Results 16,321-16,340 of 20,831 for speaker:David Norris

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: I second the amendment. If I am right, and Senator Alex White will correct me when he has collected himself, this amendment gives a person a fair opportunity to respond to a potentially damaging article that may appear in a newspaper. It must be a reasonable attempt to publish a response. I have had the experience when highly libellous material was published about me and I got a very...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: No.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: I move amendmentNo. 41: In page 22, line 37, to delete "shall give directions" and substitute "may advise". This is the question of the judge "shall give directions" to the jury in the matter of damages. That is pretty authoritarian and again we have gone through all this on Committee State. However, I want to table it again. The judge "may advise" would be much preferable as far as I am...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: It may be common, but I am tempted to say it is very vulgar, too. This is a clear case where the specialised language used by lawyers confuses the public and I am concerned this might happen with regard to the jury. If members of a jury are told the judge is giving them directions, they probably will believe they are being told what to do, whereas if he or she advises, it means they are...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: No, there was not. However, the law needs to be looked at and we should try to make legislation that is accessible to the citizen. Words should mean in law what they mean to ordinary people so that they might have an opportunity to read the legislation, understand it and, if they come within the ambit of a court, have some familiarity with what is going on. I am not sure this specialised...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: I move amendmentNo. 43: In page 23, between lines 33 and 34, to insert the following subsection: "(5) In the case of a successful defamation action, the Editor and Proprietor of the newspaper which published the defamatory statement shall be liable for damages.". This is a quite important amendment and I wish the Government had indicated it would take it on board. Senator Harris was waxing...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: I do not see why not; they are the ones with the money.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: I move amendmentNo. 49: In page 24, between lines 3 and 4, to insert the following subsection: "(7) In a defamation action the Press Council may make a recommendation regarding the reasonable parameters of damages and limitation thereto to be awarded in any case where the newspaper apologises in advance of the hearing. The court must take such a recommendation into consideration in assessing...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: Getting back to the matter at hand, with the permission of Senator Walsh, one of the matters about which I was worried was that it seemed it was possible that someone might preface their words by saying, "In my opinion", and I referred to a comedienne at the time who was using "allegedly" to protect herself against libel. We also ought to remember that there are people being defamed. Whether...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: I will not go any further than coffee. I will explain to the Senator the feelings of the two principal participants, which are of reasonably good humour.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: I welcome the movements the Minister has made in this matter. The provisions regarding the prominence of the apology are important and significant. It is a positive move by the Minister.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: I move amendment No. 22: In page 18, line 24, after "not" to insert "automatically". We had this debate on Committee Stage. Section 22(3) states: (3) In a defamation action, an apology made by or on behalf of a defendant in respect of a statement to which the action relates— (a) does not constitute an express or implied admission of liability by that defendant. I wish to insert the word...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: The Minister is correct. The lack of normality would not distress me in the slightest. However, my lack of normality has led to a resounding silence throughout the House. As I appear to have no seconders, I should not waste the time of the House on it.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: Yes, they are.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: Senator Mullen made some effective points, especially when he referred to the previous debate. I do not want to rehearse the whole debate because that would be tedious and it is already on the record. When the Bill goes to the other House, Members of it will have an opportunity to consider the whole debate, including Second and Committee Stages. We are now on Report Stage and it is not the...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: I know, but it is the directional trend which is worrying. Senator Alex White said that people in public life should be subject to robust and rigorous examination. I completely agree with him. Who on earth imagines that I am against robust and rigorous investigation and comment? I am, however, against untruth, lies and the printing of lies. We should be careful about where this leads....

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: The wording of this section is insane and unconstitutional, but I doubt if it will soon emerge that someone will take a case. I am astonished that people, especially those to the left, would support the apparent creation of two-tier citizenship.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: I do not want to attack Senator Alex White. He is a decent person and his party has not yet made the jump and done what Tony Blair did. He was happy to dine with Rupert Murdoch in Australia and that is how the Labour Party got into power in England. The newspapers owned by Mr. Murdoch had done in Neil Kinnock, so to speak, who was a fine and decent man, and put in the queasy little...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: I move amendmentNo. 6: In page 10, to delete lines 21 to 25.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

David Norris: This refers to the troubled business of the corporate body. I do not propose to take up a huge amount of time on this but it is odd that a corporate body is assumed to have feelings. I have said this a number of times in the past. The Minister pointed out previously that, for example, my own august institution, the College of the Sacred and Undivided Trinity near Dublin, might be defamed...