Blair says don't tour

[sostenurter]

Hey guys, the Zimbabwe issue was on Question Time tonight - in fact, they are talking about it as i type. I was on the programme (it's not live - it's recorded an hour before transmission) and tried to raise a point about this, but I'd already spoken and Dimbleby wouldn't let me speak again! Anyway, generally the government came in for a rough ride and the views of these message boards did come across - basically everyone said there should be sanctions on Zim and the Govt should ban the team from going..

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by sostenurter

Hey guys, the Zimbabwe issue was on Question Time tonight I was on the programme (it's not live - it's recorded an hour before transmission) and tried to raise a point about this, but I'd already spoken and Dimbleby wouldn't let me speak again! Anyway, generally the government came in for a rough ride and the views of these message boards did come across

Interesting post this sostenurter

I am part of a BBC forum called the great debate,divided into sections,from time to time I post on the virtual soapbox,and the day before | joined this forum,I found difficulty getting on the board.I had started a thread on Zimbabwe,and found after a while my replies were not getting posted,I complained,started a thread just to complain,went intoa host thread and asked her were was my replies,no answers from anyone,I was directed at times from page to page.

I even managed to get on the cricket board asked a host to find out what was happening,kept being diverted to a BBC error page,One celeb poster managed to post an almost two way thread with 108 posts,he had no trouble getting through.

The relevance of this is ,Dimbleby would not let you talk,why,are the beeb getting touchy and scared after the Gilligan affair.?

How did Dimbleby take the critics of the government?

[sostenurter]

Originally Posted by ernest

Interesting post this sostenurter

I am part of a BBC forum called the great debate,divided into sections,from time to time I post on the virtual soapbox,and the day before | joined this forum,I found difficulty getting on the board.I had started a thread on Zimbabwe,and found after a while my replies were not getting posted,I complained,started a thread just to complain,went intoa host thread and asked her were was my replies,no answers from anyone,I was directed at times from page to page.

I even managed to get on the cricket board asked a host to find out what was happening,kept being diverted to a BBC error page,One celeb poster managed to post an almost two way thread with 108 posts,he had no trouble getting through.

The relevance of this is ,Dimbleby would not let you talk,why,are the beeb getting touchy and scared after the Gilligan affair.?

How did Dimbleby take the critics of the government?

Diimbleby wouldn't let me talk because I'd spoken already and I think they like to give everyone a chance. Also, as far as he knew, I might have been wanting to say something lovely about the government, so I don't think it was the Been getting touchy ad scared. Plus, a number of people raised the points I wanted to make anyway, and generally, the government minister on the programme was given a very hard time, by the audience and Dimbleby, so I was happy enough with that. I think the BBC management might be touchy and scared, but I think Dimbleby himself is a very good broadcaster, and not someone who lets the government get away with talking b********.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by sostenurter

Diimbleby wouldn't let me talk because I'd spoken already, and I think they like to give everyone a chance. I think the BBC management might be touchy and scared

Sorry I missed Question Time ,rare that I do,

My post may have sounded that i was anti BBC,Well I have posted 2 threads saying I thought the TV licence fee should be raised so that they could keep theie standards,and even give us a better service,they dont give us new programs,or new sit coms anymore.We get very little livr sport,if cash is the problem they should be funded.

To go back to my posts that never got on the boards,maybe there was a technical problem,but why was it not the same for us all.I believe in having a strong and independant national broadcasting service,the BBC,I am even willing to pay more licence money,but things have to change.

It is only right that the Zimbawe issue was debated nationally,because it is not just a sporting issue,it is a national one,the government itself made it so.

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by ernest

My post may have sounded that i was anti BBC,Well I have posted 2 threads saying I thought the TV licence fee should be raised so that they could keep theie standards,and even give us a better service,they dont give us new programs,or new sit coms anymore.We get very little livr sport,if cash is the problem they should be funded.

Ernest

I'm very anti-BBC and have been for a very long time. I have to take you up on your view that the license fee should be raised, I can't see the logic in this at all, in fact I'd even go further than that to say I cannot see the logic in having a quasi-government organisation in Broadcasting at all.

This government and previous government's philosophy on the 'provision of services' has been that if this can be done more effectively in the private sector - then they should be privatised and allowed to compete with other private sector organisations - competition is good for the provision of services. So what do they do? They privatise virtual monopolies in the utility companies - telephone, gas, electricity, water when there was no competition at the time, yet allow an organisation like the BBC providing broadcasting and radio services to not only exist in its current form, but allow it to raise funds via direct taxation from the population regardless of whether that population actually want the services the BBC provides or not! At the same time there is plenty of competition for the BBC in the private sector!

Ask yourself what other organisation in the entire country is allowed to directly tax the population for its funding, regardless of whether that population actually wants the services that organisation provides?

I'm not making a 'value' judgement on the BBC on the 'quality' of the services it provides, I'm questioning whether the BBC has a right to exist in its current form when you consider how it raises its revenues and bearing in mind there is plenty of competition in the private sector for the kind of services the BBC provides.

In my opinion the BBC should be privatised as soon as possible, and forced to compete with other private sector companies providing the same kinds of services the BBC provides, and it should succeed or fail based on its ability to compete with these other companies and whether the population of this country actually want to pay for these services.

This is called in economics 'competing in free market economy' quite how the BBC has managed to survive for so long in its current form I have to say is well beyond my comprehension.

Scott

[sostenurter]

Originally Posted by Scott-Wozniak

Ernest



Ask yourself what other organisation in the entire country is allowed to directly tax the population for its funding, regardless of whether that population actually wants the services that organisation provides?

Scott

The NHS

The education system

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Scott-Wozniak

I'm very anti-BBC and have been for a very long time. I have to take you up on your view that the license fee should be raised, I can't see the logic in this at all, in fact I'd even go further than that to say I cannot see the logic in having a quasi-government organisation in Broadcasting at all.

This government and previous government's philosophy on the 'provision of services' has been that if this can be done more effectively in the private sector - then they should be privatised and allowed to compete with other private sector organisations - competition is good for the provision of services.

I an not saying the BBC should be funded with the Licence fee as it is.I am not a lefty,far from it,but I think a free and independant state broadcasting sevice can be good for the country.

I would reorganise the BBC,from the top down,and make sure it had an independant board.

If it were privetised it would become just annother broadcaster,putting the inerest of its owner first.

It has survived so long because it has made and shown an endless stream of popular drama,sitcoms,documentraries,and wildlife programs and not to mention live sport,this does not happen anymore,because the BBC cant afford it.

There is only so much advertising revenue to be had,and if the BBC went into the private sector it would vanish.

There are a lot of cash saving things the BBC can do itself,one being scrapping all its TV channels except BBC! and 2.

There is no evidence to say that the BBC is a quasi-government organisation,at the moment it does not know where it is going.

[Occasional Fan]

We seem to have gone a bit off piste here, don't we?

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by SSA.

Ernest I think the difference is that the Indian Government clearly told the BCCI that they did not want India to tour Pakistan becuase of the political problems between the two countries. And when India did visit Pakistan there was a lot of song and dance before the Government actually said that they could tour. ICC could not do much till the decision was taken by the Indian Government.

If the Government clearly says no the ICC can surely not overrule the decision. I've said this a few times before and I will say it again, the government does need to take a stand on this. Its all very well for the govt to make all the noises about what they want and dont want the team to do. It does not help the issue at all - just causes more complications. Its just creating a bigger dilemma for the players.

Yes SSA
The British goverment should do the same,they should (TELL) the ICC that England will not be touring Zimbabwe,but they also have to prepared to back the ECB in all ways,not hust moral support,but financial as well.

[Scott-Wozniak]

Originally Posted by sostenurter

The NHS, The education system

Neither of those two examples are funded by direct taxation of the population for a specific service. The Educational system is part funded by income tax and local authority council tax, the NHS is funded partly by National Insurance but National Insurance also contributes to social security and pensions.

As I said, and I will repeat, there is no other orgnisation in this country that exists soley on direct taxation of the population for a service they may or may not want.

I don't begrudge paying income tax or National Insurance - I do vehemently begrudge paying the BBC a Licence Fee, particularly when I also have to pay Sky to watch the sports programs I want to watch and because the BBC cannot compete financially with private sector companies for these kinds of programs that consistently outbid them.

The BBC is outmoded, outdated, poorly run, does not provide the kind of services people want; it should be privatised and forced to compete in the market place with everyone else where it will fail or succeed based on how good it is in providing the kind of services people are willing to pay for.

Scott