29/06/2017 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 29/06/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



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


With me are Tim Stanley, lead writer at The Daily Telegraph,


and Jessica Elgot, Political Correspondent


Tomorrow's front pages starting with.


welcome to you both. The front pages... We're not doing them, we


are so short a time we're going straight on. The Metro is where we


begin. Squeaky bum time. That takes hand-picking. Prime Minister clings


to power implying it was a bit nip and tuck from Theresa May today


because of her lack of majority. I'm impressed by this because it managed


to combine two stories in one. One story is the purchasing of DUP


support so the government giving ?33 per taxpayer in order to get the


support they need in order to get the Queen's speech voted through


which happened today by a margin of 223 -- 323-309. Essentially that is


the story, they have paid off the DUP and because they have support


they now have a agenda. But it has exposed how things are going was


back in the Metro says Theresa May squeaked through the speech and the


nature is everyone will be from now on. This is the best it gets for


Theresa May. This is all of the Conservative MP votes, no rebels and


all of the DUP members. Every vote will be this close. These are the


types of things the DUP said yes we will supported that they cannot be


sure if they get around to anything as? It covers finance, security, a


confidence motion, Brexit legislation so the very basic start


of the daily life of the government. That could continue but other things


could be disagreed upon and we should listen to save the DUP has


forced a U-turn on things like means testing, the Winter fuel allowance


and the triple lock and pensions. And of course as we will discuss


with the abortion amendment, the price has already shot up a little


bit because the government has caved on one other aspect. Why don't we


talk about that? Abortion concession had soft Tory revolt on the Queen 's


speech, this is an amendment tabled by the Labour MP Stella Crecy.


Normally amendments like this on specific issues usually fall by the


wayside and I get support there was something about this that really


caught the attention of MPs. I think it is because women in Northern


Ireland if they come over here for an abortion they have to pay for it


even though the UK taxpayers pay for the NHS but because it is so


restricted in Northern Ireland most of them will travel over here if


they want to have a termination. Most MPs, most Tory MPs said they


had no idea this was the case. It seemed like a really strange


anomaly. It is bizarre they didn't know because there are certain


things about Northern Ireland which set it very much a part in


legislative terms for the rest of the UK. But the key thing they


didn't know is if they came here to have a termination that they


wouldn't have won on the NHS and that they would have a charge. When


Stella Crecy put this forward and it is a bit of political gameplaying


with baiting the government to see if they would do this if they are in


a deal with the DUP, love to talk to the Mac 40 MPs might have abstained


or at the very least expressed concerns to the whip about the


issue. The government seemed to decide that they have two act in a


policy which has been the case for decades in the course of the


morning. With cross-party support. You are absolutely right. Abortion


remains devolved when it comes to Northern Ireland and there was a


ruling by the Belfast Court of Appeal today that it is not a


judicial issue, it is a political issue to be decided by the Stormont


assembly. This is why I think the amendment was so clever. She


identified the one aspect of the Northern Ireland arrangements on


abortion which the Commons could legitimately have a say on. That is


the issue if you can't have an abortion within Northern Ireland


except for cases of rape and help, if you cannot have on their... It's


not even for rape or incest. It is if the mother's health or well-being


is at risk. OK and a medical emergency. If you cannot have one in


Northern Ireland than he pays for it in England? That legitimately was


within the purview of the Commons discussion, Ian Paisley junior said


that on Wednesday in a debate about the Queen's speech. He said this is


something England can do something about so by seizing upon that one


bit, she identified the thing the Commons could legitimately discuss.


There was support and it didn't end up getting voted on, she withdrew


it. So she probably managed to identify the one thing that you


could actually do through the Commons. Movie: looking at the


express which is a somewhat perplexing headline. May gets big E


exits boost. How? When I first saw this I couldn't understand what the


story was about and then I read it and this was about an amendment


which will supported by good chunk of Labour MPs against the advice of


their own party whips which was to keep Britain in the single market.


The way the express have done this is to say that this motion was


rejected by thumping 322 votes - one original one which was betrayed as a


defeat for Labour but it was a back table amendments. Jeremy Corbyn


whipped the majority of his MPs to vote to abstain on the amendment so


it is a bit of a technical way of betraying it. It happily into the


next headline which we understand a bit more which is on page two of the


sun. Regular trio Corbinned. Some of the MPs have voted to stay in the


single market lost their place on the Labour front bench. Corbin


sacked three and two May have resigned. One definitely reside.


This is what is really fascinating. Everyone is talking about the


election that didn't go the way people expected. I have been away


for a few weeks and it seems like Labour won the election. The


government is on the back foot so that outcome is unexpected that the


other one that other people are talking about is that the Labour


front bench has reconciled itself to Brexit and not just to Brexit to


leaving the single market. So we're now in a position where Jeremy


Corbyn is whipping his people to keep them on side of leaving the


single market, sacking people who disagree with that and of course the


left and much of the Labour Party are cheering him on. It is true the


election did not produced a hard Brexit Tory led government that


everybody expected that would have this massive majority. True. But the


election result has empowered Jeremy Corbyn which means you have the


Labour Party which is essentially committed to a kind of hard Brexit.


And will thereby disappoint a lot of the Labour members who voted remain?


It is striking when you compare the Glastonbury 2016 wire it was the


time of the referendum and many people are customary weighted in


their tents for the result and this year the great reception that Jeremy


Corbyn got and it feels like there is quite a disconnect from that


young demographic who are mostly pro-remain and their feelings about


Jeremy Corbyn because as Tim just said the basically has


rubber-stamped hard Brexit. Left, right and centre there are divisions


where you look. The times. Keep the cost of cladding style tower experts


told. This is the Times investigation revealing council


pressure over the cost of the refit. We must save the BBC has not seen


these e-mails and we will tell you at the moment for the Council have


said in response. Because of obvious legal implications of this I'm going


to stick very precisely to the text. It describes this in minutes of


meetings, price outlets and other correspondence which focuses on


cost-cutting before the refurb is. Which has been linked to the fire


which seven people tragically died in. One example. One e-mail lists


three options for the reduction of costs in cladding intended to encase


the building. For instance the use of aluminium panels instead of sink


which could mean a saving of 293,000 pounds. Of course zinc panels would


be noncombustible but the aluminium cladding which was eventually used


had a flammable core. Let's tell you what the council said. They have


said that the Cabinet of the Council and the person the Council are


leading, rock fielding melon, are... Based on the advice received from


the managing company which was not only response will for delivering


the project but ensuring the Bill James met the current regulations.


-- building. They are asking for a justification in the increase of the


budget which would have been made in the spirit of ensuring public funds


whilst being poorly managed and could be justified. Safety would not


have been compared my son are quite clear that they allowed the right


amount of expenditure. If you look at the very beginning of the time


story it says in that they received, the records show little evidence


that is clearly something the council has contested in the


statement that safety concerns would have been part of the


decision-making process. I don't know if we can move on, a story


going on throughout the whole of the day about a public meeting which


should have held the night in Kensington and Chelsea Council. The


Daily Telegraph briefly, a private meeting and the Guardian and other


media organisations got a court order to allow reporters into the


meeting. Yes during the course of the day that was a High Court ruling


that says journalist should be allowed into this, what was supposed


to be a public meeting which was changed to be private at the


council. And when the leader of the council realised at the start of the


meeting that there were journalists he had another meeting to take


place. He did seem to understand they were there in the first place.


And finally some levity if you don't mind. The Daily Express, not in the


house, MPs can go tireless. The common speaker sweeping away a


custom for 100 years, should men have to wear a tie? I have been


meditating upon the Sordo. On the one hand the wearing a retired means


you have two the business, the extra effort to look presentable means


your mind is focused. On the other hand some people wear such ludicrous


and absurd tyres that they themselves undermine the


institution. Yes or no. I like the type 94 wearing one. Don't ever turn


up here without wearing one that is it for the papers tonight.


Don't forget you can see the front pages of the papers online


It's all there for you - 7 days a week at bbc dot co uk


forward slash papers - and if you miss the programme any


evening you can watch it later on BBC iPlayer.


Headlines coming up for you at the top of the hour.


Download Subtitles