Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)

I will. The report states that Ireland provided limited protection and assistance to trafficking victims during 2008. This is not correct. It goes on to say that Irish officials referred trafficking victims to NGOs providing food and shelter or to immigrant detention centres. Ireland does not have immigrant detention centres. In another location, the report states that the Government provided temporary legal alternatives to the removal of foreign victims during the reflection period. Again, this is incorrect. There are no circumstances in which an alleged victim would be removed from the State while a claim of trafficking is being investigated. We very much take issue with the statement in the report that one of the leading anti-trafficking NGOs in Ireland publicly expressed concerns to the effect that the Government does not recognise all sides of trafficking. This is a very serious allegation, implying official negligence and very bad faith. I totally reject it on behalf of all those who work very hard on a daily basis in the Garda, my Department and in other State agencies as well as in other NGOs in this respect. The report states another inaccuracy to the effect that the 2008 law criminalising human trafficking provides for extra-territorial jurisdiction over Irish residents who engage in child sex traffic tourism abroad. Again, that is not correct. Ireland has had legislation in that respect for more than ten years, the Sexual Offences (Jurisdiction) Act 1996. Again, I suggest, as with the case in the 2008 report by the US, that they need to get their facts right in these issues.

Measures have been put in place in dealing with the status of victims of human trafficking in the State as set out in the national action plan. In particular, administrative arrangements have been put in place, reflecting the provisions to be replicated in section 127 of the forthcoming Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill, which deal with the immigration protections to be afforded to suspected victims of human trafficking. The arrangements provide for a 60-day period of recovery and reflection in the State. In circumstances where the suspected victim wishes to assist with any investigation or prosecution arising, he or she may be granted one or more six-month renewable periods of temporary residence in the State. These protections allow a victim of human trafficking to acquire a formal status in the State where required. It should be noted that the 60-day recovery and reflection period is double that of the 30-day minimum set out in the Council of Europe Convention to Combat Trafficking in Human Beings and compares well with other EU member states.

I now turn to the laws regarding prostitution and activities associated with prostitution. In terms of current prostitution legislation, Ireland already has a range of laws in place to address this issue. Under the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 1993 it is an offence for a person to solicit another person in a street or public place for the purpose of prostitution. The offence can be committed by the customer, male or female, the prostitute, male or female, or a third party acting for them. The related crimes of living on the earnings of a prostitute, the organisation of prostitution, procuring a woman or girl for prostitution, advertising brothels, the services of prostitutes and causing and encouraging the prostitution of a child are also criminalised under various items of legislation.

My Department is currently preparing legislation that will make it an offence to have sex with a child under 18 years in exchange for money or some other consideration or by abuse of a position of trust, authority or influence over that child. It should be noted that section 5 of the Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Act 2008 made it an offence to solicit or importune a person known to have been trafficked in any place, public or private, for the purpose of prostitution. In such circumstances, a person who accepts or agrees to accept a payment, right, interest or other benefit from another person also commits an offence.

On legal advice, a defence was included for a defendant to prove that he or she did not know and had no reasonable grounds to believe that the person in respect of whom the offence was committed was trafficked. I will keep the laws on prostitution under review and monitor the position in other countries. If there is reason to believe that I need to change the law I will bring forward proposals in the usual way. The public debate now emerging on whether the so called Swedish model would have the effect of reducing demand for prostitution will prove useful in that respect.

I am fully aware of the UK proposal in a policing and crime Bill and which provides for punishing those who pay for sexual services of a prostitute, subject to force, coercion or fraud. It will be a strict liability offence. That is to say, ignorance of the fact that the person knew or ought to have known that any of the prostitutes activities were controlled for gain or were subject to force, deception or threats will not be a defence. I understand that the Bill received royal assent last Friday.

Garda Síochána operational measures also address prostitution - as has been evidenced by initiatives such as Operations Quest and Gladiator, which resulted in convictions and sentences, and the current ongoing Operation Abbey, a joint UK-Garda Síochána-Northern Ireland-Welsh operation as a result of which a person is currently before the courts in Wales.

In regard to the issue of setting up a high level group specifically to examine the laws concerning prostitution and extending the brief of the anti-human trafficking unit to include migrant women in prostitution, I have asked the trafficking unit in my Department to examine the ICI report, "Globalisation, Sex Trafficking and Prostitution -The Experiences of Migrant Women in Ireland" and to report back to me. I await that report and will decide then on what further action should be taken. During its second year of operation of the Dignity Project, an EU funded multinational, multi-agency research project into victim protection and care in the field of trafficking in human beings, the Irish partners might like to consider this proposal, including the use of some funding for study visits, and revert with their views in due course. One of the Oireachtas committees, perhaps, might access some of that funding, to find out the position in some other countries, particularly in relation to issues of prostitution, for instance, in Sweden, and see what has happened post-change there in that respect.

On the issue of prostitution, incidentally, for me to change the law, it would be necessary to be satisfied that any change would be in the interests of prostitutes and not leave them open to even greater exploitation by pimps, or not make it easier to induce young boys or girls into prostitution or increase the dangers being experienced by prostitutes by driving prostitution further underground or expose them to an even more violent type of client who would not be put off by changes in the law.

Again, I respectfully suggest that we should look at the experience in Sweden. My Department will do so, as perhaps could an Oireachtas committee with some funding in that respect from the Dignity project. Against this background, the suggestion made in the motion about a high-level group is somewhat premature at this stage.

I do not stand before the House tonight to claim that everything the Government is doing is perfect and needs no change. I accept that legislation should be reviewed on a constant basis as this issue is particularly new to Ireland. This is the reason I have been committed to launching the national action plan. I believe it is a living document, which should be kept under review, updated and subject to a mid-term review as is provided in the plan. Against this background, I commend the amendment to the House.

See this speech in context