27/10/2016 Newsnight


Kirsty Wark discusses the disclosures about problems within the independent child sexual abuse inquiry. Plus the prospect of a post-Brexit customs union and Trump's ghost writer.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 27/10/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



It's seen two of its top figures quit in as many months.


Tonight, new disclosures about problems at the heart


of the independent child sexual abuse inquiry.


Also tonight, the first British TV interview with the man who created


the image of Donald Trump with the book The Art of the Deal


and who is now doing everything in his power to stop him getting


He was sociopathic in the classic sense.


Telling a lie did not bother him one bit.


Shame, sex, honour and blackmail, how modern technology is making


the lives of women in some conservative societies


The video I received shows me with my husband, naked, having sex.


He told me, "I was filming the whole time.


It's been a turbulent few months for the Independent Inquiry


It's seen the resignations of a third chairwoman


The circumstances surrounding the departure of both


figures remain hazy, to say the least.


But tonight Newsnight can reveal that the inquiry


faces its potentially most challenging criticism yet,


that it was aware of an allegation that a leading figure on the inquiry


had sexually assaulted a colleague, but was allowed to resign


Jake Morris has this exclusive report.


The independent enquiry into child sexual abuse was set up to


investigate claims that a raft of institutions from police to the BBC


had swept serious allegations under the carpet for decades. The


departure of the enquiry's third share, Dame Lowell Goddard, who


denies making racist remarks, has left politicians having to fend off


charges they too have swept away serious claims. There were stories


about the enquiry and individuals related to the enquiry but the Home


Secretary cannot intervene on the basis of suspicion all rumour or


hearsay. Now the enquiry faces a potentially more serious allegation.


Newsnight has heard of a claim a senior figure on the enquiry


sexually assaulted a colleague. It seems an investigation into that


senior figure's behaviour has been quietly shelved. He resigned but is


working at home on a hand over document to his successor and in


that time the enquiry will pay him around ?55,000. It goes to the heart


of what responsibility and organisation has to act on suspicion


of wrongdoing, even in cases where it appears the alleged victim did


not want to make an official complaint. The incident at the


centre of the story is alleged to have taken place in the enquiry's


headquarters. In early September, two colleagues, one male, one


female, entered Millbank Tower and took the lift to the enquiry offices


on the 23rd floor. Inside the lift, the man allegedly pushes the woman


against the side of the lift and gropes her between the legs. That


same day, the alleged victim gave an account of the incident. Newsnight


understands in late September, the enquiry chair Alexis Jay and her


panel became aware of it. They had serious concerns over the conduct of


this man, Ben Emmerson, deputy High Court judge, a barrister of the year


and most senior barrister on the entire enquiry. Now he had been


named in the account of the alleged sexual assault. At the time the


circumstances of the departure of Lowell Goddard put the enquiry under


scrutiny. The victim did not want to make a formal complaint. The trouble


spilled into the open with the Times reporting Ben Emmerson was


considering quitting as lead counsel. That evening he was


suspended. Alexis Jay said... Ben Emmerson said the first he knew


of his suspension was when he was contacted by the media. Just over 24


hours later more news from the enquiry. Ben Emmerson, the most


senior lawyer working for the independent enquiry into historical


child sexual abuse in England and Wales has resigned. It looked like


the enquiry had got its way and whatever problems there may had been


with Ben Emmerson, they would be no longer. Suggestions the tension of


the previous night had been forgotten. He said in his letter...


No reference was made to his suspension. 24 hours after


suspending Ben Emmerson, the professor gave a tribute, she


said... Furthermore she endorsed his


reasoning for his departure. Again, there was no reference to his


suspension or any concerns about his leadership and no suggestion that


any investigation continues. Why was Ben Emmerson suspended? He is being


paid ?1700 a day by the enquiry until the end of November. In terms


of what happened, the enquiry will not say. I cannot discuss anything


to do with his circumstances. The problem for the enquiry is that it


is all a bit too convenient. The handling of the departure of the


third chair appears similar. Lowell Goddard was we were led to believe


homesick but reports in the Times newspaper painted a picture of


dysfunction with her at the helm and even claims of racism. Again the


enquiry says the details are private. Newsnight spoke to someone


close to the enquiry who paints a picture of a broken institution. One


that is so dysfunctional that if people needed to raise concerns, is


the culture made it impossible for them to do so. It described the


departure of Ben Emmerson as a kind of cover up the enquiry should


uncover and until it can confront the reality of what has happened


inside it, it will struggle to investigate others. The allegation


of sexual assault is of course unproven. Newsnight has only named


Ben Emmerson because it would be impossible to tell the story


otherwise. His legal representative said his client denied any claim of


wrong doing. The child abuse enquiry said...


Newsnight has contacted the alleged victim of the sexual assault. Her


lawyers refused to comment. Nobody ever imagines the official enquiry


into child sexual abuse would have to deal with the disclosure of an


alleged assault involving its own workers and handling such sensitive


allegations, particularly when the alleged victim does not want matters


taken further, can leave any organisation struggling to balance


competing duties but some believe that by allowing Ben Emmerson to


step down without proper investigation, the enquiry has left


itself exposed to claims it behaves note if Ridley from those it seeks


to pass judgment on. Ben Emmerson's lawyers said he categorically denies


any sexual assault, any bullying or any misconduct at the enquiry and


any allegations are completely false. I spoke to a Labour MP who


has previously raised questions about the enquiry. It is the latest


and probably the most serious to date of a series of allegations that


have emerged in recent weeks. The allegations date back not just over


recent months but some considerable time and paint a picture of an


enquiry that was setup in order to shine a spotlight on institutions


that had become by denial, secrecy and cover-up. Taking on some of


those characteristics itself. I think the latest allegations raise


serious questions of confidence for survivors and if this enquiry is to


succeed, which it must, it must proceed on a different basis based


on transparency and openness and the ability of people who raised


concerns to be heard. To be fair to the enquiry, the alleged victim did


not want this investigated. Did the enquiry really do anything wrong? It


seems inconceivable given the scale of the dysfunction that has now been


revealed in enquiry over several months and the seriousness of these


allegations that there were not a number of people who were working on


all connected to the enquiry who were aware of the allegations. It


seems to me the Home Office has serious questions to answer as to


the level of oversight of this enquiry. It is on its fourth chair


in two years. They have lost five senior legal counsel during that


time and is well as being of profound importance of the country


there are huge questions of public money involved in these decisions.


You talked about the confidence of survivors and victims. Diouf think


the whole thing needs to start again? A new chair has been


appointed -- do you think? Going forward the enquiry needs


transparency, openness, a willingness to hear when problems


occur and treat people properly and support them to be able to blow the


whistle and make sure those concerns are acted on and what we have got is


a series of allegations about very serious goings on in this enquiry


that don't appear to have been acted upon by ministers over a long period


of time, these being the latest. Some of the individuals concerned in


these allegations are still being paid by the enquiry using public


money and that is why we need ministers to come clean about what


they knew and why no action has been taken and to constitute the enquiry


on a different basis. Thanks. Today saw two of the most solid


pieces of good economic news Growth figures today


were better than expected, 0.5% as opposed to expected 0.3%,


and the government announced that not only is Nissan


staying put in Sunderland, there will be two new models


on the production line, Both the government and Nissan


insist no sweetheart deals have been done but does today's announcement


indicate that the car industry is going to be judged a special


case in EU negotiations? And if so, what other sectors might


be in the same boat? Well, our policy editor,


Chris Cook, is here along You have received information about


the conversations between the government and this. We have gone


from the chief of Nissan raising questions about its future in the UK


to the vote of confidence today. As I understand it this and has heard


three messages in meetings with government ministers and officials


that have given it confidence it can compete with European rivals once


the UK leaves the EU. They have been told, look at the substance of what


the Prime Minister is saying about the EU and Brexit. Yes, she says she


is taking the UK out and taking back control of the immigration and the


ECJ will not have jurisdiction over the UK, but she is saying she wants


to trade freely within the single market which means the strongest


access with the single market outside membership. Secondly a


question mark has been placed over whether there is a hard Brexit there


would be tariffs on the Nissan car is going to Europe. Think of the


Audis, BMWs, coming from the consulate to hear, would they want


tariffs placed on them? And the icing on the cake, the government


has said to Nissan we are proud of our industrial strategy and at the


top of the list of priorities will be the car industry and new


technology, driverless and electric cars. Who is investing in those?


Nissan. And in the past with new technology, you have had tax


subsidies you have been able to do under state aid rules and possibly


it will not be trade distorting. They have been left with no specific


commitments. It is worth thinking about why is it the government


cannot just say if they put ?1000 of tariff on this and we would pay


?1000 a head, why not go for that? It is the words trade distorting. If


we negotiate a deal with the EU, good market terms, we will not want


to appear to subsidise the industry. Secondly there are rules through the


WTO about trade distorting subsidies. The system works in that


we should aim for fewer subsidies and fewer tariffs. None of this


makes sense if the government stays within one piece of the EU


infrastructure, the so-called customs union. Leaving the customs


union is a complicated thing which imposes costs on business. We're


having this conversation because leaving the customs union would be


expensive. Why would the government do it? We have made a to explain


exactly that. A major argument for Brexit


was that our businesses should manufacture more goods and sell them


to far-flung places. A major argument for Brexit


was that our businesses should So, why is it then that there


is still discussion of Britain continuing to follow a big chunk


of EU trade policy? There's some talk here in Whitehall


about whether Britain might join what's called a customs union


with the EU. And what it means is that Turkey can


sell goods into the EU and buy goods from the EU without them having


to go through bureaucratic and onerous customs checks,


or having to pay tariffs. To be part of a customs union


with the EU means having to adopt the EU's policies and tariffs


on trade from anywhere So joining the customs


union would really tie the hands of Liam Fox,


our International Trade Secretary, who wants to cut a range of exciting


new deals with new trading partners The advantages of staying


inside the customs union are clear when you come to a wine


warehouse like this one. The inventory here comes


from all over the world. Everything inside this


warehouse has already gone But how intensive that


process is depends on where If it comes from inside the EU


customs union, then it's If it's come from outside the EU


customs union, though, it's a much more onerous process


to sell into the EU, and that's something worth


considering when we're talking about whether the UK


should stay inside the EU So to import a case of wine into UK


from an EU countries such as France, there is a simple entry


into a computer system. This is just basically so HMRC can


make sure the tax is paid? Yes, there is a track on tax


and what has been received. However, if they are importing


from outside the EU, someone is bringing wine


in from Australia or Israel, there will be a VI1 form,


it is called, which is the analytical details of the wine


plus the certificate of origin. So this sort of proves


where the wine has come from. This is entered for every


single wine producer. And then we still need


an entry of this, as well, in order to get the stock


into the warehouse here. So there is much more paperwork


if you bring the wine in from outside the EU


than if it is coming Absolutely, yes,


there is a lot more. Some of that paperwork relates


to health and environmental Some, though, relates


to the so-called rules of origin, which, if Britain gets a free


trade deal with the EU, The EU has different tariffs


for different countries and the rules of origin ensure that


you are charged the tariff Just to give you an example,


suppose there is a Chinese toy that is shipped


to the United Kingdom and then What the European Union wants


to ensure is it charges the Chinese tariff on it and not the tariff that


applies to the UK, And if we leave the customs union,


our products would also have to comply with these rules of origin


when they are shipped It is one thing being outside


a customs union when you deal in bottles of wine,


but being outside would have been a big consideration for Nissan,


who make cars in Britain Each piece might need


to be origin certified. And Nissan might face tariffs


on goods sold back into the EU. Being inside the customs union


would also make it easier to maintain a soft border


with the Republic of Ireland. It's something the government


is committed to to help I think the experience of Norway


and Sweden would illustrate the UK could be outside of the customs


union, but without a hard border. I mean, the use of technology


there to mitigate the effects of a customs border by having


a light touch approach to spot checks on vehicles, having


numberplate recognition, forwarding documentation in advance,


means that you can have the freest possible flow of goods


despite having a customs Furthermore, being inside


the customs union would make it very difficult for us to cut trade deals


of our own. It makes us beholden to EU


decisions, so politically, it cuts straight across


Vote Leave's message. The outcome that trade experts most


commonly predict for Britain is this, that we won't join


a customs union with the EU after Brexit, but rather


that the government will seek to mitigate the problems


of being outside the EU's external borders through so-called mutual


recognition agreements. What that means is that for specific


sectors that do a lot of cross-border work,


they will seek to minimise the amount of bureaucracy


that they have to deal with. Well, just because you are outside


the customs union doesn't necessarily mean terrible


bureaucracy for everyone involved. The USA, Canada and Mexico


managed to maintain across a free trade area


as opposed to a customs union, so that would illustrate this kind


of cross-border relationship and integrated supply chains


is possible in a free trade agreement as opposed


to a customs union. That's consistent with


what Theresa May said here. The important point


about the customs union is how you deal with the customs union


is not a binary choice. There are different aspects


to the customs union. That is precisely why


it is important to look at the detail and get


the answer right. Officials are currently fretting


about how ports, notably Dover, can accommodate extra customs checks,


if we do leave the customs union. Civil servants have also told


Newsnight that a new customs computer system, replacing


the current 22-year-old one, They fear delays well


beyond the current 2018 due date. But these are the short-term costs


of an attempt to become a less European and a more


global trading nation. What's it like to live and breathe


the same air in the same room If there was one single thing that


brought Donald Trump to the attention of Americans


all around the US it was a buccaneering book called


The Art of The Deal, which became an instant


bestseller when it was It takes the reader through all


Trump's big real estate deals line by line,


but he did not write a word of it. That was the job of a 30-something


year old journalist Tony Schwartz, who stuck with Trump


every day for more than a year, but when Trump announced his


candidacy, Schwartz was horrified and decided to atone


for his part in Trump's rise. And he decided to try to stop him


getting to the White House. This is his first British


television interview. I started by asking him how,


after finishing a newspaper interview with Trump,


he ended up co-writing his book. We started doing the interview and


at some point he mentioned he was going to do a book, I asked him what


it was and he said it was his autobiography. I said that he is


only 38 years old, but he said they were paying him a lot of money to do


it. I said if I were going to do that I would write a book called The


Art Of The Deal because people are interested in deals and that part of


him. That's funny because that was 30 something years ago. It's the


best title at ever come up with. I've never matched it and it


happened happened spontaneously. So do you did a deal with him


and you started to write a book From the very first time I sat down


with Donald Trump I quickly understood that he had an incredibly


short attention span. He got irritated very


quickly by questions. Had limited interest in answering


them and an even more limited So when that proved


impossible, what happened? What happened was, I first thought


maybe I'm going to have to abandon this book and then I thought,


what if I came into his office every day and he was OK with it and picked


up an extension phone and just What he was doing was making


deals, which is what I So I thought, I can get some of this


stuff from listening and I can go and fill in the details from other


people who have been So did these other people


at the other end of the line know that you were on


the end of the line? Yeah, I mean, if he could have had


an audience of 65 countries and 50 million people


listening on the calls, But having one person


listening in was great. In a way, you were very much partly


responsible for the man that we see Yeah, I think I created a version


of Donald Trump that was far more But did you actually in the course


of that see him do bad things? He treated people very dismissively,


he was intimidating, he was a bully. It was very clear that he lacked


whatever it is that allows a person to be caring and compassionate,


or even reasonably kind. I watched him behave badly


and I also became aware, and this is the most important


thing about Donald Trump, He was sociopathic


in the classic sense. Telling a lie didn't


bother him one bit. His idea of what to say


was what he thought would work. If it happened to be true,


fine but if it wasn't Not only didn't ask me about myself,


he didn't know my name, When he called my home,


which he would do once or twice a night, my wife would often answer


and in a year and a half, he never got to know her name,


he never got to know, I guess he might have known that


I had kids but he didn't The normal social graces


you would expect from a human being who you are deeply involved


with were utterly absent. When did you realise


things were going awry? Was it when he said


he was going to stand? You know when I realised


things were going awry? When he came down the escalator


at Trump Tower to announce that he was going to run


for president, to everybody's The very first thing or second thing


he said was, "We need a president who wrote


The Art Of The Deal." And I thought, I don't


want to be president! But it really struck me that


if he was going to start out his presidential campaign saying


something that was not only completely false,


I wrote every word of that book. I believe he read it,


he certainly didn't have anything If he was going to lie about that,


my belief was, wow, he's going to lie about anything


because it is completely provable You're now advising


the Hillary Clinton campaign. Is this because you feel the need


to atone for The Art Of The Deal? Well I absolutely feel the need


to atone for it. If Donald Trump were to win


the election, I don't think he's going to,


but if he were to win the election, I would take it seriously enough


to move out of the United States. A lots of people say that


but I would do it. I'm not going to put myself


in harm's way, if this man has the tools of government to use


against his enemies. This is quite extreme,


you really feel you would have I've got my whole


family ready to do it. In all that time, was there anything


that ever happened to make you think, this guy isn't so bad,


he's quite a good guy? You know, I spent a love of my life


trying to understand the human potential, what is possible


for a human being. My predisposition is to believe that


all human beings are complex and there is no such thing


as pure goodness any more Having said that, I've been asked


this question multiple times and it made me uncomfortable,


the first several times because I couldn't come


up with something. Now what I realise is,


one quality that he has that has obviously been incredibly useful


is a relentlessness. Donald Trump will come


at you and at you and at you, It's why he can tell something,


say something that is patently and obviously untrue and get some


percentage of the people If you could imagine that quality


being used in the service of something virtuous,


I could quite imagine If we are just talking


about his character, no, And if you enjoyed that then a full


version of that interview can be Let's talk now to commentator


and Donald Trump supporter Charlotte Laws, who joins us


from Los Angeles. Good evening to you. Tony Schwartz


has probably spent more time close up and personal with Donald Trump


and many people have including yourself. And he paints a pretty


damning picture. Do you recognise elements of the picture?


I think Tony Schwartz is somebody who is a disgruntled ex-employee who


is looking for 15 minutes of fame and is a strong Hillary Clinton


supporter. I think he is right when he says Donald Trump as personal


servants, a positive quality. As for a lot of -- he has perseverance.


Many people who have known Donald Trump decades will say the opposite,


that he will be a wonderful president, he is reflective, he is


kind and caring and gives to charity and gives to people when no one


knows about it. Even people like Bill O'Reilly or Sean Kennedy with


no Donald Trump for decades and they will say he will be a great


president. I have met Mr Trump on three occasions and have had nice


conversations and have nothing but positive things to say about those


experiences. Tony Schwartz says he is a liar he keeps online and what


is truth or fiction is of no consequence if it makes an impact.


If that is halfway true, is that a pretty damning indication of what he


would read like as President? I think he a grand negotiator and it


is important for his presidency to renegotiate trade deals and bring


money and jobs back to America and part of negotiating is withholding


information, or exaggerating, you could argue. I think those


qualities... But lying? Every politician lies, it is part of the


way this system works. You could not attack someone so much for that.


Hillary Clinton is commander-in-chief liar if she gets


elected. It is a universal trait of politicians. Very quickly, would you


trust Donald Trump with nuclear codes, because Tony Schwartz says


that people should not trust him with nuclear codes. I would and he


is a pacifist, he is much less likely to get into more than Hillary


Clinton, he is not into nation-building, meddling into other


countries and blasting people, that is not the way he operates and


thinks. You can look at past interviews and talk to people who


have known him and that is what they will say.


On last night's programme we broadcast a film which forms part


of the BBC Arabic Service's project on the impact of modern


technology on one of our most basic emotions, shame,


which has been ruining lives for as long as humans can remember.


Traditionally it has been used as a form of social control.


But in the modern era, technology has offered new ways


for shame to be instilled in others - think revenge porn, for example.


A problem in our relatively permissive society, but with far


bigger human consequences in the more conservative societies


Last night's film about shame, sex, honour and blackmail in an online


world, explored the impact on men, tonight's shows how


women are particularly vulnerable to blackmail.


Joining me in the studio is Deeyah Khan, the Emmy and Peabody


award-winning filmmaker and human rights activist.


And from Kuwait is Dr Alanoud Al Sharekh, an expert in women's rights


Good evening. Did anything you saw their shock you? No. I think what


the internet has done for all of us in whatever field we are in is that


it accent U eights everything that happens off-line. So whether that is


a matter of -- accentuates. Whether that is creating revolutions,


creating change or reinforcing discrimination and patriarch Lee,


the internet is a part of that, so it is not shocking. -- the


patriarch. The idea that technology, in this case cameras and the


internet were men to liberate women and make their lives free has been


turned on its head by this kind of example. There is a duality to it


and so in a way, having the camera on them and being able to describe


their experience and their own voice has been a big change that


technology has allowed. Unfortunately it has exemplified


this type of cruel and extortionate behaviour that we see happening in


online blackmail. The idea that this man felt safe to do this with


impunity in itself is very upsetting and unnerving for women. Yes, of


course. It is also possible because of the nature of the conservative


societies in this part of the world, the idea that you not only represent


your own honour as an individual but the honour of your community and


family makes you more like lead to put up with this behaviour then


tried to raise attention around it. It is interesting that women have to


put up with this behaviour. This is not exceptional? It is not. Women


are constantly expected to be... To bear the burden of the honour not


just of themselves but the burden of the honour of their family and


community, as women who come from the backgrounds we come from we are


not the owners of our own bodies and behaviours, everything we do


reflects always on somebody else, and these men know that when they


are exploiting. And the internet can amplify that? Absolutely, the


internet can amplify the resistance against these types of norms, but it


can also exemplified the discrimination and oppression and


abuse that happens. You talk about traditional societies, but in this


country we know that young women from all backgrounds, are called on


the internet and the internet for evil is something we have not got to


grips with yet. When it comes to the abuse of women in the US and


England, you might not come from a Middle Eastern background and this


shaming is the norm in some ways. I think the internet as much as it is


a source of liberation for so many women and movements, it is an


accentuation of discrimination and oppression and abuses that happen


off-line but now have also extended into the platform and the world


online. We also know just now there is an app by IS for selling. This is


the essence of the challenge we all face, that the internet is where we


can pick a lot of these challenges that we as women who come from these


backgrounds, and we can use the internet to really on pick all of


this. But it has become the space where we almost become destroyed.


How do you suggest women countered this, that women are educated into


not feeling cowed by this, particularly in Middle Eastern


societies? I would save firstly there should be stronger legislation


to prevent this kind of abuse online. Specifically be trolling and


bullying of women. Online, when they are speaking and sharing, not only


themselves, they represent a nation at times, if they are Muslim they


represent their religion and there is an added layer of ambassadorship


that women us to recognise and have the option to choose to reject and


have their own voice as individuals online. But also because of the


sensitive nature of honour in this part of the world, I think we are


seeing more and more, special units that deal with online crimes and


specifically blackmail. Thanks, I am afraid I will have to stop you. A


final word on our exclusive story. While we were on air the inquiry


said this statement, it is not true and inquiry worker made a complaint


of assault to the panel or chair or official. It is worth pointing out


our report did not say that a complaint had been made but rather


that one had been disclosed. A final word on our exclusive story


tonight on the child abuse inquiry. That's all we have time for,


apart from a quick congrats to Newsnight's Katie Razzall


and Yasminara Khan for winning an Asian Media Award tonight


for their story about intimidation Subtle changes in the weather. Mist


and fog in the south. Colder


Download Subtitles