25/02/2016 The Papers

Hello and welcome to our look at what the morning's papers will

With me are the columnist for the Independent, James Rampton, and

The headline on the i is "BBC: We are to blame

for these monsters" after the report out today looking at the activities

A lawyer for many of Savile's victims accuses the report

The Express focuses on the Broadcaster Tony Blackburn who says

he has been "hung out to dry" by the BBC in the wake of the scandal.

The Guardian suggests that the BBC and Tony Blackburn have gone to war

The Sun says the government is accused of hiding the real net

migration figures, which could be more than double those stated.

According to the Financial Times, the Chancellor George Osborne is

pushing the G20 economies to warn about the

The Times newspaper claims Downing Street is preparing to create up to

40 new peers this summer and the Prime Minister could reward

And The Telegraph says family doctors will be told that they are

wrongly diagnosing hundreds of thousands of children with asthma.

We will begin with the Jimmy Savile story and a report out today by the

former judge Dame Janet Smith into what was happening inside the BBC

that allowed abuse by celebrities like Jimmy Savile to go unreported.

Along. The Metro has it on the front page -- unreported for so long. This

is 1000 pages long, this report, and it is very damning towards the

corporation. Dame Janet Smith found that bosses were blameless, despite

117 staff telling her that they had known rumours about Jimmy Savile's

behaviour. A junior employee at the television centre complained to a

supervisor in the late 1980s that she had been sexually assaulted by

Savile, and she was told to keep her mouth shut. That just shows you that

they were elevated to such levels that they were untouchable. Rumours

were rife, weren't they? A lot of people working here now say that

when they came to work here they had heard of rumours. But it is the

other stuff, the culture that makes people feel they can't speak up,

that is what is a worry. Absolutely, and Dame Janet Smith has said that

the culture may still exist. She said the BBC must resist the

temptation to treat what happened to then as being irrelevant to today.

This is a reminder that we should all be vigilant about abuse it

happens in all sorts of organisations. What this report has

revealed is that vigilance is key. Sadly, for the victims, will it be

closure? Despite Tony hall's very good apology today, many say they

feel a bit let down. But the truth has not been unearthed and many feel

this is nothing more than expensive whitewash. Strong words, but I think

many people will agree with that. I know they are bringing in the NSPCC

to look at how to protect children. Esther Rantzen was talking about it

earlier, I think it is brilliant they have done that. I think it is

something that needs to happen in this and other corporations, because

these people are very clever and manipulative. Jimmy Savile was, he

surrounded himself with dignitaries and important people, to create this

idea of being untouchable. Also, the reputation of the BBC, another

scandal that the BBC has to somehow get through and regain trust. Trust

and integrity are words that the BBC uses a lot. I think they have made

the right step today in apologising. That is always the first step. The

worst thing is when you try to cover something up. What did it for

Richard Nixon in Watergate was not the original offence, it was a

cover-up. I think Tony Hall coming out and apologising to the victims

today is a good step, and the next step is to try to stop it happening

in the future. . The chair of the BBC trust said that the BBC turned a

blind eye when it should have shone a light. If this stops people in the

future from turning a blind eye, it will be worth a report. As a final

mention of the story, the Guardian and the Express have gone different

ways. Tony Blackburn, veteran DJ, being part of the BBC output for

about 40 years... The first voice on BBC Radio 1. Parting company, as it

says here. Tony Blackburn says he hasn't done anything wrong, the

reason he has been told he has to go is because the standard of the

evidence he gave did not meet BBC standards. He says he is a

scapegoat. Of all the stories they could put on the front page, it is

interesting that have gone with this. The Express has done. The

quote of Tony Blackburn, who would have come forward if they see how I

have been hung out to dry? This is not the end of this by any means,

there could be legal proceedings. Let's look at the Daily Mail.

Another set of devastating migration figures, but the PM says the numbers

can be slashed. Pull the other one, Dave. It is like a comedy routine!

He is trying to get this down to 100,000, apparently. Anything in the

next 200 days will be put through the two sides of the argument. The

Daily Mail is chief cheerleader for the Brexit campaign, and is

obviously using this as another is thick with which to beat those who

wish to remain within the EU. This report from the office of national

statistics is being used to encourage those who want to leave.

Any statistic will be left on by both sides and interpreted as they

wish to. Half of this figure is arrivals from the EU, and the other

half are of course non- EU people, and it is much easier to control

those figures. 630,000 national insurance numbers were issued to

non- British EU citizens in 2015, seemingly at odds with the data that

said that 257 EU migrants arrived in the end of December. Many say it can

be good for a country, migration, a sign that an economy is doing well.

I think it is a good advertisement in this country that we are

attracting so many people. I know the NHS has said it would be in dire

straits if we didn't have semi- people migrating to this country. I

think half a million British people live in Spain as well. If we stop

people moving around the EU, what will happen to those people? Lord

Howard snubs PM and backs Brexit. Another big name from Tory ranks who

has joined the out campaign. Obviously it was all about Boris on

Sunday. How much of a snub is this for the PM? I think it is quite a

snub in that Lord Howard gave David Cameron his first job. He research

for him 20 years ago, it was his way into the Tory party. In terms of

their personal relationship it is a snub, but Lord Howard has always

been a very vocal anti- EU proponent, so that is not

surprising. What is interesting is how vicious the campaign is

getting, and we are only three days in. Four months of this! We are

already getting fatigued! Lord Howard said he would not have got

support from the Brexit side even if he had returned to the EU

brandishing the severed heads of the EU commission. Quite vivid and

colourful language. It speaks of how opposed some people are to being

part of the EU, who don't feel it is what they voted for back in the

70s. And accusations of project fear, as well. David Cameron saying

that the pound would fall and the cost of holidays will rise. That is

absolutely the primary concern! That is what I will be voting on! He is

clever to go with that because it is something everyone will be able to

identify with. We have a fortnight in Spain, will that be under threat

because the pound is tumbling as a result of instability? Maybe. You

can't be too careful! The Times, Rotherham child-abuse gang leader

wanted IVF. He has fathered up to 18 babies! Many of his victims had

abortions, an awful story. This was to disclosed in court, and there are

no words to describe it. We don't want to be arrested ourselves for

the things we say, but it is absolutely shocking, and apparently

he might have been trying to use certain aspect to get himself

acquitted and to have the jury dismissed, but I think quite rightly

the judge rejected those claims and clearly he was well enough to

contemplate family life with a baby. If he was campaigning to have IVF,

he clearly is fit enough to make those decisions, and his claims that

he was unfit to do so were exposed as not quite right. Final story,

pupils who go private get ahead by two years. This is some research

being done that Durham University. I think it is interesting, but if you

delve down into the figures and take into account the background to the

pupils, it says the difference between private and state education

is only 0.64 of the grade. For me, that is quite a lot of money to

pay, ?15,000 a year perhaps, for a lot of very big difference. Even

though the Times is spinning this as very pro- private school, and

boosting willingness or decide to go to private schools, you are shelling

out a lot of money for what I think is not a massive difference. I had a

friend who went to a private school, and I wanted to say to his parents

that they should have a refund for that. The thing with this, there was

a story the other day about the fact that private schools are finding

that numbers are dropping because more people are choosing to spend

their children to successful state schools. It is not just about

qualifications, is it? Confidence that people seem to come out with

and the connections they have. I went to a state school in the 1980s,

and to be honest it was horrible, I didn't enjoy it at all and I didn't

get the support I wanted to go on and work in broadcasting in my life.

I didn't get that at all. So I was very lucky, to have the

determination that I had. We're out of time, we are very glad you are

here and we hope you will come back again. Mention that to your friend

who use it should get a refund for his private schooling. That is it

from us for tonight. Next, Sportsday.