26/02/2016 Newsnight


With Emily Maitlis. Will the politics of fear work on the Euro referendum? Evictions begin in the Calais camps, there's a new twist in the Tory bullying row, plus Artsnight.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 26/02/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Tonight, is the EU referendum going to be won by fear?


And if so, which side stands to gain?


You could see interest rates go up, food prices go up, family finances


threatened. Those are risks, and I think people need to weigh up the


risks. threats to make their point,


how on earth do the rest of us French authorities start clearing


the Jungle at Calais after a court upholds


the government's plan What is going on is French officials


are going around with a map of France saying, you could live in any


one of these places, you could go to a migrant centre, but he is saying,


I don't want to leave. On Artsnight, Lynn Barber talks


to two comedians about comedy and mental illness -


Catastrophe's Rob Delaney and Ruby When you are really ill, you can't


move, and before that, you have a racing mind, but when you are on the


way down, you have a racing mind, and they used to show up to events


to say, I am perfectly fine, look how popular I am!


In a week that feels longer than a month,


Come down on the side of security and safety and certainty.


Because in this reformed European Union, we know


Of course there will be people who try to spread alarm and anxiety.


We had much the same sort of thing when the decision came


I have no other agenda, I have no other agenda.


I think it's quite likely that during that month they would say,


let's talk some more, let's see if we can reach


a different agreement, perhaps you could have a second referendum.


Net migration continues into Britain at


And from the European Union we have zero control.


It's not for me, for me, a matter of numbers,


it's a matter of the type of people we want in this country.


We benefit from scale, we benefit from the standardisation,


It helps us to reduce our cost base and allows us to be


We will be more secure, I think.


is impossible to argue that we won't be.


So, the white men of Westminster have spoken.


And now the rest of the country has to make sense of it.


But did any of the noise cut through?


Tonight, after a week in which both sides have deployed fears


of security, illegality, economic ruin, we're trying to make


sense of the strategy each side is using to sell their argument.


Do the characters, giant as they may be, pull you one way or another?


Or do you still feel like you're fumbling around in the dark


like an inexperienced teenager on a blind date?


Here to join us are Kiri Kankhwende, Jim Waterson, Toby Young and Anne


Lovely to have you all here. Kiri, it is extraordinary to think that


this time last week it was all kicking off. The idea characterise


the shape of the arguments? It seemed like Punch and Judy, like a


lot of men lining up to take shots at each other, and I think what has


been lost heart of this is that it is a momentous decision, one of the


biggest decisions many of us will make in our lifetime, and the big


issues haven't cut through. Why do you think that is? I think it has


been caught up in personality politics. It has been very dominated


by... Almost as if whoever is more popular, we should leave, when in


short fact, no one is putting the case for either side clearly. Do you


think this does feel like a personality contest at the moment?


We have Boris on the front of the times, and he has clarified their


that he does say that no means no at the end of a referendum, but when


you look at the timings, whether it was Cameron's day or Boris's. I


think there was a risk that the debate could have seemed like that,


particularly if not many heavyweights had come out on the


leave side, and I think that was Downing Street's hope, and I think


we saw from Michael Cockrell's video last week on Newsnight about the


1975 referendum, they managed to tarnish the No camp is a group of


cranks, so I think the fact that Boris has come out Philippe, then


gof, then David Owen, now Michael Howard,... Do you think it was


coordinated? There is a relay going on? I think Boris genuinely took


until Sunday night to make up his mind. But I think the fact that it


is now a much more even contest with big beasts on both sides, and it is


not just a war within the Conservative Party, there is Kate


Hoey in labour, and George Galloway and so on on the far right, and in


question Time yesterday, the panel didn't divide on the usual partisan


lines, but it crossed those lines, and the audience seemed a gauge to.


The Spectator gets a lot of hits when it glitches stuff about the


referendum, and I think the public are very interested. The momentum


has been with the outers, people like Douglas Carswell looking like


they had a new puppy, the excitement was palpable. But it is more


exciting to be on the outside in week one, if you have a campaign


called Remain, how exciting is that? The arguments will be fleshed out in


the months to come, and I know people talk about the personality


politics, whichever country you take with a representative democracy, the


argument end up with a head on them, there has to be a person where you


think, I agree with him, or I don't like what she said, I have changed


from him to her. The problem for the remains side is if you have all the


excitement and Boris Johnson, Willie or won't he? It is, all the drama is


there, the soap opera, but you still have to find a way, and the cat mark


Economist have done a cover saying what they think, and they are in


Economist have done a cover saying flesh on the argument, and there is


a lot of excitement coming from the other side. There was a poll out


this evening online which said that the Tabac three have got the edge --


the outers have got the edge. It shows a small edge for the Three,


but we still have many don't knows, if you ask how many people have


definitely made their mind up, I think half of them would still be


surprised that the referendum is even happening, so the idea we have


a clear result this far out would amaze me. We have plenty of time,


far longer than the election campaign was. You were in Scotland


for a long time. Do you remember the point at which the people who didn't


know suddenly new? There was a feeling that there was something we


could do, but the main thing was that there was a sudden positive ups


well that had been building for a very long time, the two years


grass-roots work they had been doing, going out to schools and


colleges, so from 2012 onwards they had been building up, whereas


essentially, a lot of the campaigns are still arguing amongst themselves


and only just really deploying their ground troops. And that is exactly


what happened, the excitement, people got a big shock by how close


it was going to be and that flipped up the last moment, so excitement is


a funny metrics, you can feel it palpably and it will drive the


debate, but whether it will drive the final outcome is less assured.


Do you think there are shy outers in this? Yes, online polls have it much


more level pegging, and telephone poles have people much more in


favour of remaining. People are saying, I am and outie, just don't


tell my friends! Nigel Farage says we spend all this money every week,


others say, we get all this money back, so what the public do? How do


we make sense of the figures, whether we will be more secure, less


secure, spend more, spend less? It comes down to basically through you


trust. So the data is irrelevant? On the one hand you are being told that


leaving would damage the economy, on the other hand you are told that


staying will, you know... So it is a case of going with the spokesperson


that you believe, and I think that is one thing people are crying out


for, in fact and mentioned that having this personality leads to


excitement, but what people are crying out for when you hear them on


the street is they just want to know that figures from a neutral source


that they can assess the arguments neutrally. Identity there is any


such thing as a neutral source in this debate, because facts and


figures are subject to assessment. Do people want to be told what to


think, you have to say to them, I'm sorry, you have to do some thinking


now. The politicians will have to put that across, because if you are


waiting for someone to bring you a tablet of stone, we would all claim


that what we represent will tell some form of the truth, but in the


end, people are going to have to face up to this themselves, it will


be a brave politician who says that, but it will probably need to be


said. State with us all, because when you haven't got figures, you do


have fear. Within hours of a date


for the referendum being called, Ian Duncan Smith claimed in a BBC


interview that the EU's freedom of movement left the door open


to a terrorist attack similar Counter terrorism experts


slapped him down, accusing him But it is this scaremongering


on both sides that is being widely deployed as the weapon of choice


to bring people round. Five, seven, six... Some of the most


striking political messages have been decidedly negative, like this


American ad from 96 D4, an attack on Barry Goldwater, a Republican seen


as gung ho on nuclear warfare. -- from 1964. These are the stakes! The


European referendum will probably be a little less apocalypse Vic. But


this former referendum campaign winner says the in campaign, which


he supports, still has to be pretty tough. When it comes down to it,


referendums are an offer of change, and three out of four file because


people don't want to take the risk. So you have to pile up the risk,


show the risk. The campaign for the status quo in Scotland did end up


more negative, the consequence of extensive research by experts now


working for the campaign to stay in the EU. During the Scottish


independence referendum, the No campaign who were in favour of


staying in did some research and their opponents on themselves and


their opponents, they found that the Yes campaign was associated with


ideas like ambition, Pat Richards, pride, but also risk, but the


campaign of staying within the union was associated with ideas like


financial security, job security, peace of mind, but also more of the


same. See can see why it is that one campaign played up the changes, and


the other campaign ended up sending quite negative, it was to use a term


coined by a member of their own staff, Project Fear. Always in all


polling if you ask people if they like negative campaigning, they


don't like it. Everybody dislikes it, but if you then ask them about


how their behaviour is changed by it, they hate it, but it affects


them. The in campaign has arranged public letters from bosses and


generals to seek to make a case that will be very familiar to Scots.


Better Together Fridjonsson security. There is concern, though,


that these messages are overblown. People should be aware of the down


and upsides, but what I object to is the exaggeration of the fears about


what might happen, and the exaggeration of the coercing of


members of the establishment of retired military types and current


officials and the military to rig the referendum against Brett --


Brexit. The line between fair comment on opponent and unfair


scaremongering is a very subjective. Some of your critics would argue


that your concerns about how free movement within the European Union


undermines our security... I don't think that is an exaggerated way of


putting it. It is rather people to make up their own minds, but that is


simply anchoring what I am saying in reality. A vote cast out of fear is


as valid as one cast from Hope. You can wish for a gentler politics, but


as a way of defending incumbents or the status quo, boy can going


negative be effective. This brutal ad help the older George bush crush


Michael Dukakis in 1988. While out, many committed other


crimes like Many are still at large. Can hope


beat that? The


project fear, are we? Lets pick up with our panel again -


Jim Waterson, Kiri Kankawende, If you were going to embrace project


fear, would you say it is a powerful electoral tool? Does it work on the


public? There were only two big messages in referendums that


coalesce around a single issue. One is its time for change, the other


is, don't take any risks, don't throw it all away. To that extent,


as your film recollected, people will say, I don't like the sound of


something called project fear. It does work as long as you keep it


culturally in line with where people feel comfortable. The problem


perhaps this week when we got to something... People will choose


their own thing... I didn't like the lead involving generals. I


their own thing... I didn't like the this is like Panama a couple of


decades ago, what are we doing here? Relying on the military to tell us


about something that should be something


about something that should be on. As a weapon, yes, as Chris


Cook's film nailed it, it's a very powerful thing electorally. It


doesn't work with Buzz feed, your algorithm is based on happiness in a


way. Its puddings and online discussed, it's pleasure, putting a


link on Facebook that makes you look like a good, intelligent person for


showing this. The fact that prove my case is a strong thing want to put


on Facebook, Twitter, it makes them look good and spreads the word about


their message. One thing that is odd look good and spreads the word about


that we can pick up from the film is while we don't have paid for


political ads on TV and radio in the UK, what we have got and what the


Conservatives used to great effect during the general election, and


they have the same guys working on this campaign, for the remain


campaign, they can do paid Facebook ads. They will be targeting certain


messages using hard cash to people who could be swung in key areas.


It's one thing who could be swung in key areas.


having that people haven't picked up on. While Anne MacElvoy


having that people haven't picked up have got the fear problem, the


unknown. It definitely have got the fear problem, the


think they were thrown back on that tactic because they were wrong foot


or by the scale and respectability of those who supported leave, by the


lack of bounce after the deal brought back from Brussels. It's as


lack of bounce after the deal if they've given up having sold the


deal and are if they've given up having sold the


fear. It is security risk, and a jobs risk. The fact they fell back


on it so quickly, they shot those bolts faster than they were


intending to. We saw that in the FTSE 100 letter, they only had 36 of


the top FTSE 100 companies signing that letter. Why weren't


Sainsbury's, Tesco and Barclays Sainsbury's, Tesco and Barclays


signatories? And the military letter. One of the signatories,


General Sir Michael letter. One of the signatories,


didn't know anything about it. The whole idea of your character, the


danger, possibly, that we then talk about Europe, when


danger, possibly, that we then talk EU. People don't want to seem


anti-European because they think they like Europe, but they might not


feel as if they want to embody the EU, do you think there is an


identity thing going on here? I do think it's a factor insofar as, I


mean, everyone likes going on holiday, people talk about living


abroad. I think when it comes down to fit what people see is people. --


when it comes down to it. It comes down to migration, immigration, we


think of it as people coming in rather than us going out. We think


of it as an inbound flow. Facts and figures. Things like numerous


studies that have found immigrants actually put in more than they take


out, those sorts of figures seem to... They don't seem to land in the


immigration debate. And we don't really talk about the people from


the UK as much, going to work abroad. I wonder whether part of the


imbalance, if you like, of this whole referendum argument, is there


isn't a corner for passionate federalists. It's a question of...


UR a bit negative or very negative, nobody is really on the... Stars on


the flag. They use to become its a very good point you raise, there


used to be the stuff I remember writing about split over Europe in


the Tory party and across the parties in the 1990s. There were


outright federalists supporters, Peter Mandelson, everyone remembers.


Nick Clegg. They had a strong, pro-European stance, which was about


the institution. The EU is a damaged institution and there are worries


about its handling of things like the Eurozone crisis and migration,


these things worry people. On the other hand, there is something you


said about people not wanting to be cut off from it. They think, I go


there on holiday, I might want to work there. There is a sense that it


needs to be addressed by Toby's side of the argument. They worry


something bad will happen that they can't put their finger on now, that


they would be able to do something if we leave. No doubt there will be


some scaremongering saying we won't be able to travel as freely in


Europe. I don't think anybody who lives in Spain or France will have


to come home the day after Brexit. You are right there aren't any


full-blooded federalists in this debate. Downing Street have blocked


themselves into a corner, Cameron and Osborne for years, and a lot of


other inners, have been presenting themselves as fundamentally


Eurosceptic, rather than Europhiles. That is why they made this big song


and dance about securing special status as a result of this deal for


the UK and the European Union. Some associate membership. Having not


secured that, they can't fall back on claiming to be full-blown


federalists because it would completely be at odds with how they


presented their attitudes before. They have to fall back on project


fear, they've nothing else. We've run out of time, but you are welcome


back next week. While the debate about Europe rages here, French


authorities have been going from tent to tent in the jungle in Calais


telling residents it is time to leave.


Yesterday a court upheld a government plan to clear


the sprawling camp - which is home to thousands


Most of them want to come to Britain.


But the French authorities say they must relocate to official


migrant centres or apply for asylum in France.


It comes at the end of a week in which EU nations traded


recriminations over refugee policy and the bloc's migration


commissioner warned that the system was in danger of breaking down


Our reporter Gabriel Gatehouse has spent the week in Calais


and was there as the authorities went in this morning.


They're going in not with bulldozers but with offers of resettlement.


The authorities now have the legal right to clear the Jungle,


but for the moment, they are asking rather than telling people to leave.


It's your decision, not their decision.


The trouble is, they don't seem to be very persuasive.


So, the man who lives in this tent doesn't


want to be filmed, but what's going on is the French officials


are going around with a map of France saying,


you can live in any one of these places, you can go to a refugee


or migrant reception centre, but he's saying, I don't


These are tough living conditions but,


given the option to move to other parts of France,


places where some people would happily go on holiday,


most of the residents of the Jungle say they choose this.


In new camp, there is no place for community or cook by yourself.


Here, I can find my freedom, I am treated like human beings.


Did they say that you could stay if you want


No, they said to us, maybe after two or three weeks,


Because I feel over there there are a lot of freedoms.


There are nice people over there.


Many of the migrants speak of heavy-handed police tactics.


Night-time raids with tear gas and rubber bullets.


As news of the court ruling came through yesterday


evening, the mood in the camp was tense.


But the prefect of the region told us no one would be moved by force.


We will persuade them to move of their own accord.


One of the options on offer is this gated camp


Access is controlled by a palm print.


Once inside, accommodation is in shipping


It may be warm, but it's pretty soulless, and it's not popular.


In any case, there are only 300 spaces


left in the container park, and the southern part of the Jungle


The truth is, the local authorities simply


don't have the capacity to rehouse them all.


Well, this strange state of limbo that the Jungle now finds


itself in is symptomatic of a much wider problem.


There are tens of thousands of people heading towards


Nobody can stop them, but nobody can agree


The Jungle is also home to a small army of mostly


Many have spent months building up a community which they now fear


There is little affection between them and the police


The weeks ahead will doubtless bring more tensions as the authorities


dismantle vacant tents and try to move the migrants on.


Across Europe, the failure to forge a common strategy to tackle this


crisis is straining the very bonds that hold the EU together.


Leaks from a report into the death of the young Tory activist


Elliot Johnson amid allegations of bullying


by the Conservative Mark Clarke suggest it will say "potential


criminal matters" were committed on the campaign road trip ahead


The British Transport Police report, seen by the Daily Mail,


is also believed to contain claims that Elliott had battled


with depression for years, and had tried to commit


Elliot was found dead on a railway line last September


with a note accusing Mr Clarke of bullying him.


For the past four months, Newsnight has been investigating


allegations of bullying within the youth wing


Today, James Clayton spoke to Ray Johnson,


Elliott's dad, and asked him if the claims were true.


Elliott looked like everything was normal, there was no problem. We


first found out about it when we got a call from school to say Elliott


had told somebody in the school he had taken something. And he'd been


taken to hospital. That was the first we were aware Elliott had a


problem with mental health. Had he tried to take his life after that


when he was at school? The next incident was some months later.


Elliott had gone to a friend's birthday party. He told us later


that somebody had put a coin in his drink and he almost choked on it. It


upset him. Friends were laughing at him. He stormed out of the party. He


told us that he tried to hang himself. We've been concerned since


the first incidents. We went to the GP with Elliott, the GP referred him


to a psychiatric centre. He'd had several visits to the psychiatrist


with us. The third attempt came out of the blue. Elliott said previously


he had tried to drown himself. Under closer discussion and talking with


Elliott, it seemed they were cries for help more than anything else. He


had a difficult time for a period of about a year. He was a vulnerable


lad, clearly, had a number of issues. He worked hard to resolve


those issues. Following that period over one year, he matured, he went


to university, had no further problems. He looked forward to


getting on with the next stage of his life. It's also been reported


that Elliott became depressed after coming out as gay in 2010. And that


his family had initially struggled to come to terms with his sexuality.


When did he tell you he was gay? He didn't actually tell us he was


actually gay until two and a half years ago. And how did you react to


that? By then we'd got used to the idea, we knew that Elliott was


probably tending towards being gay, so it wasn't a real surprise to us,


to be honest, at that stage. He was also fairly open about it with his


friends in London, so there was no reason for him to take his life


because of the fact that he was gay. His friends... He was open to them


about it. Everybody knew about it. It should be no reason, no bearing


on that. We've obviously talked a lot in the last few months. You've


never actually mentioned he had mental health problems, that he had


had mental problems, that he tried to take his own life before, why


didn't you bring that up? We didn't think at that stage it was the right


thing to say, we were trying... We knew at some stage it would come out


because it would become part of the medical evidence at the coroner 's


enquiry, inquest. Five months ago we were struggling with the loss of our


son. And we were worried, I suppose, that if we'd raised the point that


Elliott had mental health issues a number of years previously, that


would have made it more difficult for us to get justice for him. I


think people would have just thought this was just another vulnerable


young boy with mental health issues who decided to commit to aside. And


would not have looked any further to the fact of what drove our son to


his suicide. Once again, you don't think that is relevant to my Elliott


ended up taking his own life? No, it's not relevant, Elliott took his


life because he'd been bullied. And picked on generally. By certain


persons. And let down by other organisations around the


Conservative Party. He was treated badly, that's why he took his life.


He was treated appallingly by people and organisations and we want to


make sure Elliott receives justice for what happened to him. Ray


Johnson, Elliot Johnson's dad, speaking to James Clayton.


Rob Delaney and Ruby Wax, about the links between comedy


We should warn you this programme contains strong language.


They say that for every four people walking the streets of this country,


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

Will the politics of fear work on the Euro referendum? Evictions begin in the Calais camps, there's a new twist in the Tory bullying row, plus Artsnight.

Download Subtitles