Been there before

In June 2012 John Myerscough produced a report on how to save 20% from the BBC Performing Groups budget, which then stood at £26.9m.  Politely, he said it was a bad idea, and to make any real case, the BBC ought to identify the cheaper, perhaps non-live music output which would replace the inevitable cut in BBC-driven music making.  Yesterday, without full figures of the impact on a current budget of £23m, we learned that 22 BBC Singers are to go, plus the BBC seeks some 50 voluntary redundancy candidates from salaried staff in three orchestras. 

Let's give space again to some of the Myerscough analysis of the Performing Groups. I wonder if Tim Davie and Charlotte Moore bothered to read the whole thing before this current rounds of cuts.

The BBC's net spend on the PGs is £26.9 million (2010/11) excluding external income and the Proms‟ tariff, and so a 20% saving would amount to £5.38 million. This could be approached either by making closures in the PGs or by shaving 20% from each of them, or some combination of the two.

Closure of either the BBC Symphony Orchestra or the BBC Philharmonic Orchestra alone would roughly realise the 20% target sum, with “savings” of £6.7 million and £5.0 million respectively. Closures in various combinations in two or three of the other PGs would also produce the “saving”. But this level of savings would be realised only if the lost output were not replaced. The specialist repertoire, as supplied by the BBC groups, averaging 72 programmes per symphony orchestra, is essential to meeting editorial needs. The cost of sourcing an equivalent volume of the right repertoire from the independent orchestras would more than eat up the “saving”.

The other approach would be to shave 20% off each of the PGs. The difficulty is that the musician establishments of the PGs form a high proportion of their total spend. Savings have already been made in previous efficiency programmes, and so further cuts would quickly reach the bone. 

The administrations of the PGs are lean. The impact of shaving 20% from the net spend would be in three of the four symphony orchestras to reduce their contracted strengths below recognised symphonic size.

This would seriously limit their repertoire. Further, an equivalent squeeze on activity spend would confine the PGs to the studio, end their concert life and limit their choice of artists. They would no longer be able to attract artists of importance. The quality and range of their output would cease to be of editorial interest.

Accordingly, the 20% cut, however approached, would be inconsistent with the Corporation‟s editorial needs and delivery to audiences. The reduction in the quality, range and volume of live and specially recorded music would jeopardise the output of Radio 3 and other services and contradict the former's service licence agreement. Like-for-like replacement programming, sourced from the independent orchestras in the necessary volume, would more than eat up the savings generated by a closure, and be self-defeating.