Niall Collins (Limerick, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank all Members who participated in this debate on the Censorship of Publications Board Repeal Bill 2013. There is no political agenda regarding the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter, and his novel, Laura. He just happened to be the catalyst which triggered a critical analysis by Fianna Fáil of the Censorship of Publications Board. We are not playing political games, but it is a fact that his book is at the centre of the issue. If we wanted to be smart or political, we could ask if he absented himself from the Cabinet when this Bill was being discussed or when the new members of the censorship board were being appointed. However, we did not.

The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Pat Rabbitte, informed us that the Government intended to oppose the Bill, which is regrettable. The Bill is timely and the Government should take it in its true spirit. Unfortunately, all Friday sittings involve is an exercise where the Opposition offers Bills which, in most instances, are opposed by the Government. Those not opposed are parked within the system and do not progress to Committee or Remaining Stages. That needs to be examined if part of Dáil reform is to allow the opportunity for individual Members to bring forward Bills. Not one Private Members’ Bill brought forward on a Friday has been enacted.

The Minister, in outlining why the Government opposed this Bill, stated this was a complex and technical area. That was the only reason he gave. He went on to state the Government would not rush to take action but was examining all details in the area. However, he has not outlined any detailed reason the Bill is being opposed, which is regrettable.

Since 2000, eight books have been referred to the board but none has been prohibited, as well as 34 periodicals and magazines. The last time a periodical was prohibited or banned was in 2003. The board has moved on in that regard. I take the point about the 1998 and 2004 child pornography legislation. Why do we not put the resources given to publications censorship into funding research into and policing against cyber bullying and child pornography on the Internet? Sadly, on many occasions this House has discussed the issue of suicide. One reason often cited for suicide among young people is cyber bullying. It is a significant problem and, unfortunately, a downside of the advancement of technology. It is a challenge for all parents with young children to keep an eye on technology and keep apace with it to ensure children are not subjected to the malevolent and deviant forces that operate on the Internet.

The imprisonment of Margaretta D'Arcy was also raised, a matter which also received a lengthy airing during Topical Issues during the week. Everyone is concerned about her welfare, but I agree with the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter, on this case that we cannot interfere with the courts which have to be allowed to do their work independently. There was an exhaustive process in the case of Ms D’Arcy. While people have to be allowed to protest, it must be peaceful and within the law. That is the beginning and the end of it. One cannot have a situation where people break onto the runways of airports. The processes are in place in the courts and the legal system. We all share the concerns about Ms D’Arcy’s welfare and health. It is right and proper that this has to be taken into consideration, but that is a job for the courts to do.

I do not agree with Deputy Michael Colreavy on section 31 of the Broadcasting Authority Act which was on the Statute Book when the State was under siege and attempts were being made to subvert it by the Provisional IRA and others. Section 31 was necessary at that point to protect the State. It was repealed when the time was right and it was proper to do so, but up until then, one could not have had a situation where people trying to subvert the State could be afforded an opportunity to engage and further their aims on broadcast stations. Comparisons between the intent of section 31 when it was introduced and the intent behind the establishment of the Censorship of Publications Board are not valid.

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for affording us the opportunity to debate the Bill which is timely and topical.

I am sure there has been a degree of outside interest, given the identity of the person who authored the book at the centre of the complaint before the board and all Members await with interest the outcome of the board's adjudication. In the meantime, I will press the matter to a vote which I understand will take place next Tuesday.

See this speech in context