Is the TV Licence fee worth it? Poll results/discussion

I agree with Bogart. It is a tax on everyone who has a television because we have a publicly funded television network. If you don't want to pay it, don't have a television. If you use your television purely for watching DVDs/playing games on and watch i-player re-runs on your computer plus listen to the radio then it's free. Check the licence fund pages. It's precisedly what is says it is - a licence fee. If you have a car, you have to get a licence, if you have a televison, you have to get a licence! Simple.

I can't quite agree with the "safer than private television because it's independent from the government of the day" as the media seem to hunt with the hounds mostly, only the "daring" ones run with the fox! It shouldn't be like that , but it is, so, bearing that in mind, I still think that the BBC is exceptionally good value for money.

I'm happy to pay the licence, it isn't just all about adverts or not. There's a lot more to the BBC than is immediately obvious.

competitionscafe wrote: »

If you ditched your TV and only used BBC iplayer and 4OD would you still need to pay the licence fee? If not, I am tempted as I hardly watch any TV, what I do i mainly catch up with on iplayer or 4OD and apart from that I mostly watch an occassional dvd. 90% of TV is carp.

Hi, the BBC iPlayer and 4OD does not require a TV License Fee.

Personally, i pretty much only watch bbc channels now anyway, with occasionally channel 5 for films and House, but with new shows coming through like Torchwood, Ashes to Ashes, 10 Days to War, and Dr Who (not exactly new but you get the idea), the licence fee is now even better value for money in my opinion. Although i don't see the point in paying the likes of Jonathon Ross millions of pounds a year for his show, which i think is OK, but it's not worth the amount they have paid him. I also have to point out that one of the reasons you pay for the NHS even if you have Private Insurance is that even if you don't see yourself needing it, if you are in an accident, would you call a BUPA Ambulance or an NHS one? Which would then take you to a Public Accident & Emergency Dept who would treat you free of charge. And if, God forbid, it was extremely serious, and you needed to go into surgery, do you think a Private Doctor would get out of bed at 3 in the morning in time to save your life? No, but the NHS Doc would be ready and waiting. There is a reason why our Health Service is the most envied in most of the world- it is free. Yes, you might be able to pay £90 to have an immediate Operation instead of waiting a month, but I for one am glad to know the NHS is there if i need it. Sorry for the rant guys, i just wanted to point out a few things.

This is the wrong question. It's not a question of if it's worth it; the main question is whether it's fair. It's effectively an unfair tax because it's so easy to evade. For those in the know, it's a voluntary tax and we break the law by evading it while the rest of you pay. Any law that can't be enforced is a bad law.

Basically, anyone who doesn't keep their TV in line of sight of anyone approaching their property is COMPLETELY safe from prosecution for not paying the TV license as long as they remember that:

1) TV license 'inspectors' have no right of admission without a search warrant and there is no evidence that they have EVER applied for such a thing; and legal opinion is that they would find it very hard to convince a magistrate to issue one. So just remember not to let them in.

2) Their electronic 'detection' equipment is just bluster and/or doesn't work. There hasn't been ONE successful prosecution in the 50 years since TV licenses started where TV Licensing has offered the data from detection devices as evidence. This is suspected to be because the defence (and therefore the public) would have the right to be provided with details of how the detection equipment worked.

3) Never admit that you have a TV. The most common evidence submitted by TV Licensing in successful prosecution cases is written or verbal evidence from the home owner themselves.

The above is not meant to be an encouragement to people to break the law. While it raises issues of morality, no law should rely solely on personal morality for enforcement. It simply highlights how easy it is for people to allow others to bear the burden of the cost of the BBC. That ease, of itself, renders the TV License an unfair tax and a bad law.