A depleted BBC will turn us into Little Britain

Send your letters to letters@independent.co.uk

Friday 07 February 2020 08:00 EST
Comments
Lord Birt challenges Nicky Morgan on license fee review, saying it would be 'seen as attack on BBC'

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

So the government is beginning a review of BBC funding in the era of Netflix. Surely this overlooks one simple truth: no streaming service offers news and current affairs. In fact, commercial broadcast news seems not to make a profit but to be funded by other parts of the channel. Amazon is the only one to experiment with sports coverage so far. What happens to the crown jewel sports competitions, Remembrance Sunday, the state opening of parliament?

The licence fee has already been raided by the government over the years to pay for a digital switchover and local city TV, amongst other things.

Furthermore, with the BBC’s world-class reputation, any major damage to it will show the world that post-Brexit, we really have become Little Britain.

Alan Hutchinson
Address not supplied

Former BBC head warns of consequences of change to licence fee

Farage vs the People

I disagree with Mary Dejevsky’s assertion in her article about Nigel Farage that parliament and the people are now in alignment in their views about Brexit.

The vast majority of opinion polls since the referendum have shown a clear majority in favour of the UK’s membership of the EU. This majority is growing and is likely to continue to grow as the malign effects of Brexit become clear.

Since the referendum, large numbers of old Leave voters have been replaced by young supporters of Remain, who will be responsible for clearing up the mess left by their forbears, even though the young ones have had no say in the matter.

It could be argued that the parliamentary shenanigans of the past three years have been a fair reflection of the division of opinion in the country, with a majority of MPs showing a commendable scepticism about the prospectus put before them by the Brexit snake-oil salesmen. Since then, however, a Brexit-supporting majority among MPs​ has been established on a minority of the popular vote and an even smaller minority of the total electorate, while a majority of electors in December backed parties who called for a confirmatory referendum.

So it seems clear to me that parliament is now seriously out of step with the people. Ultimately the people will prevail, as they have always done. Our rulers would do well to heed the lesson of history that peoples and nations are always stronger together.

Sam Boote
Keyworth, Nottinghamshire

Farage: The Man Who Made Brexit clip

Trump should have faced witnesses

“High crimes and misdemeanours” covers a multitude of sins. Donald Trump should have been forced to go through the full impeachment process which involved the calling of witnesses. The fact that no witnesses were permitted makes a total mockery of the American justice system. Trumped up charges or not, Trump should have been properly investigated.

Christopher Learmont-Hughes
Caldy​, Wirral

Ken Clarke calls Boris Johnson 'disingenuous' during Brexit motion debate

Heathrow hypocrisy

I read with interest your article about Labour leadership hopeful Rebecca Long-Bailey and her opposition to Heathrow expansion, apparently on environmental grounds. She should recall that the majority of her Labour colleagues voted for the expansion in June 2018 in parliament. Her comment that Jeremy Corbyn should have “whipped” MPs harder to oppose the scheme is very curious when you look at her own voting record. Like Boris Johnson, she didn’t vote against expansion.

Her newly defined position may have more to do with her current struggles in the Labour leadership campaign. Whipping up fears over a project that is supported by her parliamentary colleagues, the TUC and the CBI just looks like posturing for a vocal but narrow political base.

In addition, more residents support than oppose expansion in 16 of the 18 constituencies neighbouring Heathrow.

Responsible leaders do not play politics with 180,000 new jobs and economic growth, which will be delivered by a carbon-neutral airport that will play its part in meeting our country’s carbon reduction targets.

Parmjit Dhanda​, executive director, Back Heathrow campaign

Open cabinet

Reading Ashley Cowburn’s column on the cabinet reshuffle, I will be very interested to see who will form the top table of our government. I personally will lose little sleep if Jacob Rees-Mogg is demoted after his dire Grenfell comments. Instead I hope this entity will be fashioned liberally – not stuffed full of Yes, Prime Minister toadies – and will speak up when required.

These are complex and divisive times and for the cabinet not to reflect this, warts and all, is completely disingenuous. The public needs to know the plain unvarnished truth, not congratulatory and meretricious soundbites, manufactured to stop us from becoming restless. So I ask Boris Johnson: stop this bunker modus operandi and form a cabinet that is free-speaking and inclusive.

Judith Daniels
Great Yarmouth, Norfolk

The emperor’s new clothes

As the contrived (in my opinion) rumpus over the attire of Tracy Brabin MP appears not to have subsided, I thought it wise to state a common-sense angle on such matters.

Surely it is far more desirable to have our representatives showing ability and honesty with a lack of sartorial elegance (not the case here), than impeccable attire only to be incompetent and duplicitous.

Having said that, even I would draw the line at Togas and Cod-pieces.

Robert Boston
Kingshill, Kent

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in