threegee

Yes, it's to receive ALL live TV and radio broadcasts. No, there's nothing provided. Everyone who uses a TV to receive any live broadcasts is compelled to pay, even if they don't watch the BBC. Same goes for watching live programs over the Internet. Does this include live ITV and other broadcasters over the Internet? Ummm.. I don't know, and yes it's crazy and getting steadily crazier. You can end up with a criminal record if you don't pay, and many do end up criminalised. How does anyone know you are watching live TV over the Internet without a licence when its not encrypted? Don't ask, because you won't believe the answer! Who receives the money? Mainly (but not exclusively) the BBC. ITV doesn't get a bean. Who decides who receives the money? Only the great and the good. Over 75's get excused, but that could be withdrawn quite soon. Blind people seem to get a 50% reduction if they do all the right things. (So, according to the law, a totally blind person could end up in jail for "watching TV" )

Wow I'm out there raving on my own am I Merc? Well - another personal attack from you aside - polling shows about a 70:30 split in favour of abolishing the licence fee. Even if I were in a small minority I have a right not to be censured, exactly like you! I'm not surprised, I'd just like to hear them! We can have a discussion about alternative methods of funding the BBC, but it was a perfectly valid to point out that the petition does not mention BBC funding at all, and it simply isn't about funding. There's a significant body of opinion in broadcasting circles that the BBC doesn't need to be as big as it is. It regularly outgrows the licence fee and has to be pruned. That's like any self perpetuating organisation that's lost sight of its original purpose; presumably you've come across a bit of Kafka on your travels? There are numerous ways of funding what the BBC does without dragging people before the courts and criminalising them. (The petition puts this better than I do.) A lot of what the BBC does though is very me-too, and would be just as well done by commercial companies (actually it already is, but the BBC intersperses itself in the transactions). Public service broadcasting is very good at what it does well, and I don't hear any suggestions that it shouldn't continue to do that. But, we are no longer living in the 1960's and its relatively simple to deliver the programs to those who are willing to fund them directly, and allow those who don't want to pay to opt out.

No it doesn't! An LD vote is a totally wasted vote, even if you can stomach their crazy love affair with the EU and EU waste. They won't even be able to hang on to the majority of their safe seats, let alone win any more. It's very likely that even Cleggie will lose his seat. Despite continuing BBC propaganda the only party that can replace Labour here is Ukip, and Melanie Hurst is a top performing local girl who will give Bedlington its due! The weekend's Survation national poll: LD; 7% Ukip: 17% Green: 3% Other: 6% If Lavery gets in again my bet is that it will be tribal Tory votes who will make this possible. The size of the Tory vote will be the true measure of our civc stupidity! http://ukip.wansbeck.org/

The petition is about scrapping the licence fee folks. It's NOT about scrapping the BBC, or about the BBC taking advertising. It would actually be more instructive if you'd read the reasoning on the actual petition and say exactly what you disagreed with. Those who currently get a free licence could well change their minds once Labour or the Tories scrap the concession. Like the winter heating allowance it's low hanging fruit for the next round of cuts. In case its escaped your attention none of LIbLabCon has ruled this out. In fact Labour is probably best placed to do the deed, as they have less to worry about from "the grey lobby". Remember prescription charges? And, regarding the BBC bias: yes, people have always complained, but those complaints have always come from across the political spectrum. That's certainly not what is happening now; the BBC is now near totally colonised by ex-Guardinistas who see it as their purpose in life no longer to inform but to filter and indoctrinate. That's pretty much why Paxo and others quit. The attitude to things like "climate change" is telling; it's now no longer necessary to represent a spectrum of views, because the BBC has decided that debate is not "socially useful". But, it's far more sinister than harmless lefties driving the agenda: it has become the mouthpiece of the forthcoming European superstate. That should be of concern to any thinking person, and to anyone that values their liberty! Do not fool yourselves that this is the BBC we once knew. However patronising and class-ridden that was, that BBC was near transparent in what it did. Like other things in this world it's now trading on a long established brand label that doesn't truly represent the contents of the tin, and hoping that not too many people notice.

The camera isn't available at the moment whilst a new fixed IP connection is being installed for it. This should fix the occasional outages when its IP changes and the system has to play catch-up. It will also provide more bandwidth for multiple simultaneous connections. The work shouldn't take too long.

Well... as I've said before the establishment doesn't want the full truth to come out before the election, and hopefully not until they are all six feet under/unable to plead. Only question is which election! Pity though your lefty bover boys (ably assisted by the Guardianistas) were so keen to nail a Tory that they fingered entirely the wrong person. Alastair McAlpine was in fact a really decent guy, and there's no doubt in my mind he would still be alive today if it hadn't been for the mistaken identity, and the lefty lunacy. It's a sad observation that those who make the most noise on the left are no less sickening than the very people on the right they try to demonise, and are in fact far less discriminating! At least the idiots on the extreme right don't try to control and redefine our language.

Well... if it was a choice between Natalie Bennet, Nichola Sturgeon, Leanne Wood, or indeed any of the Labour wimmin (who were put there simply because they are wimmin, and not necessarily the best person for the job) I will go into coalition with Marilyn Monroe, any day, any election! Can I have a pick? How about this (sung by Nichola of course!)?

Well... does the BBC really have a conscience, or are they simply in tactical retreat? Either way it indicates that all the complaints were justified, and that the David Dimbleby protestations aren't tenable. Victory for Ukip: BBC backs down and gives Farage his own TV show after debate fix row Maybe the latest Survation/Daily Mirror poll had something to do with this, as it utterly confounds the constant drumbeat on every BBC show that the Ukip vote is faltering. I bet they don't mention that the Green support is now showing at only 3% though. The most instructive thing about Thursday's debate was what happened at the end. The coven of ladies (who are up for spending money we haven't got) formed a dutiful queue - in strict order of seniority - for their ministerial roles in Ed's minority coalition government. Ms Sturgeon is just about curtseying for the honour. But, once the knot is tied, you don't need much imagination to work out who'll be "wearing the trousers".

We are pretty used to the usual BBC "audience selection" process, and the internet is full of reports about how people were grilled about their views (and told what they could and could not say) before they were allowed into the Question Time audience. But... last night's election debate had to be one of the most desperate attempts by the BBC to sway public opinion in its history. There are even reports of the BBC paying people's hotel bills out of our licence fees so they could draw on people of suitable views. Both ITV and Sky can have proven they can stage a pretty free debate, but it seems that this is quite beyond the overpaid executives at the BBC. Apart from audience selection bias the BBC have been ordered not to use "the worm" by the House of Lords, who took compelling academic evidence that it's a very powerful tool to warp people's freely held beliefs. Yet, the BBC have ignored this and continue to use it in combination with their careful audience selection. The excuses for this are risible; they run along the lines of we hear what you say, but we know better about providing viewer satisfaction, and it's really just experimental anyway. Maybe you don't feel as strongly about BBC Bias as I do, but the petition site contains many other reasons why we shouldn't be compelled to shell out our hard earned cash to a near state monopoly, and you'll surely find other reasons you can enthusiastically support. Please sign the petition. https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/end-the-bbc-licence-fee

Yes, twenty acres in the left middle-ground and Bedlington Bank bottom right. We're looking NW towards the Rothbury Hills, and maybe even the Cheviots on the far horizon. A glimpse of the sea around Warkworth /Alnmouth top right.

Fourgee has recently uploaded an amazing shot of the town taken by his new drone. You're unlikely to be able to see it properly in your browser though, and it will take a short time to download due to the size. Access Sunny Skies Over Bedlington in the Gallery, then after it has fully loaded right-click on it and do a "Save Image as...". You'll then be able to open it in a local photo viewer and zoom around. Probably a lot more to come. Does he do requests I ask?

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/570547/Queen-Ukip-Nigel-Farage-Buckingham-Palace-Elizabeth-II-Royal-family-London Guess that's Sym's vote shot then!

I'm having smartwatch bluetooth reconnection problems with my Galaxy Note 3 since they pushed the Lollipop upgrade recently. Overall Lollipop is an improvement though, but that could be because the Note 3 has 3GB of RAM. Not that many smartwatches are currently in use, so it won't be a general problem. I'm not expecting a fix quite this week, and can live with the problem for now. Unless a tab was ridiculously cheap I'd avoid anything with 1GB RAM or less. That, of course, rules out anything Apple. Although the iPhans will claim that Apple devices don't need more it's a cop out as you can't get a quart out of a pint pot. In fact historically that's the way Apple has forced users to buy new product, as previous generations rapidly become very clunky. Anything above £100 should have more than 1GB RAM these days, and anything in the £500+ range with 1GB is a total joke. It's very easy to confuse the non-technical here by quoting the amount of flash storage, and making it very difficult to discover the amount of real working memory. If you are looking for a great budget device check out the Asus Zenfone 2. There are models with as much as 4G RAM, it's Intel powered (with 22nm silicon), and the budget end ones are relatively cheap. Snag is they are new, and in very short supply at the moment. I'd pay the extra for a 4GB RAM one. http://www.gsmarena.com/asus_zenfone_2_ze551ml-6917.php

Once again illustrating that the Labour Party and hypocrisy walk hand in hand! It's the post-democratic elitist what the plebs don't know about won't hurt them. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11540373/Ed-Milibands-US-adviser-David-Axelrod-pays-no-tax-in-Britain.html Amusingly contains: In fact a tiny rerun of Labour's PFI, and indicative of how our tax money is likely to be spent - again!

Sounds, looks, acts like a North London Jew, and even talks about North London Jews. What's he selling? Hmm... strange Google returns absolutely nothing on his princely surname except this story, and he's lived in the UK all his life, has he? Prince - I smell a szczur!

Brussels vows to block Cameron on EU treaty http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4411647.ece Game over Dave! They are going to keep us in the Fourth Reich even if every sane person in the UK votes out! Blows a hole in your just-published manifesto promises, doesn't it? Then again, you've never really intended to keep them, and you've plenty of form here. Time to have a some serious discussions with our friend Vladimir, about how we can help him on the Eastern Front (Ukraine); we may need his help on the Western Front before too long!

But have you noticed the weasel words in Labour's glossy manifesto? We are not going to go on a borrowing spree again except... Ed's definition of "investment" wouldn't cut it with any real world investor. Ed's investment returns are as nebulous as all this "influence" we buy in the EU. What he really means is go on a borrowing spree again, at a time when all existing credit cards are maxed out. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2079rank.html Frightening stuff that, as you've raised many times! It's only possible to run those massive levels of debt per head through our being THE world financial capital (something that went to Gordo's head). Yet the loonies want to chase the people with deep pockets away on the basis of a piddling amount of money which some scheming quasi Marxist tells them they are entitled to! Our present debt balancing act is only possible because of near record low interest rates. If we don't have a believable plan to eliminate the current account deficit our borrowing costs will soar. Ed might as well borrow his £30BN in voter bribes from Wonga!

OK, well spotted, and I should have followed my own link. But, I knew it was something stupid, especially when we bailed out the failing Irish (euro based) economy. How long before Milband bumps UK CT to 30%, to make us wildly uncompetitive again? Ah, the "undeserving rich". Are there no undeserving poor? Seems like public attitudes to that have come a very long way since Maggie T! http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/scrounging-off-the-state-hardening-attitudes-toward-welfare-and-its-recipients/ And, who could disbelieve the heavily EU funded (with our very own money) LSE? So, you want to put Britain's diamond industry out of business in pursuit of Citizen Syms revolution? A big loss of luxury product VAT, and more loss of jobs there, but I suppose if the non-doms have left it will be on its uppers anyway. I know I know - this time a Labour administration will all be different.

My personal view, based on long experience. To the left all wealth is wrong no matter how it is used. That's a recipe for impoverishing everyone. I'm not two-faced about this like Mliband and Balls - on the one hand "encouraging investment", on the other hand making cheap political capital by appealing to the worst instincts of the electorate. I already addressed tax dodging, and it's nothing like as big as politicos want us to believe at any convenient time. The world is unfair; life is "unfair; get over it and don't get consumed by it! In particular don't let politicos tell you there's a pot of gold out there - there simply isn't! I could have phrased it that everyone pays their taxes in the jurisdiction where it is due, except a few cheats who are breaking laws anyway, but I've already explained that at length. Non-doms - either unintentionally or intentionally - don't owe some of their taxes in UK jurisdiction. That's inconvenient for Miliband's jealousy and envy party, but if he pursues this nonsense that will become evident in time. By then it will be too late. But politicos get to walk away from their mistakes, and someone else gets to foot the bill - largely us! Why isn't he railing about 10% corporation tax in the Irish Republic that's parasitic on our economy and constantly draining our inward investment? Now that IS a serious and real loss of tax revenue; but he can't go there because it's politically inconvenient to him. http://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanalysts/2013/11/06/if-ireland-is-not-a-tax-haven-what-is-it/ Thing is I don't believe this is a Gordon Brown self-delusion kind of mistake. I believe this one is cynical manipulation of the electorate, those who don't understand, or (it seems to me, in our Tony's case) don't want to understand the full issue. This is the the old strategy of demonising an identifiable group of people, and blaming them for all ills. It's shabby, it's sad, and Miliband puts himself beyond contempt. David Starkey fully express my feelings on this - Miliband is poison!

That's what a Labour MP said on Question Time, and it seems to be the standard Labour response when confronted with the facts. But saying "good riddance" is exactly what you are doing by abolishing non-dom status. You are wishing a long goodbye to something of the order of £30,000,000,000 in GDP! Yes, please do post pictures of these champaign swilling scum non-doms, I can't wait! We might of course discover that they are not in fact non-doms, but some other form of lowlife in the class war! Everyone pays their taxes (though it looks like a lot more could be paying them somewhere else quite soon). Have you noticed that every LibLbCon politician, when confronted with the thorny problem of where they are going to get money from to pay for their unfunded electoral promises, cites a crack down on tax dodging raising however many millions they need? Does it ever happen? It doesn't because we are very efficient at tax collection in this country - sometimes too efficient for our own good. Of course tax dodging still goes on, but wealthier people present a far easier target than the very small and nimble domestic dodgers. However at the end of the day there's a law of diminishing returns, and (apart from tip offs) it's simply uneconomic to go after that last bit of graft. If it were that easy it would have been done long ago. Ergo ANY undertaking from ANY politico to fund ANYTHING from a crack down on tax dodging is a pure fiction, and should be treated with the derision it deserves. And, ANY promise that the super-rich will pay is equally risible - they can afford armies of accountants, can spin off webs of international companies, and generally have a large say in the matter. That's why the ARE super-rich! If you doubt this ask Tony - but then again, you probably can't afford his advice.

No, it was originally introduced for colonials - that's history! In case you haven't noticed the days of empire have gone. There are a few archaic elements to it, but they are harmless, and there are in many in our customs and laws. Today the vast majority of people who have non-dom status qualified for it on their own account. The people who benefit from it are us, because we attract investment into the country, and we lock it in here. Ditto with expertise. It's totally mad to abolish it because the exchequer will suffer. It's even dumber to be sold on the proposition that abolishing it will magically gain £2BN or whatever for the NHS. All of that is lies, and what will in fact happen - though it will take a few years to become evident - is that the country will be impoverished to the tune of about £30BN. That's money we desperately need for the NHS, especially if we have idiot politicians who insist on funding overseas dictators, and gifting ever-increasing amounts of our wealth to the the poor Germans! You want to abolish it solely for doctrinaire "social engineering" purposes, the overwhelming economic argument cuts no ice with you. You are perfectly prepared to go along with Miliband's lies that he'll collect revenue from abolition to suit your purpose. The end justifies the lies - well it never does, a lie is always lie! If you knowingly vote for liars then don't complain when you discover you've been had!

You could be right Maggie. By the looks of that coverage map there's a mast now in or very near Bedlington. Also OUR local UHF channelling is at the top end of the band which is in the 800Mh/z 4G range. First thing to get is a FREE filter. I smell money! Go for it Bedlingtonians! https://www.gov.uk/government/news/eliminating-interference-with-tv-signals-from-4g-mobile-services

Well... I have to confess not checking the RTC on the server after it rebooted last night, but a test post shows it's now within a minute or so of my Windoze lappy - which is easily nigh enough for Windoze (and pit work!). Check the time zone in your control panel (click on your name right up top, then select My Settings) and whether you are tracking daylight saving or not. The settings are there so everyone around the world can adjust all the displayed dates and times to their local.

Do plug the aerial straight into the TV for test purposes, then you'll be able to bypass any amplifier troubles, and check if the aerial is delivering a clean signal.. Cheap amplifiers and digital do not necessarily go together - cable mismatch problems can corrupt the bitstream. If the amplifier has a gain control turn it right down and step it slowly up. The lowest setting that works will likely be best. The aerial download is always suspect, particularly with digital, and particularly if it's more than say ten years old. If it's well over ten years old then it's likely worth re-cabling with good quality coax anyway.