CRICK GOES CUTIE HUNTING

*

It's one of the recurrent complaints of this blog that Newsnight's Labour-supporting political editor Michael Crick uses his influential position to further his endless vendetta against the Tories, picking up on any story that might embarrass them and running with it furiously. (If you click on the label CRICK and follow things from the beginning - if you have a spare hour or two! - you'll see sackloads of evidence to back this up).The most familiar sight we see of him on Newsnight is him chasing Tories around various constituencies and sticking oversized microphones right up their noses. And he's allowed to get away with it!! If there are splits, or rows, or whiffs of scandal, or policy u-turns, anything really, you can pretty much guarantee that David Grossman will be elbowed out of the way and Crick himself will present the report on the story. He does not do any of this sort of thing with the Labour Party. That's bias.

*

Last night he was in Westminster North, reporting on the 'bust-up' over 'Cameron cutie' Joanne Cash (naturally pictured above!) thrusting a microphone towards a Tory party official, pointing up 'ironies' for David Cameron, generally enjoying himself.

*

When there so much to say about this tatty Labour government, why does a BBC political editor spend so much of his time and energy gunning for the main opposition? He could have investigated the government's role in the collusion in abuse of terror suspects, Brown's 'reign of terror' at Downing Street according to Labour's Lance Price, Labour's row with its own councillors over social care for the elderly,

or the secret document released because of an FOI request from Migration Watch that suggests that Labour was far from passive in allowing the megawave of immigration to hit our shores after 1997. So much to choose from. He chose instead to chase Tories.

*

He's been at it for years of course, even when the Conservatives were no real threat to his beloved Labour Party. Everyone, including the Conservatives, seems to accept this without complaint, as if 'Michael will be Michael'. Why?

*