Ollie Crowe (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Broadly speaking, I welcome the Bill. Most if not all members of the committee have spoken in the past about the need to enhance the authority of agencies to enforce competition law and provide greater protection for the consumers. There is a need for effective deterrents in order to ensure compliance with competition law. The power to impose financial penalties is naturally required and very welcome.

I believe there is some concern about the proposed additional powers related to video and audio surveillance. I recognise it is intended that such powers would only be used when investigating serious and criminal breaches of competition law under specific conditions. It is something that was discussed at a committee meeting a couple of weeks ago when Department officials said that it was not envisaged to have such powers without court involvement and oversight. Nonetheless, my understanding is that similar powers in other European jurisdictions have been struck down by courts and the European Courts of Human Rights. I refer, in particular, to a UK case involving the interception of telephone, email and data communications where the European Courts of Human Rights found that there was a violation of Article 8 of the convention as domestic law lacked clarity and did not provide protection against the abuse of power and, I suppose, with the scope or manner of the exercise there was very wide discretion conferred on the authorities. I would also note that the European Competition Network, ECN, directive does contain provision relating to such powers. I have one or two question in light of this. Is it the view that current legislation is sufficiently clear? From my perspective, the Bill does not seem to provide much certainty about which communications could be monitored. My reading is that it is intended that these powers would be used at the investigation stage, so at a point when the persons involved have not breached any laws. Is there a concern that this impacts their fundamental rights at a point when there is no legal charge against them?