Terrible messaging for an actually positive measure. It’s like Labour are determined to drop every possible ball.
I can’t read the article and the archive link appears to be broken. But this is a good policy motivated by a weird premise. It’s not engaging with the real reason behind decriminalizing it and just stoke up culture wars.
Good. The TV licence should be a matter of contract law, like every other entertainment service.
Did Labour asked ChatGPT to come up with a list of policies that would piss off as much of the electorate as possible?
With today’s technology, in fact technology that’s been about for over a decade. They could easily make this a subscription service.
That includes the iPlayer, try using Netflix etc without a password and you won’t get very far. The BBC puts out free to air and then prosecutes you for looking at it. there are channels on Freeview the UK digital system that are already behind a paywall.
That way if you want their content you pay for it if you don’t you don’t. The government could bake in a rule for national important items to not be behind the pay wall on all channels. Things like coronations, royal funerals, remembrance Day etc
As we know laws are only allowed to disproportionately affect men
TV licensing needs a massive overhaul.
I don’t pay for it, but I’m apparently supposed to if I watch a foreign service online… That’s absurd overreach
I was surprised people were still being prosecuted. For almost 10 years, I’ve been getting letters about a “final warning” or that a case has been opened. Not once in all that time has anyone knocked at my door about the TV licence.
The licence fee should be scrapped entirely and the BBC should stand or fall on the appeal of its output but this is at least a step in the right direction.
As usual with this Labour government they have managed to get the messaging as wrong as humanly possible. We only want to prosecute men is presumably not the message they wanted.
It’s being scrapped because it’s not worth the administrative burden. But nice to see that the “culture secretary” (wtf is this even) got the chance to turn this into a gender issue.
I wonder how much tax payer money is wasted on the myriad of letters that are sent out every few weeks, claiming “Investigation Opened!”, and the people sent out to harass people on the door step.
It’s a good move for the wrong reasons.
I hope they find a way to fix its funding, I do enjoy being able to watch some shows/news/sport without needing an account or having to endure adverts.
We need to decriminalize murder as murder prosecutions disproportionately affect men.
Nobody in the PLP has said it’s because it disproportionately effects women. The headline appears to be based on a single quote from Cherie Blair:
>”When you think that a third of all female convictions are for not paying their TV licence … It’s absurd.”
Which is actually quite a startling stat and should be interrogated.
But this headline is simply tabloid bullshit.
Sending people to prison for non-payment is imprisonment for debt under another name. Better to have a non-custodial option.
>A senior government source said: “The administrative burden of policing non-payment of the licence fee should not be falling on the taxpayer. It should be carved out. It’s not worth the hassle it creates.”
This is the only actual quote from a Government source in the article. The claims this is due to concerns about disproportionate affects on women are completely unsourced and likely just spin from The Times.
Hopefully means they’ll stop sending their multitude of daft ‘investigation’ letters out, like a weirdo ex that can’t get the hint. Might save them some money as well.
Iplayer should have gone subscription based years ago.
I stopped watching BBC years ago. I found they no longer cater to my particular demographic.
I’m not a fan of science fiction. I have found that the BBC has often been disappointing in their quite frankly lacklustre attempts.
This is the channel where traditionally, their sci-fi was much see tv and discussed in parliament.
I have one TV which I use about one hour a day. I do have three radios on 09 – 20 everyday tuned to BBC R6 DAB, sometimes 5 Live, R4 or R3.
Along the road an elderly couple have two TV’s on 08 – 22 everyday, no radio.
Should we pay by consumption, thus I’d pay much less for TV than the neighbours yet more for radio. I’d like a third party to decide the BBC (and others) costs and then tell our government, I also want this third party to able to ask questions of the BBC – why do you do this etc and expect answers. BBC’s money would come from tax payers.
The broadcasting infrastructure needs to be paid for. BBC offers a huge amount of excellent media.
I mean… That seems like a really odd reason. I’m all for it, but I didn’t expect that to be the reason.
Doing the right thing for the wrong reason. You know what, I’ll take it. It’s a step up from their usual MO of doing the worst possible thing at all times.
Transferring my non-existent TV licence to my wife.
Don’t pay for it.
If the BBC claims you have to pay it, tell them you don’t.
Do not let anyone inside your property without a warrant.
If enough people don’t pay for it, it’ll cease to eventually exist or be paid for by the treasury and roped into everyone else’s tax anyway, which would still be a much better system.
Anyone got a copy of the article or link to another site? Surely they’ve not come out saying this the way the headline phrases it. If true labour is now (and maybe already) sexist, I’d like to think leaders don’t just see people for their sex but maybe they do.
Not sure why people are angry about the wording here. The fact of the matter is that Capita send predominantly men to peoples’ homes and in the case where the resident is elderly or female, it’s very easy for them to intimidate them into letting them in. Additionally plenty of single mothers don’t have a pot to piss in anyway, so when the scumbags manage to get in and conjure up a prosecution they face a massive fine. It does disproportionately affect women hence the need for the law change, but it’s a law that will benefit everyone.
I’d understand outrage if they said “it’s only decriminalised for women, men can still be prosecuted” but that isn’t the case. Let good things happen without moaning about it ffs.
Let me guess: all the voices who be happy to see the BBC defunded and essentially abolished are also keen on nationalising the railways, water supply and would never dream that the health service not be nationally run. And they haven’t noticed or thought forward what the media landscape looks like in 20 years once the BBC went commercial “it’s so shit since it was privatised, why couldn’t it be nationalised like we did the railways”
Fuck the BBC, this isn’t the 50s anymore. You do not have the right to claim you have access to all Live broadcasts.
Bit hard to comment when the article is locked behind a paywall.
Tories started using bots now?
Murder and and rape laws disproportionately affect men.
As we all know laws are only there for men and women are utterly perfect specimens with no flaws what so ever.
If that’s what they need to say to stop the prosecutions, I don’t mind…
Is this further government dismantling of the BBC? Why will people pay the licence fee if there’s no consequences to do so?
Although, we should bin the tv licence fee and fund the BBC via a WiFi charge. Due to billing businesses, it would yield greater BBC funding (which would allow higher standards and better programming), free access for low income families and hopefully some left over for the treasury
Why did I read this as “Labour Party to end prostitution”?
YES!!!! This is a move I could get behind. I recall growing up in 1980s Scotland poor where single mothers were going to prison for non payment of license fees whilst the BBC put the likes of magnenta de vine in expensive rehab for heroin addictikn. and also covered up noncing.
Any other source than a right wing media during a bombardment of stretched stories that aren’t that bad in reality?
Ok, will they be stopping murder prosecutions because they disproportionately “affect” men? Or will they have the exact opposite rhetoric?
This on top of closing women’s prisons does not seem very inclusive and equitable.
That’s a pretty stupid idea. Either collect the money or give up collecting.
38 comments
Terrible messaging for an actually positive measure. It’s like Labour are determined to drop every possible ball.
I can’t read the article and the archive link appears to be broken. But this is a good policy motivated by a weird premise. It’s not engaging with the real reason behind decriminalizing it and just stoke up culture wars.
Good. The TV licence should be a matter of contract law, like every other entertainment service.
Did Labour asked ChatGPT to come up with a list of policies that would piss off as much of the electorate as possible?
With today’s technology, in fact technology that’s been about for over a decade. They could easily make this a subscription service.
That includes the iPlayer, try using Netflix etc without a password and you won’t get very far. The BBC puts out free to air and then prosecutes you for looking at it. there are channels on Freeview the UK digital system that are already behind a paywall.
That way if you want their content you pay for it if you don’t you don’t. The government could bake in a rule for national important items to not be behind the pay wall on all channels.
Things like coronations, royal funerals, remembrance Day etc
As we know laws are only allowed to disproportionately affect men
TV licensing needs a massive overhaul.
I don’t pay for it, but I’m apparently supposed to if I watch a foreign service online… That’s absurd overreach
I was surprised people were still being prosecuted. For almost 10 years, I’ve been getting letters about a “final warning” or that a case has been opened. Not once in all that time has anyone knocked at my door about the TV licence.
The licence fee should be scrapped entirely and the BBC should stand or fall on the appeal of its output but this is at least a step in the right direction.
As usual with this Labour government they have managed to get the messaging as wrong as humanly possible. We only want to prosecute men is presumably not the message they wanted.
It’s being scrapped because it’s not worth the administrative burden. But nice to see that the “culture secretary” (wtf is this even) got the chance to turn this into a gender issue.
I wonder how much tax payer money is wasted on the myriad of letters that are sent out every few weeks, claiming “Investigation Opened!”, and the people sent out to harass people on the door step.
It’s a good move for the wrong reasons.
I hope they find a way to fix its funding, I do enjoy being able to watch some shows/news/sport without needing an account or having to endure adverts.
We need to decriminalize murder as murder prosecutions disproportionately affect men.
Nobody in the PLP has said it’s because it disproportionately effects women. The headline appears to be based on a single quote from Cherie Blair:
>”When you think that a third of all female convictions are for not paying their TV licence … It’s absurd.”
Which is actually quite a startling stat and should be interrogated.
But this headline is simply tabloid bullshit.
Sending people to prison for non-payment is imprisonment for debt under another name. Better to have a non-custodial option.
>A senior government source said: “The administrative burden of policing non-payment of the licence fee should not be falling on the taxpayer. It should be carved out. It’s not worth the hassle it creates.”
This is the only actual quote from a Government source in the article. The claims this is due to concerns about disproportionate affects on women are completely unsourced and likely just spin from The Times.
Hopefully means they’ll stop sending their multitude of daft ‘investigation’ letters out, like a weirdo ex that can’t get the hint. Might save them some money as well.
Iplayer should have gone subscription based years ago.
I stopped watching BBC years ago. I found they no longer cater to my particular demographic.
I’m not a fan of science fiction. I have found that the BBC has often been disappointing in their quite frankly lacklustre attempts.
This is the channel where traditionally, their sci-fi was much see tv and discussed in parliament.
I have one TV which I use about one hour a day. I do have three radios on 09 – 20 everyday tuned to BBC R6 DAB, sometimes 5 Live, R4 or R3.
Along the road an elderly couple have two TV’s on 08 – 22 everyday, no radio.
Should we pay by consumption, thus I’d pay much less for TV than the neighbours yet more for radio. I’d like a third party to decide the BBC (and others) costs and then tell our government, I also want this third party to able to ask questions of the BBC – why do you do this etc and expect answers. BBC’s money would come from tax payers.
The broadcasting infrastructure needs to be paid for. BBC offers a huge amount of excellent media.
I mean… That seems like a really odd reason. I’m all for it, but I didn’t expect that to be the reason.
Doing the right thing for the wrong reason. You know what, I’ll take it. It’s a step up from their usual MO of doing the worst possible thing at all times.
Transferring my non-existent TV licence to my wife.
Don’t pay for it.
If the BBC claims you have to pay it, tell them you don’t.
Do not let anyone inside your property without a warrant.
If enough people don’t pay for it, it’ll cease to eventually exist or be paid for by the treasury and roped into everyone else’s tax anyway, which would still be a much better system.
Anyone got a copy of the article or link to another site?
Surely they’ve not come out saying this the way the headline phrases it. If true labour is now (and maybe already) sexist, I’d like to think leaders don’t just see people for their sex but maybe they do.
Not sure why people are angry about the wording here. The fact of the matter is that Capita send predominantly men to peoples’ homes and in the case where the resident is elderly or female, it’s very easy for them to intimidate them into letting them in. Additionally plenty of single mothers don’t have a pot to piss in anyway, so when the scumbags manage to get in and conjure up a prosecution they face a massive fine. It does disproportionately affect women hence the need for the law change, but it’s a law that will benefit everyone.
I’d understand outrage if they said “it’s only decriminalised for women, men can still be prosecuted” but that isn’t the case. Let good things happen without moaning about it ffs.
Let me guess: all the voices who be happy to see the BBC defunded and essentially abolished are also keen on nationalising the railways, water supply and would never dream that the health service not be nationally run. And they haven’t noticed or thought forward what the media landscape looks like in 20 years once the BBC went commercial “it’s so shit since it was privatised, why couldn’t it be nationalised like we did the railways”
Fuck the BBC, this isn’t the 50s anymore. You do not have the right to claim you have access to all Live broadcasts.
Bit hard to comment when the article is locked behind a paywall.
Tories started using bots now?
Murder and and rape laws disproportionately affect men.
As we all know laws are only there for men and women are utterly perfect specimens with no flaws what so ever.
If that’s what they need to say to stop the prosecutions, I don’t mind…
Is this further government dismantling of the BBC? Why will people pay the licence fee if there’s no consequences to do so?
Although, we should bin the tv licence fee and fund the BBC via a WiFi charge. Due to billing businesses, it would yield greater BBC funding (which would allow higher standards and better programming), free access for low income families and hopefully some left over for the treasury
Why did I read this as “Labour Party to end prostitution”?
YES!!!! This is a move I could get behind. I recall growing up in 1980s Scotland poor where single mothers were going to prison for non payment of license fees whilst the BBC put the likes of magnenta de vine in expensive rehab for heroin addictikn. and also covered up noncing.
Any other source than a right wing media during a bombardment of stretched stories that aren’t that bad in reality?
Ok, will they be stopping murder prosecutions because they disproportionately “affect” men? Or will they have the exact opposite rhetoric?
This on top of closing women’s prisons does not seem very inclusive and equitable.
That’s a pretty stupid idea. Either collect the money or give up collecting.