First of all, I want to thank everybody in the House who praised the general efficiency of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. Even though they made individual criticisms, it was quite evident that the staff of the post offices can feel that they have the general support of all Parties in the House.
In regard to Radio Telefís Éireann. Deputy M. E. Dockrell led for the Opposition and in what he said there was no suggestion of excessive interference by the Government. He made no suggestion of there being a need for any kind of inquiry into the conduct of Telefís Éireann. Indeed, when one reads the speeches of all the Deputies on the Opposition side, they had so much to say in praise of the general programme of Telefís Éireann that one can only conclude that they must admit by implication that there has not been any noticeable interference by the Government of a kind which would inevitably be reflected in the programme. There were no suggestions by members of the Opposition of the failure of Telefís Éireann to express particular views on social or economic problems. There was no sustained suggestion on either side of the House that there was a lack of balance in political reporting. There was no suggestion whatever in speeches in general that Telefís Éireann failed to have constructive discussions on matters of interest. There was nothing of that kind.
When one reads the speeches, as I have done, of all those Deputies, one can only come to the conclusion that the few Deputies who made absurd suggestions that the Board, allegedly largely Fianna Fáil, was under my thumb or under the thumb of other Ministers, and was servile to the Government, were ludicrously out of touch with realities. Their statements are revealed to be ludicrous by the general character of the speeches made by the Opposition. The actual fact is that as a State company, Radio Telefís Éireann is one of the freest in the world. I do not suppose there are even 20 countries where a service is so free of interference of one kind or another. I might add that the veto clause which exists and which has not been used is to be found in the Acts of other countries setting up a State broadcasting authority. In the case of the BBC, which, heaven knows, has enough controversial programme material, there is a clause in the constitution making it quite clear that any Minister may require the broadcasting authority to broadcast an announcement, in illustration of a broadcasting organisation's obligation to deliver certain types of information.
I thought I had better speak in some detail about this in order that people may understand the complex issue of broadcasting in television. I have had very considerable experience of broadcasting already. It was I who initiated legislative freedom for Radio Éireann, or rather I set it on the path to being free of immediate Civil Service control. I am as jealous as anybody else of the freedom of Radio Telefís Éireann, that they should be able to act freely and to make quite sure that all points of view in regard to the community's problems are expressed. In a modern democracy, conditions for discussing the character of a broadcasting service are very much the same but, of course, there are local variations.
May I say to the writer of the article in the Irish Times that it was an interesting, challenging, controversial statement but one cannot lay down rigid rules for the character of a radio or TV service in the sense that the board could stick to a detailed settled policy of what their intentions and ideas were in regard to every single aspect of the programme. There are financial limitations on the Board which provide one very final discipline on their actions and their policy. I think it is true to say of all television authorities that the developing and changing programme spells the character of the policy, not a set of rules published by the board, and the extent to which controversial matters are discussed, the extent to which the programmes cover different aspects of national life as they change from year to year indicate what is in the mind of the authority. Quite naturally as the Government appoint the board and must have confidence in the board, the Government naturally have an interest in this general character of programme as it emerges through the years.
May I point out to the Members of the House who talk about this, that television is entertainment? There is only one programme and a great many different kinds of viewers with different points of view. The television service is not like a newspaper and it cannot give the sustained coverage to events that a full-scale newspaper service can give by its very nature. I suppose it is true to say that the board of Telefís Éireann, knowing the mood and the ideas of the members of the Government and of the House in general, would feel that the programme must be designed on a generally commercial basis, that there must be adequate numbers of viewers in order that the advertising can be secured, that they must entertain people, that the kind of programmes that will be acceptable would be of a light kind, that people like to relax and to be amused in the evenings with programmes of various sorts. Quite obviously, the House and the Government will wish that the Board will provide stimulating discussions and features relating to social and economic matters and particularly in relation to our cultural heritage and to stimulate interest in the modern development of a distinctive Irish civilisation.
As I have said, I know the Radio Telefís Éireann Authority have these ideals. I met them when I was appointed Minister. I should add to this general statement the desirability of having political discussions and religious talks of every kind. This is the broad spectrum of policy shared by the Board and myself. I think it is true to say that we would all wish RTE to push the higher level of programmes somewhat in advance of demand, so that we can be certain that Radio Telefís Éireann are helping to develop the national consciousness and helping to develop—how shall I describe it? —an Irish-Ireland consciousness which is at the same time thoroughly international in attitude and understanding the modern world. These are the ordinary generalisations with which any person with national feeling would agree in so far as television is concerned.
May I point out in relation to the writer in the Irish Times that there will always be discussions about what exactly is the right kind of programme. Unless there is controversy about what RTE produce, the service will die. Inevitably there will be people who will object to this programme or that programme, and say we should have more of some and less of others. There is sufficient controversy circulating about RTE, which they receive in the form of letters and telephone calls, so we can be certain that they are interesting the public. The day that controversy ceases so far as broadcasting is concerned, it will be a very dead service.
For that reason it is quite possible to have controversy arising quite suddenly on matters of alleged interference by the Government, on matters such as the request by the Taoiseach to RTE not to send a team to Vietnam. A great deal of criticism is based on the immediate view of a specific programme. It is very hard to expect people to judge a television service over a prolonged period, because most people have an immediate reaction to a programme. As a result, there is always excitement and always controversy surrounding a broadcasting service. That can be found in the BBC or in any other broadcasting organisation in any other democracy. It is quite inevitable.
Some Deputies referred to the statement by the former Taoiseach about RTE having to take account of Government policy. I have already spoken of the BBC regulations. Government decisions based on existing legislation, Government policy on new Bills passed in the House, and comments by Ministers of some importance in relation to economic problems and economic issues, should be properly broadcast by RTE and full attention should be paid to all announcements which come from the Government on important matters. When the Government decide on a specific policy it is usual, in a democratic country, for that policy to be expressed, and there should not be an immediate sabotage of that statement by someone deliberately produced to confuse the minds of the listeners or viewers in relation to important statements on policy. This does not mean that there cannot be discussions on what constitutes policies on all the social and economic problems in the country, conducted in a proper manner. That will be the case in any democratic country. RTE cannot give all the news. They must give expression to Government policy on an important matter, and Government decisions in a proper manner. This particularly applies to any Government statement made at a time of crisis or emergency. I do not think anyone could have any objection to this policy.
There have been references to the appearances of Ministers on television. Ministers appear on television services all over the world. The television news service content depends to a great extent on what is considered to be news, and what Ministers say is considered to be news. News of speeches in the Dáil is given in a reasonably balanced way. RTE cannot guarantee balances over a 24-hour period, but taking one day with another, there was very little criticism from either side of the House about the balance of the news so that the people can appreciate Deputies' views and the views of the Parties.
If anyone thinks that the appearance of a Minister on the television service here or in Sweden or in Denmark is evidence of prejudice on the part of the Authority the answer is that in every democracy there are loads and loads of unsolved moral, social and economic problems which are debated continuously. When unsolved problems are debated over television, or in the newspapers, or over the radio service, the Government of the day inevitably can only take what I might describe as a defensive point of view. If the Government are involved in a controversy, directly or indirectly, they can only indicate that they have done so and so, or will do so and so, or have not enough money to spend more on what is being done. In countries where there are unsolved problems the idea that there can be a heavy balance of interest in favour of the Government of the day is ludicrous. It is ludicrous in the case of RTE and, indeed, it has not been suggested in the House that there is an imbalance. We have unsolved problems and every one of them has been debated over RTE in one way or another.
As I say, the Government have a programme which they believe to be right for the economy. They continue that programme, amend and change it. Of course, no Government's programme ever satisfies everyone. Therein lies the opportunity for a continuous— how shall I put it? —sniping at the Government, and criticism of the Government in all those discussions which take place. A great deal of agitation takes place over a broadcasting service in times of stress. Everyone remembers the controversy that took place over some BBC reports when the Conservatives were going out of power. Equally, now that the English people have been in some financial difficulties, one can see again the controversy that inevitably takes place when the sayings and actions and politics of the present British Government are discussed over the BBC. People supporting different Parties always worry as to whether there is sufficient balance or a sufficient interest being given to one Party or another.
In all of this, it should be stated in relation to all sorts of rumours that emerge, that RTE itself is an entertainment organisation with a staff of very able people, many of them full of excitement and interest, anxious to produce this and that programme, to innovate here and there; and quite naturally every single producer in RTE has his own particular view as to what constitutes the right kind of programme and the right kind of approach to these controversial matters.
Indeed, I have heard criticism of a varied kind of RTE which can be reflected in speeches of Members of the House. Some say there is too much violence, others that the Wild West story has now become a traditional form of entertainment—that the good man always wins. I have heard suggestions that RTE produces programmes that are offensive to people of conservative taste and I have heard equally from the younger generation that the programmes are not sufficiently controversial. A balance has to be struck between the two.
From listening to Deputies, I think Radio Telefís Éireann has been fairly successful in holding a balance between the old and the new, between the traditional and the modern, between the various Parties; and I repeat that the interference in the programmes of RTE has been absolutely negligible, and I hope will continue to be so. I hope everybody understands the point made by a previous Minister for Posts and Telegraphs in regard to the veto clause. There is no reason why the veto clause should be used. In the two cases that have been quoted, the Authority agreed with the suggestion of the Minister.
I do not know whether I need to deal in detail with the various comments made by Members on the programmes. As I have said, the Board of RTE know my ideas which are of a general character requesting RTE to advance the cause, as far as possible, of a fine Irish civilisation; and I do not intend to interfere in detail. I occasionally make suggestions on things that might be considered as new programmes. These suggestions are made in a nonpolitical way. I have the right to do that.
Whether I need to comment on everything that has been said is very doubtful but I will make one or two comments because I think Deputies ought to have the answers to some of the questions they asked. It is a fact that the farming programme has been dropped, largely for the summer months. This is the kind of programme on which I have very strong views as being in general the type of programme which RTE must indeed include and I would intervene very specifically if the programme did not continue, even if I might be accused of interfering with RTE. This is a generally desirable programme which has been dropped for the summer. The same thing applies to the "Home Truths" Programme.
Deputy Dunne referred to the desirability of having more programmes on the EEC. There has been quite a discussion on the EEC and as the situation develops one way or another RTE will play the same part they have played in relation to other matters concerning our economic development. Members of the House naturally ask for more home produced programmes. I do not think I would be telling any secret if I mentioned the fact that the cost of a canned programme can be as little as one-tenth of the cost of a home-produced drama for the same time. We shall have to develop the financial resources of RTE before we can go very much beyond the present level of the home-produced programmes, which, I think, are 53 per cent of the total.
Deputy Esmonde referred to the necessity for dealing with economic problems. If he looks at Telefís Éireann and listens to Radio Éireann, he will find that in a week's programmes most of these problems, such as our relationship to GATT and the Kennedy Round of tariffs, are being covered in one way or another.
Deputy Dockrell referred to the orchestra. As this is a very important element in our cultural programmes, I should like to tell him that the Authority have entered into agreements with a number of eminent conductors to conduct the orchestra during the months that follow the time when Tibor Paul's contract ceases in July. It is the policy generally to rely on guest conductors rather than to employ permanent conductors. This is quite common to a number of orchestras. I join with Deputy Dockrell in expressing the hope that the very high standard of the orchestra will be maintained.
