We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
THE QUESTION OF how RTÉ will continue to be funded has been in the spotlight for the last year due to the ongoing controversy surrounding the public broadcaster’s finances.
Yesterday, Media Minister Catherine Martin published two Expert Advisory Committee reports on RTÉ’s governance and culture, and on contractor fees, HR and other matters, which are set to lead the way for the reform of the organisation.
However, while the report recommended that the issue needs to be addressed “so that RTÉ has a more sustainable funding model”, it remains unclear exactly how the Government intends to replace the current €160 licence fee.
So what are the options for how RTÉ might be funded?
Direct Exchequer funding is one of the options on the table and is thought to be the option favoured by the Minister.
This model was recommended by the Future of Media Commission in a report published in 2022, before the controversy surrounding the national broadcaster emerged. At the time, the Government chose to retain the licence fee system.
The model would mean the licence fee was scrapped and the public broadcaster was funded exclusively by the State.
Speaking yesterday, Catherine Martin said: “I’ve stated before that I see risks with every model, but I do believe what the Future of Media Commission recommended originally has great merit, moreso now in light of what emerged in RTE, and I do believe safeguards can be put in place.”
However, some politicians have expressed reservations about this idea, including Tánaiste Micheál Martin, who said in March that it would be a “dangerous development” and could harm the editorial independence of the broadcaster.
“In a tight situation, if politicians of the day don’t like what RTÉ is doing or are annoyed about certain programmes or whatever like that, they can say, well, let’s slash €10 million off that, that can happen in the real world,” he said.
“I think we need to guard against that. Some people think the easiest thing to do is just give 100% Exchequer. I think that’s a dangerous development.”
Another idea that has been floated is a hybrid model which would see a reduced charge for households coupled with direct Exchequer funding on an annual basis.
However, Catherine Martin told reporters yesterday that this was not something that had been recommended to her.
“I think what really needs to be done in relation to the future funding model, it needs to be credible, it needs to be sustainable, and it needs to have public acceptance,” the Media Minister said.
I think we have to be careful you don’t end up with the worst of both worlds.
Martin said she believes there are two credible options on the table: the direct Exchequer funding model, or a remodelled TV licence fee that would be collected by Revenue.
This would replace the current licence fee, which is paid directly by people online or in a Post Office.
Public Exchequer Minister Paschal Donohoe previously expressed reservations about this model.
“I would indeed have some reservations about it, but I am willing to look at it,” he said in November.
“[The reason it was rejected before] is because the Revenue Commissioners only collects taxes. And there’s a really important difference between tax, and the law behind tax, and something that is a charge.
Taoiseach Simon Harris said last month that direct Exchequer funding or “a better collected TV licence system” were the two options on the table.
“Quite frankly, all of its paid by taxpayers, all of its paid by the people we represent in Dáil Éireann, so I have an open mind in relation to that,” he said.
“I have heard people express views of concern in relation to direct Exchequer funding but I certainly wouldn’t like to see a situation where the TV licence fee would increase and I do think with better collection mechanisms, it is possible for that not to happen.”
A monthly levy on broadband bills that would replace the current licence fee had been considered as a possible option for the future funding of the broadcaster.
However, it’s been reported that this charge is not one that is still considered a serious option by Government.
It’s understood that this is due to the fact that a broadband levy hasn’t been used for public service broadcasting in any other country so there is no model to examine.
It would also be administratively difficult, since there are around 100 broadband firms in existence, it would not take account of the varying speeds and qualities of broadband around the country, and there would have to be a way to have exemptions for pensioners and low-income families.
Catherine Martin said yesterday that all options were still very much up for discussion and that there were differences of opinion around the Cabinet table on which funding model would be the most suitable.
She said the decision on the new funding model would be made before the summer.
However, the legislation required to change the funding model – and implement other changes recommended in the reports – will likely not be ready until autumn at the earliest.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Subscription!!! YOU WANT IT…YOU PAY FOR IT!!!
@Mick Hanna: exactly, totally agree. Why pay for something you don’t watch.
@Mick Hanna: They wouldn’t make very much???
@Dave Barrett: You get that life isn’t all about you right?
@Chutes: You expect me to fund RTE for you by means of a fee even though I don’t watch it.
@Dave Barrett: It’s not for me either but I get that for others it’s a worthwhile public good so I pay, you do you!
@Chutes: No, I don’t pay. I’m taxed enough.
Focus already turning to funding, no answers to any of the questions, nobody named, nobody accountable, the former DG getting away Scot free, no Garda or Revenue investigation, no transparency, no reforms, just lets start pumping Millions into RTE again, the Ireland of double standards. Let them fund themselves as a business, if it doesn’t pay, then it doesn’t survive. Public Service broadcasting is being provided by others who get no funding. Stop farting around & show some real leadership ffs. Those who exited with mega Pensions, Exit Packages & Non Disclosure Agreements are laughing & giving the finger to Joe & Josephine Taxpayer, is it any wonder Irish people are looking to the extremes.
@jak: Tell us all about these huge salaries that they earn? I’m looking now at some advertised vacancies: Sub-Principal Violin 43K-50K, Tutti 37K-47K. And anyway, it’s not all about the performance – they practice and rehearse also.
So we should pay to be propagandised, No Thanks.
Split it up.
A public service broadcaster for news, current affairs and local issues, paid for by general taxation without any advertising. And the rest sold off as a commercial station funded by advertising alone, the “stars” can go to the commercial station.
It’s really not difficult.
@John Smith: Jesus wept, we’re impossible
Any sign of Dee at all?
@John arse: Would love to know the validity of these sick certs, surely a second opinion should be asked, given that she is responsible for the mess created. The Govt should have called her bluff & summoned her to explain her actions. Disgusting to think she gets away with a mega pension considering her obvious failures, in the real world the rest of us would have been sacked.
Whether ‘losing’ barter accounts for the PAC, or ‘losing’ laptops/mobiles for tribunals, there should be legal sanctions full stop.
@Padraic O’ Sullivan: yeah she certainly fell ill just at the right time,no doubt she’s hoping that she’ll be slowly but surely forgotten about and can slip off into the sunset with her nice pension!!!
This will be like the FAI finding Stephen Kenny’s replacement. I would be very surprised if they came up with a solution by autumn.
Does anyone else think that dee forbes got away lightly ??
Considering how little regard for irish citizens taxes the entitled chancers in fgg have shown isn’t it the pure multi faced hypocrisy for the rabid way they have attacked rte .
Drop the fee to €50 a year, use it to fund a non-commercial small scale broadcaster befitting of our population size.
Let the cover only public interest programming.
Spin the rest off into a commercial venture with no public funding, whoever buys it can do as they please with their own money.
At the upcoming local elections pop a question on the ballot papers. Q. Should taxpayers money fund RTE. A. YES/NO. Listen to the people for a change.
Never mind the funding, who accountable for siphoning tax payers money?
The Licence TAX has to Go. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!
Public Service Broadcasting is important. Funding should come from Revenue.
@Sean O’Dhubhghaill: funding should be collected by Revenue in same manner as LPT.
@Sean O’Dhubhghaill: Then people will view it as a tax. People will not be happy. Then you’ll have the same situation as the water charges.
@Pat Hazzard: Get out of it. What you are suggesting is another tax on already hard pressed workers. Have no doubt that if it is collected this way it will be diverted to pay for migrant accomadation.
@Pat Hazzard: sorry I do not use RTE at all. My job is mainly overseas yet based in Ireland. Why should I pay for this?
@Sean O’Dhubhghaill: Charges should not be turned into tax. That’s what the Govt would like. Revenue would pursue you even after you died. This must be resisted. They tried to make the water charge a tax. Luckily, we gave them our answer .
@Mic JHintl: social contract
@Dave Barrett: a broadcasting charge would replace the TV license, and be less due to higher compliance
@Sean O’Dhubhghaill: The only service this broadcaster provides is for the government and watch them go into overdrive when we near the general election, they will do their best to throw muck at opposition parties, it became very obvious on the run up to the last election, this is why the government want and need to fund them. RTE should be disbanded, most of the general public have no trust in them.
@Pat Hazzard: people already pay for their streaming services. So if people decided to pay “this broadcasting charge” it still goes against the grain. Let’s face it, this government wants a national broadcasting service. I don’t, many more don’t. Still beggars the question as to who will collect this charge. If it’s revenue then it’s a tax. Irish people have had enough from this government. This charge certainly won’t be brought in before the general election for fear of backlash.
@Pat Hazzard: It will still pay for flip flops. No way am I supporting RTE.
@Seanie: RTE heads always speaking about the importance of Public Broadcasting to prevent Misinformation, the very same organization who misinformed the Irish Taxpayer & Licence Fee holder about Ryan Tubridys salary, their Barter Funds, their Top ups, their mega Exit Packages & Non Disclosure Agreements, the false Invoicing, the list is endless. RTE & it’s staff have done more damage to Irish Democracy than anybody else, working Irish people no longer trust RTE, the State, the Govt & any State bodies, Ireland is right on the edge now & those at the top can’t see it coming. It’s going to be like a bomb when things explode here & those such as RTE are responsible.
Privatise the bloody thing. Government could then set up a national charter regarding freedom of speech and serving public needs that would apply to all media outlets. Any public charges should go directly to production companies to fund native shows and encourage more people into making content for either broadcast or streaming. I believe Germany has no state media and they seem to get on fine. RTE has wasted the last 30 years shoving socialist and woke ideology down the public throat. And we’re switching off in droves. They have to start actually proving they can earn their own keep or risk sinking in the seas that is the broadcasting market.
@Paulina Henleigh: RTÉ was woke 30 years ago?! In that case props to RTÉ for being such an innovative and visionary organisation. At this rate we should be throwing even more money at it seeing as it’s able to foresee movements and buzzwords decades in advance!
In all seriousness, it hasn’t been shoving anything like that down anyone’s throat. Unless you find a little more representation of the diverse range of citizens in our country offensive. Sadly for you media and TV are under no obligation to reflect your values and ideals only. Embrace the change and variety and be glad we aren’t living in some totalitarian hellhole.
set up in a cheaper location like a business estate and live of advertising without any strings attached, like if a company that advertises on rte does something no sugar coating the news report on that company plus make programs that you can sell to other networks around the world, we are infested with British, American, Canadian and Australian programs, rte should return the favour.
We desperately need the fearless journos of RTE to read the press releases and to report on situations like the Stardust, 43 years after the event. Go back to sleep Ireland!
If Bambie Thug wins Eurovision is it fully down to RTÉ to pay for it? Or is the tourist board, arts council etc involved? I’m not sure how it works but I remember it being a big discussion years ago when Ireland used to win it fairly regularly. Surely RTÉ won’t be able to afford it if they win. I guess we could justify using some of the rainy day fund as it would be such a huge opportunity to promote tourism etc.
I was gonna let it lie, but then I see this story. You do know there’s a certain individual that if questioned publicly could make us all feel a whole-lot-better about paying the TV license fee. Yes, the person in question could really be ill, but if not, if indeed it’s all a sham, some might say (not I) that that same person knows they can never (never) show their face in public again – not the shops for a cabbage or expensive stores for whatever, not a restaurant, not a holiday snap, possibly, if ill enough, not even a walk in the park….less such a public sighting suggests they are ‘now’ available to be interviewed by certain powers. Hey, it’s that individuals choice entirely, or maybe they really are that ill, as again, some might think. Not I however, I could not give a damn.
Not us paying for it like an unwanted phallus inserting itself into your least favourite orifice.
RTE shouldn’t receive a cent from anywhere until Dee Forbes is dragged to the trough and forced to give an account of her role in all of this. The fact that this hasn’t happened already suggests to me that either she holds a significant amount of dirt on high ranking people , or she’s a frightened and incompetent little girl who should have never been allowed anywhere near the DG role.
Very convenient of RTE to announce Doireann Garrity departure on the same day as the damning report is released.
Really? Still no climbdown from €160?
They have some bledy neck on them.
What a cheek! Bring it down to €50 or less, maybe triple or quadruple those willing to pay….thus revenue increases. Core basic Junior Cert Business – lower your price, increase your customer base/turnover per unit.
What happened to “nobody gets to leave until there is accountability”?
Anyone not cooperating with PAC investigations should be assumed guilty. End of story. Same goes for Garda Bodycamera ‘turn in on and off as it suits ya’ BS.
Same raised eyebrows should be applied to Leo The Leak – what pro-Zionist coercion was applied to him in AmeriKKKa that induced him to resign after defying the will of the **IRISH** Electorate and their Representative Opposition TDs on *multiple* occasions during multiple No Confidence motions!!?
Well?
Also, curious how there have been similar subversive attacks on both the Spanish and the Scottish pro-Palestine Parliamentary Leaders and yet nobody from the pool of so-called “journalists” is saying anything about it, nor asking questions. Every last one of ye deserve to be gobbled up by the Commercial gobsheen homogenies of Murdock et al.
RTE definitely should not be privatised.
And any gobsheen advocating for such is a truly ignorant fool. Public Health, Road Safety and wider occasional cases that require multidisciplinary Public Messaging – all need affordable and guaranteed access to the multifaceted Broadcasting Medium [Radio, TV etc].
What does Public Messaging involve?
Well, ask your Journos to do their jobs, because you shouldn’t have to wonder, or ask.
Eg: historic campaigns on harms of Drinking Alcohol/Smoking while Pregnant; DV, general Road Use and Road Safety, early anti-Drink+Drive, Pandemic info during the Pandemic etcetera.
RTE should be a very low “pay per view” type of thing.
At least on a 1-2 year trial basis.
Explore the truth of what programmes actually matter to people. What programmes they want to keep or drop based on willingness to pay for them (€0.50c per episode/€2 whole season). Especially on Sundry/Surplus to core basic Series’ – like Entertanment/Drama/Reality TV/Film.
Set aside Documentary, Indigenous Nature Programming [Éanna Ní Lamhna/Moony], indigenous Music Programming, Coverage of National Events (Music+GAA+Ploughing), indigenous News, european News, international News, Weather etc as a Free to view but with a Rating requirement before viewing/listening. Guage if people are/are not willing to pay for certain programs to continue to be funded by Public.
RTE should only get a very, very, low core basic permission to request “Licence Fee” from the public. Like €30 or €50. Until they prove sustained and transparent reform ***and radical improvement on journalistic professionalism and war zone+investigative experience***.
I mean, hello like, where is their coverage from the Lebanese border?
Not just with the Irish Peacekeeping contingent fer jaysus sakes. Do **actual journalism**.
Where is there journalism inside occupied Palestine?
Why aren’t they they the FIRST News Organisation to hire **Students** of Journalism to lawfully report on Palestine Rallies inside the Campus grounds of multiple AmeriKKKan Universities!!? (highly affordable journalism, with exceptional access).
Why haven’t RTE reached out to Al Jazeera to “buy out” (in name only) aka provide cover for their entire infrastructure inside occupied Palestine so that it can re-launch broadcasting inside the Occupation Regime’s settlements.
Rebrand: “Emerald” (in Arabic). Maybe join up with Spanish and Belgian Public Broadcasters to establish a permanent journalistic presence and live reporting – not just during bombardments, but sustained reporting on child abuse of Palestinian children inside zionist prisons. Or organise to set up a “handing-off” of “former Al Jazeera infrastructure and personnel” to each Nation’s PB to prevent seizure and shut down and to help keep Al Jaz’ reporting going….under different names+shell companies….inside the Fascist Occupation.
No question. The entire Nation of Ireland would bledy crowd-fund for that like
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
[[[Should probably crowd-fund an Irish version of AIPAC while we're at it, from diaspora in Australia to across Europe to Canada *through* Ireland, mix diaspora in with indigenous crowd-funding here, then funnel it through a trusted Irish-American citizen(s) in USA {legal requirements}, and drive Cornel West to POTUS 2024, for Palestine. If AIPAC can do it, why not the "American Irish Palestinian Affairs Committee" too?]]]
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say