It took less than a week for the Israel Broadcasting Authority (IBA) to trim 20 million shekels off its original 1997 budget proposal which had totaled 670 million NIS. The 3% cut, excluding the 18 million shekels government-funding of the Third Channel which remains, was necessitated after the government had rejected the IBA's budget. Could the budget have been reduced further?

However, there is an even more important question: does the IBA presume that, as a public body, it can forever hide its organizational, administrative and financial failures from the public?

{The format in which the budget was presented quite simply made it virtually impossible to understand and thereby investigate certain fundamental accounting elements, among them, salary expenses of the IBA employees.}

Realizing that the budget proposal was yet another symptom of a "sick man" syndrome, Israel's Media Watch (IMW) decided to lobby, as is our democratic right, against its approval. {First, government ministers received our written comments. Later, members of the Knesset's Finance Committee were addressed by our representatives who requested that the budget, as presented, should be rejected.}

IMW suggested that upwards of 50 million shekels could be cut. Moreover, IMW's memoranda highlighted endemic problems of management and administration which, in addition to additional long-standing difficulties, indicated that the budget, seen as over-inflated, are a result of poor executive leadership.

IMW's recommendations included deepening the cuts, especially in the area of salaries. The two major reports, the Livni Committee in 1993 and the Ti'um Consultative Company in 1995, noted, that the element of extra hours' overtime played too significant a role in the setting of IBA workers' salaries.

In addition, featherbedding and creative deadweight increased the problematics of the situation. There is a dearth of management ability in the authority, on the one hand, while on the other, uncooperative friction between departments. Needless duplication wreaks havoc with the human and technological resources.

{As noted, there was a lack of clear information that could be gleaned from the budget proposal. }

It is impossible to compare salaries between 1996 and 1997 because certain expenses were redefined and placed in a different section. One cannot, for example, isolate the twenty highest salaries paid.

MK Benny Elon elicited from IBA Director-General Motti Kirschenbaum, as reported in Maariv on October 30, 1996, that Mabat newscaster Chaim Yavin, is paid between $500-$1,000 per show. Does Yavin receive extra funds for other editing jobs or the special documentary films which he produces? And how much does Tommy Lapid, former IBA director, receive for his various jobs on Kol Yisrael radio his Popolitika appearances?

{Dan Margalit hosts Channel One's Erev Hadash twice a week, the Musaf HaMusafim program on Fridays and moderates the weekly Popolitika on Mondays. What is his renummeration?}

After all, IBA is not a commercial station. It is the "Agra" television fee, a tax on owning a television set, which funds the IBA exclusively. The question of high salaries is important for the IBA is a public broadcasting system.

If the IBA wants to be allowed to sink its hands into the public's pockets, then the public has every right to review and lobby, if it sees fit, to alter the IBA operations.

The above-mentioned Ti'um Report was ordered by the Treasury after it had committed itself to fund the IBA, through public monies, to the tune of a total of 72 million shekels (in 1997 prices) to aid in an early retirement plan. Having committed itself to ease out 180 employees within three years, the IBA had only reduced its manpower by 110 jobs, representing 65% of the promised reduction. The IBA has now surrendered the remaining 6.6 million shekels of that grant, while promising to fire a total of 160 employees this year instead of 70. Does anyone believe that this will be accomplished?

The Ti'um report notes, not surprisingly in paragraph 5.5 on page 25, that "despite the professional knowledge and the awareness of work relations, two matters are an obstacle to him [Kirschenbaum]: lack of administrative experience and training and the pressures of his fellow workers". This is a harsh conclusion but seemingly borne out by the current situation.

{The handling, or rather, lack thereof, of the IBA budget is an outstanding example that, in addition to recriminations that the IBA is not a neutral player in Israel's democracy, even elementary concerns of a budget cannot be properly dealt with. }

Having not promoted adequately in the past three years efficiency plans, reductions of expenses, eliminating duplications, encouraging cooperation between television and radio and a host of other items, the IBA is in desperate need of of a major personnel, organizational and financial rehaul.

This has nothing to do with playing politics with the IBA. It has everything to do with halting the IBA from playing around with the public's money.

Yisrael Medad is the director of Israel's Media Watch

Israel's Media Watch is a non-partisan advocacy group concerned with the ethical and professional standards of the media in Israel.