Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

There is much that is useful in amendment No. 7 and it offers some constructive proposals to ensure that there is clarity regarding the independence of the process. However, I do not think it is worded as well as it might be. I have concerns about the phrase "and if asked shall not answer", which is quite different from not being obliged to answer. I do not want people to be penalised for answering a question in good faith. The phrase "shall not provide in connection with that application any information relating to the person’s political opinions or religious or philosophical beliefs" is reasonable but it is important to think it through and assess the effect it might have. We would need to ensure that people are not prevented from including things on their CVs, for example. If a layperson is appointed from Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, will that be construed in a certain way? There is a need for nuancing in this amendment to ensure that it does not gut the CVs of those who may have worked for trade unions or other such organisations. A little bit of thought needs to go into how the amendment may be interpreted. I accept it in principle. It is constructive, and we need to make sure that an applicant is not obliged to answer rather than "shall not answer". I share some of the concerns my colleague has expressed around a stigmatising framing in some of the language that is being used around persons in this process.

On Report Stage we may table a further complementary amendment. The key point is how the commission operates once it is in place. In that regard, as Senator Norris stated, many judges are not at all backwards in coming forward about their political or other views. The commission will have representatives of the solicitors' body and representatives of the barristers, and it may be useful if we have a complementary amendment to make it clear that everybody who is on the commission will operate in a clear way that is not in any way related to a political or other agenda. It is important for all members of the commission to be clear in that regard. I recognise that many of the positions will not be applied for, but they exist by virtue of the role people are in. In terms of the general operation, it is something we could usefully address.

The PAS has clear guidelines. Many of these issues would be dealt with, and could complementarily be dealt with during the he PAS processes. In any case, under data protection laws it would be inappropriate to deal with a person's political, religious or indeed trade union affiliation. They are special categories of personal data, and there are strict European rules around the circumstances under which they could be used. That is not to say I am not happy to support this amendment, but it intersects with two existing laws, namely the general data protection regulation, GDPR, and the PAS legislation.