Indeed - but they didn't seem to think about that last year, did they?!

I'm not sure what you mean...

I actually cant believe that Harman would have to audacity to bring something as trivial as this into a parliamentary session. This is a business decision by the BBC , if she has a problem with that then she has private channels through which to take it. What really make me laugh is that HH is supposed equalities minister. Well surely whoever took over Arlene's position is as entitled to be treated equally as Arlene is, in other words her age, or sex or race or disabilities should have no bearing on any decision to give her the job.

I can't see any point in Harriet Harmon wasting time in the House asking such a unimportant question. It's no wonder more important business of the day tends to be side stepped - but no doubt that probably suits the Government given the sad state of affairs.

Anything to deflect attention from the really pertinent questions that need answering.

In regard to Arlene Phillips, whilst I don't feel that they've made the right choice with Alisha, I won't be sorry not to have to put up with Arlene's obvious pre-scripted and poorly thought out comments regarding the contestants.

She might understand a great deal about dance but beyond that her ability to be what she considers witty and clever use of words leaves a lot to be desired.

You're basically saying that it's not right to investigate or criticise someone for being ageist and sexist, because it might offend the person that they hired while being ageist and sexist?

Quite, in UK employment law there is a mandatory requirement for a reason to be given (which can be challenged in an Employment Tribunal) for early termination of an existing contract of employment.

In this case there is no contract of permanent employment, just a contract for one season, renewable only if both sides desire it. If Arlene chooses not to renew she would be under no obligation to give a reason or to defend it.

She has been invited onto the One Program to join Christine who is allegedly aged under 30.

NO, what i am saying is that it works both ways, by HH insisting that BBC bring back Arlene, as she has been percieved to be the victim of ageism, then this would mean any contract Alesha may have agreed with the BBC would be cancelled, the reason could only be construed as being because she is too young, not because she may not be qualified,. My main point was/is that as Equalities minister HH should accept that to be truly equal then both people should have an equal chance regardless of Age, if the employer , in this case the BBC, feel that each are qualified in all the areas required to do the job.

aside from that, my overall point is that this should never be a debate in Parliamentary session,when the country is in economic meltdown, gun and knife crime are rampant, unemployemnt, and not to mention the potential swine flu epidemic , and there we have to leader of the commons wasting time talking about a bloody TV show.

The BBC only replace you if you are a woman!! Look at Bruce with his "grand-daughter" Tess, now we have Phil with his "blonde daughter" Holly who got her job on This Morning although she had had no journalist experience just wears a lot of very low cut tops and smiles a lot!! How often do we see Granddads on our screens with co-presenters half their age. If the producers wanted to freshen up SCD they could have replaced the whole judging panel with new people, perhaps had a professional dancer like Karen or Camille on the panel. Personally I find the BBC frantic need to replace any women over 50 insulting, so many mature women has disappeared from our screens Moira Steward, Anna Ford etc. The fact that they are experienced journalists with years of experience means nothing if they do not have bouncy boobs and young skin!!!


I find Arlene's complete silence on what has happened to her odd to understand as she is normally outspoken. Everyone is jumping to her defence but she refuses to talk about it when questions probably because she is frightened of having an all out war with the BBC and thereby lossing her new job on The One Show!!

Apart from one, small thing - Phil & Holly are on ITV. It's more of a generic media thing, not confined to the BBC.



It's known as a diplomatic silence Although you say that you find it odd to understand, you have I think put your finger on the reason in that last part of your post.

Arlene has spoken about this subject - check out this thread - I hope it is a case of her knowing she has plenty of people saying what she thinks and imho in the circumstances is doing the right thing.

Are you saying that you think the bbc employed Alesha because she is as qualified as Arlene to do the job?

Agree with your other point, though - I don't think this is a suitable topic to take up valuable time in Parliament, particularly as MPs are about to enjoy a 13 week break.

What i am saying is that obviously the BBC believe that Alesha is qualified to do the job they want her to do,or they would never have offered it to her. That may NOT be the same job that Arlene did, we don't know and everybody is jumping on the ageist bandwagon, well if they had found a suitably qualified person and she had been younger than Arlene we would still have had the same argument if the decision was based on age which is what HH was saying

It is my understanding HH was responding to a point about the BBC raised in the house by another MP - she didn't start the discussion (I could be wrong).

If you wish to make a complaint regarding the sacking of Arlene Phillips from Strictly Come Dancing, go here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/forms/