Brian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister. It is his first attendance at this committee as Minister, and I wish him well. I also thank Deputy Ó Laoghaire, who has brought this Bill forward.

The Minister discussed the interdepartmental group, and while it has a role, this has become a really big issue. I was here for all of the hearings with Facebook and other platforms. I welcome the Minister's acceptance that the days of self-regulation are over. We must accept, however, that when everyone is in charge no-one is in charge. A clearly defined role is set out in the Bill. The Bill will have to be amended - I certainly will be proposing some amendments - but it provides us with something to work with and sets out clearly the functions of the office, including the promotion of digital safety, ensuring oversight, the removal of harmful material, the power to force companies to take down such material, responsibility for collecting and analysing information, advising the Government and working with the Ombudsman for Children and, indeed, the Department of Education and Skills. It is a very important area.

When my granddaughter started using the Internet I was worried about her, but I think she is more worried about me now because she knows more about it than I do. If I have any problems with my phone I just hand it to her and she sorts it out. She does not tell me how she sorts it out but she does and then she hands it back to me. That is all I need to know. There is a real issue here. A large amount of time is spent online and there is a huge amount of engagement with the various platforms. It can be seen on a walk down the street on any given day. It is important that we move to take action in this area. I heard what the Minister has said about the interdepartmental group and that he wants people to work between the different silos to achieve co-operation. However, at any organisation, when everyone is in charge nobody is in charge. That is particularly the case when we are dealing with something as big as digital safety at State level.

Huge progress has been made on the technology itself. There is a possibility that by the time this Bill progresses through the Houses other forms of technology will be available and other advances will be made. We will have to run to catch up with those developments and we do not have a good record in that regard. This has crept up on us and we are ill-prepared for it.

I read the legal advice on the jurisdiction issues. Complicated jurisdiction provisions are set out in the EU regulation but I would like to see more work done in that area to clarify how we can work to enforce that. I am not suggesting that is a reason to do nothing but it is one of the challenges we are faced with.

Another part of the Bill concerns penalties. The powers of the commissioner are laid out in sections 8 and 9. Should the commissioner be able to issue a fine? An equivalent example is that under the Control of Dogs Act 1986, the dog warden can issue a fine while any more serious matter will appear before a court. In this case, it is suggested that the Circuit Court would deal with any issues and thereafter it might progress to the High Court if necessary. Should there be provision in the Bill for the commissioner to issue penalties at that point?

I am working backwards through the Bill, but under section 4 the term "harmful communications" is used. I wonder whether the words "harmful" and "illegal" should be used in the same sentence or whether perhaps "harmful" could be replaced with "illegal". It might be an area we could look at. I am just highlighting some issues I noticed when reading the Bill, the legal advice and the briefing note for today for Deputy Ó Laoghaire. The Bill is necessary and needs to be progressed, and we should not wait for the European Union to act. We are moving to roll out broadband and to give more people access to it, which is one of the other roles of this committee, as I am sure the Minister will discover quickly. More people will be engaging with the Internet and this Bill is very important in that respect.

I do not understand how it is proposed to deal with one issue. Common abuse and bullying must be dealt with, and it may involve a more minor sanction that the commissioner could issue, which might be useful. We lost one Member of this House who was subjected to serious bullying online. Some of us had political differences with him. Indeed, there are some people who are still with us who are subjected to huge intimidation and bullying on the Internet. That is just one area. This type of abuse applies not just to public representatives, but to people in all areas of life. We have to try to protect people from it. One specific area that has emerged in the last number of years is the targeting of elderly and vulnerable people, some of whom are being profiled by people living in this country. Widowers and widows are being targeted by international gangs which befriend them on the Internet and build up a relationship with them. The person believes he or she is talking to a girlfriend or boyfriend in another country and starts to send money to those gangs. I have come across one really serious case of that where an elderly gentleman was borrowing money to send into a foreign bank account, believing he was sending it to a person.

I advised him that, in my opinion, he was sending it to a criminal gang. I got another person in the community who might have more influence to speak to the man about it. I am not too sure what one can do about that. I suppose I make the point merely to highlight that the Internet is a wonderful tool and has many purposes but it is also a very dangerous world out there. There are many examples of it. I am not an expert on IT and I am not sure how the example I gave could be dealt with. However, we should move ahead with this and use it as the basis for getting strong, robust legislation in place and getting a digital safety commissioner in place.