Summary: On CBC’s 75th anniversary, MLI’s Jason Clemens evaluated the CBC within the broader context of government services and programs that are all facing potential budget cuts in the November 1, 2011 issue of the Financial Post. He used six tests developed in 1994 by the Chrétien Liberals to review all government spending. An excerpt below: One of the critical factors of success in the Chrétien spending review was that no area of government was exempt. Given the deficit and the scarcity of taxpayer-provided resources, CBC must be part of the current federal government’s review. But the choice is not whether the federal government can or should support educational efforts about the country’s history, culture and identity. Rather, the question is whether there’s a better way to achieve those goals than spending more than $1.1-billion per year to maintain a national broadcaster. The evidence suggests, quite strongly, that a number of lower-cost options could achieve similar, if not better, results than the CBC. The op-ed also appeared in the National Post, Regina’s Leader-Post, Yahoo! News Canada wrote about it, and Jason appeared on NewsTalk 1010′s The Live Drive with John Tory to discuss it. Listen to the interview below (begins at 16-minute mark). The Chopping Block: Reform the CBC No one’s watching, except for hockey and jeopardy! By Jason Clemens, Financial Post, November 1, 2011 he nation’s public broadcaster, the CBC, has attracted a lot of attention over the last few weeks. All the discussion is occurring within an Ottawa environment where at least $4-billion (probably more now, given the slowing economy) has to be found over the next three years for the government to balance its budget as planned. Unfortunately, the discourse about the CBC tends to be overly emotive and ideological rather than practical. To objectively evaluate the CBC within the broader context of government services and programs that are all facing potential budget cuts (transfers to individuals and the provinces have been exempted), one should compare the broadcaster’s goals against its performance. But within what framework? In 1994, the Chrétien Liberals introduced a year-long process of review for all government spending, which led to the historic 1995 budget. The spending review was based on six tests: 1) Serve the public interest. 2) Necessity of government involvement. 3) Appropriate role for the federal (or provincial) government. 4) Scope for public-private partnerships. 5) Scope for increased efficiency. 6) Affordability. The CBC’s stated mandate is to “inform, enlighten and entertain” viewers and listeners about our nation, its culture and identity. Although debatable, there is a cogent, reasonable argument to be made that a nation’s government should undertake action to promote its values, culture and history. Such an argument would satisfy the first three tests listed above. The satisfaction of the first three tests, however, doesn’t logically lead to the need for a state broadcaster with all its fixed costs and bricks and mortar. The CBC received $1.16-billion in 2010 from the federal government, representing about two-thirds of its revenues. The practical question is whether alternatives to the status quo could achieve better results in terms of educating and enlightening Canadians about their culture, history and national identity at the same or even lower cost to taxpayers. Tests four through six pose a serious, even existential challenge for the CBC in its current form. First, there are now a number of private companies that the CBC directly competes with, including large national organizations, such as CTV and Global, as well as many niche players. This suggests both private-sector alternatives (test #4) and room for efficiency gains (test #5) from changing the status quo at the CBC. In addition to private-sector competitors, there is also the issue of existing alternative mechanisms to [...]
