01/12/2015 The Papers


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 01/12/2015. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



in the quarterfinals of the Capital One cup. And Chelsea plans for a


brand-new home. That is in 15 minutes. First, the papers.


Welcome to the look ahead at what will be in the papers tomorrow. With


this is the political correspondent from the London Evening Standard and


broadcaster John Stapleton. We can take a look at the papers, starting


with the Financial Times which says the Bank of England has drawn a line


under the era of bank bashing by signalling it will not tighten


restrictions on financial institutions. And in the Independent


newspaper, saying air strikes on Syria is based on wishful thinking,


it says. In the Daily Telegraph... David Cameron branding Jeremy Corbyn


and allies as terrorist sympathisers. Anti-war demonstrators


pictured in the Metro. And a poll in The Times newspaper suggests UK


taking action is serial is now supported by less than half the


country, falling from 59% down to 48%. The daily express has on its


front page the story of a cure for type 2 diabetes. Let's begin with


the Independent newspaper and a dramatic front page. It quotes from


one of their most famous correspondence, saying strategy is


based on wishful thinking and poor information. It is a striking and


typical Independent front page with a strong quote from Patrick Hoban's


peace. It probably does not -- Cockburn will stop this is an issue


that will be debated at length tomorrow but it is one that has


divided the Labour Party, dividing Westminster and dividing the


country. I think there will be readers and viewers tuning in


tomorrow, probably to get clarity themselves, because there are many


conflicting arguments and I think a lot is struggling to come to a firm


view. The result of the vote is probably not in much doubt. It is


not in much doubt tonight but who knows what will happen? There are


undecided MPs. Quite a lot and some on the Tory side and on the Labour


side. I think what he has in mind while writing this, the political


and military strategy being based on wishful thinking is the fact we do


not know the end game and we will probably send aircraft to bomb Syria


on the basis prices do not recognise borders, so why should we? We bomb


in Iraq, so why not in Syria, it is like bombing in Dresden and not in


Berlin for example, is one argument. We are told about the 70,000 or so


free Syria army people. There is no doubt air strikes alone will not


solve the issue so what will the 70,000 people, if they exist, will


they do to help? Do they agree among themselves, do they agree with us,


do they agree on an outcome for this troubled country? The Times


newspaper has a front page of public opinion, what the polls seem to


think public opinion is. They say less than half of voters now back


air strikes having gone down from 59 down to 48%. Will that be a fact on


the minds of MPs when they vote? If some are undecided and the latest is


about 50 Labour MPs are likely to vote for and 30 have not made up


their minds yet, public opinion is a key element on what's they will


decide to do, as is opinion in their constituencies and constituency


parties. A lot of Labour MPs backing action are complaining they are


coming under pressure indirectly from the leader's office and


directly by comments we have seen from Jeremy Corbyn suggesting there


is no hiding place for his MPs and there would be repercussions for


those pushing for war. Not exactly veiled threats. I think public


opinion is at variance with the mood in the House of Commons. I know


Jeremy Corbyn got stick for taking the line he took, eventually


allowing a free vote. You could argue he was bullied into it and he


had no option because the Shadow Cabinet would resign but I suspect


outside the Westminster bubble a lot of people respect Jeremy Corbyn for


taking that line and saying yes, it is a matter of conscience, it is


important, nothing more important than putting armed services at risk


and possibly killing innocent people in Syria and it should be a free


vote. In that sense the House of Commons is out of tune with a lot of


people. And the controversy with David Cameron and Tory backbench


MPs. Saying those who oppose this are terrorist sympathisers, which


does not go with the sentiment that people can vote according to


conscience. This was striking and it is at odds with Cameron's general


tone during the Syria statement in which he replied to Jeremy Corbyn


after he issued his list of seven questions and said he respected him


for his long-held beliefs and understood where he was coming from,


even if he did not agree and he took a calm and measured tone. A lot of


Labour MPs and some Tories, who possibly do not support him, said


they appreciated that and said it was a sensible approach. Why has he


used the harsher language now? Because it has got political. I


think it is extraordinaire me, he has been mindful of opinions and


measured. To come out with a statement like this on the eve of


the vote is extraordinary. Is it because he was in a meeting of Tory


MPs and a heated atmosphere? Is he saying David Davis is a terrorist


sympathiser? And also the 50 Labour MPs, most of whom have valid


opinions. It is the Flashman side of his character. He had an audience of


the faithful and came out with this comment. Tom Watson has called on


the Prime Minister to apologise for saying that. On Twitter he said it


was appalling. I think it might be counter-productive. It might be


there are some MPs who had not made up their minds who will have their


mind made up by that comment, not necessarily to influence the vote.


In terms of public opinion, as well, I think people will think it is


disrespectful. We will run through quickly the other stories on the


front pages. We will stay with the Telegraph and they have a story how


foreign students will be excluded from migration figures and


accusations it is an attempt by the government to massage the figures. A


lot of international allies and universities and business in Britain


will think it is good news because what is happening to date, because


the government has set a net migration target, it which it is not


meeting, it is concerned about breaching that and anything that


might push them higher they have resisted. Students are being


penalised and universities are penalised and businesses who need


well-trained people are being penalised by this arbitrary


immigration target. It looks like he has decided to remove them from the


cap. The Financial Times, John, the end to an era of bank bashing. It


means they are shying away from more regulation of the banks and giving


them an easier ride and there will be no restrictions on buy to let


mortgages and unsecured lending. I thought you were going to refer to


the story about Manchester City. Let's talk about that. John, you are


a Manchester City fan. And I think your husband is a Manchester City


fan. The Chinese have taken a stake in Manchester City. They have taken


13%, worth about ?250 million in total. Good news for everyone around


Manchester and good news for the club, the area, because the people


who own the rest of the club have done a great deal to redevelop the


area in terms of housing, building a training complex, and brought


employment there and it can only strengthen the hand of the club.


Does it give them more money? It gives them equal market


capitalisation to Manchester United. The Chinese president visited


Manchester as part of his Tour of Britain. And we are told he is a


Manchester United fan. What about the Chinese human rights record? It


has not come into it in Chinese investing in power stations and


infrastructure so I cannot imagine it would come into it when investing


in football. The Chinese are prepared to put money into British


businesses, there seems to be an ability to overlook genuine


concerns. It is encouraged by George Osborne and the main beneficiary is


Sheikh Mansoor cause he spent money investing in Manchester City. Thank


you very much. We will see you in an hour. You will be back at 11:30pm to


look at the stories making the news


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

Download Subtitles