Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)

Mar urlabhraí ar ghnóthaí eachtracha ar son Pháirtí an Lucht Oibre, tááthas orm tacú leis an rún seo agus tá súil agam go mbeidh toradh maith ag baint leis nuair a chuirfear i gcrích é. As spokesperson of the Labour Party, I welcome this all-party motion. I also join with others in commending the initiatives of Senators Kennedy and McCain of the United States in seeking to address the issue of the out of status or undocumented Irish in the United States. As in previous discussions of United States foreign policy and Irish attitudes, it is one of the best uses of the friendly relations between our countries to be able to speak to each other frankly on every aspect of policy.

On this issue of immigration policy, the United States is entitled of course to be concerned about its security, particularly in the wake of the tragic events of 11 September 2001, which we addressed both here in this House and in the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs. At the same time the reason for the urgency that attaches to the legislation which has made its way through the judicial committee in the United States is the fact that immigration difficulties are exacerbated by the new security measures.

The Minister, in his introductory speech on this motion, made some points that are of interest. It is for another day for us to debate the appropriate equivalent response for those who come to Ireland and our attitude towards them. This is a matter which we will take up in strong measure with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform at the earliest opportunity.

In understanding the nature of migration — I studied in the United States at the end of the 1960s and taught in the United States in the 1970s — I am appreciative of the connection that exists between our countries at every level.

The uncertainty which falls on the Irish out of status in the United States is immense. For example, one must be virtually a non-person. It is not only the high skilled who are involved but those who are working in the construction industry, for example. Frankly, while it is a norm of Irish emigration to the United States that one may be assisted by family and a network of friends and relations, one may also be exploited by the same network as a result of one's out of status and undocumented nature. The cases with which I have dealt reveal that, which is also tragic.

It is interesting to note that the great Irish emigration to the United States took place immediately after the Famine. A few hundred people from the west emigrated to the United States before 1847. The pattern of emigration at that stage was circular migration, to Scotland and Britain primarily, but it revealed an important constant in Irish emigration studies, that is, the importance that was attached to contact with family. The dominant kind of emigration pre-Famine was circular seasonal migration, the rewards of which were used to pay rents, etc., which continually rose as the receipts from agricultural production in Scotland were raised.

After the Famine, the great emigration to the United States opened up. The Minister commented on the emigration to the US in the 1950s. I would contest his figure of 400,000 emigrants for the 1950s. Between 1955 and 1960, over 250,000 left Ireland, primarily for England. In one year 58,000 people left. They were mostly of an agricultural background and from rural areas. The males emigrated primarily to the construction industry and helped build Britain. The females entered the services, particularly nursing. Although it is for a debate on another day, theirs was a pattern of greater entry into British society.

The 1980s emigrants to which the Minister referred were primarily from urban areas. Most of the people concerned had second level education and many had third level education, and they were more dispersed in the choice of occupations.

The undocumented Irish in the United States is a 1980s problem that has been growing. Some of those in contact with the immigration centres are people who have been in the United States a long time. I need not go into the detail of the risks, which involve, for example, one's relationship to the welfare system such as it exists in different states, to the health services primarily, and particularly to the attachment, which Irish people have had even in an age of technological development, to contact with home. Circular migration was the predominant form of Irish migration until the modern period. The notion of once and for all saying goodbye occurred for a limited period in Irish emigration history.

Deputy Allen made an interesting point. The Irish remained in contact with their American relatives much more than with their Australian relatives. The emigrants into the cities of the United States sent home money in the American letter. In Liam O'Flaherty's story, The Letter, the father opens the letter, takes out the money and says, before he reads the details of how his son is getting on, there is the price of a horse in that. The Irish, on the other hand, did not keep up communication with their relatives in Australia. I suspect it had something to do with there being nothing in the envelope except an account of how they were getting on in the agricultural setting, in sheep farming, etc., in rural areas.

I say all of this to highlight that emigration is a central feature of the Irish experience. However, it is also about vulnerability. It is about making one's way out of one system and into another and fully participating positively. It is a constant in Irish history. For that reason it is something from which we should learn. We should take to heart President Kennedy's comment, quoted by the Minister, on the richness of the contribution of immigration into a society and it should inform our own decisions on family reunification for those who come here.

We should remember that in our own commission on immigration, set up by the 1948-51 Government, we laid a stress on economic reasons. It was a rather weak model of the push and pull factors arising at the time. It was an inadequate model, ignoring the circular nature of emigration, to which I referred mentioned, which had already started after the Second World War.

I am grateful for the interest that the current American ambassador to Ireland has taken in this matter, his attendance at the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and also his helpful nature in dealing with the proposed legislation. My office has also been in touch frequently with Senator Kennedy's office.

It is interesting that another group of people, the 42 families who fled Montserrat after the eruption of the volcano, would benefit from this legislation. Others, not only the Irish, would benefit. I suppose this is the reason in the other House Mr. Gutierrez, for example, is taking an interest, presumably informed by his connections with the Latin American community in the United States.

I join those who paid tribute to the Irish Episcopal Commission and the emigration centres. While I am a critic of some aspects of current practice in the Department of Foreign Affairs, I welcome the Minister's announcement of increased funding for the immigration centres. I hope we can debate more fully another day the matter of making full funding available for the implementation of the task force on immigration.

It is interesting to bear in mind the alternatives to this important legislation. The message that should go out from this House is that there is unanimous support for the preferred legislation of Senators Kennedy and McCain, that it is something to which we attach urgency and it is our strong belief, while understanding the manner in which circumstances have changed in the United States, that people who are important to us have already suffered by long periods of detention, deportation and by much exacerbated feelings of vulnerability of being unable to retain contact with their relatives and families.

The alternative of securing residency in the United States through the means of the diversity visa lottery programme, for example, is not realistic. Fate does not favour us, with a result of 290 out of 9.5 million applicants. The statistical projection from that would not impact on the need in relation to the current volume of out of status Irish persons. It will be valuable when we are, perhaps now on the final date of the legislation, able to establish more authoritative estimates for the number of people involved. I believe that number was never as low as 5,000. Decades ago it was twice that figure taking the rough estimates prepared not just for those on the east coast, but those on the west coast in California and wherever. The best base line figure is probably the estimate from the immigration centres, adjusted downwards. I appreciate there is a difficulty in obtaining an accurate figure as people are reluctant to come forward because through giving information they place themselves at risk.

When I hear of the comparative efforts being made to deal with the problem of illegal immigration, there is a lesson in it for us all. Perhaps we should debate more fully in this House our general attitude and policy towards migration which is one of the features of the modern world. I studied in this area almost 40 years ago. Over the past decades during which I lectured on this area, matters changed fundamentally. The speed of capital and labour have changed relative to each other. Capital has become more mobile and virtually moves in real time while the movement of labour is full of the social and psychological costs and consequences associated with leaving one system and entering another.

It is, perhaps, appropriate that we should debate the international commission on migration and the issue of migrant's rights. The Kennedy-McCain legislation is in the general atmosphere of according rights to those who make a productive contribution to the economy. We have lessons to learn with regard to the families of people who make incipient moves towards becoming part of the economy. We should draw from our experience. We should not use offensive and insulting language, as some Cabinet Members have done, for example, in saying people's stories at airports were "cock and bull stories" and one wished one could turn them back. I cannot convey how much those of us who have worked for three or four decades on immigration issues were grieved to hear such statements made by a person here. The Irish abroad is a new unit in the Department with a small staff. It is an excellent development and I hope it gets more resources and the extra staff it needs.

I am glad to be able to support this initiative which will be widely welcomed, particularly by parents here who have made contact with Deputies on all sides of the House on the issue. This pressure has been intense over the past few years. To those who may read our words on this matter, may they take into account that this is not an ordinary motion, but one debated in special circumstances. There is a huge increase in the number of people expressing anxiety on the matter, parents, relatives and people who must remain quite circumspect who receive telephone calls to do with information on their families.

I am interested in this area. Even when I was legally in the United States as a postgraduate student and a university teacher, I met people whose worry was that they would have an accident, have to go to hospital or to come out, as it were, of the dark shadows of the out of status and undocumented existence in which they were. For all of those reasons, I have great pleasure in supporting this motion on behalf of the Labour Party.

See this speech in context