Vol. 305 No. 6
asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs whether test transmissions are being, or have been taking place, from Cairn Hill Station; if so, if such tests have shown that the establishment of RTE 2 will have an effect on the reception of BBC and HTV in Wexford and the south-east of the country in general; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
4.
asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs the most recent indications regarding the effect of RTE 2 on reception of viewers in the multi-channel areas; if he is willing to offset the cost for viewers who are obliged to have their sets adjusted; the number of sets which will have to be adjusted to ensure that viewing is not interfered with; the total sum of money involved; if he is willing to give a guarantee that the quality of viewing of people in these areas will be as good as it now is.
I propose with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle to take Questions Nos. 3 and 4 together. Two UHF transmitters are being established at Cairn Hill, County Longford, and two at Three Rock Mountain, County Dublin, to provide for reception of RTE 2 and to improve reception of the existing RTE television service. All four are capable of giving rise to interference with reception of British television service in parts of this country.
Full power test transmissions commenced from the Cairn Hill transmitters in mid-January, 1978. The existing RTE TV service is being broadcast from one of the Cairn Hill transmitters since 3 April 1978 and the other transmitter is carrying trade test transmissions. RTE have advised my Department that these transmitters have not affected reception of British signals in Wexford and the south-east of the country in general and that interference problems in the service area of the transmitters are being solved by the use of filters specially designed for this purpose by RTE and available to the television trade at a cost of approximately £10.
RTE say that the level of interference with multi-channel TV reception in the Carlow area is not such as to wipe out reception of the weak British signals and that the quality of reception from Presely varies greatly throughout the town. They consider that the most effective solution to the problem is the installation of a cable system which would also have the effect of providing reception of British services in sections of the town where reception is either of poor quality or non-existent.
RTE expect that the Three Rock Mountain transmitters will commence testing in August 1978. They say that corrective action to be taken by the cable television operators concerned will eliminate any interference that may arise on cable systems. Viewers not connected to cable systems may be affected but they will be able to use filters designed by RTE similar to those being used in the service area of the Cairn Hill transmitters to resolve the problem. There is no statutory provision under which I could offset the cost to viewers who adjust their sets.
RTE are not in a position to say how many sets will need adjustment as the strength of British signals is not of uniform quality in every area. Viewers receiving a good quality signal are less likely to suffer an interference problem than viewers receiving a poor quality signal. Consequently it is not possible to give an estimate of the total sum of money involved.
I cannot give a guarantee that there will be no disimprovement in the quality of multi-channel reception in the areas concerned.
Does the Minister agree that in the Dáil on 6 December he indicated that it would cost many people between £10 and £15 each to make the necessary correction to their set? Does the Minister agree further that in some cases, on his admission, the cost would be substantially higher? May I ask the Minister yet further whether on the basis of the information he has just supplied—which is basically that he has no idea how many sets will be affected—he would agree that his attention so far to this problem has not been adequate? Surely the Minister would accept that there are some people who may not be able to afford the cost of the corrections necessary?
I pointed out to the Deputy in my reply that a filter has been designed by RTE which would cost approximately £10. I would point out to the Deputy also that, contrary to general opinion, probably at the time I gave the original reply, Wexford and the south-east have not been affected by the transmission from Cairn Hill.
Would the Minister define what he means by the south-east? We have an idea what the south-east means. Does it necessarily include Carlow?
All Wexford and the surrounding areas.
I gather from the Minister's reply that areas which have been receiving strong signals from British stations will not be interfered with in any way but there is a doubt about places like Carlow, Kilkenny and south-west Wicklow. Would that be correct?
The position with regard to the town of Carlow is that part of the town was receiving a reasonable signal and part was receiving a very poor signal at the best of times.
Was there not a promise given by the RTE Authority that if there was interference with reception from Britain the Authority would provide piped television, where people did not have it, at the expense of the Authority?
No, what was suggested was that piped television was the answer. I understand that, in so far as Carlow is concerned, a firm got the contract but pulled out and I think they are looking for somebody else to deal with it.
But did the Authority themselves not take on the responsibility—if there was not good reception—to provide a piped system at their expense?
No.
That was said to me by other Deputies in Wexford to have been said by the ex-Director-General.
If the Authority were to do that in relation to that particular——
I thought that was quite generous but that is what Mr. Oliver Moloney said. He is gone now.
No. But, however, I will check; I could not imagine it being so.
Accepting that the Minister acknowledges that the information given in his previous reply in early December may not have been fully accurate, or that circumstances may have changed since, am I right in assuming that the £10 to £15 cost for this filter, which apparently some thousands of people at least would have to bear, is the total cost? Is that the cost of the filter wholesale, or does it include the cost of installation, the operators' charge and so on? In other words, what is the total cost likely to be to the public?
I would imagine that is the cost of the filter itself.
Would it not be reasonable to say that a service man would not instal that, that the whole cost would probably be of the order of £25 to £30, depending on how far the person resided from the transmitter?
The Deputy will accept that funds for the transmitter network and the production facilities for the second channel are being provided by the Exchequer, by means of repayable Exchequer advances. Apart from any other consideration it would be unreasonable to expect the Exchequer to bear the incidental costs as well.
All I want is to be given the exact cost to a person who is now receiving a service—and we accept that people residing in single channel areas have a right to a choice. What is the total amount that the average person who may be interested in this discussion will have to bear to ensure that the quality of his viewing is not interfered with?
I have given the Deputy the information in relation to the cost of the filter. I am sure any other costs will vary from one area to another so it would not be possible for me to give the Deputy that sort of information.
Would the Minister agree that £30 would be a reasonable figure?
It would not be possible for me to give the Deputy that sort of information.
Would the Minister agree that a subsidy might be necessary in some cases, or that there are people who may not be able to afford it?
I have already given the Deputy as much information as is available to me.
The Minister has evaded the issue.
Would the Minister say whether he has seen reports that RTE 2 will obliterate one of the British stations and, if so, if he will take preventive measures?
This was the type of report we had prior to the Cairn Hill transmitter going into operation but, fortunately, it did not happen.
Question No. 5.
Will the Minister assure the House that it will not happen?
I have given the House the full information available to me in my reply. I would suggest to the Deputy that he might read the reply I have made available here, which is a very lengthy one.
Next question, please.
Would the Minister assure the House that there would not be any obliteration of any other station?
I cannot assure the House of that——
The Minister does not know.
As I said in my original reply, "I cannot give a guarantee that there will be no disimprovement in the quality of multi-channel reception in the areas concerned".
Does the Minister care?
Next question, please.
