26/01/2016 The Papers


No need to wait until tomorrow morning 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 26/01/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



semi-final line-up is confirmed. That is in the next 15 minutes with


me, after The Papers. Welcome to our look ahead to what


the papers will be bringing us tomorrow. Let us have a look at some


of the front pages. The I alleges secret deals


between big business After Google, the paper says


negotiations are now underway The Metro leads on what it calls


The Great Dane Robbery, following today's vote in the Danish


parliament to seize assets The Guardian says Ofsted is to get


tough with schools that allow girls to wear a full Islamic


veil, or niqab, The Telegraph says


the Government is backing higher council tax charges in flood risk


areas, to pay for improved defences. The Daily Mail reports on the cases


of three more children, who it claims died after


allegedly being failed The Express says many people


will have to keep on working till they're eighty, after cashing


in their pensions with no idea how The Star says that people making


false claims to the missing ?33 million lottery ticket


could face ten years I should be careful. It hasn't


changed me, my ?33 million. We will start with The Metro. Denmark is to


seize refugees' possessions. It is hard to see how this will work. It


is symbolic. The numbers given is that people will be allowed to keep


things taken of people will include things taken of people will include


phones and so on. It is hard to remember seeing anyone swimming


ashore in Greece with the laptop and phone. They have also said that


items that have sentimental value, wedding rings and family portraits,


will be immune from this. But what if you keep your wedding photos on a


laptop, presumably you still have it after travelling across the whole of


Europe. I am not sure what would take priority. It seems like gesture


politics. They are trying to say to migrants that if they do have stuff


it will be taken off them. It will also be a message that they have to


do something. We live in a country where we lock up asylum seekers for


years and will not give them money to buy food even though we have that


record we are shocked by this. The headline is very disapproving. The


have been around 30,000 migrants to Denmark. You can only assume that in


that country there is hysteria sufficient that the need to do


something like this. Although the focus is on the proposal to seize


valuables, refugee groups are more concerned about the fact that


refugees will not be allowed to bring their families for three


years. I suppose that is the proposal that might have the biggest


bearing on a migrant refugee thinking they do not want to go to


Denmark. If you think that you want something to have the desired effect


of not having people arrive in Denmark, saying he will be separated


from your spouse and children for three years, this seems to be a


stronger case than the laptop that you can have any more. It would not


make such a good headline. They have planned their way to the top. Ofsted


chief backs schools that restricts the Vale. He is getting tough on


those people out there who might want to take a particular headmaster


or mistress to task for preventing the wearing of the full veil in


class. I think any teacher or parent reading this will be confused about


what the government wants when it comes to the wearing of the Vale.


They want to have it both ways. They want to send the message that we


think that they'll should not be worn in the classroom, but all


schools can have a uniform policies. The chief inspector is saying that


the deal could lead to a school being marked down. How will you make


that judgment? You cannot make that judgment. This has been going on for


ten years. A teaching assistant was struck off for refusing to take off


her daily decade ago. I think most schools would wish that the


inspector gives out altogether makes up his mind. A lot of people reading


this story would say, good on them. I am not sure that it will be... It


will be the Spectre's actual visits and what he sees. I would have


thought since the only instance that they are considering here is


hindering communication and effective teaching, that would have


already got that school markdown. If an inspector went into a lesson and


no one was speaking or they felt strongly that students can read the


expression of a teacher, this doesn't just apply to pupils but the


staff, I am sure any inspector would have said that there was a problem


with communication there. I'm pretty sure that she would have mentioned


it. That is why these people are classrooms to do these inspections.


I find it hard to see what has changed other than the language has


been rendered specific to the Vale. I think it feels a little bit like a


big press release of the back of what is probably quite a small but


of their daily work. Flood risk areas raise council tax increases.


This is the front page of The Daily Telegraph. This is another story


that you look at the headline and you don't think it is the worst idea


in the world, but then you read it and think, wait a moment. Not just


areas that might be flooded will be paying, but areas that are close to


places that Ford will also be included. Those people will be


paying a sort of tax on being in the same environment as places that


flood, which begs the question why is it not national? Why we're not


doing this nationally? Where I live this not floods but I would pay ?15


for people who are getting flooded. It seems like an unhappy fudge and a


local solution has been found for what is quite a big national


problem. Someone has to pay for it and we clearly need more defences


against flood risk. It is a tiny sum. That cannot add up to a big


story. There are two things that make it into a splash. The


background is that when the coalition came to power the


dramatically cut spending on for the fences and many planned the fences


were approved. People are aware that the government have refused to pay


for defences. It is the local taxpayer that is going to pay. We


also got used to council tax freezes. Now it is going to go up by


2% as a standard increase to pay for social care and another 1.5% to pay


for flood protection. These are quite significant council tax rises.


The Daily Star says he will have to pay muggers attacked if you are the


winner. And if you are not only pretend to be UK get ten years. Stop


pretending, people who do not have a lottery ticket for ?33 million, that


you do. They are grumpy. Ten years since like a long time. There is


fraud. As fraud goes it is quite mild. You're not robbing old people.


Do we know how these 400 people expect to get away with it. Look how


sad the lottery faces. You will be back in an hour to look at some more


of the stories. Thank you for that. We stay with news. Now the


Download Subtitles