BBC should be accountable
Posted by Philip Dunne, MP for Ludlow, at 08:52, Tue 4 November 2008:
Last week the media furore surrounding the behaviour of two well known, and very well paid, television and radio presenters missed one crucial factor which, to me, justifies much of the public reaction. That is the lack of accountability by the BBC to anyone other than itself.
The BBC is funded by billions of taxpayers money, paid through the TV license. But it is the only entity funded by the people which has no responsibility to account to the people's representatives in Parliament or barely anywhere else for that matter (although Ofcom and the Press Complaints Commission have limited oversight).
As a member of the Public Accounts Committee the BBC appears before us on occasion, but only to discuss a value for money topic of their choice.
I have commented in Parliament that this is not good enough. In fact I emplored Sir Michael Lyons when he became chairman of the new BBC Trust last year to re-consider whether the BBC should voluntarily submit to proper Parliamentary scrutiny. He refused, again citing the primary importance of editorial integrity and independence.
But this is precisely where the BBC has let itself down. If it cannot be trusted to police its own internal rules governing taste, propriety and respect for victims of its presenters' increasingly prurient conduct, then it has no defence to the charge that it should accept external scrutiny in common with every other recipient of public funds.
Allowing celebrity talent to be produced by their own employees may be acceptable, but the lack of an effective editorial system fatally undermined BBC claims of integrity. The BBC have brought this problem on themselves. One way to start to restore public trust would be to submit to Parliamentary scrutiny of its processes; if not its content, yet.
Yours
Philip
Comments
Commenting on this message is now disabled.
Posted by Les Goss, 14:29, Mon 1 December 2008: (Is this post abusive?) #
No news yet on your support for us poor ex Equitable pensioners then?
Posted by Mark Dudley, 16:07, Mon 1 December 2008: (Is this post abusive?) #
Dear Phillip I disagree entirely. I was appalled at how the media inflated a peurile stunt by a couple of radio dummies into a centre-stage event for political posturing. Complaints on the night were magnified a thousand-fold, not by the show itself, but by self-serving diatribe of envious fools mostly enraged by the presenter's much-publicised wealth. I frankly don't care about million pound salaries. Since the BBC's remit is to entertain as well as to inform, Ross, Clarkson, Parkinson, Wogan etc. are worth every penny - we all pay, we all benefit. Nothing more than a dressing-down and suspension for the muppets concerned, and a sincere apology to those insulted was necessary. Back to work for the rest of us as normal. Yet the band-wagon was rolling all week and was covered with opinionated politicos we are paying to ruin (sic) our country. If I want to know about the contents of a radio show, I'll listen to it on iPlayer or turn to a critic. I expect the Prime Minister to be doing the job he is paid for - fixing the economy; not wasting his breath on a couple of media twerps who are well known (and indeed expected) to do anything once too often. As a leading opposition MP, the only shot you should be aiming is that the smoke-screen obscured the latest Government scandal - losing yet another memory stick carrying access details to the Government Gateway through which 12 million taxpayers - me included! - access our Self Assessment records. Now THAT makes me foam at the mouth far more than Ross & Brand's antics. As to your other point, the BBC is envied by media organisations the world over and reviled by corrupt regimes for exactly the same reason - its independance from Government. Any Government! If you aim to make the BBC accountable to the very people it is there to report on, you will make it the Government's creature and up with that we will not put! We love the BBC despite its flaws, and sometimes because of them. Don't attempt to diffuse its spotlight because _you_ can't stand the glare. Yours, climbing down off his soap-box, Mark Dudley