I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
I am sharing time with Senator Ruane. I am delighted with the work that has been achieved in respect of the Bill thus far. The phrase "child pornography" has always made me feel uneasy, but since becoming a mother I have realised how inappropriate and disgusting it is. It is out of date and completely incorrect. It does not truly reflect the nature of the abuse and it is unacceptable to continue using such inappropriate language when referring to such an awful crime.
I thank Jessica Bray, Eimear Taylor and all my team for helping me put together the Bill, and say a big "thank you" to my Civil Engagement Group colleagues and Deputy Pringle for supporting me. I thank also Mary Crilly, Caroline West and Vicky Conway for meeting me and working with my team on this legislation, and for the amazing work they do. While researching for and drafting the Bill, there were many different language options to consider. We originally used the term "child sexual abuse material" but we decided the term "child sexual exploitation material" better describes the many ways a child might face abuse. We felt the word "exploitation" recognises how varied the abuse may be. We must be clear: what is occurring here is exploitation.
While drafting the Bill, we also came across possible legal issues with changing the Title of an Act, which had not been done before. However, changing the Title of an Act does not change the reference number of the Act, so the Act can still be identified and referenced in this way. There should be no issue with changing the Title of our legislation should we need to do so, and in this case, it was very necessary. We can all think of words commonly used in the recent past that would now be recognised as offensive and divisive. I would like to think that, should words written in our laws be harmful to people, we would not hesitate to amend or replace them. This is the case here. While "pornography" is not in itself a problematic word, it is used in the incorrect context where it is, in fact, abuse. Where there is not consent, we must name it for what it is: exploitation, assault and abuse.
In 2016, a global organisation that aims to tackle child trafficking and exploitation gathered an international working group of 18 international organisations. The result was the Luxembourg Guidelines, which outlined the importance language can have in assisting and supporting victims and vulnerable people. The group recognised the role of communications and the power of language and the guidelines recommended the term "child pornography" was incorrect. As policymakers, we have a responsibility to ensure we use best-practice terminology. This has been recognised at both an international level and a local level.
I had the pleasure of speaking to representatives of the Fix It campaign this week, who have done great work in "fixing" Irish news headlines to use more appropriate language. They go by the motto "language matters", and it does matter. Language is a powerful tool and we need to ensure the language we use is appropriate and inclusive. It is time this was recognised at a national level. Language is a shared experience that allows us to communicate with one another. Our words carry meaning and we must be careful about the terminology we use. There can be no room for misunderstanding in legislation. We must ensure we use correct and appropriate language. The use of the phrase "child pornography" is incorrect and dangerous. We need a phrase that better reflects the nature of the abuse and the crime. We need to shift the focus from the victim to the perpetrator. By changing the language of our laws, we can guide the narrative on these issues.
Language shapes and defines our understanding, and the words we use are important. The terminology we use is vital. We must remove incorrect and harmful language from our legislation. We need to ensure that how we speak about and recognise abuse is correct. Let us get rid of the words "child pornography" from the Statute Book. Our laws should be written to protect those they serve by implementing appropriate language that truly names the act of the crime. We know that changing the Title of the Act in question is the right thing to do and that this really concerns child exploitation. We must shine a light on the acts being suffered by countless children.
It is our job to protect children in this country. We must listen to them regarding their experiences and do what we can to support children and victims. We must start by labelling what they went through correctly by calling it child exploitation. I have said it many times before and will say many more times that what we are talking about here is not pornography. It is exploitation and abuse, and it must change. We in this House have the power to lead by example and change the language in our legislation.
