New regulator may levy extra fees on RTE, Sky

RTÉ currently pays a flat-rate administrative fee to the regulator every year but does not pay either a levy or spectrum access fees.

RTÉ, TV3 and Sky may, for the first time, have to pay broadcasting spectrum fees and a separate levy to a new Commission for Communications Regulation that will regulate the sector from next week.

Charging spectrum fees and a levy for regulation could cost broadcasters millions of euro every year, and would further undermine the financial position of the national broadcaster.

Proposals published by the telecoms regulator yesterday suggest new EU directives, due to come into force in mid-2003, will extend regulation to all electronic networks and services on a technology neutral basis.

This raises the question of whether broadcast transmission operators such as RTÉ should be subject to administrative charges and/or spectrum fees, says the consultation paper.

An RTÉ spokeswoman said the broadcaster would respond to the regulator's paper before January 10th, but it was important to remember that the Irish broadcasting spectrum was used for public purposes.

Earlier this week, Mr Paddy Wright, RTÉ Authority chairman, told an Oireachtas committee that RTÉ faced a "cash crisis".

Cable and telecoms firms already pay levies ranging from 0.2 per cent to 3.5 per cent of turnover to the Office of the Director of Telecommunications Regulation to fund the cost of regulating the industry. The paper said the regulator believes a levy of 0.2 per cent on turnover would represent a "fair apportionment" to cover the cost of regulating the broadcast, cable and telecoms industries.

In addition, the telecoms regulator proposes charging a fixed administrative charge for all operators to cover these types of cost incurred by the new Commission.

The telecoms regulator, Ms Etain Doyle, also raises the thorny issue of making satellite service providers - such as Sky - subject to similar spectrum fees and/or a levy to cover the cost of regulation. Sky has already stated that it should not be regulated in the Republic because it is based in Britain and not in the Republic.