Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The Minister described the two Bills which introduce Eircodes as belt-and-braces legislation. This is a much more appropriate description of the intuitive and open approach that Britain is taking to changes in its postcode system. Its objective is to facilitate members of the emergency services in locate houses and commercial entities in delivering goods. This Bill, however, is different as it groups information in a way that makes it a commodity, which I would not describe as a belt-and-braces approach.

On the issue of how an individual can practically ensure that he or she is protected and his or her information is not misused, it will be difficult for an individual to prove that damage has been done.

The primary function with regard to data protection is with the company itself in this instance. The Data Protection Commissioner is the second line of defence as I see it. The consultation is where the big flaw occurred. The consultation process should have been much more open to citizen engagement. There is a fetish in both the Government and Civil Service for secrecy for its own sake yet there is a cavalier approach to data protection as we saw with PPS numbers and Irish Water. This was a secondary consideration. If it was not, why is the Bill before the House at this point? Why was this not a central part of the initial legislation?

See this speech in context