What standard has the BBC’s election coverage reached? Hard to really tell accurately as no one can watch it 24/7…of the bits I have caught some has been good, some questionable either for competence or bias, some is outright bias. However now that the Tory manifesto has been released into the wild we can at least get a feeling for the coverage overall….and it seems to be pretty much what we have come to expect from the BBC….Labour gets a positive spin and a less than rigorous going over whilst the Tory policies get forensically examined and torn apart. Pienaar used to specialise in this approach telling us there may be some problems with Labour policies but you know what, they could work and they sound good, whereas the Tories’ are pretty well unworkable and ill-thought out.
As mentioned in a previous post we’ve had Kuenssberg explaining away Labour’s nationalisation as ‘buying assets’ and so essentially costless, today we had Nicky Campbell telling us that ‘many people are worried about immigration’….what the BBC concerned about immigration????…hold on, don’t be daft…Campbell finishes with….‘they are worried about immigration being stopped…because the NHS will grind to a halt.’
Campbell went along with all the critics of the government…and all the callers were critics, Campbell had to ‘assure’ us that this was just how things were and make a plea for Tory supporters to call in. Of course that should mean he would be sure to be even more rigorous in challenging callers…but no, he at best nodded in agreement and at worst fully agreed and even added his two penneth worth as above. No challenge to the woman who criticised Tory care povision and went on to say all care homes should be closed as that would free up 60,000 nurses for the NHS…Campbell seemed to see no problem there as he treated her as if she was speaking complete common sense.
Then we had the actual manifesto launch with the big talking point being the sale of homes to pay for care. On World at One Martha Kearney mentioned a couple of times that ‘people are calling the policy a ‘dementia tax’…er…just who are these people? Oh….yes…it was Jeremy Corbyn. So the BBC picks up a highly perjorative and loaded phrase that’s been ‘weaponised’ by Labour in order to demonise the Tories and the BBC tries to get it into common usage by repeating it again and again. This is the BBC that supposedly doesn’t use words or phrases that are obviously highly political and which they claim can mean different things to different people. The BBC that doesn’t like to use the word ‘terrorism’ if it can help it but does like to use the term ‘bedroom tax’ and now ‘dementia tax’….guess their principles go out the window when it is a word that can be used to attack the ‘Right’.
And why did the BBC bring in Andrew Dilnot? He was on just about every programme throughout the day giving us the benefit of his wisdom. He is highly political and has his own agenda to sell in regard to how social care is paid for……you can see how the Left enjoyed his intervention as illustrated by the Guardian
Tory social care plans will leave people helpless, says former adviser
Andrew Dilnot, who reviewed social care for coalition, expresses alarm at proposal that will mean elderly are ‘completely on their own’
Of course they are not completely on their own…they do not have to sell their house whilst alive and if they use up all but £100,000 worth of their home’s value the state then picks up the rest of the bill….and so if you have less than £100,000 in your home’s value, or rent, you pay nothing.
He thinks the Tory proposal is unfair and there should be a universal spread of the cost through out society, rich and poor to pay…pay somehow…in the programme I heard him suggest we pay by getting insurance cover…but previously he has suggested higher taxes…..both systems mean the poorest will have to cough up more money they can ill afford…how exactly is that fairer than having the most wealthy pay for their own care as much as possible?
What we don’t hear much of on the BBC is that the previous cap on what a care patient could keep of the value of their house was around £23,000…that is, any value above that could be used to pay for care…and note that cap was going to be raised to £118,000 anyway by 2020….so pretty much as May proposes now….you will be able to keep 4 times the value of what you can now….or more if the costs do not actually use up all the value.
Dilnot’s logic seems somewhat skewed and not thought through….but nice of the BBC to give such a critic of the Tory position such a big platform to strut his stuff.
I don’t think the al beeb output means too much . If anyone under 25 registers to vote they’ll be lefties as they are not old enough to know better. Much else comes down to head lines – the old boy and his allotment v the conservative thatcher sorrogate who is female , not from a public school and not a mason . So there we are for 3,weeks to go . Torres will try to make Corbyn or Timmy a threat to national security and they’ll be a 99 majority
One part of the manifesto which isn’t being looked at much is the winter fuel payment details.
I hear that ‘wealthy’ pensioners will lose it.
Is ‘wealthy’ anyone who gets a full pension of £120 per week?
Is it any pensioner on the same as minimum wage?
Is it a pensioner on the living wage?
Is it a pensioner on the uk average wage?
Is it a pensioner paying the higher rate of tax?
Many benefit receivers whinge on about not being able to manage on £500 per week.
We are told nurses are using food banks and their starting wage is £21,652
Corbyn reckons £80,000 isn’t wealthy.
So, what is the threshold for stopping wfa.
How can we vote not knowing what we’re voting for.
3 attacks on pensioners (4 if you add no interest on savings for such a long time) so May has made 10 million enemies today.
It’s as if she wants to lose the election or have a coalition and then lose Brexit.
It’s as if she was a remainer.
And what I also haven’t heard asked is what happened to the repeated claim that testing was more expensive than paying it to everyone?
The answer is to put the wfa into the pension and let it be taxed. Similarly ascribe a nominal taxable value, say £1250 a year, to the bus pass and let the tax code take care of “means testing”.
The TV licence for over 75s could also be “taxed” similarly.
Instant means testing without the admin?
Oh mallard,
Try seeing what happens when you or some one you care for get an illness such as dementia as you age. You’ll need every penny you have to support yourself properly. The NHS and local authority will wish you dead.
£1,250 sounds a lot for the value of the bus pass. I would have thought it would be more helpful for bus companies to have a subsidised fare, say a standard £1 or £0.50 per trip.
Hello again Mr Goldstein.
I feel sure you have been paying in “all your life”. I wonder how much more you would have had to pay in if pensioners took as much out of the common wealth when you were paying in as they do now.
The average pensioner is no longer the “Help the Aged” shawl wrapped lady hunched over her one bar electric fire.
The principle concern of the many (not wealthy ones) I know is where are we going for our holidays (yes plural) this year!
P.S. I’m approaching state pension age and realistic enough to know the state (taxpayer) cannot afford the present largesse, but hell hath no fury like someone whose “right” is removed / watered down.
Sorry to miss this. Sounds like Newsnight has rounded up all sorts of beauties. Again.
Diane Abboot will be letting the air out of Paul Mason’s Brompton tyres down in the BBC carpark if he’s on much more.
Guest Who, as long as they don’t try to let out the air out on her spare tyres.
Guest
Given that diane flabbopotomus contains enough hot air to be a replacement Led Zeppelin logo she is the last one to talk
Classic bias on the Jeremy Vine show this afternoon getting Jeremy Corbyn on the show the same time the conservative manifesto was been televised ..all pre-planned of course !!
“He thinks the Tory proposal is unfair and there should be a universal spread of the cost through out society”
Does he also think everyone should be taxed at the same rate, and that death duties should be the same for everyone?
I also thought the same as GCooper that it has always been claimed that it would cost more to administer means tested benefits on such relatively small amounts.