Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim míle buíochas leis an gcoiste agus leis an gCathaoirleach as ucht an deis seo a thabhairt dom labhairt ar an mBille seo. I am very grateful for this opportunity. I will begin with some general points and background. We know about our own past when it comes to protecting and guarding children and how much it leaves to be desired. We had all of the events in industrial schools, mother and baby homes, Magdalen laundries and foster homes. However, Ireland has come a long way in ensuring the safety of children and we have seen the progress that has been made on child welfare and protection. Even though there is still room for improvement in Ireland we can only imagine what it must be like for children in those countries where they do not have protection and do not have child welfare or safeguards. The Bill is about trying to protect children who are easy prey for sexual predators in countries where the authorities cannot or will not protect them from those convicted of sexual abuse in Ireland.

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child recognises a child as being a person under the age of 18. Child abuse is also about trafficking, which is the third biggest illegal industry after arms and drugs and accounts for billions of dollars annually. Statistics indicate that 2 million children are lured or abducted into sexual exploitation, which is modern-day slavery. A report by Ending Child Prostitution and Trafficking, ECPAT, International states child sex tourism has drastically increased. It is a real incongruity that we speak about children and sex tourism in the same sentence. One of the main reasons is that the increase in global travel has created more opportunities for abuse. The offenders are generally white, western middle-aged men of some means. There are also women offenders and we also have situational offenders. The promotion of tourism for economic growth in these poorer countries brings more and more westerners to places with little or no regulation or policing but more and more children available for sex. We know the countries involved are India and counties in south-east Asia, Latin America, the Caribbean and Africa.

There have been many high-profile cases but I will mention one that I have already mentioned when speaking on this issue. This is the case of a seven year old child who was sold to a former US marine. The former marine was eventually extradited from south-east Asia and is serving a very extensive prison sentence in the United States. We also have records of the sale of virgin girls and organised sex rings. There is evidence of organisations offering sex tours with stops at bars and restaurants that are fronts for child prostitution.

The impetus for the Bill came from meetings with Irish priest, Fr. Shay Cullen, who is directly involved in rescuing children from the sex tourism industry in the Philippines and supporting children affected by it. We all know the physical, emotional and psychological consequences for children. There have been cases of suicide, attempted suicide, depression, addiction and sexually transmitted illnesses. At a press conference I was at with Fr. Cullen he spoke of what has been happening through the dark web and the rise in child pornography. To join a photo sharing paedophile club on the dark web, applicants must submit pictures of children being abused. Some clubs insist on the applicant showing himself perpetrating the abuse. To get the images, men travel to countries where there are ample opportunities to photograph and video such abuse. The images then give them a pass to access further unlimited images. This requirement to provide pictures is fuelling travel to poor countries. We know that cybersex is on the increase. Fr. Cullen spoke about five and six year olds being abused in this way over the Internet. The abuse is carried out to order and customers around the world pay per view through money transfer companies.

I will give another example from Australia. In 2017, it emerged that 700 to 800 Australian male convicted child sex offenders were travelling annually to countries in south-east Asia, such as the Philippines, Cambodia and Thailand. Following this revelation, the Australian Government passed the Passports Legislation Amendment (Overseas Travel by Child Sex Offenders) Act 2017. It was introduced in the Australian Parliament on 14 June 2017, passed both Houses on 20 June and received assent on 26 June. It allows a competent authority of the Australian Government to request its Minister for Foreign Affairs to refuse to issue, cancel or order the surrender of a person's Australian passport if his or her name is on a child protection offender register. This is to prevent reportable offenders from travelling overseas to sexually exploit or abuse vulnerable children.

This is a tricky situation for which to legislate because of the constitutional right to travel. Although it is wonderful to have this right to travel, it was never intended to grant a right to travel to a person to abuse children in other countries when that person has been convicted of child sexual abuse in his or her own country. The purpose is to regulate and restrict where appropriate sex offenders from travelling abroad in the interests of the common good and to protect persons outside the State from serious harm. It seeks to do this by increasing the powers of judges. It is not an outright ban on travelling. It relates to those convicted of child abuse, whether a physical act of abuse of children or using child pornography films, child abuse images or recordings on phones. It recognises the constitutional right to travel but also the need to protect children abroad. The restriction provisions will be decided on a case by case basis by a judge who can weigh up the issues. There is a lot of constitutional protection. The convicted person is heard and represented and the judge can hear whether the offender has been genuinely engaging with a recognised rehabilitation programme. It will be the judge who will strike the balance between the Constitution and the protection of children outside Ireland from those convicted of child abuse in Ireland.

I suggest it is not so much about punishing the sex offender with regard to travel as protecting children. When we look at the facts of the growing child sex tourism to holiday destinations such as Poland, the Philippines and other places, I must question the current freedom of sex offenders to travel to these places. There is also the frame of mind of the offenders when they return to Ireland from a place that is normalising the abuse and exploitation of children.

There are just two sections in the Bill. It has a narrow remit for obvious reasons. It is focused on giving powers to judges. It empowers them on the evidence of child abuse to impose conditions and travel limitations at the time of sentencing or later, when the judge is satisfied there is or is not a risk of offending abroad.

For example, a convicted sex offender may have leave to travel to England for a few days for a funeral or family event, but not to a country where there is known child abuse.

It is a small step, but it would be a clear signal that Ireland - we would be the first country in Europe to do so - does not want its child offenders to be in a position to offend in other countries where child abuse is happening with impunity.