The BBC is worth defending. Scotland has much to lose if we forget it

After more than a century, the BBC remains an asset of enormous value to Scotland

I have my complaints about the BBC. So, I suspect, do you. There are times when its journalism falls short, when its judgement is poor and when its defensiveness makes a bad situation worse. It should answer for those failures. We pay for it.

But I have no intention of joining those who seem to think Britain would be better off without it. We would be poorer culturally, weaker internationally and more dependent on decisions taken elsewhere about what we watch and hear.

That is why the debate about the BBC Scotland television channel matters beyond the channel itself. There are questions about jobs, commissioning and what Scottish audiences will receive in future. Moving a channel online must not become an excuse for reducing the BBC’s commitment to Scotland. It must continue to back our talent, tell our stories and bring Scottish life to audiences here and beyond.

Equally, we should be careful about treating the future of one channel as a verdict on everything BBC Scotland does. There is far too much at stake for that. The BBC is something we should be proud of.

Start with the ownership of our media. Sky belongs to the American corporation Comcast. Netflix, Disney, Amazon and Apple are American businesses. Their investment here is welcome. I want Britain to attract it. But their commitment to Scottish culture is a commercial decision, taken by people who ultimately answer to their shareholders.

The BBC has a responsibility to us. That distinction matters when decisions are being made about which stories get told, whose voices are heard and whether a programme gets commissioned at all.

A Scottish story should not have to demonstrate its appeal to an American audience before someone will back it. Nor should our cultural life depend on whether it fits the latest strategy of a global streaming company. We should have the confidence to back our own stories because they matter to the people who live here.

This ought to command agreement well beyond the usual political divisions. I believe passionately in Scotland’s place in the United Kingdom. Someone who wants independence can disagree with me about that and still recognise the value of a broadcaster with a duty to cover Scottish life.

Reporting Scotland and Radio Scotland are part of that life. So are Sportsound and Sportscene. Football matters to people, and those programmes make Scottish football available to audiences without a sports subscription. Gaelic broadcasting, through the BBC ALBA partnership, gives a language and its communities a presence that commercial broadcasting alone would not guarantee.

Then consider what happens before a programme reaches our screens. A writer gets a commission. A small production company gets work. An apprentice learns a trade. Across the UK in 2025/26, the BBC welcomed 660 new early careers apprentices. For those young people, it is a chance to build a career. The BBC backs talent before it has a track record, giving people the training, responsibility and support to succeed.

And the people the BBC trains go on to work across the industry, including for the international companies making programmes here. Netflix and Disney invest in training too, and deserve credit for doing so. But they also benefit from a workforce whose skills public service broadcasting has helped develop over generations. That contribution belongs in any honest discussion of what the BBC costs and what it gives back.

The same is true of music. The BBC employs musicians, commissions new work, backs emerging talent and brings live performances to millions. Without that sustained investment, much of our musical life would be poorer.

The BBC Scottish Symphony Orchestra has been part of our national life since 1935. Keeping an orchestra together, commissioning composers and bringing performances to audiences takes sustained commitment. It cannot be switched on and off according to this quarter’s viewing figures.

The BBC also backs the Proms, the BBC Singers and BBC Introducing, alongside coverage of theatre, books and the visual arts. For someone unable to afford a ticket or travel to a venue, a broadcast opens a door. I regard that as money well spent.

Beyond Britain, there is another reason to defend this institution. The World Service reaches 355 million people each week. For people living under censorship or through war, reliable news can be a lifeline.

We know that hostile states manufacture lies, manipulate social media and use fake accounts to give falsehoods the appearance of popular belief. Russia devotes considerable effort to it.

That makes the BBC’s responsibility to check facts, challenge falsehoods and report honestly all the more important. People need somewhere to turn when their screens are full of claims they cannot verify and images they cannot trust.

The BBC’s reputation has been earned over decades. That reputation is a considerable asset for Britain. When the BBC fails, it damages that reputation. The answer is to insist on better journalism and proper accountability. Weakening the BBC would suit the Kremlin very well. Why would we help them?

After more than a century, the BBC remains an asset of enormous value to Scotland and the whole United Kingdom. It requires reform, financial discipline and leadership willing to listen. Defending it does not mean giving its management a free pass.

I want the BBC to serve Scotland better. I will challenge it when it falls short. But I am proud that this country created it, and I believe we should defend it.

Stephen Kerr is a Conservative MSP for Mid Scotland and Fife