18/04/2014 The Papers


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 18/04/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



business end of the season and Ramberg will join the Wolves in the


Premier League. More after the papers.


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


bringing us tomorrow. With me are the broadcaster Shyama Perera and


freelance Parliamentary Correspondent Rob Merrick. There


will be no mention of swimming trunks this time. Tomorrow's front


pages, starting with... In an interview with the Independent, the


Government's Surveillance Commissioner has warned roadside


cameras are threatening our privacy. The Mail reports allegations that


British Gas have paid staff bonuses to inflate customers' bills. The


Mirror says one of the men convicted over the killing of a young boy in


Liverpool in 2007 has been released from prison. The Archbishop of


Canterbury tells the Telegraph about his anguish over the Church of


England's position on gay marriage. The Express says pensioners are


taking out equity from their homes to make ends meet. The FT says the


world's largest asset manager is preparing to launch new pension


products in the UK in the light of changes announced in the Budget. The


Guardian says the personal financial data of millions of people could be


sold under plans being drawn up by Revenue and Customs. And the Times


says a document has emerged which undermines claims by a group of


Iraqis that they were ill`treated by British soldiers a decade ago. And


that is the story we will start with. The scandal of Rikishi troops


left to face a murder lies. A secret papers shows that at users were


militants. This was a group of Iraqis that have claimed they were


mistreated and they got quite a bit of legal aid to fight the case. The


inquiry is still ongoing I believe. It is already cost ?23 million. What


I don't quite get is whether or not, ultimately, it is a bad thing


that this went ahead or in a strange way, even if they cheated to get


their weight into legal aid, it might not be entirely clear in


this. What has been worth the money? The company that represents the


Iraqis shredded the original English translation of a document which


showed that the defendants were members of a paramilitary. That was


the day before the inquiry was due to begin. This document was not


shown when legal aid was applied for and if it had been, they would not


have got legal aid. That in itself is a vital part of this story. What


I am not entirely sure of when reading this is whether that


undermines what did then came out of the inquiry. The article goes on to


say as well that if this is true, that the soldiers had been put under


incredibly close scrutiny and it has gone on for years, that is part of


this outrage. And yes it is. In 2007 the detainees and their families


were refused judicial review and it has been seven years since that


decision was taken. As you say, what the story says is that the case


would not have gone ahead because he would not have got legal aid. It is


a very strong headline. But whether that means that anyone set out at


the start who says that the murders took lays, or whether it was


established during the case, that is something different isn't it? The


issue is mistreatment and that is still ongoing and we know of other


cases where it has been true. Regardless, most people would say it


was clearly wrong that the case went ahead and that it was a war and


these were people fighting in horrific circumstances with terrible


injuries done. I am certain this will have repercussions. The law


firms at the centre of it still have 2000 additional claims against the


administration for unlawful killings and you wonder what the impact of


those will be. Yes, you wonder whether they will have any merit


(all. The argument here `` at all. The argument is that the soldiers


were put through the rigors of an inquiry that they should not have


had to face. Yes, some MPs are calling for investigation. Clearly


this needs to happen. These two firms did not show a piece of paper


that was absolutely vital. We have had Nigel Evans talking about the


cost of defending himself, and issues around legal aid because


there are people who cannot get it when they most needed, the idea that


?23 million has been spent on two law firms `` from, misleading the


fact that the case, it brings the whole thing under scrutiny. Are the


wrong people getting money? Now to the interview with the Archbishop of


Canterbury. Concentrating on the difficulty that gay marriage, now


that it has been legalized, poses for the church. You have much


sympathy for the church about Rob ``, Rob, since people of the same


sex can now be married? I do have sympathy for people trying to see


the issue through religious eyes. For people who have grown up


believing that it is a religious institution, it is hard to look at


it a different way. The Archbishop is one of those people. He spoke out


against gay marriage and was taken aback by the hostility around him


when he did it. He is now in a position of accepting it and I


imagine that is what more and more people will do. They might think


that the whole issue is done and dusted. But for the Church of


England it is an ongoing issue. He talks about his almost impossible


task of reconciling the views of riches church `goers with those in


Africa for example. I read that the Church of England is conducting


lesson type services which would feel like gay marriage happening in


church, so it is still an ongoing issue. The law changes, but


attitudes take a while to catch up, don't they? The trouble is if you


truly believe something is wrong, it is very difficult even when you have


been told that the current thinking is that it is not the case, it is


very difficult to just change your views simply because the rest of the


country thinks you should. I stay out of church issues. I am a


Buddhist and I remember an archbishop a number of years ago,


who I was sent to talk with. I didn't know that they all were


different colours so I went up to one and said, " Archbishop can I


talk to you? " and it was the wrong one. So I stay out of this. I am


always slightly anxious about people bowing down to a higher force that I


cannot see. But he has got to navigate this hasn't he? He is the


head of the Anglican Church as well and as Rob was saying among other


parts of the word tend to, how can I say it, leg behind? It is a


difference of opinion though, isn't it? It is not just a difference of


opinion. There are brutal actions being taken out over the world that


are covered up by the Church of England and the Archbishop is quite


right to be juxtaposing what is right against what can actually be


done and it is a Catch`22. To me, there is a simple solution, but


obviously you cannot take it. As the head of the church though, he can


say that the abuse gay people have suffered is an acceptable without


agreeing with gay marriage can't he? You can stand up for one thing


without caving in over everything. But this country is accepting gay


marriage to a greater degree. The Archbishop probably strikes people


as one of life great optimist `` like's. Let's move on. The moment


the ferry captain abandoned the ship. This is the ferry that sank in


North Korea earlier this week `` South Korea. Many still not


accounted for and we know of at least 20 who have died. The death


toll is likely to rise and now we know that officers and the captain


have been formally arrested. This is the last thing you ever expect of a


captain who is supposed to be the last one off the ship. It is an


extraordinary photograph. It is so clear and it looks to the naked eye


as if there is still time for him to go back and help people come out as


a large part of the ship is out of the water. It reminds one of the


Costa Concordia when that happened. The captain also instantly jumped


ship. Perhaps we have watched Titanic one too many times, but you


are expected to do everything you can to save everyone on board. I


thought that was what made you a captain not just that you can steer.


It appears there were catastrophic errors while he was still on the


ship, many of the children told to stay below deck when they could have


done more to survive. The story had it all, in terms of his behaviour.


We were amazed how little coverage this has gotten today. It is quite


difficult to see as this is quite a small picture, perhaps it should


have had greater prominence. It is all very interesting with the


Malaysian plane going down, the focus on that part of the world


around disasters, it is so interesting and will be interesting


to see how they are all managed afterwards. Moving on. Anonymous


financial details cannot be bought by different firms. What uses this


data, do you know? I would imagine it is of great use to credit rating


companies and advertisers who are able to look in either Norma's


detail at this. They can make money off of this. I suppose when most


people look at these companies, the realise that they do not have golden


records when it comes to people 's data particularly HMRC. I think


people might also remember this is on the back of the GP records being


sold off in a similar way. But there were health benefits their, ``


there. But if there are clear benefits in that case, where are the


benefits here? He looked to be eerily financial. HMRC, like all


public bodies, has had to make huge cutbacks in recent years. We have no


choice to give in the matter do we? You can look in one area and see


that there are more pensioners with too little in their pots, I am not


sure how it works or what they use it for. It may be used to help with


social support. We don't know but we don't want to take the risk. I think


that is basically what is being said. To suggest that they can


practice price dissemination, I don't know how they can do that if


it is all anonymous. I need an accountant to explain. This is a man


who is accused of conning his way around the London Marathon. He was


boasting about the time in which he had done it. I do not know how it


works. I'm told that on some parts of the London Marathon route, you


double back. I suppose he could have climbed over a couple of barriers. I


just think... It's a terrible thing to say but I think it's a very funny


story. Do you? He got a medal for it. Do you think it is funny? It is


hilarious! He allegedly ran the second half of the marathon faster


than Mo Farah. He was uncovered by a man who looks into everything like


this. And he was not the only person to have done this. He has written,


with a second`half like that, you must work on your first half pacing.


The fact that he could go around in two hours and hold the world


record... One of my friends did it in three hours and that seems


unfeasibly fast. Perhaps I should get in contact with this man and see


if he can check up on my friend. Do you think he realised there were


markers where you are literally clocked? Does he care? I know I


could probably walk it faster than I could run it, and that is not


happening any time soon. Thank you for joining us this evening. I will


be back at midnight with the news. Next, Sportsday.


Hello and welcome to Sportsday. I'm Katherine Downes. A


Download Subtitles