Fiona O'Malley (Dún Laoghaire, Progressive Democrats)

The overwhelming result in the June referendum on citizenship highlights the need for order and clarity in this area. Although the citizenship provision in the Good Friday Agreement existed for a short period, it still had an impact on the country. I find it objectionable that it is described as a loophole. Those with entitlements under our laws should not be described as having the benefit of or utilising a loophole. If the provision exists, it is then a citizen's entitlement and should be described as such. However, the provision should be subject to some degree of change. Like every citizen, citizenship matters to me. I welcome the Bill as it deals with an area where clarity did not previously prevail. The Bill also ties in with our asylum laws. There were difficulties arising from claims that people were engaged in citizenship tourism. It is an unfortunate term but the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform had to act on it. Undeniably there was a certain pull for people to this country because of the existing constitutional provision.

It is important that our citizenship laws are regulated because what it means to be a citizen of Ireland matters. It is not just about having a cover on a passport. It is a complex set of responsibilities and obligations to which an individual who is granted citizenship is subject. It also demonstrates a certain obligation on the part of people who hold common nationality. We should not be shy about requesting a certain gradation in our citizenship, as is proposed in the Bill, whereby people must demonstrate that they have a certain connection to this country through their very welcome involvement in society at whatever level rather than just acquiring it by virtue of the fact that they were born here.

During the debate which took place prior to the referendum, Paul Cullen had a rather good article in The Irish Times about this. He outlined the case of a Lebanese man who had experienced certain difficulties in the Lebanon. The one thing that sustained him was that his son had an Irish passport. When this man and his wife discovered the Irish citizenship rules his family prolonged their stay so their son would become an Irish citizen. There is nothing wrong with that. They did what was in the interests of their child, as all parents do. They wanted to give him the best possible start in life and they believed that Irish citizenship, and thereby EU citizenship, would be of benefit to their son. Is it right that we do not require people to demonstrate a commitment or loyalty to the country? I believe we should grade our citizenship in the manner proposed.

There are different levels of Irish citizenship. Not every citizen is entitled to vote, one has to be a certain age, and there are certain restrictions on our ability to participate in our country. Why should that not be the same here as it is in most other countries? Why should we not bring ourselves into line with other European countries?

The Minister stated that Governments have a duty to safeguard the institution of citizenship so as to ensure it continues to fulfil the requirement of its role as a manifestation of a nation where membership of that nation has an intrinsic value, not just a price. That brings me to section 11 which proposes to cease the connection between investment and citizenship. That was a disgraceful practice and I very much welcome its abolition. Excuses were made at the time it was introduced that we needed to encourage investment into the country. Selling off one's citizenship is not the answer to encouraging people to invest in and bring prosperity to a country. That is an extremely important part of the Bill which I very much welcome.

I have a concern regarding section 6 and seek clarification on cases where a child is born to parents who do not fulfil the period of residence criteria of three out of four years preceding the birth. In such cases, his or her citizenship is the same as that of his or her parents. If in a year or two a sibling is born, the second child will automatically become an Irish citizen as the parents would have subsequently fulfilled the criteria. I would like to think it possible that the non-Irish citizen sibling would have the ability to acquire citizenship, but I am not sure if provisions in the Bill effect that. I see the Minister's officials nodding. I welcome that fact in terms of family unity.

By and large, this is not the end of the debate on our citizenship — I hope it is the beginning. As a country, Ireland has changed so much from what it was like in the 1980s. We are now a destination country for immigrants and we need to be more confident about who we are and what are our rules and regulations, and that these are enforced. People get apoplectic at the idea of having clear definitions about the status of people living here, as to whether they are seeking asylum or work. The Minister often comes in for a great deal of criticism whenever the definitions are adhered to, which is unwarranted. If we are to have systems, we must make sure they work. In that way, our systems will be respected and honoured and they will mean something. The question of citizenship should be part of a wider debate about immigration policy. I welcome the Bill as the first part of a response to the recent referendum and I look forward to a cool, calm and informed debate on immigration policy in the near future.

See this speech in context