BBC BLOGS - Newsnight: Michael Crick
« Previous | Main | Next »

Lib Dem minister urges conference to stop reading Guardian

Michael Crick | 15:15 UK time, Tuesday, 21 September 2010

"Stop reading the Guardian," a Liberal Democrat minister told the conference today.

"It is a carrier of misinformation and lies," said the health minister, Paul Burstow, who was complaining about the paper's recent coverage of the government's health policies.

What ingratitude. The Guardian was the only daily paper to endorse the Lib Dems at the election, after much internal agony on the paper, and decades of backing Labour.

Strange really. And I swear I saw Mr Burstow briefing a Guardian journalist a few hours ago.


  • Comment number 1.

    Rats! Just when I want lots of people in Government to read my article about how to implement austerity in the Police Service!

  • Comment number 2.

    Don't read the LibDem manifesto. Given some of the government's actions and planned activities, it is a carrier of misinformation and lies.

  • Comment number 3.

    The guardian has gone back to it's leftwing roots ie labour.

  • Comment number 4.

    Maybe he's talking about the Sutton Guardian, his local newspaper which has featured a number of stories about LibDem excess in his own backyard recently?

  • Comment number 5.

    Somewhat understandable, considering the Guardian's editorial slant post-election.

    I don't think I've read a single comment piece in the thing for months that claimed that Nick Clegg was anything less than the antichrist.

    The might have endorsed the party during the election, but they've certainly done their best to backpedal on that as fast as they can since.

  • Comment number 6.

    One can see how this might ruffle feathers in a few quarters.

    Not so much the "It is a carrier of misinformation and lies," bit, which seems to have troubled no one hereabouts, factually, but... the lack of gratitude.

    Not to be tolerated, especially after decades of backing Labour. We can feel the empathetic pain. No so strange, really.

    And here was me thinking it might be to do with a degree of quoting in some places out of all proportion to its readership stats.

    But unsubstantiated gossip is fine. I swear.

  • Comment number 7.

    is this the same guardian that says it has evidence of journalists breaking the law but refuses to publish or hand the details to the police?

  • Comment number 8.

    So the Guardian is a newspaper that is "a carrier of misinformation and lies"? Perhaps the Liberal Democract minister should be asked whether the public were misinformed by the Guardian when it endorsed his party in the general election...

  • Comment number 9.

    They say a week is a long time in politics. Maybe so. Still, you would expect Liberal Democrat ministers might be more grateful for what support they did receive only a few months ago....

    I have further analysis here on this story:

  • Comment number 10.


    With each day that passes Nick demonstrated the degree to which he can kid himself (if not Charlie Kennedy and others) that he did it 'for the good'. Nick fixed it for Nick.

    But it will eat him; he knows what he has done. Blair did all his stuff 'for the good' and he is prematurely aged. Only Jekyll and Hyde Brown has the trick of not knowing, at least, in the half that might care.

  • Comment number 11.

    I didn't know anyone still read the Guardian. Remind me of its circulation ?

  • Comment number 12.

    Can someone tell me what justifies the intense media coverage of these conferences to non-party members (or atheists re-the Pope's visit)? They are nothing more than stage managed rallies designed to appease and assure the continuing support (mainly financial) of their supporters.

    In my memory, the only significant thing in terms of what actually went on to happen in reality, that ever resulted from a party conference was when the perceived public resonance with a speech by David Cameron at a Conservative conference was enough put the newly crowned Gordon Brown off calling an election that he would probably have won.

    On such the future of nations is decided, and I suppose I just answered my initial question!

  • Comment number 13.

    Really dislike the insinuation that people are incapable of formulating own opinions... For the sake of debate though, which UK paper does not present the news in favour of a single political party? Pray does anyone know what news a "non-biased" newspaper report?

  • Comment number 14.

    "The Guardian has gone back to it's leftwing roots - ie labour." (Ava78 @ 3)
    Yes, but can Labour go back to its left wing roots?

  • Comment number 15.

    Not if it wants to govern this country. To me the only thing wrong with New Labour (Which Thatcher wryly as always, claims as her greatest invention) was the arrogance and stupidity of it's principle exponents i.e. B and B.

    New Labour without the egotism and narcissism of its former leadership could well form the next government. Shame that all of the leadership contenders appear to be the same.

  • Comment number 16.

    I would sooner read the Guardian and listen to the BBC than listen to any LibDem promises about how they would oppose an increase in VAT, say No to savage cuts in the first year...I could go on but you know the rhetoric as they lied a lot and promised everything unlike the beeb and the Guardian and Vince rowed back a lot in his speech....someone must have had a word...

  • Comment number 17.

    All this user's posts have been removed.Why?


BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.