Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 4 July 2024
69. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance if he will rule out the introduction of a new household charge to be collected by the Revenue Commissioners, instead funding public service broadcasting through direct Exchequer funding; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28770/24]
View answer70. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for Finance if he is planning to abolish the regressive TV licence model; if he will instead consider taxing large multimedia corporations to fund public service broadcasters; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28772/24]
View answerIt is almost two years since the Future of Media Commission published its report recommending the abolition of the television, TV, licence and having a system based entirely on Exchequer funding for public service media and content. The Government has dragged its heels on this issue for far too long. In the meantime, RTÉ has lurched from crisis to crisis and public confidence has waned. It is time for a decision. Will the Minister rule out the introduction of a new household charge to be collected by the revenue as a replacement to the licence fee? Will he instead adopt the recommendations of the Future of Media Commission and ensure that the TV licence is scrapped and that public service media and content is funded through the Exchequer?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 69 and 70 together.
As has been stated on numerous occasions, the Government is committed to the reform of the TV licence. A long-term funding model is needed to deliver effective reform and ensure that a secure, sustainable model of funding is put in place for our public service media. The Government is committed to the introduction of a new sustainable and fair funding model in its term of office. The Future of Media Commission was established to, among other things, consider sustainable public funding models and noted three main funding models, which are a TV Licence, a universal charge, or direct Exchequer funding. In its 2022 report, the commission recommended replacing the TV licence funding model with a direct Exchequer funding model.
Following consideration of the report of the commission in 2022, Government decided not to accept its recommendation to replace the TV licence model with direct Exchequer funding of public service media. Instead, Government decided to reform and enhance the existing funding model, thereby maintaining the link between public service content providers and the public, retaining and building on the existing annual revenue, and guaranteeing the continued independence of the broadcasting sector. To this end, the Government established a technical working group to examine other potential options for the reform and enhancement of the existing system. I understand that the working group submitted its report to the Minister for Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media, Deputy Catherine Martin, last year. While initial discussions on the matter had commenced, the events regarding RTÉ last summer paused a decision on the future direction of public service media funding. Since then, two independent reviews into RTÉ have been completed, carried out by expert advisory committees appointed by Government, the reports of which have recently been published. As the Minister, Deputy Martin, has stated, discussions on the matter are continuing and a final decision on this matter will be made in the coming weeks. It would not be appropriate for me to comment further on the future of this or any reform measures until the Government has completed its full consideration of the matter.
Regarding a tax on large multimedia corporations, which has also been referred to in one of the parliamentary questions, Deputy Murphy will be aware that in 2018 the European Commission proposed a digital services tax based on a €750 million global revenue threshold and an EU-wide €50 million revenue from in-scope services threshold. This proposal, together with other digital taxes proposed elsewhere, was received negatively and as inconsistent with principles of international taxation. Subsequently, negotiations by the OECD and the G20 on reforms to the international system of taxation led to the OECD two-pillar solution to address the tax challenges arising from the digitalisation of the economy in October 2021. I note that pillar 1 of the OECD agreement provides for the standstill and removal of unilateral measures such as digital services taxes. It is important that any proposal for additional taxation avoids raising trade tensions and does not undermine the ongoing development and implementation of the OECD agreement. I believe that a global approach is preferable to unilateral measures like a targeted tax on corporations as is suggested.
I am sure the Minister will acknowledge that public trust in the national broadcaster has been shattered following crisis after crisis and scandal after scandal. We can see that reflected in the licence fee. Of those who are eligible to pay the licence fee, approximately one in three do not pay. That is how much of a drop-off we have, mostly brought on by the RTÉ scandal. The Future of Media Commission identified this is a problem in the future anyway, since fewer people will pay and with a growing population and so on, the State would be paying their portion. It also noted that it is an unfair and regressive charge. It said the fee is the same whether the person earns €20,000 or €200,000. These are the experts that the Government put in place. They recommended that the Government abolish it and fund public sector content through Exchequer funding. The Government has had the report for three years, it has been published for two years and it has still not taken any decisions. I will put it to the Minister directly. As Minister for Finance, has he or is he aware of his Department engaging with Revenue with the potential of collecting a new charge that would apply to TVs?
This is a regressive tax no matter how it is looked at. The poorest eligible household in the country pays €160 and the richest household in the country pays €160. It is a regressive, unjust tax that hundreds of thousands of people are refusing to pay, a number that has increased in the context of the outrage at what was happening at the very top of RTÉ, with massive pay for those at the very top and the behaviour with the spending of public money on flip-flops, exclusive clubs and all the rest. The Minister says here that he cannot comment but he has commented to RTÉ, saying that his preference is for keeping some form of TV licence. Is it not time to stop dragging 60 people to court a day for non-payment of the TV licence, to see the writing on the wall, to scrap this regressive tax, and instead to properly fund RTÉ as opposed to pursuing a privatisation and outsourcing agenda?
I thank the Deputies for their contributions. As I and the Minister, Deputy Martin, have stated, we will make a decision on this in the coming weeks. As a Government, we appreciate and understand the importance of public service media for a well-functioning democracy. It is also essential for cultural development, social cohesion and well-being. As such, it requires a funding model that provides long-term certainty, is sustainable and, vitally, protects the independence of media providers. Such funding is not only crucial for our public service broadcasters, TG4 and RTÉ, but also for independent producers and the wider national, local and community broadcasters.
Any new funding will need to reflect that in the context of public service content. There have been a number of reports and there is ongoing reform of RTÉ, which is important as to why a decision has not been made in the past 12 months. I stated publicly that the vast majority of people continue to pay for their TV licence and should continue to in the system we have at present. This year up to 21 June, 358,000 licences were sold while more than 800,000 were sold last year in total. A majority of people pay and contribute. Both Deputies said to abolish the fee and pay for it centrally but there are pressures on public expenditure across all Departments. When we have a system of contribution for which the majority of people pay, we should not abandon it and look for central government funding. That is why, in my public remarks, I said an ongoing contribution from the public is important in reform.
To answer Deputy Doherty's question, we have not yet decided what that model will be. We are sincere about trying to bring this to a conclusion in the coming weeks. That is what we will do, working with the Ministers, Deputies Martin and Donohoe, the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste.
I asked the Minister a simple question and I ask for a simple answer: has he or his Department engaged with Revenue about the potential of collecting a new charge? Do not force me to put down a freedom of information request; these are questions to the Minister.
This system is broken. One third of households do not pay for the TV licence and 9,000 people are dragged before the courts every year for not paying for the TV licence. The numbers are getting worse as the year goes on. Before there was ever a scandal in RTÉ and confidence in it was shattered, the Government's commission considered international best practice and the best way to fund future media content to make sure there are proper revenues to support jobs in the industry and public service broadcasting. It recommended abolishing the TV licence and funding public service content through Exchequer funding. That is exactly what Sinn Féin would do; we would abolish the TV licence and ensure that the money comes from the Exchequer licence, which would ensure RTÉ and other broadcasters could continue, knowing there is secure funding. Three years on, we still do not have a clue about what the Government plans to do. It has had this report for three years. Has the Minister's Department engaged with Revenue to look at collecting a new charge? Will he answer that question truthfully on the floor of the Dáil? It is not acceptable that he gives more information to RTÉ than to TDs in this House.
The Minister gave the figures for payment levels, suggesting they indicated that the vast majority pay. I think he said 800,000 paid last year and 358,000 had paid halfway through this year. In total, there are 1.8 million households in the State, approximately 500,000 of which are exempt. That leaves 1.3 million households. The Minister said that over a half-year period, 400,000 people paid. That indicates that more than a third refuse to pay the TV licence. People are voting with their feet. He should take the advice given a number of years ago by the Future of Media Commission to get rid of the TV licence. Multiple European countries such as Belgium, France, Iceland and others have scrapped their versions of the TV licence over the past five or six years. The Government should get rid of this regressive charge. I warn the Minister not to replace it with another regressive charge, this time simply collected by Revenue. While we need to increase funding for public service broadcasting, who pays? Is it a regressive, unjust tax on the poorest families in our society or should we tax big social media giants that are parasitical in respect of our main media and effectively suck up advertising? We need a big tech tax on them to fund proper public service broadcasting.
What I said publicly is what I am restating here: a discussion is ongoing. We are committed to the introduction of a new sustainable and fair funding model and will make a decision on that in the coming weeks.
In reply to Deputy Doherty's question, we are exploring all options for a new and reformed funding model with a contribution. As I said, we have not landed on any particular model or system of payment collection regarding the licence fee. We need to fix the system and strengthen compliance. The majority of people pay the TV licence fee, despite the Deputy speaking about a certain number who do not.
The Minister said the vast majority.
The vast majority do pay the TV licence fee. That underpins independence in public service media. We need ongoing support for that to be in a sustainable and long-term funding position. As I said in other domains, I support the ongoing contribution by the public to public service media and the TV licence. We are committed to making a decision on this matter in the coming weeks.
In fiscal terms, the solution to everything is not to just abandon the contribution people make, whether that is tax or the TV licence. We have to pay for the wider expenditure in our State, including public service media. If we were to remove the TV licence or ongoing contribution, that money would have to be found elsewhere. There is not an endless amount that can be allocated to new expenditure lines.
Will the Minister answer the question?
That is why we have to prioritise spending and make sure there is an ongoing contribution. On the Deputy's question, I said we are exploring all options for a reformed funding model.
What does that mean? I asked whether the Minister engaged with Revenue.
That is the answer.
Has the Minister engaged with Revenue or not?
We are exploring all options.
