:00:15. > :00:17.Hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the papers will be
:00:18. > :00:22.With me are Ben Chi, economics and business
:00:23. > :00:24.editor of the Independent and the Education Editor
:00:25. > :00:30.Let's have a look at the front pages first.
:00:31. > :00:33.The Sunday Times leads with its story that the Queen
:00:34. > :00:39.The front page is dominated by an image of Her Majesty in pink.
:00:40. > :00:42.The Daily Mail says hope is fading for the seven-year-old boy missing
:00:43. > :00:48.The Daily Express has the same story.
:00:49. > :00:51.It says the boy's injured British mother is desperately
:00:52. > :00:56.The Telegraph also covers the Barcelona attack,
:00:57. > :00:59.but focuses on plans to crack down on car and van rentals
:01:00. > :01:03.And the Observer reports that leading experts on EU law have
:01:04. > :01:07.cast "serious doubt" on Theresa May's Brexit strategy.
:01:08. > :01:21.Let's start with the Telegraph. The investigation is continuing into how
:01:22. > :01:30.this Barcelona cell was able to operate for a whole year undetected.
:01:31. > :01:35.It is looking at its own incompetence in the way it couldn't
:01:36. > :01:38.rent a larger van and do more damage, shone. There is a very
:01:39. > :01:42.interesting story in the Sunday Telegraph, which in the wake of the
:01:43. > :01:47.things that have happened in Barcelona, I think Britain is now
:01:48. > :01:53.looking at whether we can crack down on car and van rentals. Of course,
:01:54. > :01:57.hired vehicles have been used in several of these attacks like London
:01:58. > :02:02.Bridge and Finsbury Park mosque. So the idea is that information handed
:02:03. > :02:11.over to rental companies, including names and addresses could be cross
:02:12. > :02:16.checked against criminal watchlists quickly. And then the car could be
:02:17. > :02:21.tracked if it is rented out, or even stopped from being hired out to
:02:22. > :02:24.potential terrorists. But one of the concerns is not to infringe upon
:02:25. > :02:28.daily life, because people still need to rent larger trucks for
:02:29. > :02:34.completely valid purposes. That is the trade-off that the public have
:02:35. > :02:38.to make. As you say, it will mean that if you hire a van, if they
:02:39. > :02:43.implement the suggested scheme, it will mean a lot more red tape and
:02:44. > :02:47.delays. But my guess is that most people would be willing to make that
:02:48. > :02:52.trade-off if it meant even the small chance of a terrorist being able to
:02:53. > :02:55.get hold of an articulated van or lorry and causing the kind of
:02:56. > :02:58.carnage we saw in Barcelona, if there is a minimal chance of doing
:02:59. > :03:04.it, I suspect most people would be happy to do it. The other issue
:03:05. > :03:07.which is not raised here is that barriers in public places like Las
:03:08. > :03:12.Ramblas and Westminster, I suspect we will see more of them. That is
:03:13. > :03:20.simpler and quicker to implement than these bureaucratic obstacles.
:03:21. > :03:24.We are increasingly seeing those barriers, but in some areas, it is
:03:25. > :03:27.physically impossible to get them in. You can't put barriers
:03:28. > :03:31.everywhere. You never know whether terrorists are going to strike.
:03:32. > :03:36.There are barriers now across London Bridge. I over it every day to work
:03:37. > :03:43.and the barriers are there so that cars can't mow down pedestrians. But
:03:44. > :03:47.you can't put them right across London, or right across our capital
:03:48. > :03:54.cities. And that doesn't help with the attacks in Finland, which was a
:03:55. > :03:59.knife attack. People use common objects in horrific ways. The
:04:00. > :04:03.security services have to respond to a threat the way they see it. At the
:04:04. > :04:07.moment, the terrorists are getting vans, so they have to respond to
:04:08. > :04:11.that, but as you say, things can evolve. There are other ways to
:04:12. > :04:18.attack innocent people. So it is a terrible challenge. The Mail on
:04:19. > :04:24.Sunday focuses on this lost boy, the seven-year-old British boy. We still
:04:25. > :04:31.don't know what has happened to him. But my goodness, I have a nine-year
:04:32. > :04:33.old and I how difficult it is. If he is missing, his parents are
:04:34. > :04:41.absolutely distraught and his mother is very ill. Such a sad photograph.
:04:42. > :04:44.This boy is in his football shirt. It is always the details that grab
:04:45. > :04:52.your heartstrings. He loves to dance. His mother, who was also
:04:53. > :04:57.injured and ill in hospital, the dad flying over from Australia. What
:04:58. > :05:05.that family must be going through. When they pick up on these stories
:05:06. > :05:09.of the victims, it's heartbreaking. As Sian mentioned, the father had a
:05:10. > :05:12.22 hour flight from Australia, because his wife and son were in
:05:13. > :05:15.Barcelona for a family wedding. Imagine what it must be like not
:05:16. > :05:22.knowing what had happened to your son for all of that time. Just
:05:23. > :05:26.heartbreaking detail. This is what the Sunday papers are good at. They
:05:27. > :05:34.have found the stories of the people who have been affected. Stories of
:05:35. > :05:39.heroism are emerging as well as stories of tragedy. The Mail on
:05:40. > :05:42.Sunday has a British tourist who risked his own safety. He stayed
:05:43. > :05:45.with a badly injured boy on Las Ramblas, even though he was told to
:05:46. > :05:53.move away, because the little boy reminded him of his son. The quotes
:05:54. > :05:58.are so moving. He said, that was somebody's child. It could have been
:05:59. > :06:03.my child. You immediately think, there but for the grace of God go I.
:06:04. > :06:07.So many of us have been to Las Ramblas. We have all been to these
:06:08. > :06:12.places, and it is devastating when we see something like this. Which is
:06:13. > :06:17.precisely why the terrorists choose these targets. They know the maximum
:06:18. > :06:24.way to multiply the shock is to choose places we have all been to or
:06:25. > :06:32.that we might go to. They want to terrorise, so it is deliberate. Onto
:06:33. > :06:36.the Observer, where we are back focusing on Brexit. It doesn't take
:06:37. > :06:46.long to return to Brexit. Doubts are being cast on Theresa May's Brexit
:06:47. > :06:51.red line. What are they getting at? This is Paul Jenkins, the former
:06:52. > :06:54.head of the government's legal services division. He is pouring
:06:55. > :06:59.cold water on Theresa May's Brexit strategy. He said the policy on the
:07:00. > :07:03.little indications of Brexit was foolish and if the UK once close
:07:04. > :07:07.links with the single market, it will have to observe EU law in all
:07:08. > :07:14.but name. Of course, it is only two weeks until David Davis enters a
:07:15. > :07:18.crucial phase of talks on the exit plan. So still chaos and confusion
:07:19. > :07:26.around our Brexit strategy, with a lot of people knocking it. That has
:07:27. > :07:34.been such an issue, the chaos and lack of clarity which is getting
:07:35. > :07:38.people very concerned. We had two position papers last week, one on
:07:39. > :07:42.the customs union and one on the Northern Ireland border. And I read
:07:43. > :07:48.them closely because I have to write about them. And I was astonished by
:07:49. > :07:53.the lack of detail. The customs paper was 16 pages long, the Ireland
:07:54. > :07:58.one was 30 pages long. These are incredibly difficult challenges they
:07:59. > :08:02.are grappling with, and to give so little to people on the EU side or
:08:03. > :08:06.even the journalists or analysts to work on seems to be a terrible
:08:07. > :08:09.mistake, because it underlines how much they either haven't thought
:08:10. > :08:13.about them, or how much they are keeping back about what they are
:08:14. > :08:20.going to try and implement. Do you think they don't know, or are they
:08:21. > :08:27.afraid to share it? David Davis said last week that it reflects creative
:08:28. > :08:31.ambiguity. That was the phrase he used. It is a nice sounding phrase,
:08:32. > :08:36.but I think it is used to cover the fact that they don't know how to
:08:37. > :08:42.confront these challenges. They have grappled with the detail. This is
:08:43. > :08:46.the detail which is brought out in the Observer story. If you are going
:08:47. > :08:50.to have a temporary interim customs union with the EU which is like the
:08:51. > :08:55.one we have at the moment, someone has to oversee it. A legal body has
:08:56. > :09:01.to oversee it. So who is that going to be? The natural thing is the ECJ,
:09:02. > :09:06.but Theresa May said we will not be subject to the supervision of the
:09:07. > :09:12.ECJ after 2019. So how can the customs union proposal work? This is
:09:13. > :09:16.what Sir Paul Jenkins is saying. To make the customs union bit work for
:09:17. > :09:20.the interim, you have to have ECJ supervision. If not that, there will
:09:21. > :09:25.have to be some kind of fudge where the EU court and the UK courts
:09:26. > :09:30.cooperate. It is by no means clear that the EU side will agree to that.
:09:31. > :09:37.So this will all come into focus in the coming days. Sian, are you
:09:38. > :09:43.sensing frustration from the public that this is unravelling?
:09:44. > :09:47.Absolutely. I cover education for the Sunday Times, and universities
:09:48. > :09:52.are absolutely panicking because they have so many EU students and EU
:09:53. > :09:55.staff. They are so reliant on EU research funding, and they don't
:09:56. > :10:03.know what will happen in two years' time. Trying to make plans for the
:10:04. > :10:07.future is very difficult. We are going to stay with the Observer.
:10:08. > :10:14.This is a story that the Telegraph is also covering. It is another
:10:15. > :10:23.Twitter spat. Stephen Hawking, the eminent scientist and cosmologist,
:10:24. > :10:28.gave an opinion article to the Guardian on Friday, raising alarm
:10:29. > :10:31.about privatisation of the health service and the general direction of
:10:32. > :10:36.health under the Conservatives. And as you say, there was a pushback on
:10:37. > :10:40.Twitter, the medium by which have an ministers now communicate with the
:10:41. > :10:45.people, it seems, by Jeremy Hunt, the Health Secretary, yesterday. But
:10:46. > :10:48.he also wrote a column for the Sunday Telegraph where he went into
:10:49. > :10:52.more detail than he was allowed to with the 150 character limit on
:10:53. > :10:56.Twitter, talking about why Sir Stephen Hawking was wrong to accuse
:10:57. > :11:00.the Tories tried to privatise the NHS and pushing a pernicious
:11:01. > :11:04.falsehood. And also hitting back at the accusation Stephen Hawking made
:11:05. > :11:10.against Jeremy Hunt, that he was cherry picking data when he argued
:11:11. > :11:16.that it is less safe to be in a hospital on weekends, which is one
:11:17. > :11:21.of the big disputes related to the junior doctors' strike. So quite a
:11:22. > :11:27.serious butting of heads between the two of them. As to who comes out on
:11:28. > :11:30.top, personally I think Sir Stephen Hawking overegged it when he said
:11:31. > :11:35.they are privatising the NHS. You can't really find that in the data,
:11:36. > :11:39.but he is right to recuse Jeremy Hunt of cherry picking data over the
:11:40. > :11:42.weekend effect. All the studies I have read suggest that the data is
:11:43. > :11:46.simply not there to make the kind of claims Jeremy Hunt was making. But
:11:47. > :11:49.when you have someone like Stephen Hawking coming into an argument like
:11:50. > :11:58.this, you have to think there might be a bit of a problem or a breakdown
:11:59. > :12:01.in PR. Absolutely. It is a public relations disaster. Personally, I
:12:02. > :12:05.think Jeremy Hunt going on Twitter and attacking Stephen Hawking is
:12:06. > :12:10.ludicrous. That is not the way we expect ministers to behave. I don't
:12:11. > :12:20.want serious policy discussions played out on Twitter with use of
:12:21. > :12:24.the number two instead of the word! Now social media users have piled in
:12:25. > :12:26.and we have doctors and scientists mocking Jeremy Hunt on Twitter for
:12:27. > :12:38.taking on the world's most famous scientist. Well, they think it is a
:12:39. > :12:45.more direct way to communicate. At the last general election, Labour
:12:46. > :12:48.did so well because of social media. So ministers think, we have to get
:12:49. > :12:53.our message out there. We have seen how Donald Trump uses Twitter, which
:12:54. > :12:56.is not a good example in my view. But it is a direct way of
:12:57. > :13:00.communicating, so maybe they are making the trade-off that although
:13:01. > :13:06.people will ridicule him, it is a direct way of communicating. Another
:13:07. > :13:11.way of communicating now. The Sunday Times said the Queen will not stand
:13:12. > :13:22.down for Prince Charles. No real surprise there. Well, there has been
:13:23. > :13:32.a lot of talk that she might. She is very elderly and very wonderful, so
:13:33. > :13:35.she might want to not just stop back from duties, but have a Regency
:13:36. > :13:39.arrangement where Prince Charles takes over. This is a story from our
:13:40. > :13:42.royal correspondent, making clear that nobody is planning for a
:13:43. > :13:48.Regency, neither Buckingham Palace nor Clarence House, and that this
:13:49. > :13:52.pledge the Queen made on her 21st birthday, I declare that my whole
:13:53. > :14:00.life, long or short, shall be devoted to your service, she intends
:14:01. > :14:06.to completely honour that, even up to her 95th birthday. She will be
:14:07. > :14:11.delegating more duties to Prince William and Charles and so on. We
:14:12. > :14:17.are seeing the younger royals taking up more of an active role. And
:14:18. > :14:23.members of the public seem to like that. But in terms of the Queen
:14:24. > :14:32.standing down, that is difficult to fathom. With Brexit, a big
:14:33. > :14:38.constitutional moment for the UK, and the issues around Charles and
:14:39. > :14:45.Camilla, I can imagine that the last thing people want would be for this
:14:46. > :14:49.massively respected sovereign to invoke the 1937 Regency act and step
:14:50. > :14:56.back. It is just not the right time for it. Providing her health is up
:14:57. > :14:59.to it and she has no intention to do it, I expect a lot of ministers and
:15:00. > :15:05.the Prime Minister will be breathing a sigh of relief over that. The last
:15:06. > :15:14.thing they need is less stability. Let's finish with the Sunday
:15:15. > :15:20.Telegraph, the child genius. Sian, how different is this? I can't
:15:21. > :15:28.imagine a child like this. It is incredible. It was extraordinary to
:15:29. > :15:34.watch little Rahul. He was amazing. He is like a little 15-year-old in a
:15:35. > :15:39.child's body! He was so composed. He was so clever. He memorised things
:15:40. > :15:44.so well. Of course, the debate about Child Genius, every time it is on
:15:45. > :15:53.is, is it the children who want to take part or is it pushy parents?
:15:54. > :15:58.And watching Rahul's family, his dad was so behind him. Rahul lifted the
:15:59. > :16:01.trophy at the end and his dad lifted away from him! But you had the sense
:16:02. > :16:06.that this was a family completely behind this child more willing him
:16:07. > :16:10.on, but not in a negative way. And my son, who was watching with me,
:16:11. > :16:16.said, the family that completes together wins together! We always
:16:17. > :16:21.ask if it is good for these children to be put in the spotlight in this
:16:22. > :16:25.way, but life is pressure and competition. If you go to the Far
:16:26. > :16:29.East and you see the tiger parents, these are the children that our
:16:30. > :16:37.children will be competing against in the global economy. We have to
:16:38. > :16:42.stop being so wishy-washy. I loved it and I loved Rahul and his
:16:43. > :16:46.parents. The family were great characters. I haven't watched it,
:16:47. > :16:50.but I read the interview and I came away with from it with a jaded eye,
:16:51. > :16:53.thinking they must be punishing him. But I read the interview and they
:16:54. > :17:00.sounded like the nicest possible family, not pushy, but encouraging
:17:01. > :17:03.and pretty modest. Humble background, they are not
:17:04. > :17:08.particularly well off. And I really want to them just from reading the
:17:09. > :17:12.article, so maybe I should watch it. But I can't imagine any child of
:17:13. > :17:18.that age sitting down and getting on with this level of work. There must
:17:19. > :17:24.be some pushing from the parents. They definitely encourage them to do
:17:25. > :17:26.it, but with the difficulty of the questions, the freezing point of
:17:27. > :17:27.water in degrees Kelvin, I don't know!
:17:28. > :17:32.Just a reminder - we take a look at tomorrow's front pages every
:17:33. > :17:47.Coming up on BBC One after this programme is Sunday Morning Live.
:17:48. > :17:53.With the details, we say good morning to Sean Fletcher.
:17:54. > :17:58.Coming up on Sunday Morning Live, a row erupts about the language used
:17:59. > :18:00.to describe grooming