why never a movement against the Television Licence ? (READ POST #2 BEFORE POSTING)

The Parish Priest.

Following the very successful campaign against water charges, why not a similar campaign against the tv licence ? which btw costs the exact same amount as the Alan Kelly water charges . Funnily enough the only two parties who ever wanted to abolish the tv licence were the Pds and Renua

icdg

A few points before his thread proceeds:

- No further mentions of water charges.
- This isn't the place to go actually organising campaigns, discussion must be in the abstract.
- No TV licensing queries - they go in the sticky.
- The purpose of the forum is to discuss Broadcasting. There is a Politics forum elsewhere on Boards. If at any time I feel this thread has become more about Politics than Broadcasting it gets closed.

lertsnim

There must be a lot of people who value what they get for their €160.

doolox

Ireland has what is called a semi public Broadcasting organisation. Unlike the BBC which is totally 100% funded by the UK TV licence and has no ads, RTE is only partially funded by the TV licence and also has ads, the worst of both worlds.

When people enquire into the inflated salaries of some of the TV and Radio stars they are fobbed off with justifications that the advertising revenue covers their inflated salaries , not the TV licence. It galls me that a person on minimum wage must give approximately 20 hrs worth of work per annum to pay the salary of such stars on €500,000 per annum and who are patently not worth that sum.

If they don't cough up they are jailed for non payment.

While the govt are wise enough not to impose licences on pensioners and other groups of low paid there are many low paid workers who can ill afford the €160.00 per annum charge.

Many people use Laptops and Ipads to access bespoke programming on the sly and this will continue to grow as TV's disappear from peoples houses or become more portable and difficult to detect in use by the inspectors.

The increased mobility and rental status of a larger proportion of our population will make this outdated imposition harder to implement.

A compromise would be to get rid of all the so called overpaid "stars" and let them sink or swim in the private TV channels and stick with the likes of TG4 and a reduced set of eclectic programming with a reduced TV licence at least under €100 euro and capped at that. RTE should stick with uniquely Irish programming and let the commercials carry the overseas and populist programming.

Johnboy1951

lertsnim wrote: »

There must be a lot of people who value what they get for their €160.

Yes.

I also feel sure that all those people would like to see discussion around employee salaries, and some limit placed on those salaries, with a threat of reduction of licence fee payments for breach of the limits.

IMO, there are very few overpaid persons in RTÉ.

Victor

When the licence was introduced, TVs were very much a luxury, available to few. As usage grew, people knew they were buying into a luxury. It is also avoidable - just don't get a TV.

hungry hypno toad

Maybe most of the protestors don't have a TV licence or get a free one?

http://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/How-do-I-get-a-Free-Television-Licence.aspx

The Parish Priest.

The Parish Priest. wrote: »

Funnily enough the only two parties who ever wanted to abolish the tv licence were the Pds and Renua

Two right-wing parties who would probably have privatised RTE, given the chance. Not surprising that they were against the TV licence.

Jimmy Garlic

RTE could never survive without huge injections of public money, life support that keeps their dim ''stars'' living in the lap of luxury. Ray Darcy is on half a million quid a year for gods sake, a guy that outshone by the average DJ on local radio. He is just one of example of the many absolutely talentless amoebas that get obscene amounts of our money stuffed into their pockets by RTE.

Journalism is stone dead and buried in donnybrook, basically what RTE passes off as journalism is damage control or propaganda that they have been instructed to push. There is no public service of any value whatsoever provided by RTE. A stagnant, nepotistic club that doesn't value merit, talent or integrity.

Chancer3001

There's no need for a movement. If you don't agree with paying it, just don't pay.

It's not strict enough or monitored enough for you to be caught

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Chancer3001 wrote: »

There's no need for a movement. If you don't agree with paying it, just don't pay.

It's not strict enough or monitored enough for you to be caught

Apt name

icdg

Take a warning Chancer3001, there is no advocating anything illegal in this forum

.......

This post has been deleted.

Jayop

It's 160 quid down the toilet every single year and I hate paying it. I don't listen to RTE radio, I don't watch any of their programming, bar maybe a handful of things in the year. The sports is the only thing worthwhile on there and in pretty much every sport it's already being covered much better elsewhere. I literally only pay the license to be allowed to legally watch non RTE programs the vast vast majority of the time.

Personally I think they should either scrap it or else scrap the ads. Let RTE try to survive on one or the other and then they'd maybe trim some of the fat. 2 Orchestras and a mass of overpaid useless "Irish celebrities" getting the same jobs for the boys every single year. Get yourself on the RTE treadmill, maybe a job on children's TV or 2fm and it's a one way road to being in front of our faces for the next 50 years.

How much of their programming is already on other channels first? I'd probably guess if you take news and current affairs out about 80%. It's pathetic and a complete black hole for the taxpayer.

seamus

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No, the much-mooted broadcasting charge hasn't come in yet.

As Victor says, the licence originally came in when TVs were a luxury and the licence seen as a consequential expense of choosing to have a TV, like car tax. So it persists because it's always been there.

It's a silly system anyway because it relies on the honour system, and no doubt costs a relatively significant amount to enforce. We did it because the UK did it and nobody has really given it any serious thought since.

Remove the licence fee altogether, tack a nominal "arts and culture levy" onto all sorts of services - TV services, broadband, cinema tickets, theatre tickets, etc - and then use that money to fund the Irish-grown arts. The days of having a state broadcaster are over.

Johnboy1951

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Careful reading of the act would seem to indicate yes.

But that part of the law has never been attempted to be enforced.

elperello

Probably the main reason why there is no campaign against the TV licence is that it is an established charge and it's always easier to work up a head of steam against a new charge.

Having said that I believe that a well funded public broadcasting service is essential but as Seamus says the licence is not the way to do it.

Here's an idea everyone should stop moaning about different bills and charges and just pay their bloody bills

Jayop

Jolie Defeated Wing wrote: »

Here's an idea everyone should stop moaning about different bills and charges and just pay their bloody bills

Pay blindly and trust the government not to waste our money.

great idea. :rolleyes:

Victor

seamus wrote: »

It's a silly system anyway because it relies on the honour system

Not really. Eircode, while only public since last year has existed as a database for a long time. They know who has a licence or not.

Jayop wrote: »

Pay blindly and trust the government not to waste our money.

Let's face it, lots of people don't want to pay for anything.

icdg

A more general warning - anyone from this point on who advocates non payment gets a 48 hour ban with no further warning. Not having seen this post is not an excuse.

A reminder - not paying a TV licence isn't just a civil debt. It is a criminal offence.

ED E

Victor wrote: »

Not really. Eircode, while only public since last year has existed as a database for a long time. They know who has a licence or not.

They know. But the TV Licence inspectors are a colossal waste of money.


Annual "arts tax" of €200 for anyone earning over €20k. Stop this micky mouse enforcement game, all the admin costs that go with it. Cost Revenue zero to tack it on to ROS/MyAccount.

Jayop

Victor wrote: »

Not really. Eircode, while only public since last year has existed as a database for a long time. They know who has a licence or not.


Let's face it, lots of people don't want to pay for anything.

Let's face it, that's as BSy a soundbite as most of those who you think don't want to pay for anything.

I work in a good job, pay a lot of income tax, pay my car tax, pay my TV license pay every other bill I bloody get. It's a little sickening to have my opinion thrown in with nonsense generalizations like that.

Jayop

ED E wrote: »

They know. But the TV Licence inspectors are a colossal waste of money.


Annual "arts tax" of €200 for anyone earning over €20k. Stop this micky mouse enforcement game, all the admin costs that go with it. Cost Revenue zero to tack it on to ROS/MyAccount.

Add it to the household tax. It shouldn't be paid per income, it should be paid per household.

It also shouldn't go to the RTE. It should go towards arts and cultural projects nationwide.

benjilxp

Victor wrote: »

Not really. Eircode, while only public since last year has existed as a database for a long time. They know who has a licence or not.



Then why don't they put the homeowners name on a TV licence inspectors letter if they have this information?

Victor

benjilxp wrote: »

Victor wrote: »

Not really. Eircode, while only public since last year has existed as a database for a long time. They know who has a licence or not.

Then why don't they put the homeowners name on a TV licence inspectors letter if they have this information?

I'm saying they know the properties and the residents, not the TV owners. And while they don't ask for it, they have the power to get the Sky / Virgin Media data.

newacc2015

Firstly it was introduced before everyone expected everything for free. Unlike now where people expect everything for free without paying taxes.

Secondly I think most people appreciate the service it provides. Do we really wanted biased media like America? Do we really want media companies who rely entirely on advertising? If RTE received 100% funding from advertising, they would comprise on their reporting. Look at HBO which is violent, sex filled, etc as it is not reliant on pleasing vanilla advertisers (HBO is a premium service like Sky Sports).

Imagine RTE being owned a by a certain non-resident billionaire who has a fond interest in owning papers and radio stations. He maybe not explicitly put pressure on what is reported, but you can be sure that reporters will change their style of reporting and content.

Water is essential for life. Without it, you can't live. The last time I checked, you can live without Fair City. If you don't want to pay for RTE, don't watch it

Jayop

newacc2015 wrote: »

Firstly it was introduced before everyone expected everything for free. Unlike now where people expect everything for free without paying taxes.

Secondly I think most people appreciate the service it provides. Do we really wanted biased media like America? Do we really want media companies who rely entirely on advertising? If RTE received 100% funding from advertising, they would comprise on their reporting. Look at HBO which is violent, sex filled, etc as it is not reliant on pleasing vanilla advertisers (HBO is a premium service like Sky Sports).

Imagine RTE being owned a by a certain non-resident billionaire who has a fond interest in owning papers and radio stations. He maybe not explicitly put pressure on what is reported, but you can be sure that reporters will change their style of reporting and content.

Water is essential for life. Without it, you can't live. The last time I checked, you can live without Fair City. If you don't want to pay for RTE, don't watch it

1) I don't watch RTE but I still pay for the services.

2) It's still working at the behest of certain powerful interests and has served as a government mouthpiece a'la Pravda.

Elmo

In relation to the OPs question the Radio licence was in place for a number of decades before TV and unlike rates there was never a break in the licence fee. Another thing to remember is that official 15% of people do not pay their licence, not to mention those who are exempt.

Jimmy Garlic

Secondly I think most people appreciate the service it provides. Do we really wanted biased media like America?

RTE isn't biased?? I suppose the Pope isn't a Catholic either.

Do we really want media companies who rely entirely on advertising? If RTE received 100% funding from advertising, they would comprise on their reporting.

Assuming their reporting isn't compromised as things stand. Are you seriously trying to suggest that RTE is a bastion of good, non-biased principled journalism?

Imagine RTE being owned a by a certain non-resident billionaire who has a fond interest in owning papers and radio stations. He maybe not explicitly put pressure on what is reported, but you can be sure that reporters will change their style of reporting and content.

Shur he might as well own it. Wouldn't make any difference.

.......

This post has been deleted.

icdg

Victor wrote: »

I'm saying they know the properties and the residents, not the TV owners. And while they don't ask for it, they have the power to get the Sky / Virgin Media data.

They don't I'm afraid:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/plan-to-use-sky-upc-data-to-collect-licence-to-be-rejected-1.2380084

reubenreuben

If we do scrap the licence and scrap rte as it stands now so who would do all the nationalistic programs such as ireland 100 year commemoration etc?

TV3/Virgin media, really?

Victor

icdg wrote: »

They don't I'm afraid:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/plan-to-use-sky-upc-data-to-collect-licence-to-be-rejected-1.2380084

Note that data protection doesn't apply to the collection of taxes.

JTMan

The remit of RTE needs to be scaled back with a concurrent reduction in the license fee.
- 2FM should be privatised.
- RTEs campus in Donnybrook should be sold.
- The remit of RTE's broadcasting should be narrowed. No Home and Away or Neighbours. A strict narrow public service broadcasting remit.

Elmo

JTMan wrote: »

The remit of RTE needs to be scaled back with a concurrent reduction in the license fee.
- 2FM should be privatised.
- RTEs campus in Donnybrook should be sold.
- The remit of RTE's broadcasting should be narrowed. No Home and Away or Neighbours. A strict narrow public service broadcasting remit.

The licence should be replaced with a new small tax on telecommunications bills. It would amount to 0.02% ~ 200m per year.

RTÉ2, 2FM and associated Digital radio stations should become a new company with no funding, sold by government when suitable.

RTÉ should consist of RTÉ one, rte gold (replacing +1), rte news now, rte oirechtas, radio 1, lyric fm and associated digital radio stations (including radio one international). It would be give 42.5% of the licence.

TG4 would take control of RTe jr and jr radio, the Irish film channel, rnag, radio rira, they would also provide a part time youth channel and cula4. They would also get 42.5% of the licence.

Both TG4 and RTÉ would share repeats and news coverage.

TG4 would no longer get exchequer fund.

RTÉ music groups would become part of the national concert hall and receive 7.5% of the licence.

The BAI would get 7.5% for the sound and vision fund.

2rn would take control of RTÉ studios and become the national broadcasting network and studio, they could choose to move a set up a media centre in another part of the country.

Sports and imports would be divided between the new broadcasters depending on their business plan e.g soaps go to RTÉ2, GAA split between TG4 and RTÉ, champions league to RTÉ, docs to RTÉ and so on.

The BAI and comreg would set the level of the tax. The BAI would control advert minutes.

Government would not be involved in deciding on new services or that rate of the fee. No political pressure.

The Parish Priest.

Elmo wrote: »

The licence should be replaced with a new small tax on telecommunications bills. It would amount to 0.02% ~ 200m per year.

RTÉ2, 2FM and associated Digital radio stations should become a new company with no funding, sold by government when suitable.

RTÉ should consist of RTÉ one, rte gold (replacing +1), rte news now, rte oirechtas, radio 1, lyric fm and associated digital radio stations (including radio one international). It would be give 42.5% of the licence.

TG4 would take control of RTe jr and jr radio, the Irish film channel, rnag, radio rira, they would also provide a part time youth channel and cula4. They would also get 42.5% of the licence.

Both TG4 and RTÉ would share repeats and news coverage.

TG4 would no longer get exchequer fund.

RTÉ music groups would become part of the national concert hall and receive 7.5% of the licence.

The BAI would get 7.5% for the sound and vision fund.

2rn would take control of RTÉ studios and become the national broadcasting network and studio, they could choose to move a set up a media centre in another part of the country.

Sports and imports would be divided between the new broadcasters depending on their business plan e.g soaps go to RTÉ2, GAA split between TG4 and RTÉ, champions league to RTÉ, docs to RTÉ and so on.

The BAI and comreg would set the level of the tax. The BAI would control advert minutes.

Government would not be involved in deciding on new services or that rate of the fee. No political pressure.

I Like most of your ideas, not sure about the tax on telecommunications, I would say that a household charge of €150.00 collected by the revenue commissioners would be the way to go.

Elmo

The Parish Priest. wrote: »

I Like most of your ideas, not sure about the tax on telecommunications, I would say that a household charge of €150.00 collected by the revenue commissioners would be the way to go.

Why insist on a charge that no one wants to pay? The broadcasting charge is just a new name for the licence fee.

15% don't pay the licence fee why would this change.

15% of people choose to let revenue remove the property tax from their income... 15% look at that tax as income tax.

Unlike the broadcasters telecommunication companies have no content regulations. I'd prefer if the government took 200m from them and prevent them passing on to their customers.

Capt'n Midnight

Victor wrote: »

When the licence was introduced, TVs were very much a luxury, available to few. As usage grew, people knew they were buying into a luxury. It is also avoidable - just don't get a TV.

The license predates TV's. Before that it was Radio/TV/Colour TV, the more expensive licences allowing you to use the lower ones.



http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1927/sro/1/made/en/print

The fees for a licence for the possession of wireless receiving apparatus or to establish a wireless receiving station shall be as follows :—
(a) Ordinary Licence
10s. a year.

...
A separate ordinary licence shall be necessary to cover the private use of a wireless receiving set on a motor car or other conveyance.

The Post Office has been collecting licence fees since the The Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1904.

Licenses mean revenue could be raised, and also in the early days that receivers could be tracked.


The licence fee means that slightly fewer people are watch broadcast TV nowadays. Peak TV ownership was something like 97% so pretty universal. OK it's dropped down to 95% but I'd be shocked if most of that 5% didn't consume audio-visual material from media or interweb.

The big inefficiencies with TV licences are the cut An Post takes to collect licences and the evasion rate. Lumping it on the electricity bill would save millions and you could reduce the licence fee at the same time. TBH it should be taken out of the fees paid by the telco's for the frequencies taken out of the TV band.

Victor

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

TBH it should be taken out of the fees paid by the telco's for the frequencies taken out of the TV band.

I think the last auction for spectrum in about 2014 raised about €1.5 billion for the state.

Sam Russell

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The big inefficiencies with TV licences are the cut An Post takes to collect licences and the evasion rate. Lumping it on the electricity bill would save millions and you could reduce the licence fee at the same time. TBH it should be taken out of the fees paid by the telco's for the frequencies taken out of the TV band.

If the Licence fee was put on the electricity and reduced to €10 per month it would cost €120 per year. Since evasion and non-liability is at 15%, and An Post take about 6%, then the net take on the current regime is €126.90. €1 per month on broadband would certainly make up the difference, particularly if it was also put on mobile data services.

I would also be in favour of a small levy on pay TV services to pay for transmission charges for Saorview, which would be less than €1 per month - possibly 50c.

All in all, it is small money for the service we get.

Avada

Sam Russell wrote: »

If the Licence fee was put on the electricity and reduced to €10 per month it would cost €120 per year. Since evasion and non-liability is at 15%, and An Post take about 6%, then the net take on the current regime is €126.90. €1 per month on broadband would certainly make up the difference, particularly if it was also put on mobile data services.

I would also be in favour of a small levy on pay TV services to pay for transmission charges for Saorview, which would be less than €1 per month - possibly 50c.

All in all, it is small money for the service we get.

Why not just add it to the local property tax? Revenue already collect that.

Sam Russell

Avada wrote: »

Why not just add it to the local property tax? Revenue already collect that.

Local Property Tax is not collected from commercial premises that are currently liable for the TV licence (if they have a TV).

Avada

Sam Russell wrote: »

Local Property Tax is not collected from commercial premises that are currently liable for the TV licence (if they have a TV).

Surely for commercial properties it could be added to rates

NIMAN

doolox wrote: »

If they don't cough up they are jailed for non payment.

Is this not one of our great urban legends?

Has anyone actually done jail time for non-payment of the TV licence? I doubt it.

nhunter100

NIMAN wrote:

Is this not one of our great urban legends?

No

NIMAN wrote:

Has anyone actually done jail time for non-payment of the TV licence? I doubt it.

411 people went to prison for non payment in 2013. Serving between a few hours and a couple of days. Can't link it but the article was carried in the Indo in May 2014. Check Google.

icdg

There have been highly publicised individual instances, at least.

A general reminder aimed at no one in particular - there is to be no posts advocating the commission of any criminal offence on this forum.

political analyst

http://www.independent.ie/business/now-laptop-ipad-and-pc-users-will-have-to-buy-a-tv-licence-35567457.html

In a move that could generate an extra €5m a year for cash-strapped RTÉ, Communications Minister Denis Naughten is devising plans to broaden the reach of the licence fee.

Almost one in 10 households no longer has a traditional television set, but many are still accessing content over the internet.

Sources say proposals being finalised by officials would see the €160 annual charge applied to electronic devices with screen sizes above 11 inches.

This would ensure mobile phones and standard tablets are exempt but would see most desktop computers, laptops and large iPads targeted.

Full details of the change have yet to be worked out, including how it would be enforced.

icdg

Just the communications charge in revised form then, although in this form it at least has the virtue of not being a poll tax. Not sure it will ultimately make life any easier for RTÉ.

Sam Russell

Why not make a charge on broadband?

Perhaps have it related to data download - so you pay a fixed levy on broadband, with a further charge on the amount of data downloaded - these extra charges do not need to be huge, only that the net amount collected equates to the current licence fee, taking account for the current evaders.

Johnboy1951

political analyst wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/business/now-laptop-ipad-and-pc-users-will-have-to-buy-a-tv-licence-35567457.html

So he shot down the FF idea of a general household tax to essentially replace the licence ......

He has also ruled out the imposition of a so-called 'Broadcasting Charge' which would result in every household in the country receiving a bill regardless of whether they access public service broadcasting.

So how does what he proposes differ exactly?
Is it only those who actually "access public service broadcasting" who will pay?

Of course not, so he is in fact changing the licence to a general tax on owning a personal computer and such devices.

This is not a licence to receive a PSB as implied above.
It is a general tax on technology, regardless the use of that technology.

Why not be up front about it and scrap the 'licence' as it surely could not be termed a licence in future.
Call it what it is ..... a technology tax which is used primarily to support PSB.

I would have no objection to such a tax, but why continue with this misnomer of a 'licence'? Because 'tax' is a dirty word to a lot of people?

Call a spade a spade and be done with it!