:00:00. > :00:00.Migrants trying to get to western EU countries clash with police
:00:00. > :00:20.Hello, and welcome to our look ahead to what the the papers
:00:21. > :00:23.With me are Sian Griffiths, Education Editor from the Sunday
:00:24. > :00:27.Times and James Millar, Political correspondent from the Sunday Post.
:00:28. > :00:36.The Mail on Sunday leads with Grant Schapps resignation and the scandal
:00:37. > :00:52.The Telegraph reports that David Cameron is to risk a Commons
:00:53. > :00:59.Grant Schapps and his wife are on the front of the Sunday Express but
:01:00. > :01:03.says that up to 100 prisoners serving life sentences could be let
:01:04. > :01:08.out of jail for Christmas. The Observer says that David Cameron
:01:09. > :01:12.could risk a Commons vote despite a split in the Labour Party. The Times
:01:13. > :01:17.also goes with the story and claims if David Cameron wins the vote, he
:01:18. > :01:18.will order RAF air strikes to target the masterminds of the Paris
:01:19. > :01:19.massacre. There's more on that story
:01:20. > :01:22.in the The Independent On Sunday. It has a warning to Jeremy Corbyn
:01:23. > :01:24.from And finally The Sunday Post has
:01:25. > :01:29.a poll which says that the public cautiously back bombing
:01:30. > :01:33.raids against IS, but that 74% of people fear a terrorist attack
:01:34. > :01:48.on the UK within the year. We're going to start with the
:01:49. > :01:51.likelihood of a Commons vote this week about air strikes over Syria.
:01:52. > :01:55.At least that's what the papers are speculating about. And let's look to
:01:56. > :02:01.the observer first of all with the headline:
:02:02. > :02:06.Cameron to risk Commons vote over Syria strikes as split deepens.
:02:07. > :02:11.Sian? It's an interesting story and it does look at though David Cameron
:02:12. > :02:16.is preparing this week for a parliamentary vote, probably on
:02:17. > :02:20.Wednesday on British military action against Islamic State in Syria. And
:02:21. > :02:25.as the headline in the strap says, this comes as Labour is deeply
:02:26. > :02:29.divided over the way its MPs are going to vote, with Labour leader
:02:30. > :02:34.Jeremy Corbyn facing a shadow Cabinet revolt on the issue. I think
:02:35. > :02:36.Cameron must be pretty confident, actually, that enough Labour MPs
:02:37. > :02:41.will vote with him for him to call this vote. I think he thinks he's
:02:42. > :02:47.going to have a fairly comfortable win. And in one of the papers, I
:02:48. > :02:51.think it's the Sunday Times, it looks as though 80 Labour MPs are
:02:52. > :02:55.expected to vote with Cameron and to back the bombing. And James, it's
:02:56. > :02:59.not just getting a majority, it's getting a comfortable majority. A
:03:00. > :03:03.healthy majority, because obviously last time he tried to get the
:03:04. > :03:07.Commons to back action in Syria, entirely different action, it's
:03:08. > :03:12.worth pointing out, he lost in 2013. So he doesn't want to just creep
:03:13. > :03:17.over the line. I was talking to Malcolm Rifkin who said it would
:03:18. > :03:21.have to be a healthy majority. As a former minister, he knows a thing or
:03:22. > :03:24.two about this. And it looks like he'll get a healthy majority and
:03:25. > :03:27.that's why the story is about Labour, and it looks like there will
:03:28. > :03:30.be a vote and the Government will win. But where that will leave
:03:31. > :03:35.Labour is a different kettle of fish. You sound confident that he'll
:03:36. > :03:41.get the numbers. Where are they all phoning around, it's reported, to
:03:42. > :03:43.try to get Labour in to target certain MPs? It's a fair point. He's
:03:44. > :03:46.trying to make a compelling case, but that's to do with the healthy
:03:47. > :03:50.majority, rather than the majority. It's also because there was a time
:03:51. > :03:53.when you would have the usual channels and whips would talk to
:03:54. > :03:56.each other and everybody would know what's going on. Nobody knows what's
:03:57. > :03:59.going on inside the Labour Party, including the Labour Party
:04:00. > :04:02.leadership. So it's difficult for the Government to engage what's
:04:03. > :04:06.going on so the only thing they're doing is phoning up MPs and saying,
:04:07. > :04:10.what are you doing. And that leads us to the independent on Sunday with
:04:11. > :04:15.Watson telling Corbyn - you must back down. So it is the deputy
:04:16. > :04:22.telling the leader what to do. James, carry on. This is quite a
:04:23. > :04:26.good take on the story, I think. The new political editor at the
:04:27. > :04:31.Independent on Sunday, so well done him for getting Watson's take on
:04:32. > :04:34.this, Tom Watson's take on this. It doesn't exactly leave us much
:04:35. > :04:39.clearer about what exactly is going to happen. You would think that the
:04:40. > :04:42.deputy telling the leader to do this might have some sort of influence,
:04:43. > :04:47.but again, nobody really knows how the Labour Party is working. I spoke
:04:48. > :04:50.to a Shadow Cabinet member about this and he said, "I have no idea
:04:51. > :04:54.what's going to happen." And that wasn't just saying it to the papers
:04:55. > :04:57.because he doesn't didn't want to give away what was going to happen,
:04:58. > :05:01.he genuinely has no idea what's going to happen at the Cabinet
:05:02. > :05:04.meeting on Monday. Jeremy Corbyn supporters would say that he's a man
:05:05. > :05:09.of principle and sticking to his principles on this. Yes, I think
:05:10. > :05:13.that that is how his young activist supporters will see it. But it does
:05:14. > :05:17.seem... I mean, a number of the papers are suggesting that he will
:05:18. > :05:20.actually allow Labour MPs to have a free vote, because really he has no
:05:21. > :05:24.alternative. You know, the Shadow Cabinet has made it absolutely clear
:05:25. > :05:28.that a number of them are prepared to defy him, so I think there will
:05:29. > :05:32.be a free vote on Wednesday and the Government will get its majority. Do
:05:33. > :05:35.you think that that is damaging to people's perceptions of the Labour
:05:36. > :05:39.Party? To have the leader saying one thing, and then all his immediate
:05:40. > :05:41.management team, for want of a better description, actually
:05:42. > :05:44.announce that they're going to vote completely the other way? Of course,
:05:45. > :05:48.it's hugely damaging and it could possibly be a make or break issue
:05:49. > :05:52.for Jeremy Corbyn. I don't know. That's why we don't know if there
:05:53. > :05:56.will be a free vote. Every logic points to a free vote. But if you
:05:57. > :06:00.have a free vote, two things happen. One is that the Labour Party look
:06:01. > :06:04.mad and incapable of forming a Government and not a Government in
:06:05. > :06:08.waiting. And the other is that Jeremy Corbyn doesn't get what he
:06:09. > :06:16.wants, which is to stop the bombing. His entire career is based on being
:06:17. > :06:20.a pacifist and opposing action in the Middle East. So he's trying to
:06:21. > :06:23.figure out how to get that, and not necessarily listening to the votes
:06:24. > :06:25.saying - you can't, you're the leading of the Labour Party now.
:06:26. > :06:29.Zblts going to be an interesting week and speculation that the vote
:06:30. > :06:33.will be called for Wednesday. But we don't have that confirmed and don't
:06:34. > :06:35.know that. Of course, what do people outside the Westminster bubble
:06:36. > :06:43.think? That could be revealed in part at least in Scotland in the
:06:44. > :06:49.Sunday Post, James? Yes, this is very much people outside of the
:06:50. > :06:55.Westminster bubble. You know, outside of the "normal people", as
:06:56. > :07:00.they should be. And yes, most of them fear a terror attack in Britain
:07:01. > :07:05.after the Paris attacks. That is the big headline finding from this
:07:06. > :07:19.research that the terrorists who want to sew terror have sewn terror,
:07:20. > :07:22.but what happens next is not clear. There is cautious there. People
:07:23. > :07:25.don't want to send soldiers in to the Middle East. That's the legacy
:07:26. > :07:29.of what happened in Iraq and what went wrong in Iraq. Do you think
:07:30. > :07:33.that that is reflected on the wader population outside of Scotland as
:07:34. > :07:38.well? I think it is. I get the feeling from people, when I talk to
:07:39. > :07:41.people, there's a real reluctance and a worry about putting troops on
:07:42. > :07:45.the ground in Syria, and I think that it does go back to Iraq and
:07:46. > :07:49.what happens in Iraq and just general fears. But I think that it
:07:50. > :07:53.is interesting in this poll that 74% of the readers feared a terror
:07:54. > :08:00.attack on the UK within a year. So you know, on the one hand, I think
:08:01. > :08:04.people are incredibly aware of the threat posed by ISIS to Britons in
:08:05. > :08:10.this country. But nevertheless, still very worried about the repurr
:08:11. > :08:14.cushions if we take -- repercussions if we send troops in. Another big
:08:15. > :08:19.story dominating the headlines, dominating the bulletins today is
:08:20. > :08:24.the resignation of Grant Schapps from his ministerial post. And this
:08:25. > :08:29.all about his resignation as Overseas Aid Minister in the
:08:30. > :08:34.aftermath of all of the allegations of how the Conservative Party is
:08:35. > :08:37.being run and how it treats activists and all of those
:08:38. > :08:42.allegations, which are coming home. And James, resignation, or resigned,
:08:43. > :08:49.exposed, doomed is the headline. Yes. The Tory Party certainly has
:08:50. > :08:52.questions to answer now. The Mail on Sunday have been hammering away at
:08:53. > :08:56.this for weeks and nobody has paid a huge amount of attention until the
:08:57. > :09:01.last week or so, it's begun to build critical mass and now we have a
:09:02. > :09:05.resignation. Grant Schapps, who was party chairman at the time of a lot
:09:06. > :09:10.of allegations around bullying, blackmail and all sorts of very
:09:11. > :09:14.unpleasant dealings that may or may not have been going on, has now
:09:15. > :09:18.resigned. So the story is very much moving on. How far it's going to go,
:09:19. > :09:23.we will have to wait and see. I suspect it's not the ends of it, but
:09:24. > :09:30.the next person in the firing line is Lord Felledman, who was also
:09:31. > :09:34.co-chairman -- Lord Feldman, and the father of Elliot Johnson, the Tory
:09:35. > :09:38.activist who died, is still very much calling for Lord Feldman to
:09:39. > :09:41.follow Grant Schapps out the door. Lord Feldman given the backing of
:09:42. > :09:45.senior Conservatives at the moment. But as James is saying, the Mail and
:09:46. > :09:49.the Mail on Sunday have been pushing the story in the last few weeks? It
:09:50. > :09:53.is, and it's a dramatic front page there. But the story moved on after
:09:54. > :09:57.an interview that the parents of Elliot Johnson gave to the Guardian
:09:58. > :10:03.yesterday, which was a moving interview, and you know, on the one
:10:04. > :10:06.hand, their 21-year-old son has committed suicide amid these
:10:07. > :10:10.allegations that he was bullied, allegedly, by a senior Conservative
:10:11. > :10:14.aide, who denies the allegations. And on the other hand, they've
:10:15. > :10:21.somehow found the strength to stand up and say - yes, we've lost our
:10:22. > :10:24.son, you know. But something has gone horribly wrong within the
:10:25. > :10:28.culture of the Conservative youth wing, and it needs to be put right.
:10:29. > :10:31.And somewhere, from somewhere, they've found the strength to stand
:10:32. > :10:35.up and take on the establishment, really, and say - please sort this
:10:36. > :10:40.out before anybody else suffers in the way our son has suffered. And I
:10:41. > :10:44.think that's very brave. Indeed. On to the Sunday Telegraph. Of course,
:10:45. > :10:49.it is the first of three strikes by junior doctors due to begin on
:10:50. > :10:53.Tuesday. They've adjourned ACAS talks until Monday, so not much time
:10:54. > :10:57.left to sort this out. And the headline there suggests, "Army is
:10:58. > :11:01.poised to cover for striking NHS doctors." What do you make of that?
:11:02. > :11:06.It is extraordinary, the idea that we're going to have army doctors in
:11:07. > :11:11.hospitals. But on the other hand, this is only the first of three
:11:12. > :11:15.strikes that the junior doctors are planning to call. And I think in
:11:16. > :11:23.some ways that it is reassuring that there will be army doctors there, as
:11:24. > :11:27.opposed to nobody at all. But I think, and I'm hoping, hopefully the
:11:28. > :11:32.ACAS talks will be fruitful and the other two strikes will not happen.
:11:33. > :11:36.But I would love to know what the public think about junior doctors
:11:37. > :11:43.striking for the first time for 40 years, because will they feel it's
:11:44. > :11:45.wrong for doctors to strike? Even in places like Great Ormond Street
:11:46. > :11:48.Hospital, where children are being treated, or will they feel that
:11:49. > :11:53.junior doctors have a really, really difficult time. The job is almost
:11:54. > :11:59.undo-able. If you make their hours even longer, you extend it in to
:12:00. > :12:04.Saturday working, can the NHS... What will the future of the NHS look
:12:05. > :12:07.like? OK, but the Government and across the NHS is such a sensitive
:12:08. > :12:10.topic, and the Government is saying that this actually to make their
:12:11. > :12:15.life better, and also to extend the case to get a more uniform service
:12:16. > :12:21.across seven days? Well the Government, or the Conservative
:12:22. > :12:24.Party promised the NHS. Having won the election, they now have to
:12:25. > :12:26.implement it. That is more difficult than promising it, which is more
:12:27. > :12:30.difficult than they're finding, of course. So yes, there is very much
:12:31. > :12:34.two sides to it. You would hope that they can get around the table at
:12:35. > :12:38.ACAS and find some sort of agreement, but it has become a very,
:12:39. > :12:41.very bitter dispute. So I wouldn't necessarily hold out any hope that
:12:42. > :12:45.there will be an agreement any time soon. And I bet that is one of the
:12:46. > :12:48.topics that people outside the Westminster bubble are very
:12:49. > :12:55.sensitive of. Here's a story, great fun. Sunday Times. Riddle of Sally
:12:56. > :13:02.from Bolton. And this is all about a question worth ?100 million, which
:13:03. > :13:05.is a painting that somebody says is by Leonardo, but a forger says he
:13:06. > :13:11.did it in 2007 and based it on somebody who worked in the Co-op.
:13:12. > :13:16.It's such an amazing story. It is the only light story on the front
:13:17. > :13:21.paging of tomorrow's papers. And as you say, it is the chalk drawing of
:13:22. > :13:28.a 15th century Italian woman, possibly. So is it a Da Vinci, or
:13:29. > :13:30.was it drawn in the 1970s by Britain's most prolific forger, who
:13:31. > :13:36.used to operate out of his parent's council house, and was it inspired
:13:37. > :13:43.by a Co-Op supermarket worker called Sally. And the forger was jailed in
:13:44. > :13:53.2007 for forgery. And he claims that he drew this woman, the work is
:13:54. > :14:00.called La Bella Principisa, if I have the pronunciation correct. And
:14:01. > :14:05.I love the headline, Riddle of Sally from Bolton. Should you believe a
:14:06. > :14:05.forger, given that the career is based out of it. 15th century or
:14:06. > :14:24.1970. She looks 19 # 0s to me. You think it is a forgery? She looks
:14:25. > :14:29.quite 1970s. You are very kind to try to pronounce it in Italian, I
:14:30. > :14:42.think it was. What should it be, if it is 1970s? OK. Thank you very
:14:43. > :14:45.much. Coming up next,