Jana Bennett spoils blogger's breakfast

Jana Bennett doesn't get it. She has defended the BBC’s position in not publishing details of the individual salaries of its performers.

We have said that we would look at block spend on talent because that could be meaningful to the public.

Actually it would be meaningless - and that is just why this panjandrum would consider giving the information.

For presenting 'Strictly Come Dancing' this year Bruce Forsyth has taken a pay cut to £500,000. Does that affect my attitude to him? Absolutely. Does everyone have to agree with me? Absolutely not. But taxpayers pay the licence fee, and we are entitled to know.

Her analysis of her market is flawed. Kevin Lygo from Channel 4 hits the nail on the head. He said the pay market was “grossly distorted”:

If the BBC want to get someone they absolutely can. They don’t understand how disproportionately rich they are compared to the commercial sector.

Oh but they do. They just don't care.

Of course Jana Bennett wants to be exempt from accountable transparency. The Conservatives' Ed Vaizey says they would work with the BBC to make salaries public.

Fat chance. Sir Michael Lyons, chairman of the BBC Trust, has said that the salaries of the BBC’s highest paid entertainers should stay secret because they have no control over its funding.

He said if the salaries of entertainers were publicly scrutinised and “forked over”, it might make them want to go and work elsewhere, “which would not be in the best interests of the BBC”.

Maybe Mr Vaizey has overlooked George Osborne's pledge that expenditure items of £25,000 or more would be published on the web.

If this applies to government departments, it should certainly apply to the BBC.

The BBC are spending our money. We are entitled to know how it is being spent.

The BBC used to tell its stars "we won't make you rich, but we will make you famous". No longer.