15/10/2016 The Papers

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

With me are Tony Evans, sports columnist for

the London Evening Standard, and Caroline Wheeler, political

Welcome! We have a lot to get through. You will earn your keep

tonight! The Sunday Telegraph leads

on disquiet among military chiefs at a secret criminal investigation

into British troops accused of mistreating two Iraqis,

themselves believed to be responsible for murdering two

British soldiers 13 years ago. The Sunday Times publishes

a hitherto unseen article written by Boris Johnson on why the UK

should remain in the EU. The paper says it was written

two days before the now Foreign Secretary came out

in favour of Brexit. The Observer splashes on criticism

of the Prime Minister's so-called obsession with grammars

by the head Ofsted. The Express warns that thousands

of chemists will close if spending cuts due to be announced this

week go ahead. The Mail on Sunday gives its front

page over to the SAS soldier who's facing murder charges

after admitting shooting dead two or three fatally

wounded Iraqis in combat. A very mixed bag of stories. Let's

start with The Sunday Times. Boris Johnson - my case the Britain to

stay in Europe. When did he write this, Caroline? How has it come to

light? This was after the shock that he was going to campaign for Brexit,

and we've known about the existence of this art -- of this article for

some time but it is the first time we've seen the detail and the entire

article is on page eight. It is contained in a new book All-out War,

and we've heard many of his books. In this article Boris Johnson

predicts that Brexit could lead to an economic shock, Scottish

independence and Russian aggression, which, funnily enough, are all

things we've seen happen, but one of the very interesting things we've

seen happen in this story is that he he's always been seen something of a

Remainder anyway, but this seeks to dispel that by suggesting this

article published today was just dashed off and he wasn't very

convinced by the arguments he wrote in the article, and that's what

convinced him he would back Brexit. He was using the piece to clarify

his mind. Don't we all do that! You know what your own minders. It's

been very gentle with Boris, this piece. It is saying he looked at the

arguments and saw they were less strong than the ones to leave. The

answer is, he's written them both, so which way the wind has blown and

jumped for the one that suits them. School standards will be hit for

most and The Observer said we should be focusing on the skills we need

post Brexit. Most people are against grammars and cannot understand the

obsession Theresa May has with them but on the other hand you have the

Tory Party saying they are going to concentrate on schools to take

Britain forward. I think this is another model where they haven't

thought it through properly. The Conservatives would say, it is not

grammar schools and nothing else. There will be a variety? Yes, I was

into being Justine Greening ten days ago and is very question was raised.

What about those children who aren't going to get into a grammar school?

She was very clear that she did want to have a major focus on vocational

education, clearly with the idea in mind that we need to build up our

home-grown skills post Brexit, and she was very clear about that, but

also being clear about the idea that they need to focus on working-class

boys and the 11-year-olds, which is where it all starts, and making sure

education at primary level is right as well. Let's look at your front

page, Caroline. Prescription disaster. The end of the late-night

chemists. Why? Well, the government is looking to cut pharmacies, which

could mean 3000 chemists closing. We are expecting an announcement early

next week and there's been a furious backlash against it, the suggestion

being that those extra services pharmacies provide, the extended

hours, the delivering of prescriptions to your home, will be

truncated because they won't be able to do it. And even today there has

been a petition launched and in one day it has attracted almost 70,000

signatures in just a few days of imposing these cuts. It's an insult

on the health service at every level. They are making cuts wherever

they can and I suspect it is more ideological than what is good for

people. But if something has to go, would people rather travel a bit to

their pharmacy than -- and keep their A open? It is the level of

cuts. It is not even peanuts, it is the sort of the Peanuts! It is

nothing. There is enough money in this country to keep the health

service in a good condition and it is ideological. The Sunday

Telegraph. A couple of stories about troops facing charges. This is an

investigation which seems to have gone on in secret, it says. A

criminal investigation into the treatment of Iraqi men at the hands

of British troops. Those men were taken in and detained because they

had been involved in the deaths of two British soldiers. Yes. Because

we suspect these Iraqis of being involved in the deaths of British

soldiers, you can treat them anywhere you like. That's the

implication. If you get them, prosecute them, find a way of

dealing with them. They need to be investigated if found guilty of

maltreatment. We need to have certain standards in the British

Army and you can't just say, our poor troops, let them do it. But the

scandal is the timescale. I agree with you there. We certainly can't

say that we won't investigate any allegations from our troops just

because they've been there doing the duty of their country but what I

think is scandalous in this is the timescale. We're talking about 13

years that this has been going on. But also the other scandal is the

amount of money lawyers have been earning in the meantime, progressing

with lots and lots of cases such as this, and as we say, the Sunday

Telegraph is the only paper to have a story of this nature, which shows

there is such a large number of these cases. But can you have a

statute of limitations on something as serious as maltreatment? Well, it

should have been done more quickly. Caroline has just referred to this

disturbance story. Despicable betrayal of an SAS hero, it says.

Facing murder charges after an investigation by the MoD into a

mercy killing of we don't know how many soldiers. Iraqi soldiers. So

killing people on the battlefield is a mercy killing? It says they were

actually severely, mortally wounded. Was he a doctor? Why would you do

that? How did he make the decision? This is a very dangerous precedent.

It is not an SAS soldier, it is somebody who has Matt Baker -- made

bad choices. But it is the pressure of war and how it can affect your

thinking. Surely that has to be taken into consideration? I agree

what you have said to an extent. The idea of a mercy killing at any level

is disturbing. But I take on board what you are saying. Again, we're

talking about 13 years for an investigation to be carried out.

This chap has been under investigation for 13 years. That's

where the shock lies. You can't have it both ways. Let's move on and look

at the Sunday Telegraph again. Corbynite accused of creating a safe

space for anti-Semites. -- Jeremy Corbyn accused of. This hasn't been

dealt with yet in the Labour Party. Do you need me to show you? Do not

have it? I'm so sorry. This has been rumbling on for a long time. They

had an inquiry led by Dame Chakravarty, who sits in the House

of Lords. This is the Home Affairs Select Committee, which is a very

prestigious Home Affairs Select Committee within the House of

Commons. Three MPs sit on it but one of them was dismissed temporarily

because she herself was investigated for some claims around anti-Semitism

herself. This report is basically accusing the Labour Party of being

institutionally anti-Semitic, which is a very, very serious allegation,

and I suppose the reason it is so disturbing is that it goes so much

further than the report which was branded by many as somewhat of a

whitewash. And what has Jeremy Corbyn said in response? He claims

it is politicising anti-Semitism and just anti-Labour. Not much of a

response, really. But I would probably go as far as to say the

Labour Party is institution -- I wouldn't say there are

institutionally anti-Semitic but it is something I certainly have

concerns about. And other papers saying it is a lack of leadership?

Yes, a lack of consistent late -- leadership. He was very strong one

anti-Semitism at the Labour Party Conference but previous messages

we've seen coming from him haven't been so strident. I understand he

was invited to go to Israel to actually see for himself that the

homeland of the Jewish population, and he's turned down the request.

You can be anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian and not

anti-Semitic. But it is about the policies of a government than a

nation? Absolutely. They need to make a strong stand on this. We meet

the female Republicans standing by their man! Donald Trump went at

another of his campaign rallies. What is the appeal? I can't see it

at all! I genuinely can't see it! This is a man who has said some

fairly shocking things about women and almost suggested his stardom may

deter OK for him to feel these women up, and now there's been a string of

people coming forward to say that's what he's done and they weren't keen

on him doing it. -- stardom made it OK. Conversely to that, we have

Hillary Clinton, who could be the first female president of the United

States, who doesn't have the support of the sisterhood at all. It is a

very perverse state of affairs. In the United States, they've had

nothing like the Jimmy Savile situation. What Donald Trump was

talking about was not just locker room banter or hitting on women. He

said it himself - using his stardom because you can get away with it.

And that is far more insidious. The problem is, there's a section of

American society where he can do anything and they will vote for him,

so disaffected bay buy the political situation. He could get away with

wink murder. -- disaffected they are by the political situation. This is

The Observer saying Scotland is open for business, as Nicola Sturgeon has

said they want to remain a trading partner for the EU, but how does

that happen? One of the irony of -- one of the ironies of Brexit is that

they might break up the union. Scotland voted against leaving the

European Union. There might be material grounds for another

referendum for Scotland's independence. Except it won't do

much good for her given France and Germany have already said Scotland

is part of the UK and we are only going to do business with the UK,

and the fact that Donald Tusk has said he won't meet her to discuss

their application to join. Even as an independent country. It is not

much different from what she's been saying at every single opportunity

she's been given. We get the message, Nicola. We understood loud

and clear! I expect they are in the horse trading that goes on. People

will take different positions repeatedly over the next year or so.

What people say to us is not necessarily what is being discussed

behind closed doors! You'll both be back at 11.30pm

for another look at the stories