EXCLUSIVE: British culture secretary Lisa Nandy’s repeated attacks on BBC boss Tim Davie have sparked concern about the national broadcaster’s independence, with a Deadline analysis revealing the frequency of her interventions when compared with her Conservative predecessors.
Nandy, who was appointed culture secretary by Prime Minister Keir Starmer last July, has savaged the BBC over editorial failings related to the Israel-Hamas conflict, including the controversial Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone film and live-streaming Glastonbury act Bob Vylan chanting “death to the IDF.”
She described the errors as “a problem of leadership” last week. In an interview with The Times of London on Saturday, Nandy declined to say whether she had confidence in Davie, despite the BBC Board declaring days earlier that it supported the director-general. In the same Times interview, she questioned why no one had been fired over editorial failings related to Gaza.
It is highly unusual for a culture secretary to voice discontent about the BBC director-general so publicly and unambiguously. Although many will agree with Nandy’s position, her combative stance has raised eyebrows among fellow lawmakers, BBC insiders, and industry observers.
A former BBC board member argued that Nandy had “crossed a line.” They said: “The readers of The Daily Mail and Telegraph love the idea that the secretary of state summons the DG to her study and beats them. But there are some who behave in a much more proper way and understand how governance is supposed to work.”
Roger Mosey, the BBC’s former editorial director, accused Nandy of attempting to “micromanage” the corporation. He tweeted last week that the national broadcaster should be accountable, but this does not mean following Nandy’s instructions.
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) stood by Nandy’s interventions, telling Deadline that there is a “very important distinction between independence and accountability.”
The BBC’s independence is seen as an inviolable quality in British culture. Executives maintain close working relations with ministers, who negotiate the BBC’s funding and operating charter, but the corporation is designed to be editorially and operationally autonomous of the government.
The BBC’s charter states that the organization “must be independent in all matters” and board members, including Davie, should not take “instructions from government ministers.”
Nandy’s Repeated Interventions
The BBC board, which is partly appointed by ministers, is in place to hold the director-general and senior executives accountable. If the secretary of state wishes to discuss matters of concern, BBC governance experts say that the most appropriate avenue for doing so is through the chair, Samir Shah.
Nandy has bypassed this convention on at least seven occasions over the past year, directly contacting Davie about editorial or operational issues. There is evidence that the frequency of these interventions has increased significantly under Nandy.
On four of the seven occasions, the culture secretary got to her feet in the House of Commons and told MPs she had discussed matters of public controversy with the director-general. This was more than all 12 of her Conservative predecessors combined over 14 years.
That does not mean that Tory ministers did not raise concerns with directors general in the past (Lucy Frazer was grilled by a House of Lords committee after contacting Davie over the Huw Edwards scandal), but our analysis suggests that Nandy is signalling her authority more than previous culture secretaries.
A person familiar with the matter told Deadline that the BBC pointed out to Nandy last year that she should be speaking to Shah, not Davie, when crises emerge. “I believe that this point was not accepted by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport,” the source said. “In other words, there was a standoff.”
A senior Conservative lawmaker told Deadline: “As much as we are all angry [about BBC errors], the secretary of state does not run the BBC. And if she wants to demand action, she should contact the chairman.”
This person added that Nandy’s actions could actually be counterproductive to her aims because they may “force the board into protecting the director-general.” DCMS officials said Nandy had been in contact with Shah just as frequently as Davie over the past year.
The Issues Exercising Nandy
Nandy has been particularly exercised about workplace misconduct (she has spoken to Davie about power abuse allegations against Huw Edwards, MasterChef host Gregg Wallace, and former radio presenter Tim Westwood) and concerns over anti-Israel bias at the BBC.
Both issues will resurface in the coming days. An independent inquiry into Wallace’s conduct on MasterChef will be published imminently, while next week, the BBC is expected to release an internal review into the failings that led to documentary, Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone, being narrated by the child of a Hamas minister.
Nandy is understood to have put unusually high amounts of pressure on the BBC behind the scenes on these issues. Some have noted how her public agitation over Gaza only reflects one side of the concerns about output, with anger being equally palpable among Palestinian sympathizers, who believe the BBC is censoring output damaging to Israel, such as dropping Gaza: Doctors Under Attack.
People familiar with discussions between Nandy and the BBC said she has been more energized about scandals than the substance of policy and charter renewal. Some think she has attempted to demonstrate “grip” and justify her position amid hostile briefings from 10 Downing Street and questions over whether the DCMS will be shut down.
Another theory is that attacking the BBC plays well among populist voters at a time when Labour is losing support to Reform, the party led by Nigel Farage, a staunch ally of Donald Trump.
There is anxiety, however, that Nandy’s anger could color BBC charter renewal negotiations, with industry insiders aghast that government sources told The Sunday Times about ministers “seizing more powers” to fire board members, including the director-general.
There is a sense that if a Conservative government were behaving like Nandy, there would be more uproar about the BBC’s independence. The News Agents podcast presenter Jon Sopel, a former BBC journalist, said Boris Johnson’s government would have been accused of “overreach” had it intervened like Nandy.
A DCMS spokesperson said: “As an operationally and editorially independent organisation, decisions on what content to broadcast, and how they broadcast that content, are a matter for the BBC. However as the secretary of state made clear last week, there is a very important distinction between independence and accountability.
“Given the seriousness of what happened in relation to the BBC’s Glastonbury coverage of the Bob Vylan performance and the impact this has had on the Jewish community in this country, the Secretary of State expects rapid action from the BBC’s leadership, and to be kept updated so she can do her duty to keep Parliament and the public informed.”
The post UK Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy Accused Of Jeopardizing BBC Independence After Repeated Attacks On Tim Davie appeared first on Deadline.
