Quote: "After Emmott was disinvited to an Ofcom board meeting in July, he claims to have negotiated a settlement where he would get paid £75,000 to leave quietly."
Negotiated with who, exactly? I have visions of a meeting somewhat like the explanatory video show in the original Jurassic Park film, where John Hammond explains to himself how it all works...
"So, I've done something I was asked not to, what should my punishment be?"
"Oh I don't know, how about I award myself about three years salary for someone who works in the public sector and walk away as if nothing had happened?"
"Why yes, I believe that's the least I deserve for having made such a difference to the lives of every man, woman and child in the country."
"So I'm in total agreement, I'll have enough to fund an old person's care for a year."
"Sounds good to me, pleasure doing business with me..."
With regard to his promise to not get involved in discussions over people/organisations he had been slagging off, what then was the point of his being in the role? I presume a similar accusation of bias would be levelled for those he had 'bigged up' as well, so how could he claim any sort of impartiality when it came to doing the job he was actually employed to do? Even if he had found for someone he had insulted or against someone he had complimented, questions would (should!) have been asked as to why he was behaving that way.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
