Jim Dandy (PBUH) has expressed some cynicism about the BBC’s lack of coverage of Miliband’s ‘Predistribution’ being actual pro-Labour bias.
During the Newsnight report Allegra Stratton revealed what lay at the heart of Miliband’s new strategy for social harmony and equality…it was in essence the ‘NOBBLING OF COMPANIES’, but she didn’t expand on that any further, not saying what that meant for the economy.
Emily Maitlis went for a more technical explanation…stating that Miliband would be raising the MINIMUM WAGE…but again didn’t expand further other than to gush favourably….‘It’s such a simple idea…a wage that pays you a living wage so you don’t have to claim allowances.’ (Vote Labour NOW!)
Maitlis was asking what the government would have to do to bring down the cost of living….so merely dipping her toe in the murky waters of Predistribution, Labour’s New Grand Idea, is not enough…..this is meant to be Labour’s answer to that very question and yet the BBC fail to look at it in depth which is ironic really because….
What is strange about all that is that Labour and it’s favourite Broadcaster have been bashing the Tories, sorry the Coalition, for not producing GROWTH. Labour suddenly breaks cover and announces as the GRAND NEW IDEA, the central plank of their Comeback, a plan that ‘NOBBLES COMPANIES’, the very companies that produce the wealth that produces the growth!
And yet the BBC decide to give no more than a cursory glance at this proposal to raise the minimum wage by what would be a huge amount that would cripple the very small and medium sized companies that Labour claims are the source of growth!.
Or is that what it means? If you were to listen to Chuka Umunna being interviewed by Jim Naughtie you get a different tale….To Umunna ‘Predistribution’ means that Labour will create a lot of high skilled jobs that pay high wages.
Now if that is the case this is not a NEW idea, every government since government was invented probably had the same intentions….the last Labour government certainly did judging by Brown’s Mansion House Speech in 2007…..
‘Today there are in Britain 5 million unskilled people. By 2020 we will need only just over half a million. So we must create up to five million new skilled jobs and to fill them we must persuade five million unskilled men and women to gain skills, the biggest transformation in the skills of our economy for more than a century.
And we will need 50 per cent more people of graduate skills. Yet, while China and India are turning out 4 million graduates a year, we produce just 400,000.
Quite simply in Britain today there is too much potential untapped, too much talent wasted, too much ability unrealised.’
‘Long term decisions to ensure that because we unlock all the talents of all the British people, there is security and prosperity not just for some but for everyone.
To support world-leading industries so that we create not just jobs, but new skilled well paying jobs millions will need.
Our whole economic prosperity depends upon which competing vision of the future will win in the next few years.
One choice for Britain -the choice we reject- is a low skilled, low pay economy competing in a race to the bottom with China, India and Asia.
But if our choice – a high wage, high skills economy – is to succeed, then Britain, a small country, cannot afford to waste the talents of anyone.’
The question is of course if everyone is employed being doctors and engineers and lawyers who is emptying the bins and delivering the post? I guess that would mean Labour would be opening the floodgates again to more mass immigration…of low skilled workers on low wages…that need topping up by benefits….em…didn’t we come in here?
But the BBC happily ignore all such massive consequences that follow such a daft proposal.
Jim Naughtie failed completely to get a meaningful answer from Umunna, clearly the one he gave was pure evasive invention….or even he doesn’t know what Predistribution means. Naughtie, as a professional, interested, reporter, must have known what Newsnight had said….he works for the same company after all….and yet he accepts an answer from Umunna that is totally different to the Newsnight conclusion about a higher minimum wage….If we pay him so much We expect a lot more from Naughtie than feebly allowing a politican to walk all over him.
Naughtie is probably one of the highest paid political inquisitors in the Media, Maitlis certainly is, and both being on Premier League political programmes should be expected to get right down to the core of any issue and not be fobbed off by slippery politicians…but no, what we get is muddled and half baked unexamined reports that don’t reveal anything much.
Watching the Newsnight debate it is hard to come away with any feeling that you have learnt anything and that any conclusion was reached…other than Predistribution means ‘nobbling companies with massive wage increases’.
Certainly no examination of the consequences of the economically highly damaging ‘Predistribution’ policy was offered.
The BBC presumably ignore it because it is so damaging to the economy that the BBC knows no one would elect Labour if they knew what they really intended to enact in government….and/or the BBC knows it is such a foolish idea that any close examination would reveal those flaws and Miliband and Balls would be, once again, shown to be the economically illiterate buffoons that we know they are.
So my answer to Jim Dandy(PBUH) is that such lack of will to press forward with a more rigorous investigation into the meaning and consequences of ‘Predistribution’ indicates the BBC are showing bias, and certainly incompetence, in their coverage of Labour’s Big Idea.