Most TV viewers barely notice the split-second corporate logos at the end of their favourite shows. But the move towards increased independent production is beginning to bite significantly into the schedules on RTE. More and more programmes, from documentaries to game shows, are produced by independent Irish companies such as Agtel, Frontier and Graph.

With a substantial rise to £15 million in the allocation to independents in 1998, senior figures at RTE are protesting that the demands of the sector will lead to job losses in Montrose, a claim strongly disputed by independent producers.

In 1993 the minister for arts, culture and the Gaeltacht Michael D. Higgins introduced legislation requiring RTE to increase its proportion of independent commissions over five years. The objective was that, by 1998, independent production would account for 20 per cent of RTE's annual television budget or £12.5 million, whichever was the greater.

Seen as part of Mr Higgins's package of measures to boost the film and television industries in Ireland, the move was a belated reaction to trends in international broadcasting since the early 1980s, which had encouraged independent producers as a source of free-market vigour and cultural diversity within public service broadcasting.

The measures have breathed new life into the Irish independent sector, but the exact figures are the subject of dispute between RTE and the independents' representative organisation, Film Makers Ireland (FMI).

According to James Hickey, chairman of FMI's broadcasting sub-committee: "Until January, RTE maintained that their 1998 television budget was £62 million, for which the 20 per cent coincidentally enough came out exactly at the minimum figure of £12.5 million." He notes drily: "It would seem that Michael D's prescience [in 1993] about the 1998 figures was extraordinary."

Since then, under pressure from FMI, including threats of legal action, RTE has agreed to revise its estimate upwards, increasing the independents' share to £15 million, but Hickey is still far from satisfied at the figures offered by the station.

"We estimate that RTE's overall turnover for 1998 will be approximately £170 million. They tell us that £96 million of that represents television expenditure. We find it interesting that only 56 per cent of turnover comes from television.

"Even if you're quite generous, and assume £15 million for the other activities, such as the orchestras and the RTE Guide, that still leaves over £50 million to run the radio stations, which we find hard to believe. Apart from anything else, the independent radio stations would go ballistic if that were actually the case. In our view the figure for TV is still underestimated. We would believe that it's between £110 million and £120 million."

Mr Hickey expresses frustration at what he describes as RTE's opaque accounting systems. "They get very sensitive about the range of figures they supply, but the fact is that we don't have the resources to go in and do that ourselves."

Mr Joe Mulholland, RTE's managing director of television, disagrees with Mr Hickey's analysis. "The fact is that our figures are transparent and open, and we've got nothing to hide. RTE is small by international standards, but very large in an Irish context. It's a complex organisation to maintain. James is being simplistic. Of course, we don't spend that much on radio, but we do have an infrastructure which services our entire output, including the independents."

Another source of contention is RTE's refusal to consider the entire £96 million as the basis for calculating the independents' 20 per cent. Mr Mulholland insists that certain costs - sport and music licences, programme acquisitions, and the provision of an hour of television per day for TnaG - should be subtracted before calculating the independents' percentage.

While Mr Hickey expresses some sympathy for the TnaG issue, a cost which was unforeseen in 1993, he argues that the legislation specifically mentions acquisitions (the imported programming which accounts for 60 per cent of RTE and Network 2's schedules) as forming part of the overall figure. Including acquisitions in the overall calculation would raise the independents' entitlement to close to £20 million per year. "We have said that we will have to consider going to court over this issue," he says.

"Of course, acquired programming is mentioned in the legislation," says Mr Mulholland. "But we don't acquire programmes. We acquire licences to show programmes a limited number of times, for which we pay a fee."

In response to FMI's accusation that the station is indulging in semantics on this issue, he acknowledges that RTE is in fact deeply unhappy with the wording of the legislation: "To put it bluntly, we see this legislation as somewhat flawed and naive," he says.

Mr Hickey strongly objects to an edition of Radio 1's media issues programme Soundbyte on March 28th, in which Mr Mulholland told interviewer Joe Duffy that increased expenditure on independent production would lead to job losses within RTE. Although the programme did feature Mr Higgins defending his legislation, FMI is incensed at not being represented, and is considering making a complaint to the Broadcasting Complaints Committee.

"FMI doesn't want to get into a row," says Mr Hickey. "But blaming the independent sector for job losses at RTE is unfair, and we're very, very unhappy about it. . . RTE was given five years to prepare for this per cent requirement. Why is there a crisis now?" "I was only stating a reality which they don't want to hear," Mr Mulholland responds. "If I have to find £20 million for independents, it will decimate production within RTE. We would have to transfer a large part of our internal programming to the independent sector. There's also the issue of whether they would be equipped to meet that demand. Can they even provide the £15 million they're supposed to make this year?"

Mr Hickey argues that the 20 per cent requirement is still relatively small in an international context. "The BBC was required to achieve 25 per cent five years ago, and they've long exceeded that. We in Ireland have been disadvantaged in comparison to Britain. Independent TV is still a fledgling industry here."

But according to Mr Mulholland, RTE must take account of the fact that it has been underfunded for years. "I'd remind you that we still have the lowest licence fee in Europe. It's not that we can't live with the 20 per cent, but if we're to develop the broadcasting service that the country needs, we need the resources to do it. The independents produce excellent, effective, economical programmes, but without a strong public service broadcaster they will have no future."

He points out that RTE is currently undergoing a major strategic review which aims to streamline its operations, freeing more resources for programme-making.

"RTE is the last unreconstructed semi-State in Ireland. It's a great organisation desperately in need of reform," says Mr Hickey, who feels that politicians and the media have concentrated on "irrelevant" issues like the salaries of top names when they should be looking at the structural problems of the station.

"Unlike any other European broadcaster, they have the same number of staff they had 10 years ago. I think that in not facing up to these problems they have been unfair to their own staff," he says.

Not true, counters Mr Mulholland. "If you compare the relationship between staffing levels and output, we come out very well in comparison with other European broadcasters. Obviously we have problems in dealing with issues like new technology, and I'm not denying those. But I think our schedules compare very favourably with other European countries for their vibrancy and diversity."

For the moment, RTE is refusing to budge on the argument over the acquisitions budget, which is likely to increase in the face of competition from TV3 at the end of the year. Mr Hickey believes that legal action remains possible.

There is, however, a further possibility. Under the 1993 legislation, the Minister for Arts, Culture, Heritage and the Islands has the power to make orders varying the amount or percentage allocated to independent productions in certain circumstances, for instance if RTE jobs are threatened. For RTE, this may be the final fallback position.

"We don't accept FMI's interpretation of `acquisitions' in the legislation, and we've written to the Department to explain that," says Mr Mulholland. "I listened with interest recently to Michael D. Higgins suggesting that Clause 7 [the relevant clause of the 1993 Act] should be invoked to protect RTE jobs."

But Mr Hickey believes that RTE is blowing the situation out of proportion for its own reasons. "Independents have produced exciting, critically acclaimed, commercially successful programmes for RTE," he says. "If you look at the figures, the extra expenditure this year is only 2.5 per cent of the overall turnover. It's minuscule. Hanging the threat of job losses over people's heads is ridiculous and unfair, and it must stop."