hello this is bbc news with a look at tomorrow's papers in a moment but first, the headlines. the bbc learns that police have reopened an investigation into one of the central figures in the jeremy thorpe scandal of the 1970s. the united states accuses china of intimidating its neighbours, by continuing a military build—up in the south china sea. spanish socialist pedro sanchez has been sworn in as the country's new prime minister by king felipe, after the ousting of conservative mariano rajoy. the rail industry pledges to get train services in the north of england back on track as quickly as possible following days of disruption. on meet the author this week, my guest is the colombian writer, with her novel about two political people who shaped his history, history and truth pitted against never—ending

fascination with conspiracy. hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the papers will be bringing us tomorrow. with me are broadcaster john stapleton and kate proctor, the political correspondent of the london evening standard. welcome to you both. many of tomorrow's front pages are already in. the observer leads with a warning from a major conservative party donor that michael gove should be installed as the new tory leader, because theresa may has shown that she cannot "carry brexit through". the sunday times also leads on brexit with details of a government plan for a doomsday no—deal brexit that claims britain would be hit with shortages of medicine, fuel and food. the sunday telegraph pictures the queen on derby day also marking the 65th anniversary of her coronation, the paper also

reports on comments from priti patel that the conservatives are abandoning their position as the party of meritocracy. the sunday mirror has details of a murder probe into a british man who was found dead last september in the desert 75 miles from his home in new mexico. and back from the dead — the mail on sunday claims to have found a key witness in the jeremy thorpe affair who police assumed was no longer living. so, brexit once again making the headlines in the sunday papers, but i think shall we start on that final headline in the mail, back from the dead? is it worth doing a very quick new readers start and can you do that? i will do my best. this story isa that? i will do my best. this story is a cracker, back from the dead. we find thorpe's hit man. people who

have been watching the bbc as i have, and i know you have, watching the bbc drama series aboutjeremy thorpe will remember andrew newton was the ex—pilot who was hired, allegedly, to go and kill norman scott, jeremy thorpe's lover. his revolver jammed and he's scott, jeremy thorpe's lover. his revolverjammed and he's shot the dog but did not killjeremy thorpe. it was assumed andrew newton, the pilot, was dead. the mail on sunday say they have found him alive and well living in dorking under a different name. that is relevant, because originally andrew newton hired another guy, who is also still alive, to do thejob, to killjeremy thorpe. he had second thoughts about this but nevertheless he is subsequently confessed to the police and the mail on sunday some years ago that he had done this. he says his confession was ignored by the police, forgotten all about and the

police, forgotten all about and the police carried out some investigations, but they assumed that andrew newton... still following me? the former airline pilot was dead and therefore didn't pursue it any further. now, of course, with these revelations in the mail on sunday it is open to the police to reinvestigate, as they say they will do. it is possible they will investigate and maybe even interrogate dennis and accuse him of some involvement in this plot, murdered jeremy thorpe and possible they will do the same with andrew norton, but at the time he struck a deal with the police and that deal to stop him cross being prosecuted may still apply in these new circumstances but in any event... pretty good. ifi got circumstances but in any event... pretty good. if i got a bit of that wrong, i'm sorry that i'm doing my best. anyone who has been watching this drama, which i find intriguing and you guys have done sensational, will find this revelation even

juicier than the drama. it is extraordinary. kate, all of this happened a0 years ago. and yet listening to it it is a cracking story. it has been electrifying, the drama. ididn't story. it has been electrifying, the drama. i didn't know much about jeremy thorpe, only bits and pieces, so jeremy thorpe, only bits and pieces, so to watch the drama is amazing. at the heart of this though is somebody who was gay and didn't feel they could express themselves and homosexuality was illegal at the time and this led to this huge unfolding of events. people at my age watching this story will feel a great deal of bewilderment, really, and sadness that so many people who we re and sadness that so many people who were in politics could be openly gay at the time and were having to leave these —— lead these double louts, which in this case led to tragic circumstances. i think that anyone interested in politics, you should watch it and understand it but in

terms of how far we have come in at accepting gay people in public life, i think anyone who is in politics today must look back at this documentary on thing, thank god i wasn't working in the 705.|j documentary on thing, thank god i wasn't working in the 70s. i accept everything you say about that. it is wonderful, the strides we made. this was the leader of a political party, don't forget, was plotting to kill someone don't forget, was plotting to kill someone and encouraging others to do the same. that is why people went on trial and were eventually acquitted, astonishingly other times. most people find it astonishing. it leads us people find it astonishing. it leads us to another sequence of events on bbc four to night, a documentary, by a former colleague of mine who is 83 yea rs a former colleague of mine who is 83 years young and still active, life in some of us old dogs yet. that reveals the film he made at the time, which was quashed by the bbc because when jeremy thorpe was time, which was quashed by the bbc because whenjeremy thorpe was on trial for trying plotting to because whenjeremy thorpe was on trialfor trying plotting to kill norman scott, were acquitted, the

bbc said quite rightly we cannot put this film out. they thought they had destroyed all the copies of the film but he had kept one and you can see pa rt but he had kept one and you can see part of it on bbc for tomorrow. the fa ct part of it on bbc for tomorrow. the fact andrew newton is still alive. good. clear? you were terrific, well done! let's move onto the front page of the observer which has a brexit story. replace theresa may with michael gove, which tory donor? crispin 0d and the last donation he gave was £50,000 before the last general election. this isn't going to be happy reading for mrs may. he isa to be happy reading for mrs may. he is a donor of some importance, basically saying michael gove would doa basically saying michael gove would do a much betterjob. he is then she can't carry brexit through. i understand the frustration of those

donating to the conservative party and who want brexit happen because things are taking a long time, there are delays. it is so confusing right i'iow are delays. it is so confusing right now for members of the public to understand where we are headed with brexit. so donors are now talking out. i don't know if michael gove would be the best replacement. i don't know if he would be voted on by members. i think the situation with borisjohnson from by members. i think the situation with boris johnson from a few years ago when he went for the leadership oi'i ago when he went for the leadership on the same day... hasn't been forgotten. not at all and it was savage. i don't think conservative party members want michael gove at the top of the party. interestingly stoner does? i don't know what his relationship with michael gove is but it does smack of one guy helping out a powell. i have never heard of mr crispin odey, but as kate said, he has given the tory party £50,000. how significant? i'm not sure whether his views are shared by other brexiteers, i'm not quite

sure. it is an interesting story but i think there are several more questions that need to be asked about it. another brexit story in a moment but before we do that, i want to take a look at the other story on the front page of the observer. doreen lawrence, baroness lawrence, attacking grenfell indifference. kate? i think when doreen lawrence speaks out on something to do with any kind of institutional practice, i think you have to take a great deal of notice. she is think there is institutional indifference face by the residents of grenfell tower and people in social housing. she is saying they have the right to safety and nobody was listening to them. i think that is obscene that we will see throughout inquiry. we have had so see throughout inquiry. we have had so far some very harrowing personal testimonies. hugely emotional? hard to listen to. i think doreen lawrence has captured what people are feeling, that there was a group

of vulnerable people who were kind of vulnerable people who were kind of at the very bottom of society, not given, not able to speak up. she draws a parallel between when her some's someone —— draws a parallel between when her some's someone —— her son draws a parallel between when her some's someone —— her son ‘s murder was being investigated and how there was being investigated and how there was institutional racism on what is going on with this inquiry. she says we would like to think we have moved on and braces on an issue but it is, the elephant in the room in the g re nfell the elephant in the room in the grenfell inquiry. that is the point cheesemaking. i am sure we will hear more about it as the inquiry goes on. “— more about it as the inquiry goes on. —— that is the point she is making. the sunday times now, a brexit story and quitea the sunday times now, a brexit story and quite a startling one. kate? laughter cheerful if eating breakfast my morning. breakfast doomsday, there has been a leak from a ministerial report on preparing this, which is

saying and day one if we don't have a deal, it will be the worst possible outcome for the uk. there will be shortages of medicine, fuel and food and that is if we try to leave the eu without actually striking a deal. that is not even the worst case scenario they are talking about! the second worse. it says supermarkets in cornwall and scotland will run out of food within a couple of days, hospitals could run out of medicine within two weeks. i'm finding this report really, really interesting. i was speaking to somebody who also works in this preparedness committee and they were actually just in this preparedness committee and they were actuallyjust about ten days ago really cheerful, happy and delighted with how well the civil service were preparing for brexit. they were kind of really optimistic. this was within the cabinet, so they absolutely don't think there will be doomsday. which side were they on?

brexiteer. maybe it is significant. iain duncan smith pours cold water on it, i will get the quote, this is a new version of project fear. he says we are frozen in the headlights. they should be planning for what happens if there is no deal, not scaring the pants off each other. we need people with imagination and courage, not frightened rabbits. but he would say that, wouldn't he? it begs the question if you don't like the evidence, canjust question if you don't like the evidence, can just pretend question if you don't like the evidence, canjust pretend it is not... that is not true? and are the people who are making these allegations about cornwall running out of food and petrol and having to bring medicine in from abroad and so on, ok, they are civil servants but where their loyalties lie on this and what are their own feelings about this question that we don't know and we never will. but once again, just as we had in the referendum vote... two completely contrasting opinions and alleged

evidence about what may or may not happen. what do you think readers feel when they read these stories? because peoples feedback tends to be they are crying out for facts. right from the very beginning in the referendum, you know this is far better than me, but right from the beginning people said, who do we believe in all of this? in my opinion, anyway, vast swathes of people up and down the country were no clear at the end than the beginning and subsequent events have shown actually that we still have the same conflicting opinions about what is happening, even what is happening now, let alone the future. i think the idea that we might run out of medicine, i think i have heard that quite continuously over the last 18 months. i have heard that from pharmacy groups and from politicians. so the idea that it will be very difficult to get medications into the ukjust because of various trade convocations we might have with brexit, i think that isa might have with brexit, i think that is a real concern. that is one that

for me has still not been answered. two we e ks for me has still not been answered. two weeks before the uk runs out of medicine... it is a doomsday scenario but i feel like of all the things in this, the medicines issue is one that people are really concerned about and i think that might have a good deal of truth behind it. fascinating and troubling. the front page of the sunday telegraph has a story from a former cabinet minister. john? another startling story. three have been brexit related but they are quite amazing. theresa may's conservatives are abandoning their position as the party of meritocracy, says priti patel. formic development secretary. to be absolutely certain, ijust looked up the definition of meritocracy and the definition of people, the holding of power by people, the holding of power by people of merit, the class of educated or able people. so she is saying, the foreign minister, and there may be an element of sour

grapes because she lost herjob, she is saying the party has no merit. people have absolutely no merit and she cites all sorts of examples to back up her claim. she said there is scant evidence of meritocracy or freedom within the party, by contrast she says margaret thatcher was in tune with the hopes and aspirations of the british people. this lot are not, they are very lazy in their battle for ideas with the labour party. do you think she has a point? priti patel was sacked last