

aspect of it later. Please get in touch with your own experiences and

they will be part of our conversation today. If you are

texting, you will be charged at the standard network rate. Now we can

get the sport with Katherine Downes. What an amazing year Andy Murray has

had. Incredible! He has always said that being world number one has been

a massive room for him and he got there a couple of weeks ago in Paris

but ending the year as world number one has been a massive driver for

him all season long. He spent over three hours more on court than Novak

Djokovic before the match yesterday and there were concerns that he

would be tired because of that but in the end it showed that the big

match sharpness came through for Andy Murray, with Djokovic making 30

unforced errors, uncharacteristically for him. Murray

came out 6-3, 6-4. The fact he had clinched the top spot against Novak

Djokovic is significant for Andy Murray. He has often lacked belief

against Djokovic in the past because he has often come out on top against

Andy Murray but this means that Andy Murray will start 2017 on the front

foot when it comes to their rivalry. This is what he had to say after the

match yesterday. I just did not expect to do it, that's for sure. If

Novak had won one or two more matches in that period, I still

wouldn't have done it. It has taken a lot of work this year to do it. I

certainly was very far away in a middle part of the year before

Wimbledon. In a second half of the year, after the French Open, it has

been the best of my career and I am really happy I managed to do it. So

brilliant for him but actually there are two number ones in the Murray

family. We have never had a British singles player on top of the world

rankings before so of course we have never had two British players at the

top of the world rankings before. Jamie Murray and his partner Bruno

Suarez clinched the top spot earlier on in the week. They couldn't add

the World Tour Finals to their collection but they have finished

the year as world number one. They have had a great season together

winning three titles, winning the Australia Open and the US Open. Two

Murray brothers at the top of the rankings. What a Christmas in their

house! And the reaction around the world on social media quotes back

row -- on social media? The best one is from their mother. Andy and Jamie

Murray, the pride of Scotland. The way they were. Lots of photographs

of them when they were younger. At Roger Federer:

I would not be surprised if we had Sir Andy Murray in the not too

distant future. Thank you. And we will be speaking to one of his

former coaches later on in the programme.

Parental alienation is when one parent deliberately turns a child

against the other parent during a divorce or separation.

It affects both mothers and fathers equally and can devastate families,

causing long-term psychological damage to children.

In some countries, governments have put in place legislation

to prevent such behaviour, with parents facing fines

But in the UK, judges say there are no punishments.

Our reporter Mike Cowan has been to meet some of those affected.

The names and voices of people we've spoken to have been changed

How can he look after a young child if he's done this?

Five minutes before the end he turned to me and said,

I don't know them now. It's seven years, I don't know them.

I don't know what their ambitions, their goals, their dreams are.

So parental alienation is a set of behaviours that a parent,

one parent might employ to alienate a child against the other parent.

Alienation in its pure form is the unjustified rejection

by a child of a parent who they once loved deeply.

Parental alienation takes place where you have a situation of high

conflict, and the relationship is such that one parent

really undermines the role that the other parent has

5% of children involved in divorce or separation will experience some

That equates to 5,000 children annually, but it's

Leading family experts claim it's closer to 20,000.

In all the stories you're about to see, we couldn't

approach the other parent for reasons of anonymity.

Her marriage broke down before her youngest child's second birthday.

What ensued was a six-year legal battle that would

leave her financially and emotionally depleted.

At what point did you suspect that your children were

It probably wasn't for at least a year or so that I realised

that these behaviours, these attitudes, the need to take

control, that he'd started making allegations against me that I'd

Alison's relationship with her children quickly broke

In a public judgment on your case, the judge said, and I'm paraphrasing

partly here, "I find that the father's attitude

towards the mother, his refusal to let the boys be seen,

his complete subjugation to their views and their reaction

and attitude to their mother, in which he is complicit,

When a judge says those things, how does the father retain custody?

The judge, by making that statement, it should have rung

There was something seriously remiss with my ex-husband's behaviour.

His inability to promote a relationship with me for the boys.

What he failed to recognise is the damage had been

The judge went on to say that the children were displaying

"a violent and dangerous antipathy to the mother," to you.

The father, "far from helping them, has, by his own views,

what he has shown and told them and what he has

permitted them to say, fostered that feeling.

Unfortunately, this is the toothless nature of the family courts.

I have a shared residency order which gives me legal equal

parental responsibility, but it's about enforcing that.

Unfortunately, the only way to have enforced that is for the children

to be either engaged in some sort of restorative practice

and mechanism to ensure that they came back to stay with me,

but they would need support to do so because their views about me

The judge, whilst critical of the father, did note statements

where the father said there was no evidence he had promoted a negative

The judge also noted the father had provided a number of witnesses

who attested the boys were happy in his care.

I used to walk into the playground and feel like a leper.

What mother doesn't have her children?

It's been seven years since you last spoke to your children.

Yes, at my youngest son's final school play in primary school.

I haven't seen them, I haven't spoken to them since.

How difficult is it to write to them and not hear back?

The internal emotional trauma to sit down every month

And try and think of things to write to my children, because,

sadly and heartbreakingly, I don't know them now.

It's seven years, I don't know them, I don't know what their interests

are, I don't know who their friends are, I don't know

what their ambitions, their goals, their dreams are.

I don't know if my boys will find their way back to me.

How difficult is it for you to say, as a mother, you don't

To this day, I kiss a photo of my boys on my computer screen

I just want them to always be happy, be healthy, and have

And I will always be there, whenever, however.

But what effect will this have on the child?

Dr Fiona Pienaar is director of clinical services

at the children's mental health charity Place2Be.

So if we don't catch the issue early on and support children

when the parental alienation starts, then the concern is that they carry

this through into adolescence, when they're starting to form

closer relationships and more intimate relationships.

And the concern, really, is around that if your primary

caregivers have been distrustful and alienated each other, then

It can be really difficult to have a sense of trust

for somebody that you're forming a relationship with,

so you can have your, we say have your radar hot all the time,

constantly looking for any changes in behaviours, and really unable

And on into young adulthood it can have a generational impact,

because if that's been your modelling of how you form

an intimate relationship, then the chances are that you might

have challenges with an intimate relationship yourself,

and that may then be modelled down to your children.

Cafcass is the Government organisation that represents

Chris was forced to have dealings with them for over a decade.

Six months after his son was born, he returned home to find his

It's not meant to be, but the Cafcass process is actually

a weapon for any vindictive parent, for them to wield.

How would you interpret it when the mother of your son turns

to you and says, "Why do you want overnight contact with a small boy?"

She said to me, "If you are awarded overnight contact,

We went on for about the next, until he was five years old,

but the contact was continually frustrated.

I think it was in August when I got to see my son for one hour,

supervised, during which time he'd enjoyed playing a computer

game with me in front of a Cafcass officer.

But five minutes before the end he turned to me and said,

So that, for you, was confirmation that you are now being

But what did Cafcass do about it?

I wrote to him, that's where your letters come in,

I wrote him 80-odd letters, just one way.

When his son was nine, Chris reapplied for

Perhaps selfishly I thought to myself, you know what,

when he turns 21, 31, whatever age he is, when he comes

knocking on my door saying, "Dad, why didn't you do this," I can

give him the papers and say, "Look, I did everything I possibly could."

By the time Chris' son was 12, the pair had been reunited and were

When you look back at that 11-year battle to have access

and contact with your child, what is your residing thought?

Sadness, that so much has been lost, that he could have had

For parents experiencing separation or divorce,

there are clear indicators that a child may be being alienated.

Karen Woodall from the Family Separation Clinic is one

When I hear people say to me, "I don't know what's wrong with him,

he comes to my house, doesn't say a word for two hours,

and then all of a sudden it's like he snaps out of it, something

When I hear that, I ask them to tell me about the two hours prior

to the child going back to the other parent, and what I'm hearing is,

"Oh, he becomes really grumpy, he becomes very withdrawn,

he's very unhappy, sometimes he's crying, he doesn't want to go back

What I'm hearing when I'm hearing that are the behaviours

of children in transition, children who are vulnerable

Around the world there is growing recognition of parental alienation.

In the US, the courts can intervene at the start of a separation,

ordering the parents attend mediation in high-conflict cases.

In Mexico, alienating a parent carries a 15-year jail term.

While in Italy, alienation carries a fine.

In October, a mother was fined 30,000 euros

We have no legislation at all for parental alienation,

but judges are starting to recognise it, and it's led to some

children being removed from the alienating parent.

The family courts, though, are not given any official

guidance on alienation from the Ministry of Justice.

But Cafcass, the organisation that represent children, do provide

Parents are increasingly having to navigate the complex

Sandra Davis is the head of family law at Mishcon de Reya.

The family court system is currently creaking with the withdrawal

of Legal Aid and litigants acting in person, so whilst it's obviously

incumbent on judges to try and move these cases through as quickly

as possible and to arrive at consistent judging,

So I think it would be of real assistance to have mandatory

mediation, mandatory therapeutic involvement at an early stage

of the process so that, actually, positions don't become too

ingrained and the child, children, do have a chance

of maintaining a relationship before it sours completely.

It's the impact on the child that can be the most damaging.

14-year-old Emma was seven when her parents divorced.

Over the next two years, she was severely alienated

My brother went away from home to my dad's,

because my dad was saying he could give him everything

he wanted and he wouldn't get in trouble for anything.

And when he went away, me, my brother and my sister had

never been separated, so it was, if my brother's going,

I want to go, because we're siblings and siblings stick together.

For a time, the kids had contact with their mum,

He'd ring up and say, "Oh, the kids are busy,

we're going to do something, they can't see their mum today."

My mum would be already halfway there and she'd get the phone call

to say that we're busy and we can't see her.

Did you know that at the time?

At the time all we knew was that my mum had let us down,

that she'd been out drinking the night before and that she had

a hangover, so she couldn't be bothered to come.

When your dad would say things to you, like,

"Oh your mum's got a hangover, she's not coming today,"

I thought that my mum was never like that,

my mum would never drink loads, she's not that type of person.

But if that's what my dad's saying, I believe him, that she's a liar,

that everything that's happened is her fault, that she doesn't love

us and she's being a bully towards him and us, and that's why

One day, in 2013, Emma got an unexpected message from her mum.

She's saying that she loves me, that she's been made out to be this

She sent me this picture of me, my brother and my sister

It just made me think, why would my mum send me

You didn't know at the time that you

With me only being nine, until the age of 12 I didn't

I was threatened with all sorts by my father.

I turned around and told him, "I want to see my mum," and he said,

"No, if you carry on the way you're behaving you'll be put into a foster

home, a care home, because we won't be able to look after you any more."

Over the next few months, Emma ran away from her father's home

Eventually, she was reunited with her mum for good.

As soon as I went in, the police were phoned to report

that I'm not missing, and then I was put on the phone

to my mum and that's when I first heard my mum speak to me

How can he look after a young child if he's done this?

And I tell other children to follow what your mind says,

Later we'll be exploring the growing calls for legal recognition

I am really keen to hear your experiences this morning.

And you can read more about our exclusive story on the BBC

Thank you to Sarah who had email. I was alienated. I overheard my

husband tell my two youngest that I was leaving and he didn't know why.

I heard things coming from I2-macro youngest that could only have come

from their father and I tried not to retaliate. It is brainwashing. It

may be too late for me but others could be saved. We have changed the

names to protect people's identity just in case. This text from a dud.

I am suffering from this with my ex and my son at the moment. -- dad. I

am going to court again this week but I am not hopeful. My son has

been goaded into asking awkward questions about my parenting. He

will be five in January. And this one. My children and I suffered at

the hands of an angry and bitter man for 20 years. He tried his best to

alienate me from my children and for some years he had some success. I

promised myself that regardless of what he did, I would never run him

down to them. You have got to take the long view. I children are grown

up and can see him for themselves. They have suffered greatly and so

have I. And this father has had no contact with a 13-year-old pop three

years despite going to court several times. It seems mothers can do what

they want without question, which assists parental alienation. We will

talk about this later with the head of Cascais, the organisation that

represents children in courts. -- CAFCASS.

Still to come, should cannabis be legalised?

It's a question that's asked regularly and now a group of MPs has

described the UK's drugs policy as an embarrassment.

We'll be speaking to people on both sides of the debate.

And Theresa May will be giving a speech to the Confederation

Here's Joanna in the BBC Newsroom with a summary of today's news.

Theresa May will pledge to keep Britain's corporation tax the lowest

In her first speech to business leaders at the CBI,

the Prime Minister will also announce ?2 billion

of new investment every year in science and technology.

She's expected to say the aim is to put post-Brexit Britain

at the cutting edge, by backing fields such

There are calls for parents who deliberately turn a child

against their other parent during divorce or separation

proceedings to face a fine or even imprisonment.

Judges say they often see what is known as parental

alienation but have no power to punish those involved.

Victoria will have more on that later.

The Home Office is disregarding and mistreating medical evidence

of torture in UK asylum claims, according to a new report by the

Asylum seekers in the UK who claim they are torture victims can

have medical assessments to verify their claims.

But the charity has told this programme officials

sometimes overlook these assessments and judges

are correcting poor judgment at considerable cost to taxpayers.

The Home Office said an exceptionally small sample

was used in the charity's report and insists that caseworkers do

Britain's defences are at risk because the number of warships

available to the Royal Navy is woefully low,

according to MPs on the House of Commons Defence Select Committee.

They say the UK could lack the maritime strength to deal

with potential threats and warn that the size of the fleet

could shrink even further unless there is a clear timetable

The government insists it is spending billions on

Facebook says it will create an extra 500 jobs when it

opens its new London headquarters next year.

The additional posts will include engineers and sales staff.

The company says that the UK remains one of the best places in the world

President Obama says he won't publicly criticise

the President-elect Donald Trump after he leaves office

but would speak out if he believes American values are threatened.

By convention, former presidents avoid commenting

President Obama said he reserved the right to speak out

on certain issues as a private citizen.

And there was controversy at the American Music Awards

in Los Angeles last night, after performers mocked

Co-host Gigi Hadid was heavily criticised on social

media for impersonating Mr Trump's wife Melania,

while the band Green Day turned their song Bang Bang

into an anti-Trump anthem at the ceremony broadcast

Lead singer Billy Joe Armstrong repeatedly chanted "No Trump!

That's a summary of the latest BBC News and there's more at 10am.

So many messages for you about parental alienation. Kirsty says

thank you for covering this subject. I will have chance to read more of

those messages in the next hour of the programme. Now the sports

headlines. Thank you. Andy Murray will end the year as world number

one after beating Novak Djokovic at the ATP world Tour Finals yesterday

to cement his position. His big brother Jamie is also world number

one with his doubles partner Bruno Suarez. A huge win for India in the

second test, bowling England out for 158 to win by 246 runs.

Another English batting collapse means they go into the third test on

Saturday one down in the five Test series after drawing the first.

Gareth Southgate will meet with FA officials today at St George's Park

for his interview to become the full-time England manager. He is

undefeated after four games in charge. And Britain's Charley Hull

has won her first Britons al GPA tour event. Thank you.

Nine out of ten people who have had their tax credits stopped

by the American company Concentrix have had them reinstated.

This programme first broke the story several months ago

that the private company used by the government to assess claims

had wrongly cut off the payments for hundreds of people.

Last week we spoke to Kat Smart Ekpenyong,

whose tax credits were stopped in August.

She was appealing against the decision and told us

that without that money, she couldn't afford to get

to hospital to attend appointments for her breast cancer.

It's not fair that I should have to decide whether to

feed my child or to go to a hospital appointment.

They shouldn't have, you know, that kind of power

I'm going through cancer and I want to work.

So why should I be penalised for wanting to work?

Well, since then, Kat has been told by HMRC that the original decision

Well, I had a telephone call from the tax credits office to advise me

that my self-employment had been reinstated. And I am due back

payment of quite a substantial amount of money for everything that

they have owed me, and also they have kind of looked into further it

and an overpayment that I have been paying back since 2014 which I have

questioned many times, they now realise that was there so they are

paying me that back as well. How do you feel about that? Elated! When

you got the call, what were you thinking? I cried, I shook, I was

pinching myself. I came off the phone and I thought, did that just

happened? Was that real? I had to ask my friend who was with me

whether I just got a phone call. She said, yes, it's real. Finally after

15 weeks off, my gosh, struggling. What does it mean not just

financially but emotionally for you and your family? The weight that has

been lifted, I am beyond words. I can't actually put it into words and

express the feeling of joy, my elation. I will be able to do normal

things. Do a normal food shop and buy shoes for my daughter, just

normal everyday things. I am not looking at going mad and having a

big spend but just normal everyday living. Including being able to

afford to go to the hospital for regular post-cancer treatment

checkups? Yes, I have my next appointment on the 2nd of December,

which I will now definitely be able to make, so I can get started on the

treatment that I need for the next five years. We wish you all the

best. We can speak now to SNP MP

Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikk who's been The fact that nine out of ten people

have had their tax credits reinstated is down to a

parliamentary question that you put down. I asked a series of written

questions last week in relation to what the update was regarding man to

retreat reconsideration and there have been tens of thousands of them

and it is quite incredible. It speaks of the scandal of Concentrix

that nine out of ten were upheld but there is still an issue about the

amount of time it is taking for tax credits to be reinstated. The

average is 35 days which simply is not good enough. I am calling on

Philip Hammond, the Chancellor, to make sure there is compensation

available for all the victims of this Concentrix scandal when he

delivers the Autumn Statement on Wednesday.

So not just that they get the payments backdated but on top of

that compensation? Is that what you mean? Absolutely because there has

been a breach of contract. The Concentrix contract was not to be

renewed and the situation was so bad that the government had to cancel it

with immediate effect. Compensation should be made payable to people.

Some are receiving it but some are not. There were some is like ?20 in

some cases and some constituents are not getting any money, so there is

no consistency. These people are victims of a scandal that the

government is responsible for and they should be paid money back. Some

of the sums that they are getting in terms of compensation when they have

been offered it does not even cover the cost of the phone calls or the

postage for sending documents again and again to be reviewed by

Concentrix. It is appalling. HMRC says it is perfectly routine and

normal to ask tax credit claimants for evidence of their personal

circumstances. There is nothing wrong with asking people for

evidence, but when you find yourself in a situation when that is examined

further that nine out of ten appeals are upheld, there is something going

dreadfully wrong in the system, so that has got to be dealt with and

development has got to accept it has gone wrong and they have got to

accept responsibility and those that have fallen victim of this need to

be compensated. Thank you for your time. We asked HMRC and Concentrix

for an interview again, as we have been doing consistently since we

broke the story and they continue to say no and we will continue to ask.

Theresa May is due to speak to the CBI in the next 15 minutes and we

will bring that to you live. Before that, there are calls for cannabis

to be legalised in the UK because MPs want to end the embarrassment of

the UK drugs policy. Which countries have legalised cannabis? It is

mostly illegal in the United States but eight individual states have

legalised it including Nevada and California, and several others allow

it for medicinal purposes. The Netherlands decriminalised it

several decades ago and Portugal legalised it in 2001 and Canada is

expected to do the same next year and Germany is looking to legalise

it for medicinal reasons as well. Some MPs say a change could bring in

more than ?1 billion per year in tax revenues for the government.

Cannabis is currently class B. The maximum sentence for possession is

five years in jail or an unlimited fine. Norman Lamb is the former Lib

Dem health minister who backs legalising the drug. And Dean in Los

Angeles has sold medicinal marijuana for 14 years but since her home

state of California legalised it earlier this month, she can now

legally sell recreational cannabis to one of her top clients, Snoop

Dogg. In the studio is Penny who doesn't want to give her full name.

The sun became psychotic and at times suicidal from marijuana

addiction and stump which he started to use at 14 and she strongly

opposes legalisation. -- her son. Tell us what your vision of Britain

with legalised cannabis would look like? We got an expert panel

together including educational and a number of scientists to advise us

what they thought was the best approach.

The problem is that there are people at the moment put at risk by buying

from criminals, people who have no interest at all in your welfare, you

have no idea of the strength of what you're buying. So from a public

health prospective it makes sense to regulate sales, to regulate the

potency of the drug and at the moment, the war on drugs it seems to

me has been a catastrophic failure. We are giving billions every year to

organised crime. That makes no sense and we are criminalising large

numbers of people including people who use cannabis for medical

purposes. It is a ridiculous approach. And we should follow the

evidence and follow an increasing number of countries and States in

America who are taking a more rational approach that protects

people better. Do you smoke it? No, I don't. Do you know people who do?

Here I am advocating change and I am a politician who hasn't used

cannabis or any other illegal drugs and... But do you know people who

do? Of course I do. Of course, I do. As a dad I'm hostile to drugs. I

worry about the impact on your judgements, the risk of addiction

and so forth, but the most dangerous drug of all in terms of harm is

alcohol. And you know there is a great hip possibling crossy here

because you have ministers in this Government who will pontificate

about the horrors of currently illegal drugs who use alcohol

regularly as I do, to a moderate degree I hasten to add, but they are

criminalising other people for using a drug of choice when they are

themselves using a drug that is very dangerous.

We will come back to this discussion because Theresa May is about give

her speech to the Confederation of British Industry. Here is some of

what she is saying. The entrepreneurs and the innovators who

employ millions of people up and down this country, the basis for our

prosperity. The Conservative Party and the Government I lead will

always believe in these things. But I'm here today, not just to reaffirm

these core beliefs, but to say that if this is what we value, we need to

be prepared to adapt and change. For if we support free markets, value

capitalism and back business, and we do, we must do everything we can to

keep faith with them. And with not enough people feeling that they

share in the wealth created by capitalism and with the recent

behaviour of a small minority of businesses and business leaders

undermining the reputation of the corporate world as a whole, the way

to keep that faith is to embrace reform. To do things differently, to

recognise that some people, particularly those on modest to low

incomes, people worried about the future of the their children and

their grandchildren, see these forces working well for a privileged

few, but not always for them. So today I want to ask you to join me

in shaping this new approach and seizing this opportunity. I want to

ask you to work with me, to show that the forces of capitalism,

globalisation and free trade offer the best hope for the problems

facing so many people in our country. I want you to help me show

those who feel let down. Left behind, or marginalised that we can

respond, we can change. And that together, we can meet this great

national moment with a great national effort to seize the

opportunities ahead, and build a stronger, fairer Britain, a country

that works for everyone. For this is a true national moment. The decision

of the British people on 23rd June gives us a once in a generation

chance to shape a new future for our nation, the chance to build a

stronger, fairer country. That's the kind of change people voted for. Not

just to leave the European Union, but to change the way our country

works and the people for whom it works forever. And I'm determined

that we will deliver the change they need. So we will do things

differently. Not carrying on with business as usual, but opening our

minds to new ways of thinking. Those of us in Government, and those in

business too. For Government, it means not just stepping back and

leaving you to get on with the job, but stepping up to a new active role

that backs British business and ensures more people in all corners

of the country share in the benefits of your success. For business, it

means doing more to spread those benefits around the country. Playing

by the same rules as everyone else when it comes to tax and behaviour

and investing in Britain for the long-term. All things I know that

the vast majority of businesses do already. Not just by creating jobs,

by supporting smaller businesses, training and developing your people,

but also by working to give something back to communities and

supporting the next generation. I have no doubt at all about the vital

role business plays, not just in the economic life of our nation, but in

our society too. But as Prime Minister, I want to support you to

do even more. That is why when the Chancellor delivers the Government's

Autumn Statement on Wednesday he will layout an agenda that is

ambitious for Britain. He will commit to providing a strong and

stable foundation for our economy, continuing the task of bringing the

deficit down and getting our debt falling so we can live within our

means once again. He will build on the actions that are independent

Bank of England has already taken to support our economy. And he will do

more to boost Britain's long-term economic success. Setting out how we

will take the big decisions we need to invest in our nation's

infrastructure so that we can get the country and business moving. And

he will show how we will do everything possible to make the UK

outside the EU the most attractive place for business to grow and

invest. I know that leaving the European Union creates uncertainty

for business. I know that some are unsure about the road ahead or what

your future operating environment will look like and there certainly

will be challenges. A negotiation like the one on which we're about to

embark cannot be done quickly or without give-and-take on both sides.

But there are opportunities too. Opportunities to get out into the

world and do new business with old allies and new partners. To use the

freedoms that come from negotiating with partners directly, to be

flexible, to set our own rules and forge new and dynamic trading

agreements that work for the whole UK. Opportunities to become the true

global champion of free trade. And opportunities to demonstrate how a

free, flexible, ambitious country like Britain can trade freely with

others according to what's in their own best interests and those of

their people. That is our aim and our ambition. And I am ambitious for

Britain. I believe that if we approach the difficult negotiations

to come in the right way, with the right spirit, we can strike a deal

that's right for Britain, and right for the rest of Europe too. And the

right approach is not to rush ahead without doing the groundwork, but to

take the time to get our negotiating position clear before we proceed, it

is not to seek to replicate the deal that any other country has, but to

craft a new arrangement that is right for us and right for Europe.

Recognising that a strong EU is good for Britain. It is not to provide a

running commentary on every twist and turn, but to acknowledge that

businesses and others need some clarity, so where I can set out our

plans without prejudicing the negotiation to come, I will. That's

why I have been able to set out the timetable for triggering Article 50

before the end of March next year. Why I want an early agreement on the

status of UK nationals in Europe and EU nationals here so that you and

they can plan with certainty. And why we have been engaging heavily

with businesses over the past few months to understand your priorities

and concerns and why we will continue to do so. But while the

negotiation to come will be critical, we must not lose sight of

the wider message people send on 23rd June. And so we must use this

opportunity to build a more prosperous and more equal country

where prosperity is shared and there is genuine opportunity for all.

We've already received some massive votes of confidence in Britain's

long-term future from some of the world's most innovative companies.

Nissan's decision to build two next generation models at its plant in

the north-east, securing 7,000 jobs. A record ?24 billion investment from

Softbank in Britain's future, a ?500 million expansion and 3,000 jobs at

Jaguar Land Rover, a ?200 million investment from Honda, ?275 million

from GlaxoSmithKline, investment in a few headquarters from Apple, ?1

billion and 3,000 new jobs from Google and this morning Facebook

have announced a 50% increase in their workforce in the UK by the end

of 2017. Yet there is more that Government can do, not just to

encourage businesses to invest in Britain, but to ensure those

investments benefit people in every corner of the country. That's why

one of my first actions as Prime Minister was to establish a new

department with specific responsibility for develop a modern

industrial strategy. That strategy that will back Britain's strengths

and tackle our underlying weaknesses. Our strengths are clear

- we're an open, competitive trading economy, we compete with the best in

ought owe, aerospace and advanced engineering, we are breaking new

ground in life sciences and new fields like robotics, artificial

intelligence and quantum computing. We're leaders in global professional

services from architecture to accountancy, from law to consulting,

we've world beating universities and the highest research productivity of

the top research nations. We have a vibrant creative industry producing

an extraordinary level of talent recognised and respected the world

over and of course, we are lead nears global finance, not just

banking, but investment management and insurance too. But as we

celebrate these strengths, so we should also be frank about some of

our weaknesses. We have more noble laureates than any country outside

the United States, but all too often, great ideas developed here

end up being commercialised elsewhere. We are home to one of the

world's financial capitals, but too frequently fast growing firms can't

get the patient long-term capital investment they require and have to

sell out to overseas investors to access the finance they need. We

have truly world-class sectors and firms, but overall business and

Government investment remains lower than our competitors. We have

outstanding firms and clusters in every part of this country. But

taken as a whole, our economic success is still too unbalanced and

focussed on London and the South East. We have gold standard

universities, but we are not strong enough in stem subjects and our

technical education isn't good enough. And while the UK's recovery

since the financial crisis has been one of the strongest in the G7, our

productivity is still too low. But if we want to increase our overall

prosperity and we want more people to share in that prosperity, if we

want bigger real wages for people and if we want more opportunities

for young people to get on, we have to improve the productivity of our

economy. So these are the long-term structural challenges the industrial

strategy aims to address. It is not about propping up failing industries

or picking winners, but creating the conditions where winners can emerge

and grow. It is about backing those winners all the way to encourage

them to invest in the long-term future of Britain and about

delivering jobs and economic growth to every community and corner of the

country. That is the ambition and we need your help to put it into

practise. We cannot create a proper industrial strategy without

listening to industry and we want to work with you and shape it together.

So we will publish a Green Paper before the end of the year to seek

your views before sh ug a White Paper early in the New Year. But

today I want to sketch out some of the first steps and spell out some

specific things we will do to turn our ambition into reality. We're

ambitious for Britain to become the global go to place for scientists

innovators and tech investors. We will continue to welcome the

brightest and the best, but can only do so by bringing immigration down

to sustainable levels overall so we maintain public fAlt in the system.

Today Britain has firms and researchers leading in some of the

most exciting fields of human discovery. We need to back them and

turn research strengths into commercial success. That not only

means investing more in research and development, but making sure we

invest the money wisely. In the last Parliament, despite the deficit we

inherited, we protected the basic science budget, even when that meant

we had to take difficult decisions to control other spending. But our

competitors aren't standing still. They're investing heavily in

research and development. So in the Autumn Statement on Wednesday, we

will commit to substantial real terms increases in Government

investment in R D, investors an extra ?2 billion a year by the end

of this Parliament to help put post Brexit Britain at the cutting edge

of science and tech. A new industrial strategy challenge fund

will direct some of that investment to scientific research and the

development of a number of priority technologies in particular, helping

to address Britain's historic weakness on commercialisation and

turning our world leading research into long-term success. And we will

also review the support we give innovative firms through the tax

system. Since 2010 we have made the research and development credit more

generous and easier to use and support has risen from ?1 billion to

?1.5 billion. Now we want to go further and look at how we can make

our support more effective. Mile aim is to have a tax system

that's proinnovation. This is a comprehensive package designed to

set us on the path to becoming one of the best places for research and

development in the world. There is no point in having great

ideas, great products and great start-ups if you can't get the

investment to grow your business here. While the UK ranks third in

the OECD for the number of start-ups we create, we are only 34 the number

that becomes scale up businesses. I want to turn bright start-ups into

great scale ups for the long-term. To do this we need to understand

where the barriers are so I am pleased to announce we will launch a

new patient capital review led by the Treasury which will examine the

obstacles to getting long-term investment in innovative firms. The

review will be supported by a panel of experts and I am pleased to

announce that Damon Ruffini has agreed to that panel. We are backing

the innovators and the long-term investors but government can also

step up to help drive innovative procurement, particularly from small

businesses, just as the United States does so effectively. Their

strategic use of government procurement not only spurs

innovation in the public sector, it gives new firms are afoot in the

door. In fact many of our technologies, like the technology in

your smartphone, touch-screen and voice recognition, were originally

commissioned not by Apple or Microsoft but by the US government.

I will announce today that we will review our small business research

initiative and look at how we can increase its impact and give more

innovators first break. And Cambridge entrepreneur David Connell

will lead the review and report back next year. Our modern industrial

strategy will be ambitious for business and ambitious for Britain.

It is a new way of thinking for government, a new approach, about

government is stepping up, not stepping back. Building on our

strengths and helping Britain overcome the long-standing

challenges in our economy that have held us back for too long. It is

about making the most of the historic opportunity we now have to

signal an important, determined change. But just as government needs

to change its approach, so does business as well. We all know that

in recent years the reputation of business as a whole has been

bruised. Trust in business runs at just 35% among those in the lowest

income brackets. The behaviour of a limited view has damaged the

reputation of the many, and fair or not, it is clear that something has

got to change. For when a small minority of businesses and business

figures appear to gain the system at work to a different set of rules, we

have to recognise that the social contract between business and

society fails and the reputation of business as a whole is undermined.

So just as government must open its mind to a new approach, so the

business community must as well. That is why we will shortly publish

our plans to reform corporate governance including executive pay

and accountability to shareholders, and proposals to ensure the voice of

employees is heard in the board room. The UK rightly has a strong

reputation for corporate governance. The Cadbury, Greenbury and other

reforms built on the strong foundations of the companies act and

the corporate governance code, have made the UK prime location for

listing and headquarter in, but we stand still. We must continue to

make improvements where these result in better companies and improved

confidence in business on the part of investors and the public. But can

be done by voluntary improvements in practice. In a representation of

women on company boards and in senior positions, for example, or in

broadening diversity. But where we need to go further, we will, so

there will be a green paper later this autumn that addresses executive

pay and accountability to shareholders, and how we can make

sure that employee voices are heard in the boardroom. This will be a

genuine consultation. We want to work with the grain of business and

withdraw what works, but it will also be a consultation that delivers

what works. While it is important that the voices of workers and

consumers should be represented, I can categorically tell you this is

not about mandating works councils or the direct appointment of workers

or trade union representatives on boards. Some companies may find that

these models work best for them but there are other routes that use

existing board structures, complimented or supplemented by 53

councils or panels to ensure those with a stake in the panel are

properly represented. -- advisory councils. It is about finding the

model that works. Second this is not about creating a Germany style

binary boards which separates the interests of the company from

shareholders, customers and suppliers. Our unitary board system

has served us well and will continue to do so, but it is about

establishing the best corporate governance of any major economy,

ensuring the voices of employees are properly represented in board room

deliberations, and that businesses maintain and when necessary regain

the trust of the public. There is nothing anti-business about this

agenda. Better governance will help companies make better decisions for

the long-term benefit of themselves and the economy overall. This is an

important task. We will work with you to achieve it and I know you

will rise to the challenge. This amounts to a big and ambitious

agenda, but the times we are living through demands nothing less. Change

is in the air and when people demand change, it is the job politicians to

respond. But we do so alone. You employ the people and generate the

prosperity on which our country depends. You must be part of this

endeavour. You, who are so often on the front line of our engagement

with the world, whose actions, so often project our values in the

world, must also play your part. By joining us to shape this new

approach, helping us put it into practice, and embracing the change

we need. Investing in Britain for the long-term, generating wealth and

opportunity in every corner of the country, and reforming corporate

governance to call out the bad in order to promote the good. So let us

join together and show that we can rise to meet this moment. Let us

respond to the public's demand for change. Let us restore their faith

and prove that capitalism can deliver them a better future. And

let us build a stronger, fairer Britain together. Theresa May,

joined on stage for a while by a butterfly! Norman Smith was listing

and watching. What would you take from that? Well, as we thought,

Theresa May is setting out her industrial strategy, how government

can do things differently in terms of providing support, particularly

for high tech business, and in return demanding that business does

things differently as well, and cemented the social contract with

employers and he well not to be fazed by the moth that was ducking

in and out behind the screen. They must need some mothballs and some

lavender here. She stay focused and she kept on message. An interesting

thing at the end of the speech, which will be focused on, she seemed

to have ditched the proposal floated at the party conference of having

workers on company boards. This is part of her pitch in trying to help

people who felt they were being ignored and left behind by business,

saying let's have employees on company boards. Businesses were

shocked and said they were not keen on that. Listening to Theresa May,

that seems to have been booted into the long grass. Instead she talked

about employee panels, some kind of mechanism for consulting staff,

which is very different to actually having a member of staff sitting on

the board. That seems to have been gone, dropped, a no-no. That seems

to me to be a retreat from what Theresa May promised at the party

conference speech. Thank you. Before we heard from Theresa May, we were

talking about calls for cannabis to be legalised in the UK. We heard

from Norman Lam, the former Lib Dem health minister, and Penny, who

doesn't want to use her full name, whose son became psychotic and

suicidal from marijuana addiction, which he started to use at 14. And

we will speak to dealer in Los Angeles, who has solved medicinal

marijuana for 14 years. -- Deana. Penny, could you tell normal and why

you are against legalising cannabis in the UK? Yes, our son started

using skunk at the age of 14. Nobody is delineating the difference

between cannabis and skunk. Skunk is 17% stronger and it lacks the drug

which mitigates the psychotic effects of the drug. Our son was a

straight a student and had a stars at GCSE and by the time he took his

A-levels they were down to grade C and Grady. He started using heavily,

they addicted, had his first psychotic attack in 2010, got

schizophrenia in 2011 and has spent the greater part of the past five

years in a psychiatric ward, I locked psychiatric ward. He has had

nine months outside that ward in rehab. And he has got the diagnosis

of schizophrenia. This is a nightmare faced not just by our

family but by many families. How would you like to respond? Well, I

have enormous sympathy for that situation. I am also a parent and I

go through the same anxieties. But the current law doesn't protect our

children. What has happened to Penny's son, tragically, have

happened under the current arrangements, where we allow

criminals to prey on young people. They don't know what they are

buying. They are buying super-strength skunk very easily.

The whole approach the government has taken has no impact on reducing

supply. It is available in every town, village and city across our

country. Surely a much better approach is to regulate what people

can actually sell to control the potency. We know that if you control

the potency, you can remove most of the risk. That is the approach they

take in many American states. Any, please respond? I don't know how

much you know about addiction and how drug buying and selling works.

People who become addicted need larger and larger amounts and

greater strength of a drug to get the same effect. We have now had

this stronger strain of skunk on our streets for 15 years or more. There

are a lot of people out there who are addicted to a very high potency

drug. And you are living in a very unreal world if you think for one

moment that legalising it and having it available in cafes or cannabis

social clubs is going to somehow magically make the illegal drug

sellers disappear off the streets or persuade people who want the strong

version of the drug to somehow settle for a weaker version. That

just isn't going to happen. It is not just an unreal world, it is what

is happening in the real world. It is happening in American states and

they are taking criminals out of the market. It is exactly the same thing

that happened when they went through the disastrous experiment in the

United States of Prohibition of alcohol. It had horrendous

consequences for many people. I want to end the risk that your son face

and I want to get that high strength substance of the streets. We know

that if we pitch the tax level right, we can take criminals out of

the market, protect young people and enter the awful criminalisation of

so many people in our country, which then blights their careers. -- and

the criminalisation. All others is happening under a criminal market

and the law not protecting your son. Deana, can we bring you in? We can

hear you and superb cannabis plants behind you. How is it working for

you? I am the oldest dealer in Southern California and I have seen

people from all walks of life come in and use cannabis to help them for

medicinal reasons will stop in California you have got to see a

doctor first before you get a recommendation to use cannabis. Once

you have a letter from the doctor, meaning you have had a physical and

the doctor approves it, at that point I can give you your cannabis.

Now it has been legalised you can sell it recreationally as well, can

you quest? Only when they start the political process in 2017, if you

are 21 or over. It is keeping it out of the hands of the use, out of the

hands of the children, like the mother whose 14-year-old son is

smoking cannabis. We don't think that is healthy. The terminology

skunk that you are using could be a British term. It is just a strain

and there are thousands of strains out here and they all affects you

differently. There will always be a small percentage of people with

underlying schizophrenia, and all it takes is something to make it come

out. Cannabis, if you use to high strains, it can come out. However

there have been studies in Germany stating they are using CBD, one of

the compounds in cannabis, and they are treating schizophrenia with it.

It is merely a plant like tomatoes, it will grow flowers. And not

everyone smokes. We have here a drink that's like a beverage that

people like to take. There is there, is something that woopy Goldberg

just came out with. It is a soak which is medicated Epsom salt and it

is helping women with PMS and menstrual cramps. I don't understand

how you are able to say you can get the strong stuff off the streets by

legalising cannabis? Criminals can't make the same money that they are at

the moment. They are earning billions of pounds a year. A

legalised regulated market with a minimum age that the product can be

sold to people, you can see what is happening in American States.

Because you take the big profits away from criminals, criminals leave

the market. It is what happened with alcohol prohibition in the United

States. You can make a difference and protect young people more

effectively. Thank you very much. This tweet from Moonwalker, "Banning

alcohol and tobacco with lead to a happier, healthier countries."

Healthier country." Your views are welcome.

Why would one parent turn their child against the other parent?

It sometimes happens after the couple separates

and the legal battle over custody of the child gets nasty.

It's a serious problem, and can have a horrible

psychological effect on the child involved.

It's also hard to recognise but it is real and is called

She lived with her siblings at her dad's.

She says he lied to her about why her mother didn't turn

Over time, she began to believe her mother simply didn't

It is the impact on the child that can be the most damaging.

14-year-old Emma was seven when her parents divorced. Over the next two

years, she was severely alienated from her mother by her father. My

brother went away from home to my dad's because my dad was saying he

could give them everything he wanted and he wouldn't get in trouble for

anything. And when he went away, me, my brother and my sister had never

been separated so it was as if my brother's going, I want to go

because we were siblings and siblings stick to go so I went and

my sister followed. For a time, the kids had contact with their mum, but

that was soon stopped. He'd ring up and say, "The kids are busy. We're

going to do something. He'd ring up and say,

"Oh, the kids are busy, we're going to do something,

they can't see their mum today." My mum would be already halfway

there and she'd get the phone call to say that we're busy

and we can't see her. Did you know that

at the time? At the time all we knew

was that my mum had let us down, that she'd been out drinking

the night before and that she had a hangover, so she couldn't

be bothered to come. When your dad would say

things to you, like, "Your mum's got a hangover,

she's not coming today," I thought that my mum

was never like that, my mum would never drink loads,

she's not that type of person. But if that's what my dad's saying,

I believe him, that she's a liar, that everything that's happened

is her fault, that she doesn't love us and she's being a bully

towards him and us, and that's why One day, in 2013, Emma got

an unexpected message from her mum. She's saying that she loves me,

that she's been made out to be this Again we've clearly only heard

one side of the story. In other countries, governments have

brought in legislation The government here says

the Children's Act is enough It says parental alienation

as a "syndrome" is not recognized by But there are growing calls

from experts and parents for the government to

officially acknowledge it. Let's talk now to Anthony Douglas,

the CEO of CAFCASS, the organisation that represents children

in family courts. Joanna Abrahams, a family

lawyer who specialises in parental alienation cases;

and the Liberal Democrat MP, Greg Mulholland, who thinks

further research is needed. Why isn't it recognised in the legal

system? We do recognise parental alienation and alienating

behaviours. They are common in particularly in high conflict cases

and each day, Family Court professionals are assessing the

impact of alienating behaviours on children. It is not recognised

formally in the sense that if a parent is deemed to be guilty of it,

they would be punish as in other countries? We have some of the same

characteristics say as Brazil because in this country, we do as a

final measure remove children from one parent, who has been doing the

alienating to live with another, but that has to be done after very

careful assessment because if you're living in an alienating environment

it is like living in a cult and that belief system is so powerful, if you

remove a child from it, even though the merits are with the other

parent, it can be equally damaging for children. So to criminalise

parental alienation is not as good as working intensively with a family

early so try to help them go beyond pure unfiltered emotion to a space

in which there is some reason and some understanding of the impact of

the alienation on children, but you are right, we don't have a specific

legal prov, but your programme is a good illustration that a number of

us across the system could usefully get together perhaps to introduce

stronger guidance because the knowledge about these cases is much

stronger than it was five years ago it cannily the impact on children.

I mean, it's, for most parents, you would think, why would you turn a

child against the other partner from whom you have separated? Why do

people do it, both mums and dads are capable of this? That's right, it is

both mums and dads. Sometimes it is not always done consciously. There

could be a lot going on and we don't know about it and there are

subconscious messages going out to the child and the child will

naturally pick up on them. Like what, for example? Mum is unable to

give emotional permission to the child to have contact with dad and

becomes highly anxious before the child goes and the child will pick

up on that and then is unsettled if he is seeing dad to start with. It

takes a lot of time and reassurance, that it is OK you can go and see

your father and sometimes people need help with that. Do you think it

is the problem is a lot more than officially recognised? I think it is

starting to become more and more recognised. More and more experts

are being brought in to diagnose it. What we often ask for when we go to

court is for a psychologist to become involved. They can make the

dig know suss and assist us with a plan for a plan for targeted therapy

for the parents. Quite often for the parents because the children can

become over medicalised and they see lots of experts and it can be too

much for them and then the parents can address whether there are

problems with mum or with dad or it is not necessarily a recrimination

or a blame culture, it has to be child-centric, what's in the best

interests of the child and how we can promote contact assuming it is

in that child's best interests. Greg Mulholland, what do you think about

the current legislation in the UK and whether it protects enough

victims of alienation? Well, it is important to use that word,

"Victim." And the victims are the children as well as the parent who

has suffered from the alienation. It is something, of course sadly that

happens in many cases and MPs up and down the country get cases of

separation that has gone very badly and this is one of the things in

this there. You say why do people do it? People can lose a lot of sense

of rationality and reasonableness in the face of an unpleasant and messy

divorce and that's very sad. Where I do think there is a problem is that

where there clearly is evidence of parental alienation I don't think

that's taken seriously by Cafcass and by the family courts to the

extent that people making false allegations of sexual abuse by a

parent are not punished. There is no sanction whatsoever in cases like

this. Well, let Anthony Douglas respond to that. We have a duty to

investigate every allegation clearly because some have proven true.

Equally we can't say just because a child has been brain washed by one

parent against another that that child is not, doesn't have complex

feelings and complex wishes and needs and so to get to the bottom of

each case and to understand the complexity of it does take a little

bit of time and that's our bread and butter. We do need to have a

stronger culture of urgency because the longer a child is kept apart

from one parent the harder it is to re-establish a relationship as I

think your film showed to try to do that in any relationship six or

seven years on, is impossible. The bond has gone. Sorry. You are

entirely ducking the point, Anthony. You know full well that where there

have been clearly false allegations of sexual abuse Cafcass does

nothing. Well, it is not true. Once that is established that the

allegations are false... And then you just... We recommend that as I

say in the final analysis, it maybe right for the child to move to the

other parent. That's not the same as taking action, Anthony as well you

know. Can I step in here? Cafcass can make recommendations, but it is

up to the judiciary to consider them and decide how they need to be

implemented. But a false allegation made in any circumstance could be

regarded as a criminal offence, but Cafcass do nothing about it. They

may recommend a different custody arrangement or a different care

arrangement, but they do nothing about false allegations and that's a

problem. Greg, are' over simplifying... No, I'm not. The

nature of these allegations, there are few clear hard facts in family

cases. They are often ambiguous, they are often people's words, one

against the other with the child caught in the middle and to produce

a rounded analysis that is safe for that child does take a little bit of

time and you can't over simplify it to punish one parent. Parent.

Generally the punishment of a child rebounds on a parent who feels

partly responsible for it. A lot of people getting in touch are dads

saying it is mostly mums who do this who are guilty of parental alyen

nation, but it is as we said earlier, possible for both mums and

dads to do this. Gareth Southgate's got a job

interview this morning The FA insist there's no rush

to appoint a permanent successor to Sam Allardyce, but with England

topping their world cup qualifying group after four games under

Southgate, it's Let's talk now to,

former England Captain, And Mark Palios. Why is he being

interviewed? If you are appointing a football manager, it is an art, not

a science and you take a risk whenever you do that. They have to

be seen to go through the process. It maybe a process whereby they can

iron out some of the things that they expect of the manager. So it is

more of a briefing for Southgate than so much of an interview. But

yeah, I mean, everybody knows Gareth. They know him around the FA.

They know him through his involvement with the under 21s and

he is a candidate that shouldn't be a surprise. They are not doing due

diligence on him and I expect more of a conversation which is around

what the FA expect out of the England team.

Peter, should he get it? I think it is a gamble. I think the FA will be

going on potential rather than what Gareth has achieved in management.

He had a spell at Middlesbrough and was in charge of the adjustment we

once and they did win a trophy, but that is a different ball game. -- in

of the under-21s. He has got the right profile of the pitch for the

FA. But when you look at the actual other side, experience in

management, it is probably not good enough to be an international

manager at the moment. He has done reasonably well. I think the game in

Spain was probably his best and they played quite well. Any other games,

it was very average. So it is an potential, really. I wonder, Mark,

because he seems to be slightly studious, that people could be

suspicious of him in football? That is for other people to answer. I

understand what the question is pointed at. If you look at Arsene

Wenger, he is quite surreal. People accept him. But to take Peter's

point, they accept Arsene Wenger on his results at what he did in the

early years of his career at Arsenal. I don't think so. At the

end of the day a body of fans would like somebody ranting and raving

from the technical area, but as Peter will tell you, you don't hear

a great deal of what the manager says to them at that point in time

because of the size of the crowd and the fact you are concentrating on

the game. You pay your money, you take your choice. My own view is I

am fairly relaxed. At the end of the day you have got to be pragmatic.

Can you get the most out of the potential of the team? You can look

at managers with different styles. Harry Redknapp, different style, but

you would have said he gets the most out of a group of players but that

is what you look for in a manager. Whoever gets this job will have to

solve the Wayne Rooney issue, Peter. Yes, certainly talking about the

playing side as well? I am! I not the discipline side. He has put

Wayne in the squad. He is not the player that he was. People still

think he is good enough to play at Premier League level. That side of

it is debatable. He is obviously close to my record and I would be

the first to congratulate him if he played 90 minutes in every game. But

if he keeps coming on as a substitute, I don't see the point. I

think Gareth mentioned he had him in the squad because of his experience

and the way the players looked up to him, but obviously now Gareth has

got the decision to make with what has happened off the pitch, with the

late-night antics obviously. It is great for players to have a drink

together and go out and we used to all the time. But when the manager

sets a limit, that is when the problem starts. That is the thing

with Gareth. He has got to show some leadership. When was told to go to

bed, he is the captain, and he led a bad example. -- Wayne Rooney was

told to go to bed. He has apologised and other players have as well.

Gareth has got to show determination and leadership and he has got to be

strong and you can't have players doing what they want and that is the

side he has got to prove. Thank you very much. Still to come: As Andy

Murray ends the year as world number one, how did he do it? We will speak

to one of his coaches. And a new report claims the Home Office is

disregarding medical evidence of torture in UK asylum claims. We will

have more on that in the next few minutes. Time for the latest news

headlines with Joanna in the newsroom. Theresa May has told

business leaders at the CBI conference in central London that

they must reform in order to keep people's faith in free market that

capitalism, and to deliver the change demanded by Britain's Brexit

vote. The former French President Nicolas

Sarkozy has been unexpectedly defeated in the first round of

voting in France. Britain's defences are at risk

because the number of warships available to the Royal

Navy is woefully low, that's according to MPs on the House

of Commons Defence Select Committee. They say the UK could lack

the maritime strength to deal There will be more from the BBC

newsroom at 11 o'clock. Thank you. Now the sports headlines.

Andy Murray will end the year as world number one after beating

Novak Djokovic at the World Tour Finals.

England's cricketers have lost the second test against India

after being bowled out for just 158 on the final day.

Captain Alastair Cook was dismissed with the final ball yesterday

and the wickets continued to tumble this morning,

Joe Root faced over 100 deliveries but he was out lbw.

England lost the other seven wickets this morning cheaply,

James Anderson was the last man to go.

India win the match by 246 runs and take a 1-0 lead in the series.

And Britain's Charley Hull has won her first LPGA Tour event

finishing on a tournament record 19 under par at the season ending

The Home Office is disregarding and mistreating medical evidence

of torture in UK asylum claims, a report by a charity suggests.

Asylum seekers in the UK who say they are torture victims can have

medical assessments to verify their claims.

But charity Freedom From Torture say judges were correcting poor

judgements at considerable cost to taxpayers.

Dr Juliet Cohen is from the charity Freedom From Torture

and Conservative MP Dr Tania Mathias thinks the Home Office need

What are you saying, Julia? Although the Home Office have their own clear

policy guidance on how caseworkers should assess medical evidence in

asylum claims, they are failing to follow it, so we are seeing cases

refused and when they go to appeal the judges are having to overturn

that decision. This is a huge cost base for the mental health of the

person involved with the delay and the fear that they might be returned

to the country of origin, and the cost to the taxpayer frankly if they

hold unnecessary appeals which they wouldn't have to if they got the

decision right first time. We spoke to somebody whose case was examined

in your report who has been through this process. She had an expert

medical report and she spoke to our reporter.

Mamie was an opposition political activist in

She was imprisoned by the country's security services and tortured.

Mamie was an opposition political activist in

And did you tell the UK Home Office what had happened?

Mamie, whose name we've changed, applied for asylum in the UK

without medical evidence and was rejected.

She then applied again with a medical report,

which showed 20 scars which doctors said were evidence of torture.

But Mamie was turned down for asylum again.

This time though, that decision was overturned by a judge

The judge attached significant weight to the medical evidence

and said a doctor had carefully considered other possible causes

Let me we queue a statement we have got from the Home Office. It says

the report today is based on an exceptionally small sample of the

asylum seekers over the time period and it says that officials have to

consider all the evidence provided and our guidance clearly states it

is not their role to dispute clinical findings in medical

reports. I think what is interesting there is that the Home Office is

stating what their policy is, which is excellent. And yes, I will be

pushing them on this in Parliament when we launch the report. You are

saying it isn't happening in practice? In practice it isn't

happening. What is exceptionally useful with what Freedom From

Torture has done with these 50 cases, they are sample. A sample.

Don't ignore the staggering, staggering cases where people have

been traumatised by delays, where the government has had unnecessary

costs because the appeals get overturned. The Home Office should

not be disputing these clear-cut cases that the charity has put in

place. They should not be disputing their own case, where training that

the Home Office has, training should be rolled out. And all staff

undertake rigorous training programme? Yes, that they don't do

the training programme that is there, on the shelf, literally. I

have looked at the module which looks very difficult and very

thorough. They are not doing it. Those cases where where those people

had obviously not had the training. White as a Home Office worker, if I

can ask you to put yourself in their mind for a moment, why would you

with no medical expertise ignore and assessment that suggests an

individual has been tortured? What would be the motivation? I cannot

comment on their motivation. I am so concerned about it. This is why we

want to raise these cases. Yes, there are only 50, but we don't know

what the bigger picture is. We don't know how many other cases of medical

evidence have been refused because we have only followed up the ones

from our own charity. So we are very concerned about the human cost of

this that the financial cost. Yes, they have clear guidance. Don't be

clinical judgments if you are not clinically qualified to do so. Clear

guidance and very good training. It is just one day. The Home Office

always have it. It is already happening, staff undertake it

already. That is why we will be challenging the Home Secretary and

we will make sure it does get rolled out. Thank you. Andy Murray has

finished the year as the world men's number one, beating Novak Djokovic

in the ATP World Tour Finals last night. This victory surely puts him

up there as Britain's greatest sportsman.

That was forehand by Andy Murray. Djokovic left the ball in the middle

of the court. Djokovic staying down. It is yet another great tennis

achievement for Andy Murray! That win puts Murray

at World Number One at the end of the year -

a year which has seen him win nine trophies, one Grand Slam,

one Olympic gold and become a dad. He hasn't lost any

of his last 24 matches. We can speak now to Andy Murray's

coach, Jamie Delgado, and to Simon Mundie,

Newsbeat's sports reporter and a massive tennis fan

who was at the final last night. How was it? It was absolutely

spectacular to be there. The atmosphere was unreal. People didn't

believe what was happening. To finish the year as world number one

is such an amazing achievement. We went into the final with lots of

people thinking Djokovic would win because he had played so outstanding

in the semifinals and Andy Murray looked like he was on his last legs

against Milos Raonic. He came out just fantastic. A phenomenal

achievement. Unquestioningly one of the greatest British athletes of all

time and a privilege to be there. Jamie, tell us about Murray's mental

and physical strength to achieve this. Yes, it is incredible. We know

him well and we have seen him play so many matches and we have seen him

come through these tough situations before, especially in the training

blocks. He pushes himself to the max. Even though he was really tired

going into the final, we knew that and we also knew that he had a lot

extra in reserve to pull back on, and he played emphatically well.

Yes, it wasn't just the win, it was the man of the win, wasn't it? Yes,

and with it being something as big as he has achieved, finishing the

year ranked number one, beating Novak Djokovic in the final as well

in that high pressure situation, it was a huge mental block for him and

it will help him a lot next year. He has lost in finals to Novak Djokovic

in the last few years and it makes it just extra sweet to beat him in

the final. What does it mean to him quite? Only this year he really