Averil Power (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I second the amendment. As I said last week, the move towards greater transparency in the reporting of family law cases is good. There has been far too much secrecy and at times it has undermined people's faith in the system unnecessarily. It is good to have more reporting. However, it is important - this is the objective of the Bill - that this be done in a responsible way, that there be adequate protection for privacy and anonymity in sensitive family law cases and that members of the press who report on such cases abide by these principles and ensure any reporting on child protection, divorce and other sensitive family law cases is appropriate, respectful and done in a responsible way.

This is a very positive amendment. The process proposed is sensible and not overly cumbersome. I agree with Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh on whether a judge would know whether somebody was a member of the press and would know what was the most appropriate form of identity to seek. Would it simply be a NUJ card or would more be required in such a sensitive case? I do not believe most judges would like to be put in that position. It would be sensible to have a simple process which journalists could go through to be vetted and receive accreditation. That is the case for sports events and in reporting on proceedings in this House. In the case of the most basic conference a journalist wishes to attend, he or she must register in advance and receive accreditation. That should be the least we should expect in reporting on family law cases.