Peter Power (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)

Under section 4(1)(d) data retained for the purposes of the Act must be destroyed by the service providers at the end of the two-year and one-year periods for retention of telephony and Internet data, respectively. The one exception is data that have been accessed and preserved. The wording complies fully with Article 17 of the directive. The amendment seeks to add to that data which are the subject of a request by law enforcement authorities. The amendment is unnecessary for two reasons. First, section 4(1) (d) places an obligation to destroy data that have been retained under section 3, namely, data that would have been the subject of a request under section 6 - in other words data that have been accessed and preserved. Therefore, what the amendment seeks to achieve is already catered for.

Second, retained data must be destroyed by the service providers after two years in respect of telephony data and 12 months in respect of Internet data. The question arose when the Bill was being prepared as to what would happen to data that might be requested, say, an hour before they were due to be destroyed and could not be disclosed in the short time available. I am assured that rarely, if ever, has this happened under the existing arrangements but nonetheless it was considered prudent to cater for such an eventuality. Section 4(1)(d) provides for a grace period of one month after the retention period has expired for data to be destroyed. This allows sufficient time to arrange for the destruction of data and for any late requests within the specified times for data to be disclosed.

Both the service providers and the law enforcement authorities have expressed their satisfaction with this arrangement. As this arrangement deals adequately with the intent of the amendment, this is not necessary and there is no need for me to include it in the Bill.

See this speech in context