Abolition of TV licence fee.....

I think the BBC will always produce quality drama such as 'Wolf Hall' - that series has been sold worldwide.

Isn't paying a licence fee ring-fencing anyway? At least paying a fee you know your money is going to the BBC.
We have just been celebrating VE day. It was all BBC then.

www.theguardian.com/football/2009/feb/05/itv-fa-cup-coverage

Advertisements interrupting programmes are really annoying. I find it especially so if I'm watching a really tense drama - it really spoils the atmosphere and sense of continuity. It sometimes annoys sports fans to - as above link reports.

I'd far rather pay £12.31 and have free view than pay money to a private provider. Having spent time in Turkey, Australia and New Zealand it's always a relief to come home and see TV without adverts.
I listen to radio 4 and would like 4 extra but we don't have a strong enough digital signal except on the TV and I don't want that on all day. I think BBC provides a huge choice for all sorts of people and I'm sure the BBC must have revenue from the sale of it series programmes abroad plus income from the sales of ideas and other programmes. The ABC shop (Australia state broadcasting) where my daughter lives has loads of BBC series (at huge prices).
Has anyone thought that the BBC could be a worldwide subscription channel over the net? Whilst I was abroad I would have liked to have seen home stuff.
Save the BBC. It's a national treasure

The licence fee isn't huge. Most people probably pay more for their internet access, mobile phone, other TV provider (cable,sky whatever). Abolishing it is a political act and an attempt to bring the media further under the control of right wing politicians. The BBC has struggled to remain neutral with accusations of it having left wing bias being thrown at it all the time. It still manages to provide a service which is recognised world-wide for its excellence. And as for funding it through taxation, I thought this government were cutting expenditure on everything. Keep the licence fee the money goes straight to where it belongs.

Just realised what will go if they stop BBC4-all those foreign serials with subtitles, The Killing, Wallander, Spiral. Worth the licence fee on their own. And would we get programmes like "24 Hours in the past"? Can't imagine that would have appealed to any sponsors "Sending celebrities back to Victorian times, who the hell's going to watch that!!!" So much to lose.

Will they put those on BBC1 or 2 though, and get rid of some of the dross other programmes?

I love the history and art stuff on BBC 4 some of it is outstanding IMO. Don't forget the radio to.

The BBC is probably nearly loved as much as the NHS.

They can't afford some of the scandi dramas now because, having been discovered by BBC4 Sky are npw buying them I think.

I think it should be abolished why should we be made to pay £145.50.

You are not magpie , nobody forces you to watch television.

But for those who do, programmes are not made for free, how would a channel be financed if not by licence fee/advertising/subscription such as exists at present for Sky?

If they don't get any income, how will they make programmes, pay announcers and presenters, and so on? Their money has to come from somewhere.

He who pays the piper calls the tune. Advertisers will expect privileges for their money, like frequent ads and product placements (Henry VIII consults his H. Samuel Ever-right water-clock. "Time for my next wife!") If they are paid for by government grant, there will be accusations of government interference, whether or not they are true.

A commercial company will expect to make a tidy profit for its shareholders. It is the British Broadcasting Corporation, not the Blinking Booty-creating Company.

If WE pay, WE get the programmes we want.

I thought we owned the thing anyway. Has anyone asked us whether we want to sell it off?

Tegan i will be sorry to see the Scandi dramas go but look forward to seeing what the Beeb will discover next. Without a channel like BBC 4 we would never have discovered these things. Real innovative programmes in drama, the arts, history and culture are only brought to us because the Beeb is still an organisation with the best interests of the public at its heart www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/whoweare/publicpurposes

From The Independent:

"One of the Conservative MPs appointed by David Cameron to oversee the future of the BBC believes the licence fee is “unsustainable” and “worse than a poll tax.

"John Whittingdale, who has been appointed as Culture Secretary, said in October that the compulsory charge to fund the BBC should be eventually ended."

The article goes on to say:

"Mr Whittingdale also has a strongly right-wing record on parliamentary votes.

"According to the site They Work For You, which collates the way MPs have voted, he has voted very strongly against equal gay rights, strongly against the fox hunting ban, very strongly against equal marriage and moderately against laws to promote equality and human rights."

Just the sort of chap you'd want to be involved in decisions relating to a public broadcasting service.

Soutra of course no one forces me to watch TV, but I object to being forced to pay £145.50 just because I own a TV. I believe in freedom of choice and I personally would like to decide who I give my money to. I subscribe to Sky and Netflix.

Reading between the lines of the survey sent to me, it looked as if BBC3 was the station that looked under threat. It was mentioned rather too frequently.

Do you watch £3 worth of BBC programmes a week, Magpie ? If it were a subscription channel, I would pay that to watch (and fund) the programmes that the BBC makes so well.

Elegran What I object to is being forced to pay. The BBC do make some good programmes I agree but it has also wasted money. It should be a voluntary subscription channel.

£12 a month for the BBC channels would be better value than a comparable amount for the subscription cable ones.

For me the real worry is the Proms - they are my summer treat and I record them to enjoy in the winter months....and the Young Musician of the Year........and the Cardiff Singer of the World. I would be very sad to see them go, or have them dumbed down as "highlights."

The BBC (especially BBC4) is a valued institution.

And BBC radio is excellent - something for everyone.

According to a 38degrees petition in 2013 70% of respondents wanted changes to the licence fee.

Re the thread title, has abolition of the licence fee actually been suggested or 'threataned'? The news article I read was much vaguer than that. Where has the fear of abolition come from?

ITV staff on strike today for better pay.

Only 139,000 signatures for that petition so far, thatbags. I will not be signing it. The BBC fee is such good value for money.

Oh wait, I see that eloethan has quoted a bit about the compulsory fee being "eventually" ended. I gathered from the same article that "eventually" is envisaged as a long way off. My gathering may have been mistaken.