Mulling over BBC Tim Davie's words at a media conference this week, I'm more and more confused.
“I think there is reform (needed) in terms of potential (changes to the) licence fee, how progressive it is, and you’ll debate the enforcement question.”
Most papers have taken this as sticking to the principle of a licence fee as the BBC's preferred funding mechanism for the next Charter. He seems to want it to be 'progressive'. Currently the only variations on the annual £174.50 fee are a black and white licence for £58.50, a half-price colour licence for the registered blind, and a care home/sheltered accommodation rate of £7.50.
What other concessions might there be ? Full-time students ? Or does 'progressive' mean related to the licence fee holders income tax code ? And Mr Davie would like more money, not less. So if, say, 23m licence holders currently generate £3.66bn, would we really ask 3 million 'rich people' to pay £250 a year, so that 20 million get charged £142.50 ?
As for enforcement, presumably if everyone gets the service via the internet, the BBC might be able to 'block' those who don't pay. This would look like a sort of reverse subscription option; and the problem is that there are many more internet contracts than households; block 'dad', but the rest of the family still have access.
I like my idea of a much smaller impost on broadband and smart-phone contracts more and more ? Come on, Curbishley.
No comments:
Post a Comment