A Labour MP has suggested that £100 million would be better spent on preserving the BBC World Service, as opposed to an F35 fighter jet.
In the Commons, Peter Prinsley described the BBC as a “vital UK soft power” as he urged the Government to acquire 73 jets instead of 74, to better fund the broadcaster.
Earlier this year, the previous Conservative government said it was in negotiations to increase the number of F35 fighter jets by 2033. Meanwhile, the Labour Government is currently conducting a strategic defence review (SDR).
During Foreign Office questions, the MP for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket said: “The BBC World Service is vital UK soft power. The contribution from the Foreign Office to the funding of this is about £100 million per year, about the cost of an F35 fighter jet.
“(The) UK has plans to acquire 74 of these fighter jets, would the minister agree with me that we might consider acquiring only 73 of these jets, if this was the price of preserving the BBC World Service?”
Foreign Office minister Hamish Falconer replied: “It’s £104 million that we provide to the BBC World Service, it’s very good value indeed. I will not seek to get into Budget negotiations in advance of the Budget, because I know better than that.”
Later in the session, shadow foreign secretary Andrew Mitchell also raised concerns around funding for the BBC World Service as he voiced his dismay at the cancellation of the programme HARDtalk.
He said: “Does she share my dismay that while the director general of the BBC professes the BBC presents a key source of democratic soft power, in the face of the spread of state and non-state disinformation they are now intending to cancel internationally-admire interview programme HARDtalk, which has a global reputation holding those in power to account?”
Foreign Office minister Anneliese Dodds replied: “Any editorial decisions on BBC content will be ones made by the BBC alone, that’s quite right and proper.
“But all I can say, is wherever I have been in the world, it is very clear quite how powerful the BBC is.
“A soft power perhaps, but a very important reflection of our values as a country of connection, deep connections between the people of Britain and other nations. We’re determined to ensure that that remains the case.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel