IS
You mean cutting bases/jobs and wasting money.
You serious, the BBC grew under Dyke's control!
You consider smaller offices and studio cuts growing...
I know this is probably a discussion for another thread but I think Greg Dyke is regarded as one of the better DGs - especially after life under John Birt. His famous pledge to "cut the crap" was great and although it sadly resulted in some job losses, I believe he actually expanded the BBC workforce by taking other projects forward. I think I remember reading that his biggest legacy can be seen as one of the most influential people in ensuring Freeview got off the ground. That's not a bad achievement for a relatively short amount of time in charge.
I would dare say that many of the "bases" or studios that were either closed or downsized was on the cards a long time before he took over. There was talk of closing Pebble Mill for years and indeed the fact that network productions there dwindled from the mid 90s onwards shows that plans were already in place of where the BBC wanted to make their studio based programmes while BBC Birmingham became more of a production company for shows shot on location.
It's a shame really that an argument with the government was instrumental in his downfall because I think he could have continued to take the BBC forward further than he already had done. All my opinion of course and perhaps this should be continued in another thread...
Isonstine
Founding member
Bring back Greg anyday, the BBC was at it's best when he was in control.
You mean cutting bases/jobs and wasting money.
You serious, the BBC grew under Dyke's control!
You consider smaller offices and studio cuts growing...
I know this is probably a discussion for another thread but I think Greg Dyke is regarded as one of the better DGs - especially after life under John Birt. His famous pledge to "cut the crap" was great and although it sadly resulted in some job losses, I believe he actually expanded the BBC workforce by taking other projects forward. I think I remember reading that his biggest legacy can be seen as one of the most influential people in ensuring Freeview got off the ground. That's not a bad achievement for a relatively short amount of time in charge.
I would dare say that many of the "bases" or studios that were either closed or downsized was on the cards a long time before he took over. There was talk of closing Pebble Mill for years and indeed the fact that network productions there dwindled from the mid 90s onwards shows that plans were already in place of where the BBC wanted to make their studio based programmes while BBC Birmingham became more of a production company for shows shot on location.
It's a shame really that an argument with the government was instrumental in his downfall because I think he could have continued to take the BBC forward further than he already had done. All my opinion of course and perhaps this should be continued in another thread...
NG
You mean cutting bases/jobs and wasting money.
Err - the BBC massively increased in size under Greg Dyke. Sure some specific jobs were cut, but more were created. The BBC gained a couple of thousand staff under Greg Dyke - which Mark Thompson inherited and was unsustainable under his model for the BBC, hence the round of cost cutting and job losses that came with him.
When it comes to the base cuts (i.e. relocating from Pebble Mill to The Mailbox), they were an inheritance from John Birt and a direct result of Producer Choice, combined with a wish from Nations and Regions for regional news centres to be sited in city centre locations for accessibility reasons... In London the base cuts (closing many small buildings and relocating to the main W1 and W12 centres) were a result of a sensible desire to reduce the number of leased expensive buildings the BBC were paying for - and possibly a less sensible desire to sell off some owned-sites for short-term capital gain.
Greg is lucky as he was seen as a totemic and inspirational leader, who left "before his time". However many regard his massive expansion as unsustainable, and in some ways the source of some of the problems the BBC now has. Though whether the BBC would have them under him is a different matter. The single biggest problem the BBC has currently is the disappointing licence fee settlement Thompson negotiated. (Thompson completely messed up Salford. His argument that he would drop Salford if the government didn't agree to his licence-fee settlement really annoyed MPs, who thought they were being blackmailed. So in return they forced the BBC into going to Salford without the increased settlement. EPIC FAIL I believe is the phrase du jour...)
noggin
Founding member
Bring back Greg anyday, the BBC was at it's best when he was in control.
You mean cutting bases/jobs and wasting money.
Err - the BBC massively increased in size under Greg Dyke. Sure some specific jobs were cut, but more were created. The BBC gained a couple of thousand staff under Greg Dyke - which Mark Thompson inherited and was unsustainable under his model for the BBC, hence the round of cost cutting and job losses that came with him.
When it comes to the base cuts (i.e. relocating from Pebble Mill to The Mailbox), they were an inheritance from John Birt and a direct result of Producer Choice, combined with a wish from Nations and Regions for regional news centres to be sited in city centre locations for accessibility reasons... In London the base cuts (closing many small buildings and relocating to the main W1 and W12 centres) were a result of a sensible desire to reduce the number of leased expensive buildings the BBC were paying for - and possibly a less sensible desire to sell off some owned-sites for short-term capital gain.
Greg is lucky as he was seen as a totemic and inspirational leader, who left "before his time". However many regard his massive expansion as unsustainable, and in some ways the source of some of the problems the BBC now has. Though whether the BBC would have them under him is a different matter. The single biggest problem the BBC has currently is the disappointing licence fee settlement Thompson negotiated. (Thompson completely messed up Salford. His argument that he would drop Salford if the government didn't agree to his licence-fee settlement really annoyed MPs, who thought they were being blackmailed. So in return they forced the BBC into going to Salford without the increased settlement. EPIC FAIL I believe is the phrase du jour...)
Last edited by noggin on 25 September 2009 8:04am
NI
Yes, I saw that too. Was even nicer to hear the audience cheer when that was said!
Good to see both Digby Jones and Fraser Nelson (Editor of The Spectator) supporting Moira Stuart on last night's Question Time!
Yes, I saw that too. Was even nicer to hear the audience cheer when that was said!
WE
Why the fuss about specifically recruiting a new 50something female newsreader.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't BBC retirement age at 60 anyway, so at the most you'd only get 10 years out of said newsreader anyway?
Fiona Bruce is 45(so I read somewhere) which is only 5 years off the target age anyway, so I'm not worrying anyway.
Jan Leeming (67) was reported to say that the job should be on merit anyway!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't BBC retirement age at 60 anyway, so at the most you'd only get 10 years out of said newsreader anyway?
Fiona Bruce is 45(so I read somewhere) which is only 5 years off the target age anyway, so I'm not worrying anyway.
Jan Leeming (67) was reported to say that the job should be on merit anyway!
DV
The appointment would probably be on a contract rather than employee basis, therefore the retirement age is a non-issue in this case.
AD
I'm not quite sure that it's within the spirit of the law (age discrimination regulations) to actively seek an employee within a particular age band. The BBC News article on age discrimination says: "If the employer can 'objectively show' a sound business reason for discrimination then it may be permitted."
Also, I don't know the detail of how the BBC interprets this law, but the retirement age shouldn't be 60, it's unlawful for organisations to force employees to retire (or refuse to recruit on the grounds of age) until 65.
Why the fuss about specifically recruiting a new 50something female newsreader.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't BBC retirement age at 60 anyway, so at the most you'd only get 10 years out of said newsreader anyway?
Fiona Bruce is 45(so I read somewhere) which is only 5 years off the target age anyway, so I'm not worrying anyway.
Jan Leeming (67) was reported to say that the job should be on merit anyway!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't BBC retirement age at 60 anyway, so at the most you'd only get 10 years out of said newsreader anyway?
Fiona Bruce is 45(so I read somewhere) which is only 5 years off the target age anyway, so I'm not worrying anyway.
Jan Leeming (67) was reported to say that the job should be on merit anyway!
I'm not quite sure that it's within the spirit of the law (age discrimination regulations) to actively seek an employee within a particular age band. The BBC News article on age discrimination says: "If the employer can 'objectively show' a sound business reason for discrimination then it may be permitted."
Also, I don't know the detail of how the BBC interprets this law, but the retirement age shouldn't be 60, it's unlawful for organisations to force employees to retire (or refuse to recruit on the grounds of age) until 65.