Obvious omissions II...

[Some bad language in this post] Well, the BBC online editors seem intent on proving their worthlessness and bias ...I didn't intend to write consecutive posts about them but they have peeved me again.

Today David Cameron made a good speech about what needs to be done re making headway into the countries debt; he mentioned various topics including decentralisation, cutting the cost of politics etc and telling us how he would do this, if he leads the next UK administration, making sure that MPs etc led by example. It is well worth reading the whole thing: [Link] He was also clearly sending a message to the voters that their disgust at MPs would bear fruit, a message that the bloated and favoured civil service and Parliament itself would also have to accept cuts in spending etc.

...we have taken the bold step of telling the British people very clearly: with a Conservative Government public spending will be cut. Not reduced in growth, not frozen - but cut.

That candour is a world away from the current Labour Government

He's told us what he wants to save, some mentioned previously: reducing quangos etc, making efficiencies; ministerial salaries will be cut by 5% (to start with!) and those salaries would also be frozen for the lifetime of the next Parliament; Parliamentary authorities would be obliged to cut costs by 10%; Public sector bodies would be forbidden to hire consultants to lobby politicians; each and every quango having to justify its existence; official government cars would be cut by 30% (there's about 170 of them!); every item of government spending over £25,000 to be published online and also all public sector salaries over £150,000 to be published online; revision of "gold-lated" pension scheme (for new MPs); axing certain allowances including the £10,000 yearly 'Communications Allowance'; abolishing Regional Assemblies [yes!]; reducing the number of MPs by 10% [Yes!...but should be more 30 to 40%] ... All this and more; read the speech HERE. He also said "Taxpayers' money will not be subsidising politicians' food and drink any longer".

Now, after all that and going back to how I began the thread, how do you think the BBC online editors thought to headline this news?..."Cameron would axe MPs' cheap food" [LINK] Now Mr. BBC online editor, if you happen to read this, I think that's a bias cunt's cop-out. Admittedly other media have included the no free food bit but ALL have mentioned at least one other point (cutting pay being the most visible). However, what the BBC do here is highlight the most banal seeming point (when taken on it's own) and make that the headline leading to immediate scorn and opening the door to more wankers to make smart-arse comments: Lib Dem chief of staff Danny Alexander said that Cameron and the Conservatives must stop...

"dodging the tough questions... the Liberal Democrats have proposed not renewing Trident. David Cameron wants to increase the price of salads".

Yawn. I realise the BBC have set you up for the line Danny and you're job dictates what you say but Cameron is not dodging them you twat, read the speech.

Update video HERE with post speech comments (this morning 09.09.09) and highlights. This "is about more than the money...it's the message"