The corporation’s former DG hits out at “inaccurate” testimonies given to MPs
Former Director-General of the BBC Mark Thompson has said that the BBC Trust was informed of generous severance packages to departing BBC staff beyond what was contractually obliged – despite the current chairman of the Trust, Lord Patten, claiming they were not.
Documents given to media commentator Steve Hewlett and seen by one news channel cast doubt on the Trust’s claim that they were unaware that Mark Byford, former deputy director-general, would receive a significantly larger redundancy pay-off than was necessary.
On his departure Mr Byford received twelve months pay in lieu of notice – despite emails showing that he was informed of his redundancy eight months before he left the BBC.
A recent National Audit Office (NAO) report revealed that in the three years to last December, 150 senior BBC managers received £25m in severance pay. Many of the payments exceeded what was stipulated in their contracts.
Appearing in front of the Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on Wednesday, Lord Patten said he did not know why this had happened, and that the Trust should have been informed.
Suggesting Mr Thompson should be called to give evidence too, Lord Patten told the MPs: “If you call a previous director-general of the BBC I will be as interested as you are why we didn’t know.”
Lord Patten became chairman of the Trust in May 2011 and was not involved in Mr Byford’s redundancy. Sir Michael Lyons was chairman at the time.
An email from the office of Mr Thompson to Nicholas Kroll, the director of the BBC Trust, appears to show that the Trust had been kept in the loop.
In a message dated October 8, 2010, the DG’s office said: “The EBRC (Executive Board of Remuneration Committee, the body which set severance pay-offs) approvals are for maximum payments. From now until the individuals leave the BBC, they will be in consultations with the BBC.
“They (Mark Byford and Sharon Baylay – another senior manager informed of pending redundancy) will only get their formal and final letters confirming their redundancy arrangements when they are served with notice – in both cases, that will be in calendar year 2011.”
In a separate document, dated the October 7, 2010, the then director-general informed the Trust chairman that the total cost of Mr Byford’s redundancy would “take place on the basis of the terms set out in (his) contract” and would total £1,022,077 – a figure which, given his salary was public knowledge, suggests that at the point of his departure he would receive 12 months’ pay in lieu of notice.
In a clear contradiction to Lord Patten’s evidence to MPs, Mr Thompson, now CEO of the New York Times, said in a statement: “The BBC Trust was fully informed in advance, in writing as well as orally, about the proposed severance packages for Mark Byford and Sharon Baylay.
“Specifically, they were told that it was proposed that in both cases formal notice would not be served immediately but in the following year.
“An email from my office to the head of the Trust unit makes this clear. Both this email and a detailed analysis of the value for money case for the redundancies were sent to the Trust days before the executive board remuneration committee met to consider the proposed packages.
“I had made sure that the Trust were aware of and understood all potentially contentious issues (including the fact that formal notice would not be served at once). The Trust had every opportunity to express any concerns about the proposals before they were approved and indeed the final version of the cases included input from the Trust.”
The Trust is, according to its website, the BBC’s “governing body, working on behalf of licence fee payers to ensure the BBC provides high quality output, good value, and independence”.
Mr Thompson is due to give evidence to the group of cross-party MPs in the autumn.
The former DG said he was “looking forward to laying the facts in front of the Public Accounts Committee in person” following the “inaccuracies” in Wednesday’s testimony.
During that evidence session the PAC also questioned Anthony Fry, a BBC Trust member, about the document from October 7 which said it would be within contractual arrangements – when it was not.
Margaret Hodge, the committee chairman, repeatedly asked whether Mr Thompson had lied. Mr Fry refused to answer, saying only there was “some disconnect” between the letter and the findings of the NAO report.
Lucy Adams, the BBC’s director of human resources, said that Mr Byford’s pay-off was “custom and practice” at the time.
The suggestion that the director-general’s office informed the Trust that at least one senior manager would receive more than was necessary will serve as confirmation for critics of the BBC that pay, terms and conditions continue to be mismanaged.
The current director-general, Lord Hall, has said in future severance packages will be capped at £150,000.
In a statement, the BBC Trust said: “As set out in the NAO report, the Trust was informed of the restructuring proposals that would lead to the closure of Mark Byford and Sharon Baylay’s posts shortly before they were considered and approved by the Exec Board Remuneration Committee.
“We were told by the then director-general that the payments would take place on the basis of contractual terms, and we sought and were given explicit reassurances that the Exec Board Remuneration Committee – which has sole responsibility for the approval of executive remuneration – was content with the payments as explained to us.
“The correspondence referred to – which predates Lord Patten’s tenure as chairman – was provided to the NAO in the course of their review. It shows the Trust seeking reassurances that the EBRC was content with the payments to Mark Byford and Sharon Baylay.
“It did not contain a breakdown of the payments themselves, and there is no natural reading of this correspondence that would have indicated that these individuals were to be given excessive pay in lieu of notice.”