Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


BBC comes clean on high life of its top bosses

View Video
Download Video

Video

Video report on BBC expenses
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 26 June 2009
FIVE-STAR hotels, bottles of vintage champagne and private Cessna plane trips: welcome to the world of BBC expenses.
After responding to calls for greater openness and accountability, the corporation yesterday published on its website the expenses claims of its most senior executives over the past five years. They totalled £363,963.

The data offers an extraordinarily detailed snapshot of the inner workings of the BBC and lays bare the lavish culture at the top of the organisation.

Director-general Mark Thompson used £2,236.90 of licence fee-payers' money to fly his family home from holiday in the middle of Radio 2's "obscene phone calls" row involving Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross.

Bosses at the corporation splurged thousands on their biggest stars, lavishing them with expensive bouquets of flowers and bottles of vintage champagne.

Ross was given a £100 bouquet a month before his £18 million contract was unveiled, and £1,137 was spent celebrating Terry Wogan's knighthood.

The BBC also revealed details of executives' salaries for the first time yesterday, showing that dozens of its employees earn far more than the Prime Minister's £189,994.

Mr Thompson described the release of the expenses information as a "significant advance in openness at the BBC", although full details of top stars' salaries will remain confidential.

Notes on the claim for flying Mr Thompson's family home as anger grew over the Brand/Ross scandal read: "The chairman of the audit committee of the executive board agreed that the expense of cutting a family holiday short would be met by the BBC in advance of the claim being made. The chairman of the BBC Trust was also informed."

On the day his family flew back to the UK – 30 October 2008 – Mr Thompson also claimed £500 for hotel rooms in the towns of Siracusa and Ragusa in Sicily, where he is believed to have been spending his holiday, and a further £206 for what was described in the accompanying notes as "holiday cut short".

It was not the first time Mr Thompson had been forced to cut short a holiday, his expenses reveal. He put the £1,277.71 cost of chartering a private plane on expenses in 2004, as he had to deal with an "urgent staff issue" in London. This is understood to refer to concerns about the expenses of Alan Yentob, a senior BBC executive, who was later cleared of any wrongdoing.

The director-general claimed £99.99 last year for a bottle of Krug Grande Cuvée champagne – an 80th birthday gift for entertainer Bruce Forsyth – and £500 for a Christmas dinner for BBC executives in 2007.

The board-level claims over the past five years include numerous staff dinners costing more than £1,000, as well as hotels, taxis, airline tickets, parking charges – and a £400 cake.

The expenses claims were published in spreadsheets and, unlike MPs' heavily redacted claims released last week, do not include receipts.

Among the eye-catching claims is the £1,917.09 spent by Jana Bennett, the BBC's former head of TV and now its director of Vision, on a leaving dinner at the fashionable private club Soho House for Alison Sharman, a BBC executive poached by ITV.

Ashley Highfield, the BBC's former head of new media and technology, claimed £200 for an iPod, as well as for dinners and hotels around the world, including a "group meal after 11 hours on duty" at the Bellagio Hotel in Las Vegas for 29 people, which cost £1,430.08.

Jeremy Paxman, the Newsnight presenter, enjoyed a lavish dinner with Ms Bennett that cost £231.55.

By comparison, the BBC's former Gaza correspondent, Alan Johnston, who was held captive for four months, was treated to a "welcome back lunch" by Mark Byford, the deputy director-general, which cost only £37.90.

Ms Bennett had a number of interesting expense claims, including £500 to cover the theft of her handbag while on official business. Notes on the claim said: "The BBC decided to pay half the cost of replacing the property and cash stolen."

She also charged £35 to have her hair styled for a TV interview and nearly £190 for vaccinations ahead of a trip overseas. While on a trip to meet studio bosses in Los Angeles in May 2007, she claimed more than £1,300 for a stay at the luxury Raffles l'Ermitage hotel in Beverly Hills.

Ms Bennett, who earns £406,000 a year, spent more than £2,000 in May 2007 hosting a "talent" dinner with 22 attendees. Then in July that year, she claimed £1,500 for a leaving party for Jay Hunt, who is now BBC1 controller. Ms Bennett also spent £400 on a cake to celebrate the end of the BBC's series Any Dream Will Do, for a party for contestants' families.

Meanwhile, Jenny Abramsky, formerly the corporation's director of audio and music, spent nearly £550 in December 2007 on an internal Christmas lunch.

Even charitable efforts clocked up significant expenses. Tim Davie, who replaced Ms Abramsky as director of audio and music, spent nearly £130 on a discussion on Sport Relief and also charged £407.25 for a "Children in Need business discussion".

The corporation revealed the figures in response to Freedom of Information requests and pressure for more clarity.

Mr Thompson said: "Public expectations about openness, trustworthiness and every kind of value for money are becoming more trenchant, more insistent and more vocal than ever before."

Last night, however, Lord Foulkes, who had attacked media presenters for sneering at democracy, in an exchange with the BBC presenter Carrie Gracie during the MPs' expenses row, said he was disappointed at the limited level of exposure.

The Labour MSP said the public deserved to know what top stars were paid. He said: "I will be pushing for greater transparency. The public is forced to pay a licence fee and they deserve as much transparency in matters of pay and expenses from the BBC as from their MP or MSP."



Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 26 June 2009 1:38 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: The BBC
 
1

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 26/06/2009 00:31:52

Shame on the Man, when some of our pensioners find it a burden to pay their television licence fees.

2

One-man-bucket's older twin,

26/06/2009 00:38:08
Viewers would get better value if the BBC said work for a reasonable fee or pi55 off. Public funds shouldn't support extravagant lifestyles.

You would still be able to see your favourites, because other channels would employ them, or if they didn't, they'd stay with Auntie rather than forgo the adulation (and still have more income than doctors and other people who provide essential services earn)

The BEEB should be concentrating on A) quality, not copies of commercial channels' dross (i.e. lifestyle and reality programming); and B) bringing on (risky?) new talent.

Wossy, Wussell and Wogan would still be themselves on commercial TV.
3

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 26/06/2009 00:43:16
The British Broad Casting authority mmmmm Renamed The BRITISH BORROWING CORPORATION, Ah that fit's the bill better, and pensioners are paying for this, DISGRACEFUL
4

,

26/06/2009 01:01:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
5

One-man-bucket's older twin,

26/06/2009 01:06:31
No wonder politicians, whose responsibilities are more onerous, are whingeing about their rewards and fiddling to increase them. The BEEB is paid for from the same purse - ours.
6

Willie Mor,

26/06/2009 01:12:47
What can one say.

It just goes on and on as another 'Great' British 'institution' plays fast and loose with taxpayers cash.

No wonder the Beeb is refusing to give visibility to the multi million pound fees that they give to t*ssers like Brand and Wossy.

And if you think it's only third rate comedians that that get outrageous handouts, you should think also about good old Labour party cheerleaders like Kirsty Wark, Alan Clements, Alan Sugar.

Indeed, even on a more local setting again, the ex Herald journalist Douglas Fraser, who single handedly did so much to destroy the impartiality of that once well respected paper, was awarded a taxpayer funded sinecure at the BBC.

Now with the ITV and STV in grave financial difficulty, what do you think the price of the proposed lifeline cash diversion will be in the run up to the election?

It's just like good old Chicago town in the 1920's when the Al and the boys ran the press, the judges and the police.







7

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 26/06/2009 01:17:23

4 ~Sorry Suzanne,

What does an 'illusionist' say in the first place?




8

Finlang,

Hong Kong 26/06/2009 01:18:19
#4 BTO

Why not ask him specifically instead of posing that vacuous rhetorical question?
9

,

26/06/2009 01:37:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
10

,

26/06/2009 03:21:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
11

Finlang,

Hong Kong 26/06/2009 03:31:29
#10

It's clearly your problem. You ask him, and keep asking until he answers. Result eagerly awaited.

Meantime I'm more concerned about newly exposed publicly-funded swindlers like nonentity politicians and BBC execs.
12

,

26/06/2009 05:02:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
13

Aldi Shopper,

Irvine 26/06/2009 05:41:48
Make the BBC pay to view and that will have the top brass really work for their money. It will also stop this tax which, like our MSs, they seem to spend on themselves without any thought from who pays.
14

,

26/06/2009 05:54:02
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
15

,

26/06/2009 06:05:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
16

GrahamH,

Edinburgh 26/06/2009 07:34:17
Foulkes will press for more transparency - maybe to deflect from MPs expenses? The BBC is a business no matter how funded and £200 for a dinner is hardly lavish. Quoting £100 for a long serving stars bottle of champagne is outrageous, my PA leaves next week after 32 years and company buying a £500 watch, all normal business.

There should be no comparison between BBC and MP expenses, the two exist in different worlds.
17

Letters From Muscat,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 07:39:05
Another fantasic gravy train.... despite six figure salaries, ok old boy, just shove it on expenses, it's only the great british taxpayer who is footing the bill so no worries eh?
18

Martin Osment,

Shoreham-By-Sea 26/06/2009 07:42:04
When I left school (over 40 years ago), I applied for a trainee technical job at the BBC. At interview, I refused the job offer because it took a panel of 19, yes, Nineteen, to interview me, in the then first floor ballroom of the Langham extension, now the Langham Hilton. Clearly the obscene waste of public money continues. Now a pensioner, I want freedom of choice, not leeches with their hands in my pocket. Nevertheless, I support what the BBC stands for, just not the way it does it, so change is long overdue.
19

tommy,

belfast uk 26/06/2009 07:47:50
BBC should be like other pay to view channels
If you dont want to watch--- You dont pay!
bloodsucking leeches following government example
Is everything in the UK now rotten
20

Seymour,

London 26/06/2009 07:56:26
These are the same people (pigs would be a better term for them) who had the effrontery to refuse to help the starving and bleeding people of Gaza scratch together a few pennies of charity to save their life.
21

paulr,

edinburgh 26/06/2009 08:07:27
And I used to think the license fee went to provide public service broadcasting.....
Huge salaries, Champagne and luxury dinners are a much more worthwhile way to spend the money.
22

Jay Kay,

26/06/2009 08:09:00
Look we don't mind the odd bottle of bubbly being poped for ol Brucies 80th bless, but that w*anker Mark Thomson charging the liscence payer to have his family flown home, that i'm afraid deserves the ol tin tac my son.

Glad that wasn't any of my money he was spendin I would be livid.

Don't and won't have a telly, ever, I just will not pay this stealth tax for the heap of utter p*sh dished out by this over blown Corporation.

Tis time to let them fight it out in the real world, see then how much money would be creamed of if it was run by the likes of the Murdochs, unless of course it was the Murdochs doing the creaming.

Personaly, I know some of those poor b*astards who work at sky and the Chinese toy and shoe factories could really learn something there. Makes their working practices look pretty tame by comparison.

Talk about working in shark infested waters, f*uck me they really know how to get their pound of flesh from the staff. Poor b*uggers.
23

Andrew Morton,

Berkshire 26/06/2009 08:10:51
All this done under the threat of fine or jail for not paying the fee!

What a disgrace. I'm never paying my fee again and with that, never watch or listen to any BBC broadcast and they can take me to court if they want but the onus will be on them to prove I'm not recieving any BBC boradcast.

I no longer support the BBC.
24

drunken proffet,

Tassy 26/06/2009 08:11:10
Each generation of BBC executives brings up another level of ability. In the seventies and eighties they produced superb series and programs that are still in constant demand. In this century it is the cult of the individual, virtual reality programs and games programs. From an OAP who watches all the totally brilliant programs from the eighties, on DVD's, you get what you demand. A right scruffy bunch.
25

Phil C,

26/06/2009 08:32:08
I'd like to see the expenses of all folk who are allowed to claim them!

On second thoughts, I wouldn't. I'm bored stiff with the pettiness of it all. Cabinet flippers- that's another thing. Hound them out. It's all gone too quiet round the cabinet table!
26

The Former Mr. Angry,

Perth 26/06/2009 08:33:32
Time to pare the BBC back to its original function which was to inform. It does this well but has now grown arms and legs as regards celebs and reality TV rubbish which could be just as well paid for and presented by commercial channels. The licence fee could no doubt be halved at a stroke and all these excessive salaries nd expenses hacked right back. This is why we need someone wielding a scalpel in this country to perform the necessary surgery to get this sick country back on its feet financially and economically. The Wogans, Wosses and Moyles could go present themselves as "stars" (who told them that?) elsewhere and see how well they get paid in strictly commercial terms. I don't see why we should be paying for all that as well.

We can never trust Brpown to do any of this as he is addicted to spending without responsible controls. That's his solution for everything - spray it with money and hope it will go away and spin it to look good. Time he took his spendaholic pledge.
27

Andrah,

Embrugh 26/06/2009 08:41:08
The BBC, a temple to waste, political correctness and, often, pure drivel. It's so called News and current affairs is so hopelessly biased it might as well be written by the Labour Party and Greenpeace.

Trash TV mixed with unremitting liberal leftie bias from "reporters", presenters, "comedians", "drama" etc all paid for by your good self under the threat of criminalisation.
28

letmein,

hinterland 26/06/2009 08:47:50
The license should be scrapped at once. This shower of dog dirt should be kicked out at once. Bad enough that Scotland only receives 10% of its license fee, without looking after this bunch.
And sorry suzanne, you really are sorry. Put the lights off and start breathing slowly that's a good girl.
29

DialMforMurdoX,

26/06/2009 08:50:36
#4 SS

"Salmond did nothing about this. What's he got to say now?"

Has the fact that broadcasting is a reserved power to Westminster not entered the deep recesses of your ickle brain?

Foulke's can bluster all he wants, at the end of the cliché, he's merely micturating in the wind.
30

Marian,

26/06/2009 08:53:01
It high time that the BBC was brought to heel and cut down to size. It is clearly chronically profligate and over-manned and these days has become nothing more than the licence payer funded propaganda voice of New Labour.

David Cameron must give an undertaking in the Tory election manifesto to confine the BBC to broadcasting the same type of programmes as PBS (Public Service Broadcasting) in the USA (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PBS) but overseen by a non-political body whose Directors should be elected by taxpayers.

This way entertainment programming would be provided solely by commercial broadcasters and the license fee could be eliminated altogether.
31

Nelson51,

Newcastle 26/06/2009 08:56:46
Why should the BBC enjoy a monopoly to charge a licence fee ?. They bombard us with repeats yet still raise the license fee every year. Another organisation that thinks the taxpayer is a mug and should pay for their complacency by financing a lavish lifestyle for top dogs/pigs.
32

SlyFifer,

Somewhere South of Fife 26/06/2009 09:10:08
Was it not Thatcher who described the BBC as 'the last bastion of restrictive practice' many years ago presumably, with the intention of performing radical surgery on that quaint old establishment figure ?.
It beggars belief that in the 21st century with literally 100's of TV channels available that a tax is levied on all households with a TV simply to fund a channel which has lost all vestiges of understanding on what it's public service remit is.
So many debates about the continuence of the license fee 2012 and beyond ?. Does the BBC no less sop than the Scotsman not see the way the wind is blowing ?. Maybe by 2011 there will be an independent Scotland which will have no longer any need for the English Broadcasting Corporation and be remitting no license fee to London or any other foreign capital for the 'priveledge' of not watching the mounds of total garbage and cricket that the BBC spew forth. Of course their output is for the whole country? which country do they refer too ?. Certainly not this bonny wee one.
The BBC need to wake up and smell, before they wither on the vine. I for one will not shed a tear if I never saw another episode of Eastenders.
33

Tynietiger,

26/06/2009 09:11:04
As one tabloid said Britain is Broken. Saor Alba.

You can tell how important BBC Scotland is when not one of the top 50 highest earners at BBC is based in Scotland.

Time for a Scottish Broadcasting Corporation failing which broadcasting devolved to Holyrood so that proper scrutiny on behalf of Scottish taxpayers can be undertaken.
34

Mike S,

26/06/2009 09:12:12
What about the commercial arm of the EBC sorry BBC. They sell programmes around the world and that adds to the monies available and then there is the World service that isn't funded by licence fee money but is from taxes or at least used to be. The fact that ex BBC entertainers form independant companies, for tax avoidance purposes no doubt, should not allow the BBC to be prevented from disclosing the cost of their services.
35

Tynietiger,

26/06/2009 09:12:17
# 32

As BBC claims the BBC is the glue that keeps Britain bound together.
36

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 26/06/2009 09:41:01
To be honest, I'm not bothered.

All I want to know is how do I get myself into the position where I get paid a stupidly high salary and can claim whatever I like on expenses---then when I retire a few years later, I get awarded an obscenely high pension.

Sounds like the way to go! And I bet most people would jump at the chance to do the same... so stop bitching, you hypocrites!
37

hertscot,

26/06/2009 09:57:02
Dont bother paying your license fee, there are other things in the world apart from TV. Whinging masses venting their spleen at buggerall.
38

Dr Egg,

Information should be free not peepeevee 26/06/2009 10:03:23
I will continue to enjoy paying my license fee. The alternatives: Taggart, Big Brother and "I've got an unusually shaped willie" are not alternatives at all.
39

Tartan Viking,

26/06/2009 11:10:03
Wait until the salaries of the top 100 "executives" are revealed. If you wonder why it costs so much to run the BBC the question is answered already - an organisation that actually admits it has at least 100 "top executives" is a clue that it must have a top heavy management.

Why do they need at least 100 high earning executives? Lets see who they are, a breakdown by job, duties, gender, and where they are situated and let us all blow away some myths.
40

KB,

26/06/2009 11:15:55
I remember hearing this on the Chris Moyles breakfast show at Easter.
his sidekick, comedy Dave, was going on about a great new Easter Egg his wife had got him - a new Top Gear Easter Egg twith the Stig and made a motor noise on the box or something. He said it was made by the BBC Commerical arm and it was great that he could talk about it on air.

So our Tax mone (license fee) is being spent on producing commerical goods that they then SELL BACK to us???

Something ahs to change.
41

migrantworker,

Al Ain 26/06/2009 11:25:40
And how do they get into the BBC in the first place? After graduating (with what's considered a 'good' degee from a 'good' university), you need to do a 6-month internship, available only in London. So if you, or your parents, struggled to get you through university, they'll also need the extra cash for 6 months London rent and living expenses before you even have a chance, Not an op for the oi poloi!
42

MadJockMacMad,

Edinburgh 26/06/2009 11:34:25
#22
Mark Thomson was on a family holiday that had to be cut short for business reasons. Therefore it is perfectly reasonable that his employer paid for him and his family to return home early. Any employer in the same circumstances would have done the same.
43

Tartan Viking,

26/06/2009 12:05:10
Something stinks in an organisation that can pay almost £100,000 per annum to a woman who reads the news on the radio.
44

Tris,

26/06/2009 12:16:16
#42. Is there no one else at the BBC who could have dealt with this situation? After all, we hear that some 40 odd executives earn more than the Prime Minister, surely one of these very highly paid executives could have dealt with an infantile moron like Brand and an silly old fool like Ross. The Prime Minister earns less and has to run the whole shooting match!

If no one else WAS capable of dealing with this situation, then should the BBC not look at some training for its staff that are paid over £200,000 a year plus expenses? Just to see if it would be possible for them to actually do some executive work. Alternatively, if the DG has to be available to deal with every crisis that occurs, should we not think about sacking the usless managers who seem only to have skills in consumption?

When you consider how expensive the licence fee is, and the low standard of some of the programming, it's an absolute scandal that the fee for a whole street be used to give staff leaving dinners, or allow them to stay in luxury hotels, or pay for them losing their handbags.

There are pensioners going without food so that they can pay this fee, not because they spend any great time watching BBC, just because the telly is their main source of entertainment and the BBC has the right to levy a tv poll tax.

Time the BBC lived in the real world and it's long overdue that the licence fee be replaced with a commercial operation.
45

Tartan Viking,

26/06/2009 12:19:06
#44 Tris.

Do you have a breakdown of who the top earners are?
46

Jay Kay,

26/06/2009 12:50:53
#42 Jock what I would have done as Mark Thomson would have gone goes a bit like this:- Dring dring, dring dring, Yes Helo is that the assistant director of Broadcasting, err yes who is this, its your boss Mark thomson on Holiday with my familly, tell you what sack that p*rick Woss and Brand and I will deal with it formally upon my return. Thank you very much click, and returns to the beach witha nice cold Margarita job done my ol son.
47

Sgian Achlais,

26/06/2009 13:53:42
The Politicians, the bankers, the beeb all use the same claim.

"If they were not paid the obscene salary they would not be able to recruit the best"

Most of the politicians have never even had a job in the real world so they have no idea what the would command in private sector but I doubt other than contacts and influence they have from working in politics they have very little skills and talents. Ex welder, ex teacher, ex union steward, ex public school boy, ex researcher.

If we paid £100K for a top banker they would still live in good quality of life and would they really do a worse job. Could anyone do a worse job.

As for the BBC. Reading the news on the radio is not even a talent, talking to people on TV is also not a talent restricted to a few highly skilled people. Any old footballer, singer, ex soap star manage to become TV personalities with no training or experience. As for the executives earning massive salaries and living in luxury it is an utter scandal.

Thousands of people could to Jonathon Ross's job for a couple of hundred thousand yearly and be delighted. My god the guy cannot even speak correctly.
This is just more London based sponging and taxing of the UK wide population for the short list of elite who live in London.

The bankers, the politicians and the BBC are fools kidding themselves on they are gifted and special. Most are at best average.


48

DialMforMurdoX,

26/06/2009 14:10:40
Having worked for them on and off for a number of years, one of the worst offenders I recall, was the permanently orange Natasha Kerplunk, who would order a taxi to take her to a restaurant about quarter of a mile way from news, then have it wait, on the meter, whilst she had a leisurely two hour lunch.

Having had marital ghastliness with half the male execs, there was a collective sigh of relief when she left for Channel 5 and a frankly astonishing pay packet.
49

Tartan Viking,

26/06/2009 16:38:18
#48. Not surprised at this. An astonishing pay packet for average talent. Story of Broken Britain under the guidance of Bamby Bliar and Comrade Broon, where failure is/was no obstacle to greed. Bliar in particular encouraged a bourgoise lifestyle for the middle class hangers on and big heads, of which she is clearly one.
50

Lanne,

Edinburgh 26/06/2009 18:43:18
In days when we are all looking around to see what we can cut in our own life style to help save some money this is disgusting... not really surprising after everything we have seen and heard re government's inability to keep their staff in line and not letting them blatantly rob from the public/poor. I guess it has been a wake up call for all of us who actually thought that there might be some sort of checks and balances in place to ensure staff didnt lavishly throwing around the public money... obviously not.. I truly hope that this has been a wake up call and alot of very embarrassed people should be hanging their heads in shame... but alas I suspect only for having been caught :-(
51

Fifi la Bonbon,

26/06/2009 20:10:29
I bet Common Purpose are behind this outrage.
52

Alex Hogg,

rancho santa fe 26/06/2009 20:36:28
Another storm in a teacup.

At 70 thousand pounds a year not bad for the best news service and web site in the WORLD.

$2400.00 for 29 peole at the Bellagio in Vegas they must have only had a coffee and donut each. A real meal would have cost at least$6/9000.00.

Lets have some real rporting.

Why are we in Afghanistan??

Cots much more than 70K a minute not a year and KILLING innocent villagers to support the great US KILLING machine.

War what WAR there is no enemy.

As for the use of drones they are great when the other side has no weapons or way of defence.

Try them against a real force and they re useless.

Thats a real topic this is FLUFF
53

Scottyt,

Saint Paul, Usa 26/06/2009 21:43:49
Shame indeed on the higher-ups in the BBC especially when the pensioner has to either struggle to pay the fees or can't afford them.
It is truly disgusting; also readers of the news do NOT deserve anything like ONE HUNDRED QUID a year.
.
Power is corrupt and so very greedy.
54

Tris,

26/06/2009 22:44:38
#45. Tartan Viking.

Sorry, I've no idea, but I think some of the London papers were covering it in detail untill the Jacko story broke.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.