Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

My clear understanding is that the GDPR does not require this to be done. Our amendment merely proposes the removal of "the costs of implementation" as something that the Minister must consider in deciding whether a private body should be required to appoint a data protection officer. We are saying that by including this provision in the Act, the Minister is proposing to elevate the cost issue to a status that is too high. The acceptance of our amendment would not preclude the Minister from considering the cost. He would still be entitled to take cost into account in this context, but it would not be at an equal level with the other protections that exist. It is important to draw that distinction in light of the seriousness of this matter. We do not want a health insurance body that should be considered in this context to be in a position to argue that given that the Minister has to take account of cost, it is not obliged to have a data protection officer. We think the question of cost is being given too high a position in the hierarchy of requirements. Our amendment would not prevent the Minister from taking account of any cost issues that might exist. The GDPR does not require this to be done.