Something does not quite add up
The project is said to have wasted £125m and they're saying this guy alone is responsible for £94m of that (coming back to that) so who is being blamed for the other £31m or does that not matter? I mean, £31m is clearly nothing when they're paying someone so much and letting him supposedly blow £94m but who was responsible for losing the rest and how have they been punished?
Back to the other point. If this one person alone is somehow responsible for £94m of wasted money then who put him in that position and why was he not made to give regular reports? Of course I don't believe one person is responsible for this just as much as I don't believe he's worth his annual salary but if we have to play that game then make it as awkward as possible for the BBC to hide their lies. What a laughing stock the BBC has become. Impartial news is not something I look to the BBC for and haven't for quite a while now.