Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I wish to raise some points with the Minister. Direct provision has been raised by my colleagues. The Minister will recall that the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality responded to one of my questions a couple of weeks ago in the Dáil during Leaders' Questions, when I was asking questions for Deputy Adams. She passed the baton to the Minister of State to reply to my question. In his response, he spoke about visiting and engaging with the centres. He pointed to a number of improvements that have taken place and he reported that all were happy there. I do not have the direct quotation but that was the essence of it. Certainly, those words were in his sentence. I have no doubt there are people who are in short-term residence in direct provision centres who could say they are happy there given the improvements made and the reality of the situations they have left.

I am a resident in a town that provides direct provision and I have previously visited a number of direct provision centres along with my colleagues in the former committee on health and children. People are not happy. The primary disappointment and disgruntlement, which is understandable, is the unacceptable period of time taken to process applications. In terms of the methodology of providing for them, the Minister of State said a few minutes ago that all of their specific needs are being provided. I will set aside, for the moment, the minuscule weekly support of €19.10 and the Christmas bonus, which is embarrassing even to talk about as it was based on a percentage of what they are getting weekly. I can understand and tolerate, which is probably the best word I can use, the employment of direct provision for a limited time period for the processing of applications to stay, but I know people who have been in these settings for years. They are not just individuals but families in some instances. I have not been across the thresholds of centres in recent times but, the Minister of State's assurances of improvements aside, I have no doubt that the circumstances are unsuitable for any medium to long-term duration. This can only be acceptable for short-term provision, not medium to long-term provision. It is wrong and unacceptable. We would not want that to happen to any of our citizens and fellow nationals. In any other situation, we would be in uproar about it.

The time factor is absolutely unacceptable. Whatever about structural changes and the opportunity to prepare their own meals and so forth, the fact is that our system of processing is not functioning as it should. Regardless of the outcome and the decision that is taken, people should not have their lives suspended and be left in limbo situations indefinitely. That is the most unacceptable and disgraceful part of what we are witnessing in direct provision. It must change.

I also wish to reflect on what Deputy Wallace said. Migrant Rights Centre Ireland gave a presentation to the committee. We also had the honour to hear directly from an undocumented non-national, and the people in the Gallery that day included a member of that person's family. Those young people are making a good new life in this country. They are people who clearly have a positive contribution to make. What annoys me is the fact that we can collectively articulate a case to the Unites States for our undocumented people, who number 50,000 to 60,000 or even more. I know a significant number of them and their families personally. I share their pain and anguish at times of bereavement and during times such as now, with the advent of Christmas, at the inability of these displaced fellow Irish citizens to visit home and to be part of a family grieving or celebration, because they run the risk of losing all they have endeavoured to build during their lives in that country. We cannot politically make the case to another jurisdiction that we are not prepared to extend to people who are undocumented in our own jurisdiction.

We must lead by example. It would only enhance and improve our prospects of being listened to in a more favourable way if we were to take an international lead and demonstrate the real compassion of the Irish people. Our failure to do that is contributing, in its own way, to the difficulties our citizens are experiencing in the United States and perhaps in other jurisdictions. Whether it is a general regularisation scheme for the undocumented, we must put in place a compassionate, humanitarian opportunity for people to come forward not out of fear of an impending deportation, but in the hope that, all things being equal in their lives and in their prospects of contributing positively to Irish society, they can look forward in expectation to their cases being accepted and processed favourably. I cannot urge anything in these matters more strongly on the Minister of State in the last days before Christmas and the last week of the committee's sittings in 2016.

My final point relates to the Calais 200. On the last occasion we asked a question about this matter, although I am open to correction as it might not have been the Calais 200, one child had been provided for. I have been corrected - it was Greece. There was only one involved. The Minister of State confirmed this. What are the reasons for that?

I accept and welcome the Minister of State's invitation to those who may be able to offer detailed information regarding named individuals but it is very apparent that Tusla's role is critical.

The Minister of State tells me there is no profiling but it has already set out a profile for undocumented children in respect of age and so forth. This committee has addressed Tusla's recommendation for a cohort that could be successfully relocated here. I reject that. It is wrong but I know Tusla is unable to provide the necessary supports for its own direct project and responsibility in this jurisdiction never mind for the newly arrived children we want to welcome in our midst. I can see there is a brake on, or obstacles to, its being able to achieve what it needs to be able to do to provide the backup, continuing support and evaluation of a child newly arrived on our shores. That has to be faced up to.

It is not just the responsibility of the Department of Justice and Equality but of a compendium of Departments, Cabinet and Government to ensure Tusla is properly resourced to carry out its functions in this regard. It is imperative that is done across the board, and in the current crisis of so many thousands displaced but specifically unaccompanied children, it must be properly provisioned and resourced to accommodate the commitment we have made. How many undocumented children have we accepted? I hope it is more than we were told on the previous occasion we asked. Does the Minister of State have anything further to report from the visit by the Minister for Justice and Equality and the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs to Greece this week?