28/04/2017 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 28/04/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



the nuclear threat that North Korea may pose. We will bring you more


details later. We hope to speak to our correspondent in Washington at


11 o'clock. Hello and welcome to our look ahead


to what the Papers will be With me are Kevin Schofield, Editor


of Politics Home and Alex Deane, Tomorrow's front pages,


starting with... 'Cover-up let rogue surgeon play


God' is the Telegraph's headline after the conviction of Ian


Paterson. The Mirror calls Paterson,


the butcher surgeon, suggesting at least a thousand women


could have affected. Meanwhile, the Mail asks why did


the NHS fail to stop him. The paper also has


an exclusive interview Sergeant Alexander Blackman,


known as Marine A, who left The FT leads on the figures showing


the UK economy grew by less than was expected in the first three


months of this year. The Independent online


focuses on Donald Trump We will start with this case


regarding the breast surgeon Ian Paterson. It is in so many of The


Papers as you might expect. Here is how the meal is reporting it. I'd


had the NHS go to stop the Butcher surgeon? You could have me as many


as 1000 women. There was a man who was one of the patients in this case


in Nottingham. It is a staggering story when you think that doctors,


we are told, are taught to do no harm. Of course, they should seek to


do no harm, but surgery often involves doing what would otherwise


be sold, or even grievous bodily harm in order to do better for the


patient on the table in front of you. If a body of your fellow


surgeons thinks that what you do is write, or is at least justifiable,


then there is emerging of terror that allows people to continue to do


what they do. It is very difficult actually in law to prove that


someone did something not just wrong, but to the criminal standard


where they are qualified as a doctor where they are qualified as a doctor


and they are conducting an operation on a cable and I think that is why,


especially with someone who has a forceful personality and has an


ability to convince people around him that he is seeking to do the


wrong, but this wrong. There are two wrong, but this wrong. There are two


things permitted from out of this. The first is that no one is


infallible and surgeons should be challenged just like the rest of us


and the second, which might be a mundane point, but is behind your


introduction, this is not just a woman's issue and if one good thing


can come of this is that men often face this kind of breast cancer


tissue, or just issue and should be no more shy about than women. Some


of these women, obviously in a very fond of state. The patients, we


should say. They are desperate to be curate, desperate to be helped. You


take the advice you are given. If you put yourself in the position of


these per women, they are sitting on the other side of the table having


been given this terrific news, the worst news you can get and you are


naturally inclined, I would suggest, to believe the surgeon, qualified


and experienced, you have got to take at his word. If you're unable


to trust someone in that position then who can you trust? Imagine that


someone is in that kind of position and genuinely believes that he or


she is doing the right thing when he or she is not. It is very difficult


to prove to the criminal standard that they meant to do harm in that


situation. The Daily Express said the cancer doctor played God. We do


not know why he was motivated to do this, that is some suggestion it


could have been financial. He maintains that the operations were


justified and he did nothing wrong. While we can do is speculate. One of


the things he was doing was seeking to preserve a position of power. He


was seeking to preserve a cleavage whilst removing the north part of


breasts, but seeking to prefers an upper part which, luckily, turned


cancerous itself. Even the thing he thought he was doing that was right


seemed to be dangerous to the patient, even though he was


conducting what was apparently unnecessary operations. He was asked


many times by his managers to stop doing that and wouldn't and carried


on. The question is, how did it continue, ordered the NHS feel to


stop them? If he was being wound up by his superiors on numerous


occasions flickering out these unnecessary procedures, why was he


allowed to continue practising? The daily Mirror says he had 1000


victims, a case which involved under 20 patients, but there are many more


are waiting to see the outcome. For the conditions we have spoken to,


they have said the checks and balances and the safeguards are so


much different now compared to when he was doing his operations. These


cases did back sometime. As you rightly applied, it would be crazy


to try a case involving hundreds of victims. You choose certain sets of


victims, were alerted victims, and he tried the case on those specific


examples. It seems to me that, even if the system has moved on from them


and these historic cases have a different kind of circumstances now


to the ones carried out now, we can still learn something from a culture


that allows someone to carry out operations which, on the face of it,


seem unnecessary, but positively harmful to the patients concerned.


Let's move on. We will be the opposition said Tim Farren, leader


of the Liberal Democrats. If you look at page seven, it talks about


his hopes, particularly in Scotland, for their success in the forthcoming


general election. I cannot find anything he says we will be the


opposition though, can you? It is an eye-catching headline. It is quite a


bold claim, but I think the closest he comes, when he read the story


inside is I want to be the Leader of the Opposition Verstappen is


slightly different. That is an understandable ambition for any


party of opposition, even one with only nine MPs, but I guess it is


looking at the state of the Labour Party, looking at the opinion polls


and saying, we could get increased representation. The idea they would


be timid opposition is pretty fanciful. Labour is going to be done


and the Liberal Democrats will go up, but that does not equal the


Liberal Democrats being the party of opposition. My advice to Tim Farren


would be to keep your head down. I mean it to be patronising. Every


time his personality has emerged on his party brand, but that is his


views on sexuality, or is broader political and social views, he has


proved less attractive than his party brand. That is why keep your


head down. I don't just minutes patronisingly to him, though it is,


but I think, furthermore... He ought, properly, to look to the


political tide, which is broadly in his favour. He has had a big


increase in donations and membership. If you get more than 22


MPs he will begin on, but that will not above the Labour Party. If there


is anything like this in his rhetoric, he should turn it down.


The point is that, even the Labour Party for, if it is in line with the


fallen, it would be significant. But reflects well on the liberal


Democrats. That was tied up with Jeremy Corbyn, so the tide may not


go in Tim Farren's flavour for long. If there is nothing I could in this


story, he should not be so hubristic.


Let's look at the Telegraph. Germany admitted austerity would destroy


Greece says Arafat is. This is the German finance minister suggesting


that he would not have agreed to the deal that Greece had to take. The


Telegraph has got an interview and extracts from Yanis Varoufakis's


memoir, in which it turns out he was secretly recording conversations


when he was great finance minister when Greece was at risk of tumbling


out of the Euro and had to accept very harsh austerity measures in


return for a bailout and he said that the German finance minister


admitted at the time privately, not for public discussion, that if I was


you I would not sign this day because this is all about national


pride as much as I think that you are being asked to sell your country


down the river. It is quite an amazing story. It backs up what a


lot of people were saying that Greece were made an example of and


it shows, the point the Telegraph were making, it shows how Germany


will perhaps behave during the Brexit discussions when push comes


to shove. They will be holding the whip and as far as the EU are


concerned. Germany did make an example of Greece, but on the other


hand, they should never have allowed the Greeks in in the first place. In


an easy and economic environment, the Greeks should have been able to


come out, the value and they can't because they are in a common


currency that is not governed by economics, it is governed by


politics and that's what this revelation shows. The Financial


Times. Speaking of Brexit, we cannot go through a review without it. Work


the talk. They pressured for smooth Brexit for Japanese groups. What a


seeming like smooth Brexit? It implies the need for a transitional


arrangement to lessen uncertainty, Japan really has three major kinds


of interest in the UK. The first is financial. There are Japanese banks.


The second is automotive. There are many examples of that. It is


manufacturing broadly. All of them want a sense that they can't be here


in the short to medium term without any real uncertainty. They want not


just the two years that we will presumably be negotiating with the


European partners, but they want a sense they will be transitional


agreements and arrangements of difficulty on the two years they can


have certainty about factories and their presence. Whether that be


passport for financial institutions or tariffs imposed on manufacturing.


That is not just down to Theresa May, the smoothness of how it


happens, there are 27 other countries involved. As the promised


said last night in Leeds, the other 27 will be ganging up against us


because it is not in their interest to give us everything we want. There


will have to be give and take. If we decided to be awkward, it takes two


to tango. If I decide who's in the wrong direction it would be real. It


is not an unreasonable perspective to take. It is a surprise and one


from a nation whose diplomacy and the 20th century and onwards has


been small target. Let's look at the front of the Independent. Trump's


first 100 days. This is a fabulous photograph of him sitting at the


desk of the Oval office, which the Independent has always been good at.


As he delivered on his promises? He thinks he has and has been speaking


to the national rifle Association. They were big supporters of him. His


100 days have flown in, it has to be said. For a guy who accuses the


media of fake news, which is one of the most horrible terms that have


ever entered the political lexicon, for him to say that his first 100


days have been a success is fake news. That is not, by any stretch of


the imagination, his first 100 days have not been a success. His


successors -- his supporters think he has been a success. If you judge


it by the economic performance of the United States, there was


widespread speculate in the Trump won the election the economy would


thank. Instead, after an afternoon of fluctuation on the market, the US


economy picked up significantly after Trump won last year and has


continued to perform well subscribed to that. He was handed a pretty good


economic situation. You can only look at the time frame he has been


in. The economy was growing at an atomic comment on when he took over.


It had been a remarkable turnaround if he turned around. I was quite at


a different point, which is one of the qualities this president has


shown, which might surprise people, is his ability to change his mind.


He said it was obsolete. Even without the minister and as you


convince them otherwise. He said he would pull out of Nafta, the


Mexicans and the Canadians made strong representations to him and


he, admitted it via a tweet, which might not be presidential, but he


indicated he was willing to reconsider his position. I think it


is a strong thing to be able to say I was wrong about something and I


think that is something that, in leadership, we undervalue. Shelby D


sports story? There is a mass of boxing match in Wembley tomorrow


night. Klitschko versus Joshua. One is 47, 41, the other is 27 and they


are both very big man. I would not want to take a punch from either of


them. Klitschko, he is a class act. It is an unpopular view in Britain.


Joshua is a national hero, Olympic gold medallist. He is to stone


heavier than his normal fighting with and as Lennox Lewis who fought


his last fight a lot heavier against Klitschko's elder brother would


point out, that is a strange position to go into a fight. My


instinct is Klitschko will screw them. I hope not. Of course I cheer


for the Brit, but my instinct is Klitschko is a classy act, a


Conservative boxer who can stand off. All the pressure is on Joshua.


Support Joshua but have a fiver on Klitschko. It is a golden era for


Bush boxing for the first time in 20 years. You will be watching? I will


be watching, definitely. Don't forget you can see the front


pages of the papers online It's all there for you,


seven days a week at bbc.c.uk forward slash papers and if you miss


the programme any evening you can


Download Subtitles