Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim buíochas leis an mbeirt Sheanadóir. I oppose amendment No. 23, which is grouped with amendments Nos. 24, 25 and 26, all relating to vetted researchers. Amendment No. 23 seeks to include a provision that an accredited journalist or representative of an NGO may be deemed to have met the vetted researcher designation conditions if they can demonstrate their access to data would be in the public interest. Through the digital services regulation, the status of vetted researcher can be granted by the digital services co-ordinator of establishment to researchers who demonstrate they satisfy the specific conditions set out in the EU regulation. These conditions include that they are affiliated with a research organisation, they are independent of commercial interests, the proposed research is for the sole purpose of conducting research that contributes to the detection, identification and understanding of systemic risks in the Union and the assessment of the adequacy, efficiency and impact of brisk mitigation measures, and that the research results will be made publicly available free of charge.Researchers may then apply to the digital services co-ordinator of establishment of the very large online platform or very large online search engine to seek access to data. This means that researchers from across all member states will be applying to Coimisiún na Meán for vetted researcher status with respect to accessing data of VLOPs or VLOSEs that have their main establishment here. Whether the applicant is granted a designation as a vetted researcher is dependent on them meeting a set of conditions. These conditions are set out in the digital services regulation.

Ireland does not have scope to amend these conditions. The EU regulation has direct effect in this regard. Digital services co-ordinators of establishment in each member state have to use the same set of conditions in assessing whether an applicant is to be designated as a vetted researcher. It cannot be that a researcher can meet the conditions for vetted researcher status in one member state but not in another. If I were to accept this amendment, conditions in Ireland would be different to other member states.

Amendment No. 24 seeks to include permission to permit an appeal for both the person applying for vetted researcher status and the very large platforms or search engines from which the data will be requested. Section 189 already provides for an appeal by an applicant where it sets out that a review of the refusal may be requested within 14 days.

Regarding the provision for an appeal by the provider, this is not feasible in the application process between the DSC and the researcher applying. There is no role for the provider during the application process, nor is there provision for the provider to be informed of the decision in regard to the application in section 187(5), so it is not appropriate that the provider can appeal the decision. However, it is provided in the regulation itself and, subsequently, has direct effect in that the provider can, after receiving a reasoned request from the DSC in respect of the particular data, seek to amend the request.

With regard to amendment No. 25, the Bill provides that Coimisiún na Meán may carry out investigations into the designation of vetted researchers on its own initiative or based on information received from third parties. The purpose of this amendment is to specify that third parties include the VLOPs or VLOSEs. It is not necessary because they are comprehended by the term “third parties”.

Amendment No. 26 seeks to extend the number of days to request a review of a refusal or revocation of the status of vetted researcher from 14 to 28 days. A 14-day period is considered fair and proportionate, giving enough time for the applicant to have received the notice of refusal or revocation while ensuring that the administration process of Coimisiún na Meán can be carried out efficiently.