Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

My concern is the unintended consequences of the deletion of section 51(b)(ii), which is the import of the amendment. An example of a consequence that I am sure is unintended is it would facilitate wrongdoing and fraud. Section 51 gives further effect to Article 22 of the GDPR, which deals with automated processing of personal data, including profiling. Paragraphs 2(a) and (c) have direct effects. Section 51 ensures an appropriate level of safeguards by requiring that any automated processing must be authorised or required by or under an enactment and, furthermore, that the effect of any decision is to either grant a request of the data subject or that adequate steps have been taken to safeguard the interests of the data subject. The section makes clear that these steps must include an arrangement whereby the data subject has the opportunity to make representations in respect of an intended decision. This means, in the first place, that a data subject has to be informed of any proposal to make such a decision and, second, have the opportunity to bring concerns to the attention of the data controller. It is important that these safeguards are compliant with the requirements of Article 22. If I accepted the amendment, there would be unintended consequences that could give rise to difficulty in practice.