BBC Edits Out Bad News For Labour

 

 

I mentioned in previous posts the BBC’s refusal to report the Governor of the Bank of England’s remarks about capping bank market share and bonuses…..it looks like they knew but refused to publish it because it was too ‘Tory friendly’…….

The BBC now are eager to examine Carney’s remarks…but the BBC’s Chris Mason seems to have forgotten that he is supposed to be impartial and not be pushing Labour’s narrative as in this entirely negative, one sided, Labour’s side,  look at Carney….

On Wednesday, shortly the BBC’s Political Editor Nick Robinson had broken the story of Labour’s plans to impose a limit on the market share of individual banks, Mr Carney happened to be appearing in front of the cross-party Commons Treasury Select Committee.

Labour were clearly less than gruntled by these remarks.

Remarks, after all, about the leaked contents of a speech that, at the time, had yet to be actually delivered.

Conversely, the Conservatives were delighted and keen to emphasise what he had had to say, and the importance of his remarks, in their conversations with us.

 

So Tory MPs were talking to BBC reporters about this…and the BBC reporters decided not to report what Carney said….despite the importance of the comments which completely undermined the credibility of Miliband’s plan.

As for ‘Remarks, after all, about the leaked contents of a speech that, at the time, had yet to be actually delivered.‘….well that’s a very pro-Labour comment…and misses the point…Labour deliberately leaked the speech (I liked that ‘Nick Robinson broke the story’) and got the BBC headlines it wanted…and then got them a second time today.

Robinson didn’t of course break all the story, ignoring a rather massive, important part of it….the Governor of the Bank of England thinks Miliband’s plan is unworkable twaddle.

Carney wasn’t being ‘political’ he was doing  his job and commenting on a technical issue….what would be good for the economy.

After all Labour has no such qualms about people being political when it is Doctors in the NHS speaking out against Government reforms.

 

The BBC finally came round to mentioning Carney’s remarks on its website today…….just one tiny short sentence….

Bank of England Governor Mark Carney said earlier this week that he supported the view that a cap on banks’ market share “would not result in substantial improvement to competition”.

 

Yep that’s it….no substantial improvement to competition…..so the BBC are in effect saying Carney had nothing of importance to say…..except that he did, as the Telegraph reports:

Ed Miliband’s plans to reform banks undermined by Mark Carney

On the issue of limiting banks’ market share, Mr Carney said that similar caps in America had failed to prevent the financial crisis.

“In the United States, there is a hard cap on deposits – you can’t have more than 10 per cent of the deposit share in the US and that’s a rule that’s been in place for decades.

“And I think that’s one of the points I’d make from a financial policy perspective – that obviously that rule in and of itself did not prevent the creation of large, systemic financial institutions.

“In fact, one could argue a bit – and I wouldn’t overstate this – that by limiting the absolute funding of certain large institutions, in other words they can’t go above that 10 per cent deposit cap, it encouraged on the margin more wholesale funding for expanding balance sheets, which created risks in and of itself.”

 

So a cap in America did nothing to prevent market failure…and indeed may have created risk of banking failure.

 

 

The BBC did dip a toe into the water on this on the Today programme  (0632 ish)….where they were told that Miliband’s type of policy doesn’t work in the US, it’s a schizophrenic policy…wanting banks to be successful but capping that success….and Carney’s remarks were ‘downright negative’ about capping market share….and that is a big problem because if the Governor of the Bank of England doesn’t think it will work it won’t happen.

 

Strong stuff…and important you might think…but never heard again.  Listen to the news reports during the day and all you will hear is clip of  Chuka Umunna telling us what great things Miliband’s bank cap will do for competition and the economy….you won’t hear the criticism of the plan.

It is  a work of immense skill for any BBC editor to have found a good clip of Umunna’s interview with John Humphrys this morning (0733)….a more evasive and slippery character it is would be hard to find.

Humphrys said he had lots of questions to ask…..is Miliband’s plan in our interest, would it work, would it benefit us, do we want it?

But one question he didn’t ask…and it’s probably the most important one….if the Governor of the Bank of England doesn’t think your plan is workable and won’t support it will it ever see the light of day?

Everything else is mere pie in the sky until the plan gets support from one of the most important financial institutions in the country.

 

Good though to know that the Bank’s market share cap is designed to solve our economic problems…which are a low wage, low skill economy.

Em….isn’t that a Labour Party creation having imported literally millions of low paid, low skill workers into this country?

Anyway…capping the Bank’s market share will solve all that…and bring peace to the Middle East.

Humphrys didn’t challenge Umunna on his claims despite saying at the beginning one of his questions being….‘Will it work?‘…..He never asked the question so we never got the answer as to just how it will work in the real world….all we got were the intended end results…to grow the Middle classes.

Carney says it won’t work….so a perfect opportunity to bring his comments up…but Humphrys didn’t bother.

 

A lightweight interview from Humphrys letting Umunna, and Labour, off the hook.

 

What else has hardly had a hearing on the BBC?

George Osborne’s announcement that he wants to raise the minimum wage…whilst Miliband’s bank capping saga gets frontpage billing, twice in a week, Osborne’s minimum wage raise is relegated to a small line on the UK page…and is now shoved even further out of the limelight onto the Politics page…whilst Miliband is still on the frontpage.

 

Even Labourite Dan Hodges thinks Osborne’s pledge was the most politically significant event of the week…..so why is the BBC essentially ignoring it?

George Osborne’s announcement last night he supports an increase in the minimum wage to £7 an hour has shot Ed Miliband’s fox. And his cat, his dog, his goldfish, his hamster and his Bolivian marmoset called “Che”.

To be honest, Miliband’s speech is already redundant. The politically significant event of the week was the Chancellor’s minimum wage pledge.

 

 

Well not quite ignoring it…..

Today had a segment at 06:13 and then again at 0708.

Both times the BBC ‘exploration’ of the issues managed to convey an entirely negative view of the policy…which is quite remarkable really…imagine the reaction if Miliband had announced it…it is after all one of the left’s mantra’s…increase the minimum wage.

We were told the policy would have a significantly bad effect on jobs…but the TUC was in favour of it.

And of course….as businesses suffered or failed under the regime tax revenues would go down, unemployment would rise and welfare would go up…the economy would suffer.

At 07:08 we were told that some businesses could pay the minimum wage but that some sectors of the economy, like care homes, would have to lay off workers……the policy was inflationary and would hit pensions….all doom and gloom.

 

All very true of course….but the contrast with how the BBC treats Osborne’s proposal and Miliband’s ‘Living wage’ is marked……it’s funny how the BBC never went into this much detail about Miliband’s equally ruinous ‘living wage’ which the BBC never seemed to find the time to criticise.

 

 

So…Carney’s remarks which said Miliband’s proposal was basically unworkable, and Osborne’s minimum wage rise proposal, have either been given absolutely minimum coverage or if they have been mentioned it is only to denigrate and dismiss them.

 

Must be an election coming.  Maybe the champagne is on ice already at Broadcasting House….

….the corridors of Broadcasting House were strewn with empty champagne bottles – I will always remember that  – er – not that the BBC were celebrating in any way shape or form – and actually – I think it’s fair to say that in the intervening years the BBC, if it was ever in love with Labour has probably fallen out of love with Labour, or learned to fall back in, or basically just learned to be in the middle somewhere which is how it should be – um – but there was always this suggestion that the BBC was full of pinkoes who couldn’t wait for Labour to get back into power – that may have been the case, who knows ? but as I say I think there’ve been a few problems along the way – wish I hadn’t started this now…”

 

 

Perhaps the BBC is a bit left wing:

BBC Presenters Have ‘Deeply Held Left-Wing Political Views’, Complain Tory MPs
Much of the BBC’s political coverage is biased against the Conservative Party and the broadcaster “long ago gave up any pretence of neutrality”, Tory MPs have complained.
Angela Watkinson told the Commons on Monday that the BBC was failing in its duty to “provide balanced information” and was instead routinely offering “political opinion” presented as news.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to BBC Edits Out Bad News For Labour

  1. Anthem says:

    At 07:08 we were told that some businesses could pay the minimum wage but that some sectors of the economy, like care homes, would have to lay off workers

    That part is actual bullsh*t.

    The government dictate how many staff must be on a shift in care homes. If care homes couldn’t afford to pay those staff, they would have to increase their charges.

    Most care home residents are funded by the state.

    The knock on effect of the raising of the minimum wage for this sector would be and increase in the amount of funding required for them (i.e. increased taxes or cuts elsewhere) but people won’t be losing their jobs. The people in these homes aren’t going to simply vanish.

       17 likes

  2. Amounderness Lad says:

    It was Labour, including Miliband and Balls, who totally ignored the Competition Commission when it warned that by allowing RBS to take over NatWest it was creating a monster which would control 25 percent of the banking sector and also have a virtual strangle hold on small business borrowing.
    Now that pair grimace and complain loudly that it is shocking and unacceptable for RBS/NatWest to have such a large proportion of the banking sector. It’s a bit like the Krays shielding their eyes in horror and bemoaning the thought of violent behaviour.

       27 likes

  3. Charlatans says:

    “Now then, now then, are you trying to say the BBC is not fit for purpose and is institutionally biased?”
    “Well I can tell you we have learnt from Kim Jong, Stalin, Mao and other Socialist notables, that to control the masses you need a massive misinformation, indoctrination broadcasting arm that can get inside every home and even force the masses to pay for it – bingo it works”.

    “OK, bit OTT for UK but hey if we can organise out of the 200 top benefit receiving constituencies, 189 of them to return a Socialist Labour MP, How’s that then? I’ll fix for you”.

       10 likes

  4. Charlatans says:

    “Now then, now then, never mind consistent history Labour warmongering, NHS body bagging, economy trashing, immigration non-controlling, benefits escalating, religious misreporting, we’ll for fix for you Ed no problem”.

       10 likes

  5. #88 says:

    MASON: ‘…..Remarks, after all, about the LEAKED contents of a speech that, at the time, had yet to be actually delivered…’

    Some Labour contributor used this to explain why no-one from the top of the party would appear on Newsnight earlier in the week.

    Paxman’s response to the word ‘LEAKED’ was a picture – the head cynic knowing full well what was happening.

    Clearly the Labour leadership had mobilised their BBC colleagues, employing them as their conduit to trail their banking announcement.

       15 likes

  6. Marvin says:

    How do you know the BBC has ‘refused’ to report these remarks?

    Do you have access to some kind of internal memo where they state they will not report it? What I mean to say is that there’s a difference between refusing to report something and not reporting it. I don’t think that’s pedantic, but I think you’re comment is misleading.

       2 likes

    • The General says:

      Get real. Why would they not report the Governor of the Bank of England’s view on radical policies affecting the Banking industry unless they had an agenda? Do you really believe the would not have reported it had the Governor enthusiastically backed the hypocritical, self serving, ‘do anything to gain power’, idiot Milliband’s stupid idea?
      Still if you have a similar agenda to the BBC it must be hard to accept.

         11 likes

      • Marvin says:

        You still don’t provide any evidence of that. And how do you know it wasn’t reported? Aside from searching the website.

           1 likes

  7. Span Ows says:

    The BBC finally came round to mentioning Carney’s remarks on its website today…

    Yes but the way they mentioned it is so poorly worded in such a convoluted way as to disguise the point:

    “Bank of England Governor Mark Carney said earlier this week that he supported the view that a cap on banks’ market share “would not result in substantial improvement to competition”.
    I can think of about 100 ways of writing that to make the point clear.

    btw, did some driving again this week up and down motorways, BBC Radio 2 news on Tuesday and Thursday every hour first piece of news = “Ed Miliband says…”

    Both times it wasn’t news but Labour policy/soundbites. The bias is getting worse.

       11 likes

    • Marvin says:

      Ah, I should’ve read down before my last comment. So now that the BBC has reported it, they’re not biased now? using the same logic.

         1 likes

      • Tell em when they wrong. says:

        Marvin – you need to open your eyes, you really do not get it and possibly allowing your own prejudices, bias or denial to affect your judgement. Evidence is all over the BBC networks daily and a lot of it spotted and highlighted on here, the national press and numerous net forums like Guido Fawkes. The BBC are institutionally affected on radio TV and the web, in my view. You want evidence, they admit it, like the following:
        Only last week I got the following reply to my last bias complaint. The BBC admitted to me they got it wrong again and altered their website page to rectify the bias within an hour of me sending them the complaint:

        THIS IS A COPY & PASTE OF EXTRACT THE BBC REPLY -(SENT ME PERSONAL EMAIL – 17 Jan 2014 -)

        Many thanks for your email and for drawing this to our attention.

        “We have a policy to always list the political affiliation, space allowing, of publicly-elected officials. The fact the affiliations were not in these stories was an oversight and they have been amended accordingly.

        Best wishes
        Mark McGregor

        Mark McGregor | Assistant Editor | BBC News Online (England)
        * Mailbox I BBC Birmingham I B1 1AY
        8 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/england

        MY COMPLAINT
        15 Jan 14 BBC & Biased BBC websites

        I would please like to ask you why the BBC appears to announce Political affiliations for any Conservative misdemeanor but does not do the same for Labour? Could you please explain why?

        Examples:
        Conservative or Tory mentioned 4 times:
        http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-23060176
        Omission Labour not mentioned:

        http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-25728143

           2 likes

  8. Doublethinker says:

    If the BBC manage to secure victory for Brother Ed at the next election we can look forward to a massive hike in the License Fee and ever more draconian enforcement of this iniquitous poll tax. The BBC will also be given sweeping new responsibilities to oversee ALL types of content delivery by new media and a tax on all devices will be introduced to fund this massive expansion.
    If we think that the BBC is far too powerful now, wait and see what happens under Brother Ed, if the British people are stupid enough and easily manipulated enough, to let that socialist menace into Number 10.

       11 likes

  9. The General says:

    “………if the British people are stupid enough and easily manipulated enough, to let that socialist menace into Number 10. ”

    Have you seen ‘Benefits street’ ? These people have the vote !!! Frightening.

       8 likes

  10. Philip says:

    Its all dancing to Labours tune again. If Osborne is quoted at seven pounds then Milipeed will the offer 8 pounds (per hour) in an artificial bidding war (for more unskilled permanent immigrants we don’t need or want or can maintain on benefits). However Labour is without doubt the international Benefits party, They can just borrow it of the IMF or increase taxes to 90% and increase the BBC license fee to recent increases in Gas and Wind Power, should just about cover it. Seriously WHY do we need a ‘minimum wage’ at all when it is obviously far higher than Albanian ‘minimum wages’. It’s an idiots game of bluff, a pantomime game of ‘call my bluff’. The minimum wage is no boon to the UK economy as wages get ‘reduced’ to the lowest standards instead of the local demand and normal environment. It’s a silly game to pretend that it ‘protects’ jobs, it does not.

       5 likes