Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Somebody once said we should not knock the weather because if it was not for the weather, nine out of ten conversations would never start. The hearings we are having today show a clear obsession with the weather. If one follows that logically, the weather seems to be the mechanism by which one can communicate so much because Irish people are obsessed with it and one can use it as a tool with which to disseminate information to those who may not have a conceptional understanding of what climate change might be. Therein lies an opportunity.

I am conscious that we cannot put too much of an onus on RTÉ. The organisation has such a wide remit and only collects so much from the broadcasting fee. It would be easy for us to say RTÉ needs to do more. I note there is an audience council report from 2014 - I do not know whether there has been one subsequently - which showed clearly the need for greater messaging around climate change. We must take in good faith what has been stated here today in respect of the various initiatives in which RTÉ is involved through programming, through Science Foundation Ireland and in inculcating more stories through current affairs programmes such as "Morning Ireland".

The witnesses will correct me if I am misinterpreting the late Professor Marshall McLuhan's assertion that "the medium is the message". I accept that the medium of television and the television schedule are limited. I also accept the point made in respect of the weather slots and whether they present an opportunity to communicate a message. I would contend that is probably not the case. However, if Met Éireann and RTÉ are partnering through the RTÉ Player, they have an infinite opportunity to message to countless numbers of people and therein lies the opportunity. We are all now dependent on the player. I cannot be at home at 9 p.m. or 10 a.m. but I can watch programmes afterwards. The player is a major resource.

If we have meteorologists who are talking about the attributional effect - in that regard, we need to do more to use language that ordinary people can understand - and if we have Met Éireann partnering with RTÉ on the player to disseminate bespoke simple messages around the effects of weather patterns in three, four or five minute segments, it would become as popular as a YouTube clip. There is no reason Met Éireann could not use YouTube as a medium as well to get that message out. We have an opportunity here. This meeting has been informative.

My question arises from my lack of understanding of how Met Éireann sees its remit. While I understand the partnership with RTÉ and the element of disseminating information, does Met Éireann see its role as being an advocate for messaging around the dire impacts of climate change? In its statement, Met Éireann used the word "unequivocal" in relation to the evidence base that exists around climate change. To take that one step further, does Met Éireann see its role as being an interpreter of the science and a disseminator of a message in respect of that? I sense some reticence - the witnesses will correct me if I am wrong - from Met Éireann about its role. I understand the partnership and the dynamic between Met Éireann and RTÉ. We have all come to depend on the weather reports, which are part and parcel of our lives, but I sense some reticence on the part of Met Éireann about where it sees itself in terms of the dissemination of the message to the wider populace. I ask Mr. Moran to correct me if I am wrong.