James Lawless (Kildare North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Rabbitte. I thank the witnesses for their presentations. It was very interesting to hear their well-articulated viewpoints and to hear about the research they have done. As a representative for Kildare , I am especially interested to see Newbridge College represented in force and, of course, our neighbours from Wicklow. I visited Clare and Ennis for the Éamon De Valera commemoration with my colleague, Deputy Dooley, last summer. The witnesses have all done their schools and counties proud today.

I shall now turn to the points articulated in the presentations. Reference was made to the anti-social media. What was said is so true. We see it so many times in the context of conversations when younger or older people are in a family room, such as around the dinner table or watching TV. When one looks around the room, not a single person is talking because everyone is actually on his or her phone. We see this happening so often these days. This particularly live point has been articulated here.

People are tuning out of real conversations in order to talk online. They are not actually talking to each other. I understand some of the social media platforms are starting to build in a little endorphin hit. Refreshing and scrolling to see how many likes or comments one has attracted becomes addictive. One keeps going back to the well to see what is there. That is by design rather than accident.

The points regarding Instagram were quite interesting. There is the ideal Instagirl and, indeed, the ideal Instaboy. This has always been an issue. People always talked about glossy magazines before the Internet and about how they presented the idealised human form and depicted happy, glamorous lifestyles to which people aspire but which they can never quite attain. Social media has made this trend even more prevalent and difficult because it affects people one knows and individuals in one's circle. It is difficult to rationalise why others seem to be more happy and successful and to be living more exciting lives but, of course, one does not know what is really going on behind the facade. People of every age struggle with these issues. The witnesses identified young people in this context. They may be even more aware of the issue because they are tuned in to the pitfalls as well as the pluses. Perhaps they are even ahead of the pack on that one.

A number of delegates have made the point already that the Internet is a really powerful force for good. It is a revolutionary technology and it is has changed the world. With regard to education, I am old enough to remember my parents buying the Encyclopaedia Britannica, which comprised 24 volumes. It took pride of place in the sitting-room. It probably seems anathema to the delegation to go out and buy 24 books that would sit there and be the source of knowledge for all time. They were great when I was doing my junior certificate and leaving certificate examinations. These days, however, one finds all the information on one's mobile phone. The Internet has changed the way education works. In my school days, it was all about rote learning and doing three hours involving reading, writing and arithmetic, in addition to learning off all the tables and statistics. One does not really need to do that anymore because is all about how one analyses information. The mind should now be trained how to analyse a set of facts and how to rationalise and validate information rather than just retrieving it. Again, the Internet is responsible for this need because, in any circumstances, required information can be pulled up in minutes. There is great potential for good.

On the school's theme, I have a question that has arisen many times previously. I am actually chairman of the board of management of a school that has a lot of technology. It uses iPads instead of books. Naas community college is the school. It has been asked many times here and elsewhere whether we should ban phones or have no network connection in schools. Should we put a blocker in a school zone so a signal cannot be obtained anymore, meaning no Internet access? This results in pitfalls were a school is trying to promote gaining access to information or even Schoology or some of the other educational resources. Should there be a limited local network and a bar on the outside world? These are the kinds of questions that need to be asked. I will be interested in hearing the delegates' views. I will ask a batch of questions, if that is acceptable, rather than going to and fro. I acknowledge that we are against the clock.

Questions on parental control were already asked and I accept it is really difficult to answer. I understand and am taking away the really helpful notes on parental filters and what parents can do to be more active in their children's lives. I am a father and my children are active online. I am not sure, however, that they always want their parents looking at what they are doing or seeing what they are saying. I am sure that I, no more than the delegates, recognise a privacy concern. How do we balance the desire for privacy with the need for protection? Should parents be able to log on to see what their children are posting on Instagram or Snapchat or saying in various conversations? They probably should not. There probably needs to be a certain degree of respect, dignity and privacy. On the other hand, there is the question of what happens if something that should not be happening is happening, or if somebody is being abused, manipulated, bullied, harassed or subjected to other such nasty behaviour. I am not quite sure what is the answer. I would be really interested in hearing the delegates' views on that. What is the correct balance? How do we get it right? What kinds of protections are appropriate or otherwise?

The age of digital consent has been touched on in the discussion. One of the delegates said a youth has to be 13 to go on Snapchat but everybody can just fake the age. A child could be ten, 11 or 12. Is there such a thing as a right age? Does it depend on maturity or parental control? Is it a question of going a bit younger with parental permission? That is a question we struggle with here.

Those are my thoughts and questions. Should the signal in schools be blocked? If not, how do we get around the problem? How do we strike a balance between privacy and protection? I would be really interested in hearing all the delegates' views on those issues.