28/03/2014 The Papers

against Australia in the Twenty20 World Cup. And we will have all the

night's rugby union and rugby league scores as well.

Hello, and welcome to our look at the morning's papers. With me are

the social affairs editor of the Guardian, Randeep Ramesh, and

Reuters journalist and author Matthew Green. The FT leads with

"Insurers attack City watchdog" ` the financial insurance industry

responding there to plans to investigate 30 million financial

products. The Mail has the teenager who says she caught TB from her cat

in what is believed to be the first case of its kind in the world

"Tuberculosis Rex" is the Sun's front page ` you can catch TB from

dogs as well it seems The Independent has a headline about a

plan to spend ?45 million on a free school, which it says will make it

the most expensive in the country. The Telegraph claims Maria Miller,

the culture secretary, made a million pounds profit by abusing the

parliamentary expenses system and over`claiming for her mortgage.

"Banks must give fraud victims their money back" is the Times' lead,

referring to plans to potentially refund victims of credit card fraud.

And the Guardian has the headline that an Independent Scotland may

keep the pound, which comes the paper says via a private admission

from a government minister. That is where we will start. Matthew, it is

all a bit like and dagger, isn't it? A minister in government, not named,

all very secretive. It would be quite a bargaining chip for Alex

Salmond, wouldn't it? It seems odd that someone within the government

would have just handed over a gift like that so willingly. Very strange

indeed. We heard earlier that Downing Street is denying that this

is the case. It is obviously a huge boost to the pro`independence camp.

Nick is keeping quiet about his source. It indicates what a good

journalist he is. On the other hand, as Matthew was saying, this is about

a victory for the pro`independence brigade, because they are getting

the government to admit they are thinking the unthinkable. There is a

bit of quid pro quo going on here. The currency union, which Scotland

we understand would need, Westminster say they are not having

it, would be in return for... In return for keeping missiles in

Scotland, on the Clyde. It is a clever move, the government have

said that they are in a different country if they vote for

independence. Isn't this surrendering a little early? For me,

it is inconceivable that Scotland are potentially going to leave the

UK. I have just returned to the country after 14 years abroad, and

if you told me when I left that I would return to find Britain split

into, wouldn't believed it. The idea that senior figures in government

are starting in negotiations, I find amazing. They are pouring cold water

on it. A lot of the no campaign, we have Alistair Carmichael tonight

saying that an anonymous off the record quote does not change the

stance on the currency. Listen to the views of the governor of the

Bank of England, and the Secretary of the Treasury, that the currency

would be damaging for all of the UK, so a currency union will simply not

happen. It is getting pretty close to the wire if we are even have an

in this conversation. The atmospherics are being changed here.

We know the polls are moving towards Alex Salmond, and in order to spike

his gun somewhat, the government approaches this, or the ministry has

approached this, saying that it is a bit of give. There is something we

can trade away, so you might not want to do that. You might

reconsider. It is a way of being realistic from the government's

site. It doesn't help the no campaign, does it? Depends who is

running the no campaign. They say, you can keep the currency but we

need to keep our nuclear subs there, that is admitting defeat,

isn't it? The SNP is committed to getting rid of the missiles, so

there is a way in which they are saying, this is realistic. If you

want to be independent, these are the sorts of deals he will have to

make on your couples. This is all getting too sophisticated for me. It

seems like a huge foreign goal. They are not doing very well at this

strategy. `` own goal. Don't leave us! There is talk that the no

campaign needs to stop being so negative, and concentrate more on

the positives of us staying together. That is possibly a bit

more difficult to make. We were told to phone up our friends in Scotland

and encourage them to stay in the union, that sounds to me like it is

pretty desperate. The Daily Telegraph, Maria Miller will not be

happy to find herself on the front page. We understand she made a ?1

million profit after over claiming for her mortgage. She wasn't the

culture Secretary at the time, what she? `` was she? It is that ?1

million figure that people will be up in arms about. She may have to

repay a small amount but she has profited handsomely. The idea of the

public purse supporting that. This is so familiar, the Daily Telegraph

broke the story before the last election, and has continued. They

stand on the brink of claiming a very big scalp if she were to decide

that her position was untenable. There is a quote from a Conservative

source, saying we cannot have a member of the cabinet found to abuse

the expenses system in any way. Especially this close to a vital

election. Obviously, the Daily Telegraph would stay this, but there

is a line that has been crossed `` say. It is difficult for Maria

Miller to say, I did the right thing, and then repay and apologise.

That million pounds is first to keep, on the strength of ?5,000 she

received. It never seems to end, but the kind of sanctions that

Parliament have over MPs when they do this seem pretty feeble, don't

they? Yes, particularly in this case. Maria Miller is accused of not

cooperating with the investigation, which seems to be almost a bigger

scandal in its own way and the allegation of the inflated mortgage

claim. Let's move on to the Independent. In 20 minutes loop is

time, there might be quite a few people getting married. `` 20

minutes ' time. A couple of women there, we assume from the picture

they are going to get married perhaps this weekend. Does it matter

whether we call it a marriage or civil partnership? I think the

bigger context is the important thing. If we rewind a few decades,

something like this would have been unimaginable. The fact is, activists

and campaigners have made this huge change in society, and that gives

hope for a lot of other causes, whether it be big environmental

problems that seem insoluble, so I think it is inspiring to see what

could be achieved in the future. Some people still don't like it.

They have had years to get used to it that they don't like it. They

have lost the argument. They don't have to like it, do they? I suppose

that anger will have to find a political outlet, maybe in the form

of Ukip. You will always have to face that there will be a group of

people whose religious beliefs... If it is your honestly held religious

view that a marriage should be between a man and a woman, there's

nothing bitter about that, is there? It is bitter in the sense that you

have lost the argument and you have have lost the argument and you have

to live with it. Your views have not prevailed upon the British public.

What can you do? The march of progress is One Direction, you face

the other way. It is difficult. This is the most expensive free

school in Britain. ?45 million, six times the average on a school for

500 children. It is the sixth form for high achieving students. No

guarantee it will do them proud, is there? We have seen some free

schools getting into hot water, and not being up to scratch. That is

true, although, from where I am standing, spending more money on

education, which is incidentally aimed at pupils from disadvantaged

backgrounds or those with subsidised school meals, it seems at a good

idea to me. ?90,000 per pupil? That much money? Why not? That is a

misnomer, they are dividing the total cost of the school amongst 500

students. Over time, that will be different. We need to spend more

money on education, great, it is happening. Why shouldn't all

children have that spent on them? Because we can't afford it. If you

take ?45 million and give to 500 students, you remove it from

everyone else. Free schools, on the face of it they are a good idea, but

this particular idea rests on the fact there is a selection test. You

select those people who are bright enough to get in, and the new

trumpet the fact that you are sending essentially very clever kids

off to Oxford or Cambridge. Without the selective nature, it wouldn't

exist as a school. You are paying for elitism. There is the argument

that, does selection have a place in a state funded school? Should it be

open to everyone? You have to have a centre of excellence. If you have

got the money and you are prepared to invest it, it will yield

dividends over time. I find it hard to argue with the idea of setting up

something that is really trying to help people who are coming from

disadvantaged backgrounds to break into Oxford and Cambridge, from

which they are still excluded. I would feel better if it was in

Westminster, which is a rich part of the country, and there are other

areas that are crying out for this. I'm going to talk about football,

and care even less. I have set it. Apparently to Alan Pardew, the

Newcastle united manager, footballers are now middle class. I

thought we were all middle class, but are they? Are they eloquent,

well educated middle`class boys these days? Football has become more

posh than it once was. It is so expensive to go and watch a game,

isn't it? The audience is definitely tending towards being middle class.

What we have seen in rugby, cricket, for the Olympics, public school

educated people dominate the ranks of our athletics teams, our rugby

teams, our cricket teams. We have seen public school people appear in

football. Oxlade`Chamberlain, Frank Lampard... I think the trend is

there. I suppose because public schools have such fantastic sports

facilities often. I notice they are a lot more particular. Remember the

days when you felt so sorry for the footballers, having to answer

questions after a match. Someone who is terribly articulate is not

expected to score a goal for Manchester United. It seemed unfair

in those days. Now they get media training. The last time I looked, it

looks like football was more upper`class, or extremely wealthy.

Isn't that the issue? There is so much cash floating around in

football, that there is an excessive amount of money. Is that wealth or

social class? That amount of money must buy you some social mobility,

surely. That is the key problem, explaining the British class system

to anyone who is not from Britain, it is impossible to decipher. Those

days are gone now. That is it for the Papers. Much more

at the top of the hour about that broke all between blood it to do and

Barack Obama `` Vladimir Putin. Hello and welcome to Sportsday. I'm

Lizzie Greenwood`Hughes. The headlines tonight: The fans planning

a protest over Old Trafford tomorrow say it'll prove David Moyes isn't as

popular as he thinks he is. St Helens win the battle of the

unbeatables with a dramatic late victory over Leeds tonight, Makinson

the man of the