Ms Síona Cahill:

If we are running a consent workshop or education course, it needs to be inclusive. It cannot only be something that identifies with people aged between 18 and 24 years. There are mature students, international students and LGBTI students who need an inclusive and sex positive space.

Reaching people cannot just be the box-ticking, class-type model. We are not advocating for that. Rather, we are saying that a workshop model needs to be introduced across institutions in the wider context of consent education. As Dr. MacNeela mentioned, it can be done through theatre, videos, social media campaigns and workshops throughout the year. However, a box-ticking class is not the way forward. We tend to see people who are interested in being student leaders or who are already interested in this area, for example, those doing good work in feminist and other societies on campus, being the first to attend these. It must be asked whether they are the right people. The more we mainstream this, the better, as we will not just be equipping people who are already interested to be bystanders. In TCD, for example, accommodation was a target, with as many people as possible receiving consent classes.

Deputy Catherine Martin asked about the data collection process. There is zero to little collection, which is part of the problem. A member asked whether there will be a drop in the number of people noting violence or disclosing issues. The numbers of those making disclosures will increase.

I have seen in my own experience but also in students' unions across the country that where one runs sexual health and awareness campaigns and introduces the concept of consent people at that point see the students' union as a place to disclose, which is a concern.

Deputy Catherine Martin also asked a question about staff members. We support the idea of a person being designated in each institution to ensure consent education programmes are rolled out.

Senator Ruane asked about reporting. We have a serious concern about the protocols in third level education institutions. The question has already arisen in the DIT's submission about where people approach and speak to somebody in a counselling centre, are dealt with in a health centre but then they do not progress to the reporting stage. We are seriously concerned that the reporting structures in colleges are not clear enough. We are concerned that in the majority of institutions issues of consent, sexual harassment and assault are couched in terms in dignity and respect policies that are not very accessible to students.

A question was asked about whether educating at third level was too late or whether people should we educated about these matters beforehand. I want to make it absolutely clear that it is USI's policy that such education should happen way before entry to third level. The fact is one has a higher population of sexually active young people aged between 17 and 24 years, at which point intervention is needed. The first time people hear about consent or condoms should not be during sexual health awareness and guidance, SHAG, week run by USI in the first year of college. It is not good enough that there is no comprehensive relationship and sexuality education, RSE. I take Deputy Thomas Byrne's point that our interaction with the process is important.