BBC may not be in ‘safe hands’ under its chair, says committee head

The chairman of the culture select committee questioned whether the BBC board was in “safe hands” under chairman Samir Shah and described the evidence he presented to MPs on Monday as “malicious”.

Shah appeared before the House of Commons after a turbulent period for the BBC, which saw its director general and head of news resign following allegations of impartiality in its reporting.

Speaking to BBC World after the hearing, the committee’s most senior MP, Dame Caroline Dinenage, said she was concerned about the lack of “grasp at the heart of BBC management”.

Shah told a House of Commons committee he would not quit the job, telling a House of Commons committee he would “steady the ship” and “repair it”.

Shah and other senior BBC figures They have been called to provide evidence of how the company has handled concerns He drew attention to impartiality in his news.

The row was triggered by the leak of a memo written by a former independent consultant about editorial standards, which included criticism of how a speech by Donald Trump was edited by the Panorama program.

As a result, two of the BBC’s most senior leaders resigned, the US president threatened to sue and senior politicians in the UK renewed pressure on the organisation.

Asked about Shah’s assurances to the committee, Conservative MP Dame Caroline said: “They didn’t really have direct answers to questions about how he would get the BBC to act more quickly, to act more decisively… We were looking for really concrete evidence that the BBC board would address this issue… I’m not entirely convinced that they can and will.”

Asked about Shah’s position, he said: “The BBC cannot be left without an expert. [director general] and without the chair, someone has to be there to lead the march to replace the leadership.

“But equally, I don’t think we as a committee are too thrilled that the board is in good hands.”

He continued: “We’ll need to see much more robust answers to questions like the ones we’re asking today… it was all very stilted… there wasn’t much of a sense of influence at the heart of BBC management.”

Shah told the committee that a search for a new chief executive had begun and that he wanted to create an acting role because the job was “too big for one person”.

He also told the committee that the BBC had been too slow to respond to discussions about how Trump’s speech on January 6, 2021 was edited.

In this speech, Trump said: “We will march to the Capitol and support our brave senators, congressmen and women.”

More than 50 minutes later, he said in his speech: “And we fight. We fight like crazy.”

On the Panorama show, the clip shows him saying: “We’re going to march to the Capitol… and I’ll be there with you. And we’re fighting. We’re fighting like crazy.”

The BBC apologized for the edit after the leaked memo sparked public scrutiny and criticism from the White House more than a year after it was first published.

The company later said it “gave the wrong impression” [Trump] It directly called for violent action,” but Shah said Monday it took too long to do so because of internal disagreement over the content and nature of the apology.

He told the committee: “It took time to sort out what the original apology was for.”

Although the BBC apologized for the edit, it strongly rejected Trump’s position that it had cause to sue the company for libel and said it would not pay the monetary damages sought by the president’s lawyers.

The leaked memo was written by Michael Prescott, who was previously the BBC’s external adviser on editorial matters.

He claimed there were “systemic” failings on a range of issues, including allegations of bias in how BBC Arabic covered the Israel-Gaza conflict and the BBC’s coverage of trans issues.

Giving evidence to the same committee, Prescott said he believed problems were “worsening” at the BBC and that the board was “not taking things as seriously as I would have hoped”, but added that he did not believe the organization was “institutionally biased”.

Statements were also taken from other senior figures associated with the BBC at Monday’s hearing. His evidence included:

• Board member Sir Robbie Gibb, a former BBC editor and former communications director for Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May, dismissed as “complete nonsense” claims he staged a politically motivated coup against the director-general and news director.
• Caroline Thomson told MPs BBC News argued Trump’s regulation was “justified” but not “transparent enough”, while the board thought it was “misleading”.
• Another former external editorial adviser, Caroline Daniel, said there had been “robust discussions” on a number of issues at the BBC and said the leaked memo was Prescott’s “personal account”.

In an email to staff on Monday, Shah said replacing Tim Davie with a new director general, the most senior position at the BBC, would be his “number one priority” in the coming months.

It said work was ongoing to assess whether the measures taken in response to the issues raised in the leaked memo were “appropriate” or “whether further action is required”.

Shah also said there would be a review into how the BBC’s Editorial and Standards Committee works to ensure it has the necessary powers, represents a “broad range of voices” and is accountable.

Davie and news director Deborah Turness, who resigned within hours of each other in an unprecedented reshuffle at the BBC’s top level, denied there was systemic bias in the company’s reporting.