Dear All
I was planning to take the break but a story has prompted me to return early.
It is a story of English institutional corruption to freeze out the Scottish National Party from the leader’s debates.
So, what was the exact phrase that urged me to post?
The BBC is offering the leader of the Scottish Government the role of ‘commenting’ on the performance of Brown, Cameron and Clegg, effectively playing the role of the informed interested spectator.
The SNP in no uncertain terms should tell them that position is none negotiable; either Alex Salmond is on the same platform as any other leader or its court action.
At present the SNP is using the Freedom of Information Act to find out how the BBC, ITV and Sky done a deal on the series of party leaders’ debates.
The English controlled BBC has broken their own rules and the programmes should be barred by a court of law from being televised in Scotland without his presence on the platform.
There was no intention of fairness from the outset by the BBC.
So far the broadcasters have agreed terms only with Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats for a series of live “prime ministerial” debates during the election campaign.
In Scotland, the SNP is the party of Government.
The SNP should set the English controlled BBC a deadline, after that court action, protests and pickets of the BBC and STV in Glasgow.
The English media establishment is trying to rig the General election in favour of the Labour, Tory and Lib Dems parties to hold the status quo and freeze out other contenders as if they don’t matter.
Scotland has been silent enough.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
I was planning to take the break but a story has prompted me to return early.
It is a story of English institutional corruption to freeze out the Scottish National Party from the leader’s debates.
So, what was the exact phrase that urged me to post?
The BBC is offering the leader of the Scottish Government the role of ‘commenting’ on the performance of Brown, Cameron and Clegg, effectively playing the role of the informed interested spectator.
The SNP in no uncertain terms should tell them that position is none negotiable; either Alex Salmond is on the same platform as any other leader or its court action.
At present the SNP is using the Freedom of Information Act to find out how the BBC, ITV and Sky done a deal on the series of party leaders’ debates.
The English controlled BBC has broken their own rules and the programmes should be barred by a court of law from being televised in Scotland without his presence on the platform.
There was no intention of fairness from the outset by the BBC.
So far the broadcasters have agreed terms only with Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats for a series of live “prime ministerial” debates during the election campaign.
In Scotland, the SNP is the party of Government.
The SNP should set the English controlled BBC a deadline, after that court action, protests and pickets of the BBC and STV in Glasgow.
The English media establishment is trying to rig the General election in favour of the Labour, Tory and Lib Dems parties to hold the status quo and freeze out other contenders as if they don’t matter.
Scotland has been silent enough.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
3 comments:
Why are we having Presidential Debates in a parliamentary democracy?
Labour has shown in the last few years, as have the Tories in the past that a Prime Minister is NOT the choice of the people; it is the choice of the Party.
Why then are we being asked to choose from two possible prime Ministers and another nice guy?
They could be ousted by their own parties before the actual election. We would have no say in the election of their successors...
Idiotic nonsense! Let America do American things that suit their style of government. Let us so things that suit our style of government.
If you look at the Hootsmon. Mainly English journos, working for a yorkshire owned title. Cemmenting on Scottish independence to their own viewpoint as English journalists working in north britain, loooking to progress to wherever else in southern britain eventually?
Clearly a logical barrier in a lot of ways to fair reporting?
A bit like the Chinese media in Tibet.
"Goto tibet for a few years and we'll reward you with editorship of the the mid yorks echo"
commenting even.
Post a Comment