Mike O'Shea

ARE WE WATCHING BRITAIN’S PAEDOPHILE GROOMING-GANG SCANDAL UNFOLD IN IRELAND — WITH THE VICTIMS BEING CHILDREN IN TUSLA CARE? In an opinion piece in today’s Irish Mail, Brenda Power warns of a shocking child-safety scandal involving vulnerable children in State care being targeted by sexual predators while the authorities responsible for protecting them struggle to keep them safe. Under the headline “Grooming gangs are the real threat, not grannies”, Power focuses on three cases involving teenagers in State care which recently came before High Court judge Mr Justice John Jordan. So concerned was the judge that he directed details to Children Minister Norma Foley, Justice Minister Jim O’Callaghan and Public Expenditure Minister Jack Chambers. One case concerns a 14-year-old girl who, Power writes, was being preyed upon by organised paedophile gangs. The teenager, from a deeply troubled background, reportedly believed the men exploiting her genuinely cared about her. Despite suffering physical symptoms associated with sexual activity with numerous men, the child was unable to recognise herself as a victim. Power argues that this illustrates the sinister nature of grooming: vulnerable children can be manipulated into interpreting exploitation as love and affection. A second teenage girl in Tusla care was also reported as being sexually exploited by a large number of men. The third case concerned a 16-year-old boy involved with an older criminal gang whom he regarded as friends and supporters. Gardaí had seized thousands of euro worth of drugs from him. Power links the cases to the shortage of special-care accommodation. Despite 26 designated beds, only 15 were available. But she argues that the debate must go much further than beds. The fundamental question is: who is sexually exploiting these children and what is being done to identify, investigate and prosecute them? Power draws a disturbing comparison with Britain’s grooming-gang scandals, where vulnerable girls, particularly children in care, were systematically targeted by groups of men. She argues Ireland should learn from what happened there rather than wait for a comparable scandal to become fully exposed here. She cites Irish Mail on Sunday reporting that organised criminal groups are exploiting the State’s inability to keep vulnerable children safe. Perpetrators allegedly contact children online, obtain information about residential care facilities and arrange meetings away from their placements. Power describes children initially being offered attention, affection, money, drugs or alcohol before being passed between perpetrators and subjected to increasingly serious sexual exploitation. What may appear to be children voluntarily meeting adults can instead involve grooming, manipulation and coercion. She strongly rejects any suggestion that children can meaningfully consent to their own exploitation. They must be recognised as victims rather than having their behaviour treated as the problem. Power also questions whether Ireland’s in-camera rule, while essential for protecting children’s privacy, can prevent proper public scrutiny of organised exploitation. Her broader argument is that the State risks concentrating on containing vulnerable children through secure beds and residential placements while insufficient attention is directed towards the adults allegedly exploiting them. Ireland, Power argues, must confront the possibility that organised grooming and sexual exploitation of children in State care is already occurring here. Her central message is stark: the vulnerable children are not the threat from which society needs protection; the adults grooming and exploiting them are.