Archive for January 6th, 2010

Problems with the Robinsons

Thanks to Iain Dale for Making the Following Post #1 on his Daley Dozen

I watched both the UTV and BBC NI coverage of the Peter & Iris Robinson “affair” story on the evening bulletins and the difference in style could not have been more stark.  I’ll ask some rhetorical questions about why that should be the case later in this post.

But let’s focus on the style of reporting, first of all.  UTV had Ken Reid and Darwin Templeton – Ken being the station’s old hack and Darwin being the DUP apparatchik Editor of the News Letter.  At one point I was half expecting Soviet broadcasting mood music to be played over Ken Reid’s narration of the story as UTV used still photos of the couple in their early years as they doted on each other – contrasting with the contrite statement from Iris admitting her affair and her husband’s near-tearful public expose of their marital problems.  Ken and Darwin gave the DUP leader an easy ride.  There was scant sign of any hard-nosed journalistic rigour. 

Meanwhile the BBC’s approach was much less reverential.  Mark Devenport made clear, in interview with Noel Thompson and Donna Traynor, that the BBC Spotlight team had been conducting an investigation into financial impropriety surrounding Iris.  Her own statement made clear that she had encouraged friends to support her lover in a business venture.  Peter Robinson, when responding to questions put to him re. financial impropriety, stated that he had no involvement in any shady dealings  – but he failed to clear his wife of any wrong-doing in his responses.  It would appear that the BBC Spotlight team is still awaiting formal responses from the Robinsons re. written questions that have been submitted.

Hanging in the air, therefore, is why have the Robinson’s taken so long to go public with this story?  According to Peter he was made aware that his wife was having an affair back in March last year – and it was at this point that his wife became emotionally unstable.  However, according to unconfirmed reports the Robinsons were made aware of the BBC investigation around 10 days ago.  This may explain why the story about Iris’ affair has broken now – so long after it was made known to her husband. 

Peter Robinson’s humiliation in coming clean about his wife’s impropriety was clear in this evening’s news.  The couple has set themselves up as God fearing, and Iris, in particular, has hectored homosexuals about their sinful behaviour while she has been having extra marital sex that, on her own admission, “had no emotional or lasting meaning” to her.  In less Godly circles that might be referred to as no strings sex.  But the strings they are aplenty. 

Had this couple been less judgemental, less morally interfering, and less money-grasping in their multi-jobbing political lives we may have been able to muster more sympathy.  They have made their marital bed. 

I look forward to the next episode.

Breaking News: Robinsons

I gather some news is going to break at 6.00pm this evening (if the Twitterverse is to be believed) relating to the First Minister and his Wife. 

If the rumours are true I will be writing on the subject later.  If not, I won’t.  (Blog post in the style of Solpadeine advert).

Equality for All (but some more than others)

Just in case you thought it was just Ireland that was enacting crazy, politically correct, legislation it now appears that the UK government is to get in on the Act (pun intended).  The Equality Bill seems like overkill in the first place.  But now the Conservatives are meddling in this iffy draft legislation in order to ensure it excludes people of no religion.

The Conservatives (Baroness Warsi and Baroness Morris) have tabled an amendment to the Equality Bill – likely to be debated on Monday of next week – that will result in the removal of the word ‘philosophical’ from the meaning of belief. It would appear that this is a move to ensure that people who have religious faith are made more equal than people who have ‘philosophical’ belief rather than belief in a god or gods.  The British Humanist  Association is none too pleased.

The amendment runs counter to the stated objectives of the Bill.

The Government Equalities Office (yes, there is one!) states in its “easy read” description of the bill that “All public bodies must think about treating people from different groups fairly and equally. This is called the public sector Equality Duty.” It then goes on to list the types of groups that should be treated equally such as, “People with a religion or belief, or people without a religion or belief.” 

However, the Conservatives, in removing the key word “philosophical” from the main bill draft will ensure that only people of (old style) religion will be covered. This is bizarre. The fact that the Conservatives are showing this degree of nit-picking in order to overtly exclude people of no faith from the provisions of the Bill seems counter-intuitive.


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 24 other followers

Musings on things political and secular…

This is my site where I share my world views for anyone who might be remotely interested. Visit only if you think the content is interesting. Oh and comment is free. So go right ahead and agree or disagree. But, please, be kind and polite (especially to me).
Add to Technorati Favorites

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.