Labhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail)

Fáiltím roimh an Aire. Tá an-áthas orm go bhfuil an díospóireacht seo ag tarlú. Lorg mé é an tseachtain seo caite. Ba bhreá liom buíochas a ghabhail toisc go bhfuil sé ag tarlú chomh tapaidh sin. I requested this debate last week and I thank the Leader for the expeditious manner in which he responded. As Senator O'Reilly said, we spoke on this issue on the Order of Business. One of the difficulties of speaking on the Order of Business is that one has an eye on the Cathaoirleach all the time, wondering whether one can speak about some issue that is not on the Order of Business. Very often, important items get lost.

I welcome the Minister to the House. He has done a very fine job in endeavouring to instill balance in the debate and, in a nice, poetic way, he has challenged all our views. This is exactly as it should be. We are endeavouring to challenge the views of those people who have the power of broadcasting at their backs.

I recall listening to radio and watching television on my first visits to the United States in the late 1960s and early 1970s. I found television exceptionally mundane in the States when Irish television was creative, exciting and challenging. We were proud of that because people visiting from abroad saw it as a reflection of an ancient civilisation, of intellectual property, and it was underpinned by a sense of humanity. At the same time, we were always conscious that the broadcasting medium was very strong in the hands of anyone because it entered every home. For that reason, there has to be a degree of monitoring and accountability. As the Minister rightly said, there is a legislative structure that has been much debated and one which most will agree creates a balance. It also calls into account responsibility.

RTE has done a fine job overall. I do not believe we would have local radio were it not for RTE. Local radio emerged when RTE sent its outside broadcasting unit around the country, training people in how to prepare radio programmes etc. I had the opportunity to use that facility in Cashel for a whole week. Subsequent to that local radio came on stream. Local radio can be particularly proud of the service it provides. It is held accountable in the same way as the national broadcasters. It reflects the community that it serves and is conscious of the values which the community holds deeply. It also provides an opportunity for people to engage with it almost instantaneously.

Paddy Kavanagh, the poet, has been mentioned. Anyone familiar with his life will realise he got short shrift for a long time from those who had the power to recognise the importance of his work. I am glad he is now back in fashion. He was very faithful to his own stony grey soil and the philosophy that came with it. Kavanagh's poetry contained much philosophy. The Minister was correct in selecting him as an example of comedy that may have crossed the line. Brendan Behan could be selected as another. A list of artistic figures could be drawn up who may have crossed the line. However, they crossed it in a different way from what is being debated here.

The Minister used two words "cringing" and "embarrassing". I recall watching "The Late Late Show" when a particular comedian, whose name I will not mention, poked fun at the crucifixion of Christ and the nails that were driven into His hands. It must be remembered the majority of people on this island subscribe to Christianity. They have very deeply held views and they were hurt when they heard those jokes. The same was the case with the recent jokes about Down's syndrome children. One does not have to have a Down's syndrome child to cringe and be embarrassed at jokes about people so vulnerable and helpless. We must think of their families and how they feel.

The Irish in Britain were the butt of jokes for decades. These were not the Paddy Irishman, Paddy Scotsman and Paddy Englishman type of jokes but were malicious with a degree of national arrogance behind them because of the political background and the work situations. It was embarrassing for the Irish in Britain to attend concerts and shows where these jokes were told. It was nothing more than racism to typecast people in this manner. The Irish won in the end because the media came in behind them, which eventually forced legislators to outlaw that type of racism.

On "The Late Late Show" recently we did exactly the same to our immigrants who we have welcomed into our midst. I have heard many debates here on how important it is to ensure racism does not prosper in this country. In a letter in today's Irish Independent, Alice Li states she is sick and tired of racism and the manner in which she is subjected to it in Ireland. At least she was prepared to speak out whereas many immigrants will not do so for the simple reason they feel afraid they will be ostracised for expressing themselves. To have such jokes on a popular programme such as "The Late Late Show" is not acceptable.

The same happened on that programme in regard to Travellers. We all know how vulnerable they are as a group and the efforts that are being made to integrate them into society. To make jokes about Travellers is unacceptable. This is not a matter for legislation or directives, it is a matter for common decency. These jokes are not just happening on programmes that are not regarded as comedy. The people who are making them should put themselves in the place of the recipients of that type of crude humour and see how they feel.

I am not sure if the name at the end of the letter in today's Irish Independent is genuine, as the person may be afraid to speak out but the letter was certainly genuine. There are also those of us in public life who are afraid to speak out about the media and the broadcasting service because we think we could be made pay later. Anyone in the media who engages in such a practice is wrong because they are doing harm to their profession, their service and the loyalty of their viewers and listeners.

As mentioned by Senator Joe O'Reilly, under legislation religious advertising is not allowed, and I have raised that matter several times in the House. I do not understand that as it will not cause offence to anyone. In the main, it would be a vehicle for improving the quality of life because it is about justice and compassion. On the other hand, the airwaves are used every day to attack the Catholic Church. There could be a discussion on the weather, for example, and in some way the priests of the church will be dragged into it. A balance has to be created which must take cognisance of all the people who are paying for a public broadcasting service. If it were a private service, the same would apply. I hope the Minister will rethink the issue of religious advertising because it would not be offensive. An example of what we are talking about is the debate that took place over whether the Angelus at 6 p.m. should be removed. The defender of the Angelus was the Church of Ireland, not the Catholic Church. The point was made that there was nothing wrong with having a minute's silence for reflection at a given time of the day. No offence was being given to our other churches. It proved the point that those who start such debates within the media either have an agenda or want to create a controversy.

I and other Senators know that by discussing this here we might add to the problem. There is a very thin line between controversy and success in the world of entertainment and the media. However, if one remains silent one is to some extent accepting what comes across. If a public representative feels strongly about something he or she should stand up in the right forum and make known those views. I certainly hope that whatever might come out of a debate such as this and the comments we made on the Order of Business would not add to the controversy and thus contribute in some way to the profile or prominence of the people about whom we are speaking.

I started my contribution by saying that standards have been exceptionally high. We have a lot about which to be proud. At the same time, however, we must be always conscious of the needs and rights of other people.