New sections of the Equality Act 2010 will come into force very shortly. Regular Newsround Blog readers will know that I've taken a particular interest in equality legislation. It's now almost 2 years since I first contacted the DCMS to ask details of intentions with regard to the legislation. Last year my enquiries led to the Government Equalities Office, and yesterday I received an unexpected email from the GEO Correspondence and Enquiries Manager:-

I am writing in relation to a complaint that you raised with the ICO in the 4th March.

Please find below a reply to your Freedom of Information request and correspondence about the Public Sector Equality Duty.

We are informing the Information Commissioners Office about this response.

There were 2 attachments to the email. The first was a document from Tim Morgan, who was the lead official for the Government's consultation on the Public Sector Equality Duty:-

Ref: GEO/10/FOI/65

I understand that an FOI request you made last year to the Government Equalities Office (GEO) – to which we gave the reference above – was not dealt with properly. Please accept my apologies for this. The GEO aims to respond promptly and fully to all FOI requests.

As you will recall, we exchanged a series of e-mails in the autumn of last year, and I endeavoured to answer the various questions you asked.

In response to the specific question that formed your FOI request, I responded within the necessary timescale, and provided relevant information and context. However, I was not actually aware then that I should have been treating that particular question as an FOI request, and – among other things – failed to use the reference number that we had allocated to it, as you would rightly have expected. For this, I apologise.

Given that response, and the fact that you very helpfully explained in a subsequent e-mail the key information you were after, I recognise now that I should have given a fuller answer. This letter therefore provides further information.

Your original question was:

"Please could you let me know if the Government Equalities Office was involved or contacted in any way whatsoever, either directly or indirectly, in respect of the broadcasters' exemption? I am particularly interested in the details up to, and including, 19th January 2010."

Plainly this was a very broad question, and my response made clear that – as the lead department for the Equality Bill – GEO was of course involved in many discussions about the broadcasters’ exemption.

However, you helpfully narrowed it down to ask, in a follow up question, to focus on your key interest, which was communications with Lord Lester. Your e-mail of 20 September asked:

“Please could you let me know if the GEO had any communications with Lord Lester in connection with the public sector Equality Duty? Thanks again.”

I explained that GEO Lords Ministers were in contact periodically with Lord Lester during the passage of the Bill through the House of Lords, as he was the Liberal Democrat lead on it. But I was not aware if they had discussions about the Equality Duty outside of the House.

In retrospect, both of these answers could have been rather fuller.

In answer to your broader question, much of the involvement and contact that the GEO had regarding the broadcasters’ exemption is already in the public domain. That includes:

• Ministerial responses given to Mark Harper MP and Lord Ouseley, who asked Parliamentary Questions on the subject in June 2009;

• debates between GEO Ministers and the Conservative members of the House of Commons Equality Bill committee, who tabled an amendment to exclude the BBC from the scope of the Equality Duty, in June 2009; and

• formal responses to our first consultation on the shape of specific duties, in the autumn of 2009, from the BBC and the BBC Trust.

However, there were also exchanges between GEO officials and those from other relevant Government Departments, such as DWP and DCMS; and a meeting between GEO officials and the BBC and other broadcasters, in October 2009. These discussions focussed on the wording of the exemption to which the Government, both in those Ministerial responses and in the debates in the House of Commons, had given an explicit commitment.

In regard to your more specific question quoted above, my e-mail noted that there may well have been informal involvement and contact between the GEO’s Lords Ministers and Lord Lester. I noted that we do not hold any information on that, and instead flagged for you their formal exchanges in Parliament, which were recorded in Hansard. However, I have found one e-mail exchange between a senior GEO official – Melanie Field – and Lord Lester, which is relevant to your request. It is therefore attached, in a slightly redacted form blocking out material not relevant to the question you asked.

Moving on, you will recall that, in subsequent exchanges, you asked for the GEO's views on the BBC’s exemption – essentially whether we agreed with the Prime Minister and/or with Parliament on this issue.

I noted the difficulty of dealing with that question. GEO has no corporate view, as such, on anything. We take our lead from our Ministers, who are appointed by the PM; and the Government is then collectively accountable to Parliament for its decisions, and ultimately to the electorate.

I have kept you informed about relevant consultations and debates on this issue, and I note that you have responded. I have endeavoured to do this because ultimately – as you’re aware – the partial exemption for the BBC and other broadcasters from parts of the Equality Act were discussed in both Houses of Parliament, and agreed by all the main parties. It is politicians, not GEO officials, who need to be persuaded of the arguments on this issue.

Aside from what was necessary to deal with your FOI request, I see from my notes that I also mailed you to flag the BBC’s consultation on its diversity objectives; the Government’s work to promote LGB&T equality, including their first ever LGB&T Action Plan; and in regard to the roles of Ofcom and the BBC Charter in influencing this debate.

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport has responsibility within Government for the BBC and the other broadcasters, and I suggest that you should contact them for any further information you require.

If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request, you have the right to ask for an internal review. You should submit an internal review request within two months of the date of receipt of the response to your original letter and you should address it to: Information Management Services, 2 Marsham Street, London, SW1P 4DF or email foirequests@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. You can contact The Information Commissioner at: Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF

I still take issue with some of the above. As an example, there was no debate in the House of Commons regarding the BBC's partial exemption from the Act. This had been acknowledged in earlier correspondence with Mr Morgan.

The other attachment contained various redacted correspondence between Lord Lester and the GEO. The dates of emails were removed by the GEO:-

From: Anthony Lester
Sent: [ ]
To: Melanie Field
Cc: [ ]

Subject: RE: Broadcasters

Dear Melanie

Thank you very much for taking such trouble to explain. Before you make any more criticism of my own drafting I should like to emphasise that the drafting came from the broadcasters. I know that is no excuse since they are in my name.

Would you like me to forward this to the broadcasters or will you do so?

[ one additional paragraph on unrelated issue ]

Have a relaxed weekend

Best wishes

Anthony

From: Melanie Field []
Sent:
To: Anthony Lester
Cc: [ ]
Subject: RE: Broadcasters

Dear Anthony

On the public sector Equality Duty, the plan is to list the public service broadcasters in Schedule 19 except in respect of their broadcasting and output functions.

In case it is helpful, I have set out below further explanation of why we consider Parliamentary Counsel's drafting does the trick, and addressing concerns raised by the BBC.

1. The references to "failing", "refusing" and "omitting" in your version can be dealt with by the word "not" by virtue of clause 204(3) (general interpretation) which provides that a reference to an omission includes a reference to a deliberate omission to do something, a refusal to do it or a failure to do it. However, we have gone for an even simpler formulation which provides that section 20 does not apply to the activities in question.

2. The references to broadcasting or distributing "particular output at a particular time or in a particular manner" in your version are not necessary: the reference in clause 29(2) to providing the service would, we think, cover all aspects of provision as well as the fact of provision. There is further support for this in clause 31(7) which provides that a reference to a service provider not providing a person with a service (contrary to clause 29(1)) includes the service provider not providing the person with a service of the quality that it usually provides to the public and the manner in which, or the terms on which, the service provider usually provides the service to the public.

3. We do not think that the reference to deciding or failing or omitting to decide to take any of the steps mentioned is necessary. The services provisions in clause 29 hinge on providing or not providing the service in question. In this case, that would be the broadcasting or not broadcasting of a programme. We doubt whether deciding to do something is itself the provision of a service.

4. The reference to "programme" is intended to cover output broadcast on the television, radio or internet. It is not intended to cover, for example, advertisements. We would be happy to hear from the BBC as to why they consider the concept not broad enough, what it does not capture that they would wish to capture and what alternative can be used. We think that "output", undefined, is too vague a concept for the lay reader to understand. The reference to distribution by means of the internet can be added to to include mobile devices. It would be helpful if the BBC could include all of the activities which they think need to be covered.

4. We do not think that the commissioning of a programme is the provision of a service to the public. What matters for the purposes of clause 29 is the broadcasting of a programme rather than how it came to be made or prepared for broadcast (i.e. whether it was commissioned or bought or made in-house). It follows that we also do not think that creating a programme is the provision of a service to the public. We think that scheduling a programme is an aspect of broadcasting and that the manner in which the service is provided would include the time/day on which it is broadcast. In relation to the BBC's example of a complaint by a disabled person in relation to an absence of gardening programmes aimed at disabled people, we do not think that the issue of commissioning would be relevant to such a complaint. Such a complainant would probably have to argue that broadcasting a gardening programme that did not take into account the needs of disabled gardeners amounted to a detriment. As we do not consider that commissioning a programme is the provision of a service to the public, it does not make sense to seek to include it in the exception.

5. We have not included references to "content" or "output", but have preferred to refer to broadcasting a programme or an intem within a programme as more accessible language to the lay person.

6. Sub-paragraph (2) is intended to ensure that broadcasters are not exempt from liability in respect of decisions regarding the transmission of a signal that people receive in their homes, should the term "broadcasting" be interpreted as including that activity. We have done this by trying to exclude the relevant concepts as defined by the Communications Act 2003, but realise that some fine-tuning may be required here. We do not agree with the BBC's view that the effect of sub-paragraph (2) negates the effect of sub-paragraph (1) and would be grateful for an explanation of how they think it does this. As we have already said, the effect of sub-paragraph (2) is to ensure that any discrimination involved in the activity of broadcasting a signal is not exempted from the duties in clause 29. The exception is only intended to apply to the content of programmes broadcast on the television, radio or via the internet (or, as indicated by the BBC, mobile devices).

Best wishes

Melanie

Melanie Field
Head of Discrimination Law
Government Equalities Office

---

From: Anthony Lester [ ]
Sent:

To: Melanie Field
Cc:
Subject: RE: Broadcasters

Thank you. what about the public sector duty?

A

From: Melanie Field [ ]
Sent:
To: Anthony Lester
Cc:
Subject: Broadcasters

Dear Anthony

I thought you might want to see an amendment Parliamentary Counsel has drafted which would ensure that the broadcasting and output functions of public service broadcasters were not covered by the prohibition on discrimination in Part 3 of the Bill:

Schedule 3

2 Page 145, line 11, at end insert—

PART 6A

TELEVISION AND RADIO PROGRAMMES

(1) Section 29 does not apply to broadcasting, or distributing by means of the internet, a programme or an item forming part of a programme.

(2) Sub-paragraph (1) does not apply to providing an electronic communications network, electronic communications service or associated facility (each of which has the same meaning as in the Communications Act 2003).”

You will note that this exception does not cover the commissioning of programmes. This is because Counsel thinks that commissioning a programme is not the provision of a service to the public. What matters is the broadcasting of a programme, not how it came to be made or ready for broadcast (such as whether it was commissioned or bought). It follows that we also do not think that creating a programme is the provision of a service to the public. However, scheduling a programme is an aspect of broadcasting - the manner in which the service is provided would include the time at which it is broadcast.

Best wishes

Melanie

Melanie Field
Head of Discrimination Law
Government Equalities Office

The latest Newsround Special, on Tuesday, dealt with cancer. Other specials have included knife crime, divorce, living with alcohol, depression, poverty, Internet safety, coping with death, and growing up in care.

But one issue that CBBC avoids is homophobic bullying.

An inquest into the death of Dominic Crouch heard that he jumped from a six-storey block of flats. Roger Crouch, Dominic's father, said after the verdict of suicide was returned: "Dominic was clearly upset about rumours that he believed were being spread about him."

Mr Crouch is insistent that his son, who attended a Catholic school and played rugby, was not actually gay.

New sections of the Equality Act 2010 come into force next week.

Amongst the provisions of the Act is that for 'positive action' which is explained in part of the guidance -

‘Positive action’ is when something is done specifically to help someone who has a protected characteristic. There are several different reasons why it may be appropriate to take some sort of positive action, for instance if someone is suffering some kind of disadvantage linked to that characteristic ....

Positive action is not a legal requirement, but CBBC ought to help counter homophobia rather than condone it.

Last month Joe Godwin, Director of BBC Children's, was at the Kidscreen Summit in New York's Hilton to discuss kids' heroes: Are they reflected in children's media? Can we use attributes that kids respect in building the next generation of media heroes and superheroes?

But back here in the UK, CBBC has been resolutely silent about gay heroes and superheroes. Why is it no surprise that kids get upset about rumours of their sexual orientation and, in extreme cases, contemplate suicide?

The UK children's commissioners are rarely heard on Newsround. But this morning Leah reported that the Children's Commissioner for England [Maggie Atkinson] thinks that "you guys know better than anyone else about what makes a good teacher." Less than 1 in 5 children are consulted when hiring new teachers.

Leah said that some teachers don't like the idea because they say "it gives kids too much power."

Few regular viewers to CBBC would have missed seeing at least one of the trailers for the Channel's "biggest party of the year so far" - Finale Friday. The party, it seems, was to celebrate the season finales of two series: Tracy Beaker and Sadie J.

Perhaps Fag-end Friday would have been a more fitting description for the so-called party, as this evening's last two episodes of Sadie J were particularly dire.

Newsround Blog reviewed Sadie J in January, soon after it began. Despite very good performances from the cast, what started off promisingly soon became repetitious and tiresome. Sadie's life appeared to revolve around having fun and going to parties; we rarely saw anything much deeper in her character. Her two best friends were also one-dimensional, and I was left with the distinct impression that the writer was afraid to develop the stories into anything more serious. Hints that Kit might have been gay remained just that - hints. In contrast, it was clear that, as usual with CBBC, the programme was full to the brim with heteronormative and heterosexual references.

The lack of invention was especially noticeable in the last two episodes this evening. About three quarters of the time we were watching flashbacks to previous episodes in the series. And I mean this literally: it was atrocious. For the last few minutes CBBC resorted to outtakes - a sure sign of desperation.

Sadie J could have been so much better.

Monday's Newsround included an attempt to explain the rivalry between Celtic and Rangers football supporters.

Ricky: We sent Leah to the Final at Hampden Park yesterday to find out what young fans really feel about the tensions.

Leah: This is the first time that both sides have faced each other since the trouble a couple of weeks ago. And in just a few hours time this place will packed full of supporters from both sides. And like most big cities there are often footballing rivalries. But here the tensions go back hundreds of years, and it's all to do with religion. To start with Celtic fans were mainly Catholic, and Rangers, Protestant. And for that reason there's been friction between the two sides and they don't always get on. For some supporters the tension of years ago still matters today.

Leah spoke to two young supporters; one a Rangers fan and the other a Celtic fan. Neither approved of the violence. Leah ended her report hoping that the plans put in place to stamp out the violence really make a difference.

But apart from Leah's entreaty, CBBC doesn't exactly encourage tolerance or good behaviour. Not even between friends.

Take yesterday's Newsround. On of the news reports was about a revolutionary new way of teaching football in Scotland. The idea is to use smaller pitches, goalposts and fewer players in teams. Experts think it will get kids more involved in the game.

But after the report came the sofa chat between Ore and Sonali -

Ore: Iain Stirling would have loved to have had that programme when he was back at school. He's rubbish. He really is.

Sonali: Say it to his face.

Ore: Yeah I will do, when he's back in the morning.

Sonali: We're gonna talk about rubbish playgrounds now, not rubbish players. ..

That was just the latest in a series of put-downs CBBC presenters have made against each other, perhaps in jest, but without considering their behaviour could encourage playground taunts and bullying.

Newsround reporter Ricky says he's applied for tickets to the London Olympics. He's hoping to go to the swimming semi-finals and the closing ceremony.

On the 3.25pm bulletin this afternoon Newsround reported on the London Olympics countdown clock -

Ricky: And to add to the excitement, this clock has been unveiled in Trafalgar Square in London. It'll be counting down the minutes and days to the opening ceremony next year.

What Ricky didn't say was that the clock had broken down three hours previously. Later, at 5pm, a filmed report by Leah about the 2012 Olympics concluded with a mention of the countdown clock -

Leah: And just in case you were wondering how long it is till the London Olympics, they've got this massive clock in London's Trafalgar Square to remind everyone. They've covered all bases.

Back in the studio Leah and Ricky look at each other (see screenshot below)

Leah and Ricky on Newsround
Leah: Ooohhh dear. Not quite all bases .. (Ricky shakes his head in agreement)

Leah: .. because since I was there, the clock's actually broken

Ricky: (shocked at just hearing the news from Leah) Nooooo ... it hasn't!

Leah: But I'm sure someone will get there soon to fix it

Ricky: Hopefully. Right, now we asked some of you what you think about the Olympics ....

Yesterday's Newsround included Sonali's explanation of nuclear power. Taken together with Brian Cox's Wonders of the Universe series, it really does look like the BBC is dumbing down science at the moment.

Is homosexuality un-African? That's was the title of a BBC World Service Debate, first broadcast yesterday. Why choose that topic for debate when they might have asked so many other questions. They could have debated whether ginger hair is un-African; or whether having blue eyes is un-African; or whether being white is un-African.

Fifteen months ago the BBC asked 'Should homosexuals face execution?' That debate caused considerable offence, and Peter Horrocks explained the BBC's rationale. In doing so Peter acknowledged that the question was too stark, especially when taken out of context and circulated on social media. Nevertheless he believed it was "an absolutely legitimate debate to have."

Peter Horrocks: That wasn't just the BBC plucking that question out of the air. It was because it's being considered by the Ugandan parliament. The context within the programme was absolutely clear. The context within the website was absolutely clear. But if you just take that headline away and say "the BBC is asking this," I can absolutely understand why some people were significantly offended by that, and we apologise for that, and that's something which we're going to learn from.

What exactly was learnt from the December 2009 controversy? If they'd been a bit more thoughtful, they might have posed the question in a different way. Instead of asking 'Is homosexuality un-African?' and thereby lending credence to the notion and reinforcing prejudice, the BBC could have challenged their intended audience by calling the debate 'Is homophobia un-African?'

So why didn't they choose that title? Perhaps because it would have attracted a smaller audience, or perhaps because David Bahati - the Ugandan MP who wants to legislate the judicial murder of gay people - would be less willing to participate as a panelist. Would that have been such a bad thing? In fact aren't we really back to the question of why the BBC wanted such a debate in the first place?

If ever there was a missed opportunity to make a real advance for kids, Newsround has achieved just that. Pressacker Hannah, accompanied by Newsround reporter, Hayley, went to meet Health Minister Anne Milton to ask why the government wasn't intending to introduce a ban on adults smoking in cars when children are present.

Leah: Now guys listen, last week we told you about a group of kids who were so fed up with adults smoking around children in cars they wanted to get it banned.

Ore: You got in touch, and loads of you agree. So, with the help of presspacker Hannah, Newsround took some of your thoughts to the top to get some answers.

video clip Hayley: ... Research by the British Lung Foundation has shown that smoking in small places like the car is particularly dangerous to children. I've come to Westminster with Hannah, one of the campaigners, because you're going to put some questions to Anne Milton, the minister in charge, aren't you?

Hannah: Yes I am.

Hayley: What are you hoping for?

Hannah: Hopefully there should be a law made so that parents can't smoke in cars with children.

Hannah (questions the minister): We want to know if you're going to ban it.

Anne Milton MP: No we're not going to ban smoking in cars because we think that would be interfering in people's family life .....

Hannah might have pointed out that the concentration of smoke could be far higher in a car than in a workplace, yet smoking at work is banned. She might have asked why the government cares less about the health of children than they do about the 'rights' of grown ups. Hayley explained that kids were often embarrassed to ask parents to stop smoking. But the cheeky minister got away with telling Hannah and Newsround viewers that kids needed to educate their parents.

Hannah said she would carry on fighting, and hoped that making more of a noise would result in a change. This seems like an ideal topic where the UK children's commissioners could get involved. It would be nice to see them on Newsround more often.

Should women be allowed to wear the niqab in public places, or is the French government right to ban it? That was the first topic on Newsround last Friday at 5pm.

Ore: Most of you are used to being told what you can and can't wear at school. But imagine being banned from wearing certain clothes all the time.

Hayley: Yep. In France it will soon be illegal to wear the niqab - the Muslim face veil - in any public place. It's meant to make women feel more free, but some people say it might well do the opposite.

The video report which followed failed to give a voice to those in the Muslim community, such as Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, who favour a secular society where women and men are treated as equals. Newsround's report seemed to give more weight to those opposed to the French law, and ended by saying similar legislation is unlikely in Britain .

Tomorrow, 8th March, is International Women's Day (centenary year)

CBBC ought to take a few lessons in accuracy from Newsround Blog.

Hayley reported the Queen's forthcoming visit to Ireland. Someone at Newsround seems to be confused between Queen Elizabeth's dad George VI, and her granddad George V who visited Ireland in 1911. The script error occurred on bulletins today, but at least the accompanying film clip was of George V.

Two former Newsround presenters have been in the news recently. On Monday there was Helen Skelton's tightrope walk at Battersea Power Station, which will be the subject of a Blue Peter Special next week.

And on Tuesday it was reported that Lizo Mzimba will receive "substantial damages" and costs from The Independent after it repeated false allegations in The Tab - a Cambridge student newspaper which, itself, had already apologised for the untruthful story.

Mr Mzimba said: "I'm very pleased that this matter has finally been resolved."

After months of problems, it's nice to see Newsround video clips working more smoothly on broadband.

Here's the clip of Helen Skelton's amazing tightrope walk between the chimneys of the old Battersea Power Station. Helen presented Newsround a few years back, but now works on Blue Peter.

With 'gay' being a commonly heard word in schools, it's been something of an anomaly for it to be so infrequently heard on children's TV. But that's been the reality over the past few years, and CBBC's de facto policy undoubtedly bolsters heteronormativity and the concomitant belief that being gay is not a good thing.

Ballet Boys, in the 'My Life' series of documentaries, made a welcome change as it challenged stereotypes and broached the issue of sexual orientation in an honest, responsible and open-minded way such as used to be the norm on BBC children's TV.

The documentary focussed on three brothers from Liverpool who are all passionate about dancing and want to become professional ballet dancers. The eldest is Jamie (13), then Michael (11) and the youngest Adam (9)

The brothers have had to be strong in the face of taunts and bullying. Michael, we were told, has struggled the most with people who think that ballet is something that's not very manly. He needed to decide whether he could ignore the bullies and try and win a place at Elmhurst with his older brother.

Michael: Boys what do football call us gay, but then they say it's not gay for girls to do football, which it isn't. But then it's gay for boys to do a more girlish type sport. I mean more girls do it than boys, not it's more girlish cos you've got to be dead strong.

Narrator: In Michael's school dance largely means street dance, not ballet.

Michael: I feel like saying well dance is dance. It doesn't matter what shape or form. It's like pasta can come with tuna or tomato - it's still pasta. Toast - butter, no butter; dark, not dark - it's still toast. A boy, whether he's gay or not gay, he is still a boy.

Jamie also had something to say about the taunts.

Jamie: I did say to my mate, I said, "if you can give me one good reason, what's wrong with doing ballet?" He goes, "Yeah, cos it's gay," and that's all he could say. And I was just like, "personally, obviously, I don't think it's gay." I said "it's nothing wrong being gay." I said, "apart from that, do you know - just think about it - apart from that, one good reason?" And he couldn't think of one thing. So actually if the worst thing someone could say about us is "Ah you do ballet," then that's saying quite a lot of good things about us in a way.

Ballet Boys is a definite step in the right direction. But is a boy, who's perhaps hiding his sexual orientation from his parents and friends, likely to watch a programme about ballet? He might well prefer to be seen watching a programme about football. And that's why CBBC's continuing failure to tackle homophobia in sports is so wrong, and why the failure to report on the Justin Campaign on Saturday's MOTD Kickabout was an unforgivable omission.

Yesterday was Football v Homophobia Day. But not unexpectedly the Justin Campaign didn't even get a mention on CBBC's MOTD Kickabout, or for that matter on BBC1's Football Focus.

Justin Fashanu was a black player, but against the odds and despite racist attitudes in the sport at the time he managed to rise to the top of his profession to become the first British footballer to transfer for £1 million. Racism is far less common in football now than it was 20 years ago, but the same is not true of homophobia - the prejudice which led to his downfall. Saturday would have been Justin's 50th birthday.

We were told, before its launch, that MOTD Kickabout would focus on all things footie. On 29 January the programme highlighted sexist attitudes in the sport. So why did CBBC pass up a perfect chance yesterday to highlight homophobia? They could have easily found time if they wanted to. This is just the latest in a long list of lost opportunities.

As noted several times previously on Newsround Blog, the BBC encourages yobbish attitudes. On Friday's Newsround and repeated on yesterday's MOTD Kickabout -

Boy: ManUnited fans you'd better watch out. You get less cocky, because we're gonna crush you into the ground like a piece of dirt!

There are, however, a few positive signs on BBC children's TV. Ballet Boys, which was shown on Saturday (BBC2 at 11.15am) broke CBBC's long-standing practice regarding use of the 'g' word. More about this in a future blog.

Is the Government doing enough to combat homophobic bullying?

In June last year the Prime Minister said "... we'll never really tackle homophobic bullying in schools, we'll never tackle homophobic issues in the workplace just by passing laws. It's culture change and behavioural change that is needed as well ..."

But yesterday Mr Cameron seemed to suggest, when trying to cut welfare benefits, that legislation is a means to achieve cultural change.

David Cameron: I want to make something clear. The [Welfare Reform] Bill is not an exercise in accounting. It is about changing our culture ...

So perhaps the Government ought to do more in terms of legislating to help bring about a change in homophobic attitudes. Certainly faster movement towards equality would help.

'Should homosexuals face execution?' might sound like a debate on Radio Uganda, but regrettably it was in fact a question posed by our very own BBC in December 2009. Rather than simply issue a fulsome and unreserved apology, the BBC has sought to compensate for the insult in other ways.

Last night's BBC Three documentary: World's Worst Place to be Gay? was presented by Scott Mills, who began the film showing what he does best: DJing in clubs. Scott claimed that being gay simply wasn't an issue in most places where he works.

Scott: So, I'm gay. Big deal you might think. And in this country it really isn't.

Maybe Scott ought to question why 'gay' is now such a rarely heard word on BBC children's TV.

Scott: Although things still aren't perfect, we've come a long way.

In fact BBC children's TV has gone backwards in terms of lesbian and gay representation. Scott and other BBC employees might want to make enquiries as to why this has happened.

Scott: In other parts of the world homosexuals are still hated and discriminated against. A wave of intense homophobia is washing across Africa, where homosexuality is already illegal in 37 countries. It's being fuelled by fundamentalist preachers, intolerant governments and homophobic politicians...

Scott Mills' first impression on arriving in Uganda was that it's a really cool and friendly place. But he soon found out from talking to the population that there was a real hatred of gay people, with some saying homosexuals should be killed. As a result LGB people are disowned by their families and made to live secretly in a slum ghetto.

After undergoing a bizarre ceremony intended to 'cure' his homosexuality Scott decided to find out the views of young Ugandans.

Scott: In western countries it was the young who led the fight against homophobia. So is that where the hope lies in Uganda?

It turned out that the high school kids he spoke to had similar views to the rest of the population, which left Scott rather disheartened.

Scott: It seemed to me that young kids think like this because as soon as they're old enough to learn they're fed an unending diet of anti-gay propaganda.

World's Worst Place to be Gay? on iPlayer till 21 February 2011

Takeover is the theme of CBBC programmes for this half-term. Presumably the channel will be running repeats of programmes like Gimme a Break, Remote Control Star and Project Parent. Of course kids aren't really in charge - it's just a pretence that they are.

Pretence isn't just limited to programme making, it's also a problem on the Internet as Daniel Roche, of Outnumbered and Just William fame found out.

Newsround 5pm this evening -

Ore: Last year some of his mates thought they were chatting to him on Facebook. It turned out they were talking to a complete stranger - someone pretending to be him online.

Leah: Things got serious when the impostor tried to arrange to meet one of Daniel's friends. Now with Safer Internet Day taking place this week, Daniel wanted to tell us his story.

Ricky Eleven-year-old Daniel. Famous for playing cheeky Ben in Outnumbered. He's never signed up to Facebook - he knows you have to be 13 or over to have an account. So imagine how surprised he was when his friends said they found him online. It turned out to be a fake Facebook page created by a stranger.

Daniel: They mentioned if I had a Facebook account and I said 'no.' They said 'oh' and they showed it to me and mum and we were a bit bewildered and we kind of looked at it a bit and we researched it and he was pretending to be me.

Ricky: The Facebook impostor contacted some of Daniel's schoolfriends, and even tried to arrange a meeting with one girl.

Those lucky enough to have a very good Internet connection can watch the full report here. Last year's Newsround Special about keeping safe on the Internet: Caught in the Web is available here, and is being repeated at 4.55pm tomorrow on BBC One.

What is it about the BBC that prompts them to seek out an anti-diversity view nearly every time an LGBT-related story makes the news? It doesn't matter who, as long as they've a contrary opinion, the BBC will use them to 'balance' the report.

Remember that report about Elton John's new baby? Former Newsround presenter, Lizo Mzimba told viewers that "not everyone is pleased" about it and then, to prove his point, we saw extracts from an interview with Stephen Green, in which Mr Green suggested that gay people treat babies as designer accessories. Green said that "to deprive a baby of a mother" is like an act of pure selfishness.

Anyone who saw that news item on 28th December 2010 would have noticed that the interview was captioned with Stephen Green's name, and below that his organisation "Christian Voice." Without knowing any background about his 'Christian' organisation, viewers might have assumed Green is representative of traditional Christian family values. However thanks to some good investigative journalism on the part of the generally homophobic Daily Mail, the truth about Stephen Green is out. In view of which I suspect Mr Green is unlikely to be invited by the BBC to proffer an opinion again. Perhaps friend and soulmate Melanie Phillips will offer him a shoulder to cry on.

Can't the BBC learn a lesson? Let's hope Newsround covers LGBT History Month, which begins today, and without the usual BBC "balance."

Balance? Will CBBC ever get it: LGBT History Month is an attempt to put right the heteronormative indoctrination all kids receive from Day 1 of their lives. Or as Melanie Phillips tendentiously put it recently: the ruthless campaign by the gay rights lobby to destroy the very ­concept of normal sexual behaviour.

With the London Olympics just around the corner you'd think CBBC would want to make its output cover a more diverse range of a sports. But, contrary to common sense, someone decided to do away with Sportsround and concentrate on footy. I like football but I'd be disappointed if we don't see changes before too long, and certainly in good time for the Olympics.

For its first three weeks MOTD Kickabout was fronted by Ore Oduba, but Sonali was in charge today. The first item looked back at the recent sexist remarks by Sky commentators Richard Keys and Andy Gray. MOTD Kickabout guests Dan Walker and John Farnworth both felt that the Sky presenters were wrong and had outdated views. Walker said that he'd been taught years ago that you're never alone with a microphone.

After the full-time whistle Sonali asked Dan Walker how MOTD Kickabout compares with Football Focus -

Dan: Much better soft toys. And you're far more attractive than Lawro as well, so ..

Now why does all this remind me of a controversial Yorkie advert.