Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 68: To ask the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources further to recent comments by the European Commissioner for Media, Ms Viviane Redding, that the regulation of transnational satellite broadcasters should be addressed by member states acting on a bilateral, amicable basis and her further comments that the codification of the European Court of Justice case law in this area would allow member states to take measures against an audiovisual media service provider established in another member state that directs, for fraudulent purposes, all or most of its activity to this member state, the measures he intends to take to ensure that satellite broadcasters who are inserting local advertising into their main programme schedule can be subject to regulations set by the State on such advertising. [21058/06]

Noel Dempsey (Meath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am aware of the useful comments made by the commissioner and her recognition of the concerns of a substantial number of member states on this issue.

While I appreciate there is scope for some resolution of the issue through the recommendations of the Commissioner, my objective is to ensure that the regulatory framework at EU level provides a formal basis for national measures to have meaningful reach.

The key issue concerns jurisdiction over broadcasters along with the application of national rules. Throughout the Commission's consultation over the past two years, and at a recent Council meeting, Ireland, along with a number of other member states, has consistently argued for a fundamental shift in the approach to determining which member states' national rules should apply to any given broadcasting service. We have argued that in the case of a television channel that primarily targets Ireland, it is Ireland's national measures that should apply to that channel. Each broadcasting service should only be subject to one set of national rules, but it makes sense that the one set of rules that should apply to any broadcasting service should be the broadcasting standards of the member state primarily targeted by that service.

Ireland will continue to work with other member states and the Commission with a view to progressing consideration of the proposed revised directive. The approach agreed on jurisdiction will impact on Ireland's position on other elements of the proposal.

Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister and apologise for the cumbersome nature of my question.

It seems clear the Commissioner does not agree with Ireland in this case and that the new television frontiers directive will not accept the points that Ireland and other members have made, that broadcasters which are inserting advertising into broadcasts into particular countries should be subject to regulations in those countries. Going by her statement, the Commissioner is clearly not going to take a strong line and will leave the matter to bilateral, amicable approaches. Where they do not work, she agrees codification of law may apply, but only where broadcasting is carried out for fraudulent purposes. Given that nobody would say that companies such as Sky or Nickleodeon are engaging in fraudulent broadcasting, how are we to implement our broadcasting regulations on such advertising since the Commissioner will not include such provisions in an updated televisions without frontiers directive? Where do we go from here?

Noel Dempsey (Meath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy has given quite a succinct statement of the Commissioner's position, but in the end of the day, Commissioners do not make the final decision on directives. They have to go to EU Council, Parliament and so on. As that process continues, Ireland will clearly maintain its position. We have the support, on a consistent basis — in many respects we have led this — of 12 other member states which have argued for this fundamental approach to determining which member states' national rules should apply to any given broadcasting service. A solution will have to be worked out. On more than one occasion I have told the Commissioner and the UK Presidency that we would like serious and meaningful engagement by the Commission on the matter. The Deputy is correct that the Commissioner has taken a trenchant view on this aspect of the directive. We also have an equally strong position on it. Unless there is some movement on both sides, there will be difficulty in getting the directive through. We will not be bullied into this but will use whatever means are available to achieve our aims or a reasonable compromise.

Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the proposal for an updated directive require unanimity from all 25 member states? Is it possible for Ireland to force the issue so that we have such control? If 12 member states are in support of such a position, is the major obstacle to the proposal from neighbouring countries, active in satellite broadcasting? At the committee on communications, marine and natural resources, the head of Sky Broadcasting was asked if it would commit to the basic and simple standards on children's advertising in place in Ireland. We failed, however, with such a bilateral and amicable approach to reach an agreement that Sky Broadcasting would be bound by Irish regulations. Has the Department approached any company inserting children's advertising into satellite programming to agree to abide to our codes on a voluntary basis?

Noel Dempsey (Meath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Twelve member states support the Irish position, making it a total of 13 member states. I do not have the list of those member states but I can forward it to the Deputy. The Commission has been pursuing the particular line referred to earlier. Several other member states, including our neighbour, the UK, have been advocating the Commission's line. There is a clear divide. It will not be decided by unanimity as the new rules on voting strengths will apply. However, 13 member states can make a sufficient blocking minority in this case. Although both sides are trenchant, I hope a reasonable compromise on this matter will be reached.