Ex-BBC chair Richard Sharp: Wealthier might have to pay bigger licence fee
The former Goldman Sachs banker claimed the current licence fee system is ‘regressive’
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.Wealthier households could pay more for the BBC, former chairman Richard Sharp has suggested.
In an interview following his resignation in April, Mr Sharp said the current system of a flat rate licence fee is “regressive”.
He suggested it could be replaced by a tax on broadband bills or a household levy based on property value.
Speaking to the Telegraph’s Chopper’s Politics podcast, Mr Sharp said he would be in favour of a “form of mandatory payment” but said the fact that households on lower incomes “pay the same price” as wealthier households is an issue that “may need to be addressed”.
Asked if that meant the charge could be linked to income, Mr Sharp said: “You can look at models around the world, there’s a broadband tax, there’s a household tax and there’s the licence fee.”
The former Goldman Sachs banker left the top role in April after a report found he had breached the rules around public appointments following an introduction which led to then-prime minister Boris Johnson getting an £800,000 loan guarantee.
He has since been replaced by acting BBC chairwoman Dame Elan Closs Stephens, who started last month and will be in the interim position for 12 months or until a new permanent chairperson has been appointed.
Mr Sharp also told the podcast that the position is a “target” and whoever holds it is “vulnerable”.
“When there was a Labour-supporting chair, there’s a target. It’s a sufficiently important institution that who ever is the chair is vulnerable.”
He added that he would tell someone going for the job to “make sure you and your family know what you’re getting into”.
Mr Sharp said there had been an increase in “anger-tainment” which features “ad hominem attacks” to drive traffic to news websites.
The Conservative party donor also said he thinks the next chair of the BBC should not be disqualified for political connections or donations to a political party.
He added: “In the recruitment process, they need to assure themselves that the chairperson will take as a primary objective the strength of the BBC as an independent organisation and should behave in an impartial manner.”
Mr Sharp was also asked about the connection to Canadian businessman – and distant relation of Mr Johnson – Sam Blyth, who had offered to help the then-prime minister with his financial troubles.
He said: “I look back at it and think, ‘God, what a bloody idiot’.”
Mr Sharp also discussed freelancers and impartiality at the BBC saying it was “something that needed to be addressed”.
Former footballer turned pundit Gary Lineker was taken off Match of the Day earlier this year after comparing the government’s language used to promote its asylum proposals to 1930s Germany on Twitter.
Lineker returned to air and the BBC said it would review its social media guidelines on impartiality.
Mr Sharp, who was appointed in early 2021, was over halfway into his four-year term when he announced he was stepping down.
He said at the time he had acted in “good faith” and had the “best of intentions” after an inquiry by barrister Adam Heppinstall KC.
He added: “Mr Heppinstall’s view is that while I did breach the governance code for public appointments, he states very clearly that a breach does not necessarily invalidate an appointment.
“Indeed, I have always maintained the breach was inadvertent and not material, which the facts he lays out substantiate.”