Careless

As in, 'couldn't'

And an interesting reaction from an equally interesting quarter:

Commenting on the BBC Trust’s review of bbc.co.uk which highlights a £35 million increase in the website’s intended budget, Liberal Democrat Shadow Culture, Media and Sport Secretary, Don Foster said:

“This report is a damning indictment of the management of bbc.co.uk.

“A cocktail of overspending and budget mismanagement has led to this huge increase.

“Future investment will only take place if accountability is increased. Not only has the BBC lost track of a phenomenal sum of money, but this mismanagement will now directly impact on the future development of this popular service.”

Lib Dem Press Release

Guardian - BBC website £36m over budget: Trust raps management - What does a 'rap' actually involve

Brand Republic - BBC's online services to face greater scrutiny

'It said most of this increase was not overspend, but the misallocation of £24.9m in overheads and costs to other budgets within the BBC, representing poor financial accountability.'

That's what 'it' said. OK. But is there a translation from someone who can explain numbers in a way this licence fee payer can understand?

Telegraph - The BBC is having its cake and eating it

Telegraph - BBC website faces budget cut for stifling rivals

Daily Mail - BBC rivals amazed at internet 'whitewash' as governing body insists £110m website doesn't stifle competition

The Register - BBC website suits slapped for cash splurge

Gaurdian - Beeb's budget blunder: Where does the buck stop? - Comments already closed, so I guess we await the answer.

Daily Mail - Do these BBC trustees deserve our trust? - A small point, but I have asked before if the only way to be 'in' with the BBC is to be married to another of its officers. Mind you, I wouldn't want my missus adjudicating on my actions.