James Breen (Clare, Independent)

I welcome the Bill for the most part. While some fear that any attempt to protect our children might be diluted because of the Supreme Court decision, this Bill helps dispel many of these fears. In the Supreme Court ruling, Mr. Justice Hardiman stated that the defence should be allowed where the defendant has been positively and convincingly misled, perhaps by the victim herself. As a legislator, I am glad we will now take on board such issues and ensure that skilled lawyers do not easily find further loopholes that might result in more convicted sex offenders being freed prematurely.

That clause of the Bill which covers the defence of believing an alleged victim to be of the age of consent is a concern to me. In such a case the court shall have regard to the presence or absence of reasonable grounds for the defendant so believing and all other circumstances. This gives licence to defence lawyers for rigorous cross-examination of every aspect of a young teenager's life.

Such examination in the austere and imposing surrounds of a court room may cause such damage as to further discourage the reporting of such criminal behaviour in the first place. I ask that, in such cases, reform of court dress and manner, the removal of robes and wigs, and the consequent modernisation of court procedure be expedited, including the roll-out of video evidence facilities, which have a major role to play in such cases.

See this speech in context