Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Government agreement: Free-To-Air RTE in NI, BBC in RoI on DTT platform

1810121314

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    Having said that, Ryan wasted a lot of taxpayers money putting in place the MOU ceremony and getting it signed into legislation only to render it worthless the following day. Elmo has spent the last month defending the indefensible and thats what is getting up the nose of some posters here. The buck for this fiasco stops firmly at Ryans feet, Not Sile De Valeras or anybody elses feet. He is the guy with the portfolio and the fiasco happened on his watch by his hand.

    Did the signing of the MoU not coincide with normal UK and Irish Government meetings?

    While I understand that this issue stops with Ryan. I don't think it is a resigning issue, unlike many of the things his predecessors did and I never remember hearing anyone call for their resignations. And that annoys me. And what about Micheál Martin's role in this. Surely his statements are the same as Ryan's.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,011 ✭✭✭carrolls


    Having said that, Ryan wasted a lot of taxpayers money putting in place the MOU ceremony and getting it signed into legislation only to render it worthless the following day. Elmo has spent the last month defending the indefensible and thats what is getting up the nose of some posters here. The buck for this fiasco stops firmly at Ryans feet, Not Sile De Valeras or anybody elses feet. He is the guy with the portfolio and the fiasco happened on his watch by his hand.

    I also think that people on this forum are livid that Ryan could take a much lauded document that could greatly benefit the less well off people of Ireland, and sever any benefit out of it before our eyes.
    Also I might add he did it in a very sneaky and underhand way.
    I am also livid that this fiasco has gone largely unnoticed by the mainstream press.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    carrolls wrote: »
    I also think that people on this forum are livid that Ryan could take a much lauded document that could greatly benefit the less well off people of Ireland, and sever any benefit out of it before our eyes.
    Also I might add he did it in a very sneaky and underhand way.
    I am also livid that this fiasco has gone largely unnoticed by the mainstream press.

    I am livid that people seemed to disregard anything sneaky from previous governments, thats not to say Ryan should be sneaky just because "what's done is done".

    Well really it was not worth being said.

    Problem with the mainstream press is they aren't all that interested in Broadcasting topics. Lets face it all the sneaky little things that have been done with in this department of government have pretty much gone unnoticed on every occasion.

    Also One Vision really should not have an issue with BBC 1 or 2 FTA since it would give them a free add for the other BBC channels they would provide. Anyway One Vision is doomed.


  • Registered Users Posts: 291 ✭✭Biffo The Bare


    I don't want to accuse anybody of trolling, but...............
    Elmo wrote: »
    I don't see how BBC could benefit "the less well off people". My parents never thought about getting the BBC they didn't want it, it was not because they couldn't afford cable, they just weren't pushed. And I don't think they would be pushed to switch to digital TV just because BBC 1 and 2 is there.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    Should have stopped ages ago.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 291 ✭✭Biffo The Bare


    Elmo wrote: »
    I amn't, I am just making an opinion. The other posters infuriated me into other posts. My apologizes.
    No need for apology, but you seem to be arguing on every point just for the sake of arguing on every point.
    I mean having the BBC free on DTT will benefit loads of poor people who can't afford cable or satellite. The poster was right to say that and you were wrong to dispute that.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    Not much point really!


  • Registered Users Posts: 291 ✭✭Biffo The Bare


    Elmo wrote: »
    Again sorry I don't mean to reply so soon. But I often wonder about this that poor people go without Sat or Cable. I could be wrong but many poor people have some basic cable subscription. I am sure it would be of some benefit to some poor people. Remember most people on social also get a free TV licence. It is just a point.

    And then there are others who aren't bothered about getting a Cable sub (not just talking about poor people).

    The last number of post had me explain everything since some poster were inclined to just ask why? why? why?

    I will leave ye to mull over it.
    I bet if somebody said the floor was black, you would make a case for it being white.:D


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,991 ✭✭✭slegs


    Hard to see how getting BBC for free could be a bad thing for anybody rich or poor. BBC is probably the most desired suite of channels after RTE in Ireland. This is television we are talking about so its not life or death stuff but its still a free service that many people would have appreciated.

    What Eamon Ryan did in the climbdown was inexcusable and played into the hands of vested interests (everything that the Greens are supposed to be against). Its my opinion, but I am sure it is Onevision who kicked up as free BBC on Saorview would have been a real problem for them (in their eyes - it could be argued that a successful Saorview could only be good for them in the long run).

    I would be pretty sure that Sky and UPC didnt complain and would have held back to wait and see as its possible that as a result they could have had free carriage of BBC on their platforms also.

    Elmo, I think you are flogging a dead horse here.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    slegs wrote: »
    Hard to see how getting BBC for free could be a bad thing for anybody rich or poor.

    Not that it matters but that was not my point.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 291 ✭✭Biffo The Bare


    Elmo wrote: »
    Not that it matters but that was not my point.
    Yes it was.:mad:


    Originally Posted by Elmo viewpost.gif
    I don't see how BBC could benefit "the less well off people". My parents never thought about getting the BBC they didn't want it, it was not because they couldn't afford cable, they just weren't pushed. And I don't think they would be pushed to switch to digital TV just because BBC 1 and 2 is there.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    DONE


  • Registered Users Posts: 291 ✭✭Biffo The Bare


    Elmo wrote: »
    In the sense that "less well off people" happen to have cable subs in the main.

    The example was my parent's who could afford cable but choose not too.

    Others who had social often also had cable. At least that has been my experience. And they benefited from a free TV licence (in some cases).

    I should have said "free BBC" would not be of benefit to many poorer people since they most likely have a free TV licence and a cable sub. (From a cost point of view, not in terms of quality of TV).
    Jebus wept.:o


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    Jebus wept.:o

    AND YOU ASKED.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,235 ✭✭✭lucernarian


    I think BBC being FTA would be of benefit to a wide variety of people in Ireland, and certainly those less well off are no exception. I'm writing this as a student living in a flat, and I can't afford a cable subscription especially as UPC's network is still rubbish where I live.

    I doubt that there was ever an intention in the dept. to agree to free-to-air BBC in Ireland. But the minister was the man who had to put the signature on the page, and it was quite incompetent on his behalf to sign the first MoU.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,260 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell



    I doubt that there was ever an intention in the dept. to agree to free-to-air BBC in Ireland. But the minister was the man who had to put the signature on the page, and it was quite incompetent on his behalf to sign the first MoU.

    The mandarins that drew up the document would have done their homework with RTE and BBC. It is beyond belief that a mistake as fundamental would be made. It was a political document, detailing a political decision. It was as the result of political representations that the meaning of the document was revised, before the ink was dry. That has to have come from Onevision, and was the result of a rush of blood to the head. Mature reflection would have caused them to rejoice at having the plums for free. [I think]

    Not only would they get the best for free, it would not be carried on their mux, so the could cram more shopping channels in, and possibly a few slappers in too.:D


  • Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 11,461 Mod ✭✭✭✭icdg


    Elmo, Biffo, behave please, or bans WILL be handed out.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,235 ✭✭✭lucernarian


    The mandarins that drew up the document would have done their homework with RTE and BBC. It is beyond belief that a mistake as fundamental would be made. It was a political document, detailing a political decision. It was as the result of political representations that the meaning of the document was revised, before the ink was dry. That has to have come from Onevision, and was the result of a rush of blood to the head. Mature reflection would have caused them to rejoice at having the plums for free. [I think]

    Not only would they get the best for free, it would not be carried on their mux, so the could cram more shopping channels in, and possibly a few slappers in too.:D
    The only part of the wording that was changed was the stated purpose of the document. Seeing as no other content was changed, would that not in itself indicate that the document was worded with just providing the Irish channels in Northern Ireland in mind? There was only one error in the entire document, and it's quite plausible that the stated purpose of the document was written up by a British official. The DCENR could have neglected to spot that, and the minister inadvertently signed it.

    Can anyone point out what section of the MoU was changed? When I downloaded the pdf, I didn't actually find any mention of the phrase "free to air" at all within.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,452 ✭✭✭✭The Cush


    Can anyone point out what section of the MoU was changed? When I downloaded the pdf, I didn't actually find any mention of the phrase "free to air" at all within.

    The phrase "free-to-air" is there six times relating to the existing analogue channels.
    Only the press releases were changed (post #129).

    There is no direct reference in the MoU that the UK channels were to be made available down here on a FTA basis but when reading the MoU it could and was easily assumed/interpreted (by the Dept initially) that they were to be available FTA. That assumption/interpretation in the press releases was the get-out clause for the Dept at the end of that week.

    Eamon Ryan's response to a Dáil question earlier this month
    Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Following the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding with the UK on digital broadcasting on 1 February 2010, it was found that a reference in the joint press release in relation to facilitating the provision of BBC services in Ireland did not accord with the text of the Memorandum. Following agreement between the two administrations, the press release was amended. The text of the memorandum and the press release is available on my Department’s website www.dcenr.ie.

    http://debates.oireachtas.ie/DDebate.aspx?F=DAL20100302.XML&Node=1322#N1322


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,235 ✭✭✭lucernarian


    My apologies. Though the mentions of free to air don't change my main point. I did feel too at the time that the document implicitly supported FTA broadcasting in both countries but I still remain unconvinced that they ever intended to provide BBC free-to-air here. There wasn't an iota of political will that I came across to bring in this measure. Certainly not since the Green's manifesto for the 2007 election. There was utter silence from the Dept. since then so why would they make this announcement out of nowhere while they're quitely in negotiations with OneVision on an incomplete deal at the same time?

    Basically, I think that the MoU press release was too good to be true. The civil servants in that dept. know which side their bread is buttered on, and there's no way that they would have agreed to a provision that would have possibly thrown a spanner in the DTT rollout works. I think if OneVision were happy with BBC FTA channels on digital TV, then I think the press release would have not been amended by any whinging from UPC alone.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,760 ✭✭✭Apogee


    Elmo wrote: »
    Remind me again of why people voted for FF?

    It took me a while to find anyone who would publicly admit to voting for FF - not surprising when you see the dole queues and the abysmal state of the country - but I finally did.

    Though the mentions of free to air don't change my main point. I did feel too at the time that the document implicitly supported FTA broadcasting in both countries but I still remain unconvinced that they ever intended to provide BBC free-to-air here. There wasn't an iota of political will that I came across to bring in this measure.

    The political will (especially since the GFA), and more importantly that of the actual broadcasters, exists on both the Irish and UK sides. If only there was a minister with a spine on the Irish side who would stop kowtowing to commerical interests.
    RTÉ certainly welcomes the commitment by the British Government to continue to support the Irish language through TG4 on DTT. However given TG4’s particular Irish language remit, we believe that this does not fully reflect broadcasting or indeed the culture of the whole island. Language is one part of a complex of identities. Therefore, the making available of TG4 in Northern Ireland, while desirable, will not by itself be a sufficient step towards the achievement of the objectives in the Belfast Agreement. And it will fall short of full compliance with the spirit of the Agreement.

    [...]

    In addition, the advent of the DTT platform in Britain and Northern Ireland, and soon in the Republic of Ireland, provides a unique opportunity for broadcasters to contribute to the further establishment of peace and reconciliation and play a part in supporting the normalisation of Northern Irish, and indeed Irish, society by allowing for the full expression of ‘all traditions and identities on the island’ free-to-air in both jurisdictions.
    http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/psb2_1/responses/rte.pdf
    We note the points raised in relation to the carriage of TG4 in Northern Ireland and the need for reciprocal access to PSB channels between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

    http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/dttfuture/statement/statement.pdf

    4447734196_d906b80de3_o.jpg
    MR. PATTON: John Patton, Channel 4. We have taken a lot of soundings in the market in terms of what we believe will actually work and we have talked to a lot of people we sell advertising to. In our opinion, the model that has best chance of success is the hybrid model, whereby you take what is already available free-to-air - I'm talking about RTE and the Irish channels, and, where possible, the UK channels - and allow that to be available on DTT. From there you build up that and offer subscription model on top of that. We think if you just offer Irish channels only we think it's going to be unattractive. We also believe that if you bundle everything that is not Irish into subscription base that it will just become a Sky light, so to speak, and I think it will be ultimately unattractive to the consumer. I know there are rights issues surrounding this. I think the BBC and Channel 4 could solve the rights. I would have doubts if UTV could do it. You know, as it stands RTE and Channel 4 look the other way when they broadcast in each other's territories and I don't see why that couldn't happen in DTT.

    http://www.bci.ie/documents/Transcript_of_DTT_Forum_22_nov_07.pdf

    Certainly not since the Green's manifesto for the 2007 election.

    I prefer Andrex myself.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,235 ✭✭✭lucernarian


    Hold on, is a few statements by broadcasters some sort of measure of political will? I should have clarified and said that there is no political will in this country to have the UK channels broadcast free-to-air here. The minister's statements on anything on the communications side of his portfolio are not driven by policy (this is obvious from just how little has changed under a Green minister) but by whatever the civil service hierarchy in the dept wants. I cannot see any evidence from politicians or civil servants in this country which pointed to FTA BBC being pursued as part of ASO here.

    This part is only anecdotal so it's up to everyone here to see if there's any merit in this, but I have been told of various instances of private interests looking after senior civil servants e.g. through wining and dining, nothing corrupt per se, and that policy in the dept is "consensus based", i.e. that the major private stakeholders are listened to and consulted over what direction the entire industry should be regulated in. A confrontation would only arise when the company involved was clearly out of line with (usually) EU commission views and the dept could blame someone else for the "inconvenience". It's a "don't rock the boat" attitude that was more clearly demonstrated in the Irish Financial Regulator's office before the wheels came off the Irish banking cart.

    Your average minister, upon entering a dept that's not looked upon often by the public and has little real party policy behind it or that requires significant expertise to allow for effective decisions will always row in behind what the general secretary has to say on any given matter. So certainly Eamonn Ryan should be regarded as weak and incompetent. The solution to this issue which is typical of many others, is not just about having a more effective minister, it's about turning a spotlight to the policy implementation of a dept that is inherently undemocratic and worst of all is stuffed with ex-Telecom Éireann or An Post employees.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,760 ✭✭✭Apogee


    The statements by the PSB broadcasters are, to my mind, far more significant than those of a minister. They are the ones who potentially face increased competition by allowing extra channels FTA on DTT. Additionally, they are the ones who would be tasked with making all of this a reality and putting the infrastructure in place to transmit the channels. From the statements, it's clear that, not only do they not have any objections, but they are actively in favour of a reciprocal arrangement. To that end, the politicians are merely pushing an open door.

    I am not of the opinion that the original press statement was a mistake - how likely is it that a press release would be issued jointly by DCENR, NIO and DCMS with incorrect information and no one spotted it beforehand? And that BBC being FTA was heralded as a victory for the Greens by their councillors and on their website?

    It was only when the commercial operators, most likely OneVision or UPC (they have previous form in this regard), kicked up a fuss, that the press release was retracted. Rather than a lack of political will, it was a spineless minister on the Irish side who was too afraid to face them down. That he was reneging on a specific GP manifesto proposal only serves to further highlight his failings.

    As for the 'permanent government', the buck stops with the minister and it is up to him to dictate policy. That is what he is elected to do. If he fails, then he will be held accountable at the next GE.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    Apogee wrote: »
    I am not of the opinion that the original press statement was a mistake - how likely is it that a press release would be issued jointly by DCENR, NIO and DCMS with incorrect information and no one spotted it beforehand? And that BBC being FTA was heralded as a victory for the Greens by their councillors and on their website?

    And you are right.
    It was only when the commercial operators, most likely OneVision or UPC (they have previous form in this regard), kicked up a fuss, that the press release was retracted. Rather than a lack of political will, it was a spineless minister on the Irish side who was too afraid to face them down. That he was reneging on a specific GP manifesto proposal only serves to further highlight his failings.

    He should have done this before the DTT tender went out in 2007 not while it was crawling along zombie style in 2010. Pure stupidity I would call it.

    Anyway , the last Comreg numbers showed that ONLY 1 in 6 homes in Ireland does not receive BBC already and I would think that a third of those BBC homes are on overspill or freesat.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,235 ✭✭✭lucernarian


    Apogee wrote:
    The statements by the PSB broadcasters are, to my mind, far more significant than those of a minister. They are the ones who potentially face increased competition by allowing extra channels FTA on DTT. Additionally, they are the ones who would be tasked with making all of this a reality and putting the infrastructure in place to transmit the channels. From the statements, it's clear that, not only do they not have any objections, but they are actively in favour of a reciprocal arrangement. To that end, the politicians are merely pushing an open door.

    I am not of the opinion that the original press statement was a mistake - how likely is it that a press release would be issued jointly by DCENR, NIO and DCMS with incorrect information and no one spotted it beforehand? And that BBC being FTA was heralded as a victory for the Greens by their councillors and on their website?
    The first part of that pointed out something I was blind to. It's fairly significant that the PSB broadcaster in this state would not mind another PSB broadcaster being freely available, despite being fairly dependent on advertising revenue. Though all the same, the opinions that RTÉ may have held did not add much to the political MoU. RTÉ =/= DCENR. So on that basis alone, it makes the original release look much more authoritable.

    The second paragraph is far more suspect in my mind. Firstly, the northern ireland office and to a lesser extent the dept of culture in the UK would have little interest in the pay DTT market of the Irish state or the current state of DTT here in general. The offer to transmit and carry BBC free-to-air would have been made exclusively by the Irish Govt, presumably the DCENR. All the UK would have done is to discuss the resulting costs of obtaining broadcast rights in the first place. Unless I'm missing something.

    Furthermore, the MoU never made the direct claim that BBC free-to-air was at hand in this country, it was only the press release. One is an international agreement of sorts, the other is simply a press release. It's much more plausible to suspect possible shortcomings in preparing a press release rather than the MoU itself.

    Finally, it's clear to see by most posters here that Eamonn Ryan has little competence or expertise in his brief. So the Greens jumping up and down over how they got their sliver of manifesto in is not significant whatsoever. It's almost incumbent upon them to point out a policy success which was apparently brought about by their Green minister. I would be utterly amazed if even one of those Green politicians who made a statement on the MoU had actually read the full document.

    Could Sponge Bob offer any further information that he could share with us in clarifying what actually happened in the days after the MoU??

    P.S. There is no way in hell that a minister can effectively run a dept. with senior civil servants effectively at war with him/her over a variety of matters. A dept is not a one man show and requires tricky HR management at the best of times from what I gather. It's simply naieve to expect that someone could be any better than the existing ministers that have passed through DCENR for example. So going about and sacking them is only as good as the fella that's brought in instead. And unless they're the equivalent of a telecoms engineer, they'll surely tow in behind the prevailing opinions of the "permanent govt." I can still witness TDs who could manage DCENR more effectively, but most of the electorate rate it too low in comparison to other priorities to bring about change from a purely democratic route and capable TDs will end up in higher ministerial portfolios.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,334 ✭✭✭SPDUB


    The first part of that pointed out something I was blind to. It's fairly significant that the PSB broadcaster in this state would not mind another PSB broadcaster being freely available, despite being fairly dependent on advertising revenue.

    I'm not sure why someone would be blind since RTE Relays (predecessor to NTL ) wasn't called that just because someone liked the name RTE .
    The second paragraph is far more suspect in my mind. Firstly, the northern ireland office and to a lesser extent the dept of culture in the UK would have little interest in the pay DTT market of the Irish state or the current state of DTT here in general.

    You appear to be forgetting that while they might not care about the exact structure of Irish DTT they will be concerned at the interference potential that will occur in NI and to a lesser extent England and Wales if ASO doesn't take place here as soon as possible and ASO is going to be politically difficult if they only offerings are the current stations


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    He has been announcing high speed broadband for secondary schools for years. So far the only tender Ryan actually sent out is for 78 LAPTOP Trolleys that the schools could have made themselves in their own woodwork rooms :(
    Could Sponge Bob offer any further information that he could share with us in clarifying what actually happened in the days after the MoU??

    I have no further info at all, other posters in this thread watched matters more closely than I.

    I suppose I remember Ryan announcing the NBS last year. He committed €39m cash over 2 or 3 years. The EU committed €40m. Ryan showed up on the day of the launch and banged on about €223m being spent.

    That is at 3:19 in the clip below and he repeated it frequently elsewhere.

    He is an arrogant babbling moron and the BBC announcement is small fry by his standards.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,235 ✭✭✭lucernarian


    SPDUB wrote:
    I'm not sure why someone would be blind since RTE Relays (predecessor to NTL ) wasn't called that just because someone liked the name RTE.
    I don't know why I didn't pick up on the salient point and I admitted I made a big omission. But what does RTÉ Relays have got to do with this, other than it was RTÉ's attempt in providing cable in some parts of Dublin? It was well before my time and I'm not aware of the political consequences of its name.

    As for ASO, that point's totally fanciful. The only forum for Ofcom or the DCMS to discuss frequency allocations is at an ITU-organised conference, which has already taken place in time for any analogue switchover. All involved parties here have said that the end of 2012 is the target, and the only legal commitment IReland has in any shape or fashion is to end any analogue broadcasts which may interfere with the UK, and also to transmit DTT on transmitters not above a certain ERP, all by 2015. Why would they be concerned at the broadcasting policy of another juridistiction when we are entitled to bring about ASO in any way we choose so long as it's lawful? The fact is that ASO is going to happen, and a lot of the infrastructure has being built. The only issue in the way of having Irish channels fully on DTT is the financing of the build. If the govt has to step in to pay for it, then that's what will happen. But Analogue broadcasts remaining around a long time after UK ASO?? That just won't happen.


  • Registered Users Posts: 721 ✭✭✭MarkK


    It's fairly significant that the PSB broadcaster in this state would not mind another PSB broadcaster being freely available
    ... what does RTÉ Relays have got to do with this, other than it was RTÉ's attempt in providing cable in some parts of Dublin?

    The fact that RTE provided the BBC and ITV to homes on cable shows it has a history of providing the UK PSBs in the Republic.

    I can't think on any instance where RTE have tried to keep the BBC out of the Republic.


  • Advertisement


  • RTE have always been interested in providing UK tv services if they can make money on the provision of them.
    They made money on cablelink while it was in service and on the sale of it later.
    Someone would have provided the service eventually RTE just got in there.

    They were behind the original government/quango scuppered dtt proposals by easy tv back in 2001.
    They're probably behind the provision of it anyway by stealth once the existing onevision consortium pull out but only on a quid pro quo.
    RTE will on the quiet be able to tell large trans national advertisers that they have a potential 1.5 million extra viewers in NI and not worry about the BBC as it won't be taking any of RTE's add revenue.
    It's ingenious.

    They know a big majority in the republic already have it[so making it easier for them is not an issue given the benefits to RTE of getting on dtt in NI] and this is the best plan to increase their add revenue by claiming a potential NI audience


Advertisement