Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

162. To ask the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection if, further to the most recent fine imposed on his Department by the data protection commissioner for deficiencies in compliance with data protection rules, he will provide details of each Government Department or agency that this data was shared with; if he will confirm that the data in question has been deleted by his Department and/or other Departments; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [33107/25]

Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

My Department received a copy of the Data Protection Commission’s (DPC) final decision on the processing of biometric templates in connection with the SAFE registration process on 9th June 2025.

The biometric template created by my Department, as part of the SAFE identity authentication process, is not stored on an individual’s PSC and is not shared with any other Department or organisation. Therefore the question raised by the Deputy does not arise. The data is stored only on a secure database and is used only by my Department’s facial matching system. It should be noted that the DPC did not find any evidence of inadequate technical and organisational security measures and that there are no examples of any person suffering damage or loss as a result of SAFE registration.

The DPC decision does not find that there is no legal provision for the processing involved but that the legal provision that exists is not, in its view, clear and precise enough to satisfy the requirements of GDPR.

The DPC decision allows the Department nine months to identify a valid legal basis. The decision therefore has no immediate implications for the processing of this data, or for users of the PSC or MyGovID or anyone wishing to, register or avail of, these services in the next nine months.

My Department is carefully considering the DPC's decision report in conjunction with colleagues in the Attorney General's Office with a view to determining an appropriate response within the nine month timeframe provided for in the decision.

I hope this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.