We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
THERE HAS BEEN much discussion in recent days about the digital age of consent.
Last week, the Cabinet agreed this age should be 13 years – the lower end of the 13-16 age range set out under European law.
The digital age of consent refers to the age from which it is legal for data controllers to hold data gathered on children and teenagers. For children under the age of 13, parental consent will be required.
It could be argued that 13 has been the de facto age of digital consent for some time in Ireland – it’s the minimum age for setting up a Facebook account, for example. An official age has to be set before the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) comes into effect on 25 May 2018.
Of course, a person could lie about their age to set up a social media account. Again using Facebook as an example, the website has a mechanism in place for people to report profiles they believe belong to a person under the age of 13.
Every generation of young people will likely be more tech savvy than the next, and many children (often younger than 13) have their own smartphone or tablet device.
There are certain measures parents or guardians can take to protect their children online, such as installing apps that control the sites they can access. However, some people don’t think this goes far enough in stopping young people potentially seeing inappropriate content such as pornography or violence.
Critics of setting the digital age of consent at the lower end of the scale have pointed out that children mature at different ages and being tech savvy doesn’t do much in practical terms to protect young people online.
‘Realistic view’
The Ombudsman for Children, Dr Niall Muldoon, has welcomed the move to set the digital age of consent at 13.
Muldoon said doing so “takes a more realistic view of children and young people’s internet use, and of the integral role that the online environment plays in their lives”.
Choosing 13 as the digital age of consent is in keeping with international children’s rights standards as it allows for the balancing of the different rights that children have. It also acknowledges the opportunities, as well the risks that the online environment presents to children and young people.
Muldoon said it’s “vital” children are educated in order “to develop their digital literacy and awareness”.
He added that protecting children while they are online presents “major challenges to parents, governments, businesses and society in general” but “there is no turning back the clock”.
In a submission about data protection legislation to the Oireachtas justice committee in June, the Ombudsman for Children’s Office cited a 2015 DIT study that found nine in 10 15 and 16-year-olds in Ireland have a profile on a social networking site.
The research also found that just under 40% of 11 and 12-year-olds have a social networking profile, despite age restrictions. This figures jumps to about 75% for 13 and 14-year-olds.
The right to be forgotten
Earlier this month the special rapporteur for child protection, Dr Geoffrey Shannon, echoed Muldoon’s sentiments when appearing before the same committee. The Children’s Rights Alliance also backs the age of digital consent being set at 13.
Shannon spoke to the committee about a number of issues, including the fact that blocking certain sites could prevent children from accessing “much needed” services such as online counselling or advice (something they may wish to access without telling others), and children’s “right to be forgotten”.
In terms of the latter, Shannon said: “We all know that young people sometimes insert material online that they would regret afterwards. We need to recognise and acknowledge the vulnerability of young people.” He said this issue is not dealt with under current legislation.
Shannon told the committee digital safety is “not about creating a nanny state”, rather “about empowering young people to understand the benefits and downsides of the online world, especially in terms of young people’s exposure to cyberbullying”.
He said legislation must reflect the fact that technology and digital media “play an integral role in the lives of our young people”.
Shannon said that, in setting a digital age of consent, the GDPR also aims to “protect young people from commercial online marketing providers, for instance social media and gaming platforms”.
“The current situation whereby the same data practices are being used to target teenagers as those used to target adults is absolutely unacceptable and needs to be tackled,” he added.
The comments made by Shannon were generally well received by committee members at the time, with TDs and senators agreeing that the views of children themselves should be taken into consideration in this regard. Independent TD Mick Wallace described Shannon’s remarks as “food for thought”, noting that “children live in a different world” to previous generations.
I have a few children and I can barely turn on the computer while they can take it apart and put it back together again. Unless we listen to them we will not understand them.
“People who legislate very often are disconnected from those for whom they are legislating, and that is probably more stark than ever in the case of children. It is crucial that we start to listen to them,” Wallace said.
The dark web
It’s also crucial to listen to parents’ views, something Dr Mary Aiken has argued didn’t happen in the run-up to settling on 13 as the digital age of consent.
Aiken is a cyberpsychologist and academic adviser to the European Cybercrime Centre at Europol. She believes the public consultation period on the digital age of consent, launched by the Department of Justice late last year, would have been known to interest groups and experts in the area but likely went unnoticed by parents.
“I don’t believe that there has been a national debate about the issue that has included parents. I want a thorough public debate on the subject that includes all major stakeholders, most importantly parents,” Aiken tells TheJournal.ie.
Legally, children under the age of 16 in Ireland can’t consent to medical procedures on their own behalf. As this is the case, Aiken finds it unusual to set the digital age of consent at 13.
“If an Irish child cannot make a decision on something that could impact on their physical health, how could they possibly make a decision on something that could impact on their mental health?”
Dr. Mary Aiken / Twitter'Sextortion' children as young as 7 now being targeted online - Europol report https://t.co/PT7COgEH5H #GDPR @BarryOSullivan @EC3Europol pic.twitter.com/PhXHQt3du6
— Prof. Mary Aiken (@maryCyPsy) July 28, 2017
Aiken says the internet is full of dangers, noting that children can easily end up viewing inappropriate content.
Being tech savvy doesn’t offer any protection, it just means children can probably figure out a way to get to places they shouldn’t be. More and more young people are ending up on the deep web. That’s not a good neighbourhood for children.
“If we allow 13-year-old children – and make no mistake, these are children, not young adults – [this access] they will never be more than two clicks away from extreme content.”
Aiken notes that research in the UK has shown a surge in sexual assaults on children by children, stating: “What did we think was going to happen when we pipelined pornography to children?
“Whilst in the UK great progress is being made in terms of age verification and the protection of children online, sadly in Ireland we are moving in the opposite direction and appear to be pandering to the commercial interests of online service providers.”
In terms of the argument that younger people are spending more time online regardless of official age restrictions, making the entire situation too hard to police, Aiken says: “We don’t say with cancer there’s too much of it so we’ll just give up. We don’t say there are too many nightclubs and bars to stop under 18s accessing alcohol so we’ll just give up. Why give up with online?”
‘Blow their minds’
Barry O’Sullivan, a UCC professor and founding director of the Insight Centre for Data Analytics, has been working with Aiken to highlight this issue. The pair are planning to set up information sessions about the topic for parents and recently co-wrote an opinion piece in the Irish Times about their concerns.
O’Sullivan tells TheJournal.ie he thinks the digital age of consent was chosen as 13, at least partly, for the benefit of social media companies.
“Under what basis did they make the decision? Because it would be awkward for social media companies if it was set at 16? Being out of sync with the US would have been a big, big problem,” he says.
O’Sullivan notes that children “can’t consent to anything else at [13], like having sex or drinking alcohol – which is as it should be”.
They’re tech savvy but we don’t allow them to drive cars, for example, just because some of them would be able to. When I was a kid, video recorders were the latest technology, I didn’t have free rein over how I used that. The tech savvy idea is bogus.
“We don’t know who they’re going to be engaging with – we’ve all heard the stories of people presenting themselves as 13 or 14-year-olds, but that’s not who they are.”
O’Sullivan believes many parents will not have heard about the digital age of consent before now, stating: “If you were to say to parents, ‘Your 13-year-old child will be able to access whatever they want online and you’ll have no say’, I think that would kind of blow their minds.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Can’t stand clampers, ignorant assh@les!
Fianna Fail introduced clamping in 1998 in Dublin. At least that’s what the facts state.
Ah here, leave it out
Just park legally and clampers are a non issue.
Not necessarily. I know someone that got done while she was at the meter getting a ticket. Where I work down the quays I’ve often seen the NCPS wait in their van and count down the minutes before they get the chains out.
They’re a total scourge on the city.
@Paul this definitely seems to be true. I’ve only been clamped once, I was sick and driving through Ballsbridge, thought I was going to throw up and had to park quickly and leg it to a pub bathroom. I had no change to pay for the meter and no choice as I was going to get sick so had to leave the car. I was gone no longer than 15 minutes – when I came back the guy was filling in the form to put on my windscreen – he hadn’t even finished the whole thing properly. I tried to explain and was pretty much in tears as I felt so awful anyway but he refused to listen and said it was too late. No compassion whatsoever and he must’ve been waiting nearby.
My dad parked in town, some area were its now a case you have to sign up for an account, which he didnt have, so he went looking for a machine he could pay with, found one, paid and in the mean time was clamped.
Another time in bray, came back to his car five mins before ticket expired and had a parking ticket with no time printed on it.
Another friend of mine broke her key in the door, phone, money everything was locked in car. Finally managed to get a hold of a locksmith, was clamped, rang up to explain what happened still got clamped.
Few years ago, Step mothers road was full, parked nearby, she came out to see her car being clamped, 8 months pregnant and had to pick up her kid from playschool, offered to pay on the spot so theyd remove, no sympathy and clamped.
Ucd, somebody blocking in another car, logical thing would be to tow car, nope clamped car blocking in other car so person stuck in because some inconsiderate ass blocked them in and got clamped.
Parking awful in ucd (can take half an hr to get parking in a ditch miles away), private ambulence parked outside health centre illegaly but not obstructing anybody and they were clamped.
A space beside mater clinic used to be free near my old house, made it pay and display one day and clamped another private ambulence.
Clampers are asses.
You should have pointed him towards the “No parking at any time, unless vomiting” sign.
And one time at band camp….
Surely it would be cheaper, from an administration point of view, to just give someone a ticket (it works for expired insurance, tax etc).
Why the need for the public humiliation of a clamping??
It must take a very nasty and mean-spirited person to be a clamper. I know there are people whose parking behaviour (in disabled spaces etc) deserves a harsh response. In general these guys only cause misery and I’ve witnessed that first-hand with elderly people in particular on hospital visits whose tickets had expired. As a job, it is the lowest of the low and I don’t give a sh1te how many red thumbs I get (PS. I’ve never been clamped so this is not sour grapes!)
Or someone who would rather be a clamper than be on the dole?
As an aside, I had to fork out 120 quid this morning to get a clamp off. I don’t think the person who clamped me was evil or mean spirited. I think they were doing their job
Loved the ‘Directed by Mark Kelly’ credit at the end!! No doubt Spielberg’s shittin’ himself at the moment!!
He needed more crab juice.
Kalkalash!!
No bowl! Stick stick!
Mountain Dew or Crab Juice?
Ewwwww, ill take the crab juice
Having reached the observation deck of the first tower of the World Trade Center (before its sad demise): Toilet out of order, please use other tower! D’oh!
Sadly this was one of the best episodes. They have moments of comic genious.
Anyone see the one where they revisit new york :) kalkalash guy has huge resturant but the only sell kalkalash
Hahaha.
A tin of black spray to break the continuous yellow lines between your two parking wheels. Only has to be a couple of inches and the clampers can do nothing. Bobs your uncle…..
ps. Do it discretely
And it just gets better and better. Can’t wait till I see Peter Griffin fight a big chicken on O Connell St.
I only hope someone is there to catch it on video
Someone should so do that for the craic ^_^
No sympathy for the driver that will teach them not to park illegally.
And when clamping eventually gets to @Westmeath you won’t be so sure.. You ever been to the big smoke?
It’s in Galway and it’s a pain in the rectum.
All you need to do is let some air out of the tires and slip the clamp off put on your spare and away you go
Does that really work?
Interesting
No it doesn’t because the chain is looped around a part of the suspension that moves up and down with it. can’t remember the name of it, ‘wishbone’ maybe?
Wishbone exactly, just letting air out works on council clamps as they are fitted tightly to the wheel, but the air valve is often not accessible with this type. Also it is still possible to receive a fine with this type as it is a penalty for parking incorrectly, much like a ticket.
To remove the most common type, theNCPS ones with the chain, you have to release the wishbone at the ball joint using a ball joint seperator, takes about half hour in total if you know what you’re doing, and once you return the clamp undamaged there is no penalty as the penalty is a release fee, but you’ve released the clamp yourself.
Just call me “The Clampbuster”…
In Galway it’s something in excess of 500 quid fine if there is evidence of tampering with the clamp. They don’t have adequate signage either and I’m fairly sure one of the neighbours was being paid to report new arrivals, as one time when someone was trying to remove a clamp the guards arrived before the clamper.
And y’know what’s annoying about that, the big sign to inform you of such put on the side window of the car with super sticky tape that ruins the car window
Doh!
A private company can’t fine a citizen it gos against our human rights
Its the “you won’t get far with that” at the end that made it for me.
Just carry a bolt cutter or rechargeable grinder in your boot f**k the clampers.
i once parked in a space that was desagnated for parents with kids in a cork shopping centre as i was picking up my wife and kids when i came back to the car it was clamped i rang the company and they wanted immedate payment to get released when i explained the situation they said i would have to pay first and then appeal ……to make a long story short i succesfully sued the clamping company i donated the money to a worthy cause it was on princable that i took this action …. they cant go around willy nilly and clamp as they wish ……a lesson learned to the guys who clamped me
Before we had clampers, people parked anywhere for as long as they felt like it, without any regard for other road users. Now, you can nearly always get a parking space ( in Dublin anyway, because that is where I need to park frequently). I, for one, am grateful for the work of authorised clampers.
If clamping worked the campers wouldn’t be making millions every year.
People do park much more responsible these days but the campers look for victims, it’s got nothing to do with traffic flow or parking it’s a pure money racket
I’d buy an Industrial grinder before I’d pay the fine at least I’d get use out of the grinder again I’d leave a pile of metal on the side of the street.
Homer, one. New York , nothin’. D’oh!
The clamp chain goes around the suspension. However I know a man who got round that little problem. First he removed the wheel nuts and took the wheel off. Then he pulled the clamp up over his car bonnet and tied it to his passenger side door mirror with a small piece of rope. Then he put his wheel back on and drove off. What he did next I don’t know, you will just have to use your imagination ;)
Private Clampers can rot in hell… its legalised extortion that is completely unregulated in this country… not enough people shout about it so nothing gets done.
Private property clamping is not legal , nor illegal. But it’s illegal to extort money from someone while they’re under duress. If your car is clamped on pvt property , remove clamp by all means possible without damaging clamp chain or lock. There is nothing they can do, as they have technically assaulted your car.
But if its council clamping , there is legislation for that , therefore it would be illegal to remove a county council clamp.
I have removed a clamp , rang the clamping company and told them, never heard anything from them again as they clamped my car without legislation allowing them to do so . Bit of a grey area !
God damn clampers!
The champers should have clamped one of the rear wheels as BMWs are rear wheel drive
fair play
Typical BMW driver, f*cking delighted, hope he/she has caused some serious damage to their car!
Ahhh lads give me a break. I was trying out my independent suspension on my BMW.
Looking at where he is parked the eejit deserved to be clamped
Jaysys they’re only doing their job, I’ve never been clamped as I’ve never parked illegally, problem solved. Don’t park illegally you won’t get clamped!!!
I’d rather clean toilets for a living that work as a clamper. You have to be a really bad, nasty human being to be a clamper that’s for sure. But remember that behind every bad clamper there’s a clamping company – and their bosses are raking in millions at the expense of ordinary hardworking people.
The mans a legend in my book
Ha ha never thought of that your more than likely right nice one :)
What about 97D’s privacy?? just wondering.
Happy Clamper
That particular type of clamp is quite easy to remove. It’s connected by chain to your antiroll bar which can be unbolted to allow the chain to slip free. Before you do this it’s important to ascertain who has clamped you. If it’s a private company on private grounds they will use the term release ‘fee’ or release ‘charge’. If the clampers are licenced by the local authority it will say a ‘fine’ of x amount. If you’ve been clamoed by a private company as long as you do not damage the clamp while taking it off and do not steal the clamp, you are in the clear. I was clamped in dublin while staying in a designated parking spot for the apartment I was staying and still got clamped by APCOA. I was so livid, I stayed up half the night reading about clamping and the different types they use. I got the tools out and off came the clamp in about twenty minutes. What a great feeling. That was over six months ago now. Haven’t heard zip from APCOA.
If the clamping was done properly there would be no problem ,and I am sure everyone would be happy enough……..
Doh!
Cycle and you won’t have any clamping problems and it’s also Eco friendly. ;)
No
Only if he is on a promise..
My grandad drove the clamp off his car and through it in the skip. That was in the 80s. Good times. The clamps they have today are a bit more robust. Damn you technology!
have your say