downwithallthat

bigleyma is thinking…

Unum Influence Exposed in 2007 (yet still it goes on…)

with 2 comments

It’s quite difficult to comprehend that its four years since Jonathan Rutherford so completely detailed the process by which the disgraced Insurance company Unum had inveigled its way into a position from which it could determine the course of Welfare Reform in this country. How many sick and disabled people since then have been cheated out of their benefits for the profits Unum are anticipating from their playing of this ‘long game’? From the lack of action on this it would seem that no-one who matters cares.

And yet in the same year the BBC also cared  enough, as Rutherford notes, to run with this story on the Ten O’Clock news. What has happened in the meantime?  A recent Freedom of Information request to the BBC is attempting to find out whether, in light of even greater evidence of the corruption of our democratic process in service of private profit, the BBC are willing to revisit the subject. We all fund the BBC, let’s hope our trust in their stated independence and integrity is borne out by their response.

14.1

The BBC’s reputation, in the UK and around the world, is based on its editorial integrity and independence.  Our audiences must be able to trust the BBC and be confident that our editorial decisions are not influenced by outside interests, political or commercial pressures, or any personal interests.

The FOI deadline for their reply is next Wednesday, October 5th.

Its such a shame that the BBC’s initial exposure of this story, greeted as it was with such hope for change by those who were suffering then, did not manage to ignite a full enquiry into this scandal. Who can the vulnerable, sick and disabled in this country turn to for justice?

Advertisements

Written by bigleyma

September 25, 2011 at 11:48 am

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Just found this info….. Not only does the BBC report not offer hope for improvement, but the BBC are co-conspiritors with the Government as the report was removed from the BBC website and the BBC then suggested that they had ‘never run’ that news story and that the report was ‘a fake’. It seems they totally overlooked the fact that it wan’t just me who had watched the report, and that some of us had printed the report from the BBC News website before it was removed.

    Mo Stewart

    December 27, 2012 at 12:02 am

  2. Appreciate it! It is an wonderful webpage!

    social media

    July 31, 2013 at 12:15 am


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: