Ivana Bacik (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I wish to repeat how strongly I support this section and section 25, which we extensively debated on previous occasions in the Seanad. I am listening carefully to what colleagues say, particularly those who did not have an opportunity to speak in the previous Seanad. I hope those who have expressed doubts have looked at the justice committee report from June 2013, which was a report of the entire committee and was unanimously accepted on a cross-party basis. It did consider decriminalisation and all other models of regulation and reform. We were asked to do so by the Minister for Justice and Equality at the time, Alan Shatter. The report sets out quite fairly the cases for and against the various models and in conclusion recommended we adopt a model of criminalisation of the purchaser and decriminalisation of the seller and of the related offences of loitering and soliciting.

I listened to Senator McDowell's contribution. He raised quite a number of points that I would characterise as red herrings and clichés. In objecting to section 25 and the premise on which it is based, he spoke about the propensity for blackmail or so on but the same argument could be made in respect of any criminal offence. I do not suppose Senator McDowell recommends we decriminalise possession of drugs, for example. Possession of drugs offences also lend themselves to such extortion or blackmail. The Senator's argument is not a reason, in my view, to object to the section; it is a spurious argument. He also raised the argument that these offences relate to a private sphere. Arguments of privacy will have been well rehearsed in this debate but one should recall that privacy arguments were also used against criminalising marital rape and domestic violence. There are times when privacy rights must be read in the broader context of exploitation of power imbalance, to which Senator Higgins referred earlier. There is a broader context of power imbalance and exploitation. It is from this perspective that I approach this legislation, and it is the basis on which I support the legislation. Senator McDowell also referred to the fact that legislation such as this might drive prostitution underground. This was something we canvassed directly with the proponents of the Swedish model when we went to Sweden and met with those arguing for it here. The point they made, which is a very practical one, is that prostitution, like drugs offences, cannot be driven so underground that users cannot access it. It must be accessible so that clients can access prostitution. Prostitution is by its nature clandestine, as drug sales are, yet there must be a way in which prostitution is available and accessible to clients. As one Swedish police officer put it to us, if it is available and accessible to clients, it is also accessible to police. However, it is legislated for. It is also-----