Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour) | Oireachtas source

The answer to that is "Yes" and "No". Yes, more money will be there but the Chairman already has heard from Deputy Moynihan that others are contending for a share of the revenue. For example, the independent production sector makes an increasingly valuable contribution these days in respect of creativity, innovation and that kind of thing. The Independent Broadcasters of Ireland, that is, the regional radio stations, undoubtedly produce public service content. They are, however, commercial enterprises and therefore a state aid question again arises, apart from any other consideration. Theoretically, the honest answer to the Chairman's question is if one had a 99% effective universal collection of a new public service broadcaster charge, theoretically of course it could permit of some reduction. However, it would be a public policy decision as to whether that would be wise. There are policy objects imposed on public service broadcasters by law. Everyone in this committee meeting will have an opinion as to how well they are discharged but in terms of Deputy Moynihan's question on whether it is a large amount of money compared with what he called stand-alone broadcasters, the answer is while it is a lot of money, the public service objectives imposed by law on the public service broadcasters are not imposed on what Deputy Moynihan described as stand-alone broadcasters.

Some Deputies, including Deputy Moynihan, asked me about personnel-related costs in the main public service broadcaster, RTE. There is no doubt but that, in the recession, the cutbacks in RTE have been very serious. There are some 500 fewer staff. I am not saying the organisation is as efficient in every respect as it might be. That is a matter on which colleagues will have an opinion. In 2008, personnel-related costs in RTE amounted to €220 million. This slipped back to €173 million last year, which is very significant. What legislators have to bear in mind is that we legislated to impose a requirement on the public service broadcasters to comply with certain public service objectives and, therefore, we must make a judgment as to whether there is sufficient wherewithal to do as desired. There has been a collapse in commercial revenue at the same time, and there has also been a problem with the migration of advertising from the public service broadcasters not to TV3 or other competitors but to companies such as Google. This is a huge issue that cannot be avoided.

I do not know whether the organisation is as efficient as it might be. However, the figures exist in terms of the very severe cutbacks that have taken place, and there may be more.

Deputy Harrington and others asked about home-produced content. It is a matter of judgment. I was asked whether there is as much home-produced content as there ought to be based on the big subsidy from the taxpayer. The television licence is a big subsidy; there is no other way to describe it. The broadcaster is still a very small player, however, by comparison with the one on the neighbouring island. RTE is a minnow if one compares its television licence revenue with that of the BBC.

Let me address the point made by Deputy Colreavy on the digital terrestrial television grants. There is no provision because after the switchover to SAORVIEW last October there was no more need for provision. The issue does not arise.