21/05/2017 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 21/05/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



be talking about a novel, Peculiar Ground, said in a country house that


becomes a stage for a gripping drama stretching across three centuries.


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


Finally, I get to do some work tonight!


With me are the parliamentary journalist Tony Grew


entertainment editor at Huffington Post UK.


Nice to have you both here, coordinated outfits all-round! Do


not read anything into it! We will start with the Financial Times.


Claims that Theresa May failed to consult


some of her most senior colleagues on manifesto plans


The Times also goes for social care, saying that the planned changes


could be wrecked by poorly performing local authorities.


The Metro also leads with the general election,


reporting that the Tories are now looking to attack Jeremy Corbyn


after polls showed their lead over labour being cut in half.


The Telegraph reports that Jeremy Corbyn is at the centre


of a growing row after they say he repeatedly refused to condemn


the actions of republican terrorists in Ireland.


that Britain is set to enjoy a blast of summer with ten days of sunshine.


Do we believe it?! Let's make a start with the Financial Times,


senior Tories were kept in the dark over May's dementia tax, it says,


Prime Minister failed to consult colleagues. She has at times been


accused of being very presidential, keeping everything tightly wrapped.


She has a coterie, which I am reliably informed amounts to about


three in the inner sanctum, but obviously both Boris Johnson, the


king of love, and Damian Green today sort of hesitated when they pressed


on weather they had been consulted, and Damian Green is actually


entirely responsible for this art works and pensions, but they refused


to say weather they had been informed. I interviewed Iain Duncan


Smith about this ahead of the manifesto launch, and he said, don't


ask me for detail, I haven't got a clue! And in the pasty had been very


much involved. Years a backbench MP, so I wouldn't speak to them about


these issues, despite his expertise, but this is an interesting move from


Theresa May. We haven't seen an election pitch like this, she is


basically saying, we will probably have the raise your taxes and make


you pay for social care if you are a property owner. You could call and


brave, or you could see it as a different way of approaching things.


The interesting detail here, two things, first, that the Prime


Minister's chief of staff, one of the two brains that she's incredibly


reliant on and trust implicitly, put this in the manifesto, against the


advice of other senior people. Apparently it was put in at the last


minute by the head of staff. So that leads to this issue of a Tory


candidate saying it is playing badly with voters because people are


concerned, they do not know if it affects them. That is a serious


problem in a general election campaign, candidate on the doorstep


or cannot explain it or do not fully understand of themselves. That is a


significant mistake that gives Labour a chance to present


themselves, ironically, as the party of pensioners. Now, I would say, for


a lot of people who cannot even afford a house, this is like an


interesting conversation, you have a massive asset but you are not


required to cash in the asset when you're costing thousands of pounds


in care. I think what surprised and aggravated quite a lot of people we


have spoken to since the manifesto was launched was this idea that


there would be a cap on ?76,000, nobody would pay more than that, and


that seems to have been accepted, but now all bets are off, you have a


new election campaign trying to get a new mandate for something


different. Completely turning the sons upside down, making this a


ceiling. It is interesting that the two people asked about this, Damian


Green saying this is locked down, Boris Johnson saying it may yet be


tweaked. It is a complete U-turn on previous policies, but Damian Green


saying that is because there is a way of improving it, and the


emphasis is on making it seem there are two younger generation. Even if


they were to be elected, they would still have to get it through, and


some of their own backbenchers might rebel against it? Oblak it depends


on the size of the majority, every MP standing on this manifesto, you


can't come back afterwards and say, I don't like that part of it. It


depends on the size of the mandate, but I don't think she's going to


back down on this. Boris is being Boris. The major U-turn was over


national insurance contributions, but all bets are off now, this is


Theresa May's manifesto. The Daily Telegraph as a couple of stories,


Corbyn engulfed in IRA furore, Labour leader refuses to condemn the


group. And it has links to a hard left magazine as well, where is this


all from? The stuff about the magazine which celebrated the


Brighton bombing and advocated IRA victory has been talked about


before, but this was raised during Corbyn's leadership. This is a man


who repeatedly gave positive publicity to senior figures in Sinn


Fein IRA. He was not meeting loyalist terrorist Connie was


basically a cheerleader for republicanism,, and not just


republicanism but violent republicanism. He is trying to spin


it as if he was involved in the peace process, which is disingenuous


at best. People like Mo Mowlam argued with murderers without


bodyguards. Now that party is led by a man who evades answers when asked


directly to criticise terrorism and terrorists. These were people who,


when he was supporting them, they were murdering people live in the


streets of the city he represented. And for you, there's nothing in the


fact that it be standing on a platform with them, he is trying to


engage with them? Absolutely not, he believed in IRA victory, he believes


they can impose a military solution, drive the Brits out, drive the Brits


out of Northern Ireland. You wonder for how many people this... Although


we all lived through it, and it is difficult for young people who do


not member living through the Troubles, as we always call them,


how divisive, of course, it was. But it is, thankfully, quite some time


ago, things have moved on. I'm sure people will say it is not perfect,


maybe never will be, but how much of an election issue will this be? It


is difficult to tell. Everybody has their pressure points, and as you


say, perhaps because there is relief all round, in the past, in terms of


the Troubles, and Tony has much more intimate knowledge of this, but


Theresa May this week talked about fox hunting. I know people who were


up in arms about this, it is a deal-breaker. Everybody has their


turn, either their Achilles' heel or something they feel most


passionately about. Corbyn has so many things coming at him, I don't


know if this is going to prove to be the defined in point in the


campaign, in the election, but he will certainly spend the next


24-hour news cycle having to somehow dodge more of these questions, I


imagine. It is probably something he could do without. As you say, it has


come up time and time again at various points, this is not the


first time. And it is not the last time, wait until the last week of


the campaign, the Tories will be hitting this hard, he is


unpatriotic, he does not support our Armed Forces, the nuclear deterrent,


and he supported the IRA against British troops. He has said he would


take military action as a last resort. He may as well promise a


unicorn, he is never going to get into Downing Street. The polls have


changed quite significantly. There has been a narrowing. About ten


points ahead at the moment. The Conservatives, approximately. Second


story, Facebook won't censor abuse and violence, something else that


keeps coming up, this refusal to take down images which many people


find to be completely unacceptable. I mean, the headline is that they


have officially announced off what has happened is that the Guardian


has uncovered a bunch of internal ethical guidelines that Facebook


shares amongst its staff, and there are not that many people, for me the


lede is that only 4005 and the people are moderating more than 2


billion accounts across the world, a staggeringly small amount of people


charged with this huge responsibility. They must be


overwhelmed every time they get to work. And they have said it is


because they don't wish to censor their users. This is all very noble,


putting freedom of speech so high, but once again, we have touched on


this before, Facebook and others identify themselves as platform


providers, but there are increasingly influential publishers,


they are the biggest machines of this in the world, and when you hear


that some of the things include videos of abortions, as long as


there is no nudity, this is unspeakable. I feel like the line


has been crossed, they don't seem to think it as yet. I don't know what


it would take. The rules about what broadcasters can show is different,


we show much less than some parts of the world, but this is beyond what


we would ever imagine being able to put out. As usual, I am frustrated


by the Government's querulous approach, we are going to ask


Facebook to explain this. You are a platform provider, let's set up a


newsagent called a platform provider and start selling pornography to


children, the police would be around quickly. You need to establish that


they have extreme material that they are posting, you arrest senior


executives under the same laws that you would arrest anyone else. But


can you do that given that it is an international operation? They


operate under UK law, of course they can do it. In this piece, it does


say that Theresa May is promising that one of her next things, her big


projects, is to impose legislation on these people. We already know


there is an office of instruments talking about personal data, this


comes on the back of Mark Zuckerberg sort of tacitly acknowledging that


he is in some way responsible for fake news, and he is now sharing


tips for spotting fake news. That is as far as he has got. I feel like


walls are being broken down with this. Facebook like many and they


don't like being controlled by governments, and that some point


those two are going to collide. Church of England Barnes heavenly


17% returns put it among the top performance. -- funds. How are they


doing so well? Apparently, they are going against all trends, they have


very active financial managers who are looking seriously at headlines,


running in the opposite direction. Apps we should all take a leaf out


of their book. I love reading the Financial Times, a sentence here, an


investor remains a support of active management at a time of massive


inflows into passive index tracking funds, I don't understand it at all!


Foreign-language! Cyclical, play the long game, that is what it means. If


you are taking positions counter to industry trends, you might have to


play the long game, but we will both have to rush tomorrow to see what is


in their portfolio. I suppose you need someone who understands that


sort of talk! It is a difficult one, though, isn't it? If you are in


pursuit of wealth. It is a ?7.9 billion investment fund that


contribute about 15% of their overall ministry costs, so things


like looking after cathedrals and things like that. So less than I


thought, I thought they were making more money from the stock market,


but most of the revenue comes from people putting money in the


collection plate. No matter the size of the congregation, they are doing


all right. Let's look at the Times, air pollution can deprive you of a


good night's sleep, barely a day goes by where pollution is not an


issue for one reason or another. We look at it as a background issue,


but 40,000 deaths a year, you know, and I think about how this country


dealt with jinked driving, for example, which was another massacre


on the roads. The Government intervened, culture change occurred,


and road deaths are down significantly. I think this is a


hidden killer that we just accept as the price of living in polluted


cities. I am not surprised at this, what surprised me is that the


average age of the people involved was 63. So it has not been spread


across an age range, it is focusing slightly older. But of course the


people who actually suffer the most from air pollution are children.


Yes. Their little lungs are the ones that really suffer. And there are so


many initiatives that could be on the way, these cars scrappage,


having to pay congestion charge. Yes, and we know that these targets


are continuously failing to be met. Elution is one of the big villains,


it is up there with every week, we have a new villain in town, sugar is


the latest. But pollution has always been around. I went to a


nutritionist who told me, forget your diet, you are fighting a losing


battle when you live in the Thames Estuary, because it taps into your


immune system, allergies, your ability to process even good food.


You need to get out of towns and get into clean air. On a bicycle! We are


going to finish with the i, because Carolinas here, she can tell us all


about it. In the culture section, Twin Peaks is back, what is it all


about? It first came to the screens 27 years ago, I was out of the


country and I missed it, but I know it was a big deal. What is


interesting is that there is a whole generation who have forgotten all


who will never know what Twin Peaks was about, and they are saying, what


is it all about? But it did Harold this golden age of television that


we continue to celebrate over and over again. -- Herald. For every


auto creating these programmes, these long, corrugated narrative arc


series, they'll credit David Lynch and Twin Peaks for pioneering what


was possible. It was a bit weird, wasn't it? It didn't make any sense!


It was great television, wasn't it, Caroline, like nothing we have seen


before? Obviously I was only a young child when it first came out! But I


saw it later, it was baffling, I somebody in biology class join a


diagram, who was doing what, because it was incredibly confusing. But it


was television like we have never seen before, I am really looking


forward to seeing what they do. It is a revival, and what David Lynch


probably uniquely has managed to do is recruit a very impressive number


of the original cast members, so unfortunately the log Lady is no


longer with us, but she did film her scenes before she died, in 2015, so


she will be back on screen, along with some other strange folk. It


really said some careers allied, didn't it? Kyle McLachlan is back as


Agent Cooper, he will probably be ordering some damn fine coffee. Some


famous faces, a lot of people are writing articles, where are they


now? The wackiest characters countdown, they are going to keep us


imprint for a few weeks yet. You have to watch the first one first,


or I will be even more confused! That is it... Where are we?! That is


it for the Papers, but Tony and Caroline will be back at 11:30pm.


Don't forget, all the front pages are on the BBC News website, you can


read a review, that is seven days a week on the BBC website. You can see


us there, posted shortly after we have finished. And now it is time


for Meet The Author. A great house


with a great wall around it. We are in mid-17th century England


at a time of religious strife when many lives are touched


by danger and intrigue. Then we are in the same house three


centuries later in the grip


Download Subtitles