Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE GOVERNMENT’S CHIEF Information Officer told other senior civil servants that the Data Protection Commissioner used “evidence from those with an agenda against the [Public Services] Card” in her landmark report on the legality of the card.
In August, the Data Protection Commissioner found that there was no legal basis to make the PSC mandatory for anything other than welfare and that there was no legal basis for the State to retain the personal data of people who apply for the card.
The government, however, has rejected these findings and indicated it will not be complying with the findings and will fight the matter in court if required.
The PSC project, which has cost over €60 million to date, has seen more than 3 million people in Ireland issued with a card. Despite the negative finding against the government, civil servants have been tasked with looking at expanding the scope of the card including the possibility of using it to replace the medical card in future.
The government has been accused of damaging Ireland’s reputation through its refusal to comply with the Data Protection Commissioner’s findings but has claimed it has “incredibly strong” legal advice on the validity of its position regarding the PSC.
In documents released to TheJournal.ie and its investigative platform Noteworthy.ie under the Freedom of Information Act, internal communications at the two main government departments responsible for the PSC highlight reactions to the Data Protection Commissioner’s report.
Barry Lowry, the government’s chief information officer who works out of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, in an email to other civil servants singles out a particular section of the Data Protection Commissioner’s report.
The section reads: “However, the DPC considers that such criticisms concerning the use of the PSC have been well documented in newspaper reports, civil society reports and the Oireachtas reports.”
In an attached footnote, the report highlights almost two dozen sources – including seven articles from TheJournal.ie as well as other news sources - to support the assertion that criticisms of the PSC had been well documented.
Lowry wrote to colleagues that it was “curious” the Data Protection Commissioner was using evidence from those “with an agenda against the card” over a public consultation carried out by the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection.
Lowry references an article in the Irish Times as “particularly interesting because it seeks to scare the reader about the PSC by assessing the application of national identity schemes in other parts of the world”.
The article in question from January 2018 highlights the lack of transparency around the PSC and asks why it is being brought in for more and more services with little in the way of public discussion. In the Data Protection Commissioner’s final report on the PSC in August this year, the government’s lack of transparency around the card was also criticised.
Lowry attacks the Irish Times for a “lack of balance” in the article in question and added that “one cannot help but… also question the DPC’s judgement and understanding in quoting it”.
In light of the government’s refusal to comply with the findings of the report, the next step for the Data Protection Commissioner is to initiate enforcement proceedings which could eventually see the matter come to court.
In a letter to the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection at the beginning of September, Data Protection Commissioner Helen Dixon said that it is “both necessary and appropriate” to take that course of action given the government’s stance on the issue.
With additional reporting from Ken Foxe and the team at Noteworthy.ie – find out more about their work here.
Dear Lord, going by the headline I thought an Irish technician was lost in space.
@Shelly Levine: headline used to read “with Irish tech onboard”
Thay must be absolutely gutting for all involved. At least it’s only stuff.
Landing on the moon seemed to be so easy in the 60’s and proves so new and difficult now. Think we should refer to Hollywood /nasa for answers.
@Murph11: Easy in the 60′s? I suggest you read up on the Apollo program – nothing easy about it.
@Murph11: The Apollo program required the development of new technologies and systems that had never been created before. These included the Saturn V rocket, the Lunar Module, the guidance and navigation systems, and the spacesuits worn by the astronauts.
There were many technical challenges that had to be overcome, such as the need to land on a surface with little to no atmosphere, the need to rendezvous and dock in space, and the need to provide life support for the astronauts for extended periods of time.
There were significant risks involved, including the possibility of catastrophic failure of the spacecraft and the potential for the astronauts to be stranded on the moon.
Despite these challenges and risks, the Apollo program was successful in landing astronauts on the moon six times between 1969 and 1972, thanks to the dedication, ingenuity, and hard work of thousands of scientists, engineers, and other personnel involved in the program.
The reasons we haven’t gone back are several: cost; lack of public interest; other priorities; technical challenges; lack of funding; and a few other things.
It’s only now there’s renewed interest in space travel as it’s becoming more mainstream and funded privately by private companies.
Interesting times – the work set out in 1960s has paved the way.
@Murph11: Glad you shared your level of intelligence with us.
@Rafa C: A knowledgable comment and excellent .I think those 60s flights gave us Teflon ,titanium and some other everyday substances if I’m not mistaken .Maybe you could fill us in about those .This mission may not have been entirely successful but it had a serious scientific purpose unlike that wild vanity effort by Elon Musk .
Omg not the irish samples….NOT THE IRISH SAMPLES DEAR GOD NOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!! The horror…the horror….
@William slevin: Are you for real?!
@John Kieran G.: Unfortunately I think he is – he seems to only ever be here for a good moan.
@Gavin Conran: and bash everything to do with this land of ours.
Dear God to the people bemoaning me under my original comment…are you that unintelligent to not get it was said tongue in cheek regards the original headline that thejournal.ie has now changed…
As for you Paul furey…your against this land of ours…ask her how she feels about a weak man like you exists upon her…
@William slevin: lol
They were using Patnav for directions
We should have our own independent, socialist,republican space shuttle
Hit a huge Irish pothole maybe?
have your say