Cuts v reinvestment

Four related posts about the BBC strategy review

BBC managers face several ways when announcing plans for the years ahead. Externally, when Treasury officials (as has become the practice) are setting the licence fee, year-by-year "efficiencies" are the name of the game, as they are for all Civil Service departments. And the Treasury like to be convinced of that by seeing a smaller headcount of staff. Cuts are inevitable year by year, to deal simply with the inflation of all running costs - traditionally higher in the broadcasting industry. The worry for the BBC is a "stretch target" over and above that. The PR around this strategy review has wobbled; at first, it was said 600 jobs might go if all options were taken by The Trust; in recent days that has come down to 200.

In management-speak, the emphasis is always on transformation, creativity, new ways of working. investment in quality - a change of direction to serve audiences better, not cutting cloth to confront financial reality.

Internally, staff know these are cuts. And they are probably understated, because of the continuous "efficiencies" programme. The problem for the BBC is that it is very weak on compulsory redundancies. The unions have successfully opposed them over recent years; members, quite rightly, see very little security in the commercial world. Voluntary redundancy takes out old, experienced staff - and quite a lot of younger mothers, who fancy the cash boost, but can't imagine working through til pension time. Soon, that supply of volunteers will disappear. No amount of "re-investment" will win the support of those being shown the door.