05/02/2018 Newsnight

Crunch time for the Conservatives, a

leading Tory calls on Theresa May to

stand up to a hardline Brexiteers

and throw them out of the party.

They're not the Tory party that

I joined 40 years ago and it's

about time Theresa stood up to them

and slung them out.

Because they've taken down Major,

they took down Cameron,

two great leaders, neither

of whom stood up to them.

All this on the day Michel Barnier

has come to Downing Street to warn

us at the time has come to choose.

Without the customs union

and outside the Single Market,

barriers to trade and goods

and services are unavoidable.

Not avoidable? We will ask Lord

Lamont if Theresa May's vision for

Brexit is getting clearer or

cloudier. Also tonight.

Look how far women have come

in the last one million years.

Tonight, on the eve

of the suffragette

centenary, we ask our panel

what we got right, what we got wrong

and where we're heading now.

Good evening.

Suddenly, everyone's stopped

mincing their words.

As the government clarified

there would be NO customs

union post-Brexit.

,Michel Barnier, the chief EU

negotiator arriving in town,

said that would cause unavoidable

barriers to trade.

He called on the UK to explain

what it was looking for in terms

of future relations with the EU

and insisted that the time has now

come to make a choice.

So are those who favour

a short sharp break now

hanging out the bunting?

As for the rest - call

them Remainers or soft

Brexiteers or what you will -

are they feeling the cloud

of something long feared

becoming a stark reality?

Our political editor

Nick Watt is here.

You've been hearing

strong stuff from one

of the Conservative party's most

ardent Remainers tonight, Nick.

Tell us

what you heard.

Anna Soubry has been

outspoken since the referendum, she

says her party appears to be in hock

to watch describes as 35 ideological

exit years and it is time Theresa

May stood up to them and threw them

out. If this doesn't happen Anna

Soubry who was in the Cameron

government as a Business Minister

said, if it comes to it I will not

stay in a party which is being taken

over by the likes of Jacob Rhys Mogg

and Boris Johnson. She says, we

simply cannot go on like this any

longer. Something is going to have

to give because if not, not only

will we get Jacob Rees-Mogg as Prime

Minister, we will get a

devastatingly hard Brexit. Anna

Soubry has said stuff in this sort

of territory in recent months but

hasn't gone quite this far. It's

also important to say that Anna

Soubry can at times go a little

further than some of the Remain Tory

colleagues but and picking up quite

a lot of frustration among those

MPs. So today I've been looking at

the pressures on Theresa May as she

looks to settle what the UK wants

for its future relationship with the

EU.

I'm not afraid, I'll

race you and I'll win.

Politics is, in many ways,

about the art of timing.

Winning can demand speed

but sometimes being patient

is the virtue that will ultimately

take you over the finishing

line in first place.

Look at that white tail flash.

And so it is proving with Brexit.

There have been unmistakable signs

of anguish amongst some Leave

supporters who fear that as time

marches on, their dreams of a clean

Brexit are slipping away.

And then there are Remainers,

who appeared to be biding their time

for a more complex exit from the EU.

The fears and frustrations over

the nature of the UK's departure

from the EU have come to a head

on above all one issue.

What sort of customs relationship

will the UK have with the EU?

Some Brexit supporters fear

the Treasury is nudging Theresa May

towards a version of the current

customs union which would make it

all but impossible for the UK

to negotiate free-trade deals

around the world.

Their nerves were calmed somewhat

this morning when Downing Street

ruled out this option.

The EU's chief negotiator,

Michel Barnier, was in

Downing Street today,

where he warned that

leaving the customs union

and Single Market would create

unavoidable barriers to trade.

Downing Street said this morning

that the UK would not be staying

in the customs union

or a watered-down version

dubbed "a" customs union.

The government is

looking at two options.

A customs arrangement

in which new technology will be

harnessed to create as frictionless

a border as possible

between the UK and the EU.

A customs partnership

in which the UK and the EU

would set their own tariffs,

but they would create

as frictionless a border as possible

by levying each other's tariffs

on goods transiting their borders.

I understand Theresa May

is still keen on this option.

But there is a third option that

could be pushed by Remain supporters

who point out that the EU has talked

of magical thinking in Whitehall.

This is the possibility of a vote

in Parliament later this year

to maintain a version

of the current customs union.

One Remain supporter warns

of serious consequences

if Theresa May refuses

to keep her options open.

Labour's front bench

itself is ideological.

My front bench probably isn't,

but it's in hock to 35 hard

ideological Brexiteers who are not

Tories.

They're not the Tory party that

I joined 40 years ago and it's

about time Theresa stood up

to them and slung them out.

Because they've taken down Major,

they took down Cameron,

two great leaders, neither

of whom stood up to them.

Well, if it comes to it,

I'm not going to stay in a party

which is being taken over

by the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg

and Boris Johnson.

They're not proper Conservatives.

If that means leaving the party,

form some new alliance,

God knows, I don't know,

but we simply cannot go

on like this any longer.

Something is going to have to give

because if it doesn't,

not only will we get Jacob Rees-Mogg

as our Prime Minister,

we'll get a devastating hard Brexit

which will cause huge damage

to our economy for

generations to come.

And I'm not prepared to sit

by any longer and put

up with this nonsense.

One Brexiteer insists that there's

strong unity in the party.

I've found a very strong unity

of purpose which is everybody agrees

that the British people said

we needed to leave the EU.

In order to do that we need

to leave the Single Market,

the customs union and regain control

of our laws and our borders.

And it is the politicians

who will determine how we set policy

and the civil servants

who will help implement it.

And where civil servants

have tended to speak out

perhaps more than is usual,

I think Jacob feels

that they have crossed a line

which is inappropriate.

Our political class is working

on one iconic clock.

As that now silent landmark ticks

down to the Brexit deadline,

the two sides know that whoever

masters the timing may

master the result.

Nick Watt there.

Joining me from Strasbourg

is Mairead McGuinness,

Vice President of the European

Parliament, and Lord Lamont

former Chancellor of

the Exchequer and supporter

of Leave Means Leave.

I will come to you in a second, Lord

Lamont. If I turn to Mairead

McGuinness, has had become much

simpler, do you understand the

government position better, as of

today? Not particularly. I think I

understand what the UK does not want

to be part of because very clearly

the red lines of the customs union

and the single market. By regret

that but I feel those are the red

lines. But I'm not sure what the

United Kingdom wants in terms of the

fib in partnership. I know these

items were published last August in

the position paper but the option

the prime ministers seems to be

backing is unprecedented and there

has been no worked until flesh out.

What we are watching is literally a

battle within the Conservative Party

about what it wants for Brexit, and

in the meantime we here at European

Union level are trying to make sure

that we do reach some agreement with

the United Kingdom because we want

to have a relationship, post-Brexit.

But we also have to finalise the

details of the withdrawal agreement

and a period so it would be quite a

busy time and this week is certainly

an interesting week in those

developments.

Mairead McGuinness,

does it matter if all this is

unprecedented? For example when

Michel Barnier comes to London and

says terrorists are unavoidable,

they are not. Everyone is calling

everyone else's bluff -- tariffs are

unavoidable.

I don't think this is a

game of bluff because in my office

for example practically everyday

there representatives of British

industry, whether from the

pharmaceutical sector or others

trying to get me to understand their

position and I understand it

completely. Because they have fears

about moving away from the European

regulatory framework when it comes

to access to pharmaceuticals for

example. Let's stop calling this a

game of bluff. It is not, it is

about people's lives and livelihoods

and this is why, politically this is

difficult. Michel Barnier needs to

spell out how things are. If the UK

leads the customs union and single

market and we don't know what will

be in its

be in its place, and right to do

that and I think that David Davis

understands that and I hope other

ministers understand it. What I hope

will happen this week is that

officials and others will come to a

better idea for the UK wants.

You

will better than most the huge

question over the Irish border. --

you will understand this better than

most. Do you really think the EU

parliament will pass any deal that

creates a border with an Ireland?

I

think the question is the other way

around. It is the one piece of text

I keep very close to my heart. It is

about this agreement which the

United Kingdom has made, it is

paragraph 49 of the text. I think

it's really important that the

United Kingdom has given a clear

commitment that would be no return

to a hard border on the island of

Ireland. It wants to do that in

terms of future arrangements, that

needs to be compatible, it is saying

they will have specific solutions to

the border... But with respect to

your position, I represent a border

community on the island of Ireland.

We know what we have today and that

is what we value. And we very much

appreciate the United Kingdom 's

agreement that there will be no hard

border and we would appreciate the

United Kingdom coming to the table

and negotiating with the EU so there

is no hard border. This is part of

the process, you know how difficult

the withdrawal agreement was, the

last minutes when it was finally

agreed on money and borders and

citizens rights? I hope it's not the

same with this feature partnership.

Because we needed for security of

business and others that we get some

sort of framework in place so that

business can understand what lies

ahead.

Sure. Mairead McGuinness

thank you. Lord Lamont, first those

comments from Anna Soubry who was

called upon the Prime Minister to

show some spine and sling at the

hardline Brexiteers. She has named

Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg in

particular and she points to 35

others. Messi I think that is quite

ridiculous, frankly. I don't want to

be rude about Anna Soubry but she

does tend to go over the top

sometimes.

I think she is doing that

here. There are, obviously, while

the government is formulating its

approach, different voices from

different parts of the party.

She is

not wrong when she says that the

divisions over Europe brought down

Major and brought down Cameron and

Theresa May will be the third victim

unless she stands up to them.

I

don't think these hardline

Brexiteers as you call them are

aiming to bring her down, far from

it, they are trying to influence in

one direction.

Do you think they do

have that influence? Are they in

control?

Of course not. They do

things that Anna Soubry was

objecting to, one leaving the

customs union, and never leaving the

single market. Theresa May has

decided to pursue that for two

simple reasons. The first with the

customs union is to have the freedom

to strike trade deals elsewhere in

the world, and leaving the single

market is essential because she

judges, and I think she was this

strongly, that the British public

will also determined that we should

have greater control over our

borders.

She says?

And you can't do

that unless you leave the single

market. Those of two reasons, it is

not to do with any faction in the

Conservative Party.

She feels

differently, she calls them

ideological Brexiteers who are not

Tories. Let me run is passing.

Something has to give. If Theresa

May doesn't stand up and show, as

she calls it, spine, not only will

we get Jacob Rees-Mogg as Prime

Minister, she says, we will get a

hardline Brexit that will cause

damage... Would you welcome Jacob

Rees-Mogg is Prime Minister?

When

she says devastating hardline Brexit

she was objecting to two things the

Prime Minister has decided. Leaving

the single market and leaving the

customs union. I have explained that

that is being done for logical

reasons, not because Jacob Rees-Mogg

or anyone else asked for it. Other

people have asked for it.

Mairead

McGuinness, or you just heard, is

that not only is this unprecedented,

this is not a game of bluff,

businesses and people and lives will

be affected because there is no deal

possible without tariffs that cost

money.

If there is a free trade

agreement, tariffs will... There has

to be free-trade agreement because

it is overwhelmingly in the

interests of the European Union.

Make the assumption that the EU is

rational and will look after own

interests.

We keep telling ourselves that it is

Europe's interest to come to the

table and give us the deal we want

but Europe has made very little of

the running so far and it will

survive without the UK.

We are

sitting in the UK, quite

understandably, the way you look at

it, you say, this is what the EU

wants, that's never going to change,

and here's what Britain once, it is

unattainable. That's how the

domestic press look at it but it

isn't the reality. What was said

before the financial settlement was

agreed, 100 billion, that has never

come down and in the end the EU

changed its position and Theresa May

got what she wanted and I think that

will happen again.

Thank you for

joining us.

The White House has said

it is "concerned" about the fall

on US stock markets today

after the Dow Jones Industrial

Average dropped by 1,175 points,

the biggest one-day fall

in six years.

Our business editor

Helen Thomas is here.

What happened, what is this down to?

Just to put a bit of context, this

is a huge drop, the biggest

percentage fall in six years. I

think it's the biggest fall in

points terms ever on the Dow. What

will have rattled people, at one

point today it was down nearly 6000

points in a short space of time,

there was a sense of panic selling

-- 1600 points. There was a pretty

big drop on the markets in the USA

on Friday, and the same in Europe.

The stock markets had a very strong

January and they've wiped out those

gains in a couple of days and some

are down for the year. We are seeing

that of the two years where stock

markets only went up, in a straight

line, volatility is definitely back.

A massive jump in the so-called fear

guage today.

How do you see these

figures?

Everyone has been waiting

for a market correction, markets

going up, there have been concerns

about overvaluation. The question is

whether this is a quick, healthy

correction after which people see an

opportunity to get back in or is it

something more lasting? The

important thing is that this started

in the bond markets, they've been

selling off since the beginning of

the year. It started with good news,

a stronger global economy, making

people think that maybe Central

banks are going to put the brakes

on, fewer interest rate rises than

we thought and it rattled the

markets. What people are worried

about is that it may be a more

pronounced pick-up and there is

uncertainty especially about

inflation. If that's the case it has

the prospect of causing more

problems and having a lasting effect

on the markets.

Thank you for

joining us.

Tomorrow marks 100 years

since the first women

won the right to vote.

The day will be marked in a speech

by Theresa May praising the herosim

of the suffrage movement and warning

that debate in modern

politics is being coarsened

by bitterness and abuse.

Tonight, we devote the rest

of the programme to asking

if we should feel proud of how far

we've come in since 1918

or berate the lack of more

substantial progress.

With our panel of guests we look

at then, now and the whole

issue of gender itself.

Is that now going out of fashion?

Here's a brief history

of the journey with a bit of help

from the DVD collection.

Remember when cavewomen

used to dress like this?

We've come a long way

since the Lower Paleolithic period

though it doesn't always

feel that way.

The history of women's progress can

be told through cinema.

Women should not exercise judgment

in political affairs.

Although the fact this film,

Suffragette, took so long to make

and went bankrupt along the way

probably tells us much of the story

as much as the film itself.

It spoke of women winning a

political voice at the bollard box.

It spoke of women winning a

political voice at the battlot box.

It spoke of women winning

a political voice at the ballot box.

We are in every home,

we're half the human race.

You can't stop us all.

In Land Girls, we saw how war forced

women to match up to the men,

entering the workforce

in their hundreds of thousands in

the first half of the 20th century.

Fast forward to the late 60s,

that workforce of women,

beginning to win the right to be

paid the same as men

for the work they were doing.

Unarguably, that's still

a work in progress.

Sorry, I thought the secretary

would sit out here.

That's right.

I'm the secretary.

By the '80s, the shoulder pad

embodied the boardroom power battle.

Women working their way up

to leadership positions

in business and politics,

even if they did still

call on Harrison Ford

to lead them there.

As societal acceptance of single

teen motherhood was landed

in audience's laps with Juno,

a film that dares to frame

the question of abortion before

plumping, big-time, pro-life.

What, are you ashamed

that we did it?

No.

Because at least you don't have

to have the evidence

under your sweater.

I'm going to head out.

Oh, no, no.

Thank you.

Why don't you stay over?

Yes, no, I'm not going to stay here.

You have an early day.

Meanwhile, Amy Schumer

was telling men on a one-night

stand what to do in bed,

the sexual revolution dictated

by women who knew how to enjoy sex

and when to tell men to go home.

Whilst Hollywood took these messages

of female empowerment and threw

money at the women's revolution,

behind the scenes the exploitation

was flourishing, as the me too

movement continues to lay bare.

And you don't have to look

hard to find a battle

still being fought in the workplace.

So that was the first 200,000 years.

Will the next few move any quicker?

Which way will feminism go now?

Joining me to discuss this

I have the artist Tracey Emin,

the novelist Anne Atkins,

the former deputy leader

of the Labour party

Harriet Harman, and Ash Sarkar,

the senior editor of Novara Media.

What a pleasure to have you here.

Harriet, was there a time in your

life that was pre-feminism? Was

there an awakening when things felt

different?

Absolutely, distinctly, I

remember growing up, the idea that

the big ambition for a girl was to

have a good husband and when she'd

achieved this ambition, to be a good

housewife to that husband. And men

were regarded as superior and women,

subordinate. The thing about the

women's movement, they came along

and said we aren't inferior, we want

to be treated as equal and to be

partners with our husband.

Did you

accept it at first?

I didn't because

my mother didn't accept it, she said

to me, most people think that if a

man says something it is more likely

to be true than if a woman says it

but I don't agree with that. So I

was getting subversive messages.

However also getting the general

view that I should get a husband and

get a bit of education but not too

much because no man would want to

marry a girl who is too clever by

half in case she outshone him. A lot

of mixed messages and then the

women's movement came along and

said, forget that, we want to be

equal in the home, outside the home,

in public life, everything else.

Ash,, do you think there has been a

woman for you or has feminism been

vulnerable?

I was lucky in how I was

raised, I grew up with feminism, my

mum from an early age would make

picture books with my sister and I

doing adventurous things so we'd

grow up with a sense of possibility

but we were taught about experiences

in the women's movement in the 70s

and 80s. She told us it wasn't the

most accommodating place to be a

woman of colour and while we talk

about the mainstream history of

feminism, the one we are celebrating

today, there is a counter history of

feminism led by female trade

unionists, by migrant women, women

of colour, and crossing with the

anti-colonial and antiracism

movements. One of the important

things to remember is that there

isn't a single feminist movement.

Do

they contradict each other or do

they pull in different directions?

Often people in different directions

but they don't have too. They go in

different directions because social

movements reflect the hierarchies in

society and it's only through

solidarity that we can redress that.

I can't think of a contemporary

artist who has lifted the lid on

women are more than your work,

whether it is sexual behaviour,

abortion, the sort of, you know, the

raw truth about what it is to be a

woman and all the difficult bits. Do

you think you started a conversation

that wasn't being had before?

Yeah I

think a lot of the things that

happened to me in my life, whether

it's rape, whether it's abortion, I

was raised by my mum, a single mum

who raised me, I think having those

experiences made me a much stronger

woman because it's pretty painful,

the whole thing is painful, being a

woman is excruciatingly painful.

When you talked about rape and when

you talked about your own abortion,

did you feel that was breaking a big

taboo?

I think so, a lot of women

are really ashamed about abortion

for example but I've always said

that no woman wants to have an

abortion, you don't wake up and feel

like having one. You do it and it

feels horrific to go through that,

no woman wants to have an abortion.

You are in a position where it is

Hobson's choice, you have no choice.

Maybe in hindsight you regret it but

at the time that's all you can

possibly do and you feel very much

alone. I think society has been

incredibly cruel to a lot of women

who have made that decision one way

or another.

Do you think this is a

valuable conversation that is being

had now? Has this been a liberation

for women?

We're speaking as if

feminism was invented in the late

20th century but I think it goes

back thousands of years. You think

about the campaign to end war, and

men who have campaigned...

On some

of the points that Tracey made,

talking about abortion and being

able to have one, is that progress?

Yes, the last hundred years have

been progress. I think we've made

mistakes, as you do with any radical

changes. I think the biggest mistake

I would pinpoint is when, you know,

there are some ways in which 100

years ago women's lives were better

than men's. Instead of men's being

raised to women's standards... For

instance, lung cancer, men have very

steadily fewer and fewer of them are

dying of lung cancer, more women are

dying of it. We are doing something

wrong, 100 years ago, women smoked

less.

You could take breast cancer

and prostate cancer and reverse

them.

That's not what I'm saying,

alcoholism, men used to be three and

a half times more likely to be

drinking to their own detriment, now

the gap has narrowed in the wrong

direction and the same with

promiscuous sex and all sorts of

things. Of course we'd agree that

the last 100 years have been huge

progress but not everything has been

right.

A lot of women were dying

before the age of 45 in childbirth.

Sure.

They didn't make it past 45,

forget lung cancer, they didn't even

get through childbirth.

You're not

hearing what I'm saying, by and

large it's progress, of course it

is, we are grateful for the last

hundred years, but I'm not saying

we've got everything right. Of

course we haven't.

I'd like to make

more progress in promiscuous sex,

I'm speaking for myself here. But

the point I'm making is that one of

the things I think we need to get

back to doing is talking about power

rather than just personal choices. I

think that a feminism that

emphasises how much sex is the

feminist amount of sex to have, how

much you should be drinking, misses

the point. The point is that women,

politically, socially and

economically are disempowered. It's

really nothing to do with these

personal choices.

We all agree, I'm

pinpointing a tiny detail about what

we're talking about, we haven't got

everything right, that's all.

One of

the big issues, the gender pay gap,

generating hundreds of column inches

and this column shows that the gap

is still present. By the time a girl

hits 20 years old there is a pay gap

and that expands as women hit

child-bearing age.

I know you want to come in Harriet,

how can we be 47 years on from the

equal pay act and still be talking

about this?

Because pay

discrimination... In the past, in

the pre-feminist days, it was

positively regarded as a bad thing

to argue for a woman's pay rate to

be equal to a man's because he had

to be the breadwinner and bring home

the family wage and it was

distracting against the struggle for

him to have a proper wage for her to

have a proper wage so it was frowned

upon, even in the trade union

movement. And the argument then was

that then women were entitled to

equal pay and not everyone agrees

that it is right that they should

but of course pay discrimination

flourishes in secret. Now we have

the transparency that is coming in

but everyone is going to have to

publish their pay gap if they employ

more than 250 people, by April. And

at that point we will be able to see

laid bare the extent of the

discrimination and be able to tackle

and but part of it is because of the

unequal division of Labour in the

home. If you've got a situation

where women have most responsibility

for caring for children and older

relatives the corollary is that they

lose out in the workplace. That is

why men's involvement in the home

with their children and the elegy

relatives is as important as women

being able to do more at work.

Have

we overly defined the role that men

can play without feeling emasculated

or damaged in some way? Women can

now do everything, can't they. They

can do every job and they can stay

at home and look after children but

it is much harder for a man to take

that role in the home without it

being...

The thing here is that we

fought for maternity pay and leave

to be longer and higher. We also

fought for paternity pay and leave

but actually at some point we are

saying, why don't men fight for

paternity pay instead of saying to

us how hard it is for them to us to

work part-time why don't they fight

for that because we can't fight

men's battles as well as women's.

On

the equal pay thing everyone keeps

talking about hundred years and it

isn't. For most women it is 90

years. The vote for the majority of

women came in in 1928 and you had to

be a property owner, you had to be

university educated and you had to

be over 30. So we can now start

talking about class. That cut at the

majority

of women in this country. And sadly

enough, the majority of women in

this country will only vote for

their husbands vote for, I'm afraid

and a lot of people showed me down

for that but it is true.

I'm glad

you mentioned class and I think this

is a good time to think about how

race class and gender work together

because there is a gender pay gap

and it gets worse if you are a woman

of colour. A black woman is three

times more likely to be unemployed

than a white woman. All these things

have economic outcomes. It also

means you can have a patriarch you

without the immediate figure of the

patriarchy, just these deeply

unequal outcomes that need

addressing, it's one of the things

that has negatively affected us. Can

I finish this, one sad thing as the

demise of union agitation for better

pay and conditions along the lines

of gender and race. In the era of

Sheryl Sandberg we think that if we

improve our attitude we will be

treated better at work, no...

Can I

just ask, is the problem that women

have tried to emulate the male

working patterns instead of

discovering their own?

It is amiss

characterisation to imply that

feminism is about individualism. For

the most part feminism is about the

grid of solidarity and what we

wanted was collective feminism in

the workplace for trade unions to

adopt the rights of women as well as

her man. Some feminists have argued

for individualism but the majority

would want collective action.

There

is more than one strain of feminism.

I'm saying that there's a different

kind of history, socialist famine in

history...

I'm glad you brought up

the fact that women of colour are

even more discriminated against

another women.

Of course we must

address that. But is a fundamental

difference between racial

discrimination and gender

discrimination in that one day we

can envisage full equality across

the races. Let me finish. With

sexual differences, in a sense,

there will never be that unless we

are constantly striving for it

because women will always be more

vulnerable. We are weaker

physically, generally speaking and

our reproductive functions make us

more vulnerable socially.

You think

we will wipe out racism before we

wipe out...

We will never... Because

when I walked down the street I am

more vulnerable than one my husband

walks down the street. That's

obvious. The reason I raise that is

because there is a sense in which we

will always have to keep striving

for sexual equality and we will only

get it when we get things like child

care...

With all due respect I think

this is historical. If you look at

this Public and private divide

between home and work this is a

product of the industrial

revolution. Similarly racism is a

product of historical forces. If I

can just say it in terms of what I

have felt has held me back in my

life, I have experienced the most

violence and hostility, it has been

because of my race, not my gender.

Of course. Maybe in 500 years we

will have babies born in labs but

the point is that women have to take

more time out to have a baby even if

it's only a few days it's still more

than men have to. So unless we have

proper childcare and keep fighting

positive discrimination...

I'm just

going to move us on because Anne has

talked about the future, 500 years

and babies born in labs and

something interesting is going on.

So what's the future of this debate?

Where will it go next?

Following the Women's March

in Washington last year,

there was a backlash from some women

about how female empowerment

is being framed.

The use of pink pussy hats

and banners associating the movement

with vaginas were criticised

by transgender activists.

This year the Pussycat movement said

it would discard the pink hats

and the vagina as symbol of female

empowerment to make sure

no-one felt excluded.

So I wonder what the future looks

like. Tracy and will start with you.

Are we re-evaluating gender as a

whole?

When I first went to art

school in 1983I was interviewed by

two women and they asked me one

question, what do you think of

feminism. This was in 1983 and I

said I don't. They said why not. I

said, I just have to do what I have

to do to get on and that has been my

attitude. A lot of women spend too

much time talking about things,

getting theories, sitting down, it

is no good just sitting down at a

table and being an armchair

feminist. You have to get out there,

change things, have a voice, be

motivated. I've changed a lot in the

art world. I have changed a lot for

women. I have a very loud voice on

women's issues because I live them.

I'm not sitting around

philosophising. I have gone through

these things. I have been raped. I

have had abortions. My list of

catastrophes in my life is endless.

I'm not looking through a history

book and guessing what will happen

in the future, talking about here

and now and how we must change

things and what we must do. I'd like

to see one big policy change and I

think it would make life that for a

lot of women in this country.

And

like an end to the hostile

environment immigration policy. In

March last year a five months

pregnant woman who had been

kidnapped and raped over a period of

six months went to the police to be

reporter experience. She was taken

to a rape crisis Centre and then

arrested and interrogated for

immigration offences. The

immigration policy we have today

makes women vulnerable. We

incarcerate victims of torture,

sexual violence, that's got to end.

It has to come back too, for you,

race, race is to be intrinsic to the

feminist debate?

Race and class.

All

right. To Anne and Harriet, this

movement to take the vagina out of

feminism, to de-gender everything,

do you understand that? To say, I

don't want to recognise the female

of the feminine, I want to move

somewhere totally neutral?

I am

always a bit anxious when the

general progressive movements seem

to be arguing amongst themselves

rather than looking to the wrongs

out there. I think rather than an

internal critic of feminism we

should look at the problems of

misogyny and turning ourselves

outwards. Every sort of

discrimination and prejudice is

wrong, whether it is on race,

disability, gender or sexual

orientation. Everyone has to fight

in their own way. But all of them,

whatever people are doing on this

issues is better than those opposing

change and opposing equality, so I

think in a way we shouldn't have a

hierarchy of inequality or judge

each other too harshly because we

are always being judged ourselves.

We have to try to be generous to all

of us who are fighting against

hatred and prejudice, and for

equality.

Anne, I will give you the

last word.

I want to go back to you

started, personal experiences. My

inspiration through life has been my

mother, the most amazing person. She

came to this country at 18 on her

own from Australia to take up a

maths scholarship when women

couldn't take degrees in a man's

subject, she took some of the best

mathematicians in the country, and

yet her greatest joy, I will be shot

down in this but her greatest joy

was being and a mother. What my

mother had that was a wonderful was

the most terrific joy in life. She

had her choices.

had her choices. She had a fantastic

brain and yet even more important

than maths, which she adored was the

people in her life. She symbolises a

fantastic voice.

She still had a

period and had to pay tax on every

tampon and sanitary towel she used

and that should be stopped

immediately, but is barbaric. She

never mentioned it because you just

enjoy to life. Week have run out of

time, thank you all for coming in.

Evan will be here tomorrow, thank

you all for watching

and a very good night, Bye