27/01/2016 The Papers

comments. Chris gale caused a stir with some

on-air flirting. That hasn't stopped him being offered another contract.

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

With me are the International Editor of the Economist, Helen Joyce,

and the Times columnist, Matthew Syed.

The front page of the Daily Telegraph. Depression and rugs makes

suicide more likely. Pharmaceutical companies accused of failing to

report some suicides and deaths. This is an important scientific will

technique, clinical trials very important to establish what works

and what doesn't, with big pharmaceutical companies rigging the

trial to undermine the validity of what they are doing and minimising

the side effects. We now know from a study that these anti-depression

drugs makes suicide more likely, but the pharmaceutical companies rigged

it. If somebody died, they would come up with an alternative

explanation. If it happened at a particular time, they would say it

was a cut-off date for that particular trial. This has happened

for decades in the pharmaceutical industry. It's amazing to me they

still haven't got their act together. There are families up and

down the country, across the world, who have said for many, many years

that they have people who are under the age of 18. It isn't adult

specifically. It seems to be young people, who have committed suicide

as a result of taking depression drugs. When you have any one case,

you don't know what caused it. With one case, you can say it was a

coincidence, so that is the point of doing a trial and gathering all the

data, so you can see between comparative groups, because it has

play fair. There is an excellent play fair. There is an excellent

global campaign to force pharmaceutical companies to register

all trials before they start. You can sign up if you think it's a good

idea. This would stop the process. The easiest way to do the rigging is

to put the trials that don't give the answer you want in a drawer and

publish the ones you want. This is systematic, right through the

pharmaceutical industry. This report has been published in the British

Medical Journal. Part of the research was done by University

College London. It makes sense. Do you think anyone will act on this? I

hope so. This campaign is vital. It's called publication bias. You do

lots of different trials, and just because of luck you get the answer

you want in three of them, but the answer you don't want in five. You

then published the three and you pay your representatives to push the

trials they carried out. They are rigorous, they are authentic, they

say. But nobody asks if they carry out any other trials? It is their

intellectual property. They also bribed the doctors. They have a

conflict of interest. I. The history is interesting too. I read a book on

this recently! When the first Bible of psychiatric conditions was

published, there are a number of conditions under which psychiatrists

could prescribe drugs. That has gone up incredibly. With the rigging of

the system, it has brought the entire thing into disrepute, and it

is an unfolding tragedy. It is lack of trust. We are going to have to

move on to the bedroom tax. The fight act begins. Families have

challenged the penalty. These are challenges on rather

specific cases. One is a woman who is a rape victim and domestic

violence victim who has a safe room, but that counts as a spare bedroom.

The other is very disabled children who require a spare room for the

equipment. If they were adults, they would be allowed. So both cases

claim discrimination. -- discrimination. The government says

they will challenge it, but there are wider implications for the whole

bedroom tax policy. The government has said it has put aside money to

deal with some specific cases. It doesn't sound as if it is going to

be enough money. When you see people like this on the front of

newspapers, and potential rape victims with panic rooms, it does

see there is a disconnect here between morality and trying to save

pennies. That is on the money. Forgive the pun! It was awful. But

the anomaly between private and social housing, you could sort of

understand the logic of why they want to remove that anomaly. What

surprises me is what you are saying - why didn't they think of the

particularly vulnerable groups who are going to be horrifically damaged

by this? And the funding you mention isn't mitigated by this. They would

say that they did think about vulnerable groups, and there are

measures within the legislation, including this money that has been

set aside. Fundamentally, the majority of the public supported

these changes. You can see why. It sounds fair. But the problem is

there are not small enough houses for people to move into. The

Financial Times. Google and Apple hit back over tax. Google's European

public affairs chief has written saying governments make tax law and

Google complies with the law. Wasn't he the editor of Newsnight? The same

guy. Anyway. What has that got to do with anything? It's because I

recognised the name! I thought it was a trap. No. The Times has

written a strong leader. The Times is often in favour of business and

free markets, but this is an issue of fairness. These are huge

companies that are gaining the international tax system. What we

need is an international set of agreements where the major economies

are prepared to ask the major corporations for transparency, so

you get the tax they deserve to pay. Helen, you work for a very

pro-free-market magazine. Google and Apple. Are they gaining the system?

But they are within the law? We have no idea on what basis they are

paying this ?130 million, because there is secrecy about tax on

corporations. So I cannot tell you. But it isn't likely to be an

overestimation? I am sure of that. We believe in a free market,

fairness and rules, so this ridiculous system where you park

your intellectual property in a tax haven, and this allows you to offset

everything... Is fairness and compatible as -- capitalism

compatible? Yes, of course. It can only work if people are prepared to

be honest. Cameron goes to halt arms sales with Saudi Arabia. Saudi

Arabia is a big contributor to the British bottom line. Fairness and

ethics might suggest that for some people we shouldn't be selling them

weapons. British made weapons have been used to bomb hospitals,

schools, markets and other civilian targets in Yemen. We were discussing

this earlier. When you sell arms to people, they are going to sometimes

be used for bad things. I don't think the British government will be

surprised by this. You are right to say there is a long history of

selling arms to Saudi Arabia. The idea that selling arms to Saudi

Arabia has been a arm of policy for decades. Propping up extremists, and

a Sunni dictatorship is not going to be in our long-term interests. The

religious warring is going to make a mockery of this relationship. It

will be difficult, given the amount of jobs the defence industry

supports. The Daily Express, revealing School reports of the rich

and famous. Churchill is there, and Judi Dench. I know that Churchill's

school report was dreadful. He turned out all right! Don't you feel

sorry for teachers, having to write these works of fiction! They have to

write something about 30 kids' marks, their effort, something

crafted to suggest that their little darlings have been suggested in the

class, in every subject! I wouldn't expect to do it, and I am a writer

in trade. We were not given this stuff when I was little. There were

a lot of good marks when I was little. I was a real sucker! We

didn't get them. They are playing the music. We've got to go. We will

be back in an hour's time. We will tell you about it then. Much more

coming up at the top of the hour first, time for a very enlightening

Sportsday. here's what we have

for you on Sportsday tonight.