Curious how the BBC loves to ‘help’ us judge the effeciveness of the Tory government whether it is how it runs A&E or how successful it is in providing affordable homes for people. Neither of those helpful sites were particularly accurate…the housing one suggested it was impossible to find an affordable home in London and yet one look at estate agent websites showed that was just not the case. In light of which you have to roll your eyes at the latest wheeze from the BBC….tracking how the government is doing in fulfilling its manifesto commitments…
Daily and Sunday Politics manifesto tracker: Economy
We all know that the real world and the opposition of other political parties and pressure groups, one being the BBC itself, means that manifesto policies rarely become reality which is why you have to wonder at the reason behind the BBC move which can only highlight government ‘failure’ in the main, to varying degrees…will the BBC put such ‘failures’ in context and put the blame for the failure where it belongs or is this merely an exercise to provocatively ‘shame’ the government and call it a failure?
Here are two examples from the BBC’s most recent ‘tracking’….
Aim to achieve full employment in the UK
– Manifesto, page 18
-
The government has not defined full employment, but William Beveridge, the architect of our welfare state, defined it as a workforce that was 3% unemployed. The current unemployment rate, as of February 2016, is 5.1%. The ONS employment rate – the proportion of working-age people in work – shows 74% of those aged 16-64 were in work in September-November 2015
Now that’s pretty misleading as we know that employment is at record levels in the UK...UK employment rate hits highest level since records began…..Why no mention of that context?
And what of this?….
Accept the recommendations of the Low Pay Commission that the National Minimum Wage should rise to £6.70 this autumn, on course for a Minimum Wage that will be over £8 by the end of the decade
– Manifesto, page 21
-
In the Summer Budget 2015 George Osborne announced the introduction of a ‘National Living Wage’, starting at £7.20 and rising to £9 an hour by 2020
The BBC does mark that as a success for the government and yet they and the usual suspects have been attacking the policy as a failure for weeks now, in fact from the instant it was announced in the budget…despite the BBC never once, in my hearing, criticising Miliband for his ‘living wage’ policies and the ridiculous ‘predistribution’ plan.
Both examples illustrate how the BBC’s tracker is pretty much worthless as a trustworthy and valuable reference point as the tracker fails to report real world events and problems the government has in enacting its manifesto commitments.
Kind of suspect this arose from a brainstorm session for bored journos looking for something to write….preferably with the possibility of undermining the Tory government. Make-work for those who don’t want to go out and do some real investigative journalism and dig up some real stories.
Alan, if there’s time to post all this, then there should be time to post a new ‘weekend’? thread as there’s been no new thread for a week !
When will the BBC use this tracker on Cameron’s pledges to cut immigration and even more important his pledge about root and branch reform of the EU ?
As is now a common occurrence, the BBC doubtless faces lack of time and space to track such things, because… ‘Editorial integrity’ (correct use of BBC ‘quotes’?’).
And as I commented here earlier today, we all remember so well how the BBC did just the same to Blair and Brown, don’t we?
“…you have to wonder at the reason behind the BBC move which can only highlight government ‘failure’ in the main, to varying degrees…”
If it can only “highlight government failure”, how come it states that 40 policies have “been delivered” compered to 10 policies with which; “so far little or no progress has been made…”?
No mention of any sort of “failure”.
It then goes on to highlight five policies that have been delivered compered to two that haven’t; and those two are excused away by statements from the current government:
“The government has said it will publish proposals in due course”
“Justice Minister Andrew Selous said…”
Not one single counter opinion from Labour, SNP or Lib Dems. Just the opinion of Tory Government ministers as to whether or not the Tory Government are keeping their promises.
Almost as if it was kind of biased in favour of the Tory Government…
But never mind, here you are; “Make-work for those who don’t want to go out and do some real investigative journalism and dig up some real stories.”
Projection at it’s most transparent, Alan.
Keep up the good work…
This is a corker!
A news broadcaster covering politics in the UK can’t examine whether a government has met, or gone any way to meeting, its manifesto pledges because………’We all know that the real world…means that manifesto policies rarely become reality.’
So, its biased to ask this question because no party is ever going to actually deliver or attempt to deliver its promises?? I suspect the electorate might disagree. And it rather raises the question…why have manifestos then? or even political parties at all, if the reasons we might vote for one over another are entirely other worldly fantasy!
The government itself appears to disagree with you too, as according to the BBC it has achieved some of these aspirations and attempted to achieve others.
‘the BBC move which can only highlight government ‘failure’ in the main’ – rather depends on whether the government has delivered on the promises it made upon which voters elected it!
Shall we presume you’d feel the same about the EU referendum then? Ok, they may have promised one, but hey, get with the real world, they didn’t actually have any intention to deliver! So you’d be fine if they cancel it tomorrow?
And criticising such a decision would be biased against the government, because it was never realistic to actually expect they’d keep such a commitment?
With all due respect…….you’re falling down an intellectual black hole.
No doubt you can point us to the similar fine toothed comb having been applied to the ragged scalp of Labour during the Blair/Brown years?
Does the word ‘bias’ have some other meaning in the BBC’s dictionary?
Alan doesn’t actually make that point, but I can understand why you’ve sought refuge in that.
Except….here’s an example:
Has Labour kept its promises?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1961522.stm
Oh, come off it! A single feeble column in a reign that lasted how long?
And you have the barefaced cheek to accuse me of ‘seeking refuge’?
Is that really the best the BBC can do?
‘No doubt you can point us to the similar fine toothed comb having been applied to the ragged scalp of Labour during the Blair/Brown years?’
You asked for it, you got it.
The article Alan is complaining about is also presumably a single feeble column. But then some people have difficulties ever accepting they’re wrong or have others point that out. I’m sure you can find another ‘example’ of bias if you try hard enough.
“The article Alan is complaining about is also presumably a single feeble column”
So you don’t actually know what Alan is writing about but just grabbed an ill-fitting comparison, hoping it would get you out of trouble?
How’s that blind eye working out for you, Nelson?
‘‘No doubt you can point us to the similar fine toothed comb having been applied to the ragged scalp of Labour during the Blair/Brown years?’’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1961522.stm
I shall only reiterate the above G.
So you are unable to find a comparable example, then. Precisely my point.
Kikuchiyo’s example is directly comparable. Your denial won’t change that fact.
#ifyousayso
Tell it often enough.
Looking forward to you and your new BFF staggering towards the topic of the forum eventually.
I’m sure that if you look it up you could find a fairly comprehensive definition of ‘bias’. Presumably you could then use your undoubtedly superior intellect to explain why Al Beeb is 1) forever advocating more spending (on housing, the ‘needy’, NHS, immigrant facilities), and simultaneously 2) decrying this Government’s failure to cut benefits and the deficit and yet when the consummate Liars Blair/Brown were queening it over us and claiming they had repaid debt when any fool (or dumb Al Beeb researcher) who cared to look at the nation’s accounts could see that borrowing was going up in the years 2002 to 2007, Al Beeb’s star inquisitors failed to ask even the most superficial of questions. Today every decision by the Government is treated with disdain by Al Beeb and every call for more public funding amplified using Al Beeb’s 80% news reach.
Tell me if that fits into the ‘bias’ definition.
I do have a superior intellect, thank you.
Give me an example of your claims in 1) or 2) and I’d be willing to give it a go.
Oh dear, pride cometh before a fall.
Looks like it is so on between you and Mr. Pinder.
Will your seconds be providing the wet fish?
“the housing one suggested it was impossible to find an affordable home in London and yet one look at estate agent websites showed that was just not the case.”
Oh I see, apparently there’s no housing shortage in London and it’s not that difficult to find an affordable home. So all this stuff about migrants using up all the accommodation is a load of rubbish.
Thanks for the clarification.
And, ‘The map may suggest that you can’t afford to live where you are living now – but this might be because the price of property in your area and interest rates have changed since you got your mortgage. If you were trying to get a mortgage to buy your house today, you might need a bigger deposit and larger monthly payments.
If there are fewer than 25 properties matching your criteria in an area, it will come up with “no data”. Figures based on a smaller number of properties would be unreliable.’
Someone ‘tother day, questioned where had gone scotty, Dezzie et al….
Yer answer is here they be…..kikuyu or whoever, amounting to nowt?
I know, I know….you’re not a fan of facts.
They are keeping their heads down but still voting for Kikuchiyo.