The BBC, together with the Telegraph entrapped MP Patrick Mercer, and managed to get him to sign up to what he thought was an agreement with some lobbyists…he would get some money for asking some questions for them in Parliament.
A lot of effort obviously went into the scheme and they got the result they wanted….an MP apparently willing to compromise his position for money.
The BBC didn’t seem so keen to investigate Tim Yeo even when Guido had done all the foot work making allegations of a conflict of interest between Yeo’s position as Chair of the Commons Energy and Climate Change Select Committee and his business interests in ‘green’ industry…Guido claiming:
A serious contender for villain of the year has to be Tim Yeo. The conflicted chairman of the Energy and Climate Change select committee has time and time again flown the green flag this year, insisting that it is mere coincidence he makes over £100,000-a-year from his own renewable energy investments. Just because a conflict of interest is declared, it is still a conflict of interest…
Yeo was forced to distance himself from some businesses and to declare the rest.
But that is a side issue really…one of the biggest conflicts of interest is in fact that of the BBC itself and its coverage, well, promotion, of man made climate change.
The BBC’s coverage and active persuasion has led to enormous changes in the way people see green issues and has helped persuade politicians to adopt a radical green vision for Britain…one that the Sunday Times today (paywalled) says will make Britain’s energy the most expensive in the world….with all that entails…the fuel poverty, deaths from cold weather as people switch off their heating, and the hugely detrimental effect of the massive cost to business and homes.
Ironically perhaps, Tim Yeo is still at the heart of the problems as on Tuesday he will press for even more rigorous pollution reduction targets…ie CO2 reduction…..ensuring it is ‘green’ energy that has to be utilised to meet those targets.
The BBC knows this…but again makes no comment about his business interests….or indeed of the BBC’s pension interests in green businesses.
The full glorious story of the BBC’s own involvement in ‘secret lobbying’ on behalf of the climate change movement is laid out by James Delingpole in the Telegraph…linking to Bishop Hill and Tony Newbery.
This is Bishop Hill’s submission to the equally compromised BBC Trust review of the BBC’s science coverage carried out by Prof. Steven Jones….a man who is an ardent supporter of the AGW theory and someone who owes his career to the BBC….no conflict of interest there.
This is Delingpole’s article in the Telegraph:
Why the BBC cannot be trusted on ‘Climate Change’: the full story
Thanks to the combined efforts of the great Bishop Hill and the similarly wondrous Tony Newbery at the Harmless Sky blog, we now have the most comprehensive and thoroughly damning account yet of how the BBC became such an important part of a sinister political campaign to promote climate change alarmism. I recommend reading their report in full at either of their sites linked above. But here below are some of the highlights.
It is to Professor Jones (Steve) that Newbery and the Bishop have addressed their submission.
They conclude:
‘It would appear that, through the activities of CMEP [Cambridge Media and Environment Programme – the Harrabin outfit which deserves a blog of its own…] BBC Newsgathering has got very much too close to government, environmental activism, and the climate research community for its reputation for impartiality and accuracy to be preserved with regard to the science of climate change.’
Perhaps it is time someone investigated the BBC’s involvement and conflicts of interest with the green lobby.
2 seconds on BBC about labour peers, now back to Mercer…
Nothing to see, move along plebs
Just a mo……
Who is damaged by the Mercer scandal?
Well, the Tories, but even the BBC can’t keep a signature on a lobbying contract running for two years, surely……
Mercer is a straightforward sort of Tory, if he sees something he doesn’t like, he says so. Unless your name is Cameron, you might take the view that that’s a good thing.
So: this little scandal turns up after the local elections, when it would have been more useful for the lefties if it had turned up before, or even during…
The damage to the Government ought to be minimal in the medium term, but a forceful backbench critic of the Prime Minister is removed rather forcefully at a time when damage will be minimal to anyone called Cameron….
And the BBC go along with it because it shifts the whole paradigm leftwards…
Just thinking out loud….
Maybe, but if he hadn’t been so stupid as to sign up….
With the caveat that we may not have been given the full story yet.
Maybe the BBC could investigate the lobbyist that moved into the Civil Service, to government and then to the Lords?
Bryony Worthington’s ‘elevation’ has cost the rest of us a small fortune in higher fuel bills, blighted the environment and crippled our export trade.
Dellers’ piece in The Telegraph excoriating the BBC for its (ongoing) CAGW cheerleading dates from 2010, yet, of course, nothing has changed at all about the way this vile Corporation continues to abuse its Chartered mandate for impartiality, nor has the BBC seen fit to include the voices of climate sceptics in its propagandist coverage of ‘climate change’ issues in anything other than its usual liberal-left sneering tones of belligerent disdain and dismissal. When the BBC isn’t ignoring climate sceptics it’s actively insulting them.
And why would it change? Who is going to make it? License payers? Government? Journalistic integrity (ha!)..? No, the Politburo’s bunker mentality over CAGW continues, unaffected by such quaint notions as ‘impartiality’ or ‘accountability’. With a guaranteed annual swag of £3.5bn+ courtesy of its legally-enforced tax, it clearly doesn’t have have to care a jot what the ‘proles’ (that’s you and me) think about its political agenda on CAGW.
Entrapment according to the BBC’s secret filming rules is OK if a crime is suspected or the MP/peer is not in the Labour Party.
As an organisation so reticent to investigate the myriad of allegations of misconduct, legal and illegal, by its staff the BBC always seem so quick to demand action by others.
At least they’re working with a paper other than the Guardian.
Daily Politics (3 June) Patrick Mercer the Tory MP…… followed by a reference to three Peers, no names no affiliation. Strange that.
Interesting and detailed analysis of how the BBC covered the Mercer revelations, compared with the three lords, posted by Craig on the ‘Is the BBC Biased’ blog.
As usual from Craig, it’s good. Link:
http://isthebbcbiased.blogspot.com/2013/06/lobby-fodder.html
I don’t think the silence on a MPs interests is peculiar to Yeo. It does appear to be BBC practice not mention any vested interests when reporting statements.
Nick de Bois MP runs a company (http://www.rapiergroup.com/index.htm which is a declared interest) which specialises in providing services to the medical industry. Not surprisingly he’s involved in the NHS reforms. Maybe more surprising is that the BBC forgot to mention his interest in this article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13568175
Maybe you can find others. This appears to be loophole
Putting on trade shows and providing digital displays, step-and-repeats and all that has nothing to do with health care reform or making money off specific NHS reforms. You may as well cry foul about someone who runs an auto mechanics company specializing in maintaining and repairing ambulances. Poor analogy.
Really?
See http://www.rapiergroup.com/medical/index.htm
The point is that if Yeo has a conflict of interest, he’s not alone. The BBC have taken the view to ignore all outside interests so they are consistent. Should they then label every MP like Yeo or Nick if they have any interest? Neither of these men are hiding anything unlike the quartet of fools outed last week.
Of course the other argument is that we need to have MPs with real life experience. We can’t pick and choose what those interests are. It’s none or all.
Private Eye regularly lists MPs speaking on subjects when they forget to mention their interests. Maybe this site should start identifying those featured on the BBC were everyone is suffering from memory lapse.