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.
Browse content similar to 04/09/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the the papers will be
With me are Tom Bergin, who's Reuters' Business Correspondent and
the Senior Political Correspondent at the Times, Lucy Fisher.
Is that what you were the last time you came in? I think we give you
many different titles! Welcome to both of you, fresh from a summer
break! Tomorrow's front pages now... The Daily Express leads on words
of optimism by the prime minister about Brexit
and the UK's economic future. Allegations against Labour MP -
and Chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee -
Keith Vaz paying to meet male more on the Keith Vaz story -
but a smiling Theresa May enjoying the limelight in China
takes centre stage. Brexit makes the lead
in the Guardian - the paper claims the Prime Minister has declined
to endorse pledges made by the Vote Leave camp for a points
based immigration system. The Times continues the theme,
saying Theresa May has ruled out a points-based system
for EU migrants. It also has a picture of the
impressive replica of the Great Fire of London, set alight to commemorate
their epic blaze that happened in 1666.
Finally, the Daily Mail also runs the Keith Vaz
So, let's begin with a few of the stories to do with the Prime
Minister and Brexit. Warnings that are coming from various members of
the G20, in particular. Let's begin with the Daily Express, may, no fear
over a year exit but Prime Minister warns off watering the deal down
with Brussels. What would that look like according to the Daily Express?
They've been pretty clear that means we cannot stay in the single market.
What is also interesting is coming onto the front pages of The Daily
Telegraph, and whether she will accept some of the pledges made by
the league campaign through the EU referendum, of course they were
supported by the big beasts in the government by John Whittingdale,
Chris Grayling, but it was not government pledges -- Leave
Campaign. The idea that 100 million extra pounds a week would be given
to the NHS after leaving the EU. VAT should be cut, she's not giving into
those ideas and leaving the door open at the moment. Watering down is
not necessarily Britain's choice, is it? There are people in other parts
of the EU we had to negotiate with? Obviously, the Brexit campaigns were
clear that they wanted to have a single example with Boris Johnson
describing it as having your cake and eating it. But we live in a
real-world, and our partners, or potential partners, have ground
rules. They say that you can have free movement of access if you want
it to the market. And you have other things are potentially not just
mutually exclusive, but they also said that they wanted access to
regulated markets without following regulations of those markets. This
means Theresa May is in a difficult position as she has so many
conflicting objectives that it is very difficult for them to achieve
theirs. The Daily Express does not want her to compromise on anything
and achieve everything at the same time. But some in favour of Brexit
don't want to be part of the single market anyway? Because of all of the
other elements that have to go along with that, like freedom of movement?
Absolutely, there is such a plurality of opinion, Theresa May
can continue to say Brexit means Brexit but we are no more clear on
what that means. I understand David Davis, the Secretary of State, will
make a statement in the house tomorrow, I don't think we will see
more detail then but it's interesting, the tone of the Daily
Express is still a paper that pushed leaving the EU, they have had that
is a key agenda for years now, they are optimistic, reporting her
optimism, telling the G20 that Britain is open for business.
Everyone is waiting to see what happens, pressure is behind her.
Everyone is weighing up what is going on. But she can only wait so
long, the reality is people of investing as the Japanese pointed
out, but we don't know what will happen. The ex-head of the European
bank has said that you have to get a move on with this. The Daily
Telegraph, PM could stop Boris is plan for a points-based immigration
system, this was muted by Boris Johnson during the campaign to
suggest that we could have something like the Australian system where you
get access to Australia if you meet certain criteria and gain certain
points. Why is she thinking this would work for us? A couple of
things, there's this watering down question, is this a possible
trade-off? Basically, the Financial Times goes into more detail, Theresa
May may have a more relaxed system for EU citizens, so they can come to
the UK without fulfilling all of the criteria that non-EU people would
make. She would be doing that with a view to getting access to the single
market. On the other hand, the other reason she may want to do it is if
you talk to businesses, if they've spoken to international businesses
since the vote, they make it clear that one aspect they like about
Britain is that they can get a lot of people in easily. It's all very
well talking about these systems but the easiest ones to get still take
six months. If you are a business that relies a lot on bringing in
talent, you don't like these kinds of systems. It might be another
factor Theresa May is thinking of, if the economy goes south, she won't
want to bring in new elements that could slow it down further. And
seasonal workers who come in to help, particularly with agriculture?
You are right, if she tries to curb immigration, that is what many
Brexiteers are saying, she gets net migration to come down, but today
she said there was no evidence that a points-based system works. The
suggestion may be that Number ten is looking more and quotas for work
permits, the idea being that if you judge people by age and skills, they
have to tick the boxes and many people could fulfil those criteria
so it may be better to set a concrete upper level for people
coming in. Let's look at The Guardian on this story, Mae refuses
to guarantee Brexit pledges, promises on NHS and immigration in
doubt. Another subheading, Japan and US warned Prime Minister of exit
risks to Britain. Barack Obama not going back on what he said during
the campaign, saying we would negotiate with the EU before we talk
to the UK. A stern warning from Japan? Yes, it's interesting,
doubling down on his warning, making it clear he believes Britain made
the wrong decision in the EU referendum, they not only is it more
important for the US to negotiate with the EU, but also in the block
of Pacific nations, he's making clear that we are at the back of the
queue. And Japan have said we have a lot of workers in the UK, in the,
new factoring and technological industries, we expect the same
privileges and access that we currently enjoy -- in the car
manufacturing business. Won't this smack of more interference by
foreign countries? That really got people's backs up in the campaign?
Possibly, but we have a statement coming out today, Britain will lead
the way on free trade. There's the idea that Britain can push ahead
through sheer determination. It does not really fit with the way that
trade deals work. You cannot lead a trade deal, you need two people.
The whole perception in how it works, what is being depicted is
that it is very much by good. Trade deals now are about regulation and
not tariffs, they are pretty passed as an issue since the WTO. There is
the fundamental problem when you negotiate trade deals like
regulation, that is what they are about now. And they take a lot of
time, the WTO is still going on! The Metro, a very different story,
this is what has been happening with the story surrounding Keith Vaz, the
Leicester East MP, a Labour MP, here is chair of the home affairs select
committee or he has been. It says that he steps down as head
of home affairs committee after paying for male ex-Scots.
They are all allegations, nothing is against the law -- escorts.
Nothing has been confirmed, but there are whisperings that he's
planning to step down on Tuesday when the committee meets. He's been
head of the committee for nine years.
One of the most influential in Westminster, but it does of course
mean dealing with the Home Office and policies looking into those, it
deals with advice and there's an enquiry on prostitution and laws
around sex workers. There will be questions raised about
appropriateness of him remaining as head when he is alleged to have
engaged with prostitutes. Over the weekend it has been stated
over and over again that there is nothing illegal about paying for
sex, it is illegal in some parts of the UK?
It is a difficult area. Had he solicited a prostitute from a car it
would be illegal, in certain circumstances in the UK and Northern
Ireland it is illegal to pay for sex in most circumstances. It's a tricky
legal area to be in. It seems, as Jeremy Corbyn said, even if the
allegations are true, Mr Vaz has not done anything illegal. But the fact
that this is an area where the legality of alleged activity, there
is a broad dispute over it, and it puts them in a difficult position.
Yes, these are all allegations at the moment, nothing confirmed but
also Mr Vaz has said he is deeply disturbed by The Sunday Mirror
choosing to pay for access to this story.
Let's move on and look at The Times newspaper. NHS blows nearly ?2
million in payoffs to bosses, who is getting these hand-outs? It seems
these are the bosses of NHS various units, who are getting very
significant pay-outs for leaving their jobs, partly because there was
a rationalisation and more people were made redundant than might
normally be the case. In one sense, the NHS... It is big,
or the numbers will be big and we will be outraged by the payoffs to
bosses who we may not feel huge amounts of sympathy for. The
government said that there would be payoffs that would be capped at a
certain level of ?95,000. It seems we had pay-outs going up to
several times that amount. There seems to be a case to answer,
as to why the rules have been broken and the figure is big not just
because the NHS is big but because rules were not followed.
We don't know exactly what their individual contractual agreements
were with some people and if they were entitled to these bonuses and
payoffs? We do not have the details here but the real nub of the story
is that this goes back to the widely criticised top-down reorganisation
implement it by Andrew Lansley in 2010 during the coalition
government. That is when he abolished 150 bodies, and created
more. It was the largest restructure in the history of their NHS and has
led to payments that people have said are down to the restructuring.
There's been a revolving door system in many cases, people leaving one
unit only to become re-employed by the health service in another
capacity, some people have said it smacks of waste. Let's look at the
Express, page two, Mother Teresa, she was made a saint.
It attracted huge crowds in the Vatican.
In 2016, the canonisation of the woman who died in 1997, it has been
greeted with great enthusiasm. And the
compassion that she had for the working Kolkata, it has captured the
public's imagination. -- the poor in Kolkata. It is a touching moment,
whether you are Catholic or not, seeing someone canonised who gave so
much of their life to eliminating poverty. She is controversial in
some of the things she did, some think that her legacy was entirely
good? Growing up in Ireland, people took for granted that she was
already a saint, she was a significant figure among Catholics
for a long period of time. The controversy, yes, that's been here,
you made the point of alleviating poverty, the accusation was that she
did not tackle the causes of poverty.
Regarding compassion, the questions around alleviation of pain, and in
Ireland, in the past, one of the issues was that in Catholicism,
Payne brings you closer to God. That may have led to pain relief not
being distributed as otherwise it would have done -- pain. The whole
issue of sainthood is difficult for some Catholics as the idea of
granting miracles is something that maybe does not tell nowadays with
our scientific outlook. It's not without controversy but as Lucy
said, is hugely popular to the faithful.
And The Daily Star, Struck the winner decided already, and the
dancers have not even taken to the floor yet, they've been rehearsing.
A fixed claim made by James Jordan, who used to be one of the
professionals on the show. It is shocking. The late has gone off,
what can you believe in! Fairies! Obviously you can, I'm not a major
Struck a fan, but it captured my attention, if they are reading a
contest based on career political trajectories, it can be serious.
Similar claims made last year during the competition that it was a fix?
It overlooks the fact the audience gets to vote? I'm not sure on the
basis of this former dancer who no longer appears on the show... I
don't know their claims, but as we approach the anniversary of 9/11
Mac, conspiracies of truth, Jeremy Corbyn supporters...
People see conspiracies and wrecked contests where there are none.
Amanda is our editors tonight, and a fishy order low of Stictly, they
have not even began to dance yet. -- aficionado. That's all for now,
but Tom and Lucy will be back in an hour but now, time for Meet The