Bringing the season of good will rather abruptly to an end, today we have the Telegraph detailing the huge payoffs given to departing BBC executives.

Between 2010 and 2011 the cost of redundancy payments at the corporation more than doubled to £58 million, says the paper. A total of 14 executives have been given payoffs of more than £300,000 each, worth a total of £6m, while 194 executives have been given £100,000 each. The biggest payoff was awarded to Mark Byford, the former director of journalism, who was given £949,000.

Caroline Thompson, the former chief operating officer at the BBC, was given £670,000 when she left the corporation earlier this year. An unnamed finance officer was given a £420,000 payoff, while Sharon Baylay, the director of marketing, was given a £392,000 payoff.

View full article here

And all everyone has to do is...not pay

I'm finding it quite easy to evade. They don't seem to make much effort to enforce it where I live. I live in a downmarket area with several council estates nearby so I expect that evasion levels are probably quite high locally. There are probably plenty of people living hand to mouth nearby who shut the door in the inspector's face with a "f*ck off".

The £12 a month I used to pay now goes into my pension fund in the hope that I might avoid living my retirement in poverty, rather than paying the salaries and pensions of BBC executives.

Not paying for Auntie Nonce is a civic duty...we can't have such disgusting pervs corrupting the nations children.

There does not seem to be much point to the furore regarding BBC executive 'pay-off', with footballer transfer fee-type amounts quoted on a regular basis, and all supposedly in comparison with yet another chiseller, namely the beloved 'Our Dave'.

If we were ever given a look at the contracts signed by the various parties, we would no doubt see cast-iron proof that the BBC lawyers had once more done a sterling job in making even an attempt at a review of salary and redundancy terms a complete non-starter. By the simple method of only employing like-minded people, of the one political and 'cultural' viewpoint, the BBC upper echelon staff have made themselves virtually bullet proof. With a similar outlook on life, they have installed themselves, they have re-written the rule book to suit themselves, and, seemingly in all areas, the drones have risen to the top.

How else could we have witnessed a 'search' for a BBC Director General which results in the promotion of a complete nonentity who cannot even defend his own job, never mind the actions of others. The BBC Trust, itself staffed by appointed 'insiders' and presided over by the ultimate 'insider' Lord Patten, have approached their task of overseeing the BBC on a part-time basis, and as is well known, the only loyalty for a part-timer is to his wristwatch.

Some have proposed that all senior posts at the State Broadcaster be subject to a review by a Common's Committee; I would go further still and make all senior appointments, and their contracts, to both the Trust and the BBC be subject to such a scrutiny, and those Committee hearings should all be in public, and all contracts, inclusive of all benefits, pay-offs and perks, should be placed on the BBC website, so we could at last check what we were paying, and for whom.

£20 million?

Chickenfeed... organised peculation across the organisation has been epic for some considerable time

What is left of the BBC at the moment is a vestigial bunch of expensive signage. The assets have been looted.

Look at what's happened:
The transmission side of things been privatised at fire sale prices to cronies (rich pickings here)
Much program production has been outsourced - more cronies.
Some pretty weird property deals have been done - to cronies.
Archive assets have been at least partially transferred to cronies mostly called Dave
There's some strange stuff going on about copyright assignation too....
They've been building a morass of intertwined quasi-private accounting entities in a transparent attempt to place much of their activity beyond any reasonable scrutiny / transparency.

What they're doing at the moment is handing/shovelling out monies that magically keep rolling in ...


.

Edited by user 26 December 2012 15:36:54(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified