Is the licence fee value for money?

IT’S been a tough week for the BBC culminating in questions being asked over how the organisation is funded.

Richard Hooton took to the streets of Chadderton to ask residents if they feel they are getting value for money for their £139.50 licence fee.

THE furore over BBC presenters Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross leaving an obscene message on actor Andrew Sachs’s answerphone dominated last week’s front pages.

Mr Brand resigned from Radio 2 and Mr Ross, paid £6 million a year, has been suspended for three months — but the outcry has led to further recriminations.

It’s been revealed that the BBC spends £14.3 million a year on the salaries of 50 managers.

And a survey showed that three quarters of people now oppose the licence fee, which gives the BBC £3.4 billion a year. But do people in Chadderton agree?

Marie (69) and Cyril Hallam (72), from Chadderton, think the BBC spends too much on wages.

Marie said: “I certainly think that the presenters are paid too much. I do think the licence fee is value for money though and I have no objection to it. I think the Jonathon Ross and Russell Brand incident was quite disgusting.”

Linda Bailey (59), from Royton, said the licence fee should be reduced.

She said: “I have not thought that the licence fee is value for money for a long while, especially with the amount of repeats.

“There are some good programmes but I don’t think it justifies the amount they are paid. They (Brand and Ross) were stupid. The controllers are more stupid as it could have been avoided.”

Joanne Turner (38) said: “It would be nice if the BBC wasn’t funded that way but you just have to pay it.”

Speaking about the controversial radio prank, she added: “I think at first it was just a bit of fun but if you think about it, it was too crude. But Russell Brand is known for those kind of jokes.

“They probably do get paid too much but how much is too much?”

Allan Martin (54), of Chadderton, said: “I think it’s the correct way to fund the BBC. I think they provide, particularly on the news front, a really good service.

“I believe people like Jonathan Ross are overpaid. No one is worth that amount of money. I think the BBC generally is very good. I think compared to Sky the price is reasonable.”

Michael (54) and Patricia Lloyd (48), of Chadderton, are against the licence fee.

Patricia said: “I think adverts should pay for it and it should be a commercial channel. It’s too much to pay.”

Paul Wynne (41), of Blackley, doesn’t mind the licence fee but thinks there should be more diverse programming.

He said: “There’s not a wide enough variety of programmes — it’s all reality TV. With the money we have been paying over the years for the BBC, it would be better to have football matches on.

“Instead of paying Jonathan Ross it should be spent on programmes. All the people I know say that it’s the best value TV as it’s a set price, but there should be more programmes.”

Kirsty Booth (19), of Chadderton, said: “I don’t pay the licence fee as I live with my parents but I think it’s ridiculous. It should be funded differently with adverts.”

She felt too much of a fuss was made over the Ross and Brand incident and boyfriend Ryan Matthews (19), of Chadderton, quipped: “They should be on my wage.”

Alan Corrin (63), of Royton, said: “My only problem with the BBC is that people like Jonathan Ross are on obscene amounts of money. It does not bear any resemblance to what it should be.

“The BBC does a decent job. The dramas are very good. People don’t like paying money no matter what it is but they have to realise the BBC, by and large, does a good job.”