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!



for election and casting their votes for the first time.


Hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the papers


With me are Mihir Bose from the Evening Standard


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 celebrating


The paper also claims David Cameron is to make a dramatic climbdown


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 roadworks


will be cleared just in time for the great Christmas getaway.


The Sunday Times claims that the man who shouted "you ain't no


Muslim bruv" during an attack at an East London Tube station now


fears retribution from the group calling itself Islamic State.


Lets you give me that landmark deal that we have out of Paris, it is a


lead on the Observer, but interestingly not mentioned on many


of the other papers. World leaders hail Paris deal on climate. They are


always aiming for nothing more than a two degrees increase above


preindustrial levels, and they are now looking like they're pledging


towards more like 1.5 degrees. This article doesn't give you a lot of


detail, does it? No, it doesn't. The comparison is what happened in


Copenhagen in 2009, chaos and so on, and we know how often world leaders


have met on climate change, so in that sense yes it is a major step


forward. But I think we need to be cautious. The leap may have taken


place, but I think mankind hasn't landed on firm soil yet. It is still


up in the air, because we don't know the details, and the devil is in the


details, and starting with America, most of these agreements will have


to be taken back to domestic legislature and assemblies, where


they all agree. India, for instance, have been very resistant to any


agreement. We will have to see exactly what they have all agreed


to, what timescale, and already the article he quotes some scientists


saying it will be difficult to get to 1.5 degrees. What were the


divisions they started off with? It is a wonder that there is any deal


at all, isn't it? Yes, I think there is something to be celebrated. It is


a big deal that we have agreed to agree. There are quite a few targets


that are very ambitious, one of them that has been spoken about is the


greenhouse gas emissions being cut down from 46 billion tons per annum


to near zero within the next 50 years. That is asking for quite a


lot, giving we are nowhere near close to switching. This is going to


be an interesting debate, and it will have to go back, and this has


been hailed as a great achievement. But will it go past the Senate? Or


even the House? Especially as we are going into an election year, will it


be parked until there is a new President? Obama claims that the US


has led this, but there are quite a few issues still to be dealt with.


And within the Republican Party there are still quite a few people


that belief we don't even have a problem with climate change. Rather


than replicating what we have had in the industrialised nations, do we


have a responsibility to help those developing a low carbon way? The


question again is what other details. We have a long history of


these funds being set up, but they are generally channelled back into


consultants and other countries, back into the developed world


anyway. How will this fund be used? We don't know. I think we need to


start mitigating the impact of climate change, and we will need a


lot more than $100 billion a year. It sounds a lot of money but it is


not when you think of the task ahead. Moving on the Telegraph,


Cameron climbs down on EU benefits. The PM is going to have a dinner


this week with some of his European Union leaders. He is apparently


going to have it out with 27 leaders on Thursday, there are wonderful


ideas that apparently his great proposal to make EU... It is a


strange way of phrasing a proposal that was never considered in any


detail by any of the year, because free movement of labour is a


fundamental point. Now he has said, we are parking it in case something


better comes up. I am not quite sure where this is supposed to be. He is


playing a double game, he is trying to satisfy the home audience. I have


been very strict, I am going to negotiate the last line, the last


limit, make sure we get all the benefits, but at the same time he is


telling the EU leaders not to worry, I know this is my hardest line but I


can back down from it. The question is, can he pull it off? A lot of


people already started saying, particularly those campaigning for


us to leave the EU, that he has given way already. Even before the


negotiations have started. The Daily Mail, jihadis must get the hell out


of Britain. This is a world exclusive. They have been speaking


for five days to Shaker Aamer, who was held for five years in


Guantanamo Bay. The paper says he is saying what many Muslims in the UK


do not say. I think quite a lot UK Muslims have been saying that,


and around the world, but I think we can park that headline. It makes a


great copy... I think there are allegations he has made that quite


problematic. story is somewhere further down,


they have chosen been aware that he was being


tortured. He has alleged that the torture he endured was witnessed by


quite damning. He also says that he was denied the right to make a video


appeal to stop Jihadi John from the heading British aid worker Alan


Henning. Apart from the allegations that he has made, the other one that


he was that he was willing to make an appeal and the authorities at


Guantanamo Bay wouldn't allow him to do that. That is an interesting


allegation he is making. We must make it clear that these are


allegations being made in the Daily Mail, but we have been on the phone


to the Foreign Office to get a reaction from the government to this


article. Our Foreign and Commonwealth office spokesperson


said the UK government stands firmly against torture and cruel inhumane


and degrading treatment or punishment. It goes on to say that


the UK does not make use of any so-called enhanced interrogation


techniques. We have consistently made clear our absolute opposition


to such behaviour and our determination to combat it wherever


and whenever it occurs. A pretty clear statement that in response to


this article. He also goes on to talk about how if you don't like


this country, if you are angry about this country, why are you here? The


point here is making a very valid. I would have thought they would be


echoed by a lot of people, a lot of Muslims and people of all faiths and


religions. One of the points he makes, where he notes that things


that are being said by Donald Trump are creating a rift, and that is


helping the extremists. Let's look at a connected story. The Times,


this witness in Leytonstone, he shouted out during the attack a few


days ago. He now fears that his life. It is an interesting story,


the Sunday Times has obviously spoken to him, we don't have full


details we only know that he is called John and that he works as a


security agent. The statement he made reverberated around the world.


It is interesting, because he says he didn't hear this man, the man who


made the attack, he didn't actually hear him think it to Syria. --


link. He didn't even know he was a Muslim, but he assumed by looking at


him that he was a Muslim. That raises another question as to why he


thought he was a Muslim. This is not in any way to value the statement he


made, but why should he immediately jump to the conclusion that he was a


muslin? That again raises other questions about how we look at these


things -- Muslim. ISIS has very nicely stated several things, and we


are buying into these assumptions. It says, he looked to be a


terrorist, and I would love to know what that looks like. So would I.


Another story, England and Wales clash in Euro 2016. How excited are


you both about this? I am very excited, because it will bring


together for the first time the two nations will clash. Wales have not


been to an international competition since the 50s. And in Gareth Bale


they have perhaps the greatest player in the British nation at the


moment has, and it will be very interesting to see how, whether


Gareth Bale and a couple other players, like Aaron Ramsey and so


on, can beat England. England's group on the whole looks quite


good. I am told that Group E is the tough one to be on. The Irish seem


to have got the worst of it. Yes, the republic are written with


Belgium and Sweden, I think. You have been paying attention! The


Sunday Express, we are looking at how much Donald Trump has to spend


to get his party nomination, compare to Hillary Clinton. It is


interesting, because they are trying to convince their own party faithful


to vote. Donald Trump is spending his own money so he doesn't have to


worry about raising money, which is what Clinton and the others have


been doing. Secondly, Trump has worked out what everyone thinks of


his views, and he has worked out that the more outrageous statements


he makes the more publicity he gets, so he doesn't need to spend money to


advertise, he just goes on a news programme and say that they should


stop Muslims or Mexicans coming in. It is not hurting him in the polls,


and I think his slogan, make America great again, appeals to a certain


sector of the community that looks back on a pre- civil rights and pre-


gender rights days with a sense of nest Ultra. It is a section of the


population that believes that that was truly great America. How that


conflates with voting patterns in a country that no longer has the


demographics of the 1950s and 60s is anybody's guess. I think he's not


going to get very close to the White House, but that is just me. I hope I


am not wrong, but I may be. I think this is his strategy, this is what


they wanted. We have seen this in other countries, politician emerges


and makes a section of the population feel that have lost out,


and that the only way they can regain power is by going in for such


beliefs, that he represents the people who have been disinherited,


as it were. Clearly, 35% of the republicans are supporting him, so


there is certainly a block that he can exploit. We have quite a way to


go, his strategies might change. They start early. That is the Papers


for tonight. Lovely to see you both. Up next, The Film Review.


Download Subtitles