Professor Kevin Rafter:

Yes, I have a number of points. As regards the type of licence fee, we are talking about the collection method and it is up to the committee to examine a variety of options. If we move away from the self-collection method and it was rolled up as part of a new broadcast or household charge, it would be possible to have a 100% collection because it is automatically deducted like property tax or other charges. None of these measures in themselves solve all of the problems the broadcasting sector faces. In the short term, however, they increase the pot of money. That at least allows programming on public and private sector stations to be enhanced. The licence fee concept is going to be overtaken eventually, but it is still there and is generating a lot of money at the moment. However, the pot of money can be increased by a number of measures that are within the remit of these Houses to deal with. I encourage the committee to examine them.

Goggle and Facebook have been referred to. I was in the company of the head of Google News at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication in Arizona 18 months ago. There was a fascinating presentation about what it does but it does not employ a single journalist; it is all algorithms and computer scientists. We do not want to get to a situation whereby we do not have journalists going to the local courthouse, council meeting or this Parliament. Our democracy needs viable journalism, news and current affairs coverage both on private and public stations. That is why this conversation, as well as the committee's deliberations and recommendations are so important.