Garda Síochána (Recording Devices) (Amendment) Bill 2025: Second Stage

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration (Deputy Jim O'Callaghan)

I am very pleased to be back in the Seanad for the second time today. I cannot, however, guarantee the same level of excitement that took place before my arrival. I am pleased to introduce the Garda Síochána (Recording Devices) (Amendment) Bill 2025 and I look forward to hearing the contributions from Senators.

The Bill before the House amends the Garda Síochána (Recording Devices) Act 2023 and will provide the ability to utilise biometric analysis on a retrospective basis only. This technology is sometimes referred to more generically as facial recognition technology. There are a variety of types of facial recognition technology. One is biometric analysis, while another is biometric identification. Both can be carried out on a retrospective or live basis. What we are dealing with here is biometric analysis on a retrospective basis only.

The need to provide An Garda Síochána with technology such as biometric analysis is well established. We live in an age where the proliferation of data in society has an impact on Garda investigations. In any one investigation, gardaí could be examining enormous quantities of images or video footage that may contain vital information or evidence. Where computers, mobile phones or other devices are seized by gardaí on foot of warrants issued by a court - this could be for crimes relating to terrorism, organised crime or child abuse material - the array of documents that form part of an investigation can number in the hundreds of thousands, or even millions. An Garda Síochána will not be able to reliably process large-scale data without the relevant tools to aid this process. Biometric analysis will be a crucial tool to aid this important work.

To take the example of an investigation into child sexual abuse material, the Garda may find hundreds of thousands of images and videos on a seized device. If it has access to biometric analysis, it could utilise these tools to sort instances of a particular physical feature of a known or unknown person, such as the victims of these crimes, in that cache of images or video. This work is concerned simply with the organisation of information and will ensure that victims of these crimes are removed from harm at the earliest opportunity.

By giving the Garda the power to use biometric analysis, I am not seeking to replace traditional policing methods. Rather, this technology will aid gardaí in their work by allowing them to categorise, sort and filter documents gathered in the course of an investigation utilising biometrics for further review. This is not to say that use of these tools should be without safeguards, however. Senators will note that several safeguards are detailed in the text of the Bill, which I will summarise. Biometric analysis will not be used in every investigation. Rather, it may only be utilised where it is necessary and proportionate in respect of a specific Garda investigation into an arrestable offence, a matter relating to State security or in the context of a missing person investigation. Gardaí will only be able to search for certain data subjects, including persons reasonably suspected of having committed an arrestable offence or being a threat to the security of the State, victims of arrestable offences or missing persons.

This technology will be used to support Garda decision-making only. Human review and intervention to assess the reliability of any matches produced is built into the Bill. That means a trained garda will be responsible for its use and any decisions arising from the processing of biometric data. Gardaí finding a match utilising biometric analysis with no further interrogation of the footage or images will not be the basis for an arrest in itself. Biometric analysis is solely a tool to be used to assist with the sorting of information and provide gardaí with a starting point or leads within their investigation.

Any use of biometric analysis will be governed by a code of practice, which will set out the procedures that apply to the use of the technology. This will be drafted by the Garda Commissioner and will be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas. Approval of the code is dependent on positive resolutions being passed by both Houses. This will give Senators the opportunity to consider the code prior to its signing. As part of the process of developing a code, human rights and data protection impact assessments will be required, the results of which will be provided to the bodies listed in section 10 of this Bill. There will also be the opportunity for members of the public to provide feedback on the code, alongside the bodies set out in the Bill during the drafting process. Any use of biometric analysis will also be subject to judicial oversight by way of an annual review of the operation of this technology by a judge of the High Court.

I will now take Senators through the Bill. It is divided into 11 sections. Sections 1 and 2 are standard provisions providing for commencement orders and definitions. Section 3 amends section 2 of the principal Act. It inserts the definition of an arrestable offence and amends the definition of a code of practice to take account of the new provisions being inserted by section 10.

Section 4 amends section 3 of the principal Act, as it relates to orders and regulations.

Section 5 amends section 7 of the principal Act. This is to ensure that CCTV applications currently in train may continue to be assessed under section 38 of the 2005 Act upon commencement of the relevant CCTV provisions in the principal Act. Section 7 currently sets out transitional arrangements for existing CCTV authorisations.

Section 6 amends section 13 by removing the definition of an arrestable offence.

Section 7 amends section 20 of the principal Act. It will delete subparagraph 20(2)(a)(iv), one of purposes specified for the use of automatic number plate recognition, ANPR. The provision was deemed unnecessary as the occasions for which it was included are adequately covered by subparagraph 20(2)(a)(ii).

Section 8 will insert Part 6A into the principal Act. This comprises five sections, namely, sections 43A to 43E, inclusive. Section 43A sets out the definitions for the new Part. These include the definition of biometric analysis. The definition will cover searching for general characteristics such as height and hair colour, as well the searching of biometrics of unknown and known individuals.

Section 43B sets out that the Bill will not apply to certain enactments to ensure that any co-operation internationally where gardaí have access to or utilise biometrics will not be impacted by the provisions of the Bill.

Section 43C sets out the substantive provisions for the carrying out of biometric analysis. There are only three purposes for which it can be used, namely, the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of arrestable offences; the protection of the security of the State; and looking for missing persons. In all cases, it must be necessary and proportionate. Section 43C also lists the data subjects that may be searched utilising biometric analysis. This is to ensure transparency as to who the Garda may look for using these tools. As biometric analysis will only be utilised as a decision-support tool, the section also ensures that human review of any results is required.

Section 43D is a standard processing provision, which aligns with the principal Act. It is to make clear that gardaí may further process the results of any analysis conducted. A range of offences is then set out in section 43E.

Section 9 of the Bill makes amendments to the code of practice provisions in section 47 of the principal Act. The main change being made by this section is the inclusion of provisions to allow for minor amendments to the code of practice without the need for a full consultation process under that section.

Section 10 will insert Part 8A into the principal Act. It provides that the Garda Commissioner will have to draft a code of practice for Part 6A - the carrying out of biometric analysis. This follows on from the principal Act whereby the code will set out the procedures by which gardaí may carry out biometric analysis. The code will also outline requirements in relation to storage, access, retention, deletion of data and confidentiality.

Finally, section 11 will ensure that the carrying out of biometric analysis will be overseen by a designated judge of the High Court who will report to the Taoiseach annually.

I advise Senators that I plan to put forward two minor technical amendments to section 8 of the Bill on Committee Stage. These include a minor amendment to the wording in the definition of "biometric analysis" at section 43A, and an amendment to section 43B as it relates to international co-operation. It is of the utmost importance that effective international co-operation can proceed and the Bill does not impede such co-operation. This is particularly in the case of child sexual abuse material investigations. As Senators will be aware, the Garda regularly engages with its counterparts internationally.

Finally, it must be recognised that this Bill falls within the wider framework of EU law on the use of Al systems. The EU Al Act has direct effect, and where gardaí deploy high-risk Al systems in this context, there are obligations for the providers and deployers of such systems under that Act. Members will be well aware of that.

The programme for Government includes two commitments in respect of Garda use of this type of technology; namely, to support the Garda to use AI; and to deploy facial recognition technology for serious crime. This Bill will be a step towards fulfilling these commitments. It is also my intention to publish a general scheme of a second amending Bill which will provide for retrospective identification, and for live use of biometrics. Together, these will provide a firm legislative basis for the Garda to utilise biometric systems in the course of their work, while respecting privacy rights and working within the well-established principles of data protection. It is important that the Garda has access to the most up-to-date tools necessary to combat serious crime.

I look forward to hearing Senators' contributions in respect of this Bill.

Senator Robbie Gallagher

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire ar ais arís chuig an Seanad um thráthnóna. I welcome the Minister back to the House this afternoon.

On behalf of the Fianna Fáil Group, I welcome this debate and very much support the Bill. We firmly believe that everyone deserves to feel safe in their home, in their community, on our streets and on public transport. To achieve this, citizens must have faith and trust in An Garda Síochána to effectively tackle crime. Providing gardaí with the technologies needed to deliver an effective policing service is a central goal to this. Currently, Garda investigations can involve teams spending months trawling through CCTV footage or footage captured on phones by passers-by. This Bill, if passed, will allow the retrospective use of biometric analysis by An Garda Síochána which will help members to carry out investigations quickly and efficiently, saving valuable Garda time. It will be of most assistance where time is of the essence to preserve a person from a threat of serious harm or a threat to their life. It will also save the gardaí from the harrowing work of poring over thousands or even millions of images and footage of child sexual abuse material.

The use of biometric technology will be limited to cases of arrestable offences where it is proportionate and necessary. It will be subject to strict safeguards and a code of practice that will outline the specific data protection and human rights controls that must be taken into consideration when utilising this technology. In any serious investigation there can be a significant amount of digital data. Without data analysis tools, the length of investigations is likely to increase and have an impact on the Garda's ability to prevent and detect serious crime. The aim in proposing this legislation, as the Minister outlined, was to introduce a limited form of retrospective facial recognition which can assist An Garda Síochána to search CCTV, video footage, images or other documents, where it already does so manually, more quickly and more efficiently.

The Bill amends the Garda Síochána Recording Devices Act 2023 in order to give effect to the Government decision to provide that biometric technologies may be used by An Garda Síochána. Biometric analysis is the automated organisation of biometric data of documents, including images of video footage. Its use will mean that gardaí could sort and filter, or cluster, relevant images from a collection of images or footage. It does not seek to identify a person. Rather, it seeks to find an instance of a person across the relevant images or footage where it is necessary and proportionate to do so. Under the Data Protection Act 2018, it is not possible for An Garda Síochána to process biometric data without a clear statutory basis. The power to carry out biometric analysis needs to be explicitly provided for and is set out in this Bill.

Biometric technologies are already being utilised in police services across the EU and, indeed, in the UK as well. The Bill is subject to EU law in this area, including the AI Act and two regulations. The Bill was drafted with these two laws to the fore of its considerations and any future work in this area will have to ensure there is no conflict with EU law. The Bill contains a requirement that An Garda Síochána only carry out biometric analysis in the context of investigations of an arrestable offence. An arrestable offence, as the Minister outlined, is an offence for which a person of full capacity and not previously convicted may, under or by virtue of any enactment or of common law, be punished by imprisonment for a term of up to five years or by a more severe penalty, and includes an attempt to commit any such offence. Whether the processing of biometric data is relevant to a particular arrestable offence will be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Human rights and data protection impact assessments will be required as part of the procedure and drafting of a code of practice. The Data Protection Commission, among others, will be consulted during the drafting process. The purchase of commercial data basis, etc., against which biometric identification could run will be prohibited. As the Minister outlined, An Garda Síochána already maintains databases of images and has a legal basis to process images of individuals arrested or convicted under various enactments with the existing rules on retention of those images.

The regulatory strategy throughout is to frame a Bill as a balanced response between privacy rights and public safety. I look forward to the Bill proceeding.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Independent Group is next. Am I to understand Senator McDowell is sharing time?

Senator Michael McDowell

Yes, if that is agreeable to the House, on the basis of three minutes for me and five minutes for Senator Boyhan.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Senator Michael McDowell

I welcome the Minister to the House and welcome this Bill entirely without reservation, except that it may lean too far backwards in restricting the use of these methods to assist An Garda Síochána. I fully accept that European law is a constraint in this matter.

I merely wanted to put on the record of the House that it is now more than 20 years since I went, with the then Commissioner of An Garda Síochána, to the United States of America and inspected CCTV systems run in Chicago and other places to reduce crime in those cities. We provided, in the 2005 Act, for the use of CCTV by An Garda Síochána and by local authorities, and then we ran into the activism of the European Union, which began to restrict, under data protection law, the use of data in a way which has very seriously handicapped the use of a CCTV system, even when a local authority wants it as a general measure to discourage criminality. One only has to think of the Graham Dwyer case to see that the EU has thoughtlessly said that data which an Irish telecommunications company used to retain for civil law purposes for six years should not be available, except up to two years. These are foolish and unnecessary restrictions. To be honest, I have always thought that if my privacy is intruded upon by the Garda being able to look at my phone records for two years back to see who I have been contacting, I do not see how my civil liberties are dramatically changed if that period is six years.

Especially in relation to subversion and very serious crime, that was a foolish mistake. I put on the record my full support for the Minister on this matter and my regret that he cannot go further, for instance, to prevent graffiti being put up. These are not serious offences, but somebody should be able to use CCTV in some places to stop people defacing streets in circumstances like that. Insofar as this Bill goes, it has my total support.

Senator Victor Boyhan

I wish I could say the same. I am very positively disposed to this legislation. I thank the Minister for giving his comprehensive statement to us. I smiled with delight somewhat when I heard the Minister pointing out further elements of and commitments in the programme for Government and that he is driving them through. Clearly, this is a Minister with intent and who has a reforming zeal. He is also keeping one eye on the programme for Government, which is encouraging. I do not think any other Minister has ever come in here to us in the past year and a half and talked about the programme for Government in terms of rattling off the to-do list, as the Minister has. Well done. It is great to see that the Minister is clearly very focused on that.

The Joint Committee on Justice, Home Affairs and Migration carried out an extensive paper and pre-legislative scrutiny on this Bill. There are elements that have changed. I acknowledge that Senators McDowell, Gallagher and Ruane, who are on that committee, made 32 recommendations. It is worth looking at the analysis of those recommendations as compared with the Bill that is before us today. I thank the Oireachtas Library and Research team. I do not know if the Minister has seen their report yet. It is a really good report. Every Minister should always see the Oireachtas Library and Research work. They have done an analysis on the 32 recommendations in the report and have broken them up into four statuses. They say that the key issues that have clearly been accepted and reflected in the Bill amount to four. There are other areas. Adoption of current issues have not been brought into play. They raise interesting points. I intend to look at one or two amendments. Before I do so, I hope I can engage directly with the Minister's Department because I believe in being proactive with the Department rather than coming in here. It is only as a last resort. It may be an issue of clarification. I thank the library and research team for the extensive work that they have done. It aids us in analysing legislation. That is what they are there. I draw that fact to the Minister's attention. This document was carried out by Karen McLaughlin, senior parliamentary researcher. It is dated 16 December 2025.

It is interesting to look at a number of submissions. I am going reference them rather than talk about them. There was a very interesting submission from the Law Society. There was a particularly interesting one from the Rape Crisis Ireland. There was a submission from An Garda Síochána. There were interesting issues there. Of particular interest were submissions by the Data Protection Commissioner, Safe Ireland and the Irish Council for Civil Liberties. There are many more, but these were the six that I took out and read. There are some key issues there. I do not think we are that far apart. Facial recognition is about technology, data protection and impact assessment, which the Minister dealt with in his statement to us today. Legislation and the code of practice are clearly important. What do we want at the end of all this legislation? We want to ensure for Irish citizens that there are high standards that the public can expect of An Garda Síochána. I know An Garda Síochána is committed too. It is about confidence in a system that is not subject to or open to abuse. I referenced those particular submissions to the Minister. I have a few amendments in mind. I am a pragmatist at best. I would like to work with the Minister's officials next week, send a draft to them, and maybe they will be able to clarify some of those points. That would be very helpful.

I wish the Minister well on this important legislation. I understand the significance of embracing innovation and technology. At the end of the day, what the Minister said last night to us in another debate within his brief, there are a lot of very dangerous and sinister people out there. We have to use all technologies in identifying, exposing and bringing people to justice and account. That ranges from sexual offences, rape, intimidation, blackmail and all sorts of other issues. When we talk about smarter gardaí, it is about being smart. Gardaí on the streets does not necessarily mean everything for people. It is always important that while nothing deters crime, we must always go back to community. We need to get under the skin of why so many crimes are happening, but that is for another day. I wish the Minister well. We are going to embrace technology and innovation. If that aids and makes this a safer place for our citizens, then that has to be the right thing to do.

Senator Garret Kelleher

On behalf of the Fine Gael group, I welcome the Bill before us. As the Minister articulated in his opening remarks, it is a step forward in fulfilling the obligations made under the programme for Government, especially in the support of Garda use of artificial intelligence. Again, this is the type of thing that we would speak about in this Chamber on numerous occasions, particularly in relation to Garda powers and legislation on a broader basis to deal with modern challenges faced today that would not have been encountered previously, as we have discussed on umpteen occasions here in recent weeks, such as the challenges of social media, how we can counteract misinformation and disinformation, and enabling the legislation to be modern, robust and deal with the challenges that we face today. There is also the importance of allowing the use on a more widespread basis of the facial recognition technology, especially for serious crimes and in cases of missing persons. I do not have a huge amount to add to the contributions that have already been made by the Minister in his opening remarks and Senators Gallagher, McDowell and Boyhan other than to welcome the legislation as a step forward. It has the full support of the Fine Gael group.

Senator Joanne Collins

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this. This is very important and far-reaching legislation that will deserve careful scrutiny because it deals with the balance between public safety, effective policing and the protection of civil liberties and privacy rights. Sinn Féin believes that facial recognition technology and other biometric technologies can have a very rewarding and positive role in assisting An Garda Síochána, particularly in the investigation of serious crime, matters relating to the security of the State and locating missing persons. Gardaí today are dealing with an enormous volume of CCTV footage, digital evidence and recorded material. Technology can help process that evidence more effectively and potentially speed up investigations, identify subjects, locate vulnerable people and, ultimately, save lives. We recognise those potential benefits. We also recognise that these technologies can carry very significant risk if they are introduced without strong safeguards, proper oversight and clear legal limits. It is not an ordinary technology. The Artificial Intelligence Advisory Council stated in June 2024 that facial recognition technology when used in a lawful enforcement context is a high-risk technology given the potential consequences of its use for individuals. The council went further and advised against procuring and deploying such technology until statutory independent evaluations are conducted under real-world conditions relevant to Irish law enforcement.

The core concern here is that we do not drift into a surveillance society where people's movements, behaviours and identities can be tracked in ways that undermine fundamental rights and freedoms. The use of biometric analysis must be necessary, proportionate and strictly limited to serious and clearly defined purposes, which the Minister has outlined in his opening statement. There are some welcome provisions within this Bill. The fact that the technology can only be used retrospectively and not in real time is important.

The fact that it is confined to arrestable offences, State security matters and missing person investigations is also very important. Likewise, requirements for a code of practice, human rights assessment and engagement with bodies such as the Data Protection Commission and Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission are very positive steps.

However, there remain serious questions that need to be answered. Sinn Féin believes there must be far stronger safeguards written directly into legislation, rather than relying too heavily on future codes of practice. Codes of practice are important, but the Oireachtas must have the opportunity to scrutinise and debate the key protections in primary legislation. There must be independent oversight and a regular review of how the technology operates in practice. Reviews cannot simply examine operational effectiveness. They must also examine the accuracy rates, potential for discrimination or profiling and the impact on the right to privacy and human rights more broadly. Any wider roll-out across the State should only occur following a tightly controlled pilot phase with independent evaluation. We need evidence that the technology works effectively in Irish policing conditions and that it can do so without causing disproportionate harm.

We also cannot ignore the lessons of the past. Unfortunately, there have been incidents where Garda systems have been misused. We know a number of gardaí face disciplinary action for misuse of the PULSE system, including the shocking case of a former garda who unlawfully disclosed personal data related to colleagues and members of the public. Those incidents involved only a small minority but they underline an important point, namely, that whenever the State grants additional surveillance or data powers robust safeguards, accountability and oversight are absolutely essential.

At the same time, we must be honest about the wider challenges facing policing in the State. Technology is not a substitute for properly resourced community policing. The biggest challenge facing An Garda Síochána today is the recruitment and retention crisis. There are simply too few community and roads policing gardaí, too few detectives and far too much reliance on overtime to carry out routine policing duties. Sinn Féin has set out comprehensive proposals to tackle this crisis. We have proposed increasing the garda training allowance, the equivalent of the minimum wage, increasing the intake capacity in Templemore, introducing incentives for former members to return to policing, improving pay progressions, recognising long service and increasing the mandatory retirement age to 65. Those measures are essential because safe communities are built, first and foremost, through visible policing, strong community relationships and properly staffed Garda stations, not solely through new technologies.

Technology can support policing but it cannot replace trust, experience and human judgment. As the Bill progresses through the Houses, Sinn Féin will engage constructively and responsibly. We believe there is a legitimate role for these technologies, but only where there are strong safeguards, democratic accountability, independent oversight and full protection of civil liberties. The public must have confidence that any use of biometric analysis is lawful, proportionate and necessary and that the rights of ordinary citizens are not sacrificed in the process. That is the balance we must achieve and it is the standard against which the Bill must ultimately be judged.

Senator Martin Conway

The Minister is welcome to the House. It is great that he comes to deal with his legislation on such a regular basis. We have spoken on previous occasions about Ministers having respect for the House. He has shown respect in spades and he is very welcome, as always. The Bill is part of a commitment in the programme for Government to embrace and develop new technologies in An Garda Síochána to enable the force to take full advantage of those new technologies to do its job more effectively. Facial recognition is in operation in many jurisdictions, in particular in airports and so on. Enabling An Garda Síochána to utilise and benefit from this type of technology makes absolute sense. I am glad to hear that it is recognised across the House that this is a step in the right direction.

AI is something we are all trying to get our heads around. Clearly, it will define society in the future. It is the next generation, the same way as social media was to the generation of the early noughties. An Garda Síochána needs to be on top of it and to benefit from it. We do not need to be laggards when it comes to this. Rather, we need to be out in front, similar to how we were European leaders when it came to the Criminal Assets Bureau, CAB, which has been imitated by other jurisdictions. We need to adopt the same approach when it comes to embracing technology, given the fact that many of the tech giants have their European headquarters in Dublin. We need to reflect that in our modern policing.

Having been on the political scrutiny committee of Europol for seven or eight years, and having attended its meetings on a regular basis in Brussels and other European countries, I know how committed Europol is to embracing and sharing technology. We need to be front and centre as part of that.

The Bill is welcome. It is good to see the justice elements of the programme for Government being implemented in a very judicious way. I commend the Minister on that.

The Minister was in Clare a couple of weeks ago, for which I thank him. It was a visit organised by Deputy Cathal Crowe. He spoke at the Ennis Chamber of Commerce and met a group of business people, along with public representatives, in Ennistymon. There is a major issue with a lack of gardaí in the Ennistymon-Kilrush area, which has been amalgamated into one district. Last Saturday night, there was a shortage of personnel on the ground. I believe only one patrol car was operating between Kilrush and Ballyvaughan. The patrol car was diverted to Shannon because a plane had to be protected. That leaves the system vulnerable. I know it is a policing matter and a matter for the Garda Commissioner, but to be fair to our chief superintendent in Clare, he can only deal with the resources he has and he has to supply them as he sees fit. It is a loaves and fishes scenario. Perhaps the Minister is able to do something about additional resources in the Clare division so that situations like this do not happen on weekends. Last weekend was a beautiful weekend. The populations of Kilkee and Lahinch balloon when the weather is like this. We cannot have vulnerabilities in the system. I appeal to the Minister to address that.

On the Bill, it is great to see it being introduced in order to take full advantage of modern technologies and innovations so that An Garda Síochána can do its job more effectively, efficiently and determinedly.

Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration (Deputy Jim O'Callaghan)

I thank all Senators for their contributions. I will try to deal with the issues they have raised. I agree with Senator Gallagher that one of the benefits of the Bill is that it will prevent gardaí having to spend hours ploughing through vast amounts of data or video footage. I saw that myself this time last year when I was in Store Street Garda station. At the time, a number of gardaí were spending hours going through video footage from the Dublin riots which had taken place in November 2023. There were trying to identify individuals in the video footage to see whether they were the same as the people they had other video footage of going to a different location.

The Bill will have a real benefit in terms of An Garda Síochána freeing up Garda time so that we can use technology and, rather than gardaí having to sit in front of video screens for long periods of time, technology can be used and gardaí can be freed to do other more important and productive work. Senator Gallagher is correct in that what we are talking about here is balancing the rights of privacy with the right of the public to be protected and giving more powers to gardaí.

I thank Senator McDowell for his full support. He said that the Bill may be too restrictive. As I mentioned earlier, more legislation will be coming forward. When gardaí are looking at video footage in, say, Store Street, the technology will be able to assist them because they will be able to find out rapidly whether the person they saw robbing a shop during the riot in November 2023 is the same as the person getting off a bus in Rathmines, where there will be other video footage available. That will clarify matters. That is why it is called retrospective biometric analysis. It is not measuring against a database of identifiable people. Instead, someone is looking to see whether the face or image in one piece of video footage is the same as that in another. It is so important in missing persons inquiries because he or she will have the image of the person and be able to check to see whether it is the same as in another piece of footage.

I noted what the Senator said about the data retention rules and the rulings of the CJEU. As a result of the decision of the CJEU, we do not have a modern legislative instrument from Europe that deals with data retention. It really is important for the purpose of police investigations, not just in Ireland but also throughout the rest of Europe, that there be a live and effective directive or regulation in place for the purpose of data retention for law enforcement. When serious crimes are committed, the public expect that all available information that can be investigated for the purpose of resolving the crime will be used.

Senator Boyhan spoke about the Oireachtas Library and Research Service team. Its work is excellent. I am aware of the recommendations of the Oireachtas joint committee on justice. As has been indicated, some of the recommendations have been included. I will examine further the library document to which the Senator referred.

We need to use modern technology. Sometimes people are fearful of it. In the Lower House, there were references to reports that show this type of technology can be inaccurate but many of those reports are from many years ago. The technology has advanced considerably. I am sure most of us here use it for the purpose of unlocking our phones or accessing banking information. It is technology that is advancing every day.

Two days ago, the Minister of State, Deputy Brophy, and I were in Dublin Airport to launch the new eGates. That is a real example of biometric facial analysis. A person puts their passport in and a photograph is then taken of his or her face. The system compares the photograph of the person in the airport with the face on the passport being analysed. This technology is getting better all the time and we should not be fearful of it. Particularly because criminals are now using technology to advance their criminality, we should be using it to stand up to them.

I very much welcome the support from Senator Kelleher. He correctly spoke about AI and the fact that modern challenges require modern methods of investigation. That reiterates the point I just mentioned. We need modern methods of investigation and we should not stay away from them because they are new or modern.

Years ago, maybe when Senator McDowell was Minister for Justice, there was concern as to whether DNA evidence would be reliable. We have now gone through many years of expertise with DNA technology and science, and the evidence has proven to be very reliable. It has resulted in many cases being solved. We have to move with the times in using technology.

I thank Senator Collins for her contribution and recognition that the camera technology can play a positive role. She said that she, like many, I am sure, fears living in a surveillance society. In many respects, however, and not just through the State, there are cameras everywhere. When a crime has been committed, one of the first things that An Garda will do is seek to get camera footage, whether from cars passing by or shops in the vicinity. There is a huge amount of coverage of what is happening on the streets, particularly in cities. It is a huge assistance to An Garda Síochána when it comes to investigating criminal acts or locating missing persons. I am conscious that there is a balance to be struck but shops and cars have these cameras. We know ourselves that if something happens out on the streets, people on those streets also use cameras. I am aware that it causes some offence if people video things in public, particularly if they share the footage, but their footage can be of use to an investigation.

Senator Collins expressed concern that the information or technology should not be misused. She expressed some concern about its use in a live scenario. I intend to introduce legislation to provide for live biometric analysis and identification. When we discuss it – it is not in this Bill today – we might ask whether telling a garda to stand at the top of Grafton Street to keep an eye out for a well-known criminal in order to apprehend him is all that different from there being a camera at the top of Grafton Street with information about the criminal that can identify him if he walks by and then alert the Garda. I realise it is a contentious issue but it is something we cannot ignore. Again, it can create efficiencies in the work of An Garda Síochána.

The Senator also referred to a recruitment and retention crisis. Even the Garda Representative Association is not referring to it as a crisis now because there is no retention crisis. The number of resignations from An Garda Síochána is less than 1%, which is bizarre and highly unusual by comparison with the numbers for the PSNI and all the other constabularies in the UK. Fewer than 140 resigned from An Garda Síochána in 2024, so the retention rate is really high. In respect of recruitment, later this year we will have the highest number of sworn members of An Garda Síochána in the history of the force. I believe that, by the end of the year, we will be at or very close to 15,000 sworn members. Of course, that does not take into account the 3,500 staff who do really important work as well and free up gardaí to do their front-line work.

I thank Senator Conway for his contribution in respect of the programme for Government and AI. Across the range in government, we will just have to adapt to AI so that we can avail of its benefits while ensuring the threats are not too accentuated.

I hear what the Senator said in respect of Clare. I had a pleasant and enjoyable visit there. One thing that was consistently said to me there was that more gardaí are needed there. As the Senator knows, I do not go around directing the Commissioner, but I have certainly passed on the concerns of the elected representatives in Clare. Aside from that, it was an hospitable visit. I thank the Senator and my colleagues for the invitation.

Cuireadh an Seanad ar fionraí ar 5.48 p.m. agus cuireadh tús leis arís ar 6.34 p.m.

Sitting suspended at 5.48 p.m. and resumed at 6.34 p.m.

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 27 May 2026