Originally posted by Cockney Sparrow
View Post
-
I think it's the emotional blackmail of the 'Vote No or the Baby Gets It' logic. I believe (I stand to be corrected) that the free licences do come out of the Works and Pensions budget, so transferring the cost to the BBC will mean fewer welfare/benefit cuts …It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world. -
Tony Hall was on Today, arguing that giving in to this enabled him to bargain on other stuff - as Dr Johnson would have said Humphrys tossed and gored him, over Ben Bradshaw's taunt about becoming a branch of DWP, or was it DHSS.
But Tony Hall did manage to praise, in the same sentence, Strictly Come Dancing and Radio 3 with Live at Wigmore Hall....Comment
-
It could be that Tony Hall is a better operator than Entwistle but in the final analysis I didn't think Humphreys went for the jugular.
Hall is presumably a realist, in the 1st year of a fixed term Parliament and with the, err, shall we call them "foreign resident" (for tax purposes) press barons lined up behind the Tories, survival is the name of the game at the BBC. However, there is no reason why Osborne should be given an easy ride by Parliament and the public. Its wishful thinking, though, to think it could be like the Forestry commission, because everybody loves trees (and doesn't pay a yearly licence to fund them).
Maybe, and not for the first time, the Lords will provide some serious opposition on this. Strange how an unelected body can move to preserve freedoms (in the case of Blair's proposal to detain for 90 days on the orders of a minister) decent values (European Human Rights Convention, anybody? - let's wait and see) and free speech. Like the Monarchy, they have their uses. (Monarchy - chiefly because they are not ex-politicians).Comment
-
-
Whilst Radio listening doesn't need a licence TV does but the LF pays for it all anyway. Whilst the debate this time around may be, as usual, about the LF and what it pays for - and perhaps what the BBC does not need to do any more - it is also beginning to attack the principle of Public Service as well. It will probably survive this time but there are other ways of attack than to approach directly and a stealthy softening up will more than likely for the next LF settlement.
The BBC's main TV outlet to the public is still via DTT/Freeview despite also being carried on commercial platforms for which the BBC pays a carriage fee. After Switchover in 2012 Freeview technology allowed many additional channels to be carried in less spectrum. The top band ["800"] has already been given to mobiles for 4G services and OfCom has recently decided that the next top band ["700"] is also to be recovered requiring Freeview to move out into the lower bands; this will happen over the next few years, by 2020 - it will bring us into line with Europe and the technical side will be ratified internationally this November.
The idea is to give even more spectrum to the mobiles ostensibly to support national Mobile Broadband, a government favourite project because it promises windfalls of spectrum licences. Currently Freeview does not pay spectrum fees but will be required to do so from about 2020 under plans already published some while ago - "Administered Incentive Pricing" - thus adding to costs during the next LF period ending in 2026 -assuming the usual 10 year span].
The mobiles have now increased their demands and want ALL the rest of the Freeview spectrum so that in about 10 years' time there will be no DTT/Freeview at all and all BBC programmes [as well as ITV et al] will have to be delivered on commercial platforms for which consumers will have to pay the going rate in addition to whatever the government of the day decides to give what remains of the BBC and its Public Service Broadcasting remit. The mobiles claim that their technology can emulate terrestrial "broadcasting" as we know it but so far have failed to demonstrate that, especially in the area of universal coverage. Even if they could, broadcast would be a premium service unless regulated to be free at the point of consumption as now and would require a lot of dedicated spectrum capacity - mobiles are not charities. What chance any government will regulate to protect PSB in an era where there is only commercial means of delivery?Comment
-
By then I suspect any widespread belief in the value of public service, along with the principles of the welfare state, debt forgiveness and European co-operation will have largely vanished, relics of a more generous and enlightened age. We will simply be left in a Darwinian commercial jungle in a life that is - to qualify Hobbes - nasty, brutish and long.Originally posted by Gordon View PostComment
-
no just an appendage to the US - which is best described as a 1st world power with the welfare system of a developing nationOriginally posted by aeolium View PostComment
-
I'm inclined to agree with that rather pessimistic prognosis but would hope there was still some mileage in the compromise of a mixed economy.Originally posted by aeolium View PostComment
-
What a brilliant phrase, aeolium: "Darwinian commercial jungle.....nasty brutish and long. "
I dread what five years of unfettered Torysim will do to young, old, couples struggling to make their first house work, if they can ever afford it, to the sense of a community as opposed to a community of jostling, shouldering aside strivers.
What did we as a nation do on March 7th?Comment
-
(getting a bit close to the forbidden zone Draco?)Originally posted by DracoM View Post
"We" didn't vote for this government, that's for sure.
It's a great shame, but if things go the way they are increasingly looking like then we will loose many of the things we value in the BBCComment
-
I can't remember what I did on March 7th, but I don't think it was anything especially political!Comment
-
However much we might regret the austerity pressures on public spending there is a clear lesson from Greece about where things can go if public spending is not controlled. The Greek NO vote is whistling in the wind - they have massive debts [E320Bn] and the 11M population [well about 60% of them] doesn't wish to pay for them [caE30,000 each per head obviously a lot more for the tax payers - but I am told that Greece is like Italy, collection of public taxes is rather arbitrary]. IF they fall out of the EuroZone and go back to a national currency that currency's exchange rate will plummet for the same reason that they can't pay their bills now and they will face austerity in a different way. At least then their tourism may revive because it will become a very cheap place to visit.
We also have massive public costs and a large debt [£1.6Tn = E2.9Bn - over 64M people about E36,000 each!!] so need to find a way of paying for them. Tax is the main source of public revenue so an increase would be the obvious way to do it. Our economy is in better shape than Greece so our credit rating is good - France and Germany both have similar amounts of debt cf GDP - and can support that debt because the interest is down at 8% of that GDP which is 10x that of Greece.
Public spending needs public revenues, preferably from someone else. Last year tax revenues were £514Bn [just over half of it personal - Income Tax, CGT, NIC] and the public also paid the BBC £3.75Bn bill [Sky's revenues £5.6Bn and they produce relatively little original programming and no radio and no PSB obligations but cherry pick and capture sports rights]. Subsuming the BBC cost into personal taxation adds 0.75% to the bill. If added to VAT instead it's about 4.5%. If added to VAT it looks very like the way ITV is funded - advertising that adds cost to each product sold/advertised. Regardless of which pot it comes from the public have to pay - even if it is a wholly commercial market - the debate is really about what is paid for and whether you want it or not.
Demotic taste ie majority will always win and marginal interests like R3 will fall by the wayside. What will the 2M or so R3 listeners do if that happened? It costs £40M to run so that's only £20pa each, one seventh of the LF, surely that's worth it - so what's the problem??? What would happen if the BBC funding, ie the LF, was voluntary, ie a subscription without access controls like PBS in the USA? Why do Sky use a strong smart card?Comment
-
Can we stay on the subject of the BBC?
It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.Comment
-
Comment
-
do you expect R3 to exist by end of next charter renewal ? - your last 2 posts are somewhat pessimistic for its survivalOriginally posted by Gordon View PostComment
Comment