Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. They are helpful for us in trying to move this legislation forward. My first comments will be to the Department's representatives. The comments are somewhat political but the witnesses are representing the Minister. I presume they are here to present his views and ideas, rather than necessarily the Department's views. The scale of the problem facing public service broadcasters is enormous. In Dublin Castle last Friday, there was a public hearing from many different parts of the sector and it was clear that public service broadcasters are facing an enormous problem and that time is effectively running out. Legislators must ask themselves whether they believe in public service broadcasting and, if they do, whether they are prepared to commit to the challenge they face to address that, which is principally in terms of providing the appropriate funding.

To be honest, this legislation is tinkering around the edges. It is short term. From the Minister's perspective it might be a way of kicking the proverbial can down the road, beyond the length of his mandate. If the Minister and the Government were serious about addressing the deficit in the funding of public service broadcasting, there would have been a far more comprehensive legislative measure and they would use the facilities of this committee to engage with stakeholders. However, we are being asked to engage with stakeholders, and the stakeholders are here today, for something that is effectively bread and butter. There is nothing in this. Even the retransmission piece is not part of it and is kicked out at the end. The legislation is a sham. It fails to address the crisis that exists and which was addressed well last Friday. It is just using the committee to front end the minor elements that might be somewhat contentious, although there are no real contentious issues here. That is my opening comment, although I still have some questions about it.

The TV3 piece in head 3 and others is straightforward. Like the Chairman, I have a concern about the BAI being funded. If definitely requires more funding but funding out of the TV licence in advance of there being any increases in the revenue from TV licences is regrettable.

RTE outlined the potential cost, and although it is important to take the burden from local and community radios, heaping it back on an already overburdened and underfunded public service broadcaster is not the way to go. Will we get some assurance that this will effectively be new money coming from an increase in the collection of licence fees and it will not apply until after the roll from the licence fee increases significantly?

I have questions about the appointment of a third party licence fee agent. Will the witness tell us how that will pan out? What are the bursaries to journalists on local radio stations about? In principle, it is a nice idea but it does not address the crisis facing local media in general, whether it is print or local radio. Could we look at addressing that in a much more comprehensive way? The retransmission fee should be addressed as part of this Bill and I strongly advocate that the officials go back to the Minister to reconsider it. This is a question to RTE and its agents. It is really looking for the capacity to negotiate. That is all. Very helpful information has been provided to us. It is useful to us but more relevant to RTE in terms of developing its negotiating position, which is fine. I think all it is asking of the Legislature is to let us have a free hand in negotiating with the dominant player. This is all good information but it should not require much more input from us. We can bring in the stakeholders and I am sure they will kick up a fuss, talking about the impact it will have on viewers. I assume they will talk of passing on the cost to the consumers in an effort to frighten the horses. It is a matter that RTE can negotiate with them. It does not want to lose any viewers, as laid out in the documentation, which is being made public. It is clear that the body is constrained in terms of what can be charged to platforms.

What I am getting today is we must go back to the Department and Minister. They need to step up to the plate and address the crisis facing public service broadcasting. Frankly, with the pace of change and rate of development of technology, we will otherwise still be scratching our heads when the market will have moved on. Public service broadcasting will not be in a position to invest in the creative sector. We heard much about that on Friday. There is a benefit provided to culture and history from home-grown programmes. It will be too late if we do not move quickly. It is very clear time is not on our side. The retransmission fees seem to be the most important element, although they are not talked about, and we should allow the company to negotiate and figure it out. We do not have to involve ourselves and we have enough to do. We do not have to deal with what is paid or not paid, or what is viewed or not. We should let it on with the business. It clearly needs to be done.