06/01/2014 The Papers

fortunes of English critic. We will also see how Portugal said farewell

to a footballing legend. And bad news for British tennis ahead of the

Australian open next week. Hello. Welcome to our lookahead at

what the papers will be bringing us tomorrow. With BR broadcaster Penny

Smith and Randeep Ramesh, the social affairs editor at The Guardian. We

will start with the Express. It says the good run for the FTSE 100 means

pensioners are due a windfall. The Financial Times says that Britain's

car industry is now the most buoyant in Europe thanks to improved

consumer confidence. The Telegraph says speed limit will be lowered on

some roads to reduce air pollution. The independently each with spending

cuts proposed I George Osborne, which have been criticised by the

Liberal Democrats. The Guardian says talks of a Cabinet clash over the

policy. The Mail says that the Environment Secretary wants shoppers

to buy British food in season, instead of imports. It also pictures

a giant wave in south Wales, and the people risking the storm for a front

row seat. We're going to start with this story that has been dominating

the news throughout the day, the announcement by the Chancellor that

if the Conservatives win the next election they will have more

spending cuts. ?25 billion worth, and about half of that is going to

come from the welfare budget. Let's show you some of the front pages,

detailing that. There you have the Guardian. Cabinet clash over Osborne

welfare cuts. The Independent, happy New Year from George Osborne. That

is his New Year message, there are going to be more cuts. Let's have a

look at... Well, that is it, actually. It is on the front page of

the Daily Telegraph as well, welfare cuts spark fury from Nick Clegg. It

is on the front there, as well. Randeep, it is not the New year's

message that people want to hear, but the Tory half of the coalition

is saying it is very necessary? George Osborne is doing two things,

looking for votes, and secondly he is pitching the political debate

where he wanted, talking tough about welfare. His thing is that Labour

does not have an offer in that space and he is going to win the argument

by talking tough on welfare. You can see the reaction from his Cabinet

colleagues, they are gassed. Iain Duncan Smith thinks, I have

delivered you ?18 billion worth of spending cuts. -- they are I --

aghast. I think it is an interesting political debate. It may never come

to pass, because we have to see who wins the election. It is

interesting, one assumes that the Treasury, or at least the

Conservatives and Mr Crosby, have told this to within an inch of its

life and think it is a good idea? They must do. The thing is, they

keep on. Nick Clegg has been talking about it as being an unrealistic,

unfair attack on the poor while demanding no sacrifices from the

wealthy. In fact, I think the big point here is, can they, if they did

when, if the Conservatives did win in 2015, could there be a coalition?

You have the death of a minister talking about how you have a

Conservative Party driven by two ideological impulses. One is too

remorselessly pare back the state for ideological reasons, secondly, I

think they are making a monument of the stake in doing so. -- monumental

mistake in doing so. When you are talking about politicians that are

used to pussyfooting around, being careful, that seems extraordinarily

strong. You obviously know more than me about that, but it seems quite

strong? I think it is just politics. Or economic sap best.

Really, the welfare budget has been pared back pretty drastically. You

are really talking about the disabled carers, taking it from the

electorally important ground the squeezed middle, which is not

somewhere you want to go to. I suggested that perhaps they have

polled this within an inch of its life, but what if they think, this

is the kind of thing that will get me down to rode. Russell Brand told

me not to! The real risk is that the numbers do not add up. He's asking

for ?25 billion worth of cuts, 12 billion from welfare, that is a lot

of money from somewhere else. Do you raise taxes? That is how he would

like to position Labour, a tax and spend party. What he really doesn't

tell people is that the economic solid is that you can change how

much you repay your debts at. This is all a technical argument about

whether you want to be in surplus. That is George Osborne's vision,

nobody has to agree to that. Labour could come in and say, we don't have

to stick to those plans in 2018 and therefore we can turn the taps on.

That is the problem for George Osborne. It is a long election

campaign. Does this argument get lost when people are struggling, pay

is stagnating? I think those arguments will linger in people's

mind. Very interesting. A warning of 60 mph motorway limits. This is all

too meaty EU rules on air pollution because we are not meeting those

roles at the moment? -- to meet EU rules. They say 60 mph on the M1,

and sections of the M3 in Surrey, 13 other stretches of motorway.

Motoring organisations are saying it is going to the lowering of the

speed limit through the back door. It's interesting, only last year or

the year before, they were about raising the speed limit. We were

talking about how much that could save us, the cuts to journey times,

it would be a brilliant idea. That is dead in the water. We are going

to 60 mph. I don't know about you, it says from 7am to 7pm. I don't

understand why, if it is about congestion, which is what they are

saying, about slowing down and speeding up, changing through the

gears, because certainly just by braking it does not cause any more

pollution, I can't imagine it does. I might be wrong. Cars are more

efficient at a slower speed, apparently. They pump out less

nitrogen, or whatever. In this case, if this is going to be the new

thing, shall we just stop making fast cars? Let's make cars with a

top speed limit of 60 malls per hour. A Ferrari with a 60 mph top

speed limit? Well, we could get rid of Top Gear. Some people would not

mind that. We were promised our way races, being able to whizz around in

coalition Britain at 80 mph. Now we have to go to the continent. I do

think it is a bit odd. If you do drive on the motorway, you often

have to slow down because there was lots of traffic and congestion.

There are 50 mph signs. This does not appear to affect HGVs,

apparently the worst polluters, and there is no speed limit on them at

the moment. I still can't believe in 2014, what is it? 2014? Just gone.

And you were working on New Year's Eve, not getting smashed. When I was

a kid and I thought about 2014, I thought there would be bubble cars

flying around, you programme it and they just go off, beam me up,

Scotty. The Independent, really dramatic picture of a huge tidal

surge. This is South Wales. And those people just standing there,

taking photographs of it. Presumably somebody standing a bit more

sensibly took this particular photograph. It is dramatic, scary.

Amazing, this winter weather. Actually, London has been really

quite warm. A beautiful day. But they have raised the Thames barrier.

Exactly. But I think that would have come over the top, possibly right up

to the Shard. But they are cutting the flood budget? That is the

decision, you have to make those decisions. That would not be stopped

by flood defences. But it is odd timing and the Government look

stupid. I think David Cameron, in his own constituency, when he had

his ear bent. But I'm not sure politicians can be blamed for the

weather. It's about climate change, the fact that the climate is

changing without a shadow of a doubt. They are saying these events

are going to happen more and more often. They are actually saying,

this is what we are going to be doing, so let's do... I don't know.

We are taking it seriously with driving slower. On to the Daily

Express. We mentioned a little bit, Randeep about the coalition, or at

least the Tory half, their calculation in perhaps not hitting

pensioners as hard as some people might feel they should, when it

comes to austerity. Millions will get pensions windfall. Now, this is

because the FTSE is doing very well and annuities and pension funds are

doing OK on shares. But is there a perception that pensioners are

getting a bit of a free ride when it comes to deficit reduction? Well, it

looks like it when you just look at the figures on the face of it, but

the point is that pensioners are being squeezed for years now,

because of course they have savings. They can't make any more money. They

have savings and their savings in real terms are dwindling in a huge

way. They've been getting less and less. Only recently, there was a

story on the front page of the Express, elderly steal to survive as

pensions dwindle and prices soar. Talking about they're finding

89-year-olds being arrested for stealing to keep going. But,

Randeep, winter fuel allowance and the freedom Bass, bus passes, there

does seem to be in the coalition's calculation the idea that these

people vote therefore we are not going to take some of these away? I

think there are two different groups. There are the poor

pensioners that Penny is talking about and they are get ing wiped and

they're having to live with a high rate of inflation. The people who

have a lot of money and perhaps can do without their bus pass and free

television licence are the people who Nick Clegg and Iain Duncan Smith

would like to target. The sums are trifling. Even if we got rid of the

entire free bus pass budget it's ?1 billion. You still need to find

another ?11 billion. Pensioners were historically very badly treated and

it's only really in the last decade that they've made anything, so I

think it will be difficult to make an argument to crack down, unless

you means test them. Let's move on to the Financial Times. Lawyers

having been going on strike. Some of them don't get paid very much. Some

people out there might think that's not the case. But actually,

according to the Criminal Bar Association half their members

earned ?27,000 a year. Yes, they are saying they earn ?27,000 and that

this is going to be cut by 30% and they're saying that the trouble is

that people will just say we don't want to do Legal Aid. Therefore,

they're saying that justice is at stake and this is a problem. This is

the first strike I think, the walk-out by the profession in 400

years. It is - you look at the pictures and you just go, yes, they

look like they're 400 years. I know. I'm sorry, I'm not trying to make

light of it. But, really, it's the wig-wearing lawyers. They're saying

it's about British justice at stake. The Government have taken the old

adage crime doesn't pay to heart. If you're a criminal barrister it

certainly won't. Is that self-serving, the idea that they're

saying it's all about justice and people not having access to Legal

Aid and they're worried about their pay packets. The Government have

played a dicey game with the statistics. 84,000 was the average

income, but when you took out the people who earn over 500 grand to a

year you got down to 54,000. But that's everything. You have to pay

rent and VAT off that and - And there are a lot of them who are paid

?27,000. It's like the banking. There are still people being paid

?1.5 million bonuses. But many are on a quarter of that. 25 grand. Good

if you're at the top and bad if you're at the bottom. Thank you

both. We'll look at some of the stories later. Stay with us here on

BBC News for that. Also, coming up at 11.00pm, we'll have more on the

extreme weather, as storms and huge waves continue to batter western and

southern parts of the UK. Coming up now, it's Sportsday.