Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

Deputy Jonathan O'Brien made a very good point and it is the one I wish to emphasise most, although there are a number of other issues of which we need to be very cognisant when dealing with the question of having a full report on the implementation of the law that will be enacted. He referred to human trafficking. The justification for the campaign on the criminalisation of the purchase of sex was based on the concerns we all rightly have about human trafficking, in particular for the purposes of sex, where such unfortunates are, in effect, being kept in prison against their will and trafficked across borders. They are expected to carry out sexual activity to make lots of money for their traffickers. That is a concern for all of us.

However, as I said last night when I introduced our amendments, there has been a lot of conflation in this debate. The argument is fundamentally about whether criminalising the purchase of sex will deal with human trafficking. I do not believe that is the case and I have not seen any evidence to convince me otherwise. I have read lots of documents from Sweden, Norway, Amnesty and others that show quite the opposite is the case. Criminalisation of the purchase of sex does nothing to deal with the plight of those who are the victims of human trafficking or the criminality in that regard. We are in danger of conflating issues, which is the reason we specifically mention in our amendment that we want to see the impact of the legislation on the level of human trafficking. Whether the review is in two years or three years it must specifically focus on the impact on human trafficking. The Minister's amendment does not do that. I intend to press my amendment.

I will also press the Minister further on the question of timing. It will be three years and probably four before we get a report if we opt for the Minister's amendment and the issue is too urgent to leave it for that length of time, not specifically just on the trafficking issue but because there is a plethora of issues we have tried to amend. For example, the definition of a brothel is being taken to include a case where a number of sex workers work together in an apartment. They could be considered to be running and brothel and could be shut down. If I was a sex worker vulnerable to all sorts of creeps out there with money to buy services I would much rather operate alongside a companion in the same apartment. Working together is not just a sign of being organised in an industry, it about the health and safety of sex workers. Health and safety at work is a big part of legislation no matter what job one performs, whether a firefighter, nurse or sex worker. The health and safety of sex workers must be given a certain degree of priority, in particular because they are already extraordinarily vulnerable. The issue of working together does not necessarily mean people are running a brothel, it may just be a case of safety in numbers.

I am concerned about the heavier penalties for loitering that are contained in the Bill. We must also examine the impact of that on the human rights of the sex workers involved. Crucially, we must focus on health. I have just been going over the report on the Swedish model carried out by HIV Ireland and it is very worrying how such a measure could impact on the health of sex workers. As we said last night, very often sex workers are searched to see whether they are carrying condoms and the implication is that they are carrying them in order to facilitate the purchase of sex. There is evidence in the report that sex workers are less likely to carry condoms, which help protect their safety. There is evidence that the level of HIV is on the increase among sex workers in Sweden. There have also been statements from people connected with the Swedish department of health that they refuse to issue condoms to sex workers. I have two young nephews who have grown up in Sweden and I am aware that every school there has a nurse who provides condoms to teenagers if they request them because they are concerned about their sexual health. However, it seems all of a sudden we disrespect the sexual health of people who are engaged in sex work. That must be taken into account and in the shortest possible time. Two years is much healthier than the three years proposed by the Minister. A reference to human rights and human trafficking must be contained within the review. I intend to press amendment No. 18.

See this speech in context