The BBC's response to my accusations of bias (update)

I have replied to the BBC's response to my complaint about bias on the Andrew Marr programme. In the interests of my readers I reproduce my email below:

'Thank you for your response but it doesn't really address my complaint does it?

I accept that interviews do not follow a strict formula, such that identical times are spent on each subject. However I do not accept your characterisation of interviews as 'conversational'. The subjectes discussed were raised are decided by just one party, Andrew Marr, not by both parties. As Andrew Marr decided what subjects to raise, why did he think cuts and the deficit was really important to discuss with David Cameron but not with Gordon Brown or Nick Clegg?

The BBC has a remit to be unbiased, if the subject of 'cuts' was so important as to warrant 2/3 of the interview with David Cameron, why was it not important enough to even raise with Gordon Brown or Nick Clegg? Did Andrew Marr believe that only the Conservatives would make cuts or was that just the perception he wanted to leave viewers with?

The figures I quoted are not 'the personal views of someone called Craig', they are timings of the interviews. Timings are not 'personal views' they are objective facts. Do you disagree with his timings? Was Craig wrong and Andrew Marr did in fact discuss cuts and the deficit with Gordon Brown and Nick Clegg?

I am afraid that your email does not address my concerns and I would appreciate a proper answer to an accusation of bias in one of the BBC's flagship programmes rather than another fobbing off email.

Both myself and Craig pay the licence fee and I think that means that we are entitled to hold the BBC to account when it strays so far from its committment to impartiality. In case you are not aware, the BBC's 'Editorial Guidelines' say that 'Impartiality lies at the heart of the BBC's commitment to its audiences' and that ' The Agreement accompanying the BBC's Charter requires us to produce comprehensive, authoritative and impartial coverage of news and current affairs in the UK and throughout the world to support fair and informed debate'

I look forward to your rather more prompt response than last time and to you actually addressing my questions.

Kind regards

NotaSheep'

I await a reply and trust that the BBC's public service remit will extend to actually answering my original complaint.