Scrap the BBC TV Licence. £145.50 per year to fund child abuse, tax avoidance and other dirty secrets.

The Jimmy Savile Child Abuse Allegations

Is the BBC licence fee good value for money? The reputation of the BBC, once considered to be the “greatest broadcaster in the world”, has now hit rock bottom. The recent allegations of child abuse by Jimmy Savile spanning back decades is surely the last nail in the BBC’s coffin?

The fact that the British public are legally responsible to fork out £145.50 a year to fund the BBC is scandalous in the wake of these recent revelations. Of course, the Beeb require the licence fee to survive but how do you feel when you pay them your hard earned £145.50 every twelve months? A TV licence is required by every household in the UK under the Communications Act 2003 if live TV is being watched on Freeview, Sky, Virgin, BT Vision, live internet streaming or by any other means.

If you were buying a TV licence whilst Jimmy Savile was working at the BBC you were technically funding child abuse. Can the Communications Act 2003 be enforced in the wake of these serious and disturbing allegations? Even now, you are still funding the fallout of the situation as the BBC’s legal costs will surely be considerable.

Many people are now boycotting the licence fee in protest of the current scandals within the organisation. There are a number of websites suddenly appearing appealing the the public to boycott the BBC and its compulsory “TV tax”.

It’s not just child abuse allegations that make a mockery of the license fee, the fact that many of the BBC’s highest paid stars have been involved in aggressive tax avoidance.

For example, Anne Robinson paid £280,000 to a Jersey based scheme to avoid income tax on a whopping £4,000,000. Other high profile BBC presenters such as Fiona Bruce and Jeremy Paxman have also been involved in tax avoidance techniques. The BBC has admitted to paying over 6,000 employees as companies to avoid the high rates of personal income tax and paying corporation tax at a lower rate. Whilst this is perfectly legal, the morality of such practices has to be questioned. To be fair to Jeremy Paxman, he claimed that he was forced into the arrangement by the BBC.

The icing on the cake is that the Director General, George Entwistle, resigned just 54 days after his appointment. Despite serving less than two months in the job he will receive a full years pay of £450,000 and a pension fund of £877,000.

This is all being paid for from your £145.50 licence fee. Do you still think the BBC licence fee is good value for money?

Another waste of the licence fee is the underhand and aggressive tactics of Capita/TV Licensing. Unlicensed properties receive intimidating letters on a monthly basis to scare people into buying a TV licence whether they need one or not. A small percentage of households do not watch live TV and use catchup services such as BBCi player, ITV Player and 4OD to watch content that has already been aired. Despite this, they are continuously bombarded with letters which can only be described as harassment.

At some point, unlicensed properties will be visited by a TV Licence “Enforcement Officer”. These so called officers are nothing more than salespeople after their £20 commission for each person they bully into buying a TV licence. If you do not legally require a TV licence they will not leave you alone until an “enforcement officer” enters your home to inspect your TV to ensure that it cannot receive live TV pictures. To the best of my knowledge these salespeople are not CRB checked. Would you allow a random stranger into your house not knowing if they have a criminal past?

If you genuinely do not require a licence then this YouTube clip is the best way to deal with TV Licensing.

Visit for more advice.

If you do decide to engage in conversation with the TV licensing salesman be aware that in the past these people have been known to falsify evidence to use against you in court. There has also been a case of an “inspector” assaulting a member of the public. Just remember that you are not obliged to talk to them, sign anything or let them into you home. They have no more power than a paperboy or postman.

Maybe it’s time for the BBC to become a commercial broadcaster. Let the corporate world fund their future calamities.

13 Responses

Subscribe to comments via RSS

  1. Written by Peter Jones
    on 17/11/2012 at 11:24 am

    Very well written, but I note there is no mention of the McAlpine scandal.

    It defies belief that the BBC broadcast its 2 November Newsnight programme about the Bryn Estyn sexual abuse scandal in the wake of their botched handling of the Jimmy Savile case. Even more farcical that they are having to pay £185k to a man who they never actually named, but was somehow linked to the report by Twitter users.

    But it gets even worse. According to an article in yesterday’s DM the BBC has agreed to cover McAlpine’s legal expenses as he pursues his thousands of Twitter defamers. How could the BBC be that incompetent that they accepted such unfavourable settlement terms? McAlpine’s legal fees could easily run to hundreds of thousands, which the TV licence payer will ultimately end up footing the bill for.

    That really is a scandal.

  2. Written by Ben Eaton
    on 18/11/2012 at 11:41 am

    The public were no more funding child abuse than anyone who has ever purchased (or sampled) a Gary Glitter record.

    I pay approximately £12 a month to the BBC via the licence fee, for which I get regional radio, national television and radio, anytime content delivery via iPlayer, and one of the best websites in the world. I pay double the amount to Sky for less quality content, unrelenting advertising, and repeats of old BBC programmes. If I wanted Sky in more than 1 room I would have to pay even more.

    The fact is that the BBC licence fee is excellent value for money. It’s just that we, the public, don’t like paying for something we feel we’re entitled to for free.

  3. Written by Grumpy Git
    on 18/11/2012 at 12:36 pm

    Hi Ben, thanks for your input. I don’t think the Gary Glitter reference is quite the same argument. Every household with a record player was not forced by law to buy a Gary Glitter record. As for the BBC website, they have put many smaller websites out of business with their almost bottomless pit of funds. Again, the general public fund all this. I would much prefer the BBC to become a commercial broadcaster or even become subscription only. The BBC are scared that their subscriber base would be tiny and revenue would be a fraction of what is it now. I believe that the vast majority of people could live without the BBC, especially after all the recent controversies.

  4. Written by Adrian
    on 22/11/2012 at 2:27 pm

    I am one of the millions out there who feel the tv license fee (tax) should be scrapped. Other broadcasters manage to survive and offer a FREE service without bullying taxpayers into funding the lavish lifestyles of savile and his chums. Give us a referendum on the license fee and let the bbc fend for itself. We are supposed to be living in a democracy not a dictatorship.

  5. Written by Steve
    on 22/11/2012 at 6:30 pm

    Couldn’t do without Horizon, Attenborough, Paxman, etc and get Edmonds, Cowell, and Kyle, etc in return 🙁

    However, could do without Nick Knowles and his ilk 😉

    Sick and tired of hearing about the Savile affair.
    Years ago when there was no Facebook, Twitter or wall-to-wall media coverage to satisfy the insane urges of teens there were “groupies” who would do anything and everything to get close to someone famous. I’m sure Savile had his fair share of those in his life.
    Only those who made complaints against him while he was alive should be entertained. The rest, in my opinion are just fishing for cash or attention as seems to be the the modern way. (extremely grumpy point of view!)

  6. Written by Steve
    on 22/11/2012 at 6:36 pm

    Oh I forgot …. Nicky Campbell and Peter Allen … top drawer!:-)

  7. Written by dee
    on 03/12/2012 at 7:38 am

    what a scandalous thing to say, “If you were buying a TV licence whilst Jimmy Savile was working at the BBC you were technically funding child abuse.”

  8. Written by Grumpy Git
    on 03/12/2012 at 11:35 am

    How is that scandalous? It’s absolutely true. What happened at the BBC for almost 50 years, YES, FIFTY, is beyond scandalous.

  9. Written by kimarley godfrey
    on 18/04/2013 at 8:33 pm

    how do ignore the TV license because i accidentally sign that stupid paper now i feel im in the shot becasue they keep arras sing me for payment i want to stop they are draining me alot

  10. Written by ColR91
    on 04/12/2013 at 1:10 pm

    Ban this outdated, unfair tax. People shouldn’t be forced to pay for something that not everyone uses!

  11. Written by Bill
    on 20/01/2014 at 1:52 pm

    By the same measure, if you were giving money to your local catholic church, you were also technically funding child abuse

  12. Written by Steph
    on 14/02/2014 at 9:49 pm

    I still find it hilarious that you brits pay for TV.

    We do here – it’s called Foxtel.

    Everything outside of Foxtel and other Cable TV – is called Free TV.

    You have commercials yes? You have to sit through annoying add breaks? Do you know that our free TV over here is payed for entirely by commercials and they get sponsoring by other company’s for putting up their logo in the credits of the news/talk shows?

    You guy’s are getting scammed so badly, having to pay for a “license” to watch TV.

    Mr Kimarley Godfrey – call them and tell them your TV has broken, you cant afford another one, and dont intend to buy another one. Then follow the instructions in the youtube clip on how to deal with them – they target everyone that doesnt pay a subscriptoin – they have no way of telling if you have a TV of not other than physically looking – or having you admit it.

  13. Written by zulhaq
    on 12/10/2020 at 10:36 am

    thank for information

Subscribe to comments via RSS

Leave a Reply