In message , at 10:54:16 on Sun, 10 May
2020, Graeme Wall remarked:
On 10/05/2020 10:00, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:54:13 on Sun, 10 May
2020, michael adams remarked:

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...

If she went to work in a taxi, paid for by the BBC, then that
would clearly
be a complete waste of licence payers, i.e. our money.

Compared to her £200k salary, it's peanuts.

Is it really £200K ? Just for reading an autocue ? It really makes
you think doesn't it ?* Thats' £3.8 k a week. Even after tax that's
still £1.9 k. Every single week. Just for reading an autocue for a
few minutes.
The job's much more than that, but nice try.

You can see why some people are so upset. And its our
Licence Payer's money as well,


What I'm saying is she's *lucky* to have that time on her hands, so
what she does isn't* a particularly good role model for the rest of


According to your other post, she jogs six miles each way. Which at
a reasonable average speed of 4-6 mph should* take between 2 and 3
hours per day.

Are you seriously suggesting that somebody who spends between 2 and 3
hours per day exercising, is a poor role model ?
It's a lot more than most people exercise, but that's not the point.
Few people can fit that type of commute around their work and home
life schedule, even if they weren't having the change/shower etc.

Many people spend (spent!) two to three hours a day commuting.

Not as many as you probably think. See the transport survey I've cited.

What do you suggest she should be doing instead ?
She has a husband and three youngish children for starters, which is
going to keep all of them busy.

On £200k she can afford a nanny.

Which few people can, and part of the reason why her behaviour isn't a
good aspirational model for the rest of society which can't.
--
Roland Perry