Abolish the license system. Put the BBC on the market. Offer a management buy out to existing management for £1 billion.

If they are not interested, Auction off the BBC to the highest bidders and use the money for the redundant employees and the redundant license collectors.

Use what is left from the Auction to pay Micro Business owners £100 a week for 12 months to employ a currently unemployed 16 to 24 year old as an apprentice, with no tax or National insurance to pay for 12 months by th employer or apprentice.

Be BOLD and get the economy moving

With regard to your flailing comment “the CBC and BBC are competing with private media companies on an unfair playing field” maybe it would help to see the BBC as a mutual society. Yes, membership is compulsory but license payers all still bear the benefits. Apart from the framing bias in your use of “unfair”, please explain how this is a bad thing.

It’s wrong to pose this as an “either/or” situation, driven by ideological litmus test. You get the best outcome by balancing both types – its a proven model that works.

The independent TV companies have argued for some of the TV Licence Fee money should be redirected to allow them to compete to produce public-service programming – over the last few decades, the output and quality of educational and documentary programming (with a few notable exceptions, notably on Channel 4) has plummeted on independent television. Critics, however, would point out that this is because such programming doesn’t give as good a return as reality TV, quiz shows, chat shows or dramas, so we would end up subsidising the independent TV companies rather than the BBC.

Politicians have their own axes to grind regarding the BBC. Ironically, both major political parties (Conservative and Labour) have accused the BBC of being biased against them at various times – proof, some might say, of the BBC’s (until recent events) impartiality. In fact, part of the BBC’s growth in bureaucracy stems from the reaction to a previous political confrontation in 2003-4, over the claims that the government of the time had ‘sexed up’ the dossier of evidence used to argue the case of invading Iraq in order to topple Saddam Hussein. The government-appointed Hutton Report found against the BBC, forcing the departure of the then-Director-General, Greg Dyke, and a much more introspective and cautious BBC – hence the watchers to watch the watchers, in the form of more layers of management.

Unfortunately for the politicians, the recent revelations regarding the conduct of the press and close relationships between the press, the police and politicians – resulting in the Leveson Inquiry (soon to be published) and several ongoing police investigations – had put a dampener on moves by politicians to try and meddle with the BBC, until recent events put the BBC on the defensive. In particular, the revelations of just how close members of the current and previous governments had been to News International (owners of the Times / Sunday Times, The Sun and formerly The News Of The World, and part-owners of BSkyB) resulted in a public outcry against the bid by NI to obtain full ownership of BSkyB. In the end, NI had to withdraw the bid, and James Murdoch resigned from his role as CEO of News Internation and from his position on the board of BSkyB. Needless to say, there is little love between the Murdochs and BBC, particularly as the BBC was in the vanguard of criticism of the proposed BSkyB takeover.

The danger right now is that politicians will now use the BBC’s many mea culpas as an mandate to impose changes that not only strip away its bureaucracy, but also its ability to function in any kind of independent manner. The BBC needs to get its own house in order – and fast – in order to prevent what some will see as the Murdoch’s revenge, as there is some doubt that the politicians have mended their ways in light of the evidence presented to Lord Leveson.