Hello there. You're watching the Press Preview, a first look at what's on the front pages as they arrive. In the next half hour, we'll see what's making the headlines with writer and broadcaster, Amy Nekel Turner, and political commentator, Benedict Spence. Welcome both. So let's see what is on some of those front pages. Well, The Sunday Telegraph reports that Rishi Sunak is sending home office staff to be stationed in Rwanda as he tries to fight off a growing rebellion within his own party over plans to fly illegal migrants for processing and resettlement there. The Sunday Express claims a manhunt is underway for six suspected terrorists who've reportedly landed in the UK after crossing the channel in a small boat. The Mail on Sunday has a special investigation into the case of a gang rapist whose deportation was thwarted five years ago, but is now being sent to Somalia. Ahead of next week's autumn statement, The Times says the Chancellor may cut income tax or national insurance in an effort to win over voters. While the Sunday Mirro leads with claims of what it calls a staggering 100 billion pounds allegedly wasted by the conservative government, mostly while Rishisunak was Chancellor.

The people carries a warning from Kelly Ormirod, whose parents were killed by carbon monoxide poisoning in their holiday hotel room after the room next door was fumigated for bed bugs. The Sun has a story about the new series of I'm a Celebrity, get me out of here, and the reported gybes at Nigel Faraj by another contestant. And The Daily Star Sunday leads with a new study by scientists which suggests that eating berries can help you lose up to three stone in weight. And a reminder that by scanning the QR code you will see on screen during the program. You can check out the front pages of tomorrow's papers while you watch us. Well, we are joined tonight by the writer and broadcaster, Amy Nekel Turner and the political commentator, Benedict Spence. A pleasure to see you both. Thank you so much for coming in. Okay, let's start with The Express, page six. It says, Tory Right-wing switches to pretty in fight to regain control of the party. I'll just read the very first sentence. Priti Patel is being lined up as the Tories' new right-wing pin-up after Swellah Braverman's fall from grace. Benedict.

We said that she's being lined up as the new pin-up, but of course, Swellah Braverman was the person who replaced Priti Patel as the original right-wing pin-up. Arguably a tribute. Yes, actually, we're getting the band back together. I'm quite happy about this because I've been saying this for a long time. A lot of Tories have been nailing their colors to the Suela Braffman. While she's been very vocal about things like the Rwanda scheme, about how the Home Office is run, about how the government is run. But it has been the view, I think, of a lot of Tory about Benches for a very long time that they had all this with Priti Patel when she was in the Home Office. Actually, Priti Patel is a better politician. She's better across detail, she's better across policy, and she's slightly less chaotic when it comes to messaging, which I think is the key thing about Soella Braverman is she does a lot of talking, and you know that she's doing a lot of talking, but actually, if you look at her track record, it's not so great. And I think that this is probably where you will see Rishie Sunak's team would say they were justified in getting rid of her.

There's been a lot of talk, hasn't there, about how he's committing some suicide by doing this because all of these people are just not going to vote for him. They're not going to back him. But the point is, there are plenty of people on that wing of the party, Priti Patel being the obvious one, who you can push forward. And I think that what this is saying is that actually if all of this has been a push by Swellah Barclay for her own leadership credentials, she has slightly overestimated quite how much sway she has within even that wing of the party, let alone the party as a whole, I think.

Do you agree? Well, it's interesting you talk about that wing of the party because I do think a headline like this is designed to throw some bread meat to the Tory right because they've lost their hero. They've lost their Soella. By Soella, Hello Pretty. But I think because it's coming up to Christmas, it's a bit like the Ghosts of Tory Christmas past, like they're dragging up everyone. And I have said this before, but it is again like they've gone over to the washing basket and gone through the stink socks and picked out the one that stinks the least. I think we need to remember how much this particular sock does stink because you talk a lot about how she's a good politician. But what did she actually get done? Because it's all a bit talk of substance, even maybe Soella Trumped her on that. But let's think about it. She was the architect of the Rwanda Plan. Look where that's got us wasted a whole lot of money, a whole lot of time. She is also the person who brought in the nationality and borders bill one of the most punitive measures on migrants fleeing persecution and coming into this country.

And she was embroidered in countless bullying scandals. To my mind, that's not a great track record. And she doesn't really have much on her CV that I see worth bringing her back to the front line other than the fact people.

Quite like her. I mean, the argument that she would make is that she is the one that actually introduced policy, and that she was fumbled on other people. Terrible policy. Well, you may think it's terrible or not, but the point is, it was fumbled by other people. And bullying, you say countless, there were a finite number of bullying allegations, and that is something that goes hand in hand with... I've got to see you. That's something that happens very often with ministries that are deemed to not be working by ministers who are brought in specifically to get them to work. And let's be clear, the Home Office has not worked for a very long time. That was the remit under which he was given. But again, this is, I think, more going back to what it is that we've just lost, which is Soella Bravman, which I think everybody agrees was not, in fact, the great white hope of the tory right that perhaps she believed that she was.

I guess this leads us beautifully to The Telegraph. The page one PM deploys to fight all officials to Rwanda as revolt grows. Rishie Sunak will station home office officials in Rwanda as he tries to fight of an escalating Tory rebellion over his small boat's policy. I guess ultimately, yes, it's certain people that may appeal or not appeal, but it's the policies as well that Sunak is trying to.

Push through. It is. And I have to say, now we can discuss the merits of Priti Patel, but broadly speaking, the Rwanda policy has not been a success. And I don't think it was ever going to be a success. That's an understatement. Well, I don't think it was ever going to be a success. It's an absolute disaster. And the thing is, I think it demonstrates actually the real weakness of Sue Nack's position that rather than try to find an alternative or have a plan B, and this is, I think, a justified criticism of Suella Bratholomew, is that he's gone back to the same policy and he's trying to tink around the edges. And I think it shows you really how weak he is as a Prime Minister and how weak his government is that they don't feel that they can come up with something in a very short space of time. They don't feel that they can necessarily change legislation. All that they can do is take people and put them in Rwanda and say to the Rwandan government, Oh, please, chaps, please, improve your human rights record, improve your processes, because we're going to look like real idiots if you don't.

That shows you how weak his situation is. He's relying on a foreign government for his own domestic policy. And ultimately, I just don't see how you can take that to the country and say, Yes, we're in control of the situation. Now, it was always going to be the case that civil servants were going to have to go out to Rwanda in any event. But we're talking about such small numbers of people that are going to be sent out there, and they're going to have to be people who are sent to the UK as part of the deal. And it's just I think a lot of people are very fed up of what is now, I think just moving the debt chairs around on a sinking Titanic of a policy. It just makes him look weak at this moment in time.

I think he just doesn't want to admit that so much money has been wasted, £140 million pounds of taxpayers' money, plus what would be £160,000 per migrant that would be sent to Rwanda. This is wild waste of taxpayers' money. I think we just need to park this one now, Rishi. You've got a unanimous decision from five Supreme Court judges saying this is not on. We've got evidence of Israel doing a similar scheme, a voluntary scheme, but still a scheme with the Rwandan government. And they weren't fed, probably 12 of them were shot dead. I guess the human rights record is no joke. It's a serious safety concern for the people that would be sent there. And it should have never, ever even been conceived.

I suppose a lot of countries in Europe are trying to deal with the migration issue, and everyone's trying to, I guess, think laterally, you're seeing similar deals. So, I mean, Benindik, are you saying that basically you should just let this alone? Because migration is an important.

Topic for a lot of these core values. I mean, one of the significant points that I think Lord Reed mentioned was that the UN had said that Rwanda didn't meet certain criteria. And this is hilarious because, of course, the UN is made up by countries like Rwanda. It's not a body that is necessarily completely balanced on this. It has many different competing interests at play. But the thing here is you're never going to find a country that is willing to take in another country's migrant population that doesn't have similar issues to Rwanda. It doesn't matter if it's Colombia, it doesn't matter if it's Thailand, pick them out of the air. There's always going to be issues that means that it fails those tests. Sense. This is what I'm afraid Western governments, European governments are going to have to come to terms with. If you want a robust border system where you can actually process people, properly house them, it's going to have to be on your sovereign territory. You might not like that, and it'll be very expensive to do. But I'll tell you what, we'd have waited... We'd have spent a lot less money, rather, if we just acknowledge that that it's going to involve processing people in the UK or on a British overseas territory, then saying, I know, let's just pick a country in sub-Saharan Africa.

Yes, Rwanda, that'll do. They quite like the idea. It would have been a lot more to have just done it that way.

We have just a few minutes to look at the front page of The Sunday Express, a story which is also linked to the issue of the small boats. Terror cell sneaks in on small boats. Amy, what's this story about?

I think this is a story aimed to fearmonger in the wake of the unanimous decision about the Rwanda Plan to rally up the readers of The Express to feel like, Oh, these migrants are a problem. And... And I don't really see how it's going to be in any way helpful to have a story like this on the front page. The truth is that we have no idea who's coming over here because we're not processing the cases. There's no caseworkers. So, well, a brother of a man went in post when she wasn't grabbing headlines. She wasn't finding caseworkers, which is ironic that she couldn't find people to decide her asylum claims. We have no idea who they are, but there is a fact that the majority of terrorists are homegrown, and this story is incredibly misleading and makes it sound that a homogeneous group of migrants are a terror threat, which is just nonsense and fear mongering. It's very purist.

Is it fear mongering? I don't think you can ever take allegations or claims wherever the sources come from, that there is a terrorist cell on the loose. I don't think you can ever just say, Cart-blanch, that this is politically motivated. It's very convenient, I'd say that. But actually, I think we underestimate quite how many terrorist attacks are foiled in this country and across Europe and across the West every year. A lot of it just doesn't... It goes under the radar, it doesn't get mentioned because it's not something you want to raise necessarily scaring people, letting people know what's going on. It is true that the majority of terrorist attacks that succeed in this country are from homegrown organizations, and in Europe, that doesn't mean that they don't happen. It doesn't mean that people haven't been stopped and arrested and identified just because we don't put them on an ID parade every time we do it. It doesn't mean that they.

Don't exist. But the main thing that's going on here is yet again, the othering of migrants. Migrants are a danger. This is what this story is.

Designed to do. No problem of mothering actual terrorists is all I'll say. No, but it's.

A valid point. The two are not mutually exclusive. There could be an issue and then that issue could be whipped up. Actually, we do see that here and in other countries as well.

Sure, that's absolutely true. But it is also true that terrorist organizations look to exploit situations like this. We know that, for a fact, Russia tried to do this, bringing people from Afghanistan over its territory, trying to fall them into Poland across the Belarusian border. And the Poles blocked their border. They said none of these people are going to come in. And everybody, especially the German government, said, No, absolutely, this is a crime against human rights. Next thing you know, two months later, the Russians have invaded Ukraine, and all of the capacity that the Russians were hoping would be taken up by Afghan migrants then had to be used by Ukrainians. This stuff does actually happen, and not everybody. The vast majority of people who flee situations are refugees. That doesn't mean that nefarious individuals and organizations who want to spread disorder and chaos.

Don't exploit them. So why is this made the front page when the vast majority of people are safe? And when they are actually processed, it found that 86 % of the migrants had valid claims.

I think another thing is-I mean, a very tricky thing with that is that they prioritize women and children first because they are most likely to be approved. That is quite literal. They think who is most likely to be accepted? Who needs us most? It's the most vulnerable. Logical or ergo, yes, they are more.

Likely to be. I'm glad you mentioned children. We don't really talk about that.

We've got to go.

Ben and nick, we're just going to have to leave it there for now. We will, of course, talk with you again and look at more of the front pages, including coming up, this story on the front of the in the mirror, which claims the Tories have wasted a staggering 100 billion pounds of taxpayers' money. Welcome back. You're watching the Press Preview with me now, a writer and broadcaster, Amy Nekel Turner, and the political commentator, Benedict Spence. Good to see you, as always. Let's go to front page of The Mirror, which I think we can pull up and have a look at. Taxpayer cash squandered, staggering 100 billion of Tory waste, 1,500 pounds blown for every person in UK since the election. What have they done wrong, Amy? Say that in a way.

I didn't get £100,000 per person.

Oh, that's nothing.

I spent that on a night out. 1,500 for.

Every person. You did say you were a public school boy. Well, Itry to get my... I want it back, please. Can I have a rebate? No, this doesn't surprise me. It doesn't surprise me because I actually keep a list of Tory waste here. Some of my favorites include... Do you remember the Festival of Brexit? That never really happened, 120. Nobodyremembers the possible of a vaccine. 120 million. A little snippet, 120 million. I feel like if you're going to tell me that COVID did nothing like it yet. It did. Something like that. It's so funny that the party that's obsessed with trimming fat, cutting corners, actually ends up wasting the most money possible. Rwanda is table two.

How much of this is COVID-related there? I don't know how much of that is this?

Well, no, they wrote that off.

They wrote that off. But this is the problem with the front page of the mirror, is that it doesn't say whether or not this includes stuff that is COVID-related or not, because 100 billion is a very large round number, and it does say over the last four years, not the last 13 years of Tory rule, for example. It says very specifically the last four years. And you think, Right, what might have happened over the course of the last four years? We've left the European Union and there was a massive pandemic that led to a massive increase in government spending. I think that that's key here.

Because it specifies that the waste happened while that Richie Sunak was PM or Chancellor.

-or Chancellor, exactly. -pm or Chancellor. And I think that this is the key thing, which is if you're going to take part of the pandemic and all the associated spending with that, we can sit here and we can say, Yes, massive dereliction in terms of oversight and all that thing. But if we also remember the slight state of hysteria at the time, what were they going to do? Not spend that money on people? Were they just going to let people or businesses go under? Then they'd have been the evil Tories who let people starve and don't let them pay their bills and didn't buy enough PE.

I think you're giving them a bit of an easy ride then.

I have to give them an easy ride because you've been keeping a list. It's your job to bring.

The list out. But let's go to the express now.

It's COVID fraud, never take them back. That's what the.

Case is. See, that's.

What I want to hear. That's what I want to hear.

It's mismanagement. It's going to be dangerous schools. It's going to be dangerous schools risk to 700,000 pupils. So at least 700,000 pupils are attending crumbling schools that need major repairs or a complete rebuild. Again, Benedict.

What's the story? This is the RAC. It's gone out of my mind what RAC stands for, but it's the certain type of concrete that had a very short shelf life and that we used to build schools and public buildings because it was cheap. -they cut in corners. -yeah. Now, although this also happened under several governments, thank you very much, Tony Blur. It's one of those things, where of course, we view juxtaposed it against £100 billion wasted. And then you think of all the infrastructure projects that we've not quite managed to get off the ground and the fact that our schools are going to have to be closed, this is what happens when you don't have sufficient government oversight or very much growth. And of course, in the last 13 or so years, we have had.

Flat growth. I don't think it's about growth. I think... I think it's about planning, terrible planning.

That's also true. But if you don't have growth and you don't have the money to actually spend on things, then that is a significant problem because it means that we're going to have to find the money for rebuilding.

These schools. They've found the money for a lot of things that they didn't need to find the money for. Let's not talk... Their money is there. They've all gone now. They've built a load of schools in the '70s that are essentially made of aerobars, and they've had warnings since the 90s. Now, I think the key thing to remember here is in 2010, there was a plan to rebuild those schools. But when the Tories came in, they scrapped that plan. And now they're paying- Can.

We stop saying Tories? Let's just say.

George Osborn. Let's just blame him. Now they're paying the consequences. Not all.

Tories are heartless and want the schools to fall down. It was George Osborne. He's not here to defend himself.

You would think that any government would put children as the priority, and they haven't. Now we can literally have the potential of this-That's fair enough.

We have a minute and 15 seconds to talk.

About Nigel Farage. Oh, goodness. My good friend.

We're going to need all of that time, Ben, that.

You start. Should I be the one that starts? You're his colleague, you're his good friend and comrade. But I just want to say very quickly, I think that it's very harsh that people are dragging up tweets because anybody could have tweeted negative things about Nigel Farage, such as myself. And we wouldn't necessarily want it brought back to life. But anyway.

Yeah, I guess who hasn't sent a mean tweet about Nigel forage? Grace Dent is going to be his campmate in I'm a celebrity, which I think kicks off tomorrow. She sent out some tweets. They were very crass tweets about when he did have a near-fatal plane crash. It was a very difficult time. And she sent out a few tweets saying, Oh, I hope a migrant looks after you when you're getting better. To be honest, Nigel's got an extremely thick skin, and he's no stranger to a crass comment himself. He's spun out a few. I think that everything's going to be all right. I actually think this might be a little cheap bid because ITV needs the viewing figures this year because of the amount of money that.

They've given the camp men.

-are you going to be tuning in? -so they've got to recoup that one- Are you going to be voting for him? -are you? No.

I'm going to be watching Sky News every evening. What are you.

Going to be doing? Thank you very much, Niall. That is Benedict. That is what we like to hear. Benedict and Amy, thank you so much.