Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Committee on Budgetary Oversight for doing this work. I thank its members for allowing me to take part in some of the committee's deliberations. The committee heard from a considerable number of witnesses, including representatives of Screen Ireland, Screen Producers Ireland, the Screen Guilds of Ireland and the Irish Film Workers Association. John Arkins and Liz Murray were in the audiovisual room earlier to engage with a number of Oireachtas Members.

The recommendations that have been made are important. There is nobody who does not want to see the continuity of the Irish film industry. We all were delighted at the time of the Oscars nominations, before the ceremony rather than after it, with the recognition of the likes of "An Cailín Ciúin" and the "Banshees of Inisherin". All I can say is that we need to see things being done better and more quickly, and more of them. The whole purpose of the section 481 relief is that we have a sustainable industry. In considering what that looks like, we must take into account quality employment and training. That is the industry development test. Then there is the culture test. There must be some sort of layout in regard to how that looks.

The Minister of State is representing the Department of Finance and the line Minister. That is part of the overall process. We are discussing a tax relief, which is where the Department of Finance comes in, but the certification and sign-off come from the Minister for Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media, Deputy Catherine Martin. The provision absolutely is cross-departmental. We need to get to grips with the question of how that certification occurs. Recommendations were made on the amount of the tax relief that is offered. Perhaps we need to look at instalments and all those various issues. First and foremost, however, the most important recommendation is that the two Ministries convene the all-important stakeholders' forum in which all these issues can be considered.

Given the week that is in it, we are all conscious of the importance of ensuring there is good governance, oversight and accountability of how public moneys are used. We need to do a deep dive. We have heard that from too many people who came before the committee and from others who are not willing to go in front of committees given what has happened to the likes of John Arkins and others, who would state outright that they were blacklisted. Others will refute that but if people have worked consistently in an industry and then suddenly, after speaking in front of a committee, they do not work again, everybody can work out what looks to be happening.

A number of people within the industry have spoken about how they are not particularly happy at times with the ratios of experienced workers to trainees, while recognising there is a need to have a throughput and that this is not necessarily great at times from the point of view of the sustainability of individual productions and the wider industry. People are very slow to bring those issues up because of the reality of how this works. There was mention of 1913 earlier. I do not want to be overly dramatic but the fact is this is an industry that is not like many others in the sense that people require a head of department to ring them and ask them to come in to do a particular piece of work. If a person who comes in front of a committee to discuss certain issues expresses the view, let us say, that the working time directive or whatever is not being applied correctly, I am fairly sure that person will not thereafter be getting that call from the head of department.

The tax relief is sought by a producer, who creates a designated activity company, DAC. People get the idea that it is a one-shot type of operation for an individual film. That company then disappears at the end. In fairness, the Minister of State spoke about our entire framework for protecting workers but, at the Workplace Relations Commission and Labour Court, the representatives of employers have said that these production companies have no employees and that the people in question were employees of DACs that have folded and are gone. We need to find a means to maintain the connection between the producer and the employee to ensure that workers have rights, that they stay in the industry and that this industry remains sustainable.

We have all heard stories of productions being made in this State and then having to be filmed again in other places. That leads to questions as to what exactly went on in those particular productions. Is it a case of too many corners being cut? The difficulty is that, if Ireland were to get a name for that, we would suddenly be in a completely different place. At this point in time, we have what is a relatively thriving film industry. We need to sustain it and to add to it.

If we agreed on nothing else, we should agree that we need a stakeholders' forum. The situation is no different from that of RTÉ. A deep dive, an inquiry or an investigation is needed. It is not about accepting what I or any of the other Deputies here say or what individuals have told us or various committees over the years; it is about looking at the facts. We are providing a great deal of State money. We want to ensure the sustainability of the film industry. Deputy Boyd Barrett made a fair point about the need to look at something to ensure long-term sustainability and to ensure that the State gets something to show for its investment. I accept that employment and sustainability are sound but, as I have said, we need that deep dive. In fairness, that could not be done by the Department of Finance alone because it relates to the film industry and how we ensure that industry is sustainable and that workers are getting their rights. We need that stakeholders' forum as quickly as possible. That is the whole point of the hearings we held and the recommendations we made. This cannot just be another report that lies somewhere because of cross-departmental difficulties. We put in various parliamentary questions and are sent from the Department of Finance to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and then to the Minister, Deputy Catherine Martin's Department. That is something we cannot have.

We know that there are also wider issues with regard to Irish Equity and the EU copyright directive. We have heard testimony regarding buy-out contracts. It does not look like people have a whole pile of choice with regard to such contracts. As I have said, this is about long-term sustainability, workers' rights and ensuring that artists get the benefit of the work they have put in on a long-term sustainable basis. We presented what had been presented to us. Obviously, there are people who feel they have not necessarily got a fair run from the film industry, given these particular circumstances. Some of them have come to Oireachtas Members individually and others have come before committees. All we are saying is that there are particular issues here. Even if Screen Ireland, Screen Producers Ireland or others refute these claims for their own reasons, the fact is that questions remain. The only way to get the answers is to have that deep dive.

I request that the Minister of State engage cross-departmentally with a view to pushing forward and holding this stakeholders' forum so that we can have a means to carry out the necessary level of inquiry or investigation. We could then find the best means of offering section 481 relief. We want to see the audiovisual sector and film industry thrive but the section 481 relief now also relates to the games industry. We want the benefits for all of those involved at every level but we need fair play for workers. We cannot have people being blacklisted. The problem is that there are just far too many complaints. My fear is that we will not have a sustainable industry in the long term if we do not deal with these issues.

See this speech in context