19/03/2018 Victoria Derbyshire

Hello, it's Monday, it's 9 o'clock,

I'm Victoria Derbyshire,

welcome to the programme.

Our top story today -

highly addictive fixed odds betting

terminals should have their maxium

stake reduced from £100

to £30 or less -

that's the verdict of

the Gambling Commission,

who're calling on the

government to act now.

And I just went to the counter and I

debt, 500. I lost that in the space

of a few minutes. 1000, lost that.

1000, lost that, another thousand

until I had no more money in my bank

account.

We'll speak to one man who's lost

250 grand on fixed odds

betting terminals.

Also on the programme -

A British woman who went to Syria

to fight against Islamic State has

been killed - Anna Campbell died

in the town of Afrin,

which has been the target

of a Turkish offensive.

I said, you could be killed. And she

said, I know, dad. There's nothing I

can do to reassure you about that,

but I've got to do this.

We'll hear more from her dad

later in the programme.

And Ant McPartlin has been arrested

on suspicion of drink driving

after his car crashed

into two others yesterday.

We'll bring you the story.

Hello.

Welcome to the programme,

we're live until 11.

Throughout the programme

the latest breaking news,

and developing stories -

a little later we'll speak

to residents in Derby who've been

protesting against a new asylum

seeker centre which opened

in the last month.

There are several up

and down the country.

If you live near one,

work in one or have stayed in one,

do get in touch - use the hashtag

Victoria live and if you text,

you will be charged

at the standard network rate.

Our top story today...

The Gambling Commission has

recommended that the maximum stake

for fixed-odds betting terminals

should be reduced from £100

to £30 pounds or less,

or £2 in the case

of slot machines.

It says cutting the stake alone

won't cure problem gambling and has

recommended what it calls

a "comprehensive package of other

measures to protect consumers".

The industry had said

a blanket reduction to £2

would cost thousands of jobs.

Our correspondent

Sean Dilley is here.

Tell us more about what the

commission have said.

They are

concerned that the most vulnerable

in society are being taken for a

ride, not necessarily deliberately,

but they are clear that the industry

hasn't done enough. So whereas at

the moment, people can literally

lose £100 in 20 seconds, again and

again, they are talking about a £30

limit on most fixed odds betting

terminals. There are also saying it

should be as low as £2 on the fruit

machines, the old pub style fruit

machines. When I spoke to the

executive director Tim Miller, he

said it's not just the £30 figure,

he was concerned that whichever

figure you pick will be opposed. It

is about a wider Raft of measures

such as education.

Because they say

even reducing steaks from £130 or

less is not enough to help problem

gamblers?

They said the £30 figure,

from their research, would make

people less disadvantaged. But their

concern is that people working hard

on average wage can't afford to lose

that.

We are clear that a steak cut alone

would not go far enough. So in

addition to recommending a cut to £2

on slots, we are suggesting that

fall roulette-style games, the limit

should be reduced to £30 or less. If

the government decide to go less

than that, that would be consistent

with our advice. We are also

proposing that there should be a

form of track to play so that

players themselves can have access

to good quality data on their player

behaviour and how much they have

lost. And importantly, the gambling

companies then have no excuse not to

spot problem gambling and act on it.

This has been highly anticipated by

the industry. The Association of

British Insurers makers were arguing

that half of bookmaking shops could

close completely, so they urge

caution. There is quite a bit of

disagreement on figures, with the

suggestion that £1.5 billion is the

true cost of gambling when you

consider economic and employment.

But ultimately, the Gambling

Commission tell us that they are not

even considering the impact on the

economy, it's about protecting

vulnerable consumers.

Thank you.

Joanna Gosling is in the BBC

Newsroom with a summary

of the rest of the day's news.

Official results from Russia show

President Putin has been

re-elected with more

than 76% of the vote.

He told a victory rally that

Russia must maintain unity

following his landslide win -

but CCTV footage from a number

of polling stations appears to show

election officials stuffing boxes

with ballot papers.

International chemical weapons

experts are due to arrive in the UK

later today to test the nerve agent

used to poison former

Russian spy Sergei Skripal

and his daughter Yulia.

President Putin says

claims his country was behind

the attack are "nonsense"

but Boris Johnson claims Russia has

been stockpiling Novichok for years.

Tom Burridge reports.

More than 80 drivers were stranded

overnight on a major road

in south western England.

The A30 has just re-opened

within the last hour.

A 64-mile stretch had to be shut

for the night after heavy

snow fell in the area,

making many roads impassable.

Devon and Cornwall Police are urging

people not to travel

until later on this morning.

The television presenter

Ant McPartlin has been arrested

on suspicion of drink driving.

Police say they were called

to reports of a collision involving

three cars in south-west

London yesterday afternoon.

A child passenger in one of them was

taken to hospital as a precaution.

In a statement, Scotland Yard said

a 42-year-old man was arrested

at the scene after failing

a breathalyser test.

Cardinal Keith O'Brien,

the former leader of

Scotland's Roman Catholics,

has died at the age of 80.

He was formerly the Catholic

Church's most senior cleric

in Britain, but resigned

as Archbishop of St Andrews

and Edinburgh in 2013

after admitting sexual misconduct.

He was recently injured

in a fall and was being cared

for at a hospital in Newcastle.

A British woman has been

killed in northern Syria,

while fighting alongside

Kurdish forces.

It's understood that Anna Campbell -

who was 26 and from

Lewes in East Sussex -

died in the town of Afrin,

which has been the target

of a Turkish offensive.

She travelled to Syria last May.

Her father has told the BBC

she was idealistic and knew

she was putting her life at risk.

Our correspondent

Emma Vardy reports.

Anna Campbell was a passionate human

rights activist who travelled

to Syria last May to join

the Kurdish women's

armed group, the YPJ.

She even dyed her hair

so as not to stand out

among the other fighters.

Her father, Dirk Campbell,

said he could not have

prevented his daughter

from travelling to the warzone.

She was quite adamant about it.

I said, you know,

you could be killed.

And she said, I know, Dad.

There's nothing I can do

to reassure you about that.

But I've got to do this,

because it's the most

important thing for me.

At first, Anna Campbell had been

involved in fighting with the Kurds

against so-called Islamic State

in Deir ez-Zor, where IS still

hold some territory.

But in January, Turkey began

attacking the Kurds along

the northern border around

the town of Afrin.

It is here that Kurdish commanders

say Anna Campbell was killed.

In a statement, the YPJ said

they tried to keep her away

from the front line,

but she had insisted on being part

of the operation to defend Afrin.

Since 2015, seven British men

have lost their lives.

Friends of Anna Campbell in Syria

told the BBC she was killed

by Turkish air strikes,

the first British woman fighting

with the Kurds to have died.

A new accomodation centre

to house newly arrived

asylum seekers in the UK has

just opened in Derby.

Despite opposition

from local residents

over a lack of information,

the new centre will be able

to house up to 200 people

seeking asylum for 19 days.

This allows the Home Office time

to assess the individuals

or families and find them suitable

housing elsewhere in the country.

Scientists have announced

a significant breakthrough

in the treatment of

multiple sclerosis.

Results from a decade-long

international trial have shown

a stem cell transplant can halt

the disease and improve symptoms.

The disabling condition affects

about 100,000 people in the UK.

Doctors in Sheffield,

who were part of the study,

say the new treatment is a "game

changer" for many patients.

Residents from several cliff top

seaside chalets in Norfolk have

been told to evacuate their homes

due to strong winds.

Police say six properties

in the village of Hemsby

are at risk of coastal erosion

because of the high tide.

In 2013, tidal storms saw three

homes in the village washed away.

That's a summary of the latest BBC

News - more at 9.30.

Do get in touch with us

throughout the morning -

use the hashtag Victoria live

and if you text, you will be charged

at the standard network rate.

Let's get some sport with Jessica.

Things are hotting up

in the sport of golf

with The Masters not far away...

Yeah, exciting times for the sport,

particularly when you consider the

resurgence of Tiger Woods in recent

weeks. And now for British golf

fans, it looks as though Rory

McIlroy is back to his best. Just

won the Arnold Palmer Invitational

tournament, his first tournament win

for 18 months, and all the more

exciting because the Masters, the

first major of the year, starts in

just a couple of weeks. Because Rory

McIlroy has won this tournament, he

is now the favourite to win that

green jacket. After the tournament,

he said "I played a perfect round of

golf", and you can understand why

when you see birdie putts like this.

He made five birdies in the last six

holes to finish on 18 under par.

That was three shots ahead of the

rest, and this is McIlroy's first

win since September 20 16.

All these

little barriers that you have to

overcome, whether it be physical or

mental, is huge for my confidence

going into the next few weeks. I

kept saying I didn't need a win

going into Augusta to feel like I

had a chance, I just wanted to see

signs of good golf and thankfully, I

have been able to get both today.

Coverage of the Masters from Augusta

will be live across the BBC from the

5th of April.

And we now know who is

going to Wembley to compete for the

FA semi finals.

For all four teams

involved, it will be there any

chance for a trophy this season.

Manchester United will take on

Tottenham and when you consider

United's limp exit from the

Champions League recently and them

being off the pace in the Premier

League, this could be the trophy

they need for the players and the

manager Mourinho to answer their

critics. Chelsea play Southampton

and could be the ideal swansong for

the blues manager Conde, who if you

listen to reports in the press,

could be leaving Stamford Bridge at

the end of the season. This is how

Chelsea got to the last four. They

beat Leicester 2-1. The winning goal

came from Pedro in extra time.

Towering header from the smallest

player on the pitch. That is a tenth

FA Cup semifinal now for Chelsea in

18 years. Let's show you Southampton

did. It was a first good game for

Mark Hughes, their new manager,

winning in his first match in

charge. They won 2-0. So that is

Manchester United against Spurs and

Chelsea against Southampton in the

semifinals of the FA Cup at Wembley.

The matches get under way on the

21st 22nd of April thank you.

The maximum stake for fixed odds

betting terminals should be

cut to £30 or less -

the Gambling Commission has

recommended this morning.

At the moment - gamblers playing

games like routlette can lose

up to £100 per spin,

and can spin three times a minute -

which means people can lose

thousands of pounds in a relatively

short space of time.

The Gambling Commission also

want a maximum of £2

for fixed odds betting terminals,

which use slot machines.

The Government now has to decide

whether to accept the Commission's

advice on the stake limit,

or decide to impose a lower figure.

We've talked about the problems

caused by FOBTs a number

of times on this programme,

as Jim Reed reports.

Fixed odds betting terminals, on the

high street, introduced 15 years ago

and controversial ever since.

Tony Franklin has been campaigning

against the machine for years now.

I was in that hairdresser's over

the road, and I don't know

what happened, I came out

of the hairdressers, I thought, "Oh,

go on, what's the harm?

I'll go in and I'll have a go."

The addiction's always present.

I fed in what I had in my wallet,

which I think was about £90.

Then I came out, took some money

out of the cashpoint,

and at this point I was totally

devastated and just completely

caught up in the gambling,

in a red mist is probably the best

way to describe it,

or a fog, and I just went

to the counter and I

said, you know, 500.

I lost that in the space

of a few minutes.

1000, lost that.

Another thousand, until I had no

more money in my bank account.

How did you feel after losing that?

Devastated.

At this point, the plan

was still for my wife and child

to come and live here

in this country with me.

I'd got a flat set up

and everything ready to go.

But because of that relapse,

and because my wife realised

I was still very much

in the gambling, the

addiction was there.

To critics this is the dark side of

gambling. You could lose £100 per

spin and you can spin every 20

seconds. In October the government

said it plans to force bookmakers to

cut the state. The question now is

to watch. A final decision is

expected soon. What then are the

arguments on both sides. Critics of

the machines say the case to cut

right back to £2 per spin is

overwhelming. In a letter to the

Chancellor seen by this programme

three MPs say in a single year

players lost large amounts, more

than £1000, on children 30,000

separate occasions. Former players

say the cost to society is huge.

To

allow someone to bed up to £100

every 20 seconds, they are more

likely to become addict had to

gambling. So which the maximum stake

would reduce the harm.

Then there's

the case against, the industry says

that a two downstate would kill off

the machines completely, jobs could

be last and there would be less

money for government, local councils

and the racing industry.

With online

and casinos, both of which have

grown over this period, there are

similar potential for staking and

the human interaction you get in a

betting shop means that large losses

are monitored and we can stop them.

A £2 stake would also mean it is

possible to spend more money more

quickly on gaming machines in pubs

and arcades spent in betting shops.

Many in the industry said it does

not make sense. The share price of

the largest gaming companies fell in

January on rumours that the

government would back the £2 stake.

Nothing is final yet. But the

Chancellor and the Treasury could be

worried that it would also damage

tax revenues.

So do the recommendations

to cap the limit at 30

quid go far enough?

We can speak to Carolyn Harris -

Labour MP for Swansea East, Chair

of the All Party Parliamentary Group

on FOBTs, who is one

of three MPs to back

cutting FOBT stakes,

Tim Miller from the Gambling

Commission, Terry White,

a gambling addict who estimates

he lost £250,000 on FOBTs

- he's in Cardiff this

morning, and Andy Margett -

he lost tens of thousands

of pounds gambling online

and in betting shops -

he's in Derby today.

Tim, can you explain

what the report recommends -

how did the commission decide this?

It is a big reduction for games like

roulette are not as much as

campaigners wanted.

Well to be clear

it is £30 or less so people calling

for £2 need not be disappointed, we

have still left that door open. If

the Secretary of State considers

that appropriate it is still

perfectly consistent. We based our

advice on a wide range of evidence.

We looked at 20 billion different

plays. Individual bets. Yes, a huge

amount of data and we found it did

not point to a single individual

figure as being the magic bullet.

What we've said is we need a

conference a package of measures.

So

if it did not point to an individual

figure why have you registered to

£30 maximum.

Because it showed to

have significant impact on risk

reduction you need to come down to

at least £30. Other package says

that cutting the stake by itself is

not enough so we recommended going

even further by putting in a range

of other measures.

Caroline, how do

you react?

Initially I was

disappointed and quite angry but

then I have had a chat with Tim and

I probably am less angry. I just

need to know that the government

will not be persuaded by the

argument that £30 is sufficient.

You're saying £30 now is all right?

Well initially when I heard it

Well initially when I heard it was

£30, I said that to advance was

preferable.

The reality is the

evidence we looked at did not point

to any single figure. It is now for

the Secretary of State to make this

decision. That is what the

legislation says.

It has got to be

£2. Terry White and Andy, having

lost £250,000 on these terminals,

just explain how that is even

possible?

It sounds really difficult

to do put up but if you're losing

1000, £2000 a day, it only takes

around six months.

So how do you

then react to this recommendation

from the Gambling Commission that

for games like roulette, the maximum

stake should be £30 or less. And

obviously it is up to the government

to make the final position. They

could choose to pounce as the

maximum.

They could and I hope that

they will. I've not had time to look

at the full report put out today but

I have had dialogue with Mr Miller

and I know Carolyn is also putting -

also keen for that to be £2. But I

think there are many other aspects

like the speed of the spin and

responsibility of the bookmakers to

come and have a chat with people

when clearly they are out of control

on the machines. They say they do

that but from personal experience I

can tell you they do not.

And how

would someone in a booking -- in a

bookmakers note that you are out of

control.

Something along the lines

of a customer losing £500 or perhaps

swearing, picking the machine, they

would need to say hang on a minute,

you are affecting other people in

the shop and you know, really be a

bit more proactive and hands-on to

look after people better.

Tim

Miller, whatever you said about

interaction between people who work

in a bookmakers and someone clearly

losing money.

Well that is an

important point, a strong duty on

gambling companies to act. But

they're not. We recommend removing

all excuse not to act. That there is

a strong case to track play. So

potentially if someone had an

individual login, the player then

can have high quality data on their

play but importantly gambling

company could spot at an early stage

the risk of harmful play and act to

intervene.

Actually while they are

playing on the machine in the

bookmakers.

Exactly.

We want to

remove excuses. But will they have

time to log on to check on

individuals in their shop?

The

reality is there needs to be an

overwhelming drive to prevent people

from harm.

How do you react to these

recommendations from the Gambling

Commission customer I think it is

going after one form of gambling

will not work.

There are many forms

of gambling out there got up and any

form has the potential for harm.

form has the potential for harm. Any

form of gambling is bad for a

potential problem gambler. I think

they need to be more education and

treatment services. We are have all

been to school and we get taught

about the dangers of drugs, alcohol,

cigarettes, STI 's, but never the

danger of a potential gambling

problem. You hit a keen and you're

just free to have a gamble. Play the

lottery. So I believe funding for

help and treatment is critical and

education as well.

Let me read out

this e-mail from Keith, betting

machines are a blight, the odds of

winning can be fixed electronically.

These machines are designed to keep

you playing with very small wins

just to keep you playing.

The

problem with these machines, the

machine itself is addictive to most

problem gamblers, you might have

money that they lose Amin becomes

irrelevant, it is the activity

itself of the machine. And they are

built entirely to be captivating,

just like heroin is captivating to

some. So you will find difficulty.

Not in finding people who can use

the machines to money launder,

because the amount of money they

will get cleaned is phenomenal. But

you will have problems finding

people are personal level who have

won any money. And it becomes

irrelevant, the actual money becomes

irrelevant.

So maybe you think then

the recommendations in this report

are a missed opportunity?

Definitely, as long as the

government stays fan, and

unconvinced that this moment that

both the secretary of state and

Minister are resolute and they

believe that £2 the answer because

of the body language if you like and

the vibes we're getting. It is

essential for society, for the

individuals, but the high street. It

is essential that the social

consequences of these machines are a

limited by reducing the stakes to

£2.

They will be a suspicion that

you have been got at by the industry

customer not at all.

There have been

many arguments about the economic

impact of these cuts.

That I think

shops would close and people lose

their jobs.

In terms of our

recommendations we have not taken as

arguments on board. We have one

focus and that is taking action to

protect consumers.

I have one e-mail

from someone who works in a bookies.

It is anonymous and quite long but

really worth reading. I work for one

of the big four betting shops. Shop

staff are trained to spot trouble

gamblers and intervene when

necessary. I've tried several of

these interventions but I've had

negative responses from customers

being told to mind my own business.

I've offered the option of self

exclusion to help the customer as

well as the industry leaflets but

have been left out on several

occasions by personal safety

jeopardise for busily so much that

the shop staff can do and the rest

is the personal responsibility of

the customer themselves. The reality

of those using extolled terminals is

not what is being portrayed in the

media for the his customers are well

aware of their actions and they shun

help. Limiting the bet would just

mean that the customer would stay at

the terminal for longer and lose the

same amount of money. Gambling

addiction is a problem and more

powers should be given to front line

staff to help but I would suggest

greater powers of exclusion.

Personal responsibility of the

customer is critical. What do you

say about this that they would just

stay at the terminal for longer.

That is a risk and one of the

reasons why we do not point to any

individual number. Suggestions that

at some levels people could be

driven to riskier behaviour and that

is why we recommend this broader

package to spot the risks earlier

on.

What do you say, someone saying

you're working in a bookies and you

could be told to mind your business

and secondly reducing the state just

means you stay longer on the

terminal.

I think they are fair

points, I have seen people

approached by numbers of staff in

certain shops but it is very random

and does not happen as often as it

should. I think they need to train

staff even more now and maybe just

have one staff member in the shop

each day dealing with FOBT issues.

But unless they have the power to

exclude you from a shop you can just

ignore a member of staff, no matter

how well trained they are.

Precisely

and at the end of the day it is the

individual, it is their

responsibility to take control of

their gambling. Millions of people

to gamble responsibly and for fun. I

know I have a problem and I cannot

do that. My light bulb moment, I

smashed up my PC after losing £1000

at poker online, that is not normal

behaviour.

behaviour. I would be in a rage and

no one could come over to me and

tell me to stop. And reducing the

steak on one form of gambling will

not help a problem gambler. If it

happens, what happens afterwards to

the gambling addict if it is reduced

to £2.

Let's get answered to that

question. So the steak is reduced

and what then happens to the

gambling addict customer that is a

fair point and we should not focus

on one type of gambling.

We have

been reviewing online gambling as

well and we will make proposals on

that shortly. Because ultimately

there is no form of gambling that is

totally safe and risk-free. We need

to make sure we act on the harms

that comes from all forms of

gambling.

Let's say the government

take up your recommendation and

reduce the stakes to £2 as

campaigners want. The addict is

still an addict.

That is right and

one other thing we will say is that

the industry needs to up their game

on the amount of resources they put

into research, education and

training. Because treatment will

help for many people but at the

moment it is very underfunded.

Thank

you all for coming in. And of course

we welcome your views and

experiences.

Martina Navratilova says that

John McEnroe was paid

at least "10 times more"

than she was for their commentating

roles at Wimbledon.

The former champion told Panorama

that she was shocked when the BBC

revealed how much its stars earned.

John McEnroe was named on the list,

appearing in the £150,000 to

£199,999 bracket -

Martina Navratilova says she was

Martina Navratilova says that

John McEnroe was paid

£199,999 bracket -

Martina Navratilova says she was

paid around £15,000.

It's hard to really compare exactly

because some people work

a little longer days,

maybe a few more programmes

or whatever, but overall

it was a shock because John McEnroe

makes at least £150,000.

I get about £15,000 for Wimbledon.

And, unless John McEnroe's doing

a whole bunch of stuff

outside of Wimbledon,

he's getting at least ten

times as much money...

Ten times?!

..Than I am for very

comparable work.

So, yeah, at the moment

that's what I know.

So you're seriously telling me

that you earn about 10%

of what John McEnroe earns?

That's pretty much what it

looks like right now,

to the best of my knowledge,

yeah, that's how it shakes out.

How do you feel about that?

Not happy, let's just say.

It's shocking.

If this happens to me, then...

You know, for me, it's a part-time

job, it's two weeks of my life,

but for the women that

are there full-time,

maybe the discrepancy is not that

large but it adds up over a lifetime

to an amazing amount of money,

so it's extremely unfair,

and it makes me angry for the other

women that I think go through this.

The BBC might say, well,

John McEnroe does more hours

or he's on air longer?

Ten times as much?

I don't think so.

Do you ever say to the BBC,

"Am I earning a comparable amount

to a man doing a similar job?"

Absolutely, and we were told, yes,

I was getting comparable amounts,

so we were not told the truth,

that's for sure.

Because it's 50 years now

since the Equal Pay Act in Britain.

Wow.

Yeah, 50 years since equal pay.

So it's the law!

And the BBC is a public corporation.

I don't want to really rag

on the BBC, because I know it goes

on, I'm sure, in all the other

networks, but this one being public,

you know, they've got to do better.

The BBC says the two commentators

are on different types of contracts

and that Martina Navratilova appears

on air less than John McEnroe.

And you can see more of that

interview in a Panorama special

tonight at 7.30 on BBC One.

That's Panorama: Britain's

Equal Pay Scandal.

Still to come:

We'll be looking into how asylum

seekers are housed around

the country by private companies

on multi-million pound

government contracts.

And we will look at what Vladimir

Putin's election win means.

Time for the latest

news - here's Joanna.

The BBC News

headlines this morning...

The Gambling Commission has

recommended that the maximum stake

the fixed odds betting terminals

should be reduced from £100 to £30,

or £2 in the case of slot machines.

It says cutting the stake alone will

not cure problem gambling and has

recommended what it calls a

comprehensive package of other

measures to protect consumers. The

industry has the blanket reduction

to £2 would cost of jobs.

Official results from Russia show

President Putin has been re-elected

with more than 76% of the vote.

He told a victory rally that

Russia must maintain unity

following his landslide win -

but CCTV footage from a number

of polling stations appears to show

election officials stuffing boxes

with ballot papers.

International chemical weapons

experts are due to arrive in the UK

later today to test the nerve agent

used to poison former

Russian spy Sergei Skripal

and his daughter Yulia.

President Putin says

claims his country was behind

the attack are "nonsense",

but Boris Johnson claims Russia has

been stockpiling Novichok for years.

Test results could be seen

in around two weeks' time.

The TV presenter Ant McPartlin has

been arrested on charges of driving.

Police were called to the scene

yesterday afternoon. A car passenger

was taken to hospital as a

precaution. Scotland Yard said a

42-year-old man was arrested at the

scene after failing a breathalyser

test.

That's a summary of

the latest BBC News.

A viewer is not sympathetic to

anyone addicted to gambling. If you

don't realise you're wasting your

money on gambling, drugs or drink,

you need to grow up. There are too

many excuses. People are responsible

for themselves. You have the choice.

It is not responsible to give the

government or the taxpayer. And

Ariadne says you just have to look

at the areas of betting shops to

know that they are taking advantage

of vulnerable people. Do keep those

coming in.

Here's so coming in.

Here is some sport. McIlroy wins his

first tournament for months at the

Arnold Palmer international. He sank

five birdies in the last six holes,

including that glorious but to

finish on 18 under par three shots

ahead of the field. Chelsea confirm

their place in the FA Cup semifinals

after a 2- win over Leicester after

extra time. They will play

Southampton in the last four.

Manchester United will take on Spurs

in the other fixture. World number

one Roger Federer's winning run has

come to an end after losing the

final at the Indian Wells to Juan

Martin del Potro. The Argentine is

the first player to beat Federer in

18 matches. And England bowler

Stuart Broad tells the BBC that he

has no plans to retire from

international cricket any time soon.

England get their Test match against

New Zealand under way in the early

hours of Thursday morning. Those are

your sports headlines. I will be

back just after ten.

Every year, thousands of asylum

seekers enter the UK -

on planes, on the back of lorries,

illegally smuggled in...

When they arrive, most are initially

housed in an asylum reception centre

while the Home Office decides

whether their case to stay

as a refugee in the UK is genuine.

One such Initial Accomodation Centre

which houses over 200 asylum seekers

has just opened in Derby -

despite opposition

from local residents.

Our reporter Sean Clare

has this report.

Just over 26,000 people arrived

in the UK seeking asylum last year,

many needing somewhere to live.

Most people accept they have

to be housed somewhere,

but who wants them arriving

at the end of their street?

By the way, you're having 240 asylum

seekers on your doorstep and,

guess what, you can't do

anything about it.

Three companies are

responsible for housing them,

contracts worth millions.

In recent years, security firm G4S

have housed more than anyone else.

And with a national housing crisis,

the companies seek out the cheapest

homes in the most deprived parts

of the country.

The idea was to relieve pressure

on the south-east of England,

but is the system working as it

should for those already here?

We haven't got enough

for ourselves, let alone having

other people coming in.

..or for those hoping

to make the UK their home?

They give the accommodation

where no-one else wants to live,

and life is very difficult.

Crime is very high.

Prostitution, addiction.

Here in Derby, the student halls

of residence has just been turned

into accommodation for more

than 200 asylum seekers.

They're supposed to spend just three

weeks here before being moved

to a longer-term home.

Derby is a multicultural city

and is already home to asylum

seekers and refugees,

but local residents have been

questioning whether this

is an appropriate location for such

a transient, vulnerable community.

Fantastic area, very

close-knit community.

One of those areas where everybody

looks out for everybody.

Ajit Atwal, who used to represent

the area on the local council,

opposed the plan to convert

the student halls from the start.

We don't know what's

in there at the moment.

G4S are very quiet and very...

take a back-seat when it comes

to answering any questions.

People round here need to know,

they should be answerable

to the people of this area because,

at the end of the day,

they were here a lot longer

than what these people were.

The centre holds 225 people, and G4S

expect it to fill up this month.

It's almost full now, and there have

been no reported problems.

But residents are still worried.

Is there a way that,

if G4S had communicated differently,

you could see the system working

in this area?

It could have done, yeah.

They should have come out and spoke

to residents properly instead

of just inviting people to a council

meeting and saying,

"This is what we've put in place."

They could have sent leaflets,

they could've knocked

on people's doors.

They're a big organisation,

it's not like they're

short of a few quid.

They should consult people and give

them that reassurance that,

you know what, we're here to work

with you, any concerns you've got,

come to us directly so we can iron

those concerns out and you can get

on with life and the residents,

the refugees here

can get on with life.

While hundreds of people signed

a petition against the centre,

G4S say they consulted with local

residents, communicated

through local press,

and will continue their engagement

every three months.

But in this cafe just

across the road,

the anger at G4S is obvious.

When you go to the shop, you don't

feel in fear at the minute.

The owner moved house before

the centre even opened

because of his fears about what it

would mean for the area.

Mark Harris says he's worried

about his property and his family.

I don't want this.

I haven't signed up for this,

I don't want this.

You're lucky, you moved.

If I could have moved,

I would have been out

of here straight away.

I wouldn't have batted an eyelid

about it, I'd have been gone,

because it's not my cup of tea.

I wish they'd given us

more information before

everyone panicked.

The information should have been put

out there so people like me,

people like yourself,

everyone on Drury Lane would have

had a better educated response.

I picked this area for

what reason I wanted.

Your future.

It's close to town, my future,

it's everything it provides to me.

Then one day I get told,

out of the blue, nowt to do with me,

"Oh, by the way, you're having 240

asylum seekers on your doorstep and,

guess what, you can't

do anything about it."

It's like the next-door neighbour,

she owns her house.

Let's say she's going to sell her

property in two months' time,

somebody comes round and views

the area, there's asylum seekers,

a block on the corner,

that house has got loads more

chances of not selling.

If I walk down the road

and there were ten asylum

seekers/refugees stood out there,

I'm crossing that road.

I ain't walking past

them for anybody.

I spoke to G4S and said,

"Who's in charge?

If something goes wrong,

my house gets broken into,

my property gets stolen,

I get beaten up or anything

goes wrong, who...?"

He were like, "Well,

we're not in charge,

we're just looking after it."

The only question I haven't had

a realistic answer to is,

can you prove to us

that these aren't soldiers?

That these people aren't

killers or rapists?

Can you just tell us that they've

come from a blown-up town or city

where their houses have gone

and they have nowhere to live?

I feel sorry for them,

it's not their fault...

So work with them.

Yeah, I am working with them and my

point of working with them is,

I didn't want them living

on my doorstep.

We have an hour's English class

on a Tuesday, one on a Thursday.

A few minutes down the road

is Janet Fuller who, for years,

has been managing an advice centre

for Derby's refugees

and asylum seekers.

We've been hearing this morning

from somebody who was adamant

that he doesn't know who the asylum

seekers are, doesn't know

where they've come from,

he doesn't know what they might be

doing, and as soon as he can move

out of that area, he's going to go.

I can absolutely understand why

residents would be concerned,

because if you suddenly get

accommodation housing more than 200

people right on your doorstep,

whoever those 200 or more people

are, it's a difficult situation.

There are always going to be fears

about terrorism in this situation.

The vast majority of people we see

here have stood up to terrorism,

or have been fleeing from terrorism

and want to do something

to counteract that.

They want to have a positive

influence on this society

and they want to contribute.

If the Home Office decides

those seeking asylum

are destitute and need housing,

after three weeks they are supposed

to be rehoused in parts

of the country with a supply

of cheap longer-term accommodation.

So how does it feel to be sent

somewhere where nothing

and no-one is familiar?

Somewhere with social problems

and already-stretched services,

and somewhere where you can find

yourself at the sharp end

of resentment and fear?

It looks like you're not welcome.

They're not friendly.

No-one will come to help

you because they don't

know who's that person.

Even though there is a community

around you, you are still alone.

We've protected the identity

of this asylum seeker,

because she fears reprisals from G4S

for speaking out.

How appropriate is your

accommodation, and what are some

of the problems with

the facilities in there?

Usually the G4S people,

they give the accommodation

where no-one else wants to live,

and life is very difficult.

Crime is very high,

prostitution, addiction.

They don't contact us,

they don't reply to our problems,

they don't solve our problems,

they don't return our phone calls.

They think we're just like slaves.

That, you know, whatever

they give us, we will accept.

What would you say, then,

to those who say that the more

comfortable the system is,

the better the system is,

it might encourage more

people to come to Britain?

Some people, they come by boat,

some people, they come in a truck,

some people are living a happy life

with all their luxuries,

but because of bad luck or somehow

they are involved with the system

they go through all this stress,

it makes them like, you know,

worse than animals.

Jen, not her real name,

used to work at a G4S call centre.

I worked for the G4S contract

providing accommodation to asylum

seekers in the Midlands and East

of England and Yorkshire

and Humberside.

What effect did working for G4S have

on you and your attitude

to asylum and immigration?

The longer I worked there,

and the attitude of management

and the way that people were just

sort of treated more

like a commodity, you know,

I wanted to help people

when I was there because obviously

I started working there,

and you get to know people's

situations and people's stories,

and obviously most people

would want to do good

in that situation.

But you can't.

I'm not saying that all the staff

are bad and that a member of staff

has never done a nice thing

for somebody, but it's

not encouraged.

What kind of things did you hear

or see G4S staff doing

when you worked there?

I've heard a senior person on that

contract say that if an asylum

seeker has that got credit to call,

then don't call them back.

seeker hasn't got credit to call,

then don't call them back.

That's their problem.

Why are we paying

for an interpreter?

Why are we doing this?

That's the kind of

attitude that we've got.

There was a woman I used

to work with, she'd pretend

that she couldn't understand

somebody or that she couldn't

hear somebody and put

the phone down on them.

That colleagues said to me,

when she used to talk to people

like absolute dirt and I heard,

and I sort of looked at her one

day and she just said,

"Don't look at me like I've just

stamped on a baby."

They were her actual words.

They just don't care.

They just don't care.

In a statement, G4S told

us their staff are expected

to behave with integrity,

care and respect, and that action is

taken against those who fall short.

Two employees, they say, have been

dismissed in the last four years.

They said asylum seekers are either

asked to use a freephone helpline

number or that G4S staff would call

them back if they don't have credit.

The company said there is no

instruction to not call

asylum seekers back.

Asylum seekers like this one

are sent to parts of the country

where the local council has said

they will take them.

But in places like Loftus,

a small, isolated town

on the north-east coast of England,

the council's decision is not always

backed up by the local people.

It's one of the least diverse

parts of the country,

and the lack of local services

here is a common complaint.

This is my shop here.

I've been here for just over,

well, I've been in Loftus

business for 27 years.

When we heard the asylum seekers

were coming to Loftus,

we were told that this

was the building that they were

going to be housed in.

It only has one entrance

to the building.

It is above a pizza shop.

I think the children

would have just hounded them.

The children, at this time of night,

now, would have been gathering

outside the pizza shop and it

would have just escalated

after they'd been drinking.

What do you say to those people that

say, they'd probably come from civil

war in Syria where they've seen

a bit worse than a pizza

shop and a few kids?

But they shouldn't be victimised

when they come to another country.

We don't want them to come

here and think that this

is what England is like.

It's not like that.

But the way G4S and the council

did it, it was just,

it just wasn't right,

it wasn't fair to make us

look as though we're

horrible, and we're not.

So you're not racists?

Not at all.

One year on, ask people at this

meeting of community leaders,

and they're clear they made

the right choice

in blocking the plan.

My friend and myself saw a gentleman

going into a house along West Road

and asked them what they were doing

and they said, oh, they're G4S,

they were going to, they were doing

safety checks because immigrants

were coming in.

Nobody knew what anybody was doing.

G4S arrived, the population

here didn't know anything about it.

We all found little snippets

about what was going on.

I think it was widely

accepted that we just do not

have the infrastructure

for our own people,

let alone, let alone...

Exactly.

They would have been targeted.

The residents are so deprived

at this present time that anybody

getting a hand-out they think should

come to them rather

than somebody from...

It must be awful for somebody

who can't afford a fridge to see

a new fridge going to one of these

multiple occupancy things, you know.

And I think we just touched

on something else there,

that we have no police,

we have no police presence at all.

In the past, Loftus has welcomed

immigrants from the likes of Bosnia,

we feel as though we are that far

down the pecking order

when it comes to anything,

volunteers are running that much

services now in this town,

in this area, it would be

wrong to put more things

on their shoulders so that they were

doing all the things

that the councils and the Government

should be doing.

The multi-billion pound Government

contract to provide accommodation

to asylum seekers for the next ten

years is currently out to tender,

and G4S, the company which houses

more new arrivals that any other,

is hopeful of getting

the green light.

But here in Sheffield,

campaigners like John Grayson,

an expert on asylum housing

and long-time critic of G4S,

say complaints about the company

make them unfit to do the job.

A good minority of the housing,

30% at least, is appalling.

Atrocious conditions,

and it's been like that since 2012

when they took over the contract.

Hasn't got any better,

I'm still coming across houses

with rats, with terrible kind

of damp, bedbugs is very

common in their housing.

They dumped this disabled

asylum seeker in a house

with an asbestos notice on it,

where a ceiling had collapsed.

You know, their carers

wouldn't go in because of

that, quite right, too.

Only in November a child

with cancer, lung cancer,

was put in a house where there

were rats, and they knew there were

rats when they put her in there.

There is a new ten-year £4 billion

contract out to tender at the moment

to house asylum seekers.

Should G4S get that contract?

No, definitely not, and I think

the record shows that.

Four Parliamentary committees have

said that they shouldn't actually be

housing asylum seekers

because of their atrocious

conditions, etc.

We think there could be legal

action to stop them.

Is this a political

point you're making?

Someone's got to house these people,

someone's got to get the contract.

We're only talking about 47,000

people across the UK

in asylum housing.

It's not an amazing number.

You'd have thought the housing

association sector, for instance,

would be an appropriate kind

of landlord, and I'm sure

the housing association sector

would be quite interested in getting

that kind of public money

to house asylum seekers.

G4S said the rats at the house

in Sheffield were coming from next

door, not one of theirs.

They said the family were moved

when they were told about the state

of the child's health,

and they say no asbestos was found

in the other property.

With companies currently vying

for these accommodation contracts,

MPs have said the voices of those

living in these houses

should be heard.

Many existing local residents said

they want their voices heard, too.

Phil says people talking about

asylum seekers like that, I do not

understand them. Their lives are

hard enough without that attitude.

And Roxy says this section of the

programme is so depressing. Can you

prove that these asylum seekers are

not rapists, can you prove that

locals are not.

G4S did not want to be interviewed

about the claims in Sean's film.

But in a statement they told us:

"all G4S properties are subject

to inspections to ensure they meet

the standards set

by the Home Office.

There are over 4,000 inspections

conducted every month

by G4S and the Home Office

and Local Authorities

also conduct random,

no-notice inspections.

We always take complaints

about the accommodation

we provide very seriously.

Asylum seekers access our free 24/7

service centre by telephone in large

numbers to report problems,

in some months we receive

over 4,000 calls.

This demonstrates a service

which is working well and asylum

seekers are comfortable and willing

to engage, reporting issues."

Well it has been indicated that the

EU will support the UK in response

to the nerve agent being used in

Salisbury.

Russia's president, Vladimir Putin,

says it's 'nonsense' to suggest that

Russia poisoned the former double

agent, Sergei Skripal,

and his daughter in Salisbury.

Speaking after winning a fourth term

in office last night,

Mr Putin said it was 'unimaginable'

that Russia would do

such a thing ahead of

the election and the football

World Cup this summer.

Vladimir Putin was re-elected

as Russian president

with an increased -

76% - share of the vote

and will remain in office

for another six years.

TRANSLATION:

In relation to the tragedy you

mention I learnt about it from the

media and the first thing that came

into my mind is that if it was a

military operation people would have

died straightaway. This is the

number one. Secondly Russia does not

have those weapons. Russia has

demolished all of its chemical

weapons under the supervision,

international supervision. Some of

our partners have not yet done that.

Well he remains in office for

another six years.

That means the 65-year-old has been

either Russian president or prime

minister for 24 years.

Despite his time in office - very

little is actually known about him.

Here's the BBC's Russian translator

Pavel Koklachev with details.

Vladimir Putin.

Here are some facts you didn't know

about Russia's president.

First, he's a former spy.

Who worked in East

Germany for the KGB.

So he can reportedly

speak German and English.

But in public he only

speaks Russian.

Being a former spy, his life

is shrouded in a lot of mystery.

So we cannot be absolutely sure

about what is fact and what is not.

But it seems sure that

he is a father to two

daughters although nothing

is known about them.

No photographs of them

exist and it is not known

whether they even live in Russia.

It is reported he is

divorced from his wife

in 2014.

We know her name, but not much

else is known about her.

For the president of a country that

helped invent vodka,

Putin is reportedly nearly teetotal.

It is not known if this is fact.

But the only time he has ever been

seen holding a drink

is on official occasions.

Speaking of drinking and eating,

everything that Putin eats has

to have been cleared by the Kremlin.

According to a report in 2014,

the security around Putin

is so tight that when he travels

to foreign countries

all the food and drink,

even the bed sheets,

are flown in from Russia.

For security reasons it is reported

he does not use much technology.

According to a Newsweek magazine

profile he rarely uses the internet.

Putin likes to portray

himself as a tough guy.

As such he has only ever once

shown emotion in public.

He cried at the funeral of the man

who gave him his political break.

His tough guy image is enhanced

with his black belt in judo.

And playing ice hockey and riding

bareback on horseback.

This is when Putin is reported to be

most happy although again,

it is not known whether this

is a fact.

Or just information

supplied by the Kremlin.

Let's speak to Dmitry Linnik,

a former Russian journalist,

who worked for the Voice of Russia

radio station, and now works

at media brand Sputnik,

Professor Margot Light,

an expert on Russian foreign policy.

And MP Stephen Kinnock,

a Labour backbencher,

who has said Britain should push

to strip Russia of the World Cup

and have it held next

year in another country.

He was forced to leave

St Petersburg when he worked

for the British Council

a decade ago...

Russian people will support Putin no

matter what he does but you might I

guess qualified support is quite

significant, yes.

It would be fair

to say there is a lot of

dissatisfaction a lot of fatigue

perhaps. A lot of anger and

opposition. But when the chips are

down yes, the 76% is an increase on

2012.

And that is partly because a

spokesman for the campaign said

because of what happened as they put

it, thanks largely to the UK Gaza

what happened two weeks ago in

Salisbury.

I do not think it could

have played a major role but maybe

you know a few percentage points,

yes.

Stephen Kinnock, what is your

reaction to the election and claims

of vote rigging?

I think democracy

is not just about what happens at

the ballot box, it is the whole

environment in which the election

takes place, some of the political

debate takes place. The fact is the

Russian state basically controls the

television media and newspaper

reading in Russia is relatively low

levels. So the television plays a

massive role. And it is in essence a

propaganda vehicle for Mr Putin. So

not surprising he has tremendous

support, I think also worth

recognising there are still a lot of

support frames of the Russian people

feel he has delivered security and

stability and a certain amount of

economic growth compared to the

total chaos of the Yeltsin years. So

I think broadly is the Russian

people certainly outside of Moscow

and St Petersburg support Putin. But

I also think there is not proper

there. One of the strongest

candidate in opposition has been

constantly repressed and suppressed.

Of course we have the assassination

as well of a political rival soap

not really what we would describe as

a free and fair situation for the is

that fair? Russia is a tough place,

a rough place, much more so than the

UK or any other established

democracy. But it is a much more

normal country then people often

tend to believe in the West, and in

the UK. And perhaps primarily in the

UK because the UK has been at the

forefront of this massive sustained

could probably call it media war on

Putin and Russia.

And media war on

Hughton and Russia, Stephen Kinnock?

I spent three years living and

working in Russia and it has a

special place in my heart, I think

it is a wonderful country and I

agree it is also a tough country for

that amazing people, culture,

literature, history. A truly

fascinating place. But I'm afraid

the Russian people for centuries

have been let down by their leaders.

There is a tendency to

authoritarianism, to despotic

tendencies, to the state using fear

to suppress its people. And those

are just the facts of the matter.

Clearly Russia has changed

enormously since the collapse of the

Soviet Union. I do not think that we

are in a new Cold War, I think what

we have far more is a very dangerous

coalition of the security state and

the Mafia that are running the show.

And are not always sure whether Mr

Putin is truly in control of what is

happening in the Kremlin or whether

he's just a front man for all kinds

of, the deep state around him.

Nobody really knows what is going on

and that is part of the difficulty

with this because of course that

lack of transparency is what reads

this constant sense that there is a

hostile posture in Russia towards

the West.

Dmitri?

I agree with a lot of the.

There is a tradition that is

difficult. But again, there is such

a vast gap between the oppression of

Stalin and Zara 's and Russia today.

These are two completely different

countries that we need to speak

about and be aware of that. So I

give qualified support what MP

Kinnock has just said.

Professor,

when you hear President Putin saying

Russia has destroyed all its

chemical weapons, it's nonsense to

implicate his government in the

attack on Salisbury on the 4th of

March, how do you respond?

It's true

the Organisation for the Prohibition

of Chemical Weapons certified that

Russia no longer had any chemical

weapons. We will have to wait to see

what the organisation now says about

the samples it is taking from

Salisbury before we come to any firm

conclusions. You must admit that

when you think of the reputational

damage to Russia in the last two

weeks, it would really be an

extraordinarily poor sense of

politics that would explain any kind

of motivation for this poisoning

being accomplished by the President

ordered by the President.

Sorry,

explain what you mean?

Well, what

has happened in the last two weeks

has hardly done Russia's reputation

any good. It is extraordinary to

think that the president would order

poisoning by a chemical weapons that

can easily be identified as being

produced by Russia. It is so hard to

see the motivation.

I am going to

leave it there. Thank you, all of

you. Use of sport are on the way in

a moment. Before that, the weather.

Heavy snow over the weekend did

cause some disruption and with cold

nights and snow on the ground, we

are looking at problems with ice

over the next few days. Temperatures

are still struggling. We are looking

at another cold day.

at another cold day. If Chrissy

sunshine across Northern Ireland,

England and Wales. Edit more cloud

in eastern outbreaks of friends of

the Northern Isles, with highs of

seven Celsius. It will be breezy in

the south. Staying breezy overnight,

with increasing amount of cloud and

a few wintry showers moving in from

the east. They will be drier in the

north-west, with clearer skies which

allow temperatures to fall away. We

are looking at a cold start to the

day tomorrow and a frosty one. A few

patches of i again. A few showers in

the East.

patches of i again. A few showers in

the East.

Hello, it's 10 o'clock,

I'm Victoria Derbyshire.

Highly addictive fixed odds betting

terminals should have their maximum

stake reduced from £100

to £30 or less - according

to the Gambling Commission.

But gambling addicts have

told this programme even

more needs to be done.

Reducing the stake on one

form of gambling is not

going to help a problem gambler.

I mean, if it does happen,

what happens after to the gambling