10/04/2016 The Papers

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

With me are Kevin Schofield, who's the Editor of Politics Home,

Nice to have you both here. We were slightly worried that neither of

them would make it because of transport difficulties. The front

pages, then. The Telegraph says David Cameron

will make a 'robust defence' of tax-free gifts within families

when he stands up in The Mirror says the Prime Minister

faces a 'public grilling' over what it calls a 'second secret

stash of shares'. The Times says the focus is now

shifting to the Chancellor, George Osborne, and whether he'll

publish his tax returns, The Guardian has more

on the Panama Papers, alleging links between a top

government tax official and the offshore fund belonging

to Mr Cameron's late father. The FT leads with warnings over

negative interest rates - they're intended to encourage growth

but could undermine consumer spending, according to one major

asset management group. Pressures on A is the top story

for the Metro - it has a story about a grandmother forced to wait

in a corridor for nearly 13 hours. The Express claims that the EU

is poised to launch what it calls a 'power grab' for Britain's

pensions and benefits. It's like Groundhog Day, isn't it?

We will start with the Panama papers and all the fallout. The Telegraph,

one of many with David Cameron's tax affairs on the front page. Why he

needs to do that, Penny, I don't know, because the law says you can.

We keep coming back to the same thing. If it's illegal, the problem,

of course, is when they operate on the margins and it's all about,

let's try and see if we can find a loophole. As we know, it is all

about low poll. The point is, this is not about loopholes, it's

actually the law that says you can give your children this money

without paying tax on it. So what's the problem? Unless you are

inherently disagree with that, in which case, of course there's a

problem, but then there you need to change the law.

There were revelations about these Panama papers and secret deals that

were being done abroad that were being hidden. This has nothing to do

with the Prime Minister, but it's become a very personal story for

him. It has grown arms and legs in the week has gone on. Obviously, his

father set up and run an offshore trust. That was the connection at

first. Downing Street, the way they try to close it down last Monday was

by saying that the Prime Minister's financial affairs are a private

matter, and the thought that would draw a line under it, but that

didn't work out. -- and they thought. Here we are a week later,

and now David Cameron, Parliament is back tomorrow, so he is going into

the Commons tomorrow to talk about this, and he is going to mount, it

says here, a robust defence. This is not really part of the Panama papers

at all, it is about the prime Minster's own financial arrangements

and whether or not he or his family have benefited or have tried to

dodge inheritance tax as a result of a ?200,000 gift from his mother. If

he waited two years, there would be no tax to pay. The whole thing is,

this all started when there was no absolute full and frank confection,

as it were. If that had been the case, it would all have probably

been, I don't know, but the suggestion is it would have been

dust and done by now. First day, this is what happened, Bash Bosh,

all done. The sums of money involved are beyond the wildest dreams of

most people. The fact that the Prime Minister run the arms -- only earns

?140,000. The figures are huge, and that is what is causing the alarm.

If you look at the other front page... Would you like us to move

on? I really was just... Let's do it anyway. All right! I just wanted to

point to the Guardian, which is what many people will be feeling. This is

not the story on the left. It is the other one which says the ultra rich

are opting out of society while controlling it. Whether or not you

agree, there are many people who feel that is the case. Indeed. Shall

we look at the story we have boxed off on the left? Kevin. Again, as

you say, this Panama papers then broke a week ago. There may be still

a few weeks of this to run. The story they have today, or tomorrow

rather, is that the head of HM RC, the Inland Revenue, which has been

put in charge by David Cameron of investigating the Panama papers and

whether any illegal activity has taken place, it turns out his name

is Edward Troop, a former partner in a law firm whose clients included

David Cameron's father's overseas trust, Blairmore Holdings. It is a

bit convoluted uncomplicated. In actual fact, six paragraphs down, it

says there is no suggestion of wrongdoing. But they've raised it

anyway! Isn't that the whole thing? It is not quite poacher turned

gamekeeper, but they have that. They have to have people with expertise

who can go in and oversee the industry. There is a pool of

experts. I expect that what they are insinuating in some way, even though

there is no wrongdoing, is that it is all very cosy and everybody knows

everybody. David Cameron, in another attempt to draw a line under this,

has set up the tax force that will report to the Chancellor later in

the year. They are trying to make out that if HM RC are in charge of

it and the guy who is in charge of HM RC was in some way connected to

the Panama papers... How independent can it be? Is it not a little bit

suspect is mac we found out the Prime Minister is going to make this

statement tomorrow in the House of Commons. There is also some

suggestion as well that he will talk about making a criminal offence if

companies and their employees are found to be aiding and abetting

evasion. They have said that before. This may be David Cameron trying to

reiterate it and show that this isn't something the Government has

stumbled upon because he is in a bit of bother, that they are actually

taking steps already. To be fair, they have done a bit on tackling tax

avoidance and corruption. It's just, I think, people will look at it and

think, this all looks like shutting the stable door after the horse has

bolted. It is a whole herd of forces. Anybody can put the money

offshore, if you know what you're doing, and if you have enough money.

But most people don't have, do they? It comes back to the essential

things in which is, these people say we are all in it together, and it

feels like we are all in it together apart from the people at the top.

That is how it feels to a lot of people.

The Labour Party would like that to change. The New Dave says, isn't it

time we demand all MPs tell the truth about tax. Full transparency.

Labour are suggesting it should be mandatory for MPs to publish details

of any offshore holdings, because a tax return one tell you that. No, it

want. We're talking about full disclosure in that case. Jeremy

Corbyn on TV this morning has agreed that all MPs, or even anyone

standing to be an MP, even, he said political journalists - I'm not sure

about that! Nothing to hide! It looks like this is the direction

we're heading at an -- heading in at the moment. He didn't touch on

inheritance tax? He didn't want to pursue that. A lot of people are

saying, what about Tony Benn, who left quite a bit of money to his

family? That was... Again, it is all about... It is legal. Ed Miliband as

well had an arrangement with his mother. We should all be so lucky.

They are saying at the moment that perhaps it should be overhauled at

the moment because it unfairly penalises the middle classes.

That's it - tax done, for this hour. The Financial Times - China admits

steel glut to stay as executive attacks naive Europeans. The blame

is being firmly laid at the door of the EU. And Britain in particular,

for not tackling the Chinese steel glut. Yes, around 40,000 British

steel workers face a very uncertain future, to put it mildly, as a

result, mainly, of cheap Chinese steel being dumped on the market.

The head of US steel is saying it is all Europe's own fault because they

could have taken steps to stop China from doing this and have chosen not

to. The states have put massive tariffs on Chinese steel. They are

saying that Europe shouldn't be supporting the WTO's bid to make

China a market economy, because it is still essentially a Communist

country got up he is throwing the blame on Europe, saying, there is no

point in blaming Europe now. -- the Chinese will be a huge market.

But at what cost to us? In manufacturing, we keep on getting

dreadful figures about it and industry. You have to sort of say,

at what point do we need to protect the workers and the industries that

we need? In the future, we will be purveyors of fine waiters and

waitresses. And call centres. Service industries to the world.

I and possibly Penny, need to declare an interest, as we are from

Leicestershire. We didn't have a football team. Touching distance is

the headline. They got seven points clear. You have never been to

Leicester. Fantastic story, whoever you support. Unless you are a

Tottenham fan, because they are the only team that can release top them

in the league. If you are neutral or a supporter of another club, it is

incredible. It would be the most incredible story of the Premier

League a, and maybe going back to the 70s. -- the Premier League era.

They have created, without doubt, the greatest team. You just hope

that they can see it over the line. Jamie Vardy got a lot of credit

because he scored the goals. He has scored 20 goals, the most since Gary

Lineker in 1984. Gary Lineker said that if Leicester win, he will... He

said he will present the first Match Of The Day. I was asked to do the

news. In the event that it happens. Kasper Schmeichel, the goalkeeper, a

very clean sheet. They have no real superstars in their team. They are

more than the sum of their parts. There are no prima donnas, just

great, traditional sporting players. I was reading an article in one of

the weekend magazines about all the supporters. They were just so

excited for stop its lovely. You hope for their sick that they can

see it through, because the disappointed if they don't would

be... Don't! My house, they would be wearing black armbands.

The Telegraph - town hall planning chiefs sending drones. What's that

about? Drones could be used to check on planning applications will stop

it is being used by councils to fly over the homes of people seeking

planning approval. Two councils admitted that they have been used.

They are using them -- they have used them in the past check on the

condition of council buildings. Of course, the problem is about privacy

and all the rest of it. Two drones for five grand - not bad. Years ago,

people used to come to the door saying, we have flown over your

house and taken a photo, would you like to buy? I think that was in the

1980s. I had somebody not so long ago, but where I live it is a lot

like the 1980s. They sold them to you. You would have a big old

photograph or stop it is quite sinister, the drone technology. --

big old photograph. It's quite sinister, the drone technology.

That is it for this hour. We will be back in an hour or more. Stay with

those here on BBC News. At 11pm, the row over the primer is the's tax

affairs continues as Labour continues to call for David Cameron

to reveal more information.