Only on the BBC does a discussion concerning the exorbitant salaries of senior civil servants morph into a discussion on why the salaries of those employed in the private sector should not also be publicly displayed? Check out the interview on Today @ 7.51am. They do not understand the difference between those on the State payroll and those who make their own income.
PUBLISH PRIVATE SECTOR SALARIES…
Bookmark the permalink.
“They do not understand the difference between those on the State payroll and those who make their own income.”
Oh, I think they understand it very well. They would just prefer that we didn’t.
It’s hardly as clear cut as you make out. Many in the private sector make their living from franchises to the public sector. In which case those who have franchises cleaning for hospitals for example but work for a private company should have their salaries publicly displayed. Simply because they are not paid directly by the tax payer but by proxy through a company that is privately owned doesn’t mean the tax payer shouldn’t know. Equally the BBC and other stations franchise out the making of programmes to other sources, why should the tax payer not know. Some people hide behind sophistication and lies, its time they were outed. The tax payer hasn’t the money to prop up hte private sector as well, expose what they lift from the tax payer and stop all hand outs and benefits in kind to private business. Like the letter in the treasury said, theres no money, private business needs to feel the pain to and share the burden of the whole country, no one is exempt.
What a lot of crap, you clearly come from the leftist point of view. What a private company pays their staff is their business, it’s up to public sector companies to get the best deal, that has nothnig to do with salaries.
Incoherent gibberish.
As a matter of fact, Directors remunerations are disclosed in public records available from Companies House.
But on a philosophical level, you seem to have difficulty with the word “private.”
LOL.
There were so many smoke and mirrors in that response you need to sign up to the Magic Circle.
The private sector is already feeling the pain while the public sector and all their hangers on , like the BBC are exempt.
Perhaps the private sector should be abolished altogether. That way there will be more money for the public sector ? Er, wait a minute, maybe it doesn’t quite work that way.
Gosh,
That is an argument for revealing the sums paid to contractors and consultants, which seems wise, but how a private company decides to allocate its resources is no one’s business except its shareholders.
Those supplying the public sector are – or should be – subject to tendering and when the account is lost redundancy.
If there are problwms with private comapnies overcharging it is usually the fault of the feather bedded civil servants who negotiated a bad deal.
Thats part of the argument for sure, so you are saying that the taxpayer shouldn’t know? If any money in any way is coming in to private business from public funds then we all have a right to know. By public funds I mean even tax breaks to business. Transparency is needed in everything now, otherwise the slease will thrive and be there in more subtile forms. It should all be rooted out. Even the taxi firms that the BBC pay so handsomely (£1m during last year for taxis in NI alone 😉 should all be made accountable.)
Where does the ‘public sector’ actually get its money from in the first place?
We have a right to know how much public money is spent, but if we are not shareholders we have no right to know how private individuals and businesses pay themselves. Simples
I thought you were raising an interesting poitn, but it seems you are intent on leftist distraction.
Do you think all BBC staff salaries and fees should be published?
Of course he doesn’t. He’s just trying to mimic the BBC by smokescreening and softening the focus of the true issue.
NRG what is leftist about calling for transparency? I read recently of people who are at the helm of charities and asked by the government to tackle 1.8m housing shortfall, and are paid more that David Cameron. You think there should be obscuranism employed by the government, I call for transparency, so who is the lefty?
PS – directors in PLCs already have to publish renumeration. I would support publicaiton of slaries paid to other senior managers in PLC, this is an issue of shareholder interest and good governance.
As we are all shareholders in BBC we should see how much presenters and managers get paid, direclty and through the “production” companies they set up to avoid tax.
It’s not the knowledge of the salary that’s really the issue, rather than (a) how they come to be paid the excessive amount in the first place, and (b) why the salaries aren’t reduced to a level lower than the private sector.
Let’s face it, the public sector has no commercial pressures whatsoever as the Govt simply prints more money or taxes the rest of us (or both) to fund their gravy train. There are few, if any, circumstances where public sector pay deserves to be higher than the private sector in my view, especially when you take the job security, lack of accountability and gold-plated pensions all into account.
I wait with bated breath for the Tories to swing the axe at this monster.
I am afraid that the new social democrat administration aint gonna be cutting anything anytime soon, no quangos will be harmed in the making of this coalition of the unwilling.
The gravytrain is protected, the foreign despot mercedes’N’swiss account assistence fund is protected and all the nonjobs are fully protected, any tiny adjustments in staff will be moved to super giant quangos already planned by our intrepid coalition and the BBC funding will continue apace.
The human rites/race industry is protected and the eco fascisti are laughing all the way to the bank kerching kerching.
The EU will continue its extortion and protection racket draining the UK of tens of billions of pounds which will be used to consolidate EU power.
So what has changed so far in the transition from a new socialist regime to a new social democrat regime? No really, what has changed apart from the abscence of a brooding maniac at No10?
Meet the new boss same as the old.
Having worked in both, I found the public sector to be one big skive, apart from me, of course 😉
Cassie,
My late father always referred to the Tories as “slow-motion socialists” !
He was a wise man sure enough and no error.
I have been so wrong about so much so often it beggars belief that I can get out of my bug bag in the AM BUT on the subject of the new social democrats under honest Dave I was spot on accurate, all I have been saying for two years plus is true.
Yup, every government office I have had the misfortune of stepping into is one big Skive. Manned by incompetent and indifferent staff who regard the general public as an annoying obstacle between themselves and their wage packet.
Public sector jobs in my estimation are just a glorified welfare state for petty little jobsworths who possess no future, ability or hope of ever pinning a worthwhile job down in the private sector.
On the beeboid paper review last night it was interesting that THIS was the main interest for the ugly fat beeboid female. Clearly the BBC know their fat salaries are next in line. 100K+ a year to read an autocue? No wonder she was cacking herself.
I don’t mind REAL journalists getting well paid if they do a good job, but far too many beeboids are overpaid for doing very little.
For example why does Radio 5 need a presenter, a different person to read the news AND someone to do the sport? That’s three people. Why can’t the BBC news dept simply give the presenter something to read out? Oh then we have another person to read the weather and yet another to do the traffic.
Utter waste of money.
They also seem to need at least 3 people to annnce what is coming up next. All saying part of a sentance!!!
Each word in all broadcasts should be allocated to a different staff member.
Come on people….where is our imagination?
1. Why not request flash mobs to show up outside Broadcasting House for auditions?
2. Classify everyone based on who they intend to replace…the next Paxman, the next Vernon Kay etc,etc and put into groups.
3.All candidates to film each other with price tags around their necks…how much they would do it for…auditions to be broadcast and put to a vote there and then ,based on feedback and value for money from BiasedBBC panel!
4. Result to be tendered to the Beebs Competitive/value for money department with a Polish/Latvian type EU lawyer to insist on fair treatment or else a lawsuit there and then.
5.Results to be broadcast next evening on a ” It might be rubbish-but can`t be worse than Womans Hour/Russell Brand” spot before the news.
See -democratic,inclusive, cutting edge, in yer face and cheap cheap cheap!…what else could a linen suit desire? Both popular AND competitive! Simples and fast too!
Just wondering why the text sometimes goes a paler shade of grey. It happened to me last night when I was typing a comment.
These “civil service” pay details will pale into total insignificance when the quango top end pay is revealed, in September I believe. There really will be some gnashing of teeth then. As most of these are “political” appointees perhaps we should ask for details of their political background as well – well paid jobs for the boys I think you will find.
Hopefully that spotlight will also include the BBC figures – the organisation that is keen to make the news, except when they feature in it!
The BBC are anti-capatalist – all socialists are.
Socialism, by its very nature, is a tyrannical ideology that uses force or the threat of force to take from those who produce and redistribute to those who don’t (after the ruling elites take their cut). Under socialism, all power rests in the hands of the almighty State. The BBC types see themseleves as the elite – they do not see any contaradiction in earning large sums of money from the poor taxpayers. They deserve it because they are the voice of our conscience. They live in expensive houses because they have earned it by keeping us on the straight and narrow. They seem not to understand that a capatalist risks his own money to try and make more and in the process employs others to help him and thereby “redistributes” wealth.
And because this new coalition is made up of the same elite there will never be any end to the BBC propaganda.
“NRG what is leftist about calling for transparency?”
Oh golly Gosh – do yopu think you could convey your concept of transparency to your comrades in the BBC and convince them that issuing the BALEN REPORT is in the public interest?
One thing is for sure, unless there is a direct and tangible connection to accountability, any benefit of transparency seems minor.
Actually in many private sector set-ups the rewards for failures in charge also seem immune, but that is for shareholders to deal with.
As a stakeholder and/or co-funder of public service salaries, I’d like very much to know who is getting what, for what and whether they are worth it. And if not… see them pay the consequences.
Pay, perks, pension and perpetuity are seductive and corrupting, especially when those setting the rates and benefitting from them are so inter-twined.
Maybe the BBC could tell us how many “employees” are paid through their own “personal service companies” to avoid tax.