The following is my column in todays Argus newspaper:  As Hollywood and Westminster are both impacted by public revelations about the behaviour of a small but deeply influential number of community members it seems inevitable that the cultural change which is needed will have a short term negative impact on all of us. However this is clearly a price worth paying if it leads to a safer and morally credible environment in the world of film and lawmaking. If the power brokers who operate behind the scenes close down the focus after each admission rather than call for more honesty and transparency, then the pain will go on much longer and may even lead to these two edifices losing their role. The studios in Hollywood and the parties in Westminster need to treat the Weinstein and Fallon cases as an indication that to quote the leader of the Scottish Conservative Party, Ruth Davidson “some pretty big shovels” will be needed to ‘clear the stables’ of politics, that “the dam has burst” on a culture of harassment in parliament and the “boy’s own locker room culture” had to end.

The loss of new films made by Directors and Producers who have played a key role in that world up until now will disappoint their fans, but also open up the space for new ideas and new talent to emerge. This will of course take time and lead to some poor quality films being produced. Assuming that the same culture that operated around Weinstein exists in the financial structures, then there will need to be time allowed for new ways of financing. However there is plenty of unrecognised talent waiting to be found and the public desire to see good films will create a strong business case for new financing mechanisms. If the end result is a series of small but influential independent studios, ultimately the film industry will be much healthier and more valuable than it is today.

The situation in Westminster in most senses is a great deal more concerning. The loss of momentum and direction in Hollywood will not cause any nation to be damaged in the way in which the same challenge on Westminster does. The failings of the three main British parties to deal with issues which Michael Fallon refers to as his lack of adherence to “the high standards that we require of the armed forces” over recent decades is something that has to be resolved as a matter of urgency, yet the formation of new ways of running our democracy at the time when our nation is going through its most significant structural change for over 40 years has the potential for catastrophe. Ruth Davidson stated this “isn’t actually about sex. It’s about power. It’s always about power. And we as elected representatives have to hold ourselves to a higher standard.” The problem for Westminster is that the power, whilst nominally ours as voters is really held in place by parties such as Ruth’s. It is for this reason that Michael Fallon feels free to remain as an MP, despite his failings being announced to the 69,925 electors in his constituency of whom 32,644 voted for him in June. However he did not feel free to remain in Government, nor to represent the armed forces, yet he retains the party whip and the verbal support of Theresa May in sitting on the Government benches. Now is surely the time for parties and political groups such as the Womens Equality Party and Compass along with More United and National Health Action Party to be listened to by all of us. None of these parties and groupings are perfect, but a more diverse Parliament moving forward would diminish the dominance of 2 or 3 parties who control the way in which their members are seen in public because doing so strengthens their prospect of running the country. The reason why Michael Fallon is welcome on the Tory backbench is because if he called a by-election and the party lost, and assuming one or two other colleagues follow suit, they could end up on the opposition benches which they would see as far too high a price to pay!