Mr. Whittingdale acknowledges the historical significance and importance of the BBC but argues against decriminalising TV licence evasion for over-75s, citing potential revenue loss and increased costs if enforcement becomes a civil matter instead of criminal. He notes that the current system has been reviewed multiple times and believes it is still necessary to sustain the financial model supporting public service broadcasting.

Mr. Davies questions the need for criminal enforcement of TV licence fees if the BBC is as valuable and necessary as claimed, suggesting that such measures undermine public trust in the broadcaster.

Mr. Bridgen points out that when negotiating the BBC's funding during his tenure, decriminalisation was previously considered but later negotiated away in favour of other concessions such as taking on over-75s licences. He also mentions resisting a proposal to extend licence fee requirements to non-linear services.

Mr. Madders states that no enforcement action has been taken against over-75s, questioning why threatening letters are still sent if there is no intention of prosecution.

Mr. Leigh criticises the current law that allows for imprisonment over non-payment, highlighting its disproportionate impact on pensioners living on small state pensions and suggesting it should be repealed.

Mr. Sunderland emphasises the importance of maintaining BBC’s impartiality to justify public funding, urging for a review of governance arrangements and editorial policies.

Ms Keeley emphasises that decriminalisation would harm both over-75s who must now pay the fee and the BBC. She argues against decriminalisation due to its potential negative impact on enforcement fairness, vulnerable individuals, and the financial health of the BBC.

Mr Chope supports the proposal for de facto decriminalisation but expresses concern about a potential increase in TV licence fees. He suggests that market forces and consumer choices are already driving changes, with fewer people paying the fee and more evading it.