Noel Harrington (Cork South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The first matter on which we should focus is that one of the reasons these hearings are taking place is to deal with cyber bullying and the dangerous effects of online abuse or bullying on those who are most vulnerable. The first presentation we received was from the Minister who mentioned that there might be a gap in the legislation in this regard. In that context, Mr. Crehan referred to the relevant section of the Post Office (Amendment) Act 1953. In view of everything we have heard since these hearings began, I have come to the view that there is not a significant gap in the legislation. Almost everyone who made a presentation indicated that what was illegal offline was similarly illegal online. The difficulty lies in getting to a position where one can deal with this. Each of the platforms and companies which made presentations has different ways of operating and reporting. Some allow users to remain anonymous, while others such as Facebook demand that they identify themselves before being able to use their sites.

There has been a great deal of discussion about defamation and illegal use online. Quite often, those who are the subject of online abuse are well able to defend themselves. I refer to politicians, business people, journalists and others who are in the public eye and would often be online. These individuals are well educated, have access to the courts and know how to proceed in matters of this nature. The difficulty which arises concerns those who suffer abuse and do not have the resources to go to the High Court. In many cases, they would not even know how to report online abuse. Mr. McIntyre has suggested increased funding be provided for the Data Protection Commissioner. In the light of the fact that Google, Facebook and other companies have their European headquarters in this country, that is an absolute must. The economic benefits which these companies bring to the country are vastly superior to the costs we might potentially incur in seeking to establish a balance in this area.

Would there be any merit in creating some type of platform or method of connection, by means of a group or association, in order to assist teenagers who are vulnerable and might become so distressed by what they read online that they might do something similar to that which others have done? We are all aware of the recent cases in this regard. The committee received a presentation from the office for Internet safety, an organisation of which nobody seems to have heard and which operates under the aegis of the Department of Justice and Equality. I am very disappointed that the office in question has not played a greater role in the area under discussion. However, I am not sure it is designed to deal with it. In addition, I do not know of any other body which might be in a position to deal with it. Would our guests support the establishment of an entity to deal with the low-level problems to which I refer in order that we might protect the most vulnerable? Having listened to all of the debates in which we have engaged, it is the most vulnerable who will continue to be caught out.