I’m not renewing my TV licence - any pitfalls?

[Serial_Apologist]

You confused me with your examples. In one, the council failed to undertake an obligation that it has that produced an immediate risk to members of the public, and in the other the BBC does not want to raise revenue through a radio licence and the decision produces no risk at all; and even in one’s wildest imagination that there is a risk to the £4 billion funding, my £147 is no temporary solution. It’s a really bad analogy, but you know that already.

Were I to see an immediate danger to the public I would probably act to try and remove it without thinking in terms of other's responsibilities, official or unofficial. I would see my license payment in the same terms, as opposed to limiting the license payment to my individual interests. And that would pre-empt any question in my mind of totalling up all the payments with a view to calculating the net benefits to the BBC's existing budgeting arrangements - partly because, as others have pointed out, the license fee goes towards funding areas other than TV broadcasting; partly because I would hope the BBC would hold to its declared responsibilities - nothwithstanding my doubts about Lat's belief in the BBC's well-meaning intentions of ensuring its own impartiality and balance. After all, we can't all or always be in full possession of facts before we take action. So, while the analogy might as you say be faulty, and I would admit that it was clumsy, the fault I would argue is one of degree rather than absolute, and that there is a sliding scale along which the two situations, to me at any rate, are analogous, and therefore comparable. I hope that makes sense!

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I agree with anyone who spells the noun "licence" with two Cs.

[P. G. Tipps]

I agree with anyone who spells the noun "licence" with two Cs.

Is your hint that there is someone here who spells the noun "licence" without two Cs in any way evidence-based, EA ... ?

[vinteuil]

I agree with anyone who spells the noun "licence" with two Cs.

... tho' you wouldn't, I hope, necessarily disagree with Shakspere, Dryden, Johnson, Richardson, Steele, Macaulay, Trevelyan, Burke, Browning, and all the other English writers who spelled the noun "license" with an S?

[french frank]

and in the other the BBC does not want to raise revenue through a radio licence

Wasn't it a government decision? The radio licence fee was abolished in 1971(presumably - as with the dog licence - because it would cost more than the revenue), but the BBC weren't forced to take over the administration of the licence fee until Thatcher's controversial Broadcasting Act 1990 .

Radio listeners now are obviously offered a lot more than they were in 1946 (when the Third joined the Light and the Home Service) but the cost of the fee, at £1, would now be worth about £39.

I might try to persuade my local Post Office to sell me a monochrome licence, but last time when I bought a licence (under similar moral duress as is exercised here) they argued with me because I explained the reason and they wanted to refuse me on the grounds that I did not have a television set or watch television. It was when I decided to give up paying the fee that TV Licensing started to hassle me. And what happens when monochrome licences are phased out too? There are now fewer than 10,000 left.

[teamsaint]

I really don't understand why anybody should feel under any moral duress to pay towards radio listening, other than if the law says that they should.

There are so many areas of public finance where we have to pay for things that we don't use ( education for example) or don't directly pay ( or perhaps "under " pay) for services that we do use , that any kind of moral argument is largely irrelevant, not least because, in public finance terms, the cost of BBC radio is really very small, and already accounted for by the compulsory payments made by licence payers.

According to a news report yesterday, there are more higher rate tax payers in their 70's than in their 30's, (!!) yet we retain the licence exemption for over 75's. There isn't a moral argument for the exemption, and as Bryn pointed out, any household with an over 75 year old qualifies.

Edit: and it occurs to me that one information medium freely available to all, regardless of ability ( or willingness) to pay, is probably in all of our interests.

[Beef Oven!]

Wasn't it a government decision? The radio licence fee was abolished in 1971(presumably - as with the dog licence - because it would cost more than the revenue), but the BBC weren't forced to take over the administration of the licence fee until Thatcher's controversial Broadcasting Act 1990 .

Radio listeners now are obviously offered a lot more than they were in 1946 (when the Third joined the Light and the Home Service) but the cost of the fee, at £1, would now be worth about £39.

I might try to persuade my local Post Office to sell me a monochrome licence, but last time when I bought a licence (under similar moral duress as is exercised here) they argued with me because I explained the reason and they wanted to refuse me on the grounds that I did not have a television set or watch television. It was when I decided to give up paying the fee that TV Licensing started to hassle me. And what happens when monochrome licences are phased out too? There are now fewer than 10,000 left.

I don’t even remember a radio licence!

I don’t think I’m succumbing to the moral duress - the arguments thus far have been unconvincing.

[ahinton]

.

... if I get something for nothing by 'liberating' a bar of chocolate costing 50p from Tescos, it is no argument in my defence that Tescos is well funded and that my getting something for nothing won't signify.

If we benefit from radio 3, I think it appropriate that we should be concerned with its funding.

But radio only cannot be paid for, even by those concerned about its funding, unless invoices are issued to radio only customers on the basis that the law requires them to be settled in full by or on behalf of those customers.

[ahinton]

I agree with the principle as far as tax goes but the TV licence is not a tax. You are licensed to use receiving equipment so that you can view television programmes, just as people are licensed to keep a motor vehicle on the road. No car, no license needed.

Sure, but anyone owning a car who's licensed to use it on the public highway and does so is required to pay the appropriate rate of tax on the vehicle.

[Beef Oven!]

Sure, but anyone owning a car who's licensed to use it on the public highway and does so is required to pay the appropriate rate of tax on the vehicle.

I think Serial_Apologist buys a tax disc in relation to his bicycle, for moral reasons. Good on him, I say.

[ahinton]

I think Serial_Apologist buys a tax disc in relation to his bicycle, for moral reasons. Good on him, I say.

In so doing, I wonder what S_A quotes as it registration number? (anyway, vehicle tax discs are now obsolete)...

[Lat-Literal]

It would be wrong to imply that everyone has a choice between paying over £140 pounds or nothing at all.

Genuine radio only listeners have the option to pay for a black and white licence at just £49 if they wish to make some sort of payment.

[BBMmk2]

I don't know what I would be like, if I didn't have tv/radio. Just of late, the past few weeks, Radio 3 is increasingly becoming more of an option, rather than tv. The last good bit of tv I watched was the fantastic Galapagos mission. brilliant, imo.

[Serial_Apologist]

I think Serial_Apologist buys a tax disc in relation to his bicycle, for moral reasons. Good on him, I say.

[french frank]

Genuine radio only listeners have the option to pay for a black and white licence at just £49 if they wish to make some sort of payment.

They have the "option" to buy a colour TV licence too! This is the subtle 'moral duress' that is exerted when people suggest that some people are getting 'something for nothing', and therefore that they should pay. Free radio-only is a universal benefit and people also have the option not to have television.

There's give and take in the financing of public services. You win some, you lose some. People subsidise my radio listening - I've subsidised their children's education.