26/10/2011

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:11. > :00:16.to its position as a pillar of Tonight on Newsnight Scotland we

:00:16. > :00:19.hear from the MP at the heart of the allegations over bullying in a

:00:19. > :00:22.Parliamentary committee. We discuss what they are supposed to be

:00:22. > :00:27.achieving in that committee. Also tonight, new Scottish research says

:00:27. > :00:30.we should spend more time taking the mickey out of our children.

:00:30. > :00:32.Good evening. The Scottish Affairs Committee isn't usually the centre

:00:32. > :00:37.of attention at Westminster but today meetsding at thracted a lot

:00:37. > :00:41.of interest, but not because they were discussing health and safety.

:00:41. > :00:45.Would the chairman Ian Davidson show up? Would he resign? Would he

:00:46. > :00:50.apologise for allegedly threateneding remarks made to a

:00:51. > :00:53.female committee member? This is particularly acute... Normal

:00:53. > :00:55.business for the Scottish Affairs Committee at Westminster involves

:00:56. > :01:03.questions to people like the Scottish Secretary Mikeing moor, to

:01:03. > :01:08.keep them on their toes. But remarks allegedly made in committee

:01:08. > :01:12.by chairman Labour's Ian Davidson to Dr Eilidh Whiteford are the

:01:12. > :01:17.centre of attention. She adge alleges he said she would get a

:01:17. > :01:20.doing if it was leaked to media. She says the experience was

:01:20. > :01:24.intimidating. Labour denies the allegation, but insist it took them

:01:24. > :01:28.seriously. So does the First Minister. I spent a lot of years in

:01:28. > :01:33.the House of Commons in the days where everybody said it was a, you

:01:33. > :01:38.know a gentleman's club, a public school, but I can't remember an

:01:38. > :01:43.instant where a Select Committee chairman was had used threatening

:01:43. > :01:46.language against a female member of committee. This was a very serious

:01:46. > :01:49.matter, it is high time everyone took it with that level of

:01:49. > :01:53.seriousness. I was there at committee and obviously the first

:01:54. > :01:57.session was in private so I wouldn't divulge too much of what

:01:57. > :02:02.was said, but nothing aggressive, nothing intimidate tri, nothing

:02:02. > :02:05.hostile was said by any member to any other member. The SNP is

:02:05. > :02:09.calling for chairman of the Scottish Affairs Committee to

:02:09. > :02:13.resign. Ian Davidson is no stranger to using colourful language.

:02:13. > :02:18.notice the way in which efforts are being made to sho shout me down.

:02:18. > :02:23.That is what happened traditionally in Scotland when people challenge

:02:23. > :02:27.the nationalist. Those of us who want to challenge the narrow

:02:27. > :02:33.neofascism have to be prepared, have to be prepared to have the

:02:33. > :02:36.discussions. His supporters say the background is a decision to hold an

:02:36. > :02:38.inquiry into independence or separation as the committee calls

:02:38. > :02:42.it. This afternoon he made a statement ahead of the main

:02:42. > :02:47.business of the committee. I did not threaten anyone and did not

:02:47. > :02:53.intend to threaten anyone. I apologise if anyone took offence

:02:53. > :02:58.but say no threat was made or intended. I think everybody here

:02:58. > :03:01.understands that point. Whiteford say she is won't attend

:03:01. > :03:06.the committee until he takes responsibility for his behaviour.

:03:06. > :03:10.It wasn't an apology, it was a conditional justification of

:03:10. > :03:13.unacceptable behaviour. I think he just had failed to understand that

:03:13. > :03:18.there are no circumstances in which he can offer to give someone a

:03:18. > :03:24.doing where that is not a threat. Maybe we could move on. With the

:03:24. > :03:26.SNP and Labour standing their ground, moving on is going to be

:03:26. > :03:31.rather difficult. Earlier this evening Dr Eilidh Whiteford came

:03:31. > :03:35.into our Westminster studio and I asked her if she accepted the

:03:35. > :03:40.apology? No, I don't. I think we are in the sorry situation tonight

:03:40. > :03:44.that Ian Davidson has made a half hearted and conditional apology but

:03:44. > :03:50.seems to be saying he doesn't have a lot to apologise for. My point is

:03:50. > :03:54.that the larks he is apologising for, are completely unacceptable in

:03:54. > :04:02.any circumstances. It is just not ever an acceptable thing to say.

:04:02. > :04:05.Right. There is a slightly different can't emanating from Mr

:04:05. > :04:08.Davidson and his colleague, they are saying what happened several

:04:08. > :04:11.members of this committee criticised you apparentlyer for

:04:11. > :04:18.what they allege was premature disclosure, whether it was or not,

:04:18. > :04:22.let us leave to one side, and that what he said was he kind of summed

:04:22. > :04:27.it up and said you had had a doing and it was time to move on. That is

:04:27. > :04:30.not what has happened. I think that is about trying to make a

:04:30. > :04:34.deflection away from the issue in hand, which is that he said these

:04:34. > :04:37.thing, he is desperately trying to back away from them, and say they

:04:37. > :04:42.weren't said, but, you know, we know some members of committee

:04:42. > :04:47.didn't hear the remarks but other members of the committee explicitly

:04:47. > :04:51.have confirmed those remarks were made. You know, the idea that I

:04:51. > :04:55.prematurely leaked anything from that committee is falsehood. Right,

:04:55. > :05:00.but what is then the context in which the remarks were made?

:05:00. > :05:04.don't think it matters, I think the issue is it is never ever

:05:04. > :05:07.acceptable to tell somebody they are getting a doing, under any

:05:08. > :05:12.circumstances, and that you know, you can't justify this by context

:05:12. > :05:17.at all, it is just, it is just not on. It is not on in any workplace,

:05:17. > :05:22.I mean when did somebody in your workplace last offer to give ewe

:05:22. > :05:27.doinging? Probably about five minutes ago! The point is, are you

:05:27. > :05:31.saying that you felt scared, that you were going to be subjected to

:05:31. > :05:36.physical violence? Is that what you were saying? I was threatened. I

:05:36. > :05:40.can't imagine any circumstances in which I wouldn't have taken that as

:05:40. > :05:43.an implicit or explicit threat. It is an inherently threatening thing

:05:43. > :05:50.to say. The fact that you know after the meeting, it was clarified

:05:50. > :05:54.to me that the threat was not meant in a sexual way only compounds what

:05:54. > :05:59.was said, and it made me wonder what kind of doing I was supposed

:05:59. > :06:03.to be expecting. You are adamant, when I say people say that to me it

:06:03. > :06:06.is a joke, you are sure he wasn't meaning there... I think it is

:06:06. > :06:10.important to say this, when people try and justify their aggression,

:06:10. > :06:14.they fall back on the excuse that it was a misunderstanding, it was

:06:14. > :06:18.just a joke, a I didn't really mean it or the person interpreted it the

:06:18. > :06:24.wrong way. I am not going to take responsibility for things that Ian

:06:24. > :06:27.Davidson has said, but I am going to say that yeah, of course it was

:06:27. > :06:31.threatening and upsetting. It was inappropriate and I don't think

:06:31. > :06:36.that makes his position tenable. Why, the other point Labour are

:06:36. > :06:41.making is they are saying why did it take so long for this to come

:06:41. > :06:45.out? If you were so upset why didn't you complain? I want to make

:06:45. > :06:51.this clear, I went to the clerk of the committee first thing the next

:06:51. > :06:57.morning, as soon as I possibly could. I didn't get hold of her

:06:57. > :07:02.until later the morning, she wasn't in until later. You know, I went to

:07:02. > :07:05.the clerk of the committee as soon as possible. To see if the

:07:05. > :07:09.recording equipment had still be running and to check if she had

:07:09. > :07:13.heard anything. But, you know, I was clear I wanted to raise this

:07:13. > :07:17.and raise it in a formal way, as soon as possible. Now, you know I

:07:17. > :07:23.was not able to meet with the speaker until yesterday afternoon,

:07:23. > :07:26.but you know, that was, you know not a delay that I considered a

:07:26. > :07:30.lengthy delay. People are trying to deflect this issue from the fact

:07:30. > :07:34.these remarks were made and have not been denied. All right. Will

:07:34. > :07:39.you rejoin the committee, or if you don't want to will someone else

:07:39. > :07:42.from the SNP? I am happy to participate but not while Ian

:07:42. > :07:46.Davidson is chair of it. trouble is the other members don't

:07:46. > :07:51.appear to want him to resign. that is a matter for them. You need

:07:51. > :07:54.to ask them about that. I can't comment on that. I mean, I, you

:07:54. > :07:59.know I am of the view that this is, this is an issue about whether it

:07:59. > :08:03.is ever acceptable to tell a woman that she is getting a doing, and Mr

:08:03. > :08:08.Davidson is not denying the remarks were made. There is no context in

:08:08. > :08:12.which that is OK to say. Right. But so what would your response be?

:08:12. > :08:17.What your critics will say, whatever the rights and wrongs of

:08:17. > :08:20.what was said, even if we accept that it was wrong to say that, to

:08:20. > :08:25.you, that the fact that the SNP will not now have a member on this

:08:25. > :08:29.committee which is having this inquiry into a referendum, smacks

:08:29. > :08:33.of the SNP at the very least using this because they don't really want

:08:33. > :08:36.to be involved with it. No, I think that is absolutely ludicrous. It

:08:36. > :08:41.would be very easy for me to respond to that, but I think, you

:08:41. > :08:45.know, one of the things that you know, I have to say is that the

:08:45. > :08:49.bottom line is he said these thing, how can you expect me to sit across

:08:49. > :08:54.the table from him? That is the fundamental point here. In any

:08:54. > :08:58.other place of work. I am sorry to hear the BBC is a place where that

:08:58. > :09:02.language can be bandyed about. I am not sure if that is in your equal

:09:02. > :09:04.opportunities policy it wouldn't be acceptable in any workplace I have

:09:04. > :09:08.worked in, and I don't think it should be acceptable in the House

:09:08. > :09:12.of Commons. I have to say, I don't think it S I think most members of

:09:12. > :09:18.the House of Commons treat each other with courtesy and respect,

:09:18. > :09:22.regardless of however heated discussions get. Now Ian dirid son

:09:22. > :09:27.wasn't are able to come on the programme tonight but I am joined

:09:27. > :09:32.by the deputy leader of Scotland Labour MPs Willie Bain. What is

:09:32. > :09:36.your account of what happened? evening. It has been difficult to

:09:36. > :09:40.get a definitive account, because what has been interesting is the

:09:40. > :09:44.opposition members of the committee, the Conservative and Liberal

:09:44. > :09:48.Democrat members have said that they couldn't detect anything that

:09:49. > :09:53.was intimidatery in what Ian Davidson said. He was right today,

:09:53. > :09:58.to apologise to Dr Eilidh Whiteford for any offence he may have caused

:09:58. > :10:02.or she may have taken from these remarks but the difficulty is, the

:10:02. > :10:05.Labour Partys taken it seriously. An investigation has been done by

:10:05. > :10:09.the whip's office T Chief Whip has been involved in terms of the

:10:09. > :10:14.Government members on that Select Committee, and in working out what

:10:14. > :10:20.was said, none of the other members were of the view that there was

:10:20. > :10:24.anything which was intimidatery, or in a sense, went against the issues

:10:24. > :10:28.of a woman, I want to say this, the Scottish Labour Party has a proud

:10:28. > :10:32.record in terms of women's rights. We brought in all women short lives

:10:33. > :10:38.to make sure that we had good levels of female reputation in

:10:38. > :10:43.Parliament. We have done a lot in terms of female violence. A lot on

:10:43. > :10:47.anti-discrimination laws. We have a proud record. It not the politic of

:10:47. > :10:51.Margaret Curran or myself to condone any actions that would be

:10:51. > :10:56.discriminatory to women. The point is he didn't really apologise to Dr

:10:56. > :11:01.Eilidh Whiteford, did he. He came up with some rather mealy mouthed

:11:01. > :11:06.formulation about apologising to anyone who had taken offence. That

:11:06. > :11:11.is not the same as saying to someone "I'm sorry." I have seen

:11:11. > :11:15.the words, they look like an apology to me. He doesn't mention

:11:15. > :11:19.her. To most people outside it would like like an apology.

:11:19. > :11:23.Perhapss he's can direct them directly to her. That would be a

:11:23. > :11:28.helpful thing. We have to move beyond the politics of he said, she

:11:28. > :11:34.said. Hang on f you are conceding that maybe he should apologise,

:11:34. > :11:39.directly to, look, you saw the interview, or heard it with Dr

:11:39. > :11:44.Eilidh Whiteford there, what ever you think about her idea there can

:11:44. > :11:48.be no context whatsoever in which using these sort of phrases can ver

:11:48. > :11:51.be justifiable, she was clearly upset by it. If anyone inside the

:11:51. > :11:56.workplace or outside the workplace, you know, you say something to

:11:56. > :11:59.someone and you mean it as a joke, perhaps, and you suddenly realise

:11:59. > :12:04.they haven't taken it as a joke, you get embarrassed and you say,

:12:04. > :12:09.look I am sorry, I really wasn't meaning to give any offence. Now,

:12:09. > :12:12.was it so hard for Ian Davidson to do that? Well, of course, he may

:12:12. > :12:17.wish to reflect about whether he wants to make a personal apology to

:12:17. > :12:22.her in person. But I think we have to get back to the basic reality of

:12:23. > :12:26.this story, which is with the SNP press office were putting out

:12:26. > :12:31.stories that weren't related to a factual account of what occurred. I

:12:31. > :12:36.think there is an issue, with the ethics of the press operation they

:12:36. > :12:39.have conducted, when we have only found out today the reality of what

:12:39. > :12:44.transpired at that committee meeting. I notice as Dr Eilidh

:12:44. > :12:53.Whiteford said, you are not denying that Ian Davidson made these

:12:53. > :12:57.You are not denying that Ian Davidson made these remarks.

:12:58. > :13:01.appears to have used an expression which can be misconstrued and they

:13:02. > :13:07.accept people could take offence, and for that he has apologised

:13:07. > :13:12.today. What we have to get on to is the serious issues that this

:13:12. > :13:15.committee is looking at in terms of what is happening with independence.

:13:15. > :13:25.For the SNP not to take part in that would be a dreadful mistake on

:13:25. > :13:31.

:13:31. > :13:36.their par. We also have an Pete Wishart joining us. The SNP's Pete

:13:36. > :13:43.Wishart is a former member of the committee. Pete Wishart, at the

:13:43. > :13:46.very minimum here, let's lead to one side who said what. If you do

:13:47. > :13:52.not either convince Dr Eilidh Whiteford are one of your other MPs

:13:52. > :13:57.to go back on to this committee, you will be accused by Labour and

:13:57. > :14:00.indeed the Liberals and democrats and Conservatives that what is

:14:00. > :14:05.going on here is that you do not want anything to do with this

:14:06. > :14:13.committee because you want to betray it as the Unionist plot.

:14:13. > :14:17.That is nonsense. Let's not give in to you said, who said argument.

:14:17. > :14:21.What happened was an inappropriate phrase was used to a female member

:14:21. > :14:24.of the committee. It is not acceptable in any context and if

:14:24. > :14:28.that happened in any other workplace throughout Scotland

:14:28. > :14:32.disciplinary action would be taken. Dr Eilidh Whiteford is right to

:14:32. > :14:39.withdraw from that committee as long as the chairman who made those

:14:39. > :14:42.remarks continues to sit in that place. We will not be prepared to

:14:42. > :14:48.participate in that committee as long as somebody who makes

:14:48. > :14:54.misogynist remarks such as those, remains in his chair. You have

:14:54. > :15:01.heard Willie Bain suggesting that he has made an apology. There is

:15:01. > :15:08.some level where this has to stop, every side has got a different

:15:08. > :15:12.argument, except that. We are sorry, let's move on. When Ian Davidson

:15:12. > :15:17.resigned from the chair we will take a bar plays. As long as he

:15:17. > :15:21.remains in place we will not accept our place in that. There are bigger

:15:21. > :15:30.issues being discussed by the Scottish Affairs Committee. But

:15:30. > :15:34.this is important to us. This has to be dealt with proper relief.

:15:34. > :15:40.think people outside will feel really confused as to what is going

:15:40. > :15:44.on. They expect politicians to work together. The SNP you are proposing

:15:44. > :15:49.that we separate off from the rest of the UK. People want to know what

:15:49. > :15:54.currency we will use, who was set our interest rates, what will

:15:54. > :15:58.happen to mortgage rates, savings, pensions. These are huge questions

:15:58. > :16:02.which have to be addressed and Alex Salmond is refusing to answer them.

:16:02. > :16:08.He is refusing to deal with these questions and have all parties

:16:08. > :16:13.engaged in the answers. What about Pete Wishart's suggestion that Ian

:16:13. > :16:16.Davidson should resign? That is a matter for the committee. The rules

:16:16. > :16:25.are clear that if the committee does not have confidence in their

:16:25. > :16:29.chair they can remove them. It is a matter for the committee itself.

:16:29. > :16:32.But what is happening is that most members of the committee are

:16:33. > :16:38.content with the apology Ian Davidson made today. I think we

:16:38. > :16:42.should move on. The people of Scotland are watching us. They want

:16:42. > :16:45.to know what are the answers. When we look at what is happening with

:16:45. > :16:49.the Eurozone tonight and see the difficulty in separating the fiscal

:16:49. > :16:54.and monetary policy, people want to know what independence would mean

:16:54. > :16:58.to them. It is appropriate that all parties have their say and take

:16:58. > :17:03.part in a discussion and dialogue with the Scottish people for all

:17:03. > :17:07.stopped and you will not move on this, Pete Wishart? Dreadful

:17:07. > :17:13.remarks were made, remarks that caused great offence to the

:17:13. > :17:18.personally receive them. We have to get this resolved, the solution

:17:18. > :17:24.that we are supposed to accept his this grudging, have parted,

:17:24. > :17:30.conditional apologies. Willie Bain suggested that Ian Davidson might

:17:30. > :17:32.make a personal apology. It has taken him 24 hours since it first

:17:32. > :17:41.emerged to getting round to acknowledging there is a herd party

:17:41. > :17:47.involved at this. This is not the first time this has happened. We

:17:47. > :17:52.had the neo-fascist remark previous to this. This chairman has all

:17:52. > :17:59.sorts of been appropriate language. What he did last week went way

:17:59. > :18:04.beyond. Willie Bain, isn't there an underlying issue here, and

:18:04. > :18:07.increasingly an issue in Scottish politics. You two parties are the

:18:07. > :18:11.biggest political parties in Scotland. There is a serious

:18:11. > :18:15.problem about the way you relate to each other. There are many people

:18:15. > :18:20.in the Labour Party who do not accept that the SNP is a legitimate

:18:20. > :18:25.party. They think they are a bunch of separatists who want to break up

:18:25. > :18:30.Britain. On the other side, there are people on the nationalist side

:18:30. > :18:34.who, for example, were saying that Dr Eilidh Whiteford was the only

:18:34. > :18:36.person on the Scottish Select Committee who had any right to have

:18:37. > :18:42.an opinion on whether we should have a referendum on independence.

:18:42. > :18:46.There is a basic lack of respect between your two parties. I hope

:18:46. > :18:51.that will improve. But the people of Scotland tonight are facing an

:18:51. > :18:56.economy teetering on the brink of recession. One in four Scottish men

:18:56. > :19:01.do not have a job. We owe it to those young people, to the people

:19:01. > :19:05.of Scotland to work together. can hardly deny that these

:19:05. > :19:10.attitudes are not prevalent on your own side. I think things are

:19:10. > :19:14.getting a lot better. I think the SNP could take part in our five-

:19:14. > :19:20.point plan on the economy to a B and people get back into work.

:19:21. > :19:25.Bring forward some of those capital project. I am making a point about

:19:25. > :19:33.basic attitudes that you politicians have to each other. And

:19:33. > :19:37.you say the SNP should adopt Labour attitudes, that is laughable.

:19:37. > :19:43.a dreadful relationship. Last night there was a debate about Scotland's

:19:43. > :19:46.constitutional future. 30 Labour Members of Parliament came storming

:19:46. > :19:52.in at 10:30pm and tried to hire me down the minute I tried to utter a

:19:52. > :19:55.syllable. That is how bad it is down there. I think it is all to do

:19:56. > :20:00.with what is happening with Scotland's constitutional issues.

:20:00. > :20:05.There are people in Westminster who have not reconciled to what is

:20:05. > :20:10.happening in the new Scotland. your people to suggest that somehow

:20:10. > :20:16.our other that Ian Davidson and his colleagues on the select committee

:20:16. > :20:24.do not have the right to have used on a referendum, that is ridiculous.

:20:24. > :20:28.They are totally entitled to have used on the referendum. But it was

:20:28. > :20:32.almost like independence was cordite and separation was put in

:20:32. > :20:40.instead. That is the type of thing Labour are doing in Westminster.

:20:40. > :20:44.will have to leave it there. Research at Stirling University has

:20:44. > :20:48.found that parents who joke and have fun with their children is

:20:48. > :20:53.giving them a head start in life. The work shows that pretending and

:20:53. > :21:03.joking are two different things. Children as young as two can tell

:21:03. > :21:11.

:21:11. > :21:20.This is how it minds are made. Pretending and choking are key

:21:20. > :21:23.elements of building the school's children and adults. It is funny.

:21:23. > :21:29.Sometimes if you do something different it makes it more fun for

:21:29. > :21:39.the children. I guess pretending is good. Pretending to be something

:21:39. > :21:39.

:21:39. > :21:45.else. No science is expanding, this playgroup is taking place in

:21:45. > :21:49.Stirling University Baby and toddler room. Joking is important

:21:49. > :21:53.for attracting a mate. It is important for making friends,

:21:53. > :22:00.people who share the same sense of humour will have social bonds with

:22:00. > :22:05.each other. It is important for coping with stress. Seeing the

:22:05. > :22:10.funny things in life lead to people they can cope better. Pretending is

:22:10. > :22:16.different. Early on it is suggested that young children learn how to

:22:16. > :22:22.pretend to do things that they will do later on. The significance of

:22:22. > :22:32.this research is an underlying concept that pretending and joking

:22:32. > :22:39.

:22:39. > :22:46.Donna's four-year-old daughter is baking, or pretending to. It is a

:22:46. > :22:51.serious business, but then along comes a tiger. If two-year-old Adam

:22:51. > :22:57.took a Tiger attack as seriously, there would be tears. But he reacts

:22:57. > :23:02.differently. This is not pretending, this is joking and even children

:23:03. > :23:12.this young can tell the difference. I think he may know. The result is

:23:13. > :23:14.

:23:14. > :23:24.fun. To pretend something else, it has to be serious so they can get

:23:24. > :23:28.

:23:28. > :23:36.But how do they know the difference? Research suggests it's

:23:36. > :23:40.all down to what is exchanged between parent and child. When

:23:40. > :23:48.parents joke with their child, they give a lot of feedback they are

:23:48. > :23:51.joking, they laugh and smile more. Their tone of voice is more excited.

:23:51. > :23:57.Developmental psychologists here have been studying responses of

:23:57. > :24:02.children between 14 months and two years. As they approach adulthood,

:24:02. > :24:06.we put away childish things like pretending, don't we? We stop

:24:06. > :24:12.pretending around the age of seven. But we do it a lot of ways in our

:24:13. > :24:17.lives. People love to watch films and television. It is also

:24:17. > :24:21.important for things like sports. If you are a diver, you might

:24:22. > :24:31.imagine what do the motions before you actually dive. You can use it

:24:31. > :24:37.to prepare for things in life. research is already moving on from

:24:37. > :24:41.joking and pretending to the dark side, outright lies. It is very

:24:42. > :24:47.similar to joking and pretending. If you deceive someone, maybe you

:24:47. > :24:50.hide something from someone, you were doing something wrong. Just

:24:50. > :24:52.like you would when you're pretending are joking, but the

:24:52. > :24:55.difference is when you're pretending you want the other

:24:56. > :25:01.person to know, you joke will not succeed if no-one knows you have

:25:01. > :25:09.told a joke. When you were lying, you didn't want anyone to know

:25:09. > :25:15.otherwise it will not were. work here has been supported by the

:25:15. > :25:21.UK's economic and Social Research Council and will feature in an

:25:21. > :25:31.event in Stirling University on Saturday. It is open to 80 parents

:25:31. > :25:34.