The Reader: Help the BBC, instead of trying to shoot it down

BBC logo
PA
21 February 2020
WEST END FINAL

Get our award-winning daily news email featuring exclusive stories, opinion and expert analysis

I would like to be emailed about offers, event and updates from Evening Standard. Read our privacy notice.

Since the general election I have been reading worrying articles about Tory plans to “bash” the BBC and clip its wings. Now I read that not paying the licence fee could be decriminalised, forcing the BBC to work on a subscription basis, with a huge reduction in revenue. It may also be forced to close or sell off channels.

When the Conservatives came to power off the back of Brexit, we were told the UK would flourish and we would be proud of the country. To my mind, the two stand-out institutions we have to be proud of are the NHS and the BBC — both are the envy of the world.

Please, Mr Johnson, boost them. The BBC will change, but it must be given help and time. The attacks from the Government could ruin it, and nobody voted for that.
Steve Hanscomb

Editor's reply

Dear Steve

It’s important to separate two issues. The first is the narrow one of whether failing to pay the TV licence fee should be a criminal offence. You don’t go to prison if you don’t pay the water or electricity bill — you face a knock on the door from bailiffs.

There’s also an issue of social justice — a staggering 30 per cent of criminal prosecutions against women in our courts are for this one offence. That’s why I think decriminalisation is right and inevitable. Then there is the much bigger question of the future funding of the BBC. Unlike some rather ideological Tories, I think the BBC is a huge national asset — one of the few things that both brings our country together and projects British influence abroad. It’s because I care that it survives in the future that I think serious thought should be given to how it remains relevant as younger audiences disappear — and the licence fee model feels antiquated in an age of subscription TV. But that will take time and a long transition, and may well require an ongoing element of compulsion and taxation to secure the funding.

To borrow the dictum — if we want things to stay as they are, then things will have to change.
George Osborne, Editor of the Evening Standard

All clubs need to kick out racism

Tottenham Hotspur's Dele Alli
REUTERS

I read Stephen Pollard and Jonathan Goldstein’s plea to fellow Spurs fans not to use the word “Yid” with interest [“Fellow Spurs fans: please stop using the Y-word”, February 18]. As a Jewish fan I have no problem with Spurs fans using this word. My argument is that it is not the word but the intent behind using it that is the issue. No Spurs fan intends to use it in an anti-Semitic way, unlike supporters of rival clubs.

So, rather than appealing to Spurs supporters to stop using it, the focus should be on persuading other clubs that they need to stamp out their fans’ negative use of the word as well as all the other racist and anti-Semitic chanting and abuse.
Simon Dwek

We want a strong link with City Hall

Whoever wins the mayoralty in May must work positively with London local governments. As a cross-party group, we at London Councils want our partnership with the Mayor to strengthen. It’s essential that together we focus on the issues that matter most to Londoners, including building more homes and tackling crime.
Cllr Peter John, chair of London Councils (Labour); Cllr Teresa O’Neill, vice-chair of London Councils (Conservative); Cllr Ruth Dombey, vice-chair of London Councils (Lib Dem)

Tax should be fair and transparent

Polly Mackenzie’s article [“No one likes paying tax but a radical new idea could change our view ”, February 19] opens on a false premise. Most people do feel at least a twinge of discomfort on sight of their tax bill. But even with all its imperfections, we all acknowledge the worth of the social super-structure that taxation enables.

True, the current taxation system needs improving — introducing a simplified system of personal and corporate taxation and expenditure accountability, for example. But what is missing from the debate is an urgent reframing of the taxation proposition. We pay tax because it is a social necessity, because it is a building block in the social contract that binds us together as a community.

Ms Mackenzie’s proposals for “creativity” are unlikely to reinforce this crucial understanding: taxation should be fair, transparent, and of clear benefit to society as a whole. Piecemeal tinkering serves no useful purpose, other than to further complicate a hopelessly complex construct.
Akin Ajayi

Create a FREE account to continue reading

eros

Registration is a free and easy way to support our journalism.

Join our community where you can: comment on stories; sign up to newsletters; enter competitions and access content on our app.

Your email address

Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number

You must be at least 18 years old to create an account

* Required fields

Already have an account? SIGN IN

By clicking Create Account you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use , Cookie policy and Privacy policy .

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in