This is a Seanad Bill which has been amended by the Dáil. In accordance with Standing Order 103, it is deemed to have passed its First, Second and Third Stages in the Seanad and is placed on the Order Paper for Report Stage. On the question "That the Bill be received for final consideration", the Minister may explain the purpose of the amendments made by the Dáil. This is looked upon as the report of the Dáil amendments to the Seanad. The only matters, therefore, which may be discussed are the amendments made by the Dáil. For Senators' convenience, I have arranged for the printing and circulation of the amendments. Senators may speak only once on Report Stage.
Broadcasting (Major Events Television Coverage) (Amendment) Bill 2003 [ Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil ] : Report and Final Stages.
Question proposed: "That the Bill be received for final consideration."
There are four amendments to present to the Seanad. On amendment No. 1, following the publication of the Bill, officials from my Department met with the IRFU and the FAI. Both organisations pointed out that section 4(1), as published, would make it possible for a qualifying broadcaster to apply to the High Court for access to a designated event right up to the day before the event takes place. They argued that this would severely restrict their ability to do a deal with a non-qualifying broadcaster where a qualifying broadcaster either decides not to apply to the High Court for access or decides not to pay the reasonable market rates set by the court.
There are two issues involved. The first issue is that the event organiser, and not just the qualifying broadcaster, should be able to trigger the High Court route, so as to bring the matter to a head. The second issue is that the High Court should be given sufficient time to take a decision well before the event takes places.
In light of these concerns and the contributions made on Committee Stage in Dáil Éireann, I propose, in amendment No. 1, to allow an event organiser to request the High Court to invite qualifying broadcasters to make an application under section 4(1)(a) to the court for access to a designated event; and to extend the period during which an event organiser or a qualifying broadcaster may apply to the High Court from 28 days to 56 days. These amendments would allow an event organiser to bring the matter to a head at the earliest possible time. If, having being invited by the court to do so, qualifying broadcasters decide not to make an application under section 4(1), then an event organiser is free to sell television rights to a non-qualifying broadcaster.
Amendment No. 2 is a technical drafting amendment which does not change the effect of section 5, as published. I am advised by the Parliamentary Counsel that subsection (3) is not required as the matter dealt with is already provided for by section 48 of the Arbitration Act 1954.
Amendment No. 3 has the objective of increasing the flexibility available to the High Court or to an arbitrator when making a decision on terms and on reasonable market rates. Subsection (f) of section 6 provided that the court or arbitrator shall have regard to “such other matters as may appear to be relevant to fixing reasonable market rates”. The amendment provides that the court or arbitrator shall have regard to “such other matters as may appear to be relevant”.
Section 6 offers guidance to the court or arbitrator as to certain matters that must be considered when fixing terms or reasonable market rates. The list of criteria is deliberately limited and not overly prescriptive. The purpose of section (f) is to allow the court or arbitrator flexibility to take into account any matter it considers relevant. The amended provision increases the flexibility available to the court or to an arbitrator.
I have taken the view that a statutory obligation on the Minister of the day to review the designation order from time to time would reassure all parties affected by the designation that any problems which may emerge after the initial designation can be addressed. Accordingly amendment No. 4 inserts a new section into the Bill which provides that the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources must undertake a review of the designation of events under section 2 of the 1999 Act and that the first review must be not later than three years after the passing of this Act, with subsequent reviews taking place not later than three years after the previous review. The Minister has stated that it is his intention to undertake the first review in two years' time.
The Bill was initiated in the Seanad, as you pointed out, a Chathaoirligh, and clearly the Minister has been listening to a number of points raised by the Opposition in the Dáil and, indeed, by ourselves. He obviously did not listen to all of them since they are not all reflected in the amendments, but I welcome the level of flexibility shown by the Minister and thank him for it.
The only point I would make, and this is being very brief about it, has to do with amendment No. 4. I wonder about the setting of a review, and subsequent reviews, "not later than three years" after the passing of this Act. I suppose three years is not that long a period, but I would pose the following query which the Minister of State might clarify. The amendment states, "the Minister shall review, from time to time", and therefore I take it that the Minister is providing in legislation for a mandatory review. I seek clarification that there will be a mandatory review and the first will take place in two years' time.
Every three years.
There will be a review every three years and any designations made in the intervening periods will be covered by the following review. It is now clear to me. I thank the Minister of State for this clarification.
I, too, commend the Minister on the changes which have been made in the Dáil, which have improved the quality of the legislation. On amendment No. 1, it was nonsensical that the qualifying broadcaster could wait until the very last day to go to the court about a particular designated event. The Minister has extended the period during which they may apply to the court from 28 days to 56 days but, closer to the date, how far in advance of the event is the cut-off point when the qualifying broadcaster can go to court?
The answer to Senator Kenneally's question is one day, but an event organiser can trigger it, at any time, in the days that are laid down in the legislation.
Question put and agreed to.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."
I thank the Senators for their co-operation and their contributions. As Senator O'Meara said, the Bill started out in this House. There has been a long and detailed discussion, both here and in the Dáil on Committee Stage. As she rightly stated, the amendments reflect the views of the Opposition and of members of my party. The Minister also took on board some of the suggestions which were put forward by the IRFU and the FAI. I hope the Act will reflect what the people are seeking regarding the Broadcasting Bill.
I thank the Minister of State and his officials for the work which has gone into this legislation. It is clearly a reflection of a changed world, not only in the European context of communications and broadcasting with which we largely deal but also, particularly in the era of digital and satellite broadcasting, probably in a global context. Until a short while ago, this kind of legislation would have been unheard of and we would not have imagined that it would ever be necessary.
We must remain vigilant, not only in the context of these events but in the wider context of ensuring that our own identity is retained against a climate of global pressures of communications and also against the continuing trend of consolidation of media ownership in large conglomerations of huge, powerful players who can be more powerful than Governments. In that regard, our membership of the European Union is critical. We have the power and the authority to ensure our culture is protected and when events such as this occur, we are able to act to make sure the trends do not go against us and that our communications companies are protected.
I thank the Minister of State for his work on this legislation which we hope will be successful.
I thank the Minister of State and his officials for their courtesy and attention to the passage of this legislation through the House and all the Members who contributed. We had a lot of discussion on Second, Committee and Report Stages. I followed the debate in the other House also. From the outset, all sides were broadly in agreement with the legislation put before us and the various contributions all made an effort to improve it. We have improved on it and it is now excellent legislation. I thank all those concerned with it.
Question put and agreed to.
Sitting suspended at 2.40 p.m. and resumed at 3 p.m.