Do you think there is a media conspiracy to overreact when something happens in the BBC because of Murdoch’s vested interest in national newspapers and Sky (who would like a chunk of the licence fee)?
I think that debate about British broadcasting and the BBC in particular throughout the media is very healthy. The BBC is often in the news because it is the place where many of the big debates both nationally and internationally are played out.
The research we've done suggests that the public are discerning when they read stories about the BBC in newspapers - they make up their own minds by and large.
Do you feel you are targeted because of the licence fee?
I am always very clear in saying that because we are funded by licence fee payers it is right that we are accountable and demonstrate value for money across all areas of the BBC. That is something we welcome and expect. That's why we're publishing more information about the BBC - including executive pay and expenses - so the public can understand more about the way we operate.
Because the media industry is operating in such a tough financial climate, we are especially conscious that we are privileged to have a secure income and the stability that brings.
That’s also exactly why we are involved in a series of partnerships so that we can share some of the benefits of the licence fee’s scale and security with the rest of the industry to strengthen it for the long term.
What does a change of government mean for the BBC?
There is a specific tradition in the UK of politicians accepting and honouring the independence of the BBC.
For the BBC, the main guarantee of independence and impartiality is the Royal Charter. This is granted after an exhaustive debate about the future of broadcasting, but then removes the BBC from direct political control for a decade.
Similarly, with funding, multi-year settlements prevent the BBC from having to deal with financial pressures every year, which could leave it vulnerable to political pressure.
To date, all the UK's major parties have accepted the need for these safeguards and protections and it is this that allows the BBC to analyse and scrutinise daily the policy and politics of our country.
With regard to what channels and services the BBC will offer in the future, in June the BBC Trust and I agreed that this autumn was the right time to conduct a strategic review which will look at the future of the BBC. It is the BBC Trust, rather than any political party, that will approve any changes that may be proposed as a result of the review.
You are in charge of the responsible and effective use of licence fee revenue. So what do you spend the licence fee money on?
The majority of the licence fee money goes on TV, radio and online services and also the cost of transmitting our services. We also spend money on developing new things - like the iPlayer.
Our annual report breaks the figures down very specifically if you want some more information at exactly what money is spent where you can see it all here.
The licence fee income is not just about simply spending though, it’s also about the money it invests into the economy and the jobs it creates.
Last year licence fee income also allowed us to invest around £1.1bn in the creative economy - including £440m to independent productions companies.
The licence fee funding also enables us to properly resource training - both for the industry and new entrants to broadcasting.
Do you think the licence fee should be shared?
We believe that sharing the licence fee, or top-slicing it, would disadvantage licence fee payers. The strength of the licence fee is that is it totally separate from general taxation and it is set over a six year period which minimises the risks of any Government compromising our independence.
If the licence fee was shared, we believe that rather than increasing accountability – which is something we are trying to do – the public would be less clear how their money is being spent, and whom to hold to account.
With divided aims and less money for content, both volume and quality of programmes would suffer.
Evidence from around the world shows that in many countries where this has been tried, the long term effect has been to damage the main public service broadcaster’s ability to invest in high quality content.
A few weeks ago, the Guardian reported that Jonathan Ross was paid £6million by the BBC - do you think that this represents Value for Money for the licence fee payer? Should stars’ salaries be reduced across the board?
I realise that what we pay top presenters can appear like a great deal of money in a tough economic climate but I do hope it is becoming clear that we are working hard with our presenters to address this. We recognise the market has changed and we have already begun to reduce the amount we pay some stars. In future, we will also disclose the total amount we spend on talent each year.
Our leading presenters do realise that we need to be realistic about pay in the current climate. At the same time, viewers and listeners tell me that they want the best talent on the BBC, not necessarily the cheapest, so we have to strike the right balance.
Recently, there was another uproar over expenses claimed for by BBC senior officials, including yourself. The expenditure by staff, all of whom earn over £150,000 a year, included £30,314 on hospitality, £46,110 on taxis, £50,375 on flights and £16,678 on hotels. Do you think all these expenses are warranted?
Like all major organisations, senior leaders at BBC will naturally incur expenses while carrying out their roles. For example, without overseas travel we couldn’t deliver news from around the world or secure millions of pounds from co-production and exports that can be ploughed back into programming to benefit licence fee payers. In comparison with many other media organisations, we believe that we spend far less on expenses, and that’s how it should be. Equally, we're always looking for ways to cut costs.
We are rightly completely accountable when it comes to how our money is spent and our recent expenses disclosures put us at right at the forefront of openness and transparency among publicly funded organisations.
Do you think this culture will change now you have printed the costs on your site?
Being transparent can only be a good thing in helping us to manage expenses across the board.
The changes we have made to publish pay and expenses puts us at the leading edge of the public sector and I hope to see reductions in expenses at the BBC in future as our staff look for ways to cut costs further .
Did you ever think, especially during ‘Sachsgate’, that the situation hasn’t been put into any context or perspective, that it was just an attack by people who want to bring down the BBC?
This particular programme should never have been broadcast and that is why I took comprehensive action at the time.
But let me be clear; I don’t agree with those who say that issues like this threaten creative risk-taking at the BBC. The lifeblood of any creative organisation has risk-taking at its heart and there will always be freedom to do that here. At the same time, we also need to know where the boundaries lie.
It’s important that commissioners and presenters use their judgement and feel comfortable that our output is justified but we certainly aren’t afraid to make bold decisions and hold our creative nerve.
There are examples of this throughout our schedules when you look at great satirical programmes like The Thick of It on BBC Two and comedy offerings like Mock the Week.
How did you feel about the resignations?
I accepted Lesley’s resignation as Controller of Radio 2 with real sadness as she was a committed servant to the BBC for over 20 years and I have no doubt that she will continue to make a significant contribution to radio and music in the UK through new roles.
Russell Brand resigned following the broadcast and in the circumstances that was the right thing to do.
I’m sure many students would agree that the iPlayer and the news website especially are two of the best sites on the internet and would resent losing/having to pay for them. Do you think Murdoch is right to charge for content? Is there a chance restrictions will be placed on BBC to do this?
Delivering free impartial news is one of the central tenets of our broad public service remit and I have been very clear that we will never charge for BBC News in the UK. The licence fee enables the BBC to provide comprehensive news, universally available and free at the point of use, something the public tell us they value about us most of all.
The decision of other organisations to charge for content is a commercial one for them. The reality is that straight news is widely available on the web from a range of free sources.
I believe that the provision of such free information is vital to a healthy and informed democracy. In relation to the very popular BBC iPlayer, the cost is covered by the licence fee, so UK users have already paid for this service and we have no plans to charge separately for its use.
The iPlayer is widely loved and BBC has offered to share the technology with other channels, so why have you been stopped from doing this?
The BBC Trust, who are responsible for deciding what new activities the BBC can be involved in, supported the principle of sharing the iPlayer more widely, but said we would need to find simpler ways of achieving this.
The rejected proposal involved a federation between the public service broadcasters (PSBs) to provide access via the iPlayer to their on-demand video content, combining commercial and public service components. The Trust concluded this was not the best way to share the BBC iPlayer or to deliver increased public value to licence fee payers.
However, working with the Trust, we hope to develop an alternative proposition that can deliver value to our partners and the public alike.
Do you think Hulu will change the landscape of online programming?
There are lots of different catch-up providers out there and if Hulu launches in the UK we hope it will offer something exciting for audiences and help grow video on demand usage. But iPlayer won't be standing still - our teams are working hard to keep it as the leader in terms of quality.
Do you agree with the decision to invite Nick Griffin onto Question Time?
Yes. Those who argue that, while the BBC is right to feature BNP politicians occasionally on the air, it is wrong to have invited the party's leader on to Question Time, fail to understand not just the programme itself, but the reality of what the BBC's central principle of political impartiality means in practice.
Question Time is an opportunity for the British public to put questions to politicians of every ideological hue. Question Time is the most prominent programme of its kind on British television, and we carefully study the support gained in elections by each of the parties, large and small, before deciding who to invite and how frequently they should appear.
What did you make of the protests outside the gates?
The central right we upheld in this decision was the public's right to hear the full range of political perspectives, to hear other members of the public putting those perspectives to the test, and then to form their own conclusions.
The protests were by and large peaceful and people have the right to protest in a democratic society.
How do you deal with such a big public reaction to decisions like this?
We have to ensure that the principles behind our decision to air the programme are sound - and they were in this case. The public reaction to some extent confirms the central position the BBC plays in our democratic life.
Have you or anyone in your family ever been affected by fees? Why do you think the major political parties aren’t putting forward any stance on fees? Students obviously form a large part of the community (there are over 7 million in the UK), can you please put Wes Streeting on to Question Time so he can speak for us and get the politicians avoiding us to answer our questions?
It’s not for me to offer my personal opinions on different parts of public policy. What is absolutely the BBC’s responsibility however, is ensuring all these issues are scrutinised and debated fully on our news channels and across our output.
We can provide a forum for people to debate questions about issues like tuition fees. More recently, our news output covered the effects that late payments from the Student Loans Company were having on students.
As for Wes, he gave a live interview for BBC News on this subject recently. In the past Question Time has featured NUS presidents and would certainly consider having Wes on the programme.
Is the power to be able to react so quickly to situations and events on Twitter and Facebook a good thing?
Following the rapid changes in the digital media landscape in recent years has been fascinating. The rise in popularity in various social media sites and blogs have shown that there is a huge appetite for these services to exist as information and entertainment providers. Anything that has the power to engage the public about key issues and events in real time has got to be a good thing.
This also has huge implications for journalism and trust in online news. When news breaks quickly online the blogosphere can sometimes accelerate the issue ahead of the mainstream media without the editorial checks and balances that underpin trustworthy news. That’s why when you are reading online, it is great to have a source of information like the BBC news website that you know is not only editorially accurate but is also completely impartial.
In an evolving digital world I believe that independent impartial news, like that delivered by the BBC, becomes more important than ever.
Our online use statistics show that BBC’s mobile and web services are increasingly popular – for example, in the UK alone, our online news service is visited by 10 million ‘unique users’ each week.
That tells us that despite the increases in media services online which serve to react instantly, the public still trust and rely on the independent services we offer. The two are complimentary.
What programming do you think is missing from TV at the moment?
I would hope that the BBC currently provides something for everyone. Ensuring that all licence fee payers are catered for is, of course, one of the main challenges we face. We are constantly talking to audiences and if they tell us there is something missing we would always look at ways to fill that gap.
What things do you think typify your role as BBC boss?
The first thing I would say is that there is no such thing as a typical day, it’s a job with many dimensions and an enormous range of challenges. What I do could broadly be divided into two roles, that of editor-in-chief and also that of CEO, albeit one with a responsibility to the public, as well as to many others. But on any given day who knows what might come up and what I might need to get involved in.
What is your personal favourite TV show?
I have enjoyed Small Island on BBC One, Gavin and Stacey and David Attenborough’s Life has been excellent. I also spend a lot of time watching news and current affairs programmes such as Panorama.
In 2009, you were ranked as the 65th most powerful man in the world, how does that make you feel?
There are many days when I don’t even feel like the 65th most important person in the BBC!
You edited your university magazine, how important was getting involved in student media (or, for that matter, other clubs and societies) to the development of your career?
I guess everything I’ve done, initially at University and subsequently as I worked my way through various positions at the BBC and Channel 4 have played a part in leading me to the position I find myself in today. But I‘ve only ever done things because I enjoyed them and they interested me, it was never part of a plan to get where I am today.