BBC cuts council house row question from Rayner interview
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
The BBC is under fire after cutting short an interview with Angela Rayner over whether she broke the electoral law amid “concerns” from Labour staffers.
On Friday, Newsnight’s political editor Nick Watt admitted editing an interview he conducted with the Labour deputy leader three weeks ago to remove a comparison between the row over her former council house and the “Beergate” saga.
In the clip omitted from the original broadcast, Mr Watt asked Ms Rayner if she would consider her position untenable if it turned out she was in the wrong, just as Sir Keir Starmer had pledged to resign if he was fined over claims he broke Covid rules in “Beergate”.
Speaking live on Friday’s programme, he said the decision to cut the exchange was made for a “good editorial reason”. But he also admitted that Labour’s team had raised “concerns” after the interview that the “Beergate” comparison was unfair, as Ms Rayner was not under police investigation at the time.
Greg Smith, the Conservative MP for Buckingham, said licence fee payers who “expect impartiality” will “want answers” as to why the broadcaster made the edit when “virtually every media outlet is focusing on this story”.
The broadcaster aired the clip for the first time on Friday after Greater Manchester Police (GMP) said it had launched an investigation into claims Ms Rayner wrongly declared which house was her permanent address on the electoral roll, which is a criminal offence.
Ms Rayner has also faced questions about whether she should have paid capital gains tax on the 2015 sale of her council house owing to the confusion over whether it was her principal residency.
‘A good editorial reason at the time’
She and Sir Keir Starmer had called on Boris Johnson to quit when police launched an investigation into him over “Partygate”. They both also said they would resign if they were charged over the so-called “Beergate”, where the Labour leader and colleagues drank beer and had a takeaway curry after a campaigning event in April 2021 when most indoor gatherings were banned.
Since the Newsnight interview, Ms Rayner has promised to resign if she is found to have broken the law. But she insists she “followed the rules at all times”.
In the segment of the interview that had been cut, Ms Rayner had refused to commit to resigning if she was found to have committed an offence and said: “Well, I’ve had the expert advice and I do not owe any capital gains tax on that property.”
Explaining the decision to edit the interview, Mr Watt said on Friday: “Now, on that final exchange we just saw between me and Angela Rayner, where I was drawing that comparison between where we are today and the so-called “Beergate” issue two or three years ago, I decided at the time for editorial reasons that we shouldn’t run that.
“Now inevitably, you can’t run all of an interview – you have to make cuts. But for transparency, I should say that the Labour team did after the interview raise concerns about that exchange.
“They essentially said they didn’t really see how you could make a comparison between a commitment Keir Starmer had given two years ago after the police announced they were going to investigate him and Angela Rayner’s position after the police said they would not investigate her.
“Because of course when I interviewed Angela Rayner, the police had said they would not be investigating this matter. So look, it was a different situation then, good editorial reason at the time not to include that exchange. But obviously, things changed today with that statement.”
He added: “This provides quite an interesting glimpse into the world of relations between political broadcasters and political parties. It’s quite normal for a political party – doesn’t happen every time – that they raise concerns about an interview.
“They sometimes do that after a live interview, they sometimes do it after an interview that was recorded before the programme went on air, and that’s what happened in this case.
“So bearing that in mind and taking the whole interview in a round, I made that editorial decision. But obviously in light of today’s statement, today’s development, which is that police statement, and what Angela Rayner has said, we think that that exchange from that interview should be aired.”
A BBC spokesman said: “Nick Watt transparently explained the full situation to viewers on Friday’s Newsnight, including the fact that it’s normal to make editorial decisions about what is and isn’t used from a pre-recorded interview.
“This was a forensic and challenging interview in which Angela Rayner was asked in detail about her tax affairs. When the situation changed, including the police decision to investigate, we broadcast this exchange. We’ve covered this story impartially throughout.”
Mr Smith told The Telegraph: “Given virtually every media outlet is focusing on this story it is at best ‘odd’ the BBC would cut the interview short and hard-pressed licence feepayers who expect impartiality will want answers as to exactly why.
“The fact it has taken a police investigation to start to get the full interview speaks volumes in itself.”
In March, GMP said Ms Rayner would not face an investigation. However, it was forced to reassess its decision after James Daly, a Conservative MP, complained that officers appeared not to have contacted witnesses or looked at the electoral roll, deeds and other relevant documents.
On Friday, a GMP spokesman said: “We’re investigating whether any offences have been committed. This follows a reassessment of the information provided to us by Mr Daly.”
