BBC boss supports ‘reform' to funding of broadcaster
The Government is set to launch the review of the BBC's Charter, looking at how it should be funded, after committing to increasing the licence fee in line with inflation each year until 2027.
In April, there was a rise from £169.50 to £174.50 in the household charge, after years in which the licence fee was first frozen and then increased at a slower rate than the BBC expected, leaving the corporation increasingly cash-strapped amid rising inflation.
At the Media and Telecoms 2025 and Beyond Conference, from Enders Analysis and Deloitte, in London on Tuesday, Mr Davie said: 'I want to justify the value that we have. I want that protected.
'I think there is reform (needed) in terms of potential (changes to the) licence fee, how progressive it is, and you'll debate the enforcement question.'
He added that he does 'not want the same system' in the future, but said: 'I do want universal funding, and I want a proper investigation of begrudging, grinding cuts that we've seen over the last 10 years, which has just not helped.'
Mr Davie also told the event, at Convene Sancroft in the St Paul's area, that he is concerned about the people who 'don't care' about the BBC and are 'disengaged', rather than people who criticise the corporation.
He said he wants to 'celebrate the fact that people care', as the BBC features heavily on 'front pages' in the UK.
Mr Davie also indicated he was positive about the use of artificial intelligence (AI), before saying the BBC has 'very big ambition around the media supply chain' including the 'need for muscular partnerships with the big American technology companies'.
Later, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy told the event she is 'determined to find a way forward that works for the creative industry and creators' and technology companies after Sir Elton John and Sir Paul McCartney criticised the Government's AI plans.
She added that 'there are no easy solutions, but this Government is determined to work with you to find a solution with transparency and trust as its foundation'.
'We are a Labour Government, and the principle that people must be paid for their work is foundational,' the MP for Wigan added.
'And you have our word that if it doesn't work for the creative industries, it will not work for us. People are at the heart of this industry.'
She also promised that the BBC Charter review will be launched 'later this year to support a BBC that is empowered to continue to deliver a vital public service funded in a sustainable way'.
Ms Nandy said: 'Later this month, we'll publish a creative industries sector plan to turbo-charge the growth of creative industries right across the UK, to support film and TV clusters from Birmingham to Belfast, to tap into the huge potential of the growth that exists across our country.'
She also committed to no 'new taxes' or 'levies', after calls for a levy on streaming companies to protect UK broadcasters, and said the Government wants to 'ensure that we have a regulatory framework that incentivises inward investment, that creates opportunities for businesses, both big and small'.
In another session at the same conference, Kevin Lygo, managing director of ITV's media and entertainment division, spoke about the need for 'prominence' for the UK's national broadcasters amid their increased competition with streaming companies.
He said: 'I think you have to go back to first principles, because all this discussion is based on the programme itself being worth watching. So I think that's the key for major broadcasters is to never lose sight of making them.'
Mr Lygo also appeared to confirm that the hit ITV drama Mr Bates Vs The Post Office, which shone a greater spotlight on the Horizon IT scandal, is starting to become a commercial success, following multiple actors, including Toby Jones, saying that they took a pay cut to be on the show.
Mr Lygo said it is 'harder and harder to find the budgets', and admitted that at first, it was difficult to explain a series 'about a computer hitch in the British Post Office' to foreign buyers.
'The UK is in this wonderful position when a show really works in the UK, everybody across the world knows about it and wants a piece of it,' he said.
'So, yes, I'm sure, I don't know exactly (the profit) by the production company, but I'm sure they've got their investment back.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Atlantic
a minute ago
- Atlantic
What, Exactly, Is the ‘Russia Hoax'?
Trump's use of pardons may have induced some of his confederates—including Stone and Manafort—to not cooperate with prosecutors, or to only partly cooperate, thus depriving the public of a chance at receiving a full accounting. This was a kind of legalized obstruction of justice. Plenty of authorities have pointed out that Trump's claim of a hoax is nonsense. In 2017, PolitiFact named that its lie of the year. In 2018, The Washington Post reported: 'Trump's Russia 'Hoax' Turns Out to Be Real.' In 2019, a report by the Justice Department's inspector general concluded that, as my colleague Adam Serwer put it, 'the 'Russia hoax' defense is itself a hoax, and a highly successful one, aimed at reassuring Trump supporters who might otherwise be troubled by the president's behavior.' Still, the idea that the whole thing was a chimera has taken hold even within some precincts of the mainstream press, where the whole thing is treated as a weird passing obsession. The journalist Ben Smith, who made the decision to publish the Steele dossier, now contends, vaguely and in passive voice, that ' Trump was in retrospect treated unfairly.' Meanwhile, Trump world continues to cook up new iterations of the hoax claim. The most recent ones are driven by CIA Director John Ratcliffe, who has a history of weaponizing intelligence, to use a term he's a fan of, and Gabbard, who has for years repeated Kremlin talking points. Last month, Ratcliffe alleged that in 2016, three of the nation's top intelligence officials 'manipulated intelligence and silenced career professionals—all to get Trump,' but as my colleague Shane Harris reported, he didn't have evidence to back that up. Gabbard has released a dribble of documents intended to bolster it, but still nothing that matches the claims. In recent days, MAGA allies have pushed a new and shocking allegation: that emails show Clinton actually approved a plan to smear Trump by claiming he was colluding with Russia. The problem is that, once again, investigations have debunked it. A special counsel appointed by Barr during Trump's first term, with the goal of ferreting out political skulduggery in the Russia investigation, found that messages about Clinton being treated as a smoking gun were, in fact, likely concocted by the Russians. As The New York Times reported, 'The special counsel, John H. Durham, went to great lengths to try to prove that several of the emails were real, only to ultimately conclude otherwise.' Durham's finding of a Russian forgery is ironic: Someone has finally turned up a real Russia hoax. Rather than working to fight it, however, Trump's aides are once more colluding with Russia to mislead the American people and further Trump's political fortunes.
New York Post
a minute ago
- New York Post
Yum Brands revenue slumps as KFC, Pizza Hut struggle
Yum Brands on Tuesday reported disappointing revenue as its KFC and Pizza Hut restaurants suffered a dismal sales slump in the US. The company reported adjusted earnings per share of $1.44, missing Wall Street estimates of $1.46, and revenue of $1.93 billion, below projections of $1.94 billion. Colonel Sanders' famous fried-chicken franchise has been struggling for months, last year losing enough market share to rivals Raising Cane's and Wingstop that it slipped to the No. 5 chicken chain in the US by sales. Advertisement 3 KFC's US same-store sales slid 5% in the second quarter. Christopher Sadowski Yum's overall business – including results at Pizza Hut – was also hit by anxiety over the economy that has led consumers to grow more cautious and dine out less. Net income for the company – which also owns Taco Bell, typically its star performer – hit $374 million, or $1.33 per share, in the second quarter, up from $367 million the year before. Advertisement The company's overall same-store sales, which only tracks restaurants open at least 12 months, jumped 2% during the quarter. 'I'm proud that Yum Brands delivered another strong quarter in a tough consumer environment,' CEO David Gibbs said Tuesday. It was his final earnings call ahead of his retirement in October, when chief financial officer Chris Turner will take the helm. Same-store sales at global KFC restaurants rose 2% – but in the US, it slid 5%. Advertisement Though the chain has tried to boost sales with value options and new menu items, the offerings haven't resonated with customers, executives said Tuesday. 3 Pizza Hut's US same-store sales plunged 5% in the most recent quarter. Los Angeles Times via Getty Images Meanwhile, Pizza Hut's global same-store sales fell 1% and its US same-store sales plunged 5% in the second quarter. It was similarly hurt by an 'insufficient value message,' according to Gibbs, as American customers flock to meal deals and value menus. Advertisement The company is rushing to put out new promotions, Gibbs added. 3 Taco Bell reported same-store sales growth of 4%, though that came in below estimates of 5.2%. Christopher Sadowski Taco Bell helped boost Yum's earnings, reporting same-store sales growth in the US and internationally of 4% thanks to the success of its re-launch of Crispy Chicken Nuggets. Its overall chicken sales have climbed 50% over the past two years as it has snapped up market share from other fast-food chains, Gibbs said. 'Most people are reporting negative quarters. We haven't even had a negative week for Taco Bell,' Gibbs said Tuesday. In the second quarter, Yum's restaurant count across its companies rose 3% with 871 new locations – mostly international KFC restaurants.
Chicago Tribune
a minute ago
- Chicago Tribune
Federal judge rules Trump administration cannot reallocate billions meant for disaster mitigation
BOSTON — A federal judge on Tuesday blocked the Trump administration from reallocating $4 billion meant to help communities protect against natural disasters. U.S. District Judge Richard G. Stearns in Boston granted a preliminary injunction sought by 20 Democrat-led states while their lawsuit over the funding moves ahead. The states argue the Federal Emergency Management Agency lacks the authority to end the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program and redirect more than $4 billion of its funding. The program aims to harden infrastructure around the country against potential storm damage. FEMA initially announced it was ending the program, but later said in a court filing that it was evaluating it. 'Although the Government equivocates about whether it has, in fact, ended the BRIC program, the States' evidence of steps taken by FEMA to implement the announced termination portend the conclusion that a determination has in fact been made and that FEMA is inching towards a fait accompli,' Stearns wrote in his ruling. 'The agency has cancelled new funding opportunities and informed stakeholders that they should no longer expect to obtain any unobligated funds.' Noting money for the program was allocated by Congress, the states' lawsuit says any attempt to redirect it would run afoul of the Constitution. A lawyer for the government, Nicole O'Connor, argued at a hearing in July that the funds can be used both for disaster recovery and disaster prevention and that FEMA should have discretion to use the money how it sees fit. The program has provided grants for a range of disaster management projects, including strengthening electrical grids, constructing levees for flood protection and relocating vulnerable water treatment facilities. Many of the projects are in rural communities. FEMA said in a news release in April that it was 'ending' the program, but the agency's acting chief, David Richardson, later said in a court filing that FEMA was merely evaluating whether to end or revise it. The states, including California, New York and Washington, argue that the threat of losing the funding alone has put numerous projects at risk of being cancelled, delayed or downsized. And they warn ending the program would be highly imprudent. 'By proactively fortifying our communities against disasters before they strike, rather than just responding afterward, we will reduce injuries, save lives, protect property, and, ultimately, save money that would otherwise be spent on post-disaster costs,' they wrote in the suit filed in July. FEMA said in a court filing an injunction on its use of the funds could hamper its ability to respond to major disasters.
