Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am not going to add very much because my colleague has put the case very clearly. These amendments build on the core purpose of the audiovisual media services directive, which is the starting point for this legislation. As we discussed previously, that is not simply about protective, performative or managerial functions but also about a proactive role in the promotion of equality of inclusion, diversity, participation in the cultural space and so forth. There is a really positive role for the commission there and it is really important. Of course, there is also a public duty with regard to equality and human rights and one of the best ways to make sure that public duty is met is if it is reflected in the make-up of the commission, that is, those who are making the decisions. That is going to have an important impact.

In amendment No. 38 we set out a number of criteria, based on the IHREC legislation. There could, of course, be a very strong argument for at least giving the space for socioeconomic criteria to be included, which was discussed previously. We did not seek to prematurely anticipate that but it would be appropriate down the line.Amendment No. 37, which I hope the Minister will consider if she cannot accept amendment No. 38, is not prescriptive in that sense. Perhaps we could table another version with which the Minister may agree. If she is concerned that this is too much for herself, or another Minister in the future, perhaps there are caveats and perhaps the Oireachtas could see what those criteria are. I wish to point out that these are not generic appointments and people would have a very particular function.

Amendment No. 37, which relates to amendment No. 39, seeks clear selection criteria because sometimes a Minister simply appoints people to boards who have experience of being a member of a board and are used to being on a board but, in fact, one might need people who do not have direct experience of a board because they have relevant experience in terms of a personal diversity perspective that they bring or, as in amendment No. 39, their expertise is very pertinent. All of the amendments reflect the complexity of this area and, therefore, it is important that those appointed to this role are not simply briefed and follow through but that they actually bring expertise. It is currently unclear and - reserving the right in the future - amendment No. 38 is modelled on the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission in terms of the diversity and make up of a board, and perhaps I am pre-empting amendment No 39, but I would also look to the climate legislation.

Amendment No. 39 seeks to insert the line "an appropriate balance of knowledge of, and expertise in the following: (a) arts and culture; (b) data protection and digital empowerment; (c) online safety and digital regulation; and (d) human rights and public participation.”. Somebody can recommend systems and other things that we want to discuss but we really want to ensure that people have the core tools to understand that information. When we brought forward the climate legislation we brought forward a really clear list of the types of expertise that is needed and a requirement of balanced expertise on the board. Senator Ruane and I have set out what we think the board should look like in amendments Nos. 38 and 39. Our amendment No. 37 simply asks that the Minister is clear about what the board might look like. I think it is important that more thought is given to the make up of the board in that regard.