Minister stands by plan for Radio New Zealand
Plans to set Radio New Zealand up as a standalone TV channel in competition with Governmentowned Television New Zealand and other commercial news outlets are still on the agenda, says Broadcasting and Communications Minister Clare Curran.
But Curran hinted the TV component of the Government’s RNZ+ proposal was still some time away, saying it would be an ‘‘evolutionary’’ process and dependent on funding.
Curran has been under fire over events leading up to the abrupt resignation of star RNZ executive Carol Hirschfeld as the Government looks to pump tens of millions of dollars into public broadcasting, mostly centred on the RNZ+ model.
The controversy has rocked the broadcaster and highlighted tensions over the proposal.
Labour’s election platform promised to throw $38 million at RNZ in an ambitious plan to turn the state broadcaster into a ‘‘fully multiplatform, non-commercial entity including a free-to-air television service’’.
That would pit it against TVNZ, Newshub and other media players for audience share in an increasingly fragmented and competitive media market.
But Curran rejected suggestions it would be competition to other news and current affairs providers because RNZ+ would not get advertising revenue.
Final funding for RNZ+ is subject to the budget round, which is under way.
Budget sensitivity meant she was unable to discuss whether the full amount of $38m was still on the table.
Hirschfeld was forced to resign after misleading her RNZ bosses over the nature of a coffee meeting with Curran in December.
The RNZ executive told her bosses it was an accidental meeting, but text messages showed it had been planned for weeks.
Her secrecy has fuelled suspicions Curran was seeking allies to push her linear TV model against pushback from the RNZ board, which has made no secret it sees the future of public broadcasting being more focused on digital.
Hirschfeld was seen as an enthusiastic ally of moving RNZ to a TV platform.
Yesterday, Curran likened her plan to the failed TVNZ7 model, which got funding from the previous Labour government of about $15m a year.
The channel was scrapped as a failure under National, though against opposition from academics.
While ratings were never commissioned, figures at the time suggested it attracted fewer than 25,000 viewers. Its programmes included Back Benches,Court Report and Media 7.
Some, like Back Benches, carried on for a time on other networks with funding from the $80m-a-year contestable NZ on Air fund.
RNZ chief executive Paul Thompson has suggested a broader vision under the RNZ+ plan, focused on a ‘‘strong, independent multimedia RNZ’’, but suggests there are no plans for RNZ to become a ‘‘full-blown TV broadcaster’’.
RNZ already operates a limited TV channel, with some programmes such as Checkpoint livestreamed and run on YouTube.
Audience numbers are tiny, though some ventures – such as Radio NZ’s The 9th Floor series – have been a critical success across both digital and television platforms.
Yesterday, Curran reiterated that the discussion between her and Hirschfeld at their ill-fated coffee meeting at Astoria cafe was ‘‘high-level’’ and included a ‘‘discussion about the state of the media landscape, which is quite vulnerable, and in general terms the plans we had for the Government’s investment and the ability to provide more content for New Zealanders’’.
That included the Government’s plans for RNZ and NZ on Air.
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has accepted Curran’s assurances she was not seeking to undermine the board, chief executive or chairman by reaching over the top of them to Hirschfeld.
But a select committee hearing this week will put Thompson and chairman Richard Griffin in the hot seat, and fresh information could put renewed pressure on Curran to resign.
Griffin and Thompson inadvertently misled the select committee about the meeting being accidental and have been called back to correct that information.
Curran knew they had misled the select committee when they gave evidence last month but did not correct the public record. She insists, however, that her office twice alerted RNZ to its evidence being wrong.
There is a question mark, however, over whether protocols were followed and the extent to which she attempted to get the public record corrected by RNZ.
But Curran said yesterday that she was confident ‘‘we did the right thing’’.