Post by Teddy Bear on Oct 17, 2010 15:58:54 GMT
Besides the exorbitant claims for expenses that we find so often by the BBC, and one that the following story highlights, there are a few other elements that we should be concerned about.
In this story, Peter Horrocks has made various flights to the US for one thing or another, in this instance costing the licence fee payer over £2000 for him to attend a party there.
A month later he needed to attend a meeting in New York, and the BBC coughed up £3,700 for his flights.
There are more examples over expenses claimed, but the justification for the high cost of his flights is because "flights booked just prior to travel and standard seats were unavailable".
Which leaves the question 'why are they booking these flights just prior to travel'?
The Washington party to celebrate the UK Elections would have been organised well in advance. Ample time to book tickets and avoid high charges. But rather than be mindful of avoiding higher than necessary expenses, to the 'easy come - easy go' mentality of the BBC, it is left to the last minute when airlines charge a premium.
Another element is this bullshit that the BBC get away with foisting on the seemingly mostly ignorant public that accept it:
The BBC insisted yesterday that money for Mr Horrocks' trip to Washington and New York came out of commercial funds and that not a penny was from the grant-in-aid budget or from licence fee payers.
Whatever 'commercial funds' the BBC has, it is a long way from financing its operation. They are still taking nearly £150 a year from every licence fee payer to keep it going. I certainly would have no problem with the BBC if they managed THEIR WHOLE OUTFIT from commercial funds, but then don't take a penny of public money to support their propaganda.
An added element is the claim that where BBC World Service business is involved, the funding comes from a £272 million grant-in-aid money from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, so not out of the licence fee. This is supposed to appease the public. Except where does this £272 million grant from the Foreign Office come from, if not from the tax payer? The licence fee payer is usually also the tax payer, so there is an additional amount taken from citizens here to pay for this disgusting twisted organisation.
I am tired of their mealy mouthed excuses - cut them loose!
BBC's global news chief claims for £2,000 trip to Washington DC party
The head of the BBC's World Service, which is under threat of swingeing cutbacks, spent almost £2,000 to fly to the US for just one night to attend a British General Election party.
Expenses claims lodged by Peter Horrocks, the director of the World Service and BBC Global News, show he travelled business class for the reception on May 6th held at the British Embassy in Washington DC. He flew back to London the following day.
The flights cost £1,780 with an additional £181.49 spent on his hotel room. Mr Horrocks, who earns £242,800 a year, also charged the corporation £79.60 for taxis to and from the airport in Washington and a further £19.44 for 'access to secure BBC internet'.
The function, co-hosted by the BBC, was attended by, among others, the British ambassador Sir Nigel Sheinwald and Mark Mardell, the corporation's North America editor, who posted on his blog at the time: "The British embassy in Washington hosted a splendid party on election night, complete with red, blue and yellow cocktails and a giant plasma TV screen showing the BBC results programme."
The claims were among a number made by Mr Horrocks, a former editor of Newsnight and Panorama, paid out by the BBC in the three month period between April and June this year.
A little over a month after his one-day trip to Washington, the BBC spent £3,710 on a flight on June 13th for Mr Horrocks to travel to New York to attend a series of meetings.
Notes published with his expenses claims explain the cost was so high because "flights booked just prior to travel and standard seats were unavailable".
The BBC also paid out almost £600 for a hotel room in Johannesburg, South Africa, for a conference in April that Mr Horrocks was unable to attend because of the Icelandic ash cloud.
The cost of Mr Horrocks' flight to Johannesburg of £1,900 was refunded, the corporation said last night.
Other sizeable claims made by Mr Horrocks included a meal in the Joana restaurant in Luanda, the capital of Angola, for a team of nine that came to £491.58.
His expenses notes explain that "Luanda's restaurants [are] notoriously expensive. This was a basic meal for production team and guest interviewees after long production day." The flight to Angola cost £1,360.
The latest expenses claims and salary details for senior BBC executives were published on Friday. The figures showed 114 senior executives claiming a total of £50,752 a month.
The average amount claimed for each executive is about £445 a month, the BBC said last week. The BBC pointed out this was a reduction of about £100 a month on the same period last year.
Mr Horrocks is one of the BBC's most distinguished journalists. He is director of BBC Global News, which includes being in charge of the World Service as well as other organisations within the corporation.
He has come under scrutiny for previous expenses claims. He billed the corporation for £81 for hiring a 'white tie' attire to attend an event at Buckingham Palace in November last year.
The BBC World Service is braced for cuts of up to 1,000 jobs as it faces having its budget slashed. Unlike other parts of the BBC, it is funded with £272 million grant-in-aid money from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
Last week Mr Horrocks emailed his staff to warn them that restructuring is imminent.
"Why are we announcing these changes now, when spending decisions are just a week away?" he said.
"Firstly, these changes are needed to get Global News working together more effectively, whatever the settlement for BBC World Service. But the new roles will also help us to deliver the savings that will undoubtedly be required from us.
"Over the next few weeks, [BBC Global News managers] will be working with those directly affected by the proposals. I will then be sharing with you all the final outcome of these discussions and the detail of the final structure with which we will move forward."
The BBC insisted yesterday that money for Mr Horrocks' trip to Washington and New York came out of commercial funds and that not a penny was from the grant-in-aid budget or from licence fee payers.
A spokesman said: "These trips are essential to our business." The spokesman pointed out that the Washington party was co-hosted by the BBC and that it gave Mr Horrocks an opportunity to promote BBC World News, which is commercially funded, to key players in the US market.
In a statement the corporation said: "This [trip to Washington] was business class and paid for by BBC World News's commercial income – not licence fee or grant-in-aid money.
Peter was co-host of the commercially funded BBC World News/British Embassy UK Election night reception for commercial clients to promote our coverage."
In this story, Peter Horrocks has made various flights to the US for one thing or another, in this instance costing the licence fee payer over £2000 for him to attend a party there.
A month later he needed to attend a meeting in New York, and the BBC coughed up £3,700 for his flights.
There are more examples over expenses claimed, but the justification for the high cost of his flights is because "flights booked just prior to travel and standard seats were unavailable".
Which leaves the question 'why are they booking these flights just prior to travel'?
The Washington party to celebrate the UK Elections would have been organised well in advance. Ample time to book tickets and avoid high charges. But rather than be mindful of avoiding higher than necessary expenses, to the 'easy come - easy go' mentality of the BBC, it is left to the last minute when airlines charge a premium.
Another element is this bullshit that the BBC get away with foisting on the seemingly mostly ignorant public that accept it:
The BBC insisted yesterday that money for Mr Horrocks' trip to Washington and New York came out of commercial funds and that not a penny was from the grant-in-aid budget or from licence fee payers.
Whatever 'commercial funds' the BBC has, it is a long way from financing its operation. They are still taking nearly £150 a year from every licence fee payer to keep it going. I certainly would have no problem with the BBC if they managed THEIR WHOLE OUTFIT from commercial funds, but then don't take a penny of public money to support their propaganda.
An added element is the claim that where BBC World Service business is involved, the funding comes from a £272 million grant-in-aid money from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, so not out of the licence fee. This is supposed to appease the public. Except where does this £272 million grant from the Foreign Office come from, if not from the tax payer? The licence fee payer is usually also the tax payer, so there is an additional amount taken from citizens here to pay for this disgusting twisted organisation.
I am tired of their mealy mouthed excuses - cut them loose!
BBC's global news chief claims for £2,000 trip to Washington DC party
The head of the BBC's World Service, which is under threat of swingeing cutbacks, spent almost £2,000 to fly to the US for just one night to attend a British General Election party.
Expenses claims lodged by Peter Horrocks, the director of the World Service and BBC Global News, show he travelled business class for the reception on May 6th held at the British Embassy in Washington DC. He flew back to London the following day.
The flights cost £1,780 with an additional £181.49 spent on his hotel room. Mr Horrocks, who earns £242,800 a year, also charged the corporation £79.60 for taxis to and from the airport in Washington and a further £19.44 for 'access to secure BBC internet'.
The function, co-hosted by the BBC, was attended by, among others, the British ambassador Sir Nigel Sheinwald and Mark Mardell, the corporation's North America editor, who posted on his blog at the time: "The British embassy in Washington hosted a splendid party on election night, complete with red, blue and yellow cocktails and a giant plasma TV screen showing the BBC results programme."
The claims were among a number made by Mr Horrocks, a former editor of Newsnight and Panorama, paid out by the BBC in the three month period between April and June this year.
A little over a month after his one-day trip to Washington, the BBC spent £3,710 on a flight on June 13th for Mr Horrocks to travel to New York to attend a series of meetings.
Notes published with his expenses claims explain the cost was so high because "flights booked just prior to travel and standard seats were unavailable".
The BBC also paid out almost £600 for a hotel room in Johannesburg, South Africa, for a conference in April that Mr Horrocks was unable to attend because of the Icelandic ash cloud.
The cost of Mr Horrocks' flight to Johannesburg of £1,900 was refunded, the corporation said last night.
Other sizeable claims made by Mr Horrocks included a meal in the Joana restaurant in Luanda, the capital of Angola, for a team of nine that came to £491.58.
His expenses notes explain that "Luanda's restaurants [are] notoriously expensive. This was a basic meal for production team and guest interviewees after long production day." The flight to Angola cost £1,360.
The latest expenses claims and salary details for senior BBC executives were published on Friday. The figures showed 114 senior executives claiming a total of £50,752 a month.
The average amount claimed for each executive is about £445 a month, the BBC said last week. The BBC pointed out this was a reduction of about £100 a month on the same period last year.
Mr Horrocks is one of the BBC's most distinguished journalists. He is director of BBC Global News, which includes being in charge of the World Service as well as other organisations within the corporation.
He has come under scrutiny for previous expenses claims. He billed the corporation for £81 for hiring a 'white tie' attire to attend an event at Buckingham Palace in November last year.
The BBC World Service is braced for cuts of up to 1,000 jobs as it faces having its budget slashed. Unlike other parts of the BBC, it is funded with £272 million grant-in-aid money from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
Last week Mr Horrocks emailed his staff to warn them that restructuring is imminent.
"Why are we announcing these changes now, when spending decisions are just a week away?" he said.
"Firstly, these changes are needed to get Global News working together more effectively, whatever the settlement for BBC World Service. But the new roles will also help us to deliver the savings that will undoubtedly be required from us.
"Over the next few weeks, [BBC Global News managers] will be working with those directly affected by the proposals. I will then be sharing with you all the final outcome of these discussions and the detail of the final structure with which we will move forward."
The BBC insisted yesterday that money for Mr Horrocks' trip to Washington and New York came out of commercial funds and that not a penny was from the grant-in-aid budget or from licence fee payers.
A spokesman said: "These trips are essential to our business." The spokesman pointed out that the Washington party was co-hosted by the BBC and that it gave Mr Horrocks an opportunity to promote BBC World News, which is commercially funded, to key players in the US market.
In a statement the corporation said: "This [trip to Washington] was business class and paid for by BBC World News's commercial income – not licence fee or grant-in-aid money.
Peter was co-host of the commercially funded BBC World News/British Embassy UK Election night reception for commercial clients to promote our coverage."