27/02/2017 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 27/02/2017. 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 Laura Perrins, Co-Editor of The Conservative Women


and Joe Watts, Political Editor at The Independent.


Tomorrow's front pages, starting with...


The i leads with John Major's first speech since the Brexit vote,


The Express reports reports that the government could announce


an end to the free movement of people on the day it


The Telegraph picks up the story that UKIP is facing civil war


after Nigel Farage called on the party to oust its sole


The Metro shows the shock that last night's Oscar


And the Daily Mail says that TV licence inspectors are targeting


vulnerable people. John Major's speech at Chatham


House. The i pretty summed it up. John Major is second-guessing the


British people as what the best way is to approach Brexit. We have moved


from project fear, to project smear and B are now at project pathetic.


We had Tony Blair last week. I think things are getting a bit desperate.


No one is showing contempt for the 40% who voted to remain. What's


important is the 60% who were polled last week who said they want the


Prime Minister to get on with Brexit, which is what she is doing.


It was suggested that in London, which voted Remain, they thought


immigration should be the priority and not trade. Was John Major out of


the public? I then think so. I think what we are seeing here... Let him


talk. I can feel the heat coming off of her. There has been some real


opposition and the government is being held to account in a way we


have not seen the elected politicians in the House of Commons


doing. We've had Tony Blair making a speech, Lord Mandelson has been


writing all over the place, now John Major. They are making real point


about the way the government is approaching Brexit, about the way


they are trying to railroad the Article 50 bill through without it


being amended. Now they are trying to suggest... I knew she would not


last long. Laurie, what -- Laura what is unhealthy about the country


debating what Brexit means? Nobody knew until the last few weeks what


it meant. They can continue to debate, I'd does them think people


will listen to him or Tony Blair or whoever they will at next week. They


are not very credible. John Major's record in Europe has been


disastrous. He railroaded Britain into Maastricht. It is not about


John Major or Tony Blair it's about the message. The messenger is very


important, as we all know in politics. These two former prime


ministers are discredited. If is the tactic, it's fine. Fill your boots.


If that is the best they've got, I will be sleeping easy tonight. I


would suggest that as time goes on and the economy starts to feel some


of the strain of Brexit, then the message will carry a bit more


weight. The Telegraph picks up on the fact that Mr major says leaving


the EU is an historic mistake. He did also say in his speech that he


accept the EU is not perfect. It's not all fantastic, but he was


highlighting what he felt were major concerns about the government's


handling of the Brexit negotiations and the dealings with EU leaders as


well. Quite a scathing attack. Its scathing and bitter. It says more


about him than it does about the Prime Minister, who I think is doing


a fantastic job. I think he is going to come out of this worse off than


the Prime Minister is. He is entitled to his opinion and people


like yourself like to hear it, but it's amazing how the BBC now love


John Major. When he was in power they hated him. They absolutely


slammed him. We absolutely never take sides. We are very impartial,


Laura. It is a cheek for you to say that. The government and Theresa May


are talking about what they want from the Brexit deal. They haven't


said anything about what we will have to pay. No one is being told


that at the moment. That is a massive black hole in the debate and


all he is doing is saying look, will be to start talking about this. The


Daily Telegraph also poses the question, what now. They've


interviewed Nigel Farage. How do you keep go forward now that Brexit is


happening. Nigel Farage suggesting they get rid of the only standing


MP. That is Ukip's problem. Theresa May is going forward with Brexit in


a coherent fashion. If there is any slippage on the part of May, they'll


be relevant and important again. I don't know how you can get rid of


Douglas Carswell. He is either unelected by his constituents or he


withdraws the whip from himself, which seems unlikely. It points to


the underlying ridiculousness of Ukip. They only have this one MP who


is a constant odds with other people in the party, people like Nigel


Farage and Adam Banks, who is always demanding to take over the party.


You never know with Ukip. At any moment Nigel Farage cle comeback. It


looks as if he had Aaron Banks on his side. Tough new migrant rules.


Free movement could be ended within weeks. This is something that may be


not everyone thought about, that the rules kick in when article $50. It


will be interesting to see if it is when Article 50 is triggered or at


the end of the negotiations. Whatever the migration rules are,


they need to be decided in Westminster and not Brussels. It's


decided by democracy as opposed to bureaucracy in Brussels. When the


bill goes through there will be suitable scrutiny and an examination


of what the law should be, which is how democracy works. Whether or not


it does happen when Article 50 is triggered, everybody... The


important point is that everyone is given adequate notice, it can be


done retroactively and if rules change when Article 50 is triggered,


that is there enough in terms of notice given to people coming into


the country. Let's move the Times. The headline there that will worry


many people. Don't lock-up loneliest paedophiles. This is a quote from


the police. The public will be horrified. Give us the background.


This is Britain's most senior child protection officer saying the police


have been inundated with investigations into child sex abuse,


into paedophilia and the rise has been 80% in three years. They are


getting 112 new complaint today and they expect a further 40,000 to the


official enquiry that is happening into historic child sex abuse. They


are saying they are over spilling and they can't do with it and


because of that some of the lesser offences will have to be


decriminalised. That is going to horrify most people and even he


acknowledges that this stance will horrified a lot of people. He is


saying we have no choice. The question seems to be of resources,


or at least he is raising that here. Is it the simply a question of


money? Can you solve this problem by hiring more police officers? I don't


know if it will be as simple as that, nonetheless it will be a


shocking story. In some ways it's reassuring that people are


overwhelmed with stories because people feel they can step forward


and report. It's not just the question of not locking them up


because if you are convicted of something you can also receive a


non-custodial sentence, but what worries me about this is that he is


saying they shouldn't be given any criminal sanction which could have a


knock-on effect. If it is not on your record you will be free to what


were children. That is the first issue, and also looking at indecent


images, it is wrong to say that this is a victimless crime. The poor


children in those images, and there is a scale from minor to incredibly


dangerous image eens -- images, and I think they are level five, to say


it is victimless is wrong. It points to this idea that they are trying to


slightly change the way society views these crimes and I think a lot


of people across the political spectrum will probably agree that


actually the way we see it as a horrific crime at the moment is


right. You can deal with the sentencing in a different way, but


there should be a criminal sanction. The Guardian. It devotes a lot of


hits from to politics in America, unlike other papers. Trump plans a


huge increase in US military spending. A wonderful you have to


give credit to Trump. He made a lot of promises in his election campaign


and he is delivering on his bonkers promises. He said he will remove


spending from environmental policy and from eight spending as well.


They're trying to redirect spending in those areas to be military. Trump


has promised to reinvigorate industry in a Rocca as well and it's


a very easy way to do that, by building new tanks, ships, whatever


the needs. Defending your country is not a bonkers promise. I like the


protection that the United States give us, as you do also. Italy take


advantage of it, even though they spent hardly anything on the


military. People are being protected by the American military, who


liberated Europe from fascism. Putting that to one side, he is


entitled to fulfil his electoral promise to defend his country and I


think anybody who doesn't think defending your own country, liberty


and security should take a long hard look at themselves. But it comes at


eight cost to other areas. It is causing a lot of concern. It's only


causing concern to those opposed to Trump. We have to leave it there,


but many thanks for the interesting discussion. We will continue that.


Don't forget you can see the front pages of the papers online


It's all there for you - 7 days a week at bbc dot co uk


forward slash papers - and if you miss the programme any


evening you can watch it later on BBC iPlayer.


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