On Fri 14 Aug 2015 at 22:52:05 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Thursday 13 August 2015 09:38:03 Brian wrote: > > On Wed 12 Aug 2015 at 20:04:41 -0500, David Wright wrote: > > > Quoting Brian (a...@cityscape.co.uk): > > > > On Wed 12 Aug 2015 at 16:57:33 +0100, Martin Smith wrote: > > > > > On 12/08/2015 14:56, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > > > > >The care alone, even were there no societal cost, costs several > > > > > > orders of magnitude more money than the £145.50 cost of a TV > > > > > > licence. The trial alone, too, will have cost more than that! > > > > > > Then there is the cost of keeping her in prison. > > > > > > > > > > that is the problem, we have to punish sinners, we are after all > > > > > obsessed opinion. > > > > > I am led to believe it demonstrates our righteousness, but that is > > > > > not my > opinion. > > > > > > > > It's called upholding and enforcing the law of the country, not > > > > trangressing the will of some other entity. > > > > > > > > Incidentally. The tale you quoted and replied to is based on "When > > > > she goes to prison for non-payment of her licence....". This cannot > > > > happen. The maximum penalty is a fine. > > > > > > This may well be true. I'm not a lawyer: I don't know. However, the > > > public perception is that you *can* be imprisoned and so it colours > > > discussion of the licence fee. For example, here is a quotation by the > > > > Incorrect statements colouring discussion hampers fruitful discussion. > > > > > Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, someone involved at > > > the highest level with the licence fee problem: > > > > > > “It's actually worse than a poll tax because under the poll tax, if > > > you were on a very low income you would get a considerable subsidy,” > > > he said. > > > > > > “The BBC licence fee, there is no means-tested element whatsoever; it > > > doesn't matter how poor you are, you pay £145.50 and go to prison if > > > you don't pay it.” > > > > Both the Secretary of State and non-lawyers have access to > > > > http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/363 > > Yes, but they also have access to common sense. > > You cannot be sent to prison for non-payment of the licence. But you can be > sent prison for non-payment of the fine for non-payment of the licence. So > in effect many are sent to prison not for non-payment, if you wish to quibble > (and this is not a court of law, where one has to quibble), but because they > haven't got any money and haven't paid. It is not too great a stretch of the > imagination and language to call that going to prison for non-payment of the > licence.
It may not stretch the imagination but the penalty for non-payment of fines is a separate issue and also part of living in a regulated society ruled by law. > Here is what the Guardian said about it fairly recently: > <quote> > You cannot go to prison for non-payment of your licence fee, but you can be > jailed for not paying a fine imposed as punishment for not paying for a > licence, and in 2012, 50 people were imprisoned, up from 30 in 2009. Of > those, 49 were given a sentence of less than three months; one person was > given a sentence of somewhere between three and six months. > > If convicted, you will get a criminal record, > </quote> > http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/24/in-court-non-payment-tv-licence-television-desperate-cases Obviously. Whether it is ever disclosed is another matter. Perhaps if an application to become Director General of the BBC was made it would be. > Then: > <quote> > Culture Secretary Sajid Javid reports that 10% of magistrate court cases are > for non-payment of the BBC licence fee. Non-payment is a criminal offence, > punishable by a fine of up to £1,000. Every week about 3,000 people are fined > for non-payment, and *****about one person a week is jailed for non-payment > of the fine.***** (my stars) > > Women make up about 70% of those prosecuted and convicted, and half of those > jailed for not paying the fine. When people fail to pay other utilities, such > as energy companies, they are guilty of a civil offence, not a criminal one, > and they cannot be prosecuted and fined for falling behind with their > payments. Civil action can be taken for recovery, but without fines and jail > terms. If the argument is to have non-payment of a licence a civil offence I'm not opposed to that. The burden of proof would be lower in that case, of course. > Several newspapers have had reporters visit magistrate’s court to describe > what goes on. They all tell harrowing stories of frightened, distressed > people, mostly women, facing fines they cannot pay under threat of > imprisonment if they do not. Many are single mothers, many on benefits. They > have not paid the licence fee because they cannot afford to. The sum of > £145.50 per year is huge for a young mother struggling to feed and clothe > children. Many weep in court, unable to pay the fine for the same reason they > couldn’t afford the licence fee; they don’t have the money. > </quote> > http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/media-culture/non-payment-of-bbc-licence-fee-accounts-for-10-of-prosecutions/ > > Young single mothers are sent to prison because they have not got the money > to > pay their TV licences, with the consequences I have already described. I had a compassion bypass operation a few years ago. Sorry. :)
