Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)

The sharing of passenger name record data is important for the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of serious crimes, such as drug-related offences and human trafficking, as the Minister has outlined. This information forms part of the broader management of our borders. International co-operation in the fight against crime is crucial. The sharing of this information is a key aspect of that. These motions relate to agreements between the EU and the Schengen-associated countries of Iceland and Norway on the transfer of passenger name record data for law enforcement purposes. Sinn Féin will not be opposing these motions.

I note, however, that while it may be appropriate in this case to opt in under Article 3, it is crucial that the Protocol 21 annexe to the Lisbon treaty is not abandoned or watered down by always opting in under Article 3, as it appears the Minister has got into the habit of doing, when the option of Article 4 is available to Ireland. Indeed, the option of not opting in is there too and may sometimes be in our best interest. While this particular proposal may be clear and straightforward, we have seen the Government push through many Article 3 opt-ins where it is not clear that the final proposal will actually be in our best interests. I will make no apologies for saying that Ireland's national interests must always take precedence over whatever the wider EU interest may be. In the areas of freedom, security and justice, Protocol 21 allows us to opt in or out based on our national interests. It is crucial that we do so.

When passenger name record information is shared, it is also crucial that there is the right balance between the protection of privacy and other fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals alongside the important rationale for these data-sharing agreements in the first place. The holding of any such data must be necessary, proportionate and subject to limitations. It is also important to note - and I will ask the Minister some questions that he may answer in his closing remarks - that Ireland is an island nation. We know that there is considerable travel in and out of the Irish State by ferry as well as by air. Given that the sharing of passenger name record data is designed to prevent, detect, investigate and prosecute serious crimes, it appears to be an anomaly that this does not apply in the same manner to ferry passengers. It could be argued that this may in fact encourage those seeking to evade PNR to take the ferry. Does the Minister have any detail on whether this anomaly is having an impact on what PNR is designed to address, namely, as part of efforts to disrupt and catch those involved in criminality? Does he have any concerns that those involved in these activities are actually more likely to enter or exit the State by ferry in order to avoid monitoring through the collection of this data? Are there any plans at a national level for the collection of passenger name record data of those travelling in and out of the country by ferry?

The discussion on passenger name record data is a good opportunity to address the ongoing systemic failure of our migration system when it comes to dealing with those who do not have an entitlement to remain in the State, our ability to ensure that they leave and, just as important, to know that they have left. Passenger recognition data is used at present as part of the process to verify whether a person who is not entitled to remain in the State as a result of a negative decision in the international protection system or upon the expiration of visitor permission has left the jurisdiction. They are important questions because we have a significant problem whereby authorities do not know how many of those who are not entitled to remain in the State have left and how many are still here. This is a significant problem. While the situation is undoubtedly complicated by the common travel area, it is an issue that still needs to be addressed. We have had a lot of discussions with the Minister. He has spoken about the number of measures that he has taken, but the truth is that the system remains chaotic and crisis-ridden.

This week, we saw shocking revelations about the connections between criminality and some of those profiteering from the provision of IPAS accommodation. While 2,403 deportation orders were issued in 2024, just 162 deportations proceeded. This year, 2,330 deportation orders have been issued, while just 202 deportations have occurred. We are told that a total of 1,045 people departed from the State under various mechanisms such as enforced deportation or voluntary returns so far this year, but this is less than half of the number of deportation orders that have actually been issued to date.

Last week, I received a reply from the Minister to a parliamentary question stating, "it is not possible to accurately provide the number of people who are currently in Ireland subject to deportation orders." That is a problem. While there are no routine exit checks at Irish borders, PNR data should be available to give authorities in this State a clearer idea of who has left the State and the island of Ireland. It is my understanding that PNR data is used by Irish and British authorities when co-operating to maintain the security of the common travel area and to track cross-border criminality. Is PNR data being used and shared to help get a clearer position of who of those subject to deportation orders have actually left the island of Ireland, particularly given the statement from the Minister in reply to my question that it is "not possible" to know the number of people who have left subject to deportation orders?

Sinn Féin will not be opposing these motions, but I would like to see the Minister address the other related issues that I have raised.

See this speech in context