BBC – and Opposition party – think : public spending

The Director General of the BBC has asked all the BBC staff to try harder to ensure impartiality and fairness. The BBC has long favoured every kind of diversity save for diversity of opinion. It pursues its own agenda, often mistaking a one sided presentation or propaganda for the truth, as it sometimes  finds it difficult to even comprehend the other side of an issue.

Today I start an occasional series of articles which I will send to the DG about unconscious bias or deliberate distortion  of the arguments. The BBC in most of its comment programmes and new broadcasts accepts the proposition that if there is any problem with the quality or quantity of a public service it is owing to a lack of money. They also presume that a lot of  money for any given service is a good thing, and more money is a better thing. They fall foul of the lump of money fallacy as the best descriptor of a public service. They make the often disproved assumption that more money will secure the improvements people want.

I’m sure none of them go shopping like that. They would not enter the shop and offer to pay ÂŁ50 for the groceries up front without seeing what was available and what the prices were. They would not assume they had had a more successful shop if they had ended up paying ÂŁ60 instead of ÂŁ50. When they got home they would not say isn’t it great, I have spent  ÂŁ50 on groceries. They would return triumphant to parade the cauliflower and the apples, the eggs and the bread. Nor would a family member turn round and say you should have spent ÂŁ60 though they might complain if there were  no chocolate biscuits.

The BBC should concentrate more on the outputs of the public service, and on the resources in terms of skills, people, supplies, properties or whatever might be needed to increase the quantity or raise the quality. They will need to challenge  opposition and government politicians who simply assert it must be bad because it is only costing ÂŁ10bn or it must be good because it is costing as much as ÂŁ10bn . They need to get into more of the detail of how well managed a service is, whether productivity is rising, whether the service needs to get more right first time and work harder at quality management both to improve the experience of users and control the costs to the taxpayer. Quite often professional lobbies lobby MPs for more cash for a service yet they are unable to tell you what the current budget actually is or how it is spent. The doctrine of new money haunts the debate, yet all next year’s money is in one sense new money.

How many more times will we be treated to the lazy story that the hospital treated patients badly because it was short of funds, or that School A with bad results was short of money to do a better job even though it got more per pupil than School B with a lower per pupil amount. Sometimes the true story is a lack of funding, but other times the story is bad management, absentee staff, poor training , bad buying , too much administration or whatever. The reason people do not come back from the  shop kicking themselves for only spending £50 when they could have spent £60 is they would probably have wasted the other £10. They  would have bought more food than they could eat before the use by date had passed, or bought the dearer items that were no better, missing out on  the special promotions and good prices.

So it is with public services. Most of us want good public services and are happy to pay a decent price through tax for them. Most of us want well remunerated public sector employees, but recognise there has to be a quality and productivity back up to good pay. Our experience of the service quality will not be swayed by whether it cost a lot or less. A good series of examinations of both good and bad examples of public service management would inform a better public debate. To many in  the opposition and the BBC it seems there should be no limit on how much money is directed into some public services, and any shortcoming will always be blamed on Ministers once again failing to vote enough cash.

269 Comments

  1. DOM
    October 30, 2021

    More taxpayer funding for the public sector equals a more politically powerful unionised public sector. Your party has aided and abetted through appeasement this planned process of exploiting and feeding off the value creating, tax paying private sector to finance an impeachable and insular two party political State from which both parties benefit.

    The Tory party is now a Socialist party captured by a more powerful Socialist client State loyal to the vile Labour party

    The BBC is now more powerful. The BBC still exists. The BBC is now a political player using his role to demonise anyone who dares to question the Marxist diversity, eco-fascist and racial agenda

    Tory party capitulation has destroyed the UK and Mr Redwood knows it so please let’s have less of this ‘nowt to do with my party’ bilge, stand up and admit your party’s connivance in this wicked and deliberate importation of a culture, a politics and a people with one purpose, the destruction of our nation to assert total political control over its political and cultural institutions by weaponising any issue that promotes this agenda

    History will condemn both vile parties and their betrayal who let’s be honest died years ago and now represent a unified political and bureaucratic class

    I see odious Johnson is ramping the apocalyptic tosh before COP26. How long do we have to tolerate these blatant lies?

    1. Iain Moore
      October 30, 2021

      News headlines this morning… ‘ Johnson says climate change will result in the end of civilisation’…. my shout to the radio in response to that is unprintable.

      1. Ian Wragg
        October 30, 2021

        Sleepy Joe arrives in Airforce One with a fighter escort and 8 Globemasters carrying 85 SUvs.
        25,000 descending on Glasgow living off the taxpayer to tell me I have to freeze, starve and sit at home so they can preserve their way of life.
        Staring with Greta the goblin, these people have absolutely no self awareness just like the Brussels Broadcasting Company.

        1. Lifelogic
          October 31, 2021

          +1

        2. Mark B
          October 31, 2021

          Oi ! St. Greta of Climate Change to you oik !

          😉

      2. Lifelogic
        October 30, 2021

        The immorality of Boris, the BBC, that doom goblin, Attenborough and various world bodies, Quangos, schools & charities scaring the more gullible (and especially the young gullible) half to death with climate alarmist porn and this bogus new religion is an evil outrage.

      3. Hope
        October 30, 2021

        11 years in office with many headline catching ideas how the fake Tories are going to sort out the BBC. Nothing to date.

        Two weeks ago a ÂŁ75,000 pay rise to the head taking his pay to ÂŁ575,000! Cameron told us no one was going earn more than the PM! Over 42 new NHS bosses announced on more than twice amount of the PM.

        Over 75’s forced to pay the tax and criminalisation still there despite fake Tories saying it would be decriminalised.

        There is not a day when another ‘oh god moment’ happens because of this wretched chaotic misfit Govt.

        I do not know who is taking part in the surveys but everyone I speak to are brassed off with this idiotic govt. on all fronts.

        How many times has JR raised issues with about the rotten BBC? After 11 years everyone in the BBC must be laughing at how utterly useless the fake Tories are. I suspect the BBC are quaking in their boots, along with Macron in France, or Putin or Chinese president after idiot Johnson saying China must do more for climate change! Even India ignored him!

        1. Lifelogic
          October 30, 2021

          +1

        2. Javelin
          October 31, 2021

          China has stopped producing magnesium for Europe to cut its Co2 emissions, just like Europe wanted. European car production will stop in weeks because magnesium is used in aluminium which makes up the bulk of cars.

          Meanwhile the weather taxes will be raised because they have been so successful stopping the weather getting worse.

      4. DavidJ
        October 30, 2021

        +1

    2. Everhopeful
      October 30, 2021

      +++So well put!
      Tice calls it “consocialism” which is pretty good since the “odious” ( such a good adjective) one has both conned us and imposed hard left politics on the country.

      1. Lifelogic
        October 30, 2021

        ConSocialism, a command economy combined with expensive and intermittent energy, plus net zero is economic and political insanity.

        1. Everhopeful
          October 30, 2021

          +1
          It most certainly is!

        2. glen cullen
          October 30, 2021

          And as Boris put it ‘’while surrounded by the Arch of Titus’’

        3. DavidJ
          October 30, 2021

          Indeed LL and few politicians oppose it.

      2. Timaction
        October 30, 2021

        Indeed. His Farming Minister says they’re going to put carbon taxes on our meat. After banning our cars and boilers, such a vote winner. The Consocialists have lost the plot. Looking out my windows I see no climate change but experience all the price increases/taxes that this ridiculous Government are imposing on us. Climate change-let us pray!

        1. rose
          October 30, 2021

          Not tax on our meat: tax on foreign meat of lower standard.

    3. Lifelogic
      October 30, 2021

      Apocalyptic tosh indeed.

      Boris warns that “failing to act on climate change could consign future generations to shortages of food caused by global warming.” These deluded Classic graduates! The main requirements for growing food are CO2 in the atmosphere more helps, rain/water and slightly warmer helps too. So extra CO2, a little warming and more precipitation (which you tend to get if warmer) are all net positives for food crops actually, plants, trees, seaweeds and also fish, animals and indeed humans.

      So what is his mechanism for it all getting worse? I suppose forcing farmers to use electric tractors certainly would.

      So what are you on about Boris? Just stop listening to that deluded theatre studies lass. Your net zero agenda lunacy far more harm than any man made climate change. Political insanity too.

      1. Mitchel
        October 30, 2021

        Not even a good Classics graduate either it would appear.The end of the Roman Empire(he means the Western empire;the much more durable Eastern empire became even more powerful after the demise of the west) was the start of Europe as we know it-heavily Germanic.

        It was,however,the end for the previous ruling elite across the west-which is,I am sure,what really concerns his handlers!

      2. Hope
        October 30, 2021

        LL,
        If Johnson was serious would he not stop mass immigration, stop mass vaccination to help reduce world population? He recklessly took the stance with UK elderly transferring from hospital to care homes!

        He was also reckless how he caught and spread Chinese virus.

        Who paid the £8 million to extend an airport in Cornwall for Biden’s 747 to land? Who went on the same 747 just to watch a basketball game with a Obama? The husky Cameron and Osborn!

        1. rose
          October 30, 2021

          It was surely Professor Ferguson who infected them all in one fell swoop, at a meeting with them: the PM, the Health Secretary, the Cabinet Secretary, the Chief Medical Officer, and the PM’s Chief Adviser. Ferguson may have caught it from the medics he was hanging out with at Imperial. Yes, it may well have been reckless to meet with Ferguson.

          1. Micky Taking
            October 31, 2021

            much more reckless to believe in his estimates?

      3. Timaction
        October 30, 2021

        Indeed. The fools don’t even know that plant growers increase the CO2 in their green houses to increase plant growth. They mix up pollution and the environment with climate change that has always happened. Ice Ages have happened recently every 100,000 years. We are 20,000 years into the current inter ice age period. The next being expected in 80,000 years. We all agree that cutting down the rain forests/greenbelt is wrong for the flora and fauna. We agree that pollutants and vehicles should be as clean as possible. But trying to reduce our carbon footprint for NO reason, whilst importing 700,000 people a year is a so special kind of stupid that this Government can be ignored. Carrie on Boris. It’s the economy stupid!

        1. DavidJ
          October 30, 2021

          Fools indeed and very dangerous ones. Sadly their foolery is mirrored in much of the population and probably growing as more school kids are indoctrinated.

      4. Fedupsoutherner
        October 31, 2021

        LL. It will be a good way of getting our farmers to leave the industry. Many will go to the wall. Some will not be able to switch to arable farming. I do not wish to become vegetarian or vegan. My daughter and her husband are only in their 30’s and are both vegans. They have both broken bones recently. Having to take supplements is not a good diet.

    4. jerry
      October 30, 2021

      @DOM; The opposite is also true, More consumer funding for the private sector equals a more politically powerful (unionised) private sector, WITHOUT the necessary controls a govt managed public sector brings.

      There have always been more damaging strikes in the private sector than anything in the pubic because the govt of the day tended to settle the issues, often via an arbitration body, the same can not be said about your beloved private sector.

      “The Tory party is now a Socialist party captured by a more powerful Socialist client State loyal to the vile Labour party”

      That, and the rest of your daily rants, probably tells us far more about your own politics than it does the Tory party!

      1. mcc
        October 30, 2021

        JeRry : I must say you do sound like John Redwood himself, trying to excuse the party.

        I have some sympathy with Dom; plus, to digress somewhat from financial issues, who forced the Tory party to build a brutish totalitarian state in Britain? With worse to come; next will be the complete destruction of free speech with the passing of the Online Harms Bill. Presented to sound as if it’s for the noblest of intentions, while really it will completely silence anyone who has reasonable doubts about Government policy. Eg it will protect the lies and crimes of Big Pharma, leaving the public completely at their mercy.

        1. Hope
          October 30, 2021

          Fake Tories enacted the Snooper charter to watch everything you do on line and give the power to countless public sector bodies like the food agency!

          1. mcc
            October 30, 2021

            Its not just to snoop on us though. It will ensure that the truth and honest discussion are completely silenced.

    5. Iain Gill
      October 30, 2021

      yep I have a lot of sympathy with that

      there doesnt seem to be anyone in any of the main parties who provides any realistic hope of moving away from this nonsense

    6. glen cullen
      October 30, 2021

      Boris this morning was an absolute disgrace

    7. Derek Henry
      October 30, 2021

      Morning DON

      Hope you are having a good weekend.

      ” More taxpayer funding for the public sector ”

      Simply not true I’m afraid. As explained clearly in my post on the previous topic.

    8. Fedupsoutherner
      October 30, 2021

      Dom. Finely put. Boris thinks climate change will be like the fall of the Roman Empire. No Boris. It will be the fall of our empire or what was an empire when the Chinese walk in. Your policies dealing with so called climate change will destroy this nation.

      1. DavidJ
        October 30, 2021

        +1

        1. mcc
          October 30, 2021

          “Your policies dealing with so called climate change will destroy this nation”.
          A cynic like me might say that’s just what its designed to do, to destroy not only Britain but the entire Western civilisation.

  2. Everhopeful
    October 30, 2021

    Why continue to accommodate a wholly politicised broadcaster.
    Come on
you know beyond a shadow of doubt that a far right broadcaster would not be tolerated.
    So where is the balance?
    Like the NHS, the BBC has had chance after chance and it always betrays the “let’s pretend we want a balanced service” government.
    Maybe MPs don’t fully understand what the BBC has actually been up to all these years
or it is what they want?
    Disband it!

    1. Peter
      October 30, 2021

      Don’t have live TV. Stop paying a TV licence. There is so much dross – regardless of bias.

      I can still listen to BBC radio for free but I rarely bother. Predictable news stories, predictable analysis. ‘The World at One’ is even worse – Sarah Montague reading from a script in a monotonous voice with no attempt to use emphasis or stress a point. Basic presenting skills no longer evident.

      1. Everhopeful
        October 30, 2021

        +1
        I scarcely ever watch. Just can’t bear it.
        Can’t bear repeats either because they remind me of better times!
        The other day I regretted an unusual decision to watch an archaeology prog.
        Utter blatant propaganda. Sickening.

      2. Wanderer
        October 30, 2021

        +1. For goodness’ sake if anyone here is sick of the BBC then do what I did and stop looking at live TV. Unless you are a sports fanatic you will miss nothing, save money and deprive auntie of her tithe. There is a simple online form to declare you don’t watch TV and get a refund of your current years licence fee.

    2. Lifelogic
      October 30, 2021

      A Politicised Broadcaster and totally wrong on nearly every topic.

      1. Iain Gill
        October 30, 2021

        yes indeed

      2. DavidJ
        October 30, 2021

        +1

    3. jerry
      October 30, 2021

      @EH; “Why continue to accommodate a wholly apolitical broadcaster.”

      There, corrected that for you…

      So you think GB News is, or Sky News a decade ago were, not political?!

      1. Everhopeful
        October 30, 2021

        Seriously?

        1. jerry
          October 30, 2021

          @EH; No, I was not being serious, just a tipper truck load of sarcasm. Why are some so ready to object to the BBC for perceived political bias but have no concerns when it comes to GB News or the Murdoch years of Sky News?

          1. SM
            October 30, 2021

            For the very simple reason that GB News and Sky are NOT State Broadcasters but private enterprises?

          2. jerry
            October 30, 2021

            @SM; Not that silly chestnut again, both Sky and GB news are funded by the public too, via advertising, but unlike the TVL fee even the deaf-blind can not escape paying for commercially funded TV (vat the checkouts). Now if both Sky and GB News were 100% subscription funded you might have a point…

            Nor is the BBC a State broadcaster, at least not in the accepted meaning of the phrase, the BBC is totally editorially independent, much to the annoyance of successive govts in the past, perhaps most notably in 2003. The BBC is a Public Sector Broadcaster, in the same way as Ch4 is (at the moment).

          3. Peter2
            October 30, 2021

            Not that silly chestnut again Jerry.
            Millions of products on sales from millions of businesses.
            Only a few advertise on TV.

            I purchased lots of stuff today at a country farmers market.
            Lots of home produced things which never get advertised on TV or radio.
            And I can give you examples from companies I know that got such big increases in sales from advertising campaigns that the extra revenue paid many times over the cost of those adverts and led to reduced selling prices.

          4. jerry
            October 31, 2021

            @Peter2; You are woefully wrong, as usual. OK so lets take any Tesco own brand product as an example, you pick the item, now tell me who makes it for Tesco, you won’t find that info on the label (well not in open sight, sometimes it is there if you know the codes used by each supermarket). There are also many branded ‘discount’ products made by the larger premium brands, you won’t always find that premium brand company on the label of the cheaper product either, just the subsidiary, so unless you know who owns who.

            OK so let’s not shop at Tesco’s, or any of the other big supermarkets, after all they and many of the products are advertised on TV, so how about we shop at our local ‘One Stop’ connivance store instead?…

            I purchased lots of stuff today at a country farmers market.”

            Good for you, but not a lot of help to the old lady shopping in Peckham though, but even that alone doesn’t mean you do not support TV adverting, perhaps on channels you do not watch, or even channels you have never heard of, can not receive via your provider although others in the UK can.

            Lots of home produced things which never get advertised on TV or radio. ..//..”

            Oh right, so now we have to support paid for adverting on internet sites and/or in magazines too, that we do not visit or read! You object to one type of forced consumer paid subsidy but appear happy with others – just be honest, this is not about the the fairness of the TVL reception fee, just yours and others politically motivated hatred of the BBC. Who is next on the list, Ch4, oh sorry, they’re already under attack, perhaps it will be Sky (UK) Group, now it is owned by the parent company of NBC (known for being anti Trump) in the US?…

            I have long called for the BBC to be reformed (and I would be quite radical and brutal), but that doesn’t mean chucking out the baby with its bathwater, rather a slimmed down BBC and a top sliced TVL fee to fund proper PSB on the commercial channels. Nor do I actually have a problem with TV adverting, just pointing out the absurdity of the usual anti TVL fee argument.

          5. Peter2
            October 31, 2021

            Gosh what an essay Jerry.
            You are like a dog with a bone.
            1.
            I never mentioned Tesco…so irrelevant argument
            2
            There are lots of markets all over the UK where individuals sell produce they have grown or made.
            Including Peckham
            3
            Your last paragraph is again irrelevant.
            You were arguing about adverts on TV.
            4
            You have completely avoided countering everything I originally said with your blizzard of waffle.

          6. jerry
            October 31, 2021

            @Peter2; “I never mentioned Tesco”

            I never mentioned Farmers Markets either, didn’t stop you mentioning them though, duh!

            “You are like a dog with a bone.”

            Haha,very funny, given how you never let go.
            Whatever…

        2. Peter2
          November 1, 2021

          Where is your actual reply to my points Jerry, you know, where I responded to your claim that because people buy things therefore they pay for non BBC TV channels the same as the ÂŁ159 annual BBC levy?
          Did you forget to add it?

    4. Ed M
      October 30, 2021

      NO, sir!

      Please use your IMAGINATION!

      Yes, there is a tonne of rubbish content in the BBC at moment. Content that is left-wing / social liberal / WOKE. Cr-p like that. And that all needs to be be purged away. One way of doing that is to reduce the license fee and be more strict about the raison d’etre of the BBC.

      So what should be the raison-d’etre of the BBC?

      1) To create great original programmes that commercial TV can’t do because of commercial pressures regarding quick ratings.
      2) Create programmes that celebrate the life of this country. So create quality programmes in film, drama, arts, children’s, nature and more.

      This would enrich the minds of viewers. Add to patriotism. But also indirectly help the commercial sector, as the BBC would inspire / educate people in the commercial sector to come up with the best programmes they can create – programmes that can be sold abroad. BBC also positively impacts other areas of commercial industry as well related to TV and Radio.

      1. John Hatfield
        October 30, 2021

        It should be made a subscription service. Like that the BBC would soon recognise what its raison-d’etre should be.

        1. Ed M
          October 31, 2021

          No, because then it’s a commercial broadcaster (and won’t have the freedom to create programmes of high originality / creativity etc and programmes focused on building up patriotism etc).
          Why do people have to be so black and white? Why throw the baby out with the bathwater?
          Such a shame.
          Please use your imagination and stop seeing everything from the POV of an accountant (I don’t say this to be mean to you but to protect the BBC – not as it is now – but as it should be).

      2. jerry
        October 30, 2021

        @Ed M; Yes that is what the BBC should be dpo9ing, it was what they used to do, until our hosts ex boss and her govt told the BBC to be more like commercial TV, from that moment the BBC has dumbed down, as any one can see if they look at the old Radio times listings available via the “BBC Genome” web portal.

        1. Ed M
          October 31, 2021

          I agree with you, Jerry, completely.
          But that doesn’t mean we throw the baby out with the bathwater.
          We don’t pull down a beautiful building because lots of ugly ones have been built up around it type thing.
          Tories who want to get rid of the BBC are as bad as those people on the left who are destroying the BBC with their socialism / social liberalism / WOKE etc
          True Conservatism is about preserving what is best about the UK (whether media or not) but obviously not in a way that throws money at it (which is a socialist approach) or broadcasts left-wing / liberal / WOKE content etc ..

    5. Nottingham Lad Himself
      October 30, 2021

      It may well be politicised.

      I invite commenters to study the CVs of both the BBC’s Director General and its Chairman.

    6. Your comment is awaiting moderation
      October 30, 2021

      @Everhopeful
      Our politicians have had ample opportunity but have always failed to deal with the anachronistic BBC Licence system. The only thing left for us is to stop buying the TV Licence and to stop buying the “wasted vote” spiel.
      It’s time the British people kicked out the legacy party career politicians, just vote against them.

      1. jerry
        October 30, 2021

        @What ever your name is; Nor has any govt dealt with the anachronism that is subscription TV, funding minority channels (often Woke or right wing content) via the profits made from more populist content such as sport or premiere run films. What do you think paid for FoxNews to be simulcast here in the UK, for a long time it carried no adverts…

      2. Mark B
        October 31, 2021

        +1

        Correct ! The solution to many of our problems lay in our own hands.

  3. Everhopeful
    October 30, 2021

    Does the government really not realise that we can all see how far public services have plummeted?
    It is unbelievable what we have been reduced to.
    The really terrifying thing is that generation on generation will not remember or know what a safe, well-ordered world is like. Their reality will be this Marxist Hell, their past erased by the BBC, cheered on by government.
    None of it has been inevitable and now we are seeing a sort of climax of madness.
    All brought to us by politicians who think they know best.

    1. Lifelogic
      October 30, 2021

      Never in the history of the UK have so many paid so much tax to receive so little of any value, competence or quality back.

      1. Everhopeful
        October 30, 2021

        +1
        True!

    2. Timaction
      October 30, 2021

      +1. Absolute incompetence in all our health and public services. This Government has actively connived with Labour to ensure they’re all stuffed to the rafters with lefty, woke, pc leaders. The police are now like an arm of the BLM/woke environmental warriors taking no action against them whilst arresting old women for peaceful protest against the lock downs. No selection processes changed from new Labour in any of them and the quangos. Labour people appointed to review pay, pensions and other reforms. No change to MP’s pay and pensions, that’s just for the minion’s………………but there’s a climate emergency to tax us more!! NOT. Johnston should go to China with his Ministers………and stay there.

      1. DavidJ
        October 30, 2021

        If only but I expect the Chinese, or anyone else, would not welcome him.

  4. Lifelogic
    October 30, 2021

    Exactly right.

    You say “the BBC pursues its own agenda, often mistaking a one sided presentation or propaganda for the truth.”

    Indeed but not “often” it is “almost invariably”. Worse still the BBC agenda is profoundly wrong on almost every issue this on – net zero, economics, energy, the EU, on the lack of fair competition between state and private in healthcare, education, housing, broadcasting, energy, banking, transport… It is an organisation almost entirely led/staffed by misguided, lefty, fairly dim, art graduates.

    Programmes like Question time, The Papers and Any Question rarely have anyone much to the right of centre.
    Yesterday for example Any Question had the deluded dope Lord Deben, Claire Fox, Richard Madeley, Melanie Onn. Though the chairman – Chris Mason (Geography Christ’s Camb.) is rather more down to earth and far less dim than most BBC people (though still clearly left of centre).

    Programmes like Question time and Any Question rarely have anyone much to the right of centre. If they do it is 1 to 5 or 1 to 4.

    1. Andy
      October 30, 2021

      People to the left of centre accuse Chris Mason of being to the right of centre. You’re just upset that the BBC doesn’t parrot your views. And it doesn’t parrot your views because your views are not very popular.

      1. jerry
        October 30, 2021

        @Andy; Twenty five years ago those who pushed climate alarmist views were not very popular either!…

        It is not the purpose, or shouldn’t be, of the MSM to be “popular” when it comes to news or current affairs, they should merely be conduits of facts, all of them, people can then make up their own minds. Your generation are to used to being told what you should believe, like most who left school in the last 20 odd years, having been taught what to think rather than HOW to think.

        1. Timaction
          October 30, 2021

          ……………………….having been taught what to think rather than HOW to think……………..SPOT ON. You will support mass immigration, everything anti English is good, we must welcome illegal migrants and support them in 4* Hotels, EU is our friend, more taxes are good to pay for all of this, all diversity views and values will be supported, nuclear families will not be supported, transgender is good, gay rights will be supported, heterosexual families ridiculed, senior management in our public services are too white, the NHS is free for the world, oh and let us pray Mr climate change!!

          1. jerry
            October 30, 2021

            @Timaction; Oh the irony…

            Some on the right just love to tell the rest of us what to think, heck 100 years ago they even still told many how to vote, now if the majority vote for something different to what they want we all “lefties”, we have all been brainwashed, doubts are raised about the legitimacy of the vote etc!

            If the BBC gave an open mic to Mr Farage for an hour, like GB News has, I do wonder how many commentators would be complaining about the BBC on this site; about four I suspect, myself, Andy, that lad from Nottingham and Newmania…

      2. Nottingham Lad Himself
        October 30, 2021

        Mainly because the beliefs, on which those views are based, are wholly erroneous, and have been repeatedly and conclusively debunked.

        For example, contrary to what some on the Right claim –

        The European Union’s accounts have been properly certified every year for decades, and to a higher standard than the UK’s own.

        Masks do greatly reduce the spread of covid19, by stopping the virus-laden droplets, which would otherwise carry it in the air.

        The UK has never had “open borders”. Proper documentation has always been required for normal entry.

        1. Philip P.
          October 30, 2021

          Nottingham Lad – Your objections fall flat.

          The concern about ‘open borders’ is to do with non-normal entry, for which documentation is not required as long as the person claims to be a refugee.

          The EU accounts are audited by an organisation that is itself part of the EU, and funded by it. There was a wave of fraud accusations in the early 2000s, when a whistle-blower denounced the corrupt auditing practices under Jaques Santer. So the EU’s auditors now divides the EU budget into two parts. One part it audits and signs off. The other part isn’t signed off because it contains possible fraud cases, to be investigated by the member countries. Ingenious: the accounts ‘have been signed off every year’, but only because all the questionable bits have been put in a section that the auditors leave for someone else to deal with.

          If you want to talk about masks, you should know there’s no reliable research showing that they generally stop a virus. A virus is too small to be stopped by the mesh in a cloth mask, as has been known for years. The European CDC, the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, the International Research Journal of Public Health, the American Institute of Physics, the New England Journal of Medicine, and the British Medical Journal have all published detailed studies of this issue, of which you appear to be unaware.

          1. Nottingham Lad Himself
            October 31, 2021

            So who should audit the US’s accounts then?

            Trinidad and Tobago?

            The European Union’s accounts are scrutinised not just by its Court Of Auditors, but by the authorities of not one, but of twenty-seven historic, distinguished nations.

        2. rose
          October 30, 2021

          Droplets fall down. It is aerosols which hang in the air. They are so tiny a mask won’t stop them. But wearing a mask can induce the wearer to keep their mouth open (for ease of breathing) where normally it would be shut. Also, while wearing a mask, the air which has just been breathed out is immediately breathed back in – not healthy. It is an open question still, whether a mask is a good idea.

          1. Nottingham Lad Himself
            October 31, 2021

            Aerosols are droplets, Rose, just small ones. Like dust, they hang in the air. They are also thousands of times larger than the virus particles themselves, which people do not exhale as such.

            They also carry an electrostatic charge, which attracts them to, and causes them to stick to the fibres of masks.

            They work. Their protection is not absolute, but nothing would be, and they are still pretty good.

            Countless completely independent studies in many countries have demonstrated this.

          2. rose
            November 1, 2021

            I should have added Professor Whitty’s unhappiness at the idea of the public taking to masks, back in March 2020. It wasn’t just because the Chinese had bought them all up, along with the rest of the PPE. It was because he knew as a doctor that there are hygienic ways of keeping, putting on, and wearing masks, and then disposing of them, which the public were unlikely to do, and so it has turned out.

            But I am not in complete disagreement with you and thought masks a good idea after visiting Japan.

          3. Nottingham Lad Himself
            November 2, 2021

            The effectiveness of masks was originally groundlessly discredited here because the country couldn’t get enough of them even with demand as it was for front-line clinical staff.

      3. Lifelogic
        October 30, 2021

        He is a little left of centre, but he is a bit bright than most lefties, unlike most BBC staff he can think in real time and respond to what the interviewee has actually said.

    2. Peter
      October 30, 2021

      Lifelogic,

      Why do you bother to watch a programme like ‘Any Questions’?

      It had been poor viewing for ages – carefully selected audiences that often don’t reflect the area visited, strange panellists(Bonnie Greer) who unaccountably keep being invited back plus the mandatory ‘comedian’ (Eddie Izzard in the pink)to lighten the proceedings.

      I imagine it has only got worse.

  5. Lifelogic
    October 30, 2021

    Charles Moore is surely right today. The hounding of Owen Paterson sets a dangerous precedent in Parliament. The two-year inquiry into the MP has a high human cost – and a democratic one.

    1. Richard1
      October 30, 2021

      It is completely unacceptable that an elected representative – or indeed anyone – can be traduced and hounded out of their position on the whim of some (invariably leftwing) quangocrat. The govt needs to use its majority to swing the axe widely over the statist bureaucracy. We’d be much better without it. If Owen Patterson is accused of doing something wrong there should be a proper process with potential judicial review to establish that.

    2. X-Tory
      October 30, 2021

      The persecution of Owen Patterson by the so-called ‘Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards’ is utterly baffling. It is not disputed that neither he nor the companies he is a consultant for – and which were public knowledge – gained any financial benefit from the cases he pursued, so it is clear that he did absolutely nothing wrong.

      If Boris had any sense he would sack the Commissioner immediately. But of course we know that Boris is an absolute fool who never does what is sensible, so there is no chance of that.

      1. rose
        October 30, 2021

        It isn’t baffling at all: he is a gentleman and a Conservative and a Brexiteer; one who lives in and understands the country; one who enjoys country pursuits; a Unionist. Everything that class of person is going to convict without due process. I am so glad Sir Charles Moore has written the article today as a lot of people will have known instinctively there was something terribly wrong with the process but not known why. Let us hope the Conservatives have the guts to throw this out.

        1. rose
          October 30, 2021

          PS I don’t mean social class.

  6. Shirley M
    October 30, 2021

    The BBC is a lost cause. No amount of tinkering will put it right. The same applies to this government. I have come to the conclusion that this government just wants the easiest life possible by appeasing all the noisy minorities and letting all and sundry walk all over us (including the BBC). This may bring temporary relief, but it will lead to even more problems in the future. If you let threats and intimidation win the day, then the success of threats will lead to more and more threats. What happens then?

    1. Lifelogic
      October 30, 2021

      The New Boris – led I assume by Carrie or long Covid insanity is now “BBC think” to his core. Wrong, wrong wrong can we have the old one back please?

      1. Micky Taking
        October 30, 2021

        I don’t want the ‘ old one’ back either.

        1. Lifelogic
          October 30, 2021

          Whom would you prefer?

          1. Micky Taking
            October 31, 2021

            Our host !

          2. Lifelogic
            October 31, 2021

            Jndeed – but given the make up of Tory MPs and the Electorate you would surely get someone even worse than Boris.

    2. Peter Wood
      October 30, 2021

      On reading this morning’s post I felt the message was meant for the present occupier of No. 10, and possibly No. 11. Downing St. We know all this stuff but there seems no effort to take action.

      One gets the impression Bunter Boris won’t be changed from spending money on wasteful activity, until we reach a 1976 type financial crisis.

      1. Everhopeful
        October 30, 2021

        I usually get deleted for this thought but I always remember a particular part of “Wind in the Willows” where a very naughty fellow gets taken in hand.
        Needs to happen!

    3. Andy
      October 30, 2021

      Pensioners are the noisiest minority and the most expensive. We literally fork out a fortune for your pension handouts and you spending your days whinging.

      1. SM
        October 30, 2021

        But think of all the messy and expensive and harmful things we don’t do: we rarely get involved with fatal knife fights and illegal drug dealing, we don’t leave vast mounds of rubbish at music festivals for others to clear up (despite vociferating loudly about care for the environment), we don’t get involved with spiking drinks with harmful substances or assaulting and raping women and gay men, we don’t get addicted to playing violent video games alone in our bedrooms…

        do we?

        1. John Hatfield
          October 30, 2021

          And the state pension is contributory. It is not a handout.

      2. Micky Taking
        October 31, 2021

        You might find it easier to literally spade out your fortune instead of forking it. Money runs between the tines you see. And we might be noisier trying to drown out your whinging.

    4. Wanderer
      October 30, 2021

      +1. To answer your (I guess rhetorical) question, the Chinese will be in charge after the West collapses with all this madness.

  7. turboterrier
    October 30, 2021

    The BBC is where it is because successive government for years have allowed it to morph into what it has become. They are rarely held to account, their reporters will it seem always slant their presentation to their own personal political beliefs. The BBC has a nothing to fear attitude as they know they will get the funds win lose or draw. When presenters step outside the box and question the direction in which it is heading in matters like climate change, they are cast aside for those who will present a united front as dictated by the governors at that time.
    It has failed to change and is too guided on themes for the day until a new one comes along. It hasn’t changed to exceed the expectations of its viewers as it doesn’t feel it needs to.

    1. Mark B
      October 30, 2021

      Your first sentence is spot on. The Emily Maitlis affair left no doubt as the nature of the BBC.

  8. Everhopeful
    October 30, 2021

    6.46am
    A case in point.
    The private ( global) waste disposal company contracted by our appalling council is emptying the garden waste bins. Noisily.
    The job should have been done yesterday.
    We now pay extra for the once included service.
    Where were they yesterday I wonder. On some ludicrous training course?

    1. Mark B
      October 30, 2021

      Those generous Council Pensions won’t pay for themselves you know mate 😉

      1. Everhopeful
        October 30, 2021

        +1
        Lol
        No indeed!
        And to add insult to injury they’ve left our bin skewed across our neighbour’s drive!!

        1. H F C
          October 30, 2021

          You’re lucky.
          23% of my single person’s pension is taken by my district council yet they won’t maintain the grass and woodland on my boundary that is their responsibility.
          Fortunately I receive a private pension for which, proportionately, I paid less in salary deductions than I did in tax and NHI for my measly state pension.
          But that’s how it is with the bloated state.

        2. Mark B
          October 31, 2021

          Lucky you ! My bin went AWOL and it took me 4 weeks to get a replacement.

      2. JoolsB
        October 30, 2021

        Exactly – this pensioner and her husband are being mugged for 13% of our pensions in council tax every month to provide them with the sort of pension we can only dream of. Thanks to Boris council tax in England will take another massive hike next Spring. Funny how Sunak/Johnson could find a few extra billions in the budget to bribe the devolved nations on top of their already over generous block grants but nothing to alleviate the council tax burden in England or the social care crisis of their making.

        1. Everhopeful
          October 30, 2021

          +1

        2. Fedupsoutherner
          October 30, 2021

          +100

        3. Mark B
          October 31, 2021

          +1

      3. Lifelogic
        October 30, 2021

        Indeed millions of motorist muggings to be organised, ULEZ zones, bus lane cameras and other parasitic thieving to be arranged.

        1. Everhopeful
          October 30, 2021

          +1
          This is one of the reasons why they need to silence us.

    2. Nottingham Lad Himself
      October 30, 2021

      The poor people running (yes) behind the trucks emptying the bins, in the dark, and in all weathers, are usually private sector employees – as the comment above states.

      They do not get any generous pension, and nor do ordinary public sector ones either these days. It may be different for the “executives” as ever of course.

      If you think that the fact that this country has some of the worst occupational pension provision in the developed world is a good thing, then shame on you.

    3. Andy
      October 30, 2021

      They don’t have enough bin lorry drivers because you voted for the foreigners to go home and not enough Brexitists want to empty bins. You’re lucky it has been collected at all – though if they are already struggling I suspect it won’t be an issue for you for much longer.

      1. Denis Cooper
        October 30, 2021
      2. Fedupsoutherner
        October 30, 2021

        Andy there are plenty of young people dossing around who could do the jobs. How about some of those pointless protestors? They could try doing something useful.

      3. rose
        October 30, 2021

        Six and a half million EU citizens have registered for permanent residence here. The official number was originally I million. Then, after the Brexit vote, 3 million declared themselves and were worked up into a state of needless anxiety by people like you. Now it turns out that despite the remainiacs’ nastiness and spite, 3 and a half more million have joined them!

        1. Nottingham Lad Himself
          October 31, 2021

          Just, think, if justice had been served, and they had been allowed a vote in the referendum, Rose?

          I mean, nearly all of them work, and the rallying cry in the US was “no taxation without representation” wasn’t it?

          It’s just one more reason why the vote is void by any decent standard.

          1. Peter2
            October 31, 2021

            It was for UK citizens over 18 to vote in the referendum NHL
            I don’t think I would get a vote in EU elections or referendums just because I was living there temporarily at the time.
            You need to let go.

          2. Nottingham Lad Himself
            October 31, 2021

            Well, quite a few Leave voters have let go pretty comprehensively since 2016, Peter.

            A careful estimate of numbers would be interesting.

            I hope to hang on for a bit yet, on the other hand.

          3. Peter2
            October 31, 2021

            They are entitled to alter their opinions NHL

            You need to remain calm until the next referendum

            I waited 40 years

          4. rose
            November 1, 2021

            Do you happen to know where they are all working? Six and a half million is more than the populations of Denmark and Norway, and you would think someone had some idea, but we are only ever told they have gone.

  9. Mark B
    October 30, 2021

    Good morning

    Today I start an occasional series of articles which I will send to the DG about unconscious bias . . .

    Good ! And whilst you are about it, is there any room for the unconscious, or otherwise, bias the BBC has towards its largest contributors to its coffers – THE ENGLISH? I deplore my country being referred to as the, ‘Regions’. There is no country on a map in the whole world that is known as the ‘Regions’. It does not exist ! I would also like it when they show the flags of the other three nations in this union, they use the English flag and not the Union flag. This is naked discrimination.

    As to the BBC, schools and money I have two short stories. One I have told here before, albeit a long time ago, and the other not.

    The first involves a school administrator who, told me with a straight face, that whenever there is more funding the first demands come from the teachers themselves. Not for books or school outings but, wage increases. So if a school is short of funds you know where the money is going. 😉

    The second involves the BBC itself. I was informed by a third party whose partner worked for a fit-out company that worked for the BBC. His overall impression was the shear waste in money.

    Anyway. Why should the DG ask something that is, I believe, demanded in their Charter. If an employee, usually the producers, breaks the code they can be dismissed, can’t they ?

    1. JoolsB
      October 30, 2021

      They take their lead from this anti English Conservative Government Mark and the vile opposition that is Labour. Don’t mention England at any cost.

      1. Mark B
        October 31, 2021

        I know !

    2. MWB
      October 30, 2021

      @Mark B
      Some while ago I went through the convoluted BBC compaints procedure, to complain about the BBC way of referring to Scottish or Welsh sports men or women as Scottish or Welsh, but always referred to English sports men and women as British. They replied saying that they can’t investigate this because it was too general a complaint.
      I made another complaint about the same thing, this time giving programme name, date and time. They replied to say that they will make sure the English sports men and women are referred to as such in future. The next time I heard a sports report, theye did indeed refer to the English ports man as English.

      I don’t know if this will be kept up or whether they will revert to type.

      I also detest seeing the union flag, to the exclusion of the English flag.

      1. JoolsB
        October 30, 2021

        MWB – it’s not just the BBC, it’s the U.K. Government also. Just look at what happens after the Olympic or Commonweath Games. The devolved nations celebrate their athletes and the UK Government celebrates the U.K. athletes holding a reception at no. 10 for them all. The English athletes alone enjoy no such honour. They all have their own anthems except the English teams who of course are only allowed the U.K. anthem.

        1. Fedupsoutherner
          October 31, 2021

          I’m with you Jools. The anthem debacle really makes my blood boil. We are not allowed our own identity. There us a car in our area whose number plate spells English. Bravo I thought but don’t drive it to Scotland. It will probably get vandalised as happened during tge last independence referendum.

  10. The DG
    October 30, 2021

    Dear Mr Redwood, I have noted your many predictions about Brexit – no trade barriers, no downturn in inward investment, no shortages, new trade deals with the US, etc – and every single one has been proved wrong. So thank you for your advice, I shall do the exact opposite of what you suggest

    Reply I did not predict no barriers or a new deal with the US. I proposed leaving on WTO terms. I correctly forecast on exit GDP would grow, employment would rise and house prices would rise, the opposite of the false Remain forecasts.

    1. Sir Joe Soap
      October 30, 2021

      Perhaps if we’d exited cleanly instead of the mess that was made by remainer May you might have had a point.

      1. BOF
        October 30, 2021

        Er, no, SJS. Instead of ripping up that odious WA, Alexander de Pheffel Johnson signed it. There are consequences.

        1. rose
          October 30, 2021

          Go back in recent history to the Benn/Burt Surrender Act of 2019 and you will understand why it was impossible to leave without a deal, i.e. negotiate properly.

    2. Denis Cooper
      October 30, 2021

      I certainly didn’t expect that Brexit would lead to a huge shortage of lorry drivers, but apparently it has.

      And even in Ireland, which has not left the EU:

      https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/permits-move-will-not-plug-huge-shortage-of-lorry-drivers-hauliers-warn-1.4712251

      “Permits move will not plug huge shortage of lorry drivers, hauliers warn”

      “Minister of State for Business, Employment and Retail Damien English said a fresh overhaul of the employment permits system for workers from outside the European Economic Area (EEA) will allow more haulage drivers into Ireland.

      The haulage industry estimates there is currently a shortage of between 3,000 and 4,000 drivers.

      More builders, hospitality managers, horticulture workers, dairy-farm assistants and meat processors are also to be allowed the work permits, as are social workers and opticians.

      Mr English said he was abolishing a quota of 320 for employment permits granted to HGV drivers from outside the EEA. Some 187 such employment permits have been issued, many to South Africa.”

      “But Pat O’Donovan, of Cork-based O’Donovan Transport, said it was the additional bureaucracy involved in bringing in drivers to Ireland from outside the EEA that was driving the shortage.”

      So there you go, apart from its other defects the “Norway option” would not have helped us with this.

      1. a-tracy
        October 30, 2021

        Denis, HGV drivers only have nine driving hours per day, when all of our motorways are constantly ‘smart’ reducing speeds for no good reason down to 50 mph for long stretches, down to 40 mph, down to 30 mph, back to 50mph, 40 mph again for some obstruction for 5 miles no obstruction to be seen just everyone bumper to bumper not getting anywhere fast, removing hard shoulders which now mean 4 lanes doing 50 mph putting them in danger, no one working on the motorways with sections still shut off for years on end. Other roads slowed right down so speeding offences trap people on what used to be 50 mph by-passes reduced to 40 mph 4 captures and you’re out of your job. Just how many foreign drivers ever get speeding points gained in the UK applied, how many pay the fines, how many lose their licences? When people see HGV drivers behaving badly they’re not British drivers they’d be out of work sharpish.

      2. acorn
        October 30, 2021

        Dubai discovered it was difficult to attract foreign skilled and semi-skilled labour in hospitality, unless they were offered a two year contract with a couple of return flights home included; otherwise, it just isn’t worth the hassle. The same goes for itinerant labour in the UK and Ireland.

        BTW Denis. The word is the Northern Irish are 52% in favour of the Protocol being enacted as written. You will be aware that 52% represents an overwhelming majority in “leave” voters terms. Also, I read that IDS has given up flogging Article 16 of the NI Protocol and has switched to Article 13(6 – 8 presumably) of the same.

        Oh Denis, do you remember the days when the UK was holding all the cards; and, the ERG were claiming that Article XXIV GATT would allow for an (interim) agreement which – while the UK and EU negotiated a free trade agreement – could maintain the existing arrangements with the EU for 10 years; the so-called Malthouse Compromise. Those were the days; how did it go so wrong?

        1. Denis Cooper
          October 30, 2021

          By “the word” you mean an unreliable LucidTalk opinion poll:

          https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/opinion/columnists/owen-polley-unconvincing-poll-was-twisted-by-pundits-to-support-the-northern-ireland-protocol-3438618

          “Unconvincing poll was twisted by pundits to support the Northern Ireland Protocol”

          “There are many ways to promote an opinion, but one reliable technique is to devise a poll that asks leading questions, commission the company that is most likely to return amenable data and cherry-pick headline grabbing results.”

          I do remember those days, and I remember that I was never associated with any of those fallacies.

        2. Denis Cooper
          October 30, 2021

          “Haulage firms have to advertise for a month in Ireland that they are looking for drivers before applying to bring in one from outside the EEA. Then there is a process of visas, driving licence exchange and other paperwork to be completed.”

          Hence my reference to the “Norway option”, which would have kept us in the EEA.

          “Eugene Drennan, president of the Irish Road Haulage Association (IRHA), said regulations to get drivers into the country are “cumbersome” and “troublesome” and can cost up to €4,000 per driver.”

          That’s nothing to do with Brexit, is it?

  11. BW
    October 30, 2021

    Sir John. You have just described my council tax. They will want more next year. Yet I get less. The police want more and have closed the police station etc etc. What pressure are you putting on Wokingham Council not to increase the tax next April. I am sure there are huge savings to be made there. The massive salaries would be a start point. It’s not just the BBC that needs your scrutiny

    1. Bryan Harris
      October 30, 2021

      +1

    2. JoolsB
      October 30, 2021

      +1

    3. hefner
      October 30, 2021

      But Sir John would not do anything like that as out of the 54 seats of the Wokingham Borough Council 31 are to the Conservatives. And if we as Wokingham District residents are paying more and more council tax (+6% increase last year, to continue at the same level in the coming years, see Sunak’s recent budget) how much is due to the 11-year hold of the Conservatives in government transferring so much more financial responsibility (social care among them) to the local level under the guise of ‘reducing taxes’?

      Reply I regularly discuss keeping the tax down with Councillors

      1. BW
        October 30, 2021

        Reply to the reply
        Can you tell us when your discussions with the council have succeeded in the past to reduce council tax. We have overpaid councillors voting to increase their budgets and salary and then dip their grubby little hands deep into my pocket to pay and I don’t get a say. I have to pay irrespective of my income based on the size of my house. Please no lectures about democracy, they are all the same so voting is a waste of time. It is broken in this country. I expect that the Councillors listen to you as much as the government doesn’t.

      2. Micky Taking
        October 30, 2021

        and I bet you get a murmur here, a nod there, and then they say ‘NEXT’ !

      3. Mark B
        October 31, 2021

        hefner

        Ask yourself this. Is that 6% increase included in the UK’s inflation figures ? I bet it’s not 😉

        1. hefner
          November 1, 2021

          Mark B, very good point. The CPIH now in use includes the so-called OOH (Owner Occupier’s Housing cost), which is calculated using a ‘rental equivalence’ to deal with expenses related to housing and council tax. From what I have found (an old ons.gov.uk ‘Impact of inclusion of Council Tax and revised imputed rents on CPIH: Dec 2016’, 13/12/2016, which still appears to be the latest release), some attempts had been done five years ago to account for Council Tax in the CPIH.

          The question remains whether the tables appearing in that document have been updated in view of the bigger increases in Council Tax seen in the more recent years.

  12. jerry
    October 30, 2021

    “The BBC has long favoured every kind of diversity save for diversity of opinion.”

    Nonsense, the BBC used to broadcast very divers opinions, then September 1986 and the new Chairman arrived, less than 6 months later the then DG was gone, replaced by someone widely acknowledged to be more Thatchers liking…

    Funny how the BBC went from being considered a poodle of the (right wing) establishment in the mid 1970s, apparently intent on ousting Harold Wilson, to being the poodle of the left by 1980, intent on ousting Thatcher. Might the truth be the BBC was just doing its job, holding the executive to account, but of course the executive do not like being held to account, they far prefer to spin their own news agenda, leave skeletons in the cupboard etc.

    “[the BBC] pursues its own agenda, often mistaking a one sided presentation or propaganda for the truth, as it sometimes finds it difficult to even comprehend the other side of an issue.”

    As do/did other broadcasters, but the BBC is not so easy to be rid of, unlike say Thames and their “This Week” brand of programming, not so easy to sell off either, like Ch4, ho-hum…

    “Today I start an occasional series of articles which I will send to the DG about unconscious bias or deliberate distortion of the arguments.”

    I take it you will also be sending similar letters to the other UK broadcasters, ITV/ITN, Ch4, Ch5 & Sky, detailing perceived failings, or is this just the continuation of the anti BBC hatchet job started in 1986?

    Reply I am sending them just to the BBC because it is the BBC DG who has initiated thus debate, and because they levy a tax on us whether we watch them or not.

    1. jerry
      October 30, 2021

      @JR reply; Just because the other broadcasters have not asked for such letters doesn’t mean you (or anyone else) can not also send them similar letters, pointing out their own perceived failings.

      At times I wish the govt would cut the BBC free (and quickly, before the next general election) [1], make the TVL fee more akin to a subscription, most modern TV’s and even set top boxes now have the necessary CAM slots for subscription cards, and at the same time remove the UK’s own ‘fairness doctrine’, we might then actually start to see just how popular each diverse political opinion/leaning is via TV ratings -just as happens in the USA. What are the current ratings figures for GB News?!…

      [1] the govt certainly need to cut the (BBC) Parliament channel free, we need a UK equivalent to the US C-Span network

      1. a-tracy
        October 30, 2021

        Jerry, do you ever watch GB News? I actually see more balanced panels on Dewbs and co and Farage always has opposing opinions and interviewees points of view represented every time I’ve watched and Colin Brazier is a great interviewer that I’d never heard of before, very balanced and careful.

        I’m not actually a big fan of Farage and I don’t agree with all he says, I thought it was very odd when he fought like an alley cat for leave then just walked away and pulled all his candidates. But I like to watch him defending his perspective with an interviewee of opposing views. I used to watch the news at 7pm on C4 which is very biased to a socialist left view and it was my only option at that time slot, surely you can’t just dismiss alternatives that people don’t have to pay for as its on freeview .

        1. jerry
          October 30, 2021

          @a-tracy; Yes I have watched GB News. I think you might have miss understood what I was proposing, I was not objecting to GB News, let them or any other channel be heard loud and clear, sans any regulation that makes them be “very balanced and careful” -interesting language you used there by the way… Let the viewers be the judge, hence my comment about ratings.

      2. MWB
        October 30, 2021

        Why do you people always compare us with the US ? There’s a world out there that isn’t a slave to what happens in the US.
        I don’t think we need to follow the US in anything.

        1. jerry
          October 30, 2021

          @MWB; I to would prefer not to have a US style MSM but it is to late, we’ve had one since non UK citizens were been allowed to own newsprint titles and later the advent of subscription TV in the early 1990s. Being where we are I have (reluctantly) come to the view that we now need to also copy the US by removing our own ‘fairness doctrine’, I can understand why some might object, as it would mean political allegiances/alliances would be in plain view – be they left,right or centre…

          1. Hat man
            October 30, 2021

            That is a very good suggestion, Jerry. Public tolerance of the lockdowns was surely due to so many people believing what the BBC told them. If the public were less likely to believe that the BBC was objective, they would perhaps be more inclined to think for themselves. Likewise with Net Zero.

            Yes, let’s have the BBC’s political biases open in plain view, as well as those of other media. Then the public might start questioning what’s behind the news stories they’re being bombarded with.

          2. jerry
            October 31, 2021

            @Hat Man; “Public tolerance of the lockdowns was surely due to so many people believing what the BBC told them.”

            So it was the broadcasters who were holding those Downing Street press conferences, not the govt? Nice to know what you really think about your fellow UK nationals, we all appear to be dim-wits in your opinion, only you and your mates (usually found in the pub, no doubt) actually know and understand the facts/truth.

        2. Nottingham Lad Himself
          October 30, 2021

          Because if they didn’t then they might have to compare this country with Germany, or with France, Scandinavia, and so on.

          The comparisons, on many levels, for the expectations of ordinary people here and there might be rather awkward for those in power in the Tory UK.

    2. Andy
      October 30, 2021

      Your party levies taxes on us Mr Redwood, whether we vote for you or not.

      1. Micky Taking
        October 30, 2021

        Other Parties were available before, and you might be shocked to hear they levied taxes too !

  13. Bloke in Wales
    October 30, 2021

    “I’m sure none of them go shopping like that. They would not enter the shop and offer to pay ÂŁ50 for the groceries up front without seeing what was available and what the prices were. They would not assume they had had a more successful shop if they had ended up paying ÂŁ60 instead of ÂŁ50. When they got home they would not say isn’t it great, I have spent ÂŁ50 on groceries.”

    They might if they were spending someone else’s money. Particularly as they were spending someone else’s money on themselves, as Milton Friedman explained so well.

    1. jerry
      October 30, 2021

      @BIW; Who were you and our host talking about, the BBC or Sky, the latter is very swish in their quality of advertising but how do we know if the quality seen on the shelves carries through to the products, wanting us to spend not ÂŁ160 on goods we can not see up-front [1] but just a mere ÂŁ400, OK so its on easy payment terms (as can the TVL fee) but the consumer is held in contract for -currently- 18 months in which time prices may rise, available content may change…

      [1] something that is actually possible with the BBC, even if illicitly

      1. a-tracy
        October 30, 2021

        Jerry, I never watch Sky because I won’t pay for it. I have that choice.

        1. jerry
          October 30, 2021

          @a-tracy; What are you talking about?! Sky News is FTA on Freeview (LCN233), if in a decent reception area, or on Freesat (LCN202), for others it is available free via YouTube.

          Many also do not watch any TV, thus they do not pay the TVL fee, they have that choice, radio reception has been free since 1971 here in the UK and of course now there are many license free ways to watch content via the internet;.

  14. GilesB
    October 30, 2021

    The BBC won’t hold a mirror up to itself. It is a socialist paradise with umpteen overpaid ‘Directors’, ‘Managers’, ‘Senior Editors’, with the talent paid via external production companies to avoid scrutiny.

    Incapable of changing itself. It cannot comprehend, let alone answer, the fundamental question, ‘Why should the BBC exist?’.

    Nadine should launch a review of the future of broadcast tv in the U.K., with the starting presumption that the BBC should be totally privatised.

    1. GilesB
      October 30, 2021

      I note that this Government in its reply to the sixth waffle from the select committee on DCMS says:

      The Government also agrees with the Committee that the pandemic has reinforced the critical importance of free and easy access to trusted news provided by PSBs, both in terms of disseminating essential information and tackling disinformation and misinformation.

      How is it free? Resources have to be paid for. The government should make watching government propaganda free for the viewer by getting rid of the obsolete licence fee. That still doesn’t make it free: it just means the taxpayer is paying.

      Contracts for propaganda should be competed for, with the rewards dependent not on hours of input, but on changes in public awareness and opinion on issues that the government considers important. No-one cares if the result is achieved by earnest art programmes on BBC2, Facebook ads, or Banksy cartoons. What does the government want to achieve? That’s what matters. The answer should not be number of awards won at BAFTA for best costume period drama with a multi-ethnic, bisexual, one- legged, red-haired cast.

  15. alan jutson
    October 30, 2021

    Do not wish to rain on your parade John, but nothing will change at the BBC it is too well entrenched and filled with left leaning producers, programmers, presenters, directors, and so called experts all with their own agenda, but I admire you for trying.
    One only has to look at the set up of guests on almost any programme that has any political or news content to realise the problem.
    Just look at the latest one sided farce of reporting Fuel shortages, food shortages, HGV driver shortages, all supposedly due to the Government.
    Then we have the reporting of Covid, more freedom requested, but then joyous reporting of infections rising.

    1. X-Tory
      October 30, 2021

      Quite right – the BBC is beyond redemption.

      Sir John should focus on one specific question: Why has Question Time NEVER had a majority of guests that support Brexit? This would reflect the population as a whole, and this should be the NORM, every single week, but the BBC refuses to do so. Until the producers of the programme are SACKED the BBC does not represent me and I will certainly not give them any of my money!

      1. Nottingham Lad Himself
        October 30, 2021

        Maybe it’s because there are not a majority of people in the country who support brexit – only 26% of them voted for it after all – and the BBC might even try to make their panels and audiences representative of that if they can?

        Just a thought, like.

        So no, what you demand – with grinding predictability – would not represent the population as a whole at all.

        1. Micky Taking
          October 30, 2021

          I did a quick survey and was stunned to find no child in the nation’s Primary nor Secondary schools voted for Brexit.

          1. Nottingham Lad Himself
            October 30, 2021

            OK, well if you want to confine the audience to people of voting age and also exclude other Europeans living here – and I don’t think that the BBC make that rule – then still only 37% of them would have voted Leave – a minority.

            And even that would only be if all of those Leavers in 2016 were still alive, had not changed their minds, and no pro-Europeans had joined the electorate since, old flower.

            There simply is no Europe-hating majority among the people at large living in these islands.

          2. Fedupsoutherner
            October 31, 2021

            Ha ha Mickey. If they had their way in Scotland babes in arms could vote….as long as it was SNP.

          3. Peter2
            October 31, 2021

            So less than your 37% voted to remain.
            PS
            You falsely assume people who voted leaved hate Europe
            We voted to leave our membership of the EU

          4. Micky Taking
            October 31, 2021

            I’m pretty confident on my factual research, but treat yours with massive disdain.

        2. Peter2
          October 30, 2021

          So less than 26% voted to remain in the EU.

        3. Micky Taking
          October 31, 2021

          By the way Martin, on the theme of ‘There simply is no Europe-hating majority among the people at large living in these islands.’
          Please answer ‘There simply is no UK-hating majority among the people at large living in France.’ Yes or No?

          1. Nottingham Lad Himself
            November 1, 2021

            I haven’t researched that – but I doubt it very much.

            There’s nothing to suggest it on France Inter, to which I’ve been listening for many years.

            Do you have evidence that there is, on the other hand?

            If so, then what is it?

    2. glen cullen
      October 30, 2021

      Agree – the only course of action is to sell the BBC

      1. Micky Taking
        October 30, 2021

        I am reminded of this from ‘Oliver ‘ – Lionel Bart.

        OLIVER
        Who will buy this wonderful broadcaster?
        I’m so high, I swear they might lie.
        KNIFEGRINDER
        Knives, knives to stick!
        STRAWBERRY-SELLER
        Tripe, stories tripe!
        OLIVER
        Me, oh my! I don’t want to lose it.
        So what am I to do
        To keep a sky even slightly blue?
        There must be someone who will buy…
        STRAWBERRY-SELLER
        Who will buy?
        KNIFEGRINDER
        Who will buy?
        MILKMAID
        Who will buy?
        ROSE-SELLER
        Who will buy?
        ALL
        Who will buy?

        No takers it seems.

  16. Oldtimer
    October 30, 2021

    The BBC is beyond redemption. It is entirely self serving and will not change. Institutional inertia and a self replicating oligarchy will see to that. Change will only come from an overpowering external force. It will not be political; the will does not exist. It might come from technology if an IP driven world replaces terrestrial and satellite TV. The first signs of this shift are evident.

    1. Mark B
      October 31, 2021

      Agreed.

      Technology and the ability of small, sometimes single, content providers with access through other websites to sell merchandise and take subscriptions are slowly undermining the old models and the the grip governments have on the narrative.

  17. Iain Moore
    October 30, 2021

    I was stuck by the BBC’s reporting on the budget, making much of the fact that this Johnson Government has taken spending and taxing to record levels , and they were right to do that, the rest of the budget reporting was how the Government should be spending loads more on education, loads more on health, loads more on social care, loads more on climate change, essentially loads more on everything. Not once did they take note of their initial statement and suggest to politicians that taxing and spending has been maxed out, and may be, just may be, they should be getting a better bang for our buck.

    1. a-tracy
      October 30, 2021

      Iain, if your revenue is from the government (taxpayer compulsory taxes) and you are public sector with public sector pensions and wage packages to protect then you will form and represent the public sector union’s view. It is just human nature to represent positively something that supports your view of the world and your security and gain safety in numbers.

      Nothing will change because the Houses of Parliament and the House of Lords and the councils are all funded from compulsory taxation with no choice in it. Even if your services drop to level you don’t agree with anymore you still have to cough up more and more.

  18. MPC
    October 30, 2021

    You have written ‘occasional series of articles’ before but it is
    far too scattergun an approach and each one will be easily batted away by the BBC with bland statements that they appreciate your views but they fully take into account all arguments consistent with their charter. Why not – and with your like minded colleagues and scientists – relentlessly concentrate on just one issue: the BBC’s continued shameful editorial ban on informed scepticism about climate alarmism? If you could get the Director General to move on that issue that would be a measurable success that could be built on. A further series of articles will be all very interesting but will achieve nothing surely.

  19. Iago
    October 30, 2021

    Off topic, but exceptionally alarming report in TCW about the safety of the PCR and lateral flow test devices, not the reliability of the tests but the substances that are in and on the swabs and what the swabs are composed of. Never buy or use anything from the Chinese Communist Party.

    1. Micky Taking
      October 30, 2021

      have visits to the local chinese take-away escalated then?

    2. Nottingham Lad Himself
      October 31, 2021

      Do you have a mobile phone, perhaps?

      1. dixie
        October 31, 2021

        If you have a recent Samsung phone it wouldn’t have been made in China.

      2. Micky Taking
        October 31, 2021

        If so it can be monitored by China. Not that any of them would be enlightened by listening to a cockney conversation.

  20. Nig l
    October 30, 2021

    Agree re BBC but once again in denial about things closer to home. Politicians of all parties, addicted to ‘more spending equals good’ less equals bad. Zero knowledge or interest in efficiency, hence eye watering sums wasted, that would have made tax rises, broken manifesto promises etc, unnecessary.

    The Consocialist party is the latest manifestation. Budget delivered by Sunak written by Gordon Brown.

    1. DOM
      October 30, 2021

      More political spending equals authoritarianism but the vested interest that is the Socialist State conceal this by perpetuating a moral narrative that more is moral and humane. This deceit has become a threat to democracy. The deceit will continue, State power will grow and all threats to this politics will be confronted head on with even more oppressive laws to silence and demonise those who dare to oppose it

      Enough of my warblings. Only those decent people within the body politic can expose this threat. I myself am nothing more than a grunt

  21. Bryan Harris
    October 30, 2021

    Sensible…. But the BBC doesn’t take advice, as stated, they have their own agenda. Money is at the heart of all socialist agendas.

    Imagine a huge tsunami sweeping across the country, taking with it all kinds of liberalist thinking and other flotsam.
    This is what has happened to much of the West, with each new tsunami wave more people have their thinking adjusted to the new way. We keep getting these waves, and we keep sinking ever more into the BBC way of thinking, just as the BBC indoctrinatred others, so their agenda is constantly reinforced by other waves.

    Don’t expect those in the Commons to reject the ideas behind the waves – most have been so badly affected that they cannot tell the difference between left and right. With the waves being self perpetuating now, there is only one direction for thinking to go, which is to emulate and then exceed socialist ideology.

    Don’t expect labour and the other parties to change – they have always believed in throwing money at problems. Unfortunately, now so do the Tories.

  22. Iain Gill
    October 30, 2021

    Re “BBC has long favoured every kind of diversity save for diversity of opinion” not so, the white working classes, especially male white working classes, and their real world views, are massively under represented on the BBC. Indeed, I would say they actively discriminate against the white working classes, especially from the old industrial heartlands, and especially male ones.

    I think this is an important point that somebody in the political bubble really should get their heads around. Active discrimination against hetro, white, male, working class people is NOT diversity or equality.

    Of course the Labour party should be making this point, but they have been part of the reason for this state of affairs.

    1. rose
      October 30, 2021

      They have all the data now showing this group is discriminated against and not doing well, and still every institution continues to discriminate against them and in favour of others

      1. Iain Gill
        October 31, 2021

        yes indeed

        I just wish people like John would say this

        all the identity politics needs sweeping aside and some proper meritocracy, and fair access to the best public services etc, introduced

  23. Robert McDonald
    October 30, 2021

    There is, sadly, one major problem with the BBC analysing whether failures of other organisation are down to lack of funding or lack of management. The BBC survives on wasting our money and bad management. It is well recognised in the media business that the BBC will ALWAYS send a team to broadcast an event that will be at least twice as many as any other media outlet often four times as many. The BBC management style is well depicted by the way they dealt, sorry didn’t deal with, the Bashir actions and Saville. It is typified by their approach to the poor graphic designer in the Bashir case whose career was destroyed by them to cover up the Bashir affair. That is not alone in the BBC management culture … do not accuse someone of bullying if that someone is a preferred BBC person, despite reams of strongly written procedures to supposedly protect staff from bullying.
    The BBC management is systemically incapable of taking independent and unbiased views on anything, and never will be capable.

  24. WhatAboutTheEnglish
    October 30, 2021

    Has the BBC reported on Sadie Khan’s grants to change the names of street names in London? I don’t watch the BBC despite having to pay for it so I wouldn’t know. That over bloated organisation needs to be severely chopped down.

    Back to my other point, how is Khan being allowed to waste tax payers’ money in this way, London is OUR capital city, it is OUR heritage he is deliberately erasing. I agree with comments made above, especially by DOM. He is of migrant stock. I feel no benefit at all from him being in our country, but I can see how he and his family benefit from my taxes. It is time the position of London mayor was abolished urgently.

    Interesting article by Douglas Murray in the Telegraph today, he refers to this government’s cowardice in the face of the hard left. He is correct to say that weak tories are taking us back to the seventies. Cannot even stop protesters causing havoc on our busy motorways. Cannot stop dinghies. Have allowed teachers, lecturers etc to lose their livelihoods thanks to hard leftist mob.

    And as usual, appeasing the noisy Scots throwing English tax payers’ money whilst kicking the English. I cannot wait to vote at the next election. And if Labour get in, so what? I need a magnifying glass to find a conservative in the Tory party, and one that sticks up for the English is non existent. Boris and his team are looking like a bunch of lovey liberals, clueless and actually not giving a fig about the English who are treated as milk cows.

  25. DOM
    October 30, 2021

    ‘Emergencies’ have always been the pretext on which the safeguards of individual liberty have been eroded’. FA Hayek

    Hayek perfectly in 16 words and one sentence explains what we are now seeing. A politics and politicians whose primary aim is nothing less than the total subjugation of each person in the name of a collectivist objective.

    Johnson is merely another carrier of the collectivist BBB Marxist cabal who will use all forms of threats, incitements and scaremongering to justify a State backed, full frontal assault on our very being

    Decent Tory MPs can save this nation from this PM’s appalling actions by toppling him and his allies before he does more damage

    1. BOF
      October 30, 2021

      And on liberty from Benjamin Franklin.

      ‘Those who would give up essential liberty for a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.’

      Now we seem to be denied both!

      1. Nottingham Lad Himself
        October 30, 2021

        Well, you have gladly given up the liberty to be treated as an equal in the twenty-seven most civilised and cultured countries in the world, so tough.

        1. Micky Taking
          October 30, 2021

          just like Poland being treated as equal you mean?

          1. Nottingham Lad Himself
            October 30, 2021

            Interesting – Micky appears to think that he is a country…

          2. rose
            October 30, 2021

            And Hungary.

          3. dixie
            October 31, 2021

            and Greece, and Italy.
            Whose next I wonder.

        2. Micky Taking
          October 31, 2021

          Oh Martin you know perfectly well the subject was ‘the 27…..countries’ yet Poland and others are not treated as equals to Germany/France etc.
          Greece got beaten up, followed by Italy, Hungary decided they couldn’t wait for the EU vaccine shambles and bought a supply elsewhere, now Poland beg to differ….quite a harmonious civilised and cultured lot, aren’t they?
          What did Nottingham do to incur your displeasure?

  26. Jim Whitehead
    October 30, 2021

    Sir John, I expect that the ‘occasional series of articles’ to the DG will be treated with the disdain (if that) that your ‘urgings’ to Johnson’s Government have received.
    The BBC must be defunded and allowed to find its market value. Articles and urgings are ineffectual, Totally, almost a taunting challenge I’d think.

    Reply The DG replied promptly to the first

    1. formula57
      October 30, 2021

      @ reply – !

      So the DG unlike the Archbishop of York is not condemned for eternity through earning the shameful epithet “correspondence-challenged”. I am amazed.

    2. rose
      October 30, 2021

      This DG is not disdainful.

  27. Kenneth
    October 30, 2021

    For every credit there is a debit.

    So, when the BBC crows about the recipients of “public spending” it should provide equal weight to those who have provided the money.

    The same with “cuts”. This should never be treated as bad news but should be a balanced story since it is good news for some and bad for others.

    Since the BBC does not do this, their bias is provable and – since we could add up the sums being reported – is quantifiable.

    Mind you, I have raised complaints about this in the past using this logic and the BBC simply refuted it without explanation and OFCOM accepted their response. I gave up complaining a long time ago.

    The BBC is always guilty of measuring public sector performance by the amount of input money instead of results/value for money. Illogical.

    I rarely consume any BBC output these days. Waste of time.

  28. Just a fed up voter
    October 30, 2021

    I don’t watch the Beeb but note Sky are reporting that Britain has welcomed the first group of trans LGBT afghans.

    From the report:
    “Foreign Secretary Liz Truss said: “Britain is a fierce champion of freedom and the right of all people to be themselves and love who they want free from persecution.“

    1. X-Tory
      October 30, 2021

      Do we have a shortage of LGBTs in Britain? If not, why are we importing more? What can these people contribute to our economy that others can’t? It is clear that Liz Truss never even asked this question, let alone answered it! The government is once again acting in such a moronic fashion that I have to notch up my contempt for them all the way to 11.

      Reply They are more at risk if they stay in Afghanistan

      1. Iago
        October 30, 2021

        Well said, X-Tory!
        Iago.

      2. R.Grange
        October 30, 2021

        Reply to reply – Did that risk arise just because we invaded their country, Sir John, or would it been like that for themin Afghanistan anyway, and so is actually nothing to do with us?

      3. X-Tory
        October 30, 2021

        Reply to reply: So what? That isn’t the issue. The issue should ALWAYS and ONLY be what is good for the UK. The UK does not exist for the benefit of foreigners. If foreigners want to come here then they must benefit the UK.

    2. rose
      October 30, 2021

      One of them has left his wife and children behind.

  29. Donna
    October 30, 2021

    Oh I think the lefty virtue-signallers who infest the BBC would be absolutely delighted and pleased with themselves if they spent ÂŁ60 on their shopping at, say M & S or Waitrose, instead of shopping cannily and getting the same products for ÂŁ50 at another “less virtuous” supermarket.

    Good luck with the BBC. I’ll believe Tim Davie genuinely wants to eliminate bias when he sacks Emily Maitless and Chris Packham. I’m not holding my breath.

    The Establishment is now left-wing. The House of Lords has 800+ leeches on the taxpayer, two-thirds of whom are left of centre. The House of Commons has 650 MPs, 300 of whom are declared lefties, and half of the “Conservative” MPs are basically LibDems who couldn’t get elected if they wore a yellow rosette. The Civil Service is institutionally left-wing; the Judiciary and Senior Police all appear to be “liberal” ie left-wing; as is the broadcast media (exception Talk Radio and GB News); so is the Quangocracy, and University sector.

    Until that changes, there will be no challenge to the culture and narrative that every public sector failure must be rewarded with more taxpayers’ money. And the Establishment have ensured that it is virtually impossible to change it.

    Johnson doesn’t even want to. Everyone who thought they were getting a Conservative PM has been CONNED.

    1. a-tracy
      October 30, 2021

      Donna shouldn’t they just share these jobs out with people of opposing views, there is room for Emily and Chris but not at the exclusion of all others and those with diametrically opposing views, that is what we don’t get the balance. The reported pay packages are so high they could be split comfortably between two workers anyway and free up the Emily and Chris to top up their earnings in the private sector.

      1. Donna
        October 31, 2021

        No, Emily Maitless and Chris Packham don’t “have a place” because they are not supposed to broadcast their own opinions. If they want to do that, they should do it from another platform, not the supposedly impartial BBC.
        Even IF they were now persuaded to stop their propagandising it doesn’t make the BBC impartial because we all know their views.

  30. Peter Parsons
    October 30, 2021

    Better the BBC we have than the one Andrea Leadsom advocated of it being the UK equivalent of Pravda.

    Be careful what you wish for.

    1. a-tracy
      October 30, 2021

      Peter when did Leadsom advocate it being the equivalent of Pravda – do you have a source story for that I’m intrigued.

      1. Peter Parsons
        October 30, 2021

        Back.in June 2017.

        1. dixie
          October 31, 2021

          A proper citation would be far more helpful than a song title.

    2. formula57
      October 30, 2021

      @ Peter Parsons – would the Leadsom one require ÂŁ159 from those who do not use it but wish to use a competitor?

      1. Peter Parsons
        October 30, 2021

        She never said it wouldn’t.

    3. Peter2
      October 30, 2021

      Have you a link to where Andrea is supposed to have said that Peter.
      I’ve had a look on the Internet and nothing comes up.
      Thanks.

      1. Peter Parsons
        October 30, 2021

        She suggested it back in June 2017.

        1. Peter2
          October 31, 2021

          She said the BBC should be a bit more patriotic in 2017.
          Ther was no mention of Pravda as you suggested.

          1. Peter2
            October 31, 2021

            In response John Simpson said it showed a Soviet view of broadcasting.
            I think your comment is “gilding the lily” Peter.
            But it a good example how things get twisted over time.

    4. Micky Taking
      October 30, 2021

      BBC being unbiased is as funny as Pravda (Truth).

    5. rose
      October 30, 2021

      It feels just like Pravda.

  31. acorn
    October 30, 2021

    JR, your site and its resident commenters has become nearly as funny as “The Beano” kids comic. You can fit a Beano comic strip character to most of them, Desperate Dom for a starter.

    I suggest you turn it into a 30 minute comedy sketch programme for the 6:30 pm comedy slot on BBC Radio 4. The usual suspects complain that there is no new I’m Sorry I Haven’t a Clue; Dead Ringers; Just a Minute and similar. I see your programme aiming at being another Now Show, a satirical review of the week’s news. Unfortunately, your script would be the same every week.

    You talk about BBC bias, that’s rich! You appear on GB News which is morphing into an ultra-right Farage GBrexit News; stuffed with Brexit Party / MEP dross. Have they offered you a presenters job yet? Or, a Farage and Redwood hour (interspersed with claims by presenter Calvin Robinson for “anti-parasite drug ivermectin to fight Covid).

    1. Richard II
      October 30, 2021

      Sorry to intrude on your hilarity, Acorn, but the jury is still out on Ivermectin. There are currently four large random control trial studies researching whether Ivermectin has a benefit for persons with early COVID. If it does, treatment with a cheap generic drug would help avoid the need for other more expensive solutions. That would be especially attractive for third-world countries, in view of the ruinous cost of patented vaccines. Never mind your satire. Researchers are trying to find out the truth of the matter – it’s called science.

      1. acorn
        October 30, 2021

        “However, the FDA has received multiple reports of patients who have required medical attention, including hospitalization, after self-medicating with ivermectin intended for livestock.”

        1. Micky Taking
          October 30, 2021

          did they moan ‘moo moo’ or ‘baaa baaa’ ?

        2. Richard II
          October 30, 2021

          Sure, Acorn, and there were Americans who drank bleach because their president said it was good. So what? That’s not a scientific test of a product.

      2. Micky Taking
        October 31, 2021

        No its not -it is merely conducting trials. They may well point towards useful outcomes.
        Science is when repeating something always gives the same result -ie proof.

    2. Peter2
      October 30, 2021

      It entertains you acorn as you post every day.

    3. Mark B
      October 31, 2021

      acorn

      So now we know why you come here – to be entertained. Because you won’t get such on any glum, dreary, hatefest of the Left-Wing alternative.

  32. Newmania
    October 30, 2021

    Yes in the private sector you are congratulated for spending less not more. Fine, but I don`t think the “levelling up” Conservative Party is in any position to castigate the BBC for this ‘big-is-good’ mindset .It is one they wholeheartedly share having insouciantly parked their tanks on Ed Millibands centre left lawn adding only protectionist anti immigrant Nationalism.
    Just as the monarchy found to their surprise that post-war Labour suited them nicely, so the BBC is BBC is comfortable with Johnson’s National Socialism .Their bien pensant views on climate change or ” diversity” , are shared by Johnson, they are happy to quietly ban mention of Brexit and fail utterly to interrogate this dim incompetent Government.
    Sir John would breakfast on his own kidneys before he swapped a bribe-able compliant State monopoly Broadcaster for a Free media or a real democracy . We get to choose between Tweedle -dum and Tweedle -dumber . In the private sector Sir John dislikes cosy cartels .In the Public sector he is more than happy with it.

  33. William Long
    October 30, 2021

    I wish I thought it was just the BBC and Opposition parties who think that throwing money at it will make every problem go away, but if there was any doubt before, the recent Budget has confirmed that this approach is shared and followed by the Government. There is no evidence at all that the huge sums commited from our money are the result of any sort of costed programme. We badly need an effective Opposition to call this spenthrift Government to account, and, at the moment, it seems that the only place that this can come from is withing the Conservatiove ranks, because Government and Opposition clearly share the same philosophy.

  34. a-tracy
    October 30, 2021

    John, if you do an occasional series of articles then please don’t use a wide brush approach. Focus with examples and facts otherwise you’ll just send Jerry into a spin. I know you like the BBC and I’d guess you like British Institutions but you need to be clear about the bias.

    I used to watch Question Time and This Week. I used to watch Newsnight I don’t now I don’t like listening to the presenters. I used to watch occasional Sunday morning politics shows don’t watch any of them now. I also used to regularly catch the late BBC news I don’t now. I personally found they were too biased to one remit it just became tiresome.

    I like to watch GB News for this reason the left, XR representatives, people from the vegan society and other status quo challengers and socialist panelist’s challenge my views and make me think but aren’t allowed to just put over their view without any challenge at all night after night ramming things down our throats with no balance.

  35. Original Richard
    October 30, 2021

    There is a case for a publicly funded broadcaster but not in the form, size and cost of the current BBC.

    The BBC is over funded as evidenced by the fact that they can pay a presenter of a football programme ÂŁmillions/year. The Government could start by reducing the licence fee by 10% or more each year, which could easily be justified by the lower living standards the BBC wants for us in order to unilaterally tackle the emergency climate catastrophe. Perhaps also with a salary limit.

    As a publicly funded broadcaster not reliant on viewing figures the BBC should be instructed to develop programmes and talent and when a programme becomes popular and the staff want pay increases the programme should be sold off to the private sector.

    There is no way to prevent the Marxist bias at the BBC as it will always be staffed by young people just out of Marxist CCP funded academia and with no experience of life or business.

    But the BBC as a publicly funded broadcaster could be made to allow programmes to be broadcast by other organisations, such as perhaps the TaxPayers’ Alliance, as a way to provide diversity of opinion and information.

    And the BBC, together with all MSM organisations, should be made to always make clear to the viewer when they are interviewing an activist and not pretend it is a random person. In addition the BBC/MSM should always be informing the viewer how an organisation they are interviewing is funded.

  36. Burning injustice
    October 30, 2021

    “Most of us want good public services and are happy to pay a decent price through tax for them.”
    Sir John, I want excellent public services but don’t want to pay for them via tax. I believe the productivity of the public sector, already poor, has deteriorated markedly because of the pandemic response and the Government has no agenda to do anything about it. You will be aware of ONS and other data that show how public sector productivity has flatlined for many years, whereas that of the private sector has increased.
    It would be helpful if you discussed the topic of how government can facilitate the provision of public services rather than provide them itself.

    1. hefner
      October 30, 2021

      Productivity of the private sector in 2018-19 was (slightly) smaller than before the financial crisis of 2008. From 2008 to 2017, it has slowed down such that in 2018 the UK was ranking 31st out of the 35 OECD countries (blogs.lse.ac.uk, 07/03/2020, E. Ilzetski, ‘If the UK is high tech, why is productivity growth slow’).

      See also
      ‘Unlocking UK productivity’, 16/11/2015, enterpriseresearch.ac.uk
      ‘Boosting UK productivity with SME growth’, May 2016, esrc.ukri.org

      1. a-tracy
        November 4, 2021

        SME private sector companies don’t work out their companies productivity, they don’t know how the government are measuring it. If it is a simple turnover-v-employee numbers then it will give false readings.

        “Such concerns are, we are told, at the forefront of the government’s planning for the post-Brexit economy. ÂŁ800 million is earmarked for the new Advanced Research and Invention Agency (ARIA), a ‘high-risk, high-reward’ scientific research agency modelled on the US Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency.” this was interesting from the lse blog.

        Is this government only helping large companies to achieve better productivity, what advice do they have for SME’s and what communication are they using to share them. Tell us how you are measuring our productivity.

        Lots of R&D grants are dependent on you sharing your unique new ideas, when large concerns get their hands on them you’re finished off, catch 22. So a lot of R&D doesn’t get recorded.

  37. X-Tory
    October 30, 2021

    I see that Boris Johnson admitted this morning on GB News that what made him such a climate alarmist was the so-called ‘hockey stick’ graph. This graph has been widely criticised and challenged, but Boris has been completely brainwashed by it. The truth is that nobody can say whether the graph is right or wrong because the evidence on which it is based is so flimsy that it can be neither proved nor disproved. Furthermore, Boris Johnson immediately assumed that the increase in global temperatures indicated were due to man’s activity, when once again, there is no proof of this.

    Besides, as many people have repeatedly said (but unfortunately the interviewer was too meek to raise this point) given that the UK’s output of greenhouse gases is so small there is NOTHING that we can do that will make the slightest iota of difference. But again, Boris Johnson seems to be too stupid, or too brainwashed, to understand this. He has now become the catspaw of our enemies such as China and Germany.

    1. Sakara Gold
      October 30, 2021

      @X-Tory

      “Boris Johnson immediately assumed that the increase in global temperatures indicated were due to man’s activity, when once again, there is no proof of this”

      Absolute crap, you dont know what you are talking about. If you want the FACTS about global warming and not the fossil fuel bullshit and propaganda you read on the DT, check NASA website

      https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

      Global warming is caused by the burning of fossil fuels since the industrial revolution. Can you read charts?

      1. dixie
        October 31, 2021

        What about the wider climate swings before the Industrial Revolution?

    2. rose
      October 30, 2021

      It is a mystery why no-one has told the PM about the Roman warming period, or the Mediaeval warming period, or the Minoan warming period, all warmer than this one. History didn’t start in the mid nineteenth century and that goes for ice ages too.

      1. Sakara Gold
        October 31, 2021

        @rose
        All caused by volcanic eruption s. And all followed by major outbreaks of bubonic plague Yersina pestis after huge human migrations. The overwhelming majority of the world’s scientists – and governments – agree that current global temperature rise is due to CO2/methane emissions. For years the oil majors have been paying any scientist who would take the money to produce “research” that purports to prove otherwise. Just like the tobacco industry 50 years ago trying to “prove” that smoking does not cause cancer.

        1. Peter2
          October 31, 2021

          Whats happened to the predictions of accelerating rises in temperatures from 2000?

        2. rose
          November 2, 2021

          “The overwhelming majority of the world’s scientists – and governments – agree that current global temperature rise is due to CO2/methane emissions.”

          If you go into that, you will find the original poll it is based on consists of self selecting scientists and very few of them. You can’t know how many scientists agree with you and how many don’t, when so many are being suppressed. It was the same with the pandemic – totalitarian. That is not science.

  38. Atlas
    October 30, 2021

    I find gbnews interesting viewing. Market choices in action eh? The only thing that rankles is being forced to pay the BBC-only licence fee.

    1. X-Tory
      October 30, 2021

      You may be obliged to pay, but you are NOT “forced” to pay. You can simply stop paying. ‘Be the change you want to see’! What do you think will happen? You will get loads of threatening letters, and maybe, just maybe, someone will come round, but if you refuse to talk to him, and simply close the door, no actual action will be taken against you, as they can do nothing without evidence.

      1. Mark B
        October 31, 2021

        The law is the law and, if you watch live broadcasted TV, then you should have a license. If you do not want to watch and / or fund the BBC, then you should stop watching ALL live broadcasted TV.

        1. Micky Taking
          October 31, 2021

          Well the BBC get ALL the money, if you expect us to not watch the dozens of other free broadcasters who get zilch you’ve got another think coming.

  39. glen cullen
    October 30, 2021

    Boris – ‘’BBC is good. BBC is right, BBC works’’ 
No it bloody doesn’t

  40. Margaret Brandreth-
    October 30, 2021

    You are so right John . There is no point in throwing money at services.There needs to be an objective review, yet these people who are supposed to be independent advisors command large amounts of money for going with the flow. The question is who should decide where to spend the money. Highly paid staff who have clout will always fight for their cause or that of a friend. They put a good case forward , whilst others who are inundated with work and struggle along simply and don’t have time. Some of those looking at the individual cases are not able to understand the workings and the best options for any case put forward. They go along with pre conceived ideas and change the squares around instead of really looking at the problem with fresh eyes.

  41. Lindsay McDougall
    October 30, 2021

    Follow your arguement where it leads. Would it not be better to have fewer services that are free at the point of use?
    Part of the reason that NHS waiting lists are so dire (even without a pandemic) is that there is no demand management. Modest charges would cure that problem.
    There seems little point in subsidising public transport or providing more capacity now that demand for PT has fallen by an average of 30%.
    There is no need for low cost (subsidised) housing owned by the State, to be rented out off a waiting list or for sexual favours. The State should sell off its residential property to the tenant or a landlord and thereafter award housing subsidy for individual people just so long as they need it.

  42. Old person
    October 30, 2021

    The BBC have developed an art form on not reporting news. Take the anti-lock down protests in London. Either never mentioned, the size of the protest deliberately underestimated or prominence given to the usual troublemakers at any protest.
    24 hour news is not reporting the same single one hour of news 24 times interspersed with self advertising.
    Was there any mention of the Julian Assange appeal this week? The outcome is critical for the freedom of the press.
    Ukcolumn.org presents three video podcasts per week that report the important and critical news to which the BBC can ever hope to aspire. This organisation certainly holds the BBC to account.
    The BBC are allowed to use the derogatory term anti-vaxxer to label the smarter people in the country who have taken the time and trouble to inform themselves on the issues around the Emergency Use Authorisation of an experimental injection. All the data is available in the VAERS (US) database and our Yellow Card system. The increase in deaths/injuries among the school-age generation needs thorough investigation.

  43. forthurst
    October 30, 2021

    The BBC is doing precisely what BBC Board expects. The BBC Board is doing precisely what the government that appointed it expects. It is time for JR to stop winging against the BBC and start winging against those responsible for appointing these people, most of whom no patriotic Englishman would touch with a barge pole; then again no patriotic Englishman would touch the Tory party with a barge pole either.

  44. Elizabeth Spooner
    October 30, 2021

    The BBC is incapable of fairly discussing the public sector because it is itself a public sector body which is expensively over managed, does not have to earn a penny of its income or worry where the next ÂŁ is coming from. It does not understand business or private enterprise and does not connect with non Metropolitan opinions, so retreats to its subsidised comfort zone opinions all the time. Its education coverage never covers the private sector, likewise its health coverage even though people who support them pay the licence fee the same as the people BBC approve of and promotes.

  45. Derek Henry
    October 30, 2021

    Afternoon John,

    Hope you are having a peaceful weekend. Enjoy the rest and keep up the good work.

    The ÂŁ is a public monopoly. Like any monopoly the monopolist sets the price when it spends. MONOPOLY is the shortest topic in any economic textbook.

    Not from setting the quantity of money or something like that, but rather by specifying what you have to do to get the money from the government — that is, the prices government pays when it spends money into the economy (or the collateral demanded when it lends).

    When the Government sets the min wage it Is telling you. If government makes the min wage ÂŁ10 per hour for basic labour, then it is implicitly stipulating that you need to do 1 hour of work to get ÂŁ10

    Is the private markets compelled to move towards prices government sets ?

    Is a very good question.

    The key feature is the price competition between the private sector and the government, and the fact that the government doesn’t have to blink while the private sector does.

    If the government is paying better than the private sector for skills and real resources, then not only will private sector sales drop to zero, but the large increase in the money supply from the increase in government spending will further hurt private sellers, increasing supply while they face zero demand, forcing the private sector back to the table, to bring their price down to match the government’s.

    The result is that if taxes are above zero then the government has market power to determine the price level, and private prices are attracted towards the prices that government pays. This actually tracks certain results in mainstream Industrial Organisation and Antitrust economics, which argues that if there is something that reduces the stock of durable goods available to be resold, eg. depreciation or taxes in our case, then the production monopolist will retain pricing power.

    In the real world of course it’s a lot more complicated: administered prices means that most prices really aren’t that sensitive to imbalances in supply and demand; and, the government isn’t providing money on an on-demand basis, because we don’t have something like a Job Guarantee (yet). But we can conduct somewhat more realistic thought experiments illustrating the point too. For example, if the government announced that it was just going to pay all of its suppliers and workers 10 times the prices it paid last year, does anybody doubt that there would be inflation as a result?

    In real life, the government does not typically try to oppose inflation by holding steady on prices in this way above.

    it could do this, but it’s bad policy, because the collateral damage would be severe: in our modern administered price markets, it takes a very large, severe drop in demand to bring prices down. Instead, the better policy might be to manage the pressures within the private economy that lead to private suppliers requesting higher prices.

    That includes, but is not limited to, demand management policy, robust antitrust to keep markets competitive, and possibly incomes policies or corporate governance reforms to prevent spiraling conflict inflation.

    In short ….

    1. We need a competition and MONOPOLY authority with some teeth. Treat business like cattle not pets.

    2. The price the Government ( monopolist) pays for goods and services has been too high – See pandemic outsourcing and NHS outsourcing for details. Some businesses treat government spending like a gravey train when they find a MONOPOLY perch from which to extract economic rent.

    Price not quantity is very important.

  46. BOF
    October 30, 2021

    Your article today Sir John, reminded me of the appalling value we get from the Biased Broadcasting Company in the form of practically EVERY presenter and interviewer as they continuously use the terms, kind of (like), sort of (thing). These are often used twice in a single sentence, adding absolutely nothing! We pay for this.

    Todays Any Questions and Any Answers had no opposition to Climate doom and gloom. No contrary opinions. I wonder what generation 2050 will say when they look back from poverty and realise that none of the crystal ball prophesies have come to pass?

  47. rose
    October 30, 2021

    Tell that to the armed services.

  48. ukretired123
    October 30, 2021

    There are so many good contributions on this key topic today which really defines the most important difference between the private and public sectors of the economy. Finance.

    In the 1970s a new but necessary discipline was promoted among the Accounting professional bodies called Finance for Non-financial Managers and their staff. This subject should be mandatory for everyone in BBC (and other taxpayer funded bodies) management and if they are not up to it need weeding out. They operate on need more money not budgets and cutting one’s cloth unlike the hounded private sector.

  49. glen cullen
    October 30, 2021

    The BBC interviewed yesterday, ahead of cop26, the Glasgow transport officer, about the introduction of electric buses and when asked about the costs, he proclaimed that the buses will have cost parity with diesel buses in 15 years
.the interviewer didn’t blink an eye but also suggested that that was great news

    1. Micky Taking
      October 30, 2021

      That’s a long time to charge a bus battery.

      1. Peter2
        October 31, 2021

        Electric buses range may soon improve but at present it is about 80 miles.

        1. Micky Taking
          October 31, 2021

          Taking into account stopping and starting every third of a mile?

  50. a-tracy
    October 31, 2021

    You talk of balance and fair reporting. Have the BBC done any articles this about Brexit benefits, any information on growing businesses creating more jobs, reshoring previous companies that left the UK for the EU now returning and bringing back jobs, taxes and investment into the UK? I don’t watch so I don’t know but it is a simple question, how many programs have we had that are positive to balance the programs that are negative reports?

    1. Nottingham Lad Himself
      October 31, 2021

      Well, we haven’t had many programmes about how good covid19 has been either have we, Tracy?

      You know, lowering the pensions and long term healthcare bills, freeing up some housing, keeping the rowdies out of the pubs, and all the rest eh?

      They really are the limit, this BBC lot, aren’t they?

      1. a-tracy
        November 1, 2021

        NLH, lol 😀 you are getting amusing, 17 posts on this thread I hope you’re getting a bonus.

        People didn’t get a vote or a say on covid.

        The UK citizens had two further chances to overturn the Brexit vote at two general elections, Labour offered a pause and more votes on the issue, Lib Dems a solid overturn.

  51. Ed
    October 31, 2021

    Boris will never do anything to sort out the BBC, given that it blindly parrots more eco-loon nonsense than you could shake a stick at.
    By the way how many private jets will be transporting all those important people to Glasgow. How many people will freeze to death after their gas boilers are banned, while climate czars continue to live the high life (no pun intended) and fly about in (emissions tax free) toys.
    .

Comments are closed.