19/11/2017 The Papers

I'm talking to Chris Bodington, the

mountaineer who has reached the

world's highest places his memoir is

called, of course - Ascent.

Hello and welcome to our look ahead

to what the the papers will be

bringing us tomorrow.

With me are Henry Zeffman,

political reporter at the Times

and public affairs

consultant, Jacqui Francis.

Welcome to the both.

Tomorrow's front pages,

starting with The Financial Times,

which reports that ministers

are expected to give

Theresa May the go ahead to increase

the Government's Brexit

financial settlement offer

to move on EU negotiations.

The taily Telegraph one of a number

of papers moving on Robert Mugabe's

defiance of the country's generals

by remaining in power this evening.

The Metro also leads on Zimbabwe,

describing Mugabe as "Clinging On".

And the I also focuses Mugabe's

defiance of the Zanu-PF party's

decision to remove him as leader.

The Daily Express reports research

that the Royal family has

contributed £1.8 billion to the UK

economy this year, as the Queen

and Prince Philip celebrate

their 70th wedding anniversary.

The Daily Mirror saying former Tory

defence chiefs have accused the

Government of damaging the Armed

Forces by cutting funding no.

Picture on this at the moment. But

it gives you a little flavour. Let's

kick off. This evening, Jacqui, one

big story in town making it through

to the front pages, Robert Mugabe

and this surprise turn and big

announcement that wasn't a big

announcement

Absolutely. It I is as

here he shocked the world. I imagine

there are more people in Harare, in

Zimbabwe that are shocked than the

lest of the world. It must have been

patently obvious to him he was

going, and the fact he was doing a

televisedes announcement, everybody

is waiting to hear, to find out that

he thinks that mistakes have been

made and that he can

he thinks that mistakes have been

made and that he can come back.

That's what I understand he seems to

be saying, he is not going anywhere.

I'm not sure whether or not they

gave him the right speech or he read

T something has gone

gave him the right speech or he read

T something has gone horribly wrong.

There are suggestions going around

maybe a couple of pages he turned

over deliberately on purpose but it

was a turn up for the books.

Well it was almost chaotic, there

were bits during the 30-hour ramble.

More of a ramble than a speech where

he seemed to lose his place and one

of the generals near him had to

point out what page he was on and

when the cameras were rolling at the

end he said "I'm sorry can we

correct bits" perhaps not realising

it was live. So it was a peculiar

what we thought was going to be the

end of his 37 years in power but it

wasn't, that and obviously quite

chaotic in Harare tonight.

What do

you make of what might happen next?

One of the interesting things in the

past week has been t started as a

military coup, as it were, with

Mugabe's sacked deputy looking line

he was going to take over but then

the people took to the streets. One

of the interesting dynamics will be

whether it is a transition to

democracy that the Zimbabwean people

want or whether it is a change for

one part of the ruling elite to

another part of the ruling elite.

What happened today suggests

something a bit more like the loot

At the

Jacqui, it was interest,

within his speech, Robert Mugabe

talked about conflicts potentially

within the party, intergenerational

conflict. Talking about the need it

perhaps bring on new blood but keep

the old established players as well.

It goes to show there is a lot going

on in ZANU-PF.

There is indeed and

as you said Henry there might be

backtracking, I don't know whether

they fought people were too

ingrained inthe military didn't have

the decisive hand in terms of

getting rid of people. Because, you

know you are getting rid of one set

of people for another who are

equally, in some case, people would

say corrupt and it is about power

and who has the power. Maybe the

idea of saying - go now, it was

actually, do you know how much you

would have to get rid of in order to

put your own people in place and the

fact that his wife - I still quite

get that bit. Because, you know, he

has obviously been planning this for

a long time and all of a sudden

people realise she really does want

to become the next leader so we

should do something about it. I have

this horrible suspicion about when a

woman decides to do something - wou,

it is terrible, horrible, but if it

had been a man who was plotted the

same thing, would there have been

the same response?

All the way

through the generals were saying it

isn't a kou. We don't want to take

Mugabe out of office, we want to

change parts of the corrupt ZANU-PF

elite. People thought it was cover

and they were trying to remove him

and place him with their deputy. But

tonight suggests maybe they were at

their word and maybe they wanted to

get rid of Grace Mugabe and who

weren't war vetted rans, the younger

generation, and it wasn't about

taking Robert Mugabe out.

And the

Daily Telegraph - Mugabe defies the

generals and clings on. We were well

aware, we were speaking to the

ZANU-PF representative in the UK

tonight. We arewell aware his own

party says he is no longer the

leader yet he said in his speech

tonight - I will be overseeing the

meeting in December of ZANU-PF's

Congress and so on. Somehow some

communication has gone badly wrong.

.

Something is going on in the

background, whether or not he is

negotiating, dotting the I's or

crossing the t's to his exit or

conspiracy theory, are people in

other countries saying - we are not

sure what the deal is going to be

with the new leader, maybe we will

back him because he has had strong

backing from China all along and as

far as I'm concerned if they say zsh

we are not sure all of a sudden it

pauses until they are reasthurd this

transition is going to be the

transition they need in order to

continue to build the infrastructure

and make as much money as they can.

It is certainly true that some other

countries in Africa, which have

similar ruling elites in place for

some time, will be looking at

Zimbabwe and hoping what is

happening there doesn't catch on.

They won't want the African

equivalent of the Arab Spring, which

some of the scenes in Zimbabwe over

the last few days have reminded me

off but it comes back to the scenes

of the people exercising the coup,

doing what is going on at the top in

the presidential Palace but the

clips are seen of people in the

streets whop want investment in the

country, who want a stronger economy

and a more modernised

infrastructure. Those are two

different things.

We mustn't forget

the background to all of this is a

country in economic meltdown and the

problems Zimbabwe have faced, the

people there are Des straight to see

change.

They are. I suppose it is

not very popular to remind people,

that yes, he has been there for

what, nearly 40 years? But this

wasn't a problem and this wasn't

something that started with him. We

are talking about, it used to be

called Rhodesia, Ian Smith. Let's

not forget this is down to him at

the moment but it has been a long

time coming and isn't something that

happened overnight. As you have

said, yes, the people on the ground

want jobs and stability. If you

start hollowing out the whole

country and taking the money out,

where elsewhere you going to get the

very much, except for other

countries that have decided - yes,

we want to put more money back into

this place.

Henry we mustn't forget

that these Pape letters come out

tomorrow morning and in those terms

it is a crucial day in Zimbabwe. --

papers will come out. Because

ZANU-PF said if he didn't step down

by noon tomorrow they'll start

impeachment and that will be the

crucial decision for them to be

mulling over tonight whether they'll

hold him to that.

Rab salutely. One

of the strangest parts of Mugabe's

speech is having been sacked by his

party, earlier that day, he talked

about how he was going to preside

over ZANU-PF's scheduled Congress

next month and establish a sort of

plan for getting out of this

situation. It's not at all clear how

that is compatible with the fact he

doesn't run ZANU-PF any more. So,

the people that you have been

interviewed today have made quite

clear, members of ZANU-PF that they

are going to lanch impeachment

proceedings. I suppose the question

to which extent the rules which have

been established to work for Mugabe,

work for the people trying to I can

at that down Mugabe. Typically in

dictatorships they don't.

Plenty

more to talk about on this tomorrow,

a big story. Let's move to one side

Jacqui. Staying with the Daily

Telegraph, the story on the

right-hand side, a Brexit story

about the money.

Yes, we had the

conversation before about how much

money we were going to pay and it

was almost like - well we want to

negotiate first, then we will decide

how much money. And I was saying to

Henry, last I heard somebody was

talking about, it is a bit like them

wanting to pay for a meal and we

haven't finished it but if you go

out for a meal you have an idea it

is going to cost because you can see

the prices on the menu. Here it

seems to me that the Prime

Minister's arm has been twisted by

Philip Hammond, who is saying - we

want to know what we are getting

first before we increase the amount

of money we are talking about. We

are talking about £20 billion,

possibly but, you know we are back

to this - show us, you know there is

no show us the money first, there is

show us what the deal is, fist, then

we'll start on the money. Everybody

is getting fed up.

Henry, remind us

of some of the figures we are seeing

in some stories. What might change,

how much might this offer go up by?

At the moment, Britain sorted of

publicly accepted they are offering

around £20 #3wi8 yob. There are

suggestions it'll double, an extra

pods 20 billion to persuade the EU

to declare in their own terms

something called sufficient progress

in mid-December to move talks on to

trade and transition next year.

Theresa May had meetings in Sweden

at the end of last week with Donald

Tusk, Emmanuel Macron and the Irish

Prime Minister who insisted we are

far off. That's the context of the

discussion over money. Clearly the

Government is going to offer some

more money but although, Philip

Hammond, you know sort of leading

pro-EU, although he is not

particularly pro EU but in relative

terms in the Cabinet, pushing more

money to move to on but we are

talking about the Brexit

subcommittee, Boris Johnson in

alliance with Michael Gove, who

ruined his o leadership intentions

la year, saying they have to move

on.

People say is it really about

the money or is it political. Is

moving it that much a big deal for

our economy?

Because we started with

the stance - we are only going to

give you a certain amount and

nothing else. We have found it

difficult to be more conciliatory,

when actually it is about the detail

now. There are people in this

country worried about whether or not

they can style. There are businesses

making decision abouts whether or

not they are going to stain if this

is a stumbling block, we are going

to keep going around and around and

not actually starting to discuss the

substance which is what everybody

outside of Westminster wants people

to do, discuss the substance. The

FT, Henry of course has this story -

May set to secure Cabinet support

for higher Brexit divorce bill

offer. That really highlighting what

you were starting to allude to.

Which is, whether she has the

combination of people in the Cabinet

to back here. It does expose again,

tensions in who wants to play it

which way?

It is kind of a reminder

of why May called a general

election, now seven months on or

whatever it looks disaster, the

worst mistake a Prime Minister has

made in peace Tyne so on but she

wanted to have the authority from

the public to be able to say to her

Cabinet - I don't care what you

think or what you said what side you

are on in the referendum. I'm the

Prime Minister the people have given

me a mandate to negotiate a deal and

this is the amount I'm going to

offer. Now she is and the FT sets it

out well -- she is at the mercy of a

finely-balanced Cabinet. Lots of

people now to want to take her job

in due course as well who all have

their own view on how they can

negotiate it Bert. I also think it

is worth remembering, it is not just

money which is the stumbling block,

a striking thing last week, both the

Irish Prime Minister and EU

officials were insisting, if you

don't have an answer to the Irish

border question before December,

whether or not you offer us the

money, we are not moving the talks

on. It is very striking the absence

of anything in the papers tomorrow

about how the British Government is

going to solve that aspect of it as

well.

Plenty of head scratching.

While we are talking about money,

take us on to the Daily Express,

this is the Royal Family in this

instance, a picture of the Queen and

Prince Phillip celebrating 70 years

of marriage but the story is based

on a research that has been done

about whether the monarchy gives us

good value for money, really?

Well

according to this they do indeed.

They contributed £1.8 billion and

they cost us £292 million, which is

the equivalent of £4.50 per person

or £1p a day, which, you know what

can you buy for 1p.

£4.50 per person

per year.

Yes, I think they are

trying to tell us they are good

value for money. Who is the

definition of monarchy? Who is

included? Because there are a number

of people that you and I probably

think - actually do I want it pay

for those individuals? Are they

included in the £2. 9 -- £292

million.

What do you make of this?

Well not enough to pay our divorce

bi. I notice although they say the

monarchy has contributed £1.8

billion they don't break that down

per person, only the cost per

person. One of the interesting

things about the research is it

measured the monarchy's value as if

it were an branded business. I don't

think that's how the British people

see the monarchy, I don't think

that's why it is so popular as we

saw there was a tame when it was

less popular, after Princess Diana

died. It is more popular in how

people see this country and their

place in T maybe breaking it down

with perhaps slightly spurious

figures doesn't quite get to why

people are still happy to have what

might be quite an outdated way of

running a country in 2017.

Are you

prepared to pay 1p a day, Jacqui?

I

am. I'm certainly prepared to pay

for the Queen. I think she does a

really difficult job, can you

imagine all the people she has met

and you have to keep on smiling and

you know -- I just dread to think

what will happen if she has to meet

The Donald.

Well, an interesting

thought to leave everyone on for

now. My thanks to Jacqui and Henry.

We will be back for another go

around at 11.30 but coming up next

it is time for Meet the Author with

Chris Bonington.