Successive Governments have decided that it would neither be practical nor in the national interest to license illegal rebroadcasting or rebeaming systems. The reasons have been given in a number of replies to questions in this House. In particular, I refer the Deputy to Questions No. 65 on 18 May 1988, columns 1791-92, volume 380, Official Report No. 8 for that day, Question No. 87 on 20 November 1990, columns 1802-3, volume 402, Official Report for that day and Question No. 2 on 2 April 1992, columns 417-419, Volume 418 of the Official Report for that day.
While I have no wish to deprive anybody of a choice of television viewing the illegal systems will have to close down as alternative legal services (cable or MMDS) become available. On the question of cost, charges for MMDS will have to reflect the considerable investment involved in establishing MMDS systems and the ongoing operating costs such as licence fees and copyright charges associated with providing a high quality service on a national basis in a business-like way. Inevitably, these costs will be higher than those associated with many of the deflector systems, which because of their illegal nature, do not attract such costs. However, as with cable, there are "easy payment" schemes available to MMDS subscribers.
