This letter was published in yesterday's Times.

Sir, It is time for the Society of Authors to discuss with the Publishers Association the payment of huge sums to celebrities, television reporters, sportsmen and politicians, whose books prove to be flops. Advance fees, which should be going to bona fide authors and young literary people who need financial help as they attempt to enter a difficult profession, are being flushed away. There should be a limit on these advances, and earnings should come only from sales.

British publishers appear to be bent on ruining English literature with this profligacy and poor judgment.

I don't know Peter Kinsley and I don't know whether or not he is a writer, publisher, or reviewer. I sympathise with his irritation that large advances distort the market and draw funds away from young (and indeed not so young) writers. At Macmillan we have two experiments running where we pay no advances but do pay very decent royalties - Macmillan Science  and Macmillan New Writing. We do, of course, pay advances and sometimes big ones (and sometimes to 'celebrities') in other parts of the organisation.

The problem with the Kinsley letter is his proposed solution and the consequences of the Society of Authors and the Publishers' Association meeting to limit advances.

1. Such a meeting is probably illegal and the participants might end up in jail for collusion (arguably a reasonable place for some publishers to be but not a first choice for most).

2. If 1 could be fixed here would the limit be set and who would decide who was a bona fide writer as opposed to a celebrity?

3. If 1 and 2 could be fixed who would monitor compliance and what sanctions would the group be granted? Can you imagine the Society of Authors discovering that a publisher had paid an author more than the stipulated limit and then having to take the publisher to court for being kind to authors?

4. If 1,2, and 3 could be fixed what would happen to authors and publishers who are not members of their respective asssociations? Presumably they would be free to negotiate whatever terms they like. This would defnitely lead to the demise of the two associations as their members deserted.

5. If 1,2,3, and 4 could be fixed what would we do about foreign authors or deals struck in foreign lands (e.g. USA)? Presumably we'd have to ensure the arrangement was global and would therefore require global monitoring and compliance.

6. If 1,2,3,4 and 5 could be fixed who would ensure compliance? I imagine we'd have to call on the services of the United Nations which would divert their attention from trying to solve the problems of the world.

QED

Incidentally, it's strange that people actually think publishers are bent on ruining English literature and that they deliberately exhibit poor judgement and profligacy. We're a pretty useless lot but I promise everyone it's not deliberate - it's just another unintended consequence.

PS I see that Susan Hill has also picked up on this letter and written a much better piece than this one. Do check it out.

And because it's the holiday season here is  photo of our team in Argentina wishing everyone a very happy new year. Please note the very smart white van in the background.