Dr. Geoffrey Shannon:

I shall first reply to Deputy Daly's questions in her absence. She raised an important point about children being consulted. I am quite happy to set out how the initiative could be realised. There are two options available to the committee. First, it can request the Ombudsman for Children to assist with a consultation of a large group of children. The Office of the Ombudsman for Children is well positioned to undertake such a consultation process. The focus group cannot be tokenistic and must cover a large number of age ranges. We have pegged the age of digital consent at 13 years and it needs to happen.

I must confess to having a vested interest in the Children's Rights Alliance. I am the founding patron of the Children's Rights Alliance. The Children's Rights Alliance has conducted a similar exercise. The alliance was responsible for children's voices being heard in Geneva. Their voices were incredibly powerful because children can convey an unedited message, which is what this committee needs to hear. All too often children are ignored when it comes to issues that directly affect them. The impact these provisions will have on children should be central in this legislation.

Deputy Chambers mentioned the age of digital consent. It would be a cop-out not to make a decision about the age of digital consent. It is a hugely important issue for children. If we leave the age of digital consent at the age of 16 in the interest of political expediency then we will have failed children. Children are much more adept at technology than their parents and will use technology anyway. We should support them in a way that allows them to engage with technology in a responsible fashion.

The right to erasure is hugely important. We all end up posting stuff online that we probably regret afterwards. We do not take into account the vulnerability of children. There is stuff that a child would post online that he or she would never post at 18 years or well into adulthood.

We should not lose the opportunity of enshrining definitively in a Bill dealing with data protection the right to erasure and to be forgotten, alongside the take-down procedure. The take-down procedure is hugely urgent. Consider the cases that have come before the courts. There is a lack of legislation. The law must keep pace with technology and it has not. The victims are children. We say we are concerned about children but that concern must be matched by the necessary services and legislation for children. That is my view.

With regard to alcohol and gambling, I commend Senator Black on the extraordinary work she is doing on this issue. I feel like a fellow traveller when it comes to raising this issue, because one encounters huge resistance. I found over the last month that there is always some issue or justification from the alcohol industry, but I am delighted to have the opportunity to appear before the committee. What is staggering about my report is that the common feature across the shattered lives of hundreds of children is persistent alcohol abuse. I urge members to read chapter 3 which documents appalling abuses of children because of our reluctance to engage properly when dealing with alcohol. It requires a cross-governmental approach and it must be led from the top. We must continue to highlight this issue. I have argued that it is one of the biggest challenges standing in the way of children having the best possible family life. The failure on the part of society to address the alcohol problem properly leaves the child protection system dealing with insurmountable consequences. That is how serious it is.

I feel strongly about the issue because I have spent two years looking at large amounts of data. Visions of one case I looked at will always stay with me. It involved a mother in a fast food joint throwing her child in the air like a ball because of alcohol abuse. Such stories permeate the report. I have always argued that after the outrage there must be action. That action is the Public Health (Alcohol) Bill. There appears to be a delay in passing that legislation, and the longer we delay the longer we put on hold the opportunity to help children who live in abusive environments.