Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 3 Jan 1962

Vol. 55 No. 2

Adjournment Debate. - Television and Radio Interference.

Professor Stanford

The matter which I have the Chair's permission to raise is that of electrical interference with radio transmission. My aim in raising this matter is definitely not to suggest any censure or criticism of the Minister and his Department. At the moment he and his Department are basking, I think, in well deserved credit for their policy in connection with Irish television. I do not want to cast any shadow on that lustre. On the contrary, my aim tonight is to offer the Minister an opportunity of stating here and now what his intentions are and of gaining further confidence and esteem from the public. I do think that a statement from him now on this question of radio interference would be very welcome throughout the country. I think it is especially appropriate that it should be made in this House because the Broadcasting Authority Bill of 1959 was first introduced in this House. It is a Seanad Bill and so I think it is only fitting that we should have the benefit of the Minister's statement this evening.

I understand that the Minister has already received a report from the committee of experts which he has set up, a committee of scientists and manufacturers and dealers and others. I know it is an interim report but I do think it would be well for him to make an interim statement here and now on this interim report, and I hope there is a possibility that here and now, or at least within the next few weeks, he can take some steps to ameliorate the present regrettable situation.

At present in fact there is a state of anarchy in the Greek sense of the words, as far as interference is concerned. The Leas-Chathaoirleach, whose scholarship in Greek, Latin and in Irish has already been referred to in the House, will appreciate, and others I am sure too, this meaning of anarchia, an absence of legal control. There is anarchy in this sense now, and it is regrettable.

Since 1st January, something like 100,000 of our citizens are liable to pay £4 for the privilege of watching the excellent Irish television service, so it becomes more urgent that they should be given proper reception. At the moment many of our citizens are not receiving either the Irish programmes or the foreign programmes even reasonably well. May I confess that I am not an owner of a television set at the moment and that I do not often look in but I have my responsibility to my constituents and to others.

My information is that there are four kinds of interference with television at the moment in this country. I shall use popular terms to describe them. The first is the snowstorm in which a quite unperturbed speaker continues to make his imperturbable utterances apparently in a blizzard falling steadily from the ceiling. I understand that is the result of a weak signal and will not be experienced as far as Irish television is concerned where, if anything, the signal is too strong rather than too weak. Therefore, we can leave out consideration of the snowstorm.

The second type is what may be called the herringbone kind of interference. This has the effect of putting fishbones moving across the screen. Again, I understand this is not likely to occur on Irish television. It is the result of interference from other stations which are nearly as strong as the station one is tuned in to. We can for the moment disregard the snowstorm indoors and out of doors and concentrate on the other two forms of interference. One consists of zig-zag lines across the screen which I understand are the result of interference by smaller electrical machines and possibly by passing motor cars. Here something can be done and should be done because you will get these zig-zag lines even on our strong Irish television.

The fourth kind of interference is the worst of all. This consists of broad bands which cut out part of the screen entirely. This is the really diabolical form of interference which ruins the programmes and I regret to say, ironically enough, a great deal of it comes from hospitals. It is not their fault. It is the result of using diathermy apparatus. It is also caused by certain machines which are used in the operating theatre. These diathermy contraptions, if I may use the word, are also apparently used by industrial plants. Therefore if people are in the neighbourhood of hospitals using diathermy apparatus or these industrial plants, their television programmes may be ruined while those contraptions are working. These last two kinds are the serious ones: the board bands and the zig-zag lines. Here the Minister can do something and should do something as soon as possible.

At the moment we are in a state of anarchy and also in a state of uncertainty. The traders, the viewers and the general public do not know just what is going to be done. The main two questions in the public mind are, I think, these: first of all, will the responsibility for fitting suppressors be laid on the suppliers or on the buyers; and, secondly, will suppressors be made compulsory for already existing sources of interference? It will be simple enough to make a regulation, a Ministerial order, saying that all future sources of interference will be controlled, but what about the many sources that are already around us?

I know, and the Minister knows much better, that this is a most complicated problem. There are scientific difficulties; there are financial difficulties. Even questions of interference in another sense, interference with personal rights and liberties, are involved. Some of us are naturally apprehensive of Orders which will enable officials to search houses, and so on, being made by the Government. We need hardly fear it, but we cherish our personal rights. Here I personally stand for, and I imagine the House would stand for, the principle that interference is justified to prevent interference, and that a moderate degree of control of personal liberties in the interests of the greater number is desirable.

I look forward greatly to what the Minister has to say. I understand that he has power already under the Broadcasting Authority Act to do a good deal. Will there be need for further legislation? Whichever is the case, I urge on him that there is need for prompt and decisive action.

Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. Hilliard)

I am grateful to Senator Stanford for raising this question. It gives me an opportunity to make a statement on this very important matter of interference with reception. I notice that Senator Stanford addressed himself mainly to the question of interference with television reception. However, as interference is not confined to television, I propose in my statement to deal with both radio and television. I assume that Senator Stanford expected to get some information on this subject. I realised in advance, that that is really what the Senator wanted and that he wished to have the information available to the Seanad and to the public. Therefore, I think it best that I should read the prepared statement setting out the position in so far as it is possible for me to set it out at present.

It is not possible to deal effectively with the problem of interference with radio and television programmes by simply legislating by Act or Order that all electrical equipment must be fitted with suppressors to prevent electrical interference. Such a requirement would be too vague to be effective. Moreover, the fitting of suppressors is not practicable or effective in regard to certain kinds of interference. The problem is not one of preventing interference altogether—this is virtually impracticable—but one of reducing undue interference to a level which will not trouble the listener or viewer. This involves specifying requirements for different kinds of electrical apparatus.

While much can be done to reduce electrical interference substantially there are practical limits to what can be done. For one thing, reduction of interference to a level permitting enjoyable reception constantly can be expected only for the home sound and television services. There will, in fact, be considerable difficulties even in achieving this. It will not be possible to eliminate all interference with reception of programmes from outside our territory and particularly from distant stations because, in general, their signal strength here is too far below what is necessary for good reception. Moreover, even if interference from all other sources could be eliminated, inter-station interference, that is between stations on the same or adjoining wavelengths, would persist. This is so because in crowded wavebands, wavelengths can be shared by two or more stations only on the basis that the programmes from each station are free from undue interference within a certain limited area only. International arrangements for sharing wavelengths aim at nothing more than this. It is of little use therefore for a listener to complain that some outside programmes in which he is particularly interested are being constantly interfered with by another outside station. However, if he is still using an old set—say, one some 15, 20 or more years old—he would be well advised to give a modern efficient receiver a trial. The improvement in reception and selectivity can in many cases be surprising.

It is a fact that an efficient aerial system will of itself minimise interference and it goes without saying that the electric equipment used within the household should be in proper working order. These are the first things that viewers and listeners should satisfy themselves about. It will be found, now that television programmes have commenced here, that the signals in the Dublin area will be strong enough to be received with a simple aerial but interference-free reception should not be expected except with a satisfactory aerial system.

The legislative powers necessary to deal with interference are contained in the Broadcasting Authority Act, 1960 (Part II of the Third Schedule). This amended and extended the inadequate powers to deal with interference which were in Section 12 of the Wireless Telegraph Act, 1926. The extended powers authorised the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs to make regulations, if he saw fit, prescribing the requirements to be complied with in the case of electrical equipment likely to cause interference with wireless telegraphy. In order to advise me in this matter, I set up an Advisory Committee of experts. The Committee held its first meeting on 12th June, 1961, and has just furnished its first report and recommendations. The Committee considers that regulations should first be made to cover small electric motors (motors of less than 1 h.p.) which are used to a considerable extent in industrial and in domestic appliances; they are one of the most numerous and most widespread causes of interference. The regulations will apply to sellers, hirers and users of the equipment. The draft regulations are being prepared and the Statute requires that:

"Where the Minister proposes to make regulations under this section—

(a) he shall cause a draft of the proposed regulations to be prepared and shall cause the draft to be published and placed on sale by the Stationery Office,

(b) he shall give notice to the public, in such manner as he considers suitable, of his intention to make the regulations,

(c) the notice shall contain an intimation that copies of the draft of the regulations are available for purchase and that, during a specified period of not less than two months, representations suggesting variations of the draft may be made to the Minister."

(Sect. 12 (A) (4) Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1926).

Within the next few weeks it is hoped to have the draft regulations on sale and two months must then elapse before the regulations may be brought into force.

An appeal was made earlier this year to manufacturers, assemblers and importers of the kinds of electrical goods which are known to cause undue interference to take all practicable measures to prevent such interference before the goods reach the public. The response was heartening. It would seem, however, that electrical goods in an unsuppressed state are being imported and offered for sale and in the absence of regulations little can be done to stop this. Persons who intend to purchase electrical goods should therefore satisfy themselves in advance that they will not cause interference with radio or television programmes.

All powers appropriate for the investigation and detection of interference with radio and television were conferred on Radio Éireann under the Broadcasting Authority (Control of Interference) Order, 1960. Progress in the matter of enforcing these powers will be slow until the regulations settings out the requirements to be complied with come into force. The staff in Radio Éireann dealing with complaints of interference has recently been strengthened somewhat.

Hitherto Radio Éireann did not investigate complaints of interference with television reception in any systematic way, but now that we have our own television service the staff has been strengthened to deal with television as well as radio interference.

During 1960, complaints of interference investigated by Radio Éireann were traced to 1,225 sources. I do not think it necessary to give a complete analysis of these sources. It is interesting to note however that ESB networks and poles, fluorescent lights and drills, grinders and sanders accounted for almost 60 per cent of the causes of interference which were traced, and that another 25 per cent. was due to items of household equipment, television receivers and inefficient or defective radio sets, aerials or earhs or domestic wiring faults. The remaining sources of interference included flashing and neon signs, factory and garage equipment, motors and generators, accounting machines, hairdressing equipment, hospital equipment, etc.

From the list I have given, which of course is not by any means exhaustive, it will be clear that a very wide and varied technical field has yet to be covered. The first step will be the Regulations to cover small electric motors but it will be some considerable time before Orders or regulations can be made setting limits to the suppression of other categories of electrical appliances. Until such time as these sources of interference are covered by Regulations it will be necessary to depend to an increasing extent on the co-operation of all those through whose hands these goods flow, be they manufacturers, suppliers, importers or users. The Radio Éireann experience is that the initial response is often very lukewarm but constant pressure produces results in quite a large percentage of cases. Sometimes, however, an absolute refusal to co-operate is experienced.

It is hoped, in the long run, that a mixture of exhortation and compulsion will result in making both listening and viewing more tolerable than it has been in the past.

I do not think I need add anything to that statement or deal with any of the specific instances Senator Stanford has raised. I shall have his statement examined. The points he raised in connection with any specific matter of interference will be brought to the attention of the Department and can be examined by the people whose business it is to have these matters examined. Whatever action, if any, that will be decided upon will certainly be taken by me.

The Seanad adjourned at 6.25 p.m. sine die.