06/11/2015 The Papers

about the FA Cup match. Salford is owned by a number of other players.

This is all in sports day in 15 minutes after The Papers.

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

With me are Laura Hughes, political correspondent

for the Daily Telegraph and Joseph Harker, who's assistant

The Daily Mail claims a British flight was close to being struck

by a missile in Egyptian airspace, a few months

The Telegraph shows a tired tourist waiting to be flown

The fallout from the Russian plane crashing in Egypt is also

The i says that intelligence about the crash suggests a bomb was

The main Financial Times story says a job surge in the US could pave

And the Express claims many over 50s in Britain are struggling to get

We will start with two or three papers that are looking at the

ongoing developments in the Russian airliner crash that happened a week

ago. Here is how The Times are reporting it, bomber blew plane

departed black box experts. They say that a bomb could be heard 20

minutes into the flight. According to the report is that we are hearing

which not been confirmed this explosion did not sound like a

technical issues that we seem to be edging closer to the ball theory. If

we can hear a sound in the background of this black box does

seem to point to even more evidence. From the day of the crash itself, it

was spread over such a large area it felt like there had been an

explosion at high altitude and as the word now my -- and as there were

no Mayday signals it seems to be pointing in that direction. Egypt

and Russia have seemed to deny it but now they seem to be responding

and Russia seems to believe it could have been an act of terrorism

because it has stopped flights going to Sharm el-Sheikh as well.

Initially they were saying it could not be a missile because it was

flying too high and because of the way that the wreckage was scattered

on the ground. No, they are still saying it is something different but

not technical or pilot error. The Daily Mail have this story about a

passenger jet flying in August and a report that it narrowly missed a

missile which they say was from an Egyptian military exercise. We will

look at that any moment. The other way that this incident is being

reported is in the mirror on pages six and seven. It says that there is

a fiasco at the airport. A lot of people talking about the chaos.

People did not know if they were going to the plane back to the

terminal and David in limbo for a couple of days. We saw the

ambassador for Britain speaking to angry British people abroad asking

when they would be leaving. The Transport Secretary said this

morning that most Britons would be leaving and getting home, but we

only had eight planes that actually blew out. I think the general

consensus was that David Cameron had done the right thing and if it was

about security they were happy to wait, but they wanted to know what

was going on. People speaking to various news channels were saying

that they were finding out what was happening from British media reports

and not from people on the ground and Egypt. There seemed to have been

conflicting experiences for people. Some people were left with no

information but there were improvements in place insecurity

that make people feel safer, but the confusion at the end of the holiday

is not what you are expecting. There will have to be improvements because

security was absolutely dire. The good thing is at least significant

improvements can be made quickly, but at the same time it seems that

because they wanted the tourists to BB graduated leather luggage that

cost further delays. -- they wanted the tool is to leave without their

luggage and that caused further delays. 5000 people are stranded. It

has been very focused on British people who are stuck but there are

almost twice as many Russians who are there. It was a Russian plane

that went down. Some people are suggesting that things are being

sold because the Egyptians are tried to provoke a reaction and they are

annoyed that Britain jumped in there and said it was a bomb attack

because obviously that will have an impact on their two of them so they

want to do everything they can to calm people down. -- tourism. They

have just got over the last hiatus. You mentioned the story in the mail,

rocket attack on UK to reject. A pilot dodged a missile above Sharm

el-Sheikh. We do not have a huge amount to go on, have we? This was a

Thomson flight in August and it seems that the pilot spotted this

missile. Two months before the plane crash on Saturday, a pilot spotted a

rocket and took a bases action and it missed by around 1000 feet. From

the headline you would think this must be some kind of ices rocket,

but then they say that an Egyptian government spokesman investigated

the incident and they believe it was not a targeted attack and it was

likely to be connected to routine exercise is being conducted by the

Egyptian military. -- ices rocket. I think they are saying that to make

people feel more comfortable, but if the Egyptian military could of done

this in August there is much as they could have done last weekend as well

and it could have been friendly fire. Except if there was a bomb on

board. They have called it a bomb because they are presuming that ices

two cannot hit a plane at that height, and it opens up another

possible cause. It does leave other things open. According to this

report only does in the cockpit knew what might have been flying close

by. The only new because the site as it was happening and I think the

biggest question here is why there was no communication? Why did we not

know there were military exercises as we were flying over? How was that

allowed to happen? We do not know how high up this plane was flying

because the suggestion was with the jet that came down it was too high

to have been reached by a missile in the hands of militants, so it is an

alarming story but there are a lot of questions there. The Egyptians

have confirmed that they fired a rocket towards a plane, which is

astonishing. A couple of stories in the Telegraph, a battle over

military pay rises as they are denied automatic pay increases under

Osborne's controversial plans. Ministers are happy that they got

the 2% defence spending, but the issue is that many military

personnel believed that the government is spending too much

money on equipment and that we do not have an up men to man this

equipment. There is an eternal dispute going on and they are

arguing that if you do not give the incentive to stay you will have lots

of very high up and talented officers leaving to work in the

private sector and that this will just put people off joining when we

need people there. Why are we spending money on equipment when we

don't have the personnel to operate it? It is a peculiar message to

centre the Armed Forces, but it is money again, isn't it? This is

Jeremy Corbyn's argument against Trident why spend billions on

something that has no value to this country and that will never be used.

It is a deterrent. When these cuts are taking place and the boots on

the ground are being put in jeopardy. Another story in the

Telegraph, Prime Minister, everyone to have the right to fast broadband.

Rights are bestowed upon it and someone has to enable us to get

broadband of any sort in some places. Where I live in south London

you do not necessarily have the right to high-speed broadband, so I

am not sure. It is a great vision and we want every home to have

access to high-speed, but obviously it will take a lot of time and

digging and roadworks before that comes to fruition. It is a measure

of deprivation these days, not having access to the Internet.

People feel that it is their human rights. Just as you would expect to

have access to water and electricity, people feel that they

need the Internet. What is interesting is that the head of

columns and suffering -- is that the head of, says that people's

broadband are suffering because they have not put the richer in the right

place in the house. I need to move mine away from the phone. Now let us

look at The Express. There is a doctor crisis for the over 50s that

have struggling to see their GP on the day that they fall ill. I is

this relevant to the over 50s? I don't know because the story does

not say that they are comparing this with any other age group, they could

see that any age group struggle to see their GP. Maybe the research was

carried out by a group that deals with that age group. It does seem

interesting that they have chosen that age group. It does not save the

survey and other age groups or maybe it is because more over 50s need to

go to the doctor more than young people. I think that we all do. It

is not that you are elderly if you are over 50. That is not what I

said. There is a 50 year gap there. Maybe it is the elderly bit of that

group that would require GP services more than perhaps the under 50s. It

could be people who are in the 80s or 90s. Letters would get this

Financial Times story, the rise of its fighters as pensioners are

geared towards cheaper council. These are people who have withdrawn

their pension pot and they have to take advice and they cannot find any

human being to give it to them. There was a question at the time

that there were not enough people deployed to offer this advice. I

think this is like any kind of other service where they have to go

through the steps and a direct you. I do not know how well that will go

down with a lot of people who want to speak to a people's cutback

person. Financial professionals fear exposure to future complaints and

they demand high fees to price themselves out of the market. That

is why the automated service is required. It all boils down to the

fact that no people have the choice to get their annuities in one cash

sum and spend as they want on a Lamborghini if they want. I don't

think I've heard of anyone who has done that but I am waiting for a

couple of years to get the keys for mine. People now have access to an

awful lot of money but they will not know how to spend it they get it

wrong they get it wrong people live in poverty. Their final years will

be spent in real poverty. The professionals are now taking the

stance that they do not really want to deal with this or have the risk

and that is why this automated service has been put in place. The

pensions minister and former BBC papers reviewer says that she

welcomes all innovations. That is such a ridiculous statement. If PPI

a great innovation that people welcome? We need to look at this and

think it throws up really serious issues about whether people are

going to be getting the right advice for how they spend an awful lot of

money. When you need someone to talk you through the small print, this is

probably the most important thing. Whenever I speak to anyone I want to

speak to a real person. This is a massive issue. It is not as simple

as pressing a button to speak to someone about your washing machine,

it is about how to spend all your money. It will only cost you ?109

which is a fraction of the cost of getting advice elsewhere. It will

give you a report on 30-40 minutes. Surely, as a financial adviser, you

are professional and you should know what you are talking about. They are

realising that it is high risk. That is it, you survived it. We July to

come back at 11:30pm? -- would you like to come back. That is from for

now. You'll both be back at half

eleven for another look at the Hello and welcome to Sportsday,

I'm Lizzie Greenwood-Hughes. Salford City rise to the occasion -

giant-killing Notts County