Lisa Nandy ‘may block rise in £174.50-a-year BBC licence payment amid impartiality disaster’

The Culture Secretary is reportedly weighing blocking a rise in the BBC licence fee following a series of humiliating blunders for the broadcaster. 

Lisa Nandy is said to be undecided over whether to allow the annual licence fee to increase by almost £7 in the spring.

Next year’s licence fee is due to be based on the annual inflation reading for September this year, which stood at 3.8 per cent. As a result, the current fee of £174.50 could increase to more than £181. 

The potential rise could inspire current viewers to join the 3.6million households refusing to pay the fee as of this year. 

This is 300,000 more than the previous year, which has resulted in a potential loss of £617million if converted to paying households, according to a report by the Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC).

The report also revealed that 2.9million BBC viewers evaded paying the £174.50-a-year fee, costing the broadcaster of £550million in lost income. 

The BBC has been embroiled in a series of scandals in recent months, culminating in the resignation of boss Sir Tim Davie and Head of News Deborah Turness. 

And just last night, the corporation looked set to suffer another blow after a former senior BBC news editor warned that ‘weak’ chair of the BBC board Samir Shah could be the third senior member to be toppled.

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy (pictured) is reportedly weighing blocking a rise in the BBC licence fee following a series of humiliating blunders for the broadcaster

The BBC has been embroiled in a series of scandals in recent months, culminating in the resignation of boss Sir Tim Davie and Head of News Deborah Turness

Shah and other BBC board members are due to appear before a critical Select Committee of MPs on Monday to discuss growing concerns over editorial standards at the supposedly impartial publicly funded corporation.

But his appearance was overshadowed by the resignation last night of fellow BBC board member Shumeet Banerji, laying bare clear schisms on the 12-strong board, which is responsible for oversight and strategy of the BBC.

Banerji’s resignation over ‘governance issues’ appeared timed to ramp up the pressure on Samir Shah ahead of Monday.

He was also said to have cited frustrations at not being consulted about the resignations of Davie and Turness in his own resignation letter.

But former Editor of BBC One’s Ten ‘O’ Clock and Six ‘O’ Clock News Sir Craig Oliver told the BBC today that what Banerji was saying was ‘really code for saying he thinks there has been weakness and a lack of grip’. 

He warned: ‘The stakes were already high for Samir Shah and they just got even higher as the BBC risks the prospect not only of losing the director general and the head of news but also losing the chairman of the board of governors.’

Oliver said Banerji’s resignation was a direct consequence of the BBC’s failure to ‘get a grip on the situation’ which he also said had made it easier for ‘enemies of the BBC and those who didn’t like it’ to criticise it.

And, firmly laying the blame at the door of Samir Shah, he said the timing was ‘terrible’ because ‘the BBC Charter renewal was coming down the tracks’.

Nandy has until February to decide whether to raise the licence fee, with sources close to her claiming that no decision has been made yet, The Telegraph reports. 

Outgoing BBC director-general Tim Davie outside Broadcasting House in London following his resignation earlier this month

The crisis began when a leaked memo from former BBC editorial standards adviser Michael Prescott raised serious concerns about the BBC’s reporting including its apparent doctoring of a Donald Trump speech in a Panorama episode, its coverage of the Gaza war and reporting on trans issues.

Trump has threatened to sue the corporation for $5 billion for the way it edited two separate sections of his speech made on January 6, 2021, together. In the BBC edit, Trump appeared to be calling on his supporters to march on the Capitol.

The BBC has since acknowledged the edit gave ‘the mistaken impression that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action’.