Mr. Gerry O'Brien:

With every State-subsidised industry, as I said, there is a tendency to see this as free money that nobody will miss. I am not saying anybody is doing anything criminal, illegal or anything like that, but there is a stretch on how one costs things, how one values them and how they give a return. There is a phrase in the accounting world where there is accountancy and then there is Hollywood accounting. The joke goes - I forget which writer said it - that the most creative aspect of the film industry is, in fact, the accounting. One has to be very careful in anything that one supports with other people's money. I believe I am speaking not only on behalf of actors but on behalf of the taxpayers because, as I said, it is their investment. It does not belong to the producers or to the actors; it belongs to us, the taxpayers. We have to be satisfied that all legislation is spot on and everything is valued correctly. If one has a multiplicity of DAC companies springing up and then ending, one does not know where any of those assets are going and that is where one gets the possible suppression of value.

The big suppression of value is in the value of the performers and that has gone on for 30 years. For example, I worked on an American contract in 2006 and I am still adding $3,000 a year to my tax return here in Ireland because the revenue comes in to this jurisdiction to me. The Olsberg report does not state we want to measure fiscal improvements. It wants to look at the net benefit. If one has actors earning those residual payments and they are protected, they are taxed here in this jurisdiction. If you protect all creators of copyright, and copyright goes across everybody, not only performers but also our writers, the screenwriters should be getting this. The cinematographers, producers and directors all have an intellectual investment in the industry. We also have to make sure of it for our own cultural sector, the Irish film industry itself, not the service industry to the big global streaming networks and the big US studios. It is a great benefit to them and that is a great boon to us. We have to make sure that we get our share of the global revenue streams of that. That is how it works.

It means there is a raising of standards of living and the actor is not constantly dependent on handouts. I mentioned the excellent basic income scheme. There is more dignity to an actor getting a cheque through the door as validation for his work than having to depend on something given to him because he is so poor. It gives dignity back to the actor and that is lacking at the moment. There is a huge lack of dignity at the core of this industry. I hope that helps to answer the Deputy’s question and helps him to understand.