Priority Questions
1. Deputy Barry Cowen asked the Minister for Communications; Energy and Natural Resources his views on the 30% increase in gas prices over the past year; the actions he will take to keep energy prices down; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43955/12]
Amharc ar fhreagraAs Deputies are aware, I have no statutory function in the setting of gas prices, whether in the regulated or non-regulated parts of the market. Responsibility for the regulation of the gas market is a matter for the Commission for Energy Regulation, CER, which is an independent statutory body. Until 1 October 2011, the CER regulated the Bord Gáis Energy tariffs for its residential and smaller business customers, at which point price regulation for the latter group ended. The regulator still regulates the Bord Gáis Energy tariffs for its residential customers. Prices charged to business gas customers are wholly a commercial and operational matter for the suppliers concerned and the same is the case for non-Bord Gáis Energy suppliers to residential customers. Business and domestic customers can avail of the competitive offerings, including discounts from a number of supply companies.
Concerning the most recent increase, I understand a marginal increase in wholesale international gas prices, which are sterling denominated, did not impact on the increase as much as the deterioration in the euro-sterling exchange rate and increase in gas network tariffs. The upward pressure on gas network tariffs is primarily due to a reduction in gas demand and higher financing costs for Bord Gáis Networks, both of which are related to the financial situation here and abroad. In making its decision, the Commission for Energy Regulation takes account of the need to protect consumers from unnecessary price increases by ensuring that only reasonable legitimate costs are recovered by Bord Gáis Energy.
The Government is concerned at the impact of electricity and gas price increases, especially on vulnerable households. Included in the measures taken by the Government to combat vulnerability to high energy prices is the Better Energy: Warmer Homes Scheme. More than 17,000 low income homes will benefit this year from energy efficiency retrofits under the scheme, resulting in lower energy costs and improved comfort and well-being in the households in question. In addition, the Department of Social Protection provides supports for electricity and gas customers and operates a fuel allowance scheme. Some €464 million was disbursed under these schemes in 2011.
The Commission for Energy Regulation is also working with energy suppliers to ensure vulnerable customers are protected through, inter alia, the installation of pay-as-one-goes meters.
I note the Minister's abdication of responsibility in respect of the role of the Commissioner for Energy Regulation in pricing. On the latest hike in gas prices, it is incredible that in August, when Bord Gáis Energy applied to the Commission for Energy Regulation for a 7.5% increase in residential gas tariffs to commence in October, the regulator not only approved the application but added 1% to the increase requested. The latest hike in gas prices will result in an increase in the average annual bill, which was €700 in 2011, to €1,000 per annum.
As the Minister indicated, the role of the Commission for Energy Regulation is to protect the interests of consumers and act as a brake on the price hiking instincts of utility companies. Against a background of cuts in fuel allowances and the failure on the part of the State, as a major purchaser of energy, to secure discounts, is the Minister satisfied with the role of the regulator? Notwithstanding the Government's best efforts, for example, through retrofitting and the warmer homes scheme, has the regulator acted appropriately in this regard? Do we have a fuel poverty crisis?
What is happening is being driven by events in the Middle East, North Africa and Japan. The particular matter Deputy Cowen raises about the application from gas companies and the decision of the regulator is a function of how rapidly the position is changing. From the date Bord Gáis Energy submitted its application until the delayed date of the regulator's announcement, the position had deteriorated. A major factor in this deterioration was the decreasing value of the euro against sterling. This and geopolitical events have driven recent developments.
Looking back over recent years, the professional modelling system used by the Commission for Energy Regulation does not vary. If, owing to a set of given circumstances, the model provided for a decrease in price, a decrease was awarded. Similarly, increases are awarded where the model indicates they are warranted. I do not have any basis to criticise the modelling used by the regulator based on the advice available to me. For example, in both half years of 2011, the Commission for Energy Regulation did not give any increase and in the previous half year - to 30 September 2010 - the regulator reduced the price by 8%. In one half year in 2008, the regulator increased the tariff by 20% and in one six month period the tariff was increased by 32%. The regulator applies the model impartially.
Does the Minister have an opinion on whether the increases in the tariff are causing fuel poverty?
2. Deputy Michael Colreavy asked the Minister for Communications; Energy and Natural Resources when public information and the consultation process on hydraulic fracturing, fracking, will commence, either EU or Government sponsored; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43959/12]
Amharc ar fhreagraFollowing a request from the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources to conduct research into the environmental implications of hydraulic fracturing in May 2012, the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, published its preliminary high level research into the environmental aspects of shale gas extraction in the form of a small desk based study, which was carried out by the University of Aberdeen. This study found that further research should be undertaken. The terms of reference for more extensive research is being drawn up by a steering group, including representatives from the EPA and Department. The objectives of this further research are to establish what is best practice with respect to hydraulic fracturing, identify all possible environmental risks and ascertain if these risks are manageable.
It is anticipated that following the engagement of the relevant experts, the conduct of the study, including consultation with relevant parties and taking account of relevant international studies, could take in excess of 12 months, leading to a potential publication date in 2014. Until there has been time to consider the second stage of the EPA research, I confirm the use of hydraulic fracturing in exploration drilling will not be authorised. However, should an application to engage in hydraulic fracking be received in future, I also confirm that such an application will be subject to environmental impact assessment, including full public consultation.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply, but I am still confused. The EU Commissioner for energy regulation attended the joint committee dealing with energy matters several weeks ago at which he gave the informal advice that member states should not make a decision for several years on hydraulic fracturing. There are studies being undertaken in Poland and much more information has yet to come to hand. Yesterday the committee met departmental officials, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Good Energies Alliance and much of the discussion centred on how the information is not yet available to make a decision on fracking. Tamboran Resources which declined to attend the committee meeting considers any discussion would not be meaningful at this time, also stating more information is needed. In the September 2012 EU news bulletin for the Irish Brussels office, issue No. 94, I note the Directorate-General for Energy is offering funding to public authorities to organise early stage dialogue with citizens and launch information campaigns on shale gas as a basis for informing decision-making of its potential industrial exploitation. Not only that, but there is a budget of €200,000 to cover five or six hearings, which is 50% of the total eligible costs. Effectively, €400,000 will be spent by public authorities – I am not sure what is meant by "public authority" – to inform the decision-making process and engage in public consultations.
May we have a question, please?
Why are we organising and spending €400,000 on a public information campaign when everyone knows we cannot answer simple questions on whether fracking will damage agriculture, tourism, animal or human health? Is there not a risk that public consultations along these lines and in the absence of full information will cause fear among communities?
The Deputy referred to the Directorate-General for Energy process. Our process has commenced. Under the previous Fianna Fáil Government, a licensing option was issued, which started the clock in our process. That clock will run until November this year. Then the company in question, Tamboran Resources, must present its work programme and, by February next year, decide whether it will apply for an exploration licence. Such a licence does not allow fracking for commercial exploitation purposes. As the Deputy rightly pointed out, there are national and international concerns about the fracking process. Key issues such as well integrity, the pollution of groundwater, the consequences of leaks and blowouts, fracking fluid leaking into aquifers, the disposal of methane, local geology knowledge, the carbon footprint and so forth must be considered. No decision will be made on commercial fracking until all of these issues are understood and the various studies completed. The earliest we expect the information to be on our desk is 2014. Nothing will happen until this information is available.
Will the EU public consultations go ahead?
I have not been briefed on that aspect, but I thank the Deputy for bringing it to my attention. However, if an exploration licence was sought which involved fracking, there would have to be an environmental impact statement and full planning permission required, starting with the local authority and moving up to An Bord Pleanála. There is no question about this. The public will be fully consulted at every stage of the planning process.
3. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his plans to enable the State sector including the ESB to develop the offshore wind industry using European Investment Bank funding or otherwise in view of (details supplied); his views on whether the basis for the development of our renewable energy resource has been funded by the State through Sustainable Energy Ireland, the Department of the Marine, the Marine Institute, the HMRC in UCC and the ESB; his further views on whether his plans for the development of the resources will enable multinational energy corporations, including those based here, to extract profits from the development of this resource with no payback to the Irish taxpayer for their investment in this resource over decades. [43958/12]
Amharc ar fhreagraAs the reply to question is a very long, the Minister may be under time pressure.
Any alleviation of the burden on my shoulders that the Chair can provide for will be welcomed.
In 2011 Ireland had figure of 17.6% for renewable electricity, 3.6% for bio-fuels and 5% for renewable heating, which amounted in total to 6.5% of all energy consumed being generated from renewable sources. The Government is committed, to meet our 2020 binding targets, to increasing the figure for renewable energy to 40% in the electricity sector, 10% in the transport sector and 12% in the heating sector, which together amounts to 16% overall, in line with our target under the EU renewable energy directive.
New renewable electricity generation has been supported to date in Ireland by the AER and REFIT schemes. These schemes which provide guaranteed floor prices for renewable electricity are financed through the public sector obligation, PSO, levy that is funded by all electricity consumers and not through direct Exchequer funding.
Separate to the schemes mentioned which underpin delivery of our renewable electricity target, there has been a certain level of public funding allocated as research funding to the wave and tidal energy sector in recent years. This sector is still at the research and development phase and is not yet commercially viable anywhere in the world.
Ocean energy was recently identified as a priority area in the research prioritisation exercise undertaken by the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, given its potential for the development of a future industrial sector. The development of ocean energy sources has been pursued in line with the 2006 ocean energy strategy published by the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources. The Hydraulics and Maritime Research Centre, HMRC, in Cork has a wave test tank where early stage devices can be tested and has developed a systematic protocol for the scaling up and testing of wave technology. In addition, ocean energy research is engaged in at certain third level education institutions.
The Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, ocean energy development unit has encouraged the ocean energy sector, including through the administration of a prototype development fund of grants, whereby up to 50% co-funding for scale testing and other research in the ocean area has been provided for industry.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
SEAI, together with the Marine Institute, has been involved in the development of the Galway Bay wave test site and the Marine Institute, together with IBM, has been involved in the SmartBay project, creating ICT links side by side with the development of ocean energy technologies.
The number of long-term sustainable jobs that new renewable energy projects can deliver depends on a variety of factors. The employment figures quoted by the Deputy are estimates based on a variety of assumptions. A 2009 report by the Irish Wind Energy Association, IWEA, entitled, Jobs and Investment in Irish wind energy, estimated that the wind energy sector in Ireland can support 1.5 jobs per MW installed. At the end of 2011, 17.6% of our electricity was from renewable sources, with approximately 1900 MW installed. At an EU level, the European Wind Energy Association analysis found that at European level there were 15 jobs created per MW. Wind turbine and component manufacturing provide the majority of employment opportunities, representing 12 of the 15 jobs created in the European Union for every MW installed.
The ability to harness a high level of employment from renewable energy projects depends, to a large extent, on related industry such as turbine and cable manufacturing industry being based in Ireland. This would only occur if renewable electricity access to the much larger UK market was achieved as the Irish market on its own would not sustain such investments. The potential for export of renewable electricity was outlined in the strategy for renewable energy 2012-20 which I published earlier in the year.
The mechanisms by which renewable energy can be traded with another country are provided for under the renewable energy directive in articles relating to co-operation mechanisms. The use of these co-operation mechanisms under the directive requires formal agreement between two or more governments. I have had a number of bilateral discussions with my UK counterpart in this regard and we are actively exploring the possibility of trade in renewable energy between the two jurisdictions, with a view to reaching a memorandum of understanding by the end of the year.
A key principle for me in the event of export of Ireland’s renewable energy resources is to ensure an adequate return for the State from such activity. In the event, for example, that renewable power was being exported to the United Kingdom, for example, it will be necessary to ensure the costs associated with new transmission infrastructure to export the power and the cost of a support scheme for renewable developers are paid for by UK consumers, rather than Irish consumers. If the Government decides to enter an intergovernmental agreement under the directive with the UK or any other Government, it will ensure sufficient return and benefits to the State from such projects. This would likely include either a share of the renewable value of the projects or the imposition of a financial royalty type payment on exporting projects. Wind energy projects typically pay around €7,000 per MW installed to the local authority as a rates payment every year. On top of this, most projects typically pay between €1,000 and €1,500 per annum as a community benefit fund to the local community in return for any inconvenience caused in the locality. The export royalty payment which would be made directly to central government would be in addition to these existing payments.
The State energy companies, notably the ESB and BGE, are already engaged in the renewable energy sector. Further investments by these companies in the sector would be a matter for them, taking account of their commercial remit.
My question was about how the State would benefit from our substantial resources with reference to wave, wind and tidal energy, particularly as Ireland has one third of all renewable resources in north-west Europe. Decades ago the Minister was one of the stalwarts and leading lights in the resources protection group which produced some good material about our oil and gas industries, as well as the robbery anticipated in that regard. Now we have many private companies slobbering over the opportunities to profit from our wave, wind and tidal resources. What will the Minister do to protect these resources which could be used to benefit all of the people? Last night there was a meeting in Mullingar at which farmers were asked for sites for wind turbines for Mainstream Renewable Power and other energy groups. What does the Minister have to say about this company which is headed up by former Labour Party members Brendan Halligan and Eddie O’Connor and which stands to make substantial profits, potentially tens of billions of euro, from this resource? What is the Minister doing to ensure the people will benefit from it rather than private companies?
I apologise to Deputy Daly. The remainder of my answer deals with all of this but she must wait to read it on the record. Anyway, it deals with the matter at some considerable length.
Somehow, I doubt it.
I know the Deputy would prefer to have all the information. What am I doing to protect our indigenous wind resources? Potentially, we have the capacity to generate perhaps twice our own requirement. We would only do this if we had a market for the excess; otherwise, there would be no point. Generally speaking, one cannot store electricity. If there were a market then there would be potential for us to develop an export sector in this area.
I have been involved in discussions for some time with my opposite number in Britain. The objective is to conclude a memorandum of understanding by the end of this year to facilitate export from this island to the neighbouring island. Theoretically, it could be a win-win situation if we can generate excess renewable energy in this island and if the neighbouring island has a need for energy and a requirement to meet renewable energy targets. What is in it for Ireland? I assure the Deputy that it is not my intention that Ireland will get some jobs in construction and making the sandwiches. That is not the approach I am taking. I trust we will be able to make an agreement whereby the State retains a share of the renewable energy value or imposes some type of royalty.
It is somewhat unfair of the Deputy to seek to slander the particular company she mentioned. She alleges there are people with Labour Party membership in their present or past and that they are trying to rip off the wind. Eddie O'Connor has a proud tradition in this country, whether as an engineer in the ESB, as chief executive of Bord na Móna, as the founder and creator of Airtricity or, now, as the founder of Mainstream Renewable Power.
Minister, I am afraid we are out of time.
Would that we had more entrepreneurs like him.
I am afraid I must insist.
I was only getting off the runway.
I regret that when God created the world he gave a great deal of time with no limit, but this House is different; there are time limits. We must move on to the next question.
4. Deputy Barry Cowen asked the Minister for Communications; Energy and Natural Resources his views on whether all television viewers will make the switch from analogue to digital television in advance of the 24 October 2012 deadline; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43956/12]
Amharc ar fhreagraAt the start of the national digital switchover information and awareness campaign in October 2011, approximately 250,000 households had to make the switch to digital television. These households were solely reliant on the analogue television network, which is switching off in 13 days' time, at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 24 October. Households that use only pay television platforms, such as Sky or UPC, are not affected by the analogue switch-off. They amount to a little over 1,300,000 households, or 82.1%, according to the latest ComReg quarterly report.
As part of the digital switchover information campaign, Millward Brown Lansdowne has been undertaking regular research on the number of analogue-only households which have yet to make the switch. I informed the Deputy in a reply to a Parliamentary Question on 18 September 2012 that in August 2012 approximately 200,000 homes in the country were still using the analogue television network for their primary television reception. Since then, two further research exercises have taken place. On 2 October I announced encouraging results from a Millward Brown Lansdowne tracking study on the digital television switchover which was carried out between 10 September and 20 September. This research showed that between mid-August and mid-September some 50,000 viewers who were reliant on analogue television network made the switch to digital television, leaving approximately 150,000 still to make the switch. Awareness of the digital switchover has increased by 1% to 94%, with awareness among users who are reliant on analogue - the main target group - even higher at 97%. Awareness that it is happening this month is at 92%, an increase of 10%.
I decided further research was needed to take into account the recent national digital switchover week, which ran from 17 September to 23 September. This research was carried out between 21 September and 3 October. The findings show that the estimated number of households that need to switch in October is 100,000, down from 150,000 at mid-September; there is now 99% awareness among analogue users; and minds are becoming more focused on the actual date, with six in ten people who are aware of the switchover nominating 24 October without being prompted. Further findings are available on www.goingdigital.ie.
The above positive trends in switchover numbers and awareness show that the digital switchover public information campaign, which began in October 2011, is successfully providing information on what is happening, the timeframes involved and the choices available to upgrade to digital. It is assisting people to make the switch to digital. This comprehensive campaign includes advertising on television and local radio stations; an analogue marker to act as a constant reminder to everyone using the analogue service to switch to digital; a dedicated website, www.goingdigital.ie; research; a national telephone helpline; and an information booklet delivered to every household in the country by final week in July.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
Furthermore, feedback from the national digital switchover outreach programme, which I established earlier this year, is positive; people know what is taking place but they are inclined to leave switching over until close to the switch-off date. This mirrors what has happened in other European countries which have successfully achieved analogue switch-off.
While the recent research figures are encouraging and the indications are that viewers are making the switch in big numbers, there are still 100,000 households that have yet to make the switch. With only 13 days to go, I call on the public and Deputies to give a helping hand to friends, relatives and neighbours who may need assistance with the switch to ensure they are not without a television signal after 10 a.m. on Wednesday 24 October.
I remind people that regardless of the digital switchover, there is a statutory obligation to hold a television licence. The digital switchover does not change this statutory fact. For those people who do not make the switch to digital before 24 October, the supports provided by the national digital switchover campaign - namely, the national telephone helpline, the national outreach programme and the website - will remain in place for several weeks following 24 October. In addition, Saorview equipment and assistance will also be available after the analogue switch-off. However, I call on people to make the switch before 24 October to ensure they do not lose television access.
I thank the Minister for his reply. It appears that his management of the programme has been very successful. This is something one could have envisaged were one to examine the Minister's political career and his expertise in switchovers, and I had no doubt that he would succeed in this regard. It has also been significantly more successful than the efforts of the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, in respect of the household charge. I imagine that if he were to venture in the direction of Brussels, Deputy Rabbitte would be a shoo-in for that post.
Will the Minister comment on the fact that many of the Saorview-approved boxes are designed such that there is no facility for television viewers to watch one programme while recording another? It is deemed by me and others to be a remarkable failure of technology at this stage in 2012. It is remarkable that Saorview-approved boxes do not have the facility available in other products associated with the Sky network and so forth.
I sincerely hope the switchover will go as well as Deputy Cowen anticipates, because Irish people have a habit of leaving it until the last minute. Whereas it is fair to say that no one could be unaware that the switchover is taking place, it is worrying that there is still some way to go. I am reluctant to predict a 100% smooth transfer on 24 October. I take this opportunity to say to people that if they do not make the switch by 24 October, they will have no television on 25 October. There are people in various parts of the country with whom I have spoken who are under the impression that they cannot make the switch until 24 October. That is not the case. People should do it before there is a last-minute rush; otherwise, they will have nothing on their screens. RTE has put a good deal of investment into building up this system and it has addressed black spots in the country. These areas are serviced more effectively now than when they only received the analogue signal. Given the topography of some parts of the country I hope there will be no problems.
Deputy Cowen raised a specific point about not being able to watch one channel while recording another. There is no product on the market yet to deal with that. I presume it will emerge in future but I cannot give him any comfort on it this evening. There is no product available yet to deal with that on the Saorview system.
We are moving on to the final Priority Question, No. 5. The Minister may wish to note that it looks like a longish answer.
I will have to cut back on giving all this information to the House.
Clearly I am overdoing it.
5. Deputy John Halligan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he will consider favourably the request by the independent broadcasters of Ireland for funding to support public service broadcasting on independent commercial radio in view of the fact that EU law on State aid would not apply in such a situation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44073/12]
Amharc ar fhreagraAs I have told this House on a number of occasions, I fully recognise the contribution of the independent radio sector in bringing diversity to the airwaves, and serving the needs of communities, often at a very local level. As I noted when I addressed the Independent Broadcasters of Ireland annual conference earlier this year, "Local radio gives a voice and enhances social dialogue for people of all ages - it provides a forum for local communities; it enhances a local community; its gives confidence to people and indeed is an expression of the community in which the station is broadcast".
However, it should be borne in mind that these stations were founded as commercial operations, with the profit motive as their primary objective. Station owners sought and accepted licences on clear terms, terms which included a limited amount of public-service type content. Moreover, in many cases, their success in the licence application process was assisted by the voluntary commitments they gave in regard to the provision of public-service type content, over and above that required by the relevant legislation. The licences were accepted in the knowledge that public funding was not available for small broadcasters. The fact that some of these stations are now undergoing an understandable degree of financial stress does not mean that the State should immediately step in and provide funding. They remain commercial enterprises.
Moreover, it should also be noted that their very popularity in the communities they serve is, in many cases, as a result of the local news content and current affairs type programming that they provide and which, in turn, gives them a strong advertising presence and thus earning potential. Overall, I cannot see how it is reasonable to expect the Government to consider dispersing licence fee revenue to private broadcasters.
I would like to clarify for the Deputy that even if I were minded to provide public moneys to private investors as the Deputy seems to be suggesting, and I have given consideration to whether I can do that, state-aid rules definitely apply in this case. While it is true that neither the Altmark principles nor the general state-aid rules prohibit the State funding of services of a general economic interest, it is categorically not possible for the State to simply decide to fund a set of incumbent licence holders during a licence period. Such a move, quite apart from the reaction of the European authorities, would expose the State to the risk of prosecution from other operators who may have considered applying for a licence were the revenue stream available. In order for funds to be dispersed in the manner suggested, an entirely new scheme would therefore have to be constructed involving primary legislation and a new licensing round whereby revised licences would be offered to the market. Clearly, this is not what is being proposed here.
I thank the Minister for his frank reply. Approximately 2.5 million people tune in to independent radio stations across the country every day. Having served as a local representative for many years, as Deputy Rabbitte did in Dublin, I am keenly aware of the contribution that independent local radio stations make in serving the needs of communities and in enhancing local dialogue. That cannot be over emphasised.
In many cases local radio services, although commercially run, provide a real public service with a local perspective that helps bind communities together. This could be highlighted in many constituency of Waterford where, for instance, the local radio station, WLR, has a listenership of 71% of all adults on a weekly basis and its daily share of radio listenership is 48%, making it enormously influential in the broadcast area.
A question please.
Given the considerable cross-section of local news, sport, current affairs and drama programmes it broadcasts, it would be a contradiction in terms to say that it is primarily run for commercial purposes. My question is if two thirds of my constituents are listening to a local radio, and the same would equally apply across the country if 2.5 million are listening, surely there is a democratic deficit where all of the licence fee goes to a national broadcaster?
The board of IBI is of the belief that EU law does not constitute an obstacle on the establishment of a funding scheme for the independent radio sector. It maintains that the principle of additionality has no application whatsoever where the aid in question is domestic rather than EU funding. In its document it put forward a viable proposal as to how funding could be brought about without infringing any EU or State law up to approximately €66,000 per station per year. I am not sure whether the Minister read the document but he should do so. It negates the belief that under EU law the Minister cannot provide funding.
I do not agree with Deputy Halligan's conclusion but I do not dispute anything he has said about the merit and value of the independent broadcasters. I entirely accept what he stated about the extraordinarily high listenership of his local radio station, WLR, which I accept provides a quality service in the region.
Of course, I did read their document and I met the board to discuss it. I repeat my own admiration for the quality of work that it does throughout the country. In the present difficult financial environment, I find myself being the subject of representations on behalf of the private sector, the independent sector and even the print sector. Clearly, Members of the House would accept that dispersing the licence fee across all of that would not make any sense. There are legal public service requirements imposed on the national broadcaster and it must deliver on that, and there is a certain irreducible minimum revenue that is necessary to do that.
My advice contests Deputy Halligan's contention and the contention by the IBI that state-aid rules would permit of State funding. My advice, for the reasons I stated in my reply, is that state-aid rules would not permit funding in the circumstances he describes.
If I could ask a brief supplementary, I would appreciate it.
Ten seconds.
I cannot dispute the Minister's advice but I will not go into that. When local radio stations were set up it was not envisaged that they would have such a significant listenership. If the Minister's advice is at odds with the advice of the Independent Broadcasters of Ireland, would he consider meeting the IBI again to marry up both his and its advice to see exactly what advice the IBI got and the advice the Minister has? Either one or the other is wrong or perhaps there is a difference that could be breached.
That was 50 seconds, the Minister has ten. Only reply in a word or else discuss it afterwards.
I do not have any objection to meeting the IBI but I do not want to mislead it. I stated what my advice is. I repeat that these are commercial ventures. I recall a colleague in this House who is no longer with us described it at the time as a licence to print money. There was fierce competition to get those licences. They were commercial ventures. I do not know what the difference in principle is in us intervening where a private sector enterprise unfortunately fails in the present difficult environment. What would be the difference in principle?
