franny

If you have just been made aware maybe ESB was not aware? I have known ESB for over 40 years, in the 70's we watched many games together when he organised coachs to away games and I still see him at St Mary's now. He is bringing his nipper up the right way, has the club at heart and is just the sort of supporter the club needs. Some people need to lighten up and give him some slack.

Is it the Daily Mail saying it or are they quoting the Panorama programme?

Thankyou for your analysis I only wish I had your insight and intelligence. Pedg (I think it was?) asked for more examples of bias, I gave some that I perceived. Sometimes the bias can be demonstrated by what is not asked rather than just what is asked. I dont believe I was selective, I approved of the attacks on the Tories but since the Labout government was in power for the last 13 years I could only refer to their policies. I approved of them of taking ALL politicians to task from the right or left just that is was less intense to the left. You answered my questions selctively so I can only assume you are acting in this "classic manner" you refer to. My distrust is of all politicans and I would expect the BBC to be equal in their challenges to any of them. As I said before some people are blinkered and can only look either to the right or left and are not able to open their mnds.

Thank you for telling me what I am thinking but you do not know what my political views are and I find it arrogant that you think you do, it really confirms what I have seen over the last 13 years of Labour rule of the "I know best for you" attitude. You will note I applauded the BBC for taking Tories to account for their actions and utterances but pointed out that in my opinion they failed to do that with others. I did not say the employees were Marxist just that they were follwing their political agneda when they should be independant. You may be correct about Sky and ITV and their licence obligations and I defer to you on that but my point was that like the newspapers that people re quick to denigrate since they are commercial they will stand or fall by their output. You do not answer any of my points but just turn it back to me which suggests to me that you are not able to counter/discuss the points I raise perhaps because perhaps of your own political bias. In my view the problem with most of the posters on here from left to right is that they are locked into their own dogma and will shoot a poster down as a racist or marxist simply becasue of who the poster is rather than looking at the content. This is the same with politics in that there is good and bad in varying degrees amongst most politicall parties policies it is just the honesty that is consistently lacking.

Under the last Labour government Campbell whistled and the BBC did as he asked, you only had to look at the disgraceful behaviour at the time of the dodgy dossier furore. BBC reporter Gilligan exposed the story, Campbell/Blair in fake indignation complain to the BBC, Gilligan had no support from the hierarchy and has to go. Gilligan was subsequently proven to be correct with his story but the damage was done and once more a cover up ensued. Whilst the NUJ are happy to strike and try and black out the Tory party conference over pensions I did not see NUJ journalists picketing for their journalistic independence when their colleague Gilligan was being stitched up, I believe because they are part of the conspiracy. Time and again BBC journalists will question Tories and quite correctly put them on a spot and make them uncomfortable but not let them adequately answer, the same treatment is seldom meted out to Labour party politicians, a leading question would be asked of Blair or Brown and they would then drone on with the spin they wanted to get out there. What deep exposé has there been of the awful situation at the Staffordshire Hospital. The Labour government presided over massive amounts of money going into the NHS and created a culture of targets that created an environment where patients and their care were less important than hitting targets. I have not seen any of the Labour politicians embarrassed by this or try and explain why it happened on their watch. The man who was in charge of Health when this first started to break is now our shadow chancellor so God help us. They want the credit for any positives but have any politicians been held accountable by our public broadcaster? Despite the mantra of Education Education Education after 13 years of Labour rule we see 20% of children leaving primary school without the required level of English. Have any politicians been held accountable by our public broadcaster? They beat on about the LibDems going back on the pledge ref Uni Fees but fail to mention that they were introduced by Labour who also said they would not introduce them but did a massive U turn. Take the EU for example, if they want a loony Eurosceptic they go to UKIP, if they want a mainstream Eurosceptic they get a Tory but seldom if ever a Labourite although there are many in the party (Kate Howey, Tony Benn etc..) because it helps paint a picture in the mind of the public. Why do they keep out Griffin? As detestable and obnoxious as he, his party and policies are he is an elected politician who has enough votes and support in the country to sit in Brussels. The murderers from Northern Ireland (McGuiness etc.) who, if not themselves their policies have killed British citizens get air time even the Green Party with fewer votes get air time and invites to QT but not Griffin. The point is Sky, ITV, Daily Mirror, Daily Mail etc can be as biased as they wish since they are independent organisations and create a product to suit their audience and will survive or fail based on that. The BBC however is OUR broadcaster and the only opportunity to hold politicians to account on OUR behalf in a totally impartial way irrespective of race, colour or creed and I believe they do not.

The issue that infuriates me on some of their reporting is that instead of giving us the facts for us to make our mind up the reporters too often give their view of events and the whys and wherfores or what they think will happen etc. and with their background too often there is a left of centre bias of their view.

I think the difference is that the emergency services are for all and deliver their service without favour or question. The BBC however in my view (and yes I have delivered services for them so know how they operate) are bloated, try to do too much with the tax they recieve and demonstrate a clear bias in theor delivery of content so therefore do not deliver a service without favour. However as I have said previoulsy they shoud not be privatised but get back to basics.

Agree with this. Yes he made a misataje with Gallipoli but accpeted responsibility and resigned. Did not see Blair or Brown showing any shame or even considering following the same path after their lies to go to war in Iraq and costing many many lives (British & Iraqi) and true to the spirit of the Labour leadership over the past 13 years just brazened it out. Yes we can judge Churchill harshly in some areas but head and shoulders above the last PM's.

I would exempt that as an educational gameshow!

Should not be privatised but should return to its core values, dont try and compete with everbody but reduce the mass of channels (just count the number of radio & TV channels availble, quite astonishing), move away from the dumbed down TV that C5, ITV & Sky broadcast, just dont try and compete with them. Produce a more limited range of quality British TV (good childrens programmes not masses of cartoons, good documentaries, plays and dramas not US trash and do away with the reality TV and gameshows.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with Lord Young it is refreshing that at least he had the decency to resign after his comments clearly caused offence to some. Contrast him doing the "decent thing" to the the wasters, cheats, liars and spin merchants from the Blair/Brown coalition. Money for honours, no problem, passports for friends, no problem, dodgy dossiers, no problem they they consistently bent the rules accpeted the roles but never took responsibility for what they said or did - resign for any of that never.

Surely that cannot be true but if so disgraceful and in my opinion further undermines the point of legal aid. Much like no win no fee in reverse they shoudl pay for their defence up front (after fleecing us for so long they must have assets) and only get the expenses back if they win. Too many people (lawyers included) have jumped on this gravy train and reforms announced yesterday long overdue and probably dont go far enough.

What is interesting is the response of the Somali community in this country. I for one had grumbled to my wife about the treatment of the Chandlers and contrasted it to the safe haven/opportunities extended to the Somali's in this country and said they should be doing more and should feel ashamed. I was very pleasantly surprised (and I have to say felt a little guilty of my earlier thoughts) when I saw that the Somail community here and indeed in the town where the Chandlers were held have we are told contributed to the ransom paid. On the TV (and yes I know these can be selective in their slant) in an interview young Somali's and teachers talked of their embarassment of the episode and how it demonstrated a lack of respect for the "people over 50" (since I am in that group I admire that view!) as well as being a slap in the face for the country that had been kind to them. I know it is another thread but if the muslim comminity on this country are as opposed to the extremism as some say they could also do themselves some big favours by being more vociferous and demonstrative about that opposition, it would do a lot to for their standing in peoples eyes.

There is a lot of criticism of the solution suggested by Dune (personally I think some is warranted but not all) however I have not seen an alternative suggested by those of the left. Whilst it may not be perfect surely IF a capitalist democracy works that is better than a right wing/left wing junta that gives nothing to the people of that nation. The socialist/communiist Chinese are pillaging the country so the left dont seem to care about the people, the junta (I dont know if they are right or left) only want to line their pockets. If they had an accountable democratic government who were exploitng the assets of that country using foregin knowhow and money to fund the developoment surely that is good? Badger/BTF/Bexy etc if Dune is wrong what is your suggestion as to the way forward in Burma?

I dont understand your point?

Not very civilised for other non smoking cafe users

This

I think the debate is interesting in that it was the previous Blair/Brown coalition administration who introduced the principal of fees (even though they and many members of their teams benefited from the free education before fees) but I can't remember riots against those. The biggest hurdle always is establishing the principal that a "tax" is going to be accepted (VAT, Flight Tax, Insurance Policy Tax or any other stealth tax you can think of) but after it is introduced the only issue is how high does it go. Now we are in queer street financially and need to recover a situation all hell breaks loose simply blaming the Tories/Lib Dems, very strange. If those now bleating (the students, lecturers, "intellectuals") had not meekly accepted the initial introduction by Blair/Brown maybe the current administration would not have gone down the route? Whilst some courses may be up to £9k per year many will not but since nothing is paid up front and recovery only starts when an earning threshold is hit I cannot see the issue. If we see a reduction in some of the nonsense degree courses as a result then I think that will also be a positive side effect. When I see the impact the huge increase in student numbers has had on Southampton High Street with the massive increase in bars/clubs/drunkenness etc. maybe if students have less cash to splash that will also be a good thing.

To the bue phew I guess it is a big crowd

Bang on. Too much hand wringing or analysis of past activites (whether they be wars, slavery, empire building etc.) by todays standards and morals distort our views. Try and understand the life at the time, the fear of invasion, the fear of revolution or perhaps the excitment of discovering new lands and so on and then look at what happened and appreciate for that reason.

Benji, sometimes you say some sensible things but somtimes you come out with such sanctimonious supposed intellectual claptrap I wonder what world you live in. Ask 99.9% of people who buy a poppy and they will tell you it is to demonstrate emotional and financial support for families of bereaved soldiers, injured soldiers and rememberance. It has been thus for donkeys years and should continue so and does not in any way imply support for the recent forays by the last Labour administration. People need to grow up and most of all have respect for all those who have made these sacrifices.

How is this hurting the fans? The Echo carries a full report with pictures! I think this is just NC bashing for the sake of it.

I find it interesting all the "socialist/labour voters" that condemn the previous administration in this way and wonder who they voted for during the 10+years the Blair/Brown coalition was in power because clearly many did vote for them and I suspect many who now condemen them as non socialists did. At the start of their power a good work colleague of mine over from Turkey said then that Blair was obviosuly not Socialist and just looking for power so if he realised it why were so many fooled? It was the same after Margaret Thatcher lost power, you could not find anyone to admit they voted for her but clearly huge numbers had done so.

Perhaps if they are out of their heads thay are not thinking? You are right that maybe alcohol/tobacco may not be approved of if "discovered" today but the point is it wasnt and to go back is impossible but maybe trying to repeat the mistake with new substances (natural or otherwise) is not the way forward either. Two wrongs do not make a right. I have seen the impact on a loved one of too much skunk so believe me I know what an impact even a "light" drug can have.

I would accept some may be able to pay more but lets assume for one moment that your proposal was the right way forward, what happens to that business when it pays the new minimum wage (should that be set by region?) and then folds becasue costs outstrip income (fishy friends not included in this example of course). All jobs lost to competitors possibly overseas and people now receing 100% of income from the state.