11/10/2013 Newsnight


Told by a judge to vaccinate a child? The Muslim school shut down by Ofsted - we talk to the governors. And prostitution in the hotels of China. With Kirsty Wark.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 11/10/2013. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



. A 15-year-old who was adamant she


did not want an MMR vaccine has been ordered by a high court judge to


have the injection despite the objection of her mother, but in


accordance with the wishes of her father. I'll be speaking to the


mother's lawyer, about the judgement and the rights of a teenager to


refuse treatment. More than 50 people are dead after a plying rant


ship has sunk. This time 70 miles from the Italian coast.


The flagship Muslim Free School has been given three weeks to get its


act together or be shut down. We have an exclusive interview with the


governors, defending their decision to make a non-muslim staff wear the


Hijab. The female air hostesses wear a different dress to the male ones.


That is a choice and a decision made by the business.


And a BBC investigation in China, where prostitution is illegal,


reveals the trade is operating within well known Western branded


hotels. Good evening.


The MMR vaccine has proved to be a dilemma for many parents. It


provides protection against measles, mumps and rubella, all potentially


fatal illnesses, but after the now discredited research which claimed


to show a link to autism many parents did not use it. Now, over a


decade later, what happens when one parent wants their children to be


vaccinated and the other doesn't? The case we report on tonight


involved two divorced parents and two children, one 15 and the other


11. The judge upheld the wishes of the father and ordered the two


children to be vaccinated. The deadline for that was today. Here's


Sancha Berg. Can a 15 radio-year-old be forced to have a vaccination


against their wishes in one of their parent's insists? Last month the


High Court judge ordered that a 15-year-old girl and her 11-year-old


sister, had to have the MMR jab by the end of today, even though they


said they did not want it. The elder said she would be upset if that was


in her body. The mother did not want them vaccinated either but the


parents were divorced, the father brought the case. Andrew Wakefield's


research, published in 1988 that triggered a panic about MMR and a


possible link with autism. The mother did not want the girls


vaccinated. The father agreed. Andrew Wakefield's work,


discredited, had a significant national impact. As the yellow bars


show, the vaccination rates dropped. They are rising but older children


are vulnerable. Cases of measles, mumps, rubella have been growing.


In Wales people have been queueing outside of clinics, desperate to get


their children vaccinated after measles broke out there. This


prompted the girl's father to change his mind. He was worried there could


be serious consequences of the illnesses. He wanted the children


vaccinated. The judge had to consider the


childrens's concerns and their understanding of the issues. They


were worried about the ingredients in the vaccine but less worried


about the ingredients in medicine they may have to take if they


contracted a disease. One said with the measles you just get a rash. The


court-appointed Guardian was worried they were influenced by their


mother, in turn, the mother gave evidence she was worried about the


psychological impact on the children, especially the elder one,


who had been counselled for anxiety. Parents have a choice to do what


they believe. I feel that both children have grown up in a frame of


mind that they were settled in and supported in the same outlook and


forced now to take a different view without more positive reassurance


and the recording of ingredients of the vaccine is unsatisfactory. They


have a right to be informed. The older child, the more seriously


her views are taken and more carefully she is listened to by the


court. In the case, the judge decided that the views expressed by


the 15-year-old were not suf shenly balanced or did not give weight to


the positive side of the immunisation.


I am aware that this is against the girl's shes but that is not the only


factor. The court has to consider their level of understanding of the


issues involved. And what factors influenced their views. I am not


convinced there is a balance of understanding of them by the issues


involved. The medical debate is settled, the


lawyers say. This is the third time that the High Court has ruled that a


child should have the MMR vaccine against parents' wishes it is


child should have the MMR vaccine unusual for the children to have


such strong objections too, the judge acknowledged it will have an


impact on the family. Sancha Berg.


Joining us now is the mother's solicitor, Philippa Dolan.


Latest reports say at least 50 people


What made the mother so sure she was acting well? The mother was sure


that this was a view that the family had reached since the children were


young. That it was the father who changed his mind recently. In the


meantime the children have been brought up with a particular point


of view, which is that if you are healthy, you eat properly, you have


a good immune system, then it is not necessary to be vaccinated and that


there are side effects that can be harmful.


But presumably, maybe not, but one of the thing's in the father's mind


is not just about the children but the grandchildren, rubella in


pregnancy is devastating? Yes. They are only 15 and 11 at the moment. It


would be the mother's position. She would say that the family has always


discussed things with the children. They have been treated in a way that


their views are respected. They have been informed. They have had family


discussions. So in that sense that supports the fact that the children


can make that decision when they are this age.


Or when each reach a majority age. What do you think is the


significance of the decision? We will have to see. I was very


surprised at it. I was very surprised that a 15-year-old, who,


15-year-olds are allowed to make all sorts of decisions, legally, and not


having an MMR vaccination, is, I mean, this may be controversial but


it is not life-threatening in the south-east of England in 2013.


I know of course that you kept your distance from the daughter, you were


acting for the mother, but firstly, I want to ask you the deadline for


the vaccination was today, have the girls been vaccinated? No. There are


practical difficulties in enforcing the order.


That is at the moment an ongoing issue.


If there are practical difficulties, they were not foreseen by the judge,


then? I don't know. I would be surprised if they were


not foreseen. So what happens now, then? I can't


really say. The judge ordered the girls to be vaccinated by today, the


girls have not been vaccinated. That has implications for the mother, who


presumably has the responsibilities for the children as well as the


father? There are no legal, at the moment, there is not a legal


deadline that is a serious issue. This is John going and the parents


are in discussion -- this is ongoing and the parents are in


discussion. It is hoped without further litigation.


It must have impact on the girls, especially the 15-year-old? It has


had an impact on both of them. In the judgment it was said that they


should not be treated separately. It was recognised that they both have


a, they are in a situation where they are independent thinking


people. The 11-year-old also feels strongly about it.


Thank you very much indeed. The latest reports say at least 50


people have been killed when their migrant boat capsized 70 miles off


the coast of Italy, in a terrible echo of the 300 close to shore of


Lampedusa a little more than a week ago. Matthew Pryce joins us now.


Matthew, is the rescue effort continuing? It is, yes. Just about


five minutes ago another helicopter flew across the incident itself. It


is about 60 miles to the south of here. The helicopters have been


bringing in the injured. Some of them who have been rescued from the


sea and one woman from the airport working there told us that they are


also bringing in some of those who have died.


It is looking like this is not a tragedy on the scale of the disaster


eight days ago off the coast of lamp deucea, today we were told that 339


bodies had been found, but in terms of this one it is about 27, 28. It


may go up to about 50, some Italian news outlet's are reporting, but the


vast number, the larger number of people on board the vessel, 200, it


looks like, they have been rescued. Part of the reason is that the


Italian Navy was close to the area where the boat capsized and sank.


They had also increased patrols as a direct result of last week's boat


capsizing. Matthew, thank you very much.


One of the the Government's flagship Free schools is on the verge of


having its funding pulled, which means it faces closure. No small


embarrassment for the Education Secretary Michael Gove. Al-Madinah


in Derby, which has been open for little over a year, has what it's


website calls a "strong Muslim ethos", but three separate


investigations say the school has discriminated towards female staff,


delivered a poor standard of education,and failed to ensure the


safety of children. The governors who run the school have stayed


resolutely silent - until now. Newsnight's Zoe Conway secured


exclusive interviews with them today. Al-Madinah school is fighting


to survive. The principle, the deputy principle and the head of


administration have resigned. It is accused of being taken over by


Islamic hard liners. Three Government agencies are


investigating. The Government could shut it down. Three of the school's


governors decided to give their first interview after weeks of


allegations in the press. Much has been made of the school's dress


code, the fact that the female teachers were asked to wear a


headscarf and hijab. The very first question to ask, if


you are Muslim or non-Muslim, would you be prepared to cover your hair


as part of the uniform policy? As to this date, they have not refused.


Even those who have succeeded for the job and those who have not.


Why should they wear a headscarf if they are not a Muslim? Let's talk


about the uniform. You don't expect a sorjion to not to wear his


overalls, or a dentist to wear his overalls. We are saying we are proud


of the uniform that we have both in the terms of what we want for our


children. How do you know there are not women


who, are brilliant teachers, who are not going to come to teach at your


school because you require them to wear a headscarf and they don't want


to? We have a right to stipulate our code of dress. We have chosen. This


is the code of dress we have adopted. If we look at an air


hostess. They are required to wear certain head gear, the females wear


different clothes to the male. We certain head gear, the females wear


are not saying that they are discriminated against it is a


decision made by the decision. This is a corporate image we would like


our female staff to present. That is the decision we make. We are not


saying by wearing the headscarf you are changing your religious identity


at all, what we are sincerely saying is that this is the code of dress we


would like our female members of staff to adopt. This is the decision


as an organisation we have made. Is it possible to review that? Yes, it


is. The Government has told the school


to write to its female staff to tell them they do not have to wear a


hijab if it is in conflict with their religious beliefs, but on


Tuesday, the governors got a letter from the Education Minister, Lord


Nash. He said that Al-Madinah had failed to ensure pupil's safety, had


a poor standard of education and had been discriminating in its practise


towards female staff and was failing in financial management. Lord Nash


has given them three weeks to require with 17 requirements,


otherwise funding will be terminated. Allegations have been


made that girls have been forced to sit at the back of the class.


Nobody is forced to do anything in this school. The allegations are


unfortunate. When it comes to the seating arrangements in the class,


we do not have a boy/girl seating arrangement. The way that the class


is designed all children are treated equally. We have girls and boys


sitting in the front and the back. There is no discrimination going on.


When Al-Madinah hoped -- There is no discrimination going on.


year it said it would honour all faiths, but it has been reported


that only one of the school's 400 pupils is non-Muslim. The governors


unable or unwilling to say hourm of their children are non-Muslim.


We are on a journey, there are things that we have to improve. We


know that, but like everything else, it takes time. Time to nurture a


flower. We are coming out of a seedling point. We have to ensure


that the right practises and the teaching and the learning is


effective for it to turn into an attractive flower for people to come


to us to say that they are going to this school no, not because it is a


Muslim faith school but it is a great school.


The Government says there has been no financial mismanagement. They are


expecting that Ofsted will find the teaching inadequate, but they


believe that they can turn things around.


??The politicians can go whistle Dixie.That was how one editor,


Fraser Nelson, of the Spectator, who is here with Ben Bradshaw, the


former Labour Culture Secretary, responded to today's news that the


main political parties are now as one on a new system of press


regulation. The Conservatives collycobbles have been banished and


its all aboard the Royal Charter. Problem is, not a single newspaper


is prepared to sign up. So do we now have a Mexican standoff? Before I


consult our guests, the media commentator, Steve Hewlett is here.


So, no agreement at all? On the big thing, no. On some things there


maybe more of an agreement. So there are compromises that make a


difference. Mostly, the chafrter allows local papers who were worried


about the stipulation that they should be a part of a low-cost ash


station scream, that they were on the financial rocks, that there


could be problems that a phone call or a letter could prove... They did


not show evidence that could happen but there is now a mechanism if it


happens, that it could be dealt with, but on the big red line issue


of the political involvement in the regulation of the press, there is no


agreement. No because the charter can be changed by a two thirds vote


in both houses of harment. That could bring a threat if they were


choose to the political class, they could get directly involved in the


regulation of the press, that is a red line.


So what are the press saying about from Nelson Fraser saying go whistle


Dixie. It says there is charter controlled


by politician, it is not approved by the newspaper or the magazines it


seeks to regulate. Are the press agreed on this? No.


They are agreed not to sign up to the charter. However, here is had


how it goes. The Mail, the Telegraph, the Mirror are in to set


up their own regulator. The Guardian, the FT are half in. They


don't want to sign up but there are contractual disagreements with the


other. Guardian are half out. They don't want to sign up, and the IPCC


are floating out alone. In the last two days there has been frantic


phone calls. The minister Maria Miller and her shadow, phoning


editors trying to get to the point where when this happens that the


government does not face a united press, all of them saying "no". They


are desperate to try to get someone out there on their own.


Steve Hewlett, thank you very much. Nelson Fraser is the editor of the


Spectator and Ben Bradshaw is the former Labour Culture Secretary.


Mell Nell you could be faced with a lible suit and there could be


bankruptcy issues with the Spectator lible suit and there could be


as you are not in the charter, then the liabilities are limited? It is


worrying that the Government is inhibited free press or penalising


papers no the licensed by the proposed regulator. It has suffered


a sinister turn of events. The danger is that you become too


timid as you are worried about massive litigation? That is so. With


papers with small budgets, they would hesitate to investigate things


where you could be taken to court and pay the damages or pay expenses


even if you win, but it is probably illegal under European law, but it


is not very free. I don't believe that the Government will go down


this road and tear up three centuries of free speech and harass


the press in such a way. But it will take two of both houses


to alter this. There is no chance of this, so nothing will change? Well,


for nothing to change, we must not give the politicians the power to


regulate the press. That is why I hope that the newspapers don't agree


to this. If they do, there will be be a terrible message not just to


people in Britain but around the world, this are begging newspapers


not to sign up with this. Not to throw away our freedoms of speech.


Others may go also. Ben Bradshaw, some papers are


suggesting that they could go to the wall? That is not a correct


representation. Lord Leveson said this was to save the press money. To


save the press the expensive litigations of claims. I am


confident that a publisher, a newspaper, a publication will come


into the system, setting up a regulator, recognised by the


recognition body and then the incentives you referred to, very


powerful, are written into the system and kick in. Then the


responsible newspapers will come into line.


Name them? I don't know. Steve Hewlett is suggesting that


there may be a difference of opinion, but there is nobody ready


to step in right away and lead the charter? I am not surprised. A lot


of the newspapers, the Guardian, the FT, the IPCC have been nervous from


breaking from the Daily Mail or the Daily Telegraph, but the way it has


been set up, it is independent self-regulation, guaranteeing the


freedom of the press, giving the responsibility to the press to set


this up with the important recognition, the public assurance.


Every time it's been done before, the press have gone away, they have


said they will do it. It has not happened. That is why this body is


important. Once it rek nierzs a regulator, all it needs is one


publisher, then the system kicks in. Somebody will break away, maybe the


IPCC? I doubt it. I don't think that a paper could sign up to a


regulation with politicians, like Ben here, talking about who he


thinks is responsible, who is not. But financially, for the local


papers it could be the only way to ensure survival? That would be


terrible if it were the case. The Government bullying them to give up


freedoms or face the fines. Then they should go to Strasbourg to


appeal against this illiberal law. I don't think that the Government will


really force the newspapers to play it their way. The newspapers will do


95% of what the Government wants, they just don't want the politicians


in charge. There could be an nalt form of


regulation coming in? Somethinged from hacked off in the back pockets


to help the impasse? I don't know. I think if you look at the definition


of publisher it is broad. It does not take anybody big to set up the


body. Then the system kicks in. We have had more than two years since


Leveson started the inquiry. The victims are waiting, the politicians


have acted, the responsibility is for the press now to set up this


independent self-regulation system so that the public can regain Trust.


That is what will happen. The newspapers to come up with the


toughest regulation in the Western world but the politicians cannot


give the press their marching orders. It is the same it has been


every time. Thank you very much.


In China prostitution is illegal, but the BBC has found evidence of


organised prostitution inside a number of well-known,


Western-branded hotels in the country, including The Ramada, The


Intercontinental and Kempinski hotels. Our investigation shows that


sex is being bought and sold from third party-run businesses,


operating from within some hotel premises. The three I've named all


deny any knowledge of what was happening.Our correspondent John


Sudworth reports from Shanghai. Chairman Mao once claimed to have


driven prostitution from the streets.


Today, it is around almost every corner.


Still Strictly illegal but thriving on the commerce and the corruption


unleashed by China's modern communist leaders.


But now our investigation in which we speak to prostitutes and pimps


operating inside hotels that are household names in Europe and


America, shows for the first time just how deeply the Chinese sex


trade has infiltrated the international hotel industry.


The Kempinski Hotel chain calls itself Europe's oldest luxury hotel


group. Founded in Germany, now based in Switzerland, it operates more


than 755-star hotels around the world, including this one in the


Chinese city of Qingdao, but following the signs to the spar,


there is little luxury. Just a small independently-run


business from which more than ten women are bought and sold for sex.


He asks do you need them once or do you want them to stay overnight, he


asks? Our discussion with one of the women, cap towered on a hidden


camera is a stark illustration of how easily foreign businesses in


China can become tangled up in vice and criminality.


TRANSLATION: I am 20-year-old. I have sex with up to three clients a


day. And I'm allowed to keep 40% of the fee charged.


The Kempinski Hotel is far from an isolated example.


We called dozens of international hotels and asked to be put through


to their spas. Right across China, in around 7% of


those that we speak to, prostitution appears to be easy to arrange.


We also find sex on sale inside this hotel in Qingdao managed by the


British-based Intercontinental Hotels Group. The spa is under


independent management, as the sign makes clear. Here, legitimate


massage is the main stay of the business, but the spa also openly


rents out this prostitute to those who ask.


She tells us that the bill for her services can be settled at the


check-out through the hotel main desk.


In a statement, the Intercontinental Hotel's Group says that prostitution


is Strictly prohibited inside the hotels, including businesses. Hotel


staff are not knowly involved in processing bills for prostitution.


It has now closed the spa. Kempinski Hotels denies knowledge of the


prostitution we found. Saying that a spa was originally planned for the


hotel, hence the signage but never approved nor opened.


The Qingdao hotel, it says is connected to a third-party business,


through a basement passage way that cannot be closed off for safety


reasons. Shaun Rein spends his time advising


foreign companies in China. Now more than ever, he says, they should be


striving to stay clean. There is a definite reputational


risk for the brands to have hookers in the hotels. Especially from the


government side. They will crack in the hotels. Especially from the


down and go after the foreign brands more than domestic Chinese brands in


order to show the country that they are adhering to the laws. It is


easier to crack down on a foreign brand than it is on the local ones.


A few months ago, the British pharmaceutical giant,


GlaxoSmithKline found itself on the receiving end of just such a


crackdown. Accused of paying bribes to boost sales here in China. It was


forced to admit that some of its employees did appear to have broken


the law. Our evidence suggests that the


international hotel trade is at least running the risk of handing


the Chinese government another political opportunity to look tough


on foreign business. This is the The Ramada Plaza in the


city of Guangzhou. A reassuring mark of quality and comfort for


travellers in central Khan, far from home.


-- in Central China. Following the signs we find a third party-run spa.


This time for the yous of male customers only. With little


hesitation this man tells us that 20 women work here. He hands us a leaf


the. Prostitutes, the handwriting says,


800 RM B, about £85. A group of female travellers who stayed here


earlier in the year, raised their suspiciouses in this review, posted


on the TripAdvisor website. The Wyndham Hotel Group said that they


take this very veerl. That all independently owned and operated


hotels under its Ramada franchise are required to comply with the law


and the company adds, it provides training to identify and stop human


exploitation. Prostitution faces danger not just


from the clients but with the police. With the threat of constant


crackdowns, arrests and public shamings. There may be more that


some hotels could be doing to keep this exploitative trade away from


their doors. The companies should be negotiating


with the landlords from day one. If it is going to have a spa it could


be owned by a third party but managed by the employees. And they


are in charge of the hours, closing earlier rather than later.


The Kempinski had decided to pull from the hotel in Qingdao before the


investigation. They will crease to manage it from November the 15th, a


sign that a year after it opened, something has gone badly wrong.


For foreign companies, China offers unlimited opportunity, but the dark


underbelly of this economy is ever present. While there is big money to


be made here, there are also often overlooked, big reputational risks,


too. Before we go on to the rest of the


papers we deal with the Mail. We have Steve Hewlett back Indeed, Paul


Decker, he defends what the paper did, but the same article is in the


Guardian. So both barrels for the BBC.


Coverage orchestrated by Alistair Campbell. So both barrels for the


BBC. A tickling for the Guardian. The


article appears in the Guardian. I wonder if it may have something to


do with the fact that they are wonder if it may have something to


desperate to get the Guardian into the press self-regulator.


And the front of the Mail: A wonder drug.


The Telegraph: The scandal of an MOD cash pile. And the IPCC: The British


taxpayer. The Times: Britain and Germany in a secret pact to defy EU


laws. And the story in the Guardian: We should talk sensible about


spying. It was once described by George


Orwell as one of the most hideous buildings in the world. The Sagrada


Familia in Barcelona is due to be completed now in 2026, several


hundred years ahead of schedule thanks to modern stone carving


techniques, and a hundred years after Antonio Gaudi himself was run


over by a tram, taking the fine detail of his original design with


him. Here's what it will look like.


Told by a judge to vaccinate a child? The Muslim school shut down by Ofsted - we talk to the governors. And prostitution in the hotels of China.

Download Subtitles