The leniency of the sentence handed down in a high profile sexual offences case earlier this week has, rightfully, disgusted and angered people. The abuser groomed a young girl, bombarding her with thousands of text messages, many of which were sexually explicit. He then sexually abused her when she was only 16 years old.

I refer the Deputy to Standing Orders: "Decisions or judgments of a duly constituted court cannot be subjected to review or discussion in the House as the House is not a judicial body".

I am aware of that. The testimony of the victim was heartbreaking.

The Deputy will have to take the Standing Order into consideration in her contribution.

I have taken it into consideration. I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

The Deputy cannot proceed - the Standing Order is very clear.

Victims of such crime are robbed of their confidence and their dignity.

The Deputy will have to be general.

They are left physically, emotionally and mentally sick and their childhoods are taken yet so often, despite the horrific nature of these crimes, perpetrators receive very, very light sentences. This infuriates not just victims and their families but the general public. It sends very dangerous messages to victims of crime generally but specifically to victims of sexual violence. These are not unique or isolated cases, as the Tánaiste knows. There is a real problem with the sentences handed down to perpetrators of rape and sexual abuse, in particular, and we must face up to that. Inconsistency, leniency and light sentences are common practice. The House should make no mistake. A recent high profile case has brought the Judiciary into disrepute. The public does not trust our justice system to deliver punishments that fit these crimes. It is as simple as that.

The Deputy can be general about policy but not refer to a specific case. I have to warn her.

I have been general.

The same will apply to the Tánaiste.

I have taken the Leas-Cheann Comhairle's advice and I have spoken in general.

Disgraceful.

The Deputy should get a new script.

People have, therefore, have had enough of light sentences for these crimes and there is a real and immediate challenge. As legislators, we must respond rationally and effectively to what is a very grave deficiency within our criminal justice system and the Government must lead that response. We need to build public confidence. We need a mechanism to deliver consistency and accountability in sentencing. The sentencing council model should be introduced in this jurisdiction. This would involve a full range of stakeholders and the wider public in the process of establishing sentencing guidelines for the Judiciary. Members of the Judiciary, of course, would still remain central to the process. The sentencing guidelines issued would ensure the Judiciary must stick to the range provided for the category of offence before them. This would reassure the public of the appropriateness of sentences for serious crime. It would also ensure consistency and accountability across the courts system. Does the Tánaiste accept that there is a serious problem in respect of sentencing, specifically in respect of sexual crime and abuse? What does the Government propose to do about this? Will the Government give serious consideration to adopting the sentencing council model as I have outlined?

We can refer to general policy but not to a specific case. I remind the House as a whole that there is a long-standing ruling that members of Judiciary are independent by virtue of the Constitution and they may neither be criticised nor have their rulings referred to in the House.

I thank Deputy McDonald. There is a long history in this country and, indeed, elsewhere of difficulty in securing convictions in respect of sexual offences. There is also a long history here and elsewhere of a belief that the sentencing does not reflect the seriousness of the crime. I am on record again and again as saying that I do not believe that enough attention has been paid to victims in our legal system and I reiterate that this afternoon. We need a sea change in attitudes to victims across the criminal justice system. That is why the Government introduced victims of crime legislation in line with an EU directive, which, thankfully, is leading the way in that change. I believe as that change takes hold, some of the issues to which the Deputy referred will be dealt with more robustly and more appropriately within our system.

As the Leas-Cheann Comhairle said, sentencing is a matter for the Judiciary. We respect the separation of powers in this country. The sentencing regime for sexual crimes has been greatly strengthened in recent years. For example, as the Deputy will be aware, the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017, which I introduced last year, has much stronger sanctions in respect of online grooming. The Act introduces a specific offence relating to the use of information and communications technology to facilitate the sexual exploitation of a child. It was extremely important that the House passed the legislation because there are new forms of interaction with young children on the Internet, which makes them extremely vulnerable to sexual grooming and sexual exploitation. There is a huge educational job as well for all of us to do. The reality is our criminal law is strong in respect of the sanctions and penalties judges can hand down but in each case, it is a matter for the Judiciary and it is not open to Ministers or any other Member to intervene in any way regarding how a particular case is conducted or in the outcome of such proceedings. I hope I have made it clear that, from the Government's point of view, we take these sexual violence offences extremely seriously and we have introduced stronger legislation.

All of us appreciate and value the independence of the Judiciary, the separation of powers and the necessity for an independent Judiciary. The Tánaiste will notice that I have not advanced an argument in respect of mandatory sentences for that very reason. It is our job, however, to reflect truthfully the level of public disquiet that arises in high profile or other cases, particularly of sexual violence. It is our job, as legislators, to decide upon a framework within which the Judiciary might independently operate and that is the proposition I am putting to the Tánaiste. We are largely in agreement and I do not for a moment gainsay her concern for victims. I absolutely acknowledge and appreciate that. I equally acknowledge changes in the law but I have advanced an argument in favour of a sentencing council. In 2015, my colleague, Senator Pádraig MacLochlainn, and, in 2017, my colleague, Deputy Jonathan O'Brien, introduced sentencing council Bills. I am trying to win the Tánaiste over to the merits of that approach, not to mandatory sentencing but to guidelines that would have the dual advantage of, one the one hand, affording guidance, not direction, to the Bench, but also a mechanism that would massively enhance public confidence, which has been dented, in the sentencing policy of the State.

Clearly, in court the issues in each case have to be examined but I take the view, as does the Deputy, that consistency of sentencing is an important issue. The approach we have taken is to publish the Judicial Council Bill 2017, under which a sentencing information committee will be established to collate information on sentences imposed by the courts and to disseminate information among judges and persons other than judges. That will be a valuable tool for the Judiciary and for the public's understanding of sentencing regimes and how they work. A report of the working group on the strategic review of penal policy was published in June 2014 following excellent work. It was a broad ranging report on this policy but they examined the issue of developing sentencing guidelines. However, the majority of the group took the view that the primary role of developing such guidelines is the responsibility of the Judiciary and does not lie in bringing forward detailed statutory-based guidelines.