QUESTION TIME FOR THE BBC

Al Jabeeba - the Brown Broadcasting Corporation, had a political program in a controversial area, at a timing that suited their Political Masters. (while both the Copenhagen Conference and the Pre-Budget Report were 'massive' headlines). With these two competing issues for dominating the program, the agenda was subverted with 'Afghanistan', about the only subject that could possibly compete with either of these two 'inconvenient' news items. This was very conveniently timed.

So what spectacle. There was a token 'Pre-Budget Report' question - the only remarks worth listening to were from Piers Morgan (I never thought I would ever say that). The Bankers 50% tax starting at £25,000 would reap £0.00. The lame duck chancellor and his malcontent prime minister decided that there should be a tax on all cash bonuses paid before 8th April! So the banks just need to pay the bonuses on 8th April, and nothing is reaped.

However, this was a brilliant piece of political manoeuvring by the BBC, to prevent serious Labour damage and fallout from two extremely contentious issues. When questions should have been asked about how much damage our economy was going to suffer from Copenhagen, and just how much debt we can sustain from the pre-budget report, we had (and this is the reason Wootton Bassett was picked) worthy questions about the 'boys in Afghanistan'.

I am not complaining about the Wootton Bassett angle, and the need to address the Afghanistan issue. But when this is the last Question Time before the New Year, and there are other big issues relevant and current, while the Afghanistan issue is not going to stop being an issue any week now, this was a political Coup de Grace for the bunkered Labour Party.

Impartiality of the BBC? No. This was too convenient.
But there again, this is reason for the BBC to start thinking more seriously about their Licence, because as an Independent Candidate for MP - I am seriously thinking about their licence. As an Independent candidate for MP, I am not impressed by the fact I am standing against a 'BBC' candidate, claiming to be 'Independent'. So back to Question Time, and the BBC rules for impartiality are being distorted and even bent out of all recognition to maintain a pro-Labour agenda.

The solution? Let us start with the BBC pensions. These pensions are gilt-lined akin to the MP's pensions, they are not subject to the same tax-regime as the rest of the country. Convenient for any Government that is going to bankrupt pension pots en masse. That is why the BBC is still praising Brown, so we need retrospective legislation making both the Labour MPs and BBC employees subject to all the perversions of the tax-grabbing and pensions destructive Chancellor Brown's policies. Both sing the same hymn: 'Brown is Brilliant! - Brown is Brilliant!' Lets hear that chant when their pensions are empty coffers, because their glorious Chancellor's policies were applied to them.

But there is more important issues at stake. The BBC is supposed to represent the people, not the political masters, there is supposed to be accurate and impartial reporting. We find out that the BBC was sitting on the 'stolen' emails for a month. 'Stolen' - yes, by calling them stolen, it makes the emails more sniping by the anti-AGW lobby, rather than the truth that they were leaked, because someone inside the CRU was whistleblowing. We need to restore the impartiality of the BBC. But how? Decapitating the BBC wont solve the problem - the problem is riddled across the entire BBC as a corporation. Removing all the Labour Luvvies wont create impartiality either, that just swings the agenda from one polarity to another. What we need is an influx of staff who are capable of representing more than just New Labour, not 'Daily Mail' Lite, but impartiality, the willingness to face each issue from all angles, and accept there are a range of opinions than just their official one.

To start with would be the return of scientific programs, something that Nu Labour despises - proper education and knowledge. By providing a proper spectrum of sophisticated documentaries, there would be an internal shift of thinking (hopefully) from a politically motivated corporation to one more critical of the material it is presenting.

Programs like 'Question Time' need to be revised, with the BBC unable to set the agenda. (For those who do not know, to join the audience as a 'questioner' you have to supply the BBC with your question first. The BBC then get to select what questions are asked - so set the agenda for the night). We need to push the BBC away from its current 'lowest-common denominator' based material for more highbrow material.

Saying what is needed is academic, the biggest problem is getting a political party (Labour) to accept that the BBC should be rightfully hostile to their policies if as and when the policies are wrong, or worse detrimental to the British People (Conservatives have suffered this all too often), and somehow maintaining an independence of the BBC from the political party of the day, when the politicians get to make decisions about how the BBC is paid, and who gets oversight.

The BBC has the unenviable duty to bite the hand that feeds it, but that is what is wanted.

Dr. Stephen Lathwell BSc(Hons), MSc(Optoelectronics), PhD.
Independent Candidate for MP Luton South

QUESTION TIME FOR THE BBC