Committee on Budgetary Oversight debate -
Wednesday, 12 Oct 2022

Film Sector Tax Credits: Discussion (Resumed)

Chairman

Good evening everyone. Apologies have been received from Deputies Durkan and Doherty. Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú will be substituting for Deputy Doherty. All those present in the room today are asked to exercise personal responsibility to protect themselves and others from the risks of contracting Covid 19. For those of us here and those watching, we have broken up this session, as we did last week, into two sessions. We have Animation Ireland, Screen Guild Ireland and Screen Producers Ireland with us now and in the later session, we will have Screen Ireland. I thank everybody for their co-operation. There are many voices in this debate and it is really useful that everyone is co-operating in terms of getting everybody into the room.

I would like to welcome Ms Louise Cornally, Ms Moe Honan and Mr. Ronan McCabe from Animation Ireland; Mr. Eoin Holohan, Mr. Greg Keeley and Ms Jessica Drum from Screen Guild Ireland; and Ms Aoife O'Sullivan, Mr. James Hickey and Ms Susan Kirby from Screen Producers Ireland.

Before we begin, I wish to explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practice of the Houses as regards references they may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present or who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts is protected pursuant to both the Constitution and statute by absolute privilege. However, if evidence is being given remotely from a place outside the parliamentary precincts, witnesses may not benefit from such a level of immunity, although I do not think that pertains to today's session. They are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise, or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks and it is imperative that they comply with any such direction. Throughout the proceedings I might give a little reminder if the committee strays into territory where it might be making people identifiable.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise, or make charges against a person or an official outside the Houses, either by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the place where parliament has chosen to sit, namely, Leinster House, in order to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate where they are not adhering to this constitutional requirement. Therefore, any member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting.

I will now go to opening statements. We will start with Mr. Ronan McCabe from Animation Ireland who will be followed by Ms Jessica Drum from Screen Guild Ireland and by Ms Susan Kirby from Screen Producers Ireland.

Mr. Ronan McCabe

On behalf of Animation Ireland and my colleagues, Ms Moe Honan, who is our chair, and Ms Louise Cornally, who is a board member, I thank the committee for the invitation to appear before it to discuss the film and television tax credit - section 481. Animation Ireland welcomes the recent announcement of the extension of section 481 to 31 December 2028. Animation is a global business and is expensive to produce and projects are in planning many years in advance of production and distribution. This announcement will give certainty to our members in the financing and production of animation projects.

Animation Ireland is the representative body for the animation industry on the island of Ireland, with 42 member studios, employing approximately 2,500 people full time. The sector is well spread geographically with members operating in all parts of the island. There are established creative hubs in Belfast, Galway and Kilkenny and other members' studios are located in the counties of Clare, Cork, Derry, Offaly, Louth and Roscommon. Members are producing 2D and 3D animation for television and feature films and immersive content for the domestic and international market. The mix of our inherent national creativity and business acumen, coupled with our section 481 tax credit, has created a fertile ground in which the animation sector is growing exponentially. Animation Ireland members produce award winning, globally celebrated animation that is viewed in more than 180 countries and territories worldwide, building companies of scale, creating high-value, all-island and regionally spread investment and employment, embracing new technologies and nurturing Ireland’s culture on screen.

Animation Ireland comprises a range of companies, from one or two person operations running "ideas factories" to large-scale studios employing hundreds of animators, working in both the Irish and English language. The unique regional spread of companies was aided by the regional uplift and Animation Ireland would like to express its disappointment that this incentive has not been extended. Animation Ireland operates at the centre of a very sophisticated ecosystem and has regular engagement with stakeholders. Working in tandem with the industry, Animation Ireland has developed and implemented training programmes that are opening doors to many young people whose entry into the workforce will sustain the growth of the industry in the coming years.

Animation is a global and a competitive business. It is very labour intensive and expensive to produce.

Other jurisdictions offer a variety of regional and national tax credits, often exceeding that available here, and if Ireland is to remain competitive, it is essential that our tax credit is retained.

The animation industry in Ireland comprises two major components, namely, service work, which consists of producing animation for international partners by way of foreign direct investment, and our own intellectual property, IP, story development. Most Irish animation studios attempt to find a balance between service work, which affords companies the ability to build their studios and gain expertise by working with the major animation financiers and broadcasters, and reinvesting that expertise and capital into developing our own series and stories. The animation industry in Ireland has proven remarkably successful in both of those endeavours. In recent years, Ireland has been home to major productions such as "The Bob’s Burgers Movie", "The Cuphead Show!", "Vampirina" and "Zog and the Flying Doctors". These productions alone saw investments in Ireland of tens of millions of euro and served to showcase Irish creative talent. It is not only international stories that are told by Irish studios. Section 481 also supports indigenous production. Recent examples of which include the Oscar-nominated "Wolfwalkers", "Two by Two: Overboard!", "Jessy and Nessy", "Kiva Can Do!" and "Pins and Nettie".

There is a strong competitive environment for inward production or foreign direct investment in the locating of animation television series and film productions in EU member states. Ireland has punched well above its weight in that regard, and continues to do so. Many studios get their start by taking on service work and thereby gaining the experience to develop, pitch and produce their own projects.

The growth of major subscription video on demand, SVOD, streaming services, including Apple+, Amazon Prime Video and Netflix, in the past ten years has meant that demand for content has never been greater. This has provided opportunities and threats for our industry. On the plus side, there are well resourced customers seeking content but, on the downside, many SVODs insist on retaining 100% of the IP in the content. The ability of Irish producers to bring Irish financing to a project in the form of section 481 and broadcaster and screen agency investments is critical to Irish studios’ ability to retain IP. The funds generated from IP are then invested in the development of future projects - securing jobs, building companies of scale and creating a virtuous circle of investment for companies.

Screen content plays a vital role in how Ireland is perceived abroad and is an essential element of our cultural exports and the projection of Ireland’s soft power. Without indigenous content, Irish audiences would not see their stories reflected back at them on screen and diverse storytelling voices simply would not be heard. Without section 481, our domestic market simply would not have the resources to bring our stories to the world. Any review of section 481 must, of course, include a financial analysis for the taxpayer, but it must also include a full recognition of the cultural dividend of screen content production made in Ireland for Irish and global audiences. On behalf of Animation Ireland, I thank the committee.

Mr. Eoin Holohan

I am a non-executive director on the board of Screen Guilds of Ireland, SGI, and work as a location manager in the Irish film and television industry. My colleague, Mr.Keeley, is also a non-executive director on the board of SGI. He works as a model maker in the Irish film and television industry. Ms Drum is the chief executive officer of SGI and, prior to taking up that role, worked for many years in the camera department in the Irish film and television industry. On behalf of SGI, we thank the committee for the invitation to attend this meeting to discuss the film credit.

SGI represents Irish film and television industry crew and their respective guilds who play a vital role in every aspect of production across the various departments within the Irish film and television industry. We currently represent more than 2,500 Irish film and television crew, both PAYE and self-employed, spanning 22 departments. Our focus is predominantly in the area of skills training and development across many departments, including accounts, art, assistant directors, camera, construction, continuity, costume, facilities, editing, grips, hair, locations, make-up, model-making, production, prosthetics, set decoration, sound, special effects, stunts, transport and visual effects. We are continuing to grow and we endeavour, in time, to be fully inclusive of the Irish film industry as a whole. We are a proud community of crew working together in a creative industry, utilising a wide range of individual skills, crafts, experience, and expertise with one common goal - to promote excellence in the art of film making, both here in Ireland and through recognition abroad.

SGI aims to promote excellence in all fields of film and television production in Ireland through the representation of its member guilds, made up primarily of Irish film crew. Each department or guild nominates a crew member to represent it in discussion and negotiation of all business relating to our professions within the industry. Our members were involved in securing a new working agreement in 2022, including the introduction of the provision for the construction workers' pension scheme, CWPS, which is a welcome progression for the welfare of the crew. SGI, as a representative for these guilds, is proactive in its direct engagement with Fís Eireann-Screen Ireland, Screen Producers Ireland, SIPTU, Screen Skills Ireland and other recognised industry bodies on all matters concerning our members, namely, Irish film crew.

SGI is committed to establishing and promoting a fair and transparent working environment for all film crew engaged in film and TV production in Ireland, spanning national and international productions of all scales and genres. We are committed to the continued training and upskilling of our members through all grades, ranging from entry-level trainees right through to heads of department, and to the introduction of a fair and transparent upgrade process within the various departments we represent.

Film and television production is an ever-evolving industry and we aim to safeguard our collective interests while upholding the highest of standards in production. Our members, across all guilds, are passionate about working in the Irish film industry and are highly regarded worldwide. We have internationally recognised writers, directors, directors of photography, production designers, costume designers, hair and make-up designers and visual effects technicians to name but a few. We relish the challenges of working across different genres on indigenous and international productions. We understand that a healthy Irish film industry requires international inward production, shooting in tandem with indigenous Irish productions. We enjoy bringing the skills we learn on international films to smaller Irish films, and often vice versa.

The screen sector is currently undergoing a period of intense growth. We must attract new entrants to the industry to cope with this demand. We must ensure that these new crew receive proper training while also ensuring that existing crew members have the opportunity to upskill and progress their careers. Our membership of more than 2,500 crew continues to grow at a rapid pace with the introduction of these new entrants to the industry and returning professionals.

SGI welcomes the extension of section 481 to 2028 as confirmed by the Minister, Deputy Catherine Martin. We recognise and acknowledge that section 481 has been, and continues to be, crucial to the existence and continued development of our industry. Section 481 affords all of us the opportunity to work and establish careers in a vibrant and creative industry where we can develop skills that allow us to work across the many different genres of film and television. We are proud to be a part of the Irish film industry, and we do not take it for granted. We were especially pleased to see the introduction of the skills development plan in 2018 as part of the application process for section 481 funding.

Since 2019, Screen Ireland has assessed over 160 skills development plans and has tracked over 1,700 skills participants across 160 section 481 productions. The benefit to our members is obvious. This emphasis on skills development within the structure of section 481 compelled us at SGI to consult our membership and develop our competency framework, which is an informative breakdown document for all crew grades across the various departments in the Irish film industry. We completed this work in consultation with the Screen Guilds of Ireland at Screen Ireland. This was a very significant undertaking and is the first of its kind for our industry in the world. The framework is an invaluable tool to crew and it exists as a direct result of the emphasis on skills development within section 481.

We are concerned that the regional uplift continues to decrease and there is no allowance for it in the recent extension to section 481. It is essential that the industry grows and is nurtured in the regions, as well as in the production hub of Dublin and Wicklow. This will require further incentives to locate production in the regions but we are confident that this would pay dividends in the long term. We would like to be involved in a discussion with all stakeholders to reach a consensus on how best to promote filming in the regions and create an industry that is nationwide. We look forward with a positive outlook to the extension of section 481 and especially welcome any opportunity to be involved in future developments of this tax credit as we continue to work in a career full of possibilities within the Irish film and television industries.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Holohan very much. I call Ms Kirby to speak now.

Ms Susan Kirby

Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach agus le baill an choiste as an gcuireadh chun teacht ina láthair inniu chun an creidmheas cánach i leith scannáin agus teilifíse faoi alt 481 a phlé.

My colleagues with me here today from Screen Producers Ireland, SPI, are Aoife O'Sullivan and James Hickey, who are both producer members. SPI is a national representative organisation of independent film, television, animation and digital production companies. With over 170 company members, SPI is recognised as the voice of independent audiovisual production in Ireland. SPI members are creative entrepreneurs who produce globally celebrated film, animation and television material. They create high-value, all-island and regionally spread employment, foster Ireland’s culture on screen and preserve Ireland’s artistic heritage. SPI comprises a range of production companies, from emerging producers to producers of large-scale high-end film and television series, working in both the Irish and English languages.

We are happy to appear before this committee again. We appeared here previously in 2019 to discuss section 481 and we had a positive engagement at the meeting. We note in the invitation the request that only matters directly related to the section 481 tax expenditure that are under the remit of this committee are to be discussed. Therefore, we have kept our opening statement to this area. We hope that our statement and subsequent discussion will inform the committee of the vital role that section 481 plays in the sustainability of the Irish screen sector, both for incoming and indigenous productions.

At the outset, I must welcome the budget 2023 announcement that section 481 has been extended to 2028, something which SPI called for in its pre-budget discussions. It is worth adding that this decision was made on foot of a positive recommendation to do so in a 50-page cost-benefit collective analysis completed recently by the Department of Finance. This report included a detailed analysis of how section 481 works, gave details on the great advances that have been made in the film and television production sector in training and upscaling, and set out the very significant progress that has been made in industrial relations, including the two new collective bargaining agreements which have been concluded in the past couple of years.

Section 481 is one of the most crucial incentive schemes for independent producers in Ireland. It provides much-needed tax relief for eligible productions. This extension provides much-needed clarity for independent producers seeking to undertake long-term production planning. The Government has shown us through the extension of section 481 to 2028 that it realises the potential of international and indigenous production here in Ireland. I know that our producer members, crew and casts will create the world-class, award-winning content that they have the ability to create. However, we are disappointed that there was no extension of the regional uplift which proved very valuable in bringing productions out of the Dublin-Wicklow hub. The uplift has seen considerable production activity across the country from Kerry to Donegal and SPI will continue to advocate for its return in some form.

As I have mentioned, the Department of Finance released a new cost-benefit analysis of section 481 which showed the growth in the sector in both employment and economic size since the previous analysis in 2019. The Department analysis noted:

Supporting the development of a thriving Irish audio-visual sector remains an objective of the Government. By providing tax relief to Irish producer companies in respect of qualifying films the scheme directly contributes to the growth of a creative screen production industry in the State.

The Department also pointed out that it is important that we begin to capture the cultural dividend of section 481 projects beyond economics alone. We are glad to see that Screen Ireland will be releasing a cultural dividend report on section 481 in the coming weeks and we believe this will show a significant impact. SPI believes that with this clear statement of support from the Government, our sector can reach the targets set out in the Government's audiovisual action plan, which seeks to double employment in film, television and animation, and double the economic worth of the sector. The Creative Ireland programme audiovisual action plan also sets out the role of section 481 in contributing to the development and sustainability of the Irish screen industry, supporting jobs in the domestic economy, which is a strategic cultural industry, and supporting the tourism sector in Ireland. This can be seen through Ireland’s reputation internationally.

The past decade has seen Irish productions being nominated for over 30 Oscar nominations which is a very significant achievement for a country of our size. "An Cailín Ciúin" is breaking Irish and UK box office records for an Irish-language feature film, surpassing €1 million at the box office. It has been chosen as the Irish entry to the International Feature Film Oscar and is being touted as a possible nominee. The key to all of this success is the ability of Irish producers to hold on to intellectual property for their projects. By retaining intellectual property, producers can reinvest into new development for projects which enables them to grow their company into one of scale. This is a key issue for SPI in the coming years.

It is important to note the economic return of section 481. According to the Government-commissioned Olsberg report, for every €1 of the cost of section 481, €1.02 in tax revenues was paid to the Government and there was an economic net benefit of €2.82 from the activities supported. We firmly believe that this return on investment has increased in the years since then due to the increasing size of the sector and that section 481 is a good return on investment on behalf of the taxpayer.

With the arrival in Europe of major streaming services, including Netflix and Amazon Prime Video, over the past ten years, the scale of screen content production, which was already at high levels in film and television production, has increased dramatically. There is a strong competitive environment for inward production, which is the locating of films, television drama, animation and games in EU member states. Ireland has done well for all of the reasons it has done well in other areas of inward investment, including its talented and creative workforce, the English language and its proximity to the UK - which is the largest single production country in Europe - as well as the film tax credit and other supports currently in place.

It is important that we reflect on the types of productions that section 481 supports in this country, both incoming and indigenous. It supports multi-million budget television dramas such as the Apple TV-funded sci-fi drama series "Foundations", which was shot in Troy Studios in Limerick. The challenging new feature film "Aisha", which was directed by Frank Berry and is set in Ireland's direct provision system, recently screened and received great reviews at the Tribeca Film Festival in New York. Section 481 also supports recently released Irish indigenous productions like the worldwide success that is "An Cailín Ciúin" and the newly released "Róise & Frank", both of which were also supported by the Cine4 scheme. Documentaries like "Vicky" and "Nothing Compares", both of which were released in cinemas last week, are supported by section 481, as are television dramas such as "Kin" and "Normal People" on RTÉ.

SPI welcomes the opportunity to engage with the committee. We look forward to a good discussion about section 481 and its impact on the screen sector. Go raibh míle maith agaibh.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

Gabhaim buíochas leis na finnéithe as teacht os comhair an choiste. Bhí an méid a bhí le rá acu ansin thar a bheith suimiúil. I thank the witnesses for coming before the committee and for taking the time out to do so.

My first question relates to the cost-benefit analysis the Department undertook, which was published along with budget 2023 and which found that the net economic cost of the credit in 2020 was €78.5 million. In other words, a net welfare loss to society. The witnesses will mention intangible benefits that cannot be quantified in such an analysis. In terms of euro and cent, however, do they agree that is a worrying finding for the taxpayer? All three groups can answer.

Ms Susan Kirby

Go raibh míle maith agat. We welcomed the cost-benefit analysis report. It is a detailed report. It sets the policy context of the investment of section 481 on behalf of the State in so far as it places it firmly within Government policy to support the arts and, within that, the audiovisual sector. It points clearly to a rigorous process attached to section 481 and details the process the producer companies go through to attain section 481. It also speaks widely to the great progress that has been made. The last time the cost-benefit analysis was published was 2019. It speaks in detail to the industry development test and the cultural test which are attached to section 481. On the industry test, which is part of the foundation of quality employment, it makes the point that:

Since the publication of the first WRC report on the Irish Film and Television Drama Production Sector, significant progress has been made in relation to agreements between employers and worker representatives.

[...]

The introduction of these two industry agreements, negotiated and agreed between employees and producer representative bodies, demonstrate the ongoing focus on promoting positive work practices to ensure that the Irish audio-visual industry is attractive to employees and as a location in which to produce feature film and high-end TV drama.

It is an important point that is made in the cost-benefit analysis.

The Deputy raised the ultimate net economic being negative. There are a number of factors to that. That was also the case in a previous analysis. The factors include the dead weighting attached to the economic findings. There is an interesting table in the cost-benefit analysis, which I am sure the Deputies have read. It is a fascinating document. If we remove the dead weight and the concept of shadow costs of labour, for example, the cost-benefit analysis will quickly report a positive and points to the necessity to apply to what I referred to as the cultural dividend. The Deputy also referred to the intangibles. It is around that creative, cultural dividend delivered by section 481.

The recommendations from the cost-benefit analysis were to extend section 481, which all here have welcomed. It looked to have more data, and, again, we would welcome if more quality data was gathered to allow us create the economic case around section 481. It also pointed to the idea that Screen Ireland will be producing a cultural dividend report which will allow us to apply the full economic and cultural benefit of section 481. I hope that answers the question.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

I am aware there are intangible aspects to it but asked specifically about value for money for the taxpayer. I take Ms Kirby's point that with cultural things there is more than just dollars and cents but the question was specifically on that.

I will move on to the reference in SPI's opening statement to the role of section 481 in attracting foreign direct investment. We know many production companies availing of the relief are foreign. Do the witnesses have any information on the proportion of credits through section 481 relief that remain within the State and the proportion that are repatriated out of the State? I would also be interested in that analysis and to hear witnesses' view because I have heard in the past the relief has effectively become a taxpayers' subsidy to foreign production companies. I am sure the witnesses disagree but how would they respond to that?

Ms Susan Kirby

That is a very insightful question. On the first half of the question, there is a requirement that any recipient of section 481 is an Irish production company. Even in the case of inbound production, there is a benefit to the Irish production ecosystem. That requirement of attaching to an Irish producer is something I imagine ourselves and Animation Ireland would advocate strongly. That is there and provides protection. Mr. Holohan referred well in his opening statement to the idea of inbound production being that we need a balance between both. Our vision is for a balanced sector with strong inbound production. That allows producers, crews and casts to have experience on major TV, drama and film production, while balancing it with indigenous so we can potentially have a diverse ecosystem and sustainable career in the creative industries. Screen Ireland should be commended for the great work it does. It is something Ireland does very well. We have a global reputation for producing incredible inbound work and we would like to see a strong balance between indigenous and inbound sectors, and a strong ecosystem. Key to that is a sustainable, diverse career working across the two elements.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

I thank Ms Kirby. All these questions are for whoever would like to comment on them. Because I am not in the committee room, I cannot see if others are indicating. People should shout if they want to come in.

Chairman

I will stop the Deputy there and allow Ms Cornally to come in.

Ms Louise Cornally

On section 481 supports leaving the country and subsidising foreign companies. It gets thrown out there quite a lot. At the core of this, we have to remember that section 481 is in place to support and build the industry and create talent. Without international players coming to Ireland, we would not have that ability. The EU Commission recognises that Europe needs subsidies and the countries need to support local producers in order to attract production which allows them build on the indigenous industry.

We are competing with very strong US-based production entities. We cannot lose sight of the fact that we must remain competitive in order to maintain the industry which is at the heart of all of this. If we did not have section 481, essentially, we would not have an industry. It is very important to make that point, alongside the question of section 481 subsidising foreign productions because when a producer is looking at where he or she is going to produce animation, a live action film or a TV series, he or she will look at tax credits that are currently available right across the globe. If we did not have the tax credit, essentially, we would not have an industry here. That is the first point about the international studios either shooting or producing animation here.

In terms of producing IP, and the indigenous companies producing their own content and retaining some rights, it is extremely challenging to do that whether it is animation or live action. If one is going to finance your own production, the budget can range from €1.5 million right up to €15 million or €16 million - that would be spent locally - in order to finance it one might go to international broadcasters to get licence fees - there are multiple ways of financing it - but there would always be a gap in the production. There is simply no way an Irish company could produce that content without having section 481 in place, so it does also come back to the indigenous industry here in that regard. Despite the fact that there are international broadcasters attached to it, the point I want to make is that they are not going to fully finance the full cost of the production via a licence agreement.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

Gabhaim buíochas le Ms Cornally. Do I still have time for another question, Chair?

Chairman

Could Deputy Farrell could wait a moment as Mr. McCabe wants to come in briefly on the previous point?

Mr. Ronan McCabe

I just want to speak a little bit about the intangible side. I know Deputy Farrell mentioned it in her opening remarks. Animation Ireland represented Ireland at Expo 2020 in Dubai this year. We were at the Ireland pavilion. We had three days of Irish animation being exhibited over there, both at the Al Wasl dome and on site. It was a fantastic event to be at in terms of the projection of Irish soft power and Irish stories. We were very much front and centre of the Ireland offering at Expo. There were more than 200 countries there. It is difficult to put a price or value on that. Even when we go to markets and festivals, a significant amount of people come up to the Ireland stand and inquire about the projects that they have seen. They want to visit and come and work in Ireland because of that. It is a worthwhile exercise to try and put a value on that. I do not have those figures to hand but it would definitely be something worth doing.

Chairman

Deputy Farrell is out of time, technically, but if she has a quick follow-up question she can ask it.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

I am sure somebody else will come to it, but I just wanted to ask about what was said last week about people being blacklisted. I will listen in and I will hear if somebody comes to it.

Chairman

We might have time for a second round.

Deputy John Lahart

I thank the witnesses. We have been waiting to have this conversation for a long time. I am grateful that the witnesses have shown up in such numbers. Clearly, it is an indication of how seriously they take the issue. I hope I am not misrepresenting him, but Deputy Boyd Barrett has been particularly exercised in simple terms on the broader issue of pay and conditions, in particular for those who are considered to be lower down the food chain. The witnesses have spoken about the issue in general terms. To some extent, it is at the heart of why the witnesses are here, so I will spend a little bit of time on the issue. I have eight and three quarter minutes left, so I will give the witnesses time to respond until we have five minutes left and then I might raise my hand again. Whoever wants to answer the question and address the issue can speak to it.

Ms Susan Kirby

What is the question?

Deputy John Lahart

It is pretty obvious - the pay and conditions of the lower grade workers on film sets. Concerns were raised to the committee about the amount of money that is spent on film production by the taxpayer and the question was asked if the return is justifiable. Do the witnesses have any concerns about the pay and conditions of those who are on or just above the minimum wage and what do they do to address it? We are now down to seven and a half minutes.

Ms Susan Kirby

I apologise. I might start, but I do think it is very important to hear from Screen Guilds Ireland as well. I apologise as I cannot see if people behind me are trying to come in.

Chairman

That is okay. I will direct Ms Kirby.

Ms Susan Kirby

I thank the Deputy for the question. It is a key tenet of section 481 but it is a core issue for the industry. If I can, I might reflect back to 2019 when Screen Producers Ireland, the ICTU-affiliated union group and SIPTU requested the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC, to conduct an audit of the sector. I understand it carried out very broad consultation and it came up with four recommendations. I will not go into the audit in great detail, but I will give the committee an update on it. One of the recommendations was the importance of the guild structure. We can see today that there is a very well organised and strategically focused set of guilds. We work very closely with the guilds. Similarly, they are developing competency frameworks. We welcome the development of competency frameworks for the guilds. The simplest description of the competency frameworks is a journey map for one's development through one's career at the various grades in the guilds. That was the first element and it is being delivered on and that continues to be the case.

The second area concerns HR and the development of HR capacity within the producer communities. Screen Producers Ireland has placed an enormous emphasis on sectoral development. We have a dedicated role within the company for sectoral development. We run detailed HR development programmes for members and we work in collaboration with Screen Ireland, previously Screen Skills Ireland, on the delivery of those. We continue to focus on the area. It is not a destination; it is a constant journey.

The third recommendation that was made was in the space of industrial relations, IR. It placed significant importance of the industrial agreements. In 2019-----

Deputy John Lahart

I will stop Ms Kirby there. Is Ms Kirby saying there are structures in place that look after professional development or skills development in terms of mechanisms to challenge pay agreements or to have an input into them?

Ms Susan Kirby

Yes.

Deputy John Lahart

There is a career pathway. Is Ms Kirby saying that it is matched by a pay structure?

Ms Susan Kirby

Yes. The two agreements are very detailed in that regard.

Deputy John Lahart

Perhaps the witnesses from Screen Guilds Ireland could comment in the next two minutes.

Ms Jessica Drum

As a group, the guilds have been very supportive of SIPTU and the SPI agreement, which sets minimum rates.

Deputy John Lahart

Who do the guilds represent?

Ms Jessica Drum

We represent more than 2,500 film crew workers of all different disciplines.

Deputy John Lahart

Is that everybody who would be on a set?

Ms Jessica Drum

It would be below the line, so everybody on set - editors and other such staff who would not be on set, but not directors.

Deputy John Lahart

Who does Screen Guilds Ireland not represent?

Ms Jessica Drum

Directors and writers have their own guilds, so we just deal with the crew in the production of films. In that structure we have minimum rates set out for trainees. SIPTU has a preproduction meeting at the start of every production when we go through all of the plans for the job. We organise a meeting every month with SIPTU and the representatives from each of those departments. Each department has a guild and its representatives come along to the meeting and they can discuss any issues that they might have. That is the communication channel that is there. We all recognise that the best way to learn in film is to be on the floor. It is not something that one can learn in a classroom. I was a trainee myself in the camera department. That is the only way to learn the trade.

Deputy John Lahart

Who initiated the relationship with SIPTU?

Mr. Eoin Holohan

We approached SIPTU. When we formed the guilds, we needed a new agreement. We approached SIPTU and, between it and SPI, we now have a new agreement. It is working quite well. The guilds structure we have maintains communication among crew members. I am a crew member, as is Mr. Keeley. Communication is maintained between all the productions that are happening. If an industrial relations issue arises on a production, it is dealt with very quickly. A crew member can come to us, and we can go to SIPTU. We are in our infancy but the system is working.

Deputy John Lahart

Good. I have two minutes after all that. I am sorry this is such short, sharp stuff. If SGI is in its infancy, as Mr. Holohan says, I would certainly be interested in being kept abreast of how it develops and in the committee having a monitoring brief regarding it. I am serious about that.

I am aware that the expenditure of companies in Ireland as a result of productions was €500 million last year. That is phenomenal. I am old enough to remember the closure of Ardmore and the devastating effect. Walking along a very narrow coast road in Achill last year, I came to a bend and saw a stop-start traffic system. I was trying to figure out why it was needed and noticed there were guys thatching the cottage roof. It was part of the film set for "The Banshees of Inisherin", which has just won a major award.

Mr. Eoin Holohan

That was my traffic management.

Deputy John Lahart

There were very happy guys. Two thatchers were employed. The Chair talked about the cultural dividend. To me, that was one of the obvious ones. My late mother was from west Kerry, which is still attracting tourists as a result of "Ryan’s Daughter", which was made 50 years ago. I do not know whether Deputy Boyd Barrett will be unhappy with bits and pieces of this yet, but he is right to raise workplace conditions.

I see a world that has opened up for filmmakers, who are young but not exclusively so, actors and everybody else associated with the industry. My eldest brother was in "Excalibur". Everybody remembers working as an extra on the set. The industry has developed well beyond that now. That guilds of professionals and trades in the film industry have been established is telling. Section 481 seems to have been critical in this regard. That is essentially what the delegates are saying. The industry would not and could not have survived without it. Without it, we would not be making movies here.

There are other cultural dividends, some of which I am not so happy about. I am not happy with the impact on Skellig Michael. I have seen the impact of "Star Wars" on little villages and in Dingle. It is a question of skills, whereby young people can leave school, get training and know they can have employment in the film sector in Ireland. It simply was not a reality heretofore; it was very nebulous.

Those are some of the points I wanted to make. I have two questions. Is there any potential in the film industry arising from Brexit, because Ireland, along with Malta in the European Union, is an English-speaking country?

Mr. Ronan McCabe

My sector and the live-action sector are all content producers but the animation business model is a little different from that of the live sector. Projects can extend for multiple years. They can take from a year to three or four years. There is good career progression within that. There are training plans in place under section 481. Animation Ireland is the lead organisation for the National Talent Academy for Animation. Within that academy, we are bridging the gap between college and the industry, making people industry-ready. We also provide mentoring at all levels, and master classes are being provided. We are running animation fairs around the country. Our first was in Athlone. We are trying to bring people into the sector from non-traditional places. My colleague Ms Cornally has some statistics on training.

Ms Louise Cornally

It was stated there were obvious concerns over pay and conditions. I was just trying to ask whether there was anything specific for us to consider from an animation perspective. As Mr. McCabe outlined, the industry itself tends to be much more longer term in its commitment to employment because the production schedule is longer. Owing to the scale, there is a greater ability to focus on the longer-term sustainability of the business investing in learning and development. Anecdotal evidence indicates one of our members invests 9,000 hours per year in learning and development across all levels of staff and spends about €150,000. Bearing in mind the individual studios and, as Mr. McCabe mentioned, the establishment of the talent academy that Animation Ireland is leading, we wanted to ask whether members had any specific concerns about the terms and conditions of employment in the animation sector.

Chairman

I am going to move on.

Deputy John Lahart

I wish to conclude with one sentence. This has been really useful and very respectful to the committee. I might have some more questions later given that the delegates have turned up in such numbers. I am seeking a brief and to join some dots. I found our discussion thus far quite reassuring, aside from the obvious exciting pieces that we cannot really develop here and the enthusiasm for what the delegates do.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I thank all our contributors for their contributions so far. I do not have many questions on animation. Our job is to assess whether section 481 is delivering what it is supposed to deliver. From what I see of the animation industry, it is. They are companies, full-time jobs and industry development. The industry is supposed to be developing and growing and creating companies of scale and career opportunities. That is not to say it is perfect, because I have heard a few stories about particular companies, but it is obvious that there are jobs and an industry. My questions, therefore, are directed at the live-action sector, where I do not see the jobs. The credit is supposed to be strictly dependent on creating jobs. You either create quality employment and training or you do not, and you either contribute to culture or you do not. In fact, the European rules on this are very clear. You should not get state aid if you are not doing these things.

I want the film industry to get state aid but do not understand the contrast. I do not understand how the animation sector can create jobs and companies of scale and how theatres such as the Abbey, Gate and Project can create jobs and careers when given public money while the live-action sector does not. To put it bluntly, the testimony we heard last week from the Irish Film Workers’ Association was that every time a production ends, the clock goes back to zero from the point of view of the employee. In other words, an employee who has worked for successive designated activity companies, DACs, does not have an employer because that employer was his or her last DAC, which is now gone. Therefore, an employee starts from scratch. Even if he or she has worked for 20 DACs over 25 years, he or she effectively starts from scratch, meaning no recognition whatsoever of his or her service in the industry. There is no comeback if, for example, employees are blacklisted, as they say they are. Many of those who raised concerns about the industry with members of this committee in 2018 have not worked in the industry since.

Some of the witnesses present know that they have not worked in the industry again even though they were never formally dismissed and there was no process through which they were dismissed. They just do not get to work again. I am not here to advocate on individual cases, but I see nothing in how the industry is structured to prevent that from happening. How does the industry prevent it?

I am confused by the Screen Guilds of Ireland. I understand it is a private limited company with a CEO and it says that it represents 2,500 workers. According to the Department's analysis, we only have 2,500 people in the industry and, unlike in animation, only a few of them have full-time jobs, so it is not clear to me how the Screen Guilds of Ireland can represent people when they do not have jobs and it is a private company that I understand is wholly funded by Screen Ireland. I am confused about that. Who, then, does SIPTU represent? There is also the Irish Film Workers Association, although there are not many film workers left in the industry because they do not get jobs anymore. I do not understand how this works. Are people right in saying that the clock goes back to zero each time? Will the witnesses explain the process involved in someone getting a job on an Irish film? Who does the person go to? Who decides whether he or she gets employed?

Members of Screen Producers Ireland, SPI, get section 481 relief under the explicit requirement that it creates quality employment and training, yet Ms Elaine Geraghty, SPI's former chairperson, told the Labour Court:

I will give further evidence before the Court that there is no possible basis, having due regard to the realities of the sector, on which a relationship of employment can be said to have existed between the parties hereto. This is on the basis of the clearly established industry norms and practices governing working arrangements in this sector, including the operation of Section 481 Relief.

There were similar testimonies from representatives of some of the large recipients of section 481 relief. The people who are getting this relief are saying that they have no employees and could not possibly have any, yet they are explicitly given the relief on the basis that they are creating quality employment and training. This is a contradiction and I would like it explained.

Ms Aoife O'Sullivan

I will respond on behalf of production companies and producers, as a multifaceted response is probably required. I am delighted that the crews are present to explain the situation from their point of view.

To give a snapshot, I produced three projects in 2021, two of which were regional while the third was in Dublin and Wicklow. They were two films and a TV drama. We were lucky enough to get the regional uplift to the tax credit for a film called "Joyride" in Kerry and a TV production called "North Sea Connection" in Galway. Those projects would not have happened in the regions without the regional uplift.

As part of the regional uplift, it is important that skills, investment and training be taken on. In some ways, what the Deputy is saying points to a wild west, but it is not like that. It is heavily regulated. People have to understand that this is a project-based industry. We cannot offer continuous employment to crew members. For one thing, they do not want it because they enjoy the fact that they go from project to project and have a choice. The industry is also booming and going through a period of intense growth. Since it is so busy, we cannot get the crews back. For example, if I wanted to get the same crew for the three projects in Kerry, Galway and Dublin-Wicklow, I could not. I would love to work with the same people over and over again because we establish great working relationships, but they have moved on to the next-----

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Who decides whether they get on?

Ms Aoife O'Sullivan

There are HODs-----

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

HODs decide.

Ms Aoife O'Sullivan

-----and users.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Perhaps Ms O'Sullivan will explain to the committee who the HODs are.

Ms Aoife O'Sullivan

They are the heads of department. Every department has a head, who will crew up his or her department. For example, the production designer is the head of the art department. The production designer will get a supervising art director and various other people who are involved in creating the settings that are needed for the project.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Are they employees of the recipients of section 481 relief?

Ms Aoife O'Sullivan

Usually, heads of department are self-employed and most of the other people in the department are on the payroll. They would be employed by-----

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

They are not employees of the recipients of section 481 relief.

Ms Aoife O'Sullivan

No. They are employed by the DAC.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

As contractors.

Ms Aoife O'Sullivan

On the DAC's payroll, and they have contracts in place-----

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

The HODs who make the decisions about who works-----

Ms Aoife O'Sullivan

The HODs are normally, but not always, self-employed.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Okay. If they are self-employed, they are not employees of the recipients of section 481 relief, which are the producer companies.

Ms Aoife O'Sullivan

Yes. They are also employed by us. I am sorry – it is a Schedule D contract. There is a distinction between people on payroll and people who are independent contractors who are contracted by the DAC. Everyone is employed by the DAC.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Everyone is employed by the DAC. The person who gets section 481 relief is not the employer. Rather, the DAC is the employer. Is that right?

Ms Aoife O'Sullivan

The DAC is the employer and is-----

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Not the recipient of section 481 relief.

Ms Aoife O'Sullivan

The DAC gets the tax credit.

Ms Susan Kirby

If I may, I will respond.

Chairman

The time is up, so we will finish on this point, as I have other members who wish to contribute before the next session.

Ms Susan Kirby

The Deputy is raising an important point and we are happy to clarify. I welcome his endorsement of investment in the creative industries, which he has done regularly. He named individuals, but my response will not refer to any individual or to any testimony previously given.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I did not mention individuals. Actually, I am sorry. I did mention SPI's representative.

Ms Susan Kirby

It is important that Screen Producers Ireland go on the record, as we did previously as part of the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC, process that I mentioned. There is an employment relationship between the DAC and the employee. The nature of that employment is defined by the contract. As Ms O'Sullivan stated, this is a project-based industry and, in large part, the contract is a fixed-term contract. For various reasons, this is the global norm, including in Ireland. It is also a career choice. Speaking as someone who has worked in the creative industries for more than 25 years, and as I imagine some of those present will want to testify, one aspires to work on numerous creative projects. The concept that one producer company will move between doing a large-scale creative period piece to a small indigenous project to another project is infeasible. The committee has heard testimony that there would be an aspiration towards permanent employment.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Not permanent employment.

Ms Susan Kirby

Excuse me – continuous employment.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Recognition of service in the industry.

Ms Susan Kirby

What is key is that all of the contracts are fully covered by all relevant employment legislation. Everyone present will testify to that.

My next point is important because what we are debating is section 481. Section 481 provides the Government and the taxpayer with an even greater assurance of a high level of compliance. The DAC is a requirement of section 481 and is exactly what it says on the tin, that being, a designated activity company. It is for one purpose only. It provides everyone with transparency and auditability in terms of how the spend happens. It also exists for up to 12 months after the completion of the project. Any issue that arises for an employee – in our experience, this does not occur regularly – can be dealt with within those confines.

The Deputy raised an important point and I have been pleased to clarify it. In the same way that people have testified to the committee that they would seek continuous or permanent employment, what I will testify-----

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

To be clear, they are looking for recognition of service.

Ms Susan Kirby

We should be debating how we create sustainable quality employment. This means a funnel of scale in terms of investment and a producer's ability to go to market and bring great work here to provide work for the crews. This all feeds into the idea that we would have a globally competitive industry, since that is what is happening in all of our competitor jurisdictions.

Chairman

I am going to cut Ms Kirby off there because I need to get other members in. I know this came up last week, but I remind members that we are not here to re-litigate Workplace Relations Commission issues. I know Deputy Boyd Barrett read something into the record from an official record, so that is fair enough. The purpose of the committee is not to re-litigate WRC issues.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

We would all agree that we would want to see investment for the continuity of section 481 to build the industry. We want to see sustainable, good jobs in a vibrant industry. Production companies will make section 481 applications. The designated activity company, DAC, is a special purpose vehicle where the money can be put. It deals with the ins and outs and all the operations relating to a film. I am always interested in the rules and regulations regarding how that works out. All the obligations and costs end up in that. Eventually, the DAC is put to one side and disappears, for want of a better term. A question about this came up. Actors spoke about how they have to sign over their intellectual property, IP. Who owns the intellectual property after that? Will someone address the ins and outs in case I have missed anything about how it works and the relationship between the production company and DAC with regard to drawing down the money?

Mr. James Hickey

The Deputy is right about the structure of section 481. The tax credit is paid to the producer company, which is an ongoing company. Revenue places great importance on this, because as far as it is concerned, it wants to deal with people it knows and who it is satisfied will stay around for the purposes of continuing compliance with their obligations under section 481. An equally important matter for both Revenue and business as a whole is the separate special purpose vehicle which is established for each project. The establishment of special purpose vehicles for each project is a practice which dates to long before section 481 was established. It was always the case, and still is the case in most other jurisdictions, that for each different project, the financiers and other people involved in the production of a feature film or television drama series want a separate vehicle for each project, because that is the kind of transparency and accountability that the financiers want. The Revenue Commissioners see the value of that transparency and accountability from having a single company producing the project, so that all the eligible expenditure goes through that production and is seen to be properly spent. Revenue is happy to look at dealing with eligible expenditure.

I will come back to the separate question about rights ownership. This depends on the different types of projects which people are undertaking. In the case of indigenous projects which are produced by indigenous producers, the copyright and distribution rights of the project vest in the producer company. I will clarify that it is important that the producer company owns all the rights from all the contributors to the project. That includes all the actors, the director, the writer, the set designer and the costume designer. Everybody must assign all their rights to the producer company because if it does not own all the rights, the producer company cannot distribute the film. If the broadcaster, distributor or cinema in Paris is told that one of the people involved in the production has not assigned his or her rights to the project, the cinema owner in Paris will not want to screen the film because the person who owns those rights could come and stop the screening of that film. The structure of the industry involves all rights from all contributors to the production having to vest in the production company.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I am sorry to interrupt. It was presented to us as a difficulty by Equity since this meant people were no longer getting the payments they would have got previously.

Mr. James Hickey

This is the important matter. They transfer those rights and receive remuneration in return. It is important that a proper contractual arrangement is in place for the actors, writers, director and all of the other people involved.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

If Mr. Hickey says they have an issue where they are not getting the-----

Mr. James Hickey

Residuals.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

They are not getting the residuals like they would previously. That relates to the types of contracts they are signing up to.

Mr. James Hickey

Correct. I need to clarify-----

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Maybe that needs to be looked at later.

Mr. James Hickey

Over the last six years, Screen Producers Ireland has entered into three different agreements in respect of actors with Irish Equity. An agreement was entered into in 2016 in respect of television drama enters. There was an agreement in 2019 in respect of docudrama actors. An agreement was entered into by Screen Producers Ireland and Irish Equity in 2021 in respect of feature film actors. These agreements included provisions which allowed the actors to receive shares of downstream revenue from the exploitation of television dramas, films and docudramas. These agreements were all entered in good faith by Screen Producers Ireland and Irish Equity. It is important to clarify that there has been a history of industrial relations engagement between Screen Producers Ireland and Irish Equity, which we welcome.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Is Mr. Hickey saying that the commentary here last week was unfair?

Mr. James Hickey

I do not think the full story of the various industrial relations agreements between Screen Producers Ireland and Irish Equity was explained to the committee last week. There may not have been time to do so or there may be other reasons. These agreements have been entered into. There was a difficulty with the last agreement, the feature film agreement, which was perhaps not outlined in detail at the last meeting. It was entered into and concluded, but at a subsequent annual general meeting of Irish Equity, the union unilaterally decided to rescind the agreement. This presented Screen Producers Ireland with a difficulty. We have endeavoured ever since to engage with Irish Equity to renegotiate or re-establish-----

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

So there is a difficulty. Some of that has come from workers, crew members and Irish Equity. They do not believe that they are represented in the bodies that are here or by Screen Ireland, which will attend. Whether that is right or wrong, that is the belief.

I will follow up on an issue that Deputy Boyd Barrett dealt with. There was an accusation of blacklisting. It is easy to see that if the head of department, HOD, does not ring people, then they are not in play. We will not be able to determine here whether that happens or not. There was an accusation of there being a move away from using experienced staff to having far more trainees. I accept that there will always be trainees since people need to be trained, but at this point, people believe that they are being blacklisted. They would call it a race to the bottom.

We are under time pressure here. I am sorry if I am being a bit short.

Ms Susan Kirby

I thank the Deputy for his questions. We strongly refute any claim of blacklisting. We can demonstrate our commitment to our relationship with the unions. As I sit here, we have four agreements with five unions which have been negotiated over the last four years.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Is Ms Kirby saying that she thinks the industry development test is being dealt with and that we have an ecosystem that is providing sustainable, good quality employment? They are refuting that that is the case.

Ms Susan Kirby

Who is refuting that?

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

They are not here. I refer to the people who spoke here last week and a number of others who have made contact. Is Ms Kirby saying that we have what we are looking for from section 481, which is to have a sustainable industry that provides good quality employment.

Ms Susan Kirby

I do not think the Deputy needs to hear me say that, but I believe that. One can refer to the cost-benefit analysis which was produced by the Department of Finance and seek its view, which I imagine is extremely rigorous.

They certainly reached the conclusion that there was great compliance in terms of the requirements of section 481. The witnesses from SGI wanted to come in.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Someone might deal with the issue of the ratios and the blacklisting.

Chairman

Excuse me. I cut across Ms Kirby, who wants to finish her point. We will then move on.

Ms Susan Kirby

I have strongly refuted the notion of blacklisting. My understanding of blacklisting is that somebody is in some way discriminated against on the basis of their union membership. As we sit here today, we are showing the committee the great progress we have made in reaching agreements across five unions. We are also saying that the last Irish Equity agreement, which, in fact, we co-signed, was negotiated and entered into in good faith and was operational for over a month before Irish Equity exited. What I will say is that despite the fact it should be the producers who are aggrieved by that, we are sitting here today asking that, potentially, one of the outcomes of this committee would be to encourage Irish Equity to come back to the negotiating table and reach an agreement. This actually fulfils a lot of what its issues were in terms of dealing with the copyright directive, in our opinion. That would be the opinion of the missives attached in explanation of the copyright directive.

The Deputy raised a very important point in regard to trainees. Not just in our industry but across industry, we are seeking to encourage trainees to join.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I accept there is throughput.

Ms Susan Kirby

Absolutely. SGI will also speak to this. As part of the industry test, it is around identifying a head of department or a suitably qualified individual who will work with the trainee, be it through mentorship, shadowing or whatever, in order to develop their career. The industry should stand proudly over the fact that it is bringing in trainees. We would encourage that even more, if I can use this platform to say so. It is a fantastic and vibrant industry. We would absolutely aspire to sustainable careers and I would 100% agree with the Deputy in that regard.

Any suggestion that a trainee is replacing somebody who is deeply experienced is, again, probably not for me to refute, but I imagine that SGI is in a good position to speak to the Deputy on that. We would welcome the idea of the growth of trainees. How else are we to achieve the great aspirations that have been set out in the audiovisual action plan?

Chairman

We are well over time for this session. I invite Mr. Holohan and Ms Honan to come in and we will end on that point.

Mr. Eoin Holohan

We need trainees. I work as a location manager and I am a head of department. On my recent job which just wrapped two weeks ago, I had three trainees. There were up to five at one stage. On the job previous to that, we had two. On the job I did this time last year - the job that Deputy Lahart came across - I would have had at one stage maybe five trainees. They are all different. Some of them might be available to do my next job, which is great, and some are not and they bounce on to another job.

When those trainees come to work on the film I am working on, or to work in my department, we monitor their progress and we teach them the skills because we want to hang on to them. We need them. I need those trainees to develop into location assistants and to then become assistant location managers.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

From Mr. Holohan’s point of view, there is no displacement.

Mr. Eoin Holohan

No, absolutely not. I have been in this industry for 25 years. Deputy Boyd Barrett asked how people get a job. I got a job as a trainee. I knocked on a door and asked could I have a job on a film set, and that is what I got. People acquire the skills and they move up through the grades. There has always been training on the set from the crew: you teach your crew the skills that you have, and that is how it progresses. In 2018, when skills development came into section 481, it was fantastic for us because, finally, the crew were recognised and the skills development progress was recognised as a requirement. We want trainees to come into the industry. I do not want them to have it as hard as I did and, although I am not playing the violin, there have been tough years in the past, when people could not get work and they would be hoping the phone would ring, but it would ring. People do go from job to job. I and the people who work with me want to work on different types of films. I want to work on big budget international movies and I want to work on indigenous Irish productions; I have worked on both and that is how I made my career. For the trainees that come into my department, that is how I train them up, and they then move on and work for another location manager. Maybe the next time they come around in my direction, they will be a location assistant because they will have acquired those skills and moved on.

Chairman

I call Ms Honan.

Ms Moe Honan

Reference was made to the fact there are so many different tiers and types of projects going on in the industry, from prime time to A-list cast, to C-list cast and D-list cast.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Like myself.

Ms Moe Honan

Like every industry. In terms of the model we are working with here, and speaking on behalf of Animation Ireland, we also work with actors for voice work. In our model, where we are co-producing all of the time with partners across Europe in my case, and others with other international partners, we are in a position where we have to negotiate a buyout because, otherwise, as Mr. Hickey alluded to, no distributor will sell a film and no distributor will screen it. I want to make the point that, in that context, that buyout fee is higher than a daily fee, so it is compensated for upfront as opposed to back-end, where, frankly, the actor may never get anything.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Mr. Hickey and Ms Honan have spoken about the need for a greater level of interaction. Maybe we need some element of a stakeholders’ forum where these views can be represented and we can deal with some of these issues.

Mr. James Hickey

What we would really welcome is great advances and developments in collective bargaining. If there are two words which are repeated over and over throughout the whole copyright directive, they are “collective bargaining”. The copyright directive is there to protect authors and performers. We want to conclude collective bargaining agreements as the very best way of looking after remuneration for authors and performers. If there is a takeaway from all of this, we would love to recommend that much greater effort be put into the encouragement and incentivisation of collective bargaining. We would very much welcome that.

Chairman

Deputy Patricia Ryan is next but I might put a question myself so we have a little break between Sinn Féin contributions. I will then open it to a second round. We must finish for the next session, which is at 7.30 p.m.

I want to use my short time to talk about regional uplift, its future and the view of each representative group on that. I will start with SGI because I am trying to get a sense with regard to the workers and the guilds. We have not heard from Mr. Keeley. He has my dream job, which is model building. I might offer to swap as I would love that job. I want to get a sense of how that works in terms of trainees and people on set who are providing particular skills. The impression from the outside is that people travel to particular projects. I am interested in the guilds approach to regional uplift and how important it is to SGI. Is that of any importance to it? I will then ask everybody else to come in.

Mr. Eoin Holohan

I will speak on it briefly as a location manager, and I want the committee to understand what the location manager does. I get a script and I break it down by the locations, and then I scout and source the locations. We then secure all of the contracts and the permits, and then they make the film. It sounds easy but it is not. To have the whole country available as a location is the reason a lot of international production is coming here. To have it all available to us would be fantastic and that is why the regional uplift is so important. When we had that, it did promote filming in the regions. I worked on a couple of films in the regions. I would hire local trainees and it is part of regional uplift that we have to hire local trainees. They would go around to each department, such as my department, and ask what we need, and I would, for example, ask for two trainees, if possible. Those trainees would work with us.

We can see there is a willingness in the regions. There are crew in the regions who want to work and they do not necessarily want to come to Dublin or Wicklow.

They should not have to come to Dublin or Wicklow; it should be nationwide. It is going to take time to build up that crew base. To make a film in the regions, there is a cost involved because the crew will be based in Wicklow and they will have to be brought over. There might also be some local trainees or other grades. Galway, for example, would have more crew elements available than, perhaps, Donegal, which is nonetheless a great place to film. It is going to take a longer period to build up that crew base but it could be done if there were the regional uplift. It would make the industry nationwide and take the pressure off Dublin and Wicklow being the main production hubs.

Chairman

I might follow up on that from the point of view of guilds. Sometimes, if a development is happening locally, as I know in the case of building developments, for example, there will often be a local employment clause that sets out what "local" means. What does "local" mean in this context?

Mr. Eoin Holohan

In the uplift, it was stated that the trainee must live within 45 km of the production office. Normally, the word is put out and CVs come into the production office, and all the departments get those CVs. Pretty much everyone who applies gets a job. Last summer, we worked on Inishmore and Achill and a couple of those trainees made the move and came to Dublin, which was great because there is work here and they are working. Nevertheless, I wish there were also work in the regions.

Chairman

Yes, we do not want them all moving to Dublin. We want the projects to go to them.

Mr. Eoin Holohan

Yes, I think they would be better off if that were the case. There is a want in the regions to work in the film industry. I do not come from Dublin and I moved to Dublin to work in the film industry. We need a nationwide film industry that is not Dublin-centric.

Chairman

I do not think any of us is expecting that, say, Donegal would have a fully working set of crews but surely there could be an ecosystem, perhaps covering the west, that would be able to staff such projects.

Mr. Eoin Holohan

We have, however, kind of created one. It does not take much. If a few films are coming in every year, it will happen, but the uplift is sorely missed.

Mr. Ronan McCabe

Mr. Holohan mentioned the 45 km rule. There is activity in the regions in the animation sector, as I mentioned in our opening statement, and the uplift was really beneficial, with people getting into it. It is not quite fit for purpose, however. The Chairman mentioned Donegal. The 45 km rule is a little restrictive for animation at times because it is a highly technical industry that needs people with skills. Sometimes it was difficult to find people within the 45 km, so we had asked for that to be extended to, perhaps, 75 km. If somebody is working in Mayo, Leitrim or Donegal, it just geography.

Chairman

When that request was made, was there a request for a derogation for animation or for overall changes?

Mr. Ronan McCabe

In general, we asked for the 45 km rule to be extended because it is not fit for purpose for the animation sector, where it is not as easy to find staff.

Chairman

When was that request made?

Mr. Ronan McCabe

We asked for it in our pre-budget submissions this year and last year.

Chairman

Was there a response?

Mr. Ronan McCabe

No. I suppose there was a response in the budget, but not a personal one. The other issue relates to the habitually resident rule, which works against us a little bit. We were hoping that somebody who works on an animation production would be deemed to be habitually resident if he or she signed a contract to work on our production.

Chairman

Mr. McCabe named a number of projects in his opening statement. How many of them are based in the vicinity of Dublin and how many are being done elsewhere in the country? I have to say, “Vampirina” and “Kiva Can Do!” are big hits in my house.

Mr. Ronan McCabe

That is good to know. Is the Chairman asking about the number of studios?

Chairman

I am trying to get a sense, percentage-wise, of how much regional animation work is going on.

Mr. Ronan McCabe

I do not have those numbers to hand, although I could give some idea of the number of studios working outside of Dublin. Of our 42 members, seven are in Northern Ireland, while of the remainder, there are probably about 20 in Dublin and 15 in the regions. If the Chairman would like, I can revert with a breakdown of the numbers.

Chairman

That is fine; I was just trying to get a sense of it and that gives me a good enough summary.

Mr. Ronan McCabe

As I said, there are some really big hubs, including Galway and Kilkenny. Some of the other areas are smaller, such as Roscommon and even Cork, which is surprisingly small for a city. In Kilkenny and Galway, there is an awful lot of activity and that draws in other people as well.

Chairman

Animation Ireland still identifies the regional uplift issue, however, as incredibly important to its work.

Mr. Ronan McCabe

Yes, it is very important.

Ms Susan Kirby

We also advocated, as part of our pre-budget submission, for the retention of the regional uplift at a minimum of 5%. The intent of the scheme was so important that it was probably too short and, obviously, it was badly impacted by the fact that Covid emerged in the middle of it. The full aspirations of the scheme were probably not reached and it is our contention it should be extended at the higher level. Realistically, it is a declining base from 5% and the costs everyone is aware of, which Mr. Holohan mentioned, are very real.

While we represent the indigenous industry, we are cognisant that a vibrant indigenous industry is also represented in the regions. We represent more than 170 members and they are not all Dublin based. Ours is an all-island membership. The regional uplift is critical to the development of that regional base. One group I would like to speak to is na baill atá ag cruthú i nGaeilge. We represent Irish language producers as well. We have all referenced the films of the year, “An Cailín Ciúin”, “Arracht” and “Róise & Frank”. It is such a vibrant, rich part of our achieving the cultural aims of section 481 and the ability to support that work in the regions.

Tying those two things together, the aspirations were fantastic but an entire ecosystem probably cannot be developed in five years with a declining base of percentage, so we should revisit that. Is there an opportunity for Ireland Inc. to support unique aspects of our culture, namely, our Irish language and our Irish regional identity.

Chairman

TG4, obviously, does fantastic work in the area, but would it not be fantastic to have an entire ecosystem not just in a regional sense but in the Gaeltacht?

Ms Susan Kirby

Yes, exactly. There is the TG4-Ardán fund, for example, and the studio bases that are being built in the regions, with some of them already existing and more planned. We want our member in Donegal, The Bothy, to produce work and we want all that regional work to be supported. We also want to allow metro-centric producers, such as in Dublin, Cork and Wicklow, to bring work to the regions, but it needs an all-agency, multifaceted, mid-to-long-term strategy.

Mr. Ronan McCabe

I mentioned the National Talent Academy for Animation earlier. One of its pillars relates to regional development and a regional focus. It seems counterintuitive to reduce the regional development uplift at the same time as focusing on regional development through the talent academy.

Chairman

That does seem counterintuitive.

Deputy Patricia Ryan

Without being repetitive, the recognition of services is vital, as are sustainable and good-quality jobs, in any industry and we must not lose sight of that. Having listened to the debate last week, I felt that needed to be mentioned.

Our guests talked about young people in the industry and their training. How specifically does section 481 revolve around that?

Ms Susan Kirby

The Deputy will probably hear quite detailed contributions from Screen Ireland about the development of trainees in the context of the industry test and the great work that has been done there. Mr. McCabe referred to the national talent academies. We are also part of those. It is again quite a broad strategy of attracting trainees into this sector across the different disciplines both above and below the line and then assisting them to create. For example, the work of the competency framework is defining the career path that one might take in any given grade. As for the training, the mentorship and the shadowing that are required, I believe - and I think this was referred to in one of the opening statements - that the next generation of that is a view to work towards accreditation within the sector. That would be the journey of trainees. Ultimately, if we are putting all that effort into attracting people into the sector, it has to be a very sustainable, attractive place to work.

Deputy Patricia Ryan

What I want to know is how successful this is and what percentage of people do not continue with it. Does SPI lose many of the trainees who start with it? In what way does this continue?

Ms Susan Kirby

I do not necessarily have data outside of anecdotal-----

Ms Aoife O'Sullivan

As well as being aspirational, there is also a very practical side to this because in order to get a section 481 certificate from the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media, you must have in place a very sound and very detailed skills plan, which includes your list of trainees and, very often, who those people are. More recently, we have had diversity, equality and inclusion added to that skills plan. You have to go through all those checks and balances, and there is very rigorous compliance to be achieved when you do that. Then it is so important to continue the regional uplift and the regional trainees who were required for that. Deputy Ryan asked about trainees staying in the industry. They are not necessarily in a position to move to Dublin-Wicklow to work. If we want to sustain the industry nationwide and keep the trainees in the industry, it is really important that the regional uplift is there. The two projects I have produced in Kerry and Galway would have happened in Dublin-Wicklow if it were not for the uplift, not because we wanted them to happen in Dublin-Wicklow but because we would just not have been able to afford to make them in Kerry or Galway. We were very fortunate because both those projects were based and set in those places and we would have had to cheat them in-----

Deputy Patricia Ryan

I understand. I am conscious of the time.

Chairman

Sorry, Deputy Ryan. Ms Cornally wishes to come in.

Deputy Patricia Ryan

Sorry.

Ms Louise Cornally

In respect of section 481 and training programmes, I will point out that one of the requirements of section 481, as SPI has mentioned, is to get one's training programme certified. Take one recent project we looked at. The production schedule is really long. It is a four-and-a-half-year production schedule. We have 20 trainees on the project but they are all at different stages. There are trainees basically coming in as interns. They are learning as with a first job.

Deputy Patricia Ryan

They are graded.

Ms Louise Cornally

They are graded. Then there are people who are part of that training programme and who are moving into a director, art director or episodic director role for the first time. They are moving into new positions and being mentored. As part of tracking their performance and seeing how they are getting on and what their challenges are, they will meet not only with their mentor but also with the HR function to have an open discussion as to what their challenges are and how they are getting on, getting feedback from the mentorship. It is not just introductory roles, which this does include, but also roles right along the entire career path. That all forms part of the training programme for section 481. It is a requirement.

Deputy Patricia Ryan

There is backup to help them if they are struggling.

Ms Louise Cornally

Absolutely. They keep journals. They have to do so. The journals were all submitted to Screen Training Ireland, which I am sure has lots of fun reading them all.

Deputy Patricia Ryan

I am conscious of the time. In respect of productions between two countries - for example, in Britain - how is relief work on a practical level, and how does it compare with similar relief work in other countries?

Mr. James Hickey

It is worth mentioning that there are tax credits of one variety or another in most European countries. That is one of the reasons why it is really important that section 481 remains in place. If there were no section 481, virtually all production activity that currently takes place in Ireland would move elsewhere. For example, in Northern Ireland there is a tax credit which is fully available and which would be availed of if there were no tax credit for all production in Ireland. We have to live in this very competitive international economy. It also has to be said that there is great co-operation and co-production between the various countries. We have co-production treaties for the whole of Europe on the one hand and, on the other, co-production treaties with individual territories, Canada being a good example of a country with which we have a very strong co-production treaty. There is enormous co-operation between the countries but also a certain amount of competition between the countries in respect of the locations of productions. One has to be at one's absolute highest efficiency, with the best skills available, in order to attract the production activity here.

Deputy Patricia Ryan

I will finish with this question to Mr. Holohan. What is his opinion of the regional uplift that was introduced in July 2019? Has it worked, notwithstanding Covid? In his opinion, do changes need to be made to it?

Mr. Eoin Holohan

The regional uplift has decreased to 2% going into 2023. My experience is as a location manager. I worked in the regions during the time the regional uplift was there and I worked there when we all went back to work just after Covid, and I think it worked. I think it brought production to the regions. I think it was maybe Ms Kirby who said this. I would like to see it come back. Everyone needs to sit down and discuss what to do. It needs to be a seven-year plan, almost. What we want is an industry in the regions. For that to happen we would want crew in the regions because what is holding us back from shooting in the regions at the moment is the lack of available crew. We have to bring the crew over, and there is a big cost involved in that. It is a case of the chicken and the egg. If we bring in a regional uplift or some kind of incentive to shoot in the regions, the crew will develop in the regions. It will start with trainees. To use my department as an example, those trainee location staff will become, after a couple of years, location assistants and, a couple of years after that, maybe six years down the line, assistant location managers. There you go. Then there should be beneath them location assistants and location trainees as well. That is across all the departments that work on a film. When you see the credits of a film, that is us. That is all those departments.

The uplift worked. I wish it would come back. That is just me being selfish as a location manager. I would prefer to work there more often, but I think that the people in the regions who want a career in this industry deserve it.

Deputy Michael Healy-Rae

I will be brief. I just want to thank the witnesses for an excellent presentation. Both the statements and the questions and answers have been very helpful and very informative. This session will help us going forward in doing our work in a proper and informed manner, and for that I am personally grateful and I know that the Chair is too. It has been a very worthwhile session so far. I thank the witnesses most sincerely for their time. I appreciate the work they are doing on the ground. I appreciate the benefit that people like me, my neighbours and my constituents in Kerry have received over the years through the work of all the witnesses. I thank them very much for that.

Chairman

I thank the Deputy. We have been talking a little about filming in Kerry. I know he is happy to hear that.

I will allow a second round but we have only about seven minutes, so I will give Members maybe two minutes to ask a follow-up question if they would like to do so. Would anybody like to indicate?

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Yes.

Chairman

I thought you might, Deputy Boyd Barrett.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Do the production companies not just have it both ways? They want the intellectual property. The witnesses are saying it has to be signed over to the producer companies, and that is the standing company, so it has the intellectual property and, presumably, then benefits from the royalties from that. Maybe the witnesses could clarify that point. However, these companies do not want the employees. They are left with the DAC.

Mr. James Hickey

No. They do want to share in downstream revenues with the creative personnel involved in the production of the film - absolutely.

In the case of the actors, the actor assigns his or her rights to the production company so that the production company can exploit the film or television series but we want to make sure that the actors get fair and proportionate remuneration, which is what is required under the copyright directive.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I am sorry to interrupt Mr. Hickey but I have so little time. Last week, I asked Equity directly if someone does not sign one of these contracts, will they get the job on the film and they said they will not get it. They also said, for example, of the film done by Disney recently in the RDS and various other places such as Wicklow, that people who worked on that here got lesser remuneration, contracts and conditions than they did when they reshot some of those scenes in the UK.

Mr. James Hickey

Without getting into specifics because that is where we get into a difficulty here, the practicality of the matter is that we as Screen Producers Ireland want to conclude collective bargaining agreements with all the people who are involved as performers in productions of films and television drama series. We want to work with the actors, the dancers, the stunt people and whoever else is involved. What we would like to do is make sure that there is an organised collective bargaining system in place in line with the copyright directive.

The copyright directive was introduced last November and it is very new. We are all trying to work our way through to make it work. It entitles authors and performers to fair and proportionate remuneration. We are committed to doing that but it is important that we have everybody working with us. We urge the committee to encourage collective bargaining.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Equity has a very different view.

Lastly, on the crews, is it the case - nobody is answering this - that if one works for designated activity company, DAC A, it is 100% owned by the producer company, DAC A disappears and exactly the same producer company sets up DAC B, but claims that it is not the employer of the employees of DAC A. That goes on with A, B, C, D. It is the same producer company employing the same people but, because the DAC is now gone, that producer can say that they are not his or her employees.

Mr. James Hickey

We have to come back to the proposition that the industry is a project-based industry and it will always be a project-based industry. It is a project-based industry in every jurisdiction of the world at this stage. It is true that each time somebody is employed, he or she is employed in connection with a project. The project has a fixed period of time. It may be only six weeks for a feature film, it may be six months for a season of a television drama series and it may be two or three years for an animation television series, but there is always in the end a project-based approach to this industry. That is fundamental to how the industry is structured.

In terms of recognition of the work people do, they are recognised through each of the projects they work on. As the Deputy will know, every person involved in the project, the production of a film or a television series is given a credit at the end of the production. That is the credit acknowledgement of the work that has been achieved in relation to those people who are working in the industry. It is important. People get work on the basis of the projects they have worked on.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Who determines whether they are good enough to be on the next project?

Mr. James Hickey

They decide to make themselves available for work and if there is production activity going on, those producers will employ those people.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Always?

Mr. James Hickey

Yes, if the work is there.

Chairman

Are there other Deputies who want to come back in?

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Obviously, that can create a definite weakness. If someone is to point out certain issues in pay and condition, one is not necessarily in a very strong position.

I welcome what has been said about collective bargaining agreements and getting a deal that everyone can live it. We need a system that will deliver for that.

We have that problem that there are a number of crew and actors who do not believe they are equal players in this. I do not know how we will provide them with a fora and a system that provides them with a decent level of representation but that looks like what we need to at least get us to the next step.

In fairness, the other question I was going to ask has been dealt with to a degree. How do these working conditions and the contracts that we have spoken about previously compare with those in Britain, France or wherever?

Mr. James Hickey

As far as Screen Producers Ireland is concerned, all the contractual arrangements and all the remuneration arrangements are comparable with those in the United Kingdom. It is a moveable industry. People work from both areas and, by and large, all the remuneration is comparable between one jurisdiction and the other.

One last point, the collective bargaining agreements provide for dispute resolution mechanisms in relation to anything that may go wrong between a worker and an employer in the film and television production sector. The vital aspect of the new shooting crew agreement, which was re-concluded in 2020, and the construction agreement, which was concluded in 2022, provide for dispute resolution mechanism for employees. It is really important to us that those dispute resolution mechanisms are in place to protect employees in the context of any dispute they may have with their employer.

Chairman

Ms Drum wants to come in.

Ms Jessica Drum

I wanted to jump in and say that this is a vibrant industry with an enormous number of people working very happily. The references that are being made here relate to a small proportion of people. A lot of work has gone into the communicating with crew and all other stakeholders. There are so many systems in place and the guilds are there as a representative body to help everybody and make sure that things are done in a fair way. I am not sure that it is representative of a small number of people when we have never had such a busy time in film over the past few years. We all recognise there are always issues in every industry with employers and employees but the channels of communication here are open. At no point is anybody ever in a situation where he or she does not have somewhere to go. We have our website. Anybody who works in film in any capacity is welcome to call me and we can help them with any issues they might have. I would very much refute the blacklisting allegations. It is not something that I have come across. It is important to say that that is a small minority of people and it is not representative of the people we deal with.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

That is fair enough. We need better channels across the board so that we can have this communication and can put some of these issues to bed. All we want to see is a vibrant film industry that produces good films, good television and good animation and provides people with good jobs, which they will need to sustain the industry anyway.

Chairman

I need to make a change over to the next group. Deputy Patricia Ryan and Mr. Holohan want to come in. I will allow Deputy Patricia Ryan to make her comment, and then there can be any final comments, by which I mean two sentences, before I turn over to the next group.

Deputy Patricia Ryan

While it is all very good saying the channels are open and it is a small number of people, that small number of people still have to be dealt with in a proper manner. That needs to be addressed as soon as possible.

Ms Jessica Drum

I would agree with that. There is no part of the channels that are not available to those people either. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the committee for its work but also to invite it to come and visit a film set at any stage to see the industry.

Chairman

We will definitely do that.

Ms Jessica Drum

We are talking a lot about numbers and facts and figures but this is an industry-----

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Only if I am given a role.

Ms Jessica Drum

The committee would be welcome to come and have a look around. Mr. Keeley might show the committee around his workshop as well.

Chairman

Deputy Ó Murchú is not joking, by the way.

Ms Jessica Drum

Neither am I.

Mr. Eoin Holohan

I would echo that. There is a suggestion that there are no real jobs. I have heard the likes of that bandied about. I ask the committee to visit us. We will show the committee around and the members can meet the people who are working on the ground and can talk to them.

I did not get a chance to answer some of Deputy Boyd Barrett's questions properly, such as how one gets a job and where the guilds come from. Briefly, in 2018, a large number of crew felt we did not have a voice. There was a voice being heard but we felt that we did not have a voice. I felt I did not. We are film crew, we are good at getting organised and we got organised. We organised ourselves into guilds really quickly. The locations guild was the first guild. It is probably ten years old. Other crew took our lead and formed guilds. Then we decided we should have a representative body - Screen Guilds Ireland - and that is where we come from.

We are ambitious. We have looked for funding and got it from Screen Ireland, but we are also looking further afield. That will get bigger.

I think there is some confusion. We are all for quality employment. We want it and it is a part of section 481 that we get it but there seems to be confusion between quality employment and permanent employment. Most of us, myself included, want to work in a freelance industry. That is why I got into it. It is a creative industry and it is freelance. I want to go from job to job. I do not want to be tied to one production company and to only do the work that it does. I want to be able to move around. To have a career in this industry, how do you get a job? You go in as a trainee and get to know people. You make contacts and find out who is on the next job. People tell you who is on the job, and to ring this guy and so on. That is what happens. It sounds like a cliché but film crew are like a family. We help each other out. We tell each other what jobs are coming in and what jobs need people. I hope that answers some of the question. The committee should come out and meet us on set and can ask us anything it wants.

Mr. Ronan McCabe

Animation is a high-tech industry. On the question of using trainees, it would be impossible for us to crew up any production with just trainees. There is a defined academic path into animation. There are many animation courses on the island of Ireland. We take those people. Some go directly into the industry and some we have to put through bridging courses and give them some additional training. There is a recognised pathway into the animation sector.

Ms Susan Kirby

I would endorse the previous comments. In my professional career in the creative industries, I have spent a great deal of time advocating and believing in the creative industries' proposition for Ireland Inc. The film sector and the Irish audiovisual sector has such a key role to play in that. There is something that we have not touched on, so I wish to acknowledge what we have all experienced in the last number of years. This sector stayed open. It very quickly pivoted, galvanised and stayed open. It educated, informed and entertained. It gave us a bit of solace. I want to publicly recognise all those who were on the front line of that. That is part of the representation here today. I am very grateful for the opportunity. I believe very firmly in the proposition of the creative industries in Ireland Inc. It has been my passion. We have an ability to deliver on great ambition. A figure of €4 billion was mentioned before. We would welcome that level of commitment. I guarantee that if we had that level of commitment, the sector would deliver.

Chairman

That concludes this session. I thank everyone for coming today. I know it was slightly rushed, with a lot of voices in the room commenting on an incredibly complex area. I thank everyone. I appreciate their attendance and contributions.

Sitting suspended at 7.23 p.m. and resumed at 7.27 p.m.

Chairman

I welcome Ms Désirée Finnegan, Mr. Gareth Lee and Ms Teresa McGrane from Screen Ireland. I thank them for being with us this evening. This follows on from the session we just had with three other groups.

Before we begin, I wish to explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practice of the Houses as regards references they may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present or who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts is protected pursuant to both the Constitution and statute by absolute privilege. However, if evidence is being given remotely from a place outside the parliamentary precincts, witnesses may not benefit from such a level of immunity. They are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise, or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks and it is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise, or make charges against a person or an official outside the Houses, either by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the place where parliament has chosen to sit, namely, Leinster House, in order to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate where they are not adhering to this constitutional requirement.

I invite Ms Finnegan to make her opening statement.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

I thank the committee for inviting us here today. Screen Ireland is the national agency for the Irish film, TV drama, animation, documentary, shorts and visual effects industry. The agency works closely with industry stakeholders and creative teams to fund and assist Irish projects from early stage development through to production, distribution, marketing and exhibition. Screen Ireland is responsible for promoting the expression of national Irish culture on screen and developing skills across the sector.

In recent years, there has been extensive growth in both local and international production. From 2019 to 2021, local Irish feature film activity increased by 52% and local TV drama production spend increased by 40%. Irish animation also demonstrated a further increase in 2021, following a decade of rapid growth that resulted in record-breaking production levels. Last year, Screen Ireland-funded projects earned over 35 major international award nominations, including Academy Award, Emmy and BAFTA nominations.

Screen Ireland has a dual remit and is also responsible for attracting foreign direct investment to Ireland in the form of international production in line with the Government’s audiovisual action plan ambition to make Ireland a global centre of excellence for production.

Ireland is a recognised leader globally in animation with approximately 2,500 people currently employed across 42 studios. Ireland has also become a world-class visual effects hub for large-scale projects. Screen Ireland welcomed the opportunity to showcase this sector's work on a trade mission to Los Angeles with the Minister for Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media, Deputy Catherine Martin.

National Irish-language cinema has also been redefined in recent years. In the middle of an intensely difficult time for cinemas and the cinema-going experience, an Irish-language film broke domestic box office records, reaching a diverse audience across many different generations. It created a cultural sensation at home and abroad and is now the Irish entry for the Academy Awards. As a result of the cine4 scheme and section 481, we now have more Irish-language feature films being produced than ever before, ensuring that Irish filmmakers’ voices can be heard as Gaeilge as well as in English. The tax incentive for film and television production has been part of public policy in Ireland for more than three decades and we have provided a written submission with further detail on the importance of the credit to the sector. It exists to stimulate and support the local indigenous industry and it also attracts high-end international production to Ireland.

Section 481 supports live-action film and TV production, animation production, creative documentary, post-production and visual effects, supporting both creative endeavour and employment across all these sectors. The credit is administered by the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media. In March 2019, Screen Ireland was asked by the Department to take on a new role to develop and then oversee a new process for tracking training and skills development opportunities on projects, which is a requirement of the tax credit. This was a new departure for the agency, providing an opportunity for Screen Ireland to introduce a more structured approach to work-based learning and skills tracking, making Ireland the first country in the world to link such a formal skills tracking process to a tax credit. I will now hand over to my colleague, Mr. Gareth Lee, who is head of skills and professional development, to take the committee through some of this work.

Mr. Gareth Lee

Since the introduction of the new system, Screen Ireland has assessed more than 160 skills development plans and tracked more than 1,700 skills participants across section 481 productions. As well as the skills development aspect of the plan, producers are also encouraged to introduce both sustainability initiatives and diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives on their productions. This has seen significant positive change within the sector.

The value of the section 481 skills process to Ireland's film production sector is significant. It ensures that formality and structure is given to training. It also gives reliable front-line data on the key skills shortages and gaps that are being experienced on the ground. This, in turn, allows the sector to ensure that there is a pipeline of skilled talent to support both local and incoming production in a sustainable way.

In 2022, Screen Ireland, in collaboration with Screen Guilds of Ireland, launched a new competency framework that captures all of the skills, knowledge and competencies for in excess of 80 crew roles across 17 different departments. This resource enhances the section 481 skills tracking process, opens up access and career opportunities within the sector and supports third-level institutions and training providers with more targeted and relevant curriculum development. The next evolution is the development of a certification-accreditation model for work-based learning. Screen Ireland has started working closely with third-level partners and industry on this.

To improve workplace culture, Screen Ireland has developed two new online, self-led training programmes on bullying and harassment and unconscious bias that those working on section 481 productions will be requested to complete. These new programmes are also included as part of Safe To Create, a new collaborative programme aiming to provide safe and respectful working conditions for those working in the wider arts and creative sectors.

Screen Ireland works closely with industry stakeholders and is dedicated to doing everything possible to ensure fair opportunities for all. Before the end of the year, the agency will launch a new crew and services database for the sector that will help increase visibility of employment opportunities and access points for all to the industry. Everyone working in the industry and any new entrants will be able to self-register on the database and indicate if they are available and seeking work. Producers and companies will also be able to register on the site, search for crew and advertise opportunities centrally.

As evidenced above, a huge amount of positive work on skills and workforce development has happened in the screen sector in Ireland in recent years. This progress has either been directly related to section 481 or inspired by the section 481 skills requirement. Screen Ireland is proud of the work to date and the progress that has been made. We are keen to see even further progress in the years to come.

We thank the committee for its work on the film credit and look forward to answering any questions the members might have.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I thank our contributors. Who is gathering the database of crew?

Mr. Gareth Lee

Screen Ireland is developing the database. It will be for the industry. It will be open to everyone working in the industry, and anyone who is interested in joining the industry can self-register. There will be no restriction on access to the database. It is a resource we are developing for the industry.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Who is collating that database? I am curious. Is it Screen Ireland? It is not Screen Guilds of Ireland.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

It is not.

Mr. Gareth Lee

It is Screen Ireland. We are paying for the development of the database but it will be a self-registration process. There will be no restriction around it, so to speak.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I thought I had read in one of the documents that Screen Guilds of Ireland was playing some role in collecting the information. Is that not correct?

Mr. Gareth Lee

That is not correct.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

We have heard calls for a crew database for a long time.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I have called for one myself.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

That is true. We have heard those calls for a number of years now. Mr. Lee and the skills team have spent a long time investing in it and trying to build it out as a resource. We feel that not only will it represent crew but it will also represent facilities and services. It will be a full directory for the industry. To my knowledge, the industry has never before had something this comprehensive. What we like about it is that we see it as a tool for the industry itself. We want to ensure that the industry is as open and inclusive as possible, and that it gives fair opportunities for employment to everyone. As a State agency, we play no role in the employment relationship but we felt this would be a valuable tool to enable any individual to self-register. If a local or international production company is looking for crew, this resource would be available to them and allow them to connect with people. We hope the database will launch in the next few weeks. It is a pilot programme.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

To be clear, is it the case that anybody can register for it?

Ms Désirée Finnegan

It is open to anybody.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Is it divided up into different grades? Is that how it works? Can someone just register?

Mr. Gareth Lee

That is correct. It is open industry-wide. It is open for animation, television and film. One can register at one's grade and so on.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I would be interested to see how that plays out. It is necessary. There should be a proper register of employees and trainees.

To follow on from our earlier discussions, my concern, as I expressed it to others and it is a concern that was expressed by people who work in the film industry at our hearing last week, relates to the question of who are the employers in the industry. The film credit is given to create employment and training. From what I gather, which was more or less confirmed by Mr. Hickey during the committee's earlier session, the DAC is the employer. DACs only exist for the period of the production and approximately a year thereafter.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Yes.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

However, the production company is the recipient of section 481.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Yes.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

How can the production company be given money to create employment if it is not the employer? I understand from an answer given earlier by Mr. Hickey that the DAC is a necessary-----

Ms Désirée Finnegan

It is a tool.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

-----accounting tool but surely that should not absolve the production company from responsibility for its employees. We did not have time to drill into it further but Mr. Hickey said we need the DAC system as an accountancy tool for investors and to provide transparency about what happens financially on a particular production.

I put it to the witnesses that it absolutely runs counter to the purpose of section 481 if the producer company that is a self-standing ongoing company can say it is not the employer of the people who worked on that film, even though that company set up the DAC, owns the DAC, but yet can disown responsibility for the people who work on the DAC.

Ms Teresa McGrane

Just to go through the structure of the section, as the Deputy is aware, the producer company is the applicant company. It makes the application to the Department, receives approval and the tax credit. That tax credit is then passed down from the producer company to the DAC. The DAC is the company that employs the cast and crew and secures the location and all the necessary rights. There is a commissioning relationship between the producer company and the DAC. The delivered film passes back from the DAC to the producer company. My understanding is that the DAC is the company that employs the crew. It concludes the employment contracts and is responsible for the employment relationships, as per legislation, between that company and the crew. I suppose it is a function of section 481 that there is a DAC in the structure. I know that reference was made to the fact that the DAC ensures there is transparency, which it does, by the way. It is also a structure of financing.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Sorry to interrupt. I understand that, and I understand the rationale of the DAC as an accountancy and financial tool. If a section 481 tax credit is given for quality, employment and training, the basic requirement for an industry and employment is that we know who the employer is and we know who the employee is. The problem is we do not. The DAC exists purely for the duration of the production and for one year afterwards. The DAC is a wholly owned subsidiary of the parent company, for want of a better phrase, which is the recipient of the section 481 tax credit.

Ms Teresa McGrane

I suppose what I would say is that I cannot comment other than obviously company law and employment law comes into play. The point I was trying to make was that as the Deputy has probably gathered from the previous sessions, film production is a pretty expensive business. Section 481 is just a part of it. With any projects of scale, and when I say "scale" I am really talking about projects of a value of more than €2 million, there needs to be other financing and banking in terms of ensuring the cash flows work within the production. Banks will often lend against contracts and pre-sales and often provide gap financing.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I do not mean to interrupt Ms McGrane, but I understand all of that. I am getting back to the issue of employment and training. Once the DAC ceases to exist, who does the employee on a film production have recourse to as their employer?

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Given this is a project-based industry, isolating out each individual production within that structure is really important. My understanding is that the employment relationship exists between the DAC and those who are hired on that particular production. The DAC then stays in place for 12 months for compliance and transparency. If any issues arise, they can be addressed in that time period. Often, the crew members are going from one production with one employer to another production with a different employer. That is where that-----

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

If an employee is unfairly dismissed, for example, or an intern is mistreated or whatever, it takes around two to three years to get a case heard in the Labour Court or the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC. By the time the case reaches the court, the employer no longer exists, even though the company that got section 481 tax credit for that production on which the employee worked still exists, and that company says it has no relationship with the employee, even though the DAC was 100% owned by that company. To me, that is a problem because it means the employees and the trainees do not have an employer they can go back to once the DAC is gone. Therefore, all of the legislation those companies are required to sign up to is meaningless. The Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act 2003 is meaningless if the only legal employer an employee ever had only existed for a year and a half or less, for example, six months. Do the witnesses know what I mean? I just do not understand how the workers or the trainees can have any kind of rights, continuity or recognition of their service if their employer disappears after a period, even though their actual employer that got the money clearly still exists, but says it is not their employer.

Mr. Gareth Lee

I believe witnesses in the last session of the committee talked about the project-by-project nature of the industry and how the workers actually appreciate the way the industry works, enabling them to move from employer to employer.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I am sure the producers do.

Mr. Gareth Lee

The workers also spoke to this.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

The HoDs. That is who we heard from

Mr. Gareth Lee

The Screen Guilds of Ireland represent more than just HoDs.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

We heard from three HoDs.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

We do hear regularly that crew members enjoy going from production to production, having the freedom to choose what production they are going to work on, and not being limited to one individual producer and the projects it might be making. I suppose the 12-month period, once a production is finished, would be the time to deal with any of those-----

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

But they cannot get their cases heard in that time. That is a fact; they cannot. I have one last question, and I know I am out of time. Taking just one of the roles in the film that was mentioned, we had a witness who said they were a production manager. How many people have qualified and been accredited as production managers through the skills training structures that have been set up?

Mr. Gareth Lee

It is very important for the committee members to know as much as possible about the skills requirement linked to section 481. It is a requirement around training and skills development. It is not linked to a specific role, and it is not specifically about trainees. As some of the witnesses explained in the previous session, the approach we have taken to it is very much holistic. It is about capturing skills development across productions at all levels. As an industry, we need to make sure we are developing people at all levels. It is very much Government and European policy to address lifelong learning and continuing professional development within the industry. In terms of how the system works, at the outset of a production, a producer will engage with crew and a skills development officer to develop a skills plan. That skills plan will outline the skills that will be developed across a production. That could include learning on the job, courses, shadowing, mentoring and skills development at the different levels I mentioned. Our role is to approve that plan if we feel it is approvable or to go back to the producer to request changes.

Once in place and approved, our role is to oversee the delivery of that across the production. We engage with the skills participants, as they are called, during that process. We do set visits and so on. At the end of the process, there is a compliance stage where we look and verify that the skills that have been developed across that project have been signed off and captured. Our role is not around what level that person might get hired at on the next job. That is obviously something for the employer and the individual. That is their remit. Our remit is to ensure skills are being tracked on production and they are being developed in that formal structured way. It is important to say skills have always been developed on production. That is why we have the fantastic crews we have in Ireland and we do the fantastic work we do. What this system has put in place is a more formal structure around it.

One of the great things that was referenced in the last session and is important is the development of this competency framework, which captures all the skills, knowledge and competencies for every role across 17 departments. Our plan, as a next step, is to look at certification for work-based learning. We are engaging with third level providers around developing certification, be it micro-credentials or whatever, that will give people certificates for the work that they do and the skills that are tracked on production. That is kind of the next step. Again, that is not us being involved in the employment relationship; it is just us putting resources and processes in place to help with that, which is where the certification would come into play eventually.

Ms Teresa McGrane

I just wish to add that we introduced the system in 2019. It was clearly out of some conversations that happened at this committee. It is working very well. It is the first time in the world, I think, but certainly in Europe, that we are linking the tax credit to skills development. In fact, many European countries are coming to us now, looking at the value of what was created and are quite eager to replicate it. As Mr. Lee said, we developed the competency framework, which will go into a deeper level of linking the skills within the framework to the skills development plan, the further tracking and then compliance.

Chairman

I will probably have time for a short second round and Deputy Boyd Barrett can come back in then if he wants to. I call Deputy Farrell.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

Go raibh maith agat, a Chathaoirligh, agus go raibh maith agaibh as ucht teacht ós comhair an choiste. In respect of the industry development test, a post project compliance report must be submitted to Screen Ireland with a final version submitted within six months following production completion. Companies are also required to provide details of any Workplace Relations Commission decisions as well. If a producer does not comply with these requirements, any amount of the relief already claimed may be recoverable with interest. Can the witnesses provide an example of a production company failing the industry development test and application for the section 481 relief?

Mr. Gareth Lee

The only thing that Screen Ireland looks after is the skills aspect of the industry development test. We get a compliance report on the skills side that we have to approve. However, the Department looks after the industry development test in totality. The reference the Deputy made to the WRC would be something that would be dealt with by the Department.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

Is Mr. Lee aware of any company that failed the test in terms of the application?

Mr. Gareth Lee

I would not be aware of any company that failed on the industry development test. That would be a question the Department would be able to answer. On the skills side, we have not had a compliance report that has failed yet.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

Okay. Usually with these, it is quite common that there would be ones that fail in terms of receiving relief. That is fair if that is a question more so for the Department and we will put that in.

The witnesses are probably also aware of claims made at this committee with regard to blacklisting workers. We have been hearing from workers that they feel that they have been blacklisted by production companies etc. Do the witnesses have any comment on that specific statement?

Ms Désirée Finnegan

As the State agency, we endeavour to develop the industry and always want to see full employment levels. The crew and services database is part of what we were speaking about in that regard in providing a tool for industry to give as open and fair access points and opportunities of employment for all in the industry.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

That is fair. I am asking specifically about the blacklisting that some people have mentioned. When we are looking at this particular tax credit, that is something that has arisen in previous committees, so it is more specifically on that. Is Ms Finnegan saying that she does not feel she can comment on that?

Ms Désirée Finnegan

We do not play a role in the employment relationship. The feedback that we get from across all the stakeholders that we engage with is that the industry is thriving. Despite the pandemic, last year was a record-breaking year for the sector - it generated €500 million in production spend. We are hearing very positive feedback generally from across the sector and about employment levels as well. It is an industry that is maturing and scaling. Ensuring that there is open access for all feels like the appropriate role for us to play in that so that anybody who has experience has an opportunity to display that experience and be able to respond to employment opportunities within the sector. We hope that this database will help provide that.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

There were concerns on data in terms of blacklisting and on bogus self-employment. As people who work around the industry, if they have not been concerns that have been highlighted with Screen Ireland before - I would imagine that it is perhaps coming out of this committee - that is something that we would very strongly say needs to be looked at from what we have heard from witnesses. It is obviously extremely concerning, if that is the case. However, it fair enough if Ms Finnegan is saying that at this moment that is not necessarily something she will exactly comment on. I would then perhaps urge that Screen Ireland looks at it at a later point.

I just also wanted to note something that was said by Irish Equity last week. It noted that all performers and creatives are or should be protected by the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000 and the European copyright directive, which among other things, enshrined the right to proportionate remuneration for the ongoing financial rewards that derive from their performance. It stated that this is not an explicit requirement under section 481. Can our witnesses comment on this with their understanding of requirements under section 481 and whether it is a stipulation for receipt of such relief?

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Absolutely. Again, we do not administer the tax credit, but I can speak from the Screen Ireland perspective on this. The European copyright directive and copyright in general is a very complex area. From our understanding, it requires very careful consideration. As an agency, over the past 12 months or so, we have met with each of the stakeholders across the sector to try to understand the different views and where there might be challenges around the implementation of the directive.

We welcome the European copyright directive and its full implementation, but we believe it requires the industry to come together. Therefore, we proposed to the sector an informal working group around this. We have been seeking an independent chair because we, as an agency, are also investors within content. We wanted to make sure that we could better understand some of the complexities around it. We are actively looking at including the European copyright directive in our own contract provisions along with all of the other legislation that we have requirements around. We hope that we get full engagement from across the sector, which we believe we will, to work through where views may not fully align on certain aspects of it.

Deputy Mairéad Farrell

I will leave it at that because I know there are certain members of the committee who have a particular interest in this and I would like to hear what they have to say.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

What I took from the last interaction that we had is that there was a general acceptance of a need for collective bargaining agreements and some sort of system to deliver that. That obviously accepts on some level that there is an issue and we need to bring that to a head as soon as possible.

I ask about the remit of Screen Ireland, including but beyond its involvement regarding section 481.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

The Deputy means in general. As I said in my opening statement, Screen Ireland has a dual remit. They are both equally important in finding a fine balance between both areas of responsibility.

Screen Ireland is responsible for the expression of national Irish culture on screen. We work with a production and development team to invest in projects. We support projects literally through every stage of the process. There is our version of research and development where one develops an idea for a film, a television drama, an animation or whatever. We probably have between 80 and 100 projects in active development within the agency. That supports Irish talent to come in and develop work in this area, which we do in a variety of different ways. Production companies and producers come in with their ideas. Throughout the pandemic we worked really hard as a team to ensure that we supported opportunities for other creative talent as well. We have run a number of different programmes. For example, one programme is called The Voice and it supports Irish directors. The Screen Directors Guild of Ireland came to us with the idea for this fantastic programme as it allows directors funding so they can go off and develop their own ideas. We are seeing some of those ideas come through now. Initially, this was a Covid-19 support measure but we are seeing it now coming through the production lane We have a number of different programmes, including one called Spotlight for writers.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I get the general notion. Across the board, Screen Ireland has a responsibility to ensure the industry is supported. The agency fits itself in where ideas can be developed and that obviously means dealing with all of the relevant stakeholders. On some level, people view the agency as a general representative group of the film industry.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

No.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I know but that view exists. I have heard that said by some of the people who have outlined the issues concerning pay and conditions. They have stated they feel part of the problem is that they are not at the table and, on some level, Screen Ireland does not have people on its board who represent them.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

In addition, in order that people do not think that Screen Ireland just does development, I confirm to Deputy Ó Murchú that we take projects through the production stage. We support a project with funding when it is distributed by Irish distributors, market it and, ultimately, exhibit it wherever it might be shown whether that is in a cinema, on a streaming platform or wherever it might be.

The Deputy mentioned what some people feel.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

It has been put to a number of members that there are issues concerning pay and conditions. We can all see that there are difficulties, in that to work on the next project, one must rely on being contacted by the HOD, and there is always the possibility that someone does not ring.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Yes.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

While we could get into what is and is not blackballing, people feel that they do not have representation and they have no place to go to with complaints. We know that there are particular issues with the Labour Court, the Workplace Relations Commission and the way that DACs are set up.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Yes.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

We could debate this issue all night but people have said their views are not necessarily represented. On some level, that fits in with what Mr. Hickey spoke about earlier having not only a collective bargaining agreement but a system that can deliver that, which is what I think we are missing. How can we get to the point where people feel they are represented and we can move on from the particular issues that have been raised?

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Yes, I hope that all of the key stakeholders feel that they are supported by Screen Ireland. In particular, through the pandemic we worked directly with creatives across the board. We support crew. We have worked with the Screen Guilds of Ireland to develop crew hubs around the country to respond to the increased demand for crew because of the growth in the industry.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

As we spoke about earlier, there is an accusation abroad that the ratios have changed in respect of experienced staff being employed as crew, versus the current position of having a lot more trainees. We must find out who works where and how is that determination made.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Yes. We have received feedback, particularly at high points of production. By that I mean there is a huge demand for crew during the summer months in Ireland. We have received feedback that there is an oversubscription and people cannot find enough crew. That is why we launched crew hubs to bring more people into the industry. Mr. Lee can speak to the training piece and the work that we do there.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I ask Mr. Lee to also speak about the ratio.

Mr. Gareth Lee

As I said earlier in terms of the skills development requirement link to section 481, it is very much an holistic approach. So it is about new entrants and trainees but it is also about upskilling and progression because one needs people to move up in order to have an industry. So that is very much our approach.

As the witnesses in the previous session have stated, it is important that we bring new people in and grow the industry. We should be very supportive of that and we are. We also need to ensure that we upskill those who are in more senior positions and so on, and we do that through our work around section 481. We do a whole host of other things in the skills department around continuous professional development and so on.

As the witnesses in the previous session said, I agree, I do not think that there is an imbalance. Certainly with skills, we see a balance between the upskilling of people who are in the industry already and new entrants coming in. We are keen to grow the industry so we should not deter new entrants and trainees from coming in as well.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I accept that. We seem to have an issue with a number of people. I cannot determine how big a number that is but it seems to be significant and it is people who have worked in the industry for years. The way the industry operates, as you move from project to project, creates a certain level of difficulty. I have no wish to make headlines but there seems to be a pre-1913-type set-up whereby it is almost that you show up and then the employer takes you on. That is just the nature of project-to-project circumstances and we must discover ways to fix that part. I do not know whether we need a forum or a greater level of representation, even as I have said about Screen Ireland, of some of these people. Can we do that?

Ms Désirée Finnegan

We cannot get away from the project nature of this industry.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Fair enough.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

To the best of my knowledge, it is the same the world over. Screen Ireland wants to grow the industry to such a level that there is a consistent pipeline of work for anybody who wants work and in a variety of productions. One has international productions, which bring a different value proposition than local work.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I accept that and it is a given that Screen Ireland wants people who can do a proper job.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Yes.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Unfortunately, accusations have been made and there may be particular issues with pay and conditions. Also, there can a power differential when a number of trainees are taken on. I get it that sometimes when a film is being made there is pressure timewise and things need to happen.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Yes.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I have a limited understanding of the industry. However, I believe we need the piece where we can have representation in order that people's views can be aired and we can find a structure that works a bit better. That scenario would allow us to create a system where we can provided a sustainable industry with good quality work, which can then deliver what we need. All of this is necessary to keep the ecosystem going.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

On the pay and conditions aspect, in an international context industry agreements are the way that it is handled. Even over the past few years it seems that there has been huge progress made in the industry in terms of having a crew agreement in place now. Such an agreement provides stability not only here in Ireland but when looking for international productions to come to Ireland. It is great to be able to communicate that there are stable agreements in place.

My understand is that the second agreement is the construction agreement. I suppose that any issues of pay and conditions would be dealt with through those agreements. Our view on that is that we would welcome all parties coming together and trying to get those agreements in place across all areas. As we look at our counterparts across Europe, we see that these agreements are in place.

Again, there are dispute resolution mechanisms within those agreements. As the industry is maturing, we see that growth. The growth from 2019 to 2021 was huge. It was a 40% increase in that time despite it being the second year of a pandemic. The sooner we can get to that point, across any areas where there are concerns, that is the method by which, typically, the industry deals with pay and conditions. That should be fair and proportionate-----

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

We need to see movement on that. We are all in agreement. Can I ask a very simple question?

Chairman

It had better be quick because the Deputy is already way over time.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I know that. It is about the work that is done on due diligence in the context of section 481. A while ago we had a production that was up and running and that subsequently fell on its backside. I would have thought there would have been an element of due diligence that needed to be done to ensure that funding was in place before anyone thought about providing State money for the production. Will our guests explain, in 30 seconds, how that could have happened?

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Sure. The first thing is Screen Ireland had no direct involvement-----

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I know.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

-----in terms of funding with that project, so we would not have an awareness as to how the process was managed, but we are aware of it because this is a small industry. Our understanding is that production is back up and running-----

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

All right.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

-----which we are all very pleased to see. It is very rare to see something like that happen. It was something that came up during the pandemic whereby we had concerns and looked at the potential for abandonment of productions when there was so much that was unknown, but it is very rare.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Ms Finnegan thinks there is going to be a decent throughput of productions into the near future.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Absolutely. We opened a presence in Los Angeles with the consular office there and we have a team member out there. When it comes to bringing international production in, he is very active in speaking with all the international partners to try bring them to Ireland but also to support Irish productions, companies and talent and to deepen relationships, particularly with US partners, since that is a global hub for the industry.

Chairman

I put to Screen Ireland the same question I put to the last group regarding regional uplift, its perspective on that, the fact that it has declined recently and the importance of it.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

I will take this first maybe, and Ms McGrane may wish to jump in. It is incredibly important to Screen Ireland that the growth the industry is experiencing is nationwide and across the country. The regional uplift was a very effective intervention at the time but we feel it did not fully meet its policy objective to build a permanent pool of talent outside the hub of Dublin-Wicklow. We have had a very strong, positive working relationship with the Department of Finance and, in particular, with the Department with responsibility for culture in the context of trying to bring the industry together and understand what might be the next intervention that might be slightly more precisely targeted.

Chairman

Would Ms Flanagan say the pandemic period was the best time to make that type of decision on the mechanism of the regional uplift?

Ms Désirée Finnegan

For making the decision.

Chairman

That decline from 5% to 2% happened during a pandemic.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Okay.

Chairman

Ms Finnegan said the industry has been undergoing a boom. That is fair enough, but the regionality aspect brings a bit more complexity to the issue. Judging whether the mechanism works or not during a pandemic is complex. I am not saying Screen Ireland is writing it off, but is it appropriate to draw a line under the uplift as a mechanism in that context or should we give it another go?

Ms Teresa McGrane

Will I take that up?

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Yes.

Ms Teresa McGrane

The Department of Finance extended it by a year during the pandemic, so, if you like, we lost a year during the pandemic when production shut down but we gained that other year. What we felt about the regional uplift, which is now in its dying days as we go into the 2%, is that it was a fantastic initiative for pushing production out of Dublin and Wicklow and developing the production base around the country. A further issue arose which is that it was initially linked to a state aid map. That map has just changed again this year for next year so it is questionable, even if it had not tapered off, how valuable it could be. It was going to be rather messy and chaotic as to what was going to be included and excluded.

Chairman

What does Ms McGrane mean when she says the state aid map has changed?

Ms Teresa McGrane

I mean the state aid map it was linked to originally. When the original EU approval came through, it was linked to a state aid regional map. Unfortunately, that excluded Cork. It just so happens that we always have a lot of production which favours going to Cork. That state aid map has changed so of course the change----

Chairman

Of course, but the state aid map does not redraw the picture regarding which areas are considered more prosperous or more active in particular industries.

Ms Teresa McGrane

But it was linked to the regional uplift, so, again-----

Chairman

I am sorry, but my point is that the new state aid map will not be so massively out of line with the original one. It will be a revision.

Ms Teresa McGrane

Actually it was. It was quite different in where-----

Chairman

In what way?

Ms Teresa McGrane

-----production would happen. For example, the state aid map in Limerick was quite bitty. The old state aid map included all of County Limerick whereas the new one did not. As a result, for film production, it was going to become a bit more difficult. We had two things happening, one of which was the state aid map changing and the other being that the regional uplift tapered down to 2%. What we have seen this year is a complete drop-off in productions making the decision to move out of Dublin and Wicklow.

Chairman

It has gone down to 2%, so will-----

Ms Teresa McGrane

It goes down to 2% next year.

Chairman

Okay, so it is down at 3% now.

Ms Teresa McGrane

It is at 3% at the moment.

Chairman

Would that not indicate we have reached a threshold where it does not pay?

Ms Teresa McGrane

Absolutely.

Chairman

Maybe it should go up to 5% then.

Ms Teresa McGrane

Yes, and what we would like to do now is maybe re-engage with industry and with this committee.

Chairman

Everybody we have talked to has spoken about the importance of that regional uplift.

Ms Teresa McGrane

Yes.

Chairman

That includes the SGI representatives. They outlined why it was important to them. To be honest, I did not understand exactly how it could be as these are project-based undertakings and I would expect people to travel for projects but they outlined clearly how it works very well for them. The producers stated that it works for them. Everybody was saying why it works for them. I am not really sure why we are not doing it, or at least why we are deciding to phase it out.

Ms Teresa McGrane

That is probably a question for other policy-makers.

Chairman

Yes, okay. What I was trying to get at is were the Screen Ireland representatives going to come here and say that it is a no-brainer and that we should be doing it. They are not really saying that though.

Ms Teresa McGrane

Oh no, we are. We are for regional uplift. Considering that we are in a process of the tapering off, however, we would like to go back to the Department of Finance next year and work with industry in the meantime to present a new business case to bring the regional uplift----

Chairman

All things being equal then, would Screen Ireland like the 5% back?

Ms Teresa McGrane

Yes.

Chairman

Okay.

Mr. Gareth Lee

If I may say something on skills, one of the main objectives of the uplift was to develop skills within the regions and we did a job of putting some good structures in place. Were the regional uplift to continue at 5% we are now well-structured to capitalise on that. One of the things we have launched in recent years is a number of talent academies around the country that are in place to potentially support the uplift, were it to continue. We have also developed very strong collaborative links with third-level providers around the country as well. If it were to continue we would be in a very good place to capitalise on all that.

Chairman

I thank the representatives.

Deputy Patricia Ryan

I apologise. I had to leave the room for a few minutes. Without being repetitive, everybody here has mentioned employment and the issues around it. This is a matter we need to come back to. We definitely need to have more clarity and answers. That said, I am going to move on.

I have two questions I am going to go through consecutively because of the time constraints. Ms Finnegan's referred to the increase in the number of Irish language productions. How important is section 481 in this regard? Also, do we know what percentage of productions are in the Irish language and what the figure was prior to section 481?

The other question is a brief one. Screen Ireland has taken on the role of developing and overseeing a new process for tracking, training and skills development opportunities on section 481 and its funded projects, which is a requirement of the tax credit. How is this work going and what challenges has Screen Ireland faced?

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Section 481 has been critical to funding Irish language film. There has been a resurgence, which people have also described as a new dawn, in Irish language cinema. The work that has been generated is incredible. When we talk about cultural dividend we see projects such as "An Cailín Ciúin", "Arracht" which came before it and which we believe is the first time the famine was ever depicted on screen in that way, and "Róise & Frank", which is a third project that has come through. We believe that section 481 is absolutely critical to that. It was also part of the scheme called Cine4, which was a partnership between TG4, the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, and Screen Ireland. It has really shown the creative talent that exists there and the impact it can have. To see a film generate Ireland on screen the way it did, and to show that it can get huge audiences across multiple generations, is something very rare. There are very young people going to see it but also up through the generations. To see the critical response and the reviews across the UK, and it is to be released in the US, and ultimately to see how it fares in awards is huge. Section 481 is highly important to that process.

Mr. Gareth Lee

On the skills, I cannot emphasise enough to the committee how positive and rewarding the experience has been to be involved in the process. As Ms McGrane referred to earlier, Ireland is the first country in the world to link such a structured skills tracking process to the tax credit. We are the first country in the world to develop a competency framework for crew within the sector. We are doing extremely pioneering work as Ms McGrane mentioned. Other territories have come to talk to us to see the work that we are doing and in particular with the competency framework. We have had lots of inquiries about that. As for challenges, because we are doing pioneering work we are, to a certain extent, learning as we go. It is evolving. That has always been our approach, namely, how can we evolve and enhance the process to make sure it is working the best it can and to make sure it is as inclusive as possible. We are always enhancing and we are open to enhancing that.

Deputy Patricia Ryan

Is Screen Ireland finding answers to the challenges as it goes through them and gets through them?

Mr. Gareth Lee

Absolutely. We are always looking to enhance. The challenge is we do not necessarily have a template to copy. Other sectors have things in place but there are aspects of our sector that we must address through the work that we do. There are no other screen sectors internationally to copy. That pioneering side of it is probably the most challenging bit.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

On the Irish language, Screen Ireland has also been working for quite some time on a cultural dividend report. We went out to tender and commissioned a report by Olsberg, international entertainment industry consultants that work globally, to assess both the cultural dividend and the industry development value of section 481. It was a much more complicated undertaking than we had anticipated because cultural value manifests itself in a variety of ways, many of which can be quite hard to quantify. We hope to have that report imminently to share with the committee. One of the aspects I found very interesting in the report is a key finding around the Irish language. They applied a framework to assess cultural value across intrinsic, institutional and instrumental values. Within one of those instrumental values they talk about how it works to encourage, promote and preserve the Irish language. They surveyed a number of individuals across the Irish public. Respondents under the age of 35 were more likely to say that Irish screen content encouraged people to be proud of the Irish language and made them want to learn the Irish language or speak it more frequently. The report also went on to comment that projects made in the Irish language have an especially important cultural and educational role in helping to engage people of all ages and especially learners. We thought that was a very interesting takeaway from the report.

Deputy Patricia Ryan

If we wanted to have a look at that report is it available?

Ms Désirée Finnegan

Absolutely. We asked to try to get it in time for our appearance before the committee today. We are told that it is just in the finishing stages. We hope to have it as quickly as possible. Perhaps we could follow up with the committee just to understand the timeline it has and we will do everything we can to get it to the committee.

Deputy Patricia Ryan

I thank Ms Finnegan.

Chairman

We would very much appreciate if Screen Ireland could send on that report when it is completed. I am trying to finish on time but are there any quick follow-up questions from the remaining Deputies?

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I do not believe there is any dispute among any of us, notwithstanding all of the debates, about the need to invest in Irish language film, to invest in the film industry and to invest in the very talented crew, performers and artists that we have in this country. There was no dispute about that. I would like to see more money going in, not less. The big question that I feel is unanswered comes back to this issue of work being project by project. At the end of the day it comes back to that notion. It is a mantra I hear repeated. I question it, to be honest. Of course it is project to project. So are plays. The plays that go on in the Abbey Theatre, are project to project. Just about every form of artistic endeavour is project to project at a certain level. There seems to be a unique conclusion drawn with regard to live-action film that because it is project by project, nobody can have a job. In every other area where work is project to project, people have jobs. Uniquely in live-action film nobody can have a job. I do not accept that, to be blunt about it. It involves two groups of people. From the point of view of the actors, I perceive we are saying "We know that because of the nature of acting we cannot have a permanent job but we want the full remuneration for our performance. That is what we want but we are not getting it." That is what Equity is telling us. Then there is the crew. There is an idea that the crew are in the same position as the actors but there are different requirements. It is different. There is an idea that one must get rid of set painters, stagehands, drivers or prop makers every time a project is finished with absolutely no security for them getting onto the next production. It must be remembered that much of this is funded with public money, which is in fact their money and taxpayers' money. Both groups emphasised that this is taxpayers' money. I just do not accept that. I do not see why it is necessary, based on the assertion that it is project to project. It is not the case anywhere else. This also relates to the question of trainees. I get that things have moved on; it is partly because some of those groups have come in here and raised these issues that things have moved on. If I understand it correctly, while Screen Ireland is assessing that there may be some training going on in film production, we do not know if those trainees will be employed on the next production by that same film producer. Am I right in saying that? Also, there is no accreditation for their training. Unlike an apprentice carpenter or bricklayer there is no point at which we can say they are qualified in a particular occupation.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I have a follow-on question. Obviously, the project to project idea creates that power differential issue that we need to deal with, whether it is the actors or the crew. If we could get around that piece we could deal with the collective bargaining issues and some form of representation, in whatever forum that it needs to be, so we can bridge that gap and that power differential. Perhaps there could be a database or whatever, so there is a recording of all of those people involved and maybe it would have their skill set, an element of their CV, and who is working where, and that sort of detail. Then we could track the training across the board by having that information.

That also provides us with an overview of the industry that taxpayers' money is going into. Then we can get the best bang for our buck, for all of us.

Ms Désirée Finnegan

I will respond to the first question from Deputy Boyd Barrett. On a site, there are often different crew requirements for different projects. A massive large-scale sci-fi production will require certain crew, whereas a location-based romantic comedy, for want of a better example, would have a very different requirement. That is our understanding from talking to the screen guilds that represent thousands of crew. Even within this report there is an element about quality employment. Olsberg has applied a framework to look at what constitutes quality employment in terms of meaningful work. Over 50% of people within the sector have been working in it for more than ten years. That would suggest there is a form of stability there. The ability to go from project to project with different employers each time is part of the nature of the industry we are in. I know that sounds repetitive. With regard to pay and conditions, it is through industry agreements that that dynamic is managed appropriately. Everybody, hopefully, comes out of those agreements with fair and proportionate remuneration and feels they work well. Where there are disputes, there is a mechanism within those agreements to address those.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Would it be fair to say we need a better framework to deliver this?

Ms Désirée Finnegan

I feel it requires all parties to those negotiations to come together and negotiate.

Chairman

On that note, I will draw the meeting to a close. I thank the witnesses for attending. It has gone late and I apologise for that. I thank the witnesses for their time and the members for staying.

The select committee adjourned at 8.42 p.m. until 5.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 19 October 2022.