An Oireachtas report published today has recommended that a "zone of absolute protection" be introduced for all children under the age of sixteen.
The Joint Oireachtas Committee on Child Protection advocates measures such as an equalisation of the age of consent for boys and girls at 16 years old, and the age of consent at which persons in authority may engage in sexual activity with young people should be fixed at 18 years old.
It also recommends a maximum life sentence for people in authority who abuse children under the age of 18 and new offences of grooming of children and child sex abuse.
Consensus on the age of consent was not reached, however, with Fine Gael members, including spokesman on justice Jim O'Keeffe, pressing to keep the age at 17. It was agreed on a majority vote. "I don't believe a case was made for a change," he said.
The committee was set up in response to the enormous public controversy following the Supreme Court decision in the statutory rape case, what is referred to as the CC case, of May 2006.
Committee chairman Peter Power, Fianna Fail TD, said: "In its judgement the Supreme Court struck down a central provision of our child protection regime, namely Section 1 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act 1935".
The events which followed that judgement including the release and subsequent re-arrest of a convicted prisoner caused widespread public controversy and debate about the protection of young children by law and in the State constitution.
Mr Powers said that the committee recommends "the defence of mistake as to age not be available to persons accused of an offence of penetrative sexual activity with a child under the age of sixteen," and "never available to persons who occupy positions of authority over the child victim".
In regards to the criminal justice system the committee has proposed a number of measures aimed at taking pressure off young witnesses in child sex abuse cases, including the establishment of regional Garda child protection units.
The report calls for confidential and non-threatening facilities for young victims in abuse cases and says there should be facilities in divisional Garda stations to enable formal identification parades to be conducted without identifying witnesses of victims to the suspect; and video systems to enable non-threatening interviews.
Within the court setting the committee says that consideration be given to the removal of wigs and gowns in relation to child witnesses and the personal cross-examination of child victims be prohibited.
Further study of appropriate ways of conducting the cross examination of children was recommended and cases involving children should receive as prompt a hearing as possible.
Concern was expressed by the committee that the system behind the provision of the sex offenders register was "part paper based" and it recommended that, in order to ensure efficiency, information should be disseminated in a computer-based format.
To protect children within the State against convicted sex offenders from abroad, the committee recommended that information be shared internationally, especially within the EU.
Mr Powers said the committee was also deeply concerned that the only way of vetting prospective employees, where there was unsupervised access to children, is through previous criminal convictions.
He pointed to the Ian Huntley case in England and said "there may be a basis for concern about the suitability of any particular person for employment involving unsupervised access to children even in the absence of a previous conviction. These concerns are often referred to as 'soft information'." He said that it is recommended that there be a statutory framework where this 'soft information' could be used in the vetting process.
This means that the Garda could be given powers to warn childcare facilities if a person applying for a job had been accused of abusing a child, even if the applicant was never convicted.
Currently, the Garda's Thurles-based Central Vetting Unit can only reveal whether or not a job applicant has been convicted, but this offers inadequate protection for children, the committee believes.
Tanaiste and Minister for Justice Michael McDowell said it would be up to the Government to decide on the circumstances of a referendum on any of the 64 recommendations of the committee, if it was necessary.