Over the past four years, the BBC has consistently played a pivotal but ‘biased’ political role on BREXIT, don’t you think? That is why its dealings on BREXIT now requires an immediate judicial public inquiry to be set-up into the culture, practices and ethics of the British Broadcasting Corporation on what has been a critical milestone matter for the UK

The BBC commenced an anti-BREXIT campaign on behalf of the elite and the Conservative government in early 2016 when PM  David Cameron announced he would campaign for Britain to remain in the EU after he falsely claimed he had secured a good deal that would give Britain “special status” in the 28-nation EU bloc

Doubtless though, that was a ‘quid pro quo’ for six months previously the BBC being granted future licence fee increases in line with inflation until 2022 [the fee beforehand having being frozen since 2010]

So, the BBC became a willing promotional participant in the government’s ‘Project Fear’ in its attempt to coerce the population to vote ‘Remain’.

When the Referendum’s outcome turned-out to be ‘Leave’, it was generally expected that all Parties, MPs, organisations and voters, who had previously supported staying in the EU, would accept the result, and get behind the process of extracting the UK from the bloc. However, instead of that, some including the likes of the disgusting LibDems, diehard Europhile Tory MPs [including grandees], and even discredited ex PMs and past and present Cabinet ministers, defied British democracy and set out to thwart BREXIT as best they could

The ‘respected’ BBC itself became the prime vehicle for the anti-BREXIT elite establishment and big business to undermine the Referendum result, as it unashamedly provided an unwarranted platform over the past three years for countless political nobodies to become powerful and peddle their bile against a genuine BREXIT, aided and abetted by its over-paid presenters and programme makers. This is all done of course under the guise of being fair, neutral, and covering both sides of the debate – when in the first place there should NOT have been any debate when a democratic decision had already been clearly made – it’s not something that happens after a General Election, is it?]

The BBC, a public service broadcaster and the largest broadcaster in the world, supposedly is objective and independent of government or commercial influence, so has an obligation solely to its audiences and when reportedly it employs journalists who exercise independence of decision-making on broadcast content (albeit under the guidance of managers).

Some doubt must be cast on both of those matters in light of it and its staff’s biased behaviour on BREXIT, and moreover since the government has a stranglehold influence over the BBC, when the glaring fact is that it as an organisation is sycophantically-dependent on the government’s licence fee for ‘three-quarters’ of its funding of well over £5billion

[For example the BBC was forced to take on extra funding commitments including the World Service and Welsh-language S4C in 2010, while a potential killer blow of shifting the cost of paying for free TV licences for over-75s from general taxation to the BBC was only dodged by the Trust chairman jumping-ship – but the government subsequently got its way on that ‘welfare social costs’ burden in 2015 (a commitment made which surprisingly the BBC has now four years later performed a U-turn and reneged on)]

Because of its actions, it is the BBC which must be held ‘most’ accountable amongst the others for the Country’s failure to extract itself from the EU after over 3 full years, despite the people having voted to do just that, and had fully expected full control to have been taken back by the UK after just 2 years. Moreover, this has resulted in massive anger and polarisation of the population, uncertainty with untold strains on commerce, as well as unnecessary unbelievable cost – that is why there has to be an inquiry into how and why this has happened, and those responsible brought to task, eh?

[Such an Inquiry can be set up on the lines of the Leveson inquiry into the British press]