StatCounter

Thursday 18 March 2010

What's news?

Yesterday Gordon Brown had to admit that he mislead the Chilcot Inquiry over the relative levels of defence spending. His admission did not encompass the whole truth as he said just that "I do accept that in one or two years defence expenditure did not rise in real terms." when in fact defence spending in real terms fell in four years. Gordon Brown did not apologise for misleading the House of Commons at last wee's PMQs when he repeated the same stark claim:
"I put the facts before the inquiry on Friday. I said to the inquiry very clearly first of all that the expenditure of the Ministry of Defence has been rising in real terms under this Government.

...

I have to tell the right hon. Gentleman that the defence budget has been rising every year. He might have had a complaint if we were cutting the defence budget every year, but it is rising every year."
Now this was not an off-the-cuff remark, it was a prepared response to the Chilcot Inquiry and one Gordon Brown was happy to use as one of his prepared answers at PMQs. So was Gordon Brown's research inadequate? Was he careless as to the accuracy of his claims? Did he deliberately mislead (some might say lie) in order to protect his position in front the Chilcot Inquiry, knowing that it was unlikely that the truth would come out that day? Questions that are a) interesting and b) relevant to understanding the man that is Gordon Brown.

So what is the BBC's reaction to Gordon Brown's partial admission of guilt yesterday? The News front page makes no reference to Gordon Brown's admission at all, although they do find room for "No 'secret' Ashcroft deal - Hague " as the fifth top story. So I take a trip over to the Politics News front page where the main story is the "No 'secret' Ashcroft deal - Hague" story with three further links to related stories " Q&A: Lord Ashcroft", "Tax status new to Cameron" and "Profile: Lord Ashcroft". The Gordon Brown story is relegated to position four, the first small headline and the headline chosen is "PM misled Iraq inquiry - Cameron". Yes the BBC turn the headline so that it seems as though the claim is David Cameron's rather than an admission by Gordon Brown. Hidden away near the end of the article is the Gordon Brown defence (my emphasis):
"Mr Brown's spokesman said the prime minister had "taken the first opportunity" to tell MPs about his mistake but would not say when he first became aware of it.

Asked how Mr Brown had made the mistake, Downing Street said budgets were "pretty complex" and defence was one of the biggest.
So Gordon Brown's team are not saying when Gordon Brown first knew of his mistake in evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry, ie: was it before or after last week's PMQs. The other line of defence is that the subject is "pretty complex"; so much for the giant brain that was supposedly possessed by Gordon Brown!

So I turn to the BBC's top political story; it's a supposed leak but the 'leak' seems as much an embarrassment to Number 10 as to the Conservative party as the article itself has to acknowledge, albeit quietly (my emphasis):
"Former Conservative leader William Hague has denied any "secret" deal was done over Lord Ashcroft's tax status.

The Tory donor was made a peer in 2000 after undertaking to become a permanent UK resident, which was widely believed to mean he would be a full UK taxpayer.

But Mr Hague told the BBC leaked papers showed No 10 knew the agreed deal had not included the peer's tax status.

...

"The idea that this was a secret Tory deal for Lord Ashcroft to avoid whatever people thought he should have paid is rather blown apart by the knowledge this was all copied to Downing Street," he told BBC Radio 4's Today."
However the best comment is saved for near the end:
'Business Secretary Lord Mandelson said the leaked document showed William Hague and Tory leader David Cameron had been "economical with the truth"'
You have to admire the cheek of Peter Mandelson to accuse anyone of being "economical with the truth", he truly is a man without shame.

But that's not the end of the BBC coverage, here's the very last sentence of this report:
'Lord Ashcroft has pumped millions of pounds of his own money into the Conservative Party over the years and in 2005 was made its deputy chairman, with responsibility for targeting marginal seats at the general election.'
Breathtaking the BBC bias isn't it?


Away from the BBC's bias it is also interesting to note that Lord Ashcroft is not accused of anything illegal, he is paying tax on all his UK income as he must do as a UK resident. However as a non-dom he does not have to pay tax on his foreign income as that tax is deemed to be paid elsewhere. The difference between residence and domicile for tax is not that difficult to understand but it is one that the Labour party and their propaganda wing - the BBC - are quite happy to confuse.

Of course the fact that the reappearance of the Lord Ashcroft story has occurred just as the media spotlight was being shone on the UNITE union's links to and control of Gordon Brown and the Labour government must be entirely coincidental.


The BBC are getting more and more desperate and so fearless in their support for this Labour government. The BBC realise that with, probably, less than two months until the general election there is very little time for the Conservatives to change tack and point out the BBC's political bias and so the BBC feel free to push on and see how far they can go. What is worrying is that the BBC are not yet on a war-footing; so if you think their bias is bad now, just wait a while...

No comments: