asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs if, in view of the many areas of controversy and dissatisfaction concerning RTE with regard to programme censorship, huge losses of revenue, increasing overheads and a marked decline in viewing audiences, he will establish as a matter of priority an independent commission of inquiry to look into all aspects of RTE operations; and, if not, why.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - RTE Operations.
61.
The answer to the first part of the question is "No". As regards the second part, in June, 1971, I established the Broadcasting Review Committee—an independent body— with terms of reference which call for a review of the progress of the broadcasting services established by the Broadcasting Authority Act. This committee are still pursuing their deliberations, and I see no good reason for duplicating their work. I may mention that I do not accept the assumptions implicit in the Deputy's question.
Will this body be examining the aspects that were mentioned in the report?
In an effort to refresh the Deputy's memory, I would remind him of the terms of reference of the Broadcasting Review Committee. These are to review the progress of television and sound broadcasting services since the enactment of the Broadcasting Authority Act, 1960 with particular reference to the objectives prescribed in the Act and to make any recommendations which they consider appropriate in regard to the future development of the services.
What was the reason for the directive issued by the Minister last week in respect of piped television? Was this in view of declining viewing audiences?
I want to be charitable and I do not want to say the Deputy is badly informed but I suggest that he consults the spokesman for Post Office affairs in his own party who will assure him that he is very wrong.
If the Minister did not issue the directive, why are RTE Relays under the impression that he did?
Whatever impression RTE Relays are under probably arises from irresponsible comment which has been made by people, including the Deputy.
I have not made any statement.
I am calling No. 5.
I was at a meeting with RTE Relays yesterday and I was told that the Minister had issued a directive about the number of people who may have piped television connected to these masts, that this was a directive from the Minister.
I think the Deputy is not familiar with what he is talking about. I respectfully suggest that, before he comes in here making irresponsible charges either against me or against RTE Relays, he should go and find out the facts himself.
I would suggest——
We cannot debate this particular question now. I am calling No. 5. The Deputy may not take up the time of the House in this way.
(Interruptions.)
Deputy O'Connell has made a serious charge against a member of the RTE staff——
I did no such thing.
Could the Minister have this investigated, that a member of the staff had given erroneous information to the public? Would he take the necessary action?
I have issued no direction whatever to RTE Relays.
Did you issue it to anybody else in a way in which it would go indirectly to RTE Relays? This is the way you get out of these things. Would the Minister explain to the public——
We cannot debate this question all evening. The Deputy may not wave at the Chair as if he was going to speak about this all evening.
In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply I propose to raise the matter on the Adjournment.
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.
I wish to give notice that I wish to raise the subject matter of Question Nos. 145, 146 and 147 on the Adjournment, specifically Question No. 145 of Thursday, 8th June.
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.
Will the Minister for Health move No. 5?