Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

It is a bit like politics, indeed. We might have hoped, though, that the arts would have been slightly different. We need to try to address some of these problems. The key to getting to the bottom of it is trying to find out what is going on and resolving the issues rather than what has been happening. There has been a slagging match between different factions with accusations, counter-accusations and allegations from one sector against another

One of the issues has evolved. It is very important because it is the condition of section 481 tax relief. I will read it for the Minister who has come in to replace the Minister for Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, whom I hope will be back. The condition of getting section 481 tax relief, worth €70 million or €80 million a year, is that it acts as an effective stimulus to film making in the State through, among other things, the provision of quality employment and training opportunities. We should stress that in addition to that €70 million or €80 million from section 481, last year there were also €12 million worth of loans from the Irish Film Board. That amount varies between €12 million and about €15 million. That is a great deal of money and it is conditional on producing quality employment and training.

It is the obligation of the State, public representatives and the various Departments that oversee these funds to see if that is happening. That is the law. We need to find out if that is happening. The first step in doing that is to find out how many people actually work in the industry and how many people are trainees in the industry. I am referring to registered employees and trainees. We do not really know that figure. The Olsberg SPI report, for example, did help to make progress on answering how many people are involved in the industry. At the all-party Oireachtas Joint Committee on Culture, Heritage and Gaeltacht, and its report in January 2018, the Irish Film Board stated that there were 17,000 full-time equivalents working in the industry. Many workers from the industry came in after, however, and stated that there were actually almost no full-time jobs in the film industry. We therefore have a claim of 17,000 full-time equivalents on the one hand, and have workers who are experienced in the industry for many years stating there is almost no full-time employment for most grades in the film industry.

There is a big gap between 17,000 and almost none. What is the answer? The Olsberg SPI report begins to move us a little bit in the direction of answering this question. We discovered from that report that the 17,000 figure takes into account areas such as radio, video games, commercial advertising, animation, people who work in RTÉ etc. The 17,000 figure is not an accurate picture of what is going on in the Irish film industry at all. It includes all sorts of other areas. Now, let us get to the truth. How many people are actually working in the film industry? When it is broken down a little more, we are told further down in the small print of that report that there is an employment base of 6,300. That is considerably less than 17,000. That translates into 3,260 full-time equivalents, but full-time equivalents are not jobs. How many people, therefore, can we estimate actually work in the film industry? The answer is that we do not really know. It is probably somewhere less than or close to 3,000. Some people would put the figure at as low as 1,700 or 1,800 people.

That is a big difference. How many people are trainees? Can we track them? Do we know at what stage of their training they are at? No, we do not, because there is no training structure. Nobody knows when the training begins, how it is accredited, at what point a trainee is finished or at what point he or she becomes qualified in a particular grade or category of employment within the film industry. I understand there are about 77 different grades and categories in the industry, just to make it even more complicated. Recently, a worker from the industry informed me that there was a register of trainees a few years back. It actually had the names of the trainees. I suggest to the Minister that we need the names of the people who are registered trainees so that we can track who is a trainee, whether they are moving from one production to another, progressing through their training, becoming qualified and then having a career in the industry.

We also need to know who are the experienced workers in the industry and if they are gaining quality employment. I refer to the accusations of people being blackballed if they ask for direct PAYE employment as opposed to being categorised as contractors or subcontractors.

Recently, on a “Prime Time” special, allegations were thrown around that particular groups of workers, represented by the Irish Film Workers Association, IFWA, and the GMB trade union, which were making demands for more direct employment in the industry were, in fact, a troublemaking faction which just wanted to control it and a bit dodgy. I am not in a position to judge any of it. However, insofar as I have interacted with these groups, all they have asked for are conditions with which I am familiar in the construction industry, namely, direct PAYE employment on the basis that everything else is precarious. Rather than engage in accusation and counter accusation, the film industry and the Irish Film Board, in particular, need to be able to explain why it was not just the IFWA and the Irish Film Board which stated there was an issue of blacklisting, precarity and lack of continuity in employment. In January in a direct response to me and Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell when asked if there was blacklisting in the industry the Equity representative said:

One need only look at the results of the survey that Equity published at the end of 2016 regarding the issues of bullying and harassment to see that what the Deputy is referring to is true. People are terrified of rocking the boat in any way, shape or form when they are in a precarious situation in work. One of the questions on the survey asked whether respondents had ever experienced or observed any form of bullying or harassment. Something in the region of 65% to 70% of people said “Yes”. The next questions asked if they reported it. Of that 70% of respondents who had said “Yes”, roughly 70% said that they did not report it for fear of not getting the next job.

That is from the actors. By the way, the Minister and I have been invited to a meeting next week in Stoneybatter of the theatre actors who are complaining about the same precarity and lack of security. Even those who are called the creatives in the industry are saying there is a serious problem, as well as transport workers, stage crew and so on. Whatever accusations can be made against them, they all have been working in the industry for decades. They can show the productions on which they have worked but say they are facing blacklisting. They go further in stating a relatively small group of companies receive the bulk of Irish Film Board grants and loans, as well as section 481 tax relief, but take no responsibility for their employees. Although some may have received between €30 million and €40 million in recent years in various forms of public support which I am glad they have received, they have virtually no employees. They take no responsibility for the people who work for them because of the special purpose vehicle, SPV, structure, which means that their official employer is a company which appears and disappears like a mushroom. Everybody knows that behind the SPV, the disappearing company is actually a parent company which is the one which applies for and receives section 481 tax relief. Who are the employers? One cannot have quality employment if one does not even know who the employers are. In fact, there are no employers because of the SPV structure, but that needs to be established. Following on from it, in order to resolve some of the issues, one needs to have a more representative Irish Film Board. It should involve producers, directors and actors, but it should also involve PAYE workers and those in non-management grades, including those in areas such as transport, stage crew and so on to ensure a broad diversity of management and non-management grades that actually have an input.

As Deputy Ó Snodaigh said, there is a serious question as to whether we need to open up section 481 tax relief to foreign producers. Is this an issue that is hampering internal investment? There is evidence that some of the big productions that could have come here did not come because of the particular way the industry is set up. There is also evidence that the structures are different in other countries. Why was “Game of Thrones” filmed in the North rather than here? If we are putting €300 million through the Irish Film Board and providing up to €1 billion in section 481 tax relief, is there something a bit odd that the State does not have any film assets of its own? It does not own any machinery and has just sold off the last bit of the national studios at Ardmore to a private company. Imagine if we had no Abbey Theatre or municipal theatres and it was a completely free floating industry. Imagine if the national theatre became a place which only appeared to put on a play and then disappeared with nobody having jobs. We would find that a bit odd. However, we are told by certain sectors of the film industry that this is the only way one can structure it. I do not accept that for one minute. We had Ardmore Studios which made a big impact on Irish cinema.

These matters need to be examined. I am glad that we are having this important debate. I know that the Minister and the Minister of Finance are genuinely engaging. However, I will be submitting amendments to have a review clause inserted into the Bill to examine issues such as employment numbers, quality employment, and better and broader representation on the Irish Film Board. As a condition in passing the legislation, we need the Government to commit to dealing with these issues within a set timeframe to address the concerns raised and overcome some of the conflicts and give the film industry the boost and support it needs to thrive in the future.

See this speech in context