hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the the papers will be bringing us tomorrow. finally, i get to do some work tonight! with me are the parliamentary journalist tony grew and caroline frost, 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 to overhaul the social—care system. 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 attackjeremy 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. the express, meanwhile, says 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 ministerfailed to 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 borisjohnson, 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 ma nifesto 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 much involved. years a backbench mp, sol 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 have the raise your taxes and make you pay 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, borisjohnson green saying this is locked down, boris johnson saying green saying this is locked down, borisjohnson saying it may yet be twea ked. borisjohnson 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? 0blak 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,, 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 we re 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 fa ct 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 fox hunting. i know people who were up in arms about this, it is a deal—breaker. up in arms about this, it is a deal—brea ker. everybody has 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 ta ke 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 ta ke keeps coming up, this refusal to take down images which many people find to be completely unacceptable. imean, the find to be completely unacceptable. i mean, the headline is that they have officially announced off what has happened is that the guardian 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 fa ke 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. ifeel 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% church of england barnes heavenly i7% 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,

of their book. i love reading the financialtimes, 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! funds, i don't understand it at all! foreign-language! cyclical, play the long game, that is what it means.“ 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, andl but 40,000 deaths a year, you know, and i think about how this country dealt withjinked and i think about how this country dealt with jinked driving, and i think about how this country dealt withjinked 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 the price of living in polluted cities. lam not 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 about it. in the culture section, twin pea ks is 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. we continue to celebrate over and overagain. —— herald. for every auto creating these programmes, these long, corrugated narrative arc series, they'll credit david lynch and twin pea ks 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? caroline, like nothing we have seen before ? obviously 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