13/05/2016 The Papers

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

With me are James Millar, Westminster Correspondent at

the Sunday Post and Louise Scodie, Journalist and Broadcaster .

The Times leads with Jon Platt, who's won a High Court ruling

after taking his daughter on holiday during term time.

The Mail runs with the same story,

and says the ruling could lead to a rush of families taking cheaper

The Mirror says the government is now vowing

to tighten laws to make it

more difficult for families who plan trips outside of school

There's a theme emerging - the Independent says the ruling

by the High Court could lead to 3 pupils in every class of 30

The Telegraph leads with an apology from the new head

of the RSPCA who says the organisation has become too

from the French energy minister about the 'colossal' cost

of the Hinkley Point nuclear project to the energy company EDF.

The Guardian has an interview with the new Mayor

of London Sadiq Khan, who says Labour should follow

the same strategy as Tony Blair in order to win the next general

And the Express says a nap during the day could raise your risk

We did not really want to read that. Let's begin, we made the point that

so many of the papers are leading on a punter friendly story. We are all

interested on this issue whether you can or can't take your children out

of school during the holiday. I'm not surprised, it is right that this

front page has had so much coverage, it affects thousands of people

across the country, families are penalised by travel companies for

taking their kids on holiday during holiday season because the fares go

up massively. You can understand why this particular parent went to

court, to defend his decision to take his daughter wagering term

time. Understandably, all of the newspapers are describing it as a

landmark case, it will be fascinating to see what happens as a

result. I have to say that I find the coverage overwhelmingly in

favour of families and parents on this. There is a big theme, parent

power and bringing power back? It is a victory in the mirror, a win in

The i newspaper, the Daily Mail says it is chaos. We don't know what the

government will do, the government is not happy about this. Michael

Gove does not want people, when he brought in the roles can he did not

want people to take their kids out of school in term time so they have

said they will legislate to stop it happening. When and how, we will

have to wait and see, clearly there were rules in place and the court

has basically suggested they are rubbish and don't stand the test.

It's interesting to balance, on one hand there may be some staff and

teachers who say that they cannot have children going off willy-nilly,

they are busy trying to let them catch up and get on to what they

have missed. And parents saying, they cannot take time off in the

natural holidays? Yes, the Daily Mail would say it is chaos without

AQ at the bus stop. I don't believe as a result that all parents would

decide to take their kids away in term time, they have respect for the

education of their kids and they want their kids in school learning.

I'm not sure we will see a huge rush... James is shaking his head.

But it does... Importantly, it opens up the space for this conversation

and I think there is a wider issue at hand. I know parents with kids at

two different schools in the same borough, and holiday dates aren't

the same. RES! It inconveniences parents even further and when we are

talking about families who are single parents, it is not fit for

the purpose of modern family life, this all has to be looked at. I

agree with that. But I'm not sure, when you say that parents have

respect, a lot of parents do, middle-class parents do, but there

are a lot who don't. Michael Gove put this in so that Yvonne has the

same opportunities, kids with books at home and parents who believe in

education, they aren't the problem, it is the other ones. The rules now

our consistent and fair to everyone, they may not be brilliant all the

best rules, but the previous system where a headteacher had some

discretion. They could give ten days at discretion? They will always say

to the middle-class child who Baena was getting help at home, they will

say yes, but that child who needs help and is being kept out of school

may be for not the right reasons, it is a different matter. It is very

difficult. I'm not sure the current rules are right but I don't know

deal turn a tip. That is the problem. You are a parent, will you

take your kids on holiday next week or the week after? No. I think

education is important. You also have to teach a certain amount of

respect for authority. These rules in force that, but I'm not a problem

if you like, my kids... It's good to know! My kids have books at home,

they will hopefully be OK. When you try and get to grips with why

parents are doing it, there is a tension in the moral high ground

some parents take some parents say they feel it is educational to take

their children to Sri Lanka for two weeks. Other parents say they should

be able to do what they like, in brackets, because I do not want to

pay the whole fair... You have Jon Platt saying it is his right to take

his child away to show her a different experience and a bit of

the world. He spent ?13,000 fighting this ruling. We cannot say it is

just about finances, you was prepared to spend a vast amount of

money, far more than the cost of the holiday, on fighting for his right

to make sure as I think he would say, that his child has a well

rounded experience and if that means taking days out of school... Deal

with the consequence. I went to Disneyland last month, it was not

very educational! Did you not make a special project? We don't know what

else they did while they were there. They may have learned about the

culture of the country... What I love about this is in the Daily

Mail, tucked away, it said "Holiday companies were expected to respond

by hiking prices in term time". The idea we might finally thwart the

hideous holiday costs seems to have gone out the window. But never mind,

there's always a cloud to every silver lining! Let's look at the

Daily Mail, if we go inside, they have got the story about the IMF. We

were talking today about Christine Lagarde talking about the perils of

coming out of the EU. And there's more, James? The most telling bit of

the story is the top where it says 40 days to go before the Brexit

vote, get used to it, there will be a lot more Space-X apparently

Christine Lagarde was Osborne's IMF charmed -- a lot more of this! They

have all decided Brexit is bad for the economy, this is some sort of

conspiracy, according to the Daily Mail, it has asked four people from

the League side to comment, and one from the remains eyed, and the IMF

are conspiring, apparently. -- the Remain side. The Daily Mail

says it is a conspiracy but the IMF 's sake, to be fair, there's no

point releasing this after the vote, that seems entirely reasonable. I

love the fact this is a classic Daily Mail reporting of the story.

The fact they've gone the French bosses accused of interfering, she

is not interfering, she works for an organisation where she has a vested

interest in whether we go in or out, it will affect countries worldwide,

of course the IMF has something to say about it, thanks, Daily Mail!

They've used the word "Controversial" prize within ten

seconds, talking about David Cameron. -- twice. I enjoy her

quote, that "Squirting the EU would be pretty bad to very, very bad". --

us quitting. The thing is, the IMF are not all

-- Osborne's friend. Eight years later, the INS said they were doing

a good job. They seem to be fairly impartial, it

is fair to say. It is interesting there is a sense that we do not

welcome comments from external... The Bank of England, of course Mark

Connolly came under criticism when he dared to mention his opinion on

the matter? -- Mark Carney. I'm not sure that they want anyone's opinion

but their own! They've mentioned former Chancellor Lord Lamont, they

have not mentioned he was terrible, possibly the worst for a long time.

Now he is Brexit, he is to be respected. He does not want people

interfering, he says it has become buried politicised. I think the

bold, red font, 40 days to go will cause me nightmares overnight!

Let's move onto The Guardian newspaper, they've been speaking to

the new Mayor of London, and he's given his thoughts on where Labour

are going wrong and how they might make things right? Indeed, perhaps

not so much a thinly veiled criticism on Jeremy Corbyn's

leadership, saying that Labour should look at past leaders rather

than looking at what is happening at the moment, backtracking later

saying that Jeremy is not that bad, maybe he can do better, politics is

a team sport, bringing it back to that! A reassuring quote, "I've

achieved seven days -- in seven days rather than six days in the

opposition". It is not a long time. He is riding high. People are

looking at him to give thoughts on the Labour strategy? I love this,

there is so much in it. It does not mention he's a Muslim or the sun of

a bus driver, it has been repeated ad nauseam! I knew it would be

hiding inside! There has been stuff about the Labour Party -- the son of

a bus driver. There is stuff about their campaign, that was quite

distasteful. He is slapping Corbyn, he cosied up to him to get the

nomination. And suddenly, he turns around and

says Tony Blair is the good guy and we should listen to him. The most

telling thing is the first line is "Labour should unite and focus on

winning power". The fact he has to say that says you all you -- says

all you need to know about the current state of the Labour Party.

And the chance to critique campaigners, and criticisms of the

Zac Goldsmith campaign and the disquiet in many parties about this?

Indeed, going further by describing Zac Goldsmith as a bad sport for not

checking his hand after it was declared at the end. I think that

Sadiq Khan will continue to stick the boot in as far as Goldsmith and

the campaign are concerned for a long time. So many people were

disgusted by what went on, and I think it helped him progress his

campaign further. I enjoyed the fact that he revealed David Cameron had

phoned him to ask for help in securing a large turnout in London,

who phones? Did he not text? We are not impressed by his social media

skills! In The Times, let's go into the inside pages on this one, they

were leading like many others on parents taking their kids out of

school. Two stories we wanted to look at here, the first is to do

with hundreds more prisoners apparently allowed to be released

temporarily from jail? Yes, I don't think either of these will go down

very well with the ordinary voter. This one, yes, Michael Gove is now

at the Department of Justice, and is going to launch a prison reform bill

in the Queens speech, that is due on Wednesday. It will allow prisoners

out on temporary release. To go to work, visit relatives, integrate

into the community, a lot of people would think that is a good idea,

other people won't, largely because it is scaled back. After a

high-profile murder a prisoner out on release. It is a difficult one,

you should not necessarily change the rules just because one case, but

if one person is murdered, that's too many. I think it will divide

people. Yes, I'm not sure that many readers of The Times will be happy

to read these two stories. Interesting, in the prisoner story,

Michael Gove, and the fact he wishes to call those inmates "Men" rather

than prisoners, and accommodation rooms rather than cells, I'm

surprised to hear such humane language from him, maybe I'm

painting a bad picture, but it surprised me. It ended with a quote

on the reform trust supporting these moves. Quite a hopeful piece, I

would think. Take us underneath here. And to refugees, it's topical

today, of course, looking at numbers, David Miliband has weighed

into the debate about how many Syrian refugees we should take? For

many, the right brother, saying we should listen to him on this. He is

quoting numbers, and being very specific about what the numbers

would mean for different areas of the country, and if we were taking

25,000 Syrians per year into the country, it is 40 per Parliamentary

constituency. He says it won't overwhelm the system, it may be true

but I want more detail, I want to know the infrastructure which will

be put in place to support it, and the emotional and logistical support

given to help the refugees integrate into society. I think it is lovely

to have that top level but the ordinary person in this country

wants to know how this is going to work, if we are going to welcome

that many people in. I'm not sure he's the right brother, even this,

anyone who stands up and says we will take 100,000 extra people won't

get many votes in the current climate. To some extent, it's a good

idea, but it is how do you do it? And it creates tension, I think a

lot of people, it is hearts and minds, a lot of people look at the

plight of people and think, that's great. But where will they go, how

will they access the NHS? And it is trying to get that balance, I

suppose? The other thing is, people displaced in the country next to

Syria should be allowed to get on with settling in in that country and

working and contributing to that country. It seems entirely sensible.

It is both daft and unpleasant to have them in camps with fences, and

all the rest of it, as long as they aren't taking local people's jobs,

they could contribute and that would be good for everyone. It has painted

a black and white picture, saying the only hope is that they become

productive residents of the country they go to, yes, but he also says

the only or tentative is people are placed in camps, a magnet for

criminality... -- an alternative. There a grey area that has to be

explored. And an acknowledgement that not everyone who is integrated

in society will have a successful life. And, as we said, the one to

better support people. There was an interview on the BBC, on This

World... You will get the story in more detail this way! We will delve

into The Financial Times. Hinkley Point, take us to Somerset, what is

going on? There is supposed to be a gigantic power station at the cost

of 18 billion, but whether there will ever be won is anyone's guess.

It is another infrastructure project that is a shambles. The French are

supposed to be building it, now they are not entirely sure it is worth

the money, the energy minister, and brilliantly the former partner of

the president Francois Hollande is the mother of his children. Who

knows what will happen? It is supposed to produce 7% of the

nations black trustee, not all of the lights will go off but some will

if it is not built -- electricity. And apart from the fact we are

talking about a massive amount of money for not much output, it is

only expected to provide 7% of electricity over a decade, that does

not seem like a lot for ?18 billion. We have this quote from the French

energy minister saying if we pull out, it sends a bad signal to

competitors, the French don't keep their word, they are worried about

their reputation which seems an unnecessarily added complication

when they should look at the fact as to whether it will work and the

cost-effective -- be cost-effective. This has been running for a while,

looking ahead to tomorrow, changing up, this is a new programme on the

BBC, and I know that you will both be sitting down watching the

Eurovision Song Contest? Have you got your party planned?

Yes, snacks representing all of the nations! But it is fewer nations,

this particular angle in The Guardian newspaper is the Ukrainian

and Russian tensions, political stuff that always comes out? This is

politics, never mind Sadiq Khan, it is completely... It is a weird

event, this is the Ukrainian entrant, who has said, vote for me

because Russia invaded my country. Not whether she has a good song or

not! The Russian attitude to Eurovision is bizarre because they

really want to win... They are favourites? Yes, but they have a

terrible record on gay rights, and there is nothing Day! They are

favourites and they will get feed, I'm sure. I hope every flag waved

during their performance is a rainbow flag. To show solidarity

with the LGBT community. I hope there is not going to be any

political voting going on tomorrow because of increased public

voting... Yeah, right! It's a masterclass in political voting,

that's why the UK don't do very well even though we've had great people.

We have good contestants tomorrow! Had you heard the entry tomorrow?

They are pretty good, they can sing! The bad news is Ireland have not got

through, we have heard West 's former singer is not going to be

there. There is a small number of contestants -- Westlife. Our

coverage is always quite tongue in cheek, the late, great Terry Wogan,

and Graham Norton, do they do that in other countries? Apparently the

Russians do, but they get beat, and rainbow flags waved at them, they

don't get it. I don't understand why Putin is so keen on it, he does like

topless photo shoots, and the rest of it... He likes topless photos

shoots and Eurovision... Strange! I don't know how they cover it in

Europe, they take it more seriously? Having said that, some of the

entries cannot be taken seriously! We will leave it to you all to

judge! When you are watching this tomorrow with your special country

seemed snacks, Louise has some tips! All of the front pages are online on

the BBC News website. There is a detailed review of the newspapers,

seven days a week. You can see our spare as well with

each night 's edition of the papers being posted on the page shortly

after we have finished. All that remains to be said is back

to my guests -- is thanks to my guests, good night.