03/11/2017 Newsnight

Harassment becomes a full-blown

crisis in politics: Three

new accusations today,

affecting MPs in both main parties.

Tory Dover MP Charlie Elphicke

has the whip suspended,

and the Conservative Party says

he has been referred to the police.

He denies wrongdoing and says

he doesn't even know

what the accusation is.

And in Labour, Ivan Lewis

and Clive Lewis are both accused

of inappropriate behaviour.

Both deny it.

I don't, as a rule, at packed

Labour Party Conferences,

grope people's bottoms.

What will the effect on our politics

and the main parties be,

as allegations accumulate?

Can you judge a regime by the way

it treats its infants?

We hear the shocking testimony

of children liberated

from so-called Islamic State.

And also tonight: Given what we've

heard about Kevin Spacey,

Rouen should we still be watching

House Of Cards? -- should we still

be watching House Of Cards?

Hello.

It has been yet another

extraordinary political day.

It's so strange to see ideological

debate between the parties

replaced by talk of inappropriate,

intimate touching.

Like the expenses scandal,

which saw new exposes day after day,

this one is spinning out

of the control of

the party managers.

Politics is struggling to find

the words to cope with it.

Take yesterday's story

of Kelvin Hopkins -

Jeremy Corbyn was asked about it

this morning, but was unable

to offer any comment.

Were you aware of the allegations

against Mr Hopkins, sir?

Goodbye.

But this evening, we've had

new accusations against three MPs,

coming out hour after hour.

Two of them are former members

of the Shadow Cabinet,

and one well-known Conservative MP.

Let's go through them

with Chris Cook, who is with me.

Let's start with Charlie Elphicke.

This came out at around 9pm.

The

Tory Chief Whip Julian Smith issued

statements saying they had suspended

him from the party and issued passed

it the police. Charlie Elphicke said

he was not aware of what the

accusations are and denied any

wrongdoing.

That was all quite late

this evening and we don't know much

about it. Clive Lewis, he was pretty

well-known and indeed got into some

trouble for using the phrase get on

your knees, bitch at a party

Conference.

A brief Labour Party

statement saying the Labour Party is

investigating a formal complaint

made today against Clive Lewis,

specifically that an activist said

she felt he had touched her

inappropriately while having a hug

at the party Conference.

Clive Lewis

came out very quickly after that. He

went on to the news channel and he

didn't deny it. This is what he

said.

I don't, as a rule, at packed

Labour Party Conferences,

grope people's bottoms

when I greet them.

This, you know, it is just not how

I roll, it's not what I do.

Is the person mistaken?

Have I kind of given them a hug

and this has, you know,

been misinterpreted?

I don't know.

But all I know is that I would not

deliberately do that.

And the third one today, Ivan Lewis,

another Lewis but completely

separate and a former Labour Shadow

Cabinet member.

There are two

allegations. One is that he touched

an activist's legs, and the other is

about his conduct as a minister in

the Department of Health. He has put

out a statement denying specifically

and firmly the first of those, and

he put out a statement that sort of

says that if there are problems at

the Department of Health, no one

else seemed to know about them. I

have on occasion asked women I work

for out for dinner and develop

strong feelings for them and I am

sorry if this was inappropriate in

the circumstances.

Yesterday, Kelvin

Hopkins, another former Cabinet

member, that case emerged. Today,

late this afternoon, actually, he

issued quite a firm and strong

denial and quite a long piece about

it.

There was a statement yesterday

about Mr Hopkins is saying

inappropriate things and having

inappropriately at an event in 2014.

His statement is striking because it

features a trope we have seen

already in some of them coverage

after Hartpury Weinstein. He said

how cordial things were after the

incident is supposed to have taken

place. It -- after the Harvey

Weinstein story.

It is awkward and difficult because

even after an incident you may still

want to ingratiate yourself.

Joining me now is Jasmin Beckett,

Young Labour's representative

on the Labour Party's National

Executive Committee.

Is the party geared up for dealing

with the volume of allegations?

Yeah, I mean, I think that we have a

lot we need to improve. We recently

passed a new sexual harassment

policy which is a huge step forward

for us, but it just doesn't go far

enough. It doesn't introduce an

independent body away from politics

to deal with these complaints, so

that's a huge reason why people

haven't been coming forward, and

that's something we need to look at

again.

You wrote in an e-mail to the

NEC and Jeremy Corbyn saying there

are still people who don't want to

complain because they don't feel

able to do so. He said these

experiences are not rare.

Yeah, I

think we've all... There's a lot of

rumours, and I've been in positions

myself where I've been in NEC

meetings and had inappropriate

remarks made towards myself, and you

know, I know that, as fantastic as

they are, staff members dealing with

these complaints, and then the NEC's

disputes body, who will dispute over

them, and it puts you off from

making a complaint because, you

know, these are people you know than

they might know the person about

whom you're making a complaint.

Age

is a factor. You represent Young

labour. Pages is a factor in some of

these cases was not in your view, if

a 55-year-old MP -- age is a factor.

If a 55-year-old MP makes advances

to a young activist, is that

unacceptable in your view?

Any MPs

and elected officials in our party

or others are in positions of power,

and if they abuse that power, it is

wrong and should not be happening.

Chris Cook was saying, in some of

these cases, the women seem to have

had good relations with the MP or

the person beforehand, and good

relations afterwards. Do you

think... Because I think a lot of

people will say, it can't be so bad

if they were friends afterwards. Do

you think that can form any part of

the defence of somebody accused of

inappropriately propositioning or

forcing themselves on someone?

No,

because, as I say, I mean, these

people are in positions of power,

and ultimately, these are the people

deciding on the laws in our country,

and they should know better. As I

said today in my e-mail, with the

Labour Party, we want to look like

the society which we wish to create,

and if our MPs don't look like that

and our own procedures don't look

like that, then I worry that we, you

know, the public will see that.

There will be enquiries and a lot of

these cases and it will often be one

word against another - how do you

tell if Clive Lewis squeezed

someone's bottom? Do you think we

should always default to believing

the woman, the victim, in these

cases? It will be difficult... In

the past, people have always said we

have not given sufficient weight to

victims' testimony.

My go- to is to

believe those coming forward because

obviously if you get a lot of...

Well maybe it's not true, and it

stops people coming forward. That

has to be for the investigation's

panel to look at all these details,

and ideally, that's why we would

have an independent body looking at

those so we can ensure the procedure

is rigorous.

Thank you very much

indeed.

Ian Birrell is a former speech

writer for David Cameron,

and is now a contributing editor

for the Mail on Sunday and writes

for the "i" newspaper.

Ian, how big a crisis is this for

our politics?

I think it is a big

crisis. People are compared it to

the expenses scandal but I think it

goes beyond that. It is a political

issue rather than a party issue. It

goes to the heart of culture and

society. We see a glimpse of a

problem where too many men in

powerful positions think they can

abuse their positions, and too many

women are having their careers

dented, their confidence ruined and

their aspirations to engage in the

political system devastated and

destroyed. This is a culture that

has the change.

This might prompt a

bigger change then the expenses

scandal bid. Obviously, that led to

reform of the expenses system. This

might change our whole way of life

in the Commons really.

The hope is

gone out of this mess emerges a more

sensible system in the running of

the Commons and the career

structure. It is about attitudes in

the heart of society, which hasn't

to be forgotten. It is about women

who are having their lives

devastated and men abusing, which is

to be tackled.

Does this crisis

bring an election closer? Does it

remove the Government's working

majority with the Ulster Unionist?

We don't know yet. We are in the

foothills and every day there was an

astonishing development, like today.

If the Labour leader has knowingly

promoted someone whom they knew had

been accused, justifiably, which we

don't know yet, but if that is the

case, it raises serious questions as

to whether Jeremy Corbyn is fit to

be Labour leader. If Theresa May has

been engaged in cover-ups, there are

questions there. If you are not fit

to be in the cabinet, I don't

understand how you are still fit to

be an MP. These are profound

questions which need to be dealt

with.

Them eBay -- there may be

by-elections.

It is about equal

rights for 50% of society.

We are in

crucial times, than this, with

Brexit, and Parliament and the

Government have to make some

difficult decisions in the next two

years.

It is a body blow from

politics. The lack of faith, the

lack of trust, the economic woes,

and this is one more body blow in a

divided country with a pathetically

weak Prime Minister and a political

system not trusted by a lot of

people, with these divisions in

society, it could be worse timing.

But that mustn't get in the way of

resolving these really critical

issues.

Ian Beryl, thank you very

much.

Just one paper of note tomorrow -

the Sun carries a headlines saying

Chris Evans the BBC Radio

2 DJ exposed himself

to a girl for two years.

The BBC has said tonight:

They said they would not comment on

a story that dates back more than 20

years.

It also says police investigated

at the time and there

was insufficient evidence.

Bit by bit, so-called

Islamic State is being driven

out of Iraq and Syria.

Syrian troops have taken the last

city in which Isis had a presence,

and the group is now reduced to two

small enclaves in Western Syria,

and a section of the Euphrates River

Valley spanning the border

of Syria and Iraq.

That's not to say Isis is over,

but it is not the force it was,

a fact for which many are thankful.

And it means we can now find out

more about what life was like

when Isis was in control.

As it has retreated,

it has left thousands of women

and children behind.

Some are the abandoned

families of IS fighters,

others are being held

as prisoners or slaves.

There are also boys

who were forced to fight for IS.

The goal now is to reunite families

and to rehabilitate those whose

minds have been stolen by the group.

Tim Whewell reports now from Iraq

on the children left behind

by the fighters of Islamic state.

You might find some

of the testimony upsetting.

# If you're happy, happy,

happy

# Clap your hands...#

In a classroom in northern

Iraq, they're singing

to overcome their memories.

These nine and ten-year-olds

were all captives of

so-called Islamic State,

where music was Haram - forbidden.

From their smiles, you might not

guess the violence they've seen,

but they're all scarred by it.

ISIS enslaved this boy

and his sister three years ago.

So what did they tell

you about the guns?

The children at this

rehabilitation centre are Yazidi,

part of the non-Muslim minority

singled out for particular

cruelty by ISIS.

In 2014, their villages were seized

and thousands of men

murdered on the spot.

The women were sold into slavery,

and children taken for re-education

to serve the so-called Caliphate.

What did they say about your family?

When first they talk

aboutt their experience,

it was not actually easy and good,

but now they can express

it in a different way.

At first they were just too

scared to talk about it.

Now they can talk about it,

but freely, but in a better way,

like they don't express so much,

I wouldn't say anger, but they feel

comfortable and relaxed now.

But they say they've seen things

which are truly shocking.

Now, every day brings more Yazidi

children to camps like this one,

as they return from captivity.

And many not only witnessed

atrocities, they became instruments

in the Isis project themselves.

The terror group trained

thousands of boys like these.

They called them lion

cubs of the Caliphate.

They were fighters,

informers, suicide bombers.

More than 50 boys blew themselves up

defending the biggest Isis-held

city, Mosul, before it

fell in July.

Some were children of foreign

fighters, others recruited

or kidnapped from local families.

Zahed is a 14-year-old Yazidi boy,

reunited with his father

just three weeks ago.

But his three years away have left

a gulf between them.

Zahed lost his native language,

Kurdish, and was forcibly converted

to the Isis version of Islam.

All that time, they were teaching

you guns, and they were teaching

you about the Koran,

what were they telling

you about the Koran?

And he nearly was killed,

as he was launched into an attack

just five months ago,

over the Syrian border.

How is your leg now?

Who did they say the enemy was?

The infidels.

The non-Muslims.

According to Isis, his own

father is an infidel,

and after three years,

not surprisingly, part of the boy's

mind may still belong to the group

he was forced to fight for.

What do they show, the videos?

Back at the camp, the two children,

returning from their music class,

are taking me to meet their mother

and their aunt.

He was separated from his mother,

when Isis captured them.

The family later paid a $28,000

ransom for his release.

His military training

was shortlived.

Isis gave up on him after a few

days, as the eight-year-old cried

and failed to learn.

But though he has come home,

many other Isis captives haven't.

The children's aunt says that

even though Isis has

been largely defeated,

some Isis families are still holding

Yazidi children, passing

them off as their own.

Yazidi children like these have

suffered unimaginable horrors

during their short lives.

But no-one knows how many more

still need to be rescued.

You can see a longer version

of Tim Whewell's film on "Our World"

on the BBC News Channel

at 9.30 on Saturday night,

and 9.30 on Sunday night,

and, of course, on the iPlayer.

It is getting hard to keep up

with the allegations and revelations

about sexual harassment that

are now forthcoming.

Names are coming thick and fast -

not just in politics.

Kevin Spacey and Dustin Hoffman

are two that have emerged

this week for example.

But when you find out about the bad

behaviour of big stars

who you have admired or loved,

does it affect your

appreciation of their art?

I consider the Woody Allen film

Annie Hall to be one

of the best movies ever -

but knowing that his adopted

daughter has accused him of sexual

abuse, should I reassess my opinion?

What's the difference?

It's all mental masturbation.

Oh, now we're finally

getting to a subject you

know something about.

Just because allegations

arise about the director,

doesn't mean the script changes,

or the quality of the acting -

it's the same film it always was.

But we have a relationship

with a film that goes

deeper than the lines,

some kind of aesthetic

connection that speaks

to

us, and what it says surely does

alter with the perception of those

behind the work.

David?

It's his name.

The point is most clearly

made by Bill Cosby.

His character was a lovable

dad, a role model.

You felt

he was Bill Cosby.

Given the admission that the real

Cosby drugged women for sex,

it's hard to watch the show

in the same way again.

Or take Roman Polanski.

Is it OK to watch

movies of someone who's

exiled himself to avoid

court action for rape?

His case raises the additional

question of whether you

want to give commercial

reward to someone whose

behaviour is appalling

by buying their product.

This is an omnipresent

dilemma and arises in

cases of the dead

as well as the living.

A statue by sculptor and typographer

Eric Gill sits outside

the BBC's Broadcasting House.

After his death, it emerged he'd

abused his daughters.

Does it now makes sense to stop

using the ubiquitous

Gill Sans typeface?

For some, Kevin Spacey's House

Of Cards is the most pressing

application of this issue.

Production has stopped

on the latest series,

but if they finished making it,

would as many people want to watch

it as in previous ones?

Joining me in the studio to discuss

is the writer and Guardian

columnist Lucy Mangan,

and writer and sociology

professor at Birmingham City

University, Kehinde Andrews.

Kehinde, can I ask you, let us take

the House of Cards, it is one I have

heard people talking about, what

would be be your stance on that?

In

terms of this debate you have to

understand you can't separate out

the art from the artist, in the same

way you can't separate out racist

theorists from racist theory, you

can't separate out the idea you have

people who are sexual predators from

producing work that has created what

we call rape culture, these two

things go hand in hand and they

can't be separated out, especially

in this case.

I take it you think,

and it is 178 will like boycotting

the products of people who are

sexual predators or evil sexual

predators.

The idea you can separate

these two things out, it is not

correct. There is a reason why Kos

bee, Polanski, spacey, it is a

reason this is men and sexual

violence, unfortunately that seems

to be the permissible and that is

something which is legitimate within

the industry.

I want to pushdown

more time, you wouldn't watch House

of Cards that the point?

I do watch

it and I won't like it has changed

the way I think about it, it changes

the way I see the character, knowing

what I now know.

What about you, do

you have any sort of guilt about sop

some of these, the ones we have seen

in that little film?

It depends

whether the art is existing or if by

watching it, I am putting more money

into someone who is a proven

predator. I think there is a

different between that and watching

old Woodley Alan films for pleasure,

in you get rid of everything that

has been tainted over history, and

especially the clip we are going at

now, you end up with very little,

and also I worry that if you do

boycott everything and if you take

it off the television and off

Netflix and the rest of it, you

erase quite a part of the story, we

have to learn to sit with the fact

that these great things, and less

great things were often created by

terrible people. We have to sit with

that and learn that, that they

correlate and great talent doesn't

mean a great person.

It almost gets

you to the debate about the statue

of Cecil Rhodes and almost the same.

Where do you draw the line Kehinde?

It is sex and sexual aggression does

seem to be taken as a more, more

seriously than other violent crime,

you could imagine somebody involved

in a violent crime or coming out of

jail for some offence that is not

sexual by nature, and I don't think

you would take the same view of not

wanting to watch their product, as

you would about a known sexual

predator.

I think there is a

distinction here, because I think

one of the things is if you have

done a crime and you have given, you

have served time for that crime,

will is a question about do you,

have you recuperated? In the issues

we are talking about, these are

things that have gone unpunished, if

what is being is true and they

haven't been punished, and I think

that is why it is important that

this, it is not a coincidence these

are of a sexual nature, it is not a

coincidence it is men and it ties

into the culture of the product we

are talking about.

Lucy, it is quite

clear, isn't it, that there are

things we will take out. No-one is

going to see archive of top of the

pops with Jimmy Savile, that is

removed from the public space, isn't

it. So clearly, there is a sort of

line, and I imagine you agree with

not showing archive...

I think we

all make moral choices on a

continuum and as a watcher or viewer

we make that decision. Obviously I

would choose, easily choose not to

watch Jim'll Fix It repeats because

of the weight of that art compared

to what he did, is there is no

contest, but there is a whole other

grey area, where we make on an

individual basis a trade off, but it

becomes very difficult if people are

making those trade offs or deciding

those on our behalf. That is where I

worry we get into pushing a whole

lot of stuff aside.

The case of Eric

Gill, he has been dead for decades

now, pretty hideous stuff he did in

his life without anyone realising it

until afterwards. For you we just

have to accept he was a flawed

person and but nevertheless enjoy

his type face and his work.

That is

a difficult one. I was writing a

book about children's literature and

there is an author there who was an

active paedophile throughout his

life while he was writing and was

convicted for it, and I had to

decide whether to put him in the

book or keep him out. In the end I

made an irrational emotional act.

But it is not logical and it is not,

and I feel bad about not having put

him in the history of it when he was

a very thought of writer. I don't

think that is purely right but I did

think made the morality of the

decision outweighed the, the sort of

academic.

I understand what you are

saying. There is an aesthetic

connection. But, sorry Kehinde, do

you want to come in on that point?

We need to start decentring the

people who do this. By saying this

is great art and we have to keep it,

by doing that we are ignoring the

other art that goes on, the women

minorities who produce art which we

haven't said is this wonderful

piece, right. I think that is really

important. Sometimes it is about

shifting away from the dominant

narratives and away from some of the

things we think is good. Opening up

the debate.

You don't worry,

briefly, you don't worry you will

end up throwing away too much stuff.

We will lose half the historic art

out there.

If if we end up using a

lot so more people come in, that is

the risk we have to take.

We need to

leave it there.

Thank you both very much indeed.

Thank you both very much indeed.

That's all from us this evening.

I