Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)

I thank the Acting Chairman for the opportunity to speak on Second Stage of the Defamation Bill 2006. This Bill has modern, updated provisions.

This is my first opportunity to congratulate the Taoiseach, Deputy Cowen, on his election. It is a great honour for him, his family and the people of County Offaly. I wish him well in the future. I also congratulate the new members of the Cabinet and the new Ministers of State, particularly the Minister of State, Deputy Máire Hoctor, who is present. I wish them all well in their jobs as they will have a difficult task over the next couple of years. I wish them well for the future.

The main purpose of the Defamation Bill is to revise in part the law of defamation and to replace the Defamation Act 1961 with modern, updated provisions, taking into account the jurisprudence of the courts and the European Court of Human Rights. The key phrase is "human rights". We are talking about respect for our people, respect for our citizens and a level of truth and justice when dealing with this issue.

Other Deputies referred to the issue of privacy. We must ensure respect for persons, particularly those in public life. They are entitled to a private as well as a public life. I agree that the media may investigate the public and political activities of politicians but there is no excuse for journalists to be camped outside the homes of ill TDs. It is unacceptable and a disgrace. I refer to recent incidents of this behaviour when a Member of the House returned home from hospital and the media were camped at his door and tried to doorstep him. That is not acceptable behaviour. Those working in the media should respect the rights of these people.

Section 3 of the Bill provides that the legislation should only apply to a cause of action which accrues after it comes into operation. It also proposes that it shall not affect the operation of the general law in force immediately before commencement of the Act. Section 5 collectively describes the tort of libel and the tort of slander as the tort of defamation and defines the essential ingredients of defamation. It also provides that the tort of defamation is actionable without proof of special damage. Section 7 provides a mechanism whereby both the plaintiff and the defendant are obliged to verify the particulars of any pleading containing assertions, allegations of fact or further information within a specific timeframe, which may be extended at the discretion of the court. The contents of the verifying affidavit could also form the subject matter for cross-examination of both plaintiff and defendant to which they must make themselves available at the time of the trial.

Section 9 is very important as it seeks to clarify the existing law. It provides that a member of a class of persons shall have a cause of action if, by reason of the number of persons who are members of that class or by virtue of the circumstances in which the statement is published, the statement could reasonably be understood to refer to the member concerned. This is an important provision when applied to our ethnic minorities and people who have a right to have their privileges and rights protected. I refer to the often negative labelling of whole communities by the media. For instance it could be a community living in a disadvantaged area, members of the Traveller community or members of ethnic minority communities. They are often labelled because one person does something wrong and that is unacceptable.

In my previous life as a teacher working in a disadvantaged community, I noted that a negative image of the community was created by certain sections while the majority of people in these communities got up in the morning, went to school, did their homework, got their diaries signed and got on with their lives. Yet reading some of the articles written about some of those communities, one would think all these people were sub-human. That is not acceptable.

Section 11 provides that a body corporate may bring a defamation action whether it has incurred or is likely to incur financial loss as a result of the publication of the alleged defamatory statement. A corporate body can be a group such as the HSE. I regularly hear Members of this House remarking that we have problems in the health service and we are trying to resolve them. I hear a labelling of everybody in the HSE. I had a positive experience during this week when the HSE — Deputy Durkan will like to hear this — granted me €2.5 million extra for Dublin North-Central for a group of families dealing with those with an intellectual disability. That is something one will not read about in the newspapers. I also had the experience——

See this speech in context