Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 8 Jun 1983

Vol. 343 No. 4

Private Members' Business. - Independent Local Broadcasting Authority Bill, 1983: Second Stage.

Mr. Leyden

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I have great pleasure in introducing Private Members' Business on behalf of the Fianna Fáil Party. We have carefully studied all aspects of braodcasting and have prepared a Bill which will cater for development both in radio and television in the years ahead. In bringing forward this important Bill, we have clearly given the lead to this incompetent Government. We are, in a sense, a Government by Opposition and in Opposition. The Government are either incapable of responding or unwilling to respond to the crisis situation which has arisen in broadcasting due to the insensitive and highhanded action taken either by the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, Deputy Mitchell, or the Minister of State, Deputy Nealon.

When Deputy Nealon was given certain responsibilities in broadcasting, I then warned of the danger of control by him over RTE of propaganda on behalf of Fine Gael and, indeed, of the Coalition Government. Seemingly, he wants to exercise a similar control over our independent broadcasting. The radio stations outside his control had to be silenced. Hence the harsh, ruthless, cruel measure adopted on a Minister's instruction without warning on Wednesday, 18 May, to close Radio Nova and Radio Kiss FM, followed by the closure of Radio Sunshine. I requested the Minister to state clearly who signed the order and if the instructions came from the BBC to the British Foreign Office and via our Department of Foreign Affairs. Was the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Barry, aware of the instructions from London as outlined in the High Court case as reported in the Irish Independent of 2 June, 1983? In this report of the proceedings in the High Court, the officials from the Department stated:

Most seriously, however, a specific complaint about the company's broadcasts had formally been made to Ireland by the Home Office of the United Kingdom. It appeared from their letter that substantial interference had been caused by Radio Nova in areas of the UK and the Minister had been called on to remedy this situation...

The instructions, in other words, seemingly came via the British Home Office to the Minister via the Department of Foreign Affairs. I would like Minister Mitchell to state quite clearly when replying to the debate tonight whether he is under instructions from London as far as broadcasting within this State is concerned. I would regard that situation as a serious infringement of our democracy, our freedom of movement and of action. A Fianna Fáil Minister would never be under any control from the British Home Office.

Minister Nealon has taken a certain amount of responsibility or, at least, credit or blame, which ever is applied, in relation to the closing down of the stations. A Minister with responsibility for broadcasting has not been delegated authority under the Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1926, and perhaps the Minister would again clarify exactly who is responsible for that area of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. Various people have disclaimed responsibility. The Taoiseach seemingly was not aware of the action that was going to be taken by the Minister and I wonder if the Minister of State was aware of it. Furthermore, on the signing of the order for the action taken, seemingly the Minister headed off for sunny Portugal to be away from the flak which would occur from our young people as a result of the action taken by the Government. In the last few days a statement has issued from the Minister to which I will come later.

We of the Fianna Fáil Party took positive action in relation to broadcasting. We prepared our Independent Local Broadcasting Authority Bill which has wide powers and would give the facilities to provide an overall independent broadcasting within the State. As far as reacting to a situation is concerned, I completely reject those allegations made by Minister Nealon and other Deputies on the Government side of the House. When I was appointed front bench spokesman for Posts and Telegraphs in February 1983, the leader of our party, Deputy Haughey, requested me to give priority to independent local broadcasting. Because of the urgency of the matter we devoted our back-up committee meetings to preparing the legislation. Our chairman of that committee, Deputy Cowen, the secretary, Deputy John Browne, and the committee must be congratulated on their work in assisting me in relation to the preparation of this Bill. We worked on that legislation at every committee meeting for the last few months and had the Bill prepared and ready for printing at the time when the Government struck in relation to the closing of the stations in Dublin.

Minister Mitchell has accused me, as spokesman on Posts and Telegraphs, of preparing a Bill which is a variation of the 1981 Local Radio Bill. I accept that fully. Again, it is the consistency and continuity within the Fianna Fáil Party and Government — we believe in following up good legislation. In this case we revised it to cater for modern needs in relation to broadcasting. We have allowed it to cater at some stage for developments in relation to independent local television, which is a possibility in the years ahead, so that the stations could be licensed.

Furthermore, in view of difficulties being experienced in some parts of the country in relation to television reception, a development of a system of deflectors or rebroadcasting of television signals is taking place at the moment. This Bill will also allow the authority to investigate the situation regarding these broadcasting stations and provide an opportunity for licensing.

The Bill is broad in its concept and will cater for all the possibilities and opportunities in relation to broadcasting in this country. Government Opposition to the Bill is very weak. I reject their amendments to our Bill. Our Bill caters for local broadcasting and is community orientated as well as giving commercial opportunities. If there was no commercial aspect to broadcasting it would be difficult for any station to survive in the long term. A job creation potential, must be involved in setting up local radio stations. This is evident from the success of the stations which have been broadcasting here for some time with regard to the creation of jobs there, but many jobs have been lost in the last few weeks as a result of the action taken by the Minister.

I charge Minister Nealon with misleading the personnel involved in broadcasting by his statements on the RTE television programme "Today Tonight" when he was interviewed by presenter Pat Kenny in March of this year. The Minister first stated: "We have to get the pirates off the air". That is a direct quotation.

In response to Pat Kenny's question: "Are you determined to do that?" the Minister said: "Most certainly, but I think the way to do it at this stage is in association with bringing on local radio so that you do not leave a vaccum and create all sorts of difficulties."

Pat Kenny then asked: "People who run stations, would you allow them to apply?" Minister Nealon replied: "...various censures which you could apply: If you go off the air by July 1 or August 1, you could then apply".

I hope that the Minister will confirm the words that he stated publicly at that stage. He stated clearly to the people operating the stations that they would have an opportunity to apply and that he would give them adequate notice before he moved in the troops to close down the stations. The Minister was clearly indicating his general policy in relation to that area of broadcasting. The people involved listened to him because he had been given responsibility for broadcasting and they felt his words meant something. However, they were empty words. Within a few months key personnel in his Department moved in and closed down the stations in a most ruthless and heartless way depriving young people of a service they enjoyed. They supported the stations and got immense enjoyment from them. It was a big blow to young people from an entertainment point of view.

Our policy all along was to bring forward two Bills at the one time, the Radio and Telegraphy Bill, 1979 and a Broadcasting Bill. We would have had the legal framework to restrict people from broadcasting and also the framework to give these and other stations the opportunity to apply for and receive licences.

The Radio and Telegraphy Act, 1976 is totally inadequate. That is why we prepared proper legislation which we had intended to bring before the Dáil in 1981. Due to the election we did not get an opportunity to bring that Bill forward. If we were in power we would have brought it forward at this stage.

The Minister or Ministers of State have not given priority to this area. With the back-up staff the Minister has at his disposal and the fact that he has been given sole responsibility for broadcasting he should have got down to work and brought forward a proposal by now and have it passed before the summer recess. I appeal to Deputies to give proper consideration to voting for this Bill. If it does not go through the House I hope the Minister will bring forward his own legislation before the summer recess to enable legal broadcasting to take place before the end of the year.

There is a new generation of radio listeners. Young people are more discerning and demanding than before. Fianna Fáil's initiative in producing this legislation indicates that we recognise the needs of young people and reflects the attitude of Fianna Fáil members who are more than anxious that we bring forward legislation at the earliest opportunity to organise and control broadcasting.

I call on every Deputy who has ever availed of the facilities offered by the pirate stations to show his or her concern now by voting for the Bill. Deputies on the Government side owe it to the broadcasters to support the Bill because many of them would not have been elected to the House if it was not for the support they received from broadcasting stations operating around the Dublin area. It is a sad reflection on their interest that they are not here tonight. So many of them who queued up to appear at all times on these stations are sadly missing tonight when they would have had an opportunity to contribute to this debate. They are showing their interest in broadcasting by their lack of attendance.

Mr. Shatter

There are only five Deputies on the opposite side.

Mr. Leyden

Deputy Shatter was one person who appeared regularly and probably was elected as a result.

Mr. V. Brady

Very much on Nova.

Mr. Leyden

I hope he will support legislation to enable broadcasting to take place. Since this controversy broke the normally not too shy Deputies who are willing to make comments on radio and television have been silent on this issue. They have not put pressure on the Minister or the Government to expedite the legislation.

This is a very broad, detailed Bill. If we had had the opportunity we would have made it a priority to bring in legislation. Perhaps in the not too distant future we may have an opportunity to be on those benches and we will bring forward the legislation. The Government have been sadly lacking in this regard. The only action they took was to close down the stations and deprive young people of the facilities. In the Evening Herald of 3 June it seemed as if the Minister had second thoughts about the closure of the stations. The Minister stated that it was his policy to phase out the illegal stations at the same time as introducing the new licensed stations. On 18 May his officials closed down the stations. In that newspaper the Minister stated that it was never his intention to close down the illegal stations before his Department was ready to give licences. Who closed the stations? Was it the Minister or is he putting the blame on his Minister of State?

The Minister availed early and often of the facilities of Radio Dublin. I should like him to refute that and indeed I challenge him to do so. It is on record that he often spoke on that radio station in his constituency and as a result he probably gave support to that system of broadcasting. He did not sign a warrant for Radio Dublin and close it down.

I should like the Minister to state if it is his policy to allow the stations to start up again and not take any action before the end of the year. The Minister should state clearly if it is his policy to allow the stations to continue until the end of the year. I hope that is his policy. I will encourage him in that regard but he should have considered that policy before taking the action to close down the stations and put many people out of work. There is a certain ambivalence on the part of the Minister because the stations were paying PRSI, PAYE and company tax. They had telephones from the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. With our unemployment level we can ill afford the loss of jobs which has occurred as a result of the Government's action. This Government will go down in history as the job destruction Government. Unemployment has risen dramatically since they took office in December 1982, and by their actions they are contributing every day to further unemployment. In one fell swoop they have removed many worthwhile jobs and deprived young people, many of whom are probably unemployed, of the opportunity of enjoying the services that were provided by the stations concerned. The principal features of the Bill would be: the establishment of an independent local broadcasting authority consisting of eight to 12 members appointed by the Government; the authority to provide local broadcasting services as a public service of information, education and entertainment in addition to the broadcasting services of RTE; and programme contractors to enter into contracts with the authority to provide local broadcasting services that would be community based, community orientated and community supported.

There must be a community aspect to this because it is local and community broadcasting. Many of the stations I have been listening to in the past few years have provided a good local service and have given people who would not perhaps normally have such opportunity the opportunity of being on the national television or radio networks. It is the basic principle of local broadcasting to facilitate local areas, local community councils and voluntary organisations but it must operate hand in hand with a form of commercial radio. Contracts would be given to people who would put a package together linked with the locality and involving local interests. Our Bill provides that before establishing a station the authority would have to be satisfied that it would be in accordance with good economic principles and be operated by suitable contractors who expressed the wish to become involved in such activity. Unless there is an aspect of commercialisation together with the community interests, a station would not be in a position to provide jobs for young broadcasters.

Many Ministers and Ministers of State — I think of the Minister of State at the Department of Labour — have been heard regularly and have entertained on local radio services. Yet, they were very silent in relation to the closing down of these stations. There is total inconsistency on the part of the Government in this whole matter. They should have been aware of the service which many of the broadcasters were providing for the local areas. We propose that the contractors who provide a service maintain high standards, are responsive to the interests of the community, have regard to Irish cultural traditions, and offer news, information and entertainment consistent with local services. We propose that they use Irish produced and recorded material to the maximum extent possible. In that regard, the Irish produced and recorded material should be given pride of place in any local broadcasting service.

There are many people employed in the entertainment area whose situation is very serious now. That is why in this Bill we are encouraging the use of Irish produced material to the greatest extent possible. That is a section of the Bill that we would expect to be regarded by the authority as a guideline. There is a requirement in respect of RTE 1 and RTE 2 in relation to percentage of Irish produced material which is broadcast. That is only right and proper. It would be for the authority to decide the percentage if that was required at any stage in respect of stations that were not giving at least some attention to the place of Irish material. This is a fast growing business area and one that needs support. The more Irish produced and Irish recorded material that can be used on local broadcasting stations, the more potential there is for young people engaged in the entertainment business.

I should like to ensure also that the news and current affairs programmes would not be vested in a person who exercised editorial or other control over newspapers. What we must aim for is the portrayal of a balanced view of a local area. We must have a certain amount of competition but we do not wish to have a monopoly situation in any area where, for instance, a newspaper chain could take complete control of the editorial and current affairs sections of an independent local radio. A monopoly situation would not be helpful to broadcasting.

We propose that having gauged the need for local broadcasting services as a result of public meetings or consultations, the authority would adjudicate on the proposals of interested parties having regard to the quality and range of programmes proposed, adequacy of expertise and resources available, association with local communities, employment content, existing involvement in local broadcasting and other matters as the authority see fit. It would be the proper approach for the authority to ensure that when a station was set up it would survive and would recognise the needs of the locality and respond to them. Naturally we propose that programme would include advertisements but subject to approved tariffs and to maximum periods of air time. We propose that advertisements directed towards religious or political ends or dealing with industrial disputes would have to be gauged carefully and not necessarily be part of the broadcasting material. Also, the authority would determine the hours of broadcasting of any station established under the Act. This would provide for consistency in the number of hours and the control of the services that would be provided. We propose that the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs may direct the authority to refrain from broadcasting material that was likely to promote or incite crime, or which would tend to undermine the authority of the State. It is only right that the State would exercise a certain control over the stations and that they would do so in consultation with the Minister. We propose that the programme contracts be for a maximum of five years which would be renewable in most cases if the stations were providing a good service. At least this would ensure that the highest standards would obtain at all times and that the contractors would be aware of the need for these high standards.

In relation to the general membership of the board, I would be anxious that the local board would be representative of the arts, of journalism and of the broadcasting fields and would have expertise from the radio and television sides of the business. The board should be representative of the regions also and have regard for the interests of all the voluntary organisations who would be represented on the boards to ensure that there would be a representative balance throughout the country.

We propose that the programme contractors would pay the authority sums to be specified by the Minister as well as other sums specified in the contract. There would be the aspect of paying for the licence but due regard would have to be paid to the area serviced by the local radio station and to allow for stations in more uneconomic areas of the country where there would not be the same response from advertisers as there would be in the major cities.

I could visualise a situation in which the licence would be practically nil in local areas in order to allow stations to survive. There is no point in charging an exorbitant rate for a licence and then finding that the station was not in a positive to survive. Many of the stations would have to pay the performing rights fees and all the other charges which arise in respect of broadcasting material. In addition, the cost of running a station is extremely high in relation to the provision of electricity and all the other services that would be involved. That is the outline of the Bill.

We are also providing for the development of local television broadcasting. There is a strong possibility that in the years ahead there will be a demand for local television and I should like to see an independent broadcasting authority having the power to issue licences when the need arises. We must have the necessary framework in order to prevent the possibility of illegal television broadcasting. Our Bill would allow for the issue of licences at some time in the future. Many people feel there is a need for an independent television station.

I have already mentioned that the Bill would allow for the issue of licences to people operating deflector systems. The Minister will be aware that many parts of the country are not receiving stations from overseas. Contractors have already tendered for the provision of piped television services to places such as Galway, Ballinasloe, Sligo, Ballina and elsewhere. There is a great need, particularly in rural areas, for rebroadcasting or the use of the deflector system and the Minister should allow for the possible issue of licences to regulate the position.

We have taken positive steps to solve the crisis that has arisen. The Minister and the Minister of State have been careless in their approach and have not taken a particular interest in this matter. Their actions have been totally unacceptable. Their words were empty and their actions were forceful. The Minister, who is not here this evening, declared an amnesty last Friday and the Minister of State should now clarify the position. The Minister, Deputy Jim Mitchell, was not available for comment on 18 May when he departed for Portugal, having already closed down the stations. Pressure was exerted on him by members of his own party and he has now stated that he will not close any more stations before the end of the year or until the legislation is enacted. That is the approach which should have been adopted in the beginning and many problems would have been prevented if he had not acted in the way he did.

I would ask the Minister of State to outline the legislative steps proposed. I would also ask the Government to bring forward their legislation as quickly as possible or else to support this Bill. Why not support a Bill which has been carefully prepared and is now before the Dáil? This would allow the authority to be established before the end of this month. Deputies on the Government benches should respond to their constituents who are calling for this type of legislation. Many of those involved in broadcasting are anxious that the services they provide should not be regarded as illegal. They wish to establish fully licensed stations giving full-time employment. They do not want to have to look over their shoulders every time a Government Minister makes a statement.

A very orderly and responsible approach was adopted by the young people who marched to the Dáil and I compliment them and the people involved in organising that march. It was a legitimate action by our young people in showing the politicians exactly what they want. They want to become involved in the exciting challenges provided by independent radio. Our young people are well educated and articulate and fully capable of tackling every aspect of broadcasting. Some of our finest young commentators and disc jockeys were given their first opportunity by these local stations and many of them have moved on to RTE Radio 2 and overseas, as well as into the television area. The Minister is in a position to take the necessary action to provide the service which these young people want.

We are adopting a very responsible approach and giving a lead to the Government. We have given priority treatment to this area. Our Leader, Deputy Haughey, realised the need for this Bill to enable independent local radio and he gave me a mandate, together with a back-up committee from Fianna Fáil, to bring forward this legislation as quickly as possible. We acted positively and prepared what I regard as a fine piece of legislation. It is a historic event in that the Opposition party are in a position to introduce a Bill before the Government are able to do so. The Government, with all their back-up staff and advisers, did not take the proper action. We have adopted a proper approach. This is the first Bill brought forward by our party in Opposition and we are giving the lead by indicating exactly how we would tackle this aspect of broadcasting.

This Bill caters for local communities and gives scope for broadcasting at its best. There is an opportunity for existing broadcasters to apply for licences in a proper manner. It was stated recently in a magazine called "Sunshine Radio Give-Away" that this Bill would be costly to implement. I refute that allegation Under this Bill we would have the right to provide transmitters, to license transmitters or to approve of existing transmitters which would comply with international standards. This would ensure that existing stations would be able to apply for approval of their facilities.

The Government's approach is unacceptable and the Fianna Fáil response is the right and positive one which has been accepted by those involved in broadcasting, many of whom are in attendance here tonight. The presence of so many young people in the public gallery is encouraging. I hope this will encourage the Government to allow this Bill to be enacted without delay.

Minister of State at the Department of Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. Nealon)

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following:—

"Dáil Éireann declines to give a second reading to the Bill:

(a) because the Bill as presented is concerned only with the establishment of local broadcasting stations on commercial principles and does not make adequate provision for community oriented services, and

(b) because it is the Government's intention to proceed at an early date with legislation for the orderly development of local community radio services."

The Government are opposing this Bill because it is one designed with commercial radio only in view; because there are major internal conflicts within the Bill itself; and because we intend to introduce fresh legislation at an early date to provide for the orderly development of local radio services on a national basis.

The Opposition have said that their Bill would make it possible to have legal local radio stations operating by the end of June. In view of this let us first look at what the Opposition did with legislation on local radio when they themselves had their chances, when they were on this side of the House. The Fianna Fáil Government of the day decided to draft a Local Radio Bill in May 1979. By June 1980, more than a year later, the Bill had been drafted and ready: after that, a strange inertia but not total paralysis. Remember this was the time of the 20 seat majority, but nothing at all happened with the Local Radio Bill for one full year, until May 1981 when the then Taoiseach had already decided he was going to the country anyhow. So from May 1979 to May 1981 there was plenty of time. There were plenty of votes but no legislation on local radio. Then in 1982 the Opposition, now so concerned and in so much of a hurry, got another chance. And still the Bill was not re-introduced. Deputy Leyden was Minister of State at the time. Though there was not total paralysis, during a period of six months one paragraph was added to the Bill, 18 words, three words a month. Now back in Opposition, Deputy Leyden becomes a born-again instant legislator.

The Bill before the House is basically the text of the same Independent Local Radio Authority Bill of 1981, originally Deputy Reynolds' Bill. The initiation of the Bill at this stage is clearly an act of political opportunism on the part of the Opposition. I am sure that Deputy Reynolds will agree this is a crude Bill that does not do justice to some fine points in the original Bill.

May I say, this Government recognise fully the urgency of introducing legislation to regulate the use of local radio and to bring order into what is, essentially, a near chaotic situation. In our Programme for Government, there is a commitment that community radio will be developed in an orderly manner. I was appointed Minister of State with special responsibility to give all aspects of broadcasting the priority the situation so clearly requires and which they have not got in recent years. Since being given this special responsibility, about three months ago, already I have examined the various approaches to local broadcasting and proposals are already before the Government for consideration. Naturally, I am not in a position to announce at this stage the details of that legislation — indeed it would be quite wrong of me to do so until Government consideration has been completed. I can say, however, that it is our intention, and the Government's wish, that the services which will be provided will meet the very wide range of community needs and interests which should be catered for by local radio services. It is also our intention that the legislation will allow the greatest possible degree of flexibility for the development of services of this type and that there will be no bias in favour of commercial stations as against community based enterprises.

The speed with which action is being taken reflects, as I said, the Government's desire to bring about order in this whole area. It is in marked contrast to the inactivity and procrastination displayed by Fianna Fáil when in Government. If they had only been fractionally as concerned as they now wish to convey to the public that they are, we would not be dealing with the Bill before the House today; we would have had legislation some years ago.

The record of Fianna Fáil has been one of masterly inactivity and indifference to the two-fold problems of providing for legitimate local radio services and the suppression of illegal broadcasting stations. To fully appreciate the manner in which they presided over the developing chaos of the airwaves it is necessary to go back to the late 1970s.

Prior to then the operation of illegal broadcasting transmitters was rare. However, about that time it became evident that a determined effort was being made to establish commercial radio stations in defiance of the law. Those illegal stations became popular, particularly with young people and, it must be conceded, it became very professional, clearly demonstrating that there was a demand for local radio.

Against all this background, Fianna Fáil proceeded to have a Bill, which was similar to the one we have now before us, after the 1979 deal with commercial local radio. Then they did not do anything about it for an entire year. The sudden burst of concern on the part of Fianna Fáil, their statement reported in the Irish Independent of 26 May that their Bill would make it possible to have legal local radio stations operating by the end of June requires some explanation. That explanation has not been given by Deputy Leyden.

What is involved is political opportunism on the part of Fianna Fáil and a cover up for their absolute inexcusable inactivity during a long period while illegal stations were allowed to proliferate and when something could have been done easily. Does Deputy Leyden believe it possible to establish local radio stations under this Bill within a month?

Mr. Leyden

Where there is a will there is a way.

Mr. Nealon

Let us look at what is involved. Even with the best will in the world it would take almost a month to get the Bill through both Houses of the Oireachtas and signed by the President. Deputy Leyden claims that not only was the will absent but much more besides. People would be invited to accept membership of the new Authority; the Authority would be established, staff would be appointed and all the necessary arrangements would be made to commence the Authority's business.

Then, under section 17 of this Bill, the Authority would determine where local radio stations would be viable and a suitable programme contractor would become available. The Authority would than seek licences from the Minister for those services and then would proceed to obtain the necessary transmitter and would erect it. Under section 22 of this Bill the Authority in the same short period would hold consultations and public meetings, invite applications from people interested in becoming programme contractors, would adjudicate on those applications and then decide on a suitable contractor—all before the end of June.

Where there is a will there is a way, we were told a few moments ago. The selected contractor would then provide all the necessary facilities and organise staff and other resources to provide the services. And Deputy Leyden expects all this to be done within his timetable. I do not think he is fooling anyone with that.

Fianna Fáil must realise that if this Bill were to become law it would be a considerable time, with the best will in the world before legal local radio services would be available. It is important that this should clearly be recognised, spelled out and that we do not attempt to deceive anybody. All the steps I described earlier, and many more, would have to be taken. We must all be realistic about the time factor involved to sort out this problem. In view of that it is all the more regrettable that it was not sorted out when it first arose. We should never have arrived at our present point of departure. We are here because of the inexplicable failure of Fianna Fáil to act over many years.

It is my responsibility now to tackle the problem and I intend to do so. I assure Deputies I will do so as quickly as possible considering all that must be gone through, and there is no shortage. There is now an urgent need for order to be restored to the radio spectrum, which is a very valuable natural resource. I am sure that this is something which the pirates acknowledge and agree with. The radio spectrum is a finite natural resource and if used properly can be of enormous benefit for a range of services, including local radio. The radio spectrum has to be carefully planned and regulated nationally and internationally in order to accommodate the various services which can use it and to minimise harmful interference between services.

On the international level countries agree to abide by the radio regulations of the International Telecommunications Union, a specialised agency of the United Nations. By implementing the provisions of the regulations countries ensure the proper use of the spectrum and minimise interference across national boundaries. There is no other way in which this can be done. When complaints are received they are received under the regulations I quoted. Indeed, I could find no greater tribute to those regulations than one I have before me in elequent tones delivered by Deputy Wilson when he was Minister. The existence of unlicensed stations here places Ireland clearly in breach of the radio regulations.

Nationally, radio equipment cannot be operated except in accordance with licences issued under the Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1926. It is fair to say—in this case I will address my remarks to the Dáil; I will not refer to the Gallery attendance—that nobody wishes to deny people a reasonable choice of broadcasting service. Such a choice can never be achieved however through the form of free for all which has existed in recent years. That cannot be done on any sort of permanent basis. I believe there is universal agreement on that. Developments will have to be in an orderly fashion.

The Government are at present considering the details of the legislative framework which will facilitate that development. There will be no delay in finalising that legislation and in introducing it to the Oireachtas. I am confident that when the draft legislation that will be approved by the Government is enacted the provision of the new services will proceed quickly.

The present unsatisfactory position has arisen partly because of the inadequate powers contained in the existing legislation. It was recognised that in order to maintain order in the use of the radio frequency spectrum it would be necessary to proceed with a Bill to strengthen the powers of the Minister to suppress illegal broadcasting and to ensure the orderly use of the wireless telegraphy or radio equipment generally. The Broadcasting and Wireless Telegraphy Bill, 1979, was prepared for this reason.

As the Fianna Fáil Opposition well know, the 1979 Bill, prepared on their instruction, had a twin purpose. One was to prevent the making of broadcasts from anywhere within the State unless in accordance with a licence issued by the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs. It proposed to make it an offence for anyone to provide accommodation, equipment or programme material for unlicensed broadcasts, or to advertise by means of, or take part in, such broadcasts. The Bill was broadly on the lines of Broadcasting (Offences) Act, 1968, which was enacted to suppress broadcasting from ships, aircraft and marine structures. The Bill provided for penalties for broadcasting offences of fines of up to £10,000 or two years imprisonment in cases of conviction on indictment. The second purpose was to strengthen the powers of the Minister under the Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1926.

The approach in the 1979 Bill was to persuade not only those involved in illegal broadcasting but also those who gave it any material support to cease doing so. This approach was successfully used in the Broadcasting (Offences) Act, 1968, which dealt effectively, by concerted international action, with the problem of illegal broadcasting from ships. However, the 1979 Bill suffered the same fate as the Independent Local Radio Authority Bill, 1981. It was introduced in the Dáil in April 1979, but it was never subsequently debated. It lapsed with the dissolution of the Dáil in May 1981, and was never reintroduced.

It is my intention to proceed with legislation on very much the same lines of the 1979 Bill concurrently with the legislation to provide for the orderly development of community radio services. Unregulated use of the frequency spectrum can cause serious problems and we have had many complaints in recent times. Among the most serious was one received from the North Eastern Health Board who reported that their radio system for the accident and emergency service was rendered useless for a period of four days, from 16 to 19 April of this year, due to interference from an outside source. This was the case also with the Drogheda and Dundalk fire services and with the Meath fire service. This interference was reported to my Department on 19 April last by the North Eastern Health Board. A similar complaint of severe interference to the Dublin City Ambulance Services was reported on the same day by the Eastern Health Board. On receipt of the complaints my Department monitored the fire and ambulance radio frequency bands. Tests established that the interference was caused by a combination of signals from Radio Nova and KISS FM.

Radio frequencies in use at Dublin Airport have also been subject to extensive interference. This interference affected frequencies used by aircraft when taxiing and immediately after take-off and frequencies used by airport, fire and emergency services and the Defence Forces. Radio Sunshine was positively identified as the source of the interference in a number of cases. Garda and Army communications have also been subjected to interference by pirate radio stations. This has resulted in the loss of communications with mobile units involved in essential security duties.

The potential consequences of interference in cases of the type of which I have mentioned cannot be overstated. The safety of lives must be of paramount concern in any case where aeronautical services or emergency services are concerned. Once the source of interference of these services has been identified the possibility of recurrent interference could not be accepted without taking some action.

Illegal broadcasting stations have also affected radio and television reception in very many areas. Radio Sunshine in particular has been responsible for a deterioration in the reception of authorised services throughout an extensive area in north Dublin. Harmful interference has been caused to authorised broadcasting stations in Britain which have been subject to considerable disruption due to the activities of Radio Nova here. This interference has been the subject of a formal complaint under the radio regulations of the International Telecommunications Union.

There were persistent reports in recent months of plans for larger and more extensive illegal developments. These included plans to broadcast internationally from this country. Such developments, if they were allowed to occur, would inevitably have given rise to even more serious interference problems than have been experienced to date. There have also been attempts in the past year to establish illegal television stations. I want to make it clear that developments of this sort could not be tolerated.

Illegal broadcasting must be phased out and legal services developed in an orderly manner under a new legislative framework. We must aim for that.

Mr. Daly

The Minister's script says illegal broadcasting must be "brought to an end", not "phased out".

Mr. Nealon

To turn again to the Bill before us, the text is, as I said earlier, basically that of the Independent Local Radio Bill, 1981, with some minor adjustments. Deputy Leyden has said that this new Bill is intended to allow the proposed Authority to concern itself with the questions of independent television and other possible future developments in broadcasting. The Deputy, in the course of an interview on the RTE radio programme, "This Week" on Sunday 22 May, stated that his party had been working on the Bill for some time and has had the benefit of a parliamentary back-up advisory committee. He said the same thing tonight. I must confess that I cannot see any evidence of the impact of this work in the 1981 Bill.

There is of course a new television dimension, but how has this been achieved? Simply, as far as I can see, by erasing or scrubbing out the word "sound" before "sound broadcasting"— and there you have a new television dimension. This is the first example of legislation before this House which might be described reasonably as legislation by Tippex.

The Bill before is one designed with commercial local radio only in view. There is an emphasis throughout the Bill that services must be commercially viable. No attempt is made to ensure that services are spread throughout the country. The condition specified in the Bill would, in my view, tend to confine local radio services to the larger cities because only there could a financial return be assured. There is no suggestion that large profitable stations might assist smaller less profitable ones. Neither is there any indication that community groups might be assisted in attempts to develop the services to meet the needs of the areas which they serve. No account has been taken of the obviously different criteria that must apply if the scope of the proposed Authority is to be extended to television.

A very good example of this and of the cosmetic exercise involved in television is in section 22 which gives the proposed Authority power only to establish whether there is a demand for independent local sound broadcasting services; the Authority would have no power to consider the question of independent television under the Bill as it stands. Therefore, in this big new television dimension to the Bill which we heard about tonight the vital paragraph is not giving any authority. The word "sound" remains and we must ask did Deputy Leyden's Tippex run out?

Mr. Daly

On a point of order, it is extremely difficult to follow what the Minister is trying to say. A script has been supplied but it is completely different from what the Minister is saying.

Mr. Nealon

This is the first time I heard that anybody had an obligation to stick——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister's statement has been circulated but he may move away from it to develop his arguments.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister has seven minutes left. The Minister, without interruptions.

Mr. Gene Fitzgerald

We do not care how many minutes he has left. There is one rule for one person and another rule for another.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Leyden was allowed to speak for 40 minutes without interruption. The Minister of State has seven minutes to conclude.

Mr. Gene Fitzgerald

We have order in this House——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

And we will continue to have order.

Mr. Gene Fitzgerald

On a point of order, is it not correct to say that, if one is reading from a script as the Minister is doing and the script has been circulated to every Member, one sticks to that script? That is not happening here tonight.

Mr. Daly

The Minister is making many changes in his script.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is for the Minister to decide if he wants to move away from his script. The Minister has five minutes to conclude.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Nealon

There is another example we might look at. Section 18 makes no distinction between radio and television. Its provisions would prove impossible to observe in practice. That section requires that the services should offer a broad range of news, information and entertainment consistent with the local character of the services, they should utilise to the greatest possible extent Irish produced, recorded, published and performed material, and the programmes broadcast from different stations for reception in different localities should not consist of identical or similar material to such an extent as would be inconsistent with the character of the services as local broadcasting services. How is it envisaged that any purely local television service would be able to afford a range of services on those lines? Where would the programmes come from?

All in all it seems to me that the Opposition have given no thought at all to the implications of including television within the scope of the new Authority. They do not appear to have considered in what circumstances local television services might be provided nor have they thought of the cost of such services which are likely to be at least ten times or maybe 20 or 30 times as great as those of radio services. The Bill does not advert to the provision of local community television services by cable which seems a much more likely means of providing such services at some time in the future. The provision of television services in that way would be covered by the Wireless Telegraphy (Wired Broadcast Relay Licence) Regulations, 1974. Those regulations empowered the Minister to require cable television licensees to provide a channel on their cable systems for the relaying of locally originated programming. If the Authority are to supervise local television services as well as local radio the Bill should provide for supervision over locally originated programming on cable systems; it does not do so of course — it refers only to broadcast programmes, a different thing entirely.

As I say, it seems that the Opposition have really given no thought to the implications of including television broadcasting within the scope of the Bill. Having made these criticisms of the claims made for the present Bill, I should say that the considerations affecting local radio and local television are quite different and that the two should be legislated for separately — if, in fact, a demand emerges for local TV that needs to be catered for separately, and I think it will.

There are going to be major advances in the availability of television services, both through satellite and through cable. It is safe to predict that in five years' time viewers in Ireland will have five satellite stations to choose from in addition to the stations they can now receive on their television sets. They will be able to receive these communally through cable systems or through a simple antenna dish. It will not even be necessary to put the dish on a chimney. Cable television will also see major developments. This may not occur as fast as the developments in satellite television but inevitably there will be developments as in the United States and Canada where local cable television systems carry as many as 30 or 40 channels. These are the developments we can expect in the near future. None of these has been dealt with in Deputy Leyden's Bill.

An editorial in the Irish Press on 4 May 1983 stated:

The Fianna Fáil Bill of 1981, which fell with that Government, proposed a system of local broadcasting in which commercial interests would probably have dominated and in which the profit motive would likely have been the prime one.

The emphasis in this Bill which Deputy Leyden now presents, as in the 1981 Bill, is on commercial viability of stations. That comes out in section 17. It is also clear from the lack of any provision in the Bill which would facilitate the development of local radio services by noncommercial interests or in areas where the economic viability of services might be in any way marginal or doubtful.

I note with some amazement that section 27 of the Bill proposes to include power to make repayable advances not exceeding £10 million to the proposed Authority from the Exchequer. The enabling provision in the 1981 Bill was not exceeding £2 million. Given the Fianna Fáil claim that local radio could be operating under their Bill by the summer might I ask where they envisage the necessary Exchequer assistance can come from?

I will conclude by repeating that the introduction of the Bill is a piece of opportunism, that it would not supply the type of framework to provide for the orderly development of local radio on a national basis, and that the time-scale proposed for implementation is totally unrealistic. The Government are pressing ahead with the preparation of legislation and with the making of advance arrangements that will enable legal local radio to be implemented on the most acceptable basis for the community generally and that will not have the defects of the Bill now under discussion.

Mr. Gene Fitzgerald

When? In what year?

Mr. Nealon

We will do it with all proper expedition. There will be no short-circuiting of the various things which have to be done. For all the reasons I have set out, I must oppose this Bill and urge that it should not be supported.

Mr. Leyden

Did the Minister of State sign the order, or did the British Foreign Office sign it?

Mr. Nealon

The Deputy interrupted me.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Liam Fitzgerald.

Mr. Leyden

Did the Minister sign it?

Mr. Nealon

The Deputy insisted that I should read from my script and did not allow me to extend my remarks.

Mr. L. Fitzgerald

Ba mhian liom labhairt ar son an Bhille seo agus iarraim ar an Rialtas agus ar an Aire Stáit atá i láthair anseo anocht glacadh leis an mBille atá á chur os comhair na Dála againne. Admhaím féin go bhfuil an Bille seo cothrom agus go bhfuil sé neamhspleách. Caithim a chur in iúl don Aire Stáit, mar níl an tAire anseo anocht, is don Rialtas go bhfuil sé an-tábhachtach glacadh leis an mBille seo. Léiríonn an t-aos óg agus na daoine atá thuas ansin ag breathnú orainn go bhfuil sé tábhachtach agus go bhfuil sé práinneach. Tá sé soiléir do chách go bhfuil na déagóirí is an t-aos óg sa tír seo uilig míshásta leis an Rialtas, míshásta leis an Aire Stáit agus leis an Aire, agus míshásta freisin le RTE. Tá siad míshásta leis an Rialtas ionas go nadmhaíonn an tAire féin agus an tAire Stáit go bhfuil an Bille Craolacháin mar atá sé i láthair na huaire easpach agus go gcaithfidh siad Bille nua a chur os comhair na Dála. Tá Bille ann sa Roinn, Bille 1979, a chuir Fianna Fáil os comhair na Dála i 1981. D'admhaigh an tAire Stáit féin an Teachta Nealon, le déanaí nuair a cuireadh ceisteanna air go raibh sé sásta le príomhphrionsabail an Bhille sin ach níl seisean, an tAire nó an Rialtas, toilteanach é a chur os comhair na Dála. Ni fheadar cén fáth. Maidir le RTE ní thuigeann siad blas agus meon aos óg na tíre. Tá an dream mór seo den phobal ag brath ar Radio Nova agus Radio Sunshine agus ar uile agus áiteacha cosúil leo sin chun cláracha suimiúla is nua-aoiseacha a sholáthar.

In addressing myself to the text of this Bill I should like first of all to address the Minister of State, the Government in absentia, Deputies from Fine Gael and Labour in absentia and ask them why they did not come down to this Chamber to listen to the views expressed on both sides of the House on the very serious public concern outside this House about the seeming inability and unwillingness of the Government to respond to the very legitimate needs, tastes and desires of the public at large and particularly our young population.

Might I remind the Minister of State in the context of the need for an updating of the present legislation that it was his Government and his former Minister for Finance who introduced a Bill dealing with Dáil reform, a Bill which would prove to the people outside the responsiveness of Members of the House to the ever-changing circumstances of Irish society? We were to be seen to be vigilant in our actions and deeds as well as in our speeches. I regret the absence of Deputies from the opposite benches. In the recent past they put forward the view to the public that they are concerned about our young people. I want to quote for the Minister of State an oft-quoted statistic: 50 per cent of our population are under 25 years of age, a population ever-questioning, discerning and rapidly developing in thought and in intellect.

I want an explanation from the Minister's side of the House of the absence of those Deputies this evening. I want him to explain to the young people who went to the trouble of coming into the Public Gallery this evening why they did not see fit to come in here and show an urgent interest in accommodating the community and individual needs and tastes of the people outside the House. Is it that they are afraid? Is it that they know the Minister of State is refusing to acknowledge what is out there, refusing to acknowledge that in the 1979 Bill we have the mechanism for what is needed right now to broaden the facilities which are monopolised at present? I have heard this increasingly in recent days from our young population and from their parents, that RTE are rapidly losing touch with reality and failing to accommodate the views and tastes of our fast-growing young population.

I am saddened by this absence this evening. I am saddened that they see no justification for being present here to take serious cognisance of the terms of this Bill. In speaking here tonight I am motivated by a desire to see this Dáil and this Oireachtas responding in a positive and constructive manner to the current needs of our people both young and old.

I want to refer to a speech I made in the Dáil on Dáil reform. I felt this House was cumbersome and unwieldy in its structures and its Standing Orders, incapable of or unwilling to face up to current pressing and serious issues. The Fianna Fáil Bill is a careful and constructive attempt to respond to serious issues and needs. We have to ask ourselves what are the facts. I have already stated that half of our population are under 25 years of age. It is the duty of the State to understand and appreciate and cater for the tastes and needs of our young and rapidly growing population, to cater for them in a positive, constructive and enlightened way. I regret the stand taken by the Minister of State this evening. He took the text of our Bill and imposed a negative interpretation on it. He refused to face up to the expansive and wide terms of reference proposed in our Bill, the flexibility it offers to an authority, the futuristic and modern approach incorporated in it. This is an attempt by the Minister to evade the issue.

If he is so concerned about these young people, rather than criticising our Bill why did he not bring in his Bill? Why is it not here before us this evening so that I and other Deputies could say: "This amendment is his Bill and we have something to chew there." Sadly for the people who are listening and for the people who will read his remarks tomorrow, all we got to chew were little gems of negative wit about rubs of Tippex. This is a sad reflection on the Government's attitude and their motivation towards facing these issues seriously. The sooner they face up to the reality of this Bill and what it proposes to do about the absence of facilities, the better they will be performing and the more constructive role they will be playing.

In a number of ways the Minister of State agrees with me that for a considerable time now existing structures such as RTE have failed dismally to appreciate the tastes and needs of the new generation as they are popularly termed. There has been extreme dissatisfaction with a broadcasting authority which many of them describe as having lost their way. I am not saying that I subscribe to that view, but I believe there is a certain validity in it. After all, if the overwhelming majority of our young population turn away from the semi-State structure which has been offered a monopoly through the decades there is something seriously wrong. I believe it is the failure of this monopolistic authority to take due account of what is happening in the world outside its structure. It is, therefore, inevitably failing dismally to make a serious and positive effort to accommodate and cater for the various interest groups.

I will give one example of the kind of needs in our community today arising out of a greater awareness, enlightenment, and increase in the educational standards of our young people. I recently came across a case of a young girl confined to a wheelchair. Some neighbours of mine asked me to make representations to the Gay Byrne Hour for this lady to try to identify a flats complex owner somewhere in a particular area of the northside who might have the necessary facilities to enable this young girl to have access to a house. It is a very difficult facility to have in a flats complex. I approached the Gay Byrne Hour and one or two programmers in RTE.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. L. Fitzgerald

They told me they could not do it. I asked them if they would accept this was a very genuine need. They conceded that, but they said they were a national broadcasting organisation and they could not cater, albeit in a very needy case, for the needs of this girl. I said I did not want my name mentioned. Within days of having failed with the national broadcasting organisation and having reported back to the friends and relations of this young lady, they very quickly went to the local pirate radio who were promptly responsive to her need. They very quickly got it on the air. I should add that subsequently there was one offer from Radio Éireann to try to accommodate this need.

I am trying to illustrate the facility available to the local radio to respond promptly to what was a very genuine cause. I believe the function of any broadcasting authority must surely be to accommodate the widest possible range of tastes. If they fail to do so then inevitably there is a duty incumbent on the State to provide the necessary additional structures to ensure that fairness and equity obtain on the airways for all our people, both young and old. Our young people have told us that they do not regard the existing legitimate legal structures as offering to them a degree of fairness in terms of its programme taste or content. We have a duty to take serious cognisance of that and to reflect that duty in the House at the earliest possible date.

I want to approach another aspect of this in what I believe is a logical manner. I put down a parliamentary question earlier this year to the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs and the Minister of State present in the House tonight answered it. I asked him when he proposed to establish an independent local radio authority. The Minister of State informed me that he was bringing that Bill before the House very shortly. He conceded, in reply to supplementary questions by me, that existing legislation was inadequate to cope with, accommodate and embrace the enormously wide interests among our population for broadcasting services. That admission is on record in the Official Report. That admission surely meant that existing legislation was inadequate Recently, despite this, the Department of Posts and Telegraphs — we still do not know who authorised this — tried to implement that inadequate legislation, as conceded by the Minister of State. Surely, if legislation is inadequate and we want realistically and positively to face up to the fact, we update it to accommodate the new set of circumstances.

Earlier this year the Minister of State agreed basically with the principles of the 1981 Bill, or, as he referred to it this evening, the 1979 Bill brought before the House in 1981. He agreed that the basic fundamental principles of the Bill were satisfactory to him, Deputies Leyden, Wilson, Reynolds and a number of other Deputies were present and we all conceded that we were willing there and then to facilitate the passage of this Bill through the House, if the main bones of it were there and the Minister was agreeable to it. Instead the Minister of State chose, or perhaps it was his Minister or the civil servants in the Department chose, to apply the jackboot to a situation and structures which were rapidly winning a phenomenal proportion of our population, who were rapidly building up tremendous goodwill albeit through illegal structures. They were proving in no uncertain fashion that they could capture the imagination and service the needs of our young people in a positive, constructive and serious manner.

I can give lots of proof, if the House wants it, of the tremendous work the local structures did for charitable and community organisations. They did work for the CRC and many other charitable organisations. How did they do it? They did not do it on the basis of having two or three personnel deployed in fund raising. They did it on the basis of the manner in which they captured the imagination of our young people — the manner in which they could harness that imagination and goodwill they had built up to promote very deserving legitimate causes in our community. This is a very definite reflection of the contribution they have made.

When the Department of Posts and Telegraphs — I am not clear who authorised this — decided to apply the jackboot to these illegal radios inevitably it caused a huge public outcry. It went to such an extreme during the course of one week that parents permitted their teenage sons and daughters to take to the streets in protest that the only facility making a serious attempt to contribute to the growth and welfare of their young people was being hammered down.

I am glad the Minister of State has decided at last to put a stay on the action of his Department. The reasons given are rather dubious. The reasons given for the closure of the stations initially and for the application of what I consider the jackboot — references were made to it this evening — were that there was an interruption of emergency services and, therefore, that there was a very serious and pressing urgency that these stations be closed down. If there was disruption a few weeks ago why will there not be disruption next week and the week after? What has happened in the meantime, what facilities have the Minister, the Minister of State or the Department obtained to enable them to overcome these interferences in coming weeks and months? They have said that they will not move against them again until there is legislation before the House. I commend that decision but I ask them to justify in more legitimate, authentic and credible terms the reason they so decided.

I call on the Minister of State to adopt our Bill as one that constructively and positively contributes to the needs of our young people and express my condemnation for the absence of Deputies from this House.

Debate adjourned.