The Daily Telegraph - 27.08.2019

F

ew outside of the world of

television had heard of Dorothy

Byrne before last week. She

doesn’t use social media and has never

cultivated a public profile. As head of

news and current affairs at Channel 4,

though, she is among the UK’s most

powerful media executives, and last

week, giving the annual MacTaggart

Lecture at the Edinburgh TV Festival,

this self-confessed “old lady” of factual

television launched a volley of

rhetorical barbs at both our political

and media class.

Reactions to the stinging speech

have, depressingly, split along party

lines. Many on the Right slammed her

for calling Boris Johnson a “known

liar”, as well as “a coward” for failing to

appear on Channel 4’s recent Tory

leadership debate. Downing Street

has since retaliated, apparently

refusing Channel 4 News a planned

interview with the Prime Minister

at the G7 summit.

Left-leaning commentators have

meanwhile praised Byrne for her

staunch feminism. Recounting 40

years in TV journalism, she reported

how she was “sexually assaulted” as

a young researcher at Granada. And

referring to previous MacTaggart

lectures, she “spotted one name

among my predecessors who hasn’t

yet had the comeuppance he deserves

for his assaults on women”.

While these comments grabbed

the headlines, the speech was actually

full of important ideas and nuance,

including criticisms that went across

the board. Among the victims was

Labour’s leadership, for avoiding

media scrutiny – “Jeremy Corbyn

sometimes permits only one question,

and then doesn’t answer it!” – while

praise was lavished on Margaret

Thatcher for the “lengthy television

interviews” she routinely gave.

She rightly called out sexual abuse

against women, but backed older male

presenters, too, saying: “We must

resist the idea we don’t need older

white men any more and they should

be crushed out of the way.” This may

sound like basic good manners, but

many of Byrne’s industry colleagues

don’t agree. And while condemning

the attitudes towards women of many

men she encountered in the 1970s and

1980s, at programmes like World in

Action and Man Alive, she also pointed

to their “astonishing achievements”

and “great attributes we have lost”.

This was the important part of her

speech, overlooked amidst the

political squabbling. “Those men at

Granada were passionate believers in

the power of television,” she said.

“They believed television was there to

say and do big things”.

Recalling investigations like the one

into the Birmingham Six (which

overturned a series of wrongful

convictions) and landmark series like

End of Empire, she explained how TV

journalists in the early years of her

career set out to expose corruption

and miscarriages of justice.

“They challenged the authority not

just of those who ran the UK’s

institutions but also their own TV

bosses,” said Byrne. “How many people

in TV today would say out loud they

want to use TV to make Britain a better

place?” The answer to her rhetorical

question is surely: not many.

Terrestrial television still accounts

for 69 per cent of all UK viewing,

according to Ofcom, and 71 per cent

of the public trust TV news. Byrne was

right to argue that broadcasters should

stop fretting about Netflix and build

on that trust. “If we’re worried about

becoming irrelevant... let’s start

making big controversial programmes

about the UK which put us back at the

heart of public debate,” she told her

fellow TV insiders.

Broadcasters, she believes, need to

make programmes that engage the

“millions of young people who are

now politically aware and active”.

They’re watching TED talks and

listening to current affairs podcasts,

but not being offered much on

television. “We must stop being afraid

of serious analysis authored by big,

brainy people,” she said. “We have

Too many TV bosses think viewers are stupid

We need diversity of class

and outlook if we are to get

television that does justice

to the problems of the day

liam halligangan

T

here is another glimmer of hope for a

Brexit deal: Boris Johnson is sending

his top Brexit adviser to Brussels

tomorrow, saying that the EU wants

to get things done. As well they

should. The PM’s charm offensive at

Biarritz has shown them that he is a reasonable

man, but he has also stressed that Parliament

cannot stop Britain from leaving the EU on October

31 without a deal. Whether this proves true or not

we shall see; but what has certainly changed is that

if Remainers do seek to engage in parliamentary

chicanery, this is a Government that will fight back.

Unlike Theresa May, Mr Johnson is serious about

his exit date because he is serious about Brexit.

On top of that, Remain MPs have not equipped

themselves well. They’re meeting today to discuss

how to oppose a no-deal outcome and one big idea

is a vote of no-confidence, leading to an emergency

government. But who would lead it? Jeremy

Corbyn has the best claim, being leader of the

opposition, but he’s not popular with his own MPs,

let alone the Tory Remainers necessary to knit a

coalition together. The bigger question is what on

earth Remainers would do with such a government

beyond extending Article 50. If they really wanted

to get a deal, literally any deal, then they could

have just voted for Mrs May’s Withdrawal

Agreement – but they didn’t.

The only way to get a better agreement than Mrs

May’s, as the PM argues, is to threaten the EU with

walking away from the table, which is why Britain

is stepping up preparations for a no-deal scenario

to force the EU to take Mr Johnson seriously. If

Remainers want to leave the EU in an orderly

manner, as Mr Johnson does, then it’s time they

put aside personal ambition and backed the

Government. Any MP who refuses to do so isn’t

really interested in an orderly Brexit: they want to

stop Brexit altogether. If anyone is taking the UK to

the edge, it is they.

The reputation of Parliament itself is at stake. Is it

a genuinely representative body that seeks to

reflect the will of the people or an elected oligarchy

that listens, then ignores? Will its procedures be

marked by fairness and clarity, or constitutional

sleight of hand? And can it ultimately do its job? As

Mr Johnson said yesterday, the public has already

voted by a substantial majority to leave the EU. The

Government is acting to see that through; the EU is

forced to talk. It’s time for Remain MPs to come to

the aid of their country.

Remain MPs must

back their country

T

he BBC’s Poldark came to an end as a new

series of Bake Off begins, which prompts the

thought that Aidan Turner would never have

looked that sinewy if he ate more cake. Poldark

supposedly made Sunday nights sexier with its

lead character scything without a top on, but

some expert scythers were incensed. With his

excessive grunting and aggressive technique, they

complained that his hacking at the hay was poor

form – and he ought to have kept his shirt on to

protect himself from the sun. Indeed.

Older viewers will remember that when Mr

Darcy slipped into a lake in 1995’s Pride and

Prejudice, he did so in his shirt, trousers and boots.

That’s how Sunday television ought to be:

handsome but nothing to lose a night’s sleep over.

Some people do have a job to do in the morning.

Naughty but nice

G

reta Thunberg is everywhere. The 16-year

old Scandinavian climate activist is expected

to arrive in New York today after crossing

the Atlantic in a carbon-neutral yacht, but her

voice could also be heard at the Proms on Sunday

night as part of a show inspired by the book

The Lost Words. This celebration of nature was

described as “a unique event for all the family”,

although the younger ones might have been scared

out of their wits when Ms Thunberg’s voice

announced that we are in the midst of the sixth

mass extinction and 200 species are going missing

every day. Is this kind of apocalyptic detail

appropriate for such a concert?

The will to address climate change is found

across the political spectrum: Boris Johnson

told the G7 that they need to do more to save

rainforests. So there is consensus on the desire

to protect the environment, but there isn’t on the

scale of change happening or what to do about it.

Media elites too often ignore this and broadcast the

most alarmist, terrifying predictions as if they were

agreed by all, with the obvious implication that

only the most radical response will do.

It has been joked that many of the extreme

environmentalists are watermelons: green on the

outside, red on the inside. What Miss Thunberg and

others demand is a revolutionary economic change

that resembles socialism, and while the rich can

afford to sail the world in yachts, it will be the middle

class and poor who are forced to give up necessities.

If you live in a rural area, the demand that you get

out of the car and walk is simply silly. Politicians

should listen less to under-representative activists

and more to their own voters. And the Proms should

be primarily about the music, not the politics.

Proms and protest

ESTABLISHED 1855

the ability and the airtime – so let’s

make some really clever and

difficult programmes”.

I spent the best part of a decade

covering economics on Channel 4

News and have since made a string of

films for Dispatches, the channel’s

leading current affairs programme.

I’ve known Byrne for over 20 years.

We don’t always agree. I wouldn’t dub

authority figures as liars, for example,

because I think it’s far better to expose

lies and let viewers decide. And it’s

undeniable that the teams who make

our terrestrial news bulletins are, to an

astonishing extent, urban-centric and

pro-Remain in their outlook, failing

to reflect the country as a whole.

Yet her instincts are right. There

are indeed “seismic shifts” in British

society, and mainstream TV news and

current affairs does need to “reinvent

itself ”. Audiences are much smarter

than most TV executives believe

them to be. More on- and off-screen

diversity is needed – not just of gender

and race (where we’ve made welcome

progress), but of opinions, outlook and,

above all, class (where diversity has, in

my experience, gone backwards).

“Whatever happens about Brexit,

we need big new ideas to take us

forward – but I don’t see big ideas on

TV now,” says Byrne. And who can say

she’s not right?

We accept letters

by post, fax and

email only. Please

include name,

address, work and

home telephone

numbers.

111 Buckingham

Palace Road,

London

SW1W 0DT

fax

020 7931 2878

email

dtletters@

telegraph.co.uk

follow

Telegraph Letters

on Twitter

@LettersDesk

follow Liam Halligan on Twitter

@LiamHalligan; read more at

telegraph.co.uk/opinion

Letters to the Editor

sir – I worked in hospital catering for

33 years, 25 of those in management

roles. Every year I overspent my

budget. If I didn’t, it would have been

cut the following year. I was never

once asked by management to submit

sample costed menus for approval.

There is also the matter of pay.

Hospital catering managers and staff

earn about 20 per cent less than those

with similar responsibilities in the

private sector. So how can the NHS

expect to attract the best people?

Many hospitals and their kitchens

are also big, old and badly designed,

with out-of-date, inefficient

equipment. Food trolleys have to

travel a long way to the wards. It is

just not possible to send out meals for

about 1,000 people within an hour and

have those meals arrive in top quality.

That said, there are hospitals with

very good standards of catering. What

is needed is an in-depth review of

these in order to ensure that others

are managed in the same way.

Michael Hartley

Kendal, Cumbria

sir – Food plays an enormous part in

the healing process. I once had a

friend in the Rome Policlinico, a public

hospital, where meals are worked out

by a clinical dietitian to suit each

patient’s condition. Prue Leith, who

has been brought in to advise on NHS

menus (report, August 23), is a

gourmet specialist but not the right

person to reform hospital meals.

Wendy Field

Hayling Island, Hampshire

sir – While delicious and nutritious

food is an aid to recovery, hospitals are

not hotels and have many demands

on their budgets. So why not allow

patients to pay for better food?

If I were stuck in my local hospital, I

would be happy to pay for deliveries

from the brasserie down the road.

Christopher Boyle

Milton Keynes

sir – Prue Leith could improve

hospital food in no time by getting the

NHS to mandate two changes.

First, require that management in

every hospital must eat from the day’s

patients’ menu. The food quality

would rise within days.

Second, institute a modest charge

for meals that represents the saving

that patients make by not having to

buy food at home.

Philip Collings

Henley-on-Thames, Oxfordshire

sir – The prime duty and purpose of

the NHS is to treat and cure physical

ailments, not to provide three free

meals a day.

Those who are working or who have

sufficient financial means to feed

ourselves at home should pay for

meals while in hospital. Imagine the

transformation in quality if patients

were asked to contribute £5 a day

towards the food budget. How could

anyone argue that this is

unreasonable, or not a fair

representation of their daily costs

outside the hospital environment,

regardless of background?

Michael R Gordon

Bewdley, Worcestershire

NHS budgets simply do not stretch to gourmet catering in hospitals Abolishing slavery

sir – To hear some of the recent

student rants one might suppose that

the British had invented slavery, yet it

is as old as history.

In Genesis, Joseph’s brothers sold

him into slavery, as a result of which

the Israelites were firmly under

slavery in Egypt by about 1700 BC. In

Exodus 20, after delivering the Ten

Commandments to Moses, God gave

him a set of rules for the treatment of

slaves, implying that slavery had

already been around for long enough

to have become abused and to need

some regulation.

What we must now recognise is

that, in the early 19th century, our

national conscience was awoken by

such figures as Thomas Clarkson and

John Newton, who persuaded the

influential Member for Hull,

William Wilberforce, to fight for the

abolition of trading in slaves through

Parliament. This was finally achieved

in two stages in 1807 and 1833, against

the most powerful self-interest.

That Britain, which at the time

was probably deriving more benefit

than any other nation from the fruits

of the slave trade, should have had

the courage to lead the world in

renouncing the practice, while

accepting the enormous economic

penalties, is something of which we

should be proud.

Ted Wilson

Hucclecote, Gloucestershire

sir – With regard to anti-slavery

reparations, perhaps we could pay

them from the money the Danes

must owe us for the Viking raids and

eventual occupation, not to mention

the Italian reparations owed us for our

occupation and enslavement by the

Roman Empire, and the slave raids

against this country mounted by the

“Moorish” states.

Of course, perhaps we could also

deduct the cost of maintaining the

West Africa Squadron for several

decades, at considerable expense,

which attempted to prevent the

international slave trade despite

considerable opposition.

Peter Davey

Bournemouth, Dorset

‘Healthy’ drinking

sir – Bryony Gordon and Hannah

Betts boast in your pages of having

been sober for two and five years

respectively. I have been sober for

57 years, yet drink wine nearly every

day. It enhances meals, and makes

one more relaxed and sociable.

There are many millions of other

responsible drinkers in the UK. We

greatly enjoy our wines, beers and

liqueurs, but never to excess. We

know when to stop.

I belong to eight wine-tasting

groups and have never seen anyone

drunk, disorderly or aggressive at

these gatherings. We prize quality

above quantity and concentrate on

what we are tasting, not knocking

the drink back heedlessly to get

legless. Publicity for a minority of

irresponsible drinkers should not

deter others from enjoying products

that, in moderation, give happiness,

sociability and health.

Dr Bernard Lamb

President of the National Guild of Wine

and Beer Judges

London SW

The business of ageing

sir – Further to Bob Wydell’s letter

(August 24), let us not forget gender-

neutral beige cardigans, basket-weave

shoes and interrogation-style high-

beam reading lamps.

I was almost tempted by the home

stairlift, however, as the salesman

looked gorgeous.

Jane Brown

Caterham, Surrey

Cricketing triumph

sir – From villains, 67 all out, to

heroes, chasing down a record 359 to

win, England pulled off a victory that

few, if any, pundits or spectators could

have foreseen.

Ben Stokes was the main man, and

his innings will remain a monument in

the history of Ashes cricket forever.

However, success could not have been

achieved without the contribution and

support of other members of the team.

Norman Macfarlane

Kingston upon Thames, Surrey

sir – Might I suggest that Ben Stokes’s

superb courage and refusal to give up

on winning the Ashes Test against all

the odds could not be a better example

to all the doubters who don’t think

that the United Kingdom is capable of

withstanding the strains of Brexit and

coming out on top.

Anthony Snook

Petworth, West Sussex

sir – Several years ago you

published my letter suggesting

that “cricket highlights” were the

two most depressing words in the

English language.

In the light of the events at

Headingley, please allow me to retract

this view publicly.

Ruth Corderoy

Hagbourne, Oxfordshire

Wartime fiction

sir – War novels are not only about

war (Letters, August 22.) Plenty Under

the Counter is a whodunnit set in

London bedsitter-land during the

Blitz. Its author, Kathleen Hewitt,

modestly prophesied that her work

would survive not for its literary merit,

but as a social document.

Originally published on thin

war-economy paper in 1943, it has now

been reissued by the Imperial War

Museum as part of its new Wartime

Classics fiction series.

Eddie Lewisohn

London N

Drunken inking antics

sir – The article on the current trend

for high-quality body art (Features,

August 25) reminded me of the many

tattoos I have seen as a physiotherapist.

Perhaps the most intriguing was the

word “Trebor” adorning the upper

thigh of a mature lady. It transpired

that a former boyfriend, who wielded

the needle, was called Trevor.

Unfortunately for her, he was rather

drunk at the time.

Kirsty Blunt

Sedgeford, Norfolk

Full steam ahead: a heritage train on the Children’s Railway in Huvosvolgy, Budapest

ALAMY

SIR – The shortage of staff for our

heritage railways (report, August 22)

could possibly be met by training

children to run them.

In Budapest, Hungary, there is

a children’s railway – a heritage,

narrow-gauge track that is seven

miles long. With the exception of

the train driver, all the positions

are operated by children aged

10 to 14, who control both the

traffic and services under adult

supervision. It is an extra-curricular

educational activity, which also

enables children to learn to become

railway professionals.

Derek Brumhead

New Mills, Derbyshire

SIR – It is not surprising that there

is a driver shortage at Britain’s

heritage steam railways in the light

of the antiquated, four-year training

programme. You can become a

commercial airline pilot in less time.

Time for some fresh thinking?

Peter Forrest

London N

Recruit children to staff our heritage railways

sir – Reports on the British Airline

Pilots’ Association’s strike actions

(August 24), which highlight senior

pilots demanding higher salaries, miss

the underlying causes of existing and

planned flight-crew strikes.

Striking is not just about wages.

Airline captains are ultimately

responsible for millions of pounds

worth of kit and – much more

importantly – hundreds of lives. Most

pilots stay with British employers for

reasons of home, family and friends,

but their rosters increasingly involve

minimum rest times of 12 hours

between signing off and signing on

again.

Despite this, pilots can be urged to

go into “discretion” time when flights

are delayed by inevitabilities such as

severely congested airports and bad

weather, in order to avoid flight

cancellations that are bad for both

passengers and their employer’s

bottom line.

Exhausted pilots on the last sector

of a five-day roster are more prone to

mistakes, and they know it. They can

declare fatigue as a reason not to fly,

but this is not encouraged, as airlines

ensure each aircraft’s maximum

earning capacity by minimising their

time on the ground.

Fair air-crew wages, based on both

responsibility and supply and demand,

are vital. Equally important are

working conditions, which, if they

routinely include fatigue, are not safe

Airlines will only run healthy

and safe rosters if forced to by legal

obligation; the existing EU/Civil

Aviation Authority regulations are no

longer fit for purpose and should be

urgently changed. Airlines would then

either have to recruit more pilots or to

reduce the number of flights, to keep

both flight crews and passengers as

safe as possible.

Dr Peter N Sander

Hythe, Kent

Pilots’ strike action is not just about salaries

The Daily Telegraph Tuesday 27 August 2019 *** 15

RELEASED BY "What's News" vk.com/wsnws TELEGRAM: t.me/whatsnws