Vol. 531 No. 1
15 Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage Gaeltacht and the Islands the discussions she has had with the Swedish Government in regard to its ban on child directed advertising on radio and television; the plans she has to consider a further ban or restrictions on such advertising here; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [4984/01]
23 Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage Gaeltacht and the Islands the proposals she has to review the role played by television and radio advertising of alcohol, especially in view of the Government's campaign against alcohol abuse by young people; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [4983/01]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 15 and 23 together.
I refer the Deputies to my reply to Questions Nos. 107 and 121 of 4 October 2000. The Swedish Government has identified a number of issues that it wishes to address during its Presidency of the European Union, one of which is the protection of minors from harmful media content. Sweden intends to pursue this issue within the EU to enable the Council of Ministers to adopt council conclusions on the matter. To this end a seminar was recently held in Stockholm on this issue. I remind the Deputies that any proposal that would have a legally binding effect in these areas would have to be presented by the European Commission in the first instance.
Under provisions of the Broadcasting Bill, 1999 responsibility for drawing up codes, specifically codes and standards, practices and prohibitions in advertising, sponsorship and other forms of commercial promotion in broadcasting services will devolve to the Independent Radio and Television Commission, to be renamed the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland.
The Bill, when enacted, will enable me to require the proposed Broadcasting Commission of Ireland, to make the question of advertising directed at children its top priority and to report back to me within one year. These issues should be left to the proposed Broadcasting Commission of Ireland as part of its remit to revise and update the codes relating to advertising.
Will the Minister explain why new proposals would have to emanate from the Commission, bearing in mind that, since 1991, Sweden has legislation in place under which advertising targeted at children under 12 is banned? There is nothing to prevent the Minister from introducing, even at this late stage, an amendment to the Broadcasting Bill, 1999.
During the passage of that Bill through this House, when the Labour Party sought an all-out ban on advertising targeted at children under 12 years of age, in fairness,the Minister came some of the way to meet our demands, but it was far short of what we sought. If Sweden can do it, why can we not? I appeal to the Minister, even at this late stage in the passage of the Bill, to examine this issue in a positive fashion.
The question posed by the Deputy, "If Sweden can do it, why can we not?" is the nub of the issue. Unfortunately, Sweden was not as successful as it hoped due to the position I outlined when referring to another question with regard to advertising and alcohol. The imposition of the ban in Sweden was not successful because many Swedish stations prevented from carrying advertising directed at children simply sought and received licences outside Sweden to broadcast their services back into the State. Again, due to the Television Without Frontiers Directive, this was possible, despite the intentions of the Swedish authorities. That issue must be considered.
The views in the Council of Ministers are wide-ranging. Some have strong views in favour of a complete ban and others have strong views against such a ban. The EU Commission is reluctant to have an EU-wide ban unless there are strong arguments in favour of the ban. Obviously, that depends on the support that can be engendered among member states to put this view forward.
The Deputy might be interested to know these matters were discussed already on 12 and 13 February at a seminar entitled Children and Young People in the New Media Landscape held in Sweden. At EU level these issues will be examined further on 23 February, but that must happen in the context of the forthcoming review of the Television Without Frontiers Directive.
At the meeting, to which I referred on 12 and 13 February, many NGOs and sectors of the industry were present, including representatives from my Department, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and RTE. These issues are, therefore, being actively discussed but a great deal of persuasion must take place to reach a consensus among member states.
The Minister referred to the difficulties with a ban on advertising alcoholic drink on radio and television. Would she agree that many of the advertisements for alcoholic drink appear in the early evening and are aimed at young people? Would she introduce a ban on advertising alcoholic drink before a certain time, for example, 9 p.m.?
This certainly can be considered. I am sure it will be one of the issues which will be discussed if the Minister for Health and Children wishes to discuss this issue with me, and I look forward to that. However, when one is talking about advertising at specific times, one is referring to controls over indigenous channels. One would not be able to control advertising on stations outside the State and therefore one is faced with the same problem which was experienced because of the Television Without Frontiers Directive.
When dealing with the smoking issue in America, the state of Florida was awarded a large sum in compensation from a tobacco company. Some of that money was used to advertise the anti-smoking campaign, using young people to influence their peers. I wonder whether it would be a good initiative for the Department responsible for culture to get some young people involved in a similar way, advertising the value of not drinking alcohol and getting across the positive message. Perhaps that would be money well spent on advertising.
Perhaps that could be considered. It is a way of looking at the same problem from a different perspective. This could be considered when the Broadcasting Commission is drawing up its rules and codes.
In replying to my first supplementary question the Minister referred to the legislation introduced in Sweden in 1991 and said the Swedish authorities had not been entirely successful in attaining their objectives. Would she agree that a government is not ever entirely successful at anything and that the fact that Sweden has not been entirely successful is not an argument for not introducing similar legislation here?
We are discussing two questions here. Question No. 23, refers to radio and television advertising of alcohol, especially in view of the Government's campaign against alcohol abuse. Would the Minister agree that the constant connection between alcohol and both sport and success is not healthy or good and that it contributes to the abuse of alcohol, even by those who are under age? I can recall that one senior sports person would not turn up at a celebration for a minor team which had won a county championship on the basis that, by definition, some of the people, who would have been under 18, should not have been in the public house in the first place. We need to do something to break this culture. Will the Minister give us an undertaking here that she will look into and address this issue in an appropriate way?
Under the legislation this will be a matter not for the Minister but for the Broadcasting Complaints Commission.
Not while the Minister has a broadcasting Bill before the Oireachtas.
The Deputy is only too aware of what is proposed in that Bill. On his reference to the Swedish experience, I share the Deputy's view that it is difficult to get 100% guarantees on anything but it is important to remember that because of the Television Without Frontiers Directive, even if the Swedish measures were introduced here, one could end up having only limited results.
Deputy Jim O'Keeffe wishes to comment on Question No. 27.
I appreciate your indulgence, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. I want to point out that Question No. 27 on the Order Paper is not the question I tabled. The way it is formulated seems to imply that I, as a member of the Opposition, am urging the Minister to increase the television licence fee. That was not the question I tabled. I asked about the Minister's intentions regarding the application for the increase.
The Deputy is allowed to change his mind.
I wanted to put that on the record. I appreciate that sometimes questions are edited. I am sure that in normal circumstances editing helps to produce a better question but in this case, the editing totally changed the context of the question and I merely wanted to put that on the record. I am not urging the Minister to increase the licence fee.
The Official Report will contain the correction.
