Ofcom - Current Investigations

(07-06-2010 17:46 )gunflash10 Wrote:  Im sick to death of this shower of complete buffons at ofcon and the sooner were rid of this non fit for purpose bunch

Having 'no ofcom' is in breach of Council of Europe recommendations.. so it isn't going to happen.

Quote: who quite frankly are a total waste of taxpayers money then so much the better.

Ofcom isn't wasting that much taxpayers money - only a £2 million or so via a grant?

(07-06-2010 17:46 )gunflash10 Wrote:  What i want to find out in all of this is why was the viewer watching in the first place to be offended if they were not interested in the material??
This smells of a rat to me and again may be a rival channel trying to get another into trouble with ofcom.
Im sick to death of this shower of complete buffons at ofcon and the sooner were rid of this non fit for purpose bunch who quite frankly are a total waste of taxpayers money then so much the better.

The fact that nobody has to be offended is something Ofcom aren't interested in. The simple advice "well if you're offended by it then don't watch it" seems totally beyond them.

Besides, they're absolutely obesssed by the fact that it could cause offence, it may cause harm or young kids could be watching.

The fact that very few people are actually offended also doesn't interest them.

They just need to find a reason for their pathetic existence. Inventing their own complaints (does anyone seriously believe that Bangbabes have suddenly generated a huge flurry of complaints, relative to these channels, over recent months) and having other channels doing their dirty work for them all helps.

I wouldn't mind betting some real shady stuff would emerge about their dealings were they ever to be investigated.

(07-06-2010 17:46 )gunflash10 Wrote:  who quite frankly are a total waste of taxpayers money then so much the better.

(07-06-2010 18:22 )arron88 Wrote:  Ofcom isn't wasting that much taxpayers money - only a £2 million or so via a grant?

Ofcom Budget:
2009: £136.8 Million.
2010: £140.1 Million.
2011: £142.5 Million.

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/about/accoun/tarifftable1011/

Thanks for pointing that out vostok and i see that fountain of knowledge false knowledge at that aaron 88 has given us another of his silly infrequent posts
and full of nonsense information as always.
Two million budget via a grant dont make me laugh the very thought that quango could survive on that paltry amount is quite frankly laughable and its quite plain to be seen that aaron88 is as pro ofcom as ive seen on this forum and i always take all of his his posts with the contempt which they derserve.
I honestly dont know why he really bothers posting at all very infrequent posts which make little or no sense and i think are designed to get a rise out of others posters more than anything else.

So gunflash how much of that £136.8 Million for 2009 was from the taxpayer? All of it?

no it all comes off the money tree!!!!

arron88 = cuckoo!!

(07-06-2010 22:07 )dirtyman99 Wrote:  no it all comes off the money tree!!!!

How much does Ofcom cost the taxpayer in 2009? All I thought it got a few million from culture dept via a grant.

(07-06-2010 18:22 )arron88 Wrote:  

(07-06-2010 17:46 )gunflash10 Wrote:  Im sick to death of this shower of complete buffons at ofcon and the sooner were rid of this non fit for purpose bunch

Having 'no ofcom' is in breach of Council of Europe recommendations.. so it isn't going to happen.

A "recommendation" is not binding.

The Council of Europe has no legal authority over the UK, except where the UK signs up to international treaties, eg the Human Rights Act.

If making a point try to get it right.

At £142.5 Million Ofcom's budget is larger than the GDP of some small nations.

For this they regulate Telecoms (including landline phones, mobile phones, broadband rollout, competition, termination fees, switching, spectrum allocation, phone number allocation), Broadcasting (television and radio content, licencing, competition). Each month they handle about 17,000 phone calls and 5,600 emails, letters or web messages with complaints about phone providers as well as TV. That's it. Regulate Phone and TV for £142.5 Million a year.

At a crude estimate of total employer costs of £50k per employee that works out as about 2,910 employees, direct or indirect via consultancy. That's an awful lot of people to do 2 things.

From the Ofcom Replacement thread but follow on from the comments in this thread...

Quote:aaron88
Something I don't understand is why people think they can axe ofcom replacing it with 'nothing'
and they think that ofcom costs the taxpayer £150 million a year.

Sections 3 and 4 of the Ofcom 2010/2011 Annual Plan set out the fees that Ofcom hope to charge the Telecom and Broadcasting industries in 2010/11 - fees are based on 2008 revenue. There is a summary table on page 18 that breaks down as:
Spectrum Management £77.71M
Networks and Services £30.06M
TV Broadcasting £21.19M
Radio Broadcasting £2.85M
Other £10.69M
TOTAL £142.49M
So the money comes from fees levied on the industries - as far as I am concerned that is a type of tax even if it does not come from HM Treasury. It is money taken out of the economy to pay for regulation, and is mandatory the same as Council Tax or VAT.
See Ofcom's Tarrif Tables 2010/11

Hope that helps claify.

^^^^
Thank you Eccles.

Arron88:
Ofcom collect the payments due by ITV/SKY/Commercial radio and others who pay for spectrum space.

Those payments are the "rent" that these organisations pay to conduct their business.

No one (on this forum) who has agreed with the idea that Ofcom's regulatory stance on UK Adult broadcasting should be brought in line with every other country in the western world is saying that Spectrum receipts should not be paid.