RTE Tax

P

Purple

Registered User
Messages
13,986
We all pay, or should pay, around €150 a year in a tax to RTE to fund public service broadcasting.
Given that so much media is now consumed through the internet should some of that funding be used to support public service information provided by other sources. It struck me that this site provides a public service for free and with no advertising. Is it not just as deserving of state funding under a public service remit as RTE?
 
I have often thought that the idea of giving the licence fee to a broadcaster is outdated. Just considering TV without thinking about new media why should the public service licence fee be paid to a broadcaster. It may have made sense when broadcasting was a big deal and very capital intensive. Today there would be broadcasting in Ireland anyway without RTE. We don't need a licence fee to see Corrie.

I think the public service licence fee should be paid to content providers of Irish interest programming. Programming that wouldn't have international appeal to justify big budget productions but would be relevant to Irish audiences.
 
No consumer pays RTE a tax or licence fee of any kind. If you never watched or listened to a single RTE broadcast but possess a TV you are liable to pay the licence fee to the Minister.

cremeegg said:
... We don't need a licence fee to see Corrie. ...
Click to expand...
If you watch it on your TV you do.

This is the same ill-informed discussion that arises on boards.ie regularly and gets shut down quickly. Apparently it's spreading. It starts with letters to the Times, spreads to discussion on the BBC and residents of this State assume the funding mechanism for our State broadcaster is identical to the one in the UK. Here's news folks - it's not!
 
Last edited:
cremeegg said:
I think the public service licence fee should be paid to content providers of Irish interest programming. Programming that wouldn't have international appeal to justify big budget productions but would be relevant to Irish audiences.
Click to expand...

I agree - millions & millions of euro would be available to small firms more than willing to produce Irish programming.
 
mathepac said:
No consumer pays RTE a tax or licence fee of any kind. If you never watched or listened to a single RTE broadcast but possess a TV you are liable to pay the licence fee to the Minister.
Click to expand...
It's a tax that is used to fund RTE; it's an RTE tax. A rose by any other name and all that.
90% goes to RTE, 5% is retained by An Post as a charge to cover the cost of collection (why on earth is it collected through Post Offices?). RTE have to proivde TG4 with 1 hours worth of programming per day. They say that this costs them 5% as well. How is it not an RTE tax?

mathepac said:
This is the same ill-informed discussion that arises on boards.ie regularly and gets shut down quickly. Apparently it's spreading. It starts with letters to the Times, spreads to discussion on the BBC and residents of this State assume the funding mechanism for our State broadcaster is identical to the one in the UK. Here's news folks - it's not!
Click to expand...
Who is suggesting that the funding mechanism for RTE is the same as the BBC? I don't think anyone is silly enough to think it is. Why with the Strawman post?
 
Last edited:
In the UK the licence fee is paid to the BBC. Ill-informed people in this State, having picked up this information on the air-waves, assume their fee is paid to our State broadcaster too, which of course is nonsense. Just read the licence document, the Minister is named, RTE is not. Anyone who refers to the licence fee as an "RTE tax" is operating on the false assumption that RTE is funded like the BBC.

Traditionally post offices and broadcasters fell under the remit of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs so it made sense to have the licence fee payable via the post office as agent for for the Minister. If it's not broken, why try to fix it?
 
mathepac said:
If it's not broken, why try to fix it?
Click to expand...

Because it (the licence fee) is used to support broadcasting. This may have made sense 30 years ago, but with the revolution in technology it would make more sense to support programming making today.
 
mathepac said:
In the UK the licence fee is paid to the BBC.
Click to expand...

The UK system is actually quite similar to what we have here, but in the UK, the BBC is also the collection agency. They then sub-contract the actual collection and administration to a number of private companies including PayPoint who operate through the post offices there. They then pass the money to the central government's Consolidated Fund. The BBC then get their share via the annual Appropriation Act which allocates funding and conditions attached to the various beneficiaries of the fund. Likewise in the UK, 100% does not go to the BBC, S4C also get an allocation.

mathepac said:
Traditionally post offices and broadcasters fell under the remit of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs so it made sense to have the licence fee payable via the post office as agent for for the Minister. If it's not broken, why try to fix it?
Click to expand...

RTE have made a number of statements over the years making it clear they're not happy with An Post's effectiveness, and have asked for the collection to be put out to tender. An Post likewise have previously said they were considering requesting a legislation change to allow then to get out of the collection business as they said the negative reputational impact wasn't worth the 'meagre' return.
 
cremeegg said:
Because it (the licence fee) is used to support broadcasting. This may have made sense 30 years ago, but with the revolution in technology it would make more sense to support programming making today.
Click to expand...
But the broadcaster(s) commission and pay programme-makers and commissioning and funding for programme makers is available from other sources as well. Where is the problem?
 
Speaking as a former TV Licence Inspector I recommend that the Licence should be killed off and leave RTE to its own means (i.e. advertising for revenue). We don't have the large population to financially support a BBC type provider. Prosecuting for non possession of a TV licence is not easy. There are several "musts" before you can make a case for a court appearance. Anybody worth his/her salt could easily evade any of these laws. Even if you go for prosecution (and spend heavily in the process; An Post must have a solicitor for example who usually remains quiet throughout and collects the fee later) you face people who will offer every reason why they won't pay e.g. not enough Irish on RTE, too many US made programmes, etc.

Leo pointed out that An Post is a commercial business and can do without the negative image of prosecuting people.

Circumstantial Issue:- There was a time when Irish people needed a Radio Licence and even another Radio Licence for their car radio. People became affluent in the 1960's and bought TV sets and watched speckled black and white almost oval screens between 5.30pm to 11.10pm. To fund programming a TV licence was dreamed up as advertising was pretty basic. The TV licence while a money spinner from the likes of me who every year just pops a cheque in the post to An Post. But, the collection of lost revenue because of non possession of TV licence is probably costing as much as the income. I think it is time to kill off the TV licence fee as there is little need for it.
 
mathepac said:
In the UK the licence fee is paid to the BBC. Ill-informed people in this State, having picked up this information on the air-waves, assume their fee is paid to our State broadcaster too, which of course is nonsense. Just read the licence document, the Minister is named, RTE is not. Anyone who refers to the licence fee as an "RTE tax" is operating on the false assumption that RTE is funded like the BBC.
Click to expand...
The money is collected by the state and given to RTE. Ergo it's an RTE tax.
You are incorrect in your assumption that "Anyone who refers to the licence fee as an "RTE tax" is operating on the false assumption that RTE is funded like the BBC.". I refer to it as an RTE tax and I am not operating on that assumption.
 
Leper said:
Speaking as a former TV Licence Inspector I recommend that the Licence should be killed off and leave RTE to its own means (i.e. advertising for revenue). We don't have the large population to financially support a BBC type provider. Prosecuting for non possession of a TV licence is not easy. There are several "musts" before you can make a case for a court appearance. Anybody worth his/her salt could easily evade any of these laws. Even if you go for prosecution (and spend heavily in the process; An Post must have a solicitor for example who usually remains quiet throughout and collects the fee later) you face people who will offer every reason why they won't pay e.g. not enough Irish on RTE, too many US made programmes, etc.

Leo pointed out that An Post is a commercial business and can do without the negative image of prosecuting people.

Circumstantial Issue:- There was a time when Irish people needed a Radio Licence and even another Radio Licence for their car radio. People became affluent in the 1960's and bought TV sets and watched speckled black and white almost oval screens between 5.30pm to 11.10pm. To fund programming a TV licence was dreamed up as advertising was pretty basic. The TV licence while a money spinner from the likes of me who every year just pops a cheque in the post to An Post. But, the collection of lost revenue because of non possession of TV licence is probably costing as much as the income. I think it is time to kill off the TV licence fee as there is little need for it.
Click to expand...
If the state wants to fund RTE they should do so out of general taxation. Everyone, just about, watches TV. Why the cost of this separate funding mechanism?
 
I think this is where RTE wants to go too to be honest. They're peddling the "providing a public service" line now quite a bit. A practical example of this is RTE Junior (which is great by the way) which is ad-free. It would be a lot easier for them to get a cheque written every year from the government without having to battle it out for advertising revenue in the real world. But with such an easy source of revenue how will standards be maintained? It would be a great excuse for RTE to say that they can't provide decent programming as their only source of funding was from the government! Also, if the government of the day are writing the cheque, how do we guarantee impartiality and robust journalism?

If there is a need for providing a public service, why not offer it out to tender? Define the requirements, say, X many documentaries about Irish culture for 2016 and assign a funding to it. Get tenders in from RTE, TV3, and anyone else interested - BBC / ITV etc and pick the best. Repeat the following year - an annual contract would keep the stations on their toes, in the same way that the Masters golf tournament has been issuing TV contracts on an annual basis for the last 30 years or so.
 
Delboy said:
TV3 are already doing some great docs on Irish 'culture' from what I can see ;)
Lets hope RTE don't follow any time soon
Click to expand...

I agree and I'm no fan of most of the tripe TV3 put out. But they get little state funding and have to rely almost totally on advertising. All the while their main competitor enjoys a near monopoly in the market, with a massive chunk of their revenue coming from the license fee. Basically, TV3 is trying to fight with 2 hands tied behind their back!

What I am proposing is that funding be provided for very specific pieces of work. An example might be to offer out to tender a 3 part documentary in 2016 about the Great Famine. I've no idea how much these things would cost, but just say for argument's sake it's 600k. Whoever comes forward with the best proposal should get the job. If someone screws up, it would have a big bearing on future contracts, so it would be in their interest to do a good job. In the short term, RTE would clearly be at an advantage given its current position and relationships with film producers. But over time more and more independent film producers would be working with TV3 or someone else to make serious bids.

By turning tables, RTE would be chasing the small to medium production companies trying to get them to produce for them. It would bring more and more entrants into the market and would stimulate the market to no end.

It's a cliche I know, but competition does work!
 
I might be in the minority here but I'm absolutely in favour of RTE remaining in receipt of state funding. I can see the merit in doing away with the license and bringing the money in via taxation instead (isn't that what Pat Rabbitte was suggesting a few years back?), but I definitely do not want to end up with two versions of TV3 fighting it out for state funding for specific programmes.
I want a state broadcaster who is answerable to the state, not just to commercial interests.
This argument about RTE and TV3 being competitors just does not wash with me. RTE are the state broadcaster - TV3 are just another private operator, no different to Sky, ITV, Channel 4, or any of the other plethora of operators out there. I don't see why they think they should be any different to them personally.
 
TG4 do public service broadcasting.
RTE itself does precious little. RTE 2 is dire.

RTE1 - Eastenders, Fair City, Winning Streak etc - all pretty poor stuff.

Think - the licence fee should go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top