Question Time was flooded with complaints after a controversial immigration special.

Fiona Bruce fronted the controversial episode of Question Time (Image: BBC )

BBC’s Question Time sparked over 1000 complaints over its “bias” during an immigration special which showed two former asylum seekers in the audience. They were understood to have been granted refugee status so were allowed to be in the UK. Reform UK’s Zia Yusuf had been on the panel during the show, and said the asylum seekers had arrived in Britain “illegally by boat”. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage hit out at the show’s decision to bring in migrants, saying: “Question Time has been, over the years, a great programme. After last night, it is utterly discredited,” as the channel was accused of “ambushing” the politician.

The episode sparked 1,379 complaints accusing it of bias in favour of immigration and against Mr Yusuf, according to a fortnightly report by the broadcaster. The number of complaints for the special is around five times more than those made against other programmes during the same 14-day period between December 1 and December 14. The BBC has issued a response, saying: “The Question Time debate about immigration was a chance to explore, in detail, an issue that has had such an impact on UK politics in recent times. As well as numerous contributions from the panel, we heard from 20 members of the audience expressing views from all sides of the immigration debate.

Reform UK were left furious over the Question Time immigration special (Image: BBC)

Review, gossip and upcoming show releases plus selected offers and competition Invalid email

We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our Privacy Policy

“Within the format of Question Time, audience members often share personal details to offer context and lived experience linked to the topic in discussion. Two people featured on the programme were former asylum seekers who have been granted refugee status by the government and so now have a legal basis for being in the UK. We believe it was fair and right to feature these individuals. Their involvement meant that when a member of the audience asked why many immigrants arrive without their families, we were able to put that question directly to one of the former asylum seekers.

“To be clear, the programme featured individuals who are now legally in this country. They were not paid to participate. Each political party on the panel was informed of the participation of the former asylum seekers on Wednesday, the day before the show was filmed.

“It has been suggested that a member of the audience was given a script and / or was wearing an earpiece and being fed questions to ask the panel by the production team – this is not true. Audience members aren’t briefed what to say and ask their own questions.

“For special programmes such as this edition, the production team work hard to ensure that the audience has a range of experiences, views and backgrounds linked to the topic. We are therefore confident that the audience for this programme was not weighted towards a certain political stance.

“We recognise that immigration is a subject which many people feel very strongly about. We remain committed to covering this topic accurately and impartially. We have recorded your feedback in the complaints report and shared this with senior management.”