The first statement within the question:
“And how important do you think that each of the following should be for the BBC as a whole:”
Asks about “stability and security” of the world.
I was wondering why these two notions are linked?
For me, security is very important, and it is abundantly clear that security cannot be achieved by keeping things as they are (“stability“).
It seems to me, that in order to achieve security, a great deal needs to change, and to change rapidly.
There seem to be a lot of incentives within the economic and political systems we currently have that have tendencies toward a certainly level of stability in a certain restricted context, yet when viewed in a wider context those tendencies are destabilising and destructive to both individuals and the system that is earth as a long term whole.
It seems to me that for the sake of security, we must change a great many things about the technologies we use, the legal and political systems within which we use them, and the deeper levels of context from which we view everything.
Part of the problem seems to be the tendency of many people to view things in terms of simple binary valuations like “good” and “bad” ( right and wrong); rather than in a context of infinite possibility, acknowledging that there are an infinite number of possible paths from anywhere to anywhere.
Some things are certainly to be avoided, like killing individuals, or restricting their freedom without very powerful and publicly known cause; and within such restrictions, there remains infinite freedom of action.