JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT, HERITAGE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT debate

Register of Electors: Discussion with Data Protection Commissioner.

Chairman

I welcome Mr. Billy Hawkes, Data Protection Commissioner, and Mr. Garry Davies, the deputy commissioner. I thank them for attending. The format of the meeting will be a brief presentation from our guests on privacy issues relating to the use of PPS numbers and this will be followed by a question and answer session. Before our guests commence their presentation, I draw their attention to the fact that members of the committee have absolute privilege but that this does not apply to witnesses appearing before it. I remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person outside the Houses or any official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

The last occasion I met Mr. Hawkes was when his office and its operations were being decentralised to Portarlington in my constituency. His office has been fully and successfully decentralised and perhaps Mr. Hawkes will make a comment on that matter before making his opening statement.

Mr. Billy Hawkes

I thank the Chairman and members of the committee. I am happy to confirm the agency has happily decentralised to Portarlington and we have been warmly welcomed in the community. We operate, if not as efficiently, probably more efficiently than in Dublin. We have a happy staff, who live down the road from where their work. All in all, it is a most successful example of the complete decentralisation of a State agency.

I thank the committee for the invitation to address it. I welcome the opportunity to advise the committee on the data protection issues that may arise from proposals it is considering in regard to the electoral register. I will make suggestions as to how these might be dealt with. The Data Protection Acts seek to give the individual as much control as possible over the collection and use of his or her personal information. Our laws give effect to the requirements of the European Union's 1995 data privacy directive and to the 1981 Council of Europe Convention on Data Protection. More broadly, our laws give expression to the right to privacy guaranteed by Article 40 of Bunreacht na hÉireann and to the right to respect for family and private life guaranteed by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The right to data privacy is not absolute and it must sometimes give way to other rights such as the right to freedom of expression, the rights of others and the broader public interest, as interpreted by the Oireachtas. The Oireachtas has the right to limit by law the individual right to data privacy otherwise guaranteed by the legal provisions it has enacted in the Data Protection Acts.

I refer to the use of PPSN data held by the Department of Social and Family Affairs to improve the accuracy of the electoral register. Representatives from that Department explained to the committee the legal basis in the Social Welfare Acts for the collection and use of such data. The personal data associated with PPSNs are used to facilitate the delivery of a range of public services by the Department and as an identifier by a number of Departments and agencies. Since the PPSN is a unique identifier for individuals, linked to sometimes quite sensitive information about them, it is a valuable piece of personal information that must be safeguarded against misuse. This is recognised in the Social Welfare Acts, which lay down specific penalties for any use of the PPSN not provided for in those Acts or in other legislation.

My office has consistently sought the justification for any extension of the use of the PPSN within the public service and even more so outside of it. In part this has been prompted by a long-term concern that gradual "function creep", as it is termed, would see the PPSN extended to become a de facto national identity number by which we could all be uniquely identified and, thereby, all our interactions with the State and the private sector joined up as required. Using the PPSN and the personal data associated with it for the purpose of improving the accuracy of the electoral register would be an entirely new use.

The Oireachtas can certainly legislate for this but, before doing so, it would be worth considering the implications of such a move. One implication would be an overriding of the data protection principle that personal information provided for one purpose should not be used for another purpose without the consent of the individual. Another would be an increased risk of leakage of personal data. I am on record as expressing concern about evidence of such leakage from the Department of Social and Family Affairs. Given this concern, a detailed audit by my office of data security in that Department has taken place over the past two days.

There may be ways of using other State databases, including the PPSN database, to improve the accuracy of the electoral register in a way that respects the individual right to data privacy. For example, I would see no data protection obstacle to the data in the electoral register being compared with that in the PPSN database on a "hit-no hit" basis. This would allow the electoral authority to focus on cases where someone was on the electoral register but not on the PPSN database. Another option might be for the Department of Social and Family Affairs to write to everyone on its database who is over 18 and ask if they would consent to their PPSN data being used to update the electoral register now and into the future. The same approach could be adopted by other organisations which hold personal data on individuals. Once the individual gives consent to his or her personal data being used in this way, there is no data protection issue. These options could be put in place without the need for amending legislation. They could also work with our existing system of voter registration by local authorities. The security issues I have highlighted would still remain but, hopefully, could be dealt with satisfactorily. I hope these comments will be of assistance to the committee and I am very happy to answer the questions members may have.

Deputy Phil Hogan

I welcome the commissioner and the deputy commissioner to the meeting. There are many concerns, particularly at local authority local, among people who wish to exercise their franchise about the accuracy of the electoral register and, therefore, the committee is examining ways to verify its accuracy.

I am interested in the leak from the Department of Social and Family Affairs. Perhaps Mr. Hawkes will outline the information leaked, what it concerned and how it happened following his initial investigations so that we might be alerted to the potential difficulties of using such information. He stated legislation would not be required if a letter was sent to people seeking their consent. That would be an onerous responsibility on local authorities but I do not know a practical way to do this. Members of the committee visited Northern Ireland recently to examine options regarding the electoral register. Could Mr. Hawkes comment on the experience in the North, given the electoral register there is more accurate than in the Republic?

Mr. Billy Hawkes

Yesterday at home we received a communication from the Department of Social and Family Affairs telling us our daughter was approaching 16 years and we would have to return a form stamped by her school to continue receiving child benefit. Presumably the parents of every 16 year old in the State receive such a communication. I wondered whether it would be possible to add to this form and ask parents whether they would like their child's name added to the electoral register so that it would be updated continuously. I assume this form is sent to all parents and, therefore, a significant administrative burden would not be involved.

There have been a number of reports of leaks from the Department of Social and Family Affairs through the years. The Deputy may recall a famous leak involving someone who won the Euromillions jackpot and people allegedly accessing her data and passing them on. Perhaps, more seriously, from investigations we have carried out into insurance companies, we have discovered clear evidence that private investigators hired by these companies have had access to information from within the Department. That is serious because when we give our information to the State, often under legal compunction, we should all have an expectation of an absolute guarantee of its security. This issue must be borne in mind by the committee in its difficult considerations.

A more dramatic example occurred recently when information relating to half the population of the UK was deliberately downloaded onto disks which were lost in the system. People have been unable to find them. That was a wake-up call about the dangers involved in centralised databases and the close attention to security necessary when the further use of such data is being considered.

However, my approach is to suggest practical approaches to the committee, which would help to achieve its objective of producing an improved and updated electoral register. I have given a practical example of extending the form sent to the parents of every 16 year old to ask them if they would like their child's name added to the electoral register so that it would happen automatically when they turned 18. Changes of address could also be provided later. That would be done with the consent of the person concerned, which is the principle defended by data protection.

The State has other databases. Approximately 70% of the population has a passport. A similar tick box could be printed at the end of a passport application form asking the same question. People like to be asked if something can be done and, therefore, they much prefer to be asked rather than the State acting as Big Brother and doing it whether they like it or not. I am trying to put forward suggestions that are compatible with our existing laws on data protection, while fully recognising the Oireachtas has the right to override those rights if it considers, on balance, that would be justified.

The authorities in Northern Ireland have taken the step of making voter registration compulsory and a fine of £1,000 may be imposed if a person does not register. That is not the position in this jurisdiction and consideration would need to be given by the committee to taking that step. I am sure many members can imagine scenarios where martyrs for the cause, who for one reason or another had something against the State, would refuse to register or pay the find and end up in jail. There are many implications which must be borne in mind. This is something which the Oireachtas is perfectly entitled to do but I imagine Members would want to think carefully before moving to a system of compulsory voter registration.

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

I thank Mr. Hawkes for a clear and cogent presentation of the commission's position on this matter. One of the problems we have in the Republic of Ireland is that, unlike Northern Ireland, we have too many people on the register. In some constituencies the turnout is more than 105% of the population as recorded in the census, which defies all mathematical computations.

We spent an additional €6 million trying to sort out this problem, which was simply throwing good money after bad. When one considers that the Northern Ireland electoral office runs on a budget of £2.5 million per year while we spent an additional €6 million last year, one sees merit in the PPS argument. The Northern Ireland position is that the PPS system allowed them to eradicate difficulties in the system. The principle of voter registration, whether in Northern Ireland, the Republic or any other democracy, is founded on the accuracy of the register and the elimination of fraud. Mr. Hawkes referred to the registration of 16 year olds. The Northern Ireland model incorporates the issue of registration of 16 year olds. Mr. Baines explained last week that he can maintain a consistent and accurate register because there is compulsory registration.

In examining the electoral register one must consider systems, structures and individuals. In the Republic, a difficulty arises because some individuals comply with the register and others do not. System difficulties arise because we have 34 local authorities which are responsible for operating registers. This means we have 34 different databases, software programmes and registration forms. We also have 34 different levels of priority, depending on how seriously each city or county manager regards the task of maintaining an accurate register.

The system in Northern Ireland is managed by a stand-alone authority, separate from other Government Departments and directly accountable to Government. It has one software programme and one registration form requiring four specific details: name; date of birth; nationality and PPS number. I would be concerned if 34 local authorities had individual access to a PPSN system. We must take the registration system away from the local authorities and establish a national structure. Would Mr. Hawkes's concerns, as expressed in the document, be as strong if we had a single registration system with one database and one software programme managed by a single agency with collective responsibility for it?

Mr. Billy Hawkes

I thank Deputy Lynch for that experience. From a data protection point of view, it does not matter whether one has a central or dispersed system. The additional danger of a central database is that everyone's information is on it and a correspondingly greater security risk surrounds it. Hence, the UK scenario where the information of half the population was lost. That is the danger of central databases. One can, of course, build stronger security around such databases.

The ideas I have been talking about are based on voluntarism. Inclusion on the electoral register is voluntary at present. Acting on that principle, it would be a voluntary act by me, as a parent, to ask my daughter if I should tick the box to say she wishes to be on the register of electors in two years' time. Similarly, when applying for a passport, it would be a voluntary act to say one's information may be used to update the electoral register. That is the principle in our data protection legislation. Whether the importance of an up-to-date and accurate electoral register should override the right to privacy is a judgment to be made by the Oireachtas.

I ask members to bear two points in mind. When one registers as a voter one becomes liable for jury service and one is also liable to receive junk mail. Unless one ticks a box on the registration form, one's data is stored on a central disk which can be sold by local authorities to marketing companies. This is one of the main sources of complaint to our office. Quite apart from the system chosen, I hope the committee's report will deal with this matter because many people are slightly scandalised by the idea that placing their name on the register puts them at the receiving end of junk mail. That is a side issue but I ask members to bear in mind that people may have different reasons for deciding whether or not to place their names on the electoral register.

The more attractive registration is made and the fewer disincentives attached to it the better. I assume the Oireachtas will not take away the disincentive that one can be called for jury service, but members might do something about the junk mail issue. It is a serious issue for members of the Oireachtas whether or not to take away a person's right, currently enjoyed, not to be on the electoral register. Compulsory registration, as in Northern Ireland, increases the case for allowing the registrar to draw on any databases he or she wishes. This is a judgment call for the Oireachtas and I would not presume to say how the judgment should be made.

Deputy Christy O’Sullivan

I welcome the presentation by Mr. Hawkes. I appreciate his concern about the misuse of the PPS number. I can see how it could be misused. Nevertheless, we are facing a serious situation and we want to get the electoral register right. It is a shambles at present. As Mr. Hawkes says, it is for the Oireachtas to make the final decision. The question must be addressed sooner rather than later.

Many people regard the information associated with their PPS number as very private. Many local authorities require a PPSN to be supplied with planning applications. There was uproar in Cork County Council when this requirement was introduced. This illustrates Mr. Hawkes's point about use of data. I regard a requirement to include a PPS number with a planning application as a misuse of data.

However, we gained much valuable information from our investigation of the system used in the North. While the compulsory system may seem rough in some ways, I believe it is the correct one. While it is compulsory to register it is not compulsory to vote. There is a difference.

I thank Mr. Hawkes for his points, which are well made. We wanted to know how data can be misused and I thank him for his presentation.

Chairman

Mr. Hawkes, could you give us some further information? PPS numbers stem from Social Welfare Acts. I am at a stage of life when I do not have any interaction with the Department of Social and Family Affairs. I use my PPS number when making my tax returns. I presume that is part and parcel of it. The Chairman of the Revenue Commissioners, Mr. Frank Daly, told members at last week's meeting of the Committee of Public Accounts that approximately 2.2 million people around the country would receive new tax certificates, bearing their PPS numbers, in the next week or two. That is good news.

For what other purposes are PPS numbers used? As I understand it they are routinely requested by local authorities on all housing application forms and in respect of the essential repairs grant. I am not sure of the position in regard to planning applications. Government bodies and agencies at various levels will not process forms without a PPS number. Is this practise widespread? If so, do these bodies and agencies have the authority to refuse to process these applications?

We are not suggesting that PPS numbers appear on the published voters' register; they would simply be part of the information gathering process. Perhaps the delegation would outline for the committee what other agencies and so on use PPS numbers? Also, are they aware that people may be using them while not having a proper basis for doing so? Health boards use PPS numbers for the purpose of issuing medical cards and so on. There is a great deal of interaction between the Health Service Executive, the local authorities and the Garda Síochána. How is that system working?

Mr. Billy Hawkes

I am not an expert on this issue which is dealt with in the social welfare Acts. We have come down quite heavily on those who do not have a legal basis for using PPS numbers and have had some success in this regard including, in respect of local authorities. Where an agency or body requests a PPS number and is unable to explain for what purpose it is being used we direct it to remove from its forms the obligation to provide a PPS number.

I appreciate the point in respect of the number of times a PPS number can be requested and I acknowledge the dangers involved in this regard. The information I am providing to the committee outlines the potential for moving ahead within existing legislation without making voter registration compulsory. I am suggesting that there is a fair degree of scope for doing this on a voluntary rather than compulsory basis.

Deputy Lynch mentioned that there are too many people on the register in some places. I stated in my presentation that I could not foresee any objection to the electoral authorities giving the database to the Department of Social and Family Affairs and later informing us of cases wherein PPS numbers do not match. This would allow them to focus their attention on these people. It might assist in helping to clean up the register. I am aware of the controversy that arose in respect of people being added and others being deleted from the register. It is a difficult one to get completely right. Also, we have a greater population than in Northern Ireland. However, I am hopeful it can be done.

The type of suggestions I have been making could be put in place quite easily and administratively and would not require further legislation. That said, I respect it is the absolute right of the Oireachtas to introduce compulsory registration. Under our current framework, this is not the case and, as such operating within our current legislative framework we must consider ways of improving matters without changing the law or introducing compulsory registration.

Mr. Gary Davis

From our recent interactions with the Department of Social and Family Affairs, it is our understanding that the proportion of the population that have a PPS number tends to include people of a certain age profile. However, many people in the 60 years plus age group would not have had interactions with the State until, perhaps, they reach pension age and as such they do not have PPS numbers. A person requiring a PPS number must present himself or herself at an office — there is one in every county — and provide forms of identify which are then verified behind the counter. It might be worth considering that going the mandatory PPS route will mean that a reasonably large number of people in a particular age cohort will, in order to vote, have to go through that process.

Deputy James Bannon

I welcome the two gentlemen here today and thank them for an interesting presentation. Getting registration right is of paramount importance. We, as politicians, have come up against it on numerous occasions. The current system, which has been in place since the foundation of the State, is cumbersome. While it is the responsibility of the local authorities, this issue remains on the back-burner in terms of being addressed. Local authorities are under severe pressure at particular times of the year to meet deadlines and so on. Also, there have been problems in terms of people being omitted from the register in a particular year despite the fact that they have been registered for several years. The current system is cumbersome; we must move forward.

The privacy issue was referred to. Legislation can be passed by the Oireachtas to deal with issues relating to privacy. We must ensure people have confidence in the system. I believe the Northern Ireland system is quite good. I was impressed to hear when visiting there last week that young people are encouraged to register in schools upon reaching 17 years of age to ensure they are ready for registration in respect of elections that may be held when they reach 18 years of age. Young people in Northern Ireland will be provided with identity cards free of charge and this encourages them to register and get involved in the whole electoral process. I believe we should seriously consider the type of system currently operating in Northern Ireland.

In addition, the system in Northern Ireland is streamlined to ensure various bodies, such as the county coroner's office and local authorities, work together in terms of the deletion process when people die or move to other areas. There have been situations here whereby people have remained on a register for a decade or more following their death. It is embarrassing for politicians to learn they have issued newsletters and so on to people who have passed on.

We must move forward and devise a better system. The current system is extremely cumbersome, awkward and outdated. Unlike Northern Ireland, we issue a new register every year rather than simply updating the existing register. This issue needs to be addressed. I encourage politicians and other bodies interested in the compilation of an accurate register to get involved in ensuring we put in place a system that is acceptable to everybody.

People have in the past expressed their annoyance and concern when omitted or deleted from the register. Often, a father and son with the same name or mother and daughter with the same name have been deleted from the register with one stroke of the keyboard on a computer. I am aware, having witnessed such a situation during last year's general election, that this causes great embarrassment for all involved. We must guard against this happening again. We should look to a new system.

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

One of the interesting points made last week by Mr. Douglas Bain at our meeting in Belfast was the rationale for having mandatory registration in Northern Ireland and the legal argument underpinning it. The argument was not that it was illegal to not be registered rather, it was an offence that one was not assisting in the maintenance of an accurate register, thereby assisting fraud. His presentation of the legal argument was interesting.

As mentioned by other speakers, the objective is to produce an accurate register. The availability of an accurate register provides for better in-built flexibilities in the system as provided for in the Northern Ireland system. If people are absent from the country because of holidays, work or study, they are entitled to vote, a facility which is not available to citizens of the Republic of Ireland.

However, with regard to social welfare, the position is that registration also seemed to contribute to difficulties for the social welfare department in the North, which is a different view to the position presented this afternoon. When people in the 60s age group, who worked at home raising seven or eight children, were being registered, their PPS numbers, or the social security numbers they had been using, were found to be inaccurate, which would create difficulties for them when seeking a pension at 66 years of age. Those problems were supposed to have already been remedied. Would Mr. Davis agree that this argument supports the position he put forward?

Mr. Gary Davis

The point I made about the PPSN was that I know from interaction with the Department of Social and Family Affairs that a large proportion of the population does not have a PPS number at all. Perhaps the system is different in the UK, but that type of people, who have, perhaps, been working in the home, does not have PPS numbers typically and has not been allocated numbers to now. Another group that has come to the attention of the office is a class of people who share a PPS number, husband and wife have the same number. I mention this to make the committee aware of the situation in terms of what would be required of such people. The Department of Social and Family Affairs could provide more information on how many are involved and how they would get a PPS number. The current system is that people go to an office and present certain identification documents in order to be issued with a PPS number.

Mr. Billy Hawkes

I thank members for their interesting comments. The PPS number is not the panacea to sorting out the electoral register, but it is something that can help. What I have been trying to present to the committee is that working within our current laws and system, and without imposing an obligation on the people — members know how people feel about obligations — we can do much to improve the quality of the electoral register, just by getting people to agree to their information being passed on.

I quoted the example of myself as a parent being requested to tick an extra box on the document for continuation of child support from social welfare, which every parent of a 16 year old gets now, thereby allowing my child to be added to the electoral register. That cohort is fairly accurate, because from some years ago, PPS numbers have been allocated to every new born child. Therefore, we can be fairly sure that any feed in of those people is accurate and can be held to be accurate for the future. Also, because the Department of Social and Family Affairs receives a feed from the GRO in terms of deaths, there could be significant gains in terms of accuracy.

In other words, I suggest that by going the voluntary route the committee can achieve what it is trying to achieve by using the PPS number, without actually overriding a right. I noted the comment that legislation could be used to override privacy. I suppose because of the job I am paid to do, I would prefer not to see privacy as an obstacle but as a right with which the Oireachtas should interfere only with very good reason. Therefore, what I suggest is that there is a way of achieving the important objective of a more accurate electoral register without overriding people's rights. I would be happy for the committee to look at that as a first option, before considering a legal obligation.

Deputy James Bannon

Local authorities are responsible for the current system and each September or October they begin on the process of compiling a new register, rather than updating the existing register. This is unnecessary, creates extra work and is cumbersome and awkward to do. Work on the new register for 2008-9 will commence in September. The creation of new registers has been the process since the foundation of the State. We should organise an update of the register rather than the compilation of a new register each year. This should be encouraged.

Mr. Billy Hawkes

What I suggested was something that would contribute to that. My suggestion is that we should ask the parents of every 16 year old, who are close to voting age, to allow an automatic feed of their details from the Department of Social and Family Affairs to the electoral authority, whether a local authority or a new national one. This would achieve precisely what Deputy Bannon seeks. This would be very much compatible with a rolling registration system. We could be fairly sure that in the case of feeds from, for example, the 16 year olds, the information and the address are accurate, at least for a couple of years. This suggestion would be valid, whether we stuck with the existing system of the local authorities doing it or opted for a central system, for which I can understand the arguments.

Mr. Gary Davis

I would like to add a point of information relating to deaths. The General Register Office has a death register database and produces a feed from which researchers and others can extract information. This could, I believe, be easily made available to local authorities which could run it, without any data protection issues arising, against their existing electoral register in each region, or central point, and then remove any names of people whose deaths have been registered. This is something small each local authority could do, without significant difficulty from the software point of view. The extract of deaths is easily available.

Deputy James Bannon

Another issue which has arisen since enlargement of the EU is the number of foreign nationals coming here from other European countries. The publication of information in different languages is important to ensure that everybody is registered. Currently, the law allows people from another jurisdiction to vote in both European and local elections here. It is important we accommodate these people by providing information in various languages. In Northern Ireland the electoral registration form is published in nine different languages and this is something we need to consider.

Mr. Billy Hawkes

I want to confirm that when one dies, one has no data protection rights. Therefore, there is no issue with regard to the information from the death register.

Chairman

One cannot libel the dead. We know that.

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

That does not seem to stop them from voting.

Chairman

The joint committee adjourned at 3.12 p.m. until 3.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 5 February 2008.

JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT, HERITAGE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT debate - Wednesday, 23 Jan 2008

Register of Electors: Discussion with Data Protection Commissioner.

Mr. Billy Hawkes

Mr. Billy Hawkes

Mr. Billy Hawkes

Mr. Billy Hawkes

Mr. Gary Davis

Mr. Gary Davis

Mr. Billy Hawkes

Mr. Billy Hawkes

Mr. Gary Davis

Mr. Billy Hawkes

Mr. Billy Hawkes

Mr. Billy Hawkes

Mr. Billy Hawkes

Mr. Billy Hawkes

Mr. Billy Hawkes

Mr. Billy Hawkes

Mr. Billy Hawkes

JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT, HERITAGE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT debate -
Wednesday, 23 Jan 2008