Does the BBC license infringe my human rights?

Question

Because I have to have a television license to watch any television and we as a family choose not to watch terrastial tv.
I cannot remember the last time anyone in my family watched the BBC yet I am forced to help finance their operation.
Surely my right to free choice is impeeded by the fact that I am made to pay towards their version of quality television.
As a member of the European Union can I not appeal to not pay the license fee as I dont use their service.

Answer 1

In most countries with a receiver licence there are opponents to the system. Some of the critics dislike the very idea of a mandatory charge for using a television, they regard it as an anomaly that a person can be forced to pay the licence fee while not using the services it pays for. Such claims have grown stronger with the rise of multi-channel digital television. Critics claim that the licence fee is unjustifiable on the basis that minority interest programming can now be broadcast on specialist commercial channels.

Others argue that a fixed licence fee is a regressive tax, and thus unfair on low-income groups. Defenders of licence fees point out that, although the licence fee is a regressive tax, the same is true of many other compulsory payments such as petrol tax, vehicle tax, VAT. Furthermore, some countries attempt to make licence fees fairer to disadvantaged groups by offering discounts.

Opponents point to alternatives such as commercial funding, voluntary subscription, or funding from general taxation. However, opinion polls in most countries with a TV licence have shown that an overwhelming majority prefer the current system, as it can give them access to TV that is not driven by commercial and political pressures as is sometimes seen with commercial, subscription, and taxation funded broadcasters (and thus "dare" to show "difficult" programmes). Some claim that a licence fee also leads to better programmes on the commercial channels, as commercial broadcasters must compete with the licence fee funded broadcaster(s).

So in reality its not just for the BBC 1-4 but also for the BBC radio and money is also sent to ITV and Channels 4 and 5 among others, but after all that i still begruge paying 130 odd a year.

Answer 2

I think the license fee is a damn cheek myself. It's like going into a shop and the assistant making you buy a bag to put your newspaper in or you can't have your newspaper just because the bag is there to be used even if you insist you don't want it. I can think of no other way that anybody is allowed to force a payment on you for something you really don't use. They get away with it purely because the BBC is there and available and you can't prove that you don't watch it. It's time the BBC became a choice if the want to continue charging us for it. Either that or get rid of the licence fee (and massive pay outs for BBC employees both on the screen and off it)

Answer 3

You are talking (and spelling) a lot of rot.
Firstly the word in British English is licence, and you talk about being impeded (not impeeded).
You pay a television licence in the United Kingdom to operate a television, i.e. the licence is to receive transmissions, not particular television channels.

Answer 4

There is no license in Spain, but we have to put up with commercial breaks of up to half an hour every three quarters of an our or so. THAT I call torture, not just an infringement of HRs!
In the UK, you are obliged to pay, like it or lump it. A few years back the licensing people successfully prosecuted someone who'd retuned their set to only receive the independent stations.

Answer 5

Lets call it what it is, tax. It's a tax on entertainment. Seeing how the EU joined forces to stop you (UK citizen) buying your booze and fags from the Internet, hence depriving Robber Brown of income, I don't think your claim will carry much water.

Answer 6

wait untill they knock on the door asking to see your license. Show them last years license and tell them it is a repeat. After all they do it to us all the time.

Answer 7

I'm an American, but from my understanding, isn't the license for having a television receiver. Not for what you are watching.

Answer 8

I don't think you can appeal against this but fair point.Why should you pay for poor quality television when you don't even watch it.

Answer 9

no but the way they pursue you if you don't have a tv, even after you tell them this certainly feels like an abuse of my human rights to me!

it's preposterious and completely unfair. plus they don't even give any warning if you decide to pay by installments, it's horrid for students!