5 key moments after MPs quiz top BBC figures

Five senior officials, including the BBC’s chief executive, faced questions from MPs for more than three hours after a leaked memo raised allegations of bias against the company.

It comes after BBC director general Tim Davie and BBC News chief Deborah Turness resigned earlier this month over the Panorama episode, which stitched together parts of US President Donald Trump’s 2021 speech.

This arrangement was highlighted in the leaked memo and published by In the Daily Telegraph. Author of the note Michael Prescott He was among those who faced questions from lawmakers on Monday.

Prescott also appeared next to him caroline danielFormer fellow external editorial advisor on the BBC’s Culture, Media and Sport (CMS) committee. BBC chairman Samir Shah and board members Sir Robbie Gibb And Caroline Thomson also emerged.

Prescott, the former political editor of the Sunday Times, was clear when asked whether there was institutional bias at the BBC.

“No, I don’t know,” he told lawmakers. “Let’s be clear, tons of stuff the BBC does is first class.”

However, he stated that there were problems in dealing with editorial issues and said: “The BBC did not have such a situation and I hope they will change by addressing these problems due to systemic causes.”

“There is real work to be done at the BBC,” he added.

Prescott said he wrote the note “because I am a strong supporter of the BBC.” But he also emphasized that there are “initial problems” that have not yet been resolved. In other words, he thought that early stage problems were not solved.

It highlighted a BBC Verify story removed from 2024 that incorrectly reported that people from ethnic minorities were paying higher car insurance premiums.

Prescott said this story was found to be “completely untrue” and that it was “a terrible thing to put out there.” He added that there was editorial failure “on multiple levels” in this story, as well as a clear lack of an investigation into what happened and why.

Shah began his statement to the committee by apologizing to everyone who believed in the BBC, license fee payers and BBC staff, and said: “I regret the mistakes that were made.”

This came after I apologized to the committee – and after BBC also apologized to Trump.

Shah acknowledged that action was needed after issues with Trump’s speech editing became known at the board level.

The committee heard that former Newsnight correspondent David Grossman, who wrote internal reports commissioned by the BBC board, first flagged the edit in January and was then discussed in more detail in May.

“Looking back, I think we should have made that decision [to respond] earlier, in May,” Shah said.

He told the committee that BBC News chief Turness had previously wanted to apologize for the edit but did not think his was “enough” because the real issue was the impression Trump had “encouraged the call for violent action”.

“I think there is an issue about how quickly we respond, the speed of our response, why do we not do it quickly enough,” he said, adding: “We should have pursued it to the end and got to the bottom of it, and not wait as we did until it became public discourse.”

When asked if there was pressure from the board of directors to postpone the apology, he replied “absolutely not”.

The Shah promised to remain in his post to solve the problems.

Thomson, who worked at the BBC until 2012 and returned this year as a non-executive board member, also touched on the timing of the BBC’s apology.

He said there was a “consistent and sharp disagreement” between board members and Turness over whether to apologize for the edit or for its impact.

Thomson told the committee he thought the edit gave a “misleading” impression of what the US president had said.

He added that news bosses continued to argue that the impression given was correct because of the content of Trump’s speech that day: “They thought the regulation was justified, but there should have been more transparent regulation.”

Sir Robbie told the committee it depended on “whether there was a serious error”.

He added that he felt the editing gave the impression that Trump’s comments were a call to arms and that this was “a violation of editorial policy.”

Asked if he tried to stop Davie’s resignation, Shah said: “I really did.”

He described Turness’ actions as “honorable” and “appropriate” and repeated her claim that “the problem is over for him”.

But he said of Davie: “I wish, and I hope the board also, that the chief executive does not resign. We had full confidence in him from the beginning.”

“I’m so sorry to lose him,” he added.

Shah also told the committee that the chief executive’s role was “too big for one person” and that “when we get a new director there is a tendency to restructure the executive in the future”.

The BBC officially launched its search for a new boss on Monday, with the announcement of a new director general published. career site.

“The lens through which we view potential candidates for director general includes the idea that there will be a deputy director general who will focus on journalism,” Shah told MPs.

Sir Robbie, who worked at the BBC for more than 20 years and was former Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May’s communications director, was asked how he manages his own bias.

“My impartiality is in my bones,” he told the committee, saying he was “made fun of” when he joined the BBC in 1991.

He said he felt like he had become “weaponized” in the way he was perceived to be. Asked about Sir Robbie during the session, Shah said he had “absolute trust” in him.

Sir Robbie also dismissed claims of a “planned coup at board level” over the leak of the memo as “complete nonsense”.

“This is also extremely offensive to board members who hold major positions in different areas,” he added.