Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 4 Dec 1979

Vol. 317 No. 4

Broadcasting Authority (Amendment) Bill, 1979: Second Stage (Resumed).

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

Mr. Keating

I had almost concluded on the last occasion. As will have been apparent from the drift of the comments from this side of the House, we find this Bill unacceptable for a number of reasons. The essential reasons were well spelled out by our spokesman, Deputy Deasy. Section 3 seeks to place a monopoly of broadcasting, both national and local, in the hands of the RTE Authority. Despite our admiration for the fine work carried out by that august body, we feel there is no justification, political or otherwise, for such a provision. The Minister may point out that section 3 (1) does not necessarily exclude the possibility of enabling measures being introduced subsequently which would allow others into that area. In the absence of any visible evidence of such a proposal we may conclude that the Government intend to deal with the matter in this way. That is unsatisfactory.

In effect this is local broadcasting brought in by the back door, and it is doing a disservice. It would be far more useful and practical if we had one Broadcasting Authority Bill in front of us—whatever the draftsmanship delays—which dealt with local broadcasting and the Government's attitude and the attitude of the House to those who are broadcasting without a licence. This Bill is unacceptable accordingly. The more I thought about it over the weekend the more disturbed I became, because what appears to be a relatively innocuous Bill, designed ostensibly to give extra money to RTE to carry on their good work, could be interpreted much more subtly.

Section 3 flies in the face of the policy to which this party are committed. We believe section 3 is not in the public interest. The difference between local and national broadcasting does not need to be teased out any further. I dealt with it fairly extensively last week. I want to quote one comment from an article in an issue of the Broadcasting Review last year by Jean Darcy, the president of the International Institute of Communications. He said in reference to local broadcasting and what our response should be:

Questions concerning opportunities for self expression at the local community level should be decided not in terms of mass media but in terms of communication. The concept of group media, in contra-distinction to mass media has been proposed to cover those media operating on a human scale.

This thinking is backed up and supported by an article in The Irish Times of 23 February 1978. It is by Howard Kinlay, who wrote:

A national radio network, with its generalised approach to the issues of the day is, perforce difficult to interrupt with the localised experiences which are probably the primary preoccupation of most of the listeners most of the time. It is not the role of a national radio service to respond to these preoccupations in other than a generalised way. Indeed, in a mass communications situation, even the perception of them is extremely difficult and, to some extent, a distraction.

Therefore, we do not seek to exclude RTE from local broadcasting. What we seek is to introduce a situation in which local broadcasting is an area in which certain qualifications recognisable in law and acceptable to the community are in the possession of such groups.

We are saying that we should not seek to exclude people because of the nature of local broadcasting, and this clause undoubtedly will be used without any prevarication or any suggestion of a doubt to try to justify inaction and inertia later on when it comes to a commitment by the Taoiseach to introduce local broadcasting policy. It will then be pointed out to us that we already have an embryonic local broadcasting policy in the hands—God bless those good hands—of the national television network, and anyone daring to raise a finger against that will be accused of lack of confidence in the national network, which would be far from true. I am reminded, incidentally, of a reference by Norbert Frye when he said:

It is significant that our symbolic term for "tyrant" is the word "dictator", that is, an uninterrupted speaker.

If we seek to enshrine in the hands of any small group the main organs of communication, the main media, all of us will do a disservice. I will not go into it in any greater detail. However, I ask the Minister to reconsider section 3. If the main aim of the Bill is to give money to RTE to enable them to carry on, the Minister will not lose anything by considering withdrawing this section and its possible inclusion later in the broadcasting legislation he has promised. If section 3 does not do anything more than spell out what is implicitly understood in section 16 (1) of the 1960 Act, which gives RTE power to engage in local broadcasting anyhow, the Minister cannot say that the withdrawal of this section would delay RTE activity in this area. Accordingly he would not have anything to lose and would probably be responsible for a much more satisfactory Bill, a much more rounded debate and a more acceptable response to his promised measures when they are introduced eventually.

In the meantime, I am afraid that the insertion of this clause is not, as far as I and my party are concerned, acceptable. I have referred to section 4 which I would also ask the Minister to reconsider. It seems to us to be unconstitutional. It seeks to do something we are very prone to in this country whenever a new technological challenge arises: we run to try to introduce some cobweb of bureaucratic regulation or legislation to limit the freedom of people. We should not try to do that except in the most extreme circumstances, and I am far from convinced that we need to limit the activities or the freedom of people in RTE in the manner proposed in the Bill. I think that a constitutional action taken in the proper jurisdiction might very well be successful.

I shall deal for a few minutes with section 1, which seeks to grant funds to RTE. As I have said, sections 3 and 4 are most unhelpful from the point of view of prompting a sympathetic response and I hope the Minister will consider our objections which are based on an honest concern about the possible dangers which a Government less benign than I presume this one are might operate in this regard.

Section 1 proposes to give money and section 2 says such moneys shall not exceed £25 million in the aggregate. Last week I expressed the view that I would prefer to have the power in the hands of the Government to give the necessary moneys without having to come back to the House when an increase would be needed. It seems to me to be an unnecessary waste of public time. In so far as we are now asked to vote money towards the national television network, it is not outside the bounds of reasonable response to ask to what extent we are satisfied with the manner in which present moneys are being spent, how it is felt those moneys would be spent in the future when allocated, and what the general attitude is in this House as to the present financial accountability of the network.

As far as I am concerned, it is not at all unhelpful to have a debate of this kind now and again. It might help the people in RTE, the planners there, people watching broadcasting generally, and it would also be helpful to us to communicate our areas of interest and concern. I wish to join with previous speakers who have paid tribute to the manner in which RTE have been carrying out their functions. In a very short time they have become a fine professional organisation, they have attained a very high standard of network service, and in terms of comparable analysis with other countries, particularly in Europe, they have come out very well.

Of course, it is popular for people to say, "There is never anything on television". We are all very hard on our own station—presumably, far way hills being greener than ours—but as far as I am concerned we have a number of producers and other personnel in RTE who do a fine job considering the resources available to them. However, I should like to ventilate one or two causes of concern to me, not in any sense of wishing to restrict the freedom which RTE people have but as an honest expression of concern about the way some of the moneys which we might vote might be used. I ask those concerned to consider my remarks as respectful suggestions rather than as anything stronger.

Despite the general level of satisfaction expressed in the House about the operations of RTE, there is occasionally the major pornography of violence on the media. In a matter of two or three minutes I should like to say to RTE that when they get these moneys they might consider the impact of some of the programmes which come to the network on the minds of young people.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair does not like to interrupt the Deputy, but we are not discussing programmes on this measure. We may discuss them later on the Estimates. The money being provided here is for capital expenditure and that has nothing to do with programmes. I have allowed the Deputy to refer to programmes in passing.

Mr. Keating

I will not go into it in detail. I just want to say in one or two sentences that there is room for concern about some of the imported material RTE get. I have written to every member of the Authority in the last 12 months naming a programme or two which I consider to be repugnant. I will have an opportunity to deal more fully with this on the Estimates and I shall be content now to say that there are some imported programmes which are harmful to the minds of young people. We would be better off without them, even though they might come under the definition of "entertainment". They are relatively attractive from the point of view of listener statistics. If money is seen to be a problem for RTE, and if they have to ask us for more money, it may mean they are being forced to entertain by putting on the kind of programmes they would not normally wish to be involved with. I am not suggesting for a moment that it is not the job of the national television network to broadcast to the maximum number of people. I am suggesting that there are some types of programmes which are widely accepted as being in the common good but which might not have the kind of listenership which others might have. I would not like to see the national television network, under some kind of pressure, put on some of the drivel we have to tolerate occasionally from networks generally in the interests of trying to cope with the pressure of advertisers. Some people will argue that what is propagated through the network does not have this impact on people on a Saturday evening. Nobody denies that advertising on a network pays and it follows logically that any broadcasting will have an impact. There are programmes which are a matter of concern.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I ask the Deputy to leave the programmes at this stage because if I allow the Deputy to continue on them every other Deputy in the House would do the same.

Mr. Keating

I accept that. I was only following the precedent set last week or I would not have introduced it at all.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We did our best to stop quite a bit of it although I do not know if we succeeded.

Mr. Keating

I thought it was an interesting debate. I did not name a programme. We would be better off without some types of imported material which we have. I would be worried in case RTE had to put them on to keep the TAM figures up. The Minister might also take a look at advertising standards. As far as I am concerned the voluntary codes in operation at the moment do not operate as satisfactorily as they should. At the beginning of this season, which we hope will be one of goodwill and peace, RTE might consider a ban on advertising which is of a violent nature and propagates the sale of guns, toy soldiers and anything else which might be seen to be detrimental to the interests of young people.

The television network is no longer a means of distribution. It is now a means of communication and it has a very positive social role. I am expressing concern in that area. When it comes to voting money for any aspect of RTE we are entitled to make some remarks on the impact of advertising. I would like the Minister to reconsider section 3. On reflection he may find some substance in the remarks I made last Thursday. If so, I know that he will, as he has done in the past, be gracious enough to admit that second thoughts may be better thoughts, particularly when he will have an opportunity, according to the Taoiseach, of introducing a comprehensive Bill, when the section he wishes to insert now would not be so repugnant because it would come along with a very important enabling section for anybody else qualified to get involved in local broadcasting. I do not believe that any of us want to eliminate from local broadcasting the people at local level who have any new thinking or new technology to bring into this area.

Mr. G. Brady

I welcome this Bill. I regard our broadcasting service as a huge success, particularly over the last few years. This service needs money. Capital is urgently needed to maintain the continuity of service. This is precisely what the Bill is about. The allocation of £10 million to RTE is minimal sum when compared with overseas television networks and the standards against which RTE have to compete.

I have not got any fears or doubts about section 3. It merely regularises the present position. It makes it possible for RTE to continue to expand into local services. Any funds necessary should be allocated by the House. An additional studio is being constructed at Montrose and money is urgently needed for this work. There is a demand for home produced programmes. Any money we can give to RTE for that purpose is money well spent.

I do not think people are giving enough attention to the fact that reception of RTE 1, never mind RTE 2, is not all it should be in many areas. RTE 1, our primary channel, is unfortunately not being received very clearly in many areas. Any expenditure in improving reception of RTE 1 is money well spent. I would like the Minister, now that we have RTE 2, to give serious consideration to establishing an open university on this network. There is a great public demand for such an innovation. This project in England has been an overwhelming success. We would all welcome the allocation of money to establish studios suitable for an open university. Our higher level educational programmes are well geared towards young people. There are many adults—and not alone housewives—who feel they have not enough time or sufficient qualifications to avail of extra mural studies or extra curricula activities to improve their overall standard of education. I would like to see RTE using the second channel to establish an open university.

With regard to local radio and local television, any money invested in this area will give great opportunities for employment. We are all well aware from the Taoiseach's remarks earlier this year, when he presented the Jacob's awards, that there is legislation in the pipeline which will allow for the establishment of an independent radio authority, which will give an opportunity to many existing stations, which I consider are quite wrongfully called pirate stations. Such stations will be able to apply for licences under this new radio authority. There will also be a broadcasting Bill to regularise the pirate stations. I would like to see both Bills giving the opportunity to the people engaged in broadcasting to apply themselves to new job opportunities in the expanding local authority. It is a new concept for us to spend money in developing a television service at local level. This works very well in other countries.

Local radios can work perhaps one hour per day for each district. Rather than giving an evening's viewing time to, say, Dublin, it would be better to give one hour to each area. Local radio and television have been very successful in other countries. Let us look to the future as being a great opportunity for an expanding Authority. It is most unreasonable to expect RTE to continue their capital programme without financial assistance. Over the past two years RTE's track record has been very good. When the pirate stations started broadcasting they shocked RTE and increased their efficiency. The establishment of the second radio channel has been a success. Competition is good and it is the Minister's intention that there will be competition to produce the best possible service. It is not the Government's intention to stifle broadcasting. I welcome the Bill and look forward to an expansion in the service in the not too distant future.

Mr. Corish

This is a very short Bill but it contains two important sections—sections 3 and 4. Section 4 enables the employees of RTE to be seconded from their employment to stand for election to the Dáil and Seanad and, if elected, to maintain their secondment for the period of membership of either the Dáil or Seanad. The present position is that a person so nominated must resign. If he is not elected he would not be able to resume his employment. Section 4 puts RTE employees in the same position as national teachers and local government officials. However, there is still an anomaly in relation to post office workers. I know the Minister would need different legislation to regularise the position of post office workers. A member of the Labour Party who wanted to stand for the recent by-election in Cork city was forced to resign from his employment. As Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, I hope the Minister will include in legislation the same facilities for post office workers.

Section 3 deals with the uncertainty contained in the Broadcasting Act of 1960. Under the 1960 Act it was not clear whether RTE could establish and maintain local broadcasting services. Up to now, the Department of Posts and Telegraphs have been able to use the 1960 Act to prevent RTE from developing the local broadcasting service. Section 3 provides for the establishment and maintenance by RTE of a local broadcasting service. RTE want local broadcasting on a permanent basis. In a submission to the Minister they sought the establishment of Radio Dublin and Radio Shannonside. This request has not yet been acceeded to and I hope the Minister will indicate when the request will be granted. We need a range of regional channels, including one for each of our larger urban areas, and the continuation of Radio na Gaeltachta. Local transmitters should be provided for smaller geographical areas. Such a wide range of potential transmissions would extend programme choice.

The Labour Party have always been in favour of broadcasting the proceedings of the Houses of the Oireachtas. This matter has been discussed for a long time and it appears that agreement has not yet been reached. I know that Question Time in the House of Commons is broadcast. If we were to behave as the British MPs appear to do during Question Time, we could throw our hats at the idea. However, it is my experience that we do not act like a mob in a film although we can be unruly at times. Perhaps the Minister would give us his opinion about broadcasting part of the proceedings of the Dáil and Seanad.

Another aspect of broadcasting is the concern of cultural and economic organisations at the failure of RTE to represent their interests. I believe that additional national and local channels would obviate this problem to a great degree. Apart from the provision of extra channels at national and local level, there should be efforts to develop what is described as access broadcasting. The Minister will probably say that access broadcasting would cost a great deal of money. I believe that access broadcasting would meet the demands of many of the minority sections of the community. In terms of local broadcasting access broadcasting means providing facilities and encouragement for representative groups to make a serious contribution to programme content. It would be expected in such broadcasting that RTE personnel and facilities would be available to majority interest groups, including, of course, young people, to help them make their own programmes and propagate their own ideas on a regular basis.

The Bill does not mean that RTE will be responsible for all future local broadcasting. Under the proposed legislation the question of who will be responsible for local broadcasting will be settled. The Government have already announced, although a Bill has not been introduced to deal with this—this was referred to by Deputy Brady—that they will set up an independent local radio Authority which will have the power to grant licences to private interest groups. I expect these groups will undertake local broadcasting in certain areas. I should like to know the Minister's thinking on this suggestion. He should clarify his position about the future control of local broadcasting. The Bill does not give us any hint as to what will happen in that respect but it makes it clear that RTE may operate local broadcasting. Whether they do so in the future depends on the Minister's view or decision as to who should control local broadcasting.

In general terms, I support the Bill but I am anxious to hear the Minister's view on that crucial point, the control of local broadcasting services. Does the Minister intend to parcel out large sections of such broadcasting to private enterprise? There is a Bill on the stocks—it appears on the Order Paper and has been circulated—which seeks to prohibit broadcasting except by licence. It provides penalties for such offences also. There has been a debate as to whether or not broadcasting should be under State control. I am sure all Members remember the Broadcasting Review Committee established in 1974. One of the recommendations of that committee was that broadcasting should continue to be a public service. That recommendation was issued five years ago and I should like to know whether Members on either side of the House support that view now.

The Labour Party have reaffirmed their fundamental commitment to public service broadcasting. That has been the attitude of successive Governments and is still the attitude of the Labour Party. Our commitment to public service broadcasting arrives from our understanding of the nature and purpose of broadcasting. By its nature broadcasting can never be neutral. It will reflect ownership and control systems. The essential purpose of broadcasting is to inform, educate and entertain. The quality of its achievement in those areas will depend on the ownership and control. In essence, public service broadcasting has as its central objective the servicing of the public interest. Commercially owned broadcasting is concerned with returns on private investment. Therefore, we find we must take sides. Some questions must be asked in relation to this. The first question is: are the scarce national airwaves to be used in a way that attempts to meet public interest requirements or are some or all of those limited resources to be used by interests whose fundamental purpose is different?

I am not saying that commercial radio from time to time would not serve the public interest but public interest is not its central purpose. We believe that our limited airwaves should be used exclusively in the public interest. The present debate about broadcasting has raised the question as to whether the democratic ideal can be served where there is sole control by Radio Telefís Éireann. There have been complaints about Radio Telefís Éireann and their special position. They have been described as a monopoly and I suppose they are. Questions have been raised as to whether this monopoly position is, in fact, constitutional. There is a suggestion by various groups, commercial and otherwise, that it is unconstitutional. Those questions usually derive from the conservative end of the political spectrum. I do not believe there is anything undemocratic about a single public service broadcasting Authority, a broadcasting Authority who have been instituted by Act of parliament and with a specific legislative mandate to reflect the various views and aspirations of society as a whole. There can be, and there is, a debate as to how good or bad Radio Telefís Éireann are but that, essentially, is an argument not about control but about programming.

It can be reasonably expected that democratic content of broadcasting would be diminished rather than enhanced in a situation of competition for audiences and advertising revenue between two or more owners. Such competition for mass audiences would lessen the possibility of adequate coverage for minority interests. The minority interest is one of the central functions of radio. The need to divide advertising revenue between competing owners would diminish quality of programming in general. As far as minority interests are concerned we should all note and applaud the positive way in which RTE have, despite competition and competitive pressures from other media, consistently and generously extended patronage to a whole generation of Irish writers, musicians, actors and composers, Public service broadcasting is not inconsistent with the need for high quality and democratic programming—by democratic I mean reflecting the full range of interests and aspirations in society within the law. In a country like ours with limited airwaves it is difficult to see quality and democratic objectives being met in any other way.

There are many questions with regard to programming, as to whether we need better pop music, greater use of the Irish language and music, more access for minority groups and local communities and, indeed, local radio. Those questions deal with the use we make of our airwaves and not with who owns them. A single national broadcasting Authority are in a strong position to meet public need in those and other areas. Competitive ownership structures would reduce the possibility of them being catered for. There are now wider possibilities for radio to open up. There have been experiments by RTE in regional and local radio and, of course, by illegal operators.

We have the second national channel which has proved very satisfactory, catering to a very large extent, for the young people who want pop music. A wide range of transmissions is available to Radio Telefís Éireann. We have at present two national stations and one VHF channel; there is room for two VHF channels. As far as my information goes, only 31 per cent of the population receive VHF programmes. We could have a range of regional channels for the different urban areas and a continuation of Radio na Gaeltachta. We could also have local radio transmitters, including mobile ones for small geographical areas. This has been done very successfully over the past two or three years and we should congratulate RTE on their initiative in this respect. The Broadcasting and Wireless Telegraphy Bill to which I referred provides for the issue of licences and for penalties for the operation of unlicensed stations. Possibly all that has been said here should, or will, be said on the next Bill which is to come before the House.

I conclude by congratulating the Minister on the introduction of that section which allows employees to stand for the Dáil and not suffer any loss. Perhaps he would be a little more specific as far as section 3 is concerned. I have given my party's view on it. We believe control of broadcasting by RTE to be for the good of the country because it would look after minority interests. Perhaps the Minister might comment on some of these matters, not to be decided on in this debate but just to allow his mind to be known as far as the issue of licences for local broadcasting are concerned.

Mr. Cogan

I, too, welcome this Bill which gives RTE the opportunity of updating their equipment and providing new equipment where it is needed. In my part of the country it is difficult in many areas to get RTE at all. This is a single channel or no channel area, though in some areas we have two channels. There is an opportunity under this Bill for RTE to rectify this situation. The present picture which is being televised from Mullaghanish to the Cork area is nothing short of disgraceful. I understand that a certain amount of equipment is there and it should be put into operation to rectify this. All the transposers in that area are also affected. If this equipment is not put into operation immediately it will be out of date.

More transposers are needed in the southern part of the country and in Cork city, in places, for instance, like Glanmire, where they have only RTE 1, Passage West, where they never had RTE 1 to any great extent, and places like Kinsale and many other black spots. There are altogether 800 to 900 black spots in the country. Television started here in 1961 and while great strides have been made many people—you could call them the silent minority—have to put up with very poor reception or none at all. These people cannot strike or raise their voices to any great extent by way of protest. The Minister said that some of these moneys are for the improvement of those situations and I welcome that. It can be said of RTE that they do a very good job with the resources at their disposal.

The situation with regard to radio is equally critical in some areas which I represent. RTE 1 is not available during the day in many areas, as these people cannot get RTE 1 on the medium wave. This shows the need for a second VHF channel. RTE can be very proud of what they have done and are doing with their present equipment. The coverage of the recent visit of the Pope was of the highest standard and a credit to RTE. It proves that they have the personnel, the technicians, the techniques and the equipment. They have the will to produce the best.

I welcome the opportunity this Bill provides for further moneys for capital investment in RTE and for old broadcasting systems to be up-dated regularly, in this age of fast advancing technology. This will enable us to move into the eighties with confidence to plan ahead and to use these resources efficiently so that they will be of the greatest benefit to all the nation.

Mr. O'Keeffe

The main purpose of my intervention is to request, even demand, proper receiption on radio and television for those living in rural areas along our south and west coasts. There has been an over-concentration of resources by RTE in endeavouring to compete with the pirates on radio and with the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland channels on television, with the result that the peripheral parts of our country have been neglected and left to make do with hopeless, or, in some cases, no reception at all. This is typified by the situation which obtains in regard to Radio 1. We have had here a radio service for over 50 years; the radio broadcasting service began in 1926. The main radio programme, which caused many problems in regard to reception in the past, is now back in the same old situation.

Past problems were remedied in 1966 when Radio Éireann was broadcast on VHF frequency. This solved once and for all the reception problems in remote areas.

Then there was the bright idea of establishing Radio 2, which meant that the VHF frequency formerly available to Radio 1 was transferred to Radio 2, meaning, in turn, that Radio 1, the staple diet of many people in remote parts where there is no television reception, is no longer received. There seems to me to be absolutely no justification for this decision. It has never been justified in this House. I have raised the matter on a number of occasions. There have been vague assurances given of a second VHF frequency being available in the future, with the prospect of Radio 1 reception being restored to VHF. That is not the basic point. The real issue here is that there was radio reception of Radio Éireann, now Radio 1, available to people all over the country. That is no longer available.

In my book, that is not progress. Why was it done? As far as I can ascertain, there was an effort made to establish Radio 2, to encourage people to listen to Radio 2, but we have now a situation in which people are being coerced to listen to Radio 2 because they cannot get Radio 1. I want to impress on the Minister that this is a situation that should not have arisen and one which should be remedied now. There is considerable strength of feeling in many of the remoter parts about this iniquitous situation. If the Minister is prepared, by way of direction or otherwise to RTE—he being the Minister responsible for that Authority—to arrange that this step be taken, certainly he will receive the gratitude of those people. The Minister should not underestimate the strength of feeling in this respect. It is an issue in respect of which I have had a huge volume of correspondence, not alone from my own area of west Cork but from other parts along the western seaboard. More money is being provided to RTE under this Bill. If they are not prepared to switch Radio 1 back to VHF, they should use that money to provide a further VHF frequency but, one way or the other, the problem must be resolved immediately.

Having said that, I compliment RTE on having established a second radio programme. It shows they have developed their expertise. It provides an outlet for further Irish artists and, in turn, a choice and variety for those people able to receive Radios 1 and 2. I say: "Good luck to Radio 2 but not at the expense of Radio 1."

There are problems in regard to television also. I compliment RTE on the developments that have taken place in television. But, again, there has been neglect in those parts of the country that can receive one RTE channel only and in a number of others where there is no television reception at all. We have heard of black spots and of efforts being made to remedy them. If there is big money being voted for our broadcasting services, let me make a plea on behalf of those people in those black spot areas that their needs be looked after now once and for all. It is not fair that extra services are being provided in some areas where there is a variety of channels on offer while there is continuous and total neglect of other parts where people are left without television reception at all. Surely that is not justifiable. While RTE suffer from competitive pressure from other channels they have a fundamental duty to provide the minimum, basic service for all. That is a duty that should be discharged now. This is not a problem obtaining only in my area of south-west Cork. I am aware also that there are vast areas of Kerry, particularly the Dingle area, where there is a virtual total blackout as far as television reception is concerned. I am aware that there are other areas along the west coast similarly affected. Why are these problems not tackled? I would ask the Minister, when replying, to give a reasoned response and provide some assurance to the people living in those areas that they will not have to suffer any longer.

A further point occurs to me on this Bill. It is fashionable for politicians to be fulsome in their praise of RTE. I suppose politicians are thankful enough for the bit of publicity they get from time to time. But that does not relieve us of the obligation and duty to inquire whether we are getting value for money. We are today debating a Bill which will provide an extra £10 million by way of repayable advances for the capital purposes of RTE. I should have expected from the Minister a broader resumé of the situation in RTE from the point of view of convincing this House that we are getting value for the money already advanced, which I understand to be of the order of £50 million, and also from the point of view of convincing ourselves that further money should be advanced. I know the Minister made a few vague references to capital expenditure in his opening statement, but these were merely general projections of what might be spent by RTE in the future.

This is a major body employing over 2,000 people and it is no harm that such questions be raised. It has been suggested to me from time to time that there is considerable feather-bedding and over-manning at different levels in RTE. If that is so, it is only right that it should be brought to the attention of the public. For instance, is the Minister fully satisfied with the financial affairs of RTE? Is he fully satisfied with their production levels? Is he fully satisfied that the body fully justifies its existence, gives full value for money, is and should be entitled to call on the State for a further substantial sum of the order of £10 million? I am not an expert in this area. Yet, as a public representative, I feel these questions need to be asked. There is the duty on the Minister to give a full resumé to this House of what exactly is the situation in RTE and whether or not he is fully satisfied with it. For example, are we getting full value for money there? In that context this House could then reach a reasoned decision as to whether further moneys should be voted to RTE.

A further major point arises on this Bill, that is, what the Minister referred to as a small technical amendment of the Broadcasting Acts. I refer in particular to the section which provides that RTE may establish and maintain local broadcasting services. On reading the Bill one has the clear impression that there is some doubt about the legality of present local broadcasting services being operated by RTE. Otherwise what is the justification for this section? Perhaps "illegality" is too strong a word to use but there seems to be at least a suggestion that the present operations are ultra vires their existing powers.

Be that as it may, that is not the main point I want to make. I am concerned that sufficient power should be given in this Bill in regard to the establishment and maintenance of local broadcasting services. The Government's intentions should be clearly expressed either in this Bill or in a Bill to run concurrently with it in regard to the whole field of local broadcasting. This applies now in regard to radio but may in the future apply to television. What we are doing in this Bill is confirming the monopoly of RTE in local broadcasting and I do not agree with that. On that basis I cannot accept this Bill.

I fully appreciate that RTE have a role to play in local broadcasting but I do not in any circumstances accept that they are entitled to a monopoly in that area. The Minister may in his reply indicate that he has a further Bill in mind. If my memory serves me correctly a Bill is mentioned on the Order Paper but it has not been circulated. I even recall a promise made by the Taoiseach that a Bill in regard to local radio would be circulated in the autumn of this year. In December 1979 we are discussing a Bill in which there is a provision which gives or confirms the monopoly to RTE in local broadcasting and we do not have any other provision or enactment before us dealing with this question. In that situation we are confirming the monopoly of RTE in local broadcasting. That is neither in the interests of the country nor in the interests of RTE. RTE have a role to play in conjunction with local communities and the provincial press, and I would envisage that the expertise and technical resources of RTE could be used for local broadcasting in conjunction with other bodies. Yet, the thinking of the Government in this area seems to have stopped short of producing a Bill in regard to an independent broadcasting authority, in regard to dealing with the question of licences and so on. The whole area will have to be discussed before final decisions are made on how local broadcasting should operate.

This is the small technical amendment that the Minister referred to in his opening speech. It is not a small technical amendment but a very serious matter which should not come into a Bill of this nature. If the Government have a number of broadcasting Bills in mind, surely the question of RTE's situation in regard to local broadcasting should have been covered in those Bills and not in a money Bill which is to provide extra funds for capital purposes for RTE. It seems that by this subterfuge it was hoped to confirm the RTE monopoly without any great fuss. That is a wrong way of doing it and if there is to be full-scale local broadcasting, let us have the position and role of RTE fully discussed in an open manner and not with our hands tied, going into such a discussion on the basis of RTE starting not at the starting gate but at the finishing gate with a monopoly already in their hands. We would be in the position of trying to chip away at something which had already been given to RTE. A lot could be done by RTE along the lines I have suggested and I hope they will tackle the problems I have outlined in the immediate future, but at the same time I cannot accept the basis on which this Bill is presented to the House.

Mr. O'Donnell

Is Bille suimiúil é seo, ach níl mórán eolais ann i dtaobh polasaí an Rialtais faoi chraolachán. Tá imní ormsa nár ghlac an tAire leis an leis atá sa Bhille chun polasaí an Rialtais a leagadh amach i dtaobh cúrsai craolacháin go ginearálta, ach go háirthe maidir le craolachán áitiúil. Ní thuigim cén fáth gur thug an tAire ráiteas chomh ghairid, nach bhfuil mórán céille ná eolais ann. Maidir leis an airgead atá ag teastáil ó RTE, níl mise nó éinne eile sa Teach i gcoinne na suime sin, ach mar sin fhéin, is cúis imní dúinn go léir nach bhfuil deis againn polasaí an Rialtais a chloisint agus a phlé i nDáil Éireann.

Because I had a personal interest in this over two years as spokesman on communications for the Fine Gael Party, I could not let the opportunity pass without making a brief contribution to this discussion. I was flabbergasted at the brevity of the Minister's introductory speech. While we do not oppose the money being sought, it is a substantial amount and we are entitled to expect the Minister at this stage, after two-and-a-half years in office, to be in a position to outline at length his ideas in relation to the whole question of national broadcasting and in relation to the very controversial issue of local broadcasting.

In his speech the Minister made brief reference to local radio in relation to amending the terms of reference of RTE. Our national broadcasting system is no better or worse than broadcasting systems in other countries. One's opinion in relation to broadcasting services, whether television or radio, is coloured very much by one's attitude to life, one's interests and so on. By and large RTE are doing a good job as the national broadcasting authority, given their restricted terms of reference. Before I criticise RTE I must give credit where credit is due. We certainly appreciate the tremendously successful manner in which RTE faced up to the unprecedented challenge of the recent historical Papal visit. This situation presented our broadcasting authority with a job, the magnitude of which they never had to contend with before. Great credit is due to them for the manner in which they handled it. Irish people in the United Kingdom were loud in their praise of the manner in which the BBC dealt with the Pope's visit to Ireland. It is only fair that we place on record our appreciation of the dignified and realistic manner in which the BBC covered that visit. That in no way detracts from the significent coverage by RTE on that historic occasion.

I am interested in local radio. Last March at the Fine Gael Ard Fheis I submitted a comprehensive policy document dealing with local broadcasting. At the Jacob's Annual Awards the Taoiseach committed the Government to the concept of local broadcasting. The expectations then raised by the Taoiseach should see a practical expression by the introduction of appropriate legislation. We are now at the end of another year and there does not appear to have been any progress made in that direction. The greatest defect in the Minister's speech is that he made no effort, good, bad or indifferent, to give us the slightest hint of his attitude or thinking on local broadcasting or when we might expect to see the necessary legislation.

In this Bill the Minister proposes an amendment in phraseology for the express purpose of enabling RTE to have a more flexible approach to local radio. It was a pity he did not avail of this opportunity to expand that further and let us know what he has in mind in relation to local broadcasting.

There has been a good deal of controversy about the pirate stations. Looking at today's paper I saw a heading that another pirate station had been hammered. The Minister should face up to this situation. So far the controversy has been black and white. Some people say local radio should be totally independent of RTE and others say it should be exclusively controlled by RTE. There is a huge grey area between these two views.

Over the last year and a half I prepared a policy document for this party and looked at these two issues. The facts are that we have unlicensed local radio stations. They have pirate radio stations. They have remained in business for the simple reason that there is a demand for this type of local broadcasting. I am convinced that the type of local service they provide is one for which there is a great demand. It is enjoyed by many and is being well supported. There is an urgent need to rationalise and regularise this chaotic situation.

There must be some control over broadcasting. I believe there should be an independent broadcasting authority, totally distinct from RTE but in which RTE should have participation. In my home town, Limerick, there is an RTE studio with very good facilities and down the street there is an unlicensed radio station. There should be some flexibility, and logic should dictate that there must be some way to combine the two. The combinations possible are enormous. I would be totally opposed to the Minister bringing in a Bill for the express purpose of banning and penalising the pirates. That is no solution. Pirate stations are a fact of life and will not go away. At the same time if we were to ban them, we would be depriving the people of a service they feel they are entitled to.

The Minister will have to bring in a comprehensive, logical, practical and realistic Bill which should take into account the existing situation and try to rationalise and regularise it with the ultimate objective of providing the people in all parts of Ireland with a local broadcasting service which would be enjoyable, educational, entertaining and which would have a local slant.

This is the most important aspect of broadcasting and this problem will have to be tackled sooner or later. As the Minister does not have a brief prepared to introduce a Bill, I cannot expect him to give a comprehensive reply on the Government's thinking on this matter, but it is not merely Government thinking we want; we want to know what action it is proposed to take to set up a local broadcasting system here.

I rith mo thréimhse mar Aire na Gaeltachta, ó 1973 go 1977, bhí anbhaint agam le Radio na Gaeltachta. Is minic a bhí agallamh agam le iriseóirí as Radio na Gaeltachta. Ó am go ham nuair a bhíonn an deis agam éistím fós le Radio na Gaeltachta. Níl aon amhras ar chor ar bith ach gur chabhraigh Radio na Gaeltachta go mór le muintir na Gaeltachta, go háirithe chun leas mhuintir na Gaeltachta a chur chun cinn agus chun leas na Gaeilge agus leas na teanga a chur chun cinn.

Maidir le Radio na Gaeltachta agus an craolachán áitiúil, is féidir liom féachaint ar Radio na Gaeltachta mar saghas model local broadcasting system. Tugann sé seirbhís an-mhaith, ansuimiúil agus an-taitneamhach do mhuintir na Gaeltachta. Is breá an rud do mhuintir na Gaeltachta bheith ag éisteacht gach oíche le nuacht as Dún na nGall, Gailleamh nó ceanntracha eile sa Ghaeltacht. Sin é an saghas seirbhíse atá ag teastáil ó mhuintir na hÉireann.

Maidir le Radio na Gaeltachta, tá súil agam go bhfuil Udarás na Gaeltachta le bunadh go luath. Tá súil agam go nglacfaidh an tAire le ócáid bunú Údarás nua na Gaeltachta chun féachaint isteach i gceist chraolachán Ghaelachta agus b'fhéidir an Ghaeilge a leathnú trí theilifís.

You, Sir, will be interested in the point I am making as much of your county is in the Gaeltacht. I am referring to the role Radio na Gaeltachta have played in the social, cultural and linguistic development of the Gaeltacht. With the establishment of a new Gaeltacht authority I am posing the question that perhaps now might be a good time to look at the possibility, which has been the dream of all involved in the language and the development of the Gaeltacht, of establishing a Gaeltacht television service. There would be widespread support for this. This may sound far-fetched but the basic structure is there through the radio station. I would envisage that the establishment of a Gaeltacht television service would have a beneficial effect on the morale of the people and would make a practical contribution towards preserving the Gaeltacht, which is the tobar agus foinse, the source and fountain, of our language and culture. Side by side with Bord na Gaeltachta and Udarás na Gaeltachta the Government should look at the possibility of having a television service.

I should like to refer to the role of broadcasting in relation to education and the proceedings of Parliament. I had the privilege of being involved in an organisation founded by a wonderful Irish priest, Muintir na Tíre. Among the objectives of that organisation was the promotion of community development. There are practical examples of the successful application of this principle in many parts of the country. One of the most fundamental pre-requisites for successful community development is adult education. I should like to see our national broadcasting system playing a major and positive role in the field of adult education. Some people will go further and say that we should have an open university concept. This would be desirable but I am a realist in most things. All over the civilised world there is a tremendous emphasis on adult or continuing education. It is also called education for life but the Minister will know what I mean. I had the privilege of officially opening the annual conference some years ago of Aontas, the national adult education movement and the then director general of RTE delivered an interesting address on this question. The Minister should bear in mind the possibility of utilising the broadcasting service to promote adult education.

I have spoken many times before in various debates on the question of broadcasting parliamentary proceedings. Many Deputies are interested in this and it leads to interesting debate. I know that the possibility of live broadcast of the proceedings of the Dáil and Seanad have been discussed by various parties but no progress has been made. I know that there is mixed reaction in the UK to the experiment they are trying in the House of Commons. In this age of high-powered communication live broadcasts of proceedings on special occasions such as Question Time, budget day and adjournment debates should be looked at in a more serious way than it has been in the past.

On any debate dealing with broadcasting one programme that is always referred to is "Today in the Dáil". This programme, when the Dáil and Seanad are in session, gives a report of the proceedings. It is an excellent programme; it is straightforward and concise. I have never heard any Deputy finding fault with the presentation. That is the type of serious, realistic, responsible approach I should like to see developed and expanded. I remember that Deputy Briscoe and many others advocated the possibility of transmitting "Today in the Dáil" on television or allocating it more time. I hope that before long we will have an opportunity for a comprehensive debate on the evolution and development of our broadcasting services and a more in-depth debate on the important topic of local radio.

Mr. White

In regard to community radio stations we are all aware of the uproar there has been as far as pirate stations are concerned. I am disappointed that no direct mention has been made in the Bill of legalising these proposed new community radios. The Minister is coming to the stage where he will have to make a decision on whether we will have different county radio stations.

Radio 2 has been a tremendous success. It is catering mainly for the younger generation and we have a very big young generation at present. No matter what house one goes into where the radio is turned on, Radio 2 seems to be catching on in tremendous strides. They are putting on a first-class show and most of their programmes are worth listening to. For that reason the Minister should consider diversifying even further into community stations, county stations or whatever. If we are serious about banning pirate radio stations we must legalise some alternative. If we are going to legalise the county type station the community must certainly have a say in it. So should the local press and RTE. At this point the Minister must decide what share RTE will have in the local station. I take it he has given serious thought to this matter but that no decision has been taken yet.

Minister of State at the Department of Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick,

Dublin South-Central): We shall be introducing a Bill very shortly dealing with local radio.

Mr. White

I am delighted to hear that. What the Minister says is that they intend to make local radio a proper legal service probably on a county basis. I am delighted to hear the Minister make that commitment and I welcome it. The three elements must be taken into consideration, the local people, the local press and RTE. The only source of finance to run the station that I see for them is, first, if they get a grant from the Department or through RTE and, second, from advertising. Much advertising could be got on a local basis, perhaps from supermarkets, dancehalls, fairs and marts. In his new Bill the Minister should also provide that the local radio station may collect revenue from such sources. I mention the local press because I think that if the radio is effective and properly run the local press may lose revenue and it is only right that they should have a say.

At present in Northern Ireland there are Radio Ulster and Radio Derry and in some areas around the Border, particularly if I may speak for Donegal, it is feared that some of the advertising that could be secured on this side by, say, a local Donegal station will, if we do not hurry up with our own station go into places like Derry. The quicker the project is proceeded with and the sooner the community have a voice in running these stations the better.

We have three Gaeltacht radio stations at present, one in Kerry, one in Galway and one in Donegal. I understand the Mayo Gaeltacht also want a Gaeltacht radio station. I welcome this. Where Irish is the native tongue the people should have their own radio station. Certainly Radio na Gaeltachta is listened to in Donegal by the Gaeltacht population in the area. In travelling through the constituency it is amazing how many people tell me that they have heard certain items on Radio na Gaeltachta. Their success is probably limited because the Gaeltacht areas are limited. Even in Connemara probably not everybody speaks Irish but my point is that those who do speak Irish should be entitled to have their own radio station in the area. In mentioning Mayo I wonder if it is possible that the Galway Gaeltacht radio station would have a sufficiently high frequency to enable the people in Mayo to listen to it. If so, that could be considered in the short term. Serious consideration should be given to the Mayo Gaeltacht having its own Gaeltacht station.

In welcoming the part radio plays in regard to the national language I also have some criticism as regards Radio 1 and Radio 2—thought not so much in the latter case. I know that there is much pressure on the RTE Authority to have more Irish spoken on Radio I and to an extent on Radio 2. I think we may go too far in that way. After all, leaving out the Gaeltacht areas, the greater percentage of people who do not speak Irish feel that the national station should have 90 per cent of their programmes in English. Some people complain of a little too much Irish on the national programmes that they cannot follow. The RTE Authority have to walk a tightrope; they have a very difficult task here. They want to please a small minority and at the same time they want the majority of the community to listen to their programmes. One of the reasons why Radio 2 is doing so well is that Radio 1 has reverted to many of the Irish and programmes and people hear Irish and turn off to Radio 2. That is not the main reason, which I think is that Radio 2 is playing more music in the younger style and have caught on with the younger community. Also Radio 2 seems to provide fewer Gaeltacht programmes but it is inclined to have a little Irish and also bring in an English version of it which is a good thing. If the whole conversation is not in Irish, that is fine; people will accept something spoken in Irish with a follow through in English. That is doing a lot of good.

I know that the Gaeltacht authorities are advertising for more people to speak on our national heritage. In this regard we have some very good programmes both on RTE 1 and RTE 2 and also on the radio on traditional music. Perhaps RTE 1 could do more outside programmes taking in different areas and bringing home to people the value of our traditional music particularly in the west of Ireland, Clare, Galway and parts of Donegal where such music is very popular.

I doubt if Radio 1 and Radio 2 are heard all over Northern Ireland and the same applies to television. If so I think that even in the farthest parts of the country the Northern Ireland people should be able to receive all our national programmes just as we in Donegal—and probably in Cavan and Monaghan—are able to receive five stations RTE 1, RTE 2, BBC 1, BBC 2 and UTV. Even in County Antrim and in the most distant areas the people should be able to receive all the Irish programmes we have to offer. Probably the greatest fault in our divided communities today is lack of education. Probably the Northern Ireland people do not understand the southern Ireland people because of the way in which they have been educated. I think the Minister in charge of communications has a responsibility to see that we try to educate these people through our own media. I believe that if they see a good deal of our programmes they will not be as embittered as they have been.

Finally, I welcome the news that the Minister is introducing a Bill to deal with community radio stations and I hope he will see that the local people and the local press have a big voice in this matter. It is also important that the knowhow should be supplied by RTE. I trust the Minister will make it legal for these local stations to raise revenue in whatever way they can.

Mr. Enright

In regard to the Bill before the House there are a number of points that concern me. I will deal with those in a few moments.

One of the main criticisms I have of our national television and radio service is that there is a serious lack of good investigative journalism at present. The limited number of programmes on television at the moment lack teeth and strength and guts. I say this without in any way detracting from some of the excellent journalists presently employed in RTE. I do not wish to detract from their honesty, their integrity and their professionalism. But it causes me some concern and worry that nowadays there is not the same type of programme that we witnessed in the past.

There were a number of programmes that I, as an independent person watching television, consider had spirit and got results. There was the programme on money lenders. The people involved in that programme went out and researched that and subsequently there was an inquiry into it. Our national television service should be involved in matters of that nature. Another example is a programme on housing many years ago. It was a thorough in-depth study. It was excellent journalism. I could give more examples but I do not want to labour the point. That type of programme is necessary.

Our national papers are making a reasonable effort to get underneath stories, to find out what is happening. It appears that they have the blessing and the goodwill of their editors and the people in charge, the board of directors and so on. This is as it should be, and the Minister would be the first to agree with me on that. One must have good investigative teams who do not just accept at face value any items presented to them.

Our television network was providing such a service. I wonder why that has stopped? Has there been, if not a direct order, a curtailment? We lack that type of in-depth study, that going behind the scenes necessary to lead up to these stories. It is necessary that the people involved in these programmes have the authority and the full backing of the RTE Authority and the Director General and so on.

Let us make no mistake about it: television is a mighty, important media. It is a mighty way of getting across facts, figures and stories and it is absolutely essential to have a return to this type of journalism in our national television stations. Programmes should be researched irrespective of who is going to be affected. The people involved should have their sleeves rolled up and be out there looking for the reasons behind particular events, because that is what television is about. I am sure the Minister will tell me his views on this statement of mine here this afternoon, because it is important to have a return to the type of investigative journalism that we had in the past on our national television station.

Like my colleagues on this side of the House, I am anxious to ensure that we have a proper broadcasting service to include local radio stations and whatever else follows from that. RTE have done an excellent job in most respects. They have acquitted themselves admirably, working in many instances with limited finances and against pressures from many sides. They have worked well. But we should have more local broadcasting services throughout the country. I accept that there are difficulties. I have heard the Director General and many senior people involved in broadcasting pointing out a lot of the difficulties. There are areas with large populations, which is very convenient for advertisers who put in revenue so that a good service and excellent programmes can be provided in those areas; whereas, in smaller areas which are less densely populated, there is less incentive to advertise and therefore less revenue. Advertisers are not going to spend money because such a station would not encompass a wide area or reach as many people, so that it is impossible for such stations to provide an adequate service.

I accept that, but local radio stations should be set up wherever possible. Many of our local newspapers throughout the country are run by small companies, and a large number of these local radio stations could prove a success. It is essential that these radio stations be set up in local areas which have the network to provide such services. The Minister must agree that the staff and amenities to assimilate and distribute news are available and also the wherewithal, the capacity and the capability to organise such a broadcasting service which would be welcomed by everybody. We need a positive statement from the Minister setting out his attitude in regard to this matter.

With some minor exceptions, our television network is providing an excellent service. I have mentioned these exceptions already. I would like to see the return of some of the types of programmes that I have referred to. Another point I wish to make is that at present there is not sufficient political discussion on our national television service. Over the years the number of programmes of a political nature has diminished considerably, particularly on television. The radio does very frequently broadcast political programmes which in the main are excellent but we need more television programmes dealing with political affairs in this country. The Minister should discuss this with the three party Whips in conjunction with the Director General of RTE and members of the Authority. The only time that we see anything of a political nature on television is prior to an election, be it a general election, a by-election, a European election or a local election and perhaps at a time of a major event such as a summit meeting or when the Taoiseach is returning from abroad. Other events which are of lesser importance should also be discussed and debated on radio and on television. A number of programmes which are no longer broadcast should be restored. They gave people an insight into the policies of the various political parties and an indication of the ideas of Opposition parties and so on.

In the past 12 months too few programmes relating to agriculture have appeared on our national television network. I have always had the height of respect for the various television programmes relating to agriculture. I have been in communication with members of the agricultural community who have expressed pleasure and satisfaction with these programmes. They found them informative, educational and stimulating, and so did I. The reduction in the number of such programmes is too great and I am very concerned about the difficulties that the programme Landmark has had to face over the last few months. That programme should be restored and the number of programmes dealing with agriculture should be increased. I remember in particular programmes which dealt with farming trends in Continental countries which were most educational. We must keep our agricultural community in touch with current events in Europe and throughout the world. If we provide this type of educational programme under our national television broadcasting service we will be doing a good job for this country and one of vast importance in regard to employment, job financing and the whole structure of our economy. Because of this we in this House in conjunction with the RTE Authority have an obligation to provide agricultural programmes of the calibre of Landmark and of an even wider scope. In every way possible we must encourage one of the most important industries of this country, that of agriculture. I feel it is necessary to put the reservations that I have in regard to the Bill on the record of the House.

Mr. O'Toole

I am very glad of the opportunity to discuss this Bill and to make a few short comments on my own views and those of my party on what ought to be contained in the Bill. The Bill itself is very short. The first thing that must be said is that it provides for an increase of £10 million to RTE for further capital development. The section which provides for that is to be welcomed, not least by RTE themselves.

However, the Bill has an inherent flaw. Possibly the Minister will be in a position to correct any misinterpretation or any misreading on my part of section 3. The Bill itself together with the provision of an increase in capital funds sets out to regularise an ambiguity which has arisen and has been there for some time with regard to RTE. Under the Broadcasting Authority Act, 1960, there is no reference to local radio.

To many people this omission suggests that the national broadcasting body should not become involved in local radio or do not have the right under the broadcasting Act of 1960 to become involved in that area, whereas the Authority have been involved in local radio. The establishment of local radio in Cork and the establishment of Radio na Gaeltachta and of community radio, all under the aegis of the Authority, are examples of the involvement of the Authority in local radio, though this is something not provided for specifically in the 1960 Act. Let me hasten to add that this particular type of operation is not excluded specifically either.

Section 3 which to us embodies part of the problem concerning this Bill outlines the provision which gives the right to the existing Authority to seek the franchise to establish local radio. The wording used is, "may establish and maintain local broadcasting services". This subsection is likely to occasion dismay in the minds of many people who earlier this year interpreted the Taoiseach's reference to the establishment of local radio as a service that would be independent, free of any constraint and open to any individual or group to engage in on foot of having applied for and being granted a licence. The Minister may say that any such person is not excluded by reason of section 3 here but the fact is that the licensing authority will be the existing Authority. This legislation concerns the national character of RTE, an organisation which down through the years, perhaps by virtue of their nature, have expressed a high degree of centralisation which is tightly controlled and urban-centred. One can read "Dublin" for urban in that case. This charge has been made in the past against RTE and the physical aspect of it can be upheld without any difficulty whatever. In Dublin there is the concentration of technology and skilled personnel. There is the centralisation of the service in Dublin. Therefore, the whole area of broadcasting activity is centralised in the one spot and it is not possible to have that degree of centralisation without also having the price being paid by somebody and in this case that centralisation is at the expense of the regions within the country.

The new service provided on the second radio channel is located in Dublin and there is no reason to believe but that the bulk of the current increase of £10 million will not be extended in the same fashion, thus consolidating and extending the Dublin ethos in broadcasting. In saying this I am not in any way criticising RTE who up to now have been providing a national service with a national character, a service that is excellent, expressing a degree of professionalism which I am sure is the envy of many other stations. There are 2,000 employees based in one centre where the position with regard to anybody intending to contribute to broadcasting was to go physically to that centre except for the limited availability of studios in Cork, Waterford and Limerick.

Let us consider this aspect of priorities which arises from the charge of centralised, Dublin-based broadcasting. In the recent past we had an example of the kind of thinking that is prevalent within the Broadcasting Authority. A programme which proved to be very vulnerable and which had been running for a number of years was taken off. I refer to "The Riordans". The reasons given for this decision were justifiable but the input and the advice which was forthcoming from that section of the community which perhaps enjoyed the programme most—the farming community—was taken into consideration in regard to discontinuing the series. At any rate, the hullabaloo created would seem to indicate that that advice had not been taken into account. However, that is just one example of the kind of thinking that develops when a system is centralised but operating on a national scale though not providing the kind of service which a very large sector of the community seem to look for and want.

I may be accused of painting a very black-and-white kind of picture in relation to the situation. Admittedly, there are many conflicting factors in this whole question. The role of national broadcasting must be considered. The problem here is, taking RTE as a whole, that we have a situation in which we are competing for listeners and viewers with outside agencies with much more powerful resources than we have, who can get our attention with high-powered productions. That complicates our approach because RTE must be seen to compete with that kind of competition. The end result is that there is a dilution of the national character of presentations by RTE. It is an issue that must be considered. I suppose it could be called "the east coast syndrome" so far as RTE television is concerned. It is an issue that dictates to some degree—I maintain to a large degree—the kind of productions we are forced to present to the viewing and listening public.

For a long time the charge has been made that in RTE there is a cultural elitism that propounds a theory that the community does not get what it wants but that it gets what an elite thinks it should get. I do not go along with that theory. If I were an employee of RTE I would not worry about that kind of charge. In the personnel of any broadcasting system there are very creative people and, because of their high degree of creativity, they are of a volatile character and they will stand by their point of view. Of course, they are in a very strong controlling position because they can put their finger on the switch and the public have to sit back and take what they get.

I am not anti-culture but the fact is that such a charge has been made. I do not think RTE have to refute it. I think they should ignore it and go about their business in the same professional way that they have done in the past. RTE have chalked up some major achievements in their time. We have come a long way since the establishment of our television station some years ago. Now we have a second television station and a second national radio network. One of the things that made me proud to be Irish was the comment I heard on other radio and television stations about the handling by RTE of the recent Papal visit. RTE covered themselves in glory on that occasion and we owe them a great debt of gratitude for their presentation of events then. RTE have nothing to be ashamed of; they can shrug off any charges made against them because they have shown their ability to do a major job, as evidenced during the Papal visit.

However, the question of local radio must be looked at in a different context. The question should be asked: what is local radio and what should it provide? The logical answer is that local radio should be a reflection of the local community, warts and all—its problems, aims and aspirations. It should also ensure a standard of professionalism worthy of the community and of the people involved in the local radio system—professionalism in technical matters and in the production, presentation and content of programmes.

If local radio is to do that, the one factor that is of the utmost importance is freedom. Freedom can take on many shades. The freedom to which I refer could be said to be the freedom of expression which the local community has and which it would fight for if it were threatened. Although I am not saying it will be the case, because of the provisions of section 3 of this Bill there could be constraints on local radio by an Authority who are far removed from the local community. The late Seán Lemass said at one stage with regard to broadcasting that the system should be "an arm of government". Nothing in the recent history of RTE convinces me that that is the case. Indeed, there have been fine examples where RTE proved to be anything but an arm of government. I do not think the organisation should be an arm of government. On many occasions they have shown themselves to be a very independent institution. They can stand on their own feet.

They are also a very powerful institution and that power raises questions as to its use in the area of local radio. Local radio itself could be, and hopefully will be, a powerful weapon, provided it has the confidence and the trust of the community. The only way it can establish that confidence and trust is through its freedom of expression, and by convincing the community that it is free and not constrained in any way in the content of its programmes or the presentation thereof.

We have seen that same power expressed through the provincial newspapers which can be referred to justly as community papers. That is what they really are. I wish to refer briefly to this area of activity of local newspapers because it impinges very much on what I will have to say later concerning their involvement in local radio. We were told in recent figures that outside Dublin 85 per cent of the people read the provincial press and 42 per cent read nothing else. In other words, they do not read the daily morning papers. The local newspaper is the only source of knowledge which they avail of. With roughly two million people picking up their provincial papers every week to read them, one can imagine the impact the provincial press has on the community at large.

That degree of loyalty by a readership to a particular source of information did not just happen overnight. It has come about through confidence being built up in the public mind in those publications. There is also reciprocity. On the one hand there is a free flow of information and, in return, there is revenue to the papers in the form of advertising. There is a mutually rewarding service which is free of any restrictions, and doing a very fine job.

Having said all that about the provincial press, due to this Bill a fear arises that there may be a distinct possibility that we are sounding the death knell not of all of these papers—that would be an exaggerated statement—but of some of them. At the moment we are aware of the economic recession. Many of these papers are facing economic problems because of a lack of advertising revenue. I do not think this Bill will allay the fears of many of them concerning their survival.

The life blood of a newspaper, provincial or national, is its advertising revenue. Am I to understand that RTE may now encroach upon this source of revenue? Am I to understand that RTE may be fishing in the same over-fished pool on which the local papers are totally dependent for their survival? To make things worse, are they fishing with a very preferential bait because of the preferential treatment which they will get over the ordinary local newspapers in relation to VAT?

These are matters which may never arise, but this Bill may provide the atmosphere and the framework in which these circumstances could arise. Members of this House have a vested interest in ensuring that anything that threatens the survival of the provincial press is considered very carefully and discarded in the end. As politicians, and particularly in rural Ireland, we are very conscious of the service the local press provides day in, day out, week in, week out.

The idea that the national Broadcasting Authority may be given—and I emphasise the word "may"—the right to move into this source of revenue, which up to now was the preserve of provincial publications, should be taken seriously by the Minister. The sudden obliteration of that source of revenue obviously would have disastrous effects on them.

Have RTE a role to play in local radio? Emphatically it must be stated that they have a very definite role to play, a very constructive role, an essential role, but that role ought to be in partnership with the private bodies in the information business, the local newspapers. They have the personnel trained to collect news items. They have not got the personnel to present radio news or features. They have not got the technological expertise to do so. In partnership with this pool of resources which we have at the moment, RTE could provide a very fine local radio service.

Let RTE be there to advise, to provide the technology, to provide the technical expertise, the presentation, the editing and the studio. Even that short list would be a very large input on their part. Would that justify them in having control? I do not think it would, and I do not think RTE would demand that they should have absolute control over what went out on the airwaves on local radio.

I have mentioned very specialised fields of activity and technology. Definitely they have an input there and without them I do not think the system could work. I want to refer to an extreme case of what could happen.

Debate adjourned.