Astonishing how the BBC can skirt around a subject and not mention it even as they talk about it….when they want to.
Anyone think the Budget was all about not upsetting the punters before the referendum and keeping them onside with the pro-EU government? Lots of people have that opinion….maybe even the BBC, but it’s not letting on.
Even in this report that is specifically about Osborne mentioning the EU during the course of the Budget the BBC manages to avoid saying his actual budget is designed to further the pro-EU vote…
Budget 2016: Osborne sparks row with EU warning in Budget
The BBC manages to get in one quote three times in the space of a short article telling us how the OBR thinks staying in the EU is for the best…
- Mr Osborne quoted the OBR as saying a vote to leave “could usher in an extended period of uncertainty regarding the precise terms of the UK’s future relationship with the EU”.
- OBR chairman Robert Chote said: “But what we have also pointed out is that if you look at the things City economists and other economists are saying, if there were a vote to leave, then people expect a period of uncertainty while the new relationship with the EU is negotiated, and that could have implications for consumer and business confidence, and financial markets.
- The OBR said its comments on the EU referendum were not an attempt to quantify the impact of a possible exit as this was outside its remit. Mr Chote said the watchdog thought it was sensible “to recognise the fact this is a risk” given the extent to which it is being discussed in the referendum debate.
And then there is this from Laura Kuenssberg..
A Budget conspiracy?
Surely, just surely she will mention the machiavellian ploy to fool the voters and buy their votes with some cheap, short term baubles. Er, no.
Here is her thinking about George’s thinking…
From time to time, you know I like to pass on some of the conspiracy theories that do the rounds in Westminster.
If that’s not your bag, then please don’t proceed any further, I won’t take it personally.
Of course today, most people in SW1 are firmly in the Budget day two phase, quite rightly poring over the detail as think tanks and independent number crunchers get their hands on it, and in this case, as Tory backbenchers’ tempers rise over some of the proposals.
But one question that remains unanswered is why did the chancellor decide to undertake what’s been described as the biggest ever reduction in borrowing right at the end of the Parliament to magically meet his political target?
Maybe you need a conspiracy theory to answer that.
Yes, yes, yes…but what’s the conspiracy theory, why’d he do it?
The theories centre around George Osborne’s ambitions to move into Number 10.
One minister told me, this is all about “next generation George”, by pushing cuts and consolidation to the last possible moment in the Parliament.
He would therefore be trying to secure the top job when people are feeling more flush due to income tax cuts and the pain from last minute austerity hasn’t yet been felt. This is “fixing the leadership when the sun is shining”, they suggested.
It’s all about personal ambition to be PM…or is it? Is it the pro-EU ‘fix’?….
But another source suggests something even more devilish.
Is it a desire to join the EU, join the Euro and fling open the borders even more by joining Schengen?…er no….in fact it’s just more George wanting to be Boss…..
It’s pointless, they suggest, being bemused by the seemingly strange timing of it all.
Traditionally governments are tough on spending when they are fresh from election victory, then softer towards the end.
This time, it’s the other way round.
No need for confusion though, this conspiracy implies. The simple reason is that this Parliament is never going to make it to the end of its fixed term in 2020. And that means the cuts, that pain in 2020, is simply never going to happen because there will be a general election long before. And, a different man or woman with their hands on the Red Box.
The theoretical prize is an early election after the Tories have settled their leadership succession, before Labour’s unhappy MPs have had the chutzpah to sort out theirs.
The argument goes, George Osborne newly installed in Number 10, doesn’t have to make the big cuts, dissolves Parliament, goes to the country and beats Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour to a pulp.
But hang on, Kuenssberg finishes with this…
Try raising any of this on the record with any politician? You don’t get very far.
Try raising it off the record, you don’t get that far either.
But there are people who believe this conspiracy could well be the Tory leadership’s dream.
So on the record and off the record she can’t find anyone who can give the slightest bit of credence to her conspiracy theory…in other words this is pure BBC hokum spinning a wild tale to attack Osborne when the real story about his manipulation of the budget to serve the ‘Remain’ campaign’s purposes is ignored. Consider that before the last budget the BBC were insistent on telling us that Osborne was the most political of all chancellors odd that in two reports on the budget’s ‘politics’ they miss out on the biggest bit of ‘politicking’ going.
Wilful blindness? Old fashioned bias? Maybe you need a conspiracy theory to answer that.
Long given up on any “analysis” by the BBC over anything that might matter to us.
To watch Kuennsberg, Steve Richards etc stirring the potty outside 10 Downing St to stab stools and swish the pee around to seek runes or wisdom is invariably pathetic and lying bias.
Thinking back to the likes of Hugo Young or Anthony Howard-all lefties, but at least they KNEW some history, and had experience enough to sift useful stuff from it all.
John Cole could largely be relied upon-now it`s as if Martin Mc Guinness was the chosen filter to tell us what `s happening.
Just not worth listening to pygmies and sprites dancing around the Westminster Commode…
I used to quite like Laura Keunssberg, and thought that she at least had researched her topic before appearing in front of the camera, and she may have been critical, but I at least thought she was (once upon a time) fair.
Now, what I often see, because (as someone pointed out earlier, her opinion seems to be sought on almost every topic), is quite a different persona, in her role as BBC’s Political Editor. And I have seen her develop some kind of ‘special’ lip-curling sneer which she seems to reserve for any action by any member of the current government (at least, I haven’t seen her in full sneering mode, opining on, for example, the Labour Party’s latest ‘motherhood-and-apple-pie’ so-called ‘policies’ being touted by Messrs McDonnell and Corbyn. Now I may have just missed that, given I don’t watch the BBC full-time – but I’m sure our resident Beeboids will be quick to point out the numerous video clips which show her having a similar lip-curl ‘pop’ at Mr McDonnell’s financial ‘policies’).
She has clearly wholeheartedly adopted the ‘Political’ part of her title, but her face is now so often distorted by this facial expression, that I fear it may become a permanent feature.
For me it’s the story of our recent times; confusion, subterfuge, double dealing, uncertainty lies and spin, a pure continuation of Blair, Campbell, Mandelson et al.
Cameron is Leader of the Conservatives yet he is so close to Blair in his spineless double dealings it’s almost comical.
I’d have put money on Boris wanting ‘In’ and Clarkson wanting ‘Out’ – but no…
There’ll be cuts here, there and everywhere – yet the national debt’s tripled.
May at the last Tory Conference and her anti-immigration rhetoric – yet recent insights into the Home Office and continually huge immigration numbers (that are still palpably lower than reality) speak of the exact opposite.
It’s the Tories playing the BBC playing the left, with all playing the electorate, and the results being absolute confusion from all corners. Nobody knows the truth, nobody knows what’s really right or wrong and therefore vapid bullshit like pastie and tampon tax and vacuous emoting over illegal foreign invaders is all we’re left with.
But chin up eh, it’s all good fun!!