26/01/2014 The Papers

introduce a 50p rate of tax is fair. Thousands of Ukrainians have paid

tribute to a man killed during clashes with police in the capital

Kiev. Protests have continued to build around the country.

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

us tomorrow. With me are Mihir Bose from the London Evening Standard and

the pensions analyst Ros Altmann. Tomorrow's front pages, starting

with the Independent. It reports on what it calls the UK's regional

brain drain. The paper says huge numbers of young adults move to

London and never return home. The Daily Telegraph reports on a story

we've been covering, the attack by business leaders on Labour's planned

50p tax rise. The Metro claims England football fans are being

lured into a ?15 million scam involving the sale of World Cup

tickets. The front page of the Express says a revolutionary laser

treatment for arthritis has been discovered by scientists. The

Financial Times also examines the business world's response to

Labour's tax pledge. The Guardian claims that the

government accepted ?1,000 from a fraudster who was selling fake bomb

detectors. The Times reports that the government is planning an

overhaul of pensions which could see them increase by a third in value.

And The Daily Mail also reports on this story, saying pensioners could

be ?25 a week better off. Beginning with a story that has had

a lot of traction. Some of the papers were previewing Ed Balls'

speech on Friday night for their Saturday editions and we are now on

the Monday conditions and the story is still here. By Financial Times

reports it as businesses blast the 50p plan. Conservatives claimed the

proposal threatens recovery. We had a 50p tax rate before and it didn't

last. Isn't it Labour testing the waters? We have 15 months until the

election. Ed Miliband has already said he will freeze energy prices if

he comes into power. This 50p tax is presumably the next step. Labour is

saying how they can manage the economy. Their problem is, in the

next election, how they will convince the electorate, having

mismanaged things last time, that they are competent to do it. Ed

Miliband is hoping that he can build. And at all is, that they care

for the common people, the people suffering. The story has been kept

on the front pages because we are now looking at the business leaders

are positive response. The Telegraph reports many business leaders have

written a letter, saying this is a terrible idea. But they would,

wouldn't they? It's more about politics. This is about playing to

the people, the vast majority, in this country. Most wouldn't go

anywhere near enough to pay a 50p tax rate. It's a sort of populist

measure, perhaps tapping into some of the discontent that there is

because the disparity between those who are middle incomes and those at

top has widened. There is an increase in inequality of income.

This is, if you like, a bit of political grandstanding. Lord

Prescott on Twitter said, it's amazing seeing all these people

earning over 50 K are against it. Does it require that politicians

need to explain more to people, why it 50p tax rate is not the cure?

They are just not explaining it well enough? Political parties fight

elections on making pledges which are headline news. The right tabloid

headline. They don't go into the details. It's only when they come to

power and you discover some of their policies don't work. For Labour,

it's very important to get the right headlines. But they are really

reaching out to the right people. At the moment, Labour is still not

crossing the 40% threshold in the polls. Although this won't raise

much money at all and it indeed may not raise any money, according to

some estimates I've seen, it does play to the politics. There are a

lot of people out there who are very angry that their pay has been cut or

frozen and pay at the top has soared. That, I think, is what

Labour is tapping into. And the anger increases when you have

austerity and people are facing cutbacks. They feel, why are the

rich getting away with it? Or why are the 3% who are likely to get

away with it, why are they getting away? But it won't really be the

measure we need to tackle the deficit. But it won't completely

destroyed a recovery. The other side of the claim might also be an little

bit dubious. But, from a political point of view, Labour won't be

wanting to alienating want to be alienating business. New Labour made

an enormous claim of saying we want is this, we want people to be

successful, we want people to own money because that brings more money

in for everybody. To a certain extent that's true. We have seen

recently in France, they introduced that 75p tax rate, a lot of

businesses just got up and left. The French people came here! That, I

think, is the risk. This rate is less money than leaving tax rates

where they are. But this isn't new Labour. Ed Miliband says new Labour

is over. They are obviously still reliant on large donors, who have

already come out and said they aren't happy with this. It will be

interesting to see how it works. I would much rather see either party

talking about merging tax and national insurance together and

having a low rate overall, rather than attacking one group or another

and having a political battle over top rate tax. That's to convert

catered an idea for politicians. -- to convert catered an idea. This

idea here of the loo of London attract the young talent from the

regions. -- lure of London. And, in many cases, they don't go home. We

have a boom in the south and it's sucking people in from all over the

country because this is where the jobs are. This is where the new jobs

are being created. The article explains that 80% of the new jobs

created over the past few years have been in London in the south-east. If

people who don't live down here have not got a job and they want to find

one, they are going to have a bit -- better chance if we move down here.

Once they establish themselves, they aren't always going to go back. We

need to develop the regions and we need the recovery to spill out to

some of the other areas. But once you move to the south-east, the

temptation is to stay because you think, if I move away, I won't be

able to come back. This report emphasises that London is the big

centre of our country and London has always been the big centre for a

number of years. And this austerity, these cuts that we've had,

recession, has further accelerated the process. And the other centres

haven't developed. I can't see another process in which the other

centres can develop. I don't think we will become like France or Italy

or the US, where we have four or five big cities. Is that because we

are too small a country? The distances are short. But if you look

at the media, 11 newspapers are all in London. The BBC has gone up to

Manchester. Breakfast is their! -- there. But regional papers are

closing. The Evening Standard is free in London. You can't imagine

that happening somewhere else. London has become a capital stake by

itself. Although the Metro is available in many places. It started

off in London but that's become a free paper that's gone everywhere.

When the Olympic Committee wanted to come, they said, if you present

London, we will come, not Manchester. We need the government.

This is a redistribution issue. We need investment in other areas and

the government is talking about that. Building investment outside of

London. Develop the other areas. Let's move on to talk about a

pensions story. Good thing you are here, Ros. Staying with the Times.

Pensions to rise by 30% in pensions revolution. That's their story. But

it comes with greater risk. Can you explain this? I would say this

headline is a bit misleading. The idea that just by changing the type

of pensions scheme you are in you can get 30% more, it depends on

investment markets and it depends on investments. And your pension during

the time you get that pension could vary according to performance? It's

trying to say that the government is now looking at, because we have a

pensions crisis and not enough people are putting in funds and

employers are closing schemes, and we find a less risky pension? Now,

employers take some of the risk without offering cast-iron

guarantees. This is what we are talking about. They have this kind

of model in Holland. The idea is that everybody puts money into the

pot. Those already retired take out what they think they can afford. The

risk with these pensions is that younger people may not get the same

as older people, even though they have put in the same amount.

Somebody on Twitter, appealing to you directly, please point out this

30% comes from a spreadsheet in -- and some dodgy assumptions. It does

depend very much on assumptions. It's a bit misleading. This is about

private pensions. It's about trying to invent a different type of

scheme. One of the big benefits of this one is joining lots of schemes

together. Like they do in Holland. Doesn't it reflect the fact that

final salary schemes aren't now affordable? And we don't have a

viable employers scheme any more. Basically, we haven't found a

formula. The younger people have always subsidised the older people

but you are saying this will accelerate or even further enquiries

that process. That would be one of the risks. The people who aren't in

favour of this type of scheme would say, what you are doing is getting

money in for -- from the younger generations. They put the money in

and yet you can't be sure that the pension would be there when they

retire. Equally, this kind of scheme does also allow you to cut the

pensions of people who are already pensioners. Our current system

doesn't do that. That would be a big change. And other pensions story in

The Daily Mail. Top up lifeline for women. Boost your pension by ?25 a

week. But this is only for people who are currently... Have reached

state pension age or we'll do so by April, 2016. -- will. This is the

state pension. You can do this with the private sector. This is what

will happen to the states. And you will get a particular sum of money

back. Whether people want to do that or not... If they have the money,

why would they want to put it in a pension? They would want to invest

it elsewhere. Having money in a pension pot is a good alternative to

having an annuity. We don't know how much they will charge you to buy the

extra pension. They say ?1 for every ?900. They are all estimates. We

have not seen the final figures. And buying any index-linked pension

depends on the age at which you buy it. If you are 70, it will be

cheaper than if you are 60. Let's get that to the Times. Boys need to

be taught how to treat girls. This is according to Mumsnet, who are a

large campaigning group these days, saying that sex education should be

compulsory at secondary schools to teach boys to respect the girls

because many boys are getting their idea of what sexual relationships

are like from online pornography. It seems that in schools there is no

form of sex education that is provided. It also says one in three

girls is groped or experiences some form of unwanted sexual touching at

school and that is a very sad and disturbing statistic. We would have

thought that we have come a long way in this country in properly teaching

people what sex education is and if we are not doing that, that is a

serious problem. In state schools, there is still sex education being

compulsory but in the new academies, where the governors of the schools

are in charge of the curriculum, they can choose what to include or

exclude and some are excluding it. We need to look at how to make sure

that boys have the respect for girls and equally girls have the respect

for boys. That is all we have time for. Thank you for joining us this

evening. Stay with us on BBC News. Next is the Film Review.

Hello and welcome to the Film Review. To talk the week in cinema,

Mark