Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I regret that I have been unable to advance matters with Deputies Clare Daly and Wallace since our debate on this issue on Committee Stage when I took the opportunity to explain and put into context the importance of the section. I gave several examples and referred to important statutory enactments such as the Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Act, under which a range of designated persons, such as auditors, property service providers and financial institutions, who know, suspect or have reasonable grounds to suspect, on the basis of information available to them, that another person has been or is engaged in an offence are required to report that knowledge or suspicion or those reasonable grounds to the Garda and the Revenue Commissioners. Under sections 2 and 3 of the Criminal Justice (Withholding of Information on Offences against Children and Vulnerable Persons) Act 2012, it is an offence to withhold any information on offences referred to in that Act. As I stated on Committee Stage, the public interest must be considered in ensuring that we combat threats to public security and crime and do not do anything that might interfere with, jeopardise or compromise a criminal investigation or the prevention of a threat to public security.

This section provides an effective safeguard against excessive use on the basis that further processing is permitted only to the extent that it is both "necessary and proportionate". It is not a case of either-or.

I cannot accept the proposals in amendments Nos. 42 and 45 to remove the reference to special categories of personal data in section 40 and to add a new section, or amendment No. 44, which to my mind would weaken the section to such an extent as to result in difficulties.

Neither can I accept insertion of the words "having regard to the fundamental rights and legitimate interests of the data subject" as an additional threshold in amendment No. 43. We debated this to some extent on Committee Stage. We took the view that there may be unnecessary, uncertain or additional burdens, for example, on a youth worker reporting suspected harm to a child, or on a bank official reporting his or her suspicions that certain transactions might be linked to money laundering or terrorist financing. There are circumstances where the burden imposed by the additional threshold in amendment No. 43 would result in actions not being taken that might otherwise lead to the successful detection, investigation and prosecution of a crime.

It is much the same as on Committee Stage. I am not in a position to advance matters. I do not want to do anything that might weaken the proposal at hand and I am unable to accept amendments Nos. 42 to 45, inclusive, for those reasons.

See this speech in context