Feargal Quinn (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State back to the House. I have often stated that I value someone who has experience of working in business before entering politics. The Minister of State has that experience and remembers it well. That he was in a business that was actively involved in detergents means that he has probably come to clean up things. I do not just mean this House, but the entire system. I am impressed by how he has handled this debate. He had a script, but he went off it and provided his own opinions.

Like Senator van Turnhout, I do not understand from where the urge for child sexual abuse comes.

I do not understand from where the urge for child sexual abuse comes. It is not something I have come across. I do not understand it, but clearly it happens and this is needed.

My question is whether we should require, without warrant, Internet service providers to hand over the names, addresses, telephone numbers and IP and e-mail addresses of those under investigation in order that their Internet history can be tracked. It is a provocative question. I am interested in knowing what we propose to do by way of legislation. Is putting the legal obligation to track Internet history going too far or should it at least be considered? A Bill entitled Protecting Children from Internet Predators Bill 2011 was recently introduced in the United States. As drafted, it provides that businesses offering paid Internet access, including airports, hotels, coffee shops and so on, could be forced to keep detailed accounts of what each customer does online, on the premise that the Government might one day want to review that information. Is this going too far? I am interested in hearing the Minister of State's view on this.

Should we make it a criminal offence to make available any recording, film, video, photograph or image which depicts a person below the age of 18 years in a pose or situation that may potentially arouse sexual desire? I understand this is the direction in which other EU countries are going. Should we be considering the blocking of sites here which are listed by Interpol as dangerous? If Interpol has such information, why are we not using it? Is it possible to do so? Can we keep up with technology? In 2011, Norway admitted that its recently introduced measures to control Internet payments for gambling had failed. Italy and France now both admit that 70% of Internet gambling goes offshore despite the many blocking measures they have introduced, including restricting payments and taking the Internet service providers to court. If this is the case, what hope is there of our being able to block child abuse images? Another issue is that links to certain material can be circumvented.

In 2011, major Japanese Internet service providers began blocking access to websites that offered child pornography. This led to a sharp increase in the number of cases involving file sharing programmes. In Australia, senior police officers admitted that because of the nature of cyber crime, law enforcement agencies are usually behind the curve on new technology, particularly as the traders and creators of child pornography are highly computer literate. Federal police in Australia have warned that paedophiles increasingly record themselves molesting children before swapping the images with other child abusers. Images and videos are used as currency by abusers to buy their way into transnational groups that trade the material. In some cases, police have found large volumes of material, too much for anybody to store on most personal computers. The trend towards peer to peer file sharing and webcam streaming has presented new challenges. This illustrates that legislation to block websites can be easily bypassed.

If the Garda Síochána does not have the resources to investigate cases - I accept the Minister of State's statement that the Garda is skilled in this area but so also are the criminals - will the introduction of legislation have any real effect on determined criminals? Can the Internet service providers here at least provide better software for parents to protect their children from harmful images? It is not an easy issue to tackle. Wikipedia Commons, which is part of Wikipedia, contains pictures of adults in sexual positions, articles on sex acts and pictures of naked adults. There are images of fully nude men and women shown on this site and cartoon illustrations showing sex acts. Should we put limits on this? Also, should schools be legally required to monitor what pupils are accessing? Would it help to block links to suspect people or websites? For instance, if a child uploads a picture of himself or herself onto the Internet, how can we stop that falling into the wrong hands? On a related note, should we police social networks? In China, a real name is required to sign up to social networks so as to avoid abuse. I know that certain news websites such as The Huffington Postare moving in this direction. We have seen how children have met abusers on the Internet. Would such a measure prevent this? Another issue is that of teachers befriending children on the Internet who may be their students. I welcome the Government's proposal to move against this and believe it will do so.

Businesses must play a greater role. For instance, Google and Microsoft have signed up to the global network initiative on the Internet. More companies should be taking an active role in making the Internet safer. We must not stop at the Internet. Mr. Frank La Rue, the United Nations special rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression, has stated that he believes it is good to block a website that carries child pornography but that in itself is not enough. The issue is organised crime that deals with children. A state must investigate and punish those responsible for it.

The issues I have raised are just some of those that need to be addressed under this directive. I welcome the directive but the complexity of this issue demands scrutiny not only at EU level but at national level, with the Government here anticipating the situation which, I am delighted to hear, it is doing. I believe that this law, when in place, will go some way towards solving the problem, in particular because technology is improving rapidly. I welcome the Minister's comments today and his enthusiasm for ensuring this will happen. I believe the Minister, Deputy Shatter, has the right idea but, like Senator Bacik, I am concerned that as the relevant legislation is listed on the C schedule of proposed legislation, it does not appear this will happen too quickly. I would welcome if it could be moved up the list. Perhaps if the Dáil sat for five days a week, we would achieve more.