Written evidence submitted by the National Union of Journalists (NUJ)

The NUJ is deeply concerned about the effects of the latest round of cuts, a third of the workforce, at Monitoring and the plan to move it out of Caversham. Monitoring provides a vital and unique service. In these uncertain times, with the threat of so-called ISIS and the deterioration of relations with Russia, this service is crucial to the UK. The BBC Monitoring must not be allowed to become a forgotten corner of the World Service. The union fears that its agreement to exchange information with its US partner organisation will be re-considered if its offering is much reduced. Proper funding – from the government departments which use it – must be found and the present vicious cuts rescinded so that Monitoring can maintain its global and constant watch.

What BBCM does

BBC Monitoring (BBCM) is a provider of open-source information from the world’s broadcast and print and, increasingly, social and online media. It was founded in 1939 to listen to propaganda broadcasts for the UK government. The remit today is global, achieved through a partnership arrangement with the equivalent US organisation. The UK base is at Caversham Park, Reading, and there are several overseas offices.

Why is BBCM valuable?

At Caversham Park and abroad, BBCM’s staff are multinational and multilingual and have profound country and regional expertise. They rapidly identify, translate and transcribe, set in context, summarise, and analyse and compile information. They draw on the entire spectrum of sources from traditional mainstream to streetwise social media as they report political, social, economic, security and defence, and media developments.

Open source sheds light on places where information is scarce or tightly controlled and where the UK has little presence. It illustrates the sometimes distorted way in which others perceive the world, themselves and us. It gives clues as to their intentions and can supplement and confirm, or query, intelligence from other sources. It gives early warning of instability and conflict and is especially useful as the UK reduces its physical footprint abroad.

Who does BBC Monitoring work for?

BBCM’s primary users are the UK government, particularly the FCO, MoD, and Cabinet Office, and the BBC. Customers also include other units and non-ministerial departments of the UK government; intergovernmental organisations such as NATO, the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), EU and UN; ministries and embassies of other countries; academic and research institutes; multinationals; UK and foreign media; and charities and NGOs.

What do users say?

Individual users:

"Particularly valued when it provides early warning, helps to 'connect the dots' or to 'understand the narratives'.” EU European External Action Service.

"Absolutely to the point and relevant to the SitRoom’s daily work."  OSCE

On the record:

Open source is “increasingly important to us; partly because it is growing and partly because our capabilities are reducing”. Chief of Defence Intelligence

“Irreplaceable. DI is heavily reliant on BBC Monitoring” Intelligence and Security Committee

“A strategic asset.” Culture, Media and Sport Committee

“Cannot fulfil our mission without the unique material and expertise BBCM provides.” US Open Source Centre (now Open Source Enterprise, the US partner)

BBCM’s funding

Regardless of the praise from users and officials, for many years BBC Monitoring has been financially constricted.

In 2004 the FCO cut its contribution by two-thirds. After a funding review, the Cabinet Office took over as lead stakeholder. BBCM operated on £24-£25m a year from 2006 to 2010, absorbing rising costs while still expected to maintain the same level of service.

In the licence fee settlement of 2010 the government said it would withdraw all funding and the BBC alone would pay for Monitoring from the licence fee. Between 2010 and 2012 further cuts stripped out another £4m. At the time of the handover, in 2013, the budget was just over £20m.

The BBC was then told to carry the cost of licence fees for the over-75s. This deal will cost the BBC £1.3bn over five years, then £750m each year. Faced with this huge additional burden, it inevitably sought savings.

By 2016, after the incorporation of IT, HR and other support functions into centralised funding streams, Monitoring’s editorial budget was £13.2m. This is now being slashed by £2.5m, plus the need to make good an ongoing shortfall of £1.5m.

The impact of funding cuts

In the funding crisis of 2004-2005, Monitoring attempted to maintain coverage by laying off UK staff and moving work abroad.

The 2011-2013 cuts, on top of years of flat funding, prompted Monitoring’s director to warn that the operation could become unviable. The changes made were far-reaching. Night shifts ended, and with them a 24-hour watch. Monitoring of Latin America, Europe and Asia-Pacific ceased in the UK. A quarter of the UK editorial staff were made redundant.

In 2016, needing to shrink its editorial running costs by one third, BBCM is shedding yet more staff: 40 per cent in the UK and 20 per cent abroad. It has also begun an extensive restructuring, to make itself more streamlined and efficient and staff more versatile. A smaller but better service, according to the BBC.

Talks are under way on the parameters of the service to government. The existing agreement (the “Scheme”) requires Monitoring to be global, adaptable and surgeable. A new agreement is close to signing.

Shift in direction

Since being absorbed by the BBC in 2013, Monitoring's work has shifted in focus. The day’s agenda would previously reflect the media being monitored, with an eye to the BBC’s stories. It is now firmly driven by the BBC. As Monitoring is being redirected to the BBC’s newsgathering and journalism, it is moving away from keeping a watch and towards sampling in search of material for BBC commissions. “Old-fashioned” monitoring with the government service in mind is being de-prioritised; its prospects after the departure of so many more monitors can be guessed.

The BBC is aware of Monitoring’s expertise but its requirements for this kind of service are less in volume and different to the government’s. Advance notice of its intentions came in a Newsnight report in 2014 about “the secretive world” of Monitoring, which queried the use of licence-fee money to supply intelligence to the government and equated Caversham Park to a CIA outpost.

The Future of BBC Monitoring

In addition to closing 40 per cent of the UK staff posts now, the BBC plans to close Caversham Park and move the remnants of Monitoring into Broadcasting House. More staff will inevitably leave and this is the point at which the situation becomes irreversible.

Once in London, Monitoring will be no more than a few desks in a corner of a newsroom. The brand will continue but monitoring in sense of keeping a constant watch will not. Broadcasting House is already overcrowded - there will be nowhere to reinstate or expand Monitoring in the event of a crisis.

By this time, the US partner organisation could well reconsider the information exchange arrangement. It will be receiving little from an enfeebled Monitoring and will have lost the benefit of colocation of its UK staff with their BBCM colleagues at Caversham Park.

Conclusion

The government is facing the loss or severe degradation of open-source monitoring. Having willingly or otherwise become sole budget holder, the BBC is shrinking and remoulding Monitoring to suit its own purposes. Correctly so - the licence fee is for BBC content, not for providing intelligence to the government for free.

If the government appreciates this service, it should agree with the BBC a secure and sustainable joint funding arrangement. The cost will be trivial compared to the value of what it stands to lose.

October 2016