asked the Minister for Communications if he has received any representations from groups opposed to the introduction of the proposed MMDS system; if he has considered their views; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - MMDS System.
1.
Yes, I have received representations by and on behalf of existing operators of illegal systems which rebroadcast television signals at UHF. Their main interest is in preserving the existing unsatisfactory status quo in relation to illegal rebroadcasting. The question of licensing rebroadcasting at UHF has been considered carefully both by myself and two of my predecessors. I have decided against such a course of action, as did previous Ministers. I have dealt with the reasons why in replies recently to questions in the House. The Official Report references are as follows: 28 April 1988, volume 379 columns 2498 to 2503, and 2530; Wednesday, 18 May, volume 380 columns 1791 to 1794.
I should stress that rebroadcasting at UHF was considered not to be in the national interest even before the possibilities of MMDS were investigated.
What is the position in relation to spare capacity in the UHF spectrum and is it possible that the rebeaming operators could utilise spare capacity? They would be willing to yield up the frequency if and when the public service broadcasting sector required those frequencies. Following on from that has the Minister any comment to make in relation to the safety hazards associated with the MMDS system about which there is much public concern? I think the Minister indicated when we discussed this matter last week that he would make some statement on the matter in the near future.
Any developments in UHF rebroadcasting would not address the fundamental problems which the Department found when consideration was being given to the licensing of UHF rebroadcasting, and consideration was given to it. The UHF broadcasting spectrum is the only spectrum available for terrestrial broadcasting developments here, including RTE's medium to long term requirements and also the very limited capacity of the UHF. It is estimated that on a national basis up to four channels, as opposed to the 11 which will be available on MMDS, is the maximum which would be obtained from the band.
There is a question later on the subject of safety. I should like to refer the Deputy to the fact that the World Health Organisation have set out, since 1980-81, a series of health standards to be followed in the operation of micro-wave. Micro-wave is not just used for television, it is used for telephone systems and many other systems. The proposed MMDS system will be well within the scope laid down by the World Health Organisation and there is no question of any health risk. On the contrary, I would say to the Deputy that it is less than honest of these illegal operators to try to bring this as a red herring into the debate on the development of MMDS. The Deputy is correct when he mentioned that on last Friday on the Estimate debate I referred to it at some length and I gave him, and other Deputies in the House, a guarantee that it is my intention — and it is already in train — to prepare an information leaflet on exactly what is involved in the MMDS network, the MMDS proposals, the costs etc. The question of the cost of MMDS to subscribers is something that came up in representations I received from people in Donegal through my colleagues in Donegal. The investment required for MMDS systems generally will be very significant. A typical transmitter installation will cost up to £250,000 and each subscriber will be supplied free by the MMDS operator with between £250 and £300 worth of equipment in his house. This will comprise an aerial converter and a decoder. It is estimated that the cost of the service will be approximate to that charged for modern cable systems which is around £100.
I am glad to hear the Minister refer to the fact that he will bring out an information leaflet on the safety aspects of the MMDS system. It is unfair of the Minister to say that the people who have reservations about this system are being less than honest and that they are introducing a red herring into the argument about MMDS. In relation to the UHF spectrum, the Minister said that medium and long term planning in terms of the management of this spectrum would require that everybody else should be kept out of it with the exception of the State broadcasting service. What does the Minister mean by medium to long term planning? What number of years is the Minister talking about? It may be possible to accommodate these people until such time as it becomes absolutely necessary for the airwaves in that spectrum to be handed back to RTE.
These people, with the illegal service which they have at present, are providing up to four channels for their subscribers. The MMDS system will provide up to 11 channels, including the new national independent station here. I do not believe that the people in rural areas should have to accept a lower set of standards and a lower service than those available in cabled cities such as Dublin, Cork and the other cabled areas. The same range of choice should be available to those in rural areas where it is impossible to cable. The MMDS system is operating in America and Canada. We are the first in Europe to take it and it is known as the non-wired cable system. It will provide a uniform quality of service which is not available at present through the illegal operators where the illegal deflectors have different qualities of service; some are quite good, some are very bad but they vary from place to place. The UHF will not give the full range of stations which are important. Because of the new broadcasting changes that are coming in, the three new satellite channels that will be available in the UK before 1989, the 14 that are available from Luxembourg, the new DBS systems which are coming in from France and Germany and the satellite services which are already available, I do not see why the people in the four corners of this country should not have the same quality and range of service available to them as to those who are fortunate enough to live in the cities.
This question has taken up an undue amount of time to the clear disadvantage of other Members' questions. I will hear very brief supplementaries from Deputy Cullen and Deputy Richard Bruton but they must be brief and relevant.
Is the Minister saying that those who are operating the community service at present, albeit illegal, will have no future in the operating of rebeaming of television signals, that they will have no role to play in the new system which he is evolving and has he actually told the representatives from those community groups who are representative of the people in rural areas and who are totally against the MMDS system?
The question Deputy Cullen asks illustrates the point that it is necessary to have a full information document available to them because there is great misrepresentation and misunderstanding of the full extent of the potential of the service and the quality of the service of MMDS as distinct from the illegal deflectors. There is no bar whatsoever on those community and other groups getting involved in applying for the legal and organised network of MMDS and I would welcome their involvement.
Why did the Minister advertise the MMDS to the public without getting the acquiescence of the Dáil to the regulations needed, without publishing the appraisal he is now promising? How does he propose that the £300 million he now suggests it would cost to set up this system is to be found?
It is to be privately financed. It has been indicated to applicants where they are to go and there will be an allocation for each area. Private applications will be made by groups such as community groups, as mentioned by Deputy Cullen. No licence can be given until the regulations are made and no licence will be given until the regulations are made. I have tried to short-circuit the length of time of lead-in to give people an opportunity to be notified of the intention to proceed on this basis. I have asked them to indicate their interest in making applications but no licence will be given prior to the regulations being made.