Michael Colreavy (Sligo-North Leitrim, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses. I will not repeat what has been said. We have all received the e-mails and we all understand the level of hurt among Irish people abroad who cherish that connection they have with this country. Some of them feel we pay them lip-service. We talk about how precious the diaspora is and yet we make a decision like this which cuts off an important communication link they have with home. I will not go into the details.

A good point was made that many of these messages have been sent by e-mail but not all of them have been sent by the person making the complaint because I match the sender's name with the e-mailer's address. Obviously, some of these messages are going to people who use e-mail to get their point across. I would not like anyone to think that they are sitting there with laptops sending e-mails about long wave 252.

I am glad RTE accepts there was inadequate analysis of the impact of the decision it made. It has accepted that by virtue of the fact it has now announced that the end date is being extended to 19 January 2015 in order to allow time for discussions with individuals and organisations in Northern Ireland and in Britain. If there was a flawed analysis of the impact analysis, was there also a flawed analysis of the possible technical solution?

RTE states that it costs €250,000 per annum to operate this service. I share Senator Mooney's dismay that it costs €250,000 to run a different platform. It seems extraordinary. I am not a technician or an electronics or a broadcasting engineer. I do not know whether long wave can co-exist on the same mast as FM. I do not know the answer to that question but I assume somebody in RTE does. I also assume these issues have been considered.

I do not know whether long wave and FM can share the same power or whether there is a way to dramatically reduce the €250,000 per annum operational cost, whether it continues at Clarkstown or relocates to an existing mast somewhere else. I understand RTE must cut costs and that it is doing so. It provides a good service.

However, we all complain about individual aspects of the service.

I was disappointed that this decision was made and that the first I knew about it was when I started getting e-mails from residents in the Six Counties and in Britain. It was hastily done on flawed analysis. While I welcome that there are to be further discussions, it is clear that it is not consultation as to whether this was a good or a bad proposal, but simply a discussion on possible alternatives. I hope that the possible alternatives will not turn away many who value this connection with the country so much.