Talkback: Shock As Lakes Tops Magazine Parks Poll

I've never been to the Lakes. I dream of one day crossing the Border to visit this magical peaceful wonderland.

Until then I'm stuck with boring old Scotland

But he said he wanted to visit a magical peaceful wonderland, Mrs N!

Mrs. Nesbit wrote (see)

Come down for the Oooktoberfest, Krinkley

Mrs. Nesbit wrote (see)

Pah. Never let it be said that the Jocks are parochial

Sig's are a waste of bandwidth...

Parky Again wrote (see)

didn't the beeb recently sell their publishing company for a few coppers to bolster their coffers.

Indeed they did.  The BBC's commercial arm is highly profitable, yet the Beeb has come under immense pressure in recent years from politicians to divest itself of "non-core" activities, no matter how successful they are.

Why sell these concerns that actually make money for the taxpayer?  Some people might suggest that politicians have been pressurised by rival media interests <cough>Murdoch<cough> to do so but I couldn't possibly comment.      

Jake wrote (see)

Why sell these concerns that actually make money for the taxpayer?      

As I said, BBC Worldwide returned £182m of cash to the BBC so, no, they clearly didn't "keep it all in-house".  As to the "fat salaries", you can see the relevant extract from the annual report here.

It looks like a pretty transparent remuneration policy to me.  Base salaries are set at the median for comparable organisations yet bonuses are heavily (75%) weighted towards performance.  The organisation has to outperform its competitors (which include Sky, ITV etc) in order for significant bonues to be earned - seems fair to me.  In addition, BBC Worldwide cannot offer equity-based bonuses to executives, which puts it at a disadvantage to its competitors.

In 2010/11, 2 executive directors shared a total of £1.2m in remuneration (table shows 3 but there was a resignation and appointment during the year), down 11% on the previous year, despite profits increasing by 10.3%.

Doubtless, these are "fat cat salaries" in your socialist paradise world but out in the real world, they don't appear excessive for the industry.

What is a 'comparable organisation'? Who decides what folk are paid?  Did Jonathon Ross pick his own amount?

They are as bad as MP's. What was the excuse for their salaries? 'It is similar to what they would be paid in the private sector. My local MP used to be an unskilled factory worker. After he left his MP jolly, he went back to earning £20,000 a year. Strangely enough, no private companies wanted to give him £100,000 a year as a skilled ex-MP.

'excessive for the industry'. Harold Shipman won doctor of the year in Broadmoor.

I'm disappointed Michael.

You have mentioned only 1 of the Left's current betes noires - MPs.  No mention of bankers' bonuses or coppers accepting cash from journalists? 

As you have posted in the past that you were 'an international finance director who flew all over the world', i'd hardly expect you to agree with me on pay levels for high earners, Jack.

I don't expect you to have any empathy for ordinary mortals.

BTW, did you know a large percentage of the high earners in business, politics and the 'entertainment' business are psycopaths who have no idea what empathy is?

 Jake wrote (see)

I'm disappointed Michael.

You have mentioned only 1 of the Left's current betes noires - MPs.  No mention of bankers' bonuses or coppers accepting cash from journalists? 

Mal Mawr wrote (see)

Or are the majority of ordinary Britons politically on the left?.