SHOULD we be fussed that the BBC’s political editor met the Prime Minister twice just before last year’s indyref but didn’t meet Alex Salmond once, as Whitehall revealed last weekend?

For many, the idea Nick Robinson was o’er cosy with Number 10 has come as no surprise. After the 2010 election a Facebook petition called on the BBC to sack its political editor for being “consistently unable to disguise his bias in favour of the Conservative Party”. The petitioners said Robinson compared Cameron to Disraeli while describing Downing Street as a “Labour-free zone”, Gordon Brown as the “unelected Prime Minister”, the Conservatives as having “won” the election (when there was no outright winner) and the alternative rainbow coalition as a “coalition of losers”.

It all sounded so subjective Aunty paid no attention – even though the youthful Robinson founded the Young Conservatives branch in his home town of Macclesfield and went on to become president of the Oxford University Conservative Association.

C’mon – we’ve all done weird things in our teens. And in any case he was in good company. A glance at key appointments in recent years shows the route between the BBC’s Political Unit and the Conservative Party has become very well worn.

Nick Robinson’s senior producer left the BBC to become special advisor to George Osborne in 2012 and three years later a former vice-chairman of the Federation of Conservative Students became editor of BBC TV’s political programmes. Meanwhile David Cameron’s current press secretary is a former BBC news editor and Boris Johnson recruited a BBC political correspondent to head his media team, replacing him with another BBC news editor in 2012. Indeed, the recently retired chair of the BBC Trust Lord Patten was himself a former Conservative cabinet minister.

Let’s face it. Once you’ve hired a former Tory party activist because his political involvement is no handicap but instead gives him insight and “good contacts”, the rest is a mere formality. Of course Robinson hob-nobbed with David Cameron. Of course he met him in the last few weeks of the indyref. So what? That’s his job.

And there’s some merit to that argument. Broadcasting needs people with nous, experience and involvement. Too often inexperienced, diffident newsreaders have become wide-eyed, bushy-tailed political correspondents who let the wily old foxes of political parties run rings round them. Folk with a political track record can be followed for the slightest signs of bias while those who profess none can be as hard to believe as they are to watch.

But there’s one big snag.

BBC players like Nick Robinson don’t come from a variety of political backgrounds, they come by and large from one – the Conservative Party. The BBC’s instinctive default is to discuss the opinions, perspectives and darlings of the Establishment.

So it’s not surprising the indyref fast became the perfect storm.

One “side” represented the Conservative Party, tradition, the status quo, the great and good of London and “giants” of the business community. The other “side” represented upstarts and nobodies. Now I’ll grant you, no-one was uncouth enough to say that directly. The BBC courteously interviewed many independence supporters including myself and I’m sure I was given equal time with “No” rivals.

My enduring beef is simple – who makes news and what constitutes balance? All too often during the indyref, the forces of the Establishment were the only permissible news-makers and balance was the lowest common denominator. Thus in the absence of “No” rallies, there could be no coverage of the burgeoning “Yes” movement. In the absence of a blockbuster maiden speech by a “No” MP, there could be no coverage of Mhairi Black.

Meanwhile, David Cameron – as the very embodiment of the Establishment – made news by simply breathing. When he went to Shetland in the midst of the indyref the Prime Minister led every network news bulletin despite saying absolutely nothing. Later I walked out of a Radio 5 Live programme which played 40 minutes of unmediated Cameron propaganda as if it was a public service announcement or tablet of stone.

Compare the treatment of Alex Salmond. In August 2014 Nick Robinson had a high-profile confrontation with him over the possible relocation of RBS, at a live press conference. Afterwards the former SNP leader said Robinson should be “embarrassed and ashamed” of his coverage and Robinson said journalists had faced “Putin-like” treatment by Yes campaigners.

All that really happened was a robust challenge to BBC news values by scunnered, self-educated Scots without the deference of previous generations.

Of course since May things have changed – slightly.

Nicola Sturgeon’s popularity, Labour’s weakness, the SNP’s massive win in the May elections and its status as third party in Westminster have all shifted the perceptions of BBC high heid ’uns. Scots are no longer out of mind because we are no longer completely out of sight.

That alone will not heal the rift between Yes supporters and Aunty. The BBC could surprise everyone by opting to run all network Scottish political coverage from Scotland, and produce a Scottish Six O’Clock TV news before the May elections. They might call that impossible. I’d call it a start.