Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses and thank them for their detailed presentations. Obviously, what they have provided us with will be helpful for us in reaching a determination. We have a difficult job in that from the very start of his time in office, the Minister has indicated that he does not want to go down the broadcasting charge route. He ruled it out from the start notwithstanding the fact that our party offered it to the Irish people as part of our manifesto. It is something we believe in. It is a way of addressing the funding shortage and the very significant level of non-payment of the licence fee. While I welcome the initiative the Department is putting forward to try to get a better return, I remain to be convinced of the success of that.

In respect of public service broadcasting at this time, particularly in the context of what is now being referred to as the "post-truth" era, the provenance of content is hugely important with the advent of fake news, which is readily available on the various digital platforms. Professor Rafter rightly identified the issue concerning the ability to go through a day, a week or perhaps a month without ever having access to any Irish content and feeling one has been informed as to what is happening domestically and throughout the world. In that environment, the person could be largely dependent on Twitter or Facebook without having any access to knowledge about where it comes from, its probity or the extent of editorial management or control. That is scary in a democracy where we are moving away from those norms that are protected on a legislative basis and where people know the provenance of content. Much of the debate during previous committees and up to now has been a "them and us" debate - the independent or private commercial sectors versus RTE. We all have a responsibility now to get our act together and see the threat to democracy that is afforded to certain vested interests if they wish to use digital media and platforms to convey values that do not concur with what most right-thinking people believe.

The preservation and protection of public service broadcasting is really important - certainly to me and, I would imagine, to most people in this House. It is about how we can get together and ensure that, collectively, we have a balanced approach to it. For a long time, I have believed that includes the commercial private sector. I often think the word "independent" is somewhat misleading. I assume it only comes from the fact that these outlets are independent of RTE. We need to get over this "us and them" mentality and call it what it is. Of course, there are issues and concerns to be addressed about the commercial sector when you hear of large sums of money being paid for a television station and somebody buying two television stations. It should not be beyond us to address that on a legislative basis without ending up in a situation where we have another Fox News-style channel. An appropriate legislative base under the guidance of BAI could manage that scenario.

It then comes down to money, which is where the questions will come from. I have listened to what Mr. Purcell has said and I certainly think there is a basis for a very solid proposal there that can be worked on. It is about where the money comes from. It cannot be at the expense of RTE. I had a chance to peruse what RTE will say later. It does not have a lot of spare cash and certainly cannot afford to see a reduction in what it gets from the licence fee. Could the witnesses guide us on where that additional-----