Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, RISE) | Oireachtas source

People Before Profit will not be supporting this Bill. We are opposed to any attempt to use the current crises, including the growth of quite horrifying anti-refugee protests, influenced by racist and far-right ideas, as an excuse to add another layer to the powers and scope of policing in this State. I listened to the Minister and most of the Opposition speakers express broad support for the Bill. That was generally couched in terms of how transformative this new technology can be in freeing up gardaí, saving thousands of hours of Garda time and revolutionising policing. We should be clear and honest that body cameras, greater use of drone footage, CCTV or especially facial recognition technology will not do any of those things. They will not revolutionise policing for the better. I can predict very confidently that if this Bill is passed, we will still be back here in the same sort of position in two or three years' time with another list of requests for greater powers, laws and resources and with the same promise that it is only with these ones that we will actually be able to change the game and have an impact on crime and so on.

It is the rhetoric we always hear about extra powers being given and new laws on special criminal courts, public order Acts, etc. In this case, the promise is that technology will save us, if only we use it. There is no evidence for that. In fact, and particularly for facial recognition technology, it comes with very significant question marks over it and very significant problems from international evidence. There is a growing worldwide movement that is resisting it and pointing out the harm and damage that can result from it. We have the benefit of being able to look and learn from other states before we make this very retrograde and disastrous move.

It is shocking that the Minister, and in particular the Green Party, seem determined to ignore the evidence of the harm that this can do. It is extraordinary that we are told the Minister will bring an amendment on Committee Stage to facilitate facial recognition technology, therefore avoiding any real pre-legislative scrutiny of such a major change and development because it comes in at such a late stage. The ICCL has pointed out that neither facial recognition technology nor ANPR were in the general scheme of the Bill and, as such, were not subjected to pre-legislative scrutiny.

I want to comment in more detail on the proposed amendments the Minister says he will introduce on facial recognition technology. I will refer at some length to the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU, on this. It has experience of facial recognition technology and a very strong attitude to it. It says these technologies threaten our privacy and free speech rights. It also says that when they are used by police and immigration enforcement, they serve as yet another dangerous system to abuse black and brown people on a massive scale. The ACLU says big tech companies are profiting from these abuses because they are the ones developing and selling facial recognition to Government agencies. It also states that it is their communities, in particular communities of colour, that face the harmful consequences. The union maintains that it knows first-hand how tech companies collaborate with immigration and law enforcement agencies to build large-scale surveillance tools that facilitate and fuel racist systems that harm both immigrants and US citizens.

The ACLU believes facial recognition technology is racist from how it was built to how it is used. It states that it has been used by police departments to wrongfully arrest black men by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ICE, and Customs and Border Protection, CBP; to target and track immigrant families; and by the FBI to surveil Black Lives Matter demonstrators exercising their first amendment rights.

The ACLU maintains that facial recognition massively expands the government's power to track movements and target people based on their race, religion, political affiliation or speech. It suggests that while everyone's rights are at stake, black and brown people are harmed the most when this racist technology collides with our racist systems. In the words of Amnesty International:

...facial recognition risks being weaponized by law enforcement against marginalized communities around the world. From New Delhi to New York, this invasive technology turns our identities against us and undermines human rights.

The ICCL points out in its briefing that in Belgium, Luxembourg and Morocco, facial recognition technology is banned or greatly restricted. In the US, cities that have banned police use of facial recognition technology include Boston, Oakland, Portland and San Francisco.

In the UK, huge questions have emerged about the accuracy of the technology, with studies in some cities suggesting 80% inaccuracy in the application of facial recognition technologies. Given all of this, the Minister's unquestioning support for it is baffling. We agree with the ICCL statement that facial recognition technology has no place in Irish policing. Despite this, we are told that this technology will save us. It is particularly ironic that it is touted as some sort of response to racist and far-right attacks on refugees, when globally it is recognised as contributing to racist policing and the targeting of vulnerable minorities.

I am not reassured by bland guarantees of oversight and safeguards because the truth is we have a consistent problem with holding gardaí in this State to account. I remember the late Dara Quigley, who was an articulate, powerful writer and campaigner on many issues. I worked alongside her in particular on water charges. The sharing of her image by the Garda when she was in a clearly distressed state has never been properly investigated nor anyone held to account. Similarly, the history of GSOC investigating abuses and errors in policing in this State does not inspire confidence in any oversight or accountability when this new technology is rolled out.

Given the body of evidence globally on facial recognition technology, how it is being misused and abused, how inaccurate it is and how it seems to be pushed by big tech companies in their own interests, it is unconscionable that the Green Party in particular, which has an on-paper commitment to civil liberties, can support this. If Green Party Members had any principles left, they would oppose it and refuse to support any amendment that the Minister brings to facilitate this. The real problems communities face, such as antisocial activity, drug crimes and violence against persons, in particular against women, cannot be addressed solely by a policing response, and they cannot be addressed by some magic new technology. For that reason, we will not support the Bill.

See this speech in context