More Celebs Joining BBC License Fee Boycott

[Teddy Bear]

This is exciting, I'm starting to imagine a day in the not too distant future when I don't have to think about making new entries on to this site. In the words of Arlo Guthries 'Alices Restaurant', it's going from an 'organisation to a movement' to join those who are declaring publicly they will not be paying their license fee.

Celebrities join BBC backlash after Brand and Ross scandal as more and more ask 'why SHOULD we pay licence fee'?

By Paul Revoir
Last updated at 12:54 AM on 18th November 2008

Comments (47) Add to My Stories
A growing number of public figures are joining a backlash against the BBC licence fee.
Opposition to the annual levy has been stoked in recent weeks by the Jonathan Ross/Russell Brand scandal.
But there had already been widespread discontent over the threatening behaviour of licence-fee collectors and the perceived bias of the BBC.
Outrage: Opposition to the BBC licence fee has grown since the Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand radio stunt where they telephoned Andrew Sachs and made lewd remarks about his granddaughter

An array of influential names are now threatening to withhold their fee out of principal.
They include TV presenter Robin Page and journalist Charles Moore, who says he won't pay if Ross stays on the BBC payroll following his and Brand's infamous taunting of Andrew Sachs.
Rebel: Edmonds and partner Liz Davis

The ranks of licence fee 'refuseniks' already include TV presenter Noel Edmonds, and there are claims that the BBC is running scared of prosecuting those who refuse to pay the £139.50 annual levy on the grounds it is unjustified.
It has been alleged that the corporation fears creating a group of licence fee 'martyrs' if it enters into high-profile prosecutions of well-known faces.
Many ordinary members of the public say they have been the victim of 'bullyboy' tactics.
Some claim to have received more than 80 warning letters threatening court action and a possible £1,000 fine even when they do not own a TV or have paid.
Edmonds has said he has stopped paying his licence fee because of its 'threatening' advertising campaigns.
He has effectively challenged them to prosecute him after he decided to take a stand against the negative and aggressive tactics of collection.
So far he claims no action has been taken against him by TV Licensing (TVL), the organisation which manages the payments on behalf of the BBC.
Campaign: Russian dissident Vladimir Bukovsky
Last night he said: 'My point is quite simple. It is not about the value of the licence fee.

'What I object to is the BBC's lack of positivity in celebrating what they do.
'They have slipped into the zone where they have become quite sinister about the way they collect the licence fee.'
Outspoken radio host James Whale renewed his attack on the licence fee saying he 'vehemently' opposed the 'illegal tax'.
While he said he had now bought a licence fee he would not deny that in the past he had not paid it out of principal.
He also condemned the aggressive antics of the licence fee collectors, claiming his wife had been left 'upset' by the way they had behaved.
Former Russian dissident Vladimir Bukovsky decided not to renew his licence in 2002 claiming it had failed to provide fair coverage of major world issues.
Mr Bukovsky, 65, from Cambridge, said he still does not have a licence and has not been prosecuted yet.
Speaking at the weekend Mr Bukovsky said that 2,000 people who had joined his non-payment campaign had also not had any legal action against them.
He said: 'It seems the BBC didn't want to walk into a trap and make me a martyr.'
Another opponent of the fee who has not been paying it since 2002 is John Kelly, 70, of Exmouth, Devon, who is a member of the UK Independence Party.

He ripped his up in protest at what he perceived as the BBC's pro-EU bias.

Spectator columnist Charles Moore says he will not renew his licence fee of the BBC continues to employ disgraced chat show host Jonathan Ross
The Communications Act 2003 makes it an offence to install or use a 'television receiver' to get any service without a valid licence fee.
Anyone caught watching or recording TV programmes without a valid licence risks prosecution in a magistrates court and a fine of up to £1,000.
TVL claims its fleet of vans is capable of detecting the use of TV receiving equipment within 20 seconds.
If evaders refuse to pay the fine, they can be jailed. The average sentence is one week.
TVL prosecuted 151,137 people last year. It has a comprehensive database of almost 30million addresses.
One recent TVL advert - with a soundtrack of helicopter blades, barking dogs, a siren and a knock at the door - warned: 'Your town, your street, your home... it is all in our database.'
A spokesman for TVL said: 'TVL can and does prosecute people who refuse to pay the licence fee, whatever their reasons for doing so.'
Many people have contacted Mail Online to back the campaigning of those refusing to pay the licence fee.
One said they would not be paying next year if Jonathan Ross is still on the payroll.
Another said they had stopped paying for it two years ago but made a point of not watching BBC shows.
Kick in the teeth to my country and my values Charles Moore is a former editor of the Daily Telegraph, a columnist for The Spectator magazine and Margaret Thatcher's official biographer. He says:
'When my licence fee expires, I will not be renewing it. It is an unfair form of taxation.
'Although there is some force in the argument that it goes towards supporting public service broadcasting, when you see both the amount of money that is being paid to Jonathan Ross and the sort of unpleasant programmes that he makes, then you realise just how bogus that argument is.
'It is said that if you don't like it, you don't have to watch it.

'Fine, I don't like sport and I don't watch it, but I still think that it is worthwhile for the BBC to broadcast sporting events.
'However, I do not think that programmes featuring Ross and Russell Brand are worthwhile.

'It's not that I'm just not interested in their programmes, I'm insulted by them and I do not want to pay money for something I am insulted by.
'Such programmes do not live up to the BBC charter.

'In fact, they are debasing it, and the fact that the BBC refuses to acknowledge this simply proves that it is not telling the truth about it being a public service broadcaster.
'I have a television in the country, but I don't have one in my London flat.

'Yet despite this, I have been sent 30 abusive letters telling me that I am an evader and they are coming to get me.
'The £139.50 a year tax has always been indefensible in principle, and now it is intolerable in practice.

'Yes, I like large parts of Radio 4 and Radio 3. But why should this be used as blackmail by which I can only have them if I hand over much larger sums so that people like Ross can kick my country and my values in the teeth?
'My own modest contribution will be as follows.

'If Ross is still in post when my television licence next comes up for renewal, I shall keep my television, but refuse to pay the fee.

'I don't want to profit from it, so instead I shall hand over the £139.50 to Help the Aged, mainly because Ross and Brand were picking on a grandfather - namely Andrew Sachs.
'I certainly think most of the hurtful mockery that goes on is directed at older people, not only with Andrew Sachs, but the joke about the Queen on Mock The Week for example, and the denigration of old people on Little Britain.
'There's a lot of bullying and contempt shown for the old on these programmes - they think it's funny but it isn't.
'I'm not leading a campaign but I'm happy that other people are doing the same thing. I think it is a good thing to do.'
Fed up with its political correctness Robin Page is the former presenter of BBC series One Man And His Dog and chairman of the Countryside Restoration Trust. He says:
I'm fed up with all of the rubbish on the BBC, I'm fed up with the political correctness on the BBC, and I'm fed up with the politically-correct people running the BBC.
I don't see why I should be expected to pay when the BBC refuses to represent normal people and refuses to provide a broad variety of programming.
There is a profound bias against the countryside at the BBC, and even the programmes that are meant to represent the countryside such as Countryfile and SpringWatch are so politically correct that I just can't watch them.
It's not just me who thinks this, either.

There is a wide range of outrage out there, but at the moment it seems that we are being completely ignored.
I've been arrested for speaking my mind, and to be honest, I've felt quite vulnerable about not paying the licence fee in the past.

But like they say, there's strength in numbers, and if more people decide not to pay the fee, then what are they going to do?

I think it's a valid thing to refuse to pay it. If enough of us stop paying, then the Government will be forced to take action.

[steevo]

This day you can imagine

Well it is certainly true if refusal becomes widespread enough, what can they do?

Not a thing.

[Teddy Bear]

The more popular and 'in' this boycott becomes, the more attractive it might look to the Conservatives, in preparation for the next election, to declare abolishing the license fee altogether. With purses getting ever more tighter, an immediate saving of £139.50 to most households, especially in light of what they are receiving for this tax, could attract a lot of votes.

Let's hope!

[steevo]

Hmm, interesting

[Teddy Bear]

Not surprisingly, Charles Moore was found guilty for watching TV without a licence, which he did in protest at Sachsgate, and was fined just over £800. He can still appeal, and I hope he will, if only to further the anti-BBC publicity he generates.

Newspaper editor fined £807 over 'Sachsgate' TV licence revolt but may fight on to appeal

By David Wilkes
Last updated at 7:26 PM on 10th May 2010

It was the BBC scandal that sparked more than 50,000 complaints.

And today one man who refused to pay his television licence in protest at 'Sachsgate' robustly argued his right not to do so before a criminal court.

Journalist Charles Moore accused the BBC of a 'grotesque violation' of its own Charter by broadcasting the crude and obscene phone calls made by Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand to former Fawlty Towers star Andrew Sachs to millions of listeners on Brand's Radio 2 show.

Mr Moore, 53, eloquently argued his case about why he should not have to pay at Hastings Magistrates' Court, a pebble-dash building where tales of joblessness, debt, despair or mere forgetfulness are more often aired during non-payment of TV licence cases.

A former editor of the Daily Telegraph, a columnist for The Spectator magazine and Margaret Thatcher's official biographer, Mr Moore pleaded not guilty to a charge of using a colour television without a licence between August 1 and December 9 last year.

The cost of the licence was £142.50 per year at the time, but has since risen to £145.50.

Today Mr Moore ended up being fined £807. Afterwards he said he had expected to be found guilty but it had been 'well worth it for the ability to make the protest'.

He has 21 says to decide whether to appeal.

Brand resigned after 'Sachsgate' but Ross - described in court by Mr Moore as 'at £6million per year the highest paid person in the history of the BBC' - did not lose his contract.

At the time, in October 2008, Mr Moore wrote in the Daily Telegraph that he would keep and watch his television but not renew his licence until Ross's contract was ended.

Today Mr Moore told the court: 'My argument was and is that by broadcasting Ross, and keeping him in post, the BBC is in breach of its Charter.

'The BBC Charter includes what it calls the Public Purposes. These Public Purposes are described in the Charter as the "main object" of the BBC.

'They include the duty of the BBC to take the lead in "sustaining citizenship and civil society" and "stimulating creativity and cultural excellence".

'The Ross/Brand broadcast was a grotesque violation of these purposes by the BBC, and its attempt to repair the damage afterwards was belated and inadequate.

'The BBC Trust's report on the subject itself described the programme as "grossly offensive" and "an abuse of the privilege granted to the BBC", and therefore a breach of the Charter.

Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand made crude phone calls to former Fawlty Towers star Andrew Sachs during Brand's Radio 2 show

'So an unlawful act was admitted. But after a short gap Ross returned to his post, paid at the same rate, and remains there to this day.'

Mr Moore argued that 'the citizen has a common law duty to prevent unlawful acts occurring' and hence because the broadcast was an 'unlawful act', he and other citizens are entitled to a proportionate reduction in their contributions to the BBC.

By refusing to renew his licence, he was protesting at the BBC's 'unlawful abuse' of its Public Purposes and 'of the licence payers' money which it paid, in unprecedently enormous sums,' to Ross.

He also claimed the charge against him breached Article 9 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which states that 'everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion', referring to a tax case from Sweden in support of his argument that the magistrates should review the mandatory payments of monies to the BBC.

Mr Moore said: 'It is against my conscience that, in order to be permitted to own and watch a television, I am forced to pay a tax raised by and paid directly to a broadcasting corporation which acts on ideological principles which I do not share and in ways which are offensive to my own beliefs.

'The imposition of this tax is doubly unjust if, as in this case, programmes for which the tax pays are themselves unlawful.'

For these reasons he did not renew his licence when it came up for renewal in July last year and informed the TV licensing authorities of his intentions 'so there was no question of evasion or concealment'.

Since inquiries were first made against Mr Moore by TV Licensing, it has been announced that Ross will be leaving the BBC.

'I therefore intend to renew my licence fee as soon as he has left the Corporation,' Mr Moore said.

'I should also make it clear that I have not tried to profit from my refusal to pay the fee over the past ten months,' he added.

'I immediately paid the equivalent of the annual fee to the charity Help the Aged, in sympathy with Mr Sachs.'

Mr Moore added: 'In circumstances such as this, where the BBC has accepted unlawful conduct, there can be no authority for an individual to be coerced by the State to contribute to an ideological unlawful act of which he does not approve.

'The courts should surely side with the individual citizen and hold the BBC to account.'

But prosecutor Alexandra Ward said the offence of using a TV without a licence is an absolute offence of strict liability and there is no defence in law once the case is proved, which it had been as Mr Moore accepted that he had used a colour television without a licence.

'Therefore the reasons why someone may have chosen not pay for their licence are irrelevant for this court's consideration,' she said. 'Mr Moore's defence is simply not relevant.'

Miss Ward said it was 'not for this court' to decide if the BBC had broken its charter, pointing out there is a complaints procedure via the BBC directly or Ofcom or the Office of Fair Trading.

If Mr Moore wished to pursue his arguments, he may be able to do this by putting together a judicial review, she added.

'But he is not entitled to manufacture a defence for this criminal offence with which he has been charged,' Miss Ward said.

The magistrates deliberated for 15 minutes before finding Mr Moore guilty.

Chairman of the magistrates bench Paul Hollingsworth said: 'You did use a television set without a licence. We therefore find you guilty.'

Asked what his means are, Mr Moore, who lives in a former rectory in Etchingham, East Sussex, replied: 'Above the average wage. I won't be claiming any kind of benefit.'

He was fined £262 and ordered to pay £530 proesecution costs, plus a £15 victim surcharge, which he said he could pay right away.

The prosecution costs were reduced from £560 after Mr Moore objected to the prosecution asking for £60 for the investigation by TV Licensing during which they had to visit his home twice.

Mr Moore said he had invited TV Licensing to make an appointment to visit but they would not and came without any notice 'therefore making work for themselves - so I think it's unjust I have to pay.'

Outside court, a TV Licensing spokesman said: 'We are satisfied with the outcome of this case.

'Irrespective of personal opinion, the law is clear: you need a licence to watch or record programmes at the same time as they are shown on TV.

'TV Licensing would always prefer people to buy a licence if they need one rather than face prosecution, but if people attempt to evade the fee, for whatever reason, we will always investigate and take appropriate action.'

A BBC spokesman said: 'We are not commenting on this.'