BBC World Service Funding

Tom Rutland Excerpts
Thursday 26th June 2025

(1 day, 13 hours ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.

Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Tom Rutland Portrait Tom Rutland (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley) for securing this important debate.

I declare an interest, as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on the BBC, a recipient of BBC hospitality, and a former employee of the Prospect and Bectu unions, which represent some BBC staff.

The BBC World Service is the ultimate example of British soft power, having driven influence, stability and security across the world for almost a century. In our increasingly unstable world, with media polarisation and disinformation on the rise, the role of the World Service in countering hostile state narratives has never been more critical. Russia and China are spending an estimated £6 billion to £8 billion to use technology and communications as a tool for influence and disinformation in Africa, Asia and the middle east, and winning audience trust as a result. However, as the world’s most trusted international news provider, the BBC is uniquely placed to counter these forces, reaching an audience of 414 million people worldwide in 42 languages, across TV, radio and digital platforms every week. This includes 64 million people in the 20 most fragile states. It is the only international news media organisation still broadcasting inside Afghanistan, where it reaches 23% of the adult population, as the right hon. Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis) rightly pointed out.

Independent research shows that 62% of influential global users say consuming BBC content makes them perceive the UK more positively. However, its ability to reach global audiences has been hampered by previous moves to end the full grant-in-aid funding for the World Service. As the right hon. Member for Maldon (Sir John Whittingdale) noted, today, two thirds of the World Service’s budget is met by licence fee payers, with the remainder coming from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. With the licence fee generating 30% less income in real terms than it did in 2010, the BBC cannot ask UK licence fee payers to continue to invest in the World Service at a time when it is forced to cut UK content. That means that the BBC’s capacity to sustain coverage, influence and reach has been stretched to the limit, while that of malign state actors is increasing. Budget limitations have forced the BBC to retreat in some key parts of the world, with others taking their place, such as Russian-backed media now transmitting on the very radio frequency previously occupied by BBC Arabic in Lebanon—a point that we have heard but is worth reiterating, as it is shocking.

It is welcome that one of the first acts of this new Government was to resolve the funding crisis for 2025/26, increasing funding from the FCDO by 31%, to £137 million, enabling the BBC to maintain all of its existing language services and to provide emergency information services to those in crisis in Gaza, Sudan and Ukraine for the coming year. However, enormous pressures remain, with £6 million of savings being announced for 2025/26, focused on a reduction of 130 roles. The recent spending review and BBC charter review process offer the opportunity to put the BBC World Service on a stronger footing. The Government should grab this opportunity with both hands, to meet this dangerous era with the stable and long-term funding mechanism needed to secure the World Service’s future from central Government budgets —as was the case for the first 80 years of the life of this beacon of British values around the world.

Previous cuts to the licence fee, rising costs and the need to keep pace with technology means that the World Service needs investment. A flat funding settlement in 2026 and the years covered by the spending review would leave the BBC unable to retain the breadth of its language services, diminishing its impact and influence. As the FCDO considers how it will spend its allocation from the recent spending review in the years ahead, I urge it to restore full funding for the World Service, recognising it as a beacon of truth and trusted British influence in an increasingly unstable and fragmented world.