Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)

This is a fairly far-reaching measure and I understand the Minister's reasons for introducing it and particularly for ensuring that it is not abused. As we know, existing powers allow for interception, collection and the use of telecommunications data and other forms of data. However, a broader range of powers is being provided for and there seem to be very few safeguards. Section 61(1) states:

Subject to subsections (2) and (4), the Garda Commissioner may request a service provider to retain, for a period of 3 years, traffic data or location data or both for the purposes of—

(a) the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of crime (including but not limited to terrorist offences), or . . .

Prevention of crime is not very well defined and could lead to what is very much characterised as a trawling exercise. The definition is very broad and open to abuse. It could be argued that there is a big brother element. The power to deal with this matter rests with the Garda, the Defence Forces and the service providers and there is no monitoring body directly involved. There is no independent mechanism or forum to deal with the matter. What is the position on a service provider who decides to interfere with the general information that is collected, bearing in mind that we are not talking about interfering with the substance of the material at this point? What controls are there on a service provider once it has retrieved the data retained for three years and which it knows to be sensitive because the Garda or Defence Forces have contacted it? There is always fierce competition within the business community and a great deal of sensitive data passes through electronic and telecommunications networks. Newspapers thrive on private matters and make scandals out of people's lives. How can we control the service providers? What provision is there in this legislation to monitor them?

Monitoring takes place only if there is a complaint and complaints arise only when something goes wrong. How are we to know whether something is going wrong if there is no independent mechanism to monitor the service providers' retention of the data? Will it be stored in such a way that we can be sure it is safe? The Minister has secure accommodation for firearms but what about the data kept for three years? Given that everybody knows it is significant information, it is important to ensure it is safely stored.

I note the role of the Taoiseach in the matter but why has the Minister decided that the report of the findings of a complaint procedure would come to the Taoiseach, although one of the duties of the judge is to the Taoiseach or to the Minister? Would it not be better to give an annual report on how this operates? The Minister could report to the House on how data collection and retention mechanisms operate so that we could see what type of applications come from the Defence Forces, their number and statistics, and what applications come from the data, with statistics on that and how the service provider deals with the applications. We would see what mechanisms for secure safeguarding are in place, how many complaints there are and how many are vexatious or frivolous. What constitutes such a complaint? If one thinks that someone has been interfering with one's data, one is surely entitled to complain but the referee can unilaterally determine it to be frivolous or vexatious.

I have many concerns about this legislation. The Minister indicated that he intended to review it and introduce a more comprehensive Bill when the EU directive is available for implementation. It would be useful to know how long this legislation will remain in place in its present form.

The Minister says he did not have much influence in the matter but this material should have been before us on Second Stage for a proper debate and the Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights could have teased it out at an oral hearing. In that way we could have examined the provisions to see whether they are commensurate with our other international commitments and civil liberties and so on. Will the Minister provide more information and will he consider putting further safeguards in place?

See this speech in context