Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees
Tuesday, 30 May 2023
Joint Committee On Children, Equality, Disability, Integration And Youth
Integration and Refugee Issues: Discussion (Resumed)
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Apologies have been received from Deputy Cairns and Senator O’Sullivan. I welcome from the Department of Justice, Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan, deputy secretary general, Mr. David Delaney, director of immigration service delivery, and Ms Emer Mullins, principal officer in the International Protection Office. I thank them for attending.
I will now go through the usual procedure for housekeeping issues. I advise anyone joining us through MS Teams that the chat function should be used only to make us aware of technical or urgent matters and not to make general comments or statements. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate where he or she is not adhering to this constitutional requirement. Any member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting. In this regard, I ask members who are participating via MS Teams to confirm they are on the grounds of the Leinster House complex before they contribute.
In advance of inviting the witnesses to deliver their opening statement, I advise them of the following in respect of parliamentary privilege. Witnesses who are participating from the committee room are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect they should not criticise nor make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in respect of an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative they comply with any such direction.
I invite Mr. O'Sullivan to make his opening statement.
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
I thank the Chair and the committee for the opportunity to discuss the current position in respect of international protection applications. I am joined by Mr. David Delaney, director of immigration service delivery and chief international protection officer, and Ms Emer Mullins, principal officer in the International Protection Office.
As the committee is aware, Ireland has obligations under EU and international law to consider applications for international protection from those who come to our country fleeing persecution. The International Protection Office, IPO, of the Department of Justice is responsible for examining all international protection applications received. The staff of the IPO are independent in the exercise of their international protection functions. The International Protection Appeals Tribunal, IPAT, is an appellate body providing an effective remedy for applicants for international protection in respect of negative recommendations of international protection officers. The committee will be aware Ireland is party to the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. The convention defines the term "refugee" and outlines the rights of refugees as well as the legal obligations of states to protect them. Ireland is also bound by the EU asylum procedures directive, which applies to all applications for asylum made in the territory of a member state. The directive sets out a common procedure for processing applications and provides asylum seekers with certain rights and guarantees, including the right to access the procedure and the right to remain in the member state pending the examination of an asylum application. The International Protection Act 2015 transposed the asylum procedures directive into national law and gives further effect to the 1951 refugee convention and its 1967 protocol.
Ireland, like other member states, has experienced a significant increase in the number of applications for international protection from a broad range of countries since the resumption of international travel post pandemic. To put this in context, the number of international protection applicants last year was 13,651. This figure represents a 186% increase on 2019, the most recent comparable year pre-pandemic. The Catherine Day report, with which the committee will be familiar, and its associated targets were based on an average number of applicants of 3,500 per year. Although this is a large increase for Ireland, the number of applications we are now receiving brings us more into line with the experience of other member states generally.
The Department has introduced a range of measures to deal with the increase in the number of applications. The IPO has also developed a modernisation strategy with the key objectives of further increasing the number of decisions in 2023 and continually improving the quality of that decision-making. My colleague Ms Mullins, who leads on that project, can go into more detail about it. A new modernisation team has been established to drive innovation throughout the IPO. The team will monitor progress in four key areas, namely, infrastructure, resources, process engineering and technology. Additional funding of almost €18 million provided this year for the IPO is being used to recruit a significant number of additional staff and provide additional office accommodation. As of end April, there were 289 staff in the IPO. The number of staff there has more than doubled since 2019, from 143 to 304 staff as of last Friday, and a further 23 will arrive in the coming weeks. An additional 160 contractors are also being recruited to boost the panel who conduct international protection interviews. These resources will be supported by increased training and quality control support from the UNHCR.
On 8 November 2022, the International Protection Office introduced accelerated procedures for international protection applicants from safe countries of origin. This was in response to a significant increase in the number of applications from some designated safe countries in recent years. The determination process remains the same for all international protection applicants and applicants under the new procedure will still have the same rights to appeal a negative recommendation by the IPO to the International Protection Appeals Tribunal. This new process has allowed applicants from safe countries of origin to receive a first-instance decision in less than three months, which is a significant reduction from a norm of 22 to 26 months last year. The tribunal has also been resourced to deal with an increase in the number of appeals it receives and has introduced new measures within its processes to reduce waiting times.
While the volumes of applications to the IPO have increased significantly, this did not materialise into significantly increased volumes to the IPAT until early 2023. In 2022, it received 1,180 appeals and disposed of 1,571. In recent years, the IPAT has been resourced to deliver up to 2,300 appeals per annum. A budgetary increase of €1 million was allocated for 2023, based on a forecast caseload of 3,200 appeals coming to the tribunal in 2023, which is allowing for the recruitment of ten additional administrative staff.
We are continually reviewing the resource needs at all steps in the process. This is with a view to anticipating the impact of the increase in applications at each stage and ensuring we are in a position to maintain the momentum of processing across the board. We are confident these new measures will significantly improve the operation of the international protection process and critically keep processing times to a minimum. It is important to emphasise that, notwithstanding all of the new efficiencies introduced, all applications for international protection are, and will continue to be, examined fully and individually on their merits. This includes those from countries designated as safe countries of origin. All decisions on international protection applications are made in accordance with relevant legislation and Ireland follows the guidance of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, UNHCR, and the European Union Agency for Asylum, EUAA, in relation to claims for international protection. Comprehensive training has been provided for International Protection Office caseworkers and interviewers and is conducted in conjunction with the UNHCR. We also operate a quality assurance process with the UNHCR to ensure each decision made by the office is of the highest quality.
Finally, I acknowledge the huge efforts of staff in the International Protection Office to achieve this progress. In addition to very experienced existing staff, many new staff have joined, along with staff from around the Department who have been redeployed to assist in our efforts to reduce processing times for international protection applicants. I thank the committee again for the opportunity to set out the progress we have made in recent years. My colleagues and I look forward to going into further detail as the committee requires.
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Mr. O'Sullivan. He mentioned that Ms Mullins is in charge of a particular section. Would she like to wait for questions on that area or is there anything she would like to say at this point?
Ms Emer Mullins:
I am happy to give a brief on the modernisation work now if that helps. I can take questions later. The modernisation programme started with the Catherine Day report. It asked that an end review of international protection and the International Protection Appeals Tribunal processes be carried out and for consideration of processes that could be facilitated or enabled by information technology, IT. The Department of Justice commissioned an end review and the Catherine Day programme board approved its scope. The board had responsibility for governance of the programme. A multidisciplinary project review team set up in November 2020 looked at the entire process, from application to the appeals process in IPAT. The review identified a set of key findings and points of constraint in the system. It did that by listening to staff, service users, stakeholders and partners. It also benchmarked Ireland against a number of other countries in terms of processing international protection applications. The group reviewed accelerated procedures in asylum, the digitisation of certain international protection processes, training procedures, staff profiles and the overall processing times. That was just to get a sense of where Ireland sat. It looked internally at people, staffing levels, processes and the organisation and structure of the International Protection Office. It looked in particular at information technology before making a series of conclusions and recommendations. The report has been published and is available.
To inform the review, it is important to say that an independent external company was hired to survey international protection applicants and appellants, so that their view was to the fore in teasing out the findings. The team based its findings on those customer insights, sketching out four different customer personas that allowed us to typify some of the most common types of applicants. It also looked at their journey through the international protection application system to see where there were pain points and where they felt we could improve things. Key themes were identified for improvements. That included the development of clear business intelligence and metrics, improved processes in a number of areas and better resourcing of staff and panel members who, as Mr. O'Sullivan mentioned, are contracted to work with us. The key finding was for better use of ICT to move away from paper-based files. Key criticisms included the length of time it took to process cases, the lack of available interview slots, lengthy and unwieldy questionnaires, delays in translation of files and shortage of staff and panel members. All of those themes were picked up and brought forward into the modernisation programme. We are very conscious that from a customer's perspective, their biggest complaint was the length of time in the system and the length of time to be processed.
The recommendations have been brought forward into our modernisation plan for the next couple of years. Some process improvements such as the accelerated procedure have been in place since November 2022. The budget of almost €18 million has been costed against our efforts in 2023. In that plan, staff have clear deliverables and quotas. Timelines for cases are now actively managed. In this plan, we have committed to reaching 1,000 first instance decisions per month by quarter 1 of 2024, scaling up continually throughout this year, which we are already doing. More than €10 million of the budget will be allocated to the recruitment of new staff and panel members.
As I mentioned, the key finding was digitisation and next month we will introduce a new digital file storage system, which will make all new applications available digitally to staff and IPAT through an interface. That will remove the need for paper files for new applications. We are simultaneously developing a digital custom application system where applicants will be assisted, when attending the IPO, to create their own digital account. They will then use a portal along the lines of mygov.ieto access their own documents and files and to be able to engage with stakeholders, legal representatives and so on at any point. Ideally, they will be given an interview date when they come in to set up that account and apply for protection once the application is accepted. This will also have an IPAT interface to streamline the process of file transfer in the moved paper. We are also looking at robotic process automation where that is suitable in the business.
In parallel with an immigration service delivery-wide modernisation programme, we are improving customer service by bringing in a cloud-based, artificial intelligence-based customer contact centre. We are currently dealing with up to 150 telephone calls and 1,500 emails per week, so that will help us better engage with our customers. We recognise that not all of our customers are digitally literate and that some would prefer to engage with paper. We are not saying we will be 100% digital but digital first will be our approach. We will always engage with those who wish to deal with us on paper.
On staffing and panel members, Mr. O'Sullivan mentioned those numbers are going up and we hope to have 430 staff in the business by the end of this year. We have over 160 panel members. To ensure we have capacity to accommodate out growing teams we have secured extra space in St. John's House in Tallaght, which went operational for interviews in April. We have also secured space next door to Timberlay House in Mount Street at 85 to 93 Mount Street. We are moving teams in there. In parallel, we have set up an in-house modernisation team to drive all of this work. We are also looking to potential legislative amendments or improvements to facilitate our work where that is necessary. A robust programme of work under way.
Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses. I will start by indulging a pet peeve of mine. This is not anything personal because I hear the same language across government but the applicants are not customers. They are applicants and service users. The International Protection Office is not a business. It is a Government Department. We see this language. An Garda Síochána talks about its customers. Customers implies that people engaging with the service have a level of choice. I am not sure any of the people who find themselves on the receiving end of An Garda Síochána feel like they have a choice. Similarly, many of the people coming before the International Protection Office do not really have a choice. It is a language that has seeped into the whole of government and I really feel it is inappropriate. It seems to be the standard language but international protection applicants are not customers and the International Protection Office is not a business. It is a Government Department dealing with applicants for international protection who need to have their rights vindicated. It is a pet peeve of mine.
Putting that aside, one thing we have heard for a long time from people living in direct provision was their sense of being in limbo because decisions were taking so long. Anything we can do to speed up decisions is welcome. The modernisation and all of these things are welcome.
However, when it comes to the vindicating of rights of applicants, efficiency and speed of decision are not necessarily the correct benchmark. Rather, we have to ask if we are actually vindicating those rights. I want to explore this new process from so-called safe countries. A country can be on the safe country list but still be very dangerous for an individual applicant depending on their circumstances. By designating a country as safe, I am concerned that we are undermining individual applications and individual rights. The Department is saying that the new process will be the same and that people will have the same rights, but how is it that they can be decided in three months compared with 22 or 26 months? How can they be decided in three months in comparison with other applications? What shortcuts are being taken? What shortcuts through people's individual rights are being taken, particularly when they are being given less time to appeal and so on?
Robotic and artificial intelligence, AI, processing was mentioned. This leaves me quite ill at ease without seeing further details. In particular, I am concerned at review of robotic or automatic decisions and oversight of these. Robotic decisions can seem to be very fair. If the algorithm that underpins a decision is unfair, then every decision that grows from that will be unfair. We are in an area where there is very little legislation. The EU is acting on this, but how do we ensure the protection of the rights of applicants? I am watching the clock, so I will leave it at that.
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We do have a second session too, so five to seven minutes is our timeframe.
Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Will it be the same speaking rota for the second session? I had assumed that everyone was in together, and I have other meetings to get to.
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It will be the same.
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
I will try to be brief. I am conscious of time. I hear what the Deputy is saying regarding customers. We hear that a lot around the organisation, and I respect that view. We have a strong focus on vindicating the rights of the applicants who come before us. We invest considerable time and effort in training and instilling a sense of mission in our staff that what they are doing has a huge impact on people’s lives and is really important work that is done to a very high standard.
Staying on that theme, we are absolutely satisfied that we can maintain quality in the system notwithstanding the process by which we accelerate some applications. It is not the case that you could describe what we are doing as a shortcut. Some cases are being taken before others. That is why a case which is in the ordinary processing route now takes about ten months while a case in the accelerated processing route takes about three. It is mainly around scheduling and prioritisation of cases. The quality of the work that goes into each decision is not any different. The oversight we do around quality assurance is not any different. In practice, the appeal at second stage is not any different. In fact, a number of people who have come through the accelerated process have been granted first- and second-stage appeals. We have a range of measures in place to try and reinforce that quality of work.
I want to pick up on the issue of robotics because sometimes that term sounds a note of alarm. I hear what the Deputy is saying. The nature of the work in which it is involved largely relates to customer service and things like being able to deal with an electronic query from an applicant who might be asking when their interview will be held. In the latter instance, the system can search our case-management system and identify that it is applicant X, Y or Z and that the interview is likely to be scheduled on a certain date. That information can be obtained in a way that does not necessarily involve a human having to look it up. There is no question whatever of robotics being involved in deciding actual cases. Across the public service, there is a lot of discussion in respect of these issues. There are strong safeguards in the space of data protection impact assessment and there is huge sensitivity with regard to doing anything in the context of algorithms and decisions. I assure the Deputy that we would not stand over anything like that. There are some technologies that can make things a little bit easier, however, particularly when it comes to a system that has traditionally been very weighted down with paper and people having to look things up manually. There is now an ability to look something up electronically, give the information to a person, whether it is the applicant, their legal representative or whatever, and move things along.
Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I welcome the witnesses and thank them for their opening statements. Mr. O’Sullivan stated:
While the volumes of applications to the IPO have increased significantly, this did not materialise into significantly increased volumes to the IPAT until early 2023. In 2022, it received 1,180 appeals and disposed of 1,571.
Will he unpick that? It reads a little strangely to me.
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
It is probably not the most elegantly worded sentence I have come up with. The gist of what we are trying to say is that there was an increase in applications, mainly beginning last spring. It is initially felt in the first stage of the process. It is only really in the past few months that those cases have begun to be dealt with at first stage and are now starting to materialise in the second stage of the process, that is, the appeals stage. Does that make sense?
Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
No. Will Mr. O’Sullivan give me that in plain English?
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
If you applied in the summer of last year, if we are processing cases in about ten months on first stage then we would probably have just dealt with your case in March and now you have a right to appeal. Those cases are now starting to materialise in the appeal-stage work stream. We are working very closely with the appeal stage people to try and anticipate when they are going to see this bulge of cases, for want of a better word, coming through. While they would have been geared up to deal with a certain number of cases last year, they actually had more resources last year than they needed to deal with what they had. We expect that by the end of this year, they will need more resources in order to be able to deal with the increase in cases that is working through the system.
Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is that an increase in the number of full-time equivalent staff dealing with the cases?
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
That is a good question. At the appeal stage, it works a little differently in the sense that most of the decision-making work is done by people who are members of IPAT. Most of them work part-time. They are experienced barristers and solicitors. They drive the actual decisions. They need a lot of support from permanent civil servants. We are hiring more of the panel members. We have sanction to hire 60, I think, and we have more to hire again. That is how we will step up the processing at that stage.
Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There is sanction for 60. Is Mr. O’Sullivan confident, given the current skills shortage, that the Department can find that number of people?
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
Across the board in all our areas of work, it is very challenging to hire people. We work very hard and get a lot of help from the Public Appointments Service. It is a big work in progress. We also do a lot of work in outreach to the professions and other bodies where we know there might be people with relevant expertise to try to encourage people to come forward. It is a constant work in progress, however, and it will definitely be a challenge.
Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On Ms Mullins’ comments, I noticed her use of the phrases "clear business intelligence" and "accelerated procedures". I do not mean this in a derogatory way, but it sounds very like management consultant speak. My antenna went up because she mentioned that the Department had gone to an external resource for advice. Who was that external resource?
Ms Emer Mullins:
It was a company called Connect the Dots, which did an independent survey of applicants and those who were appealing to IPAT, as well as a number of other stakeholders. Its findings were published as part of the end-to-end review. That told us where the pain was in the system. I do not mean to use consultant speak. I have an NGO background, so it is certainly not common to me.
Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
No, and for the record, I am not personalising it to Ms Mullins -----
Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What I am really getting at is whether the Department has gone to the EYs, the KPMGs or the PwCs of this world, and, if so, how much did it cost? How much did Connect the Dots cost in terms of procuring external services?
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
We can check the figures for Connect the Dots. It is not major consultancy. When we get to some of the digitalisation work we are doing, the nature of some of the change will certainly involve professional external advice.
However, it has not been a heavy cost to us. Standing back from it, we are asking Government to invest very significant resources. We are hiring lots of people. We need to be able to argue the case for that with the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform, Ministers and so on, and show that if we are given 100 people, we will maintain the quality and improve processing. That is something which needs to be approached in a very structured way.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The witnesses are all very welcome here this afternoon. At the outset, and I am sure all my colleagues will join me, I want to condemn some of the actions which we have seen play out on our streets, both in the capital and other parts of the State over the last number of weeks. The burning of tents and personal belongings of anyone is absolutely shocking. I condemn it outright, and it is racist. I have to call it what it is. It is racist. What we have seen is extreme right-wing people preying on vulnerable communities and on their vulnerabilities, and mobilising some vulnerable people to get involved in their actions. These are a handful of right-wing hooligans and racists. I felt I had to say that at the outset. They are racist and I completely condemn them.
I have a few questions regarding the process itself. Regarding the safe countries of origin, we have those. They have not changed over the last while. They are the likes of Kosovo, and places like that. Is there a continual review of what are deemed safe countries? Mr. O'Sullivan might talk us through that briefly.
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
I thank the Deputy. The process to designate a country as a safe country of origin is set out in the International Protection Act 2015, and it sets the standards by which the Minister for Justice has to satisfy himself or herself. In broad terms, it means that there is not a generalised risk of persecution or conflict in the country in question. The orders to designate the existing list was done in 2018. There is a provision that it be kept under review, and it is kept under review. From time to time, it is the subject of a formal review. We did a formal review of South Africa in 2021, and are planning to do a formal review of most of the other countries this year, and all of them within the next 12 months. That will involve us looking at the most recent information from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, UNHCR, the EU Agency for Asylum, UN NGOs, Human Rights Watch and so on. We keep a general watching brief on those, because we are dealing with applications from those countries. I do not believe there is any reason to think that the overall position has changed, but we will do so in a formal and legal way. That will be announced and dealt with in public in due course.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Mr. O'Sullivan. Obviously, there has been a huge increase. I think the figure so far this year is around 20,600. Would I be right in saying that?
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I misread that. It is a 186% increase from 2019. Of those applications, would Mr. O'Sullivan have a percentage? What way does that break down in terms of people arriving from so-called safe countries versus-----
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Since November, with the safe countries, it is roughly a three-month turnaround time. What percentage does Mr. Delaney estimate would be turned around in the three months?
Mr. David Delaney:
To give the Deputy some broad figures, we have had about 950 people who were eligible for the accelerated process, and about 71% of those have had their cases concluded. One could put that in a ballpark figure of the more than 600 who have been dealt with through the first instance stage of the process. However, a certain percentage are still moving on to the appeal stage at that point as well.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
For all other applicants then, it takes about ten months, which I think was the figure there. Is that correct?
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Regarding the first attempt of those being successful with the initial application versus those who are unsuccessful and subsequently appeal it, what percentage is that? Would the witnesses have a figure on it?
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
No, the ordinary cases.
Mr. David Delaney:
The figures vary year on year, as the Deputy can imagine. At the moment, in 2023, which is good sort of stock figure to look at, one is looking at about 72% who are refused refugee status and subsidiary protection. However, a percentage of those will get permission to remain thereafter, so the overall rate would be around 66% to 68% who would be refused at first instance stage in the International Protection Office, IPO so far this year.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is 72% at first stage.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I see there is an additional €1 million allocated to deal with the appeals tribunal, and that is for ten additional staff. Is it correct that are 60 working there?
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
There are two staff resources there. There are the permanent civil servants, and their main job is to assemble the files for hearing. They are general Civil Service grades. Then there are the panel members, who are part-time in the main. They are lawyers, and they hear the cases in hearing. That money is going to fund a mix of both of those strands of work, if that makes sense.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Yes. I have a final question. I know no two cases are the same when it gets to the appeals tribunal, but would Mr. O'Sullivan have a rough figure as to what would be the average in terms of the appeal process?
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
So far this year, the rate at which cases are upheld is about 70% at the appeal stage. It is up a little bit on last year, which probably reflects the number of safe countries going through the system. It tends to vary from between 60% and 70% of cases which are upheld at the second stage. As Mr. Delaney said, even after that there is an opportunity to make a case for permission to remain. Some people get to stay on essentially humanitarian or family grounds after their case has been determined by the appeals process.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On the appeals process timeframe, would Mr. O'Sullivan have an average?
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Mr. O'Sullivan.
Tom Clonan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am conscious of the time. I will try to get my questions out as quickly as I can. I am familiar with the mental health tribunals for reviewing persons involuntary detention, and in that process, the detained person, or the involuntary patient, has representation at the tribunal. They have somebody to advocate for them, that is, a solicitor. It is not a patient advocate, but it is somebody who is appointed. Do appellants have any representation in the appeals process?
I note that on average 72% of initial applicants are refused. In terms of cases affirmed at appeal were: in 2019, it was 71%; in 2020, it was 65%; and in 2021, it was 64%, so it seems to be a similar kind of failure rate. That being the case, it would seem that two out of every three people who c claim asylum are unsuccessful, having been reviewed by the Department. That said, why are they coming here? Do the witnesses have any idea as to whether there is an overarching, common factor as to why people are presenting here for international protection given the numbers?
Does the Department do any follow-up at all on where people go, having failed to achieve international protection here? Do they have any idea what happens to them, or what the outcomes are for them? Does the Department have any feedback which would lead it to believe that some of them find themselves in catastrophic circumstances, having had to return? What are the means of their return?
In regard to the demographic profile, what percentage of people presenting have disabilities? What is the male-female breakdown, and how many are unaccompanied minors?
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
I may let my colleagues figure out the sums at end of that question while I try to answer the earlier ones. The breakdown regarding males and females is very straightforward; I am not sure have we all of the other information. Typically, people are legally represented at the appeals tribunal. The Legal Aid Board is funded to provide a legal service. People sometimes have their own lawyers as well. In terms of the grant and success rate, it is probably a little higher than the Senator is saying. When the people who get to remain on non-protection grounds are factored in, it is probably a little closer to 50%. This is when all of the different options are taken into account, because there is the first stage, the appeal and then the opportunity to raise additional issues. In terms of where people go, we do not have systemic information on that. We know a typical experience is that when people get to the end of the process, they have a number of options, including participating in a voluntary return programme we operate with the International Organization for Migration. However, many people simply stop contacting us. When we review IPAS records, social protection records and so on, these people do not show up. I would just be speculating as to where they go. Our general sense is that they move out of Ireland and into other jurisdictions, but I do not have any systemic information in that regard.
I will pause and see if either of my colleagues want to say something about the data. We have data on the male-female breakdown that we can share with the committee. I do not think we have figures on disability. We tend not to track individual protection grounds because quite often there can be more than one protection ground in any particular case. We tend not to track the applications but we can check to see if we have any more information on that. We would have arrangements around people with medical vulnerabilities and so on who come through our system from time to time, although they would not feature prominently in our system.
Tom Clonan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses. If there is an opportunity to do so, I suggest that the Department liaise with one of our universities. It would be very useful if there was a PhD student who tried to track where people who are unsuccessful go. If people are prepared to talk to Connect the Dots, they would be prepared to talk in confidence to a researcher or a team of researchers. If we find out where our unsuccessful applicants are going, it might better shape or inform our view of how we treat such applications in the first place. This is not a comment on the officials from the Department, but it is probably a bit irresponsible of the State to send people away not knowing what happens to them or where they go.
Will the witnesses address the question I asked about why people are coming if they are not genuine asylum seekers or individuals who deserve international protection? The figure of 50% is still quite high, and they are coming here for reasons that do not meet the Department's criteria. Is there an overarching dynamic there? Are they coming for work? Are they coming to better actualise themselves or for the better opportunities?
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
There is significant disruption geopolitically in Europe and across the world, so there is clearly instability. The impact of the Russian invasion even in the region is huge. The pent up migration pressure that was there during Covid-19 has been experienced right across Europe. There are many parts of the world and adjacent to Europe that are experiencing economic disruption. Sometimes, that would be the driver for migration. The ESRI work also identified network effects. We know from our experience of migration that if people know others who have come here, managed to get settled and get things worked out, then they will naturally follow. The ESRI considers that to be an important factor. However, it is very hard to put a figure on it.
Tom Clonan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have a very good friend who came through the full system very successfully. She is working as a teacher in a secondary school. I asked her why she picked Ireland and she laughed at me saying that she did not pick Ireland; she just ended up here. I am conscious that people who come here, whether it is for economic reasons or due to fear of persecution or whatever, they are all in extremis. This is just a general observation that is not directed at the witnesses, but it behoves us to find out what happens to the people who are unsuccessful because that may better inform our view of how just, fair, or equitable our system is.
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There were some good suggestions there around the research and so on. That is a good idea.
Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Many of the questions that were asked relate to AI and how decisions are made. I am glad it is still human to human and am hopeful that we never venture into using any sort of algorithms to speed up the asylum process.
The information may already be out there and I just have not delved into it enough, but what I am interested in is the idea of safety and safe countries. Ireland deems particular countries to be safe. What I would love to know is where that feeds down from? What criteria are used to establish whether a country is safe? Obviously, safety is relative, but we have to get to some sort of determination of what safety is. There might be a lot of people within a country who do not feel that version or understanding of safety applies to them. Consider, for example, the plight of women in countries in which women's rights in the context of safe access to abortion and contraception are being rowed back. Women in some of these countries are facing imprisonment as a result of seeking reproductive care. How moveable is the idea of safety? Is there just one definition that we have not gone back on if it no longer meets the criteria? If we look at Georgia, it is still considered safe but it is not necessarily safe at all, especially in the regions closest to Russia where people are being conscripted to fight for the latter.
I am looking for a bit more understanding as to where the criteria come from and how easy it is to change the narrative as regards what safe is? Do we need to have a different version of safety for certain countries because some countries may be religious, some may be unsafe for members of the LGBT community or women or some may not be safe due to domestic or civil war or whatever? Are we applying the same criterion of safety to all countries and doing a disservice to many countries where people are not safe for various different reasons.
In light of the current climate in Ireland, and staying with this idea of safety, because there is so much pressure, such a negative narrative out there and so much push-back in relation to migrants, is there any threat to decisions that are being made when it comes to those that are deemed to be in safe countries? Do we start to potentially water down what safety is in order that we can make quicker decisions to maybe not give a positive asylum application result to somebody and send that person home because the system is under so much pressure? If the system, the housing situation, and everything else were in a better position, is it not the case that, ideally, we would not send these people home in the circumstances in which they are currently being sent home? Is there is a threat to any of those decisions being made in light of the current climate?
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
I thank the Senator. I will try to answer the last question first. I assure the Senator that there is absolutely no threat to the integrity of the decisions made by the International Protection Office. As I said earlier, the people who work there are independent in their decision-making. They receive the latest training from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, UNHCR, and from European Union Agency for Asylum. We are very focused on getting to the right decision and on making fair decisions. We are routinely granting people protection status, including those from safe countries of origin.
As for the process relating to deciding on safe countries of origin, the 2015 Act defines how that is to be met. The Act refers to the Minister being satisfied that there is genuinely no persecution, torture, inhumane or degrading treatment or threat of violence or armed conflict in a particular country. We arrive at the decision by looking at information from the UNHCR, the UN and elsewhere in order to assess the conditions in a country. We come to a view on foot of that information.
It is really important to note that notwithstanding that determination, where individuals present with a well-founded fear of persecution, bearing in mind that all the types of circumstances the Senator described are potentially in the persecution space, and if they meet a sufficiently high bar, they will receive protection stratus. In the case of certain countries, we have assessed that for most people, most of the time, there is not a general concern. That is not to say there are no instances of discrimination in those countries or there is not scrutiny around their human rights records. Some of them are EU accession countries and we see work being done between them and the EU on human rights, the rule of law and so on. The point is whether an individual has a well-founded fear of persecution. We are very focused on making sure that where it emerges from the assessment of a claim that there is such a fear, that person will receive protection.
As I mentioned earlier, we plan to do a review of the list of countries that are deemed to be safe. We aim to get most of them done this year and all of them within the next 12 months, at which point we will go back and look at the latest information we have. We are always looking at the information, as I said, and we are, of course, familiar with the circumstances in countries like Georgia. Such circumstances very often might be part of a claim and if it turns out there is a well-founded fear of persecution on particular grounds, the person concerned would get status. It does not mean that is a fear the generality of people coming from Georgia, say, would have. We have a strong focus on taking such issues into consideration.
Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
My office has had some interaction with people from the LGBTQ+ community who went through international protection interviews and have expressed a concern or fear about being able to prove persecution on that ground. In the case of gay men, say, they may be asked questions about whether they have had a gay relationship or whether they have visited or frequented any gay establishments in Dublin. They are saying they have been asked those types of questions as if they somehow define their sexuality. For many of them, however, their sexuality may have been extremely repressed in their home country. Even though they are gay, they may not be out in the world actively being gay, seeking partners and so on. Has that come up as an issue in terms of how we engage with LGBTQ+ applicants?
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
We certainly are conscious of some of the criticism that is out there around the process. We work very hard to address that. The model we follow is one of the leading human rights standards in regard to LGBTQI status in the protection process. We do a lot of training specifically around that, which recognises exactly the issues the Senator has identified. Mr. Delaney may wish to comment on the training programme.
Mr. David Delaney:
International protection officers and panel members who undertake the interviews undergo UNHCR training when they arrive in the International Protection Office. They are not allowed to go near an interview room or interview an asylum seeker without that training. They also get on-the-job training, which includes how to handle sensitive issues, whether LGBTQ issues or other cultural sensitivities. All of that is given a very high priority within the office. It is something we review on an ongoing basis and people get updated training to make sure the standards we have set at the start are maintained all the way through the process.
I appreciate there can be scenarios in which people might feel uncomfortable in an interview. However, one of the basic principles of dealing with an asylum claim is substantiating credibility. Sometimes, questions have to be asked to query the exact details of a claim. In those scenarios, an interviewer takes account of all the variables and tries to achieve a balance in respect of the need to obtain the evidence to underpin the credibility of a claim and be able to give people refugee status or subsidiary protection, if that is appropriate for them. That is the context in which we ask questions. In the vast majority of cases, the interviews are conducted in a very sensitive manner by panel members and civil servants. When people come to claim asylum, they are dealt with in the International Protection Office by way of what we call a substantive interview day, which is a three- to five-hour interview. Everyone in the office is trained in how to deal with people in a sensitive manner. We deal with a variety of vulnerabilities and are highly conscious of how we do so at all stages in the process.
Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Are other factors taken into account? I am not sure whether different factors are weighted or how that might be done. For example, what weight is given to the fact that somebody has not had a partner of the same sex as against the other information they provide? How are those more personal questions weighted against everything else the applicant may be providing to the interviewer?
Mr. David Delaney:
The bottom line is that we deal with things on a case-by-case basis. No one factor is given a greater weight than any other. It is about trying to arrive at a kind of matrix in order to make a decision on credibility. Everyone undertaking these interviews is looking to give the applicant the best opportunity possible. We look for information to get to the correct decision.
Lynn Ruane (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses.
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The next speaker is Deputy Murnane O'Connor, followed by Deputy Dillon. We are under time pressure to finish this session.
Jennifer Murnane O'Connor (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Many of the questions I intended to ask have already been answered. The witnesses spoke earlier about staffing and recruitment. I see a huge challenge also in terms of communications and information. That has become a big issue within communities and for us as politicians. Mr. O'Sullivan said the Department has introduced a range of measures to deal with the increase in applications. In terms of staffing, what is the procedure as we go forward? I understand the €18 million allocation for the International Protection Office this year is being utilised to recruit a significant number of extra staff.
As we know, one of the biggest issues at the moment is that accommodation providers are not being paid. I will be raising this again in the next session. There have been huge challenges in that regard and we must be careful in our approach. I am very much of the mind that everybody is equal and we have to help people and do what we can to make sure they are comfortable and have access to a proper process. As I said, there are significant challenges in that regard. What could be done to improve the issues? There was reference to an increase of 186% in the numbers involved. That is challenging to everyone. This responsibility falls on all Departments, not just the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth. Again, staffing is a major issue. What measures do the witnesses see that could be achieved to improve the situation in regard to communications, information and staffing? What more needs to be done? As I said, a lot of my questions were already asked. I have highlighted the main concerns.
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
Our focus and what we bring to the table is the need to deal with cases as expeditiously as possible. That is why we have been given a very significant resource. Other parts of the system have been given significant resources to deal with accommodation. As has been mentioned, one of the traditional concerns around the whole process was that delays complicated the accommodation situation. People waiting for a decision cannot get on with their lives. When they get permission to remain, although they are facing a difficult housing market, they can get a job and then get themselves settled. Our focus is on achieving good-quality decisions as quickly as possible. We work with the other Departments on co-ordination generally and the communications issues but we are not the lead on those issues. What we bring to the solution is trying to get decisions made as early as possible in the process. If people are getting decisions quickly, it is easier for them to move on with their lives and, over time, not necessarily to be dependent on the State for accommodation in a situation in which more people have arrived in the meantime seeking protection from the State. We have a very strong focus on that.
Jennifer Murnane O'Connor (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is welcome and important.
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I welcome our guests. We have spoken about the capacity challenges within the international protection accommodation services. What are the numbers for individuals currently in the accommodation settings and due for release versus the numbers currently waiting to be approved for asylum? Are those figures available?
Mr. David Delaney:
I am not sure whether I will answer the Deputy's question correctly. He should feel free to clarify whether I have got it right. The Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth looks after the accommodation aspect. I understand it currently has approximately 20,000 people accommodated under the international protection process. Of that number, 5,200 or 5,300 people have permission to reside in the State, whether in the form of refugee status, subsidiary protection or permission to remain. As a ballpark figure then, approximately a quarter of those currently being accommodated have a permission to be in the State. The remaining 14,000-odd are currently in different phases of the international protection process, whether engaging with the International Protection Office or the International Protection Appeals Tribunal or further on in the process, such as at the permission to remain review stage. Does that answer the Deputy's question?
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Yes. I thank Mr. Delaney for the clarification on the previous question around resources and the reduction in processing times.
It is a crucially important step. We cannot sufficiently emphasise its importance for those who want to work or integrate in their local community. That they have to wait an additional six months to do so is a challenge and then there is also the uncertainty around the decision-making process. How quickly should the additional steps, with the additional resources, take along with refining the decision making process, impact those seeking asylum in the months ahead?
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
It is very difficult to say. We are doing some work to try to model it out but much depends on how many people apply for asylum over the next few months. We are investing heavily in increasing our productivity. If the rate of applications grows or even if it maintains exactly at the same level as now, I think we will get on top of it but if it goes further we will have to put more resources into it. It is quite challenging to estimate accurately.
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Can we have an indication of where the upper scale of being really challenging might be for those seeking asylum weekly? We understand that more than 88 people seek asylum weekly. Is there a figure of where the Department sees IPAS having difficulty and being seriously challenged?
Mr. Doncha O'Sullivan:
That is really a question for IPAS and its ability to scale up. It is difficult work to scale up in terms of obtaining accommodation. We have a lot in which we feel we could deploy more resources and maintain high productivity because, as Ms Mullins outlined, we have brought a lot of modernisation to the process. We feel we can continue to increase our output. We are aiming to get to 1,000 decisions a month by the end of the year which is a really significant increase on what we would have done in recent years. However, the accommodation system’s ability to manage is really a question for the guests at the next session.
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We could have spent another hour on this. It is very interesting and I really appreciated how the officials answered the questions. They were very concise and straight to the point which is really nice and welcome.
Are members agreed that we will publish the opening statements for this session on the Oireachtas website? Agreed. We will suspend while the next guests come in.
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We continue with our discussion of integration and refugee issues. In this session, we are joined by officials from the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, Ms Sheenagh Rooney and Ms Carol Baxter, assistant secretaries. We have representatives from the County and City Managers Association and Local Government Management Agency, CCMA and LAMA, Mr. Michael Walsh, chief executive of Waterford City and County Council; Ms Sinead Carr, director of service, Tipperary County Council; and Ms Niamh McCarthy, national co-ordinator of the emergency vacant housing delivery (Ukraine) unit, EVHDU, of the LGMA. They are all very welcome to the meeting.
Before we begin, I will go through the normal housekeeping matters again. In advance of inviting the witnesses who are here today to deliver their opening statements, I wish to advise them of the following in relation to parliamentary privilege. Witnesses who are participating from the committee room are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.
Each group will be allocated five minutes to deliver the opening statements and then there will be questions and answers with the members. I believe Ms Rooney and Ms Baxter are sharing time. I invite Ms Rooney to begin.
Ms Sheenagh Rooney:
I thank the committee for the opportunity to come before it today to speak about the role our Department has played in accommodating those fleeing Ukraine. As assistant secretary in the Department I lead the Ukraine response, a division that was set up in March 2022. The division has approximately 150 staff seconded and otherwise who are dedicated to all aspects of the Ukraine accommodation response working across government with colleagues in local government, communities and agencies. We work to help those who have sought refuge in Ireland and we have provided accommodation to all those who need it. It is very much an evolving response that has been challenging but immensely rewarding for all involved.
As of May 2023, more than 83,000 temporary protection orders have been granted and the Department and its staff, working with others, has successfully provided accommodation to more than 61,000 people from Ukraine within the space of 14 months. Every person who has asked for shelter from our Department continues to receive it. Daily average arrivals presently stand at 88. As the conflict continues we expect arrivals to continue and we continue to plan our response to this.
Following the invasion in February 2022, our humanitarian response has included putting in place the internal infrastructure necessary to respond effectively to the large-scale accommodation demands; processing some 60,000 for accommodation through the integrated Citywest transit hub; ensuring 95% of arrivals are processed and transported to their new accommodation within one day; contracting in excess of 47,000 beds with more than 770 providers; and working collaboratively with implementing partners, including our local authority colleagues, to enable more than 10,400 beneficiaries of temporary protection through the pledged and offer-a-home accommodation schemes, noting that to date €30 million has been paid out to hosts in respect of the annual recognition payment.
We are very much working in partnership across government with colleagues, including with the Department of Defence, which has worked with us on a number of sites. We are also working in collaboration with a number of sports organisations to secure facilities such as Croke Park, the Aviva stadium, and the National Sports Centre, Abbotstown, as required, and with the Office of Public Works, OPW, to secure the rapid homes, which the committee is aware of. We are working across government as part of the longer term response to deliver accommodation solutions for beneficiaries of temporary protection, BOTPs.
Our response continues to evolve to address the challenges associated with the scale of accommodation provision. We are now building on that response with various business process improvements, which we can talk about to the committee, including a portal to address all offers and improvements we are making around payments, having first experienced challenges in that regard. The Department has paid out more than €500 million this year and we are averaging around €30 million per week. We have put measures in place to improve the payment system and those measures continue.
We are also involved in a sustainable multi-strand accommodation solution as part of the wider government response. This is co-ordinated through the Department of the Taoiseach accommodation working group to ensure delivery of what is expected going forward. All of that work is ongoing.
No one could have envisaged the scale and the breadth of the humanitarian response that has been required but the Department is happy to confirm that all of those BOTPs who arrived and sought shelter in Ireland have received that as part of the whole-of-government response. We recently surveyed the BOTPs in Ireland and received very positive feedback from them around the welcome and the accommodation. The Department will continue to work with colleagues across government, the local sector and State agencies to do more to support the effort. I thank the Chair and members for their attention. I will now pass over to my colleague Ms Carol Baxter who will address the international protection side.
Ms Carol Baxter:
I thank the Chair for the invitation to appear before the committee today. I will brief the committee on the work being undertaken by the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth to accommodate international protection applicants.
The State has a legal and moral obligation to assess the claims of those who seek refuge and to provide accommodation and supports in line with the recast reception conditions directive. The Department of Justice has briefed the committee on the latest arrivals figures for international protection applicants and the work it undertakes in relation to processing of claims.
Accommodation for international protection applicants is provided by the international protection accommodation service, IPAS, of the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, having been procured by the Department’s international protection procurement service, IPPS. As of 21 May, more than 20,648 people are accommodated in the IPAS system compared with 11,000 people at this time last year. This constitutes an unprecedented level of demand for IPAS accommodation. The IPPS has sought to respond to this level of demand in a number of ways. It has issued a request for tender and expressions of interest nationally for suitable accommodation. It has negotiated directly with hotels. It has procured accommodation in repurposed office accommodation and arenas. It has worked with sports organisations to use accommodation provided by them for temporary use such as the Sports Ireland Campus at Abbotstown, Croke Park and Páirc Uí Chaoimh. It has also secured student accommodation for international protection applicants who will shortly begin to avail of that accommodation at Maynooth University.
We are currently working on a number of projects to purchase and build centres that would be State-owned. This is starting with rapid-build projects at the Athlone and Knockalisheen IPAS centres as part of a proof of concept project being undertaken under the auspices of the Department of the Taoiseach’s accommodation working group. This reflects the evolving situation. Members will have seen our statement that says we have procured 5,580 beds, but in fact even in a week it is now already 6,418 beds for international protection applicants so far this year. It has opened 145 emergency centres since January 2022.
On the other side, however, more than 2,500 beds have also been lost during this period as hotels, originally procured during the Covid pandemic, pivot back to tourism. A further 92 beds are scheduled to be lost by 10 June. While the scale of bed loss has been high, IPPS has also successfully negotiated with a series of hotel owners who had originally intended to end contracts for international protection accommodation, to extend their contracts with us. Otherwise the loss would have been much higher.
Every week, IPPS brings new accommodation on stream for international protection applicants and will continue to do so throughout 2023. However, in spite of its intensive efforts, demand for accommodation has outstripped available capacity over the past 18 months. In response, IPPS has installed tented accommodation for periods at the State-owned accommodation centres at Knockalisheen, Athlone and Johnston Marina. Currently, 102 persons are accommodated in tents at the Knockalisheen centre and there will shortly be tented capacity at Mullingar Barracks for 128 people as part of a combined project to accommodate international protection applicants and beneficiaries of temporary protection there.
The Citywest transit hub, originally developed as a processing centre for beneficiaries of temporary protection, has also been used for much of the past year as an overflow space where international protection applicants can remain while waiting to move to accommodation centres. The Citywest transit hub itself had to pause entry to its temporary accommodation facility for new arrivals on 24 January because the numbers accommodated there exceeded available capacity. Numbers have since reduced close to available capacity. As of 21 May, there were 627 adult males temporarily accommodated there in a facility that has bed capacity for 600 persons. Since Citywest paused entry to its temporary accommodation facility for new arrivals, IPAS has prioritised the provision of accommodation to children and their families. Accommodation has been provided for all children and their families throughout this period, notwithstanding the pause. As of 24 May, all adult females and couples seeking accommodation since January have also been accommodated.
However, as the committee is aware, it has not been possible to provide accommodation for a number of adult males at the time of request for accommodation. As of 24 May, 217 adult males remained unaccommodated, with retrospective offers of accommodation having been made to 1,061 people. Accommodation is currently being offered to persons who requested accommodation on or before 3 May. IPAS has reached agreements with Mendicity, Merchant’s Quay Ireland, the Capuchin Day Centre and Safetynet for their services to be extended to unaccommodated international protection applicants, and has co-ordinated with Crosscare, Depaul and the Irish Refugee Council to ensure unaccommodated persons have access to information on services and entitlements.
While there is a series of accommodation projects currently in preparation which will result in accommodation for 1,200 persons, it is anticipated that accommodation capacity will remain constrained into the future as it takes time to bring new projects onstream, particularly where they involve the repurposing of buildings and facilities, as is now the case for most new projects. Contractor decisions and community response are key factors in determining the volume of accommodation that we can secure and the pace at which it can be made available to accommodate international protection applicants.
In conclusion, notwithstanding the current challenges, we will continue to work very intensively to respond as quickly as possible to the accommodation needs of international protection applicants. I thank the Chair and members. We will be delighted to answer questions.
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I invite Mr. Michael Walsh to make his presentation.
Mr. Michael Walsh:
I will hit some of the main points and members can then peruse some of the data in the opening statement at their leisure. Generally speaking, the local government sector has been involved since day one in assisting Departments and others to meet the challenges of the Ukrainian crisis specifically and also beneficiaries of temporary protection. We have done this is a number of ways. A significant number of emergency rest centres were developed in the first instance providing accommodation for approximately 2,200 people. These were intended for quick turnover and have generally provided that sort of service. We also assisted the Red Cross in the assessment of promises of accommodation throughout the country. We reactivated the community response forum and community call initiative in place during the Covid-19 crisis. That has generally worked pretty well. It co-ordinates services locally through engaging with the HSE and education and other services in providing integration across communities. They meet on a regular basis and, more importantly, specific personal relationships have been developed between the responsible people in all of the local authority areas at this stage.
The other significant initiative per sewas the offer of home initiative. Members will see some of the data related to the initiative in which we sought to put in place a streamlined process for people to offer unoccupied homes. It is important to emphasise the "unoccupied" part of that phrase. We received a significant number of offers. Of the more than 2,300 properties offered, about half have been accepted for use. The reason the other half have not been accepted for use is that they were not viable properties and were simply not good enough, to be honest, in some instances. In addition, once people became aware of all of the terms and conditions, if I can put it that way, of which there are not many, a number of those parties withdrew their offers of their own volition. In a significant proportion of cases, we did not accept the properties as we were not satisfied that they were unoccupied or that they should have been unoccupied. In other words, if they were located in housing pressure areas, or otherwise, we were not satisfied to accept them.
On the whole, we are satisfied that we have given a good level of service. We will end up with the bones of 4,000 people being accommodated under the initiative. In many respects, it represents the best solution for accommodation because it is "own home, own door" in the community, if members get my meaning. While it is not for us to say, nonetheless our perception of the initiative is that it has worked reasonably well.
We have been engaged in a second area since the start in many respects. Since March and a Government decision on the matter, I have been chairing a technical working group to try to move forward significantly the refurbishment of vacant properties. These fall into different categories. Members will be able to see in some of the tables information on whether the properties are local authority-owned, State-owned or belong to owners who need capital, which may be particularly difficult, and owners who can do direct commercial agreements and have the capital to do the work on refurbished properties.
Since March, we have been working with our colleagues in the Department, the Central Statistics Office, CSO, and the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage to put together a proper framework for doing this. We are nearly there and have a reasonable pipeline to get properties moving. I emphasise, however, that these are complex propositions in many instances. The reasons these properties require refurbishment and are sitting idle is that they are "problem children", as I would describe them. If they were easy to do, they would have been done already. We have a fairly good legal framework developed with the Chief State Solicitor's. We have a clear procedural framework with the different Departments for how the legal and practical arrangements will work. We expect developments in this area to gather pace.
A few hundred properties have already been done and there are nearly 400 bed spaces. We believe we will deliver perhaps 2,500 bed spaces before the end of the year and we should be able to deliver a similar number in the first and second quarter of next year.
I know many frustrated owners have been offering properties through the online portal and otherwise. We are now communicating with all of them and within the next couple of weeks, we will be able to give them a very clear direction in respect of the parameters within which we are prepared to work.
We and the Departments have agreed that one of our priorities should be to fully target better quality accommodation. We want good results and long-term use. If the State is, in effect, investing in these properties, we need to be certain there is a longer term positive use for them afterwards. We will stay a little bit away from the dormitory-style accommodation. We will generally look to get own-door solutions and, ultimately, a better solution that can contribute more to society, socioeconomically and otherwise, in the future. That sounds like a promise that everything will be all right from here onwards but, on balance, I believe we are in a better place now collectively. We have clear parameters in which we will operate and a clear procedural framework. It will never be seamless because there will always be owners with whom we will not agree, if I can put it that way. This framework, however, will allow us to deliver on a piecemeal basis admittedly. Some of these properties are three-month propositions, some are six-month propositions and others are even longer propositions. They are that complex. We have to do procurement and many other things. We believe we are in a place where we should get a nice pipeline and a streamed process going forward from here.
I thank the Cathaoirleach very much for the opportunity to make this presentation. We will be happy to answer members' questions.
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Mr. Walsh. Members will have seven minutes to contribute. We are under a little more time pressure then normal because we are having two sessions today.
Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I welcome the witnesses and thank them for the information. I very much see this exchange as an information-providing and gathering exercise, if you will. I welcome the frankness with which the witnesses have given their information. That is a recurring theme, given the earlier witnesses we heard from, and I am grateful for it.
I am trying to seek a better understanding of two processes in particular. One is in respect of the rapid-build or modular housing piece of the jigsaw or challenge. I will direct a question to Mr. Walsh. My understanding of the protocol in place for the OPW and local authorities is that the local authority identifies lands for modular housing, the submission is then made to the OPW and the OPW then sends a contracted team to assess the suitability of the site.
Am I correct in making that assumption in terms of how that model works?
I ask Mr. Walsh, as the chief executive of Waterford City and County Council, and generally as a member of the technical working group that feeds into the accommodation working group, for his observations on what has been the experience of local authorities so far with the perceived lack of progress made with modular or rapid-build housing?
Mr. Michael Walsh:
The Deputy has described the process correctly, as we understand it. There is engagement and community engagement at a local level with councillors and otherwise. We have proposed, and in other instances, we have not proposed. The OPW has sought out the properties and otherwise we are happy to facilitate in all the engagements around services availability. In my own experience that has been the challenge on one or two sites. Water provision in one instance has caused delays and in one instance has caused the failure of one serious proposition. Ms Carr probably has experience in that space as well.
Ms Sin?ad Carr:
Yes, it is all very similar to what Mr. Walsh has said. We were given options around lands we possibly would have had, but to be quite honest, many of them would have come back from the OPW. The site that is being built in Thurles, County Tipperary, is an OPW site it would have selected. Regarding other sites it would have selected, on two of those sites water infrastructure capacity issues were the reason they did not go ahead.
Mr. Michael Walsh:
The delays rest with the detail on the servicing. There is a site that is in State ownership, but then you get into the nuts and bolts of the roads infrastructure, the water infrastructure and all the other things that are key. We do not have sight of all the OPW's programme. We have sight of individual ones. The infrastructure piece is critical.
The technical working group comprises ourselves, the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, and the Department of the Taoiseach. We work collectively to co-ordinate the refurbishment programme and not so much the other aspect as the OPW is leading specifically on the modular programme.
Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have the same question for the Department officials.
Ms Carol Baxter:
On the new strand of accommodation, good progress has been made with the first seven sites because they have either been or are being installed. As Mr. Walsh has said, and as the Deputy knows from the Mahon site in Cork, there were problems such as Japanese knotweed. We probably underestimated how much time it would take to create a new strand entirely from scratch. We feel very confident that this programme will be a great success. The OPW will hand over the first site at the end of May and we are already working extremely hard on finalising the allocation. We have contracted the International Organization for Migration to work with families in the Cork-Kerry area who are in hotels to move into modular units. The families will move in the next couple of weeks.
Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I seek a better understanding of the tender process for designating a property like an hotel. I do not have a sightline on that. As a Deputy, it is very helpful to understand the tender process, whether a facility has been built into the tender process to ensure there are no bad actors or that they have been weeded out of the process, that due diligence is done on the process, and, given we are the children’s committee, that there is a robust interaction around child protection, for instance. Child protection is one of the issues in which we, as a committee, have a particular interest. On the tender process and expressions of interest, how is due diligence done to ensure no bad actors profiteer, to use that word? I am not using that word as a dog whistle. I want that to be very clear. I am trying to understand the process. The second issue is child protection because that is vital.
Ms Sheenagh Rooney:
I thank the Deputy for the question. We had a challenge with respect to building a better process to facilitate the volume of offers we received, although we have always had checks and balances in place. Since January, there is a portal on gov.ie, which is the one place where a commercial offer can be put through to accommodate BOTPs. All the details of the approved accommodation categories are listed there. The Deputy asked about an hotel. We accept hotels, hostels, bed and breakfast accommodation and guesthouses if they have more than 15 people. We also advance non-standard accommodation. The portal has very clear guidance on the type of accommodation we accept, and we only accept it now through that portal. To date, we have received 1,400 offers through that portal. In general, people are informed where their offer is within three and five days.
Another benefit of the portal is that because it is a multi-strand accommodation response, on the portal it can also be seen that, where someone offers a private home, we provide the contact details for offers of a home. If a person has refurbished buildings, he or she gets moved on to that. It is very clear what we accept.
On standards, which the Deputy mentioned, the portal contains very clear information on the type of standards we expect for room provision. We look for details on the number of beds per room.
On child safeguarding, the majority of BOTPs are underage or with their parents. We have a requirement in the contract to meet all standards with respect to child safeguarding. Obviously, that is in place in large congregated settings like Citywest. All the requirements are met with respect to hotels. If there are issues, we investigate them.
Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Please forgive me but I have a limited amount of time.
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The Deputy is over his allotted time.
Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On child protection issues, are the Department officials confident that engagement with the Child and Family Agency is so robust that children who come into this country have protection?
Ms Carol Baxter:
On the international protection side, we require that all centres comply with the Children First policy. We have a member of Tusla staff seconded to us on the international protection side. The person works with centres to ensure they have vetting and comply with child protection, and to develop the overall capacity of centres to respond to the needs of children in IPAS centres.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I welcome both groups. I commend the work done over the past 18 months and longer under enormous pressure. I commend everyone who has worked tirelessly in very difficult and challenging circumstances to provide accommodation, as best as possible.
There have been some challenges and a lot of misdirection or no direction by the Government. There has been no coherent policy, as I see it. This time last year, there was an initial announcement to commence 500 rapid-build units and the figure was increased to 700 units with a delivery date of November 2022. None of the units has been delivered. Ms Baxter has just said we will see some units over the next while. How many is “some”? How many are we hoping to see and when?
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
When will they open?
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What about the remainder of the 316?
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
By the end of 2023, will we have achieved the 700 units that the Government committed to delivering last November?
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The Department is still working on the sites for phase 2. By the time procurement and everything is complete, we will not realistically achieve 700 units by the end of this year. Is that what Ms Baxter is saying?
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How many sites are actively under consideration currently?
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is great. I know there have been real challenges around temporary accommodation. We have seen instances in recent weeks where communities have taken issue with the identification and selection of temporary accommodation. I absolutely know there are serious challenges and pressures involved. The Minister has alluded to poor communication with communities. I wish to talk a little about that. Not for one second am I talking about giving communities the power of veto over who goes into or resides in their communities. I would say, however, that there has been a lack of communication. That is a lack not of consultation but of communication. There are genuine concerns and in many communities, it is difficult to get a school place or GP. In terms of communications, what has been learned? The Minister has said he will be taking on additional people within the Department to improve communications and develop better communication strategies. Ms Baxter might talk a little about that.
Ms Carol Baxter:
At the moment, where centres are opened, briefings are prepared to give information to Oireachtas Members and local representatives. Briefings are done for all of the centres that are developed. The Ministers have given briefings to Oireachtas Members but it is recognised that the issue needs more intensive work. The Department of the Taoiseach has a community engagement project under way to develop a much more intensive community engagement model. It has gone out to tender for a communications team and is working to bring in additional resources, recognising, for instance, that the work we have done on community engagement around the Office of Public Works, OPW, rapid build scheme has been good but involves a great deal of work at local level to ensure information is communicated and disinformation is challenged. We are trying to get advisers who can help to dispel some of the security issues that have arisen for people. We have been working with the Garda on how we can communicate more effectively to respond to some of those security issues.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Communication is key and I welcome the belated moves of the Minister and the Department to try to address some of those issues by taking on additional staff and so on.
On site selection, is the decision to use particular premises based solely on availability? What work is done to identify particular challenges in an area, including a lack of school places or challenges around access to GPs? What engagement takes place? Emergency accommodation was opened in my constituency of Wicklow. The local authority had no knowledge. There were no communications to the education and training board, ETB. This happened a couple of years ago and perhaps things have changed. What engagement with all of those service providers takes place now?
Ms Carol Baxter:
In advance of the opening of a centre, we send information to all of the stakeholders, including the local authorities and ETBs. A HSE person is co-located with us and we meet the HSE weekly to examine existing issues in centres and the issues that will arise with the opening of future centres. The context is one of acute scarcity. When contractors wish to put forward a proposal to us, they have to do so through a particular template. We assess the template in the context of issues such as the experience of staff, the offering being provided and whether or not it complies with fire safety configuration. Unfortunately, we are not really in a position to veto particular locations. We need so much accommodation that we are trying to do something different. We are trying to work with, for instance, the HSE. We also have officials from the Tusla education support service, TESS, co-located with us to try to see if we can get school places and access to health services regardless of the location. If the accommodation is of good quality, it would be difficult for us to turn it down regardless of the location.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I hope I will have the opportunity to come in again to expand on some of those issues. I know communities in parts of the country have been promised additional resources, including teachers and GPs, and none of it has materialised. I would like the chance to question some of that in a little more detail.
I know that talks have taken place between the Port of Cork authority and international protection accommodation services, IPAS, in respect of the potential use of ships for the purpose of accommodation. I want to know where that is at and if it is still under active consideration.
Ms Carol Baxter:
It is under active consideration. There is quite a deal more to do. We have to finalise berths and issue a request for tender for the operator of a vessel or vessels. There is still a number of steps to take and a bit of further engagement with the relevant local authorities is required. Such a scheme is months away but it is a serious strand on which we are working at the moment.
Tom Clonan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank our guests for coming in. I can imagine how busy they are at the moment. I will make the general observation that we would not be where we are were it not for the actions of Vladimir Putin. This is an unprecedented situation. I would consider it an emergency. We can look back to crises we have confronted in the past. In 2010, there was a period of intense flooding followed by a prolonged period of snow and ice. That crisis took place more or less in slow motion. At the beginning, with the flooding, local authorities would arrive out to a block of apartments and say it could not operate because it was private property and residents would have to contact the management company to do the necessary. There was a lack of co-ordination. The relevant Minister at the time, former Deputy John Gormley, who was identified as being responsible for that particular crisis, declared an emergency. By doing so, he was able to mobilise the civil authority. In respect of everything happening at the moment, we have gone beyond the point of crisis and are now in a situation of emergency. It is not anyone's fault because its cause is outside our control. I am wondering what would happen if the lead Department, which is the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, were to declare an emergency.
What is happening at the moment fits precisely the Government's definition of what constitutes an emergency, in that local resources are being overwhelmed and a more co-ordinated response is required at national level. What used to be the national co-ordination committee now resides in the Department of Housing, Heritage and Local Government. I think it is now called the steering committee. If the Minister and the Government were to declare an emergency, they could mobilise all stakeholders to come together. The witnesses spoke about having people from the HSE co-located with them and the difficulties local authorities have with everything from knockweed, across the spectrum to access to water. Would it be helpful for this to be declared an emergency at this point and for the National Emergency Co-ordination Centre, NECC, to be put in place so that all stakeholders could get together and work on this in a more co-ordinated way?
On the case of people arriving who are in tents on Sandwith Street, Mount Street Lower and elsewhere, I have stated that instead of having people in tents, they could be given access to Army barracks that are in use such as Cathal Brugha Barracks in Rathmines or McKee Barracks in Blackhorse Avenue, not disused barracks. If we declared an emergency and mobilised aid to the civil authority, the Defence Forces could take these people in and put them on hard stands. They could set up their tents there, as a temporary measure to alleviate an emergency. We did it before in 1992 when there was severe weather during a homelessness crisis. The Defence Forces took in homeless people off the streets as a temporary measure to alleviate an emergency. It also happened during the Troubles when we took in thousands of refugees from Northern Ireland. They were housed in operating military premises, not disused military premises that need upgrading. It would mean that hundreds of people who are on the city streets could be in the security of a barracks. An area could be easily and securely cordoned off from the working areas of the barracks. They would have access to accommodation blocks where they could have a shower or use the toilet and go about their day in dignity. At this point in the crisis, I think it is an emergency. Do the witnesses think that would be helpful? Is the Department communicating with the lead Department on this to say we should declare an emergency so we can better mobilise our resources to deal with what we hope will be a short or medium-term emergency, if the international situation resolves one way or another?
Ms Sheenagh Rooney:
It has been extremely challenging but on the beneficiaries of temporary protection, BoTP, side we have been able to provide accommodation to everyone who needs it. We are planning to provide further accommodation through various accommodation strands to those who need it. The structure that is set up to deliver that response at the moment is very much cross-Government and cross-agency. We find that structure is serving us well. Every week, a senior officials group, led by the Department of the Taoiseach is attended by all relevant Departments and agencies. A number of senior officials groups sit under that. Our colleagues from the LGMA who are present mentioned one of them, namely the accommodation working group. There are also others. Every week there is intensive engagement across the Government about all the challenges on both the BoTP side and the international protection, IP, side. Separate engagements take place every Friday morning between ourselves the County and City Management Association, CCMA, and the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage at senior level. A number of structures exist which are working well to foster the collaboration that is absolutely needed. We also serve a Cabinet committee which makes decisions that impact on the response.
We would not have achieved what we have achieved without the support of others, including those in local authorities, the offer a home scheme, communities, people who pledged to the Red Cross, the people who are involved from the OPW and modular homes and the Department of Defence, which stood up Gormanston and is working with us in Mullingar and on a number of other Defence Forces sites. We share information at local authority level every day. There are community response fora which is one of the lessons we are leveraging from the Covid-19 pandemic. We are satisfied that although it remains challenging and we are always at the mercy of the number of people who will arrive - as the Senator stated, it is uncertain where the crisis will go - the structures in place at the moment are serving us well.
Tom Clonan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Ms Rooney for that. As a layperson who is outside the loop, I wondered whether she felt it had got to the point where it should be called an emergency. From her response it seems she does not consider it to be.
This situation or crisis - I would call it an emergency - is being exploited by people on the far right and people who have other agendas. It is an intended consequence of the aggression in Ukraine to sow discontent and disunity throughout Europe and to put people under pressure. I echo what Deputy Brady said about the communications effort. Local media could possibly be targeted. All the Departments and sections have press or information people and resources. Some of the big corporate communications firms are also held on contract with the Departments to manage this. I urge the witnesses, when they are reporting back, to note that there is a wider narrative that needs to be dealt with in addition to the nuts and bolts of dealing with the accommodation itself. Media and public discourse challenges always come when we are at our busiest. They are not some kind of cosmetic add-on. They are essential because what is being exploited by elements in our society is an intended consequence and part of what the Kremlin is about.
I thank the witnesses for their answers and their time.
Jennifer Murnane O'Connor (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses for coming today. As has been said, there have been huge challenges. There is no question about that. The communication has been unacceptable. There is some accommodation that is not fit for purpose. I question how often it is assessed and who goes to check it. I know of people accommodating people who have not been paid. We must be mindful that we all want to work together. We speak about Oireachtas Members. The communication is not great there either, I will be honest. Where I live I have heard rumours recently about what will happen in my area of Carlow-Kilkenny. I have to say that I am sorry and that I am not aware of it. I feel that is unacceptable.
On the portal, does the Department meet people who have accommodation? Does it go out to assess the accommodation? How many new staff does the Department have to do this? I know it is under pressure. I do not doubt it. I can see the challenges it faces. I am disappointed about what the witnesses said about the Taoiseach and community engagement. We should have had community engagement long ago. If we had, it would have been better for everyone.
I firmly believe that we all need to work together. That is what we are here to do. We are here to work together and help in any way we can. However, it is not easy when we are trying to find information. I know the Minister, Deputy O'Gorman, has been looking for a lot of staff for his Department. Community engagement is at a critical stage. We need much more community engagement. The witnesses mentioned that they will purchase sites and build. That is good. As I said, I firmly believe we all need to work together. The problem is what you do and how you do it. I know of one area with a lot of houses where there is one entrance and one exit. There are places about which I have to question who is making the decisions. It is not us and them. As previous speakers have said, we are here to help and work with the Department and the Minister. However, if we see calls on our areas that are not - no one knows an area better than themselves - suitable or not fit for purpose, we will say so.
What can be done here, going forward?
The other thing I thought was really good was where the Department was looking for families to take in our Ukrainians. Was there a big takeup on that? It is important. We all want to mix and get to know everyone's cultures. The officials are from the lead bodies on this. If they do not lead it right, the knock-on effect will not be as good as it should be. As I said, all of us as Oireachtas Members want to play our part and help in any way we can. It is absolutely critical for us. There have been a lot of challenges for the officials, but there have certainly been a lot of challenges for us. As previous speakers have said, this is about communication, information and services. It could be schools, doctors or whatever. We just want to ensure everything is right. It is not that we do not want to do anything wrong; we just want to ensure it is right for everyone. I do not know when the officials' community engagement is going to happen, how quickly it is going to happen and what exactly will happen. What can we all do, to play our part like the officials do, to inform, help and communicate with everyone.
I have outlined my concerns there. I am conscious of how hard all the officials have worked. As I said, I am not questioning them here. Everything changed so much in the last year and a half. No-one was expecting anything like this. There are many challenges there and many things that need to be done.
Ms Sheenagh Rooney:
I thank the Deputy for her comments. We welcome the feedback. She is correct. The scale of accommodation provision we have been overseeing, with 61,000 people since the conflict started, has been immensely challenging. When everyone arrives into Citywest or wherever on that first day, the most important thing for us is that they get safety and shelter.
We are only at the stage now where we have been able to concentrate on bringing improvements to our own processes as we have ramped up our resources. In that regard, we now have more than 160 staff. We are grateful to other Departments that seconded valuable staff with valuable skill sets to our Department. We obviously still have vacancies and we will continue to be prioritised for those vacancies, but we have used those additional resources to address some of the key challenges the Deputy has highlighted. We are not there yet on some of them, but we will get there. Having the offer portal up and running has really helped us streamline. We have one portal for all offers, because members may remember a previous frustration of Members was they were not getting a response to the offers. Not to dwell on the detail, but one of the biggest challenges for us was we were getting so many offers from so many different sources to so many different email addresses it was impossible to keep track of while doing the day job, given the numbers we had at the time. We have worked really hard to improve that.
To reassure the committee, there are strong checks and balances in there that check for fire safety, tax compliance and see pictures of the rooms. We are not visiting the sites, just to be clear, but we have an oversight regime. We have a system whereby any provider, or indeed any Ukrainian, can contact us with a concern. We receive 375 tickets, as we call them, every week. Where we see accommodation concerns we investigate them. We have undertaken 78 inspections. We have walked away from some providers. Local authorities help us in that way. On the payment system, we have got additional staff and we have outsourced. We have spent €500 million so far this year. We are putting out on average €30 million every week. There is a huge amount of transactions, but we are also putting in place more automated processes so we can do it even quicker. We are making a lot of progress there and we will get fully on top of it in a very short period of time. We are certainly receiving far fewer queries on that and we are satisfied more people are being paid on time.
On the community engagement side, we continue to increase our efforts. On the beneficiaries of temporary protection, BOTP, side, we rely heavily on the community response fora. We share information daily on where Ukrainians are being located. There is a whole infrastructure there for the community response fora to look at the services. Similarly to what my colleague, Ms Baxter, has said, we have secondees in from the Departments of Health and Education who try to help us keep an eye on where we are putting people so we can match them to services. In summary, there absolutely are challenges. We see them and we will work hard to improve them.
Jennifer Murnane O'Connor (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the officials.
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Deputy Brady has one or two additional questions, but I want to ask a few of my own first. On unaccompanied minors specifically, do we have the exact figure at the moment? What is the breakdown? Are most unaccompanied minors in foster families, in residential centres or is it a mix? When somebody presents in that situation, let us say they arrive at the airport, where are they directed to? What sort of situation are they in even in the initial hours or days? I am conscious of child protection, which Deputy Sherlock raised. It is obviously a very traumatising situation for a child, so I would like some information on the unaccompanied minors.
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Does that happen directly from the airport? The minors are never in a situation where they are in a general centre.
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Okay. If the officials can send on any follow-up information it will be appreciated.
Mr. Michael Walsh:
On the community engagement piece, there needs to be an honesty around this. I can only speak from the the local authority experience. We have this, in terms of a bit of conflict with our own councillors, on an ongoing basis. It is immensely difficult, if not impossible, to conduct a commercial negotiation on one side of the fence and be engaging with the community on the other side. It is the ultimate dilemma in many respects. We have it in other ways with local authority developments. It is the kernel of the problem here. We are looking to source accommodation, which is an absolute priority at every level at the moment. We have to do a commercial negotiation to do that. We cannot really do the community engagement - and this is part of the frustration - until that commercial negotiation is concluded. People need to be realistic and recognise that reality.
On the accommodation generally and especially with the refurbishment, we prioritise locationally-appropriate accommodation where there are services. However, we need to be realistic there as well about the challenge for us as a State. In fairness it is one that is being met but once we source the accommodation we must ensure the services can follow through afterwards. In the round, I think that has been achieved. I am not aware of children being without school places. We meet the HSE regularly, as does the Department. The reality is the HSE cannot always give absolute access to a GP, for example, but it is providing clinics and anybody who needs medical attention is getting it. We need to think about it a little differently. The accommodation is, in many respects, the priority. We must then challenge the other Departments. I am not saying we need to challenge them, because in general they are stepping up to provide the services after the fact. We have to be realistic with communities and the public at large that that is the situation and the way it has to be. Again I am not speaking for Departments, but from the local authority experience, a commercial negotiation cannot be conducted in public. That is the simple reality of it.
Jennifer Murnane O'Connor (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I appreciate where Mr. Walsh is coming from. He is right there has to be a balance here. It is everybody working together and if people feel they are not included that in itself might bring other challenges. I accept the work has to be done.
If we can find a solution, the Taoiseach is looking at setting up a Department. That is good. At least it is a start. We need to do it. It is important. I thank our guests for their answers.
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am conscious that Deputy Patrick Costello has not had a chance to ask questions.
Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Thank you, Chair. I am also conscious that I have missed a lot of the discussion so I may be going over old ground. I just want to make a very quick point about the public consultation piece that was flagged. For me there are a couple of aspects and I would welcome further input on them. We have some elements of the public saying they should be consulted on this. An Taoiseach has been very clear and we all need to underline that consultation does not mean people have a veto over who is coming into their communities. However, the lack of engagement and consultation creates an excuse for those who have a much more racist agenda to exploit the situation. There needs to be awareness about that. The lack of public consultation also prevents the groups that want to reach out and support these groups doing so. We have seen the local area "for all" groups. The lack of public consultation prevents those groups from actively working on the ground.
I would love to hear more about what consultation happens with the communities we are providing accommodation for. I look at areas where people are living in hotels. The contract comes back and there are not enough rooms coming back and all of a sudden people need to be moved. These are people who have put down roots in the community, whose children are in school. These are people who have already been displaced, perhaps due to the war, who are now being further displaced and destabilised again from a place where they had imperfect stability. I would love to know what engagement happens with residents and people seeking protection. Quite often we hear they are not being consulted and moves are coming last-minute for them. It adds to the trauma and instability. Mr. Walsh was talking about planning of school placements, doctors and things like that. If decisions are being made last-minute without consultation with the residents themselves, it really undermines any work that might be done there. I would love to hear what is being done to engage with them properly.
Kathleen Funchion (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is the Deputy asking for Mr. Walsh to answer first?
Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am not sure if this has been discussed already, so whoever wants to answer.
Mr. Michael Walsh:
I will leave the piece on the hotel accommodation terminating to my colleagues. In general terms, where we can, we do consult with both local communities and the residents themselves. I would equally frankly say to the Deputy that it is not always possible. We have to recognise the position we are in generally in terms of availability of accommodation. That is the prime determinant at the moment and the absolute priority. Consultation cannot always happen. That is the way I would describe it. We do so where we can. We regularly move on a voluntary basis. For example, for every single one in the Offer a Home scenario, equally with the Red Cross and their pledges, it is all done on a voluntary basis. We seek to do so through engagement with the individuals, through helping them in any aspect we can to make that transition. Circumstances do arise where it is simply not possible. Every effort is made at local level through the community fora and otherwise to find local solutions to local problems. We are absolutely conscious of the issue the Deputy is raising of people integrating into the communities, having established relationships with services or otherwise. We try to have regard to that where we can at all. I would equally stress that there will be some instances where that will not always be possible. I might leave that to my colleagues.
Ms Sin?ad Carr:
To follow up on what Mr. Walsh was saying, there certainly is a balance in terms of the procurement of a facility and the consultation but there is also certainly a point where we can consult. It is more about information than consultation. It is around trying to address stated fears that people have whether they are around security, health or education. That is probably where we can do a lot more work in terms of the new engagement piece that is coming up. I do think that communities need to be engaged with. The vast majority of people are reasonable in communities. What we are allowing is for a certain cohort to dictate what the message is. Accommodation is the priority at the moment and we have to acknowledge that. However, when we get over that balance, when we have the facility, I think there has to be a process whereby there is engagement with the community and we deal with genuine concerns. If it is the case that there are issues around pinch points with GPs or education, it is important that those relevant Departments are coming on board, addressing them and working with the community. I think we will find that a significant proportion of the people will come along with us and we probably will not be having the sort of significant push-back we are having at the moment.
Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is also worth flagging that many of the concerns being voiced are not reasonable. It is perhaps safer for me to say that.
Ms Sheenagh Rooney:
As for the Deputy's query, to add to what our colleagues in the local authority sector have said about moves, the challenge is that there are 84,000 people here. Some 20,000 of them have made their own way and over 10,000 people are in Offer a Home or Red Cross. We have an accommodation portfolio and sometimes we lose contracts. We try to be very mindful of the impacts on those in these accommodation centres when they have to be moved. We engage with the local authority to ensure that any moves that can happen at a local level do happen. We also try to communicate with the beneficiaries of temporary protection who are in these facilities in advance on what the plans are. In a number of centres, we are very proactive about trying to engage with those who are in these centres on taking up pledges in the local area where they can remain in schools and employment. In summary, we do not take moves lightly nor the impact of them. We are very conscious of that. We do all we can to minimise them but sometimes when we are dealing with these issues, we have to think about the 500 people who will arrive next week as well as the people who are here. We have to make sure we have enough accommodation for everyone.
Ms Carol Baxter:
To give some of the statistics on the engagement that has already been done, over the past year the Minister's teams have issued 76 briefing notes to local representatives about new centres. They have provided 35 detailed phone briefings, hosted 24 online briefings and participated in 17 in-person meetings which will typically include community groups. While recognising that this work is an area where we need to do a great deal more, quite a lot has already been done.
Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Thanks for that. Deputy Brady wanted to come back in.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have a couple of questions for Mr. Walsh first. On the system for registering properties, there is a statistic indicating that of the 1,228 properties deemed suitable, a total of 980 or 80% have been allocated. That is a shortfall of 248 that have not been allocated that were deemed suitable. Is there a reason they have not been allocated?
Mr. Michael Walsh:
It is very simple. The properties have been coming on-stream gradually so those are the most recent ones. The owners are contacted and the properties are inspected in sequence. We had a further promotional campaign in February and March so there has been a gradual continuing number coming in.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There is not a long period of time that they are lying there. The Minister, Deputy Darragh O'Brien made an announcement last month about local authority tenants being able to take in refugees or asylum seekers. Has there been communication with the local authorities on that initiative? I have heard concerns from some local authorities that they had not been given any guidelines or directives.
It has been said to me it has had implications and some tenants were in the process of downsizing from a three-bed to a one- or two-bed before that process was stopped on foot of this announcement from the Minister. What communication has taken place between the Minister and local authorities?
Mr. Michael Walsh:
There has been clear communication that local authority tenants are allowed to take somebody in, expressly, if my memory serves me, from the Minister himself. Certainly the Department has communicated that. It is happening and can happen. In my instance, we have not had any uptake on it. There would be some resistance in local authorities around it but it is a Government decision and we will-----
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Clear guidance has been issued.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On inspections of accommodation that is being used, how often do they take place? Concerning my constituency, I have looked at the Department’s reports and there is a property which I will not name but where the last inspection was November of last year.
John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will not name this one but there have been concerns it had been used to accommodate 111 individuals and a decision was taken to more than double capacity to 255. I have seen photographs of the internal layout of that accommodation. A ballroom has been utlised and bunk beds are stacked in. I do not know how it would meet any safety standards. I have concerns, particularly around fire safety. That premises does not appear to have had any inspections since the huge increase in density took place. Is there protocol around that?
Mary Seery Kearney (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses for the considerable work they are doing in unprecedented circumstances. My apologies, I have been in the Seanad all afternoon on legislation so have missed much of the session but will go over the transcript. I have a small enough question but the witnesses will see where I am going with it. For many years – too long according to the programme for Government and all of our intent – we have had direct provision centres. Many of them are in rural locations. Is that the case?
Mary Seery Kearney (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Are any in rural locations? Representatives groups say they have been in rural locations on occasion.
Mary Seery Kearney (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Prior to the current emergency circumstances, were all of them only in urban settings?
Mary Seery Kearney (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is my point. Many of us are bound by diplomacy and parliamentary language from expressing what we really think but many issues that have been presented are those that have been encountered over the past two decades and overcome throughout that time. There has been bus transport, bus connectivity with local communities and so on. I will say what the witnesses may be prevented from saying: many of the arguments put up are completely and utterly spurious.
I just wanted to verify what I had heard in engagement with organisations, that there is nothing new.
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What is the current status of the second transit hub?
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The CityWest transit hub at present is closed to additional arrivals. The understanding was a second transit hub was being explored. That emerged during an engagement with the Secretary General in the Committee of Public Accounts. That was a number of months ago. Where is that hub? Is it part of the Department’s plans at present?
Ms Carol Baxter:
The Airways centre that the Government just opened was intended as a second transit hub. We have modified the plans. While we have paused for new arrivals, we have people going into the CityWest transit hub every day but others have to move from it for new arrivals to come there. We thought when we reviewed things, it made more sense for CityWest to be the primary transit hub because we have good services there, access to the HSE and health screening and the International Organization for Migration doing orientation and providing intensive support. It is a good centre in which to spend one’s first period. The Airways centre, which was intended as a second transit hub, as it stands will be a standard centre. We will keep that under review if it seems we cannot keep moving people in and out of CityWest.
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What is the capacity of the Airways centre, in terms of dealing with overflow of arrivals to our country in coming months?
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What is the current capacity of CityWest?
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Was it previously a higher figure? Was it not in the region of 2,000?
Ms Carol Baxter:
CityWest has 1,700 beneficiaries of temporary protection staying in the hotel. The transit hub has a capacity of 600. The Deputy is probably aware that at periods we have been significantly over that capacity but have done much work to improve conditions and move, very shortly, to a bed-only arrangement, whereby a person gets a place there when we have an available bed.
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
In relation to tented accommodation, how many sites is the Department overseeing?
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Many communities are concerned about support services. Colleagues in the committee have previously touched on it. How does the Department collaborate with relevant stakeholders to facilitate successful integration into agencies or the local community? Has a proper process or pathway been established for IPs and Ukrainians to access services?
Ms Carol Baxter:
My colleague, Ms Rooney, will talk about beneficiaries of temporary protection.
On the IP side, we have co-located the HSE and the Tusla education support services, which work with us to identify mainstream service needs. We have secured funding and the Department is finalising arrangements with local authorities for integration officers to be appointed to every local authority, again to support the process of accessing mainstream services and promote the integration process. We have secured funding also for an integration fund-----
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I apologise for interrupting, but how much funding has been allocated to local authorities to provide additional resources for integration?
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
My county has had more than 4,000 additional arrivals. Does that mean there will be one resource unit for every 1,000, or will it be done on a per capitabasis? How is it broken down among the counties?
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Will these trained personnel come from the existing local authority system or will they be new? Perhaps this question would be better directed at Mr. Walsh in the context of the engagement his organisation has had to date regarding the additional headcount.
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Will it be done through the Public Appointments Service or internally?
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Who currently looks after the integration aspect within the local authorities?
Ms Sin?ad Carr:
I might outline how it works in my case and it is similar in other local authorities at the moment. A director of service for Ukraine is identified in each local authority, in addition to whom there are both technical staff, to assess the pledged and refurbished accommodation, and staff who will work as relationship managers with the property owners who are pledging properties. At the moment, what we are doing-----
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
At this stage, however, most of the pledged accommodation has been reviewed.
Ms Sin?ad Carr:
Yes, but it is ongoing and we still need to maintain a relationship with the individuals in a number of areas. In addition to that, we are working with the local development companies on the ground, which are supported on the integration scene by intercultural workers. That is where the community forum comes in.
For future efforts, we will look to additional individuals if there is further integration work, whether through the IPs or the BOTPs. They will work under the local authorities rather than through the local development companies.
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Does the Department accept there has been a lack of policy on the integration aspect? From what I am hearing, it is leaving to the local development companies, in the context of their duties to work with these new arrivals, those who are seeking medical or psychological assistance or looking to secure additional employment, perhaps through job activation programmes. They seem to be getting lost in the system without any resources being allocated on the ground. How long will it take before these new resources are allocated to each of the centres? If we take County Mayo as an example, is there a timeline for that?
Ms Sin?ad Carr:
To clarify, I do not want the suggestion to go out that the local development companies are just picking up what nobody else has picked up. This was done with a very considered approach. We approached them and agreed they would take on those additional workers, through supports from the Department, because they are the best bodies on the ground to engage with that. We have a community forum where we meet monthly. They meet our staff and we work in a very collaborative manner. It works well.
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I do not disagree on the value of these workers on the ground, but they are greatly overburdened with the level of need within each of these emergency centres. I have engaged with a lot of these workers. Some of them have been funded through the HSE, but an immensely greater need is required. These workers have also worked on various other projects in Mayo, such as in Ballaghaderreen with the Syrian arrivals. I know some of them and know how they work on the ground.
From listening to the people within these centres, however, a missing piece to this jigsaw has possibly been left idle in recent months. I am trying to understand how quickly we are bridging that. They are seeking information and find it very difficult to figure out where they should go. For those who have access to medical cards now, they find it extremely difficult to get onto a general medical card scheme to get access to services because every GP's list is currently at capacity. Their only port of call is to emergency departments, EDs, but they might not require any ED treatment. How can we provide better support to these new arrivals?
Ms Carol Baxter:
My colleague Ms Rooney will talk about the BOTPs. We have been working for some time with the centre managers. IPAS has a responsibility to support people to access services. We have co-located HSE test staff, again to provide support, but we also see civil society as important, so we are working on a programme to provide funding to NGOs that will directly support centres. The Deputy will be aware many of our existing centres have Friends of the Centre and we are working to intensify that support. There is also an international protection integration fund. The call for that has just closed and we received 165 applications for funding. A national integration fund will also be announced later this year, again with a view to supporting civil society capacity in that space. It is multifaceted. As for local authorities, our understanding is the recruitment process will begin shortly.
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
In regard to accommodation capacity and long-term planning, more than 60,000 beds have been taken out of the tourism and hospitality sector as a result of this humanitarian crisis. In the context of long-term planning strategies to ensure sustainable accommodation pathways, has the Department established a long-term plan for both Ukrainians and international protection applicants?
Ms Sheenagh Rooney:
I might come back on a number of interventions that take place at various junctures to assist the BOTPs in their integration. The scale of the response requires an all-of-government effort and there are a number of structures to support that but, in the first instance, when BOTPs arrive in CityWest, they have access to medical triage, so those who are vulnerable are taken care of at that stage. Supports are also provided by the Department of Social Protection, such as the medical card. There is an all-of-government presence at CityWest.
As for the allocation of BOTPs to certain areas, the Deputy is very aware of the challenges with accommodation provision. We accept all suitable offers through the portal, but staff from the Department of Education work with rail co-ordinators on pressures in schools, so we are very aware of them. We have staff seconded to us from the Department of Health and we have a dedicated team who deal with vulnerable cases that arise on the health side.
Then, as has been mentioned by our colleagues in the local authority sector, there is a very active community response forum in every local authority, which involves all the agencies. Of course we need to do more, but there are structures in place.
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Yes. In some instances, I would fail to disagree, because I know what is happening on the ground regarding community response forums, their visitations to some of these centres, and the responses which are being implemented, and it is just not happening. That is the evidence which I see on the ground. I have talked to the people. They are not engaged within months of actually arriving. It might seem fine regarding what Ms Rooney has outlined regarding the interventions, but the evidence on the ground does not reflect that.
Regarding the long-term pathways for accommodation-----
Ms Sheenagh Rooney:
On that, we have a portfolio of 60,000 in our accommodation at the moment. While we have a certain amount of accommodation provision which has come from the tourism sector, there is obviously a lot which has not. We are concentrating on procuring from self-catering now as opposed to service. That is very much a policy which we are advocating, because we want beneficiaries of temporary protection, BOTPs to move into more independent accommodation. There are more than 20,000 Ukrainians who are employed, and that is very valuable, and a lot of those people want to make their independent way. There are a number of ways in which they can do that, through the offer a home scheme and pledged accommodation.
However, on the longer-term response, we continue to model the arrivals at 500 on average per week, which means we will have a need for 15,000 extra accommodation spaces by the end of this year. That is what we are working towards at the moment, and obviously we will have to see how the conflict goes. How that is being overseen is through the accommodation working group, which is chaired by an independent chair who is overseen by the Department of the Taoiseach. That work is progressing a myriad of different accommodation streams. We spoke in here about the fast build, but there is also the refurbishment stream. There is what more can be done on the offer a home scheme. We are also looking at other proof of concept sites to develop pod-style accommodation, which can hopefully be delivered quicker.
There is a lot of intense and very active work there, and the reason that is being undertaken is a full acknowledgment that we want BOTPs to be integrated in society. We want them to be in schools, working, and to access all the services they can. A key part of that is to have more independent accommodation, and that is the job of the accommodation working group, which is very much a collaborative, cross-government effort.
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have one final question. Regarding the four additional resources for local authorities, when is it expected to have them in place?
Mr. Michael Walsh:
Within a couple of months, I would have thought. The recruitment period will simply take that type of time.
The reality is that in terms of resources, there is no doubt that an awful lot more resources could be committed to this. I would honestly say that there is a case to be made - and maybe it rests with us local authorities to make it - that there are some local authority areas, predominantly along the western seaboard where, because of the availability of tourism accommodation, being honest about it, they have a greater proportion. There is an argument for greater resources.
I would also say that in some of those local authority areas, voluntary response through the community forums is actually providing some of the services, whether that is the way it should be or should not be. That is the reality, and I would equally say that this voluntary response has been sustained for a year. It is a struggle to sustain it in terms of the effort. We acknowledge it, and we get that feedback generally. It is something we will be discussing with the Departments.
Regarding the social inclusion and community activation programme, SICAP funding, the agency doing it is the appropriate agency in terms of the development companies. The resources to do it being commensurate with the demands is a challenge, if members know what I mean. It is a discussion we have to have. It is the Department of Rural and Community Development, DRCD which provides that funding, and we would be happy enough to have conversation with it. In a sense, I am going a long-winded way about saying that I take the Deputy's point.
Alan Dillon (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Mr. Walsh and the Acting Chair.
Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Deputy Dillon. I must say that the timeline of a couple or three months for recruitment seems very long. Does Mr. Walsh share my concern, or is there any way we can speed that up, if we are trying to put integration works in place?
Mr. Michael Walsh:
The fact that they are permanent positions means that we have to follow fairly direct lines. We will accelerate it. I can assure the committee that local authorities across the board, in this situation last year in particular, would have done recruitment campaigns in six weeks. However, to be fair, if one wants to get the best people in this instance, I think we have to advertise. We are hitting a sort of holiday period now. Appropriately, there will not be any delays on the recruitment itself, but even then I am being realistic, because even if one offers a job to somebody now, in terms of getting them to move, they have to give notice periods in their own employments. Otherwise, I think we have to be realistic.
Patrick Costello (Dublin South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Those of us who, in previous lives, have been councillors have experienced the delays put on local authorities by Departmental fiat. My concern is perhaps more about the roadblocks up there, as opposed to anything which the individual local authorities are doing. I might leave that one there, because I am straying off topic.
That is the end, unless there is anyone online? No. I thank the witnesses for their informative and meaningful engagement with the members this afternoon, and I wish to propose that the opening statements be published on the Oireachtas website. Is that agreed? Agreed. As such, the meeting now stands adjourned until Tuesday, 13 June.