Catherine Martin (Dublin Rathdown, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 130 addresses a matter raised by Senators Higgins and Ruane during Committee Stage. The purpose of this amendment is to provide that coimisiún na meán may fund, through a content production scheme made under section 159F of the Broadcasting Act as amended by the Bill, new audiovisual programmes relating to biodiversity. Following the Seanad debate and the points raised by Senators, I thought there was merit in clarifying that it is intended that programmes related to biodiversity may funded through a scheme.

The purpose of No. 131 is to change the reference in this provision from “human rights, including equality, diversity and inclusion” to “human rights, equality, diversity and inclusion”. This is to address the point raised by Senators Higgins and Ruane during Seanad Committee Stage regarding consistency with other legislation which tends to refer to these human rights, equality, diversity and inclusion as distinctive concepts rather than treating them as a subset of human rights.

On amendment No. 132, I noted during Committee Stage that I believe the general references to science and education in paragraph (a) of subsection (2) of section 159F of the Broadcasting Act as amended by the Bill would already allow such programmes relating to digital empowerment and data protection awareness to be funded. I have not changed my position and will not accept the amendment.

Amendment No. 133 provides that a content production scheme may be co-managed or delegated to another agency, and specifically references Screen Ireland in this regard. Given their complementary functions, I expect that coimisiún na meán and Screen Ireland will work closely together, in terms of both policy frameworks such as the audiovisual action plan and in terms of sharing information and knowledge regarding the operation of support schemes. However, I do not propose to accept this amendment as coimisiún na meán will include a media development commissioner whose remit will include the administration of any content production scheme.

I welcome the intention of amendment No. 134, which would provide that an coimisiún shall have regard for the need to ensure that people with disabilities can participate in new audiovisual programmes funded by content production scheme. During Committee Stage I noted that I would be worried about specifying that any one group may imply that it should be prioritised for participation in a manner that implied other groups may not be. That is why I proposed amendment No. 11, which requires coimisiún na meán to bear in mind the participation and representation of the people of the island of Ireland in relation to its policies towards broadcasting and on-demand media services. This amendment is intended to include people with disabilities and ensure their further and adequate participation and representation. Accordingly, I cannot accept amendment No. 134.

On Committee Stage, I indicated that I would give further consideration to amendment No. 135 in the context of Report Stage. I recognise the intention and would note that the Irish language element of the amendment may be adequately covered by the requirement that 25% of the annual funds of a content production scheme should be allocated to programmes in the Irish language.

I recognise the importance of both adequate access rules and participation and representation in programmes for users of the Irish Sign Language. On access rules, section 46O of the Broadcasting Act as amended provides for an coimisiún to make media service rules requiring media service providers to make their services accessible, including provision of a sign language service.

I also expect that amendment No. 11 will require an coimisiún to consider the participation and representation of users of Irish Sign Language as regards its policies. Accordingly, I do not accept this amendment.