Should the BBC licence fee be replaced with a compulsory utility bill charge?

[FunStork]

The BBC has acknowledged that the licence fee is no longer fit for purpose, and the chair of the BBC says she wants the money to be a tax that's paid out of utility bills, ensuring everyone pays it.

Do you think this is a good idea or not?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c20yjjm7n87o

What about those on benefits who cant afford the tax? A bit extra on the bill for "those with the broadest shoulders" perhaps?

BBC radio output shits all over the commercial radio output.

BBC drama output shits all over ITV drama output.

In primetime broadcasting there can be as many as 7 adverts in a break. That's time you won't get back, watching that dickhead and his white dog mopping the kitchen, or some prat blowing on chips that are too hot, or grown people talking in kids voices (to be fair, I bloody love the Haribo adverts)

When you actually compare the streaming services against the BBCs output, none of them can hold a candle to the BBC archive. We have something very special in the BBC.

Yes, the news is biased shit. Yes, Chris Mason needs sacking. But I'm still in favour of keeping the state broadcaster. Not that I am remotely a royalist, but can you imagine the death of the Queen being announced and then having to watch the dickhead and his white dog mopping the kitchen in the same 5 minutes?

The licence fee is probably now outdated, but I would still happily pay it for the weekend output on Radio 6 and all the drama, radio and archive material. To lose that because no-one thought it was worth keeping and wouldn't cough up a streaming fee to access is a very sad thought.

We used to only watch the BBC. In this last year I've hardly put it on at all. Comedies that aren't funny, endless cookery programmes, paying "celebrities" to go on holiday to somewhere I couldn't afford in a million years, game shows that are like watching paint dry. Where is the decent programming?

Every so often you get a decent series or a one-off drama but they are few and far between. Even classics like Silent Witness and Call the Midwife have lost the plot and are no longer interesting.

Then you get to summer and get hours and hours of bloody sport on every channel.

Bloody hell, totalitarian much?

I don't want to pay for the BBC, I don't use it, and they have a shitty history of enabling paedophiles and lying. No thanks.

In general we can choose what we pay for and watch, why should we be forced to pay for something that in many cases might actively work against our best interests? Doesn't seem very democratic.

Seems like some people still really value the BBC. That's great, I wish I felt the same. But those who value it should be happy to pay a sub for it, which will mean it will become very slimmed down (no more sending an army of BBC journos on a jolly to Glastonbury).

I do think they have a good archive, especially when they used to produce really good comedy.

Only if they axe Strictly - it's past its sell by date

The main reason for that is the commercial & satellite stations can easily outbid them for productions and major sporting events. Programme production companies are going to want to sell to the highest bidder, and most of the time, the BBC can't afford to buy programmes when they are up against the likes of Sky & Netflix, who can pay more.

The days of a licence fee are gone. Many countries fund public service broadcasting through general taxation like in France/Spain , adding a fee to electricity bills like in Portugal and Greece or a household charge like in Germany. UK needs to get away from the idea of the licence fee which is directed to the BBC and find a way of supporting public service broadcasting in general by levying a general fee, paid by all.

Given that the government has 'committed' to reducing peoples utilities bills this seems a non starter politically. Adding £200 or whatever the licence fee is nowadays to the average persons utilities bill must be roughly a 15% increase, which will feed into RPI. I can't see it happening any time soon!

I've just watched Colditz, a BBC drama from the 1970s. It's very cheaply made and is available for free on YouTube.

It's absolutely brilliant.

You don't need a huge amount of money. You just need excellent writers, great actors and a determination from everyone involved to produce something brilliant.

And that's exactly what the BBC is missing.

And the BBC does have a huge amount of money. BBC Studios is the commercial arm of the BBC and makes billions every year. And that's before you even factor in the licence fee.

Did you know that there are several BBC channels on Freeview alone that have advertising, like all the U channels? All showing programmes that the licence fee paid for years ago.

But I would agree that the beeb WASTES humongous amounts of money every year. Someone gave the example of them sending literally hundreds of journalists every year to report on ... Glastonbury. And don't get me started on the numerous nonentity presenters on hundreds of thousands of pounds a year.

Why do you think All should pay? There are millions who don't watch it and millions who dont watch any sort of TV at all do why should they pay? Do you think that is fair ?

@FunStork in £500 a night hotel too and transported there and back each day by helicopter . Riding the publicly funded gravy train.

I did not renew my licence this year as I am prioritising heating over paying extortionate BBC presenter salaries and paying for dramas that are too woke to watch. I don't regret cancelling the licence but would be aggrieved if I had to go without heat and electricity for two months because I was paying a bbc tax rather than choosing not to pay a voluntary licence fee

I don't watch any live broadcast so I don't need a TV licence. Its very unfair that my electricity bill, or some other bill, is increased so others can watch the drivel and lies the BBC churn out. Watching TV is a choice, its not like paying tax for education or defence, that everyone should contribute to for the universal benefit.

I stopped buying a TV licence in January, and I cannot say I have missed it much. I genuinely do not watch live broadcast from any channel on any device, I don't cheat and watch something now and again. I have told the BBC I do not need a licence.

I still get regular letters, 'reminding' me that I am probably breaking the law (I'm not) threatening me with a visit from an 'enforcement officer' (nothing more than a employee with no official authority or right of entry) to check that I am not watching TV illegally.

I watched Colditz in the 1970's.

That was at a time when the majority of programmes were actually made by the television companies themselves. Most are made by independent production companies these days, and if you look at the end credits of programmes you'll see what I mean. They pitch their original idea to the broadcasters, and sell it to whoever offers the best contractual terms and who then commissions it to be made.

BBC Studios hires out its premises for many of those programmes to be made, as do other film and tv studios all over the country.

Many presenters you see on television these days are freelancers and are not employed by the television company directly. Their contracts are negotiated by agents who take a small percentage of their fees as commission. At one time I worked for an accountancy practice which specialised in the tv, radio and film industries, so I do have some background.

Can I ask you something? If you were a television scriptwriter who came up with a stonking idea for a brilliant new long-running series, who would you want your agent to sell it to?

Hopefully not.

I pay the licence fee as I watch BBC, iPlayer etc but think it's outrageous anyone who doesn't watch, and there are many, should pay a licence fee. Just make it subscription.

I used to be a supporter of the BBC as a national impartial broadcaster- however they have messed up so badly so many times recently that I just don’t think it can work anymore.
I think “freeview” channels currently available should become a paid for optional subscription service that costs about the same as the license fee - so cheap enough for most people to pay but with no obligation

They do that here in Italy. €10ish slapped on the leccy bill. Almost impossible to get it removed. And it’s for RAI. Which is shit. Whatever the BBC is nowadays (no idea, can’t get it this side of the alps) it did at least have its glory years.

Probably Netflix would be my first choice but the BBC would still be a strong second.

I would accept less money if I was certain a buyer would do it brilliantly, but I can't think who that buyer would be.

Absolutely not.

I don't have a TV licence, and will never buy one. I would resent paying for it as a compulsory utility bill charge, as it is something that I will never use... because unlike in previous years, they rarely make documentaries anymore, and I'm not interested in a lot of their current programmes. Instead, I have subscriptions to other platforms, or pay for ad-free viewing. Perhaps the BBC should go down that route instead, if they're clawing for money.

@TheeNotoriousPIG They got 5.9 BILLION revenue 2024/25 FY

No, that is mad.
Not everyone watches the BBC or live TV.
It would be like charging someone for gas when their property is electric only (DB's flat is like that).