Is this report enough to satisfy critics on all sides?published at 12:46 British Summer Time

Katie Razzall
Culture editor

Ever since itsbroadcast, and the furore that followed, it’s been difficult to understand howa programme that the BBC classified as a “high risk project” that carried “reputational risk” and which it put on a select list for programmes that needmore scrutiny and support could ever have been put out without the childnarrator’s family link to Hamas being known.

This report is ananswer – but is it enough to satisfy the critics on all sides?

Lisa Nandy’sreaction is… perhaps.

The culture secretary seems to be rowing back from herdirect criticism of the BBC’s director general.

She’s calling what’s happenedat the BBC “a series of catastrophic failures” but says she has received anaction plan from BBC leadership to address issues of accountability.

We can bring you more now from Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy.

Asked if she still has faith in BBC director general Tim Davie, Nandy says “it’s not for the government to say who should and shouldn’t work at the BBC”.

Nandy, who previously asked why nobody at the BBC has been sacked over the Gaza documentary, says she raised this question because she wants to see “proper accountability”.

She says the BBC board has presented her with an “action plan that is aimed addressing the reasons why some of these failures happened” and ensuring they don’t happen again.

“Accountability and action” has been “too slow in coming”, which the BBC leadership has recognised, she adds. But it now “appears to be happening” and she hopes new measures will “restore public confidence in the BBC”.

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy says the BBC has made “big strides” to reset its relationship with the public after a “series of catastrophic failures in recent weeks”.

Asked about the report into the Gaza documentary, Nandy tells reporters she’s “pleased that there has been an acknowledgement about what a catastrophic failure this has been” and adds that the corporation has put “rapid measures to restore public confidence” in place in response.

“I’m pleased there has been progress but, as the BBC itself has recognised, there is more to be done,” she adds.

We can now bring you a statement from the production company that made the Gaza documentary for the BBC.

Hoyo Films says: “We take the findings in Peter Johnston’s report on Gaza: How To Survive A Warzone extremely seriously and apologise for the mistake that resulted in a breach of the (BBC) editorial guidelines.

“We are pleased that the report found that there was no evidence of inappropriate influence on the content of the documentary from any third party.

“We appreciate the rigorous nature of this investigation, and its findings that Hoyo Films did not intentionally mislead the BBC, that there were no other breaches of the editorial guidelines in the programme, and that there was no evidence to suggest that the programme funds were spent other than for reasonable, production-related purposes.

“Hoyo Films welcomes the report’s recommendations and hope they will improve processes and prevent similar problems in the future. We are working closely with the BBC to see if we can find an appropriate way to bring back to iPlayer the stories of those featured in the programme.

“Our team in Gaza risked their lives to document the devastating impact of war on children. Gaza: How To Survive A Warzone remains a vital account, and our contributors, who have no say in the conflict, deserve to have their voices heard.”

As we’ve been reporting, the review found that the independent production company bears most of the responsibility for the failure. However, it says the BBC also bears some responsibility.

We now have a response from BBC director general Tim Davie.

“Peter Johnston’s report identifies a significant failing in relation to accuracy in this documentary,” he says.

“I thank him for his thorough work and I am sorry for this failing.

“We will now take action on two fronts – fair, clear and appropriate actions to ensure proper accountability and the immediate implementation of steps to prevent such errors being repeated.”

The BBC Board adds: “We thank Peter Johnston for his work. His report is a comprehensive examination of a complex programme, the production of which spanned many months from concept through to broadcast – and is critical in laying bare the facts of what happened.

“Nothing is more important than trust and transparency in our journalism. We welcome the actions the executive are taking to avoid this failing being repeated in the future.”

Steven McIntosh
Culture reporter

The review said it had seen no evidence “to support the suggestion that the narrator’s father or family influenced the content of the programme in any way”.

It added the narrator’s scripted contribution to the programme did not constitute a breach of due impartiality.

The report concluded that the use of the child narrator for this programme, while not a breach of editorial guidelines, was “not appropriate”.

A financial examination found that a fee of £795 was paid for the narrator, paid to his adult sister, an amount which was not “outside the range of what might be reasonable in the context”.

Hoyo Films said it would explore the possibility of using some material for re-edited and re-versioned shorter films for archive on iPlayer.

Steven McIntosh
Culture reporter

A BBC documentary about Gaza breached editorial guidelines on accuracy by failing to disclose the narrator was the son of a Hamas official, the corporation’s review has found.

The review found that the independent production company, Hoyo Films, bears most of the responsibility for the failure. However, it said the BBC also bears some responsibility.

The BBC said it was taking appropriate action to review accountability, but did not name any individuals facing disciplinary action.

The review found three members of the independent production company knew of the father’s position, but no-one within the BBC knew this at the time.

However, the report criticised the BBC team for not being “sufficiently proactive” with initial editorial checks, and for a “lack of critical oversight of unanswered or partially answered questions.

In March of this year, the BBC’s director general was called before the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee to discuss the documentary about children’s lives in Gaza.

He told MPs that he made the “very difficult decision” to remove it from iPlayer after he “lost trust” in the film, after concerns were raised about the 13-year-old narrator’s family connections to Hamas – a proscribed terrorist group in the UK.

Davie said at the time that the BBC had received about 500 complaints that the film was biased against Israel and another 1,800 over its removal from iPlayer.

But he told MPs: “If you’re asked a number of times [about the boy’s family] and that question was not answered [by Hoyo Films]… that is basics.

“And at the end of the day, as editor in chief, I have to be secure, not only editorially where the film was at, but the making of that film.”

“There was absolutely legitimate journalism to be done,” he said, before remarking that “that’s what makes it frankly frustrating where we are”.

The BBC is due to release a report over its decision to airand then pull a documentary about children’s lives in Gaza. The film was removedfrom iPlayer after it emerged its 13-year-old narrator was the son of a Hamasofficial.

In February, the corporation apologised after an interim reportidentified “serious flaws” in the making of Gaza: How to Survive aWar Zone, made by the independent production company Hoyo Films for the BBC.

The review is being headed by Peter Johnston, the BBC’sdirector of editorial complaints and reviews, which is independent of BBC Newsand reports directly to director general Tim Davie.

It is expected to determine whether any editorial guidelineswere broken and if any disciplinary action is needed.

We’re expecting the review to land shortly – we’llbreak the key lines as we get them. Stay with us.