22/01/2016 The Papers


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

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 22/01/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



to join Novak Djokovic and Serena Williams in the fourth round. That


is in 15 minutes after the Papers. Hello and welcome to our look


at the morning's papers. With me are Martin Bentham,


home affairs Editor of the London Evening Standard and Lindsay


Watling, Westminster correspondent The Daily Express points to


the French Prime Minister's warning that the migrant crisis threatens


the very existence of the EU. The Independent claims that a US


health-care giant is making a fortune from the NHS but hardly


any paying corporation tax. The FT says Google has reached


a deal with the Treasury to pay "New drug to wipe out superbugs" is


the headline in the Times. The paper says British scientists


have spear-headed The Daily Mail claims


the Queen has shown "extraordinary" support for Lord Brammall, who was


falsely accused of child abuse. The Telegraph lead with the news


that more than 100 MPs want to end BT's monopoly of the broadband


cable, they say the service is The Guardian, in common with many


other papers, has a picture of the British actress Charlotte


Rampling on its front page. She's stepped into the Oscars


diversity row by claiming the objection, that not


a single non-white actor has been And finally,


The Sun claims Coca-Cola and Pepsi have vowed to slash sugar levels


in their products ahead of a Normal people never vow. Now of the


trail part to, a national disgrace. This is a very Daily Mirror story.


Just a warning in many ways come out there complaining that a contract


for new trains to replace these bone shaking ones that you can see on the


front of the paper, the Northern rail trains, has gone not to a


British firm, but to a Spanish firm that will make them overseas. The


problem is that it is damaging our rail industry, a great industry


invented in this country and exported all around the world, we


have always had a great tradition of making railways and so on, so there


that issue. Then there is the steel that is used in production of these


trains and the steel industry is and also to disarray at the moment,


losing jobs. They're not doing anything by allowing this contract


to go out of the country to support the beleaguered steel industry. But


do you want to automatically give it to a company in this country? There


was always that argument that can be made. The RMT has characterized this


as a kick in the teeth and I think many people in Port Talbot and other


areas where there have been severe job cuts will interpret this just


one way. A lack of support. The Sun, a number of companies say


they're going to cut their sugar levels but if you cut your sugar,


you usually replace it with something which is not usually any


healthier. I guess the question is by how much? There will still be a


large amount of sugar in these products, even if you cut the


sugar. Perhaps a better ideas to encourage children to drink water


and healthier juices and perhaps eat a banana rather than having serial


at breakfast. Good luck with that. The Prime Minister for the childhood


obesity strategy which will -- has a childhood obesity strategy which


will be published this quarter. One major problem is having too much


sugar and the government wants to move towards persuading the industry


to change its habits. This is what has been suggested is going to


happen. The problem is they don't always do that sufficiently and they


continue selling a lot of things which are quite unhealthy to


people. Use against Jamie Oliver, Boris Johnson, all of them who want


to introduce a sugar tax your London. It will be interesting to


see -- he is, whether it actually works or whether it is just to avoid


tougher sanctions from the government. It may be interesting to


see if it will work, they said paying 2p for plastic bags would


work but it has. Now moving on to the Times. This review of freedom of


information rules which was prompted by claims, which we should all


reject quite frankly, that these laws which were introduced by Labour


were somehow being misused and causing excess costs. This is all


about saying that public services come at the government and so on, it


is saying that private contract -- contractors should be run publicly.


If you can't obtain information about them, obviously that is a


great problem. Prisons is one of the main ones, it is a private


contractor running a public area. But how likely is it that it won't


just be expanded? This is calling for the government to go even


further. The fear is that things are going to be curtailed and there may


even be a charge imposed for making a request, that is one of the fears


campaigners have. I think it is unlikely but as Martin says, it will


be welcome. I think it might happen because it might allow the


government to do some of the things you are talking about, restricted on


one hand and use it somewhere else, offer something and take some of the


things you are talking about, restricted on one hand and use it


somewhere else, offer something it takes nothing else away. The


Financial Times, Google and the ?130 deal for back taxes. They say they


have not done anything wrong but I think most people will be pleased to


read this story although they might say, should the big companies be


doing even more? This is the news that Google has reached a settlement


with the UK to pay ?130 million in back taxes and higher taxes in the


future. Is at the start of a crackdown? There was a lot in front


of the accounts committee but if they haven't done anything wrong,


why do they owe back taxes? There is a moral case, isn't there? It may be


because George Osborne has introduced this year diverted


profits tax were people who have lots of economic activity in a


particular country and have been shifting it to other countries, the


allegation has been that their real activities in this country and they


should be paying tax here. I don't know whether it is after whether it


is simply the idea that they feel, perhaps with the new regime, that


they should make a PR gesture. Guardian, risky drinking fuels


alcohol industry sales. This is quite a startling headline, how much


problem drinkers boost the coffers. They have been accused of


irresponsible marketing, and there is a claim that they make most of


their money from people who have problems with rink. These statistics


are English only but there is a similar problem in Scotland. The


SNP, Nicola Sturgeon is trying to bring in minimum unit pricing,


they're trying to take it north of the border. It is not surprising


that the people who drink most of the alcohol are buying the most. On


the other hand, it is exactly parallel with the sugar tax story.


There is the same issue of big companies selling lots of products,


it is in their interest to do that, but if those products are unhealthy,


are they doing enough to exercise responsibility and trying to


directed away from the people who are going to suffer the most? The


allegation here in this story is that they are not and that the


marketing is done in a way that Willie Cridge people who have


problems with rink to keep doing it. There is done in a way that Willy


Cridge people who have problems with rink to keep doing it. There's a


drink responsibly label on everything -- will encourage people


who have problems with drink to keep doing it. That's true. But they are


selling cute bottles at insanely low prices. It still goes on. Up


promotions. That is part of the problem -- cheap promotions. Staying


with the Guardian, a picture of Charlotte rambling who has got


herself embroiled in this diverse city row -- Rampling. Racist to


whites, she says. She has stepped into a bit of a problem here. She


has. She stated it very strongly, she seems to be getting a lot of


criticism. Obviously no one wants to think that they have won and award


because of the colour of their skin but I do think if you look at the


statistics in the article, analysis by the LA Times found that 93% of


the members of the Academy were white and 96% male with an average


age of 63. It is not level playing field. She has been very brave to


say this. She shouldn't be denounced for giving an honest answer. What


she is really saying is, why classify people? These days people


are more or less accepted, obviously you can argue that, but she is


saying people should be taken as the person. Isn't the point that if you


look at the makeup of the Academy, the people who make the decisions


are not representative of American society? On Twitter there has been


chatter about these statistics and the data is very readily available,


but when user has said that even compared with black actors and


actresses, Asian people and Latinas have even more to complain about --


Latinos. The people nominated for the ward should be the best people,


it would be good if that reflected a broad spectrum of society. That is


what you want to go towards. It won't always be an exact


representation, nor should it be. I think that is really what she is


trying to say. Unfortunately, on this occasion and historically,


there will be very few people who agree with her. The Daily Mail on


page three. A test that could tell a woman if IVF will work for her. It


is very expensive and not a nice process to go through for people, so


how does this test work? This is a test that tells women if IVF is


futile for them. The Daily Mail says it works by detecting whether their


wounds -- wombs carry the correct DNA for it to work. Many women are


leaving it later to start a family and this is usually one of the only


ways. It might not stop you trying anyway, but you would have a more


realistic knowledge of what your odds were, which would perhaps make


it easier. Although I am sure if really wanted to try and still


unsuccessful, it would be demoralizing and upsetting. I guess


there is a danger of someone who might be put off completely from


trying because they get a result from one of these tests. And they


aren't always right. Not always. That's all for tonight.


Coming up next it's time for Sportsday.


Download Subtitles