Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 28 Apr 1993

Vol. 429 No. 7

Adjournment Debate. - Tullamore, Offaly, Television Reception.

Mr. Gallagher

(Laoighis-Offaly): Thank you, Sir, for allowing me the opportunity to raise this matter of very great concern in my home town. I should like to thank my neighbour, the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications, Deputy Cowen, for coming into the House to respond.

A number of years ago a cable company was licensed to provide a cable television system to the greater part of Tullamore town. This at present provides a number of Irish and British channels in addition to a number of satellite channels.

The original company given the licence no longer operates the system but was taken over a number of years ago by another company operating from Dublin which supplies a similar service to other towns in the midlands and the south east. As I understand it, that company faced technical difficulties when they took over the system as a result of which they had to undertake a lot of recabling. Additionally, they experienced financial difficulties in collecting many of the bad debts which had been allowed to accrue by their predecessor.

I do not believe such excuses, from the customer's point of view, justify the unsatisfactory nature of the service which has continued for well over one and a half years. The main difficulty arises because this company has no staff located in the town. This means that, if and when customers have a technical complaint, they are compelled to endeavour to contact the company by telephone, which is done by way of an answering machine located in Athlone, or sometimes in Portlaoise or in Carlow, resulting in grave delays in reporting problems and having them resolved.

Second, there is much confusion and difficulty in regard to accounts. People are not very sure how they stand financially with the company and obtain conflicting information with regard to the level of fee they may owe the company.

I raised this matter with the Department by way of correspondence about this time last year. To give them their due, the Department did investigate the matter and expressed their reservations to the company concerned. We experienced an improvement in the system for about three months thereafter. The matter was raised also through the urban district council which met the cable company concerned. When the company opened an office in the town for a certain number of hours each week a much better customer service was provided. People were happy that at least they could contact someone in the event of difficulty.

I regret to say however, that the position has got worse since last autumn when the office was closed and people once again encountered difficulties in contacting the company regarding service and accounts. As the Minister will be aware, residents in the town are very frustrated. Indeed, large numbers of subscribers were cut off recently, some unfairly. It has also been alleged that the company trespassed on people's property. In general, people believe that their representations have not resulted in any improvement in the service.

Allied to this, greater use is being made of the MMDS system in the town. As a cable television licence has been issued for the town, in effect the MMDS system is illegal but people believe that they have to avail of this option to obtain the service to which they feel they are entitled. It is dearer than the cable system but people are prepared to pay the extra sum of money involved if they can be assured that they will receive a better service.

People in the area want a choice. Because it is cheaper, some are prepared to put up with the cable system despite the difficulties in regard to service and their accounts. However, others would prefer to have a choice and are prepared to pay extra for a better service. It is my understanding that certain difficulties would have to be overcome before both systems could be provided in the same area.

I appeal to the Minister to allay the concerns of the people in Tullamore, to ask the Department to make inquiries and ensure that a satisfactory multi-channel service is provided.

Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications (Mr. Cowen)

I thank my colleague, Deputy Gallagher, for raising this issue and giving me an opportunity to respond. I will begin my reply by outlining the statutory position in relation to the issue of cable relay licences and MMDS licences. First, cable relay licences are issued, on an exclusive basis, under the Wireless Telegraphy (Wire Broadcast Relay Licence) Regulations, 1974. Each licence is granted to a licensee in relation to a particular urban area and its immediate environs. MMDS licences on the other hand are issued, on an exclusive basis, under the Wireless Telegraphy (Television Programme Retransmission) Regulations, 1989. Each MMDS licence is granted in relation to a particular cell — generally covering a radius of 30 miles — and MMDS licences specifically do not include areas for which a cable relay licence already exists. Cable systems are a natural monopoly and the fundamental economics of the cable industry suggest that you cannot have competing systems. From a strictly pragmatic point of view it makes no sense to have homes cabled twice. Apart from the planning difficulties and the sheer waste of resources it would reduce the potential homes available and make any systems unviable. Similar considerations apply in the case of MMDS accommodating disaffected cable subscribers. I firmly believe that instead it is in everybody's interests in the long term to encourage the growth and development of cable to the point where a first class service is available to all.

I would like at this stage to place the cable industry in Ireland in some context. The cable sector has an annual turnover of in excess of £35 million and has over 500 people employed. It also contributes a significant amount to the Exchequer each year in VAT, PRSI, and corporation tax. The Government is committed to a policy of growth and development in this area and a number of policy initiatives over the past few years have underscored that commitment. The Government will continue to encourage private investment in these systems to ensure that a top quality reliable service is available to subscribers throughout Ireland.

I wish also to say a few words specifically about Tullamore. When the current licensee took over control of the cable system in Tullamore the network in the town, as the Deputy said, was found to be in a very poor technical state. Overall design left a lot to be desired and some of the equipment and cabling in use was sub-standard. It was also reported to me that many of the problems with the system were created by interference in the home through signal splitting. Over the past year or so the company has embarked on an extensive capital investment on the system. In excess of 90 per cent of a projected investment of £500,000 has been spent. Over 75 per cent of all trunk lines have been replaced and the entire complement of head-end equipment which pick up the broadcast signal has been replaced. I understand, however, that the upgrade received a setback in so far as the new equipment twice suffered heavy damage from severe electrical storms last autumn.

The company has informed me that it has now completed the final phase of its upgrade in the area. The system is transmitting 13 channels and has a channel capacity far in excess of that. The level of services calls per day is now in line with other similar systems. As part of the final phase of the upgrade the company inserted advertisements in local newspapers requesting subscribers with reception problems to contact them. A special group of technicians were located in the town to deal with any problems and the position did improve. The calls which resulted from the placing of the advertisements numbered fewer than 30.

As a Deputy for the area, I am aware that there is continuing anxiety and concern about the standard of service. However, I am satisfied that the cable relay licensee in Tullamore has invested much needed capital investment in the system to bring the network up to what is expected of modern cable systems. I ask the subscribers with particular problems to contact the company directly in the matter. I am also satisfied that it continues to be in the best interests of both subscribers and the industry that exclusive licences in cable areas remain in place.

In view of the fact that the company is not located in Tullamore I will take the matter up again with it to see if the good community relations, which existed when an office was located in the town, can be restored. It might be best if this office was reopened in the immediate future. I intend to have a detailed discussion with the company to ensure, given that technical improvements have been made, that a good service is provided and that the remaining problems are dealt with.