In my live blog of today's historic PMQs I wrote this: "In what has to be one of the lowest points in public service broadcasting BBC2's Daily Politics coverage stops halfway through the Prime Minister's concluding remarks to cut to Wimbledon."
Shadow Culture minister Ed Vaizey MP has just emailed me this reaction to the BBC's decision:
"I find it incredible, whatever your view of Blair, that the BBC should cut historic coverage of a unique parliamentary affair to cover a second round match at Wimbledon."
4.30pm update: Just spoken to IDS. He was part of the Daily Politics panel when the coverage was cut. As he walked through the BBC offices at Millbank he said that there was a furious reaction with BBC staffers protesting with strings of four letter words! Iain himself said that it was an "appalling" decision.
Hear hear, completely unacceptable. Luckily I was watching it on BBC Parliament.
Posted by: Ash Faulkner | June 27, 2007 at 13:22
IDS has just shown his displeasure about the decision on Sky (which they lapped up).
Posted by: Andrew Woodman | June 27, 2007 at 13:22
Was it a Henman match? If so, I think it's fair to say that most of the Great British public would rather watch Tim play tennis than Tone depart however much Ed Vaizey might wish it otherwise.
Posted by: Patricia Clark | June 27, 2007 at 13:25
It was remarkable. Straight onto Sky for me, and that's where I'll stay for PMQ's in future.
Posted by: Ian Lucas | June 27, 2007 at 13:27
Correct decision in a consumer democracy.
When will politicians recognise that we don't care. They are all little people who bore us. Even voting onve every 4 years can't get us to participate to the same level as we do the lottery.
Posted by: reality check | June 27, 2007 at 13:29
It was a 2nd round match between 2 ladies I'd never heard of.
Posted by: Andrew Woodman | June 27, 2007 at 13:32
... Just as they gave minimal and disjointed coverage to the Royal fleet review & Trafalgar anniversary at Devonport a couple of years ago. A property programme was deemed to be of greater national significance that day.
Whatever I think of Mr Blair's legacy (i.e. not very much) it remains the case that coverage of his closing moments was a significant national event. Rain stops play at Wimbledon; so end of reign should have.
Another example of trivialisation by a once great national institution. The only surprise is that they did this to someone of their own political persuasion.
Posted by: Ken Stevens | June 27, 2007 at 13:32
This was shocking. I have always stood up for the BBC's public service credentials but this has demonstrated how low they will go. Terrible.
Posted by: Ranil Jayawardena | June 27, 2007 at 13:36
Funniest thing I've read all day. Is that the "uniquely funded" BBC, which is able to shun commercialism and show high quality programming because it doesn't have to chase ratings?
Seems like the commercially aware channel, Sky, chose to show what people really wanted which was Blair's speech. Remind me why we pay £130-odd a year tellytax for the Beeb?
Posted by: Ed | June 27, 2007 at 13:38
Whoops that was meant to quote "reality check"'s post.
Posted by: Ed | June 27, 2007 at 13:39
It really was unbelievable - because of course the second round of Wimbledon is really far more important than the final words of our Prime Minister. The BBC has become a joke.
Posted by: Howard Davis | June 27, 2007 at 13:39
This is one of the reasons why so many people are not interested, simply because the Media does not cover anything positive in politics.
Posted by: Wayne Bridges | June 27, 2007 at 13:41
What is even more absurd is that we lost Blair's final words to a BBC 'commercial' and not even the tennis. It is not beyond the wit of man, programme editor or channel controller to drop a programme trail and a channel 'ident' to give the Daily Politics the extra seconds it needed. And that's if you agree with Reality Check that the tennis is more important.
Anyone else who feels let down by this should join me in complaining via BBC Online.
Posted by: Victoria Street | June 27, 2007 at 13:46
Exactly! It was an advert for 'Rome' not even the tennis. Although I'm afraid I don't think that's much better!
Absolutely shocking. I wasn't one of the lucky ones able to switch to another channel.
Posted by: Anon | June 27, 2007 at 13:56
Anyone else who feels let down by this should join me in complaining via BBC Online.
In their own words, "use your time wisely Victoria; do not trifle". The monolithic BBC ain't going to be moved by their complaints process. Spare yourself the aggro and just switch-over.
Posted by: Mark Fulford | June 27, 2007 at 14:00
But the monolithic BBC will be moved by the splenetic outrage that I am sure Andrew Neil will be unloading on them. Let's give him some back up.
Posted by: Victoria Street | June 27, 2007 at 14:08
I will certainly be complaining - it was a disgraceful thing for a public broadcaster to do.
To complain online go to www.bbc.co.uk/complaints
Posted by: Howard Davis | June 27, 2007 at 14:09
Typical BBC what a sham they are, they did the same last year while I was watching Clinton adressing the Labour party conference.
Wether you like him or not they have no sense of priorites
I phoned to complain and they were not interested, pathetic !
Posted by: Gezmond007 | June 27, 2007 at 14:09
I just went on the BBC to their article about why Tony Blair is leaving and this is their last paragraph
"and the end result is that Tony Blair becomes an ex-prime minister at the relatively young age of 54, despite having won three large election victories and with opinion polls still suggesting the party was well set to head towards a fourth term in office."
I am not normally one for this BBC anti tory conspiracy but come on... In the last 8-10 months the Tories have come top of almost every poll, and showed that Labour was not at all well set to head towards a fourth term in office. This does drive me nuts, the editorialising of facts to suit the piece and most likely the writers political persuasion.
Link to the article is
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6238194.stm
Am I just overreacting?
Posted by: James A | June 27, 2007 at 14:14
I agree with Ed about the BBC and also surprised they stopped the programme, as they have been wittering on about their favourite Blair for the past weeks.
The Daily Politics is patronising, dummbed down and full of left wing and pro-euro bias.
The only good thing about what they,ve done is it gives more ammunition to those of us who want the TV license scrapped and for the BBC to compete in the marketplace with Sky etc thus giving us a true choice.
Posted by: John F | June 27, 2007 at 14:14
It was PMQ's, not war time speech to the nation!!
Given the minimal importance and disdain with which Blair has held the Commons throughout his tenure, how fitting that the Beeb should cut short this self congratulatory farce which is all over the tv's today.
Posted by: ACA | June 27, 2007 at 14:20
The BBC News 24 coverage is currently absolutely nauseating.
Posted by: Chris Palmer | June 27, 2007 at 14:21
Excellent decision, who wants to watch that little, mendacious, preenining oik spout his flummery, platitudes and rubbish. We've had 10 years of lies and spin and disinformation, thank god he's gone and well done the BeeB for cutting short the exit verbiage. For once i'm with the BBC on this, good decision chaps.
As for the rest of the coverage, why, oh why, do we have to have the overkill and wall to wall coverage. He's going, it was telegraphed, half the country or more hate the man and have no interest, more than half the country wasn't involved in the election of Gordo, so why the bloody coverage. We don't care, we're apathetic, we're shell-shocked with 10 years of media overkill.
I don't care if ITV waste shareholders' monies but the waste by the BBC today is scandalous and should be investigated and heads roll.
As for the convention that states that the opposition have to be kind and full of platitudes, what a load of 5h1t, he was a vile and odious liar and deserves to be lambasted and told a few home truths.
Posted by: George Hinton | June 27, 2007 at 14:26
I wholeheartedly agree with Ed Vaizey. Whatever your view of Blair (and mine is pretty dim), this was surely an historic moment. I sat open-mouthed in disbelief as the coverage on The Daily Politics cut away from the House of Commons. It was pretty clear that the studio guests were dumbfounded too and I'm glad IDS has made his feelings plain on C4.
Posted by: Richard Weatherill | June 27, 2007 at 14:27
Sorry - for "C4" read "Sky"!!
Posted by: Richard Weatherill | June 27, 2007 at 14:30
Those who aren't busy working would probably choose to watch Wimbledon, anyway.
I heard it on the car radio, with a commentary delivered in hushed tones reminiscent of Tom Fleming or Richard Dimbleby at their worst. He's only a bloody politician for God's sake.
'The Prime Minister...wearing...on both feet...his fabled lucky shoes...personally crafted by Benvenuto Cellini...'
Pass the sick bag Tony...
Posted by: Traditional Tory | June 27, 2007 at 14:31
Was News 24 showing it?
Posted by: RobD | June 27, 2007 at 14:40
Patricia Clark, no it wasn't a Henman match.He's third on Centre Court today so even if the weather holds probably won't be on until 5pm.
I suppose I should join in the general sense of outrage but having watched the sorry spectacle of PMQs today where several MPs made fools of themselves I have a sneaking feeling that the BBC did the country a favour by not showing it.
Posted by: malcolm | June 27, 2007 at 14:42
I can't believe the genuflecting towards Blair on this site. He is not the head of state. No wonder the Tory Party has been in the mess it has been for ten years.
Posted by: Bill | June 27, 2007 at 14:43
get a life eddie - not everyone is obsessed with politics!
Posted by: frank aylesford | June 27, 2007 at 14:51
I'm certainly not "genuflecting towards Blair", but I do have a sense of history and believe that the office of Prime Minister retains some importance, whatever one might think of the individuals who hold it (unlike the BBC, obviously).
Posted by: Richard Weatherill | June 27, 2007 at 14:52
Clearly the Cameron clone Vaizey, who was touting himself as 'the man most likely to' long before someone lubricated his way into a safe seat, believes that he has joined an exclusive club of VIPs who deserve red carpet treatment from the media at all times.
Perhaps somebody should have a quiet word with the fellow?
Posted by: Traditional Tory | June 27, 2007 at 14:57
Ed Vaizey's comment shows just how out of touch MP's are with the country. I have been unable to find anyone outside of westminster who thinks this was a bad decision.
He's going - who cares what he has to say. We've heard it all before and it's self-serving spin.
Now if he'd had the guts to be honest for once that would have been newsworthy.
Posted by: Hayek's Grandad | June 27, 2007 at 14:58
Well said Traditional Tory and Hayek's Grandad. As a class MPs just don't get how some despise and more distrust them. We've had the longest farewell in history rammed down our gobs for about two months now. The last thing we want to see is Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition applauding the spinmeister in chief, as if the poor electorate don't exist. How predictable to see Cameron (the Bullingdon Boy himself: there's irony) beckoning fellow members of the opposition to rise (as they did).
Posted by: Bill | June 27, 2007 at 15:11
Cut to trailer for 'Rome' in which charismatic leader is knifed by his closest political ally... [add your punchline here]
Posted by: Erasmus | June 27, 2007 at 15:12
Blair and the Beeb apart, the best thing about PMQs today was how impressive DC was when he asked his questions calmly in a statesmanlike manner. He was well mannered and Tony Blair provided him with answers.
It was very civilised and I would like to think that today could set the tone (sorry!) for later encounters with Brown.
Simple, well mannered questions demanding factual answers. How refreshing!
Posted by: David Belchamber | June 27, 2007 at 15:12
We've had the longest farewell in history rammed down our gobs for about two months now
He'd have had to have gone on a lot longer to beat 'Ol' Blue Eyes'
How predictable to see Cameron (the Bullingdon Boy himself: there's irony) beckoning fellow members of the opposition to rise (as they did).
But isn't it traditional for the heir to the throne to pay due and grovelling homage to his lord and master?
Posted by: Traditional Tory | June 27, 2007 at 15:15
I should have thought, Bill, that you might have wanted the great British public (or, at least, that small proportion that watches The Daily Politics, to "see Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition applauding the spinmeister in chief, as if the poor electorate don't exist."
Posted by: Richard Weatherill | June 27, 2007 at 15:18
Pity that Dave did not push through with GB to point out that it was his intervention in the funding of the fine DEFRA was awarded for messing up farmers payments, that resulted in the environment agency losing £150m from its budget, which they promptly pulled from river defense and land drainage budget. Read Private Eye on this one and I bet they are going to have a field day in their next issue
Posted by: Rebecca B | June 27, 2007 at 15:20
It was very funny...as they say comedy is all about timing !
Posted by: Alison Anne Smith | June 27, 2007 at 15:40
"Was it a Henman match? "
No, it was Ana Ivanovic against a girl from Hungary
Posted by: Andrea | June 27, 2007 at 15:48
Ah, but is Ana Ivanovic not quite fit? If so, the decision seems entirely reasonable.
If not, it's a total disgrace.
Posted by: Mr Eugenides | June 27, 2007 at 15:51
I do not think it matters whether we approve or disaprove of Blair, he was the democratically elected leader of our country and the BBC, whilst we still pay the licence fee, it remains the public service broadcaster. It is their duty to cover such occasions and their failure to do so is appalling. That is why I changed to Sky.
Posted by: David Gold | June 27, 2007 at 16:23
Note the update on this post, interesting anecdote from IDS.
Posted by: Deputy Editor | June 27, 2007 at 16:35
With afternoon temperatures here in Crete exceeding 106F for the fourth consecutive day, we were taking a quiet siesta after a couple of medicinal ice-cold beers. Luckily, we missed both Bliar and the tennis.
Posted by: mirthios | June 27, 2007 at 16:35
Mr Eugenides:Ah, but is Ana Ivanovic not quite fit? If so, the decision seems entirely reasonable. If not, it's a total disgrace.
Evidence from here suggests that the ball lands on the line. Perhaps we need one of those new hawkeye-type computer thingies to make an informed judgment?
Posted by: William Norton | June 27, 2007 at 16:40
Upsetting anyone at the Beeb is fine by me.
Posted by: Bill | June 27, 2007 at 16:42
Actually, the BBC do have form with this. They always cut into the opposition leaders speech during the Budget reply to talk to people in the street who are 56p worse off.
Posted by: Andrew Woodman | June 27, 2007 at 16:47
Andrew wrote at 13.32:
It was a 2nd round match between 2 ladies I'd never heard of.
Andrew! That is no way to speak of the PM and the head of Her Madge's opposition!
Posted by: Graeme Archer | June 27, 2007 at 16:48
Which 2 ladies were playing at Wimbledon when Mr Heath's grand piano was taken from Downing Street or when Mrs Thatcher was tearfully climbing in her car?
Posted by: Geoff Taylor | June 27, 2007 at 16:52
Geoff: none. Heath went February/March 74 and Thatcher went in November 90. Wimbledon is held in June.
Posted by: William Norton | June 27, 2007 at 16:57
Usually I act as an apologist for the BBC against the vitriol directed against it on this site, but I'll admit that the decision to cut away from coverage of Tony Blair's final words to the Commons and the ovation that followed appears to demonstrate poor judgement.
(I'm not sure it constitutes one of the lowest points in the history of public-service broadcasting though.)
I suspect the BBC have certain contractual obligations as part of their exclusive broadcasting rights to Wimbledon which would probably explain the switch to the tennis.
Posted by: Daniel VA | June 27, 2007 at 17:09
Hey DVA, good to see you back on here again. Where've you been?
Posted by: malcolm | June 27, 2007 at 17:13
He's been on *facebook* malcolm! Why haven't you? The perfect way to waste entire weeks of one's life!
Posted by: Graeme Archer | June 27, 2007 at 17:17
"Another example of trivialisation by a once great national institution. The only surprise is that they did this to someone of their own political persuasion."
Ken Stevens | June 27, 2007 at 13:32
Yeah but didn't little Tone and his mate Ali C brutally kick the crap out of the BBC and a civil servant for daring to suggest they may have embellished some memo or other, causing a suicide, the sacking of a relatviely well known radio journalist, and loss of a Governor plus DG and probably cowing them from being too critical again...At least until that reign was over.
Maybe they aren't so fond of him these days?
Posted by: Bill Melotti | June 27, 2007 at 17:47
Irritating as it was to have to switch, did those of you who 'couldn't even change to Sky' try following the instructions to switch to BBC1, where after missing 5 seconds, there were 4 uninterrupted hours of coverage?
Posted by: Matt Davies | June 27, 2007 at 17:57
Many of you guys seem obcessed with politics!
What is the big deal? Blair can at best be seen as a less than average PM and he took an incredibly long time to go. He's gone; good!
Posted by: jorgen | June 27, 2007 at 18:38
Matt Davies - BBC1 did not cover PMQ's which is what everyone wanted to watch because it was Blair's last speech.
Posted by: Howard Davis | June 27, 2007 at 18:42
Another dreadful day in Auntie's history, I think I've got the picture.
Posted by: Curly | June 27, 2007 at 19:33
Too old for that sort of thing Graeme, used to be on Friends Reunited but that's passe now. Tob honest I spend far too much time on CH but Ifind it rather addictive.
Posted by: malcolm | June 27, 2007 at 20:47
Everything stops for sport. The BBC are always altering programmes to accommodate the new God Sport.
Personally, I have had enough of Blair, his missus and kids. Good riddance.
Posted by: Torygirl | June 28, 2007 at 00:46
Totally sick of Blair . He has had massively too much media time . Relieved now that the slimeball has gone . Why does the Conservative party defend this man and want to give him even more publicity ?
Which is not in any way an excuse for the BBC which is in a category of smug lying and news censorship all of its own , which Goebbels would have fully understood .
Also , just accept it -
The House of Commons is now largely irrelevant and is being treated appropriately .
I suspect that the people who are jumping up and down are the same ones who approve or aquiesce in its irrelevancy .
Posted by: Jake | June 28, 2007 at 10:00
The speech seemed rather off schedule. So what if they cut the footage. You can find the whole thing on youtube or on the news anyway...
Posted by: James Maskell | June 28, 2007 at 10:07
Jake June 28, 10:00
"I suspect that the people who are jumping up and down are the same ones who approve or aquiesce in its irrelevancy"
Not Guilty, m'Jake. I'm a swivel-eyed nutter who is anti EU precisely because I want national parliamentary supremacy restored. Couldn't stand Blair at all. Nevertheless his impact (whether one regards this as entirely favourable or not!) was remarkable and it was a national occasion to which the publicly financed, public service broadcaster just couldn't be bothered to accord due priority.
Posted by: Ken Stevens | June 28, 2007 at 10:13
A Prime Minister leaving office and they switch to a tennis match. They never would have done it to Thatcher. Bias, indeed.
Posted by: passing leftie | June 28, 2007 at 12:50
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/broadcasting/a63366/bbc-investigating-blairs-speech-cut-off.html
gives you a bit more on this
Posted by: Comstock | June 29, 2007 at 21:45