Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am happy to speak on this Bill and particularly on amendments Nos. 14 and 15. Amendment No. 14 reads:

In page 28, after line 34, to insert the following:"Micro-targeting and profiling of children

30. It shall be an offence under this Act for any company or corporate body to process the personal data of a child as defined by section 29 for the purposes of direct marketing, profiling or micro-targeting. Such an offence shall be punishable by an administrative fine under section 140.".

While I accept the argument underpinning that amendment, I have to point out that fines often do not mean an awful lot to big technology companies. They are so wealthy and have so much turnover that fines often do not punish them in a proper way. It is probable that "punish" is the wrong word, so I will say instead that fines do not have much of an impact on their balance sheets. Amendment No. 15, in the names of Deputies Sherlock, O'Callaghan and Thomas Byrne, reads:

In page 29, line 2, to delete "13 years" and substitute "16 years".

As we all know, the issue of data protection must be addressed as we contend with the ever-expanding powers of social media platforms and online companies. Deputy Donnelly has referred to the impact of the decision made by Google and Facebook to shut down certain activities during the ongoing referendum campaign. It is strange that they have not made the same decision when other elections have been taking place across Europe since the 2016 US election. I have issues in that regard.

In an article in the Irish Independentlast week, Charlie Weston provided an excellent example of the issues we are talking about when he revealed that "the AIB banking group has been accused of playing Big Brother with its customers after it emerged that it spies on customers' social media accounts". I remind the Minister that we owned over 90% of this bank after we bailed it out some years ago. Mr. Weston pointed out that "the lender is trawling through Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and other social media accounts held by customers for comments on its service". As the service is now pretty unfriendly to customers, the comments are not going to be very good. When one tries to meet a teller, one has to deal with a machine. Mr. Weston's article continued:

The bank tells customers that the move "helps us understand your behaviour" [how ironic]. As part of the mortgage application process, customers are now required to sign a consent form, which gives permission for a range of things, such as a credit check, to be carried out on them and to allow their social media accounts to be looked at by the bank. It applies to those seeking mortgages with AIB [which does not give many of them anyway] and its subsidiaries, EBS and Haven. AIB Group is 71pc-owned by the State and is the Republic's biggest mortgage lender. Mortgage broker Karl Deeter accused the bank of invading the privacy of customers by spying on them. He said: "I'm confident that people would not be comfortable knowing that the bank can play Big Brother with their social media information." Mr Deeter, of Irish Mortgage Brokers, said it wasn't clear if someone who posts on Facebook that they attend the likes of anti-eviction protests would end up having a mortgage application refused if the bank was to see this.

Of course such an application would be refused because the bank would have to help its friends.

In my capacity as a Member of the Oireachtas, I recently attended an excellent briefing provided by Dr. Mary Aiken and Professor Barry O'Sullivan on the digital age of consent. I would like to quote from an email that was sent by Dr. Aiken on behalf of herself and Professor O'Sullivan this morning:

As you know there will a vote this afternoon regarding the Irish Digital Age of Consent. We take the opportunity to clarify:

- The Digital Age of Consent is about protecting the personal data of children.

- This issue is not about when children can go online.

- Parents have the right to parent their children.

In two years of campaigning on this issue, every parent we have spoken to supports a Digital Age of Consent of 16. I am a Cyberpsychologist, Prof. O'Sullivan is a Data Scientist we are internationally recognised experts in this area - we strongly support 16.

I expect that everyone is coming at this from a different angle, but the email from which I have quoted sets out the factual situation as far as I understand it. The email had to be sent out after very unfair allegations were put in the public domain by opponents of Dr. Aiken and Professor O'Sullivan. After I brought this matter to the attention of those who made the allegations, they sent out an apology and took down the allegations. If they had not done so, they would rightly be dealing with litigation and facing Deputy O'Callaghan or one of his colleagues. One is entitled to one's good name. The email sent by Dr. Aiken and Professor O'Sullivan, in which they say they "believe that the vast majority of parents of Ireland want 16 as a Digital Age of Consent, as do the teachers, the Gardaí and doctors of Ireland", makes it perfectly clear what is at stake here. The harvesting of children's data is not something we should actively encourage and promote, but that is exactly what this Bill will allow. For that reason, as I have said, I will be opposing the Bill and supporting those who are seeking to set the digital age of consent at 16.

See this speech in context