this is bbc news with rachel schofield. we'll be taking a look at tomorrow mornings papers in a moment. first, the headlines: ahead of the snp party conference, nicola sturgeon says the party would vote for another eu referendum if its proposed in the house of commons. china says it is holding the missing head of interpol, chinese national, meng hongwei. beijing said he was under investigation by the country's anti—corru ption body. pret a manger confirms a second case where a customer is believed to have died from an allergic reaction, this time to a sandwich which was supposed to be dairy—free. turkish officials say they have concrete evidence that a renowned saudi journalist was killed in his country's consulate building in istanbul. hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the the papers will be bringing us tomorrow.

with me are parliamentaryjournalist tony grew and entertainment journalist & broadcaster caroline frost. thank you very much for being with us thank you very much for being with us tonight. many of tomorrow's front pages are already in. we can give you a sense of what you will see. the times leads on brexit and a warning to the prime minister from brexiteer mps that she can only keep britain within eu customs arrangements until 2022. it comes as negotiations enter a important week ahead of an eu summit in ten days time. —— ten days‘ time. the financial times reports that the japanese prime minister would welcome the uk into the trans—pacific partnership trade deal after brexit. in an interview with the paper, shinzo abe said britain would lose its role as a gateway to europe after brexit but would still be a country equipped with global strength. the independent says the world is getting a climate change

ultimatum ahead of major report from the un's intergovernmental panel on climate change tomorrow. the daily telegraph says police are setting targets to investigate fewer than half of reported crimes. it says one of the uk's largest forces has decided it should screen out 56% of cases. the sun's headline, ‘blame it on the boozy‘ refers to the so—called curse of strictly. two of the show‘s stars, seann walsh and katya jones, have apologised to their partners after being photographed kissing. the daily mirror leads on the apology from the strictly pair as well and they have a photograph of jodie whittaker after the first episode of the new series of doctor who, broadcast earlier this evening. a mix of stories on the front pages, let's have a closer look. caroline, starting on the times, skipping over the lovely picture of the dogs with their brexit...

the lovely picture of the dogs with their brexit. .. what the lovely picture of the dogs with their brexit... what shall we say, brexit opinion reflected in their little flags. let's go to the main story, all about whether theresa may might have room for manoeuvre on the deadline for brexit and the customs union. ever since the ink set on the referendum nearly two years ago now, the big question was northern ireland and her current answer is to think about extending the european union customs arrangements until this latter date of december 2020, which, to a remainer like myself, that's ok because that's state aid by any other name but forjacob rees—mogg, he's calling this a breach of the spirit of leave —— that's remain. they're saying be you might not find this enough of a commitment to break a deadlock which we seen at the tory conference and the recent summit. as i'm sure tony will dig into, it's a case of who's

going to blink. tony, give us your political spin on this. the minister has set up... set out to brussels her suggestion, chequers, the uk remaining in parts of the single market to do with goods. the eu have said no because that's cherry picking, taking parts of the arrangements of the eu, single market, customs union, freedom of movement of people and goods and money and that sort of stuff, she's trying to cherry pick so they've said no to that effectively. jacob rees—mogg, a leading brexiteer, is concerned about the prime minister's new idea, the uk staying in the customs union in definitely. the situation is if the uk and the eu come to an agreement, the uk will stay in line with all the eu rules, including the single market and the customs union into the end of 2020 and what they're trying to talk about after we leave is the future relationship and this is future relationship and this is future

relationship territory. doesn't make much sense to me. if we're going to leave the eu and outre deals with the rest of the world then we need to leave the customs union —— and we do trade deals. this is a good trade deal, not chequers, not the uk being pa rt of deal, not chequers, not the uk being part of the single market and the customs union, they're saying that it will be wider in scope than any free trade agreement. that makes sense, we're their closest neighbour, we need a good security and defence partnership and we need to co—operate on police matters so there is scope for a free—trade agreement with extras. that will allow us to leave the customs union and forge new trading relationships after the transition period, the start of 2021. this all seems to be do with the timings as as the substance. —— seems to be to do. if it is kicked into the long grass, you would like that, caroline, but it drags it out further and further.

tony expects to be talking about brexit for the rest of his career, whether we should have left, whether we should go back in. even as a dedicated remainer, ifeel we should go back in. even as a dedicated remainer, i feel the we should go back in. even as a dedicated remainer, ifeel the time has come to basically do something, whether to commit to a no deal, whether to commit to a no deal, whether to commit to a no deal, whether to walk away, which are not afan of whether to walk away, which are not a fan of because i fear for the economy, security, everything remainers are most advocates of. somebody clearly needs to blink or to be strong—willed. we know people in the cabinet are working towards a positive no deal scenario. something has to give. a quick final thought? quickly, one of the reasons this makes brussels nervous is a basic principle of our democracy, no parliament can bound another, no prime minister can bind another. in a few years and other prime minister could say we're getting out of the customs union. there is uncertainty

from the. the tories want it wrapped up from the. the tories want it wrapped up before the next election in 2022 before it gets un—pick again, we shall see —— there is uncertainty from the eu —— unpicked. another option for us as we look beyond brexit to other trade partnerships, especially with japan. we were talking about leaving the customs union, theresa may thinks we might wa nt union, theresa may thinks we might want to stay longer, 21, 20 two. japan is saying that there's this new arrangement they have that they're part of, the trans—pacific partnership, including countries like australia, canada, vietnam and japan and they've come together in a trade deal to try to lower barriers between them and encourage trade and best practice. the uk has said that's something they're interested in and the japanese prime minister here has warmly said they would welcome the uk with open arms into that arrangement. not something we can do when in the customs union.

international trade agreements, not as easy as some people in this country think. this is a potentially really positive thing. the reason i think this is important is politically our head has been in the relationship with europe, constantly talked about over the last two years, one of the advocates of brexit's biggest ideas is there are other opportunities, opportunities with these growing economies around the pacific and there's a chance we can do trade deals with commonwealth countries and america. but japan seems a long way away, not as easy as doing business with germany. certainly. it has its eye on other regions and priorities, including security with the korean peninsula. that's why they have to keep sweet with the us so we are playing their game. notjust we talk to them, they have half an eye on what president trump is saying to them so it's

complicated. talking about complicated. talking about complicated processes, the i, as are other papers, looking at climate change and new targets about temperature rises. on that one hand, another week, another devastating report of potential apocalypse and climate catastrophe —— the one hand. they're talking in dramatic figures. they're talking in dramatic figures. the government has to cut emissions to zero x 2050, that's the first time we've heard that. we all think we're doing our bit with recycling but they're saying it's not enough, the temperature will rise three degrees by the end of the century u nless we degrees by the end of the century unless we drastically change our lifestyles. but it has impacts on all of us, how we travel, what we eat and how we go around. we talked the talk but whether we walk the walk... this will mean serious action to get it down to 1.5% rise. yes, but we don't have international

consensus. we thought we did with paris but then president trump decided he would withdraw because president trump thinks that climate change is a hoax created by the chinese. google that, i'm not making it up. his own administration is saying they expect global temperatures to rise by 4% by the end of the century. the biggest polluter in the world is in the us, it is china, and they are on board so it is china, and they are on board so there are positives even though america have decided to withdraw but the point is we need drastic action. the sad thing is the picture is very much of people in poor developing countries who are hit the hardest with rising water levels and so on. it's a big issue, isn't it? caroline, to the telegraph, not their main story but we have picked out church backs television gambling advert ban, what is this? the church of england have been talking about this for a while, rightly drawing attention to the fact sports fans

are attention to the fact sports fans a re often attention to the fact sports fans are often in the venn diagram of people who have addictive gambling problems and they suffer debt problems, and the social breakdown that comes with it, they are advocating a far more drastic com plete advocating a far more drastic complete gambling advert ban, especially around live sport events where's there is a sweet spot for bookies with real—time gambling on sports results. they arejoining a whole bunch of people, more and more mps are coming on board, and social health charities and protest groups saying enough is enough, they're not self moderating, there's no commercial incentive to do it, it is whether they can be legislated. tony, this is another example, we've seen a tony, this is another example, we've seen a lot of it recently, and with your political hat, you seen the church pressurising for policy decisions in political areas where they think they have something to say. there's 26 bishops in the house of lords, that's contentious, something they shouldn't be there and for decades the church has taken

and for decades the church has taken a lead on a range of social issues. and archbishop got into a massive personal with the thatcher government over some of their social policies. bishops have been focusing on problem gambling and advertising for a while. a tory peer, lord carrington, has taken the lead and gotten a coalition of peers in the house of lords to do something legislatively. i'm not someone who gambles or watches football, the amount of gambling ads i get on twitter everyday shocks me and not even interested. for people that have a problem, the fact advertisers can advertise before and after sports games as well as during is a major problem. the policy is already in place in australia. you can't show any gambling adverts for an hour before all an hour after a sporting event. the stats here, the poll they commissioned, 58% of the public support a blanket ban on

gambling adverts on all uk channels and platforms. public opinion isn't a lwa ys and platforms. public opinion isn't always instep interestingly with the pressure government comes under from big business, there's lots of money involved. you have all these pressures , involved. you have all these pressures, big business lobbying for the fact it's a market enterprise, they can't be responsible for social structure and individual decision—making. there's a free speech argument, why should anyone be deprived? we know cigarettes are bad for us, why don't they banned them all? it's not going to happen. we already strictly control advertising. if we know that it's that bad, why not ban the cigarettes but they don't, there's a freedom of movement and determination in this. there's a lot of money made by the treasury as well. these things a lwa ys treasury as well. these things always have multiple strands. caroline, as the entertainment expert, give us your opinion, strictly stars in the daily mirror,

the strictly curse. we watch through our fingers, the strictly curse. we watch through ourfingers, we love the strictly curse. we watch through our fingers, we love these partnerships, it is very romantic, very sentimental. perhaps they have tripped over the line, fantastic. the sun has to be given the props for calling this blame it on the bluesy, a booze fuelled in the race between a dancer and her contestant —— boozy. they have apologised to their partners —— booze fuelled embrace. the curse of strictly has been going for so long. we can't leave the paper review without talking about the new doctor, jodie whittaker, tony, how did she do? were you looking forward to seeing the new doctor? ruh doctor who fan? you wouldn't have seen it because

you have been here. it is a children's programme, isn't it? people will be throwing things at the television —— are you a doctor who fan. it is strange we have the nation's tv critics producing these long pieces about what they think about acting and dialogue and whether it fits in with the universe people have created and they don't do it for other children's programmes, the names i can't think of at the moment. that's because none of them are the bbc‘s biggest global export, therefore it has to edit to tv critics‘ briefs, they would be ignoring it and not doing theirjob —— would be ignoring it and not doing their job —— adhere would be ignoring it and not doing theirjob —— adhere to. every doctor gets mixed reviews, ones that wanted to go forward and