05/01/2016 Newsnight


In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines with Emily Maitlis.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 05/01/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



The Prime Minister allows his Cabinet a free vote on Europe.


Is everyone now having a go at new politics?


There will be a clear government position,


but it will be open to individual ministers to take a different,


personal position, while remaining part of the government.


But only once he's finished negotiating with EU leaders.


Has Corbyn resisted the urge to purge?


And should you have the right not to put your gender on a form?


We speak to one who believes the system is antiquated


Is the trans movement the next civil rights frontier?


Perhaps this new politics thing really is catching.


Today, the Prime Minister bowed to pressure from his cabinet


colleagues and agreed to allow government ministers to campaign


to leave the European Union - in direct opposition


Mr Cameron wants to keep Britain within the EU and believes he can


provide a compelling case for it - if he succeeds in getting EU leaders


The opening up of the debate - which will in essence allow not just


back benchers but those he works alongside -


The Prime Minister hopes that will be by the middle of February.


As an unexpectedly victorious David Cameron bathed in the applause of


his new MPs and the warm sunshine last May there was one big headache


on the horizon. Take's nightmare is not that he loses this referendum,


although that would be pretty bad. Nor is it that he fails to negotiate


a deal with his European partners. The EU is after all pretty good at


creative ambiguity. No, his real nightmare is this EU referendum is


the rock on which the Conservative Party is dashed, wrecked from a


natural party of government into an incoherent squabbling rabble. It was


into chillier air that the Prime Minister stepped this afternoon on


his way to tell the commons that Ministers would be free to campaign


anyway they chose. It is in the nature of a referendum that it is


the people, not the politicians, who decide. As I indicated before


Christmas, there will be a clear Government position, but it will be


open to individual Ministers to take a different personal position while


remaining a different personal position while


previous Prime Minister made a different personal position while


the Europe referendum of a different personal position while


unique problem. This is a case where all parties are divided, and the


unique problem. This is a case where disaster. Labour cabinet colleagues


freed from collective -- to disaster. Labour cabinet colleagues


argument as nonsense. Part disaster. Labour cabinet colleagues


calculation then as now is that the losers will only accept the result


of the referendum if they deem losers will only accept the result


fight fair. I want to see a fair fight so that I can feel that


whatever the result it is an honest reflection of the British people's


views and then we can get on with the rest of the Government's agenda,


which is significant. There are lots of other things we need to be


getting on with as well as Europe. David Cameron has another


calculation. The largely Euro-sceptic Conservative Party


membership may well pick as his successor someone who has campaigned


to leave the EU. And he doesn't want tall the potential candidates to


have to resign from his Government to do so. But one veteran of past


Conservative Party euro battles thinks this is a mistake. A pity


he's been forced to make it. We need a strong, unified Government to


handle some very difficult problems we face in the wilder world and in


providing a proper recovery and the base for a modern economy. To have


people insisting on staying in office in that Government but free


to attack their own Government on key and fundamental policy is quite


difficult. It's most unfortunate that his rebels have


difficult. It's most unfortunate this situation. The Prime Minister


does appear to have changed his mind on this from a year ago. Would you


give Cabinet Ministers and other Conservatives who want to campaign


for an out, the freedom to do so in such a referendum? Well with, there


are conservative members of Parliament who want to leave the


European Union come what may. But if you are part of the Government you


are clearly part of the team that's aiming for the renegotiation... But


for one Conservative minded to vote to leave the EU, this is the only


sensible solution. I think it would've been very difficult to


create a kind of a temporary Government during the referendum


campaign. Having a Secretary of State for transport or defence


perhaps for only six months, I don't think that would have been


practical. So being able to continue the role of Government, the


continuity of people who are experienced and know what they are


doing I think is really important. David Cameron only promised this


referendum to try to prevent his party tearing itself apart


referendum to try to prevent his Europe. He has made a similar


judgment in allowing Ministers to campaign to leave the EU if they


want to. But keeping the inevitable public arguments in check will now


prove a significant test for his leadership.


A vote is ongoing in the Commons right now so our guest,


the leading Eurosceptic Liam Fox, will join us from College Green


in a moment - though sadly not in discussion with our studio guest


here, the Europhile former Conservative Home Secretary,


Thank you for coming in Ken Clarke. Presumably you see this as a sign of


confidence in the Prime Minister that he feels able to make this


decision? Well, he has got a difficult problem on his hands, how


to have a referendum without making divisions in the party worse. For


the remainder of this Parliament to tackle all the many terrible


problems the country is facing. I potentially think it is a great pity


that the rebels have threatened resignation and forced limb to make


this concession. So you think it's a sign of weakness then? Well,


probably he had no choice. Harold Wilson had no choice. He didn't want


his Ministers to go out and start campaigning with each other, and he


was never able to put the party together again. The party split


irrevocably in the years that followed. Does this strike you as


the end of what he has called collective responsibility? He is


obviously suspending collective responsibility for an unknown period


of time, some months by the sound of it. We are going to have a


Government in which probably two or three members are opening


criticising one of the most, the Government's most important, as


David said, clear recommendations to the public. And he he said no


campaigning until after the renegotiation. Yes, there's a long


lapse between that and the referendum result. Throughout that


time, presumably now great pressure will be put by Euro-sceptic


enthusiasts in the House of Commons on other Ministers to spend those


months disagreeing with the Government on the recommendation


about what is the best basis for our voice in the world. How we are going


to influence mainly events and... Do you think they'll break the ground


rules? No, he said, as far as I understand it, tell me if I


misunderstood it, but I was listening to him. I think he said


once he has concluded the negotiations then in the months or


two which will follow that... They can do it? They are quite free to


say they don't agree with the Government's policy when they are


serving as Ministers in the Government. And you think this puts


your own cause at a disadvantage? No, I just think it makes the


Government in a, you know, very difficult position. It will be very


difficult for other countries to understand why they are dealing with


Ministers who are openly campaigning against one of the Government's


important policy recommendations. Presumably the Minister in office


will continue with European meetings and policies with the Government,


when openly back home they are stating they'll recommend that the


country should leave. So you do think it would be detrimental to


those who want to stay in the EU then? You are going to interview


Liam Fox. We served in a cabinet together in a friendly way. All of


us have to make a compromise sometimes. A man isn't born who


agrees with everything his colleagues are doing. But if it is


outside your area you stay quiet on it and accept collective


responsibility. If it is a matter of principle you do what any Minister


would have done in the past, you resign and you forcefully put your


views from the backbenches. What do you think will be the long-term


fallout from this? If it is part of what's going be a growing problem in


the next few months of keeping the Government together. And having a


strong and united Government thereafter. Unfortunately for us the


Labour Party's in an even bigger mess on collective unity on the


other side of the House. It is not surprisingly a unique situation in


Parliament which I don't think anybody has seen before. The British


constitution has never coped with this before. Ken Clarke, thank you.


Let's put some of those points to Liam Fox, who joins us from College


Green. Is it going to be very difficult for David Cameron to keep


the party together? If this is, as Ken Clarke claims, the end of


collective responsibility? No, I think he has made the decision that


will make it easier to keep the party together in the longer term.


The referendum's going to last between the end of the negotiation


and the date of the referendum itself, about three months we reckon


from what the Prime Minister was saying today. After that the


Conservatives will have to govern up to 2020, another three-and-a-half


years. I think the choice facing the Prime Minister was either does he


give Ministers in that three-month period the chance to say what they


want, given that it is not a normal piece of political activity with


Government legislation. It's a vote that every individual will have


across the country. And those Ministers will have to be answerable


to their voters and to their constituency associations who want


to know what they have to say. How can you carry on with Government


business in Europe, as Ken Clarke has explained, when all those


European leaders will be knowing and hearing exactly what you are


thinking about Europe? Well, that's one of the things you have to do in


a democracy. They'll have to understand that's how we operate.


We've not had a referendum on this issue. Since 1975. No-one under 58


in this country has ever had a say on the European issue - it's time we


had it. That will provide some hiccups temporarily in the way the


Government operates. The alternative for the Prime Minister to what he


did today is to say fine, you have the leave the Government, there is


then a reshuffle in that three months, and then the Prime Minister


has to consider the Government after that. That I think would have had a


greater impact upon the coherence of Government in the longer term. The


Prime Minister made the right decision. How many cabinet


colleagues do you think we are talking about here? Well, I think


most of the Westminster commentators would accept that maybe three might


have resigned. I think now they are going to be the allowed a greater


say we'll see a bigger number, maybe six or seven, perhaps more. We'll


see a large number in the parliamentary party, as we've seen


this week, including the new intake of MPs. The youngest ones, many of


them favour leaving too. And they are not rebels. This is a perfectly


legitimate view to have. We said in our manifesto we would have a


referendum so that every citizen in our country could have a say on


their future in Europe. Where they wanted written's destiny to be


determined. Ey wanted written's destiny to be


determined. -- Britain's destiny to be determined. Is it reasonable, is


there such a thing as a moderate level of campaigning on something


you feel so strongly about? Where I agree with Ken and the point I've


tried to make in recent weeks is we will have to govern together for the


second half of this decade. How difficult or how easy that will be


for us will be largely determined how well we treat one another in the


run-up to that referendum and how we conduct ourselves. I think that we


should recognise that we are allowed to have different views on this. It


is not Government versus rebels as it might have been in the Maastricht


debates in the material '90s. Everyone is free to have the view


they believe is in the national interest. If we do that and treat


one another with respect and understand that those are want to


stay are not traitors, those who want to leave aren't idiots. We have


to have a grown-up, respectful debate, and then it'll be easier to


come together afterwards. You believe a leader can have a


plurality of views in Cabinet? And presumably you think that's true for


Labour and Mr Corbyn as well then? I'm not sure I'm competent to


discuss the mess that's the Labour Party when we've got a reshuffle


that's against the Chilcot Inquiry to see which we get first. But we've


got to work out for our own party how we best govern. We've got a


majority in the House of Commons. That's our main responsibility. If


we have to have a three month hiatus where there's a relaxation of


cabinet responsibility in order for us to be the able to govern


effectively for the rest of the decade, that's a fair bargain. Liam


Fox and Ken Clarke, thank you both very much.


Meanwhile, to the opposition party as it wrestles


Think of a David Attenborough plant mating sequence that's been sped up.


Then imagine it's been slowed back down to real time.


Now you're working in the mindset of those who've been monitoring


the last 30 hours of the Labour Party reshuffle.


But so far we have one shadow culture secretary Michael Dugher,


And a bunch of rumours about a new entry onto the bench.


So has the Labour Leader resisted the Urge to Purge?


The New Statesman has been live blogging all the twists and we've


forcibly removed their political editor, George Eton,


from the staircase in that corridor of news so he can join us here.


What has the last 30 or so hours yielded for you? Trotsky spoke of


the idea of permanent yielded for you? Trotsky spoke of


this has been Jeremy Corbyn to act swiftly to


change the Shadow Foreign Secretary, remove Hilary Benn from that post


and get rid of Murray Eagle. That has not happened yet. Do we know now


that Hilary Benn is now safe in his post? Well Hilary Benn is to remain


Shadow Foreign Secretary against initial expectations but will have


to share some positions, he will not be able to oppose Jeremy Corbyn on


air strikes for example. So Foreign Secretary in name. Yes, no more free


votes on foreign policy. One fact we have today is Michael Dugher, a


vocal critic, he called his sacking today and end to new politics.


Michael Dugher was critical of Jeremy Corbyn during the leadership


campaign at shows to join the Shadow Cabinet. I think in the hope it


would be what Jeremy Corbyn called abroad church where you have people


with different views, different backgrounds, working together.


Jeremy Corbyn, his team now feel that led to a lack of coherence on


foreign policy and defence policy and they were keen for greater


unity. So you will not end up with what one person described to me as a


Shadow Cabinet of clones and zombies because Jeremy does not have the


numbers. Only around 14 MPs in the party voted for him so he cannot put


in ideological clones but he doesn't want greater discipline. It looked


as if Maria Eagle might have been a casualty at one stage possibly to


bury replaced by Maria Thornbury in defence. Is that one dead? The


latest was that Emily Thornbury was in top bashed in talks with Jeremy


Corbyn. I know she has been tipped to take a job in the Shadow Cabinet.


She is a Trident sceptic and Maria Eagle is a defender. But one Labour


MP said it would be extraordinary to have a Shadow Defence Secretary who


sneers at her own flag, a reference to the reason for the resignation of


Emily Thornbury from the Shadow Cabinet of Ed Miliband. Tony Blair


always made rapid reshuffles which were not necessarily at all


successful. They may be merit in taking time over this. But do you


had the sense that Jeremy Corbyn will emerge from this having done


what he wanted to do and being stronger for it? I think he will


have done some of what he wanted to do, to get Michael Dugher out, to


get in a new Shadow Defence Secretary. And if he does not have a


new Shadow Foreign Secretary he will have Hilary Benn under new rules,


essentially. I think he has lost goodwill with this reshuffle, Labour


MPs friendly are furious at the way this has prevented them from


attacking the Conservatives more effectively over the concession on


the EU by David Cameron, how it was to drag on over the Christmas break.


They feel they want to get back to the job of opposing the


Conservatives and in the moment they are in a position to do anything


but. The speed at which tensions


between Saudi and Iran have escalated are a reminder, perhaps,


that this is no new conflict. Saudi's decision to


behead the Shia Cleric - and hero - Nimr al-Nimr -


may mark a point of no return. But make no mistake -


the historic unease between these two states stretches back


millennia - pre Islam - to a time when each regarded


themselves as the central power What's changed this time, perhaps,


is the economics of the situation. Saudi - which made its fortune


on oil - is now feeling the pinch Whilst its expenditure


on defence has soared. How does this affect


what happens next? Our diplomatic editor,


Mark Urban, is on the case. There is religious schism,


there is power politics, and in Saudi Arabia's


confrontation with Iran, there is an increasingly vexed


economic dimension too. There is no doubt that the fiscal


challenge is enormous for Saudi They got used to living with an oil


price that was very high, at points in excess of $100


a barrel, and now that price has Saudi Arabia's government expects


revenues of $137 billion But oil and gas make up


something like 80% of that. So with the continuing price slump,


Saudi will be eating Last year these fell from 732


billion to 623 billion, leading the IMF to predict


the Saudis could run out of cash In the past two years they have been


running a huge deficit and this will continue for the next few years


if oil prices continue at this rate, I would expect they will be


in a very difficult financial With tension rising in the Gulf,


Iranian TV has been showing off The competition for regional


dominance now extends With Iran expected to boost oil


sales as a way of increasing We go back to the 1970s,


clearly Iran was one of the world's largest oil producers


and rivalled Saudi Arabia. Today Iran after many years


of sanctions has obviously fallen into a much lower position and lower


status in the global oil market. But we think that Iran


will try to regain status The more that Iran produces,


the more the market is flooded. The market share clearly,


the more market share Iran takes, the less market share


Saudi Arabia will have. So clearly there is


going to be rivalry. In a bid to avert crisis,


Saudi Arabia last month unveiled It envisages spending


$224 billion this year. That includes $61 billion subsidy


on fuel prices and $10 billion While the kingdom is now risking


unrest with cuts to subsidies, producing for example a 50%


hike in petrol prices, it's still increasing


its defence spending. It is due to go up by 27% over


the next five years to $62 There is an unacceptable level


of spending and an illogical If you look into for example


the budget, they introduced subsidies, but the spending


on defence has increased significantly, around 25%


compared to last year. And this is not counting any kind


of spending off balance sheets of the budget to go to countries,


poor countries, that Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia's decision


to intervene in Yemen and to subsidise its allies to do


the same has created financial risks Regional leadership,


they are discovering, One that Saudi Arabia may only be


able to afford by deep cuts Unless of course actual wars push


the oil price back up. How important is it


to ask someone's gender - and would you consider it


an invasion of privacy For most of us, it will


barely raise an eyebrow. But for increasingly vocal numbers,


it is a question that's both People who see their own gender


as fluid or not easily defined say they want to remove the gender


markers - for example from passports, university


applications and official forms. And it's something the UK government


could start to actively consider To some it may sound


positively Victorian. Applying to legally change gender


in the UK involves presenting formal medical evidence to a judicial body


called the Gender Recognition Panel. Applicants must first prove


they have been diagnosed with gender in their acquired gender for two


years and will do so for ever. Stripping that process back


to a simple declaration form is expected to be one


of the recommendations made For campaigners it is the end


of a dated and sometimes traumatic process and another sign of evolving


attitudes to transgender. Across the western world those


attitudes have been transformed Some have called it


the trans moment. Time Magazine has called it the next


civil rights frontier. Trans icons such as Caitlin Jenner,


formerly the Olympian Bruce Jenner, and Kellie Maloney,


the celebrity boxing promoter, have given transgender issues


new prominence in mainstream media. And stars like Ruby Rose have taught


today's generation to think more Facebook now offers more than 70


options on gender identity, ranging from polygender


to inter-sex. But for all the progress,


the work is far from complete. Transgender people are still more


likely to be attacked or face discrimination or suffer mental


health problems or drug abuse. Some campaigners argue that proposed


changes in law do not go far enough Others simply wonder why in 2016


it is still something CN Lester is a musician,


writer and trans rights activist. And Sarah Ditum is a Feminist


and writer for the New Statesman. Thank you for coming in. CN, how


would you describe yourself if faced with a form or application, what do


you write? For someone like me who is transgender and does not consider


themselves either male or female and goes through the world being traded


sometimes as a man and sometimes as a woman, it gets confusing but asked


to describe who I am. I want to tell the truth and if form simply has


male or female I cannot do that. Why are you sometimes described as a man


and sometimes as a woman? We have different ways of seeing sex and the


gender. If we look at the history of how we do gender and sex, we always


had creative ways of doing gender. We have people who transition from


one sex to another, people who live in a space between gender, people


who reject ideas of gender at all. You were born a woman. I was born


baby, is a big distinction. Because of the patriarchal system in Hong


Kong I do not even have female on my birth certificate, but while. Girl


is gender but male and female, they are different things. The nature of


transition and the reason it is traumatic is because physical sex is


a fact of biological reality. With which trans people have two


negotiate. This is one of my academic specialities, the idea of


sex as we know it emerged in the 19th century. We cannot talk about


sex without gender and the body. Coming back to the issue at hand,


the current legislation... You said the idea of male and female does not


exist in your mind? I say it is more complicated than what we were taught


at GCSE biology. None of us are biologists. It would be interesting


to talk about what is going on as opposed to these common


misunderstanding is that we have. It is immensely complicated in some


ways and in other ways enormously simple in that in day-to-day life


there are men and women who broadly are male and female, so sex classes


broadly map onto physical sex. Trans people are caught between these and


that is important and I hope the report will deal with that


constructively. But in everyday life the impression of women by men


follows the line of sex and is about the exploitation of women as sex


objects. And the argument of CN, do you think that ignores social


conditions M if we focus on complexities, which is a fascinating


and important, but small part of the argument, then we will start to


overlook the structural violence that is practised by men against


women. I would say again coming back to these proposals, which is why we


are on this programme, the enquiry has been interesting, fascinating to


see it unfold and fascinating to see someone like Maria Miller who went


into it not knowing much, realising how much this affects our general


way of being in society with each other. A poll last year found one


third of people in the UK would not describe themselves as totally male


or female. The number of trans people in society, 1% on current


figures and intersex people... If Maria Miller takes this into


legislation, what does it mean for male and female changing rooms,


public loos, how you count the number of men and women on a census?


This is hugely important. She says she wants to look at the wage gap


and the glass ceiling. If you don't have a way of monitoring men and


women as two separate classes, you can't study that. You are blurring


all the lines, all the social construct aren't you? I think what


we are saying, we don't have race on forms. The Government doesn't


mandate my race or religion on the form. But if you are not collecting


the data... If you will let me finish. Trans people are not


arguing... It is vital that we can monitor data against discrimination.


Would the data be that you start eroding that because you don't know


where the definitions lie? I am finding this amusing. It is all


hypotheticals. It is not hypothetical. We are talking about


classifying data that is private in some respects. With the individual


consent. If you can let me finish. It is a question of competing


rights. How do we protect the rights and safety of trans people. There's


a danger that we will look back and say, this revolution was happening


and you were on the wrong side. You didn't realise that this was a civil


rights movement in the way that race was or in the way that the gay


moment was and by not accepting what's happening before your eyes


you are missing the point. There are a lot of facets to what we talk


about as trans. We are not just talking about people who physically


transition and have genital reassignment surgery, but people who


identify as the opposite sex or anything along a spectrum and make


no physical or aesthetic changes but present that as their identity. How


do you present somebody who has a penis and commits violence and wants


to be admitted to female only spaces. In Kelly Maloney


pretransition life Kelly Maloney attacked his wife. Rose West is in a


prison and she attacked women... I'm so sorry, I wish we had longer for


this. Great of you to come in. The Thank you.


It is a year since the staff at Paris' satirical magazine,


Charlie Hebdo, were targeted by murderers.


This week, the magazine's new editor responded in customary style.


A provocative front cover - and the words - "We're not


going to let balaclava-clad scumbags ruin a lifetime's work."


Those attacks - as we now know - were not to be the last of 2015.


But the killings began what has now become seen as France's


Tomorrow night on BBC Two, filmmaker Dan Reed reveals


the untold story of the massacre - and of the first Islamic State


This edited excerpt from his film features previously unseen footage


and interviews with some of the hostages inside the grocery.


You may find some scenes distressing.


And you can see the full film - This World, Three Days of Terror:


The Charlie Hebdo Attacks, tomorrow on BBC Two at 9.00pm.


We leave you with President Barack Obama, who made an extraordinary


statement on gun control tonight, which speaks for itself.


Our inalienable right to life, and liberty and the pursuit


of happiness, those rights were stripped from college kids


in Blacksburg and Santa Barbara, and from high-schoolers


in Columbine, and from first graders in Newtown.


And from every family who never imagined


their loved one would be taken from our lives by a bullet


Every time I think about those kids it gets me mad.


And by the way, it happens on the street of Chicago


Unbelievably some parts of eastern Scotland have already had their


second wettest January on record and we are only five days in. Further


damp, dreary cold weather across the


Download Subtitles