Dr. Fred Logue:

I think there should be just one DPC. The benefit of expanding the commissioner level is because of the different skill sets. One needs either a very experienced lawyer or somebody with judicial experience to get the quasi-judicial side, at least, back on track. The procedure is not proper quasi-judicial procedure. There are no hearings, no evidence on oath and no engagement between the parties. It is very protracted paper-based decision-making.

The Workplace Relations Commission, WRC, holds 20 hearings a day and deals with a raft of employment and equality legislation. The WRC has much more coverage than the DPC yet it can manage to do this. The DPC has talked about amicable resolution. I have never figured out what that is, apart from the DPC telling people to ask a second time for the stuff they have already been told they cannot get. The RTB says it gets rid of a quarter of its cases based on telephone mediation conducted by professional mediators. The RTB and WRC are not exactly the same thing, but those two bodies are proof that the concept works. Given that the DPC is supposed to have expertise in data protection law, it grates when one hears the DPC say that data protection is very complex. It does not give us confidence that our regulator and adjudicator is fit for purpose when it thinks data protection is complex. It is not that complex, in my view. It is complex because the scales might be tipped back in favour of ordinary people. That is not complexity. It might upset powerful interests, particularly within the State or big business, but that is what the GDPR and the regulator are supposed to do.