Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)

I move amendment No. 13:

In page 7, line 34, after "place" to insert the following:

"and may authorise interference with private property for the purpose of installing

or operating such surveillance device without the consent of the owner of such

property".

As I understand it, we are not conferring powers of surveillance on the Garda. It already has that power. We are seeking to regulate it and make material so gathered admissible in evidence. The purpose of the Bill is to regulate surveillance, as distinct from authorising it. In that regard, I argued on Committee Stage that there is a lacuna in the Bill as it stands, insofar as while it regulates the act of surveillance and, to some extent, entry onto private property, it does not regulate interference with private property. I drew attention to the fact that the UK legislation, which I have glanced at since, expressly does so.

I do not know why it is not necessary for us to do it, which was the point of my intervention on the previous amendment. The Minister said it is for the avoidance of doubt, which I anticipated he might say, and I understand that. However, I would have thought that for the avoidance of doubt we would need to take care that the provision expressly regulates interference with property. We caught sight of a note prepared for the Minister for Government earlier, which drew attention to the problem of malicious damage. Notwithstanding that, we are not seeking to address it. I tried to address this on Committee Stage. I will not delay the House on it, but I thought for the avoidance of doubt the Minister should take it on board.

See this speech in context