After carefully reading and re-reading the original text of the Agreement between the Ministry of Economic Development and Rai for the concession of the public radio and television service (original title) we are now able to make some considerations on the merits. Let's see the most important ones. The first of a general nature: without prejudice to the principle that Rai provides a service of collective interest and, as such, is maintained in the exclusive reserve of the State, even if the reference period of time is reduced from twenty to ten years.
It seems little but it is not compared to when and to those who, until recently, thought that the Concession could be auctioned off among the various subjects directly interested in supplying the "public radio and television service". The second concerns advertising: we too wrote, and feared, that a new limit on advertising crowds could be introduced with a different distribution criterion which, if applied, could have resulted in an estimated loss of around 100 million euros per year. To the art. 9 of the text, on the other hand, refers to the current articles 37 and 38 of the Consolidated Law on audiovisual services, effectively leaving the distribution schemes unchanged.
The innovations that appear to be most significant are found in the vertical reading of the text. Where, for example, (in paragraph 5 of article 1) the principles of efficiency and competitiveness are introduced, typical essential criteria of a normal industrial company that competes on the market. This same interpretation addresses the problem of redefining newspapers, the number of general interest networks, positioning in the multimedia offer. This is an important cultural novelty: so far the income from the legislative position that Rai has enjoyed is being re-discussed under the quality check: if it works, I'll pay you, otherwise you go home, as it should be in normal industrial conditions.
The pillars on which this observation rests are the new service contract that will have to be stipulated after the Convention and the fee. On the first point there will still be much to discuss, where every five years the guidelines will have to be fixed on the "content of the further obligations of the multimedia public radio and television service defined in relation to the development of the markets, technological progress and the changing needs cultural, national and local” (art.6.4). as regards the fee, the novelty is decidedly significant: this will be subjected every year to a verification of "achievement of the efficiency and rationalization objectives indicated in the national service contract".
We have also written that the license fee should represent a reliable source on which to rely to manage any industrial plan capable of going beyond 12 months. So far it has happened that, like last year, the measure of the fee has been used more as a political club than as a financial instrument. Bringing it back to efficiency criteria therefore appears undoubtedly positive: in the eyes of those who pay it, it is believed that the tax is useful if a specific service is paid in return, otherwise it is reduced. In this context, the principle of separate accounting with respect to rental and advertising resources is reaffirmed.
The same reasoning applies to the question of networks and newspapers. We have been talking about it for some time (see the previous Gubitosi plan) but so far without result. Now it is no longer a mere company project but a provision having the force of law: it provides for "The remodulation of the number of non-generalist channels ... and the redefinition of the number of titles" (Articles 1, 6 and 7) with the objective of cost efficiency and enhancement of internal resources. Nothing to complain, it is certainly an excellent intention. There is now no doubt that the quality of the thematic channels offered by Rai is unbalanced in terms of the product/cost/benefit ratio in a market context where the public is increasingly oriented towards other types of choices. Everyone seems to agree on the number of publications: an efficient and functional restructuring is urgently needed and a request for information capable of competing with the online offer.
We now come to an issue we have written a lot about: technological innovation. The art. 4 of the Convention deals with infrastructures and systems and reports directly to Rai Way. The text seems to want to move towards two strands: the first is the evolution of national, European and international legislation. We read, between the lines, the forthcoming change on digital terrestrial following the application of the Community provisions on 700 Mhz. In this regard, just yesterday we learned that the text that will go to the vote in May in Brussels speaks of the switch off of the DTT to 2030. The second instead (art. 4.3) seems to want to give the green light to corporate mergers on the transmission towers where we read that “the construction of shared systems with other television and telecommunications operators may be envisaged”. Nothing more is said but we can recall our interview with Undersecretary Giacomelli when he recalled that the initiative in this sense is in the hands of companies.
Now the match moves to the Parliamentary Supervisory Commission for a mandatory but non-binding opinion. It is a question of understanding what guidelines will emerge and how they will be incorporated into the Service Contract. In Viale Mazzini, always in a low voice, someone comments: "it could have been worse".
