Vol. 435 No. 5
3 Mr. Molloy asked the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht if, in relation to section 31 of the Broadcasting Act, 1990, he will give the groups he has conferred with since taking up office; and the present position in relation to the upcoming review of section 31 due by January 1994.
15 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht if he has completed consideration of the appropriateness of section 31 of the Broadcasting Act, 1990, which he told Dáil Éireann on 9 March 1993 was underway; if this process is likely to be completed before the current order is due for renewal in January 1994; if he has received a submission from the Let in the Light Campaign regarding section 31; if he will give his response to the submission; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
26 Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht his views and the proposals, if any, he has in regard to section 31 of the Broadcasting Act, 1990; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
43 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht if, while horrendous violence continues in Northern Ireland, he will give his views on whether those involved or supporting those involved should be allowed access to TV or radio interviews.
81 Ms F. Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht the reason he believes section 18 can replace section 31 of the Broadcasting Act, 1990.
I am taking Questions Nos. 3, 15, 26, 43 and 81 together.
I cannot reply to these questions without first expressing, as I know Members have done already, my renewed horror and revulsion at recent atrocities in Northern Ireland.
I have made my views known to this House regarding the making of orders under section 31 (1) of the Broadcasting Authority Act, 1960, on a number of occasions, for example, in my reply of 9 March 1993, columns 1008 to 1011 of the Official Report for that day. I have indicated that I regard the question of the renewal or otherwise of the order as complex on a number of fronts and that it is a matter to which I was giving the most careful and complete attention.
The examination of the operation of this section is still under consideration but now almost complete and ready for submission to Government. The current order will expire on 19 January 1994 and I intend, as I said, to have my examination completed and my proposals with regard to the future operation of this section placed before Government for decision in good time before the expiry date of the current order.
I have received submissions from a number of individuals and organisations, including the Let in the Light Campaign. I am meeting a number of organisations next week. I am considering such submissions as I have while continuing my consultations with my Cabinet colleagues and meeting interested parties as part of my examination process, all of whose views will be considered seriously before I make my formal submission to Government.
Consideration of the operation now and in the future of section 18 (A) of the Broadcasting Authority Act, 1960, to which a question refers, as inserted by section 3 of the Broadcasting Authority Act, 1976, is but one part of my review. That section prohibits the RTE Authority from including in any of its broadcasts "anything which may reasonably be regarded as being likely to promote, or incite to crime or as tending to undermine the authority of the State". I am not giving any consideration to a relaxation of this obligation and, indeed, if one were to envisage circumstances where the order was not renewed, the RTE Authority would be expected to ensure that this statutory prohibition would be strictly observed.
I am sure the Minister will agree that nine months or more is a long time and surely within that period he reached his conclusions as to what measures will be taken in regard to the renewal or otherwise of section 31. I asked the Minister the names of the people he has consulted. Did the Minister consult with the Taoiseach and with the Cabinet as a whole in regard to this matter? Is the Minister aware that the Taoiseach said there is no place at the conference table for representatives of organisations that support violence? Is the Minister now saying that it could be time for some of these people to be allowed on television screens and on radio? The Minister must realise that these people are subverting the authority of the State and are supporting those who cause the death, maiming and mayhem we see on our television screens nightly. Are they to be given access to the national airwaves to explain, promote and justify the murderous acts they carry out or support against the wishes of the vast majority of people living in the Six Counties and in the Twenty-six Counties? The Minister must agree——
The question is rather long, Deputy. I was hoping for brevity.
——that the prevarication in this matter has added greatly to the confusion in people's minds as to where this Government stands. Will he agree that his stance so far is a complete contradiction of his stated desire to convey openly full information in regard to Government policy? Why should there be any doubt——
The Deputy is embarking upon a speech.
——about Government policy in this regard?
I want to reply to the Deputy's question by giving him as much information as I can. I have said that I am preparing a memorandum for Government. The Deputy has much more Cabinet experience than I have, but he accuses me of delaying time. I am sure that during his many years in Governments of different hue people said from time to time that he should consider section 31 but, perhaps, they were of such absolute clarity of mind that no complexity suggested it to them.
In regard to the second question, I said that I am preparing a memorandum for Government. As the Deputy knows, that involves consultation. Before the preparation of any such memorandum one must have consultations with one's Cabinet colleagues and the atmosphere in the Cabinet — perhaps unlike others — is most conducive to people having consultations.
It is entirely unworthy to suggest to those who want to see how broadcasting legislation can meet difficult changing circumstances that if they go along the road of reviewing how that works, they are somehow in possession of some agenda of finding a space for the men of violence. I have gone to great pains to point out that in any recommendations I might make I am not suggesting a relaxation of section 18. I would point out also that Members must bear in mind that when cases were made for broadcasting legislation to function in a particular way, for example, the legislation against incitement to hatred, violence did not exist. It now exists and that must be taken into account. That casts its own light, for example, in relation to section 18 (A). But I wish to emphasise that section 18 (A) comprises one element only of my review. There are delicate balances to be struck which must be sensitive to all of the circumstances. For example one cannot, at once, say one should give a rapid decision and, at the same time, that one should take all of these consultations and considerations into account. Let me put it more simply, there are matters that are the appropriate subject matter of public order legislation; there are matters that are appropriately ones for broadcasting legislation and there is an intersection in relation to the modus operandi of those two regimes function. I have never justified violence. Indeed, I have drawn the attention of this House not only to section 18 (A) of the broadcasting legislation in respect of which I have responsibility but also to the legislation against incitement to violence, hatred or whatever. In the end, if one were to say, for example, to anyone who wants to amend broadcasting legislation, to draft legislation which is responsible, can withstand the test of time and within which people can practice, that because one will automatically and wrongly be accused of false motives one should not address the task, that will not deflect me.
