24/06/2017 The Papers


No need to wait until tomorrow morning 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 24/06/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



On Meet the Author, my guest is bestselling crime writer Martina


Cole. We will talk about her latest novel the Betrayal 25 years after


her first, Dangerous Lady. who's deputy head of sport


at The Sun, and the journalist


and broadcaster Rachel Shabi. We start with tomorrow's


front pages. The Observer leads with fire safety


in schools, saying proposals to relax standards


are to be dropped by ministers. Prince Harry dominates the front


page of the Mail of Sunday, saying he considered


quitting his royal role, Blackmail fears after MPs hit


by cyber attack. The cyber attack is also the main


story on the Sunday Times, who report there was fury


at the time it took for the incident And the Express leads


with an image of Jeremy Corbyn, saying he ignored Armed Forces Day


invitations to appear Lots of concerns over the safety of


high rise buildings to the fore. The Observer leads with that - ministers


in panic over fire safety at schools. Assist guests and they


would relax standards to save money but now they have thought better of


it -- a suggestion. It appears to be a plan that was due to be in


fermented post-election with the Department of education. --


implemented. However, the events of ten days ago seemed to have focused


minds. According to the draft guidelines, school buildings do not


need to be completely protected to achieve a reasonable standard of


life safety, so it would no longer include an expectation that most new


school buildings would be fitted with them. Unsurprisingly, things


have changed somewhat. Yes, no one can afford to take that risk, can


they, and that's where the tension rises between the cost it's going to


take and the amount it's going to cost and the requirement to keep


everybody safe? Yeah, and this is what the story on the front page of


the Observer is pointing out, that this U-turn over the fire safety


proposals is signalling a shift in the government, so moving away from


prioritising cost-cutting to prioritising health and safety,


which is of course what you'd hope they'd have done to begin with. But


it does... This whole issue of regulations around fire safety,


around building materials, it does shine a light on what has been


conservative practice for some years. This is the government that


under Cameron was gloating about cutting red tape because there were


ridiculous health and safety measures that were getting in the


way of companies making money. This is what they were talking about a


few years ago. That was very much a line they were pursuing, and, you


know, things like that do have consequences, and tragically in this


case. If we look back, there will be potentially many, many years where


successive governments of all colours will not have necessarily


spent the money on these buildings that they might have. We've all seen


for many years these tower blocks all over the country. We are


talking, at the moment, 34 blocks in 17 areas. That's 600 blocks that


still have to be tested and there are concerns about those. This is a


systemic failure, this is not one government, one council. This is


over a period of time. I accept what you're saying because their result


that talk about red tape and all that nonsense... That was under


Cameron. Nevertheless this is a wider issue because in Camden I saw


they put out a press release a couple of days ago where they


thought a certain type of cladding could be put on the buildings, and


they've now tested it and found out it was an inferior, cheaper version


of the cladding that they didn't know had been put on the buildings.


So is this contractual, the local government or councils themselves


not doing sufficient testing? What we do know is that this is going to


be a hugely expensive, frighteningly expensive issue now for government,


because local government simply can't afford to find the money for


this. It hasn't got the money to pay for these revamps and retests. Where


does the money come from and what other budgets will be found? This


was never even considered as a concept until ten days ago. That's


how huge the impact is, because this will have an impact for years and


years to come. The Sunday Telegraph is talking about another problem,


not just cladding, but this time installation, which is the real


threat, safety experts are warning, and they are quoting fire safety


experts in this, a man in charge of the Tall Buildings Fire Safety


Network, saying this material should be removed from all of those, and


that material inside properties. This is material behind the


panelling, so still cladding, but behind the panels. It's not the


visible stuff. Yes, and that's the stuff that is highly flammable. What


they are saying is, why would you test the coating, the panel, and not


the material that is behind it, that is the insulating material? So we


are all, every piece of this points to just more and more potential


problems and risks in buildings that are being used, and buildings that


people are living in, and, yeah, it does point to something that does


need to be co-ordinated on a national scale, because the


consequences are huge. Some aspects of safety and regulations are not


just national, are they? They are European Union regulations as well.


So we are supposed to have got safer and safer with increasing


regulations. We have been told that some of the materials used in the UK


are legal in the UK but not in Europe, not in the United States.


Are our lives worth less than those elsewhere? It's astonishing. It's


also surprising given we are signed up, still, the regulations that have


been, that we've agreed to, with the rest of Europe, that we don't seem


to observe the same regulations. It is surprising, but then it isn't


when you look at this culture of seeing red tape is annoying and


getting in the way and something we have to find a way to navigate


around, which has been the political culture here for quite some time.


Shall we move on to politics? In its purest form! The Telegraph again.


Tory plot to skip toxic generation and install younger face is next


leader. Another headline Theresa May won't want to hear, I'm sure.


Wondering how long she has got. So the Conservatives, both MPs and


Conservative donors, have decided that their toxicity might skip a


gene, skip a generation, rather, so they've decided that the Boris


Johnsons and the Davis Daviss had had their day, and they need the


younger faces of the party to restore them to their former glory,


so they are looking at what they described as a golden generation,


which I didn't know was that thing in the Conservative and - apparently


it is - and it's the 2010 intake with people like Boris Johnson's


brother, Joe. Their arm or Johnson is in the fold! This -- there are


more Johnsons. The cross that has been hung on the neck of England


football teams for 20 years - I think if you'd said a month ago that


Jeremy Corbyn would be unquestionably the dominant force in


the Labour Party without any threat to his position, that Vince Cable,


who wasn't even in the House of Commons, would be the next Liberal


Democrat leader, and that the Tories would be fighting like ferrets in a


sack with the Prime Minister clearly on her last legs - nobody would have


believed it. And yet you've got this ludicrous concept of the Young Turks


now trying to fight for prominence within the Conservative. You've got


all these people - a year ago, Stephen Crabb was standing for Prime


Minister. Goodness me, how could we forget? He is only in his 40s. He is


passe already! That's why we love politics and working on stories like


this, isn't it? It's that it happens so quickly. It is the speed, that's


it. I always love the next Prime Minister label. Speaking of


politicians who risen from, well, difficult times, ministers want


Spreadsheet Phil as next Prime Minister! The Chancellor, in case


you didn't know. Clearly there is a rift inside the Conservative to.


They are all united in not wanting to reason and that she is toxic, and


her brand is irredeemably damaged -- do not want Theresa May to stay. Of


course there's a section the party that is a bit more remain-y and


backs Philip Hammond. There is a quote that the former Chancellor


believes he is equipped for the job because, if Theresa May could be


Prime Minister, so could he! Which is one way to look at things, but it


does in one way shine a light on this incredible crisis going on. Do


you really believe that Philip Hammond, who clearly has got an


animosity, we can say, towards Theresa May, given what's gone on in


the last month, would think about coming in for two years, go through


the hard yards of Brexit negotiations alongside David Davis


and say, right, I've now steered this country through these choppy


waters, and I'm going to give it all away? I've gone past the idea of


those two working together on anything frankly. I can't imagine


that in any scenario. Imagine them job sharing as Prime Minister? I'm


going to look, just for balance, of course, back at the Observer, and


Jeremy Corbyn - I don't know if I can find my copy of it. Jeremy


Corbyn with microphone. He tells Glastonbury, build bridges, not


walls. There he was, Martin, on the main Pyramid Stage. It is truly


remarkable that this fellow, who, for much of his political existence


was a voice in the wilderness - he was a prophet without honour in any


land, let alone his own. And now he is a mess I nick figure with banners


for him at Glastonbury? -- messianic figure. He has become the political


zeitgeist, the spirit of the aged in a way that no one could really have


foreseen, and his voice has a degree of resonance, quite clearly, with an


awful lot of young people. But how tricky time is he going to have when


it comes to the nature of Brexit? Given that many who are Labour


voters opted to leave that many young people who are now turning


towards Labour would like to stay, and we've now got beneath this the


unions saying, we need a soft Brexit. He's going to disappoint


somebody, isn't he? It's interesting to me that the minute we talk about


Jeremy Corbyn being incredibly popular, a political and cultural


phenomenon of the likes of which we have not seen - whatever your


opinion, you cannot look at this and say it's not something extraordinary


that's happening, his capacity to connect with people in this way will


stop and the minute we talk about that, we immediately talk about


things that might derail it, as opposed to trying to understand why


it is happening in the first place, and that's because whatever he is


saying, the vision of this country that he is offering, which is


collectivism in the face of rampant individualism, a vision of is a


different kind of politics to the one we've had for so many decades,


that's been quite ravaging, that's created these huge divides in


society, that has brought upon a crisis in the welfare state - you


know, the minute you have somebody like Jeremy Corbyn saying that in a


political capacity, people respond to it, because it resonates. But he


still has to deal with the issue of Brexit because labour is split as


much as the Tories are. Yes, but the overarching theme in context of


framework within which that will happen is a very changed framework.


He has managed to shift politics and the framework of our discussion to


the left in a really significant way. It was mentioned, 50 senior


Labour MPs, and we saw the list of them, you know - they are still to a


degree and oppositionist wing within the PLP, and they will represent the


majority view within that Parliamentary party as well. There


has been criticism that he didn't go to Armed Forces Day as well. Just


put that in very quickly because some papers are taking exception to


that. The Mail on Sunday. Quick comment from both of you. I wanted


out, says Harry, the reluctant Prince, saying he considered giving


up his royal role. It's a very interesting and brave thing for him


to say. I think, given the knowledge of the crisis that was caused to his


grandmother, she wouldn't take kindly to this. His


great-grandmother his grandmother's background... The reason she became


Queen was because her dad had to become king. It's about duty, isn't


it? It's about duty, but I think Prince Harry and his honesty over a


range of things is refreshing, and has kind of created a much different


image of the Royal family. I was just about to say, Martin has done


his conveyor belt of papers. Never let us down.


Coming up next it's Meet the Author.


Download Subtitles