This week's PR-speak fail: George Entwistle

The new BBC director general.

Considering the BBC is one of the best-funded communications companies in the world, its upper management has no excuse for some of the dreadful crimes it has commited against the English language. Take the ongoing project to take 16 per cent off the organisation's running costs by cutting thousands of jobs. Now they could hardly call it "slash and burn" but "delivering quality first"? Really?

First impressions are that the new BBC director general, George Entwistle, will be delivering more of the same spiel. Following his first address to all his staff, I for one was left scratching my head as to what he was going on about. Here was what he had to say about the journalism side of the BBC operation:

The progress news and sport have made in testing the boundaries of our existing content forms suggest to me that genre structures pool expertise and challenge conventional thinking to the right degree.

Where is a BBC management-speak phrase book when you need one? 

Now, I realise that Entwistle probably doesn't write this stuff himself but you would think that somewhere in the BBC's vast PR operation there was someone trained in the art of putting one word in front of another.

The next day, Entwistle told John Hymphrys on the Today programme that one of his core aims was to increase creativity by 20 per cent. Isn't that a bit like saying everyone needs to have 13 per cent more fun and come up with programmes that are 7 per cent edgier and 14 per cent  more original?

Fingers crossed news reporters don't take the demand to be more creative too literally. Because not mentioning any names, that didn't turn out too well for the BBC once before.

Dominic Ponsford is the editor of Press Gazette.

Photograph: Getty Images

Dominic Ponsford is editor of Press Gazette

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

Autumn Statement 2015: George Osborne abandons his target

How will George Osborne close the deficit after his U-Turns? Answer: he won't, of course. 

“Good governments U-Turn, and U-Turn frequently.” That’s Andrew Adonis’ maxim, and George Osborne borrowed heavily from him today, delivering two big U-Turns, on tax credits and on police funding. There will be no cuts to tax credits or to the police.

The Office for Budget Responsibility estimates that, in total, the government gave away £6.2 billion next year, more than half of which is the reverse to tax credits.

Osborne claims that he will still deliver his planned £12bn reduction in welfare. But, as I’ve written before, without cutting tax credits, it’s difficult to see how you can get £12bn out of the welfare bill. Here’s the OBR’s chart of welfare spending:

The government has already promised to protect child benefit and pension spending – in fact, it actually increased pensioner spending today. So all that’s left is tax credits. If the government is not going to cut them, where’s the £12bn come from?

A bit of clever accounting today got Osborne out of his hole. The Universal Credit, once it comes in in full, will replace tax credits anyway, allowing him to describe his U-Turn as a delay, not a full retreat. But the reality – as the Treasury has admitted privately for some time – is that the Universal Credit will never be wholly implemented. The pilot schemes – one of which, in Hammersmith, I have visited myself – are little more than Potemkin set-ups. Iain Duncan Smith’s Universal Credit will never be rolled out in full. The savings from switching from tax credits to Universal Credit will never materialise.

The £12bn is smaller, too, than it was this time last week. Instead of cutting £12bn from the welfare budget by 2017-8, the government will instead cut £12bn by the end of the parliament – a much smaller task.

That’s not to say that the cuts to departmental spending and welfare will be painless – far from it. Employment Support Allowance – what used to be called incapacity benefit and severe disablement benefit – will be cut down to the level of Jobseekers’ Allowance, while the government will erect further hurdles to claimants. Cuts to departmental spending will mean a further reduction in the numbers of public sector workers.  But it will be some way short of the reductions in welfare spending required to hit Osborne’s deficit reduction timetable.

So, where’s the money coming from? The answer is nowhere. What we'll instead get is five more years of the same: increasing household debt, austerity largely concentrated on the poorest, and yet more borrowing. As the last five years proved, the Conservatives don’t need to close the deficit to be re-elected. In fact, it may be that having the need to “finish the job” as a stick to beat Labour with actually helped the Tories in May. They have neither an economic imperative nor a political one to close the deficit. 

Stephen Bush is editor of the Staggers, the New Statesman’s political blog.