Leading article: The bloated broadcasting corporation

Friday 26 June 2009 00:00 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

In a typically self-congratulatory way, the BBC Director General, Mark Thompson, heralded yesterday's publication of executive expenses by the Corporation as signalling a new era of openness. But this was no virtuous gesture by the BBC, but a belated response to a series of Freedom of Information requests.

We also need to bear in mind that what was released yesterday was not the full picture of how the Corporation spends licence-payers' money. There was no publication of the salaries of the BBC's big-name performers. Mr Thompson argues that disclosure of this information would create "a real danger that talent would migrate to broadcasters where confidential information about how much they are paid will not be disclosed". But with commercial broadcasters slashing budgets, where exactly are these stars going to migrate to?

Even given the information withheld, the expenses charged by senior managers at the Corporation in recent years look excessive. Was it really appropriate for the Director General to claim more than £3,000 for flights when he was called back early from two holidays?

Did Eric Huggers, the director of future media and technology, really need to stay in a luxury hotel and hire a dedicated driver while on a business trip to Las Vegas? Should these executives be spending more than £1,000 a month of public money on lunches, hospitality and taxis? And is it justified for senior BBC executives to have access to a lavish bonus incentives scheme? But, in a sense, pay and expenses are a distraction from a more significant BBC financial scandal. At a time when private media outlets are feeling a painful financial squeeze, the BBC, thanks to its guaranteed £3.5bn licence fee revenue, is as robust as ever; it is even seeking to expand.

These lavish managerial expense claims are another indication of a Corporation that has grown obscenely divorced from the commercial realities of the sector in which it operates. Mr Thompson would do well to recognise that, unless this gap begins to close, the pressure for the Government to cut the BBC down to size will only grow stronger.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in