There are certain items in this Report which are quite acceptable to the Post Office viewpoint. One of them, that of the issue of licences, is, for instance, acceptable, for the reason that the situation had so developed that some such departure was essential, and also because of the fact that the Committee in its wise judgment recommended that in the interests of broadcasting control those steps should be taken. There is another recommendation which has all the appearance of reality, but at best it only conveys a pious expression of opinion, and this is, to my view, the kernel of the whole situation, that of the erection of a broadcasting station. Paragraph 8 demolishes the programme presented to this Dáil in the White Paper, but the Committee, while asking the Dáil to accept that demolition, has taken no steps whatever to ascertain whether a feasible substitute is possible. It is said, for instance, in paragraph 7, that the Committee is considering whether it would not be advisable to erect this broadcasting station by State funds, and to provide the cultural side of Irish life through some co-ordinating medium between the cultural people, and the State itself should be responsible for the running of the broadcasting station. It says that in providing that cultural programme not only would it be possible to do it for nothing, but that the State conceivably would make profit from the transaction. I wonder is the Committee serious in this matter. Has it considered whether such a thing as this is possible? Has it considered, before destroying a feasible proposal constructed over a period of six months, before destroying it in a period of six days, whether there is a practical alternative available? I would imagine the first duty of the Committee is to ascertain whether this alternative is at their disposal. I would imagine that before asking the Dáil to turn down the product of our extended labours, some feasible scheme for ensuring the provision of a broadcasting station for this country would have been presented. It is all very fine to say we believe the best thing is to put up a station at the expense of the State. Can this Committee guarantee to the Dáil that the State is prepared to expend its money in this venture? If it cannot guarantee that, why destroy the only material available? I see no reason whatever for the presentation of this Interim Report, or at least for its adoption here. There is nothing whatever to prevent the Committee from getting ahead with its further investigations and presenting an alternative for the one which they seek to remove without in any way binding the Dáil or the Committee to a refusal to sanction that which has been placed before them, and which, to my mind, is the only means through which a broadcasting station can be set up here. There is a lot of confusion in the public mind in this matter, and it would have simplified our position very much had the evidence been made public from the outset. For instance, people want to know is this a monopoly. I think the Committee will agree that it is the reverse of a monopoly, and that the one thing the Post Office aimed at from the outset was the avoidance of anything that would give the appearance of a monopoly.
He said, in effect, there are no people engaged in the manufacture of wireless in this country and, seeing that we believe that a broadcasting station would not be a proper investment for State monies, it is our duty to see that anybody within the country, any citizen of the Free State, who is able and willing to participate in a Government concession of this sort, should be permitted to do so. We followed the direct line, that the one thing to be avoided in the erection of a broadcasting station here was that under no circumstances should we be open to the charge of creating a monopoly. Now, I venture to say, if the State refuses to speculate its moneys in this broadcasting project, that the Committee will again be thrown back on the necessity of following in our footsteps and inviting Irish citizens to come forward with their money to erect the station. I have a feeling, in this connection, that paragraph 8 implies a reflection on some of those citizens—citizens of very great repute, citizens who have contributed materially to the freedom which we enjoy here, citizens of the type of Mr. Dowdall, of Cork—that it implies in the mind of the public that men of his type are unsuited or unfitted or not entitled to participate in a Government concession. That may or may not be the intention of the Committee, but the paragraph is capable of that interpretation. What I suggest to this Committee is—and I do not see any objection to it—that there is no necessity whatever for the adoption of this Interim Report. There is no reason whatever why an Interim Report should be presented. The Committee was set up to consider the White Paper, to consider a proposal already made and, failing acceptance of that proposal, to put up something in its stead. That was their job. It has not been, in any way, altered by anything that happened in the interval.
There is just one point on which I would like to dwell, in connection with this whole matter. Anything in the nature of a Government concession is pretty sure to bring trouble. The same question has caused serious trouble in other countries. We do not stand alone in respect to it. People rush to the conclusion that a concession of this kind is something in the nature of the presentation of a gift on the part of the Government. As a matter of fact, in our own experience, we found it extremely difficult to get anybody to accept the gift. We found it necessary to advertise on four successive occasions, and beg of our countrymen to chance their money in what, I think, may be reasonably regarded as a risky speculation. But that is not a matter that concerns me, so much as the causes which, in my view, led to the original inquiry.
It will be remembered that the only questions raised on broadcasting in this House, prior to the issue of the White Paper, were raised by Deputies Figgis and McGarry. It will be also remembered that both Deputies were subsequently appointed to the Committee, and it will be further remembered that neither Deputy signed the Report. All these coincidences must have some meaning to the observer. If the evidence to which I referred on the previous motion were published before the Dáil was called upon to endorse this Interim Report, I venture to say that it would come to the conclusion that an extern company—a combine in a neighbouring country—is directly associated in an effort to prevent the control of broadcasting by the Irish people. It will be seen in that evidence that both the Deputies concerned—the Deputies to whom I have just referred —were in communication with the chairman of that combine. This is why I ask that the evidence be placed at the disposal of the Deputies of the Dáil before they are called upon to pass judgment on this Interim Report. It is common knowledge in local circles at the present time—I want the members of the Committee to take a special note of this—that the first move to prevent the adoption of the broadcasting scheme embodied in the White Paper, and the subsequent Press campaign, which, I venture to say, had some bearing on certain decisions, were both the work—the direct effect—of this foreign company.
It is common talk here that this Company initiated the efforts to destroy this White Paper, to destroy the scheme brought forward by the Post Office, that they did it with the sole object of collaring and controlling wireless in Ireland in the future, that by their able tactics, within and without the Committee, they have been enabled to succeed far beyond their expectations, that they have now deprived this country of a Broadcasting Station, that they have thrown the country open to free exploitation in regard to the sale of sets, and that in short Ireland, for their purposes, is simply a continuation of an English Shire. They say further that once they brought broadcasting to its present stage, it is only a matter of time when they will be appealed to to take up the running to include Ireland in their field of exploit. That is actually the position. I believe myself that the Committee has the best intentions in the world, when it suggests that a broadcasting station should be set up here. I believe it really wishes that that should be done. It means well and hopes that it will be done. But hopes and good intentions are all very fine. I believe that before it destroys what is at its disposal, its hopes and intentions should be translated into something practical, and that before the Committee asks the Dáil to reject what, in my view, will prove eventually to be the only practicable solution of this matter, it should see to it that there is an alternative, work out the details of that alternative, and prove here conclusively that there is something to be put in its place. If you do not do that, you have no right to reject the only course which I personally can see open to the Committee, that of falling back again on private enterprise to produce a Broadcasting Station and control broadcasting here.
Already the position is very much queered. The fact of issuing licences— although I agreed to their issue, I did it without enthusiasm—to people who had walked on the law, to people who had imported sets, knowing their action was illegal, has queered the pitch of Government control of this very potent instrument in the future. I can conceive a situation in which the users of wireless will continue to defy the Postmaster-General's control in this matter, will not pay licence fees, will erect their miniature wireless stations as they please, and will bring the utmost chaos and confusion into the wireless world here, in the hope and belief that should the Postmaster-General be foolish enough to attempt again to bring them under control, another Press onslaught will save them. This is the predicament to which broadcasting has been brought. We have legalised law-breakers. We have deprived this country of a broadcasting station; we have turned it over to British music-hall dope and British propaganda, and no one of us, on the Committee or off the Committee, sees any way out of the dilemma. There is only one solid fact, and that is that the product of a Department's efforts, covering a whole six months, are roughly turned down.
