Ms Susan Kirby:

I thank the Senator Byrne. He posed a question to me directly, so I will kick off. I reiterate that RTÉ itself would acknowledge the Irish independent production sector is its largest creative partner. Our position regarding advocating for an increase in its ability to invest in the sector recognises that fact. Screen Producers Ireland has also made submissions to the Future of Media Commission, and we were clear we would support RTÉ moving towards a publisher-broadcaster model, which is, effectively, the model in place for TG4, as this committee is aware. Adopting a publisher-broadcaster model will mean everything outside of news, sports and current affairs would be created in the independent sector. We see such a situation as being mutually beneficial, although it is not without its challenges. Something similar can be achieved by RTÉ increasing its fundamental investment in the sector from €40 million to €80 million. As I have said before, and I think Ms Callery also pointed out, it would essentially just be reinstating the previous funding level.

RTÉ was sitting at the same table here as well. RTÉ is part of the group. It also realises that it has decreased funding available. It supports the idea that this fund would add additionality in any sense; whatever its design, it will complement existing funding. It would be additional to the existing infrastructure and complementary to it. It would essentially address in some small way the declining broadcasters' funding. We would advocate for an increase in funding to RTÉ. We have previously stated that there is an option for it to explore a move towards the publisher-broadcaster model. We would advocate that the fund would have additionality.

To speak to Senator Malcolm Byrne's later points, it is important that this is a contestable fund. Key to this is that applications for the fund can be made only by independent producers. That would be Mr. McCabe and Irish Screen Editors, ISE, members being able to apply for the fund. As I understand it, the fund has to support genres that are eligible under the EU cinema communication of 2013, which would point us towards TV drama, film, animation and documentaries. Within that, there will naturally be projects that are successful and which will support inbound and smaller indigenous productions. We would support that.

Another important element, which every witness has spoken about, is that I understand it will be brought in via the media commission. In our submission, we also pointed towards the fact that there needs to be a focus in the BAI on how this will be delivered and there needs to be significant industry consultation on the final design or mechanism of delivery of the fund.

There is also a couple of wider points around the AVMS directive, which would speak to prominence and the idea of the percentage of European work. In both of those cases we would also advocate that whatever the system is, there needs to be real transparency that the work that we produce, that is made by the creative talent here, is essentially visible and accessible on the platforms because it is written into the content levy that they must benefit from it. If they benefit from it, we then want them to give us fair prominence for the work. Those are the types of elements that need to be considered in designing how the fund would be used and how it would be delivered into the market.