Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Section 54 gives further effect to Article 22 of the GDPR, which deals with the automated processing of personal data including profiling. Paragraphs 2(a) and (c) of Article 22, which have direct effect, permit automated processing, including profiling, where it is necessary for entering into, or the performance of, a contract between a data subject and a controller and where the data subject has given explicit consent. Paragraph 2(b) of Article 22 permits such processing where it is authorised by the European Union or national law but subject to appropriate safeguards. Recital 71 of the GDPR mentions measures to combat fraud and to monitor tax evasion, areas where such activity is relevant under national law but subject, again, to safeguards.

Section 54 makes it clear that the steps that need to be taken to safeguard the interests of the data subject must include an arrangement whereby the data subject has the opportunity to make representations on any intended decisions. This means, in the first place, that a data subject has the information on any proposal to make such a decision and, secondly, has the opportunity to bring any concerns to the attention of the controller.

As I have said, the general data protection regulation, GDPR, mentions fraud and tax evasion as areas justifying automated processes. It seems to me that the existing safeguards are adequate and are GDPR compliant. The essential features of amendment No. 84 are contained in section 54. I am not inclined to accept it. In this regard we must ensure that our laws combating fraud and tax evasion are fully fit for purpose.