Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I was called in the nick of time.

I thank the Chair for the opportunity to speak on this directive on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and CSAM. The directive addresses a number of important issues such as investigations and prosecutions of offenders, the increased possibilities for perpetrators to hide their identity, the increased presence of children on the internet, shortcomings in assisting victims and the potential impact of new technology on the proliferation of child sexual abuse material. This is timely given that shocking new research has shown that more than 300 million children per year are victims of online sexual abuse and exploitation. Researchers at the University of Edinburgh found that one in eight, or 12.6%, of the world's children have been victims of non-consensual taking, sharing and exposure to sexual images and video in the past year. Some 12.5% of children globally are estimated to have been subject to online solicitation in the past year, such as unwanted sexual talk, including sexual acts and requests. This is extremely concerning and is clearly a global issue that requires a global response. The increased figures seen across the globe also reflect growing trends in Ireland.

In 2023, the US National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which receives reports of suspected CSAM, referred more than 10,000 such reports to An Garda Síochána in respect of material relating to Ireland. This represented a 17% increase on the number of referrals in 2022 and the rate of referrals has only continued to increase this year. Last year, An Garda Síochána identified 115 victims of child sexual abuse or exploitation in Ireland based on such reports, an increase on the 51 children identified in 2022. This is extremely worrying and shows that this issue has been growing exponentially and will continue to grow if we do not take drastic action.

I welcome that this directive seeks to change the level of penalties for those engaging in sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and criminalises in all member states solicitation, the live streaming of child sexual abuse and the running of an online infrastructure enabling or encouraging child sexual abuse or exploitation. I also welcome the focus on victims in this directive, particularly the requirement for member states to ensure that victims and survivors of child sexual abuse have access to assistance and support and a right to compensation for any damage suffered. I am also glad to see the change in terminology from child pornography to child sexual abuse material. This material is not pornographic. It is abuse and exploitation. In 2016 ECPAT, a global organisation that works to end the sexual exploitation of children, created an international working group, which consisted of 18 organisations and expert bodies, with an aim to produce a cohesive approach to tackling how global laws and policies referred to child abuse. The result of this was the Luxembourg Guidelines, a report that offered nations a comprehensive overview and breakdown of the impact language and terminology can have in further assisting and supporting victims of child abuse and exploitation. In recognising the role of communication and the power of language we, as policymakers, have a responsibility to ensure that we are using best practice terminology. The term "child pornography" is not only not best practice terminology, it is also outdated, extremely harmful and factually incorrect. Pornography implies consent and ignores the nature of child exploitation. It is important that we implement appropriate language that conveys the truth and actuality of the action and crime.

The use of appropriate language contributes to a positive cultural shift. Although I strongly welcome this language change, I am interested in how this will affect the terminology used in Irish legislation. Senator Flynn introduced a Bill to the Seanad two years ago that sought to do this very thing, that is, to change the outdated language in Irish legislation. She sought to change the term "child pornography" in Irish legislation to "child sexual exploitation material". During that debate two years ago, the Minister of State said, “Appealing as it may be to propose the straightforward replacement of the offending words with more appropriate terms, it is unfortunately not so simple." He went on to state:

[T]he act of changing the words does alter the offence. In altering the offence, a risk is created regarding prosecutions that are already under way and to future prosecutions that may be brought for offences committed before the change in wording.

Will the Minister of State clarify, then, whether this directive will impact on future and past terminology in legislation and, if so, whether that will alter the offence as he suggested it would in response to Senator Flynn in the Seanad? That is very important for how this legislation will work and have an impact, because it will also have to influence all backdated legislation, at least according to what the Minister of State said in the Seanad. I am wondering, therefore, what will happen with this in future in the context of our legislative process.

See this speech in context