Vol. 377 No. 2
asked the Minister for Communications if his proposed legislation on commercial television will preclude the owners of newspapers, religious or sporting organisations and political parties or persons with an involvement in political life from the ownership of any such stations; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
4.
asked the Minister for Communications if his proposed legislation on commercial television will preclude RTE from any involvement whatsoever; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
5.
asked the Minister for Communications if his proposed legislation on commercial television will contain any minimum broadcasting standards; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
7.
asked the Minister for Communications if a Government decision has been taken to license a commercial television channel; the steps, if any, which are being taken to protect the interests of RTE, as the national broadcasting service, in the event of such a development; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 7 together.
As I said in reply to a question on this matter last November as reported at columns 1326-1329 of the Official Report of 19 November, the potential of such a service is currently being considered. No decisions have yet been taken either to establish the service or as to the nature of any legislation that might be necessary to deal with the matter.
I thank the Minister for his reply but it certainly leaves me no wiser. Would the Minister say whether his opinion has been formed in relation to what I would see as the danger in respect of certain groups, companies or individuals — be they newspaper proprietors, religious organisations, or political parties for that matter? Would the Minister share the worry I would have in relation to these people gaining control of commercial television which, in the case of one particular company would give them practically a monopoly on news media in this country? Would the Minister ensure that that does not happen?
The whole question of whether there is to be a service has yet to be decided. The potential of such a service is currently being considered. If it is so decided the matters to which the Deputy refers will be taken into account.
Could the Minister indicate in what way the consideration is being conducted: is it within his Department or has he any special body investigating the various factors involved? Would the Minister also indicate whether his Department have considered the question of the viability of any such third channel and its effect on the existing viability of RTE 1 and RTE 2?
There is no group advising us on this. It is being examined within the Department. All of the points the Deputy has made are being taken into account in those considerations.
Would the Minister say whether the idea which he flagged in his statement on the Sound Broadcasting Bill, of having a single overall authority for the electronic media has been given further considerations and whether he will be amending the Sound Broadcasting Bill so that it will be consistent with this proposal?
As the Deputy is well aware, the Sound Broadcasting Bill is at present being discussed on Second Stage and will be resuming shortly. At the end of the Second Stage debate, when I have listened to all of the contributions, I will be responding in relation to the future of the authorities and so on.
Would the Minister not agree that it would be appropriate that an independent broadcasting authority be established? Apart from having an input into the Sound Broadcasting Bill would it not also be very relevant in the context of introducing commercial television, that they be the body that would oversee the orderly development of broadcasting generally, set standards for and monitor broadcasting? Would the Minister not consider that it would be more appropriate that they should do it?
That is a point of view.
Has the Minister any idea of the time scale of this review? Can he give us an indication when he will be in a position to make an announcement? Could I also press the Minister in relation to my concern about ensuring that people do not have a monopoly if a commercial television station is set up, that there will be an independent monitoring body so that private individuals will not, between ownership of newspapers and commercial television, have a monopoly?
The fears about monopolies were covered in the sound broadcasting legislation already. That is one of the criteria to be taken into account in the granting of a licence under section 3 of the relevant Bill. However, newspapers were not excluded from applying for radio licences. But I appreciate the Deputy's concern in relation to allowing any one group to get total control. I share the Deputy's concern and the Government have already covered that. As far as the time scale is concerned. I cannot say at this stage what it will be.
It appears that the Minister is considering the question of a commercial television channel. Could he outline to the House what is present thinking on this issue is? I have before me a cutting from the Irish Independent of 8 January which outlines some of his thinking. Could he confirm that this is correct and give a brief outline here of his views?
I would be delighted to give the Deputy full details of the decision when the decision is arrived at.
I am not asking for a decision, I am asking for his views. He expressed them to the Irish Independent. I am asking him if he will express those views to the House.
We are having repetition now.
6.
asked the Minister for Communications if he will outline the discussions he has had with television relay companies and Cablelink in particular, regarding charges for extra satellite channels; if he has approved plans for Cablelink in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I have not had any discussion with the cable industry on the specific question of charging for satellite channels although companies were undoubtedly aware from my public statements in the matter and in particular from my reply to a question on this issue on 15 October last (see Dáil Report of same date, columns 427-429) of my view that any additional charges that might be levied for these services should be levied on the basis that only those who wish to receive them would be required to pay.
Cable companies who were relaying satellite services on an experimental basis for the most of 1987 were invited to submit proposals relating to the permanent relay of these services. Cablelink put forward proposals to continue for the time being to relay at no extra charge a number of services — Sky Channel, Super Channel and MTV — which they get free and that they would enter into negotiations with a number of other channels who normally require a payment for access to their services, with a view to continuing to relay those services on the same "no extra-charge" basis. They also indicated their intention to explore the possibility of introducing a film channel on a subscription basis.
The Cork cable company proposed to relay Sky, Super, TV5 (French Channel) and RAI (Italian channel) at no extra charge and that it would be developing a package comprising various other satellite services which it would offer on a discretionary basis to subscribers at an extra charge.
I approved these proposals and also outlined the general conditions which would apply to the relay of these services.
I thank the Minister for the detail of his reply. Can the Minister tell us the manner in which the discretion will be operated. Will the customer be obliged to opt out rather than opt in?
The extra channels that I have mentioned in the Dublin area and in the Cork region are at no extra charge. The cable companies will provide a box system to each customer who will then be in a position to press a button thus making a decision to pay for a particular film that is on at a particular hour of the day or night. So the customer will have the right to choose whether to use it or not.
Has the Minister further considered the position of the RTE 15 per cent levy included in the cable charge which he indicated the last time he answered questions on this matter? He was considering its appropriateness at that stage. Has he made any progress on that?
The Deputy is injecting new matter into this question.
I have made some progress but I am not in a position to give a decision today.
