brianthedog Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 Well said Tone. I think we've had enough journalists and pundits on the Beeb this past few weeks. I'm surprised there wasn't a "celebrity" on there, although Piers Morgan could be classed as one. Stupid? Yes. Says little of interest or consequence? Yes. Irritating? Yes. Should be taken out and shot? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alastair Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 The government is undermining Question Time's role at the heart of the British constitution, it was claimed last night. The Queen has asked the Privy Council to review the status of the BBC programme after the government refused to provide a panellist, in defiance of the 1873 Question Time Act. A Downing Street spokesman said there was currently no need for curfews and internment as David Dimbleby was sent north to Berwick-Upon-Tweed for safe-keeping and constitutional experts warned of all kinds of ****. Denys Finch-Hatton, editor of Which Constitution?, said: "Britain is organised on the basis that the government of the day will provide a Question Time panellist regardless of Alistair Campbells. "We're now witnessing the most fundamental change to our national governance since the lamentable decision to give Roman Catholics the vote in 1978." Mr Campbell, the Labour psychopath, told the Question Time audience that the government was obviously some crocodiles inside the bodies of people inside the bodies of more crocodiles, before holding up a picture of a human with a crocodile's head and claiming it was the chief secretary to the treasury. The Question Time Act was passed 140 years ago after the Franco-Prussian War exposed Britain's lack of a weekly public forum made up of politicians and maybe one or two people who were not politicians. The first panel was convened on October 14th, 1873 and featured Secretary of State for the Colonies, Earl Granville, shadow home secretary Richard Cross, the novelist George Eliot, biscuit tycoon George Palmer and the controversial stand up comedian Arthur Picklethwaite. The event was chaired by David Dimbleby and seen by just 17 people because television would not be invented for another 50 years. Margaret Gerving, a retired headmistress from Guildford, said: "If the government is not going to appear on Question Time then this country is basically Somalia and I may as well set fire to all the houses in my street. If you'll excuse me, I have to go to the petrol station." But Helen Archer, from Doncaster, insisted: "Question Time perpetuates the class-based, establishment hegemony. I think we should abolish it and have a democratically elected programme that I never watch." And Bill McKay, from Peterborough, added: "Is that the one where members of the public take bits of furniture to whichever hotel Fiona Bruce is currently staying in? "I was quite upset when they had that Nazi on last year. What does he know about sideboards?" http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/constitutional-status-of-%27question-time%27-under-threat-201005282771/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 Strikes me as odd as to how Campbell just happened to have a framed photo of David Laws. In a silver frame no less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 He's coming across very well tonight! Good to see a die hard Labourite as yourself sticking to their values of supporting war mongering liars and bullies. How ironic that Mr Campbell tried to bully the BBC over their independant war reporting as not favourable enough for Blair's government and then over the sexed up dossier which turned out to be true and pretty much lead to the death of a public servant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 It's a big story because the government thought it could dictate to the beeb who should/should not appear on their programme, which is disgusting and hypocritical. Why should the Government provide an elected minister when the the Labour spokesperson is an unelected mouthpiece. All they've done is ask if they're going to provide an elected minister, the opposition should provide an elected shadow minister rather than their guard dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex C. Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 Why should the Government provide an elected minister when the the Labour spokesperson is an unelected mouthpiece. All they've done is ask if they're going to provide an elected minister, the opposition should provide an elected shadow minister rather than their guard dog. Because... No 10 stated that the objection to Alastair Campbell was that he was not an elected Labour representative or a front-bencher. Not only is Alastair Campbell one of the most senior and influential figures in the Labour movement - an architect of New Labour - but Labour ministers regularly appeared on Question Time panels when the then opposition was represented either by someone outside of the front bench or by an unelected panellist - sometimes even a prospective Parliamentary candidate. It is not an argument or an objection that bears scrutiny. It's not as if this hasn't happened in the reverse before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldprune Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 Can't really blame 'em for staying away then. Who watches QT these days? You are wrong. It is watched by thousands of political activists who spin what they watch and bore everyone else to death. Some of these people are of the opinion that repeatedly posting the same propaganda on forums like this that they influence the way people vote. Normal folk go to the pub and enjoy a social life. The activists need to up their game. It is only 5 years until the next election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libuse Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 Why should the Government provide an elected minister when the the Labour spokesperson is an unelected mouthpiece. All they've done is ask if they're going to provide an elected minister, the opposition should provide an elected shadow minister rather than their guard dog. But the government are happy to put a minister (Vince Cable) up against a Labour unelected mouthpiece (Andrew Adonis) on Any Questions tonight, so why are their rules different when its Alastair Campbell? Its just made them look a bit nervous of Campbell, which is quite amusing really Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 "I was quite upset when they had that Nazi on last year. What does he know about sideboards?" http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/constitutional-status-of-%27question-time%27-under-threat-201005282771/ Consistently brilliant. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digsy Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 But the government are happy to put a minister (Vince Cable) up against a Labour unelected mouthpiece (Andrew Adonis) on Any Questions tonight, so why are their rules different when its Alastair Campbell? Its just made them look a bit nervous of Campbell, which is quite amusing really I don't see it like that. The government are the representatives of the people, who on earth thinks that a warmongering spin-doctor like Campbell deserves the respect of the people never mind the free time slagging off their representatives, when such time could be put to better use licking envelopes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.