Perhaps we don't know how good we've got it, but I would support the licence fee more if it contributed to all channels. I feel that it basically being there to fund the BBC isn't really fair on commercial rivals. I think what I should have said is that "I'm against the licence fee in its current form".
The licence fee should fund the BBC. End of.
Advertising and other revenue streams should fund commercial broadcasting. End of.
It's always been the same stock response bleating from commercial radio and television. Unlevel playing field. Guaranteed income for the BBC not fair, blah, blah.
Tell you what, ITV and ILR you could have as much, if not even more money than the BBC, you just have to invest in your product/offering.
Better programmes, better awareness, more viewers, equals slightly higher charges for advertisers, equals higher revenues, equals more money for programming, and, a nice fat dividend per share to keep the owners of the company happy.
And, yes there will be times where the BBC will use public money to tread on the lawn of advertiser funded products. But if public money can do the job better. Then I don't have a problem with that.
A small raid on the overall licence fee pot to weaken the BBC to fund commercial television and artificially reduce the gradient of that playing field? Total nonsense.
My user name might look like Hatton Cross, but it's pronounced Throatwobbler Mangrove.