12/05/2017 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 12/05/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Conte. They are champions again. Frank Ross, it is good night.


Welcome to The Papers. We are joined by Steven blush, special


correspondent for the new statesman, and Ian Martin, columnist for The


Times. Welcome to you both. The front pages are dominated by the


cyber attack. Hospitals paralysed after cyber hackers held the NHS to


ransom in an unprecedented global attack. The daily Mirror highlights


A units vehicles and operations cancelled as they say hackers who is


NHS to ransom. Ambience is diverted and staff turning to pen and paper


after computers and phone lines were in lockdown. According to The Times,


patients weekend of chaos as security services hold an


international criminal gang. The Sun reports the statement by Theresa May


the patient records have not been compromised. The Daily Telegraph as


doctors when lives are at risk. The cyber attackers have been linked to


Russia. It carries an interview with Boris Johnson who says Russia might


be attempting to sabotage the general election. The Guardian


suggests up to 40 hospitals in the UK and GP surgeries have been


affected. It reports a political story, quoting from an interview it


has with the deputy leader of Labour, Tom Watson, whose as the


party is determined to turn its poll numbers around. I am sure to put


this spelling mistakes in just the fox me. Let's start with the cyber


attack. The Financial Times, NHS hackers used stolen cyber weapons


from US spy agency. Supposedly this has come from the national security


agency in America. It seems to be something called eternal blue, which


was developed by Kers spies and stolen and has been used to


supercharge the hand of this mysterious kind of hackers. It is a


massive story. It cuts right through the UK general election and is one


of those stories which raises a lot of questions about how prepared the


NHS was, about basic questions about fundamental cyber security, which


the government will be quite nervous about. A lot of experts we have been


speaking to sink the NHS was not the target here. It just got caught up


in this ransomware which was sent out and, unfortunately, it had an


effect on the health service. The big questions which will be raised


is this weapon, built by the US security service and sold online and


then used by hackers. Questions will be raised here, we have known about


this problem for a while. Microsoft has a free patch available to fix


that problem. If it hasn't been installed at the NHS than people


have been lax or you have people in the NHS is still using old operating


systems. 90% of hospitals are using a system which wind was not greeted


new security for 30 years. It is a story of underinvestment and IT


infrastructure and the powers we give to the GCHQ and the NSA to


build weapons like this and with any other weapon, once they are built,


they can be bought and sold by anyone. The Daily Mail sent some


hackers cripple the NHS. Operations were cancelled, ambulances had to be


diverted, but it seems like a lot of staff responded incredibly fast to


try to mitigate and reduce a lot of the impact it could have had. That


is exactly it. There seems to have been a plan, a good contingency plan


in place and it seems to have worked. I think what is not quite


clear, it is not even clear to the government yet, for and what of the


knock-on effects are into next week. I think people will be very tolerant


and patient over the course of the weekend, but we will have to see


when we get a Monday or Tuesday how convincingly this system has coped


and how well the government answers the questions. Why were warnings


ignored? Does the article explain what those warnings were coming


from? I am not sure it does. It is not in the paper. The Guardian have


stuff about warnings. The ex-assume it is about the vulnerability of


older versions of Windows and we have known of these exist in the NHS


because of the lung problem across various governments and different


parties of Whitehall not being able to build its own pay-TV, so the


advice of off-the-shelf, but you have to keep buying them what you


have well-known vulnerabilities and it looks as if that might be the


source of the NHS possible problems in this attack. Depending on which


party you are, it looks as if the NHS is once again not having the


investment it needs. Not the number of doctors and nurses, but the IT


seem to be some suggestions that seem to be some suggestions that


rather basic things which should have been done were not done. That


will come out in the wash and there will be a Parliamentary enquiry and


it is a serious subject. I should point out that it is a global


problem and this has had 74 countries already. Chinese


newspapers are talking about Chinese universities being affected. 60


major health facilities in the US. It is not an exclusively British


problem. In Spain there is a telecommunications company, the


state-owned oil company in Brazil. They are affected as well. Who were


the real target? They were asking for a bit coin as a ransom, if you


want your data back and unencrypted, you have got to pay some money. Very


probably it is getting money, rather than attacking any specific nation


or government. It is an attack of cybercrime, rather than cyber


terrorism. Probably they were just looking to see who out there was


still vulnerable to the eternal blue full mobility and everyone watching


this programme will know that in most offices, computers are replaced


when they break down. Most of us will have ageing computers until


they die. They will be hitting it to see if it works. Hackers hold NHS to


ransom is the headline in the Telegraph. It is so difficult, if


not impossible, to track who is responsible for these attacks. Very


difficult. A global manhunt underway and this is presented very much as


though the experts at GCHQ who are among the best in the field, as


though they are leading the hunt, but I am sure lots of intelligence


agencies will be involved. One practical concern that the Telegraph


raises is just this question of medical records. That includes


things like cancer diagnosis. Does the system have the ability to


update the data that has lost that has been recently collected and


people will want urgent answers on this in the next few days. Hopefully


it has all been backed up somewhere. Stay with the Telegraph. Boris warns


of Putin meddling in an election. Some interesting quotes. He covers a


lot of ground in this article. He talks about the fact that Putin


would be delighted with the Corbyn Wen, the threat of cyber hacking and


the idea of the election is not a foregone conclusion. He talks about


it being a realistic possibility that Putin will be involved in the


election and talks about seeing it in America and France. There is a


question to be had about whether it is a realistic chance in this


election, as the election is not particularly close. To be honest, it


is hard to see who the candidate Putin wouldn't be happy with in this


election is. Jeremy Corbyn is very sceptical about American


intervention abroad, Putin isn't that. Theresa May wants to take this


out of the EU with what looks like a hard Exeter, Putin is quite into


that as well. That isn't actually a foreign policy concern for the


Kremlin. Vladimir Putin does have the sense of humour, but I don't


think even he thinks he would stand a chance of making Jeremy Corbyn


Prime Minister. It is an indication of how desperate the Conservatives


are to hype up this idea of Corbyn as a threat, because that is the


biggest threat, the idea of people thinking the election is already


settled, that the Tories have a large majority test and. The concern


is some people might not vote. Boris talking about the risk of the


Russians subverting British democracy, which sounds rather


unlikely. There are figures here from a survey of 40,000 voters by


Lord Ashcroft which suggests an enormous landslide victory, if that


poll is correct. It suggested a majority of 162 to 180 seats for the


Tories. Bigger than Tony Blair's record majority in 1997, slightly


bigger than the polls. In terms of the liver of food dissolving outside


the cities, kind of what we would expect. Let's look at the Guardian.


Don't turn may into Thatcher once Tom Watson. Above that, a man


inspecting the bottom of the bus. Theresa May is looking for the C


word. He means conservative. They are not mentioning Conservative,


they are mentioning Theresa May. Tom Watson is essentially saying this is


a coded leadership version of what Ben Bradshaw and various other MPs


have been saying. Vote Labour to prevent a massive landslide and try


to rescue some seats. He is warning that it will be very difficult to


hold the Tories to account in the Commons if they have a majority of


the order Margaret Thatcher had. It was 140 odd sheets, 100 seats in


1983. It is fascinating to see this. The Conservatives themselves almost


can't believe it. You see the power of this brand, whether you are


sceptical about Theresa May or not. That picture you have added there,


they would Conservatives is in tiny letters on the door on the side of


the bus and the rest of it is hoped on Theresa May, her personality, her


signature and the Tories are astonished by how well she has


connected. There is a question of whether that will endure after the


election. For the moment, she allows them to push into all expected


territory. Jeremy Corbyn are talking about not being a pacifist and would


use military action as a last resort and it would be bomb first talk


litter pickers in his view that hasn't worked. That message will


appeal to people, would it? That is their hope. Part of the context of


that speech is the Labour MPs, Labour candidates, on the doorstep


are worried that they don't have a strong line on security. One thing


Jeremy was trying to do was think I am not a pacifist, there are


situations in which I would use military force to cauterise that


particular one. There is fatigued with foreign adventures, but people


regard Theresa May as safe and stable, to use her own message. We


shouldn't really keep repeating it? Should we? In any case, people


regard Theresa May as someone who would do that anyway. That message


would cut through and as they turn people around on Theresa May. The


Conservatives can always say they don't have a coherent policy on


security and defence. They want to rethink everything. The lines are so


easy for Conservative Central office to draft you might suspect Jeremy


Corbyn was a Tory agent. It is that easy on defence, patriotism,


pacifism and all the rest of it. It is too easy for the Tories. What you


are about to see and what happened today and is reflected in this


coverage, the Tories are going on the attack now and using her


personally to attack Corbyn and that is using the trust she has the


hammer home the point. It is only just begun. They will turn up the


volume. Let's finish with the times and a picture of the Chelsea


manager, Antonio Conte, looking rather pleased after Chelsea won the


Premier League by beating West Brom 1-0 at the hawthorns. You are not


rejoicing around this table. I am not a football fan, but these


Chelsea chaps seem to have one and well done. I am an Arsenal fan and


very unhappy. Only one year ago, is it really a year ago, I was


celebrating the fact that Leicester City had won. That was a romantic


fairy tale. Just cast your mind back. That's it for The Papers


denied. On the front pages are online on the BBC website. You can


watch the programme on the BBC I


Download Subtitles