The Staggers 18 January 2013 Morning Call: pick of the papers The ten must-read comment pieces from this morning's papers. Print HTML 1. Cameron’s incurable European headache (Financial Times) This is where the irresistible force of rising Tory europhobia meets the immovable object of geopolitical reality, writes Philip Stephens. 2. It’s too early for the Tories to assume defeat is inevitable in 2015 (Daily Telegraph) David Cameron could be a transformative leader if he had more faith in his power to change minds, says Fraser Nelson. 3. Algeria spills more blood (Guardian) The violent end to this standoff is only the start of a new chapter in the country's savage history, writes Nabila Ramdani. 4. Don’t reject a referendum, Ed. Fast-track it (Times) (£) The Labour leader should seize his chance to appeal to British business and voters, says Philip Collins. He must offer an in-out vote now. 5. Mali is not a global conflict. It doesn't require a global response (Independent) The notion of a global threat from a revived al-Qa'ida should be familiar by now; it's the same flawed reasoning the led the US to launch its "war against terror", says Adrian Hamilton. 6. A living wage, or a much higher minimum wage, is worth paying (Daily Telegraph) As City profits soar, the low-skilled, service areas of the economy continue to suffer a fall in income, writes Jeremy Warner. Radical action might avoid a social catastrophe. 7. A funny way of firing up the locomotive (Financial Times) Now and in the interwar period, austerity policies have often failed in their own terms as they have made deficits worse, writes Samuel Brittan. 8. Mr Cameron and the speech that never was (Daily Mail) The Prime Minister is confronting one of the most crucial issues of our times while Ed Miliband has nothing useful to say, argues a Daily Mail editorial. 9. Hugh Gaitskell: New Labour's old roots (Guardian) Tony Blair never acknowledged the influence of his most like-minded predecessor, who died 50 years ago this week, says a Guardian editorial. 10. Why today’s American presidents need a third term (Independent) There are compelling reasons why two four-year terms may not be enough for a competent and popular US president today, writes Mary Dejevsky. › David Bowie: The eternal space oddity From only £1 per week Subscribe More Related articles 7 problems with the Snooper’s Charter, according to the experts The buck doesn't stop with Grant Shapps - and probably shouldn't stop with Lord Feldman, either The Fire Brigades Union reaffiliates to Labour - what does it mean?