Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Ombudsman for the presentation. Why has there been a delay in bringing forward an extension of the remit of the office? Is there political resistance to extending her remit to the bodies or agencies we hope will be included? It seems extraordinary that it has taken 27 years to do something eminently sensible and reasonable.

On the issue of extending the office's remit to include offices dealing with asylum seekers, immigrants and those in the direct provision system, why is there resistance to this? My explanation is it is just institutional racism and the State does not want to highlight the appalling treatment of people in the direct provision system. I do not know whether the Ombudsman would feel free to agree publicly. Is it not telling that asylum seekers who are fleeing persecution are exempted from the treatment every other citizen expects when they should have a right of resources or appeal against the way they are being treated by the State by being lumped in with prosecuted criminals? While people in prison should also have rights, is it not telling that asylum seekers and so on are lumped in with them, which indicates the attitude the State has towards them, and that the normal process of justice, where people are innocent until proven guilty, is turned on its head and the State assumes asylum seekers are guilty until proven innocent and all rights are suspended until they work their way through the long and onerous asylum process? What explanations have the Department of Justice and Equality and the Government given to the Ombudsman for their refusal to extend the office's remit to cover these areas? Does she think if there was political will to do this, it would be such a complicated process that it could not be addressed on Committee Stage of the current Bill? I take her point that she does not want the legislation held up because she wants it enacted but if there was political will-----