I should like to begin by saying that I think it desirable for me to express my appreciation of the services rendered to me, and I am sure, to all other Members of the House, by the staff of this Department in the many dealings in which I have had to engage with them over some months.
It is somewhat unusual for me to find it possible to pay a tribute of this kind because, while a superficial courtesy is readily available in all Government Departments, it is not always followed by activity of the kind needed if a Deputy is to be seen by his constituents as discharging his duties to them. In this particular Department, I must say that I found not alone was I met by the private secretary and the officials with co-operation and consideration but, indeed, by expedition in the particular work which was required to be put in hand. It is unusual and for that I certainly am duly grateful.
Discussion on the Minister's statement in this House naturally centres around television and broadcasting perhaps more than any other subject. It is a matter of some wonder. I suppose, that within a few short years we have managed in this small country to erect a television structure and organisation, physically in the sense of buildings and staff, which, I think, can compare with that to be found anywhere else. That is not an easy thing to achieve, I should imagine, in a country such as Ireland. Because of our small population, because of our close proximity to one another, because of our universal knowledge, as it were, of one another's business and because of the intense competition in political circles, I feel that the wisdom of Solomon would be required by a television authority seeking to do absolute justice in reporting the activities of Dáil Éireann or in affording equal reportage facilities to all Members of the Dáil.
I must say I enjoyed Deputy Kitt's contribution and felt very keenly that what he was saying was the absolute truth in relation to the frustration experienced by many Deputies who make contributions in this House and who are not mentioned in news reports, as they feel they should be. It has often been a matter of wonder to me as to how these things are ordered. As I say, I know full well that striking a balance in these matters presents what is probably an insuperable problem, if one strives for perfection. It just cannot be achieved, any more than perfection can be achieved in any human activity. But there have been times indeed—and I do not complain on my own behalf— when I have seen television time devoted, particularly in the newscasts, to subjects which would strike me as having very remote interest for the population of this country; when to my personal knowledge, there had been discussed on the same day in Dáil Éireann matters of vital importance to people which were not touched upon at all in these newscasts.
Scarcely a night goes by but we are treated to an adventure in the far corners of the world and to an intensified course of education in the progress of foreign wars. I often feel there must be somebody specially appointed at Montrose to keep his eye on these things and to prepare a special part of the nightly bulletin to keep us informed as to how things are going in these almost unpronounceable places, while, at the same time, mundane affairs which might concern, we will say, the farmers—though I do not argue that they have been without their meed of publicity in recent times—and other sections of the community, the workers, or the old aged—people of that kind and local matters of this kind—do not seem to inspire the same amount of attention as things which happen in faraway places with strange-sounding names. There is a certain air of adventurous unreality in this reportage. To be sure, we want to know what is going on abroad but we do not want to be dosed with it night after night after night. We want to know what is happening in Ireland too. We are far more interested in what is happening here than in what is happening elsewhere.
I may mention the public press in passing on this very contentious matter which was recently discussed—and on which there are varying views, I believe, in all parties in the House—in connection with the proposal to send a group to Asia. I felt when I first heard of this that it was an incredible proposition. Indeed, I wrote to the Director General and asked was it true; I just could not believe it because I have seen occasions when there were functions of considerable importance taking place in Ireland which were not covered by television, and the reason given was that we had not enough cameras to cover them.
In this particular instance, it was proposed to send a camera team to a very far distant place, as we know. I thought that the conception was hardly realistic, besides which, it seems to me, too, that in this sphere of television reporting, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to present a completely and absolutely objective report on any subject. Having looked for years at the BBC, Independent Television and our own, it seems to me that the very act of reporting any particular matter or subject seems to make it inevitable that the reporter will express a view pro or con the particular matter he is looking at, or the particular problem at which he is looking. Objectivity is nearly impossible of achievement.
Therefore, we have enough trouble of our own without seeking to involve ourselves in arguments and discussions in other parts of the globe. This is my personal view, not necessarily shared by members of my own Party, though I must confess that at a later stage it seemed to me there was something to be said for sending a camera team to the place in question, particularly if it included one particular interviewer— not, I may say, Mr. O'Kelly, who was mentioned in this connection—but a particular interviewer who seems to specialise in insulting the people whom he is interviewing. He might not find it so easy to do that in other parts, and he might have his ears pinned by Ho Chi Minh, or Westmoreland, or whoever he might be talking to, which might be a beneficial thing. However, in a matter of that kind, which brings us into, as it were, discussion of international concerns, international political concerns, it is not sufficient that a semi-State body—this is my personal view—should have the sole determination of whether such a thing should be done. This is something which a government must have reference to.
Having said that, let me say—to go back to the matter of reporting on television of political events here—we had the instance of a Minister, we are told, interfering with a news programme, demanding that certain alterations be made in presentation and so on. That, to my mind, is undesirable. This is a totally different thing. In domestic reporting of this kind, unless there is positive and blatant partisanship in the reporting, it is highly undesirable that there should be any interference from politicians because, if they were to be permitted—as Deputy Kitt says, quite rightly—who is to say, who could, in justice, say, that one particular politician has the right to interfere and have a news programme changed and another has not: where would it stop?
Do we not all feel at times aggrieved that our oracular pronouncements here are not conveyed to the tense and expectant Irish nation which is awaiting our wisdom? Do we not all feel this sense of grievance, and is it not a very understandable thing, human nature being what it is? But trying to look at it from the point of view of commonsense and the national good, it does seem to be a very improper precedent and one which I hope will not be followed, and should not be followed in the future, that such interference or influence in news reporting of the domestic scene—I would emphasise "the domestic scene"— should be in any way tolerated by the Government or by the Dáil.
By and large, Telefís Éireann do a very difficult and a good job. In some of the programmes they produce for entertainment the recreational and educational content are the equivalent of what you will find anywhere, I think, in these islands, and the standard in these islands—I believe, from what I read—is pretty high, higher perhaps than anywhere else, certainly higher than that which prevails in America. In America if one is to accept what is written about television and radio, it is not admirable. Our standard compares with that of the BBC, and in many instances favourably, in expertise, in production and in general entertainment value.
The language is promoted in so far as it is possible to promote it in an excellent manner. I am thinking, for instance, of the programme "Amuigh faoin Spéir" every Saturday. Anybody who has an opportunity of looking in on Saturdays will agree with me that it is a fascinating programme in itself, produced with great skill, understandable to everybody, even those who know little or no Irish. It provides an opportunity to such people to pick up a phrase or two here and there which is a good thing.
Another programme which I would commend in the highest possible terms —I do not think it has been mentioned here but it should be mentioned—is "Garda Patrol". The men who appear on that programme discharge themselves with an amazingly able professionalism which is a revelation. It must surely be very satisfying to the public, as it certainly is to me, to see and to acknowledge that we have in the Garda young men of such ability, articulation, coherence and knowledge as to be able to put across, through what is, mind you, a very difficult medium, the difficult message of the law. They put it over in a manner which gets the best results, which projects the garda as a friend of the community, as one of the community, as the protector of the people and in an entirely different light from that in which he has unfortunately been seen in other days. "Garda Patrol" and all associated with it are deserving of every compliment. I know people who switch on "Garda Patrol" just to listen to it alone and then switch possibly to some cross-Channel programme when it is over. That suggests to me that "Garda Patrol" could easily be developed to a greater extent with benefit to everybody concerned.
I mentioned that television is a difficult medium. It is a matter of wonder to me, if to nobody else, that we have been able to harness the abilities of technicians, producers, commentators and interviewers to the extent which we have done in so short a time and so successfully. I regretted, and I still regret, the passing of a programme which we had dealing with politics up to last year in which the newspaper correspondents participated. The presentation of the political programmes as we know them is in very able hands. Certainly one could not imagine a more effective Chairman than Dr. Thornley or a more dispassionate person in charge of this very difficult activity of controlling debates between politicians. It seems to me, too, that with the passage of time, the politicians themselves who are appearing on these programmes are becoming more used to the medium and giving the listeners better value. They are shouting less together.
There is not as much cacophony from the box as there used to be. There is more argument and as time goes on, we all hope that this trend will continue and that it will be realised that it is the duty of everybody who appears on this programme to realise that the viewers, who are the people who put us here, expect debate, reasoned argument, discussion, and do not enjoy looking, for long periods, at the one individual dilating on all the problems of the country. For some queer reason, they are not as mesmerised by the personality of the speaker as the speaker is by his own personality. These are things which we learn by experience. In this particular sphere we are learning and, I feel, developing.
I would like to see all Members of Dáil Éireann have the opportunity of appearing on television. It would be a great thing if it were possible for all Members of the House to be afforded the opportunity of appearing on television in lengthy discussions, not necessarily for an hour—that might be deemed to be too long—but in reasonably lengthy discussion with constituency colleagues possibly or members from other areas on certain subjects. In fact I would like to see television being introduced here at Question Time. I wonder whether we would have as many suspensions—I do not know; it might lead to a greater number of suspensions, but it might on the other hand, prove a salutary thing. However, it would show the people what actually goes on in this Chamber of ours and what kind of a Parliament they have working here in Dublin on their behalf.
I should also like to see through television a greater examination and exposure of the work of Deputies. There is abroad, as we all know, an uninformed view concerning the duties of Members of this House. We have seen on many occasions letters to the press and speeches and comments made about the number of Deputies in attendance in Dáil Éireann at certain times. We here know the reason for this sparsity of attendance. We know that members of the Dáil, if they are not in the House, are in the committee rooms either interviewing constituents or attending to the endless ocean of correspondence which reaches them, or else attending meetings in their constituencies. Certainly we can be assured that they are attending in some way to the needs of their constituents, the urgent imperative, and demanding needs, which will not tolerate inattention or delay.
Members of the Dáil who are not present in the Dáil Chamber are doing these things. It would appear to me that television would be doing a very good job if it could bring home to the people, as it has the facilities to bring home to the people more than any other medium of communication, just what the facts are. I think it is a mean advantage to take of Members to criticise them for their absence from the House when, in fact, they are engaged on far more useful exercises on behalf of the people they represent.
In fact, let me say this. I will not say the most enjoyable, but the easiest part of the duties of Deputies is the time a Deputy spends in the Chamber, the time when he can participate in debates. The chore of correspondence and constituency work, as we have seen—let us not put a tooth in it— which I have seen in my short time of 15 or 16 years in the House has brought men to ill-health and to their graves before their time——
