Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

I wish to make two points. Undoubtedly, the Minister has put forward the argument and I must concede that the Government amendment is an improvement on the current text.

I was taken with the phrase in Senator Maurice Hayes's amendment "and to give due prominence to the correction order". I do not wish to be pedantic, but the requirement to give it due prominence may be inherent in subsection (2), where it states that a correction order shall "require the correction to be published in such manner as will ensure that it is communicated to all or substantially all of those persons to whom the defamatory statement was published".

Would the Minister consider providing in section 28(2)(b) that the correction order would specify the form, content, extent, manner and prominence? This would involve the Oireachtas flagging to the judge that it must be prominent. It may be inherent, but there would be nothing wrong with adding the word "prominence" and the Minister might consider that.

I thank Senator Mansergh for his support for the idea that an apology should be printed on the front page. The Minister might consider the following between now and Report Stage. I can see nothing in the Bill which addresses serial offenders. What will happen with all this is what has happened to date, namely, that certain newspapers will be much more prone to being involved in defamatory cases than others. Where it occurs and where a press council does not have significant powers of sanction, the sanctions should be in the legislation. It strikes me that in this section one sanction could be a requirement, following perhaps one or two offences, that the correction would have to be printed on the front page of the newspaper concerned. It would signal to the editor and the management of the newspaper that one cannot use the pen to defame people to promote circulation. Often creating certain controversies which in turn give them publicity might be reasons for people to do so. I ask the Minister to look at that aspect. Although I may be missing something in the Bill, I can see nothing in it that distinguishes between a newspaper which finds itself in such a position once every few years and one which finds itself in such a position once every month. There should be such a distinction. Our laws reflect that serial offenders are dealt with differently.