Online Safety: Motion Seanad Éireann — 2026-02-26 ============================================================ Alice-Mary Higgins (IND), National University of Ireland Thank you. I am grateful to have the debate. I acknowledge the sincerity of the contributions made by Government Senators but there is a deep tension here. There has been a recognition of the areas of concern and the speeches we have heard are driven by concern, but so many of the calls in the motion are about the economy. There needs to be an honest discussion and that is what a number of my amendments do. It has almost become an article of faith that any time you mention AI you must begin by saying it has wonderful benefits and referring to the wonderful benefits of AI. You have to begin with that and then act as if there are some accidents that happen along the way, or it is unfortunate the children got to it. In fact, we need to be clear that there is a genuine and heavily lobbied agenda, which is about the dilution of protections. There is an economic push as well. Ireland is trying to ride these two horses by speaking about how we want to be great regulators but also about how we want to really fast-track it and make all our public services use AI as quickly as possible. We want to have it permeate every area of society and get as many data centres built as quickly as possible, but we also want to be respected regulators. I actually agree with Senator Mullen. You can look to both, but you need to choose a priority. Sadly, that is not really reflected in this motion when we look at the language. There is a reference to how we need to "reap the benefits". I again suggest that we should be looking at the risks. Strangely, in the middle of a motion about online safety there a reference to "the full implementation of Digital Ireland’s 20 high-level objectives and 90 specific deliverables". Just to be clear, I looked at the deliverables. One of them is to "Implement the ‘Large Energy User Action Plan’ to attract ... very [high] energy intensive industrial developments." Where is that in online safety? Where is the consideration? I am worried that in the actual cause, it is all about the economic bit. The motion also contains language like "the misuse of digital tools." Let us be clear. We know these tools are designed. It is not they are being misused or that the wrong people are using them. It is how these tools are designed. I agree and support the idea that we should not just be advancing but implementing the AI Act. What I am concerned at, and we need to be honest, is the dynamic. I have amendments on this. The digital omnibus, which is happening right now, is not about strengthening and closing the loopholes. It is about more loopholes and more self-regulation. It is about taking whole sections out of GDPR to make exemptions to data protection for the training of AI algorithms. That is what is in the omnibus. That needs to be challenged. If Ireland was serious, we would be challenging that rather than following. I support amendments Nos. 2 and 3, in the names of Senators Sarah O'Reilly and Mullen, because they are honest about the language. They say that "recent controversies around the use of deep-fake technologies ... reveal the lack of an enforcement culture and the inadequacy of regulatory structures," and they need to be stricter. Let us be clear: we are not in an adequate issue. That discussion about horrendous business practices by major, wealthy corporations has somehow segued into being all about the discussion of children and 16 and that age. I acknowledge that Senator O'Loughlin said it is not actually the kind of golden bullet that is presented. It has to be wider. Unfortunately, in the motion that is the focus piece. I will highlight two important things that I have amendments on. I hope amendment No. 12 might be supported. It focuses on the idea in the motion that we can protect children by "supporting Coimisiún na Meán to improve awareness and reporting" of these images. By referring to "awareness and reporting", we are again putting it back on the children. What we actually need is awareness, reporting, investigation, sanction and prosecution of the AI generated non-consensual images. Sadly, we do not have Coimisiún na Meán using the full powers it has under the online safety Act at the moment or the safety code. It is instead deferring to an investigation at European level. Maybe the Minister of State might comment on this. I fundamentally disagree with the language about how Coco's Law unfortunately does not apply as it is not distribution. Let us be clear: it is distribution. Grok does not create and sell the link. If you were to ask Grok to create an image, it creates that image. I know they will not say they publish it. It makes that image in the public space so that the public can see. It has distributed that image, to be clear. Not just that, but what is also in Coco's Law is the threat to distribute. The very fact of Elon Musk standing there saying "Here is a picture of me in a bikini; you can do this to anyone" is, right there, a threat to distribute inappropriate images. I do not accept that Coco's Law cannot be applied, and I certainly do not accept that the child pornography legislation - it should be called the child sexual abuse material legislation, as Senator Flynn said - cannot apply. I really urge that we have an honest discussion because we have an immense power here in Ireland as key regulators. We are going to be key during the EU Presidency. However, if we try to have a little chat about safety on the fringes of a conversation that is urging the industry to go faster, we will not be stepping up to what I think is one of our greatest moral responsibilities to our colleagues across Europe. I really urge that safety and strengthening regulation be the centrepiece and that we do not let that be marred by the desire for more and faster money-making in this area. --- Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted. Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-02-26/debate/main Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:42+00:00 Sitting date: 2026-02-26