ABC board criticises government for breaking election funding cut statements
The ABC board has criticised the federal government for breaching pre-election statements by Prime Minister Tony Abbott not to cut funding to the public broadcaster and declare that it is satisfied that the ABC provides “value for money to Australians”.
The unusually direct statement is included in the latest ABC annual report released by the public broadcaster and takes aim at recent funding cuts including a one per cent “down payment” cut to funding on top of the loss of the Australia Network which cost the ABC $223m over ten years.
“The Board was disappointed that, contrary to pre-election statements made by the Prime Minister, the 2014–15 Budget, handed down in May, included a 1 per cent reduction in the Corporation’s base funding. The Minister for Communications, the Hon. Malcolm Turnbull MP, described this cut as a “down payment” on future funding reductions,” the board statement says.
“In addition, the Government announced it would terminate the contract between the ABC and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) for the operation of the Australia Network Service.”
It goes on to argue that over four years the impact of these cuts would be $120m, which is $30m a year, against what the documents show was a $1.03bn ABC budget in 2013.
The board says it is now looking at how best to implement these cuts, adding: “Together, the announced cuts will amount to a budget reduction of $120 million over the next four years. The ABC has commenced a detailed program of work to examine the best way of meeting these and anticipated further funding cuts, including a fundamental re-organisation of its international service.”
Click to enlarge
The documents also provide a detailed breakdown of its funding with general appropriations from the federal government continuing to be the main source of funding.
ABC Commercial’s revenues are projected to grow from $111m this year to $120m in 2014-15, with $78.4m in income coming from merchandising and $27.3m in royalties.
At the end of the statement the board says it believes the Australian public gets “value for money” from the public broadcaster.
“The Board is satisfied that the ABC provides value for money to the Australian community. The full suite of services—radio, television and digital, both domestic and international—costs roughly $120 per household per year. This compares to a cost of $300 per household for the basic pay-TV package—even after that was cut in half just before this Report went to press—2.5 times more.”
Nic Christensen
While I don’t condone the breaking of election promises, the ABC has to understand that it can’t be one-out when it comes to the funding of government bodies. Every other federal government organisation has been coping with funding cuts for years – the so-called efficiency dividend. Sure, it’s hard to cope with these cuts sometimes but so far, although there’s been some pain, the sky has not fallen. Mostly the cuts have been absorbed by working smarter and adopting shared services.
The ABC will undergo some pain, but it won’t be the end of civiliisation as we know it.
User ID not verified.
The argument that the ABC has not been subject to efficiency dividends and cuts is rubbish. The ABC has:
1 had a budget cut of 24%!im real terms since the mid 1980’s
2 delivered new channels and services funded from internal savings – and with far fewer staff
It’s the classic definition of productivity – doing more and doing it better with less.
User ID not verified.
It must be hard trying to run the ABC with a Government which promises one thing and then delivers another.
User ID not verified.
So the ABC Board is adopting the con trick of its Managing Director. How many times does it have to be said that the Australia Television service was a commercial agreement with DFAT and had nothing whatever to do with the ABC’s base funding. It was only the stupidity of ABC senior management in amalgamating that contract with the staffing of core charter responsibilities that caused the problem. If they hadn’t done that, the answer would have been simple – stop the service and save the additional external money. But no, they decided to mount a political campaign and, in the process, get rid of all the staff that did not suit Scott”s Sydney-centric “the ABC is a news organisation” mantra. It’s a sad time for the ABC – and more sadly, mostly self-inflicted by a senior management group that simply doesn’t understand what the ‘B’ in ‘ABC’ actually stands for.
User ID not verified.
Sorry CJ but you have it all wrong. The only con trick being played is the one by the Tony Abbott in not keeping a pre-election promise. The DEAT funds going to the ABC were included in the promise. But you are right in saying it is a sad time for the ABC. It always is when promises are broken.
User ID not verified.
The ABC Board acknowleges that the ABC costs EVERY HOUSEHOLD $120 PER YEAR – and they think that’s a point in their favour?
They are telling me that I am paying $120 per year for a service I haven’t used for twenty years!
User ID not verified.
$120 a year per household – exceptional value.
No. Actually that is cheap!!
It’s around one month’s Foxtel subscription. A meal for two with wine at the local restaurant. It’s the same as my annual bank fees for having an account with them. Two bottles of French bubbles. A tank and a half of petrol. A ticket to the rugby.
To all those whingers … stop and have a think. Be proud of your ABC and stick up for it rather than stick your bile-soaked knife into it.
User ID not verified.
While Rupert Murdoch has the ear of Abbott and his cohorts, the constant criticism of the ABC and the funding cuts will continue.
User ID not verified.
The ABC plays a vital part to the robust democracy that we have in Australia,through its coverage of News and Current Affairs.It offers an alternative to the News Corp/Murdoch behemoth and plays an educative role to children through programmes such as Playschool and Bananas in Pyjamas. Think of the commercial alternatives,endless cross promotion of programmes such as The Block. It’s current affairs coverage is balanced though it’s condemned by conservative commentators. Many of those who don’t watch it,believe it demonstrates bias. It doesn’t,Q & A for example this week had the Attorney General George Brandis on. It has had programmes with Archbishop Pell and Richard Dawkins in the religious debates. Christopher Pyne and Amanda Vanstone are frequent panellists. Malcolm Turnbull a regular guest. $120 per year less than a coffee per week.The Insiders programme has as panellists Piers Ackerman,Malcolm Farr and has had Andrew Bolt. Tony Jones and Leigh Sales give it to both parties.
User ID not verified.