The BBC will stop at nothing to gather in the TV Licence Tax from over 75s.
And it thinks it might have played a “sneaky blinder” with its latest tax retention plot.
The BBC regularly reports on the many misdemeanours committed by Capita or “Crapita”, one of which was an “Army recruitment drive has faced “significant problems” including a website that cost three times its budget and was 52 months late, a National Audit Office report has found. Outsourcing giant Capita was awarded the £495m contract for Army recruitment in 2012, but has failed to hit soldier recruitment targets every year since. Capita admitted it had “underestimated the complexity” of the project.
And which firm does the BBC contract with to enforce the TV tax? Yes, Crapita!
You do know, don’t you, about the incestuous affair that exists between HM Government and Crapita? The Department For Work and Pensions contracts with Crapita to assess Personal Independence Payments.
But one claimant died months after her personal independence payments were stopped following a Capita assessment and the outsourcing company was ordered to pay £10,000 in damages over its handling of her disability claim. The week after her death, a social security tribunal decided she had been eligible for PIP.
Crapita tried to overturn the decision and was accused of an abuse of public funds and plainly wrong that such “reports are presented as fact and a shameful indictment of the government welfare reform ideology clearly persecuting disabled and vulnerable people”.
The BBC has issued a statement on who is poor enough not to pay the TV tax, aka what we know as, the “Gary Lineker et al at the BBC Staff Personal Income and Fortune Retention Scam/Scheme”.
“We recognise that the current system of collection by TV Licensing could be improved, and the BBC is happy to work with Government on proposals, such as more effective access to data and extending the simple payment plan scheme to help more people, particularly the most vulnerable and those on lower incomes. Yes, those on lower incomes than Gary Lineker!
“And whilst we can of course understand why some people are attracted to a civil system, we agree with the Government’s own list of significant difficulties as set out in its consultation. This includes higher evasion and higher penalties.
“It is likely that a civil system would hit the poorest hardest as there is no discretion built into the system. Unlike in the magistrates’ courts, where the court decides on the level of the fine, there is no discretion to vary the size of the fixed penalty. It is just that, fixed. The only discretion is to establish how the penalty should be paid”. However, in its response to the Government’s consultation, the BBC has also said that they’re willing to consider alternative funding models, such as one linked directly to an existing household bill”.
The BBC has said the TV licence fee could be incorporated into broadband, council tax or energy bills. But would over 75s be welcoming of having their broadband bills so directly linked to the BBC TV Tax, particularly since most regard internet access as being an essential service but many would not hold the broadcaster’s own content to that same level of importance?
Can you imagine giving BT, British Gas, LCC, WLBC, an extra sum just for it to be paid to the BBC for its TV Tax, ensuring Gary Lineker– £1,750,000 – £1,754,999, Graham Norton– £610,000 – £614,999, Huw Edwards – £490,000 – £494,999, Steve Wright– £465,000 – £469,999, Alan Shearer– £440,000 – £444,999, Andrew Marr– £390,000 – £394,999, Claudia Winkleman– £370,000 – £374,999? No, neither can I!