08/03/2018 Newsnight

He was particularly nasty to those

he felt were below him.

I witnessed

him sort of explode at people. He

was known for having a dreadful

temper.

So he harasses you, he gets a quiet

word and you have to change jobs?

Yes.

Aggressive, dismissive, rude. And

ultimately bullying.

It ground her down.

Basically

reached crisis point and she could

no longer do her job.

Harassment, bullying

and intimidation behind the walls

of the Palace of Westminster.

Three MPs named in our exclusive

report - Newsnight has testimonies

from the women at the centre.

Good evening.

Tonight, we take you inside

the House of Commons

in a tale of bullying,

harassment and intimidation.

Newsnight has spoken

to dozens of female workers

within the palace of Westminster,

who are known as the clerks.

There is a pattern

to their testimonies.

They told us of aggressive and

threatening behaviour, of the lack

of proper redress, of careers

terminated or misdirected.

And then they told us that the very

system put in place to address this

kind of bullying, had in itself

failed to deal with it.

We heard of woman with post

traumatic stress disorder.

She left her job.

Another quit and left the country.

Even the Speaker of the House

himself, John Bercow,

faces accusations.

The women's stories are unflinching,

and there is some swearing

in this exclusive report

by Chris Cook and Lucinda Day.

Before we get to it,

Chris joins me.

One of the things that is really

struck us as we have spoken to these

dozens of women is the remarkable

sort of unity of the story. Usually

when you do a thing like this, you

will find some people who disagree

and some who agree. We found a

strong consensus there is a serious

problem in the House of Commons. The

culture in part is the reason why

processes don't seem to operate

properly. There is really no

confidence among women who work for

the house of commons that any of the

proposals being discussed at the

moment about reforming the way the

house works to protect them, will

really work. What I hope we will

show in our film is the reason why

they don't have any that confidence.

The House of Commons is not just

a seat of political intrigue or

tourist destination.

It is also a workplace.

But it is a workplace

with a particular problem with

bullying and with sexual harassment.

We've heard a number

of allegations against MPs.

And not just backbench MPs

at the bottom of the pile.

These accusations run

all the way to the top.

To John Bercow, the Speaker

of the House of Commons.

And the people making these

allegations are public

servants who have dedicated their

lives to making our parliament work.

This group is always there,

even in the biggest

parliamentary moments.

But you probably never

really look at them.

He was the future once!

You might have spotted

some of them, perhaps

the people down here

who until recently routinely

wore wigs to sittings.

Nothing is really impossible

if you put your mind to it.

After all, as I once said,

I was the future once!

Now politicians come and go

but this little army of

public servants,

they are always there.

In the chamber...

Forgive me.

Please contribute to this question.

This is a big piece of information.

And committees.

These people work for something

known as the House of

Commons service.

And they have a range of job titles.

Clerks, inquiry managers,

committee specialists, but

together, we are going to refer to

them by the term by which they are

known to the rest of Westminster.

The Clerks.

These are the people who run

committee inquiries and to quietly

umpire the business of the House.

Newsnight has heard shocking

testimony that women in these roles

face a particular problem.

Newsnight has spoken

to dozens of current and

former clerks who allege

to us that they face

a real issue with sexual

harassment and bullying by MPs.

Almost all have reasons

to request anonymity.

Usually because they still work

in Westminster or Whitehall.

He sort of manoeuvred me out

into the corridor and, um, put

his arms around me, and um kissed me

on the lips, and I couldn't do

anything about it.

I could not force him off.

My arms were against my chest

and he was holding me so

tightly that I couldn't

push him away.

I made a chocolate cake for one

of my colleagues's birthday

and I was just putting

the finishing touches

before without our end

of the day little celebration.

And I was kneeling,

putting the rest of

the icing on the cake,

and the MP in question coming

he came in and laughed and came

and stood right

over me, I remember it being very

overbearingly close, and him saying,

"Right where you belong,

on your knees with a face

full of chocolate."

The MP exploded on me so

aggressively that my colleague stood

between us to physically

shield him from me.

These cases run from the 1990s

to more recent years.

And in that time the

House has changed its

HR policies several times

but there's one we constantly

keep hearing about.

Women do not feel that if they

complain to the House authority

and their concerns will

be taken seriously.

In part because the culture

of the House emphasises the

idea that clerks need to be tough.

From the day you start working

in the House of Commons,

there can be situations

where you are required to

deliver difficult messages.

In those circumstances,

it's seen as very

important to be robust,

and if you have pushback

from members to be resilient and be

able to hold your

ground, to respond appropriately.

And that is entirely appropriate for

staff, the difficulty is one that

extends to one member behaves

inappropriately towards you, you're

still expected to just put up

with that situation.

Clerks talk a lot about resilience

but it doesn't mean

in the House of Commons

what it means outside.

It means absorbing behaviour

from members of Parliament

and also senior clerks and not

questioning it or not complaining

about it.

When you say behaviour,

harassment, bullying?

Yeah.

They expect you to suck it up

and not make a fuss?

Yeah.

I think that is deemed

to be a trait of a

successful clerk in the House.

It's your ability to absorb

and be resilient, yeah.

We found that women working

for the Commons often feel

that they pay the price

of complaining about misconduct.

This former clerk's

manager attempted to

deal with the sexual

harassment by the MP that

she described earlier.

Having spoken to the MP and some

other senior management team

members, she didn't tell me who,

that the best course of action would

be to move me from that committee.

So if he harasses you, the solution

is he gets a quiet word and

you have to change jobs.

Yes.

That doesn't seem like a reasonable

response to workplace harassment.

Not at all.

I didn't want to do.

I enjoyed what I was doing,

I really enjoyed my

team and despite was was going

on I didn't want to move.

That's something

of a theme we found.

Clerks told us that they fear

that if they raise

complaints about MPs it will be them

who is moved not the MP.

They also fear that

complaining just marks

their cards, as weak,

sensitive, or a troublemaker.

One of the women we have heard

from did complain to

her manager about sexual assault

by an MP early in her career in

the 1990s.

Nothing happened.

She was harassed

throughout her time there.

So here is how she filed by the end

of a long career in House.

There was absolutely no

point in me reporting

anything because I would have been

made to feel I wasn't resilient or

tough enough.

So one of your friends told us.

They thought that they had done

a bit better than you in the

House of Commons, even though

they thought you were more talented,

because she had stayed

quiet and you have not.

Do you think that's possible?

I think that's possible.

I think I'm not alone

as a woman in feeling inferior

in the workplace.

And that is something that I have

carried with me for quite a

long time.

People are still fearful

about speaking out because there are

recent examples where people end up

getting moved or leaving the House

in relation to raising these things.

Management have told us to report

stuff but I think if I raised

something I'd be moved.

In all my time here

I haven't seen one case go

against a member.

CHEERING

Lets start naming names.

This is the Tory MP for...

Mark Pritchard.

We have heard time

and again about his

reputation among women clerks.

He was particularly

nasty to those he

felt were below him.

I witnessed him explode

to people, he was known for

having a dreadful temper.

The people in the room

who were administering

to the needs of the committee

were all female.

And we got called a useless gaggle

of girls or something

along those lines, I wish

I remember the exact phrase.

His attitude was vile,

I remember him once giving a

female clerk a dressing down in

front of everyone, the way he spoke

was threatening and aggressive.

I have seen him with my own eyes

screaming at people for

nothing, really.

He went mad at me, it got very

personal, he said something

like, you stupid young woman,

you haven't got a fucking clue

what you are talking about,

who the fuck do you think you are?

I remember being very upset by it.

A number of the outbursts by Mr

Pritchard that we have heard about

seem to follow a pattern.

He has on several

occasions sought to change

arrangements for committee trips.

For example, changing his flights,

or in one case during the trip to

Los Angeles, trying

to change his hotel.

Then the clerks refuse because there

are strict rules about the

stuff and he will fly into a rage.

We have been told that House

managers know about this because he

would often take years and Greek

complaints directly to them.

-- angry complaints.

This was seen, we

were told, as a means

of intimidating the clerks

on his committee.

Mr Prichard said we didn't

provide him with enough

detail to respond but said...

The thing is, clerks

tend not to raise

formal complaints.

Indeed since 2014, no complaints

have been escalated to

the point where even

mediation is required.

Women know what happened

to the last clerk to pursue

a case.

They have all heard of someone

called Emily Commander.

She was brilliant, probably the best

line manager I ever had in the House

of Commons.

She was incredibly bright,

had a very deft way at

understanding huge amounts

of information very quickly.

But she also had the

people skills which I

found quite unusual

in clerks sometimes.

And she was good at managing MPs,

which is not always

easy sometimes.

She was appointed

as the clerk of the

culture media and sport

committee in 2010.

She was laid clerk on perhaps

the highest profile of a select

committee investigation,

the phone hacking inquiry.

Where Rupert Murdoch

was attacked with a foam pie.

Also on that committee

was Paul Farrelly, the

Labour MP for Newcastle-under-Lyme.

Mr Farrelly and Ms Commander had

worked together before, she had been

a clerk on the science

and technology committee.

They had even been

on a committee visit to Italy

in May 2004.

This is what one witness

said happened there.

He treated appallingly

in front of everyone.

He wound her up like a screw

and reduced to tears.

The more he upset her,

the more he enjoyed it, the

more he kept turning the screw.

He was very aggressive. It felt like

no one had the ability or the

authority to intervene. Everyone

knew it was wrong.

When they were

reunited on the culture media and

sport committee other witnesses told

us Mr Farrelly started again.

He

undermined her and pretty much every

given opportunity. We were in a lot

of meetings and in these meetings

pretty much whenever she opened her

mouth, he would undermine her. He

would interject. He would call into

question pretty much every time she

spoke.

How would you characterise

his attitude towards her?

Aggressive, dismissive, rude. And

ultimately bullying.

And how much of

an effect on her?

It ground her

down. It basically reached crisis

point. She could no longer do her

job. He had undermined her and

bullied her so much, so regularly,

so badly, that she was left entirely

exhausted, and incredibly

distressed.

And e-mail chain

obtained by Newsnight summarising

the case reveals the testimony of

Miss Commander to her bosses.

I have

an anxious about encountering him, I

have repeated nightmares about

have repeated nightmares about going

on committee visits with Mr Farrelly

and been criticised by him for

having neglected tiny details. After

particularly unpleasant meetings I

have felt physically six.

In 2012

formal complaint was raised against

Mr Farrelly, a novelty, the

procedure had been introduced just

eight months before. This was the

so-called respect policy. On inquiry

was set up to be run by has official

and it found to other women had

complaints about his previous

behaviour. Both testified. Newsnight

has obtained a summary of one of

those testimonies.

I remember on

occasions I noticed my hands shaking

before a meeting of the committee. I

began to sleep badly and lost my

appetite. My husband and friends

wanted me to go to the doctor and be

signed off with stress.

The three

testimonies gave the House

authorities a pattern of behaviour

going back eight years. But

Newsnight has learned that the House

had decided that only behaviour that

postdated the adoption of the

Respect policy should fall within

the scope of the investigation. The

Respect policy was only introduced

eight months before. An inquiry that

began in February 2012 was only

accepting evidence from June 2011

onwards. The testimony of those to

other women was discarded. The

inquiry ruled that Ms Commander's

complaint in 2012, it could only

reach a decision on a field of

allegations yet overall it upheld

the complaint, concluding that had

been an abuse of power and position,

and fair treatment and undermining a

competent work by constant

criticism. The process than called

for that decision to be considered

by the House of Commons commission,

a committee of MPs.

Order, order.

The commission was chaired by John

Burkle, then as now the Speaker of

the house. Yet when they first met

in November 2012 they couldn't reach

a decision on what to do. Newsnight

has obtained documents logging how a

senior clerk in the house let it be

known into the union in the House

that Ms Commander should go into

mediation with Mr Farrelly. They

should sit down and work it out.

Because if she did not, the hint was

dropped, the commission would vote

to conclude that no bullying had

taken place. So what happened then?

The case was allowed to Peter out

over the next six months. Mr

Farrelly wrote an apology in private

and that was it. The case was

closed. So here he is in January at

the hearing about the BBC's gender

pay gap. Still on the culture media

and sport committee. Miss Commander

has left the House and emigrated. We

put all of this to the House of

Commons. The Speaker denies that

either he or the commission ever

insisted on mediation. They also

point out that when the case of Mr

Farrelly reached the commission in

November 2012 they suspended the

respect policy. They came to this

view, they said, because

investigations were undertaken by a

House of Commons official who might

be considered to have an interest.

And members had no right of appeal

if a complaint was upheld, while

staff could appeal it if it was

dismissed. In other words, they

suspended the Respect policy in

November 2012 and then reformed and

because they thought the old Respect

policy was too tough on MPs. That is

Mr Farrelly's reading as well, he

told Newsnight the allegations were

not upheld by the commission and the

policy under which they were

investigated was considered so

unfair that it was immediately

withdrawn and replaced by another

policy. He denies any bullying. The

House also said that the policy as

it existed in 2011 lacked the

required legal underpinning to be

used to sanction MPs.

Order.

There

are discussions once more about

fixing the houses edge proceedings

but the clerks are not hopeful.

Let

me make it clear, there must be zero

tolerance of sexual harassment or

bullying here at Westminster or

elsewhere. Whether that involves

members or their staff or

parliamentary staff, or those

working on, or visiting the estate.

This is the Speaker, late last year,

the same speed get involved in the

inquiry into Paul Farrelly.

House of

Commons commission, which I chair,

has a duty to provide a safe to

work.

He remains, in effect, the

boss of all the clerks. But based on

our interviews, his reputation on

bullying is not good.

For my part as

Speaker, I am happy to do whatever I

can. Others must do likewise.

Back

in 2010, a woman

in 2010, a woman called Kate Emms

became John Burkle's private sector

to become a major position in the

House. Yet she stood down from that

post after less than a year in early

2011. His colleagues dash her

colleagues have told Newsnight that

Mr Burkle's bullying left her unable

to continue in the job. She was sad

and sick. As managers had to find a

new role within the House. Has

authorities were told she had

post-traumatic stress disorder.

Accounts of Kate Emms's experience

are widely known among clerks.

Witnesses have described John Burkle

shouting at her comic undermining

her and other stuff. A subsequent

job was abducted so she would not

have to the Speaker. A spokesperson

said that the speaker completely and

utterly refutes the allegation that

he behaved in such a manner, either

eight years ago or at any other

time. Any suggestion to the contrary

is simply not true. This episode

left one strange memento. You see

Kate Emms was the speaker's Private

assistant when he had his official

portraits done. She was supposed to

be in it with him. She posed for the

artist. However this painting wasn't

revealed until six months after she

took her next job, and it was

revealed that her successor had been

painted in, in her place, another

woman clerk moved. Men suffer in the

system as well but women clerks are

particularly vulnerable. Lots to us

that the House does not have its

house in order. That is what so many

of them cast the ultimate vote of

no-confidence in their own

management and simply choose to

public service. -- simply choose to

leave.

That story from Lucinda

Day and Chris Cook.

Details of organisations

offering information

and support with bullying,

sexual harassment or abuse, are

available at bbc.co.uk/actionline,

or you can call for free at any time

to hear recorded information

on 0800 077 077.

Joining us now, deputy leader

of the Liberal Democrats,

Jo Swinson, who sits

on the cross party working group

on an independent complaints

and grievance policy.

Jo, nice of you to come in. Let me

ask you, did any of those stories

reach you, are those names all cases

familiar?

Not those specific cases

although in the working group we

considered evidence from staff but

most of it was anonymous because

staff did not feel comfortable,

there is still this via issue around

it and we had on our working group

three staff representatives who were

excellent. They collated the stories

and brought them forward. It does

chime in, we obviously started this

process following reports about

sexual harassment at Westminster

which was obviously very serious,

and would have come forward with

proposals on that. What was

interesting from the staff

representatives, while there were

also concerned about but they said

in terms of the quantity of general

experiences, the more general

bullying and harassment was a great

issue in terms of how many people it

affected.

So what does this story as

Chris has told it to might tell you?

What it raises questions about is

the existing Respect policy which

exists for House stuff. One step

ahead of where we were. Working from

members of parliament, which we were

looking at in our deliberations,

because they had nothing like this.

At least House stuff had the respect

policy. But clearly the

implementation of that, from the

testimony in your report, does raise

significant questions.

Be blunt, it

hasn't worked. It doesn't work. If

the whole Respect policy has to be

suspended the moment you bring an

allegation and change because it is

considered too hard line,

fundamentally that is worse than

having nothing, is it not?

There is

a fair point about making sure an

appeals process is built-in, that is

fair enough. We concluded on the

working group that it would be

helpful if this new process bringing

in would ultimately help House stuff

because we did not think the Respect

policy was sufficient. Particularly

in terms of sexual harassment where

it had not been used at all, which I

don't take to believe that none of

it was happening but more that it

was not trusted to bring those

complaints forward.

So when you look

and hear and what you have seen

tonight, what should happen to those

men named, Pritchard, Farrelly and

Jon Bercow?

The obvious thing to say

would be that there should be a

thorough independent investigation.

That is what is supposed to have

happened.

Can they keep their jobs?

Whispered one side of the story. We

have heard denials. I've heard this

for the first time this evening. But

they do deserve to have a proper

independent process and I think that

is what clearly, in terms of the 20

job process, just going to a

committee of MPs is not sufficient.

This is where independence is so

important because you have this

power dynamic in Parliament.

So who

does it then? The frustrations of

Jon Bercow in particular, it is that

he is presiding over the system

while being part of the alleged

problem. Where do you go to address

that?

Is always an issue in any

organisation where you'll have some

of the other top of the organisation

who is where the complaint goes.

This is what we've recommended a

properly independent process with

the investigation will be carried

out in terms of sexual harassment by

Rob Lee trained sexual violence

advocates and in terms of workplace

by, will contract an independent

service to be able to conduct that

investigation thoroughly.

But what

does it say when legislators are not

able to look after their own

judicial process!

It says Parliament

is an outdated workplace. It doesn't

have modern professional standards.

There a culture of exceptionalism

which has many MPs see themselves

above other members of staff rather

than being in a collegiate

environment where we work with

clerks and other members of staff to

deliver good legislative lawmaking

for the good of democracy. And that

culture, whatever process you put in

place, it is part of what is so

important to change. Because what we

have seen on that video tonight is,

even when you have a process, if

your power relationships are what

they are, the dynamic is that MPs

have all the power, and if your

culture is that it's easier to move

somebody more junior than challenge

someone in power, then nothing will

happen.

Joe Swinson, you are sitting

on a committee in a position to

help. -- Jo. Do you have any sense

of optimism that you can change

this?

I have some but I don't

underestimate the challenges. We

have agreed and we are starting on

the process now of consulting on a

behaviour code for everyone who

works in parliament that we hope

will encompass all staff, all

members. And there needs to be

proper training. Because the

assumption that just because someone

is elected to parliament that they

understand how to be a good

employer, that they understand all

these issues about how to treat

others...

And not bully others

you

would hope they would but having the

training to set the cultural tone is

essential.

Jo Swinson, thank you for

coming in.

The police officer who rushed

to the aid of the Russian who spied

for Britain is tonight recovering

in hospital in Wiltshire.

Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey

is still in a serious condition

after his own exposure

to the nerve agent.

Police have praised his

courage and dedication.

Last night, after

several days' silence,

Russian domestic news put

the attempted assassination

of the former spy on its evening

bulletin, with what sounded

like a couched, possibly

satirical threat -

warning anyone who dreamt

of a career as a double agent could

expect their life to be curtailed.

The presenter went on to advise

"traitors or those who simply

hate their country in their free

time" not to choose Britain

as a place to live.

But back to our own broadcast

and our diplomatic editor,

Mark Urban, who's been

leading the way on much of

this investigation,

is with me again tonight.

As the search for the nerve agent

become any clearer?

Yes. We now know

more about the nerve agent. They

have got things pretty specific. It

has taken them a few days. It is

much more specific now. What I am

hearing is that this has been used

to construct a case that there are

very few labs in the world that

could have produced something.

Esoteric and sophisticated in

chemical terms.

You mean this could

not be a criminal lab, it would have

to be something else?

Exactly, it

points towards a state institution.

A comparatively small number of

states have real expertise in

chemical warfare.

What are the

indications?

First and foremost,

first Sergei Skripal and Yulia, the

most precise information they have

about how this agent operates, I it

attacks the body, there may still be

some hope of getting them back from

the pretty catastrophic condition

that we understand they were in

after they were poisoned on Sunday.

They remained in critical condition.

We don't know when it will be

possible to bring them back to

health. More broadly, it is going to

form part of a diplomatic offensive,

if you like. I think we can see this

building up. Some fascinating

commons today by US under Secretary

of State to Christian Fraser.

If it was proven there was a link to

the Kremlin, would the United States

do something about that?

I think we

would be very supportive of whatever

decision the United Kingdom made.

What I am hearing is, to quote one

person involved in this, a lot of

conversations are now going on

between the UK and its Western

allies. Obviously starting with

America, but obviously European

allies. This suggests to me that

early next week we may see some

diplomatic push and the finger may

be pointed at a particular country.

Mark, thank you.

The role of King Lear is often

called the Everest of acting -

a part that has been described

variously as unplayable,

debilitating and almost intolerable

for the actor involved.

Sir Anthony Sher's portrayal

for the Royal Shakespeare Company

was called both monumental

and unbearably moving -

certainly, he brought a sense

of the frustration of frailty that

comes with old age.

His new book, Year of the Mad King,

charts the time he spent discovering

"the smell of mortality".

I talked to him earlier

about the role of Lear,

whether Shakespeare's language

was misogynist, and what should

happen to Kevin Spacey now.

I started by asking him how much of

a bearing age as on a production of

King Lear.

Yes, I think that's true.

I think because Shakespeare

charts his old age so

specifically, as you begin

to investigate it, there is

extraordinary resonance with either

older people that you know, or in my

case, my own age.

There are moments of Lear that

are terribly familiar.

And there's a particular point

Lear has these rages

in the early part of the play.

These extraordinary storms of anger

that come out of him.

And in one of the most famous -

his speech, "Reason not the need" -

he loses his way in the middle

of the speech, and has a series of

unfinished sentences.

It's such remarkable writing, that.

The most eloquent

playwright ever makes his

character inarticulate.

And several people have

said that when they see

that, it really makes

them feel quite strange,

because it's their dad up

there on the stage who is trying to

exert his force and

is losing his way.

It's a very remarkable

piece of writing.

There are very funny

moments you describe.

The growing of the beard

for Lear and others, which

creates havoc with your

own personal life.

Well, there is a point

where my beard gets very bushy.

Taxis won't stop for me.

I hail a black cab, it slows down,

takes a look and then speeds off!

And I think they're making

some sort of visual

assessment, that either I am

a tramp or a terrorist.

Some of the Shakespearean

language really shocked

you this time around.

He's describing female genitalia.

He's cursing a woman's loins.

Yeah.

And you think this

is actually coming

from the playwright himself?

Well, there are times

in Shakespeare where

the writing becomes so visceral

that it starts to feel personal.

I find it so shocking,

it is so graphic,

that I just don't know where

Shakespeare is getting that from.

Do you think it's misogynist?

It's definitely misogynist,

but surprising to find

that in a man, a writer

who is so all embracing.

Do you think Shakespeare was

physically repelled by women?

There

is a strong theory that he was gay,

mainly based on the fact that his

most personal writing, the sonnets,

three quarters of them are directed

to a young man. I don't know why

being gay should make him that

frightened of women. I mean, it's so

extreme in that speech, that it's

more than dislike or disgust. It's

like naked terror.

We are at a place

now, it feels as if

the MeToo movement is

rewriting power allocation.

Do you think that's

true in the theatre?

Oh, yes.

Oh, yes, yes.

At the RSC, much more than half

of the production staff up to

the directors are women.

It's very, very evident as a change

in how theatre operates.

And when it is about

sexual abuse or sexual

harassment - obviously

not just about women,

Kevin Spacey was disappeared

from the film he was making, a sense

of sort of being erased -

is that right?

Is that the right approach?

Look, I mean it's -

we are in the kind of shock waves

of the Weinstein scandal,

so everything is very

heightened at the moment.

It's kind of like a big

learning curve that we

have all undergone,

because of the startling revelation.

So I don't know how

things will settle.

Now that we can accept

it as something

that happens and can avoid it

happening, I don't know.

Someone like Spacey,

can he come back

in a couple of years' time?

Do you think you can?

I...

I mean, I hope so,

because he is absolutely

a tremendous actor.

And I guess in the past

we have forgiven people's

personal weaknesses.

It's a tremendous loss to acting.

There is seems almost

an inconsistency,

doesn't there, with the people

that we hold up and hang out,

and the people that we sort

of ignore and move on from?

I wonder if it makes any

sense to you, the sort of

arbitrariness?

It won't any more be

arbitrary, will it?

I mean, if Polanski

was happening now, with us

so much more aware of this kind

of abuse, we wouldn't be

just letting him carry

on, would we?

We'd...

There would be a different reaction.

I really think the Weinstein thing

is a big change than perhaps we

realise yet.

Sir Anthony Sherman talking to me

this evening. Just before we go, let

me show you the front pages of

tomorrow's papers. The times has

Donald Trump saying American allies

could be spared the tariffs on steel

and aluminium. Traders not safe on

British soil, says Russia. The

broadcaster mocking it. The daily

Telegraph has give blood pressure

drugs to half of the UK. Half of the

adult population could be put on

blood pressure drugs. You can see

Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, the

officer now recovering, we believe,

from that nerve agent exposure. The

financial Times has Trump offers

exemptions to -- on steel tariffs to

real friends. And the border point,

Donald Tusk assurers Leo Varadker

that Ireland is top of the Brussels

agenda. The Guardian has NHS staff

getting a 6.5% rise.

That's all for this evening.

But before we go, it's

a very modern worry -

machines, AI, robots are taking

over our jobs.

What does it mean to be human any

more if we're out-competed

on every front by computers?

Ed Miliband once claimed to be

able to solve a Rubik's

cube in 90 seconds.

Here at Newsnight we

were pretty impressed.

Until we saw this invention today

by Ben Katz and Jared Di Carlo

at the Massachusetts

Institute of technology.

Goodnight.

Starting in three, two, one!