Gransnet forums

Chat

TV licence fee to rise by FIFTEEN pounds?

(139 Posts)
infoman Mon 04-Dec-23 07:30:34

and what are we getting from our public broadcaster,
very little in my opinion.
No where on the licence piece of paper does it say our public broadcaster is getting this money,are they embarrassed to mention the name?
Not sure why they put on programmes called introducing to promote new young musical talent,not to mention a
reduction in the amount of your local news in your area.
Don't worry,if your a football follower,
your local football team will still be heard.

MaizieD Mon 04-Dec-23 16:01:59

Technically the licence is for the equipment to receive live television. That include all live TV broadcasts from all TV companies...

Just saying...

Brahumbug Mon 04-Dec-23 15:56:36

@BlueBelle
Why did they take the free licence away from 75 year old what was wrong with that ?

They didn't, the government took it away.

M0nica Mon 04-Dec-23 15:36:26

Keeleklogger if the BBC is to stand on its own merits, no licence fee money and presumably, no advertising revenues either, how is it to be financed?

Bella51 Mon 04-Dec-23 15:15:13

Look how much Hue Edwards was getting paid.

HousePlantQueen Mon 04-Dec-23 15:10:35

Germanshepherdsmum

Where would they find the money? They don’t (thank goodness) get revenue from commercial advertisements.

Anyone bemoaning BBC broadcasting needs to spend a week in USA watching the tripe they broadcast, the advertising 'information' that is churned out. No thanks. Yes, there are some overpaid presenters, and Lineker seems to be the focus of many people's ire, but obviously the football coverage is popular. So be it.

Germanshepherdsmum Mon 04-Dec-23 15:04:41

Where would they find the money? They don’t (thank goodness) get revenue from commercial advertisements.

HousePlantQueen Mon 04-Dec-23 15:04:38

Keeleklogger

If the BBC is so great it can stand on its merits and doesn't need to force people to pay for it.

Nobody is forced to have a tv licence.

Keeleklogger Mon 04-Dec-23 14:58:38

If the BBC is so great it can stand on its merits and doesn't need to force people to pay for it.

Cold Mon 04-Dec-23 14:51:40

It's a bargain in the UK - Sweden abolished their TV licence and replaced it with a TV tax paid by everyone on their annual tax bill. It's a flate rate of around £100 per person (1300 SEK) - which means that our household pays £300 per year at the moment.

Shez1955 Mon 04-Dec-23 14:41:16

I believe we should have the choice to whether we have BBC and pay or not. Surely the technology is able to provide that now like Sky or Netflix.

BlueBelle Mon 04-Dec-23 13:48:45

PamelaJ. NZ is very bad too

The price of the TV licence is fine for people with a good pension or pensions or income Houseplant but not everyone has that and it’s a lot to pay when a large amount of the TV is already paid for by advertising
Some elderly are just heating one room and without a tv it’s a miserable life You re probably thinking it’s not much to pay for you but it is for many especially if there’s only one pension coming in
Why did they take the free licence away from 75 year old what was wrong with that ?

Casdon Mon 04-Dec-23 13:40:46

nanna8

You shouldn’t be paying a tax for TV. We have never had that and hopefully never will. It was an old idea from the start of TV - time they moved on and people refused to pay. You can still keep the BBC, just as we have ABC, ad free over here. They are playing you all for fools.

The TV is awful in Australia though, and the BBC sells lots of its stuff there.

Freya5 Mon 04-Dec-23 13:34:46

Wheniwasyourage

sassysaysso

£15 works out at just over £1 a month and is still b____y good value!

Yes indeed. The Tories, I suspect, want a more American model of broadcasting so that their pals can make money. We need to protect the BBC. With all its faults, it’s still relied on by people all over the world.

Yes and we pay for it. So everyone gets a free world service from UK payers, and through our taxes from the foreign , development and Commonwealth Office, plus limited BBC advertising. Don't know any other countries that provides free TV payed for by their own taxpayers.
On the other hand for us, and the world of course,still good value for money considering the service it provides. Although I do begrudge paying for Mr nasty Lineker over the top salary.

HousePlantQueen Mon 04-Dec-23 13:30:09

Granny23

I think it is time that we had a mass campaign as we did for the Poll Tax. IE "Can Pay, Won't Pay"

why?

PamelaJ1 Mon 04-Dec-23 12:29:16

nanna8

You shouldn’t be paying a tax for TV. We have never had that and hopefully never will. It was an old idea from the start of TV - time they moved on and people refused to pay. You can still keep the BBC, just as we have ABC, ad free over here. They are playing you all for fools.

I spent a week locked up in a hotel room in Australia when Covid started. We endured a whole week of Aussie tv🤷🏼‍♀️😂. I wouldn’t want to pay for that either!
The BBC may not be perfect but I think it helps to keep the standard of the other channels up.y

Norah Mon 04-Dec-23 12:00:24

Current threads on 'price of fish and chips' and 'TV license fee to rise' seem to indicate inflation's real. It's down to if wages are rising as well?

Callistemon21 Mon 04-Dec-23 11:47:06

Don't forget, either, they had a boost in income when free TV licences for those over 75 were abolished.

Callistemon21 Mon 04-Dec-23 11:44:25

and what are we getting from our public broadcaster, very little in my opinion.

DH reads out the number of repeats on BBC1 &2 each day.
BBC3 is a waste of money.

Quality programming has more or less disappeared, apart from one or two gems.

nanna8 Mon 04-Dec-23 11:39:34

We don’t pay for our National broadcaster, it is free and there are no ads. Why do you pay ? Get a VPN and get it free! Revolt !

Doodledog Mon 04-Dec-23 11:34:28

The BBC is a flawed institution, but it is not in the thrall of advertisers, like all the other channels. As globalisation means that there are a few big companies who own huge numbers of small ones it can be extremely difficult to have unbiased reporting. An expose of, say, a drug that harms unborn babies may mean that all advertising from any of the companies under the same umbrella is pulled, and that could be for teabags, face cream, breakfast cereal or whatever, and be ruinous for the channels.

The BBC may have government interference, which it shouldn't, but it is not working under the constraints that commercial channels have to consider.

eazybee Mon 04-Dec-23 11:21:08

Sack Gary Lineker, and few other overpaid celebrities.
The fault lies with the BBC who agree these salaries and their acceptance of the avoidance/evasion tactics that are employed.

M0nica Mon 04-Dec-23 11:13:20

Granny23 I will start the rival 'Can pay, Will Pay' campaign. hardly ever watch television but the richness of radio, especially R4, makes the license fee worth while at twice the price.

Siope Mon 04-Dec-23 10:39:37

It’s good value, it’s immense soft power for the UK, it has a key role in maintaining standards for factual programming (across the board, not just its own).

Anyone complaining about the hollowing out of content, particularly news and local programming on TV and radio, needs to place the blame firmly where it belongs, which is with the government.

Visgir1 Mon 04-Dec-23 10:02:07

Worth it, iPlayer and the Radio stations included in the price and no ads.

25Avalon Mon 04-Dec-23 09:59:12

Not me Nanna8. Haven’t paid a licence for a few years.