Seán Kyne (Galway West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. I also welcome the Minister. The area of judicial and policing matters has always been one of the more contentious issues in the development of the European Union. This can be seen by the arrangement under the Maastricht treaty of a separate pillar for social policy areas and the retention in many areas of the unanimity requirement for decision making. While the configuration changes somewhat under the Lisbon treaty, a number of countries, including Ireland and the UK, have secured opt-outs. For example, neither Ireland nor the UK is a signatory to the Schengen Agreement which removed the internal borders within the Union for the purposes of movement or travel, be it for business or leisure. Our decision to remain outside is perhaps more of a consequence of our geographical location as an island which has of course shaped our history.

For the purposes of crime prevention, however, it would imprudent and unwise for us not to be involved. The various Acts establishing Europol are an indication of closer and mutually beneficial co-operation between the member states of the European Union. This Bill will give effect to the 2009 Europe Council decision. This decision has a number of objectives, notably it will transform Europol from being a separate international institution to one which is at the heart of the European Union, consolidating its role as the European law enforcement agency.

Although the Bill is largely technical, it is necessary to build upon the positive objectives of the Council's decision. With the move to create a single marketplace with free movement for goods, services, people and capital, barriers needed to be broken down. The result after many years of work and effort on the part of thousands of officials across the Union was double-edged. On the one hand the people of Europe enjoy new freedoms never thought possible by their forefathers but, on the other, criminal elements are able to exploit the unintended opportunities.

Crime is increasingly occurring across national borders and this requires greater co-operation between national police forces. If we are to combat criminal trafficking activity successfully, including terrorism, drug smuggling, human trafficking, money laundering and so forth, we need to work together and Europol is the answer. Europol effectively works to provide intelligence and expertise to national police forces in order that member states can act decisively and effectively on the ground. Before detractors and critics of the European project begin to comment on this, I should point out that this Bill has nothing to do with extending the powers of Europol such that it would work like a national police force such as the Garda Síochána. Europol is not like national police forces and I do not believe it is envisaged that it would be such.

Europol cannot make arrests or conduct searches and it can only act at the request of two or more member states. Furthermore, this Bill facilitates an Irish law, the Council decision to lower the threshold for Europol action from having factual information of organised criminal activities to the new threshold of serious criminal offences involving two or more member states. The Bill will see the continuation of Ireland's co-operation with Europol through the information exchanged between our national Europol unit and Garda HQ and Europol HQ at The Hague.

Law enforcement agencies of whatever type or scope, however, must also be subject to checks and balances and I welcome the feature of the Council decision to enhance the role of the European Parliament in the oversight of Europol. Section 14 of the explanatory memorandum confirms that the Data Protection Commissioner will be designated as the national supervisory body under the Bill and will be responsible for independent monitoring in accordance with national law of the management of personal data by the State. The Data Protection Commissioner will fulfil his role in accordance with various provisions of the Data Protection Act. Under sections 8 and 9 it is stated that the Europol information system, EIS, is used to store personal information about people who are convicted or suspected of having committed a crime or in relation to whom it is suspected that they will commit a crime. That might create a certain degree of concern in that it might be a step too far in terms of under what circumstances or what level of proof information might be given across member states regarding an individual who has a right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. I have a slight concern about those sections.

It is interesting to note that Europol will now be funded from the central EU budget rather than the existing method which is based on contributions from member states. Overall, I welcome the Bill and recognise the importance of co-operation among the member states of the European Union in judicial and policing matters.

See this speech in context