Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 10 Mar 1998

Vol. 488 No. 4

Priority Questions. - Public Service Card.

Emmet Stagg

Ceist:

16 Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs his views on the recommendations made at the Select Committee on Family, Community and Social Affairs by the Data Protection Commissioner, the Irish National Organisation of the Unemployed and all Opposition parties to drop the relevant sections in the Social Welfare Bill, 1998, regarding the introduction of a public service card; if he will introduce a separate Bill in Dáil Éireann which would deal with the proposal; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6509/98]

I presume the Deputy is referring to the provisions of Part IV, sections 14 and 15 of the Social Welfare Bill, 1998, which were considered by the Select Committee on Family, Community and Social Affairs on 4 March last. These provisions provide a legislative framework for the development of a more integrated approach to the administration, delivery, management and control of publicly funded services.

The lack of integration between various State services has been a matter of concern for some time and there have been many calls from Members of the House and various commentators for better integration and streamlining of services. It is generally recognised that this can lead to greatly improved customer service and better control of schemes and services. My Department's modernisation programme has been under way for a many years. A key to this programme is the greater integration of services through the use of information technology and closer co-operation with various service organisations.

The report of the interdepartmental group on the development of the ISSS in August 1996 made a number of recommendations following detailed consideration of the various issues involved including data protection issues. The proposals in this year's Social Welfare Bill build on this and on the work that has been going on in my Department in recent years. The Department has links with a number of other agencies and has developed a computerised system for recording means assessments and, along with the health boards, accounts for almost half of the means assessments carried out each year. The Department is responsible for the allocation of the revenue and social insurance numbers and for the issue of the current social services card, of which there are more than 1.6 million in circulation. These cards, which are a convenient modern record of a person's RSI number, contain limited information and are used at local departmental offices and facilitate payments at post offices.

The introduction of a public service card will, over time, replace the social services cards and will enable the public service number to be used as a single identifier for public administration purposes. This is a reasonable extension of the system currently in place. The public service card is not a general identity card and is not intended as such. Indeed, the Bill provides that it will be an offence for an unauthorised person to use the card or to seek to have it produced.

At this stage I am satisfied that the proposals in the Bill, including that in relation to the public service card, have been subject to a full and constructive debate of the issues involved. For the reasons I have given, it is appropriate that these measures should form part of the Social Welfare Bill. I am satisfied that appropriate safeguards have been incorporated and when the proposals are fully implemented, which will take time, there will be a better overall service to customers and better value to the taxpayers.

This proposal was brought before a meeting of the parliamentary Labour Party in the past but was rejected firmly. Why is this measure necessary? It is a means of identification.

Did the Deputy indicate that this matter arose at a parliamentary Labour Party meeting?

It was presented by a colleague but was rejected firmly and that is why it did not see the light of day. Does the Minister agree the problem with this system is that no one, including the bearer, knows what is stored on the black magnetic strips on the cards? He suggested means testing would be facilitated by the information stored on the strip. Does this mean one's credit rating will be available to various agencies? How will he prevent agencies, such as hire purchase companies who are not entitled to such information from accessing it given the technology currently available?

I intervened because I was not sure whether I heard the Deputy properly. I appreciate he is not the Labour Party spokesperson on Social, Community and Family Affairs and that Deputy Moynihan-Cronin is elsewhere.

She is in Limerick.

I thought so and the Deputy is holding the fort on his own.

I am doing a good job.

The rest of the Labour Party Front Bench was last seen having lunch in the Lord Mayor's public house in Swords.

It is a good place to be.

On 7 November 1993, a fine article in the Sunday Business Post stated:

Joan Burton, Minister for Social Welfare, plans to issue an encoded tax and social welfare card to everyone in the country as part of the Department's drive for efficiencies in the system. Civil liberties' groups need have no worries because the information accessible by the card will be covered by the Data Protection Act and its use will be for tax and social welfare purposes only.

It is a lengthy article based on the same proposal I am bringing forward. While the Labour Party objected to the article subsequent to it appearing in the newspaper, this issue has been progressed in my Department since 1993. The Government, of which the Deputy was a Minister of State, approved an interdepartmental report on this issue in June 1996. The Minister of State at the Department of Social Welfare, Deputy Durkan, was given responsibility "to promote and progress this proposal."

I am sure the Minister is aware that when this proposal was brought before the Labour Party by my former colleague it was solidly and firmly rejected and that is why it did not see the light of day after the article was published. Will he answer my question and stop politicking with this issue? Will the credit rating of people effectively be stored on the magnetic strip on the cards even though they will not know what it is? How can he prevent such information getting from one computer system to another given computers can now take one's telephone off the hook and listen to what one says when having dinner?

The Labour Party made a decision to reject the card and it is not my problem if the Government of which it was a member proceeded very vociferously to bring forward this proposal.

It never saw the light of day. Will the Minister answer the question?

The previous Government decided to initiate a report in June 1996 which proposed to promote and progress the introduction of the card.

Without a black strip.

After initial problems, the spokesperson for the Deputy's party issued a statement recently vehemently opposing this card. However, when it was pointed out to her that articles, such as that from which I quoted, appeared in newspapers, she said she was not against the card per se.

The credit rating of a person will not be available on this card in any shape or form. Basic information will be stored on it, such as the individual's name, address, gender, date of birth and marital status. If additional information is to be put on the card, as I explained on Second and Committee Stages of the Social Welfare Bill, it will be subject to a positive resolution of both Houses of the Oireachtas in terms of regulations to extend the amount of information to be stored on the card. At the end of the day, it is not an identity card and the information can only be accessed through computer systems which are not widely available. There are strict restrictions in the legislation which will make unauthorised use of the card a criminal offence.

Data sharing between Departments is subject to strict restrictions and it is widely accepted that, rather than this contravening the civil liberties of any person, there will be no problem in that area and people need not worry as Deputy Burton said in the November 1993 article because at the end of the day it is not designed to restrict a person's privacy but to help people who are not well off and must use State bodies. For instance, an individual who applies through a community welfare officer for supplementary welfare allowance must provide certain information, but by law the officer is not obliged to take the information and transpose it into that person's application for a medical card. The officer must sit down and take the same information from the individual again. The card is designed to ensure an individual will be required in those instances to tell his or her story once. It will streamline people's applications. This move should be welcomed.

Does the Minister agree the cards should be optional rather than compulsory?

No, because 1.6 million of them are in circulation among social welfare recipients. We are extending the availability of the cards to those who interact with public bodies specified in the legislation and ultimately it will streamline people's interaction with them. It would not work if it were optional. The card has been called for by successive Dála while the Committee for Public Accounts has called on this and previous Governments to bring it forward and the Select Committee on Social, Community and Family Affairs called on me to get on with the job of introducing it. They cannot all be wrong. I do not accept that it should be optional because it would not work.

The Deputy may not realise that currently when child benefit applications are received, an RSI number is assigned to the children involved. They do not get a card until they reach 16 years but they have an RSI number prior to that. All their details are available. The legislation provides that on demand people can get a copy of the information stored on the card if they are worried about it. If there is an error in that information, there is a facility to correct it.

As the time for Priority Questions has expired, we cannot take Question No. 17. However, Questions Nos. 18 and 19 may be taken in ordinary time.

Barr
Roinn