Woman's Hour - Jazz musician Zoe Rahman, IVF regulation, County Lines, Secretary of State for Defence Ben Wallace

Episode Date: December 11, 2021

Musician and composer, Zoe Rahman has won a MOBO, a British Jazz Award, and this week Zoe was awarded the ‘Impact Award’ at the 2021 Ivors Composer Awards.Julia Chain the chair of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, made a plea for the 1990 Act governing fertility clinics and practice in this country to be updated. She argues that after 30 years, the science and culture around IVF has changed so much, and that the law needs to catch up. This week Ministers revealed a 10-year drugs strategy which includes £300m for combating more than 2,000 county lines gangs. Sahira Irshad and Jen Jones are part of Mums United, a group of local mothers fighting against rising gang violence in Sheffield. 23-year-old Vee Kativhu was told Oxford university wasn't for people like her - she proved her teachers wrong by graduating recently from there with a degree in in Classical Archaeology and Ancient History. She's now studying International Education Policy at Harvard. Her popular Youtube channel gives out studying tips and she has a new book out - Empowered: Live Your Life with Passion and Purpose. Last week the government set out how it will improve life for women in the armed forces, in response to the Women in the Armed Forces report which came out in July. It found that service-women who were victims of bullying, harassment, discrimination and serious sexual assault were being ‘denied justice’ by a ‘woefully inadequate’ military complaints process. We heard from the Secretary of State for Defence, MP Ben Wallace.Presenter: Anita Rani Producer: Dianne McGregor

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. I'm Natalia Melman-Petrozzella, and from the BBC, this is Extreme Peak Danger. The most beautiful mountain in the world. If you die on the mountain, you stay on the mountain. This is the story of what happened when 11 climbers died on one of the world's deadliest mountains, K2, and of the risks we'll take to feel truly alive. If I tell all the details, you won't believe it anymore. Extreme, peak danger. Listen wherever you get your podcasts.

BBC Sounds. Music, radio, podcasts. Hello, I'm Anita Rani and welcome to Woman's Hour from BBC Radio 4. Hello and welcome to Weekend Woman's Hour, where I bring you select standout moments from the week just gone. On the show today, the two women fighting countyline drugs gangs in their neighbourhood, the Secretary of State for Defence Ben Wallace on the government's plans to improve life for women in the armed forces, and how to make revising easier. If Beyonce was having a concert and she just put out music the night before, you're not going to listen to that song once and then get on stage and sing along. You won't know the words. You need to listen to it at least four or five times,

the acoustic version, the drumming version, all the different versions until you know it for yourself. And that's the same with revision. Study tips from the inspiring 23-year-old educational activist V. Kativu, plus music. We have the multi-award winning jazz musician Zoe Rahman on the grand piano in the Woman's Hour studio. But first, a few days ago, Julia Chain, the chair of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, made a plea for the 1990 Act governing fertility clinics and practice in this country to be updated. She argues that after 30 years, the science and culture around IVF

has changed so much that the law needs to catch up. There are areas which where the medicine and the science and the social mores of today have completely outstripped the Act. So for example, we'd like to look at the inequalities in the Act. The Act recognises a couple as being a man and a woman. That is totally inappropriate now for 21st century Britain. There are many other family formations and there are inequalities in the Act with regard to, say, as being a man and a woman. That is totally inappropriate now for 21st century Britain. There are many other family formations and there are inequalities in the Act with regard to, say, for example, same-sex couples and actually single women or men who wish to start families.

In addition, as you know, IVF treatment is predominantly private, 65% self-funded, only 35% NHS funded. And therefore, clinics have been, it's an increasingly commercialised sector. Clinics are now successful businesses, and many of them offering excellent treatment for their patients. But there are clinics offering add-ons or other treatments to patients which they might not necessarily need or even benefit from. And we have no powers to regulate this increasingly commercialised sector. So, for example, our sanctions range from a sort of slap on the wrist to the nuclear option of taking a licence away. We don't have powers to fine clinics or impose economic sanctions when they missell products or services. Let me come in at this point. So you say, what's a slap on a wrist? What does that mean? We just might say to the clinic, you know,

please consider not doing this or that, which is really not very effective when you've got a clinic who, for example, is suggesting or encouraging a woman to buy an expensive treatment that may not have been proven to be healthy. We know from a BBC panorama a few years ago that the majority of these so-called add-ons haven't been proven in the sense of there isn't enough evidence to say whether they work or not. It's very different, of course, to take part in a trial or be a part of something that's going to hopefully make the evidence for it. But right now, how big a problem is this? How many clinics would you say are selling unproven treatments that can be to the tune of thousands? Look, I think that most clinics are abiding by the consensus statement that we entered into in 2019 with a whole range of doctors, clinics, embryologists, and so on. And those clinics abide by that statement, which agree that they are not going to offer treatments to patients that are not proven to be helpful in

having a baby. But as clinics become increasingly commercialised, there is pressure on them, perhaps, to offer treatments which patients will pay for that they might not need it. It's not a big problem, but it still exists. What percentage of clinics? I think it's impossible to say what percentage, because not all clinics are offering the same sorts of treatments. And let's be clear, there are a range of patients for which some of these add-ons might be helpful. But what we want to be able to do is say to those clinics who perhaps are not being completely up front with patients about the benefit of these treatments, you know, you have to give patients completely transparent

and clear information about what you are selling them, particularly when patients are, as you yourself have said, so vulnerable. Sorry, so you can't say how big a problem this is, but it's enough of a problem that you now wish to change the law. I know you want to change it for other reasons as well, to be able to fine these clinics. Why not name and shame them? You can do that now. You don't need a law change. And I have to tell you that there are many people who would help you with that. Many of the people who've paid for such add-ons and they perhaps still do not have a baby for that reason or other reasons. I think it's very important to understand that most clinics are offering patients a good service and they're being completely upfront and giving them very good information about what treatment they can expect

and what they need and also let's be clear you know some clinics are offering patients innovative treatments which are not yet frozen as part of research trials and asking patients if they wish to participate in research trials. Yes, but we're not talking... You're the one who's brought this up. I'm the one who's trying to get to the bottom of it. You seem now quite reticent about what you could do before the law is changed, or perhaps not.

If you have the ability... So, you know, looking at this, since you made your comments, and, you know, full disclosure, I've you made your comments, and, you know, full disclosure, I've written a column about this, and I've talked to people in the industry, I've made films about this particular element as well, as a journalist, we're building on the great work of Panorama, we looked at this a few years ago, and in a landmark piece, which people can look up. Why not take away the license from those clinics that you know are selling add-ons that are unproven? Right. I'm not being reticent. Let me be very clear. If clinics are offering treatments, including add-ons, to patients that, for example, are within our red traffic light, so they're not proven and so on, we want the power to fine them or to have other sanctions against them

to stop them doing it. It feels that most of these clinics, though, on the whole, offer a lot of their patients also providing an excellent service and mainstream IVF. So taking away their licence would be really an inappropriately severe action. I think it'd be much better to have a range of sanctions, including fines, which would, I believe, be much more effective. And let me be clear, clinics are beginning to change their behaviors. So this is not something that clinics are completely not taking notice of.

We've seen over the last two years better behaviour by clinics, and we want to encourage that. It was quoted from one of the women that got in touch this weekend saying that they had several, one of these add-ons, endometrial scratches through their treatments. Every time was very painful. It never resulted in positive outcomes. She says, when I look back now, I realise we spent thousands on endometrial scratches for no good reason. What evidence should you ask for if you're going through IVF

to know if it's proven or not? Right. So we have a very clear system of, we have a traffic light system actually, and we've said that patients must be clear that there is evidence through randomised control trials, which this is the accepted sort of goal standard for the medical profession, that shows that those treatments are effective. Actually, and it's worth saying, that we are beginning to look at this whole area because there is now some suggestion among the medical and scientific community that there are other ways,

as well as randomised control times, trials that are looking at efficacy, and we will look at that. Do you think IVF doctors, very much it's linked to money, of course, do you think IVF doctors should tell you when to stop? I think that IVF doctors who are obviously the experts in this should look at, and I'm sure they do this,

how patients are doing. Each patient is different and what is medically best for that patient. And it may be that additional treatments or additional cycles is what patients need and it may be that patients you know who are paying should be actually saving their money and paying for additional cycles rather than paying for expensive treatment add-ons but there may also be certain situations I'm not a clinician so I don't know what they are there may be situations in which the not a clinician, so I don't know what they are. There may be situations in which the doctor says, this is heartbreaking, I know, but it's time that you

stopped. How long would it take until you know you can change the law? What's the next step? Well, I'm quite impatient about this. We are going to be asking doctors, clinics, patients for their views on what bits of the law need to be changed. And we hope to have proposals to the Department of Health and Social Care by the sort of back end of 2022. We hopefully get some parliamentary attention after that and move forward quite quickly. Because there are also other, apart from treatment add-ons, there are also other inequalities in the Act that we'd like to... Yes, well, you referred to one at the beginning

with regards to same-sex couples, and there is a married lesbian couple known as Wegan or Wegan on social media, you'll probably be aware of this, who've launched a landmark legal test case to see if they can have a review of this against an NHS fertility sector in England claiming it discriminates against LGBT families. It's known as the gay tax by some. Would you support those changes? Absolutely. So for example, where there is a lesbian couple, same-sex female

couple, whether they're married or not, or in a civil partnership or not, even if one is donating their own eggs to the other partner, they still have to undergo additional screening as if they were both donors. And that is completely inequitable. And Meg wrote in to say, gave up on IVF and felt empowered to choose adoption instead. A year after making that decision, we've adopted two amazing, beautiful twin girls who've brought the brightest light back into our lives. And if you'd like to get in touch to share your thoughts about any of the subjects you hear on the programme, then you can email us via our website.

Now this week, ministers revealed a 10-year drug strategy allocating £780 million in funding for the drug treatment system in England. That includes an additional £300 million for combating more than 2,000 county lines gangs. County lines is a form of criminal exploitation where urban gangs persuade, coerce or force children and young people to store drugs and money and then transport them to suburban areas, market towns and coastal towns. The county line is both a reference to drugs being taken to different counties and the dedicated mobile phone line used to sell drugs. It can happen in any part of the UK and is against the law and is a form of child abuse. Some victims of the crime are as young as seven. I spoke to Sahira Ershad and Jen Jones, two women who are part of Mums United,

a group of local mothers fighting against rising gang violence in Sheffield and started by asking Sahira why she felt she needed to create the group. I saw a lot of mums, I spoke to a lot of mums who were worried about young children engaging in the local gangs. They felt that their voices weren't being heard within their homes and within the community that they lived in. And as I got to know them and as I got to build a relationship with them, I just felt that we needed to do something more. And I didn't want it to be just a place where we just come and have a cup of tea. And, you know, I just, I wanted to be more proactive.

And that's in essence how Mums United was formed. What was your experience when you moved back to Sheffield? What did you see? What was happening? So I saw, you know, drug dealing happening openly. I saw young children as young as 10, 11, engaging in drug activity. You know, they were clearly, um you know with groups of older boys um in the parks and this was happening openly you know um taking packages and you know when I spoke to local mums they were like yeah this is what they do um you know anti-social behavior

young children just being rude obnoxious and and it wasn't a nice place to be. And it came to your doorstep. Yeah, people were carrying bags of weed quite openly and just, you know, open during the day, you know, as if it was just nothing. And, you know, taking out the packages. And, you know, there was a few times I confronted them about it. You confronted the drug dealers? Yeah, because I was just shocked.

You know, this was happening near my children and I asked them to move away from, you know, it was near my house. And they were just like, what are you going to do? You know, you're just a woman. So they were obnoxious and rude. But for me, it made me feel that gonna do you know you're just a woman so they were obnoxious and rude uh but for me it it made me feel that you know what I can't this can't happen you know I'm not gonna have men like that talk to me in that way and I need to protect my children my children are growing up in this area I can't keep on running away where am I gonna run to it's the

time that we made a stand and as mothers you know have a voice well another mum that joined you is jen who's a volunteer with you at mums united but from a different part of the city to sahara jen how did you find out about it and what made you want to get involved what happened was a couple of years ago now before the pandemic there was a shooting in my local community where a little boy was on his way to the local shop. And because there's two gangs having basically having beef with each other, one member of one gang tried to shoot somebody else. And the little boy got caught in the crossfire and caused great alarm and distress for parents, all parents throughout our community. And we held a community meeting.

Jen, I think we got clear that there was a shooting and a young boy got caught in the crossfire. Your line is a little bit fuzzy. We're just going to try and sort that out. Whilst we do that, I'm going to bring Sahira back in. I mean, that is really shocking to hear. But Jen had a meeting, got local councillors down and got you over there to see what you can do.

What about within your own community? How did the mums react when you said, I want us to do something about this? A lot of the mums, they thought that it was going to be a place where they could sit and talk, have tea and samosas. But for me, it was really kind of listening to their stories and listening to just the way that they see themselves. You know, what place do they have in the communities that we live in?

So, you know, a lot of mums came together. There was a lot of resistance from, you know, from certain members of the community. They didn't want us to talk. They didn't want us to talk. They didn't want us to take ownership of the issues that we were having. So there has been a resistance, but there's been a lot of support as well. Jen, let's bring you back in. I mean, Boris has said we've already rolled up 1,500 county lines gangs, but we still need to do 2,000 more.

As a mother on the ground, what needs to happen? What would you like to see happen? What we're currently seeing happen up to this point is that the authorities target and pick up the young people who have been victim to being groomed by these criminal gangs to become drug runners, carry guns, store drugs, store guns, knives and weapons and so on and so forth. And yes, while they are committing crimes, they are also victims.

But what we're not seeing happen is the people who are conducting all of this. And let's face it, in reality, this is grown adults, in the majority men, who are behind all of this that's happening to our children. And another important thing, Anita, is that to these grown adults who are puppeteering the children, and predominantly poor working-class children or children with disabilities like autism and ADHD who are very vulnerable to being groomed, that's children just like my own son,

which is another reason why I'm so adamant and so passionate to be to be supporting and as much as I can everything that Mums United and similar projects are doing um these these people need to be picked up and removed rather than of course it's important that there are plans in place to support people who are who are using the drugs and for them to be rehabilitated. I accept that and I acknowledge that. But what we don't have are things like safe, supervised, responsibly run activities for youths where there are crime hotspots. hot spots and and the other thing is the most the most saddening and heartbreaking thing of all of this is that when there's a young boy in a pool of his own blood on a pavement on a council estate

somewhere because gangs have had beef with each other and he's dying and crying for his mum the man behind whatever has happened the grown adult people who have conducted all of this situation are wiping their hands of that child and saying, where do we get another one from? Because our children are dispensable to the people behind these county lines crimes. Sahira Irshad and Jen Jones there. And we have a statement from the Home Office that says the government is investing 300 million pounds to tackle drug supply and county lines over the next three years and has also separately allocated 4.8 million pounds for the development of the South Yorkshire Violence Reduction Unit to identify and respond to the root causes of violent crime. On to the 23-year-old woman who makes studying cool. If

you're preparing for exams or living with someone who is, I would advise you turn the sound up now. V Cativu was told Oxford University wasn't for people like her. She proved her teachers wrong by graduating recently from there with a degree in classical archaeology and ancient history. Thank you very much. And for good measure, is now studying international education policy at Harvard with the hope of becoming a policy advisor for girls' education in Zimbabwe. Not bad for a girl who arrived in England from Zimbabwe,

age six, not speaking a word of English. Her popular YouTube channel gives out studying tips. Her best mate is fellow Oxford grad Malala Yousafzai, and now she has a new book out, Empowered, Live Your Life with Passion and Purpose. What were you doing at 23? Emma began by asking, why a YouTube channel for study revision? I realised that there was something missing, there was a gap that needed to be bridged where young people from backgrounds like mine thought that a space like Oxford was unattainable for them and yeah the channel began out of wanting to show myself being

a young black woman unapologetically living my truth and prospering in a space like Oxford without having to change or conform in any way. And I have to say that's very important but I also particularly love how much you love the work. Yes. You know, unashamedly having that joy, if I can call it joy, maybe you don't feel it. Do you actually like revising? Yes, absolutely. Because I just, since a young age, I've just always known that my voice and my power comes from the more that I know. So I used to love reading. I was always the fastest reader. You know, my mum would tell you the thing I got in trouble for growing up was taking too many books from the library and getting a fine, right, from the library. You badass.

Exactly. So from a very young age, it was always that way. So when I got to Oxford, I was like, finally, I'm being seen for who I am. I go to like a tutorial and they're asking me, why did you use this word in your essay how come you explained it this way whereas before that you know you'd write an essay it gets graded and that's the end of that no discussion but at Oxford they were listening to me my opinion was valued and this was heaven for me so when I began the channel I mean I think my love for studying really came through. One of the videos that has gone viral is revision by repetition and I went to have another look at it this morning and I love the fact that you also mentioned is revision by repetition. And I went to have another look at it this morning. And I love the fact that you also mentioned, sorry, that you've got chipped nails. Because, you know, when you're revising, you can't focus on those things. These are the important side details.

But for anyone listening who's struggling, can you summarise it for us? What can they do? Okay, so I have this amazing book that I read when I was younger called How to Ace Your A-Levels. And I've sworn by it up until the point of even going to Harvard. And in that book, there's this repetition revision method where it tells you that if you're going to go into exams, you can't just revise a topic one time and expect yourself to know it and just regurgitate it because it's just impossible. And the analogy that I use is if Beyonce was having a concert and she just put out music the night before, you're not going to listen to that song once and then get on stage and sing along.

You won't know the words. You need to listen to at least four or five times the acoustic version, the drumming version, all the different versions until you know it for yourself. And that's the same with revision. You need to go through your topics at least three or four times in depth. There's different types. Go watch the video. But there's different ways to go through it, but at least four times before sitting the exam because it just won't

go in so the repetition revision method is my best friend of life and I think I'll swear by it even if I do a PhD. I have got to I love this image it was in one of the interviews with you of you said Malala lived next door I believe or close by the university and that you you know both go off do a lecture one of you'd go to do a talk in London then come back and the other one and then you just have breakfast together yes it was a really beautiful experience and I think that was what was really interesting about being at Oxford with all of these amazing students is that everybody was just never just a student like you'd have by day they're like this

amazing world champion chess player or they're doing some training for like future olympics or they're going off to do talks around the world or winning nobel exactly it was just amazing so i think wasn't like that at my university but i'm really happy yeah but take me through so you have breakfast together after just you know winning at winning at life. Yes, exactly. I think it's just a beautiful experience to also know that you're just young people who are wanting to make a change in the world. And you also still need breakfast. You also have chipped nails and you also have an essay crisis. What breakfast are we talking about? Full English, of course.

There we go. Okay. I just want to put myself in the scene of the most motivated group of students in the world, perhaps. You know, we're Women's Hour, we focus on women. And I was very struck by the sacrifice your mum made for you. She made the decision to come over here to give you a better life and your family. And you were actually separated for some time. Yeah, we were. Just a few years, could be four or five.

And I just didn't get to be with her. And I think that's such a story that's true to so many young people with migrant families is that when you have that moment of being apart, it's so difficult, you have to rebuild those bonds. And luckily for my mom and I, and I talk about it a lot in the book, that she just became my best friend instantly, right? We happen to be able to bond back together, but that's not true for everybody. And that's why I was so excited about writing my new book is because it's not a unique story to me.

It's not like, oh, I had this sad upbringing or I had this moment of being separated from my mom and boohoo me. It's like, this is so many people's reality. And that was a hard time. What is the future of course there's just a little bit left for you to achieve at 23 the future is really really bright and I'm very excited because I think I'm just at the start of my journey like this tip of the iceberg you

know there's so many things that I want to do especially in the girls education space it's it's just an issue that I can't go to bed without thinking about it when I wake up it's all I want to talk about and I just want to be involved in that and sit at the table with other young change makers and ensure that girls are getting that safe quality and free education you know it's it's just a shame are you talking about around the world are you talking yes around the world so I always tell people the distinction when I'm like in the UK is campaigning for access to education for underrepresented groups and underrepresented students. And then when. And on the subject of exams, Chryssia says, the art of passing exams is not dependent on what you know, but on what you can recall.

My exam revision was transformed by using spidergrams when information about a topic is condensed into one diagram. Unfortunately, I didn't discover the technique until my final year of uni when my marks increased massively. And Sally writes, At 70, I still have exam dreams. I turn up at a flight of steps to the exam hall only to realise that I'm stark naked. Do I go home to dress and miss the exam or go in and do the exam in the nude?

What do you do? Please email us if you'd like to share your advice. If there is anything you would like to contact Woman's Hour about, of course, you can also go to our social media. It's at BBC Woman's Hour. Now, it's been quite a week. Allegra Stratton resigned as a senior government advisor following an angry backlash over a video of Number 10 staff joking last year about apparently holding a Christmas party. Delivering an emotional statement, Allegra said she would regret the remarks for the rest of her days. My remarks seemed to make light of the rules.

Rules that people were doing everything to obey. That was never my intention. I will regret those remarks for the rest of my days and I offer my profound apologies to all of you at home for them. Boris Johnson apologised for the video during Prime Minister's questions. Emma Heard from Sarah Vine, whose column asked why it's always women who carry the can. And from Pippa Crerar, political editor at The Mirror,

who broke the original story of the party allegedly taking place. If you want to listen back to our coverage, then go to BBC Sounds or subscribe to the Woman's Hour podcast. And it's free. Now, last week, the government set out how it will improve life for women in the armed forces. You may recall the Conservative MP and former military personnel, Sarah Atherton's Women in the Armed Forces report,

which came out in July this year, which found that servicewomen who were victims of bullying, harassment, discrimination and sexual assault were being denied justice by a woefully inadequate military complaints process. Sarah Atherton joined us last week to analyse the measures the government announced in response to her report, which include a review into how to dismiss or discharge those who are found to have committed sexual offences or unacceptable sexual behaviour, taking complaints of serious crime outside the chain of command, establishing an independent victim and witness care unit

and ensuring there is female representation on court-martial boards related to sexual offending. One recommendation the government is not prepared to do is to move all cases of rape within the armed forces from the military to the civil court system. This is despite politicians and campaigners supporting an amendment to the Armed Forces Bill to that effect. That was voted down this week in the House of Commons. The Secretary of State for Defence, Ben Wallace, joined Emma and responded to criticism of the government's plan. Some of the criticisms have confused the two parts of service justice.

So there is the criminal path. In other words, if you make an allegation of sexual assault or rape or anything or any criminal offence, that is outwith the chain of command. That is investigated by an independent police, the Royal Military Police or the Service Police. It is referred to an independent service prosecutor who takes it or decides whether to prosecute enough or not, and the judge advocate is appointed by the Chief Justice.

So that is a criminal system. If you make a criminal complaint, that is independent and very similar to the civil world. Then there is what we call a service complaint, which is effectively can range from anything from inappropriate behavior to bullying to sort of terms and conditions, which is similar to, for example, within the BBC, a worker making complaint like that. That has in the past been handled by the chain of command, the direct chain of command, which causes women real problems or anybody else,

a victim of bullying. You know, they'd have to tell the sergeant or the officer who is their boss about the complaint. I've decided that what we're going to do is, within the service or within the army, a separate service complaint system outside that chain of command that you can, as Sarah said on your own programme, I think think you can download the form fill it in yes and so those are very so that is a very concrete step that goes beyond what were the services wanted it allows

people to make those complaints and just like the civilian society complaints like that are handled within the organization it's exactly the same in the b. No, no, so you understood the difference. It's a service complaint and a criminal complaint and we mustn't confuse the two. Let's have that distinction in our minds. It's very helpful. However, you have decided not to, as you've just described, accept the recommendation that when military personnel are accused of rape or sexual assault, that the crime be tried in civil courts, not military. And this has been criticised by those in the military. And by, in fact, when you look at this, there was an amendment

which would have included this provision in the Armed Forces Bill yesterday in the House of Lords. It was defeated. But it is striking that the four Conservatives who voted against it, Sarah Atherton, Philip Holborn, Tom Tugendhat and Johnny Mercer, are all former army. So why are you not listening to the military? Well, because, first of all, the recommendation was murder, manslaughter, rape and serious sexual assault.

So let's start with the first principle here, which is if murder is taken out, why not attempted murder? Why not armed robbery? Why not sexual assault? Why not sexual touching? Why not GBH, ABH? Why draw the line around a small group of offences and not say actually all offences? Because it's highly specialised. I'm sorry to interrupt, but I cover this greatly on this programme. offences and not say actually all offences. In other words, let's get rid of them. It's highly specialised. I'm sorry to interrupt, but I cover this greatly on this programme with the police this year. I've done a great deal of focus on it, you can imagine, in light of the murder of Sarah Everard and also if the police are also to be trusted. Your own

Justice Secretary, the former Justice Secretary, had to apologise for the low level of rape convictions in this country. However, the expertise is there. And that's why not one but two recent reviews of the armed forces has recommended that change, that rape and sexual assault be tried in civil courts, not military. Well, so two parts. Maybe I could give you the statistics because this is also important. The CPS, the Civil Crime Prosecution Service, prosecute between 1.6 percent to 3 percent of rape cases.

In 2020, 50 percent of rape investigations by conviction rate in the armed forces is 8% compared to approximately 2% in the civil space. Well, if that's what you're going to trade numbers on, that your own government hasn't been able to do well in the civilian space for women who work outside the military. So we're going to stick with a system that's not trusted by many women in the military, even though reviews, excuse me, I have evidence for that, even though reviews have recommended, two reviews have recommended you take this out of the military. I don't think that's anything to brag about. Well, I'm not bragging about it. I didn't say that the civil one is something we should be proud of. What I'm saying is let's look at the facts and the outcomes. Secondly, what Sir John Murphy recommended, the former chief constable and the Lyons Murphy,

was also backed up by High Court Justice Henriquez, who I appointed. And if you remember him, he did a job on the Midland thing. Yes, he did. Was that one of the failings had been the lack of specialist, as you say, investigation capabilities. So going back to your point from Sarah Atherton, that is why we have stood up, and again, I have effectively overruled officials in the armed services, to create a specialist defence serious crime unit, so that there is a significant critical mass of expertise in the armed forces to investigate these things properly. But why not use the expertise we've already got?

And why not listen to service women and victims and fellow military people, your fellow conservative MPs on this change? Why do those four not think that you're doing the right thing? Look, there are four who don't. There were clearly others who did. But they're all former military. That's what's so striking. You're a former military man and they're former military. There are more than four ex-military in Parliament. In the House of Commons, there's something like 30 or 40. Sorry, but one of them is a woman who wrote this report. Why are you not listening to her? Let me finish up about the other part of the reforms we've done on murder, manslaughter and rape,

which is what we've also said is when a charge is made, the independent service prosecutor will consult with the civilian CPS and between the two of them, they will decide the most appropriate setting to try the case. Right. And the last word will be given to the civilian prosecutor. I think that what I'm saying to you is you're trying to draw a line and make it that women in the armed forces feel confident about reporting abuse, whatever level. Right. And that's where so many of those recommendations that Sarah Atherton has welcomed by you. But on this particular one, it is striking. Armed Forces personnel's Twitter accounts last night shows they are not in favour of what you're doing, as well as the woman who wrote the report and three other former military members of your own party. And I'll give you one more. A female member of the Royal Navy whose rape case collapsed in a military court

also has backed calls for serious offences committed in the UK within the military to be investigated and tried through civilian courts. She said the value of this amendment, which didn't pass for women like me, cannot be overstated. So are you saying she's wrong? No, what I'm saying is the answer to people's concerns is to improve the quality of service investigations and service prosecutions and indeed trials, which is the steps we've done. The answer is not to junk the service justice system. The answer is how do we address the actual core challenges, which is the quality of investigations, to also demonstrate to women and others in the armed forces that these investigations are independent, they're outside the chain of command, to also demonstrate... But they're not.

They're not going to be independent if they're not in the civil world. There are lots of people just saying, let the people who've got the specialism do it. We've had majority male juries. We've had systems that have made women lose faith and trust. It's time now, with not one but two reports, Defence Secretary, to listen and take it outside. Do you think you've made an error here?

No, I don't, Emma, because I don't think you can salami slice the service justice system. You can't pick offences and move them out. Because also, if you're accused of any offence, murder or manslaughter or rape or whatever, remember that that person's liberty is as precious wherever they are. Right. So so if I was, let's say, accused of attempted murder, I might say, hang on. Well, if attempted murders, you know, why is it good enough for me to be tried for my liberty, which potentially carries a life sentence in a military setting? But if I'm accused of murder, that's not good enough. It has to go into the civil world. I think the question at heart here is, what are the quality of the investigations like? How do we make sure they're independent? And I have taken very strong steps to improve that quality, a defence serious crime unit that

will be totally separate from the other police investigations. I have made sure we take steps to assure that process, hence the reason the High Court Judge Henriquez was stepped. And I've also addressed some of those issues so that the choice remains about where people are prosecuted by the Crown Prosecution Service in conjunction with the service prosecutor. But it's still not in the civil area, which is what women have called for. Emma, it's not ruling out the civil. It's not ruling it in.

The defeat of the House of Lords amendment, which would have seen this, was pretty comprehensive. Well, Emma, the House of Commons, the elected House, overturned that. And I just... Let me just remind your listeners, because I think it's quite important, I trust the Crime Prosecution Service, the prosecutor, to have a discussion with the independent service prosecutor

to decide amongst them. And remember, it's in their interest to prosecute successfully to make the decision about whether that is held in a civilian court or whether that's held in a service court. At present, until I've done the changes, the final word is effective with the service justice system. So I've moved the final word into the civil. I've allowed the experts, not you and me, but the experts to make a choice about where is the most appropriate setting to try that. And remember, it's in their business to prosecute successfully to make the case for

where they want to make the appropriate setting. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. And at the same time, I have increased the quality of investigations and specialists. So we have a critical mass of specialists to make sure that that is helped and supported. And what we'll be doing when the government's review of rape and sexual offences is published, we'll be making sure we transfer many of those things into the armed forces with our own strategy. Secretary of State for Defence Ben Wallace speaking to Emma. And finally, jazz musician Zoe Rahman is often described as one of the brightest stars on the contemporary jazz scene. She's won a MOBO, a British Jazz Award. And if that wasn't enough, on Wednesday, Zoe was given the Impact Award at the 2021 Ivers Composer Awards. What did the award mean to her?

It means a huge amount, to be honest, because it's given by other composers, musicians, you know, who really understand the music, understand what it is to be a composer and recognise, you know, the body of work that I've put out in all that time. It's funny, as a composer, you know, you write music in isolation on your own.

And then you, you know, for me as a jazz musician, I play that, perform it for other people with other musicians. And, you know, not with any intention of getting things like an Ivan Novello. So that came completely out of the blue. But, you know, the fact that people have listened to my music and it's meant something is, I mean, I like to just bring a bit of joy and hope to the world through my music.

We need that. Especially in these times. Yeah, it's just nice to be recognised in that way. And on the composing side, you know, of course, we talk about the need to get more women into all areas of life. But particularly on the composing side, I imagine in music, that's also a gap. Absolutely.

I mean, actually, when I collected the award last night, I did dedicate it to all the female jazz composers that have inspired me and continue to inspire me in what I do, because it is a very difficult career path, let's face it. And a lot of obstacles have been thrown in my way. And so I understand as a woman, in a male-dominated jazz world that you know it's not it's not easy so yeah I just wanted to say how much those women inspire me every day. Jazz on a Saturday afternoon on Woman's Hour you're welcome. Join Emma on Monday from 10. Sideways is back for another season with stories of incredible feats of endurance.

Mountain climbers, we plod onward through avalanches and snowstorms and occasional yetis. I'm Matthew Side and in Sideways, you'll hear stories of bold thinkers and amazing lives. Stories of seeing the world differently. Subscribe to Sideways on BBC Sounds. I'm Sarah Treleaven, and for over a year, I've been working on one of the most complex stories I've ever covered.

There was somebody out there who was faking pregnancies. I started, like, warning everybody. Every doula that I know. It was fake. No pregnancy. And the deeper I dig, the more questions I unearth. How long has she been doing this? What does she have to gain from this?

From CBC and the BBC World Service, The Con, Caitlin's Baby. It's a long story, settle in. Available now.