Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister back to the House. We have not seen him for at least a fortnight and I was wondering whether he had gone missing in action.

I welcome the Bill. It is an important element of the ongoing debate on the question of privacy and media standards. I hope, at the conclusion of the debate, we will reach a consensus to allow work to continue and to allow the Senator's work, previous work in this area and the Minister's current thinking to bring the matter to effective and useful fruition.

The walls of the self-service restaurant are decorated with front pages of old newspapers. One is from The Irish Times in 1932 and it gives the visual and factual account of the election of Mr. Éamon de Valera as Taoiseach and, I suppose to give balance, there is an Irish Independent front page from 1948 recounting the election of Mr. John A. Costello as Taoiseach. The pages are full of fact, not opinion. They give a factual description of what happened on the day, who voted for whom, the biographies of both men and from where they came politically and philosophically. They are faithful records of what happened the previous day.

While we expect the public to be cynical and doubtful about what they read in particular newspapers, as politicians, we believe nothing of what we read. It has, sadly, reached that stage. In the 1930s and 1940s, newspapers reported fact but nowadays, as far as most of us are concerned, they mostly report speculation and opinion rather than news. That is the difficulty facing the Minister, his ministerial colleagues and his advisers as he tries to put in place appropriate legislation.

We have moved on from the Ireland of silence and squinting windows and we have all the capability now of modern media and the problems that come with them. That is why the Minister's task is so difficult in balancing rights and responsibilities as far as the media is concerned. He summed up the political difficulty when he stated, "We are debating what some would see as legislation which might bring about certain restrictions". The Dáil is debating the Mahon report currently and we may have to revisit other tribunal reports. However, many of the tribunals would have been unnecessary and, more important, many of the problems that were investigated may not have emerged and the actions that led to them may not have happened if certain politicians had feared their activities or lack of action could have been highlighted and reported on in the national media. The Minister must strike a balance between freedom of speech and expression and the right to appropriate privacy.

I do not envy his task but a substantial body of work is available to assist him. He referred to the 2006 Bill and the Bill tabled by Senator Norris and his colleague adds to this. Notwithstanding the fact that the Minister has formally declared his opposition to the Bill, he will give it fair and due consideration. There is public demand for higher standards not only in politics and public life but also in the media, particularly in the context of taking responsibility.

As was stated by previous speakers, most newspaper articles are opinion pieces and do not report what happened the previous day. They are often ideologically driven, with which I have no problem, but newspaper reporting is much different now from 30 or 40 years ago and that makes the Minister's task more difficult. We must seek balance. He mentioned that one of his predecessors, the late Brian Lenihan, proposed a two-year window before he would act further on privacy legislation. This window has passed but we have a new Minister and a new Government and it is only fair they would have time to reflect.

Senator Quinn referred to recent presidential election and "tweetgate". The possibility that the outcome of an election to one of the highest offices of the State may have been adversely affected by such an intervention is a matter of serious and grave concern.