Skip to main content

Broadcasting Reception

Volume 832: debated on Wednesday 1 March 1972

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

18.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he will list in the OFFICIAL REPORT the radio and television transmitters, and the booster stations, indicating the power, whether in operation, and, if not, when expected to be in service, and which programmes and frequencies such as B.B.C.1, B.B.C.2, or independent such as Yorkshire TV, and whether very high frequency or ultra high frequency they transmit, which are now or will be transmitting to an area of 25 miles radius from Sheffield Town Hall.

I welcome the progress which has been made during the last 18 months, but is my right hon. Friend aware that reception is still poor in the Peak District of Derbyshire and the valleys of Hallam? Will he outline what progress has been made and make known to the people living in the area the progress which we can expect in the months to come?

Since there is a great deal of detailed information in the answer I am, as my hon. Friend suggested, circulating it in written form. As he knows, there are particular problems in getting the signal through in mountainous areas, but the B.B.C. and I.T.A. are anxious to make as fast progress as they can.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in my constituency, within 18 miles of Sheffield, it is impossible to receive Radio Sheffield but it is possible to receive Radio Humberside which is 70 miles away? Is it not ludicrous that the transmitter in Sheffield should have only one-tenth the strength of the transmitter in Humberside? Does the Minister agree that in the recent national emergency transistor radios were worth their weight in gold and that radio stations throughout the country should all have the same transmission power?

That would not make sense because local radio stations serve populations of differing sizes. I have said that I am prepared to look at the transmission strengths of B.B.C. local stations in the context of the frequency review which is now in progress.

Following is the information:

VHF RADIO TRANSMITTERS AND VHF AND UHF TELEVISION TRANSMITTERS WORKING OR PLANNED TO PROVIDE SERVICES RECEIVABLE WITHIN 25 MILES OF SHEFFIELD TOWN HALL

Station

Programme

Frequency/Channel

Power

Radio

Holme MossRadio 289·3 MHz120 kW
Radio 3 (stereo)91·5 MHz120 kW
Radio 493·7 MHz120 kW
SheffieldRadio 289·9 MHz0·06 kW
Radio 3 (stereo)92·1 MHz0·06 kW
Radio 494·3MHz0·06 kW
BBC Radio Sheffield88·6 MHz0·03 kW
Rotherham relay95·05 MHz0·01 kW
BBC Radio Manchester95·1 MHz4kW

Television

VHF Television—BBC

Holme MossBBC1*Channel 2100 kW
SheffieldBBC1*Channel 10·05 kW

VHF Television—ITA

Emley Moor (Yorkshire)Channel 10200 kW
Sheffield relay (Yorkshire)Channel 60·1 kW

UHF Television

Emley MoorBBC2Channel 511,000 kW
BBC1 duplicateChannel 441,000 kW
ITV duplicate (Yorkshire Television)Channel 471,000 kW
Chesterfield relayBBC2Channel 260·7 kW
ITV duplicate (Yorkshire Television)Channel 230·7 kW
BBC1 duplicate (planned for 1972)
Saddleworth relayBBC2Channel 450·5 kW
BBC1Channel 520·5 kW
ITV duplicate (Granada)Channel 490·5 kW
Sheffield relayBBC2Channel 275kW
BBC1 duplicateChannel 315kW
ITV duplicate (Yorkshire Television)Channel 245kW

Planned UHF stations transmitting all services (BBC1, BBC2 and ITA)

Glossop relayGranadaPlanned for 19731 kW
Cop Hill relayYorkshire2kW
Buxton relayGranada1 kW
Ladder Hill relayGranada1 kW

20.

asked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he is aware that the transmitters now being used by the Sheffield and Leeds British Broadcasting Corporation radio stations are not sufficiently powerful to reach many of the people in their catchment areas; and if he will take immediate steps to allow these two radio stations to use the Holme Moss transmitter.

I have undertaken to consider the possibility of improving the coverage of B.B.C. Radio Leeds and B.B.C. Radio Sheffield as part of the total frequency plan for local radio.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it is time some- thing was done apart from considering? Is he waiting until the Sound Broadcasting Bill completes its passage through the House of Commons? Does he not realise that Sheffield has 160 times less power and Leeds 30 times less power than the average power of the other four stations—Derby, Teesside, Humberside and Manchester? What is wrong with these two cities? Do they not qualify for a good radio transmitting station?

These stations are broadcasting at the powers which the B.B.C. proposed when it sought the approval of my predecessor. What we have to do if we want to get the maximum coverage is to have a comprehensive frequency plan. If one gives permission in a higgledy-piggledy way to people here, there and everywhere to broadcast at different powers, one will in the end get less coverage than if one does it in a rational way.

Does not Radio Sheffield have a new and more powerful transmitter installed? Why has it not been used?

Because if a radio station broadcasts at a higher power, that may mean that less broadcasting can be received in another area. Frequency planning has therefore to be done on a comprehensive basis.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he appears to be shelving this problem? The extreme end of my constituency is only seven miles from Sheffield Town Hall, but 33,000 of my constituents who live within the Sheffield area cannot receive transmissions from the Sheffield transmitting centre. Will the right hon. Gentleman look seriously at this and make proposals to the B.B.C., if it is the B.B.C.'s responsibility, to correct the problem at the earliest possible moment?

The B.B.C. has its proposals and they are being discussed between my Ministry and the I.T.A. As soon as we can see a frequency plan which will enable broadcasting at higher powers at any of the B.B.C. stations, I shall certainly authorise it.