28/05/2016 The Papers

Or, a trip for Allah is through the looking glass. -- coming up, another

trip for Alice through the looking glass.

Hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the papers

With me are Lisa Markwell, former editor of the Independent

on Sunday, and Kevin Schofield, editor of Politics Home.

Tomorrow's front pages, starting with the Sunday Times,

which leads with accusations from vote leave leaders that David

Cameron has lost public trust over his failure to curb immigration.

The Sunday Telegraph also goes with the EU referendum,

with claims from eurosceptic ministers that the Prime Minister is

unconcerned with the impact of immigration on working families.

But an Observer poll suggests a boost for the remain campaign,

as experts warn that the economy will be harmed

And on the front page of the Express, a new protein jab

Try as we might, we can't really start with anything other than the

EU referendum. We will get two books as status symbols in a minute but we

can't start with that. Let's start with the Observer, and the poll they

have commissioned. A massive boost for the Prime Minister as 600

economists reject Brexit. 82% alarmed over household income. This

is a poll which would suggest, these experts are concerned about the

long-term fall in GDP. You have better eyesight, Kevin, you can read

this print. It is interesting, I was looking at Twitter earlier this

evening and long before the page was printed, the first person to tweet

link to the story was David Cameron. So obviously he was very

keen, because as we all know, the remaining camp, the economy is their

big driving message, and for leave it is very much about immigration. I

think leave feel it is the only way they will get some traction so this

is welcome. It is a poll of 600 economists, and they are from the,

from big business, the city, all sorts of different sources. So this

idea, because the Institute for Fiscal Studies has got a lot of

criticism from the leave campaign, because all the economic forecasts

are seen as propaganda for the remaining camp. But this sets out

quite a broad range of opinions. And usually economists don't necessarily

agree so whatever you think of David Cameron making hay with it, it is

actually quite an interesting poll. It is a large number of people to

have sought opinion from. I suppose the vote leave campaign would say if

you speak to business leaders privately and they speak in a

personal capacity, not representing their company or their organisation,

they might say something rather different. They do feel able in a

personal capacity to speak up for leaving. For those of us who covered

the Scottish independence referendum there are a lot of parallels, and in

terms of the economy, there were warnings about leaving the UK, that

share prices would collapse, all that type of stuff. It is more or

less the same argument but I'm not sure it cuts through for those who

are the keenest on Brexit. I think it will work for swing voters, and

you can see why they are going on this tack. But if you fervently

believe in Brexit, then it is a few quid here or there, that is not

going to change your mind. It is about national sovereignty and

independence, bringing the laws back from Brussels. That is the way they

would view it but as Lisa says, the economy remains a big strong suit.

This is the one thing that they will just knock people over the head

with, this warning, day after day. Almost economic Armageddon if we

were to leave the EU and I think that will sway quite a lot of

undecided voters. Newspapers love poll, it gives them a lead story and

it is a very different set of circumstances for the BBC's listens.

We are very wary of how we treat the results of polls but they can be

very influential, beyond their readers. Yes, and getting back to

Scotland for a second as well, if you remember the Sunday Times had a

big hole a couple of weeks out from the Scottish referendum saying that

US had gone into the lead and that caused massive panic, prime

ministers questions was cancelled, the three parties ran up to Scotland

to try and make people change their mind. It can really shift the

political weather. And also, I can say this because the newspaper I

edited no longer exist, but there is absolutely unequivocally not a very

balanced press on this. Many more of the papers that we have in Great

Britain are reporting with a bit of a pro- Brexit angle. So the

Observer, whether or not... I will not say whether I would agree or not

but it is welcome that there is a bit of a balance because as we can

see from all the papers we will talk about tonight and the ones on the

tomorrow, there is a lot of pro- Brexit rhetoric in the papers so

there is no harm in having something that is portraying the other side.

Let's look at the Sunday Times, and the impact of immigration -- impact

on immigration of all of this. I hope David Cameron saw this before

it got splashed over the Times, a letter accusing David Cameron of

failing to get immigration down to the tens of thousands. Their

argument is that he never will inside the EU. Yes, the fact that

the statistics are standing at something like 330,000, the promise

of tens of thousands was absurd to make in the first place. If we are

to remain in the EU, that number will never come down. But what they

don't look at here is, you know, they don't sort of go into the

nitty-gritty of who those people are, what they are doing in

Britain. It is just the sort of... Yet again, the broad sweep

troublemaking and the kind of language they are using, talking

about waiting list increasing appallingly, class sizes increasing

appallingly, extremists being unable to be sent out of the EU, it is real

drumbeat stuff. Is it true to say that it will never come down? If

David Cameron remains in the European Union, if the rules are

changed about when we can access in work benefits, his argument is that

that might deter some people from coming even from within the European

Union, with those freedom of movement rules. It might, but the

argument is that most come here to work, not to claim benefits. You

could argue that the National living wage going up to ?9 an hour will

probably be more of a draw, if they think they can come from a country

where the pay is much less than it is here. You can see why Britain

would be such an attractive prospect and also even the Prime Minister no

longer says he is going to hit that. He will not say that he will not hit

tens of thousands but he will not say that he definitely will, and

that speaks volumes. David Cameron to reach to care about migration,

this is Priti Patel campaigning on the vote leave campaign trail. The

suggestion he is out of touch but there are people in both camps who

are very privileged, who come from very privileged backgrounds.

Briefly, she said, Kevin will speak more about the politics but she is

talking about people coming in and working as cleaners and domestics,

to the sort of privileged elite, which is a little bit... We are

talking about quite small numbers, most people come into work for the

NHS, that is the biggest employer in Europe. I don't think we are talking

about the lady who comes around dust at David Cameron's country home. I

would say that Priti Patel has probably been the most outspoken of

the government ministers against her own government, and this turns it up

to 11. The attack on the Prime Minister and the Chancellor

personally about their privileged backgrounds, I mean, she is not mad

enough to actually name them but you don't have to be too much of a

criminologist to read between the lines when she talks about leading

campaigners and those who don't have their advantages. I think it cuts

through in that ordinary voters, many of them from working class

backgrounds, who have real concerns about migration, and when it comes

to the main driving factors for them, this actually does cut

through. Does the tone of it put people off? Does that make people

think they don't want to vote at all? It is interesting, that is what

David Cameron said some weeks ago. The voter apathy is going to be a

massive problem. People will be turned off, which they are,

overwhelmingly. We quite enjoy the Westminster bubble but the idea that

it is going to be another 26 days, staggering towards the finish line,

people are fed up with it. If it is just two messages, headbanging on

the economy, people are going to feel disenchanted. Very quickly,

NATO generals say that an invert is vital for security. NATO is an

organisation which is not dependent obviously on being in or out of the

EU but security is another big buzz issue. And they don't like

uncertainty, and Britain leaving the EU, whether you think it is a good

or bad thing, would disrupt a world order which would create

uncertainty, that is what we definitely don't want. Going back to

the Sunday Times, plastic fibres and era of dirty money. No more of the

traditional cotton banknotes. We are getting a polymer version which you

can live in your pocket and it will all be fine, come out in the wash.

You can apparently wash about 90 degrees and it will come out the

other end just as nice as it did before. Even better, you can pour a

glass of red wine over it, it wipes clean. You can't tear it. You can

obviously still lose it down the back of the couch. Whether this is

intentional or not, the size of the banknote is going to be 15% smaller.

What does this say about the value of money? Lisa Southgate got in

touch to say that Northern Bank had plastic fibres in Northern Ireland

for years, owned by the National Australia Bank, and they are pretty

indestructible. There are still a few floating about. Australia was

the first country to have plastic money, so that would make sense. We

are not trailblazers. But not enough women still on them, whatever they

are made of. Elisabeth Prior is being taken off the note, and we

have Jane Austen to look forward to eventually, when they get around to

the ?10 note. Going back to the Telegraph, I am going to show it to

you on camera three. Dennis, thank you. They always laugh when I

mention their names, it is very sweet. Books are now status symbols.

They are something that we buy but don't necessarily read. That seems

like a lot of money to spend. There are cheaper ways to have status

symbols in your home. Rich people always say that they bought their

books by the yard, now the rest of us are putting these big, heavy

Booker shortlisted novels on how IKEA coffee tables to look

intelligent -- our IKEA. We are reading on the readers, but we are

buying the books nevertheless. -- e-readers. There is nothing nicer

than holding a book and reading a book and smelling the ink, though.

Or is that just me being odd? No, that is true, but looks have

survived a bit better than CDs have from the new technology, when you

have your Amazon reader and can download books, and people still

like to have the physical book in your hand. You forget what you have

read and if you want to recommend it to a friend, I love handing books on

and getting books from other people, you can't do that with an electronic

gadget. Also if you are falling asleep and hit yourself in the face

with an e-reader, that is not very pleasant. Coming up next, it is the

Film Review.