Conservative MP Graham Stuart appeared on the Victoria Derbyshire show this morning to discuss Lord Paul after the non-dom Labour peer had chickened out of an interview at the last minute. Stuart took the opportunity to have a bit of a go at the BBC (his segment begins approx 12.30 in – available for 7 days):
“Imagine a Tory donor who’d bought a company, run its pension fund into the ground, bought the assets back for pennies in the pound, who became a privy counsellor even though he wasn’t qualified while personally funding the leader’s leadership bid – they (sic) would be a massive story and yet somehow the BBC runs day after day on Lord Ashcroft, who as far as I can see has done nothing wrong, and gives Labour an easy ride. It takes me back to the tales we had of the champagne bottles in 1997 and I’m afraid the BBC remains biased and fails to ask the proper questions of those who are currently in power.”
Even though I won’t be voting Tory I find much to agree with there.
Update 8pm. Iain Dale has made this his quote of the day (copy ‘n’ paste job, no link back here I might add). In response, Victoria Derbyshire has asked about the champagne reference:
I’m surprised she hasn’t heard about it, but for her benefit here’s her former Radio Five Live colleague Jane Garvey to explain. (Unfortunately the mp3 link no longer works. If Laban still has the sound file he might like to upload it again.)
Completely off topic, but does anyone else find the BBC’s new-found adoration of George W Bush amusing?
His ‘intervention’ in the Northern Ireland devolution talks has been all over the corporation’s output today. It’s amazing watching the moral compass of the BBC twist and turn. George Bush is evil — err, except when he shows David Cameron or the Tories in a bad light. Then he is suddenly the calm voice of reason.
Glad we got that clear.
Good for him. Especially the great reference to champagne bottles, due to the Five Live connection.
And it’s funny how Derbyshire says that her viewers tell her they don’t care about this non-dom donator stuff, yet she was supposed to have Lord Paul on today to talk about it.
Well done Graham Stuart. If only Cameron had enough balls to shame the BBC and others.
Apparently “Victoria Derbyshire is not available at this time”. Another “technical hitch”? You know, like the recent one where Osborne was (for a change) making mincemeat of the government and – due to a “technical hitch” they had to go back to the studio.
Update – caught it late last night – very refreshing!
Jeremy Hunt the ‘culture’ spokesman for the Tories went into fawning and creeping overdrive in front of a smirking beeboid Sackur, he lavished high praise on the BBC monster with slightly less critical insight than the DG would show.
He sounded like he was trying too hard, trying to fawn and creep to an organisation that clearly despises him.
If Hunt is the culture commissar does anyone think he will even try to reform the bloated BBC monster or roll over and cringe before it?
I see Iain Dale has copy ‘n’ pasted my little transcript without bothering to link. Would complain but I’ve got a Morning Star column to finish.
That segment was music to the ears! It was obvious that the aptly named `VD’ couldn’t shut Graham Stuart down fast enough! As `thespecialone’ says, if only Cameron had the balls to stand up to the bastards.
Yes funny that now the Socialists are in the frame the BBC doesn’t want to talk about non-doms.
Oh and notice how the BBC tried to switch it to Ashcroft being unelected but at the heart of the Tory party machine, so what about Mandelson then? Who elected him? He’s basically second in command and totally unelected, but the BBC love him.
And forced to resign at least twice.
Anyone see the beeboid prat reporting from Northern Ireland over the vote on devolving policing powers? Why did the BBC feel the need to try to link the anti vote from UUP to the Tory party when the Tories made it clear they wanted the vote to go through? Yet another smear from the BBC.
No mention of Lord Paul and his ripping off of a pension scheme either.
The tories are pathetic. They deserve nothing more than total failure at the next election. It’s March and still the morons are just rolling around with their legs in the air hoping desperately somebody will scratch their bellies and come up with a reason why we should love them.
They are Labour in blue, and will continue to fawn to all those who hate them because all Cameron’s band of merry hypocrites want is to be liked.
That was great to hear an articulate and erudite Graham Stuart stick it to them. We have got barely a whisper from the BBC on Lord Paul, though this is no surprise and we all know why. That I am forced to fund this garbage makes me sick.
Derbyshire knows fully well that Lord Paul would have weaseled his way out of any tough interview, not that the BBC would have given him one.
“…. (Lord Paul said) he was under pressure not to speak to us until he’d released a statement on his non-dom status….”. I BET he was.
http://www.coolinfographics.com/blog/2010/3/9/bbc-budget-treemap-infographic.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CoolInfographics+%28Cool+Infographics%29
A very cool infographic about the BBC budget…shows just what they waste OUR money on
Way to go Graham Stuart! Victoria Derbyshire gave him his rein though. To say this is an exception not the rule for Tory MPs to speak out against BBC bias would be a gross understatement.
If the Tories can produce an internal briefing on how to deal with the politicisation of ACPO, it shows their abject cowardice and stupidity in not producing something that even touches upon the rampant politicisation of the BBC.
Unfortunately Mr Stuart’s sound comments on this are going to be isolated and quickly forgotten. Cameron’s Tories aren’t worth spit. Stuart should be a clarion call to all his colleagues to mount up and join the charge. Not going to happen. Nonetheless, in fact especially because, a medal for Graham Stuart. A true hero of British democracy.
Anyone who wants to send ‘attaboys’ to the Honourable Member:-
graham@grahamstuart.com
I assume that all you people who post here and say you won’t vote Tory sound less like the principled right wingers you think you are, and more like the mugs who will usher in 5 more years of Broon or god forbid Balls…
I dont think you have really thought through the implications of your post have you?
Are you really saying that we should cast aside our moral objections to the current shambles of a Tory front bench, ignore our doubts and fears and blindly vote for Cameron because it might allow the other guy in again if we dont?
This is not a football game with two sets of supporters Dan, this is our nations future at stake, blind loyalty to a bunch of hypocritical liars for the sake of winning is as ludicrous as it is childish.
Its not our fault that Daves crew of sellouts are doing badly(and trying to hide it), Dave is to blame for Daves betrayal and oooooh yes Dan if that means that Brown gets another turn then so be it!
You can plaster a common puropose eurotrash fraud in blue rossettes but that dont make him a Tory.
Given the choice between voting for Tory or BNP there is simply no choice. You, on the other hand Cassandra, have said that you will be voting for these Nazi scum.
Hippiepooter,
The term nazi scum describes the uaf/anl bullyboy street thugs perfectly, it does not describe the BNP however.
The BNP are not a nazi party, I wouldnt support them if they were.
The BNP are a party that puts the interests of the British people first, they have no interest in the kind of nasty hate campaigns and violence of the uaf/anl love to indulge in.
Many good people support the BNP and its to be noted that many have served their nation in uniform and many have family who fought and died against the real nazi vermin.
Its also to be noted that most if not all the uaf/anl scum wouldnt dream of serving their nation in uniform, that tells me who the real scum are.
On the contrary Cassandra, Dan has thought it through very clearly and summarised it correctly. You, on the other hand, will be to blame if the Tories do not get a working majority.
And if the Tories do get a working majority, what will they do? Deal with BBC bias? Roll back the climate change scam? Tackle EU corruption and come clean over how much legislation originates from there and how little our MPs can actually legislate for?
I don’t believe they will do any of those things. So why would I vote for them? It’s not good enough to say “because they aren’t Gordon Brown”.
Dear Backwoodsman,
As I have already explained perhaps poorly, the Tory party is not the party you and many others think and hope it is. It is a fake construction led by fakes whose ulterior motives have nothing to do with traditional Tory heritage.
They are a metropolitan collection of empty fakes whose sole function is to placate its grassroots with useless soundbites and empty promises while they enact common purpose euro federalist progressive new world order policies.
They are in on the eurotrash empire scam, they are in on the global warming fraud, they lied about the referendum to our faces, they will work under the new despotic rulers of the EU because they are in on the fraud.
Cameron is there to hypnotise real Tories with false promises of standing upto the eurotrash when in fact he is their bitch.
Why would any real Tory support a bunch of lying frauds like the Cameroons? They are stooges and puppets and WILL betray us given the chance.
I suggest the Pro-Dave tendency here read the interview of Hague in the FT this morning
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9edb4714-2bbe-11df-a5c7-00144feabdc0.html
Yet another message from CCHQ that the Conservatives in power will be the same as Labour except with better tailoring.
Of course, not voting for the Conservatives may mean another Labour government. The problem is that were the Conservatives to win then the Cameroons will take it (incorrectly) as a wholesale endorsement of their policies. The only way that this country will (in the end) get a government which will not repeat the crapola of the last 13 years is if Dave goes down to defeat. Yes, if that happens, the next 5 years will be dire – but they’ll be dire anyway. However, such a defeat against this government will give the Conservatives the opportunity to dump Cameron and his coterie and re-create a genuinely conservative party or, at least, a party prepared to offer a choice to the electorate. The post-Dave Conservatives might even be “right-wing” (which has become the insult of choice used by Cameroons to describe the Conservatives natural supporters within and outside the party).
For me, voting BNP is not an option. Forget about anything else, on economic policy alone, there is little difference between the BNP and the SWP. The BNP is a socialist/authoritarian party with nationalist knobs on. I’m not prepared to vote for nationalist socialism just because I want to get rid of the (apparently) non-nationalist socialist party currently in office.
Exactly, why vote in Cameron to continue the New Labour project in a more Blairite fashion?
If the Camcons can’t beat this appalling Brown Government, then lets hope that truly will lead the Tory Party going ‘back to basics’ and launching all out war against the BBC as a propaganda weapon of the subversive left and take the culture wars to the enemy.
On the other hand, I seriously wonder if British democracy can survive 5 more years of Brown. Cameron or Brown? As someone once said, ‘that’s not a choice, that’s a dilemna’.
I realize this is a difficult situation for many people, and I’ll give some analysis that you’ll never hear from the BBC as they aren’t qualified and it would never occur to them. In fact, this is all very reminiscent of the situation so many non-Leftoids in the US felt during the last election. John McCain was labeld a RINO (Republican In Name Only) by many, which is the equivalent of the charges against Call Me Dave now. Also similar is the soul-searching so many voters in the UK seem to be going through now.
The choice was either vote for McCain and get more Bush-style big government, vote for some party even more obscure than UKIP or the BNP, or just stay home. Contrary to conventional wisdom, I think Sarah Palin gave him a much better final result than he would have had otherwise, but that’s another debate entirely. Anyhow, you all know the unfortunate result. I don’t sympathize with any of you.
However, there may be one chance at avoiding your worst fears. The difference between the US election and the one coming up in the UK is that the non-Leftoid party has a real chance to win. I get that there’s a difference between the deal in the US and the requirements to form a government in the UK, so bear with me here.
If Cameron is given the needed majority to form a government without the Lib-Dems or anyone, there is one more chance to convince him and his motley crew to get away from his worst wet tendencies: a Tea Party-style movement.
In the US, the furthest possible Leftoids are in power, both in the White House and in Congress. If McCain had been elected, there would be no Tea Party movement, and no real efforts to reform the Republican Party or the rest of the government. But the Tea Party movment has already affected local and state-wide elections in places most never would have dreamed possible.
Dan Hannan held a little shindig in Brighton a couple of weeks ago. From what I’ve seen, he has many of the right ideas. He seems to still be a bit weak on Warmism, but that’s the only major negative as far as I can tell. In any case, if Cameron is given a majority, that movement can quite possibly affect real change on how he governs, and right from the start.
I think that’s a far better opportunity than staying home or doing a protest vote which would be like taking any real chance of pragmatism and proper Conservatism and, as you say in the UK, kicking it into the long grass.
Get your point DP, its a real tough one to call. However, for this Tory, you’re McCain-Cameron analogy doesn’t work at all. I would have voted for McCain at the drop of a hat. The man is an authentic American hero and robust on the war against terrorism.
A second point, we British are far too apathetic to get up ‘Tea Party’ movements. Holland has its Geert Wilders, the US has its Lt Col Allen West, who have we got? The closest hope we have I guess is Lord Pearson, UKIP leader.
No, McCain never put forward such guff as ‘all-woman’ shortlists. As someone said, the danger of electing Cameron is that he’ll think people actually support him and aren’t just desperate to get rid of Brown. But then if we dont, there is the question of the survival of British democracy – tough call, but I’m not going to support New Labour II.
I hear what you’re saying. But my analogy was more regarding the situation and not the actualities of the two politicians. The thing is, once Cameron is in power, there can be a movement to straighten him out. I’d bet the Tories would listen. If Labour gets in instead, it will just make the Tories think they have to move even further left and pick somebody even worse. Then what?
As I said, I realize it’s a difficult situation.
If someone does have the original mp3 recording, it might be useful to stick it on youtube.
Could always ask the BBC for a copy.
Unless they share the same archiving ‘systems’ on the info highway such as the CPU, where things get found, lost or edited in mysterious ways.
Labour BBC’s propaganda timetable:
“Budget in a fortnight as Britain heads for May 6 election”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7055956.ece
BBC now (9:17 am) coy about providing details of panel for its discriminatory, propagandist all-women audience ‘QT’ tonight from Dewbury?
BBC’s ‘QT’ tomorrow night: I think that it should be boycotted on grounds of being discriminatory against men, an a political insult to women.
It’s going to be really shit, I don’t think I wil be able to watch.
Re”QT’: will BBC’s Dimbleby mention this about Dewsbury and TABLIGHI JAMAAT?:-
“While Tablighi Jamaat’s financial activities are shrouded in secrecy, there is no doubt that some of the vast sums spent by Saudi organizations such as the World Muslim League on proselytism benefit Tablighi Jamaat. As early as 1978, the World Muslim League subsidized the building of the Tablighi mosque in Dewsbury, England, which has since become the headquarters of Tablighi Jamaat in all of Europe.[10] Wahhabi sources have paid Tablighi missionaries in Africa salaries higher than the European Union pays teachers in Zanzibar.[11] In both Western Europe and the United States, Tablighis operate interchangeably out of Deobandi and Wahhabi controlled mosques and Islamic centers.
“Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing
“The West’s misreading of Tablighi Jamaat actions and motives has serious implications for the war on terrorism. Tablighi Jamaat has always adopted an extreme interpretation of Sunni Islam, but in the past two decades, it has radicalized to the point where it is now a driving force of Islamic extremism and a major recruiting agency for terrorist causes worldwide. For a majority of young Muslim extremists, joining Tablighi Jamaat is the first step on the road to extremism. Perhaps 80 percent of the Islamist extremists in France come from Tablighi ranks, prompting French intelligence officers to call Tablighi Jamaat the “antechamber of fundamentalism.”[12] U.S. counterterrorism officials are increasingly adopting the same attitude. “We have a significant presence of Tablighi Jamaat in the United States,” the deputy chief of the FBI’s international terrorism section said in 2003, “and we have found that Al-Qaeda used them for recruiting now and in the past.”[13]
http://www.meforum.org/686/tablighi-jamaat-jihads-stealthy-legions
A notable Dewsbury landmark for Dimbleby to mention:Markazi Mosque-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markazi_Mosque
Audio clip of Jane Garvey’s “champagne bottles” statement can be heard here. I just captured it myself in case this disappears. There are a number of archived newspaper articles revealing bias at the BBC on the site as well, all courtesy of the intrepid Jonathan Boyd Hunt, who used to comment here.
More BBC propaganda for its Labour and EU chums’ BARONESS ASHTON -wife of pollster PETER KELLNER, who will be forever on the BBC between now and Election day.
1.) BBC’s Hewitt propaganda is here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/gavinhewitt/2010/03/the_trials_of_catherine_ashton.html
2.)BBC proppaganda for Ashton and EU superstate expansionism:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8559250.stm
(Supplementary to David P’s comment just now at ‘Open Thread’.)
No agenda there, then.
<i>”You, on the other hand, will be to blame if the Tories do not get a working majority.”</i>
No, the Tories will be to blame for not coming out NOW with Conservative policies, notably on Europe. Until they do I shall not vote for them.
I vote on principles which means I am loyal to an ideology not a party. Therefore I can never vote for socialists no matter what colour they are. red, pink, blue or wrapped in the Union Flag.
Voting Tory is like drinking low-calorie bleach. You can see how it’s healthier than the alternative, but it doesn’t really get to the heart of the problem.