30/05/2014 The Papers


No need to wait until tomorrow morning to see what's in the papers. A lively and informed conversation about the next day's headlines.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 30/05/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the papers


With me are broadcaster Shyama Perera and the Guardian's Social


One of Google's key advisors has told to


the Independent that the ruling allowing people to ask the search


engine to remove their personal information changes "everything"


The Daily Mail describes letters being sent to taxpayers by HM


Recipients are being warned to re`check


Polling carried out for the Daily Telegraph suggests that


the majority of those who voted for UKIP in the recent European


elections do also intend voting for UKIP in the general election.


The new leader of the Police Federation has told the Guardian


that the days of "scandal" in his organisation must come to an end.


House prices will continue soaring for at least another two years,


According to the Financial Times, the European Central Bank is next


week "poised" to cut interest rates and boost


Finally, the Times reports that David Cameron has joined


international calls for the death sentence imposed on a woman in Sudan


for marrying a Christian to be reversed. So, let's start with UKIP,


which is the next chapter of the local and European elections. That


is on the front page of the Daily Telegraph. If this poll is to be


believed, it will possibly shut up many politicians that still call


this a protest vote. I think this is quite interesting because I do think


it is a protest vote. This was a poll that was funded by their


financial backer, Paul Sykes. We were just saying, it is 37% of UKIP


voters have said they will vote again. That is 37% of 4 million. If


you spread that across the country is not a huge number, in terms of


bringing in MPs. Is it a flash in the pan? Well, obviously there will


be those who will continue voting for UKIP, but the question is not


whether it is a flash in the pan, but whether there is a meal being


cooked in the pan, and I don't think there is. They are and `` A1 policy


party, but that means it is very clear what they are about. One could


argue that the people voting for them know what they are voting for


and they will stick with it. It was an interesting strategy coming into


these elections, because they just wanted to talk about Europe and


immigration and tie them together. No one question them on anything


else because they had no policies, because they dismissed their


prospectus just before they arrived on the scene. Voters have not made


up their minds. 37% of 4 million is about 1 million. The Conservatives


got 10 million people voting for them at the last election, so we are


talking about 3% or 5% of the general electorate. And there are


still more than 30 million people who did not vote at all. The job for


many of the parties will be to reach out to those people. And it is not a


bad thing anyway if a third of these people say they will vote again for


UKIP. UKIP, whether we like it or not, has forced a number of serious


issues onto the agenda which need to be addressed between now and the


next election. If the threat of the UKIP vote going up, or staying


loyal, is held over the main parties, maybe we will see some


movement. Staying with the Daily Telegraph, towards the bottom of the


page, junk food applications to attract children must be banned.


Basically, it is internet advertising. There are strict rules


on television advertising. It is another example of how underhand


multinationals can be when they want to be. They have been banned from


dealing with children's television, and sticking on adverts for fatty


soft drinks, but they still managed to get it on various devices. How


does it work? If you search on a search engine, it notes that you are


interested in that product, probably of that age and that area of the


world, and then they latch onto it and start sending you adverts. This


was actually a game developed by Coca`Cola and McDonald's. It was


that blatant. There was no sneaking in! But it is also about pop`up


windows. It is about advertising that can pop up on a child's


computer screen. How do you police that? Do you know, I can't get


terribly excited about children being targeted by advertisers


because at the end of the day they are always targeted within their


capability, and ways have been, whether on TV, Saturday morning


pictures or whatever. It is down to the parents to deal with it. If your


child knows that it is no fizzy drinks, the advert for fizzy drinks


is not going to make the child believe they will get it. This is


all about the belief that everything is outside our control. But it is


pressure for the parents. It is more pressure for the parents, another


thing they have to be responsible for. Of course, but, you know what,


you have children, you are responsible for them. It's as simple


as that. The Independent dedicates its front page to the new privacy


laws affecting Google. A rethink of basic freedoms, is how it is


described. This is speaking to an Oxford philosopher who is charged


with advising Google on the new law. Is this really a revolutionary


change for Google? I suppose so. As I am the standard, the date will


still hang around but Google will not link to it on a search. But if


you went to a newspaper and searched for it, it would. For Google, it


means a whole set of bureaucracy they did not want to have to deal


with. They always maintained they have nothing to do with the


information but just tell people where it is, a library system of


sorts. What information are we talking about and where does it go?


It will be caught cases, mainly. That is where the concentration is


at the moment. At some point it will be footballers having affairs and


the usual celebrity nonsense. In the first instance, the complaint is


that people whose criminal convictions are long spent are still


being made to pay for them and suffer for them, because employers


now Google people before they ring them in for interview. Therefore, a


misdemeanour in your youth, or a one`off bad moment is held against


you for the rest of your life. Interestingly, the case that was


referred to, that case, the professor did not think that would


actually get removed because he said, it is public knowledge, public


information. We can't patrol other people's prejudice, if you like. It


could be argued that sometimes it is important for the information to


remain out there, rather than being removed. In the past, people would


have said, I want to see that, but you could not because there was not


the means. The Daily Mail headline is just as frightening as some of


the letters it is describing. Absolute nonsense! Taxman's bully


boy letters to innocent families. Hundreds of innocent taxpayers, it


says, have been sent letters by the Inland Revenue asking them why they


are paying not enough tax. Most Inland Revenue letters are quite


frightening, aren't they? Paying tax is frightening, but that is life!


This story is so ridiculous. It is an alarming letter sent to homes


telling them that Taxman has been scrutinising their self`assessment


form and their bill is lower than the average for people with a


similar amount of income! This takes up one and a half pages! When you


read through, it has been sent to 1000 higher rate taxpayers. They are


in the top 5%, and they are putting in tax returns which suggest they


are not paying as much as they should be. And the Daily Mail gives


reasons for this, because apparently if you make a large charity donation


you pay less, or if you make a large pension payment. What sort of large


are we talking about? Is it outrageous, at a time when we are so


angry at large organisations not paying tax, at the fat cats not


paying tax, is it outrageous that people who are earning a lot and


don't appear to be paying the right amount of tax are just sent a


standard letter, asking them to check and please let the Inland


Revenue know? I partly agree. The difference here, this is a Daily


Mail campaign. They revealed earlier this week that the taxman wants the


power to dip into the bank accounts of married couples and their


savings. We don't see companies being busted by HMRC and their


capital savings being rifled through. So I think there is


probably a little bit too strong arm tactics, if these things do come out


in the way the Daily Mail portrays them. Surely, there is actually an


argument to extend this to companies, rather than to not do it


for the little man. I would prefer it was done to companies first,


perhaps! The Daily Express, depending on what paper you read and


choose to believe, depends on what is happening to house prices.


Soaring house prices is good for some but horrific for most. House


prices are to some but horrific for most. House


prices soar by 12% is their headline. Gosh, what a surprise! The


economists are predicting this. The boom will last until 2016,


evidently. Didn't we know this? May be house prices will zoom in


Liverpool or something. They are zooming in London. Absolutely. As


somebody who for the last 15 years has earned houses that are earning


more has earned houses that are earning


each day than I am, I know all about this. I don't think it's a great


thing but nor do I think it is a surprise. I don't quite understand


why it is the front page. I would rather have had this football fan's


World Cup mission as the main story. We love owning our castle. Let's


move on to the financial Times. Tony Blair on the front page. Blair


presses for pro`European role to fight the rise of populism. This is


off the back of the European elections and the rise of right`wing


groups and populism. Tony Blair is stepping in. I suppose there isn't


really a figure. Nick Clegg attempted it and failed. There is


not a figure selling the EU in Britain and Tony Blair is a good


salesman. But if there is going to be a referendum, which is looking


likely, somebody needs to do that. People would perhaps learn about the


benefits of the EU, rather than the drawbacks and problems. There is


never much of that reported. It seems to me that former prime and it


is are just the right people to do it. This week, I have heard Tony


Blair and John Major give lucid arguments for remaining in the EU,


reminding us why we are there, why we can't extricate ourselves and why


we would be mad to try. And it is quite nice to hear their measured


tones, reminding us why they themselves supported it. It feels


very different from, let us say, the S NP, why we should leave the UK.


This feels a very positive, probe Laura Liz argument. `` argument in


favour of pluralism. I wonder how it goes down in Europe. This is a


bigger role than just the UK. We must leave it there but you will be


back later with more insight into the papers. Thanks for taking us


through. Stay with us on BBC News. Later, a big rise in the number of


illegal migrants coming to Europe from North Africa. Next, Sportsday.


headlines: Mission accomplished as England comfortably win the World


Cup warm up against Baru three ` zero. Arsene Wenger targets more


success as he signs a


Download Subtitles