Jonathan O'Brien (Cork North Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

We have similar concerns to those expressed by Deputy Ruth Coppinger on amendment No. 10. As people are aware, it is our party policy to support the Turn Off The Red Light campaign, and while there is growing evidence around the purchase of sex and whether that has a knock-on effect on the safety of sex workers, we think deleting the entire section is also deleting some of the existing protections for sex workers. Two separate debates are required and for that reason, unfortunately, we will vote against amendment No. 10 if it is put to a vote.

Amendment No. 11 is a well thought out amendment tabled by the Labour Party. If it remains the case that we are going to criminalise the purchase of sex, the sex worker could be prosecuted under current legislation, namely, the Proceeds of Crime Act, as he or she could be perceived to benefit from a crime having been committed. The Minister must clarify the situation in this regard. If there is no clarification and the amendment is put to a vote, we will support it.

We support Government amendment No. 12 as it includes penalties and goes after those who organise prostitution, namely, the pimps. While we can argue about whether what is proposed goes far enough, a penalty of up to ten years in prison is something we welcome.

Amendment No. 13 also deals with sentencing. Perhaps Deputy Ruth Coppinger or even the Minister might clarify whether it is possible to specify an unlimited fine in legislation. If that is the case then I would not object to that. Whatever about an unlimited fine, we should certainly consider including a minimum fine and we need not specify a maximum fine. We will support the amendment if it is put to a vote.

Amendment No. 14 is a Sinn Féin amendment. Amendment No. 15 has been moved by the Anti-Austerity Alliance and amendment No. 16 by People Before Profit. In essence, they all propose to do the same thing, namely, to give some protection to a sex worker who is working within a property or building with another sex worker for safety reasons. There is a significant difference between individuals who are forced into the industry by pimps, who are victims of trafficking and exploitation and the women who choose to be sex workers and to engage in such activity. We should provide every safety mechanism to those women that we can. The essence and spirit of the three amendments tries to do that and to distinguish between a sex worker who is working within a property with another sex worker for his or her own safety, as opposed to someone who has been forced into the industry by a pimp and has been subjected to trafficking.

We often talk about unforeseen, unintended or unknown consequences when we deal with legislation, but in this case the consequence has been flagged on every Stage of the legislation. It is unfortunate that the Minister has not been able to come up with a wording to provide protection to sex workers who work in groups for their own safety and who are not being exploited or who have not been trafficked. It is unfortunate that we have not been able to come up with a suitable combination of words. Provided amendment No. 10 does not pass, we will push amendment No. 14 to a vote, and if amendments Nos. 15 and 16 are also pushed to a vote, we will also support them.

See this speech in context