Patrick O'Donovan (Limerick County, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The Senator is right that the definition of data sharing in section 8 is quite wide. If I came here with a narrow definition, I am sure we would be having a different debate and Senators would be arguing that the Minister was trying to restrict what was covered by the Bill for the purpose of the establishment of data sharing agreements between agencies and was doing so to suit himself. The reason we have not done so is to make sure we capture everything that can be properly constituted as data sharing, which includes the disclosure of information and personal data by a public body to another public body. The definition is wide because it should be.

The Senator proposes changing the definition of data sharing which is set out in section 8 and used throughout the Bill. It would have a consequential impact on section 18 which specifies the information that shall, at a minimum, be set out in a data-sharing agreement. The purpose of section 8 is to provide a definition of data sharing. This provision does not set out the processes under which data may be shared. In addition, sections 12(1) and 14(1) set out the conditions under which data sharing may take place in the context of national and EU law.

We have, as I said, set out a wide definition of data sharing to ensure all forms of data sharing that may be carried out by public bodies will be captured and, therefore, regulated by the legislation. If the definition was limited, as the Senator is proposing, it would mean that other forms of data sharing not captured by the proposed definition would not be subject to the governance and other provisions of the Bill such as the limitations on processing set out in section 12 and the requirements for formal data-sharing agreements and associated consultation, scrutiny and transparency provisions, as I mentioned. I do not think that is what the Senator intended.

Section 18 specifies the information which shall, at a minimum, be included in a data-sharing agreement. Among other things, it provides that public bodies must set out the purpose, function and legal basis for sharing and processing the data concerned and specify what data are to be disclosed and how they will be processed. Notwithstanding that the requirements for the content of the agreements are comprehensive, section 18(2) gives the Minister the power to prescribe additional information that must be included in a data-sharing agreement, if required.

The Senator’s amendment to section 18 is very technical. People want to know what data are held and why, what they are being used for, for how long they will be held, who is going to use them and what internal processing works will be used. I appreciate the Senator's comments, but, on reflection, her amendment would overly complicate the agreements we have set out in the provisions of the Bill. On that basis, I encourage her to consider withdrawing it.