asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs if he issued any directive to or communicated with RTE following the 11.45 p.m. news bulletin on 22nd May, 1972.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - RTE Directive.
164.
Apart from informing myself of the contents of the news bulletin in question I have so far taken no action in the matter.
When the Minister mentions the words "so far" which definitely are the operative words in his reply, would he inform me when he intends to do so? Is he aware that since he issued his directive last year, the orders of the Government and their wishes and the wishes of the whole people of this country are being flouted by anarchists and subversive elements in RTE? Is he aware that there are slick operators there who build up and glorify men of violence, who downgrade and vilify men and women who are out for peaceful action? Is he further aware that if they continue as they are doing they will lead this country into civil war and strife? I should like to know what action the Minister intends to take in this matter?
I am personally very unhappy and disappointed with the amount of publicity being given by RTE on radio and television to members of subversive organisations. While the direction under section 31 of the Broadcasting Authority Act, 1960, may not have been breached it seems to me that an undue amount of time has been given to these people, who have no mandate from the electorate and represent nobody but themselves, to express their viewpoints and philosophies which are clearly unacceptable to the vast majority of the Irish people. I am reluctant to intervene in programming matters but the authority has its duties under the Act and I have my duties and responsibilities in the last resort in relation to the performance by the authority of its statutory functions and I hope to convey my views on this matter to the authority in the very near future.
Is the Minister aware that in relation to the Taoiseach's speech of 22nd May, 1972, at 23.48 hours on Radio Éireann a certain Mr. Rory Brady was given equal time to comment on the Taoiseach's speech? I should like to ask you have some of those little anarchists and members of the subversive organisations, many of them in the Provisional IRA, have they a standing arrangement to contact those particular people at all hours of the night? I would like to ask the Minister if employees of this State body go out of their way to get the views of gunmen and others who represent nobody, to belittle and play down the considered views of the Taoiseach—and he is at present Taoiseach of this country? I should further like to ask were Members of the Opposition, either the leader of the Fine Gael Party or the leader of the Labour Party, asked to comment on this statement by the Taoiseach?
Before the Minister answer the long supplementary question from Deputy L'Estrange, might I put the other point of view that much too much direction has been given to the authority and by the authority to the staffs in RTE in regard to the suppression of the views of people who do not conform to the views of the establishment. This is an aspect of it that I should like the Minister to take into account and balance it out against the views expressed by Deputy L'Estrange. Far from there being a need for suppression, in my estimation there is a need for a ventilation and giving of facilities to those who do not necessarily conform in every detail to the views of the establishment.
The gunmen.
That is typical of Deputy FitzGerald.
I should like to say that I do not accept or agree with the sentiments expressed by Deputy Blaney. In reply to Deputy L'Estrange I shall say that the prominence given immediately following an important statement by the Taoiseach to a counter statement by a spokesman for a very small, unrepresentative group was, to my mind, an unbalanced presentation of the news. I hope to bring this matter to the attention of the authority very shortly.
On a point of order, is it appropriate that a Member of the House should, as Deputy L'Estrange in his supplementary has just done, refer to Mr. Ó Brádaigh as being a member of the IRA and that in view of court proceedings at present——
I did not.
Well, the transcript will indicate that you referred to Rory Ó Brádaigh as being a gunman and member of the IRA. Is this not, in fact, out of order——
I did not.
——in view of the legal proceedings or the infamous, the alleged legal proceedings?
He did not.
Would the Minister not agree——
I did not say he was a member of the IRA. I said he was given equal time. That is all I said.
Would the Minister not agree that it is a highly unsatisfactory state of affairs that it should be necessary——
(Interruptions.)
May I put it to the Minister—that it is undesirable in the national interest and in the public interest——
We cannot have a debate on this question. Would the Deputy put his question?
I shall put a question if I am given the opportunity. Would the Minister not agree that it is unsatisfactory that a major statement of policy of this nature made by him in the past few minutes should be made arising out of a question at Question Time when there is no opportunity available to the House now to discuss the matter raised unless, as I would wish, that we would raise the matter on the Adjournment and have a discussion on it? I do not want to impinge on Deputy L'Estrange's function but could I ask the Minister finally what he means by involving himself in the news bulletin?
I did not use the phrase or expression of involving myself in news bulletins.
You said you were involving yourself and as yet had taken no action. That was the first sentence of your reply.
No. I said I am reluctant to intervene in programming matters.
In the very first point in your answer you said you were involving yourself?
No. In reply to another query raised by Deputy L'Estrange, I am not aware whether the leader of his party or the leader of the Labour Party were invited to give a comment on that speech by the Taoiseach.
Is the Minister aware, as regards the statement by Deputy O'Malley—who is not a friend of mine at times but, at the same time, I will back him when he is doing his duty—that he was completely misrepresented and misquoted and that words were put into his mouth that he never used—that in the newscast on the next day in RTE they referred to "republican prisoners"? I checked the script; he did not use that term; he referred to political prisoners. Would the Minister agree that we are not getting responsible reporting and balanced journalism from the irresponsible fellow-travellers and anarchists we have in RTE and who need to be weeded out as soon as possible?
On a point of order, may I ask you, a Ceann Comhairle, to rule that staff and members of State-sponsored bodies, particularly RTE, should not, under the privilege of this House, with due respect to Deputy L'Estrange, be pilloried in such a manner?
A small number of people who could bring this country——
This is a serious question and should be dealt with in a serious manner, with due respect to the Deputy. I think the Minister is endeavouring to deal with it.
Would the Minister not agree that to some extent the difficulty may arise from the vague terms of the directive given and would it not be better to deal with this matter in a clear and precise way by stating precisely what action should be taken in not publicising the views of illegal organisations rather than by way of a vague directive? In fairness to RTE, I think some of the difficulties derive from that.
I do not agree with what the Deputy says.
I should like to give notice that I intend to raise this matter on the Adjournment.
It will be necessary for the Deputy to give notice next week.
I wish to give notice, too.
As a final request, may I ask the Minister who it was who was responsible for banning somebody of the name of Ó Murchadha who was to appear last Saturday night because he was banned at the last moment and there is no use in anybody shirking the responsibility?
That does not arise on the question on the Order Paper.
I wish to give notice that I intend to raise on the Adjournment the subject matter of Question No. 145 on today's Order Paper.
The Deputy might give notice some day next week.