01/03/2017 Newsnight


Right to remain for EU Nationals in the UK? Will Brexit reignite troubles in Ireland? Armando Iannucci on satire in 2017. And blasphemy in Pakistan.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 01/03/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



It absolutely clear that people from other European countries who are


living here have their rights protected.


And today the House of Lords upheld that same idea.


It's not the vote the Government wanted.


It takes away negotiating flexibility,


We'll examine the case for and against making promises


Also tonight, how can we leave the EU customs union without having


Programmes like this took a long time to get over


being satirised by Armando Ianucci like this in 1994.


So how might he go about doing the same


Also tonight, how can we leave the EU customs union without having


a hard border between the Republic of Ireland


If you set up border checks, you are setting people up in static


positions which makes it incredibly easy to shoot at them and as soon as


they come out of those checks they will be easy to shoot out. -- shoot


at. The Lords have thrown the first


spanner into the Brexit works so carefully constructed


by the Prime Minister, voting to amend the Brexit bill


to tie the Government's hands by giving EU citizens here


a guarantee of a right to remain. Now the plain truth is,


there is little controversy over the substance: the Government wants


the EU residents here just as the Lords do and the Leave


campaigners in the referendum did. The issue is about whether you


negotiate their guarantee of residence in return


for assurances over the rights Or should we make the


guarantee unilaterally? It was hard fought


in the Lords today. If we are to be concerned about


anybody's rights after Brexit, to live anywhere on this continent of


Europe, it should be our concern for the rights of British people to live


freely and peacefully in those other parts of Europe. Somehow or the


other, today we seem to be thinking of nothing but the rights of


foreigners. My lords. All our debate has been based on the premise that


somehow we will get what we want in the end because there will be


reciprocity. But supposing there is sent. Will we really at that point


turnaround to EU nationals in this country and say on your way. Will we


say take your children out of the schools? Will we say to the elderly,


please go away from our care homes? My lords, this idea of it as a


negotiating point, which I agree it is being used as, is totally


unrealistic and totally unacceptable.


Well, the signs are the government will try to overturn


But for Europeans here, it's a bit fraught.


Most have been here over five years and are already entitled to get


permanent residency - but they have to fill out a huge


form, go through various hoops, some potentially impossible,


and even then there is a good chance of rejection.


So some kind of automatic recognition of a right to remain


is key, and especially so for those here for less than five years.


John Sweeney has been meeting some of those affected.


The question is that the motion be agreed to? As many of that opinion


will say content. To the country, not content. Clear the bar. Not the


dog and duck, but the House of Lords tonight fired the first shot against


the government's plans to deliver Brexit. Until the day before


yesterday, well, the end of 2015, members of European Union states had


a right to live in Britain. Enter the Home Office. The people who work


in this building behind me came up with this. It is a native 5-page


form you have to fill in and people who have done that say the whole


process is a nightmare -- and 85-page form. Brexit is beginning to


bite in parts of Britain you would least expect. Welcome to Surrey's


stockbroker belt. Cave, originally from France, has applied for for


permanent residency repeatedly. Yesterday she got her third


rejection letter -- Aurelia cave. I was told I could send a certified


copy of this passport knowing they had the original previously. This


application was rejected on the basis that they needed the original


of the passport. But they had a certified copy? Indeed. Are they


making life deliberately difficult for you? I feel like it really, yes.


I don't understand the rejection. My kids are British, my husband is


British. I never asked anything from them, I just want this card for


reassurance and I felt like I was dealt with really unfairly. Aurelia


is on the neighbourhood watch committee. Twenty20 coppers came


round to talk about a burglary, her youngest son thought the worst. He


said, you are not taking my mum, you're not taking my mum. When the


police arrived? Yes, because he thought they were coming to get me.


Sabine von Toerne is a midwife originally from Germany who has


lived in Britain for 13 years. Her eight-year-old boy was born here.


She has not been rejected, she cannot even apply. You were training


at the NHS and you now work for the NHS? Correct, yes. But that doesn't


count? Well, because I have only started work two years ago, in


February 2015, and before I was a student, did not have specific


insurance, I now haven't got the years together, sufficient years to


get by permanent residency document. Did you ever imagine when you first


Kenya all these years ago that it would end up like this? No, I would


never have imagined this. I basically thought after 1989 that we


were free to go wherever we liked. I would never have imagined that I


could end up being a second-class citizen and that my rights could be


questioned in any way. It makes me sad, disappointed, angry and a bit


helpless, although I am trying to do something about it. Are you


sleeping? Not always that well. It depends. If I had a very hard day at


work I might fall into my bed and sleep, but there are definitely


nights where I am kept awake because I am thinking about my future. NHS


nurse Joan Pons Laplana has lived and worked in Britain since 2000. Do


you consider yourself British or Spanish? My passport says I am


Spanish, my heart says I am British. For the last eight months I feel my


life has been put on hold. It is a situation where the government don't


want to guarantee a right to stay, I feel they took my voice away because


I was not able to vote at the referendum. They decided my future


without me. For that reason, I feel a bit angry towards the government.


John Sweeney there. Nicolas Hatton is the co-founder


of the pressure group The 3 Million which campaigns for the rights of EU


citizens who live in the UK. And Peter Bone is the Conservative


MP who co-founded the pro-Brexit Good evening to you both. Nicolas,


you have been here for a couple of decades. 21 years. Are you seriously


fearful that you will be deported? No, I'm not fearful. I am not in the


risk population I think, but some people are. I think that what we


have seen today is a message of hope for Parliament, because finally we


have got a majority in parliament, in the Lords to say we can't vote


you the rights to stay but we are worried because we never had this


before. We never had a message from the top saying yes, you could stay.


It could well be overturned and then we will be back to where we were and


we will be invoking Article 50 in a couple of weeks and we will not have


a guarantee. Exactly. For some people it is quite tragic. They feel


they are being rejected by the Home Office when they apply for their


card or permanent residents and now they feel what will happen to me if


there is no guarantee? Peter Bone, I just want to imagine after two years


of negotiations it fails and we crash out, this is a possibility the


Prime Minister has talked about and the Chancellor has talked about, and


no agreement is reached and one country says we will kick the


British back home now, what are we going to do? The truth of the matter


is, and we all know, and this is a little bit of a Sherard is that EU


citizens here, certainly before the 23rd of June will be allowed to stay


and you have already pointed out somewhat that if people have been


here for five years they have residency. I saw those hard cases


but you know, if they pop down to the local MP he would sort it out


for them. It is a 3 million. I suppose the question is, if we all


know, and when the Spanish sake, OK Brits, you go home, we will have an


argument about Gibraltar and send you home, we will not say a million


Polish people have to go back to Poland, why do not guarantee that if


you were here before June 23 or much the 15th or whatever, you are


allowed to stay? That is a perfectly arguable point. I remember having an


arc and with Will Straw who said we will send everybody he. -- I


remember having an argument. It is outrageous you said there is no


guarantee that people will be sent home. There is no suggestion, is


there? But why did the government... You know why. No, I don't. This bill


is about invoking Article 50 and the will of the British people to tell


Brussels we are leaving, nothing else. Give me the other reason. On


the general principle of the thing, there are a million British people


in the EU and we are looking after their interests. Lord Tebbit put it


rather bluntly. How are we looking after the interests of British


people in Spain? To make sure the argument goes we will agree this


very rapidly. If the Spanish used our people as a bargaining chip you


are saying that we will take Nicolas and others and threatened to send


them home that you have just told me we will not do that so we don't have


a bargaining chip so why did we just say it? You can make that argument.


Theresa May is a very sensible person. She likes to adopt all the


eyes and crossed the Tees. Nicolas, you heard Peter Bone say and he is


probably right that they will not send people home because we need


them to run the health service, does that give you any reassurance? I


think Peter might not understand the environment for, the hostile


environment at the Home Office for any migrants and foreigners,


including EU citizens now. We see this 85 page form. I would fill out


the form, no problem. But there is a 28% refusal rate on that form, a


rejection rate. We should all be able to stay. It doesn't matter


whether we have a certified copy of our passports. The truth of the


matter is if someone came to senior researcher in the form is dull that


wrongly, I helped them to get it correct. That is about filling out a


form -- if the form is filled out wrongly. There are people who were


turned down because they did not have a continuous health insurance


policy. They may not have been here, the they may have been away for two


years. All I am saying that the 3 million figure is wrong but


actually, the truth of the matter is, all three of us around this


table know that in some time in the next few months there will be an


agreement. It is not us who are not agreeing, it is people in the


European Union. It is the German Chancellor who does not want to


agree with it. If everyone agreed we could settle it tomorrow. Beat you


have already said we are going to keep them anyway, Peter, so I come


back to this troublesome point I do not understand how that if Spain


uses our citizens there is a pawn in their fight with us over Gibraltar


and send them back here, are we going to say to Poland you have to


take a million Polish people back? Of course not. Would then the art


would not be with Spain? It would be. A lot of immigration is a


national matter anyway. If we want to talk about Gibraltar, Spain


better keep its hands off Gibraltar. My view is Gibraltar should have the


protection of the united kingdom but that is another discussion. Do you


understand the anxiety and stress that people are feeling because they


do not have the certainty. I feel my future will stop in two years' time.


I am here to reassure me. My next-door neighbours are Polish. --


I am here to reassure you. The vast majority of people know they are


safe. It is only people who are talking up the problem who are


creating the anxiety thank you. It is election day in


Northern Ireland tomorrow. Such treats are meant to come along


only every five years, but the two main parties


in the governing coalition And so only ten months


after the last election, Sinn Fein pulled the plug


on the Executive after a row about the escalating costs


of a renewable heating scheme. But Brexit, and deeper differences


over the legacy of the Troubles also divided Sinn Fein


from the Democratic Unionists. The expectation now is that those


two old governing parties will be back as the potential


new governing parties post-election. Now in case you'd thought


you could peel your eyes away from politics in Northern Ireland


as having become prosaic, Our political editor


Nick Watt reports. Over the past quarter of a century


Northern Ireland peace process has ebbed and flowed. Now after a decade


of unbroken power-sharing, the political settlement is facing a


grave challenge. Northern Ireland has been transformed beyond


recognition since I first reported from here in the days when armed


squaddies still patrolled the streets. Now Belfast is a thriving


city with gleaming new buildings. But almost 20 years on from the Good


Friday agreement, ancient divisions are haunting the selection. Very old


memories of the border have been thrown up by the very new challenge


of Brexit. Northern Ireland's largest party the DUP supported


Brexit. But nationalists voted overwhelmingly in favour of remain


amid fears that Brexit could lead to an EU border cutting across the


island of Ireland. The former American senator who chaired the


Good Friday agreement has told Newsnight he hopes the UK Government


will ensure there no return to the hard border of the past. I can look


my first days there when it was very difficult to move back and forth


across the border. It was heavily militarised and there has been a


huge difference now with people moving freely back and forth,


reducing stereotypes, reducing the possibility of demonising those who


are other in any way. One of the architects of the peace process


believes the UK decision to sever most of its links with the EU


customs union means a hard border will be unavoidable. The possible


return of customs officials at new Borders boasts an seen in decades


could be used by dissident republicans to justify their


campaign of violence. Of course there is no doubt about it, I don't


think it will set of those people who, small as they are and almost


dangerous because anyone who plays the game of armed struggle or


violence is always a danger. They would see checks on the border and


customs offices on the border and the identification of the border as


in some way justifying the kind of things they always have in their


mind. Tony Blair's former chief of staff issued a more stark warning. I


think it would be dangerous if you have a hard border, if you put in


blocks along the border people will try to destroy those that will


create problems. If you set up border checks, even if they are ten


miles one side or other of the border you are setting people in


static positions which are easy to shoot out and as soon as they come


out the other easy to shoot at. The distance are tiny, they are not


compatible to the old IRA but it takes few people to start murdering


offices in those circumstances and once they start it's hard to know


how to react, you get into the cycle of radicalisation, repression, all


over again and that's not what we want. An adviser to the former First


Minister David Trimble believes today's so-called soft border may


eventually be preserved. It may be a soft border, two or three years from


now is when you would want an election when some of these issues


might have been amicably sorted out. This is a dreadful moment to have


one. Concerns over Brexit will complicate attempts to re-establish


the power-sharing executive. If the two largest parties in each


community, likely to be the DUP and Sinn Fein once again, failed to


reach agreement then the UK Government may be obliged to


reimpose direct rule. I think there is every danger we could go back to


direct rule and I hope that focuses minds in Northern Ireland, Dublin


and London. I think it's a mistake for the British government to stand


back quite so far on this issue. That was the problem in the 60s, the


British government tried to ignore it, the Home Office was responsible,


letters were returned, but this is something to do with us and we have


to play a role. The collapse of the power-sharing executive has


exasperated Jonathan Powell, a veteran of the Good Friday


agreement. I think it's interesting people as different as Martin


McGuinness and Ian Paisley were able to make this system worked. Two


sworn enemies who played crucial roles in bringing about the troubles


yet they were able to make the power-sharing executive work. The


real question is can a new generation, who are not themselves


involved in the troubles, even if their families had been, can they


make a new system work? Northern Ireland's divided communities are


heeding familiar songs which has something of a retro feel. Bertie


Ahern says people waiting for normal bread-and-butter politics should be


patient. I remember when I was a young politician may be in the late


70s, an old politician from one of the southern counties said to me


that he detected in the 1977 election that the Civil War politics


was coming to an end. So, that was the south, I don't expect the north


to move. Maybe not a slow but not as quickly either. After three decades


of violence the Good Friday agreement was designed to end the


conflict by giving all the main parties a seat in government, in a


system which defies the usual rules of democratic politics. The


agreement was structured in a way to meet the needs at that time. That


require power-sharing. It acquired institutions that are unique to the


circumstances. When and how those institutions should be altered or


modified or changed is up to the people and the political leaders of


Northern Ireland. They are the best judges of that. They will make that


determination because they are the ones affected by it. I did not


expect when I along with my colleagues drafted document that


became the Good Friday agreement, we did not expect that that would be


written in stone. Northern Ireland's parties have tried to form a more


democratic system to sit in cross community opposition. This is a


tricky sell at election time. I think the developments with parties


are quite interesting, the idea that they would have if not a formal vote


sharing agreement across the sectarian divide, is a progressive


development. Now they are, some people describe Northern Ireland as


almost like two separate electorates, nationalists and


unionists but if they cooperate in this way that changes that to some


degree. A conflict which once seemed intractable has been largely quiet


for the best part of two decades. Nobody is predicting a return to the


violence of the past but these elections show that the Northern


Ireland political settlement has entered a fragile face. -- says.


And Nick Watt is at Stormont for us tonight.


The election may not resolve very much, what happens next do you


think? If the polls are to be believed then the DUP and Sinn Fein


will emerge once again after these elections as the two largest


parties. What that means is the onus is on them to restore the


power-sharing executive. As things stand it looks pretty difficult to


see how they are going to hammer out a deal. What that could mean is that


the UK Government on the 45th anniversary of the first imposition


of direct rule from London over Northern Ireland at the height of


the troubles, that Westminster could once again take charge of all of


Northern Ireland. The signs are that James Brokenshire, the Northern


Ireland Secretary, is determined to do everything he can to ensure that


mammoth step does not have to be taken, so what that means is very


serious talks amongst the parties. But they cannot go on forever, the


legislation talks about how they can last for a reasonable period of


time, it was interesting that Bertie Ahern, the former Irish Prime


Minister, said in my interview that perhaps the rules could be tweaked


to allow those talks to last as long as six weeks. There is even talk of


possibly having a second election to concentrate minds. But I have to


say, in the rain here in Northern Ireland I do not truly detect much


appetite for yet another election. Thank you. You can see a combines a


guide to the parties and candidates in tomorrow's election on the BBC


News website. One thing about President Trump


that everyone will agree on is that he has smashed


the old rules of political communication, he's dispensed


with the conventions of political spin and obfuscation,


and re-set the relationship Now there is one man who did more


than anyone to expose the nonsenses of those old rules,


Armando Iannucci, the creator of The Thick Of It, bitingly


satirising political spin and the clenched-butt message


control of New Labour. And, back in the '90s


producing The Day Today, parodying programmes like this,


with fake earnestness, Susanna has broken


through to the front line, This is the very heart


of the conflict. The men here have been fighting


nonstop for three days. We drove in at night,


straight into the The air now is thick


with what they call We are under strict


instructions not to With no cover, we run across open


space to a nearby house. We found an injured


man, we did our best. There was a family


sheltering in the back We had no tounge in common


but through the universal language of mutual need,


I knew she was saying, come, set your equipment up in our refuge,


the world must see this mess. These brave people


are now sleeping but they know that tomorrow our aerials


and transmitters could make this Well, Armando Iannucci is with me -


the world has changed since The Day Today,


and The Thick Of It, and indeed since Veep -


the series he created in the US. For him, the world and comedy? As


you look at the world are you laughing at politics? No. I should


be but, I am an avid watcher of political shows. It is how you are


so good I admit mimicking. I got heavily involved in watching


American election coverage until the result and then I actually could not


watch television for about a week or indeed read a newspaper. You are on


Twitter a lot talking about Donald Trump, we had Tom Friedman at the


New York Times on the programme and said if you try to take the guy on


he will suck your brain out and I wonder... That is his genius I think


the great mistake is to portray him as an idiot. Because he's not. He


knows what he's doing and he's very clever, he's a very clever salesman


and that is what he has been doing for the last year and a half,


selling this model of the successful businessman believes everything he


says and is persuadable enough to get a sizeable amount of the


electorate to vote for him. How did we get here? Let me put a suggestion


to you, you spent the 2000's mockingly controlled and careful


politics of new Labour, the message clearly donated, the PC stuff. And


the public rebelled against it, they took your message and said... Are


you saying I am responsible for Donald Trump? No, but you have to be


careful what you wish for. Some of The Thick Of It arose from genuine


frustration and anger, in my case that we could go to war with Iraq


despite millions of protests on the street and every expert saying it


would be a disaster and it proved the case. I took that sense of


frustration, the sense that politicians were not connecting with


the people and produced something like The Thick Of It which was also


looking at the notion that politicians were concentrating more


on a smaller and smaller group of people, the middle England, the


squeezed middle. The tiny amount of people who can swing an election. In


the course of doing that taking for granted everyone else. And as the


years have gone by, that group of people we have taken for granted is


becoming 85% which is why you get the frustration. You told the


Financial Times in 2012, you said all of this, seething anger,


everything has become poorer lies to, people do not mind system is


being held up to ridicule because it articulates what they are feeling.


But you have just given an accountant of people who felt cut


off from politics, that is what the populists as people call them, that


is the appeal, that is what Donald Trump says, they forgot the rust


belt of America. But you do not like Trump and are not a fan, so the


people who were left out did not like the things you wanted, they


wanted other stuff. People were being left out on the right and left


which is why in the UK we have Momentum and Ukip, and the rise of


personalities. Instead of parties we have got Jeremy Corbyn's Labour and


Boris Johnson conservatism and Theresa May conservatism, we have


got factions, nothing which resembles the two or three party


system we had in the 50s and 60s through to the 70s. You mention


Jeremy Corbyn, one of the things you parodied was the severe control of


pagers and people having to give out the line. Nobody would say that


Jeremy Corbyn's Labour is controlled. Does it work or does it


not work? What happens is you get this frustration with the intense


media management, people are hungry for something that is entirely


different which is why we go to Boris Johnson because he mumbles and


has hilarious hair or Jeremy Corbyn because he wears a vest and has a


beard. That has an instant appeal and I can see why it has an instant


appeal. Then you get to the point of trying to work out how you can


actually control a party and get back into government and that is


when the chaos approached the politics does not work. You have


lampooned politicians, do you respect or pity them at all, do you


basically, because a lot of them are lovely people...


I find the most sympathetic characters in The Thick Of It the


politicians. It is the strange young people she surrounds herself with


who have a degree in PPE from Oxford and very little else who are trying


to run her department that I think is the real danger. You took some of


the humour to the states with Veep, about a vice president who wants to


be president. Is it exactly the same, you, a British guy, from


Scotland, you can take the same humour and it works there or did you


have to employ lots of writers. I might be deported if I do it now.


But it is still going, you are not involved any more? After four years


of jet lag and flying backwards and forwards, I think it is a British


thing, we only do three or four series of something but in America


you are expected to do 29 series of 13 episodes a year and then died.


What about news. The Day Today, have you seen any improvements in the way


news is covered? What is interesting is the whole business of fake news.


The fact that the Internet now allows anyone saying anything to


make it look as valid as the Telegraph or the Guardian or the BBC


website, because it is there in typeface. That is a real problem. I


think what the rise of Trump or his attack on the news may do is provoke


people like you into thinking afresh about how you make the news, how you


shoulder the news isn't fake. I felt it was interesting the advice he had


yesterday following journalists in the White House. -- you had


yesterday. People want to come to a place which has a heritage. It is


important for the established news programmes to show the decisions you


have to make on a daily basis. Could you make a comedy like The Thick Of


It now? I think it would be very difficult and I am not inclined to


you because I am more interested in trying to energise 16 and


17-year-olds into politics. That is the frightening thing. They don't


vote, well, they cannot because they are 16 and 17 but 18-year-olds do


not vote in the numbers that people over 35 and 40 vote and I think that


is because they have been turned off by party politics. It was really


interesting in the Scottish referendum having the votes for 16


and 17-year-olds, because it galvanised them and told them their


view was important and it made them examine the issues and I only wish


that opportunity had been presented to us all in the general election.


Armando Iannucci, thank you for talking to us.


Blasphemy is one of the most emotive issues in the Muslim world -


particularly in Pakistan where it's legally punishable by death.


Though no-one there has been executed for it -


many accused of it have been lynched.


And one man - Mumtaz Qadri - killed a politician


who simply spoke out against the blasphemy law


and remains a hero to many for that murder.


Qadri was executed by the Pakistani state


Secunder Kermani went along to the events commemorating him -


to try and explore what's behind his popularity -


and what it tells us about Pakistani society.


Thousands turn out to honour a convicted killer.


They're here in support of a man called Mumtaz Qadri,


executed last year for murdering a high-profile Pakistani politician


who was trying to reform the country's blasphemy laws.


The authorities executed Mumtaz Qadri on the 29th


of February last year, perhaps thinking the fact


it was a leap year would make it harder for his supporters


The figure of Mumtaz Qadri and the issue of blasphemy has


become symbolic of the tensions at the heart of Pakistan's identity.


Earlier in the week we visited the shrine that houses


They are also constructing a mosque and a seminary here.


Built with donations from the public, it receives


a steady stream of visitors of all ages.


Mumtaz Qadri was a police bodyguard who shot the politician he was meant


But his supporters don't see him as a traitor,


rather as someone who died trying to preserve Pakistan's Islamic


character, exemplified in their view by a law that holds blasphemy


The adoration for Mumtaz Qadri is matched by a hatred of politicians.


Today at the rally in honour of Mumtaz Qadri, speakers railed


against the Prime Minister and the opposition, portraying


For the crowds gathered here, blasphemy isn't just a religious


This is a kind of populist movement dedicated to opposing


what they see as a more secular liberal political establishment.


Dr Ashraf Jalali is one of the leading figures


He sees himself as part of the battle for Pakistan's soul.


Over the past decade, globalisation has brought Western


culture more visibly to Pakistan, with a growing number


of shopping malls, seminars and cable TV channels.


That has accentuated cultural divisions within the country.


This represents the divide which we have in our society


and I think that divide is right, you know, with the establishment,


Pakistan as a post-colonial state, because I think there are people


who feel that Pakistan should become a democratic secular country,


and there are others who believe that Pakistan should


I think that is a consistently, I think there is no consensus


in society but the state, the nature of state should be


And the blasphemy law actually sharpens that divide in society.


Whilst the religious right complain they are being marginalised,


it is often the most vulnerable in society that are affected


Mumtaz Qadri's victim was speaking out in favour of a Christian woman


sentenced to death for supposedly committing blasphemy in an argument


Since he was murdered, she has remained in jail.


An appeal due to take place last year was delayed and her family fear


judges are too afraid to hear the case.


There is also now growing concern that allegations of blasphemy


are being used to discredit critics of the state.


In January this year, a group of liberal activists were abducted.


Many believe the intelligence services were responsible.


As crowds gather demanding their release, a counter


campaign sprang up accusing them of blasphemy.


Since they were freed, none of them have been willing


to say who detained then, but one, now out of Pakistan,


agreed to speak about the impact of the allegations on him


In a society we have any allegation taken so seriously,


so in future you say something, you do something,


you are already discredited in the eyes of the people.


So people see you like this person who has committed blasphemy.


Next year, Pakistan will hold a general election


and Mumtaz Qadri's supporters are launching their


Whilst unlikely to gather many seats, they will make it difficult


for anyone to challenge the prevailing notions of blasphemy.


We leave you with news that Disney is to feature its first


gay movie character, with a love scene no less,


The film in question is the live action remake


of Beauty And The Beast, Disney's exploration of


The character in question is Lefou, the sidekick of the film's alpha


And as fans of the 1991 cartoon version will know,


this development isn't a huge surprise.


# For there's no man in town half as manly


# You can ask any Tom, Dick or Stanley


# And they'll tell you whose team they'd prefer to be on


# No one's got a swell cleft in his chin like Gaston


# Not a bit of him's scraggly or scrawny


# And every last inch of me's covered with hair


Download Subtitles