Brian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for attending, sharing their views and making their presentations. This is an important issue. The importance of local media reporting on local issues has been highlighted very well by Mr. Gerry Lennon and others. The business case and the business element and competition end of it has been ruled on and that has been parked. That is done.

It is the question that has been raised. Concern has been raised about the fact that INM is involved in national newspapers and the business of local newspapers is different. We are having this discussion because there is public concern. There is also concern within trade union circles, journalists, former journalists and in political circles. The concerns relate to three areas. The first is plurality and diversity. The second is the public interest, while the third relates to the terms and conditions of workers. The main concern is the dominance of INM, in particular Denis O'Brien and his influence. The case will be made by INM that there is not editorial control. I do not believe someone is holding the hand of journalists or editors but he who pays the piper always calls the tune. The evidence is in the pages of the newspapers. When one reads them, one sees the relentless pursuit of a political agenda. In the Sunday Independentone can see commentaries written by three Deputies from one particular party. That should be encouraged. I do not have a problem with that and the party I represent does not have a problem with scrutiny of political parties, including Sinn Féin. Scrutiny should be vigorous, but it must also be balanced. However, the question is whether two or three Deputies from the political party I represent or those from other parties will be allowed to have the same coverage.

Another concern is the use of legal avenues to slap down opposition. A total of 12 cases has been taken by Denis O’Brien against media organisations and there have also been threats of legal action. I am not interested in personalising the situation but we must look at the issue as it stands. The newspapers are now referred to as "viewspapers". Newspapers should carry views but they should also have balanced news content and that is where the problem arises. I do not think democracy can function without having a free press. Any objective read of INM publications will show there is a particular editorial line. The big concern is around centralised editorial content and consolidation of editorial content in that local editors do not have the same influence as was previously the case. Former journalists to whom I have spoken said they might not have been told what to write but they knew what not to write in newspapers.

I am interested in the views of Robert Pitt and Gerry Lennon on how we protect the editorial independence of local titles, which are valuable. I have dealt with Tadhg Carey's newspaper in the past when we had a larger constituency. Could they comment on how we maintain the plurality and diversity of content, given the sheer weight of the financial interest of a small number of individuals? I am also concerned about the protection of workers in those titles. People in the media not just in INM, but right across a range of newspapers, in the past two years in particular have approached politicians to say their terms and conditions have gone through the floor. They said do not get a chance to research the content of the stories they write, that their work is hampered and the quality of what is being produced is not up to standard. In tandem, their terms and conditions have reduced. They are employed on temporary contracts and they are in a very precarious situation. I do not envy them. They are the three issues that must be addressed, namely, editorial independence, diversity and plurality of content and the terms and conditions of workers, in addition to how we protect those working in the media in terms of pursuing stories and having the time to research them without being hampered in their efforts.