Paul Murphy: X is enabling mass production of sexual abuse images

In November 2012, Elon Musk wrote to Jeffrey Epstein, What day slash 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 now 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 this government's approach to big tech appears to be, see no evil, hear no evil. When Richard Boyd Barrett asked you if those in X responsible for enabling Grok to produce sexual abuse imagery would be arrested, you scoffed at the idea. You suggested that to do so would be like 1984. Well, Taoiseach, 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 for Artificial Intelligence about her engagement with X since this scandal broke. After she met with X, she had put out a press release repeating X's claim that quote, quote, Grok as integrated on the X platform has been disabled from removing or reducing clothing on individuals worldwide. I asked the Minister whether she had checked that that was true. It turned out she hadn't checked and it was not true. X lied to your Minister, X lied to your 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 also told me that the Guards are criminally investigating private individuals who use Grok to create sexual abuse imagery. But she said she didn't know if any criminal investigations were underway into X itself. I want to ask you Taoiseach, is there a criminal investigation into X? Or is the State simply kicking the can to the European Commission instead of launching the Criminal Investigations Against Act that it could under the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act of 1998 and the Erasment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act of 2000. Both of those laws are crystal clear about the criminal liability of directors and officers of corporate bodies that distribute sexual abuse imagery. Your government is also failing to act to protect people from the torrent of toxic content coming at them from social media algorithms. The promotion of misogyny, the promotion of self-harm, the promotion of eating disorders. 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 that 68 per cent of people want these toxic algorithms turned off. Will you support the People for Profits Bill to do so? The Prime Minister First of all, I must say I take offence at your very dishonest portrayal of the government's position in respect of this and your deliberate conflation of the different series of events to give that impression that the government somehow condones the behaviour of X, or the behaviour of Grok, or the behaviour of Elon Musk. That is reprehensible political behaviour by you, but it is par for the course, par for the course all of the time, to distort the actual truth. The French prosecutors are prosecuting. Our prosecutors are pursuing. That is the point. The Guardi have indicated there are up to 200 complaints and lines of inquiry. We do not interfere with the prosecutors in this jurisdiction. We do not interfere with the Guardi. Now you use this other phrase, kick the can to Europe. Another dishonest portrayal of the reality. Because you know the legislative framework as well as anybody else. And the European Commission is responsible for the very large platforms. X. And it has opened an investigation. But it has opened an investigation in collaboration and working with national regulators. In this context, Commissioner Oumann. And when we met last week, Commissioner Oumann gave us a very comprehensive presentation on the work it has been doing in relation to this. And also the degree to which it was cooperating and working with the European Commission. Which I believe is essential. So this isn't about kicking the can. And I think 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. On any platform. And there is no attempt by any government to protect such proliferation of abuse material. After all, it was this House and the then government back in 1998 brought in very far-seeing legislation in respect of the issue of the generation of child abuse material. Both generation and dissemination of child abuse material. And the 2020 Act is also very comprehensive in its coverage. And the Attorney General is quite positive in terms of the depth and breadth of the 2020 Act. In terms of what it can deal with and what the prosecuting authorities can pursue in respect of that Act. In terms of the sharing of adult material that is generated on any platform. But particularly and specifically in terms of the X platform here. And the Minister for Communications is meeting with his French counterparts today in respect of this issue. And is also will be introducing age verification tools and is doing some significant work on that. And initially on a pilot basis to then inform how we would do it on a nationwide basis. And all potential measures are under review in terms of how we deal with social media. Because we understand fully the very negative impact that social media can have on many children across talent and breadth of the country. Deputy Murphy. Thanks. Let me be clear, T-Shark. I am not saying you condone the production of sexual abuse material. I am saying you do not want to do anything about it. Because you do not want to annoy or harm your relationship with big tech. And the big tech investment here is more important to you than standing up to these people. That is what I am saying. And I want to ask very, very precisely, because we can take action. We can take action under the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 and the Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act 2020. We can take criminal action, the state can 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. And my question is, in relation to the Guarda investigations, are those Guarda investigations into X, as opposed to people who may have used Grok to produce those imagery, those people may well be liable for prosecution, should be prosecuted fine, but into X itself, which is the machinery that is being used to produce these, and return to the point, to turn off the toxic algorithms. Spain is taking action on the toxic algorithms. Will the Government agree with our Bill to turn it off by default for everybody, and to turn it off for all children? I think you have just made a reprehensible assertion at the commencement of your last comment. The idea that we would not stand up to big tech, or sorry, 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? 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. No, the state does not get involved in every, you know, in the guard of investigation. Politicians do not bring in the guardie and say, what are you doing there in that investigation? What are you doing there? The guardie, under the law, are pursuing all aspects of the 98 legislation where it is breached, and the 220 legislation, particularly the 98 legislation, to make sure there is absolutely full accountability, but not before the law and before our courts in respect of that issue. I think both domestically here in terms of our own national laws, and also in terms of the European Commission. I think it is important that the European Commission, on behalf of everybody within Europe, pursues the platform in respect of this.