From top: last Sunday’s Sunday Independent; Gary Gannon
It is not the role of the State to misappropriate the personal information it contains on private citizens to gain political advantage.
Gary Gannon writes:
Those of us who retain the ideal that ‘The State has no right to enslave a conquered people’ watched with some bewilderment this week as Minister for Social Protection, Leo Varadkar announced that he was to seek permission from the Data Commissioner for ministers to be allowed to pass comments on individual cases were they believe incorrect claims are being made.
We often hear about data protection in the context of regulating what companies can do with our personal information such as our contact details. Most of us would seek to ensure that private companies cannot profit from selling on our email addresses or our phone numbers to other private marketers or worse.
Such expectations of data protection are even more important when it comes to our relationship with the State.
We can mostly choose not to share our data with private companies- we don’t have to sign up to club cards, mailing list or even social media sites. As citizens of a state however, we have no choice but to disclose our personal data to the multitude of different service providers that exist to serve the everyday functions of the State.
If we register to vote, or wish to have a medical test done, or pay tax, or apply for an entitlement then there is inevitably a form to be filled that requires personal information to be offered to the State.
It is an important component of the modern social contract that we fill out a lot of forms and in doing so; we must be able to trust that the personal information which we relinquish to the state is used solely for the intended purpose under which it was disclosed.
Where data protection has been breached – the bulwark against abuse is the Data Protection Commissioner. Ireland’s record on data protection is not great and in the past we have had to go to European Courts of Justice to get the State to conform to its obligations.
Now we have a minister proposing to pierce a great big loophole in our already pretty weak legislation.
The European Court of Justice has made it quite clear that Data Protection Agencies must act impartially and remain free from any external influence, including that of the State. As such, it would be interesting to see how the Minister’s proposal would hold up if it were to be brought through the European courts.
Independence in the case of Data Protection Agencies precludes not only any influence exercised by supervised bodies, but also any directions or other external influence which could call into question the performance of those authorities of their task consisting of establishing a fair balance between the protection of the right to private life and the free movement of personal data.
A spokesperson for the Minister quoted in the Irish Times stated that he “was not seeking to waive confidentiality in every case but specifically ones that make their situation public through the media.”
The state should not have the power to circumvent privacy legislation when it suits its own PR purposes. What is the logical extension of this? It can lead to silencing of people – it basically means that the price for speaking up about failures of the state becomes giving up yours and your family’s privacy.
Minister Varadkar’s request to the data commissioner came in the same week that his office had put out a press release which pertained to the high profile case of Erica Fleming and the fact that she had been vocal in the media regarding her declined application for Back to Education allowance.
The Minister in his press release to the media felt compelled to set the record straight on this issue as it was his fear that “a lot of inaccurate information had entered the public domain due to a high profile individual case that might cause lone parents to pass up educational opportunities.”
It was an extremely unfortunate week for Erica Fleming in regards the State and her personal information.
On the issue of data protection, an internal report that was prepared by Dublin City Council detailing Erica’s interactions with the council was leaked to the Sunday Independent.
This report gave the false impression that Erica had declined two housing offers while remaining as a campaigner on the issue of homelessness.
There are no indications that this report was leaked by any particular government agency but that it was passed to a journalist was clearly done on the basis that it would discredit Erica in the eye of the public.
This has now been referred to the office of the data commissioner for investigation. The circumstances around how the article came about will undoubtedly raise a multitude of difficult questions for Dublin City Council as its appearance in the public domain is in direct contravention of its own data protection code of practices.
Therein lays the danger of this desire by the minister to seek approval from the data protection commissioner to comment on individual cases should they appear in the media.
As a society we should we should encourage people to come forward as a whistleblowers who highlight malpractice within State services.
This is the duty of all citizens that reside within a State. It is not the role of the State to misappropriate the personal information it contains on private citizens to gain political advantage.
It is only the people who are sovereign, the government must remain distinct and accountable to the collective good.
Gary Gannon is a Social Democrats Councillor on Dublin City Counicil for Dublin’s North Inner City. Gar’s column appears here every Friday before lunch. Follow Gary on Twitter: @1garygannon
Previously: Erica’s Education
Yesterday’s Phoenix
Yep. Still available for a free read in SPAR.
Reading (in all good bookshops nationwide) is stealing.
blushirts don’t like it when the poor get uppity
Taxpayers don’t like it when the “poor” get grabby.
the cheek of them
Sorry dav, is the taxpayer some kind of bottomless milkshake that anyone can take as much as they like from? I want to have kids with a deadbeat dad with nary a thought for how to provide for their upbringing. Ah, the gimp Irish taxpayer will provide.
well they can bail out banks at the drop of a hat, or accept that american multinational can make millions but only pay €250 in taxes??
Sorry but your anger against the poor can be better directed against those who are truly screwing the country over..
We have unsustainable welfare spending for a variety of reasons. It existed before the GFC, during it, and will persist after. We’re still borrowing gazillions for it, year in, year out.
There is more than one cause to our current problem, try holding the two conflicting views in your mind if you can.
The Blueshirt trope that this gav chap is tiresome for sure but the bottom line is is this…
Welfare fraud in general and true misrepresentation of this lady’s plight more specifically is no doubt unpleasant , but the day the State genuinely tackles the financially exponential levels of corporate and banking related fraud in this country, I have no interest in the petty amounts lost to those trapped in poverty. It’s a pittance in comparison.
In fact I read something somewhere that there’s more money left unclaimed by those entitled to it than there is taken fraudulently. I cannot cite that.
So, this lady is a pawn in a game she probably wont fully appreciate. Certainly though when the full apparatus of the state bears down on her, she’ll begin to.
So… These stories are all but smoke screens and slights of hand to have us fleeced ‘taxpayers’ eyes diverted while the real bandits make their getaway.
“I have no interest in the petty amounts lost to those trapped in poverty. It’s a pittance in comparison.”
– the social protection budget accounts for one-third of Ireland’s GDP; hardly a pittance.
Actually it us more like a tenth.
Come back to me with a number relating to welfare fraud, then we can discuss.
Again, the amounts lost to welfare fraud compared to monies lost to State, corporate and banking corruption is an absolute and utter pittance…..
Bottomless milkshake…. hmmmmmm…
… Do the thousands of employees of the Multinational corporation paying no tax not pay PAYE and PRSI? Would the entire economy not collapse if the government didn;t bailout the banks via the EU and NAMA, resulting in our nation becoming a non-player on the international market (the MCN previously mentioned would probably leave Ireland as a result)
….your views on the governments spending and how people who take advantage of the system based on their socioeconomic background is a bit shortsighted. Enlighten yourself.
Don’t like Varadkar me
Lair, liar, pants on fire.
This has been talked to death on other forums already at this stage. I don’t think she is sincere and I don’t think she’s a victim and I’ll leave it at that.
Another perspective:
“Ms Flemings rejection of being accommodated under the Housing Assistance Payment scheme is entirely reasonable and not uncommon for reasons not explored in the Sunday Independent hatchet job.”
https://m.facebook.com/MichaelOBrienAntiAusterityAlliance/posts/686912281458309
https://twitter.com/namawinelake/status/767643114748215296
The issue a lot of people have is her status as homeless, in her case in particular the state have been very accommodating but she’ll bullying her way to getting exactly what she wants. And I’ve been supportive of her in other regards.
Know that namawinelake on twitter and the website namawinelake are not related.
? Not sure how that would change the point made in the tweet.
But to clarify for anyone glancing at your comment, said twitter account has the link to the Namawinelake website in its twitter bio.
Said twitter account is also being followed by a number of high profile journalists/editors/people (e.g. Dearbhail McDonald, David McWilliams, Rachael English, Broadsheet favourite Michael Taft, Broadsheet favourite Mick Clifford. To name but a few.)
How do you know that?
Genuine question. Website was fantastic with well considered blogs. Twitter is just anti-govt/bank/elite whatever’s popular today.
P.S. The Phoenix Magazine also makes an interesting point about the timing of the leak. The Sindo claimed that an offer of private rented accommodation was made to Fleming before last January’s RTE homeless programme. That was 7 months ago. Yet the story was only released last Sunday, which happens to be the same day that the latest record breaking figures for homelessness were released.
Hi rory.
https://www.broadsheet.ie/2016/01/23/de-sunday-papers-144/
The Sunday Mail front page on Jan 24th 2016 has a story about forgery in the Housing Board from 2004.
I wondered what the point of that was, on first reading it suggests a recent occurance.
I’m with you on that Harry Molloy!
Hmm, that’s a charming jacket she’s wearing.
Paul Costelloe?
Charity shop?
You leave charity shops out of this, y’hear?
should be in sackcloth and ashes, eh?
Bin liners. And she’d probably look good in them too. :-)
“As a society we should we should encourage people to come forward as a whistleblowers who highlight malpractice within State services.”
but whistleblowers who have info that disputes claims malpractice in state services should not be encouraged, right?
Indignation that they backed (yet another) media-friendly victim and it backfired rather than any real substance here. Like the Car Mother who actually *had* a council house she didn’t like, for instance
So was she offered a gaf or not? if she turned it down we have a problem here.
My understanding is that yes, she was offered a gaff under the HAP scheme which pays private landlords for accommodation. She has an issue with this HAP scheme because she feels a private tenancy is insecure (got burnt before) and would prefer a a full council house, or she wants the HAP scheme to offer 5 year fixed rent tenancies. There is also an issue I think with your place on the housing list if you go on HAP.
My reading of it is she seems to have an issue with private tenancies and the HAP scheme but she is using her personal situation to make a protest. IMO she’d be better off taking the accommodation on offer (which seemed decent – an apartment in Clontarf) and carrying on with her campaign against HAP etc. in parallel.
I should caveat I have not studied this at length but that’s the opinion I have formed form the various articles I have read (including Eric’s rebuttal to the Sindo article).
“Erica’s”
Erica’s rebuttal:
http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/erica-fleming-setting-the-record-straight-2943798-Aug2016/?utm_source=twitter_self
Yeah, read that. See this is what I think people are taking issue with:
“My main objection to HAP is the lack of security of tenure. My only ask during that phone call, and indeed the next one, was that I be given a lease that would guarantee the rent remained static or at least within DCC’s rent limit over the next five years. This request was declined on each occasion, and I never got the opportunity to meet with any landlord.”
Lots of people in the private rental sector can only dream of 5 year rent certainty, hence people are getting their backs up. If she wants to campaign for these kind of tenant rights she is entitled to do so, but she seems to be cutting off her nose to spite her face. If it was me I’d take the accommodation and continue to campaign independently for better tenant rights. It’s like any legislative change, it can’t be done overnight and will take time, if it can be done at all. I just think she is being unrealistic and she is losing support over her stance.
What is it with those jackets with fur collars and the lower classes? It’s almost like it’s an assigned uniform.
Really? That’s your take on this?
People should not be cowed into silence if there is a problem in dealing with state agencies. There are serious problems and we need to be able to discuss them without fear of consequences.
Some parties have form in naming people publicly to cite as examples of social problems. But also tend to walk away once the point scoring is done, leaving the person involved to ultimately try sort it out but now with additional publicity.
Politicians need to get stuck in and sort out the problems that everyone knows we have. 70 day to form a government, no legislation of consequence passed in first 100 days, now on holidays.
And other parties need to stop using vulnerable people for their own ends.
I wonder if we would feel different about this if it was Denis O’Brien’s personal data instead of Erica Fleming’s….
like the stuff they read out in the Dail?
Heh
Bottom line is that one or more individuals took it upon themselves to reveal what should have been confidential information. A dirty trick if ever there was one.
If DCC are so concerned about their public profile then perhaps they could make a public statement as to why there is so many boarded up flats all over the city center?
“Bottom line is that one or more individuals took it upon themselves to reveal what should have been confidential information. A dirty trick if ever there was one.”
are we talking about Catherine Murphy and DOB here or the SIndo and Erica Fleming?
touché
What Catherine Murphy revealed should have been confidential information? Nope.
I think Mr O’Brien is well qualified to speak on sharp practice, his own.
Yes, the private info of a single mother trying to get a council house is just as important to the public as that of a billionaire speculator who owns half the media and has gotten millions of euros of discounts from the government.
It is as important, because well over 50 % of these “single” mothers know the father and still feel entitled to have everything handed to them.
That is a question I would love to have an answer to. Its not a question of money.
http://www.merrionstreet.ie/en/News-Room/Releases/Minister_Kelly_Commits_to_funding_for_boarded_up_social_houses_for_Dublin_City_Council.html
“If DCC are so concerned about their public profile then perhaps they could make a public statement as to why there is so many boarded up flats all over the city center?”
Agreed.
DCC is controlled by Sinn Féin – the very same people who are coaching Ms. Fleming for the duration of her one-woman crusade. So, maybe they should concentrate more on getting land zoned and accommodation built within the DCC area, rather than using Erica Fleming as proxy in their political fight against the govt.
‘…It is not the role of the State to misappropriate the personal information it contains on private citizens to gain political advantage.’…when Alan Shatter was Min of Justice and Defence, he thought it was perfectly OK…
Calling solo parents ‘lone’ is like calling immigrants ‘aliens’
IT title: ‘Another Life: The aliens among us – accommodate or eradicate?’, thankfully it’s about immigrant plants.
I’m classed as an alien in the country I live it.
I have no special powers though – that’s the depressing part.
From her Twitter bio:
“Dublin mother of one forced to raise my daughter in a cramped hotel room because of FG/Lab/FF austerity”
Maybe there wasn’t room for:
“Dublin mother of one forced to raise my daughter in a cramped hotel room because DCC won’t give me the exact type of accommodation I want, in precisely the area I want, for the rest of my natural life”.
– it’s the poor child I feel sorry; I’m sure she would be only delighted to be living in a nice apartment in Clontarf.
+1
This is all “shoot the messenger” narrative from the SocDems.
– Why did Gary say he attended a meeting with her and DCC when she said herself she only ever had 2 phone calls with them on this matter?
– Why did Gary recommend she apply for the BTEA when she did not qualify? Did he not understand it? Gary has a degree you know……
Credibility levels dropppppppppppppppppiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnggggggggggggg
Nah, their credibility levels are just fine. No amount of mini blog posts by some FF/FG/Lab volunteer will change that. People have had enough of their collective summery. The SDs are a real alternative and you are legit terrified. They’ve 3 TDs and you’re talking about them like they’ve 30. Clearly they’re on the right path.
From her Twitter bio:
“Dublin mother of one forced to raise my daughter in a cramped hotel room because of FG/Lab/FF austerity”
No agenda there then! Massive credibility! Not.
Isnt it strange how Rob_G and Jake38 posted almost identical arguments there within minutes of each other? You don’t think they’re singing off the same pre-ascribed hymn sheet do you?
It’s weird… it’s almost like a lot of the people who pay for the “I’m entitled”-brigade are getting collectively ticked off by this one particular case…
I’d say you find the concept of people voting for the same gimp on Big Brother simply astounding.
I would if it was being done on a suspiciously copy and pasted word for word basis Tony. But you just go ahead and play the man not the ball there.
bit silly to post them right next to each other, if we were part of the same grand conspiracy, but.
because it’s impossible for any two people to think alike
So alike as to post almost word for word the same thing is a bit more unusual.
Personally, I don’t give a hoot about this issue either way. I just find the transparency of efforts by the “YFG “media team hilarious.
A bit of selective in the interpretation of Leo’s request there Gary.
He’s only looking for the right of response to people who campaign publicity on state services issues. Sure isn’t everyone, including the State, entitled to that?? Especially in grey areas such as the case of Fleming??
http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/varadkar-seeks-right-to-comment-on-individual-cases-34984049.html
He is not asking to be proactive in making such info public – if he was – everything you outline above would be correct. I agree with all of that . But it doesn’t cover this situation. The info is only looked to be used in a reactive manner
Secondly the housing crisis is a failure of the state. True. The homeless not being offered rent security for 5 years, when other members of society don’t get that, except paying for fixed term mortgage – is not.
+1
And a +1 from me
I’m inclined to agree. I’m no mad raging right-winger but…well put it like this…
Alan Shatter has a go at Mick Wallace on the telly about penalty points using information that, as of yet, we’ve no idea how he came by it. I mean, we know he was told by the Garda Commissioner, but we’re not sure precisely what rationale was being employed by Shatter such that he’d be offered this info.
In any event, I think most would say that what he did was wrong, Wallace was commenting in general terms about a problem that he believed existed and that should be looked at, and by the responsible Minister. Shatter went and, for want of a better term, using information he gleaned from An Garda Siochana, played the man rather than the ball, and put Wallace back in his box toot sweet.
So this was wrong. Why? Well, Wallace wasn’t seeking to gain any personal benefit from banging on about penalty points being quashed. I mean, obviously, in the long term, he’s a politician, but there appeared to be problem, he drew attention to it, and if we ascribe selfish motives to Wallace in this instance, then we should do so to all politicians no matter their politicial hue.
But if an individual is willing (and I’m not saying this is what happened with Erica here) to say something untrue, and to go public and their motive is (for want of a better term )’selfish’, and the result of such an untruth, if accepted unquestioningly, is a cost to the tax payer then I think that a person hiding behind Data Protection Concerns is wrong.
I’ve lost all empathy and sympathy for her. She’s a bully! Her 5 seconds of fame has proved this. Erica, Go take the apartment you were offered. The rest of us will pay massive rents and mortgages while you expect us to give you a home and educate you.
If a member of the public makes a false statement about a body or company then that body is entitled to correct the record.
This woman is a liar and a bad mother. It’d the child I feel firy
“It is not the role of the State to misappropriate the personal information it contains on private citizens to gain political advantage.”
Is it the role of the citizen to deceive others about their circumstances?
…and I’m struggling to see the political advantage?
“This report gave the false impression that Erica had declined two housing offers while remaining as a campaigner on the issue of homelessness.”
Sorry to say that Gary Gannon has damaged the Soc Dem’s credibility in my eyes with the above quote. The impression is not false. Accommodations were offered and Ms Fleming refused to proceed with them (as is her right) because they were under the HAP scheme and did not guarantee the security she wanted. The validity of her reasons for refusing is the crux of the debate. It does a huge disservice to the public to mislead the discourse by pretending that this didn’t happen – it’s the kind of semantic deflection I’d expect from established spin doctors but am very disappointed to see coming from a party whose recent rise to prominence was largely because of Catherine Murphy’s sterling efforts to uncover truth. Don’t hide the facts, explain the context and let people decide for themselves. I honestly think Mr Gannon should retract and apologise for this obfuscatory statement.
+1
Have to agree. I’ve taken a great interest in the SDs due to the competence of Donnelly and Murphy but I’m not liking a lot of what’s coming out under the party badge.
It’s seems populist and reactionary rather than the well thought out prudent but fair positions that I had hoped for.
+1 Agree. He’s damaging the Social Democrats
I’ve voted for Catherine Murphy in the last 2 elections, and was interested in the SDs as a result, but their two columnists on Broadsheet are turning me off.
In fairness to Annemarie and Gary, they have to do stuff like this to raise their profile. If any politician wrote a weekly article on a topic, we’d probably find stuff we didn’t like about their opinions too.
I agree with Varadkar on this one, to an extent. If I was in Erica’s position and the state released that I’d been arrested twice a few years ago, then that would be a major breach, having nothing to do with my dispute. If I claimed that I had never been offered accomodation then I think the state would be perfectly right to release that they’d offered me two houses which I turned down.
In Erica’s case its a bit greyer as she doesn’t make a specific claim, but the whole “homeless because of FG/FF” stuff I think makes the info released fair game.
The concern is that it was leaked. Should not have happened and should be investigated. I’d have no problem with the state having a right of reply with relelvant info though.
I can understand people in private rentals being frustrated that someone would turn down a place because it doesn’t have rent certainty. But that doesn’t mean that she’s wrong to do so.
It’s the same every time there’s an industrial dispute: ‘I get paid badly – so why shouldn’t they?’
Why not support the people fighting for better things, rather than turning away from them in disgust? More often than not, their fight is your fight, though it mightn’t look like it at first blush.
I live in a private rental, I pay too much rent for a small, cold house with no security of tenure. It sucks, and it makes me angry that almost everyone I know pays too much rent to live in small, cold houses or dank apartments with mould on the ceiling. And I can understand that people paying 1,500 a month to live – not in the equivalent of council houses, but literal, ex-council houses – are bitter at the idea of someone paying only 300 a month to live in similar non-splendour in an actual council house.
But getting angry at the people who want to pay 300 a month to live in a council house, and who qualify to do so because their income is low enough, won’t solve the problem. It certainly won’t reduce your rent. They’re right to want that, and as someone whose income is above the social housing limits I’m right to want a system where I don’t have to spend such a huge lump of my income for a roof over my head. Our interests coincide. More council houses means fewer social tenants in private rentals, means more supply, means lower rents for private renters. Telling someone they should suck up an insecure, private HAP tenancy that’ll throw them off a housing list they might have been on for 8 years won’t make anything better. It’ll make you feel better for a second to spit your bitterness at someone, but it won’t do anything to improve your own situation. It’ll just make it worse.
She can fight away all she wants and fair play to her if that’s what she wants to do.
She can’t say the state has done nothing for her though, or claim to be homeless unless most people I know are too.
Most people have to compromise when it comes to renting or buying a home. The ideal situation isn’t always realistic. She needs to learn this or she’ll be waiting a lot longer. And be a little more upfront.
it’s telling how much good will she had last week that the general population like to see people work to improve their situations and are happy to see their taxes spent that way. They’re less than happy to see unrealistic and dishonest demands though, hence the loss of support this week.
The thing about council house tenancies are that they are for life. In fact, even longer, as they often pass down to tenant’s children.
By insisting that she will settle for nothing less than a council house, Erica Fleming seems to be acknowledging her intentions to never fully pay her way in life.
HAP tenancies are for 2 years (I think); this is good length of time to get back on your feet, start education or training or whatever, and get back working. Council house tenancies offer a perverse incentive not to achieve financial independence; I’m glad that councils are moving away from them. Social welfare should be for a limited duration for those really in need of it, not a crutch for life.
The problem I and I think a lot of people have is with the attitude of most dcc tenants. They pay next to nothing in rent and wont the “corpo” to pay for and fix everything. I only had a conversation with a corpo tenant about rats, the outrage about the corpo not doing anything and how the cant leave windows open. When I suggested buying traps and poision them selves I nearly had my head bit off. See again its the attitude of, I deserve everything free.
Fine and all but her child still lives in a hotel room instead of a nice flat in Clontarf because of her decision.
All farmers in receipt of CAP funds have their name, townland and the amount received on the Department of Agriculture website. It totals about €1bn a year.
Is there a case to be made for being equally transparent with the welfare budget? (It is our money too). Most households get something: generally only <65s in employment with no school-age children don't.
@HarryMolloy But that’s what’s depressing – someone wanting security of tenure and a predictable rent is described as being ‘unrealistic’. If we accept things as they are currently then they’ll never get better. Things are atrocious currently, and maybe we could all do with digging our heels in a bit more and saying, no, this is unacceptable. Because the powers-that-be aren’t going to be doing us any favours if we don’t – we have to fight for them, and that’s what Erica is doing. I get the idea of compromise, but at what point do you say enough? Is paying half your income for a place two hours away from your work a compromise, or just a huge failure of the State that you’re expected to suck up and be grateful for? I know if I had the possibility of a secure place to live for myself and my child (if I had one) I’d hold out for that rather than give up all chance of it in exchange for a private rental in the system as it’s currently constituted. I don’t think that’s unrealistic, I think that’s profoundly reasonable, and I’d campaign for exactly the same opportunities for everyone currently stuck in the hell of private renting. It’s not unreasonable to not want to move every year, and it’s not unreasonable to not want to spend your nights wondering not if but when you’ll have to move, especially if you have a kid.
@Rob_G HAP tenancies are the same as private rentals; the length of tenure and security of it is governed by the same legislation, and the rents are unregulated. Recipients of HAP have to find their own private rentals and get a landlord to agree to renting a place to them. In other words, it’s the same ole nightmarish wild west any private tenant is in. It’s just a renamed Rent Supplement, and the tenant’s landlord is the private landlord, not the council.
Not that simple, she demanded a state agency to deliver her a unit with no rent increases for 5 years, in the certain knowledge it could not be delivered. By all means have a campaign for better tenant rights but don’t do it from a hotel room claiming you’ve not been offered housing when a 2 bed apartment in the heart of Clontarf was discussed, it is an insult to the army of commuters paying for this country to run.
The Sockies have built a reputation reading leaked info the Dail record, much of it in the public interest.
Don’t try the data protection nonsense, truth is truth and lies are lies.
Ask yourself what is the USP of the Sockies, concealing truth or reading leaked information into the Dail record.