James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister and all the Deputies who contributed to this debate. This report came out of a lottery but it is very appropriate that it did so and it was important to have the opportunity for this debate in the Dáil after many detailed sessions in committee and work over the preceding 12 or 18 months.

I welcome the Minister's comments and engagement. I note that he is to take the report back to the committee. He asked that the report address issues in the wider public service broadcasting area and particularly the general scheme of retransmission fees.

He passed the ball to us and we took it and ran. We made our own of it and now we are giving it back to the Minister. I ask him to put that ball in the net at his end and follow it through to implementation.

We had a broad consensus at the committee but, it is fair to say, we had a couple of dissenting voices also. We heard a few concerns from Deputies Bríd Smith and Brian Stanley in particular. Although they agreed with the broad thrust of the report and the broad principle, as is their entitlement they took issue with a couple of points and I note this. It is worth noting as well that where concerns were raised about charges, the impact on households and poverty issues, the report also states the existing household benefits package, existing concessionary schemes and existing waivers and discounts all continue to apply and will roll over into a new model. While I acknowledge there were concerns, I hope we have dealt with them in the body of the report.

It is important we support content creators, and this has been mentioned also. The gist of the report and the challenge to fund public service broadcasting is to capture the funding model and funding streams, be they commercial or State or all of the above, and ensure that independent and State media and all forms of public service broadcasting media can compete, generate revenue and source revenue, so this public good is supported in much the same way as other public goods, be they schools, hospitals, roads or rail. People may not use them but they generally agree that the State benefits from having them and it is so important to the greater good that we have them.

Along this vein, we have multiple sources of competition for content. We can avail of international content and global content. It is important that we have moved away from the traditional box in the corner type of device, because there is a multitude of different avenues of content today. We have Moore's law on computing power doubling every 18 months, and this has continued to happen since the early 1960s. The only thing technology will do is to continue to surprise us. Having a broader and wider definition makes an awful lot of sense rather than trying to be prescriptive about which devices do and do not qualify, what they might look like and how big or small they should be.

For the avoidance of confusion, it is important that newspapers be considered as part of the broadcasting spectrum. One of the recommendations of the report is that we move from the traditional definition of "broadcasting" to a definition of "media", whereby public service media would become the new term. It is a wider term and incorporates other channels.

I spoke about content creators. It is about the quality of that content and, in terms of public service, it is also about indigenous, localised and regional content, which can include programmes aired at State level but aimed at particular regional audiences. It can incorporate local channels and stations, and programmes that may not be commercially viable but fulfil a particular real cultural and informational need. This is so important, particularly in the area of news media, in this age of fake news. I believe "fake news" was the word of the year in 2016 or 2017. Perhaps it will carry over into 2018. There is a need for impartial, objective, adequately funded and adequately resourced news coverage to report accurately, fairly and objectively the events of the day, be they in the political arena, the discussions in this House or other fora, and to capture them correctly.

On a slightly aside note, but on a related matter, the Minister alluded to Mr. Martin Fraser's report on the strategic communications unit, which was released on Tuesday night. It is a very important report and I read it with interest. One piece of legislation was singled out in it, which is the social media transparency Bill I introduced. Mr. Martin Fraser, the most senior civil servant in the State, as the Minister said, acknowledged the very real need for such legislation and such regulation with regard to the very real issues that arise from it. I look forward to working with the Minister and the committee when the legislation comes before the committee in a fortnight. I also welcome the Taoiseach's commitment on the floor of the Dáil on Tuesday, when he told my party leader he is very open to working with us on advancing this legislation with regard to the very real needs it would tackle.

I echo a comment made by Deputy Eamon Ryan and I endorse it. This is an example of new politics at work. Sometimes new politics is derided and sometimes people feel it is a charade or not productive.

I have seen it up close for the last 18 months. All members of the committee have collaborated with each other, with the Department, the Minister and with other stakeholders. Even though we have had dissenting voices, which is healthy and natural in a democracy, all involved have got together to produce a significant report with outside consultation and engagement. We can all be very proud of it and stand over it. It is an example of politics functioning as it should and politicians doing what they are elected to this House to do, which is to produce reports for consultation, to source inputs, produce outputs and formulate an action plan based upon the best available evidence. I believe we have done that well.

I thank all my colleagues on the committee and the staff involved. I commend the report to the House.

See this speech in context