Was last night's Question Time a preview of how the coalition will deal with the media?

Right On

The decision by the BBC to include Campbell and Piers Morgan on the same show was clearly an attempt to stack the deck against the government.

I think the makers of the show are perfectly entitled to make the most interesting show they can, I think the government is entitled not to appear on a show they believe to be stacked against them.

Non story, lets all move on.

Lizzy

No 10 refused to appear unless they had a shadow front bencher for balance?
Quite bloody right too. Alastair Campbell is an unelected poisonous piece of work and despite being "in" with the habitual lefties that produce the BBC's news programmes he is loathed by most right thinking people.
Dimbleby was disgraceful too and should be put out to grass and it's about time they did something about the audience who seem to be recruited from university political activists.
Just look at the comments on forums right across the blogosphere if you think No10 was wrong. The public clearly don't think so.

No 10 has just laid down their rules of engagement and the BBC had better look out.

nonny mouse

Hopefully they give media lessons to cabinet members too. Theresa May came across pretty badly the previous week.

wrinkled weasel

As I wrote on Dale, (and a lot of people seem to agree with me) QT is a travesty of free speech and balance.

So, the Coalition refuses to play the game; refuses to be jeered by the stacked audience or praised by carefully selected loonies with shaved heads or to be given short shrift by Dimbleby.

Come on, let's get real. QT has been a platform for the BBC's left wing agenda for sometime now. Cameron is proving to be a bit cleverer than we thought. Remember, Question Time needs the Government, it's not the other way around.

Lord Monkington-Smythe

To be honest, I don't blame the coalition for not putting anyone up. As would have been predicted, Campbell was allowed to interrupt at will with no censure, and go off on vitriolic monologues whilst Dimbleby sat in some sort of reverie (doubtless having flashbacks to the time when Campbell was in reality his boss at the BBC).

Putting John Redwood on was a good move, because he is seen as an outsider, is uber-calm in the face of provocation and made Campbell look like what he is, which is a slightly touched representative of "Old Politics". Holding up a photo of David Laws was just desperately sad, and actually had me feeling pity for him, which is certainly a new experience.

Cheshire Cut

The BBC’s political coverage is getting so biased it’s hardly surprising that the Conservatives did not put somebody up from the Cabinet to be confronted with Alastair Campbell’s distortions and lies.
If the new Government has any sense it will be planning a large reduction in the annual tax we have to pay whether we watch the BBC or not. That will put money back into the real economy rather than than paying vast salaries for BBC executives to run a massive and unnecessary bureaucracy.
The chairing of last night’s QT was a disgrace with Campbell and Morgan allowed to interrupt constantly. Maybe it’s time for a new (and cheaper) chairman for QT.
Good, however, to see Piers Morgan nailing Campbell for his lies over the dossier that led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Perhaps Campbell should also be confronted more strongly on programmes over his role in the death - whether it was suicide or murder - of Dr David Kelly.
If Chilcott or an inquest suggests ‘unlawful killing’, and given Campbell’s role in this terrible affair, will the BBC please ignore his future pleas for airtime so that he can then be despatched to his rightful role in history - as the man who did more to bring political integrity and debate in this country to its lowest ebb ever.

nonny mouse

>>There's a sense in coalition circles that many media appearances will just reduce into attempts to conjure a split story between the Tories and the Lib Dems

This is not limited to TV. Newspapers and bloggers seem to be playing the same game, including Coffee House.

ollie

I simply can't believe Labour would put Campbell forward anyway - some break with the past. They should be doing everything in their power to distance themselves from him.

Still, as long as he is the mouthpiece for Labour, they will be consigned to opposition for many years to come.

strapworld

Mr Hoskin, You are right to ask the question on how the government will deal with the media. Last night's Politics Show with David Davis and Hazel Blears replacing Portillo and Abbott was a case in point. Andrew Neil was trying desperately to dig up such divisions within the coalition. I did think the Liberal Democrat, Julie Goldsworthy, dealt with it really well as did Davis.

But dealing with Question Time. The programme needs taking into a dry dock and major work done on this tired programme.

As a man in his late sixties I can say that Dimbleby is way past both his sell by date and therefore usefulness. He has had a very good innings indeed living off the Dimbleby name. There are far too many young presenters waiting to make their mark.

With two young men as Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister I think we need a Chairman of such a topical programme who is of the same age range. I also would welcome a female chairman. I think an unbiased Chairman, such as Richard Littlejohn or Jon Gaunt, would be welcomed by many!!

Last night's programme, despite the rather political protestations from the executive editor, was designed to ambush whomsoever the government had asked to appear.

One last observation. The audience. I am sick to the backteeth (which I still have!) of the audiences of this particular programme showing a definate left wing bias. This is something the rather useless but vastly overpaid Director General should have investigated.

Rhoda Klapp

Entirely correct, the government does not work for the BBC, who will have to blink first if they want anyone to watch their rotten biased fixed nasty little programme.

GeoffH

"So don't be surprised to see Downing St being fussy about Question Time, and other shows, in future."

I won't be 'surprised', indeed I expect and demand that they be more fussy in choosing when and when not to appear on supposedly debate programmes.

Only when the likes of Campbell and Morgan and the desperately unfunny comics such as Mark Steel are driven from these forums will it be appropriate for the serious politicians from both government and opposition to get involved again.

For the BBC QT team to get all huffy about protecting Campbell's appearance shows where their priorities are - in protecting their luvvie friends and creating a bear pit for the government.

I'm pleased No 10 had the nous and resolve not to play ball with such agitprop idiots.

Bill Rees

Despite the excellent John Redwood I had to turn off Question Time last night. I couldn't bear watching the inflated egos of Campbell and Peers Morgan.
Why did the BBC invite Campbell, when there are six contestants for the Labour leadership, at least one of whom would presumably have been available, and a whole new intake of new and returning MPs.
One of the main things the new government will have to do is stand up to the BBC, which has already shown its contempt for the coalition. Last night was just a start.

Enguerrand de Coucy

Isn’t it more a question of how the media will deal with the coalition? QT had on their panel Campbell (resigned after the death of David Kelly) and Morgan (sacked for falsifying the front page of a newpaper) – both unelected, unprincipled, nasty pieces of work. When they couldn’t get a government front-bencher, they wheeled in John Redwood in the hope of stirring up trouble for the coalition. Why was Campbell allowed to produce that photograph of David Laws and call him names? Dimbleby should have ruled that out of order. In fact, why was Campbell there at all? It was typical, left-wing biased broadcasting from the BBC monolith. I hope Cameron eviscerates it.

Nicholas

If it was a "mis-step" then it was a "mis-step" in the face of an orchestrated BBC/Labour stitch up. I watched the programme and in a long succession of blatently biased and contrived QT's this one took the biscuit. I seriously doubt that there was anyone in that audience who was not a paid up member of the Labour party and/or activist.

The BBC has had its flag up the mast long enough. I hope No.10 destroy the BBC because until that nest of lefty vipers is eradicated there will be no truth or honesty in British politics.

In2minds

Alistair who?

Grow Up Get Real

The only elected politician on this programme was a Conservative MP.
Just the way this story is being spun demonstrates the blatant bias of the BBC. The Government didn't think it was worth "putting up" a panellist for the simple reason that the Opposition hadn't thought it worth doing so.
Toss in a biased host, planted questions and a clearly rigged audience and you wonder why the Tories don't give this awful programme the swerve permanently.
Let the Libtards prattle amongst themselves.

Rhoda Klapp

A coalition split is much more easily dealt with than a arty split. Splits are expected in coalition, and the answer is to invoke good will, and require the BBC to do the same. This will work when the split is a trumped-up trivial one. In coalition, you don't have to deny splits or even attempt to fix them, you just learn to live with them. Once the inter-coalition goodwill is gone and you can't live with compromise any more, well, you might as well give it up.

It would be very nice if the BBC could grow up. And the other media too.

THX1138

So Tories & LiB Dems will share a QT platform with Nick Griffin but not Alastair Campbell- Pathetic cowards!

Fox in a box

This was, quite simply, a shot across the bows of the BBC.

And not before time, many would consider.

alexsandr

It was better with Robin Day

And the title music was better than the current plinkey plonk music.

As to new presenter/chairman. Not sure who has the gravitas really..... :-(

Robert Eve

Campbell & Morgan are not welcome in my living room.

Billy Blofeld

Time for the coalition to send a massive warning shot over the BBC's bow.

At minimum we need to separate regulation of BBC content away from the BBC itself.

DavidDP

Worth noting Paul Waugh's report that No10 were still in the middle of negotiating when the BBC went ahead and announced Redwood unilaterally.

Mycroft

Oh bring them all on, Campbell, Morgan - and even better, Whelan or Mandelson - to remind everyone of the Labour propaganda machine, and the kind of creeps who were involved in it.

Walsingham's Ghost

"...it is their prerogative to choose whether or not they join it. Last night, they simply chose not to."

Quite! - rather too much hysteria across the blogosphere this morning about the Government's 'no-show'.

I'm no fan of Coulson, but he got this one right. If Labour could not be a*sed to put up a Shadow Front Bench member, why should the Government bother to dignify the event with a Minister.

Campbell is a now a burned-out, (former?) alcoholic has-been with a book to sell - leave him to his delusions of grandeur, the Government has a crisis to sort out...

WG

The Bellman

Surely the story - if there is a story - is that the Labour party has calculated that is in its best interests to berepresented by an unelected thug with a flimsy grasp on sanity and an at-best semi-detached relationship with honesty and integrity. Seriously: could no shadow minister better represent new new Labour than this washed-up old hack? Perhaps someone on the production team is friends with his publisher.

And yet the BBC is stuck in some kind of bizarre masochistic Stockholm Syndrome with this odious man. The more he kicks them, the more they snivel 'Ooo, more please, oh you presentational genius, you'.

local local

Campbell was responsible for Labour in government refusing to allow ministers to be interviewed alongside opposition spokesmen.

This lead to the rise of the soft interview of Labour characterised by the fawning of naughtie et al and the viscious, "when did you stop beating your wife" approach to opposition spokesmen.

His hypocrisy over this last night was incredible.

Percy

The only elected member of the panel was a Tory.

Vulture

There are two parties in the dock here:

a) The BBC for pursuing its boring old Liebore agenda and ignoring the fact that their darlings are no longer in Govt.

b) The Downing Street media operation. The Liebpour spin and ie machine would never have allowed themselves to be bamboozled in this blatant way by the Beeb ( not least because they controlled the corp's agenda.)
Dave needs to get a few hard nosed pros in to kick some BBC ass.
I understand that someone called A. Campbell who has some experience of BBC ass-kicking is seeking gainful employment...

The Bellman

@Alexandr, strapworld: Peppa Pig? As well as being a more youthful and culturally 'relevant' figure than Dimbleby, she has a proven reputation for asserting her political neutrality. And she is strangely emblematic of the political classes.

gordon foster

Once again the left bias of the audience of QT came to the fore, particularly with the appearance of Campbell & Morgan on the panel (what a pair!). Redwood performed well & No 10 was very wise to keep their top guns away from a circus such as this.

canonalberic

They made absolutley the right decision. Like many other people I find QT unwatchable. Audiences that seem to have been transported from a labour party special conference circa 1981. A Chair who is the very epitome of the heriditary mediocre arrogant BBC millionaire peoples tribune; and a panel arranged to triangulate any right of centre view and present it as erroneous absurd and uncivilised.

Often it seems designed only to produce distorted soundbites in pursuit of aunties all too obvious news agenda; and seeing Tory people lumbering onto it likes oxes to the shambles is one of the wonders of the political world. As if Obama decided that he could somehow win round Fox News.

If the government just dont co-operate it will become irrelevant and the BBC will have to produce something new interesting and balanced.

Likewise with Newsnight and Today.There is no way any coalition spokesman is going to get a fair hearing on either of these programmes. So why bother. Noone gives a tuppenny what an old knacker like Bad Al has to say.Leave them to talk to each other.

michael

Watching Morgan and Campbell throw teddy out of the cot over Iran was disappointing.....the Boulton moment never materialised.

Simon Stephenson

strapworld : 11.37am

Richard Littlejohn? Unbiased?

Rarely have I seen anyone apparently so biased in favour of the common touch, and so biased against the concept that the "bleedin' obvious" is only bleedin' obvious to those who don't see the benefit in putting much thought into things.

Geoff

BBC spent fortunes on Campbell's memoirs Mk1; last night presumably BBC giving their old mucker exposure to help him peddle memoirs Mk2. QT completely biased like all BBC current affairs output. No wonder No 10 didn't bother, I wouldn't bother with C4 News either.

Patrick

The Coalition got this one wrong..and it can not be defended. What do they have to fear from Alister Campbell? Whoever is in Government, can not and should not dictate to a broadcaster who is on the panel. It is a disgrace..

Wily Trout

Who is the BBC working for? Not the population of the country, who pay its wages. Shouldn't the government be looking into the BBC remit and how they fulfil it?

Sulis

If only they'd had the wit to put Adam Boulton on against Campbell... that would have been worth watching...

Tiberius

Following David Steel over the coalition negotiations, I have now also lost my respect for Dimbleby. I know a lot on here already didn't like him, but until last night, I thought he'd done okay in trying to keep things in balance.

It may not be him who selects the panel, but he chairs it, and the way he allowed (he wasn't shouted down) Morgan and Campbell a hugely disproportionate amount of time to screech their hysterical sore-loser rantings was disgraceful.

As for Cameron vetoing representation, he was proved right by the chimps' tea party that Dimbleby allowed to unfold. But at least the three sat to his right kept their nappies on.

Alcazar

Lizzy, your early rant sounds like it's your time of the month. But you got the talking points in order, well done! Now, have a chamomile tea.

Frankly if No. 10 won't put a candidate up against Campbell well more fool them, pathetic really.

DavidDP - why should they even be negotiating appearances on QT?

If this were 12 months back and the now-defeated Labour hacks at No. 10 tried to pull a stunt like this - well I wonder what all you guys would be saying......

Maggie

Question Time is trading on its past reputation when it used to be an interesting, informative programme whose guests were intelligent, well-informedamusing and erudite. Today's Question Time features ill-mannered egomaniacs speaking to rentamob audiences. Its become a nasty game show and serious politicians should give it a wide berth.

TrevorsDen

I think, Coffee House, you have got your answer from the man in the street.

You should excuse THX though - his comment is rubbish. The tories and LDs did put up people against campbell, simply not cabinet ministers (and there were no labour front benchers on the programme either).

And of course whilst there were tories and LDs up against Griffin there was also a labour front bencher.

Clunking Iron Arse

I had to turn QT off last night and it will be quite a while before I watch it again. I can appreciate that any lefty activists who turn up to the event may well be quite vociferous compared to the rest of the audience, but the bias being shown by the producers is shocking. The BBC clearly cannot produce balanced political output and this should result in at least one very overpaid head rolling.

lescam

Alastair Campbell to Piers Morgan; "Are you saying I lied?" This said in a threatening manner, leaning forward aggressively.

Piers Morgan to Alastair Campbell; "er er no, I didn't say you lied, I think you were wrong".

Says it all. Don't dare to question Campbell's "integrity" (I use the word loosely) or else you will get your head ventilated.

Dimbleby was pathetic last night, he allowed Campbell to get away with murder, letting him interrupt repeatedly no matter who was trying to speak. I thought the whole point of QT was that everyone has a fair chance to express their opinions. Not last night.

QT definitely needs a new, younger chairman or woman. Someone who will really take charge of proceedings and not allow one loudmouth to dominate.

anxiouswarrior

the first signs that you can see of the odious cowards on the right together with the liberal treachery trying to impose big brother on the bbc , hopefully once the despicable policies become clearer to see the liberals will realise theyve been conned by a whiff of power, big society my arse

The Masked Marvel

So everyone is just now waking up to the inherent pro-Labour/Leftist bias at the BBC? You all should have a look at the Biased-BBC website. It's about time more people were outspoken about the deliberate bias endemic at the state broadcaster, for which everyone is forced to pay on penalty of law.

http://www.biased-bbc.blogspot.com/

nash

Anyone who thinks Piers Morgan and Alastair Campbell should appear on a publicly funded political show should be fired immediately.

Having these two clowns sproutting their nonsense is insulting the audience. In particular, Campbell by his "clever" editing caused the deaths and maiming of our troops and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. It is a massive insult to put Alastair Campbell on as a "pundit".

If I never heard or saw him every again, my life would have been improved!!

old fogey

This is to personal to pass unmoderated I suspect, but I have to ask of the Spectator, for which magazine she occasionally writes, what on earth does the beautiful and intelligent Celia Walden see in the ghastly Piers Morgan ? He is awful; I know that love is blind, but is it deaf as well.....

AAE

How often, in the lifetime of the last government, did we hear on The World at One that no government member or spokesman was available? I didn't notice the BBC getting all huffy about that. Nor did they ever show shame in the early days of New Labour when James Naughtie would "correct" something said on Today because he'd just been rung by Peter Mandelson! Situations like yesterday's QT problem show that the lack of a Tory polecat is a real weakness.

Chuck Unsworth

Simply, who the hell do the BBC think they are?

They issue an invitation, the recipient indicates their terms for sending someone to appear, the BBC refuse to accept those terms - and then complain that they aren't getting their way.

Well, ain't that just too bad? Why do the arrogant loonies in the BBC think anybody is obliged to talk to them at all?

I know that the former administration always wanted to showcase everything on the BBC. Maybe this Government is more interested in doing rather than saying. I do hope it is. We've had far too much of the grossly incestuous love-in between the BBC and NuLab.

Tim Carpenter LPUK

Well, I was glad to hear at least one person "daring" to say that our current system is unaffordable.

Shame John Redwood did not chime in too.

Ian, Essex

THX-1138 "So Tories & LiB Dems will share a QT platform with Nick Griffin but not Alastair Campbell- Pathetic cowards!"

Nick Griffin is an elected represenative of this country and so should be debated with. Al Campbell is not and the BBC had already filled the non-elected Labour seat with Piers Morgan. The Opposition should be represented by an elected official (as should the government).
Simples

strapworld

simon stephenson, you appear to have left your sense of humour at home this morning. May I suggest marmalade with your toast!

Naomi Muse

A bit of stupidity all round.

Having seen the appallingly badly chaired QT with Nick Griffin on it, it was clear that the BBC and Mentorn were after what they think of as good tv and not a good and balanced debate or answers.

Clear then that the BBC do not want to be fair.

As the coalition is talking all through of being 'fair' it will have to choose what it does in relation to appearances on the BBC, where pretty well only Andrew Neil gives a balance to his questions in both the DP and his evening show.

The government should do what they think right, but not expect the BBC or others to set up programmes for a balanced view.

Alastair Campbell has never been elected and therefore there was no need for any elected person from the coalition to appear on the programme at all. How would the BBC fare if fairness was the order of the day?

Ian Walker

Alcazar: if Labour had tried the same tactic 12 months ago, you can be damn sure it wouldn't be the BBCs headline news the next day.

Bias isn't just how you report, it's also what you do (and don't) report as well.

Remittance Man

THX1138,

Whether one likes it or not, whether one detests the odious little man or not, Griffin is a politician, the leader of a legitimate political party duly chosen by its membership who puts himself up for public election.

Campbell is an unelected, unaccountable propagandist paid to perform like a barking seal by his masters.

Can you spot the difference?

JONNY

The flatulent pomposity of David Dimbleby stinks to High Heaven. Surely surely way past his self-satisfied sellby date.
Also if Auntie Beeb refuses to rinse out her urine-stained knickers, it's high time for the government to do it for her.
Omo washes whiter than white.
As for Alistair Campbell....

Ms Manners

Alcazar 1:12 has the impertinence to impute the fact that Lizzie holds an opposing opinion to his own to her "time of the month" - to wit: "Lizzy, your early rant sounds like it's your time of the month. But you got the talking points in order, well done! Now, have a chamomile tea.".

Coarse, patronising git.

I am astonished that such primitive crudity got through.

This over-familiar attempt to weaken someone's argument by invading her privacy, in public, is a way inadequate men dismiss the opinions of women who take an opposing view.

Perhaps his GP should cut back on the prescriptions for potency pills.

Verity

Dimbleby has to go, obviously.

You know who would be a dynamite Chairman for QT? Melanie Phillips! Cool head, clarity of thought, and a terrifyingly swift slice 'n' dice intelligence.

John Bracewell

Maggie @1.12 pm hits the nail on the head.

Frank P

Simon Stephenson

Unlike you to miss the irony in strapworld's posts. Tut, tut!

Why is Campbell - a two-bit ex-porn magazine scribbler, unelected self-appointed 'political' fixer, part-time manic-depressive nutter and Blackburn Rovers supporter FFS! - allowed to strut the BBC stage, anyway?

His double-act charade with the egregious chubby-faced petulant Morgan was obviously arranged and scripted beforehand, including the faux-polemical ding-dong. Both the ugliest examples of their generation and clearly the reason why we are now all in the hands of the politicians currently running the 'nation'; the blurred hues of political colours are now a sort of dirty yellowy reddish mush with more than a touch of faecal Brown. Not a blue tint in sight. As unattractive as those who wield the political paint brushes - daubers and dabblers all.

Dimbleby Major is just a piss-taker now; a treble dipper of gigantic greed (two major series wandering around Britain at licence fee payers expense, as pensions, already. More in store no doubt), he just has fun with QT; how could he not know what his apparatchiks rig up for both panellists and audiences? It's The Left's agitprop flagship.

As for 'This Week'. My missus summed it up nicely last evening! "Ah well!" she said. "The new faces have solved a problem for me; it's way past my bedtime anyway and if you want to watch that new boring bunch you can do it alone. It's been deteriorating for some time - now it's rubbish!" I could only concur. I assume Itchy and Scratchy are now history? Not before time, of course, but the whole format is now so tired, even Neil appears to be bored to the point of somnolence as he mumbles and stumbles through the autocue. Another overblown hack with a gigantic ego despite the jokey self-deprecation-for-effect.

As for that pseudo intellectual scouse git from soap TV given a slot last night to pontificate with his whimsical 'Liverpewl 'words of wisdom' , his incoherent enunciation was a relief in one way, because what he did manage to utter in reasonable English amounted to a whole load of bollocks, so I was pleased to have missed most of his gabbling.

David Davis once again displayed why he didn't win the leadership and as for the flame-headed Chipmunk, I would have thought she would have hung up her political clogs and applied for a job on Coronation Street, to which she would be eminently suited.

Must revisit Thursday late evenings. There's always Fox, or maybe a book at bedtime. Coffee house is of course dormant at that time - read only. I'd get a life, if I hadn't already had four or five eventful ones already, which have left me completely knackered.

Gawain

I never watch the programme anymore, it has become a rather unpleasant experience. There is no debate because everyone is trying to complete everyone elses sentances. The audience are allowed to participate without declaring their party allegiance. The panel is too large. If I was in the cabinet I'd rather have my toenails extracted with a blunt knife than appear with Morgan and Campbell. Life is just too short to put yourself through that kind of humiliation.

Paddy

Alistair Campbell did himself no favours last night.

He was given enough rope and he was exposed for what he is - a liar.

He knows he has been "rumbled" and there is no way back for "New Labour".

They're like "ferrets fighting in a sack".

Just enjoy!

The Man

I think the Government should take David Cameron's statement (about not being part of the entertainment industry) to heart and decline all media invitations where they don't have a specific message to communicate. QT, Newsnight et al seldom shed any meaningful light on any topic because of the self importance of the presenters and their adherence to their own agenda, rather than seeking to understand or explain that topic.

Tiberius

Frank P: that is one brilliant post.

But, as a point of fact, Campbell is a Burnley supporter.

lescam

"Situations like yesterday's QT
problem show that the lack of a Tory
polecat is a real weakness".

Lord Tebbit, where are you? Your country needs you!

Must admit to having a soft spot for Piers Morgan. He gives me the impression of being amiable, not malicious. Don't always agree with him, but I don't dislike him. I couldn't argue with his view, stated on an earlier QT last year, that it was grotesque having Tony Blair as the Middle East peace envoy.

As for Campbell, he should go back to playing his bagpipes and watching Burnley. He is not a politician, he never has been, he is merely a motormouth who has pushed himself to the front and thinks the BBC owes him a living.

It is not just time for a new chairman of QT, it's time for a new producer as well.

Minekiller

@The Man

Completely agree. Emperors New Clothes time, Govt show QT to be a lefty chat show and last night's was to anyone with half a brain watching a cack-handed attempt by the BBC to ambush the government. At least the government now know that the BBC is at war with them.

Senor Frizby

Has anyone heard or smelt mandelson since the election? I wonder what silver lining he is extracting from what cloud in preparation for his umpteenth return to front-line politics.

Forget the issues surrounding hereditary peers.. it is these politically shameless self-interested, anti-democratic peers I'd like to see removed.

Simon Stephenson

strapworld and Frank P

Didn't spot the irony. Sorry. Still don't in fact, even after a re-read. Still that's my fault.

Maybe it's because I've grown so used to people singing the praises of the likes of Littlejohn, Clarkson and Botham, that I've lost sight of the fact that not everyone is a halfwit, and that some people are just taking the p1ss.

I'll try to be more alert.

Liz Brown

the biased beeb says it is up to them whom they have on the DD show - equally it is up to No 10 to decide if they want to play that game....they (No 10) are under no obligation to put someone up and they chose, rightly, so not to do. The biased been is forgetting its place in the great scheme of things and has done itself no favours.
Why were both Campbell and Morgan invited to appear on the same prog? this is reminiscent of the witch hunt that took place with regard to Nick Griffiths' appearance. The biased beeb needs to be reminded that it is a public broadcasting company funded by the tax payer and that the tax payer expects a level playing field.
I applaud the attitude of No 10 who are prepared to show that they will not be bullied by the beeb.

Maggie

Campbell and Morgan conspired together to create a schaltzy rose- tinted "interview" with Gordon Brown in a failed bid to improve his image. Yesterday, the conspired with the editor and presenter of Question Time to humiliate a Cabinet Minister. They and their BBC co-conspirators are seriously pissed off that they didn't succeed.

Liz Brown

"senior frizby - mandelbum is swanning it up in one of young Rothschild's chateaux in Switzerland and whizzing around, in the style to which he has become accustomed, at our expense, in one of YR's ferraris or whatever the de luxe sports cars of the day is. He is also being tipped for the post of chairman of BP..........the bastard

David Ossitt

Gavin Allen executive editor of Question Time; gave a self serving explanation as to why he had including the liar and cheat Alastair Campbell in last nights Question Time, this explanation included the following statement.

“Not only is Alastair Campbell one of the most senior and influential figures in the Labour movement”

This is self evidently pretentious bollocks.

What he did not seek to explain was his reasons for having only one elected politician, ‘John Redwood’ on the panel of the five.

For the first time in many months I did not watch, though I did want to; because it is always a pleasure to listen to John Redwood and the journalist and historian Sir Max Hastings who always brings intelligent argument to any debate.

But I was aware that they would be outnumbered; by four to one, David Dimbleby no longer pretends to hide his bias in favour of the labour party, the arch liar in chief Campbell, the self opinionated, I am a celebrity, bag of left wing wind Piers(insider dealing)Morgan, and the horrid and ugly Susan Kramer.

And so she who must be obeyed and I had an early night.

David Ossitt

Sorry it was not two against four; it was two against four plus the very carefully selected left wing audience, so it was two against the many.

jaybs

I fully back and support the decision to put no one up against Campbell, like Mandelson he is unelected and why should they represent the labour party.

What do we expect from Campbell cheap PR and what we are coming to expect from the BBC! with the Love In they seem to have with Liebour.

Snowman

What Robert Eve and nash and Frank P say. Spot on boys.

cannot bear watching these two unprincipled, rotten minions either. Why should anyone listen to them, what do they represent except for their egos. If there ever was a case against the BBC, the appearance of these two vile unelected has-beens and the selection of the QT audience must be it.

Victor Southern

I suppose that I have watched 95% of all the QTs over the past 10 years or so.

Last night's episode was about the worst of all. I doubt that I shall bother with it in future. Two slightly mad and disgraced men were allowed to talk for about 60% of the time, over anybody else.

Dimbleby is fading fast and does not have the energy or mental quickness to control the show.

Frank P

Tiberius

Campbell - Blackburn/Burnley.

Yeah, I know, but the ultimate insult is to dis a man's football obsession. Even his thick skin wouldn't withstand that barb.

Btw I expected some protest from you on my objection to Eutamias Minimus being allowed on QT. Has your lust waned now that it's no longer a member of the government?

Polly Gamma

You've absolutely nailed it once again Frank P.

Big Applause from this household.

perdix

That the public are often poorly informed about policy (of any party) is largely due to the MSM's preoccupation with "splits" and "rows" rather than rational discussion. Still I suppose they feel they have to do something to increase sales and ratings, but public service? Nah!

David Ossitt

THX1138

“So Tories & LiB Dems will share a QT platform with Nick Griffin but not Alastair Campbell- Pathetic cowards!”

Well THX that is your opinion and as an avid admirer of Anthony Charles Lynton Blair; one can understand that because of this you probably do not despise Alastair Campbell, even though to many he is an utterly despicable bully.

You might not like Nick Griffin but he is the leader of a legitimate political party, Campbell is not, Nick Griffin is an elected politician, Campbell is not, Nick Griffin did not lie and falsify documents so that Blair could go to war but Campbell did, Nick Griffin did not hound Weapons Expert Dr David Kelly to an early death but Campbell did, Nick Griffin has never misused his influence to bully the BBC into doing his bidding but Campbell did on a number of occasions.

The Tories and Lib-Dems are not pathetic cowards; it is just that labour at long last are no longer in power and the arch liar Campbell like his master is a yesterdays man.

Alcazar

Ms Manners
May 28th, 2010 2:43pm

You don't even bother to spell Lizzy's name correctly and assume that I am a man and Lizzy is a woman.

Presumptuous, but no more than what is expected from a classless act such as yourself. You should be listening to Woman's Hour with the rest of the sisterhood.

TGF UKIP

Of course the guy who would have wiped the floor, with great gusto and enjoyment, with both Back on the Bottle Campbell and Moron (both ex-D Mirror) would have been the great and good Lord Tebbit.

Trouble is from the Cameron Green Party point of view, he would have wiped the floor with Dave as well - and just as deservedly so.

Lizzy

Alcazar my dear do steady yourself. As you have quite rightly observed how do you know that I am a woman.

Whatever my mysterious gender why are you attempting to insult me, or indeed any woman, with that time honoured pathetic excuse for a put down of "time of the month".

I suspect you were trying a bit of trolling against my "rant". Well I seem to be ahead of all the other "ranters".

I love it. Now must dash as I need a quick shave, a couple of steaks and a quick work-out before rugger practice.

Tiberius

I have to admit, Frank P, to using Google to unravel your Latin reference, and while I don't remember expressing uncorrect thoughts about this particular fiery red-head (I do own up to Caroline Flint and Isobel Lang), I have to say I thought her body language was something of a draw last night. If anything, her lack of involvement in government has liberated her libido.

Mind you, who wouldn't let their hair down after escaping 13 years of subjugation under the Faecal yoke.

JohnRS

The government is not a branch of the entertainment industry, despite the biased BBC's wish to make it so.

It would do the BBC a power of good to find that not a single coalition politician at any level would agree to be interviewed for the next 2 or 3 months. I'm sure Sky, ITN, C4 etc would be most happy to provide a platform to replace them. Just how popular would Question Time be if no-one of any influence ever appeared?

Now the election is over the BBC needs to realise that a government with 5 years ahead of it needs the BBC a lot less than the BBC needs the government.....and, oh yes Auntie, by the way, there's a TV Tax review in 2012, had you forgotten??

Alcazar

Lizzy, happy to share my Ladyshave.

Alcazar

Tiberius
May 28th, 2010 8:35pm

I thought she was gagging for it. Apparently she loves it on a bike in leathers.

TGF UKIP

Frank P, not Tiberius but Fergus who had the hots for his "little chipmunk." Easy mistake to make though as both were and are among Dave's most avid and adoring fans.

Fergus Pickering

Is my name being taken in vain? Yes, I am a big fan of David Cameron. He's a Tory and he's Prime Minister, isn't he? What's not to like? And he's a Tory prepared to tax the rich. I'm not rich so what's not to like? The last Tory to tax the rich ws Nigel Lawson, of whom I am also a fan. Oh, and which (female) politician do you fancy? I'm developing a bit of a ting for Angela Merkel. A pity she's on the way out.

Boudicca

With Campbell, Morgan and Dimbleby, QT was heavily biased towards the left.

Cameron was quite right to let the left-wing luvvies talk amongst themselves. They just demonstrate how repulsive they are.

When the BBC make QT genuinely impartial - for a start by changing the Chairman - perhaps the Tories will take it more seriously. Cameron said that the new Government would not be interested in continuing with Labour's 'Politics as Entertainment' and perhaps this was just the start.

Good on Cameron.

streaky

You got it all wrong.

They'll just only appear on loyal channels owned by rupert murdoch i.e. all of them but the BBC (for now anyways).

Did at some point we have media ownership regulations in this country anyway?

Archie

Reluctant as I am to give credit to the Cleggeroons, my reading of this is that they got it spot-on. It's about time the government of the day set the agenda for what is, after all, a publicly funded body and not pander to said body's agenda; and to the best of my knowledge Ali C has not been elected and besides John Redwood can more than handle himself; and is it too much to hope that this little skirmish signifies the start of some major aggro for the Beeb? If so, about bloody time! And Verity is spot-on with her suggestion for Sweet Mel!

Joanne Morley

I don't know if these Downing Street petitions actually amount to anything, but I think I might sign this one: 'We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to abandon TV licence or let us have a choice whether or not to watch BBC...'

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/TVlicenceBBC/