Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)

Prior to the introduction of the habitual residence condition in 2004, full examination was given by my Department to the question of whether it was consistent with a number of international conventions to which Ireland was party, including the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The convention allows national legislation to prescribe the manner of provision of that benefit. The benefit does not have to be a cash payment. Benefit-in-kind may equally satisfy the requirement. Therefore, direct provision is made in the case of persons in the asylum process. That provision meets the obligations of the convention and Ireland is not obliged to pay child benefit in addition to this. The outcome of this examination was, therefore, that the habitual residence condition was not incompatible with the provisions of the convention.

We had a very good debate in the Seanad on this subject in the past couple of weeks. I made the point, which I reiterate, that because we have a direct provision system, funded by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, to look after the families and children, this was accepted under international law as fully meeting the obligations of the convention. It is wrong to suggest people are being asked to survive on the minimalist cash payment. The State is more than meeting its obligations.

We must be careful because we do not want to open potential floodgates. If there was no restriction, many more people would try to come to this country to access the welfare system, which is quite generous and is a good one by any international standards. Although we cater for almost all people, particularly our colleagues in the European Union, having the habitual residence condition is clearly of benefit.

See this speech in context