Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

—— but it is being pressed. I am not objecting to any of these biometric data being included in the passport. However, this House should have the debate on what biometric data should be included in the future so that we take the decision. Deputy Kathleen Lynch is correct in what she has said about children. We will hand a future Minister the power to demand that whatever biometric data he or she wishes must be included in a passport. If we are to substantially change the way passports are being regulated we might as well get it right now. The Minister of State has said there is no indication from Government that we will include citizens' fingerprints. However, if he believes that eventuality or other biometric indicators such as skin tone is coming down the track, it should be written in clear English that this is what will be included. If there is insufficient scope in the five or six items I mentioned, including iris images, fingerprints, DNA or whatever, we can always amend it later. I am trying to limit it to what exists at the moment unless someone can outline what we need to introduce in the future and say, for example, we need to introduce fingerprint data because the rest of the European Union has done so and it would restrict our movement and that children's safety, which is paramount, would be enhanced. It is not intended to include those under six because it does not work with their fingerprints.

If we are to take that route, where biometric data are listed in the Bill it should be clearly outlined exactly what data are involved, namely the physical characteristics concerning the facial structure. I seek to limit it to that but if the Minister so wishes there is nothing to prevent him, at this late stage or in the Seanad, from expanding beyond that to include fingerprints or whatever. At the very least, this House should be informed when that decision is taken. Under the terms of the Bill, however, the Minister can take that decision by himself or herself and we will not have any way of arguing over it in future.

See this speech in context