BBC knew the severity of Huw Edwards allegations, says chief

BBC knew the severity of Huw Edwards allegations, says chief

The BBC Director General has defended the decision not to dismiss Huw Edwards, despite knowing that the presenter had been arrested in November over severe charges related to indecent images of children.

In a BBC News interview on Thursday, Tim Davie explained that the corporation made “difficult decisions fairly and judiciously.”

When questioned about what BBC managers knew in November, Davie said, “We were aware that it was serious, but we had no specific details other than the category of the potential offenses.”

Additionally, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy has expressed concerns about the BBC’s handling of the internal investigation and the use of license fee payers’ money, according to a spokesperson from her department.

Edwards, who was the BBC’s top newsreader, pleaded guilty on Wednesday to three counts of making indecent images of children.

Despite being aware of the gravity of the allegations, Davie noted that the police had not provided the BBC with detailed information about the case, including the ages of the children involved.

Upon learning the full details of the charges earlier this week, Davie said, “We were very shocked. No one knew the specifics of what we learned in the past few days, which have been deeply disturbing.”

When BBC’s David Sillito asked why Edwards was not terminated following his arrest, Davie responded, “Because the police requested that we maintain confidentiality to allow their investigation to proceed without interference.”

Edwards had not been charged at that point and it was still possible he would be cleared, Mr Davie noted.

“We thought long and hard about this. This wasn’t a knee-jerk decision. When you think about this in terms of precedent, people do get arrested, and then we’ve had situations where [there are] no charges, and there’s nothing there to be followed up on.”

He said the corporation also had to consider its duty of care to Edwards.

“When it comes to the decision we made in November, we were faced with a difficult decision, and we considered it very carefully,” Mr Davie said.

“The police… wanted to be assured of total confidence, and the reason they rang us at that point, it’s a technical process to ensure employees are protected and there’s no risk.”

He added: “Another factor at this point was very significant duty of care considerations. I think it was right for us to say we’d let the police do their business, and then when changes happen, we will act.”

Edwards received a £40,000 pay rise in the last financial year, despite being off-air for most of it.

The director general said the pay rise dated from before any allegations.

“There was a [small] inflationary increase, which was standard stuff, but in terms of the big pay rise you saw in the annual report, that related to his work at the BBC, extending the scope of his work at the BBC, and that relates to February [2023], way before any allegations.”

Asked whether Edwards would still receive his pension, Mr Davie said it was “very difficult to claw back, nigh on impossible”, adding: “These are unfortunately the specifics of how it works.

“When it comes to pay, again, [it’s] legally challenging [to recover], but we’ll look at all options.”

Mr Davie was also challenged on the BBC’s investigation into Edwards, which has not been published.

The director general said the BBC was “not sitting on anything that I think we need to share with the police or is of a serious nature that would make me feel that we hadn’t followed up properly”.

He continued: “I can categorically say that when it comes to the offenses we’ve seen, which are truly horrendous, any evidence that is out there is not in the hands of the BBC. If I saw evidence of that, that is not a complicated decision [to hand it over].”