Broadcasting and Wireless Telegraphy Bill, 1987: Committee and Final Stages.

SECTION 1.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

In section 1 we have amendment No. 1 in the name of the Minister. Amendments Nos. 2, 12, 14 and 17 are related and amendments Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13 and 16 are consequential on amendments Nos. 1 and 2. It is proposed, therefore, with the agreement of the House, to take those amendments together for discussion. Agreed? Agreed.

Minister for Communications (Mr. R. Burke)

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 4, line 13, to delete the definition of "premises" and substitute the following:

"`premises' includes land not built on, land covered by water and a structure of any kind whether attached or affixed to the land or not;".

In amendments Nos. 1 and 2 I am putting forward a slightly revised definition of the term "premises" and I am also inserting the term "vehicle". The revised definition of "premises" is primarily of a technical nature to embrace the idea of a structure on an inland lake or waterway. The introduction of the term "vehicle" stems from the fact that it was unclear from the original Bill whether an illegal broadcast from a vehicle was covered. This is now being put beyond doubt as is the possibility of an illegal broadcast from a structure or vessel on an inland lake or waterway.

The relevant consequential changes are in amendments Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13 and 16 to sections 3, 4 and 6. These sections are at the heart of this legislation and provide:

—that it shall be an offence to make a broadcast from any premises or vehicle in the State save pursuant to a licence issued by the Minister;

—that any person who owns, controls or manages a premises or vehicle and who knowingly permits an illegal broadcast to take place from them shall be guilty of an offence.

The other offence created in section 3 relates to a person who operates or assists in the operation of wireless telegraphy for an illegal broadcast, while section 4 creates offences for:

—making available a premises or vehicle from which such broadcasts are made;

—having or keeping wireless telegraphy apparatus used for such broadcasts; and

—supplying, installing or maintaining such apparatus for the purpose of making illegal broadcasts.

Amendments Nos. 10, 11, 13 and 16 relate to section 6 which deals with the withdrawal of telephones or electricity service from a premises used for illegal broadcasts and provides for the insertion of the terms "premises" or in one instance "vehicle" as appropriate in place of previous references to " premises or structure".

Amendments Nos. 12, 14 and 17 from Deputy O'Malley are also relevant in this regard. I would like to assure the Deputy that it was not through oversight that the reference to "vehicle" was excluded from the particular clauses in question. In this regard we felt it did not make sense to be talking about a physical connection point for ESB service in a vehicle. The only circumstances in which such an unlikely connection would be made would be if the vehicle was permanently stationary, in which case it would, for the purposes of this Act, constitute a premises.

The same considerations apply to a physical connection for a telephone. So far as mobile telephones are concerned, there is no physical connection as such save at the exchange but, apart from that consideration, a subscriber is registered for such a service by reference to his home or place of business and a prohibition notice to withdraw telephone services would relate to that address rather than the particular vehicle in question.

I should perhaps take this opportunity to remind Deputies that this Act is very much complementary to the Broadcasting (Offences) Act, 1968. That latter Act was passed to enable Ireland to ratify the Council of Europe Agreement entitled "European Agreement for the Prevention of Broadcasts from Stations outside National Territories". It made it an offence to participate in any way in a broadcast from a ship, aircraft or marine structure in or over the State or sea waters adjacent to the State, or to supply materials or advertisements to such stations. The Act, in conjunction with similar legislation in the UK and other European coastal countries, virtually put an end to illegal broadcasting from ships.

Mr. P. O'Malley

The amendments, and particularly the definition of the word "premises" and the addition of the word "vehicle", are very worthwhile. It certainly ties down the difficulties that would otherwise arise if these amendments had not been included. I note the Minister referred to amendments Nos. 12, 14 and 17 in my name and I accept his explanation. I put them down in the interests of consistency and because I felt that the word "vehicle" was very adequate and necessary for inclusion. Because these are mobile and it may not be possible to provide either an ESB or a telephone service to them I accept that the word "structure" in that instance is probably more appropriate.

Mr. O'Sullivan

In regard to the Minister's amendment No. 15 to section 6 which deals with prohibition notices, a person on whom the prohibition notice is served pursuant to the subsection of this section shall be immune from liability in respect of anything done or omitted to be done by that person in pursuance of the notice. If it involves damage to property, does that mean that people who are executing their duty are immune from any charges? If damage is done to property does it mean that the aggrieved person cannot claim against the Minister?

Dáil Éireann debate - Wednesday, 8 Jun 1988

Broadcasting and Wireless Telegraphy Bill, 1987: Committee and Final Stages.

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 8 Jun 1988