Report: Tony Abbott poised to break election promise with ABC cuts
A pre-election promise of "No cuts to the ABC or SBS" is at risk of being jettisoned.
- Published by David Knox
- on
- Filed under News
Despite his pre-election promise of no cuts to the ABC, Prime Minister Tony Abbott is set to wield the axe to the broadcaster’s current funding, according to Fairfax today.
The Sydney Morning Herald reports the expenditure review committee is considering a number of proposals for trimming the ABC’s budget, all of which involve cuts.
Prior to the 2013 election Tony Abbott promised voters, “No cuts to education, no cuts to health, no change to pensions, no change to the GST and no cuts to the ABC or SBS.”
The ABC was allocated $1.03 billion in the 2013 federal budget. A 2.25 per cent efficiency dividend would see the broadcaster forced to strip around $22.5 million from its budget in the first year – a figure equivalent to almost half the ABC’s annual budget for TV drama.
Further cuts would then be applied in each subsequent year.
ABC managing director Mark Scott told a Senate estimates hearing earlier this year that he could not guarantee any services would be spared if the broadcaster’s funding is cut.
Behind the scenes ABC executives have been planning how they would deal with major funding cuts and the potential merging of departments with SBS.
A spokesman for Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull said: “We don’t speculate on the budget”.
55 Responses
@bicks357 and @GAZ well said. The ABC is terrific hence why it is flogging Ch 10 in the ratings.
@Once Upon A Time
Yes I very much agree, it certainly does happen across all private sectors, but this is a TV blog site, so I’m only addressing the ABC.
I’m also not quite sure why everyone else keeps bringing up what other networks and media outlets do, or what Channel Ten does with Bolt. They are privately owned companies and can do whatever the hell they want. It’s their money, and it’s their heads on the chopping block if something goes wrong. The ABC is owned by the taxpayer. It absolutely must be un-biased to the nth degree. It must be 100% accountable for every single cent it spends and must be open to public scrutiny
@ros
Totally agree, but sadly it seems Rupert has progressed beyond the imagining phase, and is seemingly now well advanced into the enactment phase.
While the ABC should never be above criticism, it pays the price for being a broad church. Unlike the commercial broadcasters, it is a voice for all groups in the community and this is why the coalition government are so critical of it. The publically funded broadcaster provides good value for money across a wide range of platforms. Imagine a media landscape in Australia in which our only sources for news and current affairs were commercial.
@KangaRoo
I agree with most you’ve raised, but why just single out the ABC, and in no way am I condoning any of what you raise, but doesn’t much of what you have raised, apply across a wide spectrum of publicly funded National, State and Local government sectors, as does the same seemingly extravagant practices also apply throughout the private sector, and most times is a direct result when Tax Laws,( lurks and perks??) are exploited by very creative accountants,or as an example, the disposal of 2 year old vehicles, there is a very good chance that somewhere there may be actually a requirement to do so.
This is sometimes what happens when ‘ Lurks and Perks aimed at a select few’, (self & mates) require laws,rules and regulations to become enacted, causing politicians to cry foul, when creative accountancy (suss?) enables exploitation by one and all, ie the recently…
Leave things the way they are.These were the people that gave the younger generation Teen Drama way before Ten even considered stuff like that.Without Degrassi would we even have had a 90210 or a Heartbreak High to use some examples and then there’s things for the rest of us like Mr Bean and Miranda plus all those assorted Travel Shows.
People are saying its just $20 mil, get over it!
But that is just the start! If they do this and get away with it whats to stop them from bringing the whole organization down? They will do anything to silence criticism of the government and bringing the price down so Rupert can buy it out.
Some of the panel on Studio 10 just discussed this, they have clearly forgotten about their media upbringing.
@Weatherman
Perhaps some of those who are welcome and frequent panelists on Q and A, The Drum and Insiders, and whom you have seemingly lumped in as ‘left leaning socialistic propagandists’, may be very ‘rightly’ miffed indeed.
Why is it many ‘right leaning, anti union worker, protagonists’ are more eager/available to appear on the non-audience venues, instead of risking the instant audience response to some very blatant B/S, and perhaps if only in your eyes there would a more ‘right leaning’ balance, if many of those of the ‘right’ accepted the ‘Open Invitations’ extended to them over many years, instead of lining up to appear as panelists on the very balanced ‘Bolt Report’
I cannot understand why people are against the ABC being made more efficient. I’ve worked in media for 28 years and have witnessed first hand just how over-resourced the ABC is compared with other media outlets – TV, print and radio. For example, please explain why any company, particularly one owned by the taxpayers, needs to have brand new, highly expensive work vehicles, which are turned over every two years. It’s just not necessary. They employ more staff than any media outlet in the country. Why doesn’t the ABC need four television stations? Of course the ABC is top heavy. It has countless departments staffed by countless workers all on very good money. And for some reason, the average Joe and Josephine Blow seem to think that ABC staff are paid less than commercial media. That is a huge misnomer. Yes, there are a handful of high-profile people in radio and television that are…
Whoever thought the ABC wouldn’t suffer under Mr Abbott and Co’s government, would in hindsight now probably be as regretful as who ever rejected Mr Andrew Bolts application to host the ABC’s ‘Media Watch’, because if current trends continue, with ‘Sir Andrew Bolt’ on board, the ABC’s budget would have probably been ‘untouchable’ or possibly been increased, even after the sometimes justified efficiency purges that usually target all the wrong areas,( how many overpaid execs. put their own name on the ‘To Go List’ ?).
Mr Hockey says ‘ the age of entitlement is truly over’ and all shoulder a fair share of the burden, will this ‘fair share’ also apply to all politicians feeding trough perks, including overseas study travel and especially their early access to very lucrative super benefits( usually well before age.65/67 or 70)
@ Weatherman. Just because the ABC asks the Tough Questions to both the Liberal Party and Labor Party, doesn’t make the ABC Left Leaning.
Example The ABC went after Gillard and investigated the Union Corruption scandal with her Ex Partner, that god awful Tv Comedy show about Gillard and her partner.
Sky News with Chris Kenny, Paul Murray and Alan jones, would they attack Tony Abbott if had a chance? the answer in no, no and no!
Let’s see in the coming weeks if Paul Murray and Chris Kenny, attack Tony Abbott over his “Great Big Lies” that he told the Australian Public before the election. Just as the same way they attacked Gillard over her “Great Big Lie”
They say it is “our ABC”, yet when watching ABC News 24 and Q and A, the content is very much left-leaning, with a lot of socialist propaganda as well, of which I find highly misleading sometimes. It is not in line with mainstream Australia, seemingly representing the far-left-leaning minority at times in its journalism. If the ABC is to be truly “Our ABC”, it should be influenced both by the private sector, as well as the public sector. It is customary in most countries to have state-run broadcasting in the official language of communication and trade for the public.
@ Jason D.
I believe Gardening Australia has magazines and books. Plus there’s this thing called the ABC Shop. It sells DVDs and other merchandise. The ABC has some commercial aspects to it. It is a ridiculous argument to make. Also I believe this government needlessly added to the debt they claim to be trying to solve.
Frankly however a country needs organisations independent of both government (interference not necessarily funding) and corporations to be able to investigate and report accurately any misdeeds. If you don’t have that you have an organisation that is liable to be part of the problem then something to highlight and expose corruption or any other wrong doing.
Plus these days newspapers (perhaps one day TV) seem to be dying. So the need is greater to fund the ABC and SBS. To make sure there is mass communication.
The government is wanting the ABC to become more commercialised. To reclaim revenue from advertising. For example, the Better Homes and Gardens show is on a commercial network (Seven Network), and produces income from advertising and product placement, as well as achieving the outcome of a lifestyle show production. Where as, the Gardening Australia program is a similar concept and provides a loss as a redundant duplicate. I do believe that the government should still fund public broadcasting content, such as arts, sports, culture as the government should preserve those aspects of society within the media landscape.
This Can’t Be True? Rage in Danger of being Cancelled due to Budget Cuts? The Popular Music Program has Outlasted Video Hits and Currently the Oldest Continuing Music Show in the World.
Losing Rage would be a Huge Blow to ABC and it’s Many Satuday Nights watching the Guest Progammer.
Cuts are not confirmed, let alone specific shows.
It’s $20m out of $1 billion.
Calm down people. Typical of our modern society, nobody willing to make sacrifices for the betterment of the country.
Quite honestly the ABC needs to be bought down a few pegs, there was no excuse for reporting the 2009 phone hacking scandal (which had nothing to do with Tony Abbott) yet he was made to wear it and cop an unrelenting abuse since for some ridiculous reason.
There is no need for Tony Jones to be on a reported $10k a week, if he thinks a commercial will take him then good luck to him (doubtful)
There is no need for the producers of Q&A to push their friends tweets every week, sick of seeing the same twitter handles on screen every week
Also no need for Q&A to bring in overseas guests/”activists” and give them a platform to rubbish the nation as a whole and the government, hey how about we look after our own first before letting everyone in as seems to be the want of these outside “experts”
In short, the ABC picked fights in areas and shouldn’t and quite rightly should…
Don’t blame me i voted for Kodos.
This is ridiculous. This so called debt is just an excuse to dump the SBS and ABC in wishes from Murdoch.
Everyone complains about the debt Labor caused and also the promises they broke but when the LIbs come in and do exactly the same thing nobody bats an eyelid. Ridiculous.
Clearly, the Member for Murdoch is doing what he agreed to do when he got the full backing of Rupert at the last election.
And clearly, the Member for Murdoch has not learned from the lessons of the past when his idol Howard attempted to do the same, and it was one – of the many – decisions that led to his undoing.
But let’s see now how Rupert’s rags and the likes of Bolt spin this, promoting it as a smart move all the way to the people who don’t know any better.
This is nothing more than paying off an election promise to a prominent backer. Bring on the next election asap,
@Veritas. The ABC does not have ‘two comedy units’. It has a head of comedy. It also has an entertainment department that does panel-type shows. There is no ‘unit thinking up comedy programming’.
Gaz April 13, 2014 at 2:43 pm –
“I can’t help thinking it is just retribution for the ABC’s criticism of the Abbott Government. I love my ABC, and I will be furious if these cuts happen”
Sadly predictable. Writing was on the wall when Abbott became PM.
Libs have been dying to slash and hack at Auntie with their bloody big axe for ages now.
They will gradually and relentlessly starve her of funding under the guise of “economising”
until she is but a pale shadow of her former self, if she survives at all.
Bloody disgusting – worst government ever !!
Sadly shows like Rage will be the first to go.
I am further to the right than Atilla the Hun and always considered the ABC as hard left. Exagerations perhaps, but you get my drift. Nonetheless, the ABC is the only network that does not appear to engrossed in ‘fluff’ that is the staple of the commercial channels. If Abbot wants savings then governments should stop discounting the commercial channels licence fees.
Get off the ABC/SBS case. They are not perfect but they are way in front of 7,9 and the other one.
The previous government has gotten this country into so much debt through its frivolous spending over the 7 years it was ‘running’ the country it doesn’t leave the current government with a lot of options.
I still can’t believe that my wife got a cheque for $900 from the government when I earn what I do and she earns that she does. I checked with the appropriate government departments and we were entitled to it. Unbelievable. They were clearly completely out of control in their spending. It was like a 7 year old in an iPod game with no control over in app purchases.
If funding has to be cut to the ABC and SBS to reign in the debt then so be it. They should just cut funding completely in the longer term and let them advertise and run as a proper business. That will get the efficiency required.
@Veritas – And why not go all the way and revert to 4:3 black&white?
AN is funded by DFAT. It is not a ‘news’ channel. It broadcasts much ABC content and is rebroadcast on FTA around the world alongside Al Jazeera. Sky News -v- Al Jazeera, hmmm.