Joe O'Toole (Independent)

I am happy to second amendment No. 20 tabled by Senator Mullen. In doing so, I wish to address some of the other issues. I will begin with a story. On Sunday night, in my home town of Dingle, I was out with one of the youngest people I know. We had a few pints, went for a meal and had great fun. He is 93 years of age and I do not think he would have liked Senator Mullen's speech inferring that something happens when one reaches the age of 65. I completely accept Senator Mullen's good offices on the age issue but it is very close to being ageist. I see where he is coming from and appreciate what he is trying to do. He is right that there should be something which reflects the views of every group in the population. I entered public life back in the 1970s and one of the first major rows I had was in 1981 when a Minister decided that four-year-old children could not go to school. I did not like that much and still do not like age divisions on anything.

I take all the argumentation that Senator Mullen has made in favour of reflecting elderly people in programming. I completely agree with that but I have a real difficulty with the age limit of 65. I am approaching that age rapidly myself, so perhaps I have a personal interest. We are all approaching it at the same rate, but some of us will arrive at it more quickly. I was trying to think what I would do if I was given the brief to implement the amendment as a broadcaster. I do not know. Senator Mullen mentioned certain programmes, such as "Reeling in the Years", and I could mention "Laochra Gael" and "GAA Gold" on TG4, which are retrospective. Young people are as interested in those programmes as older people, however.