Amber Rudd interview shows the BBC is still soft on Conservatives

Amber Rudd was interviewed by Andrew Marr, May 28, 2017. Notice the defensive body language.

Why did Andrew Marr fail to ask Amber Rudd about the harm to UK security caused by cutting police forces by 20,000 since 2010? Where was the criticism of their decision to cut 1,337 firearms officers? What about the loss of one-third of police dogs?

It seems clear the BBC is still giving the Conservative Party an easy time in this general election campaign.

Mr Marr did manage to drag from Amber Rudd an admission that the Tory ‘Dementia Tax’ is still very much a part of the party’s manifesto commitments. The only difference is that, contrary to Jeremy Hunt’s claims before Theresa May’s now-infamous u-turn last Monday (May 22), there will be a cap on it – to be decided only after the Conservatives have won the election, and when they can put it where they like without fearing a loss of votes.

See for yourself. Here’s Ms Rudd’s admission:

Here’s Jeremy Hunt explaining exactly what the Dementia Tax is about: It’s about creating an insurance market for care of the elderly (that will cost anyone likely to inherit a family member’s house, not only the building but its entire value as well):

Here’s Amber Rudd on the BBC’s Question Time last week, being utterly defeated by an audience member who criticised her over the loss of 20,000 police officers and its implication for intelligence-gathering against terrorists:

Here’s James O’Brien on LBC, pointing out that the policing cuts included 1,337 firearms officers – and now we have 984 armed soldiers on our streets, covering for the police, almost a one-for-one replacement.

Notice the comments from Damian O’Reilly to the police federation in 2015. He said “intelligence has dried up” because there is “no pro-active policing” even though “neighbourhood policing [is] critical to dealing with terrorism”. His words are a complete (and prophetic, as they are from two years ago) rebuttal of Ms Rudd’s claim on Question Time.

Who do you believe? The woman from the political party that wielded the axe and caused the cuts that led to the atrocity in Manchester on Monday night, or the police officer who warned against them?

Labour has a plan to restore policing and counter-terrorism levels to their pre-Tory numbers.

So vote Labour on June 8 – to save your children from terror.

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

7 thoughts on “Amber Rudd interview shows the BBC is still soft on Conservatives

  1. Dez

    Not a very good performance obviously did not want to accuse her new boss Mrs. Sway for her cut backs dulling the police performance. Interesting the JC interviews took so long over his past associations that there was no time left to promote the heaps of new Labour ideas coming to the front line. Maybe that was the whole idea spend the time on distant past negative attacks so there was no time at all for asking about the new ideas waiting in the wings. Crafty old Cons and dozy old BBC doing what it does best…..Not a word from the Cons or media about his past for all these years and right this minute it all comes out of the woodwork…funny that if it was not so pathetic.

  2. anthony holborn

    next couple of weeks i suspect the dirty tricks used in Brexit i.e ripping off your meta data from fb and google i.e your emails use with latest cutting edge software to analyse and predict voting intentions targeting floating voters i.e those who take 30 secs to decide who will lead the country in the future will be the targets for this. This is illegal, but they will still do this and you will wake on 9th jun to find that whatever the lead labour had disappeared due to said fence sitters who lets face are not the brightest cognitive bulb in the box, spam bots everywhere predicting dystopian nightmares under labour seen this mentioned in guardian articles by Carole cadwallagher your thoughts

  3. leslie

    The Atrocity was in “Manchester” Not in “Birmingham” as you Have Stated …

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      Yes. very odd, that. I could have sworn I typed “Manchester”. The heat must have got to me.

  4. Barry Davies

    I don’t know who came up with the stupid phrase dementia tax, but I think if we all start to use the more suitable age related medical tax it would be closer to the truth. After all it isn’t only dementia that lands you in a nursing home.

Comments are closed.