Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 10, between lines 14 and 15, to insert the following:"(6) A specified body may not make presentation of a public service card or access to a person’s public service identity the sole or exclusive basis by which a person may confirm their identity in order to conduct a transaction or access a service.".

The amendment is on the public services identity card. Again, there is a fundamental tension in the Bill between sections 6 and 12 and I will address the same issue in each of these sections. The amendment proposes that a "specified body may not make presentation of a public service card or access to a person's public service identity the sole or exclusive basis by which a person may confirm their identity in order to conduct a transaction or access a service." It relates to a concern that has arisen regarding the public services card or, more specifically, the public service identity data set. I am a member of the Joint Committee on Employment Affairs and Social Protection which has considered this issue in detail. Experts in data protection and the Department have made presentations to the committee. We are awaiting a report from the Data Protection Commissioner who is considering the now notorious issue of whether the public services card is compulsory but not mandatory or mandatory but not compulsory. The issue is whether it is appropriate to make the presentation of a public services card and-or public service identity data set number, which are effectively the same thing, the only basis by which a person may confirm his or her identity. A number of challenges have been made to this requirement. One such challenge was made by a pensioner who was denied a pension on this basis took a challenge. We now know that persons have been denied child benefit or, potentially, denied student grants on this basis. In all cases where challenges have been made, the body in question has backed down because the provision does not yet have legal standing.

Alternative ways to prove identity is required, specifically for persons who are not happy to share their data in the new public service data identity set, which is under investigation. I acknowledge that many people will choose to use their public services card, which is their prerogative, and many will choose to use the public service identity data set. However, the Data Protection Commissioner is undertaking a section 10 investigation into a number of issues concerning the public service identity data set, including storage, access and whether the data is adequately secure. I have listed only some of the issues that are being considered. In the absence of a clear, strong assurance that the conditions regarding storage are satisfactory and meet the required standards, we should not force anybody to engage with the public services card or make it the only means by which essential services can be accessed.

My amendments to sections 6 and 12 simply suggest that the public services card and public service identity data set should be a non-mandatory means by which a person may verify his or her identity. They provide that people can use this means and share data for certain purposes. If an individual finds it wonderfully convenient to use his or her public services card, so be it but he or she should not be forced to do so. The amendments provide a reasonable middle way whereby the data set can be used but other options are made available. I hope they will be accepted by the Minister of State.