I am pleased to open this debate on the Broadcasting (Funding) Bill 2003. This Bill is a core element in the programme of public service broadcasting reforms which I announced in December last year. It provides for the allocation of 5% of the net proceeds of the television licence fee, approximately €8 million annually, to a scheme to fund new programmes on television and radio. This initiative will increase the availability of high quality programmes on television and radio in both the public and private broadcasting sectors. The scheme will be available for new programmes on Irish culture, heritage and experience. It will also deliver new programmes to improve adult literacy and additional Irish language programming.
In recent years the debate on broadcasting in Europe has been dominated to a significant degree by issues related to digital television. The debate has focused on what technology will win out or what business model is most likely to succeed. Some people have criticised the lack of progress in this area. They advance simplistic and baseless arguments. They ignore the spectacular failures of a number of pay DTT platforms. They ignore the rights issues which our broadcasters would face on many digital platforms. They ignore the complex realities and the substantial cost to put up a DTT platform. I do not have that luxury because I must live in the real world, with real policies affecting real people.
My bottom line is that I want digital platforms for Ireland which work. There is no point rushing to mimic the pay DTT platforms which have lost billions or rushing to mimic the satellite platforms where copyright issues would entail huge financial and ultimately programming losses for Irish broadcasters. I have instructed my officials to assess the options for rolling out digital television services in Ireland, in particular the options related to digital terrestrial television. This consideration is being informed by international experience, including the spectacular failure of a number of pay DTT platforms. My Department is consulting with industry and will report to me by the end of the year. I want whatever solution emerges to include the possibility of a broadband offering. This will improve the economics of the platform. It will also provide much needed cross-platform competition in the broadband sector and it could provide universal broadband connectivity. This is especially relevant to rural Ireland where the market is not addressing broadband demand.
While these issues are of consequence, it is important to remember that television is primarily about content. What is important is what people actually have available to them to listen to and to watch. It matters little to viewers whether radio and television services are delivered from a satellite, over a wire or by terrestrial means. Audiences are interested in programming. The core aim of the broadcasting fund is simple. It is to provide Irish audiences with more high quality programming. Recent experience in the case of the development of digital television is worth considering. The most striking aspect of digital terrestrial television has been the explosion in the number of channels on offer to viewers. Unfortunately, this has not resulted in an equivalent increase in the choice of programming available to viewers. It is true that many new channels provide more choice. There are specialised news, sports, history and music channels, for example. These channels meet a demand that exists for such specialised services. However, as they are generally only available on a subscription basis, access is restricted to those who are willing to pay and can afford to do so. It is also true that many extra channels just offer more of the same. There is a genuine concern that the digital era will result in fragmentation. This could result in viewers being offered more channels while being offered less real choice as broadcasters increasingly move towards a generic schedule in pursuit of the most economically advantageous audiences. In that scenario society would be the loser. Having regard to these developments the introduction of the fund is timely. The aim of the fund is to encourage broadcasters, who cater for Irish audiences, to include in their schedules additional programming of a high quality that is of interest and relevance to Irish audiences.
The Government decision to introduce the broadcasting fund was taken at the same time as the decision to significantly increase the public funding available to RTE through the television licence fee. These two measures should be considered together. The decision to substantially increase the level of public funding for RTE was a clear indication of the Government's commitment to the principle of public service broadcasting. It was also a clear indication of the Government's resolve that the people of Ireland should continue to be guaranteed a minimum level of high quality programming that is of interest and relevance to an Irish audience. I am of the view that as we move increasingly to a digital era there remains a compelling case for providing the national public service broadcaster with adequate funds to continue to deliver the type of service that Irish audiences deserve and expect.
RTE's services must continue to be available to all of the population and delivered without charge. As RTE is owned by the people, it exists to serve the people and it must be available to all the people for free.
I fundamentally disagree with those who argue that with the explosion in new services there is no longer a need for intervention by the State. Nor can I agree with those who suggest that State funded broadcasters should be limited to delivering a restrictive range of outputs. RTE's mandate requires it to provide radio and television services for all the people. I see no justification for revising this legislative mandate.
RTE should not be restricted to providing niche programming for a small proportion of the population. I have no doubt that the shape and range of services provided by public broadcasters will continue to be adjusted as these broadcasters react to changes in the environment in which they operate. Decisions on what to include in schedules should continue to be based on how best to serve the person who pays the licence fee. It would be over simplistic to expect that decisions would be based simply on whether the same service was already being provided by other broadcasters. Many other factors would have to be considered, including whether the service is available free of charge and available to all of the population; does the broadcaster need such a service to engage with certain elements of its audience; the impact of the programming in attracting the audience to other parts of the schedule; and remaining relevant to the audience.
Decisions on scheduling are complex and are best left to the broadcaster. Such decisions should be driven by a consideration of how to best serve the audience and should not be influenced by the commercial concerns of independent broadcasters. The decision to establish the broadcasting fund should be seen in the context of the Government's commitment to ensure Irish audiences continue to have access to high quality programming that is of interest and relevance to them.
The Government has acted in two ways. It has increased the level of public funding available to RTE. It has also proposed the creation of the fund to encourage all broadcasters serving Irish audiences to include additional high quality programming in their schedules that would be of interest to Irish audiences.
The emphasis on additionality is central to the fund and it will be a fundamental criterion of eligibility for funding. Programmes funded must be in addition to the existing requirements on broadcasters and in addition to their existing outputs. The scheme will also be used to fund the development of archiving of television and radio programme material. This is a follow-up on one of the recommendations of the forum on broadcasting which reported to me last year. The forum highlighted the lack of a co-ordinated approach or overall direction to the archiving of programme material at present, and the variety of agencies already involved in the archiving of audio-visual material generally, including for example the National Archives, the Irish Film Board and the Irish Traditional Music Archive.
The Bill provides the legislative framework for the scheme, which will be prepared and administered by the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland. It does not set out the detail of the scheme itself, such as grant rates, allocation of funding to various categories, or assessment criteria and procedures. That detail will be developed as the scheme is put together, and the final scheme or schemes will be subject to my approval, and will be laid before each House of the Oireachtas.
It may be useful to Senators to have some idea of the timeframe envisaged for the scheme. It is my hope that the legislation will be enacted before the end of the year. This will enable 5% of the net television licence fees for 2003 to be allocated to the scheme. It will also enable the Broadcasting Commission to begin preparation of the scheme in the new year. I envisage the scheme, because of its complexity and the intention to consult widely, will take some months to complete. It will then have to be put to the European Commission for approval as a State aid. Following such approval and my formal agreement, the scheme will be published and applications will be invited, hopefully early in the second half of 2004. Time must then be allowed for interested parties to develop and submit proposals, and for applications to be assessed. I hope audiences will begin to enjoy the new programmes on radio and television in 2005. Once the legislation is enacted the fund will come into being. In the period in which the detail of the scheme is being decided and applications sought the fund will continue to grow.
I turn to the detail of the short Bill, which has nine sections. It sets out the framework for and objectives of the scheme, the amounts to be paid to the scheme, the details of the scheme to be included in annual reports and accounts of the Broadcasting Commission, and it provides for the contingency of the winding up and dissolution of the scheme.
Section 1 is a standard provision which gives definitions for the purposes of the Bill. Section 2 provides, as I have already mentioned, that the Broadcasting Commission will prepare and submit for my approval a scheme or schemes to support new television or radio programmes on Irish culture, heritage and experience; new television or radio programmes to improve adult literacy; programmes under both of these categories in the Irish language; and the development of archiving of programme material.
With a view to ensuring the widest audience within the State, television programmes may be funded only if broadcast on a free television service which provides near universal coverage or on a cable or MMD system, as part of a community content contract. Radio programmes may only be funded if broadcast on RTE or on services licensed by the Broadcasting Commission. This means the fund may support additional programming on the three pillars of Irish broadcasting. It will be open to the fund to finance programming carried on national, local and community services. As an effort to increase the range of broadcast programmes, funding is specifically not available for news or current affairs programmes.
For reasons relating to EU legislation, it is not possible to construct the legislation so that the scheme is available only to broadcasters based in Ireland, such as radio and television services licensed by the Broadcasting Commission or to RTE services. The important aspect is that as a result of the scheme, more high quality new programmes will be widely available to Irish audiences. The fund is not for broadcasters but for the audience.
Section 2 also provides that I, as Minister, may direct the commission to amend or revoke a scheme. This could arise, for example, where the operation of a scheme turns up particular anomalies, difficulties or unintended effects. The Bill also provides powers to direct the commission to prepare a particular scheme, if for example it had not put forward for approval a scheme covering any one of the categories previously mentioned. The section finally provides that any scheme approved by me will be laid before each House of the Oireachtas.
Section 3 sets out the objectives of the scheme. In regard to programmes on Irish culture, heritage and experience, these are to develop high quality programmes; develop these programmes in the Irish language; increase the availability of such programmes to audiences; represent the diversity of Irish culture and heritage; record oral heritage and aspects of heritage which are disappearing, under threat or which have not been previously recorded; and develop local and community broadcasting.
The objective of the development of archiving of programme material is to develop an integrated approach, including the development of suitable storage processes and formats and the accessing of material by interested parties. An objective for adult literacy programmes is not included in this section as there is already a specific reference to it in section 2. My colleague the Minister for Education and Science will be closely involved in this particular aspect of the scheme, in regard to the national adult literacy strategy under the national development plan.
Section 4 provides for annual payments to the scheme of 5% of net television licence fee receipts. This will amount to an annual payment to the scheme of approximately €8 million. At present the full value of the licence fee receipts, less collection costs, goes to RTE to fund its public broadcasting service. The 5% payment will be for the purposes of the scheme and any administration or reasonable expenses relating to it. Costs to the Broadcasting Commission of administration are estimated at about €400,000 per year.
Section 5 requires the Broadcasting Commission to review and report on the operation, impact and effectiveness of the scheme every three years, or at such other time as may be requested by me. If necessary following such a review the scheme can be amended or revoked under section 2, either on the commission's own volition or on my direction, and the ultimate option of winding up the scheme is provided for in section 7.
Section 6 provides that details of the scheme will be provided in the commission's annual report and in a special account in its annual accounts. The Radio and Television Act 1988 referred to is the primary legislation relating to the commission.
Section 7 provides for the winding up and dissolution of the scheme. This is included as a last resort provision, in that once the scheme is wound up and dissolved by order it ceases to exist and cannot be revived. Section 2 already allows for the fine-tuning of the scheme over time by means of amendments or revocations. Winding up the scheme will require the consent of the Minister for Finance and the dissolution order will be laid before each House of the Oireachtas.
Section 8 is a standard provision that the expenses incurred by the Minister in the administration of the Act will be paid out of moneys provided by the Oireachtas. Section 9 sets out the short title of the Bill.
This concludes the run through of the Bill's provisions. Senators will, I hope, see it as straightforward and non-controversial and give it their support. I look forward to hearing their observations on the Bill in the debate. I commend the Bill to the Seanad.