Morning Call: pick of the papers

The ten must-read comment pieces from this morning's papers.

  1. More spending? The coalition may as well build a bridge to the moon (Guardian)
    David Cameron and Vince Cable are both wrong. Infrastructure isn't the answer and nor is QE – money in pockets is, writes Simon Jenkins.
  2. Pay up for Nato or shut it down (Financial Times)
    Being prepared for new threats requires military capabilities but no one wants to pick up the bill, argues Philip Stephens.
  3. The crumbling Coalition is being torn apart by the post-Budget Public Spending Review (Telegraph)
    Deciding the contents of George Osborne's Budget has been relatively straightforward. How to divide the shrinking budgets is a battle that has taken on Bosnian complexity, says Fraser Nelson.
  4. David Cameron's very own magic money tree (Guardian)
    This speech outlines Cameron's strategic gamble of ploughing on with austerity and using quantitative easing as a palliative, writes Richard Seymour.
  5. Benefit tourists are just political phantoms (Times)
    It’s a myth that lazy foreigners are sponging off our welfare state. Our leaders ought to be straight with us, says Philip Collins.
  6. The man at Number 10 is not for turning (Financial Times)
    If the British government’s plan is working, what would a failing one look like, asks Martin Wolf.
  7. Ministerial rows over cuts show how much weaker Cameron and Osborne have become (Independent)
    The Tories now see the reality of public-spending cuts—and they don't like it, writes Steve Richards.
  8. It’s plain what George Osborne needs to do – so just get on and do it (Telegraph)
    The politics are tricky, but the Budget must confront some hard economic choices, insists Jeremy Warner.
  9. The Market Speaks (New York Times)
    Yes, the Dow Jones industrial average has been setting new records this week, but the message from the markets is actually not a happy one, says Paul Krugman.
  10. MPs reading the news? Pigs (and bats) might fly (Independent)
    There was a curious absence at DEFRA questions, writes Donald MacIntyre.

Alex Hern is a technology reporter for the Guardian. He was formerly staff writer at the New Statesman. You should follow Alex on Twitter.

Matt Cardy/Getty Images
Show Hide image

What did Jeremy Corbyn really say about Bin Laden?

He's been critiqued for calling Bin Laden's death a "tragedy". But what did Jeremy Corbyn really say?

Jeremy Corbyn is under fire for describing Bin Laden’s death as a “tragedy” in the Sun, but what did the Labour leadership frontrunner really say?

In remarks made to Press TV, the state-backed Iranian broadcaster, the Islington North MP said:

“This was an assassination attempt, and is yet another tragedy, upon a tragedy, upon a tragedy. The World Trade Center was a tragedy, the attack on Afghanistan was a tragedy, the war in Iraq was a tragedy. Tens of thousands of people have died.”

He also added that it was his preference that Osama Bin Laden be put on trial, a view shared by, among other people, Barack Obama and Boris Johnson.

Although Andy Burnham, one of Corbyn’s rivals for the leadership, will later today claim that “there is everything to play for” in the contest, with “tens of thousands still to vote”, the row is unlikely to harm Corbyn’s chances of becoming Labour leader. 

Stephen Bush is editor of the Staggers, the New Statesman’s political blog.