Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I will start with a technical matter I raised previously. I have been critical of the Department of Justice in its treatment of this House regarding the transposition or adoption of EU directives. This is a really important matter. Standing Orders require motions to reach the Clerk of the Dáil at least four working days before they are scheduled to be taken. The Business Committee was able to publish the agenda for this week last week saying that this was to be taken but it was only yesterday that the motion was added to the Dáil business site at 2.25 p.m., a mere 24 hours or so ago. That does not underscore the importance of a proper debate in this House. As long as we put up with that, it will continue.

As has been made clear by the Minister of State, this is a proposal to opt in to a reform and update of the directive we agreed to and legislated for. The new recast directive demonstrates the importance of continued review and update of EU laws, particularly in this area, to take account of changes in technology, which are constant and ongoing. The first phase of work was done by the Council of Europe in 2007. It adopted a comprehensive Convention on the Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse. The convention criminalised a wide array of practices constituting sexual abuse against children. States were required to criminalise such practices and to take measures to prevent sexual violence, protect child victims and prosecute perpetrators. That convention was also ratified by all 46 Council of Europe member states and two non-member states. As regards the European Union, the original directive dates from 2011 and was largely given legislative effect here in the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017. In September 2021, the Commission launched its initiative to assess the implementation of that directive with a view to revising it.

According to the European Parliamentary Research Service, as a consequence of new technologies and the Covid pandemic, criminal reports of child sexual abuse have never been so numerous. It is a shocking fact. It estimates that one in five children is a victim of some form of sexual violence in Europe. That amounts to 16 million children. Both governments and NGOs have acknowledged a dramatic increase in online child sexual abuse materials. For example, between January and August 2023, the Internet Watch Foundation identified 101,988 web pages containing such material hosted on several servers in the EU, a 26% increase compared with 2022. Of those pages, 21,651 depicted the most extreme forms of child sexual abuse, including rape, bestiality, sadism and sexual torture; these are shocking facts. It seems from the Commission's viewpoint that there has been a delay by member states in transposing the 2011 directive and that it has been transposed unevenly, with different rules still applying in different member states. Some of this may be inevitable and may relate to matters that do not fall within the EU's competence, for example, the age of consent varies in the EU from 14 to 18. According to the helpful summary provided by the European Parliamentary Research Service, what was more worrisome than transposition weaknesses was the dramatic increase in online child sexual abuse. This becomes the major problem and is not a consequence of member states' failure to transpose the directive properly. This phenomenon is the main driver of the revision as it calls for certain clarifications.

The issues include investigations and prosecutions of offenders, the increased possibilities for perpetrators to hide their identities, the increased presence of children on the Internet, shortcomings in assessing victims and the impact of new technology in the proliferation of child sexual abuse material. I welcome the general objectives of combating and reducing child sexual abuse in all its forms. I welcome in particular the specific objectives of ensuring effective assistance to and support of child victims. We have very little time in this debate. I hope we will have fuller debate on a matter that really is of importance and substance. This may not be the final version of the directive but I have no difficulty agreeing that a balancing exercise along those lines is clearly necessary and not at all unusual. I and my party strongly support this motion.

See this speech in context