Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I support amendment No. 10 which provides for the deletion of a section inserted by the Tánaiste in respect of the criminalisation of the purchase of sex. We propose to remove something the Tánaiste is proposing. It is surprising that people would turn that on its head and choose to translate it into suggesting we propose to remove protections for sex workers. Everyone here is genuinely motivated. People here who are putting forward diametrically opposed views are doing so for genuine reasons. To imply motivation in some people's motions or contributions by stating that this is being done in order to overturn and remove protections for sex workers is utterly ludicrous.

In listening to and opposing the points we made on Committee Stage about soliciting, the Tánaiste suggested that our removal of section A inadvertently leaves soliciting in place. However, that can be amended in the primary legislation at any stage. It is not, therefore, a reason to oppose the amendment. Ironically, by removing soliciting, the Tánaiste has inserted a new soliciting offence under the loitering under public order offences. What she gives with one hand, she takes away with the other. Concentrating on that rather than focusing on the real issue, which is the broader debate that societies are having about how best we deal with this issue, is regrettable and an attempt to muddy the waters.

The theory of the Nordic model is that criminalising the purchase will reduce demand and the activity will go away. That is it in a nutshell - traffickers will be deterred because nobody will be buying. The sad fact is that there is no evidence to support that viewpoint. In fact, there is a considerable and growing body of evidence showing the opposite, namely, that it does not do as has been suggested. It is not necessary to be a rocket scientist to know that prohibition has never worked. All it does is drive the activity underground to a less visible place where transactions are likely to be negotiated in a more rushed way, compromising the health and safety of the sex worker.

Points have been raised about how a purchaser of sex can be tracked. That can only be done through the person who is selling. The issues of surveillance of and interference with sex workers will take centre stage in that regard. Many of the issues raised have not been adequately addressed. For example, what role will the Garda play? We know that many people are highly vulnerable from the point of view of immigration status. They are also highly vulnerable to further exploitation and threats. For example, 70 complaints were made to GSOC from sex workers about gardaí attempting to exploit them and demanding sexual favours. How much worse will this be when the legislation is changed?

HIV Ireland has serious concerns about the model. Apart from an elevated risk of violence against sex workers, the whole issue of HIV and sexually transmitted infections, STIs, is very worrying in light of issues relating to carrying condoms and so on.

I will not repeat the points made by other Deputies. International data-based studies have been conducted by organisations such as Amnesty International, which argue for a human rights-based approach to protect sex workers. It is worth saying that the only research carried out on this island relates to a study conducted by Queens University Belfast. The researchers talked to sex workers and their clients. Some 67% of sex workers said they would not report crimes against themselves to the PSNI. The users of sex workers - those who purchase sex - said criminalising the purchase would not deter them from the activity of doing that. The notion that it will suddenly go away if we do this does not stack up.

A previous speaker said that all sex workers were exploited. I recognise that fact. However, all work is exploitation. The idea that a sex worker does not have the ability to realise what a consensual sexual act is - albeit that he or she chooses to engage in that activity in exchange for money - is an appalling thing to say about any woman, any man, any human being. In the context of remarks made about consent, I find that absolutely incredible.

Of course, there are people who are trafficked into this country and who are coerced and made to perform sexual acts that they would not otherwise willingly perform. Those crimes are already prohibited in our laws. The new addition here relates to those instances where adults consent to a sexual activity in exchange for money. People can put whatever moralistic spin on it they like. It might not be a great choice, it might be a very limited choice or it might be a choice that the person would not, in many other circumstances, make. However, they are rational responsible adults who can say, "Well, okay, I don't like it, but it's the choice I'm going to make."

The Tánaiste should listen to the testimony of the USI students in this country who are engaged in sex work and who will tell her why they are doing it. It makes me sick to think that we patronise women in particular in this country while we are cutting grants, cutting housing benefits, attacking lone-parent payments and making it harder for women to support their children in decent employment, yet we are taking away an option making it more difficult by taking away their clients.

This legislation will not help any woman. It will not deter any man or person who wants to purchase services from a man, a woman or a transgender person. We say that based on the evidence in other countries. We have debated this matter on many occasions in the House. We all know how the votes will go. However, a review of this area is badly needed. I am sorry to say I believe we will regret passing this legislation tonight.

See this speech in context