10/04/2016 The Papers

final day of the championships from 2:50pm this afternoon. That's all

the sport for now. Hello and welcome to our Sunday

morning edition of The Papers. With me are economic advisor

Ruth Lea and Peter Kellner, political analyst and former

President of pollsters YouGov. The Sunday Telegraph leads

with the story that dominates this morning's papers -

the details of the prime minister's financial affairs,

after David Cameron published The Sunday Times also has the story

and analyses what the paper says The Sunday Mirror claims PM

could avoid paying on inheritance tax on a gift from his mother,

following his father's death. Cameron's decision to be transparent

is hailed as "historic" But it says the PM now faces a fresh

row about his wealth. The financial disclosures also make

the front of the Observer which is concedes is "unprecedented"

by a sitting prime minister. And The Sunday Express also pours

over the details but says it also wants to know how rich

Samantha Cameron is. There will obviously be no end to

this given the various things going on

We will take this in tandem with the mail, which has Cameron tax bill

Dodge on moderate's 200 K gift. This is about inheritance tax. It is

revealed the family may avoid ?70,000 in debt.

This is obviously a major story. For the first time, the Prime Minister

discloses his tax bill. The Sunday Times, in the course of that story,

uses the word Dodge. The mail on Sunday has it on the front page

headline. I take issue with that. No one ever accused me of kowtowing

conservatives. I think David Cameron has a pretty raw deal from a number

of this morning's papers. It is the term tax avoidance. Legal but

perhaps questionable. I think we should ban the word avoidance and

have tax dodging and tax planning. Tax dodging is when you abide by the

law to the letter that you do things which are questionable. Like Jimmy

Carter, the comedian, two or three years ago. What we are talking about

today is David Cameron's mother living in ?200,000. If she gives for

seven years, the wrist inheritance tax. That is not tax dodging, that

is doing what the law is, what you're supposed to do under the law.

If you put money into a pension fund or into an ice as an individual and

don't pay tax, that isn't tax dodging. What we have is proper,

innocent, sensible tax planning. I think to use the word Dodge is wrong

and unfair and inappropriate. Can I suggest that for many people, the

scandal is not the details, not what is in -- not what's illegal, what is

legal and it's about wealth and partly about class. It's partly

about a lot of money, which the Prime Minister takes head on, but

most of us don't get this kind of money from mum and dad. As Peter

says, this is just ordinary tax planning. You have Mrs Cameron, the

mother, is to live seven years and then it's tax-free. The problem is

that he is a wealthy man and his wife is a wealthy woman. If they

were just open and honest and transparent from day one, I don't

think there would be the problems are today. It was interesting last

week when the whole pan papers blew up and it was obvious that Cameron

been involved. Camera's father. At that point, Cameron says, actually,

we did benefit from some of these offshore funds. Let's just admitted

now and get the whole thing out the way. They came up with this woolly

statement that they wouldn't be benefiting from these offshore tax

funds in the future. But the location is that it was in the past.

If you just said there and then, I benefited from these offshore funds,

I think these stories would have started to die. Because there was

that very occasion, that obfuscation, I'm afraid this has

undermined his authority as a time when there are all sorts of other

things happening within his party, within politics, which are quite

damaging. Are you surprised by how cack-handed it has been? He is a PR

person, that was part of his profession in the past. He knows

above anybody that if it is bad news, you get it all out at once and

then you make your apologies. You are right. I think David Cameron is

innocent on what the papers say on the substance of the issue, but he

has handled this in a ridiculous way. Whenever he is faced with

issues, what do I say today to get me pass tomorrow's headlines? Three

or four years ago, he would probably be in internal three party

management. What he did when the Palmer story broke, he thought, how

can I get this past Tuesday's headlines? He said it was a private

affair. But he didn't get it past Tuesday's headlines. They buy day,

he thought 24 hours ahead and got it wrong. I think it is right. He

should from the beginning have said, this is everything. If you have

thought strategically rather than tactically, he would have done that.

But he is tactical rather than strategic. When he was talking about

offshore funds, the indication is that he still benefits from onshore

funds or trusts, which he broke windows, but not another?.

TUC, as some have said, that part of this has got to do with internal

convulsion within the Conservative Party over Brexit or not Bradford?

-- do you see? Some people in the party are rubbing their hands in

glee as Mike in glee at posts Cameron politics. I don't know them

well enough to know whether they are rubbing their hands in glee. The way

this story has just gone on and on, I think it's actually caused quite a

lot of damage now. That clearly will be well come in some parts of the

Tory party. Let's move on to the Telegraph, which has capitalised on

this great story we have about Justin Welby and the way he handled

his paternity issue. It is extraordinary that everybody has

kind of rallied around him and said, fine, well done. Perhaps he has done

what you suggested people should do. It has happened is that we have got

it out into the open and people have accepted it. When I read this story

and his mother's liaison with this gentleman, who in the private sector

worker Winston Churchill, the thing that struck me forcibly was how

there were lashings of lashings of alcohol that seemed to accompany

these activities. It was so 1950s. This is sort of like Agatha Christie

and Miss Marple were anyone who was fatally upper-middle-class bans most

of their time absolutely blotto. To him, I don't think he really had

much alternative. If he hadn't come out with it, there would have been

whisperings, head and he might have had the odds denial and the odd bit

of obfuscation and clarification. At the end of the day, this would have

come out. As it happens, it is out. That's right. There's another

dimension to this which is that scandals, I use the term in inverted

commas, over the last 30 years, most of them have been sexual scandals or

financial scandals. The public has actually ceased to care about what

happens in bad. They are much more concerns. Not only is Justin Welby

right to come straight out with it candidly, fully and in a way which

gets lots of sympathy, it was on an issue that people don't think is

that bad. I shall be quoting calmer's law of what the public

finds scandalous in the future! He had thought Gavin Welby was his

father for 60 years of his life. He also says he finds his identity in

Christ. Perhaps you would expect that. He is also quite clear about

who he is. He is a very stable, focused, centred person which is

helpful. Even so, it must have been quite a surprise. He will get a lot

of wrath from his viewers. Georgia was a tax dodger. If you look at

Churchill's financial arrangements... Tax planner, do you

mean? No! He got royalties for his book which looked like capital gains

which were attacked law than income. It was perfectly acceptable in his

day and secrets. If Churchill were alive today, doing the things he did

then, he would people are far more than David Cameron. That is one to

think about. Let's move on to the server. This story on the EU. Labour

MPs urge Corbin to fight harder for EU in June. This is also striking.

We have heard from quite a lot of people about this, mostly within the

Conservatives, having a go at each other. There are those that think

Jeremy Corbyn is focusing on local elections and will leave the June

poll till after May. He does seem very unenthusiastic about Brexit,

with a British campaign. He is officially in favour of staying in

the EU, but he is saying it without any conviction. You do wonder what

his inner beliefs are. What's happening is the Labour Party isn't

really campaigning very hard to stay in Apple moments, at a time when the

people who are voting for Brexit seem much more energised and

dynamite. Whatever happens at the 23rd of June, I think we can say

that those campaigning for Brexit seem much more highly motivated than

the people who want to remain in. Is the rain methodology behind that? I

detect that to that people like Ruth are going to boats... People who

were supporting Brexit are more likely to turn out than people who

want to stay in. The paradox with David Cameron's position is that if

he survives, he will win the referendum. To win the referendum he

needs Labour supporters to turn out to vote. Voters are on the whole

bracelets. The problem with Jeremy Corbyn, when he stands up to save

Labour's position is to stay in, he looks to me like a hostage saying

the form of words his captors have forced to say. He doesn't look like

he has any enthusiasm. What you got, as some of his critics in the party

have said, he needs to be more enthusiastic. I think they're right.

If Britain is to vote to remain in, because if Corbyn remains

unenthusiastic, it will be a slice of the Labour electorate. I don't

know if they will turn out at all. I'm sure you agree it is one of the

most important votes that any of us will be called to make in our

lifetime. Absolutely. In the Observer column, they're talking

about his natural and historic opposition to the EU, which could be

true. That makes him look even more... Is part of the Cameron story

is we just want to know what the real person is and don't mind too

much providing you are open about it, given that Mr Corbyn, one of his

big selling points is his authenticity, always having said the

same things, is that a problem? I think it is. If people really

believe he has this natural and historic opposition to the EU. It

somehow suggests, as Peter said, he is almost a hostage to his party. In

terms of the Labour Party, what Corbyn should come out, in terms of

the view from remaining in, he should say I have historically been

sceptical but I have changed my mind and this is why. And put some

passion behind that. He could say that that would people believe them?

It's like so many of the Tory quotes, the ex-Eurosceptics who have

said they're going remain in. Philip Hammond, Theresa May. All these

people were out and out Eurosceptics and then suddenly decided to remain

in. Quite honestly, it doesn't look very authentic. We want

authenticity. The man is authentic that is not authentic on this. Let's

move on to the Sunday Times anti-doping row. I thought this was

interesting for a number of reasons. It was the biggest story a week ago

today. Because of the pan papers, it was blown off the front pages. What

struck me was that has been a good week for the British press. They

have turned out some great stories and this was one of them. I shot

doctor dope but watchdog ignored me. The Sunday Times kept out of the

story on the front page. I think this story will come back. The drugs

in sports story is not going away. It may lie dormant because of Panama

for a while but it won't go away. The story today is about the racing

cyclist called Dan Stevens, who has now admitted that he took banned

performance enhancing drugs from Doctor Mark Bowler, who was in last

week's story. He has denied any wrongdoing. The evidence is piling

up of things going badly wrong and perhaps worse, that the anti-doping

agency failed to act on any of it. This is as much as anything a

regulatory failure as well as an intrinsic scandal of wrongdoing. Is

anybody surprised? Right through my life, there have always been stories

about doping in sport, not least in cycling. But those people who are

not interested in sport, we just shrug our shoulders and say that's

how it is. I suspect that it will re-change that much. What is

interesting now is that, for whistle-blowers from the Panama

papers to Snowdon to people in Fifa to be either we yes, whatever you

think about it, if you are up to some dodgy dealings, it used to take

spies in cloak and dagger and perhaps a truckload of papers to get

you. Now it just takes much less. When we were all much younger, these

things were hidden. They were much less important -- much less reported

and people were much more trusting. Perhaps trusting on a false basis.

When things started to go wrong, we entered this age of transparency.

Transparency is meant to restore trust, but what actually happens is

transparency... People are behaving better but they are not behaving

perfectly. When imperfections, which are much more trivial than they were

50 years ago, are much more widely reported, the end result is better

behaviour but more distrust. I'm not sure we are behaving that much

better! Speak for yourself! I thought the Pamela leaks were

incredible. That was a terrific story.

There is a lot more to come, apparently. It has been interesting

how well it has been curated by various news agencies. Let's move on

because one of the great stories is in the mail on Sunday. Lady

Thatcher's daughter Locksley ?300,000 statue because the sculptor

omitted the one vital accessory, which the mail had helpfully added.

That is the handbag. What do you think of this?

I don't know why you are looking at me! You either go to Guy! Can I

delicately hand this over to route? I think that's just bizarre because

I think she looked, if I may say so, for better without the handbag. Not

least of all because it is held unnaturally. You wouldn't all the

handbag like that. Would you? I personally know -- I personally

wouldn't know! It looks ridiculous. The whole poses completely bonkers.

I don't see why she shouldn't have a handbag bearer because, when she was

in the House of Commons, she wouldn't have a handbag, would she?

She wouldn't be carrying it. When she was making the huge conference

speeches, she wasn't holding a handbag. Do we have time for the

other story, the great story of the week, in the Sunday Mirror? It's

page 22, the death of the long dress, apparently. High street rents

are rocketing for them that smacks of the launderette is finished. Do

people still go to the launderette? You do see people in there. Also

during the winter, very cold cats sitting on the tumble dryers. Well,

that justifies it. Being a cat lover, that justifies it. I've used

them in the 70s and 80s. This is a series -- just like public telephone

boxes, they are more or less disappeared from lots of places.

People no longer needs the public facility. But some do. What happens

if a business of telephone boxes or launderette is, there are not enough

people around for them to be viable. You are cutting off perhaps a small

minority but they minority who really need these services. I don't

know what the answer is. Should we subsidise the one launderette in

every area? One should not forget the minority who were deeply

affected. We will leave it there. Just a reminder, we take a look

at tomorrow's front pages every evening at 10:30 and 11:30pm

here on BBC News.