22/12/2016 The Papers


No need to wait until tomorrow morning 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 22/12/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the papers will be


With me are journalist and broadcaster Rachel Shabi,


and deputy political editor at the Telegraph,


Tomorrow's front pages: The Metro leads with news that the British


public have helped raise more than ?75,000 for the family


of the murdered Polish lorry driver whose vehicle was hijacked and used


The Times says the Queen is apparently disappointed


with Theresa May, after the PM declined to share plans for Brexit


The Financial Times says China has warned Donald Trump that


co-operation is the only way forward, after the US


President-elect appointed a China hawk to run a new White House


The Daily Telegraph highlights claims that some of Britain's


leading universities are becoming no-go zones for Jewish students,


The Daily Mirror leads with the story of shoppers diving


for cover, as e-cigarette batteries blow up inches from a pram.


The Guardian says violent and abusive men are being allowed


to confront and cross-examine their former partners


And the Daily Express warns that the UK faces violent Christmas


storms, with 90 mph gales and torrential rain.


The story of the week has been the attack on the Christmas market in


Berlin. We will start with the times. German spies knew that the


suspect had talked of a suicide attack. So much is coming out about


this man, the chief suspect in this appalling atrocity. Yes, Anis


Amri... When you get these horrific events there is always this clamour


to try and find answers about why it wasn't stopped and build better


protections for the future. There are a string of quite worrying


snippets which are coming out about what the intelligence services in


Germany knew about the lead suspect. The Times brings out a couple of


them tomorrow. This bloke had talked about a suicide mission, the


security services had talked about him saying that maybe I will go on a


suicide mission but they dismiss them because of suggestions were too


vague and they didn't think they were that credible. He was also seen


visiting a mosque for the attack which was linked to Islamist. And


the third debt which is still worrying given the person is on the


run, is that footage of him has emerged going to a mosque close to


the Christmas market. Taken together it does raise questions about why he


wasn't apprehended. Our security correspondent Frank Gardner pointed


out that the problem is that if you were to keep tabs on everyone with


links to Islamist group or said something vaguely dodgy than you


would be tying up so many people, at an enormous cost, that you just


can't do it. You do have to prioritise. And the fact that this


man seemed to be grandstanding, didn't really seem to have a


definite plan, in terms of a terror attack, made the German authorities


think he is not someone we should continue to pursue. I think that


sounds right. It is not just that you would be chewing up resources,


it is that you would actually be requiring a more powers to do those


things. And that is always going to be a balance, whether you think we


should give up more powers in the fight against terrorism. And of


course we are all terrified, and this was a horrific attack, and we


would all like there to be answers. But it is interesting, this whole


thing of lorry attacks, you can Paratoo a country like Israel, which


has much more surveillance. -- you compare it to. At levels which other


countries would not be comfortable with, a higher level of security, a


level that we might not be OK with. But it also can't deal with these


random lorry attacks. We are dealing with something quite different, and


it is not necessarily that our security and police services are


doing anything wrong. It might actually be that they are doing all


they can. The changing nature of the threat is something that is


certainly keeping everyone on their toes, and everyone guessing. If


there is an upside to this horrible story, then perhaps it is this. Go


fund the Berlin hero, British cash floods in for a Polish trucker's


widow. The Polish trucker whose truck was essentially hijacked in


this awful terror attack in Berlin, and who put up a tremendous


struggle, it sounds like, to try and stop this attack from happening, or


to try and make it less brutal than it actually was, try and steer it of


course, it sounds like he really put up a tremendous fight to try and do


something, lost his life. And since then, a lot of donors have answered


a call from Dave Duncan, who put up a crowd funding for this Polish


man's wife, and his widow, and his teenage son. They have managed to


raise ?75,000 so far, which is wonderful and heartening, obviously,


at an awful time. Just before Christmas, as well, to lose the


breadwinner, this is something that might help a little bit. But also


shows, I think, just the level of violence that must have existed


inside that cab, as he tried to wrestle with this guy, who was


aiming for this Christmas market. And this poor man, this Polish


driver, tried to stop the carnage that was about to unfold. He got an


indication of what was happening, and fought and gave his life to try


and stop it, and an unimaginable tragedy for his wife and teenage


son. You just hope this outpouring of kindness and generosity, from the


Brits and others, hopefully sends a message. Indeed, all right. The


front page of the Telegraph. Now clearly, salt is something that Mr


Putin and Mr Trump only put on their chips. It is terrifying. It is


absolutely terrifying. Just to explain Salt, the strategic Arms


Limitation Treaty, it is what Reagan and Gorbachev used to bring down


their stockpile of weapons. Now we have these two leaders talking about


increasing their stock piles of weapons. Can you imagine a more


powerful tweet than one which has overturned 30 years of American and


Russian foreign policy? It is a scary prospect. Since the end of the


Cold War there has been a systematic descaling of nuclear arsenals across


the world, both in America and the USSR, dropping down. And then within


the space of a couple of hours you have Putin saying we are thinking


about strengthening the nuclear potential of our strategic nuclear


forces and then Donald Trump, on Twitter, how else, says he will


greatly expanded nuclear capability. It is a genuinely terrifying


prospect that these two nations would begin to get into that. But


the argument goes, some are suggesting, that the upside of this,


if there is an upside, that Donald Trump is actually talking to Iran


and North Korea. Yes. So we are now in a situation where the


President-elect's quite significant communications about quite


significant issues via the medium of Twitter are then being decoded by


his team. His team have to try and understand what the hell he is on


about. They are saying that you know what, this is actually a deep


proliferation statement. I can see how you might have missed that, but


that is what it was -- de- proliferation. I think we need that


clarity. I am not sure that would bring clarity. Maybe it wouldn't.


That is part of the problem. Some of these stories are beginning with


Donald Trump has tweeted again, XYZ, and fundamentally, yes, there is an


issue with what he is saying, for some people, but it is the manner in


which he is doing it which is quite concerning. There was a quote from


Malcolm Rifkind, the former Foreign Secretary, talking about British


foreign secretaries, where he said they are either dull or they are


dangerous. He went on to say that Doris Johnson isn't dull. The same


applies to American diplomacy -- Boris Johnson. Words matter when you


are in an administration at that level. Going back to the times, the


Queen frustrated with Theresa May over Brexit secrecy. It seems that


Theresa May's reluctance to divulge any kind of specifics about Brexit


have disappointed not just so many of us, but have gone all the way up


to disappointing the Queen. According to this report, the Queen


and the Duke were quite looking forward, when Theresa May came to


Balmoral a couple of months after coming into power, they were quite


looking forward to perhaps a little bit of a secret exchange of


information. But unfortunately all they got was what the rest of us are


getting, which is that Brexit means Brexit, Marm. Does this mean that


she was holding back, Theresa May, or that she doesn't have anything to


say? There is political bite to the story which will hurt Number Ten.


There is a genuine frustration building about the lack of


information. The referendum was in June, and we are about to have


January and a couple of months, and there appears to be a frustration


building about not enough details about where we are heading imagine.


Is that because she is being scrupulously careful, before making


any public statement, or is it, as critics say, they are beginning to


just be totally... Realise the scale of this negotiation process? But if


even the Queen is reportedly getting frustrated with the lack of


information, then it does get to the point when this is becoming a


running narrative. Building up of steam, isn't it? A disturbing story


on the front of the Guardian. The secret abuse of women in the Family


Court. Violent former partners are allowed to take part in cross


examinations. This is a horrifying story about family courts where


apparently, because of cuts to legal aid, men and women are now


representing themselves more in these courts, which has created


situations where people who have been abusive to women are then


allowed to cross examine them in court, sometimes the hours. A lawyer


for the south-east who deals with these issues says he has seen this


happen in hundreds of cases. He has told the Guardian, and he is urging


that even if it means putting a student liar in the situation, --


student lawyer in the situation, even if that is what it takes to


stop these women being cross-examined by sometimes violent


and abusive partners, just trying to figure out a way where this duration


doesn't happen, because it is obviously horrific and traumatising.


It is the adversarial system that we have, isn't it? The example they


give is really quite horrific. In one case a woman was cross-examined


for hours by her ex-husband despite him being the subject of restraining


order. So she has gone to the court and got protection from this bloke,


and now she is being... Courts are undermining the protections being


put in place. Presumably people are allowed to represent themselves, but


do you want to totally withdraw that as a right? Is clearly one of those


terrible side-effects. And finally, e-cigarette AB horror. Shoppers


dived full horror as e-cigarette batteries blow up, in a guy's


pocket. Our jaws dropped at this front page, and the video is just as


scary. It is out of nowhere and the middle of a supermarket, it bursts


in his pocket, and having read a little further down, he was actually


carrying a battery, a spare battery, that goes into one of these vaping


cigarettes, and that came into contact with something metal. It


wasn't the e-cigarette itself, but the spare battery. These tiny


lithium batteries, they are incredibly powerful. We saw those


phones blowing up and South Korea. And that close to a pram. That is


the terrifying thing, it is such an EMS. Many, many thanks to you for


coming in and looking at some of the stories behind the headlines.


This is my last Papers for this year, so a Merry Christmas to you


and happy New Year. Coming up now, it is Sportsday.


Hi everyone, you're watching Sport Today,


No need to wait until tomorrow morning to see what's in the papers - tune in for a lively and informed conversation about the next day's headlines.

Download Subtitles