A compulsory 'Broadcast tax' next on the list for homes in Ireland

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

In the case of Larry O'Toole, yes they did.

Glad we finally confirmed that then.

Happyman42 wrote: »

The Joint Committees 'propose' members of the Board. 'Propose', the minister can refuse to appoint if he doesn't deem them fit.

They're Board members selected by the committee - not the government - as I said.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

Glad we finally confirmed that then.

I've been saying it since post 209.
Have you anything to say about government interference in RTE of which section 31 (ancient history apparently) is just an example.

They're Board members selected by the committee - not the government - as I said.

'Proposed' by the Joint committee. The Minister names the Board and can refuse a 'prposed' member.
Subtle but important nonetheless.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

I've been saying it since post 209.
Have you anything to say about government interference in RTE of which section 31 (ancient history apparently) is just an example.

Yeah - there isn't any government interference in RTE.

Happyman42 wrote: »

'Proposed' by the Joint committee. The Minister names the Board and can refuse a 'prposed' member.
Subtle but important nonetheless.

Selected by a non government committee. The minister has the power to fire the board, so all members are ultimately approved by him/her, but there's never been a joint committee nominee rejected by the minister, same as there's never been a union appointee rejected. The board operates independently of the Minister, and the government - a scenario confirmed by the various spats between them over the years (including the most recent one over Fr Kevin Reynolds).

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

Yeah - there isn't any government interference in RTE.



Selected by a non government committee. The minister has the power to fire the board, so all members are ultimately approved by him/her, but there's never been a joint committee nominee rejected by the minister, same as there's never been a union appointee rejected. The board operates independently of the Minister, and the government - a scenario confirmed by the various spats between them over the years (including the most recent one over Fr Kevin Reynolds).

Well some clarity is needed here...The Joint Committee have only been proposing members since the 2008 Broadcasting Act changes.
http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/bills/2008/2908/B29b08s-da.pdf
Already we have accusations that the new arrangements re: the Broadcasting Charge, are favours in kind to RTE for services done to the government.

You'll need to post sources for your contention that...

there's never been a joint committee nominee rejected by the minister, same as there's never been a union appointee rejected.

where is that on the public record? I haven't seen it and would like to look at it.

Rather than disprove my theory of Government control of RTE the Fr. Reynolds case shows how the government of the day routinely mark RTE's cards. There is no doubt that journalistic hands are tied either by subtle pressure from above or by self censorship.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

You'll need to post sources for your contention that...

where is that on the public record? I haven't seen it and would like to look at it.

Are you serious? The joint committees (which you didn't appear to be aware of as of yesterday) are very vocal in asserting their independence from government, and any minister that would veto their decisions would be dragged through the vilification process in the media. It's the kind of leverage that the joint committes are designed for.

Happyman42 wrote: »

Rather than disprove my theory of Government control of RTE the Fr. Reynolds case shows how the government of the day routinely mark RTE's cards. There is no doubt that journalistic hands are tied either by subtle pressure from above or by self censorship.

Rubbish. RTE undoubtedly screwed up royally with regard to Reynolds. The board, by design, get to carry the can for institutional failings - of which this is a prime example. Has there been any government interference? Not a bit of it. Just critical commentary, equivalent to any other observers of this mess.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

Are you serious? The joint committees (which you didn't appear to be aware of as of yesterday) are very vocal in asserting their independence from government, and any minister that would veto their decisions would be dragged through the vilification process in the media. It's the kind of leverage that the joint committes are designed for.

Sources please. I've posted mine (the changes to the act) that spell out exactly what I was contending... that ultimately the government have control of who sits on the board.

Rubbish. RTE undoubtedly screwed up royally with regard to Reynolds. The board, by design, get to carry the can for institutional failings - of which this is a prime example. Has there been any government interference? Not a bit of it. Just critical commentary, equivalent to any other observers of this mess.

Of course the government can take the right to interfere if it's a 'state broadcaster', the Act is very clearly worded to allow this, the question is, would it have that right if it was a proper 'public broadcaster'.
There is a distiction between a 'state broadcaster' and a 'public broadcaster'.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

Well some clarity is needed here...The Joint Committee have only been proposing members since the 2008 Broadcasting Act changes.
http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/bills/2008/2908/B29b08s-da.pdf
Already we have accusations that the new arrangements re: the Broadcasting Charge, are favours in kind to RTE for services done to the government.

We have? And what do RTE stand to gain from a change to a broadcast charge? It makes no difference to them.

The current board by the way - all the ministerial appointments? - made by Eamon Ryan. Clear evidence of subtle government control at play there - given that the Greens are running the country.

Oh, wait...

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

Sources please. I've posted mine (the changes to the act) that spell out exactly what I was contending... that ultimately the government have control of who sits on the board.

Sources for what? Ministerial vetoes that didn't happen? The government didn't choose anyone sitting on this board btw.

Happyman42 wrote: »

Of course the government can take the right to interfere if it's a 'state broadcaster', the Act is very clearly worded to allow this, the question is, would it have that right if it was a proper 'public broadcaster'.
There is a distiction between a 'state broadcaster' and a 'public broadcaster'.

The only distinction between a public broadcaster and a state public broadcaster, is that it's a national public broadcaster. It's still, by law, completely independent of government (aside from having to adhere to the laws of the land, like the rest of us).

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

We have? And what do RTE stand to gain from a change to a broadcast charge? It makes no difference to them.

What institution, business do you know of that will bite the hand that feeds it?
If you where say, in reciept of a grant from the Arts Council, how publically critical of it could you sensibly be?
That is the subtle influence that can be brought to bear on a DG or a Board, and it is readily seen, if your eyes are open, in how RTE reports what is actually happening in this country. There is a reason Enda Kenny and most high ranking government ministers will not appear on the unfettered and uncontrollable Tonight With Vincent Browne show. Pat Rabbitte was threatening the high court two minutes into his appearance with Browne's stand-in Sam Smyth the other night.

The current board by the way - all the ministerial appointments? - made by Eamon Ryan. Clear evidence of subtle government control at play there - given that the Greens are running the country.

Oh, wait...

Not made by Eamon Ryan on his own, announced by Eamon Ryan after passing at cabinet level.
The point that you seem to miss is that the appointment of the Board and the removal of members of the board, is within the gift of the government as is the funding of the station.
That is not by any standards an 'independent' board or station.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

What institution, business do you know of that will bite the hand that feeds it?

Again - what difference does the broadcast charge make to RTE? You're claiming it's a pay-off - on what basis?

Happyman42 wrote: »

Not made by Eamon Ryan on his own, announced by Eamon Ryan after passing at cabinet level.
The point that you seem to miss is that the appointment of the Board and the removal of members of the board, is within the gift of the government as is the funding of the station.
That is not by any standards an 'independent' board or station.

Who in the government was in that cabinet? Not one of them. The board is independent of the government.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

Sources for what? Ministerial vetoes that didn't happen? The government didn't choose anyone sitting on this board btw.

It's a simple question...how do you know 'they didn't happen' ?

We didn't know this happened until state papers where released

http://www.thejournal.ie/state-papers-haughey-personally-intervened-in-rte-news-bulletins-63333-Dec2010/

Read this letter in the Irish Times

http://www.publicinquiry.eu/2009/04/01/time-to-bear-witness-once-again/

The evidence of continued government interference and influence in RTE is all over the place if you care to look.

The only distinction between a public broadcaster and a state public broadcaster, is that it's a national public broadcaster. It's still, by law, completely independent of government (aside from having to adhere to the laws of the land, like the rest of us).

The distinction is not sufficiently defined here, is the point I am making. The review of the way forward did not address that distinction when it should have.
And it's clearly the reason why savvy people no longer look to RTE News and Current Affairs as their primary source. That will only deepen the crisis in RTE and it's status and usefulness as National Broadcaster as we move forward into the digital age. (Would you really go to RTE.ie for content? Seriously?)

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

Again - what difference does the broadcast charge make to RTE? You're claiming it's a pay-off - on what basis?

By not properly reviewing Public Broadcasting and it's shortcomings in Ireland and maintaing the lions share of the Broadcasting Charge for RTE. By maintaining the staus quo despite calls for part of the funding from other broadcasters and media.

Who in the government was in that cabinet? Not one of them. The board is independent of the government.

It clearly isn't and hasn't been on numerous occaisions, I can't understand the denial you seem to be living in.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

It's a simple question...how do you know 'they didn't happen' ?

We didn't know this happened until state papers where released

More rubbish. Joint Committee decisions are not sealed - they kick up a fuss very publically if they don't get their way. They're not the government.

Happyman42 wrote: »

The distinction is not sufficiently defined here, is the point I am making. The review of the way forward did not address that distinction when it should have.
And it's clearly the reason why savvy people no longer look to RTE News and Current Affairs as their primary source. That will only deepen the crisis in RTE and it's status and usefulness as National Broadcaster as we move forward into the digital age. (Would you really go to RTE.ie for content? Seriously?)

More of the 'savvy' guff? This is your personal fantasy - and best of luck to you, but I'm not a subscriber.

http://www.siliconrepublic.com/new-media/item/29318-rt-is-the-most-visited-loc

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

By not properly reviewing Public Broadcasting and it's shortcomings in Ireland and maintaing the lions share of the Broadcasting Charge for RTE. By maintaining the staus quo despite calls for part of the funding from other broadcasters and media.

Funding recommendations are the remit of the BAI. We've no idea how the government will respond to those recommendations - so unless you've a crystal ball - you've no idea what's going to happen.

Happyman42 wrote: »

It clearly isn't and hasn't been on numerous occaisions, I can't understand the denial you seem to be living in.

I'm simply dealing with the facts of the matter.

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

Sources please. I've posted mine (the changes to the act) that spell out exactly what I was contending... that ultimately the government have control of who sits on the board.

.

That is a ridiculous request.

Try googling "oireachtas nominees to RTE authority rejected by government" and you get nothing to answer your demand because there is nothing. You are asking him to prove a negative.

Now, for an illustration of how you can get on to the board, read the following:

http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/mediazone/pressreleases/name-1387-en.html


You didn't happen to put your own name forward, did you?

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

More rubbish. Joint Committee decisions are not sealed - they kick up a fuss very publically if they don't get their way. They're not the government.

How many proposals have they made?

More of the 'savvy' guff? This is your personal fantasy - and best of luck to you, but I'm not a subscriber.

http://www.siliconrepublic.com/new-media/item/29318-rt-is-the-most-visited-loc

I asked...'would you use the RTE.ie site for content?'

I'm only too aware that part of the problem in this country is that people only use RTE for their political analysis and content. And because they routinely fail at the job of being a proper National Public Broadcaster is what is at the nub of this. Those who support the establishment parties in this country will always be happy to shore up RTE's position.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

Funding recommendations are the remit of the BAI. We've no idea how the government will respond to those recommendations - so unless you've a crystal ball - you've no idea what's going to happen.

Given what I know of how things work in this country, I can guess.

I'm simply dealing with the facts of the matter.

No you aren't, you attempted to say that Section 31 was a 'Stickie conspiracy' when the fact is that it was a legal instrument drawn up and passed into law and strenghtened by the government. You ignored the fact that the entire Authority of the time was sacked by the Minister and that jounalists where jailed when they broke ranks and what that means to any notion of 'independence'. And you have ignored the fact that that those acts have left a legacy that hampers and hinders a proper Public Broadcaster.
You haven't dealt with sources posted that clearly show repeated government interference in the day to day running of the station.
You stated that no proposals from the Joint Committee have been vetoed by the Minister without any sources or facts to back that up.
Are you sure you know what a 'fact' is?

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

That is a ridiculous request.

Try googling "oireachtas nominees to RTE authority rejected by government" and you get nothing to answer your demand because there is nothing. You are asking him to prove a negative.

Now, for an illustration of how you can get on to the board, read the following:

http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/mediazone/pressreleases/name-1387-en.html


You didn't happen to put your own name forward, did you?

I didn't make the statement, Alastair did.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

I didn't make the statement, Alastair did.

No - you did.

It's a simple question...how do you know 'they didn't happen' ?

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

No you aren't, you attempted to say that Section 31 was a 'Stickie conspiracy' when the fact is that it was a legal instrument drawn up and passed into law and strenghtened by the government. You ignored the fact that the entire Authority of the time was sacked by the Minister and that jounalists where jailed when they broke ranks and what that means to any notion of 'independence'. And you have ignored the fact that that those acts have left a legacy that hampers and hinders a proper Public Broadcaster.
You haven't dealt with sources posted that clearly show repeated government interference in the day to day running of the station.
You stated that no proposals from the Joint Committee have been vetoed by the Minister without any sources or facts to back that up.
Are you sure you know what a 'fact' is?

The courts of the land proved that RTE were censoring independently of any Section 31 requirements. That's good enough to confirm my statement regarding an internal bias.

A singular RTE journalist was jailed btw - for two days on a contempt of court charge - section 31 wasn't in force at the time.

No proposed JC nominees for the board have been vetoed - that's a fact. If you feel you can prove otherwise - knock yourself out.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

No - you did.

No, it was you who said it, I asked you for a source.
I never said that a proposal was vetoed, I merely stated that the Minister had and has the power to so do.

alastair wrote: »

Selected by a non government committee. The minister has the power to fire the board, so all members are ultimately approved by him/her, but there's never been a joint committee nominee rejected by the minister, same as there's never been a union appointee rejected. The board operates independently of the Minister, and the government - a scenario confirmed by the various spats between them over the years (including the most recent one over Fr Kevin Reynolds).

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

No, it was you who said it, I asked you for a source.
I never said that a proposal was vetoed, I merely stated that the Minister had and has the power to so do.

You disputed that this was the case. Are you now happy to accept that no nominee has been vetoed?

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

The courts of the land proved that RTE were censoring independently of any Section 31 requirements. That's good enough to confirm my statement regarding an internal bias.

No proposed JC nominees for the board have been vetoed - that's a fact. If you feel you can prove otherwise - knock yourself out.

The courts of the land proved that RTE were censoring independently of any Section 31 requirements in relation to the Larry O'Toole issue.

Stop it Alastair and deal with section 31 itself.

No proposed JC nominees for the board have been vetoed - that's a fact. If you feel you can prove otherwise - knock yourself out.

I don't know what happened when the names where presented to the Minister, and neither do you, obviously. All I said was that the minister has the power to veto any name he deems unfit to serve. (and I posted a source for that). That is all the proof I need to say that the government controls who sits on the Board and who the DG is.

Have a look at the Joint Committee also, nice cosy coven of the establishment parties eh?
M.J. Nolan TD, Fianna Fáil, (Chairman)
Peter Kelly TD, Fianna Fáil, (Vice Chairman)
Noel Coonan TD, Fine Gael
Simon Coveney TD, Fine Gael
Michael D'Arcy TD, Fine Gael
Jimmy Devins TD, Fianna Fáil
Mattie McGrath TD, Fianna Fáil
Joe McHugh TD, Fine Gael
Liz McManus TD, Labour Party
Michael Moynihan TD, Fianna Fáil
John Browne TD, Fianna Fáil
Senator Maria Corrigan, Fianna Fáil
Senator Joe O'Reilly, Fine Gael
Senator Jim Walsh, Fianna Fáil
Senator Joe O’Toole, Independent

Btw, the answer to that other question you failed to answer;
The JC have only proposed canidates once.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

You disputed that this was the case. Are you now happy to accept that no nominee has been vetoed?

No, I asked you for a source for what you said was the case. I didn't dispute it, because I don't know either way.

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

No, I asked you for a source for what you said was the case. I didn't dispute it, because I don't know either way.

Well now you do!!!

http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/mediazone/pressreleases/name-1387-en.html

My previous link gave the nominees see above. The next link gives the current board - see below

http://www.rte.ie/about/en/how-rte-is-run/2012/0220/290060-rte-board/

The nominees are all on the Board, therefore the Minister has not exercised his veto.

Will you finally admit that the Minister has never used his veto?

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

I don't know what happened when the names where presented to the Minister, and neither do you, obviously.

I do though. They were accepted.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

All I said was that the minister has the power to veto any name he deems unfit to serve. (and I posted a source for that). That is all the proof I need to say that the government controls who sits on the Board and who the DG is.

Again - the government appointed no-one to this board.

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

Well now you do!!!

http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/mediazone/pressreleases/name-1387-en.html

My previous link gave the nominees see above. The next link gives the current board - see below

http://www.rte.ie/about/en/how-rte-is-run/2012/0220/290060-rte-board/

The nominees are all on the Board, therefore the Minister has not exercised his veto.

Will you finally admit that the Minister has never used his veto?

At last! Was it that hard?
Now maybe we can deal with the implications to an 'independent' Public Broadcaster of the Minister having a very clear veto and control of the board.
Here is yet another instance of interference in an actual appointment of The DG.
That power still exists, make your own mind up about the possibility of it happening again and the implications of that.

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/1985/03/12/00023.asp

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

At last! Was it that hard?

Getting past the quibbling? Yes it was.

So far we've had you claiming the board was entirely government appointed, that the joint committees were part of the government, that the minister could have vetoed a JC nominee without a massive PR disaster, and that a board appointed under a previous government would be 'subtly' influenced by a subsequent government.

Meanwhile you continue to deny that RTE operates independently of the government.

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

At last! Was it that hard?
Now maybe we can deal with the implications to an 'independent' Public Broadcaster of the Minister having a very clear veto and control of the board.
Here is yet another instance of interference in an actual appointment of The DG.
That power still exists, make your own mind up about the possibility of it happening again and the implications of that.

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/1985/03/12/00023.asp

That was 30 years ago!!!!! We were winning Eurovision and still had our own currency then!!!! We barely had RTE2!!!!

You seem to be living in another era.