Scottish Lib Dem Leader Alex Cole-Hamilton this week praised our public service broadcasters for their reporting of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. He described how the BBC was keeping Ukrainian people informed through short wave broadcasts while Russian forces attacked other methods of communications. He pointed out that we don’t get that level of service from Netflix subscription.

His whole speech is below:

Our public sector broadcasters are vital to the health of our democracy. For the past two years, they have kept us informed and have even managed to create and foster a vital sense of togetherness in our darkest times in the pandemic, amid the isolation of Covid-19. Now, in the middle of one of the worst geopolitics crises that we have seen in our history, while the knot of war tightens around our world, our public broadcasters are on the front line in Ukraine, putting themselves in harm’s way and keeping us up to date with events as they unfold.

It is extraordinary to think that many journalists and camera crews have left the safety of these shores so that each of us can be kept updated in the comfort of our own homes. Their bravery is an example of public sector broadcasting at its finest. We owe them a debt of sincere gratitude for the work that they are doing—I have no doubt that we can all agree on that.

During the past week, we have also witnessed how the Russian state has weaponised disinformation. Make no mistake: that is a weapon that is deliberately used to influence any opposition to Russia’s activities. The kleptocrat tsar who occupies the Kremlin and his gangsters have used their own state-owned media to justify their unjustifiable actions and to spread lies about the Ukrainian leadership and, of course, the Ukrainian people. As the Harvard professor Jane Lytvynenko has said, Russia is preying on the “gaps in knowledge” of western audiences in the hope that a demotivated west will be much less likely to offer help to Ukraine.

Our public sector broadcasters have always played a vital role in holding the line in that battle for truth itself. In doing so, they have awakened us to the plight of the Ukrainian people and galvanised us to protest, donate and volunteer. That demonstrates once again their immeasurable value. Indeed, as I mentioned in my intervention on the cabinet secretary, the BBC took the decision just this week to transmit radio broadcasts on short-wave frequencies to keep everyone with a transistor in Ukraine informed, even as their TV towers are being bombed and internet services are being brought down. We do not get that level of service with a Netflix subscription.

It is simply not possible to achieve the calibre of journalism to which we in Scotland have become accustomed without public funding. Public funding shields our broadcasters from the influence of shareholders and other corporate interference. We must always legislate to protect that. That goes for the BBC and, of course, Channel 4 as well.

Over three weeks ago, I lodged a motion for a members’ business debate on the future of the BBC—that has already been mentioned in this debate. I was grateful that members from all parties came to speak in favour of what was widely acknowledged to be a crucial public service. That mirrored the reaction of many people across Scotland and the UK when they saw a much-treasured public institution come under threat from Nadine Dorries and the Conservative Party. Many people, regardless of their political stripes, spoke up in the BBC’s defence, including, I dare say, some Conservatives.

It is to our great shame that some of our journalists and broadcasters have not always been treated with the respect that they deserve. Two weeks ago, we learned of the abuse that was suffered by the former BBC Scotland editor Sarah Smith simply for doing her job and by virtue of who her father was. She was relentlessly harassed online and in person. She faced attacks that were often tainted with misogynistic bile, all of which culminated in an environment that was, as she said, so toxic that she made the decision to leave Scotland altogether. That is shameful.

Sadly, Sarah Smith is not alone. I could name a number of journalists at the BBC, Channel 4 and STV who have been subject to online abuse just for doing their job. Although we may not always enjoy being at the end of a line of questioning from a journalist, that does not mean that we should allow for them to be on the receiving end of a barrage of abuse from those who support us. We must publicly oppose that type of behaviour, regardless of from where it comes. I call on all parties to reflect on that.

I conclude by saying that only when we protect our public service broadcasting do we protect our politics, our culture and our free democracy.