07/12/2016 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 07/12/2016. 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 Ben Riley-Smith, Assistant Political Editor


at The Daily Telegraph and Lindsay Razaq.


Westminster Correspondent at the Scottish newspaper,


Let's look at some of the front pages.


The Telegraph says tonight's Brexit vote in the Commons has handed


Theresa May a 'blank cheque' for leaving the EU.


The Prime Minister's victory also dominates the front of the i -


it says the government will now set out a strategic Brexit plan.


And the most jubilant headline on the story comes from the Express.


The Financial Times reports on the deal to save the Tata


Steelworks in Port Talbot, which will keep the blast


An image of the out-going HMS Illustrious dominates


the front of the Times, which also has a story


on consultancy companies earning billions from overseas aid.


And the Metro leads on the fines handed down to two pharmaceutical


companies for over-charging the NHS for drugs.


We are going to start, where else, with Brexit. Lindsay, victory for


the promised, the Commons backs her, and MPs show support for Downing


Street on Article 50. There is no going back now, it is going to


happen. That is what the Brexiteers would


like to think. It has been a significant day, a significant vote


in the House of Commons today. It is the first time MPs have shown


support for Article 50. Clever politics from Theresa May. It came


from a Labour motion calling on the government to publish its plan for


Brexit. She was fearful of a rebellion from the backbenches, and


came in with an amendment of her own, which said, yes, OK, but in


exchange, we want you to commit to our timetable for Brexit, Article 50


being triggered. It gives her breathing space.


A bit of breathing space, Ben, the fact is we have a few months before


31st March, there could be a lot of pitfalls and barriers, and hurdles


up to that point. For instance, the Labour motion said they wanted a


plan. That plan has got to be detailed enough, hasn't it? To


satisfy those critics who feel the party, the Tory party is not putting


out enough details as to what it is going to do.


That is one of the big question is, we are in a big spin operation after


the vote to work out what it means, which side has won. Whatever happens


in the Supreme Court, whatever legislation, whatever decision is


taken, the others are saying, hang on, there needs to be a piece of


legislation, that is what we are arguing for in the Supreme Court.


The second is how detail should the plan be? Labour appear to want to


say, do you want to be in and out of the customs union, the single


market, be specific about what you want. You can imagine, Theresa May


will keep it broadbrush. Some conservatives? Ken Clarke voted


against. One conservative. He voted against the government


today. He is a well-known Europhile, which is not surprising. Others that


did back the Prime Minister, it might not prevent them from being


vocal, the Lib Dems are demanding a vote on the final referendum on the


final deal, so people know they voted to leave, but now they want to


know what the next stage will be. They want to have a vote on that.


The pressure isn't going to go away. I suppose it is a momentary pause


for her where she can reflect and think, OK, this is under my belt.


Fact is, critics, the Labour Party, Plaid Cymru, they might say that


there is not enough detail, they want a Bill. We will get to the


Supreme Court in a minute. We know it has to be done by 31st March, we


have agreed to that, but they could be big problems.


It becomes incredibly hard labour and the critics which is where


Theresa May has been clever. She has said, you backed 5-1 that we should


begin the talks, if they begin to amendments down saying, OK, we are


not going to talk again until you reveal the plan, she will ask why?


You are undermining the agreement that we made a couple of weeks ago.


It is hard for Labour to say, yes, we will force you to reveal the


plan, but agree that you have total authority to begin it.


Keir Starmer initiated the motion in the first place. Although Labour


will claim it as a victory, it has backfired a little bit, potentially.


The papers seem to think it has backfired. They are talking about as


we talk about the Daily Telegraph, MP s hand made blank check for


Brexit. Whatever happens in the Supreme Court, it doesn't matter.


In theory, it does, because the vote we had today in Parliament isn't


binding. It is utterly meaningless. In reality, it is not. But if the


Supreme Court says she has two consult parliament before triggering


Article 50, we have to have a Bill. I understand the government has


prepared a three line Bill on the back burner in case they are obliged


to do this. Even one of the justices is conceding that it would appear


odd now if the Supreme Court were to say, "This is what we think". That


is in contradiction to what the MPs have voted.


You can see the way the Tories are beginning to put it, the Brexiteers,


the Supreme Court ruling is now irrelevant. Iain Duncan Smith saying


the government have a blank cheque. They are saying, case closed, job


done, move on. The numbers are interesting. Like you said earlier,


5-1, backed exit. If you look at Labour, this year, who has been the


party with the biggest split over Europe, the Tories will thought one


Tory refused to vote with the government. Most of Labour voted


with them, 50 Labour MPs refusing to take a decision, and 23 Labour MPs


voting against the motion. They are the most spit party.


Why are we surprised at the size of the victory here? I was going to say


that no one in their right mind, there was Tim Farron and others


saying we should have a second referendum. The bottom line is, the


vast majority of people did not say, we should overturn the will of the


British people, and rerun the whole thing, they didn't.


And remember, the key thing is that MPs are accountable at the ballot


box. If you are at an MP in a constituency that is proper exit,


you cannot stand up in Parliament and say your constituents are wrong.


Anyone that wants to get elected again shouldn't be doing that.


What these headlines are suggesting is that there was nervous and is on


the part of Brexiteers that there could be some mechanism whereby the


vote was overturned -- nervousness. That was seriously real.


The greater fear was not that the vote would be overturned, that was


the ultimate fear. It is two fold, one that they could use the vote to


force Theresa May to be really specific about what she wants. Once


she is public with that, they can chip away at it. The second one is,


can you delay the process by withholding their support? Maybe she


will miss her March deadline. Those two things become less likely with


this boat. They are not out of the woods yet.


The mention of the devolved nations, we heard from the lawyer for the


Scottish Government, who is arguing that there should be a vote in


Holyrood as well. Is that going to fly?


We will have to wait and see. We are going to prejudge the most


eminent minds in the Supreme Court, it is worth a go on the part of the


SNP, no question about that. Let's go to Tata Steel. On the face of it,


Ben, a good news story. Thousands of jobs look as though they will be


saved. As with businesses up and down the land, the pension scheme


has been the real stumbling block here. That seems to have been taken


out of the equation now because the old scheme is the past.


It is such a turnaround from when the announcement seemed sudden when


the plant could be closed. The government was caught on the hop.


Sajid Javid came in for criticism because he was abroad when the


announcement was made. Critics said this looks fantastic on the face of


it, 1 billion over the next ten years, 8000 jobs secured until 2021.


The sticking point, I think, will be the pension scheme. Tata Steel are


saying let's close the ?15 billion pension scheme that was spiralling


away. Let's replace it with a new contributory scheme. It has not yet


gone to the trade union, so we are only halfway there, which is why


Greg Clark is cautious. Let's wait and see. On the face of it, very


good news. Indeed. What the steel industry is


saying is that Tata Steel have moved a long way here, secured some jobs,


now the government has got to step in. Got to deal with Chinese


dumping, deal with green energy, taxes, corporation tax, energy


costs, a whole host of things. The head of UK steel was telling me


tonight that he hasn't heard, as part of Theresa May's industrial


policy, an idea of where steel fits in, and that is what he wants to


hear. There has not been a huge amount of


detail with strategy, as with the Brexit plan. Certainly, the


government will be under pressure off the back of this because there


is momentum with this. Theresa May has stood outside Downing Street and


said she is on the side of ordinary, working people, as she called it,


the people that are just about managing. These are the very people


she is talking about when she says that. There will be pressure for her


to do more. All right, OK. Back to the


Telegraph, commuters on rail strike line lose job offers, what is this


about? Extraordinary story, the problems at


Southern Rail have been well but committed, terrible delays, people


spending hours getting to work and getting home. We are seeing some of


the terrible repercussions but that is having on people. Specifically,


job offers are being removed when employees here that the people they


were going to employ are travelling on Southern Rail. There is a woman


who is an IT Trainer quoted in the paper, telling me could not have the


role because users Southern Rail. This person has done nothing more,


they may be perfectly qualified, the problems of somebody else, other


than them, has stripped them of the chance of getting a is worrying.


It is horrific. If you are a boss, the point of having a worker is that


they will come and be able to do the job on time and when he you require


them to do so. If that cannot be guaranteed because the trains are


rubbish, what are you going to do? It does seem extraordinarily harsh


that people are being dismissed as candidates, they might be the best


candidate going, but may be dismissed because of this. If you


are the boss, you are counting the pennies, and you have to make sure


your employees are at work on time. In one sense, I guess, it could be


perceived as reasonable. When I first read it, I wondered if,


legally, employers can disconnect on this basis. I don't know if there is


an illegal reason. Any lawyers out there, if Lord


Pannick is watching, tell us what is going on with this story.


The Metro, we have a little picture in the corner, Donald Trump, Person


of the year on the cover of Time magazine. There he is on the front


of the Metro. He is Person of the year. That picture is taken from the


front page of Time. There it is will stop he is upset lips is who is that


fellow? Is it a contributor from the United States? He is upset that at


the bottom of Time magazine it says that Donald Trump is president of a


divided States of America. He is suggesting that he did not divide


America, he is bringing America back together.


I don't think he would argue that it is divided, that is essentially the


reason why he won. But he is taking issue with the reason, I guess,


behind it. He did say it was a great honour, but has taken issue with


that description of him, unsurprising really. It is like Time


magazine having their cake and eating it, giving it to the


controversial person and... the editor said it was a


straightforward decision, and a choice of the person that has had


the greatest influence on events for better or worse.


If you speak to Nigel for while -- he beat Nigel Farage to the title.


Donald Trump call the list a joke in 2014.


No one is surprised any more. Thank you so much for the stories and


headlines, many thanks for that. Stay with us on BBC News.


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 - and you can see us there, too -


with each night's edition of The Papers being posted


on the page shortly after we've finished.


Thank you to you for watching. Goodbye.


Good evening. The last 36 hours has felt like going from early winter to


Download Subtitles