:00:07. > :00:09.Grammar schools, faith schools -what's the Government really
:00:10. > :00:13.If what Mrs May is planning is an expansion of today's
:00:14. > :00:15.type of grammar school, then that will not
:00:16. > :00:21.In fact, it will be a social mobility disaster.
:00:22. > :00:23.We've got exclusive details of Theresa May's plan
:00:24. > :00:25.to open new grammars, encourage new religious schools,
:00:26. > :00:26.and to get universities and private schools involved
:00:27. > :00:35.Also tonight, more revelations about the Commons committee split
:00:36. > :00:37.over whether to block arms exports to Saudi Arabia.
:00:38. > :00:39.We'll be joined by a senior MP from the committee charged
:00:40. > :00:49.I mean, you can say, oh, isn't that a terrible thing.
:00:50. > :00:51.The man has very strong control over a country.
:00:52. > :00:53.It is a different system, and I don't happen
:00:54. > :00:57.But certainly, in that system, he has been a leader more
:00:58. > :00:58.than our president has been a leader.
:00:59. > :01:02.As Donald Trump sings Putin's praises, and the polls tighten,
:01:03. > :01:05.our commentators in the US pick out their standout campaign moments
:01:06. > :01:12.And I'll be asking this writer and director
:01:13. > :01:14.how he is remaking horror with his debut film,
:01:15. > :01:38.set in Tehran, with not a female cliche in sight.
:01:39. > :01:41.Earlier today Newsnight exclusively revealed that a new green paper,
:01:42. > :01:51.is set to propose the opening of new grammar schools.
:01:52. > :01:56.will also propose allowing further selection by faith,
:01:57. > :01:58.and place requirements on universities and private schools
:01:59. > :02:02.Our policy editor, Chris Cook, has had first sight of the paper,
:02:03. > :02:06.would make selection a key factor in English education,
:02:07. > :02:08.and a defining feature of Theresa May's leadership.
:02:09. > :02:21.This is a pretty big deal. It is a very big deal, and a way to think of
:02:22. > :02:30.it is, marking a moment when the Government change. It has been the
:02:31. > :02:34.idea since 2007 that grammar schools don't work, and they kept saying
:02:35. > :02:37.they were moving on from that. It is also intrusive into the private life
:02:38. > :02:43.or private schools, which is a big change. It also intrudes into
:02:44. > :02:46.universities, a game, a big change. Theresa May and universities don't
:02:47. > :02:50.get on all that well. And finally, it shows a lack of nervousness about
:02:51. > :02:51.faith schools, which Michael Gove was always prone to. Here is my
:02:52. > :02:59.report. This week, the Government confirmed
:03:00. > :03:03.its intentions over new grammar schools in England. Newsnight can
:03:04. > :03:08.reveal it is part of a four pronged plan to improve social mobility, a
:03:09. > :03:12.plan that is certain to attract controversy, not least because of
:03:13. > :03:15.the research that has gone on into grammar schools. The evidence is
:03:16. > :03:20.conclusive, that they do not improve social mobility. If you're just
:03:21. > :03:25.looking at kids who are high attaining at primary school, about
:03:26. > :03:31.40% of poor kids actually get into grammar schools, compared to about
:03:32. > :03:34.two thirds of other kids. Poor kids actually stand much less chance of
:03:35. > :03:40.getting into grammar school, even when they are performing well at
:03:41. > :03:44.primary. The test for the Prime Minister, she is thinking about the
:03:45. > :03:48.next generation of grammar schools, is, how can you avoid that form of
:03:49. > :03:54.social selection, and in particular, returned to the bad old days when
:03:55. > :03:58.there was great education for a few - excellent - and then second-rate
:03:59. > :04:05.education for the many in secondary moderns. Newsnight has learned that
:04:06. > :04:10.the Government's preferred way of opening new grammar schools is to
:04:11. > :04:15.mandate them to take a proportion of their intake from advantageous --
:04:16. > :04:19.disadvantaged as goals. They also want private schools and
:04:20. > :04:24.universities to stop sponsoring academies. Finally, they want to
:04:25. > :04:32.encourage new faith schools by encouraging religions to operate
:04:33. > :04:36.schools where they select on the basis of religion. The remaining
:04:37. > :04:42.grammar schools still have fans, particularly in Kent. Parents in
:04:43. > :04:48.Kent as a whole C gamma scrolls and faith -based schools as engines of
:04:49. > :04:56.opportunity and aspiration. So how good are Kent's schools? Let's show
:04:57. > :05:02.a grasp of performance in schools are crossing. This shows attainments
:05:03. > :05:06.in maths GCSE are crossing, starting with the poorest neighbourhoods on
:05:07. > :05:16.the left, through to the richest neighbourhoods on far right. The
:05:17. > :05:21.slide -- the line slopes upwards. How does Kent do? We can draw the
:05:22. > :05:26.line in for Kent and Medway. Watch can see is, that line, first of all,
:05:27. > :05:30.is below the line for the rest of England, so the school system is a
:05:31. > :05:35.bit lower performing. You can also see that it is much more steep, so
:05:36. > :05:40.poor children are further behind in Kent than they are in the rest of
:05:41. > :05:43.England. The grammar advocates are right, though, that good
:05:44. > :05:47.comprehensives tend to be nearer expensive places to live. If you
:05:48. > :05:51.look at the earnings of people who grew up in grammar school areas
:05:52. > :05:55.compared to similar comprehensive areas, you see that if you are a top
:05:56. > :06:00.earner from a grammar school error, great, you will be earning 10% more
:06:01. > :06:03.than a top earner from a comprehensive area, but from people
:06:04. > :06:06.at the bottom of the income distribution, if you are a low
:06:07. > :06:13.learner from a grammar school area, you are earning 35% less. It is
:06:14. > :06:22.making the rich richer and the poor poorer. Can we do better? This is
:06:23. > :06:26.footage from the popular charter school system in America. Each has a
:06:27. > :06:38.number in what we would call a tombola. 20.
:06:39. > :06:41.APPLAUSE Lottery is not everyone's favourite
:06:42. > :06:44.way of doing things. They would prefer to have their child go to
:06:45. > :06:53.their first choice school, but when schools are Rover scribed -- are
:06:54. > :07:01.oversubscribed, you can't do that. It is a way of allocating scarce
:07:02. > :07:09.Resorts is. Fixing admissions so that a school's intake represents
:07:10. > :07:16.the whole area is one solution. -- scarce resources. When you have
:07:17. > :07:20.poorer kids who are 35% less likely to be high income earners as adults
:07:21. > :07:25.than less bright kids who come from wealthy backgrounds, that is a
:07:26. > :07:30.failure in the state education system. It is a failure probably in
:07:31. > :07:34.our society. Mrs Wright is -- Mrs May is right about the diagnosis.
:07:35. > :07:38.The danger is that she is wrong about the prescription. The next few
:07:39. > :07:41.weeks will be dominated by arguments about whether new grammar is likely
:07:42. > :07:45.the old ones, about the virtue of faith schools, and about whether the
:07:46. > :07:49.Government has the votes it needs to get its plans through Parliament. We
:07:50. > :07:51.asked the Government for an interview, but they declined.
:07:52. > :07:53.We're now joined by Neil Carmichael, Conservative Chair
:07:54. > :08:02.This is big, isn't it? It is, it is a big change from what we expected a
:08:03. > :08:06.few weeks ago. Last year and you said you supported the extension of
:08:07. > :08:10.existing grammar schools but were against new ones, if that still your
:08:11. > :08:14.position? Existing grammar schools can and should be extended if that's
:08:15. > :08:18.what they want to do, and we have seen it happen already in Sevenoaks.
:08:19. > :08:24.The question is about scale and speed, and it's also about the
:08:25. > :08:30.fundamental issue of, is this going to help social mobility? Will it
:08:31. > :08:33.actually deliver for 16, 17, 18-year-old children the right
:08:34. > :08:38.opportunities? I'm not convinced it will. Let's go one now from talking
:08:39. > :08:42.straightforwardly about grammar schools to talking about a really
:08:43. > :08:48.massive change, and that is the movement of 50% intake to faith
:08:49. > :08:53.schools to 100% thought that signals a complete change of direction for a
:08:54. > :08:56.Conservative Government. It does. We were talking about that in the
:08:57. > :09:01.education select committee earlier this week. Partly because we are
:09:02. > :09:04.looking at what constitutes a good multi-academy trust, and this is
:09:05. > :09:14.going to be very much part of the discussion. Your discussion centred
:09:15. > :09:18.on the good mix rather than 100%? We have to focus on the quality of
:09:19. > :09:22.teaching that happens in the classroom and the ability of
:09:23. > :09:25.teachers to reach into those children who really need to be
:09:26. > :09:29.helped in terms of social mobility, and I think that if we are always
:09:30. > :09:32.talking about structure and not talking about what is happening in
:09:33. > :09:40.the classroom, we sometimes miss the point. Argue uncomfortable with this
:09:41. > :09:49.degree of selection? Selection is OK providing it is within a context of
:09:50. > :09:55.a fair range of choice and is not a blunt at 11 plus system. I am
:09:56. > :10:02.opposed to that. -- a blunt in 11 plus. And that children will be
:10:03. > :10:06.fluid enough to move from one system to the other. It sounds like this is
:10:07. > :10:09.not your kind of conservatism, what is being offered in the Green paper
:10:10. > :10:15.that is coming out tomorrow, that you would like a much more mixed
:10:16. > :10:18.approach. What matters is social mobility, and what also matters is
:10:19. > :10:21.that we make the best use of the talent available in our country.
:10:22. > :10:27.This will become more and more important as we move closer to
:10:28. > :10:31.leaving the EU. It seems that this is very much Theresa May's view of
:10:32. > :10:37.how she would like Conservative education to be. What do you believe
:10:38. > :10:41.his/her motivation for this? I think she is right to be worried about
:10:42. > :10:46.social mobility. I think she is absolutely right to want to give
:10:47. > :10:52.every child an opportunity to get up the ladder, so to speak. I think
:10:53. > :10:55.that the key is to make sure we have good schools all over the country so
:10:56. > :11:01.that children can get to a good school, wherever they are. If the
:11:02. > :11:07.final bill to be put before parliament looks a lot like this,
:11:08. > :11:12.would you vote for it? I would be looking for certain things. One is a
:11:13. > :11:15.holistic approach. I am interested in bringing in the Independent
:11:16. > :11:20.schools. I think it is good for universities to have a role in this,
:11:21. > :11:25.because education is a linear thing, not just blocks of this and blocks
:11:26. > :11:30.of that. If it looked like this for your final vote, would you vote for
:11:31. > :11:34.it? I want to emphasise that this is a consultation process. It will be a
:11:35. > :11:39.Green paper. Theresa May says she looks at the evidence and then makes
:11:40. > :11:46.a decision, and so will I. It sounds like you are undecided. This may not
:11:47. > :11:50.pass without a majority. There is a political challenge there. It was
:11:51. > :11:54.not in the manifesto, but it is something which the Prime Minister
:11:55. > :11:58.is entitled to do as our new leader. I am as ambitious as she is in
:11:59. > :12:03.making sure we have an education system fit for what we see as our
:12:04. > :12:05.future - a modern Britain in a modern world. Thank you for joining
:12:06. > :12:07.us. This week, Newsnight has exposed
:12:08. > :12:08.extraordinary disputes within an influential
:12:09. > :12:10.Parliamentary Committee over British arms
:12:11. > :12:11.sales to Saudi Arabia where many civilians
:12:12. > :12:15.have been bombed. Today, Crispin Blunt,
:12:16. > :12:18.one of the key MPs on the committee, who appears to want to water down
:12:19. > :12:21.key passages in the report, complained in Parliament
:12:22. > :12:23.about the documents being leaked even calling for private
:12:24. > :12:31.investigators to be called in. The draft report, revealed
:12:32. > :12:33.by Newsnight on Tuesday, that weapons supplied by a British
:12:34. > :12:38.company had been used to violate international humanitarian and human
:12:39. > :12:42.rights laws in Yemen. Yesterday, we revealed that some
:12:43. > :12:44.members of the committee attempting to water down
:12:45. > :12:49.the language of the report. For example, in this
:12:50. > :12:52.passage of the report, Crispin Blunt and John Spellar
:12:53. > :12:54.wanted to downgrade the phrase "very serious evidence"
:12:55. > :12:57.of human rights violations and to remove altogether a reference
:12:58. > :13:03.to cluster munitions Today, we spoke to one
:13:04. > :13:09.member of the committee who believes that
:13:10. > :13:11.Britain may well have There is a very serious risk that
:13:12. > :13:17.Britain is breaking its own laws, but the international treaties
:13:18. > :13:22.which we are party to. about potential breaches
:13:23. > :13:25.of humanitarian law where we may not be able
:13:26. > :13:29.to sure that the arms
:13:30. > :13:31.we are exporting are not going to be
:13:32. > :13:33.used against civilians Crispin Blunt told
:13:34. > :13:37.Parliament he was outraged the committee was unable
:13:38. > :13:39.to deliberate on its report without it being
:13:40. > :13:51.leaked to Newsnight. Newsnight reported
:13:52. > :14:02.extracts of the amendments tabled by the right
:14:03. > :14:09.honourable member and myself which can only have come
:14:10. > :14:11.from the consolidated which was circulated to members
:14:12. > :14:14.of the committee on Tuesday. of such deliberate
:14:15. > :14:17.and repeated leaking of information Would you confirm that it
:14:18. > :14:26.would not be open to the Privileges Committee
:14:27. > :14:29.if it is referred to them to call in the police,
:14:30. > :14:32.because it is not a criminal matter, on the services of private
:14:33. > :14:35.investigators who have the capacity to interrogate
:14:36. > :14:37.the electronic records, including deleted e-mails of potential sources
:14:38. > :14:39.of this confidential and private consideration of select committees
:14:40. > :14:42.in this instance of the greatest seriousness involving
:14:43. > :14:46.life and death issues seriousness involving life and death
:14:47. > :14:49.issues and the employment of tens Our political editor,
:14:50. > :14:51.Nick Watt, is here. So, you have news
:14:52. > :14:59.from that committee? We understand there was a bloody
:15:00. > :15:03.meeting of arms export control committee last night, they were
:15:04. > :15:05.bitterly divided over whether to say that British arms were used
:15:06. > :15:14.unlawfully by the Saudis in that conflict in Yemen. There is absolute
:15:15. > :15:18.fury. Every member of the four select committees that act as the
:15:19. > :15:21.feeders to this export control committee have received e-mails
:15:22. > :15:26.asking whether they were the source of the leak and I understand there
:15:27. > :15:30.is a lot of chat about MPs saying, our e-mails and phone records going
:15:31. > :15:35.to be trawled through? I managed to bump into the Middle East minister,
:15:36. > :15:37.as he was heading back after a difficult week in Parliament,
:15:38. > :15:40.interestingly he told me that the Saudi Foreign Minister told a
:15:41. > :15:45.meeting of MPs yesterday at Westminster, 60 MPs, that yes, Saudi
:15:46. > :15:54.Arabia has bombed schools in Yemen but crucially said they were being
:15:55. > :15:58.used as munition dumps. But it was said that the Saudis have got to get
:15:59. > :16:01.much better at explaining the situation is and crucially saying
:16:02. > :16:04.that if there are allegations that international humanitarian law has
:16:05. > :16:09.been broken, it is for the Saudis, in the first instance, to
:16:10. > :16:12.investigate that, if Britain is unhappy, it will sanction an
:16:13. > :16:15.independent international examination, and it was an error of
:16:16. > :16:18.the government to say that it was Britain that does the first
:16:19. > :16:25.investigation, in fact it is the Saudis.
:16:26. > :16:27.Crispin Blunt is chair of the Foreign Affairs Select committee.
:16:28. > :16:30.He is also a key member of the committee on arms export controls.
:16:31. > :16:37.Good evening. You were very unhappy that we are talking about this, why?
:16:38. > :16:44.The select committees, this is a rather peculiar select committee, it
:16:45. > :16:46.is composed of four working together, but any select committee
:16:47. > :16:51.going through the process of consideration for a report will
:16:52. > :16:56.usually start off with a draft from one person uses the chair of the
:16:57. > :17:01.committee, presenting a draft to his colleagues for consideration. --
:17:02. > :17:04.from one person, usually the chair of the committee. Given the
:17:05. > :17:10.circumstances of this committee, 44 members potentially, what you
:17:11. > :17:16.presented last night and the night before was the opinion of one member
:17:17. > :17:19.of that committee. Which had yet to have any discussion or consideration
:17:20. > :17:22.by the rest of the committee, and then in those circumstances you
:17:23. > :17:27.purported to put forward that this is the likely conclusion of the
:17:28. > :17:30.committee, before any of the other 43 members have the opportunity to
:17:31. > :17:35.make a contribution to the discussion about it. The way that
:17:36. > :17:40.select committees work, there is often a discussion, sometimes around
:17:41. > :17:43.drafted amendments drafted in, around how to get to a place where
:17:44. > :17:49.generally select committees will agree conclusions. We made it clear
:17:50. > :17:53.that it was a draft, we made it very clear. He certainly did not
:17:54. > :18:00.contextualise it. I thought that we did say it was a draft. You said it
:18:01. > :18:04.was a draft but but... But what did you do... What you did not explain
:18:05. > :18:08.is that it is a draft from one person. Let me put it to you, you
:18:09. > :18:13.would surely be the first to agree that there is a public interest in
:18:14. > :18:20.all of this, if it is proved that Saudi Arabia has been... I would
:18:21. > :18:23.hope... British weapons... ... Public interest... I would hope
:18:24. > :18:26.there is a public interest in everything that select committees
:18:27. > :18:30.are doing otherwise you would wonder why they are conducting enquiries,
:18:31. > :18:34.the process by which select committees work to depend upon
:18:35. > :18:40.within the committee people being able to have a discussion around the
:18:41. > :18:43.issues concerned, and what we would normally... What would normally
:18:44. > :18:46.happen, the practice my committee, would generally be that I would put
:18:47. > :18:52.a draft report to the committee, I would have taken the trouble to have
:18:53. > :18:56.a decent understanding of where the different members of my committee
:18:57. > :18:59.stood on the issue and I would try to put forward a text which I
:19:00. > :19:03.thought the committee was going to agree to, or one which was going to
:19:04. > :19:08.command majority support. Then they have the opportunity, in informal
:19:09. > :19:12.session, to have an informal discussion about the direction of
:19:13. > :19:15.the report, informal discussion about the particular amendments to
:19:16. > :19:20.it, you go through peoples considered amendments in detail. And
:19:21. > :19:24.then, if there still remain disputes, formal proceedings of the
:19:25. > :19:30.committee, recorded for everyone to see, if there are recorded votes,
:19:31. > :19:34.where there are disagreements of opinion, it is all completely
:19:35. > :19:38.transparent. Lets, let's am a let's look at... Let's look at this, we
:19:39. > :19:40.will go to a graphic, you may probably have seen this, this is the
:19:41. > :19:54.initial report: you change that to remove
:19:55. > :20:01.allegations... And to include the targeting of civilian areas...
:20:02. > :20:04.Serious discrepancies. You have said something that is completely
:20:05. > :20:07.incorrect, you have said that I have changed that, I will not comment on
:20:08. > :20:10.the proceedings of the committee because there is no way whether you
:20:11. > :20:18.can know whether that was changed or not. INAUDIBLE QUESTION
:20:19. > :20:23.I'm not going to comment on the internal proceedings... This report
:20:24. > :20:27.is still in the process of consideration. It is now in the
:20:28. > :20:31.public domain. The draft is in the public domain. You have put the
:20:32. > :20:35.draft in the public domain, I am not going to be further party to that.
:20:36. > :20:43.The agreed line from the committee is that for the purposes of you and
:20:44. > :20:45.everyone else and the press, is the proper one, this is still being
:20:46. > :20:54.considered, and there will be no further comment until this report.
:20:55. > :20:58.Is it safe to say that the draft... Let me finish the question, is it
:20:59. > :21:02.safe to say that the draft of the report, which we received, which
:21:03. > :21:08.will broadcast on Tuesday night, which was pretty robust about
:21:09. > :21:21.possible involvement of British made weapons in Saudi civilian targets,
:21:22. > :21:26.do you demur from that? I do not, from the fact that you got hold of a
:21:27. > :21:29.draft of... The issue here is one of process, what is the ability of
:21:30. > :21:32.select committees to properly hold the government to account, and to be
:21:33. > :21:38.able to have discussions between themselves. This is not just about
:21:39. > :21:44.this issue, it is about every piece of work. 67 amendments... Is that
:21:45. > :21:50.not... What that means... What that means... Kirsty, I am not... Kirsty,
:21:51. > :21:55.I'm not discussing... I am not discussing, I'm not entitled to
:21:56. > :21:59.discuss the workings of this enquiry, on this committee, it is
:22:00. > :22:04.still being considered in private. Did you agree with the original
:22:05. > :22:08.draft? Did you agree with the original draft? I'm not going to
:22:09. > :22:12.answer that question, the point is, you, I do not think you improperly
:22:13. > :22:18.obtained the material you got, but it was certainly improperly given to
:22:19. > :22:21.you, the reason it is improper, and the reason... It is now in the
:22:22. > :22:25.public... Surely the electorate has the right to know that there is a
:22:26. > :22:29.serious disagreement in a key committee about whether British arms
:22:30. > :22:33.are being used to target civilians in Saudi Arabia. We already know
:22:34. > :22:38.from Nick Watt, that the Saudi Foreign Minister himself has said,
:22:39. > :22:43.that schools had been hit. How select committees work is that the
:22:44. > :22:48.chair put forward his draft, there is then the opportunity for all
:22:49. > :22:52.members to put forward amendments, informally, have a discussion as a
:22:53. > :22:58.committee, then you get to what is largely and usually can be a
:22:59. > :23:03.completely agreed text, and then published unanimously, everyone
:23:04. > :23:08.looks... Wait, what the collective view of the committee is. We are in
:23:09. > :23:12.a situation now where the meeting last night. Kirsty, let me then it's
:23:13. > :23:15.plain what happens if there is a disagreement, if at the end of this
:23:16. > :23:19.there remains a formal disagreement between members of the committee
:23:20. > :23:26.about the conclusions of the report, then there is a formal recorded
:23:27. > :23:29.vote. Then people can see where people on the record... Let's be
:23:30. > :23:33.quite clear... On the record, on the record. Lets be fair about what
:23:34. > :23:37.happened last night, I have been told that you walked out because you
:23:38. > :23:40.did not think you would get the amendment through, if you walked
:23:41. > :23:45.out, the meeting would not be chorus, a vote would not be taken.
:23:46. > :23:51.That betrays a misunderstanding of how this particular... Did you walk
:23:52. > :23:55.out? There was not a vote? Whatever comes out of this particular
:23:56. > :24:00.oversight of arms export control committee... Did you walk out? Did
:24:01. > :24:03.you walk out of the committee? I'm not going to talk about a committee
:24:04. > :24:10.process that is still under consideration. The suggestion is
:24:11. > :24:13.that... The issue... The suggestion is that this report could not be
:24:14. > :24:17.voted on because you walked out last night because you are unhappy that
:24:18. > :24:22.your amendments did not get through, watering down this report, did not
:24:23. > :24:25.get through. The reason why this is so serious is because select
:24:26. > :24:29.committees are meant to work on a basis of trust, that the discussion
:24:30. > :24:33.you have is not, during the course of the discussion, then subject
:24:34. > :24:40.to... The contextualisation you put this in last night, meant that...
:24:41. > :24:50.About 26,000 people have received... Crispin Blunt, please eff off...
:24:51. > :24:55.Those kind of messages, they are a product of the contextualisation.
:24:56. > :24:59.That you provided. It is completely improper. The way that the
:25:00. > :25:05.information was given to you. Thank you very much, Crispin Blunt.
:25:06. > :25:07.From now until the US presidential elections in November,
:25:08. > :25:10.we'll be convening a pair of guests in America each week
:25:11. > :25:12.to pick and discuss standout moments of the campaign,
:25:13. > :25:15.as we try to divine the big issues on which the voters will finally
:25:16. > :25:17.decide whether Hilary Clinton or Donald Trump
:25:18. > :25:21.This week our guests are senior political correspondent
:25:22. > :25:24.and former director of strategy for David Cameron,
:25:25. > :25:30.now political commentator, Steve Hilton.
:25:31. > :25:53.Good evening to the both of you, yet again, it has been pretty
:25:54. > :25:56.extraordinary, this week, claim and counterclaim, great praise for
:25:57. > :26:03.Vladimir Putin, from Donald Trump. First of all, what caught your
:26:04. > :26:09.attention this week in the campaign? That commander-in-chief forum was
:26:10. > :26:12.something else! It was full of all kinds of moments that would make you
:26:13. > :26:16.question Donald Trump's usability for president. The moment I felt
:26:17. > :26:23.stood out was not one of the more grandstanding ones, it was very
:26:24. > :26:28.subtle, a female veteran who works with suicide prevention, she asked
:26:29. > :26:33.about the issue, a terrible issue here in the United States. She said
:26:34. > :26:36.something about how 20 veterans everyday commit suicide. Donald
:26:37. > :26:40.Trump corrected her! I think that says about who he is as a person and
:26:41. > :26:51.what he does and does not know about the militarist. -- the military. It
:26:52. > :26:57.is almost impossible to conceive that this is happening in our
:26:58. > :27:06.country. Actually, he was trying to be sympathetic, wasn't he. He
:27:07. > :27:10.betrays that he does not know what the issue is, really, he keeps on
:27:11. > :27:13.saying they need help, they need help, then he says something about
:27:14. > :27:20.how they might be killing themselves over the long wait times, for
:27:21. > :27:23.physical health issues, at the VA, and it is one thing to say that they
:27:24. > :27:28.need help. That is a little condescending. All Americans need
:27:29. > :27:33.help, all veterans need help. This suicide epidemic is an issue that
:27:34. > :27:40.has to do with creating social networks, creating a better safety
:27:41. > :27:44.net for these veterans. Steve, is the problem that this makes Donald
:27:45. > :27:48.Trump sound glib, just another thing... Another thing that he can
:27:49. > :27:53.toss out of the way. I think it is kind of marginal to the real appeal
:27:54. > :27:56.that he has, which is precisely that he does not speak in the same
:27:57. > :28:02.carefully crafted way that other politicians do. That is really the
:28:03. > :28:06.source of his appeal. That has become evident this week. The polls
:28:07. > :28:11.have tightened, this looks like a race that is essentially tied. He is
:28:12. > :28:15.talking in a different language, he's saying things like, we must
:28:16. > :28:18.keep this secret, how I am going to deal with the Middle East is
:28:19. > :28:25.something you only find out if you make me president! LAUGHTER
:28:26. > :28:32.There is an argument, which he has made directly, is that being
:28:33. > :28:36.unpredictable in relation to foreign and security and defence policy is a
:28:37. > :28:43.good idea, it is not a good idea to telegraph intention to your enemies
:28:44. > :28:46.if you want to beat them. There is a kind of substantive argument
:28:47. > :28:49.underlying that remark. I want to look at something that has dogged
:28:50. > :28:54.Hillary Clinton, not through this campaign only, but also when she was
:28:55. > :29:00.secretary of state, the issue of her health, she had an extended coughing
:29:01. > :29:12.fit. I want to show you a little bit of that now.
:29:13. > :29:29.Is there a serious issue about the way that people are reviewing both
:29:30. > :29:34.candidates, but particularly Hillary Clinton, in terms of stamina? I am
:29:35. > :29:37.sorry we had to watch that again. I think this is a sideshow issue, if
:29:38. > :29:43.it is an issue at all. Millions of people saw that will stop people did
:29:44. > :29:46.not see that a week ago she released a mental health plaque from that
:29:47. > :29:49.dealt with suicide of veterans really directly and I haven't heard
:29:50. > :29:55.anyone talk about that. There are issues we need to talk about, but
:29:56. > :29:59.her health is pretty marginal. I get postnasal drip all the time. Maybe
:30:00. > :30:07.that is what is going on with her. Donald Trump's doctor is also not
:30:08. > :30:11.very... Made me confident about his health, but I would prefer to get
:30:12. > :30:16.the issues. Steve Hilton, this is seized upon because of her past
:30:17. > :30:19.health problems - is she healthy enough to be commander-in-chief? Not
:30:20. > :30:24.only trumped by people in his campaign are feeding that out. I
:30:25. > :30:30.agree with what we just heard about this. -- not just Donald Trump. One
:30:31. > :30:34.of the things I admire about Hillary Clinton, not necessarily her
:30:35. > :30:40.positions and policy platforms, but you can't deny that she is an
:30:41. > :30:43.incredibly strong, tough resilient politician who has been there for
:30:44. > :30:47.decades and is still there fighting for what she believes in. The notion
:30:48. > :30:52.of a health problem, I agree, doesn't feel a serious part of the
:30:53. > :30:57.campaign. Interesting that if you look at one statistic, it has been
:30:58. > :31:06.227 days since Hillary Clinton held a press conference. What does that
:31:07. > :31:14.say about the way she wants to campaign? I wonder if she held that
:31:15. > :31:17.conference because she knocked it out of the park at the
:31:18. > :31:22.commander-in-chief debate. She had momentum underneath. I am one of the
:31:23. > :31:25.people who feels like our press corps doesn't necessarily do a great
:31:26. > :31:27.job covering the presidential campaign when they have press
:31:28. > :31:31.conferences. I think more conferences are better and she does
:31:32. > :31:36.more of them. Whatever prompted this, I hope she does more. We can
:31:37. > :31:40.do our part in the press to make this more about issues without her
:31:41. > :31:45.having to give a press conference. If you were advising Hillary
:31:46. > :31:49.Clinton, Steve, would you tell her to get in front of the press or stay
:31:50. > :31:52.away? It is not to do with that but whether she has a message that
:31:53. > :31:56.really mobilises people and persuade them that she would make a great
:31:57. > :31:59.president. I think the problem right now for her is that she doesn't
:32:00. > :32:04.really have that. Our only messages that she is not Donald Trump, and
:32:05. > :32:07.that is not getting anyone sufficiently excited or engaged in
:32:08. > :32:10.her campaign. Thank you both very much. Until next week, thank you.
:32:11. > :32:12.Do horror films have a problem with women?
:32:13. > :32:14.After all, they're hardly famous for feminist plots...
:32:15. > :32:15.Weak women, mad women, women who fall over
:32:16. > :32:18.Now a film is challenging these conventions.
:32:19. > :32:22.It's the debut by British-based Iranian director Babak Anvari.
:32:23. > :32:25.It was snapped up by Netflix when it premiered at Sundance this year
:32:26. > :32:30.and it's about to open in cinemas here.
:32:31. > :32:33.Under The Shadow is terrifying but starts as a social drama centred
:32:34. > :32:36.on a woman and her young daughter who are all but confined
:32:37. > :32:39.to their apartment in Tehran during the Iran-Iraq war.
:32:40. > :32:41.After a missile attack a demonic presence enters
:32:42. > :33:08.Well, in a moment, I'll be talking to the director of Under the Shadows
:33:09. > :33:11.and a feminist horror fan from the British Film Institute,
:33:12. > :33:14.but first, we asked the veteran film critic Kim Newman to pick his top
:33:15. > :33:41.The kitchen in the 1990s, popcorn on the stove, perhaps.
:33:42. > :33:43.Here we meet the most literally disposable woman in horror films.
:33:44. > :34:03.The Victim, the pretty girl terrorised and killed.
:34:04. > :34:22.The woman who knew that there was a conspiracy to get her.
:34:23. > :34:25.What have you done to it?! What have you done to its eyes?!
:34:26. > :34:33.Another image of woman in horror, the Protective Mother,
:34:34. > :34:48.fighting the monster for the life and soul of a child.
:34:49. > :35:04.Here in Hammer's Dracula, we have the powerful archetype
:35:05. > :35:31.of woman as vampire, as monster, as Femme Fatale.
:35:32. > :35:35.Rural dereliction, here we encounter the final horror heroine,
:35:36. > :36:07.the girl who outlasts all her friends and defeats the monster.
:36:08. > :36:11.We're joined by the director of Under the Shadows, Babak Anvari,
:36:12. > :36:19.and horror fan Anna Bogutskaya from the British Film Institute.
:36:20. > :36:25.She is really here because she loves horror. Making this film, you took
:36:26. > :36:32.as its basis in your childhood growing up under attack. Yes. I was
:36:33. > :36:36.born in Iran during the Iran- Iraq war, right in the middle, and by the
:36:37. > :36:39.time it ended, I was more or less the same age as the child in the
:36:40. > :36:44.film, so it was basically tapping into all those memories, what I
:36:45. > :36:51.remember from wartime. And being confined in a house, underground.
:36:52. > :36:56.Yes, going downstairs, all of that. What was the spur to make this
:36:57. > :37:00.horror, where the woman is the central protagonist and the saviour?
:37:01. > :37:07.The spark of the idea came from the conversations I had with my mum,
:37:08. > :37:13.because my dad is a doctor, a young doctor in the 80s, like the father
:37:14. > :37:17.and a film, and he had to serve on the front line. My brother and I
:37:18. > :37:25.have fears and night terrors, still do, and I was having a conversation,
:37:26. > :37:33.and my mum blamed that on herself. She had anxieties. When you look at
:37:34. > :37:37.those films there, you basically want to make a different kind of
:37:38. > :37:41.film. You'll a different kind in what sense? Putting women in the
:37:42. > :37:47.role of central protagonist who takes all the big decisions. The
:37:48. > :37:53.feminist film. I didn't set out are set an agenda to write or direct a
:37:54. > :37:59.feminist horror film, it just came naturally, because the main
:38:00. > :38:02.protagonist is female. Anna, looking at your interest in horror, do you
:38:03. > :38:13.see a difference between this and the majority? What I think is so
:38:14. > :38:22.special about Babak 's film is that the centre role character -- central
:38:23. > :38:26.character is deep, complex, and that is what makes it fascinating and
:38:27. > :38:32.makes you engage. It is a slow burn horror. By the time the scares come
:38:33. > :38:36.along, you are completely with them. She draws you in and you are on her
:38:37. > :38:40.side. I wonder if in the genre there is a contradiction, or is it just
:38:41. > :38:44.the way the genre has been prosecuted in the past that there is
:38:45. > :38:50.a contradiction between horror films and feminist films? There is trouble
:38:51. > :38:55.in the genre. There are always films that are very conflicted and don't
:38:56. > :38:59.have the most positive portrayal of women, but actually, horror
:39:00. > :39:04.audiences have notoriously been 50-50s but between men and women, so
:39:05. > :39:08.the audience for horror films has always been equally female. I know
:39:09. > :39:12.that Netflix snapped it up, and we are going to see it, the
:39:13. > :39:17.psychological horror is on so many levels. It is about a woman and her
:39:18. > :39:24.child, it is about existential danger, and it is about urban myths
:39:25. > :39:29.about demons that will come and get you, and your mother is not able to
:39:30. > :39:33.protect you. And herself doubt - can I protect this child? It is a
:39:34. > :39:37.universal thing for all mothers at home. If women are re-big audience
:39:38. > :39:41.for horror, what are they looking for? So many of the horror films of
:39:42. > :39:49.the past do portray women as victims. Women don't particularly
:39:50. > :39:54.want to see themselves as victims. In the video, it touched on it. The
:39:55. > :39:57.final girl standing calls for the audience to identify with her
:39:58. > :40:00.because the audience wants to survive. They won't identify with
:40:01. > :40:05.the killer of the bad guy, but rather with the survivor. This film
:40:06. > :40:13.does not take sides in the war, but I wonder if it will be able big hit
:40:14. > :40:21.-- since it will be a big hit, what the view of the authorities in Iran
:40:22. > :40:23.is. Women in Iran are notoriously much stronger than they are
:40:24. > :40:30.portrayed, by and large, by outsiders. It is a big question to
:40:31. > :40:35.ask the authorities, but it is not going to get a cinema release. I
:40:36. > :40:39.think they usually have an issue with films being made about their
:40:40. > :40:46.run outside Iran. It has a huge film industry. It's in the RC, it has
:40:47. > :40:51.subtitles, but presumably they will be under the table somewhere. --
:40:52. > :41:11.Farsi. We learned of the death of scar-
:41:12. > :41:18.reggae pioneer Prince Buster. -- ska. Here in one of the first number
:41:19. > :41:31.according is of him on film. This is Prince Buster performing. This song
:41:32. > :41:53.is Wash, Wash. # Don't You Hear Me
:41:54. > :42:09.# Wash, Wash # Yeah,
:42:10. > :42:10.The Weather Is Unsettled Over The Next Few