Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I am also very concerned about how wide-ranging the definition of "statutory undertaker" is. It could include contractors.

On newspaper publications and circulation, our amendment states:

... where the prescription of either publication in paragraph (a) or (b) above, prioritises the effective accessibility of the publication given factors including its circulation figures in the functional area of the authority concerned, the overall costs associated with purchasing or accessing it, and the quality of its archive and costs associated with accessing archive editions of the publication.

That is not overly prescriptive but it means that when regulations on this are done or local authorities are doing this, they must prioritise the accessibility of the publication, given its circulation or accessibility. The amendment to the amendment should be accepted. If the Minister will not accept it, he could bring forward his own in the Seanad. I do not see any issues with the way it is worded. Why would the accessibility of the publication not be prioritised? Why would we not put that into the legislation? It makes eminent sense we would do that, especially given that we currently have a situation where that sometimes does not happen. Sometimes, notices are put in a publication that has minimal circulation or accessibility in a particular area where the notice might be most relevant.

See this speech in context