The Data Protection Commissioner's 172 page report into the public services card provides us with much more than just the findings of her lengthy investigation, which has been ongoing since 2017. It tells us of the flawed arguments put forward by the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection that in some instances are totally nonsensical. It also gives us a very clear insight into the Department's attitude to the Data Protection Commissioner, one that can only be described as embarrassing and childish. I am embarrassed when I think of the 470 scanned pages, without numbers, and sent illogically by the Department to the commissioner as its response to her initial draft report, like a child throwing a tantrum. That is unprofessional and unbefitting a Department of the State. We see a total lack of regard for taxpayers' money, which we have seen time and again from the Government. The Department threatened the Data Protection Commissioner in October 2018 when it did not get its way when seeking more time to respond to the draft report, even though the commissioner had already extended the deadline for reply. The Department's response was totally unwarranted and unreasonable.

The Data Protection Commissioner referred in her report to the Minister's insistence in arguing that there is no evidence of dissatisfaction with the public services card. Has the Minister forgotten the uproar when an elderly lady lost her pension payment for not having a card, or the delays experienced by people forced to get a public services card in order to allow them to apply for a passport or driver's licence? Likewise, has she forgotten the people who were adopted who were denied a card unless they had an adoption certificate, or any of the numerous complaints received about the public services card by her Department, the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade? That hardly screams of satisfaction.

The holding indefinitely of personal documentation belonging to those who apply for the public services card by the Department cannot be explained. The Department's response is that the process of satisfying the Minister as to identity is not necessarily complete once the card issues, yet the legislation clearly states that a public services card will not be issued unless a Minister is satisfied as to the identity of the person. Which is it?

The Taoiseach said yesterday that his view on the Data Protection Commissioner's findings is supported by outside legal counsel.

I thank the Deputy. His time is up.

That advice should be published by the Government in the public interest. Will the Taoiseach publish it? Is he concerned by the clarification given by the Department to the commissioner-----

The Deputy's time is up.

-----that not everyone who was issued with a public services card went through the SAFE 2 process. Some did and some did not. How was the differentiation made and how does that combat fraud?

Like the majority of people in this House, I am a big supporter of the public services card. I think it has worked extremely well. More than 3 million people in this country now have a public services card, including me, and when people were asked what they think about the public services card they have, more than 80% of people were satisfied with it and prefer it to what they had before, namely, a number of different books and passes such as pension books, children's allowance books, free travel passes and the social welfare services card. The public services card has replaced all of those and given people one simple card which enables them to access public services. That is what the public services card is; it does exactly what it says on the tin. It is what it was intended to be in 1998 and in 2005 when it was introduced in legislation. It is there to assist people to access public services and to make public services more efficient to deliver. It is not primarily about fraud, but it also has benefits in terms of deterrence and reducing fraud. Its primary purpose is to make it easier for people to access the public services and benefits they are entitled to and it also makes it more efficient for Departments and agencies to provide those public services.

The reason most people support and like the public services card is that instead of having to go through the rigmarole of going to the chemist, getting passport photos, signing them on the back, going to the Garda station, getting forms signed, filling them in, finding a utility bill and having to do that every year or every couple of years when they engage with a new Government service, they only have to do that once. That is the big advantage with the public services card and that is the reason it has worked very well.

In the pension case Deputy Brady mentioned, it is worth putting on the record of the House that the Data Protection Commissioner found in favour of the Department, but it was dealt with sympathetically in any case by the Minister accepting that there was a conscientious objection.

It is not our practice to publish legal advice either from the Attorney General or from outside counsel. We will not do that but if this case goes to the Circuit Court or the High Court thereafter, the legal advice will be made public at that point, which is the normal procedure when it comes to litigation.

What we just had was a rehashing of all the Taoiseach's arguments on the perceived benefits of the public services card. The Data Protection Commissioner accepts those points, but she says the process is totally illegal. The collection and retention of individuals' data are completely illegal. I again urge the Taoiseach to issue the third-party legal advice. I accept it is the practice that advice from the Attorney General is not made public but there is a strong argument for the third-party advice to be issued.

Some 3.2 million people had no choice but to get the public services card because it was mandatory but not compulsory. Reading between the lines, the Government is not going to implement the findings of the Data Protection Commissioner and will continue to illegally implement the use of the public services card and essentially put it up to the Data Protection Commissioner to initiate enforcement proceedings so that the case ends up in the court. That is an unfortunate continuation of the waste of public funds.

I thank the Deputy. His time is up.

In terms of the continuation of the roll-out of the public services card, from October it will be required for the national childcare scheme. There are also plans to require the public services card for school transport cases that are being appealed. Under the current system, no ID is needed-----

The Deputy's time is up.

-----for that process. Rather than selling the benefits of the card, which is illegal, the Taoiseach should fully implement the findings of the Data Protection Commissioner and desist from his continuous undermining of the commissioner and her good office.

As Deputy Brady is aware, the national childcare scheme is coming into effect later this year. It will provide increased subsidies for childcare for tens of thousands of families across the State and, for the first time, some 10,000 middle-income families will qualify for childcare subsidies.

The vast majority of these families, about 80%, have the public services card already and will be able to apply for those subsidies and increased subsidies online. I think the vast majority of them will do that because they will see the convenience of just being able to take out the public services card, apply for those childcare subsidies online and get those subsidies without having to go through all the rigmarole of filling in forms, getting photographs, producing bank statements and all of that. However, for those who want it, that option will be available - there will be an option available for those who do not want to get a public services card. Mark my words, people will vote with their feet and their keyboards, and the majority of those parents will use the public services card to apply for that subsidy because it makes sense. Moving online and digitisation are the future of providing public services to people in this country but the alternative will be there.

In regard to the Data Protection Commissioner's report, we have yet to receive an enforcement order from the Data Protection Commissioner. When that arrives, obviously, the Department will study it and if this case goes to litigation, then, at that point in time, of course, any legal advice will be made available. The Minister has offered to meet the Data Protection Commissioner to discuss her concerns and findings but, unfortunately, the Data Protection Commissioner has declined that request.

The one thing I would say is that this is a democracy. The right of appeal is part of a democracy; it is in our Constitution. It is not unusual for the Government to appeal a decision. Dublin City Council made a ruling against the injecting centre on Merchants Quay and the Government has appealed that to An Bord Pleanála. The European Commission, on occasion, makes decisions that we do not agree with and we appeal them to the European Court of Justice. I think we would be undermining the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner if somehow we said her office was unique and that there was no right of appeal. That would be the wrong approach.