Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)

I presume I have two minutes or whatever is the allocated time permitted. I recognise the Minister has at least acknowledged the conversation we held on Committee Stage by tabling amendment No. 11. Since the last discussion, I tried the late night service on TV3. Let us be upfront about the broadcaster to which we refer. Even if I had switched to high-definition television, I do not believe I would have spotted the difference, which was the name of the game I played that night. We were asked to pick the odd one out in what appeared to be a very simple game, but, in fact, it was almost unwinnable.

It reminded me of the time I worked as a student in Ocean City, Maryland. Essentially, I worked on a three-card trick gameshow which ripped off gullible Americans who believed they could trust the Irish guy. At the time, they could not. This is the same idea. It attracts viewers because one thinks one is spending a small amount of money. One fails the first time and tries again because it is only a small amount. Before one knows it, one has tried many times with a small amount and all of a sudden it becomes a large amount of money. This attracts young people because each effort costs only a small amount. The presenters are rather talented, persuasive and attractive.

The point Deputy McManus has made more eloquently than I is that whether the broadcaster has hired a premium rate service provider to facilitate the telecommunications application that allows people to telephone in, be charged and participate in a competitive gameshow or the broadcaster decides to provide the service in-house, there is an onus on the broadcaster and we must ensure that it has a responsibility in legislation towards the provision of that service. This is the point we are making. It is somewhat missing the point to state that we should leave the broadcaster out of it because it simply provides the platform and promotion for the premium rate service provider, essentially, to scam people and to suggest ComReg should pursue the premium rate service provider because it provides the technology to do so. There should be a stick such that if a broadcaster knowingly facilitates unacceptable behaviour with regard to premium rate services, it should be liable and subject to an investigation from ComReg. I am not satisfied this is covered in the legislation and I do not understand why the Minister has rejected amendment No. 6.

See this speech in context