'Dodging TV Licence Will Not be a Crime'

[Teddy Bear]

If this goes through it could be the beginning of the end for the BBC.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

The BBC have responded with:
A BBC spokesman said: “Legislation is a matter for the Government, however changing the law could lead to higher evasion. Just a 1 per cent increase in evasion would lead to the loss of around £35million, the equivalent of around 10 BBC Local Radio stations.”

The local media will be delighted.

Win Win!

'Dodging TV licence will not be a crime'
Non-payment of the annual £145.50 charge would be a matter for the civil courts rather than a criminal offence, under plans backed by ministers

By Tim Ross

It will no longer be a criminal offence to refuse to pay the TV licence fee, under radical plans being backed by ministers.

Currently, anyone failing to pay the licence fee who watches live television at home faces a fine of up to £1,000 and a criminal record. Those who refuse to pay any fines they are given by a Magistrates Court ultimately face jail.

More than 100 backbench MPs from all the major political parties are now supporting a change in the law which would make non-payment of the annual £145.50 charge a matter for the civil courts, rather than a criminal offence.

This would mean nobody who fails to pay could be given a criminal record, although penalties, including potential fines, would still apply.
The Telegraph can disclose that Chris Grayling, the Justice Secretary, and Maria Miller, the Culture and Media Secretary, both now support the idea.

Teams of Whitehall officials will begin working on detailed proposals for how to bring about a change in the law.

However, the reform will be fiercely resisted by BBC executives, who argue that it will increase licence fee “evasion” and lead to a significant fall in the funding available for the broadcaster.

According to the most recent figures, about 70 people a year are jailed for TV licence fee offences. But the scale of prosecutions for licence fee evasion is far higher and now accounts for one in nine of all Magistrates Court cases.

More than 180,000 people – almost 3,500 a week – appeared before the Magistrates Courts in 2012, accused of watching television without a valid licence in, with 155,000 being convicted and fined.

The figure has been rising in recent years as TV Licensing, which is responsible for catching “evaders”, has adopted a more determined and effective approach.
Ministers are now concerned at the huge burden these cases place on the criminal courts.

Mr Grayling, the Justice Secretary, told The Daily Telegraph: “The Culture Secretary and I both agree that this is a really interesting idea - particularly given the pressure on our courts system. Our departments will be doing some serious work on the proposal.”

The reform could become law within months as a growing number of backbench MPs supports an amendment to the coalition’s Deregulation Bill, which is currently passing through Parliament.

The amendment would delete references in the 2003 Communications Act to licence fee evaders being “guilty of an offence” and state instead that individuals who refuse to pay the charge will be “liable to a civil penalty”. The level of any fine would be determined by the government of the day, under the plan.

The amendment has been backed by 101 MPs from all the major parties, including the former Liberal Democrat leader, Sir Menzies Campbell, David Davis, the former Tory shadow home secretary, and Frank Dobson, Labour’s former Health Secretary.

Andrew Bridgen, the Consevartive MP for North West Leicestershire, who tabled the amendment, said the wide support his proposal had received showed that the government should support it.

“For those in real hardship who cannot pay the television licence fee, the current legislation is effectively criminalising them for being poor, which cannot be right,” he said.

“I and many colleagues feel that the non payment of the TV licence being a criminal offence is disproportionate.
“The current funding arrangement for the BBC is a Poll Tax and is one of the most regressive forms of taxation. Most of those sent to prison as a result of non payment are the elderly and women and this serves no purpose and the huge associated costs are borne by the taxpayer.”

Government sources said ministers were considering whether it would be possible formally to support Mr Bridgen’s amendment when it comes to a Commons vote.
However, a source at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport said Mrs Miller would prefer to wait until the BBC’s Charter, which determines its funding, is renewed in 2017 before changing the way the corporation is funded.

The source said: “The Culture Secretary supports the idea in principle but the timing of this issue is vital. Maria will put decriminalisation of the licence fee on the table during Charter Review discussions, but to do it beforehand would waste an opportunity.”

A BBC spokesman said: “Legislation is a matter for the Government, however changing the law could lead to higher evasion. Just a 1 per cent increase in evasion would lead to the loss of around £35million, the equivalent of around 10 BBC Local Radio stations.”

[Teddy Bear]

Apparently
A 12-strong panel established by James Purnell, the corporation’s director of strategy and digital, have proposed replacing the licence fee with a subscription scheme
and is said to have made the recommendation to the BBC’s executive board. However, on Saturday night the BBC denied the claim.

The BBC often claims that according to their polls the majority of people would be happy to pay more for their services. If they really believed that why wouldn't they opt for a subscription scheme, and let those who want it, pay for it. A poll appearing on the Telegraph website with the article below shows so far that 77% of readers would prefer a subscription scheme over a licence fee.

Yes 77.28% (592 votes)
No 17.89% (137 votes)
Makes no difference to me 4.83% (37 votes)
Total Votes: 766

The BBC claim "The report recommends that the BBC pursue an inflationary licence fee increase with greater commercial revenue," a spokesman said. "No subscription model is recommended."
So somebody's lying, and I know who my money is on.

The BBC had told The Sunday Times: “This piece of work looked at how we would continue the BBC’s mission to inform, educate and entertain as we approach our centenary. “We are always keen to explore ways to serve licence fee payers better, and will continue to innovate.”

'Innovate' by just getting more money to provide the crap service they have been for years whilst vastly over-rewarding their pompous and arrogant egos and failing to abide by their charter.

If they want to really 'explore ways to serve licence fee payers better', make licence fee payers history, and let only those who want to pay for the BBC do so.
The British Bullshit Corporation.

BBC report 'proposes scrapping licence fee'
A BBC report being considered by the corporation's executive board is said to have proposed replacing the licence fee with a subscription scheme

By Edward Malnick

A 12-strong panel established by James Purnell, the corporation’s director of strategy and digital, is said to have made the recommendation to the BBC’s executive board. However, on Saturday night the BBC denied the claim.
The panel, which was formed last year to provide an outside assessment of the BBC’s future, said the licence fee should be retained until 2020, according to the Sunday Times.

The disclosure came after the Telegraph revealed that ministers have backed radical plans to decriminalise refusals to pay the fee.
David Elstein, a former Sky and ITV television executive, who was a member of the review panel, said: “It is socially unjust that so many are fined and indeed go to prison for not paying the licence fee.

“And it makes more sense too for the BBC to move to subscription from 2020, which is about the date when set-boxes go, and standard definition is phased out to high definition.”

The board which has been handed the report is led by Lord Hall, the BBC's director general.
However, on Saturday night the corporation denied that the review proposed replacing the licence fee with a subscription scheme.
"The report recommends that the BBC pursue an inflationary licence fee increase with greater commercial revenue," a spokesman said. "No subscription model is recommended."

The BBC had told The Sunday Times: “This piece of work looked at how we would continue the BBC’s mission to inform, educate and entertain as we approach our centenary.
“We are always keen to explore ways to serve licence fee payers better, and will continue to innovate.”
News of the report emerged a day after the Telegraph disclosed that Chris Grayling, the Justice Secretary, and Maria Miller, the Culture and Media Secretary now support a move to decriminalise non-payment of the licence fee.

Currently, anyone failing to pay the fee who watches live television at home faces a fine of up to £1,000 and a criminal record.
Those who refuse to pay any fines they are given by a magistrates court ultimately face jail.
More than 100 backbench MPs from all the major political parties are now supporting a change in the law which would make non-payment of the annual £145.50 charge a matter for the civil courts, rather than a criminal offence.

[Teddy Bear]

It's worth reading the following article for several reasons. One really gets a glimpse of the outright hypocrisy and failed logic when the outcome of a particular issue affects themselves.

Here's James Purnell, BBC's director of strategy and digital trying to convince everybody why dodging the licence fee should remain a criminal offence. He starts by saying 'the move would be a “huge risk” and lead to a rise in the number of people who fail to pay the fee. “Say the rate of evasion was to double from the five per cent it is now – that would be £200 million, or the equivalent of all of BBC Four, CBeebies and CBBC,” Mr Purnell claimed.
“The choice would be either we take those services off or the Government would have to have a higher licence fee.

One has to compare this to how the BBC cover any motion by the government to increase control over who gets unemployment benefit, as an example. Immediately the BBC goes onto full attack mode to show how much they care about the unemployed, and why they should be continued to be financed by taxes, regardless of whether they have the will to work or not. The BBC wants to be seen as the champion of the poor, until it might affect themselves. Who then are the majority of people who want to avoid paying the licence fee - the poor or the rich?

The BBC are quite content for anybody and everybody who doesn't pay them their blood money to get a criminal record. It will hardly make it easier for these 'criminals' to get jobs in the future. As for the threat of losing BBC4 and CBeebies.....may it be the beginning of many others.

Now look at his logic:
The BBC is also arguing that decriminalisation would penalise the poor.

Mr Purnell said: “Potentially, it would be worse for people who do find it hard to pay. Either you have a low penalty – in which case the evasion rates would go up and everyone would have to pay a higher licence fee – or a penalty which is higher and more difficult to pay.
“Penalties under the civil system are higher on average than the ones for the licence fee. Under the current system, the court has the ability to match the fine to the income of the household.

"As I understand it, under a civil system they couldn’t do that.”

Since civil courts have never been involved in fixing penalties for licence fee evasion, he has no basis to make the comparison. Just the fact that maintaining the current system where a poor person receives a criminal record as well as a fine or imprisonment can possibly be seen as easier than just getting a fine shows just how ridiculously blinkard and stupid this man and his peers really are. In their eagerness to keep their grubby little hands on public money, makes it all the more imperative that they should be cast adrift to have to earn their money in the real world or join the ranks of the unemployed.

BBC: decriminalising licence fee evasion could spell the end of kids' TV
BBC chief James Purnell says making licence fee evasion a civil offence could force the closure of CBBC and CBeebies

By Anita Singh

Decriminalising licence fee evasion could lead to the closure of BBC children’s channels and a higher fee for every household, the corporation has warned.
Government ministers want to make non-payment of the £145.50 charge a civil offence, thereby freeing up valuable court time.
However, James Purnell, the BBC’s director of strategy and digital - and Labour’s former culture secretary - said the move would be a “huge risk” and lead to a rise in the number of people who fail to pay the fee.

“Say the rate of evasion was to double from the five per cent it is now – that would be £200 million, or the equivalent of all of BBC Four, CBeebies and CBBC,” Mr Purnell claimed.
“The choice would be either we take those services off or the Government would have to have a higher licence fee.

“At the moment we have one of the lowest evasion rates in Europe. It would be a huge risk to do it now and it would be better to look at it through Charter Review.”
The BBC is also arguing that decriminalisation would penalise the poor.

Mr Purnell said: “Potentially, it would be worse for people who do find it hard to pay. Either you have a low penalty – in which case the evasion rates would go up and everyone would have to pay a higher licence fee – or a penalty which is higher and more difficult to pay.
“Penalties under the civil system are higher on average than the ones for the licence fee. Under the current system, the court has the ability to match the fine to the income of the household.

"As I understand it, under a civil system they couldn’t do that.”
More than 100 backbench MPs from all the major political parties support decriminalisation, and the proposal has the backing of Chris Grayling, the Justice Secretary, and Maria Miller, the Culture and Media Secretary.

The most recent figures, which cover 2012, show that 3,500 licence fee evaders appeared before the courts accused of watching television without a valid licence. Around 70 people are jailed each year for television licence offences.
Mr Purnell said that the cases were not time consuming for the courts. “The volume [of cases] is quite high, the time is much lower. These cases are done in bulk and the average time for one is three minutes.”

A BBC review ordered by Mr Purnell reportedly proposed scrapping the licence fee altogether in favour of a subscription service.
However, speaking at the launch of the corporation's revamped iPlayer service, he said the cost of moving to a subscription model would be £500 million. "You would need to visit people's homes, you would need to put in place conditional access systems and give people subscription cards.
"The cost of running such a subscription system would be greater than running the current licence fee system. So on a technical and financial basis it doesn't look like it would be more attractive."

[Teddy Bear]

The BBC are clearly scared about losing their leverage to force people to pay the licence fee. They are using their resources to try and force MP's to back down from this proposal. I hope it merely enforces the need to end the travesty that is the BBC and their insidious evil influence on society. There are no doubt corrupt MP's who can and will be bought by the BBC. One can say that this issue will be a defining moment in the future of this country. We will soon know if it is completely beyond repair.

BBC accused of trying to bully MPs over plans to decriminalise non-payment of the licence fee
The BBC has been accused of trying to bully MPs to drop their support for a change in the law to decriminalise non-payment of the licence fee.

Christopher Hope

The BBC has been accused of trying to bully MPs to drop their support for a change in the law to decriminalise the non-payment of the licence fee.

More than 140 MPs from all parties are backing a change in the law which would mean that people who do not pay the TV licence fee will no longer be prosecuted in a criminal court.

The change would mean that failure to pay the annual £145.50 fee would become a civil matter, meaning those who fail to comply will not be lumbered with a criminal record.

More than 180,000 people are currently prosecuted each year and face a potential prison sentence for not paying the licence fee.
The change will be debated by an MPs’ committee in the House of Commons this Thursday.

In a briefing document circulated among MPs, the BBC proposed that a working group is established with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, and Ministry of Justice to consider licence fee penalties ahead of the renewal of the BBC’s Charter in 2016.

The BBC also said that decriminalisation could see the end of TV licence detection vans, warning that “decriminalisation would make it harder to justify the use of detection equipment rarely used for offences attracting civil penalties”.

In a letter to MPs, Andrew Scadding, the corporation’s head of corporate affairs, said: “We think that if such a measure is put though in isolation, it would damage BBC content and services without any demonstrable benefit to those who struggle to pay, since it is not clear from the amendment how a civil penalty would work.

“In the absence of a criminal penalty for evasion, the fixed civil fine would need to be sufficiently high to deter evasion. In practice this could increase costs for households who are least able to pay. Alternatively if the fixed penalty was set at a low level evasion is likely to increase substantially.”
MPs reacted angrily. Andrew Bridgen MP, who has proposed the amendment, urged other MPs “to stand firm against these strong arm tactics”.

He said: “The BBC are rattled about the thought of not being able to hide behind criminalisation to protect their income stream.

“They are now deploying all of their resources at their disposal from their £3.6billion taxpayer funded-budget to influence the will of Parliament.”
James Duddridge MP, who received a copy of the letter, said: “It is outrageous that licence fee payers money is being used to bully MPs into giving the BBC treatment.
“The BBC needs to get itself back into the real world if it wants to survive.”

A BBC spokesman said: “Like all broadcasters, we regularly speak to MPs of all parties about parliamentary business that affects the industry.
“It would be strange if the BBC were not able to discuss issues that have a direct impact on what it can offer audiences.
“We are looking forward to meeting Mr Bridgen and any other MPs to discuss the issue.”

[thehighlandrebel]

Absurd - a so called civilised country in which it's citizens can be fined, jailed and given a criminal record solely for owning a television set.
Maybe they'll no be so smug now about attacking a government constantly with smears and innuendo when that same government has the power and the will to derail their gravy train.

[Teddy Bear]

Hi THR Good to see you back. I trust your trip went well.
I noticed 2 articles yesterday, one by Alex Massie at the Spectator, and the other by Tom Chivers at the Telegraph, and a quick glimpse shows another today by Brendan O'Neill at the Telegraph, all basically saying the same thing - 'the BBC is not biased to the left or right, and that's why both sides have it in for them. They're really doing a good job'.
It could be a coincidence, but I don't think so. Clearly the BBC are worried about their future, and getting any of their allies to tell the world how good they are.
I'm certainly going to remember just who these 'journalists' who don't find the BBC biased are for future reference. They're clearly as 'ethical' as the BBC scum.

[Teddy Bear]

Excellent article by Daniel Hannan looking ahead.
I especially like the end paragraph, and hoping it comes to pass. It's all we've worked for here:
Once the BBC becomes a private institution, this won’t matter any more. No one will think its values are supposed to be neutral. It will simply be one more news outlet, like the Guardian or the Huffington Post, entitled to its point of view. For what it’s worth, the fact of no longer being state-funded will probably make the Beeb a little bit less Leftist, but that’s neither here nor there. What counts here is that Britain will no longer have what in any other country would be called a state broadcaster.

To my mind, first it is the false cloak of the charter that makes the BBC so dangerous to our society as far as their bias is concerned. Removing that, they can be as biased as they want, but the blinders will be removed from the public.
As far as the poor quality and wasted £millions, once they’re in the real world they will have to address that properly or find themselves out of business.

One only has to see the Guardian circulation figures to know with what regard they are held in this country. if the BBC want to continue emulating them then they must suffer the same fate.

The BBC will, in effect, be privatised – with vast consequences

By Daniel Hannan



Budgets come and go, but something more far-reaching will take place in the House of Commons today; something that might change our political discourse significantly, benignly and permanently.

The Government has indicated that it will back a Bill, brought in by the backbench MP, Andrew Bridgen, to decriminalise non-payment of the Television Licence Fee. Instead of being dragged through the courts, defaulters will simply have their access to the BBC switched off – in the same way that Sky withdraws its services from those who don’t pay their subscriptions.

The practical case for the measure is unarguable. The BBC’s privileged legal position is silting up our criminal justice system. A ridiculous 180,000 people face prosecution every year over non-payment. Under the new regime, they will instead be in the position people who don’t cough up for their gas or electricity bills. A great deal of time and money will be saved.

But the real significance of the proposal is that it will, in practice, remove the BBC’s monopoly. If the penalty for non-payment of the licence fee is withdrawal of the service, rather than prosecution, then that fee ceases to be a tax and becomes a subscription. Refusal to pay is no longer a criminal act, but an exercise of consumer choice. The BBC will become, in practice, a pay-on-demand service like its rivals.

Many within the Corporation have known for some time that technology would bring them to this pass. Several have been arguing that the Beeb needs to prepare for a post-monopolistic future. It will, after all, start with huge advantages. We are creatures of habit, and most of us will carry on paying for a familiar service. Even now, three decades after privatisation, British Telecom continues to enjoy a large market share, and the BBC is a far better-known global brand than BT ever was – with the additional advantage of profitable overseas sales. In practical terms, I don’t think we’ll see much difference, except that, as with all formerly nationalised industries, the BBC will become more cost-efficient.

The change will be felt, however, in our political culture. Because the BBC is state-run, and obliged by its charter to be neutral, viewers tend to treat it as definitive. In reality, of course, no broadcaster can be objective, for the simple reason that no two people agree on what objectivity means. Should the BBC try to balance the anti-Mugabe bias in its coverage, or ensure that North Korea gets no less favourable a press than South Korea, or be neutral on whether the abolition of slavery was a good idea? The more you think about it, the more you realise that impartiality is impossible, and that the most we can hope for is accuracy.

The BBC, as Andrew Marr put it, is not so much partisan as culturally biased. There was a neat demonstration on Twitter the other day. How long, I asked playfully, before the Corporation started calling Vladimir Putin, a former KGB man who rails against Ukrainian nationalism, “Right-wing”? A BBC radio producer Tweeted back crossly that it was a perfectly fair way to describe him since he was conservative. Hmm: what he wants to conserve is the old order of the USSR, but never mind: in Beebspeak, “Right-wing” simply means “baddie”.

In fairness, the BBC has made real efforts to make its employees aware of their bias and, in the field of news and current affairs, to correct it. What it hasn’t corrected is the bias in – well, in everything else: drama, comedy, consumer affairs. Try to imagine an episode of Eastenders turning on a market trader being ruined by an EU directive rather than on, say, a gay character overcoming prejudice. You can’t, can you?
Once the BBC becomes a private institution, this won’t matter any more. No one will think its values are supposed to be neutral. It will simply be one more news outlet, like the Guardian or the Huffington Post, entitled to its point of view. For what it’s worth, the fact of no longer being state-funded will probably make the Beeb a little bit less Leftist, but that’s neither here nor there. What counts here is that Britain will no longer have what in any other country would be called a state broadcaster.

It won’t be political objections that do for the BBC monopoly, but technological progress. And, of course, you can’t argue with progress.

[steevo]

If this comes about, there's a bigger issue. What becomes of Biased BBC and a Teddy Bear hug?

[Teddy Bear]

I'll always be happy to give you a hug matey, You've been with me since the beginning of the site
I would certainly leave the site as a historical archive. Maybe then we need to focus on the UN?

[Teddy Bear]

Former BBC boss, Michael Grade, has voiced the opinion that he believes the licence fee is too high and should be decriminalised, though he still thinks it should be retained. Lord Grade says non-payment could lead to boring programming choices
Like their existing £3.7 billion gives us exciting programming choices?

Although he called for licence fee evasion to be decriminalised, Lord Grade said the BBC must still be allowed to impose penalties on those who fail to pay.

He said: ‘You have to retain compulsion, otherwise you are opening the way for subscription. Subscription means pre-determined, well-known programming that will be guaranteed to drive subscription. You won’t get Happy Valley. You will be getting whatever they can pick up in the free-market in competition with Sky.’

Never watched it, but would that be Happy Valley with the right ethnic and racial balance?

He goes on to assert that if choosing now the public would not select an organisation like the BBC to exist today, 'the BBC is one of those institutions that relies for its existence not on political whim, not on political dogma, but on the affection and support of the British public.'

So why, if he believes that, does he still think that the licence fee is really necessary? If it's so beloved by the British public, they would surely be happy to subscribe to it.

There's something wrong with his logic!

Even the BBC's ex-boss says TV licence is too expensive: Former chairman Michael Grade also believes people who do not pay should not be criminalised

• The Government is reviewing whether to decriminalise the licence fee
• In 2012, 193,049 people were prosecuted for non-payment
• Lord Grade says non-payment could lead to boring programming choices

By Alasdair Glennie

The BBC licence fee is ‘too high’ and should be decriminalised, its former chairman has admitted.

Michael Grade, who left the corporation in 2006 to lead ITV, said he feels ‘squeamish’ about the fact viewers can be sent to prison for not paying the £145.50 charge.

And although he said he supports the principle of charging all households to watch live TV, he called for it to be reduced when it is comes up for renewal in 2016.

Lord Grade told a Royal Television Society debate: ‘I support the licence fee, but I think it is too high. That is a whole other debate, but nevertheless I fully support the licence fee for the next charter period.’

He added: ‘I think the big debate is going to be about the issues of criminality, compulsion and so on. I think we all feel a bit squeamish about the fact you can go to prison if you don’t pay the fine for not paying the licence fee.

‘If there is a way to decriminalise non-payment of the licence fee, that would be a good thing.’

Lord Grade first joined the BBC as controller of BBC1 in 1984, and became its director of pro-gramming in 1986. During his time in charge of TV output, he courted controversy by cancelling production of Doctor Who, which he branded ‘awful’ and ‘outdated’.

After a stint at Channel 4, he became BBC Chairman for two years and now sits as a Conservative peer in the House of Lords.

Although he called for licence fee evasion to be decriminalised, Lord Grade said the BBC must still be allowed to impose penalties on those who fail to pay.

He said: ‘You have to retain compulsion, otherwise you are opening the way for subscription. Subscription means pre-determined, well-known programming that will be guaranteed to drive subscription. You won’t get Happy Valley. You will be getting whatever they can pick up in the free-market in competition with Sky.’

Lord Grade added: ‘If you were inventing the United Kingdom today I think there are three institutions you wouldn’t create in a modern world. I don’t think you would create a hereditary monarchy, I don’t think you would create an unelected second chamber, and I don’t think you would create an organisation like the BBC and organise for it to have £4billion of public funding in an age of media plenty, expansion and so on.

‘But you have to believe that there is something in these three institutions that connects with the British public, and the BBC is one of those institutions that relies for its existence not on political whim, not on political dogma, but on the affection and support of the British public.

‘It faces an incredibly difficult few years coming up, not least with the whole argument about how it should be funded.’

The Government is currently conducting a year-long review into whether to decriminalise the licence fee. It followed a campaign by backbench MPs to scrap the threat of prison sentences for fee evaders.

In 2012, 193,049 people were prosecuted for not paying their TV licence, accounting for one in nine of all magistrates court cases.

Most of those found guilty were landed with penalties of up to £1,000 and a criminal record, and between 50 and 70 viewers are sent to jail each year after they fail to pay the court fines.

[Teddy Bear]

According to the preceding article we are told that former chairman of the BBC, Michael Grade, supported the idea of decriminalisation for non-payment of the licence fee.

Which makes me wonder when I read the following article today in the Telegraph.
'Something rotten in the State of Denmark'.

Michael Grade: keep criminalising licence fee dodgers until 2017
Former BBC chairman Lord Grade of Yarmouth backs plans to continue hitting TV licence fee evaders with criminal records until 2017, in defiance of MPs who want to end the threat of jail

By Tim Ross, Senior Political Correspondent

Michael Grade, the former chairman of the BBC, has been accused of trying to block plans to end the criminalisation of hundreds of thousands of people who do not pay the television licence fee each year.
Ministers have drawn up reforms that could result in an end to criminal sanctions for those who fail to pay the annual charge, which stands at £145.50 for a colour TV.

However, Lord Grade of Yarmouth has now backed an amendment to the Deregulation Bill which would delay any move to end the criminalisation of fee evaders until April 2017.

It the amendment passes, MPs will be forced to decide whether to accept the delay, or begin a potentially lengthy battle with the Lords which could see the Bill run out time before Parliament is dissolved for the election.

Licence fee evasion is an offence which can incur fines of up to £1,000 and a criminal record.

Each year, about 60 people are jailed for TV licence fee offences, which now account for one in nine of all Magistrates Court cases.
More than 180,000 people appeared before the Magistrates Courts in 2012 accused of watching television without a valid licence, with 155,000 being convicted and fined.

Last year, MPs voted in favour of reforms which would allow the government to make non-payment of the fee a matter for the civil courts, rather than a criminal offence.

Lord Grade, who is now a Conservative peer, is one of four members of the Lords who are backing the delay to implementing this plan.
He said the amendment was designed to ensure that any changes take effect at the same time as the BBC’s new licence fee and Royal Charter, which are due to be reviewed next year, come into force.

“The Lords is there to scrutinise legislation and amend it accordingly,” he said. “At the end of the day, the Commons will always prevail. I don’t know why everybody is getting so exercised about the normal process of scrutiny.”

The BBC has argued that removing the threat of criminal sanctions could see the rate of evasion double, potentially costing the BBC £200 million a year, and threatening the viability of its budget for children’s programmes.

However, Andrew Bridgen, the Conservative MP, who led the campaign to end the criminal sanctions, said: “Lord Grade is someone who has worked for the BBC and is now promoting a policy which even BBC executives privately admit is indefensible.

“This is an 11th hour attempt to frustrate the clear will of MPs and it will potentially see another 300,000 people given criminal records over the next two years.

[charmbrights]

To my mind the most interesting point is:-

The BBC has argued that removing the threat of criminal sanctions could see the rate of evasion double, potentially costing the BBC £200 million a year, and threatening the viability of its budget for children’s programmes.

Why specifically children's programmes? Why not "Eastenders" or "The Archers" (which are, I believe among the highest budgeted programmes on air)? Or even (perish the thought) stopping sending reporters and camera crews to stand outside buildings to give reports on topics which could equally well be given in a studio in front of a picture of the building concerned (e.g. Ministry of Defence, when reporting on actions half across the world)? Or (in my wildest dreams) stopping sending hordes of reporters to fly over every natural disaster in helicopters giving inaudible reports and wasting resources which could be better used helping the victims?

[Teddy Bear]

Frankly, it would be the best for society if the BBC did less programming for children. Judging by the website CBBC they mainly use it for early indoctrination of children in the BBC narrative. Unfortunately it's an empty threat because they know they won't give it up that option. Whatever the BBC would cut can only benefit society.

[Teddy Bear]

It just about sums up the state of the Tory party, and how far removed they are from their supposed 'conservative' roots. I'm not a politician, and I presume most members of this site aren't either, but we're all aware of the twisted and biased agenda of the BBC, in completely the other direction from conservatism. Yet we've seen supposed Tory politicians, like former head of BBC Trust Patten, and here Michael Grade, making sure the status quo remains.

The votes have been cast, and by 178 to 175 Grade has ensured the BBC keeps its criminal offence for non payment of the licence fee, despite his empty claim previously when he said he supported the idea of decriminalising it.

Now he states: He warned: 'I would love to see the licence fee decriminalised, but there are risks in doing that.

'There are risks the enemies of the BBC will see it as an opportunity to then move the compulsory element of the licence fee and move the BBC to a subscription model which would completely undermine the whole concept of public service broadcasting. I think there are dark forces at work.'

Yes I think there are dark forces at work, and he's part of it.
Worth having a look at his right eye in the picture, despite his trying to appear 'pleasant', there's something quiet evil there.

Failing to pay TV licence to remain criminal offence after peers reject Government plans to end draconian punishment

• Peers voted to keep the non-payment of the licence fee a criminal offence
• Tory peer Lord Grade warned 'dark forces' were at work to undermine BBC
• Former BBC chairman 'deeply concerned' about impact of move on funding
• Move is a blow to the Government who wanted to decriminalise offence

By Tom McTague, Deputy Political Editor for MailOnline

Failing to pay your TV licence will remain a criminal offence after peers voted down Government plans to water down the draconian punishment.

Peers voted by 178 to 175 to keep the non-payment of the licence fee a criminal offence, amid fears that thousands of families may refuse to pay if the system was overhauled.

Tory peer Lord Grade, a former chairman of the BBC, warned that 'dark forces' were at work – and said he was 'deeply concerned' about the uncertain effect of decriminalisation on the BBC's budget.

He warned: 'I would love to see the licence fee decriminalised, but there are risks in doing that.

'There are risks the enemies of the BBC will see it as an opportunity to then move the compulsory element of the licence fee and move the BBC to a subscription model which would completely undermine the whole concept of public service broadcasting. I think there are dark forces at work.'

Lord Grade said that if the licence fee was to be decriminalised, it needed to happen as part of longer-term funding plans for the corporation.

'We need to reflect on that in the context of Charter review not in a hurried order from Government just months away from Charter review,' he said.

'I see no reason at all to interfere with the BBC's financial planning and I see every reason to support this amendment in order to take a measured look and so that we don't interfere with the delicate financial arrangements for the BBC.'

Lady Benjamin said there was a 'potential impact on children's programming' as, if licence fee evasion increased to around 10%, it could result in a reduction in the BBC's revenue of £200 million.

'This could mean that children's original UK content could suffer,' she said.

Lord Fowler told peers: 'We know nothing about the future of the BBC, we know nothing about the future of the licence fee and we know nothing about the impact it will have on the finances of the BBC.

'This is all basic information that Parliament is entitled to have before making a change of this type.

'What we do know is that some of the most enthusiastic supporters of this change are opposed to the licence fee to any event.

'This is just a mini sideshow as far as they are concerned. They are opposed to the BBC as a public broadcaster and they advocate a subscription system.

'We know that that is the case.'

Lord Cashman said: 'I see it, quite frankly, as an attempt to constrain the BBC - it is a seat belt wrapped over the BBC. It will stop them being able to do any long-term planning.

'This great public service broadcaster will be inhibited from going into contracts of employment with their own staff, let alone staff that they need to bring if their long-term planning is to produce the programming that we demand.'

Baroness Howe of Idlicote, an independent crossbench peer who put forward the amendment, said: 'Under the current settlement the BBC has been able to plan its programme-making years in advance and budget accordingly.

'Any changes to the licence fee enforcement regime coming into effect before April 1 2017 would have a significant impact on the content the BBC provides.'

But Labour peer Baroness Corston, who wrote a landmark report on women in prisons, opposed the amendment and called for an early end to the criminalisation of non-payment of the licence fee.

She pointed to the effect on women who were sent to prison and lost their children because they were unable to afford to pay the licence fee.

'I know that 50 people a year are imprisoned because they don't pay a television licence,' she said.

'They are not imprisoned if they don't pay council tax and local authorities seem to survive.'

She added: 'We should not allow the continuing criminalisation of this penalty because of the malign effect it has on an admittedly small number of people.

'I do not think that the signal we are sending that the status quo is alright is acceptable.'

Viscount Colville of Culross, a BBC producer and an independent crossbench peer, said that going ahead with decriminalisation would 'blow a huge hole' in the corporation's budget.

Labour peer Lord Rooker, who chaired the committee that scrutinised the Bill before it was considered by Parliament, warned: 'The risk to the BBC of what might happen is so substantial because of the forces charged up against the BBC under other guises.'

For the Opposition, Lord Stevenson of Balmacara said that when the licence fee settlement was announced in 2010 the then culture secretary Jeremy Hunt said there would be 'no new financial requirements or fresh obligations of any kind' placed on the BBC before 2017.

He said: 'I call on the Government to honour that commitment, which it can do in part by accepting this amendment.'

A spokeswoman for the Prime Minister said David Cameron believed decriminalisation was an idea that 'warrants proper consideration, that's why we have put David Perry in place to conduct an independent review of that'.

She added: 'That's due to report back this June and the PM's view is that we should have the flexibility to act on the recommendations in that review.'

The amendment passed in the Lords 'does not give the flexibility to act sooner (than the licence fee settlement) and that is exactly the point I think during the parliamentary process we will continue to make and seek to preserve'

[Teddy Bear]

Be afraid, be very afraid.

BBC could get power to access private data
Independent consultation proposes giving BBC a raft new powers to crackdown on licence fee evasion

By Steven Swinford, Deputy Political Editor

The BBC could be given new powers to access to people’s private and public data as part of a raft of new measures to tackle licence-fee evasion.

An independent consultation suggested that the corporation could be given access to “new data sources” to help make collection of the charge more efficient.

A spokesman confirmed that as well as publicly available records, the databases could include information from banks, utility companies and other sources as long as it was considered “proportionate”.

The data would feed into the TV licensing Authority’s database of 31 million households, which it has been building for the last 26 years.
The review also suggests that new legislation could be introduced to prosecute anyone who fails to inform authorities that they don’t have a television.

Other measures include giving the BBC to the power charge people for periods when they did not have a television licence, on top of any fines.
The plans to strengthen the licence fee are detailed in a series of options published in an independent consultation published yesterday.
The consultation options range from doing nothing to strengthening the licence fee or decriminalising it.

The consultation will feed into a review will be presented to Parliament in June next year, giving the next government a series of options for the future of the licence fee.

Earlier this month members of the House of Lords faced anger after they voted to delay for two years an attempt to end the criminalisation of 150,000 people who fail to pay the licence fee every year.

The BBC argued that the government-backed reform could see the threat of evasion double, potentially costing the corporation £200 million a year.

The future of the licence fee will now be shaped by an independent review led by David Perry QC, a senior barrister who has represented the government.

His consultation, published yesterday, includes an option to give the corporation access to “new data sources” to help reduce levels of evasion.

At present, the TV licensing authority uses a database drawn from the Royal Mail’s register of postal addresses and information provided by inspectors and households.

A spokesman for Mr Perry’s consultation said that submissions would “not restricted to publicly available stuff” and could include suggestions that the corporation has access to private data.

He added, however, that it would have to be “proportionate” and pay heed to people’s rights under the data protection act. The spokesman said: “This is an open-ended consultation. They want to look at what people come back with.”

The consultation says that the prosecution of people for evading the licence fee represents one in 10 cases in deal with in magistrates, costing the court £17 million a year.

[charmbrights]

Feb 13, 2015 16:12:52 GMT Teddy Bear said:

Be afraid, be very afraid.

...
A spokesman confirmed that as well as publicly available records, the databases could include information from banks, utility companies and other sources as long as it was considered “proportionate”.
...

REMEMBER that it is NOT the BBC who run this database - it is Capita plc, a public limited company.

Feb 13, 2015 16:12:52 GMT Teddy Bear said:

Be afraid, be very afraid.

...
The review also suggests that new legislation could be introduced to prosecute anyone who fails to inform authorities that they don’t have a television.
...

So the burden of proof is moved to the accused? The only offence for which that is true today is, I believe, the presence of illegal drugs in premises you own. Even for Income Tax the only offence is not telling HMRC what your income is when they ask you.

[Teddy Bear]

If they grant these powers to this insidious corrupt organisation then I can see that eventually there will be a violent revolution. It may well be coming anyway considering everything these foul successive governments have done to our society.