Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Ó Laoghaire for the work he has done. He has given recognition to the Law Reform Commission with which he has worked in bringing the Bill to its current level. We have supported and will continue to support this initiative. I may have some amendments at a later Stage because I certainly think we need to strengthen the powers a digital safety commissioner would have. I take the point about the definitions but I think it is important that fines would be set out in the legislation. I think they must be very significant because, quite frankly, I do not trust the social media platforms to adhere to anything unless there is a very significant monetary penalty.

I recognise that the Minister is relatively new to this area but he will certainly have experience from his time as Minister for Education and Skills and would know the concerns of the education sector about the harmful impact of online bullying on children. I hope that in furthering this effort, he will look to address the situation now rather than later because there is little doubt that children and vulnerable adults are definitely in danger and are being harmed every day. We do not want to leave it for five, ten or 15 years. We do not want to allow this to get to a point where we are depending on somebody else to tell us what to do. While I accept that good work is happening in other jurisdictions, it is for us to try to implement insofar as we can rules and laws here that govern to the extent of protecting our own. I am conscious that the Germans have made very significant advances in this area. As a result of that, the digital platforms employ significantly more people there to ensure that harmful content is removed more quickly. They do so because the law penalises them if they do not do so it is certainly worth looking at that. I do not think we can necessarily wait for Europe to force us. I think we can be ground breakers and leaders in that regard. The digital platforms have very significant bases here. I do not want to make a charge against the Minister or Government but I am taken to some extent with the Taoiseach's infatuation with these digital media platforms and their mega-wealthy owners. They are always up for a selfie with the Taoiseach when the opportunity arises. While we must recognise that they are really important employers here, I still think it should not be a wild west for the digital media platforms just because we value their significance in terms of the benefits to our economy. We must also ensure that we have a rule-based society and that these people are brought to book.

I welcome the fact the Minister said it is time to move beyond self-regulation. Facebook and others have appeared before us. They publish their own guidelines and protocols. On the face of it, they look fantastic and anybody would sign up to them yet we saw that investigative programme on Channel 4, which the Minister may or may not have had a chance to see. In respect of what we see them do at management level and how they moderate their own content, it is very clear that the vast majority of the people who watched that programme believed the content was harmful and in breach of the company's own guidelines and regulations yet its moderators said material such as footage of a child being beaten or people talking about self harming was okay. We saw people who were demonstrably affected by that content being left there for very considerable periods of time. The company was aware of it and it was in breach of the company's own stated protocols and guidelines yet it was being used as training material to say it was okay to leave that there. I have great respect for Facebook and the way the company has been built but in respect of the idea that this is not material it wants up there and that it somehow impacts negatively on people who advertise because they do not want to advertise around this content, the model for Facebook and all digital media platforms involves trying to retain the user in their space for as long as possible. Their stated intention is that they will only take down content where the user is gratified by or in some way engages positively with negative or harmful content yet if a user adds a tag to some negative piece of content or video saying "Isn't this awful?", they seem to suggest that this is okay to leave that up there because of free speech. This is furthering their agenda because if I comment negatively about some hurtful, harmful or damaging content, I promulgate that information and others view it. That works for Facebook because it keeps my friends and I longer on the platform. We must stand up to them and protect our own, including our children and vulnerable adults because while much of this debate has been about children, there are vulnerable communities out there.

That programme signalled the difficulties for people who have certain forms of mental illness. I was taken by the story of one particular young adult who had an affliction whereby, on certain occasions, she self-harmed by cutting herself and drawing blood. The idea that there were others talking in an open chat environment about that behaviour was almost creating an impulse to act in that way and encouragement to do more than the last person did. That really is difficult and harmful content. If we heard such news on the radio or on television there would be uproar throughout society. However, one can access all of this information on one's iPad, iPhone or smartphone. Society has not yet understood the extent to which this material is there, personalised to everybody and accessible, yet there is a massive amount of regulation regarding what our national broadcaster, local radio stations and our independent broadcast sector can do. There are phenomenal controls in place there, yet this is far more accessible and direct and we are taking a laissez-faire approach. It has not reached the level we expect it to reach yet because it is developing and evolving, and I do not believe that will be an excuse in the long term. We will have to act.

I welcome that the Minister has signalled there will be movement in this area but I believe he will have to do more as he reads his way into the brief. We can build upon this Bill to offer the necessary protections.