Above, some very unappetising carrots!
Following Nadine Doris’s announcement about a freeze in the TVT (Television Tax) Polly Tonybee attacked her plans in a Guardian article yesterday: http://www.british-gazette.co.uk/2022/01/17/polly-comes-to-the-defence-of-aunt-beeb/
The problem about the BBC is very well known. Today’s blog-post (https://www.turbulenttimes.co.uk/news/front-page/climate-change-suppressing-the-debate/) by Doctor North demonstrates the problem insofar as the CO2 issue is concerned.
There is no doubt, no doubt at all: Something has to be done!!!
The BG itself has put forward a proposal to more fairly tax the UK taxpayers than the present system: https://british-gazette.com/abolishing-the-tv-licence/
The questions that need to be asked and answered however are these:
– Is it right to continue to finance a state broadcaster from taxpayer’s money? This in the light of the fact that in 9 months time the BBC will celebrate it’s centenary.
The plain simple FACT of the matter is this: The world was a very, very different place on 18th October 1922 than it will be on 18th October 2022. ANY reform of the BBC MUST take this FACT into account. Lord Reeth was most concerned (correctly) that the BBC be impartial and not become like a newspaper in having a definite editorial line. This was because the BBC at the time was going to have a monopoly in terms of it’s broadcasting services. Today there is no monopoly. The argument Lord Reeth used was one of choice. He maintained that a man (or woman) had a choice as regards which newspaper they chose. Thus there was pluralism. Today the person accessing “he media” has a choice. Of instrument (TV/PC/DAB radio and more). Of channels. Now large numbers of people get their news and entertainment from what is termed “social media”. Places like Facebook and YouTube where editorial control and standards are noticeable by their complete absence!
The BG’s Answer: The BG believes that given the difference on size of the demographics between the USA and the UK, it is essential for the cultural life of the UK for it to have a main stream broadcaster that commissions content to be made that is British and not American. We do not make this case for xenophobic or nationalistic reasons but because of commercial and economic reasons. You see, private broadcasters in a free market seek to maximise revenue and minimise costs. US TV series are generally cheaper than their UK equivalents simply because they can spread production costs over a larger audience due to the USA’s population being around five times the UK’s.
Thus if we want to maintain a healthy vibrant popular British cultural life and not one restricted to the wealthy elite a British state funded broadcaster is essential.
OK then, how should it be run?
The answer is straightforward for an organisation financed through taxation: Democratically!
When the American revolutionaries held the Boston Tea Party and began the struggle for independence a principal rallying call was “No taxation without representation.”
Most would agree with this.
Therefore we put forward this proposal:
We think that the management structure BBC should be reorganised with a resurrected Board of Governors and a Board of Directors. The Board of Governors should be elected by the people who pay the Council Tax where a Broadcast Levy is charged. In other words the person named on the council tax bill!
The Board of Governors will set the strategy and the policy of the BBC and will appoint the BBC Board of Directors. The Board of Directors will be responsible for the day to day running of the BBC.
We propose that the Board of Governors should be made up of nine directly elected members.
There should be an elected President of the British Broadcasting Corporation who will sit ex-officio on the Board of Governors with a casting vote. The President of the British Broadcasting Corporation should be democratically elected by the members of the public. That is to say any person on the UK’s electoral role who is eligible to vote in local and national elections. The UK would act as a single constituency for this election and the method of election used should be the Supplementary Ballot – the system used to elect Police and Crime Commissioners.
The post should be full time and salaried. The sort of salary we have in mind is what the Police and Crime Commissioners get paid.
There should in addition be eight directly elected Governors of the British Broadcasting Corporation who will sit on the Board of Governors each with one vote. Each Governor of the British Broadcasting Corporation should be democratically elected by those persons whose name appears on the Council Tax Bill and who therefore possess the legal obligation to pay that bill – which includes the Broadcasting Levy.
As with the case of the President, the UK would act as a single constituency for these elections and the method of election used should again be the Supplementary Ballot. Again, the posts should be full time and salaried. The sort of salary we have in mind is again what the Police and Crime Commissioners get paid.
Now to the most controversial aspect of the method of electing the eight governors.
This is because there would be eight sets of candidates each contesting for one of the gubernatorial posts. In each of the eight cases the geographical area of the constituency would be the entire UK. In other words, the Electoral Commission would NOT be required to divide the UK up into eight separate geographical constituencies! Instead the eight UK wide constituencies would comprise the eight council tax bands! In other words, if a person (like me) living in a Band A property has performed their legal obligation to notify the council that they possess a TV and or a device on which they can receive live broadcasts and as such were required to pay the TV Licence and are now required to pay the Broadcasting Levy they will be entailed to vote for the Governor representing all persons paying the said levy living in council areas across the UK. As with the person living in a Band A property, persons living in bands B, C, D, E, F, G and H will be entitled to vote for the governor representing that council tax band across the entire UK.
Now of course as they read this there will be howls of anguish and indeed shouts of outrage from all those left wing, politically correct persons who will realise that numerically the numbers of persons living in band G and band H properties will be substantially less that the numbers of persons living in band A and band B properties! In other words the richer people will have MORE say via their elected governor than the poorer people!
At this point Dear Reader, we ask you to think sympathetic thoughts for Sir Keir Starmer, Knight Commander of the Bath who will be so consumed with righteous indignation that he will likely be feeling feint to the very great concern of Lady Starmer!
These elections will be very easily to take part in! The election for the President will be by universal suffrage and will have a white ballot paper. The eight gubernatorial elections will have ballot papers in eight distinct colours!
We imagine that like the Police and Crime Commissioner elections the political parties will put candidates up and similarly, there will be independent candidates as well. The costs and requirements of standing involved should be the same as the Police and Crime Commissioner elections. One requirement will be that candidates can only contest ONE election! In other words a candidate say one “Fred Blogs” could NOT stand for Governor in more than one council tax band constituency and candidates for the office of President can NOT stand as governors.
It is very likely that the turnout for these elections will be similar to those for the Police and Crime Commissioner elections. This of course will make poor Sir Keir even angrier to the increasing concern of Lady Starmer. This because Sir Keir will realise that the turnout from bands A and B voters will likely be lower than that from bands G and H voters!
Sir Keir can at least content himself that whilst there are separate constituencies for the different bands of council tax, there is NO enfranchisement of businesses liable to pay the BCL in their Business rates!