BBC cost cutting

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

Not my main gripe at all. I was just making a point, and your figures again quote 4 million, but your not taking in to equation that UK tax payers pay for the scottish government, who subsidise BBC Alba to the tune of 10 million.

But your spot on about the parliament channel, don't know the viewing figures, but as you say, they can't be very high. Also, how can that cost 9.6 million, surely a few fixed cameras and a bit of miking would do.

If it was my decision, I would move scottish gaelic programming to BBC Scotland's schedule, and if they can't drastically reduce what seems an obscene amount of money for the parliament channel, that can go too.

Everybody has different ideas about what is good tv, what is justifiable programming, what should stay, and what should go, but money has to be saved somewhere.

iMark made a good point about fractionally increasing income tax and doing away with the licence fee, then pay for the BBC directly from taxation, thus saving a lot of money which is spent on administration and chasing non payers of the licence fee.

Would you object to a small amount of advertising on the BBC?

 

[JamesOK]

I would guess (having spent some time in a public sector organisation) that the BBC could save a great deal of money with very little impact on their output. Whilst I agree on things like BBC Alba, Asian Network, S4C (theres even an S4C/2, who knows why, hardly anyone watches S4C 1!), I would expect you could find millions of pounds worth of savings just from reducing overheads, staffing levels etc. As with all public organisations, I bet you will find overbloated departments with too many people doing to little. This is where they should look at reducing costs.

As for the 3 million on Wimbledon, 12 million on world cup etc. The level of return you get for their investment is absolutely amazing. Normally on HD channels, red button, radio, internet. I dont know whether it could be done cheaper to the same level, but would be very surprised if so.

 

[DavieCee]

Since we don't receive BBC England, the BBC Scotland schedule is already full of programmes, hence a part time additional channel was created. The channel wouldn't exist without the backing of the Scottish Government but it is up to them how they decide to spend their budget. It just means that our potholes don't get filled in

Re taxation, what about chasing non tax payers?

Re advertising, no. The BBC is either advert free or license free.

Maybe what you want to propose is an American style Public Broadcast Station (PBS) that caters for minority interests but is donation funded.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

DavieCee:
Since we don't receive BBC England, the BBC Scotland schedule is already full of programmes, hence a part time additional channel was created. The channel wouldn't exist without the backing of the Scottish Government but it is up to them how they decide to spend their budget. It just means that our potholes don't get filled in

Re taxation, what about chasing non tax payers?

Re advertising, no. The BBC is either advert free or license free.

Maybe what you want to propose is an American style Public Broadcast Station (PBS) that caters for minority interests but is donation funded.

I'm not proposing anything, just offering an opinion on what other people have suggested and my thoughts, but donations to me, mean political bias. Political parties are funded by donations, and that's when the corruption starts with contracts handed out as well as knighthoods etc. to those who donate the most. People don't donate for the fun of it, they want something in return.

Is BBC Scotland 24 hours? If not, then broadcast BBC Alba throughout the night, and if anyone wants to watch these programmes, they can record them and watch at their leisure.

You obviously don't like the idea of paying fractionally more tax, but you would be saving the licence fee. If you think about it, it would definitely be a more efficient way of paying to watch tv than the current system.

Who do mean by non tax payers? Unemployed? Or the wealthy tax avoiders?

 

[The_Lhc]

BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW:You obviously don't like the idea of paying fractionally more tax, but you would be saving the licence fee. If you think about it, it would definitely be a more efficient way of paying to watch tv than the current system.

Yes but then you're actually reliant on the government of the day to give that extra tax to the BBC, instead of farming it off to some other requirement (see collection of road tax compared to the amount actually spent on the roads). Currently an anti-BBC government can simply say, we don't want the license fee to go up. Under your scheme that government could effectively pull the plug entirely, should they so want (something which many in the Tory party would like to see happen if the rumours are to be believed).

Personally speaking I don't want to see that happen.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

the_lhc:BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW:You obviously don't like the idea of paying fractionally more tax, but you would be saving the licence fee. If you think about it, it would definitely be a more efficient way of paying to watch tv than the current system.Yes but then you're actually reliant on the government of the day to give that extra tax to the BBC, instead of farming it off to some other requirement (see collection of road tax compared to the amount actually spent on the roads). Currently an anti-BBC government can simply say, we don't want the license fee to go up. Under your scheme that government could effectively pull the plug entirely, should they so want (something which many in the Tory party would like to see happen if the rumours are to be believed).Personally speaking I don't want to see that happen.

Fair point, but surely there could be some kind of legislation which would prevent any government scrapping the BBC, and ring roading an agreed amount of money to pay for the BBC