Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Dooley for tabling this motion. It is our first debate on broadcasting in my time in this Ministry. It is timely.

I recognise the strong endorsement of the role of local radio stations given by all speakers from the Fianna Fáil benches. That will undoubtedly be reflected in other contributions. Local radio stations are the information lifeline for audiences and citizens. They are also the lifeline for politicians, providing platforms on which to discuss important public issues.

As Deputy Dooley rightly pointed out, we are increasingly seeing the room for sober debate on issues being dominated by the echo chambers of social media with the fury and anger that they can generate. Major changes are under way in broadcasting, both in television and radio. Some of these are cyclical as a result of the crash. We have seen a decline in commercial advertising and the pressure on licence fees. However, some of the changes are structural. The migration online will not stop. Audience penetration among younger listeners and viewers by traditional media is low. As they move to new online communication platforms such as players, it is difficult for many of these traditional broadcasters, which are an information lifeline, to monetise that move. They are under significant pressure. The restructuring that has occurred in public broadcasting as well as many parts of the private broadcasting sector has been necessitated by that pressure. I was not around for the recent Estimates process in this Department, but nearly €2.5 million has been provided to TG4 and €10 million to RTÉ in the past two years in recognition of the pressure that they have been under in recent times.

Deputy Dooley raised a number of issues and I will try to deal with them in the limited time available to us. The revenue collection system is not working. As Deputy Cassells mentioned, the evasion rate is 14% and the collection cost is 6%. The committee also pointed to an 8% exemption, increased from 2.5%. Combined, these figures constitute a 28% drain on licence fee revenue.

As the House knows, my Department chairs a committee involving all the relevant players, including Revenue, which Deputy Dooley believes should be the future collector. The committee has also considered other options, for example, a fresh tender, as a way of raising money more effectively from the licence fee. I understand that the committee's report will come to me by the end of March, and it appears to be on schedule.

The other issues raised by the committee are interesting and I would be open to considering all of them. We will have a thorough debate on them when the broadcasting Bill is before the House. As Deputies have pointed out, that Bill has been delayed. There have been tricky drafting issues around some of the provisions, in particular the putting out to tender and the power of the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, BAI, to vary levies on different types of broadcaster. There has been an anxiety in the draftsman's office to ensure that proper policies and principles underpin the latter and it is not seen as an arbitrary power. When moving away from a public authority, in this case An Post, the powers of collection must also be properly based. These tricky issues explain the delay, but good progress is being made and I hope to be in a position to present the Bill.

The committee and Deputy Dooley have raised the question of how to use the proceeds of additional revenue. The Deputy recognises that the BAI has recommended €30 million for RTÉ and €6 million for TG4. The Government has made some progress in that regard. The Deputy has also set out proposals as to how a fund might be structured, but we must consider the issue of state aid rules. As I understand the matter, we cannot provide state aid to a commercial entity except for a clear public purpose that is stated in advance and where the competitive delivery of that public purpose is tendered for. We cannot have a fund that gives money to a commercial entity just because it has a current affairs obligation. It would have to be a different structure. Some Deputies suggested that we needed to provide money to commercial stations so that they could keep going, but it would constitute state aid if it were phrased like that. We must identify public purposes for which private, local broadcasters can tender to deliver. Notwithstanding this difference in approach, the principle is there.

To be fair to the BAI, it makes a 7% allocation to encourage content. It does not include local information, but it includes information about international and wider issues. This comes from the legislation. There is an expectation that, while a local station will be good at identifying what is happening in its own community, there may be justification for support when moving to a wider arena. That is in the existing scheme, as are cultural and other important objectives. It is a question of designing something that would be seen as equitable.

Deputy Scanlon raised the issue of the broadcasting levy. It is intended under the Bill that some of the revenue would be used to fund the BAI, thereby reducing the obligation on a levy. I do not think the former Taoiseach said he would abolish it. Rather, he indicated that up to 50% could come off the levy. That continues to be the thinking within the Bill that will come forward for consideration.

The committee also raised some other issues, which Deputy Dooley referred to, such as moving away from TV set ownership to other devices. This is an issue that we need to consider. There is no doubt that we are seeing a huge change in the way people consume media. The penetration of the market of those aged under 15 is in the low single figures. Even if one considers those aged 25, the viewing figures do not even hit 20%. It is only as viewership gets up to people of our own vintage, sadly, that we can see the high figures. A dramatic change is happening. If it continues, and those people are unlikely to change their behaviour as they get older, it will represent a massive change. This issue was raised by the committee and is worthy of thought.

The committee also looked at the idea of retransmission fees. I believe this is a double-edged sword. If one takes public service broadcasting off some of the platforms such as Sky and Virgin, do we achieve the public objective we set to provide Irish audiences with access to quality public service content? It is a double-edged sword but I believe the committee indicated that it is something the station should be allowed to negotiate rather than it being an all-or-nothing situation. The committee asked what we mean by public service broadcasting. It pulled up short of making really strong recommendations but there is no doubt that it raises issues we need to consider.

I welcome this debate. Our broadcasting services are, and continue to be, under pressure. This is the difficulty. There is a long-term migration that will pose challenges for us in the fake news arena and in getting access for Irish audiences to Irish content. We need to focus more on how we drive that content to the audiences.

See this speech in context