David Rose of the Mail on Sunday tears the BBC a new one, thanks to an “amateur climate blogger”.
- Pensioner forces BBC to lift veil on 2006 eco-seminar to top executives
- Papers reveal influence of top green campaigners including Greenpeace
- Then-head of news Helen Boaden said it impacted a ‘broad range of output’
- Yet BBC has spent more than £20,000 in legal fees trying to keep it secret
The BBC has spent tens of thousands of pounds over six years trying to keep secret an extraordinary ‘eco’ conference which has shaped its coverage of global warming, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
The controversial seminar was run by a body set up by the BBC’s own environment analyst Roger Harrabin and funded via a £67,000 grant from the then Labour government, which hoped to see its ‘line’ on climate change and other Third World issues promoted in BBC reporting.
At the event, in 2006, green activists and scientists – one of whom believes climate change is a bigger danger than global nuclear war – lectured 28 of the Corporation’s most senior executives.
Then director of television Jana Bennett opened the seminar by telling the executives to ask themselves: ‘How do you plan and run a city that is going to be submerged?’ And she asked them to consider if climate change laboratories might offer material for a thriller.
A lobby group with close links to green campaigners, the International Broadcasting Trust (IBT), helped to arrange government funding for both the climate seminar and other BBC seminars run by Mr Harrabin – one of which was attended by then Labour Cabinet Minister Hilary Benn.
Applying for money from Mr Benn’s Department for International Development (DFID), the IBT promised Ministers the seminars would influence programme content for years to come.
The BBC began its long legal battle to keep details of the conference secret after an amateur climate blogger spotted a passing reference to it in an official report.
Tony Newbery, 69, from North Wales, asked for further disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. The BBC’s resistance to revealing anything about its funding and the names of those present led to a protracted struggle in the Information Tribunal. The BBC has admitted it has spent more than £20,000 on barristers’ fees. However, the full cost of their legal battle is understood to be much higher.
=============================================================
Related:
BREAKING: The ‘secret’ list of the BBC 28 is now public – let’s call it ‘TwentyEightGate’
Thanks to Maurizio for that revelation.
=============================================================
Tony Newbery writes:
What is clear in the Mail on Sunday report is that funding for the 2006 BBC climate change seminar came from a government department. Also that the funds were channelled through environmental lobbyists who were organising the seminar. And it is possible that the government department that provided the funds had some input about the topics selected for the seminars. Lord Hall, as the man who encouraged Roger Harrabin to set up the seminar programme, features in this story too. However since his return to the BBC he has thrown some interesting light on the matter, contradicting just about everything that the BBC has claimed about the seminar previously. –Tony Newbery, Harmless Sky, 12 January 2014
There is more at Harmless Sky, including links to the FOI release that nails the BBC.
===========================================================
The new attention on the BBC’s 28gate seminar has been prompted by disclosure of documents showing how the [UK Government’s] Department for International Development responded to a funding request for funding from the International Broadcasting Trust a body that lobbies broadcasters on behalf of green NGOs. What we have, in essence, appears to be government paying for subversion of the state broadcaster. –Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, 12 January 2014
=============================================================
UPDATE: from comments.
Roger Harrabin was on the advisory board of the Tyndall centre, at the same time his CMEP was being funded by Prof Mike Hulme (seminar attendee) Tyndall to organise the seminars.
I’m still to curious to know whether he had stepped down or not from Tyndall , when the January 26th, 2006 seminar happened.
According to wayback machine,
Roger Harrabin was on the Tyndall Advisory (alongside Bill Hare Greenpeace) board in August 2005, (after this date, the Tyndall website changed and advisory board info was no longer available, via wayback)
the conflict of interest for the BBC seems huge, given:
Prof Mike Hulme (climategate 2 email):
“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)
Both Harrabin and Smith seemed to have thought that the CMEP seminars werevery succesful in persuading the BBC to change it stance and policies in the reporting of ‘climate change’ as described by Dr Joe Smith’s in his OU profile: (h/t DAvid Holland)
“The seminars have been publicly credited with catalysing significant changes in the tone and content of BBC outputs across platforms and with leading directly to specific and major innovations in programming,” – Dr Joe Smith
“It has had a major impact on the willingness of the BBC to raise these issues for discussion. Joe Smith and I are now wondering whether we can help other journalists to perform a similar role in countries round the world” – Roger Harrabin
We wrote about the above at Watts Up With That, when climategate 2 broke, quotes from & more detail here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/27/climategate-2-impartiality-at-the-bbc/
Congratulations to Tony, in finally getting all the information..
Links to all the docs on his blog – The Harmless Sky
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This quote from the Mail article is interesting. A listing of outside attendees to the BBC seminar includes: “Andrew Simms of the New Economics Foundation, who argued there were only 100 months left to save the planet through radical emissions cuts”
So this was in 2006, 100 months from 2006 would be, lets see… NOW!
Since nothing has been done to reduce the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, the warmist disaster should be upon us. Except that it isn’t.
Anybody who has any dealings with Mr. Simms should feel free to point this out to him at any opportunity.
I said it before, I’ll say it again, We need a list of discredited reporters and journalists who either willfully or unwillingly allowed themselves to be programmed by the greens.
They aren’t journalists, they are public relations people.
We need to know who they are.
According to Dorthe Dahl-Jensen’s own CV she “Participated in the Advisory Board for BBC global Warming 2006” would that be the very same event?
Which case seems like the secrecy had escaped DD-J
CV at http://cms.ku.dk/nat-sites/nbi-sites/cik/
Thanks….Jimbo.
Rick Bradford is correct. The BBC is a member of the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change Ltd. They have invested a large portion of the pension fund there.
http://www.iigcc.org/files/…/IIGCC_EC_EU_ETS_Consultation_28_Feb.pdf
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/156703/8bn-BBC-eco-bias
Here is Richard Black on quoting them. No conflict of interest there. It’s a bloody scandal I tells ya.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15352764
This is not from any personal exprience, but my next door neighbor in Florida once complained
to me that the gray water used in our lawn watering system got on his car and damaged the finish.
Any observer of mainstream media has suspected such plots for a long time.
I wonder if there are any analogs to this in US media, like MSN?
Harrabin => he is the model of a useful tool for censorship
John
Shocking state of affairs, Harrabin should be just that (Binned) and the BBC needs to root out these middle class left leaning lentil scoffing do gooders and sack the lot with out pay offs or pensions.
Publically funded broadcasters should be unbiased and Apolitical, This whole stinking country has been corrupted by these chattering middle class nobodies, who when given influence and a bit of power become Deity like with opinion and expect the people who pay for them to be in such position’s to adhere and follow like school children.
The BBC ‘s attitude is the same with subjects such as immigration and the European Union
despite poll after poll showing the British people not wanting EU membership and a stop to unrestricted immigration. moral cowards!! the lot of them.
The usual suspects will all debunk ’28 Gate’ as a baseless smear whipped-up by the ‘oil-funded deniers’ and the BBC will, as always when under fire and clearly in the wrong, simply ignore it all.
This is how the BBC operates – and never more so than when it comes to The Holy Consensus. It is now beyond all reasonable doubt that the BBC sees CAGW as a political project close to its socialist heart – and nothing must be permitted to get in the way of that. Not even the facts.
As a UK citizen (or is it ‘subject’?) I see this every night on the BBC news, I hear it every morning over my Cornflakes as I listen to the Today Programme. They never – and I really mean NEVER – miss an opportunity to slip in a sneaky CAGW meme whenever they think they can get away with it (which is, of course, most of the time). For the BBC, CAGW is a permanent, on-going project and all departments (and, I kid you not; this includes, comedy, light entertainment, online, radio drama and every other imaginable department within the £3.5bn pa publicly-funded broadcasting behemoth) are expected to make an effort to reinforce the climate line adopted by the Corporation’s upper-echelon Politburo.
Still, small consolation, but in the end all mighty empires ultimately fall to shadows and dust, right?
Did anyone notice the Chinese delegate at the table?
And has anyone noticed how well China has done out of this scam as we destroy our industry and send our industry to China?
Now, I wouldn’t do a Lewandowsky and suggest something where there is nothing, except I did notice the UEA had a lucrative deal with some Chinese University like Shanghai.
So, I just wondered if anyone else could explain why there was a Chinese delegate at the British Broadcasting Company meeting?
Sorry exact URL for CV: http://www.iceandclimate.nbi.ku.dk/staff/?
I forgot, the BBC like to cover up scandals involving the BBC. I wonder if any of the same BBC executives were involved in covering up the abuse by their ‘paragon of virtue’ , Jimmy Savile?
I notice BBC ‘news’ chief, (now director of BBC radio), Helen Boaden in her statement opposing disclosure said “some editors and executives who attended were inspired to be more ambitious and creative in their editorial coverage of this complex issue”.
More ‘ambitious and creative’ ? Looks like an admission of guilt to me rather than a statement of defence.
So we have had it from the horses mouth, they don’t report the news they ‘create’ it (with ambition).
Is that not the definition of ‘propaganda’ ?
I would like to be able to read what is written in these threads. For the last several days parts of my screen have been invaded or obliterated by intrusive areas that have no perceptible relationship to WUWT, and I am unable to remove them. Are others equally affected? If I cannot stop this activity I shall have to abandon my reading of this blog, wehich I have followed since its inception. Is there a cure for this? Help, please!
This is not really such shocking news. The BBC is so biased towards the EU, AGW, mass immigration and the Labour Party that no one should be surprised. They are a thoroughly corrupt, self serving organisation and are not to be trusted. They even receive funding from the EU to push the agenda.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9055183/BBC-admits-receiving-millions-in-grants-from-EU-and-councils.html
The information at your link does not support your claim. It appears only to show that any carbon trading is not in the top 100 investments. The next 100 investments can be large as well but we don’t know from the list if any such investments exist.
But credit where credit’s due. BBC’s ‘More or Less’ documentary that looks at the ‘truth’ behind statistics has finally debunked the 200 million ‘climate refugees’ meme. Listen here: http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/radio4/moreorless/moreorless_20130831-0600a.mp3
Robin says:
January 12, 2014 at 8:33 am
“I would like to be able to read what is written in these threads. For the last several days parts of my screen have been invaded or obliterated by intrusive areas that have no perceptible relationship to WUWT, and I am unable to remove them. ”
Nothing here. You are virus-inflicted would be my guess. Bulldoze your windows.
But we needn’t worry, we can rest in the knowledge that the matter will be thoroughly investigated by Lord Patten, Chairmen of the BBC Trust, who would not dream of letting such a serious criticism pass without looking into the whole matter and reporting fully on his findings. Then again, pigs might fly!
Robin, it is just you.
Try doing a virus check. it looks like some “aggressive marketing” software has got on your machine.
.It wouldn’t surprise me if this site was attacked by anti-sceptic bots, though.
It is quite appalling that a public body funded to the tune of £3.3B, should decide what the public should see in this debate.
The abuses in the BBC is simply astonishing. They base everything on a highly biased “seminar” with only zealots permitted to talk. But this is not all, think of the money used to produce pro-alarmist programmes like “Meldown” and Climate Wars”!
The BBC even financially contributed to Myles Allen’s ClimatePrediction.net – yes Myles Allen who then made the ridiculous 11 degree rise claim.only to find the software had errors!
No wonder Savillle got away with his crimes for so long. We can only watch as the abuses continue to accumulate – tax avoidance,huge payoffs, etc.
Despite spending a lot of money on an enquiry into why the Newsnight Savile programme was pull, we still do not know why! And the BBC does not care!
Caz Jones says:
January 12, 2014 at 8:37 am
“They even receive funding from the EU to push the agenda.”
From the article:
“The news prompted MPs to raise questions about the BBC’s impartiality when its journalists report on events in the EU. ”
Ya don’t say! That’s like saying CNN is working for the CIA! I’m cracking myself up!
ConfusedPhoton says:
January 12, 2014 at 8:46 am
“The BBC even financially contributed to Myles Allen’s ClimatePrediction.net – yes Myles Allen who then made the ridiculous 11 degree rise claim.only to find the software had errors!”
Link?
ConfusedPhoton says:
January 12, 2014 at 8:46 am
“The BBC even financially contributed to Myles Allen’s ClimatePrediction.net – yes Myles Allen who then made the ridiculous 11 degree rise claim.only to find the software had errors!”
Ok found it:
“In April 2006, the coupled models were found to have a data input problem. The work was useful for a different purpose than advertised.”
Nicely put!
“The first results of the experiment were published in Nature in January 2005 and show that with only slight changes to the parameters within plausible ranges, the models can show climate sensitivities ranging from less than 2 °C to more than 11 °C.”
What’s a factor of five between friends; at least we’re still in the positive range! (phew)
Forgot the link that I quoted:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climateprediction.net