David Norris (Independent)

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 4, line 42, after "television" to insert "and digital radio mondiale".

I am happy to welcome the Minister of State back to the House and regret I was not present on the previous occasion. I spoke extensively on Second Stage and tabled many amendments, which my colleague Senator Henry moved on my behalf because I was detained at a symposium in Trinity College.

I am being helpful and in this regard I have tabled one amendment on Report Stage as a test case to provoke debate. I hope the Minister of State will take on board and include in his speech the point that, but for the Seanad, the radio broadcasting element might not be included in the legislation. It was certainly not in the Bill until the amendments were tabled. It is very important that we have the most efficient and technically advanced form of broadcasting for our citizens abroad, who also include deaf people. The radio system is very important. The BBC, for example, would probably consider the radio broadcasts of the BBC World Service to be at least as significant and powerful as the television broadcasts, and probably more powerful in terms of altering public opinion.

My remarks concern a kind of conflict between the digital audio broadcasting, DAB, system and the digital radio mondiale, DRM, systems. I must be open and lay my cards on the table in that I am simply not technically proficient in this matter. I am therefore putting on the record of the House what I have been advised about the broadcasting systems and what may be regarded as the advantages of the DRM system over the DAB system. The first is that DRM is a cost effective solution delivering free-to-air digital community radio. There is particular value in reviewing this option to create affordable opportunities for small-scale service on digital platforms, especially for targeted audiences. The DAB system is 25 years old and is really designed for large national services. It has not been available to small-scale community stations because of its prohibitive cost and its multiplex nature. This means that coverage for a single service is difficult to target effectively.

My advice indicates that many in the industry regard the DAB system as already out of date. As I am sure the Minister of State and his advisers are aware, what we used to call "wireless receivers", in other words, radios or "trannies" or whatever they are now called, are not equipped for DAB1 and they certainly will not be equipped for DAB2. They will not get the updated system, as has happened elsewhere. DAB1 has already been replaced by DAB2. The two systems are not compatible and new receivers are required for the latter, which is now coming on stream.

DRM is an energy saving upgrade for the medium, long and short wave bands, giving near FM sound both day and night. It complements DAB rather than competing with it. DAB2 is more efficient and allows better sound quality and more stations. Like broadband, DAB creates a deficit for those who live away from large towns. I presume this makes a significant difference to a scattered population abroad and implies that its receiving capacity is reduced.

DAB carries many stations grouped on a multiplex and transmitted from a common mast. A centralised mast is remote from existing target areas of small stations. DAB duplicates in that each station's programme is carried into the service areas of others to uninterested listeners, thereby producing a scatter effect. Many rural areas have too few stations to form a group and fill a multiplex so they cannot be served by DAB. Does this imply that to receive DAB, one must create a group and subscribe or be near a re-broadcasting system? Does it mean isolated people will be excluded under DAB?

I am also advised that if DAB is to be used in Ireland, it should have broadcast quality at least equal to FM, which is not the case in the United Kingdom. DAB2 will improve fidelity. RTE's FM signal is three times stronger than that of our UK neighbours and this will make it very difficult to convince the public that DAB1 is relevant at this late stage. It other words, it is being suggested that we leapfrog and go straight to DAB2. However, we must tell consumers that their receiver equipment is out of date.

Radio Denmark has advised would-be DAB radio purchasers that DAB2 has been adapted by the world DAB body. Existing radios now being sold in Ireland will not work with this new system. Micro-power DRM, using near CB channels, can provide a solution. In other words, provision could be made for small-scale stations. It would be important for RTE as a public-service broadcaster to inform its listeners that existing DAB radios do not meet the new standard and will be obsolete in future years.

The Minister of State should acknowledge the problem. Let me refer to a quotation by the Australian Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, who I am glad to see is both a Senator and a woman.