Committee Reports > List of Committees > Joint > 1998 > Committee on Public Enterprise and Transport > Report on the meeting with the South East Community TV Group on Multi Channel TV

HOUSES OF THE OIREACHTAS

Report of the

Joint Committee on Public Enterprise and Transport on Meeting with

South East Community Television Group on Multi Channel Television

November 1998

HOUSES OF THE OIREACHTAS

Report of the

Joint Committee on Public Enterprise and Transport on Meeting with

South East Community Television Group on Multi Channel Television

November 1998

Contents

Introduction

The Joint Committee on Public Enterprise and Transport was established by Order of Dáil Éireann of 13th November, 1997 and by Order of Seanad Éireann of 19th November, 1997. In addition, Standing Orders state that the following powers may be conferred on a Committee:

“(1)power to take oral and written evidence and to print and publish from time to time minutes of such evidence taken in public before the Select Committee together with such related documents as the Select Committee thinks fit;”.

This report of the Joint Committee on Multi Channel Television was agreed at its meeting on 29 October, 1998.

________________

Seán Doherty, T.D.

Chairman

AN COMHCHOISTE UM FHIONTAIR PHOIBLÍ AGUS IOMPAR

JOINT COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ENTERPRISE AND TRANSPORT

Déardaoin, 17 Meán Fómhair, 1998

Thursday, 17th September, 1998

The Joint Committee met at 2.00 p.m.

MEMBERS PRESENT:

Deputy Brendan Daly (Vice Chairman) in the Chair.

Acting Chairman (Mr. Daly): Deputy Doherty is unavoidably absent so I will preside over proceedings. I welcome Mr. Michael Power who will introduce his colleagues. I remind the delegation that members of the committee have absolute privilege but witnesses do not. Perhaps Mr. Power will make his presentation and then the members may ask questions.

Mr. Power: I thank the committee for giving us the opportunity to make this presentation. Our delegation is Mr. Paddy Horgan; our chairman, Mr. John Fahey; Mrs. Mary McCormack; our technical advisor, Mr. Michael Bulfin and Mr. Michael Murphy.

We are here today because thousands of TV viewers in the south east cannot receive English TV stations. The technology exists, in deflectors, to ensure that this service can be provided. However, as a result of the Government’s failure to ensure a licensing scheme is put in place, many people face a bleak winter without access to multi-channel TV. This is particularly hard on our elderly and housebound as TV plays a major role in their entertainment. This should not be allowed to happen and we urge all Deputies to intervene so that this problem is resolved immediately.

We view the airwaves as a natural resource. Under international agreements Ireland is allocated certain frequency bands. Therefore it is important that these are regulated in a fair and just manner in the public interest. We contend this has not been the case in respect of TV retransmitting services. It is our argument that the exclusive licences given to MMDS operators does not serve the public interest but primarily the interests of franchise owners. This is all the more alarming given the fact that the majority of franchise cells are owned by multi-national companies.

These resources should be used in a manner which benefits the public primarily and business interests secondly. This resource can be used by enterprising rural communities to retransmit English TV stations into rural areas which cannot be serviced by any other source. This would ensure that households in rural areas would have access to the same services that urban dwellers receive from cable.

We wish to assert our rights to be able to use this resource to enhance the living standards of our rural communities. We recognise that the spectrum frequency is a scarce resource and that certain services have primary right of use. We wish to point out that the EBU nominees report commissioned by the previous Rainbow Government acknowledges that there is enough room on the spectrum for UHF retransmission operators, commonly known as deflectors. This fact was reiterated in the Nera and Smith report commissioned by the Director of Telecommunications Regulation.

We are entering the information technology era and this will bring enormous changes to our lives. It is important that community based enterprises are allowed access to this technology and that the Government does not sell these rights to the highest bidders or manipulate the marketplace in favour of certain businesses. We contend that the 1988 MMDS regulations do exactly this as they prevent community groups from entering the marketplace.

Government policy should be promoting community groups to look after their interests and not raising barriers for them. Looking back on Irish history we see that when schemes are devised for the betterment of the community the benefits to the nation are enormous, i.e. the co-operative movement and credit unions. When Government policy is solely directed in favour of business interests the community often loses out. The bottom line for big business is profit whereas community groups are more willing to provide better service and play a greater social role. Therefore, the present policy of maintaining the monopoly position of MMDS companies is depriving thousands of viewers in the south east of multi-channel TV and furthermore we argue is contrary to European competition law.

MMDS operators in the region, Cablelink and Suir Nore Relays, are not able to provide a large geographical area with a service because their technology is not suitable to the terrain. These areas include the Hook and Bannow peninsulas in County Wexford; Kilmacthomas, Passage East and Dunmore East in County Waterford; the Fethard and Killenaule region in County Tipperary and the Mullinavat and Ballyhale areas in County Kilkenny, to name a few. These areas were previously supplied by deflector operators before they were forced to close. Second, many people are not satisfied with the service quality of MMDS and would prefer the deflector system.

In the interest of the consumer the Government should be promoting competition between service providers and not maintaining the monopoly rights of certain groups. What options are open to the public who are not serviced by MMDS or are not happy with that system? There is talk of BBC and HTV being transmitted by digital satellite and made available to viewers in the Republic of Ireland. Our latest information is that this will not happen because the signal will be coded to make sure it cannot be received in the Republic. Digital terrestrial television operated by RTÉ is another option. However, this will not be operating until late in the year 2000 at the earliest. Clearly, another alternative is needed if people living in rural areas are to receive multi-channel TV this winter.

It is our firm view that the only option available is the introduction of a dual licensing system for both deflectors and MMDS operators. Therefore, we ask Members of this Committee to use their influence to persuade the Minister for Public Enterprise and the Government to allow deflectors to resume operations. I am sure there are many mechanisms by which this objective can be achieved.

We have been informed recently by Mr. Hugh Touhy, head of the licensing division in the Regulator’s office, that the Regulator is in favour of licensing some deflectors but that she has to overcome certain legal difficulties before she can even consider proposing a scheme for the Minister’s consent. These legal difficulties mainly relate to the exclusive licence granted to the MMDS companies. We have been told that December is the earliest date that she would hope to have a licensing scheme in place and it would be February before licences could be issued. Therefore, we feel it is imperative that the Minister intervenes to resolve this issue now. Quite clearly, the Regulator wishes to introduce some scheme but is prevented by legal difficulties.

In her latest correspondence to us on the issue the Minister for Public Enterprise passed the problem on to the Regulator by stating, “Any proposals by the Director to issue licences in respect of UHF re-transmission systems should be subject to my consent. It is entirely a matter for the Director to take the initiative in this regard.” From our meeting with her officials it is quite clear that she wishes the Director to take such an initiative but is hindered by the exclusive licences held by the MMDS companies. Therefore, we contend that the Minister has a responsibility to intervene now and it is hypocritical of her to hide behind the Director. We realise this is a complex issue but we are certain that if the Minister was to devote a little political effort the issue could be resolved to everybody’s satisfaction, especially that of the public.

The lack of access to multi-channel TV is having a detrimental social and economic effect on the south east. As a community orientated enterprise, developing additional services such as a community channel has been high on our agenda. For five years until our forced closure in January of this year we operated such a service. It mainly consisted of community messages informing viewers of social, sporting and educational activities in the area. In addition video recordings of local sporting and festival events have been shown. This has proved highly popular with viewers and is something we want to develop. Rural areas, by their nature, are often isolated and we feel the community channel has an important role in creating a great community awareness and binding individual community members closer together. It is a useful mechanism for voluntary and social groups to inform the rural population of services available to them. For example, we have been in discussion with Waterford Institute of Technology with a view to providing distance learning courses on the community channel. With the advent of digital technology we could offer the community numerous such services. There will be no charge for using the channel as we believe this resource should be used for the benefit of the community.

We firmly believe the public should have a right to choose what type of technology they want. We believe the Government’s policy of forcing a certain technology when other alternatives exist is wrong. Many members of the public have fears regarding the safety of MMDS technology. They are fearful that microwave emissions may be carcinogenic. While research is ongoing and the state of scientific knowledge uncertain, there is a general principle of environmental law that nations should take precautionary action to prevent environmental damage. With research ongoing as to the safety of MMDS the Government has a responsibility at least to allow consumers to choose which technology they are most comfortable with and not force MMDS on them.

We note that the Government is in the process of selling Cablelink. This company has several MMDS franchises including Cell No. 27 which covers east Waterford, south west Wexford and parts of south Kilkenny. If the exclusivity clause of the MMDS licences is included as part of a sale it will ensure that legal barriers will still exist for other TV groups such as deflectors to enter the market. Therefore, the Government needs to balance the optimum price it can receive for Cablelink while protecting the interests of consumers in these franchise areas. If this Committee has power to examine the terms of sale of Cablelink it should remember that by including the exclusivity clause of the MMDS licence the Government is at the same time denying access to multi-channel TV to viewers in the south east.

Acting Chairman: I thank Mr. Power for a very concise assessment of the situation as he sees it. A number of Deputies and Senators have indicated their wish to ask questions. We will first take questions from Deputies Aylward and Yates.

Deputy Aylward: I thank Mr. Power and the members of the deputation for the presentation and I thank the Chairman for making it possible to receive them today. I support what Mr. Power has said. The service his group has given affects my own constituency. I know the service and I know of the concern of many people at not having it. This community group should be encouraged and supported. We try to support community effort in all walks of life and yet in this area a community group who are giving a valuable service are being put off the air.

Can the role of this Committee in helping to have the deflector system licensed be clarified? When I write to the Minister on this matter I am told it is the responsibility of the Regulator and when I write to the Regulator I am told it is the responsibility of the Minister. We public representatives must face the electorate and we seem to be no nearer to finding a solution to this problem although it has been before us for a long time. Can the role of this Committee in this matter be clarified? Can we influence the Minister or the Regulator?

Our previous difficulty in relation to the Regulator appearing before this Committee has been resolved. The members of the deputation will be aware of that. I see the need to have the deflector systems brought back on air and I think I echo the views of most Members in that. However, I would like to have the Committee’s role clarified.

Chairman: Our role is to report on issues of relevance to the Committee to the Houses of the Oireachtas. I do not think we can adjudicate on whether the Regulator is the final arbiter in these affairs. The views of the Committee are taken very fully into account by Departments and by the Regulator. The Regulator has appeared before the Committee and I am sure we will have further opportunities to talk to her. We do not have a report yet from the Regulator.

Deputy Aylward: If we wish may we put forward a resolution from this Committee later on?

Chairman: Yes we can discuss that at a future date. Between now and the next meeting it will give me an opportunity to see precisely what we can do as a committee in this regard. Maybe we could take up that particular issue at the next meeting.

Ms. McCormack: If I could make a brief reply to your question Deputy Aylward. I feel you should be sitting on our side of the table because we are no wiser than what you are as to whether it is the regulator or the Minister who has the final say in who does or does not get a licence. I live in a small community and for the past ten years I have been active in community village affairs and I have never come across so many grey areas and so many promises. Many times our hopes have been raised and we have been through the High Court and Supreme Court and have appealed to the Supreme Court but at the end of the day the judge in the Supreme Court in giving his decision said: “With the best will in the world this is a matter for your politicians”. From that we presumed that the decision lay with the Minister’s Office. We have had meetings with the officials of the Regulators Office who expressed on behalf of the Regulator her wish to licence some deflector groups. We do not know whether we are going to be one of them but all we want is to have our picture back in Killenaule and to have fair play. We had so many people including cross party support wishing us well. I can show you letters we received from people who are house bound, people with handicapped children and people living in isolated areas who had our system and it worked very well for almost 12 months until an injunction was taken again us. We worked on the principle of non interference. We wanted a community service.

Our intention in coming to this meeting today is to find out who actually has responsibility for granting this licence.

Chairman: We do not have a name tag for Deputy Brian O’Shea but I am sure he is very familiar to the delegation.

Deputy Yates: First of all I would like to welcome Mr. Power and his colleagues here today. I appreciate their submission. As they know I have been one of the people who have been following this issue very closely and before asking the questions I would like to say that I would support what Deputy Aylward said about a resolution in so far as the Secretariat can prepare a suitable wording that would meet with all party support to call on both the Minister and the Regulator to provide interim TV transmission licences as soon as possible. I think that would be a useful input of the Committee. I have met the Regulator on three occasions since she came before this Committee and I am absolutely clear in my own mind as to the legal, political and administrative procedure. She would ultimately issue licences and draft regulations which have to be approved by the Minister but if the MMDS people were to sue for their lack of exclusivity, it is the Government they would sue and therefore the Government have overall responsibility for policy in this area. Therefore both have responsibility in tandem. If the Government refuse to consent to the regulations the Regulator cannot issue you or anyone else with a licence and even if the Government wanted to and the Regulator did not, the Government cannot issue a licence to you. That is absolutely clear. In fairness to the Regulator - and we are very critical in our Report The Way Forward - for the first time she has said on grounds on competition and on technical spectrum grounds that she rejects the exclusivity and favours both pre digital being available and interim licences being granted.

I would like to ask the Members a few questions. First of all do you have any figures collectively available as to how many have a total lack of access to multi channel TV? Because the Government made a decision to licence Digico which is the RTÉ subsidiary for the roll out of digital TV in Ireland have you made any approaches to RTÉ in relation to either a joint marketing arrangement or an equity arrangement? They have expressed they are willing to work with local groups in ensuring that a service is provided. Do you have any information on how soon the service will come into operation. Finally has the Regulator given a timescale in which she would be submitting to the Minister the draft licensing regulations? Until that happens the book will continue to be passed. The Minister then has to consent to these regulations and may withhold consent at her own wish. I would like to ask did she give you a firm date by which she promised to have the licensing regulations in place?

Mr. Fahey: I would like to express our disappointment, frustration and even anger at the fact that nobody seems to be able to do anything about this issue. We have met both North and South Tipperary county councils and we have got unanimous support from all parties but the difficulty is that nobody seems to be able to ask the regulator to do something now. We have been trying for the past three years. We expressed to the number two team in the Regulator’s Office our annoyance at the fact that the Regulator did not see fit to see us even though we travelled up from four different counties. Deputy Yates ask how many people have a lack of access to multi channel TV but with the deflector system it would be impossible to say. Three years ago we decided to try to get a licence for all the different community groups but we were only back on the air when we were cut off. A number of different secondary outfits needed to be put up so that people in the hills and valleys would be able to pick up the signal. We will work with anybody but work within the law. Our aim is to get a licence and work within the law and be in there in the market. Michael made reference to the fact that we went down to Waterford Institute of Technology. Michael made reference to our visit to Waterford Institute of Technology. The people we spoke to there, after talking for an hour, commented that we had not spoken about money. They said that when MMDS people come to speak to them they mention only one word which is money. They told us they had a budget within which they had to work.

Mr. Power: At our meeting with the regulator it was said that the office hoped to have regulations in place for the Minister by the middle of December. When we pressed for a date for the issuing of licences they told us that would happen in February at the earliest. They said they were having legal difficulties, namely the existence of exclusive licences. Reading between the lines I would say that negotiations are in progress with the MMDS companies. Mr. Touhy was more hopeful than convincing when he said that regulations would be in place by December. That is not good enough for us because members of our community constantly ask when they will have multi-channel viewing. They want to know something definite but we can never give them a definite answer.

We have been told by RTÉ that they will have digital TV up and running by the year 2000. However, we are concerned with the present. Our people want multi-channel TV this winter. When RTE go digital we will be glad to work with them. We will make contact with them with regard to digital technology.

In answer to the question about numbers of houses it is difficult to estimate that. Because of the terrain half the houses in an area might be capable of receiving multi-channel TV and the other half not. We estimate that in our region almost 1,000 households cannot get multi-channel TV. That includes the whole south east region. Many more who can get it do not wish to use MMDS. They are holding out until we get a licence. However, some of these who are elderly or families with children who wish to watch TV, want to have TV as the winter approaches. They are accepting MMDS as a last resort. There is a difference in the services provided by MMDS and the deflectors. With MMDS if you have two or three sets you can still only watch one channel. The deflector system allows a choice of viewing. We want to provide choice and comfort especially for elderly people who have worked hard and have a right to benefit from the current economic boom. I stress again the inaction of the Minister and the Government. We have asked to meet the Minister on numerous occasions and we believe she could find a way to resolve this issue if she expended some political capital on it.

Cablelink is practically a state owned body and has an exclusive MMDS licence. The Members of this Committee should examine the terms of the sale of Cablelink. The value of Cablelink will fall if the company does not have an exclusive licence but if it is sold with the exclusive licence hundreds of households will not have access to multi-channel TV. For an extra £1 million the Government will deny hundreds of households access to multi-channel TV.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Daly): Deputies O’Shea and Roche have indicated their wish to speak. I ask witnesses to try to avoid mentioning individuals by name. Members have absolute privilege but witnesses do not.

Deputy O’Shea: I too welcome the delegation and thank them for their very comprehensive and explicit presentation. One of the questions I was going to ask has been answered in effect with regard to south Kilkenny, west Wexford and east Waterford. The witnesses have told us where there are black spots and the number of viewers excluded from multi-channel viewing because of them.

Deflector systems are still operating in some parts of the country and I have raised this matter in the Dáil. Do the witnesses know the extent of this? I do not wish to damage these operators but the law should be applied equally to everyone. If there is information on this question I would be glad to get it.

I believe the Committee should call on the Director of Telecommunications Regulation to draw up the regulations as speedily as possible. The point has been made more than once that winter is now approaching and TV is needed by senior citizens, by others who are housebound and by housewives who wish to know that their children are safely occupied. It has been my experience that since the office of the regulator was set up parliamentary questions on this matter are not being answered. Deputies can ask questions on policy issues and when the Director presents the regulations to the Minister the matter will come back into the political arena and Deputies will be in a position to pursue it. Many issues have been raised but the most important task is to have the regulations drawn up by the regulator and presented to the Minister as speedily as possible. Our efforts as Deputies and as Members of this Committee should be directed towards that end.

Deputy Roche: We have frustrated ourselves and tied our hands by creating quangos such as the office of the Director of Telecommunications Regulation. This is well illustrated by the point just made by Deputy O’Shea. I was about to make the same point myself. We can best be of service by making the point to the regulator that we expect expeditious decisions on the draft regulations. It should be possible to produce these regulations fairly rapidly in view of the frustrations expressed by today’s delegation. When we mistrust the people we elect to fulfill certain executive functions and pass them over to quasi-autonomous bodies as we have done in this and other areas I believe we frustrate the people’s right to demand democratic accountability. This is a broad question which must be faced.

I think in all candor that the best service the Committee can do for this group, is to ask the Regulator to deal with the whole aspect of this problem as expeditiously as possible rather than going further into the minutia of it and asking voluntary groups, who do not have a huge research capacity to start researching more information.

Chairman (Deputy Daly): Does Mr. Horgan wish to answer the questions raised by Deputy Brian O’Shea about the other systems operating?

Mr. Horgan: Without having full knowledge of what the position is throughout the country I will make an attempt to answer that question. Down South with the exception of South coast the vast majority of areas are off the air. Donegal, Mayo and Galway are also still on the air. I would respectfully suggest that this is a business operation for the licensees. The reason why they are not off the air in the West is the terrain is something similar to that in South Tipperary. It is not suitable for the MMDS system so that people with the exclusive licence are not particularly interested. It is not viable. I can understand that and as such they are not giving the service and are not particularly concerned with the people owning the deflectors. They have escaped the net to date.

Our Secretary, Michael Power talks mainly about the area he is familiar with. I am familiar with Tipperary and want to specifically state that we do not have the service. We aimed at about four rural parishes and in those four parishes it is not available to 90 per cent of the area. There is a token service in Killenaule for the last two years. We sought a High Court injunction against it on 13 July and the people with the exclusive licences informed us then that within three weeks they would have a service in Fethard which is the main town in our area with a population of about 2,500 population in three weeks. Presently there is a token service in Fethard. Again it comes down to funding. We are in a hilly area and it is not viable for these people to provide a service. We are unfortunate our area is not suitable for the service. I can understand the reluctance of the licensees to expend big money for small pockets. So we do not have a licence. In 1956, 42 years ago I saw television in Dublin in the Red Cow Inn. I live 78 miles as the crow flies from the Red Cow and in this day and age, 42 years later I still do not have BBC nor do quite a few members of the Committee. I would like to emphasise we are a voluntary group doing it for the community and as such I would hope that the Committee would use whatever power they have to bring pressure on either the Minister, the Regulator or both to make a decision on the issue. It is discrimination.

We look at our friends from a line north of Athlone who have BBC free all through the years. We went to the trouble of getting the BBC but we cannot retransmit it. What we are looking for is an interim licence to put the service back on the air. We ran a service for £40 per house, had tremendous response and I feel that if we got a few more years we would run a full list. We have no vested interest whatsoever.

Mrs. McCormack: My thirteen year old son is able to contact anybody around the world on the internet and yet in this age of information technology with money being poured into communications networks and computers we in the South East of Ireland are not able to receive the four BBC channels. If any of you gentlemen decide in the years to come to record your memoirs and when you refer to the year 1998 and the fact that a group are looking for the BBC channels it will be actually the funniest chapter in the book. It is like something from the last century.

From a moral point of view if there was a better choice of TV stations there would be less demand for videos some of which are unsuitable which children can purchase from any video shop. We notice on our train journey today there was a lot of independent aerials in the Kildare area which would receive the BBC signals. There is no law to stop this transmission but just because we are an organised community group the law is actually working against us. I wish somebody could provide a suitable explanation.

Senator Hayes: I welcome the group and I am delighted to hear their presentation. I have heard it on numerous occasions both at public meetings, at county council meetings and indeed right across the community in South Tipperary. This group have basically understated the frustration and anger in that part of the country in relation to the ongoing problem for the last number of years. These people are actually frustrated at the state of limbo they are experiencing. I would ask that this Committee through the offices of the Chairman to unanimously support the group and bring this problem to a final conclusion before the winter.

Chairman: I think members have expressed their views very clearly. Perhaps Mr. Power might want to finalise his presentation at this stage.

Mr. Power: We are very grateful for the support shown by all the members here. We would hope that a final decision will taken in the matter and we will be able to transmit BBC and HTV for this coming winter. It is important that people have access to these stations now and not in a year’s time. Thank you on behalf of the Committee.

Chairman: On behalf of the Committee members I would like to thank the delegation for their very clear presentation today. At the next meeting we will have an opportunity to discuss the points made by Deputy Aylward and Yates and try to resolve the matter. Perhaps you could draft a suitable resolution for approval at the next meeting which can then be attached to the reports which will be laid before the Oireachtas. In my opinion that is the way to go with the case at this stage and to show recognition that the case has been ably presented by the delegation today.

There is all-party arrangement in that regard.

Deputy Yates: We can work through the secretariat by submitting different drafts and at the next meeting decide which is the most appropriate.

Chairman: That is fine. I will also bring this discussion to the notice of the Chairman so he will be aware of what has taken place this afternoon.

Deputy O’Shea: Would it not be possible for the Committee to make it known to the regulator that we wish to have the regulations brought forward as quickly as possible?

Deputy Roche: That is probably the only way of shortening the process. If we go the other route it will be well into 1999. I propose that the Committee write to the regulator indicating what we feel.

There are black areas where commercial enterprises are sitting on these licences and are not really interested in pursuing them. There is a dog in the manger attitude since they are surrendering something which they do not wish to pursue. The regulator should recognise that. That might not help the people living in Fethard but it should provide a degree of relief to some of the people affected by the legal morass into which we have walked ourselves.

Chairman: The secretary has taken note of the Deputy’s comments. However, the Committee must operate within the remit of its terms of reference.

Deputy O’Shea: Is there no mechanism whereby the Committee can communicate with the office of the regulator?

Chairman: I am sure we can write to the regulator’s office and outline the views expressed this afternoon.

Deputy Roche: I am not attempting to advise the Chairman but when I was Chairman of the Joint Committee which preceded this Committee, I was never enthusiastic about punctiliously observing the rules the Committee set itself. In this case, the Oireachtas spancelled itself by putting through laws which we now know to be unwise. We must recognise that and not be prepared to further spancel ourselves. The point made by Deputy O’Shea is worthwhile. If somebody says the Committee is not operating quite within its terms of reference, so what.

Deputy Yates: The Committee can, as happened previously, contact and make representations to the regulator’s office but there is a difference between that course of action and framing a formal, considered resolution on behalf of the Committee stating that interim licences are appropriate pending digitalisation.

In fairness, the publication of “The Way Forward” in July by the regulator was the single largest step in the direction of rejecting the exclusivity of MMDS licences. This matter will not be resolved without Government consideration because the Government is the body that will be sued at the end of the day. Notwithstanding the immediacy of the issues raised, this issue will not come to an end until the Department of Finance signs off on it. It is that Department which will ultimately be sued.

In addition to contacting the regulator, there is a need for a considered resolution along the lines proposed by Deputy Aylward.

Mrs. McCormack: I agree with Deputy Yates and Deputy Roche. Before the last general election we were given the same promises, including promises of letters to the Minister and so forth, and it got us nowhere. We are looking for positive action. We live in one of these black spots and the frustration is unbelievable. I wish the best of luck to the MMDS and other service providers if they provide a good service but the use of the word “exclusive” should be banned when their licences are being renewed. The buck stops with the Minister and we are seeking a statement from her. We are not looking for promises or letters but for a statement of intent and we are not prepared to settle for less.

Chairman: You made an excellent presentation which has generated cross-party agreement on the part of members of the Committee. This issue will be discussed again at the next meeting when the Committee will have an opportunity to examine whatever resolutions come forward. That is probably the best way forward.

Deputy Roche: We can write to the regulator in the interim. It is the clear wish of the Committee.

Chairman: The secretary has pointed out on numerous occasions that the Committee’s standing orders were laid down by the Dáil and they must be complied with.

The case cannot be advanced further this afternoon. We are grateful to Mrs. McCormack for making her excellent presentation. I am sure she will be in touch with the Committee to see how we progress.

Mrs. McCormack: We will.

Chairman: Thank you. I adjourn the meeting until 2.30 p.m. on 1 October.

The Joint Committee adjourned at 3 p.m.

Resolution

The Joint Committee on Public Enterprise and Transport adopted the following Resolution arising from a hearing and discussion with representatives of South East Community Television on 17 September, 1998.

“The Joint Oireachtas Committee on Public Enterprise and Transport calls on the Director of the Office of Telecommunications Regulation to bring forward, and the Minister for Public Enterprise to consent to, the relevant regulations to facilitate the licensing of television transmission systems of analogue services on a short term or an interim basis until a digitalised transmission service is available nationwide and that such short term or interim transmission licences would be made available to commercial and community groups who have been providing a multi-channel television service through what are known as ‘deflector’ services over the past number of years and that these measures would be operational as soon as possible.”

1 October 1998

Appendix 1

Appendix 2

List of Members of Joint Committee on Public Enterprise and Transport

* Senators John Cregan and Willie Farrell substituted for Senators Des Hanafin and Peter Callanan.

* Senator Tom Hayes substituted for Senator Fergus O'Dowd (for part of the meeting).