16/10/2016 The Papers


A lively, informed and in-depth conversation about the Sunday papers.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 16/10/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello, and welcome to our Sunday morning edition of The Papers.


With me are the journalist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown


and Dave Wooding, political editor of The Sun On Sunday.


The Sunday Telegraph leads on disquiet among military chiefs


at a secret criminal investigation into British troops accused


of mistreating two Iraqis, themselves believed to be


responsible for murdering two British soldiers 13 years ago.


The Sunday Times publishes a hitherto unseen article written


by Boris Johnson on why the UK should remain in the EU.


The paper says it was written two days before the now


Foreign Secretary came out in favour of Brexit.


The Observer splashes on criticism of the Prime Minister's so-called


obsession with grammars by the head Ofsted.


The Express warns that thousands of chemists will close if spending


cuts due to be announced this week go ahead.


The Mail On Sunday gives its front page over to the SAS soldier who's


facing murder charges after admitting shooting dead two


or three fatally wounded Iraqis during combat.


Let's begin with the Sunday Times. We thought we knew that Boris


Johnson had written an article saying Britain should stay in Europe


for coming out for exactly the opposite. Now that we have seen a


bit, what do you make of it? We knew that he had written two, 14, one


against. In no way, he is not like Donald Trump, but there is a kind of


escaped man's fate that he has, so whatever he does he will always be


adored. Because this is ridiculous, that two days after penning a very


strong, his columns are always very strong, robust, enthusiastic, you


can see his hair, and two days later he is going the opposite way. How do


you trust this man to be a Secretary of State? It is an interesting


question, here he is talking about Syria today, as the Foreign


Minister, and he was in two minds about the biggest decision of our


lifetime. It rekindles the thought of back to the day when this all


happened, I was covering this story and it all happened over that


weekend. On the Friday we were led to believe you would be supporting


David Cameron and his people were telling us on the Saturday morning,


he still hasn't made up his mind, he is going to decide on Monday


morning. I called it and said he would back Brexit on the Sunday


morning and he came out on Sunday afternoon and said he was. What is


interesting about this piece as well, he argues it saying the


economic shock, the new calls for Scottish independence, and Russians


getting aggressive... Not the Marmite on the shelves! But


everything else he got right. I love the phrase he talks about David


Cameron coming back with a deal would be like Hercules, typical


Boris! But it was of course entirely, entirely about Boris. That


is the thing. He changes mind for reasons of ambition? I think he


continues to have ambitions to be Prime Minister of this country.


Sorry, but I laughed. It is totally unprincipled, actually. It is to do


with Boris. He says that he wrote both articles as an intellectual


exercise in putting down his thoughts and helping him to decide


what he would like. I have to say that this piece doesn't really show


a lot of enthusiasm for Remain, it concludes, yes, folks, the deal is a


bit of a good but it contains the germ of something really


good. I will muffle my disappointment and


back the Prime Minister. So it is not a ringing endorsement. But the


EU referendum was not a surprise and he has been in front line politics


for years as well as front line journalism, so it is not as if he


suddenly had to make up his mind about it, he could have made up his


mind any time in the previous ten years because we knew we were moving


in this direction. Also, how does Cameron feel? However you think of


him, and a bit of me misses him at the moment, I really do, Mrs


liberalism, but he was Boris Witten, seemingly doing this term. It also


says in an article that he wanted to punch Michael Gove! Nobody could


blame him for that! Moving on! The front page of the Observer, a story


which will run and run for a long time, Ofsted's cheap saying Theresa


May is obsessed with grammars, the school plan will hit standards for


most, and is... There is a lot by Michael Wilshaw, it is quite a


thoughtful analysis, quite a few weeks after the announcement at


party conference, and he is right, he is right. Theresa May's two


announcement on education were nothing other than giving legitimacy


to totally are totally divided country. Grammars are divisive and


she wants to expand the faith school sector as well. Has she never been


to Northern Ireland? Has she never seen what this does to young people?


Generation after generation? I think this is a really important response,


and it is not political, it is actually very thoughtful. But it has


huge political ramifications, and you could say when Theresa May made


that speech, some people said, this is moving onto Ukip's territory, she


is trying to see them off, you could have been arguing this for a long


time, whatever the merits of grammars or otherwise. They are


popular among parents in areas where they want them, and I think where


they went wrong in the presentation of this, she is not returning to a


grammar school system, she is moving the law which bans new grammar


schools from being set up in areas, there are about 160 at the moment,


so there will not abolish them, nor will they bring them all back. What


I think is more interesting in this, Sir Michael Wilshaw addresses what


she isn't doing, talks about the skills gap. A very interesting


point. Vocational training is really poor in this country and there are a


large number of pupils who need that training. And I also think that


turning polytechnics, some of which were brilliant, into universities


was just a really silly idea. But we are in a country, unlike Germany,


where the class system looks down on the vocational education, and until


we can change that, until we admire our plumbers in the same way that we


admired journalists, said... Do we?! Hundreds of thousands of young kids


will tell you do want to be journalists, because they know. This


is linked in a way to immigration, why do we need Polish plumbers,


because we don't have enough British plumbers. One of the reasons people


come here is because they have skills, we have a skills gap. There


is a big gap in the education system. If we had grammar schools


for purely top academic kids, technical schools and a selection of


four or five different types of schools that catered for the needs,


more or less tailor-made to the kids' needs, that might be a better


system than a two tear... We have to get rid of some of the snobbishness.


But I don't know whether, at the age of 11 or 12, a child's potential has


been reached and he or she can be defined. Some are late developers.


We have to change the whole of our society before this can work but it


is a really important piece. Let's move on to the Labour Party, which


we haven't talked about for at least 15 minutes. Corbyn accused of


creating a safe space for anti-Semites. This is very damning


because the report suggests that actually the Labour Leader has been


at best ineffective and incompetent in dealing with anti-Semitism within


the party among a small number of people with very vile views. Yes,


there were two Labour MPs in this committee, Chuka Umunna and David


Winick were there, and I'm sure it does need to be taken seriously.


Where I do disagree with the kind of going for Shami Chakrabarti, who


wrote the report, and in a sense going for Corbyn, I feel a bit


uneasy about it because increasingly I have to say whenever I write on


Israel I am accused of anti-Semitism. It has become much


worse in the last two or three years than ever before, ever, ever, and


you can't mix those two. So I think, I do totally believe that the


committee was being fair, but at the same time the way certainly the


press has covered it, which is kind of billing for Shami Chakrabarti,


who is criticised... But it does look a bit odd to produce an


independent report and then suddenly go to the House of Lords, that looks


very odd? And the other thing the report mentions, they ask Shami


Chakrabarti to explain when she was first offered the peerage, and she


refused to answer those questions to the committee, which leaves a cloud


hanging over the whole question of why she was offered a peerage, why


she produced a report which cleared Labour of any blame for the


pernicious anti-Semitism. I have known Shami Chakrabarti for a very


long time, I just don't believe she is capable of that kind of very


British kind of corruption. But if you won't talk about taking the


peerage, it looks bad. It looks bad, but I don't believe some of the


accusations are fair. But the big story here, that is part, but the


big stories Jeremy Corbyn's alleged weakness in getting to grips with


something. Which is true. The phrase they use is failing to tackle the


Bishop forms of anti-Semitism in the party, allowing a six space within


Labour for anti-Semites too strong. We have seen on the Internet, they


now use this phrase, as the report points out, Zionists, which has


become a euphemism for Jew hating, effectively. The lines have been


blurred between criticising the state of Israel and criticising


Jews. It is blurred and we need to become more clear.


The Sun On Sunday, page 14, not good enough, Theresa. Why did you do this


to the nice lady with that nice shoes?! At least this article is not


about the shoes, because it is Lord Bell, a close adviser as we know to


Margaret Thatcher, and plans for Brexit, fail, grammar school row,


fail, U-turn over Hinkley Point, fail, too timid to doctors, fail.


This is somebody who has served the Conservative Party but does not


think much of the new leadership after 100 days. Pretty much saying


her 100 days in the job on Friday is not Margaret Thatcher, some will say


that is a good thing! One of the things he says is that she is trying


with this Britain that works for everybody, her mantle, trying to


please everybody but may end up please nobody. She is trying to


seize the middle ground, he thinks she looks more middle-of-the-road.


The two main criticisms is that she is not outspoken enough. If she came


out and explained her policies, like grammar schools and Brexit, people


may go along with her, but she is keeping a lid on everything which is


creating a vacuum in which people like Yasmin and I fill it with


comments and pundits and opponents get involved. Mind you, Lord Bell,


Margaret Thatcher is dead and gone, she is not coming back and we should


stop this hankering after a period... Margaret Thatcher was not


for Brexit,. Does, she never wanted to leave Europe, so why would you


even think we would want to listen to Lord Bell? I was surprised that


he effectively said she could communicate better, because he is a


communications expert! Finally, to show we are not alone in


having rather odd politics, the Independent front page, Trump's


women, we meet the female Republican standing by their man. Yasmin has


just come back from the United States, I don't see you in the


picture! I was hugging him at the time! I suspect you weren't! But I


am not blonde! Ruled out on medical grounds, not blonde enough! What do


you make of the women who stand by Donald Trump after what we have


heard? I know, it does make me wonder, what does he have to do?


What does he have to do... Don't suggest something, please! This man


cannot beat the leader of, I don't think it is the greatest nation in


the world any more, but certainly the most economically powerful,


militarily powerful nation in the world. I cannot explain it. But then


I think, for example during Brexit, the low nations became very


anti-immigration, and I can't explain that either. I don't


understand, but it is happening. Maybe it is women who like the rough


guy, I don't know. An American friend pointed out to me that under


general employment laws in the United States, if he were to apply


for the job as, I don't know, a janitor or somebody working in a


supermarket, he possibly wouldn't get the job if some of these


allegations were known about somebody looking for a very low paid


job. Yes, I think a lot of people will go in there holding their


noses. He is doing so well partly because of the dislike of Hillary


Clinton. She doesn't appeal to people either. That is the key,


isn't it? I think November D8, most people who vote, many millions of


people will be holding their noses when they put the cross in the box.


I met a lot of young people because I was doing a lecture tour at


universities, and they are utterly depressed about this because they


are very civilised about these values, they have grown up thinking


this is wrong. They don't like either candidate? They are just very


ashamed of what Trump represents. It was interesting, someone from


Republican families but they feel a sense of shame. It is surprisingly


you seem to be right that many people will vote holding their noses


but the nation which produced John F Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, whatever you


think of their politics on either side they were great figures, and


they have two people that nobody is particularly keen on except those


close to them. There are some areas, I think Florida was one, where they


are neck and neck. But his popularity has fallen in the last


two or three weeks. I believe if you can't fall out of love, if you were


ever in love with Donald Trump, after the stuff we have heard, then


nothing is going to convince you, so I think his vote will be quite hard,


with the people who still support him now. We will see. Thank you both


very much. Our thanks to Yasmin and date.


Just a reminder, we take a look at tomorrows front pages every


Download Subtitles