Maladministration at the top of the European Commission - ruling

European ombudslady

I spy breaking news, though it must be said mainly on my Twitter feed...

Emily O'Reilly, the European Union's chief ombudsman (elected by the European Parliament), has slammed the European Commission for ignoring its own rules when appointing Martin Selmayr as Secretary General of the Commission last year.

She's ruled that the Commission committed four acts of "maladministration" by appointing Mr Selmayr as Mr Juncker's right-hand man in February 2018 and “did not follow EU law, in letter and spirit" and "did not follow the Commission’s own rules”.

Mr Selmayr, as you probably know, is playing a highly controversial role in the Brexit negotiations.

The European Commission has (in the usual way of such things) rejected her findings. Apparently, she's not been fair!

So Big News then about EU maladministration at the very highest level - something that's of obvious relevance to the ongoing EU membership debate here in the UK.

It will be interesting to see how the BBC reports this. So far there appears to be nothing. 

The likes of the Daily Telegraph and the Daily Express (as well as Politico) have reported it quickly - as you might expect. 

So will the pro-Remain media, including the BBC, try to squash this story?

Let's watch and see.

Lead story on tonight's BBC News at Ten anyone? (No, me neither).

Ah, and, yes, I see DB is already on the case:

Debates about debates

Buzzfeed's Mark Di Stefano and Alex Wickham have a very interesting account of the various shenanigans surrounding the intended Brexit deal debate between Mrs May and Mr Corbyn, and Alex has also handily provided a Twitter summary of its  contents:

• BBC accused of acting on behalf of Downing Street with debate pitch that favours May’s deal over any of the alternatives.
• Original BBC pitch was for May and Corbyn to appear with a 20-strong panel (!) made up of members of the public, figures from public life and politicians. 10 pro-deal, 10 anti with various different views. No10 loved the idea. Others less so.
• SNP have written to Tony Hall complaining. Corbyn’s office also unimpressed with BBC twitter antics yesterday.
• Under original BBC proposal, once you account for moderator’s comments, May/Corbyn opening statements, and interventions from the panel, there would be an estimated 12 minutes left for head to head debate. ITV’s plan allows for half an hour even with ads.

eg me

Well, it's an idea:

😁

And there's more:

I think Paul may have a point though about the BBC's "panel of hand-picked numpties". That's my worry too. 

"Me? The BBC? Here? In charge of choosing a panel for a major Brexit debate? At nine o'clock in the evening? With our reputation? What were they thinking of?"

Breaking news...

A train of events this lunchtime:

• Breaking - BBC wins broadcasters race to host Brexit deal debate on Sunday December 9, at 8pm.
• BUT hang on: This is still dependent on Labour agreeing. Corbyn said to prefer ITV's pitch - not least because of its 7pm start time, avoiding a clash with I'm A Celebrity. All still in play, I'm told.
• Labour party spokesman: "Negotiations about the debate are still ongoing". Fury in Team Corbyn, accusing No10 of trying to bounce them.
• Interesting. I'm told BBC are promising a far bigger audience because their debate would follow Strictly's result show. On same Sunday last year in 8pm slot, BBC had 11.9m viewers, vs ITV's 4m. I’m A Celeb's big audience bounce only kicks in at 9pm when it starts.
• I also hear that the BBC's debate will not be hosted by Andrew Neil. A shame, but unsurprising neither May nor Corbyn would agree to that type of box office savaging.

Also:

• BBC  format for TV debate would also include panel of  "names" involved in Brexit to quiz PM and Jeremy Corbyn.
• It's understood Labour do not believe BBC format for TV debate is a genuine head to head - as it would also involve a Brexit panel.
• Labour believe ITV also offer  bigger, more diverse viewing audience for TV debate.

Hmm. Not liking the sound of the BBC's use of a panel of "names".