29/05/2014 The Papers


No need to wait to see what's in the papers - tune in for a lively and informed conversation about the next day's headlines. Presented by Clive Myrie.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 29/05/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



mid`fielder and Andy Murray breezes into the third round in the French


Open in tennis. Hello there. Welcome to the look


ahead to the papers tomorrow. With me, David Davies and Anne


Ashworth an assistant editor at the Times. We start with the Express. It


is saying that UK doctors are winning the war against high blood


pressure. The Government is hiring debt


collectors to chase hundreds of thousands of people whose tax


credits were overpaid, according to the Independent. The new Chief


Executive of the NHS has told the Daily Telegraph that there must be


more treatment of patients in the local communities. And the Metro is


reporting that members of a drug gang who lived a luxury lifestyle


have been convicted by a court but ordered to pay ?24. While the


Guardian claims that there is new doubt over Scottish party


calculations over possible future earnings from international


companies. We start David with the independence


independence. A photograph there of a thoughtful looking George W Bush


and the man with his back to us, that, we assume is Mr Tony Blair.


That was at a NATO summit in Prague 2001. Two years before the Iraq war.


We know that all of of the correspondent, the private


correspondent between the two leaders will not be made public in


the Chilcot report. And the reality is that the Chilcot report is very


unlikely now to be published until after the general election, 2015. Of


course it was initiated by Gordon Brown back in 2009. So an


extraordinary period of time. Yes, the Independent has it here on the


front page but I have to say to you, journalists will always, you know, I


was one of them, absolutely publish, publish, publish. We should know.


The Chilcot Inquiry should know. The problem with this, at one level, is


that there are two people in the conversation. There is a man called


the President of the United States. I have to tell you that when you go


around the world and the British demand that this should all be


published, in America a lot of people say, excuse me, there were


two people in a private conversation, maybe you British


don't regard it as private, we do. So, in the future, if this was


published, and my instinct is why has it not been published? The


reality is who is ever going to talk in confidence to a British Prime


Minister again? Anne that is rail politics, and certainly Whitehall


have made it clear that no American President will trust us again if we


publish these. But the families? They are not happy. The phrase


quotes and giveses, ie snippets of the conversation, ie everybody


mentioned in it will be able to have sight of what could be written and


then further reduced. They are not satisfied. They feel this is not


enough. They thought that the Chilcot Inquiry would be a


investigation of the conversations and the deliberations leading up to


the war. That is what we were led to believe.


The word whitewash has appeared on one paper, it has not even been


published yet. And what about the word gives. The


gives? Who is going to give the gives.


What does it even mean? Yes. That is the real problem. But this was


always the potential flaw of the inquiry.


There are, to go back on the first point, there are suggestions that


the Prime Minister is hoping it could be published before the


general election. They are hoping to get it out by the end of the year.


But it could go on and on. And those criticised will have the


chance to answer Chilcot, how long will it take? He is hoping to speed


that up. We will see. Exactly. Now, continuing with the Independent, the


debt collectors hound the poor estover `` the poor estover tax


credits, what is this about? The HMRC has made mistakes and people


pointed out that they are receiving the wrong amount, and then the


taxman says don't worry, they are right. Then HMRC decides that the


wrong amount has been paid out and they are hounding these people for


the money, reclaiming goods, calling them, texting them in a great deal


of distress. It seems that if the mistake by HMRC and the person has


pointed it out, I cannot see how the money should be reclaimed.


And who are these people? They are private debt collectors, hired by


HMRC, phoning the people, targeting them. Some of those targeted say


that they feel harassed and frightened. Who is monitoring the


activity of the private debt collectors, that is the question I


would like answered. We are paying for the operation as taxpayers. I


think we should be told if it is being done properly.


There should be oversight of what is going on. But Iain Duncan Smith, and


those who support the benefit changes, who want the Welfare Bill


to come down, they would say look, we have to do what we can to get


this money back. Also, we want to know if people who


have money that is now due under tax avoidance schemes to be revealed how


will they be chased for the cash? Will they be having people nothing


on their door? I am playing devil's advocate. There has been a debate


about reducing the Welfare Bill. It could be argued that the people who


know how best to do this in chasing up those people who perhaps are over


or have been deemed to have overclaimed or paid too much,


whatever, that you need experts, independent experts who know what


they are doing. People who know this field. And the suggestion could be


that is what is happening but they are getting out of control? I am not


questioning that if the money is owing it should be repaid but


chasing people who cannot pay is that worth anybody's money? It is


not worth the effort. And how it should be done. It is how it is


done. This is the key.


It is not the principle but how it is done that is extremely important.


OK. On to the Guardian. New doubts over Scottish wealth, David. More


figures this week. Everyone is confused. I suspect that the SNP are


confused as much as the UK Government are confused.


What to believe? And for the people who have to make the vote? Anne will


give you a better version of what I can give you of what this is about.


But we are going to get, you will have more and more of these figures.


The "yes" and the "no"... It is hotting up, even our side of the


border, you can see how this is hotting up. I just observe it. I


worry that you are not going to have an overwhelming result we are yes,


or an overwhelming "no". I think that is a dangerous situation.


I think it is interesting. They are not trying to win the battle over


the referendum on hearts and minds anymore. It is not about what it


means to be Scottish. It is what it is worth to you to be Scottish. We


are under an onslought of statistics. Douglas Alexander has


one figure, Danny Alexander has another. And it has been pointed out


that Scottish whiskis either UK or overseas owned, that the profits


could flow elsewhere. They are saying don't look at GDP, look at


GNI, that is a better measure of what all of this is worth to the of


a Raj Scot. On that basis it is less than Alex Salmond is estimating. I


am not sure if we are somewhere in the great debate about who owns what


and what it is worth to the Scots, if we are comparing apples and pears


but I think we should prepare for more of this. It is obviously how it


has been decided that this battle will be fought, through the pockets.


It is really extraordinary. It will be fought, through the pockets.


It is really extraordinary. has been a radical shift this week. The


feeling that you have to quantify to the Scots voter as to whether how


much it is worth him or her to say "yes".


Does it feel that is the wrong tactic? Well far from an Englishman


who has had a few run`ins with the Scots at some football, to tell the


Scots how they ought to be campaigning but Alex Salmond made a


statement saying: Scotland is one of the wealthest countries in the


world. More prosperous per head than the UK, France and Japan. I am sure


he can sub`Stan sheet that claim. `` substantiate that claim but I am


sure that in some ports of the `` parts of the world it woman come as


a surprise. Part of the problem is that it is


not clear how much oil is there in the seas off Scotland.


It is easy to say it is running out quickly but for others to say that


the reserves are there. For the technology to be able to get it


there. Even the whisky is not there, it is


80% overseas or UK`owned. But they are paying taxes, employing


Scottish people to get it made. But still we are having a marc #k0678 ``


microcosm debate here. This is interesting. I like this story. The


sex and the drug trade has added to the GDP figure. The economy is doing


well, partly because of the sex and the drugs trade in the United


Kingdom. This is interesting.


This is about the way that they managed to calculate how much drug


dealing and the heat and the electricity required for its


production. Making a bit of grass! Yeah, how


much is being spent on that, how much is earned in prostitution, how


the figures are collated, we are not told but... We have been told. If we


are to believe the stories we have to be told.


But significantly, GDP. How did they get this data? That is what we would


like to know. What I love is: As economies develop


and evolve, so do the statistics that we use to measure them. Now


that is, it says obviously that they have been deliberating as to whether


or not these unsavoury hidden economy trades should be included


and they have decided yes, if there is enough money made it.


There are specific figures. We are told according to the estimates,


that there are 60,879 sex workers in the UK in 2009. There are more


today. The ONS needs to tell us more about exactly what records it is


keeping. It is coming from a combination of cannabis, cocaine,


ecstasy and amphetamines. And these people do not pay taxes. I can spot


a Nigel Farage line in this story. The move brings us into line with


the European rules. It is all their fault! I forget now the state that


has just legalised the sale in the United States. Maybe it is Oregon.


They have made a fortune in taxes. One wonders if this kind of


information might add grist to the mill of those who believe that you


should have the state make some money out of this. Or have the guys


at the ONS been watching the box set of making bad and thinking, there is


money in a bad substances! It must drive you mad looking at these


figures all day. It is an extraordinary thing. We are going to


leave it there. David, you will be beer back in another hour to look ``


you will be back in an hour to look at more of the stories. On BBC News,


we will be reflecting on the disappointment of some of the


families of soldiers who died in Iraq at the news that the full


details of letters and correspondence between Tony Blair


and George W Bush ran wide Britain went to war will not be published.


Now, time for Sportsday.


Download Subtitles