Regulation of Artificial Intelligence Bill 2026: Committee and Remaining Stages Dail Éireann — 2026-06-30 ============================================================ Niamh Smyth (FF), Cavan-Monaghan I thank all colleagues for their thoughtful contributions and well-placed intentions. I have an array of notes here to help me respond to them as best I can. Deputies Geoghegan and Ó Cearúil asked questions about the next phase, primary legislation to go with the non-personal data Bill to cover the pre-legislative scrutiny report's recommendations and any amendments needed for the digital omnibus and levy provision for any regulation. The next phase is primary legislation. This legislation is not only critically important but we will need to keep changing it and come back to it many times in future, unlike much of the other legislation that is established and enacted here, for example, planning law, which may be in place for the next 20 years. I cannot imagine that being the case with legislation on AI. I genuinely believe it will develop organically, but we have to start somewhere and this is the somewhere. This is what we are attempting to do tonight. Deputy Ó Cearúil was right that we have a deadline to meet; there is no getting away from that. As regards the Bills and the process, I accept that and will do my best. Unfortunately, I have no authority over the process, as the Bills Office decides that. However, I accept that Deputies feel this is being rushed. I assure them that the next phase is primary legislation, and I will take on board any requests or suggestions. I am happy to work with them on this. Deputy Gibney said this issue is being viewed entirely through an enterprise lens, and Deputy Paul Murphy said the same thing. I have said numerous times that I am very cognisant of the human-centred aspect. The Deputy might be throwing her eyes up to heaven, but the truth with regard to the AI Act is that fundamental rights are enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, including rights relating to democracy, the rule of law and environmental protection, which the Deputy called out. Member states must notify the European Commission of the designated authorities to ensure transparency and effective co-operation across the EU. Ireland's fundamental rights authorities include Coimisiún na Meán, the Data Protection Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman, the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, IHREC, and the Office of the Ombudsman for Children, none of which comes under the Department of enterprise. To be fair, there is a broad scope and I certainly do not come at this issue from that narrow prism of enterprise only. While I am a Minister of State in the Department of enterprise and the office is being created by my Department, I assure Deputies that its autonomy and independence will be absolute in the legislation and there will be an arm's length approach taken to the AI office. I emphasise that this is a process and not a done deal; it will not be done and dusted tonight. I accept that Deputies would like to have more time. Two committees, the AI and enterprise committees, have responsibility in this regard. The enterprise committee has statutory responsibility for pre-legislative scrutiny. I have no authority over that, but I am always happy to go before the artificial intelligence committee to answer questions and engage in debate and discussion with Deputies. I am waiting on the enterprise committee's pre-legislative scrutiny recommendations and I will be happy to see how we can knit those into the next phase of the legislation. I hope that answers some of the calls that have been made. The pre-legislative scrutiny process was watched closely by officials. Certain matters have been incorporated, including the carve-outs in section 2 and the inclusion of the requirement for the market surveillance authorities to share the fundamental rights impact analysis reports with the AI office. However, we stand ready for the report and are eager to take the recommendations in the next phase. I hope that puts to bed concerns that people may have that are raised here tonight. Deputy Gibney raised the CEO recruitment. I do not pick the CEO. There is a very public, transparent process there, which the Deputy knows full well, I have no doubt. The position was advertised through a Public Appointments Service competition. The competition is at an advanced stage. I can tell the Deputy that, but I do not pick the CEO, so please do not indicate that I do, because I do not. I thank Deputy Gibney for her amendment. However, I do not consider it necessary to introduce a definition of service for the purpose of the Bill. The references to the Public Appointments Service in the Bill are limited in number and are clear and unambiguous in their context. The provisions concerning the appointment of members of the board expressly refer to the Public Appointments Service. There is no difficulty in understanding those references as drafted. As a general principle of legislative drafting, defined terms should only be used when they are necessary to assist the interpretation or operation of legislation. In this instance, introducing a definition of service would not materially improve the readability or operation of the Bill. For those reasons, I do not consider the amendment necessary, and therefore do not propose to accept it. Regarding amendments Nos. 13, 14, 15, and 16, I thank Deputies Gibney, Lawlor, Conway-Walsh and Geoghegan for their amendments in respect of the board members of the AI office. Deputy Byrne may have raised this too. I recognise the objective behind the amendments, namely, to ensure a highly transparent, merit-based appointments process and a broad range of expertise on the board. I agree with these objectives. Indeed, the Bill already provides for a Public Appointments Service process and requires that both initial and future appointments be made, having regard to the experience and capacity of prospective members in matters connected with the functions of the office. In other words, we will be looking to ensure that the expertise required as technology develops is there. Many of the procedural requirements proposed in amendment No. 15 are already provided for under the Government's guidelines on appointments to State bodies. Those guidelines require open advertising of vacancies, publication of the criteria for the appointment, and the independent assessment process conducted by the Public Appointments Service. I do not consider it necessary to prescribe these operational details in primary legislation. However, the existing provisions provide the appropriate degree of flexibility for a newly established organisation. The office is being created in the context of emerging technology and an entirely new regulatory framework across the EU, with access to independent AI experts becoming available through the EU scientific panel. It is important that the appointments process can evolve in response to the practical needs of the organisation as it develops. I do not consider it appropriate at this stage to prescribe in primary legislation detailed requirements in relation to the appointments procedures, selection panels, or particular categories of expertise. That said, I am sympathetic to the intention. As the office matures and gains operational experience, it is important to keep under review the mix of expertise and experience required for its effective and efficient performance, and to seek to adapt accordingly. In that context, matters such as the board's composition and expertise requirements could be considered in a future phase of the office's development, should experience demonstrate a need for additional statutory measures. --- Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted. Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/dail/2026-06-30/debate/main Retrieved: 2026-09-14T01:01:06+00:00 Sitting date: 2026-06-30