:00:00. > :00:16.possible return to cricket for Freddie Flintoff as well.
:00:17. > :00:22.Welcome to our look ahead to what the papers will be bringing us
:00:23. > :00:25.tomorrow. With me are Liam Halligan, the economics commentator for the
:00:26. > :00:32.Telegraph, and Hugo Rifkind, columnist for The Times. We are
:00:33. > :00:36.going to start with the Guardian. International court examines UK war
:00:37. > :00:40.crimes. If you go to the ICC website, there are ten countries
:00:41. > :00:44.where preliminary investigations are taking place, including the Central
:00:45. > :00:49.African Republic, Afghanistan and Honduras, and we have been added to
:00:50. > :00:54.the list. As a spin doctor would say, the optics on this are not very
:00:55. > :00:58.good. This is the announcement that a specialist tribunal in The Hague
:00:59. > :01:03.will investigate alleged misdemeanours by UK military
:01:04. > :01:11.personnel relating to 60 allegedly unlawful killings and 170 apparent
:01:12. > :01:16.mistreatments of Iraqis. This story will go on for many, many years.
:01:17. > :01:21.Even preliminary investigations into this will take several years, we
:01:22. > :01:24.understand. The UK is the only western country who will be subject
:01:25. > :01:28.to this investigation. The Government has come back, the
:01:29. > :01:34.Attorney`General saying, well, what can he say? He says, of course we
:01:35. > :01:38.support the process of the International Criminal Court, but
:01:39. > :01:42.these allegations are already being comprehensively investigated, in his
:01:43. > :01:50.words, why the UK Government. But Hugo, Dominic grieve says, it is not
:01:51. > :01:54.systematic, what happened, it may be, although I am putting these
:01:55. > :02:00.words into his mouth, the odd guy here or there, if any mistreatment
:02:01. > :02:03.happened at all. But what the lawyers putting forward this case
:02:04. > :02:08.are saying is that this goes right to the very top, Army chiefs and
:02:09. > :02:14.defence ministers, potentially? With an allocation of 60 cases of
:02:15. > :02:18.unlawful killing, that is not good. Unlawful killing, that would
:02:19. > :02:21.suggest, if true, that there were things going on in a fairly routine
:02:22. > :02:27.fashion which should not have been in the field of conflict. However, I
:02:28. > :02:33.think it is important not to get this story backwards, which is easy
:02:34. > :02:35.to do. Yes, the UK is the only western states to have faced a
:02:36. > :02:42.preliminary investigation like this one, but what that means, if you
:02:43. > :02:53.think about it, it means Abu Graber did not go to the ICC, that means
:02:54. > :02:56.Fallujah did not go to the ICC. Britain is committed to
:02:57. > :03:00.international justice, Britain has cooperated with this court. Most
:03:01. > :03:03.likely, after a preliminary investigation, whatever happens,
:03:04. > :03:08.even if there was found to be substance in the allegations, the
:03:09. > :03:14.ICC would probably understand that written is capable of investigating
:03:15. > :03:19.these things themselves. `` Britain. Written is I think doing the right
:03:20. > :03:23.thing in cooperating. It would be relatively uneasy to say, this is
:03:24. > :03:29.rubbish. Liam, that is right, isn't it? Dominic Grieve came out today
:03:30. > :03:34.and said what he had to say, but he also said, we are open to anyone
:03:35. > :03:40.coming here and investigating this? It was a very measured statement. I
:03:41. > :03:43.am sure there were some cross`party talks in formally before the
:03:44. > :03:50.statement took place, because this could go on for a very long time, as
:03:51. > :03:54.I say. I think Hugo is right, it does show that we are open to
:03:55. > :03:59.investigation from outside forces, and some other western countries are
:04:00. > :04:03.not. But it does not look good, given the other countries which are
:04:04. > :04:13.being bracketed with the UK in the aftermath of Iraq. Staying with the
:04:14. > :04:16.garden, US takeover could cost lives. I don't think I have ever
:04:17. > :04:22.heard an excuse to prevent a takeover, the suggestion that it
:04:23. > :04:28.could actually kill people? This takeover battle is getting pretty
:04:29. > :04:34.bitter. I am not saying the man is wrong, he knows what he is talking
:04:35. > :04:38.about, however, it is not in the interests of any drug company to
:04:39. > :04:42.delay cancer drugs. Cancer drugs are held drug companies make their
:04:43. > :04:47.money. Any drug company that can bring a new cancer drug to market
:04:48. > :04:54.will do so as quickly as possible. The development costs are such that
:04:55. > :04:58.they will not risk a delay. So I would take that with a pinch of
:04:59. > :05:06.salt. But it shows how nasty this is getting. All manner of politics and
:05:07. > :05:15.protectionism and thinly veiled xenophobia is coming into this one.
:05:16. > :05:19.I think this will run and run and there will be a lot of fallout
:05:20. > :05:27.afterwards. The shareholders, one assumes, are watching all of this,
:05:28. > :05:31.and ultimately, one would assume that they are going to make the
:05:32. > :05:42.final decision, it is not going to be Vince Cable. Yes, what would
:05:43. > :05:45.usually be seen as a dry business story has become a soap opera. It is
:05:46. > :05:53.now being talked about in the pubs and clubs and taxis up and down the
:05:54. > :05:57.land. Not only because it is a ?60 billion bid, not only because
:05:58. > :06:02.pharmaceuticals is our second biggest sector in this country after
:06:03. > :06:06.financial services, or that it would be the biggest takeover of a British
:06:07. > :06:10.company by a foreign company in our history, it is also because the
:06:11. > :06:15.Government is considering intervening. That is the reality.
:06:16. > :06:18.Simon Walker from the Institute of Directors, speaking to you earlier,
:06:19. > :06:23.having already spoken once to the press, again this evening he
:06:24. > :06:28.reiterated his view, that it is up to the shareholders, who own the
:06:29. > :06:36.company. I do not think it is clear that in the run`up to an election,
:06:37. > :06:40.we will not get intervention here. Of course, the Treasury does not
:06:41. > :06:51.want it, it is trying to say that Britain is open for business. Even
:06:52. > :06:54.in the States, the citadel of so`called free market capitalism,
:06:55. > :07:00.you have had foreign deals blocked when they have looked politically
:07:01. > :07:03.too sensitive. I think we could yet see some kind of intervention,
:07:04. > :07:09.although I personally hope that we don't. There is a difference between
:07:10. > :07:12.foreign direct investment and selling off your own industries.
:07:13. > :07:15.There comes a point where we need to ask ourselves whether we want to be
:07:16. > :07:26.somewhere. Mike with the car industry, somewhere where with we
:07:27. > :07:29.can produce cars for companies owned in other countries, whether we want
:07:30. > :07:40.to be that sort of nation. Pharmaceuticals is one that we have
:07:41. > :07:44.always been very good at. I am being told that apparently we are making
:07:45. > :07:49.more cars than we ever did. That is true, but we do not have a volume
:07:50. > :07:56.car`maker in this country it is Nissan, it is Tatar, of course. Yes,
:07:57. > :08:00.we are making more cars, giving people gain full employment, with
:08:01. > :08:05.semiskilled and skilled jobs, not least in the north`east of
:08:06. > :08:13.England... But they are not British cars! . The companies are often
:08:14. > :08:19.domiciled elsewhere, sometimes the tax goes elsewhere. All of this
:08:20. > :08:27.stuff about life sciences, research and development ` if Pfizer said
:08:28. > :08:34.?100 billion, then all of that goes out of the window, the shareholders
:08:35. > :08:37.will say, come on in, weren't they? The Government needs to decide
:08:38. > :08:46.whether they will put limitations on any possible deal or not. It is
:08:47. > :08:48.interesting, Pascal Soriot, the CEO of AstraZeneca said almost nothing
:08:49. > :08:52.in front of the Commons committee today, but he did launch this
:08:53. > :08:56.extremely emotive headline, maybe this could kill people. He said
:08:57. > :09:02.almost nothing else that was worthy of reporting! But he was determined
:09:03. > :09:12.to get this in the papers, and he did! Moving on to the Metro, this is
:09:13. > :09:22.really interesting ` Google told to wipe your past off the internet?
:09:23. > :09:27.This was a judgement by the European court today. There is no possible
:09:28. > :09:29.appeal. On the one hand, Google and people interested in freedom of
:09:30. > :09:33.speech will say that the ability to remove things from the internet
:09:34. > :09:36.events honest reporting and disclosure of information in the
:09:37. > :09:40.public interest. On the other hand, others will say that if the
:09:41. > :09:44.intermediary of the information, the search engine, has to become
:09:45. > :09:50.responsible for the veracity or otherwise of the content, that has
:09:51. > :09:53.big implications for internet publishing not just for search
:09:54. > :10:02.engines, but all media organisations. It is a very
:10:03. > :10:05.important story. Hugo, in this particular case it was a Spanish guy
:10:06. > :10:09.who had had financial problems in the past, and that affected his
:10:10. > :10:14.credit history. And he is fine now financially. So he wanted that stuff
:10:15. > :10:20.wiped. That seems fair enough. Yes, in his case, fair enough. But it
:10:21. > :10:23.ends when else this would happen. Anyone who has ever wanted anything
:10:24. > :10:26.removed from the internet on if they believe they have a decent case to
:10:27. > :10:31.do it, sometimes they do have a decent case to strike the record.
:10:32. > :10:37.The question is, who owns the record? Even if his credit history
:10:38. > :10:45.is flawless these days, should it not be in the public domain that it
:10:46. > :10:49.once was not? Your credit history cannot be flawless. Your history is
:10:50. > :10:54.your history. That is why it is your history. There is something to be
:10:55. > :11:02.said that your history should not be evaporated. How many people were
:11:03. > :11:06.googling him anyway? I never have. I am sure you would like to wipe the
:11:07. > :11:13.old photographs of you that are still being used to this day. That
:11:14. > :11:21.was his rebate phase. And he used to have dreadlocks. Few photographs
:11:22. > :11:25.remain. Nothing wrong with that. Right, we go to the Daily Telegraph.
:11:26. > :11:33.Hugo, it is official. We are not going to win the World Cup. The
:11:34. > :11:40.government is saying this now. Less of the week, please. Ouch! Speaking
:11:41. > :11:44.as a Scot, we got used to not winning the World Cup long ago.
:11:45. > :11:47.Controversial. I doubt I will get away with this, but it has always
:11:48. > :11:52.puzzled me, watching the England football team, because the England
:11:53. > :11:56.football team goes to the World Cup and there is always a sense of
:11:57. > :12:06.surprise that they don't win. As if it is not possible. It is not
:12:07. > :12:09.possible to do unusually badly every time . It is like when you call a
:12:10. > :12:14.call centre and they say, we are unusually busy. It happens every
:12:15. > :12:23.time. The government has said a report by the Home Office has used
:12:24. > :12:30.bookmakers' odds when considering the benefits of keeping the pubs
:12:31. > :12:40.open. There is a 54% chance of us going beyond the group stage. We are
:12:41. > :12:46.in group D with Italy, Costa Rica and Uruguay. The top two go through,
:12:47. > :12:51.so we should get through that. But then we only have an 11% chance of
:12:52. > :12:56.going beyond the quarterfinals. I once asked the former Governor of
:12:57. > :13:00.the Bank of England, Mervyn King, how good he thought various players
:13:01. > :13:07.were, particularly when Theo Walcott was going to the World Cup. If we
:13:08. > :13:11.have a cup run, everybody buys barbecues and summer clothes and
:13:12. > :13:19.consumer spending goes mad, which has a big indication for the
:13:20. > :13:24.economy. You are onto a hiding to nothing asking Mervyn King that, he
:13:25. > :13:29.is an Aston Villa fan. What does he know about football? I will get a
:13:30. > :13:34.lot of abuse for that on Twitter now! You will both be back later. At
:13:35. > :13:37.the top of the hour, we will have the latest on today's developments
:13:38. > :13:39.in the enquiry into the disappearance of Claudia Lawrence.
:13:40. > :14:00.Now, it is time for Sportsday. Hello and welcome to Sportsday. I'm
:14:01. > :14:03.Olly Foster. Here's what's coming up tonight. Vacancy at the Lane ` Tim
:14:04. > :14:06.Sherwood has been sacked at Spurs. The stampede for Wembley ` Leyton
:14:07. > :14:14.Orient are through to the League One play`off final.
:14:15. > :14:16.And a second chance for Michael Carberry, as he gets an England