Next is Senator Keogan and I will give her latitude given that she facilitated Senator Mullen.

I thank the Cathaoirleach. I second the proposal to amend the Order of Business. What Senator Mullen proposes to do in the House next week is far more important than what has been going on in the two committee meetings that have been taking place yesterday and today.

I call for a debate with the Minister for Justice on the use of body cameras and facial recognition technology. The Government's handling of this will be extremely costly and will result in serious issues relating to data protection and the protection of civil liberties. The press release issued by the Department of Justice states the Garda Commissioner will begin tendering for the purchase of body cameras. This is putting the cart before the horse. We will spend a sizeable amount of money on technology that we may not be able to use for a very long period of time.

By the time gardaí will be able to use the bodycams, the technology could be outdated. If we purchase bodycams now, we might later find out they are incompatible with our legislation.

According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, facial recognition technology is accurate only 70% of the time and is often worse at identifying women and members of minority groups. In the US, the American Civil Liberties Union is taking cases for people who are wrongly identified. You cannot call yourself anti-racist, progressive and liberal while at the same time enacting legislation that is anything but.

I have talked to people in the Data Protection Commission who are very concerned about the compliance perspective. The press release states that the Garda will make use only of images it is entitled to use, but the AI is trained on multiple samples. If this collects data that the Minister says will not be used, what is to stop someone else from using those data accidentally or for a more nefarious end in the future? Whenever it is pointed out to the Minister for Justice that something could be open to abuse, she has a stock response along the lines that this is not about racial profiling or mass surveillance but about helping gardaí to do their jobs. That statement appeared in the Irish Independent. If the wording of her upcoming Bill does not do what she says it is intended to do, she will need to change it. I do not think the Minister understands the consequences of the legislation she is trying to pass. At the very least, the upcoming Bill should be subject to pre-legislative scrutiny.

Is this good public procurement practice? What evidence gathered by this technology puts people at risk of unlawful arrest? Gardaí risk gathering inadmissible evidence. We also risk having the data being used for unlawful purposes. May we please have a debate on this in the hope of preventing further embarrassing legislation being brought to this House?

I add my congratulations to Kilmainham Gaol. I echo that there are incredible workers in the OPW. Many of the tour guides - I have raised this in this House before - are on contracts that prevent them from progressing beyond a certain grade. That causes them to leave because no matter how experienced or qualified they are, they cannot progress beyond that point. There are incredible people who work in the OPW.

This morning during a Commencement matter I raised concerns that senior management in the OPW break the law and have broken the law. The Minister of State, Deputy O'Donovan, said that if I had evidence of that, I should bring it to him. He knows I have repeatedly raised the matter through parliamentary questions and in this House. I will now put the proof on the record. I had to go to the Office of the Information Commissioner to get it. I was put through the hoops but I want to confirm that on 16 November 2020 a report was carried out by a ranger in the National Parks and Wildlife Service. That report stated:

In conclusion:

In light of the evidence that unfolded during my investigation, I recommend that the Office of Public Works is prosecuted under Regulations 51 (2)(b); and 51 2 (d) of the European Communities (Birds & Natural Habitats) Regulations ... for disturbing the breeding and resting place of bats in Emo Court House without a bat derogation license. Furthermore, I recommend that the Office of Public Works is also prosecuted under Regulation 65 of the said EU Regulations namely: incites, directs, procures, permits or assists another person to carry out an action that is an offence under these Regulations shall also be guilty of an offence.

The Minister of State is aware of this. I will post this to him to let him know. I want it on the record of this House that I do not come in here and make accusations without having my facts in place. The Minister of State is well aware of the fact that the OPW was recommended for prosecution, including in a second case in Barryscourt, where it also carried out works without the necessary licence.