Oh, what a tangled web we weave when we practise DEI. The BBC has fallen into a trap of its own making. Figures reported today show white staff receiving lower median hourly pay than ethnic minority colleagues in six of its seven career bands. Imagine the BBC’s response if those figures concerned another organisation. The yowling.
The Royal Charter obliges the BBC to “reflect and represent…all of the United Kingdom’s nations and regions”. A broadcaster funded by a compulsory charge on anyone watching live broadcast television should not be picking favourites.
The BBC-commissioned Thematic Review of Portrayal and Representation, published on January 29, 2026, warned about forced, tick-box diversity and failures to connect with working-class audiences and people outside London. It highlighted the treatment of older women and found “less positive portrayal of white, working-class men and women in BBC output”. So much for inclusion.
Meanwhile, the BBC’s defenders are sounding the alarm. This week, John Simpson called it “the worst position the BBC has ever been in” and said “the licence fee has had it”. Amol Rajan warned in August that the BBC was “screwed” without a funding overhaul. Yesterday, Director-General Matt Brittin warned changes could be “painful for audiences”.
The public is already heading for the exit in droves. There are around 2.7 million fewer households paying the TV licence than at the start of this decade. And opposition goes well beyond those who have stopped paying.
A nationally representative poll of 2,000 UK adults in 2024 found 66 per cent wanted the licence fee scrapped in 2027. Yet Westminster’s answer is to find new ways to make them pay.
Households can legally stop paying by giving up live broadcast television and BBC iPlayer. They can watch other on-demand services instead. Their money. Their choice. But Simpson wants a mandatory household levy. He even compares paying for the BBC to paying for national defence. Watching Strictly is hardly defending our borders. The BBC now makes programmes in a market packed with alternatives. It has no divine right to our money.
The message from its defenders is becoming tiresome: rescue the BBC or lose something essential to British life. How convenient, just as the Charter Review decides its future.
Last week, the Culture, Media and Sport Committee recommended widening the licence fee, keeping a household levy under consideration and making the Charter permanent. So, more people would pay, with no regular Charter renewal to force the BBC to justify the arrangement.
A household levy would drag the millions of people who have legally opted out straight back into paying—even if they never watch the BBC or any live broadcast TV. General taxation would do exactly the same.
As it stands, Ministers have ruled out both. Yet widening the licence fee remains on the table. Whatever the label, the aim is the same: make people pay even when they have chosen to walk away.
Families struggling with food, heating and housing bills should not have to rescue the BBC from its own failures. The Charter Review should end its entitlement to their money and make it earn their support.
The BBC has tangled itself in its own claims of fairness and inclusion. Hard-working Britons should not be handed the bill for unravelling the mess.
Our Standards:
The GB News Editorial Charter
