:00:00. > :00:00.South Africa won by one wicket. We will also have the Rugby Union and
:00:00. > :00:24.Super League scores. Hello and welcome to
:00:25. > :00:27.our look ahead to what the papers With me are the Daily Telegraph's
:00:28. > :00:30.political correspondent Ben Riley-Smith, and Eleanor Mills,
:00:31. > :00:32.editorial director of the The Independent leads with news
:00:33. > :00:47.of attacks by far-right militia The Times says stolen bank card
:00:48. > :00:51.details are available on an illegal website for as little as ?1.67 The
:00:52. > :00:54.Mail criticises police forces for refusing to reveal the names of some
:00:55. > :00:58.wanted suspects - it says they cited data protection
:00:59. > :01:00.and human rights laws as a reason. The Mirror carries news of a drug
:01:01. > :01:03.used to treat cancer which, it's According to the Telegraph,
:01:04. > :01:07.NHS inspectors are set to trawl through social media to pick up
:01:08. > :01:10.on criticisms of poor healthcare. The FT says banks have been fighting
:01:11. > :01:13.back to try restore investor confidence
:01:14. > :01:14.on the world's stock markets. The Guardian says ministers are
:01:15. > :01:17.considering putting all convicted Islamist terrorist prisoners in
:01:18. > :01:19.one single secure unit - a British And The Sun leads with the latest on
:01:20. > :01:24.the court case involving footballer Adam Johnson, accused of sexual
:01:25. > :01:36.activity with a 15-year-old girl. We will begin with the Guardian. Tia
:01:37. > :01:42.Sharp transplant for Islamist terrorists. Guardian, you will get
:01:43. > :01:50.rubbished. It is an incredibly exciting headline, but... Ministers
:01:51. > :02:03.are seriously considering putting all Islamist terrorists in a single
:02:04. > :02:10.secure unit. The PM said this last week, so this is a classic case of
:02:11. > :02:16.reheating an old story. It was reported everywhere. The bits they
:02:17. > :02:20.do have that our extra are some of the places they could have one of
:02:21. > :02:28.these prisons. One of them near Durham, one in West Yorkshire. There
:02:29. > :02:34.is absolutely nothing. I think someone looked at the front page and
:02:35. > :02:41.thought, world's 50 best beaches, that looks exotic. Alcatraz will fit
:02:42. > :02:45.in! If this idea were to take root would it be a sensible idea? To put
:02:46. > :02:51.people with similar ideologies in one place? David Cameron said they
:02:52. > :02:55.were considering doing this, because I think it is quite sensible. We
:02:56. > :02:59.don't want all the terrorist prisoners all radicalising other
:03:00. > :03:03.people in prisons, and there has been a lot of that going on. It has
:03:04. > :03:08.been a real problem, but the kind of creed has been spread within prisons
:03:09. > :03:13.from people who have already been radicalised to others. That is what
:03:14. > :03:16.they are worried about. A bit like the prisons we saw in Northern
:03:17. > :03:21.Ireland during the height of the troubles. Exactly. There is a real
:03:22. > :03:26.concern within government and prison circles that this is like a kind of
:03:27. > :03:31.virus that gets infected into the rest of the system. Is there any
:03:32. > :03:36.talk that if they are all put together they will be simply
:03:37. > :03:40.radicalising programmes? To play devil's advocate, how much time to
:03:41. > :03:45.the police spent trying to break up sleeper cells in Britain? Is it a
:03:46. > :03:51.fantastic idea to put them all in the same place so they can spend
:03:52. > :03:57.days on end chatting about it? And making themselves a nice tie itself
:03:58. > :04:00.when they get out. Prison is a kind of university for crime, people
:04:01. > :04:06.going without having done anything bad and come out with a network.
:04:07. > :04:16.Whether there is any truth in it. The Daily Mail, we won't name
:04:17. > :04:22.fugitives. Human rights. This is the police, isn't it, saying that they
:04:23. > :04:25.can't say who they are because of these laws. What is interesting
:04:26. > :04:33.about this is that basically the Daily Mail asked 45 police forces on
:04:34. > :04:37.a freedom of information request, how many people they had on their
:04:38. > :04:42.wanted list and who they were, and 21 forces refuse to give their
:04:43. > :04:47.names. This is pretty serious crimes, child abuse, murder,
:04:48. > :04:50.kidnapping and rape. 21 forces would not give them the names on privacy
:04:51. > :04:55.grounds under the Human Rights Act, and our old friend data protection.
:04:56. > :04:59.You can understand why people get hot under the collar. There are
:05:00. > :05:03.times when people get data protection wrong, don't they? This
:05:04. > :05:05.has happened in the past, with police forces not sharing
:05:06. > :05:09.information with each other which has caused the problem trying to
:05:10. > :05:13.keep track of people. Surely there are issues where they have two tread
:05:14. > :05:18.carefully. You can be fined a lot of money if you get it wrong. And there
:05:19. > :05:26.is the function that you are innocent until proven guilty. This
:05:27. > :05:30.doesn't go into the details, but some of these people are petty
:05:31. > :05:33.criminals, petty theft, should it be a principle that anyone who is
:05:34. > :05:40.suspected of a crime should be publicly named and shamed by the
:05:41. > :05:48.police? I think it is shocking that the police are so confused about
:05:49. > :05:53.what data protection means. Wightman is this a first for you agreeing
:05:54. > :06:05.with the Daily Mail headline? It may be. The Times, stolen credit cards.
:06:06. > :06:14.This is all down to hacking. This is saying that 100,000 British people
:06:15. > :06:26.having credit card details available on the internet. You can buy
:06:27. > :06:32.people's data for ?1 67. It is shocking that this is in plain
:06:33. > :06:38.sight. They even have a consumer kind of line, so it was quite an
:06:39. > :06:44.organised operation. Online fraud is the biggest growing area of crime.
:06:45. > :06:50.?27 billion of online crime. Everyone has to be extra careful
:06:51. > :06:54.about their passwords. It is so difficult to remember them all it is
:06:55. > :06:59.tempting to have the same one for lots of different accounts. You
:07:00. > :07:04.don't want to do that. Are done, but it is tempting. I don't know if you
:07:05. > :07:08.have done this before, but sending your account details to yourself.
:07:09. > :07:11.People have so many details were different accounts that they have
:07:12. > :07:19.started e-mailing them to themselves. That is incredibly
:07:20. > 3:59:03insecure. And you don't need your cat or your kids names or the name
3:59:04 > 3:59:03of your cat, because you can find a lot of that out on social media, and
3:59:04 > 3:59:03work out a lot of passwords. What do you do to shut down these sites?
3:59:04 > 3:59:03This is a site operating in the normal internet, how do you do
3:59:04 > 3:59:03that? They just pop up somewhere else. The Daily Telegraph, Facebook
3:59:04 > 3:59:03inspections to find poor social care. They are going to be having a
3:59:04 > 3:59:03look, looking on social media. I think this is a great idea, don't
3:59:04 > 3:59:03you? I think the principle of the NHS and regulators looking beyond
3:59:04 > 3:59:03official data when inspectors come in is not a bad idea, and why not
3:59:04 > 3:59:03use information that is out there in public domain to try to get a more
3:59:04 > 3:59:03360 degrees vision on the services being provided? Sign however, there
3:59:04 > 3:59:03is a 25% funding cut to proper expenses to inspections by the
3:59:04 > 3:59:03quality care Council. That means there will be a reduction in the
3:59:04 > 3:59:03number of inspectors going around and looking at stuff, and trawling
3:59:04 > 3:59:03through Facebook and things they see as a kind of sticking plaster for
3:59:04 > 3:59:03the fact that there are big cuts to what is important. If you think
3:59:04 > 3:59:03about some of the terrible scandals in some NHS hospitals. They are now
3:59:04 > 3:59:03cutting inspections by 25%, so a lot of that will go uncovered. I don't
3:59:04 > 3:59:03think a little trawl through social media is the same as going into a
3:59:04 > 3:59:03hospital. Wouldn't it be better to make it easier for people to come
3:59:04 > 3:59:03forward with complaints? The headline is all about Facebook, but
3:59:04 > 3:59:03the new head of the CQC, who was interviewed, goes into many things
3:59:04 > 3:59:03like looking at patient complaints and contacting patient groups. It is
3:59:04 > 3:59:03not just that, it is the idea of widening out your investigation is a
3:59:04 > 3:59:03good idea. Not of it is just a mask cuts. Assad vows to retake the whole
3:59:04 > 3:59:03of Syria. The balance of power has really turned back to President
3:59:04 > 3:59:03Assad in recent weeks. We are on the brink of an agreement to cease
3:59:04 > 3:59:03bombing and to try to get some more normality in the country that has
3:59:04 > 3:59:03been ripped, and then Assad goes to invite the media to his palace and
3:59:04 > 3:59:03says, screw that! He said this before the big announcements about
3:59:04 > 3:59:03ceasefires. But they have made so many games, the suspicion is why
3:59:04 > 3:59:03they agree to any kind of compromise. He is not going to stop
3:59:04 > 3:59:03now, he has been ruthless in the way he has bombed his own people. He now
3:59:04 > 3:59:03has Putin helping him, why would he stop? Some say the Russians are
3:59:04 > 3:59:03ready to have talks with the US. Bombing some places... Turkey are
3:59:04 > 3:59:03key in this, because they don't want to end up in the wrong side. It is
3:59:04 > 3:59:03so complicated because there are so many different interests. And they
3:59:04 > 3:59:03are at loggerheads with Russia. And then ISIS is not saying they are
3:59:04 > 3:59:03going to stop bombing anyone, so... Camera and dilutes sugar tax plan.
3:59:04 > 3:59:03The sounds that he is making a syrup. Alevi threat if producers
3:59:04 > 3:59:03fail to act. Food campaigners, like Jamie Oliver, have been hammering
3:59:04 > 3:59:03away at this. He is through through Tory on things like tax, he doesn't
3:59:04 > 3:59:03want to tax people. If he can strong arm them into voluntarily reducing
3:59:04 > 3:59:03sugar content, rather than a sugar tax? Sign doesn't this feel like a
3:59:04 > 3:59:03total paid into the food and drinks lobby? Thinking that something like
3:59:04 > 3:59:03Coca-Cola off --or Kelloggs is going to make a modest cut and that will
3:59:04 > 3:59:03solve our obesity crisis? What is the proof that a sugar tax will make
3:59:04 > 3:59:03any difference? In Mexico they think it reduced consumption by around
3:59:04 > 3:59:0312%. About 55% of writs are in favour of it, and what Jamie Oliver
3:59:04 > 3:59:03says in his own restaurants, where he has put his own tax on it, is
3:59:04 > 3:59:03that the money could be used for extra sport and education
3:59:04 > 3:59:03programmes, so you could ring-fence that money to do something with it.
3:59:04 > 3:59:03Isn't it down to parents to say, sorry, not having it. You know how
3:59:04 > 3:59:03it is as a parent. Yes, and you ultimately have to no. Ask my kids,
3:59:04 > 3:59:03I'm very good at at saying no. I ban fizzy drinks, but it is the devil.
3:59:04 > 3:59:03But everywhere you go, it is sugar. The other criticism is that putting
3:59:04 > 3:59:03a sugar tax on fizzy drinks will not stop children from eating sugar. We
3:59:04 > 3:59:03are not thinking about chocolate or... Fizzy drinks are the real
3:59:04 > 3:59:03danger. You have ten or 12 spoonfuls of sugar. But it won't stop obesity
3:59:04 > 3:59:03in kids. It is calories that people don't even think about. Nutrition
3:59:04 > 3:59:03free, two litres of Coca-Cola is bags of sugar. But the idea that
3:59:04 > 3:59:03they don't have a can of Coke but then can have Mars bars and other
3:59:04 > 3:59:03things, which will be totally unaffected. But if you speak to
3:59:04 > 3:59:03doctors and things, just stopping the fizzy drink stuff would really
3:59:04 > 3:59:03help. I am also a trustee for a diabetes charity, and that is a
3:59:04 > 3:59:03terrible thing, with huge increases in type 1 and type two. We have to
3:59:04 > 3:59:03do something about it. If they fail Jamie Oliver will be on their case.
3:59:04 > 3:59:03Other celebrity chefs are available in other newspapers. We will finish
3:59:04 > 3:59:03with a Daily Express. Fury over lottery farce. Basically, they
3:59:04 > 3:59:03change the rules on the lottery. It used to be that you had a one in 8
3:59:04 > 3:59:03million chance of living. Now you have one in 14 million chance of
3:59:04 > 3:59:03winning. So, there are lots of rollovers. All these people are
3:59:04 > 3:59:03complaining that last week some people got five walls and they only
3:59:04 > 3:59:03one ?883. I thought those were always the odds. They have made it
3:59:04 > 3:59:03more difficult, you have to do more balls. That is why there are more
3:59:04 > 3:59:03people complaining, that... I don't often play the lottery, and I always
3:59:04 > 3:59:03assume someone has won a massive pot of cash. 73 people last week one
3:59:04 > 3:59:03?883 each. It is a scam, because they roll over and everyone runs
3:59:04 > 3:59:03down and buys it. The reason it is rolling over is because Nvidia is
3:59:04 > 3:59:03winning. Everyone knows that bigger jackpots and more millionaires mean
3:59:04 > 3:59:03more sales. More money for Camelot. I'm not sure people play the lottery
3:59:04 > 3:59:03to give money to charity. There is no such thing as altruism! That is
3:59:04 > 3:59:03it, thank you so much. Next, Sportsday.
3:59:04 > 3:59:04Hello, and welcome to Sportsday. I'm Lizzie Greenwood-Hughes.