Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Senator. Like her, I welcome the representatives of both trade unions to the House.

As my colleague Senator Ó Domhnaill has outlined, Fianna Fáil supports the Bill. I compliment Senator Bacik, who gave me her personal insight into this legislation prior to the debate. I listened with great interest to her presentation, which made it clear that this amendment was long overdue. I posited to her - she may have been wearing her barrister's hat, as she did not quite reply - that perhaps I should have sued RTE during my time there because there are people in that organisation who are operating on minimal pay rates. I do not want to separate from the NUJ, which has done the same job, but I thank Irish Equity. As an on-air presenter in RTE, I was always subject to contracts that were of short duration and at the minimum rate that was negotiated by Irish Equity on my behalf, even though I was deemed as self-employed for tax purposes. This is the case that the Senator is making, more or less. It seems that RTE and I were acting illegally in this regard because our situation went against the essence of the 2002 Act, which I understand this Bill will correct in order to remove the legal limbo regarding the status of people such as myself who operated in RTE under those terms.

The Bill is also timely in that it allows me to reiterate the fact that the majority of on-air people working in RTE are operating on minimum Irish Equity rates. The high flyers and celebrities give the public the mistaken impression that everyone they listen to on RTE radio is earning multiple thousands of euro. Only a small number of presenters are being paid at that level. They operate on individual contracts that are negotiated by agents whom they are affluent enough to afford. I was never in that situation. During the recent economic downturn, rates for programmes were cut drastically by RTE. In my case, it sadly reached the point at which it was no longer worth it to me financially because of the amount of work involved in the programmes. I am not blaming RTE, which was in a loss-making situation. I am glad it has extricated itself from that position, as I am a strong supporter of the concept of public service broadcasting.

This debate allows me to make a point, particularly given the attendance of my Irish Equity friends. When I started in broadcasting, there was an agreement between Irish Equity and RTE that non-Irish television and radio advertising would be re-voiced by the former's members, but that agreement seems to have gone away. Forget about the other channels. I am becoming increasingly irritated with regional British voices on RTE trying to sell consumer products to Irish viewers. It is unacceptable. One does not hear Irish voices in adverts on ITV, but one hears a plethora of British voices - not just plummy, upper-class English voices, but also regional accents that are, in some cases, harsh on the Irish ear. I wonder whether advertisers are aware of the adverse impact this has on Irish consumers. It is not because people are anti-British, but because they cannot understand some of the accents. I should have checked with Irish Equity prior to this debate whether the agreement had lapsed or RTE had taken a decision to end it, but it is long past time for it to be restored. It provides Irish voiceover actors with work. I do not know whether the Minister has a role in this matter or whether he will stand back and state that this is between RTE and the trade union concerned, but I would be interested in his opinion. Perhaps I can draw him out a little.

This legislation is welcome. It will protect many of those who - like me, even though I am no longer employed by RTE - operated or continue to operate on short-term contracts. This issue may also affect local radio, where there is a race to the bottom. People who are anxious to get involved in broadcasting, particularly young people, are prepared to take whatever money is offered. I am not suggesting that they are not being paid the minimum wage, as they are, but JobBridge raises serious concerns. The NUJ conducted a survey on its use in enhancing the income of local radio stations. JobBridge participants were taken on for nine months, only to be told at that point that the stations were not in a position to offer them full-time employment. The stations then re-advertised the same jobs, albeit with different wording to give the impression that these were different jobs. The radio stations benefited by having a continuing stream of people taking over from other people. This practice is unacceptable. I do not know whether the Minister has been made aware of the NUJ's survey, or whether there has been communication between the NUJ and his office in this regard. It is unacceptable regardless of the difficulties facing local radio in maintaining current job levels following a difficult economic period that affected it and other elements of the economy. I am not trying to have a go at local radio. If, as this Bill proposes, the law is meant to protect workers and ensure that they get fair wages, it should be applied across the board.