I have always felt that technology is a positive force in society. My career has been shaped by how technology can be harnessed for social good. Back in 1997, I did my undergraduate dissertation on the impact of the information revolution on the development of socialism, would you believe. That was back when we called it the information revolution and back when I called myself more openly a socialist. I come at this as a tech enthusiast. I love technology and I see that social media is incredibly positive in our world in so many ways, or was, and particularly for younger people. For them, as we have heard from other Deputies, there is no difference between the physical world and the online world. When we talk about solutions for the online world and compare them to the physical world, young people simply do not have that mentality. They do not have the same privacy concerns either, for example. This is something I looked at when I worked in the tech sector. Attitudes towards privacy for younger people are completely different because, largely, that horse has bolted. They have grown up and live in a very different world where privacy is a different ball game for them completely. However, the online worlds has become so toxic and harmful. This is true of the Internet more broadly, as I have discussed directly with the Minister, particularly things like chatbots that are prompting people towards suicide, some of the online radicalism we are seeing and so on. Specifically in respect of recommender algorithms, there are some specific harms around polarisation, mental health and misogyny that are being discussed this morning which have to be addressed. This is brilliant legislation which offers off by default as a starting point, and off for under-18s. That is just a starting point but it is a good and important start. I acknowledge the incredible work of Deputy Paul Murphy and People Before Profit, not just on this Bill but on the issue more broadly. I believe there is a value that Members of this House share. I have seen much hand-wringing from the Minister and Government spokespeople who seem to grapple with this issue. What I do not see is action and what I did not hear in the Minister's speech today is action. I want to touch on some of the framing he used. He stated that "the issues around recommender systems can be and are being addressed." I do not understand how anybody can stand over that when the recommender systems continue to do what they are doing. Describing the EU Digital Services Act, he said it "requires that platforms explain, in understandable language, the main parameters their systems use to suggest content, as well as providing options for users to change or influence these parameters." He further described the Act as requiring platforms "to assess and mitigate risks that their recommender systems may present, including to the protection of minors", and as obliging platforms to provide minors "the option to use recommender systems that do not rely on profiling." All of these are listed as current solutions that are out there and working. They are not working because people are still being fed promotion of anorexia - pro-ana - material. People are still being polarised. People are still being radicalised. Young men are being turned into misogynistic monsters by these tools. These are not working. If this is what the Government's solution is, it is not working. The Minister referred to preliminary findings and the need to address investigations, regulation and action. This has been going on for years. When I worked in Google between 2006 and 2014, one of the biggest topics towards the end of that period was pro-ana websites which were being promoted to young women at the time. That developed into additional issues around self-harm. I have personal, family experience of exactly how problematic and difficult that can be. To tell me that the EU is regulating it and has responded, that the Government's tools are working and the responses and solutions are there just does not wash. I read a book in 2011 by Nicholas Carr called The Shallows. It was the first time I came across the idea that the Internet is changing our brains. These algorithms are one of the biggest ways in which our brains are being rewired. The technology is rewiring us. That is why in this legislation it is so important that we single out children. They have greater plasticity within their brains and are at greater risk of that rewiring. I read that 15 years ago and I recommend it even now as a book that still stands in terms of addressing how our use of technology is affecting our cognitive function and emotional regulation. Telling me the Government is dealing with it, it is happening, it is under investigation, none of that is good enough. We need real-time solutions and they are not forthcoming. I have mentioned some of the problems. For me, polarisation is one of the biggest issues in society that is proliferated by toxic algorithms. They create a bubble whereby our own stereotypes and biases are reinforced again and again. We are losing the wonderful discourse and public discussions we have had in society because people are being pushed into camps further and further away from themselves. Misogyny has been discussed at length already today. I want to use a real-time example for that one. I was on "The Tonight Show" last night and I get the usual hate online from that. I am sure the Minister of State knows that too. I took a little look at the four first clips that were put up of me and the Minister of State, Deputy Neale Richmond, who was on the panel with me. Under the two clips of his contributions on Twitter, there are nine and three comments, respectively. Under the two clips of me, which were put up at the same time from the same show, there are 156 and 171 comments, respectively. They are not nice. There is a lot of the c-word, that one that rhymes with blunt. There is a lot about calling me a man. I am consistently transvestigated online because I talk about trans rights issues. It is horrible. It is such a clear example. I get that all politicians, all public representatives, get hate online. The Minister of State, Deputy Richmond, would have a much higher profile than I would. He has been a politician much longer than I have. Apart from the fact that maybe I have less likeability factor or something, even accounting for that, it still seems a clear example to me of misogyny and how women are bearing the brunt of these issues. The Minister has gone but I thought he might like one particular reply which was added. It said, "she is giving Patrick O'Donovan a run for his money as the biggest idiot in Leinster House." I appreciate that everybody gets it but what I am trying to demonstrate here is that there is sexism and misogyny in our society that is being fuelled, amplified and turbo-charged by these toxic algorithms. We are all living it every single day. Age verification is being put forward again and again by the Government. It is not going to work. The summary I have on that points to the privacy issues it raises, the fact that it contravenes children's rights issues, namely, the right to participate in society and particularly online, and essentially leaves behind the major issues of our day. It is arbitrary to say that, at 16, all of a sudden you are supposed to be able to read all of this hateful content and deal with it. It is simply crazy at this stage. Then we also hear, on a more general basis, the Government say that there are no solutions and that we in the Opposition are not coming up with solutions. I have been heartbroken on that recently. It happens with regard to anything we come forward with. This is a really clear, well-worked out Bill that offers a solution to a problem we all discuss all the time, and once again the Government is choosing to say "no thanks" to it. This is a solution that could work, and I urge the Government to reconsider its decision. One of the other things we need to look at is platforms as publishers. The Minister of State has raised this. Honestly, I am kind of surprised that it might be offered by this Government because it is a much larger legal question to deal with platforms as publishers. Essentially, that means they would be held to account for the content they host. For decades now there has been talk of how that could change, but it really gets to the heart of the business model of these tech platforms, which is ultimately the source of all these issues. We, the user, are the product, and as long as we remain the product we will have issues with platforms not taking on the role of publishers and we will have issues with their recommender algorithms pushing us into where they want us to be, which is eyes on screen all the time. Dealing with that user-as-the-product issue is really too big not to tackle. This Bill is exactly where we need to be in terms of pushing us towards that space of actually having regulation that might work, because the regulation we have right now is simply not working, nor are the solutions being offered at European or domestic level. I urge the Government to withdraw its amendment. I also once again ask this Government to stop supporting the digital omnibus packages making their way through the European Union because they will gut the AI Act of any meaningful impact it would have had. They will also further strip back the protections we enjoy under the GDPR. I want to hear the Government push back on the simplification agenda at European level because it is that agenda and harmonisation that are informing the Government's wish to keep this kind of self-regulatory model in existence. Littered throughout the Minister's speech is rhetoric which sounds to me like self-regulation of the tech sector, and we are not moving away from it. Certainly, the digital omnibus will push us back towards that. As a member state of the European Union, we do not have to take that as our direction of travel. We can say, "No, we want to maintain the regulation that European citizens enjoy and cherish and push back against that agenda."

Sentiment score: 0.10