Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The term "sex worker" is, however, used in international discourse.

Deputies will be aware that the law on prostitution is under review. The criminal law in this area is being reviewed primarily because of the changed nature of prostitution in Ireland. Prostitution here was once a street-based phenomenon but that is no longer the case. The organisation of prostitution is now much more sophisticated and highly mobile and is easily facilitated by the use of mobile telephones and the Internet. Technological advances have largely resulted in the movement of prostitution indoors. Modern communication technologies make it easier for clients to contact prostitutes. In addition, prostitutes and pimps use these same technologies to arrange their business, including the setting up of short-term brothels in, for example, rented apartment buildings. These brothels can be quickly moved from location to location. I have no doubt that every Deputy present is very much aware of that. These developments also reflect the trend in other countries. While there is already a significant body of criminal legislation in this area, it is important to review the law periodically to ensure it is up to date and sufficiently robust and flexible to address criminality in the environment in which prostitution currently operates.

Prostitution is a subject that gives rise to intense debate. People disagree on how to respond to the many issues that arise. Those issues cover a wide spectrum and include, among others, the causes of prostitution, sexuality, organised crime, health and public safety, the exploitation of individuals, including children, inequality between men and women and human rights. All of these matters require careful consideration. The Minister is also acutely conscious that persons who sell sexual services do so for a variety of reasons. They do not constitute a homogenous group. Many women involved in prostitution have very limited life choices, whether owing to poverty or other circumstances. Mental and physical harm and violence can be intrinsic to prostitution and some women caught up in it experience objectification and dehumanisation. They can be vulnerable to manipulation and exploitation by others. However, there are other women involved in sex work who object to being labelled victims and who claim the right to sell sexual services is a legitimate lifestyle choice. While I am focusing on women, I am conscious that men can also be involved in the sale of sexual services. Whatever one's views about their motivation, who buy sexual services do not constitute a homogenous group either. We must be aware of that reality in considering and formulating policy responses.

In addition to the activities of parties directly involved in prostitution, the current legislative review must, of course, consider the impact of prostitution on communities and, more broadly, the interests of society in general. In examining how the criminal law might address the issue of exploitation or abuse of sex workers in a changed environment, it is necessary to consider the variety of circumstances in which prostitution occurs. There is prostitution which is of an organised nature. This involves third parties and is exploitative to varying degrees. Some sex workers operating in networks are trafficked or coerced, while others are not. There are also prostitutes who operate independently and who choose, for whatever reason, to become involved in prostitution. In devising policy responses, including legislative and enforcement measures, it is crucial to distinguish clearly between, on the one hand, human trafficking for sexual exploitation and, on the other, prostitution. While the two can sometimes overlap, human trafficking and prostitution are separate phenomena and require distinct policy responses if each is to be targeted effectively, efficiently and in a manner which reflects the relative gravity of different types of criminal activity.

In this context, the report of the UN Global Commission on HIV and the Law, published in July 2012, emphasised that criminal sanctions against human trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation of minors were essential, but laws must clearly differentiate these activities from consensual adult sex work. Also, the report of the UNAIDS advisory group on HIV and sex work, published in December 2011, expressed concerns about the conflation of sex work and trafficking and the impact on sex workers of failing to distinguish clearly between the two.

The Minister would like to highlight that there is already a clear consensus on the unacceptability of child prostitution and human trafficking for sexual exploitation. In this jurisdiction, the criminal law does not tolerate either. Any person convicted of human trafficking for sexual exploitation is liable to life imprisonment. A person who solicits or importunes a child, regardless of whether it is for the purpose of prostitution, to commit an act that would constitute carnal knowledge or sexual assault, is guilty of an offence. In addition to the solicitation offence, a person who engages or attempts to engage in a sexual act with a child can be charged with serious offences under the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2006. The consent of the child is not a defence.

Criminal law also protects persons engaged in prostitution from exploitation. For example, a person convicted on indictment of organising prostitution or brothel keeping can be imprisoned for up to five years and receive a substantial fine. However, there are differing and genuinely held views on the approach the criminal law should take to other aspects of prostitution, particularly the purchase and sale of sexual services in private by consenting adults. Currently, it is not an offence to sell sex. In general, it is not an offence to purchase sex either. I say "in general" because, under the Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Act 2008, it is an offence to solicit or importune knowingly a trafficked person, in any place, for the purpose of prostitution. Consequently and other than in this particular circumstance, neither party to the transaction is currently criminalised. Our legislation does not seek to prevent sexual contact, and adults who sell or purchase sexual services in private are not breaking any law.

Traditionally, our law has had two objectives. First, it aims to protect society from the more intrusive aspects of prostitution from a public order perspective. Accordingly, under the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 1993, it is an offence to solicit in a street or public place for the purpose of prostitution. The offence can be committed by the prostitute, the client or a third party, for example, a pimp.

Second, the law seeks to protect prostitutes from exploitation. It is an offence under the 1993 Act to organise prostitution, coerce or compel a person to be a prostitute, knowingly live on the earnings of a prostitute or keep or manage a brothel. In addition, public order legislation prohibits the advertising of brothels and prostitution.

As part of the current review, the Minister published a discussion document in June 2012 on the future direction of prostitution legislation. The document's purpose is to facilitate a public consultation process. It was published to promote public discussion on the function of the criminal law on prostitution and to identify possible legislative responses based on analysis and debate informed by evidence. The intention is to gather views on what the criminal law's approach should be to reduce, deter, detect and prosecute criminal activity and protect prostitutes from exploitation, with due regard to the principle of human rights.

To assist public deliberation, the consultation document sets out four broad approaches to legislative policy for discussion. The four options include the one often referred to as the Swedish model, which criminalises the purchase of sexual services. This is the approach followed in Deputy Pringle's Private Member's Bill. By targeting only the buyer of sexual services, the Swedish model is a partial criminalisation approach. The other options outlined in the discussion document are total criminalisation, non-criminalisation and a model based on legalisation and regulation. For each option, the discussion document identifies possible arguments for and against and raises questions for consideration. The analysis does not favour any particular option, and instead tries to adopt an even-handed approach to assist reflection.

In addition to examining Sweden's legislative model, which has been followed by Norway and Iceland, the discussion document examined legislation in many other jurisdictions, including the UK and other EU countries, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States. It is important that we determine what works and does not work across a range of potential legislative models. Debates similar to ours are taking place in other jurisdictions and we should take note of the insights gained therein.

On the discussion document's publication, it was referred to the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality, which has been independently conducting a public consultation process. The committee's report is awaited. There is considerable public interest in the issue, with reports of the committee receiving many hundreds of submissions. I understand that it also organised public hearings over a number of months. The Minister would like to put on record his acknowledgement of the sensitivity and complexity of the committee's task and his appreciation of the work it has done in the public consultation process. He looks forward to the committee's report in due course.

Last October, the Minister's Department hosted a day-long conference to discuss the consultation paper. There was a large attendance, and the conference brought together speakers and an audience from a wide and diverse range of backgrounds. The Minister opened the conference and, despite many competing demands on his time, stayed for its duration to hear the many contributions and to engage with attendees. The Minister of State at the Department of Justice and Equality also attended and spoke at the event. In addition, members of the joint committee were present.

It is the Minister's intention that the report of the committee and the views expressed at the October conference will be fully considered in the framing of any necessary legislative proposal to be submitted to Government in due course. The Minister also anticipates that, when the committee's report becomes available, there will be an early debate on it in the Houses.

A process of public deliberation is ongoing. Until the consultation process and review are completed, it would not be proper to commit to or rule in or out of contention any particular legislative approach. The Minister has consistently emphasised that the consultation process must be, and be seen to be, objective, transparent, open-minded and fair. He has also consistently stated that the expression of all views should be facilitated and examined in due course. Given the circumstances, it would not be appropriate for him to comment on the merits or demerits of Deputy Pringle's Bill.

I acknowledge and commend the work of the Turn Off the Red Light campaign, members of which are present for this debate. I look forward to hearing Deputies' contributions. The Minister welcomes the opportunity for a further debate in the House when the report of the justice committee is published.

See this speech in context