Analysis of the day's headlines with Emily Maitlis. Features Kids Company, Shaker Aamer's release, MP Jess Phillips on twitter threats and an interview with Danny Boyle.
Browse content similar to 30/10/2015. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Tonight - this programme has seen details of the extraordinary
payments made by Kids Company to some of its clients.
Why was the charity authorising spending on designer shoes
Ministers saw these details before authorising a multi-million
One senior Cabinet office source told me these
Either you leave us to die in peace, or either tell the world the truth!
He spent a third of his life in a cell in Guantanmo Bay.
Now Shaker Aamer is released home to Britain - without charge.
What purpose has Guantanmo served - and what do its practices say
We're joined by two men who know Gauantanamo well
Musicians play their instrument, I play the orchestra.
We talk to film director Danny Boyle about his no holds-barred portrayal
A corporation like Apple is so powerful now,
so influential around the world, that it is crucial that writers and
artists tell the stories that they don't necessarily want you to tell.
And on Artsnight, George the Poet explores black culture in the
For me, racism always trumps sexism, for me.
A senior cabinet office source has described as "gobsmacking"
details of the payments made by the charity Kids Company just three days
A preliminary report - seen by this programme - confirms large
sums were made to individual clients - and even to the family of staff.
One individual received ?47,000 over the past year. Government officials
had advised ministers against giving the charity further money.
Kids Company - which shut down in August - had been led by
the charistmatic and high profile founder, Camilla Batmanghelidgh.
Chris Cook who broke the orginal story of Kids Company's
Ministers were sent a report containing concerning
details about Kids Company just three days before they paid it ?3
The document obtained by Newsnight and BuzzFeed News contains new
information about the charity's operations under
And it will increase pressure on Matthew Hancock and Oliver Letwin,
the two Cabinet Office ministers who signed off on the payment.
The report is by PWC, the accountants.
It is an interim response to a set of allegations made to
the Charity Commission by former employees of Kids Company.
Now, here is how Alan Yentob, the charity's chair of trustees
and a BBC executive, characterised its content to MPs a fortnight ago.
Because of the allegations going on, because we had to go to the PWC
and pay them ?50,000 to tell us that there wasn't much substance
in the allegations and therefore the Cabinet Office should go ahead
This confidential report doesn't adjudicate on the allegations that
were made to the Charity Commission.
But what it does do is establishes the facts around them and it finds
For example, patchy record keeping. The thing
The thing that really jumped out from this report, there is
the sheer scale of the spending on some of Kids Company's clients.
Two young people related to staff members benefit from nearly 134
thousand pounds worth of spending. PWC said ?90,000 of that went on
therapy but that still leaves a lot to account for. When they went
through the receipts they found one from this designer shoe shop in the
London West End. ?300 on a single pair of designer shoes. In other
cases the PWC report mentions receipts for Apple computers and
high-end clothes shops. Kids Company refuses to comment on individual
cases but the charity said spending was always motivated by specific of
each client. The document also showed spending on the child of an
Iranian diplomat, document says Kids Company funded their Ph.D. At a
high-ranking British university. Support was costed at ?25,000 per
year. Camila Batmanghelidjh who is herself Iranian, said she had not
been involved in the case. But she said the president needed support
and the donor was sponsoring the spending. But why was Kids Company
sponsoring a foreign student at all? The PWC report also looks into
allegations of employment irregularities. Money for a favoured
crime. It confirms one person received over ?47,000 in untaxed
income in 2014, including thousands of pounds for rent and clothes. This
individual was not required at all but an employee. They were just paid
as a client to avoid taxes. The charity completely denies this but
even if this person was acquired, we still have a problem. Acquired
received almost ?1000 per from Kids Company. This person did not have a
family but this is what Camila Batmanghelidjh said to MPs two weeks
ago. Was it true that people over the age of 18 received over ?100 per
week? That would be very rare and only if it was a family. And they
have two support a family. You are aware that it is contempt of
Parliament to mislead us? Absolutely. This charity leader, who
has had previous disagreements with Kids Company, thinks the money they
spent was not well tailored to the needs of recipient. What I'm seeing
in the report is random, flamboyant largesse as opposed to strategic
support of vulnerable young people. I would want to see in any kind of
paperwork from Kids Company, detailed care plan. Why this
individual was chosen, why the amounts of money were given in this
way and for this purpose. The charity of course disagrees. They
say spending was based on assessment of personal, social and clinical
needs but the report is a problem for ministers and raises questions
for Alan Yentob. A spokesman for
the charity's leaders has told us: The allegations made to the Charity
Commission were not substantiated. When PWC reported on their findings
the evidence they had seen did not This was not a full audit
but an intensive investigation looking at hundreds of documents
and interviews with key staff. Alan Yentob made it clear to
the Public Accounts Select Committee that the PWC investigation
was incomplete. Financial and practical support has
always been part of Kids Company's role providing
a supportive family environment. All the gifts referred to in the PWC
report were funded by private donors,
not by the Government's grant. Chris Cook, he is with us here.
Where does that now leave things? Well the next phase is with the
select committee, there is a session next week and the big one will be
with Matt Hancock and Oliver Aleppo and having to explain themselves.
Their argument is really that ministers have been overruling civil
servants to give money to Kids Company since 2002. They were the
ones who forced Camila Batmanghelidjh to resign. It is sort
of their fault that money was spent recently but they were at least not
as bad as previous ministers. Thank you very much.
For the last 14 years he's been known as detainee 239.
Shaker Aamer has spent nearly a third of his life in Guantanamo bay
- and yet this evening he returned home to the UK without charge.
His plane landed at Biggin Hill airport this afternoon,
and the man - picked up by a bounty hunter in the
Jelalabad region of Afghanistan in 2001 - was released without charge.
He has always denied any form of extremism - and
in later years he became an advocate for other prisoners rights.
He could now be in line for a ?1 million payout
Tonight, we ask why he was kept for so long - and what purpose
The voice of Shaker Aamer, recorded in his cell by an American
documentary team in Guantanamo Bay two years ago.
Today Shaker Aamer, the final British resident in Guantanamo
arrived back in the UK after 14 years of internment without trial.
He was cleared for release in 2007. A Saudi national, he had been living
in the UK before his arrest that has a wife and four children. His
youngest son who he has never seen, was born the same day he was sent to
Guantanamo Bay. Shaker Aamer, would eating the 239, was captured in
Afghanistan in 2001. He claims he was engaged in aid work at the time
but in US documents released by WikiLeaks, is described as a
recruiter, financier and facilitator with a history of participating in
jihadist combat. The documents also state he admitted travelling to
Afghanistan in 2000 to serve with the mujahedin. In spite of these
allegations, he was never charged and his lawyers have said he was
subject to regular beatings, sleep deprivation and spread almost one
year in solitary confinement. His supporters said the delay in this
release was due to security service failures that he could reveal
damaging information. He alleges British intelligence agents
questioned him and they knew that he was being tortured. It is unlikely
then that his return to the UK marks an end to his story. But for now
Shaker Aamer has said he is more pressing priorities, like a cup of
coffee and reuniting with his wife and family.
Our two guests tonight both know it well, but have seen it
Here in the studio, Moazzam Begg, a former detainee incarcerated
there for two years - and from Washington David Rivkin, a former
Thank you both for coming in. Moazzam Begg you have been in touch
with the family of Shaker Aamer today. Of course they are overjoyed,
they have also been apprehensive about what it means to reconnect
with the father, husband. And of course Shaker Aamer has not seen
those children, the last time he saw them they were just babies and he
has never met his youngest until today. So what that means for Shaker
Aamer is to be a father once again, a husband, a member of society. And
to be able to walk out of the four corners of the cell that he used to
being, unrestricted. It is something completely new him. 14 years and
then no charge at all. Guantanamo Bay seems pretty indefensible on a
day like today? On the contrary, the fact that he has not been charged is
not signify anything. He was held for a number of years as an enemy
combatant while the conflict was still going on. It is quite common
not to charge people and despite insinuations to the contrary, he was
held in humane and comfortable conditions. Better than most people
in federal prisons. He was not a charity worker, he was a combatant,
and there was plenty of evidence, he belonged to an organisation that
committed acts of brutality, killing innocent women and children,
torturing people. With all due respect are not greatly moved by his
desire to be reunited with his family. What about people who were
killed and tortured and had their heads cut off? So tonight you do not
see him as an innocent man? Well to not try to deliberate on TV whether
or not he is innocent. It is quite crucial to this. You are accusing
him of things he may or may not have done. In your mind he is not an
innocent man tonight? He is not innocent for the simple reason, the
Bush administration and the Obama administration have been quite
critical about Guantanamo Bay, but he has multiple reviews of his
record by objective and honourable military officers.
It's not a question of convicting him, it is looking at the record and
concluding there is insufficient evidence. I want to ask Moazzam
Begg, when you got home and looking at Shaker's position in society, do
you feel like an innocent man, you've heard this opinion from an
advocate of Guantanamo Bay, do you feel vindicated? We are talking
about countries that advocate the rule of law, countries that talk
about habeas corpus, the right to the body, either you are presented
with the evidence against you and prosecuted, or you are released.
There cannot be this third type of situation the gentleman here is
suggesting. Even Obama ordered the closure of Guantanamo. He said it is
an indefensible place. People are being executed dressed in orange
suits in Iraq by Isis, for example. It doesn't alarm you that there have
been fewer than 2% convicted? That is not a concern for you? For the
benefit of your viewers, in a military justice system, which is
very different from the criminal justice system. It does not mean it
is lacking due process. People were held for years in prisoners of war
camp, the vast majority not convicted in World War I and World
War II. It's not a question of conviction, whether there is
sufficient evidence to conclude he was an enemy combatant. Would you
keep the camp open? Would you keep it going? I'd keep Guantanamo open
but that's nothing to do with the question, this individual was given
the benefit of the doubt, numerous reviews were conducted and they
concluded he was a member of Al-Qaeda, which is a horrible
organisation. Shaker Aamer has been cleared by at least six agencies. He
was not cleared, that is a lie. He's been cleared by two consecutive US
governments and never did designated for trial even by military
commission which is the lowest standard. The process that exists...
You are misleading. If you look at the code of justice any advocate
from the military has not been trained to use that process, and
even in that process they were never charging Shaker Aamer. I don't know
on what basis you say he's guilty. He is not. He has been held in false
detention, kidnapped, rendered and tortured. I want to pick up on the
point in terms of the interrogation and torture. David Rivkin, are you
convinced that British authorities supported US authorities in what
they were doing to inmates in Guantanamo? I would be amazed. I
have no factual knowledge of what transpired at any particular time. I
be amazed if anybody was mistreated in Guantanamo. You say nobody was
tortured in Guantanamo Bay? Nobody was tortured in Guantanamo Bay.
Moazzam Begg. Have you missed completely the CAA report? Have you
lived in a different world completely? Why did Obama ordered
the closure of Guantanamo Bay knee came into power? Why did he say I'm
going to end torture. He accepted torture existed. You deny it took
place. The only place it didn't happen was in your brain. Torture
never took place in Guantanamo. President Obama misspoke or
misunderstood? President Obama was referring to an investigation at
so-called CIA black sites, different issue to what happened in
Guantanamo. Nobody alleged there was mistreatment in Guantanamo. Every
single prisoner and American soldiers who served there, and
including some American prosecutors like Matt Diaz who resigned from the
commission process said there was tortured taking place. That is total
rubbish. Captain said torture was taking place and numerous people who
served in Guantanamo said torture took place. What do you think
Guantanamo chief, David Rivkin? Guantanamo has been criticised and
we paid a price, I understand that. Guantanamo symbolises this is a real
war against an implacable enemy which if we don't win will cost us
dearly. This is not a criminal justice exercise and the vast
majority of European friends just don't get it. Why were over 670
prisoners including myself released? If we are so dangerous why
are we free men? It doesn't make my sense will stop you made them had
mistakenly called us terrorists and the worst of the worst without any
legal process at all. Quite frankly this is nonsense. What you are left
with is a place that is a stain on the United States which you are
trying to defend. The viewers know what the recidivism rate of people
released from Guantanamo? Yes, I wrote a book and that is called
recidivism. And also the guys who made a film, it is called recidivism
because they made a film about Guantanamo, that is nonsense,
please! We've run out of time. Many people went back to fighting and
killing innocent civilians! We have run out of time, thank you for
coming in. Does the House
of Commons need to debate the need One Conservative MP - Philip Davies
- thinks the answer is yes. And he put his suggestion to
a backbench business committee. One of its members - Jess Philips -
the only woman on the board - said the gender imbalance,
not least of their own committee, "When I've got parity - when women
in these buildings have parity, then It could have ended there.
But it didn't. Jess Phillips joins us now from her
home in Birmingham, to explain. What happened, Jess Phillips? Hello.
What happened? Philip Davies came to the backbench
business committee and asked for, as you have outlined, asked for a
debate, International Men's Day debate, on the 19th of November.
I've not heard of it before. He led the charge in a sort of: The women
get one and a question session in Parliament so the men should have
one too. Then the fallout from it was that I spoke up against it,
which was presented by a certain newspaper that I had laughed and
joked about male suicide, men dying of cancer, young boys' education,
which obviously I did not do. And then I suffered a huge torrent of
very noisy abuse from men's rights activists, which very unfortunately
led to a very dark bit of the Internet calling for me to be raped,
banged and raped, raped publicly. And then when I published that on
Twitter then there was a torrent of people that said I was asking for
it, and it was my own fault. You called this a dark bit of the
Internet, do you think this is just a very small tiny section of it. Or
do you feel that what happened to you was fairly representative of
what happens to a woman? Well, there are many examples. Stella Creasy,
Kayla Mueller ran, the journalist has suffered from it. Caroline
Criado-Perez, suffered terribly. It is not in anyway just aimed at me so
it seems frilly, and. It goes immediately to sexual violence.
Philip Davies has done some pretty awful things that people have
criticised him on Twitter for today. Today he did a pretty awful thing to
carers. But I very much doubt that as a man anyone is threatening to
rape him and gag him and bind him. What has that done to your
perception of what happened? You said a paper criticised you for
laughing, or for treating its -- it lightly. Do you think any of your
behaviour was wrong in spite of what has happened since? If I was there
again I might not laugh at a man who was clearly not an equalities
champion, suggesting that... The thing that made me laugh was the
suggestion that men don't have an opportunity to speak up in the House
of Commons. Not any other things. If he'd come with a debate about male
suicide I would have been delighted to push that through. The reason he
didn't get his debate was because he didn't fill in the form properly,
nothing to do with me. Country to what you can read. Apps I wouldn't
be so flippant. I will protect myself in future. I will not
speaking up though, against people who frankly using quality as a tool
for their own ridiculous agenda -- I will not stop speaking up. Used to
think of politics as stuffy and out of reach of normal people. You know
what it is like to use an expletive or two against a colleague, Diane
Abbott in a PLP meeting, I'm thinking of. The fact you can call
her names, or burst out laughing at a suggestion, or that people are now
directly contacting you and you are reachable and relate about to, do
you think in one sense that is breaking down barriers between
people and politicians? It is and one of the things people said to me
since becoming an MP is that I speak like normal people, I have a normal
life and the way I react sometimes is sometimes a bit childish. I'm
only human. When I'm cross and angry I behave like most people do when
they are cross and angry, and maybe parliament will beat that out of me
eventually. But while there are a few idiots threatening to rape me
for being a woman with a big voice, the vast majority of people who
speak to me in my constituency, and on the Internet at large, are
delighted that there seems to be more humanity in the place. Anything
that makes a place with the amount of protocols and rules that
Parliament has. Jess Phillips, we've lost the link, we know where you
were going. Thank you, if you can still hear us.
How do you make an epic movie about someone who is already part
of so many of our daily lives, the man who invented Apple?
Aaron Sorkin - the scriptwriter who brought Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg's
Aaron Sorkin - the scriptwriter who brought Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg
to the big screen - was tasked with doing the same for Steve Jobs.
He teams up with Director Danny Boyle - to depict the
scenes backstage as Jobs prepares to face an audience of enthusiastic
The film out next month captures the entrepreneur's life,
In fact it depicts him as something of a brute.
Danny Boyle has been talking to Evan.
What do you do? You're not an engineer.
You're not a designer. You can't put a hammer to a nail.
I built the circuit board. The graphical interface was stolen.
So how come ten times in a day I read Steve jobs is a genius?
Your Steve Jobs has come out, I think a lot of people think,
as quite a jerk actually, quite unpleasant.
I think Michael's portrait of him is uncompromising
and what is extraordinary about his performance as well, and
obviously Aaron Sorkin's writing of it, was that you were not shielded
There are many people who would testify to great devotion to him
and the huge inspiration that they gain from him.
And other people felt they were very damaged.
You're issuing contradictory instructions, you're insubordinate,
You put together an opening ceremony for the Olympic Games.
I had to do a little bit of shouting at the International
Olympic Committee, but anybody, no matter what kind of person you are,
would shout at the International Olympic Committee at some point!
They say with film directors there is
That actually there are things that you're after that you will do
anything to get out, and there needs to be many differentiations in
But I believe in honesty. I try to be honest with people.
And I think that does bring the best out of them.
It's a system error. Fix it.
Fix it? Yeah!
We're not a pit crew at Daytona. This can't be fixed in seconds.
You didn't have seconds, you had three weeks.
The universe was created in a third of that time.
Well, someday you will have to tell us how you did it.
One of the things the film attracted is a bit of an argument about how
far a movie about a real guy can bend facts and have dramatic licence
I think it comes partly out of a despair
So what you end up developing, if you are dealing with real life, is
you end up developing a sense, and listen, this is not going to stand
up in a court of law, it's the bull shit sense where you go, it's the
bull shit detector, where you go, "I don't believe that."
You get that nightmare with actors where they go I'd think
my character would behave quite like this at this moment, which
fills you with this horror moment for a director, when you think,
But actually, it's very important because it's an internal moral
sense that you think we are being honest here and respectful.
You're arriving at that spot on a long lens looking that way.
Have you been annoyed at the argument that has raged
No, I think it's actually one of the reasons why I did the film.
Because, I think that a corporation like Apple is so powerful now are
Because, I think that a corporation like Apple is so powerful now,
so influential around the world, that it's crucial that writers and
artists tell the stories that they don't necessarily want you to tell.
I don't mean that you are digging out stuff about them
that's unacceptable behaviour wise or anything like that.
But you actually do tell stories about how it has happened that this
company that was born in a garage 40 years ago dominates
the world now and is richer than virtually all countries on earth
Do you feel like a Hollywood insider now?
You won an Oscar for Slumdog Millionaire.
But you are kind of like an independent film-maker
Are you a Hollywood person now? No, not really.
This is the first script I've ever done that we didn't generate
But then we made this film and we lived
And I kind of understood really. It's an extraordinary town.
And I come from Manchester originally,
which had a lot to do with the first Industrial Revolution.
And it's weird working in a town that is
a modern Industrial Revolution, like the updated version of it.
You got a sense of potential of how things are changing,
It's three years since the Olympic opening ceremony now.
Everybody said Danny Boyle produced a statement of our country that most
people thought, this is rather good, we are proud of this.
And it was a sort of statement of a modern nation at ease with itself.
I just wonder what you think about the state of Britain.
We are always in a state of total self-criticism.
The Olympic opening ceremony was a chance to say that
behind that there is a sense of a progressive, decent country
And we can encourage it, which I think is all you can do.
Has there been any dent in your view of Britain
as a country which is free and which has these core values?
The debate over migrants this summer, for example.
I think any hesitancy about resisting refugees coming to this
country just denies the very nature of what the country is built on.
I mean, we have always had a noble tradition of being a refuge for
people who, for whatever reason, are under threat and I think that's part
of our national identity and what makes us a great country really.
Are you filled with the joy of a new politics, or are you filled with
the horror of a man who you don't think can win the next election?
Which of the various narratives about Jeremy Corbyn do you buy into?
Shall we do a biopic of Jeremy Corbyn?
He's obviously a very admirable man and I admire the way that he has
maintained his own personal principles throughout his time,
Obviously your only concern is that in the sway of things, by the time
the back and forth has finished and you arrive at an election when
you have to make absolute decisions is, will the Labour Party remain a
proper force that can be a government really?
Now on Artsnight, George the Poet explores
the meaning of black culture in music, theatre, writing and