Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 23 Jun 1998

Vol. 156 No. 3

Child Trafficking and Pornography Bill, 1997: Committee and Remaining Stages.

Sections 1 and 2 agreed to.

SECTION 3.

Mrs. Ridge

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 5, subsection (2), between lines 32 and 33, to insert the following new paragraph:

"or

(d) sells for monetary or other gain a child under the age of 16 years into a marriage contract,"

I appreciate that the marriage of minors is already outlawed, but I propose this amendment with regard to the trafficking provisions of the Bill. There was an instance in which a young person was traded by a minority community resident in the country. The social practices of the community does not forbid the sale of young girls as brides. This will become more of a problem because the numbers in this community are increasing and I cannot see it doing away with traditions which are not outlawed in its native country.

The culture of some of the ethnic groups allows for the sale for money of girl brides who may be as young as ten or 11 years of age. When these children are sold the effective result is statutory rape. If possible the Bill should make provision to deal with this trafficking. This practice goes beyond our marriage laws and, I believe, falls within a definition of trafficking or sale for money or gain.

Dr. Henry

I support the amendment. We must look at this problem in the financial context of the major worldwide market in brides, particularly those from the Far East. The former President, Mary Robinson, recently spoke in Geneva about the major industry in the trafficking of women. It is worthwhile remembering that many of these young girls come from areas where there may be difficulties in obtaining a birth certificate, so it is hard to know the girl's actual age — she may say she is over 16 years but may be under 16 years. The Minister knows of the "green harvest" in Vietnam and Thailand where the daughters of farmers who cannot pay their debts are sold into marriage or to brothels — depending on their good or ill fortune.

The selling of women into marriage is a big financial business. We have little knowledge as to the age of these women. They are sold and brought to Western Europe and America. The acceptance of this amendment will be worthwhile in specifically stating our concern about girls who may be sold into marriage.

Mr. O'Donovan

The principle of Senator Ridge's amendment is laudable and I support the arguments made by her and Senator Henry. However, the provision is incorporated in the Children Bill, 1996, a broad and important Bill which has not yet been enacted. While I support Senator Ridge and accept the sincerity of her contribution, the Children Bill deals more effectively with her proposed amendment. The Bill incorporates a great deal of new legislation covering the abuse of children under 16 years. I urge the Minister to bring the Bill before the House as early as possible in the next session.

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue)

The effect of this amendment would be to make it an offence for a person to sell a child under the age of 16 years into a so-called marriage contract. I appreciate the thought behind the amendment and I share the sentiments of Senator Ridge, Senator Henry and Senator O'Donovan on the despicable practice of selling young girls as brides.

However, this practice, as already indicated by Senator O'Donovan, is catered for and criminalised under existing law — in this Bill and the Children Bill, 1996, which is awaiting Committee Stage in the other House. It is clear that the type of marriage contract we are discussing is not a valid marriage in law. The Family Law Act, 1995, provides that a marriage between persons, either of whom is under the age of 18 years, is not valid in law unless the consent of the President of the High Court has been obtained.

The position of children who come here from abroad is not different to that of Irish children since the 1995 Bill applies to marriages taking place here, irrespective of where the parties to the marriage are ordinarily resident. In the absence of a valid marriage, sexual activity with an underage girl constitutes an offence of unlawful carnal knowledge. Section 2(2) of the Bill creates a number of offences of taking, detaining or otherwise using children for the purpose of their sexual exploitation as well as organising or facilitating such taking, detaining or use. The term "sexual exploitation" is comprehensively defined in subsection (3) to encompass, among other things, the commission of any sexual offence against the child which is an offence under any enactment. Clearly, this will include the offence of unlawful knowledge which, as I have said, is committed in the event of a marriage to a child not being valid.

I would also point out that the Children Bill, 1996, contains a provision which will punish any person who causes or encourages a sexual act with a child under 17 years of age. This will update a provision in the Children Act, 1908, under which the penalty on conviction is a maximum of two years' imprisonment.

The penalty proposed in the 1996 Bill is five years imprisonment on conviction on indictment. I believe that to be unacceptably low and I am proposing to increase it to 14 years in line with the penalty structure provided for in the Bill before us.

Lastly, I should like to mention a provision in the Non Fatal Offences Against the Person Act, 1997, which would also be of relevance in the context of selling children as brides. Section 15 of that Act extends the common law offence of false imprisonment to cover cases where the false imprisonment is brought about by deception causing the victim to believe that she is under legal compulsion to consent. A person commits the offence if he or she takes, detains or causes to be taken or detained, or otherwise restricts the personal liberty of another person. That offence carries a penalty of up to life imprisonment on conviction on indictment.

I hope from what I have said that Senator Ridge is as satisfied as I am that what she is seeking to do is already covered in our criminal law as well as in this Bill. If her amendment were to be accepted it would be open to the interpretation that such was not the case. In the circumstances I trust that she will understand why I am not in a position to accept her amendment.

An Cathaoirleach

Is the amendment being pressed?

Mrs. Ridge

Did the Minister say when the Children Bill will be enacted?

Mr. O'Donoghue

The Children Bill is awaiting Committee Stage in the Lower House. I anticipate that when the legislation is taken it will be expedited and this matter will then be catered for. As I have already stated, the practice is also catered for under this particular Bill.

Mrs. Ridge

I know the Minister shares the concerns of Members of this House with regard to this matter. If he is categorically stating that this matter is already covered I will accept his word. I would ask him to bear in mind that I am still worried that the practice is a specific act of child trafficking which has been unknown in this country until now. That is why I would ask that specific reference to this aspect of it should be referred to again when the Children's Bill is being discussed. I would be pleased if that could be arranged. Under those circumstances I will, of course, withdraw my amendment.

Dr. Henry

I hate to correct Senator Ridge but I do not think we should let the impression go out that a child was never sold for money in this country before some minority groups came here. I do not think that is the case at all and Irish literature would tell the Senator the contrary.

Mrs. Ridge

I appreciate that.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Section 3 agreed to.

Section 4 agreed to.

SECTION 5.

An Cathaoirleach

Amendments Nos. 2 and 3 may be discussed together by agreement.

Mrs. Ridge

I move amendment No. 2:

In page 6, subsection (1)(a), line 20, after "publishes" to insert "or allows access by children to".

I appreciate that, as the explanatory memorandum states, the Bill deals specifically with child trafficking and pornography. I am concerned, however, about the ease of access by children to pornography. I have stated my concerns about this on several occasions in the House. The amendment seeks to insert the words "or allows access by children to" because I think we are all missing the boat with regard to this matter. The availability of hard core pornography, including imports from Holland, France and Germany, is advertised in newspapers. These advertisements are published in supposedly reputable newspapers and I can produce them if the Minister wishes. However, I do not want to be considered a crank who collects copies of such advertisements and the Minister need only buy a newspaper to see them.

One particular shop on a Dublin street has a sign in the window with large writing for everyone to see, including small children, which proclaims "Hard core videos for sale or rent". I understand that some of the specially imported videos advertised in the press contain child pornography. I hope this amendment will not be struck down, because it is an established fact that under-the-counter child pornography specially imported from the continent can be obtained from sources advertised in newspapers and magazines. I cannot see how the amendment does not comply with the spirit and meaning of Bill and it should not be struck down.

Dr. Henry

I support Senator Ridge's amendment. The quality of many of the child pornography videos, etc., is poor and I am heartened by the fact that it is virtually unknown for the people who purchase such material to appeal to the Consumers' Association for recompense from those responsible for producing it. However, as stated on Second Stage, this material is used to "soften up" children to facilitate their involvement in sexual abuse. It is important that those who provide children to it should be prosecuted.

I may have been as sanguine as other Members in respect of gaining access to pornography on the Internet because it is not as difficult to do so as I had believed. For example, innocuous names such as "House of Lords" can, when entered into one's computer, provide access to a number of Internet sites. If one does not notice that some of these sites are geared towards men who like men, the first site one will visit is pornographic in nature. To gain further access to this site, one must use a PIN number, provide money, etc. My point is that innocuous names are often used by the owners of pornographic Internet sites to attract unwitting people and it is easier than I had believed to gain access to such sites. Senator Ridge is right to ask that those who provide children with access to pornographic material should be held guilty of committing a crime.

Mr. O'Donoghue

As Senator Ridge stated, these amendments aim to prevent children having access to pornography. Clearly the Bill is only concerned with child pornography. What might be termed "adult" pornography is a separate issue.

In so far as child pornography is concerned, I am satisfied that what the amendments seek to achieve is already provided for in the Bill. The relevant provisions are contained in section 5 which makes it an offence to distribute, sell or show child pornography or to advertise the distribution, selling or showing of such pornography. Section (5)(2) provides that the term "distribution" in this context includes parting with possession of something or exposing or offering it for acquisition by another person. The section is targeted primarily towards large scale producers and distributors who trade in child pornography for profit. However, it is also designed to deal with persons who trade in child pornography without profit. It is clear that shopkeepers who carry and expose child pornography for sale and newspaper groups which carry advertisements concerning the availability of child pornography may be dealt with under section 5. In the circumstances I fail to see the need for the amendments.

Adult pornography or any pornography other than that relating to children is outside the scope of the Bill. However, it is among the issues addressed in the discussion paper on the law and sexual offences which I published last month. The discussion paper sets out the existing laws in respect of the exhibiting of indecent or obscene material in shop windows and the affixing of such material in any public place. Given that these laws date back to the last century, the paper rightly points out that they would benefit from updating. It also asks that they be strengthened to include all advertising and displaying of pornography by whatever manner or means.

The point which Senator Ridge is seeking to address, in so far as it relates to adult pornography — although not appropriate to this Bill — will certainly be examined in the context of the formulation of legislative proposals ensuing from the discussion paper. In those circumstances I hope the Senator will withdraw the amendment.

Mrs. Ridge

I am not going to withdraw the amendment. I accept the Minister's statement that the forthcoming sexual offences legislation will deal with this matter. However, legislation can be slow to take effect. Like many parents and adults, I am concerned by the fact that children have free access to print and media pornography. If the Bill is to be comprehensive it should include an acknowledgement of that reality. For that reason I am pressing the amendment.

Mr. O'Donoghue

As drafted, the amendments would not have the effect described by Senator Ridge. They are worded so that they refer only to child pornography, which, as already stated, is covered by the Bill. In those circumstances, will the Senator reconsider her position?

Mrs. Ridge

No, I feel obliged to press the amendment.

Amendment put.

The Committee divided:Tá, 12; Níl, 23.

Tá

• Burke, Paddy.
• Coogan, Fintan. Cosgrave, Liam T.
• Gallagher, Pat.
• Hayes, Maurice.
• Henry, Mary.
• Cregan, Denis (Dino).
• Doyle, Avril.
• Doyle, Joe.
• O'Dowd, Fergus.
• O'Toole, Joe.
• Ridge, Thére se.

Níl

• Bohan, Eddie.
• Callanan, Peter.
• Cassidy, Donie.
• Chambers, Frank.
• Cox, Margaret.
• Cregan, John.
• Farrell, Willie.
• Finneran, Michael.
• Fitzpatrick, Dermot.
• Gibbons, Jim.
• Keogh, Helen.
• Kiely, Daniel.
• Lanigan, Mick.
• Leonard, Ann.
• McGowan, Patrick.
• Mooney, Paschal.
• Moylan, Pat.
• Norris, David.
• O'Brien, Francis.
• O'Donovan, Denis.
• Ó Murchú, Labhrás.
• Ormonde, Ann.
• Ross, Shane.

Tellers: Tá, Senators Burke and Ridge; Níl, Senators Farrell and Keogh.

Amendment declared lost.

Amendment No. 3 not moved

Section 5 agreed to.

SECTION 6.

Dr. Henry

I move amendment No. 4:

In page 7, subsection (2), between lines 14 and 15, to insert the following paragraph:

"(c) including material sent by ‘Hot Line' for the purpose of reporting an offence.".

This amendment concerns the Internet. The main objectives of a hot line or a focal point are to monitor child pornography and paedophile activities on the Internet. They can also stimulate and educate non-governmental organisations about the fact that the Internet represents a powerful medium for the distribution of child pornography. The most important hot line was set up by the Norwegian ombudsman. I had the privilege of attending the first world congress on child sexual abuse in Stockholm a number of years ago. At the conference the Norwegian ombudsman volunteered to set up a hot line which could serve Europe so that people could report child pornography on the Internet. This is funded by the European Union. Not only is the hot line used for reporting pornography at various sites, it is also used to educate non-governmental organisations involved with children on how to deal with child pornography in their respective countries.

I compliment the Minister on bringing forward this legislation because one of the most important objectives of the conference was that we would try to bring forward as rapidly as possible comprehensive legislation on child pornography and it is good to see this Bill, albeit later than other countries. The focal point or the hot line receives tips about the location of sites containing child pornography on a daily basis. These sites are usually linked to paedophile activities, and strategy proposals can be brought forward on how to combat these distribution sites and prevent the activities involved.

When I started to investigate child pornography on the Internet everyone told me it would be impossible to bring in legislation to cover it. However, I went to Helsinki because the Finnish police managed to prosecute a server that was receiving pornography from America and then retransmitting it. They managed to close the server on foot of a Bill introduced in Finland following a successful prosecution by the Church of Scientology after the server used some of its material without permission. This was craftily used by the Finns to say servers would have to show they received permission from the source of the pornography before they could distribute it on the Internet.

To run centres which will police cyberspace on behalf of children, one must account for the possibility of information being given to the source. Have we allowed for information to be distributed on the Internet via a hot line or a focus point so that users will clean up their sites? Do we need to specifically mention that such people should not be prosecuted?

It is important we ensure people are encouraged to send in information about sites on the Internet where child pornography can be found. This is a big business. The focal point in Norway was set up 18 months ago and it has received 3,000 reports, which is a considerable number. Reputable web users are closing them down and there is another hot line in Rädda Barnen, Sweden. I do not wish that people who report to such cyberspace vetting stations be liable to prosecution. Does the Bill cover this?

Mr. O'Donovan

I support Senator Henry's remarks in principle as they are valid. However, on Second Stage the Minister outlined that a working group was set up by the previous Government to report on Internet abuse and it will shortly publish a report on these matters. It would be more appropriate to wait for the outcome of this report.

I referred on Second Stage to this very important area. It is of grave concern that the Internet can be used to facilitate child pornography in a very technically advanced fashion. It is amazing that children of six or seven years of age are better able to use computers and access the Internet than many people in my age group. This area must be looked at. I fully concur with the Senator's remarks. The whole question of abuse of the Internet, not just the dissemination of information about child pornography, must be looked at.

I urge my colleague to wait until we see what light the report will throw on this area. I have no doubt we will return to these matters in the not too distant future after the report is published. We must deal with the abuse of information acquired over the Internet soon.

Miss M. Wallace

There is some concern in regard to the drafting of Senator Henry's amendment. The subsection she is trying to amend reads: "Section 5(1) and subsection (1) shall not apply to a person who possesses child pornography. ." to which she wishes to add "including material sent by ‘Hot Line' for the purpose of reporting an offence". That causes drafting problems and distorts the meaning of what she is trying to achieve. For those reasons, we cannot accept the amendment.

However, the interim report of the working group on the Internet, which has been referred to, will address the question of these hot lines. As Senator O'Donovan said, the Minister stated he will be in a position to publish the report shortly and he expects to do so in the next week or two. I hope something will come from that in terms of what Senator Henry is trying to achieve, which accepting this amendment would not do.

Dr. Henry

Senator Ridge is waiting for a Bill and I am waiting for a report — I will have to wait even longer. I know the amendment is clumsily drafted but it is very important for the Bill to cover these people in some way. There have already been 3,000 reports in 18 months, which represents a very small number of the available sites. I will not repeat in the Seanad the innocuous sounding names of the Internet sites I have been given which, to my amazement, contain child pornography, although I will tell the Minister's officials privately.

The Norwegian ombudsman, to whom I referred, is being financed by the European Union to police this situation. Some service providers close down these sites. I gather one of the service providers here closed down all binary images for about two weeks when it got worried about something pretty innocuous. The providers are prepared to play their part in policing themselves but someone must point out the providers who are pushing this material on the web.

It will be unfortunate if the people who find it — which will not be the Minister or I because I do not see us spending our evenings surfing the web — cannot be sure they will not be prosecuted if they report it. We might have to wait quite some time, during which a great deal of child pornography might be left unreported on the Internet. What guarantee does anyone have that they will not be prosecuted if they report it? As far as I can see, they could be. I will be delighted if the Minister's officials can say that will not be so. However, we all know it will take at least five years to produce a report and an Act.

Mrs. Ridge

Hear, hear.

Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Miss M. Wallace)

I am advised pornography can be reported because it will allow the crime to be investigated. The crime which would be investigated would be the distribution of child pornography, not the reporting of it.

Dr. Henry

If the Minister says there will be no problem under this Bill for persons reporting child pornography I will publicly say so. I have taken an interest in this for years and one could see from the word go that there was going to be trouble. Sites involving pornography, including child pornography, are among the most visited sites on the web. If the Minister can tell me that people who report this will not be prosecuted I will be perfectly happy to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Section 6 agreed to.

NEW SECTION.

Mrs. Ridge

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 7, before section 7, to insert the following new section:

"7.—It shall be an offence for any newspaper, magazine or periodical on circulation in the State to publish any advertisement for sex chat lines or any chat line which is pornographic in content.".

I have received many representations from parents whose children ran up telephone bills, sometimes in excess of £500, and the unanimous support of members of my local authority on this matter, all of whom received similar representations. From the work I have done on this issue I have found that greed is the great motivator, specifically the greed of Sunday and daily newspapers in accepting sexually explicit and visually offensive advertisements.

I am not necessarily advising the Minister of State to access these lines, although I hope her officials have done so and have received the quite shocking aural service I received when I accessed it. I feel very strongly about this. Anyone who can use a digital telephone can access these lines by dialling a PIN number. As I said on Second Stage, the depravity and perversion lines are freely available through explicit advertisements in newspapers and magazines.

Senator Henry is talking about the Internet and I am talking about telephone lines. The Postal and Telecommunications Services Act, 1983, amended section 13(1) of the Post Office (Amendment) Act, 1951, to read:

A person who—

(a) sends, by means of the telecommunications systems operated by Bord Telecom Éireann, any message or other matter which is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character . shall be guilty of an offence.

Such a person is liable on conviction by a jury to a fine of £50,000. We could make a great deal of money for the State by enforcing this, apart from anything else.

My simple, honest request, based on my duty as a public representative and on the representations I have received, as have other elected representatives who have raised this issue, is to ask why we are not acknowledging that seven year old children know how to use telephones. We are contributing to a massive con in regard to the cost, which can be £1.94 a minute. We are allowing some children to be prematurely introduced to unnatural sexual practices. It is all carried in explicit advertising in newspapers, magazines and periodicals.

On Second Stage, the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Fahey, agreed with my views on the advertisement of sex chat lines. I trust the Minister of State will, therefore, accept the amendment, especially when the Leader of the House assured me the matter would be covered by this Bill and that I would be supported by the other side of the House. Why would the Bill allow the commission of what is an offence under the Postal and Telecommunications Services Act? It would appear advertisers and telecommunications services who allow these calls are guilty of an offence.

I am sure Senator O'Donovan and the officials accompanying the Minister of State, who, if I recall correctly, also accompanied the Minister of State at the Department of Children and Health, Deputy Fahey, on Second Stage, recall his agreement with my views on the banning of telephone sex chat lines, which can be and are easily accessed by children.

Dr. Henry

Senator Ridge has given another example of how this Bill is about money from the sale of children and their images for sexual exploitation. These sex chat lines are not free. This is all about money.

Miss M. Wallace

In so far as sex chat lines have a child pornography content, what Senator Ridge is seeking to achieve is already catered for by this Bill. The definition of "child pornography" includes ". audio representation that advocates, encourages or counsels unlawful sexual activity with children,". In addition, section 5(1)(c) makes it an offence for any person to knowingly publish or distribute—

. any advertisement likely to be understood as conveying that the advertiser or any other person produces, distributes, prints, publishes, imports, exports, sells or shows any child pornography,

We agree that encouraging the use of sex chat lines is a distasteful form of advertising. From the telecommunications viewpoint, the Department of Public Enterprise would have a role to play in any legislative proposals and in the implementation of the law in this area. Section 96 of the Postal and Telecommunications Services Act may prohibit the transmission of objectionable messages.

I am sure all in this House object to adult pornography. Perhaps sex chat lines could be discussed in the context of a discussion paper on the law on sexual offences. The Senator may have discussed this earlier with the Minister.

The amendment refers to the need to distinguish between child pornography on the one hand and pornography generally on the other. However, in its proposal to deal with chat lines which are pornographic in nature it fails to make this distinction. Nevertheless, sex chat lines which have a child pornography content are covered by the legislation.

Mrs. Ridge

The Minister of State and I rarely disagree but on this issue we have different interpretations of a definition. If the Bill covers unlawful sexual activity with children, is an adult who engages in obscene and unnatural descriptions of sexual practices with a minor on a telephone line not engaging in such unlawful activity? Why is this not viewed as child pornography?

Miss M. Wallace

There are three relevant aspects to this question. With regard to telephone numbers, the information can range from the use of weather forecasts to horoscopes to explicit sexual content, which is what we are concerned with. Even the latter category can be subdivided into educational material — for example, advice for worried teenagers — to the pornographic. Any legislation would have to isolate this pornographic category by defining the word "pornography". This would not be easy and would require much work. For example, it might be necessary to distinguish between "erotic" and "pornographic". It may also be necessary to make a link between violence and pornography. It was hoped that what we were trying to cover has been included in the legislation.

Mrs. Ridge

I disagree with the views expressed by the Minister of State. It is ludicrous if we must start to define again the meaning of "pornography". The dictionary contains a simple definition of the word. Unfortunately, this was compiled before the Internet or the odious sex chat lines. I almost take exception to the reference to the weather forecast. It has nothing to do with this ongoing unlawful sexual activity, which is most expensive, is a massive con and an abuse of children. It is concerned with the sexualising of young children on a provided system of telecommunications for which nobody is prepared to take the flak.

Perhaps I am not skilled enough in the wording of amendments. However, the Leader of the House knows my concerns and told me they would be covered in the Bill. Where is the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Fahey, who agreed with me on Second Stage? It is disgusting that anti-family and anti-women advertisements are carried in newspapers where any child can read them. It is not good enough and I will be pressing this amendment. I know the Minister would not want to encourage the continuance of this. It comes within the scope of the Bill — it is an unlawful sexual activity. The parents who approach me are not concerned about their children making calls to the weather forecast. I rang one of the numbers myself and what I was offered was mind boggling; it would be charitable to call it unlawful sexual activity. Any ten year old child could ring that number.

Are we protecting children in this Bill or trying to demonstrate how good we are at defining words in the dictionary? Due to the verbal support I received from the Government benches, which has fallen strangely silent today, I withdrew one of my amendments. What is the purpose of my being here when I was told categorically that I would have the support of the entire House?

Dr. Henry

I hope we are not returning to the argument about the difference between eroticism and pornography. That has been discussed for generations and I would hate to think we would go down that road at this late stage.

What is the situation if an adult dials a sex chat line and then hands the phone to a child? Is the child then being abused? I ask this because I have seen too many instances where pornographic videos were used to soften children up so that they felt some totally unsuitable activity was normal. This is one of the main problems with incest, children think that this is what happens in every household. That is often why they take so long to report abuse. If an adult rings a sex chat line and hands the phone to the child he is trying to abuse, is this form of abuse covered by this Bill?

Miss M. Wallace

On pages 3 and 4 of the Bill the definition of child pornography in the context of this Bill is given. We are trying to address the difference between child pornography and pornography to which children have access.

Mrs. Ridge

When they access the lines, they specifically engage in unlawful sexual activity.

Miss M. Wallace

Within the definition, which I tried to explain during the debate, our advice is clear that this is the definition of child pornography. General pornography to which children have access is a different issue which is outside the scope of this Bill. The Bill deals strictly with child pornography as defined on pages 3 and 4. The difference between child pornography and general pornography to which children have access was dealt with by Minister O'Donoghue.

Mrs. Ridge

Is there any way out of this dilemma of definition? I accept that the Minister is acting in good faith on foot of the advice given to her. The advisers' definition of unlawful sexual activity with minors and my definition differ greatly. I will reword my amendment and come back on Report Stage if that is of assistance.

Miss M. Wallace

I am advised that is outside the scope of the Bill.

Amendment put.

The Committee divided: Tá, 12; Níl, 25.

Tá

• Burke, Paddy
• Coghlan, Paul.
• Coogan, Fintan.
• Cosgrave, Liam T.
• Costello, Joe.
• Cregan, Denis (Dino).
• Doyle, Avril
• Doyle, Joe.
• Henry, Mary.
• O'Dowd, Fergus.
• O'Toole, Joe.
• Ridge, Thére se.

Níl

• Bohan, Eddie.
• Callanan, Peter.
• Cassidy, Donie.
• Chambers, Frank.
• Cox, Margaret.
• Cregan, John
• Farrell, Willie.
• Finneran, Michael.
• Fitzgerald, Liam.
• Moylan, Pat.
• Norris, David.
• O'Brien, Francis. Ross, Shane.
• O'Donovan, Denis.
• Fitzpatrick, Dermot.
• Gibbons, Jim.
• Glynn, Camillus.
• Keogh, Helen.
• Kiely, Daniel.
• Lanigan, Mick.
• Leonard, Ann.
• McGowan, Patrick.
• Mooney, Paschal.
• Ó Murchú, Labhrás.
• Ormonde, Ann.
• Ross, Shane.

Tellers: Tá, Senators Burke and Ridge; Níl, Senators Farrell and Keogh.

Amendment declared lost.

SECTION 7.

Acting Chairman (Mr. D. Cregan)

Amendment No. 6; amendment No. 7 is related. Amendments Nos. 6 and 7 may be discussed together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Dr. Henry

I move amendment No. 6:

In page 8, subsection (4), line 2, to delete "£1,500" and substitute "£5,000".

This is a very small fine for obstruction and I would have thought we could increase it to £5,000. Twelve months is a short term and I would like to see the Minister increase it to five years. These are serious offences but the penalties do not seem serious. pass."

Miss M. Wallace

The effect of these amendments would be to take the offences in section 7(4) out of the category of summary offences to be dealt with by the District Court and to make them indictable offences, by which I mean offences triable in the Circuit Court. This is because the penalty which may be imposed on summary conviction for an offence does not normally exceed a fine of £1,500 or imprisonment for a term of up to 12 months. It is only in very particular circumstances that the District Court can sentence a person to more than 12 months imprisonment and even then the sentence may not exceed two years. with the advice she received but I am sure she

The offences in section 7 are standard offences created in just about every entry and search provision in every enactment. If I were to agree to this amendment, then clearly the consistency which exists between the many analogous offences under other enactments would be broken. Certainly, the offences under this Bill may be regarded as more serious than certain other criminal offences. However, for the purpose of the offence created under section 7(4), what is at issue is not what the Garda are attempting to seize from the search but rather the fact that the person, whose premises are being searched, is not co-operating with the Garda. It is this lack of co-operation which warrants punishment rather than the nature of the goods seizable under the warrant. Accordingly, while I appreciate the thinking which influenced Senator Henry to table these amendments, I regret we are unable to accept them.

Dr. Henry

I do not want to take it out of the District Court but maybe it would be no harm if it had to be referred to the Circuit Court. To give false names and addresses is a very serious offences in the context of such a serious crime. However, I understand the Minister's reasons.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment No. 7 not moved.

Section 7 agreed to.

Sections 8 to 12, inclusive, agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment and received for final consideration.

Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."

Dr. Henry

I congratulate the Minister on introducing this Bill. It is of great importance and is long overdue. I know the Minister put a great deal of time and thought into it.

One of the most important aspects of the conference I attended in Stockholm in 1996 was that our countries should try to become active in the protection of the rights of children in this area. Certainly I will take a little of the credit when I write and tell them how well the Minister has done with it.

Mrs. Ridge

I thank the Minister. I do not agree with the advice she received but I am sure she acted in good faith. When will the sexual offences Bill be introduced?

If I am correct in any of my interpretations this afternoon, the State should be doing something about the abuse of the Postal and Telecommunications Services Act, 1983. Either there is legislation or there is not. As usual, we are great about enacting it but imposing it seems to be another matter.

I commend wholeheartedly the good aspects of the Bill and wish it every success. I hope that the next time my colleagues say they will support me they will mean it, not like today.

Mr. O'Donovan

I too compliment Minister of State, Deputy Mary Wallace, and Minister O'Donoghue on introducing this important Bill which will be on the Statute Book soon.

This has been a good debate. I would not like to see my colleague, Senator Ridge, lose heart. She made some valid contributions on both days. Sometimes when amendments are not accepted I get the impression that the Senator could be right but, even though I am a lawyer, I, too, must be guided by my Minister and her advisers. In fairness, this issue has been well debated. The Senator made many points with great sincerity and I agree with her. She called two votes because she felt strongly about the amendments, and rightly so. She should not feel demoralised or lose heart.

Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Miss M. Wallace)

I thank the Members for their contributions and advice. To answer Senator Ridge's question, the discussion paper on the law on sexual offences was published approximately two weeks ago by the Department. With regard to what we talked about today, it might be of interest to the Senator or the groups she represents to know that the Department is open to submissions up to the end of August and there will be debate on the legislation which will arise from that.

Senator Henry referred to her long-term interest in this area. When I was involved in the Joint Committee on Women's Rights, Senator Henry raised this issue on a number of occasions. I thank her, Senator Ridge and Senator O'Donovan for contributing to the Bill.

This Bill relates to two main changes in legislation. First, it creates new offences of trafficking children for the purpose of their sexual exploitation with penalties of up to life imprisonment; second, it outlaws all forms of child pornography with penalties of up to 14 years imprisonment. In doing so, it takes account of the EU joint action against trafficking in human beings and sexual exploitation of children, and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. I hope people will consider that this is another step in the right direction with regard to the many important issues we discussed today.

Question put and agreed to.

Sitting suspended at 4.50 p.m. and resumed at 5.30 p.m.