2026-01-15

It is a great pleasure to address the House on behalf of the Minister of State, Deputy Smyth, who will join us momentarily. The Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment asked me to begin by addressing the serious concerns that all of us have in relation to the abuse of Al capabilities, more specifically regarding Grok’s ability to "nudify" individuals without their consent. To be absolutely clear, the sharing of non-consensual intimate images is illegal and the generation of child sexual abuse material is illegal. Coimisiún na Meán, as Ireland's new online safety and media regulator, is at the heart of Ireland’s online safety framework, including the regulation of social media. Under the online safety framework, there is an obligation on platforms to act on reports of illegal content, so the public can report illegal content to the online platform, which must react on that report, and to Coimisiún na Meán. A failure by the platform to protect against illegal or harmful content being shown can lead to significant financial sanctions and, under the Online Safety and Media Regulation Act, continued non-compliance can lead to criminal sanctions for senior management. Under the Digital Services Act, the European Commission has powers with respect to the proliferation of illegal content online on platforms, including X, and the protection of fundamental rights, including protection for minors. Coimisiún na Meán is engaging with the European Commission in this context in relation to Grok. The Attorney General has also been asked to advise on other mechanisms within the legal framework to protect people from digital harms like these. To move on, the Department would like to share its key priorities and long-term vision for Ireland’s approach to artificial intelligence. Our country has long been recognised as a dynamic and forward-looking digital hub, but maintaining this position demands continuous effort and ambition. To secure the country’s place at the forefront of technological change, it is essential to embrace the transformative potential of artificial intelligence across the economy and wider society. Last week’s announcement of the €4.7 billion sectoral capital plan marks a decisive moment in our ambition to lead in innovation and advanced technologies. This is the largest ever investment in our enterprise and innovation ecosystem. It is a long-term commitment to jobs, competitiveness and building the infrastructure that the world’s most advanced enterprises demand. Crucially, more than €1.3 billion of this plan is dedicated to enterprise, innovation and commercialisation. That means sustained investment in disruptive technologies, technology centres, research partnerships and major European projects. Through these investments, we are clearly signalling our ambition to position Ireland as a global leader in advanced manufacturing, Al and space technologies. As the Department pursues this ambition, we must also acknowledge that rapid technological progress brings real societal challenges, particularly around safety, privacy and the protection of fundamental rights. Building public trust in Al is at the heart of Ireland’s Al strategy. Our Government has prioritised putting in place the appropriate governance mechanisms and guardrails to ensure Al is used responsibly in Ireland. The opportunity Al offers is immense, but so too is the Department’s responsibility to get this right and to use Al for our greater good in business, the economy and wider society. That is why the Department has been actively working to build public understanding of Al through trusted independent voices, including the enterprise digital advisory forum and the Al advisory council; implementing the EU Al Act; rolling out standards and certification for Al; establishing a new Al office of Ireland; and making Ireland's voice heard in international Al governance forums. The Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment will continue to couple bold innovation with strong, trusted governance. Citizens and businesses need confidence that Al systems are safe, fair, trustworthy and accountable. The Grok Al scandal and the misuse of Al to generate appalling deepfake images is a prime example of why governance is so important. This leads me to one of my, and the Government's, key ambitions in the broader Al agenda, namely, cementing Ireland’s position as a centre of regulatory excellence and as a strong voice in Europe advocating for well-designed digital regulation that is fit for purpose to protect individuals' safety and fundamental rights while enabling innovation. The Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment is firmly committed to implementing the EU Al Act, which is a forward-looking framework that balances innovation with proportionate safeguards. The Department is making very good progress. It has adopted a distributed model implementation allowing businesses to work with regulators who understand their sectors, making compliance more practical and effective. This past Tuesday, the Government approved priority drafting of legislation to give full effect in Ireland to the EU Al Act. Looking to the months ahead, the Al office of Ireland is set to be established by August 2026, supported by €1.5 million in start-up funding. Work is well under way on the general scheme of the regulation of artificial intelligence, which will create the office as an independent statutory body. The office will act as Ireland’s central authority for implementing the EU Al Act. It will also promote research and adoption. All businesses should begin assessing their Al use and compliance. The Department has already put resources in place to help businesses do that, through CeADAR, Ireland’s national centre for applied Al, the Department’s website and the EU Al Act service desk’s compliance checker. The Department also needs a place where businesses can safely test, learn and innovate. An important function of the office will be to ensure the establishment of a national Al regulatory sandbox. This sandbox will support Irish businesses, particularly SMEs and start-ups, to navigate the Al Act requirements while driving innovation. Together, these measures strengthen our national framework for trustworthy Al. They are also aligned with a wider European effort to ensure regulation is effective and proportionate. In October, the Minister of State, Deputy Niamh Smyth, sent a letter to her colleague, Henna Virkkunen, European Commission executive vice president for technological sovereignty, security and democracy. This letter called for an ambitious digital simplification package that supports the EU’s strategic positioning as the location of choice for trustworthy digital innovation. The European Commission’s digital simplification omnibus package, published last November, is an important development because it includes proposals to simplify rules on data, cybersecurity and artificial intelligence. These proposals are a very welcome first step to improving competitiveness at an EU level. The Minister of State, Deputy Smyth, has been vocal at meetings with ministerial colleagues across the EU that Ireland believes the digital simplification package should take a dynamic, ambitious and risk-based approach, focused on removing regulatory overlaps, reducing administrative burdens and yet supporting compliance. However, the Department wants to be clear that simplification does not mean deregulation. The proposed simplification measures have been arrived at through significant stakeholder consultation by the Commission. They maintain the same high standards for safety and fundamental rights protection while ensuring more effective implementation of the Al Act. The Department is confident we can create a future where innovation and integrity go hand in hand with a more simplified and straightforward approach to deregulation. Trust and effective regulation give us a strong foundation. Equally important to our future success is to fast-track widespread adoption of digital and Al technologies across the Department’s enterprise sector. The Department has seen first hand the impact that Al can have on boosting productivity and enhancing competitiveness in firms of all sizes. The Department’s key focus is to empower more businesses, particularly SMEs, to do exactly that. The Department is working with the local enterprise offices, European digital innovation hubs and enterprise agencies to ensure that every SME is aware of the benefits of Al use and the State supports available to them. These range from targeted funding programmes, expert guidance and consultancy to research and development grants. The Department is building on this momentum and recently announced a further €23 million in additional funding for lreland’s four European digital innovation hubs to support SMEs in their uptake of Al and other cutting edge digital technologies. These hubs in Cork, Dublin, Mullingar and Sligo are delivering real and practical supports that help SMEs understand, test and adopt advanced digital technologies with confidence. Ireland already has a strong reputation as a choice location to research, test, develop and scale the latest cutting-edge technologies. This has not happened by chance. It is the result of sustained investment in our talent, creativity and capacity to innovate. The impact of this investment can be clearly seen in initiatives like the Disruptive Technologies Innovation Fund. This fund awards funding to collaborations between SMEs, multinational corporations and research performing organisations and Al is increasingly at the centre of these projects. The number of DTIF projects placing Al at the core of their solutions has grown rapidly. To date, €183 million has been invested by Government in the 51 DTIF projects that place Al at the core of their solutions. The Department is determined to accelerate this progress even further so that Ireland remains well positioned as new technologies continue to evolve. Our recently announced sectoral capital plan reflects that ambition. It will strengthen Irish SMEs and attract world-class foreign investment. Under this plan, €1.33 billion has been allocated for enterprise innovation and commercialisation, including €190 million in funding for technology centres, €196 million for the Disruptive Technologies Innovation Fund, €170 million for European Space Agency programmes and €120 million for Important Projects of Common European Interest. Innovation is what drives our competitiveness. By investing in disruptive technologies, research collaborations and digital transformation, the Government is positioning Ireland as a global leader in advanced manufacturing, Al and space technologies. The Department also allocated €250 million to the seed and venture capital programme and €100 million to a new scaling fund for Irish SMEs. The Department will continue to develop an environment where funding for entrepreneurs is accessible, and ambition is backed so that transformative ideas that create jobs and drive progress can be realised and scaled right here in Ireland. The Government shortly plans to publish an updated national digital and Al strategy, which will set out a clear roadmap for lreland’s digital and Al adoption and development in the years ahead. The strategy will take a whole-of-government approach. Alongside commitments to Al adoption across sectors and company sizes, it will address the wider critical enablers for a successful digital economy, building on Ireland’s strengths in digital skills to infrastructure and the way we deliver our public services. As Ireland prepares to take the wheel for the Presidency of the Council of the European Union, it is a huge opportunity for Ireland to shape and drive forward work in the areas we believe are of the greatest relevance for the European Union and, crucially, its citizens. Next October Ireland will host an Al and digital summit in Dublin. This will be a flagship event bringing together over 1,000 participants to include thought leaders, businesses, governments and innovators. The Department is looking forward to showcasing lreland’s leadership in Al and digital innovation, fostering collaboration across EU member states, and exploring opportunities for ethical, sustainable, and inclusive technology development. This debate comes at a particular moment but it is a timely one regardless. It gives us a great opportunity to discuss events that have occupied the public mind over the past number of days and weeks, and indeed have haunted the minds of many people who use social media or, more pertinently, have children who use social media. It also gives an opportunity to talk about the wider strategy. I look forward to engaging thoughtfully and earnestly with all Deputies from across the aisle and the Minister of State, Deputy Niamh Smyth, looks forward to responding at the end of the debate.

It is unfortunate we are here discussing AI at this particular time because it forces us into a space that nobody wants to be in. At the outset, I want to talk about the benefits. If everything in the plan presented by the Minister of State is to be implemented to its fullest in a timely manner, then we will be making progress. As a party, and personally as the spokesperson on enterprise, tourism and employment, we will work with the Minister of State to progress that. It is true it can bring many benefits to businesses and individuals, from reducing costs to improving productivity. One thing I say with regard to the many millions of euro announced is that we make it easy for small and medium sized businesses to access that money in an easy way because small businesses will not have the resources to do that. The last thing we want is for AI to end up costing the businesses which are already on their knees and struggling to survive. We need to be really conscious of that. I was glad to hear the Minister of State say that simplification does not mean deregulation because that is enormously important. The Minister of State knows that the drivers - some of the richest people in the world - will be driving for that simplification to turn into deregulation and we must be acutely aware of that and stand up robustly to not be sucked into that. That speaks to the whole EU agenda following the Draghi report. The difference between simplification and deregulation is hugely important. That needs to be monitored on an ongoing basis. The Minister of State also referred to public services. They obviously can be delivered in an efficient way with AI but at the same time, it can give rise to much social exclusion. I am talking about people who are not AI literate or indeed technological. People who are elderly and disabled are not used to that and just want to talk to a human being on the other end of the phone. Because of AI, they get one message after another. It is impossible for them to access public services, so I again ask him to be acutely aware of that and put measures in place to ensure everybody can access public services in the same way. Everybody deserves the same treatment. Last week I was at the Stripe Young Scientist Exhibition and saw the wonderful and innovative projects created by students from my own county of Mayo, from Claremorris and Crossmolina. It was fantastic to see what they have achieved, and I commend everybody involved in that and the winner. To me, everybody who was there was a winner. AI is the present and the future and it can be a force for great good. However, without robust regulation it can be destructive and dangerous. What we experienced this week, particularly on social media platform X, exposes the darker reality. AI is only as ethical as the rules that govern it and right now those rules are failing us. Over recent weeks we have seen the disgusting and appalling behaviour from users on Elon Musk's X who deliberately promoted the platform AI tool, Grok, to generate child sexual abuse material and non-consensual nude deepfake images, predominantly of women. Let us be absolutely clear. This is not experimentation. It is not curiosity and it is not victimless. It is sexual abuse facilitated at scale by technology and enabled by corporate and government negligence. It is vile and misogynistic. It is criminal sexual exploitation, regardless of whether the image is synthetic or not. What makes it even more alarming is that it was not even hidden in the dark web. That will tell you the arrogance and impertinence of some of the people promoting that. It happened in plain sight on a mainstream platform owned by one of the wealthiest individuals on the planet, who has many followers in this country I am sad to say. X chose to deploy a tool without adequate safeguards and effective moderation and without regard for the predictable ways it would be abused by its users. X last week confirmed Grok’s image generation function had been disabled. I welcome that, but it says this has been done in jurisdictions where actions are deemed illegal. It should be disabled immediately across the globe.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on these statements. I would like to have the opportunity to talk about the potential benefits and the approach we need to take to reap those benefits and mitigate the potential negatives. This debate will have a significant focus on the real negatives. We did not have to imagine them because they presented in very clear terms. The Garda confirmation yesterday of 200 active investigations into child sexual abuse material generated by the Grok AI chatbot is not just alarming; it is a damning indictment of the despicable conduct of X and its owner. This is a platform and leadership that has shown a blatant disregard for basic decency and the safety of our children, treating both Irish and EU regulations with contempt. I say that even in light of the partial row-back overnight. The very ability of this tool to create such vile images represents a profound failure of corporate ethics and a direct assault on the most vulnerable in our society. This case exposes a toxic culture emanating from the very top of X, where the pursuit of profit and a warped sense a free speech are placed above human dignity and the law. When the company's CEO openly ridicules legitimate concerns and regulatory efforts, it fosters an environment where abuse is facilitated. Therefore, this scandal must be the catalyst for immediate and forceful action. We have laws in our Statute Books, from Coco's Law to the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act, and the EU Digital Services Act. The critical deficit is enforcement. Legislation alone is meaningless without the power and will to apply it. Coimisiún na Meán must be empowered and resourced to act decisively. The European Commission must follow through on its warning and use every enforcement lever the Digital Services Act provides, without delay, including by imposing dissuasive fines and sanctions. Platforms that wilfully enable the generation and distribution of child sexual abuse material cannot be allowed to operate with impunity.

AI, including generative AI, is the most challenging issue of our time. It is architecturally composed of a mixed blessing, with both good and ambiguous components. We were all shocked and disturbed by the recent revelations regarding Grok and how AI can manipulate and destroy a person's reputation in a split second. Therefore, it is incumbent on all of us to ensure proper regulations and that laws governing AI platforms are complicit with human rights, the protection of citizens' intellectual property and GDPR, and, above all, that they encompass the rights of children. As a member of the Oireachtas committee, I welcome the establishment of the national AI office in August and the AI observatory. However, I believe it would best serve the nation if it was a separate independent entity, with a dedicated commissioner and its own budget. I ask the Minister to consider placing an AI joint committee on a permanent footing to provide ongoing parliamentary oversight and ensure democratic accountability. This is a very important recommendation as it would have the effect of holding these platforms accountable to the public and provide a forum for all of our citizens and any organisations that find themselves being denied due process to deal with these platforms. Approved terms of reference must be established for any advisory bodies placed on a paid, permanent footing, ensuring clarity and mandate and accountability. The obligation on platform owners to provide the use of AI recommender systems for misinformation campaigns aimed at destabilising society should be included. I ask the Minister to address these issues. All bots must be clearly identified to users. Operators must provide transparent notifications regarding data storage, ownership and sharing practices. We must also insist that data centres publish their electricity and water consumption figures and develop new and innovative cooling systems. As has been said, these are very challenging issues. AI will have a positive effect on many mundane and repetitive tasks, but it must be accompanied by civil rights, the rights of children and the rights of those sections of society that are most vulnerable.

In April last year, two young men died by suicide. I am not going to put their names on the record but they are in the public domain. Both of these young men had been chatting with an AI bot at the time of their deaths. Their families say that a specific version of this artificial intelligence bot designed to be friendlier, more empathetic and encouraging had in fact encourage the deaths by suicide of these young men. These claims made by the families are being investigated. These cases serve as a lesson because AI is easy and fast, and it is becoming a tool more and more people rely on. Therefore, it will increasingly become a tool that people communicate with. It is not necessarily always a force for good and there are more than two families who have real reasons to watch this and other debates as they try to make sure we get this right. We know that artificial intelligence offers huge potential but it carries with it great risk, as is the case with all new technologies. There has to be regulation. This particular form of technological endeavour might move a little faster than others, but that does not mean regulation should not be able to move fast as well. We know the EU has put a lot of store in its digital policy work. It obviously wants to be a world leader in the online space, as does Ireland because that would make us good and fair Europeans. In practice, it is going to fall to Ireland, as the place where many of these companies are based, to be the regulator. In the previous Dáil, I was worn out pleading with the then Minister for enterprise, Leo Varadkar, to intervene and help content moderators, as their jobs were being outsourced and downgraded. Content moderators are the front-line defenders when it comes to online activity. They are the people who stand between the user and the AI platform. The then Minister response was that a lot of that work would probably be done by AI in the future. Mr. Varadkar is not here but I am sure if he was, he would regret those words. We need to put safeguards in place, which will not be easy. This cannot just mean banning social media for under-16s because social media can be harmful to over-16s and over-18s. Austin Gordon, who was 22 when he died by suicide, had identification that would have enabled him to use the platforms. The protections must be real and workable.

I acknowledge and very much welcome the Minister's comments on deregulation. The stories we have heard over the past few weeks in relation to the Grok feature on X have shocked many people here and across the world. The AI element within social media has been encouraged by tech tycoons such as Elon Musk, owner of X. The Grok website features a claim that, as part of X, Grok offers real-time search image generation, trend analysis and more. Musk also claims Grok is now a source of objective information that users use to verify information. We have all seen the Grok "Is it true?" questions on X, but let us be honest, that is not what Musk invented this for. Recently, a clip went viral of Musk speaking about Grok’s ability to do a viral roast of somebody you know recently. In essence, you can take a photograph of somebody and ask Grok to make fun of that person in increasingly disgusting ways, as Musk put it. That Musk found this hilarious is really worrying. This is the man in charge of an AI revolution on social media, who now says, after a lengthy bout of criticism from all corners of the globe, that Grok will no longer be able to use and edit photographs of real people, including children, to show them in revealing clothing in jurisdictions where it is illegal. This is nonsense because social media, as we all know, has no borders and can be read across the globe. That feature needs to be disabled completely. How can we trust Elon Musk and this technology going forward? We know he thinks this type of thing is funny, even though it is so damaging to women and young children. We need the Taoiseach to stand up to Musk and his ilk and ensure this nudification feature on Grok is completely outlawed. We also need to ensure we are not prioritising data centres to facilitate AI taking precedence over new homes, because AI is insatiable when it comes to energy. We are going to need an increasing number of data centres if we have to keep this up. Information obtained by my party colleague Lynn Boylan states that a single data centre in west Dublin consumes enough energy to power 200,000 homes. We have already seen a data centre given priority over a housing development in Castlebaggot. This was meant to be for houses but because of the first-come, first-served model, it was given to data centres. A Herbata Limited data centre is set to be built in my constituency in Naas, County Kildare and many constituents have been in touch because they are really worried about this because we have power cuts all over north Kildare and we just cannot keep up.

Over the past year or so, we have all seen the emergence into the general populace of what can only be described as a profound technological transformation. Artificial intelligence is no longer a distant concept. It is here and it is partaking in every part of our daily lives, shaping our economy, public services, our ways of communicating and, increasingly, our vulnerabilities. The decisions we make in this House or further afield in other parliaments will determine whether AI becomes a force for human flourishing or a tool that magnifies and indeed encourages exploitation, inequality and harm. AI is not inherently good or bad but it is powerful. Power, as history teaches us, must be governed with foresight, responsibility and moral clarity. We cannot afford to be passive observers. Today, we all need to speak frankly about both sides of this technological revolution - the extraordinary benefits AI can bring to Ireland and the world but also the grave danger it poses, particularly when it comes to the sexual exploitation of women and children. I also want to address without equivocation the deeply troubling behaviour of certain AI systems or apps and platforms, including the Grok app on X whose reckless design choices and permissive content generation have raised legitimate alarm. I welcome Grok's announcement overnight with regard to its facilitation of clear abuse of people, albeit enforced on it by worldwide outrage. Ar dtús, let us begin with the positive, because the potential is immense. AI is already helping doctors detect cancers earlier, analyse scans faster, and personalise treatments with unprecedented precision. AI assisted radiology can identify tumours invisible to the human eye. Predictive models can anticipate cardiac events before symptoms appear. Virtual assistants can support people with chronic illnesses, improving quality of life and reducing strain on our health system. Imagine how the HSE would benefit where waiting lists shrink because of an AI triage system that would streamline diagnostics and where rural communities in particular gain access to world class expertise through AI powered telemedicine. This is not fantasy; it is happening now. For instance, AI apps are analysing vital signs for heart conditions, diabetes, hypertension and fall risks. AI can also be transformative in education and learning. Tools for students with dyslexia, ADHD or autism can level the playing field. In a country which in theory commits itself to opportunity for all, AI can be a great leveller. As we are all aware Ireland’s tech sector is already a global powerhouse. AI can both enhance and amplify that success. It can drive innovation in agriculture, manufacturing and renewable energy. If we harness it wisely, AI can strengthen our competitiveness and create high-quality jobs for decades to come. AI can help Government operate more efficiently and transparently and God knows nobody in this building would denounce that. Fraud detection systems can protect public funds. AI driven analytics can improve transport planning and reduce congestion. Emergency services can use predictive modelling to allocate resources more effectively. In short, AI can help us build a smarter, more responsive state and community. However, we must also speak with equal clarity about the dangers because the same technology that can diagnose cancer can also generate deepfake child abuse imagery. The same algorithms that can personalise education can also personalise harassment. The same systems that can empower us can also exploit. The sexual exploitation of women and children is the darkest frontier of AI misuse and it is expanding at a terrifying pace. AI can now fabricate hyper realistic images and videos of people - often minors - without their consent. These deepfakes are being used to harass, blackmail and degrade. There have been cases where teenage girls discover their faces pasted onto pornographic images circulating among classmates. Women have been targeted by ex-partners who use AI tools to create fake sexual content as a form of coercive control. Predators use AI to generate fake child abuse material that is indistinguishable from reality. This is not, as we know, hypothetical. It is happening now and at a frightening scale. The psychological devastation inflicted on victims is profound. Their reputations, their sense of safety and their dignity are all shattered by images that never existed but feel real to everyone who sees them. We must be absolutely clear. AI generated sexual exploitation is sexual exploitation and is absolutely and completely a criminal offence and must be punished. AI generated child abuse imagery is child abuse and is absolutely a criminal offence and must be punished. The harm is real. The Grok app on the X platform has become a symbol of this irresponsibility. Its design choices and its willingness to generate inappropriate, sexualised and harmful content have demonstrated a profound failure of duty. However, Grok is not the only app to facilitate this type of deviant behaviour. A quick Google search this morning revealed a myriad of such apps. A review of one of them stated: Using the app was a surprisingly engaging experience. The interface is user-friendly, making it accessible even for individuals with limited technical skills. I uploaded a simple photo, and within seconds, the AI generated a stunning transformation. The ability to adjust the level of nudity was particularly impressive, allowing for a customized outcome. What an amazing review of such a deviant app. We must condemn, in the strongest possible terms, any platform that treats safety as an afterthought. We must condemn any AI system that trivialises harm or enables exploitation. We must absolutely condemn the culture of "move fast and break things" when what are being broken are people's lives. We must most definitely ensure that the people responsible face the rigours of the law and face criminal conviction. We, as a Parliament, must show in the strongest possible terms, using every available power we have, that we cannot and will not tolerate AI systems that facilitate abuse, harassment or exploitation. We must hold platforms accountable legally, financially and morally. AI can also generate convincing fake news, fake speeches and fake evidence and, as a result, democracies are vulnerable. A society is judged by how it protects its most vulnerable. Women and children are disproportionately targeted by AI enabled abuse. That is a fact we must confront. Ireland must lead with strong, modern legislation. We must establish clear rights for victims, including rapid take-down mechanisms and legal recourse. We have already seen that we cannot rely on voluntary codes of conduct. We need enforceable laws. AI does not respect borders and neither should our response. We simply cannot do it alone. We have to work with the EU, the UN, and international partners. It is also imperative that we equip parents, teachers and young people with the knowledge to recognise and report AI enabled abuse. Digital literacy is now a form of safeguarding. Despite the dangers, I certainly remain optimistic because AI, with proper governance, can be a force for extraordinary good. We should invest in AI tools that protect, not exploit. AI can empower people with disabilities with real-time captioning for the deaf, AI powered mobility aids for the visually impaired and communication tools for people with speech impairments. That is AI at its best, expanding human capability. We cannot stop the AI revolution, nor should we want to but we can shape it. We can use our powers to guide it. We can ensure that it serves humanity rather than harms it. The question is not whether AI will change society. It already has. We have to ensure that platforms that feel they can operate without consequences get the message very directly that there will be no hiding place for their ambivalence or inaction. AI in the wrong hands can do dreadful things but in the right hands - in responsible hands - it can save lives, expand opportunity and strengthen our society. Let us in this Chamber and in this Oireachtas ensure that Ireland stands as a global leader in ethical AI. It is our responsibility but we must act with the urgency the times we live in demand.

I welcome the opportunity that has been afforded to all Members of the Dáil to speak on AI. I particularly welcome it in my capacity as Vice Chair of the Oireachtas AI committee. A few moments ago there was a school of young children sitting in the Gallery. I am fairly certain that somebody here thought it wise to perhaps say that this was not a debate that their ears should be listening to in the context of what we have heard this week, so a simple act of child safeguarding took place and the children left the Gallery a few moments ago. It really beggars belief that an AI provider, a global organisation, a multibillion-dollar organisation, cannot implement the most basic levels of children's safeguards in the operation of what it is trying to produce. What has happened this week is a stark reminder of the challenges and the risks we face with AI. We know what the public think about AI. In every poll in this country, in the United States, all around the world, people are fearful of AI. The majority of people are fearful of AI, and it is our job in this Chamber to ensure that as AI is introduced into society and into our State, we regulate it in an appropriate way so we can harness its benefits. I am extremely proud of Ireland's membership of the European Union. I am extremely proud that the European Union, in great distinction from the United States and China, is adapting a regulatory approach to AI. We are certainly not there yet, and this week is a reminder of the challenges we face, but I am very proud that An Garda Síochána does not discriminate between what is taking place online and what is taking place within the real world. From the remarks that were made in the Oireachtas committee yesterday, it is quite clear that the gardaí in this country will be carrying out the laws that have been initiated in these Chambers to their fullest when it comes to any illegal behaviour that takes place, whether it is Grok or any other AI provider out there. They must comply with the laws of this country, and we must ensure that when it comes to the EU regulations we are introducing here, Ireland becomes a beacon, a global leader, for regulatory enforcement. The EU Presidency, which Ireland will host, is a great opportunity for Ireland to lead in this direction. There is the intention to host an AI summit that would champion regulatory enforcement. We have already demonstrated that Ireland can attract some of the biggest technological companies in the world to base here, to attract a skilled labour force, to be supported by universities and research, that can develop extraordinary things that will literally change mankind. We have been able to do that, support employment and provide a regulatory based environment in which they operate. Ireland can show, when we host the Presidency and implement the AI Act, that we established the AI office and we have multiple competent authorities. We know that AI will touch every edifice of every single Government Department. We can show that with a strong regulatory environment, we can harness the benefits from AI and address the harms. Out there in the public, however, there is no doubt about it. We are talking this week about sexual harm that can be imposed from how AI entities can be manipulated, but one of the biggest concerns people have when it comes to AI is the disruption to the labour market. That is why it is so important that right now we get this right and that we adapt AI in a way that we ensure we are meeting the future skills needs for the kids who were here earlier, the kids who are in primary school, secondary school and third level. Whether we like it or not, this is a pivot moment in society the likes of which we have not seen for generations. We have seen in Ireland when moments like this arise that people stand up. One thinks back to T. K. Whitaker and all the changes that were made in this country to open Ireland, to open our economy, to give us the kind of society and the kind of wealth that was unimaginable in decades past and that we have today, that we survive off today and that puts Ireland in the envy of Europe when it comes to employment. This is another one of these moments where we, as a State, as a country, have to decide how Ireland will harness the benefits from AI, how we will change how we operate in education and how we will change how we operate in our health services. For that reason, I really welcome this opportunity to speak.

I want to speak about AI because it is obviously so important, it will become so important and, as Deputy Geoghegan has outlined, it will cut across different boundaries and different areas. Other speakers will probably choose to speak on other areas on which we all well know the impacts. We can see even on social media that it has become a topic of conversation not alone in Ireland but across the world. I think that will be covered in the debate. It needs to be covered and we really have to be conscious of it. I will focus on the impacts AI will have on business, what we can see, the positives and the negatives, the risks associated with that and, ultimately, how we need to be ready, as Deputy Geoghegan outlined, countrywide. I will focus on business. Under the leadership of the Minister, Peter Burke, we have seen the announcement of a dedicated AI office to co-ordinate strategy, policy and implementation across all sectors. This really needs to be done to ensure that our businesses are at the forefront. We know that AI can lead to a huge competitive advantage, possibly for different companies, but if we are not at the forefront, we will lose out. We are at the forefront in many ways in Ireland, mainly because of the FDI we have had over many years, its impact and how it has soaked in around the country. We have so much knowledge coming from those companies that came here, including ex-employees who have gone on to build other companies and smaller companies. We have seen it in med-tech, finance and agri-tech. All across the areas we have seen these companies start up, but we need to ensure that they are using AI and that we are in the position as a Government to supply the companies with the relevant supports. Earlier today I raised a question during Questions on Policy or Legislation on that point specifically. We need to ensure that we are driving SMEs with innovation in SMEs, that we are driving not only funding but also the knowledge and the need for these AI tools. We know that Enterprise Ireland is an amazing section of our Government and how our country runs. As a CFO previously, I sought its benefit. It helped keep so many businesses afloat during Covid, but sometimes the difficulty with Enterprise Ireland is how you navigate getting into it. We need to ensure that Enterprise Ireland is part of the network that is going out to these SMEs to make sure that they can actually use those tools and involve themselves in getting those tools because some people will have the ability and the knowledge but not everyone will. We also have to be aware in many ways in Ireland, because we have so many of these high-skilled jobs, that AI integration into business will change how business is done. As someone who came through from PwC, I saw many people starting off in year one. You wonder in a few years about all the work. Will people starting off in their careers be there to do it, or will an AI model simply go through invoices and do checks and spot checks? Obviously, the world is changing. If we are not there at the forefront, we will lose that but we will have nothing else to replace it. As we know, AI offers benefits but it also means that we need to be strategic. We also need to be fully ready, through governance and everything else, to make sure we do not fall behind. Ultimately, if we delay AI adoption, or if the skills are not put into the Irish companies, we risk ceding advantage not just to the US or maybe the UK, which we previously would have been focused on, but all across the world. We deal in English in business. That would have been an advantage we had before, but we see all across Asia and all across eastern Europe that all these countries are as adept at the business world as anyone else. There is no reason to think we will be special and will continue to stay ahead. That is why I come back to the Government support. The Government has been at the forefront, as I said, with the AI office, but we also need to ensure that that gets out to the individual businesses. In a way, what we can do there is invest in the companies, put out funding into the companies and monitor all the way through. Something we have been really good at from an IDA perspective is going abroad, but Enterprise Ireland is building companies from within. We really need to use that to champion AI and to push it across all systems, be they supply chain, business, financial or even sales tools, in order that all across that AI ecosystem we can ensure that our companies are ready, more so than anyone else, to be there for the future generations of what the business world might look like. As a Government, we have taken the proper steps to date and we need to continue that.

While AI has many benefits for convenience, it is not a force for good, and therefore must be regulated, as Grok's widespread generation of sexually explicit images of children has proven. Grok is run by the platform of X and the European headquarters of X is just a 20-minute walk from this Chamber, so there is no excuse for the Government not to act immediately. While AI is a form of high-tech plagiarism, and certainly makes life easier in a range of areas, convenience generally comes at a price. It is a kind of Trojan horse that we invite into our lives. The infrastructure that makes AI possible is a network of data centres. AI has significantly driven the demand for the roll-out of such centres across Ireland. These centres service the needs of transnational corporations and their profit models first and foremost. The multimillion euro corporation Echelon is planning to install two such centres in my local area, just outside Arklow. However, data centres and AI come at a high cost to the local consumer. I attended its glitzy reception in the Arklow Bay Hotel last year. However, Echelon conveniently did not tell us about the cost, nor do politicians who seem fanatical about AI and the rolling out of such data centres. They are okay with proliferating a vast network of centres in Ireland so that we have to bear the burden and process an ever-growing load of social media content from much of the world's population. They talk up and greatly exaggerate the supposed benefits but conveniently do not mention the high cost to upgrade our electricity network, a cost borne by Joe and Josephine Public in their electricity bills. We know that an AI search consumes between ten and 30 times the amount of energy of a normal Google search and that one data centre alone can consume an equivalent amount of electricity to the city of Kilkenny on a daily basis. Meta uses 3.1 billion litres of water for the cooling systems of its data centres each year. Numerous groups and even senior departmental officials, in a confidential memo, warned Government Ministers that Ireland's rapid growth in data centres to facilitate AI is using up electricity capacity and adding to the risks around energy costs and climate targets. They estimate that these centres, to power AI, will devour 31%, or just under one third, of Ireland's electricity by 2030 and that this will affect homeowners in getting connections to the electricity grid. On the morning of Echelon's launch, we officially opened the Arklow wastewater treatment plant nearby, which will allow for badly needed housing development to take off in the town, which could not take place previously. What guarantee is there that these future homeowners will be able to connect to the electricity grid? Who will be given precedence, the local Joe or Josephine Public, or a multibillion euro corporation? Of course, Government politicians will not mention that inconvenient truth, because Ireland, is in effect, getting prostituted out for the interests of big tech corporations.

When I think of AI, I get so excited, because I genuinely see this as an evolution of us as a species from when we first picked up tools to a point in our history where we are about to see those tools take on a life of their own. It is genuinely awe-inspiring to consider the transformation that could bring to us as a globe and what it could do for us as a population, but sadly, the other thing I think of is that we cannot have nice things. Unfortunately, the way AI is being governed and managed is wreaking havoc on our society. Nobody is talking honestly about labour displacement from AI. We are talking about the fact that it will displace jobs, that it will create other jobs, and that it will have to keep up with the tech and create better, more high-skilled job. That is simply not true. We will see labour displacement at a scale which is unprecedented in our history. We have to start talking about the just transition which that will require on the same level that we will see the environmental just transition. It is already happening, with issues with labour quality and labour precarity that we have already seen happen over the past number of decades simply being a result of the automation and AI that we are seeing. Unfortunately, those who are most structurally disadvantaged in society will be the ones pushed into poverty and disadvantaged even further. Another way that it is wreaking havoc on society is through decision-making, because ultimately, when we think about it, what AI can do is allow us to delegate decision-making from humans to machines, which is exciting when considering the efficiencies that can bring about and potentially the impartiality, but, unfortunately, again, what we are seeing is that those tools are being developed with biases and errors that we as humans bake into them, only now, when those biases and errors play out, they are at such a scale that they can absolutely destroy parts of our society. The area which I am most concerned about, which we are seeing play out right in front of our eyes, is the vulnerabilities that we as humans are exposed to, and the exploitation. Just as the business models of big tech right now exploit our data, AI will exploit our human emotions. That is exactly what is happening. We have heard stories of the suicides that people are being pushed to through AI chatbots. We have seen across society over the past couple of weeks the horrific way in which it is being used to promote image-based sexual abuse and the development and proliferation of CSAM. It makes me so sad, because I see so much that could happen if we were properly governing AI. We could look at labour displacement in a way that allowed us to have more leisure time in our lives, that allowed us to care for our loved ones without the poverty that normally ensues. There is so much we could do on labour. There is so much that we could do on decision-making and the vulnerabilities that I mentioned that could be flipped on its head and turned into positive forces in our society, but because the governance and regulation of AI is so weak in this State, in the European Union and across our globe, that is not happening. I want to pick up on one thing that the Minister of State said in his opening statement about the fact that simplification does not mean deregulation. I absolutely reject that statement, because that is what it does. To deny the fact that big tech is lobbying Brussels, Washington and Dublin is just sticking your head in the sand. Of course it is about deregulation and capitulation to these big tech companies. I also have issues with the fact that the dedicated AI office, which I appreciate is going to be detached from the Department of enterprise, is being developed within it. I see a slew of conflicts with the fact that that is a Department helping and assisting enterprises to use AI while also trying to govern it and the sandbox in which those things are being tested. AI will only have this transformational impact on our society if the public has trust in it. None of the things that this Government is doing are inspiring that trust right now. I laud the Minister of State with responsibility for AI and what she has done to shift this Government into action on this issue.

I have been keeping an eye on the statements. Many of the issues have been raised and I do not want to go over them, so I will give these two minutes over to young people's opinions on AI for the Minister of State, Deputy Richmond's, interest. The National Youth Council has been leading a programme where it has had youth juries on AI, specifically on themes such as education, the environment, jobs and misinformation. The last of those juries, this weekend, is on laws and regulation. So far, they have come up with very interesting recommendations. We often speak about AI and social media. The concern goes straight towards children and young people and their interaction with these apps and services, but their own voices are often misheard. To give a flavour of some of those recommendations, they state that Government should fund research on the social development of young people and the impact of AI on that development; the national AI office should have an explicit mandate to address AI in vulnerable groups; and when making a complaint in an AI-enabled app or service, users should have the option to automatically send a copy of that complaint to Coimisiún na Meán. They are some practical steps that the Minister of State might take on board and consider in his future work. Young people's voices need to be central in any debate about AI. They are predominantly using it every day. We have seen so much research. Young people too often rely on AI for friendships, relationships and support. It is about how we do that safely. I appreciate that young people's voices are central as part of that debate.

This week's Grok scandal tells us something important about artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence is never neutral. It takes the values of the people who build it and the people who control it. What we saw this week was one of the most powerful AI tools aligned to a social media company in the hands of a creepy little slimeball who has shown again and again that he does not care about harm. Under Elon Musk, the platform X has rolled out an artificial intelligence tool that could be used to undress, sexualise and humiliate real people, women, men, teenagers and children, all without consent. That was never a glitch but a design choice. We are told it was about innovation, but it clearly was not. It was simply about power being exercised without any restraint. A billionaire with a track record of recklessness is now shaping how artificial intelligence interacts with human bodies, identity and dignity. What predictably followed when there was an uproar was that we were told this feature to do all of those horrific things would only be available to paid users. Now, we are getting different information today that it will be turned off. That is not nearly good enough. If someone built a tool allowing strangers to create sexualised images of children, we would shut it down immediately. We would not ask for patience or wait for a voluntary code of conduct, but because this tool sits inside a tech platform, there was hesitation. That hesitation is and will continue to be dangerous. Ireland hosts these companies, regulates them and gives them legitimacy. This means we have a duty to act when their products cause harm. This week is not just a story about Grok; it is a warning. AI in the hands of people who lack empathy, restraint or basic decency will be used to hurt people.

AI has the ability to be useful and harmful. In the last couple of weeks, we have not been able to open newspapers without seeing the negative impacts of AI. As a result of the disgrace of Grok on the X platform, I will no longer be using it. I was a Twitter user for about ten years. I have to say that since its current owner took over, I will not be using it because of the misogyny, the meanness and the racism. I have to say the step too far for me is the generation of child sexual abuse material. It is a step too far for humanity and there is no benefit to this tool whatsoever. It needs to be banned and legal steps need to be taken to prosecute the platform. At the education committee before Christmas, we discussed leaving certificate reform and the use of AI and examinations formed part of it. Part of the conversation was about the fact that educators needed to be enabled to support young people who were using generative AI instead of doing the work themselves for coursework or exams. Of course, we also discussed the use of AI as an excellent way of assisting young people and, actually, everybody in terms of learning. It is a tool, like books and the Internet, to help students learn. However, if they are not able to use it as a tool in a way that helps them learn instead of just generating the work itself, that is where the difficulty lies because they are not learning the stuff themselves. Again, educators need to be supported in understanding AI. It is moving at a pace that far exceeds our training and CPD provision for educators now. In two weeks, I will be hosting the CyberSafeKids charity in the audiovisual room. I am looking forward to the conversation because it is saying it wants to discuss the use of AI and other technologies in children's lives. It is calling for stronger regulation enforcement, embedding critical digital literacy into school curriculums and equipping parents to assist their children in their online lives. I encourage all TDs and Senators to attend because the organisation has a lot to say and we have a lot to learn.

The EU AI Act aims for AI to be transformative, trusted and transparent. I think we can all agree that, in recent days and weeks, we have seen how swiftly AI can move to put dangerous tools in the hands of millions of people all across the globe. Make no mistake, though, Grok might have put the ability to nudify into the public domain and it might have opened the eyes of people and governments who were not already aware of the huge dangers of these tools, but these tools, especially the nudify apps, are not a new phenomenon. We know AI is being used every day, hour and second to exploit mostly women and minor girls. This is why, no matter what pay walls or features are geographically disabled, we must continue this focus that has been so sharp in the last couple of days and the urgency for global co-ordinated action, stronger regulation, mandatory safeguards and accountability measures to prevent AI from becoming a weapon of exploitation. We must ensure that innovation serves human dignity and does not undermine it. As the Chair of the Joint Committee on Children and Equality, I am committed to advocating to protect our young people. To do that, we have to provide legislation and regulation, but also education and empowerment. We did a survey in November that went out to over 2,200 parents. At that point, Grok had not even been launched. In some ways, then, that survey is nearly out of date. We do not know what is coming next week or the week after. We do not know what other apps and technologies are coming down the line, so we have to give people tools to prepare them for the unknown. We have to start building in safety by design. Safety by design and even co-design are also key when we look at AI for people with disabilities. I also sit on the Joint Committee on Disability Matters. We have heard of the fantastic ways in which AI can assist those in our disabled communities, including 131,764 children in Ireland. AI is bringing massive help in the form of assistive technologies. This includes things like screen readers, speech-to-text technology, navigation aids, eye tracking, voice recognition, real-time transcription for those with hearing impairments, etc. These AI tools can lead to greater autonomy, inclusion and participation in education and society. However, we heard really loudly and clearly in the disability matters committee that AI, as it becomes increasingly integrated across public and private services, has the ability to further push the inequalities already present. There are built-in biases already in many of these tools, and new barriers can be created. In the short time we have left to us, therefore, we must use the opportunity to ensure that people with disabilities are properly supported and are meaningful co-designers, especially in things we are using across public services, so AI continues to be a tool for inclusion and not inequality in the disability space. In the time left to me, I want to touch on something Deputy Farrelly mentioned, namely, the rise of AI companionship, especially in relation to our minors. We have seen that there has been huge growth in romantic relationships with AI chatbots. I was alarmed to see that 10% of adults in Ireland had had an AI romantic relationship in the past year and 12% were considering it. That is a massive number of people. The adults in Ireland now did not grow up with chatbots. We grew up learning about relationships in what I do not want to say is the normal way, because maybe this is the new normal, but the teenagers coming up now who are starting to engage in these romantic relationships do not know what to expect. The AI romances are all about control and customisation. You could have the perfect partner and it is really dystopian. We must ensure, therefore, that we are providing supports so our young people coming up are not becoming emotionally dependent on chatbots. We have seen the harm caused in relation to suicide. We are not, though, fully seeing yet the harm being caused in relation to physical and sexual abuse when it goes from offline to the real world, so we really must tackle this crisis. I will finish by saying AI offers unprecedented opportunities for accessibility and inclusion, but only if it is governed by robust regulation, ethical integration and ongoing research into its impact on children, underpinned by education and empowerment. We do not know what is coming, so we have to ensure technology serves human dignity and supports independent living rather than redefining or diminishing it. AI is here. We cannot fight it and we cannot resist it, but we can legislate for it, regulate it and guide it.

Before we move to the next Deputy, I advise Members to be aware there are some young attendees in our Gallery. The usher will advise their chaperone that this may not be an appropriate debate, I am afraid. We do welcome you, other than that. I call Deputy Ryan O'Meara.

Go raibh maith agat. I might change my speech around a bit from what I was going to start with for a few minutes to talk about the positives of AI to begin with, just to give the group in the Gallery a moment. What I was about to say here was quite negative and scathing of what we had seen through Grok and X in recent weeks, but I had planned on concluding by saying the positives were there for AI and an entire conversation was to be had around that point. I am not coming in here to be entirely negative. It is obviously the future and it has the potential to be transformative for our society, economy and the way we do so much in terms of productivity across our country. The positives are there, with an awful lot of work needed. Am I okay to go ahead now with the other part of my speech?

Yes, you are.

I would like to talk about Grok. Requests to Grok have included: "remove her clothes", "take her clothes off", "Grok, bikini now", "put her in a bikini", "replace her clothes with dental floss", "Grok, make her clothes transparent", and "Grok, make her look like she is kneeling for Donald Trump in a bikini". These are some of the requests made by warped individuals on X to take photos of women without their consent and produce sexually explicit, harmful and illegal imagery. Elon Musk's AI invention on X, Grok, duly complied with all requests, normally within minutes. The Guardian in the UK has reported that relatively tame requests by X users to alter photographs to show women in bikinis rapidly evolved during the first week of the year, hour by hour, into increasingly explicit demands for women to be dressed in transparent bikinis, then in bikinis made of dental floss, placed in sexualised positions, and made to bend over so that their genitals were visible. By 8 January, as many as 6,000 bikini demands were being made of the chatbot every hour. Also reported by The Guardian in the UK, a woman called Evie had an image of her altered by Grok to depict her in a bikini covered in baby oil. Evie said: People saw it was upsetting me and I didn’t like it and they kept doing more and more. There’s one of me just completely naked with just a bit of string around my waist, one with a ball gag in my mouth and my eyes rolled back. The fact these were able to be generated is mental. The article further states: Some users, mostly men, began to demand to see bruising on the bodies of the women, and for blood to be added to the images. Requests to show women tied up and gagged were instantly [created within minutes]. Ashley St. Clair, the mother of one of Elon Musk's children, had pictures of her as a child undressed by Grok. Images of a child actor from "Stranger Things" were produced at the request of warped-minded Grok users of the child in a banana bikini print. The more women spoke out at the exploitation and sexual harassment inflicted upon them, the more Grok was asked, and duly complied, to create even more explicit images of the women brave enough to speak out. It was first used to harass women, to inflict emotional and mental harm on them. Then, where women were brave enough to speak out, it was used to intimidate and silence them. I am angry about this. The general public should be angry about this. Parents concerned about online safety should be angry about this, but we have to do something with that anger. For the year since the last general election, many of us in this House have focused on online safety, and rightly so, across all parties. We are working genuinely hard to try to make the online world a safer place. When we talk about a smartphone ban and a social media ban for under-16s, what would those do to protect the women and young children who have been victimised in recent weeks by warped-minded individuals on Grok and X who have asked for these images to be created as well as the horrendous, mindless and numbing individuals who created this to begin with and who stand over it? It is not a veil of incorporation that is creating this. People are responsible for it, like Elon Musk, who is making billions from the technologies he is creating, but the people working for him, too. What sort of human beings are they? They allowed for laws to be broken. They allowed for mechanisms to be created without protections in place for these images to be created of women and children. The people who asked for these images to be created should be prosecuted, too. We should take a very firm stance on this and we should go after every single person who created child pornography in recent weeks.

Like any technology, there are pros and cons when it comes to the use of artificial intelligence. It has the potential to be incredibly important in areas like healthcare, science and technology. We saw that at the Young Scientist exhibition last week in the RDS, where many of the projects demonstrated to us how it could be a force for good. A school from my own constituency, Gaelcholáiste Reachrann, had a really impressive project on how AI could improve mental health supports. Indeed, the overall winning project also used AI as a part of a brain cancer diagnosis tool. Unfortunately, in recent months, we have all seen how this technology can be abused, the most obvious being its use on X to produce illegal sexual abuse material and other images intended to humiliate people. It also led to a huge increase in misinformation, not to mention serious copyright and privacy laws infringements. We have also seen the use of AI systems by militaries, particularly by Israel in Gaza to completely blur the lines of accountability when it comes to the responsibility of war crimes. Like any new technology, the regulation governing its use needs to evolve at the same pace. We have all probably heard about situations where AI is being used to screen applicants for jobs, for example. There are concerns that this could result in applicants of certain backgrounds, class, gender or race being excluded from a shortlist when CVs are filtered through the system. That can just be down to the original data used to train the system not being reflective of society as a whole. There needs to be strict monitoring and regulation of AI systems used for this purpose. The big issue here, and it is something that the National Youth Council of Ireland mentioned recently, is the need for proactive public engagement and education on AI systems. Digital literacy and education for young people is particularly important because the reality is this technology is not going away, so they need to understand it. They need to know the rules around it and they need to be equipped for the challenges that it also poses.

Before I move on, I welcome Baroness Margaret Curran of Townhead in the city of Glasgow and Mr. Chris Murray, an MP from Edinburgh East, who are in the Visitors Gallery as guests of Deputy Conor Sheehan. They are most welcome to the Parliament. I call Deputy Paul Murphy.

There was an interesting opinion poll a few weeks ago that showed only 27% of Irish people had a positive view of AI compared with 48% who believed that it would be a force for bad in the coming years. Research by RED C found that Irish people have among the lowest levels of trust in AI in the world. That demonstrates some good sense. Why? I think it is because people smell a rat. This is being forced down our throats by big tech and by propaganda from a Government that is in thrall to big tech. People get it. This is not improving my life. It is not making my life easier. Last year, the Taoiseach told us that AI was "in the same realm as the industrial revolution, and the printing press". I challenged him on this on one occasion and he stood over it, 100%. He said this was just as significant as the printing press or the industrial revolution. His conclusion was that the EU needed to innovate more and regulate less when it came to AI, that it must not "tie companies up in knots so that don't over-regulate to the extent that we paralyse certain sectors of the economy". On Tuesday, he said that arresting the people in X who were responsible for Grok producing child sexual abuse imagery would be like 1984. How low can he go in bending over for big tech? We now have the rightful and righteous horror of people about the realities of AI and what it is being used for, but the Government is going to continue on its same track of being fundamentally subservient to big tech. What is really Orwellian are the breathless claims that AI is some kind of fourth industrial revolution. The Government has drunk the big tech Kool-Aid big time if it believes that churning out child sexual abuse imagery and misogynistic image-based sexual abuse of women on an industrial scale - over 160,000 images in one 24-hour period at the start of this year - is an industrial revolution. If it is, it is an industrial revolution that ordinary people want no part of. This is a revolution of the warped, big tech billionaires and their Government cheerleaders. They want this pollution in our lives because it makes them so much money. If you look at Musk's reaction to the scandal, it was to say that the feature would be limited to subscribers in order to monetise it. For depraved billionaires like Musk, Zuckerberg or Bezos, there is no such thing as bad publicity, only free advertising and opportunities. To hell with the human or the environmental cost. Their latest reaction to attempt to assuage public concern was to geolimit it. In other words, if a person has a virtual private network, VPN, they will be able to continue to access and produce this abusive and illegal imagery. The background to the latest AI scandal is the Covalen strike. Content moderators hired by big tech and outsourced to police the wild west that it has created are to be replaced by AI. Anybody worried about AI should support this strike. Without humans moderating it and social media, it will become even more of a hellscape than it is already. Content moderation is an incredibly hard job that is traumatic. It should be highly paid and carried out by humans. Otherwise, child protection is going to be left to AI. Does any parent want that? The only way that the AI revolution is genuinely industrial is in the escalating demand for power and for water-hungry data centres. The 19th century industrial revolution turbocharged the burning of fossil fuels for profit, ultimately laying the basis for the climate crisis. The AI revolution is doubling down on that, accelerating climate collapse. Donald Trump told the World Economic Forum last year that he wanted to double US energy production to power AI and big tech and that they could fuel it with anything they wanted, including coal. Our Government is following Trump's lead by bending over backwards to facilitate data centre expansion. Data centres are already maxing out the grid. They are already swallowing up electricity that we need for housing and public transport even though we do not know what is going on. We got a glimpse from the genocide in Gaza where Irish data centres were holding Israel Defense Forces, IDF, intelligence data used to target and murder whole families. They are used to train AI using vast amounts of stolen data created by artists, creatives and ordinary people in their social media posts. They store vast amounts of our personal data that they use to target us with advertising and algorithms. Next week, I will be introducing our online safety recommender algorithms Bill to turn off these hateful toxic algorithms for children under the age of 18 and turn them off by default for adult users.

Donald Trump's pal - the richest person in the world - Elon Musk is profiting from producing sexualised images of women without their consent and, disgustingly, child abuse material. When the alarm bells are raised and people express anger about it, Elon Musk still wants to monetise it. It is far from clear that the announcement, which has been forced on X as a result of the outrage that has been expressed over the last while, will mean that this sick, depraved practice and the profiteering of Elon Musk from it is going stop. Last Friday, when I was on national radio and suggested that the laws existed and the police should be sent into X at that point, the Minister, Deputy O'Donovan, was saying that it was the users who were responsible, not the companies. To my knowledge, nobody - the Government or the Opposition - were suggesting that the police should be sent in directly to X. There was talk about legislation being done over time and so on. However, it turns out that, as we learned from the Garda, there are complaints being made and investigations are taking place. We were right. We are still having a protest outside X's headquarters on Saturday at 12 noon. This sickness and the people profiteering from it need to be protested against. People have been abused. Children have been abused. Women have been abused. There is absolutely no certainty. I am gathering from reading between the lines from Deputy Kelly's comments yesterday that, of the companies that say that they are coming in, the one that is not is probably X. This is the attitude of these people. They do not give a damn about the abuse of children or women if they can make money from it. Insofar as they have been forced to do something about it, it is because of outrage and pressure from the public. Then there is Covalen. I wish to echo Deputy Murphy. I was just talking to one of the workers in Covalen at the moment. It really tells a lot. They will be picketing outside the headquarters of Covalen in Sandyford today between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. and again tomorrow between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. They are content moderators doing content moderation for Meta, which is another company. Their job was to train AI. It now turns out that they were training AI to get rid of their jobs. Three hundred of them have been made redundant. Covalen is owned by Cpl, which is another important name with lots of Government contracts working for the HSE and so on, and using the bare minimum statutory redundancy that it can get away with legally. There is no engagement. It is refusing to recognise the trade union and so on. It is miserable treatment of these workers who were the ones who had to sift out this sick material, who protected the public and children from this sick material. That is what they do, but now it is AI that is going to do it. That is where we are heading with this stuff. The workers, who are protecting us, stressed to bits and have to deal with mental health issues over protecting our mental health and our children, are treated in an absolutely despicable way and have to go out on strike. I hope we are going to get intervention and support of the Covalen workers from the Government and certainly from the public. It is not only in the interest of the workers that they are successful in their fight for union recognition and decent treatment, but they are protecting us from these profiteers who make money from the sort of depravity we have seen from X.

Is mór agam an deis an seans seo a thapú labhairt ar cheist na hintleachta saorga. It is a timely discussion. It is important to recognise that the recent surge in conversation has led us to an reset about how we think of AI, the potential it brings and the power it has as a technology. Oftentimes in this House, we have looked at the positive benefits and positive potential of AI as a new technology. However, this is a point for us to reset that conversation and talk about it in terms of harnessing the potential, placing as much import and emphasis on the harness as we do on exploring the actual potential. It is a pivotal moment where societies will need to come together, understand fully the risks and take a risk-based approach to how we take account of the fact that there is a new technology in AI. No one is going is reverse the technology, but we need to make sure that our legislative frameworks and regulatory approaches are fit for purpose and allow us to benefit as a society from what AI can do while ensuring that we fully eliminate the risks. Any parent who has observed the discussion in the last few weeks has been disgusted by the use of AI tools to create child sexual abuse material, CSAM, and the weaponisation of intimate images of women, which it is important to emphasise are already illegal according to Irish law. I pay tribute to the Minister of State, Deputy Smyth, for her proactive approach in leading from the front on this and vocalising what a lot of constituents have been saying to me about the horror they have felt at this underbelly of AI use. When we talk about the harnessing of potential, that indicates the importance of talking about the guard-rails that we put in place, the responsibility, the governance and, most importantly, having control as a society. AI can be an excellent servant for our society, but it can be a wicked master. We need to make sure that the balance is perfectly set back towards governments steering and regulating the overall direction of the technology. In this House, we have explored the potential of AI already regarding healthcare, the improvement of diagnostics, early detection and personalised care, and assisting in administrative support for our front-line workers, such as gardaí, nurses, prison officers and so on. There is a role AI can play in education and expanding innovation, which many of us saw in the RDS last week when we visited schools from our constituencies that were using AI as part of their work. Regarding the overall economy and approach to work, there are gains to productivity that AI gives many workers across the economy in various different sectors by allowing them to focus on being creative and bringing into focus the importance of emphasising human skills, such as the ability to work as part of a team, think critically and solve a problem. These are skills that are not developed by AI and are intrinsic to human beings. As we have this discussion about the impact that it will have on the world of work, we need to acknowledge that there will be disruption in the employment market. That is why it is important that we take a skills first approach to how we set up our society and our economy to take advantage of the AI technology. This is not just in terms of digital skills. We have work to do in terms of ensuring that digital skills penetration is where it needs to be to allow the population to take advantage of AI. It is also about ensuring that people understand what AI technology can do. It can have biases built into it by its creators. It is ultimately artificial. It is built on training data. It does not have the intrinsic ability of a human being to analyse and think about a problem. It is a machine and not the equivalent to a human consciousness. This is why I encourage the need for reskilling, not only for digital skills but also in the area of critical thinking. I know the Minister, Deputy Lawless, is working on this. This is where arts, humanities and social sciences are so important in promoting these skills and making sure that when people see content on the Internet they do not take it as gospel but question the source from whence it came, the assumptions on which it is based, whether it is strong enough to hold up and whether it is something we should hang our hat on. We know that in various spheres of the economy, and I have spoken about e-scooters in this House previously, that technology often outpaces regulation. The discussion in recent weeks shows us the need for our policy-making apparatus to be up to scratch in order to have the skills to be able to engage with those it seeks to regulate. We need to protect our children above all else. It is important we protect them from harmful materials and the AI-generated risks they encounter but there is also the fact they are entering a world that has AI, as opposed to our generation for whom AI entered the world. They are growing up with AI. They need the basic skills to be able to engage with it properly. Ireland has the opportunity to position itself as a world leader, not only in terms of the benefits of harnessing AI but also in taking a rules and risk-based approach to regulating it properly and preparing all aspects of society for it. The economy can benefit but society knows how to steer it. I look forward in particular to the AI summit to be held next year.

Artificial intelligence is no longer emerging; it is already embedded in how society functions. It shapes how information is ranked, what people see online, how decisions are made and, increasingly, how power is exercised. This reality requires us to move from abstract discussions and act with urgency, clarity and competence. One of the biggest misconceptions about AI is that it is something people choose to use. In fact, the most influential AI systems today are the ones people never consciously engage with. They sit inside platforms, search engines, social media feeds, recommender systems and automated decision-making tools that quietly influence behaviour at scale. This is where the real impact is. System such as Grok, which we have discussed this week, embedded directly in social media platforms demonstrate how quickly AI can shape public discourse when it is trained on live data, optimised for engagement and applied in real-time and, in Grok's case, enables legal non-consensual image manipulation. These systems are not neutral. They reflect incentives, values and commercial priorities. When these priorities conflict with the truth, well-being or democratic norms, the consequences are serious. Another major shift that is still not widely understood is the move from AI that responds to AI that acts. We now see the rise of autonomous AI agents that will carry out tasks across multiple systems, write and deploy code, interact with other AI tools and make decisions without continuous human interaction. These systems are already operating enterprise environments and will soon appear in public services. Our governance frameworks are not yet equipped for this level of autonomy. We must also confront the impact on children and young people. Algorithms are designed to maximise attention and emotional engagement. For children this can mean exposure to content loops that amplify anxiety, distort self-image and damage mental health. If we fail to recognise algorithmic exposure as a child protection issue, then we are falling behind the reality that families already deal with. This is why the establishment of the national AI office is not only important but urgent. I published legislation to create the office because I believe the State needs dedicated expert capability focused solely on AI. The office must be more than a future structure box ticking exercise. It needs to be operational now. AI systems have already been deployed across public and private sectors. Decisions are already being automated. Data is already being processed at scale. If the national AI office is still finding its feet in eight or ten months' time, we will already be regulating after the fact. What should the office be doing immediately? It must act as a centre of real technical expertise in the State, not only regarding a legal interpretation of things such as the EU AI Act but a genuine understanding of how models are trained, how data flows and how risks emerge in practice. Without this, oversight will always lag behind deployment. The office must actively guide public bodies that are already experimenting with AI. Departments and agencies need clear practical advice on what is acceptable, what is risky and how to deploy AI safely. Silence or delay create uncertainty and drive poor decision-making. The office must be able to intervene quickly. AI deployment cycles are measured in weeks and, in some cases, days rather than years. If our response mechanisms are slow, fragmented or overly cautious, and if we are dealing with AI purely in the political cycles, then we will fall behind. We have already fallen behind and let us be clear about this. AI is not waiting for us to get comfortable with what it is and what it is doing. It is moving fast and it will continue to do so regardless of how prepared we are. The real risk is not that we act too boldly but that we move too slowly and with too little understanding. The natural fear that is there around AI has caused us to act slowly and to double check and double think what we are doing, particularly when it comes to regulation. Particularly when it comes to the national AI office, we need to act quickly and boldly and ensure that people can see the State is working to protect the interests of the public. Ireland has the talent, the credibility and the values to lead in AI, particularly with regard to regulation, but leadership requires urgency, expertise and the willingness to engage with AI as it exists today and not as we might wish to exist in future. We can shape it if we engage. Putting our heads in the sand and asking whether it will go away will not cut the mustard.

Artificial intelligence is playing a bigger role in society today. While it has some benefits, I do not always see artificial intelligence as a force for good and I will give an example. South Dublin County Council has a system in place, and I know Deputies Shane Moynihan and Gogarty are well used to using it, whereby elected representatives can contact South Dublin County Council on behalf of constituents and get a written response which we are able to send to our constituents. Before Christmas I noticed some very unusual language in some of the responses I was getting. I contacted South Dublin County Council and asked whether it was using AI to generate the responses. The response I got was that it has 25 staff members with access to AI and they use it to generate content, including responses to elected members. The council stated it is committed to maintaining human oversight of these responses but I have concerns. I have had to contact the council numerous times about some of the responses I have received which did not make sense. I have been using the system since 2016 when I was first elected to South Dublin County Council. I know when I am getting a computerised response that does not make any sense. We cannot send them out to constituents. Constituents in Dublin Mid-West cannot meet a council official face to face since the civic offices in Clondalkin were closed to the public. When they make a phone call they get an automated message and they cannot get a human at the end of the phone. While AI has its benefits, we must not lose human contact. Constituents and people need this human contact as they go on. People have spoken about Grok on Twitter being used to make sexual images of children and women. The Minister of State has condemned it and everybody in the House would condemn it because it is absolutely deplorable. It needs to be tackled with the full weight of the law. If the law is not strong enough, it is up to us to make it stronger. I have heard horrendous stories of women who have had sexual images made on Grok without their consent. Earlier this year, and it is at the lower end and I will not compare it, an image of me was AI generated. It was at the lower end of the scale but it did involve the removal of some items of clothing. I reported it to X and the first response I got was that it did not go against its community standards. On 8 January I received another response because the account was reported by numerous people on X. This response, after several complaints, stated it did break X's abusive behaviour rule and the account is now locked. It is locked but it is not banned despite several complaints. The bigger issue is whose account was locked. It is an anonymous account. There is no accountability for people with anonymous accounts and this needs to be tackled. I have no problem with people having a different opinion and having a go at me over my political opinion. That is fine but at least own it and do not hide behind an anonymous account.

Artificial intelligence is already embedded in all aspects of our lives. We look at healthcare, education, transport, the creative arts, music, business and Government services. As others have said, there are many practical applications that are useful but, equally, there are a lot of dangers out there which have been referenced. They are now impinging on our basic human rights and we need to protect our children and manage threats to our energy resources. It is not going too far to say there is an existential threat to humanity from AI. Even the creators of it have acknowledged that. We need to be very careful. That said, AI is not going to go away which is why it has to be hugely regulated to protect our basic freedoms. The likes of Musk talk about taking away freedom but to protect our freedom we need to regulate him and his ilk. It should not be left in the hands of the tech bros. None of these massively wealthy individuals has shown any inclination or ability to put the common good at the heart of their businesses. The algorithms are all about prioritising engagement no matter how negative, no matter how down right evil. They are all about maximising revenue and there is little or no moderation left. As others have mentioned, moderators have been fired to push up the profits. That is why I welcome that Ireland has taken some first steps in implementing the EU Artificial Intelligence Act and designating the 15 national competent authorities to enforce it, which places it among some of the first EU member states. However, if we want this legislation to truly protect our citizens, we need rigorous enforcement, enhanced transparency and resources to adapt to any technological advances as they come. Quite frankly, the jury is still out. As of now, we have regulation under bodies like the Central Bank, the Data Protection Commission, Coimisiún na Meán, the HSE, the Health and Safety Authority but we still need one single, empowered point of co-ordination. I am interested to see how the proposed national AI office is actually going to work. Will it be in place by this year? Will it be properly resourced? I am talking about technical experts, the engineers, the auditors and the data scientists who can do a deep dive into the AI and algorithms, rather than just carry out sample audits and tick boxes. Enforcement must be proactive, not reactive. High at risk areas like policing, elections, healthcare and employment must be routinely inspected, not monitored after the harm or after the event, and non-compliance needs to have the strict penalties at our national remit and at EU level. I acknowledge that the EU is doing a much better job than other jurisdictions but we need to go further and not ease up due to pressure from the likes of Trump. I note the Minister, Deputy Burke, has said that building an AI ecosystem requires something that is informative, trusted and transparent. To deliver on that we probably need a public register of high-risk AI systems that are deployed in Ireland and keep our public in the loop rather than let them be disinformed by the trolls and the bots. The EU AI act is a landmark piece of legislation but we need to resource it to keep up because the technology is going to change all the time and we need to be at the forefront and keep up the pressure. If they are not going to play ball, we should get rid of the AI systems.

Before I move to the next speaker, I welcome our visitors to the Gallery. They look like minors. They are very welcome. I am not sure where they are from. I am going to leave it up to their chaperone but we are having a debate on AI and the recent Grok controversy. It may or not involve some explicit detail and it is up to the visitors' chaperone as to whether or not they stay and hear the content.

Aontú is a long-term critic of AI and its gross under-regulation in this country. We were the first party to call for an Oireachtas committee on AI. We believe there should be far stricter democratic oversight of AI. There is little regulation if we are honest and that is because a lot of governments are afraid to stand up to the oligarchs who own the technology. In many ways, AI, like nuclear power, can be used for good but for sure it can be used for serious damage. However, imagine the damage nuclear power would cause if it was not regulated properly. I want to speak to the Grok crisis this week. We, as a party, have drafted Bills previously to ban the provision of hardcore pornographic materiel to children. We regularly provide evidence to this Dáil of the damage of that material to young minds. Hardcore pornography distorts the minds of children, it leads to horrific violence against women and it leads to rape and murder. Yet, we have very little support for this Bill in this House. All we received from the Government is shrugs and measured tones in response. There is a subsidiary of Pornhub that operates in Dublin as part of the Government's foreign direct investment policy. It pays corporation tax to the State. Pornhub provides hardcore pornographic materiel to children without checking their age. There is a US lawsuit against Pornhub alleging the distribution of child pornography yet, as far as I can see from this Government, it is ignored. Aontú is currently drafting a Bill that will see smart phones for children under the age of 16 banned. The damage these screens are doing to our children is incredible. Regarding the nudification tools, there are nudification tools provided by Grok, Merlio AI, SoulGen, Nudify-Online, Undress AI, DreamGF, deepnude-cc, Promptchan.ai and Candy AI. They are all should be criminally banned. The Wan video generation tool was developed by the Chinese giant Alibaba. It is completely unmoderated. The users are free to upload a photo of anyone at any age and generate any AI video they want. This is a disgrace. ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok, offers its own unmoderated video generation tool which also allows users to generate nudification images for a small fee, completely unmoderated. This should also be banned. Why is there no focus on these companies as well? Any legislator that stops using X but does not use their legislative power to ban these tools is not doing their job. They are substituting the real beneficial action to citizens for virtue signalling that makes absolutely no difference. We need to get strong but we need to do it with legislation.

I thank the Minister of State for joining us in the House. I know she had a personal situation this morning but in fairness she and her office reached out to nearly every Member of this House to tell us why she would not be in the House and I appreciate that. I may be misquoting the Minister of State but when she took this Ministry role, I think I read somewhere that she said she did not have a huge amount of experience when it came to artificial intelligence. In fairness to her, what she has produced so far, and calling a spade a spade, she has been very good in her role. As my grandfather used to say, I might not have gone to school but I met the scholars on the way home. The Minister of State has played a very progressive, active role. My experience with AI has been very positive. I remember visiting a Shanghai hospital a number of years ago, going to a training unit in that hospital and witnessing how AI was so important, not only for diagnosis of cancer and for checking all results coming through the hospital but also for the training processes for nurses, doctors and surgeons. I went into a virtual reality room depicting a crash site, and we were geared up like "Star Trek" or "Star Wars", but you were able to operate, to assist and to learn all through AI. It was absolutely fascinating. They are the benefits of AI and they are areas which prove that AI works very well. There are huge benefits for someone like me who is dyslexic. I have Copilot, which is the programme allowed on the Oireachtas computers. It has been enormously beneficial. Dragon NaturallySpeaking 9 has been enormously beneficial to me. I can upload something from Leinster House which could be 100 or 200 pages and it reads it back to me. It is very helpful to me. AI has been beneficial to many people in society today. There is a lot to say, and I know I have a short time left on the clock, but people have mentioned Grok and those images that are circulating. It is absolutely appalling that non-consensual images are allowed of males, females or children on any social media and that has to be regulated in Ireland and Europe. However, I wonder if the owner of Grok had been Greg Brockman or Sam Altman, who are the directors of ChatGPT, whether it would be a very different story with the outrage here. Given the outrage that has come from TDs today, I must ask about all those people who have gone through the court systems in Ireland and who have walked away with suspended sentences for downloading thousands of genuine child pornography in this country? Continuously we are seeing people walking out of court rooms with suspended sentences. I would like to see the outrage that has come from some Members of this House applied to those getting suspended sentences.

That is an absolutely shocking statement.

I think this is the second set of statements we have had on artificial intelligence. A bit like the previous speaker, I do not think anybody in this House is an expert in AI in the same way as there are in industry. That is part of the challenge for us as representatives of the people. That is why we are here. It is for us to understand, articulate and predict an industry that is rapidly changing. Its applications are rapidly changing. What we saw this week was a fairly grotesque application of a tool. We would be wrong to think in terms of one platform or in terms of AI being the issue. The issue here was the application of the tool. That could happen on X, ChatGPT, Copilot or others. It often does not because those companies have put safeguards in place. Initially, at least, X seemed to revel in not putting any restrictions on technology. That is because of the overall ideology of its owner. If somebody goes on X and asks somebody to create an image which involves the sexualisation of children and a company produces that image, my view is the person who requested it and the company which generated it both created the content. Whether you use a camera and a light, a Photoshop from ten years ago or AI, you are responsible when you generate sexual images of children. I understand there are investigations and I hope that is the interpretation the Garda takes, regardless of what Acts are in place. I note the comments from the Taoiseach on the 1998 Act. There is also Coco's Law, which we probably never thought would apply in the area of AI, but it has. Both of those Acts appear, in my reading of it, to be sufficient for the Garda to act. This is now an enforcement issue. I welcome the Minister of State saying she is willing to look at new legislation. Of course we should look at new legislation. There are many areas of AI. When we think of AI as an additional tool, we have to think of how it will impact. Whether it was the industrial revolution, rural electrification, the Internet or AI, this is just a different version of new technology and of course it will have impacts. An area of concern is creativity. When somebody creates something, who are they creating it with? They are contributing their ideas and prompts, which can be creative and dynamic, but they are co-creating it with a platform. Who is credited for that? How will that be credited in terms of creativity and rights going forward? There is the area of skills. My daughter is in transition year and has an AI class. They are learning how to use AI; they are not necessarily learning how AI can replace traditional work. There are so many societal impacts. Grok caught everybody by surprise because it is a company that did not seem willing to be bound by the norm of not approving images involving sexualisation of children. There are many people out there who do not accept the norms of society. That is why the Government should step in and make changes where required. I acknowledge the work the Minister of State and the Taoiseach have done. I hope the Garda Commissioner will follow through. In the American system, the chief police officer is able to stand up and say, "We're going after this guy", and make a public statement. Our police do not operate in that way. That is regrettable. If there had been a statement from the Garda earlier in the week, we might be in a different space in the debate. I wish good luck to the Minister of State. It is a very open area and one we have to be careful of. It is a tool with positive and negatives. Our job as legislators is to balance that.

I welcome this debate. This is an incredibly important subject. I thank the Minister of State for the leadership she has provided in this space. Working with me as chair of the Oireachtas committee, she has been very co-operative, as have officials in her Department. As my colleague Deputy McAuliffe said, artificial intelligence is a tool, not a goal in itself. We use any tool to, hopefully, improve all our lives, our community and the delivery of public services. It is here and there are many positive use cases. I have been fortunate to experience those, such as the National Library using it to translate ancient manuscripts and GP surgeries using it to assist patients. Recycling companies are now using it. I read something interesting recently from the AI for Good Lab. Ireland is, among the working-age population, the fourth highest user of artificial intelligence of all countries around the world. I have just come from Amazon Web Services where they had a hackathon. Their programmers and others worked with charities such as Vision Ireland, Rehab and GOAL to see how AI and technology can improve delivery of their services. I am sure the Minister of State was at the Stripe Young Scientist and Technology Exhibition and was amazed by the number of projects about AI and in which students used AI. I draw her attention to one she will be interested in, a project from Bunclody Community College, an excellent school in north Wexford, by Sam Bolger, Thomas Larkin and Aaron Sharlott called "The Firehouse Effect", which looked at misinformation and disinformation and how AI can supercharge those. We know all these changes are happening in society. The Minister of State will be aware of the interim report of our committee from before Christmas in which we made 85 recommendations. The key to what our committee is trying to do, which is critical to Ireland's approach to this area, is proper regulation and safety by design, and that we balance that with supports for innovation. We have to get the message out clearly that regulation and innovation are not mutually exclusive concepts. We have to make sure they work hand in hand. Throughout history, as Deputy McAuliffe pointed out, with any new invention, proper regulation allows it to develop appropriately. We have to focus on how Ireland can become the AI island. That is about tackling the problems Grok and others have caused. Our first obligation is to ensure our citizens and those who reside here are as safe online as offline. We also need, through the use of sandboxes and so on, to encourage innovation, particularly in deploying AI against the dangers we face. The Minister of State is driving the national AI office. It is important it does not become a "thou shalt not" office, but an enabling office that is focused on supports for SMEs, charities and community organisations to use AI safely to improve their services. It should be a hub supporting other regulators operating in the space. It is critical those regulatory bodies are sufficiently resourced and have the necessary people to carry out the functions expected of them. I am a big fan of the creation of an AI observatory. We are seeing huge changes. The Higher Education Authority, HEA, recently produced a report on the huge changes we will see in the skills base in this country. We need to upskill and reskill across nearly every category of work. It is therefore important we have an observatory that can inform us in real time of changes in society and the economy. We can respond to that. The Minister of State and I have been working with the Minister for further and higher education, Deputy Lawless, on this, particularly on the development of short programmes and microcredentials, so every individual can access, for example, a simple programme or course on what AI is, and SMEs can embed AI in their business and use it safely to improve their processes. We need to start thinking about what is coming down the line. I introduced the Protection of Voice and Image Bill to the House. Part of our digital identity is not just the standard form of data and, particularly as politicians, our voice; the image, identity and likeness of every citizen are crucial. We need to address that as soon as possible.

The AI genie is definitely out of the bottle. It is a technology with huge positive potential for medicine, mental health, construction, media, education and all parts of human interaction. In the wrong hands, however, AI has the potential to do huge harm. Palantir Technologies is a significant presence in Israel, providing the Israeli military and intelligence agencies with advanced AI and data analysis tools. What does that do? It creates kill lists for the Israeli military. It also enables drones and remote machine guns to identify individuals in the West Bank and Gaza and to shoot and kill them without human interaction. That is what AI can do. That is the danger of this type of technology in the wrong hands. I will go back to Grok and Elon Musk's X. Grok has manipulated photos of people to create images, often removing their clothes or making them pose in suggestive ways. Members of An Garda Síochána were here yesterday. They said the organisation was dealing with over 200 new cases of women and children being abused. Can the Minister of State imagine that? There were 200 cases in the last couple of weeks. The Garda knows where they are being produced. It is just down the road from here in X's headquarters. That is where these images are being distributed from. I acknowledge what Deputy McAuliffe said because he was absolutely spot on. He said that there are people sitting at computers asking Grok, which is just down the road, to do despicable things to women and children. They could not produce those images without the technology of Grok and X. They could not do it. I simply cannot believe that this Government is as outraged by the actions of Musk and X as the Irish people are because it did not deal with this immediately. I am not talking about looking at new legislation, considering doing something down the road, having a look at it or seeing if it fits into some category or other. The Government did not go to An Garda Síochána and say that it knows that digital images of child abuse are being produced down the road. It is mind-boggling that this has not been done yet. I genuinely ask the Minister of State if she can imagine any other circumstances in which the Garda knows that a company is enabling the distribution of child pornography and the abuse of women who put up photos online on their own social media profiles and no action is taken against the producers of that technology. I am sorry but I do not accept that taking the details of more than 200 victims of abuse is good enough. By the time the perpetrators, those people who created those images, get to court, there will be thousands of victims. I apologise to the Ceann Comhairle; I will finish with this but it is really important. If Joe Bloggs sitting in his bedroom had created this technology, that house would have been raided, the computers would have been seized, that person would have been in court and he would have been charged. The reason that has not happened is because it is Elon Musk, Trump's buddy, and X. That is the only reason.