Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 8 Mar 1972

Vol. 259 No. 8

Teachtaireacht ón Seanad. - Wireless Telegraphy Bill, 1972: Second Stage.

Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. G. Collins)

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

The main objective of this Bill is to reduce to a minimum the evasion of payment of licence fees on television sets. The need for new legislation to deal with this problem has been apparent for some years and has been referred to in this House from time to time. For example, my predecessor said on 19th March, 1970—column 928 of the Official Report—that a scheme for legislation to reduce the number of unlicensed sets had reached an advanced stage. I also referred to the matter on 25th February, 1971— column 2133—and on 18th November, 1971—column 2451—when introducing the Estimate for my Department, and I indicated broadly the main provisions which would be included in the new Bill.

The need to minimise evasion of payment of licence fees has become more pressing within the last few years because of the increasing financial difficulties which have been facing Radio Telefís Éireann. Costs have risen steeply and television receiver growth and advertising revenue are both levelling off. Indeed, during 1970-71 television advertising revenue dropped for the first time. The voluntary decision by RTE to eliminate cigarette advertising meant a serious loss of advertising revenue.

It is hardly necessary to remind Deputies that although broadcasting licence fees were increased with effect from 1st July, 1970, the authority's annual report for the year ended 31st March, 1971, showed an overall surplus of only £3,647.

Deputies will also remember that it was decided to increase the combined licence fee from £6 to £7.50 as from 1st September, 1971, but to abolish the radio licence fee of £1.50 as from 1st September, 1972. Because of the spread of television the number of radio licences now represents only a small fraction of the total number of licences in force. It is estimated that these licence fee adjustments will provide RTE with net additional revenue of £550,000 in a full year. The authority's latest annual report comments on these adjustments but goes on to call for a systematic review of licence fees at two-yearly intervals.

In this situation, it is important that evasion of payment of licence fees should be reduced to a minimum. Otherwise the licence fee may have to be increased again sooner, or to a higher level, than would otherwise be necessary. This apart, it is, of course, quite unfair that viewers who pay licence fees should be subsidising those who do not.

No reliable estimate is available of the number of unlicensed television sets in use. RTE's latest annual report states that an Irish TAM survey carried out in March, 1971, indicated a television set count of 529,000 private households. At the end of January, 1972, the number of current combined licences was slightly over 471,000 and about 19,000 were overdue for renewal. Even if no allowance is made for television sets hired or bought since March last by households which previously did not have a set, these figures would suggest that there may be 40,000 unlicensed sets in use at present. This number of sets would represent gross licence receipts of about £300,000 or the equivalent of about 60p per existing combined licence.

Apart from pursuing people who do not renew their licences promptly, my Department mount special campaigns from time to time. These campaigns include house-to-house visits supported by publicity in the various media, including television. The special drives have met with a good measure of success. Moreover, during the past two years the use of a new television detector van has had considerable effect in persuading defaulters to take out licences. Nevertheless, it will be evident from what I have said earlier that special measures are needed to deal effectively with the problem.

Sections 2 and 3 of this Bill require television dealers to register with the Minister, to maintain records of transactions in the sale and hire of television sets and to supply the Minister with particulars of transactions which take place after the Act comes into operation. Section 4 requires television dealers to notify the Minister of hire, hire-purchase and credit-sale agreements for television sets which are current when the Act comes into operation. The information to be supplied by dealers is specified in the Schedule to the Bill. The information obtained from dealers will be compared with the Department's records and this will make it possible to give special attention to households where there is good reason to beleive they an unlicensed set is held.

Cases have arisen where difficulty was experienced in proving to the satisfaction of the courts that a defendant was in possession of a TV set detected in his home when the defendant himself was not interviewed by the Post Office inspector. Section 10 of the Bill provides that until the contrary is shown by the defendant it shall be presumed in such cases (1) that the set was in possession of the occupier of the premises and (2) that he did not hold a licence for it at the time to which the prosecution relates. Section 10 also provides for a presumption of a similar nature in a prosecution for an offence under section 7 (3) of the 1926 Act, that is where a person fails to complete and return a special notice sent to him by registered post.

These special notices are used frequently in following up suspected licence fee evaders. The person concerned is required to state on the notice whether he has wireless telegraphy apparatus in his possession, the kind of apparatus, whether it is licensed and so on. The alternative to using the special notice is to have a personal visit of inspection made, at much greater cost. Unfortunately, some people simply ignore the notice. The new provision will make the procedure more effective.

Each year my Department find it necessary to prosecute about 6,000 evaders. The penalties imposed by the courts are obviously not a sufficient deterrent against evasion. At present the maximum fine for a first offence is £10 and fines generally fall within the range of £1-£5. These penalties are quite out of scale with the present fee of £7.50 for a television set and represent a mere fraction of the annual cost of hiring a set. When the present maximum fine of £10 was fixed in 1926 the licence fee for a radio was 10s and there was no television service.

Section 12 of the Bill proposes to increase the maximum fine for a first offence to £50. The same section provides for a maximum fine of £100 for a second or subsequent offence. This replaces the fine of £1 per day which at present applies to a continuing offence and which is not in practice enforceable because of the impossibility of proving that a person had a set continuously in his possession over a particular period.

Section 12 also provides for an amendment to section 3 of the Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1926, which will enable the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs to exempt, by order, certain classes of wireless telegraphy apparatus from the requirement that they must be licensed under the Act. It is under this provision that I propose to implement the decision to abolish the ordinary radio licence fee as from 1st September, 1972. With the abolition of the radio fee the present combined licence will of course become a television licence but part of the receipts from fees will continue to be allocated to the sound broadcasting service.

This opportunity is being availed of to make provision for the better control of interference with wireless telegraphy, including interference caused by wireless telegraphy apparatus—sections 5, 8 and 14.

Section 7 is aimed at certain types of apparatus which are in use in some countries but which my Department are not prepared to license, generally because of the interference they can cause to legitimate wireless telegraphy apparatus. For example "walkie-talkie" equipment operating on the 27 megacycle band is not licensed in this country because that band is reserved for industrial, scientific and medical purposes and because this type of equipment can cause serious interference with television and radio reception.

Licences are not issued either for "bugging" devices for different but obvious reasons. The section will enable the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs with the consent of the Minister for Industry and Commerce to make an order prohibiting the sale, hiring, manufacture or importation of any class of apparatus which my Department are not prepared to license. Provision may be made, however, in the order to grant licences permitting the manufacture of such apparatus solely for export.

Some of the remaining provisions of the Bill are of a routine character. The others are of minor importance and none of them appears to be of a controversial nature. Accordingly, and as any discussion considered desirable can appropriately take place on the Committee Stage, I do not propose to comment on them now. If, however, some Deputy wishes to raise a general question in relation to any of them I shall do my best to deal with the matter in my reply to the debate.

In conclusion, I would like to say that I believe that the main provisions of this Bill are essential to eliminate licence fee evasion which is unfair to RTE and to the vast majority of viewers who pay their licence fees when they become due. I confidently recommend the Bill to the House.

Mrs. Hogan O'Higgins

This Bill, like much of the legislation enacted here, will not be popular with the public generally. The Bill is not contentious. In many ways, it is a very fair piece of legislation because those who pay their television licence fees regularly should not have to subsidise those who consistently evade paying their fees. Of course, there will be people in the constituency I represent, for instance, who will say that they should have a reduced fee because they cannot receive BBC programmes. There is no substance whatsoever for that argument because the programmes paid for are those put out by our own station.

The Bill is likely to be unpopular with television dealers, but in this respect it might be pointed out that this is not a new type of legislation. Gunsmiths, for instance, must register the sale of guns and garage proprietors are obliged to notify their local authorities on the sale or resale of cars. It can be argued, perhaps, that the supplying of information to the Minister as to whether a television set is sold on the hire purchase system or otherwise is an intrusion by the State on the rights of individuals, but when one considers that one's bank account can be inspected, the inquiry regarding a television licence would seem a very minor detail. After all, licences regarding motor cars can be investigated. Therefore, there is nothing novel about this Bill in that respect.

Perhaps this is not the place to refer to the expenses that must be borne by RTE, but I would merely say in this regard that we will have to reconsider the way in which the authority are financed. We must realise that it is necessary that they be given sufficient money to run the station.

The advertisement on television relating to TV spongers is a disgrace to the nation. The actor who participates in this advertisement has a very fine voice. I have heard him on many other programmes, but for this particular programme he adopts a pseudo Dublin accent. We must remember that all television viewers are not in Dublin and also any Dubliner I know, regardless of which part of the city he comes from, has not an accent like the one used by the actor concerned. The advertisement is an offence not only to Dubliners but to everybody else.

Dr. O'Donovan

Indeed it is.

Mrs. Hogan O'Higgins

Now that there will be more revenue available to the Minister, by way of an increased number of licences being purchased, he might use some of the money for the purpose of putting on a decent advertisement.

Mr. G. Collins

I will take the matter up with the authority. The Deputy will be aware that the advertisement is put on by them and not by the Department.

Mrs. Hogan O'Higgins

It is not correct grammatically either.

Dr. O'Donovan

The Minister did not promise me that he would take the matter up.

Mr. G. Collins

How could I refuse Deputy Hogan O'Higgins?

Mr. P. Barry

The Deputy is inferring now that all Dublin people use correct grammar.

Mrs. Hogan O'Higgins

They certainly use better grammar than the actor uses on this advertisement.

Acting Chairman

We are discussing television licences and not Dublin accents.

Mrs. Hogan O'Higgins

I should imagine that the keeping of registers will eliminate the necessity for detector vans. It would seem a waste of money to use both systems simultaneously. I notice that in section 10 the onus is to be on the owner to prove his innocence instead of it being the other way round. This idea seems to be slipping into other legislation also. I sympathise with the Department and I do not see how they could detect defaulters without pinning them down in some way.

We are told that prosecutions for non-payment of licence fees last year amounted to £6,000. I see here that for a first offence the fine will now be £50 while for a second offence, it will be £100. That seems rather steep. However, it might result in defaulters paying up.

Mr. G. Collins

The fines mentioned by the Deputy are maximum ones.

Mrs. Hogan O'Higgins

It is more sensible to do that than to have a fine of £1 per day in respect of each day of default. The onus of proof is difficult under that system. We are all glad to see the abolition of radio licences. The situation in this respect has become ludicrous because many people had several transistors for which they did not buy licences. I understand that it was costing the Department more to collect the licence fees than was actually being gathered in this way.

Section 7 deals with radio frequency. I hope this will not result in any interference with existing ham radio operators. During the week I received a couple of letters from people who derived much pleasure from this pastime and they expressed fears that this legislation might in some way cut across them. In any case, we have never had these walkie-talkies here so there is nothing revolutionary in that.

It was inevitable that this legislation would be introduced because when there is a law in existence provision should be made for ensuring that everybody adheres to it. As I see it, the only objection that people could have to the Bill is that it is another intrusion into their private affairs; but, as I have said, when one's bank account can be inspected, one can hardly call his soul his own.

Mr. Desmond

On behalf of the Labour Party I welcome this Bill. We accept the view that it is anti-social and undemocratic that a very small minority of viewers do not pay their share of the cost of our radio and television services. Therefore, it is only proper that current legislation, not having been reviewed and updated for at least three or four decades, should be amended as is being done here. Accordingly, we support the Bill. We do not regard it as being contentious or controversial although defaulters who might be fined £50 would a get severe shock.

As the Minister has pointed out it is estimated that there are about 40,000 people in the country who are getting away with about £300,000 per annum. As one who pays his television licence fee but who defaulted on one occasion through oversight, I appreciate that everybody should pay up. I am a little worried about the method of notification of overdue licences. There may be cases where people will be away on lengthy holidays or may be away from home because of illness or some other reason for a lengthy period but who may come home to find, as one finds nowadays in one's letterbox, a proliferation of notices and other material.

I must confess I have found it difficult to extract the scruffy little card I receive from the Department reminding me that my television licence is due. I would ask the Minister and his Department to design a proper notification and, if necessary, to send a second and a third notification. There are other bodies which send subsequent and final notices. The Department of Posts and Telegraphs might adopt the same practice. Once the Bill receives the President's signature we will, of course, all be very careful. I have no sympathy for those who are caught in evasion. They should be hammered. However, a very small fraction may unwittingly overlook payment and they should receive some sympathetic consideration.

I appreciate there will be extra clerical work imposed on television dealers making returns to the Department, but this is unavoidable. It is another piece of bureaucracy and, while we commiserate with the dealers, it is essential that we should have their co-operation. Indeed, I think their co-operation is overdue.

Section 4 requires television dealers to notify the Minister of hire purchase and credit sale agreements current on the passing of the Act. I hire my set but, if I had bought my set last year, the dealer would not have to notify the Department. I gather that is the interpretation of this particular provision. Might I suggest that there should be 12 months retrospection? I am sure most dealers would have the names and addresses of those who bought sets in the last year. Someone could have bought a set and installed it in his week-end country cottage and he could get away with not paying the licence fee. If records of HP and credit sales have to be notified then previous transactions by way of sale should also be notified.

Could the Minister enlighten us about paying one's licence fee by way of credit transfer and banker's order? There has been a tremendous growth in the use of cheque books and people might find it useful if they could get from the Department a credit transfer slip and then a banker's order slip and that should be an end of it.

A special case must be made for those who do not have the benefit of multi-channel facilities. We along the east coast have those but there are areas which do not have this facility. I do not think they should be subject to a £50 fine for a very poor service or no service at all. This is a point that must be made. It may be outside the scope of this measure. I have been in parts of the country in which there is low ESB voltage or in which the use of machines without suppressors constitutes a very serious interference with television reception. I know families who for months on end have either very poor reception or no reception at all. When this Bill comes into operation every effort should be made to ensure that reception all over the country is the very best possible.

Hammering the 40,000 who fail to pay licences is a rather odd way of getting money for RTE. I know RTE need the £300,000 very badly. There should be a full-scale review of the method of financing Radio Telefís Éireann. Radio na Gaeltachta will mean increased expenditure. I think all of us here would willingly vote any money required for the service. We support this Bill and we do not propose to table any amendments to the Bill.

Mr. P. Barry

I support this Bill. It is, as the Minister says, very unfair that those who pay their licence fee should subsidise those who do not. That is something with which we all agree. An extra £300,000 for RTE will represent an increase of about one-eighth in revenue. Deputy Hogan O'Higgins was rather derisory about the TV spongers. It is in rather poor taste but, like the curate's egg, it cannot be all bad since it has met with a good deal of success.

How does the Minister propose to get after secondhand sets? If I sell my set privately to the Minister who will ensure that the Minister has a licence for that set? This is a possible loophole.

Section 10 provides that until the contrary is shown by the defendent, it shall be presumed that on that day the apparatus was in the possession of the person who was then the occupier of the premises and that he did not hold a licence for it at the time to which the prosecution relates. I am told this sort of provision is in quite a lot of legislation but I think it is wrong that a person is presumed guilty until he can prove himself innocent. We always presume in this country and the best television courtroom dramas always told us that a man was innocent until the law of the State proved him guilty. This may not be sustainable in law but in justice there is something to be said for it. This now takes the opposite point of view, that a man is guilty until he can prove himself innocent. If the Department are to spend a considerable amount of money chasing defaulters they should go the whole hog and even if they must go back again and again to certain houses they will gradually, as the records from the dealers become available to the Department, be eliminating the people who have unlicensed sets. I do not think it is too much to ask them to keep on chasing those people rather than bringing them to court as guilty people and making them prove their innocence.

I should like the Minister's assurance that under this Bill an order cannot be made by some future Minister for Posts and Telegraphs which would require licensed television dealers to build into the price of a set the cost of a licence, that the dealers are not to be made collectors of the licence fee for the Department.

Mr. G. Collins

That would have to be new legislation. That could not happen under this Bill.

Mr. P. Barry

That is fine.

Mr. Tully

We must all agree that people who have been using television sets for years without licensing them can have no complaint if they now get a hefty crack of the whip. It is remarkable that it is not the really poor who do not have a licence. It seems to be the "in" thing with certain people to brag that they have never taken out a licence and do not intend to do so. Many of them have devised ways of avoiding detection, such as indoor aerials. I should not like to see the full rigour of the law being applied to somebody who had a licence when he first had a set, but because of family commitments was unable to meet it later. Those are the people who get caught. I have no sympathy with those who have quite a good income but do not want to pay the licence fee. These are usually the people who complain about the programmes. They say it is not worthwhile paying for the type of service we get from RTE. We can get four or five stations very clearly in certain areas and the case is made that four of the five are free and they do not see why they should pay for what they consider to be an inferior service. This is a peculiar argument but it is made.

I have great sympathy with those who live in areas where Telefís Éireann is the only station that can be got and, indeed, a very poor reception of Telefís Éireann. It might be an idea if the Minister would consider having a different licence fee in areas where reception is very good. This may sound a little awkward to administer but, coming from where he does come from, he will admit that reception is not as good there as it is north of Dublin city. If he succeeds in getting the additional money mentioned here. I hope an effort will be made to strengthen both Telefís Éireann and Radio Éireann so that people on the other side of the Border can receive them. We get the British services. Radio Éireann disappears beyound Dundalk. When you pass the Cooley mountains you get very poor reception. Telefís Éireann does not go beyond that at all. If the Minister gets additional money I hope he will be able to beam them across so that we can put our point of view on the other side of the Border.

The Minister mentioned notification of RTE by the people who sell or hire sets. Does the Minister think this will have any effect on the staff of the Post Office who at present do something in this line? There is a detection unit. Is it proposed to continue its use or to interfere in any way with the Post Office staff or is it proposed to ensure that they do not suffer a loss? When changes like this are affect people in a way finds that they affect people in a way which was not at first considered possible.

Would the Minister have discussions with the Minister for Social Welfare about an extension of the free television licence? There are people who are as much, if not more, entitled to this than some of the people who have got it. I assume the reason why they have not got it is that RTE feel that the loss of revenue would be too great. I would ask that this should be considered.

Have RTE made any effort to recover in other ways the amount of money which has been lost by the discontinuance of cigarette advertising? I read recently that the loss amounted to £400,000. Surely it should be possible to collect extra revenue from advertising. The air space seems to be there and I have not noticed any longer periods between the advertisements. When cigarette advertising went off I expected that we could view for a few minutes without a break but it is still a case of somebody spoiling a good advertisement with a programme. The Minister should look into this and see if other advertisements can be got because otherwise it looks as if the people who do pay for their licences will have to provide more. Those who pay do not complain too much and those who do not and who can pay should not be allowed to get away with it any longer.

Mr. J. O'Leary

I welcome this Bill the main objective of which is to reduce to a minimum the evasion of payment of licence fees. This is admirable. It is very important that we should not allow people to get away without paying radio or television licences. These people expect the service at the expense of those who pay for their licences. Radio and television are running into increasing financial difficulties due mainly to a levelling off in advertising revenue. RTE decided voluntarily to eliminate cigarette advertising. That decision caused a reduction in revenue. If we could get everyone with a radio or television set to pay for his licence the Government might not be forced to increase the licence fee.

I note from the Minister's speech that it is estimated that there are about 40,000 unlicensed sets in use at present. I believe this is a conservative figure and that a figure of 60,000/ 70,000 would be more correct. If everyone with a TV set paid for a licence the additional revenue accruing could be used to provide good television reception in remote areas where reception is poor or non-existent. In an area near Glengarriff and in many parts of west Cork and south-west Kerry reception is very poor. Any additional money which the Minister can get for RTE should be used to improve the existing service and to ensure good reception in all areas.

I should prefer to see this happening rather than to see multi-channel television being provided in certain areas. Before we consider multi-channel television we should ensure that all our people can get good reception from our own network.

Mr. P. Barry

Whose fault is it that they are not getting good reception?

Mr. J. O'Leary

We should ensure that our people can get proper reception from RTE before we set about giving multi-channel television service to a certain section of the community. The provisions of this Bill will not impose undue hardship on television suppliers. It will be simple for them to keep their registers written up and to notify the Post Office or the appropriate authority as to the number of sets sold or hired out. I welcome this Bill and compliment the Minister on the manner of its introduction.

Mr. Kavanagh

The maximum fine of £50 is very steep. This represents a five-fold increase. This is very harsh. I do not agree with the speakers who recommend that the Minister should impose such a fine. There are people who evade paying licence fees. Those of us who looked at the "Late, Late Show" last week saw young married couples, the breadwinner being unemployed. These young couples said that they would have to get rid of their cars and television sets in order to make ends meet. If they do not pay for their television licences they will be faced with a fine of £50. The husband, or whoever was the licence holder, will have to go to jail if he does not pay the fine. Cases like this will be taken to court. I hope that they will be considered sympathetically. A fine of £50 is very steep. The biggest deterrent for most people who evade paying for their licence is to see their names in the local paper. This worries most people more than the fines do.

Mr. G. Collins

I doubt that.

Mr. Kavanagh

The disgrace of seeing one's name in the local paper for evading tax or for the non-payment of radio, dog or car licence fees acts as a deterrent. People worry about such things and are prepared to go to great lengths to avoid this happening.

Like other speakers I do not agree with the type of advertisement which appears on television in connection with non-payment of licence fees. A plain statement about the possibility of a fine should be sufficient. The category I have mentioned is the only one with which I have sympathy. I am sure that district justices will have sympathy with such people if they appear before them charged with non-payment. The Minister does not wish to sanction another increase in television licence fees this year. He is doing everything possible to avoid an increase.

Last year the Minister mentioned that colour television would not be a feature of our services for some years to come. Each night approximately two hours colour television is transmitted from RTE. The number of colour television sets must be increasing weekly and monthly. It is estimated that there are about 30,000 colour television sets in the country—perhaps that should be 3,000. Anybody who can afford £300 for a colour television set can certainly afford to pay double the licence fee, as is the case in England. The Minister could introduce a special licence fee for colour TV because if two hours colour television is to be given to the well-off section of the community who can afford to pay £300 for a colour television set they can afford to pay double the licence fee.

The abolition of the £1.50 licence fee suggests to me that revenue is being lost here. This could be continued if RTE are in straitened circumstances at the moment. Perhaps it is the difficulty of collecting the money that is cancelling out the fee itself. At present I believe 8 per cent are evading collection. If that figure can be got down to about 4 per cent it is as low as it is likely to be. It will become increasingly difficult and more expensive to catch this remaining 4 per cent. Perhaps what the Minister is doing in this Bill will catch those people.

There is very poor radio reception in many areas of the country. I travelled from Galway to Dublin today, which is perhaps the area of best reception because we pass the Athlone transmitter. In my constituency in Wicklow it is almost impossible to receive Athlone but the reception from distant stations is overpowering. The Dublin medium wave transmitter cannot be received beyond Bray. There is very little point in having Radio Éireann on the medium wave if one cannot receive it. When I was in Wexford recently I found the same difficulty. The answer is VHF but not everybody can change his set when he wants to change his reception frequency. Reception is not very good on car radios either. Perhaps the power could be boosted, particularly on the Dublin transmitter. Many people like to listen to the radio especially those who cannot afford a television set.

The popularity of tape recorders and cassette recorders is growing at a fantastic rate. I do not think this particular type of apparatus can be licensed. I wonder how many people know that there is copyright infringement by recording perhaps music or radio broadcasts on these. I do not think these come under this Bill. Perhaps the Minister would let us know if people who use tape recorders to record radio programmes are breaking the law. I would like the Minister to look at certain categories of people who may be fined up to £50 for the first offence.

Dr. O'Donovan

I want to talk about one subject out of which I got a negative mileage because I was absent when a question about this subject was answered. It is my genuine objection to the low grade advertising for which the Minister is responsible. He may pretend he cannot control it but it is an official advertisement which is a disgrace to the Government. I refer to the advertisement "TV Spongers" in a low-grade Dublin accent, the inference being that the poor people in Dublin are the only people who have not got TV licences. It is a nasty piece of west Limerick propaganda.

Mr. G. Collins

That remark is completely uncalled for.

Dr. O'Donovan

It is in order. It is right to talk about it.

Mr. G. Collins

No. That is hitting away below the belt, not in the Deputy's usual gentlemanly way.

Dr. O'Donovan

The Minister was not too gentlemanly when in my absence he answered the question.

Mr. G. Collins

I could not help the Deputy's absence.

Dr. O'Donovan

I am talking about the Minister's gentlemanliness. Nobody likes to make a case that might result in a man losing his employment. This man from his appearance is quite capable of talking in an ordinary accent. This is not his normal accent.

Mr. Desmond

He is a member of Irish Actors Equity.

Dr. O'Donovan

It corresponds to low-grade Cockney in London and you would not hear under any circumstances a low-grade Cockney accent on the BBC except in a farce or in a play of some sort. I thought it was dead and gone until it was resurrected again. It is not quite as offensive as it was, because he does not talk about £10 as he used to.

Mr. Desmond

He does.

Dr. O'Donovan

Perhaps I am so disgusted that I do not listen to him at all, but turn my attention to somebody else when he comes on. The Government are found of telling us that they have regard for the people in the country yet they are responsible for this official advertisement. No matter what the Minister says this is an advertisement for the Department of Posts and Telegraphs and they can determine what the advertisements contain. I agree with Deputy Kavanagh that a straightforward statement should be made. I suppose the expression "TV Spongers" is regarded as "trendy" and supposed to be "with it". In fact, a sponger is a different kind of human animal altogether. If the RTE administration have drafted this advertisement for the Department of Posts and Telegraphs they should be ashamed of themselves. If they have not the common decency to stop it they should get a good kick in the posterior from the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs. The Minister and the Government are interested in getting into the news on television. In the middle of the news on two occasions we got biased reporting about redundancies from the chairman of the Industrial Development Authority when redundancies were soaring. These lies were put across on television. I could not speak too strongly about this matter of the television advertisement. I do not believe for one moment that this man could not speak in an ordinary voice.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

I shall be very brief on this. I understand that Telefís Éireann comes within the scope of the Bill before the House. In my opinion the programmes televised are, generally speaking, reasonably good. However, I was listening very attentively to Deputy Dr. O'Donovan, who referred to the Department of Posts and Telegraphs advertisement describing people who have not paid their licence as TV spongers and issuing a warning to them. I want to agree most emphatically with what Deputy Dr. O'Donovan said in that regard. That advertisement is most unbecoming and it must be possible to devise a more dignified way of warning TV licence defaulters. Wireless broadcasting and television are very important. They are great media of education and steps should be taken to ensure that these media are not used disrespectfully.

I do not devote very much of my time to either listening or watching but occasionally I enjoy programmes, particularly those on television. I want to make one complaint. Perhaps I should have addressed it to the Director of Broadcasting, but I did not. In any case, I had the privilege of appearing on one of the "Late Late Shows". A number of other people were guests of Telefís Éireann on that occasion, but whether it was deliberate or whether it was lack of organisation, I was ushered out to the view ing seats without any introduction whatever to those other people on the panel. It was only when the programme had almost concluded that I realised who some of those similarly invited were. One was a writer of note whom I never had the pleasure of meeting previously, and I was completely unaware of his identity until the programme was just finishing. In the course of the programme this literary gentleman produced a ream of cuttings from an inside pocket and commenced to quote some of those cuttings in relation to myself. Naturally he was entitled to his cuttings and to his views, but anyone participating in those programmes, whether he is a Member of this House or anyone else, is at least entitled to know who the other people are who are participating in the programme.

An Ceann Comhairle

This is outside the scope of the Bill.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

I am inclined to agree that it is outside the scope of the Bill, and perhaps I should not occupy the time of the House making personal complaints, but I would like the Minister to use his good offices in this regard. While he could not compel the authority, at least he should advise them to show some respect to those who are good enough to accept the invitation to be their guests on a particular occasion. Perhaps the reason for the discourtesy of which I complain was that one of the participants on the same occasion admitted during the show that he was the retired proprietor of a strip-tease show in the West End of London. Such an introduction might have been rather embarrassing. However, incidents of this kind should not take place.

I feel I may be doing a service to some other Member of this House who may find himself in the future in the embarrassing position in which one must be placed when one is ushered in among strangers without the courtesy of an introduction. Although I am equipped with the knowledge that it has nothing to do with the Bill, I am taking this opportunity of saying what I have said not in the form of protest but by way of advice. While criticisms may be hurled at RTE from time to time, they are doing a very fine job. It is not possible to please everyone. Providing a television service is extremely expensive and no matter what kind of programme is put out it will meet with both acceptance and criticism.

Before I conclude I wish to refer to one matter in regard to which the Minister should have taken action. I shall just mention it now and raise it with the Minister later when I am having some personal or social contact with him. I refer to the extremely ill-mannered and unbecoming attack made on the Most Reverend Dr. McQuaid. This was resented throughout the country——

An Ceann Comhairle

This Bill deals with the evasion of payment of licence fees.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

Programmes of that kind should not be put on the air, offering personal offence to individuals and causing resentment among the community. It is a great pity there is not some method which could be used to prevent such a thing happening. I am making these observations so that the Minister will know my feelings. I feel sure he knows the feelings of the community already. The former Archbishop was the victim of a most unwarranted and unworthy attack.

Mr. E. Collins

One of the signs of good government is that there should be a minimum amount of administration. I am of the opinion that a large part of this Bill is superfluous. I am certain there is a sufficiency of apparatus available to the television service to detect set owners who have not got licences and I suggest that this is a typical method of creating more jobs for the boys. I am against the Bill on that ground.

I agree it is necessary to legislate in regard to interference with radio and television reception and that the Minister should have sufficient powers in this respect. On the question of piped television, the television authority have seen fit to provide it in Dublin city and county but not to extend it to other urban areas such as Waterford and Cork. They have been most unhelpful in the matter of allowing outside private firms to install such a service. The rule of 500 has no real basis as far as I am concerned and if the Minister saw fit to relax that rule it would be possible for outside interests to provide piped television in urban areas throughout the country.

An Ceann Comhairle

It does not arise.

Mr. E. Collins

Section 12 provides that the Minister may——

Mr. G. Collins

That does not cover what the Deputy thinks it covers.

Mr. E. Collins

What it covers is not defined.

Mr. G. Collins

It is, if the Deputy cares to read it.

Mr. E. Collins

It is not defined fully. There are for instance such things as the telephone buzzers used during the war so as not to allow other people to hear your conversation. That kind of apparatus could be covered. So could piped television apparatus and the Minister should interest himself in getting the authority to extend this to all urban areas of the country.

Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. G. Collins)

I thank all Deputies for their contributions and for their acceptance of the proposals in the Bill. I was glad to note in particular a recognition of the need for more effective measures than are at present open to the Department to deal with the problem of evasion of licence fee payments. Some Deputies referred to the burden which the operation of the provisions of this Bill will place on dealers.

I appreciate straight off that a certain amount of trouble will be created for dealers but I am sure they readily appreciate that they, too, will benefit from the effective reduction of the number of people who do not pay their licence fees. As well as that, the additional revenue which will result will mean that the national television service can be strengthened and will be in a better position to improve on the attractiveness of their programmes.

In these circumstances I confidently look forward to the co-operation of dealers with the Department of Posts and Telegraphs in the measures which the implementation of the Bill will necessitate. It is the intention of my Department to seek consultation with representatives of the dealers on the detailed implementation of the necessary measures as they affect them. There is nothing new in the principle of having information about sales or lettings of television sets made known to the Department. For many years garages have been performing a somewhat similar function in regard to motor car transactions. The vast majority of viewers pay their licence fees and their names and addresses are on record in the Department anyway. The additional information that will be forthcoming as a result of this legislation will merely mean that gaps in departmental records will be filled more quickly and efficiently than would otherwise be the case.

I wish to assure Deputies that the information so received will be used solely for the purpose of enabling the Department properly to collect revenue. I might add that the type of legislation we are discussing is already in force in nine other west European countries, with a tenth on the point of bringing in similar legislation. As far as we know, the legislation has worked satisfactorily in those countries and none of those administrations wishes to divest itself of power in this respect.

Several Deputies, including Deputy Hogan O'Higgins, referred to the advertisement on RTE which is popularly known as the "television spongers" advertisement. Deputy O'Donovan took great exception to this advertisement. It can be argued that the fact that people took exception to this advertisement could be an indication that it is quite effective. I should add that this advertisement is the responsibility of RTE. They were asked to co-operate with my Department in this drive against people who were evading payment of licence fees. I am satisfied it was never intended to suggest that people with Dublin accents are the only defaulters——

Dr. O'Donovan

With respect, the advertisement definitely suggests that the poor people in Dublin are the only defaulters. Can the Minister state if this is an official advertisement, for which the Department of Posts and Telegraphs pay?

Mr. G. Collins

The Department of Posts and Telegraphs do not pay RTE for this advertisement.

Dr. O'Donovan

Are the Department getting the advertisement for nothing?

Mr. G. Collins

The Department have no function in the advertisement which appears on RTE. The advertisement was made by RTE; the Department of Posts and Telegraphs saw the script but they examined it only to see if there was any departmental objection, for example, in the portrayal of staff. Personally, I do not like the advertisement; I think it is too slick and too gimmicky but we must admit that it is effective and that it works——

Mr. Corish

The advertisement is so effective that the person falls off the ladder.

Mr. G. Collins

At least that shows that Deputy Corish is aware of what happens in the advertisement; I am afraid that Deputy O'Donovan has got lost in the whole matter.

Mr. P. Barry

If it was so effective there would not be any necessity for this legislation.

Mr. G. Collins

I know that many people do not like the advertisement and I have heard many objections. However, it can be argued that the advertisement is effective. Deputy Hogan O'Higgins asked if section 7 would interfere with what are known as "ham" operators. The section will not interfere with them in any way.

Deputy Desmond inquired if the method of notification about over-due licences could be improved. Perhaps it could, but I do not agree with the Deputy that the little brown card which is sent out as a reminder is a scruffy card. I admit it could be better but the Deputy must appreciate that we must do our utmost to keep the cost involved in the collection of fees to a minimum. Deputy Desmond expressed some fears regarding the procedure for the collection of fees but I do not think it is necessary for me to go into detail on this matter unless the Deputy specifically wants me to do so. I am satisfied, and I think the majority of the people are satisfied, that the method used is reasonable. If a person is away on holiday for two or four weeks he will not be taken to court and hit with the maximum fine set out in this legislation. A reminder form is sent to each licence holder three days before the renewal date; a second reminder is sent 14 days after the renewal date and if a licence has not been taken out within 21 days of the renewal date a statutory declaration form is issued by registered post to the person concerned requiring him to state within 14 days if he has a licence. As the Deputy can see there is ample time given.

Mr. Desmond

I had a constituent who was in hospital for a couple of months and I raised the matter in this connection.

Mr. G. Collins

That would be a different case. I am sure if such a person were brought to court the district justice would look on the case with leniency. Deputy Desmond also asked if records of sales last year would be made available to us. I am advised that the Bill would not cover sales last year for the simple reason that there were no such records last year, at least not in the way that we would require them.

Mr. Desmond

Surely those who sold for cash in the past 12 months have a record of the sales?

Mr. G. Collins

Cash sales would not be covered but credit sales would be covered.

Mr. Desmond

Therefore, anyone who bought a television set for cash gets away with it.

Mr. G. Collins

That has been the case up to now but from now on we will be able to check on these people. Deputy Hogan O'Higgins, Deputy Desmond and others referred to the general financing of RTE. I do not think this matter comes under this Bill. I imagine that the general financing of RTE is being considered at the moment by the Broadcasting Review Committee and I should imagine when they are making their recommendations to me they will deal with this subject.

Deputy Desmond suggested that in areas where there is bad reception people should not pay their licence fees. The law requires anyone with a television set to have a licence, irrespective of the quality of reception, and whether his television set is working. Therefore, in case people living in areas where the reception is poor might think, as a result of any publicity which may be given to what the Deputy has said, that they can have television sets without paying licence fees I should like to state the law in this regard.

Deputy Peter Barry raised a query about secondhand sets. There is nothing in this Bill that will cover private transactions in secondhand sets. If the Deputy wishes to give anyone his television set it would be impossible for my Department to register such a transaction. Therefore, it is better to be practical and realistic and to admit that we can do nothing about private sales of secondhand sets.

Mr. P. Barry

That is rather serious. If I have a television set already, I can buy another one from Deputy O'Donovan and give it to Deputy Collins and it appears nothing can be done.

Mr. G. Collins

If Deputy Barry buys a secondhand set from Deputy O'Donovan and if the latter is a dealer in television sets he will have to register the sale and he will make the records available to my Department. My officers will go to Deputy Barry and query him in connection with this matter.

Mr. P. Barry

That is fine, but suppose I had one set and I buy another from a registered dealer which I pass on to Deputy Collins, how will the Department deal with Deputy Collins?

Mr. G. Collins

I presume Deputy Barry will be honest and say that the set was given to Deputy Collins——

Mr. P. Barry

I might not say so.

Mr. G. Collins

If there are many people who are dishonest I am afraid all the legislation books could not be effective. However, I am advised that we have ordinary means of detection which might be quite effective. If Deputy Collins is willing to run the gamble of having to pay a £50 fine he is entitled to take this gamble if he wishes.

Deputy Barry mentioned that our inspectors should be more persistent or effective, that they should keep calling back and chasing the defaulters. That would certainly be very effective but the cost would be exceptionally high. At the moment our cost collection runs to about 11 per cent and if we had to keep calling back, as the Deputy suggests, and keep chasing after people who had not taken out their licences the cost of collection would be far greater than it is at the moment.

Deputy Tully raised some very interesting points. He mentioned various attitudes of people, people talking about the licence. Like Deputy Desmond, he suggested that if they have bad reception, people believe that they have not got to get a licence. It must be clearly understood that any person who owns an apparatus must have a licence for it whether it is working or not irrespective of the quality of the signal.

Mr. Desmond

Suppose you give a set to your dealer and he holds on to it for seven or eight months and you are trying to get it back, must you still have a licence for it? A man may have taken it away for repairs. I have known it to happen in country areas.

Mr. G. Collins

If you license your set this week and if next week you hand your set to a dealer for repairs, I do not think there would be any point in your coming back to me, say, in two months time and asking for a refund for two months on the basis that the set was in for repairs.

Mr. Desmond

No. You may not have your set when the inspector calls.

Mr. G. Collins

I would not like to be in the position where that would be my only excuse to a district justice if I were brought before him in a case like that.

Mr. Desmond

Fair enough.

Mr. G. Collins

Deputy Tully expressed the hope that more television licences would be given under the social welfare umbrella. I have no objection to this, if the Minister for Social Welfare can provide the moneys for television licences which I in turn will pass on to RTE. He also suggested that there was no noticeable fall off in the advertising time on RTE. It may not be noticeable to Deputy Tully or, indeed, to any of us, but it is a fact that there has been a fall off, as I said in my opening statement. I shall read the full sentence again:

Costs have risen steeply and television receiver growth and advertising revenue are both levelling off.

I understand that there has been a fall off in advertising.

Deputy Tully, Deputy Mrs. Hogan O'Higgins, Deputy Kavanagh and many other Deputies expressed the view that television and radio reception should be improved so as to give signal into areas in the Six Counties. I can say that RTE have been requested to proceed without delay with the replacement of the existing 100 kilowatt Athlone transmitter by a more powerful one with special anti-fade aerial. This, I understand, will give excellent radio coverage over the whole of Ireland during the hours of daylight and reception during the hours of darkness will also be improved. The cost of this is estimated to be in the region of £500,000. It is hoped that the installation of the new transmitter will be completed within two years.

Deputy John O'Leary thought that the number of unlicensed television sets in the country would be higher than 40,000 and suggested that the figure might be as high as 60,000 or 70,000. I stated how the figure of 40,000 mentioned in my opening speech was calculated. It may very well be, as the Deputy suggests, a conservative figure and, if it is, it shows the great financial loss that RTE is suffering, even greater than I imagined it was.

Deputy O'Leary took pains to talk about the provision of a signal for areas such as Glengarriff, Bonane and similar areas which do not have television signal available to them. For the record, I should like to say that about 98 per cent of the country has reasonably good television coverage and the other 2 per cent which has not got the best television coverage is being attended to by RTE. I fully understand that people are impatient that greater progress is not being made. The Deputy will probably be aware that as late as yesterday I met people from Glengarriff who are quite annoyed that they still have not got single channel television, that they still have not got the RTE signal. They are very loud in their demands that at this stage of 1972 something should be done for them. I agree with them and should sincerely hope that RTE will be in a position to provide the necessary transposers, not alone in Bonane and Glengarriff but also in Roscarbery and other areas that need it. That is a very expensive business.

Deputy Kavanagh considers that the fines in the Bill are too high. I should like to point out that these are maximum fines and I would expect that the maximum fine would be imposed only in rare and blatant cases. I am sure a district justice would take the circumstances of the defendant into account when deciding on the amount of the fine in any particular case. Deputy Kavanagh seems to think that, instead of a maximum fine, people might be embarrassed in having their names in local papers. I find it very hard to believe this. I do not think that could be true. The Deputy also expressed the fear that we are getting far too much colour television.

Mr. Kavanagh

No. I said it was a method of getting more revenue.

Mr. G. Collins

Perhaps my note is wrong. The Deputy should know we have about ten hours colour television a week and this is necessary, according to RTE, for purposes of experiment and of training their staff.

Mr. Tully

It is very good.

Mr. G. Collins

The Deputy's figure of 30,000 colour televisions is not correct. To the best of my knowledge— I am open to correction on this—the figure is in the region of 5,000 to 10,000. The Deputy made a suggestion which I have heard before, that is, that we should have a special licence for colour television. Perhaps we should. Perhaps we should not. Personally, I do not think we should because if I am charged £25 or £50 licence fee—and these are the figures that I might be thinking of—for colour television, I will look for £25 or £50 worth of colour from the station broadcasting the signal.

Mr. Kavanagh

They may get the balance of it from another area.

Mr. G. Collins

That may be so but the Deputy must realise that there are areas outside the Pale where colour television sets are in use. I am primarily concerned with RTE. I believe that if we did have a special colour television licence fee it could create a demand for more colour and I have said publicly time and again that I will do everything I possibly can to slow down the introduction of full colour here, for obvious reasons. I might say also that there is another thing we should consider and are considering in dealing with colour television sets, that is, the possibility of having a very heavy import duty on them. Whether this is possible or not I will know in the near future.

Mr. Tully

What about the EEC?

Mr. G. Collins

If I could find some way of putting a duty on them, I would love to do so.

Mr. Tully

Free trade.

Mr. G. Collins

On the question of tape recorders and cassettes, I can assure Deputy Kavanagh that I would not like to introduce and hope to get away with a licence for tape recorders and cassettes because it would be completely impossible to get a list of these instruments and to catch up on them. I know that Deputy Kavanagh said that people who record radio programmes are breaking the law. Possibly they are but they are not breaking the laws which affect my Department. If they are infringing actors' rights or anything else I would hope that the people affected would take the offenders to task. I could not do it in any case, I think.

Mr. Kavanagh

I just wanted to know what the position was.

Mr. G. Collins

Deputy Oliver Flanagan asked me to advise the authority for him on a few things. I shall not advise the authority on anything for Deputy Flanagan or anybody else but I shall make the authority aware of what Deputy Flanagan said. I should not like to think that any Member of this House was treated in a discourteous or ungentlemanly way by anybody in RTE. If this were so I believe it should be brought to the attention of the authority. I fail to get his second point about stripteases. Perhaps by repeating what he said I might share the headlines he hopes to get by saying it. That and also what he said about Dr. McQuaid, as was pointed out by the Chair, are not matters for discussion on this Bill.

I think Deputy Collins is off the beam with all due respect to him. I think he misunderstands the Bill, either intentionally or accidentally, or perhaps he is just trying to get in his plug about communal aerial licences for Waterford; I do not know. The fact that he says this means "jobs for the boys" and that therefore he is against it does not make sense to me. I can assure the Deputy it does not mean "jobs for the boys". If the Deputy were here earlier he would have heard Deputy Tully express the hope that nobody would be laid off as a result of this legislation. We certainly hope nobody will be laid off and I should like to assure Deputy Collins that nothing could be further from the truth than his remark that there would be "jobs for the boys" here.

Mr. E. Collins

Would the Minister not agree that if RTE or some other body provided a piped television service in the more populated areas it would be a method by which you could increase substantially the revenue to RTE?

Mr. G. Collins

I think the Deputy is opening up a completely new field. I do not object to that and I would have no hesitation in discussing with him at any time what is involved in and necessary for piped television, licences for communal aerials and extension to multi-channel of single channel aerials if he wants that, but it does not come under this Bill. I understand from some of the Deputy's remarks that he believes there is a good deal of money in piped television. I do not think many in RTE would share that view at this stage. It was a popular belief some time ago but I think they have learned——

Mr. E. Collins

But RTE have provided communal aerials or piped TV in the Dublin area and did not provide them in other urban areas outside the Pale.

Mr. G. Collins

Communal aerials can be provided by RTE or others involved in providing piped television in any part of the country and there are systems in operation outside Dublin.

Mr. E. Collins

RTE have not provided them.

Mr. G. Collins

However, a discussion on piped television would certainly be out of order. As far as possible, I think I have dealt with most points raised by the Deputies and I should like again to thank them for the very courteous manner in which they have dealt with the Bill and for their very constructive criticism.

Mrs. Hogan O'Higgins

Will the fines that are collected go to the RTE Authority or into the Exchequer? The latter, I imagine.

Mr. G. Collins

The fines collected do not go to RTE. It might be cheaper for us as a Department not to have to bring people to court because there is no profit in doing things like that.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take remaining Stages today.