17/01/2016 The Papers

and gunshots, how Leonardo DiCaprio survived the Oscar Durie. We get the

reviews on The Revenant and the other top releases in the Film

Review. Hello and welcome to our look

at the morning's papers. With me are the journalist

Rachel Shabi, and Tim Stanley, The Express leads with Britain's

future in the EU, citing new research that suggests

growing support for Britain to leave The Telegraph's main headline

concerns GP waiting lists. It says 10 million patients are

struggling to get appointments, with record numbers having to wait

more than a week. The Times headlines David Cameron's

plans to integrate Muslim women into mainstream society, including

English classes for new migrants. The Guardian covers plans by the NHS

to launch its own sugar tax The Daily Mail leads with mounting

pressure on Scotland Yard to apologise to ex

army chief Lord Bramall after child The Metro's top story is speculation

over delays to the relaunch of The Sun has more on Jeremy Corbyn's

desire to remove nuclear war heads The Independent covers

Saudi Arabia's stock market crash, after the lifting

of sanctions clears the way for Iran We are surprised he Iran deal hasn't

featured more widely on the front pages, but anyway. We start with a

Sun. Off his warhead, with Jerry Corbyn stuffed inside a missile with

his hat on. Do a Falklands deal and start talks with IS fiends. The

nuclear bid is interesting. Jeromy Corbyn has a problem. He would like

to get rid of Trident. He has playwrights saying he shouldn't do

it on principle and union saying he shouldn't do it because of jobs --

Blairights. And others are saying he should come out floating in a

halfway house modelled on what Japan does, apparently, whereby you retain

nuclear capability - in a sense that you can fire a nuclear weapon if you

want to, but you don't have their weapons, so you have the weapon

system but not the weaponry. In that way you are part of the nuclear

umbrella without being a nuclear power. Could you find yourself in

this artistic insight has a marine quickly? Where is the closest one?

-- could you find yourself a ballistic missile. He talked about a

lot of domestic policy. Wealth inequality, NHS, this is what the

Sun ends up with. And then they complain he does not talk about

domestic policy. It is always something that has been likely to

crop up. Absolutely. The nuclear issue. I am looking at the other

things. They are trying to cover a lot of bases. John Prescott

complained that they were focusing on things out of the past. They are

focused on lots of things. Jeromy Corbyn is out of the 80s. Trying to

apply a 1980s policies to today, having a conversation with Argentina

about handing back the Falklands... He didn't say, let's talk about

Islamic State. It is the point about the Trident, it isn't an 80s

conversation, it is a 2016 conversation. Trident is not an

effective defence measure. All but officials will say that. In the face

of the biggest threat, international terrorism, Trident is no use. It is

a really good idea to have this review. And to look at whether there

is better ways to spend the money. How does the Telegraph look at it?

Be careful what you say. LAUGHS. Why, what will happen? Deal with it

in an elusive manner... Jeromy Corbyn's the idea, the deterrent

with no ability to deter is like the army without rifles. They are having

a review, they are at the beginning of this review. This is one idea. I

am sure there will be more. The reason it was flagged is because it

is a way to look at not making a lot of people redundant. One thing of

concern with losing Trident is it will cause unemployment. That is the

reason they have looked at this compromise arrangement. I am sure

there will be of other things come up in this review. That quote is

from John Woodcock, Labour MP, from where Trident is found, so it is a

jobs issue for him. The lingering plus for the idea of keeping Trident

is maintaining Britain's prestige in the world. That is why we are at on

the Security Council, that is why we are at the heart of Nato. We have to

move on. We have a lot to move on with. The Times - half of UK

universities curbing free speech. The Times has information from Spite

magazine. It has totalled up the numbers of universities which have

asked publications to be shut down. It comes out with some striking

figures at universities, curtailing free speech among students. I think

it is down to students becoming consumers. When you introduce

tuition fees, asking people to pay for their education through the

roof, they start to look at their education in a different way. They

feel, I live here, it is very expensive, and I don't want that

newsletter around where I live, I don't want that person coming to

speak at the place which I take to be at. I think at the root of this

conflict is the fact we have changed the nature of higher education with

commercialisation. Isn't it about universities being cautious that

they cannot know for sure who is coming into their campus and what

they will say? Whenever you talk to people... This is just one example.

When you talk to people trying to counter radicalisation, what they

say is you cannot drive this conversation underground, otherwise

you can't challenge it. Have people say it out loud, in the open, to

demolish the argument. What I worry about is people won't be - if you

are not exposed to this dissenting voice, how can you learn to form

rational arguments against them? It is coming from left-wing activist

students, it is coming from those students making these demands.

Crucially, it is coming from the government, and prevent Mac strategy

encourages the closing down of society -- Prevent. It is asking the

government, proactive ways to stop free speech. This is not entirely

the fault of left-wing students. Nor universities. It is the fruit of

government policy. Pressure on Scotland Yard boss after ex- army

chief cleared of abuse. Lord Bramall was accused of sexual abuse by

someone. The police took it seriously, as they were right to do.

The result was his home was raided by 20 policemen. His wife, who has

Alzheimer's, witness to this and was very disturbed by it. The police

kept the investigation for over a year and finally they have said that

at the end of the investigation, because of insufficient evidence...

Some people say what they should do is plainly say they have ended it

because it is not a fair allegation. It is incorrect. And that the police

should give an apology. One of the things an officer did was described

the allegations made as credible and true, which is very unusual for the

police to do. One suspects they are responding after the fact to the

Jimmy Savile thing. In all of this, the victim is Lord Bramall. Let us

move on to the Express - Britain is ready to leave the EU on the back of

another survey. The opinion poll, which we know are not always right.

Yes. This has to be thought of couched. Dot a 6% surge in favour of

quitting the EU -- this has to be sought of couched... Put down to the

migration crisis, terrorism and the attacks on Cologne. We have to couch

it with even more caveats about opinion polls at, because with the

EU people don't vote in the way that they necessarily say they will. A

lot of people still don't know. There will be a lot of movement in

this until the referendum, whenever it will be. And the Prime Minister

hasn't made his case for it yet. When he comes out and says he wants

to stay in - people say that - whatever he gets out of the

negotiation, the figures will change. Is it fair, sensible,

accurate, to conflate leaving the EU with issues of terrorism? No, of

course not! As we were saying earlier, we are outside of

Schengen. We have strict passport can -- controls. Others have to show

their passport. We have cauterised some of the problems affecting

European problems in the refugee crisis. We don't take as many

migrants, for instance. Migrants don't cause terrorism. It is an

unfortunate completion. The public think it is an issue. It is not. If

the public thinks it, we should have a bigger debate and conversation

about why they think it, because it is erroneous. We will look at the

Telegraph. Millions wait longer to see a GP. 10 million. More than.

They are trying to find an appointment but having to wait more

than a week. For a long time we have talked about the hours GPs work. We

need more GPs to work more hours. Yes. I mean, it is the usual

depressing story about access to the NHS and seeing a GP. People are

waiting far too long. 30% of those surveyed said that they were having

problems getting an appointment. A lot of us can relate to that, trying

to get an appointment with a surgery. It is not that the doctors

are not aware of this - of course, they are - but if they spread

themselves to be available on the weekends in the same set up, which

is overstretched already, they will end up cutting back on services

available on a daily basis. It is an issue of funding rather than

available GPs. Good comment. I go to NHS walk-in centres. They are not

available everywhere. I know that I sound like I have discovered

something new. Amazing! There are growing numbers of practices where

you can pay 40 quid to see a GP. That is a lot of money! A lot of

professionals do it. Apparently, a lot of migrants do it. I am not

saying it is a solution. We finish with page three of the Times.

Behold, the great literary device. The idea that a chosen few writers

racked up a fortune, and others struggle. The book market in this

country - people say it is dying - has a problem, those that do well

only a small number benefit a couple of authors. This research has

discovered that the median income for writers is ?11,000, which is

below the ?16,000 that the Joseph Rowntree foundation should be the

normal wage. They have figures on how much people earn. Even these

figures, I suspect, having just seen the story, are a bit misleading.

When you list the sales of a book, that is not what the author is paid.

They are paid 5-10% of each copy. And if it is an e-book, Hugh get

nothing. It is effectively impossible to live as an author --

you get nothing. It is like winning the lottery, writing a book that you

can live off. This carries on from something we were talking about,

Philip Pullman saying authors should not appear at literary festivals

without being paid. That happens a lot. I am glad he has said that. The

article talks about the fact that publishers are if they are making

lots of money from top-rated writers, they are not using it to

enable them to take risk with other writers -- publishers, if they are

making lots of money... Publishers are playing it very safe and they

are not taking risks or going for people who might be a little bit

less mainstream. That of course is resulting in a very narrow and

planned market as well as one that isn't very well funded. Let's all

buy a book we wouldn't normally buy this week. There is the challenge.

If you buy a book! Lovely to see you both. Thank you. That is the papers

for tonight. Coming up next, the Film Review.