I move amendment No. 5:
In page 7, before section 7, to insert the following new section:
"7.—It shall be an offence for any newspaper, magazine or periodical on circulation in the State to publish any advertisement for sex chat lines or any chat line which is pornographic in content.".
I have received many representations from parents whose children ran up telephone bills, sometimes in excess of £500, and the unanimous support of members of my local authority on this matter, all of whom received similar representations. From the work I have done on this issue I have found that greed is the great motivator, specifically the greed of Sunday and daily newspapers in accepting sexually explicit and visually offensive advertisements.
I am not necessarily advising the Minister of State to access these lines, although I hope her officials have done so and have received the quite shocking aural service I received when I accessed it. I feel very strongly about this. Anyone who can use a digital telephone can access these lines by dialling a PIN number. As I said on Second Stage, the depravity and perversion lines are freely available through explicit advertisements in newspapers and magazines.
Senator Henry is talking about the Internet and I am talking about telephone lines. The Postal and Telecommunications Services Act, 1983, amended section 13(1) of the Post Office (Amendment) Act, 1951, to read:
A person who—
(a) sends, by means of the telecommunications systems operated by Bord Telecom Éireann, any message or other matter which is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character . shall be guilty of an offence.
Such a person is liable on conviction by a jury to a fine of £50,000. We could make a great deal of money for the State by enforcing this, apart from anything else.
My simple, honest request, based on my duty as a public representative and on the representations I have received, as have other elected representatives who have raised this issue, is to ask why we are not acknowledging that seven year old children know how to use telephones. We are contributing to a massive con in regard to the cost, which can be £1.94 a minute. We are allowing some children to be prematurely introduced to unnatural sexual practices. It is all carried in explicit advertising in newspapers, magazines and periodicals.
On Second Stage, the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Fahey, agreed with my views on the advertisement of sex chat lines. I trust the Minister of State will, therefore, accept the amendment, especially when the Leader of the House assured me the matter would be covered by this Bill and that I would be supported by the other side of the House. Why would the Bill allow the commission of what is an offence under the Postal and Telecommunications Services Act? It would appear advertisers and telecommunications services who allow these calls are guilty of an offence.
I am sure Senator O'Donovan and the officials accompanying the Minister of State, who, if I recall correctly, also accompanied the Minister of State at the Department of Children and Health, Deputy Fahey, on Second Stage, recall his agreement with my views on the banning of telephone sex chat lines, which can be and are easily accessed by children.