Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 30 Nov 1926

Vol. 17 No. 5

WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY BILL—SECOND STAGE.

MINISTER for POSTS and TELEGRAPHS (Mr. Walsh)

Wireless Telegraphy in Saorstát Eireann is at present controlled by an Act passed in 1904, a temporary measure, and since then it has been changed from year to year by this supplementary Wireless Act and the Act of 1906. Since the Act of 1904, wireless has developed very rapidly and in particular in respect to the broadcasting field. Because of this development and because of the absence of legislation, covering certain phases and also because of the uncertainty of existing legislation in respect to the issue of a licence fee, we have, for a considerable time past, decided that it was necessary to have it defined and as a consequence the Bill, which we are now reading the Second Time, proposes to repeal the existing Acts and to make full provision for the control of wireless, both broadcasting and wireles telegraphy. The Bill before the House to-day makes provision for the collection of licences. That is the main and outstanding provision. Of course, there are others and in addition to so doing, it purposes to place the necessary machinery in the hands of the State for that enforcement. It also deals with the question of wireless as applied to ships in and around our coast and to airships. Except with regard to broadcasting, the Bill is not a very serious departure from existing provisions. I should like to say at this stage that its provisions have been agreed to by the other departments which are likely to be concerned in the control of wireless generally. As is usual here, I intend to give a resume of the provisions of the different sections.

Clause 2 gives the definitions of the various expressions contained in the Bill which are necessary to cover the present and probable future development of wireless telegraphy and to remove the ambiguity as regards reception which existed in the Act of 1904. Clause 3 relates to the restriction on the possession of wireless telegraphy apparatus except under licence issued by the Minister. Exceptions for ships and the Army are covered by Sections 5 and 6. As to Sections 1 and 2, under the Telegraph Act, 1896, the Minister has already a monopoly of telegraphic communication and is, therefore, entitled to prevent the use of wireless telegraphy except under a license granted by him. This is merely a continuance of the power already possessed by the Minister under the Wireless Telegraphy Act of 1904 which will be repealed. Wireless on ships is already within the scope of the Act of 1904, and it is proposed to extend control to cover wireless in aircraft. With regard to Section 3, the maximum penalties of £10, with a further fine not exceeding £1 per day during which the offence continues and forfeiture of apparatus is reasonable compared with the Act of 1904, which prescribed a penalty of £10 and, if convicted on indictment a fine not exceeding £100, or 12 months' imprisonment, and in either case forfeiture of apparatus. The penalty which we propose to introduce is a big modification of the one already existing. As to Section 4: in the case of ships to which this Section applies, in the matter of contravention, the apparatus shall be deemed to be kept by the Master of the ship as well as by the owner of such ship. This is intended to facilitate proof in case of a prosecution. Clause 4 relates to restrictions on signalling stations.

As to sub-sections 1 and 2 of Clause 4, signalling stations referred to are such as are capable of communicating with ships by means of semaphores, bells, lamp-signalling or any other device as defined in Clause 2. Communication of such kinds is within the Minister's exclusive privilege and the use of it must, therefore, be licensed. Sub-section 1 of Clause 5 provides for the issue of licences at a prescribed fee (if any) by the Minister.

Clause 6 gives the Minister power to make regulations in regard to licences —their form, duration, renewal, suspension or revocation, the terms and conditions to be observed by the holders, the fees to be paid, and any other matters in respect of which it shall appear necessary to make provision by regulations.

Sub-section (1) of Section 6 deals with a matter that is of more than passing interest to Deputies who probably intend to speak on this question. As regards traders and dealers in apparatus, retailers, etc., and also as regards institutions, where more than one receiving set is used, it is not intended that licences should be taken out for every set. One licence will suffice. I want to explain that the alternative to this course would have been to insist on licences for every set. That would bring in its train an immensity of complications for my Department. It would mean, in the case of institutions, such as hospitals, where several extensions of a main set or several independent sets may be found necessary, insistence on licences for every set. Likewise in the case of experimenters who find themselves in possession of one set with many parts, otherwise a set that may be used in its plural form, or a number of part sets, or a number of individual sets, such persons would not have escaped a fee of 10/- for each set or part thereof. In this proposal we let them off with a single licence. In the same way it simplifies our position in regard to retailers' broadcasting instruments. Every retailer will, we may reasonably expect, provide himself with a medium of reception for demonstration purposes, and that medium can, and will, be switched on to any particular set. It may be put on to more than one set. In this case we merely charge for one medium, regardless of the use made of it. This removes a great difficulty with which we were faced in regard to this matter. I regard it as removing one of the greatest possible difficulties which a Bill, such as this, could introduce. In effect, we are asking for one licence for one building—one licence from one authority.

While, of course, this matter will be reduced to print through our regulations at a later stage, it would be well to explain here that it is possible for one owner to live in two residences. In that case, should he be the possessor of two sets, one in each residence, he must, of course, pay two licence fees. Likewise, should he have a set in his residence and another, say, in his motor ear, he must pay two licences, but, generally, in one building, owned by one individual, we intend to seek only one licence fee, regardless of the number of instruments which may be contained in that building. Sub-section (2) of Section 6 refers to licences for transmission for experimental purposes, which are granted only to persons qualified to carry out experiments and are subject to special conditions. Sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 7 provide for the serving of notices by registered post, requiring any person to furnish information regarding his apparatus. This is a new requirement which is intended to facilitate the administration of the Act. It is the alternative to taking out a search warrant. It is understood that the Customs and Excise authorities have similar statutory powers in connection with the licences which they control. Sub-section (3) prescribes a maximum penalty of £5 for failing to furnish the required information or making a false or misleading declaration.

Sub-section (1) or Section 8 provides for the issue of a search warrant by a District Justice to officers of the Ministry and to members of the Gárda Siochána on sworn information. A similar provision already exists in the Post Office Act of 1904, authorising officers of the Post Office or police officers to enter and inspect under a search warrant any place or ship where it is suspected that a wireless apparatus is used without a licence, and to seize such apparatus. A warrant is only granted by a District Justice on sworn information. He may refuse to grant same if, in his opinion, there is not sufficient ground for granting it. Sub-section (1) of Section 9 provides for the making of regulations in regard to the efficiency of ship and aircraft operators, the granting, duration and renewal of certificates of competency, regulating and controlling the time and manner of working of apparatus, and observations of the International Convention. The expression "or any other person" in E (1) means that wireless operators on ships and aircraft may hold certificates granted by the British Postmaster-General, the British Air Ministry or by a Dominion Government. These certificates are recognised here. I (1) states that the Government of Saorstát is a party to the International Radio Convention under which wireless telegraphy on ships is regulated.

Section 10 provides for the control of wireless telegraphy by the Government in times of emergency. The necessity for that section is obvious. In times of crisis it is essential for the safety of the State that the Government should have full control over all wireless apparatus. Sub-section (2) provides that the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs shall make such regulations regarding wireless telegraphy in the emergency as the Executive Council may consider necessary. Sub-section (3) provides the penalties which are a departure from those already referred to and which appear in the early part of the Bill because the situation is different. Under this sub-section it is provided that a maximum of £50 or six months' imprisonment, together with forfeiture of the apparatus, is to be imposed for every breach of the regulations and, in addition, there is a fine of £5 a day for a continuing breach.

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

took the Chair.

Mr. WALSH

Sub-Section (4) of Section 10 provides that the special regulations continue in force as long as the emergency exists. Sub-section (7) deals with merchant shipping. The Merchant Shipping (Wireless Telegraphy) Act, 1919, is administered by the Minister for Industry and Commerce, and it will be necessary to obtain his sanction to any regulation respecting wireless on ships to which this Act applies. In other words, any steps which the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs desires to take with regard to wireless on board ships can only be taken in collaboration with that Minister. The Merchant Shipping (Convention) Act of 1914 was passed to give effect to an international convention regarding the safety of life at sea, but it has not, so far, been ratified by some countries. Because of that the Act has not yet come into operation.

In Section 11 we find prohibition of certain classes of messages of an indecent, obscene, or offensive character, messages or communications subversive of public order, false or misleading signals of distress, or false or misleading messages or signals to a ship or aircraft in distress. In sub-section (2) we find a regulation for the purpose of maintaining the secrecy of any telegraphic message sent by wireless. We propose that the Minister should be empowered to prevent the leakage of information from wireless telegraphic stations, and with the necessary penalties to enforce that secrecy. In this case the offences are of a serious character, and it is necessary to carry with them a serious punishment. Imprison ment instead of a fine is, therefore. sought for. Sub-section (4) provides penalties for misdemeanours. In some cases the facts may mitigate the offence, constitute it of minor importance, and warrant its being dealt with summarily by a District Justice. In such cases a fine not exceeding £10 or one month's imprisonment is proposed.

Section 12 deals with the interference caused by the working of wireless apparatus. Sub-section (1) applies to the irregular working of apparatus in such a way as to cause interference with the users of wireless sets or any broadcasting station. The Minister is bound to protect licensees from undue-interference caused by oscillation arising from the improper working of apparatus by other persons. This is a type of nuisance experienced elsewhere. In some countries it has been dealt with by enactments and in other cases it has not been dealt with, and is a continuing nuisance. Sub-section (2) authorises the Minister to serve notice on a person who works his apparatus. irregularly, requiring him to terminate the interference he is causing. This precaution is similar to that which we have taken in cases where people fail to pay their licence fees. Instead of invoking the law at first we give them an opportunity of rectifying their ways.

Sub-section (4) deals with interference by ships with telegraphy. Any rectification of an obstruction of this character can, of course, only be approached with the consent of the Minister for Industry and Commerce. In sub-section (5) we find that the provisions which already exist in regard to the maintenance of the rights of the-Postmaster-General, in respect to certain powers which enable him to prevent interference from electrical extensions of another character, are being-retained. The Telegraphic Acts, 1863 to 1921, give the Minister power to prevent interference with telegraphs, and it is not proposed to detract from these. The necessity of that power is very obvious.

Section 13 deals with the method of instituting prosecutions. Prosecutions can only be at the suit of the Minister. This section is intended to prevent prosecutions being instituted by the police without the prior knowledge of the Minister, and also prosecutions which might be instituted by private persons for vindictive or other motives. Section 14 deals with the offences committed in ships or aircraft.

Sub-section (2) of Section 15 provides for the continuance of existing licences until the expiration of the period for which they were issued, and for the protection of the user from being required to take out a new licence. It enables the licensee to get a full run for his money for a full twelve months. Sub-section (3) is to prevent claims for refunds of licence fees already paid, on the grounds that owing to the ambiguity of the Act of 1904 there was no authority requiring licences for a receiving apparatus, or exacting fees for payment thereof. Because of the uncertainty that prevails as to the powers of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, and the necessity of taking out licences, it is only natural to anticipate that certain people who paid for licences may seek a refund. In this particular case we arc taking steps to prevent that.

Section 17 provides for the establishment and maintenance of broadcasting stations. Sub-section (2) deals with the responsibility for the material which passes over the broadcasting station. Someone must have responsibility for what is proper in broadcast matter, and the Minister of the Department is obviously the person on whom that responsibility should fall. The Special Committee appointed by the Dáil in 1923 recommended that broadcasting should be a State service, and should be solely in the hands of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. The report of the committee was approved by a resolution of the Dáil, and this section proposes to give legislative sanction to the resolution. Section 18 deals with fees for broadcasting. It provides for charging fees to persons or firms who make use of broadcasting for advertising purposes, appeals and other causes. At the present time we are issuing advertisements and charging for them. That is one of the proposals made by the Broadcasting Committee of 1923.

Clause 19 provides for the establishment of an Advisory Committee of not less than five, that five to include a representative of the Department of Lands and Agriculture and a representative of the Department of Education. In actual practice we have found it more advisable to extend the number. As a matter of fact we have a committee of eighteen at present. and it is a good committee, a committee that is likely to carry its weight and to be very helpful in the drawing up of programmes and the general direction of programmes which we hope will satisfy the public, or, at any rate, a majority of them. The right of nomination to this committee by the Minister may be questioned, but. as far as we can see, there is no alternative to that course. I have seen it suggested that certain organisations and societies ought to be permitted to nominate their own representatives. That would open up a great many difficulties. Firstly, there may be duplications of such societies, or societies of a particular type, and secondly, we have no assurance that the rules and regulations governing particular societies are those with which we could find ourselves in full concurrence. There are a great many other reasons. On the whole, I am satisfied that the method adopted, that of nominating members, is a satisfactory one. I see no justification for departing from it.

If this Bill should pass in its present or approximately present form we hope to find ourselves in a strong financial position. I anticipate—it is only a guess because we have nothing very clear to guide us—that fully 40.000 people in the State have broadcasting apparatus at the present time. Up to now, during the current year, only about 4,000 of these have taken out licences. Therefore, it will be seen that the public are not prepared, in the absence of legislation, to pay for broadcasting, and that once this Bill becomes operative we should be able to secure the greater part of these fees. It will surprise me if from fees alone we should not reach the sum of £20,000 during the coming financial year. That sum, plus a lesser sum which we expect to get from import duties, will place us in a sound financial position. I said in speaking here on the Estimates last year that, once this Bill was in operation and when we had the advantage of the import duties, broadcasting would pay its way. I am satisfied now that that statement was not wide of the mark, that broadcasting will, during the present year, and, as far as we can see, for the future, clear its own passage. Not only should it meet day to day outgoings but I venture to say we will be in a position to pay back to the State the capital advances which it has been, and will be, called upon to make in regard to the erection of the stations. In other words, broadcasting will stand on its own legs without any burden on the taxpayer. That, considered from the standpoint of the committee who decided in the first instance to devolve this responsibility on the State, is a prospect which will create great satisfaction. It is all the better that broadcasting ought to be clear of Central Fund Expenditure, that it should be self-supporting. There was no prospect of realising that position in the absence of this Bill, and whilst we have endeavoured to avoid anything in the nature of contentious clauses, we feel that nothing less than what the Bill provides will be satisfactory. I therefore move the Second Reading.

Mr. GOOD

There is just one point on which I would like to get some information from the Minister in addition to what he has already told us. He has not given us, so far, much indication as to what the policy of the Department is in regard to broadcasting. In Clause 17 of this Bill very wide powers are conferred on the Ministry with regard to broadcasting. Before these powers are conferred one would like to know what exactly is the policy of his Department. When the Minister was discussing this question of policy not very long ago, in this House, he informed us that he was rather inclined to set up, I think, four stations in different parts of the Saorstát. I do not know whether it is the intention or not to continue that policy. but it does appear to one, in connection with a rapidly changing industry like wireless, that a decision of that character might be reviewed. The expense of maintaining four stations will be considerable, particularly if they are to be maintained in a state of efficiency comparable with other stations we know of. It will mean as I said an expenditure of a considerable amount to maintain that state of efficiency.

It would be well to consider whether in view of the rapid developments that are taking place, it would not be better to concentrate on one station, to make the programmes in that particular station highly attractive, and then to relay from that central station to these other provincial stations. I suggest that to the Minister as a policy that is pretty largely adopted elsewhere and as one that is likely to make broadcasting much more popular in the Free State than it is to-day. Of course in addition to that relaying from the central station it would be possible to give additional information from these local stations but I do maintain that it would be preferable as a policy to concentrate on one station and to make that station of the high-class that we would like to see it and then to relay the programmes to the different sub-stations. That is a point on which one would like to have the views of the Minister. There was one other point on which I would like to have heard him—with regard to these charges. I was glad to hear from the Minister that he does not propose to tax the proprietor of a number of sets for each individual set. There are other points, however, that are worthy of consideration.

It has become customary, on this side as well as on the other side, since wireless sets have become much more portable than they were, to move these sets as one moves from one part of the country to another, and I would like the Minister to make it quite clear that if a tax on a set is paid in any portion of the Saorstát that apparatus will be free of tax in any other part.

Mr. WALSH

It will.

Mr. GOOD

I am sure from his statement that that is the intention, but he did not make it as clear as it is desirable it should be. These are the only two points on which I would like information. I would like the Minister, if he possibly could, to consider that question of centralisation of broadcasting. We are all glad to recognise the improvements that have taken place in some departments of what we might call the central station, though all departments have not been improved to the extent that one would like. I do not know that the announcer in the Dublin station has improved. However, that is a matter that is capable of consideration in the future. But one would like to see programmes given in the Dublin station that would be really attractive and comparable with other programmes that one has opportunities of listening to.

Mr. WOLFE

I think the Minister has made it pretty dear that it is necessary for wireless to have governing it a more recent Act than that of 1904, or even of 1906, because wireless, as we all know, has made vast progress of late years, particularly within the past year. The Minister said, and I think it is quite true, that the greatest necessity, and the thing, I suppose, that urged him most strongly to bring in the Bill, was the matter of the licences, and the regulations to be made governing them. I think he is quite correct in that, because I am perfectly certain, from what I see myself, that there is a huge number of people having wireless sets who are not paying the licences for them—some few out of ignorance, but in a good many cases because they consider that it is more profitable for them to haye ten shillings in their pockets than to pay ten shillings out. It is necessary, in such cases, to have something to compel people who have the privilege of this wonderful discovery to pay a reasonable amount for its enjoyment. All classes are now participating in wireless, and I am glad to see that it is going down to the very bottom. In my district a very considerable number of labourers have sets in their houses, and the amount of enjoyment and pleasure it gives to them, some of them tell me, is beyond description. But they have all their little grievances about it; a great many of them think that there is a little too much music that is above their comprehension in some cases, and that there might be lectures on subjects that would be useful to them, dealing with matters of agriculture, with which they are in daily contact, and things of that sort, which. no doubt, the Minister may be able to see to in time.

Another question which is very important to country people is this: At present the time signal and the weather forecast is given very late, at about 10.30. In the country districts it is the custom for the labouring classes to go to bed at about eight-thirty or nine, because they have to get up early. It would be a great advantage to them to have the weather forecast, the time signal, and all that kind of thing, given before the ordinary programme commences, instead of at 10.30 or later. I think it would not cause very much disarrangement or create any difficulty if that were done, and possibly the Minister will be able to see to it. Another matter to which I would like to refer is this: I think a great many more—in fact a huge number—would take to wireless if it was possible to reduce the fee to five shillings, that many would do so who are now hesitating on the brink and trying to decide whether they can afford ten shillings or not. I am quite certain that there would be no loss to the revenue if the Minister could see his way later to make this change.

I agree with what Deputy Good has said about a central station of great power, on the style of the Daventry station, to transmit to other stations. and I think that that would be a good thing. It would probably make the reception clearer in certain districts where at present they have a difficulty in this respect. I think that the fines laid down are rather severe. I do not mean fines for an outside country, for ships, or that sort of thing, but for people in country districts who have not really thoroughly understood all the ins and outs of the matter. In their case I think a fine of £1 a day would be rather severe. It may be that there is power in the Bill to reduce that amount, but if such a provision is to be enforced I think it would have a very deterrent effect on anybody proposing to take up wireless if they thought that, through ignorance, they might have to pay such a crushing fine. I am sure it is not the idea of the Minister, or of anybody who has to do with wireless, to put any hindrance in the way of its spread.

I think there is no discovery that has such possibilities before it as wireless of transmitting knowledge and of making the most wonderful difference to people who live in isolated places, and to young people especially living in districts where they have very little to do at night. Wireless has a most wonderful educative value, and I hope that everything possible will be done to make it a success. I think the lower the licence fee is made the greater will be the spread of wireless, and the greater also the amount of revenue the Government will derive from it. I hope the Minister will look into the matter of the programme and try to suit all classes as far as possible, and that he will be able to give to every class a fair share of the subjects likely to be of interest and value to them. If that can be done it will be the means of opening up vast sources of information to every class in the community, and will pay the country well.

Mr. WALSH

I do not know whether or not I would be justified in giving a very full explanation of the development of policy on the occasion of the Second Reading of this Bill, which really has nothing to do with policy. I am, however, always prepared to satisfy the curiosity of Deputies. On previous occasions I indicated the course that that policy was likely to follow.

Mr. GOOD

Might I intervene to point out to the Minister that under Section 17 of the Bill, as I have already mentioned, he gets the right to set up stations. What I want to know is what use is likely to be made of these stations, and what is to be the policy with regard to them?

Mr. WALSH

As a matter of fact we have discussed the question of policy here on a number of occasions. I think I am not exaggerating when I say four or five occasions. I am prepared to restate briefly why we find it necessary to go ahead with the high power station in the centre of the country. The technical development of that has not yet gone beyond the stage of a safe radius —a guaranteed radius of 80 miles. It may, in certain parts of the circle, extend to 100 miles. Now, anybody who looks at the map of Ireland will see that there is no spot at which we can place a high power station with a safe radius of 80 miles and an uncertain one of 100 miles that will provide the user of the crystal range, which, after all, is the one that mainly concerns us, with what will be satisfying. We have in mind Athlone as a centre for this high power station. Athlone is, I think, about 80 miles from Dublin. We have a population of about half a million centred in the City of Dublin. It will be seen at once that a population of half a million on the extreme verge of certainty, and perhaps on the verge of uncertainty, is not a situation that we could face. Therefore, we find it essential to maintain the Dublin station. In any case, the original cost of that station was only £5,000 or £6,000. The expenditure on it will be earned over and over again before the high power station can possibly be in operation. Similarly, in the case of Cork City. We have in the vicinity of that city a population of about a quarter of a million. It is outside the 100 miles radius, and therefore outside the radius of even the best high power station that we could envisage at the moment. It is clear also in that case that we would require a small transmitting station. The Dublin station is working, the Cork station is being erected, and we hope to find it working about the end of February or at any rate early in March.

Mr. GOOD

The Minister, I take it, will relay. That is his proposition.

Mr. WALSH

I will come to that. The third station that we intend to provide is the one for the Gaeltacht. I believe it will be agreed that we cannot reconcile ourselves to a programme, largely in English, circulating in that district, seeing that we have set our minds to the maintenance of the Gaeltacht area. We have, therefore, decided to put up a station for that particular district. It will not cost a great lot of money, and the intention is that it should provide a programme in keeping with the language of the people. Now, these are the only small stations that we intend to provide. One is there already, the other will be there within a couple of months, and the third will, I hope, be provided in the forthcoming estimates. I have explained that it is the intention to go ahead with the high power station, and in all probability the location of that station will be Athlone. I do not see any better location so far. The original cost of that station will be anything in the neighbourhood of £60,000. It would perhaps be £20,000 more if we had to erect a power station in addition, but we hope that the Shannon power will be available before the station is complete. It will take at least eighteen months to complete it. In anticipation of the erection of that station we have made representations to the Department of Industry and Commerce to bear in mind the necessity of an early construction of cables in the Athlone area. I believe that will be possible. Now, once we have this high power station and our two smaller stations, because we must exclude from consideration the one in the Gaeltacht, you can take it that the great bulk of the programme will be provided from the high power station. In other words, we have no intention of providing more than one programme for the country at any one time. It may happen, and it will happen without a doubt, that the bulk of the programmes will emanate here in Dublin, where the major portion of our material will naturally be derived, but it will also frequently happen that material for a programme will be secured from Cork, Limerick, Galway, and other places. There will be no duplication of that programme. There is no intention, for instance, of having a programme originating in Dublin and another in Cork, Limerick, or somewhere else at the same time. There will be one programme at one time, but if we can diversify the programme or pick up material in any part of the country, then, naturally, we intend doing so. By that means, of course, we will only incur one expense at the one time.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

resumed the Chair.

Mr. WALSH

A further point to be considered in connection with broadcasting is that with the introduction of the beam system I venture to say it will be possible to switch on any foreign station, any station from any part of the world to any other part of the earth, quite as easily and conveniently as one may at present switch on the telephone. That is, to my view, a certainty, and once that materialises those in charge of broadcasting in this country can vary their programme to any extent, and at very little cost. The world material will be at the disposal of the world. Broadcasting is really coming to that. Deputy Wolfe is rather inclined to think that we could popularise broadcasting by reducing the licensing fee to 5/-. That fee would not pay us for the cost of collection. and 10/- is the very lowest rate there is anywhere.

Mr. WOLFE

But look at the number that would be brought in under the 5/- fee?

Mr. WALSH

I do not believe you would bring in 5 per cent. extra. As for the penalties, people incur these with their eyes open. They have got to face them. Nobody need pay a £10 penalty if he or she pays the licence. If, on the other hand, if there is a general attempt to evade paying that fee then people have to meet the consequence. We find that in the absence of an Act to enforce the payment of fees, there are very few who are willing to pay anything. Most people want everything for nothing, and at the same time they want the privilege of abusing the State for not doing more for them. They cannot have it both ways. The people are called upon to pay a little more than one-third of a penny a day for the best programme we can produce. Under the circumstances, I do not see where the grievance comes in. Generally speaking, our programme is a good programme, and the proof of that is that we have received thousands of commendations in regard to it from people living in Great Britain. We have proof that a very considerable percentage of the listeners-in in Wales, Cumberland, Westmoreland, Lancashire, Yorkshire, and the South of Scotland are regular listeners-in to the Dublin programme. Within the last fortnight alone the Director of Broadcasting brought to my notice twelve or fourteen communications of that kind. and it would surprise some of the critics of the Dublin station to read what these people think of our programmes here. We are very much inclined to depreciate the resources of our own land—very much inclined to see the long horns of the distant cow. If we had a little more respect for our own country and what it can produce, it would be all to the good.

I think our programme is generally a good one and that, with the encouragement our artists are receiving, it will improve. I believe we have every reason to be satisfied that we have done so well in regard to broadcasting. One further point I want to mention is that we invited through broadcasting and the Press comments of any kind, good, bad or indifferent, with regard to our programme. Thirty replies were received. Fifty per cent. of these expressed satisfaction, but made some slight suggestions, and the other 15 replies may be included under the category of the dissatisfied-some because we had too much Irish, and some because we had too little Irish, and too much English; some because we taught German; some because we had not enough of jazz, and some because we had too much jazz; and so on. At any rate, notwithstanding the fact that we must have some 40,000 set holders, and that every possible effort was made, extending over a week, to get suggestions and to rouse up the dissatisfied, we got only 15 of these people to come to the surface. That does not indicate general dissatisfaction. We can take it the bulk of the people are satisfied that we are doing well, and doing our best, and that the Dublin programme is a good programme. I would be always glad to get suggestions from members of this House with a view to making that programme better. It is our desire that it should be the best.

Question put and agreed to.

Ordered that the Committee Stage be taken on Tuesday, 7th December.

Mr. BLYTHE

I move the adjournment until 3 o'clock to-morrow.