Brexitwatch: how the BBC should be interviewing Brexit-ers

I have just sent this complaint, which also includes helpful suggestions, to the BBC:

"It is immensely frustrating to hear Brexit apologists run rings around BBC interviewers day after day with lies, evasions and obfuscations. It is the duty of your interviewers to take a far tougher line.

So if a Brexit-er tells you that Yellowhammer is out of date, a Remainer plot, that everything is now sorted, that the government is preparing for no-deal, etc, etc, the next question should be:
‘So do you guarantee that Brexit will not cause any shortage of medicines, foods or fuel or a hard border in Ireland?’ If the Brexit-er equivocates, they need to be pressed hard: ‘So what might there be shortages of? How long could these shortages last?' etc

If they say: ‘well I can’t tell you exactly’, the next question should be: ‘shouldn’t you know exactly how serious the shortages are going to be before you inflict them on our country?’

If the Brexit-er re-iterates that no-deal is nothing to fear and that everything will be fine, the next question should be: ‘so do you guarantee that you will resign if there are shortages of medicines, food or fuel or a hard border in Ireland?’

BBC interviewing on Brexit so far has let the country down. The UK is now facing its worst crisis since World War Two. If the BBC lets us down again, its reputation will never recover."

Brexitwatch: another complaint to the BBC

The BBC's performance has been so lamentable that I could complain every day about the way pro-Brexit interviewees are allowed to spout their lies on programme after programme without even a token challenge.

But I've finally lost patience, and written to them again:

Last night a journalist was killed in N Ireland as Brexit undermines the peace process, and unfortunately the BBC has played its part in this sorry state of affairs by failing to expose systematic lying by pro-Brexit speakers on its news and current affairs programmes.

Day after day, they are allowed to spout that the UK has to leave the EU because 'people voted for it'. (Most of them have by now given up any pretence that Brexit has any benefits.)

I used to work for the BBC as well as other broadcasting organisations, and I would have been asking these interviewees:

1. Why should we have to obey the result of a referendum that was won by lying, cheating and criminality?

2. Why should we have to obey the result of a referendum in which voters were promised a Brexit that is not being and cannot be delivered?

3. Why are we pretending we have to obey the result of a referendum that was explicitly non-binding and advisory?

I have heard many, many Brexiters being interviewed on your programmes, but I have NEVER heard one of your interviewers putting these points. Why is that? Is it because they are ignorant of the facts or is it because an edict has come from on high forbidding them from raising these inconvenient facts. If it is the latter, from whom does it come?

Brexitwatch: time to contact the Met again

Could all the brinkmanship about no deal and the unicorn amendments from Tory MPs just be a smokescreen, designed to make us forget that the referendum result, which these days is the only justification offered for Brexit, was procured by lying, cheating and law-breaking?

Back in October (see my post of 15 October 2018) I contacted the Metropolitan Police to find out why they had done nothing about law-breaking by the Leave side, even though the evidence had been submitted to them in May (now 9 months ago). On 16 October, they sent me this reply:

The electoral commission has made referrals to the MPS. The special Enquiry Team are assessing a number of documents in order to make an informed decision as to whether a criminal investigation is required.

If this 'assessment' has made any progress over the last four months, it is a closely guarded secret, so I have just written to the Met again:

It is nine months now since you were presented with clear evidence of widespread illegal activity by the Leave Campaign in the 2016 Brexit referendum. Four months ago I asked why so little progress had been made, and you told me on October 16, 2018: 'The electoral commission has made referrals to the MPS. The special Enquiry Team are assessing a number of documents in order to make an informed decision as to whether a criminal investigation is required.'

So could you now tell me:

1. Have you now finished assessing the documents? If not, why not?

2. Have you now started your criminal investigation? If not, why not? If you have, when will it be concluded?

3. Is it correct that your plan is to spin out any 'investigation' beyond the date when the UK leaves the EU so that if there was a criminal conspiracy, it will have reached a successful conclusion before the police take any meaningful action and that thus you can avoid upsetting the government in view of the 'political sensitivities' you talked about?

I look forward to hearing from you as a matter of urgency.

Brexitwatch: don't let the BBC mount a pro-Brexit stitch-up

On December 9, the BBC is planning to mount a 'debate' on Brexit between.....two Brexiters! Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn.

If you want a fair debate with equal representation for anti-Brexiters, complain to the BBC here - http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/

This is what I have sent:

For years I have had to endure BBC interviewers failing to challenge pro-Brexit spokespeople when they have used your programmes to spread lies and untruths.

Now I understand you are planning to silence anti-Brexit voices altogether by mounting a 'debate' on Brexit between two committed Brexiters - Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn. All the opinion polls indicate that more people support Remain than Leave and even if you made the assumption that they exaggerated the Remain lead, at the very least you would have to conclude that opinion was evenly divided.

MPs are about to make one of the most crucial decisions in our history, and it would be a dereliction of the BBC's duty to present a debate that does not give equal prominence to both sides.

The BBC has so far failed the nation over Brexit. It would be inexcusable to mount the kind of propaganda for Brexit that you are proposing.

Brexitwatch: BBC pro-Brexit bias - the BBC's response to my complaint

In my post of March 30, I put up a complaint I had sent to the BBC about pro-Brexit bias.

Below is the BBC's reply:

Dear Mr Withington

Thank you for contacting us in relation to the BBC Radio 4 broadcast of 'Today' on 30 March.

I understand you have concerns of pro-Brexit bias relating to a number of segments during this broadcast. I have reviewed these sections of the programme for you.

I understand that you feel that Nick Robinson's piece in the lead up to 8:00am contained inaccuracies and implied those who wished to remain were trying to undermine the EU Referendum. It is important to note that this was part of a day of programming on 29 March which saw Radio 4, with one year to go until the UK is scheduled to leave the European Union, broadcast a number of specialist programmes under the theme UK at the crossroads.

Nick Robinson had provided an analytical piece, exploring the question of 'What happens if the government fails at the Westminster Parliamentary hurdle.' In this report he discusses that "there is; as of yet, no agreement amongst Remainers on how to maximise their chance of beating the government, some favour a vote on a customs union, others on a second referendum or as they prefer to present it, a people's vote on a deal the Prime Minister does".

All staff; including Nick Robinson, working for the BBC, though clearly entitled to hold personal opinions and beliefs, are acutely aware that their views should never in any way influence their work for the BBC, nor should they be apparent to our audience. It is important to recognise however that a fundamental part of the role of our correspondents is to offer analysis, using their experience and knowledge, but this is not indicative of bias.

I also note your concerns relating to an interview which took place later that morning with Dr Liam Fox. On this date a range of contributors including Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell, International Trade Secretary Liam Fox and Tony Blair were invited on to the programme to discuss numerous topics relating to Brexit over the next 365 days.

During this interview Mishal asks Liam Fox a range on questions looking ahead to 30th March 2019 and what trade will look like for the UK and also explores how this will impact citizens living in the UK. They also explore the subject of a deal between the UK and the EU and what would happen if Parliament failed to vote in it's favour. As the interview wraps up Mishal questions Liam Fox on the subject of employment in places such as Nifco and whether the UK could compete outside of the EU.

In a fast-flowing interview situation, it may not always be possible for an interviewer to cross-check every statement and claim that is made by a guest, we're sorry this spoiled the interview for you. We always seek to ensure that the interviewer's particular question is answered by the guest first and foremost.

The key point here is that we aim to cover the ongoing Brexit negotiations with due impartiality. This means we carry a wide range of views about the European Union from across the political spectrum on our output. We regularly hear from those who are in favour of leaving the EU and those who wished to remain. As with any story we cover, the BBC does not have an opinion on the European Union, or on the UK’s position within it. Instead we try to explain the different and sometimes complex issues affecting our audience during Brexit. Our aim is to give them the information they need in order to follow the process clearly.

Due impartiality isn’t necessarily always achieved in one single report or programme, so we would ask that you take account of how we cover a topic over time.

We do value your feedback about this. All complaints are sent to senior management and the team at Today and I’ve included your points in our overnight report. These reports are among the most widely read sources of feedback in the BBC and ensures that your concerns have been seen by the right people quickly. This helps inform their decisions about current and future content.

Thank you once again for getting in touch.

Kind regards

Donal Rainey

BBC Complaints Team