Taking up on what Deputy Kenny said, there are two things. This is not the first time we have dealt with legislation like this. We are talking about transposing the EU e-evidence package, the regulation and the directive. It has been on the books for a considerable amount of time. It has taken too long for us to get to this point and now that we are, as per normal, it is utterly last minute. We want a sufficient amount of time to do some element of due diligence. My colleagues, Deputies Ward and Kenny, have spoken about some of the issues. Where technology meets domestic and international law, we all know the difficulties that are involved. For those involved in investigating and prosecuting crimes, there is a requirement that they can get the evidence. Sometimes, the first time you see issues of antisocial behaviour or whatever is when they are up on TikTok or somebody has taken a screen grab on Snapchat. You are sent that and you send it to the guards. The guards talk about the difficulties they have in getting that information and getting it in the correct format, even when dealing with companies that are based here. We want to see this office set up to deal with these issues for those across the European Union looking for evidence, particularly given that a significant number of the big players in the tech world have their headquarters here. Therefore, there will be multiple contacts. Deputy Kenny spoke about 300,000 requests. It is hard to see how this office, no matter how it is resourced, would not be overwhelmed by that. We need to have the systems, know-how and technology to deal with this. There is a huge issue when dealing with social media giants from the point of view of delivering evidence. Nearly every committee in the Oireachtas has dealt with the big tech companies, such is their impact on and footprint in the world in which we live. It has generally been from the point of view that we have insufficient regulation and leverage to deal with what they offer, which is social media platforms that are addictive by design, have recommender algorithms and are based on keeping people online no matter what the material is. They will say they offer a service that goes above and beyond the law and that the minute nefarious material is there, they get rid of it. What anyone realises who has lived in the real world, used any of these platforms or talked to the young people in front of the children's committee, the EU affairs committee or the media committee is that these companies have made little effort in relation to facilitating those who have had information put up that is detrimental to them. I have a particular issue with it. We know what sort of material we are talking about. We are talking about sometimes intimate material, including intimate material produced through artificial intelligence. I have no doubt this office will be dealing with a huge number of these issues. When we talk about Coimisiún na Meán, the Data Protection Commission and even the European Commission, I am not quite sure they are sufficiently resourced to take on Google, Meta or TikTok. I think I said before it is like having your winter league team going up against Barcelona at their best. We need to resource the office. There is a particular issue in relation to this office. We are talking about social media bans but we are not next or near having a conversation and ensuring we have the tools-----
Sentiment score: 0.03
-----to really put it up to these companies so we can make this place safer for all who use social media, particularly young people,-----
Sentiment score: 0.42
-----and tackle the issues in relation to disinformation and even more nefarious material that we keep seeing.
Sentiment score: 0.00
I am colour-blind.
Sentiment score: 0.00