Seanad debates

Wednesday, 21 March 2007

Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed)

 

3:00 pm

Photo of David NorrisDavid Norris (Independent)

I welcome that the Minister is showing flexibility and am glad he is considering the issue of lodgments. It seems very unfair that a person is in trouble if he or she does not accept a lodgment where the award turns out to be less than the amount lodged. The Minister's argument was that the provision existed in other legislation but that does not make it any good. Rather than reject the arguments made on both sides of the House on lodgments, other Acts which provide for this noxious practice should also be examined because it turns litigation into a gambling matter and is simply unfair. I am against the provision and when the Minister says it exists in other legislation, I am against it in that case too. I see no logical inconsistency in that.

I am glad the Minister has also indicated a degree of flexibility on the question of apologies because I have made the point as vigorously as I could that it is like an uneven playing field if a newspaper is able to make an apology which can be taken as mitigation on its side but which the plaintiff cannot introduce. The opinion that such a possibility is unfair is shared by conservatives and so-called pinkos alike.

While I am on the subject of language, I compliment the Minister if, as I suspect, he is responsible for the term "commentariat."

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.