A Vote Of No Confidence In Mark Thompson

[Tiger]

Ok here is the first draft..please add or change.

"To Lord Patten Chair of the BBC Trust.

In October of last year Mark Thompson introduced some proposals to cut spending at the corporation.
He said that BBC local radio would only operate in peak hours. Afternoon and evening programming would be delivered as networked output and a pan England broadcast would replace local broadcasts in the evening.


As licence fee payers and listeners to BBC local radio we are united in our disgust. We no longer have any confidence in Mark Thompson as Director General of the BBC.

These are our reasons.


1. The licence fee settlement , which should be a matter for public scrutiny was conducted in secrecy.It resulted in the proposals to destroy BBC local radio. There was no consultation with the BBC Trust or indeed the fee payers. That is not how a leader of a publicly funded organisiation should act.


2.BBC local radio is a voice of the people. It is the only voice. To take away that voice in a time of national crisis is not a responsible act.

3. Mark Thompson has not protected local democracy . He decided to protect BBC1 and Radio4. That is not acting in the public interest.

4. Mark Thompson pays himself and his executive very well.He earns £800,000 pa and that does not include his pension and his expensive expenses. As one member of his own staff told him his salary is"wrong and corrosive"

5. Mark Thompson decided to spend millions of our licence fee on building an empire in Salford. Yes, just before the Olympics forcing staff to relocate from London(where the Olympics will take place) an act of madness.


6.Mark Thompson is unfit to be in charge of the BBC, he has no understanding of the value of public service, he has shown that he is not accountable to the British public, he is prepared to  take a vast salary for himself, but clearly shows that he is unable to value public service broadcasting.


We the undersigned, are not prepared to pay our licence fee to a corporation that is managed by Mark Thompson."


OK this is just a bare bone first text, and I will be fine tuning  it, hopefully with your help. But we need to express our anger.

[Rita]

Tiger,
Where you've got "expensive expenses" I think I would put (after pension) plus the expenses he receives, which in a time of austerity are extreme to say the least.
I don't know whether this is applicable, but I would mention the fact that much-liked presenters, especially the "freelancers" are more at risk and as some of these people have been loyal servants to their stations over many years and could lose their programmes "at a stroke" and without thought, that is completely unacceptable.
Also, the fact that it seems to be taking a long time for the results of the consultation to be known (surely the comments from the listeners have been looked out as they have been received - I don't know).  Hope this is helpful.

[Tiger]

Ok , good points Rita, I will put them in.

Also we need to underline the damage to weekend broadcasting.

And it is important to comment on the delay in the reporting of the Trust's findings because it is becoming clear that cuts are already being made(even before the consultation close) and presumably will continue before any attempt is made to address public opposition.

Oh I will link the new petition to the old text..so those issues remain as a given.

Will put new draft up tomorrow,


Thankyou for your input X

And please keep contributing with your thoughts.

[darcysarto]

Just a random couple of thoughts Tiger, firstly, I think perhaps the damage that will be done to local journalism needs to be underlined?  We have seen many concentrate on losing this or that programme, coverage of this or that sport etc, but one of the biggest loses may not be counted in lost programmes but content?

Should it be made clear that the BBC as an entity is completely valued?

6Music fiasco?

Advertising on the World Service?

Sorry to be so random.

[Tiger]

Yes, I agree..

As I have said the original text of the petition will be a major plank of the new one. But I agree, we need to stress local journalism again(have to be careful to balance that with the fact that the cuts are not directly targetting flagship news programs..so perhaps the obvious needs to be stated that cuts in staff journalist numbers, whether or not they dirctly work on peak shows, damages the capability of the station..)

I think 6 Music and The WS can be introduced..into the text.

I am struggling a bit with a crossroads here..

Do we want a vote of No confidence in Mark Thompson..sort of all singing and dancing, everything thrown at it.

Or do we want a vote of no confidence in the DG, primarily directed at the destruction of BBC local radio?

We can do both...

Words can be powerful things when used with economy..(sorry thinking aloud!)

[News Mutt]

I hope I can offer a constructive suggestion here... The NUJ's vote of no confidence was triggered by DQF and centres around it. But the basic text was very simple - not all singing, all dancing. I don't have a copy to hand but I'm sure it's on the NUJ website.

Personally, I'd focus on the LR aspect of things - as the Local Radio Forum you have a clear focus in that respect. Listing a line of "dislikes" in the main "motion" isn't always helpful. However, you could incorporate those into any accompanying press releases etc.

[darcysarto]

I hope I can offer a constructive suggestion here... The NUJ's vote of no confidence was triggered by DQF and centres around it. But the basic text was very simple - not all singing, all dancing. I don't have a copy to hand but I'm sure it's on the NUJ website.

Personally, I'd focus on the LR aspect of things - as the Local Radio Forum you have a clear focus in that respect. Listing a line of "dislikes" in the main "motion" isn't always helpful. However, you could incorporate those into any accompanying press releases etc.

The NUJ website has not imo been the most helpful or easiest to navigate in the past, I have previously looked around for information relating to the ballot but found nada.  Has the ballot happened?  And a link to the wording would be of interest.

[Tiger]

Yes, I think we need to see the text of the ballot and a clear idea of the timetable. I will contact the NUJ formally tomorrow to request that, it is not available as public info, however, if anyone can short circuit that please do so.

It is very clear, however that the NUJ in their lobbying info to journalists, that they agree with this forum that any delay is dangerous to outcome and that BBC management are already implementing the cuts before the public consultation conclusions are delivered.

"The BBC has refused to wait until the outcome of the BBC Trust’s public consultation on
programme cuts before beginning the process for making people redundant. This makes a
sham of the consultation."


http://www.nuj.org.uk/files/ONLINE_BBC_LEAFLET.pdf


Any delay is merely a way to dampen public anger in the hope that the proposals will be delivered by stealth.

[News Mutt]

The ballot closed on 16th January. I don't havevthe text to hand and don't know when the result will be announced.

However, I would urge some caution in the link you provided to the leaflet. That was from November, whilst the NUJ and BECTU were actively balloting for industrial action over the cuts. This dispute has now been settled as the BBC has since agreed to a new framework for the way in which any redundancies are notified or handled.

I can't really go into the fine detail on a public forum, but the phrase you've selected there is talking about pushing through redundancy notices. It's different from urging the Trust to speed up its conclusions, and I wouldn't want the two issues being linked.

What I can say is that there's lots of internal work being done about redundancies by the Unions, and the whole process is likely to continue for some considerable time yet.

[Tiger]

Well, I await replies from the NUJ.

It would be interesting to see the text of the ballot. However, so far as this forum is concerned, this is an action by the public and one is not dependant on the other. And I can imagine most of the text, after the Belfast meeting. But it would be useful to be in tandem.


Newsmutt, I take your point, however, if redundancies are being made(possibly voluntary, I heard what Pauline Causey said about that point) and  if replacement is not forthcoming then indeed the cuts are already happening before the end of a public consultation,( which is of course very different from union consultations), and that is not democratic or correct and needs to be challenged fairly strongly.

[darcysarto]

Sorry don't have time to comment just drop this and dash http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.com/2012/01/succession-planning.html

[Tiger]

Yes and in Guardian.

BBC hires headhunting firm to find Mark Thompson's successorChairman of BBC Trust, Lord Patten, starts process to find a replacement director general but there is no 'imminent vacancy'

 

 
guardian.co.uk, Monday 23 January 2012 11.31 GMT Article history 
There has been speculation Thompson, who has been director general since June 2004, will leave after the London Olympics in August. Photograph: Dave Thompson/PA Wire/Press Association Images
The BBC has hired a headhunting firm to develop the "initial stages" of a succession plan for Mark Thompson, beginning the process of finding a replacement for the long-serving director general although there is as yet no job vacancy.

Lord Patten, the chairman of the BBC Trust, told Monday's Times that he has appointed headhunters Egon Zehnder to identify the scope and remit of the director general role that will be filled by Thompson's successor.

However, the BBC Trust said the appointment of Egon Zehnder, which were used by the government for the recruitment process that led to the appointment of Patten to take over from Sir Michael Lyons as trust chairman, "does not signal any imminent vacancy".

There has been speculation Thompson, who has been director general since June 2004, will leave after the London Olympics in August and that the BBC will make an announcement confirming this before the Games start in late July.

Patten said the aim of bringing an executive search company in at such an early stage is to produce a report on "what sort of people we should be looking for" to handle the role – "they are not seeking a candidate".

"As the chairman [Patten] has repeatedly said, Mark Thompson does an excellent job as director general and we hope the post does not become vacant any time soon," said a spokesman for the BBC Trust. "Mark Thompson is aware of and supports this exercise."

Patten has made it clear that whoever ultimately takes over from Thompson should expect to take a substantial cut in the current £670,000 salary attached to the director general position.

A spokesman for the BBC said the exercise was a "sensible" step to take but would not elaborate on any timeline for Thompson's departure.

"As has been made clear, this is sensible succession planning, which Mark fully supports," said the spokesman. "It does not mean there is a vacancy."

Confirming a departure date for Thompson after the Olympics would mark the end of a tumultuous period for the BBC under his leadership.

He played a central role in securing the 2010 BBC licence fee deal with the government, which has been criticised in some quarters because of the hasty way it was negotiated and the funding freeze imposed on the corporation. However, Thompson has maintained it will come to be seen as a good deal for the BBC.

Thompson has also overseen the Delivering Quality First process to identify the £700m in cuts required by the 16% real terms cut in BBC funding that resulted from the licence fee settlement, the move to Salford, the sale of Television Centre and redevelopment of Broadcasting House.

Patten gave some clues as to the type of candidate that he is likely to consider for the role, when the time comes.

"It requires renaissance talents," he told the Times. "It's a big management job, it's an editorial job, it's a creative job and it's an important part of our national culture. When the time comes some people will crawl over broken glass to get the chance of doing it".

The list of potential internal candidates to replace Thompson includes George Entwistle, director of BBC Vision; director of news Helen Boaden; chief operating officer Caroline Thomson; and Peter Salmon, director of BBC North.

External candidates could include David Abraham, chief executive of Channel 4; one of his predecessors, Michael Jackson; and Peter Fincham, director of television at ITV and a former BBC1 controller.

Others seen as possible contenders include Sky's head of entertainment, broadcast operations and news, Sophie Turner-Laing; Channel 4's chief creative officer, Jay Hunt; and former Channel 5 chairman and chief executive Dawn Airey.

[Tiger]

This from Bill Rogers..

"Form book 2
Today's DG speculation all in one place.

Ehpraim Hardcastle in the Mail muses on Lord Patten's recruitment strategy: "Is he looking for a new BBC DG who is under his thumb and in his own image – a safe-pair-of-hands time-server at the end of his career ?"

(Him ? End of career ? Male candidates so far mentioned in the press are Tim Davie, George Entwistle and Danny Cohen - none of whom would see the DG role as the end of their working lives. Certainly not at Patten's proposed sub £500k salary).

Tim Walker in The Telegraph says Joan Bakewell is backing Helen Boaden - and, horror of horrors, Joan had dinner with Lord Patten last night. Brave Tim covers the field with an "insider" who tips Caroline Thomson, George Entwistle and Tim Davie.

(The "insider" also talks about Patten halving Mark Thompson's £671k salary for a successor.  That's off - as we've said, over £400k and below £500k is Patten's thinking).

Broadcast takes a measured approach: "Names in the frame have tended to focus around those already working at the BBC, particularly director of Vision George Entwistle, director of news Helen Boaden and director of BBC North Peter Salmon."

(I think an insider is inevitable. It needs to be someone who's bought into DQF, not someone with a different plan) "

[Tiger]

Oh, I have been thinking about this..

Would it be fair to comment, that this move by Patten, allbeit very politely done, is a very clear signal that DQF was a bit of a fail..and that it is now a fail too far...


We have heard and witnessed Mark Thompson over the last year before several committes etc and indeed his DQF delivery, and it must be clear that we do not get a cosy feeling! Votes of No confidence tend not to be a good thing!


Hmmm..

[Tiger]

Seems, that I am not alone in speculation here.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jan/25/lord-patten-succession-plan?intcmp=239


Also, discussed on The Media Show R4 25/1

I think it is generally agreed that the original Times article is "strange" ?