Seanad debates

Wednesday, 7 March 2007

Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) (Amendment) Bill 2007: Second Stage

 

12:00 pm

Photo of David NorrisDavid Norris (Independent)

Those people who are privileged to have that experience should cherish it but there is a danger, because of the language being used now, that we automatically equate "sexual" and "indecent" as if they are replaceable terms, and they are not. I am not saying there is not sexual exploitation but let us not pretend that sexual pleasure is dirty or reprehensible. It is a wonderful gift. That is why it must be treated sensitively and examined carefully.

I regret that, once again in this area, we are dealing with rushed legislation. Senator Quinn was right when he remarked on the requirement on this House, under the Constitution, to carefully examine legislation, and had some hesitations about what was happening here today. I do not believe that is the case. Even though it may well be that almost every speaker who wants to speak will get to speak on Second Stage, there is virtually no provision for the teasing out of amendments in a considered way and then to return to the issues after the Minister's explanation on Report Stage. That is not what this House is about. In fact, it is a flat contradiction of what we are about.

The timing of this Bill, in the run up to an election, could not be worse because it provokes the kind of posturing we saw in the debate in the other House last night. I watched "Oireachtas Report" last night and I was appalled by the pious posturings, particularly from Fine Gael Members. I like Enda Kenny, by and large, but I was disgusted by what I saw. The kind of posturing that went on would make a rat puke.

I want to say, while the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, is in the Chamber because it is not the first time this has happened, that there were suggestions that he was less interested in protecting the welfare of children from sexual abuse or that he regarded such matters as minor offences. That is a deeply dishonest and wrong suggestion. I may differ with this Minister on a number of aspects but it is outrageous that any politician should make that kind of accusation. That is what we get when this kind of legislation is introduced in an election period. The Minister showed considerable tact in the way he dealt with suggestions from both the Labour Party and the Fine Gael Party and he has addressed the problem of grooming.

In the absence of the Minister, Senator Ryan raised a query about grooming and wondered whether one meeting constituted grooming. I do not believe it can because as I understand it, grooming is a deliberate preparation over a long term to make children believe it is a normal process. In some horrible cases they were given the impression that it was a religious duty to co-operate. That constitutes violation.

To return to the first point I made about the profound involvement in all of our natures of the sexual instinct, we must also face reality. A few minutes ago the Visitors Gallery was full of teenagers and I would say the hormone level was through the ceiling. That is the reality and politicians do nobody any favours if they pretend the citizens of this country are eunuchs until they are 16 years and 11 months.

My colleague, Senator Henry, referred to the recent case, which is troubling in many aspects, and said the young man involved was solicited by a large number of men. That is not the case. This young man placed an advertisement on a gay website stating that he was 19 years of age and inviting correspondence and contact. A considerable number of the gay people who contacted him refused to have anything to do with him when they found out that he was underage, deleted his number and told him to stop the contact in his own interest. Those people behaved responsibly.

I do not use the computer. There is something in me — I know I am old-fashioned — that revolts against the mechanical element of looking for partners through a machine. I do not like it. It does not appeal to me but I know it is very 21st century. I pay tribute to the young man in question for his courage, integrity and the way in which he told the truth throughout what must have been an extremely difficult time. This State has let that young man down because we have never protected the interests of young gay people. We still have the exemption of the churches from the operation of the equality legislation. That copper-fastens bullying by both students and teachers of young gay people in schools. Report after report indicates that 80% of bullying contains a homophobic element but nothing is ever done about it, although the Stay Safe programme was mentioned.

In the case which was widely reported, reports started off referring to a paedophile ring. There was no paedophile ring. There is a great deal of rubbish written in newspapers. Senator O'Rourke's contribution was excellent. She spoke about the need to be allowed to discuss these issues in a rational manner without being automatically labelled.

The Minister, in anticipation of the fact that we might not have time to have long discussions, took up the question of the amendments. Among others that I tabled was one about honest mistake. I did so partly because I saw "Oireachtas Report" last night and suggestions were made from the Labour Party benches that there might be a constitutional problem. The Minister mentioned the question of mens rea, which is very interesting. As a distinguished lawyer, I am sure he is right. He then stated this was a fundamental part of the Constitution and that we may well have a referendum to knock it out. If it is so fundamental, if it is automatically assumed and if it is a good thing, why are we then knocking it out?

I wish to make a point about protecting people who are mentally handicapped, with which I agree. However, let us not be too simplistic about this. The mentally handicapped have various degrees of handicap. Some of them can be pretty bloody cunning. I know of a case of a person who was borderline handicapped and used that condition to approach people as sexual partners and then blackmailed them. He made a career out of it. What about protecting the rights of those people who under this law would be copper-fastened as criminals? We must realise this area is not fully black and white.

I believe we will need to return to legislate on this subject. Let us have a full sexual offences Bill that deals with the whole situation and not during the run up to a general election. Senator Ryan mentioned the second last paragraph in page 6, which refers to "inviting, inducing or coercing the child to participate in or observe any activity of a sexual or indecent nature." God bless The Tailor and Ansty. What about a farmer who takes a young lad aged 16 and a half to the yard to see the bull service the cow? Under this section the farmer could go to jail, which is daft because the wording is so loosely drafted. We must protect people from real exploitation. We must be honest and admit the sexual identity of young people, which is true.

The Minister should be aware that parents inevitably resent that their children are sexual beings because they see it as part of growing away from them. We need only consider how fathers often react to their daughters' marriages.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.