The hypocrisy of the BBC and the Guardian

Definition of HYPOCRISY: a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion

Today brings the revelation that MPs on the Public Accounts Committee have voiced concerns about so-called “off payroll” tax arrangements having discovered that 2,400 civil servants are paid not through normal payroll with PAYE tax deductions but via private companies which they own and which enables them to avoid National Insurance payments and to be taxed at the lower rates of Corporation Tax applicable to small companies rather than higher Income Tax rates.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19839836

You might have thought the BBC would struggle with reporting this as it was also revealed that there are 25,000 people at the BBC who have such “off payroll” contracts. Strangely the word “hypocrisy” did not appear in the BBC report.

Neither did it appear in a recent Guardian article about the Conservative Party Treasurer’s views that the UK should lower tax rates to allow the UK to compete with offshore tax havens like the Cayman Islands in which many hedge funds are incorporated.

The Guardian article managed to criticise the company of which I am CEO, Tullett Prebon plc, because it had previously had a Conservative MP on its board and operated in tax havens. Amongst the tax havens it listed that we have corporations in were Bermuda, the Channel Islands and Switzerland.

It was hard to see how the Guardian could legitimately have regarded this as newsworthy given that we had informed them that the companies in Bermuda and the Channel islands are all UK tax resident; and the Swiss company is our local broking business which operates in the local capital and money markets as an intermediary between local banks i.e. self-evidently none of these companies are being used to reduce the amount of tax Tullett Prebon pays.

But what was truly staggering is that the Guardian omitted to mention that Guardian Media Group has used Cayman Islands companies for tax management purposes and that it pays a lower rate of tax than Tullett Prebon.

The BBC, the Guardian and all those who drone on about “The pervasive culture of greed and tax avoidance in many areas of the private sector" need to be taught the rule about what you shouldn’t do if you live in a glass house.

Comments

[John Hayes]

Touché!

[Robert]

I'm just speechless. Not only do we have to accept the outrage of mandatory funding for an organisation which throws millions into chasing sports coverage like F1, and rewards mediocre journalists, TV/radio presenters and management with premiership footballer-like salaries, but we also find out they are tolerating widespread tax avoidance schemes among their staff. When are we going to see some leaders with integrity and backbone emerge to start purging the system of this rottenness?

[Terry Smith]

Robert: I find the hypocrisy breathtaking. One of the Guardian columnists recently proposed a levy on broadband subscribers to fund newspapers-like the Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/sep/23/broadband-levy-save-newspapers These people are so arrogant that they think they should be funded by us compulsorily like the BBC. Any government worth its salt would surely stop the licence fee and leave the BBC to fund itself.

[Prohyp]

Hypocrites can never admit to being wrong, because they are hypocrites. Their modus operandi, as I'm sure you know, is to seek to discredit those who expose them, or are a perceived threat to exposing them.

We have yet to find a leader or leaders in Government with the necessary courage and moral fibre, prepared to fight the double standards and hypocrisy that is endemic at the BBC, or to investigate and curtail their profligate spending habits.

[Lawrence]

I totally agree with your point on hypocrisy by the BBC and I would say newspapers generally including the Guardian. Years ago I attended an event that the BBC reported on, it was like I was on Mars and the BBC was on Venus or even another galaxy!The BBC has on many occasions not provided news, just opinion, when challenged they just change the subject. I am one of those who used to support a licence fee but not any more.

I long ago stopped buying newspapers as stories to enlighten readers were in fact mostly lies and distortions to suit the editor or owner, they then hide behind freedom of the press. Despite the obvious bad points of the internet, we now have access to finding out the truth of hyped up media stories. Even the FT which back in the 60s and 70s was almost pure fact based, is now full of misleading and poor quality reporting.
I very much enjoy your site, more power to your elbow.

[Andrew]

I agree the Guardian article really ought to have a full disclosure statement that indicates its own use of offshore tax havens (regardless of whether it has MPs on its Board).

With regard to the BBC article, it seems to be a balanced report and spends a reasonable number of inches describing its own role in the story. I'm not sure how I would write this differently.

OTOH, the Guardian article about a contribution to save newspapers is probably one of the most ridiculous things I've read in a long time (thanks for the good laugh!).

[John pd]

Love it.

[CST]

There is a great clip of an MP or ex MP, it may have been Lord Falconer being harassed live on TV by a news reader about how much MP's earned. He turned the tables and insisted she told him how much she earned. When she finally replied I nearly fell off my seat. She said she was paid £90k for reading the news. The world has gone mad, I know many people who would pay to read the news !!. This is tax payers money. And as for Jonathan Ross being paid millions it beats me !!. In Norway the most popular book published each year is the earnings and tax returns of all the population. That would soon sort out the overpaid tax funded salaries there would be hell to pay if we really knew what they are paying themselves with our money.

[PK]

If these "civil servants" and BBC bods are employed by their own companies and not by either the Civil Service or the BBC then logically they do not qualify for the Civil Service Pension or BBC pensions? Sorry, I forgot that logic does not apply here!

[Terry Smith]

PK: I don’t remember mentioning pensions.

[BLACK PEARL]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/07/bbc_is_private_go_away/

BBC a Private Company now ?
So no freedom of information access

Huh

[BLACK PEARL]

Here are the names of the"experts" on climate, the BBC spent (wasted) £ thousands on lawyers to prevent the release of, in their formulation on their stance / agenda on climate change reporting.
(Hardly a Scientist between them)
What do you think ?

http://omnologos.com/full-list-of-participants-to-the-bbc-cmep-seminar-on-26-january-2006/

[Terry Smith]

BLACK PEARL: Thank you for that. I have put this up as a blog post as I did not want it to be lost in the comment section.