I understand the Minister of State is going to request a Clerk's correction.

I wish to draw the attention of the House to a minor typographical error that my Department has noted in the Bill. On page 26, line 17, the word "Minister" has been incorrectly spelled with the second "i" omitted in error. I seek to invoke Standing Order 196 and request that the Ceann Comhairle, as Chair, direct the Clerk to make a correction in the Bill so as to substitute the correct spelling of the word "Minister" in this location.

I thank the Minister of State and hereby direct the Clerk to incorporate the changes as requested.

It just shows that text language is finding its way into legislation as well. We now proceed to the Report and Final Stages. Amendments Nos. 1, 3, 10, 21, 28 to 30, inclusive, 36, 43 and 44 are related and will be taken together.

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 14, between lines 29 and 30, to insert the following:

“ “vulnerable person” means a person who has—

(a) a physical disability,

(b) a mental or intellectual disability, or

(c) a mental illness,

which is of such a nature or degree as to severely restrict the person to guard himself or herself against serious exploitation.”.

I will speak to this group together. The intention is to replace outdated terminology in the Criminal Law (Human Trafficking) Act 2008 and ensure this carries through to this new Bill. These amendments replace the term "mentally impaired" with the more appropriate "vulnerable person" and includes a definition of this. Terms elsewhere have also been aligned with this for consistency. The amendments also serve to ensure that a lower threshold applies to trafficking offences committed against a vulnerable person. It is not necessary to prove that a vulnerable person was, for example, coerced or deceived into a trafficking situation and this is in recognition of their particular circumstances. These amendments aim to ensure the vulnerable persons are appropriately safeguarded in our legislation.

I move amendment No. 2:

In page 18, between lines 11 and 12, to insert the following:

“Presumption of age of child applicant

26. Where—

(a) an applicant or appellant, as the case may be, or

(b) in the case of an application under section 26(4) , the person making an application on behalf of an applicant or an appeal on behalf of an appellant,

claims in the application that the applicant or appellant, as the case may be, has not attained the age of 18 years, the competent authority, the trusted partner, the operational committee or an appeals officer, as the case may be, shall presume, unless and until the contrary is proved, for the purposes of this Part, that that applicant or appellant, as the case may be, has not, at the date on which the claim is made, attained the age of 18 years.”.

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 18, lines 37 and 38, to delete “person who is unable to make the application himself or herself by reason of a mental or physical incapacity” and substitute “vulnerable person (other than a child)”.

Amendments Nos. 4 to 9, inclusive, 11 to 20, inclusive, 22 to 27, inclusive, 32 to 35, inclusive, and 37 to 42, inclusive, are related. Amendment No. 8 is a physical alternative to amendment No. 7; amendment No. 19 is a physical alternative to amendment No. 18; amendment No. 34 is a physical alternative to amendment No. 33; and amendments Nos. 4 to 9, inclusive, and 11 to 20, inclusive, 22 to 27, inclusive, 32 to 35, inclusive, and 37 to 42, inclusive, will be discussed together.

I move amendment No. 4:

In page 19, line 10, to delete “subject to” and substitute “in accordance with”.

These amendments collectively remove the credibility requirement when an application to be recognised as a victim of trafficking is being assessed. I will speak to the amendments in the grouping together. We are maintaining the current threshold for identification of victims of trafficking on the basis of reasonable grounds of belief. This will ensure our legislation remains aligned with the European Union and the international measures on human trafficking and, in particular, the 2011 EU directive on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims. More fundamentally, this amendment clarifies the standard to be used when assessing applications, ensuring our processes are robust and transparent. This was sought by a number of Deputies on Committee Stage and is also the subject of amendments submitted by Deputy Pringle today. I know the Minister, Deputy McEntee, previously reassured Deputies that work was under way with the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel on formulating this very amendment. As Deputies will see, what is required to achieve this is rather complex from a drafting standpoint. However, this complexity is necessary to ensure the wording is sound and most importantly, that it achieves its objectives.

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 19, line 11, to delete “whether—” and substitute “whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant is a victim of human trafficking.”

I move amendment No. 6:

In page 19, between lines 11 and 12, to insert the following:

“(2) The competent authority or the trusted partner, as the case may be, shall, in relation to a decision under subsection (1) —”.

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 19, to delete line 12.

I move amendment No. 9:

In page 19, line 13, before “the” where it firstly occurs to insert “take into account whether”.

I move amendment No. 10:

In page 19, line 16, after “child” to insert “or a vulnerable person”.

I move amendment No. 11:

In page 19, line 21, to delete “ section 25. ” and substitute “ section 25, and”.

I move amendment No. 12:

In page 19, line 22, to delete “(2) A decision under subsection (1) shall be made” and substitute the following:

“(b) make the decision”.

I move amendment No. 13:

In page 19, line 28, to delete “ paragraphs (a) and (b) ” and substitute “ paragraph (a) ”.

I move amendment No. 14:

In page 19, line 29, to delete “ subsection (1) are” and substitute “ subsection (2) is”.

I move amendment No. 15:

In page 19, line 33, to delete “ paragraphs (a) and (b) ” and substitute “ paragraph (a) ”.

I move amendment No. 16:

In page 19, line 34, to delete “ subsection (1) are” and substitute “ subsection (2) is”.

I move amendment No. 17:

In page 20, line 12, to delete “whether—” and substitute “, in accordance with subsection (3) , whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant is a victim of human trafficking.”.

I move amendment No. 18:

In page 20, to delete line 13 and substitute the following:

“(3) The operational committee shall, in relation to a decision under subsection (2) —”.

I move amendment No. 20:

In page 20, line 14, before “the” where it firstly occurs to insert “take into account whether”.

I move amendment No. 21:

In page 20, line 17, after “child” to insert “or a vulnerable person”.

I move amendment No. 22:

In page 20, line 22, to delete “ section 25 .” and substitute “ section 25 , and”.

I move amendment No. 23:

In page 20, line 23, to delete “(3) A decision under subsection (2) shall be made” and substitute the following:

“(b) make the decision”.

I move amendment No. 24:

In page 20, line 26, to delete “ paragraphs (a) and (b) ” and substitute “ paragraph (a) ”.

I move amendment No. 25:

In page 20, line 27, to delete “ subsection (2) are” and substitute “ subsection (3 ) is”.

I move amendment No. 26:

In page 20, line 29, to delete “ paragraphs (a) and (b) ” and substitute “ paragraph (a) ”.

I move amendment No. 27:

In page 20, line 30, to delete “ subsection (2) are” and substitute “ subsection (3) is”.

I move amendment No. 28:

In page 22, line 20, to delete “a mental or physical incapacity” and substitute “being a vulnerable person”.

I move amendment No. 29:

In page 22, line 21, to delete “his/her” and substitute “his or her”.

I move amendment No. 30:

In page 22, line 21, after “sharing,” to insert “or”.

I move amendment No. 32:

In page 25, line 21, to delete “whether—” and substitute “, in accordance with subsection (8) , whether there are reasonable grounds for believing that the appellant is a victim of human trafficking.”.

I move amendment No. 33:

In page 25, to delete line 22 and substitute the following:

“(8) The appeals officer shall, in relation to a decision under subsection (7) —”.

I move amendment No. 35:

In page 25, line 23, before “the” where it firstly occurs to insert “take into account whether”.

I move amendment No. 36:

In page 25, line 26, after “child” to insert “or a vulnerable person”.

I move amendment No. 37:

In page 25, line 31, to delete “ section 25 .” and substitute “ section 25 , and”.

I move amendment No. 38:

In page 25, line 32, to delete “(8) A decision under subsection (7) shall be made” and substitute the following:

“(b) make the decision”.

I move amendment No. 39:

In page 26, line 2, to delete “ paragraphs (a) and (b) ” and substitute “ paragraph (a) ”.

I move amendment No. 40:

In page 26, line 2, to delete “ subsection (7) are” and substitute “ subsection (8) is”.

I move amendment No. 41:

In page 26, line 5, to delete “ paragraphs (a) and (b) ” and substitute “ paragraph (a) ”.

I move amendment No. 43:

In page 27, lines 18 and 19, to delete all words from and including “amended” in line 18 down to and including line 19 and substitute the following:

“amended—

(a) in section 4—

(i) by the substitution of the following subsection for subsection (3):

“(3) A person who trafficks a vulnerable person for the purposes of the exploitation of the vulnerable person shall be guilty of an offence.”,

and

(ii) by the substitution of the following subsection for subsection (8):

“(8) In this section, ‘vulnerable person’ means a person who has—

(a) a physical disability,

(b) a mental or intellectual disability, or

(c) a mental illness,

which is of such a nature or degree as to severely restrict the person to guard himself or herself against serious exploitation.”,

and”.

I move amendment No. 44:

In page 27, between lines 19 and 20, to insert the following:

“(b) by the insertion of the following section after section 5:”.

I move amendment No. 45:

In page 34, line 18, after “their” where it secondly occurs to insert “behalf, from intimidation and retaliation;”.

I compliment the Minister of State and the Opposition spokesperson on their efficiency and alacrity in dealing with these matters.

When you have good officials, it makes it very simple.