Mr. Declan McLoughlin:

The issue of balance has certainly been on the radar for quite a number of years. It probably came to a head in the recent referendums on marriage and life. There was considerable commentary and probably misperception about what the broadcasting regulations say. It is important to note there is no legal obligation for balance. It is not in the Broadcasting Act and has never been in any broadcasting legislation.

Balance is a mechanism for achieving fairness, objectivity and impartiality in particular circumstances but it is not a requirement in all circumstances. What we have done over the years, especially in our most recent guide around election and referendum coverage is to articulate that equal air time and strict balance is not necessary to achieve fairness. It may be necessary. If somebody makes a claim about a Deputy or Senator on a radio or television programme, the Deputy or Senator naturally has a right of reply and it would be reasonable to say we would balance that view by having Deputy X or Senator Y on the programme but where there is no alternative view, in the case with regard to the fundamentals of climate change and the greenhouse effect, there is no requirement to provide balance.

That can be challenging for broadcasters who do not have the resources, expertise or confidence to take that position. At the same time, the issue of climate change will become far more impactful on our society and throughout different communities. Real news and current affairs issues will need to be teased and thrashed out around policy at a local level and that is where balance will be important because we will be dealing with real changes to people's lifestyles. Some of those changes will have to be made and others will be matters of debate at a local level. That is where balance becomes an important element. It is about finding where balance is correct and avoiding balance for the sake of it because one ultimately ends up with false equivalency where views are presented that do not represent the truth or do not represent anyone, or if they do represent somebody, they represent somebody whose views are not factually correct.

It has been a challenge for the BAI in the likes of elections and referendums to press home that message. We have done it in our guidelines, workshops with broadcasters and our public communications. However, it is an ongoing challenge, especially given the turnover in media. There is considerable turnover in media, especially in local radio and, to a lesser extent, the national media. It is an ongoing educational challenge. One can write it all down and tell people what it means but one needs to speak to them, tease out their concerns, fears and uncertainties and empower them via resources and information to be confident to make a decision. I do not need an alternative view here to discuss climate change. It is a reality and we will not entertain somebody who thinks it is not.