Mr. S?amus Dooley:

Many of the issues relevant to this debate that have already been raised formed part of my contribution to the debate on the European Media Freedom Act on 9 November and I had not expected to be back with the committee so soon. The issues raised so far are relevant to the NUJ and we would share many of the concerns raised and many of the views expressed as part of the work being done in DCU.

The issues of low pay, precarious employment, and the concentration of ownership, notably in the regional newspaper sector, are all factors which shape the media landscape in Ireland and I want to emphasise that journalism is in crisis. It is an irony that at a time when the need for professional, authoritative journalism has been widely recognised, journalism itself is becoming an unattractive and unaffordable profession. Print journalism, in particular, has seen an exodus and we as a union are deeply concerned at the loss of experienced journalists and in particular specialist correspondents. This is a function of low pay, the merger of roles and functions, and in some cases mergers in print and titles, combined with the denial of the right to collective bargaining, including by some members of the organisations represented here. We are not always allowed in the same room. In raising this, I realise I am a minority voice.

In Ireland the NUJ's Irish executive council, IEC, has hosted a number of events under the title Journalism Not Just Busin€ss and I want to apologise for the absence of the IEC Cathaoirleach, Siobhán Holliman. The philosophy of Journalism Not Just Busin€ss informed our approach to the committee's timely discussion. On World Press Freedom Day in 2020 we published a recovery plan From Health Crisis to Good News. That recovery plan stands the test of time. We called for a Government-led strategic plan to rescue the media and I echo that today. In different ways, we are all saying the same thing. We called for a reimagining of the State's role in: facilitating a diverse, vibrant and independent media; enabling public interest journalism; and looking for new solutions to secure employment in the industry.

We believe, and the commission's report vindicates this, that public interest journalism is a public good that must be protected. There is agreement on that but perhaps disagreement on how we get there. There is now an awareness that journalism is a public good. We need policies and measures to protect the regional press and specialist publications across all platforms. In this regard I welcome the reduction to 0% VAT on newspapers as a positive step but it is entirely wrong that periodicals are excluded from that. While this is a budgetary measure, I think it is also an issue of relevance to this committee.

The Future of Media Commission's report had many initiatives which we welcomed but on my previous outing I expressed disappointment at the decision not to implement recommendations in respect of public service broadcasting. I also expressed concern at the wide-ranging nature of the huge responsibilities attached to the media commission which will have, in my view, far too wide a brief. The vast powers in respect of regulations, licensing, standards, safety, training, development, aspects of competition and ownership and the promotion of diversity and inclusion is untenable and grants too much power to one agency that is appointed by the Government.

In our submission, we proposed the creation of a training and development agency for the media sector and that the important separation of roles and responsibilities should be considered. All of those issues have been raised across the community sector, print and broadcasting. All of those issues could be addressed. There is a need for a separate training and development unit.

While piecemeal measures, such as those contained in the budget, are to be welcomed we are concerned at the lack of detail around the funding mechanisms, the criteria used for allocation of funds, and the absence of consultation with industry representatives. In particular, we believe there should be specific measures to ensure those who receive State funds should adhere to basic principles. We believe no public money should be made available to firms making compulsory redundancies, cutting pay, giving executive bonuses or blocking trade union recognition.

We also believe the issue of concentration of ownership must be addressed. This has now become a crisis. In that regard, our proposal that the conferring of community value status on local papers is one that is worth revisiting. This ensures that titles are preserved for potential community ownership rather than automatically being prey to large monoliths swooping in, with very limited action by those charged with competition law.