BBC and Royal Mail left out of public sector pay inquiry

[POSTMAN]

Some of the largest salaries are to be found in those two public sector institutions, but they have independent revenue streams

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/ ... sector-pay" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A government-commissioned review into disparities in public sector pay being led by the centre-left writer and economist Will Hutton is to be barred from looking at pay levels in the BBC and Royal Mail.

Some of the largest salaries are to be found in those two public sector institutions but the Treasury has ruled they cannot be reviewed since they both have independent revenue streams apart from the taxpayer.

Although the BBC has made efforts to be open about its top salaries, there is still outrage in some circles at the level of payments. Terms of reference due to be published this week by the Treasury are likely to give Hutton scope to look at pay in the private sector, if only to see if the alleged explosion of private sector wage levels in recent years has had an impact on salaries at the top of the public sector.

Hutton has been involved in negotiations over his terms of reference over the past fortnight, and has been privately arguing that it is not possible for him to do his work without looking at comparisons with private sector pay.

The review will include staff covered by the senior salaries review body, non-departmental bodies and managers in local government and the NHS.

David Cameron has asked Hutton to examine how to prevent disparities of pay that lead to top-paid employees in the public sector earning 20 times as much as the lowest paid or more. In practice, there are only 100 or so public servants, according to some estimates, who fall into that range, mainly in the NHS, but Hutton is expected to examine whether a maximum pay ratio is workable in principle.

The terms of reference will allow the former Observer editor to look at pay in quangos as well as some of the largest regulators.

He will not be able to look at salaries of those working in the voluntary sector in organisations that are heavily dependent on public-sector contracts.

Hutton is also expected to try to look into claims that senior managers will leave for jobs in other industries if they are not paid the most competitive rates. There is mounting evidence in the US that managerial skills are no longer regarded as transferable between one sector and another.

Hutton, the executive vice-chair of the Work Foundation, was seen as a surprise choice to conduct the review given his Labour-leaning views, and the heavy demands being made by the right for a clamp on public sector pay.

There are still a lot of arguments over whether public sector pay, including pensions, has surged ahead of that in the private sector.

It also emerged today that before the election, senior Labour cabinet figures including the Treasury chief secretary, Liam Byrne, tried to persuade Gordon Brown to set up a high pay commission by reworking the existing senior salaries review body.

[chunk]

Some of the largest salaries are to be found in those two public sector institutions but the Treasury has ruled they cannot be reviewed since they both have independent revenue streams apart from the taxpayer.

A TV license isn't a tax on viewing TV then?
virtually everybody in the country pays it
a bit like PAYE and VAT .

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Some of the largest salaries are to be found in those two public sector institutions but the Treasury has ruled they cannot be reviewed since they both have independent revenue streams apart from the taxpayer.

A TV license isn't a tax on viewing TV then?
virtually everybody in the country pays it
a bit like PAYE and VAT .

There are murmurs that the TV Licence may be consigned to history soon.

[plainpat]

Some of the largest salaries are to be found in those two public sector institutions but the Treasury has ruled they cannot be reviewed since they both have independent revenue streams apart from the taxpayer.

A TV license isn't a tax on viewing TV then?
virtually everybody in the country pays it
a bit like PAYE and VAT .

The BBC also get revenue from selling programs, hiring out their studios and making programs for other TV companies, their spin off merchandising arm (books, DVDs etc)

[chunk]

Those facts hadn't escaped me .
But the suggestion is that these companies are not accountable to the public .
that will be true when the license fee is abolished.
As tbt suggests.

[Lounge Lizard]

Some of the largest salaries are to be found in those two public sector institutions but the Treasury has ruled they cannot be reviewed since they both have independent revenue streams apart from the taxpayer.

A TV license isn't a tax on viewing TV then?
virtually everybody in the country pays it
a bit like PAYE and VAT .

No, no more than a first class stamp is a 41p tax on posting a letter.

[chunk]

Nice!

Id settle for saying its an indirect form of taxation
most of the price of stamp pays for the service.

Why do I pay a tv licence?
the BBC is now only a handful of many hundreds of channels
many free to air.

[Lounge Lizard]

Nice!

Id settle for saying its an indirect form of taxation
most of the price of stamp pays for the service.

Why do I pay a tv licence?
the BBC is now only a handful of many hundreds of channels
many free to air.

No.
Some programmes you pay for - BBC by the license fee - others you don't - ITV etc paid for by the advertisers.
Some letters you send you pay for - 41p for a first class stamp - others you don't - Freepost addresses paid for by the recipient.
The TV License is simply the means of paying for BBC programmes that enter your home just as an electricity bill is the means of paying for electricity that enters your home.

[chunk]

Nice!

Id settle for saying its an indirect form of taxation
most of the price of stamp pays for the service.

Why do I pay a tv licence?
the BBC is now only a handful of many hundreds of channels
many free to air.

No.
Some programmes you pay for - BBC by the license fee - others you don't - ITV etc paid for by the advertisers.
Some letters you send you pay for - 41p for a first class stamp - others you don't - Freepost addresses paid for by the recipient.
The TV License is simply the means of paying for BBC programmes that enter your home just as an electricity bill is the means of paying for electricity that enters your home.

Thanks for the advice I wont pay my TV license now that i know its for a service I can just disconnect it.
except that i would not then be able to watch satellite as thats covered under the BBC license terms.

Some programs you pay for - BBC by the license fee - others you don't - ITV etc paid for by the advertisers.

if itv is paid for by advertising why is not free to me?
if i only watch itv i still pay BBC.
imagine a scenario where eg British gas levied a standing charge for service supply
that you had to pay even if you were only connected to the water supply! or telephone!
it is that bizarre.
as for rm
I know this is is a little bit deep but rm is a government owned monopoly and is a public service (for now)
and makes huge profits that flow straight into government.
governments are expected to raise income to cover spending but not generally to make money out of public services!
The dictionary definition of tax: = government charges or levee on people, services
or goods to fund public expenditure.
Ticks most of the boxes!

And ps if my bank sends me a postage payed envelope that doesn't stop rm being a monopoly.

if and when rm is eventually stock floated private individuals will profit not the government although there may or not still be a monopoly
back to the thread title no reason these companies shouldn't be publicly accountable and included in review.

[POSTMAN]

One critisim i've read about the 'TV' licence is that they are using OUR money to pay for their internet ventures.

[Lounge Lizard]

Nice!

Id settle for saying its an indirect form of taxation
most of the price of stamp pays for the service.

Why do I pay a tv licence?
the BBC is now only a handful of many hundreds of channels
many free to air.

No.
Some programmes you pay for - BBC by the license fee - others you don't - ITV etc paid for by the advertisers.
Some letters you send you pay for - 41p for a first class stamp - others you don't - Freepost addresses paid for by the recipient.
The TV License is simply the means of paying for BBC programmes that enter your home just as an electricity bill is the means of paying for electricity that enters your home.

Thanks for the advice I wont pay my TV license now that i know its for a service I can just disconnect it.
except that i would not then be able to watch satellite as thats covered under the BBC license terms.

Some programs you pay for - BBC by the license fee - others you don't - ITV etc paid for by the advertisers.

if itv is paid for by advertising why is not free to me?
if i only watch itv i still pay BBC.
imagine a scenario where eg British gas levied a standing charge for service supply
that you had to pay even if you were only connected to the water supply! or telephone!
it is that bizarre.
as for rm
I know this is is a little bit deep but rm is a government owned monopoly and is a public service (for now)
and makes huge profits that flow straight into government.
governments are expected to raise income to cover spending but not generally to make money out of public services!
The dictionary definition of tax: = government charges or levee on people, services
or goods to fund public expenditure.
Ticks most of the boxes!

And ps if my bank sends me a postage payed envelope that doesn't stop rm being a monopoly.

if and when rm is eventually stock floated private individuals will profit not the government although there may or not still be a monopoly
back to the thread title no reason these companies shouldn't be publicly accountable and included in review.

"The dictionary definition of tax: = government charges or levee on people, services
or goods to fund public expenditure." so tax is charged by GOVERNMENT but the BBC is an AUTONOMOUS public service broadcaster that operates under a Royal Charter. Within the UK, it is funded principally by an annual television licence fee, which is therefore NOT a tax.

[Lounge Lizard]

i've just learnt that "The British Broadcasting Company Ltd. was created by the British General Post Office (GPO) and John Reith applied for a job with the existing company and later became its General Manager. The company was wound-up and on 1 January 1927 a new non-commercial entity called the British Broadcasting Corporation established under a Royal Charter became successor in interest." how different things would be if that original company hadn't been wound up and the BBC was now still controlled by Royal Mail.

[POSTMAN]

Cue eastenders absorbing casualty type jokes.

[chunk]

i've just learnt that "The British Broadcasting Company Ltd. was created by the British General Post Office (GPO) and John Reith applied for a job with the existing company and later became its General Manager. The company was wound-up and on 1 January 1927 a new non-commercial entity called the British Broadcasting Corporation established under a Royal Charter became successor in interest." how different things would be if that original company hadn't been wound up and the BBC was now still controlled by Royal Mail.

it might have gone something like this:
1948 royal mail offer TV to all parts of UK. as per U.S.O
1984 roll out of big brother interactive TV. ..it watches you!
2004 the down stream access agreement means bbc has to broadcast itv on its channels and at a loss.
2005 cuts number of channels.
2006 reduces money spent on program making.
2007 huge number of redundancy's.
eastenders actors required to do half an hours lapsing (as extras on casualty).
2008 public outcry at huge golden handshakes and pension deficit(no change there then)