A Van For All Seasons

The BBC, remember, makes extensive use of bluster, intimidation and disinformation as far as the TV tax is concerned. This is nowhere better exemplified than in the matter of the "TV Detection Van". Everyone is familiar with the idea of the van, packed with sophisticated electronics, cruising the leafy byways of Britain and pin-pointing a TV in someone's house to within an inch or two as it drives past. Here's a video from the heyday of such propaganda:

The PR people employed by the BBC have fed stories to the press and other media about these vans, with accompanying images such as the following of a more modern one:

And, of course, we need the ice-cool, technologically-savvy whizz-kid to operate this highly-secret detection apparatus:

Note the disembodied hands peeling off the removable logo. The suggestion was that instead of having the logo and other identifying marks permanently painted on the vehicle, it would be fitted with removable gubbins so that it could enter stealth mode. Then you'd never know whether the van going by was driven by White Van Man or someone altogether more sinister ...

Then technology advanced to the point where the electronics could be miniaturised into a hand-held device which I'll call "the wand" (other, less genteel, sites use another name which caused me to faint when I looked up the meaning):

Well, so much for the deceit. What are the facts? Fact No. 1 is that surveillance of this sort is restricted by law and enshrined in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, usually abbreviated to RIPA. Further, the matter of detecting TV use is given its own particular Order, the Regulation of Investigatory Powers (British Broadcasting Corporation) Order 2001 (SI 1057). Section 27A clearly states that detection cannot be random but must be authorised for specified premises by "the Head of Sales or Head of Marketing within the Television Licence Management Unit of the British Broadcasting Corporation" or someone more senior than them in the Unit. So the cruising van and the man randomly waving his wand are deliberate deceptions by the BBC. Indeed, the BBC has admitted on record (downloadable pdf) (emphasis mine):

... detection equipment is complex to deploy as its use is strictly governed by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers (British Broadcasting Corporation) Order 2001. RIPA and the Order outline how the relevant investigatory powers are to be used by the BBC and ensure compliance with human rights.

Fact No. 2 is that the BBC has resolutely refused to give any information as to the mode of operation and the effectiveness of its detection technology. Because of this secrecy (which many believe to indicate the technology does not actually exist) the evidence supposedly gathered cannot be introduced into a court of law because all evidence must be capable of being challenged by the other side. As a result, there is no record of anyone being convicted on the strength of such evidence. The best the BBC can hope for is that its salesman will tell a householder "we have the detection evidence" and get them to sign a confession. The signed confession will secure the conviction.

Fact No. 3 is rather interesting. Not only does the BBC refuse to say how its supposed detection technology works, but it also refuses to say how many detection vans it has. However, you can see a great piece of detective work on this very useful site which puts the number at a maximum of 26 but possibly as low as around a dozen.

Finally, consider this. When the BBC refused to answer the questions "how many vans and how do they work?" under a Freedom of Information Act request, an appeal was made to the Information Commissioner. In his Decision Notice (its a downloadable pdf) the Commissioner makes the following significant observation (emphasis mine):

30. The Commissioner recognises the importance the BBC places on the public perception of the use of detector vans, and he also recognises that disclosure of this information would change this perception as the information outlines: the extent of their use; the conditions under which they are used; the procedures necessary to enact their use; the equipment used and its capabilities; and the areas in which they are more or less frequently deployed. The Commissioner notes that a change in this perception could increase the evasion rate in paying TV licences by individuals. For these reasons he accepts that disclosure would be likely to prejudice the prevention or detection of crime; the prosecution of offenders; the assessment or collection of tax or the ability of the BBC to ascertain whether any person has failed to comply with the law.

Did you get it? The public perception is that detector vans work and they are very effective. The BBC has worked long and hard in disseminating this bluster and disinformation. The Commissioner says that if the public ever found out the truth about detector vans that perception would change. In what way? The only logical conclusion is that people would either fall about laughing, or weep at the way they have been deceived.