Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I have one immediate concern that springs to mind and then some wider questions. An immediate concern is looking to the figures, with only 48% having those basic digital literacy skills.

As I understand that 57% is the average across European countries, we are extraordinarily far beneath the European average. Looking at this, I think as well about the acceleration of initiatives such as MyGovID. Soon that is predominantly how we will access childcare; increasingly, it may become how we access medical appointments; it may become how we access driver licences and so on. What are the witnesses' concerns about our not bridging the gap? There is also the fact that the pace of a digital requirement from citizens is moving far faster, it seems, than the pace of skilling up citizens, giving them digital skills and empowering them. Are the witnesses concerned about the deepening of certain of the social, economic and other disadvantages we have across vital areas such as health, education and childcare? Are we in danger in the short term of a period of in fact exacerbating or accelerating disadvantage? What should be done about that? Do we need to provide non-digital alternatives alongside MyGovID during the bridging period for skills? That is a short-term question, and I ask it in the context of my membership of the Joint Committee on Employment Affairs and Social Protection. We have seen that accelerating of digital requirements.

We are policymakers, and policy consists always of decisions as to how we live together and the spaces we share. The online space is clearly a space we now share. Big debates are happening at the macro level which relate to exactly the work the witnesses talked about. The online space is not simply something that is happening; it is being created and driven. There is, for example, the general data protection regulation at a European level, with the idea that people's data and information belong to them. The web accessibility directive came in in September. This is the idea that websites should be usable by people, including those with a disability, at a basic level. There are these positive drivers and elements, which should be empowering. It is a matter of that route from digital literacy to digital empowerment. It is almost that we have this huge gap to bridge but we have quite far to go. I ask the witnesses to comment on how we go from digital literacy to digital empowerment. I ask this because we need people; it is not simply that people need these skills for employment. I was very interested to hear the witnesses' comments on employment. Again, I sit on the Joint Committee on Employment Affairs and Social Protection, and through the Chair I might find an opportunity to bring a complementary discussion to that committee on employment and the future of work. We need our social processes, decisions, policies and so on to reflect the diversity of society. We as policymakers need people to be digitally empowered.

The witnesses might build further on the question of the algorithmic bias. How do we ensure transparency for people in respect of how they are being algorithmically targeted? How do we ensure the push on diversity within that? There are also a few really practical things. One thing I would like the witnesses to comment on is community development. I was pleased to hear that much of it seems to be grants-driven. That is important and appropriate in order that we are not simply giving people a particular digital skill for a particular digital job which may exist now but might not exist or be relevant in six months' time but that we are giving people those slightly deeper needs-based skills. I think Dr. Mathers identified that people need to identify their needs, hopes and ambitions for the online space. How do we then make sure their needs drive it and that we have enough flexibility in the funding that is going to the grass roots? Perhaps the witnesses could talk about that. It is not just a matter of reaching out to tell everybody about a course they can do in order that they can get a job; it is a case of listening upwards a little more. I ask witnesses to comment on that.

I can see that there is some funding. It clearly needs to be scaled up immensely in the short term, given that Ireland is 10% behind the rest of Europe. One area I have identified, and it is an issue I have highlighted before in a couple of other fora and which complements the GDPR, is that we are now facing a period when Ireland will in fact, through our data protection law, be issuing some of the largest fines under data protection legislation and the GDPR. I suggest that a portion of that funding be ring-fenced for digital empowerment. That would be a way of including, as I said, a positive circular dynamic in order that it is not simply a matter of grants from companies and so forth but a matter of the fines going back into skilling people up to be more aware. Ms Waters mentioned the issue of people's own digital safety and digital empowerment, that they are able to mind their data and that we could remove a lot of the fear of engaging. This is a comment for Mr. Morrissey. When we talk about fear, there is fear that is justified and then fear that needs to be overcome. People can be apprehensive about their own skills and we must give them the encouragement to overcome that. Then there is also the matter of people being given the confidence and skills to be able to mind their own safety. When we go to the United States we see people taking out insurance against identity theft. People are just in a state of fear there and literally take out insurance in case their identify is stolen because they do not have the relevant skills. In Europe we have tools that people can use to guard and protect their digital footprint and their digital safety online. People feel able to use those and make them meaningful for themselves.

Those are just some of the areas I would love the witnesses to comment on. This is a hugely important area for all of us. We will come back to it, as I said. I might try to have a complementary discussion on employment, which I have not focused on. We have a committee on employment and I would love this to be a part of the debate on the future of work because it intersects with the four-day week and all those ideas of rethinking work in a positive way. I have talked enough so I will leave it at that.