Why the MPs are wrong to target Nick Robinson

I happen to find the MP expenses issue the most boring issue on earth.

I couldn't care less about Speaker Martin's Air Miles.

But I think the MPs are quite wrong to demand to see Nick Robinson's expenses.

First, it is a naked attempt to bully the media into keeping quiet about allowances and the like. However tedious I may find the story, it is a legitimate issue for the press to investigate.

Attempting to silence the BBC's political editor through an Early Day Motion is a shameful action.

Second, the idea that the BBC's political editor is publicly accountable for his actions in the same way as an MP is a very dangerous one indeed. It strikes at the very idea of BBC independence.

For as long as the licence fee exists, it is vital that public finance not become a route to political interference.

Comments

[Guido Fawkes]

The BBC is different so they say. It is a "public service", objective and a national treasure they never cease to tell us.

Not like you Murdoch lackeys.

Well it is the public's money and we should have the right to know. The BBC has just got back to acknowledge my FoI request for his expenses. We shall see...

[Doug Chaplin]

It seems to me that how Nick Robinson accounts for his expenses is the BBC's business. How the BBC spends public money is our business, as is how MPs spend public money. It may or may not be interesting. In trying to draw a parallel, the MPs signing the EDM are simply wrong, because they are not to be equated with employees, nor should they interfere with the employment of individuals.