Time to change the TV licence?

Elmo

There are now 3 electrical companies 2 semi-state bodies and 1 independent. The levy would be applied on each companies bill.

We should never ever forget Ray Burke.

The use of An Post comes from era when the Department of Post and Telegraphs ran both the postal and broadcast services.

Sam Russell

There may be 50 electrical supply companies, but there is only one billing company, ESB Networks. That is why it is the obvious candidate to colllect the RTE licence fee. If you have a TV, you have to have electricity, so you have a bill.

The fact that much of RTE services are now available on the net, it would be reasonable to extend the charge to all electricity users. Not many would not have any interaction with broadcasting. Nearly none, i would think.

Elmo

Sam Russell wrote: »

There may be 50 electrical supply companies, but there is only one billing company, ESB Networks. That is why it is the obvious candidate to colllect the RTE licence fee. If you have a TV, you have to have electricity, so you have a bill.

Bord Gais and Airtricity both issue their own Bills.

Apogee

Written answers
Tuesday, 12 May 2009
Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources
Television Licence Fee

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Question 113: To ask the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his views on new methods of collecting television licences; the methods available to him to collect TV licences; his views on whether any new method needs to be mandatory; his further views on whether the jailing of more than 50 people in 2008 for non-payment of the TV licence is a waste of resources; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18690/09]

Eamon Ryan (Minister, Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources; Dublin South, Green Party)
There are various methods of collection of television licence fees in other countries which could be adopted here. While such other systems may have advantages, I have not yet formed any conclusive opinions of which new method, if any, would be appropriate for this country.

In relation to the imprisonment of persons, I have introduced two new provisions in the Broadcasting Bill 2008, which I anticipate will reduce the necessity for criminal proceedings in respect of the non-payment of the television licence fee.

The first provision in section 149 of the Bill proposes an on-the-spot fine mechanism to be deployed at the option of the television licence collection agent. In essence this mechanism provides that if a person buys a television licence within a set time period and pays a penalty equivalent to one-third of the annual television licence fee, then no court proceedings will be taken, thus reducing the necessity for court proceedings.

The second provision which is proposed in section 150(3) empowers the television licence collection agent to pursue as a civil debt an amount owing in respect of a television licence fee.

Apogee

Charles Flanagan (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)

Question 183: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of persons who were committed to prison in the past five years for non-payment of fines following court proceedings initiated by An Post for not having a television licence; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2684/10]

Dermot Ahern (Minister, Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform; Louth, Fianna Fail)

I expect the number of committals for non-payment fines to fall substantially once the Fines Bill 2009 has been enacted. The information requested by the Deputy for the years 2005 to 2009 is set out in the table that follows this reply. These figures relate to persons committed to prison for breach of the Broadcasting and Wireless Telegraphy Act 1988 where a fine or a prison sentence or indeed both may be imposed for not having a television licence.

Year Total
2005 52
2006 31
2007 32
2008 54
2009 62

I can advise the Deputy that the number of such people held in custody at any one time is a tiny fraction of the overall prisoner population. To illustrate this point, figures relating to 20 January 2010 indicate that there was no person in custody for non-payment of fines in relation to not having a television licence.

http://www.kildarestreet.com/wrans/?id=2010-01-21.1072.0

Mike 1972

DePurpereWolf wrote: »

My problem with the TV licence is the stupid method of paying 'tax' for it. If we see it as part of the culture and heritage of this country. Why than not just add it to the income tax.

If culture and heritage is the reason for public funding a TV channel surely the lottery would be a more appropriate source than income tax (especially given all the free advertising they get from RTE.

The licence fee made a certain amount of sense in the sixties and seventies but with developments in technology and increacing cultural diversity (e.g. Polish people watching Polsat and not even having an aerial for RTE) its a lot more difficult to sustain a case for it now.

Elmo

Mike 1972 wrote: »

If culture and heritage is the reason for public funding a TV channel surely the lottery would be a more appropriate source than income tax (especially given all the free advertising they get from RTE.

The licence fee made a certain amount of sense in the sixties and seventies but with developments in technology and increacing cultural diversity (e.g. Polish people watching Polsat and not even having an aerial for RTE) its a lot more difficult to sustain a case for it now.

Even foreigner need to know about the country that they live in. If I lived in Poland I would possibly try to look at RTÉ but I would also be looking at my local content from Poland. Also with the downturn this seems less of an issues and even with foreigners their children are Irish and will watch Irish programming.

As for the National Lottery it would mean taking money away for the charities that it supports and I wouldn't be in favour of that.

You have also got to remember that the Licence fee isn't just about television.

I would be less inclined to go with income tax the government can pressurise RTÉ politically with Exchequre funding. I know that in the past (RAY BURKE) capped advertising and the licence fee because of political feelings but it is hard to do and much more public.

Mike 1972

Elmo wrote: »

Even foreigner need to know about the country that they live in. If I lived in Poland I would possibly try to look at RTÉ but I would also be looking at my local content from Poland.

Are you suggesting that Irish people who dont have television (or watch little/no RTE) dont know about their own country ?

Elmo wrote: »

have also got to remember that the Licence fee isn't just about television.

Which makes the logic behind a levy on TV(broadband/mobile phone) ownership even more questionable really ?

Elmo

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Are you suggesting that Irish people who dont have television (or watch little/no RTE) dont know about their own country ?

I am never surprised about how little Irish people know about their country but that may not be down to not watching RTÉ. Could TV3 afford to support RTÉ's network?

Which makes the logic behind a levy on TV(broadband/mobile phone) ownership even more questionable really ?

Or you could ask why isn't every one paying a TV Licence regardless of how they use RTÉ. Concert goers, Radio Listers, Mobile phone users, Computer users, Irish Language enthusiast, Sports enthusiasts, News etc etc

Which leads me back to the Electricity bill idea.

Mike 1972

Elmo wrote: »

Or you could ask why isn't every one paying a TV Licence regardless of how they use RTÉ. Concert goers, Radio Listers, Mobile phone users, Computer users, Irish Language enthusiast, Sports enthusiasts, News etc etc.

Concert goers do not necessairly attend events run by RTE
Other radio stations are available.
The overwhelming majority of mobie phones are never used for anything RTE realted
Ditto computers
RTE are not the only source of news
If one is into sport one doesnt need a television to enjoy it
And I daresay the Irish language enthusiast(s?) you refer to can speak Irish to their hearts content without ever hearing it on RTE just like -er English language enthusiasts.

Nowehre did I dismiss your Electricity bill idea. There actually is a lot to be said for it although some might criticise it for being even more arbitrary (in relation to linkage between cost and usage) than a Television licence.

Whatever method is chosen for funding RTE there should be a lot more transparancy regarding what individual programming is being funded by it and what programmes are self funded by advertising/sponsorship

Apogee

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Nowehre did I dismiss your Electricity bill idea. There actually is a lot to be said for it although some might criticise it for being even more arbitrary (in relation to linkage between cost and usage) than a Television licence.

What linkage between cost and usage?

Elmo

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Concert goers do not necessairly attend events run by RTE
Other radio stations are available.
The overwhelming majority of mobie phones are never used for anything RTE realted
Ditto computers
RTE are not the only source of news
If one is into sport one doesnt need a television to enjoy it
And I daresay the Irish language enthusiast(s?) you refer to can speak Irish to their hearts content without ever hearing it on RTE just like -er English language enthusiasts.

Note the etc at the end of the sentence I could have continue with children, classical music enthusiasts, trainspotters, anoraks, dogs, cats, elephants .... TV viewers and Radio Listers whom listen or watch only Today FM, Newstalk and TV3, since it seems they don't pay that much to RTÉ NL for the use of the network.

I was just pointing out the range of things that RTÉ provide.

Whatever method is chosen for funding RTE there should be a lot more transparancy regarding what individual programming is being funded by it and what programmes are self funded by advertising/sponsorship

I have said this before but you can go online and take a look at their annual report, the BAIs annual report on SandV, the Departments of Comms annual review and many other items which show RTÉ's transparency, how much more transparent do you want them to be?

If you have read them you can give an educated guess as to what is supported by the Licence Fee and what is not.

If you don't read them well then producing more material for you not to read would be pretty pointless.

When I say you I am not directing it directly at Mike1972, I realise it may come across badly.

Mike 1972

Apogee wrote: »

What linkage between cost and usage?

When the TV licence was originally introduced the linkage was pretty clear cut. (Most of) those who had TV sets paid the licence Those without didnt. It was a fairly safe assumption that even among those in 2/3/4 channel land the overwhelming majority of people would watch at least some RTE. Granted there was still the anomoly wherby someone watching less than 30 minutes per week paid the same as someone who watched five or more hours per day but at the time there was no practical way around this. Funding RTE out of general taxation or a levy on ESB bills would have been unfair on taxpayers who didnt want/couldnt afford TV (quite a few in the early sixties)

Nowadays technology and cultural diversity has made things a little more complicated. Although 98-99% of households own a TV its no longer safe to assume all of them watch RTE. Many migrant workers (particularly those who dont intend to stay long term) never watch it. Even those who have have English as a first language now have potentially hundreds of other channels available to them (not to mention DVD's and Game consoles). TV ownership is starting to fall. Alternative platforms (mobile phones, computers) are starting to have an impact. In a few years from now the concept of a TV licence may seem as anachronistic and unenforcable as the Radio licence started to become in the early seventies.

Apogee

Independent.ie
Over 60 are jailed for not paying TV licence fines

By Louise Hogan
Monday February 22 2010

MORE than 60 people were jailed for failing to stump up court fines after they were caught without a TV licence last year.

The cases were among more than 15,700 prosecutions launched against TV licence dodgers in 2009.

An Post said every single household was given time to purchase a €160 licence after they were caught viewing television without the valid paperwork.

Inspectors called to more than 222,000 homes and businesses last year, which resulted in 15,700 prosecutions being initiated. However, not all of these resulted in court cases.

"An Post works to ensure that people are aware of their legal obligation, and to make it as easy as possible for all customers to buy or renew a TV licence," said a spokesman for the company, which earned €12.4m for collecting the fees.

"Prosecution is not the aim, it is a last resort, at which time responsibility moves from An Post to the Courts Service."

More than €226m was collected from fees last year after more than a million licences were purchased -- with a further €55m received from the Department of Social and Family Affairs to cover the 380,000 given to those qualifying for household benefits.

More than 3,366 people were jailed in the first 10 months of last year after they refused, or were unable, to pay various fines. This included 62 who ignored fines for not having a TV licence.

The numbers jailed for failing to pay fines have risen by 150pc since 2007. A new Fines Bill, due to give the courts power to impose community service orders, such as painting, landscaping or cleaning, is expected to become law this year.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/over-60-are-jailed-for-not-paying-tv-licence-fines-2073526.html?service=Print


An Post fees of €12.4m + legal costs of 15,700 prosecutions + expense of jailing 62 people = €20m?

Sam Russell

Apogee wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/over-60-are-jailed-for-not-paying-tv-licence-fines-2073526.html?service=Print


An Post fees of €12.4m + legal costs of 15,700 prosecutions + expense of jailing 62 people = €20m?

More reason to put it onto the ESB bill. It would be paid every two months, would be paid by everyone who had electricity, and would be difficult impossible to avoid.

According to figures from RTE, 98% of homes are liable. If the rate was reduced to €25 per two months, it would be popular less unpopular.

I think it would be cheaper to collect, like free. People who move home, take their ESB with them, or they do not get connected.

It just passes the collection from one semi-state to another.

Poly

Sam Russell wrote: »

According to figures from RTE, 98% of homes are liable.

Surprise surprise!

With the broadband technology advancing, the defining line as what is classified as tv is moving all the time.

Feck RTE! it's a waste of space, however I would gladly contribute/subscribe to the BBC license fee if I could get access to it's playback feature.

Sam Russell

Maybe if we get fta access to BBC, we may get access to BBC iPlayer. It makes sense.:)

pjrey

I'm just going to rant on this as it I am seething..

First - 222,000 homes and people intruded upon - for the 15,000 'wrong doers'.
Its a horrible experience, when the inspector bypasses your security (apartment) and knocks on your door.

Secondly - think of the expense the above has incurred. Why can't the govt either a) tax through provider (ie UPC, SKY) or b) force them to release the names of people paying for TV. You simply don't pay 60e a month for tv without owning the equipment.

Thirdly - Back in the day television was an important medium for national communications - RTE had a public function. Now we have independent commercial stations with less adverts and better programming than RTE. Cut RTE's funding and let them sink or swim. I don't watch RTE, I don't like RTE, I think they squander completely ridiculous amounts of money. I refuse to pay money that I can ill afford to support them.

Finally, its a gorgeous day out, shouldn't be watching TV anyhow

Elmo

pjrey wrote: »

First - 222,000 homes and people intruded upon - for the 15,000 'wrong doers'.
Its a horrible experience, when the inspector bypasses your security (apartment) and knocks on your door.

They should know if you have a licence if you do they won't intrude, aren't you lucky you don't live in a house.

Secondly - think of the expense the above has incurred. Why can't the govt either a) tax through provider (ie UPC, SKY) or b) force them to release the names of people paying for TV. You simply don't pay 60e a month for tv without owning the equipment.

When you buy a TV the seller is actually required by law to get your name and address, I have only ever once had this to be the case and I actually thought they were joking but it is actually in the law.

Thirdly - Back in the day television was an important medium for national communications - RTE had a public function. Now we have independent commercial stations with less adverts and better programming than RTE. Cut RTE's funding and let them sink or swim. I don't watch RTE, I don't like RTE, I think they squander completely ridiculous amounts of money. I refuse to pay money that I can ill afford to support them.

Independent commercial stations with less advertising and better programming????? Who, where, what and when?

Finally, its a gorgeous day out, shouldn't be watching TV anyhow

Indeed.

Mike 1972

Elmo wrote: »

They should know if you have a licence if you do they won't intrude.

One is not required by law to have a licence if they dont own a television set.

Elmo wrote: »

When you buy a TV the seller is actually required by law to get your name and address, I have only ever once had this to be the case and I actually thought they were joking but it is actually in the law.

This indeed still the case in the UK but I thought it was abolished in the Republic (due to outright refusal to cooperate by the overwhelming majority of TV dealers). I have never seen anyone buying a TV in Ireland being asked for their name/address. Most NI dealers (even Tesco/Argos etc) will ask but quite frankly one could (If paying in cash) give their name as Elvis Presley and their address as Graceland.

Elmo wrote: »

Independent commercial stations with less advertising and better programming????? Who, where, what and when?

Possibly but not any RoI based ones ?

Sam Russell

Mike 1972 wrote: »

One is not required by law to have a licence if they dont own a television set.

The definition of a television set has changed in the latest act and could include a computer with an internet connection with software to view TV broadcasts. Not tested in court yet as far as I know. If it was based on the ESB bill, then it would be automatic, and cost nothing to collect, and no need for 220,000 thousand visits from inspectors. Only 2% would be overcharged. If they reduced to cost by the 5% an Post get to collect it, it might even be popular.

Elmo

Mike 1972 wrote: »

One is not required by law to have a licence if they dont own a television set.

I know I was referring to the fact that if people have TV equipment more than likely they have a TV and if they have a Licence then the inspector doesn't call. Otherwise you have to prove you don't etc etc another topic.

This indeed still the case in the UK but I thought it was abolished in the Republic (due to outright refusal to cooperate by the overwhelming majority of TV dealers). I have never seen anyone buying a TV in Ireland being asked for their name/address. Most NI dealers (even Tesco/Argos etc) will ask but quite frankly one could (If paying in cash) give their name as Elvis Presley and their address as Graceland.

I was asked in Aldi in ROI, never saw it anywhere else. Rang the TV licence section of An Post and the lady said that as far as she knew it was still the case but it was rare that they got the info in recent years. And Aldi informed me they sent all info to the licencing section. I refused to give my info.

Possibly but not any RoI based ones ?

UK private companies also show more ads than RTÉ unless your paying for Sky Movies and even they show ads between each film.

Mike 1972

Elmo wrote: »

if they have a Licence then the inspector doesn't call. Otherwise you have to prove you don't etc etc another topic

Innocent until proven guilty how are you ?

Elmo wrote: »

Rang the TV licence section of An Post and the lady said that as far as she knew it was still the case but it was rare that they got the info in recent years.

So the agency in charge of enforcing the TV licencing law.
1) Dont actually know what the current law is
2) Are aware that (what they think is) the law is being widely flouted and dont seem particlularly bothered

UK private companies also show more ads than RTÉ

Thats prettty debatable (Lottery Shows/"Our next guest who has a new book/CD out" shows.......) In any case the UK is not the only other country in the world.

Elmo

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Thats prettty debatable (Lottery Shows/"Our next guest who has a new book/CD out" shows.......) In any case the UK is not the only other country in the world.

UK TV has plenty of those show as well. It is an unfortunate fact of how TV has gone. Both RTÉ and TG4 do not show as many ads as their Irish competitors. AFAIK ITV, C4 and five show more ads than TV3.

So the agency in charge of enforcing the TV licencing law. 1) Dont actually know what the current law is 2) Are aware that (what they think is) the law is being widely flouted and dont seem particlularly bothered

I was only talking to someone who answered the phone she prob knows more than the CEO of An Post, I assume she knows exactly what the law is and didn't want to be drawn on it. So I am going with 2.

themont85

themont85 wrote: »

This has been discussed before, but i find its mainly discussed in Britain and pushed heavily by anti-BBC folks. Does anybody think its time to scrap the Tv licence system in Ireland? I believe it is time to completely overhaul the system in Ireland.

I believe in PSB and I believe RTE do a decent job cosidering our population size. It is dissapointing that we can't have a service like the BBC, extremely comprehensive and provides something for the whole population(which some fools in Britain don't get), with no ads. The reality is we need PSB and a regulated system is needed to enforce this, involving some form of public funding. Instead of the TVL i think it should be taken out of general taxation. This would reduce collecting costs(TV licence inspectors, TV ads ect), avoidance and be far more equitable.

Now the arguments against it being out of general taxation was always, what about people who don't own TV sets? Why should they pay for others service? Well the reality is 99% of the population have a TV set and we already pay taxes for services we may never use i.e Hospitals, Third level education, social welfare ect, all for the general good of the country. Now some will say, how can you compare education to TV? Well, we also pay for librarys and this is just hazording a guess but i'd say more people use the medium of television than a library, and the tv is a great way of informing the population. With the fact that almost everything is becoming available online i think we may see in the future less people buying tvs because they access what they want online without the need for a licence, thus reducing the money for RTE for PSB. I read an article recently about an elderly couple in Britain who got rid of their tv because BBC's iplayer gives them everything they want without the need for a licence. What they are doing isn't wrong technically but will certaintly have an effect long term.

I think the Irish Govt should act immediately to change the system.

All well and good but your fogetting one thing. the people who are on long term social welfare and have no intention of getting a job would now be exempt from paying a tv licence. another perk and incentive to stary on sw that the rest of the country is paying for.

DePurpereWolf

Deleted User wrote: »

All well and good but your fogetting one thing. the people who are on long term social welfare and have no intention of getting a job would now be exempt from paying a tv licence. another perk and incentive to stary on sw that the rest of the country is paying for.

What's the difference.
Either, they get social welfare to pay for the tv licence,
or, they don't have to pay the tv licence.
In both cases the working public pays for them.

But when the tv licence is taken out of the monthly expenses of people on social welfare, than the amount of social welfare could easily be lowered.
Pas de problème.

Apogee

Irish Times wrote:

TV licence will not exist in 2020, says Minister

RONAN McGREEVY

Wed, Apr 28, 2010

THE TV licence fee as we know it will not exist in 2020, Minister for Communications Eamon Ryan has said.

Television on devices from mobile phones to laptops will make the old way of charging for a physical television in a home neither practicable or possible, he predicted.

Mr Ryan told the Media 2020 Vision for Change conference organised by mediacontact.ie at Croke Park yesterday that he did not know what would replace the current licence but alternatives would need careful thought.

He said any replacement needed to be allied to new technology with a guaranteed stream of income and should not be dependent on decisions taken by the minister for finance of the day.

Mr Ryan said the time was right for another media forum to rival the one at the Royal Hospital Kilmainham in 2002, which eventually led to the setting up of the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland. The forum would seek to address many of the issues surrounding digital media for which there was no obvious answer.

RTÉ Publishing executive director Múirne Laffan said connected TV, which will allow viewers to access the internet through the television, will be coming to Ireland this summer.

She predicted that within eight to 10 years every television in the State will be connected to the internet. RTÉ Publishing, which runs RTE.ie, now has 3.3 million unique users with a million of those living overseas.

She said RTÉ was the first national broadcaster in the world to make its content accessible worldwide through its RTÉ Player.

Google’s head of acquisition Natalie Bagnall said the downturn had not affected the company because people regarded the internet now as more important than ever.

© 2010 The Irish Times

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2010/0428/1224269221173_pf.html

Elmo

Apogee wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2010/0428/1224269221173_pf.html

TG4 was the first broadcast to provide not only archived programming but also a live stream, long before RTÉ and a good year before BBC iPlayer.

Mike 1972

Ryan is right about a need of a rethink on the TV licence but the notion that every TV in the state being connected to broadband 8-10 years from now is patently ridiculous. For several reasons the most obvious being that for a start it would be necessary to have broadband* actually available everywhere in the state.

* And actual broadband as opposed to capped fraudband

watty

Apogee wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2010/0428/1224269221173_pf.html

The article and his comments are complete garbage.

Basically the TV licence is a Tax on having a working TV receiver, no matter even if you only watch foreign TV or only DVDs, if the receiver is functional.

TV can be "received" by Aerial, phone line, coax cable, fibre or dish.

The screen can be 3" on a phone, or a 72" video only inlet projector.

Currently it's "live broadcast" that counts as TV. Streaming YouTube type quality has till now been a grey area. Semi-Cable like service delivered by IPTV to setbox or PC is not a grey area. A DTT dongle, Analogue or Satellite tuner card/module on PC/Laptop is not a grey area, it's a TV receiver.

They want to tax more, not less, hence petrol has three taxes where one would do (Excise Duty, VAT, Carbon), they could easily have a fuel rate of VAT instead.

RTE happens to be partially funded by the TV tax, otherwise RTE would be like TV3, a complete UK / USA clone lowest common denominator channel with almost no local indigenous content or culture. Direct Government subvention would likely mean RTE would be a lacky of the Government. The BBC resists that for good reason.

The ESB idea is stupid. because actually not everybody buys electricity and they may not buy it from ESB.

Any viewing card or broadband system for TV licence payment/Viewing entitlement again leads to easy government control, loss of privacy etc. Again for good reasons the BBC abhors that. Control not money is the main reason that BBC left the FTV scheme. They only ever intended temporary use, this is well documented. S4C~digidol was a deliberate test case of the "rights issues" which is why it was FTA first.

The quite simple approach is to assume every premises is liable unless the occupier proves they are not. That is why with TV penetration so high, they are not fussed about enforcement of shops collecting details. That's a waste of time now.

I'd suspect a high proportion of the 2% of premises allegedly not liable, probably are.

Any well thought out changes in TV licence by any competent Government will simply be to reduce any possible loop holes in avoiding payment, assume a TV receiving phone doesn't need a separate licence as you will have a TV licence for your home (which will have something more sensible to watch, even if only a laptop/netbook poor for European TV as refresh rate is usually related to USA format, even if "full HD") and assumption every address is liable unless it annually submits an exemption certificate.

Offices need a TV licence, right now, even if the screen is 99% used for powerpoint.

Most of the people objecting to a TV licence pay Sky or UPC. There is plenty of FTA TV. No-one is making them subscribe to PayTv, much of which is poorer than the basic free channels available via your aerial and FTA dish.

TV licence is a TAX. Only stupid governments abolish a Tax. Usually they come back and hit harder.

The countryside is full of flytipped rubbish and companies getting rich collecting bins. This used to be paid out of Rates. Abolishing Local Domestic rates (there are still commercial ones, which is why we get stupidly zoned shopping centres), a local tax was stupidity of highest order. No doubt it needed reformed. The Government was never going to replace the shortfall out of general taxation, but has not made and never will make sufficient alternate funding. Hence the disaster of bin charges and inevitability of other charges.

Getting rid of TV licence would be a disaster for content.

Linking TV licence payment to enabled viewing (and potentially the other information that could be gathered if all TV receivers had broadband for this feature) is something that Stalin, Mao, Hitler etc would have loved.

Yes some TV sets now have Broadband. Maybe they all will. Yes you can watch TV on your Laptop/PC/Netbook/iThing/phone whatever. Lets keep that well away from Government. It's nothing to do with TV licence.

Let Government define what constitutes "TV reception" for the obligation of paying TV tax. Assume everyone is likely to be liable and have a nice simple process (online or paper form in PostOffice) to certify exemption.

Have it that they must apply for warrant from Court if you have submitted the exemption form, but otherwise have right of entry to search for unlicensed (i.e. untaxed) Visual Reception equipment if your licence is not current and you have not applied for exemption.

There should probably be some categories of "viewers" that get a free licence. Unless they have Jobseeker or Educational content on Irish TV, recipients of Welfare should get no TV licence support. They should however get equivalent of a basic Broadband subscription, paid direct to ISP.