12/12/2015 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 12/12/2015. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



the outcome of those climate change talks. With us now to look at the


papers. With me are Mihir Bose


from the Evening Standard Tomorrow's front pages,


starting with... The Observer welcomes the historic


climate change deal in Paris, quoting the words of the French


president Francois Hollande who described it as a "major


leap for mankind". The Independent shows a line


of dancing polar bears The paper also claims David Cameron


is to make a dramatic climb-down That story also makes the front page


of the Telegraph, pointing out the U-turn will be


on the Prime Minister's central The Mail carries an exclusive


interview with Shaker Aamer, the British man held


at Guantanamo bay for 14 years. The Express goes it alone saying


more than 400 miles of road works will be cleared for the great


Christmas getaway. The outcome of the talks in Paris.


Not all of them have gone with the climate change. What is interesting


about the Observer story, is that while it says it was a major league


for mankind, it says that temperatures will be rising to a


maximum of 5 degrees. It does not give any detail of what was agreed.


And the devil is in the detail. This looks to me like an agreement to


agree rather than actual agreement which can be implemented or maybe


invented. I think we are being a bit too... The leaders, understandably,


are a bit anxious and a bit too ambitious in the claims are making.


Do you think, Sunny, after Copenhagen which was such a


disaster, almost anything would be better? There is something to


celebrate, which is the fact that this was actually signed. But if you


look at the draft that was circulated earlier today, it is very


much an agreement that is a first step. Let's not forget that most of


the leaders who have signed it now have to go back to their own


parliaments. It has to be ratified. And regardless of -- what Obama has


said, it may not get through the house. We are going into a election.


The Republican side have made a virtue of denying climate change


completely. I am happy that this has happened, but I think this agreement


is something to be taken forward, an agreement to agree. And India for


instance says it will still be burning coal and India is a


developing country that wants to develop. We will have to see exactly


what India has agreed to do. China has changed tack but what will India


agree? The second most populous nation in the world. We will have to


see exactly how it is implemented. In a lot of praise compared to


Copenhagen, but we should be a bit cautious. I think that is always


sensible women are talking about getting 195 countries to agree. And


we don't have the clarity about emissions. You were saying Russia,


China, Japan and India. We have some clarity on some of these, but we


don't have clarity on what Russia has signed up for and where they


will stand on this particular agreement. Yes, it may be signed,


but where the details may come in, we are not sure. So we should hold


the champagne for a bit. Isn't this partly about sending a message to


the markets, to investors, that we are heading away from carbon fuels


and renewables are the place to put your money? And if the markets drive


that, we will end up using renewable energy. I think one of the big


shifts from Copenhagen has been a business signal that has gone out. A


signal from part of the private corporate world. But we still are


reliant on fossil fuels to a huge degree and unless that is addressed,


we will be in the cycle and yes, the signal has gone out, but we are


taking a tiny step. I am not sure if it is a step or a shuffle forwards.


And we have to tackle the wider questions of developing crop


countries, what is the model they are aiming for? Is it the model of


America, with two cars? But to be fair to America and China, they have


invested huge amounts of money in renewable energy sources. But they


have got to understand that for prosperity, you don't need three


cars. That's other model, we have not gone back from that. That is


what everybody wants. If you want that, where do you get that? We have


not discussed that enough. We haven't told you, but we are going


to get you to cycle home on a tandem! I will look forward to that!


I will be at the back. Let's stay with the Observer together. Oxford


and Cambridge condemned over the failure to improve state school


access. They are under fire from state school inspectors because they


have not increased state school pupils studying in their colleges. I


feel I have read the story a few times! We seem to be in a


perpetual... Groundhog Day! This comes up every six months and I


wonder where it goes. We get very similar figures, we get very similar


statements and then it is parked for another six months. So I'm really


not quite sure where this is supposed to go. Having said that, I


think there is a case to be made that diverse class rooms and diverse


workplaces are better for the economy and there are lots of


reports and studies on that. They are better for business and for


productivity. Having said that, how do you convince people that they


should change? I'm not sure Oxbridge will happen because the government


pushes it? The figures are pretty damning. Between 2004 and 2013,


independent school pupils still make up two fifths of the intake as


Oxford and Cambridge. So we still in a society where if you go to a


private school, you are likely to go to Oxbridge. And if you are going to


Oxbridge, it makes a huge difference to what happens to the rest of your


life. Do you still think that having an Oxford or Cambridge degree makes


a marked difference to people even in 2015? I think so, because it


gives you that network. You will onto a club and we know, with jobs


and things like that, if I'm looking for somebody, I will think of


somebody I know. That is the way it works. It is not nepotism, but it is


the structure of the world that works anyway. It might be nepotism,


it might not be. It is problematic because we have our government to


look at. It does change your life to be from that exclusion Oxbridge


club. -- exclusive Oxbridge club. But there are more issues that come


in which a more problematic for Britain in the long-term. Where you


have something that keeps entrenching itself and we are not


taking full advantage of the population and the talent that


exist. But what you do to force colleges to change their intake? We


have to look at our entire education system because the gap between a


good private school Andy Goode state school, even a basic state school,


-- and a good state school, is huge. Is that down to money? We have not


thought about how our state system works. We need people who have come


from a not very good state school system and they have been deprived


from expressing themselves which is unfair. There is something noted in


the story where the Inspectorate welcomed Oxbridge use -- Oxford's


use of other methods. That'll be interesting where does take into


account the point that we don't necessarily, the cultural capital


which is quite elusive. The confidence, the language that is


used, that helps private schools students to get through doors. Maybe


that is the way forward, if it can be used to identify talent without


necessarily using that. Let's look at the Telegraph.


Cameron's climb-down on the benefits. It is buried about two


fifths of the way down in the story. David Cameron is having a dinner


this week on Thursday where he is probably going to say, I know I'm


not going to get my limit of four years on people coming from other


parts of the EU, that they have to wait four years to claim benefits.


But on the other hand in here, they are saying they are going to park it


and hope we get it further down the line. Quite confused... The story is


not very well written in that respect. You would have expected the


Telegraph to have written it more sharply. Essentially, over dinner,


he's going to say, you are not inclined to support me in the four


year barrier to getting benefits, therefore I am willing to give way


on that and... Not a lot of choice! Probably, if you think about it


after the meal, we could come back. That might take a long time. But


essentially, he is giving way. And what is interesting if having given


away on that, it comes back on him. How does he justify it if he says


you should vote to stay in the EU. That'll be interesting. I think this


is a nonstory. This was such an unlikely demand because it is linked


to a larger issue of free movement of people. It is the absolute


fundamental basis of the EU. So, then to say that we are not pushing


it because we didn't think it was likely but we might come back to it,


it feels as if we are trying to make it sound as if we are having a great


U-turn, but it would only be a U-turn if there was a lack -- if


there was a likelihood. Isn't he playing two games, telling them he


is willing to put it on one side and telling the British audience that he


hasn't given up. Don't worry, I'm still there fighting for you. He is


playing a double game. Shall we look at another story on


Jeremy Corbyn. Another 100,000 new members to oust Jeremy Corbyn.


Critics who are going to try to flood the party with members who


would vote out Jeremy Corbyn at some point. They have also admitted that


it will not happen until 2017. The good thing about the story is that


they are at least not mentioning the moderates. Until quite far into it


which I find quite a strange use of the term "Moderate". But I would


love to know where they are going to find these people and whether they


will be quite as involved in ousting Jeremy Corbyn. It seems there is an


internal conflict and on a popular ground... And watchable sees Labour


Party member standing at street corners of saying a don't you join


the member ship -- membership. Free membership! I've sadly offended I am


not be offered free never ship. But you might get the pen -- free


membership. But you might be a potential leader.


Can I push you in this direction. Roadworks banished, exclusive. This


is the political editor who was one of our paper reviewers. She is


reporting this as a victory for our crusade. They have been mounting


one, apparently, to stop roadworks in the run-up to Christmas. Do you


know about those? I had to come through roadworks to come here! So I


don't know, has it been managed in London or other parts? Typical


express, this is obviously the story we have all been waiting for! Of the


more important than the Christmas dinner. But it is interesting.


Before the Olympics, the talk was that all the roadworks would be done


and it would all be finished. But it is clear that we are in for a long


season, several years of roadworks. Obviously we need infrastructure,


infrastructure is old in London of cities -- in London and other


cities. It is a hope. Ree. This may be the moment to check your car out.


Maybe. They were also -- also told that we were going to limit the


distance that roadworks could go across. They were trying to stop the


hotspots. The other story on the express is


trump's campaign Trail. Mixing up a comparison between Donald Trump and


Hillary Clinton and how much they are spending on their campaign. I


found this story quite strange because there are some points which


are quite fair, that he has had 100,000 supporters who have given


him donations of ?40. But at the same time, we are still in the


run-up to who gets to be candidate so it is a very odd way of comparing


his spending to that of Clinton. Different parties. Hillary Clinton's


spending at this stage it is not really as what -- Trump is doing,


but to do with party dynamics. If we were comparing Jeb bush who has


spent 35 and in to date and is really trailing that would be a


story as to why that is happening. But to compare candidates for


different parties is odd. You could almost be forgiven for thinking we


were talking about the presidential race, not the nominations. But the


story is that because Donald Trump is making these statements, and is


getting these publicity, he does not need to throw money around. And it


is his own money. The others had to go out and get the money. Trump is


spending his own money and maybe he has thought that the more outrageous


statements he made, the more publicity he gets. When, the last


time any primary nomination, did the candidate's words affect the British


political scene is Mac even Boris Johnson made a comment on Donald


Trump. I can't remember an occasion when a London Mayor commented on


somebody who is hoping to get his party's nomination. There is quite a


lot to be said for that and the fact that the police commented on it. So


it is something, whether we like it or not, if he is running for


candidate of the Republican party, and in some ways there is a joke


that if the US president claims to be the free world -- leader of the


free world, the free world should have a vote on it, which I can back!


But at this stage is getting a large amount of publicity and his


statements are outrageous. I will still hold of to see what happens to


nominations. We are still far away. This does not mean he will crash and


burn. But running a presidential nomination, it is not enough to have


a lot of airtime, you need an enormous infrastructure. I am not


sure he will be able to put that together. But he is a long way ahead


in the polls? And to think that is getting 35% of the support, even


though it is the Republican party, not in the election, suggest that he


is holding in on a sense of dissatisfaction, a sense of anger


that there is in some of the American public. One hopes that it


does not extend much further than that, but there is a sense of anger


and adapt he can articulate it in this fashion -- and that he can


articulate it in this fashion. He has not burned out yet, but


everything he says makes him more popular. That is it for the papers


this hour. A bit longer than normal, which will please some! Sunny and


Minir, we will see you again at 1130 when we will see other stories


making the news. Your weather forecast comes


Download Subtitles