0:00:38 > 0:00:43Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
0:00:43 > 0:00:47Former Shadow Cabinet Minister Kelvin Hopkins is suspended
0:00:47 > 0:00:49from the Labour Party following allegations that he
0:00:49 > 0:00:52behaved inappropriately with one of the party's student activists.
0:00:52 > 0:00:59How much did Jeremy Corbyn know about these allegations when he
0:00:59 > 0:01:00appointed him to the Shadow Cabinet?
0:01:00 > 0:01:02Further allegations emerge about the conduct
0:01:02 > 0:01:10of the Defence Secretary, Michael Fallon.
0:01:10 > 0:01:12But has the choice of Gavin Williamson as his replacement
0:01:12 > 0:01:14just exacerbated concerns about Theresa May's handling
0:01:14 > 0:01:16of sexual harassment claims?
0:01:16 > 0:01:24It's the anniversary of the 1917 Russian Revolution -
0:01:24 > 0:01:27a seismic historical event - but is it one that should be
0:01:27 > 0:01:30celebrated or just marked?
0:01:30 > 0:01:33And 2017 has been a pretty big year in British politics.
0:01:33 > 0:01:40We'll look at how cartoonists have chronicled it.
0:01:40 > 0:01:44All that in the next hour, and with us throughout are Iain Martin -
0:01:44 > 0:01:46he edits a website called Reaction - and the left wing
0:01:46 > 0:01:48commentator Rachel Shabi.
0:01:48 > 0:01:53Welcome to both of you.
0:01:53 > 0:01:55We'll talk about the latest revelations concerning Labour MP
0:01:55 > 0:01:59Kelvin Hopkins in a moment, but first new allegations have
0:01:59 > 0:02:01emerged about former Defence Secretary Michael Fallon.
0:02:01 > 0:02:05According to the Sun and the Mail, Mr Fallon made lewd
0:02:05 > 0:02:07comments to Andrea Leadsom, the Leader of the House
0:02:07 > 0:02:11of Commons, six years ago.
0:02:11 > 0:02:14He is also said to have made derogatory comments about other MPs
0:02:14 > 0:02:18and members of the public.
0:02:18 > 0:02:23The papers claim Mrs Leadsom went to the Prime Minister and her Chief
0:02:23 > 0:02:25of Staff Gavin Barwell with the information
0:02:25 > 0:02:26after Downing Street refused to investigate Sir Michael
0:02:26 > 0:02:30for inappropriate behaviour.
0:02:30 > 0:02:32A source close to Michael Fallon "categorically denies" the claims,
0:02:32 > 0:02:39and Andrea Leadsom has declined to comment.
0:02:39 > 0:02:43In the last few minutes Downing Street has issued a statement saying
0:02:43 > 0:02:47the Leader of the How's Andrea Leadsom did not and has not asked
0:02:47 > 0:02:58the Prime Minister to
0:03:48 > 0:03:50position of Sir Michael Fallon when he was Defence Secretary. Iain
0:03:50 > 0:04:02Martin, let's try to undertake some of this, if we can.
0:04:04 > 0:04:06If we take Michael Fallon, who resigned over allegations of
0:04:06 > 0:04:08impropriety, do you think Andrea Leadsom's comments were the tipping
0:04:08 > 0:04:10point in that resignation?The situation is extremely murky but
0:04:10 > 0:04:13that seems to be the case, and if it now imagines the Defence Secretary
0:04:13 > 0:04:15Michael Fallon was removed on the say-so of operations coming from the
0:04:15 > 0:04:18Chief Whip and not directly from Andrea Leadsom to the Prime Minister
0:04:18 > 0:04:20we are in extremely strange territory. That is why Conservative
0:04:20 > 0:04:22MPs asking fundamental questions about the role of the Chief Whip and
0:04:22 > 0:04:25remember one of his chief jobs is to collect intelligence on the
0:04:25 > 0:04:26parliamentary party.Is the Prime Minister, Theresa May, responsible
0:04:26 > 0:04:29for installing party discipline, and in that role, she knows things about
0:04:29 > 0:04:32MPs and senior members of the Government, and would have been in
0:04:32 > 0:04:35possession, one would assume, of those comments alleged against
0:04:35 > 0:04:39Michael Fallon. It does mean questions are going to be asked,
0:04:39 > 0:04:43further questions.
0:04:43 > 0:04:47Gavin Williamson is being someone with very little experience is now
0:04:47 > 0:04:50running a key department in the Cabinet.There are lots of questions
0:04:50 > 0:04:58to answer and people keep mentioning house of Cards, the drama, and it
0:04:58 > 0:05:01seems that Gavin Williamson regarded it not so much as fiction but as an
0:05:01 > 0:05:06instruction manual.Do you think apart from resigning that Michael
0:05:06 > 0:05:10Fallon may be forced to, you know, be suspended?I think that is
0:05:10 > 0:05:18possible. There is even talk of a by-election. Things are moving so
0:05:18 > 0:05:22fast, and there are so many allegations about other people that
0:05:22 > 0:05:27it is difficult to say, but I don't think by-elections can be ruled out.
0:05:27 > 0:05:33Rachel Shabi, the word witch hunt has been used. Do you think that is
0:05:33 > 0:05:38fair when it comes to investigating complaints made about sexual conduct
0:05:38 > 0:05:43of MPsno, it is not remotely fair and also an extraordinarily
0:05:43 > 0:05:48inappropriate word to use given the origins of the word witchhunt, and
0:05:48 > 0:05:54this has been horrifying, this couple of weeks. And, you know,
0:05:54 > 0:05:59there are people who are going to feel anxious about it, but fine. You
0:05:59 > 0:06:05should feel anxious about it. There are going to be allegations about
0:06:05 > 0:06:09abuses of power, and that will make people in power feel uncomfortable,
0:06:09 > 0:06:13but that is not to say that those allegations shouldn't be made and
0:06:13 > 0:06:17should not be taken seriously. Of course they should. Something has
0:06:17 > 0:06:21gone fundamentally wrong for a long time. There has been not only an
0:06:21 > 0:06:26abuse of power, with the sex abuse and harassment in itself, but as we
0:06:26 > 0:06:37are now ceiling, there has been an abuse -- as we are now seeing there
0:06:37 > 0:06:40has been an abuse of keeping and attaining power and that will come
0:06:40 > 0:06:46to light in the next few weeks, who knew what and when and what did they
0:06:46 > 0:06:50cover up in the pursuit retention of power?It is these allegations of
0:06:50 > 0:06:57power and perhaps -- allegations is 90 but both parties that these
0:06:57 > 0:07:00things were not properly investigated. How much do you think
0:07:00 > 0:07:05political loyalty has trumped proper investigation of sexual misconduct?
0:07:05 > 0:07:09That is the real thing and we are seeing it and I would emphasise it
0:07:09 > 0:07:13is a cross-party thing. We cannot single any party out for it, but the
0:07:13 > 0:07:17IDR, what we saw with the revelations over the weekend that
0:07:17 > 0:07:23Theresa May was briefed about people's various abuses and
0:07:23 > 0:07:26instances of harassment, so the extent to which these issues were
0:07:26 > 0:07:31known about. And that is the thing. It is not only the abuse and
0:07:31 > 0:07:34harassment which obviously is excruciating enough, but the idea
0:07:34 > 0:07:38that you know about it but don't do anything about it. You are sending
0:07:38 > 0:07:43out into society and message of acceptability, that not only is it
0:07:43 > 0:07:46OK but people might actually be rewarded for it. That is the bit
0:07:46 > 0:07:51that is really toxic and dangerous in our society.And people feel
0:07:51 > 0:07:57public servants should be above, be expected to behave in a way that is
0:07:57 > 0:08:00sending out a message, whether criminal or moral behaviour we are
0:08:00 > 0:08:03talking about. If we look at the Government, though, and the impact
0:08:03 > 0:08:07it is having on whether Theresa May is really getting a grip of this
0:08:07 > 0:08:10situation, and we will talk about Labour in a moment, comparisons are
0:08:10 > 0:08:15being made between this Government and John Major's. Tweets have been
0:08:15 > 0:08:18going out from within Westminster, fin de siecle, back to basics. Is
0:08:18 > 0:08:26that fair?There are certainly echoes and parallels. What concerns
0:08:26 > 0:08:30me, while I agree with much of what you see, and there are really
0:08:30 > 0:08:34serious allegations and something really wrong with the culture around
0:08:34 > 0:08:39Westminster for decades, I think my colleague on the Times, Philip
0:08:39 > 0:08:43Collins, put it rather well this morning, saying that the term
0:08:43 > 0:08:44witchhunt is completely inappropriate, if you go back to
0:08:44 > 0:08:51where that comes from. Arthur Miller, the Crucible, the Salem
0:08:51 > 0:08:56witch trials, an extraordinary play. The point is there were no which is
0:08:56 > 0:09:00and this time there are.Of course, but the difficulty is, and I think
0:09:00 > 0:09:08this is why the due process matters, in among those allegations which are
0:09:08 > 0:09:11very serious, on these lists circulating or stories which are
0:09:11 > 0:09:14really the currency of Westminster rumour, some of them denied by both
0:09:14 > 0:09:20parties, some of them involving consensual behaviour between single
0:09:20 > 0:09:26adults, and to lump Paul of that together and to rely on the tyranny
0:09:26 > 0:09:32of the list, it is not a witchhunt but it does take us into Isaac
0:09:32 > 0:09:37extremely dangerous territory -- lump all of that together.Some
0:09:37 > 0:09:41people's lives could be rude over this and allegations vowed to be
0:09:41 > 0:09:48absolutely false. Careers, rather. You are absolutely right. There has
0:09:48 > 0:09:51been a conflation of things that are harassment and things that are
0:09:51 > 0:09:53consensual and frankly none of anybody's business, but I think we
0:09:53 > 0:09:58really need to be wary, when we are talking about a backlash, already we
0:09:58 > 0:10:02are seeing a backlash against women who have speaking out. Imagine the
0:10:02 > 0:10:06extraordinary degree of bravery and courage you would need.And young
0:10:06 > 0:10:11men.And young men, then they are just berated and face this Barrett
0:10:11 > 0:10:18of abuse including from some of our national papers for doing so, so
0:10:18 > 0:10:21there is this culture of blaming women, even when they are the
0:10:21 > 0:10:25victims -- this barrage of abuse. Moving on, on Gavin Williamson,
0:10:25 > 0:10:27former Chief Whip, now the new Defence Secretary, why such a fierce
0:10:27 > 0:10:33backlash from his own side? Jealousy, snobbery?I don't think
0:10:33 > 0:10:38so. There is some snobbery involved. He is a conference of educated boy,
0:10:38 > 0:10:47certainly not the case as far as I am concerned. -- he is a state
0:10:47 > 0:10:54school educated boy. Has alienating some of his colleagues, which I
0:10:54 > 0:10:59don't think his friends realised. Part of this was to do with the
0:10:59 > 0:11:02following Lee McCulloch to the general election, which he was
0:11:02 > 0:11:05closely involved with, he went off back to Belfast to handle the
0:11:05 > 0:11:08discussions with the DUP which were really quite badly botched
0:11:08 > 0:11:11initially. A lot of questions were asked about the way in which he
0:11:11 > 0:11:17handled that. He has also not really made a secret of his ambition, which
0:11:17 > 0:11:21is quicker dangerous thing to do in politics. He made a speech at the
0:11:21 > 0:11:26Conservative Party conference where most Tory watchers would say that is
0:11:26 > 0:11:33highly unusual for a Chief Whip, to put himself out front and centre,
0:11:33 > 0:11:35presenting the brilliant new Tory intake and almost presenting
0:11:35 > 0:11:40himself, some people thought, as a potential leader, so he has made a
0:11:40 > 0:11:44lot of enemies and I think it's probably discovering that and
0:11:44 > 0:11:53probably rather surprised, I would guess.As is Theresa May, in
0:11:53 > 0:11:56appointing?Yes, and as you mentioned at the beginning of the
0:11:56 > 0:11:59programme, it is all unscrambled and I think it will get even more.
0:11:59 > 0:12:02So, as we've been discussing, there are more allegations concerning MPs
0:12:02 > 0:12:03published this morning.
0:12:03 > 0:12:06Labour are facing criticism that they failed to act over
0:12:06 > 0:12:07an allegation of sexual harassment.
0:12:07 > 0:12:09So what are the details?
0:12:09 > 0:12:12The Daily Telegraph has published claims that the MP for Luton North,
0:12:12 > 0:12:13Kelvin Hopkins, acted inappropriately to university
0:12:13 > 0:12:23activist Ava Etemadzadeh in 2015.
0:12:24 > 0:12:26She says she complained to the Whips' Office
0:12:26 > 0:12:27after the incident.
0:12:27 > 0:12:29But was told she "couldn't take anonymous action."
0:12:29 > 0:12:31It's thought Mr Hopkins was reprimanded at that point
0:12:31 > 0:12:33for the alleged incident.
0:12:33 > 0:12:40But six months later Kelvin Hopkins was was asked
0:12:40 > 0:12:42to join the Shadow Cabinet, as a promotion, as Culture
0:12:42 > 0:12:44Secretary, after dozens of Labour frontbenchers quit in the wake
0:12:44 > 0:12:46of the EU referendum.
0:12:46 > 0:12:48Ava Etemadzadeh got in touch with the Labour Party again,
0:12:48 > 0:12:51this time with the Leader's Office, but no action was taken.
0:12:51 > 0:12:53Last night Kelvin Hopkins was suspended from the Labour Party,
0:12:53 > 0:13:00pending an investigation.
0:13:00 > 0:13:03He hasn't made any comment on the allegations, despite repeated
0:13:03 > 0:13:04attempts by the BBC to contact him.
0:13:04 > 0:13:08Ms Etemadzadeh told the BBC:
0:13:08 > 0:13:10"I'm disillusioned by the party not just not doing anything,
0:13:10 > 0:13:13but then promoting him afterward. They ignored it."
0:13:18 > 0:13:20This morning our cameras caught up with the Labour
0:13:20 > 0:13:23leader, Jeremy Corbyn - he didn't have much to say...
0:13:23 > 0:13:24Good morning, Mr Corbyn.
0:13:24 > 0:13:25Good morning.
0:13:25 > 0:13:26Nice to see you.
0:13:26 > 0:13:27Did you know about Kelvin Hopkins...
0:13:27 > 0:13:29Good morning, nice to see you.
0:13:29 > 0:13:30Thank you for coming to my road.
0:13:30 > 0:13:31Goodbye.
0:13:31 > 0:13:33Did you know about Mr Hopkins' behaviour before
0:13:33 > 0:13:34you promoted him, Sir?
0:13:34 > 0:13:36Were you aware of allegations against him, Mr
0:13:36 > 0:13:38Corbyn, before you promoted him to the Shadow Cabinet?
0:13:38 > 0:13:39Thanks!
0:13:39 > 0:13:42Were you aware of the allegations against Mr Hopkins, Sir?
0:13:42 > 0:13:50Goodbye.
0:13:50 > 0:13:54Well, reporters following Jeremy Corbyn given short shrift by the
0:13:54 > 0:13:59Labour leader when asked about these allegations of sexual impropriety.
0:13:59 > 0:14:02I'm joined now from Central Lobby by the Labour MP, Stella Creasy.
0:14:02 > 0:14:05Stella Creasy, welcome to the programme. Do you think Jeremy
0:14:05 > 0:14:15Corbyn and the Leader's Offers where we about these complaints about
0:14:15 > 0:14:19Kelvin Hopkins?I have no idea, I wasn't aware of it, but I think it
0:14:19 > 0:14:22is a fair question people are asking and I hope the leadership will come
0:14:22 > 0:14:27forward to respond to that concern. Ava Etemadzadeh who is the
0:14:27 > 0:14:32university activist he said she first complained about him in 2015,
0:14:32 > 0:14:36Kelvin Hopkins, yet he was promoted to shadow culture secretary six
0:14:36 > 0:14:40months later. Should he have been promoted?I was not involved in how
0:14:40 > 0:14:51they managed this, but I don't think any
0:14:53 > 0:14:56of the young men or women involved in these cases should have to go to
0:14:56 > 0:14:59the media for people to look at it and ask, is this the appropriate
0:14:59 > 0:15:01response? That is why a lot of us are calling for an independent
0:15:01 > 0:15:03third-party system to be able to properly investigate these instances
0:15:03 > 0:15:06and make sure the victims are able to be confident if they come forward
0:15:06 > 0:15:09that they will be believed, until there is any evidence to the
0:15:09 > 0:15:11contrary, and that the appropriate action will be taken.Was she dealt
0:15:11 > 0:15:14with properly in this case?I can't tell you, Jo, because I was not
0:15:14 > 0:15:17involved in this particular incident but I understand why people are
0:15:17 > 0:15:21concerned, and I can hear Ava's concern and she is incredibly brave
0:15:21 > 0:15:30to have come forward and be in the public domain to what I am
0:15:30 > 0:15:32frustrated by is that at the moment this is what seems to be happening
0:15:32 > 0:15:34without a proper system to investigate these things, and that
0:15:34 > 0:15:37anybody, whether a member of staff or a volunteer, can feel confident
0:15:37 > 0:15:40it will be taken as easily.Clearly it was not taken seriously enough in
0:15:40 > 0:15:44her mind, and that she couldn't make an anonymous complaint, why not?We
0:15:44 > 0:15:51don't have, as I say, an independent third-party system, but...But why
0:15:51 > 0:15:54couldn't you make an anonymous complaint to the Labour Party at the
0:15:54 > 0:15:58time?We don't have a system in place with these complaints can be
0:15:58 > 0:16:01investigated independently of people who may know... As Bex Bailey said
0:16:01 > 0:16:06when she came forward, she was offered career's advice, and clearly
0:16:06 > 0:16:09the situation has to change and the question is what is the right
0:16:09 > 0:16:13change. For me and all of us we are saying we need an independent system
0:16:13 > 0:16:17so there is no question of anybody's friendship with anybody or career
0:16:17 > 0:16:20will come into it and it is all about allegation.When you look at
0:16:20 > 0:16:24it, as you say, these are the questions being asked. Rosie
0:16:24 > 0:16:28Winterton was Chief Whip at the time, and surely the Chief Whip, the
0:16:28 > 0:16:41head manager of the party, and its
0:16:42 > 0:16:44activities, would have called the Leader's Offers about the
0:16:44 > 0:16:46allegations against one of its MPs? I was not involved directly in the
0:16:46 > 0:16:48management of it and my understanding from what Ava said is
0:16:48 > 0:16:51she was unhappy with how rosy manage the situation, but you would have to
0:16:51 > 0:16:53ask the leadership. What I am saying, rather than having
0:16:53 > 0:16:55individual show trials and particular examples, we need to get
0:16:55 > 0:16:59this right. We can't keep waiting until we have a proper process to
0:16:59 > 0:17:02investigate these things properly, and yes, there are sanctions, and
0:17:02 > 0:17:06you might have heard me already say there is a good case location for
0:17:06 > 0:17:10bringing back recall. I voted for it before. I think there are cases
0:17:10 > 0:17:14where members of Parliament can bring Parliament into disrepute.You
0:17:14 > 0:17:23are doing interviews, but why isn't the leadership? Why is Jeremy Corbyn
0:17:23 > 0:17:26running away from reporters when Labour is claiming it is being open
0:17:26 > 0:17:28and transparent on this, and yet he was very brusque with a reporter
0:17:28 > 0:17:31just asking about sexual propriety within the party?From what I do
0:17:31 > 0:17:34know Jeremy and his team have taken this incredibly seriously this week.
0:17:34 > 0:17:37Those of us coming forward asking to change this, there have definitely
0:17:37 > 0:17:40been a lot of meetings. You will need to as Jeremy and his team...We
0:17:40 > 0:17:45tried, that is the point.I am a backbench Labour MP who is
0:17:45 > 0:17:53determined there needs to be change coming out of this.
0:17:53 > 0:17:56This is something men and women have to learn to cope with. It is
0:17:56 > 0:18:02damaging to everyone.Would you like Jeremy Corbyn or one of the senior
0:18:02 > 0:18:06team to be doing interviews and to say that Labour is taking this
0:18:06 > 0:18:09seriously?Are you trying to give me a job in the Labour Party press
0:18:09 > 0:18:15office?It sounds like they needed. We have to show as a party of
0:18:15 > 0:18:20equality that we take these matters seriously, but I also recognise that
0:18:20 > 0:18:23this is being taken seriously by the Labour Party. As someone who has
0:18:23 > 0:18:27been involved in conversations about what change looks like, I'm
0:18:27 > 0:18:30confident that people recognise that the status quo cannot continue. It
0:18:30 > 0:18:36cannot appear that anybody is treated with favours.If we look at
0:18:36 > 0:18:43the allegations that have been made against the MP Jared O'Mara, making
0:18:43 > 0:18:46historical sexist and offensive remarks, Bex Bailey, who you
0:18:46 > 0:18:49mentioned, allegations that she was raped and then discouraged from
0:18:49 > 0:18:54reporting it by a Labour official, James greenhouse, who was an intern,
0:18:54 > 0:18:58was sexually assaulted by Labour MP. And he said he couldn't make an
0:18:58 > 0:19:01anonymous complaint. Now these allegations with Kevin Hopkins. Are
0:19:01 > 0:19:06you embarrassed by your party?I feel we have let these young people
0:19:06 > 0:19:12down. I was working with Bex Bailey, try to raise concerns about how we
0:19:12 > 0:19:17got a process in place, not knowing of her personal experience. So I am
0:19:17 > 0:19:21heartbroken when I hear these stories. That is why this has to
0:19:21 > 0:19:28change. That conversation is taking place. Many of us will push to make
0:19:28 > 0:19:33sure we get the best independent third-party report in process, so
0:19:33 > 0:19:35there are proper sanctions and everybody can be confident that when
0:19:35 > 0:19:44an allegation is made, it is treated seriously.You say you will
0:19:44 > 0:19:48guarantee that this will be independent...A lot of us recognise
0:19:48 > 0:19:53how serious this is and we are determined to see it change. We are
0:19:53 > 0:19:57trying to come up with the processes. Show trials in the media
0:19:57 > 0:20:04will not change the process so that people can come forward. We need a
0:20:04 > 0:20:07proper and independent process.But people have had to come to the media
0:20:07 > 0:20:12to get these things brought to light in the first place. The Labour
0:20:12 > 0:20:15leadership are not willing to answer basic questions on an issue that
0:20:15 > 0:20:19they say they are addressing. Yesterday, I had Dawn Butler, your
0:20:19 > 0:20:23colleague, the shadow women and equalities minister, saying we had
0:20:23 > 0:20:27put robust policies in place, but couldn't tell me what they were. Who
0:20:27 > 0:20:32do you go to in the Labour Party if there is a new system to complain?
0:20:32 > 0:20:39Who is the third-party personal? That is not there at the moment.So
0:20:39 > 0:20:43there are not robust procedures? That is what we are pushing for. A
0:20:43 > 0:20:47hotline staffed by people who know those you want to complain about
0:20:47 > 0:20:52probably isn't good enough. We need somebody independent who can deal
0:20:52 > 0:20:56with anonymous concerns and can support somebody. Someone with an
0:20:56 > 0:21:06independent sexual violence advice experience.Was it right that these
0:21:06 > 0:21:11people could not make complaints anonymously at Labour Party and is
0:21:11 > 0:21:14it credible that the leader's office could not have known about this
0:21:14 > 0:21:19complaint against Kelvin Hopkins.On the first point, I agree with
0:21:19 > 0:21:24Stella. It is absolutely not right. The idea of someone like Bex Bailey,
0:21:24 > 0:21:29bad enough that she was raped, but then to be told not to talk about it
0:21:29 > 0:21:36is appalling and should not happen in any party. The idea that if
0:21:36 > 0:21:39something like that happens to you, you have to talk about it to someone
0:21:39 > 0:21:44who is potentially your superior or a colleague who knows the people
0:21:44 > 0:21:50involved is so transparently ludicrous that obviously, that has
0:21:50 > 0:21:54to go, for all the parties. You can't have a situation where that is
0:21:54 > 0:22:00the procedure. It is not a robust procedure and I hope all the parties
0:22:00 > 0:22:05introduce some kind of independent system whereby people who are facing
0:22:05 > 0:22:09any kind of abuse or harassment are able to talk about it.Should Kelvin
0:22:09 > 0:22:13Hopkins have been promoted when this allegation had been raised with the
0:22:13 > 0:22:17Labour Party?With hindsight, clearly not, but I don't know how
0:22:17 > 0:22:21that situation arose. Obviously, the leadership is not going to talk
0:22:21 > 0:22:26about it now because there is an investigation.But shouldn't they be
0:22:26 > 0:22:31answering questions about these allegations and what they are doing
0:22:31 > 0:22:34about it?I don't think they can answer the question of the
0:22:34 > 0:22:40allegation while there is an investigation in place. But
0:22:40 > 0:22:43definitely, the entire party should address the issue of getting robust
0:22:43 > 0:22:48procedures in place urgently.Let me go back to Stella Creasy. There was
0:22:48 > 0:22:55another report by Jo town on the Conservative side, talking about an
0:22:55 > 0:22:59experience she had in one of the bars, with drinks being spiked. Is
0:22:59 > 0:23:05this what is going on? Do you know of other people who have had their
0:23:05 > 0:23:09drink spiked in bars in the Houses of Parliament?I know of countless
0:23:09 > 0:23:14women who have had their drink spiked in society.But in the Houses
0:23:14 > 0:23:18of Parliament?I don't know of another example. What Jo has
0:23:18 > 0:23:23reported is horrific. That is why this has to change and we have to
0:23:23 > 0:23:29take it seriously. Frankly, people who say they will deal with it
0:23:29 > 0:23:35internally, that is not good enough. And that is a cross all political
0:23:35 > 0:23:38parties and across society. The only thing that is different in
0:23:38 > 0:23:40Parliament is that it is behaviour which if you did in other
0:23:40 > 0:23:46workplaces, there would be a proper HR function and it would be a
0:23:46 > 0:23:48disciplinary offence, rightly. That is not in place and that has to
0:23:48 > 0:23:58change.Stella Creasy, thank you. We hope to be a interview with Ava
0:23:58 > 0:24:00Etemadzadeh, the victim of Kelvin Hopkins' alleged behaviour, later in
0:24:00 > 0:24:02the programme.
0:24:02 > 0:24:05The October revolution ushered in 70 years of Communist rule in Russia
0:24:05 > 0:24:09and across vast swathes of Eastern Europe and Asia.
0:24:09 > 0:24:12Those events have shaped politics across the globe
0:24:12 > 0:24:14and are still used to define political allegiances and dogma.
0:24:14 > 0:24:17There were no cameras there to film the moment the Bolsheviks stormed
0:24:17 > 0:24:20the Winter Palace in St Petersburg 100 years ago, but this
0:24:20 > 0:24:25is how the great Soviet film-maker and propagandist,
0:24:25 > 0:24:27Sergei Eisenstein, chose to portray the events in his film
0:24:27 > 0:24:37October: Ten Days That Shook the World.
0:25:05 > 0:25:10And we can talk to Rob Griffiths from the Communist Party of Britain.
0:25:10 > 0:25:18He is in St Petersburg. There were two revolutions in Russia in 1917,
0:25:18 > 0:25:21the one in February, a popular uprising which brought to power a
0:25:21 > 0:25:26socialist government, and the second, which was a clue, the
0:25:26 > 0:25:28Bolsheviks, which was achieved by armed force and consolidated through
0:25:28 > 0:25:34terror. Should that be celebrated? Yes, it should, because the
0:25:34 > 0:25:39revolution transformed the lives of millions of people for the better
0:25:39 > 0:25:45over the following 60 or 70 years. In what way did it improve it for
0:25:45 > 0:25:49the better?Provided education and health services for entire
0:25:49 > 0:25:54populations that had not previously received them. It gave them low-cost
0:25:54 > 0:26:00housing, public transport. It gave them great advances in every field
0:26:00 > 0:26:05of life.Bet against a backdrop of fear and punishment. The secret
0:26:05 > 0:26:10police were set up. Elections were all but abolished. Everything was
0:26:10 > 0:26:14done by force, wasn't it? They basically said it was their way or
0:26:14 > 0:26:24the highway.Can you still see me? You have just disappeared. Did you
0:26:24 > 0:26:30pull the plug? Can you hear me? No. I think we have lost Mr Griffiths
0:26:30 > 0:26:37temporarily in St Petersburg.Putin and the Kremlin do not want to
0:26:37 > 0:26:41celebrate the Russian Revolution, so it is mysterious that it has
0:26:41 > 0:26:46disappeared!Not just a power cut! Should be celebrated or just marked,
0:26:46 > 0:26:51Rachel Shabi?To have a one note response to the Russian Revolution
0:26:51 > 0:26:57would be wrong. It was so many things. I am not about to celebrate
0:26:57 > 0:27:04the violent, authoritarian murderous and of Stalin. But because of
0:27:04 > 0:27:09Stalin, I am not going to discount the hope and the cause and the
0:27:09 > 0:27:14popular uprising in which the October revolution began. It is
0:27:14 > 0:27:20complicated. It has significance in lots of different ways and it would
0:27:20 > 0:27:25be nice if we could explore all of those instead of just asking to be
0:27:25 > 0:27:30put in one category or another.But it was a regime of terror to a large
0:27:30 > 0:27:35extent. In the end, did the means justify the ends?Of course not, but
0:27:35 > 0:27:45that doesn't detract from how it began and what the sentiment that
0:27:45 > 0:27:49began it was, and the defiance and audacity of what they pulled off in
0:27:49 > 0:27:54the early days. I don't think there was an inevitability to it, although
0:27:54 > 0:27:58that is something historians are still discussing.But began with
0:27:58 > 0:28:01Marxism, which is one of the worst ideas in human history and has
0:28:01 > 0:28:07failed everywhere it has been tried. The cry of the far left is always,
0:28:07 > 0:28:11well, it has never been tried properly. But it has been tried and
0:28:11 > 0:28:19is responsible for the deaths of 100 million people, potentially. It
0:28:19 > 0:28:24should not be commemorated. It should not be seen interims of being
0:28:24 > 0:28:29marked. It should be lamented in the same way we lament the Holocaust is
0:28:29 > 0:28:35one of the great catastrophes of human history. It unlocked the door
0:28:35 > 0:28:42to tyranny, to the Gulag, to an extraordinary degree of repression,
0:28:42 > 0:28:47and the price was paid across the world by the victims of the
0:28:47 > 0:28:55Communists.Do you think the victims of the camps and the purges, in some
0:28:55 > 0:28:57ways and the play because of the horrors of the Second World War and
0:28:57 > 0:29:04the Holocaust? What happened once the Iron Curtain had fun than
0:29:04 > 0:29:10before, do you think there has been underplayed in history?I am not
0:29:10 > 0:29:16about to start comparing the October revolution to the systematic
0:29:16 > 0:29:19extermination of 6 million people. Has it been underplayed? I think all
0:29:19 > 0:29:25sorts of things have now re-emerged and been we discussed. --
0:29:25 > 0:29:30re-discussed. But I would not want to compare the predetermination of a
0:29:30 > 0:29:35historical event with an ideology. Marxism was bad, therefore
0:29:35 > 0:29:38everything was bad about the revolution? I don't think that is a
0:29:38 > 0:29:46helpful analysis.The root of the Marxist analysis is essentially the
0:29:46 > 0:29:50abolition of the basic means of exchange, the junking of the market
0:29:50 > 0:29:57system. In every case where this is tried, those who then object to that
0:29:57 > 0:30:03economic analysis must be contained and ultimately cracked down on. This
0:30:03 > 0:30:07is what happens every time, to varying degrees, because it has at
0:30:07 > 0:30:12its root if false historical economic analysis, which is a
0:30:12 > 0:30:18catastrophe and has never worked anywhere.
0:30:18 > 0:30:23There is a rejection of an economic system, capitalism, that doesn't
0:30:23 > 0:30:25necessarily lead to authoritarianism, which is what you
0:30:25 > 0:30:29are implying. I think that is very naive...That is why what is
0:30:29 > 0:30:35happening now in the Labour Party is so significant. The Democratic
0:30:35 > 0:30:39Socialists and the mainstream left, who have always controlled the
0:30:39 > 0:30:46Labour Party and took the decision, in the 1920s, to make Labour a
0:30:46 > 0:30:50parliamentary force rather than a revolutionary force, did something
0:30:50 > 0:30:53so important and patriotic, which is why the Labour Party has throughout
0:30:53 > 0:30:58its history until now been a mainstream bulwark against the far
0:30:58 > 0:31:03left...Just to be clear...For the first time in its history the Labour
0:31:03 > 0:31:08Party is now being controlled by the far left and people...So you're
0:31:08 > 0:31:13saying, just to beclear, the people now in the Labour readership, they
0:31:13 > 0:31:17are pretending to support the NHS and, you know, free tuition fees,
0:31:17 > 0:31:21but actually they want to get into government so they can overthrow
0:31:21 > 0:31:24government, ie themselves? They want to overthrow themselves, that is
0:31:24 > 0:31:29what you're saying? It doesn't make any sense!It is how the Bolsheviks
0:31:29 > 0:31:33operated, if you look at the history...Self-proclaimed
0:31:33 > 0:31:39democratic socialist, I think the clue is in the the parliamentary
0:31:39 > 0:31:42system. They are not? Just in your opinion.Based on evidence the
0:31:42 > 0:31:45people of their association, the Communist Party of Great Britain,
0:31:45 > 0:31:52their writings in defence of Stalin, their defence of the October 1917
0:31:52 > 0:31:57revolution, there is a very smart group around Jeremy Corbyn, much
0:31:57 > 0:32:01smarter than the Labour leader, who have taken control of the Labour
0:32:01 > 0:32:05Party. It is a historically significant event. I think what the
0:32:05 > 0:32:09danger then is, and what worries mainstream Labour people and
0:32:09 > 0:32:14mainstream Labour voters, if they get in, what then follows is the
0:32:14 > 0:32:18Government can do quite a lot without legislation, quite a lot...
0:32:18 > 0:32:24Why have so many people bought it -- why are so many people voting for
0:32:24 > 0:32:30Jamie Cording?-- Jeremy Corbyn. Said a small group have taken
0:32:30 > 0:32:34control.You agree with that, Rachel, that there is a small
0:32:34 > 0:32:37revolution being planned around Jeremy Corbyn, that he is surrounded
0:32:37 > 0:32:41by people who would like to see something much more extreme than
0:32:41 > 0:32:44socialism?I think that is conspiratorial to the point of
0:32:44 > 0:32:48hysteria. We are not even talking about state ownership. This is a
0:32:48 > 0:32:53party that clearly supports a mixed market, they support an increase in
0:32:53 > 0:32:59taxation for the very highest level of earners in society, they support
0:32:59 > 0:33:03some renationalisation of utilities, they support investment in the
0:33:03 > 0:33:07welfare state, none of these things are a revolutionary! By definition,
0:33:07 > 0:33:11none of any of these things are revolutionary.Controls... When
0:33:11 > 0:33:16there is a run on the country... Don't answer the question with
0:33:16 > 0:33:19another question.When wealth leaves the country and essentially
0:33:19 > 0:33:26everything that is not nailed down please, do you think John McDonnell
0:33:26 > 0:33:29as Chancellor will have to introduce capital control to stop money
0:33:29 > 0:33:32leaving the country -- nailed down flees.Do you think getting the
0:33:32 > 0:33:36levels of corporate tax to the levels that currently exist in the
0:33:36 > 0:33:41rest of Europe would cause businesses to flee the UK, and if
0:33:41 > 0:33:46so, to where?I think the cleverness of the manifesto, McDonnell is a
0:33:46 > 0:33:50very smart guy, and that is a really rather brilliant document, to con
0:33:50 > 0:33:53people in that way, when you just have to look at what he has said
0:33:53 > 0:33:57before he was Shadow Chancellor. Asked who his greatest influences
0:33:57 > 0:34:05were, he said Marx, Lenin and Trotsky.Just briefly, fascinating
0:34:05 > 0:34:08though this discussion is from an ideological point of view, Rachel,
0:34:08 > 0:34:12can you name a successful Marxist Communist regime that exists today?
0:34:12 > 0:34:19No! And not talking about... I'm not even saying this is support for
0:34:19 > 0:34:23Communism. We started by saying what can we take away from the Russian
0:34:23 > 0:34:28Revolution? One of the things you can take away from that is that, you
0:34:28 > 0:34:31know, people who believe in supporting workers' struggles might
0:34:31 > 0:34:34choose to do that through parliamentary means, through
0:34:34 > 0:34:40democratic socialism.And finally, on that, do you think by using your
0:34:40 > 0:34:44critique of the October Revolution, which you say should be lamented, it
0:34:44 > 0:34:48is actually unfairly staining the credible cause of socialism in many
0:34:48 > 0:34:51people's Maine's?I don't think it has. I'm just really old-fashioned.
0:34:51 > 0:34:58I just want the proper old stream Democratic Labour Party back, Gordon
0:34:58 > 0:35:02Brown, Tony Blair, and for once the far left has managed to steal the
0:35:02 > 0:35:09Labour Party.You support of the Labour Party then, did you, Iain?I
0:35:09 > 0:35:18was raised in a Labour household!
0:35:18 > 0:35:18LAUGHTER
0:35:18 > 0:35:22Now, should peers in the House of Lords be restricted to a 15-year
0:35:22 > 0:35:25term, rather than being given a seat for life as is currently the case?
0:35:25 > 0:35:27That was the proposal from the Lord Speaker's
0:35:27 > 0:35:28Committee on Tuesday.
0:35:28 > 0:35:31This latest bout of introspection has been prompted in part by claims
0:35:31 > 0:35:33from the former Lord Speaker, Baroness D'Souza, that many peers
0:35:33 > 0:35:35were abusing this system - she made her comments
0:35:35 > 0:35:37in a documentary broadcast earlier this year.
0:35:37 > 0:35:41There is a core of peers who work incredibly hard, who do that work.
0:35:41 > 0:35:43And there are, sad to say, many, many, many peers
0:35:43 > 0:35:45who contribute absolutely nothing, but who claim the full allowance.
0:35:45 > 0:35:47I can remember one occasion
0:35:47 > 0:35:50when I was leaving the House quite late, and there was a peer,
0:35:50 > 0:35:59who shall be utterly nameless, who jumped out of a taxi just
0:35:59 > 0:36:02outside the peers' entrance and left the engine running.
0:36:02 > 0:36:04He ran in, presumably to show that he had attended,
0:36:04 > 0:36:07and then ran out again while the taxi was still running.
0:36:07 > 0:36:08I mean, that's not normal.
0:36:08 > 0:36:11But it is something that does happen, and I think that we have
0:36:11 > 0:36:13lost the sense of honour that used to pertain,
0:36:13 > 0:36:23and that is a great, great shame.
0:36:24 > 0:36:33And the current Lord Speaker, Lord Fowler, is here now.
0:36:34 > 0:36:38Do you think there will be enough to restore confidence in the House of
0:36:38 > 0:36:41Lords, when they have a perception it is full of old men who turn up to
0:36:41 > 0:36:46speak, or not, and spend a lot on expenses?I don't think that is a
0:36:46 > 0:36:50true perception. I don't think that clip you should from my predecessor
0:36:50 > 0:36:53is the true position as far as the House of Lords is concerned. We were
0:36:53 > 0:36:57never given the opportunity of actually replying, which I think is
0:36:57 > 0:37:05the case with all the rules of the BBC.What would you say in response
0:37:05 > 0:37:09now?I would say there may be some who do what she alleges, but most
0:37:09 > 0:37:16actually work rather hard. We have over 300, 330, who sit on the select
0:37:16 > 0:37:19committees, who work, you know, each week on select committees, and what
0:37:19 > 0:37:24we are doing now is to try to bring the numbers down, and for the first
0:37:24 > 0:37:30time in history we are going to have a cap on the numbers of peers in the
0:37:30 > 0:37:34House of Lords. It has never been done before in this country. I think
0:37:34 > 0:37:39it is universal overseas, but never been done before.And the number is?
0:37:39 > 0:37:47It will come down to under the House of Commons and 600 from about 820,
0:37:47 > 0:37:50so we are getting rid of the quarter, and if I may say so, there
0:37:50 > 0:37:57are not that number of organisations who buy their own volition decide to
0:37:57 > 0:38:01reduce themselves by almost a quarter...You said yourself there
0:38:01 > 0:38:04are a few passengers in the current House. Will they be the first to go?
0:38:04 > 0:38:09I think that is very likely. It is what the process will be, that the
0:38:09 > 0:38:16party groups will decide the process by which, you know, existing members
0:38:16 > 0:38:21go, and they know who the passengers are. Much better than anybody else,
0:38:21 > 0:38:27and I can't believe that someone who has made next to no contribution
0:38:27 > 0:38:32will act to survive.Even though some of those in defence say, well,
0:38:32 > 0:38:35it is about people to take round the Houses of Parliament, ambassadors,
0:38:35 > 0:38:39do you believe that?I believe we should be ambassadors but I think
0:38:39 > 0:38:43one of the troubles there have been, and again we are tackling this,
0:38:43 > 0:38:48peers when they are first appointed, they are not actually told what is
0:38:48 > 0:38:53expected of them. I think this is a most extraordinary mission. And
0:38:53 > 0:39:00what...Couldn't they find out themselves?I can think of cases,
0:39:00 > 0:39:05again, one case in particular, where someone who had just been appointed
0:39:05 > 0:39:08was having doubts, literally, within days, you know, this is ridiculous.
0:39:08 > 0:39:15What we are doing is to have the commission saying to people, now,
0:39:15 > 0:39:19look, this is what is expected of you. If you don't want that then,
0:39:19 > 0:39:22you know, don't...There is the door, right.
0:39:22 > 0:39:24LAUGHTER In the past figures like Gordon
0:39:24 > 0:39:28Brown have called for the Lords to be replaced by an elected Senate
0:39:28 > 0:39:31alongside a more federal UK structure. What you think of that?I
0:39:31 > 0:39:35think the idea of a Sennett is right. In other words, we are
0:39:35 > 0:39:43looking and reviewing what the Commons is doing. The Commons is the
0:39:43 > 0:39:48elected chamber, and they have the final say. Whether you want two
0:39:48 > 0:39:51elected chambers, side by side, I think is quite another matter. At
0:39:51 > 0:39:57the moment we accept the elected Commons is superior. If I go in as
0:39:57 > 0:40:05an elected peer, my whole attitude changes and I will say my vote is as
0:40:05 > 0:40:09good as the man next.They are doing quite well at scrutinising what
0:40:09 > 0:40:13legislation there is at the moment in the House of Lords?We are, but
0:40:13 > 0:40:20we very rarely come to bunfight at the OK Corral with us trying to
0:40:20 > 0:40:24insist by our ways -- we very rarely come to a gun fight at the OK
0:40:24 > 0:40:30Corral. We accepted as the House of Commons who have the final say, and
0:40:30 > 0:40:34that is right, but I think we have the constitutional duty of actually
0:40:34 > 0:40:40checking what the Commons do.Let's talk about regeneration in terms of
0:40:40 > 0:40:45the building itself. You are a fan of that, broadly speaking. He
0:40:45 > 0:40:49recently visited Ottawa were Canadian MPs and senators have moved
0:40:49 > 0:40:51out of the existing parliament building to facilitate maintenance
0:40:51 > 0:40:54work. I don't know if it is on the same sort of scale we are speaking
0:40:54 > 0:40:57about here in the Houses of Parliament. Would you like to see
0:40:57 > 0:41:03that happen here for the maintenance work needed?Yes. They are moving
0:41:03 > 0:41:08out, to be fair. By this time next year in Ottawa.Yes, we can see the
0:41:08 > 0:41:13pictures I think being shown right now.Both the Commons and the Senate
0:41:13 > 0:41:16will have moved out, all the members will have moved out of the main
0:41:16 > 0:41:19parliament building, and the contractors will go in, and that has
0:41:19 > 0:41:24been decided, and they will be out for some years, and I think that is
0:41:24 > 0:41:29by far the most effective and efficient way of doing the repairs,
0:41:29 > 0:41:36and doing the reconstruction. The situation in the House of Lords by
0:41:36 > 0:41:42any stretch of the imagination is not good. I mean, we have over 1000
0:41:42 > 0:41:45asbestos sites, over 1000. We actually don't know how many
0:41:45 > 0:41:49precisely we have got. We have electric fault all over the place.
0:41:49 > 0:41:56We employ 24 full-time fire inspectors, 24 hours a day, going
0:41:56 > 0:42:01round checking for any fires, and there are, and there have been, and
0:42:01 > 0:42:05this is ridiculous. No other organisation does that.Right, but
0:42:05 > 0:42:10you still need agreement, don't you? From the Prime Minister, and all the
0:42:10 > 0:42:14parties?From the House of Commons. Do you think that is good to be
0:42:14 > 0:42:20forthcoming?I very much hope so. I think there was a pretty good
0:42:20 > 0:42:23agreement in the Lords this should be done. I think we will have a
0:42:23 > 0:42:28debate, hopefully, before Christmas, and presumably a motion will be put
0:42:28 > 0:42:34on the table on this. The Government is setting up a committee now to
0:42:34 > 0:42:39look at the exact costs, and that is fine.Costs are potentially huge?
0:42:39 > 0:42:43That is what they are looking at to find out and I think it is very
0:42:43 > 0:42:48difficult to tell. If you see the costs are, for example, £4 billion,
0:42:48 > 0:42:53no one will write that check. It is over a period of a decade probably
0:42:53 > 0:42:57your speaking.If that doesn't happen and the Commons don't agree,
0:42:57 > 0:43:03and you don't move out, what are the risks?I suppose we would have to do
0:43:03 > 0:43:07it some other way. We would be building around, and there would be
0:43:07 > 0:43:12the risk something would go wrong. A fire, something fell down the other
0:43:12 > 0:43:18day... There are dangers to members, the
0:43:18 > 0:43:22staff, and actor to the people who come. I don't think anyone is in any
0:43:22 > 0:43:27doubt at all that something needs to be done. It is not a question...I
0:43:27 > 0:43:31think they agree that but there does not seem to be a way of finding
0:43:31 > 0:43:34agreement, we have done so many interviews about this, no one has
0:43:34 > 0:43:37moved out and the one looks like they are going to in the near
0:43:37 > 0:43:43future.You know, one just hopes common sense prevails on this. It is
0:43:43 > 0:43:46much better and more effective to have and allow the contractors and
0:43:46 > 0:43:49all those people to come in and do the whole thing, rather than doing
0:43:49 > 0:43:53it, you know, there was one suggestion we should do it over the
0:43:53 > 0:43:59space of 20 years. It will also cost about ten times as much! In politics
0:43:59 > 0:44:03there are not too many issues you see are no-brainers but this does
0:44:03 > 0:44:06seem to be one of them.It is good to know things move quickly in this
0:44:06 > 0:44:10regard. But to go back to the beginning on tapping the numbers, is
0:44:10 > 0:44:16that a good thing?I think so. I would be bolder than that. I think
0:44:16 > 0:44:19we need post Brexit a complete rethink of the constitution and I
0:44:19 > 0:44:22would rethink the role of the second chamber and possibly even the
0:44:22 > 0:44:27Commons becoming an English chamber. There are all sorts of ways you
0:44:27 > 0:44:31could do it without subdividing England into lots of regions, as
0:44:31 > 0:44:35Gordon Brown suggested, but the move I think an opportunity is also
0:44:35 > 0:44:42missed to go outside London, and I think MPs and peers should be as
0:44:42 > 0:44:48bold as possible.Where would you suggest they wentLeeds, for
0:44:48 > 0:44:57example. In light of the disrepute in which the Commons is held and the
0:44:57 > 0:45:00reputational problems parliament has, I think Parliament has to
0:45:00 > 0:45:03completely rethink its relationship with the country.What about going
0:45:03 > 0:45:07to somewhere like Leeds?If it was going to go anywhere I would go to
0:45:07 > 0:45:12Birmingham, but just to make the one essential point about the proposals,
0:45:12 > 0:45:15we are doing this without legislation. Everything you are
0:45:15 > 0:45:19talking about requires legislation. I mean, we haven't got... The only
0:45:19 > 0:45:23thing we can do is to actually reduce numbers, basically. It is up
0:45:23 > 0:45:27to the Government to introduce legislation. I haven't regrettably
0:45:27 > 0:45:32got that power.Rachel Shabi, when it comes to an elected second
0:45:32 > 0:45:37chamber, this argument that the primacy of the Commons would be
0:45:37 > 0:45:42undermined, do you agree with that? There is something about that, yes.
0:45:42 > 0:45:47It would change the tone of the second chamber, and there would be a
0:45:47 > 0:45:52problem there, potentially. With the perception of independence and
0:45:52 > 0:45:56allegiance and so forth, but I'm... I think this conversation is to be
0:45:56 > 0:46:02encouraged.
0:46:02 > 0:46:06I also think the conversation about why the second chamber exists is one
0:46:06 > 0:46:11that we need to have, because that seems to have been lost or Brexit,
0:46:11 > 0:46:17the function of the second chamber and Wyatt is a necessary part of our
0:46:17 > 0:46:22democracy -- why it is a necessary part of our democracy seems to have
0:46:22 > 0:46:28been eroded.When Michael Fallon resigned, he said that some of his
0:46:28 > 0:46:31behaviour fell below standards that are acceptable today, the
0:46:31 > 0:46:34implication being that they might have been acceptable 15 years ago.
0:46:34 > 0:46:46Do you agree?Not really. The case with Michael Fallon is not entirely
0:46:46 > 0:46:53clear, but I think the kind of sexual harassment were talking about
0:46:53 > 0:46:58was not acceptable 15 years ago and certainly is not acceptable today.
0:46:58 > 0:47:02What we have to do now is, particularly with the people working
0:47:02 > 0:47:06for members, we have to find a way whereby complaints that they make
0:47:06 > 0:47:13are taken seriously and are acted upon. This is a much more serious
0:47:13 > 0:47:17issue than some of the things we have had in the past where someone
0:47:17 > 0:47:21has been having an affair with someone else. That is not what we
0:47:21 > 0:47:29are talking about. This is harassment.I suppose if there were
0:47:29 > 0:47:34allegations of sexual impropriety, someone might come to you. Have you
0:47:34 > 0:47:39ever had anyone report it to you? No. We have a good system in the
0:47:39 > 0:47:46Lords for looking after staff and staff complaints. As far as I know,
0:47:46 > 0:47:50there have not been any in recent years. But certainly, no one has
0:47:50 > 0:47:58come to me. But you are right, if John Bercow and myself can help in
0:47:58 > 0:48:02this way of stamping the whole process and being independent, we
0:48:02 > 0:48:06would be happy to do so.Norman Fowler, thank you.
0:48:06 > 0:48:12I know there are two months until the end of the year,
0:48:12 > 0:48:17but if you're a cartoonist, you've already missed your chance to get
0:48:17 > 0:48:19into this year's Compendium of the best political cartoons.
0:48:19 > 0:48:22Mind you, it's been a bumper year, what with that snap general election
0:48:22 > 0:48:25no one thought would happen, the surprise result, and all the fun
0:48:25 > 0:48:27of those drawn-out divorce negotiations with the EU.
0:48:27 > 0:48:31Here's Ellie with the top five political cartoons of the year.
0:48:31 > 0:48:35At five, Christian Adams pokes fun at the three-week summer holiday
0:48:35 > 0:48:38Theresa May took walking in the Swiss Alps.
0:48:38 > 0:48:41Critics say the fact that she was away so long
0:48:41 > 0:48:43without appointing a deputy at a crucial moment in the Brexit
0:48:43 > 0:48:48negotiations was a bit cuckoo when the clock is ticking.
0:48:48 > 0:48:51At four, Jeremy Corbyn was depicted as being lost at sea when the Labour
0:48:51 > 0:48:55election campaign launched, attacked left, right and centre
0:48:55 > 0:48:58by sharks in the guise of Theresa May, Rupert Murdoch
0:48:58 > 0:49:01and fat cat lobby groups, or so it seemed.
0:49:01 > 0:49:05Of course, he did manage to secure that bigger vote from the jaws
0:49:05 > 0:49:07of catastrophic defeat.
0:49:07 > 0:49:10Who knows what could happen if there were a sequel?
0:49:10 > 0:49:13At three, the Observer's Chris Riddell imagines Labour's 2017
0:49:13 > 0:49:16manifesto as an irresistible sweetie shop,
0:49:16 > 0:49:19with the PM as Cruella de Vil.
0:49:19 > 0:49:22If she doesn't scare you, no evil thing will, or maybe that's
0:49:22 > 0:49:24just the cartoonist's take on her policies on immigration,
0:49:24 > 0:49:28Brexit and foxhunting.
0:49:28 > 0:49:31The runner-up at number two, the powerful image
0:49:31 > 0:49:32from Peter Brookes
0:49:32 > 0:49:34of tower blocks portrayed as tinderboxes in the wake of
0:49:34 > 0:49:40the devastating Grenfell Tower fire.
0:49:40 > 0:49:42The event caused a backlash against Tory cuts amid accusations
0:49:42 > 0:49:45that the Government didn't care about residents' welfare.
0:49:45 > 0:49:48And coming in at number one, Ben Jennings' depiction
0:49:48 > 0:49:52of the rather complex workings of Boris Johnson's conscience.
0:49:52 > 0:49:55When the Sunday Times published the draft pro-EU article BoJo had
0:49:55 > 0:49:57written before the referendum, people began to wonder -
0:49:57 > 0:50:00did he really support leaving the EU, or had he backed Brexit
0:50:00 > 0:50:03merely for his own political gain?
0:50:03 > 0:50:10Angel or Machiavelli?
0:50:10 > 0:50:11And just imagine the lexiconic nightmare
0:50:11 > 0:50:16of having two Borises whispering in your ear.
0:50:16 > 0:50:20Joining us now are Tim Benson, editor of Britain's Best Political
0:50:20 > 0:50:22Cartoons and Martha Richler, a cartoonist who uses
0:50:22 > 0:50:29the pseudonym "Marf".
0:50:29 > 0:50:34What makes a great political cartoon, Martha?It should be
0:50:34 > 0:50:41truthful and funny. In equal parts. Some of the most powerful political
0:50:41 > 0:50:49cartoons draw on some funny story and some truth more all in one. I
0:50:49 > 0:50:52don't think it would be possible to draw a cartoon and then try and
0:50:52 > 0:50:58think about caption. It comes all together to the cartoonist's
0:50:58 > 0:51:04imagination.Do you agree?And no, I don't. I don't see how all cartoons
0:51:04 > 0:51:08can be funny when they cover very serious subjects on occasion. Can
0:51:08 > 0:51:14you make terrorist attacks funny? No. So they can be funny. They can
0:51:14 > 0:51:18ridicule and satirise those who deserve it. But again, political
0:51:18 > 0:51:23comment doesn't always have to be funny.Let's pick a particular
0:51:23 > 0:51:30favourite that you have, Tim.They are all my favourites.But talk us
0:51:30 > 0:51:38through one of the ones you like, this one.This is on the front cover
0:51:38 > 0:51:48of the book. It encapsulates the mess we are in over Brexit. I always
0:51:48 > 0:51:51worried about putting a cartoon on the front cover about whether it
0:51:51 > 0:51:56would loses topicality by the time it comes out.But you are not
0:51:56 > 0:52:03worried in this case! What do you think, Martha? Do you like it?I do,
0:52:03 > 0:52:09and by the way, I don't think this is a competition like a race. I
0:52:09 > 0:52:12would not be cartooning if I didn't think I could add something to the
0:52:12 > 0:52:17mix, but if I can, I will look at cartoons all day. I used to get
0:52:17 > 0:52:26attention in school for doing that. All I am ingested in is making sure
0:52:26 > 0:52:32we are seen and heard. I think Tim Benson's selection is immensely
0:52:32 > 0:52:40valuable, but there will be a companion volume and another. It is
0:52:40 > 0:52:45a continuing story. I want to get away a bit from the male-female
0:52:45 > 0:52:53opposition if you don't mind. Part of my issue with Tim Benson to do
0:52:53 > 0:52:58with his lack of enthusiasm for online publishing. A lot of women
0:52:58 > 0:53:07are publishing online. I published a serious political cartoon on sexual
0:53:07 > 0:53:12harassment at Westminster, as you are discussing earlier. And it is
0:53:12 > 0:53:16very serious, but it has elements of humour. Everyone has to laugh at
0:53:16 > 0:53:22that detail in the mail online about the minister with a proclivity for
0:53:22 > 0:53:28boys wearing women's perfume.Is this sort of thing one should laugh
0:53:28 > 0:53:32at? Cartoons are supposed to trigger thought. They are supposed to be
0:53:32 > 0:53:39thought-provoking. Are these things funny?They can be, when done well,
0:53:39 > 0:53:43like Peter Brooks or Christian Adams. It depends on your political
0:53:43 > 0:53:50viewpoint, of course. I am not a fan of Steve Bell's work, but I do think
0:53:50 > 0:53:54there is a great revival happening with political cartoons.If you went
0:53:54 > 0:53:57back to ten years ago as a journalist, one of my concerns was
0:53:57 > 0:54:01that the art would die out because newsprint was fading away. But
0:54:01 > 0:54:05actually, things like the iPad have given it a great boost because they
0:54:05 > 0:54:11are backlit and they look fantastic. I disagree.Martha's point is that
0:54:11 > 0:54:16we have to look broader than the newspapers, because there has not
0:54:16 > 0:54:21been a woman among the six full-time political cartoonists working for
0:54:21 > 0:54:24newspapers to stop isn't this another way of bringing cartoonists
0:54:24 > 0:54:31and cartoons to the national diet, if you like, without having to rely
0:54:31 > 0:54:34on the newspapers?I don't think it has anything to do with gender bias.
0:54:34 > 0:54:38I think in political cartooning, if you are good enough, you will get
0:54:38 > 0:54:47there. The cream always gets to the top.I disagree that this has
0:54:47 > 0:54:50nothing to do with gender. The idea that talent rises regardless of
0:54:50 > 0:55:00gender is just absurd.It is idealistic.It does in political
0:55:00 > 0:55:04cartooning.There are all the invisible obstacles and privileges
0:55:04 > 0:55:12in operation.I see it that newspapers are archaic and wonderful
0:55:12 > 0:55:19in some ways. Traditionally, a cartoonist who began drawing would
0:55:19 > 0:55:23continue drawing and die in his chair. Jack died in his chair 50
0:55:23 > 0:55:29years after starting as a cartoonist. And his successor
0:55:29 > 0:55:33started the morning after. So there is a kind of continuity that is
0:55:33 > 0:55:42wonderful. It is not to replace the Jacks of this world.Cartoonists
0:55:42 > 0:55:52don't employ themselves.We have to leave it there, because I think we
0:55:52 > 0:55:55are going to be able to bring you part of the interview from the lady
0:55:55 > 0:56:00we were talking about earlier who made a complaint against the Labour
0:56:00 > 0:56:13MP Kelvin Hopkins. And we can play that to you now.The first instance
0:56:13 > 0:56:19happened on campus. He hugged me very tightly and rubbed himself
0:56:19 > 0:56:29against me. It made me feel extremely uncomfortable, and it was
0:56:29 > 0:56:35a revolting act. The second incident was in Parliament, when I went to
0:56:35 > 0:56:40have a conversation with him and he told me, let's not talk about
0:56:40 > 0:56:45politics, do you have a boyfriend? And he also said that if nobody was
0:56:45 > 0:56:50in his office, he would have taken me there. I was shocked.You have
0:56:50 > 0:56:56brought your phone. You have more than one text message, tell me about
0:56:56 > 0:57:00that.Yes. A few weeks after I refuse to respond to his calls, he
0:57:00 > 0:57:10left that message saying I am an attractive, lovely young woman and a
0:57:10 > 0:57:15man would be lucky to have me as a lover and if he was young... But he
0:57:15 > 0:57:22is not.And how did you feel?Again, I was shocked. I was not really
0:57:22 > 0:57:26expecting that. I think someone who is representing the people in
0:57:26 > 0:57:30Parliament should act like that. It made me feel extremely
0:57:30 > 0:57:34uncomfortable. This is why I decided to do something about it.This is
0:57:34 > 0:57:39Ava Etemadzadeh, who has made complaints against the Labour MP
0:57:39 > 0:57:44Kelvin Hopkins. He has declined to comment, but he has been suspended
0:57:44 > 0:57:47by the Labour Party. How does it make you feel listening to this
0:57:47 > 0:57:52young woman, Rachel?It is excruciating to hear these stories
0:57:52 > 0:57:58again and again. This woman is so young. Nobody should be exposed to
0:57:58 > 0:58:03what she is exposed to. Every time you hear these stories, these women
0:58:03 > 0:58:09are so brave for coming forward. They have all my respect as well as
0:58:09 > 0:58:13my sympathy for what they are going through. But every time you hear
0:58:13 > 0:58:20these stories, you realise how much women are held back by these things.
0:58:20 > 0:58:24There is another person whose ambitions, hopes, energy and talents
0:58:24 > 0:58:31may have been hindered by these unwanted acts of harassment that
0:58:31 > 0:58:34have a terrible and long-lasting effect. If you think of all the
0:58:34 > 0:58:39women who have been hampered in this way, it is awful to think of all
0:58:39 > 0:58:45that lost ambition as well as the disrupted lives.Rachel Shabi, thank
0:58:45 > 0:58:49you. We have come to the end of our programme. Thank you to both of you
0:58:49 > 0:58:52for being my guests of the day.
0:58:52 > 0:58:57The one o'clock news is starting over on BBC One now.
0:58:57 > 0:59:01We will be back on Sunday with the Sunday Politics. Bye-bye.