:00:13. > :00:15.Hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the the papers will be
:00:16. > :00:18.With me are the business editor of The Independent,
:00:19. > :00:20.Josie Cox, and Helen Joyce, the international editor
:00:21. > :00:25.Let's take a look at the front pages then.
:00:26. > :00:28.First up the FT - it's reporting that companies competing to build
:00:29. > :00:34.nuclear power stations in the UK have been asked to offer
:00:35. > :00:36.a significantly lower price for electricity than the ?18 billion
:00:37. > :00:47.According to an investigation by the paper, eleven maternity
:00:48. > :00:49.and neonatal units across England face closure or consolidation under
:00:50. > :00:54.The Independent focuses on the stark US
:00:55. > :00:57.warning to NATO allies, that members must increase military
:00:58. > :01:01.The Express takes a look at the latest
:01:02. > :01:04.official employment figures, saying the number of foreign-born
:01:05. > :01:07.workers rose by almost 450,000 in a year -
:01:08. > :01:12.And the Metro leads with the fresh attack
:01:13. > :01:15.by Donald Trump on US intelligence agencies for reportedly leaking
:01:16. > :01:28.details of discussions between his team and Russia.
:01:29. > :01:37.Let's start with President Trump. He accuses US intelligence services of
:01:38. > :01:43.criminal push to undermine him. This is today's episode of the ongoing
:01:44. > :01:48.soap opera. This is going to be a running plotline, cars since before
:01:49. > :01:53.the election there have been serious worries, including the American
:01:54. > :01:59.intelligence community and elsewhere, that President Trump's
:02:00. > :02:05.liking for Vladimir Putin is puzzling, to say the least. He
:02:06. > :02:10.criticises other people, but not him. His national security adviser
:02:11. > :02:16.has had to step down because it appears he has had unauthorised
:02:17. > :02:20.contacts with Russian intelligence agents, and now President Trump
:02:21. > :02:27.doesn't really like that people are leaking things like this. One
:02:28. > :02:34.extraordinary thing about this story is that in a tiny corner of the FT
:02:35. > :02:40.we have, Trump backs off a 2-state solution. On another day, this would
:02:41. > :02:44.be enormous news. It has four little lines on the front page because of
:02:45. > :02:51.this ongoing soap opera. Quite incredible. Having said that, it is
:02:52. > :02:54.a bit out of order. Your intelligence services leaking
:02:55. > :03:02.private documents. What would happen tomorrow morning if Theresa May
:03:03. > :03:06.found out that MI5 and MI6 were leaking stuff? You cannot function
:03:07. > :03:11.in that way? In any other situation, this would be a remarkable story.
:03:12. > :03:15.But in the context of what we have seen in the Trump administration and
:03:16. > :03:22.the narrative that is unfolding, it is not as surprising as it perhaps
:03:23. > :03:27.should be. And his reaction, the words he is using, the aggressive
:03:28. > :03:34.tone, in accusing the intelligence services of doing this, that is not
:03:35. > :03:39.unusual either. He has fired similar shots at the media, the Obama
:03:40. > :03:44.administration and at Clinton. This is becoming routine. And is he
:03:45. > :03:49.trying to have it both ways? As a campaigner, when he was running for
:03:50. > :03:53.the White House, he was happy for the Secret Service to leak against
:03:54. > :04:00.his opponent. You cannot have it both ways. Is he stupid, or what? I
:04:01. > :04:05.think he is a man with a special approach to what we might call
:04:06. > :04:12.consistency. The most extraordinary thing he said before the election
:04:13. > :04:18.was he lives in bite it Putin to hack into and release Hillary
:04:19. > :04:21.Clinton's private documents. He asked the Russians to get
:04:22. > :04:29.information on Hillary Clinton, so how can he talk about it now? All
:04:30. > :04:33.bets are off. The Republicans are in control of Congress and should be
:04:34. > :04:37.saying that we should investigate this, there are credible links
:04:38. > :04:43.between the Trump administration and the Russians. But they are not, so
:04:44. > :04:48.this is the point where we have the intelligence services leaking this
:04:49. > :04:55.stuff. And something about the nuclear plant's viability being in
:04:56. > :04:59.doubt? Another bad story in the week of bad stories about the power
:05:00. > :05:04.industry in the UK. We had some very poor results from Toshiba, the
:05:05. > :05:10.Japanese conglomerate, which owns a very large stake in the company
:05:11. > :05:16.supposed to be developing a nuclear power plant in Cumbria. That called
:05:17. > :05:24.that whole development into question. Now we have a story about
:05:25. > :05:27.funding. Government officials have indicated that future projects would
:05:28. > :05:33.be expected to deliver a discount of at least 15% to 20% on the price of
:05:34. > :05:39.electricity, which is absolutely massive, and will deliver a big blow
:05:40. > :05:43.on any revenue they may generate to pay off those projects. This is a
:05:44. > :05:49.big blow if you are into nuclear power. Even the green lobby believe
:05:50. > :05:53.this is the way forward. The problems, potentially, that there
:05:54. > :05:58.might be of leakages and so forth seem to have been dealt with, unless
:05:59. > :06:06.you live in Japan and you have a tsunami. We know the problems of
:06:07. > :06:12.Fukushima. So we know that cost is potentially a problem. It seems like
:06:13. > :06:18.a massive shame. You don't want to overpay for your electricity. We are
:06:19. > :06:21.on the cusp of having lots of other renewable energy a lot cheaper. So
:06:22. > :06:27.would you want to spend millions on a whole load of nuclear plants if
:06:28. > :06:33.you can get solar in a few years? That is what the green lobby is
:06:34. > :06:45.saying. It's starting to look like a possibility. On to the daily out
:06:46. > :06:51.loud. Or is that lots of love? That is what David Cameron thought. Are
:06:52. > :06:56.used to think that as well! Perhaps we all did. This is the laughing
:06:57. > :07:09.airport assassin. This is one of the suspects in the death of the
:07:10. > :07:16.brother-in-law of Kim Jong-un ill. Apparently he has been a target of
:07:17. > :07:22.the North Korean assassination plots for several years. He believed he
:07:23. > :07:26.was going to be attacked. You normally has Chinese bodyguards with
:07:27. > :07:31.him. They seem to have injected him with poison in the airport and
:07:32. > :07:36.attempted to get the body back before there was an autopsy. This is
:07:37. > :07:39.a mysterious state were terrible things happen, and these things
:07:40. > :07:44.erupt into our consciousness. I don't know what to tell you about
:07:45. > :07:54.it. I don't know anything about the man or what he did. But I guess we
:07:55. > :07:59.have this mysterious picture that has caught our imagination because
:08:00. > :08:03.of the T-shirt. It is cold war. Basically, if you are related to Kim
:08:04. > :08:12.Jong-un, where ever you are in the world, watch out, basically.
:08:13. > :08:17.Absolutely. In the Daily Telegraph as well. The Church of England a
:08:18. > :08:24.step closer to gay marriages in church. A three years study from
:08:25. > :08:27.bishops from the Church of England said that the church should still
:08:28. > :08:34.not approve of gay marriage. They put together a report of a status
:08:35. > :08:38.quo that they should believe that they should not approve of same-sex
:08:39. > :08:44.marriages, that they should have a more welcoming attitude towards
:08:45. > :08:49.same-sex marriages. The motion has been rejected, which means that we
:08:50. > :08:55.will stick with the status quo for the time being. It seems like they
:08:56. > :08:59.haven't really created any change or furthered any cause, but it is
:09:00. > :09:04.perhaps encouraging to see that there is motion in the debate around
:09:05. > :09:09.the subject. I think they were trying to balance between two very
:09:10. > :09:15.much opposing sides, say that marriage is between a man and a
:09:16. > :09:18.woman, but that we must be nice to same-sex couples. But that seems not
:09:19. > :09:27.to have worked. The House of Clergy of the three bodies, so your
:09:28. > :09:32.ordinary rank and file vicar, it seems they've voted to reject this
:09:33. > :09:38.report. They are the ones who have to deal with it. Yes, they are the
:09:39. > :09:44.ones who have to deal with parishioners every Sunday. With
:09:45. > :09:50.someone saying that they are being rejected. The idea is that, at some
:09:51. > :09:53.point, some way down the line, perhaps the church is moving closer
:09:54. > :10:04.to officially sanctioning gay marriages. Let's go to the Times. An
:10:05. > :10:10.ultimatum on Nato spending. I cannot understand why a country like
:10:11. > :10:15.Germany, the fourth or fifth biggest economy in the world, doesn't pay
:10:16. > :10:20.its way. What's that about? They said they would. One of the Nato
:10:21. > :10:25.agreements is that you spend 2% of GDP on defence. It's not just what
:10:26. > :10:30.you spend, it is what you spend it on. It is that troops can
:10:31. > :10:39.interoperate and so on. Only five countries actually spend that 2% of
:10:40. > :10:45.GDP. That headline, he is right. I agree with him. He has said so many
:10:46. > :10:49.different things about Nato, and some very worrying. This is a man
:10:50. > :10:59.who was not willing to affirm a long-standing commitment to one of
:11:00. > :11:11.Nato's commitments that if one were attacked, -- to be attacked, that
:11:12. > :11:15.the others would stand with them. I agreed with him for about five
:11:16. > :11:21.seconds! That if you are a member of this alliance, why would you not be
:11:22. > :11:27.willing to pay for the privilege? I guess people haven't for such a long
:11:28. > :11:37.time. Spending on defence is like spending on foreign aid. And we have
:11:38. > :11:45.all felt so save for such a long time. The world seemed a nice place
:11:46. > :11:50.a year ago, five years ago. Now it all looks a lot scarier. I really do
:11:51. > :12:00.think they will start stumping up. So you approve of Trump's policy.
:12:01. > :12:04.I'm not sure if it is his policy as such, and I don't agree with
:12:05. > :12:09.undermining what Nato is about. It looks like a lot of the thrust of
:12:10. > :12:18.this is coming from his Defence Secretary. Nato itself has been
:12:19. > :12:24.saying this for a long time. In the Times, Britain sees final warning on
:12:25. > :12:29.the shameful air-pollution levels. Yes, another topical story, though
:12:30. > :12:33.it does feel like we have been here before. It seems like air pollution
:12:34. > :12:38.is one of those things that keeps coming up. It will keep coming up in
:12:39. > :12:45.the lead up to Brexit, because of EU regulation and to what extent we in
:12:46. > :12:52.London could benefit from that. I don't know if this furthers the
:12:53. > :12:56.causes or not. What will Brexiteers think of this? This could
:12:57. > :13:01.potentially go to the European Court of Justice. But I suppose Brexiteers
:13:02. > :13:05.will want clean air as well, but will not want it to be legislated
:13:06. > :13:14.over there rather than via? The problem of this particular aspect of
:13:15. > :13:21.air pollution is diesel cars. They produce less carbon, but they do
:13:22. > :13:29.produce these little particles that go into your lungs. Josie runs and I
:13:30. > :13:35.cycle, so... This will feed quite nicely in to the tinted Brexit
:13:36. > :13:41.debate, no doubt about that. It should be about us being healthy!
:13:42. > :13:51.Thank you so much for joining us. That is it for The Papers tonight.
:13:52. > :13:54.You can go to our website for more details. And if you have missed the
:13:55. > :13:58.programme, you can watch it on my player. Goodbye.