01/04/2017 The Papers

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