It’s time for everyone to wake up and realise how potentially malevolent this government’s plans for the BBC will be in their effect, writes Raymond Snoddy.
Independence from government is supposed to be a touchstone of the BBC, something that sets it apart from broadcasters in questionable regimes everywhere.
In recent years the concept has been increasingly stretched by politicians eager to dip the BBC licence fee for many purposes, from the digital switchover and boosting broadband to launching local television.
At least such enterprises had a rough relevance, a connection with communications, even though such infrastructure projects should more properly have been funded from general taxation.
For Sir Michael Lyons, the former chairman of the BBC Trust, and the majority of his Trustees, funding free licence-payers for the over-75s was a step too far, turning the BBC into an arm of social services.
They threatened to resign en masse in 2010, apart from two internal dissenters, and the threat was powerful enough to force the coalition government, encouraged by the Lib-Dems, to back down.
Why would you want to try to undermine an organisation that reaches 97% of the population each week, unless you are motivated by commercial rivalry, malice or ideology?”
The deal, as we all know now, involved taking on and paying for a raft of new responsibilities in return, not only for having the open-ended commitment of the over 75s taken away, but also avoiding the threat of a full “scale and scope” investigation.
Roll on five years and the over 75s free licence fees costing at least £650 million a year and rising, is back with a vengeance – as is the “scale and scope” inquiry.
Each director-general in turn has said that the deal they negotiated was the best in all the prevailing political circumstances at the time.
This may be true in the narrowest sense, but neglects to recognise the damaging cumulative impact of two shotgun settlements across just five years of government “policy-making” in terms of both cash and the constitutional well-being of the Corporation.
This week’s Green Paper, to be published on Thursday, will reveal the scale of the threat now facing the BBC, not least the further threat to its independence.
The approach which was already troubling is now descending into farce as politicians who rarely watch television are trying to turn themselves into programme commissioners – telling the BBC what programmes it should or should not commission and transmit.
[advert position=”left”]
Actually, farce is the wrong word. A good farce can display wit and intelligence. These are truly witless politicians.
How long before they try to interfere with the BBC’s news coverage?
A line has already been crossed and it is time for everyone to wake up and realise how potentially malevolent this government’s plans for the BBC will be in their effect, whether wholly intended or not.
Just below the surface of those who argue Thou Shall Not Broadcast The Voice is the much larger ideologically agenda of those who want the BBC turned into a small rump of what it currently is, merely proving a narrow range of programmes that the market will not provide. That way heads towards marginalisation of the sort enjoyed by PBS in the America.
Across the generations what would now be called the BBC’s “mission statement” has been to entertain, educate and inform.
Delete the entertaining bit, and with it goes the ability to reach 97 per cent of UK adults each week and you undermine the case for a universal licence fee.
But why would you want to try to undermine an organisation that reaches 97 per cent of the population each week, unless you are motivated by commercial rivalry, malice or ideology?
Not for the first time the BBC’s highly-paid army of policy wonks have got things badly wrong. Instead of going public and launching the defence of the BBC as early as possible – getting the retaliation in first – they decided it would be better to keep the ammunition dry. Better to play it long and engage in rational debate over time in the Charter Review.
Commercial rivals, instead of scenting blood, would be wise to take a longer term and more balanced view.”
Then came the smash-and-grab raid out of the blue and the poor old BBC was hopeless wrong-footed and is now struggling for breath.
To make matters worse the DCMS has appointed a panel of advisers largely made up of experts weighted in the direction of those who, temperamentally, would like to see a much smaller Corporation.
As Chancellor George Osborne talks glibly about BBC imperialism when in recent years the opposite is the case, few are prepared to look dispassionately at the role the BBC plays in the creative economy.
One of those dealing in facts rather than prejudice is Enders Analysis.
As a result of recent events, Enders warns of the BBC’s declining share of TV revenues. In 2010 it was 22 per cent. By next year this will have fallen to a forecast 17 per cent with a mere 12 per cent likely by 2026 when the new Charter period ends.
We can mock – and indeed should mock – the BBC’s failure until now to do anything serious about its over-blown management structure.
This actually disguising the fact that overall the BBC is effective and efficient at its primary role – producing first run programmes.
Enders points out that when the BBC had 22 per cent of TV revenues in 2010 it produced 49 per cent of first run content origination. Even at 17 per cent of revenues the BBC should still be well above 40 per cent and with radio the BBC figure is likely to be over 50 per cent, although no official figures are available.
Independent producers have already got the message and realise just how damaging an artificially constrained BBC would be to the whole sector.
Commercial rivals, instead of scenting blood, would be wise to take a longer term and more balanced view.
As for viewers, whether fans of The Voice or not, if they value what the BBC has been and could yet be, it might be wise to inform tennis fan John Whittingdale he does not speak for them.
