It’s like re-living the early 1990’s again with the BBC in its default position of leading the charge against the sleazy Conservative Party. The lead story today is actually located in the 1990’s with the shock horror! news that Conservative Party chairman Caroline Spelman has admitted using her MP’s parliamentary allowance for payments to her children’s former nanny. Spelman told BBC’s Newsnight that the money, paid in 1997 and 1998, was for secretarial work the nanny did. Following on from the revelations concerning Conservative MEP Giles Chicester, it’s like the good old days are back. A story that is TEN YEARS OLD is the single most important issue for the BBC this morning. Now I have no sympathy at all for our rapacious political caste and the fact that they abuse their expenses does not surprise me in the least but this is OLD news. I am sure the beleaguered Mr Brown will be thanking the BBC for doing all it can to shift the news agenda away from his serial woes. Naturally Labour MP’s are squeaky clean when it comes to their own use of parliamentary expenses. Mr Speaker Michael Martin is a good example of Labour financial propriety I suppose.
THOSE SLEAZY TORIES.
Bookmark the permalink.
“I remember all these cases recieving extensive coverage. Selective memory?”
No Joel,reminding you about the party of corruption,the worker’s party,the party of the people,the party with its hand in the till.
It might imbue you with a sense of proportion,compare these A team fiddlers with a poor working class nanny keeping body and soul together.Michael Crick and his handsome remuneration from the tax payers exploiting a working woman.That is real sleaze.
Joel: Do you think Gordon Brown should pay for his own TV tax?
Sunday Times: “Boris uncovers Ken’s ‘wasted millions’”
Metro: “City Hall overspending ‘rife’ under mayor Ken”
Press Association: “Audit boss ‘horrified’ by findings”
Guardian: “Mayor’s London audit uncovers shock” (and Express, Channel 4 etc)
BBC News Online: *tumbleweed*
Bit strange for a news website that spent Sunday leading with sleaze allegations against Spelman as their top story – due, of course, to the fact that it was the latest in a long list of similar stories on “an issue of considerable public concern”.
State broadcaster goes after opposition party on obscure 10yr old non-story as Ruling Party’s popularity disappears. Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation?
Still, it does clarify exactly where it stands, and what needs to be done to it on Day One of the next government.
Joel, do you think large-scale corruption under Livingstone is more or less important that Spelman?
Or are you still running away from this one?
The other thing about the BBC’s coverage is its timing: ie, the Friday surprise, which usefully allows this ancient non-event a free run at the weekend news. Ie, the political attack-dog’s favourite lampost. . .
Interesting to see that commenters on the Newsnight blog are generally less than impressed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/2008/06/questions_that_sir_john_lyon_might_like_to_ask_car.html#commentsanchor
I do hope the Beeb have over-reached themselves on this one.
Talking about creepy bias anyone remember when Mandelson was outed live on Newsnight by, I think Mathew Parris? The fearless Paxman was despatched at great haste on the very night to Mandy’s Notting Hill pad with apologies and commiserations. Possibly a bunch of flowers and a box of chocolates too! I wonder if similar happened to Cammo’s gang they’d be round with red faced apologies?
Last post on this by me – promise, but interesting to recall the findings of the Commons Standards and Privileges Committee when it investigated Crick’s allegations regarding Iain Duncan Smith’s employment of his wife (which were put together for a Newnight report that was spiked).
Clearing IDS, it said it had “grave doubts” about some of the techniques used by Mr Crick to gather information for his complaint, but added:
“these are matters for the BBC.”
And lo the BBC took a long hard look at the matter and appointed him political editor of Newsnight less than three years later.
Tomorrow on Newsnight, how the Tories started the war in Iraq – a special report by Andrew Gilligan.
A new Populus poll is out in the Times tonight/tomorrow:
Conservatives 45%
Labour 25%
LibDems 20%
Since Populus has been doing polling (nearly 7 years), this poll represents the biggest lead any party has enjoyed, the largest share any party has enjoyed, and the lowest share either Lab or Con have had. So it breaks 3 records. Will the BBC mention it?
Point of note, this poll was conducted 6-8, in other words, while Nannygate and MEP stuff was in full swing.
6-8 *June – obviously.
“the lowest share either Lab or Con have had”
Sure? 😉
In a Populus poll, yes. Should have made that a bit clearer.
The BBC have a report entitled – “Watchdog ‘baffled’ by MPs’ probe” which starts:
“Standards watchdog Sir Christopher Kelly says he is “baffled” as to why MPs thought it appropriate to carry out a review of their expenses themselves.
The Commons Members Estimate Committee, made up of MPs, led by Speaker Michael Martin is looking into MPs’ expenses.
Sir Christopher said the results of the review were unlikely to command as much public confidence as they would if there was outside involvement in it.
The MPs’ report on reform of their allowance system is due in mid-June.”
Obviously some examples of the kind of expenses issues under question are called for, so who do the BBC mention:
“Tory MP Derek Conway” and “Tory chairman Caroline Spelman”.
No mention of Ann Keen’s life assurance policy, Barbara Follett’s window cleaning bill, Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper’s questionable property expenses, Peter Mandelson’s £3,000 shower, Tony Blair’s £10,600 kitchen or the many allegations made against Peter Hain to name just a few…
Why would the BBC be so selective? Surely they are not biased against the Conservative party, they are after all independent by charter.
Of course the biggest ‘sleeze’ comes from the BBC itself. Charged with the task of impartial news reporting, education and entertainment, it is now as crooked as it is possible to be. They ‘take’ our money to fund their ‘fascist’ (the proper meaning of the word) and unpublished manifesto. They are everything they purport to be against.
Will the BBC give some prominence to this story of a Labour MEP?:
“EastEnder MEP pays gay lover £30,000 to be his secretary”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1025371/EastEnders-MEP-pays-gay-lover-pound-30-000-secretary.html