Eddie Barnes: This is one high-profile scrum the SNP will not want to lose
AT FIRST glance, the question of whether Alex Salmond should be a Calcutta Cup match pundit would not appear to be the stuff of constitutional fury ahead of the 2014 independence referendum.
That is not the way the SNP sees it, however.
Mocked by Conservative leader Ruth Davidson about his dubious credentials as a rugby expert, the First Minister did not respond in a light-hearted way yesterday. This issue is serious.
The importance of the broadcast networks to politicians is paramount: the most recent Ofcom data suggests that 74 per cent of people put TV as their main source of news. And despite the rise of the web, this figure is growing, up 6 per cent from 2005.
For all political causes, therefore, it is TV – with its strict rules on impartiality – that provides the best chance of punting the message. And with a consummate broadcast performer like Mr Salmond in charge, it is the case with spades for the SNP.
That was illustrated last year when, during the election campaign, an appearance on the network-wide Question Time and a series of spats with Jeremy Paxman were hugely beneficial to the cause, serving further to highlight the profile gap between him and the lesser-known Iain Gray.
With the referendum campaign under way, it was no wonder that Scottish Government civil servants were busily ringing up the BBC last week, offering Mr Salmond’s services to appear on the Calcutta cup match. And little wonder his spinners were so determined to kick up a stink when the offer was knocked back.
The weeks before the independence referendum in 2014 will see the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow and the Ryder Cup in Gleneagles. The SNP will not want its lead man frozen out.
Last night, it appeared Mr Salmond has chosen his battleground wisely. A formal complaint is now heading Auntie’s way: this is one scrummage the SNP will not want to lose.
Email to a friend
Print this page- Scottish independence: I don’t want ‘separatism’ says Sir Tom Farmer
- Call for sleaze inquiry into peer’s expenses
- Craig Levein insists Scotland will recover from US thrashing
- Man arrested after woman found dead in subway pool of blood
- Rangers administration: Duff & Phelps ‘hopeful’ that Taxman will agree to CVA
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Monday 28 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 15 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Cloudy
Temperature: 10 C to 16 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 17 comments to this article
Page 1 of 2
Anagach
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 08:09 PM6 Vote 'NO' what the Scots firms can't get a looksee on the Forth Bridge. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Perhaps you'd care to post how much money is being spent in Scotland, and how much outside, how that compares with big project government contracts elsewhere and also the laws regarding tenders. Or can we just take it that your post is the macMince it appears to be.
douglas-home rule
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 10:34 AMAll politicians make the Media aware that they are available for comment. The rules that exist are being interpreted on an ethnic and partial basis by the BBC. Why is it OK for Cameron to give his opinion on Englands next football boss yet Salmond is censored for his opinion on rugby. Most of Scotlands news and current affairs programs originate in England, I cannot see how they will ensure "balance " if only Scots opinion is curtailed.
neoloon
Saturday, February 11, 2012 at 10:32 AMThe BBC is a unionist organization.It will do anything to hamper the cause of the independence movement in Scotland.The BBC cannot be trusted.Impartiality,if it ever existed,has gone for ever.
easyzone
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 08:53 PM8 Reading from a letter from Carl Hicks, editor of BBC TV sport, Mr Salmond suggested the request for his attendance came from the corporation. Quoting from the letter, he said Mr Hicks told his bosses he had "a little think" about getting the First Minister involved and did not anticipate problems....................................... Doesn't sound like an invitation from local BBC Scotland to me .
Sneeky
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 04:05 PM#11 Rider000 - Oh you are hilarious... you cant fault the argument so you try a personal attack on my integrity by implying I am part of the government. They call that an Ad Hominem attack in propoganda. ______ No, I work for a living in the Energy Industry and dont have any government connections. Perhaps you should declare if you are a Labour MP, MSP or councillor so that your posts can be viewed in thier true light???
Badgersarse
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 03:19 PMWhether the First Minister asked to appear or was invited to appear is a red herring. The reason the BBC gave for excluding him was that there were "Heightened tensions" due to the referendum and council elections which are months away. If they believe there are "heightened tensions" .. why in the name of the wee man did they allow Cameron on within a few hours? Whichever way you look at it they have contravened their own advice and breached their charter, All other points are irrelevant.
rider000
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 02:53 PM8 Sneeky.................. Maybe you should declare your role within the government to declare interests so your posts can be regarded accordingly.
Marga
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 12:39 PMHow do journalists get away with writing what is at best a half truth - not to call it something rather more ugly: "Yesterday Mr Salmond revealed emails that proved claims from the Scottish Government that an invitation had been offered by the BBC who had then overturned the decision following an intervention from a London based political advisor." And they criticise the voluntary online press for inaccuracy and amateurishness. Shame, Scotsman.
Sneeky
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 12:01 PM#5 and #6 please see posts #7 and #8 as these answer your ridiculous assertions.
Sneeky
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 11:59 AM#2 andy 1874. I also thought I would point out that in FMQ's yesterday the First Minister read out the e-mail that was written TO HIM inviting him to appear on the show. It was the decision of the local Scottish BBC to invite Salmond and it was the decision of the London BBC to override them on political grounds citing "HEIGHTENED TENSIONS", which happens to also be the line they are using about Syria for god sake. If these tensions are due to the referendum then are they going to ban Salmond from T.V until 2015??? The SNP are quite right to bring up this incredible bias from the BBC, especially since they will be providing platforms to Boris Johnson and David Cameron during the Olympics.
Sneeky
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 11:55 AM#2 andy1874_____ (AKA) AndyLABOURALLTHEWAY on the DR. You posted the same thing there and were rubbished for it. But to spell it out again... The steel ontract is worth 5-10% of the £790 million budget so that is £39.5 million to £79 million. Of this figure rougly 25% refers to Steel Plate, which we can manufacture in Scotland (thats £9.9 million to £19.8 million). However NO SCOTTISH PRODUCER SUBMITTED A PROPOSAL FOR THIS. The remaining steel cannot be fabricated in Scotland as there are no yards capable of creating it. This is since the decimation of the Scottish steel industry under thatcherism in the 80's and early 90's. 118 of the 155 subcontracts on the project had gone to firms in Scotland, while Scottish companies are benefiting from 870 of the 1,041 supply orders. To further improve upon this the Scottish government have gone to the lowest cost supplier for the sections we cannot provide through indigenous industry, i.e. the steel fabrications. This is all on top of the EU procurement laws that prevent the Scottish Government from favouring local suppliers and instead having to focus on the best bid. The reason that so many scottish firms have got a part of the contract is due to the online submission system set up by the SNP to allow smaller contractors to bid for parts of the work rather than large multinationals bidding for the whole thing. This has allowed them to get the best deal in each section and reduce the overall cost of the bridge down from its original £1.6 Billion price tag proposed to a more acceptable £790 million. _____ It doesn't matter how hard this is spun, it cannot be shown to be bad news... you only need to look at the figures to realise that Johan Lamont is on another PLANET if she thinks that the overall 71% of contracts awarded to Scottish Firms on a £790 million project comes to only £20 milion. _____ People are not stupid and the Labour party and MSM should stop treating them as such!!!
Vote 'NO'
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 10:10 AMScots firms can't get a looksee on the Forth Bridge, which goes to China, but at least we got 2 pandas. Maybe Salmond should've announced both stories at the same time, because it sure shows his executibve for the macMince they are.
Vote 'NO'
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 10:08 AMSalmond's lackeys contacted the BBC - and were rebuffed. Sport and politics, and all that. I hope theBBC also took the opportunity of warning them away from any thoughts of El Presidente appearing on masterchef and the Beechgrove Garden, cos if they haven't, you can be sure El Presidente will seek to make political capital out of it.
Tipping Point
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 08:59 AM#2 Andy1874, I recall the decimation of the Scottish Steel Industry as yet another benefit of the Union. That there is no suitable steel manufacturing remaining in Scotland is hardly Mr Salmond's fault? For Ms Davidson to raise the Steel Industry as a topic at FMQ's would be quite hilarious if it was not so tragic for Scotland and so many Scots. When will it get through that all of the supposed Scottish disasters, weakness, and failures that the No, No and No parties use to scare us away from Independence have come about under the neglect of the Union. Time for something better.
gus1940
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 04:12 AMWhy is that the strict rules on Impartiality mentioned above are blatantly not applied by BBC Scotland.
Page 1 of 2
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.