Ivor Callely (Fianna Fail)

I listened with interest to the Minister and I appreciate the need for a lodgement in order to have a speedy settlement. I presume our intention is to improve the legislation. If a person has been defamed and he or she accepts the lodgement, what is to stop him or her being defamed again on the basis that he or she accepted the lodgement but no apology or correction was made? While the person was awarded an amount of money, it does not clear up the situation in terms of whether he or she was defamed. One could argue that point. The media, whether print or otherwise, could continue to use the original line.

Why is section 27(4) included? If the lodgement route is being taken to ensure speedy settlement, I presume it is being done on the basis of the relevant professionals speaking either inside or outside the court and on agreements being reached in regard to the lodgement. There must be a wink or a nod. Perhaps I am wrong but there must be some discussions. If there are discussions, perhaps there could be agreement in regard to an apology or otherwise. That is the reason I ask about the need for section 27(4), if there is an agreement on the lodgement.