Abolition of TV licence fee.....

If there's a petition asking you to sign if you want the fee to be abolished, how do they know how many people have not signed because they want to keep it?

They don't. Not from that petition anyway, but there is the Save the BBC petition as well, vague though it is about what the BBC needs to be saved from. I might sign it if that were perfectly clear. At the moment everything is just speculation and rumour.

Apparently you do not need a licence to watch tv programmes on 'catch up'. It would mean waiting to see them and of course not all programmes are on iplayer etc

Well, if they bring in a levy on all households, whether they have a tv or not, they will take care of that.

That will. Not they will

Even you will have to pay it Bags.

Oh. She's long gone. In bed most likely.

secure.avaaz.org/en/uk_media_loc/?bkHcnjb&v=58392

I don't have a telly, dj.

Whoops. Didn't read far enough. So where has this idea of an entertainment levy tax, or whatever it's called, sprung from?

"The best alternative to the licence fee, the report concluded, would be a compulsory broadcasting levy paid by all households, regardless of whether they watch TV, or how they watch."

(extract from report by committee of MPs set up to think about it)

full article here

Cameron wants to decriminalise not having a TV licence because it gives people a criminal record for a comparatively small offence. Which is, relatively speaking, unfair.

article here

I say, it's a rubbish idea. 'If it aint broke, don't fix it'. And it's not 'broke'.

Thanks, jings. Still all up in the air then. Time will tell.

I love BBC tv and radio but I do wonder if it is fair that those people who never watch or listen have to pay for those of us who do.

There are a lot of things that everyone pays for, but not everyone uses. Some people don't read books; or have no interest in the arts; or are not into tennis, football, keep fit, swimming, etc. But everyone contributes towards the cost of libraries, council sports facilities, the opera/ballet, museums, art galleries, etc. etc. Some people believe that there should be no subsidy of the arts - and that is a valid point of view (although I absolutely disagree with it) - but I don't understand why one particular form of entertainment/information/education should be singled out as an unfair "tax".

I do, however, agree that it seems a bit much to criminalise people for not having a TV licence. I suppose the reasoning behind this is that if there was not a strong deterrent, a lot more people would risk not paying.

I'm not sure people are 'criminalised' for not having a TV licence.

They can be fined for not having one, and if they don't pay the fine then they can be prosecuted for non-payment of that fine. Not quite the same.

And it is a criminal record against them. That's why there is talk of decriminalising non-payment of the licence fee. You can't decriminalise something that isn't classed as criminal.

It's all there in those links people put up.

OK, then you may as well say people are criminalised for parking in the wrong place, or for too long in the right place - it's a very emotive word and it's not being correctly used.

It is a very emotive word and that's why people (the BBC and others) want to decriminalise it. But people who are frightened of change, even when it's a good thing go into "Save the BBC!" mode instead of stopping to think.

I stand corrected, thatbags. Apparently it is indeed a criminal offence not to have a tv licence if you're viewing live-screened programmes. I had thought it was only a criminal offence not to pay the fine.

Sorry, I should have checked the links.

Nae bother, pal (as they say up here).

I watch Eastenders and the Apprentice from the BBC. My husband likes the BBC news. I cant think, off the top of my head, what else we watch regularly or irregularly on the BBC.
So a no brainer as far as I personally am concerned. But that is not the rest of the country.