Isn’t it REMARKABLE to see the BBC keeping the non-story concerning administrative errors in a list published by Education Secretary Michael Gove’s Department running, trying to suggest this could be a resigning matter and might be the first split in the Coalition. Like rabid dogs, the BBC shows no logic on this but instead chooses to use it to try and hurt Gove and the Coalition. The BBC is trying to create the fiction that Gove himself has clumsily made serial errors of such a scale that were he honourable, he would resign. It’s much ado about nothing but through the malign prism of the BBC, this is a chance to undermine the Government and THAT is the real agenda in play here. I could understand this if the BBC was choosing to point out the incompetency within the Civil Service but that is somehow not mentioned. It’s Gove Jihad and it is truly pathetic.
GOVE JIHAD
Bookmark the permalink.
Al Beeb giving Mr Gove the John Redwood treatment
Still cranking on Breakfast, with the Bouffant and Brunette reading out the latest teleprompter screed from their mates in the edit suite. “More trouble for…’ ‘The row rumbles on…’ ‘Critics [who are oddly preferentially placed on or iPhones] say…’.
The only credible aspect is that some Conservative MPs are being a bit overt in what they support and when, when it hit home.
It was only after reading around that I discovered that Mr. Gove actually was pretty honourable in manning up in a ‘buck stops here sense’. If one is to get excited, it is with the competence of a civil service system (that has in 13 years become very ‘interesting’) which the BBC seems oddly content with in other areas.
Which is pure agenda abuse over objective reporting.
I hold no candle for Gove or the coalition, but have to say the image of that ‘tired and emotional’ Labour MP busting blood vessels and trouser buttons, dragging what’s left of the public’s respect for the House into the gutter, was … choice.
Of course no mention is made that under 13 years of Labour, virtually no maintenance appears to have been carried out on these schools.
How much did we blow on Iraq so you could be Bush’s poodle Mr Blair?
Like him or not, this is similar to what the BBC did to Jonathan Ross. I happened to listen to Radio 2 a lot that weekend and every single hourly news broadcast for the entire weekend started with the report of the Ross/Brand phone call. Over and over. Same seems to be happening to Mr. Gove.
Yes, I was struck that comment by the Scottish Secretary is bigged up as “criticism” of Gove, whereas the man appears to have accepted Gove’s apology, other comments by back benchers (doing what they have to do) is reported as a threat to the coalition. The BBC never seemed to go out of their way to seek divisions in the Labour government where a backbench awkward squad regularly voted against the government.
The fat one eyed jock gay mong Brown lied for 13 years, starved the armed forces of money and caused the death of hundreds of soldiers, yet not once did the BBC demands he resign.
I wouldn’t agree it’s a non-story, as it was a pretty big mistake. However it’s now run its course and is being kept on life support by the BBC. It’s quite clear it was a civil service cock up (sabotage?) and the story to me is the contrast between Michael Gove’s acceptance that he as minister is ultimately responsible, and the mealy-mouthed excuses for apologies that were the best that could ever be extracted from Labour ministers (because they were and still are always right).
The real non-story was the headline I heard on Today this morning saying Gove had been attacked by a fellow minister. The clip played didn’t quite say that – all he said was that it was a terrible mistake. Something Gove has conceded already. Only the BBC could turn agreeing with a minister into an attack on the minister.
I’m starting to smell a rat here. The civil service is turning out to be very uncivil.
The scale of the mistake (in that they issued the minister with a list, and then issued him with another list, neither of which appears to be correct), seems to be too convenient and too early on in the game to be pure coincidence.
Is there anything in the fact that Ed Balls in Gove’s shadow and has a great deal of support from the public service unions, the left of the labour party and the BBC? Or am I just seeing reds under the bed?
I am not even sure that the list was produced by the Department’s civil servants – I have a notion that some quangoesque agency of the department may have been the originator.
It is clearly a cock-up by Civil Servants and the people responsible should be sacked. Or was it deliberate ? Surely not.
Getting the first statement wrong was a very serious error by civil servants – which would normally focus the very top civil servants in any department on getting the amended statement exactly right.
But I remember that Department as a rats nest of “progressives” ever since the 1970s. They were horrified when Jim Callaghan pointed out that education standards for the working class seemed worse than when he was at school.
The use of the word ‘jihad’ in the thread title here is quite appropriate, because another ‘reason’ the BBC will oppose Michael Gove is because of his book, ‘Celsius 7/7’, which (rightly) criticises the West’s policy of appeasement towards Islamic jihad.
I didn’t think it was. I wondered at its use myself. Is there no suitable English word?
Is Thompson wondering whether BBC is politically biased?:
“Radio 4 bosses in a spin over Labour tomes”
http://londonersdiary.standard.co.uk/2010/07/radio-4-bosses-in-a-spin-over-labour-tomes.html
Pathetic.
Another segment on the News Channel with some local councillor complaining bitterly about Gove and the schools now not being built. Still no mention by anyone that this building project was unfunded and bloated, no blame placed on Labour for scheduling these projects when they knew there was no money for it, no suggestion (except a tiny hint on Nick Robinson’s blog) that it was a little time bomb left by Ed Balls.
Except for a couple of clips of Gove, I haven’t seen or heard a single word out of anyone except Labour mouthpieces and jilted schools officials.
They really don’t like Gove. I have seen him deal easily with the Newsnight morons. A bit too able and Conservative so lets get him might be the Beeboid narrative- and probably the unionised Civil service narrative as well.
BBC reports D.Miliband’s critique of Gordon Brown’s Labour government – in which D. Miliband had a key part, in losing the trust of the British people:
“David Miliband says public lost trust in Brown’s Labour”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/also_in_the_news/8806560.stm
But BBC decides to build up its own anti-Gove propaganda instead; and puts its anti-Gove campaign in position One on Politics page.
‘Telegraph’ blog:
“Don’t blame me – I didn’t notice Labour was rubbish ”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/melissakite/100046904/dont-blame-me-i-didnt-notice-labour-was-rubbish/
So it seems it was some daft quango in charge of building the schools that provided the figures to the department. It is said that the useless quango’s database was wrong. It in turn depended on info supplied by local councils. Hm…the wonders of labyrinthine bureaucracy.
The quango’s boss lost his £40,000 bonus last month, apparently, whatever that means exactly. (Maybe it fell out of his back pocket 😀 )