01/01/2016 The Papers


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

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 01/01/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



England are expected to bring James Anderson back into the side.


Hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the the papers will be


With me are the political commentator Miranda Green


and the Daily Telegraph's chief political correspondent,


Thank you for being the first paper reviewers of 2016. Setting the year


off on a good standard, I hope. We can look at the front pages.


The FT's picture is of the shooting in Tel Aviv.


They also feature President Obama's New Year's message and a claim


he is planning to bypass Congress to impose new controls on gun sales.


Pope Francis at his New Year's Day mass dominates the front


It also reports on the potential for British troops to face criminal


charges over abuse and unlawful killing during the Iraq War.


The Daily Mail has comments from the first wife of suspended


Simon Danczuk about the impact which the allegation that he sent


explicit messages to a 17-year-old is having on their family.


"A student cheating crisis" is the headline on the Times.


It says almost 50,000 students have been caught cheating


The I says Jeremy Corbyn must get 35% of the vote in next year's


elections if he's to avoid a coup from fellow party members.


The Sun reports on a former EastEnders actress, Sian Blake,


who has been missing with her two young children for almost three


Government plans to double the fine for littering to ?150


And the Mirror has claims from a couple who say they missed


out on a ?35 million lottery jackpot, because of a mix-up


Welcome. Let's begin with the FT Weekend, a two-day paper, so plenty


of time for people to delve into this but a striking story on the


front page as President Obama enters his final 12 months in office. What


he has done is returned to an issue he has been vocal on before, which


is gun control, which in America is incredibly controversial. The


Republican party refuses to countenance control on who can buy


and keep weapons. Plenty of Democrats feel the same. Because of


the American system it is difficult to get legislation through and in


2013 they tried with a bipartisan Bill after the Newtown school


killings which was blocked in the Senate and President Obama is


determined to return to this is his last few months to try to introduce


a background check on who can buy guns. It is controversial and part


of the rise of Donald Trump, the phenomenon in the Republican


selection as to who will run against we think Hillary Clinton, is the


idea that America and President Obama do not understand each other


and so trying to take on America's love of guns is controversial. It


has legacy written all over it. His comments are so important. When the


most recent massacre happened he said the reporting and reaction is


routine and it must stop. He was so cross. He has woken up to the fact


the clock is ticking. When you read the detail, it says he has been


pushing hard for background checks on those buying guns and would like


them to be mandatory which Congress will not permit. The only power he


has is to expand regulations, for background checks on people selling


the guns. The wrong way round. It is a tiny step towards even having a


conversation on controlling who has the guns. It is interesting when you


talk to Americans about this, they will quote to you, very clear in


their minds, about the right to bear arms. When you look at the


Constitution, it is the right to bear arms as part of a well ordered


militia, presumably when there was no police force and presumably the


police force is armed. They reserve their right to have their cake and


eat it. Loretta Lynch, the scourge of Fifa. If anybody can do it,


perhaps she can. That is an interesting thought. We will find


out more on Monday. In the Times newspaper, and very intriguing


story. An interesting report from the special correspondent who has


done investigations and he says he has found 50 student is caught


cheating at British universities. Many more likely to cheat in exams


rather than coursework. The Times newspaper has done it in a measured


way, but it is alarming. Extraordinary these figures. You try


to get Freedom of Information on these figures but you have to go to


individual university groups and to pull them together in one go is


interesting. Students coming from outside the EU to British


universities are an important source of revenue. Our universities charge


extraordinary multiples of what British and EU students pay. Is


there a debate on whether the scale of fees foreign students pay,


significantly higher than paid by our student is, whether they create


an incentive for people to behave in a way they might not otherwise


behave. It is an interesting point. We are as the UK in competition with


other English-speaking nations to attract people to universities.


Partly because we want the best people from around the world. We


want them to stay here and win Nobel prizes here! That they are a source


of revenue. In the detail of the story, which looks robust as an


investigation, there is an extraordinary one, five cases of


impersonation where students arrange for someone else to sit exams on


their behalf. Imagine getting someone else to turn up to suit your


Ph.D. . Less than 1% of those found guilty of misconduct. If you aren't


getting a lot of money from foreign students, you might not want to


chuck them out. Are they enforcing the rules properly? Presumably it


will raise questions they will have to answer about procedures, and for


the employers who might say, is that degree quite as good as I thought it


was? Colonel Gaddafi, something to do with his Ph.D. In the past... ? I


think there have been a lot of allegations that he is not with us


to offer a response, so perhaps we will move on to the I newspaper.


This man, almost the man of the year in terms of publicity in 2015,


Jeremy Corbyn. This is fascinating. You have written a piece for the


Guardian and about pantomime. I do not what -- know what character he


would be. Dick Whittington? The streets of London paved with


electoral gold? Jack the giant killer. This piece says Jeremy


Corbyn's team are letting it be known they think the benchmark for


success in the May elections is for Labour to get a 35% vote share,


which could lead to do with managing expectations as to what would allow


him to survive as leader. A lot of the backchat has been, will there be


a coup against Corbyn by the moderate wing of the party? We


expect Jeremy Corbyn in the next weeks to probably knife his Shadow


Cabinet who are not onside. The drama will not go away any time


soon. 35%, they are playing down arguably expectations. Roughly 2%


above the average they are polling at the moment. Local elections are


not the same thing but we will try to map this on to a figure for the


next general election. You mentioned reshuffle. What is your sense of


this? There has been debate about whether it would happen. We had it


with that stuff in one of the Labour whip saying it is time to deal with


these traitors. Others trying to slap him down. John Ashworth saying


he should not have said it. Nobody is saying whether the reshuffle is


taking place. They say it is a matter for the leader and we are


told it is next week. How far does it go, dealing with the 11 or so


members of his close group of Shadow Cabinet who voted against him on


Syria. What is the risk? It already is called among the media the


revenge reshuffle, which is a problem because everything he does


to assert his authority is seen as part of the ideological battle and


spirit within the party and it goes back to the phenomenon of someone


who rebelled against the previous Labour leaders over 500 times,


trying to impose stern party discipline. You remember this, I can


remember a former minister under John Major when I asked him about


Iain Duncan Smith's demand for loyalty, saying some expletive rich


responses about what he thought. Because he had been a serial rebel


and made John Major's life hell in that period. In the Independent


newspaper, this is serious. The striking photograph of Pope Francis


kissing a statue of baby Jesus on New Year's Day. What do you make of


this? The context, a rambling about human rights we are seeing at the


moment. They are concerned human rights laws are being used to


prosecute soldiers, British soldiers, in foreign battlefields


is. It is a great story. The reporter has found there could be as


many as 200 people unlawfully killed by British soldiers. It puts it into


context, if you are trying to defend, and thinking about if you


will be sued at the end of that, it conflicts the idea of your job. The


legacy of Iraq is very much with us, domestically also. I agree. We are


waiting for pitch Chilcot report. Which we are told we will get this


summer. I hate to say, let's wait and see. -- for the Chilcot report.


The legacy of Iraq continues to haunt British politics. I am struck


by the idea that the caseload of the group looking into unlawful killing


and torture by British troops in Iraq is exploding. They were


investigating 152 cases and it has swollen to 1500 potential victims of


British troops behaving in a way against the laws of war, allegedly.


We will hear more about this in the course of the coming months. I will


let Christopher start again. I should do with this next one. A drum


roll. The front of the Daily Telegraph. War declared on litter


louts by one Christopher hope. It is a consultation from the government


to increase on the spot litter fine. -- finds. It is something that


annoys our readers. And probably a lot of other people. Some would say,


about time. Also interviewed, a man who is running a clean the country


for the Queen ahead of her 90th birthday and he is concerned that


some people think it is a human rights to drop litter. I trace it


back to when Vince were removed from London underground. An


anti-terrorism strategy. After the King's Cross could be right. --


Kings crossfire. You could be right. It is said we should police it. He


is saying... How do you go to someone and say you have dropped a


cigarette packet. Do it with politeness, he says, oh, you have


dropped something stop hopefully you will embarrass them into doing


something. The government is interested in this and it thinks it


has done it with the supermarket levy. And also sending text messages


to tell people neighbours had paid up, creating the sense you should


play along. Neighbours have picked up their litter and so maybe you


should. This person, a great wit, talks about why everybody should


have to live in a teenager's bedroom, it is bad for your spirit.


He is right. Interesting you have an American talking about it because


Bill Bryson is obsessed with the way we British do not look after our


country and drop litter. If they say we could improve, we should listen.


Let me give you the last story from this review. The front page of the


Mirror newspaper. We will leave the free slimming pull-out aside. The


story at the bottom. This couple say something went wrong with their


mobile phone app with which they bought their tickets, which would


have been a winning ticket and they would have been able to claim ?35


million. Clearly that is not a brilliant start to the new year for


them, thinking what might have been. I am interested in why it is the


splash and the psychology of it. You will you did to the slimming


pull-out and every single front page has a diet, turn over a new leaf


from page. What is the psychology of this? Are we supposed to think we


feel bad for them, or that our New Year will be more cheery? Buy a


paper ticket, that is what I say. I do notice... We do not have the


whole story yet, and I might be unfair to the couple, but they say


the ?2 online ticket purchase failed because they only had 60p in their


recount. That might not be the fault of the app! It could happen to any


of us. We have all thing when we thought we had sorted something.


Misreading the numbers and thinking you have one! It cannot be all of 35


million. It must be a share of that. That is something I cannot answer.


Perhaps we will have more when we come back in an hour. Thank you for


racing through a busy run of stories in the first paper review of 2016.


Now, the sport.


Download Subtitles