02/04/2017 The Papers

Hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the the papers will be

With me are Jim Waterson, who's the political editor

And the public appointments adviser Jacqui Francis.

Decently giving up their Sunday evening!

The cover of the FT features a stark warning

from President Trump over North Korea.

The Telegraph also carries the President's comments

on its front page, ahead of his first meeting

The I focuses on the row over comments made by Michael Howard

The same story is on the front page of the Metro, with the paper

highlighting the former Tory leader's claim the Prime Minister

would even consider war to keep the territory.

The Express says 20-minute walk a day could save your life,

following a report by the British Heart Foundation that

three quarters of heart patients take no exercise at all.

Donald Trump's warning to the Chinese is the Times' lead

tomorrow, with the President saying he would take unilateral action

if necessary to halt Kim Jong-un's nuclear programme.

The Daily Mirror carries a photo of the daughter of Tracey Wilkinson,

visiting the scene where her mother was stabbed to death

alongside her brother Pierce in Stourbridge last week.

We have to start with Gibraltar. Tonight of all nights. Fighting talk

on Gibraltar. The Defence Secretary insisting the UK will defend the

Rock all the way and Lord Howard comparing Theresa May potentially to

Margaret Thatcher should it come to it. He did not quite mention war,

did he? I think he's said this has been mentioned and that obviously

Theresa May will strongly defend and support Gibraltar. For some reason

it was translated into Margaret Thatcher and possibly tanks and

invasion. I am not sure how that happened and I am sure Theresa May

is pleased he is incommunicado as she works out how to roll back from

the idea that we will invade Gibraltar. The direct comparison was

made? A former Conservative leader Michael Howard was doing the rounds

on the shows this morning and said comments to the effect of, we were

willing to defend the Falklands and would be willing to do the same

again. We are not going to war with Spain. They are a Nato member. We

would have to defend them against ourselves if we did. We would tie

ourselves in not. You have someone like Michael Howard willing to talk

this language and willing to say we will use military force to defend

our landed interests. It gives you an insight into the mindset of the

people coming up with this. And maybe the people they appeal to,

that kind of talk would have a residence, even if it is only

metaphorical. Absolutely and what happened for some people, when they

heard about the letter sent, it was civilised, like, we will do this and

that and will negotiate and was not as hardliners some individuals

wanted, I think so Michael Howard, saying this is what we want to hear.

How one is this? It is one thing to appeal to the constituency you think

it will resonate with but another thing to start the negotiations.

Lord Howard will not be part of it. It comes back to the latter invoking

Article 50, it did not have a mention of Gibraltar, which

surprised some EU officials and Spanish diplomat saw the opportunity

and put in a line on the response letter. It is a misalignment of the

two letters, which may be as simple as someone forgot to put on line in

one letter when it was drafted in Downing Street, but we end up four

days later with talk on the front pages we might have an armed

conflict. That will not happen. It is all about the language and

mentality we can learn from this. The Telegraph newspaper is connected

to Brexit as well, Spain buoying Scottish Nationalists as the row

over Gibraltar intensifies, saying Spain has abandoned plans to stop at

independent Scotland, should Scotland achieve that, from joining

the EU. There have been concerns from some Scottish interests that

Spain would not want to see an independent Scotland act ceding to

the EU because it might give Catalonia ideas. This might be more

important of the two Brexit stories tomorrow. This gives Scotland and

Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP a free pass on a key issue in the past,

with the argument being if you declared independence, before the UK

left the EU, you would not be able to get in the club. This clears a

major hurdle for Scottish nationalism. It makes life easier to

make the case it would not leave them outside the EU. This is another

front on which tensions will be raised between Madrid and London. I

am sure everybody is wondering, is this a quid pro quo for something

else Spain feels aggrieved about, for example the idea of security

arrangements and sharing details. If you want to play that card, OK, we

will play this card, saying we will not say anything about Scotland if

they want to join. I wonder behind the scenes what messages have got

mixed up that people are saying things like this. It is a lot of

sabre rattling before the negotiations. You wonder if there

will be temperate language when they negotiate. Of course. This is people

setting out their stall. Going in and waiting to see what everyone

comes back with. On Scotland getting independence and getting in the EU,

there has been a change of thinking from Spain on this. Staying with the

Telegraph, police warn they'll changes will help release criminals.

Can you outline this. Broadly speaking the story is that police

will have to charge offenders, alleged offenders, within 20 days or

release them from prison. There have been cases particularly around long

crime investigations into historic child abuse and also stuff about

journalists with phone hacking where people were kept on bail months and

years and never charged but also having their name besmirched and

unable to work. The issue is is it more fair to people let off

eventually without charge? Or is there a risk you end up letting off

people who are guilty because the police have not within a month found

the evidence. The College of Policing think it is the latter and

dangerous. They give the example of the Soham murders. They say it takes

longer than people think. It is not like CSI, you tap into a computer

and it tells you information. You wonder if it will mean that people

are arrested over and again. It is possible. Some of the journalists

cases, close to our industry, use or careers ruined with no charge, then

reading across into other cases not as well reported, there must be

people whose lives have been ruined because the police have not got

round to finding evidence so it seems a fair balance. The Financial

Times, telling us it has an exclusive interview with President

Trump. If China is not going to solve North Korea, he says, we will.

That headline is on the front pages tonight. Clearly cross about the way

North Korea is behaving. China is one of North Korea's few allies, but

we do not know what sorting North Korea means. No, he is saying if

they don't, we will. As you said, slightly worrying, because I wonder

when things are not going well domestically, sometimes leaders

think, let's look abroad and see what we can do. A pre-emptive

strike, I presume, is one of the things they are thinking about or

covert operations in North Korea. But who would want to go there?

Sabre rattling is one thing but if you say that to North Korea, they

might easily call your bluff. He is said arranged that man it might be

something he decides to do. The missile tests have caused such

tensions on the Korean peninsula, as well. It is not a complete joke of a

nation, they have the ability to fire missiles along way. It is on

the back of comments by the Obama administration, it is not just in

Donald Trump's heads. What might be something Donald Trump came up with

on the spot that if China does not do anything, we will wade in.

Sometimes politicians go into interviews with a single line they

want to put across. If you read the transcript of this interview it gets

the feeling of they said, what will you do if they do not back down?

Well, I will wade in on my own. Which is worrying if that is how

policy is made. Perhaps he just wanted to answer the question.

Terrifying if that is coming about. Setting out his stall before he

meets the Chinese premier? He is meeting him the first time this

week. It is part of what he is trying to do. I worry if in the

Pentagon they say, sorry, what? Did somebody mention, get your boots on,

we are off somewhere. Perhaps he is trying to say he has put pressure on

the Chinese before he meets them. There could be sanctions. China has

failed to step in. In South Korea they have a political crisis and are

less willing to act tough. It is basically down to Mr Trump to work

out what he wants to do. This will not bounce China into doing

anything. They will do something if they want to do it but him having an

exclusive and they are reading the Financial Times of thinking of

course, Donald, we will do what you want us to do. Send them a note and

saying, please stop doing that? We can look at the Times newspaper and

aired a -- air disaster fears over a poor standard of English among

foreign pilots, meaning perhaps communication in the skies when

things get tricky is not as clear as it might be. It is worrying that

this is more than once before we have had pilots... I understood they

double-check and speak carefully in a particular language to ensure if

they do not understand they asked them to repeat it but one assumes if

you are a pilot, you have the same standard in terms of communication,

no matter what country you are from. You would have thought. This implies

not. There is a case where a pilot has gone on the wrong way without

being clearance which the air traffic controller thought the pilot

did not necessarily understand instructions. The main concern is

pilots based overseas are in some way getting around, all being guided

through the language tests. They can fly the plane, the issue is whether

they understand what local controllers are telling them. Shall

we finish with the Express. They love a health story. We are being

told to walk. Obviously not enough doing it. A daily walk, experts tell

20 million lazy Britons to get more exercise. That always goes down

well, to be called a couch potato! The point is simple. The British

Heart Foundation are concerned patients they see do not do any

exercise. This front page could have been run at any point and probably

has been over the last 50 years. It says if you keep walking you will

get fit. If you keep eating healthy food you maybe will have a healthier

life. The moment this breakthrough is the moment the Express will go

out of business. Maybe we need is the Express to remind us. It says in

some regions, the figure is as high as 97% of people being physically

inactive. There are lots of ways we are told we can change that. It is

difficult to acquire new habits and easy to acquire bad ones. Take the

stairs, get off the bus they stop earlier. But the real thing is the

cost of 1.2 billion to the NHS and increasingly we are told we have to

take care of our own health because some of the things we do cost the

NHS so much more. This idea we should do more exercise. 20 minutes,

of daily walking, which I'm sure we all do already? We are doing our

bit. I certainly do. That is because I have a dog and she insists upon

it. We will be back at 11:30pm. You can

also see all the front pages online on the BBC News website. We will be

back in 42 minutes with Jim and Jacqui.