Stop government letters which threaten fines

"Respond to this letter or be fined £xxxx.xx amounts of money. Yours faithfully, the State."

These kinds of threats belong in the mafia or other crime syndicates who 'know where you live'.

The government is using the law to literally rip the shirt off peoples backs simply for not replying to a letter which could get lost in the post anyway.

This type of state interference and bullying is a infringement of civil liberties and is a psychological weapon. It has to stop!

Why is this idea important?

"Respond to this letter or be fined £xxxx.xx amounts of money. Yours faithfully, the State."

These kinds of threats belong in the mafia or other crime syndicates who 'know where you live'.

The government is using the law to literally rip the shirt off peoples backs simply for not replying to a letter which could get lost in the post anyway.

This type of state interference and bullying is a infringement of civil liberties and is a psychological weapon. It has to stop!

Scrap the TV tax

Are we the only country in the entire world that has to hold a license in order to watch TV?

It's a ridiculous idea. Scrap it, and let the beeb work for their money like everyone else.

Why is this idea important?

Are we the only country in the entire world that has to hold a license in order to watch TV?

It's a ridiculous idea. Scrap it, and let the beeb work for their money like everyone else.

Let the BBC be the best it can be, for the public who pay for it

 

In the name of commercial fairness the BBC is held back from offering the services it wants too.  These additional services (such as offering more HD content, or creating iPhone Apps) would cost little to implement but would offer a good service for the public.  Various regulatory bodies however, often hold the BBC back.  This is apparently because the new services offered by the BBC would harm its commercial rivals.  In reality however, this probably wouldn’t hold true.  For example, there are few people who would watch a BBC program at the expense of an ITV one, just because it happened to be available on HD or remained on the iPlayer for a few more days.  It would merely improve the viewing experience for the public. 

If there is a mandatory license fee, the BBC should be obligated to offer the best possible service it can to the public.  If that drives up the competition, so much the better.  The commercial competition should not mind the BBC forging ahead with improved broadcasting technologies – taking the risk from first implementation away from them.

Why is this idea important?

 

In the name of commercial fairness the BBC is held back from offering the services it wants too.  These additional services (such as offering more HD content, or creating iPhone Apps) would cost little to implement but would offer a good service for the public.  Various regulatory bodies however, often hold the BBC back.  This is apparently because the new services offered by the BBC would harm its commercial rivals.  In reality however, this probably wouldn’t hold true.  For example, there are few people who would watch a BBC program at the expense of an ITV one, just because it happened to be available on HD or remained on the iPlayer for a few more days.  It would merely improve the viewing experience for the public. 

If there is a mandatory license fee, the BBC should be obligated to offer the best possible service it can to the public.  If that drives up the competition, so much the better.  The commercial competition should not mind the BBC forging ahead with improved broadcasting technologies – taking the risk from first implementation away from them.

TV Licence – completely outdated idea

I suggest the law making anyone owning a device capable of receiving BBC tv signals (even if the device cant actually receive the signals in reality*) needing a tv licence be abolished.  its unbelievable to think you can still ultimately go to prison for not paying your licence fee.

Many, many people never or hardly ever watch the BBC and would gladly never watch it again if they were saving the £145 a year.  Why does all the money still go to only the BBC anyway?

I pay less for all the hundreds of other channels I get on Sky than I do for the four BBC channels – which I dont watch!

Why cant we at least be given a choice of whether to receive  BBC channels or not? Technology nowadays could surely produce devices that block the BBC and so we would not have to buy a licence.  When I buy a microwave i dont have to buy a licence from Birds Eye to subsidise them making meals which I may never, ever eat!  You get me?

I read somewhere that the BBC would only need about 20 minutes of advertising a DAY to be able to do away with the licence fee altogether so why not do this?

* An example: A man who bought  a video recorder/player to use in a lead lined submarine (totally incapalbe of receiving any tv signals) to watch videos was taken to court for not owning a licence.

Why is this idea important?

I suggest the law making anyone owning a device capable of receiving BBC tv signals (even if the device cant actually receive the signals in reality*) needing a tv licence be abolished.  its unbelievable to think you can still ultimately go to prison for not paying your licence fee.

Many, many people never or hardly ever watch the BBC and would gladly never watch it again if they were saving the £145 a year.  Why does all the money still go to only the BBC anyway?

I pay less for all the hundreds of other channels I get on Sky than I do for the four BBC channels – which I dont watch!

Why cant we at least be given a choice of whether to receive  BBC channels or not? Technology nowadays could surely produce devices that block the BBC and so we would not have to buy a licence.  When I buy a microwave i dont have to buy a licence from Birds Eye to subsidise them making meals which I may never, ever eat!  You get me?

I read somewhere that the BBC would only need about 20 minutes of advertising a DAY to be able to do away with the licence fee altogether so why not do this?

* An example: A man who bought  a video recorder/player to use in a lead lined submarine (totally incapalbe of receiving any tv signals) to watch videos was taken to court for not owning a licence.

Privatise the BBC

I object to paying for the BBC whether I want to watch it or not. I don't see the justification for making people who do not like the BBC pay for others to watch it. Privatise the BBC so that subscribers pay for the content. Public funding of the BBC is an anachronism.

Why is this idea important?

I object to paying for the BBC whether I want to watch it or not. I don't see the justification for making people who do not like the BBC pay for others to watch it. Privatise the BBC so that subscribers pay for the content. Public funding of the BBC is an anachronism.

Get rid of the BBC

We should not be asked in this day and age of mass communication to pay taxes to keep one particular broadcaster in business. The BBC wastes the huge amount of money it forces us to pay to just view a tv or listen to a radio and I object  to funding the excessive lifestyles ot BBC staff! For instance it takes no less than 5 people to front the BBC’s breakfast show when anyone could do it with two! IT’s not a small amount of money the licence fee and if I want to watch ANY tv in my house I have to pay it. I object to having the  element of choice  taken from me and if it were’nt for the fact that I could go to prison I would refuse to pay it!  I suggest that if it was’n’t for the threats which the BBC hangs over us in the event of not paying their protection money most people would opt for getting rid of the BBC.

Why is this idea important?

We should not be asked in this day and age of mass communication to pay taxes to keep one particular broadcaster in business. The BBC wastes the huge amount of money it forces us to pay to just view a tv or listen to a radio and I object  to funding the excessive lifestyles ot BBC staff! For instance it takes no less than 5 people to front the BBC’s breakfast show when anyone could do it with two! IT’s not a small amount of money the licence fee and if I want to watch ANY tv in my house I have to pay it. I object to having the  element of choice  taken from me and if it were’nt for the fact that I could go to prison I would refuse to pay it!  I suggest that if it was’n’t for the threats which the BBC hangs over us in the event of not paying their protection money most people would opt for getting rid of the BBC.

Make the BBC commercially self-sufficient and ban the TV license

Abolish the TV license tax to support the extravagant and wasteful BBC channels – most of which people do not view/listen to.

Make the BBC a commercial organisation that has to drive its own advertising revenue to survive.  Fat cat producers and heads of programming would get salaries that are more realistic, "stars" like Jonathon Ross would not get £18m of taxpayers money for his own form of dwivel and we would not be supporting internet only radio channels that you cannot find, or satellite stations that people do not watch.

Why is this idea important?

Abolish the TV license tax to support the extravagant and wasteful BBC channels – most of which people do not view/listen to.

Make the BBC a commercial organisation that has to drive its own advertising revenue to survive.  Fat cat producers and heads of programming would get salaries that are more realistic, "stars" like Jonathon Ross would not get £18m of taxpayers money for his own form of dwivel and we would not be supporting internet only radio channels that you cannot find, or satellite stations that people do not watch.

Not having a TV license should NOT be a criminal offence!

People who fail to obtain a TV license can be classed as criminals in this country and even jailed  this is patently a nonsense.  Americans cannot believe that we even have to pay for a TV license at all.  The BBC is the main beneficiary of our license fees and yet they continue over indulge themselves with the Trustees fat paychecks and overpaid TV 'stars'  gross overmanning on every programme, see for yourself in all the programme credits etc. Not enough new programming  so thorough  'Root & branch reform' is now overdue and the license fee should begin to fall year on year by advertising. This institution must no longer be a permanent government sop.

bigace49

Why is this idea important?

People who fail to obtain a TV license can be classed as criminals in this country and even jailed  this is patently a nonsense.  Americans cannot believe that we even have to pay for a TV license at all.  The BBC is the main beneficiary of our license fees and yet they continue over indulge themselves with the Trustees fat paychecks and overpaid TV 'stars'  gross overmanning on every programme, see for yourself in all the programme credits etc. Not enough new programming  so thorough  'Root & branch reform' is now overdue and the license fee should begin to fall year on year by advertising. This institution must no longer be a permanent government sop.

bigace49

BBC television license

Instead of paying a fixed fee, which is the same for everyone, regardless of how much they watch the BBC channels, why not have these channels subscription based….so you only pay the fee if you choose to subscribe to the channel.

Why is this idea important?

Instead of paying a fixed fee, which is the same for everyone, regardless of how much they watch the BBC channels, why not have these channels subscription based….so you only pay the fee if you choose to subscribe to the channel.

SCRAP TV LICENSE

MAKE THE BBC WORK FOR ITS MONEY . THEY MUST HAVE TO COMPETE WITH OTHER CHANNELS.  BEING A CORP IS AN OUT OF DATE IDEA IN TODAY S CLIMATE .  IT COSTS THE TAXPAYERS A LOT OF MONEY… WHERE DOES IT GO … TO OVERPAID , SOMETIMES, TALENTLESS INVIDUALS.

SO, SCRAP THE LICENSE FEE AND LET US DECIDE WHERE TO PUT OUR MONEY AND WHICH CHANNELS WE WANT TO PAY FOR.

 

Why is this idea important?

MAKE THE BBC WORK FOR ITS MONEY . THEY MUST HAVE TO COMPETE WITH OTHER CHANNELS.  BEING A CORP IS AN OUT OF DATE IDEA IN TODAY S CLIMATE .  IT COSTS THE TAXPAYERS A LOT OF MONEY… WHERE DOES IT GO … TO OVERPAID , SOMETIMES, TALENTLESS INVIDUALS.

SO, SCRAP THE LICENSE FEE AND LET US DECIDE WHERE TO PUT OUR MONEY AND WHICH CHANNELS WE WANT TO PAY FOR.

 

Abolish TV licensing

The entire TV licencing system should be abolished.  All pending prosecutions quashed and all past prosecutions revoked and removed from criminal records.

Continuing to fund the BBC through this system is archaic and authoritarian.

Ironically it has meant that during a recession and with massive fiscal austerity, the BBC can be added to the NHS and overseas aid as immune from spending cuts.  It is the only public broadcaster in the world that tries to compete with commercial broadcasting in terms of broadcasting rights and salaries.   What is worse is that unlike commercial broadcasters, you can be a criminal if you don't pay.

The future funding of the BBC should be subject to a major review, with the interim funded from general taxation.  Yes it will mean cuts, and yes it will be tough, but why should the BBC be some island immune from austerity?

In the long run the BBC could be funded from a mixture of pay services (i.e. channels beyond 1 and 2), taxation and revenue from overseas sales, but that need not be decided now.

The TV licence has been abolished in several countries, such as New Zealand.

Why is this idea important?

The entire TV licencing system should be abolished.  All pending prosecutions quashed and all past prosecutions revoked and removed from criminal records.

Continuing to fund the BBC through this system is archaic and authoritarian.

Ironically it has meant that during a recession and with massive fiscal austerity, the BBC can be added to the NHS and overseas aid as immune from spending cuts.  It is the only public broadcaster in the world that tries to compete with commercial broadcasting in terms of broadcasting rights and salaries.   What is worse is that unlike commercial broadcasters, you can be a criminal if you don't pay.

The future funding of the BBC should be subject to a major review, with the interim funded from general taxation.  Yes it will mean cuts, and yes it will be tough, but why should the BBC be some island immune from austerity?

In the long run the BBC could be funded from a mixture of pay services (i.e. channels beyond 1 and 2), taxation and revenue from overseas sales, but that need not be decided now.

The TV licence has been abolished in several countries, such as New Zealand.

The TV License re-evaluated

Understandably, there is a growing amount of hostility towards the TV license. Many see the License fee as just another tax and, perhaps, do not recognise the important part it plays in maintaining high quality and cheap broadcasting in Britain.

Britain has the best television and radio in the world and one of the most economical. The unique way broadcasting is funded through the TV license is a fundamental reason for this. Although the public may feel like they are paying twice to watch television and have no choice in the matter, in fact the license fee actually sets the price point for TV in Britain. Just look across the ocean to our neighbours in North America who have fully commercial television. A typical cable bill is $100 per month and the service is riddled with advertising every eight minutes.

The TV license is not a “BBC-TV tax”, yes it funds BBC television but also national and local radio services. The so-called “freeview” channels also benefit from it.

However, the BBC has changed over the last decade and become too commercial. Celebrities are paid far too handsome salaries and private production companies profit from BBC programming. It seems a shake up at the Beeb and a re-evaluation of the license fee would be in the publics’ interested. The uniqueness of the license fee should be protected but its revenue used in a new way.

My proposal is that the TV license is replaced with a “Broadcasting License” to reflect that the financial contributions from the license fee not only support BBC television production but local and national radio services and other independent TV broadcasters. We also need to recognise the changing way the public access broadcasting. The Broadcasting License should also support the internet/network infrastructure across the UK. The new license, as well as supporting the BBC, should also contribute to the development of a national fibre optic network and supply every UK license fee payer with free high-speed broadband internet access. Profits from the commercial arm of the BBC should also be used to support the national broadcasting and network infrastructure.

The BBC also needs to get back to its roots. It should become a television producer again rather than a publisher. It should reinvest in its production and post-production facilities so that it can make its own programming once more. The BBC should be making a wide spectrum of programming not just cheap commercial reality-type shows. It should be the world leader in training broadcasting professionals and in research and development of broadcasting technology. Its back catalogue of vintage programming and radio productions should be made available online for the public to access freely. No more ridiculous salaries for celebrities. The BBC does not need to pay these high wages, there are plenty more upcoming actors and presenters ready waiting to take they place without requiring Hollywood contracts.

In summary my proposals are:

  1. Ditch the current TV license for a new “Broadcasting License”.
  2. The License to also fund a national high-speed fibre optic network.
  3. Free high-speed broadband internet access for all license fee payers.
  4. The BBC to make its own television programmers in house.
  5. The BBC should be a world leader in broadcasting staff training and R&D.
  6. No more celebrities on Hollywood salaries.
  7. The BBC should be making TV programmes for all from costume dramas, to documentaries, educational, special interest, comedies, etc. Cut the cheap commercial reality and quiz shows.
  8. BBC worldwide profits re-invested in the broadcasting/network infrastructure.

The downside – there has to be one right?
The new Broadcasting License would be payable by any residence owning a TV, radio, or with any other means of accessing “Freeview” channels either through terrestrial, satellite, cable or via the internet.

Why is this idea important?

Understandably, there is a growing amount of hostility towards the TV license. Many see the License fee as just another tax and, perhaps, do not recognise the important part it plays in maintaining high quality and cheap broadcasting in Britain.

Britain has the best television and radio in the world and one of the most economical. The unique way broadcasting is funded through the TV license is a fundamental reason for this. Although the public may feel like they are paying twice to watch television and have no choice in the matter, in fact the license fee actually sets the price point for TV in Britain. Just look across the ocean to our neighbours in North America who have fully commercial television. A typical cable bill is $100 per month and the service is riddled with advertising every eight minutes.

The TV license is not a “BBC-TV tax”, yes it funds BBC television but also national and local radio services. The so-called “freeview” channels also benefit from it.

However, the BBC has changed over the last decade and become too commercial. Celebrities are paid far too handsome salaries and private production companies profit from BBC programming. It seems a shake up at the Beeb and a re-evaluation of the license fee would be in the publics’ interested. The uniqueness of the license fee should be protected but its revenue used in a new way.

My proposal is that the TV license is replaced with a “Broadcasting License” to reflect that the financial contributions from the license fee not only support BBC television production but local and national radio services and other independent TV broadcasters. We also need to recognise the changing way the public access broadcasting. The Broadcasting License should also support the internet/network infrastructure across the UK. The new license, as well as supporting the BBC, should also contribute to the development of a national fibre optic network and supply every UK license fee payer with free high-speed broadband internet access. Profits from the commercial arm of the BBC should also be used to support the national broadcasting and network infrastructure.

The BBC also needs to get back to its roots. It should become a television producer again rather than a publisher. It should reinvest in its production and post-production facilities so that it can make its own programming once more. The BBC should be making a wide spectrum of programming not just cheap commercial reality-type shows. It should be the world leader in training broadcasting professionals and in research and development of broadcasting technology. Its back catalogue of vintage programming and radio productions should be made available online for the public to access freely. No more ridiculous salaries for celebrities. The BBC does not need to pay these high wages, there are plenty more upcoming actors and presenters ready waiting to take they place without requiring Hollywood contracts.

In summary my proposals are:

  1. Ditch the current TV license for a new “Broadcasting License”.
  2. The License to also fund a national high-speed fibre optic network.
  3. Free high-speed broadband internet access for all license fee payers.
  4. The BBC to make its own television programmers in house.
  5. The BBC should be a world leader in broadcasting staff training and R&D.
  6. No more celebrities on Hollywood salaries.
  7. The BBC should be making TV programmes for all from costume dramas, to documentaries, educational, special interest, comedies, etc. Cut the cheap commercial reality and quiz shows.
  8. BBC worldwide profits re-invested in the broadcasting/network infrastructure.

The downside – there has to be one right?
The new Broadcasting License would be payable by any residence owning a TV, radio, or with any other means of accessing “Freeview” channels either through terrestrial, satellite, cable or via the internet.

Registering for a TV license every time you buy a Tv or set top box

Surely by now everyone with a TV has a license, so why do I as a consumer have to gaff around for 15mins filling in a form each time I buy a new TV or set top box.

Why is this idea important?

Surely by now everyone with a TV has a license, so why do I as a consumer have to gaff around for 15mins filling in a form each time I buy a new TV or set top box.