I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in the following amendment:—
The following words added at the end of Section 2—"ancient monuments."
I hope there will be no objection to that.
STATISTICS BILL, 1925—FROM THE SEANAD.
The Dáil went into Committee.
Amendment put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in the following amendment:—
In Section 8 the following words added at the end of sub-section (1)—"unless such occupier shall satisfy the court that the document was not received by him."
It is urged in connection with this section that the requisition of the document amounted to a case for prosecution, and that it would be a hardship upon persons that they should be prosecuted in respect of documents they had not received. These words are inserted so that an opportunity will be afforded to a person who would feel aggrieved to satisfy a court that the document had not been received by him.
Amendment put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in the following amendment:—
In Section 1 (6), line 60, the words "purports to act" deleted and the words "produces a certificate in writing signed by a superintendent of the Gárda Síochána that he is acting" substituted therefor.
There is objection to this section on the ground that cases have occurred in which persons have represented themselves to be members of the Gárda Síochána who were not members of that body. In order to provide that no doubt would arise in respect of properly authorised persons seeking for certain information, it has been arranged to insert this amendment.
Amendment put and agreed to.
It is arranged by the insertion of this amendment that the officer should produce a certificate in writing signed by a superintendent of the Gárda Síochána that he is acting. The reason a superintendent is selected is that he has under his charge something like fifty or sixty Gárdaí. An instruction in writing from the Central Office would necessitate the signing of, perhaps, a large number of authorisations and the delivery of them to each Gárda. The superintendent authorising him and knowing each Gárda will be a greater security than if the document had been sent from the Central Office. I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in this amendment.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Dáil agree with the Seanad in this amendment:
4. In Section 11, a new sub-section added as follows:—
"(7) Every appointment and every certificate signed by a superintendent of the Gárda Síochána under this section shall contain a reference to the prohibition on the disclosure of information imposed by Section 14 of this Act."
This amendment is inserted to meet the objection that was raised to there not being a sufficiency of safeguards to ensure secrecy. A suggestion was made that either an oath or a declaration should be made. There was objection to that on various grounds. The fact that secrecy should be obtained is brought to the notice of every officer or person discharging the duties under the Act by having inserted a reference to the prohibition on the disclosure of information imposed by Section 14 of the Act. It was agreed by those who urged that certain information might possibly, innocently or otherwise, be disclosed, that the fact that it was confidential information was brought commonly under the notice of the Gárdaí by having the section prohibiting the disclosure of information cited in or on the certificate which gave them power to get the information.
There is one observation I would like to make on this because it touches so many of the points raised in the Seanad. I have no objection to the close guarding of secrets where necessary, but I think there is undue care when this secrecy has to deal with the better-off classes. In respect to an unemployed man, an applicant for relief or a person under examination in the Compensation Courts, there is no hesitation to inquire into his financial position. It is made open to the world. Every person is quite willing and is expected to disclose all he knows. That is the case in respect to a man who would ordinarily be in receipt of a weekly wage. When it comes to a man in business the secrecy must be absolutely safeguarded. I draw attention to the difference in the approach to such questions that we noted in the discussion in the Seanad.
I put it to Deputy Johnson that in respect to an unemployed man his credit is not affected very much by an allegation or a whisper regarding his business. In the case of a public company, or a man in a big way of business, such whispers or allegations are very expensive at times. If information which would disclose the circulation of them were available, it would be open to the person aggrieved to get some compensation.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in the following amendments:—
5. In Section 13 (1), line 3, the words "Neither any" deleted and the word "No" substituted therefor
This is a grammarian's amendment, as is also the following amendment:—
6. In Section 13 (1), line 5, the words "nor any" deleted and the words "and no" substituted therefor.
I will take the two together, and accordingly I move.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in this amendment:—
7. In Section 13 (1), line 6, after the word "document" the words "and no verbal information or answer given relating to any individual person, business or concern" inserted.
This is to give the same sort of security for verbal information or answer as is enshrined in connection with information otherwise obtained.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in the following amendments:—
8. In Section 14 (1), the words "or any verbal information or answer given relating to any individual person, business or concern" added at the end of the sub-section.
9. In Section 14 (2), line 50, after the word "aforesaid" the words "or any verbal information or answer given relating to any individual person, business or concern' inserted.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in the following amendment:—
10. Before Section 17 a new section inserted as follows:—
"Any order made under sub-section (1) of Section 16 of this Act shall be laid as soon as may be on the Table of both Houses of the Oireachtas."
This amendment occasioned a very considerable amount of discussion and it was desired at one time to have resolutions passed by both Houses, or, at least, to give both Houses an opportunity within a certain number of days of expressing disapproval. It was pointed out that would hold up, during certain periods of the year, the collection of any information. It was then agreed that any order made under sub-section (1) of Section 16 shall be laid as soon as may be on the Table of both Houses of the Oireachtas.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in this amendment:—
11. Before Section 18 a new section inserted as follows:—
"Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require any person to give information in relation to a matter as to which his knowledge was acquired in circumstances that would entitle him to decline to give such information in a civil proceeding in a court of law on the ground of privilege or to require any bank or corporation carrying on the business of banking or any official thereof to furnish any particulars which would enable any person to identify such particulars as relating to any individual person, business or concern without the consent in writing of that person or of the proprietor of that business or concern."
This amendment refers to persons placed in a position of confidence, such as solicitors or people like that. They would occupy the same position with regard to this Act as they occupy in a court of justice. The latter portion of the amendment deals with information concerning private banking accounts. I am not satisfied that there were any real grounds for the apprehensions which were expressed regarding the possibility of getting information concerning private accounts in banks. I am perfectly satisfied that it would have been impossible to have made a case for getting such information. I am satisfied that the banks would have been quite within their rights in refusing it. I am satisfied that the statistical officer would not have succeeded had a prosecution been entered. I am satisfied that it is most unlikely that any Government would instruct a statistical officer to seek such information. I am satisfied that no such information regarding a private account would be of any use in connection with statistics. But the apprehensions were there. I would feel myself perfectly satisfied that the tradition, the experience and the common-sense of the business community and the people generally engaged in commerce would be against the necessity for including any such provision as this even in this Act. But the apprehensions were there. To satisfy them, this proviso was inserted and I recommend it for acceptance.
Perhaps the President would relieve my mind of a slight doubt—it is slight in my mind, but it might be stronger in the minds of other people—as to whether this provision will relieve banks of any liability which they have under other laws. I refer to such a case as the failure of a bank to disclose its operations in the event of an issue as to the misuse of funds. There have been cases where banking institutions, as they are called, have failed, and where their operations have had to be disclosed. I am wondering whether there is anything in this proviso which relieves banks of liability of that kind. Personally, I do not think the Bill will have this effect, but I would like to have the assurance of the President, if he is in a position to give us an assurance, on the matter.
The section is very plain (section quoted). I think there is very little doubt that that has reference to the privacy of particular accounts.
There are certain cases where a bank might be required to give information as to what they have done with certain accounts—for instance, in criminal proceedings. While I think that this section deals only with requirements under the Bill, if it could be read so as to relieve banking institutions from liability to disclose particulars under other circumstances. I think it should not be accepted. If it only applies to this particular Bill—that is, to requirements for statistical purpose—I would not be disposed to oppose it.
The second section deals with the collection of statistics. (Section quoted.) As far as the statistical side is concerned, all the powers the Minister would require are enshrined in that section. The section in question simply deals with the privacy which up to this has been regarded as sacrosanct in connection with accounts in banks.
Is it not a definite answer to Deputy Johnson that the section commences: "Nothing in this Act..." The whole proviso is limited by that particular phrase.
Question put and agreed to.
The Dáil went out of Committee.
Amendments reported.
Question—"That the Dáil agree with the Committee in their report"— put and agreed to.