Search

Newsletter

After Commitments Commission Accepts Funding Scheme for Public Service Broadcasters

About two-thirds of the funding of the Dutch public service broadcasters comes out of public means. Public funding has to comply with the European rules for State aid. In brief, public funding of the public service broadcasters is only allowed as far as these means are necessary to fulfill the public service remit. If more funding or funding for other tasks is granted to public service broadcasters, this may be forbidden State aid. Commercial broadcasters could be the victims of this, for example. This is the reason why approval from the Commission is required for the funding scheme for public service broadcasters as drawn up by the Dutch Government.

New Regulations and Approval of New Funding Scheme

The Netherlands have been the subject of criticism from the Commission for some time because of poor compliance with the State aid rules. One of the reasons for the criticism was that commercial broadcasters complained to the Commission about the unclear description of the public service remit of the public service broadcasters, especially with regard to new audiovisual services, and the disproportionate nature of the funding. It was partly because of this criticism that the Dutch Media Act was amended at the end of 2008, when the Media Act 2008 was introduced. However, this was not enough.

Recently the Commission has published its new Communication on the application of State aid rules to public service broadcasting (OJ C 257/01) to which the funding of the Member States has to comply. The changes compared to the former communication relate in particular to new developments:

  • Significant new services launched by public service broadcasters must be subjected to an ex ante check, including a consideration between the impact on the market and the value for society;
  • More clarity has been given on the extent to which pay services can be part of the public service remit. The remuneration element in pay services can be related, for example, to the duty of broadcasters to pay network distribution fees or copyrights;
  • There is more actual supervision on possible overcompensation; and
  • The Commission is able to exercise more supervision on the fulfillment of the public service remit, because Member States have to define clearly what the public service remit includes, and there has to be a clear and appropriate separation between public service activities, and non-public service activities, including a clear separation of accounts.

This Communication is (partly) a codification of the decisions of the Commission on the funding of public service broadcasters during the past years.

In view of these tightened measures, it has been unclear for a long time whether the Commission would agree to the way in which public service broadcasters are funded in the Netherlands. During the consultation phase of the new Communication, the Netherlands have been lobbying hard against the introduction of a market test. Although the Dutch regime now appears to have been approved, it first had to be amended as insisted by the Commission in its decision of 26 January 2010.

For example, the public service remit will become more detailed, also in the field of mobile telephony and online services and other new media activities. New media activities, including pay services, must also be subjected to a prior test before they can be designated as a task to the public service broadcasters. This test has to take place in a transparent manner and, for example, commercial broadcasters will be consulted. The consideration desired by the Commission between the market effects of the new audiovisual services and their value will also have to take place. This is an important step. To date, the Netherlands have refused to perform such a test. In addition, the compensation will not be allowed to exceed the amount necessary for the fulfillment of the public service remit. Incidentally, the Court of Amsterdam ruled on 22 January 2010 (AWB 08/140 WET) that the regime for side tasks such as theme channels, as was applicable until 1 January 2009, did not meet the rules for State aid. The distinction between side tasks and main tasks does no longer exist, but the substantive review has not been changed since then.

The former Minister Plasterk and the former European Commissioner Kroes have expressed their contentment with the result achieved. Plasterk: "I am happy that - after years of negotiations - we have reached an understanding with the European Commission. The broad multimedia task of public service broadcasting is still standing" (news report from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (only in Dutch)). Kroes stated that: "The new regulation will ensure more transparency, proportionality and accountability, and will enable the public service broadcasters to perform their public service remit while public funding will be limited to what is strictly necessary." (News report of the European Commission, IP/10/52.

Closing Remarks

The accepted funding regulation seems to be in line with the new Communication of the Commission. However, the Netherlands have had to make commitments by explicitly giving commercial parties the right to be heard and by accepting that they are obliged to carry out a market test for significant new services, before the public service broadcasters are granted permission to engage in new media activities. The market test must be implemented immediately. We are very interested to see how the (next) Minister will deal with this in practice.

Share this:   
linkedin facebook twitter email
Machteld Robichon-Lindenkamp

Tel: +31 20 5506 897
E-mail: machteld.robichon@kvdl.nl







Jochem Apon

Tel: +31 20 5506 862
E-mail: jochem.apon@kvdl.nl

View our profile

linkedin