Amendments Nos. 1 and 13 are related and will be discussed together.
Broadcasting (Amendment) Bill 2026: Report and Final Stages
I move amendment No. 1:
In page 8, between lines 1 and 2, to insert the following:
“ ‘new audiovisual works’ where it is referred to in section 159F(2) shall be interpreted to include but not be limited to feature films, animation, drama, and documentary programmes;”.
This amendment is based on a number of proposals put forward by Screen Producers Ireland, SPI, that we feel did not get sufficient discussion on Committee Stage but are still crucially important. We have engaged with the Minister on this on a number of occasions. SPI, which represents over 200 member companies across the independent productive production sector, is concerned that there is a substantial change in language regarding what sort of programmes are to be funded under this legislation. While the previous Sound and Vision fund of the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, BAI, was established in line with section 154 of the Broadcasting Act 2009 to fund programmes, including feature films, animation and drama, these words are missing from the new sections in this Bill relating to its successor teams within Ciste na Meán to be operated by Coimisiún na Meán. News and current affairs are now included but these other forms of programming should not lose out. Funding provided to films, entertainment, drama and factual programming under the old BAI Sound and Vision fund should be maintained and enhanced, not written out of the law. We are proposing the inclusion of documentary programming as well as the old wording. We would welcome clarity from the Minister. I understand that he is not here today but we are seeking that clarity as to whether he will accept this proposal or insist on the inclusion of these genres of programming in future Ciste na Meán funding and the potential impact of that in the sector in terms of employment and output foregone.
The audiovisual sector is deeply concerned that Government is abandoning commitments and SPI put forward a number of other amendments in the hope that the Minister would demonstrate sufficient commitment. SPI is concerned at inaction in relation to the Future of Media Commission's recommendation that the percentage of RTÉ's public funding that should support independent production should be increased to 25%. It is concerned about the failure to deliver adequate, sustainable and predictable financial resources to public service broadcasters in line with Article 5.3 of the European Media Freedom Act, which has been compounded by budget 2027, has left TG4 facing real-time cuts to deal with inflation and has seen the restructuring commitments for RTÉ torn up. All of this will harm the independent production sector, which relies on RTÉ and TG4 for commissions.
Budget 2027 failed to mention any regional uplift for the film tax relief. Sinn Féin has called for this to be developed in partnership with the sector. SPI also raised concerns about the administrative burden of new regulatory review and reporting requirements. We are looking to see if the Minister has considered how to ease that burden while ensuring prudence in public spending. Lastly, would the Minister ensure that the wording in the Bill is inclusive so that Ciste na Meán does not exclude feature films, animation drama and documentaries?
I commend this Bill. There are a few things I wish to highlight. The first is the levies that have been charged by Coimisiún na Meán, particularly over the past 12 months. We have seen a significant increase in the levy as a percentage of costs that it has put on original local radio stations throughout the country. These are significant costs in the region of 30% to 40% after those local stations would have put their budgets together for the year so I ask that consideration be given to this. It needs to be reduced to the previous level. I ask that Coimisiún na Meán would make sure in its budget for 2026-27 that this is dealt with sufficiently to make sure that we support local radio stations in particular that provide trustworthy news and information to us throughout the country, as was particularly the case during Covid a number of years ago. It was there that we listened to get all that local news - as I said, trusted news - in all our local communities. They provide a fantastic service so there has been a difficulty with that increased cost and I ask that this be robustly changed to make sure that those increased costs are not carried on to the stations but are absorbed by Coimisiún na Meán.
I will speak to amendment No. 13. In this Bill, the broadcasting fund or Ciste na Meán is restricted to the private sector - the commercial, independent or - whatever words we want to use - creative sector. This has real potential consequences for RTÉ and TG4. In particular, it has implications for TG4, which has a treasure trove of archived material that could be repackaged and repurposed for broadcast. This takes money so it needs to access funding to be able to do that. Given that we have seen no increase for TG4 in this year's budget in terms of funding, it seems that it would be prudent to give Coimisiún na Meán the remit to potentially provide funding to TG4 in particular but also RTÉ from that funding. That is what this amendment proposes.
I will deal first with amendment No. 1, which aims to expressly provide that the types of programming that may be funded through the proceeds of the European works levy may include certain specified types of genre. The Broadcasting (Amendment) Bill is not intended to restrict funding to a particular type of genre whether in relation to public service content schemes funded through Ciste na Meán or in terms of any European work scheme that may be funded by the European works levy. Instead, section 59 of the Bill includes provisions to align the terminology used as it relates to programming that may be funded under the European works scheme, with several of the categories set out in respect of public service content in section 5 of the Bill. These categories refer to various types of subject matter rather than genre. For example, a previous reference to Irish culture, language, history, heritage, society and sport is being replaced with a reference to the culture, language, history, heritage, society, music and sport of Ireland and of the people of the island of Ireland. This reflects that some people living on the island of Ireland do not consider themselves as Irish as recognised in the Good Friday Agreement.
I understand that there is some concern that the inclusion of news, current affairs and international affairs in the category of programming that may be funded may imply, first, that it refers to the genre of news, current affairs and international affairs and, second, that it is the only genre that may be funded. I assure Deputies that the use of the term "news, current affairs and international affairs" in this context is intended to refer to the subject matter of news, current affairs and international affairs rather than a specific genre or programme format such as a documentary panel show or daily news broadcast. Given that the Bill refers to subject matter rather than genre, I do not think there is a need to refer to any specific type of genre and, accordingly, I do not accept the amendment.
Amendment No. 13 would allow RTÉ and TG4 to apply for public service content schemes funded through Ciste na Meán.
As the Minister, Deputy O'Donovan, set out on Committee Stage, there is a clear rationale for excluding RTÉ and TG4 from directly applying to Ciste na Meán. Both providers have been assigned a clear public service remit under sections 114 and 118 of the Broadcasting Act 2009. This statutory remit includes the media services that RTÉ and TG4 are required to provide to the public, including the maintenance of archives and libraries, the types of values that should underpin those services and specific programming obligations in respect of those services.
RTÉ and TG4 are provided with significant public funding to fulfil that statutory remit. If RTÉ and TG4 were to continue to be allowed to apply directly for funding under Ciste na Meán, this would amount to a type of dual funding. Unlike other media providers, they would receive funding directly from the State as public service media providers and then be permitted to compete with other media providers for funding under Ciste na Meán. Accordingly, I cannot accept the Deputy's amendment.
However, I want to assure the Deputy that independent producers that receive funding under Ciste na Meán will still be able to partner with RTÉ and TG4 to make funded content available to the public and to enter co-funding agreements with those independent producers. This is a particularly important consideration given that at least 25% of funding in any scheme must be for content in the Irish language. We would expect that those independent producers in receipt of that funding would continue to make content available primarily on TG4.
Finally, I note Deputy Carrigy’s contribution in that regard. I acknowledge the importance of trying to ensure that as much communication as possible is in place between Coimisiún na Meán and local independent radio stations on the issue of the levy, how it is set and when decisions are made around that.
For the record, I also want to extend my best wishes to the Minister, Deputy O’Donovan, for a speedy recovery today.
In response to the Minister of State's comments on TG4, in particular, I appreciate that it can work with independent or commercial providers, as he outlined. Nonetheless, it is in a unique position, given the trove of extensive cultural material it has, and RTÉ too, which is not going to be possible to do with independent partners. It could use that material for the purposes of fulfilling its public service broadcasting mandate. That is the issue for me. Bit by bit, we are chipping away at that public service broadcasting mandate in all the various ways the Government is choosing to transform broadcasting in this country. I do not think there is any issue with a State agency accessing dual sources of funding. I appreciate it is the case that they would be able to do it in both instances but I do not think there is any issue in terms of precedent. I do not think there is any governance issue with them being able to access two different sources of funding. It is not rationale enough to vote down the amendment. I urge the Minister to reconsider that and adjust the provision so that TG4 and RTÉ can access that same pot of money.
I thank Deputy Gibney. I will certainly pass on her best wishes to the Minister, Deputy O’Donovan. All of us in the House extend them to him today.
I take the point and argument the Deputy is making in her amendment. The position from a Government point of view is that we are already funding both TG4 and RTÉ in their public service remit. It is important that we also ensure that public service is provided to others outside of RTÉ and TG4. That is the objective behind this fund. There is a mechanism for the Government and it will continue to be there. We would all agree on the absolute importance, particularly in the world we live in at the moment, of protecting and ensuring that we have strong public service broadcasters to carry out that work and make sure the public are getting accurate, independent information and programming. That will be done through the public service funding we provide. This fund is targeted outside of RTÉ and TG4. That is the objective behind it.
Amendment put and declared lost.
Amendment No. 2, in the names of Deputies Ó Snodaigh and Byrne, arises out of committee proceedings.
I move amendment No. 2:
In page 12, between lines 5 and 6, to insert the following:
“and
(b) by the insertion of the following after subsection (3)(i):
“(j) support the development of arts broadcasting and promotion, including by progressing the incorporation of regular arts bulletins akin to existing sports bulletins as part of the news service of public service media to inform the public of developments and achievements across all artforms of local and national significance, drawing attention to the launch and exhibition of new artistic, literary and musical works, upcoming performances, competitions or funding opportunities.”.”
Deputy Ó Snodaigh withdrew this amendment on Committee Stage on the basis that the Minister, Deputy O’Donovan, promised to come back with a formula that allows this to be achieved. The Minister said there should be provision, particularly in the so-called flagship news bulletins, for arts and culture reports on a regular basis, as was set out in that amendment, and that he would return with an amendment on Report Stage or in the Seanad. As no such amendment has been brought forward on Report Stage by the Minister, is he accepting this amendment, which is based on the recommendations not only of the cross party pre-legislative scrutiny of this Bill but also on the committee's 2024 report entitled Future Business Model Plans and Long-term Vision for the Media Sector and the Report of the Future of Media Commission? If not, we need an update on what amendments will be tabled before the Bill goes to the Seanad, if possible.
I appreciate that the Minister of State, Deputy McConalogue, is only stepping in at the last minute. I thank him for being here.
I thank Deputy Byrne for the amendment. As the Minister, Deputy O'Donovan, set out on Committee Stage, he agrees with the intention underpinning the amendment. He asked officials to examine the issue to formulate a legislative provision that would have the effect of promoting the coverage of the arts in broadcast media while respecting the editorial independence of broadcasters. Given the need to enact this Bill as soon as possible to assign the Comptroller and Auditor General as auditor of RTÉ, there will not be time to include a provision in this Bill. However, given the pace of change in the media sector and legislative developments at European level, there will be a need to bring forward successive media legislation in the coming period. There will be an opportunity to address the issue in that context. Taking on board the issues and suggested approach raised by Deputies Byrne and Ó Snodaigh, the most effective mechanism may be to require Coimisiún na Meán to prepare a media service code providing for standards and practices for the promotion of culture and the arts, including up-to-date news about culture and the arts. Such a code would cover not only RTÉ and TG4 but all licensed broadcasters. This may strike the balance by respecting editorial independence while also setting out clear best practice. However, I am conscious that the Deputy may have another perspective on the best way forward on this. The Minister, Deputy O'Donovan, will continue to engage with her and other Deputies on this point in the context of forthcoming legislation.
Deputy Gibney wishes to come in there.
Deputy Ó Snodaigh and I were the only two members who brought forward amendments on Committee Stage. Deputy Ó Snodaigh withdrew a few different amendments on the basis that they would be addressed. I have to say, the whole tone of the session was very much that nothing was getting passed. Deputy Ó Snodaigh withdrew amendments in good faith so that they could be worked out by the Government in that time. This was a few weeks ago. The fact is that this has not happened. I hope we do not see this pattern repeated for the rest of these amendments because that would be quite shocking. We are trying to make things work here. The Government is not allowing any amendments past just because they have been put forward by the Opposition, and then when we try to work with the Government, as Deputies Ó Snodaigh and Deputy Byrne have done, by withdrawing them to go back to the drawing board and allowing it to help elsewhere, this is not happening.
This is an absolutely vital amendment. We see a huge amount of sports promotion, for example, increasingly in broadcasting and we do not see the same matched for arts. That is what this amendment chooses to do. It is trying to inject back into that public service broadcasting remit the priority of arts announcements, arts information and arts news and current affairs. That is what it is trying to do. It is really regrettable that nothing has been done to address this.
I echo everything Deputy Gibney said. A level of faith was provided to the Minister by my colleague Deputy Ó Snodaigh. I am also a member of the Committee of Public Accounts, so I am aware that the delay in passing this legislation is causing problems for the Comptroller and Auditor General. I respect that there has to be some balance, but that that cannot be used as a catalyst to bypass genuine intent for the good of the arts sector, as set out in in a lot of these amendments.
I will take the Minister of State's word that he agrees with the intention underpinning these amendments and that there is a commitment to work towards that objective in other upcoming legislation. If that does not happen, we will be back to the drawing board at any opportunity to ensure we revisit these amendments through whatever channels are open to Deputy Ó Snodaigh and me.
As Deputies Gibney and Byrne have outlined, there was a meeting of minds on Committee Stage regarding the objective behind this amendment. I agree there is an urgency to this because we want the Comptroller and Auditor General to have the legal capacity to have RTÉ and TG4 under his remit for the purposes of auditing their 2026 accounts. We are trying to get the Bill through both the Dáil and the Seanad in as good a time as possible to facilitate that objective and outcome.
In relation to the commitment given by the Minister, Deputy O'Donovan, on Committee Stage and here today, he is open to, and will continue to engage across the House on, this proposal. One way forward might be, as suggested, to have Coimisiún na Meán prepare a media service code, which could help to address the issue and would apply not just to TG4 and RTÉ but to all licensed broadcasters. That can be discussed and examined to see whether it could be an effective way forward. In terms of drafting such a code and considering the detail as to how something like it might be transposed into legislation in a way that is effective and proportionate, there has not been sufficient time to tease that out in the context of this Bill. There will be other opportunities to do so. In advance of those opportunities, there will have to be discussion and engagement on how it might work. How it can best be achieved might be something that needs to be teased out at the Oireachtas committee in advance of legislation. Everyone is on the one page in terms of the objective behind the proposed amendment.
Amendment put and declared lost.
I move amendment No. 3:
In page 19, between lines 35 and 36, to insert the following:
"Insertion of new section 46MA into Principal Act
19.The Principal Act is amended by the insertion of the following section after section 46M:
"Duty to the whole community of the island of Ireland
46MA.(1) RTÉ and TG4, whose national television broadcasting services shall be made available, in so far as it is reasonably practicable, to the whole community on the island of Ireland, in accordance with section 114(1) (a) and section 118(1)(a) respectively, shall pro-actively make every reasonable effort to end the practice of geo-blocking and exclusion of audiences in that part of the island not currently under the jurisdiction of the State from their services, including programming content, audience competitions and visual cartographic depictions of the island and its population.
(2) In the interests of fulfilling their duty in line with subsection (1) as national broadcasters for the whole nation, RTÉ and TG4 shall pro-actively seek to resolve any competing claims to licencing rights across the island with the objective of ensuring equal access to programming content north and south across service providers, particularly where that content relates to their participation in events of importance to the nation, including in terms of news, current affairs, sport and culture, in line with the entitlement and birthright of every person born on the island of Ireland to be part of the Irish Nation under Article 2 of the Constitution.
(3) The Commission shall, no later than six months after the enactment of this Act, prepare and publish a report setting out ways in which RTÉ
and TG4 could be facilitated, assisted and required to make available these services in full to the whole community of the island of Ireland,
including how they could work to achieve a resolution and cooperation across rights holders in the case of competing claims across jurisdictions, and toward removing any obstacle or barrier, such as the geographical restriction of their broadcasting rights to one part of the
island or the use of geo-blocking to enforce such a restriction, to their equal availability across the whole island.
(4) The Minister shall engage with the British government, and with international organisations responsible for the licencing of rights for
international events, with a view to establishing an all-Ireland market for television licencing rights, and to resolving any competing claims
across jurisdictions, and shall lay a report outlining all such engagements made over the previous year on an annual basis starting
from one year following the enactment of this Act.
(5) The reports and engagement referred to in subsections (4) and (5) shall pay particular regard to the importance of supporting the fulfilment of commitments in the Good Friday Agreement relating to the widespread availability of services provided by TG4, and acknowledging the public service duty of RTÉ to the whole community of the island of Ireland, to better facilitate equal access to programming content by the whole community of the island of Ireland.
(6) The Commission shall pay due regard to the need for equal and widespread availability of services across the whole of the island of Ireland when agreeing licences for television broadcasting services.".".
This amendment relates to the geoblocking of all users in the Six Counties, which Sinn Féin has been raising consistently for a number of years. There was widespread support across all parties on Committee Stage for tackling the issue, with agreement to engage with the sector on it. Deputy Ó Snodaigh was happy to withdraw his amendment in light of the Minister's commitment to escalate the matter politically, including through engagement with the British Government.
We have tabled the amendment again on Report Stage to put on the record that this issue still demands our attention and to give the Minister of State an opportunity to provide any updates he might have on efforts to engage with the Minister's counterpart in London or through the various regulators and broadcasters North and South. I thank him for those efforts, if there have been any, and ask that he pass those thanks on to the Minister. I presume there is no update at the moment. We were hopeful there would be because we plan to raise the issue at the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly this weekend.
I thank the Deputy for this amendment. l am conscious, as she outlined, that the amendment was discussed in some detail on Committee Stage and that there is no disagreement on the principle underpinning the amendment. As the Deputy who probably lives closest to the Border, it is something of which I am very much aware. I think I am closer even than the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach to the Border.
I think that is right.
I will not argue the point.
I am very much aware of the impact and effect of this issue on a practical basis. That view was shared among all speakers, both Government and Opposition, in the discussion on Committee Stage.
As the amendment recognises, as part of their statutory public service remit under sections 114(1)(a) and 118(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 2009, both RTÉ and TG4 are required to operate free-to-air services and to make them available, insofar as is reasonably practicable, to the whole community on the island of Ireland. The qualifier "in so far as it is reasonably practicable" is there to recognise that international rights holders are invariably outside the jurisdiction of the State and, therefore, neither RTÉ nor TG4 can control the pricing of rights or the geographical or territorial distribution decided by the rights holders.
As recognised by the Minister, Deputy O'Donovan, and by many Deputies on Committee Stage, this gives rise to practical difficulties in terms of audiences in the North being able to access certain types of programming. I agree completely that this is a source of ongoing and significant frustration, particularly in relation to sports events such as the Olympic Games, where Team Ireland includes athletes from across the island. I understand that RTÉ has stated its preference to acquire all-island rights. Where possible, both RTÉ and TG4 make broadcasts available on an all-island basis, in line with their existing statutory duty. However, as I have mentioned, there are cases where rights restrictions preclude them from broadcasting certain content outside the State. In some cases, a British broadcaster will have acquired exclusive rights to the content, which includes exclusive rights in the North. These are commercial and legal matters for the rights holders and broadcasters and we must recognise there is an extra-jurisdictional element to that.
Before considering any legislative amendment to address this issue, it is necessary to fully understand and scope out the range of issues that impact various types of content and rights packages. As the Minister indicated previously, Coimisiún na Meán has been engaging on this matter with counterparts in Ofcom Northern Ireland for some time. An coimisiún proposes to address the issue further at the next meeting of the Television Broadcasters of Ireland Group, to be held in Belfast in early November. That group consists of RTÉ, TG4, Virgin Media, BBC and UTV and is facilitated by Coimisiún na Meán and Ofcom Northern Ireland. All of those parties recognise the complexity of this issue. The forum provides a useful way to identify the challenges and to propose possible solutions. The Minister recently discussed this matter with the British ambassador and will shortly be writing to the British Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.
Given the complex commercial and contractual limitations that we all acknowledge exist, continued engagement between officials in both jurisdictions to encourage practical solutions is the most effective way forward. Departmental officials will continue to engage with their UK counterparts on the matter. I do not think there is an immediate Irish legislative solution to this matter and, accordingly, I do not propose to accept this amendment today.
I support the amendment. There was cross-party support for the same proposal on Committee Stage. The Minister highlighted that work is ongoing on the issue, which should be acknowledged. The Minister of State, Deputy McConalogue, has outlined the significant engagement there has been. At a later stage, when those discussions have taken place, the Minister might come back to the committee to outline where we are in terms of the possibility of addressing the issue and to discuss it.
I will take the Minister of State at his word on this matter. There is cross-party acknowledgement that it needs to be worked through and teased out a bit further. I sincerely hope the engagement does not stall at writing to the British Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. We need actions to follow up on that engagement. If that happens, the Minister of State will have the support of the Sinn Féin team to ensure we can overcome geoblocking for the sake of all our family members, friends and fellow citizens in the Six Counties. They are missing out on so much. The Minister of State mentioned the Olympic Games but we have had other monumental moments in sports alone, including from the Irish football team and Katie Taylor's historic night in Croke Park. I could go on all evening listing the events in respect of which people are being held back from cheering on their fellow countrymen and countrywomen.
I look forward to working with the Minister on this issue. It is of particular interest and significance to both Deputy Ó Snodaigh and me. We will pursue it with him, once he is back with us, over the coming weeks and months.
I thank Deputies Byrne and Ó Snodaigh for bringing forward this amendment, which is the same one they proposed on Committee Stage.
Once again, I find it disappointing that in that time we have not seen the co-operation that we had hoped for come forward from the Department. Within that 90-minute session, I remember the words of the Minister that it had not been all bad when he discussed the geoblocking because he finally felt there was an issue that he could work with the Opposition on and bring it forward.
As Deputy Byrne outlined, there are always, and there always have been, opportunities missed because of the geoblocking issue, and there are plenty more stacked into our calendar for the next 12 months. This legislative process is known to the Government. It knew that there were a few weeks between Committee and Report Stages where it had the opportunity to develop it. This was a piece of legislation that was available to the Government to address this. I appreciate there are lots of different ways to tackle it but it knew this was coming. It should have knuckled down, done the work and found a way to get it into this legislation because we cannot just say that fixing the C and AG issue is the reason this has to be rushed. The Government knew this was coming. We knew it was on the books and there was plenty of opportunity to do it. It is real shame that we have not seen greater co-operation and collaboration from the Government on the amendments Deputy Ó Snodaigh withdrew in good faith that they would be worked on.
The Government's position is entirely reasonable in relation to the approach that it is taking here. We agree and share the view on the issue and the desire to try to improve it and change the situation whereby programmes can be accessible all across the island. As I said in my contribution at the start, there is already provision in legislation under the Broadcasting Act requiring RTÉ to provide free-to-air services and make them available across the island as far as is reasonably practical. That is already in the legislation. We all have to recognise that there is not a straightforward legislative fix here. Were we to put a blunt requirement into legislation that RTÉ shall only broadcast programming that is only available to all of the island and that there is no geoblocking, which is the objective we would like to see, the net effect would be that certain types of programmes would simply not be possible to broadcast on RTÉ or TG4 because the rights had already been sold by international providers to, for example, BBC for Britain and Northern Ireland. If we say that RTÉ can only broadcast something if it broadcasts it to the whole of the island, then it would not be able to broadcast it at all. That is the type of outcome we want. We want it to go to the whole island but the actual net effect would be that we would be blocking certain types of content from even being broadcast in the Twenty-six Counties.
This just goes to prove the point that we do not have a legislative fix. By working with Ofcom in the North and broadcast providers internationally, we want to achieve the objective whereby content is available to the whole of the island as much as is practicable. That is certainly where all of our minds are at, and we are happy to continue to engage cross-party in relation to any steps we can take. As I said, the Minister has raised it with the British ambassador already and will be engaging with the relevant minister in Westminster to see how we can make progress here. We, along with our officials, are happy to work across Government and to engage on any suggestions and proposals around it so we can make progress here.
Amendment put and declared lost.
I move amendment No.4:
In page 20, to delete lines 21 to 24 and substitute the following:
“(iii) by the insertion of the following paragraphs after paragraph (b):
“(c) the broadcast in programmes broadcast on sound broadcasting services of a diversity of music composed or performed by persons with a connection with the island of Ireland;
(d) the broadcast in programmes broadcast on sound broadcasting services of music in the Irish language.”.”.
This is a fairly straightforward and short amendment to recognise and ensure the promotion of Irish composed and Irish performed music, as well as music in the Irish language, to make sure it is included in the remit for sound broadcasters. It is just a simple amendment that we believe is very important in making sure that those who are culturally keeping alive our Irish language and traditions are supported in doing so by their broadcaster.
I know the Deputy will be aware that the Future of Media Commission recommended a comprehensive review of the provision of Irish language services and content across the media system and that this is to be undertaken by Coimisiún na Meán. Coimisiún na Meán's Irish language action plan is now at an advanced stage. The plan will be informed by the comprehensive review, a feasibility study into a new radio service for young audiences and the other research commissioned and carried out by Coimisiún na Meán.
The Irish language action plan is currently open to targeted consultation. I understand the consultation will further inform the plan. The action plan is a thematic plan which will include a detailed implementation timeline, and I expect the final version to be published by the end of the year.
I appreciate the intention of the Deputy's amendment. Regulatory provisions such as that proposed by the Deputy can make a difference, particularly when they includes requirements to measure types of content. At this point, however, it is prudent to wait on the measures that will be contained in the Irish language action plan and the Minister, Deputy O'Donovan, will examine whether any further legislative measures are required on foot of that plan. Given the pace of media legislation and forthcoming European legislation, any required legislative change can be accommodated in a future Bill.
Amendment put and declared lost.
Amendments Nos. 5 and 7 are related and will be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 5:
In page 25, line 19, after “TG4” to insert “, and, in the case of at least 50 per cent of the members of the board of RTÉ, to the board of RTÉ,”.
Deputy Ní Raghallaigh will speak on the amendment.
Baineann leasuithe Uimh. 5 agus 7 ó Shinn Féin le hinniúlacht sa Ghaeilge a chinntiú do leath na ballraíochta ar bhord RTÉ, craoltóir atá in ainm a bheith dátheangach, agus don bhallraíocht ar fad ar chomhairle lucht féachana TG4, atá ina chraoltóir náisiúnta don Ghaeilge. Faoi láthair tá an tAcht Craolacháin, 2009 soiléir gur chóir go mbeadh inniúlacht sa Ghaeilge ag gach ball den chomhairle lucht féachana. De réir alt 96(5) den Acht sin:
In appointing the members of its audience council, TG4 shall endeavour to ensure that the members of the audience council are able to communicate proficiently in the Irish language.
Bhí tuiscint ann i gcónaí gurb é príomhról TG4 ná freastal ar lucht féachana na Gaeilge. Ba TG4 agus Raidió na Gaeltachta ina dtorthaí ar ghluaiseacht cearta sibhialta na Gaeltachta. Is féidir leis na stáisiúin seo tacú le foghlaimeoirí agus is féidir le daoine gan mórán Gaeilge sult agus tairbhe a bhaint as ábhar orthu ach, chun tuiscint a bheith ag duine ar ábhar i nGaeilge, teastaíonn inniúlacht sa Ghaeilge. De réir alt 96C, alt nua a mholtar sa Bhille, is féidir leis an gcomhairle lucht féachana comhairliúchán a lorg le dream ar leith sa phobal, mar shampla foghlaimeoirí, daoine óga, daltaí scoile nó daoine den phobal gur mhaith leo féachaint ar spórt, ach caithfidh an chomhairle féin a bheith in ann ábhar an chraoltóra a thuiscint.
De réir an dlí, tá comhairle lucht féachana TG4 ag feidhmiú go hiomlán trí Ghaeilge faoi láthair. Mar sin, cén fáth a bhfuil an tAire ag iarraidh comhairle lucht féachana TG4 a Bhéarlú? Dúirt an tAire go mbeadh sé "exclusionary" dá mbeadh ar gach ball de chomhairle lucht féachana TG4 Gaeilge a bheith acu. An bhfuil comhairle lucht féachana reatha TG4 "exclusionary"? Mar atá ráite cheana, beidh an chomhairle ag iompú ar an mBéarla má tá daoine gan Ghaeilge ann. Beidh costas sa bhreis ann ó thaobh ateangaireachta agus an t-airgead sin ag teacht as buiséad TG4, atá níos ísle i mbliana de bharr boilscithe. In aighneacht ar an mBille seo mar chuid den phróiseas grinnscrúdaithe réamhreachtaigh, dúirt TG4, "All of the members of the TG4 audience council must be competent in Irish." Cén fáth a bhfuil an tAire ag déanamh neamhaird ar mholadh TG4? Luaigh an tAire go bhfreastalaíonn TG4 ar dhaltaí scoile nach bhfuil inniúil ar an nGaeilge. An bhfuil sé ag rá go mbeidh páistí scoile gan Ghaeilge ar chomhairle lucht féachana TG4? An mbeidh sé sásta glacadh le páistí scoile gan Bhéarla ar chomhairle lucht féachana RTÉ? An mbeidh sé sásta daoine gan Bhéarla a bheith ar chomhairle lucht féachana nó ar bhord RTÉ? Ní bheadh an comhrá seo againn faoin gcomhairle lucht féachana nó bord RTÉ. Tá sé inghlactha go mbeadh Béarla acu mar phríomhtheanga úsáide na seirbhíse. Níl aon duine ag iarraidh a admháil gurb í an Ghaeilge príomhtheanga oifigiúil RTÉ de réir an Bhunreachta.
Tá comhairle Raidió na Gaeltachta ag feidhmiú freisin trí Ghaeilge in aitheantas go bhfuil an stáisiún ag freastal ar phobal teanga ar leith, bunaithe ar ghluaiseacht cearta sibhialta, cé nach bhfuil stádas sa dlí aige. Ó 2022 go dtí 2025, ní raibh aon chomhairle ann. Mhol Sinn Féin leasú go mbeadh sé sonraithe sa dlí go mbeadh comhairle lucht éisteachta ann féin ag Raidió na Gaeltachta. Dúirt an tAire ar Chéim an Choiste, "It is not wise to create an audience council for a specific service provided by RTÉ", cé go bhfuil a leithéid i bhfeidhm cheana féin.
An bhfuil an fhoráil sin ag lorg fáil réidh le comhairle Raidió na Gaeltachta nó an rabhthas aineolach go bhfuil sé ann? Ar a laghad, ba chóir go nglactar le ball le Gaeilge ar chomhairle lucht féachana RTÉ, mar a mhol an Teachta Gibney i leasú Uimh. 6; le comhairle lucht féachana lán-Ghaeilge ag TG4, mar atá ann faoi láthair; agus le bord dátheangach ar RTÉ. Vótáil baill an choiste, idir bhaill Rialtais agus bhaill Freasúra, i bhfabhar moladh sa ghrinnscrúdú réamhreachtach "that a proportion of the Board of RTÉ would also have proficiency of Irish at the level of B2". Cén fáth a bhfuil Fine Gael agus Fianna Fáil ag tarraingt siar óna moladh féin anois? Cén fáth a bhfuil an Rialtas ag diúltú leis na moltaí go léir faoin nGaeilge?
I commend amendment No. 5. I will speak to amendments Nos. 6 and 7. Amendment No. 6 essentially seeks to copper-fasten what already exists in the RTÉ board, where at least three members should be competent in the Irish language. In some ways we can call it a quota but, as I said, there is a level of competence in the RTÉ board at the moment. That competence is vital because the board needs to be able to oversee RTÉ's Irish language and general public service remit. Addressing the Irish language remit has been a weakness for RTÉ in the past, so it is vital that the language is adequately supported.
In reality, this number of board members are usually in place but that is not good enough and it is not enough to mean it will be maintained in future. What we need, copper-fastened in the legislation, is the requirement for three members of the board to be sufficiently competent in Irish to do their job. It is good governance. We see different requirements and quotas for different competences on all sorts of State boards. This one makes sense for the RTÉ board to fulfil its mandate.
RTÉ is an organisation that has to serve the Irish speaking community and support the Irish language and the Gaeltachtaí. Having struggled to do so in the past, this is what we need to see happen to make sure the position improves into the future. RTÉ's audience council already has around that number of people with Irish on it and, as I said, this amendment proposes to simply provide for it in legislation.
There was a very heated discussion on amendment No. 7 on Committee Stage. It was quite surprising to see the Minister's reaction to it. As matters stand, all members of TG4's audience council speak Irish. What we are trying to do with our amendment is to make sure that remains the case. The Bill, as it stands, seeks to reduce the number of TG4 audience council members with Irish from all of them to at least ten out of 15. That would leave the TG4 audience council having to conduct its business as Béarla, with interpreters and translated documents as required, because there will not be the competence to continue to operate as Gaeilge. That is simply not good enough.
We also heard the Minister confirm in the committee that this would come at the cost of TG4, which would have to pay for the translation services. It would mean a simple slowdown for TG4 as an organisation to have to facilitate that. The response of the Minister, that the proposal is "exclusionary" and does not speak to the diverse culture we now have in Ireland, is really insulting to those people who have come to this country, for example, and learned Irish. The idea that one should not be able to speak Irish to be on the TG4 audience council simply does not make sense. If we cannot have an audience council of our Irish language broadcaster conducting its business in Irish, it is a poor sign for the future of the language and the present ability to protect what little space there is for it in our institutions. That is a really important point - that we are trying to protect a very small level of compliance that preserves the Irish language. That is what we are trying to do. We should be bolstering the presence of Irish speakers and their experiences in our institutions, not rowing back.
Taispeánann an cinneadh seo dímheas iomlán ar TG4 ar bharr an easpa measa do mheáin na Gaeilge a léiríodh sa mbuiséad. Is údar díomá é, go háirithe ó iarAire Stáit le freagracht as an nGaeltacht. This move shows complete disrespect for TG4 on top of the lack of respect for the Irish language media shown in the budget. To be clear, TG4 does not want this. The Irish language community does not want this. This audience council should be preserved to be able to conduct its business and work as Gaeilge. This legislation chooses to erode that - in fact, it will completely abolish it - so we must include this amendment.
I thank the Deputies for the amendments. I will go through them in the order that they were raised.
Amendment No. 5 provides that 50% of the members of the RTÉ board should be competent in the Irish language. As the Deputies are aware, there is currently no requirement for a minimum percentage of the RTÉ board to be competent in the Irish language. Section 27 of the Broadcasting (Amendment) Bill introduces a number of reforms to the criteria for membership of the board of RTÉ and TG4, following on from the recommendations of the expert advisory committee on governance and culture in RTÉ, chaired by Professor Niamh Brennan. In accordance with those recommendations, board members of both RTÉ and TG4 must now have experience and expertise relevant to the oversight of an organisation of the size, range of activities and level of complexity of RTÉ or TG4, as the case may be, in one or more of a range of listed areas of expertise.
There are a number of new key areas of expertise, such as corporate governance and risk management, which have been included on foot of the experience of the issues with RTÉ governance. However, existing areas of expertise have been retained, including the development of the Irish language and Gaeltacht affairs. This necessarily means that a number of members of the RTÉ board will need to be competent in the Irish language. As the Minister, Deputy O'Donovan, set out on Committee Stage, given the criteria in place, there is no need for specific Irish language requirements for the RTÉ board. The provision requiring all members of the TG4 board to be competent in the Irish language has been retained and has been updated in light of provisions of the Údarás na Gaeltachta (Amendment) Act 2026. This will ensure that the same level of competence required of the board of an t-údarás will be required of the board of TG4, ensuring an alignment of approach to two of our largest Irish language bodies.
Amendment Nos. 6 and 7 relate to the audience councils of RTÉ and TG4, respectively. The reforms to the audience councils of TG4 and RTÉ set out in the Broadcasting (Amendment) Bill are based on a recommendation of the Future of Media Commission that there should be an enhanced role for audience councils, which, first, reflects the definition of "the public" adopted by the Future of Media Commission, and, second, supports diversity, inclusivity and democratic engagement with wider public sphere issues.
Regarding the definition of "the public", the Future of Media Commission set out that it should mean "the total population that is the intended recipient of media content" and reflect the principles of universality, diversity and inclusivity. To implement this recommendation, section 38 of the Bill provides that Coimisiún na Meán shall, following an open selection process, seek to appoint an audience council that ensures a diversity of membership, inclusion of a number of members who are actively engaged with Irish communities outside the island of Ireland and inclusion of members who are active in underserved audiences. Following a recommendation arising from pre-legislative scrutiny, a specific reference to underserved audiences identified by reference to disability has been included.
In respect of the TG4 audience council, membership must include at least ten members who have the required level of competency in the Irish language and, following a recommendation arising from pre-legislative scrutiny, at least five members representative of Gaeltacht communities. The rationale for allowing up to five members who may not have the requisite level of competency in the Irish language rests in the statutory public service remit of TG4, which makes specific reference to its role in catering for "the expectations of those of all age groups in the community whose preferred spoken language is Irish or who otherwise have an interest in Irish".
As we all know, and in line with its public service remit, TG4 plays an important role in promoting the Irish language through its programming. There are many viewers who watch TG4 for its high quality and standards of programming who would otherwise not be as exposed to the Irish language in their daily lives. The TG4 audience necessarily includes many who will not have the requisite level of competence in the Irish language. The Bill is an attempt to recognise that and, if a number of persons without the requisite level of competency apply and qualify for the audience council, to incorporate that perspective onto the audience council of TG4.
I acknowledge the practical and other difficulties raised by Deputies and that what is being proposed is something of an experiment. The Department and Coimisiún na Meán will work with TG4 to address any of these difficulties, should they materialise in the lead-up to and following the open selection process to ensure the work of the TG4 audience council continues to take place in the Irish language.
Regarding the RTÉ audience council, I recognise there is no minimum requirement for a number of members to be competent in the Irish language. There is a requirement inserted on foot of a recommendation arising from pre-legislative scrutiny that both the RTÉ and TG4 audience councils have regard to the Irish language and the needs of Gaeltacht communities. There is also the requirement on Coimisiún na Meán to ensure a diversity of membership in both audience councils. Given the specific role of the RTÉ audience council, I trust that Coimisiún na Meán will ensure an appropriate number of persons with competence in the Irish language.
We are getting the same argument again that it is discriminatory to require language proficiency for the Irish language broadcaster, which is absolutely ridiculous. It erases the many people across Ireland who are from overseas, who have learned the language and who are now fluent. They are able to provide a learners' perspective, if that is what is wanted here. That is what we are talking about. TG4 has a mandate to promote the Irish language. Nobody is suggesting preserving its ability to do its business as Gaeilge compromises those who are not Irish language speakers from watching what it is putting out there.
This year during the by-election, I had the privilege of travelling around the Gaeltacht in the west of Ireland. I now work with a native Irish speaker and I have worked with native Irish speakers in the past. I can tell you that TG4 wants and needs to do its business in Irish. That is absolutely clear, right through to the audience council, but it will not be able to do that if this legislation passes.
Nothing of what the Minister of State has said deals with the challenges arising here. We might not see anybody come through who does not have the right level of proficiency in this first round but dropping it from 15 to ten might ultimately bring it to that point. Government will have these council meetings, operations and interactions run with the need for the facilitation of translation and interpretation of documents, meetings and everything it is doing for its business. The Minister of State's suggestion that maintaining the operations being run in Irish is exclusionary is ridiculous. I am not an Irish language speaker and I watch TG4. I consume Irish language media. None of that is compromised by the organisation maintaining its ability to do its business in Irish. That is what is quite shocking here.
I want to correct something. I mentioned the board of RTÉ in relation to amendment No. 6 but I was, of course, speaking about the council. I apologise for any confusion there.
Going back to TG4 and amendment No. 7, it is absolutely shocking that this legislation proposes to do this. We know it is not what TG4 and the Irish language community want, and it is very sad that we are rowing back on that facility to protect and preserve our language in this legislation rather than continuing to bolster it further into our public institutions and law.
I see the argument Deputy Gibney is making but there is a fair point in the alternative in terms of the way it is presented in the Bill at present. For example, if we were to follow the Deputy's approach, it would mean somebody who is not proficient in the Irish language would not be able to be a member of the audience council. As I said, there are many people who watch TG4 as it stands.
They can still watch it.
They can continue to watch TG4.
Of course, they can continue to watch TG4-----
That is not what the audience council is. It does not need to be representative-----
-----and we want them to but were we to accept the amendment, they would not be able to take part in the audience council. They would be legislatively prohibited from taking part in it. I do not think that is appropriate either.
It has been appropriate until now.
The legislation does not prohibit all 15 being proficient in Irish but it requires that at least ten must be.
It fundamentally changes the way it does its business.
It provides the opportunity for somebody who is not yet proficient. Somebody, for example, who is on the journey of learning Irish but is not yet proficient, who is keen and who feels they have a contribution to make to the TG4 audience council; people whom TG4 is assisting on their journey in becoming proficient in the language.
The Deputy's amendment would prohibit them from being able to contribute to the audience council, even if they really wished to do so and had exceptional ideas to bring to the audience council. That would be the effect of the Deputy's amendment. I take her other point, and we fully expect nothing other than TG4 conducting its business in Irish. However, we think it is fair to provide this.
Looking back at my previous constituency colleague, Joe McHugh, for example, who was appointed Minister of State with responsibility for the Gaeltacht, to much criticism at the time. However, his particular journey became one of the best examples of how one could learn Irish and how this learning can be accessible. He also went on to publish a book on his experience.
We should ensure the audience council is open and accessible to everyone of all perspectives. If somebody has something of value they can contribute to that audience council, but they have not yet become proficient in Gaeilge, we should not be prohibiting them from making that contribution and being a part of it.
Did Deputy Gibney want to come back in?
Apologies, I thought because it was grouped that we could bring the Deputy back in.
Amendment put:
The Dáil divided: Tá, 58; Níl, 79; Staon, 0.
Tá
- Bacik, Ivana.
- Boyd Barrett, Richard.
- Brady, John.
- Buckley, Pat.
- Byrne, Joanna.
- Carthy, Matt.
- Clarke, Sorca.
- Collins, Michael.
- Conway-Walsh, Rose.
- Cronin, Réada.
- Crowe, Seán.
- Cummins, Jen.
- Devine, Máire.
- Donnelly, Paul.
- Ellis, Dessie.
- Ennis, Daniel.
- Farrelly, Aidan.
- Farrell, Mairéad.
- Gannon, Gary.
- Gibney, Sinéad.
- Gogarty, Paul Nicholas.
- Gould, Thomas.
- Graves, Ann.
- Guirke, Johnny.
- Hayes, Eoin.
- Healy, Seamus.
- Hearne, Rory.
- Kenny, Martin.
- Kerrane, Claire.
- Lawlor, George.
- Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
- McGettigan, Donna.
- Murphy, Paul.
- Mythen, Johnny.
- Nash, Ged.
- Newsome Drennan, Natasha.
- Ní Raghallaigh, Shónagh.
- O'Callaghan, Cian.
- O'Donoghue, Richard.
- O'Donoghue, Robert.
- O'Gorman, Roderic.
- O'Hara, Louis.
- O'Reilly, Louise.
- O'Rourke, Darren.
- Ó Broin, Eoin.
- Ó Laoghaire, Donnchadh.
- Ó Murchú, Ruairí.
- Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
- Ó Súilleabháin, Fionntán.
- Quaide, Liam.
- Quinlivan, Maurice.
- Rice, Pádraig.
- Sheehan, Conor.
- Smith, Duncan.
- Stanley, Brian.
- Tóibín, Peadar.
- Wall, Mark.
- Ward, Mark.
Níl
- Aird, William.
- Ardagh, Catherine.
- Boland, Grace.
- Brabazon, Tom.
- Brennan, Brian.
- Brennan, Shay.
- Brophy, Colm.
- Browne, James.
- Burke, Colm.
- Burke, Peter.
- Butterly, Paula.
- Buttimer, Jerry.
- Byrne, Malcolm.
- Cahill, Michael.
- Callaghan, Catherine.
- Calleary, Dara.
- Canney, Seán.
- Carrigy, Micheál.
- Carroll MacNeill, Jennifer.
- Chambers, Jack.
- Cleere, Peter 'Chap'.
- Clendennen, John.
- Collins, Niall.
- Connolly, John.
- Cooney, Joe.
- Crowe, Cathal.
- Cummins, John.
- Currie, Emer.
- Daly, Martin.
- Dempsey, Aisling.
- Devlin, Cormac.
- Dillon, Alan.
- Dolan, Albert.
- Dooley, Timmy.
- Fleming, Sean.
- Foley, Norma.
- Gallagher, Pat the Cope.
- Geoghegan, James.
- Grealish, Noel.
- Harkin, Marian.
- Heneghan, Barry.
- Heydon, Martin.
- Higgins, Emer.
- Keogh, Keira.
- Kyne, Seán.
- Lahart, John.
- Lawless, James.
- Lowry, Michael.
- McAuliffe, Paul.
- McCarthy, Noel.
- McConalogue, Charlie.
- McCormack, Tony.
- McEntee, Helen.
- McGrath, Séamus.
- McGreehan, Erin.
- Moran, Kevin Boxer.
- Moynihan, Aindrias.
- Moynihan, Michael.
- Moynihan, Shane.
- Murnane O'Connor, Jennifer.
- Murphy, Michael.
- Naughton, Hildegarde.
- Neville, Joe.
- O'Brien, Darragh.
- O'Callaghan, Jim.
- O'Connell, Maeve.
- O'Connor, James.
- O'Donnell, Kieran.
- O'Meara, Ryan.
- O'Shea, John Paul.
- O'Sullivan, Christopher.
- O'Sullivan, Pádraig.
- Ó Muirí, Naoise.
- Roche, Peter.
- Scanlon, Eamon.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Timmins, Edward.
- Troy, Robert.
- Ward, Barry.
Staon
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Joanna Byrne and Shónagh Ní Raghallaigh; Níl, Deputies Emer Currie and Paul McAuliffe.
Amendment declared lost.
I move amendment No. 6:
In page 34, line 11, to delete “inclusion of members” and substitute “inclusion of at least 3 members in the case of the audience council of RTÉ”.
Amendment put and declared lost.
I move amendment No. 7:
In page 34, line 12, to delete “at least 10 members” and substitute “all members”.
Amendment put and declared lost.
I move amendment No. 8:
In page 38, between lines 1 and 2, to insert the following:
“Insertion of new section 105A into Principal Act
41.
The Principal Act is amended by the insertion of the following section after section 105:
“Duties of a Corporation to ensure revenue supports sustainable employment
105A. A corporation shall support sustainable employment where its revenue is used to fund productions, performances and commissions, including by ensuring—
(a) that no revenue is used to fund the production of content by artificial intelligence;
(b) full compliance with the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000 and the Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019;
(c) performers, writers, composers, artists or other workers are not required to sign away their rights to future residual payments for their work, or to agree to a so-called ‘buy-out’ contract, as a precondition of work;
(d) that the principle of equal pay for equal work is upheld;
(e) the publication of and adherence to objective criteria for determining employment status and for using contracts of service, which abide by both the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of the Revenue Commissioners and Karshan (Midlands) Ltd t/a Dominos’ Pizza on 20th October 2023 and the Code of Practice on Determining Employment Status.”.”.
This amendment relates to the rights of creative workers and attempts to enshrine in law the principle that additional criteria and safeguards should be included with any money that goes towards production. On Committee Stage, the Minister, Deputy O'Donovan, outlined that he agreed with all that was being proposed but said that he could not agree to the amendment as he believed it replicated existing legal requirements. The truth is that the existing requirements have been ignored or not enforced. Whether in relation to buy-out contracts for copyright, bogus self-employment or equal pay for equal work, they have been ignored. That is why the amendment was proposed. With the additional focus on workers' rights and conditions this week, it is a shame the Government still has its head buried in the sand.
The Minister also objected to prohibiting the use of RTÉ funding for the production of content through the use of artificial intelligence - a measure he seemed to agree with - on the basis that the amendment could be interpreted as including the use of AI as a research tool. The wording regarding the production of content by AI was very clear but we were open to changing the wording if the Minister had a better suggestion that would make the intent clearer. With artists gathering in Leinster House this evening to speak about this issue and in light of the Dáil's unanimous vote in July that no public money should be spent on AI-generated content that undermines artistic content, it would be better for us to work together on a workable wording for this Bill rather than simply dismissing the amendment. I urge the Ministers to reconsider and to use the Seanad debates as another opportunity to address this issue.
I strongly support this amendment. It relates to a later amendment of my own, which proposes the deletion of the section requiring 40% of all revenues that go to RTÉ to be spent on production outsourced to the independent sector. The amendment requires that employment rights and workers' rights be properly upheld, that the use of buy-out contracts for actors and performers be avoided, and that public money not be used for that.
I do not know what assurances the Government is giving but I do not credit them. I will tell the Minister of State why. I have just come from a meeting of the Committee on Budgetary Oversight where representatives of Irish Equity, SIPTU and film crew were pointing out what happens if you try to assert your rights in the Irish film sector, as they have been doing for about a decade. We are now going to insist that 40% of revenue that goes to RTÉ be spent on productions outsourced to this sector. The Bill explicitly mentions section 481. Companies that are in receipt of what is now €177 million in tax relief are now also going to get 40% of RTÉ's revenues. The people who work in that sector, which is funded by section 481 tax relief, are in this building as we speak and they are saying that their rights are being trampled on. They have been saying that for a decade.
This Bill is about the governance of RTÉ. We have heard about excessive salaries and all of that stuff. That is true. We want the Comptroller and Auditor General to look at that. However, does the Minister of State know what nobody is scrutinising? It is the private companies RTÉ's money is now going to go to. This Bill requires that 40% of all the money that goes to RTÉ be given to private companies that are subject to no scrutiny at all. This well thought-out amendment proposed by Sinn Féin proposes that we at least put some conditions on that. My own amendment goes further and says that we should not be doing this. This is essentially a mandatory requirement to hollow out RTÉ and to outsource productions to the private sector, over which there is no scrutiny. In responding to the governance scandals and excessive salaries in RTÉ and saying that we need more oversight, why would we insist that most production be outsourced to a sector where there is no oversight? It is bonkers. They can do what they like.
What the actors and performers were saying in the Houses again today is that, in this sector, you are blacklisted if you do not accept a buy-out contract. Under EU law, you have a right to royalties from the future exploitation of your work in film or whatever. If you do not accept a contract that buys you out of those entitlements and rights, you do not get the job, you are blacklisted and you will not work again. It is similar for film crew who insist that their service to the industry be recognised. For example, you might say that you have been working as film crew for the same producer, a producer who is getting all of this public money, for 20 years and insist that your service to the industry be recognised. However, these producers refuse to recognise that service. They hide behind the DACs set up in respect of all of these independent productions. That allows them to say that you were employed by one DAC, which does not exist any more, and that neither they nor any new DAC has any responsibility to you whatsoever. They will say they do not have an employment relationship with you and that, if you dare assert your rights, you will not work again. Some of the people who were here today said that, since they first came to these Houses and brought these issues to the attention of an Oireachtas committee, they have not worked. These are people who worked in the industry for 20, 30 or 40 years.
Blacklisting is rampant in this sector, which this Bill insists will get 40% of all RTÉ's revenues. That is absolutely unacceptable. This amendment at least tries to put some conditions on it. It says that there can be no use of buy-out contracts. Every single contract given to actors and performers in this country requires them to give away their rights to future revenues. Most of the revenue that is generated from these productions comes from downstream revenues.
A film or drama does not make revenue while it is being produced. It makes revenue down the line. However, the people who are in the film are being asked to sign away that entitlement and the Government is doing nothing. In fact, it is now going to give carte blanche to those companies to have even more public money but not guarantee the rights of actors not to have to work under these contracts. That is in sharp contrast with every other jurisdiction. In Britain, they do not have to sign buy-out contracts. Even in the United States, they do not have to sign buy-out contracts. In many of the countries in Europe, they do not have to sign buy-out contracts. The situation is similar for crew, or the below-the-line workers, as they rather insultingly call them. Their service is recognised. In the Irish film industry, however, your service is not recognised. I am against that.
The Sinn Féin amendment is at least trying to say that there should be some conditionality on this money going to this sector, but in reality, we should not be insisting on what is essentially the backdoor privatisation of RTÉ to the benefit of producers who will then trample on the rights of actors, performers and film crew.
I thank the Deputies. I will reiterate what the Minister, Deputy O'Donovan, said on Committee Stage about our clear expectation that State bodies comply fully with all applicable law, whether it be employment, copyright, social protection, tax law or any relevant case law. This includes the principle of equal pay for equal work as set out in the employment equality Acts and the protections for rights holders set out in the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000. We also expect State bodies to comply with all relevant guidance, including the code of practice on determining employment status published by the Revenue Commissioners, the Department of Social Protection and the Workplace Relations Commission; the code of practice for the governance of State bodies; and any other guidelines issued by regulatory bodies, such as Coimisiún na Meán, and, likewise, for every other independent body and company as well, which are equally subject to the law in the same way.
In the context of the Deputies' amendment, it is important to note that the most recent iteration of the code of practice on determining employment status contains a five-step framework included in the Karshan judgment, which provides a decision-making model to determine the employment status of workers.
I am conscious that artificial intelligence is a new area presenting both challenges and opportunities for the media and creative sectors. In this context, I acknowledge the work done by Deputies Ó Snodaigh and Joanna Byrne in highlighting the massive challenge AI can present to our creative sectors.
From an AI transparency perspective, we have introduced regulation at EU level, which I would expect RTÉ and TG4 to fully comply with. Article 50 of the AI Act, which came into force in August of this year, sets clear transparency requirements, including a requirement on a provider such as RTÉ or TG4 to disclose if an AI system has been used to generate or manipulate text that is published with the purpose of informing the public on matters of public interest.
The supervisory responsibilities in this area as they relate to the media sector have been assigned to Coimisiún na Meán as the independent regulator. The Deputies have proposed that no revenue should be used by RTÉ or TG4 to fund the production of content using artificial intelligence. I recognise that this builds on the Dáil motion on the impact of AI on creative workers, proposed by Deputy Ó Snodaigh, which was passed this summer. This would be quite a wide-ranging provision to include in Irish law at this stage of the development and deployment of AI, particularly in the absence of accompanying guidance and consideration of the degree to which AI could be used to assist in creative or journalistic work funded or undertaken by RTÉ and TG4.
Given where we are in terms of policy development on artificial intelligence, it would be premature to introduce a measure of this nature, though I understand the intention and the concern the Deputies have for the rights and position of creative artists in this context. As the Minister, Deputy O'Donovan, set out on Committee Stage, ultimately this amendment cannot be accepted, not only for the uncertainty regarding AI but also because it replicates many of the legal requirements that apply to RTÉ, TG4 and other public bodies.
The companies are not complying with the law. They are not complying with the EU copyright directive, which relates to buy-out contracts. They are not complying with the law when it comes to the fixed-term workers legislation. Not a single worker in the Irish film industry has a contract of indefinite duration. That is after approximately €5 billion has gone into the industry. Do I trust them with AI? If they are not vindicating those rights, I absolutely do not.
Amendment put and declared lost.
Amendments Nos. 9 to 12, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 9:
In page 48, to delete lines 28 to 38, in page 49 to delete lines 1 to 41, and in page 50, to delete lines 1 to 38.
This amendment follows directly from the previous point. I will elaborate. This amendment deletes the section. The Broadcasting Act contains a figure for the amount of revenue that has to go to the independent account. I think the relevant figure is €40 million. That amount would go up to 40%, as far as I understand. We are hardwiring that into the public funding for RTÉ. In fact, it is not 40%. Some 25% must go to the independent sector. One quarter of all the money that goes to RTÉ does not actually go to RTÉ but to the independent sector for outsourcing to private companies.
The Government's amending legislation also refers to section 481. I will repeat that it is €177 million and rising. It went from €122 million in 2024 to €177 million last year. It is rising all the time.
Do not get me wrong, I am for funding the Irish film industry, but it is conditional on quality employment and training. There is no quality employment and training. The actors and performers are having their royalties, which used to be known as residuals, effectively stolen from them. There is no other way to describe it. They are forced to sign contracts whereby they sign away their rights to future residuals for ten years. Actors and performers would normally get a small cheque every time a production they were in aired again. They do not get them any longer because they have to sign them away. If they do not sign them away, they will not be in the movie. That is the way it works. Our committee heard testimony recently, for the umpteenth time, saying that is the case.
Similarly, we have film crew who have worked for the same producer companies to which the Minister of State now wants to give an even higher percentage of our RTÉ money. Those companies refuse to acknowledge an employment relationship with people they have employed again and again over periods of 20, 30 and 40 years. The clock goes back to zero for people who have worked. Imagine every single day the workers came in here and were told they were only employed for a day, and that if they were to say anything, they would not be employed the next day. That is how it is in the film industry. We would not accept that anywhere else. Why do we accept it in the film industry?
We are insisting on that 40% of RTÉ money. What we are doing is replacing proper jobs in RTÉ with no jobs and giving the money to film producers who deny their relationship with the employees, and who rob the actors and performers of their future rights to residuals. I do not believe we should do that. No oversight mechanisms are included anywhere in this legislation to prevent that from happening. There has been no serious enforcement despite the Committee on Budgetary Oversight producing a report on section 481 recommending a whole series of actions. Representatives of the trade unions came in to say that all the bits that suit the producers have been activated and that all the bits that would help the workers have not. That is what is happening. Workers, as usual, lose out. Public money is subsidising an abuse of workers' rights. I do not think that public money should be used in that way.
I will speak to amendments Nos. 10 to 12, inclusive, which are grouped alongside this amendment. We have taken a slightly different approach. We recognise that promises have been made to the independent sector, the commercial sector, regarding the 25% level of funding but we would like to see Coimisiún na Meán having the discretion to go above or below that. We have introduced that in amendment No. 10. It would allow the commission to meaningfully react to the financial situation and public service remit of RTÉ when deciding to alter the percentage in the independent productions account. We have seen such uncertainty in RTÉ funding. We need to ensure that if circumstances outside its control mean that RTÉ cannot meet its financial obligations or execute its strategy that the media regulator can assess those situations with regard to ring-fencing one quarter of its budget.
With amendments Nos. 11 and 12, we are trying to include reporting on staff wages and collective bargaining for workers' rights in the reporting of independent commissions from RTÉ.
As Deputy Boyd Barrett has just noted, with this shift away from State-provided employment in this sector, we are seeing all of this being pushed towards the commercial sector, which is how it should be described as opposed to the independent sector. We are seeing an erosion of workers' rights as a result of that.
RTÉ has assured me it follows through the public service mandate in the commissioning process, but we know the same does not happen with workers' rights. That is a reality. Broadcasting is already a precarious sector in which many people have incredibly precarious working conditions and very little access to the workers' rights they would have in other public or State-funded bodies. This is essentially what amendments Nos. 10 to 12, inclusive, seek to achieve, while still recognising that the 25% commissioning level has been worked through, that Coimisiún na Meán should be able to put that in place, if necessary, and should also be able to react to the financial circumstances of our State broadcaster, if required.
Amendment No. 9 proposed by Deputy Boyd Barrett would remove all of the proposed changes to the RTÉ independent programmes account set out in the Bill. In addition, it would remove the proposed requirement on TG4 to publish an annual report on its commissioning of productions from the independent sector. As the Deputy will be aware, section 116 of the Broadcasting Act 2009 currently provides that RTÉ shall pay a fixed index-linked sum into the independent programmes account. For 2026, this sum was €49.1 million. The independent programmes account was first introduced through the Broadcasting Authority (Amendment) Act 1993.
As the time has for the debate has elapsed, I am now obliged to put the question, "That Fourth Stage is hereby agreed and the Bill is hereby passed." Is that agreed?
Deputies
Not agreed.
Question put: "That Fourth Stage is hereby completed; and the Bill is hereby passed."
The Dáil divided: Tá, 133; Níl, 3; Staon, 0.
Tá
- Aird, William.
- Ardagh, Catherine.
- Bacik, Ivana.
- Boland, Grace.
- Brabazon, Tom.
- Brady, John.
- Brennan, Brian.
- Brennan, Shay.
- Brophy, Colm.
- Browne, James.
- Buckley, Pat.
- Burke, Colm.
- Butterly, Paula.
- Buttimer, Jerry.
- Byrne, Joanna.
- Byrne, Malcolm.
- Cahill, Michael.
- Callaghan, Catherine.
- Calleary, Dara.
- Canney, Seán.
- Carrigy, Micheál.
- Carroll MacNeill, Jennifer.
- Carthy, Matt.
- Clarke, Sorca.
- Cleere, Peter 'Chap'.
- Clendennen, John.
- Collins, Michael.
- Collins, Niall.
- Connolly, John.
- Conway-Walsh, Rose.
- Cooney, Joe.
- Cronin, Réada.
- Crowe, Cathal.
- Crowe, Seán.
- Cummins, Jen.
- Cummins, John.
- Currie, Emer.
- Daly, Martin.
- Dempsey, Aisling.
- Devine, Máire.
- Devlin, Cormac.
- Dillon, Alan.
- Doherty, Pearse.
- Dolan, Albert.
- Donnelly, Paul.
- Dooley, Timmy.
- Ellis, Dessie.
- Ennis, Daniel.
- Farrelly, Aidan.
- Farrell, Mairéad.
- Fitzmaurice, Michael.
- Fleming, Sean.
- Foley, Norma.
- Gallagher, Pat the Cope.
- Gannon, Gary.
- Geoghegan, James.
- Gibney, Sinéad.
- Gogarty, Paul Nicholas.
- Gould, Thomas.
- Graves, Ann.
- Grealish, Noel.
- Guirke, Johnny.
- Harkin, Marian.
- Hayes, Eoin.
- Hearne, Rory.
- Heneghan, Barry.
- Heydon, Martin.
- Higgins, Emer.
- Kenny, Martin.
- Keogh, Keira.
- Kerrane, Claire.
- Kyne, Seán.
- Lahart, John.
- Lawless, James.
- Lawlor, George.
- Lowry, Michael.
- Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
- McAuliffe, Paul.
- McCarthy, Noel.
- McConalogue, Charlie.
- McCormack, Tony.
- McEntee, Helen.
- McGettigan, Donna.
- McGrath, Séamus.
- McGreehan, Erin.
- Moran, Kevin Boxer.
- Moynihan, Aindrias.
- Moynihan, Michael.
- Moynihan, Shane.
- Murnane O'Connor, Jennifer.
- Murphy, Michael.
- Mythen, Johnny.
- Nash, Ged.
- Naughton, Hildegarde.
- Neville, Joe.
- Newsome Drennan, Natasha.
- Ní Raghallaigh, Shónagh.
- O'Brien, Darragh.
- O'Callaghan, Cian.
- O'Callaghan, Jim.
- O'Connell, Maeve.
- O'Connor, James.
- O'Donnell, Kieran.
- O'Donoghue, Richard.
- O'Donoghue, Robert.
- O'Gorman, Roderic.
- O'Hara, Louis.
- O'Meara, Ryan.
- O'Reilly, Louise.
- O'Rourke, Darren.
- O'Shea, John Paul.
- O'Sullivan, Christopher.
- O'Sullivan, Pádraig.
- Ó Broin, Eoin.
- Ó Laoghaire, Donnchadh.
- Ó Muirí, Naoise.
- Ó Murchú, Ruairí.
- Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
- Ó Súilleabháin, Fionntán.
- Quaide, Liam.
- Quinlivan, Maurice.
- Rice, Pádraig.
- Roche, Peter.
- Scanlon, Eamon.
- Sheehan, Conor.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Smith, Duncan.
- Timmins, Edward.
- Tóibín, Peadar.
- Troy, Robert.
- Wall, Mark.
- Ward, Barry.
- Ward, Mark.
Níl
- Boyd Barrett, Richard.
- Healy, Seamus.
- Stanley, Brian.
Staon
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Emer Currie and Paul McAuliffe; Níl, Deputies Richard Boyd Barrett and Seamus Healy.
Question declared carried.