Nothing should be taken for granted
David Cameron's call for the BBC licence fee to be frozen is significant. Not for its impact on ordinary people - which would be rather small - but for the signal it sends.
Firstly, to the BBC, which is being told: your days of expansion are at an end, and you won't be able to use the downturn to expand further.
Secondly, he's telling the rest of the media industry: we know that you're suffering and that you're angry at what you see as unfair competition from the BBC.
But thirdly and most importantly, it is a signal to the public sector that nothing should be taken for granted and that he, David Cameron, is willing to say no. If he's ready to freeze the licence fee, this question is raised: what is his intention for government spending for which he is directly responsible?
Look again at Friday's speech, and you'll see that the Tory leader's main apology was for basing his spending plans on government growth projections.
He's clearly intending to change that; the only question is when he'll tell us what exactly he means.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~34~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
And, what, pray is the Government's response to this statement?
Complain about this comment
The change Cameron is advertising will just be a change from tired Labour. It looks less and less likely that there will be any change in the tired old Tory policy of: if times are hard slash and burn public servces.
Its well known that many Tories see the BBC as a kind of left wing think tank, even Labour in its centre right position sees it this way.
Given the present economic climate the Tories are likely to completely rethink the last vestiges of the Municiapl socialist era such as the NHS and the BBC. However Labour also want to do the same.
My own gut feeling is that however bad Labour is if the Tories get in it will be disasterous for this country as a whole. The kind caring face of Cameron placed like a mask over the Medeusa's head of Toryism. Lift the mask and we will all be turned to stone.
Complain about this comment
And about time too.
What is the divine riht of the BBC to go on spending taxpayers' money.
Is Jonathan Ross still not paid enough for larking around?
Are the nine new channels still not enough?
Whenare the news channels going to revert to their real function of news reporting rather than the blatant opinion shaping that they attempt at the moment?
This is a welcome first strike from Cameron and it will be hilarious to see newlabour defend the out of controll public sector spending of other departments like the NHS and Education; not just the bloated BBC.
Call an election.
Complain about this comment
Cameron is right on with this one. Expanding the public sector when all around the private sector belts are being tightened with lead to friction within the community. If people see the public sector continuing to get larger pay rises and better pensions that the rest of us it will lead down the road of unrest.
I know the public sector have had to catch up in the past 12 years but it has now and these increased demands on the public purse cannot be allowed to continue... until such a time comes as we can share the proceeds of growth again.
Complain about this comment
We need a Gov't spending freeze for 5 years with 50% of any increase in revenues being used to pay down Labour's debt pile and 50% aimed at cutting taxes for small businesses to get unemployment down.
In 5 years time improvements in public services can be paid out of increases in tax revenues from a growing economy with at least 50% still going towards Labour massive deb't pile.
In 10 years we'll be back to a sound economy based on sound money, not Gordon's funny munny!
It will be a long hard slog...........but it's great to get the first mutmerings of truth about our position and prospects as a country from a candid Politician. Well done Dave.
let truth be your guiding light for the next decade not hollow boasts...ala boom and must style!
Complain about this comment
A very small step in the right direction.
Don't forget the licence payer is also lumbered with a 'digital switch-over surcharge'.
And ofcom (supposedly the protector of the public) are suggesting that the BBC should keep receiving this - even AFTER the switch over is complete.
You can keep your hands out of my wallet Nick.
Complain about this comment
Well, the starting point is what he said last time, which was that overall, spending would increase, but not as fast as Labour state in their plans (though we all know Labour cannot now achieve what they say in their plans anyway).
Labour would like to portray the Tories as "nasty", of course, so that when they come to power, some awful hobgoblins will creep out from behind nice Dave and cut all sorts of vital services, simply out of a combination of spite, political purism and because it is fun to hurt people. That seems to be a strand in Labour's propaganda theme. I'm sure there will be some troll postings below that will assert this nastiness as if it is already in the smallprint of the manifesto.
The truth will be different, of course.
I expect a big squeezing out of projects like ID cards and other big computer infrastructure systems. I expect an effort to control the costs of PFI contracts. I would be very sad if there wasn't a push to deliver far better value out of suppliers to departments like Health and Education, where there is plenty of room for improvement. I also expect we will be drawing back gradually from our existing international commitments.
But that's it. Benefits can't be reduced. Reducing the numbers in receipt of benefits will actually cost money in the short term. The effectiveness of education and health can't be reduced either. A lot of public infrastructure costs less to keep going than to close down (e.g. libraries).
So no nastiness to be expected, otherwise there will be riots and the Conservatives won't get back in in 2015. Just a recognition that Labour's record includes a significant degree of carelessness and inefficiency over the operation of publicly funded enterprises, and a clear indication that a lot better can and will be done.
Complain about this comment
The upshot of Hutton was crude threats by HMG to the BBC over increases in the license fee.
Now 'Dave' is setting about them too.
As an outsider, I suspect that things have been very cosy at the BBC for a very long time.
Ordinary people probably don't know, for example, that the BBC's pension scheme is one of the finest in the land, ranking alongside those other mostly unloved public servants - MP's.
To its credit however, the Beeb has seen all this coming for some time, hence its commercial moves over the past couple of decades.
The Beeb will survive Dave's onslaught but the days of milk and honey are drawing to a close.
PS. None of this will probably affect those bods like Nick that you see on the google-box or many of the top backroom people - they are probably mostly all freelancers.
Complain about this comment
Sorry, in my message at 7, I meant international MILITARY commitments, of course. Typing and thinking not fully in sync today.
Complain about this comment
Freeze it? How about *reducing* it?
There's no need for four main Beeb channels, especially when tat like Hole in the Wall gets shown, or some of the downright unfunny and low quality stuff BBC 3 shows alongside repeats of Family Guy and Dr Who.
Out of the hours of output of BBC3, there's only really been Gavin and Stacy and Being Human that's been any good. The rest are either repeats (Dr Who, Family Guy) or mediocre stuff like My (insert embarrassing condition here) Body. Even the new Corden and Horne material is tosh.
Each increase in the licence fee seems to correspond with an increasingly lowbrow output.
BBC4 shows some good stuff, programs that you used to find on BBC2, but that is the television equivalent of the hinterlands. Is this really what Auntie wants to be? Purveyors of Lowest Common Denominator TV, with anything vaguely arty or educational shoehorned in where no one watches?
Complain about this comment
'Almost three quarters of British people believe there should be a public inquiry into the invasion of Iraq, an opinion poll suggests. '
BBC News
I think it can be taken for granted that David Cameron won't be asking for a public inquiry into the invasion of Iraq.
Complain about this comment
Cameron's ability to think outside of the box is one of his greatest assets I'm sure New Labour is finding. Nick rightly recognises the true symbolism of his comment. And, who knows, once the necessary but, for some, unpalatable truth begins to dawn, it is likely that the public will see the need to ditch the Sacred Cow of an endlessly funded, constantly increasing BBC, amongst many others.
Mega-salaried town hall bureaucrats should start looking over their shoulders perhaps also. Cameron will find vast swathes of the public sector, and the BBC, sitting like ripe friut waiting to be picked off, squashed and turned into a nice pie for the delectation and delight of the struggling electorate.
Complain about this comment
We have to be pretty niaive to think that public spending can continue on its present course during what looks like a period of austerity and high unemployment for years to come.
We have a government who during the good times expanded the public sector into a monster and now finds it almost impossible to control.
Where do they start weeding out the wastage which has become endemic?
It would be a massive undertaking which has been tried but abandoned in the past because of union objections. So much for state control.
Yet the money will no longer be there to pay for it in its present form unless taxation is increased to mind boggling levels or the level of printed money increases dramatically.
Neither are options without further damage to the economy or what will be left of it.
Privatisation of services seems to be the only option with the essential services such as military NHS and education remaining under government control.
This is a mammoth task so the plans need to be put into place right now.
Better to have leaner meaner public services than none at all.
Complain about this comment
Hmmm.... missed a trick here - the licence fee shouldn't be frozen, it should be abolished.
Why should we continue to be forced to fund massive amounts of waste & one-sided journalism?!
BBC Waste Money - It's What We Do.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
Give DC some credit at least for signalling his intentions to make cutbacks in the public sector, which is more than GB is doing. DC cannot do anything until he sees the books. Nobody says what their budget is until they see what`s coming in and what`s going out.
GB knows full which ever party wins the election they are going to have to make massive cut backs; because of the debt this country has accrued.
I personally don`t think GB is going to risk leaving calling an election until 2010. If he does he will then have to go through two budgets. I would not be suprised if he does his usual, "smoke and mirrors," budget this year and goes to the country in May 2009
If GB waits until 2010 to call an election his options of hiding the consequences of the enoromous public debt to the electorate will be about zero. This year he may just get away with it; but another 12 months of poor returns on savings, cut backs in the public sector, a decreasing job market and the inevitable big tax hikes in 2010 all points to an election in 2009. Also I don`t think he will be able to hold his party together for another year. Labour aren`t really known for its unity once the going gets tough and Brown is really running out of talent for cabinet posts if he got rid of those plotting a coup.
Complain about this comment
Nicholas:
I also wouldnt rule out an element of payback either for cosying up to New Labour either since the Gilligan affair....
Complain about this comment
Nick - I hope you're right about all the things Cameron might mean when talking about freezing the licence fee.
But WOW! That's an awful lot to infer from just one thing the guy has said.
Complain about this comment
Anyone who does not think there is going to be massive cuts in public spending in the near future is a fool to themselves.
The state is going to need every penny it can get given the debts the current government has run up so there will have to be significant restructuring of budgets.
I don't think Cameron will go far enough but even then it will be too far for many.
Complain about this comment
Blimey if the licence fee is frozen the mods will never get round to authorising comments :oP
Complain about this comment
Good for David Cameron. It is absolutely absurd that Jeremy Paxman is on one million pounds plus a year. He needs to be de-leveraged along with all the other excesses of the era. And fast.
The risible Paul Heiney was opinionating while reviewing the papers on Radio 4 yesterday that blogging feedback on articles and blogs such as this were a monopoly of mr angry and that "something must be done" to stop people (such as everyone here!) having their say. Feudal clap trap from one of its least impressive gate keepers!
The world has changed. Time for the BBC to change with it.
Complain about this comment
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
The likes of Jonathan Ross will be ******* devastated... although all it'll mean in practice is quality programmes such as Yellowstone will be shelved as they still have the wasters under watertight contracts.
Will they still be able to afford you Nick?
Complain about this comment
It's about time ! The public sector (BBC included) may think it can sail on regardless, but everyone must face up to the fact that it has become much too bloated under Labour. In fact, given the huge increase in public debt, the public sector must shrink back to levels much lower than in anyone's memory.
Complain about this comment
So, 'former Carlton PR man attacks BBC for some easy headlines'. Good to see Cameron is developing the agenda. Hardly newsworthy is it? For once I agree with the LibDems.
Complain about this comment
Yes that sounds about right lets stop the worlds best provider of TV and websites ..... its un-British to be a success. Eton was it?
Complain about this comment
What makes you think this is such a profound decision, Nick? If this is an example of his future pronouncements on policy, I've lost interest already. He is so predictable.
Complain about this comment
I am afraid those of us who are not enamoured with all of the BBC's output find it galling that it can justify its youth orientated output aimed at a section of the population that probably do not spend its time watching television in the first place.
There are flagship channels which deserve protection Radio 4 and BBC2 are gems but why do we need Radio 1 and 2 when the commercial sectors can compete on equal terms?
Why do we need such duplication in the news service? News 24 and the main BBC1 news broadcasts should be one and the same and why do we have to have different funky news broadcasts on BBC3? Every major event there are representatives from each news programme, this could all be rationalised.
If all other sectors of society [apart from the public sector] are having to make cuts , so should the BBC and I would go further than David Cameron and actually look at reducing the BBC license fee – I doubt the programme quality would suffer much.
The BBC represents the worst excesses of the public sector, unable to regulate itself or act in a manner befitting the times.
Complain about this comment
In the digital age it will be possible to identify all BBC consumers, as the analog signal will be shut off and the only way to listen or watch will require a subscription to BT, Sky or cable. At present we have an entirely unsatisfactory body called TV Licensing that employs all sorts of intimidatory tactics against the general population at large demanding payment with not much justification other than the blithe assumption - everyone watches TV!
Cameron should go further and link a TV License to the what the viewer actually watches. When a TV subscription is taken out if all BBC channels are chosen, then the subscriber pays the full licence. If only some channel a partial amount is paid; if none then no licence. The licence could also be collected as part of the subscription service with the digital provider.
Even with a reduced rate offering the income to the BBC might actually rise. The other benefit is the days of taking someone to court over non payment of licence would be over, as the digital provider would simply switch off the signal. Similarly some of the commercial channels could get more of the licence fee income based on real viewing figures, as existing figures are based on surveys.
The BBC/gov would then need to decide on overseas charging and the internet use such as this site. Will the BBC radio World Service continue to be broadcast on short wave? As someone who used to work abroad in the pre-internet era, the BBC performed an invaluable service and is much appreciated by those who do not always have access to truthful reporting.
Complain about this comment
To base anything on the creative figures that come out of the government these days would be madness.
Far better to say we don't believe the figures and are unable to make detailed plans.....that would be prudent and lay the emphasis at Darlings door to come clean because atm its just unbudgeted spend spend spend from No11 with no plan involved......
Complain about this comment
Cameron's advisers are very clever. What he has said in the speeches you mention is precisely nothing. He is too late to get the BBC licence fee reduced until next year - but he is paying a little back to Murdock for his nice Med. trip to his yacht last year. As for apologising - he has nothing to apologise for so it has cost him nothing. He must like baked beans as he is very wet and windy at present.
Complain about this comment
I agree that there is a signal from David Cameron. It's called common sense.
It was stated recently that advertising on ITV was down, and I'm glad Mr Cameron has kept his finger on the pulse.
The ball is in the BBC court now.
As for his spending plans, Mr Cameron is going to have to apply more same common sense, and he'll have to be careful in his timing of announcements, or the government will take his party ideas and make them their own!
That goes for the Libs too!
Complain about this comment
This is really worrying and confirms my long-held fears that if elected the Tories would do real damage to the BBC and turn it into yet another rubbish media service devoted to the mindless celeb populist culture. Whatever you do David, just please please lay off Radio 3 & 4, currently the only remaining route to sane thinking in these troubled times.
Complain about this comment
Unless Cameron is politically naive, he will keep his powder dry for as long as possible and even then he will have real presentational problems.
He has a definite dilemma on this. Brown has constructed a huge and growing client state comprising public sector workers, people on benefits and credits and the families of all of them.
It will be easy for Brown to play to that audience and tough for Cameron to avoid spooking them.
This state reliant client base has been expanded by design, not by accident. Brown set out to grow the public sector at the expense of the private and to move government support for individuals from the safety net of its original intention to a fishing net.
It is hugely damaging and ultimately unsustainable but turkeys don't vote fro Christmas.
Complain about this comment
David Cameron I am sure will answer the question by stating that the economy at this point in time needs to be treated with prudency.If this was put into practise at the BBC, then there would be no need to raise the licence fee. but Iam afraid over the past year with the Jonathan Ross afair coming to mind, Stable Door and Horse comes to the fore.
Complain about this comment
Cameron is sending exactly the right messages.
Public funded bodies and government need to do more with less.
The reality is that we can no longer afford bloated organisations.
As for the BBC brand - this must be protected - however, it is time that the BBC took a long hard look at itself and came up with proposals for change, before someone forces drastic change on the BBC.
The cultural bias that pervades BBC news and political content on a number of topics means that there are a lot of people who are very willing to see very deep and radical change within the BBC.
Ditto radical change and cost control with respect Government departments.
Complain about this comment
2 Alfred Earnest Ramsey
My message 7, para 2.
Your post isn't exactly original.
You might at least have tried to think up a logical reason why the Conservatives would like to destroy the NHS, rather than creating a bit of gothic imagery and then hoping your more gullible readers will fill in the gaps.
As I said in 7, the effectiveness of the NHS cannot be reduced, otherwise there will be riots and the Conservatives will be kicked out in 2014. Even if you reduce them to the basest instinct, the Conservatives have zero motivation to mess with health. Therefore, they won't.
Complain about this comment
In case Labour supporters had not noticed Government income will be somewhere in the region of £100bn less than expenditure. Keep spending more than we earn, a great economic policy, it is not like their is any huge inefficiency in the public sector.
Oh by the way the last Tory government still increased spending in real terms but just reduced the percentage share of GDP.
Complain about this comment
New YouGov poll out:
The result for the YouGov poll is here.
16/03/2009 - Voting intentions, economy and conflict regions [ Sunday Times ] ...
Voting intentions
Labour 30%
Tory 42%
LibDem 16%
Roll On 2010 - less than 15 months to go!
Complain about this comment
Here we go again on the 'Cameron hunting' trail - as a BBC journalist, Nick Robinson is expected to be objective in his reporting but this does not appear to be the case. Blog afer blog all we see is more Tory bashing and praises for Golden Brown!
Complain about this comment
If he's talking about capping the renumerative excesses of Woss, Wogan and the like then he's probably onto a vote-winner - but he needs to be more specific
The problem with past Tory cuts to the public sector is that the highest earners are either protected or packed off with a big payout. The pain falls disproportionately on the clerks, cooks and cleaners who are transferred to an outsourced provider in the name of budget cuts. After the euphamistically-named "Consultation Period" their wages are cut and their workload increased. Those who can afford to do so bale out, the rest stay, demoralised and disaffected.
If Dave is still trying to distance himself from Thatcher and all her evil works then he needs to be more forthcoming about what expenditures and what levels in the hierachy he intends to attack.
Wossie at the Job Centre might just swing it for me. Somebody on 15 or 20K being ground into the dust is just same old Tory.
Complain about this comment
Unlike most broadcasters (who sell viewers to advertisers using programme content as bait) the BBC sells programme content to viewers. This means that the BBC are not in a position to be dictated to by advertisers. Other advertisement-free broadcasting organisations in the world are funded from taxation and so are effectively in the pockets of governments.
The BBC's legendary independence is almost unique among broadcasters.
One thing I want to know, though:
The digital switchover requires the replacement of every TV receiver in the country. (The ones fitted with the appropriate connector can still be used as *displays* for an external *receiver*.) Why was it not mandated before the switchover that every digital receiver must be fitted with a reader for a conditional-access viewing card?
This way, the BBC programmes could have been scrambled; and there would be no need for poison-pen letters, detector vans or enforcement squads. You don't buy the card, you don't get a picture, simple as. Leave the sound in the clear, so that blind people can still listen for free.
Limited-hours viewing cards could also be sold, for people who wanted to watch only a small amount of TV and for whom a full-time licence would prove uneconomical (the same people who do without a TV set at all today). Certain especially important events and public service announcements in times of national emergency could be broadcast in the clear.
It's true that such a change would shift the payment model from per-household to per-set (and recording devices would also need a card in order to record BBC programmes), but this is not utterly insurmountable. A person living alone but having more than one TV set (perhaps one in the living room and another in the bedroom) could buy just one card and swap it between sets as needed.
During the initial consultation, which would necessarily have involved all major players in the broadcasting and setmaking industries, such a system must have been at least mentioned. So who was responsible for rejecting it, and on what grounds?
Complain about this comment
What's this? An attack on my beloved beer and BBC on the same day?
It's Armegeddon.
I'd leave the country but the beer and telly is hopeless abroad.
Complain about this comment
Yes, these are hard times. If the BBC is finding it hard to meet its commitments, like everybody else, there are ways they can economise. For starters, cut the money wasted on Jonathan Ross to the absolute minimum. If he quits, good. Somehow, I don't see commercial stations running after him or making any offers.
Complain about this comment
lets all say
"cut public services, lower taxes for the rich"
Complain about this comment
Anything that will help to reduce the fat salaries of some of these so called celebrity stars is fine by me. We all have to cut our cloth according to our means. The BBC are no different.
Complain about this comment
hmm....there's nothing like a bunch of people speculating about what they *suspect* or *might* be the case. Some really laughable comment here. Not sure they really *deserve* a broadcaster like the BBC.... have you tried ABC? Star - or even Channel 4 recently?
Maybe the BBC should just surrender and let us live on a diet of old Star-TV style repeats, episodes of Friends and partisan reports from the so-called broadsheets.....mind you, given that no-one whips itself as well as the beeb, I suspect someone senior there will be suggesting this shortly.....
Complain about this comment
I am involved with a venture backed private business. In the past 6 months we have made 25% of the staff redundant, taken 15% pay cuts at board level and suspended pension contributions.
Meanwhile our politicians continue to draw full salaries and build up pension rights that ordinary people can only dream of.
Now it seems that the BBC just does not get it either - get real - the economy is a mess and we ALL have to tighten our belts.
I enjoy your radio programs on various aspects of politics but a few days ago when you had Portillo et al pontificating about how to finesse the 'politics' of restraining government department budgets I was driven to distraction.
Instead of playing politics we need some simple action
What Brown or the next government needs to do is say that they are prepared to lead by example, take a pay cut, have their pension contributions suspended and also instigate an immediate 10% pay cut for every civil servant. ( If you wanted to shield the low paid then put a threshold on it )
Only then will I believe that they truly understand what is going on and are prepared to join us in the fight to rescue the economy.
As it is they seem to be content to fight over how far they can get their snouts into the trough !
Can you please ask the next politician you interview if he or she is prepared to lead by example and take a pay cut
Now that would be interesting to hear
Complain about this comment
How is it that freezing the licence fee for the BBC is twisted into something more sinister by our dear Mr Robinson? Did your paymasters at the treasury issue instructions.? I'm surprised benefits, health service etc. wasn't mentioned in the same article , or would that have been just a little bit over the top? God knows if ever there was a need for a curb on public spending, it's now, the BBC needs a considerable paring, as does the expenditure on politicians, equal rights ,focus groups quangos etc. Roll on a chancellor with a big pair of scissors.
Complain about this comment
so he is sorry and then this is the best plan he can come up with ??????????
come on I want David shouting from the rooftops , screaming at PMQ's not looking for a sorry from Gordon, but exposing the Labour government for the sham it is and then detailing exactly how he will start the new system that is needed as the way things are going will never continue
Bet the people who are out of a job , worrying about losing their house and stting there going phew David has sorted it all out so what if we cant eat or afford anything we will be able to put the savings from the TV licence towards a potato
in normal circumstances this story may merit a look but come on for gods sake there is bigger things out there to tackle
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
WOW!
'Dave' has finally had a BIG idea to save the world's economy!!!!!!!
Good grief..................
Complain about this comment
So the Conservatives supported the governments bank bailout to the tune of £1.3 trillion, but is opposed to the BBC charging £3 extra? seems pretty bizarre to me, everyone i've been speaking to today (not scientific obviously) has been saying the same thing as when the VAT cut came, that politicians talk with passion about money which is insignificantly small but say nothing when mind-bogglingly big sums go up in smoke, is there a reason for this Nick?
Complain about this comment
And there I was thinking that public spending helped to stimulate the economy...
Complain about this comment
The public sector can only expand and be sustained by a private sector.
If the private sector shrinks, so must the public sector.
As GB will see, one is dependent on the other, not the other way round.
Reducing public sector reduction of cost does not neccessarily mean reduction of public sector services; it can and should lead to less wastage of money, better management, and greater efficiency.
If we're really lucky, it will mean the abolition of the FSA (replaced by a smaller smarter department), the removal of several pointless quangoes and the disappearance of focus consultancies.
If DC wants to be remebered as one of the greats, start reforming anything in sight; it's way overdue.
Complain about this comment
The BBC wastes money hand over fist. Most news programmes have two news readers -why? This applies to both central and regional stations.
Where else do we have two people doing one persons job. Lets think now, government, Whitehall, the public sector.
The BBC needs to drastically trim its staffing levels, reduce executive pay, make less period dramas, stop showing so many repeats and start showing Match of the Day in HD.
Why isn't MotD shown in HD - doesn't Rupert allow it?
The BBC needs a major overall.
Complain about this comment
But thirdly and most importantly, it is a signal to the public sector that nothing should be taken for granted and that he, David Cameron, is willing to say no. If he's ready to freeze the licence fee, this question is raised: what is his intention for government spending for which he is directly responsible?
The BBC never even covered the speech, but if he is signalling a need to haul in the spending then surely that is what all the economic experts are telling Brown.
Best find out what the government are going to say
Complain about this comment
Ha! At last! Someone with an iota of common sense.
The BBC have taken us, and our license fees, for granted for far too long. It's about time they were told in no uncertain terms to get their act together.
Complain about this comment
If Brown's too impotent to give us justice the the UK...
...it looks like we just might get it from the 'good ol' U S of A!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7946124.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7945774.stm
Complain about this comment
Wonderful policy statement of intent by David Cameron.
Why should a left leaning, human rights pressure group, pro EU, politically correct, organisation get increasing public funds to diseminate New Labour propoganda.
A news department that never confronts Labour politicians, such as the unelected Lord Mandelson.
What really annoys - the absence of choice- don't pay, go to jail.
What really turned me off. A BBC economics editor attacking Cameron personally for suggesting some young women chose single motherhood as a career choice. As though this never happens.
Complain about this comment
Post 16. I was just thinking the same myself.
Complain about this comment
The problem for Cameron is that it is still a long time until the next election and that Labour MPs do not want to to lose their seats.
Brown can announce public spending cuts that are popular eg ID cards, some giant IT projects and a few others like slowing down on several promises. Then Cameron will not be able to claim them. What he will then force Cameron to announce is what less populist cuts he is prepared to make. A lot of people have been making the assumption Public Sector = Bad, but with the large number of people working in the public sector and many more receiving support from it, 'the privacy of the ballot box' may reveal a lack of apetite for such a view.
A further problem is that there had been an indication before the crisis that he would follow Labour's spending plans for a year or two. If he can change then so can Labour. There is also the problem of explaining how cutting expenditure will lead to better services. Yes, we can all point to public services which are not good enough - but the curious fact is that the majority of people are very satisfied with the NHS, believe that teachers are doing a good job and are totally mystified by the fashionable talking down of the country. But then good news never made great headlines.
We need a change of government as the present lot have passed their sell by date, but I'm still unconvinced by the 'special offer' that is being touted about. If it seems too good to be true, it probably is.
Complain about this comment
RobinJD asks what is the BBC's divine right to 'go on spending tax-payers' money'.
I can't actually remember anyone in the BBC claiming they had such a right, though it's true they have to pitch hard to whichever govt controls the license fee to earn an increase.
Also, it may be 'tax- payers' money - but it's not a tax, though its detractors work overtime to characterize it as such. It's what it says on the tin - a license fee for a specific service.
Go back to the origins of the BBC in 1923 and its impossible to find a decade in which it - and its news division in particular - was not being baited for its 'politically partial' or 'unpatriotic' coverage. Some things never change. Other countries regard that as a symptom of its independence.
Sorry he feels the BBC is overpaid - but then it's hard to fund on pea-nuts a service that provides more than 40 local radio stations, seven national speech, music and drama stations, four national tv channels, and the most read and most diverse - and probably most respected - web site in the world.
As to finding it 'hilarious' that Mr Cameron may choose to put the knife to public sector services such as health and education as well as the BBC - no doubt he'll be in fits if the Tory leader also tackles those giants of probity and financial prudence, the (formerly) commercially-controlled Banks. But I think he might have to wait for that giggle for rather a long time.
Complain about this comment
Yes, public spending cuts are coming.
One of the problems is the public sector final salary thingy.
I think the solution here is clear... : Yes, of course you can "retire" at 60 on 40/80ths.... of your final salary.... the only stipulation is that you will have to carry on turning up to work... 40/80ths of the time.
Hope that's allright, Nu Lib / Lab / Con... redefining retirement.. if you don't like it, blame your parents.
Complain about this comment
And another thing.... you should have had more kids and brought them up to expect less.
Although, this only postpones the problem... but we like that.
Complain about this comment
Clearly, DC not gone down well with the Mods, and thats a hat-trick.
Complain about this comment
It would seem Cameron has seen an opportunity that he simply cannot let pass. In the economic downturn that we have at this moment in time, any demand by a public organization for more money and using the same tired excuses for it, will be seen by any politician of any political persuasion, either something to court or condemn. Cameron has very cleverly hit the spot when bringing up the subject of the license. Not because it is a real plea for people having to find the extra, but in a climate as this, the government allowing this increase, shows them to be out of touch and arrogant. The opposition has seen this, hence the speech. Nothing will change for that is not the desired outcome. Its about how the parties are seen by the public. In this case, Cameron has out flanked Brown, again. Also with a cabinet hell bent intent on pushing through public reforms that the country cannot afford, they are leaving the doors wide open for cuts in spending that are going to be needed eventually. So, unless Brown, fully aware that the next election is going to be a bloodbath(according to the polls), he can either respond in kind( doubtful) or carry on busy as usual,( more than likely).
Complain about this comment
Nearly thirty posts covering the best part of 5 hours...
certainly cant take prompt moderation of any posts for granted.
Come on BBC, sort it out for heavens sake!!!
Complain about this comment
Good ma Cameron- just lets here you say those magic words- privatidation of the BBC machine, tool of the Guardian reading lefties!
Every license fee payer should get an allocation of shares.
Lets free people everywhere in this fine country from the Beeb Tax.
Complain about this comment
I really am envious of those above that know the minds of the Tory front bench team. I wish that I had a quarter of their imagination.
Come on Mr.Robinson, Tony Blair is long gone. We, the voting public, are no longer fooled by the spin. (I was never a convert). So let us have the truth, not just your fervid imagination please.
If you can really see into Mr.D.Cameron's mind, then say so, not just put out a load of pro-goverment propaganda.
I wonder how many people were fooled? Cannot say, appears that the Moderators are on Go-Slow again.
Complain about this comment
sounds good, the TV license needs to be reined in a bit, and government really needs to tighten its belt in the next decade so it makes sense to freeze the license
clearly Cameron is now edging his way towards saying 'spending cuts' - the crisis has escalated so much that people are now coming around to the idea and Cameron can risk going against Brown's tractor lists
Complain about this comment
RE THE BEEB EXPENSES?
THERES PLENTY OF FAT TO BE CUT AT THE
UPPER END OF THE FOOD CHAIN.
START IN THE BOARD ROOM FIRST!!!
CAMERON HAS A VERY VALID POINT!
Complain about this comment
SOON GORDY WILL BE OFFERING A TRACTOR
AND PLOUGH TO EVERY VOTER.
SAD BECAUSE WE WILL ALL SOON NEED
SUCH TOOLS!
ROLL ON THE POTATO REPUBLIC.
BUST BRITAIN BY GORDY & THE GANG SOON
TO BE FEATURED BY THE BBC NEWS WITH A
PERSONAL FOCUS ON EACH OF US.
Complain about this comment
lots of comments on here seeming to support a reduction in the public spending area.
All good - I tend to agree
Unfortunately, I suspect that what we have on this blog is not representative of what we'll get at the ballot box. Even on the current polling data, it is possible to get a hung parliament.
However, I believe that the blog issue around the BBC is a smokescreen. We urgently need to be talking about reining in public spending on non-urgent front line services, not trivialities. Fine, leave the license fee where is is, when the money dries up, Jonathan Ross will have to take a pay cut as certainly ITV and C4 haven't got that kind of money now.
The bigger debate is reining in public spending!!! We need to have it now so people are truly aware of the excesses of the state, and its growth under Labour
Regardless of how people distrust Gordon Brown, there is still a inbuilt distrust of the Tories in some peoples minds (in the same way it tood 18 years for Labour to to rehabilitated).
MY bet is that the Labour election broadcasts will focus on a number of the good things they've done, followed by
1) The Tories wouldn't have given you these nice things (that we've paid for on credit 'cos we were too scared to tax you, less it reminded you nasty tax & spend labour)
2) The Tories will take them away from you.
3) The Tories are to blame for the current issues, its all a result of the things they did 20 years ago (but we've not fixed, as we quite liked the tax revenue from the City)
4) REMEMBER MAGGIE THATCHER !!!
Oh, by the way I voted for the other lot :-)
Complain about this comment
"....David Cameron, is willing to say no. If he's ready to freeze the licence fee, this question is raised: what is his intention for government spending for which he is directly responsible?"
trackback a few weeks ago nick, think youll find that he has already explained that he would grow public spending slower than this shower propose to do
a more apt and required question would be to gordon brown:
how are labour going to fund their future projected spending increases?
higher taxes?
less benefits?
cutting services?
i dont believe labour can even match their own spending projections, as they are in power, hows about you BBC journos hold the government to account?
"..... the Tory leader's main apology was for basing his spending plans on government growth projections.
He clearly intending to change that; the only question is when he'll tell us what exactly he means."
could the answer be when an election is called?
he could call a goat a sheep and it wouldnt matter one iota, as the conservatives are not running the country.
only when they are, or are involved in elections, and present the country with a manifesto to base their judgement on, would your question be warranted.
i seem to recall the chancellor telling us the finances were in a state, last seen during the second world war, dont recall you asking similar questions of the government then nick?
Complain about this comment
Come on Alex - explain - why the capitals? Are you a computer program?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Nick,
I know you are always interested in promoting the webcameron tory spin, but you have missed a fourth point, which in Cameron's mind it will be at the top of your list: Desperate times, call for desperate measures - the tories hope the public will think that they understand their pain during these hard times. - Rubbish, complete rubbish. Is this the best the tories can do ? It's the global economy stupid.
Complain about this comment
Good
Complain about this comment
Why have I been given a number ???
Complain about this comment
Cameron's ideas do not go anywhere near tackling the explosion in cost of government and near-government services. His aim for the BBC is just not enough. He needs better groundbreaking ideas if he is to be taken seriously about improving cost effectiveness in how taxpayers money is deployed.
Much as I love aspects of the BBC I contend that the Corporation has gone well beyond its public service broadcasting remit and needs a jolly good shake-up.
I'd split the BBC into three.
There should be the creation of the PSB component of TV News 24, Parliament, BBC 4 and CBBC, together with Radio 4, Radio 3, Local Radio, and the BBC web sites associated with these TV and Radio services. These to continue to be funded by licence and constrained from competition. All material to be solely the copyright of the BBC to put an end to the "this item cannot be broadcast for copyright reasons" that has crept into podcasts and iPlayer Download services.
The World Service funded by government is a separate entity in any event. It can contract for access to material and services from the BBC PSB organisation in relation to the value that government puts on programming for non-UK services. It can buy non-PSB services according to the funding arrangements with government.
The rest of BBC broadcasting including all sport programming, and non-broadcasting media services, should be formed into a commercial venture, not funded by the taxpayer but by subscription. For a period of time, say 10 years, this business should be protected from acquisition, demerger or other market activity, and then should become a plc.
The BBC's extensive broadcasting and media archives should be inserted into a new charitable national broadcasting archives trust with a widened role, taking responsibility for maintaining archived broadcast material from all UK broadcasters and financed on a similar basis to any other archival service.
The above ideas would allow for a significant reduction in the licence fee. The subscription model would test the real value of services such as BBC1 and Radio 2 and give the management the opportunity to achieve commercial competitiveness not possible within the existing remit. And for me it would create a proper legal entity to protect against broadcasters making arbitrary decisions on whether to keep or destroy archive material.
Complain about this comment
#72 brownloadofrubbish
Having read a number of posts on this blog, I totally agree with you.... the Tory-in-Chief talking about spending cuts really does sound quite sinister and New Labour are bound seize upon our fear of Thatcherite cuts.
Whilst it's obvious that spending will have to be cut by whoever forms the next government, I really think David Cameron is making a mistake by starting with the BBC.
Although many (but probably not the majority) in the UK have an ambivalent feeling towards the BBC, it's a national institution and one that the majority are really quite proud of.
Yes, Jonathan Ross et al are overpaid, however, the vast majority working for the BBC are badly underpaid and are regularly being made redundant.
If David Cameron is prepared to decimate this national institution, then how is he going to approach our other institutions like the NHS?
Personally, I don't have to vote New Labour or Conservative as Vince Cable is my local MP and I like him and have voted for him since '97.
With Tory tough talk and New Labour seizing upon it, I wonder what the rest of the country will do?
Complain about this comment
In some ways the BBC has been allowed to get out of control like the banking sector. So called "stars" being paid vast sums because it was their "market worth". And, just like the bankers this has been found out to be a load of tosh and now there is no market for them. I never understood it. If a particular "star" could get more money elsewhere let them go. There are plenty of others to fill the slot.
So until the BBC can stop wasting vast sums on taxis, bottled water etc. then freeze the fee.
As for the political motive, well, can any of our pampered representatives know what it is like during these "difficult" times? Just look at the expenses debacle. It is not confined to a single party.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
As someone who pays the telly tax (obviously I have no choice, unless I want to receive threatening & menacing letters and visits), can you answer me this with regards to BBC waste...
How many staff did the BBC send to the US to cover the recent American election? How much, in total, did this cost? Why did nearly every single tv and radio programme need to send their own team to cover it??
Is it true that this question has been asked of the BBC many times & they've refused to answer? Is it also true that they claimed immunity from Freedom of Information requests citing 'journalistic privileges' or some other such nonsense??
There are massive amounts of waste at the BBC - the US election is just one example - I wouldn't be surprised if the licence fee could be cut in half without dramatically effecting the quality of the output...
Complain about this comment
Its about time that the Licence was abolished and the funds collected thru our council tax bills, in the same way we pay for the police and parish councils.
I suspect that 99.999% of households use the BBC's services in some way.
Collecting the funds thru councle tax bills and passing them directly to the BBC would be a huge saving in the licance managerment.
The only group that would need Licences would be comercial properties, but they already pay a higher fee.
If all house holds paid this way then the anual fee would drop to between 100-120. Pensioners and other people who receive discounted licences would also sinply and cheeply be handled.
Complain about this comment
So Brown finally states that he takes full responsibility for the economic crash. Hmmmmmmmmmmm. So why hasn't he resigned then?
What is it with politicians that seem to think that merely uttering the words "I take responsibility" is enough? Correct me if I am wrong, but, I always thought that taking responsibility for something that has gone very badly wrong means that some ACTION of some sort follows those words. Action in the form of an apology, (like I am sorry) followed by a confession of guilt, (It was my fault) and then action to fix the problem, OR if the problem is sufficiently serious, an immediate resignation.
Brown has done nothing to fix the problem. he has set aside hundreds of billions in insurance for the economy AFTER it had already crashed. By doing so he has guaranteed that any recovery will be strangled and snuffed out by frighteningly high tax rises for everyone. He has run the economy in such a way that the UK has lost over 2 trillion pounds of value in the last 18 months. That is how much has been wiped from the value of shares and properties and businesses. To me, that is a resignation issue AT THE VERY LEAST. A more just action would be that he should be charged with criminal negligence and thrown in jail.
He has done NOTHING to demonstrate that he has taken responsibility for this crash. He will not apologise, because he still thinks that he has done nothing wrong.
Complain about this comment
Oh, and one other thing - as a way of convincing us that the BBC isn't wasteful, perhaps you'd now like to publish your expenses in full....? I know you've refused before.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
I have always tried to be honest. If Cameron must now tell the real truth about the state of the economy. We know that taxes must rise, that the economy is shot to pieces. There must be job cuts in the public services, that pensioners are really going to suffer, the generation who have just retired have stripped the cupboard bare.
For too long we have lived on past glories, we are just like any other third world bankrupt country. We need to enter the real world, our past always was not sustainable, the demographic nuclear time bomb has just started to explode. People will otice a massive decrease in our incomes, not all pensioners are like Sir Fred Goodwin who did so much for the Princes Trust, well according to Harriet Harman that was why he got his knighthood.
Complain about this comment
Regarding the sabre rattling emanating from Downing Street about Iran possibly developing a nuclear bomb - and the evidence so far is as flimsy as the 45 minute WMD threat - is the persona of Gordon Brown actually a metamorphosis of George W Bush?
Is the aim of this gov not to alienate the entire world's population of muslims? This is also at odds with Obama's gov who are anxious to open up a dialogue with Iran. What is going on? I cannot think of one part of the UK electorate that will be impressed by this rhetoric.
Complain about this comment
I do worry for this country. The vast sums of money (or potential future debt) pumped into banks, public sector etc. just seem to be falling through the cracks. It needs to be reined in. What is the point in owning a mansion to pass onto your children if it is 100% owned by a bank and in need of repair?
For all the spending on public services there have been improvements but not in line with the expenditure. Education has become "tick box" and although we are told our school leavers are the most qualified ever we are slipping behind in science and innovation.
We need to invest in the future and not propping up the past. Hard decisions are needed which requires a strong leader. Just who is up for the challenge?
Complain about this comment
From a Scottish perspectvie the BBC is nothing but a propaganda tool for the British. It dostorts Scottish news to reflect badly upon the Governement we elected, that is the SNP. Union good, independence bad, that summarises the BBC's view.
When Tony Bliar or Bungler Brown have a cabinet reshuffle, it comes with a headline of bringing in fresh talent, when the Alec Salmond has a reshuffle it comes with the headline, ministers sacked., etc.
The BBC has been thinking for the past 10 plus years if Scotland should have a news programme at 6 pm to cover its needs. They are still not sure. The political and social map has changed, the BBC have chosen not to keep pace, thius pandering to Unionist politicians in Westminster.
The sooner this organisation is broken up and fees returned to the good people of England and Scotland, the better.
TDBs
Complain about this comment
11. At 4:11pm on 16 Mar 2009, Poprishchin (U11710922) wrote:
"'Almost three quarters of British people believe there should be a public inquiry into the invasion of Iraq, an opinion poll suggests. '
BBC News
I think it can be taken for granted that David Cameron won't be asking for a public inquiry into the invasion of Iraq."
WHY?
TORIES CALL FOR AN INQUIRY
Complain about this comment
Nick,
it is possible that we have been involved in torture, whether directly or indirectly. There is a petition on the Downing Street site calling for an inquiry. Sign it, let's see if there is any hope left for our moral values, or are we just like the Nazis, either we followed orders or we didn't know what was going on.
Complain about this comment
@88 re Iran, You are correct. Iran is a signitory to the NPT and have acted entirely in accordance with the letter of that treaty. (according to the IAEA). They have industrial scale centrifuges, but they can only enrich uranium to about 5% which is what is required for a nuclear power station. ALL the LOW enriched uranium is permanently monitored by the IAEA. To build a nuclear weapon, they would need to be able to increase the enrichment process to over 90%. Their centrifuges are not capable of this.
Even the American intelligence agencies are stating clearly that Iran does NOT currently posses the capability to make a nuclear weapon and have NOT demonstrated ANY intention to do so.
What annoys the west, is not any potential to build a nuclear weapon, but Iran's status as an independent nationalist state. Iran wants to be wholly self sufficient as a nation and that is completely at odds with the new world order goals of the international elite. These elitists want to have the power to switch off any region in the world so that they have ultimate control over the people. That is why they are happy for Iran to have a nuclear power station, so long as Iran has to rely on the west to provide the fuel for it.
Complain about this comment
IF Camerons so bad and Brown is so good for the BBC, Why are you Journo's going on strike over redundancies.
Lets face it why do we need Peston when we have steph flanders. Why do we need Nick when we can read Mandelson
Complain about this comment
@85 doggz
"So Brown finally states that he takes full responsibility for the economic crash. Hmmmmmmmmmmm. So why hasn't he resigned then?"
No he didnt what he said was "i accept responsibility for my actions but it wasnt those actions that had any bearing on the situation whatsoever, Its a global crisis mate, not me gov, my actions were all ok!"
Complain about this comment
"90. At 09:19am on 17 Mar 2009, The_Dogs_B wrote:
From a Scottish perspectvie the BBC is nothing but a propaganda tool for the British. It dostorts Scottish news to reflect badly upon the Governement we elected, that is the SNP. Union good, independence bad, that summarises the BBC's view."
The BBC is a propaganda outlet for the English Establishment. It is not an anti-Scottish thing, it is a pro-establishment thing. ANYTHING that goes against the globalist elitist agenda, (that is centred in the City of London), is rejected by them and either censored not to be reported on at all, or is ridiculed.
Complain about this comment
Attacks on the BBC or populist sabre rattling.. you decide..
...Just goes to show that you can't be too careful!
Complain about this comment
Re: 81 & others
I am not quite sure why you think that cuts in public expenditure should mean cuts in public services.
Anyone who has worked in the private sector knows that over the last couple of decade there have been repeated cost cutting exercises. Those exercises are generally not carried out to reduce the services to customers* but to cut expenditure and improve efficiency and competitiveness.
Most private sector senior managers know that they can only charge what their customers are willing - or can afford - to pay. That message simply does not seem to have got through to the public sector.
Someone needs to tell the people at the BBC**, and indeed the public sector generally, that they can only exist if the private sector generates enough wealth to pay the taxes that support them.
Given the economic mess the Labour Government has created the wealth in the private sector the tax revenue that flows from that is going to be drastically reduced. Thus, the public sector needs to learn that it will have to cut its clothes according to the available cloth.
* Call centres might be the exception that proves the rule!
** The contempt in Caroline Quinn's voice when she report David Cameron's announcement on Radio 4 yesterday evening had to be heard to be belived.
Complain about this comment
If anyone needs cheering up go to guardian.co.uk/politics page and have a look at the portrait of GB.
It looks like it was inspired by a David Blaine poster...
"For my next illusion... (captions welcome)
Complain about this comment
96: "The BBC is a propaganda outlet for the English Establishment. It is not an anti-Scottish thing, it is a pro-establishment thing. ANYTHING that goes against the globalist elitist agenda, (that is centred in the City of London), is rejected by them and either censored not to be reported on at all, or is ridiculed"
I agree with your comment that it is not an anti-Scottish thing but more general and to some extent also agree with your comment about "the global elist agenda". However, I do not think it is centred on the City of London but on the Guardian and has at its core a politically correct, anti traditional vales and pro-EU agenda.
And whilst on the subject of the Guardian can anyone explain why virtually all public sector jobs with a salary of more than around £25k have to be advertised there? Does anyone know the total of the public sector spend with that newspaper?
Surely, with today's technology a dedicated website for public sector jobs would cut out a great deal of the cost. I appreciate that this might cause problems with loss of revenue for other newspapers - eg the Times and Telegraph - but they seem to deal mainly with the more senior jobs. So perhaps we can have a ruling that all public sector jobs up to, say, £50k are advertised in either local papers or on the web. The more senior level vacancies could then be split between the appropriate newspapers.
Complain about this comment
Good on Cameron. Whilst the BBC does provide a valuable service and has 'some' high quality programming, a lot of fat can be trimmed. BBC3 and BBC4 should be amalgamated. With the quality docs from BBC4 joining only the best quality programmes from 3. Many of the regions should be combined to cut waste and should be split as much as possible to similar population sizes. And people shouldn't bleat about BBC staff's pay. I've worked in a TV production company and we were paid significantly lower than BBC employees doing the same job, albeit they probably had less work to do.
Surely everyone realises by now, the one thing Cameron will not do is not cut frontline NHS services. His personal situation means he is more aware than possibly any other currently active British politican of the work that Doctors and Nurses do for the public. But the waste behind the scenes is scandalous. More of the NHS's budget should be directed at frontline services rather than middlemanagers and beureaucratic redtape.
The public sector is only funded by the proceeds of the private sector. Now that the private sector is shrinking drastically, the public sector needs to follow suit. The status quo cannot be maintained.
Complain about this comment
@99
The image of GB is on the interview pg "I should have done more" (Really?)
Complain about this comment
Cameron is proposing the entirely sensible idea of cutting back on non-essentials. Why the BBC (and the public sector, for that matter) feel they can blithely go on recruiting and expanding whilst expecting hard-pressed taxpayers pick up the tab is beyond me.
Complain about this comment
Minister denies RBS pension role
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7947844.stm
Is this then another way of saying that Lord Myners is a "do nothing" minister? I am in complete agreement about cutting wasteful spending, but what annoys me intensely is when highly paid people simply do not do their job at all! Or is it an incompetent appointment where his job specifications and responsibilities have yet to be defined? If so the buck stops with Brown.
Complain about this comment
Oh, I heard this on LBC this morning and it is great!
Firstly, the BBC IS getting too powerful.
Secondly they appear to have their strings pulled by the Labour party, or at least they have an unfair bias toward Labour with the employees and chiefs there. Sons and relatives of Labour peers for heaven's sake. Neopotism or what?
Thirdly, they are somewhat of a dichotomous outfit, letting lewd behaviour and speech prevail (Jonathan Ross, Jo Brand, Russell Brand, Graham Norton etc) whilst coming down unnessarily heavily on poor Carol Thatcher whose ill chosen words were not even on air!
In addition, it is scandalous to pay such outrageously high salaries to likes of Ross - higher than the PM I believe.
Complain about this comment
#92 TAG
Re: UK Complicity in Torture
What is the point of petitions to the No. 10 website, other than as a collection point for e-mail addresses?
Craig Murray makes a number of observations on his website that go beyond what one individual may have suffered during arrest, extraordinary rendition and transfer to Guantanamo Bay.
His testimony is based on classified information received as a senior diplomat and conflict with statements made by senior figures in Government.
(Interestingly Murray also makes some interest observations regarding postal voting in the constituency of a leading Cabinet member at the last General Election).
Whiter than white? More like Browner than Brown.
Complain about this comment
saga, sorry to rain on your parade.
I previously posted how NuLabour will struggle at a GE to get the required foot soldiers. The following article also shows that they still have serious problems with party funding:
NuLabour struggles for money and muscle in fight for fourth term.
Short on money, Lack of foot soldiers…. Labour Left revival…. Dream on!
Complain about this comment
there is no other choice.
taxes will rise and public spending will be decimated.
this will have to happen whatever political creed is elected.
to think anything else is cloud cuckoo land. any political party claiming otherwise is lying.
we better get used to the idea.
Complain about this comment
Bet you are glad you opened this subject Nick!
Whilst we love our Beeb, we think it is bloated and full of its own self importance.
Like everything Labour has done the additional spending has been for the benefit of the few not the many.
Overpaid broadcasters - let them go the commercial sector if they think they can earn more.
Overpaid consultants and GP's ,who do less for more whilst the patients are denied life saving drugs.
Dentists driving round in Mercedes and Range Rovers whilst pensioners are pulling out their own teeth because they cannot find an NHS dentist [not anecdotal, I know a pensioner who did this]
.... who gained from this spending spree, it was not the general public?
It can only be sorted by a change of Government - this one has too much self interest in covering itself before the next election.
It will not sort out the great social injustices of protected pensions in the public sector and rampant waste.
Roll on the Election!
Complain about this comment
Labour have been very short on money, BUT the Government (which happens to be labour) now owns the biggest parts of several large banks. Who would be willing to bet that the banks will make major contributions to the labour party prior to the next election?
Surely the Labour government could not be that corrupt? Could it?
Complain about this comment
When the Conservatives have nothing worthwhile to say they stir up their troops with a little BBC Bashing. They're so easy to please. Who operates this site they are so fond of?
Thatcher was good at punishing the media. Do you Remember Thames television? Its Thatchers fault that ITV is so rubbish these days.
It just goes to show you can't be too careful.
Complain about this comment
Hi Nick
This is an interesting line of thought from David Cameron. You may want to look at the FT which argued a week or so ago that the digital communications market was in danger of getting out of kilter.
Why? Because the BBC keeps getting its licence fee plus increases whilst the competition for example ITV is hitting hard times. The FT felt that the current DG of the BBC had lead OFCOM and the relevant ministry a merry dance and was in danger of increasing its monopoly like position.
However not all is bad I watched the programme on Yellowstone park yesterday and it was excellent. So although I want the BBC's role reduced in some areas in others it still does a good job. Someone called Reith had some views once but little regard is taken of him/them now.....
Complain about this comment
===
111. At 12:21pm on 17 Mar 2009, dhwilkinson wrote:
When the Conservatives have nothing worthwhile to say they stir up their troops with a little BBC Bashing. They're so easy to please. Who operates this site they are so fond of?
Thatcher was good at punishing the media. Do you Remember Thames television? Its Thatchers fault that ITV is so rubbish these days.
It just goes to show you can't be too careful.
===
Sigh - there it is again. The woe of the world is all because of Thatcher. Things that happened over 20 years ago - are the reason for the ills of today - and there was never a chance to change the course of the ship since then, I mean it’s not like there was anybody else in charge that could have altered anything...
Unless you give a detailed explanation as to what did happen - and how there was never an opportunity to redress any wrongs that had happened - then this argument reeks of the ploy that if you tell a lie often enough and its big enough eventually it will be perceived by the public to be true.
Just like Great Britain being best placed to weather the economic storm, or the end of boom and bust – ooops – those one did fail – well never mind - try again.
I can only put this ploy down to
Complain about this comment
The TV Licence fee is, in effect, an hypothecated tax. Money raised with a specific purpose in mind, ring-fenced and paid to a nominated agency.
(There aren't too many of those around!)
I grew up with the Beeb. They do some good stuff. Some dopey stuff too.
After all, if you claim to have the biggest network of correspondents around the world, why is it necessary to fly in people from London when (for example) Obama is inaugurated? Waste of money, I'd say!
It's rather odd, that since a lot of TV output is available on-line, the government hasn't put a tax on every PC sold, on the basis that it could be used to receive BBC programmes...
Complain about this comment
I have no objections to a £3 increase to watch top quality dramas, natural history docs, consumer watchdog programmes, etc.
What I do object to is paying a licence fee to watch toothless, lazy, toadying political journalism, this blogger included. Even Paxo has become a parody of himself. There are a few exceptions but what is the point of the likes of Andrew Marr? Will a new government be given such a soft ride?
Where are the new Jon Stewart / Colbert Report / Spitting Image political satirists? There is so much ammunition out there...
If it is to remain genuinely independent, as it claims to be, maybe the Beeb should report the political news like the shipping report, without comment or colour. It could cut back on a few salaries. Sorry, Nick. In the words of Sir Alan Sugar...
PS
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/mar/17/gordon-brown-recession-banking-regulation
What were his image advisers thinking?
Complain about this comment
BTW I thought Brown made a measured speech about Iran's right to develop peaceful nuclear power and that the UK and others would help.
Couldn't help wondering just how many power-plants (of any sort) have been approved, commissioned and brought into service in the UK since 1997...
I don't count windmills.
They only work when there's wind. There should be planning permission to create one on the Houses of Parliament...
Complain about this comment
111#
Oh FFS, here we go again.....
"it was all Thatchers fault....."
For gods sake someone pass me the cyanide pill.
Look.
You want to blame someone for ITV being crap?
Blame Cameron.
He worked for Carlton Communications at the point where they swallowed all of the regional stations like Anglia, Central, Granada, Yorkshire, et al. ITV are crap because of Carlton and Cameron not because of Maggie.
For Gods sake, change the damn record, its becoming REALLY flamin' irritating!!
Complain about this comment
113 banburyg
Death on the Rock was a documentary about an alleged setting up and assassination of members of the IRA in Gibraltar. Thatcher tried to stop it and when she couldn't decided that the ITV franchises where a "license to print money" and put them to the highest bidder. ITV used to be of comparable quality until then and didn't try to con its viewers with impossible phone in quizzes. Now its of comparable quality of Sky one. Home of Noels HQ. Quite few fans of that show here I'm sure.
Your ?quotes problem? I suggest you switch off smart quotes in word as the software blocks the characters(thanks to thatcher!). or use a browser with a spell-checker built in to comments boxes like the free Firefox 3.
Complain about this comment
@115
Apologies - GB image no longer accompanying article.
See
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics
I get it now, the Clunking Fist has become the Open Hand of Conciliation
or is it arthritis?
Complain about this comment
115. At 1:35pm on 17 Mar 2009, LGeorgeknewmyfather wrote: "Where are the new Jon Stewart / Colbert Report / Spitting Image political satirists? There is so much ammunition out there..."
The current political class are so bumblingly incompetent, ignorant and corrupt that even the most imaginative satirist cannot hope to keep up with what the real politicians do daily. If we did not see what the politicians actually do these days, then If the Satirists wrote sketches, plots and commentary based on what real politicians actually do, nobody would believe them.
But I do take your point about John Stewart. It is such a disgusting and shameful situation whereby we cannot rely on the BBC to give us frank, honest and interesting news, but have to rely on a comedy show for accurate news. The Daily show is way more accurate and informative and holds the administration to account in a way that the BBC cannot even dream of here. The daily show is a far superior news show to anything broadcast by the BBC.
And believe me, the Daily show really holds back in many ways. I would like to see them go no holds barred against the administration.
Complain about this comment
dhwilkinson, the only reason that you can enjoy the internet and free exchange of ideas is because Thatcher invented them. (internet and free exchange of ideas) She wrote the code for the free firefox 3 browser that your are reading this on, and invented your eyes for to use to see these words.
SEE! you are not the only one that can write unsubstantiated utter rubbish about Thatcher.
Now give it a rest, not only is it rubbish, it is BORING now too.
Complain about this comment
#120 purpledogzz
I have to agree with you about the Daily show presented by Jon Stewart on CNBC. I only came across it recently on a previous blog. Now I access it on a regular basis.
It is interesting looking back and considering the "Not the Nine O'clock News" satire program - would the current BBC have the guts to show it now? Doubt it.
Complain about this comment
118 dhwilkinson
I enjoy a reasoned debate, with people putting forward arguments and counter-arguments - so here goes...
Your argument is based upon her not being able to stop ONE program being shown, causing her to sell the franchises off to the highest bidder.
I suppose because she recieved a few wrong numbers she decided to sell off BT, powercuts and gas leaks - sell the power companies. Then were the trains, water authorities - what did they do to upset her?
At least she did not decide to tax to dividends paid to pension companies, or was that her fault as well.
Back to ITV. The world has changed massivley wrt entertainment in the last 20 years.
The Internet, cable and satellite providers have lead to advertisers spreading their money around - across these other formats, but their budgets have not increased so as to keep the TV advertising at the same level.
Complain about this comment
Don't panic! I cant keep that up. Just parodying your view of me.
117 Mubar..
Don't panic! I cant keep that up. Just parodying several peoples view of me. I had given it up but saw this opportunity. Carlton took over from Thames. So you can blame Thatcher for removing the quality element for ITV franchises and making it more about the highest bidder. That made possible for Carlton and Cameron to Mess up beyond all Repair ITV. Wierd this site has changed. Have they fixed the pound signs? ££££££££££££££££
Complain about this comment
@120 purpleDogzzz
" even the most imaginative satirist cannot hope to keep up with what the real politicians do daily.."
Not far off... in fact if you want an example of fact being stranger than fiction or reality trumping imagination, visit http://www.labourlist.org/
Complain about this comment
Cameron's suggestion was, I think/hope, a prelude of things to come. My guess is that the tories have had enough of the tax payers subsidising a labour spin machine, and that they'll not just freeze the fee, but probably reduce it, and possibly bin it altogether, and perhaps make the bbc go commercial.
Good luck to the tories on that one I say; I'm behind them 100% - I see no reason whatsoever why the BBC can't be commercial; there is no need for a license fee at all.
When the government destroys the economy and causes the worst recession for 100 years, and the bbc then calls brown the saviour of the world and calls the opposition nasty lord snooty, then you know it's time for the BBC to be put in the bin.
Complain about this comment
When you get over your self-righteous indignation, you may consider that a request to work within current budgets is the very least you could offer the nation.
You are insulated from economic reality inside the BBC, because public subsidy allows it.
Even your admirers are becoming impatient with your profligacy.
Complain about this comment
About time. I do think that they should get rid of it completely. Over the years the beeb have become more powerfull and i feel that they have lost touch with the viewer. We do not need the likes of Jonathon Ross who only offend and are paid so much for so little. The amount of waste is just unbeliveable but as they say what goes up must come down, people are loosing their jobs left right and centre and can't afford to pay these over inflated prices any more. We are paying more and more every year and are getting less and less for our money. It is the same for every goverment department. This freeze in the T.V licence and council tax which he announced a few weeks ago is only the tip of the iceburg who ever is going to take over from golom and co have got there work cut out, the goverment needs to have its behind kicked in to shape and get back into touch with the people. Cuts can be made without reducing services, problem is they are all too gready and have enjoyed their little perks for so long theydon't want them to go, even though there is no money to pay for it.
Sorry to ramble on.
Complain about this comment
#106
Thanks for that. Was able to look up Craig Murray. Why is there not an injunction against him. Surely if he is lying or being economical with the truth then he must be taken to the courts. It has happened to at least one other person who now has an injunction against him.
Complain about this comment
This is Cameron beginning I believe, to set out his plan to deal with the public sector.It will be a slow road as I think he needs to take public opinion with him. This is unfortunate as reform needs to begin now before our important services (NHS Education) are affected by cuts. A decline right across our services would be devastating, therefore the Government needs to get on with cutting the waste and unnecessary public sector jobs as soon as possible in my opinion.
Complain about this comment
I think this is a message to the BBC - you are not impartial, you are the broadcasting arm of the labour party, therefore the taxpayer cannot subsidise you any further. I would cut the payments right back, not just freeze them. And fire Jonathan Ross. And anyone who earns over 500k. That will do for starters.
Complain about this comment
I think this is a message to lojolondon - you are not impartial either
Complain about this comment
Its strange how these tories go into tax bore mode when talking about the BBC. The license fee is the same for everyone. £139.50 per year or £47 for black and white. didn't know you could still get that. Thats probably less than what you pay to watch a load of satellite TV tat for a year. Normal people are subsidising this site that they never use! Just a PR ploy from dave to rally the troops.
Complain about this comment
133 dhwilkinson
satellite is optional (and you get much more/better programmes on it when you take into account the proportional differences in price/quality/qty, and you get to choose the price/package which suits you).
The bbc license fee is mandatory if you want to have a tv.
It's the "you have to pay it even if you never watch the BBC" aspect that winds most people up, plus the fact that it's so ridiculously expensive for what it is/does, plus the fact that their news section is so ridiculously biased/slanted.
Logically there is no reason whatsoever to stop them from going commercial and leaving the tax payer alone.
I'd be happy to get Sky to stop all my BBC channels if that would let me off the hook for the license fee, but the government changed the law and that's no longer possible; you now have to pay even if you can't receive any BBC channels.
Complain about this comment
Taken from the BBC site itself:
"In 2007/08, £3.4bn in fees was collected."
"In 2007/8, the evasion rate was 5.1%."
"744 senior managers, with 672 of them earning more than £70,000 a year and 13 earning more than £250,000 a year."
Now, I'm not a financial genius, but to me 3.4billion quid of hard-earned tax payers' cash in one year is a lot of money, and when you also take into account that the BBC get a fortune from selling/licensing their stuff abroad then that income figure may well double.
The problem is that almost everything that the BBC does is already done by free commercial channels, who get a tiny slice of extra help from the government for those aspects, there's just a handful of very specific things which the BBC really needs government money for, and that could be in the realms of a couple of million at the most rather than 3.4billion.
Funnily enough, the libdems said that the output/budget of the BBC should actually increase because due to the recession there are now lots more people sitting at home watching telly now that they're unemployed so they should get more choice about what they see while they're sitting on their sofas collecting their dole money. (lib dems definitely no longer get my vote in 2010; I was wavering but no more)
My own MP (who now most definitely gets my vote in 2010) tried to axe it with a private members bill, but sadly failed.
What other company gets *3.4billion quid* simply given to them on a plate *IN ONE YEAR*?
It's bad enough for private citizens, but imagine if you were in charge of a commercial tv/radio station and you saw your competitor getting 3.4billion given to them in one year when you had to do exactly the same as they do but with virtually no public money. If I ran a commercial station I'd be absolutely fuming about the injustice from all sides, and constantly hassling the government about it. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if ITV/Channel4/Channel5 simply dropped out of the market soon citing "unfair competition; let us know when you've levelled the playing field a bit; we can't compete/work in these conditions".
Complain about this comment
The unfair licence fee should now be stopped. Time has come for this cosy arrangement to end. Standards in public broadcasting have seriously dropped with some personalities receive vastly inflated salaries way beyong their talent and represent exceedingly poor value. The BBC has seriously lost its way and the public are very angry at having to pay this TAX. There are hundreds of other competitive TV channels that provide an equal service without charge.
Nothing more to be said,time is up for the BBC.
Complain about this comment
I'm a bit baffled as to why some of you Tory folk are such big fans of Sky. To me, Sky has wrecked broadcasting. Time was I could watch all the Test matches, live, for free plus any European Cup footy games, Six Nations Rugby, Ryder Cup - all for free!. Admittedly the sports folk didn't get massive wages then, but can't say I'm impressed with the astronomic wages they get now as a result of Sky money. If Ross is not worth x million, neither is Ashley Cole.
Get rid of Sky and leave the BBC alone. You capitalists are never happy till you've wrecked the cultural heritage with your free market.
Complain about this comment
Not only is Sky poor quality drivel like Noels HQ, with American imports and sport pinched from terrestrial channels. As well as having to pay for it, you still have to watch adverts. Quite a few channels of repeats funded by the license payer as well. Its weird you say you don't watch the BBC but every sunday you people are on here complaining about Andrew Marr. and mentioning what has been said on The Daily Politics. and how biased Nick Robinson was compared to whoever's on SKY!!!! are there people here from SKY,ITN etc pushing their service? Maybe some people here think that some license payers are special license fee payers and if they want a publicly funded Fox News they should have it.
Complain about this comment
I can tolerate quite a lot, but when the BBC needs to raise revenue by showing adverts, that's when I'll finaly leave the country.
..and before anybody mentions it, I know the BBC shows a lot of self-promoting adverts, which are annoying, but nothing like on the scale of the commercial channels.
Complain about this comment
139 Iantownhill
They wouldn't actually need to show adverts. You're missing the point; they can use loads of other options such as subscription to premium aspects, and also cut down on duplication of programme-types (eg no point spending tax payers' money on making mindless entertainment programmes; the commercial channels do that already).
Remember that Sky already show loads of BBC programmes on the various sky channels, and the BBC get paid a lot for that. The BBC also sell/license their programmes to foreign channels, and they also have their own merchandising setup which I assume they make a lot from too.
In fact, if the BBC simply collected the money from selling/licensing their archives and from their merchandising, chances are they'd have enough income to do what they should be doing without any help from the government and without any adverts being needed.
I think the main problem is that they do too much and that they do it at too high a cost (as with any government department; it's hopeless management who aren't willing to try and keep costs to a reasonable level).
The Sky structure is much fairer (you pay for what you want to watch) for people, and more sustainable than the BBC structure. Sky movies also doesn't have any annoying screen logos or adverts within the films either.
Complain about this comment
#140
I may agree with you to some extent over the 'mindless entertainment programmes', but you're not going to convince me that a channel under the control of Rupert Murdoch (or any other private organisation) is going to be freer from political bias.
Complain about this comment
Nick:
David Cameron's call for the BBC licence fee to be frozen is significant. Not for its impact on ordinary people - which would be rather small - but for the signal it sends.
I would like to accept the theory of Mr. Cameron case for the freezing of BBC Licence Fees, but...There would be major cuts across the Corporation and also; reductions in services for communities that are not getting fair representations in other media organisations...
~Dennis Junior~
Complain about this comment
I don't see why I am forced to always be 6 months in credit with my Licence payments just because choose to pay my TV licence by monthly direct debit?
We should demand an interest payment on this money that they are keeping!
Complain about this comment
The TV license is an easy target, particularly when you're in opposition and don't have to implement it. For the Tories public spending is a real problem area. There are some easy targets, but they won't save very much, and the electorate are very distrustful of the Tories on this issue. Whoever wins the election will have to make substantial reductions in public spending. Labour did what it promised - it substantially increased resources, but it failed to sufficiently reform the public services. Extra money some problems, but reform is needed.
The BBC output is still the best, just to look at today we have Countryfile, Yellowstone, Ladies No1 Detective agency and Top Gear, as well as excellent Radio stations. Is Jonathan Ross paid too much? - yes, he is. Is there rubbish and repeats on the BBC? yes there is. Have there always been such critisms of the BBC? yes, there have. I subscribe (and far greater cost than the TV license) to cable TV. I get quality sport, channels with excellent US imports, and channels full of repeats of stuff originally seen on the BBC.
Complain about this comment
George Osborne was indeed christened with the first name of Gideon by his parents but he stopped using it when he was 13 because he disliked it, so it is he who may well have incurred his parent's wrath at the change, not myself. To use it against him is a tease on your part. We might as well call Gordon Brown Jimmy because his first name is James, the difference being that Jimmy doesn't have toff like, Bullingdon boy connotations which is your real intenton here.
Complain about this comment
#145 scicilian29
Conservative central office (aka scilian29) is working overtime and on every blog. Gideon Osborn may have changed his name at 13, because he was anticipating the trouble his parents' cruel joke on him was about to cause him at his next private school, who knows and who cares? The point is that Cameron, advised by his chum Gideon, thinks that by squeezing the BBC budget, something will have to go, and seeing what a mauling a PM gets on this blog from the posters, he's hoping that the dear old Beeb will make this the first cut.
I wonder what difference to the political process that would make?
Complain about this comment
145 sisilian
you must put the post number or name of the poster you replying to, its very difficult to follow you on times, no offence old chap.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS