Vol. 534 No. 4
30 Mr. McGinley asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage Gaeltacht and the Islands if she has obtained an independent evaluation of RTE's application for a licence fee increase; and when she expects to bring the final proposals to Government. [10767/01]
As I indicated previously, RTE lodged a formal outline application with me on 5 October 2000 for an increase of £50 in the television licence fee. On 31 October 2000, RTE lodged detailed documentation in support of the application. My Department engaged PriceWaterhouseCoopers to advise on the application.
The consultants' report was received in late January 2001. During the course of their work, PriceWaterhouseCoopers sought and received a considerable amount of further information from RTE in support and justification of its application. The report identified a number of significant issues with the RTE application that were not resolved by the further information supplied by to the consultants. These issues were of sufficient significance as to preclude any submission by me to Government in the absence of additional information from RTE.
I have had meetings with the chairman of the authority arising from the findings in the consultants' report. The director general of RTE was present at one of these meetings. In addition, at my request, PriceWaterhouseCoopers met the chairman and senior management of RTE to set out the type of information that RTE needs to provide in the form of an additional submission to address the issues identified by the consultants. RTE has indicated that the additional information will be supplied towards the end of this month.
I wish to bring this matter to Government for decision at the earliest possible date. However, I cannot consider doing so until RTE has provided the necessary additional information and it has been objectively and independently examined.
I thank the Minister for her reply, but, obviously, there has not been much progress since the matter was last discussed in the House. Is the Minister familiar with the report in today's Irish Independent which states that she “carpeted” RTE for what it calls a “cock up” in its application? It is strong language. The report also states that the Minister expressed her annoyance at the meeting to which she referred between her and the chairman of the authority and the director general of RTE, both of whom are honourable gentlemen. Such conduct would unbecome the Minister I know.
We are dealing with supplementary questions, Deputy.
If the gentlemen concerned were sensitive souls, would they take the Minister's conduct as subtle intimidation? Will the Minister give me, the other spokespersons and the Committee on Heritage and the Irish Language copies of RTE's application and the PriceWaterhouseCoopers report? What are the deficiencies in the case made by RTE?
I understand there is a newspaper article, but I have not seen it. However, words such as "carpeted" and "cock up" are not ones I use.
Annoyance?
The Deputy is correct that I do not use such words in general political conversation.
They are not very parliamentary.
I agree. There has been some movement since the last parliamentary question about the proposed increase in the licence fee for RTE was tabled. I am sure everybody agrees in the context of public moneys that it is incumbent on me to have the application examined objectively and in detail by consultants. RTE had no problem whatsoever with that move. The consultants feel they cannot report because they are seeking further information from RTE. I understand this information will be supplied by RTE at the end of the month and it will then be possible to have it examined independently.
The additional information relates to issues such as sources, content and scheduling of additional programming; RTE's transformation process; projected capital expenditure; plans for digital television services; cost base going forward; key performance indicators; and transparency of activities, for example, between radio, television, commercial and other activities. This is some of the information that needs to be furnished so that the process can proceed.
I am happy the Minister agrees with our position that there must be transparency and accountability before any increase is granted because it involves public money. However, does the Minister agree any undue delay in dealing with this important matter would mean RTE is left in a state of suspended animation while a revolution in telecommunications takes place around it? It cannot plan for the future until this issue is resolved.
The matter is in the hands of RTE because additional information has been sought from it. It is not a case of any delay on my part or that of the Department. Once the information comes to hand, the consultants I employed can deal with it before the matter is passed on to me. As I said earlier, I am interested in ensuring this matter can be brought to Government at the earliest possible opportunity. However, that cannot be done because I am not in a position to make a decision on the matter until all the facts are to hand. I understand RTE has indicated that the additional information will be supplied to the consultants I appointed by the end of the month. As soon as that information is forthcoming, I will be in a position to consider the case further.
