Child Abuse: Motion

Senator Jillian van Turnhout

I move:

That Seanad Éireann:

Notes the adoption by the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, on 13 December 2011, of the Directive on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA. Among wide-ranging provisions in relation to criminal offences and sanctions in the area of sexual abuse and exploitation of children, the Directive requires all EU Member States to take the necessary measures to ensure the prompt removal of any webpages containing or disseminating child abuse material hosted on servers within their jurisdiction. The Directive also, with appropriate safeguards, permits Member States to take measures to block access to internet users within their territory of webpages containing or disseminating child abuse material hosted on servers outside their jurisdiction.

Notes that while Ireland has arrangements in place to secure the removal of child abuse material on domestic servers, and reports material found outside the jurisdiction via the INHOPE network, Ireland has not sanctioned a system which would allow the same material hosted overseas to be blocked, where removal proves difficult or takes an unreasonable length of time.

Recognises that "[C]hild abuse images are not just images. Despite the fact that most of them can be found in a "virtual world", one must never forget that behind every image, there is at least one child who has been sexually abused in real life. Child abuse images involve a series of crimes ranging from the solicitation, corruption or trafficking of children for sexual purposes and various forms of sexual abuse perpetrated on children, to the distribution, collection and consultation of images of the abuse committed." [Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, Report of the Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee, "Combating ‘child abuse images' through committed, transversal and internationally co-ordinated action, Doc 12720, 19 September 2011].

Recalls with approval Ireland's ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child on 28 September 1992 and welcomes that Ireland promotes and supports activities aimed at the removal of webpages containing or disseminating child abuse material in Ireland and shares this information with other EU countries through the INHOPE network and through cooperation with Europol and Interpol.

Calls on the Minister for Justice and Equality to:

1. Commit to bring forward a proposal to Government to ratify the United Nations Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography, signed by Ireland on 7 September 2000;

2. Commit to bring forward a proposal to Government to ratify the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse, signed by Ireland on 25 October 2007;

3. Bring forward legislation, without delay, to implement the Directive on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, which, legislation should:

a) Underpin efforts to combat sexual abuse and the sexual exploitation of children and child abuse material in cyber space;

b) Ensure a victim identification database and management system is in place which is directed at identifying child victims, prosecuting offenders and disrupting crime networks;

c) Underpin measures already in place which seek to ensure the removal of webpages containing child abuse material hosted in Ireland;

d) Direct that Irish internet service providers put in place a system whereby child abuse material, as defined by Section 2(1) of the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998, hosted overseas be blocked where removal proves difficult or is likely to take an unreasonable length of time; and

e) Be guided by transparent procedures and provide adequate safeguards, in particular to ensure that the restriction is limited to what is necessary and proportionate, and that users are informed of the reason for the restriction.

I welcome the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, to the House. Having had the pleasure of working with the Minister when Opposition spokesperson on children, I am confident of his commitment to children's rights and child protection. I am happy he is here to debate this important motion tabled by the Independent group.

This motion is about child pornography as clearly defined under section 2 of the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998. The definition in the Act includes any visual representation that shows a child engaged in or being witness to explicit sexual activity and where the dominant characteristic of visual representation is the depiction for a sexual purpose of the genital or anal region of a child. Child abuse material on the Internet is child pornography, but it is also so much more than a single definition can encompass. The image or depiction is a culmination of, at best one and more than likely a series, of the most serious criminal offences known to the Statute Book, including rape, incest, assault, sadism and bestiality. For each child abuse image produced, it can be expected that numerous offences are committed, as the online distribution of child abuse images exponentially multiplies the number of offences against the integrity of the child. A child abuse image is a crime scene. It is a digital record of sexual abuse being perpetrated against a child.

According to the National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children, a staggering 69% of the victims depicted in child abuse images are under the age of ten. The sheer depravity and calculation of the offenders is such that they are increasingly targeting children at pre-speaking age because they cannot articulate the abuse they are experiencing. Shockingly, we were told by an Interpol officer at our briefing last week that some of the children depicted in these images are so young that the nub of their umbilical cord is still visible.

Why are we proposing blocking? One can say that is not where all child abuse is happening. Statistics show how abuse is often by somebody trusted and known to the child. It happens in the home by a close relative or a trusted family friend. The State should put its resources towards ensuring those children are protected. I also acknowledge that much of the exchange of information of this child abuse material happens off the Internet via other web devices such as FTP protocols, and this is where Garda Síochána resources need to be targeted. Our motion is to ensure that this crime can be blocked so that all our resources do not go towards this.

The motion is intended to address a specific reality, that there is a significant volume of requests made to access child abuse material on the Internet, intentionally or accidentally, through standard web pages throughout the world. In Norway, which has a slightly bigger population than Ireland and which has blocking in place, they get 12,000 requests a day for these pages, that is, approximately 4.5 million requests a year. In New Zealand, which has it in place, from February 2010 to November 2011, they blocked 13.5 million requests. In the UK, BT's network alone blocks 40,000 requests a day.

Some say its prevalence is decreasing on the Internet. To give the House an idea of figures of what we speak, in 1995, which often is considered year zero for the Internet as the boom had not fully erupted, Interpol calculated there were 4,000 child abuse images worldwide. Recent figures suggest that the number has multiplied considerably. Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre's database states that there are 850,000 distinct child abuse images stored in the UK alone. It is not an issue of us trying to block a small number.

I do not contend that blocking will sort it all out, but it sends a strong signal. Removal at source is the best solution, and where we can do that, as Ireland is trying to do, I support it. However, where material is hosted on sites outside the jurisdiction, it is not within our power to ensure removal at source. We are forced to rely on other jurisdictions applying the same standard for removal at source as we apply in Ireland. The difficulty can be in rogue states where co-operation is not forthcoming or where it is not done in a reasonable time.

The blocking proposed in our motion would give us this control and ensure there is consistency in our policy on child abuse material on the Internet. It would send out a clear message that child abuse material, whether its source is domestic or foreign, will not be tolerated in Ireland. This deterrent value cannot be overstated.

I do not believe we know the full extent of child abuse material available in Ireland given the lack of public awareness of www.hotline.ie, where the public can report suspected illegal content encountered on the Internet.

From our research of this issue in preparation for today, it is very much a spiral of abuse that takes place which starts with curiosity, but it has been proven to be a progressive descent, from curiosity to becoming a trader. If one was trying to equate it to something else, on the road here each day there is a new speed sign that tells me if I am going over the speed limit and it deters me, and I slow down. Every time it works. It is about having a deterrent.

Those countries blocking are: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Italy, Malta, the UK, Australia and New Zealand. All the mobile phone operators in Ireland are blocking as part of an EU agreement. The UK, as I stated, is blocking. That means Northern Ireland is blocking all of this child abuse material.

I want to share a case with the House. It came to light 14 months ago. It is a case where a child abuse image came to the attention of the US authorities as part of a domestic child pornography investigation. The image depicted a two year old victim who was unknown to the US victim identification database. A member of the investigation team recognised in the background of the image that a doll was not a traditional doll but a Dutch doll, and they contacted the Dutch authorities. The Dutch authorities broadcast an image of the face of the child and the parents came forward. On investigation, they found that a 27 year old male nursery worker was perpetrating the crime of abuse against that child. On further investigation — they had to call all the parents together to a hotel on a Sunday afternoon to tell them their children may have been at risk in this child care place — the accused man has admitted to abusing 87 children aged two and a half and younger. His partner is accused of facilitating child abuse and distributing this material, and an additional 11 men are accused of having shared and distributed the images. The case will go to trial this year. This one image led to 87 child victims being identified, which is why a victim identification database is so important.

We tabled the motion here today, not because we do not acknowledge that there are other child protection measures that the State needs to have in place. We need to ensure we put a focus there. We also need to focus on child abuse within the home or by trusted family members or friends of the family in the off-web services. However, we need to ensure that child abuse material that continues to be traded and transmitted over the Internet is blocked. The fact that a child knows or believes images of his or her abuse remains and continues to be spread on the Internet can lead to an increased feeling of helplessness. We must say to children that we do not accept these images on the Internet and we do not accept what has happened to them. We must send a clear signal that we want to prevent any further publication of these images. That, for me, is the real reason behind this motion.

If child abuse images are on the Internet, Irish people are looking at them and we need to block them. When we block them, what will come up is a simple page stating that this is illegal and one may e-mail an address that follows because one needs to ensure it is transparent and in line. In Norway and New Zealand where they did this, the number of e-mails received was zero.

Senator Marie-Louise O’Donnell

I second the motion. I thank the Minister for coming to the House.

Images of children on the web being abused or in the act of abuse are real, plentiful and profoundly evil. They harm and destroy the children concerned for life. According to Interpol, 4% of these children are under two years, 20% are between three and six years, 45% are between seven and ten, and 30% are between 11 and 15 years. What is done to the child can never be erased, eradicated, washed away or made to vanish. The images of abuse are, therefore, cemented in the souls, hearts and minds of the children for all time. They will also be present on the Internet for all time. The children are captured, abused and caught in the abuse through a camera moving, through a camera still or through an image superimposed. Images of children are published and they are then defined for life by these. That is probably the most important point I am going to make. These child-abusive pornographic images never go away and can never disappear unless we take action. They roam the world of the web like horrific evils. Even when the child depicted has grown up and tried all his or her life to find a route to another world where these gruesome abuse images do not exist, these images continue to roam and route their way to other screens, other screeners, other abusive sinners and other casual, informed or syndicated watchers.

Each time an image is viewed, a child is abused once again, with a new and defined force. Those who may witness or watch such images, whether by chance or deliberation, are witnessing crime scenes. They are also offenders and are aiding and abetting the repetition of the crime. We must do everything possible to stop the distribution of these images. The private, public and unconscionable abuse of children of three years of age and younger sometimes masquerades on the Internet as a kind of public entertainment. In the absence of legislation to stop this, the web will alter — it is already beginning to do so — the structure of our interests and the things about which we think. The web can also present awful images as being normal. Such images suggest a reality about and around children which allows those who look at them to believe that this is how children want to be perceived or viewed. Children have no power to stop this. I am reminded of a quote from Karl Marx, "As individuals express their life, so they are."

The images to which I refer are without boundaries and without dimension. What we are dealing with is what John Milton referred to as "paradise lost". Child pornography is the greatest evil and it generates more money than the oil industry. That is what makes this debate relevant. To be obliged to address such an issue in the Seanad takes my breath away. Such is the seriousness of this motion, however, it must be expressed in the kind of language which can expose those who perpetrate crimes of this type against children. We must legislate to introduce the kind of methods by which we can find a way into the realms of technopoly and technocracy and then stop, block and remove the material to which I refer. Technology is now a kind of fulfilment: it is creativity, it is a purpose but, unfortunately, it is also pornographic. For all our lives, there is now a technological alternative. What happens with the images to which I refer is that ever-increasing numbers of them are subjected to generation storing and distribution in more convenient ways and at greater speeds than ever before. In essence, what is happening is an elevation of this kind of information to some sort of acceptable, metaphysical level.

The quest to access the information to which I refer is as horrifying as the images themselves. What we are trying to do in the form of this motion is bring about the introduction of legislation to stop such horror running amok. At present, we have reached a kind of dysfunctional level and there has been a breakdown in the control mechanisms. Information without regulation is lethal. To the perpetrators of horrific abuse crimes against children, the accommodation — in the absence of suitable controls or blocks — of web pages is something of a wayward licence or gift. It should, of course, be the direct opposite. Child pornography takes its authorisation from and finds its perverted satisfaction in technology. It also takes its orders from technology and creates its own continued and uncontrolled perversion through technology. It is these aspects of the problem to which Senator van Turnhout and I are trying to put a halt through encouraging the introduction of legislation.

Sexuality is the new truth. It is also a new form of truth-telling. We are accepting its availability and its infusion into all we do without knowing we are doing so. The world of pornography is only a small step away. It would not be so relevant if that were not the case. One's sexuality is now everybody's business, intimacy is now public and the computer is now a kind of meta-medium. Child pornography not only directs our knowledge of the world but also our ways of knowing. It is all show business and we are beginning not to be able to separate the awful from the unconscionable.

Abuse of children on the Internet, presented to anybody and all in the guise of knowing, sexually-enticing adults entirely comfortable in the milieu of eroticism, is outrageous. Our tolerance for humiliation is becoming inexhaustible and the boundaries of our behaviour are becoming broader, whether it is in respect of clothes, food games or entertainment. We are all moving towards a uniformity and sameness of style and our tolerance for pornographic language is following this. There are no secrets left in the context of language and meaning. The latter are both used by adults and children with the same ease and violence. We live quite well in highly sexualised excitement. Sex and sexuality are no longer adult mysteries. They are available to everyone, like mouthwash or under-arm deodorant.

The leap to child pornography, while humanly outrageous, does not seem that surprising. If we have become used to and comfortable with such displays of soft pornography, the adult child becomes a kind of aspiration and childhood begins to disappear. It is now merely a matter of how one wants to state the problem. The fading distinction between childhood and adulthood is nowhere more evident than in the abuse of children within pornography. The onset of the world of technopoly and technocracy — the great and gifted world wide web — has opened the door for the very worst of human crimes, namely, those against the innocence of children. The great and good world wide web has forged and honed crimes against child humanity which are difficult to detect, extremely difficult to police and even more difficult either to control or bring to an end. Blocking solutions have matured and are well known to providers of Internet services.

In order that we might begin to tackle this evil, I ask that the Oireachtas support the motion, which recommends that the type of abusive material in question be blocked on servers within the jurisdiction of all EU member states and beyond. If this is done, it will allow us to afford protection to children and families in Ireland. Blocking is the next best thing to deletion.

Pornography and abuse of children are only a mouse click away. Denying abusers access to images of the latter would at least be a start. We cannot bargain with children's lives. It is both our job and our duty to protect children. If we cannot do that or put in place mechanisms which can facilitate it, then we should not be sitting in the Seanad.

Senator Paul Bradford

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "Seanad Éireann" and substitute the following:

"•notes the adoption by the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, on 13 December 2011, of the Directive on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA;

welcomes the new Directive, in which Ireland was actively engaged during the negotiations, and which seeks to enhance the protection of children from sexual abuse and exploitation;

welcomes the requirement in the Directive that EU Member States take the necessary measures to ensure the prompt removal of any webpages containing or disseminating child abuse material hosted on servers within their jurisdiction;

notes that the Directive, with appropriate safeguards, permits Member States to take measures to block access to internet users within their territory of webpages containing or disseminating child abuse material hosted on servers outside their jurisdiction.

recognises that Ireland already has arrangements in place to secure the removal of webpages containing or disseminating child abuse material in Ireland and reports such material found outside the jurisdiction via the INHOPE network of internet hotlines and through cooperation with Europol and Interpol;

notes that many of the provisions of the UN Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography, the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse and the EU Directive on Combating the Sexual Abuse and Sexual Exploitation of Children and Child Pornography have already been implemented in existing domestic legislation;

notes that the Minister for Justice and Equality expects, in the coming months, to bring forward legislative provisions to Government for approval in the usual way, in order to strengthen the protection of children from sexual exploitation and sexual abuse, and facilitate full compliance with relevant international legal instruments; and

further notes that, following enactment of the necessary legislation, arrangements will be made to ratify the UN Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography, and the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse."

I welcome the Minister and sincerely thank the Independent Senators for once again doing the Seanad and the public a great good in bringing forward a matter of such substantial importance. I listened with great interest to what the mover and the seconder of the motion said and I am looking forward to the Minister's response. Let us hope we can progress this very important matter together.

The subject of child abuse has, tragically but very necessarily, been to the fore on the political and social agenda in recent years. Many debates have taken place in this House and throughout wider society with regard to abuse in the church. We are also engaging in a necessary debate on abuse in the home and among families. Tragically, the rate relating to such abuse is extremely high. The abuse which is the subject of this debate, however, is that which takes place in the shadows — in dark places where depraved people abuse children. The lives of the children to whom I refer are literally being destroyed. As Senator O'Donnell stated, such abuse defines these children for life. This abuse does not merely amount to images on computer screens, photographs or whatever, it involves an act which results in children being defined for life. That is why the motion and the sentiments behind it must be taken very seriously by the Government. Action in respect of this matter must be taken at the earliest possible date.

Senator O'Donnell also referred to the "fading distinction between childhood and adulthood". That is a very important observation, which is worthy of much wider ventilation, and it sums up why this debate is taking place. The fading distinction to which she refers and the sexualisation of children across all strata of society are causing profound difficulties for children. This is an extremely serious matter about which we should be greatly concerned and in respect of which we should engage in a broad debate at a later date. The amendment I propose on behalf of the Government is not to strike out the proposition or in any way reduce the strength of what is proposed by the Independent group. It is simply to give a balanced overview of the current position and attempt to chart a route forward so that early progress can be made.

The motion before us covers a broad spectrum but there is a strong focus on seeking the Minister to legislate and require the introduction of a system of blocking web pages containing child pornography content. There is an ongoing debate, not just in Ireland but internationally, about the effectiveness of blocking systems. We must hear the Minister's views on that. In one sense, blocking systems are becoming almost obsolete and international experience now seems to show that most child abuse images or child pornography are now being transmitted and traded via other technologies on the Internet, such as peer-to-peer file sharing systems and online digital lockers, which would not be affected by the blocking of standard web pages. Sadly, the people who trade in and profit from this appalling business are probably trying to move one step ahead from a technological perspective, which is why we need the strongest possible response. It would be interesting to hear the Minister's comments on the effectiveness or otherwise of blocking systems.

It can be argued that blocking systems only hide the existence of illegal child abuse images instead of ensuring this criminal activity is tackled and removed at source. I am advised there have been significant improvements in the speed in which such content has been deleted or taken down in recent years but there is a long way to go. From international experience, it seems that blocking access to web pages and websites containing appalling and graphic child sexual abuse images at best prevents inadvertent or accidental access to such material. In almost all cases, sadly, a determined or sophisticated Internet user can circumvent such blocking systems with some degree of ease and continue to deprive children of respect through a depraved method of sexual enjoyment.

I am advised by officials in the Department of Justice and Equality that the German and Dutch governments, for example, decided not to introduce a process of blocking in respect of child abuse images on the Internet, and the Minister might comment on that. Last year the German Government decided to annul a law to block Internet usage where there is a possibility of child abuse images appearing as it came to the conclusion that the deletion of illegal content should be the priority. In effect, the material should be removed rather than having access blocked. In addition, the success of Internet hotlines and police forces internationally ensured that illegal child abuse images on the Internet would be removed in a much more timely manner. That is the updated position in Germany and the Netherlands.

We often see the Dutch as being liberal in one sense but also advanced in child care and protection. I am advised that a majority of the Dutch Parliament supported a Dutch Minister's decision not to require Dutch Internet service providers to block access to websites, etc. Following receipt of certain information, the Minister advised the Dutch Parliament of his conclusion that alternative Internet services apart from websites were being used to distribute child abuse images and as a result, the blocking of websites containing images, or a blacklist, would no longer serve as a reliable and effective way of making progress.

Like all great problems, this is complicated and complex so the answer may not be as clear as we would wish. We must move on this grave issue as children at home and abroad — right across the world — are being abused and people are benefiting from this financially. I look forward to the Minister taking the necessary action at the earliest opportunity.

Acting Chairman (Senator Paschal Mooney)

I apologise. We were slightly distracted in working out the order of speakers, which allowed Senator Bradford some extra time.

Senator Terry Leyden

I welcome the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, to the House. His very presence indicates how he feels about the motion. This has been a good debate on these vile crimes that are perpetrated on the Internet. I commend the motion, proposed by Senator van Turnhout and seconded by Senators O'Donnell, Mac Conghail, McAleese, Mary Ann O'Brien and Zappone. They put together an extremely good motion and Senator Paul Bradford has tabled an amendment.

I very much support the motion and the amendment. The amendment, through a technical process, outlines the Government's position on the points put forward in the motion. I urge Senators not to divide on the motion as the issue does not warrant it. I support the contents of the motion put together by the Independents and the technical information supplied by the Minister and his senior officials, whom I welcome to the House. That shows how seriously the Department is taking this issue.

The area is complex and I attended the meeting of experts last week. I know Senator van Turnhout has been particularly involved in bringing in two experts in the field. I expect that the information given at the seminar in the audiovisual room last week will be made available to the Minister and his Department, or that may have been done already. These experts were very informed in the highly technical end of this business. A startling view expressed by Senator O'Donnell, which I presume is accurate, is that this pornography industry is bigger than the oil industry. It is a stark statement about an illicit industry.

Senator van Turnhout mentioned that once an image is put on the Internet, it is there for all time, and somehow or somewhere it can be used by others, exploited and families will have to live with it. Abuse will continue and, as another Senator noted, each time the image is shown, the abuse is committed again. The information given last week was worthwhile, and it was indicated that the casual viewing of pornographic images can result in people who would never intentionally tune into a website doing so. Curiosity can be dangerous and lead to inadvertent involvement.

When sites are reported they can be pulled down but as this is a large worldwide industry, it can be very difficult to control. I know the Department of Justice and Equality, together with the Garda Síochána, has been extremely active in detecting crimes and raiding premises where abuse has taken place. There is follow-up on leads to the source of abuse, as outlined by Senators, with investigation of how this can be prevented. This is crucial as such acts are almost unbelievable in a civilised world. That a child of any age could be allowed to be abused is a First World rather than Third World issue. The ages cited in the briefing document we received last week were extraordinary. The New Testament, in the most extreme statement to be found in the Bible, refers to child abuse. The reaction to the abuse of a child then was not different from the reaction today. The biblical statement makes clear the sense of hurt and damage done by child abuse.

The amendment offers a well worded response to each point in the motion. It is interesting to note that Ireland will soon be in a position to ratify the UN Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography. Issues of this nature are regularly discussed in the 47 member Council of Europe. Having listened to those who briefed us last week and the articulate views expressed by all the Senators who have spoken before me — I also look forward to the Minister's contribution — I am confident that this debate will be of great assistance. Airing these issues in the second House of Parliament is a great use of our time. Many other issues of vital importance, for example, employment and education, are discussed regularly. The Taoiseach's nomination to the Seanad of a number of specialists in the area of children's rights has added to the variety of motions that have come before the House. The expertise of Senators can serve an educational purpose for all of us. It is also useful that information on this debate will be circulated to the media.

The Fianna Fáil Party does not want the House to divide on the motion or the amendment. For this reason, I appeal to Senators to unanimously agree to the motion, as amended.

Senator Aideen Hayden

The Minister is welcome. I also welcome the motion tabled by the Independent Senators and congratulate, in particular, Senator Jillian van Turnhout on her work on it. The amendment also has much to recommend it and I hope an agreement will be reached on the matter. I also welcome the indication given by the Minister that the Government plans to introduce a sexual offences Bill in the coming months. This legislation will facilitate the State's full compliance with the EU directive on combating the sexual abuse and exploitation of children and child pornography. It is important to note that this directive permits member states to take measures to block access to Internet users in their territory of web pages containing or disseminating child abuse material hosted on servers outside their jurisdiction. I hope this will go some way towards addressing some of the issues raised by Senator Jillian van Turnhout.

The Special Rapporteur on Child Protection, Mr. Geoffrey Shannon, has also called on the Government to ratify the UN Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography. It is envisaged that the protocol will be implemented in the sexual offences Bill.

Child pornography is a complex and difficult problem to tackle. As Professor Philip Jenkins of the University of Cambridge has concluded, the overwhelming evidence is that child pornography is all but impossible to obtain through non-electronic means. The Internet is often used and, for the most part, unregulated. I draw a clear distinction between the proposal in respect of blocking access to the Internet and recent controversies surrounding the Stop Online Piracy Act, SOPA, and Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, ACTA. As the only victims are children who must be protected, there is no debate about blocking access to the Internet in the circumstances I have described.

Despite increased international co-operation on child pornography, the problem is increasing. According to the National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children in the United States, the number of child pornography images on the Internet increased by 1,500% between 1997 and 2003 and has probably increased exponentially since. In 2007 the British based Internet Watch Foundation, IWT, reported that child pornography on the Internet was becoming more brutal and graphic and the number of images depicting violent abuse has risen fourfold since 2003. The IWT also found that approximately 80% of the children in the abusive images were female and 91% appeared to be children under the age of 12 years.

I fully support the intentions of my colleagues, as expressed in the motion. While it is important to make strong efforts to tackle child pornography, it is also important to recognise the need to find new solutions and means of approaching the problem. According to its 2010 report, the self-reporting system, hotline.ie, which has been operating for ten years, only recently succeeded for the first time in identifying and removing child pornography from the Internet. The reason for this stark illustration of the need for new approaches is not a failure of the system but child pornography is not readily or easily found when trawling through the Internet.

Given the high stakes involved in child pornography, especially in financial terms, perpetrators of this crime have considerable technical knowledge and take advantage of sophisticated systems to manage the proliferation of child abuse material. Some child pornographers circumvent detection by using viruses to illegally gain control of computers on which they remotely store child pornography. In one case, a Massachusetts man was charged with possession of child pornography when hackers used his computer to access pornographic sites and store pornographic pictures without his knowledge. Prosecution is difficult because multiple international servers are used, sometimes to transmit the images in fragments to evade the law. Without international co-operation it is almost impossible to find those responsible.

Another trend, one to which other speakers alluded, is the growing use of sophisticated security measures and peer-to-peer networking in which participants share files on their computers rather than downloading them from a website. This means no fingerprints are left on the computers of those who view child pornography images. The group uses encryption and data destruction software to protect the files and screening measures to ensure only authorised participants can enter the chatroom. Hosting images on websites that could be accessed by members of the public is being consigned to the past. For this reason, blocking websites is failing and we should be careful not to use valuable resources in pursuing this outdated approach.

The clearest example of how child pornography rings work is the recent coup by the Internet vigilante group, Anonymous. The Anonymous hackers infiltrated what is known as "Darknet", essentially a network within the Internet. This "underground Internet" is often used by criminals and sometimes dissidents in countries such as Iran and China to circumvent government censorship. Anonymous members disrupted and hacked into systems of websites hosting child abuse material and obtained the log-in details of more than 1,500 users which they then published online. This incident demonstrates that there is a level of expertise which could be made available to governments and concerned bodies. We should ensure we are as technologically informed as is possible. Simply blocking or removing material may only provide temporary solutions which will not guarantee success. Suggested methods such as monitoring financial transactions and covert electronic surveillance are more likely to yield promising leads as they lead back to the people involved. Pursuing these approaches will require resources, however, and we must make available sufficient resources to ensure we have access to the most up-to-date technology and information to tackle child pornography on the Internet. It is also crucial to continue to increase co-operation at European level and worldwide. I support the methods used by the Garda Síochána under Operation Icarus which is supported and co-ordinated by Europol.

The Government must also embrace the good will shown by those involved with the Internet. For example, in 2008 the Google search engine worked with the National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children to help automate and streamline the way in which child protection workers sifted through millions of pornographic images to identify victims of abuse. Google has developed video fingerprinting technology and software to automate the review of some 13 million pornographic images and videos which analysts at the centre previously had to review manually. Although specialist technology is available to the Garda, it is important that Ireland is at the forefront of advances in order that we are able to tackle this developing disease with a suitable cure. I commend the Senators who tabled the motion and I also commend the Government amendment. I hope and believe a middle way can be found between the two.

Senator David Norris

This is an important but also extremely sad evening for Seanad Éireann. There is no doubt that the last shred of innocence or naivety that any of us might have claimed to possess is gone. I do not know much about this subject. I have never seen child pornography and I do not use the Internet. I am horrified, frankly, by what I have heard. I find the figures placed before the House astonishing. Senator Hayden referred to 13 million images. What concerns me about that is there appears to be demand for this material. I find that utterly shocking and incomprehensible.

Senator van Turnhout, who proposed the motion, said that many of the children were aged between zero and ten years, and I simply do not understand this. She referred to some being aged two and the physical characteristics suggested that some of these children had recently been born. They are not capable of consent, obviously. It is not like the Romeo and Juliet case I raised, which is a reasonable subject for discussion. That is a totally separate issue. They are not capable of consent and they are obviously not capable of reproduction or mutuality of pleasure. What is the point? I do not understand human beings doing it or being interested in watching it. Perhaps curiosity is a factor but I do not know. Perhaps there are people who, when they hear about it, innocently look it up to see what it is all about. I simply do not know.

The Senator also mentioned rogue states and I would be interested in hearing more about that. Which ones are they? Is the phrase "rogue state" intended to mean that there are states which deliberately facilitate this? If so, they need to be named and diplomatic representations need to be made to indicate to them that this is absolutely and utterly unacceptable. A large part of this issue is technical. I do not understand it and I do not know how images can be blocked. These people are terribly devious having listened to what is being said. Senator Hayden seemed to have a clear grasp on it. I admit the technicalities of it are beyond me.

The Minister is a lawyer and his amendment is more concise. It may be that there is room for agreement. I believe it would send out a bad message if there was a division on this because it might be portrayed as if there was division among Members on the subject of child pornography and I do not believe for one second that this is the case. We stand united against it but it could be portrayed that Members were in favour of it or there was some kind of shading or nuance. I recall in the late 1970s attending a conference on the continent and two groups applied for association with us. One was called the Paedophile Information Exchange and the other was called the North American Man/Boy Love Association, both of which I opposed. I called a vote on both and had both excluded but papers surfaced which showed that they had been in contact with us. This was used by the media to suggest that I was in favour of them. I find that astonishing. Let us be united.

I have a suggestion for the Minister and the proposers of the motion. I find nothing to disagree with in either the motion or the amendment. The proposers in their detailed recommendations have, for example, called on the Minister to make a commitment and so on and to bring forward legislation and to spin that out. Perhaps they would be satisfied with a commitment from him that the details they seek will be contained in the legislation he intends to bring forward. I am concerned that a division on this would be problematic. On balance, I believe that, because the motion was brought forward first by the Independent nominees of the Taoiseach, my inclination would be to vote with the motion. I feel I would have to do that but I would regret having to do it.

It is important that the original victims should have their fate addressed. Where are they? What has happened to them? The crime has been committed and the commission of such crimes should be prosecuted as vigorously as possible if the perpetrators can be found. I accept that it must be devastating for people who are perhaps too young to understand what happened to them. I simply do not know what was going on. I do not understand it but to have those images eternally available to be viewed by strangers or, worse, relatives and friends is shocking. I recall hearing of snuff movies, which are equally as bad. I could not believe it. Perhaps other Members do not know what they are. Let us include them as well. Apparently, viewers get pleasure from watching other human beings being tortured and murdered. That should be prosecuted and outlawed as well.

I appeal to all sides to find a method of accommodation in order that the motion is not put to a vote. If that happens, I will feel obliged to vote with the proposers of the amendment.

Senator Martin McAleese

I welcome the Minister to the House. I intend to make a few brief comments because this is an issue on which it should be possible for all us to agree without difficulty, as Senator Leyden stated earlier.

Ireland is attempting to lead in many fields, for example, information technology, digital services and the smart economy. We should also be willing to lead in the prevention of abuse of children either through or on the Internet. The motion, as originally drafted, was aimed at a simple goal, which is the protection of children. It calls for two specific actions. First, it calls on the Minister to bring proposals to Government to ratify two key international treaties on the protection of children from sexual abuse or exploitation. This may require implementing legislation prior to ratification but the motion, as drafted, is broad enough to capture that.

Second, the motion calls for the adoption of legislation to require Internet service providers in Ireland to block child abuse images or material hosted on servers outside the State. Although the amendment tabled by the Leader and supported by Senator Bradford at first glance seems extensive, it only involves changes to drafting or emphasis. When the texts are examined side by side, it becomes clear that there is only one difference of real substance, namely, the amendment tabled by the Leader does not include a call or a commitment to block child abuse images in Ireland or material hosted on servers outside the State. As was stated earlier, this option is legally open to us under the European directive on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography.

I am morally certain that no one — the Leader, members of the Government or anyone else — is opposed to the idea of requiring Irish Internet service providers to block child abuse images or material hosted overseas. In that case, therefore, was it necessary for an amendment to the motion to be tabled at all? Surely the protection of children is an issue on which we can agree the substance of a motion without unnecessary complicated procedural manoeuvrings. I look forward to the Minister's reply.

Senator David Cullinane

I debated with myself a number of times today whether to say what I am going to say at the start of my contribution, but I think I should. On two occasions, because I was in a leadership position in the organisations I was involved with at those times, I had to deal with allegations that were made about access to and viewing of child pornography on computers. Thankfully, in one case, it turned out not to be child pornography, although it was still pornography and was dealt with accordingly. However, in the other case, it was child pornography. As a complaint was made directly to me, I had to access the computer, and some of the images I saw were absolutely sickening. I immediately called the Garda. Luckily, there were robust guidelines in place that helped me do the right thing and make sure the appropriate action was taken. The perpetrator was subsequently dealt with by the Garda. I say that because it is important that all organisations and public bodies — we have seen complaints about people accessing child pornography in public bodies, private companies, whatever it might be — have strong and robust guidelines and that people who come across such images know exactly what to do. There must be proper mechanisms in place to ensure the relevant authorities are contacted and the matter is dealt with.

I welcome this motion, which provides an opportunity to discuss this important issue, and I will be fully supporting the amendment that was tabled by the Independent group. Few subjects evoke such strong feelings as the exploitation and abuse of children. It offends our basic sensibilities and morality. I have two young children, one of five and one of nine months, and it would sicken me to the core if any of my children were abused in any way. As Senator Norris said, nobody can say he or she is not aware of what is happening out there. Young children in this country and outside it are being sexually abused and some people are using that as a form of enjoyment by accessing pornographic images of children on the Internet. It is happening, and we know it is happening. Every single public representative has a responsibility to ensure we do whatever we can to deal with the problem and deal with those who are involved in the abuse of children. Few topics can excite as much outrage as cases involving abuse of children, but that means we should unite on this issue. There should be no differences of opinion or amendments to motions such as this. There should be agreement on what we need to do, and whatever needs to be done to protect children should be done. It is that simple. I will get to the specifics of the Independent group's amendment in a few minutes.

We support the ratification of the optional protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child that relates to child prostitution and pornography. On many occasions we have questioned the current Minister and previous Ministers seeking its furtherance. I hope the Minister will commit to this. As the Government amendment appears to indicate that he might, I hope it happens.

The Government has a responsibility under the Good Friday Agreement to introduce protections at least equivalent to those in the Six Counties. Ultimately, we should be seeking to harmonise upwards and introduce on an all-island basis a child protection framework that is evidence-based, human-rights-compliant and reflective of international best practice. We have for many years advocated constitutional reform, specialised training for gardaí, prosecutors and the Judiciary, and an effective all-island sex offenders register with pre-release risk assessment and post-release supervision to help tackle the issues of exploitation and abuse of children. However, this will require much more than legislation. For the Children First guidelines to have a practical effect, they must be fully resourced. Putting the guidelines on a statutory footing is welcome, but the social workers and others who deal with such situations are beyond stretched as it is, so resources, as ever, are key. I am cognisant of the economic climate and the difficulty in finding resources, but it would be remiss of me not to highlight the importance of such guidelines. It is not merely the letter but the resourcing and implementation of guidelines that are important.

I note that the special rapporteur on child protection has made numerous recommendations that the process of child grooming be criminalised. What is the position regarding the joint work of the Department of Justice and Equality and the Department of Health on the drafting of legislation to criminalise grooming? Can we expect the publication of such legislation in the medium term? This is an area in which we can work to tackle this issue.

I note the importance of measures to block people's access to child pornography in the media. As the motion notes, child abuse images are not just images; they are crime scenes. We must take whatever measures are necessary to ensure those responsible are brought to justice and that such images are blocked from all media. There are those who want to restrict the use of Internet technology to clamp down on free speech, and Sinn Féin shares some of the concerns in this regard. However, this is a matter of protecting children, and we must take appropriate measures to ensure that this happens. We endorse the measures outlined in the motion to this effect.

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter)

I thank Senator van Turnhout and those who tabled this timely motion, and welcome the fact that we are having this debate on an issue that is of substantial concern to me and to the Government and which we are currently addressing.

I listened with interest to the previous speakers who outlined in great detail the need for ongoing strong measures to combat child abuse images, commonly referred to as child pornography, on the Internet. The protection of children from sexual abuse and sexual exploitation, including measures to combat child abuse images on the Internet, is crucial. We all abhor the evil trade in illegal images of children being sexually abused and exploited. I can assure Senators that the Government is fully committed to fighting child sexual abuse, including child sexual abuse images on the Internet. This commitment is demonstrated in the fact that Ireland has signed up to the various international instruments referred to in the motion. The implications for policy and the Government in the whole area of the Internet are complex, since the situation is evolving quickly and is subject to frequent significant technological change.

There are no easy solutions to these issues. The Internet is a worldwide phenomenon, as everyone knows, with no borders and no single organisation controlling it. International co-operation is therefore vital. Every country is struggling to deal with these issues, as evidenced through the various international instruments that touch on this sphere. Technological change is so rapid that policy is almost inevitably in a situation of continuous catch-up.

My Department has been conducting a wide-ranging review of the law on sexual offences, and I expect to bring legislative proposals, in the form of a sexual offences Bill, to the Government in the coming months. This will include measures to enhance the protection of children against sexual abuse and exploitation, including exploitation through prostitution and child pornography. These will facilitate full compliance with the criminal law provisions of the UN and the Council of Europe, as well as the European Union instruments referred to in the motion. I say "full compliance" because, in fact, much of the optional protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography has already been implemented through the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 and the Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Act 2008. For example, our trafficking legislation criminalised the sale of persons, including children, for any purpose. Also, my Department has been advised by the Department of Health that the Adoption Act 2010 meets other requirements of the optional protocol. Similarly, many of the criminal law provisions of the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse, also known as the Lanzarote Convention, are already covered by the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 and the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2006. The EU directive on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography was adopted only recently in December 2011. Ireland's participation in the adoption and implementation of this measure had been approved by the Government and the Oireachtas. The deadline for transposition of the directive by way of national measures is 18 December 2013. As with the UN and Council of Europe instruments mentioned, many of the directive's provisions have been implemented in existing legislation.

There is an existing self-regulatory framework for Internet service providers in Ireland which aims to combat illegal child pornography content online. Members of the public who encounter such material may report it to the hotline.ie service of the Internet Service Providers Association of Ireland. If the material is hosted in Ireland and deemed to be illegal and in contravention of Irish law, ISPAI members are obliged to remove such material. The Garda Síochána is automatically advised of any such instances in order that it can follow up, if appropriate. If the material is hosted in another jurisdiction, it is notified to the Internet hotline in that jurisdiction and-or the relevant law enforcement agencies for follow-up action, with the aim of having illegal content taken down. My predecessors and I have continually drawn the public’s attention to the existence of the hotline.ie service. The first and most important response to illegal child abuse images on the Internet is to track down the source and have the material removed. This focus on so-called “notice and take down” is a key measure stressed in the new EU directive on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography. The hotline.ie service, with the Garda Síochána, plays a vital role in this regard.

There are some important facts to consider in contextualising the debate on child sexual abuse material on the Internet. In only a handful of cases has illegal child sexual abuse material been found to be hosted in Ireland. In the first case in 2009 illegal web content reported to hotline.ie was found to be hosted in Ireland in an incident in which a website owned by a small Irish business had been hacked into. A Garda investigation discovered that because of weak log-on passwords, the site had been hacked into by criminals outside the jurisdiction. In 2010 there were two cases of “mirroring” illegal content in Ireland. They involved large website mirroring services with servers located in Ireland. Although the USA was the actual source of these child sexual abuse images, this illegal content was replicated here. The material was reported to the United States where it was removed. As a result, it also disappeared from the mirrored websites hosted in Ireland.

There has been a continuing downward trend of confirmed illegal content reported by the public to the hotline.ie service, with 186 such reports in 2010 compared with a peak of 284 in 2007. This is despite the fact that the number of reports of suspected illegal content has continued to rise. The total number of such reports was 2,646 in 2010, representing a 25% increase on the 2009 figure. At the very least, this suggests illegal material is being encountered less often by the average Internet user in Ireland. This correlates with international experience in recent times.

The Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 provides penalties for child pornography offences which I consider to be robust, subject to one comment. The offence of knowingly possessing child pornography attracts a maximum prison sentence of five years or a maximum fine of €6,350, or both. I do not regard this fine as adequate. This is an issue that will be addressed in the sexual offences Bill. The maximum penalty for knowingly producing, distributing, printing, publishing, importing, exporting, showing or selling child pornography is a maximum prison sentence of 14 years or an unlimited fine, or both.

The Garda Síochána's domestic violence and sexual assault investigation unit is responsible for the investigation of criminal offences involving child pornography. Any suspected offence involving the abuse of children through the Internet or other technology, whether originating in this jurisdiction or coming to the attention of the Garda Síochána through international agencies or by any other means, is subject to thorough investigation. Specialist computer software is available to the Garda Síochána and utilised to gather information and intelligence on possible suspects operating in this jurisdiction. The resources available for the investigation of this type of crime are continuously monitored by the Garda authorities to ensure they are sufficient.

There is a vigorous and ongoing debate internationally about the merits of employing blocking mechanisms or filters to prevent access to either illegal or harmful content on the Internet. It is important to note that blocking systems will only prevent inadvertent access by Internet users to illegal content and the use of such systems should not give a false sense of security to Internet users.

Those who are against blocking systems fear that they may undermine freedom of expression online and lead to what is described as mission creep, where blocking initially relates only to web pages containing illegal child pornography content but potentially could be extended to any web pages which governments might find objectionable. I do not regard this as a credible reason for inaction. In the past decade blocking systems by Internet service providers in respect of child abuse images have been implemented in several jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Italy and Finland. In the majority of these cases such blocking systems were set up on the basis of a voluntary opt-in approach by individual ISPs, rather than a legislative mandate on all ISPs. In addition, many individual well known Internet companies implement their own filtering systems, for example, Google in respect of search results and Facebook in respect of uploaded images.

On the other side of the argument, the German Government decided last year to repeal a law on Internet blocking of child sexual abuse images it had previously introduced because it considered that deletion of the images should be the priority and because of the success of Internet hotlines and police forces internationally in ensuring child abuse images were removed in a much more timely manner. In 2011 a majority of the Dutch Parliament supported the Dutch Minister of Security and Justice in his decision not to require Dutch ISPs to block access to web pages containing child sexual abuse images. This was on the grounds that other Internet services, rather than websites, were being used to distribute such images and that as a result, blocking websites containing child sexual abuse images on the basis of a blacklist could no longer serve as a reliable and efficient way to contribute to fighting child sexual abuse images on the Internet.

Under a voluntary agreement brokered by the European Commission with GSM Alliance Europe, the association representing European mobile phone operators, all mobile phone operators in Ireland implement a form of blocking on their mobile Internet service which prevents access to websites identified as containing child pornography content. This is important since a key ongoing development in Internet technology is the shift to persons using mobile devices such as smart-phones to access the internet.

Article 25 of the new directive specifically relates to measures against websites containing or disseminating child pornography. First, it provides that member states shall take measures to ensure the prompt removal of web pages containing or disseminating child pornography hosted in their territory and will seek to ensure the removal of such pages hosted outside their territory. This reflects the fact that the primary aim of all efforts in respect of child abuse imagery on the Internet should be to ensure it is removed at source.

Second, Article 25 provides that member states may take measures to block access to web pages containing or disseminating child pornography content. It further provides that any such measures should be set by transparent procedures and provide adequate safeguards, in particular to ensure such restrictions will be limited to what is necessary and proportionate and that users will be informed of the reason for the restriction. The directive also specifies that these safeguards should include the possibility of judicial redress. I am giving a commitment to this House that blocking will be fully considered in the development of the planned sexual offences Bill and in line with our obligations to implement properly the EU directive in this jurisdiction.

While blocking is of assistance in preventing inadvertent access on the Internet to child abuse imagery, it is not enough. It cannot adequately deal with the transfer of material of this nature via peer-to-peer file sharing systems, usenet and e-mail, rather than on standard web pages. How best to implement Article 25 of the recently adopted EU directive is under consideration. This debate is a valuable contribution to our deliberations on this very important issue.

It is the Government's view that everything practical and effective that can be done should be done to address the evil of child pornography. It has correctly been said by some speakers that every such image is evidence of a crime scene and records the sexual exploitation and abuse of children. In an Internet world, with no territorial boundaries and an extraordinary evolving technological ecology, the children presented on such sites continue to be abused and their images viewed across the world. The removal of such sites is crucial. Because of the extraterritorial dimension, international co-operation is essential to counteract access to child pornography and end the continued exploitation of children.

This is an important issue concerning the welfare of children on which there is no substantive disagreement among Members of the House. As I said, a great deal has been done in our legislation to address this evil. Further steps must now be taken pursuant to the recently adopted European directive. I, therefore, ask Senators not to divide on this important issue and to unite to support the Government's amended motion as a clear and unambiguous signal of a united commitment to the protection not only of our children but also children across the world.

The amendment tabled on behalf of the Government is not brought forward for any technical or pedantic reason, or in any way to disadvantage those who, in good faith, have tabled the motion which initiated the debate. It is merely to provide the detail necessary with regard to the international instruments to which we are a party and to make express and important reference to the EU directive which provides architecture to be put in place across the European Union to address this evil. It provides important guidance on the final measures that should be included in our legislation on sexual offences which is being developed. That legislation will go a great deal further than addressing this issue. It will also address a number of recommendations contained in Oireachtas reports, one of which dates back to 2006. Another report which contains recommendations is the that of the committee of which others and I were members in the previous Dáil which dealt with the issue of children's constitutional rights.

I will comment in response to the reference to an all-Ireland child protection framework. This is something of which I am very conscious, particularly where there are differences between the legislative architecture in the State and that in Northern Ireland. Issues relating to child abuse, child pornography and trafficking have been the subject of discussions between the Northern Ireland Minister of Justice, Mr. David Ford, and me. These discussions have been very valuable and I hope we will move to a position in which we will have similar laws on the island of Ireland in the area of child protection and in which we will work in harmony together to ensure the maximum protection possible to ensure the welfare of our children.

Senator Mark Daly

I welcome the Minister. I hope there will be agreement on the motion and the amendment which, as the Minister said, are not entirely in conflict. As Senator Martin McAleese said, they are virtually identical, aside from a few sections.

I agree with Senator Martin McAleese that although this country excels in high technology, we are not blocking images from abroad being accessed in Ireland. I consider this to be a failure of will rather than a failure of technology. I welcome the Minister's statement in the amendment that the Government will bring forward legislation in the coming months to strengthen the protection of children against sexual exploitation. As the Minister is a man of his word, I know he will bring that legislation forward as soon as possible. This is critical. Unfortunately, we have been lacking and fallen behind in many ways in ensuring child protection.

An issue not included in the motion but which, perhaps, the Minister might also consider is that of listing the names of people who have offended against children. It is a very sensitive subject that is not easy to address. However, in a case in Boston Cardinal O'Malley, whom I commend, took the extraordinary step of listing the names of 132 priests who had been found guilty of sexually abusing children. It included those who had left the priesthood but had been accused before or after they had left; it even included the names of dead priests. In some cases — I am sure the Minister will take issue with this — they had not actually been convicted of anything. However, the cardinal considered it important because the people and children involved came first in terms of protection.

When the Minister is drafting the legislation in the coming months, will he contemplate making provision not only for the victims' database proposed by the Taoiseach's nominees to the House but also a list whereby convicted sex offenders would be made known to the public? If they are considered, even after their term of incarceration, to be a risk to the community, the community is entitled to know this. It is the likelihood of their reoffending that makes them so dangerous. Some have refused treatment and, in some cases, the criminal justice system, unfortunately, does not provide them with the treatment or counselling that might prevent them from reoffending. However, in cases where the authorities believe they will reoffend, they should be considered a threat on their release back into the community. There is nothing more serious than the abuse of children and where somebody is likely to reoffend, people in the community, especially the Garda, should be made aware of this in a very clear manner. The guidelines in this regard must be put on a statutory footing and obligations placed on the criminal justice system to ensure the Garda is made aware of such provisions.

I had reason to be somewhat thoughtful about Cardinal O'Malley's actions recently after I had asked a religious order in this jurisdiction to follow his course. It stated it was not obliged to do so. If one element of a religious organisation in Boston can take the lead and, without compulsion or being forced to do so by the government, put children's safety first, it is a wonder that the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart will not follow suit. I have had some very interesting correspondence with the head of the order in which it is stated the order is doing all that it is required to do and does not necessarily have to do any more. I pointed out that it could do more, as Cardinal O'Malley has done——

An Cathaoirleach

The Senator should refrain from naming people in the House who are not here to defend themselves.

Senator Mark Daly

I am praising Cardinal O'Malley.

An Cathaoirleach

I ask the Senator to refrain from using names in the course of the debate.

Senator Mark Daly

Other Members have praised people. I do not believe Cardinal O'Malley, whom I met in Boston on this issue, would be too upset about the fact that I am praising him for his very courageous step. It is not that he was praised by anybody else. Given that he did not receive much encouragement from others, I will take the extraordinary step of praising him. Not many members of his organisation saw it as the correct move. When people take such steps which are above and beyond the regulations and the law, because their primary concern is children's safety, they should be commended. Perhaps the Minister might consider this issue. I realise there are issues surrounding due process, but when the objective is child safety, we should, like Cardinal O'Malley, go above and beyond the norm.

Senator Deirdre Clune

I am glad to have the opportunity to speak on both motions. I welcome the Minister's commitment to consider fully the mechanism of blocking in the context of the sexual offences Bill, which he will bring to Government shortly and that on its enactment, the State will fully comply with the UN protocol on the Convention of the Rights of the Child, the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse and the EU directive on combating sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography. It is very important to be able to state that we are fully in compliance with these three provisions. The sexual exploitation of children is a most serious violation of their rights as it impacts on their dignity and their mental integrity. Child abuse on the Internet needs to be tackled. We need to tackle sexual exploitation of children on a transnational basis and across many forms of activity. We can play a part in harmonising legislation and practices with the EC directives and conventions. There is evidence of a growing number of cases of child pornography, as well as the sale and trafficking of children for sexual purposes and sex tourism, involving children, on the Internet. What are the reasons for this increase in the exploitation of children? With the growing use of the Internet, increasing travel and social disparities, children are increasingly vulnerable in conflict areas. Harmonisation of legislation and practices to combat exploitation is extremely important. It is estimated that one in five children will be victims of sexual abuse or exploitation at least once in their lifetime. Other Members have spoken of the circle of trust, parents, relatives, friends, teachers and carers, where a significant number of cases of sexual abuse takes place. It is very difficult for children to report these cases or to assert themselves, to recognise that such behaviour by a member of this circle is wrong and should be reported.

The Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation, known as the Lanzarote Convention, was open for signature in 2007. It will be a legally binding instrument and is based on more than 15 years of work in member states to tackle this issue. I am a member of the Council of Europe, as is Senator Leyden. We have eight Members from the Houses of the Oireachtas on the Council of Europe. It is very important that we can report that these issues are being dealt with and that legislation will be enacted in Ireland to ensure the Lanzarote Convention is implemented in full.

Images of child exploitation on the Internet is an international phenomenon and the figures are startling. In 2006 the World Health Organization carried out a study which showed that 150 million girls and 73 million boys under 18 years have experienced forced sexual intercourse or other form of sexual violation. UNICEF reckons that each year at least 2 million children across the world fall into the grips of the sex industry. The UN estimates that the sex industry generates between €3 billion and €20 billion and is a lucrative industry. We need to play our part in tackling this.

Last week Interpol made a very interesting and informative presentation to Members in the audio-visual room. The point was made that blocking images of children will not stop all exploitation, but nevertheless, to paraphrase what Interpol said, it is an important element because the material which Interpol is seeking to block is only that which falls into three of the most severe categories of images that are being distributed on the Internet, assault, gross assault and sadistic bestiality. It wants to exclude the lesser categories. A very important point is that Interpol wants to target simple viewers, or individuals who encounter the material by accident, because once their curiosity is tweaked by such images, there is a chance that one in three of these individuals reach a point where they commit a sexual offence against children. Blocking is extremely important as a preventive measure. Other offenders, who are more creative will not use the Internet but will find other ways of communicating.

It is welcome that the Minister will consider blocking such images on the Internet. By so doing we can play our role in tackling the gross crime of child sexual abuse.

Senator Fiach Mac Conghail

I welcome the Minister. I thank my fellow Member, Senator Jillian van Turnhout for raising this issue, as I knew nothing about this before the briefing from Interpol last week.

It was upsetting to see the statistics on offenders that the National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children provided to us. The profile of an offender is a person like me, as 59% are married, 41% have children and 83% are in the age range from 21 to 50 years — I just about make the 50 years mark. It is extraordinary that as a parent, a husband and a man, I fit the profile of the user. We know it is insidious and that we probably know people in our community who access these images.

The Minister must forgive us our suspicions and our comments, when the Government amendment was tabled, because the one word we were looking for, which Senator McAleese mentioned, that is "blocking", was omitted. I know it is no fault on the part of the Minister, but it has happened in previous Private Members' motions that a Government amendment appeared to be a whitewash. Being a new Member, we were looking for the magic word, which was not there, and I ask the Minister to forgive us. I understand and accept this is not his intention. I welcome his commitment to this House this evening that blocking will be fully considered in the context of the planned sexual offences Bill. I invite him to consider introducing the Bill in the Seanad before it goes to the Dáil.

Being a relative newcomer to the issue of child sexual abuse, I wonder if the hotline is as well known, as the Minister and others might expect. I think we need to promote it more, as well as encourage more self regulation and more reporting. I urge the Minister to look again at ways to promote this hotline. Senator Bradford raised the argument made in Germany, which the Minister also mentioned. The difference in the German context is that when the government changed, it became an ideological issue. The then German government agreed on the new law and the police developed it but with change of government, it was suspended. The opposition is clear, that is the former government is clear, that if it returns to power it will reintroduce blocking. I think it is more of a technical than a real point that Senator Bradford tried to score. In the Dutch case, there was also an ideological argument around blocking. It is not fair to say the government changed its view, it is that the government changed.

The importance of blocking becomes apparent when one examines the available evidence and the scale of the attempts being made to reach known addresses containing child abuse images on the web. In 2009, as mentioned by Senator Jillian van Turnhout, BT announced it had estimated that over its broadband network its blocking solution was preventing up to 40,000 attempts a day to access websites known to contain child abuse images. Extrapolated across the broadband network in the United Kingdom, this suggests blocking was preventing up to 58 million attempts a year. Five months after blocking was launched in Denmark in 2006 Danish police estimated that 238,000 users had attempted to reach known illegal child abuse images on the web. BT has implemented its blocking solution in Newry, Belfast, Coleraine and Derry, yet 100 km from Newry that is not the case. Because of our anxiety about the Government amendment, we sought a commitment from the Minister which he has given, for which I thank him.

Senator Mary Moran

I welcome the Minister. I congratulate the Independent Senators, led by Senator Jillian van Turnout, for tabling what is an excellent motion. I also thank them for organising the wonderful briefing session in the AV room last week. Like some of my colleagues, I, too, was unaware of the scale of the problem. As a mother of young children and one who has been involved in the education of young children, I was shocked. I agree with the amendment and commend the Minister for his commitment to consider the blocking solution in the development of the planned sexual offences Bill. As he said, everyone has the wellbeing and the rights of children at heart. We all realise its importance and are united in our commitment to ensure the protection not only of our children but also children across the globe.

Technology such as the Internet, although very valuable, can put children at risk of exploitation and harm. The Internet gives those interested in abusing or exploiting children a new medium to network, share information and explore new identities. Its use has national and international implications which makes the monitoring of exploitative practices all the more difficult. However, it is encouraging to know, as the Minister pointed out, that the Garda Síochána thoroughly investigates suspected offences involving the sexual abuse of children through the Internet or other technologies. We are speaking not only about the distribution of abusive images of children online but also the grooming of children through the use of teen chat rooms, bulletin boards and online communities in which the abuser befriends the child to gain his or her trust. It can also involve prostituting a child. For the children who have been subjected to online abuse, there is a sense of powerlessness, as the digital imagery can remain on the Internet indefinitely. This can have an effect on recovery and treatment, as the child who has been abused in this way is defiled forever.

There is an ongoing international debate about how effective blocking systems are, as new technologies are constantly coming on stream such as peer-to-peer file sharing which can bypass blocking systems. However, blocking will prevent the accidental viewing of web pages containing abusive material by persons who do not intend to access such material. Last year, when I was teaching, a pupil reported to me that she had inadvertently put the name of her favourite pop star into a search engine on the Internet and that vile images had appeared. She was shocked and reported the matter to me. Out of curiosity, there is a temptation to view such images again, which can lead to a fascination for illicit material.

Many European countries, including the United Kingdom, Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Italy, have voluntarily blocked content. It is hard to determine the number of children affected by exploitative practices through the Internet as they may not report the abuse out of fear or shame, something of which we are all aware. Given the large-scale Internet usage among children and young people, their potential exposure to exploitation is heightened. Parents can feel inadequate in monitoring their children's Internet usage, as they may have fewer computer skills than their children. Many parents would most likely be shocked by the content on their children's friends' Facebook or Twitter pages if they knew how to access them. As a parent of five teenagers, I am acutely aware of these issues and the problem of monitoring children's Internet usage. We need to ensure we have the best possible controls in protecting our children.

It is clear from the debate that no one action will combat child abuse on the Internet. This is all the more reason all stakeholders need to adopt a multifaceted approach, not only at national level but also at European level and worldwide.

Senator Rónán Mullen

I commend the Independent Senators for tabling this important and timely motion. I have listened with interest to the various contributions made. I also listened to the Minister's contribution. I wondered initially if it was necessary to table an amendment to the motion. I am starting from the point of view that far too often motions are amended and that there is not adequate tick-tacking beforehand to allow an agreed motion to be tabled. However, I was impressed by what the Minister had to say and I am aware that he takes the issue seriously. I welcome, in particular, the commitment he has made in respect of the forthcoming legislation with which I wish him well, as it is important to be a reforming Minister. The legislation should be supported by all sides of the House.

There is always a difficulty on an issue such as this in that people can, not as a result of insincere motives, try to outdo each other in their expressions of outrage and disgust at the sexual abuse of children and particularly child pornography. There is no doubt that it is one of the horrors of our time. The Internet and related technologies offer many positive opportunities, including advances in education. There is also the importance of the democratisation issue attached to access to the Internet and the free availability of information. In this regard, one has only to think of the challenges facing people in other parts of the world, including China, where there are restrictions on the information they can access and even basic democratic discourse is clamped down on by oppressive regimes. However, with child pornography we see the other side of the coin. The use of the Internet and related technologies takes people to a very dark place, reflecting something very dark in human nature and society.

I have mentioned previously in the House the writer Stephen Rossetti who helped victims of sexual abuse and treated perpetrators. In a book he referred to abuse as a slayer of the soul. When speaking to Senator Jillian van Turnout last week she may have mentioned this; if not, it may have been mentioned by others. There was a particularly sickening instance where a person having left an abusive past, one in which they were abused as a child and exploited for child pornography, tried to put their past behind them and make a new life. They put something very innocent and relating to performance on YouTube and within a short time they were targeted by a former perpetrator or somebody that knew about their past as an exploited child. It was a story that illustrated to me the psychological nature of this type of abuse and the terrible ongoing torture inflicted on children. It also brings home how difficult it can be for people to put their past abuse behind them.

Child abuse is a form of evil in our society that is difficult to explain. Many crimes can be understood as crimes of passion, revenge and so on. This type of crime relates to a particular sickness in human nature. Undoubtedly, in some cases it stems from an extraordinary degree of immaturity and confusion in some of the perpetrators but it arrives at a point where terrible evil is involved. An evil that cannot be wished away by simply referring to it as a sickness or mental issue. It behoves us as parliamentarians to leave no stone unturned. Today I heard arguments about the issue and people said in the Chamber, and I have no doubt that it is true to some extent, that we face a technological challenge as it is not only on websites that some of this pornography exists but in the private exchange of files. The belt and braces approach is always called for when dealing with an issue like this. We should do what we can to ensure that sites are blocked by Internet service providers. This is not an area for light touch regulation. We are not in an era where it is thought best that people regulate themselves. That is no longer the accepted norm in areas like medicine and law and it should not be the norm here. While it is always welcome that Internet service providers show a willingness to regulate themselves, this is an area where we should not fear to legislate to ensure that they do so.

On a positive note, we should pay tribute to people who work with victims of this terrible exploitation and prevent it from happening. The debate ties in with the one we had on trafficking in recent times because women and children are also victims. Children, particularly in the context of today's debate, are victims. We need to do whatever we can, get various Departments of State that deal with various issues to work together, and make sure that this country is always a cold place for anybody that seeks to abuse children. We should also pay tribute to Irish people, and I am thinking of somebody like Fr. Shay Cullen in the Philippines, who have done so much work to tackle those who would abuse children in the sex industry. Their efforts deserve all of our support and we can do our bit as legislators. I look forward to the legislation coming before the House in the autumn.

Senator Cáit Keane

Before the clock starts ticking, how many minutes have we left?

An Cathaoirleach

The Senator will be okay.

Senator Cáit Keane

Senator Healy Eames is also worried about her time.

An Cathaoirleach

She will not be fully okay but she will get a couple of minutes.

Senator Cáit Keane

That is nice to know, even if everybody might not agree with you. I welcome the Minister to the House. I also welcome the motion that was tabled by the Independent group, including Senator van Turnhout. I know that the European Parliament and Council directive was adopted last December and that the Government is working on it as well. We know from the history of the State how we have failed children in the past. I know the Minister is proactive and such failure will not be repeated under his watch. Legislation is one way to deal with the issue and he has shown, since he came to office, that he is serious about tackling such matters. I also thank the Independent group for tabling its motion.

The EU directive demonstrates the willingness of the European Union to protect children from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse and enhance international co-operation. If we look at the stark reality of advanced technology, the Internet has given the sexual exploitation of children a cross-national element. The UN estimates that 200 new child abuse images are placed on the Internet every day. The Internet can be regarded as having transformed global communication, but in many ways it is a dangerous tool that can facilitate some heinous crimes, including child sexual exploitation. It needs careful policing in this regard.

The Internet is a worldwide phenomena without borders or an organisation controlling it. Earlier I listened to the Minister's speech when he spoke about the Internet's self-regulatory framework for the ISPs that operate in Ireland that actively encourages the adoption of best practice procedures aimed at limiting the proliferation of illegal child pornography content. In a number of EU member states, Internet blocking systems are in use. The list of blocked sites containing child pornography is made available by the police and other competent authorities and is utilised by individual ISPs to prevent access to such content. Earlier Senator van Turnhout listed the countries that have a blocking system. It is generally acknowledged that all Internet blocking or filtering systems are not foolproof and can be circumvented in certain circumstances. Filtering systems do prevent Internet users from inadvertently encountering such illegal content. Of course the key objective from a law enforcement perspective is to achieve the removal of such material from the Internet at source. I welcome the call from the Independent Senators' group to sanction a system that would allow child abuse material hosted overseas to be blocked.

I read the Minister's speech and listened to his presentation and understand that he is working on the issue in the sexual offences Bill that he will introduce. Any such Bill must be seriously considered and thought out. The motion was seriously thought out and thorough and I commend those who composed it, but I also support the Minister's legislation and his comments in that regard.

Any suspected offences involving the sexual abuse of children through the Internet or other technologies, whether originating in Ireland or coming to the attention of gardaí through international agencies or hotlines, is subject to thorough investigation. I wanted to state that should anybody listening to the debate or reading it later think there is a free-for-all in the country. Specialist computer software is available to the Garda Síochána and is utilised to gather information and intelligence on possible suspects operating in this jurisdiction. Law enforcement agencies from 26 European countries, including Ireland, supported and co-ordinated by Europol, carried out a major crackdown in 2011 against online child sexual abuse file sharing networks. The operation targeted those sharing the most extreme forms of video material, which included babies and toddlers being sexually abused. The operation has already uncovered previously unknown networks of child sexual offenders operating on different Internet channels.

As I said, there is ongoing international debate about the effectiveness of blocking systems because they only work on standard web pages. The systems have become almost obsolete since international experience has shown that most child abuse images or child pornography is now transmitted via other systems such as peer-to-peer file sharing systems, digital systems and online digital lockers that are unaffected by a blocking system. I think Senator Rónán Mullen and other Senators have already referred to the various online technologies and I am not going to pretend to be au fait with half of them. The Minister also mentioned them.

I know the legislation is in good hands and the Minister is working on combating the issue. Again, I thank the Independent Senators for tabling the motion.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames

I welcome the Minister. I thank the Independent Senators for tabling this Private Members' motion and also welcome the Government amendment as both are mutually supportive.

Everybody has said that we are mostly singing off the same hymn sheet. Child sexual images are on the Internet in our living rooms and in children's bedrooms and that is the new crime scene, as Senator van Turnhout said. It is vile, repulsive and profoundly evil. We must work in unison to combat the problem. It will not be easy to do because the problem is not just in Ireland or Europe but worldwide. Unfortunately, the victims are getting younger and the images are becoming more aggressive and violent. I have spoken to victims of child abuse who are now adults and they continue to have flashbacks, they cannot maintain relationships and they experience neediness because they are defiled forever. We must continue to work together to combat this problem and condemn it in the strongest terms. I know the Minister is bringing forward the sexual offences Bill and, as a leader on the issue, he will facilitate the State's full compliance with the most recent EU directive on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography.

There is a need for an international approach as well as a domestic approach to this issue because legislative provision, internationally and domestically, must be responsive. The Internet is changing rapidly in the context of abusive behaviour and the environments available for abuse. However, because the issue is international in nature does not mean we should fail to do anything. We need both a local and a global approach, as this is not only an Irish or European problem but is a worldwide issue.

We must consider who are the victims; they are young children. It is abhorrent to think of babies and toddlers in this context. We must educate our young people about Internet usage and the dangers that exist. We must empower them to know that being approached in a manner like this is not healthy and is wrong and that these images are wrong and unlawful. It is stunning what children can find funny and what they think may not be wrong. We should not think for a minute that because we think it is wrong that they know it is wrong, so education is critical. It would be helpful to provide for blocking of access to such content by Internet service providers, ISPs, in the State. I acknowledge this will be difficult because the Internet does not have boundaries but this would be the responsible approach to ending this crime and it may help prevent abusers from originating here. There is a danger that if we do nothing and look on this as a global problem, we could be lax. Every country should play its part.

How does the Government link with other countries, not just in Europe but across the globe, to provide the best protection and prevention possible? Is there a way to detect centrally whether a person or group accesses a website with pornographic images of children, innocent or otherwise or if they download images? That has to be nub of the problem. I recall a few years ago a prominent individual was found to have downloaded images on his hard drive. There was a Garda investigation. A fear was expressed about people accidentally landing on a website with these images and whether they would be detected. Approaches should be made by gardaí if they are detected. Is that possible? This is the level of detection needed to prevent such heinous crimes and I am keen to know if there is any information on that available.

Senator Jillian van Turnhout

I thank all my colleagues and, in particular, the Minister. He has paid full attention throughout the debate and he has listened to what we have had to say. He has given a commitment to fully consider blocking sites in the context of the development of the planned sexual offences Bill and I strongly urge him to do so. Both the Garda Síochána and Interpol wrote last year to Internet service providers in Ireland requesting them to introduce blocking. That has not happened and that is why, as a group, we took the step to put forward the motion to introduce a legislative proposal.

I thank the ISPCC, which has been strongly supportive of our work in this area. While I thank all the Senators who made contributions, I would particularly like to thank colleagues in my group: Senators O'Donnell, O'Brien, McAleese, Mac Conghail and Zappone.

I served seven years as chief executive officer of the Children's Rights Alliance and I thought I had hardened to some of the hardcore child abuse issues and I had heard most of it. As we have explored this issue and as my colleague, Senator O'Donnell, clearly illustrated, there is the issue of the effects of these images and how they can define one's life. Every picture is a child scene. I earlier described the profile of the main victims, with 69% being under the age of ten and 4% under the age of two. They often receive counselling as part of their recovery but what about the knowledge they have that their names and pictures are on the Internet and that Ireland is not blocking them? Can Members imagine walking down Grafton Street or around a shopping centre looking around and wondering whether people know who they are and what happened to them?

I trust the Minister's commitment and believe he is convinced but I want to share with him our group's commitment to follow this issue up to ensure blocking is put in place.

Amendment agreed to.

Motion, as amended, agreed to.

An Cathaoirleach

When is it proposed to sit again?

Senator Paul Bradford

Tomorrow at 10.30 a.m.

Seanad Éireann debate - Wednesday, 29 Feb 2012

Child Abuse: Motion

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 29 Feb 2012