The Broadcasting Commission's ruling that Premier Jennifer Smith's speech to the Island in February was a "political" speech rather than a "Government" speech is correct; the only surprise is that it took so long for the Commission to reach the decision.

The ruling, which is available on The Royal Gazette's website, (www.theroyalgazette.com) essentially says that a "Government" speech should neither criticise members of the Opposition nor praise members of the Government in a partisan manner.

The Broadcasting Commission regulations also allow for the leader of the Country to speak on matters of public urgency. But the Commission noted that the cause of the Premier's urgency - the September 11 terrorist attacks - had occurred months earlier and the televised address was taking place the night before the Budget debate was due to begin. The Commission, rightly, was unimpressed by the Government's arguments on this point.

On that basis, the Progressive Labour Party owes the Government a considerable amount of money, both for the cost of the production and, presumably, for the cost of the air time. The PLP is to meet to discuss that question. In reality, there's nothing to debate. The party should pay the money and move on.

If this was a political broadcast, then surely Opposition Leader Grant Gibbons deserves a right of reply, but how do you reply to speech that is more than six months old? You cannot. Perhaps Dr. Gibbons should be given 20 minutes of air time now to talk about what's on his party's mind now.

The broader issue concerns the Broadcasting Regulations themselves. These apply only to the "free" television stations and not to the printed media or cable television. And in spite of the clear and excellent decision rendered by the Commission in this case, the rules on political broadcasts are complex and place an unfair burden on the Island's TV stations.

Because television is a very powerful medium, it is probably correct that it is placed under some form of regulation. That prevents it from being abused by the wealthy, the powerful or both.

But the Commission requires the TV stations themselves to make a decision on whether a broadcast is political or not, sometimes minutes before it is due to air. While they can get guidance from the Commission, the decision ultimately lies with them. Because they also receive a TV licence from the same Government they are now supposed to regulate, this presents an impossible conflict.

But in the case of Government broadcasts, it would seem to make sense to give the Opposition the option of replying to all broadcasts by the ruling party. In the US, the minority party has the right to reply to the State of the Union address and to the President's Saturday morning radio broadcasts, without quibbling over whether they are Government or political.

The stations' own news broadcasts should be exempted from this proposed rule as should election periods, which have their own regulations. But any other broadcasts should follow that simple rule, which would remove much of the uncertainty and heat from this debate.