Ulick Burke (Galway East, Fine Gael)

I am pleased to have an opportunity to comment on this welcome Bill. Prior to the establishment of many local radio stations, RTE and its predecessor, Radio Éireann, had sole responsibility for providing broadcasting services. Both organisations operated on shoestring budgets as they set out to establish proper broadcasting services and deserve great credit for the service they provided.

I understood the Bill was intended to review the functions of RTE, establish a broadcasting authority of Ireland and give both bodies greater independence to develop and expand. I was, therefore, disappointed to read in the legislation repeated references to the Minister and his role in controlling broadcasting. Will the legislation result in further intrusion by the Minister on the new regulatory authority, for example, in the selection of its members? The legislation requires that those appointed to the authority must have experience in areas such as media affairs, public service broadcasting, broadcast content production, digital media technologies, trade union affairs, business or commercial affairs and matters pertaining to the development of the Irish language. If those appointed have expertise in all the areas cited in section 9, we will have an active, constructive authority. I am concerned that the Government will appoint the nine members of the authority. Nevertheless, I welcome the new role of the joint Oireachtas committee in this regard. That change will provide an element of transparency in the appointment of members. At least their characteristics and the background they may have in broadcasting will be scrutinised and their names laid before the House, which is welcome. I am not sure if the Minister of the day will be magnanimous and will move away, once and for all, from the idea of politically motivated reasons for appointments. That has been the case with many boards in the past, although not necessarily with the board or authority with which we are dealing. It is positive that we might hear of the demise of many boards and quangos next week and that those appointed to boards in any area of Government responsibility in the future will be selected on the basis of merit and expertise. If the Minister does that, it will be a first, a welcome step forward. I am not convinced, given the provisions of the Bill and the reference to the controls the Minister will have, that this will be done.

In the recent past, at the start of the current financial crisis a fortnight ago, the Minister immediately contacted the director general of RTE and is supposed to have given him a dressing down, although that has been denied, about the contents of a radio programme that started what might have been a panic reaction among people to move their finances between, or withdraw them from, the banking institutions. People do not change their ways that quickly. I would welcome being proven wrong about this.

The Bill introduces many new concepts. It will grant a range of new functions to broadcasters and regulators and will set a framework for new activities and services, particularly in the light of technology, and at the same time it will liberalise and streamline the regulatory burden placed on broadcasters. If that is to be the case, section 32 clearly indicates there will be an imposition and a burden on broadcasters in regard to the way they present their programmes and the balance and fairness in them. Those two proposals are not reconcilable.

Presenters of RTE radio programmes and television programmes in particular, who are household names, have dominated certain programmes over the years. While they have been entertaining, no effort has been made by RTE to give the new talent of professionals in this field, whom we have in abundance, an opportunity to work in this sector. They have had to leave to work in the media across the water or elsewhere. These young professionals have not been given a chance to work in the broadcasting media here because of the dominance of presenters who have continued to work on shows, the ratings of which have declined over the years. These presenters have been given selected high exposure time slots and demand not to be shifted out of those time slots which attract high audience participation, listeners and viewers. Not only do they demand particular time slots during which they will be available to present, they receive unbelievably high remuneration.

It is sad that RTE management does not provide more opportunities and exposure for our young talented people who are professionally trained in all aspects of the media. Perhaps in the past programme presenters did not have the required training, expertise or professionalism, but they were balanced in their presentation and provided a good service, having regard to the requirements of the day, but this is 2008. Some individuals have been successful having exercised great determination and grit to break the stranglehold many of the old hands had over certain areas. I hope this Bill and the new authority will recognise this issue and give those young people an opportunity to work in broadcasting.

RTE has been generous in its support of Raidió na Gaeltachta and TG4 down the years. There is no doubt that the stations were a burden following their establishment, but they were supported by various Ministers, two of whom I single out for mention, the former Minister, Deputy Michael D. Higgins, representing a Gaeltacht area in Connemara, and the Minister, Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív, who identified the function of TG4 and Raidió na Gaeltachta in representing RTE's cultural obligation in recognising our language. It has supported the Irish language and, as a result of the nature of the programming provided by Raidió na Gaeltachta and TG4, has put life back into it and people have recognised its importance as a language. Were it not for RTE, Raidió na Gaeltachta and their work, Gaeilge would not be recognised as an official European language. It is important to recognise RTE's input and, given the restricted finance available to it relative to the service it provides, it has stretched the contributions of TG4 and Raidió na Gaeltachta, so to speak, in terms of continuing to provide programmes.

On the question of income derived from advertising, the danger of allowing an over-dependence on some major advertisers to develop will be evident to many people who watch NBC, Fox News or other such channels, having regard to the restrictions on which they can insist in return for advertising revenue, the slant that can be put on even the news, the presentation, focus or highlighting of particular aspects of policy they may favour or, as is becoming prevalent now with the pending presidential election in the US, putting forward their political views.

We have a restricted capacity for advertising in Ireland. If the Government gave a commitment, once and for all, to respond to the difficulties in certain areas, particularly that of alcoholism, it would recognise that this legislation presents an opportunity not previously presented to ban or severely restrict alcohol advertising to very late hours during programming. If we add up the cost of dealing with the downside of the abuse of alcohol, whether in the area of health, education or insurance, and divert some of the resources spent on advertising of alcohol to other areas, this legislation will have done a good job. I hope the Minister will give serious examination to this issue and will ignore the powerful lobbies dedicated to the promotion and sale of alcohol. I urge him to make a clear and sensible response in respect of the need that exists.

When one compares the resources available to RTE 1, RTE 2, TV3, Raidió na Gaeltachta etc., to those that are available to BSkyB, one can see how difficult it is for Irish broadcasters to compete in order to win the right to cover major sporting events, both domestic and international. BSkyB and other sports broadcasters are in a position to monopolise particular events. RTE can rarely compete at that level. However, it tries its best to do so within the limited resources available to it. During the Olympic Games, it was unfortunate that we could not watch Irish athletes perform as a result of certain restrictions that were put in place. That was terribly unfair to those who wanted to follow our the progress of those competing at the Olympics on behalf of Ireland.

Many people cannot afford to pay the contributions required by BSkyB to watch football matches at weekends. They are obliged to go to the local pub or hotel to watch and are presented with the opportunity to indulge in imbibing alcohol. I accept that everyone might not partake of a drink, but the opportunity to do so exists. People's need to go to pubs and hotels to watch sporting events dictates the content of advertising on television. Many of these sports networks carry large amounts of alcohol-related advertising.

The Bill places a burden on broadcasters to ensure that there is balance and impartiality in the context of advertising and in the way in which shows are presented. Deputy Deenihan referred to an event that happened prior to the 2002 general election. I agree with him but I will not repeat what he said. I recall many other instances where it was not as glaring but where a similar political bias or slant occurred. There are those who will observe: "He would say that, wouldn't he?" However, a certain party has dominated the Government for the past decade.

If one considers a list of presenters of various programmes and compares it to a list of the names of candidates who put themselves forward for election, one will discover an extremely close connection. I will say no more than that. However, this matter must be examined. I am delighted the Bill——

See this speech in context