TV Licence article Discussion

Zapito

You can bet that if the present system was stopped then it would be replaced with something worse. The system in Republic of Ireland is probably fairly typical. There, they have to pay 150 euro per year for a TV licence just for owning a TV set, and guess what, all their TV and radio is full of advertising - no ad-free services (even radio) as there are here. And pretty low standard of output too (except what's bought in from BBC).

Zapito

Chris_Bolt wrote: »

Now that iPlayer allows you to watch a programme from the start while it is still being broadcast live, there is some ambiguity in the examples. So does 'live' really mean that, or is there a problem watching the programme from the start (say time-shifted by five minutes) before the live broadcast has ended?

The straightforward and morally honest solution is to simply pay the licence of around 40p per day and watch and listen to whatever you want whenever you want to, and thus avoid all this anguished self-questioning.

Cornucopia

Zapito wrote: »

You can bet that if the present system was stopped then it would be replaced with something worse. The system in Republic of Ireland is probably fairly typical. There, they have to pay 150 euro per year for a TV licence just for owning a TV set, and guess what, all their TV and radio is full of advertising - no ad-free services (even radio) as there are here. And pretty low standard of output too (except what's bought in from BBC).

They've had a lot of problems implementing that in Ireland. I can't remember where they are with it, but they certainly postponed it at one stage. I do not accept the premise of "be careful what you wish for" anyway.

Politicians will do what they can get away with in the context of getting re-elected. That's not the same as genuine integrity, but it can still have a chilling effect on their worst excesses. Sometimes.

Zapito

rizla01 wrote: »

And here is a lovely reply to the very efficient TV Licensing bunch following an identical letter to one I received this morning. ...

Just 10 more years and I will be exempt anyway, if it (or I) are still around in those days.

You've got your licence, you know you are in the clear, so why go to all that bother? I'd have simply put it in the bin. Or, if can ID it from the outside, simply return it marked "RETURN TO SENDER".

Cornucopia

Zapito wrote: »

How can it possibly be "good faith" to completely ignore the context?

I didn't ignore the context. I said that I didn't think your question in your context had a viable answer - how is that ignoring it? If you mean that your cunning plan to impose a context upon me didn't work, then, well... yes. Can I say: Boo Hoo?

Of course you do. In fact, that's exactly what the democratic process is all about!

Now who's getting their context all bent out of shape?

(Clearly) I meant I cannot prevent other citizens from breaking the law inside their own houses - in both a practical sense, and in terms of it not being my responsibility to do it. Though I would respect my civic duty to report any serious offences to the relevant authorities.

I have already agreed that if there is a general problem then it needs to be dealt with. But it would be wrong to condemn the whole system just because some over-zealous enforcement agents have to be curbed by means of legal action. That is the sort of thing that legal action is for.

As I've already said in various different ways, the present system does appear to be broken in its entirety, and therefore needs root and branch reform. It's much wider than a proportion of the workforce having "gone rogue", although that is a major issue, particularly since the rogue activities seem to defy any and all attempts by BBC/TVL to stop them. Assuming, of course, that they *are* making any and all attempts to stop them - the evidence isn't good on that point.

FWIW, here's the submission my group made to the Perry Review. The back section is a comprehensive analysis of the problems with the existing TVL regime. It will assist our discussion no end if you would consider this to be the context of any comment I might make about the entire TVL process and organisation being "broken" or dysfunctional. By all means state any aspects of the list that you disagree with (I'm not one to unilaterally impose a context).

http://licencefree.co.uk/Response%20to%20the%20Perry%20Review%20of%20Licence%20Fee%20Enforcement%20Final.pdf

You can find all the responses here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/tv-licence-enforcement-review-a-consultation

Zapito

Cornucopia wrote: »

They've had a lot of problems implementing that in Ireland. I can't remember where they are with it, but they certainly postponed it at one stage. I do not accept the premise of "be careful what you wish for" anyway.

I was referring to the present system, that they've had for years. They intend to reform it to require it to be paid by every household, but that has been postponed because of other reforms on entirely unrelated matters that are also being brought in. But the situation I described is as it is right now. 150 euro PA which in effect is simply a tax on possessing a TV and completely without any relationship with broadcasting.

Politicians will do what they can get away with in the context of getting re-elected. That's not the same as genuine integrity, but it can still have a chilling effect on their worst excesses. Sometimes.

No politician who does anything to kill off or seriously impair the BBC need expect my vote!

Nilrem

BBC-Died-in-1980 wrote: »

Yes, Iain to a "T" - a dormant 6 year old account, put to one side in the BBC PR dept, to be bought out as & when it suits (Charter renewal time again?) - you lot fool NO ONE - & never will.

Always fun to see the allegations start to surface when someone can't be bothered to come up with a coherent argument.

Zapito

Cornucopia wrote: »

As I've already said in various different ways, the present system does appear to be broken in its entirety, and therefore needs root and branch reform.

And as I've already said, I entirely disagree. A bit of mild tinkering here and there, no doubt, but "root and branch reform"? Sheer nonsense!

The real problem is mean spirited cheats squirming their way around the system to get free for themselves what the vast majority of people are perfectly happy to pay for.

Cornucopia

Zapito wrote: »

And as I've already said, I entirely disagree. A bit of mild tinkering here and there, no doubt, but "root and branch reform"? Sheer nonsense!

You're entitled to your opinion. As I am mine (though mine's rooted in formal analysis, of course). At this level of discussion that's about the best we can say about it.

If you want to discuss any of the points from the formal analysis I linked to please be my guest.

The real problem is mean spirited cheats squirming their way around the system to get free for themselves what the vast majority of people are perfectly happy to pay for.

You seem to be forgetting where you are. This forum is about saving money by using legitimate and lawful strategies. You'll get short shrift describing that process as "squirming".

Zapito

Cornucopia wrote: »

If you want to discuss any of the points from the formal analysis I linked to please be my guest.

I've downloaded them. You have some beefs, fine. They seem to have been considered, and conclusions reached. But as far as I can tell from my first brief glance at the lengthy documents the main concern is that sometimes the enforcers are a bit rude or impatient, and write occasional letters of a somewhat brusque nature. You are taking political action, and that's fine by me. But don't expect the whole system to change just because you don't like bits of it.

You seem to be forgetting where you are. This forum is about saving money by using legitimate and lawful strategies. You'll get short shrift describing that process as "squirming".

There are limits beyond which I would not think it morally right to go. Because I value the NHS one of mine would be abusing the NHS system in order to get special privileges or wasting NHS resources just because I can't be bothered to take care how I make use of them. Another would be to cheat my way into getting licence-free TV and thereby undermining the BBC.