Michael D'Arcy (Wexford, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The amendment is opposed on the basis that the words highlighted for removal were specifically drafted by the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel to provide for the fact that it may be impossible for insurers to completely anonymise the information they provide for the database. It might be easy to identify a very large claim settled publicly by a small insurer. If we were to set the very high threshold suggested in the amendment, it could cause insurers to take an overly conservative view of the information they were comfortable in sharing with the bank, which would result in a deficit in usable data. The amendment is also opposed on the basis that it is unnecessary in the context of data protection, as an appropriate safeguard has been included in the section to protect personal data. Where an insurer provides information from which an individual is identifiable, the Central Bank is mandated under subsection (3) to ensure the information is not disclosed by it. That requirement is in addition to, rather than in substitution for, any other data protection requirement in the Bill or the Data Protection Act 2018. We do not want insurance companies to propose giving aggregated information to the Central Bank in order to avoid the potential identification of an individual from among a smaller number of claims, bearing in mind data protection requirements. That is why the section provides that insurers shall use their best endeavours to provide the information.