It pains me greatly that the BBC is, with good reason. so scared of Dominic Cummings that these days it hardly bothers to follow-up on stories that might impact upon the government. Just today, there was one item that needed investigating and another than needed correcting. The BBC did neither.
First up, may I introduce the disgraced former defence secretary, ‘Dr’ Liam Fox, who just happens to be Dominic Cummings’ choice to be the new head honcho at the World Trade Organisation. It turns out that Russia hacked into his computer, stealing documents relating to a future UK/US trade deal. It’s true that the Russians are the bad guys in all this, for hacking into Fox’s account, but it very much looks like the account hacked was his personal account and not one relating to his former ministerial role during which he displayed to the world his mediocrity. I would like to know one thing: why are journalists in general and the BBC in particular holding back on getting to the truth? This is potentially very serious.
If you work for the government, as I did for 39 years, you do not hold sensitive information on your own computer and you certainly don’t use your personal email to send or receive sensitive documents. Transgress and you will get the sack, no ifs, no buts. Inspector Knacker might pay you a visit, too. But much of the media merely reports that Fox had his email hacked. Find out, for goodness sake, which email address and if it’s his own then go for the slimy little weasel who has for too long thought himself far more important than he is.
Then, we had an interview on Emma Barnett’s Radio 5 Live show with Charlie Mullins, the Peter Stringfellow lookalike who runs Pimlico Plumbers. Chas complained that 30 of his staff were having a ball on furlough and refused to return to work. He promptly sacked them. If these are the actual circumstances, meaning also that Mullins ensured his workplace was COVID-19 safe and he told them to return to work, then he was well within his rights to sack them. But he blamed the workers.
Said Mullins: “The furlough scheme was a good idea and it was the lifeline that businesses and workers needed at the time. I think it’s been badly abused and milked by a lot of people who don’t want to go back to work.” This all seems perfectly reasonable apart from one minor thing: workers do not choose to be furloughed. It cannot be “badly abused and milked by a lot of people who don’t want to go back to work” because bosses like him determine everything to do with the furlough scheme. We can debate workers rights, although we have very few these days, but in truth Mullins has got the wrong end of the stick. He holds all the furlough cards.
Ms Barnett, who is a wonderful journalist, at no point challenged Mullins’ misleading comments, which was especially odd since just a few weeks ago Money Saving Expert Martin Lewis explained on her show that so called furlough shaming should stop because – yes, you guessed it – workers don’t choose to be furloughed. And that’s 9.5 million of us.
Two very different stories but the same lukewarm levels of reporting. Fox should be challenged as to which account was hacked and if it was a personal account, then there could be consequences for him. And Charlie Mullins should have had the furlough rules explained to him, especially as he owns a large company that made good use of it. It shows one set of rules for one group of people and quite another for the rest. Which is Britain today, isn’t it?
