David Norris (Independent)

I support these amendments because it is important that there should be a review and if there is no timescale, it could go into limbo. In light of the considerable debate, particularly when the Bill was before the House in its previous incarnation and a number of us on both sides tried to sabotage elements of it because we were concerned about the effect its operation would have on libel law and citizens' rights, it is important that there should be a review within a specified time to ascertain if our fears were justified and to take into account case law.

There was a celebrated case in recent times where an unfortunate man was murdered in a Dublin suburb and the newspapers got hold of a story, describing him as being trussed up like a pig, suggesting it was some kind of bizarre sexual experimentation. The fact he was gay was bandied about the papers to the intense distress of his family. No proper apology or recompense was made by certain sections of the press that published this to the distress of the family. There is nothing in the law that gives the families in these circumstances any right to secure real retribution. This sort of case should be reviewed when the law is being looked at again.

It is very important, particularly when we are making significant changes, that we monitor implementation of legislation and its consequences so we can improve the legislation in the light of experience. To hold the review within one year is a very good idea.