One would hope that a person would inform himself or herself fully of all potential consequences when consenting to the publication or broadcast of material likely to reveal his or her identity as an applicant for asylum. The problem with Senator Terry's amendment is in determining whether consent is informed. What is meant by that? Is it sufficient for the person to conduct an internal interrogation of his or her own reasons, or should there be overt evidence of steps taken by the person to inform his or her consent by, for example, contacting a legal representative, the United Nation High Commissioner for Refugees or, indeed, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform? The latter option is provided for in the Bill in any case. If such contacts are made mandatory by requiring informed consent, they would become, in effect, a replacement for ministerial consent and remove from the applicant the independence provided for by the amendment to section 19(2) of the 1996 Act.