New low with BBC’s coverage of the economy

This morning I awoke to the BBC telling us there are just two choices for the government – relax the rules on borrowing (i.e. borrow more) or put up taxes.
What is with these so called independent journalists?
Why is cutting public sector waste and undesirable spending never an option for them?
How much more waste and needless spending do we have to have before it might just be?


  1. Stuart Fairney
    July 18, 2008

    It's as if actually cutting back on any government activity is beyond the pale and simply cannot be considered. Amazing really.

    Please, please, please, privatise them.

  2. Brian Tomkinson
    July 18, 2008

    Expecting the BBC to advocate cutting public sector waste would be like asking turkeys to vote for Christmas.

  3. AlanofEngland
    July 18, 2008

    It's because the BBC itself is utterly wasteful and it's executive staff just take advantage of we taxpayers. I wrote to the Director-General to query how the BBC could pay 107 BBC staff more than £100,000 in 2001 and that number had risen to 322 by September 2006. I also queried how he, on a salary of £816,000, was paying the same licence tax as me, on a basic state pension of 4716 and why wasn't it therefore on a means to pay sliding scale. I also asked why some of his top staff were receiving 24/27% increases. I received no explanation other than when I am 75 I will not have to pay the BBC tax. I think he is too stupid to understand the point I was making. Now I see Jana Bennett, the Director of Vision, who was heavily criticised for her role in the 'Crowngate affair' where a trailer for a documentary about the Queen was wrongly edited, saw her salary rise from £433,000 to £536,000 last year, a 24 per cent hike. Jenny Abramsky, the outgoing head of Audio and Music who is leaving the BBC with a £4 million pension pot thought to be a record for the public sector, was paid £419,000, a 27 per cent increase from £329,000. These figures are obscene and the BBC should be privatised in my opinion with current licence payers being given free shares. A good dose of competition and the scrutiny of shareholders would do wonders for the BBC.

  4. Neil Craig
    July 18, 2008

    I heard that too. There is no excuse whatsoever for the BBC "news" saying that. It is a plain lie. The BBC might have displayed their common bias by saying that the 3rd option of not spending so much would be unpopular, at least with the political classes that spend it, but to say that option does not exist is unforgiveable.

  5. Vulpus_rex
    July 18, 2008

    I too felt my jaw drop at such staggering dishonesty when Nick Robinson made exactly the same claim about there being only two choices, borrow more or increase taxation, on the BBC News at Ten last night.

    Nick Robinson clearly isn't a fool, so I really wonder at his motives for reporting in this way.

  6. Richard
    July 18, 2008

    I recall that in a recent online survey over 90% of BBC staff (including talent and journalists) indicated they were either Labour or Liberal supporters with only 10% in favour of "other parties" including Conservatives.

    Any pretence of independence is clearly laughable and the sooner we do away with the telly-tax the better…

  7. adam
    July 18, 2008

    Hmmmm, I cant think. What was the beeb executive pay rise again?

    It also appears to have become a media talking point that high energy/food (or whatever the commodity of the moment is) prices are here to stay and everyone should accept that.
    Im not sure how many beeboids have been down the exchange and bought themselves futures on oil and food but one would think lots if future prices are now going to be determined by media announcement.

  8. Barry
    July 18, 2008

    Amazing – I have just got out of the car having heard a report on R1's lunchtime news and thought exactly the same thing. I considered it may be a simplified report for the benefit of young listeners, however I imagine you were listening to R4. The lack of knowledge of economics or inability to consider all options is astonishing. How are people to make informed decisions if they are treated as idiots in this way?

  9. T Dorlas
    July 18, 2008

    The most annoying thing is that when they have a Conservative on Newsnight, they do not object to this argument either! Why can't they have you on some of these programs for a change.

  10. mikestallard
    July 18, 2008

    If I were a useless BBC journalist, I should be really hoping that my NuLab buddies were about to win the next election. And, do you know what? I would be thinking that it was a real possibility too!

  11. James
    July 18, 2008

    John – the BBC mentioned cutting spending on the 6 o'clock news.
    "or they could cut spending *pause* on schools and hospitals".
    No mention of endemic waste in the systems, a benefits system that plainly doesn't work, or gross inefficiency that could be removed without impacting on front-line services.

  12. Graham Doll
    July 18, 2008

    If the licence fee is to be retained, then it should at least be reduced and the expensive, inefficient, incompetent and biased BBC news service scrapped. There is no place for it in a 'free' society.

Comments are closed.