Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context

128. To ask the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment if he will abolish the TV licence and replace it with a tax on big tech companies to fund public service broadcasting. [35187/25]

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The TV licence is a regressive, unjust tax.

Patrick O'Donovan (Limerick County, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Ah Jesus.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The richest household in the country has to pay the same €160 as the poorest eligible household in the country.

Patrick O'Donovan (Limerick County, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Oh my God.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Increasing numbers of people are voting with their feet and boycotting the TV licence. Will the Minister read the writing on the wall, scrap this regressive tax and replace it with a levy on big tech corporations?

Patrick O'Donovan (Limerick County, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The question is whether I will abolish the television licence and replace it with a tax. No, I will not. That is the end of that. I have no notion of doing it. That fund is in place to support RTÉ and public service broadcasters. It also supports Sound and Vision. I have no intention of replacing it. I also have no intention of going down a cul-de-sac as the Deputy would like us to do, which would be a road to nowhere for RTÉ and everyone associated with broadcasting. The short answer is "No".

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister. I presume he accepts that the tax is deeply unpopular. Licence sales have plummeted since the Tubridy scandal and everything else that came out in terms of the behaviour of those at the top of RTÉ. In 2022, €950,000 was paid. This dropped to €825,000 in 2023 and €790,000 in 2024. This represents a drop of more than 155,000 households that are refusing to pay, either in protest or because they cannot afford to pay this regressive flat tax that takes no account of ability to pay.

I suspect that RTÉ's appalling coverage of the genocide in Gaza has contributed to the further drop in people buying TV licences, when RTÉ often continues to use a both sides framing of what is a horrifically asymmetrical conflict in using terminology like "Hamas-run health ministry" and providing platforms for representatives of the genocidal Israeli State.

Patrick O'Donovan (Limerick County, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am here to answer questions regarding communications, so I will answer the question on communications. There was not really a question in the Deputy's second contribution. My position remains the same. The television licence is not a tax, by the way. I do not see that reference anywhere in the legislation, so I do not know what hat he drew that rabbit out of. It is an important funding mechanism for RTÉ. The Deputy would be the very first person out in RTÉ protesting if the Government were to in any way reduce funding to it. He wants to have his cake and eat it. On this, I am not going to go down the cul-de-sac where he just wants to erode the tax base of every element of public expenditure and revenue generation. He seems to think there is a phantom entity out there that can pay for everything bar yourself. That is the way he operates. In the real world of a constitutional democracy, that is not the way things work. If he ever gets the opportunity to spend a day in government, maybe he will realise that.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister might tell us if considers all the countries across Europe that have abolished TV licences not to be constitutional democracies. Is the test of being a constitutional democracy having a TV licence? He might clarify that. I presume he is aware that just over one third of funding for RTÉ and public service broadcasting comes from the TV licence. It is not even where a majority of funding comes from. The Minister may not be aware of our proposals in RTÉ for the People: A Radical Plan to Transform RTÉ and Public Media, which would increase funding for public service broadcasting, and takes on board many of the recommendations of Coimisiún na Meán and does so not by imposing this regressive flat tax on ordinary households, but on the big tech corporations making huge profits. I do not know if the Minister is aware of this fact. I do not know if he is aware of the parasitical role these corporations play on journalism, where they are not creating any of this content but getting most of the advertising revenue from it. It clearly makes sense, therefore, to allow those companies to pay. I will continue to support those who refuse to pay the TV licence. I warn the Minister this number is increasing. It seems even An Post has given up pursuing people, if we look at the number of prosecutions, which are also dropping.

Patrick O'Donovan (Limerick County, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is no stranger to RTÉ and he gets a fair crack of the whip there. Of course, he never uses the opportunity to express his thanks for the unbridled coverage he seems to get from RTÉ on a day in, day out basis. Those of us on this side of the House might have something to complain about if there was a fairness test. I do not, however, because it is a public service broadcaster and I am not going to interfere in editorial coverage.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It sounds like the Minister is interfering now.

Patrick O'Donovan (Limerick County, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy has form in this space. He does not want to pay for anything. He feels that everybody else should pay for something else other than him. He is entitled to start whatever campaign it is he wants to start to undermine another public service. I do not wish him the best of luck with it. Most people do not either. When he does get an opportunity to sit on this side of the House, with whoever it is that will actually have him as a partner in government, he will then see there is more to running a public service than a megaphone.