Conor McGuinness (Waterford, Sinn Fein)

Before we begin, I have a note about privilege. Witnesses giving evidence from within the parliamentary precincts are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they give to the committee. This means a witness has a full defence in any defamation action for anything said at a committee meeting. However, witnesses are expected not to abuse this privilege and may be directed to cease giving evidence on an issue at the Chair's direction. Witnesses should follow the direction of the Chair in this regard. They are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that, as is reasonable, no adverse commentary should be made against an identifiable third person or entity. Witnesses who are to give evidence from a location outside the parliamentary precincts are asked to note that they may not benefit from the same level of immunity from legal proceedings as a witness giving evidence from within the parliamentary precincts and may consider it appropriate to take legal advice on this matter. Privilege against defamation does not apply to publication by witnesses outside of the proceedings held by the committee of any matters arising from the proceedings.

I advise members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex in order to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate where they are not adhering to this constitutional requirement. Therefore, a member who attempts to participate from outside the precinct will be asked to leave the meeting. In this regard, I ask any member participating via Microsoft Teams that, prior to making their contribution to the meeting, they confirm they are on the grounds of the Leinster House campus. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

The agenda for the first session of today's meeting is the review of the Sea Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Act 2006, as agreed previously by the committee. The committee will hear from a number of officials from the Seafood Ireland Alliance and the Irish Seafood & Fishing Alliance. From the former organisation we have Mr. John Lynch, Mr. Dominic Rihan, Mr. Patrick Murphy, who I believe is joining us remotely, and Mr. Brendan Byrne. From the latter organisation we have Mr. Cormac Burke.

The witnesses' opening statements have circulated to members, so I propose to give two minutes to each of the witnesses to give a brief summary of their statements. We will then go to questions from members, with ten-minute slots at the outset. I remind members that that ten minutes has to include both questions and responses, so if they wish to have a response to the points they raise, they should allow sufficient time for the witnesses to answer. When asking questions, members should also direct them to the witness or witnesses they would like to respond.

I invite Mr. Lynch to give his two-minute summary.