hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the papers will be bringing us tomorrow. with me are anne mcelvoy, executive editor at the economist, and kevin schofield, political editor at huffpost uk. thank you both for being with us this evening. good to see you. just before we hear from them, let me bring you up—to—date at home with the front pages we have so far. the daily mirror has a big picture of the queen shedding a tear for her late husband at a service

in his honour earlier today. the i is leading on partygate. it claims borisjohnson still doesn't accept that lockdown laws were broken, despite scotland yard issuing 20 penalties. and saying it will issue more. over to the war in ukraine, the telegraph writes that russia has given up its conquest of the capital kyiv, with president putin to instead focus on the donbas region. the metro also leads on ukraine, saying "it's russian roulette", as the us warns not to be fooled by moscow's latest move. the front page of the ft leads with the standoff between russia and the eu as putin insists on rouble payments for gas. a p pa re ntly apparently president putin is now insisting that europe pays in roubles and the europeans are saying you cannot rewrite the contractjust like that. do you want to kick us alternate, anne, first of all, with p.m. do you want to kick us alternate, anne, first of all, with pm. in

denial? anne, first of all, with p.m. in denial? , , , ., ., ., _ denial? depends on what you mean by denial. it is clear _ denial? depends on what you mean by denial. it is clear these _ denial? depends on what you mean by denial. it is clear these fines _ denial? depends on what you mean by denial. it is clear these fines it - denial. it is clear these fines it is clear these fines were to be issued, but the number ten position issued, but the number ten position is still that it did not knowingly break rules or oversee the breaking of rules. that is kind of difficult, because it is rather obvious these fines have been issued and rules have gotten broken, but i would guess that number 10's position, which would've been taken of legal advice, is that if he did not know that officials were not supposed to help parties the way they held parties, therefore if anyone intended they could not reasonably be seen to know it did not really break the rules. it is a bit convoluted, i would say, but if you think about it from number 10's position, at the moment it says, yes, it did break rules, there is a problem. boris johnson trying to have it both ways and say, if something was done wrong, we are sorry, but nonspecific

about what that was. $5 wrong, we are sorry, but nonspecific about what that was.— wrong, we are sorry, but nonspecific about what that was. as ever, kevin, we aet about what that was. as ever, kevin, we get bullet — about what that was. as ever, kevin, we get bullet points _ about what that was. as ever, kevin, we get bullet points from _ about what that was. as ever, kevin, we get bullet points from the - about what that was. as ever, kevin, we get bullet points from the i, - we get bullet points from the i, ever easy to read on the train. it is idealfor that. what do ever easy to read on the train. it is ideal for that. what do you ever easy to read on the train. it is idealfor that. what do you make of the things they have highlighted? notably, the suggestion that advisers who get penalties won't have to tell your bosses? number 10 have to tell your bosses? number 10 have basically _ have to tell your bosses? number 10 have basically said _ have to tell your bosses? number 10 have basically said that _ have to tell your bosses? number 10 have basically said that they - have to tell your bosses? number 10 have basically said that they won't i have basically said that they won't confirm _ have basically said that they won't confirm the identity of anyone who receives _ confirm the identity of anyone who receives a — confirm the identity of anyone who receives a fixed penalty notice other— receives a fixed penalty notice other than the prime minister, or at least _ other than the prime minister, or at least that— other than the prime minister, or at least that was the position this morning — least that was the position this morning. they later said they would confirm _ morning. they later said they would confirm if— morning. they later said they would confirm if simon case, the cabinet secretary. — confirm if simon case, the cabinet secretary, if he also receives a fixed _ secretary, if he also receives a fixed penalty notice, but the 20 fp ends issue — fixed penalty notice, but the 20 fp ends issue today, we don't know who they were, _ ends issue today, we don't know who they were, other than we can assume

boris _ they were, other than we can assume borisjohnson was not they were, other than we can assume boris johnson was not one they were, other than we can assume borisjohnson was not one of they were, other than we can assume boris johnson was not one of them. -- the _ boris johnson was not one of them. -- the 20 _ boris johnson was not one of them. -- the 20 fpns. that boris johnson was not one of them. —— the 20 fpns. that does not mean he is _ —— the 20 fpns. that does not mean he is in _ —— the 20 fpns. that does not mean he is in the _ —— the 20 fpns. that does not mean he is in the clear. it was something picked up _ he is in the clear. it was something picked up on — he is in the clear. it was something picked up on quite like in the lobby this morning, that essentially you have public funded civil servants found _ have public funded civil servants found to — have public funded civil servants found to have broken the law and publicly— found to have broken the law and publicly funded government buildings, yet their identity will not be — buildings, yet their identity will not be revealed. and they have no obligation— not be revealed. and they have no obligation either to tell their employers that they have received these _ employers that they have received these fines, so essentially they pay these fines, so essentially they pay the fines— these fines, so essentially they pay the fines and nothing more is done about— the fines and nothing more is done about it. _ the fines and nothing more is done about it, and ijust wonder how that will go down with the public. there is obviously a lot of anger but around — is obviously a lot of anger but around the idea that these rules were _ around the idea that these rules were set— around the idea that these rules were set by the government and broken _ were set by the government and broken by— were set by the government and broken by government ministers allegedly and government officials. ithink— allegedly and government officials. i think people want to see people held to account, and it does not look at — held to account, and it does not look at the _ held to account, and it does not look at the moment, at least, as if that is— look at the moment, at least, as if that is going to happen.—

that is going to happen. anne, the economist tracks _ that is going to happen. anne, the economist tracks political - that is going to happen. anne, the economist tracks political polls - economist tracks political polls very closely, not least of boris johnson. does this have the capacity to damage him or is the damage done, is it priced in, as it were? i to damage him or is the damage done, is it priced in, as it were?— is it priced in, as it were? i think it is not so _ is it priced in, as it were? i think it is not so much _ is it priced in, as it were? i think it is not so much priced - is it priced in, as it were? i think it is not so much priced in - is it priced in, as it were? i think it is not so much priced in as - it is not so much priced in as though taken by events, as the moment has importance in preoccupied with ukraine —— has borisjohnson. that continues to be the dominant news story. i do think, however, that there is still an underlying anger here and we have not yet got to the may elections, we have not done local elections, we have not had a chance to test public opinion. clearly public opinion is on the whole on the side of the uk, supporting ukraine playing in important role, but people are quite good and increasingly good at holding different ideas in their heads about politicians. they may think they're good at one and

terrible at another, so this mix, this alchemy does change. boris johnson was never out of the woods on patty —— on pa rtygate. —— on partygate. but if there is something unseen as important, the uk economy, and ukraine there, they may be things that dominate more. it does not mean people think that porsche often is all right about partygate, but in the mix it may not weigh as much as it appeared the way at the time, and that is what he is gambling on. at the time, and that is what he is gambling om— at the time, and that is what he is auamblin on. ., ., gambling on. kevin, the front of the telegraph has _ gambling on. kevin, the front of the telegraph has a _ gambling on. kevin, the front of the telegraph has a bit _ gambling on. kevin, the front of the telegraph has a bit of— gambling on. kevin, the front of the telegraph has a bit of a _ gambling on. kevin, the front of the telegraph has a bit of a side - gambling on. kevin, the front of the telegraph has a bit of a side bar, i telegraph has a bit of a side bar, really, to the actual investigation, but it is an interesting one because the college of policing that draw up guidance on whether you're supposed to name suspects is suggesting that the guidance that police are using to justify it is

only guidance, and if they wanted to, they would be quite in the ability to ignore it and name everybody. what you make of this story? everybody. what you make of this sto ? , , . , , everybody. what you make of this sto ? ,, . , , , story? essentially, this is the story? essentially, this is the story that _ story? essentially, this is the story that broke _ story? essentially, this is the story that broke quite - story? essentially, this is the story that broke quite early i story? essentially, this is the i story that broke quite early this morning — story that broke quite early this morning before 9am, so the newspaper are trying _ morning before 9am, so the newspaper are trying to _ morning before 9am, so the newspaper are trying to kick the story on a little bit — are trying to kick the story on a little bit and try make it, get a new— little bit and try make it, get a new angle and, yeah, to be fair to the telegraph, theirs is the one different— the telegraph, theirs is the one different angle that we have seen on different— different angle that we have seen on different pages so far, and it is interesting that it looks as though the police — interesting that it looks as though the police are falling back on this post levinson guidance. and it is important — post levinson guidance. and it is important to stress it is only guidance, the people who receive things— guidance, the people who receive things like speeding fines, fixed penalty— things like speeding fines, fixed penalty notices, relatively minor sections. — penalty notices, relatively minor sections, you don't have to be named — sections, you don't have to be named -- _ sections, you don't have to be named. —— post—leveson. ithink there— named. —— post—leveson. ithink there is— named. —— post—leveson. ithink there is the— named. —— post—leveson. ithink there is the world of difference between — there is the world of difference between a member of the public getting — between a member of the public

getting a — between a member of the public getting a speeding fine in naming them~ _ getting a speeding fine in naming them i_ getting a speeding fine in naming them. i think there is a lot of public— them. i think there is a lot of public interest, actually, in civil servants, — public interest, actually, in civil servants, as i said earlier, who are public— servants, as i said earlier, who are public funded, broke the law and government buildings, which are also publicly— government buildings, which are also publicly funded. i think there is a strong _ publicly funded. i think there is a strong public interest, an argument you can _ strong public interest, an argument you can make, that these individuals could _ you can make, that these individuals could be _ you can make, that these individuals could be named, especially given the level of— could be named, especially given the level of public anger and people being _ level of public anger and people being able to attend funerals of loved _ being able to attend funerals of loved ones and visit grandparent in hospital. _ loved ones and visit grandparent in hospital, what have you come up during _ hospital, what have you come up during lockdown. the vast majority of the _ during lockdown. the vast majority of the public stuck to these rules, to the _ of the public stuck to these rules, to the letter, and rightly are furious — to the letter, and rightly are furious at _ to the letter, and rightly are furious at what appears to been a rather— furious at what appears to been a rather cavalier attitude to the rules— rather cavalier attitude to the rules at— rather cavalier attitude to the rules at the top of government, sol think— rules at the top of government, sol think a _ rules at the top of government, sol think a lot of— rules at the top of government, sol think a lot of pressure will be on the mat — think a lot of pressure will be on the mat to— think a lot of pressure will be on the mat to perhaps think again, or for the _ the mat to perhaps think again, or for the government to put pressure on them _ for the government to put pressure on them to— for the government to put pressure on them to release these identities. anne, _ on them to release these identities. anne. there — on them to release these identities. anne, there is a quote from the former chief prosecutor of northwest of england, basically saying there

is an opportunity here for transparency, the police need to improve public trust, and this would be a good way to do it. he accuses them of hiding behind guidance. l them of hiding behind guidance. i think the police, and we've seen it with the resignation of cressida dick as the head of the met, i understand his position and it makes a lot of sense but i do slightly wonder why all the deputies... it fundamentally seems like a political issue. if it is right that civil servants and officials are named, then they should be named because number 10 says they should be named or because the head of the civil service said they should be named. i am not sure it is thejob... there is a role for the police to conduct these investigations and to be very fair and square about what happened, i'm not sure it should be there call what is public or not. this is simply an opinion. i am not sure why we keep asking... we are putting a

lot of pressure on the police do things that are not totally related to their job. things that are not totally related to theirjob. there is one reason that could be put up as a defence, that... �* , that. . . laughter because - that. . . laughter because if - that. . . laughter because if you're | that... laughter - because if you're thinking that... laughter _ because if you're thinking about it as an official, someone who sends out invitations, you probably don't do so without knowing that it has got your political masters quite happy for this to happen or go to be invited, so is it always really fair to blame the person who sent out the e—mail? yes, it is public funded buildings, i do get document but in the end, i wonder, is the police's fault, it is the official�*s fault for sending the e—mail... where are the politicians? i know what happens when there's a lot of problems to go around. people are very good at getting other people to take the

rap. that is why i slightly worry about the direction of the conversation. i about the direction of the conversation.— about the direction of the conversation. , , ,.,, ., conversation. i suppose, kevin, that is a fair point- _ conversation. i suppose, kevin, that is a fair point. if _ conversation. i suppose, kevin, that is a fair point. if there _ conversation. i suppose, kevin, that is a fair point. if there was _ conversation. i suppose, kevin, that is a fair point. if there was a - is a fair point. if there was a dismissive culture in downing street, it was not down to the officials probably, it was down to borisjohnson officials probably, it was down to boris johnson anti—political officials probably, it was down to borisjohnson anti—political group boris johnson anti—political group around him. borisjohnson anti—political group around him. the point has been made on several occasions, it is quite hard to imagine an official would've sent out a letter like on inviting people to bring your own booze event if theresa may has still been down the street, because they would've been a tone set politically that would have kind of made people think, actually, iwill would have kind of made people think, actually, i will not send them is like that, because it would not have gone down very well. exactly. if you're sending a work email— exactly. if you're sending a work email like — exactly. if you're sending a work e—mail like that, the one thing you think— e—mail like that, the one thing you think is. _ e—mail like that, the one thing you think is, what happens if the boss find out? — think is, what happens if the boss find out? clearly, the attitude of senior— find out? clearly, the attitude of senior civil — find out? clearly, the attitude of senior civil servants was, this is probably— senior civil servants was, this is probably all right, boris won't mind — probably all right, boris won't mind you _ probably all right, boris won't mind. you mentioned theresa may. can

you imagine _ mind. you mentioned theresa may. can you imagine if— mind. you mentioned theresa may. can you imagine if it was gordon brown? it you imagine if it was gordon brown? it would _ you imagine if it was gordon brown? it would never have happened! it is not a _ it would never have happened! it is not a case — it would never have happened! it is not a case of someone doing it and not a case of someone doing it and not giving — not a case of someone doing it and not giving a — not a case of someone doing it and not giving a moments thought to what the prime _ not giving a moments thought to what the prime minister would have thought— the prime minister would have thought of but it would've thought of boris _ thought of but it would've thought of borisjohnson's thought of but it would've thought of boris johnson's attitude and thought. — of boris johnson's attitude and thought, he would be fine with it, as he _ thought, he would be fine with it, as he clearly was a.— thought, he would be fine with it, as he clearly was a. let's move on to ukraine- _ as he clearly was a. let's move on to ukraine. anne, _ as he clearly was a. let's move on to ukraine. anne, it _ as he clearly was a. let's move on to ukraine. anne, it is _ as he clearly was a. let's move on to ukraine. anne, it is russian - to ukraine. anne, it is russian roulette, how the metro stars it. it is very intriguing, this offer from russia. what you make of that and its current ability or otherwise? and also, what do you make of the commitments that ukraine is considering making, which have to be underwritten, it says, by security guarantees from the west, whether or not russia or like the duty to that? i don't believe the russian offer at all. there is one thing in here, that clearly they don't a fancy

family for kyiv. at the moment, that is to the credit of president zelensky and most of the background, very much the us there, notwithstanding the pratfalljoe notwithstanding the pratfall joe biden notwithstanding the pratfalljoe biden had at the weekend when he appeared to get rid of that imprudent, in a sense, which is not as easy as that, but also the uk and other european allies. i think russia has got the message it is not worth trying to kyiv, it is taking too much damage. i am cautious about over egging how bad the russian retreat is, but it is pretty bad. i think it does not need to be devastating. the russians are very good regrouping, coming back again. they would learn from the bloody knows they got the last few weeks, so i would guess but i think we can see strategically what they are likely to do. you remember what was supposed to happen was their response to correct the donbas —— they were supposed to take back the

sub what will happen, for practical and propaganda reasons, is the same as you always was — you go as far as you can go and you pull back again if you think it is practical to do so. does not mean they have given up on invading ukraine, but it looks like you are being a bit more realistic and they will try and leverage it or lease get some time. kevin? it leverage it or lease get some time. kevin? , ., . ., kevin? it is rather convenient, the 've kevin? it is rather convenient, they've been _ kevin? it is rather convenient, they've been going _ kevin? it is rather convenient, they've been going at - kevin? it is rather convenient, they've been going at it - kevin? it is rather convenient, they've been going at it for - kevin? it is rather convenient, l they've been going at it for now five weeks, and clearly the expectation was they were to kyiv rather _ expectation was they were to kyiv rather quickly. that has not happened, they are looking for a bit of an— happened, they are looking for a bit of an off— happened, they are looking for a bit of an off ramp here, so they have said, _ of an off ramp here, so they have said. you — of an off ramp here, so they have said, you know what? we will pull back from — said, you know what? we will pull back from attempting to take kyiv sub as _ back from attempting to take kyiv sub as an— back from attempting to take kyiv sub as an act of good faith, so we can get— sub as an act of good faith, so we can get these peace talks going, mavbe _ can get these peace talks going, maybe make some progress, but, yeah, it is clearly— maybe make some progress, but, yeah, it is clearly a _

maybe make some progress, but, yeah, it is clearly a face—saving exercise. _ it is clearly a face—saving exercise, isn't it? as i say, they have _ exercise, isn't it? as i say, they have been— exercise, isn't it? as i say, they have been trying for weeks not to seize _ have been trying for weeks not to seize the — have been trying for weeks not to seize the capital, they realise it does _ seize the capital, they realise it does not — seize the capital, they realise it does not want to happen thanks, as anne _ does not want to happen thanks, as anne savs. — does not want to happen thanks, as anne says, to the remarkable leadership of president zelensky, but also _ leadership of president zelensky, but also to the fortitude of ukrainian people. it has been remarkable to watch the rearguard action _ remarkable to watch the rearguard action of— remarkable to watch the rearguard action of the ukrainian people in defending their country, so, yeah, i think— defending their country, so, yeah, i think it— defending their country, so, yeah, i think it is— defending their country, so, yeah, i think it is a — defending their country, so, yeah, i think it is a face—saving exercise. take _ think it is a face—saving exercise. take us— think it is a face—saving exercise. take us to — think it is a face—saving exercise. take us to the ft, kevin. we know the europeans are going to carry on getting gas, so do we come up to a limited extent as well, but we may be a territory the gaskets switched off very soon, because we are not prepared to pay the way president putin insists —— the gaskets switched off. putin insists -- the gaskets switched off.— putin insists -- the gaskets switched off. the russians are insistin: switched off. the russians are insisting they _ switched off. the russians are insisting they want _ switched off. the russians are insisting they want paid - switched off. the russians are insisting they want paid in - switched off. the russians are - insisting they want paid in roubles. at the _ insisting they want paid in roubles. at the moment, the gas is paid

mainly— at the moment, the gas is paid mainly in— at the moment, the gas is paid mainly in euros and us dollars. countries — mainly in euros and us dollars. countries like