Jul 2009 15

Paying for Aunty9

After calling for ‘wage restraint’ at the BBC, it has been revealed that the chairman of the BBC Trust, Sir Michael Lyons, earns £213,000. This represents a 33% pay rise from last year and places him comfortably in the top 0.6% of earners in the UK. Lucky him. The only problem: you’re footing the bill.

I don’t pay a license fee because I find it morally questionable – that and the fact that I don’t have a TV. But for those of you who do shell out £139.20 a year, do you really expect this money to end up in Sir Michael’s pockets? I would imagine not. I would think that when you write out that cheque you are hoping that it goes towards providing quality BBC programming. I’m just not sure how a chairman’s income fits into that.

It gets worse. Sir Michael isn’t the only BBC staff member who earns a top income thanks to your hard earned money. He is only one of 383 employees earning over £100,000 annually and one of 701 staff earning above £70,000 a year.

Is this seriously how you think your money should be spent?

I thought we were in the middle of a recession. How can it be possible that these public servants are getting pay rises and salaries of £70k+ while we all sit around hoping that our jobs still exist next month.

Sir Michael wants ‘wage restraint’? Maybe he should lead by example. I think he could stand to shave a couple thousand off his income..

Another man who dislikes license fees: John Kelly. Ironically, you can read more about him on the BBC's website: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/8151957.stm

Related Posts

  • Nice Boy Nigel

    I will confess to a little angry at some of the goings on at the BBC recently (claims for leaving parties etc), but I can’t really say that I’m upset about the salaries. I’m sure there are well paid people at ITV, Sky etc as well.
    The licence fee works out at less than three pounds per week and I personally am more than happy to pay it.
    I know the BBC doesn’t always get it right and can sometimes appear a little haughty, but it is one of the last truly great British brands left and we attack it at our peril.
    Put together a list in your head of the tv programmes you consider to be brilliant that were made during the last ten years. How many of these shows that come to mind were made by the BBC? Most of them I bet.
    And Radio 4 to boot.

  • http://www.taxpayersalliance.com/westmidlands West Midlands Taxpayer

    Emily is right. What a hypocrite Sir Michael is to call for ‘wage restraint’ at the BBC one week & then pocket a massive pay rise the next!
    Nice Boy Nigel says: “I’m sure there are well paid people at ITV, Sky etc”. Yes there are & they are worth their salaries paid by their privately owned companies. Sir Michael is NOT worth it — he is not in the same league as captains of industry at ITV, Sky & elsewhere. What has he ever done in the real world, outside of the quangocracy? He was useless at Wolverhampton MBC. Whilst we all grow poorer & poorer in our old age you can be sure that Sir Michael will have retired in style (& earlier than 65, no doubt) on his gold-plated, taxpayer funded pension.

  • Richard Watts

    AT £213,000 per annum I think Sir Michael Lyons should be set to task making the BBC pay for itself and not dipping in the public purse. Our ageing population means we must seriously look at what taxes pay for in the future and a complete sea-change in our fiscal system. Better that a pot of Government money was made available each year for “public programmes” and let each channel submit a tender and bid for the money. Lamenting “Aunty” is like believing postcard Britain will return it’s gone a bygone era, best put to rest.

  • Hardeep Singh

    … but the BBC and it’s legions of self appointed czars are always the first to snarl at ‘nasty’ bankers. Yet the beeb themselves seem exempt from any attention or focus on their own activities, what hypocrisy! We are all prepared to pay for reasonable services but we don’t wish to be ripped off so that this brigade of so called execs at the BBC (it’s hardly a multi national company with the headache of sruviving tough times within a market) can award themselves this apparently deserved salary status. You mention 700+ people on in excess of £70k well that’s food for thought. Does the BBC actually generate wealth? I highly doubt it, it should get back to being a broadcaster and stop becoming a socio-political beast!

  • Nice Boy Nigel

    West Midlands Taxpayer comments:
    “Nice Boy Nigel says: “I’m sure there are well paid people at ITV, Sky etc”. Yes there are & they are worth their salaries paid by their privately owned companies. Sir Michael is NOT worth it — he is not in the same league as captains of industry at ITV, Sky & elsewhere”.
    I guess that it’s a matter of opinion, but I would suggest that the programmes produced by the BBC are far superior to those produced by ITV and Sky, so are these “Captains of Industry” worth the money?
    I’m not against rewarding success and there are, even within the current econimic gloom, many successful companies producing great products that pay their top brass accordingly.
    I’m just far from certain that Sky and ITV are producing anything particularly worthwhile.

  • Paul

    The BBC has long since abandoned quality programmes in favour of non-stop soaps, gameshows and reality tv. If it went few of us would miss it. An alternative would be to provide one channel with public service programming (and the BBC would have difficulty doing that based on current output) and stop trying to copy ITV. First thing they could do with is getting rid of the daily stripping scheduling.

  • Steve cooke

    Sorry, I’m never going to accept the high salaries paid out at the BBC. Please remember that they are all paid by us. How can you justify paying people like J. Ross, J. Paxman et. al more than £1 million a year? If they are are really that good, please let them go to the commercial TV. Even a measly newscaster earns £92k a year – just for reading a bloody autocue. There are some of use who’d gladly do it for half that amount. Why, oh why can’t we not just privatise the BBC and stop having this discussion every year?

  • eileen pohl and alan broomhead

    we think it is a total disgrace that a bbc
    executives salary is more than a highly
    skilled surgeon that has to perform operations for hours on end,there is no
    comparison,this should be stopped surely the
    licence payers should have a say in this
    matter it is disgusting and unacceptabl when
    the public have to pay the licence fee with
    no choice in the matter.

  • L Morgan

    Because of the influence of television and its major role in all aspects of living in the 21st century, it is necessary to have an independent broadcaster. We are compulsory quasi-shareholders if we want to watch sport of see and hear the Proms on TV.
    It was also a by-word for truth and quality in many areas of the world and gained a reputation for this and quality.
    But it has always been bloody-minded. Spike Milligan had to wait nine years for his Goon show scripts from the BBC – no, from someone AT the BBC.
    As we are shareholder in all but name, I am proposing a website called It’s our BBC dot com. I cannot do it alone and need people with the same attitude to their licence fee money as they are to the TPA.