Free to view BBC/ITV channels are not only available to the public through sky. It is possible to buy a non sky receiver and dish to receive these free to air channels the general public are not made aware of this and they associate satellite tv only with sky!. In effect a free digital satellite tv service is available now from the BBC and ITV without any reliance from SKY (unless their is some contract attached to the Sky Astra satellite itself). In addition the BBC are presently broadcasting an HD channel which is also available under the above conditions provided the correct HD receiver is purchased. The most important thing is that the BBC must have a long term platform for broadcasting HD TV without this the viability of any free to view organisation will be limited. The writing is on the wall, how many HD ready Tv's have been purchased recently? When the public realise they may not get HD without paying for it they are not going to be very happy.

Michael Dunglinson, carlisle, Cumbria

I applaud the BBC for at last showing some ambition and doing something about the national coverage problems with Freeview. Many people in this country simply have no choice but to subscribe to pay TV operators such as SKY if they want digital TV. I am currently with SKY but would move in a trice if I thought the BBC could come up with a basic free digital satelite service package, coupled with additional pay TV channels and a recording machine that could rival SKY+ . The issue here is choice and it is a poor show that the public has been treated so badly todate. Ultimately responsibility for this lack of choice lies with the Government.

Mike , Bristol, UK

I'm a bit surprised by this as the BBC channels and others are already available unencrypted on the Sky satellite - so what is different in this proposal ?

Andy, Luxembourg, Luxembourgf

Does this mean I will be able to watch British TV in the USA - I hope so.

Derek Boulter, Sugar Land, Texas, USA

Golly. The BBC and government seem to live in a parallel universe where the public is at fault for not using Freeview.

“For those seven million homes yet to make the switch [to digital television], it needs to be clear that the benefits of digital television do not need to equal ‘pay television’.” What a load of twaddle.

Seriously. Terrestrial Freeview is good. I used to use it, but I have had to switch to Sky, which I hate because it so expensive and commercialised. Why did I switch? Because I moved to a large town in Wiltshire, which is not scheduled to get Freeview until 2012.

I just don't understand why there is any debate about all of this. If the government got on with the rollout of terrestrial freeview, they wouldn't need these satellites, or for us to get more dishes.

Christopher, Shrewton, UK

But all the BBC channels (and radio) are already on free to air Astra satellites along with ITV and hundreds more channels, they have been for over a year! I watch them all the time with my £20 reciever.

Oliver, Cologne, Germany

I am also fed up with the BBC. Their grasp of digital broadcast strategy is tenuous to say the least. If more than a quarter of homes can't get Freeview, why are they starting the digital switchover soon? What's their proposed solution? The whole thing also requires quite a big spend by consumers who at least have to buy a box for each TV, and maybe multiple satellite feeds. For this we get precisely nothing except endless trashy new channels. On the DAB front, they spend a lot of time on R5 repeating that it's available on Digital Radio, Digital TV and On line. None of these is available where I live. What will happen when they switch off the medium wave? And will digital car radio work in hilly areas? A bit less disingenous pushing of unproven fixes for the technical problems in their expansion policy would go down quite well around here.

colin, Shrewsbury UK,

The BBC needs to get technology predictions and investment plans in-line with some urgency. Living in the 'high-tech' Thames Valley, I still cannot get Freeview with any reliability. Some days, and recently this has been more often than not, there is no Freeview reception on any channel.
I would not invest in a BBC satellite service because the BBC has taken the 'tabloid' approach to journalism and programming.
Give the BBC a commercial charter so it can get a satellite service operational as suggested and free us from the terrestrial licence fee for a service it can't deliver now and has no hope of delivering in the future HD world.
I'm sure the BBC wants to embellish its global reach, and no doubt with a satellite service, it would do a good job!
I can then choose SKY+ now, and reception issues will be a thing of the past.

M Delaney, Thames Valley,

Here in Skipton, a sizable market town, we are only able to receive analogue television, without even channel 5. As far as I know we are not likely to have a terrestrial digital service until the end of the rollout.
I have had to accept that despite paying my licence fee, the only real alternative is the SKY system if i wish to access the "free to view" channels.
What a carry-on!!

John, skipton, North Yorkshire

The TV licence fee has long been an unfair tax on those unable to receive terrestrial channels due to their geographic location. Whether the old analogue or newer digital terrestrial channels, if the terrestrial broadcasters cant provide coverage by terrestrial means then the licence fee should be waved. Sat coverage whether by Sky or by new 'free' sat channels is not 'free' and still involves extra costs if you're unfortunate to live in a remote area, and its pretty certain you wont find NTL/Virgin either on your doorstep. It seems that the TV licence specifically meant for the BBC, is charged whether you are given a terrestial service or not and that should be changed.

Mike, Denia, Spain

The term "BBC" and "free" seems funny when we pay a hefty Standing-Charge just to own a TV-set and have no control over this State Monolith which is a law unto itself.

It is the new State Church collecting its tithe and punishing those with criminal law who do not offer supplication

Tom, Leeds, England