(Dublin Central): This amendment is in keeping with our policy in relation to a second channel but since debate on the Bill has been disrupted on so many occasions, it is difficult to remember exactly what point we finished on. However, when discussing this amendment on the last occasion we said that in the event of the introduction of a second channel and of its being within Irish control, the Authority should be enlarged and a programme council set up. We consider an extension of the existing Authority to 12 to be appropriate at this time. I am not in favour of a very large board in any concern and would prefer compact boards which can be more efficient than the larger ones. This has always been conceded in the private sector and it is a policy that has worked effectively in the public sector—in many semi-State bodies where there are boards of seven, eight or nine people. Although the Authority with which we are concerned here may not have the large volume of employees that is a feature of other semi-State bodies, we must realise that the department concerned is very technical and, with the introduction of a second channel, will become more complex.
It is important that the second channel should have the good will of the people. In this context we consider that an enlarged Authority will help in the diversification of interests in that they will ensure that the views of those in single channel areas are taken into consideration and reflected in programmes. I can foresee the Authority having to form sub-committees consisting of members who would be conversant with the wishes of the people in the single channel areas. Preferably, the additional members we propose would be resident in the single channel areas because there is no better way of knowing the views of people than to live in their area.
The number of the present Authority residing in these areas is very small but acceptance of our amendment would make it possible to increase it.
I am not casting any aspersions on the existing Authority. They are doing a good job in trying to satisfy viewers but a second channel will give them more scope in this regard. It is for these reasons that we tabled the amendment. We are anxious, as is the Minister, that the second channel which is expected to come into operation in about October, 1977, will be acceptable to all sections of the community. From a survey carried out we know that a majority favoured a second RTE channel as opposed to what the Minister proposed originally. However, we must ensure that those who opted for the Minister's proposals will be given what we can consider a better choice than that which was suggested by the Minister in the first case. It is for us to ensure that the people generally will accept the second channel because in the main they will be paying for the service. This is why I ask the Minister to consider seriously the new burdens which the Authority will be undertaking. It will be their task to monitor programmes and decide on which are most suitable and acceptable in the various parts of the country that now enjoy only single channel viewing. The board were appointed originally on the basis of operating a single channel but the view of the proposed new channel the Minister should consider our amendment.
If the Minister looks at our amendment he will find substance in it. I do not want to see the Authority becoming too cumbersome. I am not for very large authorities or boards because I believe a compact authority can operate just as efficiently in normal circumstances in relation to other semi-State bodies. Such authorities are commercial enterprises. There are not the diverse interests in those that we have in relation to this Authority. This Authority will have to please all sections of the community. The task we are entrusting to the new Authority will be far more complicated than it ever has been. We will not be dealing with the huge volume of turnover in personnel that other semi-State bodies are dealing with. Here we are dealing with culture, news, current affairs and the various aspects of broadcasting which are technical and complex.
It would be impossible to please everybody in relation to broadcasting but I know the Authority will be anxious to do their job as efficiently as possible and to please as many people as possible. That is the reason I am putting this proposal to the Minister. I believe there is substance in it. If the additional number we are proposing in our amendment were resident in the single channel area this would give added confidence to the people in that part of the country that we are genuinely concerned that they will get a balanced programme, that it will reflect their views and that it will be the type of programme they feel they are entitled to. I have said that at various meetings we have had throughout the country that television viewers in the single channel area are entitled to as good a programme as those who live on the east coast are entitled to. Now that the decision has been taken as regards the channel it is our duty to ensure that the board are facilitated in every way to bring this type of programme to the people we are speaking about. I hope the Minister will look sympathetically at my proposal.