Terry Leyden (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister, Deputy Shatter, to the House. He has been in the Seanad more often than any other Minister. I also welcome the departmental officials who have scrutinised the directive. They, along with our ambassador, represent the views of the Department in the European Union.

The proposal for the passenger name record, PNR, directive is the result of much consultation and communication between the European Commission and the European Council through theJustice and Home Affairs Committee. Thereafter the European Parliament contributed to the policy in the shape of the Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee. Opinions were also submitted from the Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee and Transport and Tourism Committee.

At a national level, the directive has been considered most carefully by 14 member states through their parliamentary scrutiny procedures. Countries such as the United Kingdom, France, Portugal, Italy, Belgium and Poland have in some shape or form thoroughly examined the terms of the directive. At this juncture it is important to note that many countries have also chosen not to examine the issue, and in certain cases scrutiny is in progress.

The Joint Committee on European Scrutiny, of which I was a member together with Senator Burke, the then Senator Alan Kelly and the late Senator Kieran Phelan, studied the 2007 Council framework. I am aware that the 2007 framework proposal, which had not been adopted by the Council, became obsolete on the introduction of the 2009 treaty on the functioning of the European Union. The framework document takes into account the views expressed by the member states in Council discussions on the draft framework decision as well as the recommendations of the European Parliament as stated in its resolution of 20 November 2008 and the opinion of the European data protection supervisor.

The Joint Committee on European Scrutiny report, dated 13 November 2008, feeds into this very process. The work of the committee under its Chairman, the now Minister of State, Deputy John Perry, was very comprehensive. It is, I believe, a highly accessible and comprehensive analysis of central issues of the directive, and is an example of the good work of the two Houses in the context of our role in the European Union. I will refer to the report throughout my contribution.

I wish to make a number of observations on the directive. The journey the proposal has taken has been transparent and reassuring. It is interesting to recall that at the impact assessment stage of the proposal, the option existed to broaden the PNR framework to include not only "the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious crime", but also the addendum of "other policy objectives".I am glad to see this was discounted as in my mind it would be vague, open to future interpretation and disproportionate.

As national parliamentarians and advocates of the European Union, we are charged with communicating fairly and effectively the complexities and nuances of our membership. The Irish Times today reports a Sinn Féin Deputy as stating in yesterday's Dáil debate on the matter that the PNR procedure "would mean passengers would be subjected to extensive tracking, tracing and screening procedures". This is always a danger and I know that, as someone who advocates human rights, the Minister will be very careful in this regard. The Deputy was right to bring these issues to the attention of the Minister in the other House.

It is made explicit that the assessment criteria to be employed by the national authorities in respect of the passenger name record shall in no circumstances be based on a person's race or ethnic origin, religious or philosophical belief, political opinion, trade union membership, health or sexual life. I know the Minister is very conscious of this and that the Department is very aware of it. Put simply, the PNR directive relates to information of passengers as they interact with at least one European member state and a third country. There has been discussion on broadening this matter to include internal flights of the European Union. The Joint Committee on European Scrutiny commented as to how this might contribute to the perception of a European surveillance society, where private space is increasingly restricted. I would welcome a detailed consideration as to how the proposed internal aspect of this would be put in place.

When considering the PNR issue, the joint committee held an exchange of views with the then Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Data Protection Commissioner. It also invited views from Aer Lingus, Ryanair and Aer Arann. In his detailed submission to the joint committee, the Data Protection Commissioner indicated there is a delicate balance to be struck with regard to reasonable and proportionate measures to counter violence perpetuated against innocent people, but he further suggested that such measures should represent a proper balance between the need to combat such illegality and the rights of the innocent majority to go about their daily lives without any undue interference by the state. Based on his submission, the committee did not believe that the principle of proportionality was satisfied. I would welcome clarification from the Data Protection Commissioner on this position having regard to the directive before the House. I would welcome clarification on the Communitydefinition of "serious crime" and a Communityinterpretation of the term "terrorism", lest there be a technical difference to its natural meaning.

I look forward to considering the directive when it is finalised and to contributing to its implementation through the House in the coming years if I am fortunate enough to be re-elected. As someone who uses airports, I find the principle is to protect passengers from terrorism and that is what the directive is about. Those who go about their work in an honest and law-abiding way have nothing to fear from the directive. It is an inconvenience to take off one's shoes or belt in an airport, but these measures are for one's protection and the protection of other passengers. People must bear it in mind and arrive earlier at airports to ensure they comply with security requirements. We have seen attempts to put bombs in watches and shoes. Terrorists will use every effort to promote their views and very attractive publicity is attached to attacks on airplanes.

I am concerned about air safety control the United States where it seems people sleep on the job and place the President's wife in jeopardy, but this is not the Minister's responsibility. In Ireland we have a high standard of air traffic controller but it seems to be getting lax in the United States. The Government should consider interaction and co-operation between air traffic controllers.