JOINT COMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS, MARINE AND NATURAL RESOURCES debate

Scrutiny of EU Proposals.

Chairman

We begin with the consideration of COM (2004) 91, which is a proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing a multi-annual Community programme on promoting safer use of the Internet and new on-line technologies. This has been referred to the committee by the Sub-Committee on EU Scrutiny. This morning we will hear presentations from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. I understand that this will be a joint presentation and will be followed by presentations by the Internet advisory board and RegTel. This afternoon we will hear a joint presentation by the Irish Cellular Industry Associations, ICIA, along with the Telecommunications and Internet Federation, or TIF. It will be followed by presentations by the Internet Service Providers Association of Ireland, ISPAI, and the Irish Internet Association. I welcome Mr. Kevin Conlon and Ms Máirín Ní Dhuinn from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, as well Mr. Aidan Ryan and Ms Ruth Hennnelly from the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources.

I draw attention to the fact that members of this committee have absolute privilege. I wish I had that privilege last week. This same privilege does not apply to witnesses who appear before the committee. The committee cannot guarantee any level of privilege to witnesses who appear before it. Furthermore, under the salient rulings of the Chair, members should not comment on, criticise, or make charges against a person outside the House or any official by name in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I would like to advise members that the format is a presentation followed by a question and answer session.

Mr. Kevin Condon

The document subject to scrutiny by the joint committee is the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing a multi-annual community programme on promoting safer use of the Internet and new on-line technologies. This proposal has been developed in the framework of the Transport, Telecommunications and Energy Council working party on telecommunications and the information society. I understand that this proposal is currently being considered by the European Parliament under co-decision procedures.

The role of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform arises from our specific responsibility in the area of Internet safety and our role in supporting the Internet Advisory Board. In respect of the European Community multi-annual programme on safer use of the Internet, which is the subject of the European Parliament and Council proposal for a decision, the Department has a specific role in the monitoring of the approval of qualifying initiatives under the existing programme.

Essentially, this proposal provides for a safer Internet action plan for the EU member states for the period 2005-08. This is the promotion of safer use of the Internet and new on-line technologies, particularly for children, and to fight against illegal content and content unwanted by the end user. This action plan has been preceded by a four year plan for the period from 1 January 1999 to 31 December 2002. It had a budget of €25 million. That programme set up a European network of hotlines for the reporting of illegal material, particularly child pornography, encouraged self-regulation and codes of conduct for the Internet industry, supported development of filtering and rating systems and stimulated awareness actions. That plan was subsequently extended for a further two years, from 1 January 2003 to 31 December 2004. A budget of €13.3 million was provided for those two years. Some new elements were introduced and several adjustments made to the way the action plan has been implemented so far.

The proposed decision that is subject to scrutiny provides for a new four year programme to run from 2005 to 2008, with a budget of €50 million. The plan is called the Safer Internet Plus. I understand the budget has been adjusted downwards to €45 million. The annual breakdown of the budget over the four years is as follows: €9.720 million for 2005; €10.330 million for 2006; €14.970 million for 2007 and €14.980 million for 2008. The new programme will continue to promote safer use of the Internet and new on-line technologies, particularly for children. It will also pursue the fight against illegal, harmful or unwanted content, building on the experience from the initial Safer Internet programme. However, the scope will be broadened to include new media and new issues such as spam. It will also expand the network to accession countries, stimulate a multiplier effect and broaden international outreach, with action directed primarily at the end user parents, educators, and children.

A number of Irish projects have received or are receiving funding from the current action plan, either in their own right or as part of a consortium, including the National Centre for Technology in Education for awareness projects in schools, and the Internet Service Providers' Association of Ireland's public hotline for reporting child pornography. Invitations to submit proposals are published in the Official Journal of the European Communities. The plan is administered by the European Commission’s information society Directorate General.

The legal basis of the proposal will be Article 153 of the treaty establishing the European Community, specifically Article 153(2) on protection of the consumer. This was agreed by the European Parliament and European Council for the original safer Internet action plan in 1999 and for the two year extension to 2003. It continues to be appropriate since the programme would focus on the end-user or consumer, particularly parents, educators and children, and is intended to promote their safety when using the Internet and new on-line technologies.

The proposal has no legislative implications for Ireland. These are administrative measures which provide for financial supports for projects, dissemination of information and best practice in the area of the illegal and harmful uses of the Internet.

Mr. Aidan Ryan

Much of the material has been covered by my colleague from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Mr. Condon, but I will provide some of the more technical details on the issue. This programme is part of an ongoing series of programmes across Europe and complements the work of the Commission in trying to drive the ICT agenda forward. This began with the Europe 2005 action plan which worked on developing the Lisbon strategy to increase the take-up of ICT, Internet and broadband across Europe, and to stimulate industry in developing secure service applications and content where the citizens of Europe would benefit. There followed the original Safer Internet Action Plan 1998-2004, which is coming to an end and is being replaced by the Safer Internet Plus Programme 2005-2008.

The draft legislation provides for four themes or topics in the Safer Internet Plus Programme: fighting against illegal content; tackling unwanted and harmful content; promoting a safer environment; and awareness raising. The EU Commission has a key role in this programme. The Commission is responsible for the implementation of the programme and for drawing up a work programme. It will determine the content and criteria of calls for proposals and carry out a programme evaluation. Towards the end of the process, there will be requirement to present a quantitative and qualitative evaluation to both the European Parliament and Council.

To deal with the first heading on fighting against illegal content, the documents have identified that the main way to tackle this is to promote the use of hotlines to allow the public to report illegal content. This method will allow for the passing of reports to the appropriate body, be it the Internet service providers or the police. In terms of tackling unwanted and harmful content, the aim of this section is to increase information available about the performance and effectiveness of filtering software and services where, ultimately, the market will provide a choice and it will be up to the user to select the appropriate choice. In addition, there will be funding for research on innovative use of existing and new technologies to continue to deal with these unwanted and harmful content issues.

The matter of promoting a safer environment is broken down into a number of sub-groups which deal with promoting self-regulation, holding consultations and developing codes of conduct. A beginning has been made to the setting up of a safer Internet forum made up of representatives of industry, law enforcement authorities, child welfare organisations, policy makers and relevant stakeholders.

Awareness raising is the final matter. It is proposed this will be achieved by way of campaigns to address new interactive ICT technologies, for example, the mobile telephone, the creation of awareness nodes which would be mandated to educate the public on the safer use of the Internet, and by establishing and maintaining key stakeholders where we would have access to a source of relevant expertise.

We can only provide an indicative breakdown of cost and it will be a matter for the Commission to finalise the actual breakdowns. However, fighting against illegal content has been earmarked at 25% to 30% of the total, tackling unwanted and harmful content at 23% to 30%, promoting a safer environment at 8% to 12% and awareness-raising is quite high at 34% to 42%. The original estimated financial budget for the new programme was €50 million, double the figure for the old programme. However, recent debate has resulted in this figure being brought back to €45 million because some member states did not support the allocation of the higher figure. This is an ongoing process involving continuing discussions between the Council and Parliament, and we must await the outcome which is expected in the coming weeks.

I now turn to the departmental initiative, which takes a slightly different approach to promoting safer Internet use. The Minister for Communications, the Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Dempsey, proposes to launch a campaign based on the principle of making IT secure. We have identified 17 November identified as a national awareness day and the project is being undertaken with Department and industry collaboration. The campaign is aimed at delivering a few key messages, mainly to protect PC users by emphasising the need to install Internet firewalls, to ensure that operating systems are fully patched and to use up-to-date anti-virus software. In computer usage terms, the message is to only visit trusted sites and to treat e-mails from unknown sources as suspicious.

The activities proposed as part of this campaign include the printing of up to 800,000 leaflets containing the basic messages and their distribution through the national press. It is also planned to engage in an extensive advertising and marketing campaign. We also propose working with partner organisations to deliver the message, including the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. We have set up a dedicated website, www.makeITsecure.ie, which we expect to go live today. In addition, we have engaged with a consultancy company to survey people’s experiences and knowledge of issues such as the problems with viruses and firewalls. We hope to have the results of that survey on 17 November and, when the action plan is complete, we propose to carry out another survey to discover the effects of the action plan, which we hope will be positive in terms of raising awareness.

The issues to be addressed through the use of leaflets and the website include the concept of viruses and worms in programmes, modem hijacking, phishing, spyware, spam and simple matters such as good IT practices in terms of changing one's password regularly so that others will not have easy access to one's computer or data on it.

Chairman

Thank you. I have a question for the officials of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. What are we learning from the present use of the Internet and mobile telephones? For example, there is an existing code of practice, about which we will meet Mr. Condon this afternoon. The Minister was upset last week about Internet service providers not signing up to the code of practice. Mr. Condon indicated in his opening address that there are no plans for legislation. However, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has said that the code of practice may have to be placed on a statutory basis. Is the Department at odds with the Minister on this?

Does the delegation know how many people have been prosecuted under the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998? Is similar legislation in place in other European countries and how active are they in securing prosecutions in this area?

There is no statutory body responsible for content. What is Mr. Ryan's view on this? He spoke about the establishment of a new body to deal with the issues covered in his presentation. Would this constitute a duplication of the work of the Internet advisory board? Mr. Ryan might give us an idea of the amount the Department expects to draw down from the EU fund. A sum of €50 million was posited originally but this has been reduced to €45 million. Does this suggest that the EU is not taking seriously the issue of safe Internet and mobile telephony usage?

Mr. Condon

The Department is not at odds with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform regarding plans to legislate in this area. When I said there is no plan to legislate, I was talking specifically about the lack of requirement to legislate under the safer Internet action plan, which is purely an administrative measure. The Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 is one of the strongest legislative measures in the world in this area and the Minister is working on legislation which will further strengthen the law. This will address two EU decisions regarding the trafficking and exploitation of children, taken at a UN convention and a Council of Europe convention.

The Chairman mentioned the statement of last week by the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Lenihan, regarding the code of practice and ethics that governs the conduct of Internet service providers, ISPs. The Internet advisory board conducted a review of the code over the last year which concluded quite positively in its assessment of industry compliance. It is a good code which makes provision, for example, for acceptable use policies, complaints procedures and requirements for ISPs to remove material identified as offensive. However, the weakness to which the Minister of State referred is that, while more than 90% of ISPs have signed up to the code and are complaint with it, a small proportion of the industry has not done so. The Minister of State made his statement with regard to this specific context. The code is part of an approach based on self-regulation but the Minister of State was pointing out that self-regulation is not necessarily settled policy. The Government has an open mind on how it should proceed in this area.

Chairman

Newspapers reports indicated that only 14 of the 80 ISPs have signed up to the code which is one of the reasons the Minister of State is considering another course of action. Is this correct?

Mr. Condon

It is broadly correct. However, of the ISPs who have not signed up, most are very small providers. Those which have signed up represent 95% of the service being provided. This is still not good enough, which is the point the Minister of State was making. He is allowing those providers who have not signed up a number of months to do so. If a satisfactory outcome is not attained, he will review the situation closely. There are alternative approaches which may be taken.

Mr. Ryan

I shall address the Chairman's question regarding the need for another forum in view of the existence of the Internet advisory board. The document we are discussing attempts to address a problem right across Europe. As in most cases, some member states are more advanced in addressing issues than others. The Commission is trying to stimulate best practice in all member states through the establishment of a forum which is capable of performing an orientation role both within the EU and internationally. This forum will serve to provide EU-level benchmarking and a source for networking and will co-ordinate research funds. This is only a preliminary report, however, and we must wait and see how the forum will develop in practice.

Deputy Eamon Ryan

I thank the delegation for its presentation. Can Mr. Ryan explain the word "phishing", a term with which I am unfamiliar? I would also like to hear more about the concept of spyware. I am aware of the modem hijacking of spam and the issue of viruses and worms. My colleagues and I in the Oireachtas are subject to a significant amount of spam even though I am sure a robust firewall is in place. If the IT systems in the Houses of the Oireachtas are vulnerable, my home PC must be especially so as it has far less anti-spam protection. Can Mr. Ryan outline whether this body can invest money in preventing unwanted communications via e-mail or is it primarily concerned with the screening of harmful content? There are two issues here, namely, protecting children and adults from harmful content and the issue of unwanted communication. Does the fund allow for investment in efforts to "ban-the-spam" and anti-phishing measures?

Mr. Ryan

Phishing is the act of sending an e-mail under a false claim that the sender is an established or legitimate enterprise, in an attempt to persuade the recipient to surrender personal information that may be used for identity theft. It is quite a recent phenomenon in Ireland and has been gaining some media coverage. The e-mail may direct the recipient to a website where he or she is asked to update personal information such as passwords, social security number, and bank and credit card details. The request is bogus and set up purely to elicit information in a fraudulent manner.

Chairman

In recent times, a number of people were caught in money and goods transactions. Do you know of many cases?

Mr. Ryan

I am aware of the details which appeared in the newspapers. From my personal knowledge, most of those issues occurred in the financial sector. I have not yet seen the statistics, but the financial regulator and financial organisations have more information on this matter.

Spyware is software that can collect information from your PC without your knowledge and permission. It operates on different levels. It may collect a list of websites you visit or the keystrokes you make. This information can then be transmitted to the originator of the software. It is a relatively new piece of code, but it has a potential of which citizens must be made aware.

EU figures show that approximately 66% of e-mails are spam. That is an enormous amount of traffic through the Internet, and raises issues regarding volume, usefulness and engineering. It also raises the personal issue of dealing with receipt of these e-mails, and the time and cost involved in processing and deleting them. We brought in legislation to deal with the problem at EU level, and on 6 November 2003 transposed the directive on privacy and electronic communications in Ireland.

The difficulty with spam, whether wanted or unwanted, harmful or not, is the majority of it comes from outside Europe. The opportunity for one country, in particular a small country, to address the issue on its own is difficult. This fund will address all the issues by co-ordinating research together with the technical and practical aspects of dealing with spam. It is possible to separate them individually in terms of how they affect the user. However, in terms of the operation of the Internet, they must all be considered. The fund will look at all aspects of spam, wanted and unwanted, harmful and non-harmful.

Senator Kenneally

This is similar to the problems in the area of television, except it is more complex. COM (2004) 91 relates to something Europe is doing, and we are trying to control what is happening within Europe. However, once we move outside the area, I assume there would be bilateral agreements with the United States and the developed world. What happens if somebody goes to an area where there are no regulations whatsoever? It can be done in other areas, for instance, if somebody is trying to escape extradition to a particular country, they can go to a certain place and not be touched. Similarly, people can move their moneys to certain markets, knowing they cannot be touched. The same applies to this situation. There are countries which might facilitate a type of industry with which we would not be happy. How are we going to impose sanctions on people who send unwanted material into our jurisdiction? How do we pursue those found to be in breach of law? Can they be blocked? We are referring to new technologies. Does new technology exist to block this traffic, or is it envisaged that some type of jamming procedure could be used over Ireland?

Regarding the issue of spam, what sanctions are proposed and how would they operate? One thing that annoys me when I turn on my computer is the various pop-up windows. How are these dealt with? How does an Internet firewall work?

Mr. Condon

Statistics emerging from the Irish hotline tend to support what the Senator has said. The hotline identifies approximately 130 suspected illegal pieces of material on the Internet each month. We get the breakdown of these statistics. Virtually none, if any, of the material is hosted in Ireland. Most of it comes from abroad, much of it from outside the EU. This underlines the difficulty of dealing with the issue.

Consumers can buy proprietary devices to filter material from their PCs. The code which regulates the Internet industry requires it to promote the use of filtering techniques. We are closely examining a current major initiative in the UK called Clean Feed, which has been successful in blocking a large amount of illegal material on the Internet. We have met the company that produces the system, and we intend to pursue and examine it further. The Internet Advisory Board has discussed it with the company, and the Department is also looking at it. There is a great difficulty with the nature of the technology in preventing this material appearing on the Internet. However, a certain amount can be done in the area of filtering, and is currently being examined.

Mr. Ryan

Filtering on a network or personal level is one way of tackling the issue of content and its origin. The European proposal identifies this as a specific area which must be addressed in terms of identifying technology to help and deal with the issue.

One possible way of moving forward is to classify or certify sites by their standard. This means that people will have software on their computer to identify the standard of a site they access or that appears. Their computer will either block the site or give the user the option to move off it or refuse to accept information from it.

The content issue will be addressed from a technical perspective in terms of better and more effective filter ware. Through the user campaign, we are trying to increase awareness of what is on the Internet. People should be aware of the harmful and unacceptable material available, and should access reputable sites. When downloading free material, we advise people to be careful about getting more software than they bargained for. However, there is awareness in terms of using the Internet and educating people about some of the difficulties that may arise.

The question on the Internet firewall is technical. A firewall can be a piece of software or hardware, or both. It hides a computer's presence from people scanning the Internet to check who is out there. If a computer does not have a firewall, people can scan the Internet to check what computers are connected to the Internet. If such people find one's computer, they can start trying to probe it to check if they can get access to it to check the data available. A firewall is a technical device for basically trying to remove a computer's presence from the Internet to make it much harder for people to check that a person's computer exists, first of all, never mind trying to get through one's system.

Deputy Durkan

I thank our guest speakers for their presentation. How successful can the system become in deflecting unwanted messages, spam and so on? For example, I am aware a number of Departments were breached in the past five years by intruders. Deputy Eamon Ryan asked how safe is the computer system in Leinster House. It is channelled in through a mainframe which could give rise to some difficulties.

How successful are we in this jurisdiction at identifying the sources, nature and users of Internet porn? In the US the authorities have an invasive system where they can identify such information not only in the US but elsewhere throughout the world. To what extent have we been successful in that area? In respect of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, how many prosecutions have taken place? We know about the high profile ones, but I am sure there are others.

Filtering devices were mentioned. With the advances in modern technology surely it should be possible to build into the system at any given time a device that will deflect unwanted material, unwanted probing of the system, unwanted visiting of personal data such as information relating to bank accounts, etc. Surely there should a built in identifier of such activity that could be used.

I noticed in the issues to be addressed a survey is to be carried out, along the lines to which I referred, to assess the viruses, worms, hijacking, phishing, spyware, spam and good IT practices. How is it to be conducted?

Mr. Ryan

I will take the last question first. In terms of the survey, a company, Amárach Consulting, which has considerable experience in this area, has been engaged to gather this information. It has considerable experience in the area of producing reports and creating a sample of people who represent different classes across society. It will ask the sample of people questions on Internet use, whether they have PCs at home, how many hours they spend on them and about the migration from dial up to broadband. This company also has considerable experience in dealing with the gathering of information on Internet use. It has been engaged specifically to find out about issues such as viruses and whether people know what to do if they find one on their computers. It is a first cut at gathering information.

On the question of filtering, what makes this issue particularly challenging is that it is not stagnant. New technology is developing continuously. The software writers are developing new and more effective operating systems. They are making more services available to us from which we all benefit. When we get the latest version of our operating system, we take it for granted that it is able to do more and perhaps is even more user friendly. Similarly, there is a body of people who, for whatever reason, wish to exploit the flaws or difficulties in these software packages that are released, and this is what has generated some of these problems.

Filtering is particularly difficult in that as more services and electronic commerce services are delivered, more information is required and the technology gets more complicated. The European Commission has recognised this and that is why we have such a substantial fund to keep up to date with the technology and to carry out the necessary research. I appeared before this committee some time ago in regard to the European Network Information Security Agency. This is another agency which has a reasonable sized budget to try to complement all this work and deliver a European solution for Europe, but it is a challenging task. It is a fast moving world.

Mr. Condon

On the Deputy's question on the identification of material and so on, there are two issues. The main resource members of the public have in this respect is the Internet service providers' hotline. It they come into contact with anything they consider suspicious or of harmful content, they are encouraged and promoted to contact the hotline. I understand the committee will meet a representative of the hotline, Mr. Paul Durrant, later today. The next step is that the hotline alerts the Garda Síochána where it identifies and confirms suspect material on the Internet. The Garda Síochána has strong laws, enacted by the Oireachtas, at it disposal to deal with this matter. We have had some high profile prosecutions in that area and Operation Amethyst resulting from that. I cannot give the Deputy the precise number of prosecutions made under 1998 Act. That would be a matter for the Garda Síochána and the Director of Public Prosecutions, although we could get that information for the Deputy.

Chairman

You might forward it to the committee.

Mr. Condon

Yes.

Ms Máirín Ní Dhuinn

The emphasis in the prosecution of child pornography has shifted from tracking down the perpetrators who are making child pornography to identifying and rescuing the child victims. In that regard, a new international child pornography image database has been set up under the management of Europol and Interpol, towards which the European Commission is making a contribution. That is bringing together all the various image databases that were held by various police forces around the world, including the FBI. It is an international database which, hopefully, will facilitate the quicker identification of the child victim with a view to rescuing him or her from that situation and identifying other potential victims in that immediate circle.

Deputy Ferris

I thank the representatives for their presentation which was very informative and helpful. I wish to raise a few issues that concern me. Some 97% of children in a number of countries, which include Ireland, have used a computer and 44% of children who use the Internet have visited a pornographic site. There is a big emphasis on awareness, primarily among parents, as a means of prevention to deal with this problem. How is it proposed to actively inform people about awareness and to reassure parents about prevention, through the use of whatever mechanisam is available on the market? It is frightening that most of the 44% of children who visited a porn website did so without their parents' knowledge. It is a major concern.

I am also concerned about the harmonisation of legislation in Europe, where there is a different emphasis on values. Parents in other countries might be far more liberal than parents in this country. There is a European regulation on this so how can this country use its sovereignty to prevent that type of access becoming available here? What is extremely frightening at present is the latest situation in Iraq. One can access a website and see a person being murdered. I was in America recently and the people I stayed with had seen the murder. It is a grave concern that violence, child pornography and unsolicited pornography on websites can be accessed by children and young people. Speaking from a parent's point of view, perhaps Mr. Condon would focus on the awareness issue.

Mr. Condon

With regard to awareness, the committee will be talking later to Audrey Conlon, chairperson of the Internet Advisory Board. That board was set up by the Government four years ago and one of its key roles relates to the issue of awareness and parental responsibility with regard to the use or abuse of the Internet.

Over the last two Christmases the Internet Advisory Board conducted a high profile radio awareness campaign funded by the Government's Information Society fund. The thrust of the campaign was on the safe siting of PCs in the home, parental supervision of time spent on-line, control of time spent on-line, advice on not giving out personal details and so forth. There has been emphasis on the issue of awareness. Earlier this week a conference was organised and held by the Internet Advisory Board. It focused on the results of a survey conducted by Amarach Consulting, which had produced some encouraging indicators on the issue of parental awareness of Internet safety.

I can give some statistics that emerged from the survey. The survey showed that nearly 90% of parents monitor their children's Internet use by checking phone bills and monitoring websites they visited. Almost all parents set rules and discussed the dangers posed by chat rooms. With regard to chat rooms, the survey showed that only 5% of children over the test period had visited then. It appears that the risks associated with chat rooms are somewhat less than they were previously. However, one cannot be complacent about it. The survey tends to show that the awareness emphasis and programmes conducted by the Internet Advisory Board are having an effect.

With regard to the other point on how different jurisdictions might approach the issue, there is no doubt that the 1998 Child Trafficking and Pornography Act goes well beyond what many other jurisdictions provide. The central offence provides for a maximum penalty of 14 years for knowingly producing, distributing, printing, publishing, importing, exporting, selling or showing child pornography. Simple or mere possession of child pornography can attract a penalty of five years imprisonment. While we are driven to a considerable extent by what is happening in Europe, the United Nations and in the Council of Europe, there is always scope for us to legislate for circumstances here. We have done that and we will continue to do it.

With regard to the library, that issue was brought to the attention of the Internet Advisory Board. It discussed contacting the various libraries and making them aware of the need to monitor the use of the Internet in the libraries. We will be addressing them on that basis.

Deputy O’Donovan

I appreciate and acknowledge the substantial work the advisory board is, and has been, doing. This problem is a little like the notion of zero tolerance of crime. With regard to the abuse of the Internet, whether that is by accessing child pornography or anything else, is there ever likely to be a utopia — I noted the mention of the firewall protection system — where we will be able to say the shutters are fully pulled down on abuses? Will it be a case that we will get so far and then a new system or new expert will arrive? It is a question of catching up. Despite all the progress we have made, it is regrettable that although its incidence might be only 10% or 20% there are still many problems with the improper use of the Internet. As a parent, that is a source of worry. Does anybody envisage that in the short or medium term we will be able to pull down the shutters and introduce a foolproof system? Is that a utopian dream?

Ms Ní Dhuinn

To some extent it may well be a utopian dream but we will have to pursue it in whatever way we can. There is no solution; we will never be able to screen out every material. The Internet is not controlled by any organisation. It involves a multiplicity of jurisdictions and legal systems. Every state must put its own house in order first and have its national legislation in place so any material generated within its jurisdiction can be dealt with from there. After that it is a matter of international co-operation and ensuring that as many states as possible are signed up to international codes of practice and co-operate in dealing with illegal material. That is something that is being worked on at EU level and internationally with other countries worldwide but there will always be one or two whose legislation or technical capacity will not be as advanced to deal with material that is generated in their territories.

Nationally, apart from the legislative provisions, we can encourage awareness measures with parents, continually hammering home the message that responsibility starts at parental level. We can encourage parents to monitor and control what their children are accessing. That happens in the home, in schools and at community level. It requires a multiplicity of actions from everybody who uses the Internet.

Chairman

Having listened to the presentations, I have a number of concerns that I know are shared by other members of the committee. Mr. Ryan mentioned that his organisation would send out 800,000 leaflets. First and foremost, however, should the message in those leaflets not pop up on every computer screen? Is that not one of the most practical ways of doing it? Should the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform not advertise the hotline number on television, rather than saying there is a hotline?

The committee is of the view that there should be an Irish standard of certification for websites but there should also be an international standard. The committee is aware that it is hard to police something which is not entirely within our jurisdiction.

Currently, there is no legal obligation covering mobile phone contents. The mobile phone operators will be appearing before the committee later today. I had a private meeting with them in February about developing software that would effectively act as a content guardian. Departmental officials may recall — I am not sure if I spoke to Mr. Condon earlier this year — a case in Cork where a young girl received a pornographic message on her multi-media messaging service. I have received a letter from one of her parents, which I will not read now. Having spoken to the lady last night, I am aware that, to date, there has been no prosecution in that case.

The committee is concerned that 3G technology is just around the corner, so one will be able to download just about everything from a mobile phone. We think there should be tremendous emphasis on mobile phone content guardian technology.

Mr. Condon referred to both Departments doing different things — one is technical, while the other relates to his own brief in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Is there a working group between the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources? In this regard, are they working together or independently of each other?

I thank you for appearing before the committee today. The session has been very informative. You will be aware the committee takes a deep interest in anything involving the Internet and broadband, on which we produced a report earlier this year. The committee will make a number of observations on COM (2004) 91 with reference to Community standards, what is and is not harmful, the regulatory environment which must be developed, national legislation and international agreements.

I thank the officials from both Departments for appearing before the committee. After the suspension, the premium rate regulator, RegTel, will appear.

Sitting suspended at 11 a.m. and resumed at 11.30 a.m.

Chairman

I welcome Ms Audrey Conlon, chairperson of the Internet Advisory Board. I draw attention to the fact that members of the committee have absolute privilege but the same privilege does not apply to witnesses who appear before the committee. The committee cannot guarantee any level of privilege to witnesses who appear before it. Further, under the salient rulings of the Chair, members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

The format will be as follows. We will hear a presentation and this will be followed by a question and answer session. Representatives of RegTel are also present and will appear immediately after Ms Conlon.

Ms Audrey Conlon

I am chairwoman of the Internet Advisory Board. The Internet offers a wide range of learning and recreational opportunities, particularly for our children. It is widely used in schools and homes as a learning tool and has a huge educational benefit as well as its entertainment value. However, as with all such major developments in society, the Internet has its negative as well as its positive influences. The concerns for children identified in the national children's strategy are a particular focus for the Internet Advisory Board.

The Internet is not controlled by any one organisation. Access is easy and regulation is difficult in view of the many jurisdictions involved, differences between political systems and variations in societal norms from country to country. What is illegal in one jurisdiction may not be in another. A distinction must be also made between what is illegal and what would be regarded as harmful and undesirable but not necessarily illegal.

For that reason there are risks associated with Internet use, particularly for children and young people. Children can be exposed to material which is undesirable, such as pornographic, violent, hate-based or racist. The negative effects of exposure to this kind of material on behaviour, belief, attitudes and values has been very well documented. The Internet can be also used by paedophiles to target children. Regrettably, the range and quality of service provided makes its use very attractive to them. It facilitates the virtual anonymous distribution of child pornography and information about paedophile behaviour. Paedophiles have been known to use chat rooms, for instance, to access children and to groom them for further contact. Some children can even become addicted to surfing the net, spending an inordinate amount of time at the PC, to the detriment of their physical well-being, social development, school work and family life.

The report of the working group on illegal and harmful use of the Internet commissioned by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform was published in 1998. This report concluded that the policy of self-regulation by the Internet service provider industry was the most flexible, efficient, least bureaucratic and most cost effective means of addressing Internet downside issues. The leading service providers at the time supported this policy of self-regulation. This report made three main recommendations, all of which have been carried out. First, the Internet Advisory Board, IAB, was established in February 2000 to promote awareness of Internet downside issues, to co-ordinate efforts to combat child pornography on the Internet and to monitor the progress of self-regulation by the Internet service provider industry. Second, a public hotline for the reporting of child pornography was established in 1998. This hotline is funded by the industry. Third, an industry code of practice setting out the duties and responsibilities of each Internet service provider was agreed in February 2002 and its implementation is supervised by the Internet Advisory Board.

The Internet Advisory Board itself held its inaugural meeting in February 2000. Its membership includes representatives from the Internet service provider industry, the Garda Síochána, Government, the education sector, child protection interests and legal experts. The board has no statutory power but works closely with the gardaí, the service providers and Government. Apart from carrying out its general function of monitoring the overall mechanisms of self-regulation and the working of the hotline, the board's work programme also includes the promotion of advice and research on Internet downside issues, identifying and addressing legal liability and data protection issues, setting up and maintaining a website on the board's activities, promoting and facilitating liaison between the gardaí and the Internet service provider industry on combating child pornography and other crimes, standardising agreements between the service providers and users and monitoring and contributing to international initiatives on combating illegal and harmful use of the Internet. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform provides the secretariat and funds the board's operating costs. Funding for projects is provided by the information society fund.

In the context of its role in supervising a system of self-regulation for the Internet service provider industry, the IAB agreed an industry code of practice with the industry's representative body, the Internet Service Providers Association of Ireland, ISPAI, and the resulting code of practice and ethics was adopted in January 2002. The IAB carried out a review of the codes of practice and ethics during 2003 and its report was presented to the Minister of State with responsibility for children, Deputy Brian Lenihan, recently. This report is largely positive. It found that the technical and legal content is still relevant and it found encouraging levels of compliance among service providers who have subscribed to the code. An independent examination of the code commissioned by the board from an Oxford University-based research group also concluded that the code was a model of its type. However, the board's report concluded that some providers are not members of the ISPAI and have not subscribed to the code. The board is currently working with the ISPAI to encourage these companies to sign up.

The www.hotline.ie service was launched in November 1999. The hotline accepts and processes reports from the public of illegal material such as child pornography and attempts to identify the source of that material. If it is hosted in Ireland it will request the relevant ISB to remove it in accordance with the code of practice and ethics. The hotline also liaises with the Garda as appropriate. The Internet Service Providers Association of Ireland manages the hotline and funds the operating costs with assistance from the safer Internet action plan.

The convergence of modern communications technology means that the Internet can be accessed by a number of different devices, including mobile phones. It is in that context that the board twice met with the mobile phone companies in Ireland earlier this year. The board also met with Esat BT and its UK counterparts on 1 September regarding its plan for the introduction of clean feed technology in Ireland.

In 2001 the IAB commissioned detailed research on Internet downside issues with particular reference to the attitudes and perceptions of Irish parents and children. The research findings were presented to the board in September 2001, which highlighted a number of interesting facts regarding Internet usage among 10-14 year olds. A further research project was commissioned this year to examine Irish children's use of new media in view of the convergence of new communications technologies such as 3G mobile phones and video game consoles. These research findings were presented at the Internet Advisory Board's conference on Monday of this week. The board will publish the research in the next few days.

The Internet Advisory Board also promotes awareness of Internet downside issues among parents, children and the wider public. While use of the Internet has become the special domain of children, many parents are not computer literate and so are excluded from the awareness promotion if we do it on-line. The board has identified a need to alert parents to the Internet's downside using the most friendly and accessible medium for that particular audience, nationwide radio. Radio and poster campaigns have been run on all national and local radio stations in October 2001, December 2001, December 2002 and December 2003 through to January 2004. The board has also co-funded the production of an Internet safety awareness video with the national centre for technology in education, the Internet service providers of Ireland, ISPAI, and Microsoft. The video will be distributed to all primary schools in the next few weeks.

The board also maintains its own website, www. iab.ie. This website, which was launched in October 2001, is designed to serve as a public source of information about illegal and harmful use of the Internet with particular reference to the activities of the board. It is also intended to be a source of information on the safety measures available for Internet use. The board also operates a helpline during office hours where parents and other members of the public can get advice over the phone. Other awareness campaigns are in the planning and the board is prepared to play its part in the upcoming national e-security day on 17 November. Board members are also available on request to talk to parents and community schools about Internet safety.

The Internet Advisory Board's first conference on the subject of Internet safety in Ireland in November 2002 brought together all the various stakeholders in this area, from child protection, education, the Garda, health services, legal profession, the ISPs, relevant Departments and international experts. This conference considered the illegal use of the Internet, particularly in regard to child pornography, paedophile on-line activity, racism, xenophobia, adult spam and privacy protection.

On Monday of this week the board's most recent conference on the theme, child safety and new media, continued the dialogue on child protection with discussion on harmful as opposed to illegal content. It also provided a forum in which to ask whether regulation is more effective than awareness, or to what extent a combination of both is necessary or desirable. It also provided an opportunity for the new media technologies industry and those with responsibility for media content regulation to respond to the challenges presented by these new technologies.

The new communications technologies are ever-changing. The pace of change is ever-increasing and the complexities of the challenge ever-widening. The board must be ready to respond to these challenges in order to continue the important work of protecting our children and young people. I assure the committee that I and other board members will do all in our power to ensure this is done. I thank the committee for the opportunity to make this presentation.

Chairman

On behalf of the committee I congratulate Ms Conlon and the board on the work done to date and the excellent code of practice introduced to the industry.

How can the industry be self-regulated when it cannot control all of the content on the Internet? Does Ms Conlon agree that we need an Irish community standard and a community EU standard in addition to an international standard to which every country would sign up? I already made this point to the delegation from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. That is a tall order but somebody has to start. What are Ms Conlon's views in that regard?

Will Ms Conlon forward a copy of the report to the clerk by e-mail? I am interested to know about the mobile phone content. As we know, 3G is around the corner and people will be using their mobile phones for Internet access. This could be the case in a matter of 12 months to two years.

Ms Conlon may be aware that a number of pornographic images and messages were sent to schoolchildren in Cork earlier this year. Everybody probably knows by now that I am from Cork. I have a letter from a parent which started us on a process of talking to mobile phone operators in February of this year and asking them to introduce software to prohibit the sending or receiving of pornographic images. I would welcome Ms Conlon's response to these matters.

Ms Conlon

The issue of community standards is something that was very hotly debated at our conference last Monday. This is probably where we should begin. We have film and video legislation. We have had film legislation since 1924. We still use the terms "obscene" and "indecent". People often use the word "pornographic" as shorthand for those terms.

One of the difficulties surrounding this area is that there is very little case law. We have no good definitions, as such, for what we as Irish people mean when we refer to material as being obscene and indecent. As Deputy Kelly is aware, I was in the film censor's office for ten years and this was something with which we often grappled. The legal advice to us was that we were asking for a definition of something that was practically indefinable. However, that should not be a reason why we, as a community, should not look at this issue again and make some attempt to define what is acceptable and what is deemed to be obscene and indecent. It may be late in the day for us to do this but it certainly would be very desirable. To use the old cliché, what is one man's pornography is another man's high art.

Chairman

The committee will meet representatives of the mobile phone industry after lunch. They are to tell us that they have tested software and asked three companies to tender for the project. They hope this software will be in operation in a matter of months.

Ms Conlon

We are very aware of this issue because——

Chairman

What does the Internet Advisory Board mean by clean feed technology?

Ms Conlon

That is for the Internet as opposed to mobile phones. The Internet Advisory Board is very aware of this issue because it was referred to the board at the time of the incident in Cork. We have had several meetings with the Irish Cellular Industry Association. Those in the industry are all members of the ISPAI and have signed up to its code of practice.

The industry has produced advice for parents through discussion with the Internet Advisory Board. There are some very good initiatives in this area. We are aware that the industry is looking at fairly sophisticated filtering technology, which it hopes to use to block out pornographic material.

Deputy Broughan

I apologise for being late but I had other meetings to attend. I welcome Ms Conlon to the committee and commend the Internet Advisory Board on its work so far. We read a version of its most up-to-date research report on the children's issues. Has the research changed much since 2001, at which time it was pretty frightening in regard to children's exposure to the Internet? In that year, 56% of children knew more about the Internet than did their parents and nearly half the kids, on their own or as one of a group, used the Internet without parental supervision. It was quite a disturbing report and may be indicative of a lack of standards.

I remember seeing a report on the commercial development of the Internet and e-commerce in the US, which everybody welcomed. A couple of years ago, some 70% to 80% of Internet-related revenue came from pornography. Pornography seemed to be driving the development of the Internet. It is almost as if the elephant is sitting here in the middle of the room and nobody wants to look at it and deal with it. I know the Internet Advisory Board has been attempting to address the problem.

From what Ms Conlon has said, does she not believe that there is a clear case for her board to be established on a statutory basis and given significant powers? The Chairman may have asked this already. Is there not an overwhelming case for its being given a statutory footing, given the informal way in which all the different agencies operate and the fact that the Chairman had to invite two major Departments to attend this morning to invigilate over the developments in question, bearing in mind that the Internet Advisory Board is very professional?

Ms Conlon's presentation paper stated that the board's report concluded that "many" providers are not members of the ISPA and have not subscribed to the code of practice, yet in her speech she stated that "some" providers have not subscribed to it. Is it the case that the IAB should become a statutorily based institution to oversee all these matters and be answerable to the Oireachtas?

Does Ms Conlon believe providers and operating systems such as Microsoft have great responsibilities in this area? Is it not a fact that any adult or child looking for information on the Internet could type into a search engine a particular word that would trigger an avalanche of pornography? Is this not a problem? I remember a journalist saying that if the word "Latin" — the language of the Roman empire — is typed into any search system, it will result in a flood of pornography. Do we not need many more controls and filtering technologies? I know clean feed technology was mentioned. The Esat BT system gives us some confidence in this regard.

We will be speaking to some the providers and mobile phone operators in the afternoon. The difficulty is that these companies very often speak out of two sides of their mouths, as we have noted before at this committee. When they talk to the IAB they talk about clean feed, filtering technologies and so forth, yet we read in an international newspaper that virtually all of the companies in this sector in the country had representatives at a conference of pornographers in Amsterdam. The object of the conference was to maximise revenue from pornography. Is it not a problem that mobile operators, service providers and the operating systems provider up to now have all been in it together to maximise revenue from pornography? This is a great problem if we want to protect our children. We want people to be able to use the Internet without being abused by purveyors of pornography. Do we not need a much more dynamic approach, given the hypocrisy of certain providers?

I noticed yesterday another aspect of Internet use, namely, gambling. This practice has exploded, as many of us know, and one can bet on anything over the Internet. For example, one could almost bet on how long it will be until this committee has heard the last report from the industry and the regulators today. Gambling over the Internet mainly affects vulnerable adults, young adults in particular. There has been an explosion of gambling related to Premiership football. Gambling seems to be an integral part of the football industry. Is this an area to which the Internet Advisory Board has paid attention?

I commend the Chairman for timetabling this debate in a very busy session. We do need to address this area.

It is high time that these matters were ventilated and addressed in a serious way. Notes based on Deputies' work from some years ago refer to Scoilnet, Internet shops and the library service. Week in, week out, this committee and the new Minister, whom I wish well, call for the integration of the Internet into education. We seem to be way behind other countries and need more clarification in the area under the remit of the Internet Advisory Board.

In the context of the Chairman's remarks, some time ago local newspapers on the north side of Dublin reported complaints when workers in Dublin City Council were faced with the job of cleaning machines in public libraries after people had used them. Presumably, the city library service was trying to develop the use of the Internet for research and to assist people who could not afford or did not have access to computers. However, the officials were left in a very difficult situation about which debates took place when I was a member of Dublin City Council.

One of the most heartening and rewarding aspects of the recent research, which was published at our conference last week, is that there has been quite a change. The focus of the work of the Internet Advisory Board is to protect children. In that context, 98% of parents have rules in place for Internet use; 91% of them have placed restrictions on their children giving out personal information, for example. Some 87% have restricted website viewing and 90% of parents surveyed have limited the time their children can spend online.

The research involved talking to both the parents and children and it was enlightening that the children indicated that they were co-operating with their parents. There would be no point in imposing rules and restrictions if the children were not co-operating. The children saw the point of not giving out information online. There was a significant drop in the use of chat room facilities. This may be due to a number of factors, one of which is that chat room facilities are not now offered by some of the ISPs. As a result of a number of high profile cases, parents and children are now aware of the dangers of unsupervised chat rooms. The use of chat rooms has fallen by some 30%.

As I stated, the focus of the board's activity is protecting children but the people primarily responsible for this are parents and there is no substitute for a vigilant parent. However, a number of provisions will help parents better understand the technology, which is the focus of the advertising campaigns which we will again undertake at Christmas. We can also provide general advice and information. In that regard, we have a website and use all the usual tools which should be available to help the public, particularly parents.

Judging from the research, one of the reasons for the increase in the involvement of parents is that, with the change in demographics, younger parents are themselves using technology in the workplace. They are more familiar with it and, therefore, the same technological divide does not exist. By the time my grandchildren are going to school, their parents will have been using technology all their lives.

The issue of pornography is of huge concern and all the research has shown that parents' major concern is that their children will accidentally or otherwise access adult pornography. It is in the interest of the industry to keep the Internet a safe place for children because it is in their use of the Internet that market growth lies. As members will know, there is a huge issue around restricting adults' rights to watch pornography in terms of civil rights and so on. However, the focus of the board is on the protection of children.

In regard to the conference to which Deputy Broughan referred, it is regrettably a fact of life that the pornographic film industry in the United States is probably of the same dollar value as the legitimate movie business, which is the subject of a huge debate. On the issue of gambling, the throwaway remark is that the business of 3G mobile telephones will thrive on "girls, games and gambling". The new technology will present a whole new challenge for people in the business in respect of parents or teachers who are trying to protect their children. The industry has made huge strides in this area and I know the industry representatives will address the issue later on.

If we were to ask ten people in the street how we define community standards and what we find unacceptable, there would be very little consensus. What we mean by indecent or obscene material is something we, as a society, should debate.

Deputy Broughan

The conference to which I referred was one I read about in two newspapers. I made the point that companies seemed to take one attitude when they came before the committee while their sister companies are mentioned in dispatches elsewhere in a totally different context. Does Ms Conlon think there should be legislation to underpin the work of the Internet Advisory Board?

Ms Conlon

Statutory regulation of media content is something we have had since 1924. That was possible in an era in which someone came into the film censor's office with a can of film and someone else watched it and classified it. It was also possible later on in the case of video and DVD. However, how does one statutorily regulate material which is coming from cyberspace? There are issues around jurisdiction and so on. When the group representing the film censor's office of which I was a member started to examine the issue of regulation of the Internet, we looked at all the existing models and at what had been undertaken in other jurisdictions.

The consensus, which was pretty unanimous, was that we had to look at new models. We opted for a form of self-regulation, which I have already outlined to the committee. Statutory control of content in cyberspace is not possible.

Chairman

At this point in time?

Ms Conlon

Yes.

Deputy Kelly

I welcome Ms Conlon to the meeting. She is a well-known personality with vast experience in the communications world. I have no questions to ask her because I have full confidence in her and in the Internet Advisory Board, which was only established in February 2000. We are fortunate to have a person like Audrey Conlon devoting her time to this subject in which she is an expert.

I am an advocate of self-regulation. If the different trade associations practised self-regulation in a proper and fair manner and with a little common sense, there would be no need for Departments spending a great deal of money on the regulation of trades and professions. In the case of the 14 out of 18 service providers, their colleagues should appeal to them to join up, in the interests of everybody and in their own interests. The board has no statutory powers at present but they will probably be required. It is not possible to force everybody to join but it would be in everybody's interests if they did.

On the provision of Internet services around the country, every library provides a magnificent and free Internet service. The county library is situated in the town centre of Longford. It has excellent facilities for anyone wishing to use the Internet free of charge.

With Audrey Conlon as chairperson, the Internet Advisory Board is doing a good job. There should be no worry about the use of the Internet in Ireland while people like her and the current board are in operation. She should be allowed get on with the job and I wish her the best of luck. The committee members can sleep peacefully in their beds knowing the situation is in the hands of a capable, conscientious and energetic woman who has vision and drive and who will do her job.

Deputy Ferris

I thank Ms Conlon for her presentation and commend her on her tremendous work and on the service she provides for all of us. I concur with the remarks of other members who are in favour of putting the board on a statutory basis. I am concerned there is no sanction against people who do not comply with the code of practice and ethics. They are relatively free to do something that is not illegal but is definitely harmful. Some mechanism or sanction should be introduced against those who are non-compliant or who have not subscribed to the code of practice and ethics. They should at least be required to be compliant with the code of ethics and practice even if not formally subscribing to it.

I thank Ms Conlon for attending and I look forward to her sending on the research figures. I wish her well in the board's work.

I welcome the regulator of premium rate telecommunications services, Mr. Pat Breen and Ms Susan Moore. Members of the committee have absolute privilege but this same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. The committee cannot guarantee any level of privilege to witnesses who appear before it. Furthermore, under the salient rulings of the Chairman members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. The format will be that we hear the presentation followed by a question and answer session.

Mr. Pat Breen

I thank the Chairman for inviting me to give a short presentation on the role of RegTel and the functions thereof. RegTel is the regulator of premium rate telecommunications service. I am the regulator and with me is Ms Susan Moore, our financial administrator. RegTel was established in 1995 arising from the liberalisation of the telecommunications market. It is a not-for-profit company and has a seven-member board of directors. The role of the regulator is to supervise exclusively the content and promotion of premium rate telecommunications services and nothing else. It consults with the industry, prepares and provides codes of practice and continuously monitors samples of premium rate telecommunication services in terms of calls and advertising. It investigates consumer complaints arising from premium rate calls, authorises new services and endeavours to ensure that all service providers comply with the code of practice.

A premium rate service is one in which part of the overall charge is paid by the network operator to the service provider. Initially, the caller pays. The premium rate call costs more than an ordinary call and offers a premium or value-added content to the consumer, is identified by specific price-related prefixes and the revenue is shared by the service provider and the network operator. Two types of prefix are in use: for fixed line telephones, otherwise known as interactive voice recording, or IVR, they range from 1520, through 1530, 1540 and 1550 up to 1590, with the price ranging from 15 cent to €2.90. There are also drop charges whereby there is an immediate charge for making a call. The drop call prefix range goes from 1512 to 1519, and the charge to the consumer varies from 25 cent to €3. Mobile services are known as SMS or premium SMS and the prefix range starts from 5000 to 57889. At the low end the texts are free and rise to a maximum of €2 with a varied price range between.

The types of service offered include weather forecasting, ringtones and logos, competitions, software technical support, promotions, charity donations, professional advice, tarot, horoscope, chat and date services, text alerts, sports results and occasionally on-line dialler services. Since the liberalisation of the market in the 1990s six network operators work in the IVR market. Prior to that, Eircom was the only provider of such services. Recently, three mobile operators have entered the market, offering premium rate SMS. All of these are authorised by the Commission for Communications Regulation and hold regulation agreements with RegTel. There are 420 service providers in the market offering services through fixed line and mobile phones. Authorisation is subject to compliance with RegTel's code of practice within which there is a range of sanctions for various breaches of the code, up to and including closure of the services and seizure of all the moneys derived from it.

Last year up to 31 March 19.14 million calls were made to premium services with a market value of approximately €40 million. There were 63 million SMS text messages with a value of almost €25 million, marking an increase of 300% on the previous year while the IVR remained static. The contractual steps for a premium rate service are that the service provider first contacts the network operator, with which it enters a contractual arrangement part of which obliges it to contact us with an application form and to agree to our code of practice. The network operators have regulation agreements with RegTel and agree to abide by the code of practice and to provide funding for our services. The service provider then, through an authorisation process on the application form, also agrees to comply with the code of practice. Each side pays 50% of our costs. The code is revised occasionally in light of developments in the market and covers promotion and pricing of material, certain categories of services such as live, children's, competition, chat and date, adult, on-line and premium SMS. There are no live adult services.

No.

Deputy Broughan

Perhaps I might develop the point. In the Dáil we often say that he who pays the piper calls the tune. Is this not another area where we should consider a statutory independent regulator of premium-rate services? I would like to hear Mr. Breen's opinion. I know we have something similar in the insurance industry. We used to deal with that in another committee. How can Mr. Breen be truly independent?

He gave us an interesting briefing regarding pricing. I will allow him to expand on that later. Who sets the prices? I assume from what Mr. Breen has said that he does so. Does ComReg have any input into pricing? Such services often amount to complete rip-offs, especially for fixed-line calls.

Mr. Breen described the sanctions he took regarding one complaint and the kinds of steps that he may take, including closing a service and withholding moneys. However, it could not be taken any further. Has he ever thought a complaint serious enough to refer to the Director of Public Prosecutions? On the trial introduction of adult services on the 1559 number from April 2005, is Mr. Breen stating that all pre-paid mobiles should be registered? I cannot see how his system, were it to become operational, could possibly protect vulnerable people and children. Many people find all such operations extremely distasteful. We are obviously entering the 3G era. Is Mr. Breen proposing to open the floodgates? Will pornography be used to maximise revenues from this area of e-commerce?

Mr. Breen

The Deputy raised funding from both sides. We are a self-regulatory body. Originally our work was done by Eircom, and with the liberalisation of the market it was agreed that a self-regulatory body called RegTel Holdings Limited be set up. No member of the industry sits on the board. We maintain and strongly adhere to our independence. All that we operate is the code of practice. It does not matter what service provider is involved or how large it is; the code of practice is the Bible by which we go, and if an operator is in breach, sanctions will be implemented. I do not believe that our independence is threatened in any way.

Deputy Broughan

Has the regulator taken action against a service?

Mr. Breen

We have closed several services, suspending them for up to a maximum of 18 months. We may use various types of sanctions. We can close the number for that service or close the operator altogether — those are the different levels. As far as I can see, that is not a difficulty. RegTel does not set the prices, but deals only with promotion and content. The original prices were set in 1988. In the last two years, the industry had meetings with the Commission for Communications Regulation, to which I was privy, to agree pricing in line with inflation and the cost of providing those services. Those prices are generally based on an industry agreement.

We have already discussed the sanctions, of which there is a range, depending on the gravity of the breach. We have a provision in the code to close a service immediately, within 60 minutes or so, or we can take a little longer, depending on how serious is the breach. If we feel that a fraud is involved, we contact the Garda fraud squad rather than the DPP. That is our connection and the Garda investigates the matter and takes it from there.

Deputy Broughan

Was there ever a case where the bureau of fraud investigation took action against such a company?

Mr. Breen

I am not aware of any such case. Generally, the fraud reported to us does not concern premium rate calls as such. There may well be fraud on a mobile, and the Garda may come to us. If we feel there is an element of fraud, we will refer a case to the gardaí, who will follow up on it. On adult documents, there is to be a slight amendment since, following a recent meeting with the industry, we are moving away from 1559 and using 1599 to separate such services totally from ordinary premium-rate numbers. There will be two numbers, 1599 and 1598. The first will be for live, one-to-one adult services, while the other will be for recorded adult services. In our experience, there is a large market, which can be unregulated or regulated. Many rogue diallers are part of that problem too. If there is a need for some sort of self-regulation in the market——

Chairman

What are rogue diallers?

Mr. Breen

Mr. Breen stated 58% of complaints were written and 18% of telephone complaints related to unauthorised on-line services, which resulted in large bills. How many complaints were made because it could be ten or 500? He also stated moneys were withheld from parties responsible. How much was involved? Why was a penalty not imposed rather than withholding moneys? If money is only withheld, those responsible are only risking somebody else's money as opposed to their own. A penalty commensurate with the misdeed they have committed would be a deterrent. That might be a way to convince them not to take that route in future.

I thank Mr. McCabe for his invitation to tomorrow's conference. Any member of the committee who is free will try to attend. We are grateful for the invitation.

Today, we spoke to the Department of Justice, Equality, and Law Reform and the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources on COM (2004) 91, a EU programme regarding safer use of the Internet and other technologies. A fund is available to the industry, and those engaged in it, to introduce programmes for safer use of the Internet and mobile phone technology. According to the document it was €50 million, but this has been reduced to €45 million. I understand from the Department that the fund will be advertised shortly. People will be able to apply directly to Europe for moneys from the fund.

Before we proceed, I draw attention to the fact that while members of the committee have absolute privilege, the same privilege does not apply to witnesses who appear before it. The committee cannot guarantee any level of privilege to witnesses who appear before it. Furthermore, under the salient rulings of the Chair, members should not comment on, criticise, or make charges against a person outside the House or any official by name in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I advise members that the delegation's presentation will be followed by a question and answer session. I invite Mr. Tommy McCabe to address the committee.

Mr. Tommy McCabe

I am pleased to be at this meeting. I wish to make a correction to the Chairman's opening remarks. Mr. Gerry Fahy is running Vodafone at present following the promotion of its CEO last week. He is the vice-chairman of the Telecommunications and Internet Federation. The Irish Cellular Industry Association is affiliated to the TIF. As the leader of the delegation, Mr. Fahy will introduce everybody and make some opening remarks. Mr. Garret Davis of Meteor is filling in for Mr. Andrew Kelly, who is the chairman of the TIF's wireless group. We have tried to ensure that all interests within the industry are represented in the delegation this afternoon. I invite Mr. Fahy, who is the vice-chairman of the TIF, to introduce everybody.

Mr. Gerry Fahy

I thank the Chairman for the opportunity to address the committee. I hope the delegation's presentation will cover the issues which are raised in the EU proposals for the safer use of the Internet and new on-line technologies. I will outline how the proposal will be dealt with by the industry. I am the vice-chairman of the Telecommunications and Internet Federation. I will outline some background to the TIF, explain its structure and give an overview of the current situation in Ireland. I will look specifically at fixed line and mobile operator initiatives, under headings which are taken from the EU document. I will throw the issue open to questions from the Chairman and members of the committee after I conclude.

The Telecommunications and Internet Federation is a representative body for the electronic communications industry. The federation, which falls within the ICT sector of IBEC, has approximately 50 member organisations which are divided into a number of working groups to focus on specific areas of the sector. Working groups have been established to consider matters relating to fixed lines, wireless issues, regulatory affairs, outsourcing services, Internet service providers and cable and broadcasting matters. A number of the working groups are represented at today's meeting because they are interested in the topic under discussion. The TIF also has a number of affiliated organisations, such as the Mobile Marketing Forum and the Irish Cellular Industry Association. The latter organisation is represented here today because its work pertains to some specific issues which the committee may wish to address.

I would like to introduce the individual members of the delegation. Mr. Fintan Lawlor of Eircom is the chairman of the ISP industry group. Mr. Justin Cahill of Esat Telecom is the vice-chairman of the ISP group. Ms Jill Johnson is the vice-chairperson of the Irish Cellular Industry Association. Mr. Tommy McCabe is a director of TIF, which is affiliated to IBEC. Mr. Garret Davis of Meteor is also present.

The industry estimates that approximately €8 million has been spent in Ireland in recent years on matters relating to the safe use of the Internet. It has produced safe Internet guides and trained staff involved in customer care and retail services in dealing with customers and advising them on the safe use of the Internet. The Internet service providers have distributed CDs containing information about the safe use of the Internet to schools and teachers. The Government jointly funds a hotline which operates as a reporting mechanism for the misuse of the Internet. The hotline has a direct connection to the Garda. The industry promotes safe surfing products and services. My colleagues will refer later to today's launch of a national security day, which is supported by the industry. Services are provided to the Garda by individual operators and the industry as a whole to support its investigations. Information and documentation are provided to help the Garda to pursue any complaints which may arise. The industry provides significant resources in that regard.

The committee has asked representatives of the industry to attend this meeting to discuss the EU proposal. We propose to focus on four areas, as the committee suggested. We will initially address those areas under the fixed line and mobile headings. I invite Mr. Fintan Lawlor, who is the chairman of the ISP industry group within IBEC and the TIF, to speak about fixed line issues.

Mr. Fintan Lawlor

I propose to speak about some issues which relate to fixed line operations. I will start by discussing the fight against illegal content. The existing legislative framework includes the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998, section 13 of the Post Office (Amendment) Act 1951, section 10 of the Non-Fatal Offences against the Person Act 1997, the EU electronic communications networks and services regulations, which were enacted in November 2003, the Interception of Postal Packets and Telecommunications Messages (Regulation) Act 1993, the Video Recordings Act 1989, the Prohibition of Incitement to Racial, Religious or National Hatred Act 1989, the Data Protection Act 1988 and the Data Protection (Amendment) Act 2003. Anything that is illegal in the physical world is also illegal in the on-line world. The communications medium used to breach the Acts does not matter, as such breaches are covered by the legislation which I have mentioned.

I wish to outline some of the fixed line measures which have been taken by the industry to fight against illegal content. The industry and the EU have funded the Irish hotline, www.hotline.ie, which was established in 1999 to investigate complaints and reports of illegal use of the Internet. Some 95% of Irish Internet users are covered by the code of practice and ethics of the Internet Service Providers Association of Ireland, which was adopted in December 2001 and launched in January 2002. The hotline has not yet been informed of any instances of illegal content being hosted or produced in Ireland. Many complaints which have been received by the hotline, representatives of which will discuss this matter with the joint committee, have related to content which originated in third countries or non-compliant countries within the EU. There is a high level of co-operation and liaison with the Garda, the international hotlines and the Internet Advisory Board. The hotline and the ISPAI are represented on the IAB. Representatives of the hotline and the ISPAI have been working with the IAB, the child protection agencies, the Departments of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and Justice, Equality and Law Reform and other bodies for several years.

I wish to speak about the efforts being made to tackle unwanted and harmful Internet content. Copies of filtering software for parents and a children's guide to the Internet have been included on CDs produced by ISPs for dial-up Internet and broadband use, on the homepages and websites of the various service providers and in bill inserts sent to utility customers. The National Centre for Technology in Education has distributed copies of its guide, Be Wise to the Net, to schools. The industry has distributed significant numbers of guides to safe on-line searching to schools for the use of parents, teachers and children.

The code of practice used by operators has been benchmarked. If one compares it to other European codes of practice, one will see that it is the only code designed to apply both to Internet service providers and content providers. The document includes formal provisions for review and amendment, regulates information on business and contains provisions concerning illegal activity. It includes provision for limiting access to material which is harmful to minors. For example, it refers to hate speech, xenophobia and racism. It covers such areas as the sending of unsolicited bulk e-mail to customers, data compliance and privacy provisions. It sets out a formal complaint mechanism and contains provisions for the regulation of co-operation with law enforcement agencies and third parties. There are mechanisms within the guide to sanction members who breach it.

The awareness guide produced in conjunction with Barnardos has been circulated to all school and residential customers and is available on demand. It is also available on-line from Barnardos and various Internet service providers. Be Wise on the Net was an initiative of the National Centre for Technology in Education for parents and children. The centre also produced a specific guide for teachers on the Internet and the use of filtering software in educational establishments to protect children from harmful material. The Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, announced a national security day this morning which will be funded jointly by industry and the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. The date which has been set for the national security day is 17 November.

The address www.hotline.ie is being promoted on the front pages of the various Internet service provider sites. More than 5 million compact discs which include the parental guide have been distributed by service providers through shops, petrol stations, music stores and Xtravision outlets to ensure the widest possible availability of the guidelines to parents and children. Scoilnet is distributing a video to schools which covers safe Internet use. Fixed-line and mobile phone operators are represented on the Internet Advisory Board and work to promote the guidelines with its various members including University College Cork, Barnardos, the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. The advisory board has produced posters, which it presented to the committee this morning, and radio campaigns on Internet safeguards.

International co-operation is very important. While legislation outlines the law as it applies in Ireland, much of the material at issue comes from outside the State. The ISPAI will deal with the way in which the hotline co-operates with hotlines in other countries to ensure offensive material is taken down by third parties and investigated by law enforcement agencies in other jurisdictions. It is important also to bring the new member states of the enlarged EU into Eurispa and the hotline regime as soon as possible to share expertise and eliminate the illegal and harmful use of the Internet.

Filtering is only part of the solution. Education and parental guidance and supervision in the context of harmful material is key. We must continue to build awareness among parents of what they can do to supervise the use of the Internet by their children. Self-regulation has been very important in reacting to the new technologies and methods used by criminals to propagate illegal material. There has been extensive co-operation with the Garda and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform in this context. I reiterate that awareness raising is very important as some adults are not as technologically savvy as their children and must be informed of how best to protect them on-line. Schools, libraries and workplaces should be encouraged to develop and enforce codes of practice on the use of the Internet.

Ms Jill Johnson

I intend to take the committee through the key action areas outlined in the document submitted and discuss the various initiatives the Irish Cellular Industry Association has undertaken in this area over the past months.

Mobile phone operators are members of the ISPAI and have signed up to its code of practice and ethics. Operators provide a direct link to www.hotline.ie through their and the Irish Cellular Industry Association’s websites for anyone who wishes to report any incident of the receipt of a malicious call. All mobile phone operators have dedicated spam reporting lines and customers can forward free of charge any unsolicited premium rate message received. Such messages are sent to RegTel and the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner for investigation. Operators have a high level of co-operation with the Garda crime intelligence unit through dedicated staff in Garda liaison departments which provide a single point of contact. Operators assist the Garda with a range of services including the tracing of malicious calls free of charge, which is not the case in other member states, especially the United Kingdom.

Action 2, the tackling of unwanted and harmful content, involves primarily the filtering initiative. As part of the code of practice launched on 1 June this year, we introduced a parental authorisation service whereby a parent can register on a child's mobile phone account to monitor his or her usage. We understand that the industry filtering trial is a world first and an extremely ambitious project. The document submitted highlights the development of effective filtering technology, a process which has already started in Ireland. The aim is to find a technical solution to filter offensive images, websites and video sent via mobile phones. The trial process is being observed carefully by our sister organisations in Europe and beyond. We have just undergone a rigorous tender process and hope to be in a position to announce the winning company shortly.

Action 3 involves the promotion of a safer environment. On 1 June, we announced our jointly produced code of practice for the responsible and secure use of mobile services. Members of the committee have been supplied with a copy. The code establishes the standards on parental control, malicious communication, spam, Internet access and premium-rate services to which mobile phone operators will adhere. We fully intend to update the code in line with technological developments in the industry. As I mentioned earlier, we have also signed up to the ISPAI's code of practice and ethics.

We have produced a parental guide to mobile phones, The Knowledge, to promote awareness. The guide is designed to help parents gain a more complete understanding of the range of mobile services on offer in Ireland. We distributed the guide throughout the summer through our retail networks and it is available on-line and through the Garda crime investigation unit. Over the past few months, we have engaged closely with the Internet Advisory Board and discussed this subject in detail.

Mr. Fahy

As an industry, we support the safer use of the Internet and new on-line technologies. In Ireland, we have a strong history of action in this area. The committee has heard from the fixed-line and mobile phone sectors that we are proactive in taking actions and sometimes lead the field internationally in addressing these issues. As we are all aware, Irish society is less tolerant than many others of the types of content we are concerned about here. As an industry, we continue to collaborate despite being competitors of one sort or another. Despite the competitive nature of the market, we believe that collaboration on filtering trials, the development of codes of practice and guides for parents is the approach the industry should adopt. We are fully committed to it.

We are also committed to a high level of ongoing co-operation with the Garda which we hope, if queried, would say it is very satisfied with the level of industry support across the sector in providing the information it needs to pursue criminal investigations. On both fixed and mobile sides, Irish initiatives can be held up as examples of best practice in a European context. We know from the organisations of which we are a part internationally that many look to us for advice on how we develop our processes and programmes to allow them to replicate these in other markets. To date, through the hotline, there have been no incidents of Irish posted or Irish produced illegal content being found or reported. That is a testimony to the safeguards we have in place as an industry.

As outlined by my colleagues, currently there is a significant amount of legislation governing our actions. As an industry, we do not have the right to act as editor or invigilator. We pass the content that customers seek. We can introduce, with the consent of our customers, filters or blocking mechanisms once complaints have been initiated but we are not in a position to initiate an action ourselves or to take a view of what is appropriate or inappropriate for our customers, other than in the case of illegal content.

Chairman

Thank you, Mr. Fahy. Before I go to Deputies Durkan and Broughan I will address a question to Ms Johnson. The problem with filtering goes back to January and February of this year when pornographic images were being sent from a picture phone to the picture phone of a student. Everyone thought the student was from Cork but it turned out to be someone else. You are also aware, Ms Johnson, of a message which came to another child in Cork, as a result of which we were contacted by the child's parent and asked to do something about this matter. You will recall our having an informal meeting in February when we discussed content guardian or filtering systems for mobile phones.

The joint committee appreciates the fact that you introduced a code of practice and conduct and produced an awareness booklet for customers for the three networks. You mentioned that you are at an advanced stage of introducing a filtering system. Can I presume that the filtering system will be shared by the three networks and that the three networks will use the same system to implement a single software package?

Ms Johnson

Deputy Durkan

To what extent is the code of practice applied and to what extent is it effective? Those who have signed up need to observe it to the fullest extent.

I refer briefly to the point made by Deputy Broughan. It was not suggested in the newspaper article that identification was a problem. Last June the Taoiseach stated the Government would introduce a national register for 3G phones later in the year. He also said we must aim to have the register in place in advance of the commercial roll-out of 3G phones.

A spokesperson for the Minister has confirmed the Department is considering technical proposals from the industry — I suppose for the filtering system referred to. The presumption is that such a system will work, but how will it work, given that one cannot intercept transmission without a person's permission? With pre-paid mobile phones, in particular, anybody can walk into a shop, buy a phone and send messages anonymously to a person he or she dislikes. There would be great difficulty in tracing such a person unless somebody could say where the phone was bought and identify the person involved from a description.

Why can all means of communication not be registered? There are ways and means of dealing with every situation. When I went to change my mobile phone recently, I was asked all kinds of questions and had to produce a passport or driving licence for identification purposes. I do not understand why this cannot apply in all cases. If I was intent on engaging in some nefarious act, I certainly would not have been able to get away with it. If everybody had to go through similar procedures, it would have an impact on traceability levels.

I would like to get some samples of complaints received by the organisation, as to the nature of the complaint, method of detection and the action taken following investigation. I suspect there is organised abuse of the Internet and mobile phone systems. Groups with dubious backgrounds and objectives are targeting others in society. Can the organisation update us on this matter?

I do not know how a parent can police a child with a mobile phone to the extent required. While I do not have minors in my household now, I did have and I am sure everybody else in that situation finds it difficult to police less important matters than mobile phone abuse. I wonder about the degree to which policing methods are likely to be effective in clamping down on abuse, such as the example to which the Chairman referred, the transmission of a photograph illegally taken. I seek further information as I am a little uneasy. We have not reached the stage where I could say with satisfaction that we have achieved an adequate degree of self-regulation and self-policing to meet the innovative approaches of some groups in society which have their own reasons for promoting something akin to abuse.

Mr. Fahy

Chairman

It is impractical now because it was not done from the start. However, if nobody knows who owns them, the danger arises of mobile phones being used for activities other than what we are discussing today such as crime etc. Nobody knows who owns certain phones used in crimes. It is a difficult issue which is by no means fully addressed, but we will take the remaining questions because other groups have to make presentations today. I thank the industry for moving forward with filtering technology and hope it will prevent the sending of pornographic images from phone to phone and from network to network. I presume phone-to-phone messages are being taken into consideration. This is a huge step forward. If Ireland is the only country taking this step — perhaps the United Kingdom was involved in another trial — it must be congratulated. Could we have answers to the other questions asked? If Mr. Lawlor is answering, he might also answer the $60 question I asked him.

Mr. Lawlor

Deputy Broughan

I welcome the delegation. The director of RegTel indicated this morning that pressure or encouragement from the industry had led to his deciding that there would be a trial introduction of adult services on the 1559 prefix from April 2005. Was the pressure for this coming from the industry? The director told us about a number of security issues concerning pin numbers, etc. What role did the industry play in that regard?

On a related point, is it true that companies represented here speak out of both sides of their mouth on these issues considering that it is reported that in other markets a number of companies which are active in our market are very deeply involved in trying to maximise revenue from pornography? Is this not total hypocrisy?

When one considers COM (2004) 91, which we have in front of us, one will note all the different regulatory authorities. In the United Kingdom, for example, there is a very powerful regulator for the whole industry. In Ireland it is very weak; it waves fingers, makes occasional threats and issues press releases but never really bites or insists on certain behaviour regarding pricing and certain other issues. Are there particular problems regarding future developments in the European Union and the transnational nature of communications?

I was not but I have a copy of the view and I can comment on it on behalf of the industry. For an international standard, it is essential. While there is broad international agreement on illegal uses of the Internet, such as child pornography, incitement to hatred, violence and xenophobia, there are difficulties in getting a specific international agreement for the elimination of harmful material, even at EU level. More work has to be done. For example, the definition of a child varies in EU member states between the ages of 14 and 18 years. The definition of child pornography, therefore, is different in each of the member states. There should be an opportunity to get broad agreement across the EU for protecting the Internet community. While there is much discussion on the downsides of the industry, everyone agrees that the Internet has much to offer from an educational and communications viewpoint. However, we have to protect our children from the downsides. There will be a broader agreement on engagement in this.

We would welcome an annual review of the codes of conduct on an open basis to deal with new issues as they arise, particularly with the development of technology in the future.

Chairman

I take it, Mr. Lawlor, that the industry is doing everything in its power to keep bad content off the Internet?

Mr. Lawlor

Yes. Mr. Paul Durrant from the Internet Service Providers' Association of Ireland will inform the committee of what is being done. Mr. Cormac Callanan, director general of Internet Hotline Providers in Europe Association, Inhope, will also address the committee on this issue. While there is much co-operation between the various hotlines in the member states, there is room for broader international co-operation.

Chairman

We will save some of those questions for those individuals.

Mr. Cahill

Members of the Internet Service Providers' Association of Ireland promote filtering software and parent guidelines to our customers. If a complaint is made, once it is justifiable we act on it immediately. If anything illegal happens, we act on it and work closely with the Garda.

Deputy Eamon Ryan

Although Ireland has more prepaid mobile telephones than other EU countries, do other jurisdictions have registers of prepaid mobile telephones?

Mr Fahy

It varies. Typically, those countries where prepaid mobile telephones are registered use national identity cards as a basis for registration.

Deputy Eamon Ryan

So other countries have a registration process?

Mr. Fahy

Yes, on the basis of national identity cards.

Ms Johnson

Mr. Durrant

In the previous presentation, we saw how the ISPAI's code of practice fared extremely well in a comparison undertaken by the independent Oxford University Comparative Law Forum for the European Commission. Part of the safer Internet action plan is trying to develop common codes of practice so that we can achieve greater standardisation across Europe. With such elements as child pornography, there is very little disagreement. Essentially, anything classified as illegal here is, except in borderline cases, illegal in other countries. We have a very swift exchange of information. Just last month, there were one or two instances where a European country was involved. Along with many of our other members, we picked them up through reports. Within days it was gone and there was an effective law enforcement follow-up in that jurisdiction.

Deputy Broughan

The real issue is not simply Europe, since it goes beyond that. Is it not necessary to seek a world standard? I understood that China had some concerns about the evolution of the Internet. There are worries about free speech and the freedom of the media, but the Internet is a revolutionary medium. It is probably as revolutionary as the printing press in the 15th century. It has transformed our entire culture and will continue to do so. Was it not on the Internet that horrendous events in Iraq such as executions were publicised? It must have come from some service provider in a Middle Eastern country. The broadcast of barbaric practices on the Internet is a recent occurrence. Is the question not therefore broader than simply the European Union?

On the point that so far there has been no confirmation of any objectionable material being generated from this jurisdiction, objectionable material has been received on a number of occasions. How many times and by what method was such material detected? Was it detected within the State or was information received from outside the State?

Significant amounts of objectionable material are posted on the world-wide web but the persons posting it must have registered their sites. It must be possible, given modern technological advances, to ensure people can only download such material with a PIN number. This immediately raises the question of what is objectionable material. For example, as Deputy Broughan stated, witnessing somebody's death, whether as the result of natural causes or otherwise, is not entertainment. Such material is provided for other reasons, including financial and propagandist, as is child pornography and other material. These sites cause serious damage to society and serious offence to many people. Is it possible to advance technology to terminate such sites, notwithstanding the public hunger for information, whether it is in its interest?

Mr. Durrant

I hope I can answer the Deputy's question because it covers an extremely complex transnational area. It is extremely difficult to decide what is powerful material and people will have different views on it. Channel 4 and the British board of film censors recently approved the televising of an autopsy, which many people found distasteful. The Internet is a communications rather than an entertainment medium. It has entertainment content but there is also a great deal of news and propaganda. It is extremely difficult for the industry to decide what should be there. We would look to legislators for guidance on that.

We have found it difficult using the hotline to go beyond child pornography. The legislation on child pornography is clear. It is extremely difficult to establish where the law stands in regard to hate speech, racism, xenophobia, distasteful news items and so on. The hotline can only pass on to law enforcement information about things it believes are illegal. Greater definition is required in legislation, for example, in regard to adult pornography. Where should the line be drawn so that such pornography becomes illegal by virtue of gross obscenity, whatever standards we choose, as a nation, or under EU guidelines? Those guidelines are not in place and it is, therefore, difficult for an industry body, legislators or public censors of the Internet to become judge and jury. I am not trying to shirk this but it is a problem about which I agree with the Deputy.

Chairman

It is a new medium, which is changing rapidly. It is difficult to keep up legislatively and that is why the industry is so important. Did Mr. Callanan attend the Internet Advisory Board conference last Monday?

Mr. Cormac Callanan

Yes.

Chairman

There was a consensus on the need to strengthen regulation through agreement on a world-wide basis on codes of standards, practice and conduct and the need for the conclusion of a review mechanism, possibly annually, where elected representatives could review developments, suggest changes or raise the legitimate concerns of everyday users in an open and transparent forum. This route is more proactive than the lengthy and cumbersome process of legislation. Does Mr. Callanan agree this was the consensus of the conference?

Mr. Callanan

Yes. I represent Inhope and I am also a member of the Internet Advisory Board. I established the ISPAI and the Internet hotline five years ago and I was fortunate to develop the code of practice the committee has been discussing. In my role with Inhope, I represent 20 hotlines in 18 countries. Four countries — Australia, the US, Taiwan and Korea — are joining. Achieving consistency in interpretation and understanding in the network is the greatest issue we address. Modern definitions are guided by the Council of Europe definition in the cyber crime convention dealing with child pornography and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which also defines abuse of children. Even though such consistency exists, the Inhope network is an efficient way of dealing with complaints about illegal content on the Internet.

The answer is mixed. There is some case law in the Irish context regarding libellous speech. If disparaging material was sent out it would reach a massive audience, perhaps internationally, it might not be removed from the Internet and may be on it for many years. If it was sent tonight, it would reach a massive audience and might never be removed from the Internet or be on it for many years. That is one of the greatest difficulties regarding child pornography. It is one of the greatest abuses of child victims in that pictures might not be removed from the Internet. One can do so, but one can be sued by one's colleagues who will probably achieve a prosecution.

It is hard to gauge the amount of material received by people. The hotline receives reports predominantly from Irish people. To report material to the hotline they will have to see something unpleasant and illegal, probably child pornography. The hotline can only state the large volume of reports it receives are from Irish people who have seen unpleasant or illegal content, which is why they report it. That is one the system's strengths and weaknesses. By empowering people, they also have the choice to be able to see material in order to report it and object to it.

It is difficult to analyse how many access illegal material from overseas. The technology is not available to provide for widespread interception of communications to identify its content. INHOPE emphasises that one of the challenges is that they are not yet trying to hide content in a sophisticated way. One of the most sophisticated ways in which they can do so is to use encrypted technologies. Police forces around the world have huge problems with paedophile rings which are highly technically structured and use sophisticated techniques, including encryption, which prevents interception.

I thank the committee for giving me the opportunity to make this presentation. I note it has time constraints and understand members have received a copy of the brief presentation we intend to make.

The Irish Internet Association is a not-for-profit organisation. It was established in 1997 as an industry representative body by industry experts, representatives of Internet suppliers, telecoms, Internet service providers and companies which develop software. It has 350 member organisations nationwide, including corporate bodies, SMEs, individual organisations and Government bodies. The voluntary board which governs the association consists of 12 industry experts who are elected by the members and has a two member executive which runs the organisation on a day-to-day basis.

The IIA's mandate is to educate suppliers and users of Internet technology about various matters such as codes of conduct, standards within the industry and best practice. Such policies relate to Internet and e-mail use, for example. The association represents the industry side as opposed to those who addressed the committee earlier who represent the user side. It is involved in the self-regulation of companies involved in the industry.

I wish to speak about the activities undertaken by the association. It organises 25 educational events for its member companies throughout the year. It examines Internet usage policies and forthcoming legislation and disseminates information to its members. Companies must sign up to a code of conduct when they join the association. They must adhere to e-commerce directives, data protection regulations and software directives. The IIA has organised an educational one day Internet congress to help member companies to understand technology and the various codes of conduct, best practice and EU legislation. The information is disseminated in many ways. The association publishes a magazine and a digest which is sent by e-mail to 10,000 people every month, has a website which is a resource for the industry and organises workshops on legal aspects of the industry. Mr. Lyon will speak about the six industry working groups. The association also arranges CEO leader lunches. Its activity is based on and driven by educational concerns. It relates to the industry and the relevant regulations.

Not only does the association represent its members, it also represents the industry as a whole. If it was arranging an event relating to EU directives, it would disseminate information to the Internet industry as a whole as well as its members. Mr. Lyon will speak briefly about the working groups established by the association. He will discuss issues relating to the safer Internet plan and the safe use of technology.

Mr. Colm Lyon

I thank the committee for giving me the opportunity to speak briefly about this issue. I have a voluntary role as a director of the Irish Internet Association and, since August 2004, as its chairman. My day job is managing director of Realex Payments which I established four years ago. It is at the heart of the Internet because it processes payments for businesses which sell on the Internet. Its top business priority is security, a core Internet issue. It is involved in protecting information by ensuring it is transported in a safe way between business and banks, for example. My role in the association is in tune with my day job.

When I became chairman of the IIA in August, I examined the association's strategic objectives to determine what it could do. Ms Gahan has mentioned that sharing information among its member companies and ensuring they have access to information which is easy to use are fundamental issues for the association. There are many Internet technologies and many things are happening because it is so dispersed. Our member companies ask us to organise seminars on legal or security issues, for example, or the latest trends in on-line payments. The association tries to respond to such demands by organising such events.

The IIA has set an ambitious objective for the coming year. It had three working groups, or sub-committees of the association, last year. A member of the board may be asked to volunteer to establish a working group on legal issues, for example. Mr. Don McAleese, a partner in Matheson Ormsby Prentice, asked others in the industry with an interest in legal matters to join the legal working group. Working groups meet on a regular basis with the aim of producing white papers, submissions to a Department or guides for consumers. A guide to acceptable Internet usage policies was published some years ago, including a policy document template which can be used by companies when drawing up Internet access rules for staff. The association tries to provide what its members demand.

Six working groups have been established this year. The IIA called this week for participants in the working groups. It allows non-members to become participants. The outputs from the groups are publicly circulated on the association's website in order that they can be seen by people other than the IIA's members. The working group of most interest to the committee is that relating to security and spam, headed by Mr. Conall Lavery of Entropy who has been a leading figure and a regular commentator in the Irish Internet security business for a long time. I appreciate that the committee has been considering this matter from the perspective of protecting users, but the association is also interested in threats to businesses.

Chairman

Will Mr. Lyon tell us briefly about pop-ups, auto-dialling, spam and money and goods scams?

Mr. Lyon

Yes. Mr. Lavery's group is in the early stages of asking for participants. SMEs which want to be connected to the Internet for the first time face many issues such as securing their systems and connecting to a public network which may be a big threat to its business and connections. They may have worries about e-mail, spam, viruses and firewalls, if they know what a firewall is. The IIA believes the role of Internet service providers will change over time — they will become managed service providers to a much greater extent. They will offer SMEs a broad product, including Internet infrastructure management, filtering systems and servers, as well as Internet connectivity and broadband. If I want to protect my staff from accessing Internet sites in a certain way, I have to put in place a usage policy. SMEs have to address such issues. The IIA finds that many of them struggle with such matters.

Many good Irish companies which sell on the Internet such as CNG Hotels can sell their merchandise to the world because the Internet discriminates positively in favour of small players. Skiing holidays are sold throughout the world on www.directski.com. CNG Hotels sells hotel reservations in the United States from an operation based in County Kerry. Such international on-line operators have security issues. In this regard, the four central issues are confidentiality, integrity, authenticity and non-repudiation.

Businesses want to ensure information is confidential and stays private. It should have sound integrity because it is important that it should not have changed in transmission. Other parties need to be authenticated. The need to register users of mobile phones was mentioned. If I send a business e-mail to Ms Gahan, I want to know that she gets it. When I receive her reply, I want to know that it came from her, not somebody pretending to be her. If I am involved in business, I want non-repudiation because when I pay off my credit card bill at the end of the month, my bank will need to be able to say to me I definitely did something, that it was not done by somebody else. If the four needs are met, we will build trust which is what we are trying to do in electronic commerce and on the Internet. We cannot build trust quickly — trust in any sphere is developed slowly over many years.

Will Ms Gahan let us have her document in order that we can include it in our report? She was not here earlier when the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform stated it would be advertising the fund which has been reduced from €50 million to €45 million and is not confined to this country alone. Nevertheless, an organisation such as the IIA should watch the fund and talk to the Department. If Ms Gahan needs a name, we can give it to her after the meeting.

I thank the IIA for sharing its views with the committee. This has been a long meeting for members and I thank everyone for their patience. We will keep in touch with the association on any issue. Ms Gahan is more than welcome to communicate with the clerk to the committee by e-mail on any issue which is of concern to her and her organisation.

Deputy Broughan

I congratulate the new Fine Gael spokesman on communications, Deputy Durkan, who has joined the committee. I served with him as my party's Whip and also on the Committee of Public Accounts under the chairmanship of the late Deputy Jim Mitchell. I look forward to his contributions to this committee.

Chairman

We welcomed the new member earlier.

Deputy Durkan

I thank members for their warm welcome. I hope when I leave that their memories of me will be as fond. I have served with most of them previously and we were always constructive and objective and never, I hope, objectionable. I hope we can continue this in the interests of the people we represent and the good name of the House.

The joint committee adjourned at 5.30 p.m. sine die.

JOINT COMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS, MARINE AND NATURAL RESOURCES debate - Wednesday, 20 Oct 2004

Scrutiny of EU Proposals.

Mr. Kevin Condon

Mr. Aidan Ryan

Mr. Condon

Mr. Condon

Mr. Ryan

Mr. Ryan

Mr. Ryan

Mr. Condon

Mr. Ryan

Mr. Ryan

Mr. Condon

Mr. Condon

Ms Máirín Ní Dhuinn

Mr. Condon

Ms Ní Dhuinn

Ms Ní Dhuinn

Ms Ní Dhuinn

Ms Ní Dhuinn

Ms Ní Dhuinn

Mr. Ryan

Mr. Ryan

Mr. Ryan

Mr. Ryan

Mr. Ryan

Mr. Ryan

Mr. Ryan

Mr. Condon

Mr. Condon

Mr. Ryan

Mr. Ryan

Mr. Condon

Mr. Condon

Mr. Ryan

Mr. Condon

Mr. Condon

Ms Audrey Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Ms Conlon

Mr. Breen

Mr. Breen

Mr. Breen

Mr. Breen

Mr. Breen

Mr. Breen

Mr. Breen

Mr. Breen

Mr. Breen

Mr. Breen

Mr. Breen

Mr. Breen

Mr. Breen

Mr. Breen

JOINT COMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS, MARINE AND NATURAL RESOURCES debate -
Wednesday, 20 Oct 2004