§ Mr. Wintertonasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it is the practice of his Department to demand a supplementary payment in respect of a television licence which has been issued and to revoke that licence if the supplementary payment is not made; and if he will make a statement.
§ Sir D. Kaberryasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will ensure that no additional charges will be imposed upon colour television licence holders who have already renewed expiring licences or taken out new licences prior to the intended increase in price.
§ Mr. Geoffrey Finsbergasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department by what authority the National Television Licence Records Office is demanding an additional fee of £6 from those persons who took out a colour television licence in March 1975 from an address where there was already a licence in force not due for renewal until May 1975.
§ Mr. Roy JenkinsThe new licence tees were assessed on the footing that all licences issued in renewal of licences expiring after 31st March would be charged at the new rate; and the regulations so provide. People whose licences expired before 31st March were reminded of the importance of prompt renewal.
If a new licence is issued at the old rate to a person who already has a licence due to expire after 31st March, the saving to the licence holder results in a corresponding loss of revenue by the BBC, and if the practice had been universal that loss could have reached some £6½ million.
The Wireless Telegraphy Act 1949 imposes no obligation to grant a licence to a person to cover a period for which he already holds a licence, and it is not easy to see a basis which is both fair and sensible for a person who already has a permission to use a set to he given it a second time. The Post Office, which issues licences on behalf of the Secretary of State, was accordingly instructed not to issue a licence where the applicant already held a licence which was not due 137W to expire before 31st March. In the instances in which overlapping licences were nevertheless issued the Post Office is asking the licence holders to pay the additional amount which would have been due had the new licence not been issued until the expiry of their old one; and informing them that if the additional amount is not paid the new licence is liable to revocation under the powers of Section 1(4) of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1949.
When licence fees are increased it is inevitable that some licence holders should pay the higher rate sooner than others; the action that has been taken is that which is judged to be in the best interests of licence holders generally.