Pat Rabbitte to force sky/upc to give data to catch licence dodgers.

Fratoue

Sofiztikated wrote: »

It's not theft.

It's tax evasion. There IS a difference.

TV license not a tax as you well know

Genuine question to people why bother even opening the door to the tv license guy? Believe me you know in advance if its good news so why engage them and worse people tell them all their details!? WTF. Just amazed that people can be so obdient drones as to allow a stranger to harrass them out of personal information in their own homes! : (

Fr_Dougal

120_Minutes wrote: »

I pay for them, but i dont watch them... like ever. there is nothing on irish televison that appeals to my interests, that i cannot find on other broadcasters, or on other media.

and judging from what i see on the epg when i fly past them. or on threads here on boards it looks like i aint missing much.

really, the only time i see rte is when i visit my parents.

When did you lose interest in RTE?

I quite like Love/Hate, some of their programming is very good.

Sofiztikated

pajopearl wrote: »

How do you manage that? There's no sky package that I'm aware of that doesn't carry the Irish stations as standard!!!??? Unless of course you're not paying for sky either and just using their dish and box with the free to air stations.???

I've got a dish, sky box, no sub card, and don't receive any Irish channels.

Engine No.9

120_Minutes wrote: »

I pay for them, but i dont watch them... like ever. there is nothing on irish televison that appeals to my interests, that i cannot find on other broadcasters, or on other media.

and judging from what i see on the epg when i fly past them. or on threads here on boards it looks like i aint missing much.

really, the only time i see rte is when i visit my parents.

So you are receiving the channels. If you weren't receiving the channels, I'd say your argument has some merit, but you have a tv system, which you have elected to have installed with the full knowledge that the stations are being carried by the operator, makes you liable for the tv licence charge.

Max Power1

Sofiztikated wrote: »

Huh. TIL.

I don't mind admitting when I'm wrong.

I still want a Mars though.

You want a mars? Well here is half a snickers. Now you must pay the snickers license of €160 p/a and you are a thief if you dont!:P

Max Power1

Phoebas wrote: »

Any argument for paying the TV licence is laughable.

.

FYP

Phoebas

120_Minutes wrote: »

well then, as someone who had admitted to being not very political in the past, can you advise me on how i make that effort? genuine question.

I believe this law, and some others are unjust. how do i go about making my voice heard by the right people?

Lobby your political representatives for a start I suppose. Get involved with or start a campaign. Figure out exactly what you want (rather than just what you oppose). Try to understand the opposing argument. Seek out opportunities to inject your point of view. Write letters. Blog.

All the usual stuff.

R P McMurphy

I don't have a tv so don't pay the licence but would not mind paying some nominal fee for a scaled back national service along the lines of tg4. Have not viewed much of it but seems to have some quality documentaries and returns a good enough service for the input. If RTE was the same then would not object to the fee but hearing of some of the salaries paid to the 'stars' in case they get headhunted by international media companies seems bizarre.

Phoebas

R P McMurphy wrote: »

I don't have a tv so don't pay the licence but would not mind paying some nominal fee for a scaled back national service along the lines of tg4. Have not viewed much of it but seems to have some quality documentaries and returns a good enough service for the input. If RTE was the same then would not object to the fee but hearing of some of the salaries paid to the 'stars' in case they get headhunted by international media companies seems bizarre.

I think most people see the value in having well funded public service broadcasting, but get pissed off with high salaries paid to 'stars'.

But the argument made by some people here that they shouldn't have to pay for a service they don't want is a bit bogus. I could apply the same logic to, say, the social welfare service - I pay a small fortune into it, but I hardly access it myself. But I recognise that there are wider societal benefits of having a social welfare service (and state funded public service broadcasting) even if there are lots of problems with the service that need reforming.

120_Minutes

pajopearl wrote: »

So you are receiving the channels. If you weren't receiving the channels, I'd say your argument has some merit, but you have a tv system, which you have elected to have installed with the full knowledge that the stations are being carried by the operator, makes you liable for the tv licence charge.

but as i keep saying: i dont want to receive them

Phoebas wrote: »

Lobby your political representatives for a start I suppose. Get involved with or start a campaign. Figure out exactly what you want (rather than just what you oppose). Try to understand the opposing argument. Seek out opportunities to inject your point of view. Write letters. Blog.

All the usual stuff.

what i want:

for those who want to avail of semi-state broadcasting services the fee be applied either by absorbsion into subscribtion television or by levy on saorview sales

dont want them? remove the irish stations from your subscription, or dont buy saorview equipment.

simple really.

Qualitymark

Those who don't wish to pay the TV licence because they don't watch TV - could I suggest that it's a bit like the way even childless people pay tax to support schools, and drivers pay tax to support trains, and so on; we all support the common good with our contribution, and gain from that (for instance, those childless people who have paid for the education of others' children will benefit from those children's contribution to their old age pension).

Phoebas

120_Minutes wrote: »

what i want:

for those who want to avail of semi-state broadcasting services the fee be applied either by absorbsion into subscribtion television or by levy on saorview sales

dont want them? remove the irish stations from your subscription, or dont buy saorview equipment.

simple really.

That's a legitimate thing to want, but its not legitimate to evade your licence fee because your not getting what you want.

rambutman

Qualitymark wrote: »

Those who don't wish to pay the TV licence because they don't watch TV - could I suggest that it's a bit like the way even childless people pay tax to support schools, and drivers pay tax to support trains, and so on; we all support the common good with our contribution, and gain from that (for instance, those childless people who have paid for the education of others' children will benefit from those children's contribution to their old age pension).

non smokers to pay health costs associated with caring for smokers in hospitals through medical card, workers paying PRSI that pays social welfare etc, etc.

Thing is there's a difference between these things which are the common good and a semi-state agency like RTE who pay massive wages etc, etc. Remove RTE, and the state, and the welfare of its citizens wouldn't be a whole lot worse. Remove benefits, health care medical cards etc, etc and real people will actually suffer.

bgrizzley

Phoebas wrote: »

I think most people see the value in having well funded public service broadcasting, but get pissed off with high salaries paid to 'stars'.

But the argument made by some people here that they shouldn't have to pay for a service they don't want is a bit bogus. I could apply the same logic to, say, the social welfare service - I pay a small fortune into it, but I hardly access it myself. But I recognise that there are wider societal benefits of having a social welfare service (and state funded public service broadcasting) even if there are lots of problems with the service that need reforming.

Not really like with like though Phoebas. Most people realise that they/someone they know may/will need SW at some point. But paying so someone gets to watch Fair City?
I'd be all for Pay-to-use, it's a great public service so they will have no problems. They are doing it with Irish Water and water is actually essential. We could probably manage without Pat/Marion.

Engine No.9

120_Minutes wrote: »

but as i keep saying: i dont want to receive them

I'd have a word with sky so and ask them to remove access to them. I'm pretty sure they'll say they can't do it so if you're so dead set on not having them, get rid of sky altogether is the right job.

If you're so principled against paying the tv licence then surely your principles should drive you against any operator which carries the relevant stations as standard. Do yourself a favour and get rid of the double standards here.

120_Minutes

pajopearl wrote: »

I'd have a word with sky so and ask them to remove access to them. I'm pretty sure they'll say they can't do it so if you're so dead set on not having them, get rid of sky altogether is the right job.

If you're so principled against paying the tv licence then surely your principles should drive you against any operator which carries the relevant stations as standard. Do yourself a favour and get rid of the double standards here.

But what if i want some of the services sky provide? eg i quite like sky arts and thats subscription only.

i only want to pay for what i want.

Sonics2k

I have to pay a TV licence even though I don't even own a TV.

I use my pc for streaming services like Netflix and so on, never go near the RTE player as it had nothing of interest to me or my girlfriend.

It's insanity.

Engine No.9

120_Minutes wrote: »

But what if i want some of the services sky provide? eg i quite like sky arts and thats subscription only.

i only want to pay for what i want.

That's your choice mate. It's akin to going into a restaurant that only has a set menu on for this particular night for whatever reason. You don't want dessert but you're still made pay for it as that's the offer. You have to pay for what you don't want as well as what you do be ause its the only way to get what you want. Either that or you'll take your business elsewhere but it just so happens every other restaurant in town is holding the same offer.

lightspeed

The biggest insult is that others like TV3 struggle to compete cause RTE has more money to swing about from squeezing €160 a year out of people.

Why is it justified that the staff at RTE are paid so much when RTE itself is a loss making enterprise at the cost of the tax payer?

bgrizzley

pajopearl wrote: »

That's your choice mate. It's akin to going into a restaurant that only has a set menu on for this particular night for whatever reason. You don't want dessert but you're still made pay for it as that's the offer. You have to pay for what you don't want as well as what you do be ause its the only way to get what you want. Either that or you'll take your business elsewhere but it just so happens every other restaurant in town is holding the same offer.

As opposed to RTE, where it's akin to walking past a restaurant, and being handed a bill so the their customers can eat. it's a funny auld country. :pac:

Big Bottom

What is it with people thinking they are some kind of principled Robin hood type by not paying Taxes?
Pay your way or get the boat.

120_Minutes

Sonics2k wrote: »

I have to pay a TV licence even though I don't even own a TV.

I use my pc for streaming services like Netflix and so on, never go near the RTE player as it had nothing of interest to me or my girlfriend.

It's insanity.

under the current system, you are exempt from paying the tv licence.

only if your pc has a tuner card, then you have to pay.

Phoebas

bgrizzley wrote: »

Not really like with like though Phoebas. Most people realise that they/someone they know may/will need SW at some point. But paying so someone gets to watch Fair City?
I'd be all for Pay-to-use, it's a great public service so they will have no problems. They are doing it with Irish Water and water is actually essential. We could probably manage without Pat/Marion.

The 'Fair City' reference is also a bit bogus, because most people wouldn't consider it to be public service broadcasting.

Some of the News and Current Affairs stuff is.

Tin Foil Hat

The Backwards Man wrote: »

7 out of 8 subcribers who pay their taxes welcome this move.

I don't. I pay the licence fee but disagree with it. Best of luck to those who manage to evade it.

Engine No.9

Big Bottom wrote: »

What is it with people thinking they are some kind of principled Robin hood type by not paying Taxes?
Pay your way or get the boat.

It's not a tax. Jesus. Taxes go into the exchequer to fund public services... Welfare, roads, education etc.... RTE is quite far removed from a public service. The majority of this country doesn't bother with it. It's a niche audience market really as the wider audience market programming is quite often found on other stations a few years ahead.

The tv licence just lines the pockets of the fatcats in Montrose.

The story I heard years ago about the BBC and the tv licence in GB was that somebody took the BBC and the UK government to court to not pay his licence as he felt that why should he when the BBC was taking in advertising revenue to pay for it. He argued that he would pay it if the BBC didn't bring in advertising revenue. Strangely enough the judge agreed with him and found a loophole to permit him not pay it. UK legislation changed the following year but rather than put the onus on the licence holder for paying it they removed advertising revenue from the BBCs budget and basically forced them to come up with better programming. Could all be a load of hogwash but it actually stands to reason.

Phoebas

pajopearl wrote: »

The majority of this country doesn't bother with it.

You'll have some figures to back that up I suppose?

bgrizzley

Phoebas wrote: »

The 'Fair City' reference is also a bit bogus, because most people wouldn't consider it to be public service broadcasting.

Some of the News and Current Affairs stuff is.

Ah c'mon dont be so hard on it. This is from wiki...

Social realism

The show has featured a number of gritty storylines reflecting major issues in Irish society, particularly from the mid-1990s onwards.


Not so very different from their Prime Time entry...

Content

The programme deals with serious issues current in Ireland


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_City#Social_realism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Time#Content

Phoebas

bgrizzley wrote: »

Ah c'mon dont be so hard on it. This is from wiki...

Social realism

The show has featured a number of gritty storylines reflecting major issues in Irish society, particularly from the mid-1990s onwards.


Not so very different from their Prime Time entry...

Content

The programme deals with serious issues current in Ireland


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_City#Social_realism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Time#Content

Fair enough. Put me down for an extra tenner a year.

Engine No.9

Phoebas wrote: »

You'll have some figures to back that up I suppose?

http://www.dailyedge.ie/the-most-watched-programmes-in-ireland-last-year-332260-Jan2012/

The Toy Show secured an average viewership of 1,528,000 viewers last December – making it not only the most watched programme of 2011 but also the most watched programme in Ireland for 17 years.

In a country with a population above 4 million it only stands to reason the rest of the country was watching something else on that night. And that's just one night!!!

I jest of course, that argument is very thin. But an argument nonetheless. Just an illustrator of my point.

enigmatical

I do think there needs to be public service broadcasting, but I'm not convinced that giving all that money to a bloated organisation like RTE is how to do it.

They've done very little to reign in their crazy levels of pay for certain people and they provide almost no regional coverage.

I'd rather see the money being tendered for by any Irish broadcaster and RTE being completely transformed into a commissioning house only.

We should be looking at ways to reduce the license fee, not increase it.

120_Minutes

Phoebas wrote: »

You'll have some figures to back that up I suppose?

If they gave us the choice to opt out we'd know for sure.

Sonics2k

120_Minutes wrote: »

under the current system, you are exempt from paying the tv licence.

only if your pc has a tuner card, then you have to pay.

Or came with one, but I removed it ages ago.

According to the TV licence inspector who stopped by my place, even though it's been removed I all need to pay.

Max Power1

Sonics2k wrote: »

Or came with one, but I removed it ages ago.

According to the TV licence inspector who stopped by my place, even though it's been removed I all need to pay.

Why do people open the door to tv license inspectors?

It's the 21st century, surely anyone that you actually will want to visit you will text you when they are outside!

R P McMurphy

Max Power1 wrote: »

Why do people open the door to tv license inspectors?

It's the 21st century, surely anyone that you actually will want to visit you will text you when they are outside!

Even if they did call and you opened the door, just close it again. Don't need to be talking to uninvited people

Sonics2k

Max Power1 wrote: »

Why do people open the door to tv license inspectors?

It's the 21st century, surely anyone that you actually will want to visit you will text you when they are outside!

We were expecting pizza

The way our flat is structured we can't see who's at the outside door until it's opened.

120_Minutes

Sonics2k wrote: »

Or came with one, but I removed it ages ago.

According to the TV licence inspector who stopped by my place, even though it's been removed I all need to pay.

dear god man, you toldhim it once had a tuner card but you removed it?


to be fair, you should till be exempt, all analouge tuner cards are now defunct so you'd have to get a digitial one, and i dont know of any that work with a sky sub. but hey, it isnt a fair law.

i wouldnt be paying if it were me.

my condolences, but you should have kept schtum. tough lesson.

Sonics2k

120_Minutes wrote: »

dear god man, you toldhim it once had a tuner card but you removed it?


to be fair, you should till be exempt, all analouge tuner cards are now defunct so you'd have to get a digitial one, and i dont know of any that work with a sky sub.

i wouldnt be paying if it were me.

my condolences, but you should have kept schtum. tough lesson.

He asked if I had a TV, to which I simply said "No, I only use a PC for online streaming from US or UK channels, but it's mostly used for gaming." He said I'd need a TV licence and I did say I have no tuner card in it anymore so no I don't.

He insisted I did, I said no and then he left.
About a week later a letter comes in door telling me I require a TV licence and after speaking to them on the phone they said I had too anyway.
Apparently I have to pay RTE for a service I have no interest or use for.

Insanity I say!

the purple tin

Sin City wrote: »

Really it should be incorporated into whatever subscriber a customer is with
eg UPC/SKY add it to their monthly billing and you pay your licence when you pay your bill. Or seeing as its going to be a media licence soon not just a TV licence they could charge your boradband supplier.

Either way the Irish system both TV and broadband needs a major overhaul

At 2:24 in the second video it's like a comedy sketch. The inspector waliking through the gate and carefully closing it even though there isn't a wall or fence

120_Minutes

Sonics2k wrote: »

He asked if I had a TV, to which I simply said "No, I only use a PC for online streaming from US or UK channels, but it's mostly used for gaming."

up to that point you were right.

He said I'd need a TV licence and I did say I have no tuner card in it anymore so no I don't.

aaaaand at this point he was right.

HurtLocker

I think for €160 we should get way more input into what they air. Too many ads, sub par programming. Set up digital poles to make decisions. We should be able to reign in on their spending. It's a joke that they continue to burn through money like there's no tomorrow. I think everyone can agree a wage cap at €100,000 would be a good thing. We pay for we should decide. Not them.

No Pants

emo72 wrote: »

Some guy owed the revenue 80k and his choice was a month in jail or pay it. Did his time the debt is written off.

If that's true, that's excellent value. I have to work for an entire year to earn half of that. Then I pay tax on that.

Qualitymark

HurtLocker wrote: »

I think for €160 we should get way more input into what they air. Too many ads, sub par programming. Set up digital poles to make decisions. We should be able to reign in on their spending. It's a joke that they continue to burn through money like there's no tomorrow. I think everyone can agree a wage cap at €100,000 would be a good thing. We pay for we should decide. Not them.

If there were fewer ads, the licence fee would be higher. The licence fees give a tiny amount of support; most of RTE is paid for by advertising.

As for wage caps, I'd cap all wages and salaries at €50,000, with no extra perks, pensions, etc; anyone who wants to make more is welcome to become a millionaire entrepreneur.

And as for the programming, I'd like to see much more Irish-made programming, and to see RTE TV back in the programme-making business instead of only buying in independently made material. (Not that this independently-made material isn't excellent, especially on TG4.)

darkhorse

Ando's Saggy Bottom wrote: »

And sure Ill repeat this too.

IMO tax evasion is theft.

But you keep saying its theft. What's it the theft of?

Capt'n Midnight

Freddy Smelly wrote: »

privatise all publically owned irish broadcasters. no need for broadcast tax then.

if people want rte then they can pay a sub for it. if they dont want it then they dont have to pay for it.

<sigh>

it's not a broadcast tax


it's a tax on owning a receiver, even if it's only used to pickup arabic stuff

Fratoue

the purple tin wrote: »

At 2:24 in the second video it's like a comedy sketch. The inspector waliking through the gate and carefully closing it even though there isn't a wall or fence

Like your style pal, unfortunately people on this love the system and love paying for Ryan Freemason Tubridy's €600,000 a year salary so it' will fall on deaf ears. Though PM me if you want I have used similar techniques very effectively in the past.

camel jockey

Qualitymark wrote: »

the licence fee would be higher. The licence fees give a tiny amount of support; most of RTE is paid for by advertising.

Not quite. TV Licence revenue is now greater than advertising revenue.

2012 Licence Revenue of EUR 183.6 m with commercial revenues of EUR 167.3 m

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/sectors/media-and-marketing/rt%C3%A9-losses-widen-despite-cuts-1.728930

enigmatical

Qualitymark wrote: »

If there were fewer ads, the licence fee would be higher. The licence fees give a tiny amount of support; most of RTE is paid for by advertising.

As for wage caps, I'd cap all wages and salaries at €50,000, with no extra perks, pensions, etc; anyone who wants to make more is welcome to become a millionaire entrepreneur.

And as for the programming, I'd like to see much more Irish-made programming, and to see RTE TV back in the programme-making business instead of only buying in independently made material. (Not that this independently-made material isn't excellent, especially on TG4.)

The license fee, during boom times, paid for 50% of RTE's operation during the boom times.

Approximately 7% of the license fee goes to the BAI where it's distributed via the "Sound and Vision" funds which go out to independent broadcasters and TG4.

TG4 is funded to the tune €32.25m directly from the exchequer, with a further €8.9m from RTE's budget, €4.7m from the BAI Sound and Vision and NI broadcasting fund (not sure how that breaks down), €460k from the Irish Film Board and €3.8m from commercial sales.

There's a good bit of info in this Wiki article about the 2010 breakdown of RTE's expenditure : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raidió_Teilif%C3%ADs_Éireann#Income_and_expenditure

...

There are a few things I think RTE should be banned from doing by ministerial order though:

1) Engaging in paying for any form of commercial sponsorship. There are other companies quite capable of sponsoring major events etc, RTE should be spending the money on programming. If they want to support something, provide some extra coverage on air.
They are not a commercial organisation and they should not be competing for naming rights or any of those kinds of things. It doesn't achieve anything.


2) I'd have big concerns about the fact that a lot of its activity has nothing to do with broadcasting : orchestras, etc etc. I think it's long overdue that it got back to basics and concentrated on broadcasting radio and television services.

UPC already do it.

enigmatical

If they assume that 99%+ of homes have a TV, then I don't really see the point of providing information. It looks like just yet more data mining by the state to me.

The British crowd go even one step further by requiring the TV retailers capture your name and address and pass it on.

Phoebas

donegal_road wrote: »

Who voted for this stuffed shirt? He is obviously not there to represent the people.

Nearly 13,000 people in Dublin South West.
He topped the poll.

Edit: Here is what Labour said about public service broadcasting in their manifesto, so it should come as no surprise that they would seek to protect funding for public service broadcasting.

Labour wrote:

Labour supports and values public service broadcasting, which has always been a fundamental cornerstone of the Irish broadcasting system. It promotes diversity, social and cultural values that are essential to a properly functioning democracy. Labour will uphold these values as Ireland makes the transition to digital television and radio, ensuring that access to, and the quality of public service broadcasting, are protected.
Labour will examine the role, and the collection of, the TV license fee in light of existing and projected convergence of broadcasting technologies.