04/04/2016 The Papers

Hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the the papers will be

With me are the journalist and author Rachel Shabi

and Toby Young, author and associate editor

Tomorrow's papers, starting with the FT.

The FT's main picture features three serving leaders implicated

in the Panama tax leaks story - Sigmundur Gunnlaugsson from Iceland,

Petro Poroshenko of Ukraine, and Vladimir Putin.

The Kremlin said "Putinphobia" was behind the leaks.

"Wish you were hiding your money here" is The i's take

They say that half the companies exposed are based in

The Telegraph lead on a poll claiming that the EU Remain campaign

is gaining ground with the headline, "project fear is working".

A handful of walnuts a day could help us live longer

by preventing heart disease according to research published

Back to the Panama Papers in the Guardian.

They put David Cameron centre stage, they say the PM has insisted his

late father's offshore fund, which avoided paying any tax

That's also the top story in The Times.

They claim that Ian Cameron's investment fund paid no UK tax

And The Mail also go with those leaked documents,

"Cameron dragged into Tax havens storm."

No letters talk about some of those stories. We will start with The

Guardian that has access to a lot of the leaked material. Rachel, tell us

what they have on their front page. There are going with David Cameron's

father. They are focusing on a couple of things on the front page,

they followed from these leaks but also David Cameron and the fact that

his father avoided paying UK tax. David Cameron has insisted that this

is a private matter and he says it was looked into if years ago, or he

responded to it if you years ago. This is problematic when the father

of the Prime Minister is making use of these tax havens. I don't think

it is problematic. There are two things I find really annoying. The

liberal left led by The Guardian condemns The Daily Mail as morally

disgusting for using Ed Miliband's father to attack him when they ran

that story about Ralph Miliband. Why is it acceptable to use David

Cameron's father to attack him when it is unacceptable to use Ed

Miliband's father to attack him? Whatever your view about the

morality of using tax shelters offshore to legally avoid paying

tax, I don't see how David Cameron can be held responsible for the

actions of his father. If he can then every single Guardian

journalist is equally responsible because they use the tags heading in

2008. -- they use the tax haven. If the Prime Minister's late father is

named in these kinds of documents it would be strange of the newspaper

didn't mention it. It would be audited and mention it but the

suggestion is that there is something dodgy. He benefited from

his father's perfectly legal use of tax shelters, but he had no choice

over whether to benefit or not. He had no choice about whether to

benefit but he could stop bashing people who do not have the

privileges he had, but more importantly he is the Prime

ministers since he has the power to close these loopholes. The whole

thing that it's still annoying is not who has benefited or not, it is

the fact that the people that are benefiting from it are so closely

allied to the governments that failed to prevent its. This idea

that the Prime Minister has the power to close the loopholes is only

partly true, because if you're going to resolve this issue, and you can

debate how serious it is, it has to be global. Of course, I'm not saying

the David Cameron is any more guilty. There is a conclusion of the

leaves are perpetuated the system and they are in it together. It is

an important story and it reveals the extent of corruption by

political leaders across the globe, but the attempt to turn it into a

partisan issue and to use it to bash the Conservatives or capitalism or

the leaders in the West is ridiculous. The only way you can

improve it is not a partisan story is that there was a progressive

Labour government under Jeremy Corbyn and they did not close the

loopholes. Then you create accused them of being hypocritical. George

Osborne has close more tax loopholes in his six years than Gordon Brown

did in ten years. That is why said a progressive Labour government. It

strikes me it is not necessarily a left- right issue. The issue of

whether people should pay the right amount of tax. That is what is so

annoying to most people is the fact that most people are bearing the

brunt where we are paying our taxes and taking collective responsibility

for the running of the country and elites are not. They are getting a

way out. It emerged that the last general election that Labour's

greatest and it was the tax avoid. One of the reasons Ken Livingstone

lost the mayoral election was because it emerged he was avoiding

tax, powerful illegally. This was one of the loopholes that George

Osborne shut down. We need to move on. The Financial Times, they are on

the same story. They have taken the more international view of it in

terms of who else is mentioned and might be feeling uncomfortable. I

think this is a blow against David Cameron and it will be forgotten

about in 24 hours. I hope it will not. The story about Vladimir Putin

is much more serious. The story is that people closely connected to him

are funnelling billions of pounds through these offshore tax shelters

and investing in the alias industries -- in various industries.

It paints a picture of Vladimir Putin at the centre of a web of

corruption, which comes as no surprise to anyone who has been

following his regime. This will hurt Labour because of links with

Vladimir Putin. You are now free styling to ludicrous degree. I am

denying that connection. We should focus on... We must... No leader is

any less more guilty than the other. To say that Vladimir Putin is more

corrupt... To say he is more corrupt then David Cameron is wrong? You

have to let me finish one sentence. There are other things coming and we

will hear about other leaders. This points to corruption on a scale that

is very widespread. I do not think it is justifiable for the Kremlin to

accuse the British media or the global media of being against likely

near Britain because other leaders have also been accused. -- being

against Britain. -- Vladimir Putin. Somehow the accusations against

Vladimir Putin cannot be presented as being similar. They are all

avoiding paying tax. I'm going to move it all now. There is another

subject here you both agree on, Project Fear is working is the front

page of The Daily Telegraph. We were talking about this earlier and we do

agree that who can trust the polls as they seem to be swinging every

day. I don't think anything can be revealed from which way the polls

are going, but I do think that the gentleman quoted in this piece has

said the one true thing he will ever say which is that the outcome of the

referendum will hinge on which side can turn out their supporters. I

think that is likely to be the case. I fear that a lot of people will

stay at home. I think The Daily Telegraph has over emphasising the

results of this poll, the paid for it. It is the telephone poll and

generally they show a stronger trend to remain badly. The general trend

over the past couple of weeks has been towards leaving rather than

remaining, insofar as there is any detectable movement in the polls and

we need to take it with our pension of salt especially as they could not

affect the last general election results. Rachel made the point about

turnout been key. The campaigns are virtually tied at the moment so this

idea of the people who are not sure whether they will bother will make a

difference. Project Fear doesn't alienate a lot of people. They will

be less likely to vote and the lower the turnout than were likely they

are to win. You could argue that the campaign to leave is also quite

fearful and they are turning people away in equal numbers. Note The

Times. They were talking about people preaching jihad. This goes

back to 1993. It is a terrible story. The story has been uncovered

by Andrew Norfolk from The Times and is producing good journalism these

days. This story is that one of the biggest Islamic sects which controls

almost half of the 16,000 mosques in Britain invited an extremist cleric

for a 30 day visit in 2003. He went on a tour of the mosques lecturing

young Muslims and urging them to seek weapons training in Pakistan

and they are linking this to one of the London suicide bombers, who it

seems attended one of these lectures. It speaks to the wider

story about the tolerance within our own news on community for Islamic

extremism being far greater than is often claimed by representatives of

the Masonic unity. I don't think it points to that at all. This is a

really frightening story and it is very troubling if it is true. I

don't think there is intolerance for Islamist extremism amongst British

Muslim communities. I have spent a lot of time with those people and

they are just as worried as anyone else. There was a BBC poll a few

years ago after the Charlie Hebdo though murders where a large number

of Muslims said that they got what was coming to them. I don't think

they said they got what was coming to them. Are we talking about

Charlie Hebdo? There is a difference between condemning what happens to

the cartoonist which everyone does and, at the same time, questioning

the kinds of cartoons they were running. No one is suggesting that

to question Charlie Hebdo is to condemn them to death. A bit like to

get one more story and if I can. I know you sought earlier ritual. It

is in The Telegraph. This is a story saying that magicians are failing to

check children because they do not blink as much as adults and the

premise of this is that slight of hand happens when you blink and

because children do not blink predictably... It seems like

complete rubbish. The notion that children are not taken in by magic

because they blink too much. When the magician takes the woman out of

the cabinets and Solitaire and have, the rest of us are blinking so we do

not notice. It was on the front of The Telegraph so it must be true and

accurate. On that note thank you both very much.

Thank you Rachel Shabi and Toby Young.

These headlines have just come in. There is an alarming rise in

children self harming. The Daily Mirror says that the Prime Minister

also has questions to answer. And The Independent says that Europe

closes its doors to refugees under the EU's repulsive. Do not forget

that the front pages are lying on the BBC news website where you can

read them in detail. You can see us there as well. Each addition of The

Papers was posted on the page shortly after we had finished. Now

it is time for the weather. The heaviest of the showers have now

faded away. There was thunder and lightning earlier Ron but that is

now mostly gone. For the rest of the night