Joe O'Toole (Independent)

In line with what I said yesterday when I seconded Senator Brian Hayes's proposal, I agreed to its withdrawal on the basis that the Leader would do her utmost to get a debate on the issue today. She has failed to do that. I accept that she said she would try her best, however, she did not succeed.

I wish to be clear on this without playing politics. It would be seriously irresponsible and an abrogation of our responsibility as public representatives to leave the House today without having a discussion on this issue. I agree with Senator Brian Hayes that we have the debate in our gift. Even if there is no Minister available, I want to go on the record and I am certain people on the Government side of the House feel as strongly about the issue as Members on this side. It is only fair to have a debate to allow our constituents see that we know what is going on and that we are connected enough to their concerns to at least put our views on the record.

Yesterday, I asked for three things. I asked the Government to outline its plan on this issue so that we can at least answer the question as to what will happen next. I also asked about closing the loophole and about the age of consent. It is even more difficult today to see our way through from where we are now. I called yesterday for immediate legislation to close the loophole and suggested we wait for a time before dealing with the age of consent. As I am not a legal mind I do not know now whether the constitutional appeal being lodged by the DPP, the Government or the governor of Mountjoy Prison, impacts on the situation or on whether we should bring forward the legislation to close the loophole. However, I want to hear the case one way or the other.

The crucial issue is that ordinary people want to know who is affected. I cannot answer that question. I know there are six people in prison who are clearly affected to some extent, but I do not know whether they can simply take their case to court and walk free. Is it possible for the State to bring alternative charges and if it does, is there an issue of double jeopardy? People need to know the answers to these questions. Where cases are currently being investigated, what charges are available to the DPP? Can he bring forward charges of serious sexual assault that attract the same incarceration penalty as the charge of statutory rape? Can the old charge of rape, as opposed to statutory rape, be brought? I want to know the answers to these questions.

Also, if cases are currently due before the court on particular charges, can those charges be changed now to reflect the new circumstances? With regard to the Supreme Court decision, what date of implementation are we tied to? Are we tied to the date of the Constitution or are we tied to the date the law was enacted by us? If the law enacted by us is wiped from the Statute Book, does that mean amendments to it which changed previous legislation are also wiped and that the previous legislation stands?

I have exceeded my time, but I want to make the case for a debate on the issue. I do not want the debate now, but I want it today. I think I am making the case on behalf of all Members of the House. I spoke to Members on the Government side last night and they are dismayed by what is going on. We are answerable to the people and must be able to answer their questions. I demand some opportunity to put our views forward today. If the Government chooses not to send in somebody to talk to us, we can interpret that as we like. I want to go on the record on the issue. All Members are entitled to do the same so that they can show afterwards where they stood on the issue and what proposals they made. We can then measure or benchmark ourselves against that.