TV licence fee
- Thread starter Geoff
- Start date
In a poll, earlier this year, the vast majority of us thought the television licence should be scrapped.
http://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f69/tv-licence-37178.html
http://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f69/tv-licence-37178.html
Bring on 15 mins of adverts per hour
As opposed to the seven minutes per broadcast hour we have to endure now, advertising their own programmes/products, and for which we have the privilege of paying £139.50 per year?
Bring on the free Beeb say I.
At least then they won't be able to pay Jonathon Ross £17 million pound contracts.
Here we go again – another fruitless debate about TV Licences based on an inaccuracy.
Way back in the mists of time the government of the day passed an act of parliament to launch a national radio station named 2LO, which later evolved into the British Broadcasting Corporation, known as the BBC or just plain Beeb. At the same time the government decided that anyone owning a wireless so that they could listen to this new fangled ‘wireless’ would need a licence to operate it. The government funded the operating costs of 2LO and recouped the cost from the general public by way of the wireless licence. In the early days the cost of running 2LO far outstripped the receipts from the licence.
That’s the way it is today except that the licence has changed to a TV licence. If you want to watch TV programmes from any source and by any means you need a licence to do so. Much in the same way that you need a licence to operate a HAM radio or a CB radio or to drive a motor vehicle on the public highway – that being the Road Fund Licence. Even the RNLI needs a licence to operate its radio equipment, as do taxis, ambulances, the police and fire service.
The DVLA collects the Road Fund Licence on behalf of the government but the running of the DVLA is funded from government funds. The BBC collects the TV licence fee on behalf of the government but the running of the BBC is funded from government funds. The funding of either is not directly related to the amount of the licence fees collected.
The BBC is awarded an annual fund from the government coffers – better known as our taxes. The BBC supplements the funding by selling many of its excellent programmes world wide and of course buys trash from the US and Oz to show on our screens.
If the BBC suddenly ceased to exist you, me and everyone else in the UK would still need a licence to watch TV unless there is an act of parliament to scrap the licence.
If you want to whinge about the TV licence then target the government not the BBC. If you want to whinge about the way the BBC is run then target the BBC or Ofcom.
What really amuses me is that millions of people will happily subscribe to cable or Sky with an annual/monthly fee to watch programmes that are funded by the adverts shown during them where those same people have bought the products being advertised. You are paying TWICE. Once to the company making the product as a part of their advertising budget and then again to the TV station which charges you to watch programmes and adverts that you have already paid for.
So 31 people out of the 46 that voted were in favour of the licence being scrapped, garinda.
That can hardly be called representative of the country as a whole. In fact it cannot even be said to be representative of this forum members seeing as the total stands at 14,668.
Way back in the mists of time the government of the day passed an act of parliament to launch a national radio station named 2LO, which later evolved into the British Broadcasting Corporation, known as the BBC or just plain Beeb. At the same time the government decided that anyone owning a wireless so that they could listen to this new fangled ‘wireless’ would need a licence to operate it. The government funded the operating costs of 2LO and recouped the cost from the general public by way of the wireless licence. In the early days the cost of running 2LO far outstripped the receipts from the licence.
That’s the way it is today except that the licence has changed to a TV licence. If you want to watch TV programmes from any source and by any means you need a licence to do so. Much in the same way that you need a licence to operate a HAM radio or a CB radio or to drive a motor vehicle on the public highway – that being the Road Fund Licence. Even the RNLI needs a licence to operate its radio equipment, as do taxis, ambulances, the police and fire service.
The DVLA collects the Road Fund Licence on behalf of the government but the running of the DVLA is funded from government funds. The BBC collects the TV licence fee on behalf of the government but the running of the BBC is funded from government funds. The funding of either is not directly related to the amount of the licence fees collected.
The BBC is awarded an annual fund from the government coffers – better known as our taxes. The BBC supplements the funding by selling many of its excellent programmes world wide and of course buys trash from the US and Oz to show on our screens.
If the BBC suddenly ceased to exist you, me and everyone else in the UK would still need a licence to watch TV unless there is an act of parliament to scrap the licence.
If you want to whinge about the TV licence then target the government not the BBC. If you want to whinge about the way the BBC is run then target the BBC or Ofcom.
What really amuses me is that millions of people will happily subscribe to cable or Sky with an annual/monthly fee to watch programmes that are funded by the adverts shown during them where those same people have bought the products being advertised. You are paying TWICE. Once to the company making the product as a part of their advertising budget and then again to the TV station which charges you to watch programmes and adverts that you have already paid for.
So 31 people out of the 46 that voted were in favour of the licence being scrapped, garinda.
That can hardly be called representative of the country as a whole. In fact it cannot even be said to be representative of this forum members seeing as the total stands at 14,668.
Currently 67.39% of us think the licence fee should be scrapped.
An overwhelming majority, by any stretch of even the most blinkered imagination.
A trend which is representative of the findings of poll after poll, such as the 2001 Mori poll on the subject.
Campaign to Abolish the tv Licence
So what if 67.39% AccyWeb members who bothered to vote think that the licence fee should be scrapped. It’s not as if the rest of the UK hangs onto every word published on this forum, even if some people seem to think that it does or should.Currently 67.39% of us think the licence fee should be scrapped.
An overwhelming majority, by any stretch of even the most blinkered imagination.
A trend which is representative of the findings of poll after poll, such as the 2001 Mori poll on the subject.
Campaign to Abolish the tv Licence
The Mori figures add up to 101%. That fact alone invalidates it.
In any case Mori polls are usually samples of no more than 5,000 people and that can hardly be called representative of the nation. Neither is a poll some 7 years old.
The only people with blinkers are those who just refuse to accept the reality of the TV licence issue and try to twist it to back up their own incorrect view.
This guy Rob Godfrey, the founder of CAL, gets all emotive by publishing inaccuracies to back up his case. No one has ever been jailed for not having a TV licence. Those who have been jailed were put away for contempt of court by refusing to pay the fine imposed for breaking the law with regard to the TV licence fee. And that is a totally different issue.
Besides paying vast salaries to it's 'stars', such as Ross and Brand, most of whom are lured from commercial channels, as in the case of Messrs. Ross, Brand, and Norton, here are two more reasons why I think the licence fee should be scrapped, and the B.B.C. should compete in a free arena with other media companies.
The B.B.C. spend £60,000 pounds of our money on a commissioned work of 'art' by Tracey Emin.
The BBC, Emin and a bill for £60,000 | UK news | The Observer
The annual costs of taxis used by the B.B.C. rose by 60% to £14 million pounds of our money.
BBC's taxi bill soars by 60% in a year to a staggering £14million | Mail Online
The B.B.C. spend £60,000 pounds of our money on a commissioned work of 'art' by Tracey Emin.
The BBC, Emin and a bill for £60,000 | UK news | The Observer
The annual costs of taxis used by the B.B.C. rose by 60% to £14 million pounds of our money.
BBC's taxi bill soars by 60% in a year to a staggering £14million | Mail Online
Last edited:
That is an issue with the BBC not the licence fee. I don’t suppose that it has occurred to you to write to the BBC to make your views known has it? There is also Ofcom.
But if you are going to moan about wasting money then there is no bigger culprit than the government. When was the last time that you put your MP wise on your views?
Perhaps basic mathematics has moved on somewhat, since it was taught using slates and chalk.
It's common practice, for ease of reading, that figures above .5 are rounded up, and below that are rounded down to the nearest whole number.
Thus the findings, of this, and other more recent polls, are accurate.
We've got to remember that besides the 50 journos that already work for the Beeb over the pond, they are sending over another 100 to cover the Presidential elections next week, why. don't know about anybody else but I'm fed up with the whole circus that is American politics, our system may not be to every ones liking, but I'd sooner have ours than theirs any day
Know-it-all garinda was privy to the actual figures and jumps to the conclusion that some of them have been rounded up or down.
By the way round up occurs at 0.5 and above not above 0.5.
i think the fee should be scrapped, i've never had to pay it, but i'd rather read the paper, do you have to have a license to listen to the radio?
And that is a case against the BBC spending not the TV licence.
Who receive their funding from us, the licence payers.