Vol. 429 No. 6
23 Mr. Shatter asked the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications the action, if any, he intends to take on an application by Cablelink Ltd., to increase charges to subscribers and with regard to the company ceasing to broadcast Sky News and Sky television channels to subscribers who previously contracted to receive them.
29 Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications if his Department has concluded its consultations with the Department of Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht regarding an application for Cablelink to originate advertisements, which he informed Dáil Éireann on 3 March 1993 was under way; if he will give the current status of the discussions and the application from Cablelink; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
36 Miss Harney asked the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications if he will approve the proposal from British Sky Broadcasting and Cablelink for local advertising on Sky News and Sky One to enable these channels to be restored on Cablelink.
259 Mr. Haughey asked the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications the position regarding proposed increases in charges by Cablelink for the provision of certain satellite channels; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that consumers are very concerned about this issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
260 Ms McManus asked the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications if his attention has been drawn to the reduced service now available to Cablelink subscribers who continue to pay for a full service; and the action, if any, he intends to take to remedy the situation.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 23, 29, 36, 259 and 260 together. I refer the Deputies to my response to a similar question on this issue on 3 March 1993 — Parliamentary Debates Volume 427, No. 3, columns 536-537.
Agreement reached between Cablelink and satellite operators for the return of a range of satellite channels to the Cablelink network revolve around a mix of increased subscription charges to the subscriber and approval to carry local insert advertising on the advertising breaks of the satellite channels. Shortly before Easter, Cablelink submitted an application to my Department seeking approval for this two-pronged approach. The two elements of the package are intrinsically linked and the whole package pivots on approval being granted for the concept of local insert advertising. Consultations between my Department and the Department of Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht on the issue of local insert advertising are continuing and a decision will be taken shortly.
While the satellite services in question have been available hiterto free of charge to the company and its subscribers alike, I recognise that there is a misguided impression abroad that subscribers have already paid and contracted for these services. This is not the case; subscribers have paid for and continue to receive a basic tier of services consisting of both RTE 1 and Network 2, BBC 1 and 2, UTV and Channel 4. I am conscious, nonetheless, that the cost impact of any deal between the cable company and the satellite TV services on the subscribers should be kept to a minimum.
(Limerick East): Has the Minister any plans to ensure continuity of service in circumstances where cable companies have a monopoly in a particular region and where services frequently break down? What responsibility has the Department to ensure continuity of service considering that the Department issue the licence in the first instance?
That is a slightly different question which I would have answered had I been given notice of it. The MMDS system must be considered in this regard. This system provides an excellent service and I would like to see a more widespread operation of the system throughout the country.
(Limerick East): I will put down a question on that matter — the Minister is correct in that he would need notice in order to reply to it. What is the Minister's attitude to access to overseas channels, whether by satellite or by stations coming in on the airwaves being provided by unlicensed deflector systems? Is it different from that of his predecessor, who seemed to have one attitude on south Munster and a different attitude on the west?
Again this is a separate question that I would like to answer in detail. In any modern European state, in so far as illegal drinking clubs and shebeens should not be allowed, neither should illegal deflector systems. As a member of the legal profession I cannot condone illegal systems whether they relate to the broadcasting service or otherwise. I am aware that illegal deflector systems operate in certain parts of the country where no other service is available. We will try to ensure that the MMDS system operates in as many areas as possible so that if one were to get rid of the illegal systems people would not be left without a service. That is probably the most pragmatic approach to adopt.
In relation to Cablelink, will the Minister agree that it is totally unacceptable that Cablelink subscribers pay more than £80 a year for a service that amounts to no more than a children's channel? In that context has he any plans to ask Cablelink either to make a refund of contributions to those subscribers who have not been getting the service for which they paid in the last number of months or to absorb the money already received from subscribers to ensure that no increase will be made in subscription charges to those subscribers? In relation to advertising, when does the Minister expect that consultations with his colleague, the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht, will be concluded? Has an assessment been made of the impact on RTE's revenue of allowing Cablelink to run advertisements? Will he comment specifically on the reports that the impact of allowing Cablelink to run advertisements on its service would be more severe on RTE than was the advertising cap on that company which has been the subject of controversy in the last couple of years?
To take the last question first, I do not accept there is a finite amount of advertising revenue available. RTE's advertising increased by 25 per cent in the period 1988-92. There was an increase of 5.4 per cent in 1992 over 1991 in spite of the cap on advertising and minutage, which will be eliminated as a result of the decision of Government to amend the Broadcasting Act. In the period 1988-92 local radio advertising increased to £10 million per annum. I do not accept there is a finite amount of advertising revenue available to one company and not to others. Local radio is in a position to increase advertising revenue, while at the same time there has been a 25 per cent increase in advertising revenue to RTE.
In relation to the first part of the Deputy's question it is not correct to say subscribers are paying £80 for the Children's Channel. There is unfortunately, a misapprehension that that is what one is paying for but what one pays for is the six mainstream channels — RTE 1 and 2, BBC 1 and 2, UTV and Channel 4.
I disagree with the Minister's submission that people are subscribing only for the UK channels and the Irish channels, because implicit in the advertising was the availability of satellite channels. Would the Minister accept that the service has deteriorated substantially in the last number of months and that the only way the channels that have been lost will be restored is by the introduction of advertising by the cable companies at local level? Has the Minister a difficulty in principle with that idea, or is it a question of working out the detail of how such an arrangement could come to fruition? As the Minister raised the question of MMDS, would he accept that the delivery of the new system has not occurred in most areas throughout the country for which it was promised so it is not yet seen as an alternative to cable services?
The MMDS system was raised in reply to a question asked. I simply answered a question about it. If the Deputy wishes to put down another question he should feel free to do so.
I will deal with the misapprehension in relation to cable companies. Cable companies were permitted by the Department to relay satellite television services on an experimental basis in 1986. At the beginning of 1988 the Minister of the day announced that he was prepared to authorise cable companies to relay satellite services on a permanent basis. As a result of a discretionary condition most cable companies relayed what were then, free satellite services, including Sky 1 and Sky News, as part of their basic packages. Charges were not passed on to the subscribers because at the time satellite broadcasters were more than happy to be carried on a large cable company such as Cablelink, as they could claim an almost immediate increase of 250,000 viewers. As Sky and other services became more popular throughout the UK the Cablelink penetration figures became less critical. Cablelink were aware that the Sky Broadcasting Corporation would be seeking payment in respect of their services. Other satellite services were also seeking payment from Cablelink, although none of the other services appeared to have become as popular as the Sky service.
In recent years Cablelink has been paying copyright holders for the relay of the UK terrestrial services, the normal UTV, BBC services, roughly the equivalent of 10p per subscriber per channel per month. The Sky Corporation's initial demand was for 30p per month per subscriber per channel, which would have meant an annual payment of the order of £1.2 million. Cablelink, understandably, tried to minimise and delay the introduction of these new charges as far as possible. Unless there was a change in departmental policy, they could not agree to an increase in basic charges. They also hoped that they could obtain approval for the insertion of advertisements aimed specifically at the Irish market during breaks in the Sky services and they were led to believe that Sky would be satisfied with the advertising revenue thereby derived. This negotiating stance seemed to have been viewed as procrastination by Sky and in early December they told Cablelink that unless there was an agreement by 24 December Sky would revoke permission for the relaying of Sky 1 and Sky News.
According to Cablelink, they had decided on a commercial basis that while they did not wish to lose Sky 1 and Sky News they should not pay more for the services than they pay in respect of the terrestrial channels. Accordingly the company was not prepared to offer more than 10p per channel per subscriber per month for Sky 1 and because Sky News is a dip-in service it was felt that less should be paid in respect of this service. According to Cablelink, negotiations broke down before Christmas when it appeared that Sky would not accept below 30p per channel per subscriber per month for each service. In early March MTV also withdrew from the Cablelink network in a dispute over royalty payments. That dispute was recently resolved and resulting from the agreements reached in these two cases Cablelink have now submitted an application for a modest price increase as one element of a package designed to ensure the return of a range of satellite services to its network. The other element of that package is the local insertion of advertising. The details of the whole package were made available to me just before Easter. As the House knows, this has been going on for six months. I have had it for a few weeks and I will deal with it as soon as possible.
Cable television is chaotic. Is the Minister seriously saying that cable subscribers are now paying for the privilege of getting the Irish and UK channels only, topped up perhaps by a small ration of tabloid television? Can the Minister inform the long suffering subscribers to Cablelink when they will get the service for which they have been paying and have access to the range of cable channels, particularly cable channels in other languages that are available in every other country in the European Community?
I have made it clear that I am giving as full information as possible. The issues are being dealt with. If it took the people concerned in the business six months to come to an agreement I am sure I will be allowed a few weeks to ensure that I have the fullest information possible so as to get the best deal for the consumer. As soon as that is available I will get it.
