Welcome To Zelo Street!

This is a blog of liberal stance and independent mind

Wednesday 8 February 2023

Richard Sharp - Out You Go

The position of BBC Chairman Richard Sharp, apparently awarded the role by disgraced former alleged Prime Minister Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, was precarious even before he surfaced yesterday to be lightly grilled by the DCMS Committee. After that grilling, his position verged on the untenable. One Committee member was on to him from the get-go.

Richard Sharp

SNP MP John Nicolson, scourge of (yes, it’s her again) Nadine Dorries, wanted to talk about Sharp’s appointment, especially after the latter had asserted that he secured the post on merit. “You previously applied for a job on the BBC board” punted Nicolson. Sharp confirmed “I applied to be a non executive … on the management board … and I didn’t … get an interview”.

So Nicolson came back. “What do you think the difference was between your failed application then, and your application now, following the huge facility that you helped the Prime Minister with?” Subtle enough? Sharp was, well, sharp in his response. “I did not help the Prime Minister with the huge facility”.

Unfortunately, his own testimony rather undermines that assertion. “Mr Blyth is a personal friend of mine, who I’ve known for some time. As a result of press reports that he had read in September, he raised with me at that time his concern that his cousin, the Prime Minister, was reported in these press reports to have some difficulties. Mr Blyth raised [with] me the fact that he was interested in feeling … about whether he should do something to help”.

There was more. “He raised that with me at a private dinner at his house. I said to him at that time ‘you may be a family member, but you need to be very careful. Things need to be done by the book. There are rules in this country, and these rules exist for a good reason’”. So let’s see what Bozo said about Sharp, and why the former PM has been caught lying once more.

Richard Sharp is a good and a wise man, but, you know, he [knows] absolutely nothing about my personal finances, I can tell you that for 100% ding dang sure”. Bozo pants on fire. Again. But back to Sharp, who went to see Cabinet Secretary Simon Case about Blyth’s proposal. Kevin Brennan, who represents Cardiff West, was interested in the chronology of that.

Before you went to see Simon Case about this matter, [am I] right in saying you went to see the Prime Minister to tell him you were going to see Simon Case?” Sharp confirmed that. “Yes, I had a meeting with the Prime Minister and I told him”. Brennan was yet more interested. “What did you tell the Prime Minister you were going to meet Simon Case about?” What say Sharp?


I told him that Mr Blyth wanted to support him. I told him that I’d advised Mr Blyth … that there are rules in this country, and therefore as a result of that, he should be in touch with the Cabinet Office, and as a result of that, I was going to do so … I definitely informed the Prime Minister”.

Brennan pressed a little more. “Approached you to lend him money to support his lifestyle?” Back to Sharp. “Well I informed, yes I informed the Prime Minister that Mr Blyth wanted to meet the Cabinet Secretary to see whether he could help the Prime Minister”. The key word there is YES.

So Brennan put it back to Sharp “The implication of that is whether he could help him financially [Sharp agreed with this interpretation] … so although you didn’t offer direct financial advice to the Prime Minister, the point you were making earlier on, you did inform the Prime Minister before you met the Cabinet Secretary that there was someone who had approached you, who was a member of his family, who wanted to help him financially. So in effect, without giving financial advice, you had discussed his finances, or rather, that someone wanted to help him with his finances, with the Prime Minister”.

Sharp confirmed that that was correct. Former BBC Panorama man John Sweeney had seen and heard enough. “BBC Chair Richard Sharp is compromised. The essential fairness of the BBC is critical to trust. Setting up a bung for Boris and not telling the public about it breaches that trust, big time. Sharp must resign”. This looks bad. Because it is bad. Very bad.

As to Sharp’s defence, Byline Times political editor Adam Bienkov explained it thus: “‘I did not arrange a loan’ for Boris Johnson, says BBC Chairman Richard Sharp, who helped to arrange a loan for Boris Johnson”. He did not arrange the loan, but he was rather adjacent to the whole business.

Richard Sharp may not want to resign. But now … he has to resign.


Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

35 comments:

Steve Woods said...

Sharp is another flawed product of the Oxbridge PPE factory.

Anonymous said...

Two things here:

ONE, Sharp is as sharp as a bowling ball, just another tory spiv in a suit.

TWO, hysterical Sweeney, of all people, talking about "trust in the BBC". Jesus wept.

And talking of possible bribes... the Quiff Quisling still hasn't explained why he didn't disclose his righty financial backers during the "Labour leadership election". After, what's source for the blue tory goose is source for the red tory gander.

Exiled in Ard Mhaca said...

Get him out and get rid of the bloody tv licence as well.

I Think You're Nadine said...

@ 13:49
Did those "righty financial backers" have a block vote?
What sort of "bribe" are you on about?
How much of the "bribe" did individual party members and affiliates get?

Anonymous said...

@21:40

Oo look......https://labourheartlands.com/starmer-backing-labour-group-fined-14250-for-failing-to-declare-donations/

Also, check out the Quiff Quisling abandonment of "leadership election" promises such as abolition of tuition fees. That's just the beginning. The fellow's a red tory lying hypocrite, as are his apologists.

Tsk tsk. You really must try harder.

I Think You're Nadine said...

@12:00
So no bribe and not directly controlled by Starmer and, according to the link, "There is no suggestion of wrongdoing by the donors."

Anonymous said...

@13:00.

Of COURSE "...there is no wrongdoing...by the donors..."

Just as "there was no wrongdoing" by Bliar/Brown and co when they lied about WMD in Iraq and mass murdered hundreds of thousands of innocents. And when the Quiff Quisling paid off the racist saboteurs in the Legal and Governance Unit for election sabotage "well done" (see the leaked report and even the Forde Report). And when Bliar/Brown and co ignored criminal police and establishment coverup of the Hillsborough disaster. Those are just starter examples.

That's the way it works. Didn't you know?

Anonymous said...

It certainly has Nadine’s special combination of relentless trollery straight out of the gate each time.

Either that, or it’s a donkey that died before Starmer was able to buy the sanctuary and is still bitter about that.

Anonymous said...

@13:50.

"... not directly controlled..."

Slippery word that "directly"....

Straight out of the McTernan far right bullshit playbook.

Anonymous said...

@16:28.

U OK hun?

You sound overwrought at hearing an inconvenient truth......but worry not, there's a red tory app for that....

Burlington Bertie from Bow said...

Don't be too critical or he'll flounce off for another 2 months.........

Burlington Bertie from Bow said...

@16.28

Mine at 18.00 above intended for you but not about you. (Be gentle with him, he's just back from injury and every % rise in the Labour lead could induce a relapse).

Anonymous said...

And no sooner is there a mention of a red tory app than one shows up at 18:00. Right on time.πŸ˜‚

I Think You're Nadine said...

@17:10 How much control then? There must be a document for you to quote, surely? What about the votes?

Anonymous said...

@20:11.

Tell you what...let's ask the Quiff Quislings to set up an independent inquiry. You know, like the Hillsborough families had to set up after 13 years of Bliar/Brown and that gutless gobshite Straw ignored them.

And like the Bliar/Brown war criminality is ignored to this day, as is their corruption of everything the Labour Party is supposed to stand for. Bliar of course became a multi-millionaire on the backs of his betrayal and over the dead bodies of hundreds of thousands of innocents - and now, equally of course, supports the Quiff Quisling as he too betrays the promises he made during the "leadership election"....No guesses for what kind of a "prime minister" HE'LL make.

And like the Quiff Quisling racist gang betrayal of the 2019 general election, plus pay off of the guilty parties. For which, see the leaked report (full of racist emails and corrupt practices) and the Forde Report.

Those are your precedents and your documents. So the chances of an honest independent inquiry are near zero.

The Quisling will likely "win" the next election off the backs of tory corruption, criminality and incompetence. It won't be because of reconstruction policies because he doesn't have any and has no intention of forming any. Like he said, his dad was a toolmaker. And Starmer is indeed the biggest tool he made. Which is why his "leadership" is a red tory rotten-to-the-core charade.

Time will show just how morally corrupt he and his type are. There might even be a last minute pre-election corporate media "Labour scandal" if Starmer steps even slightly out of the righty party line.

So don't hold your breath for any political decency. That died decades ago in this country and it isn't even on the horizon.

Anonymous said...

@19:18.

Awww....don't be a Silly Billy Bertie.

Your jellied eels and brown ale are going stale.

I Think You're Nadine said...

@22:01 Yurr. It's always the same with conspiracy peddlers. If someone is officially in charge of something, the CPs will claim that the real power is elsewhere. Never any proof though. Just a load of Look-Over-There at something else.

Anonymous said...

@10:20.

So the leaked report (including internal emails and witness statements) and the Forde Report are "conspiracy peddlers"?

Gosh. That's a new one, even for a red tory Quisling.

I Think You're Nadine said...

The Forde Report looked into allegations of racism, sexism and bullying within the Labour Party. I understand that Labour Together, the group that backed Starmer, welcomed the Report.
"For years, it has felt like Open Labour, as well as others, like Labour Together, have been shouting into abyss about the sectarian nature of the Labour Party" - Open Labour org

Anonymous said...

@19:39.

Yes, it's safe to say Quisling Labour are right wing sectarians, some of them far right racists.

Do you want a list from the Forde Report, the leaked report, the public record, and The Quiff's own actions?

I Think You're Nadine said...

@22:06
Yes please.

Anonymous said...

@13:04.

Here you go:

https://off-guardian.org/wp-content/medialibrary/200329-Labour-Report-Final.pdf?x29353

https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/The-Forde-Report.pdf

And this is the result of spineless Quisling betrayal:

https://www.lse.ac.uk/media-and-communications/research/research-projects/representations-of-jeremy-corbyn

And this is what it sabotaged, what we could have had:
https://labour.org.uk/manifesto-2019

Get back to me when you've, y'know, READ the evidence.

In your own time.

Anonymous said...

@13:04. Addendum.

Try this one too:
https://jacobin.com/2022/07/forde-report-starmer-corbyn-labour-antisemitism

Anonymous said...

@13:04. Second addendum.

Try this too:
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/labour-files-forde-report-keir-starmer-racism-b2198773.html

And this most of all:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elp18OvnNV0

Only here to help.

I Think You're Nadine said...

@13:36, 13:41, 13:52
Which link proves that Starmer directly controls Labour Together?

Anonymous said...

@20:54.

Bad start there with the paranoid "handle" again. A dead giveaway, that.πŸ˜‚

And there's that repeated slippery "directly" again. As bad as a former head of the CPS who "failed" to follow up on years of accumulating evidence against Sir James Wilson Vincent Savile OBE KCSG. See, he was a "Sir" too, and a BBC employee.

As was the pay out to the Quislings despite legal advice to the contrary. Which pay out, of course, prevented the case going to court. Which would've run a real risk of exposure of said Quislings during cross-examination. Thus the pay out to both the Quislings and the BBC tory propaganda clerk Ware. None of it authorised by the Party membership, all of it authorised by a tiny number of Starmer Quislings....because had THAT gone to a democratic debate that too would have exposed Quisling activities for what they were.

Meanwhile, try reading and viewing the evidence listed above. It shows just what a moral degradation the Starmer Quislings have re-injected into the Labour Party. It's Bliar/Brown all over again. The same rottenness, the same corruption, the same red tory spiv opportunism.

So far all you've done is spread the stink of look-over-there fish heads. Par for the red tory course. The sort of bullshit peddled by a tenth rate spiv shyster from Oxted.

I Think You're Nadine said...

@17:46
Okay. Which link proves that Starmer has some control of Labour Together?

Anonymous said...

@13:33.

Sigh.

READ the evidence.....Really READ the evidence.

Which you obviously haven't done.

You can't expect others to do it for you. Directly or indirectly.😊

I Think You're Nadine said...

@17:31
Yep. You can't provide it.

Anonymous said...

@17:31.

Nope. You haven't read it.

Next! πŸ˜‚

I Think You're Nadine said...

@17:31
Read it out to me and provide a detailed link of page and paragraph.

Anonymous said...

@21:31.

Nope.

Get off your lazy red tory Quisling arse and do your own reading. That's how democracy works. The truth is out there.😊

I Think You're Nadine said...

@11:36
Why should I take hours poring through pages of documents looking for proof that you're right? Prove it yourself.

Anonymous said...

@18:17.

You asked for evidence. There it is.

Now you won't look at it, directly or indirectly. Just as Starmer wouldn't face a court case which would have exposed the Quislings in the Legal and Governance Unit and elsewhere. Red toryism in "action".πŸ˜‚

Oh my aching sides.πŸ˜‚

I Think You're Nadine said...

@19:51
It seems that you can't quote anything from the links you mentioned to prove that Starmer has control over Labour Together.