Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

There are a couple of key arguments to respond to in what the Minister has said. The first is the conditions are too cumbersome and it will mean electronic monitoring will not be selected and therefore it defeats the purpose. I do not accept that. The Judiciary is more than capable of balancing the requirements and the conditions I have put forward. In many ways, it could be argued the Judiciary takes many of these measures into account anyway. That is probably an argument that could be made. I do not accept the idea its members would not be capable of taking on board the list of requirements in the legislation. They are more than qualified to take a balanced view. I do not see a problem in outlining in legislation factors they would be required to take into account which in many instances they already do. I see them as a safety precaution in instances where the odd member of the Judiciary might not do it.

I will address the Minister's point about the protection being there in terms of data in existing data protection legislation rather than criminal justice and bail legislation. If it is, there is no problem in reiterating it here. It is not causing any problems. It is a case of "to be sure, to be sure" and re-emphasising the situation. I do not see it as a particular problem. There are issues when we look at new forms of data, particularly areas like GPS trackers and so on. The old electronic monitoring systems operated on radio frequency monitoring whereas the new systems have been very much upgraded. There have been some court cases and legal action around some of these issues. As a protection of data, the amendments I have proposed to protect privacy are particularly important so we do not leave the door open for profiteering.

I feel more strenuously about amendment No. 4 because I do not see any basis for a for-profit operator to exist in this area. It should have no part in such an important public service that could be abused. We should take a holistic approach and de-escalate situations. I will definitely be pressing amendment No. 4.

See this speech in context