What is happening is nothing to do with any perceived need to serve the listeners better or to provide the "licence payers" with an improved service. Though all of those concerned reply with their standardised responses, that it is as a reult of a "wide-ranging review", the fact of the matter is that such actions are ingrained into the BBC philosophy. Ambitious BBC employees gain no kudos by presiding over a continuing success - they have to be seen to be proactive and so changes are made for changes sake, (or at least for the benefit of those having the power to make such changes). They are then senn to be "doing something", thus justifying their inflated salaries and improving their chances of promotion. ( and I have come to this conclusion through personal experience). All of which is good reason for not having some of these people in the first place! Perhaps that is how the licence payers would benefir most as there would be no need to employ those who have to justify their positions by tinkering with things of which they have little or no understanding.
But then, they DO always know what's best for us, don't they?