The amendment would oblige coimisiún na meán to make reports and recommendations on how public bodies engaged in the distribution of State moneys for the production, screening and broadcast of audiovisual or sound content to ensure funds are distributed equitably and proportionally throughout the island of Ireland, with regard to the need for regional balance in investment and representation in audiovisual content, screen and sound. For a number of reasons, I will not accept the amendment. At its widest and taking …

With regard to amendments Nos. 44, 52 and 57, as I outlined at Committee Stage, the main reason for the language in this section is that it is in line with the standard of “harm or undue offence” applied to material by the BAI through its code of programme standards, ensuring that the statutory provisions align with the practical implementation of the prohibition. In addition, freedom of expression is not absolute and like all other rights, it is subject to balancing in law to ensure that the rights of others, for …

As I said previously, this language is in line with the standard of harm or undue offence applied to material by the BAI through its code of programme standards and, therefore, the interpretation of "undue offence" is a matter for the BAI on a case-by-case basis. It would be very difficult to anticipate everything covered. It depends on the context and it is for the BAI to set out in its codes.

It is what the BAI does currently on a case-by-case basis. That language has been carried over from the existing provision set out in section 39(1)(d) of the extant Broadcasting Act 2009 which, in turn, reflects previous legislation and, ultimately, Article 40.6 of the Constitution.

As I set out at Committee Stage, the amendment would represent a significant policy initiative and, as such, requires extensive analysis and consideration with a number of complex legal and policy questions that need to be addressed. For example, it does not appear to have any basis in European law. There are also issues to be addressed regarding the rate and nature of the levy, notwithstanding that the amendment now specifies “post tax revenue”. Finally, it appears to apply to services only established under the j…

I move amendment No. 51: In page 53, line 30, to delete “the” and substitute “a”.

I move amendment No. 54: In page 54, between lines 28 and 29, to insert the following: “(4) Media service codes may provide for standards and practices to promote the following: (a) balanced gender representation of participants in news and current affairs programmes broadcast by broadcasters or made available by providers of audiovisual on-demand media services; (b) the broadcast in programmes broadcast on sound broadcasting services of music composed or performed by women.”. This group of amendments are intended …

I move amendment No. 55: In page 54, line 29, to delete “(4) The Commission” and substitute “(5) The Commission”.

I move amendment No. 56: In page 54, line 34, to delete “(5) The Commission” and substitute “(6) The Commission”.

I move amendment No. 58: In page 55, line 13, to delete “(6) Provision” and substitute “(7) Provision”.

I move amendment No. 59: In page 55, line 20, to delete “(7) In preparing” and substitute “(8) In preparing”.

I move amendment No. 60: In page 55, line 23, to delete “(8) The Commission” and substitute “(9) The Commission”.

I move amendment No. 61: In page 55, line 24, to delete “(9) A failure” and substitute “(10) A failure”.

I move amendment No. 62: In page 55, line 26, to delete “(10) Subject to subsection (11)” and substitute “(11) Subject to subsection (12)”.

I move amendment No. 63: In page 55, line 35, to delete “(11) After” and substitute “(12) After”.

I move amendment No. 64: In page 55, line 36, to delete “subsection (10)” and substitute “subsection (11)”.

I move amendment No. 68: In page 67, to delete lines 16 to 27. This is a technical amendment to remedy a drafting error in the Bill. This amendment will ensure that a section 70 contractor can continue to benefit from the exemption as set out in section 71(3) of the Broadcasting Act 2009.

I move amendment No. 71: In page 70, line 2, to delete “subsection (1),” and substitute the following: “subsection (1)— (a) in paragraph (b), by the deletion of “and teletext services”, and (b) ”. The purpose of amendments Nos. 71 and 73 is to remove the statutory requirements for RTÉ and TG4 to establish and maintain their respective teletext services. This change was agreed in consultation with our public service broadcasters and is considered important to allow progression from outdated technologies with very li…

I thank the Deputies for the amendment. The amendment would introduce obligations regarding the rates of pay of RTÉ employees. Mar a dúirt mé cheana, tá sé fíorthábhachtach go mbeadh cothromaíocht ann idir an Ghaeilge agus an Béarla. Bheadh imní orm faoi aon difríocht pá a bhaineann go hiomlán leis an teanga ina ndéanann duine a chuid oibre. Parity of esteem between Irish and English is vital. I share concerns about any disparity in pay being purely related to the language through which someone conducts their work.…

I share the Deputies' concern in relation to parity of esteem between Irish and English and I have written to RTÉ asking it to address their concerns. If the Deputies do not receive a reply shortly, I will write to RTÉ again. I see an opportunity given that the chair of RTÉ who was appointed to the position yesterday is a fluent Irish speaker. I will meet the new chair, arising from her appointment, and will raise the matter with her.