:00:00. > :00:00.in the Queen Mother Champion Chase. And another British Paralympic medal
:00:00. > :00:16.at the Winter Olympics in Sochi as well.
:00:17. > :00:23.Hello. Welcome to our lookahead at what the papers will be bringing us
:00:24. > :00:25.tomorrow. With me Jenny Wilson, columnist for the Times, and Neil
:00:26. > :00:32.Midgley, media writer the Daily Telegraph. We are going to start
:00:33. > :00:35.with the main picture story in the Independent. It is of the news
:00:36. > :00:39.conference today for the missing flight, MH370. The main story is
:00:40. > :00:46.that tens of thousands of people are being unlawfully detained in care
:00:47. > :00:49.homes according to a House of Lords inquiry. That's also the main story
:00:50. > :00:54.on the front of the Daily Mail. One in ten adults will pay two thirds of
:00:55. > :00:58.all income tax according to analysis done by the FT. It says there is a
:00:59. > :01:03.growing debate about whether next week's budget should do more to help
:01:04. > :01:06.top rate taxpayers. The Telegraph's leaders that statins have no side
:01:07. > :01:13.effects according to research done by Imperial College. Billions of
:01:14. > :01:17.funding will be needed for NHS reforms according to the outgoing
:01:18. > :01:20.boss of the service with an interview with the Guardian. The
:01:21. > :01:28.Express says there are ten days of sun on the way. We like that
:01:29. > :01:34.FrontPage! We hope it's true. A lot of express stories about the weather
:01:35. > :01:44.turn out to be mistaken. Was there supposed to be a big freeze this
:01:45. > :01:47.winter? At least three times a week! That plane crash, MH370, still
:01:48. > :01:53.missing, five days after it disappeared. Nobody seems to have a
:01:54. > :01:56.clue what happened to it. A huge press conference, where it is clear
:01:57. > :02:02.it is not just potential debris that's at sea, it is the search for
:02:03. > :02:06.this plane at sea as well? The word farcical is in inverted commas in
:02:07. > :02:11.the headline, that is exactly how it teams to be going. It seems there
:02:12. > :02:15.were images taken by the Chinese satellite on Sunday showing daydream
:02:16. > :02:23.in the sea, almost precisely on the flight path. -- debris. Since then,
:02:24. > :02:27.they have been searching hundreds of miles to the west of air. The real
:02:28. > :02:32.tragedy is that there were hundreds of families waiting in Beijing, who
:02:33. > :02:35.know nothing about the fate of their loved ones. They are now being fed
:02:36. > :02:40.all of this inconsistent information. It must be not only
:02:41. > :02:48.heartbreaking for them, but really trying as well. Very frustrating.
:02:49. > :02:51.There is probably a lot of politics involved as well. The satellite
:02:52. > :02:56.image was apparently taken on Sunday. It was only released today.
:02:57. > :03:04.The Chinese, it is daily Chinese nationals on the plane, the Chinese
:03:05. > :03:08.authorities need to be seen to be doing something? If the Chinese knew
:03:09. > :03:14.they had pictures of debris on Sunday, why have they spent so long
:03:15. > :03:18.not telling anybody about us? It's a mystery to all of us to realise that
:03:19. > :03:22.aeroplanes don't automatically send out signals telling everybody where
:03:23. > :03:26.they are. We can get tracks every 100 metres by mobile phone signals.
:03:27. > :03:29.It wasn't until this crash happened that I discovered that the
:03:30. > :03:33.transponder sends out those signals. But if it is turned off or
:03:34. > :03:37.if the aeroplane crashes, or if somebody, a hijacker, decides that
:03:38. > :03:43.it should not operate any longer, there is no automatic signal being
:03:44. > :03:45.sent by the plane. Apparently it is perfectly technically possible that
:03:46. > :03:49.you could make an aeroplane turned out a signal every few milliseconds
:03:50. > :03:52.on a low band of the radio, but it has never been a matter of course. I
:03:53. > :04:00.would have thought that now everybody would want that to happen.
:04:01. > :04:04.It seems impossible you could lose something so large in a contemporary
:04:05. > :04:09.age. The last-minute occasion suggested everything was fine. All
:04:10. > :04:17.of a sudden's flat. Does make you wonder, after 9/11, you would have
:04:18. > :04:23.thought all of these things, God forbid there was a hijacking in this
:04:24. > :04:26.case, you would have thought that all of the aviation authorities all
:04:27. > :04:30.around the world would have got together and thought, what can we
:04:31. > :04:34.do? That was another fascinating theory that I've read. We don't have
:04:35. > :04:37.any idea what happened to this plane, but I read a book by a pilot
:04:38. > :04:41.that said, what happens if you turn off the transponder is that the
:04:42. > :04:44.plane then becomes invisible to the civil aviation authorities because
:04:45. > :04:48.it is no longer sending a signal. It is only military radar which is
:04:49. > :04:51.picking up objects which are reflecting back to them, which can
:04:52. > :04:59.then read what a plane is doing. One of the series is if a hijacker had
:05:00. > :05:02.come into the cockpit and turned the transponder off, only the military
:05:03. > :05:07.would be able to detect it. Post 9/11, why would we expect that to be
:05:08. > :05:12.an acceptable fate for any aeroplane? If they were able to
:05:13. > :05:16.detect it, the military, why aren't they telling us? I know this is
:05:17. > :05:20.incredibly serious, but there are many journalists that are absolutely
:05:21. > :05:25.rubbing their hands with glee about the fact, as the story continues, it
:05:26. > :05:30.is riveting all of us, it is on the front pages and nobody can make any
:05:31. > :05:33.sense of it. It's like an episode of Lost. Nobody can make sense of it,
:05:34. > :05:38.and because there is a shortage of concrete information, that vacuum is
:05:39. > :05:44.filled with all kinds of theories. Let's move on to The Financial
:05:45. > :05:50.Times. Boom in higher rate tax fuels relief calls. The suggestion may be
:05:51. > :05:57.that there may be pressure on Mr Osborne to cut the top rate of tax?
:05:58. > :06:00.I'm sure that the boom will lead to calls from readers of The Financial
:06:01. > :06:05.Times, just as many readers of the Times, which also run this story
:06:06. > :06:09.this morning, will have a vested interest. But I don't know that the
:06:10. > :06:12.majority of the population is going to be joining this call. I think
:06:13. > :06:17.what it indicators there is a lot of political pressure on George Osborne
:06:18. > :06:21.from the Conservative Party, saying, let's make sure our people are being
:06:22. > :06:24.rewarded here. At a time of austerity, it doesn't make sense to
:06:25. > :06:29.be saying to the people that are only one in ten voters, earning
:06:30. > :06:32.enough to pay higher rate tax, it does not make sense to be saying,
:06:33. > :06:37.these people above all must be getting relief, it really doesn't.
:06:38. > :06:43.The FT has a fascinating statistic. It says that, had the threshold kept
:06:44. > :06:48.pace with wage growth over the last few years, somebody earning ?75,000
:06:49. > :06:56.would only be paying 20p basic rate tax at this point. So it should have
:06:57. > :07:03.gone up? That is assuming we still have money to spare. We know that we
:07:04. > :07:07.haven't got money to spare. Over a couple of decades, it shows you the
:07:08. > :07:10.change in the political landscape. There was a time, dim and distant,
:07:11. > :07:16.we can all remember, when tax cuts won elections. John Major got
:07:17. > :07:20.re-elected in 1992 because of his tax policy, more than anything. The
:07:21. > :07:28.Tories in this government seemed to be fighting shy of saying, not just
:07:29. > :07:32.that we need an enterprise economy, but that includes a lower tax base
:07:33. > :07:36.and giving people's money back to them, as Margaret Thatcher did in
:07:37. > :07:40.the 80s. It would be very difficult to sell at a time of austerity. It
:07:41. > :07:48.would not be difficult to sell a cut in the basic rate, it might for the
:07:49. > :07:51.top rate. To be fair, they are trying to raise the lower rate of
:07:52. > :07:58.income tax. But that is really a Lib Dem initiative? Speak to Tories and
:07:59. > :08:03.they'll tell you furiously at not, it's just the Lib Dems trying to
:08:04. > :08:08.take credit for it. Tories being on the side of lower taxes used to be a
:08:09. > :08:14.motive. When you have to cut the deficit, I can see why there are
:08:15. > :08:20.internal oddments going on. But we are in strange Financial Times? Ed
:08:21. > :08:24.Miliband has done a fantastic job about making it about what he calls
:08:25. > :08:30.the cost of living crisis. That is the political dialectic at the
:08:31. > :08:35.moment. The Tories, if they had any sense, in my opinion, would try to
:08:36. > :08:39.move away from twiddling with electricity bills and talk about
:08:40. > :08:44.bringing prosperity to the masses. That is how Margaret Thatcher won
:08:45. > :08:47.elections. I think we might take it from all of the lobbying going on to
:08:48. > :08:50.these papers and behind-the-scenes that there may be some change next
:08:51. > :08:57.week, that actually the threshold may go up a little bit. With some
:08:58. > :09:02.any people briefing that senior nurses, and we all love nurses, are
:09:03. > :09:05.being caught in this tax regime. It indicates Osborne is being pushed
:09:06. > :09:10.and perhaps he's going to jump a little. Prisoners of care homes,
:09:11. > :09:14.front page of the Daily Mail? Interesting story. A devastating
:09:15. > :09:19.report, revealing tens of thousands of elderly and vulnerable people are
:09:20. > :09:23.being locked up against their will? There is something called the mental
:09:24. > :09:27.capacity act, enacted by the Labour government in 2005, which the Daily
:09:28. > :09:30.Mail politely says was botched. Apparently, according to this House
:09:31. > :09:33.of Lords report coming out tomorrow, tens of thousands of
:09:34. > :09:39.people are being held against their will. Tens of thousands is an awful
:09:40. > :09:46.lot. The prison population is, what? Around 100,000? Something like that.
:09:47. > :09:51.70,000, just under. If there are tens of thousands of people in care
:09:52. > :09:56.homes, being held against their will... The idea is that this law
:09:57. > :09:58.was passed so that people could be protected, people that were not
:09:59. > :10:05.capable of managing their own affairs could be detained against
:10:06. > :10:08.their will if they were demented or otherwise incapacitated. According
:10:09. > :10:15.to the report, it's been used too much. It might be against their
:10:16. > :10:20.will, but it could be good for them? Of their will is not rational, it
:10:21. > :10:24.could be. It's getting the balance right between those that you have to
:10:25. > :10:27.keep in homes and those you allow out into communities? That's the
:10:28. > :10:30.problem with the issue of mental health. How much autonomy do you
:10:31. > :10:35.give people that may not be capable of making decisions in their
:10:36. > :10:38.interests. I think it is a reflection of the mess that mental
:10:39. > :10:43.health policy has been in for 25 years, since it was decided to close
:10:44. > :10:46.so many homes that looked after the mentally ill and put them back into
:10:47. > :10:50.the committee. Lots of people I know that have friends or relations, or
:10:51. > :10:54.who themselves have been mentally ill, as soon as you enter the system
:10:55. > :10:59.you find that care is very short, in very short supply. You find yourself
:11:00. > :11:03.being committed, when you know, and you feel, you should not be there.
:11:04. > :11:07.Or you are pleading desperately for some kind of respite care,
:11:08. > :11:10.short-term assistance, and it's not available. Basically, we just don't
:11:11. > :11:15.know what to do with people that temporarily conduct after
:11:16. > :11:20.themselves. -- temporarily conduct after themselves. Difficult area,
:11:21. > :11:23.another difficult area. Statins apparently have no side effects
:11:24. > :11:34.according to Imperial College, despite many, many years of being
:11:35. > :11:39.told that they do. All sorts of side effects, muscle problems, renal
:11:40. > :11:47.disorder. But apparently, Imperial College have surveyed 29 pieces of
:11:48. > :11:49.academic research and they say there's no greater risk of
:11:50. > :11:56.side-effects from statins than if you a placebo, which seems hard to
:11:57. > :12:01.credit but is obviously, if it's true, or if it is held to be true by
:12:02. > :12:05.the health service, then that will have important consequences because
:12:06. > :12:10.statins are set to be prescribed much more widely to people over the
:12:11. > :12:14.age of 50, almost as a matter of routine. New NHS guidelines, which
:12:15. > :12:19.were out just when I was last on this programme, are going to
:12:20. > :12:24.recommend that the majority of men over 50 and women over 60 should
:12:25. > :12:29.take statins in the future. From your experience and members of your
:12:30. > :12:32.own family, is that there are side effects? Absolutely appalling
:12:33. > :12:37.side-effects. The second half of this piece has all the evidence that
:12:38. > :12:42.says actually, statins do have severe side effects. There are
:12:43. > :12:45.doctors saying that the trouble is in clinical trials lots of people
:12:46. > :12:51.and a report side-effects. It says here, last week a survey revealed
:12:52. > :12:54.that the majority of GPs would not take statins themselves or recommend
:12:55. > :12:58.them to a relative. The argument is they are the people who are seeing
:12:59. > :13:01.the patients coming in day by day, saying, I am feeling terrible on
:13:02. > :13:07.these. They find that symptoms disappear when they come off them. I
:13:08. > :13:10.know many people who were put onto statins and found that things like
:13:11. > :13:15.muscle fatigue and weakness was so severe that they could hardly walk
:13:16. > :13:21.or get out of their chairs. We will have to end it there. You are back
:13:22. > :13:26.in an hours time. Stay with us on BBC News because at 11pm we will
:13:27. > :13:29.have the latest that missing Malaysia Airlines plane, as the
:13:30. > :13:33.Chinese government releases satellite images of floating objects
:13:34. > :13:37.in the South China Sea. Are these clues to what happened? Time for
:13:38. > :13:54.Sportsday. Hello, I'm Olly Foster. Here's
:13:55. > :13:57.what's coming up on Sportsday. Messi puts City to the sword as another
:13:58. > :14:00.English side are knocked out of the Champions League. At Cheltenham, the
:14:01. > :14:01.favourite, Sire de Grugy, wins