Results 4,241-4,260 of 20,831 for speaker:David Norris

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: Yes, but they do not always have the best. There is no question that the newspapers can always afford the best. There is a disproportion there.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I am surprised a member of the Labour Party would support multinational corporations in the way the Senator has.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: Socialism is changing and I know there is a middle way and a new Labour.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I am on the side of the small person in this.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: They must be defended. I welcome Senator O'Donovan's honesty in saying what we all know, that this Bill is a result of intensive lobbying by media interest and the press barons. The politicians, by and large, have strong and serious reservations about it. I hope the Minister will be in a position to take on board at least some of the amendments put before the House today.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I have experienced a gross obfuscation of my views. It should be a lesson to us all.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I hope the Senator is not using it there as well.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I understand other speakers discounted the notion of feelings altogether.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: This point goes to the matter of the press council. The Minister raised the matter of apology. A few years ago, The Sun newspaper was admonished very strongly by the British Press Complaints Commission for publishing particular photographs of Princess Diana. The Sun dutifully published the PCC's judgment and then republished the offending pictures under the heading "This is what all the...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: This section relates to the reliance on a defence of truth. I made a point during the Second Stage debate and I regret that I did not table an amendment. I wish to signal that I will table such an amendment on Report Stage. Truth is the very best defence because nobody could possibly object to newspapers publishing truth however painful it might be for the person embarrassed or...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I move amendmentNo. 3: In page 12, subsection (2), lines 3 and 4, to delete paragraph (f). I oppose the inclusion of judges in the exemption from defamation. The Minister has strengthened my feeling on this matter when he talked about truth. Why would a judge want to lie about anybody? Judges should not make outrageous or untrue comments about anybody. After all, a judge should know...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I disagree.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: Hear, hear.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: While I will be happy to withdraw the amendment, I am glad I tabled it because it has teased out a number of issues. I greatly welcome Senator Walsh's comments that were supported by Senator O'Donovan. I agree that one must protect the independence of the Judiciary. However, one of the instances given was very interesting. If, for example, a judge in his or her court told someone, who was...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I thank the Minister for his undertaking and his understanding of what I was getting at and I am happy to withdraw it.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee and Remaining Stages (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I agree, but I support the points made by Senator Walsh. It is a fact that the chairmen of committees, in advance of hearing submissions from members of the public, clearly indicate to them that while members of the committee are covered by privilege, the witnesses are not. It is correct to put them on notice of this because some controversial matters have been broached at committees in...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee and Remaining Stages (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: That includes our revered colleague from the other House. The difficulty is the matter of delay. The tribunal is not a court of law and has a lower standard of proof in terms of giving evidence, which is not tested in quite the same way. The tribunals always make the point that they are not courts. However, if somebody makes an outrageous, defamatory and untrue statement, and that is...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee and Remaining Stages (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I thank the Minister for having read the previous debate and for making this clarification. I was one of those who raised the question of the obscurity of the language and I am glad he is operating in this fashion.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee and Remaining Stages (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I welcome the Minister's amendment. All sides of the House fought vigorously on this section because, as originally drafted, it seemed to come dangerously close to meaning "this is true because I say it is true or I think it is the case". By prefacing something with "my opinion", it seemed to mean everything would be all right. I categorised it as the "Joan Rivers defence". At the time,...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee and Remaining Stages (Resumed) (5 Dec 2007)

David Norris: That is not what I am saying.