I move:—
That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration.
I do so for the purpose of widening the discussion which would otherwise possibly not be as wide. The Minister has facilitated us on this Estimate, as on the previous Estimate, by circulating copies of his speech which enable us to keep a note of matters to which we wish to refer. However, I do not propose to make any comment in relation to Radio Éireann, partly because I am not a radio fan; partly because I lack, unfortunately, any musical ear and am, therefore, unable to make any comment on the performance of the Radio Orchestra; and partly because I do not want to get involved in a discussion on the work of Radio Eireann as I hear so many violently differing criticisms of its programmes and its performances.
I want, however, to make a few remarks in reference to television, not in reference at all to any particular proposal or even to any method of providing a television service. I think some of us do not realise the immense influence of television in the countries in which it is completely available or the immense influence it is likely to have in other countries. Already in some areas it has moulded, and in others it will do more to mould the thoughts and habits of the people than even the national Press. I do not think there is any doubt whatever that, as a medium of propaganda, it is far more powerful than even the newspapers or sound radio.
We see when we read and we hear when we listen to the sound radio, but we get a combination of both with television, and we can be conditioned into a frame of mind, by a medium such as television programmes, in a way that is not at all possible other wise. For that reason and because of the immense impact and effect it has had and will have it is of the greatest possible importance to Ireland that whatever is done in relation to a television service here should be done carefully, and after the most exhaustive inquiry.
I must say that I entirely agree with the terms of reference which were set out for the Television Commission by the Minister's predecessor, but I am not sure that I entirely agree that those terms of reference were correctly interpreted by the members of the Commission. It may be, indeed, that there is always room for difference of opinion about the manner in which terms of reference should be interpreted. There is, however, considerable difficulty in discussing television on the Estimate today because the report which has been made public is not the full report at all. I am not attributing any blame whatever to the Minister or to the Commission in that respect. I fully understand and appreciate that it was necessary for certain aspects of the matters which were discussed by the Commission to be confidential not only to the Government on the one hand, but to the proposers of the various schemes, on the other.
I appreciate, therefore, that it was not possible to make public every piece of evidence that was given and every proposal that was put forward. The main reports were made public but they are incapable of complete critical analysis without the information that the reports themselves say has been given in supplementals, privately and confidentially to the Government. That is inevitable perhaps, but it makes it more clear that some other type of approach is necessary at this stage.
Everyone will agree on the importance of ensuring that the impact of television on the Irish viewing public is such as to be in complete accord with national and economic policy. The reports suggest that we have, at the present time, some 30,000 sets here. There were 20,000 sets in the country in the year previous to that in which the Commission started and, when they had concluded their report, there were some 30,000 sets. It is visualised that that figure may rise to 100,000 sets after three years of operation. It may even rise to very near that figure when the British I.T.V. station opens its services in the Six Counties. Even at the limited figure of 100,000 sets, it means a capital of £8,000,000 sunk in television receivers which, to put it midly, is a very very substantial figure in our circumstances. Where we may go afterwards in density of viewing sets can be seen from the position which obtains in other countries.
In America, there is virtually 100 per cent. cover per family; virtually every family in America has a television set. In Canada, the figure is about nine families out of ten. Of course, in Europe the position is not anything like as fully developed as yet, but in Great Britain, which is the most fully developed European country, it is approximately one in every two families. After Great Britain, there is a very big drop in the figure in the other countries in Europe and none of them reaches more than 15 per cent. of the families in each country. Sweden is probably next to Britain, having one in every seventh household, which is the same in Sweden as five television sets for every 100 inhabitants.
When we see the development there has been on the one hand, and on the other hand, that it is not possible to make generally available to the public the evidence from the supplemental reports which is essential if we are to judge the merits of the main Television Report, we realise that we are faced with a very big problem. As well as the supplements, I think the interim report to which the Minister referred was not published either. I am not quite certain of that but I do not think it was published.
One of the most disastrous things there could be in a service such as this, which will have such an immense impact on our national and economic life, is that it would become the plaything of Party politics. It would be very much in the national interest that there should be the greatest degree of unanimity on what it is desirable to do about a television service.
It would not be right or in the national interest that the Government of the day would set up a television service on one basis—when I say "set up" I mean bona fide in every way— in what they thought was the best way, and that another Government would come along in a few years and, because they had different ideas, attempt to change the service and its method of operation. For that reason, I want to make this suggestion to the Minister. The commission have made it clear— and the Government also have made it clear that they are standing over that part of the commission's report—that much of the information on which a decision must ultimately be based is so confidential that it cannot be released to the public.
I would ask the Minister to suggest to his colleagues in the Government that the best way of ensuring that we would get a television service that would be above Party political lines and that would be dealt with as a real national service would be for him to call together an all-Party committee of this House to whom the confidential information could be made available and who would be in a position, therefore, to judge and assist objectively on that confidential information. In that way we could ensure that whatever service was set up would be one on which there would be the greatest degree of unanimity amongst our people on having the best possible service in our circumstances.
Unless something like that is done, I cannot see how any decision, no matter how bona fide it may be made, could be judged objectively without the full information necessary for its judgment. I do not expect the Minister to offer any comment on that suggestion now. It is clearly a suggestion, coming as it does from us, that he would have to convey to his colleagues. I do not expect he would be in a position to make a comment on it at this stage.
I said earlier I personally accepted and agreed with the terms of reference of the commission. As a country, I do not think we can afford to have the cost of a television service borne by public funds. I do not think we can afford in our existing circumstances, when taxation is already too high, to do anything in relation to a television service that might mean that any part of its cost had to be borne out of the public purse. Therefore, I personally entirely agree with the limitation included in the warrant of appointment to the television service that no charge should fall on the Exchequer.
I differ with some members of the commission in their interpretation of what that means. Licence fees will presumably be charged when a television service is in operation. The report on page 27, paragraph 79, recommends that the licence fees should be paid to the television authority. Reservation No. 3 to the main report differs in that respect. I agree with reservation No. 3. I do not think that when licence fees are being collected by the State the payment of those fees to the television authority complies with the terms set out in the warrant of appointment. It will be inevitable that these licence fees will have to be paid to the general Exchequer and retained there to make up for the loss of revenue in entertainments duty from cinemas when an Irish television service becomes an established fact. In addition, there is likely to be a loss of other revenue to the Exchequer. The Reservation also mentions the existence of the tax on newsprint and indicates that perhaps there might be such competition by television with newspapers that they would be affected. I do not agree with that but I agree that there will be a loss in general entertainments duties.
I cannot see how the establishment of a commercial television service can fail to hit the existing revenue of Radio Éireann fairly substantially. Whatever decrease there may be in the revenue commercial receipts of Radio Éireann, it will have to be made up somewhere. It seems to me that if the Exchequer will have to make that up, as perhaps it may, the television licence fees should be available to make that up and it should be treated, therefore, as being contrary to the terms of the warrant of appointment.
The majority report in paragraph 91 makes it clear that it accepts the view that the establishment of a television service will affect injuriously the commercial receipts of Radio Éireann. I agree entirely with the Minister that, notwithstanding the establishment of a television service, sound broadcasting must continue and Radio Éireann must continue. It is no good our hoping, therefore, that the gap that might be thereby created in respect of Radio Éireann would be made up out of the sky. It would have to be made up somewhere and I cannot see where else it would be made up otherwise than out of licence fees.
I disagree also with the suggestion being made in certain places, that the stipulation that there is to be no charge on the Exchequer permits an indirect method of the Exchequer providing the capital for this service. It is entirely illusory to suggest that when a State-sponsored body, which gets its money out of the resources of the country because it is a State-sponsored body, puts up the money, that that is not being put up by the Exchequer. I cannot see the slightest difference between moneys being advanced direct in this context by the Minister for Finance on a loan to the television authority which is going to be set up and the money being made available by the Industrial Credit Company, Ltd. That is only a question of the channel by which the moneys are available.
We must never forget that the whole problem of capital for all the various needs we have is one that must be considered as a whole. Considering it piecemeal will not improve our economic position. If we take more in one respect than is available, it must come out of some other pocket. Whether it comes out of the pocket of the Industrial Credit Company or directly out of the pocket of the Exchequer, so long as the Exchequer has to stand over the Industrial Credit Company— and it will have to stand over it—it amounts to exactly the same thing.
For the reasons I have already given I do not intend to discuss in very great detail the various recommendations in this report. There are many interesting problems posed some of which are not answered at all partly because the information has not been released in the report. They may, for all I know, have been answered in the confidential document the Minister has received. I am interested today in making a contribution purely from the point of view of trying to ensure continuity, to make certain that the service will be above Party politics and to ensure that the baby in relation to television does not come back on the desk of whoever may be Minister for Finance for the time being. I accept that there should be no charge on the Exchequer and I want to ensure that the "no charge" is a fact not merely in relation to the establishment of a television service but also in relation to its working and to its continuity.
It is perfectly clear that we must have some type of Irish television service because of our contiguous position to Great Britain and to their station operating in the Six Counties. The question is not whether there would be television programmes viewed in Ireland or not. The question is whether we shall have some control over the television programmes that are viewed or whether we shall have none.
Over a large part of the country at present, even though it is in the area of fringe reception, programmes are received, and the area will grow even larger when the new station comes into operation in the Six Counties. If we are to have any control then we must ensure that the service we provide is one that is so worthwhile that our people will be more anxious to look at an Irish television service than to some of the fringe reception they are getting at present from the B.B.C. or from I.T.V.
If we are not able to produce a service here—and I am talking of the time after its teething troubles are over— that compares favourably with the B.B.C. and with I.T.V., then the people here will turn on to the B.B.C. or to the British commercial service. If they do not turn on to the Irish service, the possibilities of the Irish service obtaining receipts from commercial advertising will diminish considerably. It is unfortunately a circle. If you have not got a large number of viewers you do not get the commercial receipts and if you do not get the commercial receipts you do not get the money to provide the programmes which will command a large number of viewers.
Speaking entirely, therefore, from the point of view of someone who at one time had the responsibility of looking after national finances and speaking from the point of view of whoever may be looking after national finances in the future, I think the two most telling paragraphs in the whole of this booklet that has been published are paragraphs 22 and 23 on page 64. Unless we have programmes here that are of a standard that will entice Irish viewers to look at them in preference to the B.B.C. and in preference to other British programmes, I cannot see how we can maintain the finance of this service. Unless that happens, sooner or later the Minister for Finance of the day will be called upon to come to the rescue because once the service has been established it must be continued no matter what it may cost. It says in these paragraphs that the programme costs put up by the proposers are between £140 per hour a programme to £190 per hour maximum.
I cannot reconcile the figures there with the figure that is given of £350,000 for the cost of the service in paragraph 43 on page 19. I understand that the programme cost there is based on 30 hours per week and that would work out at £230 an hour. I cannot see how we can hope, as a general principle, to command the viewers when our costings are made on a basis—to get the widest possible maximum—of £140 to £250 per hour, when the programmes that are at present being received on fringe reception reasonably satisfactorily, were costing £1,538 on an average in 1956-57 and £1,730 in 1957-58.
Of course there would be individual programmes which will cost very little and which will be so appealing to an Irish audience that they will be anxious to switch them on but it is not an individual programme which is going to maintain that regular number of viewers on which firms will give their advertising and which will therefore produce the receipts for the service.
As far as I can understand—and everything I say is subject to the limitation that all the facts have not been disclosed to us for perfectly proper reasons—everything seems to suggest that we will be setting up a service under the scheme that is proposed that will be like using a pea shooter against a gun, in army parlance. Undoubtedly there will be programmes so appealing to Irish viewers that they can be produced at very small cost but we could not possibly hope to compete with live programmes, at the figures that I mentioned. We must remember that what is at present merely fringe area reception will, with the advances that are being made in television science and engineering in the future, become actual areas of reception. I am afraid that the proposals that are made accordingly are based far too much on what is called here in one of the paragraphs in the main report, "filmed and tape-recorded material". I think in a parlance that we know better in this country what that means is "old canners." If you are going to have an Irish television service in which a large proportion of the programme is merely "old canners" or out-of-date stuff dished up by one or other of the television people, be they Canadian, British or anything else, people will not turn on that programme but will inevitably switch over to one of the other programmes coming from across the water. If they do that, the commercial receipts will fall and if they fall, whoever is Minister for Finance at the time must come to the rescue.
One of the first things we must do, therefore, is to ensure on all sides of the House, that when this service is being set up it will be done in such a way that there will be that continuity of thought and of object and of method of financing that only discussion in an all-Party committee such as I have already suggested could provide.
I want to take great exception to the suggestion summarised in paragraph 17 on page 12, in which, of course, they are only repeating what was put up to them. I am not attaching any blame in that respect except that I think that they should have asked for a different approach. One of the reasons why we want an Irish television service I think is not for the Dublin area but for the remote rural areas, to make life more attractive in those areas. We could try to utilise such a service as something that will tend to keep the people in those areas. But the approach that is indicated in paragraph 17 is that it should be started in Dublin and perhaps extended to the rest of the country over a period of years.
I think it should be started outside Dublin and extended upwards to the city centres rather than the reverse. Apart from the desire and the necessity to keep people in rural areas it is quite clear that the establishment of any television service here will bring with it substantial teething troubles at the beginning. That is obvious and inevitable. Is it not better that these teething troubles would be overcome where the people have not quite the same criterion of television as in the areas where they can already get good reception. If something happens during the early teething troubles in the Dublin area and people can get perfect reception by switching to the B.B.C. or to British commercial television, they will do so. Not merely that then, but a habit will be set up that will to a great extent injure the Irish service at a later stage. That cannot be the position in the remote areas, so that, apart from the question of keeping the people in rural Ireland, it would therefore be better that the service would be introduced in the reverse of the way contemplated.
Finally, I want to refer to colour television. The report suggests that it is a long way off but says it is a reality. In Sweden they visualise that colour television will be introduced in a widespread way throughout the country in 1960. It may not be introduced in the same way as ordinary television but it is likely to become a reality next year in Sweden. That will add even further, as far as I can understand, to the cost. Everything we have by way of information points to the same view, that what we are doing now will have a vast effect on the lives of our people in the future. It will have a very great effect on our habits, on our modes of thought and on our economic future. Indeed, I believe that television could considerably assist agricultural education quite apart from any other type of education or any other type of aid to industry.
More than anywhere else we could bring help home to agriculture by bringing, so to speak, the pilot farm and the results achieved in pilot farms throughout the country, right into the farmers' own homes. And it is where they have seen pilot farms in operation that the greatest advances in agricultural methods have been made.
Television will be, perhaps, the most dynamic thing that has happened in shaping our mode of life. In the words of the report: "The service is hungry for money." Let us make quite sure that we do not set up something that cannot do its job efficiently and that, when it is set up, it will be carried on under proper Irish Governmental control. It must be under Government control, directly or indirectly. Let us ensure as it will be such a strong weapon of propaganda, that it will be utilised for the benefit of the community as a whole and not merely something that will be a financial weight around our necks in the future.
