Skip to content

The BBC’s Green Gestapo

December 14, 2015

By Paul Homewood





I was just surfing channels last night after watching Strictly (yes, I know, but it’s the wife’s fault!), and blundered on David Attenborough on BBC1, telling us how we are killing of the poor little polar bears.

I quickly switched to BBC2, where Monty Don was doing his gardening stuff. Within a minute, he was intoning on how climate change was leading to more intense rain, to the detriment of our gardens!

At which stage swore at the telly, the wife and mother-in-law!


So it helped to read Dellers’ piece today, covering the BBC’s disgraceful attempt to shut down free speech:


The BBC’s Green Gestapo has struck again – this time hauling one of its best loved presenters over the coals for having given voice to incorrect truths about climate change in a BBC Radio 4 documentary.

Quentin Letts, the censured journalist, has described his experiences here. He likens it to being airbrushed out of one of Stalin’s photographs: one minute, his documentary – about the Met Office – was freely available on the web; the next it had been written out of history. (But you can still read the full transcription here)

And all because some of the people he interviewed said a few disobliging – but perfectly accurate – things about the way Britain’s state-funded meteorological organisation has been hijacked by climate change alarmists.

In his piece, Letts chooses to be mildly amused by the BBC’s high-handed response to his journalism.

Meanwhile, the BBC top brass held meetings about my allegedly scandalous programme.

Apparently we should have done more to explain the science of climate change. There was a danger that listeners were ‘misled’ by my interviews with Mr Lilley and Labour MP Graham Stringer, who argued that the Met Office were ‘excellent’ at short-term forecasts but ‘very poor’ at climate and medium-term predictions.

I was on the naughty step. That was the last I thought of the matter until last month, when I received a long document from the BBC Trust — a draft of an official inquiry into my misdeeds, complete with a conclusion that there had been a ‘serious’ breach of BBC rules on impartiality in my programme. I was given a few hours to offer any comments before the finding was likely to be made public.

The report, which must have cost thousands of pounds to prepare (rather more than was spent on our programme, I’d wager), included news that from the outset of the production process it had been agreed that we would never touch on climate change.

Er, hang on, chaps. No one ever told me that. Why on earth would independent journalists accept such a stricture? Why should climate change be given such special protection?

Read the BBC Trust’s 20-page report into the incident, however, and you begin to appreciate why it was that George Orwell modelled his Ministry of Truth in Nineteen Eighty-Four on the BBC. Letts’s analogies to Stalin’s Soviet Union, you realise, are only slightly overdone.

Here, for example, is the entire department responsible for Letts’ programme being ordered to attend a re-education camp:

All programme makers in Religion and Ethics’ radio department would complete the BBC Academy’s Impartiality online training module, which included a substantial scenario on reporting climate change science.

Radio division was reviewing training records to ensure all relevant production staff had also completed this module.

Here, as Letts reported, is the programme being airbrushed out of history:

The programme would not be repeated in any form.

Here is the sclerotic, statist monolith that is the BBC binding itself in yet more red-tape procedural guaranteed not only to drive up costs but to make it even less likely that any department will be able to show flashes of originality or independent thought.

The Radio compliance form would be amended so that it would no longer only ask if a programme contained a personal view that was unbalanced, but would also include prompts for consideration of how impartiality had been achieved in a personal view programme.

Letts concludes in his piece that for all its egregious faults the BBC is an institution worth preserving.

This is a BBC — a Corporation worth defending, in my view, despite this ridiculous show-trial I have been through — that exists to be frank and fearless, to stand up to dictatorial forces, to divert and entertain while at the same time standing apart from Whitehall.

Using such a heavy steamroller to crush the life out of my no-doubt imperfect but innocent little programme is the behaviour not of a bastion of British liberalism, but an insidious and worrying threat to two very British qualities: common sense and freedom of expression.

I agree with his analysis but not his conclusion. It’s a bit like saying “What we should try to do is keep the good bits of Nazi Germany – the fabulous Hugo Boss uniforms, the amazing Nuremberg choreography, the train timetable, the spiffy tank design – but absolutely get rid of all the unpleasant stuff like the Jew hatred, the torture, the mass extermination, the military aggression….”

Er, no. Sorry, Quent but it just doesn’t work like that. The reason the BBC behaves like this is because behaviour like this is inevitable in an organisation accountable not to its audience but only to its own (impeccably progressive) bureaucracy.



We are already familiar with the story, but we can rely on Dellers to add a bit of steel.

  1. rah permalink
    December 14, 2015 2:11 pm

    Proof or Orwells predictions has been demonstrated by BBC for some time and this just shows that they are continuing down that destructive path. How far they have fallen since WW II when journalism and the factual reporting by BBC radio, even when the facts were bad, was considered the standard for the rest in the field to strive to obtain? This was the opinion of even many American servicemen that served overseas and heard them during that time.

  2. A C Osborn permalink
    December 14, 2015 2:13 pm

    They have been ramming it down our throats for ages now, making the most outragous claims and yet just one program that sheds a little light on the subject and they send them for “conditioning”.
    How they can get away with under their charter I don’t know.

  3. December 14, 2015 2:53 pm

    After I stopped listening to the BBC and then only got the odd glimpse, I began to realise that not just on climate but almost every subject they broadcast, they are the most biased bunch of hypocritical bigots in the Universe.

    For “feminists” read “man-haters” for “green” – read putrid hatred of humanity and industry. For “politically neutral” read “obsessively sycophantic to everyone in Westminster and two fingers up to the rest of us”.

    The BBC are a cesspit of hatred, bad science, bad economic and general immoral behaviour and the sooner they are shut down the better.

    • Cynical Scot permalink
      December 14, 2015 3:04 pm

      Wow, is there anything you left out. i try to believe that I’m paranoid about the once illustrious BBC but…………

    • Cynical Scot permalink
      December 14, 2015 3:27 pm

      Wow, have you missed anything out! I try not to believe that the once illustrious BBC has sunk and been taken over by these smug Metropolis liberals but……..

    • December 14, 2015 4:09 pm

      I quite agree.
      There was a time when the BBC merely reported the news, now they control it.
      But it’s not just the news, the propaganda is present, in a more subtle form in their more general programming.
      It’s impossible to exaggerate the total control they have exercised over discussion of “climate change” surrounding COP21.
      Absolutely no discussion whatsoever of any alternative to the accepted theory. I don’t that any other topic is dealt with it a similar manner. In a free country, we should be able to discuss alternatives, but not here. It’s like living in a totalitarian state.
      And, because they have more money than they know what do do with, they can devote massive resources to putting the case for “climate change”.

    • Ben Vorlich permalink
      December 15, 2015 7:54 am

      That’s a pretty fair summary of today’s BBC.

  4. knutesea permalink
    December 14, 2015 3:26 pm

    Wow, I’m starting my Monday follies and am stunned by such nastiness. How does a society recover from such ingrained cognitive dissonance ?

    Globally we are staring down pretty big threats of deflation. I wonder if economic times where we can’t afford to worry about fake monsters straightens out the upside nature of things.

  5. saveenergy permalink
    December 14, 2015 3:35 pm

    Scottish Sceptic, I wish you’d get of the fence a say what you really mean !!

    I tend to agree with you.

    BBC program ‘What’s the Point of…? The Met Office’
    Despite the BBC erasing all traces of the offending program from their archives, we have the full transcript safe and sound, and here it is –
    Full transcript

  6. December 14, 2015 3:36 pm

    The Ministry of Truth in 1984 was based on the BBC and now the BBC takes 1984 as its bible. You couldn’t make it up.

    • saveenergy permalink
      December 14, 2015 3:59 pm

      You don’t have to make it up, it’s per-ordained.

  7. dosbrygos permalink
    December 14, 2015 4:03 pm

    Thanks Savenergy and ScottishSceptic

    We best keep this link alive because there are probably armies of BBC ‘1984 Winstons’ in their cctv rigged offices, beavering away at deleting all remnants of global warming truth from their archives. The BBC really is now showing it’s credentials as the real ‘Ministry of Truth’ that gives anything but.

    How so ‘on the button’ George Orwell was. He just got the date wrong.

    Let’s hope some of the BBC’s Winstons break free but unfortunately I fear the BBC Academy’s ‘Impartiality on-line training module’ has brainwashed them all.
    Full transcript

  8. markl permalink
    December 14, 2015 5:12 pm

    It’s like this the world over and not just the BBC. A respected meteorologist in France loses his job for writing a book contrary to the AGW narrative. The LA times openly says it will not print AGW dissenting letters to the editor and focuses its’ reporting on alarmism. “State of Fear” has been achieved and permeates the scientific community involved in climate with numerous scientists losing their jobs for daring to voice dissenting views. The MSM has been bought and taken over by Uncle Karl’s minions. There’s no other explanation for it. You can’t safely have open dialogue on climate science anymore without being shamed or losing your livelihood….or both.

  9. Roy Hartwell permalink
    December 14, 2015 6:20 pm

    And how ironic that tonight, one of the main news stories on the BBC is about lack of freedom of speech in China as they try to attend the trial of a Chinese human rights lawyer !!!

  10. Paul permalink
    December 15, 2015 3:27 am

    For BBC read ABC in Australia. It is too easy for quasi-experts to make statements without being held accountable for the facts.

    • markl permalink
      December 15, 2015 3:41 am

      Response to Paul Homewood: “… It is too easy for quasi-experts to make statements without being held accountable for the facts….”

      Except they are held accountable by the owners of the business that employs them. What’s that tell you?

  11. December 15, 2015 5:57 am

    I totally agree with earlier comments about the reprehensible and Nazi-like behaviour of the BBC in crushing all discussion on climate change/global warming. I have to say that my personal listening history to the BBC goes back to pre-Second World War, even though I was only 2 at the time.

    What I was amazed at, though, was the fact that Andrew Neil (on his weekly BBC 1 show “This Week” after Question Time on Thursdays) on Thursday 3rd December, got away with interviewing Piers Corbyn! And Piers Corbyn did not pull any punches in his total refutation regarding CO2 having anything to do with global temperatures.

    I could scarcely believe what I was seeing and hearing. And the great thing is that this show is still available on BBc iPlayer (I just watched it again, as well as having recorded the original at the time).

    Another sad fact is that not only the BBC but also ITN news programmes (who I believe control news output for ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5) never allow any dissenting voices to be heard either. So, it’s virtually a complete blackout of the truth about climate change for a huge number of TV viewers who, like myself, only have Freeview or Sky Freesat.

    • December 15, 2015 6:06 am

      I meant to add to my previous comment that Quentin Letts was hauled over the coals by the BBC for daring to criticise the Met Office AND his short radio programme on BBC Radio 4 has been completely expunged, without trace, by the BBC. And yet, the Andrew Neil programme with a far more outspoken critic of the theory of climate change, still stands.

    • December 15, 2015 11:01 am

      Andrew Neil has always adopted a “sceptical” stance.
      Maybe he has more “clout” than Quentin Letts.
      I was actually more surprised to hear Michael Portillo’s fairly sceptical opinions on the subject.

      • December 15, 2015 11:24 am

        It was just a pity Brillo allowed Alan Johnson to get away with the 97% nonsense. Unfortunately the whole scam is now so well established, and people like Neil so uninformed, that the claim is taken as gospel

      • December 17, 2015 5:47 am

        97% !, They’ve got a chocolate 97%, just like chocolate money,
        ..Is what Cruz is reported to have said

  12. December 15, 2015 7:48 am

    What really annoys me, is the fact that while no anti climate change opinion is allowed, anyone with absolutely no knowledge at all, can repeat whatever lies and exaggerations they like, without any challenge whatsoever.

  13. Windy Miller permalink
    December 15, 2015 1:40 pm

    As long as there is always subtle wind turbine propaganda present in just about any BBC climate based or similar broadcast – the weather forecast for example – then I am happy that renewables are the answer to all our alleged climate woes.

  14. December 15, 2015 4:57 pm

    Like several others above, I can remember when the BBC was the envy of the world as an honest reporter of facts and open debate. Those days are long gone: Al Jazeera and Russia Today have far more objective reporting than any of the UK meja.

    The unquestioning pushing of any rubbish that supports their global warming agenda has been beyond belief: Old Dimbleby will be rotating in his grave.


  1. The BBC’s Green Gestapo | The Road to Revelation

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: