Talking of silly money...
Via the comments:
A report by Parliament's finance and expenditure select committee – issued Thursday 16th Dec, revealed Ian Fraser and Bill Ralston's "Talk Television" tour to discuss broadcasting with members of the public in Napier, Dunedin and Hamilton (???) cost an estimated $173,342, including $28,166 in travel and accommodation.
I’m sure those gentlemen would like to provide the public with a more complete breakdown of actual costs. Considering both of them could have travelled around the globe a couple of times First Class for that outlay…
How long was the tour?
How much did they pay for the private jet which ferried them? (At those prices, it had to be private and luxurious.)
How many gold plated limousines did they hire?
How many hotel suites did each of them occupy?
(Do any of those towns even have decent hotels?)
How much did they actually spend on the meals?
How much on average did they pay for each bottle of wine consumed?
How many hookers/call girls/boys etc did they hire for themselves or clients on the trip?
(The last may be unkind, but I’m desperately trying to think of ways to pad out the cost of a three town trip by two people and it’s difficult without that sort of excess.)
Oh, and did they get reimbursed for actual and receipted expenses, or did they just get a very large dollop of cash in hand and told to go spend it?
Or did they just take a cash advance based on a first class trip, do it on the cheap, and then pocket the difference?
In this case, and doing the maths, what could be a considerable difference.
posted by Anonymous at 10:27 AM
14 Comments:
The comment about Talk TV is nonsense. More than two people traveled the country etc, I would hope this blog could be used to provide informed debate. If you don't know the facts, don't cloud the issuses with emotional make believe.And no...I don't work there.
I agree with the comment above
"Talking of sillly money" sounds like something to make a soap out of! Certainly nothing reality TV about it..................
Get over yourself.
again - here here! this site has rapidly gone downhill, was a nice idea, pity it's just turned into something as useful as "About Town"
Isn't it funny that the comments surrounding the estimated costs upset some more than the costs themselves.
Of course there were more than two people who travelled but do the math - how many people need to travel and stay in 3 centres before $173,342 is justified??
Don't be ridiculous! We all know that SOE's and the executives that run them never misappropriate taxpayer money. Tsk Tsk. Shame on you for even suggesting it.
Here's a simple solution to take any sting out of the whole silly tour subject.
TVNZ just issues a statement explaining what really went on. Simple, eh?
The statement would explain how many people went on the tour, how long it lasted, the rationale behind it, why those three cities, etc, etc.
It would also be interesting to know what benefits TVNZ/we the viewers got/will get from the trip, and if any further such tours are planned.
All that "transparent" stuff Mr Fraser and co do so well.
It's not as if anyone in TVNZ mangement has anything to hide.
Perish the thought.
I'd like to know where my tax money goes.
http://ihatenz.blogspot.com
The above blog has TVNZ scoops that reinventingtvnz misses out on. How come?
It's hilarious that my $400 Christmas bonus was in that Dom-Post article.
I wonder if they'll do an article on all those times I stayed a little bit later to get work finished.
The public perception that money spent by TVNZ comes from their taxes is quite erroneous. The company has to operate as a private business and does so quite successfully. While it is funded in part by the government to produce charter programming, this is a small percentage of the total running cost of the company, and it is questionable that the money used on this trip was taken from that pool.
Are you serious? So it comes from a different pool! It's a STATE broadcaster with a Govt monopoly, no-one to answer to and jacks up the price of ad revenues by dodgy "research".
It's a sham, a rort and a Govt pet broadcaster. TVNZ should be sold, end of story.
Yes it is state owned but one of it's key objectives is to make a profit. The Government could sell TVNZ, but they make twice as much from it as they put in. As long as the company is profitable the Government, and consequently the taxpayer is benefiting from it being owned by the government.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment
<< Home