[strollfan]

The rules are pretty simple: if you are not a prominent person, and are something like a member of a political party but don’t draw attention to it, then that’s fine. Even if it is in the public domain and “known” by the public that you are a member/whatever.

On the other hand, if you appear to be keeping yourself in the public eye heightening your own profile in large part due to your role at the BBC, then using this profile to draw attention to political issues publicly (such as via social media) this crosses a line.

And before anybody says it’s difficult to know where “the line” is; obviously, you have to assume that if in doubt, don’t say it. It’s as simple as that. Nobody is going to go mad just because they can’t put their every thought on Twitter. And if they don’t like it they are free to leave the BBC. If they want to do that there appear to be several other media organisations in the commercial sector which will probably be glad to have them and have much more relaxed policies.

All of this is true regardless of who is in government or who the presenter is. Nobody should be “bigger than the BBC” and think the rules don’t apply to them. Nobody should be given a free pass for breaching the guidelines but being “morally right”. The BBC has to represent everyone and the BBC’s staff have to do everything they can to be relatable to the whole country, so can’t be picking sides in any political disputes. Otherwise, the appeal and impartiality of the BBC itself is damaged.

Do you really think Carol Vorderman is in the public eye "in large part" due to a weekly show on Radio Wales? Again, your points are valid when dealing with individuals who work in news or current affairs - but Vorderman is not that, and her show does not deal with those issues. Why should she be fired for opinions that she holds entirely in her private life and does not attempt to bring to work? I understand the policy entirely, I just don't think the policy is justified and I don't think the BBC should be in the business of controlling their talent's speech when not at work. The vast majority of the country have no interest in being outraged by Vorderman's political views when not at work, so why is the BBC now in the business of appealing to the very extremes?