Live 8 has deserved mention in its own right ever since dear Bob came up with the idea but somehow without a more comprehendible context, I just couldn’t bring myself to write about it.
Well thanks to Panorama, I now have that context and can tell you pretty much exactly how I feel in relation to a real problem. I can also talk about my wife and her midwifery, which is a relief since I daresay most of you thought I had made that up just to make myself appear a little more human. As if!
Mortality in childbirth (mothers and babies) in the World’s poorest nations was the subject of this programme. Lara and I watched with interest (and a little commentary!) and dutifully followed the emotional rollercoaster that the presenter intended – starting off with despair, moving towards hope, only to fall back into utter despondency. Basically, the programme revealed that in Chad, as just one example, mothers and babies are dying during and shortly after childbirth for want of such basic drugs and medical facilities as you and I would find in any half decent chemist and the poor midwives and gynecologists can only watch. Heart rending stuff, without a doubt.
What’s that got to do with Bob, I hear a couple of you ask. Well that’s where it gets interesting. You see they go on to tell us that in Honduras, a little bit of good political lobbying, clever funding and organisation and appropriate training has led to a massive reduction mortality rates despite being a very poor country. The inference is of course that Africa is a special case and that Sir Bob and his merry band of publicity seeking flunkies will ride to the rescue, force billions in aid out of the richest nations and Africa will be healed. Sadly I am not convinced.
You see I have left out the crucial bit. What follows is part politics and part sociology but it is interesting. Late on in the programme, Chad’s lady health minister dared to be interviewed at the featured hospital. Now instead of simply confronting her with the problem, and urging her to come to the rescue with some cash from their newly found oil reserves, the tactless presenter took it upon himself to berate her, lecture her, insult her, and accuse her of corruption and laziness. Now women are women the world over and I am sure you can predict what her reaction was. But in her response came some truly revealing statements:
Firstly she rightly said that there was no machine into which you could put the culture of Chad and transform it into a Western one. Her point is beautifully made. We will never solve the problems of Africa, whilst we determine their problems with modern, developed, western attitudes and presumptions. Africa must be encouraged and urged to develop but at a pace they can handle and assimilate the new world requirements.
Second, she rather curtly said – “Are you finished? Thank you for your ideas. Very kind of you!” – which in any language means “you can be thankful we have developed this far or you would be waist deep in vegetable stock and new potatoes by now”. Apart from the fact that the BBC has now single-handedly set progress on this issue back a decade, her response was typical of any young political establishment. a) She’s probably got a dozen other health priorities to deal with, b) quite enough healthy babies are being born to keep the population buoyant and compound those other health priorities I just mentioned, and c) whether its true or not, if all we ever do is accuse these people of political corruption and incompetence, they might as well get on and live up to it.
So dear Bob can force as much money out of Bliar and Sploosh as he likes, but the astonishingly patronising and tactless approach we take towards Africa simply means the money would be poured into the pockets of soon-to-be, if-not-already corrupt politicians. Your effort is commendable, Bob, and I do admire your energy and drive, but it is to no avail.
We must understand and accept that Africa is not Europe, Asia or America and that it cannot become so overnight. Their traditions and cultures, however distasteful to us, exist for perfectly valid sociological and anthropological reasons (I regret that they have since been perverted by that most awful of confidence tricks – religion) and I know that it is painful to watch.
For Africa to be helped, it has want to be helped. So what can we do? I think that we can do three things:
We can make the trade system work better and more fairly, so that they can see for themselves the benefits of hard work, enterprise and innovation and so that economic growth has as real and stable foundation to grow on;
We can focus our efforts and aid and support on education, through which we can start to break through some of the cultural barriers to reform and give the people more understanding of their own environment and the wider world;
We can encourage and support our kindest charitable souls to load up containers with materials and expertise and go to Africa and work with small communities to make their life a little better.
How many thousands of other Lara’s watching that programme said at the end “I’d go and help if I got the chance.”
Bob, pssst. Stop pissing about with your sanctimonious, smug, do-gooding pop stars and start looking for Laras.
Tuesday, 28 June 2005
Friday, 24 June 2005
The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away
For people like me, Thursday night’s are a misery in front of the TV. BBC Question Time is compulsory masochism. I have to watch it but I know I will despair at most of it.
It show cases the very worst of invertebrate politics. I know from experience that the Parties prepare their participant with great care prior to departure for the host City, and even then we get the traditional “tell ‘em whatever they want to hear” rubbish.
Tonight’s super-miserable moment came with the inevitable question on the repayment of tax credits. The debate went something like this:
"Ooh, isn’t it awful. Those poor people have been given the money and now they have to pay it back and they can’t afford it. It’s so unfair, but it is our money and we can’t just write it off. Those forms are terribly difficult to fill in and maybe people forgot to inform the tax people that their situation had changed. Are you calling them cheats, Minister? Of course not, I am sure they just forgot. We must do something to restore confidence in what is fundamentally a good thing. I speak to lots of people who have been liberated by tax credits……………….”
STOP, right there.
Tax credits are a fundamentally bad thing and it is simply impossible for anyone to be liberated by something that ties you inextricably to the benevolence of the state and income support.
Tax credits are without question the most devious and insidious dependence mechanism ever created and done so deliberately by this most anti-liberty chancellor.
Nobody can possibly be "set free" by having to fill out a 60 page form to claim a “credit” which they then become dependent upon and must fill in another 60 page form whenever the most minute detail of their life changes. Liberty is to be free from interference or control of the state and other individuals. Tax credits are shackles and it astonishes me how anyone who did not absolutely have to, could so willingly and so thoughtlessly put them on. I for one will never claim a tax credit no matter how many I become eligible for.
What pissed me off most on the programme was the fatuous response by Francis Maude. So bent on wanting to appear “caring” and “emotional”, he was completely incapable of setting out the naturally conservative position on solving this problem:
Yes, the poorest recipients of this money and now victims of this Whitehall cock-up should be freed from the burden of repayment, but tax credits can NEVER work and will always be liable to this sort of bureaucratic catastrophe.
The real solution is to give people this money through not taxing it in the first place. By raising the tax threshold, by reducing the basic rate of tax and by taking a ruthless scythe to a bloated and useless government bureaucracy. We can’t pay tax quickly enough to feed this army of unproductive tax collectors, inspectors, blanket stackers and bean counters.
An overhaul of the benefits system to encourage people into gainful and productive employment and then leaving more of their wages in their pockets - now that’s liberating and that is fundamentally good.
Night, night!
It show cases the very worst of invertebrate politics. I know from experience that the Parties prepare their participant with great care prior to departure for the host City, and even then we get the traditional “tell ‘em whatever they want to hear” rubbish.
Tonight’s super-miserable moment came with the inevitable question on the repayment of tax credits. The debate went something like this:
"Ooh, isn’t it awful. Those poor people have been given the money and now they have to pay it back and they can’t afford it. It’s so unfair, but it is our money and we can’t just write it off. Those forms are terribly difficult to fill in and maybe people forgot to inform the tax people that their situation had changed. Are you calling them cheats, Minister? Of course not, I am sure they just forgot. We must do something to restore confidence in what is fundamentally a good thing. I speak to lots of people who have been liberated by tax credits……………….”
STOP, right there.
Tax credits are a fundamentally bad thing and it is simply impossible for anyone to be liberated by something that ties you inextricably to the benevolence of the state and income support.
Tax credits are without question the most devious and insidious dependence mechanism ever created and done so deliberately by this most anti-liberty chancellor.
Nobody can possibly be "set free" by having to fill out a 60 page form to claim a “credit” which they then become dependent upon and must fill in another 60 page form whenever the most minute detail of their life changes. Liberty is to be free from interference or control of the state and other individuals. Tax credits are shackles and it astonishes me how anyone who did not absolutely have to, could so willingly and so thoughtlessly put them on. I for one will never claim a tax credit no matter how many I become eligible for.
What pissed me off most on the programme was the fatuous response by Francis Maude. So bent on wanting to appear “caring” and “emotional”, he was completely incapable of setting out the naturally conservative position on solving this problem:
Yes, the poorest recipients of this money and now victims of this Whitehall cock-up should be freed from the burden of repayment, but tax credits can NEVER work and will always be liable to this sort of bureaucratic catastrophe.
The real solution is to give people this money through not taxing it in the first place. By raising the tax threshold, by reducing the basic rate of tax and by taking a ruthless scythe to a bloated and useless government bureaucracy. We can’t pay tax quickly enough to feed this army of unproductive tax collectors, inspectors, blanket stackers and bean counters.
An overhaul of the benefits system to encourage people into gainful and productive employment and then leaving more of their wages in their pockets - now that’s liberating and that is fundamentally good.
Night, night!
Monday, 20 June 2005
Cricket Rocks!
I know it is late but today's victory by England over Australia in a One Day International cannot pass without mention. Nor for that matter can my hitting the winning runs in our village cricket match on Saturday (A sweet straight drive back past the bowler for four. No backswing, just timed it and leant on it.)
A little inkling of what is to come this summer was on show today in Bristol. We have waited long enough, but a completely new generation of young, hungry, talented England cricketers are ready to strip Australia of their dignity this summer. The team is properly led for the first time in nearly two decades (Vaughan), the bowling is strong and fast and accurate (Harmison / Gough), the fielding is awesome and inspirational (Collingwood / Strauss), and the batting is belligerent and fearless (Flintoff / Pieterson).
Cricket matches of all descriptions are won and lost in the field and finally one feels that England have remembered this. At the end of the day, there is only one way to guarantee winning a test match - and that is to bowl the opposition out twice. Our bowling attack is now strong enough to tolerate one person having an off-day.
But fielding is where you really see how a team is feeling. A team on the up has fielders who are right there all the time, who will run down every ball, stop anything as a matter of pride and make catches and stops that actually inspire each other to even greater heights. Every player on that pitch today will have been lifted a foot watching Collingwood pluck that ball out of the sky. They are responding to each other. They are a team and it shows.
Cricket is not boring. It requires patience, stamina, courage, skill, and intelligence. Cricket is exciting. Cricket rocks!
A little inkling of what is to come this summer was on show today in Bristol. We have waited long enough, but a completely new generation of young, hungry, talented England cricketers are ready to strip Australia of their dignity this summer. The team is properly led for the first time in nearly two decades (Vaughan), the bowling is strong and fast and accurate (Harmison / Gough), the fielding is awesome and inspirational (Collingwood / Strauss), and the batting is belligerent and fearless (Flintoff / Pieterson).
Cricket matches of all descriptions are won and lost in the field and finally one feels that England have remembered this. At the end of the day, there is only one way to guarantee winning a test match - and that is to bowl the opposition out twice. Our bowling attack is now strong enough to tolerate one person having an off-day.
But fielding is where you really see how a team is feeling. A team on the up has fielders who are right there all the time, who will run down every ball, stop anything as a matter of pride and make catches and stops that actually inspire each other to even greater heights. Every player on that pitch today will have been lifted a foot watching Collingwood pluck that ball out of the sky. They are responding to each other. They are a team and it shows.
Cricket is not boring. It requires patience, stamina, courage, skill, and intelligence. Cricket is exciting. Cricket rocks!
Sunday, 19 June 2005
Power to the People
As the news of this blog drifts slowly around those I know and those I don’t, I take the view that for anyone to actually read it, it must be written in a lively and engaging fashion. Equally, of course, such a style will attract a good deal of contradictory thought.
To that end, I took an early decision that comments must be freely accepted from anyone who wishes to make one. So indeed, comments are welcome and criticism is expected and accepted.
Derisory belittlement of my efforts to think and express my thoughts, however, is not welcome. “Catholic white noise” it may be but the discipline of thinking and communicating one’s thoughts clearly and concisely is indisputably commendable and not to be sneered at.
What is far more “symptomatic of modern life” is the constant scorn poured on any attempt to advance the intellectual, cultural or political agenda of this country. The determination in some quarters to stamp out political debate is little more than a childish and insecure fear of their attempts at policy being exposed for the shallow, knee-jerk reactions that they are.
Such dismissive and contemptuous treatment may work to silence the know-it-all in the classroom, but it doesn’t work here. This blog is my small attempt to “grapple with modern life” and answer “the questions that the vast majority of people have” (chavs excluded, as they are precisely the group depreciating society’s value and holding us back).
My Grandmother always taught me that “if you have nothing nice to say, say nothing!”
p.s. Any belief that the Conservatives are doomed and that only “taking a leaf from President Tony” will revive them is an utter contradiction since any examination of Mr Blair’s tenure reveals him to be as Conservative as any before him. Mr Blair has achieved an astonishing feat – in a single stroke, he has demolished socialism in Britain and pushed the Conservatives out of the picture and into a marshmallow-brained and delirious muddle. Sadly the result has not been the ideal meritocracy he promoted but a simple re-ordering of the same old power base that rules Britain and furthers it aims through money, power and privilege. In so doing, has brought civil society to its knees. Never has this country been led with such little integrity and doesn’t it just show.
To that end, I took an early decision that comments must be freely accepted from anyone who wishes to make one. So indeed, comments are welcome and criticism is expected and accepted.
Derisory belittlement of my efforts to think and express my thoughts, however, is not welcome. “Catholic white noise” it may be but the discipline of thinking and communicating one’s thoughts clearly and concisely is indisputably commendable and not to be sneered at.
What is far more “symptomatic of modern life” is the constant scorn poured on any attempt to advance the intellectual, cultural or political agenda of this country. The determination in some quarters to stamp out political debate is little more than a childish and insecure fear of their attempts at policy being exposed for the shallow, knee-jerk reactions that they are.
Such dismissive and contemptuous treatment may work to silence the know-it-all in the classroom, but it doesn’t work here. This blog is my small attempt to “grapple with modern life” and answer “the questions that the vast majority of people have” (chavs excluded, as they are precisely the group depreciating society’s value and holding us back).
My Grandmother always taught me that “if you have nothing nice to say, say nothing!”
p.s. Any belief that the Conservatives are doomed and that only “taking a leaf from President Tony” will revive them is an utter contradiction since any examination of Mr Blair’s tenure reveals him to be as Conservative as any before him. Mr Blair has achieved an astonishing feat – in a single stroke, he has demolished socialism in Britain and pushed the Conservatives out of the picture and into a marshmallow-brained and delirious muddle. Sadly the result has not been the ideal meritocracy he promoted but a simple re-ordering of the same old power base that rules Britain and furthers it aims through money, power and privilege. In so doing, has brought civil society to its knees. Never has this country been led with such little integrity and doesn’t it just show.
Friday, 17 June 2005
Is anybody out there?
I think so. You may suppose that no-one is paying the blindest bit of attention to anything I say, but a certain national daily newspaper appears to be logging in and paying close attention.
The Daily Telegraph no less. Yes indeed. Today in her comment piece, Alice Thomson can be found to have published a number of thoughts that you read here first.
Consider these remarkable coincidences:
In my post "Conservatism transcends race, creed and sexuality" yesterday, I said:
"Theresa May is the straw that broke this camels back. Today she reveals herself as another "potential candidate" for the Tory leadership. And her big idea - that the Conservatives should be nicer to women and should discriminate in their favour. Tim Yeo's big thought is to pursue the "centre-ground" and Alan Duncan thinks that by having a gay leader, the party will show it has changed. That's it. That is their big idea."
Alice Thomson wrote today:
"Andrew Lansley hampered his chances by saying that the Tory party should change its name to the Reform Tories. Theresa May's main claim to the title is that the party is too "macho". Alan Duncan is not macho, but he has put everyone off by comparing the party to a pair of frilly M&S knickers."
Not a million miles apart, I think you'll agree!
In my other post of yesterday "A leader, a leader. My kingdom for a leader", I wrote:
"The very essence of leadership is that you have to have a vision and it's got to be a vision you articulate clearly and forcefully on every occasion.
Alice wrote today:
"Ideally the winner would combine both their skills of will to win and calm management. But they need one other attribute. They need to provide a vision of the future."
Quality blogging or what. I rest my case. Read her excellent piece in full - "Suddenly Tory MPs want to win again."
Watch it, Alice. I'm onto you!!
The Daily Telegraph no less. Yes indeed. Today in her comment piece, Alice Thomson can be found to have published a number of thoughts that you read here first.
Consider these remarkable coincidences:
In my post "Conservatism transcends race, creed and sexuality" yesterday, I said:
"Theresa May is the straw that broke this camels back. Today she reveals herself as another "potential candidate" for the Tory leadership. And her big idea - that the Conservatives should be nicer to women and should discriminate in their favour. Tim Yeo's big thought is to pursue the "centre-ground" and Alan Duncan thinks that by having a gay leader, the party will show it has changed. That's it. That is their big idea."
Alice Thomson wrote today:
"Andrew Lansley hampered his chances by saying that the Tory party should change its name to the Reform Tories. Theresa May's main claim to the title is that the party is too "macho". Alan Duncan is not macho, but he has put everyone off by comparing the party to a pair of frilly M&S knickers."
Not a million miles apart, I think you'll agree!
In my other post of yesterday "A leader, a leader. My kingdom for a leader", I wrote:
"The very essence of leadership is that you have to have a vision and it's got to be a vision you articulate clearly and forcefully on every occasion.
Alice wrote today:
"Ideally the winner would combine both their skills of will to win and calm management. But they need one other attribute. They need to provide a vision of the future."
Quality blogging or what. I rest my case. Read her excellent piece in full - "Suddenly Tory MPs want to win again."
Watch it, Alice. I'm onto you!!
I love my blog!
I really do. I am addicted. I could sit here all night just thinking out loud. My wife thinks I am "surfing the net" (and we all know what she means), but I am not. I am blogging. Look, see what time it is!!
Thursday, 16 June 2005
Botton is tops
As I read recently of Lady Warnock's admission that her integration policy for people with special needs had failed, I was genuinely touched by sadness that a) such an issue could have been the subject of a social experiment and that b) we had let these people down so badly and for so long.
I have searched my soul on many occasions to decide how best to deal with the mentally handicapped. Integration, I concluded was actually more about making the rest of us feel better about ourselves than it ever was about doing the best for these people. Segregation of course seemed souless and inhumane, but ultimately I believed that it was best for them as it provided the safest environment for them to engage with life without confronting the reality of its unremitting harshness.
I have seen comparatively little of the mentally handicapped in my life and so I am very aware that I am in no position to judge but then tonight I watched the Channel 4 programme about the Yorkshire village of Botton and was enthralled and delighted.
For those of you who missed it, Botton is a sanctuary; a place where people with serious mental needs can live as real a life as possible, with each other, safe from harm and interference. As a father of small children, I could see how childish these adults were, but with supervision from genuinely kind people, they interacted with passion, liveliness, humour and attentiveness.
Botton is full and there is a waiting list to get in. Why? Just create new Bottons.
I have searched my soul on many occasions to decide how best to deal with the mentally handicapped. Integration, I concluded was actually more about making the rest of us feel better about ourselves than it ever was about doing the best for these people. Segregation of course seemed souless and inhumane, but ultimately I believed that it was best for them as it provided the safest environment for them to engage with life without confronting the reality of its unremitting harshness.
I have seen comparatively little of the mentally handicapped in my life and so I am very aware that I am in no position to judge but then tonight I watched the Channel 4 programme about the Yorkshire village of Botton and was enthralled and delighted.
For those of you who missed it, Botton is a sanctuary; a place where people with serious mental needs can live as real a life as possible, with each other, safe from harm and interference. As a father of small children, I could see how childish these adults were, but with supervision from genuinely kind people, they interacted with passion, liveliness, humour and attentiveness.
Botton is full and there is a waiting list to get in. Why? Just create new Bottons.
A leader, a leader. My kingdom for a leader.
Now that Conservative MP'S have given Mr Howard the swiftest of blows to the goolies, will someone please get on and lead the troops out onto the pitch and get this sad and thoroughly un-interesting durge over with before I chew my own arm off.
While I am about it, may I remind everyone that the job vacancy is for a LEADER of the Opposition. For the avoidance of doubt, a leader is someone who "induces action by a group through their own persuasion and example; someone who directs actions and opinions".
The very essence of leadership is that you have to have a vision and it's got to be a vision you articulate clearly and forcefully on every occasion. Leadership is practiced not so much in words as in attitude and in actions.
"Where there is no vision, the people perish. " - Proverbs 29:18
"Leadership has a harder job to do than just choose sides. It must bring sides together. " - Jesse Jackson
"The task of the leader is to get his people from where they are to where they have not been. " - Henry Kissinger.
Heaven knows I could go on forever with inspiring thoughts about leadership, but all I really want is for someone of good Conservative stock to demonstrate it.
Please, aspiring candidates, before you leap into the fray, stand in front of a mirror, look yourself in the eye and ask yourself if you are a leader or an ego.
Mr Howard, thank you kindly for holding the fort, but it is time to go. I am desperately sad that you have undone such great work during your time in charge, by your ludicrous post election judgement. You are now, however, humiliating yourself, your party and your supporters and it is not appreciated.
Bring it on!
While I am about it, may I remind everyone that the job vacancy is for a LEADER of the Opposition. For the avoidance of doubt, a leader is someone who "induces action by a group through their own persuasion and example; someone who directs actions and opinions".
The very essence of leadership is that you have to have a vision and it's got to be a vision you articulate clearly and forcefully on every occasion. Leadership is practiced not so much in words as in attitude and in actions.
"Where there is no vision, the people perish. " - Proverbs 29:18
"Leadership has a harder job to do than just choose sides. It must bring sides together. " - Jesse Jackson
"The task of the leader is to get his people from where they are to where they have not been. " - Henry Kissinger.
Heaven knows I could go on forever with inspiring thoughts about leadership, but all I really want is for someone of good Conservative stock to demonstrate it.
Please, aspiring candidates, before you leap into the fray, stand in front of a mirror, look yourself in the eye and ask yourself if you are a leader or an ego.
Mr Howard, thank you kindly for holding the fort, but it is time to go. I am desperately sad that you have undone such great work during your time in charge, by your ludicrous post election judgement. You are now, however, humiliating yourself, your party and your supporters and it is not appreciated.
Bring it on!
Conservatism transcends race, creed and sexuality.
Theresa May is the straw that broke this camels back. Today she reveals herself as another "potential candidate" for the Tory leadership. And her big idea - that the Conservatives should be nicer to women and should discriminate in their favour.
I've had enough. Tim Yeo's big thought is to pursue the "centre-ground" and Alan Duncan thinks that by having a gay leader, the party will show it has changed. That's it. That is their big idea.
Once and for all, can we understand that a conservative philosophy transcends sexuality, race and creed. The basis of Conservatism applies as equally to a lesbian, black muslim as it does to a white, english, male christian. Please God (whichever God!) can we understand that it is the winning of the philosophical and policy arguement that will restore us to power. Just having a gay leader or a woman leader doesn't make the slightest difference. In case you had forgotten, New Labour is lead (if you can call it that) by a public school educated, white, British male.
What matters is that we find a leader, one who can espouse the finest policies on taxes, health, education, transport, crime control, freedom and environment all bound together with a seamless thread of quality conservatism.
If you have nothing helpful to say, Alan, Theresa, Tim and all the rest of you "girlie men", then say nothing. You are not political leaders if you waste an interview or a speech to talk about spin and image before first setting out your comprehension of what it is to be CONSERVATIVE.
Substance before spin.
David, please put us out of our terminable misery and LEAD out onto the pitch. I just can't bear it anymore.
I've had enough. Tim Yeo's big thought is to pursue the "centre-ground" and Alan Duncan thinks that by having a gay leader, the party will show it has changed. That's it. That is their big idea.
Once and for all, can we understand that a conservative philosophy transcends sexuality, race and creed. The basis of Conservatism applies as equally to a lesbian, black muslim as it does to a white, english, male christian. Please God (whichever God!) can we understand that it is the winning of the philosophical and policy arguement that will restore us to power. Just having a gay leader or a woman leader doesn't make the slightest difference. In case you had forgotten, New Labour is lead (if you can call it that) by a public school educated, white, British male.
What matters is that we find a leader, one who can espouse the finest policies on taxes, health, education, transport, crime control, freedom and environment all bound together with a seamless thread of quality conservatism.
If you have nothing helpful to say, Alan, Theresa, Tim and all the rest of you "girlie men", then say nothing. You are not political leaders if you waste an interview or a speech to talk about spin and image before first setting out your comprehension of what it is to be CONSERVATIVE.
Substance before spin.
David, please put us out of our terminable misery and LEAD out onto the pitch. I just can't bear it anymore.
Biased (and arrogant) BBC
Wandering around in the blogosphere, I came across a blog to which I simply had to link IMMEDIATELY.
It is called Biased BBC and it simply provides example after example of the BBC's entrenched anti Conservative bias.
I am not afraid to despise the BBC for its undignified and improprietous descent into blatant political partiality. I have seen it at first hand and will bring you the finest examples myself, as I find them. Whilst everyone who owns a television is required to pay a tax for the privilege and in doing so fund the BBC, it will bloody well do us all the courtesy of providing our news and programming without fear or favour. If, however, it wishes to become the televised Guardian / Independent / Mirror, then it can find some other way of raising its cash. I really don't mind, either way.
In the meantime let me recount an example from last night of real inappropriate BBC activity.
The programme "Funny Money" recounts the story of a Police / BBC investigation into a counterfeiting operation in Manchester. So far so reasonable. However, soon into the programme, it starts to become obvious that the real purpose of this arrogant programme was to get one up on the Police.
You see while the BBC were free to employ (with license fee money) bone fide criminals to infiltrate and entrap the counterfeiting gang, the Police were working painstakingly within the law to build up their case for prosecution. The BBC streaked ahead, as you would expect, and got all the characters on tape along with footage of the printing press in motion.
The icing on the cake was the reconstruction of the moment the BBC finally showed then Police what they had and then argued with them over whether they could broadcast it without damaging a future trial.
We are close to the end of the road when our national broadcaster conducts criminal investigations without the consent or even knowledge of our police service; employs criminals to do their undercover dirty work (as they admitted, one of them is now in prison for a supporting role in a murder); and puts ratings above our proper trial process. This programme was little more than a Police belittlement exercise and if I were them I would be absolutely furious.
p.s. It goes without saying that I firmly believe that our current criminal investigation rules and procedures are ridiculously tight and that as a result our police are hopelessly handicapped in their pursuit of crime. Get the evidence, capture the ciminals. It really isn't that hard.
It is called Biased BBC and it simply provides example after example of the BBC's entrenched anti Conservative bias.
I am not afraid to despise the BBC for its undignified and improprietous descent into blatant political partiality. I have seen it at first hand and will bring you the finest examples myself, as I find them. Whilst everyone who owns a television is required to pay a tax for the privilege and in doing so fund the BBC, it will bloody well do us all the courtesy of providing our news and programming without fear or favour. If, however, it wishes to become the televised Guardian / Independent / Mirror, then it can find some other way of raising its cash. I really don't mind, either way.
In the meantime let me recount an example from last night of real inappropriate BBC activity.
The programme "Funny Money" recounts the story of a Police / BBC investigation into a counterfeiting operation in Manchester. So far so reasonable. However, soon into the programme, it starts to become obvious that the real purpose of this arrogant programme was to get one up on the Police.
You see while the BBC were free to employ (with license fee money) bone fide criminals to infiltrate and entrap the counterfeiting gang, the Police were working painstakingly within the law to build up their case for prosecution. The BBC streaked ahead, as you would expect, and got all the characters on tape along with footage of the printing press in motion.
The icing on the cake was the reconstruction of the moment the BBC finally showed then Police what they had and then argued with them over whether they could broadcast it without damaging a future trial.
We are close to the end of the road when our national broadcaster conducts criminal investigations without the consent or even knowledge of our police service; employs criminals to do their undercover dirty work (as they admitted, one of them is now in prison for a supporting role in a murder); and puts ratings above our proper trial process. This programme was little more than a Police belittlement exercise and if I were them I would be absolutely furious.
p.s. It goes without saying that I firmly believe that our current criminal investigation rules and procedures are ridiculously tight and that as a result our police are hopelessly handicapped in their pursuit of crime. Get the evidence, capture the ciminals. It really isn't that hard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
