05/10/2016 The Papers


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.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 05/10/2016. 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 Paul Johnson, Deputy editor of the Guardian


and Tim Collins, the former Conservative MP and current


managing director of Bell Pottinger Public Affairs.


Tomorrow's front pages starting with...


The Telegraph looks at Theresa May's speech at the Conservative Party


conference, which the paper says was largely aimed at winning


over wavering Labour supporters, particularly


The Daily Express says she invoked Margaret Thatcher as she promised to


reunite a country where everybody had a chance to succeed.


The Times says the speech was strongly interventionist and put


some of the UK's biggest businesses and notice to expect aggressive


actions against some of their practices.


The Guardian says she will use the Brexit vote as a mandate to break


decisively with David Cameron's brand of conservatism.


The Daily Mail says the speech was one of the most radical delivered by


a Conservative leader in a decade. And it talks about some of those


companies that she will be going after.


The Daily Mirror ignores the whole speech, sticking with a story about


bullying and the tragic death of a young man.


Let's go straight in. The Daily Telegraph. By far the most striking


line in her speech, it's time to remember the good government can do.


Not a phrase one can see others using. It went down well with the


Conservative faithful. She was distancing herself from a lot of


things which have been conservative totems of faith. They were lapping


her to the rafters. Used to write her to the rafters. Used to write


speeches at one point further previous leaders. -- you used to.


She would not have liked it if I had put that in. She may have struck it


out, even thrown it on the fire. What is interesting about all of


this, I think I know which book she took with her and her walk. Because


one of the themes that comes through all of the report in the papers


tomorrow is this theme of citizenship and this idea


repatriating some. This idea of something being more important than


individualism and selfishness. About bringing the whole country together.


That theme of citizenship is the central theme of the biography of


Clement Attlee which was published this year, which is all about this


man who was incredibly patriotic. He got Britain a deterrent. But he was


someone who built the NHS and brought people together. Normally


you would think Clement Attlee would be a hero for the Labour Party,


somebody the Tory party would not like. He is one of the people they


often quote. What has happened with Jeremy Corbyn is that the Labour


Party have vacated that ground patridge 's, which is the core of


the values of many of the traditional Labour voters, and that


she can move on and say I get that patriotism bit, and I get the


holding business to account bit, so she could clean up electorally. It


is all over for the left? He has come straight from Birmingham, his


pulse is still racing. CHUCKLES


He is so excited. The heady aroma of politics and power. This is a speech


of two halves. It could have been written in a combination of Ed


Miliband and the Daily Mail lead writer. On the one hand you have the


extraordinary thing about advocation of workers' rights over, sort of, we


will pursue the tax avoidance. And if you look at the Daily Mail, we


are coming after you. Looking at dysfunctional markets. A


house-building bill. All of that was straight up the root of Ed Miliband.


But there was this hard Brexit, grammar schools, human rights


lawyers bit, well, you are on our list. Foreign workers, you and Amber


Rudd's list. Foreign students, you are probably on the list, as well.


-- you are on. Camerons and Blairite and maybe Guardian writers don't get


it. That category of policies Paul has set out is absolutely what a


whole chunk of people, several millions of people who in the past


voted Leaves, who are up for grabs, voted Leaves, who are up for grabs,


they believed both parts of that. They believe I'm being tough on


immigration, tough and Brexit, but they believe in the NHS and workers'


rights. -- voted Leave. She voted on behalf of the people who will decide


what happens in the future. So she isn't talking to liberals. She is


talking to small seed conservatives who are in Ukip, or who have


traditionally been in labour. Because Clement Attlee was quite a


conservative person. Many people who haven't voted Conservative before,


and wouldn't have dreamt of it Margaret Thatcher or David Cameron


is fascinating about to May is that is fascinating about to May is that


at the moment she is at the peak of her political potency. --


fascinating thing about Theresa May. She is popular. That won't last.


What she do with that power? Not what Margaret Thatcher did, I'm


going to tell you why you have got to be nice, she says, on the


contrary, I will tell business what you have got to do your country,


which is more. We don't have to go back to Clement Attlee. John Major


had the age of consent policies. Cameron had his common ground. Now


we have the new centre ground. No politician declares themselves and


I'm an extremist, this is where I am coming from, do they? Have you heard


of Jeremy Corbyn? CHUCKLES


You are being defensive now. I'm not defensive about Jeremy Corbyn. Let's


go to the front of your paper. Is it your kind of paper's line tomorrow


morning, OK, we will take her at her word, but we will look at this in


six months and say, did she mean what she said, or is it rhetoric? I


think it is that. There are some things that were attractive in the


speech. She must have been struck by the lily livered and the Sudbury


made accusations. It was noticeable in the speech, she thanked Cameron.


Two sentences later she said we see all around us division and


unfairness. That was a bit of an atomic missile. A little unfair. The


sentences in between were pretty important. Nobody claims that David


Cameron had managed to solve all of the nation's problems. She


congratulated him on changing the party. He had done some important


things for the party. But she said circumstances have changed again.


One of the sub themes at the conference was, what is her mandate?


She wasn't elected. Cameron won the election. She will take the Brexit


referendum as mandate for change. It is paradox given she was against.


That seems to be the way she is going. This is somebody speaking as


if she has won the swathes of the public. She was on the right side of


the referendum. Anyway... Do you break by this idea that seems to be


at the heart of this speech, this kind of... This year zero.


Everything that went before in politics no longer applies because


of the referendum result? In other words you can get rid of the things


the current government did over the last six years you don't want to be


associated with thinking the public were not impressed with that. You


can say all of the elites were out of touch. We are coming in, it is a


fresh political situation as a result of that one vote. That is


certainly what she is going to try. certainly what she is going to try.


I think it'll be a challenge. She is right to be able to point out that


more people voted in the referendum than at any other general election


in our history after 1992. There was a bigger mandate for Leave. I was on


the side that won the referendum, she was on the losing side. But she,


like others, has accepted that the public have spoken and she is


determined to deliver Brexit. But how much of this domestic agenda can


she possibly deliver given Brexit will be so all-consuming? We have to


be careful. There were not many camera


-- there were not many Cameron and Osborne supporters at the


conference. This must entreat you, what the consequences of the


downfall of the fate Sheikh might be. He has been working for 30


years. He's had a similar process. He goes in with a disguise. He who


is people into situations whereby they are either culpable in a sense


which isn't criminal but culpable in the way that the campus of Essex was


lured into this. -- he lures people. There have been suggestions that it


went too far and that it was entrapment. This was a very


extraordinary case with Tulisa. He posed as an agent. He talked about


drugs. She said she was tricked into getting a supplier. There have been


other cases of Victoria Beckham, an alleged kidnapping, where the trial


fell apart. A dirty terror bomb, the trial fell apart. This is


potentially very serious. Does it reopen some of the questions which


were raised during the Leveson Inquiry, which seems a long time


ago? He used to work for the News of the World and it no longer exists.


It might. One of the things that never and slightly obscured was that


that was predominantly about phone tapping. -- that Leveson obscured.


The perception was that was all, all of the sin was in the News of the


World, no other tabloid was doing it, and it turned out Mirror group


were right up to their necks with it and probably did more of it. We


don't know that. But I take your point. And this one I think it is


important again to note that what we have to have is an independent


assessment of what is going on. One thing which is interesting is to


what extent were the Met actually working with the so-called fake


Sheikh. Was he a useful source? It's possible that they might have cut


him some slack, maybe turned a blind eye because he was useful to them on


certain investigations. Mark Lewis, who did many of the hacking cases,


is acting on the half of 19 people who are aggrieved by this and think


they have a good case for reopening. As more than that, very substantial


damages. We may not have heard the last of the fake Sheikh. Let's look


at some other stories. Teenage girls more likely to get drunk than boys.


Thought we knew this. It was the ladette culture, but the OECD says


it so it must be true. They are saying it is almost uniquely a UK


problem. It is more of a problem amongst young girls than young boys.


However it is important to put it into perspective. They are saying


the figures have arrived even though drinking is going down nationally. I


think the number in that age category is dropping. That's good.


Some of the messages are getting through. Better than they are with


the adults. Yes. Amongst those drinking too much among young girls,


it is more likely to be British women who are better educated than


those who are not. That's interesting. It belies problem


drinking with more than 14 units per week. It is difficult or identify


that. Do you think you drink more less 14 units per week? Less, sadly,


but probably because I am here too often. At the very end of the


Telegraph. Perhaps my favourite story of the night. It is about


toads. Apparently they are in trouble. They've been dropping by


nearly 70% over the last 30 years. Apparently it is due to the loss of


ponds as well as pesticides. Not sure what the answer is. But we must


do something to help. I used to have a toad called Gloria outside my flat


until a friend of mine tried on her. Rather tragic. The common toad no


more. What ever happened to pond life? Pleasure as always. Thank you


for being here. Don't forget all the front pages


are online on the BBC News website where you can read a detailed review


of the papers. It's all there for you - seven days


a week at bbc.co.uk/papers - with each night's edition


of The Papers being posted on the page shortly


after we've finished. a bit of a rut. It is a pattern that


is fairly unusual


Download Subtitles