FRESH concerns over BBC bias have been sparked after three pro Union figures lined up to attack Scottish independence in a prime time show just as the SNP’s conference opened.
A Radio Four programme broadcast on Friday evening and repeated again at lunchtime yesterday had the trio of critics, all based in England, make various arguments against Scotland becoming independent.
The three pro-Union members were Sir Graham Brady, chair of the 1922 committee of Tory backbench MPs, John Mills, a businessman and former chair of Labour Leave, and Professor Ngaire Woods, dean of the Blavatnik School of Government at Oxford University.
Alyn Smith, the SNP MP and former MEP, was the only member of the four strong panel on the Any Questions programme in favour.
The three opponents of independence gave their views one after the other, with Smith then told to respond to their claims "briefly" so the discussion could move onto another subject.
On independence, Mills told listeners: “I think there is a possibility this will happen. I think it’ll be unfortunate if it did. I must say I have never understood the logic of Scotland wanting to part company with England and Wales and Northern Ireland while opposing the idea of Britain leaving the European Union.
“It just seems the two things are not to be compatible with each other. I think the economic arguments for Scotland parting company with the UK are very weak especially with oil prices being very low as way ahead as we can see.”
The presenter Chris Mason did not give any clarity to the view that independence supporters do not see an incompatabilty between EU membership and Scotland leaving the UK as they believe the UK is not a Union of equals and point to Ireland's position strongly being protected by Brussels during the Brexit talks.
Woods then weighed in to give her reasons why she opposed Scotland becoming independent.
She said: “We are sitting in a world where countries realise they have to group together with their neighbours in order to set rules at least within the neighbourhood they live by and that means for England and Scotland and Northern Ireland and Wales holding together is the optimal idea but that in my view for effectiveness requires really working on the connective tissues between the governments.”
Sir Graham insisted the Union was strong – despite 14 successive polls showing majority support among Scots’ voters for independence. “There are lots of positive arguments in terms of the economic arguments for being together,” he said.
“But for me it’s more of an emotional argument … I just feel it would be terrible failure for all of us if the Union feel a part it’s been a huge success for hundreds of years.”
He added: “The Union has remained strong and the benefits of it for all the peoples’ of the United Kingdom remain as great as they ever where.”
Smith was asked to respond “briefly” to the points made by the trio.
He said: “It’s not about any particular one individual...Graham makes an important point there about the broad shoulders of the UK Treasury. What the UK Treasury has done is massively borrow on the international capital market the same as any other country but we have not had a say in how it’s been distributed and how it’s been spent.”
Smith then went on to elaborate his point.
Afterwards, Roger Mullin, a former SNP MP, said: “They should be doing proper research beforehand to make sure the panel is balanced in terms of views. Or if there has been research that has been done it raises the question about whether there was some deliberate bias.”
Ahead of the 2014 referendum the BBC repeatedly came under fire from Yes campaigners.
In Septemer Yes campaigners staged a protest outside the broadcaster’s Scottish office in Glasgow over plans to cut the Government’s daily pandemic briefings. The BBC then dropped the proposal.
A BBC spokesman said: “When Scottish independence was discussed SNP MP Alyn Smith was given more time to elaborate on his points.
“Across different episodes of Any Questions panels have had a mix of viewpoints on independence and this will continue to be the case.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel