Media interviews on Brexit

It is commonplace for tv programmes on the BBC and even on some independent channels to interview far more Remain than Brexit sympathisers, and to give them more uninterrupted airtime. Doing some interviews again this week I was reminded how bizarre it sometimes is.

There is first the test they sometimes apply to you. They ask if you would be willing to come on. When you say you will they then interview you for the task to see if they think your views are the ones they wish you to have for the sake of their programme. Sometimes they drop you, presumably because your views are not stupid or extreme.

Then there is the barrage of interruptions when you are on, if you dare to say sensible and moderate things. They are constantly putting words in your mouth that you have never uttered or thought, and you have to spend the interview denying their words are or ever have been your views. They are particularly hostile to new points or points they have not heard before.

If you look as if you are going to answer a question they think should floor you, they interrupt with another one in the hope that you will not have an answer to that.

I cant remember on Brexit when I was last asked an original or different question. The whole debate is repetitious, going over the same old lines we rehearsed on both sides endlessly for the referendum campaign. Every day is Groundhog day. We have debated at length the issue of membership of the Customs Union and single market, and the Commons has twice decisively voted against remaining in either. Now Labour wants to do it all over again as some Labour MPs have apparently changed their mind and wish to ditch their Manifesto on this matter. So the media then goes through it all over again.There is little likelihood of another Commons vote beforre Easter on this.

It is easy for the media to know what I am likely to say, because my views are all set out on every issue they raise on this topic on this website. Most of them interviewing me seem to be briefed by researchers that have never read my actual views, yet nonetheless reckon they know them better than I do.

Some in the media still have not grasped that the Northern Ireland/Republic of Ireland border is already a complex border with a different currency, different Excise taxes, VAT and Income taxes either side which need sorting out as goods move across. This does not need a man or woman in a kiosk on the border doing the sums whilst vans and lorries wait. It is all done electronically. So why can’t the new arrangements be done similarly? Have these interviewers ever heard of TIR, Authorised Economic Operators, and electronic manifests? If not, it is difficult for them to ask sensible questions of those who think all this means watch towers and Customs officers holding everyone up which no-one wants and we do not need.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  1. Mark B
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 5:54 am | Permalink

    Good morning.

    Now you know how some of us feel about being moderated 😉

    Or alternatively I could say; “If you do not like it, why don’t you set up your own TV Channel ?” as some do here 😉

    Seriously though. Does our kind host expect an easy ride ? The MSM is part of the Establishment. An Establishment that has grown fat and rich from the trough offered to them from the EU. Do you seriously think that they are just going to let that be taken away from them ? That is why we are expected to pay billions to the EU. It is to compensate some of these parasites. Our EU contributions were nothing but Romanesque Tribute. More designed to show our subjugation to our true masters than anything else.

    The privately owned news media are entitled to take a political position. But the BBC is banned by force of its Charter. A Charter, as our kind host well knows, it granted to it by the Queen via Parliament. A Parliament that he is very much a part of. If our kind host does not like it, then may I respectfully suggest that he and like minded MP’s begin to do something about it ? And removing the law that says I must pay the BBC for the right to use a TV, even if I do not watch its content, is wrong. The BBC can encrypt its content and has the TV Tax pay for by subscription. Then when viewers do do not like the things that they see being done to our MP’s and others, they can vote with their purse 😉

    Simple !

    • JoolsB
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:15 am | Permalink

      “Now you know how some of us feel about being moderated 😉

      “Exactly!! As many on this site may be aware I often criticise John’s Government, a Tory one at that, about the bias they show towards the rest of the UK whilst constantly and deliberately ignoring the rotten deal they give England and the English. I’m lucky if it appears 24 hours later.

      But John does have a point. The BBC in particular and Andrew Marr and Jo Coburn are two interviewers who spring to mind, who when interviewing Brexiteers constantly interrupt them as soon as they open their mouths whilst allowing the Labour or remain politician to have their say.

      Your Government is in charge John. It is time to sort out the biased BBC. They are supposed to be impartial which they are anything but. Having said that Sky aren’t much better.

      • Hope
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 7:38 pm | Permalink

        May’s speech yesterday was a confirmation she has unconditionally surrendered to all EU demands other than its land grab of Northern Ireland. Presumably this one are was meant to convince us that she was negotiating and not totally capitulating like she did in the way discussions would proceed, phase one capitulation and all her alleged red lines, if and it is a big IF they ever existed. To be fair she was prepared to give away Northern Ireland in phase one but was caught out by the DUP so the charade had to include a firm rebuttal this time. Everything else that could be a good negotiating lever she dismissed and stated publicly she would not advance. So having told the EU she has no bargaining chips and I still not prepared to use them we can expect another capitulation with some form of charade agreement on Northern Ireland to make it look as though she was actually negotiating and ameliorate DUP that she was not selling them out again.

        May is an utter embarrassment. To allow 27 other countries to decide your trade policy without a voice shows how utterly pathetic she is. Moreover it says a lot about JR and his colleagues for allowing it.

      • NickC
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:04 pm | Permalink

        JoolsB, I loathe the BBC because of specific examples of bias that I have personally experienced over the years, as well as program bias. I watched the BBC “interview” a UKIP woman candidate some time ago. BBC interviewer: “Why do you hate Europeans?” I happen to know the candidate: both her parents were from the continent. Naturally the interviewer didn’t get what he was after.

      • Bob
        Posted March 5, 2018 at 8:51 am | Permalink

        ” It is time to sort out the biased BBC.”

        The Tory govt gave the BBC year on year increases to the TV Licence fee.

        Doesn’t sound like they intend to address the problem, does it?

        • Incredulous
          Posted March 6, 2018 at 7:54 pm | Permalink

          Not true, it was stuck at £145.50 for six years. Please do a teeny weeny bit of research before commenting.

    • APL
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:35 am | Permalink

      Mark B: “Or alternatively I could say; “If you do not like it, why don’t you set up your own TV Channel ?” as some do here ”

      Difference being (specifically the BBC ) is that we all compelled to pay for the BBC. Not only that, it presents itself as the voice of Britain.

      And anyway, Redwood has set up his own newspaper. Very successful it is too.

      Mark B: “An Establishment that has grown fat and rich from the trough offered to them from the EU.”

      And our host is very comfortably ensconced as a part of that establishment. JR is definitely not an outsider!

      I have often asked, why the BBC still exists after seven years of a Tory government. Answer came there none.

      We’re all little oysters, the Politicians and ‘big’ Media are the Walrus and the Carpenter respectively. Neither had any intention of helping the Oysters.

      • Mark B
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 4:56 pm | Permalink

        I was being rather, ‘tongue-in-cheek’ in what I said about the TV.

        But yes, our kind host is part of the Establishment whether he likes it or not.

    • Anonymous
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:17 am | Permalink

      “Seriously though. Does our kind host expect an easy ride ?”

      No. But Remainers do get an easy ride and this difference needs to be pointed out. Especially when it comes to the licence funded BBC.

      It is also biased on the Middle East and climate and needs scrapping or boycotting.

      • Anonymous
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:18 am | Permalink


    • jerry
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:05 am | Permalink

      Mark B; “Or alternatively I could say; “If you do not like it, why don’t you set up your own TV Channel ?” as some do here”

      How would that help, such a TV channel (or indeed radio station) would still have to obey Ofcom rules and the Communications Act 2003.

      “The privately owned news media are entitled to take a political position.”

      No they are not!

      • Mark B
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 4:58 pm | Permalink

        Jerry, did you spot the ‘winky emoji’ ? I was being cheeky, and not to our kind host but to a few people that have criticized me with a similar comment. People who do not often post, if ever !

      • NickC
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:07 pm | Permalink

        Jerry, But they do take a political position, as does the BBC.

        • jerry
          Posted March 5, 2018 at 8:29 am | Permalink

          @NickC; You are entitled to your opinion, but opinion is not proof, nor evidence of wrong doing – oh an do go and read the URL I posted, especially the explanatory note on what “Due” means legally.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:07 am | Permalink

      Indeed we all have to pay the BBC tax (or be fined & imprisoned) then they use this money to tell us what we have to think. Unfortunately they are totally wrong on every major issue:- their love of the EU, their endless unscientific climate alarmism (no warming since 1998 still and coldest March day since records began), their endless political correctness and their insufferable “Guardian Think” on every issue.

      Dim, PC, lefty, innumerate, unscientific art graduates almost to a woman or man. All accepting the absurd establishment “group think”. A sort of “Peter Mandelson Think” TV all paid for by you.

      • Sir Joe Soap
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 12:46 pm | Permalink

        They are a bit dim about the rules governing self-employment too.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted March 4, 2018 at 4:48 pm | Permalink

          Understandably as the courts, HMRC & Hammond keep moving the goal posts!

          Still they are all rather overpaid so perhaps they deserve it.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:53 pm | Permalink

          Would the money be better spent or invested by this tax & piss down the drain lefty government or the typical dire lefty BBC employee? A difficult choice!

          On balance I still think even a dire, lefty BBC employee will use it better than Hammond.

    • Hope
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:42 am | Permalink

      May has allowed this to happen. Dennis has pointed out endlessly that no rebuttal from the govt or Davis’s dept! She wanted this to gain traction to change our minds or remain.

      Today another pathetic interview showing her credentials. Why does the whole of the country have to comply with EU regulations, not only those businesses hat trade with it?
      The EU does not want the UK to be more competitive than it is and May is allowing this! Regulatory alignment for an indefinite period. The UK bound by EU regulation without a voice and applying to any trade deal the UK wishes to pursue with the rest of the world so our country cannot be more competitive than the EU! Is she completely stupid of what she is advocating? This is the point of voting to leave!

      Share fishing quotas but disguise it under the UK has control of our waters! Giving away £100 billion to talk about trade after her extension and not knowing what that might be. ECJ applying to citizens living in this country! Immigration continues during her extension without a voice. Good grief what are your party and govt doing other than con the public that we are leaving the EU when in reality it is remaining under regulatory control of the EU without a voice in trying to negotiate with the rest of the world, May unconditionally willing to support EU foreign policy through security, Willing to tie the UK further to EU spending.

      The public voted leave and your govt and party are delivering staying in by another name. In respect of trust who in their right mind would trust parliament not to tie us back to the EU even further than now as a tidying up exercise!

      You wonder why the media behaves as it does, then look at who s briefing them. Sell out May and her remaining cabinet have to go.

    • lojolondon
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

      The BBC is the major obstacle to Democracy withing Britain and also any commonsense actions by parliament. It is to our eternal shame that we have had a Conservative PM for 7 years now and no action has been taken.

      • rose
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 2:30 pm | Permalink

        But we haven’t had a conservative PM for 7 years, just a liberal and now a socialist.

        • Mark B
          Posted March 4, 2018 at 4:59 pm | Permalink

          True that !

        • Lifelogic
          Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:54 pm | Permalink


      • Lifelogic
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

        I think the last Conservative PM was Mrs Thatcher and even she failed to tame the bloated state, sort out the Nhs or Education ( no freedom of choice), buried us further in the EU, allowed Major to force her into the Erm and even let him become PM.

        All daft dire socialists since then. Brexitina MAYBOT is particularly socialist.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted March 4, 2018 at 3:53 pm | Permalink

          A huge electoral liability too. I suppose we have to put up with her a bit longer all thanks to Gove knifing Boris. But surely she cannot be allowed to do an over the cliff, John Major repetition at the next election.

    • rose
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 2:34 pm | Permalink

      The squealing about the trough being removed was amply illustrated by that Eurocrat and his three course meal. The media loved it so much they forgot he wasn’t the minister and repeated it throughout the day and for several days since. It really struck them as the nub of the matter.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

        Philosophy, Politics and Economics at Oxford University, international economics at the College of Europe in Bruges, and at the École nationale d’administration in Paris.

        Almost the fully house of qualifications suited to become a paper pusher, feather bedding oneself in as a professional UK or EU bureaucrat. Must be really annoying that the voters occasionally get a say in things and actually know best too.

    • Peter
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 4:47 pm | Permalink

      The Marr show today was very good. He asked the important questions and listened to the answers. It was all very civilised.

      A recurring theme was why the reaction to May’s speech was so muted from both her own party and the EU. Heseltine was a notable exception. His verdict – ‘Phrases generalisations and platitudes’ which do little to make a deal more likely because the EU will say no to cherry picking.

      May was on the programme herself having been recorded after the speech in Downing Street. She seemed more relaxed with Marr and handled questions better than she usually does. Mandelson and Ian Duncan Smith appeared at the end and both gave intelligent answers from a different viewpoint.

      So not all BBC programmes are hopeless, biased affairs.

    • Steve
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 6:52 pm | Permalink

      I agree entirely, sooner BBC is pay for view the better.

      As a matter of fact whenever I see a programme where the journalist is interrupting the guest while allowing another one an unhindered platform – I just change channels straight away, it’s undignified and I don’t like it.

  2. Peter
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 6:02 am | Permalink

    So you are saying they want Brexit supporters to appear on their programmes as some sort of Aunt Sally figures with predictable views that they can easily demolish?

    Not surprising and they are no longer fooling people these days.

    Though there are parallels on here, where prominence is given to the sort of angry Remain supporters who claim Brexit is all the fault of pensioners. There are more nuanced arguments to be put in favour of Remain.

    • Peter
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 5:37 pm | Permalink

      I just watched the Maitlis interview with John Redwood on the iplayer.

      Yes, she did interrupt – though I have seen worse.

      However, it did allow Mr. Redwood to make his point that ‘No Deal’ is not off the table. The scenario envisaged further EU intransigence in the face of UK generosity.

      I am still not sure May has the strength to go for ‘No Deal’ myself. Possibly if she gets that far and stalls she could then be replaced. That may be a possible strategy. Let her do the heavy lifting and put someone else in if she runs out of steam.

    • getahead
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 7:33 pm | Permalink

      “There are more nuanced arguments to be put in favour of Remain.”
      I’d certainly like to hear some Peter.

  3. rick hamilton
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 6:28 am | Permalink

    What gets me is the condescending attitude of so many of these overpaid reporters. That’s all they are, just observers and commentators, yet they seem to think their opinions are of national importance and that people actually doing a responsible job can be treated like idiots. The quality of some questions after Theresa May’s speech was so depressingly shallow it is hardly surprising she didn’t bother to answer.

    A bit of humility wouldn’t go amiss. After all, whatever you think of their policies, being PM or a Secretary of State is a hugely demanding task. I just wish some of these media types would listen more carefully, think a bit harder – and grow up.

    • Excalibur
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:20 am | Permalink

      I concur, Rick. The most used pronoun by news anchors on Sky is ‘I’, as if the whole nation is interested in their petty likes and dislikes. I wrote to them about it. but it makes not one iota of difference.

  4. sm
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 7:08 am | Permalink

    John, I’ve watched you being interviewed many times over the years about the EU, and still don’t know how you manage to remain calm and polite.

    I realise it would be awfully bad form to actually wallop an interviewer (sarc.), but when the next one interrupts and lectures you, could you not realistically say something like: “I’m sorry, I didn’t realise I’d been invited to come and listen to your views, rather than you asking me for mine?”.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:30 am | Permalink

      Indeed perhaps a bit too polite in the interviews sometimes.

      The BBC, ITV and channel four only seem to have interviewers who are Pc, lefty, climate alarmist, Euphile, innumerate, magic money tree, dopey and stroppy art graduates. A Neil perhaps the only balanced one they have.

      Listen to the Cathy Newman interview of Jordan Peterson to see how idiotic some people with a 1st in english at Oxford can actually be!

      Yes as you say they often just want someone who is a leaver but is a bit stupid and perhaps a bit racist too so they can attack them more easily. They do not want rational arguments from Brexit supporters.

      Still on the climate alarmist agenda no one is allowed on to point out what an exaggerated scam it all is at al, just not invited onl.

      On economics they even discuss the Corbyn McDonnall agenda as if it was a sane alternative plan!

    • Fedupsoutherner
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:45 am | Permalink

      Sm. Good suggestion.

    • Geoff not Hoon
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:51 am | Permalink

      sm…I couldn’t have put it better.

    • Mark B
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:03 am | Permalink

      John, I’ve watched you being interviewed many times over the years about the EU, and still don’t know how you manage to remain calm and polite.

      Because doing so conveys authority, dignity and commands respect from the audience. People, as you have just confirmed, do not like bullying and will feel more sympathy to both the person and their cause. Our kind host is very media savvy as most professional politicians are.

    • jerry
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:16 am | Permalink

      @sm; could [politicians] not realistically say something like: “I’m sorry, I didn’t realise I’d been invited to come and listen to your views, rather than you asking me for mine?”

      What a good idea, perhaps Mr Corbyn, McDonnell and Diane Abbott etc. could say the same when interrupted!

      • sm
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

        jerry, back in the days when I still listened to R4’s Today programme, Gordon Brown (then Chancellor) was interviewed by John Humphry. I have never voted Labour, I loathed Mr Brown, and I was a Conservative Party officer, but he held the second most important position in Government and he was owed respect – AND I wanted to hear his explanation of various economic matters.

        The wretched presenter constantly talked over him and cut him short, and so I complained to the BBC. They indicated that they didn’t see there was any problem.

        So yes, if members of the Opposition parties are interviewed, the emphasis should be on what they say, not on how the presenters interpret it, nor should they be rudely interrupted.

        • Dennis
          Posted March 4, 2018 at 5:09 pm | Permalink

          Yes the BBC should learn interviewing techniques from RT – they let people have their say with no interruptions.

        • jerry
          Posted March 4, 2018 at 5:44 pm | Permalink

          @sm; I wasn’t just talking about the BBC (nor was our host), what is more many of those other broadcasters are funded by the public regardless of paying the TVL fee or not – an inconvenient truth that you and those who suffer from the same blinkered vision refuse to see, non so blind and ignorant as those who choose not to see as they say….

          • Bob
            Posted March 5, 2018 at 10:03 am | Permalink

            Try to refrain from using this blog as a platform for vitriolic ranting, it doesn’t further the debate it just disrupts it (or is that your intention?).

            The bottom line is that the BBC is funded by govt legislation supported by official enforcement by the already overburdened police & law courts, not voluntary subscription. Citizens should be allowed to opt out of paying the BBC without giving up their rights to watch other channels.

          • NickC
            Posted March 5, 2018 at 6:08 pm | Permalink

            Jerry, What you perpetually miss is that the the BBC TV Tax is an EXTRA on top of paying for other content providers that you really want. The only fair and just arrangement is that each content provider charges; and every household decides what to buy.

          • jerry
            Posted March 6, 2018 at 6:42 am | Permalink

            @Bob; Try doing as you preach, it is not I who rants against the BBC, I accept that they get things wrong but all broadcasters do, were are you you criticisms of ITV, Ch4/5, Sky?

            @NickC; What you perpetually miss is what you call a tac is at worst a discretionary tax, like VED,, unlike the ‘advertising tax’ applied at the check-out – or the imposed multi-channel subscription packages were one has to pay to 500 channels you do not want, do not watch before even being allowed to subscribe to another multi-channel package just so that you can watch the one channel you want. I have no problems with a level playing field, I suspect know that the commercial and subscription channels do, one will see less income if the BBC is commercialised, the other will see less income if the viewers can cherry pick single channels…

          • Bob
            Posted March 6, 2018 at 2:44 pm | Permalink

            When was the last time someone was fined £1000 or jailed for watching TV without buying products advertised on the commercial channels? 😂

          • jerry
            Posted March 6, 2018 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

            @Bob: Err, actually shoplifting is far more common than TVL fee evasion – next! 😛 🙄

          • Bob
            Posted March 7, 2018 at 8:48 am | Permalink

            Another of your debating techniques, “when you’re in a corner, answer a question that hasn’t been asked”.
            Try again Jerry, and here a clue: it’s fewer than 1.

          • jerry
            Posted March 7, 2018 at 4:39 pm | Permalink

            @Bob: Another of your debating techniques, “when you’re in a corner, not liking the answer you got, claim to have asked a different question than the one you actually did ask”.

            It is you, Bobby, who needs to find the clue. If a retailer or supplier suffers losses due to theft they have less money spare to spend on such things as investment and advertising.

    • old salt
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 5:20 pm | Permalink

      When an interviewer interrupts why not just say “now hold on a minute” and carry on with your reply pronto and watch them recoil. Not many MPs have mastered this and yes it does work.
      Last week I switched off one sky interviewer again who constantly interrupted within a few words of replies losing the whole point of the interviewee being there.

  5. alan jutson
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 7:08 am | Permalink

    Afraid the media now have their own agenda on almost everything JR.

    They are no longer happy to report the news with facts, but want to make it, and manipulate it with their own so called expert opinion.

    I can only guess that with 24 hour news reporting with multiple channels, not enough new news will fill a time slot or would be much different from a competitors news, hence the reason for expanding any story to its maximum.

    Sad fact is they seem to luxuriate in bad news , good news stories always seem thin on the ground.

    • Anonymous
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:25 am | Permalink

      The refugee crisis has gone quiet… or has it ?

      • APL
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 1:29 pm | Permalink

        Anon: “The refugee crisis has gone quiet… or has it ?”

        It’s winter. Not migrant season.

        Wait for the Spring.

    • Mark B
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:05 am | Permalink

      There is plenty of news. Trouble is, and this applies only to commercial outlets, good news does not always sell.

      The BBC is in a unique position that it does not have to follow the herd in this respect. Sadly it feels it does.

    • jerry
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:21 am | Permalink

      @alan jutson; “[the MSM] are no longer happy to report the news with facts, but want to make it, and manipulate it with their own so called expert opinion.”

      Have you only just realised that, many understood that back in the early 1990s at least. Never allow the facts to get in the way of their Headlines or front page pictures, it was “the Sun that won it” after all.

      How the right-wing bleat, now the boot is on another foot, for once…

      • alan jutson
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 1:19 pm | Permalink


        ” have you only just realise that….”

        No have been aware of it for very many years, indeed about 40 years ago was involved with a company in a media storm about a particular product, service and topic, where information given out and labeled as fact in so called news reporting over a reasonably lengthy period of time, was total and absolute fiction.

        Left, Right, or Centre it does not matter, I would prefer news reports and the like were fact, rather than fiction or opinion to create sensationalist headlines.

      • APL
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 1:32 pm | Permalink

        Jerry: “How the right-wing bleat, now the boot is on another foot, for once…”

        Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings!

        So, despite all his protestations to the contrary. Jerry let’s slip the truth.

        A once only event, folks.

        • jerry
          Posted March 4, 2018 at 5:54 pm | Permalink

          @APL; Oh do try actually understanding context!

  6. Helena
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 7:28 am | Permalink

    So the Irish government doesn’t know how there can be no physical controls at the border, unless the UK stays in the customs union and the single market. The EU doesn’t know how there can be no physical controls at the border, unless the UK stays in the customs union and the single market. The British government doesn’t know how there can be no physical controls at the border, unless the UK stays in the customs union and the single market. But John Redwood says it can all be done “electronically”. Brilliant! And to think some people accuse Brexiteers of not addressing the detail!

    • A.Sedgwick
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:25 am | Permalink

      You are demonstrating our host’s comments about the media ignoring the current operational facts. The Irish border is an EU manufactured and spurious dispute cynically exploiting a centuries old conflict. If Bertie Ahern and a past Eire Ambassador to Canada think there is no problem then the current Eire Government should wake up to reality that they are being used as pawns, especially as the USA and UK are Eire’s biggest markets.

    • SecretPeople
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:25 am | Permalink

      Helena, it already IS being done electronically and needs to be because (in case you didn’t read John’s blog entry):

      “the Northern Ireland/Republic of Ireland border is already a complex border with a different currency, different Excise taxes, VAT and Income taxes either side which need sorting out as goods move across.”

      And yes, the EU DOES know how there can be no physical controls at the border (or no more than now) – see this report they commissioned:…/IPOL_STU(2017)596828_EN.pdf.

      And yes, the UK DOES know how there can be no physical controls at the border (or no more than now) – David Davis recently went to visit Canada to see how it manages the smart border between itself and the US.

      Like the media John describes, you’re attributing words to him that he hasn’t written.

      • Dennis
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 5:15 pm | Permalink

        I heard that with Google Earth one can see lines of trucks tied up at the USA
        /Canada border – true I don’t know – have to check with Google.

    • Andy
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:25 am | Permalink

      The UK Government has proposed a solution to the Irish Border in a paper last year. The EU Directorate of Internal Policy produced a report on the border for the EU Parliament which mirrored most of the UK report. So the solutions are there.

      However, the UK Government may control its border as it sees fit, being a Sovereign State. The EU must decide how it wishes to control ITS border with the UK. The Customs Union and Single Market are theirs not the UKs, so it is up to them.

      • rose
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 2:41 pm | Permalink

        At the moment the Southern Irish police patrol the border on their side. One has to assume the Garda are armed. There are big notices warning of their presence which were taken down when Barnier visited.

    • Caterpillar
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:32 am | Permalink

      1. The EU has recognised the digital solution in Smart Border 2.0.
      2. The EU could view the Celtic Sea as the EU border rather than the Irish Sea as it seems to want (this would allow the EU to send a signal that it is is not a territory grabber/threat as it can appear to be to e.g. Russia. The EU will need to not send similar signals via Gibraltar).
      3 Ireland can become a state free of the EU if it wants border arrangements to remain.
      4. If the EU and Ireland don’t want to follow any of the above them a hard bordering is. Options exist (1) requires investment by EU and UK, (2) and (3) require a choice from EU and Ireland as to what they value .

    • Mark B
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:10 am | Permalink

      But Suriname, Brazil, Norway and many others all do know how to have ‘non-hard’ borders with EU member countries, and can trade with the EU without being members of the CU and in some cases, the Single Market.

      Big Corporate Business wants the UK in the CU and SM. Why ? Because it allows them to control a market through tariffs and regulation. Stopping outside producers from competing against them and, new competitors within the SM from competing via regulatory overload.

      • Dennis
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 5:28 pm | Permalink

        Mark B – “But Suriname, Brazil, …(with French Guiana)………….. do know how to have ‘non-hard’ borders with EU member countries, …”

        How much trade, if anything, is does there across borders? From Suriname to French Guiana I saw the only way to cross that river was by rowboat!

    • Richard1
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:10 am | Permalink

      The issue is completely contrived. Boris Johnson was right – if we really have to add duties and checks etc (which will be due to EU protectionism not an initiative of the U.K. which will hopefully work with zero tariffs, MRAs etc), then they can happen like the Dartford crossing.

      What this shows is Continuity Remain (& the EU) can’t think of any good arguments for being in the customs union and the single market, given we are leaving the EU, so they have invented a bogus technical reason For doing so.

      Think of a good argument.

    • graham1946
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 12:04 pm | Permalink

      There are none already now. The Irish government is an arm of the EU which doesn’t want Brexit or wishes to punish us for it, so is it surprising that they club together to make scare stories? What is surprising is that otherwise intelligent people just swallow it all and ignore their own government.

      I think JR has told you, if you care to read and think for once rather than just taking in propaganda, that this is already done because of currency differences, excise duties etc. HMRC are already working on a new system to be ready for next March and it wouldn’t take much effort to put in a line of code covering import duties from the EU if that’s what the EU decides. It does it for the rest of the world.

      Of course it could all be unnecessary if the EU see sense and agree free trade which I think they will in the end, especially if they see our money being taken off the table.

    • Tom William
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

      If you actually read what our host has written in several posts you might actually understand his argument.

      A rather simplified similar answer was given by Boris Johnson who was caught by a media person when returning from a run. Needless to say his comment that the technology would be somewhat simpler to the congestion charge was ridiculed by media who can not think for themselves and like to portray him as a simpleton.

      • rose
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 2:46 pm | Permalink

        Classic case of sentence interrupted half way. The culprit interviewing him on Today was the aggressive Mishal Hussein. Boris really needs to learn how to stand up to these ruthless people as our Mr R has.

    • stred
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

      A scanning camera and computer is a physical control. A sign with ‘welcome to Eire. speed limit 100kph’ and a sign saying ‘welcome to Northern Ireland. speed limit 60mph’ is physical and is on a physical border. A lawyer would know this.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 3:02 pm | Permalink

      The Irish government has made it clear that it is not open to any suggestion, however sensible, which might even imply the existence of a border on the island of Ireland, and so far the EU is prepared to back up the Irish government rather than attempt to inject any common sense. And as the border between the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland will become an EU external border the EU will demand the last word on how it shall be controlled to defend the integrity of the EU Single Market. The volume of trade across the border is low – about 0.1% of UK GDP and about 0.1% of the EU’s total external trade – but the EU likes to pretend that it is a major threat because that provides leverage against the UK government, with the help of disloyal Remoaners in the UK.

    • Monty
      Posted March 5, 2018 at 12:59 am | Permalink

      How do you imagine worldwide goods entering or leaving the EU at a seaport are moved, tracked, quarantined, checked and released by customs, allocated for onward transport and ultimately forwarded to final destination? How does the Port of Rotterdam keep all that routing under control, for all those containers, every day, without getting into a complete snarl up? Close to 500 million tonnes overall, 13 million containers each year. How is it that you can get online tracking data for your own consignment in real time? Do you seriously imagine that all of that is actually physically moved through some customs shed, with uniformed blokes opening and checking each container against a manifest? What do they do then, put a chalk mark on it?
      And have you ever noticed those overhead cranes that deftly traverse across a massive bank of stacked containers and pick exactly the right one up, and gently put it onto exactly the right lorry in the right place at the right time? And they must have been stacked in the right order because they never have to tell the driver his container is the one at the bottom of the stack?
      I can quite believe that you have no conception of the technology, and the standards for tracking and identification, underlying such a system. I do not believe that you’re so green that you don’t know when some party with his own agenda is determined to make trouble by withdrawing from well established norms, because he’s piqued, and he’s looking to cause chaos.

  7. Nadine
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 7:31 am | Permalink

    I have heard you several times being interviewed. You have explained that the UK has voted to leave the EU but to keep the benefits of membership. What is so difficult about that? Why is the EU not respecting the democratic views of the English people?

    • DaveM
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 12:22 pm | Permalink

      The EU doesn’t respect the democratic views of any nation.

      That’s one of the main reasons the UK voted to leave. Its recent behaviour underlines that fact quite clearly!

      • rose
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

        It is also why Berlusconi is riding high at 81 – because the Italians have had enough of the EU managing their “democracy”.

    • Jonp
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 12:34 pm | Permalink

      Nadine..the EU is an economic bloc not a it works to different rules and constraints..I see Mrs Merkel is back just in time for the EU Council meeting on thing we can be sure of.. the democratic views of the English people will be well down the agenda list

      • Mark B
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 5:24 pm | Permalink

        WRONG !

        The EU is a government. It is not a complete government, it does not have the full trappings of a sovereign power, but it will acquire them all over time, as it has done.

  8. Nig l
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 7:58 am | Permalink

    Re the Irish border, obviously I am not going to question your expertise, nonetheless if it is a ‘simple’ as you suggest, why aren’t David Davis and Theresa May et al pushing your solution?

    • alte fritz
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:02 am | Permalink

      The best comment I have heard was from an Irish politician who said that the border was a matter for Ireland and the UK to settle to their satisfaction and then to present to the EU.

      The Irish establishment behaves like a client state in doing the EU’s bidding.

      • Mark B
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 5:28 pm | Permalink

        Sadly, as the RoI is part of the EU, it will be an UK / EU border, not a UK / RoI border. It is the EU that needs satisfying. And it will not give in until we remain either in, or, closely aligned to the CU and SM. Which I believe is the aim. They do not want us being competitive and will do all they can to shackle us down.

        They fear our independence.

    • Man of Kent
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:08 am | Permalink

      DD and TM have done , but at the moment no one else is listening .

      As Independence day approaches and the prospect of the Republic’s huge agricultural trade balance with us being adversely affected there will be a dawning realisation that the border is a non problem .
      At least an easy problem to fix given goodwill on both sides .

    • Mark B
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:17 am | Permalink

      That is the art of negotiations. You determine what you really want and try to second guess the other guy as to what they want. You then demand more in the hope that the other side will give you it. If not, you make small concessions and ask the otherside to do the same if you do. Trouble is, the EU does not have to concede to anything, it is the UK that is leaving and will practically start all over again.

      I am not a Remainer, I voted Leave and would do so again. But many saw this coming and knew that we had to plumb for a ‘already, but far from ideal, solution’ in the form of the EEA. The EEA is the ‘Transitory Phase’ as is already set up so we know what we are getting and cannot be screwed like we are now.

      • NickC
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:27 pm | Permalink

        Mark B, I haven’t noticed Norway transiting out of the EU’s EEA lately. Have you? Then the EU may not offer us the EEA agreement that it offered the EFTA nations anyway. Then once trapped in the EU’s EEA (probably with extra strings attached) it would be as hard to exit the EEA as it is to exit the EU – especially as the EU will go on making extra rules. Then why have two transits: EU>EEA then EEA>Independence? If independence is worth having then the sooner we have it the better: delaying makes no sense.

  9. eeyore
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:02 am | Permalink

    I’ve always thought it rude of interviewees to attempt to speak over an interviewer’s interruptions. People like our host should remember their station.

    The purpose of a political interview is to demonstrate the journalist’s adroitness at constructing alternative forms of expression to those of the contemptible stammering politico. “In other words, what you’re really saying is . . .”

    “No you clown, what I’m saying is what I’ve just said.”

    If only!

    • Mark B
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:27 am | Permalink

      You are, Ms. C. Newman and I claim my £5.


      • Lifelogic
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 4:04 pm | Permalink

        Indeed how can someone like her get 1st English at Oxford and yet be so clearly unable to understand or address rational argument or think on her feet? Google her past interviews if in doubt about this.

    • Ian wragg
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 2:40 pm | Permalink

      Interesting on BBC East Midlands. Friday they set up a stall asking about should we stay in the Customs Union. There were cakes with Union Flag, EU flag and for some obscure reason a picture of Corbyn. The first 3 members of the public said definitely Leave and picked up a Union Flag cake.
      Not what the BBC wanted to hear and it was pulled from the next bulletin.
      Biased or what.

  10. ferdinand
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:08 am | Permalink

    TIR has been operating since 1959 !

    • jerry
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:29 am | Permalink

      @ferdinand; TIR, in Europe, has actually been around since 1949, thus it pre-dated even the ECSC…

  11. Paul Cohen
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:10 am | Permalink

    Much of the BBC output is moronic and repetitious and illustrates how it has lost it’s way in educating and informing its audience – indeed it seems to have morphed into becoming its own W1 A!

    The BBC is expected to report news impartially but seems incapable of this, and rather present it with blatant bias.

    Time for a new top team and clear out the present complacent , overpaid and useless lot.

    • Peter
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:12 am | Permalink

      I think the BBC top team is Humphreys, Marr, Robinson and Neill. The rest are a supporting cast.

      Once popular programmes like ‘Newsnight’ are now a ratings disaster. This may be for a number of reasons. The departure of Paxman(who was over rated anyway) the fallout from misreporting a recent sex scandal and a straightforward drop in programme quality.

      Evan Davis seems emblematic of much of what is wrong with the BBC. The strange grin, the suit that is too tight and the predictable metropolitan outlook. I don’t think he will rise to the top of the interviewer tree but the fact that he is there at all is a bit of a mystery.That said, Peston went on to get his own show despite his irritating delivery and quirky manner. So who knows?

    • Andy
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:29 am | Permalink

      Which is why the BBC needs to be broken up and the license fee abolished. The BBC has failed miserably to remain impartial regarding Brexit and generally politically – it is viscerally anti-Tory. And in any democracy it is profoundly worrying and dangerous that one media provider controls over 70% of broadcast news and current affairs output. We need diversity of opinion and views, which is why the BBC needs to be killed off.

    • jerry
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:40 am | Permalink

      @Paul Cohen; Time for a more, some might say, pure Reithian vision perhaps, rather than the faux commercial vision that was put in place during the 1980s perhaps, were each department, each genre, each programme had to be justified via measurable data such as an internal market or ratings figures.

      Guess which party of Govt. created the ‘beast’ that is the modern BBC…

    • Adam
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 3:18 pm | Permalink

      News reporters sitting side-by-side at the same desk, each share-reading single sentences from auto-cue typifies waste & incompetence.

      It evokes contrast recalled from decades earlier. In the days of entirely single newsreader delivery, Monty Python included a sketch about BBC waste. They showed the daft image of two readers sharing the same desk, reading news about BBC overmanning, simultaneously, as if in stereo. It created raucous laughter then, but nowadays is regarded as normal.

      The current style is so prescribed, that even when a newsreader refers to a 2-word quote, they glance down from the auto-cue to paper on their desk, as if they are using a more credible source!

      • jerry
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 6:16 pm | Permalink

        @Adam; You cite an old Monty Python sketch, only problem is that when it was made the BBC news programmes had a single newsreader, unlike those of ITN’s News at Ten which did used two…

        Having more than one person in an office is also waste, until you understands the job! There are many reasons why it is wise to have two presenters on a live programme – such as a microphone fault, stuck auto-cue and even possible illness. Anyway, most BBC news broadcasts do (now) use a single presenter, unlike other channels.

        That said, I agree that sharing scripts, reading out alternate sentences, which has become the modern way across the broadcast industry is crass.

  12. ChrisK
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:19 am | Permalink

    The BBC and others will debate it over and over ad infinitum because they are obsessed with it. The aim is to wear people down, week after month, until they beg the government to remain and shut the broadcasters up once and for all. Broadcasters just won’t let go, and won’t accept that the vote was to leave.

    • Mark B
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:29 am | Permalink

      Or alternatively, people can stop watching and buying their product.

      • ian wragg
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 6:18 pm | Permalink

        And as over 3 million are doing, stop financing the left wing Brussels Broadcasting Company.

    • jerry
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:45 am | Permalink

      ChrisK; “The BBC and others will debate it over and over ad infinitum because they are obsessed with it. The aim is to wear people down, week after month, until they beg the government…”

      …Oh you mean like the eurosceptics did prior to the European Union Referendum Act 2015 becoming law?

      Hypocrite, your comment is nothing more than shouting ‘do as we say, not as we did’.

      • NickC
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:41 pm | Permalink

        Jerry, So you’re equating a purportedly impartial broadcaster with politicians/public entitled to have a particular viewpoint? Interesting. And rather a giveaway. The BBC regarded eurosceptics as fruitcakes or racists, up to only a few years ago. Even Humphrys admitted BBC bias. Eurosceptics managed to get a referendum despite the BBC not because of it. The BBC is merely reverting to its original anti-eurosceptic form.

        • jerry
          Posted March 5, 2018 at 8:44 am | Permalink

          @NickC; No one is saying that the BBC is without fault, but you and others keep ranting on about the BBC as if it’s still 1954…! Try actually watching or listening to the broadcast MSM of today, there was only two TV channels in the UK that gave Brexiteers a easy ride prior to 2016, RT and FoxNews.

  13. stred
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:23 am | Permalink

    They live in a babble bubble, only reading free copies of the Guardian and obtaining their jobs through the Guardian ad page, exclusively used by the media. They are also ignorant of technical matters and possess an arts or history degree, even when given the job of technical correspondent. It is hopeless trying to educate them, as they are confident in their cocoon and funded by the liberal establishment of big business and tax.

    • SecretPeople
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:27 am | Permalink

      Yes, the people who pay the licence fee help keep the Guardian afloat.

  14. JimS
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:30 am | Permalink

    The interview technique has now become known as, “So what you are saying..”, following Channel 4’s Cathy Newman v Prof. Jordan Peterson ‘battle’.

    Join the 8 million plus that have now watched it on YouTube and realise that politicians no longer have to dance to the tune of the media.

    • IwasGnarth
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:21 am | Permalink

      Thank you. Looked up the reference and had the best ten minutes worth of You Tube I can recall. ‘She took a walnut to a brain fight’ gets my vote for most concise comment.

    • David Price
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

      That was a very illuminating interview. The analysis from Scott Adams was particularly interesting but I thought a bit generous in that he seemed to assume Ms Newman wasn’t trying to push an agenda.

      I didn’t watch the programme until after I had seen some of the commentary otherwise I wouldn’t have watched it to the end without getting exasperated at her attitude, or even at all as I had no interest in the subject matter.

      I’ve since taken more interest in Peterson’s work and related material that examines how the media tries to manipulate people, there is a Youtube article on the non-verbal communication in that interview/debate which offers an interesting perspective on whose agenda was actually being pushed.

  15. Fedupsoutherner
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:30 am | Permalink

    Obviously the media don’t do any in depth research of their own and if they do, then it would seem they don’t have the capability of taking it in. They would be doing the viewer a big favour if they just shut up and let people listen to the person being interviewed and that way we might all learn something. The BBC and other channels are so obviously pro Europe that they cannot have the public hearing sensible solutions to any situation that might arise. They want us all to think everything is impossible. Haven’t they realised that most of us are switching off now because we’re fed up with going over old ground that we understand even though they don’t want us to. Brexit is becoming a bore so let’s just get on with it.

    • SecretPeople
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:32 am | Permalink

      I once underwent training in how to handle TV interviews and the course was run by a former BBC reporter. One of the main points drummed into us was to use catchy sound bites (the other was to use broken record to get your point across), so that’s what they want.

      On another occasion I was recorded for the Today programme and was told what to say!

    • Andy
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:41 am | Permalink

      I’ve dealt with various media organisations over the years, but in the ‘arts’ area not politics. Researchers from the BBC are usually bright young things, but very thick and very lazy. The last one I dealt with was perfectly amiable, and it started off with ‘Do you know about x’, then it was ‘do you know where I can find this, who owns the copyright to that etc’, and eventually I did the work for them. It took more than half a day to answer all the questions for which I didn’t get paid and I don’t think I even got a thanks for it !! That is entirely typical. I’m sure the political researchers are just the same.

      • Anonymous
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 5:43 pm | Permalink

        I gave out a medal on Jim’ll Fix It.

        I didn’t get thanked for that either.

        The shame. The shame.

  16. Kenneth
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:31 am | Permalink

    It is quite right that politicians are not given direct access to powerful transmitters to promote their views.

    That means that those who do control this output – the broadcasters – have a duty to treat this power responsibly and not to use it to promote a narrow political viewpoint.

    The BBC has failed to do this and is guilty (along with some others) of abusing this power.

    There is plenty of evidence and so why is OFCom not acting?

    Why are the executives at the BBC responsible for this bias still in their jobs?

    • John
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:16 am | Permalink

      Another case of toothless watchdogs !!

    • Man of Kent
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:23 am | Permalink

      The BBC could learn from Bloomberg and their interviews with prominent personalities .

      I was fascinated to watch Warren Buffett being interviewed on Bloomberg by someone who just asked intelligent questions . It was a very satisfying learning experience.

      It would also be a good example to young managers and business people in how to find out the true position of your prospect, competitor , client .

      I find CNN even worse than the BBC in that they usually have a bank of 6 or 7 pundits with groupthink so if someone forgets a point then another can follow up .
      Very depressing !

  17. G Wilson
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:36 am | Permalink

    Such questioning would be unlikely to work, since nobody who purports to think there will be physical customs officers on the border seems to really believe it.

    The idea is just a veil for the implied threat of terroristic violence, to prevent us from leaving the EU.

  18. agricola
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:37 am | Permalink

    You find the interrupted answer irritating. From a viewers point of view it results in wishing to throw something at the set. There is one strident female interviewer whose volume and malevolence seems to align with her menstrual cycle.

    Repetitious re-cycling of questions on the NI/Irish border only reflect the ignorance of the interviewer and insult the intelligence of the viewer. Are media studies so limited in scope, or is it that these interviewers have never been near the real world and have no knowledge of how international commerce is conducted. Perhaps the interviewees response should be to forcefully emphasise the ignorance of the interviewer. Mockery would make far less frustrating viewing. Even my secretary, the archetypal devils advocate, admits to a desire to hurl something at the screen.

  19. oldtimer
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:38 am | Permalink

    I suspect nothing much has changed over the years. Back in the mid 1970s I decided that we needed media training. Much of it was provided by well known BBC TV presenters of the day. We were warned about slanted questions designed to catch us out. Their solution was twofold. Prepare two pieces of paper. On the first, the size of a postage stamp, write down your message – preferably in words of one syllable that everyone could understand and make that point regardless of the question asked. (I note in passing that this tactic is still in use daily). On the second piece of paper, the size of an open broadsheet paper, write down all the issues and your stance on them that the researchers were likely to have researched so your response on the issues could be instant.

    You are not invited to comment very much because they know you know your subject backwards and have zero chance of catching you out. The unprepared are those who give car crash interviews to the likes of Andrew Neill.

    • Nig l
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:21 am | Permalink

      Yes. People who rant about broadcasters should do some media training to understand where they are coming from, rightly or wrongly. The politicians could be seen to have bought in upon themselves. Over the years I have been fed up with too much filibustering/the constant reciting of set positions etc so to get a decent answer in a few minutes slot often needs a waffle stopping intervention but I agree that seems to have gone too far to become overbearing.

      I see we have got our current account into credit (despite Brexit!!!) I bet that hasn’t featured much in their interviews. Strange that?

  20. duncan
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:39 am | Permalink

    They ask questions not because they want the answer, for they already know the answer, but to create the narrative that Eurosceptic politicians are confused, extreme, dangerous and out of their depth.

    The London based media (the vile BBC, print media, political lobby groups, charities) are to a man, pro-EU. They’re all connected by a COMMON PURPOSE. To prevent Brexit from happening. That is their fundamental aim. The tool to be used is slander

    The beating heart of this liberal left infection is of course the BBC. An organisation that’s so biased it now barely conceals it. Indeed it revels in its pro-EU stance

    All of these observations are nothing new to all who casually follow politics like I do.

    The question is how do the Tories counteract this bent, bias and partiality?

    If a majority voted to leave the EU in the face of almost total pro-EU propaganda pumped out by the BBC and its alliances then can you imagine what the majority would have been if the BBC had been vehemently Eurosceptic in its coverage? I suspect the margin for Leave would have been 70-30 or even greater

    Leave won. Now the Tories must realise this and understand that with the right leader (someone with defiance, balls, determination, vision, a radical heart and one who doesn’t apologise every five minute) our party can demolish the grotesque and the extreme that is Labour

    We must fight fire with fire. It is not good enough that we should be fearful of a liberal left bias media based in London. These people do not represent the country. The Tories need to understand that. London is NOT the United Kingdom

    The BBC must be utterly and absolutely deconstructed from top to bottom. Reform is too meek a word to describe what we should with this monopoly.

    • Norman
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:09 am | Permalink

      We have to defer to the power of the ballot box. In the 2015 election, and in the referendum (not to mention the 2017 election) the pundits were confounded by the electorate. We have to remember that freedom depends on people being free to get it wrong, as well as right.
      Few realize the depth of the ideological battle being enacted here. Whilst we must all individually stand up for truth (as JR manifestly does), we cannot legislate against those who are bent on indoctrination – not in a democracy, anyway. Having said this, I agree the situation in our country at this time is very dire, and freedom itself is at stake, because institutionally, we have forsaken our spiritual moorings. The media is not alone in this, although it is certainly a cheerleader. This same pattern has happened before in history, with devastating consequences. We who love the unseen graces that have blessed our land, yet pray for a merciful outcome.

    • Man of Kent
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:28 am | Permalink

      Hear, hear – spot on !

    • Hope
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:49 am | Permalink

      If the Tory party and govt wanted that it could have done this over the last seven years. The BBC has changed the Tory party no the other way around. May is left of the BBC and prepared to give away your fundamental rights of freedom and liberty to backwater eastern European counties without any redress from our legal system or govt. She chose to do this, not forced or mandated, but chose.

      May makes false claims to reduce immigration to tens of thousands. This is a lie. Osborne made clear no one was serious in govt about this. May has reiterated her false claim while being responsible for the highest numbers on record including those from outside the EU. Only last week, she wants more immigration from France and is willing to give vast sums of our taxes to France to achieve theHer aim, Rudd advocating more from Syria. No money for infrastructure, housing, Energy, water, waste, schools, NHS, Military, roads, clearing of raids. But has plenty of money to get more immigration! The vast amount of overseas aid was claimed to stop immigration! Lies.

  21. ChrisS
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:44 am | Permalink

    In common with most people I have discussed this with, in every story I have ever read in a newspaper of which I have professional or personal knowledge, the writer has been wrong on quite fundamental points. I see evidence of this in most TV interviews, although in the case of politicians, they are just as likely to be spinning a line and misleading the audience by omission as the interviewer !

    I watched your appearance on Newsnight after Mrs May’s speech and your comments were a perfect example of clarity and logic. Emily Maitlis seemed determined to undermine what you were saying and it was obvious that she was attempting to get you to criticise Mrs May’s speech.

    Of course, in interviewing such a seasoned campaigner, she singularly failed and appeared frustrated as a result. In fact, it looked as if she gave up early because she had failed to make headlines.

  22. Atlantic Span
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:02 am | Permalink

    Mr Redwood might I suggest you make a series of short videos on your views of each aspect of Brexit. and post them on YouTube for the whole world to see. You could then simply refer lazy interviewers to them.

    • ChrisS
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 1:25 pm | Permalink

      An excellent idea.

      One can imagine that the late, great historian AJP Taylor, famous for his informative TV monologues, would have made frequent contributions on You Tube.

    • David Price
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:05 pm | Permalink

      I would go further, I recommend that anyone who is prominent in the eurosceptic camp should have any media interview independently recorded … to keep the lazy interviewers honest, especially the BBC and Channel 4.

      Has the BBC explained why they haven’t released the Q&A from your Speakers House presentation?

  23. Peter A
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:03 am | Permalink

    I remember my grandmother waxing wroth about all the terrible stories the newspapers habitually put out everyday. It seemed to her like the world was coming to an end more or less every day, if you read all those terrible things: scandals, outrages, wars, etc. So what has changed – the BBC has got in on the act and is now no better than the gutter press.

  24. Brian Tomkinson
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:14 am | Permalink

    I have written several times about the daily flaunting of the broadcasting code of impartiality, with impunity, by the main broadcasters. The News programmes have their own agendas and clearly see their role, not as neutral purveyors of information, but propagandists. They talk over, misrepresent and interrupt those with whom they disagree whilst giving uninterrupted free rein to those who support their views. In addition, they interview their own “editors” for their interpretation whilst trying to present the illusion to the viewer/listener that they are thereby giving an unbiased account. They often betray their feelings with their facial expressions and voice intonation.

  25. Iain Moore
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:38 am | Permalink

    I have had to change the definition of split second, from the time it takes a taxi driver abroad hit the horn after the traffic lights turn from red, to the time it takes one of the MSM interviewers interrupt someone of the political right or a Brexiteer as they try to answer a question put to them. The constant interruptions are bad when taken on their own, but when compared to red carpet they roll out to their fellow political travelers, it is really appalling bias, here I wouldn’t be surprised to hear them put a question from the 1950s to them, like ‘what would you like to tell us today?’ and then give them 5 minutes of uninterrupted air time.

    One further point , I have noticed the bias has got really bad of late, any lip service they gave to impartiality has gone, there is no pretense to have any balance . It is now normal for the BBC to have a 4 Remainers to a Brexiteer on their Question Time/ Any Questions panels, and if that isn’t bad enough, the Dimbleby’s play to the Remainer audience, just to make the Breixteer’s life that bit more difficult. In this I can only presume the BBC, having got over the Charter review, with the licence fee locked in until 2027 , now thinks its beyond accountability ,and they can do what ever they like.

    The only interviewer worth watching is Andrew Neil.

  26. formula57
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:43 am | Permalink

    So why does the Cabinet not go on a media offensive to get its message across about what it is doing on Brexit?

    Now (post-Trump) belittling and manipulating the media to show it up for the incompetent, tendentious, gullible clown operation that is it has never been easier surely?

  27. BOF
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 9:52 am | Permalink

    Heading that media list is the supposedly neutral BBC. My wife, with acute antennae and good hearing picks it up before I do! As soon as anyone says anything contra to the prevailing left wing dogma, the interviewer will do their best to shut them down by talking over them or move on.
    We need to move on from the BBC poll tax.

    The Irish border is being disgracefully used as a weapon, deliberately to stir up trouble but unfortunately Mrs May and team have done nothing to counter these trouble makers. Why has it not been set out clearly that there will be a system similar to Norway/Sweden or Switzerland or USA/Canada. They need to get used to the idea and prepare for it. There is a border now and there will be a border after we leave the EU.

    I do not share the jubilation of many following THE SPEECH, parts of which were encouraging and other parts sounded like more capitulation.

    OT Should Mrs May do a shady deal on fishing, she may be amazed at the negative reaction. Although a tiny part of the economy, it carries much symbolism and public sympathy.

    • rose
      Posted March 5, 2018 at 12:48 am | Permalink

      As Nigel Farage says, getting our fish back will be the final test of whether we have won back our independence.

  28. Original Richard
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:07 am | Permalink

    It’s not just yourself who is interviewed by the BBC/C4/Sky etc before they decide to allow you airtime, it is quite clear that all callers on “‘phone-ins” are vetted in advance on their views because “as I already told your researcher” is often heard said by these callers.

    BTW the final outcome of Brexit will define whether we have a democracy or whether the MSM, the corporates, the bankers, the wealthy and our unrepresentative Parliamentary elites have taken complete control.

  29. formula57
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:10 am | Permalink

    On the border in Ireland, why does the government not echo US Treasury Secretary John Connally’s memorable 1971 remark “the dollar is our currency, but your problem”?

  30. Oliver
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:16 am | Permalink

    It is amazing how the lies get endlessly repeated, without being credibly challenged.

    We are continually told “People didn’t vote to be poorer”, when the clear balance of the vote definitely says that, on average, the judgment of the Britih people was that the benefits of being in the EU were less than the costs, which aren’t purely monetary.

    We are continually told “Educated people voted “Remain” 2:1″ but we’re never told these people tend to be richer, and probably selfishly voted for the status quo they benefit from.

    Major tells us only 37% of the electorate voted to leave. But his credibility rests on 32% voting for him in 1992, a vote share that fell to 21% in 1997, after he signed us up to Maastricht. Similarly, Blair only won 32% in 1997. These people are shabby liars, and need calling out.

  31. Anonymous
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:20 am | Permalink

    The bias is obvious, Dr Redwood. It’s not just on Brexit and even apolitical people I know are now asking just what the hell is going on.

  32. robert lewy
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:22 am | Permalink

    As a a response for BBC interviewees accused of “cherry picking” may I suggest
    the line that ” surely this requires both freedom of movement and unrestricted immigration”

  33. Iain Gill
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:22 am | Permalink


    If you have not seen it, watch the

    “jordan peterson channel 4 cathy newman”

    video on youtube. Although not about Brexit, it does illustrate perfectly how our broadcasters are determined to slant things, attempt to put things in peoples mouths, and so on.


    • Prigger
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 3:29 pm | Permalink

      I found her questions excellent and her whole approach. But she did let him off the hook several times Eg. She rhetorically put it to him that he had generalised
      Question: “Weren’t you generalising?! His answer
      ” I am a Clinical Psychologist” He paused, he had nothing further to add.
      She should have asked again and again and again and again “Weren’t you generalising?” His answer was of the nature of the logical fallacy Appeal to Authority (argumentum ad verecundiam ) as if his being of a certain authoritative job entitled him to possibly make a generalisation irrespective of particular application or that Clinical Psychologists by their job were just generalisers.
      She was most polite to him. Too polite seeing the undeserved flak she has had to endure
      Incidentally I agree with the thrust of what he was saying but he was a bad communicator, wordy and evasive.

      • Prigger
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

        Correction “You’re making these vast generalisations!?” Same result
        4 minutes 15 secs into the interview onwards
        jordan peterson channel 4 cathy newman

  34. Prigger
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:39 am | Permalink

    In view of what Mr Sajid Javid has threatened and what Mrs May has said it would seem only by voting Labour , who will be their usual incompetent self at house-building, will we as a people be able to stop the seizure of green spaces and essentially building houses for fresh immigrants.
    Odd that The Tory party has now made voting Labour the right thing to do!
    Tackle immigration First, Second and Third!

  35. Billy Marlene
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:40 am | Permalink

    I had to laugh at the non-biased BBC Any Questions audience on Friday evening.
    Soubry utters her usual repetitions and irrelevant bile – to thunderous applause. Fraser Nelson quotes Lord Trimble on the facts of the Belfast Agreement and is heckled.

    • rose
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 2:57 pm | Permalink

      And Mrs Soubry was allowed to meander on and on but Fraser Nelson was cut short.

  36. Bert Young
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 10:41 am | Permalink

    I am not surprised at the blog from John today . Apart from certain newspapers , the TV news programmes echo precisely what John outlines . The bias from the BBC is one thing but this , more recently , seems to be the same on Sky ( the programme I turn to in preference ). It is no use making complaints to these sources because they reply that it is their intention to retain a neutral position . I’ve approached the |BBC twice before and each time they have replied denying such a bias .

    My daily reading includes the Telegraph , the Daily Express and the Daily Mail – all are Brexit oriented ; I do not wish to read the Guardian or any publication that persists in emphasising a Remain bias . I have always made my own mind up on current affairs and I have always favoured right wing politics ; listening to other points of views I do not turn my back on . Throughout my life I have always believed that one should strive to achieve and not be dependent on others . In the educational and business periods of my life I know what it is to attend to all sorts of views and opinions that don’t accord with my own , but , what I have learned is that one has to stick to ones own principles and be prepared to argue them through .

    John is a bastion of the right and an example to all in intellectual content . I have no patience with the Corbyns and McDonnells .

    • rose
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 3:01 pm | Permalink

      I think it is worth complaining. I remember on one occasion they had so many complaints that it got out and they had to reply. On another – when they were describing the then Sir Andrew Green as an extremist – they had so many complaints that they actually stopped doing it and haven’t done it since.

  37. agricola
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:01 am | Permalink

    Watched Marr, by no means the worst offender, with the PM today. They talked of trade after Brexit and the retention of EU standards in the UK. I would point out to all that most manufacturing standards are international, laid down by the International Standards Organisation (ISO). In doing so Marr seemed to miss the point when speaking of Mr Dyson and his cleaners. No doubt cleaners for sale in the EU by Dyson will be made to ISO standards , but to EU customer specifications. The missed point was that after Brexit Mr Dyson will be able to make cleaners for the UK market that satisfy ISO standards but are to UK customer specifications. The EU will no longer govern what the UK customer can buy. An end to the apocryphal straight cucumbers, Toc H lamp bulbs and asthmatic vacuum cleaners.

    • stred
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 1:07 pm | Permalink

      May said that we will write our own regulations but these will be the same as the EU’s for manufactured products, unless we ‘diverge’, in which case we will have to agree with the EU using arbitration. ie the ECU. So Dyson and Numatic will have to make half powered hoovers, unless Verhofstadt’s friends agree otherwise. And of course, they won’t let us ‘cherry pick’ between cars and hoovers.

      She also said nothing about the £3obn or is it really £100bn and said that no deal would be a problem, rather than threaten WTO and tariffs on cheese and flowers, fruit and wine. They must be laughing up their sleeves.

    • Helena
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

      Not sure you know what “apocryphal” means

      • agricola
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:00 pm | Permalink

        Invented, mythical, but at times talked of as if real.

  38. Bryan Harris
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:13 am | Permalink

    The BBC in particular is unfit for purpose – when are we going to see its demise?

  39. Mark
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:15 am | Permalink

    Suggestion: get e.g. Mark Wallace to interview you and post the podcasts, as he is doing with Rees Mogg. You can simply refer to the podcast when interviewed by the mainstream broadcasters.

    My experience of living and working in Northern Ireland was that even with 20,000 troops to help patrol the border, it was ignored by the Irish on both sides for most practical purposes (collecting EU subsidies was an exception – at least one way on the circular tour). I cannot see the EU making any difference to that attitude, whatever they try to proclaim – and I doubt they have the troops to spare.

  40. Alan
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:50 am | Permalink

    There is clearly little problem with electronic customs controls when dealing with lawful trading. The problem comes with illegal imports and exports, and we need to decide what risks we are willing to take. If someone in the Republic of Ireland has obtained some food that does not meet our standards, but completes a fraudulent customs declaration in order to sell it in the UK, how is this to be detected?

    Usually this is done by a physical examination of a proportion of vehicles, in the best cases acting on intelligence information. Now whether that is seen by people in Ireland as a hard border or not I don’t know, but it is definitely different to the border we have at the moment and I don’t feel confident that it would be seen as acceptable.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 1:48 pm | Permalink

      How would it be detected now? There are no checks at the border, so how are UK consumers protected from harmful food being imported from the Republic over the border into Northern Ireland, and similarly how are the Irish protected from illicit imports being brought into the Republic over the border? After the UK has left the EU what would make it absolutely essential for the Irish and the EU to reinstate the border checks which could end when the EU Single Market was created, and what alternative legal or practical measures could be taken so that it remained unnecessary to do that? And if border checks were reinstated what exactly would the Irish authorities be checking for? Would it not be easier if the Irish just went down the East German route and constructed an impenetrable barrier like the s0-called “Anti-Fascist Protection Rampart”, surely that should work to stop the wicked British deliberately sending their defective goods across the frontier into the EU paradise.

    • mancunius
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 3:55 pm | Permalink

      That would surely be no different to now: savvy cross-border customs co-operation between RoI and NI, e-checks, and if a suspicion exists – make a spot inspection at the consignment’s destination.
      Having a little cosy sentry box for jobsworths to flag down any passing motorist is a job-creation scheme, not a modern customs control method.
      Yet the border does exist – and the GFA has not wished it away, simply de-politicised it. That process need not be halted.
      Those fearmongering Remain-hired actors who travel around NI in 1950s customs uniforms with STOP signs, flapping their hands and trying to look like B-Specials –
      they must be laughing all the way to the bank. The media love those photos – not that they ever bother to inform the reader that they’re only Remainers making propaganda.

  41. Chris
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:59 am | Permalink

    O/T but may be you will permit it Mr Redwood>

    This quote from Conservative Home website about Sajid Javid’s plans for housing are alarming:
    “Javid said he would approve at least two new towns between Oxford and Cambridge, with up to three more to follow. …”

    We all know there is huge demand for housing, but unless this government can put in place proper immigration controls which mean that we have sustainable immigration which serves our economy then the concreting over of our Green Belt will continue. If the government apparently refuses to recognise the cause of our burgeoning population (mass immigration plus very significant illegal immigration) then it can never hope to solve the housing problem. All that will be done is a sticking plaster policy, which causes huge erosion of our Green Belt.

    • Yorkshireman
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

      I have fond memories of travelling between Oxford and Cambridge. Drama films and books like Three Men in a Boat evoke an England I do not wish to see ruined. Mr Jarvid does not appear to have that almost mystic dream of yesteryear. I blame it on the fact he was born in Lancashire. We Yorkshire folk have since the Wars of the Roses known there is something not quite British or even slightly sane in people from those parts.

  42. Edward2
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 12:19 pm | Permalink

    I see Blair’s attempt at a Brexit opinion poll has backfired despite a biased leading question.
    70% said leave out of 160,000 responses.

    And less than 20% want an early election in another remainers poll with the 18 to 34 age group being more against than other age groups.

    Seems the public want the Government to just get on with it.

  43. Prigger
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

    I have some sympathy with journalists being adversarial.
    It is entertaining for some who oppose the inteviewee and conclude it was a balanced interview. It raises emotions of those who agree with interviewee and convinces them they are fighting the good fight against THE Establishment. The lack of balance of the media is that it sets off from the standpoint that governing ourselves as a nation and people is a debatable point.

  44. Drice
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

    The first comment above – by Mark B – proposes the only way forward. The BBC must be made to stick to it’s Charter, or lose it’s current funding method and switch to subscription payment. The Law that forces everyone to pay the TV licence fee should be changed, in the light of the BBC abusing it’s Charter. The Government has a duty to see to this. It is reported today that the Planning Laws are to be changed, to address the housing shortage problem. This kind of power from above is the only way to change the BBC. JR and like-minded fellow MP’s, as Mark B points out, have it in their power in Parliament to address this problem.

  45. Denis Cooper
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 1:27 pm | Permalink

    In her Mansion House speech:

    Theresa May said:

    “But these options would mean a significant reduction in our access to each other’s markets compared to that which we currently enjoy.”


    “We are leaving the single market. Life is going to be different. In certain ways, our access to each other’s markets will be less than it is now.”


    “If we want good access to each other’s markets, it has to be on fair terms.”


    “We both want good access to each other’s markets”,

    repeatedly referring to “access to each other’s markets”; but from watching four political programmes this morning it is clear that many politicians and journalists have a blind spot over the reciprocal nature of any restrictions on trade which may develop, and for them it will all be a matter of the UK alone losing market access.

    I’ve been hearing that same kind of nonsense for nigh on half a century now; I recall when I was at grammar school there were often various voices on the wireless urging that we should join the Common Market so that our British businesses would have easier and better access to continental markets with little or no mention of continental businesses having correspondingly easier and better access to our market.

    I wonder if this deeply ingrained deceit will ever change until one or two generations of politicians and journalists and also civil servants have come and gone.

  46. Alan Joyce
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 2:22 pm | Permalink

    Dear Mr. Redwood,

    My post is slightly off topic but very topical obviously.

    It will be very interesting to listen to the EU’s official reaction to the Prime Minister’s Mansion House speech last Friday. So far we have only heard the usual asinine mutterings from Verhofstadt et al.

    Mrs. May has gone as far as she possibly can in setting out her vision for Brexit consistent with keeping both Brexiters and Remainers in check.

    If the EU continues to treat the UK in a ‘vicious and dismissive’ manner then what is left for her to persuade the EU to progress rapidly to a transitional deal and a trade deal? The crown jewels perhaps or some other UK territory to add to Northern Ireland?

    Any hints of another keynote speech or more concessions further down the road will only serve to blow apart the uneasy truce she has secured within the conservative party and encourage an intransigent EU to continue their campaign of making leaving the EU as difficult as possible so as to deter others from doing so.

    Time is very short but there is sufficient for the EU to abandon their attempts at vicious and dismissive (I would add deliberately humiliating and provocative) treatment, dispense with their silly games and engage seriously in Brexit talks. If they will not do so then there has to come a time when a self-respecting PM, of a proud nation such as the UK, calls a halt to the process and prepares the country for a no-deal Brexit despite insisting that she will not threaten a walk-out.

  47. Adam
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 2:44 pm | Permalink

    Misc suggestions from an observer, which might assist:

    An interview starts with the questions. Do not accept the added pre-interview stage.

    Control the pace with slower speech. Many interviewees rush to conform to the interviewer’s hasty pace, & their answer quality wanes. Your & JRM ‘s measured delivery are often fine examples to others, & among the best on broadcast media.

    On being interrupted, stop speaking instantly, & continue when the interrupter stops speaking. If the original question was worth asking first, it is worth answering. Accept the 2nd question only after answering the 1st.

    • jerry
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 6:34 pm | Permalink

      @Adam; “An interview starts with the questions. Do not accept the added pre-interview stage.”

      The producer controls the interview, they are legally responsible for what is broadcast, you pale by their rules or you do not play, if your intention is to be ignored by the broadcasters your idea is great!

      “Control the pace with slower speech”

      The director (and their links-system contractors, if a live broadcast) control the time slot, if you want to get half way through your message and then be cut off, making you look a fool, your idea is great!

      “On being interrupted, stop speaking instantly, & continue when the interrupter stops speaking.”

      Again, if you want to the interview to be cut short by the director then you idea is great!

      Want to be in total control of the interview and message, make your own web-cast, either stream it live or upload to social media – that is what Corbyn supports did, they won the leadership (twice), they pulled off an GE result that almost put Corbyn in Downing Street…

      • Adam
        Posted March 6, 2018 at 11:09 am | Permalink

        Thanks, jerry, for showing broadcasters’ tendencies. The loss of message you describe may apply more to short interviews. If respondents provide relevant succinct answers to questions instead of merely replies, value increases. Sometimes brevity is beyond even the most skilled respondent’s ability, yet it is better to omit a message than allow a mess.

        Guests from opposing parties on ‘Daily Politics’ typify those at whom the suggestions were aimed. Often, they react as if in message-missile combat, hastily hitting back every risky word. A smoother respondent would not magnify the perceived risk.

        • jerry
          Posted March 6, 2018 at 6:10 pm | Permalink

          @Adam; What ever, I gave you the cold facts.

          Do as you suggest and whilst you might get the upper hand once you will never do so again, you will likely never get the chance! Producers, directors and anchors (presenters) control the programme, not the guests. The Daily Politics is not as it is (awful…) by accident, guests and issues are selected to make ‘good TV’, it is the political equivalent to ‘Reality TV’.

          If the UK still had political programming such as Weekend World, the old style Panorama, or even The Record (and its sister programme about EU affairs), you might have a point, in such long-form interview programmes a politico could just as easily make the interviewer look ill-informed, impatient, even crass & rude etc. just as much as the interviewee could be – both had to be on top of their brief.

          Modern “Sound-bite” interviews do not lend themselves to such tactics, even less on radio, your silence, slow speech or what ever will get taken as hesitation or even evasion and will become the sound-bite….

          • Adam
            Posted March 7, 2018 at 9:51 am | Permalink

            The suggestion, jerry, was for slower speech, avoiding gabbling; & more about interviewee clarity than intimidation. Broadcasters control what they release & audiences assess their parts. The better quality communicators seem consistent throughout.

          • jerry
            Posted March 7, 2018 at 4:56 pm | Permalink

            What ever… Adam, I told you why that will not work in a previous reply, do you really want to waste our hosts time having a circular argument?

  48. Denis Cooper
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

    There was an academic on TV suggesting that the UK – Ireland Common Travel Area could be complemented by a Common Trade Area. But I doubt that the EU would wear that; it was one thing to accept an existing bilateral agreement on free movement of persons when both countries acceded to the EEC, but it would be another thing to allow a continuing member state to enter into a new bilateral trade agreement with a departing member state.

  49. Denis Cooper
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 4:43 pm | Permalink

    I saw a Remoaning Tory MP who wants us to join EFTA but simultaneously wants us in the/a customs union with the EU countries, which the EFTA countries are not:

    first implying that financial services make up 80% of our economy but then correcting that to services in general; he could have gone further by saying that most financial services have nothing whatsoever to do with the EU beyond having to obey all EU laws even though they never export anything to the EU.

    And then he could have gone even further by pointing out that only a fraction of those services making up 80% of our economy are “tradable services” which are or could be traded internationally.

  50. Denis Cooper
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 5:54 pm | Permalink

    “WATCH: Morgan – “Mutual recognition of regulations is the way to go””

    Michel Barnier:

    “In the absence of a common discipline, in the absence of EU law that can override national law, in the absence of common supervision and a common court, there can be no mutual recognition of standards.”

  51. acorn
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 6:01 pm | Permalink

    I have never met a Westminster politician, who was not desperate to get on television. When the BBC, or any other channel calls, you, and every other MP, will trample over any and every body to get in front of that TV camera.

  52. Andy
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

    You misunderstand the situation Mr Redwood.

    For 30+ years you were an insurgent. As a backbench MP you were only ever on the TV and radio because you provided a reliably Eurosceptic voice. This at a time when you did not represent the direction of the country or any government.

    In June 2016 your side ‘won’. You now have to answer the hard questions demanded of those leading the country.

    There are a million and one things you need to figure out. Brexiteers can answer the many legitimate questions people have about their lives and livelihoods or you can all whine.

    Brexiteers mostly pick the latter because they are unable to engage with the former.

    This will not get any easier for you. You’ve not even started figuring out the really hard choices that you’re all going to have to make. That’s when Brexit will really become fun.

  53. Prigger
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:33 pm | Permalink

    The fact that supermarket shelves were barren two days into a normal March weather spell: this should stop all Parliamentary debate on Brexit, Re-Referendum, Green daftnesses. There should be concentration on why successive governments have overpopulated this country…why their intention is to continue overpopulating it. Give Sourby, Grieve, Miliband, and other non-serious people playing at politics the day off and figure out how government is going to feed people.

  54. Iain Gill
    Posted March 4, 2018 at 8:50 pm | Permalink

    Moving on from the country running low on supplies of gas…
    I understand that the water in Rugby Warwickshire is very low pressure, run out completely in some places… and will shortly have run out completely everywhere, with no realistic prospect of it coming back any time soon
    Not because of winter or ice damage to the supply system, but the water company is saying the reservoir is too low… WHAT ON EARTH IS HAPPENING IN THIS COUNTRY? In winter? When its hardly been drought season… when there have been no warnings supply was getting low?
    If this turns out to be true I really hope heads roll, this is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard
    What exactly is this country coming to?
    Which minister is responsible for this shambles?

    • Iain Gill
      Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:00 pm | Permalink

      They are going to try to use road tankers to try and refill the reservoir, sounds desperate.

      Come on government get a grip!

      • Iain Gill
        Posted March 4, 2018 at 11:08 pm | Permalink

        And the schools will all be shut, as apparently they cannot open without water. after being shut due to snow.

        The country has lost the plot completely.

        • Iain Gill
          Posted March 5, 2018 at 9:08 am | Permalink

          well apparently the water is on, and the schools are open, and the messages from the water company have changed in tone (no doubt the PR people back at work). does however sound like they are running very close to the edge. it must be desperate to use water tankers to refill a reservoir.

  55. Androcles
    Posted March 5, 2018 at 3:40 pm | Permalink

    David Cameron had until October 2017 to hold the referendum yet I cannot recall an interviewer asking one of those remain MPs, who constantly complain about the poor quality of the referendum debate, how issues were not covered and no one made clear what Brexit meant, why they didn’t press for a long campaign similar to the Scottish independence referendum. The truth is, of course, that remain had a 15-20% lead in the polls and no pundit, bookmaker or pollster was giving leave any chance and the MPs were assuming that the electorate would do as they were told. Even when the first ministers of Scotland, Wales and N Ireland asked for the date to be put back so as not to clash with elections to the devolve parliaments there was no call from the Soubry’s and Grieve’s for the voters to be given more time to consider the issues. But now this group want to water down or reverse Brexit because the great unwashed did not understand the issues.

  56. Stop Fake News
    Posted March 6, 2018 at 8:32 pm | Permalink

    We are honestly getting to the point where we are going to have to ban TV, we either ban TV or be ban politicians.

  • About John Redwood

    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page