asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs if the views which the Taoiseach expressed regarding the RTE series The Spike were conveyed to RTE prior to their taking the decision to cancel the series; and if representations of any kind were made to RTE by any member of the Government.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - RTE Programme.
5.
The view expressed by the Taoiseach was that the Director-General and the Authority were entitled to their judgment that there was a lapse in standards in this instance and that having arrived at that judgment their decision to discontinue the series was a correct one. Obviously such a view could not have been conveyed prior to the decision.
As regards the second part of the question, my Department brought to RTE's notice various complaints and criticisms which had been received concerning the series.
Is it a fact that the Taoiseach condemned this without having seen the programme? More important, might I ask if the Director-General as editor-in-chief had agreed to this programme going out and then altered his opinion later having seen the programme? Could the Minister explain the peculiar discrepancy in that situation?
The question refers to the Taoiseach's attitude. The Deputy is now moving into very open ground.
As I understand it, the editor-in-chief—because of the wide variety of programmes broadcast —cannot view each and every programme that goes out. Therefore, I do not see where there is any contradiction in what the Deputy has raised.
There are various forms of censorship exercised in Telefís —as Mr. Lemass called it, an arm of Government—in relation to politics and so on. Are we to assume now that this is a precedent on which we will get censorship of a completely new kind in relation to the artistic merits of a programme, sexual morality and so on? Is this a new departure on the part of the Government, a precedent being established, in the suppression of this programme with the approval of the Government?
The Government are not involved in this at all. I explained exactly what was the situation in relation to the Taoiseach's statement and, if the Deputy will read my reply, he will see that what the Taoiseach said there could not possibly have been conveyed to the Authority prior to the decision being made by the Authority and so I just do not know what the Deputy is talking about.
Would the Minister not agree that the behaviour of the Director-General in this particular situation is extraordinary in that he would attack his own service and it would appear therefore as if some indication was given to him by the Government as a result of the complaints made and that he acted on Government advice?
The Deputy is trying to imply something he knows is not correct. I have explained to him what exactly the situation was in relation to the Taoiseach's statement and the Deputy is now trying to imply something else. The fact of the matter is the Director-General is responsible to the Authority and as editor-in-chief he has the right and the responsibility to deal with matters such as this as he thinks fit subject to the Authority itself.
Would the Minister say how on earth the Director-General as editor-in-chief can be exculpated from what appears to have been a very strange programme put out by Radio Telefís Éireann——
That does not arise on this question.
——and the blame transmitted to the unfortuante artist?
On a point of order, I understood Question No. 8 would not appear on the Order Paper until tomorrow and I would ask that it be postponed.
Question No. 8 postponed until tomorrow.