Culture, Media and Sport Committee

Wednesday 8th July 2026

(began 3 months ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
10:00
10:00
10:01
10:01
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

Well thank you. I'm just six and a half weeks in, so I've been doing a lot of listening and learning, but also, um, before joining, I had the chance to tour the country and see what the BBC was doing in the front line, from local radio to drama productions England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales. And I think the creative engine and powerhouse for the UK is a key part of the case for the BBC. It's reached for audiences, if you think about it, it's quite remarkable when we've got infinite choice in our pockets that the BBC still reaches 94% of UK adults every week, it's pretty remarkable.

It's pretty remarkable that it's the most trusted, despite some of the recent issues, the most trusted news provider domestically and internationally. So I see those as huge strengths. But I also see, you know, we're in a week where ITV and Sky are merging. We've seen Warner Brothers Discovery and Paramount merging the shift in consumer behavior around media and the concentration in power that you heard from other witnesses about the concentration of power in some of the American and Chinese players means we're at a critical moment, and I see the jeopardy for the BBC, but I also see the strengths and final point I'll make, because I'll be snappy, as you suggest, but happy to expand on this.

The reason I ultimately decided to join the BBC at this time, because I could have done other things, uh, was because I believe in its mission. Genuinely. I read the hundred year history. The BBC has been at the forefront of innovation in technology, creativity and journalism for over a century. I believe it's needed now more than ever in that world of a concentration of power, disruption by technology. British values and truth, and British creativity, I think are more important than ever.

And we're just announcing today that the World Service has reached over, or BBC internationally has reached over half a billion people a week. So we have a huge role to play in the world looking for this kind of truth and creativity, as we do in the UK.
10:03
10:03
10:05
10:05
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

Look, I think it's really important. One of the key principles I said on my first day as I actually, just before I walked through the door, my priorities personally were making the case for the BBC editorial Excellence and Velocity, by which I mean sort of speed, but in a direction sort of not in a circle. And that's about getting closer to the audience, being simpler as an organisation and being faster to the future. So closer to the audience. Absolutely. If you look at young audiences, they're five times as much media time on YouTube as they are on any linear television.

And that's actually happening. The older you get almost up to kind of my age bracket, that shift is happening. I noticed Carolyn McCall on the announcement of the merger, the CEO of ITV saying, you know, change is exponential. So I do think that's happening incredibly fast. So I think what I can bring is a sense of how to operate in an uncertain but fast changing world at a greater speed, and that will require us to experiment more, probably to partner with other people and to be focused on tomorrow's world.

And I do think some of the arrangements under the charter that will be reviewed, you know, to do with requirements around the old ways of working, can hold an organisation like the BBC back. So part of what we've got to do is readopt that pioneering spirit of the original founders of the BBC around technology. I think it's unlikely that building our own technology in every respect is going to be something that's sustainable. But I do think if I think about the case for the BBC today, chair, and I'll just be brief on this, the audience value, the audience value is enormous, and we need to sustain that.

There's a second case, which is the economic impact. I'd love to come on to that, which is big, and I can share some report we're publishing today. And I think the third case is sovereignty. It is a world where the BBC is the biggest funder of original British content today. People around the world want that content and want those values, but we're being disrupted by a small number of very big, very powerful tech players. I know about this because I came from that world, and I think that puts at risk our ability to create content, our ability to fight misinformation and our ability to distribute that content to audiences.
10:07
10:07
10:07
10:09
10:09
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

You're absolutely right. So I came in with the need to save 10% of cost already announced, and I've been working with the team, and we made the first set of announcements. There will be more to come about how that restructuring happens. What I've asked the teams to do is have some key principles in mind when they're making those difficult choices, because we're no longer in the stage where we can say, well, we've got programmes that nobody watches, or we've got functions that don't do everything.

The BBC has made real progress, and the National Audit Office actually have accredited the BBC for getting overheads to a sensible benchmark level. So the principles I've asked our teams to look at are first and foremost, to preserve and maximise audience value. Um, to reduce duplication where where there is duplication and to simplify the BBC so it can move faster. And I think you can see in what the teams have already announced that, that it's hard. We're going to have to um stop.

Doing some programmes that are very popular with people. Um because there are more popular programmes, we're going to have to look again at how much we do in terms of the linear output. I mean radio and television is traditionally known as the audiences are shifting faster and faster. The point I'd make is the BBC is not unique here. You know, Sky and ITV have merged because they need scale. Warner Bros. Discovery and Paramount have merged before because they need scale and on the production industry side, Banerjee in all, three media have merged because they need scale.

The BBC also needs to preserve its scale. If it's to make the interventions that it needs in the market. And, you know, one of the just to pick one tidbit, I've been surprised and impressed by many things I've seen since arriving at the BBC one being the impact of its work across the UK. 60% of its network spend is now outside London. 55% of staff are now outside London. Talk about something that only the BBC.
10:11
10:11
10:12
10:12
10:12
None Portrait Speaker 5
-

Should I. Take that. Um, it's obviously one of the most important questions that needs to be resolved in the Royal Charter. I just want to step back one moment before I answer that question. It's really important. And I think in the conversations and witnesses you've heard, this has come through very strongly that the BBC is much more than just a broadcaster. It is a public good. It's a national asset. So our relationship to the licence fee payer or the funder is not simply a transactional one.

It's not, as it were. We're not Netflix saying you get pay 9.99. You get these programmes. It's more than that. We provide a national asset and we need to look at that funding model in those terms. As a result of that basic thought. It's really important that the funding model is both universal. Every household has a stake in the BBC. It makes the BBC a national asset. Secondly, it needs to provide enough scale, as Matt is so eloquently put, that the BBC is big enough not only to deliver its purpose, but to be able to compete in this new world that we're facing.

And I think we've discussed, we can talk further about the kind of funding options we've we've are open to. It is, of course, for the government to decide. And one of the things just one I was really interested to hear, as you were doing your witnesses, that the issue of the household levy surfaced again and, um. In our view, we are open to any conversation about funding model. The household levy has many advantages. You know, it's enforceable. It takes out lots of the costs that the current licence fee means it can be fair.

So we're open to that. But we do recognise that first of all, in the Green Paper, the government of the had ruled it out. But, you know, we're open to that conversation. I think if it's not the household levy, the important point is universality and scale. And as Matt pointed out, the licence fee is always evolved to capture changes in behaviour or consumption. The consumption behavioural change, we all know, is moving away from linear to on demand platforms.

So we need to capture that in the modernised licence fee needs to capture that moment, and that will include other platforms currently. Licence fee of course, if you watch ITV you still have to pay the licence fee if you're watching television you have. So it's that same principles. But the important thing here is a modernised licence fee must capture the way people are now consuming content, particularly the younger generation.
10:15
10:16
10:16
10:16
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

Yeah. So I've looked a little bit at this. And I think you see a number of European countries where they've moved to a household levy for the reasons that the chair mentioned around shifting behaviours. I think what the advantages are, as you say, is, you know, it's it's universal collection can be simple in different places. It's done, you know, through um. Utility bills, you could imagine broadband or mobile or, um, electricity being ways to do this. So that gives you universality, which is one of the things we need, uh, you know, on behalf of our audiences, it can give you scale because it's universal and so on.

I think it can reduce the collection costs, which are currently about £190 million a year for us to collect the licence fee. And I suppose it gives you an option, which is if you say that 80% of households are paying today and you went to 100% of households, you know, the licence fee could be lowered for everyone and government could make, you know, make calls on, uh, lower income households, younger viewers, which I think is all quite appealing. As Samir says, I think the challenge is it's been ruled out and I can understand the concerns about cost of living and so on, on households, but I think it's got merit and others have found it to have merits.

I think extending the scope of the existing mechanism has merits, too. It's simpler. It probably wouldn't require legislation, but I think one of the challenges there would be the collection, which is already challenging and more challenging, is more young people are used to just clicking and accessing content, and it becomes harder for us to enforce the conversion rate. On enforcement actions as been going down, as you know.
10:18
10:18
10:18
10:18
10:19
10:20
10:20
10:20
10:21
10:21
10:21
10:22
10:22
10:23
10:23
10:24
10:24
10:24
10:25
10:25
10:26
10:26
10:26
10:27
None Portrait Speaker 4
-

Okay. Thank you.
10:27
10:27
10:28
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

Um, so you're talking about what's now called BBC Studios, which is basically producing shows for the BBC and other people as distributing shows that have already made or rights deals with people internationally. And it's running a number of things like BritBox and other streaming platforms internationally. I think the opportunity to grow that is a significant one. I think we are in a bit of a cyclical moment, so when I talk to the team at studios and bear in mind, I've just been six and a half weeks, um, you know, what they can say is, uh, that there was a period of time where the streamers globally were funding content hugely because what they were trying to do was say, here's our show, come and sign up to our platform and stick with us.

That game is over. You know, and we've seen multi-billions spent on streamers that have yet to turn a profit, particularly in American streamers. So that means the market is squeezed at a time when production costs are growing at around 7% year on year, partly driven by energy but partly driven by, you know, various other kind of cost of living factors. So, um, there is scope to grow studios revenues. More borrowing would allow us to be, uh, to be longer term in that which could be useful.

And it's something that I think we should be looking at within the scope of these discussions, because the more that the BBC can draw on commercial sources of funding, the more it can offset what's happened with the licence fee. And if I may just add a minute on this, um, the committee probably understands this, but I think it was something that I needed to get clear on arrival. In the last ten years, the BBC has lost 1.2 1.3 billion of licence fee funding, about 60% of that is due to price freezes, which are government interventions and taking on the over 75 and some of the world's service costs.

So 60% of the drop in our income comes from policy, 40% from a reduction in households paying what the BBC has done. Um, Samir and Tim previously, and the management team has chosen to invest as much as possible in content and channels. It's kept as many services as possible, running, spending, cash reserves and dividends from the commercial business. The reason we've had to now make savings is because that game is over. Um, we can grow studios and we'll continue to try to grow studios, but in a tougher market.

All the factors that have led to the mergers I mentioned are the factors that we face as well. And that's one of the reasons why we're having to deal with making tough cuts and choices at the moment.
10:29
10:29
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

I think, um, couldn't tell you that in the rank order of priorities, but coming in with a commercial background, I understand completely the public service remit. And we need to do everything we can to fund that as well as possible. I'm looking at all of the ways in which we could drive income for the BBC. Um, obviously the charter settlement is the most significant part of that because licence fee funding is by far and away the biggest single source of funding. But things which we do through studios, it's commercial growth, potentially funded by further borrowing, further partnerships, um, opportunities to monetize some of our services around the world.

That sort of growth in the BBC world reach is significant. That could be further monetized. And then the sort of arrangements on rights. So one of the things that surprised me on arrival at the BBC, I was sort of aware of this, but I grew up in a world where the BBC made everything itself, and therefore it had control of its rights. So the archive was something that could be exploited. When those rules changed some years ago, it created the independent production sector.

But the BBC doesn't have control of the rights of most of the content that it airs. And so that's one of the challenges here, is how do we get value for licence fee payers in that world?The production sector is wonderful. And you had representatives here very positive about the BBC. So we want to continue to support the independent production sector. But we should look at how do we make sure in doing so that we also get value for licence fee payers.
10:31
None Portrait Speaker 6
-

Thank you.
10:31
10:32
10:33
10:33
10:34
10:34
10:35
10:36
10:37
10:38
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

I'm, I'm really aware BBC news and BBC journalism, although, um, some issues in the last year or so remains the most trusted. And you know, since I've been there, I've seen, you know, two high impact panorama's I've seen Ed Thomas's investigation of high streets resulting in policy change. So there's some incredible journalism going on there. So no cut in our staffing or services is an easy one to make. Uh, the best way we can do this is to have two things.

One, a set of principles, which I mentioned earlier, which is to kind of minimize audience impact. So to kind of maximize the highest value things we do for audiences to look at ways to reduce duplication and make the BBC more agile and fit for the future. But you're absolutely right. One of the reasons I think we're in a moment of real jeopardy, not just for the BBC, but for Britain and for public service broadcasting. It's a unique asset for us, and that's why a universal, sufficient and scale funding solution is really critical.

We will have to continue to make cuts. Um, can I just address your question on sort of news specifically because various figures have been reported in the press. So each part of the BBC has a different cost structure. So in news we make our own programming. We are our own content, uh, sort of top to bottom from the journalists you see on screen or listen to on radio through to the trucks and, uh, the technical services and the distribution, um, in, um, other content.

Typically we're commissioning from other people. So the cost structures are very, very different. So you're right, if you're having to make savings, there are more likely to be savings to do with people and programming where we're making our own programmes. On the content side, we can scale back on some of that investment. Indeed, Kate Phillips, our brilliant head of content, announced about 8% reduction in budget for independent productions, which obviously impacts the sector, which is a huge source of value to the UK as well.
10:40
10:40
10:40
10:40
10:41
10:41
10:42
10:42
10:43
10:43
10:43
None Portrait Speaker 1
-

Thanks, Damian.
10:43
10:45
10:46
10:47
10:47
10:47
10:48
10:49
10:50
10:50
10:51
10:51
10:51
10:51
10:52
10:52
10:53
10:54
10:54
10:54
10:54
None Portrait Speaker 8
-

Indeed.
10:54
10:54
10:55
10:55
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

Just in England.
10:55
10:56
10:57
10:57
10:59
10:59
None Portrait Speaker 6
-

Pay now.
10:59
11:00
None Portrait Speaker 6
-

Those two.
11:00
11:00
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

These encourage them to email me directly. I'm answering all the questions of colleagues. You mentioned pay in a world where we have to cut half a billion from the BBC's budget, by the way, half a billion is equivalent of more than the entire film and drama budget of the BBC. It's more than the budget for news. It's more than the budget for sport. So it's a significant amount of saving in a world where we have to do that.

I do think colleagues accept that. They have to make that. We all have to make change. One of the things I'm most impressed by is colleagues at the BBC are there because they believe in the mission, and they know it's tough, and they see what's happening around the world. And, you know, these are very informed colleagues. So we're in negotiation. We haven't reached the end of the negotiation on pay. I think it's reasonable to offer an increase, but we can't afford an increase at the scale that people might like.

My job is to do two things come in and make sure that we are operating within the envelope we currently have argue for a better funding solution for the future, but also to reshape the BBC. As Samir says, for the future. And so that depends on what the charter asks us to do. But you're absolutely right. If we want the BBC to continue to be brilliant journalistically, creatively and technically, we need people to want to come and work there and build careers there.

And so that's what I'm looking at as I'm trying to make the strategy for the future.
11:02
11:03
11:03
11:05
11:05
11:05
11:06
None Portrait Speaker 1
-

Yes.
11:06
11:06
None Portrait Speaker 5
-

This will.
11:06
11:06
None Portrait Speaker 5
-

Thank you for that. Um, well, as you know, as the chair, I act in the public interest and there's nothing more important, as you point out in our survey, that the public wants the BBC to be independent. That is its principal reason, and particularly independent of government. One of the one of the reasons I've raised in my November speech, some chair will remember back in in Leeds in 2024, that we should consider whether we should lose the permanent charter. I lose the ten year limit and have a permanent charter because it will benefit both the public, the government and the BBC, because then we will not be.

Every few years have facing an existential crisis. About the beach. And that just is not a very helpful thing. It's not helpful for many, for many reasons. Let me just identify 2 or 3. First of all, just let me say this is not special treatment. Every single, as far as I'm aware, organization created by Royal Charter does not have a time. Only the BBC has. Why?There is no reason for it.

It just enters. We have negotiations and discussions with government with this first question, which is why should you exist?It doesn't happen. That's not a helpful start to any relationship. I think the other reason is that to their practical reasons, if we. This cliff edge means that we cannot have any long term strategic planning. We can't have contracts where we can get value out of having discounts for longer contracts. But what it isn't is to shy away from accountability.

Some of our other ideas is about strengthening accountability. So what a permanent charter does is strengthened. Both the independence and attached to some of our other ideas make us more accountable to the public, to Parliament. What we do not want. And that's the problem with the ten year rule that the government of the day can simply, passively not produce a charter, and the BBC ceases to exist. I'm not suggesting the BBC has a right to exist. It does not.

But if the. If you decide to abolish the BBC, it should be a national debate involving the public Parliament and then Parliament can legislate or to reveal. To revoke the charter. It needs to be a public, proactive decision, not something that happens by default.
11:10
11:10
11:10
11:11
11:11
11:11
11:12
11:13
11:13
11:13
11:14
11:14
None Portrait Speaker 10
-

Thank you.
11:14
11:15
11:15
11:15
11:16
None Portrait Speaker 7
-

That needs to be one.
11:16
11:16
11:16
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

Yeah, yeah. I mean, I was just going to add. So there's an employee survey that tells us how employees feel. It shows some progress on things like culture, which Samir and others have put in place. Quite a big programme around increasing the sort of safety that people feel to call out bad behaviours. And I've seen data that suggests real progress on that, both in terms of cases, but also in terms of employee sentiment. So that's one lever to the earlier question.

I'm open to, you know, reshaping the BBC in a way that modernizes it. I've seen lots of different models across Europe as well on employee representation. They may or may not work in different ways. I think it's a fundamental part of your leadership task as a manager to be, well, engaged with employees. That's why I spent six weeks going around the country listening to people in the front line. I met, I think, almost all of our 1000 apprentices who were brilliant.

We have a next generation committee that are sort of rising talent. The whole of the Exco, the management team listened to the other day. And I'm looking again at how we engage coming in fresh. I in my previous role, a lot of employee engagement. And I think hearing direct from employees at senior management level fundamentally important. Final point on that is in a world where organizations are changing fast and are subject to much greater uncertainty, whether it's government or companies or organizations like ours.

Uh, the more you communicate, the better. And actually you need to hear from the frontline to lead properly. So I think it's important how we resolve that, you know, is up for grabs.
11:19
11:19
11:20
11:20
11:20
11:20
11:21
None Portrait Speaker 5
-

I'm sorry sir, that.
11:21
11:21
11:22
11:22
11:22
None Portrait Speaker 9
-

What's the strategy?
11:22
11:22
11:22
11:23
11:23
11:23
None Portrait Speaker 9
-

Of the.
11:23
11:24
11:24
11:24
11:24
11:25
11:25
11:25
11:26
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

Was the question.
11:26
11:26
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

It's a it's a very good question. I mean, the first thing to say is no organisation can rule out mistakes completely. I think we need to start with that premise. However, on my first day before I went through the door, I said, make the case for the BBC Editorial Excellence and Velocity on editorial excellence. I spoke to several previous DGS, several previous heads of news, previous Deputy Director General to understand how things had operated and what I needed to do. I opened the role of a deputy director general on arrival and appointed.

Four weeks later, Rhodri Talfan Davies, to play that role. Somebody who's been at the BBC began as a journalist and has a good understanding of the organisation. That's helpful as somebody coming from the outside, the remit there is to assist in ensuring when there are issues, whether it's operational, editorial or corporate, that they're immediately gripped within a rigorous framework. I think that's one of the challenges has been if things happen, there's been not necessarily enough accountability and clarity on it. So he's going to help to ensure that we put in place something.

Also, I think, you know, if you make a mistake, it's really important to be quick. One of the things that I, you know, looking at is velocity. If we make a mistake, we should own it. We should apologize for it immediately. And then we should sort of say what we're going to do to try to understand what went wrong or to address it. And I think that's one of the things that I'm very clear on from the start.

And, you know, so watch this space. I hope that we will live up to that promise.
11:28
11:28
11:28
11:29
11:29
11:29
11:30
11:30
11:30
11:31
None Portrait Speaker 9
-

New people.
11:31
11:32
11:32
11:32
None Portrait Speaker 9
-

From PwC, one from.
11:32
11:33
11:33
11:33
11:34
11:35
11:35
11:36
11:36
11:36
11:37
11:37
11:38
11:39
11:39
11:40
11:40
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

Yes. So, um, I appointed deputy two and a half weeks ago or two weeks ago. And so we're just working through what's the best way to address the issue of that role and how it operates around, um, any kind of crisis or incident, whether it's editorial. Operational or corporate, his role will be to lead the response on behalf of the corporation. Not necessarily the public response. It depends on the seriousness. I would expect you would want to hear from me in the case of something very serious, but there are all kinds of issues that come up all the time.

So I think given the scale of the BBC and its output and also the rightly, the scrutiny that it has uniquely ahead of anyone else in the media sector, we need to make sure that we have that sort of approach to understanding the risks and what the appropriate response, both publicly and operationally. So we're working on putting that in place. It's not fully established because, you know, we're only just getting started. I think it's important. That's part of dealing with the response.

The other part, though, chair, is about ensuring the conditions are there so that we can take big risks and be bold in our journalism and creativity while, um, being held to the right standards that you would expect from the BBC. So we want to make sure that we've got the conditions in place as well on that. And I've been impressed by things like the editorial guidelines, but the world's moving so fast. We need to modernize what we do. And I've talked about, for example, when criticised, it's hard for me to pull data on how many times did we cover a particular story.

And I want to make sure that we can do that better and faster.
11:41
11:42
11:42
11:42
11:43
11:43
11:44
11:44
11:44
11:45
11:46
None Portrait Speaker 1
-

Thank you.
11:46
11:47
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

Yes. Um, thank you for the question. So so yes, I understand the question. Sorry. And let me just sort of unpack it for you. Um, I asked the team about this in respect of the Makerfield byelection, which happened soon after I started here and a complaint had been raised by one of the, I think it's 14 candidates standing about not being on Question Time. A Question Time has a panel, I think, of. Five.

And so the way in which they select panellists is a key thing that they've looked at very closely. And, um, in fact there was an Ofcom complaint because this was during an election period and Ofcom ruled with the BBC that we had been fair and appropriate in the application of our guidelines. So in the context of something like reform, as you mentioned, the MPs versus the representation. The political situation, as you all know, is changing very dynamically. And so we can't just look at, you know, historic representation in terms of numbers of seats.

We also look at things like vote, share, intention to vote, and so on. And, and the team has to make a judgment based on all of those factors. They're very clear editorial guidelines. In fact, uh, 10.4 .21 in our editorial guidelines deal with election and its integrity by elections to. And obviously, there's a code of practice for candidates. So that's always under very close scrutiny. It's a question I've already asked in Makerfield. I was and also the Ofcom adjudication was supportive of our guidelines, but we'll need to keep it under review, particularly as the situation on elections and by elections is very dynamic.
11:49
11:49
11:49
11:50
11:51
11:51
11:51
11:51
11:52
11:52
11:53
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

Um it's a great question and there's a lot I could answer there because I've got some background here. I mean, I think what I've asked immediately is, is two things. One, that we prioritise improving iPlayer and its recommendations. So if you are making programmes for the BBC, I think it's right that those programmes are easy to find. So for example, I really enjoyed the show. Small profits had an audience of 8 million plus. I think many of you may have seen it.

Great, great show. Greater Manchester based exactly what the BBC should be doing. By the way, it came out of Mackenzie Crook, who was discovered on the office. The BBC backed him in his first ever writing piece, which was directed detectorists. So I watched Small Profits. You'd think that it would suggest that iPlayer would suggest detectorists to me, but. But it doesn't. And so some of our technology investment has fallen behind where it should be.

So improving the user experience or the audience experience in our digital properties is one key priority for me. Another priority is going where the audience is, so we've got to get comfortable with the BBC being seen on third party platforms. I don't think, you know the current licence fee straitjacket on funding. You've got to be on iPlayer or linear to pay. The licence fee is in the way of that progress. I think we have to go past that already and make the assumption that the BBC and continuing has to reach the audiences where they are.

So there's this other another piece there, which is ensuring that we appear on third party platforms in the best possible way. And I mentioned BBC News now at 20 million YouTube subscribers, they've done a good job, I think, with their branding. If you go to YouTube, you can tell BBC news Red. Is there people like Steve Rosenberg?Uh, and, and our other key correspondents are there. Um, uh, elsewhere in technology, there's an awful lot of other things we need to do.

The use of AI is going to disrupt both the creation of content and the distribution of content. It's already doing so. And the BBC needs to be careful in using its AI, in its content creation and journalism, but it needs to use it because some of the tools are really powerful in those arenas. So I've looked at I have set up a group that's looking at, um, what technology do we approve at greater speed for use in our production processes, both journalistic and otherwise.

And also what do we do in terms of our distribution. Distribution has been complicated by chat bots circumventing people. Google search since I left has now been augmented with AI summaries. So people are less likely, in some cases to go through to the original content provider, be that the BBC or a newspaper. So there is a lot to do in the field of technology. It's been a bit underinvested and we've got a lot of legacy technology that's about, you know, radio masts and linear TV broadcasting too.

So the challenge is how do we maintain that?Because it has to support the audience while we build these new things, and there's a job to do there.
11:56
11:56
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

I said, I think the case for the BBC today is about what it does for audiences, what it does for the economy, which is £6.7 billion worth of economic impact and what it does for sovereignty. And I think, you know, when I've spoken to policy makers here and around Europe in particular in the last few years, seen lots of regulation here, you know, the Online Safety Act. And now we have obviously the social media ban. I think that's in response to concerns about technology.

But tomorrow's battle on technology is all about AI. AI. Now, you know, on my phone, I could generate something that looks like a Hollywood movie with with just a few words. So that's a completely different world. And I think part of what we do within charter, and this is something we've not yet talked about, is how does the BBC play its role alongside government and other institutions in equipping the UK in the battle against misinformation, digital sovereignty, information security, but also the skills for the jobs of the future?You know, I grew up in the era of the BBC micro, and I know that our games industry in Dundee and the DeepMind team in London and many of the unicorns that the UK is producing in this area, are led by people who grew up with the BBC.

Micro were inspired to become software engineers through that program. What's the equivalent of that today?How do we help people with the skills of the future?I know, um, Damian asked the question about education. I strongly believe that the BBC has got a big role to play in equipping ourselves in this battle for truth, which is already here.
11:58
11:58
11:59
11:59
11:59
12:00
12:00
12:01
12:02
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

Oh well, I wouldn't.
12:02
12:03
12:03
12:03
12:04
12:05
None Portrait Speaker 1
-

Natasha.
12:05
12:05
12:06
12:07
12:08
12:08
12:09
12:09
12:10
09:44
09:45
09:45
09:45
09:45
09:45
09:45
09:45
09:45
09:45
09:45
09:45
09:45
None Portrait Speaker 2
-

I just have for 30s.
09:45
09:45
09:45
09:45
09:46
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page