asked the Minister for Communications if he will return the multichannel television equipment confiscated by his Department on the Galtee Mountains serving North Cork and South Tipperary; if he is aware that this action by his Department is depriving families and householders in the area of a viewing facility that other citizens in this country enjoy, especially in the south east of the country; the action he proposes to take to solve the problem; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Written Answers. - Confiscation of Multichannel Television Equipment.
47.
Officials of my Department, on foot of a court order, recently siezed equipment believed to be apparatus for wireless telegraphy which was part of an unlicensed system for rebroadcasting British television signals located on the Galtee Mountains near Mitchelstown. The question of prosecution under the Wireless Telegraphy Acts, 1926 to 1972, is now being considered.
While people who were receiving television signals from the system may feel a sense of grievance, the position is that systems which rebroadcast television signals operate in breach of the Wireless Telegraphy Acts and copyright legislation. As indicated previously in reply, by myself and my predecessor, to questions on this subject and by way of public advertisements in newspapers during the past year, these systems are liable to be seized and their operators are liable to prosecution at any time.
Rebroadcasting systems are inefficient and wasteful users of the radio frequency spectrum which is a limited natural and national asset. They also threaten the viability of legitimate cable systems, capital investment in which is estimated at £15 million, and which currently employ up to 500 people and deliver television broadcasts to over a quarter of a million homes in the country. They are also a disincentive to the development and expansion of a cable infrastructure which must be regarded as an integral part of the existing and future communications infrastructure of the country. I cannot allow the efficient management of the frequency spectrum and the orderly development of a cable infrastructure to be prejudiced by the existence of illegal rebroadcasting systems.
While I have every sympathy and understanding for people in areas not covered by cable systems and who, therefore, have no access to multichannel, it is not within our power in this State to waive the copyright rights of foreign television stations. We, therefore, cannot legalise rebroadcasting systems even if the clogging of the frequency spectrum which I mentioned earlier could be overcome.