Sunday 26 June 2016

And on we go (starring Evan Davis)....

Would Monet have been for Frexit?

Impressions, Sunrise (or Sunset)...

The first Newsnight since the referendum result was declared (Friday night's edition) was punctuated by a series of reports, all of which (even Mark Urban's) featured melancholy background music and wistful images. Such music couldn't help but convey a mood of regret.

(Were you thinking what they were thinking? - to paraphrase an old UK election poster).

The programme's newest edition - its new business editor Helen Thomas (once of the FT) - looked weary and depressed while reporting on "the plunge" of the pound:

Helen Thomas, looking happy

Of course, she could just have been tired (having - like me - stayed up all night the previous night, perhaps?).

Then there was Evan Davis, who didn't seem tired at all.

In the three-way discussion between Remainers Ken Clarke and Tristram Hunt and Leaver Suzanne Evans, it was Suzanne Evans who got the tougher challenges from Evan. 

And Evan and Ken Clarke chatted like sad old friends reminiscing, poor things.

And when Dan Hannan duly appeared, Evan outperformed Emily Maitlis. 

He went for Dan over immigration, suggesting that Dan and the Leave campaign had misled the public over dramatically cutting the numbers of migrants once we leave the EU. 

Evan kept putting his head in his hands to demonstrate his disbelief at the sheer dishonesty of the Leave campaign (despite Dan not having said anything different that night to what he's ever said before - and I've been 'following' Mr Hannan for some time, so I know that). 

Of course, I can see the point Evan Davis was trying to make. I know (from talking to them) that quite a lot of the people up here in Morecambe and Lancaster who voted Out did so in the expectation that the number of migrants coming into the UK would be cut substantially after we left the EU. 

That Dan Hannan has never argued that - despite Evan's heavy and repeated implying that he has - is something known to me (and, probably, you) but perhaps not to most Leave voters. 

Dan has always been openly pro-immigration and has always been clear that, for him, it's about us being able to control our own immigration and choose who we want to come in, even if that amounts to huge amounts of people. 

That could prove to be a problem with voters up here - and elsewhere. Most of them don't want that at all.

That, however, is beside the point of this post. Its point is that Evan Davis gave the impression of being petulant and spiteful towards Dan Hannan...

Evan, in full flow on Friday

...and, after all his theatrics and heavy hints about Mr Hannan's dishonesty, he concluded the interview by saying "Wow!" to Dan's final answer, and then saying: 
Dan Hannan, thank you very much. Christine Ockrent, thank you. I had meant to come back to you Christine. We're out of time. But I hit a nerve there with Dan Hannan. Thank you.
He then moved on. 

If there's any BBC presenter I expect pro-EU bias from it's Evan Davis. His performance that night didn't snap me out of that expectation. 

His performance on last night's 'Life after Brexit' Newsnight special was much better. Maybe he'd calmed down a bit.

Well, those are my impressions anyhow.


  1. John Piennar was being relentlessly downbeat this morning. The whole of the BBC are at it...mind you Sky are no better in this respect and on ITV Robert Peston has been desperately trying to talk up the Remain rivals to Boris. The BBC is also trying to publicise the petition to have the Referendum overturned. Clearly that is because it wants to use that as a wedge to drive into the Leave coalition.

  2. One could be forgiven for thinking the BBC actively wanted the Pound & the FTSE to drop like a stone...

  3. Immigration will be reduced at some point. Maybe not substantially (depending on how one defines that), but at least noticeably. It will take time, but there will be a reduction. There will have to be if unlimited free movement is stopped. The numbers everyone is using to 'prove' which kind of immigrant and how many come from within or without the EU are not telling the real story.

    Those numbers don't - can't - really account for illegals (either illegal entries or those staying past their visas), and don't really reflect the...shall we say...cultural particulars of those immigrants from the EU. If someone does have those numbers, they sure aren't talking very loudly about them.

    My point is that ending the free movement of people with an EU passport will automatically lead to some reduction, as there will immediately be obstacles - however small - to people simply turning up and working in a restaurant, shop, office, or construction firm. Even the smallest obstacle will be a difficult one to people without much means or connections. There will have to be some reduction, just by natural attrition.

    On top of that, the million plus who came in to Europe this year, and the tens of thousands from each of the poor countries the EU is rushing to bring in, won't be able to come in easily or automatically. So, even if real numbers from the EU aren't reduced substantially, those numbers won't increase like they would have. I'm being a hypocrite using that logic, I know, but just for fun let's throw the BBC's own logic that something increasing slightly less is a 'cut' back in their faces.

    Bottom line, there will have to be some measurable reduction eventually, and it won't increase like it was going to. Nobody knows or can say how much or when or what kind yet, but it's certainly not a lie to say Brexit will reduce rapid, mass immigration.

    1. There are several issues that the Useless Media, as I am now given to call them, never examine in relation to migration control.

      Migration can be controlled in a number of ways without necessarily have a complete ban. There is the points system approach. One can have caps from particular countries. One can have work permit and time limited contracts with no right of naturalisation or family entry. One can apply infrastructure levies to foreigners working in the UK. One can exclude migrants from free services like the NHS, welfare benefits and social housing.

      All these issues need to be examined urgently. The message coming from the Referendum was I believe loud and clear - "something must be done" about an unsustainable migration-driven population increase of 515,000.

      My own view is that a combination of infrastructure levy,denial of benefits, caps, points based entry and timed limited work permits would bring migration control to a halt.

      I think we can negotiate a free trade plus reciprocal migration agreement with the EU.

    2. Exactly. Farage regularly mentioned an Australia-style points system, as did Brexiters. That covers EU and non-EU. He's even suggested favoring former colonies and Commonwealth countries over (Eastern) Europe. Yet the BBC and Resentful Remainiacs are all pretending it's impossible and Brexiters were lying.


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.