Committee on Finance. - Vote 46—Posts and Telegraphs. – Dáil Éireann (17th Dáil) – Wednesday, 15 Nov 1961

Committee on Finance. - Vote 46—Posts and Telegraphs.

Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. Hilliard)

I move:—

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £325,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1962, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs and of certain other Services administered by that Office, and for payment of Grants-in-Aid.

When I was introducing the Estimate for my Department in May last I said that it contained no provision for payments in respect of television licence fees or for any change in the sound licence fee. I also said that extra revenue from licence fees could be made available to the Broadcasting Authority only by Vote of this House and that if the television service opened towards the end of this year a Supplementary Estimate would be needed to pay over the proceeds of a television licence fee.

It will be remembered that provision was made in the Broadcasting Authority Act, 1960, that the Authority might be paid in respect of each of the first five years of its existence:

(a) a grant equal to the total of the receipts in that year from Broadcasting licence fees less the expenses incurred in collecting those fees and in preventing interference with reception

and

(b) a further grant subject to a limit of £500,000 for the five years.

The latter grant was intended to help the Sound Broadcasting Service to balance income and expenditure during the initial years after the change-over from direct State operation. Already £278,400 of the total subsidy of £500,000 which may be paid in respect of the period ending 31st March, 1965, has been made available to the Authority.

As Deputies are aware the Broadcasting Authority announced several months ago that they expected to commence a regular television service from the Kippure transmitter about the end of December. It was accordingly decided that holders of television sets would be required to obtain a special television licence as from the 1st January, 1962, and as announced by my Department on the 11th August last this special licence will cover sound as well as television and the fee will be £4 a year.

Costs of sound broadcasting have been rising and it was therefore necessary to increase the fee for an ordinary radio licence from the figure of 17s. 6d. which was fixed in 1953 to £1 as from 1st September last. The extra receipts from this source will not make the Sound Broadcasting Service self-supporting but they will help to keep down the draw on the subsidy provision.

The purpose of the present Supplementary Estimate is to enable my Department to pay over to the Broadcasting Authority the television licence fees which will be collected during the current financial year together with the additional sum resulting from the increase in sound licence fees less, of course, the estimated cost of collection in both cases.

The Supplementary Estimate will not result in any extra charge on the taxpayer.

Accurate figures of receipts from licence fees and expenses of collection for the current year will not be available until after the 31st March. Accordingly the payment to the Authority under Sub-Head K 1 will have to be an estimated figure and an adjustment will have to be made in a subsequent year when precise figures are available.

I have already referred to the special £4 television licence which will come into operation on 1st January next. A new form of licence costing £1 per annum for Sound Broadcasting will be introduced as from the same date but existing licences will continue in force in respect of Radio sets only until the normal date of expiry. Television licences and the new Sound licences will be on sale at all Post Offices as from the 1st January, 1962. Persons who buy a television licence for the first time will normally possess a current licence for sound reception and it has been arranged that such licences may be used in part payment for television licences. Any person who hands in his existing sound licence at the time of purchase will be allowed a reduction in respect of each month or part of a month which his licence has to run to the date of expiry.

The reduction will be at the rate of 1s. 6d. or 1s. 8d. per month depending upon whether the unexpired licence costs 17s. 6d. or £1. For example a person who buys a television licence on 1st January and who surrenders a sound licence which is due to expire on 31st October, 1962 will pay a net £3 3s. 4d. If a person pays the full £4 fee for a television licence at the time of purchase it will be possible for him to get a cash refund calculated in the same manner but in that case he will have to make a special application to the Head Postmaster of his district and enclose his old unexpired licence. The more convenient course is to hand up the unexpired sound licence when one is purchasing a Television licence.

When speaking on the Estimate in May last, I mentioned that I had invited certain persons to become members of the Interference Advisory Committee which is provided for in the Broadcasting Authority Act, 1960. The Committee met for the first time in June and it has since been giving the most careful study to the ways and means by which interference with reception may be brought within tolerable limits. It is a very big question. The sources giving rise to interference are practically endless and it is my intention to limit those sources in so far as it will come within my power to do so. I understand from the Committee that it should be possible to introduce the first set of regulations towards the end of this year. Deputies will welcome this positive step but I would emphasise that in making provision for reducing interference the problem is so extensive that progress will necessarily be slow.

Side by side with the day to day operation of the Sound Broadcasting Service, Radio Éireann has been pressing ahead with all possible speed on the establishment and development of the Television Service. I shall not go into any details regarding the work involved but I would like to say that the progress made has been quite remarkable and augurs well for the future of Irish television.

My responsibility for the services Radio Éireann provides is limited to matters specified in the Broadcasting Authority Act, 1960, and I shall not, therefore, treat of matters which are now solely the concern of the Authority. In this connection I would again ask Deputies seeking information on questions falling within the competence of the Broadcasting Authority to seek that information direct from the Authority. I am sure that they will find the Director General most anxious to help them.

Mr. Sweetman

I must comment at once on the last sentence of the Minister's statement as being not good enough. The Minister is asking us to vote moneys for him today and it is not good enough on his part to direct the Members of this House to the Television Authority for information on general principles that are involved. One of the safeguards in relation to State companies, so far as this House is concerned, is that where these companies get certain voted moneys and when the Minister concerned comes into the House to ask for these moneys to be voted, there is an opportunity for the House to review the work involved in that State company. It was made perfectly clear on the passage of the Broadcasting Authority Bill that in relation to their initial years the House would have the opportunity of reviewing the work of the Authority. Merely because this is a Grant-in-Aid under the terms of the Act and sub-head K.1 of the original Estimates is no reason why the Minister should neglect to fulfil his proper functions in relation to the House. The House and the people outside are very much in the dark in relation to the working of the Television Authority and this is an opportunity the Minister should have availed of to give some information to the House and, through the House, to the country at large.

Before I go on to mention some of the information that the Minister should have given, may I ask him to make one thing clear in relation to this question? On the first of January next a television licence fee of £4 is being introduced. If a person has a television set in his house and has also a sound broadcasting receiver is it clear beyond question, as I hope it is, that the one £4 fee covers both instruments?

Mr. Hilliard

That is correct.

Mr. Sweetman

I thought it was but I have heard some people say they were not clear about it and I think it is desirable to clarify it. We are all agreed in the House that television will have the biggest impact on our way of life that we have known for a very considerable time. Some people consider that impact will be of great benefit but there are some things in relation to it we must know and the House has a right to know before it is asked to vote this money.

Times have changed very considerably since the initial estimates were made in relation to commercial television, in relation to the cost of it, in relation to the expenditure on it and in relation to the revenue that is likely to be received from it. The Minister should give the House the latest information available in respect of that. In the last six years, for example, the revenue from British commercial television has grown from £5,000,000 a year to £80,000,000 a year. The Television Commission's report is now quite substantially out of date and I should like to know whether in view of the great rise in commercial television revenue in Britain, the Minister has now got, as he should have, more up-to-date estimates in relation to what revenue is likely to be here.

I should like to know also, as the position has changed very much since the time of the Television Commission's report, what is the present estimate of the amount of money that will be involved from the Television Authority's point of view in installations, studios, transmitters, and so forth, and what estimate is made of the amount of money that is involved at the present time in the matter of television sets already in operation in the country. I am sure the Minister must have a modern estimate of how many television receivers there are here and the House should be given that number.

Would the Minister also tell us how existing receivers which have been established for what I would call fringe reception are to be converted for purposes of Irish television, whether that involves scrapping the existing receivers or, if not, what the cost of adaptation to Irish standards will be. We are entitled to have some indication of that. We are entitled to know, for example, whether as from the 1st January the new service which will operate will include a service from Eurovision right from the beginning. Particularly in view of our Common Market discussions, it is vital to know whether we will get the Eurovision link from the very beginning.

I should like to know what rules have been laid down by the Television Authority in relation to advertising home produced articles and foreign produced articles and whether there is any differentiation between rates for home produced articles and foreign produced articles using the term "foreign produced" in two different senses: in one sense in relation to those countries with whom we hope to be associated in the Common Market and, in the other sense, in relation to those countries which will be outside the Common Market.

Would the Minister also let us know what plans the Television Authority have for utilising the service for the purpose of increasing productivity? The visual means is perhaps the most important educating element in that connection there can possibly be. We all accept that, unless we are able to increase productivity, we shall find it difficult in the short time available to us to meet the competition that under Common Market conditions we may have to meet. We should be told what arrangements have been made in co-operation with vocational bodies to ensure that the Television Authority will be utilised to the best advantage, with farming organisations in relation to agriculture and industrial organisations, perhaps, in relation to other matters. It certainly seems to me that the impact of television can be one that can be used to tremendous advantage in relation to improving our competitive position abroad.

We have been told that in the beginning there will be approximately a five-hour distribution. I understand there will be approximately five hours' viewing time. I should like to know how much of that five hour viewing time will be in respect of live material and how much will be in respect of recorded material. I should like to know what is proposed in relation to the methods of the utilisation of advertising time. Let me assure the Minister that I am not the only person who finds that the Television Authority is trying to hide its light under a bushel and not to disclose any of these matters.

The Irish Times of November 9th carried a report of a paper read by an advertising firm to an advertising Press meeting at which that person, skilled in his own profession, complained bitterly about the lack of information available and described the situation as being one in which advertisers were being asked to take a pig in a poke. I think it is fair for the House to expect that we should be given some indication by the Minister before we give a blank cheque in this respect because this is a blank cheque in the sense that it is a grant-in-aid. It will not be audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General. It will be paid over to the company.

Neither do I know what system the Television Authority has been working in relation to the allocation of its advertising or what is proposed. That no one in this House knows is also borne out by this gentleman in the advertising service. It seems to me that the Television Authority has been doing its utmost to try to cloak its activities and prevent people discovering what it proposes. I cannot see for the life of me what the reason for that is.

It seems to me, talking as an ignorant outsider in relation to the knowledge of advertising, that the more one publicises the medium that one proposes to adopt and the more one publicises the line of country one proposes to take, the greater will be the chance of getting a satisfactory type of advertiser to take time.

I do not know whether any viewer rating system has been adopted. I think that is one thing that we should know about. I do not know whether in relation to the booster stations round the country it is proposed that there will be any regional facilities for advertising or whether an advertiser from Sligo advertising from the Sligo booster station will advertise at a different rate when his advertising would not be any use in the general scheme for viewing in Dublin and Cork.

I do not know what plans there are for publishing research into viewer rating. I think we should have been told now also how the programmes will be balanced. What is proposed in relation to what I understand are called heavy programmes, symphony orchestras and so on? How are they going to be balanced with "Wild West" features? Is it going to be all one or all the other?

It seems to me that the House is entitled to some information on these matters before it votes money under the Act. Of course, as I said already in the beginning, it is one of these things that was visualised when the Act was being introduced. More than anything else, I am particularly interested to know what is the position in relation to advertising. What has been done to make the possibility of people taking time an open competitive matter?

I want to know whether that has been thrown open to advertisement. I want to know whether the time made available to advertisers has been offered to all or whether it has only been offered to a select few. I want to know whether that select few have been selected because of the fact that they got an opportunity to quote before others got such an opportuniy. I want to know whether some firms got the same opportunity as others to quote at lower prices, as was certainly visualised at an earlier stage, or whether they did not.

I want to make this perfectly clear. I look at television regularly on a Sunday. I am afraid it is only on a Sunday. The only programme that I ever really look at and enjoy is a programme on which the Chairman of the Television Authority appears.

I have for him as an actor in that programme and as a producer of that programme the very highest and greatest admiration and he is welcome to the free advertisement, if he wants it, that that is the programme I enjoy most on television. But, being a first-class actor and a first-class producer is not at all to say that he is a first-class chairman of a television authority. That is an entirely different thing. It is a job that requires administrative as well as acting and producing experience. The fact that the public have been left so much in the dark and that there is such tremendous complaint amongst the public and amongst the professional people who will be involved, such as advertisers, shows that he is not a good administrator of a television authority.

Of course, I have said before in this House, and I repeat, that it is not the person concerned whom I blame but the Minister and his Government, that it was a cardinal blunder, a cardinal mistake, to appoint as the Chairman of the Television Authority a person who at one moment would be acting as the buyer of programmes and at another, as the vendor of programmes to that Authority. No man can serve two masters and neither he nor the other member of the Authority, who, I understand, is doing the same thing, who is acting as a member of the Authority, on the one hand, and, on the other, is producing programmes which he is selling to the Authority through another company, can do so. That is not the way to get the best value out of the Authority. I do not blame that other member because the headline was set, not by him, but by the Minister and the Government when they appointed a Chairman of the Television Authority who would act in two different capacities. It is an entirely wrong and rotten principle and one which the Government should not have countenanced for a minute.

The sooner the cold light of day and the searchlight of public opinion is let in on the method of allotment of advertising contracts with the Television Authority, the better it will be for everybody concerned and, most certainly, the better it will be for the good name of the Authority itself.

Nobody is clearer than I am that the attitude some people adopt of sneering at those in politices is a disgusting attitude. I am proud of being in politics and everybody else should be proud of being a politician. I do not attack the other director concerned because he is well known as a politician, but I do say that it is very bad indeed that the Chairman and another director should in this way be on two sides of the fence and that advertisers should find it so difficult to get proper information about the essential facts of the development of the new service on 1st January.

I criticised in the previous Dáil the method by which certain appointments had been made by the Authority. I criticise them again. In regard to some things, it would be entirely wrong to say anything but some things and some appointments that have been made by the Authority have done us no credit and the Minister, notwithstanding the terms of the Broadcasting Authority Act, would have been wiser to come to the House and have made good the deficiencies of the Authority up to date. To have had that clear, frank disclosure to this House would have shown that he appreciated his responsibilities under the Act and it would have done a great deal, I believe, to dispel much of the bad feeling that is at present abroad and that will inevitably operate against the success of the service when it starts on 1st January next.

Mr. Byrne

I should like to avail of the opportunity afforded by this Supplementary Estimate to pass a few bouquets to the Television Authority and, at the same time, a few brickbats to the Minister.

I agree with the previous speaker when he says that we must repudiate the implication of the Minister's concluding remarks in his statement here tonight that we should not call him to task to answer for the broad principles upon which the Television Authority is administered. Those principles, by and large, have been laid down by the Minister himself. In respect of one of them, I had a Parliamentary Question down here some time ago.

There is in all our semi-State bodies a well-established principle that contracts for work should be put out to public tender. That principle has not been adhered to by the Television Authority in it entirety and I suggest to the Minister that that is most regrettable and unfortunate. The headquarters of the Television Authority at present being built at considerable expense out of public moneys, at Montrose in Donnybrook, were not advertised for public tender and it would appear that the consultant architect who is acting for the Television Authority invited three or four building contractors to submit tenders for that contract. That was not good practice where public moneys are concerned, although it may be sound commercial practice.

It is up to us in this House to impress upon those administering Irish Television, who may be impatient with the established methods laid down for the administration of public bodies and who may consider that there is too much red tape, that it is not possible for them to reach their target in setting up the service at an early date if they adhere to these principles which I am speaking of, that we in this House want to see to it that where public moneys are concerned, it must be made manifest that work is being given to those who submit the lowest tender and to those who are best equipped to do it.

In respect of the contracts which have been advertised by the Authority I have heard that in some cases they gave a very short period, a deadline which would make it impracticable for people in the ordinary course of business to submit tenders. That also is something which I deplore. I hope it is only necessary to refer to these matters in the House to ensure that we shall have no further grounds for complaint.

Personally, I am very hopeful for the future of Irish television. All the implications are that we may expect first-class programmes from the Television Authority. I say that because it is apparent to a lay person like myself, merely reading the newspapers, that the Authority has gone to pains to secure a first-rate staff, a staff which is technically competent and equipped to provide us with a good television service. I say that I am hopeful for the future of Irish television because the Director General of the Television Authority has made it clear that he is a man of considerable courage and ability.

I refer in particular to the manner in which he stood up to an unfair and low attack made on him some time ago by the lunatic fringe of the Gaelic revival movement, people who wrote to him and demanded he should give a certain undertaking regarding the knowledge of Irish of the staff he was about to employ. He replied to their letter in a courageous and forthright manner and did so in the English language. Because he did so, they had the ill manners to reply to him suggesting that he should have replied in a language which he did not know.

I admire the manner in which the Director General stood up to these people. I should like to see more of that attitude manifested by people in similar positions and I believe in the future we will see it. If we are to reach the stage where persons appointed to the Television Authority are to be subjected to the same farcical tests regarding their knowledge of Irish as operate in other places and State services, then we can throw up our hands for the future of Irish television. We want in the service persons who are technically competent and technically equipped to give us the best possible service. For my part, I am not at all concerned with whether or not those people can carry out their work through the medium of Irish, provided they do it efficiently and competently. I would qualify my optimistic hopes for the future of Irish television programmes by this reservation. If we get as much so-called Gaelic culture on the television programmes as we got in the past from Radio Éireann, then there is a pretty poor look-out for us.

It is a fact that at some of the peak listening periods we have from Radio Éireann Irish programmes to which nobody listens. The listeners' survey carried out by Radio Éireann some time ago, and published so tardily, makes that manifest. Deputy Sweetman has raised a few queries about which he would like some further information. I should like to ask the Minister if he can tell us whether the Television Authority has any plans for educational programmes. In other countries, television is being widely used for educational purposes and is proving to be a splendid aid to modern teaching techniques. Perhaps it is early yet to start thinking about school programmes for Irish television, but the Authority should be planning on these lines, in consultation with the Department of Education.

I am very glad that the problem regarding the line standard of our television service has been resolved to everybody's satisfaction. In that connection, I congratulate the Minister and the Authority for the very sensible solution which appears to have been arrived at.

Mr. S. Collins

I do not know what the secrecy about television is. I always thought it was a very forthright, exposed medium of expression and that the secret of television was that it could be seen. What we have succeeded in getting out of the Government ever since television came into vogue has been nothing but evasion after evasion of any factual statement about the nature of the programmes or the problem. I am beginning to wonder is there something slightly esoteric in the whole background to the launching of television because it is staggering to discover that the advertising community are completely in the dark about what time will be available and about the manner in which they can tender for or make representations to get periods for their advertisements on the programmes.

I do not think that we should be on the eve of initiating our television service without having some effective outline available to us regarding the nature and format of the programme. I listened to my colleague, Deputy Sweetman, talking about the heavy programme as balanced against the light. I am more worrierd, and I think the public are, too, as to how many siamsa ceoil or rinnce ceoil we are going to have during the course of the day. They are far more concerned to know what is the nature and balance of the programme and whether we are to have spinning wheels for half the day and knitting needles for the other half.

We are well aware of the fact that there is a completely distorted balance in sound broadcasting at the moment and there is a genuine concern throughout the country about what we are to get for the £4 which is to be levied on us for the new television licence. The time has come for the Minister to come from behind whatever screen he is going to use and tell us what is to be put on the screen. He should tell us whether we are to have a programme in which we will continue to have profiles of embryonic or junior Ministers cast about for the edification of the hard-pressed people in rural Ireland, or whether we are to have a programme of fol-de-dols or fol-de-lals, or a hotch-potch of re-runs of programmes which have appeared elsewhere, or the back end of out-of-date syndicated programmes.

What is the need for all this secrecy? Is the Television Authority not something for which there should be a common goodwill? Is it not something that we want to develop in an effective way? Is it not something in respect of which the people who, possibly, will have to suffer the ordeal of watching it, should be given some say in the kind of programmes that should be designed? I feel that in the circumstances surrounding this Television Authority, there has been far too much secrecy and far too much patronage and privilege used in the allocation of posts within it. I am saying that in a positive, deliberate and responsible way.

Grave doubt is being created in the minds of the people by the continued secrecy about the administrative end of television, the availability of time, the nature of the advertising programmes, the concept of the serious programmes and, in fact, the general format of the programmes. I will not say that some of the people connected with the Authority are not people of proven worth and skill in television, but I agree thoroughly that when we are asking this House for a blank cheque, returnable to nobody in the form of accountancy to the Comptroller and Audtior General, we are entitled to know the real purpose.

We are entitled to get an assurance from the Minister on many things. We have never been able to hear Radio Éireann in West Cork. I want an assurance from the Minister that if we are to have television in Ireland, we will be able to see some of it in West Cork. We are getting no real information at all. All we see is an occasional snippet in the papers that So-and-So has been appointed to such-and-such a position. We have no knowledge of how many of the minor positions, the general factotum positions, have been filled. I believe the reason we have not that knowledge is that the Authority is being used as a ready medium of placing disgruntled and disconsolate supporters who have not been able to get jobs elsewhere.

If the Minister does not want this type of suspicion to grow, it is time he came out on the screen to tell us what the television programmes are to be, how much time in the day will be devoted to Irish, how much to educational subjects, how much chamber music we are to have, how much will be devoted to children's programmes —in fact, how much time will be devoted to each type of programme the public will require? Why does the Minister not tell us? Surely, if television is to come into operation in January, somebody has the programme format by now? How much advertising time has already been allotted, in what circumstances and at what prices? I know the Minister knows that it is generally known that much of the time has already been allocated and that certain people have received preference in the allotment. Why not tell us why they got into this privileged position? If it is because of their loyal political background, tell us so; but do not keep us in the dark.

The Minister ultimately hopes that the revenue from licences will maintain his television authority. It will not do so if the programmes are not designed in consultation with the people who have to pay the licences and for their entertainment. I think I am entitled to ask the Minister when are we to get a detailed, specific outline of the type of programmes and their duration. It is time the people who will have to pay the piper, either in advertising fees or in licence fees, were let into the picture. Why be so secretive about it? Is it that the particular appointments of chairman and directors have involved the Authority in an executive command not already available to the Authority at all and that the busy commercial lives of these people, their own busy participation in other forms of television, has left them without the time to get down to the detail and administration of a programme meant to commence in January?

I hope this continued hiding of the real nature of the programmes will not militate in any way against the success of television. I want to see, and always wanted to see, Irish television a conspicuous success. I have always said that we have here all the necessary ingredients to produce a magnificent television programme: a wide range of able and skilled actors, musicians, narrators and comedians. We have a wealth of traditional dances and songs and we have various natural beauty spots—all ingredients of a comprehensive and effective programme. Now, on the very eve of the launching of this programme, we are unable to tell anybody what the programme will be. If we are asked the question; "How can you get time on the programme?", you cannot give an answer to it. I am not going to tell them to see if they can get it by joining a Fianna Fáil cumann. That seems to be one of the easiest ways to get advertising time with the Television Authority.

The Minister will have to answer the questions posed. He will have to give assurances as to what the nature of the programme will be and what the reception will be, particularly in the more remote parts of the country, what we can expect to get for the £4 we will have to pay for the licence—a licence at the moment, apparently, to look in the dark. Everybody seems to be afraid to tell us what the future of television will be. It is farcical that in respect of this most effective medium of advertising and entertainment, the programme format has not been broken down and we are unable to say whether we are to have proper programmes in respect of education, music, language or anything else you like.

We do not know what programme we will have in relation to sport. We do not know what type of coverage the various games will get. We do not know what the design of the whole television programme in general will be. In those circumstances, we are still asked to vote this large sum of money blindly. I am making an earnest appeal to the Minister to give this Authority a chance by letting us have a preview of the conception and design of the programmes.

Mr. Sherwin

I want to say a few words of a different kind from what has been said in the form of criticism. We cannot expect to know very much about the programmes at this stage. When we see them we will know all about them and know what to criticise. For anyone to say that they should be this and they should be that is nonsense. I have a family and they all differ and so do the public differ. My girls want to hear Elvis Presley and no one else. I have a son who wants to hear only the classics and turns the radio off when he hears Elvis Presley. The kids like to see a cowboy programme. I like Bing Crosby and others like him. I took my wife to see Macbeth and she hated it and wanted to leave. I had to hold her there.

To say what the programmes should consist of is all nonsense. There will have to be a balance. We may not like half of it but there will be people who will not like the other half and who will hate what we like. I am prepared to wait and see the programmes before I criticise them and I think everyone should do the same. I am satisfied that we have men with experience who know what the public want. The people who spend money on advertising know what the public want and they know who listens to their programmes by the sales of their goods. The people who will be running the television service have some experience and they will know. We will then be free to say what we like when we have seen the programmes.

Apart from that, I want to say to the Minister that it is a great pity that we cannot have our own television, say, a week in advance of the 1st January. Many people would like to have it over the Christmas. There will be thousands who would buy a television set for Christmas if they had a few shillings to spare. They would enjoy seeing the programmes and it is a great pity that it cannot be advanced by at least a week. I do not know whether or not that could be done but that is my view and the view of many more people.

With regard to the £4 for the licence, the Minister knows how hard it is to get £1, never mind £4. There will be a lot of dodging and the Minister knows that too. Many poor people will find it hard to collect £4. Some people say, "They can afford a television set," but I know that many people get one on the family budget. The mother contributes 5/-, the father another few shillings, and one or two sons who are working put up another 2/6d. That is the answer to people who criticise Corporation tenants for having television sets. Those people say nothing if they have a few "jars" but because they get a television set one would swear they were millionaires.

Asking people to pay £4 is asking too much. I would suggest to the Minister to make it possible for them to pay it in two sums and not £4 down. The Minister will have plenty of trouble and expense in collecting the £4. Therefore I would ask him not to have a lump payment of £4, but to break it into two sums of £2 every six months or something like that.

Mr. Hilliard

What I said when concluding my introductory statement must have been unheard or greatly misunderstood by Deputy Sweetman and another Deputy or two. I should like to repeat what I did say:

In this connection I would again ask Deputies seeking information on questions falling within the competence of the Broadcasting Authority to seek that information direct from the Authority.

General MacEoin

But the Minister is asking the House to vote money.

Mr. Hilliard

I did not in any circumstances say that matters of broad policy could not be raised in this House on this Estimate. If Deputies would think longer over this matter they would, in fact, create a better understanding between themselves and the Authority, and they would become more familiar with its work if they sought information in relation to the daily operations of the Authority from the Authority itself. I thought that I should direct their attention to the matter. I feel that, this being a new Authority dealing with television which, it is admitted, is bound to have a tremendous effect upon the public mind and the public character, the Government were very wise in their decision to establish an independent Authority to carry out this work.

Deputies, and particularly new Deputies, may not fully understand that my powers, as Minister, to interfere with the daily operations of the Authority are limited under the Act passed here by the Oireachtas, and that I, as Minister, have endeavoured since this Authority was established to lay down a code of conduct between the Authority, the Department and myself.

I wish to emphasise, as strongly as I possibly can, the good that will flow from a better understanding of the relations that should exist between the Authority, the Minister and the Oireachtas. My authority to intervene is limited. The Minister's power to interfere or to intervene in the affairs of the Authority are restricted under the Act. When the Bill was going through the Oireachtas I said I would endeavour, in establishing the Authority, to give it full freedom of action in making its decisions regarding the administration of the service which would be placed under its control. I told the House that I had no authority whatsoever to intervene in the day-to-day administration of the broadcasting service, that the Authority was being given a particular job to do, and that I did not intend to interfere unnecessarily by asking for detailed information unless I had some very good reasons for doing so.

I cannot understand Deputies complaining here that they are in the dark in relation to the affairs of the Authority. The Director General gave a Press Conference and made public statements on several occasions in regard to what he hoped the Authority would achieve. In my opinion he gave a clear indication to the public as to the job he had on hand, how he proposed to proceed with the business of establishing this new Authority and to carry out the work with which he is charged under the Broadcasting Authority Act.

Deputy Sweetman asked me about the accounts of this Authority. I would remind him that the accounts of the Authority for the ten months ended March, 31st last must be furnished by the Authority under Section 25 (2) of the Act. The section says that the accounts shall be audited within 90 days of the end of the period or such time as the Minister may allow after that. The accounts of the Authority this year have not been laid on the Table of the Houses of the Oireachtas because there was a delay in having them prepared, but I can tell the House that the accounts will be presented very soon and the Dáil will have every opportunity of examining them.

It is not true to say, as Deputy Sweetman said, that money has been paid over and no account rendered of how it has been spent. The Authority is obliged to make a report each year to the Minister, in addition to giving its accounts. Section 26 of the Act directs the Authority to make to the Minister a report of its proceedings during the preceding year and that the Minister shall cause copies of the report to be laid before each House of the Oireachtas. The Authority proposes, with my agreement, to give a report of its proceedings for the ten months up to March 31st, 1961, at the same time as it furnishes the accounts for the same period.

Accordingly, I do not see how any Deputy could think, or how anybody else could think, that we are being kept in the dark in relation to the affairs of this Authority. In its appointments, the Authority must follow the procedure laid down in the Act and it therefore is not true to say, as Deputy Seán Collins alleged, that persons were being appointed because of their political affiliations. I want to deny that emphatically. Advertisements appear in the daily papers regularly for staff. The Authority, of course, took over the staff of Radio Éireann as it stood and then proceeded to advertise in order to get a competent staff for television. I am quite satisfied that the Authority has been following the terms of the Act in the employment of staff.

A complaint was made that advertisers were kept in the dark in relation to advertising time and advertising terms. There were allegations that certain people were getting preferential treatment in relation to advertising time on the service. I would point out that this is all laid down on the rate card which was circulated to all advertising agencies. It carries the full details of the method of application, the rates charged, the time allocated, the preferential rate that is applicable to Irish advertisers, and it gives all the information necessary for any person interested in having his goods advertised. Beyond that, I think the charge that advertisers have been kept in the dark is unfounded and uncalled for. I do not know why such an allegation should have been made.

The service is a new one which, in its establishment, involved many difficulties. A new Bill had to be introduced; authority had to be given to the Government to establish an independent body; and we naturally had to look around in order to get people who knew something about television to supplement the information already available in the Department of Posts and Telegraphs, the senior officers of which had made a detailed study of television over a number of years and were, accordingly, in a position to advise the Government.

It was quite natural for the Government to select as Chairman a man of the standard and calibre of Éamonn Andrews. I am not making any apology to the House or to anybody else for his appointment. I believe the general public agree that the Government did the proper thing in that respect, that they were well advised to seek the assistance of someone like Éamonn Andrews and to appoint him as Chairman of the authority. I do not think the Chairman of the Authority wishes me to defend him in this House. He is quite capable of defending himself, but it is a recognised procedure in the House that persons who are not here to defend themselves cannot properly be charged in the House with misdemeanours or with making use of official time to benefit themselves. I am surprised that such tactics were adopted here by members of the Opposition in relation to the Chairman of the Authority and to another member of it.

In so far as the capital expenditure is concerned, I was asked if the estimates circulated at the time the Bill was being passed were those upon which the Authority was now working and whether they were sound or otherwise. I should like to say, for the benefit of new Deputies particularly, that provision is contained in the Act for making repayable advances not exceeding £2 million in the aggregate for capital purposes, including working capital. It was felt at the time that £1,500,000 would be sufficient for establishing the service, including the erection of the five transmitters, and that the balance of £500,000 would be used for other capital services. Present indications are, however, that capital expenditure before transmissions commence will be somewhat higher than the original estimate of £1,500,000 and may, indeed, exhaust the full amount of £2 million. Estimates of current expenditure are offset by the £4 licence fees which we hope will apply to 94,000 sets.

With regard to the programme, I agree with Deputy Sherwin that it is better to wait and see. It is too early yet to know what the Authority can put on. A great deal will depend on the financial success, or otherwise, of the venture. A great deal will depend then on the income of the Authority from television licence fees and commercial advertising. It is my wish, and the wish of the Government, that the programmes should be of a very high standard and generally acceptable. We are establishing an Irish television service and it would be my wish that we should have a live programme acceptable to all our viewers. We are, however, limited in our resources and limited in our population in regard to the provision of entertainment. In essence, this programme will be one of entertainment. We also intend to have an educational programme to induce our people to greater effort in the national endeavour to increase productivity. That, too, will be conditioned by the amount of money available.

There is provision in the Act for the establishment of advisory committees and it is my intention, after consultation with the Authority, to set up these committees. It is unfair to speculate. We must wait before passing judgment on the programmes. Next year, on the Estimate, we will be in a better position to evaluate the work of the Authority.

Deputy S. Collins asked if West Cork would get reception. A transmitter is being erected at Bally-vourney. Until the transmitter is in operation, it will not be possible to find out what particular pockets of the country are blind. That problem will be one for the engineers and the technical side of the service.

Deputy Sherwin suggested that the licence fee should be collected by instalments. I wish that could be done. Unfortunately, the cost of collection is very high, and the collection of the fee by instalments would have the effect of increasing the collection costs which are already high. I cannot, therefore, subscribe to the Deputy's proposition.

Votes 44 and 46 reported and agreed to.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht - Wednesday, 15 Nov 1961

Committee on Finance. - Vote 46—Posts and Telegraphs.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 15 Nov 1961