UPDATES ARE CONTINUOUSLY BEING ADDED at the end of this story. Check below.
WUWT readers may recall this post last week:
The Secret 28 Who Made BBC ‘Green’ Will Not Be Named
The BBC pits six lawyers against one questioning blogger, Tony Newbery of Harmless Sky, who was making an FOI request for the 28 names. In the process, the judge demonstrates he has partisan views on climate change.
Now, thanks to the Wayback machine and Maurizio Morabito (omnologos) we can now read the list that the BBC fought to keep secret. [Damn those mischevious bloggers 😉 ]
This list has been obtained legally. (link to Wayback document.) My heartiest congratulations to Maurizo for his excellent sleuthing!
Maurizo writes: This is for Tony, Andrew, Benny, Barry and for all of us Harmless Davids.
The list from: January 26th 2006, BBC Television Centre, London
Specialists:
Robert May, Oxford University and Imperial College London
Mike Hulme, Director, Tyndall Centre, UEA
Blake Lee-Harwood, Head of Campaigns, Greenpeace
Dorthe Dahl-Jensen, Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen
Michael Bravo, Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge
Andrew Dlugolecki, Insurance industry consultant
Trevor Evans, US Embassy
Colin Challen MP, Chair, All Party Group on Climate Change
Anuradha Vittachi, Director, Oneworld.net
Andrew Simms, Policy Director, New Economics Foundation
Claire Foster, Church of England
Saleemul Huq, IIED
Poshendra Satyal Pravat, Open University
Li Moxuan, Climate campaigner, Greenpeace China
Tadesse Dadi, Tearfund Ethiopia
Iain Wright, CO2 Project Manager, BP International
Ashok Sinha, Stop Climate Chaos
Andy Atkins, Advocacy Director, Tearfund
Matthew Farrow, CBI
Rafael Hidalgo, TV/multimedia producer
Cheryl Campbell, Executive Director, Television for the Environment
Kevin McCullough, Director, Npower Renewables
Richard D North, Institute of Economic Affairs
Steve Widdicombe, Plymouth Marine Labs
Joe Smith, The Open University
Mark Galloway, Director, IBT
Anita Neville, E3G
Eleni Andreadis, Harvard University
Jos Wheatley, Global Environment Assets Team, DFID
Tessa Tennant, Chair, AsRia
BBC attendees:
Jana Bennett, Director of Television
Sacha Baveystock, Executive Producer, Science
Helen Boaden, Director of News
Andrew Lane, Manager, Weather, TV News
Anne Gilchrist, Executive Editor Indies & Events, CBBC
Dominic Vallely, Executive Editor, Entertainment
Eleanor Moran, Development Executive, Drama Commissioning
Elizabeth McKay, Project Executive, Education
Emma Swain, Commissioning Editor, Specialist Factual
Fergal Keane, (Chair), Foreign Affairs Correspondent
Fran Unsworth, Head of Newsgathering
George Entwistle, Head of TV Current Affairs
Glenwyn Benson, Controller, Factual TV
John Lynch, Creative Director, Specialist Factual
Jon Plowman, Head of Comedy
Jon Williams, TV Editor Newsgathering
Karen O’Connor, Editor, This World, Current Affairs
Catriona McKenzie, Tightrope Pictures catriona@tightropepictures.com
BBC Television Centre, London (cont)
Liz Molyneux, Editorial Executive, Factual Commissioning
Matt Morris, Head of News, Radio Five Live
Neil Nightingale, Head of Natural History Unit
Paul Brannan, Deputy Head of News Interactive
Peter Horrocks, Head of Television News
Peter Rippon, Duty Editor, World at One/PM/The World this Weekend
Phil Harding, Director, English Networks & Nations
Steve Mitchell, Head Of Radio News
Sue Inglish, Head Of Political Programmes
Frances Weil, Editor of News Special Events
For those who don’t know what this is about, read the back story here.
Here is the backup link to the original document just in case the original disappears:
Real World Brainstorm Sep 2007 background (PDF)
============================================================
UPDATE: Now this Climategate 2.0 email makes more sense, as they’ve just been carrying water for CRU and the eco-NGO’s all along. The meeting with the 28 was just a pep rally. From: this WUWT post:
BBC’s Kirby admission to Phil Jones on “impartiality”
Alex Kirby in email #4894 writing about the BBC’s “neutrality”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
date: Wed Dec 8 08:25:30 2004
from: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.xx.xx>
subject: RE: something on new online.
to: “Alex Kirby” <alex.kirby@bbc.xxx.xx>
At 17:27 07/12/2004, you wrote:
Yes, glad you stopped this — I was sent it too, and decided to
spike it without more ado as pure stream-of-consciousness rubbish. I can well understand your unhappiness at our running the other piece. But we are constantly being savaged by the loonies for not giving them any coverage at all, especially as you say with the COP in the offing, and being the objective impartial (ho ho) BBC that we are, there is an expectation in some quarters that we will every now and then let them
say something. I hope though that the weight of our coverage makes it clear that we think they are talking through their hats.
—–Original Message—–
Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit
BBC and “impartiality”…”ho, ho” indeed.
UPDATE: ‘TwentyEightGate’ was coined by RoyFOMR in comments. I liked it enough to put in the title.
UPDATE3 – Barry Woods writes in an email to me:
Don’t forget Mike Hulme Climategate email. why he funded CMEP, to keep sceptics OFF BBC airwaves… (below)
Mike Hulme:
“Did anyone hear Stott vs. Houghton on Today, radio 4 this morning? Woeful stuff really.
This is one reason why Tyndall is sponsoring the Cambridge Media/Environment Programme to starve this type of reporting at source.” (email 2496)
let us also not forget, that Roger Harrabin BBC & CMEP – (and Greenpeace Bill Hare) were also on the Tyndall board from 2002 to at least Nov 2005.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/27/climategate-2-impartiality-at-the-bbc/
When did Roger Harrabin step down from Tyndall advisory board?
(and he no made no mention, when reporting Climategate, of connections)
Tyndall were funding CMEP seminars for years to persuade the BBC, so not just that seminar, but years worth of lobbying
UPDATE4: Bishop Hill makes this excerpt from correspondence the “quote of the day”:
We now know that the BBC decided to abandon balance in its coverage of climate on the advice of a small coterie of green activists, including the campaign director of Greenpeace. This shows that the “shoddy journalism” of Newsnight’s recent smear was no “lapse” of standards at all. BBC news programs have for years been poorly checked recitations of the work of activists.
UPDATE5: Maurizo has added some analysis.
Summary for those without much time to read it all: Why the List of Participants to the BBC CMEP Jan 2006 Seminar is important
http://omnologos.com/why-the-list-of-participants-to-the-bbc-cmep-jan-2006-seminar-is-important/
UPDATE 6: Maurizo asked to add this –
I have not “given” the 28Gate list any importance. In fact, not one of the bloggers and journalists and commenters has “given” the 28Gate list any importance. It has been the BBC that GAVE IMPORTANCE TO 28GATE by spending so much money on lawyers. Therefore, 28Gate is important.
It would be really interesting to gain a set of minutes of this BBC planning meeting.
After all, it is in the public interest and the meeting was financed by the public.
Since the costs of adopting the BBC view of climate will break the EU it is in the interests of all Britons to be informed.
If the British Isles adopt carbon capture and windmills this will be in the economic interest of the US, as the latter is going fracking shale oil gas and eventually nuclear, making it an energy efficient competitor of the EU including GB.
If promoting this was the US aim via the BBC the public must be informed.
As Gail Coombs has pointed out Trevor Evan’s job description includes
‘[to] promote adoption of economic policies by foreign countries which further US interests.’
Perhaps he was there to promote US economic interest over that of the UK.
Now that the BBC management is under scrutiny there needs be an overall enquiry into its content, competence and direction.
Mike Haseley of SCEF (Scottish Climate & Energy Forum) has reported the BBC to the Met on the grounds of fraud regarding the FOI request about this.
http://scef.org.uk/news/1-latest-news/374-statement-on-the-bbc-meeting-of-28#.UKIqvnPbwYU.facebook
This is not shoddy journalism. This is not investigative journalists failing to make the most elementary of checks before libeling a respected man. This is deliberate conspiracy to defraud the public. Not an insular public in Britain but the public (and Governments) worldwide.
One may suspect that such things go on, but conspiracy almost invariably lurks in the shadows and only glimpses generally emerge. What is without precedent here is that the names of seventy- some of them are documented and out in the open for all to see. My disgust could only be deepened if the British Government now fails to commence prosecutions.
Anthony, please make your post sticky.
——————
I read through and the man seems that the good Rev Dr Peter Mullen is a ‘denier’. The Church of England is splitting.
Ouch!
The list is pretty much everything we knew it would be. That the BBC reportedly spent over £100000 on lawyers to keep it secret is no surprise. This cannot be allowed to fade away. The BBC must answer for this serious breach of its charter.
_Jim says:
November 12, 2012 at 6:12 pm
Umm, who are their ‘handlers’?
Who is at the top; the “Mr Big”?
Are there more names we need to see?
____________________________________
I have posted those types of links several times as you well know. The fact you have your head in the sand and refused to see what historians Steve Fraser and Gary Gerste point out very plainly is your problem – go look up the money connections yourself. Greenpeace and the rest do not exist in a vacuum so start digging.
I agree with Roger Knights 2.22am.
A mass campaign to withhold the licence fee should concentrate minds.
The damage inflicted on our electricity generation is enormous, supported in no small way by the BBC’s stance on AGW.
Will the MSM cover this scandal? I won’t hold my breath.
_Jim says:
November 12, 2012 at 6:12 pm
Umm, who are their ‘handlers’?
Who is at the top; the “Mr Big”?
Are there more names we need to see?
__________________________________
Oh and _Jim? WHO are your handlers? Enquiring minds want to know.
@Grey Lensman says: November 13, 2012 at 2:25 am
The odious Black, Michael Mann’s lost twin, left the BBC to save the oceans.
He is not missed.
“Jon Plowman, Head of Comedy”
Says it all really.
Keeping these names secret reminds me of the classic one liner from “Dads Army”; “Don’t tell them your name, Pyke”
Comedy from the days before the BBC was occupied by a load of upper middle class lefty parasites.
@Joseph Adam-Smith says: November 13, 2012 at 3:31 am
Don’t worry. The TVLA is in fact, Capita. They have no right to enter your property, and you can note that formally by writing to the TVLA and stating that you are withdrawing their common law right to enter your property.
That way they can only get onto your property with a warrant.
One of the attendees is from “Stop The Climate Chaos Coalition” . Their website makes interesting reading, filled with the usual green mumbo jumbo, Robin Hood taxes and redistribution agenda. And their steering group has the same old candidates.
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2012/11/13/bbc-and-the-stop-the-climate-chaos-coalition/
Les – you must have missed some of the earlier comments. Richard D North was in attendance; you are probably thinking of Richard A E North from EUReferendum. Different guys.
Tony Newberry well fires up by this …
http://ccgi.newbery1.plus.com/~newbery1/blog/?doing_wp_cron
“As a first step I have asked the BBC’s Litigation Department to confirm or deny that the list Maurizio has found is the one that I requested at the hearing a fortnight ago.”
dear Rhys Jaggar,
would that be the lynching the BBC was salivating over regarding Lord McAlpine- oops, the BBC in its hatred of all things to do with Conservatism , its eyes blood red with anger, forgot to do a simple bit of investigative journalism.
Another attendee was Tessa Tennant from an outfit called “ASrIA”.
According to their website, their membership list is full of banks and other outfits looking to make a quick buck out of “sustainability”.
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2012/11/13/the-bbc-asria/#more-1924
Rhys Jaggar:
I am writing to refute your rant at November 13, 2012 at 4:03 am.
I am NOT a “foreigner”, NOT adherent to “some crazed far-right dictum”, and have NOT had a penny from Rupert Murdoch. I am a left-wing socialist of the old-fashioned British kind who is – and has always been – a British Subject resident in the UK.
And I am appalled and ashamed that the BBC has become the deplorable propaganda mouthpiece of self-serving money grubbers and activists promoting the political scam of AGW which is falsely represented as having a basis in science . The BBC has a Charter which is intended to prevent such despicable behaviour, but in this thread we are discussing the clear fact that the BBC has deliberately ignored that Charter and has acted in opposition to it.
The BBC is in a unique position in that it is empowered by government and financed by a levy imposed by government (i.e. a tax). Without adherence to its Charter the BBC is no different from Pravda in the Soviet Union. And it has abandoned its Charter.
This is far, far more serious than the ‘Jimmy Saville Affair’. The BBC having abandoned its Charter can have far-reaching and long-lasting effects on UK culture, governance and security.
The BBC needs a root-and-branch reorganisation. Those responsible for the usurpation of the BBC need to be imprisoned as a warning to others who may want to usurp the BBC or any other national institution.
And if the BBC cannot be corrected then it needs to be abolished before its corrupted condition can do additional harm.
Richard
There are lies within lies in this story.
AFAIR, the seminar we are talking about was not originally intended to be a ‘policy-making’ meeting.
My understanding of the history is that the BBC unilaterally dropped their Charter requirement to provide balance in reporting Global Warming, purely due to internal activists. This change was noticed by outside bloggers, who started asking questions about why the BBC was in breach of its Charter.
So, to shut them up, the BBC responded that they had duly considered the issue, and received proper scientific advice that there was no real controversy – the science was settled. They picked a recent internal seminar (which had been held to promulgate the Global Warming message to internal BBC staff) and claimed that this comprised ‘the top scientific brains’ who had provided this policy advice. There had been NO minutes – odd, for such a fundamental policy decision.
That was meant to shut up the bloggers, who were crying for more details. The meeting was retrospectively claimed to be under the non-attributable Chatham House Rules, which neatly made it unable to be investigated.
Blogger Tony Newbery submitted a FOI request for the names of these august scientists who had advised the BBC to drop its impartiality position. The BBC fought this tooth and nail, finally spending a 6-figure sum on barristers and packing the Tribunal where, last Friday, the request was rejected on the spurious grounds that the BBC could consider itself to be a private organisation if it wanted to keep secrets from the public.
Now we can see that the meeting which was claimed to be with a policy-defining group of top scientists was, in fact, an activist jolly/propaganda exercise. And trying to hide this has cost the BBC a lot of money and face.
I wonder whether charges of perjury are in order?
Incidentally, for UK readers I suggest that one of the things you could do is write to your MP, raising the specific question of whether the BBC should be allowed to override its Charter requiring it to provide due balance, and then claim that a secret internal meeting was sufficient to OK this. And then point out that the secret internal meeting has been found NOT to have done what was claimed, and ask what he/she intends to do about it…
Beale says:
November 12, 2012 at 7:51 pm
In view of the presence of someone from the U.S. Embassy, it should be noticed that this was in the administration of the younger Bush.
___________________________________
Who interceded on behalf of Maurice Strong to make sure Strong was the chair at Kyoto. Strong contributed to his campaign fund. As I keep saying the Right/Left crud is only a Dog and Pony Show for the Great Unwashed.
[snip – comment in poor taste]
I think we may have got it all wrong, here is an exclusive interview with His Charlieness on impending climate catastrophe. Obviously, sceptics were allowed to respond to these highly inflammatory comments, as required for balance by the BBC charter. My problem is I cannot find where, can someone please help.
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=charles%20climate%20bbc&source=web&cd=9&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CE4QtwIwCA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2F18498749&ei=uk-iUPjPIsfY0QW8zIGwAQ&usg=AFQjCNHk3Cwe5OlPShExlUy91Hhw6v5e9w
Richard D. North’s comments on the BBC gabfest, which I recollected having read here, were posted a year ago on WUWT here.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/27/climategate-2-impartiality-at-the-bbc/
A slightly longer version of his remarks is in Christopher Booker, “The BBC & Climate Change: A Triple Betrayal”
http://gwpf.w3digital.com/content/uploads/2012/08/Booker-BBC.pdf
PS: Hit page-down four times after clicking my first link and go to the bottom of the page.
I highly recommend Booker’s report.
Patrick says:
November 12, 2012 at 8:57 pm
“Jolly farmer says:
November 12, 2012 at 7:59 pm”
The “TV Detector Van” was more about the fear of being caught because people believed they actually worked the way the BBC said they did. The Ads ran on BBC!!! I never saw one in all my life in the UK. Back in the 70′s the fine was 1000 ponds I think, a lot of money to many back then, so people simply coughed up the license fee. Nice way to extract your income, hold a gun to your viewers head!
I worked for the NTVLRO for a year (73-74). I don’t know how they work but work they do !!
I believe someone posted on WUWT in another thread some months ago regarding the how.
It would be interesting if you removed all ‘broadcast receive capability’ from your house as it’s not receiving the Beeb that you are legally bound to pay for the license, rather, that you have the capability to receive broadcast programs.
I could receive anything I want to see over the net, but here in the PROAustralia it’s all free-to-air .. we pay for our left-wing ABC (and SBS) through general taxation
Why stop at BP? Why not Shell? Why stop at tobacco? Why stop at big car? Drug companies? Why not gas as well? Here is a small sample in no particular order.
Its good to see that when it comes to
global warmingclimate change the BBC sure puts their money where their mouth is. And they have. Its what you call spreading the risk. ;-pInstitutional Investors Group on Climate Change
Members……..BBC Pension Trust……
http://www.iigcc.org/about-us/members