Ryan Refuses to Legislate for Choice of Supplier

Sponge Bob

The Broadcasting Bill is going through the Dáil and is in committee stage .

Ryan was aked by Liz Mc Manus and Simon Covenery what he intended to do about property developers and their deals with scammers like Sky Conway.

Ryan got very flustered under pressure and

1. Refuses to do anything for the victims of these developer supplier exclusivity scams saying that they were too complicated for him and pretending he did not understand what other TD's were talking about

then

2. Tries to dump the matter on his colleague John Gormley

You should email your displeasure to eamon.ryan@oireachtas.ie

It starts here

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/DDebate.aspx?F=MAS20081126.XML&Node=H2&Page=7

Deputy Liz McManus: I need to raise another question about access. It relates to people who live in apartment blocks and who want to have choice but the developer has signed an exclusivity agreement with NTL and the people involved cannot choose Sky.

The Competition Authority has been contacted about this and it has confirmed that it has received about 1,500 formal, written complaints. The authority accepts there is a problem but it does not come within its remit. ComReg was contacted but it claimed it is not responsible. The National Consumer Agency was contacted and is aware of the problem but it is not the agency to deal with it either. The three bodies had a joint meeting and, in their opinion, the only way the problem can be solved is through legislation and a change in the Broadcasting Acts. The change would allow a dish to be put on the roof of apartment buildings so that owners and tenants could get their cable feed from it.

The people involved also met Sky UK, which is very anxious to have access to purpose-built apartment blocks. NTL own the cabling ducts in the majority of purpose-built apartment blocks. Almost all developers sign a contract with a cable television provider at the time the apartment is being built because it is necessary to build a plant room and feed the cable into every apartment before the walls are rendered. These 1,500 people have contacted the Competition Authority because they feel they have a valid complaint. All the arrows are pointing towards this Broadcasting Bill 2008.

I do not know how to resolve this, but the buck stops with the Minister. I cannot see if this matter is being dealt with in the amendments.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: It is not being dealt with in the amendments here. I am aware of the issue and I can see the difficulty raised by the Deputy.

Deputy Liz McManus: I raised it on Second Stage.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: This is a complex legal problem because there is an agreement with a residents group. I would have to seek legal advice on whether signing an agreement carries legal implications.

Deputy Liz McManus: The developer has done the deal. The residents group does not necessarily want to be tied in. The group wants the choice.

Deputy Simon Coveney: The deal is done before there are any residents.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: Did the Deputy say that this is a condition of the management contract? Is that deemed to be

---

Deputy Liz McManus: No, it is the developer that has signed the exclusivity agreement with NTL.

Chairman: The resident buys into this agreement when he or she buys the apartment.

Deputy Simon Coveney: The management company ends up paying for it. The deal is done with the cable company at the building stage. This actually happened to me in Cork a few years ago. I moved into an apartment and I asked whether I could get Sky and I was told absolutely not because the management company had done a deal with Chorus. I said I did not want a Chorus service and that I would rather have a Sky service because I wanted to get X, Y and Z channels.

The initial response was that they were sorry but that could not be facilitated. An issue arises. As it happens, at a later stage it was agreed to put a Sky dish on top of the apartment block so those who wanted it could get it, but that was after negotiation.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: Negotiation with the developer or the management?

Deputy Simon Coveney: With the management grouping, which was controlled by the developer, as it happens.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: So it depends on the control of the management company.

Deputy Simon Coveney: Yes.

Deputy Liz McManus: According to the statement here, which is obviously based on an individual who pursued this matter through all the various authorities, the management company were trying to deal with it and failed.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: There is one thought to add, although it is not an answer to the concerns of those who would want Sky. There will be other alternatives evolving as DTT becomes available where there is a set-top box rather than a satellite. This will have an effect. I can understand the point being raised but, because it is a complex legal issue, we would have to consider it in some detail and perhaps seek legal advice rather than giving any immediate commitment. I would have to consider how the input from this Bill would affect that area or whether this is legally an area that could be addressed.

Deputy Liz McManus: I appreciate

---

Deputy Eamon Ryan: Legislation is also pending on management companies of apartments, which would surely be a vehicle in this regard. The real concern is with the developers getting an exclusive agreement. If legislation is pending on the management companies and what they can and cannot do, it might be a better location to address it.

Deputy Liz McManus: That sounds like the Minister is passing the buck. This is a deal done.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: I know this legislation is imminent.

Deputy Liz McManus: It is an agreement with a provider that comes under the Minister’s remit. At present, people are not allowed to have the choice, which I presume it is the Minister’s duty to defend. It is all about competition and about encouraging different players. Here we have a situation where people who want to avail of a particular provider are forced into a situation where they have no choice, although they have gone through all the channels. It would be worth talking to the various bodies, such as the Competition Authority, ComReg and the National Consumer Agency, to ascertain their view. They have obviously done the legal analysis to see where this should go, and they are pointing to the Bill we are now discussing.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: We want to know what is the key issue. My sense is it is in regard to the management company and developer arrangements rather than the broadcasting legislation, which may be more specific.

Deputy Liz McManus: It is the agreement that NTL has been able to have with the developer.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: For example, it could be a deal in terms of telecommunications or a range of other services. The fundamental legal issue revolves around management company legislation. I understand legislation on management companies and how they operate is imminent in the Dáil, and that legislation would be a better location in which to address this rather than during broadcasting legislation. While this legislation relates to one of the services, it would be hard to see how we would introduce a whole new section in regard to management companies and how they legally operate, or the developer contract.

Deputy Liz McManus: It is not about the management company. The Minister is missing the point. NTL has the right to have an exclusive deal with the developer, which impacts negatively on the householders who occupy the block. We have just debated at length provisions the Minister is making to ensure people have access. In this case, they do not have access and they are blocked from having it. It is not about a management company at all.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: If that is the case, did the Deputy consider an
amendment?

Deputy Liz McManus: I have a great team but I did not think I was in a position to bring forward an amendment. I raised it because I felt that by raising it on Second Stage, I was putting down a very clear statement of an issue that needed to be resolved. Frankly, my job is to scrutinise what the Minister is doing.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: While this is not final as I will have to go away and consider the issue, my instinct is that the pending legislation in regard to management companies, which is imminent, may be the best location to affect a change to the satisfaction of the concerns the Deputy rightly raises.

Deputy Liz McManus: I do not want to be cynical but I am afraid I am. That sounds to me like the Minister is trying to fob off a problem. If the Minister can come back to us and tell us that this issue should be dealt with in management company legislation, it is not just a question of “should”. He should be able to say that there is a section in the Bill dealing with this in a certain way. If the Minister can guarantee that - if it is imminent presumably he can know the provisions in it - and state that there is a specific section dealing with this specific problem, it will certainly clear my doubts but, unless that happens, I will just see it as the Minister fobbing this off.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: I said at the start that I would listen to what the Deputy had to say and then go back and seek legal advice. I said I cannot know what that legal analysis will be.

Deputy Liz McManus: Sure.

Chairman: Will Deputy McManus pass on the information she has to the Minister?

Deputy Liz McManus: Yes. I have outlined the information but I can provide some back-up information. I would say the Minister is well aware of it. There is no problem with that.

Chairman: In terms of the information, the advice the Deputy got was that it should be dealt with in the Broadcasting Bill. Perhaps that could be made available to the Minister and his officials.

Deputy Liz McManus: I am easy. I do not mind where it is dealt with but we need to have hard evidence it is being dealt with somewhere. That is my concern.

TheDriver

Sponge Bob wrote: »

.

Deputy Liz McManus: I am easy.

Thanks for that, interesting stuff! Couldn't resist the quote though, sorry.....

Sponge Bob

It is particularly important to note that the debate was 2 days ago and while Ryan is getting his legal advice it would be an opportune moment to visit his constituency office especially if you are a Dublin South resident who is locked into an unsuitable provider for your TV ....or even Sky CoN AwaY God Bless Us :eek:

Either way, get right on his case .

Mind you the plank won't even maintain his own website , look at what Ryan considers to be a ' current issue ' according to his OWN website

http://www.eamonryan.ie/local/current-issues/

channelsurfer

playing the devils advocate here.... but he cant even legislate to get sky to go by irish law or force them to provide utv etc on the epg or channel 6 on 106.... he aint gonna legislate to force people to have an alternative supplier...

Zaphod

Deputy Simon Coveney: I wish to tease out this issue because it is very important for broadcasters, particularly potential satellite operators. Is it the case at present that Sky has exclusive rights to the satellite RTE service? I refer to RTE because it is the obvious example. RTE One and RTE Two are broadcast on Sky, but Sky has exclusive rights to broadcast them via satellite. Senator O’Toole has stated repeatedly that other potential satellite operators which want to compete with Sky in Ireland effectively cannot do so because the exclusive satellite rights to RTE are held by Sky. Is this not the case?

Deputy Eamon Ryan: I should have clarified that. While we do not have jurisdiction over broadcasters outside the State, there cannot be an exclusive arrangement in that one must provide the offer of services of other providers.

Deputy Simon Coveney: The consequences of this for RTE, TG4 and TV3 are potentially serious. Sky could state to a broadcaster that if it is not willing to sign an exclusive deal with Sky, it will not beam RTE into Irish households. This would put the Irish broadcasters in a very awkward position because the majority of households with a satellite television service are subscribers to Sky.

I imagine Sky would behave very aggressively to keep other satellite services out of Ireland. It recognises the importance RTE would ascribe to broadcasting through Sky. I want to ensure we know exactly what we are doing although I realise the Minister’s intention is correct. Anyone who wants to broadcast via satellite in Ireland should be offered all the free-to-air channels that are supported by public service funds. Has the Minister considered what would occur if one of the bigger players in the market place, such as Sky, which we cannot regulate in any case, decided to be difficult?

Deputy Eamon Ryan: I have considered that issue. The fundamental point that must be recognised is that Irish consumers want Irish programmes. There is a great public demand for news services, drama, sports and other programmes based in Ireland.

Deputy Simon Coveney: That is not why people subscribe to Sky. They can receive RTE independently.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: In any transmission system, the home-produced, free-to-air channels, backed up by the electronic programme guide regulations, are still the most popular. It is in the interest of a provider of a broadcasting system that they carry such stations. Do we want to legislate for it being exclusive? My instinct is no and it is better to have a must-offer option so the services paid for by the public may be available on as wide a basis as possible.

Deputy Liz McManus: Currently, there is a value attached to an exclusive contract. Will there be financial implications if there are no longer exclusive contracts? What about the scenario of an individual installing a satellite dish on his or her property, paying a television licence but not being able to receive RTE?

Deputy Simon Coveney: If it is an Irish satellite company, there will be a requirement for RTE to offer its free-to-air channels.

Deputy Liz McManus: Only if it is an Irish satellite company. For example, if one purchased a free-standing satellite dish in Lidl and installed it, it would not be connected to an Irish satellite service.

Deputy Simon Coveney: It does not solve the problem.

Deputy Liz McManus: No, it does not. There may be a legal question as to how one must pay for a television licence but cannot get the services paid for by it. I recall when people were paying waste collection charges but did not get their bins collected. It was brought to court to be resolved. There is something wrong if people are paying a television licence but cannot get the service for which they are paying.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: There is a terrestrial analogue service which is available throughout the country.

Deputy Liz McManus: That will not be available.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: I do not know how the Deputy’s concern relates to this provision. The must-offer option does not affect this.

Deputy Liz McManus: No, I appreciate that, but it is still an issue. I had hoped that we might be able to resolve it but it is clear we cannot. It is only for Irish providers or those operating in Ireland.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: Yes. This is not treating one operator more favourably than another. It is based on the principle of having those services paid for by the licence fee on as wide a basis as possible. One could argue that it might create a disadvantage for RTE’s negotiation position with Sky but it could easily work the other way. The must-offer option is balanced and is not aiming to empower one company at the expense of another.

Deputy Liz McManus: Is there a financial value attached to having the inclusive contract?

Deputy Eamon Ryan: Only the two parties to any such negotiations would know that. It would be difficult determining who is benefiting who in the provision of such services. The reason for this amendment is not to make it a restrictive or an exclusive arrangement. As the services are paid for by the licence fee, it is appropriate for it to be available on as wide a basis as possible.

Deputy Liz McManus: It is widely available anyway.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: It is, but as the broadcasting system evolves, this amendment will ensure it will continue to be.

Deputy Simon Coveney: The problem with this legislation is that it does not apply to satellite broadcasting because the majority of those companies are not Irish.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: No, but the definition includes providers available in Ireland. It provides Sky with a reassurance that it has the must-offer clause available as well.

Deputy Simon Coveney: I do not understand how that works. Sky is not an Irish broadcasting company.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: No, but it is available in Ireland and within the definition of the must-offer option it is to services that are freely available.

Deputy Liz McManus: That comes back to the individual with a satellite on his or her property. The service is available but not based in Ireland.

Deputy Eamon Ryan: Freesat is not retailing in Ireland. The definition is based on those retailing in Ireland and who have direct contact with consumers.

Deputy Simon Coveney: We are putting an obligation, through regulation, on RTE, TG4 and TV3 to make their services available to a satellite operator retailing in Ireland. However, we have no powers to regulate the retailer because it is based abroad. Am I correct in this?

Deputy Eamon Ryan: Yes. We are recognising the reality. We have tried through the television without frontiers and the audio-visual media services directives to get such regulatory powers but we do not have them. We cannot ignore the reality that a large number of households are accessing Irish broadcasting though satellite operators. This provision is designed not to lead to a restrictive availability. It aims to allow other providers to carry the services if they so wish.

Deputy Liz McManus: How many broadcasting retailing companies would be in that position?

Deputy Eamon Ryan: It depends. This provision extends beyond satellite providers to Internet protocol television, cable and other networks. We are legislating for the future and we cannot be certain what new broadcasting platforms will come on board. Currently, it is limited and there are not many providers. We did not want the possibility of a restriction being developed that would hinder new platforms being provided directly to the public.

Eamon Ryan is a waste of good oxygen.

rlogue

Is it me or does Eamon Ryan completely miss the point that I have been hammering on about since the RTÉ-Sky deal came about that it is scandalous and a total disgrace that Sky AND RTÉ make Irish viewers PAY to watch RTÉ on satellite?

We have seen how effective Ryan is about getting the Diaspora service started. Basically RTÉ are running rings around him desperately hoping to get goverment funding for a service that would be unnecessary had RTÉ not forced Tara TV off the air or had the gumption to go FTA on satellite.

The Cush

A recent discussion (5 Nov) took place between the Joint Committee on Communications and RTE in relation to the new Broadcasting Bill, during the debate the Sky/RTE situation was discussed.

Deputy Liz McManus: ...
A greater issue is that of new sources of accessing television, namely, the Internet and alternative media, that are not being captured by the traditional An Post system of collecting television licence fees. For example, a man who came to see me had put up his own satellite dish and paid his television licence but cannot receive RTE. RTE needs the money but what is it doing to collect it? How does it propose that these issues can be addressed?

...

Senator Joe O’Toole: ...
I agree strongly with the point made by Deputy McManus about free-to-air access via satellite. I have written to RTE many times and Mr. Goan will be pleased to hear that I have a letter ready to go to the Chairman of the committee. It says that the amount of VAT that Irish people are paying to Sky for satellite is €100 million, all of which is going to the UK and only because RTE has done a deal with Sky preventing any other provider

---

Mr. Cathal Goan: That is absolutely wrong.

Senator Joe O’Toole: I would be happy to be contradicted. The fact that Sky is the only company that can provide RTE on satellite is depriving this jurisdiction of €100 million in VAT. Many people receive satellite because of the better reception and would like to receive RTE in this way. Money that would go to the State is being lost. RTE is at the end of its contract with the providers, Sky, and there should be an open market in providing free-to-air satellite access to RTE, TV3 and TG4.

...

Mr. Cathal Goan: ...
I wish to firmly nail on the head what Senator O’Toole said about RTE doing a deal with Sky. The incontrovertible and unavoidable reality is that RTE cannot go into the sky unencrypted. We cannot do that because over 50% of our schedule is acquired from external sources and we can only buy the rights for Ireland. If we go, unencrypted, into the air and people outside the island of Ireland acquire that programming, we will be breaking the terms of the acquisition of those rights. That situation is not going to change. The only way that we could distribute on satellite in Ireland is in some form of encryption. Whether that is through Sky or another provider is a secondary point. The Senator is correct that we are in an exclusive arrangement with Sky in terms of satellite distribution although that may change. While I imagine that competition will increase, it will always be based on encrypted distribution of the service. Where DTT differs fundamentally is in our determination to continue offering free-to-air television in the digital era.

Deputy Michael D’Arcy: Other stations are on Sky but their transmission to Ireland is blocked because they are under UK jurisdiction. Has RTE explored the option of maintaining exclusive rights to RTE programming broadcast on satellite? It is an option that should be considered.

Mr. Cathal Goan: To be clear, RTE has significantly progressed its proposals to the Department in that regard as part of our service to the diaspora. We had planned to commence broadcasting this month and have made arrangements with Freesat and several other providers in that regard but, as we have informed the Department and the Minister, we have postponed the service for one year because it would not be wise to proceed under the current economic circumstances.
...

I have attached the full debate in pdf

channelsurfer

ok my two cents on this is that Cathal Goan is like an ostrich with his head in the sand.... he refuses to recongise the fact that rte CAN go only on sky ireland and go FTA without appearing on the sky epg or the freesat uk epg... they could argue that like itv2 itv3 and utv technically their service is not available to uk sky subscribers because it is not on the epg.
Mr Goan should cop on and get RTE's head out of the sand...

bk

Hmm, this is interesting, isn't sat4free retailing in Ireland and isn't it therefore an Irish Sat service and by extension, isn't RTE required to be offered on this platform?

It seems to me that there is an opportunity here for some Irish company to launch an Irish Sat service which includes the FTA UK channels and force the carriage of RTE on the service also.

old boy

yes and did not the head of r.t.e. say when adressing a eurovision symposium some years ago that sky would fail because of costing and lack of demand, the gov. needs to look at all them state funded bodys, its there the an board snip should start

Tony

Nail on the head

bk wrote: »

Hmm, this is interesting, isn't sat4free retailing in Ireland and isn't it therefore an Irish Sat service and by extension, isn't RTE required to be offered on this platform?

It seems to me that there is an opportunity here for some Irish company to launch an Irish Sat service which includes the FTA UK channels and force the carriage of RTE on the service also.

zanardi

It really annoys me that RTE are dragging their feet on RTE International. One thing that puzzles me though is why not let them put advertising on it? Or is this what all the procrastination is all about?

One day I'd love to see RTE seeing the big picture and even just paying the extra rights fees for the UK audience - I know the fees would be massive, but so would the advertising revenue.

On a really good day I love to see RTE being relocated out of d4, but our first Irish Mars colony is more likely.

Tony

zanardi wrote: »

I know the fees would be massive, but so would the advertising revenue.

How do you know this?

SoupyNorman

'Choice of Supplier'

I dont know the meaning of that phrase. What I do know is that no matter how much I liked an apartment, I would never buy in a development that had fixed providers.

My last rented accomodation had Magnet, Now I'm at the mercy of SkyConway (Bad to whatever comes after worse) . I'm lucky to have few frustrations in life but this issue is one of them. It's like a big open infected sore, its blatantly obvious there is a problem but nobody wants to touch it. The fact that even one politician (Liz McManus) is chasing the issue gives some comfort but the reality is that because management companies have made things so complex and behave so obtusely things will probably go on as is :mad:

byte

bk wrote: »

Hmm, this is interesting, isn't sat4free retailing in Ireland and isn't it therefore an Irish Sat service and by extension, isn't RTE required to be offered on this platform?

It seems to me that there is an opportunity here for some Irish company to launch an Irish Sat service which includes the FTA UK channels and force the carriage of RTE on the service also.

Interesting post.

Sponge Bob

Sat 4 Free is a _somewhat_ dubious repurposing of the BBC Freesat Overlay Code

A software hack is not an Irish Satellite Service ....surely

Tony

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Sat 4 Free is a _somewhat_ dubious repurposing of the BBC Freesat Overlay Code

A software hack is not an Irish Satellite Service ....surely

It is an Irish retailer though. The software has not been hacked as it is not encrypted