State Broadcaster goes after Elderly poor

[Zambo]

Content, not the source, so that covers everything. Do you want an Affidavit, list all possible sources, on the left, on the right in the centre, do an analysis of how many times the BBC has been dissed and by whom, or can we close this particular issue now ?

[Royal24s]

An interesting slant on things. One that could have an affect on the BBC, but more so on the Government.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/money/9307053/ ... -benefits/

And please, no more on whether a source of info is shite or otherwise, and whether posters need help if they read or use either to support posts. Mail v Guardian views aren't going change people's minds. It's the content which is relevant and what should be discussed.

Fine and it goes for you too

Whoa... Didn't you notice all the lefties trying to tell him he wasn't allowed to quote the Daily Mail ? When did he do that , and who appointed you as the fourth official ?

Haven't done that Royals, but have to admit to being mean to Guardian readers in the past, so will take note of my own request. I promise in future to treat them with the respect they deserve.

So is it only the Guardian?
Don't think so
Anything reported by the BBC is also immediately discarded.

Which is a different matter, not being a newspaper. In any case, it's not about doubting the news source , it's about telling people they can't quote it

[Reg]

The Today programme alone gets an audience 4 times bigger than Talksport.

Quality not quantity, my Hill.

The nation's movers and shakers are tuned in to Big Al as they chomp their kedgeree and sup Earl Grey, don't worry about that.

[birdie]

Apologies for resurrecting this thread, but I'm watching question in the House just now and there have been a couple of question about this, and it would seem that we have been labouring under the misapprehension that the BBC is footing the whole of the £720m that it will cost this year, it seems that the BBC does not bear the total cost as has been the impression her, last year the cost of the concessionary licence was £677m of which the Exchequer contributed £468m and the BBC £209m, this year the cost is £700m of which the Exchequer bore £247m and the BBC £453m, in 2020 under the BBC proposal the cost to the BBC would be £260m, considerable less than they are paying this year, so to say that the cost to the BBC is £720m is somewhat misleading, or have I heard the Minister incorrectly?

[Zambo]

Good spot Birdie.

[Hillman avenger]

This is getting confused
This explains it
https://www.digitalspy.com/tv/a28032870 ... -defended/
The £260m is only the cost it will bear for over 75s who receive pension credit, and the rest is the cost it would have additionally if it continued to fund free licences for all over 75s. So £750m would be the full cost of carrying it on unchanged.

[Jon Gout]

So it's almost like those who can afford to pay it will have to pay it, but those who can't afford to pay it won't...

Perfect.

[subsub]

So it's almost like those who can afford to pay it will have to pay it, but those who can't afford to pay it won't...

Perfect.

Indeed.
But still people bend over backwards to have a pop at the Beeb, irrespective of the facts

[Hillman avenger]

And rather than establish its own means test, for which it has been slated incorrectly, it is using the existing pension credit qualification. Sensible.
If the effect of this is to make more over 75s aware of pension credit, billions of pounds of which is unclaimed, then so much the better. In fact it could well be that if that happens the cost to the state will be greater than if the TV benefit had been left alone.