IT is in little, unguarded phrases that we reveal ourselves.

This thought came to me on Monday evening as I listened to Radio 4 while making a curry.

Just before 6pm, weather forecaster Louise Lear told listeners what to expect for the day ahead. Unfortunately, it was bad news, with sunshine giving way to showers.

As she said: "We have got a change afoot, and it’s already starting to occur across Scotland and Northern Ireland."

Perhaps, as a chippy Ulsterman, my ears are too attuned to the slightest of slights. But I heard in that phrase, the casual, unspoken bias against those who live in far off places of which the BBC in London knows little.

Surely, if it’s already raining in Scotland and Northern Ireland then for some of "us" the change is not "afoot" - it’s already happening. So who is the "we" for whom rain is coming rather than occurring?

Could it be possible that "we" are the people,like Ms Lear, who live in London?

You might think I’m being overly picky, but I detected in her phrasing the assumption that people who listen to Radio 4 don’t live in Scotland or Northern Ireland.

And fair play to the BBC, it has at least recognised that it has a problem. Last month a BBC Trust report found the corporation was "falling short of its own highstandards" in reporting the regions and nations inhabited by its licence fee payers.

In particular the report found that the BBC often covered health and education stories without mentioning that the policy changes would affect England alone.

This most glaring of errors seems to have been corrected. The BBC has learnt the word devolution - for example when it carefully noted last week that the upcoming council workers’ strike will affect "England, Wales and Northern Ireland".

Scottish bins will be collected as normal.

But the BBC still refers to "the Government" as the one led by Gordon Brown, without realising that there is another government on this island - also led by a Scot,but this time Alex Salmond in Edinburgh.

The Beeb, with a massive per centage of its staff based in London, struggles to reflect this diverse and complicated country.

Watch BBC news bulletins and you wouldn’t guess that Britain has a manufacturing industry - mainly based in the Midlands and the North - though you will here plenty about London-based cultural events and Westminster tittle-tattle.

Indeed the North of England - an area which contains many of the UK’s large cities - barely gets a look in on the BBC news, unless we are unfortunate enough to host a particularly grisly murder.

The Beeb has a long way to go before its "national" news lives up to its name. But it is at least trying.

All media outlets are in some way biased towards the place where the journalists are based.

It’s not just a problem for the BBC in London. I have a friend from Sheffield who refers bitterly to Look North as Look Leeds.

And some of you reading this in the Holme and Colne Valleys may point your fingers accusingly at the Examiner as well.

Mostly it’s not outright bias or indifference, it’s just the practicality that reporting what’s happening on your doorstep is quicker, easier and cheaper than venturing further afield.

But for the BBC the problem is all the greater because it is a public broadcaster. People either choose to buy the Examiner or don’t, but anyone with a TV must pay for the Beeb.

With this huge source of cash comes a huge responsibility for the corporation - to report what’s going on in everyone’s backyard.#

And, that throwaway phrase by one of its presenters, shows there is still a long way to go.

But keep on trying, guys. Change is afoot.

HOW much would you pay a man you’ve never met to help him impress his girlfriend?

The answer is nearly £10,000 - and we all paid it.

That’s how much it cost for Prince William to fly a helicopter to his girlfriend Kate Middleton’s home in April. Apparently he circled the house outside Reading while Kate and her parents looked on. 

I hope she was suitably smitten, because the Ministry of Defence revealed this week that that little stunt cost the taxpayer £8,716.

I don’t know about you, but I feel comforted knowing that my hard-earned taxes are going to such a deserving cause.

But the Berkshire sortie was just one of young William’s vital training exercises.

He also made a trip round to Dad’s place in Highgrove - cost just shy of £12,000 - and flew to Granny’s pad in Sandringham - the bill for that one was a little under £5,000.

Then there was Operation Wedding In Northumbria, for which we paid £18,500. And last, but by no means least, there was the trip to the stag party on the Isle of Wight - complete with stop-off in London to pick up the wee brother - which cost nearly £9,000.

Add it all up and you’ve got more than £50,000 of our money spent on the five trips.

Is it just me, or does this smack ever so slightly of special treatment for His Royal Highness? I doubt the average RAF helicopter pilot gets to treat a Chinook like his own property.

But really, there’s little sense in getting wound up at this scandalous waste of public money. The prince’s entire military training - at who knows how much cost - is a waste.

It’s perfectly clear that he won’t get to see conflict. He will never test his flying skills - honed in the badlands of Berkshire - in Helmand province or Basra. Like his father, he won’t be put in harm’s way because he’s heir to the throne. The spares on the other hand - princes Harry and Andrew - have gone to war.

But I can’t see Prince William flying anywhere more hostile than Northumbria.