More reflections on the licence fee

There’s a good article here on how the licence fee deal came to be.

What does it mean for our pensions? As I said a couple of days ago, it increases the funding pressure, and the BBC will use that to argue that our pensions are still more unaffordable. I don’t agree. I think the questions that we’ve been asking about the deficit, about how big it really is, about alternative ways that the deficit could be funded, and about the true scale of the long term liabilities are just as valid now as before. The BBC’s long term aim – quite explicitly – is to reduce the amount it spends on pensions. It’s a choice, and there is nothing unrealistic about asking the BBC to change that choice and stick to the long term commitments it entered into when it set up the pension scheme.


2 Responses to “More reflections on the licence fee”

  1. BEN Says:

    so why did Mark Thompson not even ask the government for a 1% rise on the licence fee last month? He just gave away “income” for the BBC around 160M for the next 2 years/

  2. almost witty Says:

    To be fair, this Government seems far more obsessed with cutting spending than raising revenues. Which seems bizarre to me – if I have a financial crunch on the family budgets, I don’t just cut costs – I get a second job or whatever.

    So in that scenario, asking for a 1% rise in the licence fee would get a very quick No from the DCMS…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: