Jennifer Carroll MacNeill (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I hope to be able to come back to the meeting. I wish to make some points on the submission from IHREC. I completely agree with the first point made by the representatives from IHREC that the provisions for separate legal representation should also be extended for the purposes of sexual exploitation. That is obvious. We have other legislative reference to the point that, "the term ‘exploitation’ should be expanded ... [to] forced/exploitative marriages", and I agree. Both IHREC and the MRCI have made the point about the credibility requirement as opposed to reasonable grounds. This may be a matter to be queried with the Department of Justice in the context of explaining the thinking behind it. I am always interested in the intellectual thinking behind these things. I agree that the word "credibility" is challenging. We are only at an early stage but the thinking behind this should be queried with the Department.

The wraparound supports are not for legislation as such but we have spoken about them in different contexts with regard to accommodation, access to training, counselling and education as being the only real measures. On sexual exploitation and the research project in UCD, it took six or seven attempts for people to try to get out of prostitution. Different degrees of control are obviously being exercised. In the same way as trying to leave a domestic violence situation, however, it is very difficult. Without having support measures in place, it is very difficult to get out.

I will go back to the point Dr. Saidléar made about sexual experience. I would take a different approach and just rule out the provisions with regard to whether a person has had an abortion or what type of contraception the person is on. Those are completely and utterly irrelevant. I would probably go farther than Dr. Saidléar and suggest that it simply be ruled out as a line of questioning. I do not see what it has to do with this. Frankly, I have a difficulty with the questions relating to sexual experience. People can have sex as many times as they like with whomever they like. That has absolutely nothing to do with the instance of rape under assessment. It is a backward approach to ask such questions. I have not reconciled the age and maturity piece that Dr. Saidléar suggests. I know it comes from the Law Reform Commission paper, but there is more thinking to be done with regard to how that works. I am not being critical of either approach, but I certainly have not reconciled that aspect just yet.

In the report compiled by Professors Healy and Breen, which is great - I thank them for providing it - reference is made to 132 victims of trafficking being identified. What was the reference period in that regard? I made a comment on International Women's Day on 8 March that there were 744 women for sale on the Internet in Ireland that day. If one goes by the sexual exploitation research programme data, approximately 87% of those women were migrants. What proportion do Professors Healy and Breen think are victims of trafficking? Can they track their research across that?

Dr. Yonkova's research in respect of Northern Ireland is very interesting regarding the queries relating to the purchasers. I think 60 Irish buyers participated in the survey, which sought to ascertain whether the buyers thought they were buying sex from the victims, whether the buyer asked the question in that regard or whether a buyer ever changed his or her mind because the seller appeared scared, unwilling, frightened, controlled, unhappy, intimidated, hurt or injured or too young. Dr. Yonkova recorded approximately 10% as stating that they believed the seller appeared to be under someone else's control. The survey included more than 400 buyers. It is very important to put that on the record. I agree with Dr. Yonkova regarding the appeal process.

I keep getting the acronyms confused. There are so many of them. Will the Immigrant Council of Ireland representatives talk through the practicality of giving effect to immigration status? Mr. Killoran and I spoke about accommodation and direct provision approximately two years ago, and neither matter has been resolved. He is quite right. I am sorry.