I move amendment No. 111: In page 52, line 7, to delete “may” and substitute “shall”.

The amendment is comprehensive and I will speak to two or three of its components. I am hopeful that either the Minister will accept this amendment or will bring some of its components forward on Report Stage. The reason this amendment is important is because the section in which the amendment may be inserted is the media service code section. At the moment we have the very good values, which I think many of us across the House agreed on and sought to strengthen under the powers and functions section of the legisla…

The Minister has addressed the issue of gender to some extent and indicated her intention to look to those issues. It was useful and positive that she correctly identified that gender quotas are something that can be done and there is a lot of EU legislation in respect of them. That is positive, but on the issue of reporting in regard to music in particular, again, as Senator Warfield says, his amendment would not have placed a requirement for blocking, but it would have allowed a monitoring of what is happening in…

I move amendment No. 114: In page 52, lines 13 and 14, to delete “that in programme material audiences are protected from anything harmful or offensive, and in particular”. While, in general, there are many areas where we would like to have a more proactive preventive role, we have identified specific areas where there should be prohibitions or restrictions. In some ways, there are very specific known concerns backed by research and facts which are not addressed in the Bill, while it also includes wide provisions t…

Whatever resolution or proposal we may come to in respect of amendments Nos. 92 at 93 might need to be reflected or echoed in this section. Those amendments relate to harmful content, whereas this amendment relates to the media code. I imagine a similar solution can be found. I appreciate what the Minister has said. I sympathise with the fact that there need to be measures in this regard, but it is just a matter of having better caveats and clarifications. In that context, I will withdraw the amendment.

I move amendment No. 115: In page 52, to delete lines 16 and 17 and substitute the following: “(i) with due sensitivity to the subject matter and the audience,”. I am concerned about how this is framed because there could be a potential mandate for a restriction on equality, rather than supporting it. At the moment, the Bill states, "With due sensitivity to the convictions or feelings of the audience,". Again, if we talk about the fear that terms like "harmful" or "offensive" could be interpreted widely, the convic…

I am concerned about what I believe is an excessive reliance on the Broadcasting Act. We need an acknowledgement that we are not dealing with the exact same thing. Simply taking the fact that a previous piece of legislation exists in terms of the 2009 Act, we should legislate for what we know to be the world and its concerns rather than simply following through on measures from a previous piece of legislation. I am concerned by a general pattern of, in effect, transposing measures developed in terms of broadcasting…

I accept the subject matter is sexual conduct. I refer to how LGBT rights have been treated in our media and in the media of our neighbouring country. Due sensitivity to the convictions or feelings of the audience is one thing but what has happened is that the convictions of persons who do not really recognise the rights of transgender people have been given an equal footing with the feelings and sensitivities of persons who are transgender. That is why I do not think convictions in this space should be given the s…

I move amendment No. 116: In page 52, line 19, after “mental” to insert “, emotional”. This amendment seeks to add the term "emotional" to the list of developmental categories for children which should be respected in regard to making standards and practices on broadcasts depicting gratuitous violence or sexual content, effectively anything that may impair their physical, mental or moral development. At a debate some were saying we should remove moral development because they were concerned at how moral development…

In that context, I would especially urge the Minister to revisit the convictions point given that those convictions may be read alongside the moral development point. I appreciate the Minister is bound by the Audiovisual Media Services Directive. I may reserve the right to find another way to look at perhaps an additional point in regard to protection from emotional harm. However, in a context where moral development is inserted and the convictions of an audience are referred to, there is a concern of a possible si…

I did acknowledge that the debate has been better in Ireland than in other countries. Senator Cassells mentioned persons with a disability. Persons with a disability have found that many people seem to be offended by discussion of their sexual activity, for example. Persons with a disability have really had to push for visibility of their right to have relationships and be sexually active. There have been wonderful films and productions that have tried to address this. It is a subject that many people are very unco…

I move amendment No. 117: In page 52, line 19, to delete "moral" and substitute "emotional".

I move amendment No. 118: In page 52, between lines 20 and 21, to insert the following: "(ca) for the avoidance of doubt, in paragraph (c)(ii) sexual conduct shall not be construed to include educational materials which feature discussion of sexual content and seek to provide education on topics such as consent, sexual health and relationships,". This is a caveat to the same section we have been discussing. It is for the avoidance of doubt and makes it very clear that when we speak about sexual conduct, the limitat…

I thank the Minister very much. In this context I withdraw the amendment and reserve the right to reintroduce it on Report Stage.

I move amendment No. 119: In page 52, line 21, after "that" to insert "advertisements and". This is on the issue of advertising and commercial communications.

I move amendment No. 120: In page 53, line 17, to delete "may" and substitute "shall".

I move amendment No. 121: In page 53, line 18, after "in" to insert "advertising or".

I move amendment No. 122: In page 53, line 18, after "of" to insert "advertisements and".

I move amendment No. 125: In page 53, line 22, after "sugars" to insert "or substitutes for breast milk".

I move amendment No. 127: In page 53, between lines 22 and 23, to insert the following: "(5A) Provision made for the purpose referred to in subsection (2)(d)(ii) may prohibit or restrict the inclusion in advertising or programmes of advertisements or commercial communications relating to the promotion of gambling or speculative financial activities likely to pose a significant financial risk to an individual, including the promotion of cryptocurrency trading.".