ido knowing what the accusation is. i do not, as a rule grope people's bottoms. what will the effects on oui’ bottoms. what will the effects on our politics and the main parties be as allegations accumulate? can you judge a regime by how children are treated? we look at children are treated? we look at children liberated from islamic state. also tonight, given what we have heard about kevin spacey, should we still be watching house of cards? it has been yet another extraordinary elliptical day. it is a strange to see ideological debate replaced by

talks of inappropriate intimate touching. new expose day after day. one is spinning out of control. struggling to find the words to cope with it. jeremy corbyn was asked about it this morning but was unable to offer any comment. goodbye. this evening, we had new accusations against three mps coming out how after all. two former members of the shadow cabinet at one well—known conservative mp. let's start with charlie elphicke. an mp for the conservative. the tory chief whip issued a statement saying they received allegations against charlie elphicke. they suspended him from the party and passed the issue to the party and passed the issue to the police. charlie elphicke at cricket a statement. saying he is

not aware of any allegation and denies any wrongdoing. we know very little about that. clive lewis, he was pretty well—known and indeed got into trouble for using the phrase get on your knees at a party conference. a brief party statement said the party is investigating a formal complaint. an activist said she touched in inappropriately while having a hard at a party. clive lewis came out very quickly after that. he went to the news channel and denied it. i do not, as a rule, at pact labour party conferences,

grope people's bottoms when i greet them. it isjust grope people's bottoms when i greet them. it is just not what i do. is that the person mistaken? have i given them a hug and this has been misinterpreted? i do not know. but i do know that i would not deliberately do that. the third one today, ivan lewis, again a former labour shadow cabinet member. allegations that he once touched an activist‘s lakes and another was about his conduct as a minister in the department of health. he denies the department of health. he denies the first of those and he put out a statement that sort of says that if there were problems in the department of health, nobody else knew about them. i have occasionally

asked women i worked without to dinner all the drinks. yesterday, kelvin hopkins, another former shadow cabinet member, that case emerged. today, late this afternoon, a firm emerged. today, late this afternoon, afirm and emerged. today, late this afternoon, a firm and strong denial. a statement was put up yesterday about with appropriate behaviour. his statement is striking because it features a trope and he makes a point about how cordial the relationship was after the incident has taken place. it is a difficult thing to grapple with because fundamentally, if you are someone in a position of authority, you have the power to do something to begin

with, that power does not dissipate whenever something unpleasant happens. it is very awkward and difficult. that was part of the description we got. thank you very much indeed. joining me is jasmine back it, a young labour ‘s representative in the national executive committee which runs at the labour party. is the party did up the labour party. is the party did upfor the labour party. is the party did up for dealing with the volume of allegations? yes, i think that we have a lot in it to improve. we recently passed a new sexual harassment policy which is a huge step forward for us but it does not go far enough. it does not introduce an independent body away from politics to deal with these complaints so that is a huge reason why people have not been coming

forward. it is something we need to look at. you wrote an e—mail to the nec and jeremy corbyn and in it you say there are people who still do not want to complain. you know of more members who want to complain but do not feel as though they can. and that this is not a rarity. they area and that this is not a rarity. they are a lot of rumours and i have been in positions myself will wear i have been hiked inappropriately. remarks made towards myself and i know, as fantastic as they are, staff members dealing with these complaints and ultimately the nec dispute body which will dispute over them, it puts you off from making a complaint because these are people that you know and they might note the person you're making the complaint against. you represent young labour. age is a

factor in some of these cases. it your view, if a 55—year—old propositions and ambitious 25—year—old, is that on its own unacceptable behaviour? yes, i mean, it is clear that mps in any political party in a position of power, if they abuse that power then it is wrong. it should not be happening. chris cook was saying just before, in some of these cases, the women seem to have good relations with the mp or the person beforehand a good relations afterwards. a lot of people say, it cannot have been that bad if they we re cannot have been that bad if they were friends afterwards. do you think that can form any part of the defence of someone accuse inappropriately, propositioned ? defence of someone accuse

inappropriately, propositioned? no, asi inappropriately, propositioned? no, as i say, these people are in positions of power and ultimately these are the people deciding on the laws in our country and that they should know better. as i said today in my e—mail, with the labour party, we wa nt in my e—mail, with the labour party, we want to look like a society which we want to look like a society which we wish to create. if our mps and oui’ we wish to create. if our mps and our procedures to not look like that, i worry that 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 whetherjeremy 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. 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: that the matters raised do not they said they would not comment on a story that dates back more than 20 years. relate to a bbc programme and date 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 about 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. 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 injuly. 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. 0h, 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. it 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 push you one more time, you wouldn't watch house of cards? i do watch it and i won't lie 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 literally by watching it i am putting more money into someone who is a proven predator's hands. i think there is a different between that and watching old woody allen films for pleasure. i think if 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 interesting that sex

and sexual aggression does seem to be taken more seriously than other violent crime. you could imagine somebody involved in a violent crime or coming out ofjailfor 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, then there is a question about do 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 these are 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 withjimmy 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... it is. i think we all make moral choices on a continuum and as a watcher or viewer of whatever it is. 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. there's 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 things on our behalf. that's where i worry we get into pushing a whole lot of difficult 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 but nevertheless enjoy his type face and his work? that is a difficult one. i was writing a book about child ren'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. 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. that's all from us this evening.