I will leave it at this point.

I move amendment No. 7: In page 8, line 4, after “shall” to insert “be subject to the criteria set out in section 177D(2) and”. The amendment seeks to add a new caveat to the definition of "exceptional circumstance" being inserted into section 177A of the principal Act. The caveat is that the exceptional circumstances should be subject to the criteria set out in section 177D(1B)(2), which outlines that in considering whether exceptional circumstances exist, the board should have regard to whether regularisation of …

I thank the Minister for some of the clarifications, particularly with regard to precedent, which is useful to have on the record. However, I continue to disagree regarding the question of incentivisation. The Minister outlined that there is a risk in applying for substitute consent and said that is the main caveat. The concern is that at the moment, a local authority can require a developer to seek a substitute consent but the Bill as set out basically leaves that decision about whether to apply for substitute con…

I move amendment No. 8: In page 8, line 5, after "177K(1J)" to insert the following: "and shall also reflect the obligation to ensure that there is no creation of a precedent or incentivisation". I withdraw this amendment and reserve the right to introduce it on Report Stage.

I move amendment No. 187a: In page 85, between lines 6 and 7, to insert the following: “(fa) levels of risk of exposure to disinformation when using designated online services, and levels of risk of harm from such exposure,”.

I move amendment No. 188: In page 85, line 24, after “time” where it secondly occurs to insert “and not less than once every three years”. I will speak to amendments Nos. 188 and 189. Amendment No. 188 proposes to amend section 139N(5), which currently provides that the commission will from time to time review the online safety code, by inserting the provision that the review would happen at least every three years. Earlier in the Bill, it is provided that the commission should respond to societal and technological…

I accept the Minister, as a matter of principle, does not want to set any dates. My concern and hope is that we will have regular reviews. I may reserve the right to bring amendments that ensure the reverse will be the case, whereby if reviews are not happening, there will be a mechanism to ensure we do not have out-of-date codes in play for longer. I will withdraw the amendment and try to approach the matter from the other side to ensure we do not have undue delay with regard to a review.

I move amendment No. 189: In page 85, line 25, after “makes” to insert “and shall make a report on the review available on its website”.

I move amendment No. 190: In page 85, between lines 35 and 36, to insert the following: “(1A) In the case of a large online service provider, meaning those with more than 500,000 users in the State, the Commission shall require information on the provider’s compliance with all online safety codes, and this information shall be deposited with the Commission and the Minister and laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas on an annual basis.”. The amendment provides that the commission would, in the case of a large onl…

I accept the Minister's point about "all online safety codes". It should, of course, only be the online safety codes relevant the provider in question. In that context, I will bring a revised amendment on Report Stage.

I will be brief again. These are excellent amendments. Senator Cassells is right. The reaction to the amendments is a sign that they are powerful amendments that would make a difference to the efficacy of the Bill. I remember being in America just before the first dotcom crash, at an event in Denver where there were people in cowboy hats telling people to ride the light on the first go of the dotcom boom. There has been a culture of rewarding risk taking. There is a culture where risk is rewarded, whereas responsib…

I encourage the Minister to engage with Senator Byrne. The Minister mentioned the criminal sanction for refusal to comply with an order and that is where it kicks in. It comes back to the question of patterns, for example, if the same persons are in charge when there are multiple breaches, either in the same company or in different companies. There may be a breach involving an individual who is caught, then complies before the criminal sanction comes in, then commits another similar breach. What happens when person…

I move amendment No. 192a: In page 88, between lines 33 and 34, to insert the following: “(ga) levels of risk of exposure to disinformation when using designated online services, and levels of risk of harm from such exposure,”.

I move amendment No. 193: In page 92, between lines 14 and 15, to insert the following: “(2A) A record of any consultations conducted under subsection (2) shall be kept and will include the rationale by which the Commission deemed the person to be appropriate to consult with, and such records shall be deposited with the Minister and laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas.”. This is the same principle we discussed earlier in regard to other amendments. It is the principle that records of consultations should be k…

It is my intention to table a version of this that will remove the requirement for laying but will, nonetheless, have a requirement for transparency. I will withdraw the amendment and bring a revised amendment forward on Report Stage.

I move amendment 194: In page 92, between lines 14 and 15, to insert the following: “(2A) In developing an e-Commerce compliance strategy, the Commission shall consult with appropriate persons with scientific expertise pertaining to the impact of e-Commerce on energy demand, carbon equivalent emissions and the environment more broadly.”. There is a remit within the powers, functions and general responsibilities relating to climate change that is mentioned elsewhere, and the Minister will be aware I tabled amendment…

In light of this, I will look elsewhere. I am looking to how I can appropriately insert the core principle. Perhaps the Minister is correct and it would be better dealt with in another section. In that context, I withdraw the amendment.

With regard to the same section on age-inappropriate online content, two examples are mentioned in respect of violence and pornography. I reserve the right to bring in other areas. It is a section that could be very useful in addressing areas where there may be a reluctance to have a kind of activity fully designated. I come at this in a different way in some of the later sections. When we are trying to designate certain kinds of things as harmful - and there are certain things that while there may be debate or a d…

I move amendment No. 194a: In page 93, line 36, after "content" to insert "presented in a manner". It was brought to our attention by a number of people that this section is not clear. The text of the Bill, which reads, "Online content by which a person applies force to the body of another, or causes another to believe on reasonable grounds that he or she is likely immediately to be subjected to such force", is very unclear. This could mean dance, martial arts or anything. It was only from further examination that …

I still think it is a little unclear. The Minister addressed the issue of the concern about exclusion but did not address my concern in respect of inadvertent inclusion. The framing seems to be quite wide. We are relying on the word "by" versus "in". Is it sufficient that we say it is "by" the content the force is applied and not "in" the content? Is this sufficiently distinct or clear? The Minister has addressed my concern to an extent. She has made clear what she expects to be included. I am still worried that we…