19/02/2017 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 19/02/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



and their role in the space programme in the early days of NASA.


Find out what we think of this film in the Film Review. Bats with Mark


Kermode. -- that's with. Hello and welcome to our look ahead


to what the papers will be With me are broadcaster


Natalie Haynes and the Independent's Let's start with the FT leads


with the news that Kraft Heinz is abandoning its ?115 billion


takeover offer for Unilever. The i's front cover focuses on this


week's Brexit debate in the House of Lords,


where some of the New Labour grandees could resist


the government's plans urging the Lords not to weaken


or delay the government's The NHS has cut 15,000


beds in six years, The Guardian reports that


EU leaders are telling Theresa May that, what they call,


blackmail tactics will backfire The Times says No ten


is on a collision course with small businesses


over its reforms to business rates. A warning from the


Defence Secretary makes Sir Michael Fallon says Britain must


maintain a military presence in Afghanistan to avoid millions


of Afghans migrating to Europe. Meanwhile, the Mirror


is leading with the story that


former boxer Michael Watson has who attacked him as they


tried to steal his car. Let's start with the Telegraph, and


this morning from the defence secretary Sir Michael Fallon, UK


troops to prevent Afghan knock down because Europe faces a new exodus if


Britain pulls out of a war-torn country, plus echoes of what's


happened in Syria with hundreds of thousands of people trying to make


their way to safety in Europe. Yes, the Defence Secretary is using the


migration argument to make the case for Britain to remain in Afghanistan


where we still have 500 troops, most people have probably forgotten that


because clearly it's gone much quieter there since Britain ended


full combat operations, those troops are just in a training capacity. It


raises more questions than it answers I suppose because the


headline states UK troops to prevent Afghan meltdown, you might think


Britain is about to send more troops to Afghanistan but the Defence


Secretary isn't saying that, or at least not yet, he seems to be


talking about the need for our troops to stay there. But is he


hinting at... Trying to persuade the British public that at some point in


the future more troops will be required? There's a quote at the end


of the page that suggests he is, he quotes the Defence Secretary saying


we're asking the government of Afghanistan and their military to


deal with the same situation we had ten times as many troops to deal


with, clearly accepting they need more troops but will they be ours?


Is the public being softened up? Maybe because I think it's fair to


say this feels like a respond to an argument that people didn't know was


going on. Nobody said you couldn't have there smack there used to be


10,000 British troops there. Now 500 are in a purely training role. It


does feel very much like an opening salvo if a war metaphor of isn't


inappropriate in the context. We'll allow it. Thank you. Coming back to


the Guardian. The Home Office saying... They have agreed to


review, and my going to the right one? At the bottom of the page, try


refugees have hopes raised as Home Office reviews Calais cases. It


emerges people hoping to come to the UK have gone back to the site in


Calais where everybody used to gather to get across the Channel.


And where it was such a big story last year that it was finally being


shut down and bulldozed and children were being may be found somewhere to


go to in France where they would be safe, or somehow getting lost in the


whole chaos of it all being shut down. Obviously this story has been


quite aside from one's opinion on the humanitarian nature of it, it's


been terrible PR for the government, saying we had room for 3000 children


under the agreement and now we have a few hundred and we're shutting it


down. Across-the-board people have stood up to say it's a disgrace. It


seems like the most enormous own goal really and yet they're not


actually stepping back from it. They're agreeing to review


applications, which is almost the exact same thing as not really doing


anything at all. They're not agreeing to change the policy or put


a pause in or anything like that, their agreeing to review it, which


is pretty mild-mannered. A review could mean they could allow a few


more in without immediately looking like they've changed their minds


while changing their minds. A few is very few, it says they have their


hopes raised but the public could have their hopes raised that there


is a major change coming, which isn't happening. As you said, we're


talking about a few children forced away from Calais when the Jungle


close, they found their way back and they could have their circumstances


looked at again. But the big picture is, the government will still end


the so-called Dub scheme, meant to bring in 3000 but only brought in


150. I'm reminded of a favourite limit of a favourite band of mine,


the Pogues, lend me ?10 and I'll buy you a drink, a very small of. A


couple of Brexit stories... I wonder which Pogues lyric you were going to


choose, you had me worried. -- small of. And isn't it right that ?10


would just about buy you a drink in Islington? With straws. On the


Independent, Mandelson. The Brexit bill goes to the Lord's this week,


lots of them are going to have lots to say, will they meant it in any


significant fashion? Yes they will. Almost certainly the


bill will be amended in some fashion and it will have to go back to the


Commons and it will ping-pong as the saying goes. In the end you assume


the Commons will get its way over the issues of EU nationals and what


kind of vote takes place on the final deal the Prime Minister Seals.


Lord Mandelson was on the TiVo this morning, certainly trying to bolster


a few in the Lord's to stand up against the Brexit bill -- on the


TV. He certainly believes the British public will change its mind


when they see what miserable deal they get into years time or next


year. In our paper tomorrow they go further saying the public should be


allowed to pass judgement on the deal, raising the prospect of a


second referendum or a general election if it goes wrong for the


p.m. . Lex looked at the Guardian's Brexit story, the Brexit scandal. --


gamble. -- let's look at. This is whether we should have to pay an


except Bill, Natalie, a very large bill. The whole discussion has a


faintly godfather like quality in it. Blackmail and division are the


things we're being accused of. Yet David Davis, he wasn't trying to


blackmail anybody, he was going to chat to our friends in Estonia,


Latvia and Lithuania. Really? Everybody could not sound more


dubious about this conversation! The blackmail line doesn't appear to be


anywhere else on the front page, but I'm happy to be corrected by some


ways better than me at reading, but I can't see it. It's within his


rights to speak to everyone of the 27. There's only going to be one


person at the negotiating table and not 27, the EU will have a


negotiator and their employers that going round and talking to some of


the 27 to pressure the negotiator is not going to work -- they're


implying that. It's not going to work as a divide and rule tactic. It


will be very interesting! Very interesting. The Daily Mail, NHS


cuts... Let me repeat that with the right emphasis. NHS cuts 6000 beds


in six years, one in Ted, the equivalent of closing 24 hospitals.


-- 15,000 beds. In real terms funding has gone up year on year and


it hasn't kept pace with demands. -- one in ten. The BBC ran its own


series about how much difficulty the NHS is in. It's a stark bigger


tonight, it says there used to be 150,000... There are now 130,000


hospital beds, there used to be 135,005 years ago. I think that it


started to be well intentioned -- 135,000 five years ago. There was an


idea that you could treat people closer to home in smaller clinics


rather than big district hospitals, it could have been well-intentioned


reform, but it happened at the same time as huge cuts to social care so


the consequence is there aren't enough beds. We have so-called bed


blocking, operations are delayed and then we have the problems we've seen


in the NHS. What's wrong is you're talking about funding going up just


about year-on-year, but on the government's own figures, next year


funding will fall, it will go down per head next year at a time of an


ageing population and greater demand. It's a real nightmare for


the government, this sort of problem, the NHS is going to get


worse and worse. Health officials say patients recover more quickly if


there looked after in their own homes, but you have to have doctors,


nurses, district nurses in particular to visit people.


Absolutely and you have to have a home safe to be released into. If


you live alone and you're relatively frail, even if your sprightly the


rest of the time, when you come out of hospital you're more fragile by


definition so perhaps a home with lots of stairs or example isn't


appropriate. You could easily let someone back into a flat or a


bungalow but not a house and so on and so on. The Daily Mail is at its


best when it has these consumer or patient lead stories, it's very good


at these campaigns. I would be quite worried if I was Jeremy Hunt right


now. And people buy papers because they're always interested in the


NHS. Bill Clinton said you shouldn't pick fights with people that buy


their ink by the barrel. Let's look at the Telegraph, plans to save the


University of Oxford's funding with a Paris branch perhaps. They've been


in meetings this week apparently, friends of visuals continuing their


charm offensive. Flipping the glad I at banks. -- French officials.


Orchestras, as Rob saw last week, and universities. From spending a


lot of time with academics in the last couple of weeks, by coincidence


they are all very worried about the Brexit decision, they are all where


worried about what's happening to their students and their funding. --


very worried. One of the popular schemes funded by the EU is the


Erasmus scheme, the exchange, where you can study at a foreign


university and lots of students wanted to come to Britain but


they've seen the numbers drop of four applications because they're


sensing the Brexit effect. -- drop-off for. Universities have been


one of our great strengths recently and that is what we are concerned


about when we leave the. It's a red example of a negative story about


Brexit that makes the Telegraph -- leave the EU -- red example. It's a


big downside potentially for universities -- rare example. Let's


finish on something slightly cheery. Who doesn't love a David


Attenborough series? The Cure Luke Planet, the award-winning series


about the oceans, is going to return -- the Cure Luke Planet. There's a


lovely quote about maintaining his works schedule, would you rather


sail in a balloon over the Alps or sit at home dribbling? Not everyone


has the choice! Thank goodness you tidied yourself up! Even these


pictures in the pay per look amazing, don't they, never mind on


the TV. We'll all be watching, weren't we? -- paper. The Blue


Planet was his most successful series. I want to read this again.


There will be the species we've never sing before, behaviours we


have ever seen before by a dolphin, a task fish and a crap, so named


because it has a hairy chest and it is like David Hasselhoff. I wonder


if there is a Pamela Anderson equivalent. -- crab. The cuttlefish


scene of the mating ritual, where we see what looks suspiciously like


tentacles of a cuttlefish giving a back rub to another cuttlefish, we


are all channelling our inner Baywatch memories, I think we are.


That's it. Before we get into anything more on that! Discussions


of swimming costumes and that kind of thing! That's it for the papers


to Mike. Don't forget all of the front pages are online on the


website where you can read a detailed review of the papers. --


tonight. We are there as well each night. It is posted shortly after we


finish and it is on iPlayer. Natalie, Rob, thank you very much.


Coming up next it's the Film Review.


Download Subtitles