Richard O'Donoghue (Limerick County, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The review of this Act must be welcomed in all its aspects as what it has cost the Irish people since 2009 has been extraordinary. I compliment the Minister on proceeding with this review. We certainly have been out of sync with our European neighbours and countries all over the world. We have been a soft target when it comes to defamation cases. Getting rid of juries in defamation cases is to be welcomed as extraordinary payouts have been given.

The importance of the media being able to perform investigative journalism without fear of being sued is at the heart of this legislation yet they cannot have free rein to say what they like about people. This review of the Defamation Act 2009 will bring about legislation that must be welcome as a part of our transparency into considerable compensation in our courts.

Our investigative journalists have uncovered a great deal of wrongdoing in this country and we must be thankful for that. However, sometimes the media get it wrong. When they get it wrong, the recourse is that they put their hands up. However, much of the time people say they will fight this and take it for two or three years at considerable cost. At the end of the day, the person who has the case brought against him or her, whether the person is right or wrong, usually in the media outlets looks like he or she is wrong. I myself saw this when I brought a truck into the Dáil and the story went out that I had no insurance on the vehicle even though I was contacted and I said that it was above on the dashboard. It was a replacement vehicle. It went on the media. I could have taken a defamation action against that media outlet but I did not. They took the story down. That was good enough for me. They realised that what they had done was wrong and they took the story down. However, that was a case that somebody could have taken; I did not. They made their mistake and I was happy they took it down.

We also must look at how journalism can be practised without fear of these type of cases coming against the journalist but we must make sure that a person's name is respected. If, regardless of who brings a defamation case, the right outcome is given and if the person's name is clear, it must be portrayed that it is clear because the media outlook on this can show that even if the person was cleared, he or she still, in the eyes of the public, looks wrong.

I support this review and I support the changes that will be made.

See this speech in context