26/03/2014 The Papers

against Novak Djokovic at the Miami Masters. That's coming up in the

next 15 minutes. Straight after The Papers.

Hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the papers will be bringing

us tomorrow. With me are James Rampton, features writer at the

Independent. And Kate Devlin of the Herald. Let's have a look at the

front pages. We start of the Independent. It looks of alleged

police corruption and subsequent investigation has found dozens of

Metropolitan Police detectives were in the pay of organised crime. The

Telegraph is leading an energy prices. The watchdog is likely to

order a competition enquiry into the big six providers tomorrow,

apparently. The financial Times says Rupert Murdoch's eldest son is in

pole position to take over as father 's media empire. The guardians of

the Home Secretary will take personal charge of the way the

police respond to domestic abuse in England and Wales after a damning

report. The express is looking forward to cheap energy bills after

today's price freeze by SSE. The mail newspaper reports on fears of

runaway house prices. We will start with a big debate tonight. Between

two party leaders, one speaking five line which is including Dutch, the

other one feels uncomfortable on a commuter train when he hears foreign

managers. Which do you think is which? It's so hard to tell, isn't

it? No idea. They were both, the audience and everybody told were

told they had no idea what the questions are going to be. You just

thought, it's on Europe. But you were there. Technically. You were in

their spin room getting all kinds of jibber jabber from UKIP and the Lib

Dems. Who do you think came out on top? It's very interesting because I

thought it was very close and both of them had at the moment is dying

moments and probably, Nick `` Nigel Farage one but he squeaked it. A

poll says he won by a large margin tonight. What's very interesting is

the last time we had TV debate during the general election, Nick

Clegg was the man of the people, when speaking. He was the outsider.

I think this time, Nigel Farage has managed to beat him. Apparently, in

one of these polls, one in five Liberal Democrats thought Nigel

Farage one. That is interesting. So they don't agree with Nick Clegg

either. I agree with you that Nigel Farage has stolen Nick Clegg's

outsider clothes and he's playing the underdog card for all it's

worth. This front piece in the Guardian says it's interesting

because UKIP has no more major experience of winning anything in

the UK than a town called Ramsay in Cambridge with a population of 6000

people but Nick Clegg is the Deputy Prime Minister. Lord Heseltine

thought was a bad idea to dignify him with this debate and I think a

lot of Liberal Democrats must be nervous about it but you can have

got 30% in the polls going into May's Europe elections and the Lib

Dems are 9%. Nick Clegg has to raise his profile to make it look

statesman`like. He does have to prove he is a statesman. That's what

you may have done tonight. That's the reason they went for it for what

they are rock bottom in the polls. What happened in 2010, he came

across as passionate, and man of the people, to a degree. Also, as well,

because he was the outsider, he was perhaps hoping some of that Sheen

would rub off tonight. Basically, they had nothing to lose another

thing to gain and they had to do this. There was a call at the end

when Nick Clegg said, it is never voted Lib Dem before, us a chance.

They could equally absurd comeback. If you're hacked off at about

tuition fees, for instance. It is very interesting, he made a real

slip and said people always had to read the small print and he was

talking about the combo ideas around EU referendum is but I think a lot

of people will see that as tuition fees. The latter with a small print

you sent to voters will come back to haunt him because people will see

that as the most rank hypocrisy, and that could be why they are 9% in the

polls. There is another debate next week so he could pull it back out of

the fire and be seen to be the man who won an all that kind of stuff,

but was it a mistake, given Nigel Farage's performance? It might be a

mistake given what David Cameron and Ed Miliband aside to do because what

tonight proved was that two people debating was quite dynamic, quite

quick, a lot more sensible in some ways than three people debating.

So, the upshot from tonight is Nick Clegg could end up being cut out of

the general election debates. Then I think they will see it as a massive

mistake. Is that a possibility? Basically, the parties get to decide

themselves. The Lib Dems are going to say Nick Clegg are going to get

on the stage. Many conservatives are keen not to have Nick Clegg are

there. They think there's enough differentiation between Ed Miliband

and David Cameron and their comfortable they can win that and

they think Nick Clegg in the middle could muddy the waters. If Nick

Clegg and David Cameron said we don't want Nick Clegg there, they

can get away with that. Yes, I think Nick Clegg would try to take some

action. I'm not sure if he would go for legal action. He would be

spitting tacks of that was the case. If they said the doubly Prime

Minister Erdogan along powerful enough to stand on the platform. The

old boxing match, the confrontation between two people, that's why the

US presidential elections work so well. It feels much more ponderous,

everybody being asked the same question. Much more laboured. Two

men feels a bit clean and clear. Let's move on to the Telegraph.

Millions are paying too much for energy. No, Sherlock. Ofgem

criticises the Big Six companies amid allegations of profiteering.

This is interesting because it says it could lead to an enquiry that

might even break up the so`called Big Six and this is an incendiary

issues with the election right now. This is a big one in people's minds.

People are being talked about the quality`of`life and the cost of

living and this is absolutely key to that and people thinking that the

increase, some as high as 11% recently, in their energy bills are

unsustainable. That's why, although some people saw it a cynical, I

think SSE has pledged today to freeze its prices for cue years was

quite clever. They are losing 500 jobs at to off`load assets to

achieve that but it seems they were getting ahead of the game so it will

be interesting to see how that plays out. People are hoping that the

other five big energy companies are following suit. Absolutely. I do

wonder, though, what this will say tomorrow. It's basically about

profits and SSE seem to be suggesting, by cutting energy bills

and getting rid of staff, profits might not be too much affected, and

you saw that in the stock market today. Actually, today, it will take

the regulators to go in and change this market and we can't really rely

on the goodwill of the energy companies. That sounds very

tautological to me. On to the Daily Mail. House price bubble. Beware.

The suggestion is we are stoking up house prices too much. Yes, it's

quite worrying for the bid comes from the head of the independent

office the budget responsibility, whose job it is to predict what's

going to happen is the economy and if he says there's worries about

house price bubbles, we should probably listen carefully. The

problem is, as we know, the government has got interests in

this. With helpers abide, they are hoping that this high risk strategy

will get lots of people onto the market `` help to buy. And get their

votes, without stoking a housing bubble remains to be seen. The Bank

of England, Mark Carney, recently, was saying he doesn't think there's

a bubble, but the public shouldn't get too much credit and overextend

themselves just in case. It sounds as if the Bank of England is

slightly worried as well. Interestingly, Prince Charles has

weighed into this debate and I think, in this particular instance,

I applaud what he said. He said is not sustainable, the average house

price in London is expected to jump from ?458,000 up to ?650,000 and the

next few years. Who can afford that? Most normal people would find that I

bought a really expensive and would have to move out of London so Prince

Charles is absolutely right to point this out as a huge issue. How can

people get on the housing ladder if the average goes on up to 650,000?

For the coalition, they're not in any mood to do anything about this

before the election. On the flip side of this, as we always say

before bubbles burst, everybody gets a lot richer. Quite a lot of people

might be quite happy to see their bills... What his activity, I like

that phrase, a lot of developers and speculators are buying things off

plan that they don't intend to live in and that overheats the bubble

which then bursts. I know one developer and where the plans have

been sold twice. The plans. It hasn't been built at full sub sold

twice, foreign investors. Was this when Gwyneth Paltrow kissed goodbye

to her marriage? We've got no idea who the bloke is, someone called

Donavon Leach, but she publicised the fact that she was separating

from her husband, the lead singer of Coldplay, on her website. It wasn't

even on the front page, it was in the blog spot, and she used a

curious phrase which I have forgotten now! Conscious and

coupling. I don't know what it means either! I am slightly conflicted

about this story, I hate to see couples breaking up. But there is an

element of schadenfreude about it, a woman whose very persona reeks of

smugness. Really?! Absolutely, if you read the website, it tells you

how to live your life, fun and banned, you have to knit sandals out

of tofu. You have to leave... Live an incredibly dusty life, and some

people say, I don't want to do that. There may be an element of that, I

am not surprised he's run away if that is the way she is. Do you

agree? This phrase turns out to be a self`help and trap and a whole

industry... You learn a new thing every day on the Papers. Candy

Crush... I did not think you were so cynical! I have absolutely no idea!

Never heard that before! We will end with new media, Candy Crush has King

takes 15%, explain what this is. You are a young person! I do know what

it is, newfangled games that people play on their iPhones while they are

commuting and all that kind of stuff. They are quite simple games,

but they are worth millions, because they are very addictive. The problem

is they might not be worth as much as people thought they were, and

Candy has indeed been crushed on the stock market, taken an absolute

pounding. It raises a couple of questions, is it just that the

markets think this particular company had a one`hit wonder they

will never repeat again? Or do they think that general tech stocks sell

for a lot of money, do they think they are overvalued and we are

heading towards another tech bubble? Oh dear, not like 2001 again! That

does seem to be another bubble, and one analyst says, it is an unproven

business and the presidents for this are not great. You can say that

again! `` precedents. We saw Facebook by that company recently,

WhatsApp, billions. Yeah, one wonders if it is money well spent.

Absolutely. To be fair, the owners of Candy Crush did not help

themselves. They basically admitted they were one`hit wonders and said

the plan is not to find another megahit. OK! An interesting

strategy! Merry Christmas, their one`hit wonder for ever and ever,

live of the proceeds. And interesting business strategy, you

will be back in an hour for another look at the stories, thanks for

that. Stay with us, because at the top of the hour we will have a

little bit more analysis of that debate between Nick Clegg and Nigel

Farage. But coming up now, time for Sportsday.

Hello and welcome to Sportsday, I'm Olly Foster. Here's what's coming

up: Cock`a`Hoops, Celtic hit five at Partick, and they are champions for

another year. It's been 24 years since Liverpool

last won the title, but another victory keeps them in the