For months, the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, has expressed increased irritation with the conduct of MPs in the House of Commons. This week, he took the extraordinary step of writing to the leaders of all the main political parties to discuss how Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs) can be cooled amid increasing dissatisfaction from the public.
The viewing public have complained that the shouting, hollering and sniping in the sessions have made PMQs difficult to watch, representing an absurd indictment on the quality of current MPs.
Another recent complaint is that PMQs sessions have become increasingly orchestrated, with the Prime Minister being asked orchestrated questions from his backbenchers, readily identifiable by the similarity of question characteristics throughout the sessions.
Recently, Bercow slammed the Education Secretary, Michael Gove, in the Commons with the rebuke: "You need to write out a thousand times, 'I will behave myself at Prime Minister's Questions'."
Other than encouraging MPs to quieten so questions and answers can be heard, it is unclear how the sessions can be improved, other than naming and removing the worst offenders.
One option could be restricted entry to the session, with MPs scheduled to ask questions permitted access. This has the potential to make the sessions more manageable.
The Hansard Society has included among its recommendations on the issue a rugby-style "sin-bin" for particular wrongdoers and rescheduling PMQs to prime-time to generate viewer interest.
Wednesday 19 February 2014
Saturday 15 February 2014
BBC found to be the broadcast wing of the UK Government in bias row
The BBC is biased towards right-wing politics, with much of its output manipulated by government sources, researchers have found.
The findings, revealed last year by academics from Cardiff University found that other broadcasters, such as ITV and Channel 4, drew on academic and scientific sources, while the BBC relied more heavily on official lines from Westminster and contributions from business sources.
A row has broken out over the BBC Trust's lack of response to the findings. The BBC Trust is led by former Tory MP Chris Patten, and is charged with overseeing the work of the state broadcaster and responding to viewers' complaints.
Professor Justin Lewis of Cardiff University has expressed disappointment at the playing down of the findings by the Trust and will continue to pursue a written report on the matter.
The BBC has repeatedly attracted criticism of its right-wing output on social media since the election of the right-wing coalition government in the UK in 2010, which lies in contrast to its past reputation (correctly or incorrectly) of bias in the opposite direction.
The findings will be unsurprising to those who watch current affairs programming on the BBC. Previous BBC Director General, Mark Thompson, and Sunday morning stalwart Andrew Marr had both previously complained about times they felt BBC output sat too close to the left.
Many viewers of BBC News are also aware of Political Editor Nick Robinson's past as Chair of the Young Conservatives. Andrew Neil, the BBC's most omnipresent of figures in the corporation's political programming, is a major figure of the economic right.
Bias of BBC output is thought to be only partially related to the political persuasions of their main protagonists though. An article on this issue published today at The Independent explains how dependency on the government to secure a sizeable share of the licence fee for funding represents a major threat to impartiality.
In short, the BBC is a "Public Service Broadcaster" in name only - the need to appease the government effectively renders the BBC a state broadcaster.
A summary of Professor Lewis's view and some statistical comparisons with ITV and Channel 4 can be found in this article by Ian Burrell of The Independent.
The findings, revealed last year by academics from Cardiff University found that other broadcasters, such as ITV and Channel 4, drew on academic and scientific sources, while the BBC relied more heavily on official lines from Westminster and contributions from business sources.
A row has broken out over the BBC Trust's lack of response to the findings. The BBC Trust is led by former Tory MP Chris Patten, and is charged with overseeing the work of the state broadcaster and responding to viewers' complaints.
Professor Justin Lewis of Cardiff University has expressed disappointment at the playing down of the findings by the Trust and will continue to pursue a written report on the matter.
The BBC has repeatedly attracted criticism of its right-wing output on social media since the election of the right-wing coalition government in the UK in 2010, which lies in contrast to its past reputation (correctly or incorrectly) of bias in the opposite direction.
The findings will be unsurprising to those who watch current affairs programming on the BBC. Previous BBC Director General, Mark Thompson, and Sunday morning stalwart Andrew Marr had both previously complained about times they felt BBC output sat too close to the left.
Many viewers of BBC News are also aware of Political Editor Nick Robinson's past as Chair of the Young Conservatives. Andrew Neil, the BBC's most omnipresent of figures in the corporation's political programming, is a major figure of the economic right.
Bias of BBC output is thought to be only partially related to the political persuasions of their main protagonists though. An article on this issue published today at The Independent explains how dependency on the government to secure a sizeable share of the licence fee for funding represents a major threat to impartiality.
In short, the BBC is a "Public Service Broadcaster" in name only - the need to appease the government effectively renders the BBC a state broadcaster.
A summary of Professor Lewis's view and some statistical comparisons with ITV and Channel 4 can be found in this article by Ian Burrell of The Independent.
Tuesday 11 February 2014
The US accused of talking down the Winter Olympics
A major sports event is always accompanied by a mishap or two and the fear of a major security incident, but US reporting of Sochi 2014 has been dismissed in Russia as a 'dampener' and against the spirit of the Olympics.
Many Russians were dismayed by the pre-event reporting on US news networks, following warnings of terror and calling the area a "war zone". The coverage was described as dampening the excitement preceding the event.
There was nothing too remarkable in itself about the warnings of bombs in toothpaste tubes. The London 2012 Olympics event was also carried out under high security amid similar fears. Russia had already reacted to security concerns by restricting liquids and pastes on flights. It is also accepted that Russia will need to continue the security standard already set.
However, it is argued that some media outlets in America were overly creative when expressing their fears, with the warnings of war on the streets totally unwarranted. While it is true that Russia has had a recent struggle with terrorism, if anything it demonstrates that Russia's problems are not that different to America's.
It is felt in Russia there has been a cultural assault on the games for months. Television viewers in both the US and Britain were treated to imagery of poorly constructed toilets, sparsely-furnished hotel rooms and hotel accessories with components falling off. (Presumably by people who have never had the pleasure of staying or living in a "new build" home or hotel in the UK!)
There was also the moment which amused some, when there was a problem with the firework display at the opening ceremony. Russian TV was criticised for switching to footage of the faultless rehearsal display. It is unlikely that anyone else's media would have dealt with the glitch quite so efficiently.
American media lashed out at the firework display coverage as an example of how secretive and window-dressed Russian society remains.
The relative petty nature of pre-Sochi posturing distracts from an issue that many people, especially EU citizens, are concerned about - the status of homosexuality in Russia. The Russian President, Vladimir Putin, argued that while Russia accepts that "non-traditional" relationship activity takes place, it is against providing information on it to children. A new law has criminalised the presentation of information on homosexuality to children.
Critics say that the new law effectively prevents gay rights protests and educative communication regarding sexuality. Many competing nations appeared to respond the concerns at the opening ceremony of Sochi 2012 by wearing highly decorative suits, with the Germans looking particularly colourful.
Many Russians were dismayed by the pre-event reporting on US news networks, following warnings of terror and calling the area a "war zone". The coverage was described as dampening the excitement preceding the event.
There was nothing too remarkable in itself about the warnings of bombs in toothpaste tubes. The London 2012 Olympics event was also carried out under high security amid similar fears. Russia had already reacted to security concerns by restricting liquids and pastes on flights. It is also accepted that Russia will need to continue the security standard already set.
However, it is argued that some media outlets in America were overly creative when expressing their fears, with the warnings of war on the streets totally unwarranted. While it is true that Russia has had a recent struggle with terrorism, if anything it demonstrates that Russia's problems are not that different to America's.
It is felt in Russia there has been a cultural assault on the games for months. Television viewers in both the US and Britain were treated to imagery of poorly constructed toilets, sparsely-furnished hotel rooms and hotel accessories with components falling off. (Presumably by people who have never had the pleasure of staying or living in a "new build" home or hotel in the UK!)
There was also the moment which amused some, when there was a problem with the firework display at the opening ceremony. Russian TV was criticised for switching to footage of the faultless rehearsal display. It is unlikely that anyone else's media would have dealt with the glitch quite so efficiently.
American media lashed out at the firework display coverage as an example of how secretive and window-dressed Russian society remains.
The relative petty nature of pre-Sochi posturing distracts from an issue that many people, especially EU citizens, are concerned about - the status of homosexuality in Russia. The Russian President, Vladimir Putin, argued that while Russia accepts that "non-traditional" relationship activity takes place, it is against providing information on it to children. A new law has criminalised the presentation of information on homosexuality to children.
Critics say that the new law effectively prevents gay rights protests and educative communication regarding sexuality. Many competing nations appeared to respond the concerns at the opening ceremony of Sochi 2012 by wearing highly decorative suits, with the Germans looking particularly colourful.
Wednesday 5 February 2014
Miliband and Cameron gender quarrel disguises true parliamentary failings
Labour leader Ed Miliband has criticised the lack of promotion of women by David Cameron's ruling Conservatives in a fiery Prime Minister's Questions session.
Describing the Conservatives as an "old boys' network", Miliband slammed a decision by the party to deselect long-serving Member of Parliament Anne McIntosh for the next General Election.
Embarrassingly for the Prime Minister, his front bench was full of male MPs for the session, while Miliband packed his front bench with women.
Miliband also noted that there are just as many members of David Cameron's cabinet from two fee-paying schools as there are female members. The ruling coalition has been criticised in the past for hindering social mobility, with the current cabinet the least diverse in years, if not decades.
There has been activity in all of the major UK political parties in recent years to promote more women to Parliament, occasionally controversially in the form of 'all-women shortlists' in some parliamentary constituencies.
The coalition parties have been wholly unsuccessful in returning women to Parliament though. In the aftermath of the 2010 General Election, 31 percent of Labour MPs were female, compared with 16 percent of Conservatives and 12 percent of Liberal Democrats.
This deficit has given the government a headache, as Labour has a broad pool of female talent to draw from. In contrast, promising female MPs on the government benches have largely fallen by the wayside.
Louise Mensch was part of the parliamentary committee charged with interrogating Rupert Murdoch over the phone-hacking scandal that engulfed his newspapers. Following that role, she suddenly stood down as MP citing family reasons and now writes for Murdoch's Sun newspaper.
Other promising female careers in the coalition government have also fizzled out, including that of Sarah Teather - now a regular rebel against government policy. Teather has announced she is stepping down at the next election.
Others, including Nadine Dorries, have also taken to frequently opposing their own party. Indeed, Dorries has also criticised the Conservative leadership, dismissing them as "posh boys."
However, there must inevitably be an allowance for the prospect that any MP, regardless of gender, may fail to fulfil early promise - at best serving as a good constituency MP. The problem for the coalition is there are still not enough female MPs to source talented potential cabinet members in sufficient numbers.
The true failing, it would seem, is not just the failure to get enough talented women into high-profile government roles, but getting them into Parliament in the first place.
Describing the Conservatives as an "old boys' network", Miliband slammed a decision by the party to deselect long-serving Member of Parliament Anne McIntosh for the next General Election.
Embarrassingly for the Prime Minister, his front bench was full of male MPs for the session, while Miliband packed his front bench with women.
Miliband also noted that there are just as many members of David Cameron's cabinet from two fee-paying schools as there are female members. The ruling coalition has been criticised in the past for hindering social mobility, with the current cabinet the least diverse in years, if not decades.
There has been activity in all of the major UK political parties in recent years to promote more women to Parliament, occasionally controversially in the form of 'all-women shortlists' in some parliamentary constituencies.
The coalition parties have been wholly unsuccessful in returning women to Parliament though. In the aftermath of the 2010 General Election, 31 percent of Labour MPs were female, compared with 16 percent of Conservatives and 12 percent of Liberal Democrats.
This deficit has given the government a headache, as Labour has a broad pool of female talent to draw from. In contrast, promising female MPs on the government benches have largely fallen by the wayside.
Louise Mensch was part of the parliamentary committee charged with interrogating Rupert Murdoch over the phone-hacking scandal that engulfed his newspapers. Following that role, she suddenly stood down as MP citing family reasons and now writes for Murdoch's Sun newspaper.
Other promising female careers in the coalition government have also fizzled out, including that of Sarah Teather - now a regular rebel against government policy. Teather has announced she is stepping down at the next election.
Others, including Nadine Dorries, have also taken to frequently opposing their own party. Indeed, Dorries has also criticised the Conservative leadership, dismissing them as "posh boys."
However, there must inevitably be an allowance for the prospect that any MP, regardless of gender, may fail to fulfil early promise - at best serving as a good constituency MP. The problem for the coalition is there are still not enough female MPs to source talented potential cabinet members in sufficient numbers.
The true failing, it would seem, is not just the failure to get enough talented women into high-profile government roles, but getting them into Parliament in the first place.
London's railway workers take industrial action over jobs
London Underground workers have taken industrial action against Transport for London, following the authority's decision to cut around 1,000 jobs.
Union members started their 48-hour walk-out at 9pm on Tuesday (4th February) hoping that planned ticket office closures will be dropped.
The decision by Transport for London to close some ticket offices is in stark contrast to election pledges made by the chief of Transport for London, Mayor Boris Johnson.
British news outlets have been reporting that fans faced disruption to their journeys to watch Taylor Swift perform at Greenwich. Meanwhile, the British Prime Minister, David Cameron, described the strike as "shameful".
Union bosses claim that ticket office closures will lead to a decline in service to commuters and that the jobs provided are vital.
Union members started their 48-hour walk-out at 9pm on Tuesday (4th February) hoping that planned ticket office closures will be dropped.
The decision by Transport for London to close some ticket offices is in stark contrast to election pledges made by the chief of Transport for London, Mayor Boris Johnson.
British news outlets have been reporting that fans faced disruption to their journeys to watch Taylor Swift perform at Greenwich. Meanwhile, the British Prime Minister, David Cameron, described the strike as "shameful".
Union bosses claim that ticket office closures will lead to a decline in service to commuters and that the jobs provided are vital.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)