Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 15 Feb 2001

Vol. 165 No. 4

Broadcasting Bill, 1999: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Mr. Ryan

I welcome the Minister back to the House. I am afraid I may be a little less eloquent this morning than I was last week, as I had eaten and drunk well on the night in question. I reiterate the point I made last week regarding RTÉ. While it is worthy of support as a public service broadcaster, it has obligations as well as rights. It is obliged not to be coerced but to reflect the real and genuine complexities which make Ireland an interesting place. RTÉ's function is not to replace a, perhaps dated, version of Irishness with another which reflects a particular view of the world, what I would call The Irish Times view of the world. The Irish Times is entitled to have its view of the world because its readers share that view. It rarely provokes the world view of its readership. Many of those who form opinions in RTÉ only read The Irish Times and believe that is the entire world, not the 90,000 people who buy that newspaper.

RTÉ is very good at producing investigative reports on two sectors who fully deserve it, the public sector and the church. I have said a dozen times in this House and in other places that the old Goldenbridge orphanage is one of the places RTÉ loves to film. There has been a procession of photographers, cameramen, colour piece writers, etc., out to write about it. Beside Goldenbridge is the worst complex of high-rise flats in Dublin and I know it very well because I helped some of the people there to put together a development programme. What intrigues me is that not one of the commentators, writers, camera-persons, photographers or journalists who went out to look at Goldenbridge even saw the appalling complex of high-rise flats that was beside it, because that was not the issue they were pursuing.

There is a great need for criticism of current mores and of things that are invisible. One of those is the absence of prosperity from about 40% of the population who are either in poverty, or living on close to poverty wages, with public services in health and housing that no-one in this House has to live with. That is to a considerable degree invisible. While there are worthy programmes about these issues, the basic principle is that Ireland is now prosperous and we are all much better off. That is the assumption. It is occasionally challenged by bits of programmes, but the overall assumption remains the same.

I do not want to go back over my comments on RTÉ's extraordinary Dublin bias, including the predilection of "Questions and Answers" to focus on people from Dublin in its panel choice. I reiterate that the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Martin's announcement of a code of practice on advertising and young people will, if enforced, close down a number of the new radio stations opening up. If there is no alcohol advertising where more than 25% of the audience is under 18, then a good number of those stations will close and if their viability is based on advertising alcohol to people under 18 then they should close.

The Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaelteacht and the Islands, Deputy de Valera, like many of her predecessors, has talked about choice and the need to produce high quality indigenous services. Let us not get carried away with choice. The satellite services rarely break 10% of the audience. Some 90% of viewers in Britain watch the dull old reliable terrestrial services that were supposed to be under threat. I suspect the figure here is even higher. If Sky Sports did not carry premiership soccer the percentage who watched satellite television would drop to about 3% or 2%. It is an effective monopoly given that Sky Sports purchased something that everybody is interested in by spending an enormous amount of money. That has given the satellite services a foothold among British viewing audiences.

What we did was different when we introduced commercial television. In Britain that service provides different views of the country and of British life. It looks at different things, some high brow, some low brow, but provides different choices as well as being essentially made in Britain. What we have, in the name of diversity, is a singular view represented by "Coronation Street" first, second, third, and fourth, "Eastenders" fifth and sixth, "Emmerdale" ninth, "Eastenders" tenth and "Emmerdale" eleventh. Those placings represent one week of top viewing audiences for TV3. I am intrigued as to what new choice we have as those programmes were available before, and are still available from their country of origin now that we have TV3. A small minority cannot view the British television channels, but that is all.

The Minister has got to insist, if necessary in this legislation, that a third Irish television channel has something about it which makes it identifiably an alternative choice. There is an alternative television station available and it is called TG4, but that station is under-funded and under-resourced.

This brings me to the licence fee. If you believe the myth of the market, which I do not, then the licence fee is a nonsense. If, as most people are beginning to realise, you have limited resources in terms of technological skills or scale, etc., then it is necessary to intervene in the marketplace to provide diversity. One of the most imaginative ways is by a television licence fee. I am not sure about the scale of RTÉ's licence fee increase, but they are under-funded in terms of licence fee income and that is a great pity. Senator Ross and myself had a motion down for years, in the days when I was an Independent, supporting a once-off licence fee, and a mechanism independent of Government for a regular review and increase of that licence fee. RTÉ might do things I do not like, but if they were not there nothing that most of us are interested in would be done.

Miss Quill

Exactly.

Mr. Ryan

There is no evidence that the alternatives to RTÉ will do the things that most of us believe are important. The new television service, TV3, does not do any live sports broadcasting, but buys other things and uses other people's facilities. TG4, on a limited budget and with a limited mandate, does more to cover Irish sport than the so-called competitor to RTÉ, TV3. That is a commentary on our failure to put together regulation of television that guarantees that a further channel would be commercially viable and represent serious diversity. A licence fee is for the encouragement of diversity, for looking at alternative ways, for innovation, for minorities, etc.

Providing more and more channels, as has been the case in most other countries, will not provide different television programmes. It will provide a miasma of sameness with a few spectacular exceptions. That is an issue that is far from being addressed and it is true whether we talk about television or much that passes for radio.

Where it is has been done properly, local radio has been an enormous success but there is no local radio in Dublin, for example. There are just two stations which are unashamed competitors of 2FM. Those who live in Cork would say that RTÉ is the Dublin local radio station. There is a degree of truth in that but it is not the point. I am not entirely sure why, as Senator Mooney said, a diversity of radio stations to cover a diversity of tastes is not possible. Why is there the belief that one particular market is the only market? I know that people with grey hair might have lots of money, but they are not as easily parted from it by sophisticated advertising as younger people with lots of money, and there is no point trying to focus advertising at older people.

I am concerned about section 37 of the Bill which seems to give the multiplex or the transmission company a monopoly on the necessary equipment to convert digital back. I do not see why there should be one single provider of that. I may be looking at the wrong section; I will come back to it.

It is a pity that the transmission company and the multiplex company should be referred to as companies incorporated under the Companies Act. We have perhaps the most secretive companies legislation in the world under which it is virtually impossible to find out much about what a company is doing. These are companies that will have effective monopolies and they should be covered by company legislation which reflects their unique status and not by the catch-all of the Companies Act which as I said is profoundly secretive and profoundly unfriendly to anybody who wants to find out anything about it. We should have some commitment that the transmission company and the multiplex company will be covered by something similar to the Freedom of Information Act and that they ought to be accessible and accountable.

Tá an-díomá orm faoin laghad airgid atá á chur ar fáil do TG4 faoi láthair agus, b'fhéidir níos tábhachtaí, nach bhfuil aon bharántas ann go mbeidh airgead ar fáil dóibh as seo amach. There is nothing in the legislation which will guarantee TG4's continued funding by the State. There is nothing that says that it must be funded in any way directly or indirectly. That fund could be halved, quartered or – I do not think this will happen – ended and they could be left to sing.

TG4 is also hopelessly under-funded. The sum of £16 million per year is a very small amount on which to run a television channel. At a time of considerable affluence and in the interests of both the language and diversity in television, TG4 deserves to be much more generously funded. What it has done with its resources is a marvellous achievement and it deserves much more. It needs statutory guarantees about its future funding.

Miss Quill

Fáiltím roimh an Aire agus tá áthas orm go bhfuil an Bille ós comhair an Tí. I welcome this legislation to the House. It has been a very long time in gestation and I am glad that it is here now – not before its time. We are now on the threshold of the advent of digital television, which will change everything fundamentally. We must make proper provision in law to ensure the new regime will be made to benefit as many viewers and as many citizens as possible. The prospect of a choice of 30 channels is indeed an exciting one, provided that there is real choice as opposed to the kind of choice between weak tea and cold coffee. It is also a very daunting prospect, particularly when we consider how our national broadcaster, RTÉ, will fare in the new regime. That is the first question I want to explore.

A key question is how the national broadcaster will fare in this new maelstrom. How will it continue to discharge its public service remit? How successfully will it be enabled to compete for advertising, for example, in the teeth of such unprecedented competition? To what extent will it be enabled to promulgate the cultural values that enrich contemporary life and promote citizenship?

Citizenship is something that needs to be considered very carefully. The question of promoting citizenship is one that is more acute now than ever before considering the large number of people who feel disenfranchised, who feel democracy is not worthy of support and who demonstrate that by their reluctance to come out and vote on polling day. There is a strong obligation on a national broadcaster to seek with greater intensity to promote citizenship, to keep in place current affairs programmes of a very high calibre and of independent turn of mind and to put in place very well researched news bulletins, which RTÉ does very well, frequently and on a daily basis.

The making of quality television programmes does not come easily and does not come cheap, yet when quality programmes are on offer, the viewership soars. We have evidence of that from the viewership, for example, of Sean Ó Mordha's wonderful documentary "Seven Ages" and also, more recently, the viewership for Gerry Stembridge's programme "Black Day at Blackrock". There is an audience and an appetite there for quality television and this has been demonstrated.

In addition to its obligation to make more of these types of programmes, that would I hope be the norm rather than the exception, RTÉ is expected to support the National Symphony Orchestra, the RTÉ Concert Orchestra and the Vanbrugh String Quartet. We put a very heavy obligation on RTÉ.

While we rightly ask a great deal of RTÉ, what are we prepared to pay for all we ask? The environment in the future will be more challenging than in the past. That is a key question for policy makers. RTÉ is looking for an increase in the licence fee from £70 to £120. That is the magnitude of the increase sought. If RTÉ is to be given any increase, it must demonstrate that it will continue to make programmes to the high quality I have mentioned. It must demonstrate that it has the capacity, expertise and sufficient staff to produce the kinds of programmes I have picked out for special mention.

Before RTÉ can confidently ask for an increase in the licence fee, it should be prepared to look at what it already has. RTÉ does not need three channels to enable it to discharge its public service remit. Network 2 does not add greatly to the kind of quality programme making that I speak of. It is largely a channel which specialises on imported television programmes and movies and RTÉ should now sell it off or franchise it out. This then would free up RTÉ to develop a new dynamic, digital service in conjunction with RTÉ1 and TG4. TG4 is grossly underdeveloped and under-funded and is not available in large tracts of the country. I argue very strongly that RTÉ could discharge its public service remit in a dynamic fashion with the use of two channels. I ask the Minister to consider that.

This would enable RTÉ to make quality programmes, like Seán Ó Mordha's "Seven Ages," or "Bad Day at Blackrock." They were successes, attracting huge audiences. These are the conditions that should be imposed for an increased licence fee. The leap from £70 to £120 is excessive. It has to be proved that it is deserved. RTÉ is at a crossroads and should restructure itself as a first step.

I admire radio, and television too although I do not have much time to watch it. I was breastfed on RTÉ 1. Radio opened up the world to and kindled the imaginations of my generation. It set the world alight for us. I admire RTÉ 1. I rejoice in its achievements as it celebrates a tradition of 75 years.

Good quality local radio is of social and cultural benefit. It is important that it is nourished at a time of globalisation. Local radio keeps the folk tradition, colour and personality of a locality alive. It maintains the richness of our culture. It is the bulwark against the dumbing down caused by globalisation, that is soap to suds and suds to soap.

I am concerned about the provisions in the Bill dealing with radio. Should it be the function of the Independent Radio and Television Commission to regulate licences that are due for renewal? It must continue to fulfil its duties responsibly in its new form. The Independent Radio and Television Commission is not required to re-advertise every five years. This does not benefit local radio. Market forces apply and the better local stations rise to the top like cream. Those with no proper structure and nothing to offer are weeded out. A number of bodies have invested in management and training in local radio. Consequently the standard has improved greatly. We must not endanger this in the Bill. People in the industry need to have a certainty about future regulation. This is needed to attract investment and retain staff. I ask the Minister to consider this on Committee Stage.

Lyric FM is a great success. It recognises that people have different tastes and like to listen to different things at different times. It is increasing its audience. It gives a good service which is an alternative to constant talk. It is refreshing, particularly if travelling in a car, to tune in to Lyric FM. People ringing in to chat shows with their complaints and ailments is overbearing. I remember a pop song, "Don't Tell Me Your Troubles, I've Got Troubles Of My Own". I sometimes feel like that about chat shows. The option of Lyric FM is sustaining.

We need a television channel dedicated to education, for young and old embracing the concept of life-long learning. I heard an American economist saying that 20% of the jobs that will be needed in 20 years' time have not yet been invented. Unless we value life-long education we will not be able to cope with that kind of change. Television is a powerful educational medium, if properly planned and linked to other institutions. I hope that in the digital era we have a station dedicated to education. In particular it must address European languages and cultures which are dealt with in a threadbare manner in schools. The pressure at second level to take nine subjects, to get 999 points for the CAO limits time for other subjects. Television enables people to return to education in a setting and at a time which suits them. There must be such a television channel, similar to Lyric FM on radio.

There is a resource in TG4 which is underutilised. The Minister must consider this in regard to the capacity which would allow RTÉ to discharge its public service remit. This Bill is vague on TG4. It will be put on a statutory basis but to what end? What benefit will it confer on the station, viewers and RTÉ? When will this happen? What other changes will follow?

Many bright young people produce programmes for TG4. We should see more of these, but they are not on offer. There is great scope for developing the young people concerned, for using the channel for commissioning films and drama programmes, of which there are not enough on television. If there were more such programmes, I am sure I would make time to watch them. If indigenous films were available for viewing more frequently, I am sure I would make time to watch them also. I cannot see how TG4 can achieve that aspiration. It is most disappointing that it is not available in large tracts of the country many years after its establishment. It is one of the matters which must be examined in what is a new era.

I am not certain that I have anything else or useful to say. If that is the case, perhaps I should do the honourable thing and sit down. If I was to suggest that there are times when television is filled with programmes which are largely meaningless, perhaps I should not fill my contribution with comments which are not full of meaning.

I am serious about the future of public service broadcasting. We regularly discuss items and state that they are matters for legislation and then societal matters, but the major carriers of meaning in society are education, religion and the media. It is in that context that we should consider the importance of nurturing the national broadcaster and assisting it produce the best programmes at all times. That is my intention. I hope that, as a result of the enactment of this legislation, there will be a renewed effort to make that happen.

Mr. Manning

I very much enjoyed the contribution of Senator Quill. I am in agreement with what she said.

The Bill has come close to celebrating its second birthday. I am sure, therefore, the Minister will be happy to see it on the Statute Book before we have a party and light candles. As it has been widely debated, I will only make a brief contribution. The main points of principle have been made by my party colleagues in the Dáil and by Senator Coghlan. I will unashamedly concentrate on one issue, which was raised by Senator Quill. The other points I wish to make will keep for Committee Stage.

I declare an interest in the matter. My brother works for RTÉ, although I have never appeared on his programme.

Mr. Mooney

I have not appeared on it either.

Mr. Manning

Perhaps for different reasons. I delcare my interest, lest I am accused of not doing so.

I would strongly support a substantial increase in the RTÉ licence fee and urge the Minister to consider the case for it. I would do so without apology. It may not be necessary to increase it by £50, as RTÉ is asking; slightly more than half may be sufficient, but its case must be analysed properly. I ask the Minister not only to have an open mind, but to place the concept of public service broadcasting high in her thinking in coming to a decision.

RTÉ is at the heart of the country. The concept of public service broadcasting, as developed by it, is one which stands up to the closest scrutiny. Not everything within it is perfect, however. None is of us is under an illusion about that. There are broadcasters who annoy us and whom we think are unfair. There are areas, of which Senator Quill outlined a number, where the station could do a great deal better. There are some appallingly bad programmes. While I accept all these assertions, it is an institution made up of human beings and has its failings. It has missed opportunities. At times it can be guilty of corporate arrogance. Some of its presenters can be guilty of personal arrogance. All those points can be made, many of which can be sustained.

What put this matter in perspective for me were many of the programmes over Christmas commemorating the 75th anniversary of RTÉ. They placed it in a wider perspective because RTÉ is almost as old as the State and its history mirrors its many developments. When one looks back one thinks of the early days where in a single room studio in Great Denmark Street two or three people kept the service going, and of the move to the studios in Middle Abbey Street and over the GPO. This shows how far RTÉ has come. It can also be seen that the philosophy underpinning the station from the very beginning has been the right one.

In the early years especially, RTÉ suffered from chronic under-funding and considerable bureaucratic interference by the Civil Service. At times it suffered from political censorship or timidity. In the 1940s James Dillon, who was frequently ahead of the pack, proposed that the full proceedings of Dáil Éireann and Seanad Éireann be broadcast live. He was of the view that this would be one way of bringing Parliament directly to the people, but he was laughed at and told that the people were not interested or that it could not be done. I hope with the advent of digital television that with a press of a button citizens will be able to see what is happening in Seanad Éireann, Dáil Éireann and committees. That day is not far off. It is in that sense that broadcasting would be bringing the workings of Parliament directly to the people.

When one looks at RTÉ today in an international perspective one will see that it is a station which has high editorial and governance standards, which were laid down in legislation during the years, the aim of which is to create a radio and television station which will be at the service of, not a slave to, the people. It fulfils that service, as far as possible, by telling the truth about current affairs and events, allowing us to engage with our literature and film, helping the creative arts, bringing sporting activity directly to the people and providing recreational entertainment, all of which it does well.

Senator Quill mentioned Lyric FM, an absolutely marvellous radio station. There are many other services provided by RTÉ which would not stand up to the highest or tightest commercial scrutiny. We live in a world where the influence of the market has become excessive, but there is more to a country than market forces. There are other values which are part of a nation. A service such as that provided by RTÉ is a vitally important part of what we are. The bad things one could say about RTÉ are outweighed by the good it has done in helping us to evolve as a people, to better understand ourselves and in performing its basic functions of bringing us in a fair manner news, comment and information on the world about us. We should stand back from this rush to allow market forces rule. Everything should not be dictated by market forces in respect of which I have huge worries. I would much prefer to see a strong RTÉ within a statutory framework, with a broadly representative board of governors selected by the Government, some of whom would be elected by the staff, which does take its brief seriously in a dominant position than one controlled by Rupert Murdoch—

Mr. Norris

Hear, hear.

Mr. Manning

—Dr. Tony O'Reilly or any other media mogul. These people have a right to exist. Their commercial success has put them in a powerful position. However, equally, public service broadcasting must be strong, vibrant and capable of fending off the attacks of commercial predators while also having a space within which it can grow.

I hope the Minister will subject the RTÉ request to the most rigorous scrutiny on the basis that public service broadcasting is a fundamental part of our value system. It is something the country needs and which has been enormously beneficial. I am an unapologetic supporter of whatever increase the Minister decides is warranted.

Mr. Cassidy

Hear, hear.

Mr. Manning

If we believe in strong public service broadcasting, we must give it the resources, subject to scrutiny, to enable it to be strong. We do not want an enfeebled, cowardly public service broadcasting system prey to attacks from outside groups and unable to do its best in presenting what it has done best over the years. That is the point I wanted to make. We need to stand back, see it in perspective, examine what RTÉ has done over the years, examine how important it is to have strong public service broadcasting and be brave after that.

Mr. Cassidy

I welcome the Minister and the Bill. I congratulate the Minister and her officials for bringing this fine legislation before us.

I support the great work RTÉ has done in its 75 years of working for Ireland as the media face of Ireland from its beginnings under the Minister's grandfather, the former Taoiseach and President, Éamon de Valera, through the periods in office of various Taoisigh, Presidents and Ministers with responsibility for communications who have had the privilege to hold the office and who have over the past 75 years made RTÉ the great station we know it to be. The media clips from the past 75 years serve to remind us of the achievements our country has made in that time and it is wonderful RTÉ was present to record historic events and keep them in its archive. It reminds us from time to time how difficult it was in the early years of the State and what we have achieved to bring us into the digital age, as Senator Mooney called it, the challenge of which we now face and which heralds another great phase in broadcasting to which we look forward.

RTÉ, the public service broadcaster, must be and will be supported by the Government, especially under Fianna Fáil. Public service broadcasting is something of which we are proud and which forms part of our heritage and part of Ireland. With the legislation under discussion, we will ensure the wonderful work done by RTÉ continues. It faces enormous competition which it has never faced before. It is a challenge in which we must support it fully by giving it the tools of its work, namely, the financial resources to continue its endeavours on behalf of the taxpayer and the people.

RTÉ has risen to the challenge of broadcasting special events which take place here occasionally and which need enormous resources. This was never more obvious to people, inside or outside Ireland, than in the late 1970s when the Holy Father visited Ireland and RTÉ responded in a wonderful manner to the challenge of covering the his visit. In the world of entertainment, no other country of similar size has achieved the success we have with our Eurovision song contest entries. Enormous resources had to be spent by RTÉ to cover these events but it showed Europe how well it responded to the enormous challenge. I congratulated the station as Fianna Fáil spokesperson in the Seanad on communications, a position I held for 11 years, on the way it responded. Despite things being very difficult in Ireland, it showed Europe what a marvellous young population we had, how successful we were in winning the Eurovision on many occasions with the talent of our writers and composers and what talent existed in a small country of 3.5 million people. This was shown through the terrific national broadcasting public service station known to us as RTÉ.

I have worked with many producers and presenters in radio and television for more than 30 years and it has been a complete labour of love. Product, such as a new release, was judged on the basis that if it was good, it was given fair play and exposure and if it was not, one was told so in no uncertain terms. There had to be a standard and one was rewarded if one's product was of that standard. I had a sponsored programme on RTÉ when it only had one radio station. That one station had an unbelievable impact in that, if a programme was broadcast in the afternoon, such as mine which was broadcast at 2.15 p.m. after the Glen Abbey programme, one was in the office until 12 o'clock that night because 75% to 80% of people listening to radio were listening to that programme. At that time artists had a magnificent business, as Senator Mooney would know having been in the business for a long time, being very respected and having achieved an enormous amount on behalf of artists. When only one radio station existed, it was easier to give artists a start.

The position is different and more difficult today. I wish to be helpful to artists in my contribution because when I entered this House I was a musician and had been a band leader for 18 or more years. Public service broadcasting has a duty and an obligation to create an opportunity, a shop window for artists. Private enterprise can do as it wishes because it comprises commercial entities. However, the public service broadcaster should always be in a position to give young talent and existing entertainers a right to live and have their wares aired in their own country. In the days of sponsored programmes, there was the single, album and power play of the week on Radio One. Now, for reasons best known to us all, they no longer exist on that station or on 2FM. I say this as one of the largest and best supporters in the commercial world of local record company people and publishers.

Everyone with whom I have been associated over the years will know I have been a committed supporter of radio and television under the auspices of RTÉ and will continue to be so. In an effort to be helpful, perhaps something could be done on behalf of the many hundreds of artists, songwriters, publishers and record company people who depend on public service broadcasting. Perhaps the RTÉ Authority, the director general and the controller of programmes could re-examine this issue to see if the single, album and power play of the week could be brought back. We could then develop a business. If there was an opportunity for a young, talented person from Clare or Westmeath who makes an album to display that album and sell 30,000 or 40,000 units, that would also give an opportunity to the recording studio in Scarriff, Headford or wherever. The people behind these studios would make a great contribution. Ten jobs created in Castlepollard or Scarriff are as important as 100 jobs in a larger town.

I thank RTÉ television for the wonderful programmes it has produced down through the years, "The Late Late Show", Donncha Ó Dulaing's programmes and Liam Ó Murchú's "Trom agus Éadrom". Many wonderful people have been involved in helping Irish artists. "Open House" looks after the interests of Irish artists now.

Many contributions have been and will continue to be made about RTÉ during this debate and the debate on Committee Stage. The success of "Riverdance", Lord of the Dance, U2, Enya, Clannad and the Corrs has given us massive credibility as a young vibrant nation. They have been wonderful ambassadors. People providing middle of the road music have also been very successful. We have achieved an enormous amount, but upcoming artists will also need support.

Radio 1 provides speech only programmes from 8 a.m. to 3.30 p.m. when Ronan Collins's show comes on air. Lyric FM is a wonderful station. RTÉ radio does not broadcast programmes which play music aimed at people in the 35 year old and upwards bracket. I played a major part in the introduction of local radio licences. Local radio stations have made a marvellous contribution to the airwaves. I wish to pay tribute to local Radio 3 in the midlands and all other local radio stations for their commitment to local matters. They have a tremendous advantage in being local and that is the reason they are so enormously successful. Surely RTÉ can broadcast music which promotes Irish artists from 8 a.m. until 3 p.m, which is prime time listening.

Compliments are deserved on everything that has been done to date. Lyric FM has a listenership of 3%. If it broadcasts a middle of the road music segment for two hours, that percentage might increase to approximately 20% or 25 %. I say that as an advertiser and a person who has been associated with this business for a long time. Those in the 35 years of age plus group are starved of music.

I am ware there is a time limit for contributions – I proposed it myself. I look forward to enhancing this debate. I congratulate local radio for their contribution to Irish broadcasting.

Acting Chairman (Mr. R. Kiely)

Senator Cassidy is breaking his own rules.

Mr. Cassidy

I thank the Chair for his understanding. We are in a very healthy position to provide choice in radio listening. I support the Minister's view that it is time RTÉ received an increase in licence fees.

Mr. Norris

I would like to share my time with Senator O'Toole.

Acting Chairman

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Norris

It is always a pleasure to welcome this Minister to the House and to listen to the Leader's contribution. However, I must disagree with him on one matter. I think he should declare an interest in this debate – perhaps he has, he usually does. I would like to nail my colours firmly to the mast in that Lyric FM is one of the best things that has ever happened in wireless broadcasting in Ireland. It is very important that we maintain our high quality of music and it is also educational. Many people who may not have suspected they had an interest in classical music have been led to it by the superb quality of broadcasting at that radio station. Of course one would receive more advertisers if one played Foster and Allen's music but I think there is another place for that.

I will not waste time attacking Rupert Murdoch – the House is aware of my views in that regard. I am delighted a bulwark to protect the integrity of our national airwaves has been negotiated into this Bill and I am very pleased it provides a clear definition of public service broadcasting. That is badly needed because there is a great deal of pap out there. I am currently suffering a little from insomnia and have been watching the television from my bed zapping from station to station. Horrendous programmes are being broadcast and we are subjected to the vulgarity being induced from highly intelligent people such as Jerry Springer. This is cascading in, we cannot defend against it by jamming but we can at least provide an intelligent alternative.

We can produce wonderful programmes here. I am very proud of much of what has already been produced. I am thankful we are now employing people like Gerry Stembridge. Half of the broadcasters in the BBC, such as Terry Wogan etc. are of Irish origin. Let us use our own talent. I do not think RTÉ should be exclusively driven by contract, that is neurotic. Artists should be nurtured in RTÉ.

I am also happy to see that provision is being made for subtitling. I have been approached by people in this regard who are hard of hearing. I do not think the provision is strong enough and it is my intention to table an amendment to it. I hope the Government will be in a position to accept it.

The question of accessibility throughout Ireland to RTÉ programmes which reflect Irish culture has been raised. It is not technically possible to receive the RTÉ signal throughout the entire island. If we are serious about creating harmony – I am not talking about political union – we need to achieve this degree of penetration so that we at least hear what the other is saying. It is very important that we do this.

I would like to draw attention to the questions raised by Muiris Mac Conghal in an article in The Irish Times in which he says this Bill is only of interest to broadcasting organisations, it is very narrow, it is a turf war between different Ministries and the selling off of Cablelink. I am sure the Minister is aware of those arguments.

I strongly support TG4. I will not say, tá an Gaeilge go maith agam agus ba mhaith liom an Gaeilge a labhairt go minic sa Seanad because it simply would not be true. I possess a cúpla focal of buntús comhrá which I like trotting out sometimes. It is a mark of our definitive cultural status. We have an opportunity, with the establishment of digital terrestrial television, to improve the TG4 signal which is not universal. We must undertake to ensure that it is available throughout Ireland. There is a strong argument for it to include a must carry status on MMDS. It has car ried out a survey in this regard and is aware that it is not covered.

The question also arises regarding TG4 as an independent entity. I have received a briefing on this. It contains a certain amount of pious aspiration saying things like, "we are going to do this". Let us set a date for the establishment of TG4 as an independent separate entity. We should set out clear milestones so that we know the way in which we are advancing. We should state clearly what Exchequer funding will be provided, otherwise it will remain in the realms of a pious aspiration. We ought to receive guidelines in this regard.

I welcome this legislation which should be used, if we are serious about supporting the language, in a more vigorous manner to support TG4. TG4 may never be self-sufficient and may require Government funding. There is an appetite out there for the language. One only has to look a short distance from here to see two or three Irish speaking cafés, Dáil Bia and Trí-D – there is a nice little bilingual pun there. We have moved away from the old-fashioned idea of rejecting a vision of Ireland with which the Minister's grandfather was associated. I sometimes wonder why. The notion that is pilloried about healthy active young people being able to enjoy themselves in a decent relationship with their environment is not laughable. I do not know why it was ever pilloried. It is something we can return to.

Even though it was purported that I had been sentenced to death by the Provisional IRA, I strongly supported the abolition of section 31 as it was not useful in terms of civil rights and should have gone. There are other ways of protecting ourselves against this insidious material and the best way is the kind of argument we traditionally make here. We are not babies and do not need to be protected in this way, which is a violation of civil rights.

Mr. O'Toole

This welcome Bill is moving forward well. I do not have significant problems with the issues it raises, though I will also be tabling an amendment on subtitling. That is an important issue as broadcasting services should recognise the requirements of those with special needs and respond accordingly and proactively.

Regarding digital broadcasting, there has been a huge debate over the past two years about masts. I made the same point when we started debating mobile phones many years ago: why did we not skip a generation and go straight to satellite? Why do we need masts at all, apart from having a backup system? Why do we not concentrate on satellites, which means no unsightly masts or rows with local communities or environmental groups? We should use geostationary satellites, as there are now backup systems and we would not have to rely on just one and could move the service from one satellite to another if change was needed. That would bring a welcome improvement to the countryside.

Is there a significant difference between terrestrial digital broadcasting and satellite digital broadcasting? If the Bill explains any such difference, perhaps the Minister will point it out to me, but as far as I know there is none. I am particularly interested in technical issues such as the range of digital terrestrial broadcasting as opposed to conventional terrestrial broadcasting. Is there a difference in range? Could one satellite cover the whole island and much more? I raise the issue with reference to those living in remote areas and reception black spots, as satellites would solve their problems.

The future of broadcasting will be much more specialised. I do not watch a lot of television, but I have had digital television for a number of years and it is very useful for information. I see no future for MMDS, no more than I saw a future for deflector or mast systems; the whole system should be satellite based. The joy of digital broadcasting is that if someone is interested in money, there are four or five different finance stations: the Money Channel, the Financial Times Channel, the Economist Channel and CNBC. They are available on digital television at the touch of a button. If someone is interested in news, there is ITN News, Sky News, CNN and several others. There are also five MTV channels. One may ask why there is a need for five such channels, but it is good to have them because that is how people learn to use broadcasting; they can select the kind of music they want.

Digital television also includes the National Geographic Channel, the History Channel, the Biography Channel and drama channels, which give a great choice. A new Arts Channel which began last month would address many of the issues raised by Senator Norris. I made a point of watching that channel last weekend while preparing for this debate and it showed some extraordinarily good shows. There are also movie and sports channels available.

We discussed pay-per-view at length with the Minister some time ago and welcomed her protection of the annual events of various national sporting institutions. That was very important, but whether people like it, pay-per-view is the future as long as it is affordable. Fans of Celtic and Rangers had to pay £12 to watch a football game on television at home, which is outrageous, but people do not find it outrageous to pay £3 for a film because it compares with going to the local video shop. We have to have a rational view on this.

Tá an-jab ar siúl ag TG4 agus tá a lán de na cláir atá ar fáil uathu i bhfad níos fearr ná mar a cheap aon duine againn go mbéadh. Is cuimhin liom a bheith ag plé Teilifís na Gaeilge anseo le deich mbliain anuas. Is cuimhin liom féin agus Éamon Ó Cuív ag cur brú ar Charlie Haughey na blianta ó shin chun £5 milliún a chur ar fáil chun an tseirbhís nua a chur ar bun. Is cuimhin liom, go mór mór an bhliain seo caite, go raibh clár amháin acu, "Rothaí Mór an tSaoil", mar shampla, a chuaigh go gach cúinne den domhain, i ndáiríre.

Tá an talent acu siúd chun jab an-mhaith a dhéanamh ar son na teanga agus ar son cultúr na tíre. Tá sé an-tábhachtach go mbeadh an tacaíocht ann dóibh.

In that situation the State channels can compete efficiently, effectively and competitively with what is provided anywhere else.

Mr. Farrell

I wish to share my time with Senator Ó Fearghail.

Acting Chairman

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Farrell

Ar dtús ba mhaith liom fáilte a chur roimh an Aire agus roimh an mBille. Ba mhaith liom cúpla focal a rá faoin raidió áitiúil.

Local radio has done great work and deserves our congratulations. The difference between local radio and national broadcasters is that when one is on local radio one is allowed to say what one has to say. Unfortunately, national radio and television sometimes carry comment on what different Ministers have said. It is sad to see two or three journalists interviewing each other about what they think a Minister will say. That should be discouraged. We should wait until someone says something, then their comments can be discussed.

There should also be more balance in programmes from the national broadcaster, though the Minister cannot do anything about that. A recent programme about St. Theresa's Gardens was completely one-sided, showing only the bad side of the area. There are two good football pitches in the area as well as good social workers and voluntary workers, but that good work was ignored. The cameras should show both sides, as what is broadcast is taken as the norm by those watching. They are of the view that that is what the whole area is like. Credit should be given to the many people working hard to improve life in the area. Praise should also be given to successive Governments, councils and health boards for investing money in the area. There should be more balance and both sides should be shown. A whole area should not be condemned because of what one small section of the population is doing.

The media can be harsh about politicians. I am not worried about fair comment, but there is cynicism about the political system because of the manner in which politicians' actions are fed to the public. There are many good things said both here and in the Dáil, but a report is crushed into three or four minutes. If someone says something daft or foolish, that is what will be highlighted. Senator Manning made a positive speech, but there will not be one word about it on the national airwaves. The media should adopt a more positive approach. We need a national ser vice, but they should give a fairer crack of the whip and report both sides of a story.

The media also seem to be anti-mast, but we all want a mobile phone. Every parent in the country will tell you how great it is that their children have mobile phones. They can ring home if they cannot get a lift or if something is wrong. We cannot have mobile phones and services if we do not have the infrastructure. The infrastructure is a mast. I believe masts will be short lived and that over the next five to ten years a completely satellite infrastructure will be put in place.

In the short term we must put up with masts. The media encourages the perception that masts are deadly. If that were true everyone out in Montrose should be ten years dead. There are more aerials and high-voltage cables there than in any other part of Ireland, yet it is also the most valuable property in the country. I think we should therefore ask the media to be more broadminded on this subject. I would like the Minister to do something about it.

I understand that An Post has the obligation of collecting television licence fees and is not doing it. About a third of people do not pay due to the bad collection system. I believe the Minister should give the responsibility to RTÉ and let it tender for an agent to collect the money. It is scandalous that there are so many houses and apartment complexes being built yet the number of licences is not increasing. I ask the Minister to look at the area of licence fee collection and return it to RTÉ which can in turn delegate it to the private sector.

Mr. Ó Fearghail

Ba mhaith liom fíorchaoin fáilte a chur roimh an Aire chuig an Teach. I acknowledge the generous manner in which the Minister has given her time to the House to debate this matter.

I recognise the importance of the Bill, given the magnitude of the influence radio and television have in our lives and on society as a whole. I also acknowledge that the huge array of new channels that will flow from the enactment of this legislation will be predominantly commercial. I welcome the fact that this Bill puts in place a framework within which those channels will be transmitted. It is more important now than ever that this legislation redefine and support the public broadcasting remit of RTÉ.

Other Senators in excellent contributions explored the current performance of RTÉ in pursuit of its public service remit across its two television stations and its two principal radio services. Notwithstanding the general high standards which prevail in RTÉ I share the concern that was eloquently expressed by Senator Paschal Mooney regarding the current scheduling on Network 2. Questions were raised about the absence of adequate daily current affairs, educational or informative programming on 2FM. This is a point of particular significance given the huge share of the young audience that that radio station has.

RTÉ has quite rightly involved itself in a nationwide consultation process and is seeking a licence fee increase. Given the strong commitment in this House to the concept of public service broadcasting I am sure that after due consideration every Member will support RTÉ in its request for furthur funding, as l am sure the Minister will. If we are to have a quality service that service must be resourced.

What RTÉ is learning in its consultation process across the country and what we are saying here is that what is wanted is more quality programming. Let the station have the self confidence, the courage of its convictions if you will, to produce more of its own material. It should develop on the work being done regionally where there is a network of RTÉ units in places like Cork, Galway, Sligo, Athlone, Waterford and Dundalk. What we want to see is more programming of the type that we see in "Ear to the Ground,""Léargas" and "Nationwide."

We have identified the fact that standards are generally high in RTÉ but what of complaints? What of the Broadcasting Complaints Commission? I note that in the nine years up to early 2000 only about 80 complaints were processed by the commission in relation to RTÉ. Some 83% of those complaints were rejected, yet four out of five complaints against the independent stations were upheld. I wonder if RTÉ has reached a state of near perfection or is the Broadcasting Complaints Commission under resourced? Given the breadth and scale of material that will be broadcast into this country in the years ahead would the Minister tell us how the commission will be resourced?

Ba mhaith liom tacú le gach rud eile atá ráite ag na Seanadóirí eile. Irish language speakers must be very proud of what is being done by TG4. It has proved its worth. It has become a resource not just for schools, language enthusiasts and gaeilgeoirí. It is a major resource for the host of young families who have decided to educate their children through the medium of Irish. It brings the language to life for many young people living in communities where the language would not otherwise be heard. I endorse the call to give must-carry status on MMDS systems to TG4. I also seek assurances in relation to the continuance of funding for this station which is doing a superb job.

In the area of local radio an absolutely superb job is being done. I see local radio as an important tool for local and community development. That they are is through the medium of the 20% news and current affairs not through the provision of wall to wall music. If that 20% demand was not there we would not be getting that particular service. I commend those who have been involved in ensuring that that is the way in which local radio has evolved. Maybe the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland would look at the pay and conditions of those who provide that 20%. I understand the conditions are poor. Working hours are long and remuneration is not great in the local radio sector.

Mr. D. Cregan

The Minister is very welcome. I will not go into the detail and technicalities of modern broadcasting nor would I be able to. I would be very conscious of how multi-channel is now dictating with regard to television and local radio. There is Chorus, for example, who are now taking over in Munster and will be based in Limerick. When I look at the Cork multi-channel situation and the deal done by the State to give them the benefits I often wonder about the line we took.

I would be socialistic when it comes to RTÉ. There are four to five acres of equipment sheds in Donnybrook that in my opinion should be working a lot better. I think we should have total control in respect of all channels and I do not see why RTÉ could not have been handling them. They had the equipment and the facilities to be able to do that. More could be done by RTÉ, given the number of people working there, particularly in the Dublin area. We should be promoting RTÉ more. We cannot do this if it is a contradiction in terms.

With regard to local radio, we are well served in Cork by private stations. The way they work with the small numbers they have makes us wonder why it takes RTÉ so much effort to operate. The amount of money that was put into equipment in Cork that is not being used mystifies me and I do not understand why Cork local radio station had to be closed. Yet private local stations can make profits in that region by providing a service RTÉ could very easily provide. Is RTÉ examining what is happening locally? Other Senators have also raised that point. RTÉ's coverage is only relevant to and oriented towards the Dublin area. I am not being biased, although I am a Cork man and why would I not be biased about Cork? When I travel to Dublin by car I constantly listen to RTÉ and if the listener phoning in is not from Inchicore, he or she is from Templeogue or some other area in the Dublin region. It appears nothing in that area is being done in the provinces. That is a big mistake.

It is a mistake to close down local stations. We, as taxpayers, provide the funding for such facilities and then they become non-events in places such as Limerick, Tralee and Cork in particular. Cork has two stations, which were built at an enormous cost, but RTÉ is not using them to their potential. For example, it broadcasts only about two or three programmes from the Cork region every week, although programmes may be broadcast from that region on a particular Friday. Senator Mooney will be aware that the late show, which runs from 2 a.m. to 6 a.m., is broadcast from the Cork station, for which I thank the Minister. Probably nine-tenths of the nation are asleep when it is broadcast. While public representatives like myself travelling from Dublin would hear the programme which I enjoy, I do not know who else would.

While stations such as 96 FM and 103 FM produce great programmes, RTÉ used to produce excellent programmes in Cork. However, it did not get enough air time. The calibre of RTÉ staff in Cork at the time was excellent and they opened up debate on many issues. Senator Farrell made a good point, that when a listener from Dublin phones in to a radio programme, he or she is asked only for a comment, not his or her view on the subject being discussed. Listeners who phone in to Cork local radio can speak up, get replies to their questions and there is a good debate on the various issues.

There are not many local affairs programmes on RTÉ. The local affairs programme introduced by the broadcaster after the news on RTÉ is excellent. There should be many more such programmes produced.

I am concerned when I think of the amount of money we, the people, have put into two buildings to provide broadcasting facilities in Cork, which are now virtually bird sanctuaries. That is not the way to move forward and I will defy anyone to say otherwise. Millions of pounds was spent on those facilities and in other areas in Cork by RTÉ, but, as the Minister knows, they are not being used.

The station provided no more than four years ago in Fr. Mathew Street in Cork is great, but I do not know what it is being used for. One would not get a second cheque for it, if that happened in the private sector, as there is no logic to it. I would like the Minister to explain why local radio in Cork has been eliminated. While Cork local radio was popular, it had only a limited number of hours on air and was not allowed to compete with private stations such as 96FM and others. I am not knocking 96FM, it produces great programmes, but people in Cork do not have access to local current affairs or local news programmes, although they hear a good deal of music on radio. I am not saying that there should not be as many music programmes on radio. The 96FM music programme on Sunday morning is excellent. All of Cork listens to it. RTÉ in Cork could be producing that type of programme, as it has the necessary staff and ability to do it.

I am mystified by the amount of building taking place in RTÉ in Donnybrook and the manner in which its facilities in other parts of the country have been downgraded, a matter on which I seek clarification. I do not know how many producers or staff in general are employed in RTÉ, but I would like to know what they are doing in providing local coverage in my area.

Mr. Mooney

They are not an endangered species.

Mr. D. Cregan

I appreciate that. I would not like anyone who has the ability to produce or direct not to be employed, but I would like them to be employed throughout the country. I do not want them to be employed only to facilitate the transmission of a listener from Inchicore who phones in to Joe Duffy's radio programme or a listener from Greystones who phones in to Mr. Kenny's radio programme. They should facilitate listeners from Portloaise to the southern end of the country. It is as if those listeners are not there. They are taxpayers who must pay increases in licence fees and listen to programmes orientated and relevant only to the Dublin region from which they do not get local information. I am not jealous. It is most unfair that RTÉ local radio coverage was eliminated in Limerick and Tralee.

The Irish television service in the west is doing well. I wish it well, although I do not watch it that often. I have no hesitation in saying that the satellite stations, such as Sky, are providing viewers with a choice of programmes, but RTÉ could have paid Sky and other such stations for the programmes they broadcast. Why was that not done? There are four acres of land in Donnybrook, parts of which have probably never been walked on. There are lamps in RTÉ which are probably covered in cobwebs and have never been lit. I am not being disrespectful, but factual. There are parts of RTÉ which have not been visited in a while. I will take that comment back, if I am wrong. I hope such areas are being used more than in the past. I do not know how many people are directly and indirectly employed by RTÉ.

I listened to a point made by one of our best, Gay Byrne, who when asked in an interview last week why things are changing, admitted that local radio is locally orientated, that RTÉ is not the station it was 20 or 30 years ago. That is an admittance it was not able to handle local radio, nor was it prepared to fight to provide that service. I would not give in that easily and ask RTÉ to do likewise. As it had a facility before other stations, it should have used it to its potential. When 96FM first started it operated from a bungalow in Whitechurch. When Lord Mayor of Cork in 1991 I went to that bungalow to make a broadcast. If I had to go to RTÉ to make a broadcast, I would have to go through many offices and rooms of cable. 96FM's premises are no bigger now and it is doing extremely well, as are other local stations. I cannot understand why RTÉ has withdrawn its local radio service from the area. If one were to see the equipment in the facility in Father Mathew Street, one would think one was in Titusville, in Florida, from where the satellite stations operate. There is almost as much equipment in the facilities in Cork, but they are not being used. Why is RTÉ not making more use of its existing facilities in this area? Why is it not availing more of the skills of the exceptionally good staff it employs? I could name some exceptional individuals for whom Cork would be very relevant but are not being used there. Why is it not competing more with other private radio stations? Why is it afraid to compete with those it considers can pro vide a better service, but which cannot? RTÉ and its technical staff can be very good.

Mr. R. Kiely

I welcome the Minister and the opportunity to speak on the Bill. I listened with interest to Senator Cregan. While he accepts that Dublin is the capital, we, in Munster, especially in Limerick, recognise that Cork is the capital of Munster.

Radio and television broadcasting is an important service, especially for those confined to their homes. I am aware that RTÉ is seeking an increase in its licence fee, but I would like to see an improvement in the quality of its programmes. Not enough sport is broadcast live. I mentioned on the Order of Business that a meeting in Down Royal some time ago was transmitted live on Channel 4 and a French television station, but could not be transmitted live on an Irish television station. More sports, especially field events, should be transmitted live on television. If that were the case, the increase in the licence fee would be justifiable.

I never featured much on television and radio, unlike some of my colleagues. My former neighbour, Nollaig Ó Gadhra, who lives in Galway, produced a series called "My Home Place" and he featured our native village in one programme. He interviewed me on that occasion and I have appeared on television on a number of occasions through my involvement in the GAA. I appeared on Liam Ó Murchú's programme "Up for the Game" and it was an honour. Communities are proud to see local people on television. More ordinary people should feature on television because it would encourage greater viewing figures. There is a good audience but everything should be done to improve numbers.

I recall the advent of television in the early 1960s. There was no television in my house at the time but a neighbour had one. He was very generous as he allowed us to watch television programmes in his house. Many people became addicted to television but as time went on they grew out of the addiction. They would even watch the advertisements but that has changed.

Pirate radio stations were also broadcasting but the Government decided to set up the Irish Radio and Television Commission to grant licences to local radio franchises. Given the scenario in Limerick, what power has the commission? A licence was granted to a station in Limerick and it was then threatened with the suspension of its licence because, according to the Independent Radio and Television Commission, the station was not complying with the regulations. I was asked if I could do something. I made representations to members of the Independent Radio and Television Commission but they said there was no way they could allow the licensee to continue broadcasting and his licence was suspended. It meant nothing because the station is still broadcasting. I was asked to partake in a programme but I would not do so because I thought it was illegal. However, every other politician in Limerick has featured on the station since then.

Mr. Mooney

That is terrible.

Mr. R. Kiely

A licence was then granted to 95FM but RLO is still broadcasting. It provides a better service than 95FM. What power has the Independent Radio and Television Commission to regulate licences when that can happen? I have nothing against the holders of the 95FM licence. I spoke to people working for RLO over the past few days and told them I would mention their position during this debate. One must have power if one is to regulate. There are other radio stations operating in Limerick without licences. What power will the commission to be set up under this legislation have to deal with these matters?

I do not want these people to be put off the air, but one radio licence is enough in Limerick. Senator Cregan referred to RTÉ being put off the air in Cork. This is a serious problem which must be considered. The two radio stations in Limerick are providing a good service. RLO, which operates without a licence, is giving a much better service. The draws for the GAA championship were made at a county board meeting, at which I was present, on Tuesday night and they were transmitted live by RLO. What regulations cover such licences?

Mr. Ross

Like other Members, I have several interests to declare. A significant amount of my family income comes from RTÉ, although not a significant enough amount.

Mr. Mooney

Circumstances have changed since I was there.

Mr. Ross

Significant for me is different from significant for Senator Mooney. I earn a portion of my income on an irregular basis from Today FM. I hope the House will bear that in mind during my contribution. I will try to get all the Members on "Playback" on Saturday morning if they do so.

There has been too great an emphasis in this debate on RTÉ. RTÉ is the monolith which dominates broadcasting but we have not heard much about TV3, Today FM and the other independent broadcasters. I pay tribute to the independent stations, particularly TV3 and Today FM, which have managed somehow to break RTÉ's monopoly. I say that in no sense of hostility to RTÉ. However, it is a good, brave and laudable achievement to have been able to break into that market against the odds. The road for TV3 was extremely long and difficult to break into this market but it has done so successfully. The result has been, contrary to many predictions, that there has been a growth in the number of people watching Irish stations. People may say that quality of programming has improved but the result is that the universe has grown and that should be welcomed.

Having listened to and been lobbied by both sides on this legislation, both have spoken highly of the Minister, and that is a great achievement. They see faults and difficulties in the legislation but they see it as an honest attempt to lay a playing field which is level. That is quite a tribute. However, they have criticisms which I will voice later. They feel that at least the legislation was drafted with motives in mind which were not nakedly political or biased. That is unusual and I congratulate the Minister on that.

I wish to voice one or two of those criticisms. First, there is a problem with the RTÉ Authority. RTÉ's problems stem from the way it is appointed. The history of appointments to the authority has been deplorable. There is absolutely no doubt – there are always howls of protest when I say this – that political parties from both sides of the House have been wantonly political in the appointments to the board of the authority. The most recent board does not err badly in this regard. There are not such obvious people with party political affiliations as there have been in the past but there are still some. There are people who stood for various elections under party banners and others who would not have been chosen unless they had a loyalty to a party.

I cannot normally identify people who belong or have affiliations to other political parties except the Government in power. I can on this occasion and this is worthy. The fact that this Minister has behaved in a highly commendable way, and she has erred maybe in one or two cases very obviously here, is a tribute. It should not be taken because it has happened on this occasion that it will not in the future be abused.

RTÉ authorities have in the past been abused. They have been abused because people have been put on them because they have been seen to be 'safe' by the Government. They are people they can telephone and say they do not want something on and they can bring pressure to bear concerning various political programmes. There has been a history of this and there have been high profile incidents of it. The fact this Minister has not brought pressure does not mean it will not happen again. It is certain to and the next authority will again be riddled with political puppets.

The RTÉ Authority should be taken outside the political arena. I have the highest respect for Mr. Paddy Wright, who was appointed by this Minister as chairman of the authority. I have every reason to believe that had the authority been chosen by a non politician he would have been found worthy of appointment. He is exactly the sort of person we need at the moment because we need private sector ethos to be injected into a public sector company. It would have been better, however, if that appointment had a different source. That is the point I am trying to make. The Minister might look at ways whereby she and her successors can at least be at arms length from this particular procedure. There should be at least a layer separating the Minister, as in the appointment of judges.

The issue of the licence fee is dominating the debate. I do not believe there will be a licence fee increase before a general election. People do not want to have to pay an extra £50 and politicians do not want to impose increases. It is a political decision. Is it fair to TV3 that RTÉ should get another subsidy of £50 per household? Leaving aside the issue of whether a licence fee or public service broadcasting or even a national broadcaster is either necessary or a good thing, if it is necessary to charge an extra £50 we should know where every single penny is going. We do not know and it is not required. That is not fair to TV3. TV3 is happy to compete with RTÉ but it does not know what it is competing with because this money will go into the pot. Some of it will go towards the orchestra, some to minority programmes, some to other public broadcasting areas, but we will not get a full account.

What we ought to have is TV3 competing with a rigidly defined commercial sector in RTÉ. There should be no overlap. RTÉ will take this money and we will never get an account of it. So TV3 will be competing with a subsidised part of RTÉ. Can the Minister respond to that? That is what will happen. The definitions are not in the Bill in the crisp form they ought to be. It is not fair if the competitors do not know what they are competing with or are competing with a subsidised element. If there is any overlap between the commercialised and subsidised side then the competitors are not being asked to compete on a level playing field. To TV3's credit, they did not object to a licence fee but they do want to know exactly where it is going so they can compete happily. Let RTÉ have this licence fee but let us see where it is going. It is only then that we can question the whole fundamental area of public service broadcasting.

What is public service broadcasting? I know what I think it is. It is whatever the Minister or anybody who makes a decision thinks it is. It is the most subjective and objectionable phrase and everybody's pet hobby horse. We have heard Senators today say they think some programme or other is good and we should spend more money on this or that. That is public sector broadcasting. It is whatever whoever is in power thinks it is and thinks is good for the people of Ireland. It is a very paternalistic type of attitude. It is a Minister saying we should have an orchestra. Why the hell should we have an orchestra if the people do not want one? Why should we have minority programmes if the people really do not want them and they are so minority that nobody wants to watch them? They are broadcast because, apparently, they are good for us. Who makes that decision? It is a subjective decision made at the top.

I do not say we should not have subjective decisions because there are some elements in our society we have to make decisions about. We cannot have criminals, subversives or paramilitaries running riot on the airwaves. Obviously we have to make fundamental decisions but within broad parameters.

We should look again at the question of public service broadcasting because it is open to political abuse and abuse by those who believe that they are right. That is happening in RTÉ. I have no doubt that RTÉ was responsible for the passage of the divorce referendum because people there have a certain view on that. Every programme that I have listened to over the last ten years on that issue has been biased in favour of divorce. Is that fair? Of course not, but the culture in RTÉ is pro divorce, pro liberal and pro what they term politically correct. That has now become public service broadcasting. We must ask if that sort of culture is something we should support with the licence fee. It is an insoluble question but one we should continually ask. At the moment this licence fee comes under the control of very few people who use it to push their own views and minority interests on the people. We should have full accountability on the licence fee.

What is meant by a high quality programme? It is what you and I like or what some middle class member of a political party thinks is good for everybody else, and so the Irish people must be educated up to high quality programmes. There is no such thing as high quality programmes. It is intellectual snobbery which means nothing at all. I question what public service broadcasting is.

We should ask a question about the regulator. I am sure the Minister will enlighten me as to why there is not a single regulator for all television stations. We have the Independent Radio and Television Commission on one side and the Minister on the other, and this is one of the roots of the problem. There are two television stations answering to different authorities.

A politician's loyalty is to politics, political survival, popularity and many other things. The Minister makes decisions for one station and ultimately the buck stops at the Minister's door, even if it is a very hands-off Minister. The Minister can sack the RTÉ Authority and this has happened in the past. On the other hand, the Independent Radio and Television Commission controls TV3 and other media. This means that different cultures and different standards pertain and infiltrate the different stations. This is very unfair to TV3 which comes under more stringent standard rules and it is unfair to RTÉ because it comes under more stringent political pressure.

Ms Ormonde

I am pleased to see the Minister in the House for this debate. I am confused as to what areas should be prioritised. Many important points have been made this morning and the Minister seems very intent on taking on board all those points. The Senators' contributions have been superb and I may not have much more to add.

We are in a changing world and digital television is helping to bring about these changes in television broadcasting. This growth will certainly increase the number of commercial stations. Television is a powerful medium in terms of information and public opinion. I am worried that with this huge growth we may not be impartial and it may be difficult to maintain standards. Senator Shane Ross has referred to quality of programming and I will refer to this in another way. New technology such as the Internet means that it may not be possible to prevent undesirable content being viewed by the consumer. How can the consumer be educated to recognise good and bad programmes? I do not mean censorship but rather education and that is the core of my argument.

Senator Ross also mentioned that the quality of material available may not improve and that there are real fears the quality of programming will diminish in the new world of broadcasting. We have examples in the United States and in countries in Europe where the material programmed is not intellectually challenging. I am not an intellectual snob but I would not like to see some of the programmes from Europe, the United States and Australia dominating Irish screens in the future. The Minister has indicated this concern in her speech. She said it is important to get the balance right between protecting and enhancing the needs of Irish society in terms of programme content and the expectations of those working in the broadcast sector with regard to commercial exploitation of radio and television. I agree with those views. We need to attain that balance. I welcome section 24 of the Bill which provides for complaints to the Broadcasting Complaints Commission with regard to breaches of the code of taste and decency for programme material.

RTÉ has delivered a service to the State for many years with current affairs, drama, comedy and news programmes. Its programmes opened Ireland to the world. We have benefited greatly from this service and I compliment RTÉ.

I am concerned about the power of journalism and journalists. Are journalists impartial? Are they operating to another agenda when they conduct interviews? I referred to people in RTÉ when I asked those questions yesterday. I recall George Lee speaking on radio after the budget speech last year when he turned the whole country against individualisation. This was before the public understood the concept of individualisation or how it would be implemented. Here was a commentator who personalised the issue, for whatever reason. Why should RTÉ be supported if that is its agenda? I want a public broadcasting service. We need a national service to reflect our culture and our value systems and if RTÉ pro vides that service, then I will support funding for it in the future.

I am pleased that the Minister has given a statutory basis to TG4. This shows the Government's commitment to the Irish language and to the promotion of our heritage and culture. I welcome that. Irish radio and television services will be available worldwide and that should be seen as an opportunity for many Irish people to claim their heritage. It will also provide a receptive new market for broadcasters.

RTÉ has attempted over the years to provide cultural and educational programming. Links have now been established with schools such as Ballyfermot Senior College and Coláiste Dulaigh, where there is a very good local community broadcasting station. The Bill has acknowledged this link with communities. School students should be made aware of good quality programmes and how to evaluate them. Media studies are now part of the leaving certificate curriculum. This should be extended so that it becomes broader than just a literature critique. Closer links between school and community, and teacher and parent should be encouraged.

Last year the Government invested in technology in schools and colleges so that we would be up to date with e-commerce and electronic information. Everything should start in our schools. Although we cannot stop the proliferation of programmes coming to our country, we can show children how to assess what is good and bad. This must be done in schools. The RTÉ Authority must help young people to make judgments. The future growth of stations will present dangers.

Television is the most important organ of public opinion and it has enormous impact on society. We will destroy our ethos, culture, heritage and language if we do not get this Bill right. We will subject ourselves to low standards in all walks of life. The media have such an enormous impact on society that they must shape our future through education of our young people. This is landmark legislation in the history of Irish broadcasting. It will provide the framework for the future planning of RTÉ programming. It must reflect our cultures and values. The Minister's speech, which I have read in depth, showed that she understands these concerns. I am sure we will be protected in her hands.

Mr. Bonner

I welcome the Minister to the House, after a long delay in getting this Bill to both Houses. I am a member of the joint Oireachtas committee which spent over a year and a half debating the introduction of digital television and meeting the companies involved. The Office of the Director of Telecommunications Regulation did a lot of work on this last year and eventually licensed the deflector systems. The director intended that this Bill would be passed by the end of last December and that deflectors would be gone, but it is better late than never. I welcome the Bill as it primarily facilitates the introduction of digital terrestrial television.

Other items need to be addressed, particularly the expanded functions of the Independent Radio and Television Commission, including its name change to the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland. Local radio was an excellent introduction. Highland Radio, which serves Donegal and much of the North, is the most successful local radio station in Ireland. I compliment its directors and founders. People in every home in Donegal, particularly in the north of the county, listen to it. Highland Radio and Radio na Gaeltachta are the only radio stations listened to by the majority of the population of Donegal. The younger generation listen to the RTÉ stations and Today FM. Very few of those over the age of 30 listen to RTÉ. They prefer the local stations because of the local content, including music and news, provided by those stations. Only when I leave the county, and when Radio na Gaeltachta is dealing with areas such as Senator Tom Fitzgerald's part of the country, do I tune into a national broadcasting station.

I welcome the elimination of the levy on local radio stations. It will give them more funding to expand and improve their service. I also welcome the £500,000 provided to the broadcasting commission to assist with capital expenditure in local radio. There has been a lot of talk in recent years about the make-up of the board of the Independent Radio and Television Commission. It has been argued that it is more orientated towards urban than rural Ireland. Like Senator Ross, I am confused regarding the expanded functions of the broadcasting commission. I do not know whether the Office of the Director of Telecommunications Regulation or the commission will be in control. Perhaps the Minister will elaborate on that.

Licensed local radio stations undergo critical examination of their programme content. Illegal stations are still in operation. Highland Radio has informed me of its concerns on this matter, and I have written to both the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Local radio stations are losing both revenue and listeners. Illegal stations are not required to provide any content other than entertainment.

The Minister's memorandum states that she may set up a separate corporate body for TG4. I would like to see control of TG4 taken from RTÉ. TG4 has received unjustified criticism. Many people feel it should only promote the Irish language and broadcast Irish language programmes. It provides a great balance in its programmes, including re-runs of old GAA and soccer matches and its own news service. I watch TG4 news and I find that it mixes international and local news. A snowflake falling in Donnybrook would almost make the headlines on RTÉ. RTÉ would not mention that west Donegal was snowed in for a week, as was the case this year when the area had a month of solid frost.

As regards sports reporting, Donegal has to win the All-Ireland before it gets a headline on RTÉ.

Mr. Connor

Did the Senator's county ever win the All-Ireland ?

Mr. Bonner

More often than Monaghan has. If a player from Dublin, which is well down in the national league, hurts his toe, there is a headline on RTÉ about it.

TG4 has made up for deficiencies in RTÉ. TG4 often has interesting programmes on at night when there is nothing of interest on any of the six main channels. Cathal Goan, who is now with RTÉ, deserves to be complimented for his work in setting it up. Pól Ó Gallchóir, the present ceannaire of TG4, and the leas-ceannaire, deserve similar praise. The biggest problem they face is lack of finance. I hope the Minister can provide additional funds for TG4. I have spoken to Pádraig Ó Ciardha, the leas-ceannaire, about this problem. TV3 is also an excellent station, both in terms of its sport and current affairs programming. Many Irish speakers had no service from TG4 until the good work done by its head of reception, Tom McCarthy, and the same complaint applies to TV3. One of the biggest towns in Donegal, Ballybofey, still has great difficulty getting TV3.

The introduction of digital television will produce powerful commercial opportunities, not alone for the television companies but also for advertisers who use the service. It should be regulated properly, because television and radio broadcasting is an important means of communication and has great influence on how people think and operate.

I welcome the introduction of digital television, but the effect it can have on local communities and the services provided to them is important. When we met the different companies at the joint Oireachtas committee on the introduction of digital television there was no difficulty as to digital television in Donegal. There was a hectic battle three years ago at the time of the general election. I am best qualified to speak about that battle because I suffered most by not getting elected to the Dáil due to the victory of the single-issue deflector candidate. Despite talking to the Government, officials and our own party in the lead up to the election, nobody took the issue seriously except the people of Donegal.

Through the telecommunications regulator we eventually got a licensing system for deflector groups and when we were dealing with the matter at the joint Oireachtas committee I was excited at what I saw happening. RTÉ was to join up with a commercial company, Digico, to provide digital terrestrial television, which in Donegal is the only transmission service that will operate because of the mountain terrain. I was disappointed that this was held back and is now being shaped in a different direction.

RTÉ, much as I have criticised it, was the only company that provided services for Donegal. It set up a transmission structure which serviced just 30% of the population 30 years ago, but has developed and now serves between 95% and 98%. I was very excited that it was to provide the service, but this Bill will see another company take over the transmission service, with RTÉ having 28%. When RTÉ was lagging behind, it was the local community who set up piped television services initially, eventually changing over to the deflector system.

The regulator appreciated and accepted that legislation was deficient and that there was need and demand for deflector systems. The commercial companies, who have a job to do, came in heavy-handed and the deflectors were threatened and in some cases put off the air, particularly in the run-up to the last general election. The regulator has accepted that in her report but she did not listen to me, the only public representative to make a submission on the matter.

Due to the delay she has had to extend the licences for one year with the possibility of another year after that, but nowhere in this legislation is provision made for the small minority who cannot afford or receive digital television. If digital licences come in, the Minister must ensure that the deflector system remains in place. Deflectors will provide service for people who cannot afford digital, or who live in geographical pockets where the digital service cannot be received. This includes many areas in Donegal, particularly in the mountains.

The deflectors may become compatible with a digital system. The south and west coast have introduced a system from France that they hope will be licensed. To allow the analog and deflector systems to remain in place, as they have been for 30 years, is vital.

Mr. T. Fitzgerald

Cuirim fáilte fé leith roimh an Aire go dtí an Teach agus aontaím leis an mBille. Television and radio can be very dangerous in the hands of the wrong people. They can make or break a politician depending on its liking for him or her, and I agree with Senator Ross in his views on media coverage of the divorce referendum.

It is important that programmes are edited carefully, especially in the context of future referenda, but I foresee RTÉ going in one direction on the abortion issue. This has to be played straight down the middle. The Seanad has a Cathaoirleach who gives fair play to both sides, and I hope that RTÉ gives fair play to both sides in any future referendum. I could be wrong, but I feel that its views are already set in a particular way on the abortion issue. It is definite that the RTÉ view was that divorce must come in.

What RTÉ should do is project the views of the people. Local opinion is broadcast by Radio Kerry, which attracts probably the biggest listenership in its broadcast area. The broadcasters emphasise the point, when they introduce pro grammes with the words "Guth na Ríochta"–"The Voice of the Kingdom". It is not the voice of the commentators which matters, because they listen to everybody, no matter what opinion is voiced. The lot comes out, and if you have a complaint against the station, it will be dealt with immediately. It is impossible to contact RTÉ with a complaint, although I will not keep knocking the service. I am very proud of RTÉ and its achievements and we should support the Broadcasting Bill in every aspect.

Everyone does not get the programmes they are looking for. There are people who sit in front of the television from when it starts in the morning and they want their programmes – and only their programmes – to run until midnight. Many people were disappointed because of "Coronation Street". I got drunk that night. I was delighted to see it go. My wife and my mother-in-law always had to change over to it regardless of what was on. The droning music got on my nerves. However, it was two to one and I had to concede.

Senator Mooney has just come in. I spent many pleasurable hours listening to his programme. I would say that to Senator Mooney whether he were in this House or not. He filled a particular gap that has not been filled since. "Riverdance" and its impact were mentioned earlier. A number of artists were introduced on different television and radio shows went on to become popular. While Senator Mooney, with his particular country and western programme, did play plenty of music from singers outside Ireland, he also was quick to introduce new Irish singers. I am not saying to take Senator Mooney back; I am saying a programme like that—

Mr. Mooney

Why not?

Mr. D. Cregan

Why not is right.

Mr. T. Fitzgerald

Why not indeed. A programme like that is still needed in RTÉ. "Trom agus Éadrom" was mentioned and that was my favourite programme. I used to love Liam Ó Murchú and his ways. Some would say that he was not very professional in his presentation. That had nothing to do with it. He was like me. I am not professional at standing up here and speaking properly, but I do it anyway because that is the way I am. Who are they trying to reach?

On my behalf and on behalf of Senator Bonner, I believe there is a need for a half hour programme on the fishing industry. It is broadcast on radio by the excellent presenter Tom McSweeney. I cannot understand why the same programme could not be on television, although not perhaps throughout the year. At present there are a number things happening in the fishing industry and as the Minister knows, representing the west, we depend heavily on tourism and fishing. Take the fishing away from Killybegs and there is nothing. People love the sea and love boats.

I return to the issue of the commission. It must have power to go to RTÉ and call a halt to its presenters projecting only one view. I do not mind individuals, people off the street, who go on and express their own view, but the presenters on RTÉ should not project their personal opinion. Senator Ormonde mentioned last year's programme about the budget and a number of similar things have happened. I do not like the political bashing that we are getting. It is wrong to say, in a broad sweeping statement, that all politicians are corrupt. We could decide to take RTÉ to court on the issue. All of us are branded and that should not be allowed.

A presenter or a newsreader may confront a Minister and asks him to justify his pay increase but we do not know what that presenter is earning. I disagree with RTÉ broadcasting the news live from Jerusalem or somewhere like that and yet they are looking for extra money. Within minutes Mark Little, who has been brought from the US broadcasts from some part of Europe and then Seán Whelan gives an overview and finally Tommie Gorman tells us what he thinks. Why do they not stay at home? There are plenty of people out there to give them the information they want.

I came home recently to find a notice asking me to fill in a form assuring an Post that I had a licence. It was a waste of time to go to my house to see if I had a licence. I was threatened with legal action if I did not complete the form by return. I specify my house because my licence states: Fitzgeralds, Dingle Heights. Outside my home is a four-foot square bed and breakfast sign saying: Fitzgeralds, Dingle Heights. How could a person waste his time just because I have a television aerial? Is there not a list available of those who have licences? These people are strangers knocking on doors at random. This should be done by the postman who knows every house and everybody who has a television. The postman could be paid extra for this.

We have to obey the law – everybody should have a licence. When all of us were not paying our taxes it was higher for everyone else. But when everyone came into the tax net, that was when we started to succeed. I want everyone in the licence net.

Ms Leonard

I join other Senators in welcoming the Minister. It is difficult to appreciate the enormous changes taking place in broadcasting in general and television in particular. I want to refer to the things we should keep despite the changes. Probably two of the greatest institutions in this country are RTÉ and the GAA.

Mr. Bonner

And Fíanna Fáil.

Ms Leonard

I had not considered talking about Fíanna Fáil here today.

As we have heard in the discussions here both RTÉ and the GAA are going to come under pressure from outside forces, from the larger digital stations. RTÉ will come under pressure because there will be other stations able to offer greater money for the rights to our major championship games in hurling and gaelic football. The GAA, which is embarking on some major developments, may be offered significant amounts of money from outside stations. Rather than looking at short-term gains for the GAA and maybe losses for RTÉ, we need to consider the long-term future of both RTÉ and the GAA. A station like Sky will not be at the Ulster championship at Clones or club championship finals or semi-finals. They will be there on all-Ireland hurling or football final day but they will not be there on a wet Sunday in the middle of the league. I join Senator Bonner in congratulating RTÉ and TG4 for the value they place on the GAA and for showing the games that they do because they are an integral part of both urban and rural Ireland. Despite short-term gains, the GAA should consider the long-term future of the sport in terms of encouraging viewers. They should continue their association with our own stations.

The contribution of independent radio stations to rural society cannot be overestimated, and I speak as someone coming from an area served by one. We depend on the national broadcaster for national and international news but local stations, in the face of a declining rural population and eroding of community spirit, have expanded and become more professional in the past four or five years. They supply local news and entertainment and contribute to the development of the arts. They provide support, inform people of their rights and encourage locals to be involved with youth and community organisations.

Obituaries are an aspect of this. My six year old niece tells her parents when they come home from work what obituaries were broadcast that day. Such is the extent of the involvement of local radio in the community that no one plans the day without listening to the obituaries. This may seem strange to someone from the city or other areas. About 80% of the population in Cavan and Monaghan listen to Shannonside Northern Sound at 8.10 a.m. to hear the obituaries. This has replaced the death column in the local paper, which was once the first page read. Just as the GAA and RTÉ are integral to our society, so too is local radio as it keeps communities together. There is a role and demand for all stations, especially local stations. They are as important, more important in some cases, as the national media.

I welcome the Bill. The debate was enlightening. What we need is a balance in terms of local, national and international contributions.

Mr. Mooney

To avoid having to return to the debate after 4 p.m., I propose that the time agreed be extended to allow the Minister to conclude her speech.

An Cathaoirleach

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands (Miss de Valera)

Thank you, a Chathaoirligh, Senator Mooney, and the other Members for agreeing to give me extra time. I thank Senators for their contributions during the past two days on the Second Stage, which have been useful. Senators devoted much energy to the debate.

The other House spent a long time on this Bill, reflecting its concern over this social and economic issue. This House has expressed similar concern. Senator Coghlan stressed that all members of the community benefit from digital technology. The Government is introducing DTT so as to provide universal service. There is guaranteed access for our existing broadcasters because viewers are entitled to receive free at the point of reception the services in digital which they receive in analogue. Not all programmes on all channels will please everyone. Senators will agree that despite some possible flaws, broadcasting is better left to broadcasters than to Government.

Senator Coghlan expressed concern regarding the transparency with which the multiplex and transmission companies are designated. I refute the implication that I would or could abuse my powers or obligations. Under section 5, I cannot designate the transmission company unless onerous conditions are satisfied. Under the same section the transmission company must ensure in so far as is practical that its services are available to all the community. Under section 8 similar conditions apply regarding the multiplex company.

In selecting the multiplex operator I will be advised by the project management group, comprising my Department, the Departments of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Finance and Public Enterprise. In addition I have appointed a consortium of consultants led by AIB Corporate Finance to manage the selection process in which interested parties will apply to be designated by me as the multiplex company. The consultants will ensure that the process meets all international and European regulations. I will appoint a process auditor to verify the openness and fairness of the process. With the consultants I will supervise the sale of the network business by RTÉ. The process auditor will verify this also.

As Minister I am accountable to the Oireachtas for the exercise of these functions. While every effort has been made to ensure that the process is open and fair, and meets regulations, I cannot guarantee that there will not be challenges. It is the Government's policy that the legislative framework that establishes the DTT platform in Ireland must address issues that go beyond regarding broadcasting as another telecommunications service. For this reason, I will have the primary role in the initial selection of the transmission and multiplex companies.

Senator Coghlan is concerned at the "ferocious" powers of the Minister, including power to appoint the RTÉ Authority and decide the licence fee. It is the Government, not the Minister, that appoints the authority. A member may only be removed for specified reasons and after a resolution is passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas. I cannot appoint or dismiss members willy-nilly. While a strict interpretation of the law allows me, with the consent of the Minister of Finance, to increase by way of statutory instrument the licence fee, in practice this is always decided in Government. The Oireachtas can revoke any statutory instrument made by me. As the fee is a charge on the public, it is appropriate that the level is set by Government rather than an agency, as suggested by Senator Coghlan.

Senators Coghlan and Bonner referred to the delay with the Bill which was published on 25 May 1999. The Government decision of July 1998 on the introduction of DTT envisaged that the transmission function would be separated from RTÉ. The entity thus created, in which RTÉ would have retained an equity stake, would have been mandated to build and operate the DTT infrastructure and promote the development of multimedia services and the information society. The decision envisaged that the process of selecting the investor in the DTT entity, which became known as Digico, would be progressed in parallel with the development of the legislation. This was reflected in the Broadcasting Bill, 1999, as published. As envisaged by the Government decision, Digico business would have consisted of two activities, transmission and multiplexing. It was likely that a bidder would place a value on the multiplexing business, that is, the retailing of a package of services to the viewer in much the same way as a cable television operator, on top of the value which the bidder might place on the transmission process.

The advice of the consultants appointed to advise on the process was that in order to achieve the Government's objective, the transaction should be progressed on the basis of a predetermined value of the transmission business if RTÉ's share of the combined Digico business was to be calculated. The RTÉ Authority objected strongly to this approach and indicated that it was of the view that it should determine the value of the RTÉ transmission business.

I was of the view that the concerns of RTÉ could not be lightly overridden. However, on the advice of the majority of the project management group, I decided that the proper way of achieving market value for the transmission business was to separate it from the multiplexing business. Accordingly, following extensive consultations with RTÉ, I brought proposals for an alternative approach to Cabinet which was accepted. As a result, RTÉ was instructed to sell its transmission network as a going concern. The Government agreed in addition that I should select a DTT multiplex operator with the advice of the project management group. The separation of the activities required that formal amendments be developed to the Broadcasting Bill, as published, and this process, including, in particular, consultations with RTÉ, took a considerable amount of time.

I want it to be understood that it was not just a question of a political delay, that these consultations were necessary. Further consultations took place as outlined. The Bill has passed through the Dáil and we are now in a position to deal with it in the Upper House. To try to make a political point that the Government has been tardy in bringing forward the legislation is not only unfair, but inaccurate. I am glad that it is the Government of which I am a member which has brought it forward. While it was promised time and again by the previous Administration, it was not forthcoming. The only document it produced was a position paper entitled, Clear Focus.

A number of Senators referred to local radio broadcasters. I recognise the importance and outstanding success of local radio as outlined time and again both in the Seanad and the Lower House. Its wonderful and outstanding success is acknowledged in a number of ways in the Bill.

With regard to the sound broadcasting contracts issued by the Independent Radio and Television Commission, section 60 expressly provides that the track record of an existing broadcaster will be taken into account where it applies for a new contract. This will ensure the performance of existing broadcasters will not be ignored when contracts are being awarded.

I reject totally the suggestion that I am unaware of, or disregarding, the success of local broadcasting services. The Bill does not prohibit the carriage of local television services on the DTT platform. If such services are feasible, it will be a matter for commercial decision by the platform operator, as will the provision of interactive services subject to the terms of any licence issued by the ODTR. As the radio frequency manager, the ODTR will regulate the technical configuration of the DTT platform and those licensed to operate deflector systems.

The number of regulatory agencies may seem a little daunting to the uninitiated. The Bill will provide a clearly defined regulatory structure, of which the ODTR will be the frequency manager. There is confusion in the minds of some about the division of powers regarding the role of the Independent Radio and Television Commission, the RTÉ Authority and the ODTR. It is important that people are aware of the different functions of the Independent Radio and Television Commission and the ODTR. The ODTR will be the frequency manager and technical regulator of all broadcasting platforms while the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland, the new extended Independent Radio and Television Commission, will regulate broadcasting from a broadcasting perspective. The RTÉ Authority will be responsible for national public services while the Broadcasting Complaints Commission will independently investigate complaints. To respond to Senator Ross, the Minister will not have a regulatory function, as is appropriate in any democratic state.

I thank Senator Mooney for his support for the principles underlying the Bill. While it would not be appropriate for me to join in or comment on the criticisms of RTÉ by Senator Mooney and other Senators, I expect they will be heard in Montrose. It is useful that a number of the Senators have taken the opportunity to refer to particular types of programmes which are the strength of RTÉ. Some of its weaknesses have also been outlined. Those who have tuned in to the debate in both Houses of the Oireachtas will be happy to learn of and, I hope, act on the proposals made by Senators and Deputies.

Mr. Mooney

They are listening right now.

Miss de Valera

The nature of the relationship between the Minister and RTÉ is outlined clearly in the Broadcasting Authority Acts. The Houses of the Oireachtas have decided that the RTÉ Authority should act independently in pursuit of its public service remit and, for obvious democratic reasons, be free from interference from Government in its day-to-day programming.

There is near universal support for the concept of public service broadcasting. This is reason I highlighted the great importance of taking the opportunity to underline the purpose of public service broadcasting and to bolster that philosophy and ethos. That is being done strongly in the Bill. I thank Senators for their contributions which highlighted the importance of public service broadcasting.

The cultural and social significance of high quality broadcasting services in an age in which we run the risk of being smothered by information without context must be realised and affirmed. Like Senator Ryan, among many others, I am of the view that there should be plurality and diversity of choice in broadcasting services, not simply a choice between the same type of programming and services.

Part of the broadcasting sector, at least, must cater for the whole population, for minority as well as mainstream choices. Such services should be provided as a public service. The essential difference between public service broadcasting and commercial broadcasting was enunciated thoughtfully by Senator Quinn. Most of the new services which will be made possible through the introduction of digital television will be provided on a commercial basis. It is imperative, therefore, that the counterbalance of public service broadcasting is protected and nourished. Unless public service broadcasting is maintained and supported, we run the risk in the new broadcasting environment of creating a two-tier society.

I cannot agree with Senator Quinn's solution of significantly reducing RTÉ's revenues. Such a reduction would ensure public service broadcasting would be relegated to areas of so-called market failure rather than provide the varied and comprehensive range of services to which every citizen is entitled, regardless of his or her economic circumstances.

I thank Senator Ó Murchú for his encouragement and agree with his comments about TG4 and its potential to be a significant broadcaster in its own right. Many have referred to the fact that it has been a tremendous success. I reiterate the point that it is a wonderful example of what can be done within the broadcasting sector, especially by young people. It is tremendously professional and run efficiently. To underline the Government's commitment to the station, I have secured funding of £18.4 million for 2001, an increase of more than 23% on the year 2000. This is clear evidence of the Government's commitment to its ongoing development. On the basis of my discussions with my colleague, the Minister for Finance, I am confident I will be in a position to secure a further significant increase in funding in the Estimates for 2002 to support the station's development plan. Senators can be assured of my continuing interest in and support for TG4.

The issue of the licence fee was raised by a number of Senators. This is being actively considered by me. I will bring forward my views to Cabinet and a Government decision will then be taken. People will want value for money if such an increase is granted. We will also want to ensure it bolsters the ethos of public service broadcasting. I will take the remarks of a number of Senators, including Senator Manning, into account in making my decision.

A point was made about the collection of the licence fee. According to An Post, the licence fee evasion rate for 2000 was 10.5%, while in 1999 it was 11.9%. The calculation is rather complicated and the evasion rate is estimated. For example, most wait until their licences are out of date before they purchase a new one. This could not be calculated as evasion as most will purchase a licence after a reminder. It is not the case that one third do not pay their licence fee. According to An Post, the evasion rate was about 10.5% for the year 2000. It is an issue, however, which needs to be examined and addressed.

According to RTÉ and TG4, the latter's signal is available in more than 95% of the country on a free to air basis. This brings us back to the importance of universality, an issue we always discuss in terms of public service broadcasting as opposed to the commercial side. There are areas where there are reception difficulties for technical reasons. Senator O'Toole suggested that one way of resolving this is by satellite transmission. Such a move would present problems for domestic broadcasters. The Government chose digital terrestrial television as the platform because it provides the alternative which gives the greatest degree of coverage to the population. Satellite equipment in the home is extremely expensive and does not necessarily guarantee blanket coverage.

The Broadcasting Complaints Commission was referred to on a number of occasions. I am well aware of the need to strengthen it and the opportunity for citizens to register complaints. The provisions in the Bill are designed to strengthen the commission by providing a clear statutory basis for its structure, funding and remit. The contribution of full-time staff, appropriate accommodation and other resources will increase its capacity to investigate comprehensively and decide on complaints. The complaints process is addressed in the Bill which provides that a person will be able to complain directly to the commission and have his or her complaint investigated. That is a fundamental and significant change, one which can be welcomed.

Many hoped we would have the opportunity to see programmes providing greater access to education. Senator Quill said that she would like to see channels devoted to it while others hoped there might be a channel devoted to the Houses of the Oireachtas. I am glad that their work can be seen on RTÉ at night. It might not have the highest TAM ratings, but there will always be an opportunity to improve on this.

I hope I have covered most of the issues raised. Many contributors referred specifically to types of programming. I explained that it would not be appropriate for me to refer to programming, but I hope RTÉ will take the opportunity to reflect on what has been said both here and in the other House.

The question of subtitling and the reference to special needs were raised by Senators Ryan and O'Toole, among others. I have referred specifically to these needs in the Bill and the fact that they should be addressed. We will return to the issue on Committee Stage.

Senator Bonner asked specifically about deflectors. That is a matter for the Office of the Director of Telecommunications Regulation, not my Department. Senator Rory Kiely was concerned about the licensing of radio stations and ensuring they adhere to a certain position. Broadcasting by what could be termed "pirate" radio stations is a matter for the ODTR, not for me or the Independent Radio and Television Commission. The ODTR has a specific remit and responsibility for the management of frequencies. Although Senator Bonner and others may have written to me or the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, it is a matter for the ODTR which comes under the aegis Department of Public Enterprise.

I thank Senators for their contributions and patience in allowing me extra time to reply to this debate. I look forward to Committee Stage.

Question put and agreed to.

An Cathaoirleach

When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?

Mr. Mooney

Next Tuesday, 20 February 2001, at 2.30 p.m. I take this opportunity to thank our colleagues in the ante-chamber for their tolerance in permitting this debate to extend beyond the agreed time.

Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 20 February 2001.