asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs what steps he takes to ensure that Radio Telefís Éireann programmes do not offend against the public interest, referred to in the Taoiseach's reply of 12th October, 1966.
16.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - RTE Programmes.
15.
asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs what criteria he uses in ensuring that Radio Telefís Éireann programmes do not offend against the public interest, referred to in the Taoiseach's reply of 12th October, 1966.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to deal with Questions Nos. 15 and 16 together.
I cannot accept the suggestion in these questions that there is already some form of concealed surveillance and censorship of RTE programmes.
I spoke at length during the occasion of the Estimate on what I felt was a generally desirable policy for RTE. There was no disagreement from any quarter. I enlarged upon my statement in two speeches made later and there was no complaint from any quarter.
In discussing the annual report of RTE on future development with the Chairman and in one conference with the Board, I have emphasised the importance of maintaining a balanced challenging current affairs programme with a constructive content giving full information on policy as enacted in the Oireachtas.
Any representations I receive on RTE on the subject of programmes I transmit to the Chairman. I have taken no action whatever to restrain the discussion of current affairs or to compel RTE to alter the character of programmes so that the interest of any one party would be given undue prominence.
I should make it clear that I have asked RTE to consult the Department of External Affairs on programmes undertaken in sensitive areas just as they should seek information from Government Departments when discussing matters involving administrative action which of course is the practice elsewhere. I have at no time suggested any structural changes in the RTE organisation.
Additionally, section 31 of the Act empowers the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs to issue written directives with which the Authority must comply, but the House is aware that this power has never been used.
Does the Minister consider that it was in the public interest that a ban was placed upon all discussion of the Government's proposal regarding proportional representation?
That does not arise on this question.
Surely it arises out of the question of public interest?
These are general questions. They do not deal with any specific programme.
The question which I seek to raise has to do with the public interest. My question is related to a statement made by the previous Taoiseach that the public interest was consulted by the Government in their relations with RTE. Last week I sought to raise a specific matter here. I was challenged and dared by the Taoiseach to prove what I was saying. I am in a position——
The Deputy may not make a speech.
——to prove it here. I have documentary evidence——
Let us have it.
——that there was a definite ban on discussion of PR. If I can get a guarantee that these people will not be victimised, I will put it on the Table of the House.
Put it there: do not be bluffing.
I have the proof. This was done by stooges.
There was no instruction, direct or indirect, implied or given, in regard to any restriction on comment on RTE in connection with the debate that will take place on proportional representation.
That is completely wrong.
The Deputy knows perfectly well that the statement issued by RTE indicated that in the opinion of the producers, it was wise to limit, to some extent, the amount of space given to the PR debate because of the length of the news programme which amounted to a quarter of an hour in the day, that in relation to and compared with the vast amount of space in the newspapers, it would be more effective without any consultations with me if the main part of the argument were left until it appeared to be of the greatest interest to the public and would have the greatest impact for and against the issue.
After the Wicklow by-election.
Arising on this very important matter, I was challenged for proof of what I said and I have the proof here. I am now asking the Taoiseach to give me an opportunity of presenting this proof before any inquiry he likes to set up that there was, in fact, and that there is interference in respect of this presentation and that it has a political bias in favour of the Government.
(Interruptions.)
I should like to say something else. The Deputy does not seem to be aware that there is section 18 of the Broadcasting Act, 1960, governed by legislation passed in this House which directs RTE to be impartial in the manner of its presentation of the news. Further to that, does the Deputy really imagine that if the Government took the deliberate action of restraining discussion and having it on a biased basis, it would advance our own cause?
Here is the proof that it is being done. Give me an inquiry.
Typical invention.
I want a guarantee of protection that these people will not be victimised by the stooges——
Bluff, typical bluff.
Here is the proof.
Read it out.
Would Deputy Dunne resume his seat and let questions continue?
Would the Minister explain how the RTE authority could be balanced or impartial when it is 100 per cent Fianna Fáil?
That is a separate question.
Is it not true that the name of Deputy T.F. O'Higgins was never mentioned on television prior to the presidential election? That is quite true.
It is a separate question.
It was deliberate Government policy to keep his name off television when the other old gentleman appeared every night.
On a point of order, is it in order to refer to the President of this nation as "the other old gentleman"?
Yes.
I well appreciate the Deputy's motives. He would prefer to see a Governor General there.
(Interruptions.)
The Viceregal Lodge.
I will allow one more supplementary question.
(Cavan): Will the Minister explain if what he says is correct, how was Deputy Molloy in a position to say within the past couple of weeks that a film which had been made to be shown on the programme “Seven Days” would not in fact be televised, and was not televised?
The Deputy evidently knows nothing about television or its conduct——
(Cavan): Deputy Molloy seems to know a lot about it.
If that occurred in this country or in any other country and if any Minister tried to direct any television authority on the basis of a single programme, it would be an absolutely fatal mistake, because people disagree with one another on programmes of all kinds. The Deputy is not going to create a precedent here of discussing one programme because if that began, there would be no freedom whatever for RTE to discuss anything.
I am calling Question No. 17.
Has the Taoiseach anything to say to me? He dared me last week and I am daring him now.
You have no evidence and you know it.
Give me an inquiry.
This is typical bluff by Deputy Dunne. There is no proof.
There it is.
Produce it if you have it and do not be stalling about it.
Anyone can produce a bit of paper.
We will have more of this.