Vol. 540 No. 3
2 Mr. O'Shea asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage Gaeltacht and the Islands the date on which she received an application from RTE for an increase in the licence fee; when a final decision on the matter will be made; when she will bring proposals to Government; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [20297/01]
4 Mr. McGinley asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage Gaeltacht and the Islands if she has had discussions with members of the RTE authority or executive concerning the licence fee increase application; and when she expects to bring her proposals to Government. [20875/01]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 4 together.
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. That report identified a number of significant issues of concern arising from the consultants' examination of the RTE application which were not resolved by the further information supplied to the consultants. These issues were of sufficient significance as to preclude any submission by me to Government in the absence of additional information and clarification from RTE.
Following a number of meetings with the chairman of the authority, arising from the findings in the consultants report, at my request PricewaterhouseCoopers met the chairman and senior management of RTE to set out the type of information that RTE would need to provide in the form of an additional submission in order to address the issues identified by the consultants. Additional information supplied by RTE in support of its application for an increase in the level of television licence fee was received in my Department on 20 April 2001 and was examined by PricewaterhouseCoopers. Its report on the additional information was received by my Department on 5 June 2001. I have today made arrangements for copies of both reports to be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas.
Having regard to the reports I formed the view I had no option but to adopt a phased approach to the question of a licence fee increase. On 3 July 2001 the Government reached a decision on the application. Based on my recommendations, the Government agreed to an increase of £14.50 in the television licence fee to take effect from 1 September 2001 bringing the colour television licence fee to £84.50 (107) and the monochrome licence to £68.50 (84), and to consider a further increase in the television licence fee from 1 April 2003, subject to prior independent verification that certain conditions have been met.
The intention behind this decision is to enable RTE to continue to provide the existing level of service while maintaining reasonable cash reserves. A very significant proportion of the additional revenue which a £50 increase would generate was proposed by RTE to be spent on improving the level of output and quality of indigenous programming. The Government could not agree to this element of the application because the RTE supporting argument was found to be less than convincing.
It is Government policy that public service broadcasting must be supported and strengthened. However, Government has to be assured that RTE has prepared itself both in its organisation and thinking for the new broadcasting era. Technological developments will allow for the establishment of many extra broadcasters who will compete for the attention of Irish viewers and listeners. Therefore, there must be confidence that additional public moneys provided to RTE through the licence fee will be efficiently spent on improving the quality of services rather than maintaining existing cost bases. Structures must be put in place to ensure that RTE's performance in delivering on its statutory remit is transparent and effective. The Government has deferred further consideration of this element of the RTE application in order to allow it the opportunity to provide such reassurances.
Having regard to the analysis by PricewaterhouseCoopers, the Government also found the case made by RTE to introduce new digital channels to be less than convincing. The Government believes that, as the national public service broadcaster, RTE has a vital role to play in the roll out of such services. The Government wants to see more convincing plans from RTE regarding the introduction of digital channels.
I look forward to receiving in due course its robust submission that will enable the Government to address with confidence RTE's financial requirements. I am satisfied that the Government decision in its entirety represents a satisfactory approach that will seek to ensure the financial viability of RTE in the long-term and render it more accountable without creating unwieldy bureaucratic structures.
Will the Minister ensure Opposition spokespersons are provided with copies of the PricewaterhouseCoopers report? Will she assure the House that what appears to be leaked material, which appeared in the Irish Independent this morning, was not leaked by her or anybody acting on her behalf? Does the Minister agree that the policy adopted by her effectively means RTE will never be able to get into the area of digital terrestrial television in an effective way? Does she agree that competing transmission platforms are absorbing market share and that the critical mass necessary for the RTE project to be viable will not be around in 18 months time and that by deferring any further decision until her Government is long gone out of office, she is, in effect, copping out and leaving RTE in a very bad state financially and without the resources to move forward? The Minister spoke about an independent survey to determine what, if any, organisational changes and resources are needed by RTE in the discharge of its mandate. Will she give the House a categorical assurance that this in no way alludes to editorial policy? What exactly does this mean?
Copies of the report are being made available to the Library this afternoon. The Deputy will have access to them. If he requires a copy, I can get a copy for him. In regard to any leaks, I only had time to read one newspaper this morning and I did not see any leaks but if there are, they are certainly not my doing.
In regard to RTE's digital terrestrial proposals, this is particularly important as we in the Houses of the Oireachtas know having discussed the first broadcasting legislation in 11 years. It referred to the structure of digitalisation and those structures are running to time. What we are referring to here in terms of the digital channels is something far more specific. These proposals were made in the RTE submission looking for funding to be able to progress with digital channels. On independent evaluation of RTE's proposals, it was found by PWC that no strategic approach was available from RTE on that. Far greater detail would be needed before any consideration could be given to funding. I would encourage RTE to come to me as quickly as possible. Perhaps by the end of the year we might be able to see a strategy being put in place with regard to the proposals RTE might have on digitalisation. If so, I would be extremely interested to see those proposals because it is most important that we move forward with new technologies and use them to best effect.
On the licence fee and deferring this decision, this is an interim increase of £14.50. The figure of £14.50 was arrived at in a scientific way based on the application made by RTE which was independently evaluated by PWC. The £14.50 is to cover and ensure the maintenance of existing services and ensure there is not an elimination of cash reserves. The decision of Cabinet was that a number of other issues have to be addressed with regard to the programming, digitalisation and completion of the transformation programme. When these criteria are met, RTE will then have an opportunity to come back to look for a further increase. While I have specific responsibility where broadcasting is concerned, I am also dealing with public moneys which have to be accounted for in a very strategic way and that is why it is most important that a strong case is made and that we can stand over figures, as we can with the £14.50 in this case.
In regard to editorial policy, I do not think any Government would wish to interfere in editorial policy. That is not the intention of this Government. We want to ensure there are resources in place and that there is an opportunity in organisational terms for the authority itself, as opposed to the executive, to carry out its statutory functions. That is why it would be very useful to have an independent look at this. I am sure there would not be any problems with that and that this would be welcomed by any organisation. We might find that there is no need for further resources or a further look at the organisational position. That is up to the independent study that will take place.
Minister, between yourself and Deputy O'Shea you have succeeded in absorbing the 12 minutes allocated for two questions. As Deputy McGinley had tabled one of the questions, in fairness to him—
I would be very disappointed in view of what has happened this week if I did not have the opportunity to ask at least one supplementary question. Obviously, the PWC report was of critical importance for the Minister and the Government in deciding what to do with RTE. The purported conclusions in this morning's newspaper suggested PWC, a highly regarded and eminent firm, has produced a flawed, inadequate and short sighted report based on little or no public and industrial consultation and ignored the digital challenges facing Irish broadcasting of which RTE is at the heart. Will the Minister admit that PWC is no more than a fig leaf of respectability to conceal her own decision to starve RTE into silence? The report is being given to the House this afternoon but, more importantly, will the Minister publish the brief she gave PWC so as least we can find out what her instructions were?
I understand the Minister met the chairman of the authority yesterday. Did the chairman tender his resignation and those of the authority in response to the manifest and public display of zero confidence the Minister has shown in the chairman and the authority which she appointed? Does the Minister believe it will be possible for the chairman and the authority to regain or reaffirm the confidence not only of the public but of their own employees in RTE who are in a state of chaos at the moment? I understand it is like being at a wake out there. They just do not know what is around the corner or what is their future as employees of that organisation.
It is somewhat shocking that a Deputy would cast aspersions on a very eminent firm such as PWC. PricewaterhouseCoopers has not given a flawed report. What it has done is evaluate an application that was made to it directly, and that was its job. I do not think any one in this House is in a position to point a finger at its professionalism. That is quite unwise and unfair when it is not here to defend itself. Its reputation stands for itself.
The Minister's brief—
The Deputy has asked me a number of questions and I do not wish to run out of time before I can answer them.
What was the Minister's brief to PWC?
Deputy McGinley, I ask you to allow the Minister to conclude.
I do not wish to run out of time before I answer the Deputy's questions because he seems to have a great knowledge of the PWC report even though he has not yet had the opportunity to read it. That points to the incredulity of what he has said.
RTE has not had an opportunity to read it either.
On the question of delays, it took six months to obtain the additional information from RTE. I did not receive that information from Pricewaterhouse until June, subsequent to which the Government made a decision on the matter. I invited the chairman to come to see me and I have issued an open invitation to the unions. The answer to the last question posed by the Deputy is "No".
Would the Minister be prepared—
We have spent 14 minutes on these questions and must move on to Question No. 3. The Chair has no discretion in these matters. I call Question No. 3.
—to attend a meeting next week of the Committee on Heritage and the Irish Language to discuss the report ?
I ask the Deputy to give way to the Minister. The Chair is obliged to treat all Deputies fairly and cannot allow one Deputy to exceed time.
The Leas-Cheann Comhairle allowed the Minister to go on.
The Chair has no control over Ministers or Deputies during Priority Questions.
