Shane Ross
Ceist:94. Deputy Shane Ross asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if it is intended that responsibility for the print media will pass to his Department in future legislation. [10325/13]
Amharc ar fhreagraTuesday, 26 February 2013
Ceisteanna (94)
Freagraí ó Béal (5 píosaí cainte)
As Deputy Ross may be aware, at present my primary function in regard to media is directly related to my remit in the broadcasting sector. The responsibility for control of mergers and acquisitions, including those relating to the media in the State, lies with my colleague, the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation. However, legislation is in train in his Department to significantly update the media mergers function and transfer responsibilities in this regard for all media to my Department in the coming months.
Control of mergers and acquisitions is a vital policy area given the central role of the media in our democracy and the potentially harmful effects of an over-concentration of media ownership. The Government is committed to implementing a new set of robust measures that allow for a transparent and objective assessment of the public good in media merger cases, which will be done as quickly as possible. These revised rules will bring the system in operation here up to date and give full effect to the recommendations of the advisory group on media mergers. Under these provisions, my role will be to conduct a statutory test on the effects on plurality of ownership and content of any new merger or acquisition.
At present, the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland is charged with endeavouring to ensure the provision of open and pluralistic broadcasting services in Ireland. To this end, it operates an ownership and control policy in regard to its licensing of television and radio services. In doing so, the BAI has regard to concentration of media ownership, including print media, in licensing broadcast media.
The primary regulatory structure for the print media in Ireland today is the Press Council of Ireland. As such, this body is recognised in the Defamation Act 2009. However, it is not a State body per se, being funded and organised by the print industry in Ireland. This model of media governance has worked well and has been held up internationally as an example of good practice. As such, there are no proposals before Government for a change in this structure. The operation of a free, independent and responsible media is a key component of our democracy. It is difficult to marry intervention and freedom.
However, it must be recognised that the media business, globally and nationally, is changing dramatically. Newspaper circulation has fallen significantly in recent years, accompanied by a convergence of new and old media on a variety of online platforms. The same can be said, to a degree, for broadcast media. It is far too early to predict what the ultimate implications of these fundamental changes are, either on a general basis or for a small market like Ireland. The Government must continue to ensure a diverse, pluralistic and independent media, however, and will remain open to new measures to that end.
I thank the Minister for his reply and note that he has achieved in the coming legislation something that was never achieved by one of his predecessors, Michael D. Higgins, who is now President of Ireland and who eyed this particular pathway back in the 1990s with some enthusiasm but never got to it. Under his portfolio, the Minister now has an extremely important position in regulating the print media.
I know the Minister's principal role will be to supervise plurality and acquisitions and mergers, but does he have any plan to impose or propose new interventionist measures which would set a standard or charter for the newspapers and introduce a neo-public sector ethos to the private media? In particular, now that this transfer is being made, does he have any plan to introduce privacy laws to control the print media which have been part of some of his colleagues' interests and declarations in recent times?
My colleague, the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Richard Bruton, will bring the refurbishment of competition law to the House during this term. It will transfer the responsibilities referred to by the Deputy to my Department.
On the point about plurality, the review group examined this issue and the law will reflect the importance the Government attaches to diversity of ownership and content because of the impact the media have on the character of public discourse and our democracy.
I do not have plans to introduce a privacy law. There is a widespread view in the House on occasion that such a Bill ought to be brought before the House. When the Press Council of Ireland was being established, the then Minister for Justice and Equality made it plain that he was prepared to legislate if the necessity arose. Presumably, the Bill he prepared is still lying around. I agree with my colleague, the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter, that some commentary in the media does not appear to be able to distinguish between privacy and prurience, but I do not believe the answer is a legislative measure on privacy. That would be an unwarranted interference with the media. Before or after the transfer of these functions to me, that will continue to be my view.
I welcome the Minister's reply. I do not understand why the Minister for Justice and Equality is involved in this issue if it is not for his Department to be involved, but I take it that the proposals of the Minister for Justice and Equality for a privacy law are now a dead duck and that the Minister will investigate where they are lying around and ensure they are not allowed to do so for much longer.
With a Minister for Justice and Equality as dynamic as the current holder of that office, it would be very foolish to presume his legislative schedule might be abridged in any way by considerations such as those the Deputy raises.
The Press Council of Ireland has worked well. One can say it has not yet had a severe enough test, but in so far as I can observe, it has done a good job. Lord Justice Leveson came to Dublin to learn more about the peculiar construct we have in Ireland and I understand he was impressed.
The protections afforded by the fact that it is rooted in defamation legislation are very important. The fact that he has conferred approval on its reputation to date should not be ignored. If it is working and not broken, why try to fix it?