On amendment No. 196, I do not see the value in inserting the word "reasonably" into the provision. The circumstances in which an authorised officer may use his or her powers are set down comprehensively in section 139ZC and are, among other things, subject to considerations of reasonableness. On amendment No. 197, section 139ZC clearly provides that an authorised officer cannot keep material or equipment obtained in the course of an investigation in perpetuity and that, during the course of an investigation, may k…

Section 139ZC clearly provides than an authorised officer cannot keep material or equipment obtained in the course of an investigation in perpetuity and that during the course of an investigation the officer may keep such materials or equipment for such a period as deemed reasonably necessary. This discretion is proper and sufficiently drawn to mitigate against unnecessary retention of equipment and materials. Furthermore, it is clear that authorised officers do not have the power to keep such equipment or material…

First, I note that the indemnification of authorised officers is a standard and necessary legislative provision. In this regard, the proposed deletion of the relevant provision by amendment No. 200 is not something I can accept. What the provision does is to squarely place the legal responsibility for the actions of an authorised officer on coimisiún na meán, except where the officer acts in bad faith. It is right and proper that complaints in respect of the actions of a person engaged by an coimisiún to carry out …

As regards amendment No. 202, I do not see the value of specifying a maximum timeframe of eight months for an authorised officer to draft the report of an investigation. The wording of the Bill at present is: "As soon as is practicable after the completion of an investigation, the authorised officer shall prepare a draft report of the investigation." In my view, this is sufficient to ensure the draft report will be prepared within a reasonable time, depending on the nature of the investigation, whether it is within…

Section 139ZG of the 2009 Act, as inserted by this Bill, requires an coimisiún to publish guidelines made by it in respect of the operation of the enforcement provisions of the Bill. It is proper that an coimisiún should be subject to the same obligation in respect of rules made by it under section 139ZF regarding the conduct of investigations. Accordingly, I am rejecting the amendment but I am considering the matter for Report Stage.

While I understand the purpose of the amendment and that it is trying to mitigate against perceived delays to the execution of enforcement decisions, whether the granting of a judicial review should override or pause the application of a decision of an coimisiún is a matter for the courts. In relation to this matter, I note that section 38 of the 2009 Act, as inserted by the Bill, specifies how applications for judicial review regarding decisions by an coimisiún shall be treated under this Bill, including in terms …

If the Senator is a agreeable, I will get my officials to get back to her.

As a matter of public policy, the treatment of moneys raised through administrative financial sanctions is for such moneys to be paid into or disposed of for the benefit of the Exchequer. Hypothecating the moneys, as the Senator suggests, would be counter to this policy. In addition, it would appear to create an incentive for coimisiún na meán to attempt to impose more or higher financial penalties than warranted in order to increase its own operating budget since it will have a function in promoting media literacy…

This amendment aims to enable coimisiún na meán to issue a content limitation notice to restrict the availability of specified content to people aged 18 or older. This would be in cases where the content appears to an coimisiún to fall within the definition of "age-inappropriate content" in section 44, by inserting section 139D into the 2009 Act. In this regard, it is important to note that the content limitation notice provisions in section 46, inserting sections 139ZV to 139ZY into the 2009 Act, are limited in ap…

I thank the Senators for bringing forward amendments Nos. 208 to 227, inclusive, which relate to the European works levy and scheme provisions contained in section 53. I acknowledge that this is an important issue for the Irish audiovisual sector and it is one on which my officials have engaged extensively with the sector. By way of background, Article 13(2) of the audiovisual media services directive gives member states the option to levy media service providers under their jurisdiction or which are not under thei…

On amendments Nos. 208, 209, 212, 213 and 214, I have said that the content production levy has the potential to raise funds to further support the audiovisual sector. It is really important in that context that the levy is effective and efficient in its design and application. That is why we are giving time to the commission to do that research and make sure it works properly.

I thank Senator Ruane for tabling amendments Nos. 145 and 146 regarding the definition of cyberbullying in the Bill. The current definition in section 44, inserting section 139A into the Broadcasting Bill 2009, was arrived at through extensive consultation and engagement with the Office of the Attorney General. It refers to online content by which a person bullies or humiliates another person and subjects that definition to a risk test regarding risk to a person's life or risk of significant harm to a person's phys…

I understand the Senator's concerns but I believe the provision is sufficiently precise to avoid the issues she raised. It was done with extensive consultation with the Office of the Attorney General. It was considered in-depth during drafting. Therefore, I will not accept the amendments.

The effect of amendment No. 147 would be to insert another category of harmful online content regarding disinformation. I do not propose to accept the amendment for a number of reasons. Disinformation and false information intended to mislead is being tackled on an EU-wide basis through a number of mechanisms, including the Digital Services Act, political agreement on which was agreed on Friday, 22 April. The Government has decided that Coimisiún na Meán will be the digital service co-ordinator which is the primary…

On the Senator's query, there would be no need to revisit this legislation because the Digital Services Act will provide for it itself.

I thank Senator Ruane for her amendment regarding a role for the Oireachtas joint committee in requesting that an coimisiún consider making a proposal for a new category of harmful online content. As it stands, the Bill provides at section 44 - inserting sections 139B and 139C into the Broadcasting Act 2009 - that it is within an coimisiún's sole discretion as to whether it considers making a proposal to the Minister for a further category of harmful online content. No specific role is provided for the Minister, th…

I thank the Senator for the amendment. The amendment would require an coimisiún, when undertaking a public consultation on a proposal for a new category of harmful online content, to publish the draft proposal four weeks before the consultation begins and to require that such a consultation should be at least four weeks. I do not propose to accept the amendment as it appears to be overly prescriptive. In the first instance, it would be more usual for a public body to give notice that a public consultation was comme…

The amendment would provide that where an coimisiún has submitted a proposal for an additional category of harmful online content to the Minister, the Minister may request that an coimisiún reconsider or review the proposal. The relevant section in the Bill as initiated provides that the Minister may request that an coimisiún review the proposal. I do not accept this amendment as I do not see a substantial difference between the meanings of reconsider and review in this context. It is difficult to see how an coimis…

I thank the Senators. In terms of amendment No. 164 regarding a minimum age requirement for children, it is important to acknowledge that there is a very real issue with young children accessing online services that simply were not designed with them in mind. It is an issue that I am particularly aware of as both a parent of young children and chair of the National Advisory Council for Online Safety, which recently released a comprehensive report on children's online safety. Finding workable solutions in this area …

With regard to amendment No. 163, as I said, there is provision in section 139K of the 2009 Act specifically in respect of providers of video-sharing platform services. We know the coimisiún shall make online safety codes requiring those providers to comply with Article 9(1) of the revised directive, which has an extensive list of requirements, including the protections for children. With regard to amendment No. 164, as I said, it really is a complex issue. I agree with the intent of the Senators' amendment but I d…