24/04/2014 The Papers


No need to wait until tomorrow morning to see what's in the papers - Martine Croxall presents a lively and informed conversation about the next day's headlines.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 24/04/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



couple of places. In the south`east, there could be heavy downpours into


the evening hours. Whatever the weather, have a peaceful night and


day tomorrow. Hello and welcome to our look ahead


to what the papers will be bringing us tomorrow. With me is pension


analyst Ros Altman. And the journalist Mihir Bose. Nice to have


you with us. Tomorrow's front pages. The Telegraph leads on comments by


Nick Clegg that the Queen should lose her constitutional role as head


of the Church of England. The Times has the same story. The paper says


senior cabinet ministers are split over the role of the church. The


Guardian reports on Russian forces carrying out fresh manoeuvres on the


Ukrainian border. The paper also says the Gherkin building in London


is for sale. And the price tag ` ?500 million. The Independent says


senior executives at Barclays were heckled by shareholders over


boardroom pay today at the company's AGM. Three cups of coffee a day


could help slash the risk of diabetes. That's according to the


Express. And today's court appearance by the Coronation Street


actress Barbara Knox dominates the Mirror's front page. She denies


drink driving. Something that doesn't give us much


information to go on here in de Mirror. Ten British women fighting


in Syria exclusive, is the headline. Police in the country have been


encouraging British Muslim women to report their sons or husbands, male


relatives, to try to discourage them from going to join the fight in


Syria. It appears that some women have already joined the fight? They


say some women are going with their husbands and joining jihadist


factions come as there are several the regime. This one seems to be the


Islamic state of Iraq and Syria. So extreme that even the Al Qaeda has


disowned it. The worry is that, apart from what they're doing, many


are coming back and radicalising here. They have a story about Nick


Clegg saying that the security forces are very worried and when


they come back from Syria they radicalise the young Muslims here on


jihadist slogans and so on. What this exposes is our belief to do in


some years ago the rebellion started we thought it was a good thing but I


don't think we paid enough attention to all of the forces raging against


President Assad, whether they were desirable or not. The removal of the


regime could bring out an even worse regime. Some go to Syria to deliver


aid and the risk is they could get caught up in it but they are setting


out with something noble in mind. Exactly. There are two issues. One,


it is really frightening that apparently there are 600 Brits


fighting in Syria. Fighting, not delivering humanitarian aid. And of


course it is highlighting that there are ten British women. At the role


for us should surely be to deliver the humanitarian aid. Joining in the


fighting or trying to change regimes... We don't know who is who


is better than who. It's not our role. But everything splinters so


much. 130,000 people have died, 100,000 children. We need to deliver


aid as much is possible to believe their suffering. No sensible person


would support the Assad regime but reports are coming out of the sort


of collateral effect of the Arab Spring. There is a lot of


discrimination faced by Christians and other minorities. These are


worrying signs. Don't you have to be fairly radicalise before you even go


there in the first place? Seeing pictures might be enough to


radicalise people? Absolutely and what sort of propaganda is emerging


to radicalise them? What sort of information is coming to this


country to make young people want to go and fight for the Syrian rebels?


Moving on. Independent. Berkeley is told to stop `` says to stop moaning


about our bonuses! ?2.4 billion, that is the pot handed out. You


would have got a good lunch! There is an interesting point that the


Independent has focused on. The head of the remuneration committee at the


bank has criticised standard life. They only on 2% but that's a big


amount of money. But what Barclays was saying is, why have you done


this publicly? Why didn't you come to us in the pre` consultation


period and express your displeasure? Isn't that a fair point? Express it


before it has happened? Not really. It sounds like there are these


backroom chats with the institutional investors that block


the small shareholders out of any possibility of having powered here.


Doesn't this show that shareholder democracy is a bit of a farce? You


have a shareholder meeting, invite everyone, the vibe drinks and


canapes and what have you. But at the moment they are ordinary


shareholders. `` provide drinks. You already have the vote in the bad.


That's what they are saying... But they say it is after the horse has


bolted. 30% isn't enough. It is important that the institutional


voters, who represent our pension funds and our money invested, are


able to stand up in public and say that they disagree, if they do. But


they don't stand up. That's why it's important. It is telling that


Barclays expected them not to. But the world hasn't changed since the


banking crisis. We are still paying large sums of money to bankers. And


profits are down and where does that leave shareholders? How do they


justify it? Limit they said they had many people trying to leave and they


would lose people if they didn't pay more money. That's what they always


say. But at the end of the day shareholders should have some say.


They own the business. But it ends up with lots of ordinary small


shareholders thinking they don't have any power. Moving onto the


Times. Coalition split on role of church. Nick Clegg calling for an


end to links with the Anglican state, claiming the Queen should no


longer be the head of the church. I can't quite pin down why that would


make any difference and how it would be a good idea. I can't see any


difference between the Queen remaining the head of the church. Of


course this was an historical legacy, what Henry VIII did for his


own personal benefit, but that's a long time ago. I don't see how...


Nick Clegg suggest if you do that churchgoing will increase. I don't


see how that would work out and I don't see what effect it would have


on the church. There are larger questions of the church being part


of the state, of the state being the head of Whitchurch, and whether we


should have a ships in the House of Lords. That's a political question


but he doesn't raise that. That are much more import and question that


whether the Queen remains the head. `` we should have bishops in the


House of Lords. Everybody who lives here should have no problems


accepting that, provided the country doesn't discriminate against


Christians. But it relies on the monarch being a believer. It does.


But Nick Clegg's intervention strikes me as being political.


Against David Cameron, who encouraged people to have more faith


and bring religion perhaps more into their lives. I actually think the


Prime Minister is right on this one. David Cameron has kind of expressed


the view that many people think, whatever your religion, the fact


there is a head of state who is also a religious figure and that we are a


country that is tolerant of all other religions I think is something


we should be proud of. For political reasons, the Deputy Prime Minister,


to come along and say to get rid of this idea, that somehow there is a


connection between the state and religion, I think would detract from


something really important. In the past, prime ministers didn't say


that. Alastair Campbell's famous phrase, we don't do God. My


ministers didn't talk about religion. Like in the United States.


The president going to church is something you see every weekend. But


as long as we are tolerant of it we can be proud that we want to have


the kind of traditions and history that this country has always done,


which is bound up... What would other faiths feel more included in


public life if the head of state were not attached to one particular


religion? I doubt it. We have such a pluralistic society and such an


inclusive society. We respect all other religions as a nation. I


think, in a way, trying to take religion out of the game is a threat


to people. You might make the Christians feel that they are being


discriminated against and are being targeted, which would be a bad thing


to do. Moving onto the Guardian. President Putin warning... Soldiers


on the board again after the deaths and violence in Slavyansk.


Pro`Russian supporters were killed there by Ukrainian forces. We have


just been listening to John Kerry rebuking Russia for its actions.


But, in the view of many, there is an interim government bear which got


there by illegal means and overthrew an elected president. `` government


there. It is difficult when the West goes on and tries to impose its


views on other countries, when there are complex circumstances. But, at


the end of the day, it looks like President Putin is going down the


gauntlet and saying to the West, what are you going to do? John Kerry


has just said, we will punish you because you will pay. It will be a


financial problem. Your markets are down, your currency is down. But


there is more here. This is actually a fundamental threat. Ukraine wanted


to be part of the EU and part of the problem is a rose from Russia


wanting to stay with Ukraine or the Ukrainians wanting to stay with


Russia. And not join the EU. What has the interim government in


Ukraine properly insured ethnic Russians in Ukraine, there are many


across the country, do they feel their position is safe? I think


interim government has been caught on the wrong foot. It didn't


anticipate what the Russians would do and it hasn't done enough.


Clearly Ukraine can't be sustained as it is. We be careful. If you look


around the world, the onto the West, not all countries are supporting the


western attitude. Let to a couple of health stories. Coffee helps fight


diabetes. That is music to my ears. I have tried to stick with only two


cups. Previously we have had all these warnings, don't drink too much


coffee. Having three would be fine by me. I grew up being told aides


were good, and then they were bad. And then we have heard for years


that coffee is bad. `` eggs. Green tea and raw fish, is at a price


worth paying? Possibly no alcohol. Is that appeal to you? Green tea?


You get green tea at the BBC, don't you? Green tea is all right, but no


fish, and no dairy... And all you get is four more years of life. Is


it worth it? I don't think so. That's it for The Papers this hour.


Thank you both. Stay with us here on BBC News. At midnight, as violence


escalates in Ukraine, we will bring you US Secretary of State John


Kerry's comments on today's developments. But coming up next


it's time for Sports Today. Hello, I'm Nick Marshall`McCormack and this


is Sport Today on BBC World News. Chelsea's title hopes take another


hit, as Ramirez is banned for the rest of the season. Tottenham's


conquerors. They take an advantage into the second leg


Download Subtitles