Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail)

I support the motion tabled by my Independent colleagues on the other side of the House. Our position has not really changed since the original motion. I congratulate the sponsors of the motion on their unusual parliamentary punctuality, which is sometimes very lacking in this House. It is unfair to blame the current Minister but I am sure that when we were on the other side of the House we would have said returning within six months was very quick and that one should be given time to react.

When in government, Fianna Fáil passed the Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Act 2008. We, as a party, will do everything possible to try to eliminate prostitution and control and curb human trafficking in any way we can. When the Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Act 2008 was being passed, I remember a spokesperson on the other side of the other House talking to groups such as Ruhama and others, which felt we should have gone the extra mile to criminalise totally the purchase of sex. We did not do so at that stage. I had reservations and the then Minister felt the Bill was very important, a major milestone and step in the right direction, which I have no doubt was the case. Circumstances have changed, however, and I believe it important to go the extra mile to eradicate prostitution from our society.

While experts point to the Swedish model and others to the model in Holland, I do not believe that by eliminating prostitution one is putting women's lives at great risk and increasing the number of sexual attacks. There is a view that prostitution somehow helps to control depression and reduce the incidence of suicide. I do not subscribe to this. I accept that there is a lot of common ground between the Government's amendment and what is purported by others. It is easy on this side to be totally critical of the Government. Playing that trump card will not do me or this side of the House any good. I hope the common ground can be explored to the advantage of the genuine people who tabled the motion.

I read the Government's amendment and have a couple of interesting queries for the Minister. A paragraph states, "in supporting all reasonable and effective measures to curb prostitution, recognises that any proposal to criminalise the purchase of sexual services within our legal and constitutional framework raises complex issues and requires very careful examination". I honestly believe the criminalisation of the purchase of sex is neither legally nor constitutionally complex; one opts for it or one does not. The Minister might enlighten me on the legal pitfalls. The area is very black and white. I have some knowledge of the Constitution and certainly envisage no constitutional restrictions or parameters that might in some way impede the Minister from moving in this direction.

The punctuality of the re-entry of this motion must certainly have taken the Minister by surprise. I empathise with him in that regard. I have no doubt that if progress is made within the next six months we will revisit this issue. I recognise a tone of determination on the part of Senator Zappone and others. Like a hungry dog with a bone, they will not give up on this.

The amendment "acknowledges the Minister's announcement, on the same date, of a planned public consultation exercise to help inform the future direction of legislation on prostitution, thus ensuring that public debate on this sensitive issue is open to the widest possible audience". I am a little perplexed by that. I am not saying so in an unhelpful way. Prostitution is one of the oldest trades, dating back many thousands of years. We are discussing this matter because of the way Europe and society has changed in the past decade. Twenty or 30 years ago, the idea of trafficking human beings to Ireland for sexual purposes was unheard of. One could argue this was the case less than 20 years ago. I am concerned that there is a need for further debate. This issue has been debated for many years. People's positions are clear in one way or another and the facts are that prostitution, whether it involves the trafficking of women or minors, is a blight on society and that it escalated as we became more European and because of demographic movement.

In our madness during the Celtic tiger era, there was so much money flowing around that using prostitutes became more affordable for many, thus intensifying the abuse. My position is quite clear. While I understand the Minister's anxiety to move in this direction – I have no doubt that the Government intends to try to resolve the issue, as stated by Senator Bradford – and there is much common ground, unless the Minister makes a pragmatic statement that affords the Independents who moved this motion an opportunity not to push it to a vote, we will support the motion as tabled.