As part of the digital Britain report, it was proposed that national FM radio be switched off to free up bandwidth for DAB broadcasts. I believe that FM radio should be retained. I also believe that if we are to switch to a digital format, there are several formats which have considerable advantages over DAB.
I suggested to the last government that FM should be retained and DAB allowed to die. Their response was that DAB had to proceed since there were already a few million DAB sets in the UK. The fact that there are hundreds of millions of FM receivers in the UK seemed lost on them.
Why is this idea important?
As part of the digital Britain report, it was proposed that national FM radio be switched off to free up bandwidth for DAB broadcasts. I believe that FM radio should be retained. I also believe that if we are to switch to a digital format, there are several formats which have considerable advantages over DAB.
I suggested to the last government that FM should be retained and DAB allowed to die. Their response was that DAB had to proceed since there were already a few million DAB sets in the UK. The fact that there are hundreds of millions of FM receivers in the UK seemed lost on them.
WE MUST NOT GO DIGITAL FOR RADIO BROADCASTS. MORE EMISSIONS. MORE BATTERIES DITCHED AS DONT LAST LONG. IMY PARTNER MY SON AND I HAVE 3 RADIO ALARM CLOCKS .RADIO ON HIFI. RADIO IN KITCHEN, TWO CAR RADIOS,2 WIND UP RADIOS.2 MOBILE PHONES WITH RADIOS. NOT SURE HOW CAR RADIOS CAN BE CHANGED UNLESS OF COURSE I DITCH THE 2 CARS WE OWN. THEN DO I DITCH ALL MY RADIOS TO LANDFILL.I HAVE DAB ON MY SATALITE RECIEVER QUALITY NOT MUCH TO TALK ABOUT.
HOWEVER I CANNOT RECIEVE DIGITAL IN BRISTOL NTH WITHOUT AMPLIFICATION OF SIGNAL. ICANT SEE DIGITAL WORING IF YOUR ON THE MOVE AS THERE IS LIKELY TO BE LOADS OF DEAD SPOTS.
WE MUST KEEP FM ANALOUGE AND IF DAB COMES THEN RUN IT SIDE BY SIDE.
Why is this idea important?
WE MUST NOT GO DIGITAL FOR RADIO BROADCASTS. MORE EMISSIONS. MORE BATTERIES DITCHED AS DONT LAST LONG. IMY PARTNER MY SON AND I HAVE 3 RADIO ALARM CLOCKS .RADIO ON HIFI. RADIO IN KITCHEN, TWO CAR RADIOS,2 WIND UP RADIOS.2 MOBILE PHONES WITH RADIOS. NOT SURE HOW CAR RADIOS CAN BE CHANGED UNLESS OF COURSE I DITCH THE 2 CARS WE OWN. THEN DO I DITCH ALL MY RADIOS TO LANDFILL.I HAVE DAB ON MY SATALITE RECIEVER QUALITY NOT MUCH TO TALK ABOUT.
HOWEVER I CANNOT RECIEVE DIGITAL IN BRISTOL NTH WITHOUT AMPLIFICATION OF SIGNAL. ICANT SEE DIGITAL WORING IF YOUR ON THE MOVE AS THERE IS LIKELY TO BE LOADS OF DEAD SPOTS.
WE MUST KEEP FM ANALOUGE AND IF DAB COMES THEN RUN IT SIDE BY SIDE.
Currently anyone in the U.K wishing to use a marine VHF set for transmissions at sea has to pass a test of competence and then apply for a licence. The test covers correct radio procedure, including in emergencies. The one day course costs about eighty pounds. My handheld radio cost about sixty pounds. It might seem reasonable that users should use correct procedure. However, I wish to make two points:
1. I know that many people ignore the requirement for a test and licence. I have never heard of any enforcement.
2. I spend most of my sea time in USA coastal waters using marine VHF. No such testing or licensing is required in the USA, and radio procedure seems no worse than in the UK.
There is already an excellent Government booklet to advise users on correct procedure. Any abuse of the system could be dealt with as at present.
Why is this idea important?
Currently anyone in the U.K wishing to use a marine VHF set for transmissions at sea has to pass a test of competence and then apply for a licence. The test covers correct radio procedure, including in emergencies. The one day course costs about eighty pounds. My handheld radio cost about sixty pounds. It might seem reasonable that users should use correct procedure. However, I wish to make two points:
1. I know that many people ignore the requirement for a test and licence. I have never heard of any enforcement.
2. I spend most of my sea time in USA coastal waters using marine VHF. No such testing or licensing is required in the USA, and radio procedure seems no worse than in the UK.
There is already an excellent Government booklet to advise users on correct procedure. Any abuse of the system could be dealt with as at present.
I am a full time carer for my disabled wife and we often listen to our local radio station on FM especially when we are out and about.
Are you (The goverment) going to assist us and many more like us to upgrade all our radio equipment so that we can get the radio stations that we like listening too. I doubt this very much so I ask you to reconsider this plan, as upgrading all our TV's have cost us a lot and now the prospect of having to upgrade or change all the radios we have will just be crippling.
Why change things that don't need changing?
Why is this idea important?
I am a full time carer for my disabled wife and we often listen to our local radio station on FM especially when we are out and about.
Are you (The goverment) going to assist us and many more like us to upgrade all our radio equipment so that we can get the radio stations that we like listening too. I doubt this very much so I ask you to reconsider this plan, as upgrading all our TV's have cost us a lot and now the prospect of having to upgrade or change all the radios we have will just be crippling.
Why change things that don't need changing?
The country is in a financial mess, which the people will have to pay for over many years. We all know this, and must accept it. It is unreasonable to force the ordinary people of this country, who are already having to pay for government mis-management, to spend money replacing perfectly good radios, when the only benefactors would be a few importers, and several far east manufacturers.
The choice MUST be left to the people, and market forces MUST be the deciding factor. If digital radio is the way forward, let the technology prove itself, and market forces sort it out, in a similar way to video or dvd recorders. It is getting harder to buy video players, as market forces and superior technology make dvd players/recorders more popular. Soor, VHS will die the death, but it will be by market forces, NOT government direction.
Why is this idea important?
The country is in a financial mess, which the people will have to pay for over many years. We all know this, and must accept it. It is unreasonable to force the ordinary people of this country, who are already having to pay for government mis-management, to spend money replacing perfectly good radios, when the only benefactors would be a few importers, and several far east manufacturers.
The choice MUST be left to the people, and market forces MUST be the deciding factor. If digital radio is the way forward, let the technology prove itself, and market forces sort it out, in a similar way to video or dvd recorders. It is getting harder to buy video players, as market forces and superior technology make dvd players/recorders more popular. Soor, VHS will die the death, but it will be by market forces, NOT government direction.
In common with probably millions of people all over the UK I would like to be able to retain the FM radio signal. Please review the plans for Digital Broadcasting; even when the take-up of digital radio increases in the population, please do not switch off the analogue FM signal. This would lead to horrendous waste and expense all over the country.
Why is this idea important?
In common with probably millions of people all over the UK I would like to be able to retain the FM radio signal. Please review the plans for Digital Broadcasting; even when the take-up of digital radio increases in the population, please do not switch off the analogue FM signal. This would lead to horrendous waste and expense all over the country.
It doesnt seem all that long ago we were all having to get used to FM frequencies for our favourite radio stations. Now we are (possibly) going to totally lose FM in favour of DAB. Why? I havnt seen any good write ups for it. In fact, it seems to me that its an excuse by government who may be looking to get more taxpayers money if they switch off FM and force people against their wills to get DAB. I cant afford it. My car is the only place I listen to a radio and I wont replace it in favour of DAB. I live in a rural location and I doubt very much if I could receive DAB.
I say keep FM and if anyone wants DAB, let them get it. Dont force it on the taxpayer. As the saying goes, if it aint broke etc!!
Why is this idea important?
It doesnt seem all that long ago we were all having to get used to FM frequencies for our favourite radio stations. Now we are (possibly) going to totally lose FM in favour of DAB. Why? I havnt seen any good write ups for it. In fact, it seems to me that its an excuse by government who may be looking to get more taxpayers money if they switch off FM and force people against their wills to get DAB. I cant afford it. My car is the only place I listen to a radio and I wont replace it in favour of DAB. I live in a rural location and I doubt very much if I could receive DAB.
I say keep FM and if anyone wants DAB, let them get it. Dont force it on the taxpayer. As the saying goes, if it aint broke etc!!
Since I was a child I have enjoyed listening to and exploring "steam" radio and do not see any point to changing things so that we will no longer be able to listen to the BBC and local radio unless we buy very expensive DAB radios.
I would be forced to only be able to listen to CD's in my car and would have to buy expensive equipment in order to listen on my hifi.
From my experience of TV the sound quality is much poorer than that obtainable on UHF/VHF frequency modulation broadcasts and nothing like as reliable as the broadcasts on MW/LW amplitude modulation broadcasts.
My crystal set would also cease working after 90 years.
I cannot see the point with radio so implore everyone to join a petition to save analogue radio, for all the frequency bands to go silent would be a disaster and a waste of the investment millions of people have put in when buying good, functional radios.
Why is this idea important?
Since I was a child I have enjoyed listening to and exploring "steam" radio and do not see any point to changing things so that we will no longer be able to listen to the BBC and local radio unless we buy very expensive DAB radios.
I would be forced to only be able to listen to CD's in my car and would have to buy expensive equipment in order to listen on my hifi.
From my experience of TV the sound quality is much poorer than that obtainable on UHF/VHF frequency modulation broadcasts and nothing like as reliable as the broadcasts on MW/LW amplitude modulation broadcasts.
My crystal set would also cease working after 90 years.
I cannot see the point with radio so implore everyone to join a petition to save analogue radio, for all the frequency bands to go silent would be a disaster and a waste of the investment millions of people have put in when buying good, functional radios.
why oh why, what ever next, is the goverment getting money from this dab stuff, do they know how many cars do not have dab radios in cars and the cost to US to change over from fm to dab, or is it that they earn so much money that they forget about avarage joe, i would love to meet the person that thinks all this up, i live in the REAL world…….. (for now)
Why is this idea important?
why oh why, what ever next, is the goverment getting money from this dab stuff, do they know how many cars do not have dab radios in cars and the cost to US to change over from fm to dab, or is it that they earn so much money that they forget about avarage joe, i would love to meet the person that thinks all this up, i live in the REAL world…….. (for now)
Pirate fm should stay on air because it is probably the most listend to radio station and because we all l♥e!it think of it this way if we didnt have pirate fm the there would be no more secret sound,most wanted,friday songand gr8 music!!!!!!!
SO KEEP PIRATE FM!!!!!
Why is this idea important?
Pirate fm should stay on air because it is probably the most listend to radio station and because we all l♥e!it think of it this way if we didnt have pirate fm the there would be no more secret sound,most wanted,friday songand gr8 music!!!!!!!
SO KEEP PIRATE FM!!!!!
Hey dont turn off fm radio, Unless you are going to buy us all new radios when ours are redundent!
Why is this idea important?
Hey dont turn off fm radio, Unless you are going to buy us all new radios when ours are redundent!
Most people listen to radio while doing something else, often in a noisey work environment so quality is not vital. Clarity of speach and battery life, however are important. Both are better on FM. Don't force those of us working in mobile situations into working in silence or listening to CD's, keep FM and even AM and Long wave. Test match special is the best radio listening possible when doing a dull job out inthe countryside.
Why is this idea important?
Most people listen to radio while doing something else, often in a noisey work environment so quality is not vital. Clarity of speach and battery life, however are important. Both are better on FM. Don't force those of us working in mobile situations into working in silence or listening to CD's, keep FM and even AM and Long wave. Test match special is the best radio listening possible when doing a dull job out inthe countryside.
I recognise that Mr Vaizey has made some mildly encouraging noises recently but I wish to add my voice to the debate about the threatened shut down of the FM channels on the radio. The FM Channels MUST be maintained. My concerns fall into two areas:
1. Cost
2. Performance
1. I have 7 FM receivers about the house and one in the car. I would not afford to replace them with similar quality DAB devices so I would do without. As I listen only to BBC R3 & R4, there is no obvious net gain (to me) from switching to DAB, merely additional unnecessary expense.
2. Currently, DAB is not fit for purpose. I have only one DAB receiver (a portable) which I use when I am out walking the dog but it suffers from frequent "hiccups". I have approached the BBC in the past to ask if the DAB signal is poor in the Gosport area and they tell me all is fine. Well, it is not fine! DAB does not work properly. Even when reception strength is OK, the sound quality is as good on DAB as it is with FM.
Why is this idea important?
I recognise that Mr Vaizey has made some mildly encouraging noises recently but I wish to add my voice to the debate about the threatened shut down of the FM channels on the radio. The FM Channels MUST be maintained. My concerns fall into two areas:
1. Cost
2. Performance
1. I have 7 FM receivers about the house and one in the car. I would not afford to replace them with similar quality DAB devices so I would do without. As I listen only to BBC R3 & R4, there is no obvious net gain (to me) from switching to DAB, merely additional unnecessary expense.
2. Currently, DAB is not fit for purpose. I have only one DAB receiver (a portable) which I use when I am out walking the dog but it suffers from frequent "hiccups". I have approached the BBC in the past to ask if the DAB signal is poor in the Gosport area and they tell me all is fine. Well, it is not fine! DAB does not work properly. Even when reception strength is OK, the sound quality is as good on DAB as it is with FM.
CE Marking conformity assessments and examination facilities for EMC, R&TTE and LVD are simply too expensive at around 500 to 5000 pounds for the small manufacturer making one offs or small runs. These facilities need to be made available to all small manufacturers at a reasonable price. I don’t think the examinations should be for free, but I do think that they should be made at a cost that is affordable, maybe for the same price as a car MOT examination. Ofcom, Universities and some technical colleges have the test equipment to make these assessments and examinations very easily. Such an examination could be made in 1 to 2 hours. I know Ofcom have regional offices all over the UK in the major cities for policing communications in those areas. It is also Ofcom that is responsible for monitoring compliance with the EMC and R&TTE directives. Without evidence of this compliance you cannot CE Mark your product and therefore you cannot place it on the market. Surely it must be possible to make a program or process where the small manufacturer can take new designs for assessment and examination at the regional Ofcom offices for a small fee that will cover the cost of the time used by the of Ofcom employee. This would not result in any further cost to the taxpayer, in fact if enough assessments were made Ofcom may make a profit, this would open the market up to small manufacturers with new inventions, innovations and ideas that would lead to more jobs and skills.
Why is this idea important?
CE Marking conformity assessments and examination facilities for EMC, R&TTE and LVD are simply too expensive at around 500 to 5000 pounds for the small manufacturer making one offs or small runs. These facilities need to be made available to all small manufacturers at a reasonable price. I don’t think the examinations should be for free, but I do think that they should be made at a cost that is affordable, maybe for the same price as a car MOT examination. Ofcom, Universities and some technical colleges have the test equipment to make these assessments and examinations very easily. Such an examination could be made in 1 to 2 hours. I know Ofcom have regional offices all over the UK in the major cities for policing communications in those areas. It is also Ofcom that is responsible for monitoring compliance with the EMC and R&TTE directives. Without evidence of this compliance you cannot CE Mark your product and therefore you cannot place it on the market. Surely it must be possible to make a program or process where the small manufacturer can take new designs for assessment and examination at the regional Ofcom offices for a small fee that will cover the cost of the time used by the of Ofcom employee. This would not result in any further cost to the taxpayer, in fact if enough assessments were made Ofcom may make a profit, this would open the market up to small manufacturers with new inventions, innovations and ideas that would lead to more jobs and skills.
I am concerned at the proposal to switch off the FM radio signal. Doing so would render my FM Hi Fi, bedroom clock radio, car radio and all the other radios I have in my home completely useless. These radios cost many hundreds of pounds and all are working perfectly. I have one DAB radio. Other than making many more stations available, stations to which I never listen, DAB has nothing to offer that is better than FM. Reception is nowhere near as good, whilst power consumption is much higher. I write as an 85 year old veteran of the Battle of Arnhem. Mr. Clegg. I urge you to scrap this unwanted law and leave FM operating.
Why is this idea important?
I am concerned at the proposal to switch off the FM radio signal. Doing so would render my FM Hi Fi, bedroom clock radio, car radio and all the other radios I have in my home completely useless. These radios cost many hundreds of pounds and all are working perfectly. I have one DAB radio. Other than making many more stations available, stations to which I never listen, DAB has nothing to offer that is better than FM. Reception is nowhere near as good, whilst power consumption is much higher. I write as an 85 year old veteran of the Battle of Arnhem. Mr. Clegg. I urge you to scrap this unwanted law and leave FM operating.
I have both Fm and Dab radio. The dab radio has electronics built in to give the output a more 'Mellow' sound. In fact to sound more like annalogue Fm radio. I can make a direct comparison by switching between the two, however I still by far prefer the FM output. Are we to go digital just because all things digital must be better?
Why is this idea important?
I have both Fm and Dab radio. The dab radio has electronics built in to give the output a more 'Mellow' sound. In fact to sound more like annalogue Fm radio. I can make a direct comparison by switching between the two, however I still by far prefer the FM output. Are we to go digital just because all things digital must be better?
The Communications Minister Ed Vaizey says that "listeners need to be persuaded that the quality (of Digital Radio) is high, Digital Radio is affordable and the quality is as good as FM"
This seems to be the same attitude as the last government; i.e. if the public don't want it, the public are wrong, so they must be persuaded. Well it is Mr Vaizey that must be persuaded, that is what many of us are trying to do. Here are the arguments:
1. He says that "Digtal Radio is a huge opportunity…" Well, no. Digital Radio WAS a huge opportunity 25 years ago when it was intruduced (first with test transmissions in the Midlands). Now we have the prospect of Radio 6 Music, one of the few digital only stations, being closed down.
2. The quality is as good as FM. Wrong. The quality has the potential to be better than FM, but the bit rate is variable, and often restricted in order to accomodate more stations. Pre-emphesis and companding used on FM is also used in digital transmission.
3. The FM transmissions run in parallel with digital radio would require no seperate distribution system, the same distribution feeds both at the same transmitter sites, as it does at the moment. Only continued maintenance revenue for already exitisting FM transmitters would be needed. The cost of this is less than the extra battery current required by every portable receiver, of which there are tens of thousands per transmitter.
4. Not only do car radios need to be replaced, as in recent publicity, but many Hi-Fi enthusiasts have the FM tuner integral to their music system. Buying a portable is not an option, enthusiasts want to reproduce the signal; through their quality loudspeakers. Also the substitution of a digital tuner for an FM one is not simple in such a system.
5. For television, analogue closure was necessary to allow the full power digital transmissions in all areas in the same transmission bands (bands IV and V). The FM band II is not required for digital use because the digital band is seperate.
6 If you want a government which allows people choice, why not have FM and Digital both available, and let the listeners choose. The cost of continuing an already existing FM transmitter in a given area (paid for by the listener through the television lisence fee) will be less than the ongoing cost of extra batteries for digital receivers. (also paid for by the listener).
7. Have you actually listened to a digital receiver, such as the Gemini, and compared the quality to reasonable size stereo speakers (such as the LS3/5A by Rogers, a BBC design, commercially available)? I think if committee had done this in an A-B test, you would stop saying that Digital is as good as FM. One has to consider the whole system and what comes out in the listeners' room.
8. Radio 4 Long Wave is valued by many sports listeners, particularily for Test Match Special. The last time its closure was proposed there was a demonstration march to Broadcasting House.
9. What will happen to digital services in a serious national emergency, when radio is the only means of contacting the people? AM receivers are small, simple, and can be used almost anywhere with an internal ferrite rod aerial.
thanks for the opportunity to give my opinion,
Colin Pierpoint
Why is this idea important?
The Communications Minister Ed Vaizey says that "listeners need to be persuaded that the quality (of Digital Radio) is high, Digital Radio is affordable and the quality is as good as FM"
This seems to be the same attitude as the last government; i.e. if the public don't want it, the public are wrong, so they must be persuaded. Well it is Mr Vaizey that must be persuaded, that is what many of us are trying to do. Here are the arguments:
1. He says that "Digtal Radio is a huge opportunity…" Well, no. Digital Radio WAS a huge opportunity 25 years ago when it was intruduced (first with test transmissions in the Midlands). Now we have the prospect of Radio 6 Music, one of the few digital only stations, being closed down.
2. The quality is as good as FM. Wrong. The quality has the potential to be better than FM, but the bit rate is variable, and often restricted in order to accomodate more stations. Pre-emphesis and companding used on FM is also used in digital transmission.
3. The FM transmissions run in parallel with digital radio would require no seperate distribution system, the same distribution feeds both at the same transmitter sites, as it does at the moment. Only continued maintenance revenue for already exitisting FM transmitters would be needed. The cost of this is less than the extra battery current required by every portable receiver, of which there are tens of thousands per transmitter.
4. Not only do car radios need to be replaced, as in recent publicity, but many Hi-Fi enthusiasts have the FM tuner integral to their music system. Buying a portable is not an option, enthusiasts want to reproduce the signal; through their quality loudspeakers. Also the substitution of a digital tuner for an FM one is not simple in such a system.
5. For television, analogue closure was necessary to allow the full power digital transmissions in all areas in the same transmission bands (bands IV and V). The FM band II is not required for digital use because the digital band is seperate.
6 If you want a government which allows people choice, why not have FM and Digital both available, and let the listeners choose. The cost of continuing an already existing FM transmitter in a given area (paid for by the listener through the television lisence fee) will be less than the ongoing cost of extra batteries for digital receivers. (also paid for by the listener).
7. Have you actually listened to a digital receiver, such as the Gemini, and compared the quality to reasonable size stereo speakers (such as the LS3/5A by Rogers, a BBC design, commercially available)? I think if committee had done this in an A-B test, you would stop saying that Digital is as good as FM. One has to consider the whole system and what comes out in the listeners' room.
8. Radio 4 Long Wave is valued by many sports listeners, particularily for Test Match Special. The last time its closure was proposed there was a demonstration march to Broadcasting House.
9. What will happen to digital services in a serious national emergency, when radio is the only means of contacting the people? AM receivers are small, simple, and can be used almost anywhere with an internal ferrite rod aerial.
thanks for the opportunity to give my opinion,
Colin Pierpoint
The idea of scrapping millions of radios for other units that use more power is bizare. There seems to be an unnecessary rush to change over and force an consumer demand. We should be looking at a general reductionalist strategy to consumer goods not creating one. If there has to be a change over then make it over 20 years and do not reduce the coverage or quality of FM in an underhand way of making people change. Wait till the last car with an FM radio is scrapped before the earliest considered change over if at all.
Why is this idea important?
The idea of scrapping millions of radios for other units that use more power is bizare. There seems to be an unnecessary rush to change over and force an consumer demand. We should be looking at a general reductionalist strategy to consumer goods not creating one. If there has to be a change over then make it over 20 years and do not reduce the coverage or quality of FM in an underhand way of making people change. Wait till the last car with an FM radio is scrapped before the earliest considered change over if at all.
Let's keep FM radio. I have one digital radio in the house ( a free set, courtesy of Classic FM.)And I have four FM radios, plus one in the car that I do not want the expense of replacing.Where are all the redundant sets to go? Landfill?Expense
Why is this idea important?
Let's keep FM radio. I have one digital radio in the house ( a free set, courtesy of Classic FM.)And I have four FM radios, plus one in the car that I do not want the expense of replacing.Where are all the redundant sets to go? Landfill?Expense
It would be ridiculously expensive to continue with switching off FM. Digital radio uses more energy, makes our car radios obsolete and will force many poor people to buy new radios.
Now is the time to agree to maintain FM.
Why is this idea important?
It would be ridiculously expensive to continue with switching off FM. Digital radio uses more energy, makes our car radios obsolete and will force many poor people to buy new radios.
Now is the time to agree to maintain FM.
Scrap the government plans to phase out FM radio broadcasting by 2015. It is unnecessary and will be prohibitively expensive for radio listeners.
Why is this idea important?
Scrap the government plans to phase out FM radio broadcasting by 2015. It is unnecessary and will be prohibitively expensive for radio listeners.
No compulsory switch-off of FM transmissions to compel us to change to digital, making our many FM receivers useless.
Digital uses much more power, and incurs considerable capital costs [sets are much dearer], with no way of recyling the old radios. Will not be able to go from one room to another set with continuity of programme. Music will be less faithfully reproduced.
Also, the Time Signal will be wrong!
Why is this idea important?
No compulsory switch-off of FM transmissions to compel us to change to digital, making our many FM receivers useless.
Digital uses much more power, and incurs considerable capital costs [sets are much dearer], with no way of recyling the old radios. Will not be able to go from one room to another set with continuity of programme. Music will be less faithfully reproduced.
Also, the Time Signal will be wrong!
The Digital Economy Act (ending of FM and medium wave radio ) is ill thought out and typical of the Big Brother State of New Labour who sought to control every aspect of the UK citizens life. The switch to digital broadcasting is not necessary, the current frequency band allocations are well mapped and do not cause mutual interference within the UK.
Why is this idea important?
The Digital Economy Act (ending of FM and medium wave radio ) is ill thought out and typical of the Big Brother State of New Labour who sought to control every aspect of the UK citizens life. The switch to digital broadcasting is not necessary, the current frequency band allocations are well mapped and do not cause mutual interference within the UK.
Replace the licence fee with a communications tax, put the money into both the BBC and communications infrastructure.
The BBC should have its independence enshrined in law and should not have to worry about viewing figures when it comes to news reporting, its sole priority should be producing high quality unbiased news.
Why is this idea important?
Replace the licence fee with a communications tax, put the money into both the BBC and communications infrastructure.
The BBC should have its independence enshrined in law and should not have to worry about viewing figures when it comes to news reporting, its sole priority should be producing high quality unbiased news.
The turning off of theFM broadcasting is quite wrong. There are millions of radios that would be effected and it is quite wrong that this is being imposed on the public. By all means run both in tandum but do not turn off the signal – I can't imagine any contry in Europe planning to go down this road!!!
Why is this idea important?
The turning off of theFM broadcasting is quite wrong. There are millions of radios that would be effected and it is quite wrong that this is being imposed on the public. By all means run both in tandum but do not turn off the signal – I can't imagine any contry in Europe planning to go down this road!!!