Derek McDowell (Labour)

I will have to start by dealing with a number of Senator Tuffy's points. It is undoubtedly the case that section 14 of the 1935 Act was examined in the PG section of the Supreme Court's two-phased dealings, which ended with the CC case. In PG's case, it was found that sexual assault does allow the defence of mistaken belief and its constitutionality was upheld. Likewise, it is undoubtedly the case that anyone under the age of 15 cannot consent to sexual assault. It is also the case that the Legislature increased the penalty in relatively recent years to a 14 year sentence. Moreover, although Senator Tuffy doubts this, every person who has sexual intercourse with a child, who cannot consent, must as a matter of fact, law and logic have committed a sexual assault on that child. He or she does much more than that. At present, he or she commits rape if there is no consent. However, at the very least, he or she commits the offence of sexual assault, which carries a 14 year sentence.

I remind Senator Tuffy that Mr. A, who sought his release and has succeeded at the first instance, received a three year sentence for an offence which carried life imprisonment. Hence, the maximum of 14 years available for sexual assault was more than adequate to deal with his case and would be more than adequate to deal with it if it came to be served again.

Two views have been expressed in the House. One, to the effect that this is not the time to rush ahead, was expressed by Senator O'Toole. The other view, expressed by Senators Tuffy, Brian Hayes and others, is that this is definitely the time to move ahead. I heard of this matter last Tuesday and the drafting of legislation commenced in my office on Wednesday. Senator Tuffy has suggested that I should have closeted myself away with the Parliamentary Counsel. I have done precisely that and I understand that we have already reached our fifth draft. We have spent hours working on this matter, even up to 11 p.m. Hence, the notion that I do not take this seriously or am swanning around pontificating on other subjects is simply untrue. From Wednesday, the day after the Supreme Court decision, my draftsmen have been working continually on this matter. They worked through the weekend and while I would not care to hazard the number of hours I have spent with them, I have done practically nothing else in the intervening period.

I have taken on board the views expressed in this House regarding the victims, who must be terribly upset by the fact that the perpetrators are queueing up to get out. It is the business of the State to ensure that they are given every possible special protection and support at this stage. I haven taken this on board and on my return to my Department I will ensure that, to the extent that it is not happening, it will happen.