David Norris (Independent)

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 places 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.