Before we get back onto the probation agenda proper, I think we need to talk about poor old Auntie. Not to put too finer point on it, the BBC is now facing an existential threat to its very existence, by a right-wing government gloating at it's recent victory. Let that sink in for a moment. The organisation that was caught out trying to massage the image of a dreadful, lying, bully of a prime minister, leading a party that many thought benefited from its media bias, is now set on a path of destruction by the said beneficiaries of that bias.
Put another way, the organisation that it is said felt obliged to 'massage' the PM's poor image on Remembrance Sunday, on a TV debate and at other awkward moments because it might foster public distrust in the democratic process if we were allowed to see what a fucking arse we had as a PM, is now going to face demise with the connivance of the unelected career psychopath, Dominic Cummings.
Of course there is the not small matter of the shouting match with Andrew Marr who dared to demand the PM answer his questions, rather than those chosen by him, and Andrew Neil who so brilliantly called out the nasty, lying and scared PM for refusing to be interviewed at all. Boris got away with it all and now for all his 'one nation' bollocks, wants his revenge.
Many will say we've been here before and the BBC has survived many previous attacks because, along with the NHS, it is a much-loved institution. The trouble this time is that the number and nature of attacks are considerable and it's difficult to see a way out of squaring the circle regarding the vital matter of how the bloody hell we pay for it?
Old people watch it, but young people don't. The government disgracefully saddled the BBC with paying for the over 75's, despite it being a political decision to exempt this group from payment, but have now washed their hands of any responsibility. The cost of the World Service, regarded as vitally important by HM Government, has now been off-loaded from the Foreign Office to licence-payers.
In a rapidly-changing environment of online content providers and subscription services with less people finding BBC content of interest, it's now becoming increasingly untenable to hold the line regarding compulsory licence-paying, especially when combined with criminal sanctions for non-payment. The BBC really is between a rock and a very hard place with discussions regarding the licence fee due by 2022 and Charter renewal in 2027. With Nicky Morgan agreeing to ennoblement and remaining at the DCMS, her stated view of being 'open-minded' regarding the licence fee looks ominous.
Then there's radio. We learn that No10 has lost confidence in the 'Today' programme because Dominc Cummings thinks it's 'too metropolitan'. As the absolute key national daily agenda-setting political programme, felt to be so important it's absence from the airwaves is used by the Royal Navy as an indicator for possible nuclear armageddon, if this is going to succumb to partisan political pressure, the whole notion of public service broadcasting must surely be in danger?
We have all witnessed the rapid demise of local newspapers due to the effect of free on-line content, and the consequent abandoning of scrutinising local democracy and court proceedings. Somewhat ironically and with little fanfare, I wonder how widely it's known that the BBC is now lumbered with financing 'local democracy reporters' in order to try and redress the situation? This sort of 'fudge' is only possible of course because of the special way the BBC has been historically funded, by an hypothecated tax.
Of course in days past and an ideal world where common sense rather than political advantage held sway, such matters as important as the future of Public Service Broadcasting and the BBC would be decided only after lengthy deliberation by an independent Royal Commission. But we now live in the nasty world of Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings and pretty much everything many of us sensibly hold dear is now under threat, the very Union of nations, NHS, Supreme Court, Royal Prerogative, House of Lords, Judicial Review and BBC.
To me it's beginning to make me think long and hard about what makes a Nation, its very nature and identity and if it's one I can continue to feel proud of. The BBC is the National flag-carrying broadcaster and where we would still turn in order to share great moments of national grief and celebration, despite the growth of time-shifted and paid-for subscription content. Doesn't it really deserve a bit more thought as to its future than allowing a nasty, vindictive government to trample all over it in pursuance of revenge and political advantage?
Sept 2016:
ReplyDelete"The BBC licence fee and the corporation’s flagship channel BBC1 should be scrapped, according to a report from a rightwing thinktank.
The report, Licence to Kill: Funding the BBC, was published by the Centre for Policy Studies.
It claimed that removing “BBC services which are not distinct, (and) are already provided by its competitors ... would save £1.8bn – half the licence fee”.
BBC iPlayer loophole closes as licence required for catchup TV
Read more
The report called for the closure of BBC1, Radio 1, Radio 2, local radio and BBC orchestras among other services.
It criticised the government for what it said was simply a “tweak” in the BBC charter review.
The report said that the new set-up – designed to remain in place until 2027 – was “not sustainable” and that a full charter review should take place during the “midterm review” in 2021.
It said that the case for “radical changes to the BBC” to make it “much smaller” and “specialise in what no one else can do ... will become even more compelling over the next few years”.
The report called for the scrapping of the licence fee and for a smaller BBC to be “directly funded by the government in the same way as the Arts Council or the NHS”.
A loophole is being closed on Thursday that allowed people to watch BBC shows they had missed on live TV for free.
They will now risk prosecution and a £1,000 fine if they download or watch programmes on the iPlayer without a TV licence."
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/sep/01/tv-licence-fee-bbc1-centre-for-policy-studies
Guardian
ReplyDeleteA history of the licence fee
First published on Tue 11 Oct 2005 18.51 BST
An annual licence fee of 10 shillings was first introduced under the Wireless Telegraphy Act in November 1923, to cover radio sets. At the time, labourers in the south of England were earning around £2 12s a week.
If the fee had risen at the same rate as other retail prices since 1923, it would cost around £18.50 today.
By the end of 1923, 200,000 licences had been issued and by 1928 this had risen to 2.5m.
The first combined radio and TV licence, costing £2, was issued in June 1946.
Initially the Post Office collected the payments and in return received a slice of the revenue. The Treasury also took a cut until October 1963, when excise duty on licences was abolished.
Advertisement
Radio sets, including car radios, were exempted from the fee in 1971.
As a result of the Broadcasting Act 1990, the BBC was made responsible for licence administration and TV Licensing is sub-contracted to collect the fee on its behalf.
In March 2004, there were 24.5m licences in force.
Approximately 5% of televisions are currently believed to be unlicensed.
A colour TV licence currently costs £126.50 annually for each household. It is free for over-75s, and half-price for those who are registered blind. Black and white licences are £42.
A licence must be obtained for any device "installed or used" for receiving broadcasts, which potentially covers equipment such as a tuner card in a PC or a portable television.
Plenty of reason to be concerned. This from Civil Service World:-
ReplyDeleteA review of civil service employment terms is also expected. The Sunday Telegraph reported that Cummings, a long-standing critic of the civil service, would spearhead work to underpin radical reforms, including a review of hiring and firing processes.
Cummings has claimed that a permanent civil service is “an idea for history books” and proposed the abolition of the role of permanent secretaries in his vision for civil service reform.
In 2014 lecture, Cummings said that the civil service "weeds out dissenters" and instead “promotes people who focus on being important, not getting important things done”.
“So if you have an entire political structure that selects against the skills of entrepreneurs and successful scientists, don’t be surprised when the people in charge can’t solve problems like entrepreneurs and scientists.”
In the same lecture, Cummings said that the HR system in many parts of the civil service discourages people from caring about their work, because "almost no one is ever fired" and failure is not treated as "something to be avoided".
Cummings has also called for the cabinet to be radically slimmed down. “The idea of a cabinet of over 30 people is a complete farce; it should be maximum of probably six or seven people,” he said in the lecture.
Reorganisation 'distraction' warning
Responding to the reported changes, FDA general secretary Dave Penman said that policy is a better way of ensuring than government can effect real change than reorganising departments.
“Whilst the temptation from every new government is to demonstrate their reforming zeal by reorganising Whitehall, this can often be a distraction and waste both time and money as civil servants merge or split departments, rather than simply getting on with the job in hand,” he said.
"Government departments, many of whom employ thousands of staff, are all separate employers with their own pay and grading structures. Putting these together alongside IT and back office functions takes time and resource.
"It’s never a short-term fix and only works if it’s supported by a clear policy focus and is embedded for the longer term.”
Chief secretary to the Treasury Rishi Sunak remained tight-lipped yesterday when pressed on whether the prime minister wants to implement a raft of changes in Whitehall.
"I think what people watching will not be interested in the process of government," the cabinet minister told Sky News. "What they want to know is that government’s going to deliver for them."
The Financial Times also reported that cabinet secretary Sir Mark Sedwill is set to stay in the post, rather than fill the vacancy for UK ambassador to the US. Sedwill was mooted as a possible successor to Sir Kim Darroch, the ambassador who incurred the wrath of US president Donald Trump earlier this year.
Here's Cummings' essay about Whitehall from Oct 2014:
Deletehttps://dominiccummings.com/2014/10/30/the-hollow-men-ii-some-reflections-on-westminster-and-whitehall-dysfunction/
Some selected bits:
Delete"The people at the apex of political power (elected and unelected) are far from the best people in the world in terms of goals, intelligence, ethics, or competence... Their education and training is such that almost nobody has the skills needed to cope with the complexity they face or even to understand the tools (such as Palantir) that might help them. Political ‘experts’ are usually hopeless at predictions and routinely repeat the same sorts of errors without being forced to learn."
Cummings' response to one of the many comments at the end of his blog:
"I do stress that the most important distinction is NOT public/private but bureaucrat/startup mentality.
Best wishes
DC"
In a series of exchanges with Lindsay Jenkins (an investigative author and journalist who specializes in the history and current operations of the European Union) Cummings persists with his version of events, while Jenkins says it is not accurate:
Cummings: "What I ‘suggest’ is simply what the verifiable historical record says re the ECSC. All serious historians of the ECSC describe [Monnet's] role as important. That does not mean that others were not important."
Jenkins: "That’s an interesting use of language"
________________________________________________
Clearly nothing is what it seems where Cummings is concerned.
Can I suggest some light is shone upon this Cummings character?
ReplyDeleteHe provides a summary at https://dominiccummings.com
"I read Ancient & Modern History at Oxford University (graduated 1994).
I worked in Russia 1994-7 on various projects.
I was Director of Research then Campaign Director of Business for Sterling and the ‘no’ campaign (to stop Britain joining the euro) 1999-2002.
I worked on various projects 2003-7, including trying to stop the EU Constitution being enacted (2004-5) and helping to run the referendum campaign against the North East Regional Assembly (2004) which won 80-20.
I was Michael Gove’s main adviser September 2007 – January 2014, with a break May 2010-December 2010. (NB. BBC people in particular: I said in September 2013 I was leaving and I left voluntarily in January 2014, do not put me in your lists of ‘people who were fired’ as you are prone to.)
I have never been a member of a political party.
In 2015/16 I ran the official leave campaign in the EU referendum, Vote Leave.
I run a company, North Wood, that tries to solve problems (management, political, communication)"
BBC News, Worboys decision:
ReplyDeleteA probation report in August this year found "he is potentially just as dangerous now as the point of the first sentence".
That's it!! I've had enough of this pro-probation media. Stop the Licence Fee! Cancel the news!
(err, but don't get rid of Rhys James Isn’t… "B" - Comedian Rhys James doesn't have any opinions. Over two episodes he'll be trying some on, from both sides of the argument, to see how they fit. R4).
Modern-day Tories are keen on power and the headline soundbite, but not the detail.
ReplyDeleteAn arrogant incompetent tory minister (shurely not?) has fucked up in relation to post-Grenfell legislation:
"The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has been forced to set aside elements of a suite of building-safety measures introduced following the Grenfell Tower fire after a High Court challenge.
Trade body the British Blind and Shutter Association (BBSA) questioned the lawfulness of part of the Building (Amendment) Regulations 2018 because they effectively banned products made or sold by its members from being installed on buildings taller than 18 metres.
Judge Mrs Justice Steyn said in her judgment that parts of the consultation process, which was launched by then housing secretary James Brokenshire, had been “so unfair as to be unlawful”.
The 27-page judgment said no evidence had been put before the court to suggest that the use of combustible materials in products like external shutters, awnings and roller blinds created a fire risk."
https://www.civilserviceworld.com/articles/news/high-court-forces-mhclg-scrap-post-grenfell-safety-change
Fearing I may be advancing the arguments of Cummings re-the civil service; these are also from CSW:
ReplyDelete* Department uncovered indecent images in routine check on press officer’s laptop... A former press officer at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has been jailed for online child sex abuse offences and possessing hundreds of pornographic images and videos involving minors... [he] told officers he visited the conferencing room to watch male pornography, but could not remember what he had viewed or streamed because of his crystal meth habit.
_______________________________________________________
* A Department for International Trade barrister has become one of the first people in the country to be sentenced for the new offence of “upskirting” after being apprehended by a police officer at a central London tube station. An expert in trade law, Timson-Hunt was head of DIT’s EU exit and goods legal team at until he left the post last month. He had previously worked at HM Revenue and Customs.
________________________________________________________
* A Department for Work and Pensions caseworker has been jailed for defrauding the public purse to the tune of £41,446.50 by diverting cash into accounts set up using other people’s National Insurance numbers.
________________________________________________________
* A Department for Education manager has been jailed for conning the DfE out of more than a million pounds, after his mother, a senior civil servant, informed the authorities... A court heard that [he] set up bogus companies – called JP Swimsafe Ltd and My Swim Ltd – to get hold of funds intended for swimming programmes, using the diverted money to buy a series of properties for himself... The total value of the transfers made was £1,103,000, and the former higher executive officer's fraud only came to light when his partner noticed irregular payments in his account and then informed his mother, a deputy director in the DfE.
________________________________________________________
More? Oh, okay then:
DeleteReported fraud levels across Whitehall have more than doubled to an annual £73.6m according to new data published by the Cabinet Office.
The 2015-16 figure, contained in the latest Cross Government Fraud Landscape Annual Report is a significant hike on the £29.7m reported for the previous year. The totals exclude tax- and benefits-related fraud involving the Department for Work and Pensions and HM Revenue & Customs, which are subject to a different reporting regime...
... According to a table in the report, the Ministry of Justice had the highest level of total detected fraud and error in 2015-16, recording a figure of £28.79m. Of that figure £24.44m was described as “detected fraud”... The MoJ said its 2015 figures included a "significant amount of unsubstantiated claims"
(this was a 2017 story)
I found the 2018 report, which seems to be the most recent, covering 2016/7...
DeleteYou have to hand it to those cheeky Tory bastards, they've got brass cahonas. "We first however acknowledged that in order to fight fraud, you had to find it."
The 2016/17 figures show:
"Total detected fraud increased by £45m, or 61% to £119m (excluding anomalies)".
After blaming the Labour administration for leaving them with an empty bank account in 2010 we find a lovely small section buried in the report entitled "The scale of loss":
**Government’s understanding of the potential range of losses is increasing as we continue to build our knowledge and understanding of the fraud landscape in central government. As a result of this work, government estimates that fraud and error loss outside of the tax and welfare system cost central government between £2.7bn and £20.3bn in 2016-17.**
That is "ANYWHERE BETWEEN THREE BILLION & TWENTY BILLION POUNDS FUCKING STERLING" of *public money* lost through fraud or error!!
That's some massive fucking margin of missing dosh and doesn't begin to quantify the years when they never even bothered to look.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/764832/Cross-GovernmentFraudLandscapeAnnualReport2018.pdf
Quick - jump on the bandwagon before it leaves you behind!
ReplyDeletehttps://www.aol.co.uk/news/2019/12/17/nearly-half-of-people-in-the-uk-think-bbc-news-journalists-dont/
Nearly half of the people in the UK believe BBC News journalists are not honest and objective, according to a new YouGov poll.
DeleteThe study showed 28% of people did not have much trust in the public broadcaster, while 20% did not trust it at all.
The number of people who did trust the BBC a great deal was 8% and a further 36% trusted the organisation a fair amount.
The latest figures showing the decline in public trust came after the organisation was criticised for its coverage of the general election.
With a majority of 80, Johnson really has to do the walk.
ReplyDeleteCan't blame opposition for blocking policies to tackle the issues that cause homelessness. Can't blame anyone for public service failures, for housing, for the state of the CJS, or anything else. He can do whatever he wants to do
I personally think he's an educated idiot, but I'd love to see history prove me wrong.
'Getafix