James Reilly (Dublin North, Fine Gael)

Having listened to the debate, it strikes me that the major problem here is the manner in which this matter has come before the Dáil and the fact that most Opposition Members feel totally uninformed. There is an awful sense of big brother about it and that is of deep concern. People will always get paranoid and upset when they do not have full information. The main problem here is the lack of information relating to this issue and the manner in which it has come before the House. As my colleague, Deputy Simon Coveney, has pointed out, the documentation only arrived in the library late last night and most Deputies have not had a chance to read it. Even if one had it on one's desk this morning, given the other business in the House, one would not have had the time to read such an important document.

I am pro-European and would be the first to say that the benefits to this country of membership of the EU have been enormous. Similarly, we are all aware of the risk from terrorism but despite that, the manner in which this issue has been presented to the Dáil, as a fait accompli, is frightening. It is a frightening example of our sovereignty being undermined. We are being forced to vote on something which most of us have not been able to comprehensively inform ourselves about.

I agree with speakers who referred to the erosion of civil liberties and using the threat of terrorism to justify this. How far are we to go in this regard? Will we end up with our own Guantanamo Bay? I have serious concerns in that regard. What are the guarantees and safeguards for our own citizens, on whom information will be stored? The most important issue in this context is the Freedom of Information Act. Will it be possible, under the terms of that Act, for Irish citizens to access the information that the airlines and the Department of Homeland Security hold on them? That, in effect, would be the greatest reassurance for people, to know they can check the information and ensure it is correct.

We are all familiar with the amount of information that is collected on us, even in the commercial arena, by the banks, for example. If one seeks a loan, not alone does the bank want to know about one's own situation, it also wants to know one's children's age, gender and so forth. One might wonder what such information has to do with obtaining a loan, but the bank is simply profiling one's children to determine whether they might also be in the market for a loan at a future date.

I have serious concerns about this matter. Unless Irish citizens have access to the information held on them, the potential exists for misinformation to be on file, causing serious delay, upset or even wrongful arrest in the United States of America. That has happened before. Indeed, it has happened here also. We must do our utmost to protect our own citizens from potential miscarriages of justice arising from erroneous information being held on file, to which they cannot gain access in order to correct it.

I have ten minutes to speak but I will not need all that time. I simply wish to express my deep concern about the lack of information on this motion and my inability to tell anybody who asks me what safeguards are in place and what the letters of assurance contain. While I do not mean to be derogatory, I am not in any way reassured by the statement that "Such data may only be accessed in response to an identifiable case and on the approval of a senior Department of Homeland Security official designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security". That does nothing to reassure me, even though I consider the United States of America to be a great friend of Ireland. It has also been the greatest protector of democracy in the western world, when times where bad in Europe, with the Iron Curtain and so forth.

The way this document has come before us is totally unsatisfactory. The Minister and the Government have a duty to properly inform the Dáil and reassure us. Perhaps this is all perfectly fine but we do not have the requisite information to know for sure. We must be reassured and there is a lesson in all of this for the Minister. We would not have had such a long debate on this matter had it been handled differently.

See this speech in context