Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the publication of this Bill and its wide-ranging provisions that seek to strengthen our laws combating child pornography and the sexual grooming of children, to update our laws relating to incest and indecent exposure and to provide amendments which focus on the victims of sexual offences. The provision criminalising the purchase of sex included in Part 4 of this Bill is welcome.

According to the Immigrant Council of Ireland's statistics, between 800 and 1,000 women and children in Ireland are advertised online for sex on any given day. Of that number, between 87% and 98% of those are migrant women and many are from impoverished backgrounds. If sex work was a choice, surely that statistic would reflect the population of this country, but it definitely does not. Having informed myself of all views on the introduction of the criminalisation of the purchase of sex, I cannot help but think that if prostitution was a choice, why are the majority of those in prostitution coming from very vulnerable circumstances and from marginalised and targeted social groups? Isolation, cultural differences, language difficulties, debt bondage and the ease with which they can be controlled all contribute to the vulnerability of victims of sex trafficking.

In 2013, I introduced a Bill that also sought to criminalise the purchase of sex. Not surprisingly, it was voted down at the time by the Government and it took another three years to have the Bill before us debated. The year that the Bill I introduced was voted down, 83 people were trafficked into Ireland for the purposes of sexual exploitation. We can only imagine how many have experienced the same fate in total over the past three years. Yet, not one single trafficker or pimp has been convicted under the 2008 Act since the time I introduced my Bill back in 2013. While one purpose of that Bill was an attempt, as is the so-called Nordic model, to try to reduce the trafficking of women for sex work, the other purpose of it at the time was to effect a cultural change.

The other aspect of the Bill is that I hoped it would effect a cultural change even more so than to seek to convict people for the purchase of sex. I hoped it would feed into a process of change within society, whereby men would learn that it is not okay to purchase the body of a woman or man for sex. We should aim to change that culture as a society so that men do not feel it is their right to do so. That is, in part, what legislation should try to achieve, namely, to effect cultural change. The alcohol Bill is going through the Houses currently which is trying to effect change in the culture of alcohol abuse in society. It is reasonable to use legislation to try to effect such cultural change. I have a problem with Part 4 of the Bill in that the inclusion of the change in a very wide-ranging sexual offences Act minimises the potential for cultural change in society which we should work towards. One in 15 men in this country have purchased sex, which is approximately 6% of the male population. We should try to reduce the demand by way of legislative change. Such an approach would be worthwhile.

I also welcome the added provision including the criminal offence for the prostitution of a person who has been trafficked. Upholding human rights is the central tenet in this regard, ensuring that the rights of those trafficked for the purposes of sexual exploitation are vindicated in legislation. Legislation can effect change, but not as a stand-alone act. It must coincide with resources to fund the vital front-line services and organisations which help protect those in prostitution and those who wish to get out of prostitution. Legislation can effect cultural change but we must introduce other initiatives also to facilitate such change through education, for example. There is no doubt that for many women involved in the sex trade it is external societal issues that encourage them into it. Perhaps it is not really a choice but it is more due to their circumstances that they end up in the sex trade.

I urge the Minister, in addition to the implementation of the legislation to allocate the necessary resources and investments for front-line services and organisations that support exit strategies and the health and well-being of victims of sex exploitation. Service providers are working with very few resources and limited personnel. It is shocking that there are no dedicated services for those engaged in prostitution outside of Dublin. The sex trade is not exclusive to the capital city or even confined to larger cities, it is in smaller towns and villages around the country.

Concerns have been expressed about Part 4. While I support the proposal to criminalise the purchase of sex, I wish to see certain aspects strengthened via amendments as the Bill goes through all Stages in both Houses. First, I will address the issue relating to the brothel-keeping provisions in the Bill. We know that women choose to work together indoors for safety, yet they are liable to be prosecuted for operating a brothel. Other Members mentioned that last weekend four women were fined €200 each for brothel-keeping in Galway, even though the Garda suspected they were trafficked into this country for the purposes of sexual exploitation. It was said that the women denied that was the case, but it is likely they would do so because if they revealed that was the case they would only be allowed to stay in the State until the perpetrators were prosecuted and then they would be deported. There was no incentive for them to expose the trafficking that had taken place.

While that aspect of the Bill will possibly help to prosecute the criminal gangs who operate the vast majority of prostitution in this country, we must ensure it does not inadvertently affect victims. Concerns have been raised by the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission about Part 4, which maintains - and increases the penalty for - the existing offence of brothel-keeping. I believe that could place persons engaged in prostitution, who are working together for safety, in greater danger, as they may have no choice but to opt to work alone despite the risks involved. Again, the Garda must respond appropriately to exploitation in such circumstances, but that requires adequate resourcing of front-line services, including the Garda.

The decriminalisation aspect of the selling of sex must be fully realised. I know the act of prostitution is not criminalised at present, but there are issues around the solicitation offence and profiting from the proceeds of crime element. I understand the Tánaiste amended this Bill in the Seanad to decriminalise on-street solicitation explicitly. However, an amendment was then added under the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act to criminalise loitering for the purposes of prostitution. The Government gave with one hand and took away with the other. I am concerned that the new public order offence could end up replacing the solicitation offence and, as a result, attract the focus of the Garda's attention. I urge the Tánaiste to reconsider this offence and remove it when the Bill is scrutinised in order that the selling of sex will be fully decriminalised. Organisations that deal with victims of sexual exploitation are of the understanding that women will not be targeted by the Criminal Assets Bureau under the offence of profiting from the proceeds of crime. We need an assurance from the Minister that this will be the case. Now that we are criminalising the purchase of sex, we may need to address this issue again to ensure women are not targeted by criminal gangs for further financial exploitation. This may be outside the remit of the Bill before the House, but it is worth looking at in the context of this legislation.

We must emulate the Swedish approach by monitoring and reviewing this legislation to measure its effectiveness and impact. The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission has recommended that the proposed reform should be kept under periodic review to monitor and evaluate the effects of the change in the law. The commission has also recommended that the proposed reforms should be accompanied by ongoing research on best practice, awareness-raising programmes, targeted information campaigns and educational programmes. Legislation in Northern Ireland compels the Department of Justice there to review the operation of the reform within three years of its coming into operation, including with regard to the number of arrests and convictions, an assessment of the impact on the safety and well-being of people providing for payment of sexual services and the Department’s assessment of the extent to which the reform has operated to reduce human trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation. This is something we should consider here. I suggest this legislation should be reviewed within two years of coming into effect. We can learn from the Northern Ireland process.

According to the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, there is a large amount of conclusive evidence that a stand-alone legislative approach does not have the definitive effect of reducing trafficking in human beings for sexual exploitation. We must recognise that legislation alone cannot protect people in prostitution. Legislation must be enacted alongside research, strategies, monitoring and, most important, adequate resourcing for front-line services that reach out to people in prostitution by providing exit strategies and support services. Ireland’s implementation of the Council of Europe's Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings will be monitored later this year by the Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, GRETA, which will visit Ireland next month. GRETA has recommended that states which have adopted the Swedish model should keep their legislation under review to measure the impact on the provision of protection and assistance to victims of trafficking and the effective prosecution of traffickers. I hope the measures in this Bill that I have discussed, and which have been commented on by many Deputies, are taken on board by the Minister and the Government during the legislative process.

See this speech in context