"IS THIS TRUE ABOUT TERRY WOGAN"!!!

Everyone connected to the children in need fundraising give up their time for nothing.All bar Terry Wogan apparently who demands a fee and always has done.Former crimewatch presenter Sue Cook stopped doing children in need as Wogan was turning into his show due to his enormous ego and greed.Always thought he was a big headed tw*t anyway.Shame on you Wogan if this is true.

Everyone connected to the children in need fundraising give up their time for nothing.All bar Terry Wogan apparently who demands a fee and always has done.Former crimewatch presenter Sue Cook stopped doing children in need as Wogan was turning into his show due to his enormous ego and greed.Always thought he was a big headed tw*t anyway.Shame on you Wogan if this is true.

Been well known for years

Everyone connected to the children in need fundraising give up their time for nothing.All bar Terry Wogan apparently who demands a fee and always has done.Former crimewatch presenter Sue Cook stopped doing children in need as Wogan was turning into his show due to his enormous ego and greed.Always thought he was a big headed tw*t anyway.Shame on you Wogan if this is true.

Been well known for years

Criminal,why don't the bbc f**k him over and get someone else in who would do it from the heart.Somebody should have shoved his blankety blank checkbook and pen up his arse!!

Terry Wogan has never taken a penny from children in need, not even expenses, another bullshit rumour

Suspect gets paid by his employers the BBC and nothing taken off children in need!

Correct gets no extra wages doing children in need

Terry Wogan has never taken a penny from children in need, not even expenses, another bullshit rumour

Your wrong,the bbc state that he has demanded a fee every year since 1980 when it started.Also he is the only person who has ever demanded being paid for hosting it.I was unsure myself until I checked it up on the net just now.

A BBC spokeswoman said the payment was "never remotely commercial" and came from the programme's budget and not from charitable funds.

The veteran broadcaster said: "I would quite happily do it for nothing."

The 68-year-old added that he had "never asked for a fee" for fronting the marathon appeal, which raised more than £18m on the night last November.

'Honorarium'

Documents which were released to The Mail On Sunday newspaper under the Freedom of Information Act showed that Sir Terry received £9,065 in 2005 for anchoring the seven-hour extravaganza.

The BBC's spokeswoman said the payment was an "honorarium" for Sir Terry's services and had "never been negotiated", but added that it had risen in line with inflation.

"We are not ashamed to pay him and see no reason why it should not continue. If It wasn't for Sir Terry, Children In Need would not be what it is today," she said.

A BBC spokeswoman said the payment was "never remotely commercial" and came from the programme's budget and not from charitable funds.

The veteran broadcaster said: "I would quite happily do it for nothing."

The 68-year-old added that he had "never asked for a fee" for fronting the marathon appeal, which raised more than £18m on the night last November.

'Honorarium'

Documents which were released to The Mail On Sunday newspaper under the Freedom of Information Act showed that Sir Terry received £9,065 in 2005 for anchoring the seven-hour extravaganza.

The BBC's spokeswoman said the payment was an "honorarium" for Sir Terry's services and had "never been negotiated", but added that it had risen in line with inflation.

"We are not ashamed to pay him and see no reason why it should not continue. If It wasn't for Sir Terry, Children In Need would not be what it is today," she said.

Cheers for that,he should have put the £9,000 in the pot though.

But he did help them raise £18 MILLLION

Everyone connected to the children in need fundraising give up their time for nothing.All bar Terry Wogan apparently who demands a fee and always has done.Former crimewatch presenter Sue Cook stopped doing children in need as Wogan was turning into his show due to his enormous ego and greed.Always thought he was a big headed tw*t anyway.Shame on you Wogan if this is true.

Wogan is someone who talks a lot but says very little

But he did help them raise £18 MILLLION

He could have helped them raise £18,009,000!

But he did help them raise £18 MILLLION

He could have helped them raise £18,009,000!

My thoughts exactly,that £9,000 was in 1980's,i bet his fee is double that now.

He takes a wage, they have turned down freedom of information requests regarding payments to celebrities for appearing on the shows which says it all.

Children in need is a programme with a bunch of tax dodging celebrity millionaires yelling at us to give more and more money of which a significant amount doesn't go to those that need it most. Give local I say.

I think the truth is that they pay his company so technically they aren't paying him

He takes a wage, they have turned down freedom of information requests regarding payments to celebrities for appearing on the shows which says it all.

Children in need is a programme with a bunch of tax dodging celebrity millionaires yelling at us to give more and more money of which a significant amount doesn't go to those that need it most. Give local I say.

Too true, children in need has become a cringefest for celebs doing it for their own agenda

BBC saying he's pulled out of tomorrow for health reasons anyway.

A BBC spokeswoman said the payment was "never remotely commercial" and came from the programme's budget and not from charitable funds.

The veteran broadcaster said: "I would quite happily do it for nothing."

The 68-year-old added that he had "never asked for a fee" for fronting the marathon appeal, which raised more than £18m on the night last November.

'Honorarium'

Documents which were released to The Mail On Sunday newspaper under the Freedom of Information Act showed that Sir Terry received £9,065 in 2005 for anchoring the seven-hour extravaganza.

The BBC's spokeswoman said the payment was an "honorarium" for Sir Terry's services and had "never been negotiated", but added that it had risen in line with inflation.

"We are not ashamed to pay him and see no reason why it should not continue. If It wasn't for Sir Terry, Children In Need would not be what it is today," she said.

Cheers for that,he should have put the £9,000 in the pot though.

How do you know how much he has or hasn't put in?

A BBC spokeswoman said the payment was "never remotely commercial" and came from the programme's budget and not from charitable funds.

The veteran broadcaster said: "I would quite happily do it for nothing."

The 68-year-old added that he had "never asked for a fee" for fronting the marathon appeal, which raised more than £18m on the night last November.

'Honorarium'

Documents which were released to The Mail On Sunday newspaper under the Freedom of Information Act showed that Sir Terry received £9,065 in 2005 for anchoring the seven-hour extravaganza.

The BBC's spokeswoman said the payment was an "honorarium" for Sir Terry's services and had "never been negotiated", but added that it had risen in line with inflation.

"We are not ashamed to pay him and see no reason why it should not continue. If It wasn't for Sir Terry, Children In Need would not be what it is today," she said.

Cheers for that,he should have put the £9,000 in the pot though.

How do you know how much he has or hasn't put in?

We don't but as he has never claimed to have donated the cash to children in need and it appears to been paid to him or a company owned by him then it is perfectly reasonable to assume he hasn't.