menuMENU    UK Free TV logo Archive (2002-)



Click to see updates

Want to know how much the BBC spend in England, Scotland, Wales and NI per home?

Interesting figures from Broadcast magazine today - from their Nation and Regions Special - shows how much money is spent in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. I thought I would share...

Lovely Scotland.    Photograph:
Lovely Scotland. Photograph:
published on UK Free TV

Just in case you missed it today, BBC Scotland would like to have their own Six O'Clock news on BBC One at an extra cost of £65m a year - BBC Scotland bosses lobby for 'Scottish Six' news programme | Media | The Guardian.- at a time when the budget is being cut by £50m this year and £650m by 2020.  

Perhaps if they cut BBC ALBA (£9m/year) BBC Radio Scotland ( £31.4m a year), BBC Radio nan Gaidheal (£6.0m) that might get half way toward paying for it?    Not sure how a 30 minute news remix show would cost almost the same as a 24-hour news channel either. 


But here are the figures from Broadcast...

BBC Spend per £145.50 Licence Fee

There are 2.4 people per TV Licence (from BBC Full Financial Statements 2014/15). 

England £126.70, Scotland £175.72, Northern Ireland £202.98 and Wales £203.47 - from A new deal for the nations.


Workings out...

  Per Capita millions of poeple
England  £    52.10 53.01
Scotland  £    72.20 5.295
Northern Ireland  £    83.40 1.811
Wales  £    83.60 3.064



All questions
BBC Three Linear channel re-opens1
Removing all barriers to communication between diverse cultures2
How do I get a test card with Freeview3
What can I do when my Sky Digibox says 'No Signal' or 'Technical fau4
Can I receive UK TV in Ghana?5
In this section
BBC salami-slicing returns to overnight services?1
#GreatBBC campaign launched2
Goodbye BBC Red Button!3
S4C and Welsh Exceptionalism?4
BBC future: make sure you make the deadline5
Time for the BBC to release the DOGs?6

Monday, 16 November 2015

12:12 AM


You raise the question of climate change. Firstly to show I am not a crank I have a Physics Degree and an MSc in Solid Sate Physics. I also have passed the CAA Meteorological exam for private pilots.

I certainly do not believe there is sufficient evidence to prove that human activity has a significent effect on global weather. The weather systems are extremely compicated and cannot be predicted even by using the most powerfull super computers.

In the 60's "scientists" were predicting another ice age.

link to this comment
trevorjharris's 367 posts GB flag

11:43 AM

trevorjharris: I'm not going to try to debate the in's ans out of climate change here, because:

a) This website has an entirely different topic

b) My physics is barely above O level, for the most part.

However, with your background in physics, I'm sure you would be interested sites like the ones from Tamino Open Mind | Science, Politics, Life, the Universe, and Everything (who has an excellent set of links to data sets if you want to crunch the numbers yourself - Open Mind | Science, Politics, Life, the Universe, and Everything climate-data-links/ ), and Eli Rabett's Rabett Rabett Run

Both are working scientists, and have lots of links to others working in the field. And RealClimate is a must - the permanent and guest contributors are working (and publishing) climate scientists, and there is a huge amount of commentary on journal articles, data and other links as well. They have just put up a review of the situation in the Antarctic which is very interesting. RealClimate: So what is really happening in Antarctica? .These, and many other sites, will give you an insight into climate science at a level your academic background warrents.

Unfortunately, the 'ice age' meme is false. The 'possible ice age' stories started being reported in the 1970's, but were based on basically one outlier paper What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s? . The science was pretty clear by that time anyway - Lyndon Johnson was briefed in a report in 1965 about it, and mentioned it in a speech to Congress in Feb 1965 http://www.washingtonpost…tml.

As we know, science is reflected in the journals, not the popular press. The number of journal articles attempting to argue against AGM is tiny. And thats why I find the evidence for AGM overwhelming. However, the links above should allow you to look at the data with your own eyes and evaluate it.

link to this comment
MikeB's 2,579 posts GB flag
Tuesday, 17 November 2015
Simon Parsons
12:45 PM

Brian Butterworth raises some valid and long overdue questions about the cost of the BBC Scotland newsroom but the figures in broadcast are spurious and disingenuous. They include the cost of distribution around the terrestrial transmitter network which is proportionately more expensive in areas of low population. When it comes to spend on production and administration the BBC trust instructed the BBC top dogs nearly eight years to bring that spend in proportion to the number of licence fees raised in each country. Needless to say it hasn't happened and with shows commissioned years ahead they won't achieve it in the foreseeable future. On the other side of the coin, the geography of Scotland means an independent BBC Scotland would have trouble making ends meet.

link to this comment
Simon Parsons's 3 posts GB flag

1:20 PM

Simon Parsons: Thanks for your kind comments. The only way to look the cost of distribution in Scotland is to look at BBC Alba. It costs 6m a year for "content", 1.4m for "distribution", 900k for "content and support costs" and 700k for "general overheads". So, 15.5% ... For BBC One it's 3.2% (46.2/1,433.6) for distribution. It's a great shame the BBC Annual Report doesn't break these down.

link to this comment
Briantist's 38,902 posts US flag
Thursday, 19 November 2015
3:34 PM

You keep saying spending 'in' scotland, but the BBC claim spending 'on' Scotland. Not the same thing at all..Match if the Day is spending 'in' E&W, but it is considered spending 'on' all UK citizens, as it is a nationally broadcast programme. This goes to show how fake these figures are. Of course, the BBC is under political pressure in Scotland, so it's a narrative they want to push. I'm surprised there's anyone out there who would actually believe the BBC spends more per head in Scotland than in England.

link to this comment
Andrew's 2 posts CN flag

3:42 PM

Andrew: just for the purpose of clarity. The figures are for spending IN Scotland, Wales, England and Northern Ireland.

This means that the money is paying for people, buildings, equipment and services there. This isn't about making local programming for these areas.

link to this comment
Briantist's 38,902 posts GB flag

3:45 PM

For additional charity, the BBC doesn't spend more in cash terms in Scotland than England because TEN TIMES as many people live in England than Scotland. The graphs reflect this.

link to this comment
Briantist's 38,902 posts GB flag
4:18 PM

You're completely wrong, I'm afraid. The figures are based on national spending per capita, on things like the BBCNews 24, Radio 1 etc divided by UK population. This produces a figure probably north of 45 quid per person UK wide. Then you add regional spending. This is much higher in NI, Wales and Scotland than in England.The regional part is spent in those regions as you describe. The national bit is spent mainly in London and Manchester, but also overseas on news coverage. Per head, more money is spent *in* England than in NI or Scotland. Not sure about Wales.

link to this comment
Andrew's 2 posts CN flag
Monday, 23 November 2015

10:33 PM

Andrew: Just for the record.... what I wrote is correct and I have provided links to the primary source. You assertion isn't evidence, sorry. You are just making it up, as they say.

link to this comment
Briantist's 38,902 posts US flag
Select more comments
Page 2

Your comment please
Please post a question, answer or commentUK Free TV is here to help people. If you are rude or disrespectful all of your posts will be deleted and you will be banned.

Privacy policy: UK Free Privacy policy.