« A Tale of Two Leaders | Main | Voters believe that Britain is on the wrong course »


Kirstie Allsopp was very good, far better across the board than Chris Patten. Blears took a fearful battering over police pay.I hadn't appreciated how bad this might be for the Labour government.

Well at least Allsop got the only real applause when she pointed out that Brown hadn't appeared at the group signing because he was ashamed of reneging on the promised referendum.

The BBC, or to be accurate, the EUBC, are Marxist traitorous scum who are in the EU's pay ever but as much as Broon and McLabour.

If we allow our soveriengty to be signed away, and we do nothing, then we deserve all we get.

And get it we will.

Just one more reason why it needs to be privatised. When we are back in power we really need to take the BBC on once and for all. We should make them suffer big time.

Why isn't it conservative party policy to privatise the bbc?

Absolutely Dale and Alan. Let us "deregulate" and set free the BBC. Scrap TV licence and instead dig up Sid and invite the masses to stake in the corporation. They know the Tories are coming that's why they're propagating their left-wing agenda.

Yes...sure...do to 'em wot they do to us.

Use your IQs.
There are many quality programs aswell, and good people who do not press a poltical agenda, and a high reputation abroad.
Do you want adverts and more junk celebrity gossip with people who tawk like "scum" which will destroy good decent Tory values even more?

What is needed is reform, and a proper system of dealing with (justified) bias complaints, with teeth.

Forgive me for beleiving that in a free market, a state controlled broadcaster should not be funded by the tax payer (the license fee is a tax in all but name), should not have a monopoly in almost all areas of broadcasting and should not be able to outspend all other news outlets put together.

I don't beleive the bbc should be privatised because it is bias, I beleive it should be privatised because it is extremely uneconomical and goes against everything I beleve as a conservative and a free marketeer.

If the bbc is so great, why can it not be funded by pledge drives like CBS.


''Yes...sure...do to 'em wot they do to us''.

I'm not proposing we bleat out propoganda, simply that we privatise them. Thus I am not proposing that we do to them what they do to 'us'.

We live in an age where the BBC and their so called quality programmes are no longer needed. Look at the choice people have - the history channel, biography channel, uktv drama, movie channel after movie channel etc.

'High reputation abroad' - Even if this is true so what? Why must I pay so BBC employees can feel the world respects them? I care about by bank balance not about what some German thinks about the BBC.

I want a free market of channels and that means deregulation. Some channels are dedicated to rubbish, often the BBC e.g all those stupid dance contests, singing contests etc. Let's not forget who airs Eurovision. There are many channels which don't have 'celebrity gossip junk' like the history channel.

Reform is just a cop-opt. If people want a TV let them buy it and don't force them to buy a licence to fund the BBC as well. The BBC is a backward institution which has no place in todays world.

The quality argument is a Red Herring. The vast majority of what the BBC does is complete tosh. If consumers of quality TV were not forced to pay the TV tax, there would actually be more money available to pay for quality programes. Many of them would be made by the same people who now make BBC's decent output.

Dale; CBS (Columbia Broadcast Systems) is not funded by viewer pledges; you're thinking of PBS (Public Broadcasting System). And PBS is also supported by the government, through the National Broadcasting Foundation (and also major grants from the Department of Science).

"Just one more reason why it needs to be privatised. When we are back in power we really need to take the BBC on once and for all. We should make them suffer big time."

This is a troll from a Labour/Lib Dem supporter. Don't bite folks.

The BBC only confirmed the 'institutional bias' what we knew about already. I was convinced that Ken Clarke was going to appear on Question Time as he did on the Daily Politics. Kirsty Allsop did well although she is not a heavyweight debater. We could have done with Tony Benn in the pro-british corner - and that says it all about the lukewarm Tory leadership. "Gutless" was bandied around a lot on Question Time. It applies to the so called opponents of the EU just as much.

The other issue where there is no disagreement on the BBC is climate change.

Could this be because the panellists you describe as "Europhiles" behave in a rather more grown up manner than some of the "Europhobes" and therefore end up being taken rather more seriously by the media? Just a thought!

Stop being a schoolmarm Sally Roberts.

There are plenty of very grown-up Eurosceptics that Question Time could have chosen, Sally...

Frank Field from Labour would have been a good pick.

Next's Simon Wolfson who ran one of the most successful and intelligent Eurosceptic campaigns.

Or someone like Bob Geldof who could highlight the impact of the EU's trade and development policies on the world's poorest people.

The BBC, or to be accurate, the EUBC, are Marxist traitorous scum who are in the EU's pay ever but as much as Broon and McLabour.

Please continue in this vein. Nothing more clearly bangs home the message that the Tories cannot be trusted than this sort of mouth frothing stuff.

Frank Field was on the Daily Politics yesterday.

Blears got a battering over police pay. She retreated back in her seat when Kirstie Allsopp went on the attack pointing out that to backdate pay would have cost 30 million pounds, which is quite something for Blears because shes hard to see at the best of times...

I note that for all his other ,arguably more important baggage(Oxford,Hong Kong etc) the BBC labelled Patten as former Tory Party Chairman.It is appropriate ,given the timing to remind ourselves that he was rejected by the voters in Bath ,something we cannot do to the EU President and Commission.Rather than trawling the Tory EUrophile back catalogue they should have invited one of the current crop of ELECTED Tories.

There are some very OTT comments on here. The BBC has its problems, but to call them "Marxist traitorous scum" is just stupid, and merely serves to justify Sally's comment.

We live in an age where the BBC and their so called quality programmes are no longer needed.

I can't believe I'm reading this. BBC drama in particular is not only admired around the world, it is envied. Please, let's not throw away a reason to be proud of something Britain produces.

As for the bias argument... The BBC strives to achieve neutrality. Often they fall short. But they do a remarkable job in being even-handed most of the time, extraordinarily difficult in a world where people hold strong opinions, especially on the subject of politics.

You may scream at the TV because you feel your view is not represented properly. Just remember your political opponents are probably doing the same thing. Being "neutral" inevitably involves upsetting both sides as much as it means pleasing both sides (which is pretty much impossible).

You only need to read Tony Benn's diaries from the 1980s to know he considered the BBC to be a vast Conservative conspiracy working against him, twisting his words in interviews, always presenting his case in the worst possible light, giving an easy ride to the Tory ministers who were being interviewed alongside him and so on. It wasn't true then, and it isn't true now.

As to the specific issue of this edition of QT, which I haven't seen yet. Maybe that is an example of the BBC falling short. But there are considerations behind assembling a panel for a show like that which don't necessarily reflect an "agenda" - perhaps someone was unavailable at the last minute and had to be replaced. In such circumstances they would no doubt be grateful to whoever stepped in, their views on Europe not a factor to be considered. Also, the parties do have a say on who goes on when - it's not just the BBC's decision. They may have invited Chris Patten to appear, but it was the Conservative party's decision to put him on this week.

So come on, let's get this into perspective. It may be unfortunate, but it's not justification for ripping the BBC to pieces, either metaphorically or literally.

Europe is only one of many issues where the standard BBC opinion runs counter to public opinion generally. So there will always be a majority on QT for that progressive point of view, for eg:

Anti hanging
Anti hunting
Pro government expenditure on almost everything
Soft on criminals generally
Pro-comprehensive education

You will seldom see more than one, and never more than two out of the five panellists disagreeing with the above viewpoints.

Yet the overwhelming majority of the public is anti all these.

Why do we have to pay for this?

Labour might complain that this is typical bbc bias there were two tories on the panel, or supporters of the Iraq war complain that the inclusion of known opponents of the war like Piers Morgan and Chris Patten was a clear attempt to undermine support for that conflict and its consequences.

There have been arguments in this discussion about privatising the BBC to which I am sympathetic but that must be based on a strong market case for doing so, not childish and deeply paranoid whining about percieved bias.

My main criticisms of the BBC are

1. Too much mindless dross on BBCTV
2. Institutionalised left-wing bias in its reporting of politics and current affairs. This could be mitigated if it could be forced to change its recruitment policy. Why does it have to advertise jobs only in the Guardian? This only serves to perpetuate this bias.

Having said that, the BBC does provide us with The Proms and Test Match Special as well as other excellent programmes on Radios 3 & 4 and good sports coverage on 5 Live so it can't be all bad.

Kirsty Allsopp was rubbish! She came across like the runner up in a high school debating club. Surely we could have found a more convincing speaker. Shameful.

"Too much mindless dross on BBCTV"

Lord knows what you call the crap on ITV et al then........

Best post on this thread Graham D'amiral.Some people just ruin their case by going way over the top(Mike Bishop).
Veronon, are you sure it was the Conservative Party that was responsible for putting Patten on? I can't think that he has much support in CCHQ , the Parliamentary party or amongst the grassroots anymore.

Veronon, are you sure it was the Conservative Party that was responsible for putting Patten on?

No, but he was the only "official" Conservative on the panel, alongside Blears for Labour and Kennedy for the Lib Dems.

I'm sure CCHQ couldn't have stopped Patten appearing if he wanted to, but they do have the right to put up an official Conservative spokesperson as well (hence on-message Blears in addition to Labour-supporting Morgan).

If Kirsie Allsop was supposed to be *the* representative of the Conservative party on this show, God help us all.

I suggested a week or so ago on this website, that I wasn't sure that Patten was a 'paid-up' Conservative any more, and I think he demonstrated that last night, at least enough to water down the supposedly conservative answers that he gave.

Hazel Blears is a trade-unionist first and foremost, but the reason she is useful to Mr. Brown is because she can deliver more words per minute than your average tic-tac man - well almost, yes indeed she was in 'full throttle' and unfortunately I waasn't there to 'full throttle' her which I would have liked to be (and I don't mean verbally!).

I thought that Kirsty Allsop was very concise and impressive, since she does not have much experience of a Question Time panel unlike most of the others.

The BBC problem dates back to the DG Sir Hugh Carleton Green (1960 to 1969).
Green, deliberately in my view, promoted very left wing programming and the prestigious producer trainee scheme was taken over by Marxists. Tariq Ali was one of those trainees.

Within a short time news and current affairs in particular had a very far left wing slant. It is still there today forty years later.

It will take a determined effort and a clear out to bring back balance.

But don’t throw the whole BBC baby out with the bath water!

Conservatives have to take what the BBC offers in the round. Yes, we have to put up with Andrew Marr, Stephanie Flanders, Kirsty Wark and Jim Naughtie, but we also get Andrew Neill destroying Labour politicians every week. I gave up taking their politics coverage seriously when, commenting on the retirement of John Reid, their news described him as having had a "distinguished" career! You only have to look at the calibre and type of BBC editors who appear on the Raymond Snoddy programme to better understand where the BBC recruits from. BBC Editors have literally all got a copy of the Guardian's Society pages rolled up in their pockets, and a Sinn Fein/Hamas badge on the lapels of their jackets (leather patched of course).

People like John Pinnaer and Evan Davis remain an exception to the rule, and we still get TMS, Radio 4, and Radio 5 live, so it is not all bad.

Yes London Tory you are right - it was television rather than radio which was 'taken over' by Marxists and others of the far left.

Regarding last night's Question Time panel, surely the BBC can do better.

We had:

1. a discredited big head,
2. the baffled ex leader of a group of non entities,
3. a trust fund deb who's idea of hardship would be only one bottle of bubbly with dinner,
4. a funny little mannequin who's chip needs re-programming,
5. a complacent and self satisfied old has-been who's only claim to fame is to lose his seat.

Truly a stellar cast.

Lowlight for me was that Labour activist in the audience at the end of the show almost in tears at how wonderful his dear leader Mr Brown is.

It truly made the stomach turn.

This is reposted from the Caroline Jackson thread.

For the benefit of our colleagues, I quote from the Rules of Procedure of the EPP-ED Group in the European Parliament at


a)The Group shall consist of representatives elected to the European Parliament on the lists of the member parties of the European People's Party (Federation of the Christian‑Democratic Parties of the European Union).

b)Other members of the European Parliament may become members of the Group of the European People's Party and European Democrats if they subscribe to the political programme of the European People's Party and accept the Rules of Procedure.

These representatives (4.a and 4.b) are committed to a policy, which, on the basis of a Constitution, pursues the process of federal unification and integration in Europe, which is a constituent element of the European Union as a Union of citizens and States."

CONSERVATIVE MEPs are REQUIRED by the EPP-ED Group rules to a policy of FEDERAL UNIFICATION AND INTEGRATION IN EUROPE. That was not part of our European Manifesto in 2004. It contradicts Michael Howard's agreement with the EPP.

A poor panel. No proper Tory panelist. Piers Morgan is pious and vain - he's been o n there too often.

As for "making stomach's churn", the sad fact is a lot of Conservative Home posts are equally unpleasant -
I read these comments and think if these people are let out of the cupboard they'd be losing 3-4 votes for every 1 that I recruit at weekends canvassing.

I'm encouraged to see a lot of measured posts aswell - people don't want to lose everything that the BBC provides of value.

This is typical of the BBC. Perhaps they think that having a panel where EU-philes are in a 4 to 1 majority would help influence voters towards their pro-EU policy position by creating the impression, mood-music, that it is the majority and only sensible view. Which of course it isn't. But how they managed to mention on R4 last night Sun and Express headlines about surrender and Mr Bean signing away our freedom, I don't know.

Same thing happened last week. Three politicians dealing with global warming and they were unanimous that "we are all to blame,the government must act now." Loud applause. Climate change will continue, sometimes warmer, sometimes colder as it always has done and man`s puny efforts can do nothing about it. But no one is allowed to state this publicly. Anyway this boring programme has long since passed its sell by date.

Kirstie Allsop was excellent. She ran rings around Hazel. Patten and Piers had nothing interesting to say - keep them off TV.

Editor, how does the BBC get its party panelists? Do they ask CCHQ to put someone forward or do they deal directly with the politicians? In other words, was Chris Patten was the BBC’s choice?

Personally I like Patten and don’t feel that his wing of the party is over-represented. From the figures you published yesterday, the Conservative government was surprisingly popular during his day and had an unusually long period of positive approval.

Piers Morgan should stick to talent shows, where we can all happily avoid him.

Perhaps we should have a referendum on whether to privatise the BBC or not?

"Perhaps we should have a referendum on whether to privatise the BBC or not?"

No, the way to curb the BBC is to offer choice, for we believe choice offers the consumer the best results in private business, choice is now considered the best solution to offer customers better service from the public sector, the one remaining area that hasn't been subject to choice is the public sector broadcaster.

What needs to happen is that we either split the BBC in two, or incorporate channel four and split the combined channels in two. Then give people the choice which public service broadcaster they allocate their licence fee to. This would force a change on the BBC for they would have to respond to their customers, rather than being a closed off socialist politically correct preaching organisation.

By doing it this way would enable the Conservatives to mug the BBC, for hand on heart the Conservative MP’s could claim they support public service broadcasting, but the reality of this would be to set up the route to subscription broadcasting.

I despise the EU and our Traitourous Government, however I do like some of the BBC stuff, their documentaries are world class.
If the Spin and Propaganda could be neutred, the BBC would be what it ought to be. A world beating and respected British Public Asset.
No don't scrap it, Reform it.
The Tories should have it on their agenda to neuter the BBC Propaganda.

The BBC are simply following Heaths Agenda Steamroller the thing through all the while saying, no loss of essential Sovereignty, no loss of essential Sovereignty.
Until one day, the deed will be done British wil be a Minority in their Own Country and that will be it, the end of a thousand years of British History.
We all have a part to play in stopping this.


And Where is Queenie in all this. Dissolve Parliament Liz, Put the Generals in charghe until we can sort this damned mess out.
I want our Constitution back, Bagna Carta and the Bill of Rights.
It's a bit rich them saying, our constitution needs redoing because it's not on one peice of Paper.
How many pages are in the Reform ConstiTraityTution.
Come on Queenie, get on that white Charger, we will all be there.


The post about Chris Patten's only achievment being to lose his seat was a little harsh as it overlooks the fact that he ran the successful 1992 general election campaign and of course we should point out none of his successors in Bath have managed to win the seat back off the lib dems.

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker