Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank our witnesses for coming in. It has been an interesting conversation although a good deal of what I had wanted to cover has been well covered at this stage.

On the discussion of alternatives by Deputy Daly, for instance, and the PIAB idea, which is certainly worth exploring, the Bill proposes alternative dispute resolution. Perhaps some of the witnesses might want to make some additional comments on that as I believe it would be helpful to us.

On press freedom, Mr. Kealy mentioned at the start of the conversation, I believe, that we were second in the World Press Freedom Index, which is obviously good. He then qualified his remark by saying he was of the view that the reason we were second was based upon those who had created the list recognising the Government’s acknowledgement of previous reports. I wonder did that World Press Freedom Index come out before or after the announcement of additional members of the Judiciary across all of the courts. That would be an interesting measure to speed up access to justice, which also applies here. I imagine access to justice is a big issue in this matter.

My other point goes to Mr. Foley and his colleagues. It occurs to me it is very difficult to go to the point the ICCL made and manifestly to measure the number of SLAPP cases that have been taken because they tend to stop in their tracks at that particular point. I just so happened to be chairing the debate on SLAPP cases, which I believe was coming through the EU into the Dáil Chamber via the Minister of State, Deputy Browne, and I found quite interesting because I was not familiar with it. I listened carefully and I am just wondering if there is some means for journalism to report internally to the NUJ to give us an idea of the sort of level of these applications, or SLAPP cases, which the union might determine them to be? This might give us an idea of how prevalent this is within the sector and within journalism. We only really see the ones which make it to court or where journalists themselves, perhaps, say they cannot talk about something because it is subject to litigation. Otherwise, we are not seeing it and that in and of itself is obviously the purpose of the matter being proceeded with in the first place. I believe that would be helpful for us in trying to frame this legislation.

As I say, there may be some comments which our witnesses may like to make in response to my point here. Dr. Foley looks like he is ready to respond.