BBC gagged over item on alleged corruption in party funding ("cash for honours" affair)

AFP on Yahoo ^ | 3/2/07 | AFP

[NormsRevenge]

LONDON (AFP) - The BBC on Friday said it had been prevented from broadcasting a news item about allegations of corruption in party political funding after losing an emergency hearing at London's High Court.

The broadcaster said its lawyers had been locked in legal argument with representatives of the government's most senior legal advisor, Attorney General Lord Peter Goldsmith, for about two hours about the right to air the item.

But Goldsmith was successful in obtaining an injunction.

The BBC said in a statement that their reporting of the so-called "cash for honours" affair was an "legitimate matter of public interest".

There was no indication for how long the injunction will last.

Goldsmith's office said in a statement: "The application for an injunction was made by the attorney general this afternoon at the specific request of and in co-operation with the police because of their concerns that disclosure of certain information at this stage would impede their inquiry.

"The attorney general acted in this respect completely independently of government and in his independent public interest capacity."

The probe, launched early last year, centres on whether Prime Minister Tony Blair's governing Labour Party and other parties offered seats in Britain's unelected upper chamber House of Lords in return for financial donations.

It is also considering whether there was any breach of the Political Parties Elections and Referendums Act 2000, which requires donations and non-commercial loans to parties to be publicly declared.

Scotland Yard detectives have interviewed all members of Blair's Cabinet while Blair himself has been quizzed twice as a witness, rather than a suspect.

But two of his closest aides -- director of government relations Ruth Turner and his Middle East envoy Lord Michael Levy -- have both been arrested on suspicion of breaching the the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925.

They have also been quizzed about alleged conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, which has led to speculation there was an alleged cover-up at the heart of government.

Both Turner, whose job involves liaising between government and the Labour Party, and Levy, nicknamed "Lord Cashpoint" because of his key fund-raising role for the centre-left party, have not been charged and are on police bail.

[billybudd]

This goes out to all the liberals who *love* the BBC and want to see state-funded TV here in the US, along with the return of the Unfairness Doctrine.

[snarks_when_bored]

All your BBC are belong to 10 Downing Street.

[Chode]

and SlickWillie SOLD burial plots in Arlington tooo...!!!

[Winniesboy]

Difficult to see what this story has to do with state funding. The police have to resort to the law courts, via a government officer, to try and stop a broadcaster doing something they don't like? Sounds like an illustration of the BBC's independence of state control, rather than the reverse. Not exactly the modus operandi you would expect with a state-controlled broadcaster, is it? Even if (which heaven forbid!) this action (as is rumoured by some naughtier commentators) originated in the government, not the police, the same comment applies...

[billybudd]

So because the BBC is not a communist-style state organ, it is "independent"? Give me a break. The state funds it, the state controls it. This story is but one example of a somewhat less subtle exertion of that control.

[Winniesboy]

Sorry, I don't follow. Had this story been about to run on an independent channel, say Sky News, or a newspaper of any political persuasion (as it well might, since after all it was an anti-government story), the police and/or government would have gone to the civil courts for a restraining injunction in exactly the same way, and with exactly the same result - as has indeed happened on previous occasions. The fact that this happened to be the BBC that was breaking the story, and the fact that the BBC is funded in a certain way, is completely irrelevant to this particular course of events. If the BBC is, as you say, controlled by the state, then how come its constant attacks on the state's policy in Iraq and the WOT, so often castigated in this forum? Can't both be right.

[UKrepublican]

This has nothing to do with the bbc being under the thumb of the government. That claim is nonsense.

The bbc, while having left wing tendancies has been anything but kind to the government.

Sure it got caught up in the euphoria of 97, but few didn't.

However, this injunction was requested by the police, as part of a criminal investigation, and we should simply wait and see before jumping to conclusions.