Seanad debates
Wednesday, 21 March 2007
Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed)
3:00 pm
David Norris (Independent)
I hope Senator Maurice Hayes will rise to the challenge and provide an example of a generous apology. Unless I have completely misunderstood the position, the amendment is extremely specific. It states the order shall specify the date, time on which an apology shall be issued, the form it shall take, etc. What will happen if there is a tsunami or a particular publishing exigency arises and an apology cannot be printed on the requisite date? A newspaper would then be in trouble. Senator Hayes, in the light of his experience of what it is like to run a newspaper, is seeking a degree of flexibility. The newspaper business is highly pressurised and in the sole circumstances to which I refer, I would have a degree of sympathy with those involved in it.
I would separate the three newspaper articles to which I referred. Two of them were despicable and the clear products of Grub Street. However, even though it was unfavourable to me, Fintan O'Toole's article was intelligently argued, well written and easy to read. Mr. O'Toole is a person whom I respect. The Minister announced that he had declared himself to be a Marxist but I must inform him that is one step up from his colleague, the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, who is only a socialist. I am fond of old pinkos. I am definitely with the pinkos. Therefore, that does not worry me a jot.
I do not want people to get the notion that I would want to launch either a personal or professional attack on Fintan O'Toole. I do not always agree with him and life would be very boring if I did. Sometimes he enrages me. I will not go into the reasons for this, save to say he was terribly soft on China once he arrived there. I would have been a great deal harder on that country, particularly in the context of its treatment of Tibet. Mr. O'Toole is a fine journalist and I do not take exception to the content of what he wrote. He expressed a perfectly legitimate view and sustained it by argument. Unlike the two other articles to which I referred, his did not contain any personal abuse. I am quite happy to read what he has to say as a contribution to the debate. His words do not bother me in the slightest.
I may be wrong but I do not recall Fintan O'Toole referring to the Seanad previously. Journalists are somewhat like academics. The latter are terribly precious about their own little areas; they have corns that would do justice to Mother McCree and no matter what one does, one is guaranteed to walk on them. I reiterate that I do not recall Mr. O'Toole writing about the Seanad before. A writer from a newspaper which is a direct rival to that for which Mr. O'Toole writes has been giving tremendous disquisitions about the Seanad and how it should be reformed. I have never once seen the former's lean and hungry form in the press gallery. However, I will give him the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps he was watching proceedings on the monitor.
It was unusual and interesting that attention was suddenly focused on this subject. One of the few occasions on which one will gain the attention of and coverage from newspapers is by taking a whack at them in the Seanad. Unlike all the other newspapers, including that with which Senator Maurice Hayes is involved, The Irish Times continues to cover the deliberations of the Seanad. It is a great shame that no other newspaper reports on our business. I would prefer to be presented with intelligent questioning by somebody of the calibre of Fintan O'Toole rather than to be met with the awful dull silence accorded to Seanad Éireann by the other newspapers.
No comments