I know we had plenty of time for Brexit last week and we will have another debate on Thursday to mark Europe Day, but I would like to speak about Brexit again in the context of Boris Johnson's latest pronouncement. He said during his visit to the US that the customs partnership is a crazy plan because it will create a whole new web of bureaucracy. He has gone against his own Prime Minister on this issue. Of course, he has not offered a different plan other than to come up with what has been termed the "Boris border". This type of seamless and frictionless border has not been tested because it does not exist anywhere in the world. We know this because a month ago, it was confirmed in a House of Commons report that no technological solutions, other than the theoretical, are available anywhere in the world to keep the Irish Border open if Britain leaves the customs union and the Single Market. The enterprise secretary in Westminster has said that thousands of jobs will be lost if Britain does not sign up to one or the other because of the extent of Britain's reliance on frictionless trade with the EU.

I thank the Leader for organising statements on corporate manslaughter. I propose to circulate to Members a letter from the Irish Haemophilia Society on this issue. This is relevant because the hepatitis C scandal is being seen again in a new guise. Neither the hepatitis C scandal nor the CervicalCheck cancer issue that is now before us can be attributed to mismanagement alone. Once more, the health service has covered things up by not informing people when they should have been informed. That is what happened 27 years ago in the hepatitis C case, which resulted in two tribunals, more inquires and recommendations. In 2006, the Law Reform Commission recommended that a corporate manslaughter Bill should be introduced to ensure people who fail to act are held to account, not by losing their jobs, resigning or going off with their pensions, but by going to jail for up to 12 years. Such a Bill has not been passed in this House, however. There are times when we do statements. Maybe the next legislation we debate should be the Committee Stage of the Corporate Manslaughter (No. 2) Bill 2016. I will raise this again during the statements on corporate manslaughter. Why are we talking about investigations by commissions of inquiry? Such investigations should follow criminal investigations and interviews carried out by the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Garda. We can put in place the systems that are required after that. People have died as a result of mismanagement. We were told in this House less than two years ago that there was no need for the Corporate Manslaughter (No. 2) Bill 2016 because people could go to jail under existing legislation. That can be tested now on foot of a Garda investigation, rather than an investigation set up by this House or the other House.

Last week, I spoke about the need for us to get behind or beneath the Ministers when disasters like the cervical screening disaster take place. I explained how the Carltona doctrine or principle allowed public servants, including those who took decisions and hid information in this case, to remain faceless. I want to see Tony O'Brien go, but there are other people who need to go too. If he goes, what about the people beneath him who did not report? Where does the responsibility lie?

All too frequently in this world, we look for the head of a big name while the wrongdoers continue to do the same thing. Nowhere is this more the case than in the health service where we have had scandal after scandal, yet the wrongdoers always remain in place and there is no accountability. I am all for protecting workers and ensuring they are treated fairly and correctly. However, when senior officials deliberately set out to hide information that cost people their lives, there must be accountability. Surely it cannot stop at the desk of the Minister or chief executive officer as they cannot have their finger on every pulse at all times.

My colleague, Senator Mark Daly, spoke a few moments ago about the British Foreign Secretary, Mr. Boris Johnson. The EUobserver website features an interesting article under the title, "At Northern Irish border, Brexit risks hard-won peace". It begins as follows:

In Belfast's Alexandra Park stands a very hard border. A three-meter high wall cuts through the hilly green meadow, separating the republican Catholic and the unionist Protestant communities.

The piece then discusses the risks presented by a border in the event that Brexit goes wrong. The utterances of the Foreign Secretary, Mr. Johnson, and some other British Ministers indicate that Brexit is going wrong. As I have stated numerous times, the Taoiseach, Tánaiste and Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs, Deputy Helen McEntee, have done a tremendous job. However, all of their work will come to nothing if the Conservative Party in the United Kingdom falls apart and the Brexit negotiations collapse. It is beginning to look as if that could happen because the clock is ticking and nobody seems to have a clear idea of where we are going. One of my fears arising from the current cervical screening disaster is that the importance of Brexit may slip off the agenda. For this reason, I seek an assurance that Brexit remains a high priority.

Last week, I asked for a debate on corporate governance in the public sector, with particular reference to the Carltona doctrine, which protects individuals who clearly act wrongfully in their positions, and how this principle made its way into the Ministers and Secretaries Act.

The cervical cancer screening issue has created a number of knock-on issues in terms of legislation. We must, in legislation, address open disclosure and the issue of corporate manslaughter. Major questions also arise regarding procurement and ensuring the best and most appropriate outcomes in this area. I will bring proposals to the House on this issue before the summer. I hope all sides will work with me on that.

Facebook has announced it will not accept advertisements purchased abroad in the lead up to the referendum on the eighth amendment. I first highlighted this issue last November at the World Forum on Democracy, which focused on big data. In recent months, I have been pressing relentlessly for the implementation of necessary regulation and legislation in this area and for social media platforms to step up and take some responsibility in the interim.

Just a few weeks ago, officials from Facebook appeared before a meeting of the Joint Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment at which I and others challenged them to take action in response to the large amount of political advertising and sponsored content being targeted at Irish voters, including advertisements from unaccountable, unidentified and international actors. We urged them to ensure Ireland would not be another bad example of this practice. The committee was informed that Facebook did not have the technical capacity to provide the transparency required. I urged the company to stop selling advertising if it could not deliver transparency.

When I made the same demand last week, I was informed it was almost impossible to meet, yet today Facebook has agreed to stop selling advertisements to unaccountable international actors in respect of our referendum and the decision which is for Irish people to make as part of our electoral process. The company's decision is correct and in line with the spirit of our electoral laws.

Nonetheless, our electoral laws and online regulations need reform and the ultimate solution must be legislation. The onus is on Google, through its advertisements, and YouTube to take responsibility and ensure they follow the spirit of our electoral laws by also declaring that they will not take internationally purchased referendum advertisements. I urge Google and YouTube, which are linked, and any other relevant platform to take action.

As well as the legislative work needed for online regulation, there is a concern about a loophole in the Data Protection Bill 2018 which could potentially allow parties or candidates to hire companies such as Cambridge Analytica or Cantor. That is not in the true spirit of Article 9.2(d) of the general data protection regulation. It exceeds what is included in it. It behoves the Government to take the opportunity to get this right from the beginning by ensuring we close any loophole which could be manipulated in that way. I hope the Minister for Justice and Equality will take this on board.

I welcome the announcement made by Facebook that it will no longer accept advertisements aimed at the upcoming referendum on the eighth amendment if funded by organisations outside the country. From today such advertisements will be rejected. The Irish Times reports that a combination of machine learning and good old-fashioned people power will govern this initiative. Facebook has some automated tools at its disposal that would help to identify and reject advertisements. In case anything slips through the net, the advocacy groups and the transparent referendum initiative will have an input into the reporting process. These groups have dedicated communications channels with Facebook. While there are no facilities for ordinary citizens to contact Facebook directly and report advertisements, one could bring an advertisement to the attention of the advocacy groups and the transparent referendum initiative. I encourage all citizens to be proactive in the absence of legislation.

We are in the full swing of the referendum campaign that has taken an unprecedented turn. undecided8 has been shut down thanks to the stellar investigation carried out by the tech journalist Gavin Sheridan. However, as he knows, it is only a start. The State has a responsibility to the voting public which has been targeted by a foreign source which is seeking to deceive undecided voters and its resources are greater than those of the Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO, and the Referendum Commission combined. It is undermining their work. This should absolutely be a call to action for Google, YouTube and the State. The State is failing to give resources to SIPO to investigate effectively whether campaigns are receiving donations from international sources. Will we continue to have zero defence against foreign influences on public votes and will the online free-for-all continue?

I acknowledge the transparent referendum initiative.

The Senator is not allowed to come back in.

That is all I want to say. I simply acknowledge the transparent referendum initiative.

Ten minutes was given to dealing with this topic by way of a Commencement matter today before the Senator even mentioned it. Senator Fintan Warfield was off the blocks ahead of the Senator.

I propose that No. 20, Broadcasting (Amendment) Bill 2017, be taken before No. 1.