In November 2012, Elon Musk wrote to Jeffrey Epstein: "What day/night will be the wildest party on your island?" Epstein was already at that point a convicted child abuser and Musk was looking for an invitation to the island where horrific child abuse by ultra-rich paedophiles took place. Musk has turned Twitter into a machine for the mass production of child sexual abuse imagery and image-based sexual abuse of women. We know the horrific, traumatising impact this abuse has on victims. It is why image-based sexual abuse, including through the use of deepfakes, was made a criminal offence six years ago but the Government's approach to big tech appears to be see no evil, hear no evil.

When Deputy Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach if those in X responsible for enabling Grok to produce sexual abuse imagery would be arrested, he scoffed at the idea. He suggested that to do so would be like 1984. Yesterday, French prosecutors raided the offices of X in Paris as part of their investigation into its creation of child sexual abuse images and image-based sexual abuse of women. They have also summoned Elon Musk personally for questioning. Is it 1984 in Paris?

Last week, I questioned the Minister of State with responsibility for artificial intelligence about her engagement with X since this scandal broke. After she met X representatives, she put out a press release repeating X's claim that "Grok, as integrated on the X platform, has been disabled from removing or reducing clothing on individuals worldwide." I asked the Minister of State whether she had checked whether that was true. It turned out she had not checked and it was not true. X lied to the Minister of State and to the Government. Now, they are giving two fingers to this Parliament by refusing to attend a committee meeting today.

Right now, anyone in Ireland can still create sexual abuse imagery through X using a VPN. The Minister of State also told me that the Garda is criminally investigating private individuals who use Grok to create sexual abuse imagery but she said she did not know if any criminal investigations were under way into X itself. Is there a criminal investigation into X or is the State simply kicking the can to the European Commission instead of launching criminal investigations against the app it could under the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 and the Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act 2000? Both of those laws are crystal clear about the criminal liability of directors and officers of corporate bodies that distribute sexual abuse imagery. The Government is also failing to act to protect people from the torrent of toxic content coming at them from social media algorithms, including the promotion of misogyny, self-harm and eating disorders.

Thank you, Deputy.

The only thing they care about is maximising profits by selling more ads online. That is why they have these toxic algorithms. Opinion polls show 68% of people want these toxic algorithms turned off.

Thank you, Deputy.

Will the Taoiseach support People Before Profit's Bill to do so?

I take offence at the Deputy's very dishonest portrayal of the Government's position in respect of this and his deliberate conflation of a different series of events to give the impression that the Government somehow condones the behaviour of X, Grok or Elon Musk. That is reprehensible political behaviour by him but it is par for the course all the time to distort the actual truth.

The French prosecutors are prosecuting. Our prosecutors are pursuing.

X?

That is the point. The Garda has indicated there are up to 200 complaints and lines of inquiry. We do not interfere with prosecutors in this jurisdiction. We do not interfere with the Garda.

The Deputy has used another phrase, "kicking the can to" Europe. It is another dishonest betrayal of the reality. He knows the legislative framework as well as anybody else. The European Commission is responsible for the very large platforms, including X. It has opened an investigation in collaboration with, and working with, national regulators, in this context Coimisiún na Meán. When we met last week, Coimisiún na Meán gave us a comprehensive presentation on the work it has been doing on this and the degree to which it was co-operating and working with the European Commission, which I believe is essential. This is not about kicking the can.

We all have an obligation in here to lay out for the public the legal frameworks by which we can go after large platforms. There is no toleration of child abuse materials on any platform. There is no attempt by any Government to protect such proliferation of abuse material. After all, it was this House and the then Government in 1998 that brought in very far-seeing legislation in respect of the issue of the generation and dissemination of child abuse material. The 2020 Act is also very comprehensive in its coverage. The Attorney General is quite positive in terms of the depth and breadth of the 2020 Act regarding what it can deal with and what the prosecuting authorities can pursue in respect of that Act pursuant to the sharing of adult material generated on any platform, particularly and specifically the X platform here.

The Minister for Culture, Communications and Sport is meeting his French counterparts today in respect of this issue and will also introduce an age verification tool. Significant work is being done on that, initially on a pilot basis, to inform how we would do that on a nationwide basis. All potential measures are under review in terms of how we deal with social media-----

Thank you Taoiseach. I call Deputy Murphy.

-----because we understand fully the very negative impact social media can have, and is having, on many children the length and breadth of the country.

Let me be clear: I am not saying the Government condones the production of sexual abuse material. I am saying it does not want to do anything about it because it does not want to annoy or harm its relationship with big tech and big tech investment here is more important to the Government than standing up to these people. That is what I am saying.

I want to ask a precise question. The State can, under the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 and the Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act 2020, take criminal action against X. We do not have to wait for the European Commission; we can take criminal action, as is happening in France.

Are the Garda investigations into X as opposed to people who may have used Grok to produce those images? Those people may well be liable for prosecution and should be prosecuted, which is fine. Is the investigation into X itself, which is the machinery that is being used to produce these images? We should return to a point where we turn off the toxic algorithms. Spain is taking action on the toxic algorithms. Will the Government agree with our Bill to turn them off by default for everybody and turn them off for all children?

The Deputy just made a reprehensible assertion at the commencement of his last comment. The idea that we would give priority to not standing up to big tech over the generation and sharing of child abuse material is an absolutely shocking and reprehensible assertion. How dare you?

Hear, hear.

Who the hell do you think you are? Do you have some moral superiority over everybody else? You do not have moral superiority over anybody else in this House. Everybody in this House is at one in terms of going after anybody who would generate and disseminate child abuse material, and the legislation is there to do that. The State does not get involved in a Garda investigation.

Politicians do not bring in the Garda and ask, "What are you doing in that investigation?" The Garda, under the law, is pursuing all aspects of the 1998 legislation where it is breached and the 2020 legislation, but particularly the 1998 legislation, to make sure there is absolutely full accountability before the law and before our courts in respect of this issue. I am thinking both domestically, in terms of our national laws, and-----

What about the algorithms?

-----in terms of the European Commission. It is important that the European Commission, on behalf of everybody within Europe, pursues X and the platform in respect of this.