02/01/2017 The Papers

Welcomes our look ahead to what the papers will be bringing us tomorrow

morning. -- welcomes our look ahead. I have the business editor of the

Independent here as well as Caroline Wheeler, political editor of the

Sunday express. We will look to the papers in a moment, but first, let's

have a look at the front pages. The Daily Telegraph reporting a warning

from Public Health England that children are eating half their

recommended daily allowance before they even leave for school. -- daily

allowance of sugar. The Istanbul terror attack is the lead on the

Independent. IS has declared war on Turkey, it says. It is the same lead

for its sister paper which carries a striking image of the funeral of one

of the victims. Meanwhile, the Times leads with the rail price hike,

saying that rail fares are six times higher than those in Europe. One

study says commuters now pay 27p for every minute they are on a train. A

similar front page for the Metro, which reports claims that thousands

of commuters will be spending 14% of their incomes on train fares. A

political lead for the Daily Mirror, it reports that an aid for Nigel

Farage could face time in jail after a plan to foil drug smugglers in the

US. Pakistanis have been queueing at cashpoints to use cars loaded with

British taxpayers money, according to the Daily Mail. The Daily Express

leads with health care, it says that staying in shape can stave off

dementia. Those are the front pages. Let's have a slightly more in-depth

look with Caroline and Ben. We will kick off with the Daily Telegraph

and a health story. A warning from Public Health England to make

households and families across the land feel incredibly bad about what

they are giving their children at breakfast. An astonishing statistic.

The average child is eating the equivalent of three cubes of sugar

every day at breakfast. Which will be a frightening prospect for a lot

of families. We are all parents, are you shocked by that figure? When you

read it on paper you think, well, obviously my children are not having

that, and obviously we are virtuous and give our children the right...

They are not average children. Obviously. But when you think about

what you do feed your children, we were trying to work out the best

breakfast for a child, and the best we could come up with his porridge.

But in porridge they want raisins, honey, treacle, whatever comes with

it. Then you have cereals, and lots of them, even the ones you think are

good, you know, not like Coco Pops, are full of sugar. But what strikes

me about this more than anything else is it is the drinks. What do

you give your child to drink at breakfast? We would quite often give

them a glass of orange juice. What they are saying here is that even

the guidelines around that have changed and that we should only be

giving our child one portion of a fruit drink per day will stop we

might give that at breakfast. -- per day. They might have one at lunch,

after-school club, etc. So you can see how easily the amount of sugar a

child intakes add up throughout the course of the day. And children are

becoming far more educated, possibly more than their parents, at school.

My daughter is coming home at the age of eight and telling me fruit

juice has too much sugar, I shouldn't be drinking fruit juice. I

tell her to drink it. But I think children are becoming aware of what

they are eating. Maybe that is a good thing. As strange as it is to

be lectured on things like that from our children, it might be a good

thing. Breakfast is a difficult time of day. You are tired, you want your

children to go, eat, set themselves up for the day. You've got to rush

to work, you have lots of pressure on you. You are probably not

thinking as much as you are necessarily at other meals and at

the weekend about what is in food. We should be focusing more on what

is in these things. Do you agree with Jamie Oliver and his sugar tax?

From an economic perspective it's a good thing. You can force the

consumer to realise the content is and the social ramifications of this

stuff by changing the price. The problem with it is it is a false

economy to a certain extent because if impact on those families that are

least able to afford it. There are issues around price. But when it

comes down to, what has been happening over the last decade, or

so, we are seeing an increase in the number of primary school children

who are classed as obese when they start. I find that alarming. At the

same time, you've got to change habits, you've got to change

behaviour. I was talking to a food nutritionist who was talking about,

well, you've got to start with the parents rather than the children,

because only when we start changing our behaviour toward our children,

not rewarding, for example, with sweets, and saying, if you are good

money will buy you chocolate. Actually saying, if you are a good

book, we will go and play football. Or another leisure activity. I am in

favour of what Jamie had to say in all of this. I'm finding it harder

and harder to differentiate between puppy fat and children that are

unnecessarily overweight. Habits have changed so much. The Times,

those rail fares, goodness, it is going to hurt, isn't it? We all

travel by train at some point in the year. You, as well? Absolutely. And

I am a Southern rail traveller. I am feeling more of the pain. It is

another bad New Year story. At the start of every year it is the time

when the new rail fares kick in and they go up by a certain level above

inflation every year. And a lot of people will be feeling the pinch

when they come to renew their season tickets in the next few days and go

back to work. The southern rail story skews our perceptions. Because

it is so bad that it is so consistently on the news. The

overall rail service is not as bad as Southern rail. It is worth

pointing that out. But the cost is high, relative to Europe. Is it

right to compare it with Europe? No. When I go and top up to go to work

tomorrow, I would like to see that that it has -- I would not like to

see that the price has gone up. Nobody will be pleased. But we are

weighing six times higher than in Europe. -- but we are paying. Yes,

they don't see the rise is as much, but their infrastructure is

nationalised and they pay much higher taxes. -- rises. It is a

payoff over whether we are paying it in terms of their price hikes, or

taxation. But we have seen a period of time where we haven't seen any

investment in our rail infrastructure. To be fair, whether

you agree with HS2 and the ramifications of Crossrail, of some

of the other big infrastructure projects this government are driving

forward, actually, in terms of the people using our rail services, you

know, the numbers are going up. It is higher than ever. It has to be a

positive thing that we are getting people onto rail and off the roads

from an environmental perspective. We will all be reading this, we will

slump into our sugary breakfast tomorrow morning in dismay,

ultimately the point is that, you know, they pay in a different way to

how we pay, but we all pay. We will stay with the times. The story at

the top, this little spat that has developed through today, a bit of

tit-for-tat. Do you agree with what men McCluskey has said? It's

interesting because he has always been the union leader who has always

stood up to Jeremy Corbyn. -- Len. A very different tone in these

comments. He is saying, if he won't be turned around by the time of the

next election, they are not egomaniacs, they will probably step

down. I'm sure Caroline will talk about this. There is a bit of union

politics going on. McCloskey is in a battle to be re-elected to Unite, a

very important union, but perhaps he is thinking more about that than

have this comes across, but this is not great headlines for Jeremy

Corbyn. It is gameplaying. Len Did Corbyn. It is gameplaying. Len Did

not have to stand down at the time that he has done. He chose to do

this for political reasons. He said it would help the union by having

simultaneous elections rather than later run. But he has now found

himself in a stand-off with his deputy, who is much more of a

moderate. So, actually, when you think about the dynamics of this,

you know, McCluskey seem to be in the pockets of Jeremy Corbyn, and

vice versa in this context, and actually he will now be challenged

by a moderate, his language around Jeremy Corbyn, it has to change a

little bit. Because ultimately, I mean, what are the unions in a

relationship with Labour if Labour isn't going to be in power again, or

certainly not for the foreseeable? When you look at the polling

recently... 24%. And that also shows that that is the lowest support for

Labour since July 1983, which was Michael foot. And that was just

months before he wrote his longest ever suicide note in history. --

Michael Foot. Everybody thought that Labour would go onto the back burner

is for a while. But after this, it says that Labour could have as few

as seat after the next election. And he has been given two years. OK,

let's turn to the FT. I was trying to get my head around this one. What

are they trying to tell us? Airbnb are bringing in a 90 day limit. You

cannot let your property for more than three months in a year. Some

number crunching has been done. They say that because of the restriction

the company will miss out on ?400 million of revenue. It is an

interesting story about his burgeoning sector of the sharing

economy, and how regulations are going to put it back in its box. You

can say it is a good or bad thing, but I think there is a strong case,

reading the detail, that it is an unfair playing field. Because they

have advantages in terms of tax that hotels do not have. If you are going

to be a hotel by any other means it does make sense to have them put on

a level playing field. Especially when it points out that such a large

number of those people offering this service, they are not just people

living next door to you, offering their spare bedroom, lots of them

are professional listings. They are hotels in any other name that are

benefiting from it. The other thing to remember about this, the reason

people go to Airbnb, it is competitively priced. We could see

indications post Brexit and the benefit the economy is seen from

that with people wanting to come into our cities. I will quite often

use Airbnb over a hotel chain because we are a family of five. And

if we go and stay at a hotel it is two rooms that we need, and it is

astronomical, and finding two connecting rooms can be difficult.

Renting out a three-bedroom property in a city is very welcome to us.

Barack pros and cons for both, the problem and the solution here. Is

this a new tax? Has it always been in place? It has always been in

place but it hasn't been enforced. Airbnb Have said they will start

enforcing that from this year. It has been mentioned in the last

financial statement. I think they are trying to get ahead of the

politicians, which is possibly a sensible move. What is your New Year

's resolution regarding your health? The Daily Express are giving you a

chance here, not only to get yourself it, but also potentially

stave off a risk of dementia, developing dementia. I think it is a

very good bit of advice. My personal resolution is not to read so many

diet plans, keep fit schemes, because they are dominating the

newspapers. I am going to have a look at breakfast cereals as soon as

I get home and think about those again. It is the Daily Express, but

would that headline make you think there is another reason for me to

get fit? Thing is, most of these things, keep fit, don't get

diabetes, don't get dementia, they are things that he would initially

think, you know, generally looking after yourself, whether it is

dementia, obesity, you know, diabetes, any of those things, is a

good thing. Most people will be thinking that. But it is the

beginning of the year. I think we have all admitted that we are

thinking, you know, thinking ourselves thin, as we reach for the

biscuit tin. The paper links obesity and type two diabetes to a greater

risk of developing dementia. I think all getting into it. Anyway,

Caroline and Ben, we will leave it there, but we will be back in just

under an hour's time. Thank you. That is it for this hour. All of the

front pages are online, on the BBC News website, where you can read a

detailed review of the Papers. It is all there for you. Each night's

edition of the Papers posted onto the page shortly after we have

finished. Thank you again to Ben and Caroline. We will be back for

another look at the papers later.