BBC Right to Condemn Cameron - Shock

I have received a reply, entirely predictable, you may agree, from the BBC about my complaint over their headline saying that "David Cameron had been widely condemned" for his use of the word "swarm" in connection to the human tragedy at Calais. The BBC say, in their defence, that the language was condemned by "the Refugee Council, Labour’s acting leader, Harriet Harman, the SNP, the Liberal Democrat leader, Tim Farron, and the UN Special Representative for International Migration, Peter Sutherland."  To coin a phrase, they (all the above) would say that, wouldn't they?  All the BBC have done is to prove that if they ask the right people you will get the answer you need to support your corporate agenda!  Finally, I agree that " BBC News did not take a standpoint on the language used by Mr Cameron"  - that would have lead to accusations of bias.  Quite cleverly, the BBC got their knife in by hiding behind those "widely consulted," whoever they were!

This is what they said in full:

"BBC News has reported extensively on the migrant crisis in Calais and our coverage has included voices from across the debate. We have reported on measures taken by both the UK and French governments to deal with incursions into the Channel Tunnel, explored the motivation of migrants trying to come to the UK, and examined the impact of the situation in Calais on tourists and businesses.

As part of this overall coverage, we reported on reaction to the Prime Minister's use of the word “swarm” when describing migrants trying to reach the UK. The language he used led to criticism from a number of prominent groups and individuals, including the Refugee Council, Labour’s acting leader, Harriet Harman, the SNP, the Liberal Democrat leader, Tim Farron, and the UN Special Representative for International Migration, Peter Sutherland.

We believe that these concerns were reported entirely properly and we included Downing Street’s reaction to this criticism. BBC News did not take a standpoint on the language used by Mr Cameron; we simply reflected the views of others.

Thank you again for contacting us, we value your feedback. All complaints are sent to senior management and news teams every morning and we included your points in this overnight report. These reports are among the most widely read sources of feedback in the BBC and ensures that your complaint has been seen by the right people quickly. This helps inform their decisions about current and future programmes."

Swarming at Calais

On the BBC News at 2200 on Thursday 30 August the headline was that the Prime Minister had been "widely condemned" for his language on the Calais illegal immigrant problem.  Of course, the BBC did not repeat the word "swarm" but we may assume that it provoked the "outrage."

As it sounded to me, which was clearly the BBC's intention, the whole weight of public opinion was against Mr Cameron. But I think we are entitled to ask exactly whom they consulted to justify the use of the term "widely."  Specifically, what was the extent of their research and what cross section of opinion did they consult in order to reach their editorial position?

It comes as no surprise that the Prime Minister would be condemned by the Labour Party for whatever he said and I suspect that most of the egalitarian hierarchy in the BBC would be only too eager to mount the highest moral ground at the slightest sniff of a humanitarian interest.  However, I feel sure there would be many who would consider the use of the word swarm, collective aggregation by definition, as entirely descriptive of the situation.   I wonder whether the BBC consulted the occupants of the Clapham Omnibus, to say nothing of the long-suffering people of Kent, before trumpeting their headline? I have asked them the question in an official complaint.

RAF Fighter Numbers

The report that the RAF will reduce to just 127 fast-jet aircraft, "the lowest number that the RAF will have fielded since its creation in 1918,"  is dismal. On the other hand, at the same time, the RAF will be able to boast no less than 14 huge Voyager air refuelling tanker aircraft (leased on a watertight 30-year PFI deal).  We may not be able to deliver much of a punch but we shall certainly be able to reach a long way!

Meanwhile, We Have a Referendum to Think About

With the Greek debt crisis solved until the next one, we can turn our attention back to the more personal issue of Britain's membership of the EU.  With the European democratic deficit firmly in the electorate's mind and the latest sleight to UK independence, news that, indifferent to previous undertakings, the European Commission proposes to use The European Financial Stabilisation  Mechanism to provide emergency funding to Greece, one might expect that the PM would feel his negotiating  position somewhat strengthened.  But will he use it?

I remain highly suspicious of the negotiating strategy.  I hope I am wrong but I believe the PM is pre-disposed to stay in the EU and intent upon delivering a compromise, the best result possible, rather than the optimum, best possible result.  The best possible result will not be achieved by adjusting the existing deck chairs!  Having just witnessed the astonishing semantic contortions and financial deceits being brought into play to save the Euro (sorry Greece), I am not at all confident that the Government will find the strength to stand up to the Euro Technocracy and negotiate a lasting settlement that will save our Nation from the EU economic and social spiral of decline.

If I was asked to vote today it would be a resounding NO!  On the other hand, if a binding settlement could be achieved that satisfied the following then I could be persuaded to change my mind:

•          A "no ifs, no buts" guarantee that there would be no obligation to further political union.  Indeed, a negotiated trading relationship with the EU that excluded political union would be preferable
•        Complete control over our borders.  This is the only way in which we could keep control of economic and social fabric and ensure that our inexorable population growth could be managed
•         Democratic accountability, particularly over the EU budget.  I am particularly fearful of the increasing tendency for government by the EU technocracy
•         Judicial autonomy ie whatever it takes to put our Courts and Legislature back in charge of our own justice system
•         A commitment to Free Trade.  All the facts point to an EU in decline as a trading bloc because of bureaucratic inertia on protectionist jealousies.  We need complete trading freedom, both of goods and services together with complete overhaul of restrictive cartels such as the CAP, Fisheries Policy and the emerging Energy surrender.  There must also be national autonomy in terms of the Social Chapter, Working Time Directive and other EU red-tape etc.

 So come on Prime Minister and do not be deterred by the Euro propensity for zero-sum compromise - it we don't ask, we certainly will not get!  

Greek Tragedy Continues

No doubt the Euro elite will be congratulating themselves on reaching a deal that saves the Euro (sorry Greece). Although the elephant in the room, the unmanageable burden of debt, gets a mention there is hardly a commitment from the Euro hard-men to do anything about it. Meantime, Greece will have to put up with draconian cuts, intimate external supervision and an effective loss of sovereignty.  It is hard to see envisage any positive impact upon unemployment and relative depravation and one wonders just how long the Greek people will be prepared to put up with their subjugated status.  History tells us that the harsh terms imposed upon Germany by the victors in 1919 prepared the ground for another European catastrophe.  Let us hope that, in their determination to save their currency, the Euro elite have not made another Versailles!

Greece

As another final deadline approaches, a helpful intervention from Mr Obama and Frau Merkel - "it is in everyone's interest to reach a durable agreement that will allow Greece to resume reforms, return to growth, and achieve debt sustainability within the eurozone."  Quite, but I wonder if "everyone," in this more of the same package, includes the hapless Greek people?