Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank all Members who contributed to the debate and I thank the Minister of State for his responses. I know everyone is genuinely interested in this and anxious that the loopholes in the existing sex offenders register are closed off so that for the first time in Irish statute we can give a legal right to parents to access relevant and appropriate information.

There seems to be some confusion that this legislation simply deals with stranger danger, which is not the case. I do not want that impression to go out. While the legislation addresses strangers that is not its primary purpose. Dr. Geoffrey Shannon has raised this issue in the past and made the point that the law needs to include appropriate checks and that is why I have drafted the Bill in the manner I did. I believe it reflects a fair balance between rights and responsibilities.

A woman I admire greatly, Ms Fiona Doyle, has today publicly endorsed this legislation. Her bravery in waiving her right to anonymity to talk about her personal experiences has touched everyone. The difficulty is that some women feel they have to come out and let people know about the perpetrators of such heinous crimes on them so that everyone knows who they are to prevent them from abusing again. For the first time this legislation will take that onus from those women. It saddens me every time I read a newspaper article or listen to or watch a broadcast interview when a woman has waived her right to anonymity. Families often waive the right to anonymity because they want to expose someone. They want to ensure that an offender, who is released from prison, will not do it again. This legislation will take that burden of responsibility off their shoulders. They have carried enough burdens up to now. It will ensure that the parents have access to information that the Garda has on file.

I accept we need to do far more about the treatment of sexual offenders in prison. We need to introduce proper assessments of convicted sex offenders. We need better treatment and management of sex offenders after release, as I have acknowledged in my initial contribution. It is fundamental that disclosure forms part of that treatment process after release because it has been found to be an integral part of the process in the UK. It can and should be an integral part of it here. We need to bring balance to the issue because we need to ensure the vulnerable and not just the violators have rights in this society.

The Minister of State rightly flagged possible constitutional issues and the European Court of Human Rights. These issues have already been addressed in National Vetting Bureau (Children and Vulnerable Persons) Act 2012, the information of which will be used in this legislation. That is the intention and it is drafted with that legislation in mind. These issues have been overcome. I do not claim to have all the solutions for this matter. This is a Private Members' Bill and the Minister of State knows the challenges and difficulties in that regard.

The Bill will also allow for a person's name to be cleared. As Deputy Durkan mentioned, how often have we come across cases of mistaken identity where someone's name is tarnished through rumour and innuendo? Now for the first time parents will be able to go to the Garda and find that there is no issue with such an individual and that there is no need to have his or her name ballyragged throughout the community. So it will also protect those individuals.

The Minister of State spoke about the monitoring of convicted sex offenders and that each Garda division has an inspector responsible. However, there is no formal training process for gardaí who are monitoring sex offenders - it has developed on a haphazard basis. I commend one individual who has done a tremendous amount of work, nearly on his own within An Garda Síochána, Sergeant John Hynes in Castlerea, County Roscommon. He has done outstanding work in protecting children in my community. We need more such individuals and we need to learn from the skills and experience they have developed.

The Minister of State asked why we need to elaborate on the statutory scheme here when none was required in the UK. The reason is that we need action. The mechanism I have to bring an issue like this to the floor of the House is through a Private Members' Bill. When I published it, I made it crystal clear that I wanted to see action. I do not mind whether that is through my legislation or Government legislation; I just want to see children protected.

More importantly the Minister of State asked why we should focus on just one aspect of monitoring in the UK and not the bigger picture. I made reference to that in my contribution. I do not have the resources of the Department of Justice and Equality or the Parliamentary Counsel behind me. It has taken the Department a long time to reach this stage. It is not possible for me to come up with every solution. As the Minister of State pointed out, this year 103 sex offenders will be released from prison and a further 99 will be released next year. Even at a very low recidivism rate of 5%, ten of those individuals will be convicted of another crime, some of which will be very serious crimes against children. We need to act to protect those children.

We all accept the need to address loopholes in legislation. One of those loopholes is the seven-day notification process. In April 2009 when I raised this matter with the then Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Mr. Dermot Ahern, he advised the House that because the UK had changed its seven-day notification process back to a three-day notification process, a three-day notification period in this jurisdiction would ensure harmonisation of our laws in that respect and should ensure that none of our jurisdictions would become a safe haven for convicted sex offenders.

That was said in April 2009 but the loophole still remains on the Statute Book and it needs to be closed off.

The Bill, while taking a similar approach to Sarah's law, restricts the right to make requests for disclosures to parents or guardians of children and vulnerable adults and does not provide for an open approach from members of the public generally. An applicant must show reason for a request for disclosure. Under the provisions of the scheme the Garda must investigate the matter but the force is also obliged to provide any information which is relevant and appropriate to the protection of their child to the person who submits the inquiry. That includes soft information as written into statute already under the National Vetting Bureau (Children and Vulnerable Persons) Act 2012 and that is an important feature as well.

I thank everyone who has contributed to the debate. In particular, I thank the people who have assisted me in bringing the Bill to the floor of the House; the parents who initially brought these issues to my attention; Ms Jill Mellor and Mr. Brian Hunt for their help in drafting the Bill; parents throughout the country who have contacted me in support of the Bill since I published it 15 months ago; and the Minister and the Government for facilitating the enactment of the provisions set out.

I call on the Minister of State to go one step further. The issue of family abuse was mentioned by everyone in their contributions. Approximately 30% to 35% of cases involve family abuse. I have published other legislation, the Criminal Law (Incest) (Amendment) Bill 2012, which addresses an 18 year legal loophole that sees men liable for life imprisonment if convicted of incest while women face a much shorter maximum sentence. That Bill amends the Punishment of Incest Act 1908. I call for an assurance from the Minister of State that in the forthcoming legislation this loophole will be closed off once and for all in the interests of families that have become victims and in the interests of one family in particular.

The United Kingdom legislation has ensured the safety of hundreds children in the year since its full enactment. This is testament to the fact that such a scheme was needed in the United Kingdom. Corresponding legislation is needed here as well. Referring to Sarah's law, the UK Home Secretary, Theresa May, stated: "We are doing everything we can to protect the public, and especially children, from predatory sex offenders by tightening the law and closing loopholes." This is exactly what I and every parent, grandparent and anyone concerned with the safety of our children want to see happen here through the introduction of this legislation.

We have all seen the shocking statistics released this week, including the fact that children under the age of 13 years are most vulnerable to sexual assault. There is a misconception that this legislation is solely to deal with stranger danger; it is not. The Minister of State quoted statistics from the Rape Crisis Network Ireland indicating that some 31% of cases involved a close family member, but the vast majority did not involve a close family member. As I said at the outset of my contribution, when Sarah's law was initially piloted and an analysis of that pilot was carried out, it turned out that half, that is, 50% or one in every two, the requests for information did not involve a stranger but a relative, a neighbour or someone known to the immediate family member, perhaps a new partner of one of the separated parents of the children. Fully 50% of requests did not involve a stranger. We all know that the perpetrators of these heinous crimes in the vast majority of cases groom the children and, sadly, in some cases, they groom the parents as well. This legislation is needed to protect communities, families and children from that grooming and from individuals who worm their way into the circle of trust within a family and allow families to access that information. This is why did the legislation is so important. It deals with the vast majority of cases of abuse in this country and every other country. We must act to give parents the tools to protect their children and to close off some of the crazy loopholes that are placing our children in danger. I will paraphrase the words of the mother of Sarah Payne: if just one child can be kept safe as a result of this law, then it will have been worth it. I have no doubt this Bill can do that.

I make the following appeal to the House. Let us not give this legislation or the Minister's drafting of it the name of another little girl. We have heard of Megan's law in the United States and Sarah's law in the United Kingdom. Let us not give this legislation the name of a vulnerable little Irish girl or girls. Let us all work together as politicians and show that democracy works. Let us show the people that we represent society in this country, that we represent the people in each of the 43 constituencies, that we can listen, that we can act, that we can take the initiative and that we can work together as a Parliament, whether in government or opposition, to bring forward legislation that does not have the tagline of some young girl's name. Let us take the initiative and decide that we want to change the legislation in the interests of our people and our society and in order that we can say we acted first, closed the door and protected our children. I commend the Bill to the House.

See this speech in context