hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the the papers will be bringing us tomorrow. with me are the political commentatorjo phillips and nigel nelson, political editor of the people and the sunday mirror. tomorrow's front pages, starting with... the observer leads with partygate and the imminent sue gray report — claiming that the prime minister is expected to �*sacrifice�* the head of the civil service, simon case when it is released. the conservatives are threatening an attack on transport and education unions — that's according the sunday telegraph, which says the government is poised to draw up laws requiring

minimum numbers to work during a strike. the sunday times�* front page says an nhs ambulance trust has been caught covering up evidence about deaths linked to mistakes made by paramedics. one to one help for all pupils — that's the education secretary's pledge on the front of the sunday express. wagatha christie on the front of the sunday mirror — featuring a confident statement from coleen rooney, saying �*it�*s in the bag'. so let's begin... if we start first of all with the observer, the pm to sacrifice top official over partygate to save himself. is simon case a big enough sacrificial lamb, joe? he himself. is simon case a big enough sacrificial lamb, joe?_ sacrificial lamb, joe? he probably is if it means _ sacrificial lamb, joe? he probably is if it means boris _ sacrificial lamb, joe? he probably is if it means boris johnson - sacrificial lamb, joe? he probably is if it means boris johnson sales| is if it means borisjohnson sales in hisjob. he is the head of the civil service and it suggests his head will roll, either by

resignation or by sacking, and he is going to take the rap. now, that would put the prime minister in a rather peculiar position because of simon case loses hisjob, this is a man who has not been fined by the police investigating the various parties at downing street, while the prime minister stays in hisjob, having been fined. it is all speculation and i am sure it is very fevered speculation about what is actually going to be in sue gray's report, this is the civil servant whose report was delayed because the metabolic and police decided to investigate. that report is supposed to be out next week. there is also concern about a meeting that took place between sue gray and the prime minister with various versions of who instigated the meeting and what was discussed at the meeting. and they are very many questions which we will not know the answer to until we will not know the answer to until we see this report or indeed what is actually in it and what is left out

of it. simon case, it looks like his headis of it. simon case, it looks like his head is on the block to save the prime minister's skin, and it won't be the first time borisjohnson has done that. be the first time boris johnson has done that. ., ., , , done that. nigel, would anything be enou:h to done that. nigel, would anything be enough to save _ done that. nigel, would anything be enough to save the _ done that. nigel, would anything be enough to save the prime _ done that. nigel, would anything be enough to save the prime minister l done that. nigel, would anything be| enough to save the prime minister 's enough to save the prime minister �*s skin at this stage? i enough to save the prime minister 's skin at this stage?— skin at this stage? i think he is under much — skin at this stage? i think he is under much less _ skin at this stage? i think he is under much less threat - skin at this stage? i think he is under much less threat at - skin at this stage? i think he is under much less threat at the l skin at this stage? i think he is - under much less threat at the moment and he _ under much less threat at the moment and he was _ under much less threat at the moment and he was in — under much less threat at the moment and he was injanuary. we have gone through— and he was injanuary. we have gone through the — and he was injanuary. we have gone through the whole police investigation, he has got one fine, we expected more. it turns out the police _ we expected more. it turns out the police only— we expected more. it turns out the police only investigated two of the parties _ police only investigated two of the parties out of the sexy attended, which _ parties out of the sexy attended, which is — parties out of the sexy attended, which is a — parties out of the sexy attended, which is a little bit odd anyway, —— out of— which is a little bit odd anyway, —— out of the — which is a little bit odd anyway, —— out of the six _ which is a little bit odd anyway, —— out of the six he attended, which is a little _ out of the six he attended, which is a little bit _ out of the six he attended, which is a little bit odd anyway. they still want _ a little bit odd anyway. they still want to — a little bit odd anyway. they still want to get rid of the prime minister. _ want to get rid of the prime minister, there are so a significant number_ minister, there are so a significant number of— minister, there are so a significant number of rebels that want to see the hack— number of rebels that want to see the back of— number of rebels that want to see the back of am but at the moment, partygate _ the back of am but at the moment, partygate kind of has run its course, _ partygate kind of has run its course, so my view is unless there is something absolutely devastating

in the _ is something absolutely devastating in the sue gray report, something that we _ in the sue gray report, something that we actually don't know about, then the _ that we actually don't know about, then the prime minister is probably safe _ then the prime minister is probably safe and _ then the prime minister is probably safe. and that is why we will see what _ safe. and that is why we will see what happens when the report comes out on _ what happens when the report comes out on tuesday or wednesday, that is why i_ out on tuesday or wednesday, that is why i am _ out on tuesday or wednesday, that is why i am a _ out on tuesday or wednesday, that is why i am a little bit doubtful about getting _ why i am a little bit doubtful about getting rid of the cabinet secretary. at the moment, i don't secretary. at the moment, idon't think— secretary. at the moment, i don't think boris— secretary. at the moment, i don't think borisjohnson secretary. at the moment, i don't think boris johnson needs interesting, interesting, they will be much — interesting, interesting, they will be much more to discuss on that, i am sure _ be much more to discuss on that, i am sure. �* , ., be much more to discuss on that, i am sure. �*, ., ., ., ,, am sure. let's move on to the sunday teleu-rah am sure. let's move on to the sunday telegraph which _ am sure. let's move on to the sunday telegraph which talks _ am sure. let's move on to the sunday telegraph which talks about _ am sure. let's move on to the sunday telegraph which talks about tories - telegraph which talks about tories interact to torpedo unions, the paper says they are threatening to try, in their words, to break the trade unions stranglehold on the public. this is in reference to the ballot for the rmt union members as well, so if we start with you, jo, is this tough fighting talk that we would expect any way at this stage?

well, the government is constantly coming out with tough fighting talk about all sorts of things, whether it returns into anything resembling a policy or thought out idea remains to be seen. as you say, there is the threat of strike action, which one of the unions, the rmt, has said could paralyse the country, including freight services on the railways. but we have been down this road many, many times before. in 2016, the government, the conservative government brought in its trade union bill, it suffered heavy defeat in the house of lords, really big defeat, but a lot of that stuff did actually end up on the statute books, there seems to me like dusting off what is there, you know, union membership has gone down considerably from what the unions would call the heyday of the 1970s in the early 1980s. talking about a

stranglehold, i don't think most people would think that the unions have got the same sort of stranglehold, and actually at a time when people are really, really facing terrible squeezes on their household finances and their bank accounts and their cost of living, there is an argument that people need unions even more than ever. you know, whether or not this is just rhetoric, who knows, but i think there will be some resistance towards it. there will be some resistance towards it— there will be some resistance towards it. , , ., ., ~ towards it. nigel, is this all talk no action? _ towards it. nigel, is this all talk no action? we _ towards it. nigel, is this all talk no action? we will— towards it. nigel, is this all talk no action? we will see. - towards it. nigel, is this all talk no action? we will see. tory - no action? we will see. tory governments _ no action? we will see. tory governments often - no action? we will see. tory governments often want - no action? we will see. tory governments often want to l no action? we will see. tory i governments often want to -- no action? we will see. tory - governments often want to -- the governments often want to —— the unions _ governments often want to —— the unions and — governments often want to —— the unions and i— governments often want to —— the unions and i can remember margaret thatcher— unions and i can remember margaret thatcher doing the same thing. nobody— thatcher doing the same thing. nobody was to see a strike, we don't want our— nobody was to see a strike, we don't want our trays to actually stop but i am always uncomfortable about the idea of— i am always uncomfortable about the idea of effectively stopping the film idea of effectively stopping the right to — idea of effectively stopping the right to strike because ever strike doesn't _ right to strike because ever strike doesn't work, then obviously there is no _ doesn't work, then obviously there is no point — doesn't work, then obviously there is no point it, and that is what grant — is no point it, and that is what grant shapps seems to want to do. i

used to— grant shapps seems to want to do. i used to he _ grant shapps seems to want to do. i used to be every union representative myself many years ago and my— representative myself many years ago and my view was that it ever i called — and my view was that it ever i called a — and my view was that it ever i called a strike, i would have failed — called a strike, i would have failed. but equally i do feel that working — failed. but equally i do feel that working people have the right to actually— working people have the right to actually do that, they have a right to bring _ actually do that, they have a right to bring services to a halt, and if you take — to bring services to a halt, and if you take that away, ijust begin to wonder— you take that away, ijust begin to wonder what is left. we you take that away, i 'ust begin to wonder what is left._ wonder what is left. we will go on to something _ wonder what is left. we will go on to something along _ wonder what is left. we will go on to something along the _ wonder what is left. we will go on to something along the lines - wonder what is left. we will go on to something along the lines of. to something along the lines of again the political approach in terms of how to do something that doesn't, that wins over the public, i suppose, doesn't, that wins over the public, isuppose, because doesn't, that wins over the public, i suppose, because that is on the front page of the sunday times, this is the windfall tax which, of course, is something that is considered as appealing to the public, especially at a time when energy bills are high and what the times says is sooner canjohnson clash over how to spend the windfall tax. this is the first sign that has beenin tax. this is the first sign that has

been in the papers that discusses a rift between them, jo, but what do you make of their clashing over the windfall tax, specifically? it is funn , windfall tax, specifically? it is funny. next — windfall tax, specifically? it is funny, next on _ windfall tax, specifically? it 3 funny, next on neighbours at number ten and number 11 downing street, they never managed to get on that very long. we haven't got anywhere near having a wonderful tax at the moment, and it seems the cabinet is fairly split on it. there are those who think it is un—conservative to have a winter full tax, in other words, they would see it as penalising successful businesses, but given that energy prices are the biggest singlejump in household bills at the moment and the big energy companies are making an absolute fortune, i mean, this is not the energy suppliers, it is the big energy companies. so, what boris johnson apparently wants to do is to say ok, we can have a windfall tax but that money has got to be used to

spend on infrastructure like nuclear power, offshore wind farms, etc. the chancellor is resistant to that idea and there are varying arguments about actually, this isjust pandering to, i think boris johnson's birds —— words were, bleeding hearts, those will be the people who cannot afford to turn the heating on or feed their kids. i think it sticks in the core of many people that these massive profits, and in fact, wouldn't it be lovely if you didn't have to be the government doing it, that actually these companies said, look, we have made such a lot of money, we are going to put this into a fund that is going to help people pay their energy bills properly.— is going to help people pay their energy bills properly. well, i don't know, energy bills properly. well, i don't know. nigel. _ energy bills properly. well, i don't know. nigel. is— energy bills properly. well, i don't know, nigel, is that _ energy bills properly. well, i don't know, nigel, is that something - energy bills properly. well, i don't. know, nigel, is that something that might ever be a realistic approach by companies? i might ever be a realistic approach by companies?— might ever be a realistic approach by companies? i don't know, it is an innovative idea _ by companies? i don't know, it is an innovative idea for _ by companies? i don't know, it is an innovative idea for jo. _ by companies? i don't know, it is an innovative idea forjo. yes, - by companies? i don't know, it is an

innovative idea forjo. yes, i- by companies? i don't know, it is an innovative idea forjo. yes, i think i innovative idea forjo. yes, i think it would be _ innovative idea forjo. yes, i think it would be a _ innovative idea forjo. yes, i think it would be a popular— innovative idea forjo. yes, i think it would be a popular one - innovative idea forjo. yes, i think it would be a popular one among. it would be a popular one among members of the public but whether it is radical is another thing.— is radical is another thing. perhaps jo should be _ is radical is another thing. perhaps jo should be running _ is radical is another thing. perhaps jo should be running the _ is radical is another thing. perhaps jo should be running the country. i jo should be running the country. thank— jo should be running the country. thank you. — jo should be running the country. thank you, nigel, about time, too. i think nigel is there supporting your bed there, jo. i do think nigel is there supporting your bed there. jo— bed there, jo. i do think that after rishi sunak _ bed there, jo. i do think that after rishi sunak had _ bed there, jo. i do think that after rishi sunak had such _ bed there, jo. i do think that after rishi sunak had such a _ bed there, jo. i do think that after rishi sunak had such a rubbish - rishi sunak had such a rubbish spring — rishi sunak had such a rubbish spring statement, he really does need _ spring statement, he really does need to— spring statement, he really does need to do something to tackle the cost of— need to do something to tackle the cost of living crisis so i can understand that he wants to veer towards — understand that he wants to veer towards a — understand that he wants to veer towards a winter full tax, i wouldn't _ towards a winter full tax, i wouldn't go as far to say he wants one. _ wouldn't go as far to say he wants one. that — wouldn't go as far to say he wants one. that is — wouldn't go as far to say he wants one, that is the labour party, they reckon— one, that is the labour party, they reckon that — one, that is the labour party, they reckon that 10% tax to raise £2 billion— reckon that 10% tax to raise £2 billion could really help. but surely — billion could really help. but surely it _ billion could really help. but surely if you are going to put this taxon. _ surely if you are going to put this taxon. that— surely if you are going to put this taxon, that money has really got to id taxon, that money has really got to go to— taxon, that money has really got to go to those — taxon, that money has really got to go to those people who most need it, either— go to those people who most need it, either with— go to those people who most need it, either with some kind of uplift in universal— either with some kind of uplift in universal credit, or some more help with energy— universal credit, or some more help with energy bills. i don't think you can start _ with energy bills. i don't think you can start spending it on

infrastructure. if it goes ahead, it must _ infrastructure. if it goes ahead, it must go — infrastructure. if it goes ahead, it must go to— infrastructure. if it goes ahead, it must go to the right people. let�*s must go to the right people. let's move on to _ must go to the right people. let's move on to politics _ must go to the right people. let's move on to politics on _ must go to the right people. let's move on to politics on the - must go to the right people. let�*s move on to politics on the other side of the world now. let's talk about the australian elections and the success of albanese. jo, do you think this marks a bit of a shift to global politics that we are seeing, that australia's labour party has had such success?— that australia's labour party has had such success? yes, i do, and i think it is — had such success? yes, i do, and i think it is really _ had such success? yes, i do, and i think it is really interesting - think it is really interesting because this is about the climate and about climate wars, he referred to that in his victory speech. there has been a group of people during the election campaign, they are called teals, teal as in the colour, and they are climate focused independence, and what they did is really focused on the sort of once safe conservative seat and that is

what cost scott morrison the victory, if you like. but i think it is very interesting because we know australia has had terrible weather, terrible wildfires, terrible heat, terrible wildfires, terrible heat, terrible drought, and so on and so fourth but i think there is always been this feeling, certainly from over here that theyjust been this feeling, certainly from over here that they just think been this feeling, certainly from over here that theyjust think i well, sunscreen for ninnies and don't need to worry about it but i think this is actually really sending out a very clear message that climate change is a really, really big issue, there is a country thatis really big issue, there is a country that is suffering directly. and if you appeal to voters in the right way, actually, you can change government. so i think climate activists around the world will be welcoming this, he is not necessarily has an overwhelming outright majority, he may have to work with other parties but it certainly triggers a change in australia and hopefully a change to

the global attitude to climate change. the global attitude to climate chance. ., ~' the global attitude to climate chance. ., y., ,, , , change. nigel, do you think this is about the single _ change. nigel, do you think this is about the single issue _ change. nigel, do you think this is about the single issue about - change. nigel, do you think this is l about the single issue about climate change, or do you think it isjust about the single issue about climate change, or do you think it is just a perhaps an almost inevitable pendulum swing away from the more right—leaning politics we have had globally over the past few years. it is always dangerous to actually say that because of one election that shows— that because of one election that shows the well dashed the way the world _ shows the well dashed the way the world is— shows the well dashed the way the world is going. but it is interesting in the sense that we have _ interesting in the sense that we have had — interesting in the sense that we have had the area of populism with people _ have had the area of populism with people like donald trump getting elected. — people like donald trump getting elected, donald trump —— boris johnson — elected, donald trump —— boris johnson here, and the populace were elected _ johnson here, and the populace were elected in _ johnson here, and the populace were elected in europe, too. an issue like climate change comes to the fore and — like climate change comes to the fore and very clearly, changes that perspective of the electorate. it could _ perspective of the electorate. it could well be that could be repeated elsewhere. at the moment, in this country. _ elsewhere. at the moment, in this country. we — elsewhere. at the moment, in this country, we are struggling with by far the _

country, we are struggling with by far the major issue for voters is the cost — far the major issue for voters is the cost of— far the major issue for voters is the cost of living crisis but once we get — the cost of living crisis but once we get over that, it may well be that climate change will come back, and you _ that climate change will come back, and you can — that climate change will come back, and you can see the greens, the lib dems— and you can see the greens, the lib dems here. — and you can see the greens, the lib dems here, maybe it is time for other— dems here, maybe it is time for other parties. dems here, maybe it is time for other parties-— dems here, maybe it is time for other parties. dems here, maybe it is time for other arties. . . ., ., ., other parties. what we are going to do now, other parties. what we are going to do now. very _ other parties. what we are going to do now, very briefly _ other parties. what we are going to do now, very briefly we _ other parties. what we are going to do now, very briefly we are - other parties. what we are going to do now, very briefly we are going . other parties. what we are going to| do now, very briefly we are going to look at the mirror which talks about wagatha christie. she says she has celebrated with a cup of tea, is that something you would do? i want to know which _ that something you would do? i want to know which one _ that something you would do? i want to know which one of— that something you would do? i want to know which one of her— that something you would do? i want to know which one of her many - to know which one of her many handbags it is in? i am sure she has got more than you or i have.- got more than you or i have. nigel, more than — got more than you or i have. nigel, more than the _ got more than you or i have. nigel, more than the number _ got more than you or i have. nigel, more than the number of _ got more than you or i have. nigel, more than the number of handbags j got more than you or i have. nigel, more than the number of handbags you have, too. . more than the number of handbags you have, too. , ., , , have, too. yes, indeed. probablyi will set about _ have, too. yes, indeed. probablyi will set about with _ have, too. yes, indeed. probablyi will set about with a _ have, too. yes, indeed. probablyi will set about with a cup _ have, too. yes, indeed. probablyi will set about with a cup of - have, too. yes, indeed. probablyi will set about with a cup of tea - have, too. yes, indeed. probablyi will set about with a cup of tea but frankly. _ will set about with a cup of tea but frankly. on — will set about with a cup of tea but frankly, on this trial, i don't think— frankly, on this trial, i don't think there are any weathers. on that think there are any weathers. that note, think there are any weathers. qt that note, we will leave it think there are any weathers. q�*i that note, we will leave it there. thank you both for that. —— i don't

think there are any winners. jo and nigel will be back at 11:30pm for another look at the papers. next here on bbc news, the abuser working for mi5. this is the story of a dangerous mi5 agent which the government tried to keep secret. a warning this programme contains details some viewers may find disturbing. wielding a machete, this is an agent of the british state. ultimately, this position within the security services was used to terrorise me. a violent mi5 agent was able to exploit his position, despite a long history of abuse. he said he would be able to kill me and my daughter, too. but the abuser, a threat to women and children, can't be named.