There are few things more savagely amusing than a disgraced member of the BBC becoming indignant. (‘Member’ seems the oddly appropriate word, considering how employees seem to conform on everything from loving transvestites to hating Israel.)
It’s hardly surprising, though still rather shocking, that Huw Edwards, a keen viewer of indecent images of children, is getting into a self-righteous stew over the Channel 5 drama ‘Power: The Downfall of Huw Edwards’
It’s often said approvingly that ‘the NHS is the closest thing the English have to a religion’ (as Nigel Lawson first sarcastically noted) but though the BBC is very much in favour of the NHS, it probably regards itself as the sole national religion now. So it’s hardly surprising, though still rather shocking, that Huw Edwards, a keen viewer of indecent images of children (several of them category A, the most serious level of abuse, depicted a child around eight years old) just a couple of years after being sacked by Auntie is getting into a self-righteous stew over the Channel 5 drama Power: The Downfall of Huw Edwards which aired last night.
In a statement to the Daily Mail, this preposterous man complained that Wonderhood, the makers of the two-parter, ‘made no attempt to check with me the truth of any aspect of their narrative before going ahead with the production… they belatedly asked for a response after the drama had been made, while reserving the right to edit any such response. They also refused to disclose whether any of those making allegations had been paid for their contributions. Channel 5’s “factual drama” is hardly likely to convey the reality of what happened.’
Incredibly, he added:
‘It is difficult to see how this approach can be considered remotely responsible or fair, or be in compliance with key sections of the Ofcom code on broadcast standards.’
Why on earth would anyone expect ‘the truth’ from someone who hid their repellent and illegal behaviour for many years?
Actors are generally so pro-BBC that it makes me feel like rushing out and getting a huge Martin Clunes tattoo, after he dared to take on this role portraying Edwards, a former member of this most hallowed of clubs. He really is magnificent in this role, and it was a daring move by the makers to cast a – hiss! – National Treasure in what is a very grim watch indeed.
Clunes deserves a Bafta; it will be interesting to see if the showbusiness establishment who have the final say will vote for something which shows their beloved Beeb in such a bad light. (It’s immeasurably better than the BBC’s own belated Jimmy Savile bio The Reckoning.) The excellent writer, Mark Burt, talked at length to the young man who was allegedly groomed by Edwards. Played by Osian Morgan, the portrayal of the alternating arrogance and insecurity of youth is spot-on (also excellent is Sian Rees-Williams, who plays the boy’s mother – Baftas all round!).
In a Guardian interview to promote the show, Clunes reveals himself to be a rather down-to-earth, cheery sort, especially considering the po-faced aspect of those who hawk their wares in the bazaars of Thespis. Clunes jokes that they probably asked Michael Sheen first. When the newspaper can’t help reverting to type at the end – ‘Could he ever allow himself to reflect on what Edwards might think about the drama or did he have to close his mind to that?’ – the actor answered with admirable bluntness:
‘Well, I don’t think he’d like it. But I mean he shouldn’t watch it, should he? And he would have happily reported on other people committing similar crimes so that aspect doesn’t worry me. There’s no way back for him. People get forgiven for cheating on their wives and bit of tax evasion. But, this one, I don’t think you do come back.’
Edwards certainly doesn’t need the money. Last year Steerpike revealed that ‘not only had one of the Beeb’s highest paid stars received a £40,000 pay rise in the 12 months between March 2023-April 2024, he was paid a further £200,000 after his arrest – with BBC boss Tim Davie confirming last year that the corporation had been aware Edwards had been arrested over the most serious category of indecent images of children.’
He’s also had the freedom to spend it, having received only a six-month sentence suspended for two years. You’d think that he’d consider himself fortunate in getting off so lightly, but in a surreally ill-judged demonstration of the Barbra Streisand Effect, Edwards says he plans to produce his own account of ‘these terrible events.’
He says:
‘Mental illness is misunderstood by many but can never be an excuse for criminality. It can, however, at least help explain why people sometimes behave in shocking and reprehensible ways.’
If he is serious about this (although I am generally sceptical of those who blame ‘mental health’ for their vile behaviour) he really has lost his marbles. That said, given licence fee payers are involuntary funding this paedophile’s handsome pension – as we once funded his child pornography habit – we’re not quite all there ourselves.
Tim Davie may have gone, and a new Director General been appointed (or rather, anointed) but the profound stupidity of the BBC will still be with us. Inexplicably, the nation’s broadcaster has both prized and protected paedophiles before: Jimmy Savile, for decades, and half a million pounds spent last year on reinstalling the sculpture by the daughter-abusing artist Eric Gill after it was attacked by a man with a hammer in 2022.
It’s entirely likely that they will learn nothing from this terrible episode – and we, the suckers, will keep on funding their disastrous lack of a moral compass. Indeed, the BBC is so irrevocably corrupt that it even makes the Church of England appear fit for purpose as a national religion – and that’s really saying something.
Comments