[flurdy]

I wish the UK would just scrap it as an independent license, and just include it as part of the government budget.

Like Norway did last year. Now they have it as part of your income tax. [1] This will save a lot of expenses in informing, collecting, organising, prosecuting etc.

I know that means everyone pays even though you don't own a TV, but that is fine by me. You pay taxes if you don't use every road, hospital, school, opera house as well.

(Note, their license fee was about £300 per year last year.)

Scrapping the BBC license fee and not fund it the same via a budget, but instead, a subscription-only will be awful. It will then join the other commercial channels which is 99% reality TV and gameshows.

* [1] https://info.nrk.no/faq/the-tv-licence-will-cease/

[rickdeckard]

> I wish the UK would just scrap it as an independent license, and just include it as part of the government budget.

This would mean the funding of the BBC would be under direct control of the ruling government, which creates a conflict of interest (no positive coverage -> no money next year).

> Like Norway did last year. Now they have it as part of your income tax.

Norway TV isn't funded by government budget, they just streamlined the calculation and payment process into your income tax procedure. The budget is still dedicated to TV licensing and owned by the broadcaster.

That's a big big BIG difference. In one case only the financial process is optimized, in the other case you turn the broadcaster into a "national propaganda station".

As a citizen, keep an eye on this distinction on every proposal that is made, and speak up against every step the government takes to gain more control over the budget.

[thu2111]

The idea of arms length funding doesn't make sense. The conflict of interest already exists. The government can and does control the license fee, hence the recent kerfuffle about decriminalisation (many more people just won't pay if there's no consequence to not doing so). Ultimately the BBC is funded by government mandate. What government giveth, government can take away.

Additionally, the BBC has lost the argument that the license fee makes it neutral and independent to the betterment of all. More than half of the British population perceive it as being untrustworthy and biased (in favour of London metro media studies grad type viewpoints). This phenomenon is especially strong amongst the kinds of people who voted Tory for the first time and gave Boris his big majority, so their views are seen as very important.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/1...

YouGov figures show British trust in the press to tell the truth has fallen, with less than half believing BBC news journalists are honest and impartial.

The loss of BBC market share to other services is being raised as a justification for attacking the license fee here, but the ground is filled with kindling. Both the Tories and Labour see the BBC as ideologically opposed to them now.

[wccrawford]

IMO, it's even better to be in the government budget, because those who can't afford the TV license probably already don't end up paying much taxes in the first place, putting more of the burden for the TV on the people who can afford it, instead of the people who use it.

Normally I'd say that's a little backwards, but the BBC is definitely a culture and education thing, and that firmly belongs in the "benefits everyone" category, IMO.

[dependenttypes]

> but the BBC is definitely a culture and education thing

Before the the dawn of the internet, sure. Now not so much, I would say it is more of a political tool that sometimes produces some low quality educational content.

[vixen99]

'You pay taxes if you don't use every road, hospital, school, opera house as well'. Yes but that's not by itself an argument to bung even more services, used or not, into the mix.

[PaulRobinson]

As a Brit, I consider the BBC to be at least as essential as most schools. Life without it is really hard for some of us to imagine.

[dependenttypes]

This might be fine with you but I do not think that this would be fine by everyone else paying taxes.

> You pay taxes if you don't use every road, hospital, school, opera house as well.

And this is a bad thing. No need to make it even worse.

[duckmysick]

You can vote for people who set the budget. If the issue (let's say defunding a local opera house you don't attend) is important enough, you can form a voting bloc and get your way. You might need to spend some time and money on raising awareness among local voters. And you will definitely face some opposition, but it's doable.