Eoghan Murphy (Dublin South East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Acting Chairman and I thank the Minister for taking this matter. I believe we have a problem with the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland and how it interprets its own code of fairness, objectivity and impartiality in news and current affairs. I refer, in particular, to recent rulings by the BAI under this code that some people saw as not fair and objective but daft and depressing. These rulings led the National Union of Journalists to say the authority is acting in a manner harmful to the public interest, and this is a serious charge to level.

Two complaints were made recently regarding radio shows discussing marriage equality issues and in my view they were spurious complaints. The complaints were upheld on the requirement to present a balanced view, but the shows in question were not current affairs programmes discussing a matter relating to a referendum campaign that is under way. In those circumstances there is a duty to be objective and include all sides of a debate. These shows were not debates. One was an RTE programme in January 2014 and it was a human interest piece on civil partnerships with people telling their personal stories. The other was a Newstalk programme in June 2014 on the Dublin gay pride parade with people discussing and celebrating rights, some of which they do not currently have.

For too long such people have been outcasts in Irish society and the State and, thankfully, we are moving to correct this next year. The programmes in question were not discussing matters in the context of a referendum campaign and they were not conducting debates. A referendum campaign is not yet under way. These were popular and important radio shows that were giving voice to people who have a different point of view from other people. I hope in time that point of view will be regarded as normal.

The Broadcasting Authority of Ireland objected on the basis that one cannot allow a person to speak on radio about his or her aspirations to marry without having another person, a guest or presenter to challenge those aspirations, hopes, dreams and fears. I do not think this is right. Not only does it set a worrying precedent for free speech in the media in Ireland but it lacks common sense.

Senator Zappone challenged the authority of the BAI, apparently correctly, as the Government has failed to make appointments to the authority and, as a result, they are having difficulties obtaining a quorum at meetings. The Senator succinctly asked who calls the shots and makes the rulings at the BAI. Where is the legitimacy in these rulings if there are governance issues at the authority? The Irish Council for Civil Liberties has strongly criticised the BAI and has said it has used the complaints to chill public discussion on equality. This is a very serious thing to say.

A referendum on marriage equality is approaching.

It is coming, and I am looking forward to voting "Yes" in that referendum. We should ask ourselves whether the authority is fit to make rulings on future complaints that may arise between now and the beginning of that referendum campaign or once the referendum is under way.

We need to move quickly to address the governance issues in the authority, if they exist, and how the authority is interpreting the rulings under its code. If the code was not written to chill public debate or prevent people from expressing a point of view in the normal way on something they are passionate about, without having to bring someone in to put them down, then perhaps the code needs to be amended. Will the Minister offer a view on these issues?

Alex White (Dublin South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Murphy for raising this issue. The Broadcasting Authority of Ireland is an independent statutory body which has as one of its functions under section 26 the Broadcasting Act 2009 the preparation of broadcasting codes or rules. Accordingly, I, as Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, have no function in this matter and my Department has no role in the consultation process or in the drawing up of codes.

The BAI is required to draw up and enforce a series of codes for broadcasters on the basis of a list set out in section 42(2) of the 2009 Broadcasting Act. The first two items on the list deal with news broadcasting, including objectivity and impartiality in news broadcasting, and the broadcast treatment of current affairs. News and current affairs content broadcast on Irish radio and television is required to comply with the 2009 Act and with the BAI code of fairness, objectivity and impartiality in news and current affairs. The statutory requirements and the BAI code require news and current affairs to be fair, objective and impartial.

The BAI has prepared detailed guidance notes to accompany the code to assist broadcasters in their interpretation. The notes are provided as an aid to understanding the intent of the principles and rules and the manner of their application in a broadcast context.

One issue about which there has been some discussion recently is the role of the presenter. The guidance notes recognise the vital role of a programme presenter. They highlight, however, that the role comes with attendant responsibilities. The aim of the code in this regard is to seek to prevent a partisan position from being advocated by a presenter and to guard against a presenter using his or her programme to pursue an agenda via comments, choice of guests or otherwise such that a biased view on an issue is articulated.

The code also sets out the manner in which complaints may be made about a particular problem. Any person is entitled to make a complaint about news and current affairs content. In the first instance, complaints should be directed to the broadcaster to consider on the basis of the code of practice for complaints handling. Section 47 requires broadcasters to consider all such complaints. Complainants may refer complaints to the BAI if they are not satisfied with the response provided by the broadcaster or where the broadcaster does not respond. One common issue arising in complaints dealing with fairness, objectivity and impartiality in news and current affairs relates to balanced coverage. The BAI has stated on many occasions that there is no automatic requirement for each topic to be balanced by an opposing view. While there are some instances where balance may be required - for example, in the case of a closely fought referendum - an automatic requirement is considered inappropriate. This has been made clear in several codes and documents published by the BAI since its inception in 2009.

The codes to be followed by broadcasters are published by the BAI. The requirements in respect of balance and fairness are not confined to the period of a referendum. Particular rules relate to the period of a referendum, but there are general rules in respect of fairness and balance that are not confined to referendum periods.

I have no wish to express any view in respect of any particular complaint or issue. However, for the information of the Deputy and the House, I note that rule 22 of the BAI code states: "a presenter and/or a reporter on a current affairs programme shall not express his or her own views on matters that are either of public controversy or the subject of current public debate such that a partisan position is advocated." It may be that from time to time listeners, politicians or otherwise regard a particular point of view expressed in a programme as one that they are less than comfortable with. However, we need a third party to determine complaints in an objective way. It should not be done by politicians or otherwise. The Oireachtas has set up a third party to do this. Whereas people may have views as to the outcome of this or that complaint, we should support the independent body set up by the Oireachtas to make decisions on the basis of complaints made and brought freely pursuant to the codes. We should support the BAI in this regard. This does not mean we must agree with all of the authority's decisions, any more than we would agree with the decisions of courts or other quasi-judicial bodies, but the authority should be given the freedom to do the job we have asked of it.

Eoghan Murphy (Dublin South East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I completely respect the idea that the authority must be independent and that we need a third party to rule on these things, but what if the third party is wrong? What if we believe it is acting irresponsibly or inappropriately? To whom is the authority responsible at that point? What if, in setting up the code of conduct according to specifications in the Act, the authority did not proceed as it was intended under the legislation? Is there no point at which the Minister can review the legislation, the authority or the code?

I appreciate the Minister's response, in which he referred to instances where balance may be required and where an automatic requirement for balance is considered inappropriate. If there is a closely fought referendum the former may apply.

Is there not a contradiction in the rulings on the two specific issues raised? They relate to the same issue, that is to say, the debate on marriage equality. One related to people talking about civil partnership some years after agreeing a civil partnership, what it meant to them and how they looked forward to marriage equality. The other related to the gay pride parade in Dublin. Of course we are going to talk about marriage equality in the context of that debate. Of course there should be no automatic expectation of a contrary view in that case. How could anyone interpret the code of the BAI to deem it necessary for a contrary view in these two instances, both of which relate to marriage equality? This does not look good for the BAI.

There are legitimate public concerns on this issue because many people have been talking about it. Where is the mechanism by which we can argue that there may be a legitimate reason for us not to interfere with the independence of the authority? How do we assess whether it is acting in accordance with the legislation as set up? The Irish Council for Civil Liberties expressed concern publicly about the possibility that some of these rulings could have a chilling effect on public debate. The National Union of Journalists referred to this decision being harmful to the public interest. Therefore, we cannot sit back and take the view that the authority is an independent entity which we set up in 2009 with a code drafted by the authority itself and therefore we cannot get involved. We must consider the matter and establish what mechanisms we can use to ensure it is acting in accordance with the best interests of public debate.

The Minister referenced other parts of the code in respect of issues of controversy. This is not an issue of controversy. Some people might have a difficulty accepting the way Irish society is going, but we should consider the public interest. Here we are one year before a referendum is to be held and people are talking about an event in which they are participating. As part of that discussion people are projecting a view on something that may happen in future and the broadcaster is doing the same. That is not controversial, and the BAI should not be able to intervene, declare this inappropriate and rule against the parties involved on the matter.

Alex White (Dublin South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have no wish to trespass on the particular issue, but where there is a difference in point of view there is likely to be a controversy. The fact that we have a particular viewpoint on an issue and others have a different view would seem to point to the existence of a controversy. The fact results from people disagreeing with a particular decision. I am at pains to emphasise that I am not trespassing on the particular issue. However, the fact that Deputy Murphy, I or others might think something is wrong or might disagree with a decision made does not impugn the integrity of the body or third party making that decision. The point is to take it away from the political system or any third party other than one set up properly under legislation.

I respect that Deputy Murphy has raised this issue, but he made a point about whether the BAI is acting in accordance with legislation. I have no reason to believe from anything that I have seen from the BAI in this regard or anything with respect to what the Deputy has said this afternoon, even remotely, that the BAI is not acting in accordance with the legislation.

Reference was made to the codes the BAI has published. As I understand it, these were done after a lengthy consultation period. I am unsure whether the issue relates to the code or the particular outcome.

Another point is relevant to this issue. This morning, on my nomination, the Government agreed to appoint five new members to the broadcasting authority because the term of office of the previous authority had come to an end. I thank the outgoing members of the BAI under the leadership of Bob Collins. The new members will take up office immediately under the chairmanship of Dr. Pauric Travers.