Catherine Martin, the Minister for Media, has a considerable task to persuade her fellow Cabinet members that her favoured financing structure for RTÉ should be implemented, according to the Oireachtas Media Committee chairman. Ms Martin is advocating for a multi-year government funding model for the media company, as advised by the independent body, Coimisiún na Meán.
Yet, there is hesitancy among some Cabinet members, including the Minister for Public Expenditure, Paschal Donohoe, and Tánaiste Micheál Martin, about endorsing such a commitment. Ms Martin has expressed her wish to finalise the decision ahead of the Dáil’s summer break in the coming weeks.
Niamh Smyth, the head of the joint committee on Tourism, Culture, Arts, Sports, and Media, stated on RTE’s Morning Ireland show that she personally believes in gaining public ‘buy in’ via the TV licence to partially support public service broadcasting.
According to her, lessons learnt over the past 15 or 18 months amid intensifying debates about RTÉ indicate the public’s respect for public service broadcasting. She emphasised the public’s trust in credible media outlets and noted that in 2022, €156 million was amassed from the TV licence. She expressed that this income should not be dismissed.
Given these elements, she concluded that Minister Martin has a significant task ahead to persuade government leaders and counterparts that this is the right way forward. However, she added that while she supports the TV licence, the current collection method isn’t appropriate.
Smyth’s comments came as a response to the report titled “Future Business Model Plans and Long-Term Vision for the Media Sector,” due to be released today. Smyth, a TD for Cavan Fianna Fáil, further expressed the public’s visible dissatisfaction with RTÉ’s handling of severance packages.
The media sector’s future-oriented report is a thorough study comprising 29 proposals, which range from public service broadcasting financing to community, regional content, digital development and digital transformation.
In her claim, she affirmed that the study delved deeper than just exploring finance for public service broadcasts. She highlighted it discussed enthusiastic, extensive-period funding mechanisms and their attached indexation. The conversation also included community aspirations for the media sector, future journalism scholarships and bursaries.
She strongly believes the examination’s overriding emphasis was the repercussions on democracy of misinformation and disinformation and the paramount role all these factors play when considering public service broadcasting.