hello. values of 7— nine degrees. that's it, take care. this is bbc news with lukwesa burak. we'll be taking a look at tomorrow morning's papers in a moment — first the headlines. the bodies of british climber tom ballard and his italian partner have been found in pakistan — two weeks after they last made contact. the home secretary, sajid javid, is facing criticism for revoking the citizenship of shamima begum, whose baby son died in a camp in syria. much of venezuela remains engulfed by darkness amid one of the largest power cuts in years raising tensions in a country already on edge. a man has been remanded in custody charged with the murder ofjodie chesney in east london earlier this month. brie larson and samuel ljackson are out to save the universe in captain marvel, the latest superheroine

stallman from marvel studios. —— superhero instalment. see what mark kermode makes of that in the film review. hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the papers will be bringing us tomorrow. with me arejohn rentoul, the chief political commentator at the independent and ruth lea, economic advisor at arbuthnot banking group. lovely to have you both. first, a look at the front pages. many of tomorrow's front pages are already in. the mail on sunday says a nurse who took care of renowned scientist stephen hawking is the subject of a tribunal. the sunday telegraph leads with an opinion poll suggesting public support for a no—deal brexit is currently at 44%. staying with brexit, the sunday times says cabinet ministers have warned

theresa may she might have to quit if she wants to pass her brexit deal this week. also going with brexit, the sunday express carries a call by conservative backbencher jacob rees—mogg, describing the prime minister's deal as ‘rotten‘. and the observer reports a church of england bishop calling home secretary sajid javid a ‘moral coward' over the death of shamima begum's three—week—old child. so a varied set of front pages — let's have a look at some of them in more detail. those are the front pages. dominated by brexit. let us start of the sunday times. this is an interesting take. first off, is she likely to quit? who knows. but i very much doubt it. she is a stale. when i looked at the political aspects of this particular article i thought it was highly speculative. it struck me

as, ifi was highly speculative. it struck me as, if i may say so, here say. rather more interesting is what mr hammond will get up to on wednesday, when he has his spring statement. there is going to be the vaped —— vote on the deal on tuesday which may be voted down, and then on wednesday he is going to stand out, according to this article, and say if you support the deal we will give you an extra £20 billion, because i will have £20 billion in my locker for extra spending and tax cuts, at cetera. the timing seems a bit odd. i'm not sure 20 billion there either. we are facing this week where there will be a collision of political directions, so to speak. vote on tuesday, spring statement on wednesday, and so on and so forth. it isa wednesday, and so on and so forth. it is a big week. obviously the temperature has gone up another notch. i don't know whether the

prime minister promising to resign as soon as the deal goes through would actually make much difference, to be honest. i am not sure how many mps would be persuaded by that. and also the question is, who would she be replaced by? presumably by the people giving this story to the sunday times my favourite is one of them. obviously they think that some deals could be doing a betterjob? but who is it? we don't know. that is why i think the stories are a bit ofa is why i think the stories are a bit of a waste of time. perhaps i am being unfair. it is clearly a very important day on tuesday coming up. absolutely. lots of people are considering their position. but i don't see how she is going to win the vote. that is going to be a bit ofa the vote. that is going to be a bit of a problem. do you think it will get through on tuesday? how do you think it will end? i am with john. i think it will end? i am with john. i

think the probability is it will failand then we think the probability is it will fail and then we will have been no deal vote on wednesday and that will almost certainly fail, and then we will go on to a vote on the thursday, which is about delaying the article 50 negotiations. i don't know where that leaves us. talking of delaying, if it is delayed the independent says that according to a poll they have run, the public want brexit wrapped up in six months. we have heard of soft brexit, hard brexit, they do not want a never—ending brexit. brexit, they do not want a never-ending brexit. no. butl brexit, they do not want a never-ending brexit. no. but i think thatis never-ending brexit. no. but i think that is where we are headed. i suspect if the prime minister loses the vote on tuesday, then the house of commons will vote to delay. a short delay is what the prime minister has said. she doesn't want to do it, but if that is what mps vote for she will do it, she says. but my view is that once you delay brexit once there is nothing to stop you delaying it again, because after you delaying it again, because after you get to june, you delaying it again, because after you get tojune, what will you delaying it again, because after you get to june, what will have changed? you get to june, what will have changed ? absolutely you get to june, what will have changed? absolutely nothing. the eu

knows that the pressure is off, because they know we're not going to live about which is the one thing that they would find difficult. and so they can keep on giving us extensions, because they know that that increases the possibility that we will eventually change our mind. exactly right. i think the movement will develop for a second referendum and the probability of a no brexit actually becomes more and more real. i think this is the danger. and in a way, what theresa may is tragedy without entrapment policy, is say you support my dear lauret is no brexit. and that is what i see the choice to be. -- my deal or there is no brexit. she is trying to pretend it is still an option. it will fail on wednesday. we all know that. ok, well, in the independent they say that 52% and want a delay to last more than six months. we have a poll on the front page of the telegraph. it finds that 44% of the public

should leave without a deal. yes. that is not really surprising, because people are fed up with the deadlock. the simple emotional response to that is to say we should walk away. that is not going to happen. mps don't want us to live about a deal. they realise how economically disruptive it would be. noma -- economically disruptive it would be. noma —— no matter how much ruth wa nted noma —— no matter how much ruth wanted to happen. she is realistic and realises it will not happen. anyone who wants to leave should be supporting the prime minister. why do you want to leave? he has taken the words out of my mouth. i think the words out of my mouth. i think the deal is appalling. £39 billion for what? no guarantee of a future relationship, vassal status, it is a shocking deal. and then there are problems with the backs. it is better to go for a clean break, no deal. but asjohn has said, i don't

think no deal is on the table now. just forget it. and having taken me no deal off the table, it does mean that the ability of the british authorities to actually negotiate with the eu is diminished, because there is no give or take. because they think that we will stay. you are in numbers woman, ruth, what is the fallout of a no deal?” are in numbers woman, ruth, what is the fallout of a no deal? i think there would have been some disruption, because i don't thing the preparations have been made properly. but at least we would be free come out of the single market and customs union, we would not be paying £39 billion, we can start negotiating our own trade deals. we would be paying some money because it is money that we do. and we are country that feels our obligations. perhaps 19 billion. not 39 billion. not 39 billion because we would not be getting a transition period. you have to pay for that. but i'm talking about a no deal. yes, but

you are confusing two things were start you get some for the 39 billion. 39 billion getsy nothing. half of it is what we are one half of it as payment for the transition period. if we just left we would not pay the 39 billion we go. we would suffer economic disruption instead. there would be disruption would be able to cope with them then we would move onto a glorious future. laughter. as far as jacob rees—mogg is concerned, on the front of the express, potentially rotten, certainly a rotten deal.|j express, potentially rotten, certainly a rotten deal. i agree. well, yes. this is brexiteer hyperbole. where is ruth sensibly accept that the prime minister's deal is... you are trying to get round me now. is a compromise. and it is one that jacob round me now. is a compromise. and it is one thatjacob rees—mogg ought to accept. this is an interesting article by jacob rees—mogg to accept. this is an interesting article byjacob rees—mogg in the sunday express, because he does not repeat what he has said in the past, which is if he is faced with a choice between the prime minister's

deal and staying in the eu, which is the choice that parliament is now facing, because, as ruth says, a no—deal brexit is not possible, he has in the past that he would vote for the prime minister's deal and he carefully avoids saying that and i don't know what is going to do on tuesday. it will be interesting to watch. it will be a fascinating night. we will all be up, won't we? yes, most definitely. mitta the observer —— mitta the observer. shamima begum. sajid javid being described as a moral coward. has anybody agree with that?” described as a moral coward. has anybody agree with that? i think it is very debatable and questionable when he withdrew the british citizenship from shamima begum. i think it was treating her as something of a token and an example. the truth is, we have a bigger question is to what we do with all the other british citizens who are supporting and have fought for isis. they would presumably come back to this country and they would have due a dealt with, especially if they are

going to be a terrorist abate, dealt with fairly firmly. we have got to get to grips with this issue, people coming back. ithink, of course, he said that she had dual citizenship, because she also had citizenship with bangladesh... which she didn't. bangladesh disputes this somewhat. putting aside the bangladesh issue, it looks like he has made a stateless. i think there are some explanation here, it is a questionable decision that he made. and yet, if you speak to a lot of the british public they say she made her bed. oh, absolutely. people feel that very strongly. bart is... it is not up to the home secretary to pander to an emotional reaction that the british public quite rightly have, because he, as home secretary, has to abide by international law. as ruth said, into —— under international law you cannot make someone stateless. shamima begum is

our responsibility. you have got to face up to it. let us turn back to the sunday telegraph. the middle class are feeling that they don't belong anywhere, because there isn't any diversity category they fit into. that is slightly misunderstanding the point of diversity categories. they have been squeezed out. oxford rejects demand a nswe rs , squeezed out. oxford rejects demand answers, that is the subject.” squeezed out. oxford rejects demand answers, that is the subject. i am torn. i am all in favour of students being more assertive. aqi middle—class. being more assertive. aqi middle-class. and i am middle-class. of course. they understand that the whole point of trying to recognise the potential in students, rather than what they have achieved already, which is what universities ought to be doing, does mean that, you know, students who have had all the privileges in life are going to possibly feel disconnected against.

do you think then that there should bea do you think then that there should be a different set of rules?” do you think then that there should be a different set of rules? i don't think you need to talk about rules here, ifi think you need to talk about rules here, if i may say so. i think the people making the decisions at oxford university, they will have a very good idea when they look at a student and look at the potential of that student. and, after all, that is what they should be doing, not just blindly looking at grades. that was was the case, my understanding was. i think really be middle class willjust how to cope with this the best way they can will stop and if they wish to demand answers, then fine, because that is what they are like. laughter. shall we leave it there are? on that note? very assertive. that's it for the papers tonight. thank you for that. don't forget you can see the front pages of the papers online on the bbc news website. it's all there for you — seven days a week at bbc.co.uk/papers — and if you miss the programme any

evening you can watch it later on bbc iplayer. thank you, john and ruth. next on bbc news — the film review. hello, and welcome to the film review on bbc news. to take us through this week's cinema releases is mark kermode. so, mark, what do we have this week? very mixed bunch. we have everybody knows, a spanish language thriller.