MPs Urge BBC to Stop Overpaying for Overseas Hits Like Suits and Schitt's Creek

The BBC has been urged by a cross-party group of MPs to stop paying above the market rate when acquiring the rights to popular international programmes, citing shows such as Suits, Schitt's Creek and Scooby Doo as examples of questionable spending. The recommendation forms part of a wide-ranging report on the corporation's funding and long-term future, produced by the House of Commons culture, media and sport committee, which draws together members from across the political spectrum.

While the BBC commissions and produces the majority of its own output, it also purchases certain overseas titles for broadcast on its television channels and its iPlayer streaming service. The committee argued that, when bidding for such content against commercial UK broadcasters, the corporation ought to exercise greater restraint, particularly given the financial pressures it currently faces.

The report stated that the BBC "could spend more wisely when competing for programming", and characterised the practice of outbidding commercial rivals for foreign acquisitions as illogical. The MPs singled out three specific titles — Suits, Schitt's Creek and Scooby Doo — whose rights the BBC secured after existing deals with other networks or streaming platforms had lapsed. In each case, the committee suggested, the corporation entered into a competitive bidding process that resulted in licence fee money being spent on programming that was neither originated nor owned by the BBC.

Dame Caroline Dinenage, who chairs the committee, framed the report as arriving at a pivotal moment for the broadcaster. She noted that the BBC is simultaneously navigating shifting audience habits, a squeeze on its income, and ongoing negotiations with the government about how it should be funded in the years ahead. In her view, the government has a duty to guarantee the BBC a universal and sustainable funding mechanism — but the corporation itself must also play its part.

Dame Caroline said the BBC could demonstrate good stewardship of public money by "sweating its assets" and being cleverer on behalf of the licence fee payer, including by ending what she described as the illogical practice of outbidding commercial broadcasters for overseas hits. The committee was explicit in its conclusion that such spending does not represent value for money for households that pay the licence fee.

The BBC pushed back against the criticism, pointing out that it devotes less than 5% of its overall content budget to acquiring programmes — a smaller share than other broadcasters. The corporation also argued that these acquisitions are a cost-effective means of delivering high-quality content to audiences, and that viewers who are drawn in by a popular international title frequently go on to discover homegrown BBC programming they might otherwise never have sampled.

The context for the report is the government's ongoing consideration of the next BBC Royal Charter, the framework that will determine how the broadcaster is governed, regulated and financed from 2028 onwards. The committee's findings are intended to feed into that debate, which many observers regard as one of the most consequential in the BBC's recent history given the pace at which viewing habits have shifted away from traditional broadcast television.

Suits, a legal drama that originally aired in the United States, has found a substantial new audience in recent years, in part owing to the profile of one of its former stars, the future Duchess of Sussex. Schitt's Creek, a Canadian comedy series, was picked up by the BBC after leaving Netflix. Both illustrate the growing value that streaming platforms and broadcasters place on acquired catalogue content, which can be licensed relatively cheaply compared with original commissions but may still command significant sums in a competitive market.

Beyond the question of acquisitions, the committee levelled a broader criticism at the current TV licence fee, describing it as outdated and no longer fit for purpose. The MPs highlighted a stark gap between reach and payment: roughly 94% of individuals use the BBC in some form each month, yet only about 80% of households actually hold a TV licence. That discrepancy, the committee argued, undermines the sustainability of the existing model.

The report recommended that the licence fee be reformed so that it is no longer tied to the consumption of live television or to a specific device such as a television set. The MPs suggested that expanding the base of contributors while simultaneously reducing the cost borne by each individual could make such a change more palatable to the public — an argument that echoes previous comments from BBC director-general Matt Brittin, who has described the current model as a "busted flush" and "yesterday's model", and has indicated the price could fall if more people contributed under a revamped system.

The committee also set out a series of measures it believes the BBC itself should pursue. These include exploring the possibility of an international TV licence to grow revenue and global reach, working more closely with the independent production companies that own the rights to many BBC programmes so that more of that content remains available on iPlayer, and developing its existing premises with facilities capable of harnessing new media and supporting the creator economy.

The MPs further recommended several actions for the government. They called for legislation requiring a BBC button on smart TV remote controls, for pressure to be applied to YouTube to give prominence to content made by the BBC and other British public service broadcasters, and for the full restoration of funding for the BBC World Service, which the committee described as the UK's number one soft power asset. The report also backed opening up iPlayer to programmes from rival public service broadcasters such as Channel 4 — an idea that gained traction earlier in the week when Channel 4 chief executive Priya Dogra said she was open to her network's content being hosted on the platform.

On governance, the committee called for an end to political appointments to the BBC board, arguing that doing so would strengthen public trust. It also recommended that the BBC be given new public purposes focused on innovation and technology, and on countering misinformation and disinformation — areas where the corporation's role is increasingly contested and increasingly important.

The BBC responded by welcoming the report, saying it contained some important and interesting recommendations about the corporation's future. A spokesperson reiterated the broadcaster's long-standing position that the current funding model is outdated and requires reform. For all the criticism directed at the BBC, Dame Caroline struck a notably affectionate tone, comparing the corporation to a much-loved family member whom the public may grumble about but would miss enormously if it were gone — a reminder that the debate over its funding is ultimately a debate about what role the BBC should play in national life.