TV licence people wanting to open a 'full investigation'.
Comments
-
That wasn't my point, but I don't think it's accurate, anyway. Pretty much every survey of public opinion on the TV Licence rates the current system poorly (typically in the 25-35% range). Whilst there may be no clear favoured alternative, I think that to call the present system "popular" would not be correct.poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »But your problem is that the majority of the British Public are content that the licence fee continues in it's present form.
Personally, I see little practical difference between a £12pm Licence Fee and a £12 Subscription, especially when coupled with a new regulatory regime in which the BBC is held accountable to its broadcast licences (rather than being accountable to no one as has historically been the case).I for one know of nobody who considers the licence fee a "hated and dysfunctional system (that) would be replaced by something more rational, fit for purpose". Most people I know pay the licence fee monthly and believe that £12 per month represents excellent value for money.
I used the term more about TV Licensing (TVL) the pseudo-organisation than about the overall TV Licence. I think most people who have an opinion about TVL will have had an unsatisfactory experience in some way, or will regard it with general fear and suspicion. (I certainly had that view before I became legally Licence-free).
As I said previously, I am doubtful about whether the (now public) issues with TV Licensing (the pseudo-organisation) can be resolved without making the enforcement process less effective and more expensive.Most of the opposition to the licence fee comes from forums like this, along with a few MP's who are looking to boost their names in the eyes of the public.
I'm not saying everything about the licence fee is perfect. It does need some minor adjustments, but not abolition.
There are probably now 2-3 million people who are at the "business end" of TVL's operations, and whilst that is still a minority of people, I think our society becomes less healthy when minorities are subject to unfair or unlawful treatment at the hands of public organisations. The same is true of other bad outsourcing arrangements like Concentrix and ATOS.0 -
I thought this subject might be having an airing here after just seeing this article in The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/feb/27/bbc-investigation-tv-licence-enforcement-outsourcing-firm-capita
Incidentally, I had a new version of their letter last week with a stiff envelope with an extra open window saying 'will you be in on the nth of March', or words to that effect (I'm not going downstairs to my firelighting bin..). Out of curiosity I did look inside, and it had a slightly different wording and said 'nth of March or any other day', doh. As if anybody with any intelligence would take them at their word.0 -
-
I've just been on TalkRadio to talk about this.0
-
Personally I would prefer to see it merged into general taxation. Though there will be claims that it will lose its independence, but that was never really true anyway when governments threatened to slash the licence fee as revenge for reporting governmental abuses. It is also very regressive hitting single mothers very hard, who make up a large slice of those in-prisoned for non payment.poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »But your problem is that the majority of the British Public are content that the licence fee continues in it's present form. I for one know of nobody who considers the licence fee a "hated and dysfunctional system (that) would be replaced by something more rational, fit for purpose". Most people I know pay the licence fee monthly and believe that £12 per month represents excellent value for money.
Most of the opposition to the licence fee comes from forums like this, along with a few MP's who are looking to boost their names in the eyes of the public.
I'm not saying everything about the licence fee is perfect. It does need some minor adjustments, but not abolition.
The Daily Mail are particularly interested in this to reduce competition for their TV arm and to help slash the BBC websites which are serious competition to their websites and publications. If the BBC were to close its websites then the Daily Mail would rush to put its site behind a paywall. It is all about eliminating the competition.It's really easy to default to cynicism these days, since you are almost always certain to be right.0 -
Live in a block of flats never had a TV licence I don't watch BBC but do have a TV. The fee should only be for BBC imo and restrict BBC tv access.
Ignore any letter simple as.0 -
Are you sure you're not confusing this with the Dog Licence, which I think was also 37½p for decades until its abolition in 1987.poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »We had that for many years in this country, until about 1970 I think.
Again, from memory, I think it was seven shillings and sixpence (37.5p) a year. I don't know anyone who ever bought one - I never did, but at the time the TV licence was £4, which included £1 duty (tax)!0 -
The radio licence was 1 guinea (£1 5s) and was withdrawn as a separate licence in Feb 710
-
Kernel_Sanders wrote: »Are you sure you're not confusing this with the Dog Licence, which I think was also 37½p for decades until its abolition in 1987.
OOpps. I did get this wrong, didn't I!
http://www.radiolicence.org.uk/costlicence.html"There are not enough superlatives in the English language to describe a 'Princess Coronation' locomotive in full cry. We shall never see their like again". O S Nock0 -
Well, you're in good company...poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »OOpps. I did get this wrong, didn't I!
A guinea was £1 1s.unforeseen wrote: »The radio licence was 1 guinea (£1 5s)0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards