It took off for Cleveland, Ohio, whence Tyson would proceed by car to his multi- million-dollar estate The reporters turned to the cameras “There you have it, folks Mike Tyson’s flight to freedom.”Sports section, page one. A CABINET minister yesterday provoked a full-scale political row with the fiercest personal attack on a BBC journalist for nearly a decade. Jonathan Aitken, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, accused John Humphrys, presenter of the BBC’s Today programme of embracing “open partisanship”. Mr Humphrys is one of the broadcasters “poisoning the well of political debate” with his “ego-trip interviewing”, Mr Aitken said.
The claims – reminiscent of Lord Tebbit’s attack on the BBC’s Kate Adie in 1986 – centred on an aggressive interview with the Chancellor, and Mr Humphrys’s chairmanship of a meeting about the Government’s failure to fund in full the teachers’ pay settlement.Tory sources indicated that this was the first attack on broadcasters thought to be biased against them in the run-up to the General Election. Labour accused the Government of trying to “soften up” the BBC, and promised to monitor interviews to ensure that the corporation “did not cave in”. Labour’s spokesman for national heritage, Chris Smith, said Mr Aitken had “taken leave of his senses” and John Prescott, the deputy leader, said: “Bashing the media is a common Tory tactic whenever things get desperate for them.

It is a further signal of a party that is panicking because it has no message, no purpose and no direction.”Mr Aitken’s attack came in a speech in Broadstairs in which he said it had “become apparent in recent months that some prominent broadcasters have embraced open partisanship”.Referring to a lobby organised by teachers’ unions at Westminster last week, he said: “If the BBC’s senior political journalists are going to be allowed to chair meetings organised by the Government’s political opponents, we shall soon have to rename their organisation The Blair Broadcasting Corporation.”Mr Aitken added that Mr Humphrys’s “bizarre breach of the normal convention that political journalists stay out of partisan politics” would not surprise those who heard his interview with the Chancellor, Kenneth Clarke, on 10 February.”John Humphrys interrupted him no fewer than 32 times,” the Chief Secretary said, adding that Mr Humphrys was “conducting the interview not as an objective journalist seeking information, but as a partisan pugilist trying to strike blows.”Other BBC journalists, including the late Brian Redhead, have been the object of Tory attacks. But Mr Aitken’s speech seemed designed partly to chime with recent criticisms of politician journalism made by John Birt, director-general of the BBC. In February, Mr Birt criticised overbearing interviewers who “sneer disdainfully at their interviewees”, adding that political coverage is being drowned out by “a cacophony of disputation”.Yesterday Mr Humphrys denied that he had interrupted the Chancellor 32 times and said that Mr Clarke had happily returned to do another interview the following week. Mr Humphrys said that he had simply done his job and that politicians appreciate that “they are not going to be allowed to make a series of party political points”.The appearance at the education rally had been arranged by his agent and he understood – wrongly as it proved – that a Tory representative would be on the same platform. Other participants included David Blunkett, Labour’s education spokesman and Paddy Ashdown, the Liberal Democrat leader.Mr Humphrys said: “I have absolutely nothing to apologise for.

I was a strictly impartial chairman.”A BBC spokesman said: “If we had known John was going to chair this meeting, as it developed, we might well have advised against it. We have no doubts about his impartiality or capability as a journalist.”His role at this meeting seems to have been misunderstood by Mr Aitken. At no time did he express any support for any particular cause.” The Clarke interview was “good natured but tough”, and there were no complaints, the BBC said.That interview, page 2Leading article, page 26. A MAJOR change in A-levels, which would allow sixth formers to sit a much broader range of subjects along the lines of Scottish Highers, is being considered by the Government’s exams advisers. Sir Ron Dearing, chair of the School Curriculum and Assessment Authority, has ordered an investigation into a new exam system under which students would take up to five subjects after one year in the sixth form.
If the scheme goes through, it will bring to an end a battle to broaden the English sixth-form curriculum that has lasted for nearly 30 years. School teachers and university academics have long regarded A-levels as too narrow and specialised, particularly compared with their equivalents on the Continent. A-levels have been blamed for the innumeracy of arts- educated civil servants and managers, and for the illiteracy of scientists.Several recent schemes have failed because Tory ministers were determined to protect the tried and tested A-level “gold standard”.

But now ministers have hinted that they may be ready to shift their position.The new exam would recognise the achievements of those students – about one-third – who at present either fail A-Level or drop out. It would also allow the brightest students to take a wider mixture of science and arts subjects.At present most students take two or three A-levels in two years. In future they could leave school after gaining the new qualification or continue for another year to take A-levels.Exam advisers are also discussing the introduction of “core skills” of literary, numeracy and information technology to A-level courses. These are already required for GNVQs, the new vocational sixth-form courses, and their development at A-level could lead to an 18-plus diploma, involving a mixture of core skills, A-level and vocational courses.Eric Forth, the Minister of State for Education, told a head teachers’ conference earlier this month that vocational exams had already broken the monopoly of A-levels. “I do not want to give the impression that A- levels are the be-all and end-all because we have already moved away from that.” He said he was “more broadminded” than teachers thought.. BRITISH AND US defence officials knew that victims of Gulf war syndrome were exposed to chemical weapons agents, according to previously unpublished military documents.

Restricted British and US military papers, obtained by James Tuite, a former US secret service agent, contradict government claims that chemical weapons were not deployed by Iraq during the Gulf war. The reports say allied soldiers were exposed to mustard agent and sarin, the nerve gas which killed 10 people in Tokyo last week.
Mr Tuite, an international security consultant and adviser to the US Congressional inquiry into Gulf war syndrome, wrote in a report on his investigations: “There is plentiful and significant causal and medical evidence to support the claim that [Gulf veterans'] illnesses are the result of either the immediate or delayed toxic effects of exposure to chemical and possibly biological warfare agents.”At least 500 British men and women who served in the Gulf have been given legal aid to pursue compensation cases against the Ministry of Defence. Day in and day out John Humphrys and his colleagues on the Today programme demonstrate with great professionalism how it is possible to achieve both those objectives. Mr Aitken, a Cabinet right-winger, also accused Mr Humphrys of interrupting the Chancellor, Kenneth Clarke, 32 times in a short interview last month, and added that he was “not conducting the interview as an objective journalist seeking information but as a partisan pugilist trying to strike blows”. Yesterday, Roger Gale, chairman of the Tory backbench media committee, called for Mr Humphrys to stand down.A BBC statement said: “Viewers and listeners expect BBC interviews with politicians to be fair but also robust and testing. He said the BBC could well be renamed “the Blair Broadcasting Corporation”. The BBC and opposition politicians yesterday signalled they were on the alert for an onslaught of Tory pressure on broadcasters as the next general election looms.