A compulsory 'Broadcast tax' next on the list for homes in Ireland

Royal Legend

If 20% of households that should be paying TV licence are not, (that's one person in every five! ) my question is

Why are we paying for "TV licence inspectors" if they are obviously not doing their job?
Or do they even exist? has anyone ever met one? has anyone ever seen their vans going around?

Phoebas

Royal Legend wrote: »

If 20% of households that should be paying TV licence are not, (that's one person in every five! ) my question is

Why are we paying for "TV licence inspectors" if they are obviously not doing their job?
Or do they even exist? has anyone ever met one? has anyone ever seen their vans going around?

It looks like they weren't being successful enough, otherwise we probably wouldn't have this blanket charge.

The primary responsibility for the c.20% of evaders is obviously the evaders themselves.

Royal Legend

Phoebas wrote: »

It looks like they weren't being successful enough, otherwise we probably wouldn't have this blanket charge.

The primary responsibility for the c.20% of evaders is obviously the evaders themselves.

or, they only worked 4 days per week :rolleyes:

20% failure rate is a poor figure in my opinion, so because yet again more civil servants are incompetent, we have to pay to ensure the exchequer gets its pound of flesh

Its the same with the water rates, we have not got the intelligence to fix the leaks, so we will charge people for the loss of the water due to the leaks.

All hail Pat Rabbitte the great trade union man and voice of the people :cool:

Happyman42

Royal Legend wrote: »

If 20% of households that should be paying TV licence are not, (that's one person in every five! ) my question is

Why are we paying for "TV licence inspectors" if they are obviously not doing their job?
Or do they even exist? has anyone ever met one? has anyone ever seen their vans going around?

I live in a moderately sized town and in my 40 odd years of awareness of these things, I have never seen or heard tell of them visiting. Funny one that when you think of the millions they have wasted trying to infer in ad after ad on (funnily enough) RTE! that they where camped outside every door.

Phoebas

Royal Legend wrote: »

or, they only worked 4 days per week :rolleyes:

20% failure rate is a poor figure in my opinion, so because yet again more civil servants are incompetent, we have to pay to ensure the exchequer gets its pound of flesh

I agree it is a high failure rate.
If they give collection of the broadcast tax to the Revenue they'll get that number down.

Royal Legend

Yet again, we have incompetence, first with the banks, then the water charge and now this new media tax. rather than sort any of the glaringly obvious issues, especially water leaks and now a lack of some mythical TV licence inspector doing his job, the governments standard answer is to legislate for the general public to pay more tax.

Happyman42

Phoebas wrote: »

I agree it is a high failure rate.
If they give collection of the broadcast tax to the Revenue they'll get that number down.

The problem has always been and still is, waste. Rabbitte says that 500 have been let go and savings of 800 million have been made since he became minister...have you noticed any difference in RTE's output? There are still huge savings and rationalisation to be made before this ridiculous notion of a 'Labour' party inflict us with another tax.
The non-collecting of the licence fee is because of the productivity (or lack of) of the licence inspectorate.

Phoebas

Happyman42 wrote: »

The problem has always been and still is, waste. Rabbitte says that 500 have been let go and savings of 800 million have been made since he became minister...have you noticed any difference in RTE's output? There are still huge savings and rationalisation to be made before this ridiculous notion of a 'Labour' party inflict us with another tax.
The non-collecting of the licence fee is because of the productivity (or lack of) of the licence inspectorate.

Simplifying it by making it a universal charge and giving it to Revenue would almost certainly get the compliance numbers way up.

Everyone wins apart from evaders and a very small number of people who don't own TVs.

Happyman42

Phoebas wrote: »

Simplifying it by making it a universal charge and giving it to Revenue would almost certainly get the compliance numbers way up.

Everyone wins apart from evaders and a very small number of people who don't own TVs.

No it doesn't, the revenue out there that the evaders account for will not make the problem go away.
What is needed is root and branch review of what public service boadcasting is and what it can be in the future in an Irish context. This is not about keeping RTE trundling along the way it has been.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

The problem has always been and still is, waste. Rabbitte says that 500 have been let go and savings of 800 million have been made since he became minister...have you noticed any difference in RTE's output?

Yes. The cuts show in their TV programming.

alastair

Royal Legend wrote: »

If 20% of households that should be paying TV licence are not, (that's one person in every five! ) my question is

Why are we paying for "TV licence inspectors" if they are obviously not doing their job?
Or do they even exist? has anyone ever met one? has anyone ever seen their vans going around?

They never had 'detector' vans - they relied on door-to-door visits and databases of previous TV owners/licence holders. And they certainly did call on people. I had them at the door more than once over the years.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

Yes. The cuts show in their TV programming.

Where? You are telling me that 500 less people and 800 million less (since Rabbitte got into his bolt hole) to squander has affected change in RTE? That the missing 'productivity' of that number of people is noticable? Where? What in John Logie Baird's name where they doing?

alastair

Royal Legend wrote: »

or, they only worked 4 days per week :rolleyes:

20% failure rate is a poor figure in my opinion, so because yet again more civil servants are incompetent, we have to pay to ensure the exchequer gets its pound of flesh

Civil servants had nothing to do with TV licence enforcement - that was a job contracted out to An Post. And evasion rates here are roughly compatible with the UK, who have a serious enforcement operation (450 collection officers going door-to-door).

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

Where? You are telling me that 500 less people and 800 million less (since Rabbitte got into his bolt hole) to squander has affected change in RTE? That the missing 'productivity' of that number of people is noticable? Where? What in John Logie Baird's name where they doing?

Fewer commissioned programmes, more repeats, fewer correspondents on news, fewer production crew on shoots, less sports coverage, etc - it's pretty evident across the board.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

I live in a moderately sized town and in my 40 odd years of awareness of these things, I have never seen or heard tell of them visiting. Funny one that when you think of the millions they have wasted trying to infer in ad after ad on (funnily enough) RTE! that they where camped outside every door.

I'd imagine that RTE didn't charge An Post anything for showing TV licence campaign adverts.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

Fewer commissioned programmes, more repeats, fewer correspondents on news, fewer production crew on shoots, less sports coverage, etc - it's pretty evident across the board.

No it's not. Again, take 500 people and 800 million out of a business the size of RTE and it would ordinarily be devastating, if that money and employment was actually being used effectively in the first place. It wasn't and isn't.

Sort the business model out first, then look for the money to run it. It's basic economic sense, which our leaders STILL haven't grasped.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

I'd imagine that RTE didn't charge An Post anything for showing TV licence campaign adverts.

How much did they cost to make? And they didn't just advertise on RTE.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

No it's not.

It is.

listermint

alastair wrote: »

Fewer commissioned programmes, more repeats, fewer correspondents on news, fewer production crew on shoots, less sports coverage, etc - it's pretty evident across the board.

But the same oul face of the government reporting.

RTE are nothing more than the PR arm of any sitting government in power. They do NOTHING to challenge the status quo and their reporting on serious items of national interest is nothing short of a disgrace.

Look at the coverage of the whole Anglo Phone calls debacle. It was nothing more than a bit piece of their coverage.

Banjo String

alastair wrote: »

Fewer commissioned programmes, more repeats, fewer correspondents on news, fewer production crew on shoots, less sports coverage, etc - it's pretty evident across the board.

What was the excuse pre-bailout?

BBC reported the troika where on our doorstep. Not a whimper from Montrose when our govt were systematically denying their arrival.

The tail doesn't wag the dog though.


RTE are merely a mouthpiece for whatever govt we have at the time.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

How much did they cost to make? And they didn't just advertise on RTE.

They don't cost millions to make - and TV3 and TG4 also receive TV licence subvention, so I'd imagine they don't charge advertising time either. Do ITV or Channel 4 carry Irish TV licence ads?

alastair

SamHall wrote: »

What was the excuse pre-bailout?

BBC reported the troika where on our doorstep. Not a whimper from Montrose when our govt were systematically denying their arrival.

Rubbish. I remember quite clearly the RTE coverage, which was in stark contrast to the Govt line. And which station carried Patrick Honohan's cat-out-of-the-bag revelation?

yoloc

So tell me what this is all about. I own a house, dont have a tv,radio or even a computer phone to access the net. Will i still have to pay this charge

Banjo String

alastair wrote: »

Rubbish. I remember quite clearly the RTE coverage, which was in stark contrast to the Govt line. And which station carried Patrick Honohan's cat-out-of-the-bag revelation?

not rubbish.

I'm on mobile atm so finding it difficult to access bbc link.

Who reported the troika arrived in Ireland first? Bbc or rte?

Simple question.

yoloc wrote: »

So tell me what this is all about. I own a house, dont have a tv,radio or even a computer phone to access the net. Will i still have to pay this charge

Yes.

And if (outgoing) pat gets his way. Revenue might not issue you a tax clearance cert due to that fact.

Great setup altogether.

alastair

yoloc wrote: »

So tell me what this is all about. I own a house, dont have a tv,radio or even a computer phone to access the net. Will i still have to pay this charge

Yes.

Is your home a cave?

Phoebas

yoloc wrote: »

So tell me what this is all about. I own a house, dont have a tv,radio or even a computer phone to access the net. Will i still have to pay this charge

Yeah. You still gave to pay.

Why do you have a freeview box if you don't have a tv?

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

They don't cost millions to make - and TV3 and TG4 also receive TV licence subvention, so I'd imagine they don't charge advertising time either. Do ITV or Channel 4 carry Irish TV licence ads?

Unless you can back up your contention that An Post don't pay for the ads then we have to assume that they do, like everybody else.
And where are the figures for 'how much' they cost to make? That last campaign, the 'botox' ones certainly weren't cheap to make. And they publish print ads all the time...how much do they cost, are they 'free' too?

Kicking and screaming RTE have been forced to do something about the waste of taxpayers money, they still have a way to go.
We also need a clear and transparent inquiry into what 'public service broadcasting' actually is. Then come up with a mechanism to pay for that. Not the stupid cart before the horse way things are done here.
RTE in it's current form has no god given right to survive.

Banjo String

Phoebas wrote: »

Yeah. You still gave to pay.

Why do you have a freeview box if you don't have a tv?

Projector/pc monitor?

alastair

SamHall wrote: »

not rubbish.

I'm on mobile atm so finding it difficult to access bbc link.

Who reported the troika arrived in Ireland first? Bbc or rte?

Simple question.

So - moving away from the 'not a whimper' thing?
I've no idea who got the story first - if you've evidence that the BBC did, then post it up, but RTE were all over the story, in a timely fashion, and contradicting the Govt line at the time.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

Unless you can back up your contention that An Post don't pay for the ads then we have to assume that they do, like everybody else.
And where are the figures for 'how much' they cost to make? That last campaign, the 'botox' ones certainly weren't cheap to make. And they publish print ads all the time...how much do they cost, are they 'free' too?

It stands to reason that beneficiaries of the TV licence wouldn't charge for screening TV licence campaign ads.

2.13 Certain aspects of An Post’s role as licensing agent have been governed by payment agreements negotiated between An Post and RTÉ, subject to the approval of the Department. The agreements have focused mainly on the level of payment to An Post and on payment terms. Under the agreements, RTÉ also undertakes, at its own expense, to broadcast advertising campaigns to encourage licence payment and deter licence fee evasion.

http://www.audgen.gov.ie/documents/vfmreports/47_TVLicence.pdf