TV Licence article Discussion

4justice2

Watchkeeper said:

They would probably use the "detection of crime" get-out clause. Watching/recording "live" broadcasts without a licence is a criminal offence.

Thank you, that's why I was curious if anyone had ever got their details permanently removed. BBC response to me in the past (I've been licence free for ten years) is that they can keep data as they're "enforcing the law". I also wonder as they often address letters to "The Occupier" rather than the person's name they think that exempts them!

Mickey666

But what data do they need to keep in order to chase up non-payers?   They can get the address of every property in the UK from the 'Post Office Address File', they know which addresses have got licences, so it's a simple job to generate letters to 'the Occupier' for every address in the UK without a TV licence.  That's basically all they do.

The real affront is the assumption that everyone should have a TV licence and the implication of law-breaking if they don't.  Expecting everyone without a TV licence to register themselves as such is another affront to natural justice.  How many people on here would write to the Police to inform them that they don't need a gun licence, for example?  And how many people would put up with the Police writing to everyone in the country reminding them that it's an offence to possess a gun without a gun licence, and that they are going to send someone to your door to check.

The whole TV Licence scam is long overdue for a complete overhaul.

veganpanda

  "The whole TV Licence scam is long overdue for a complete overhaul." I totally agree with you on that!

I'm not sure about your gun analogy though?! 😲☮️

cw18

veganpanda said:

 I'm not sure about your gun analogy though?! 😲☮️

In the slightly dim and distant past, I'd have suggested dog licence as a better one to use.   Never had a dog growing up, so my parents didn't need one.   I got a dog shortly after getting my first home, and had to pay for one for a couple of years (before they were abolished).   But I've had years without a dog since then, then some years with one (then two), and back to none for the last 9+ years.    I'd have been annoyed if they'd chased me on a regular basis to see if I'd got another dog and now needed a licence again.

Cornucopia

One of the fundamental problems with the TV Licence is that it blurs the line between permission from the State to do something (receive TV broadcasts) and payment of a tax.   

That's one of a number of fundamental principles that are problematic either with the way the Licence is established by government or in the BBC's choices in enforcement approach.  

veganpanda

A simple way for the bbc to sort this tv license (tax) debarcle; why don't rhey implement a TV ad sponsorship before every bbc show, why won't they even consider it?? 🤔

Cornucopia

veganpanda said:

A simple way for the bbc to sort this tv license (tax) debarcle; why don't rhey implement a TV ad sponsorship before every bbc show, why won't they even consider it?? 🤔

The Licence Fee income is around £3.5bn, which is about as much as the big commercial channels put together.   

That means that funding the BBC just by advertising probably isn't going to work (not without slimming it down first).   There's also a question about the total amount of advertising the UK economy would support.  

Personally, I think subscription is most similar to the Licence Fee (they could even continue to call it the Licence Fee if they wanted).   The only issue is whether Freeview is ready for a locked-down service or not.  If not, then they could create a special ad-funded version of BBC1 for Freeview and that would also allow for less committed viewers to dip in and out.

Watchkeeper

I rather like James Delingpole's solution to the BBC problem:
"I want it burnt to the ground and I want the earth salted.  There is no hope."

Cornucopia

Watchkeeper said:

I rather like James Delingpole's solution to the BBC problem:
"I want it burnt to the ground and I want the earth salted.  There is no hope."

What, no locusts?  

4justice2

Indeed, one of the problems with the BBC's guaranteed funding through the licence fee is that it remains hideously bloated. Were it to change to advertising or voluntary subscriptions it would have to slim down a lot. I don't know whether there is sufficient advertising revenue to support both BBC as well as the existing commercial networks. I too feel that subscription is the model to go for. After all, if the BBC genuinely believes that everyone loves it's output, surely they would lose only those hardcore "defund the BBC" activists and everyone else would happily cough up? Yet BBC claim that a subscription could be £400 a year, so more than double the current licence fee, so they must be expecting a hell of a lot of people to stop paying!