Tag Archives: John Whittingdale

Tories split over plot to destroy the BBC

“Blatantly Backing Conservatives”: and a fat lot of good it did the BBC! De facto Tory leader Dominic Cummings wants the BBC privatised and he has employed ‘Minister for Murdoch’ John Whittingdale to do it.

Days after the man formerly known as the Minister for Murdoch returned to the government, unelected leader Dominic Cummings has apparently declared war on the BBC.

It seems Cummings was just waiting to get the right man for the job – and the well-connected Whittingdale fitted the bill perfectly.

So it fell to The Sunday Times to herald the forthcoming assault on our national broadcaster:

“Downing Street turned on the BBC last night — vowing to scrap the television licence fee and make viewers pay a subscription. The national broadcaster could also be compelled to downsize and sell off most of its radio stations.

“In a plan that would change the face of British broadcasting, senior aides to the prime minister insisted that they are “not bluffing” about changing the BBC’s funding model and “pruning” its reach into people’s homes.

“The blueprint being drawn up in government will:

“● Scrap the licence fee and replace it with a subscription model

“● Force the BBC to sell off the vast majority of its 61 radio stations but safeguard Radio 3 and Radio 4

“● Reduce the number of the corporation’s national television channels from its current 10

  • “Scale back the BBC website
  • “Invest more in the BBC World Service”

It’s an interesting plan – especially, as Zelo Street points out, considering the fact that the BBC’s current agreement with the government runs until 2027, three years after the current Tory government’s term runs out.

Cummings is either incredibly confident of getting a new term with his puppet Boris Johnson, or he’s sure that Tory plants in the Labour Party will keep it riven by controversy and unable to mount a meaningful challenge.

That blog also points out that the plan has not been properly thought through: how can the government expect to dictate that BBC stars can’t have second jobs if they become part of a subscription service that is independent?

The announcement has provoked considerable debate online – and a clear contradiction has emerged in that most of those who oppose the BBC are only angry with it’s pro-Tory current affairs bias. It would be lunacy to think the Tories are going to create more balance!

(It’s worth pointing out that Raj Ganesh – above – considers the Conservative Party to be left wing and may therefore be considered a far-right extremist. That’s the kind of person who really hates the BBC. But expect also his phrase “telly tax” to catch on – Tories love that kind of thing.)

But it seems the plan does not have wholehearted support – even within Conservative Party ranks. Sure, some have described it as “Tory vandalism”…

… and, sure, some Tories have helped undermine the BBC and are now using the results of their own actions as reasons to attack it again…

… but some are standing by it:

Before anybody jumps in and tries to rubbish Mr Green’s opinion because of his past connection with certain forms of online… entertainment… let’s just remember that Whittingdale had a relationship with a female sex worker that only ended when he discovered the story was likely to be sold to the tabloid press.

And Mr Green isn’t alone, anyway. The Independent reports:

“Huw Merriman, another Conservative MP who is also chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on the BBC, also warned that the corporation should “not be a target”.

“Writing in the Daily Telegraph, he said ‘it feels as if senior government aides are now ramping up an unedifying vendetta against this much-admired corporation’.

“A third Tory MP, Damian Collins, a former chair of the Commons culture committee, added: “No surprise that no-one has put their name to this destructive idea.

“’This would smash the BBC and turn it from being a universal broadcaster to one that would just work for its subscribers. The biggest losers would be the UK’s nations and regions.’”

The consensus among Tory opponents of the plan is that it will cost the party votes.

Personally, I don’t think that will stop Dominic Cummings.

He wants to smash everything of “cultural importance”, as Steve Coogan put it, to the UK. He’ll happily sell the lot to foreign investors and see all the money we earn dribble abroad, reducing the UK to Third World status. The NHS is set to be privatised, with the profit-making parts sold off to the US, remember.

Now why would a patriotic UK citizen want to do such a thing?

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


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

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

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!

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

Arcuri ‘blocked’ and ‘ignored’ by Johnson after she ‘kept’ his ‘secrets’. WHAT SECRETS?

Boris Johnson and Jennifer Arcuri: What have they been up to?

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. Boris Johnson was a student of the classics; he should know that.

It is clear that Jennifer Arcuri feels scorned by Mr Johnson. In a new interview, she has all-but-admitted misleading the UK public about her relationship with him.

Or am I misinterpreting her comment, “I’ve been nothing but loyal, faithful, supportive, and a true confidante of yours. I’ve kept your secrets, and I’ve been your friend”?

It seems she is unhappy after Mr Johnson gave her the cold shoulder: “You’ve blocked me and ignored me as if I was some fleeting one-night stand or some girl that you picked up at a bar… I wasn’t – and you know that. And I’m terribly heartbroken by the way that you have cast me aside like I am some gremlin.”

It seems she had tried to contact Mr Johnson for advice on how to handle media attention over allegations that her relationship with him led to inappropriate awards of more than £100,000 in grants to her company, and invitations on business junkets, while he was Mayor of London.

But she had been rebuffed by an aide who allegedly said “there are bigger things at stake”.

What “bigger things”?

For one thing, she seems to be involved in the allegations of Russian intervention in the UK’s democracy – as does Mr Johnson. The allegation, as published here, is that she attended a regular “digital barbecue” arranged by one Sergei Nalobin in a bid to build ties between Russia and the Conservative Party. Other “social media influencers” alleged to have attended included Paul Staines of the Guido Fawkes blog, alt-right commentator Milos Yiannopolous and the then-MP Douglas Carswell.

Nalobin went on to launch the Conservative Friends of Russia, in an event attended by senior Tories including John Whittingdale, who was accompanied by Carrie Symonds. She now lives in 10 Downing Street, as Boris Johnson’s partner.

The relationships created by these groups seem to have benefited the Conservatives – and particularly Mr Johnson – greatly. The Canary has reported that Russian oligarchs have contributed more than £2.7 million to the party.

One of these is Alexander Temerko. Byline tells us Mr Temerko financed Mr Johnson’s campaign to become the leader of the Conservative Party, and continues: “According to Reuters, Temerko describes himself as a “friend” who would “plot” late into the night over a bottle of wine when Johnson became Foreign Secretary. He admitted to being behind early plots to remove Theresa May.”

And then there’s Mr Johnson’s relationship with newspaper proprietor – and son of a KGB spy – Yevgeny Lebedev. Mr Johnson is known to have attended Lebedev’s infamous parties in Tuscany – on one occasion, as Foreign Secretary, without his security detail. The Canary states: “That in itself could mean Johnson should be regarded as a security threat. Johnson reportedly visited the villa Palazzo Terranova four times, and flew there via Lebedev’s private jet.”

So it seems entirely likely that Russian influence may have been exerted on the EU referendum and Tory leadership campaigns, via puppets including Ms Arcuri, Ms Symonds, and Mr Johnson himself.

And now two of those people live in 10 Downing Street – one of them as the UK’s Prime Minister.

But publication of the report that could confirm all of the above – and, presumably, much more – has been delayed until after the general election, by order of Boris Johnson.

Do you think there might be something suspicious about that?

We must not be hasty – it is fundamental to UK law that people suspected of wrongdoing must be considered innocent until proven guilty.

But this is a national security issue.

I would not be happy to vote for a man with such allegations hanging over him. The fact that he was responsible for delaying the report is an aggravating factor.

But you may take a different view. It’s a free country, after all… for now.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


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

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

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!

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

Tory liars suggest MPs can’t be trusted with Brexit impact assessments. So what? THEY DON’T EXIST

Robin Walker: Very well-groomed but he talks a load of codswallop.

David Davis and his Brexit gang have made fools of themselves with the claim that MPs can’t be trusted with the 58 sectoral “impact assessment” documents they have been ordered to release to the Commons’ Brexit committee.

After all, who lied to the Commons that these papers existed in “excruciating detail” (in a dig at Theresa May on October 26) – and then had to admit that they didn’t at all? David Davis.

So the implication by John Whittingdale today (November 28) that the full facts should not be shared because “leaks are not without precedent” is risible – Parliament has already proved itself to be far more trustworthy than a government whose minister lied about the form these documents took.

And Brexit minister Robin Walker’s attempt to justify the pig’s ear his department has made of the matter simply made it worse.

“The problem with the motion that was passed is it referred to sectoral impact analysis,” he said. “We were clear from the start that the motion did not exist in the form that was requested, therefore what we have done is to pull together sectoral analysis for the select committee and its scrutiny and I think that will prove valuable.”

Not true. DExEU was forced to go back on the claim that the assessments exist in “excruciating detail” once it became clear that Parliament was going to see exactly how “excruciating” that “detail” was. If the Commons hadn’t voted – unanimously – to have the reports delivered, in full, to the Brexit committee, David Davis, Robin Walker and their cronies would still be telling us that lie.

Now, despite having demanded time in order to “prepare the information” – by which some of us thought DExEU might actually try to divide the information into the 58 sectoral impact assessments we all expected – ministers have delivered to the Brexit committee a single 850-page document … with some of the details removed.

They’ve made a proper dogs Brexit breakfast out of it.

Tory David Davis was blasted today for suggesting members of Parliament’s Brexit committee could not be trusted with his secret Brexit papers.

The Brexit Secretary failed to hand over unredacted papers examining the possible impact of Brexit on sectors of the economy.

Labour MP Hilary Benn, who chairs the Commons Exiting the EU Committee, fumed in the Commons after ministers argued the full papers were not handed over as assurances of confidentiality were not given.

Mr Benn said he objected to “any suggestion” that he or the committee could “not be trusted” to handle the papers.

Source: David Davis blasted for suggesting MPs can’t be trusted with his secret Brexit papers


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

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

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!

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