Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State. I understand the motivations of the proposer and seconder of this Bill, but I have reservations about it. As I understand it, the Bill seeks "to empower local authorities to authorise the installation and operation of surveillance devices for the purposes of deterring, preventing, detecting and prosecuting certain offences, to provide for exchange of certain data from third party data controllers to local authorities for the purposes of the performance of their functions in relation to such offences", and to provide for other related matters. The experience of the two Senators who are proposing and seconding this Bill is well known. They have been involved and have a great track record in local government. I want to acknowledge that because I think it is important. I know of their work, their commitment and their engagement in local government.

However, we must set some context here. We know, from last week's reports, that Limerick City and County Council was investigated for its use of CCTV, which brought into sharp focus for me issues around the Data Protection Commissioner, DPC. The council was given a fine of €110,000 and a reprimand, and is required to either bring all surveillance into compliance with the data protection law or turn it off entirely. Those are the findings; I had a look at them today. I accept this is an issue of concern for local authorities. As Senator Malcolm Byrne has said, they want to be on the right side of the law. They want whatever CCTV operations they wish to have to comply with legislation, but currently, they do not. In the case of Limerick City and County Council, the DPC found 48 infringements, covering 20 separate articles of the GDPR issues of concern. That is serious. Some of the key points that the Commissioner identified were that there was no precision in terms of the cameras, no joint controller agreements with An Garda Síochána, and no legal basis for the automatic number plate recognition, ANPR. That was just one issue of concern. I know that Senators have spoken about illegal dumping. However, there are other issues and impacts around this. The DPC found that Limerick City and County Council had no legal basis for the monitoring of private dwellings, houses, estates or halting sites. We must deal with that. It is an issue of concern. Councils will now have to review their own CCTV policy. I know that a number of councillors have raised it with their respective chief executives in the last few days and have expressed concerns. Such policies will have to be in line with the protocols to ensure full compliance.

Therefore, this Bill is timely and there is a lot of merit in it, but there are concerns. My concerns in relation to it are that there is an issue around CCTV pilot project schemes. I am concerned about the area of the role of the local authority, but also of the Garda Commissioner in terms of sanction and approval. Ultimately, someone has to take responsibility. Clearly, there is a role and a function for the Garda Commissioner in relation to CCTV. As the Minister of State will be aware, because he is very well-versed in the area, CCTV is a powerful, yet invasive tool in terms of personal data and the tracking of people's movements. Clearly, it can be used to assist in bringing people to justice and dealing with crimes etc., but there are many abuses of it. I have heard reports of CCTV being used in locations in the city of Dublin to track down and monitor sex workers. It has been involved in tracking other activities around universities, tracking people who are involved in certain peaceful demonstrations and engagement. We must protect that too. I know what the Senators introducing the Bill are trying to do but I am also conscious of people's civil rights and civil liberties. The balancing of those rights is a sensitive issue. There may very well be a need for community CCTV and a justification for it but there has to be a strong justification and need for it. It does not have to be ongoing. In my own local authority area, there is temporary CCTV for a period of perhaps a week on a particular hotspot. My point is that there are issues.

I would be interested in further public consultation on this. I am aware that Senator Malcolm Byrne has talked about his extensive engagement with local authorities and members. However, there are issues in relation to retrospective evidence gathering versus real-time surveillance. It is most important. I will repeat that, because it is not just something that I have picked up. I had a conversation with someone who is an expert in the area. There are issues around retrospective evidence gathering versus real-time surveillance. We need to be very careful that CCTV is not being used for profiling particular audiences, groups or segments of people. It cannot be used for targeting people on the basis of some preconceived idea that they are up to something that is not appropriate. There need to be huge constraints in relation to this legislation. I understand that the Minister of State and is Department may have reservations. I would be interested in hearing them. The Minister of State might also confirm that this area is not part of his portfolio. It is my understanding that this issue does not fall within the local government remit.

Those are my thoughts on the matter. While I accept and understand what is trying to be done here, I am deeply concerned about abuses or potential abuses that may take place under this system. I am particularly concerned. I think we must have full cognisance of the findings of the DPC in relation to Limerick City and County Council. There are issues there. We need to examine them and learn from them and see if we can improve it. I acknowledge that it is the Senator's legislation and I am interested in what the Minister of State has to say.