"It's no good, Tarquin, we can't sustain our levels of Executive Remuneration Packages for the thousands of skilled managers we need here at the BBC if we give licence discounts to the over-75s. We have to end it"
"Damn. That means inviting public responses - every charity will oppose it, as will MPs and politicians and of course the old buggers themselves. We won't get it through."
"We can, Tarquin - if we hold a Referendum!"
"Are you mad, Tony? If we ask 'Should we end free licences for the over 75s - Yes or No?' you know damn well what the answer will be"
"Ah, but we can finesse it. Ask several questions. Use first and second preference. I know some clever people who can design the thing for us so it looks fair, but will give us the 'End it' answer we want. It also has the advantage of nullifying all the 'Change' petitions and submissions from the charities - a referendum outranks everything else"
"Tony you're a genius! You deserve every hundred thou you get!"
=======================================================
BBC Consultation - We will do what you decide
Should we-
(a) Keep free licences
(b) Abolish free licences
(c) Change free licences by (i) giving over-75s a 50% discount OR (ii) raising the age to 80 OR (iii) means testing the free licence?
Results - 84,761 responses were received
1. Keeping free licences was most commonly ranked 1st (48%) followed by Changing (37%) and Abolishing (15%)
2. Changing was most commonly ranked 2nd (55%) followed by Abolishing (25%) and Keeping (20%)
3. Abolishing was most commonly ranked 3rd (47%) followed by Keeping (30%) and Changing (23%)
When combining first and second preferences -
4. Changing was the winner with the greatest number of first and second preferences (44%)
5. Keeping the discount had the second highest total of 37% whilst Abolishing had the third highest total at 19%
It is quite clear therefore that we now have an unassailable mandate to apply means testing of free licences for the over 75s. The old folk themselves have decided.
==========================================================
"Tony! There's a case of Lanson on its way to you. You're a bloody miracle! Any chance these people of yours can do us a second Brexit referendum?"
(NB the central section was taken almost literatim from the BBC's reporting of its consultation outcome at http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/reports/consultation/age/traverse.pdf)
19 comments:
I don't think I have ever seen a better expose of corporate cynicism. Just fking amazing.
Many countries have state broadcasting of some kind, so let's be honest and fund it by general taxation.
That would be infinitely preferable to the State-Within-The-State broadcasting, that we have had since 1922 here too.
Yes, the LF is a poll tax, just as the rail franchises etc. are one on people's getting to work and the rest.
It bloody well isn't whimsy!
The BBC spit in the faces of so many citizens, who just despise the bias and downright profligacy of a once-loved institution, and with their appalling bias and left-wing idiocy, make a mockery of a national broacaster's supposed intent to inform.
I've watched just a few minutes of the BBC news since September 2017, (because I wanted to see the boat race or something), and while I'll see the various websites which are pretty damned good at exposing the waste of talent/fees/unpleasant 'broadcasters', I have to pay them for their twaddle and inefficiency - mainly because our tv is easily seen through the window, and Senora O'Blene may be the one who has to deal with Crapita when they waste time calling. I don't want that.
The bbc. Not fit for purpose, and now the tv tax is going to be collected from pensioners forever, they can go and feck themselves.
The actual consultation was very similar.
Though the BBc avoided any chance Retain the current system would win, by not allowing that option.
Where I last worked we had annual staff surveys with questions ranked 1-5. When the report came out it was clear that the responses had been grouped 1-4 v 5 or 1 v 2-5, depending on what answer was wanted. I kept telling everyone to choose 1 or 5 as literally those were the only votes that truly counted.
If ever there was an opportunity for public dissent then refusing to pay the TV Tax has to be 'unbeatable'.
It threatens the poorest in our society, is mendacious in its motives and disliked by a huge proportion of the public and would have zero support in any debate.
Don't pay. Watch TV as and when you want. Don't open any correspondence from the BBC hired thugs and refuse to answer any questions if they appear on your doorstep.
If you are foolish enough to end up in court, cite the BBC's failure/refusal to abide by their Charter as your reason for refusal to pay. Use the Balen Report and/or 'the science is settled climate BS' to back your stance. Demand the Balen Report be used in evidence.
The idea that you can be (and many are) jailed for non-payment is a travesty of the Courts when many much more serious crimes go unpunished or with minimal effect.
If an issue such as Brexit can bring about the downfall of Government then the BBC License fee has absolutely zero chance of being upheld in the face of its universal despise.
Excellent work Radders.
The arrogance of spokesmen (from Hall down) is breathtaking.
My only consolation is that tv sets, as an entity, are destined to end up like Betamax and 8 Track cassette players. My 15 year old son and his cohort have ZERO interest in sitting in front of a box. Nothing is going to change that.
@Cheerful Edward,
The BBC isn't supposed to be "state broadcasting". The fact that it is funded by a poll tax is supposed to free it from "state" interference (or any other kind).
It's not even "state" either, but a remorselessly "progressive" propaganda organisation. If the "state" was not deemed to be sufficiently "progressive" by the BBC star chamber it would be remorselessly hostile to same.
A dedicated poll tax or from general taxation. What difference would that make to it's bias?
They need abolishing or wings clipped right back. They do not NEED to compete so they do not NEED most of their money.
Max 3 TV channels
Max 4 radio national channels (keep local)
Completely split off production (from broadcasting) and let it compete on level playing field.
Root and branch reform of news gathering so they simply 'present the news', not their agenda or their fucking opinions or their collegues' opinions.
The licence fee first came about to fund broadcasting on the new fangled wireless thingy. It only affected those who actually possessed the apparatus. As independent operators arrived on the scene the raison d'etre for the fee exists no more. However, the government has made good use of their broadcaster so they won't give it up lightly.
Not had a TV for nigh on 10 years and can honestly say life's better without it.
Do occasionally listen to R4 but can only tolerate its annoying left wing bias for a very short while then it's back to Classic FM.
The most satisfying way to end the BBC propaganda machine is to end the license fee, force the BBC to encrypt its signal and make it pay to view.
I guarantee if that were done it would whither and die within a couple of years or less.
The left only gets fat on other peoples money.
My point is that the BBC is worse than state broadcasting, because it is a plumb-central part of the never-changing British Establishment - the real one - irrespective of what government the voters select.
My perception of its bias would be very different from yours, no doubt.
Claims to its independence are laughable.
Encrypt all channels, let people that want to watch the bbc pay for access. Obviously they won't do that because the revenue will drop, and we will cease to fund the governments propaganda machine. With any luck it will either disappear or be taken over by someone that can run a business without subsidies.
The BBC are on your middle class Marxist side Cheesy.
Time they were shut for good.
I'm not a Marxist Ecky. I believe in the importance of private property. It's a silly term anyway. He, Marx, was a social scientist, and people don't talk about "Einsteinists" or "Newtonists", do they? They've all said interesting things though.
If the BBC were not as I say, then it would broadcast this towering, simple truth.
*ALL* forms of EU exit are, and can only be, Leave In Name Only, for the simple reason, that the idea of a no deal EU exit is as silly as say, Solihull voting to leave Birmingham, and each other's buses not being allowed to run on the other's land, nor goods or workers in and out either way.
It's utterly batsh** mad. But the BBC don't say it. Nor many other such self-evident things.
Cheerful, slight problem with your analogy: Solihull is not a part of Birmingham and don't ever suggest to a Silhillian that they are. I know, I used to work there.
OK, Raybond. Greenwich voting to leave London, or a thousand other such examples. Sorry to the good folk of Solihull.
Arrogant utterly deceitful egotistical bullshit Cheesy. And you are middle class leftist proggie scum regardless of your self-fantasy.
The BBC have peddled your pack of lies for you indirectly a million times over. That you profess not to see that marks you as double dumb or just a liar.
What is the main lie that the BBC have pushed, that you claim I would too, Ecky?
Post a Comment