The BBC a bastion of feminist equality? You must be joking!

NOW, I’m not one of those women obsessed with positive discrimination for female employees, or who believes that pay equivalence between the sexes is non-negotiable in the workplace.

I like the fact that men and women do things differently, and believe that remuneration should be based on ability, not gender.

Even so, what is plain from these salary revelations is that the BBC, that self-styled bastion of political correctness and liberal ideology, is — when it comes to its female employees — as biased against women as any wall Street bank or City law firm.

(And before you argue that the Beeb has just announced the first female Doctor who, do you think it was just chance that Jodie whittaker was unveiled days before these bombshell salary revelations? No, me neither.)

How bitterly ironic that the BBC obsessively promotes a feminist agenda, but pays most of its female presenters less than their male counterparts.

For example, it is simply inconceivable that Jenni Murray, one of the most admired and inspirational female journalists of her generation, apparently earns less than £150,000 a year.

The same is true of her woman’s Hour colleague Jane Garvey, with whom I disagree on almost anything, but who, it cannot be denied, is a brilliant presenter.

As for the Today programme’s Sarah Montague, the idea that a woman who has worked on Radio 4’s flagship morning news show for 15 years does not make it on to a list that includes her colleagues John Humphrys and Nick Robinson on a combined salary of nearly £ 1 million makes me want to dust off my dungarees and head for Broadcasting House with a banner attacking sexist Auntie.

AND it gets worse. Look more closely at this list and there’s sexism within sexism.

Because not only are the women at the BBC almost invariably paid significantly less than the men across the board, it is clear that what the BBC seems to value most in a female is youth, or an ability to look nice in a sparkly frock and high heels.

Thus simpering Tess Daly is paid upwards of £350,000 for her weekly wiggle and giggle on Strictly Come Dancing, whereas feisty, mind-like-asteel-trap Political Editor Laura Kuenssberg is on £200,000 for working — as far as I can tell — 16-hour days. what justification could there be for that salary differential save the obvious: a woman with a good brain is worth less than one with bouncy hair.

Similarly, Kirsty wark on Newsnight is — on paper at least — worth less than Dannii Minogue. Yes, Dannii Minogue, a woman with Botox where her brain used to be. And Alex Jones, the fawning ninny who copresides over the inanity that is the teatime one Show, gets twice as much as The world At one’s Martha Kearney.

It’s bad enough that this sort of lookism should exist in the commercial sector, where the need to provide a saleable commodity is paramount. That it should be practised by an organisation that purports to be a national public service broadcaster is outrageous.

There is no other word for it: this is institutional sexism with a hefty side order of ageism. It’s what women like Miriam o’Reilly, the sacked Countryfile presenter who famously won her case against the BBC for discrimination on the grounds of ageism, have been complaining about for years.

It vindicates all those stories of women forced out of their jobs after having babies, of being subject to internal bullying and intolerable pressure, of being sidelined in favour of men (Steve wright, you may remember, was the replacement for Gloria Hunniford on Radio 2).

It all goes back to what former newsreader Alice Arnold once said about women ‘of a certain age and appearance’ struggling to be seen on screen.

So, IN short, if you’re a woman at the BBC, you are worth less than a man; and if you are an older woman, you’re worth less than everyone.

The opposite appears to be true of men, with whom — it seems — the older and grumpier they get (Lineker, Evans, Humphrys), the more the BBC showers them with cash.

This cannot continue. If the BBC wants to treat talented, experienced women like second- class citizens and discriminate against them on grounds of age and appearance, it cannot call itself a public service broadcaster.

If it does not put its house in order, it does not deserve to retain the licence fee.