01/04/2017 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 01/04/2017. 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 Anne Ashworth, who's the associate editor


at the Times, and Bonnie Greer, playwright and writer


Very glad you have hung around for the next review. I would be no good


on my own. The Mail on Sunday


continues its campaign against videos on Google and YouTube


which show violent or Tomorrow's story highlights a video


showing how to penetrate Britain's airports and nuclear


power stations need to tighten their defences


against terrorist attacks, according to a story on the Sunday


Telegraph's front page. British passports


could soon be returning to their former dark blue


livery following Brexit, The Sunday Times


headlines the news that some peers are claiming thousands of pounds


worth of expenses for attending the House of Lords, despite making


little contribution And the Observer highlights


pressures being put on the government by some


cross-party MPs who want to guarantee that EU nationals


would still be able to work Several Brexit - related stories on


the front pages. We will begin with the Observer, NHS recruits given


special status after Brexit. This is a cross-party group. It is very


logical. I don't know why the government doesn't model the


society, why it doesn't make a model of the NHS without EU national is


not without immigrants. Let the people see it. Then we can


understand the challenge, as opposed to making stories about the


problems. It is a simple thing to do. Let's see it, let's see how long


it will take you have national strength up to staff the NHS that we


need, and let's see the gap in between. That is the reality. These


stories are important but they don't move a long, they don't get us


anywhere. There is an urgency about this. It seems as if EU nationals in


the NHS are going home more than in the past. They are giving up.


Thinking they won't have a future in the NHS. It is interesting. All of


the debate about EU migrants has focused on hospitality. Their


biggest contribution is to the NHS. Exactly. It makes you wonder why


this simple modelling isn't done. Why are people debating something


that is easy to do? We can find out the gap. We can make a policy about


the gap. It could be part of the negotiations. Everyone throwing up


their hands saying it will be horrible. It is easy to know. Is it


necessary to have negotiations? Car not the government say, we need


them. -- cannot the government say. It is about people being told about


immigration, if you do something logical, we need these people, it


affects the political question. The government is balancing both of


these things at the same time. Then you have stories like this. We have


a number of issues jostling for prominence in the Brexit


negotiation. Remember, an awful lot of people voted to come out of


Europe because they thought that there would be an immediate cash


injection into the NHS. Now, imagine the dismay if the NHS is dismantled


when these - if these people are forced to go home. I think it is a


simple thing. If they want to do it, that is the issue which perplexes


me. Show people what it looks like. It is not difficult. We have the


tools to do that. There is another NHS story not to do with Brexit on


the Sunday Times. NHS threatens GPs with closure, this is incorrect,


with the cost of renting property to run a surgery from the NHS. It seems


as if the NHS is a landlord to some NHS surgeries. So you have your GP


surgery and your landlord is the NHS. There has been more money put


into a transformation in technology and it is putting up the cost of the


service charges and there is going to be a rebellion over this. I would


imagine that there is a generation of doctors and medical people,


nurses within the NHS, who think this is absurd. That is basically


it. You mean, we will get kicked out because we are not paying your rent?


When this surgery is what it is about, not the building. You should


be helping us to stay here as opposed to giving us a bill for


rent. It doesn't make sense. This is not the point and it might be


simplistic, can't you move somewhere cheaper and have a different


landlord, or by the building themselves? The technology required


as part of the GP role. It is movable, isn't it? You have people


who have a client base, maybe they can't move. Maybe they can't find


premises. I am a London. It is not easy to find a place. People cannot


just move because they cannot pay the rent. I think people probably


wouldn't know that they were paying rent to the NHS. It was news to me.


It has been a story that has been bubbling under the medical press and


is beginning to get national prominence. Exactly. And it is also


the issue with the NHS. A lot of us don't know how much it has become


privatised. And how much it is being privatised. That is not to do with


privatisation, if the NHS owns the building. It is a landlord- tenant


tussle. The internal market. It is privatisation by other means. Other


people might argue that is not the case. Well, it is. Let's not get


bogged down. OK. The Times, ?20 toxic tax for diesel drivers. Not


long ago we were advised that diesel was a clean option. And now we worry


about what to do with the diesel cars. It will be too expensive for


people to drive. We were trying to do the sums outside, with the


congestion charge and other penalties to drive certain cars


before 2006, plus the ?20 toxin attacks in London and other cities,


it might be as much as ?40 a day to drive a car in London and some other


cities. It would get you onto the train, wouldn't it, or public


transport. Heaven help us. I live a couple of streets from here and it


is bad at ten o'clock. There are areas in London that have already


hit their yearly pollution level. They hit it into ready for hours.


This is extremely serious. I think Siddique Khan is trying to do


something about it in London because it cannot go on like this --. This


is Andrea Leadsom's mission? Yes. He is one of the drivers. Let's have a


look at the Mail on Sunday, a campaign on what gets shown on the


websites platforms like Google and YouTube. Google blood money, cashing


in on five video showing how to pierce a stab vest, like one worn by


the police officer who was murdered in the Westminster terror attack.


Without going into too much detail... It is highly unpleasant,


shot by some weapons enthusiast, a German guy, about how to penetrate a


stab vest. Let's hope it is not still on YouTube after it has been


on the front of the Mail on Sunday. He is making money from exhibiting


that video. It is just yet another - feeding into all of this. We have


allowed Google to rule over us in all of its manifestations without


check. Google rules over us. They agree with you again. You're


absolutely right. Problem is that Google is born in the first


Amendment culture. That is their culture as a company. The issue


becomes how to regulate - how can you regulate this behemoth and their


ideas about expression, how can you do that in a culture like the UK


which regulates what people say, which regulates what goes on air?


That is the issue. The pressure is mounting on this country. It is --


company. It is a publisher. It doesn't even pay the tax it was


supposed to pay. Google, Google - it is not illegal but let's not get


into the tax story. This article makes the point that you said it had


permanently removed these videos. -- YouTube said. It did not reveal how


much money was made from them. A spokeswoman said we have cleared


policies against inciting violence and harmful or dangerous activities


and remove content that breaks guidelines when we are made aware of


it. -- clear. That is the same as Google. They will take down


material. Who is meant to police it? Well, again, this culture is a First


Amendment culture. How can Google adapt itself to this territory? How


can this territory adapt itself to Google? That is the issue. And that


is the wall that we are coming up against. We go next to the Sunday


Telegraph, airports and nuclear power stations on terror alert. And


we knew that not long ago restrictions were in place for


taking types of devices on board planes from certain places. And even


then some holes were found in that security system. This is a wider


issue to do with not just airports, as the headlines has, but nuclear


power stations. It will come to the point where ISIS, I call it Daesh,


it will get to the point where they can understand and get these


entities, these machines, themselves in their possession and build


systems that would counter them. That is something that was always


going to happen. So, the issue now is how to get up to speed to be


faster than they are. That is what they are doing. Their only job is to


win this. So they can take a machine, take it back to ISIS hiding


hole, wherever they are, and build something that counters it. This one


I think they are putting in the battery of the computer it self the


bomb. Getting them on board the plane. Yes. And in watches. This


huge technical know-how. And their strongholds are under threat. They


have to look too different ways to keep and maintain the terror


attacks. Well, they are the electronic caliphate now, they don't


have any territory. This was always going to be a battle of hearts and


minds at the end of the day. The technology - it is a race. Let's


stay with the Sunday Telegraph. How the Cabinet plotted to exploit EU


defence fears. We soon found out about it, didn't we? It was on the


headlines around the world. The idea that because of the importance of


Britain sharing intelligence and the security of the EU, that it would be


a powerful piece of leverage in the talks. It is just extraordinary,


isn't it, just all of the different issues jostling for what is going to


be the most important thing. Is it people, is it defence? You know, we


have a good name in defence in the EU, you know, this is where we have


our strength, and it probably is legitimate to use as a bargaining


tool. But Donald Tusk stood up and said he didn't even believe Theresa


May actually used security as a bargaining tool. He said he can't


believe she did it and he totally dismissed the fact that she might


have done. This story says this was discussed. She was a former Home


Secretary. Exactly. She made the point in the run-up to the


referendum that security was an important part of the two operation


with the EU. Would she sacrifice that? I suppose it was - will you


put that on the table? You are going to share intelligence if we don't do


what you say? That is how it is. We are still in Nato. Not only that, a


lot of other things, and we are a leader in defence, a round-the-world


and in the EU, and it is quite frightening, actually -- around the


world. And what is also surprising is people didn't think that there


would be pushed back about it. Because headlines around the world


were basically, what the heck, that the UK would put it on the table.


More Brexit stories on the Express, Wi-Fi on the trip to the dentist,


and things we have to pay for in this ?50 billion except Bill,


including Polish roads, rail routes and dentists in Bulgaria. All of the


stuff we have to pick up the tab for after we leave including projects


that have not even begun. But we did agree to help fund them because they


were still in. It is a contract. It is so cut and dry. They are able to


deduct... Is it cut and dry? Yes. I think everything is up for argument.


Let me put it this way, the way they came up with a ?60 billion, 60


billion euros thing or whatever, they deducted certain things that


the UK promised to do and it came out to 60 billion euros. Now,


whether that is going to be paid is another thing. It is not hard to


find out what it is. It is a list. It is there. It does exist. It is


all a lot of creative accounting going on. There are numbers all


across these stories and you think, really, is it the full truth of what


we have to pay? And whether we will have to pay for some of the other


projects that it has already committed to pay for. If anyone


thinks it will be clean, done and dusted... And that it will last two


years. Someone says, signed the cheque and then we will talk.


Finally, the fun of the Sunday Express, true blue passport reborn.


Apparently the iconic dark blue passport that someone might remember


will make a comeback, and the conservative MP who chairs the flags


and heraldry committee... Did you know? No. He says it is a matter of


identity, having the pink passport. Are you colourblind? It is maroon.


It has merged us into one European identity which isn't what we are.


People were unhappy about giving up the dark blue passport. Did you


really? There is also a percentage of the population - I have never had


won. I have a pink one, that is for sure, I don't like pink. Burgundy,


that is yours. Liz Hurley is looking forward to the return of the navy


blue passport with the crest. She wants deutschmarks as well, she


wants francs. Does it matter if you are stopped and you have to join a


long queue? It is - nationhood exemplified by the navy blue


passport. Is it worth a 500 million at? You see, I am hugely suspicious


-- ?500 million of effort? I think it would be worth much more. Much


more. That is it, that is the papers for tonight, thank you, Anne and


Bonnie. It works so well because they talk to each other, you see?


Coming up next, Meet the


Download Subtitles