Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

The Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill is a crucial part of the legislative architecture of modern Ireland. More than any other legislation, it epitomises the enormous change that has taken place in our country in the past 15 years. The latest census figures show that immigrants account for over 10% of our population. It is not the figure in itself that is most striking so much as the short time in which we have reached that figure. Other countries with a long tradition of immigration have taken decades to reach that figure. We achieved it in one decade.

The success of our economy, which is the product of the hard work of our people and the enlightened policies of Governments since the late 1980s, has made us a country of net inward migration. Our economy needs migrant workers. Our health services, for example, could not function but for the nurses, doctors and carers who come here to work. There is a ready supply of migrant workers because Ireland is now an attractive destination for those who want to share in a burgeoning economy, whether they come to settle here or simply to experience our way of life for a short time. We have a right to be proud of this turn of events but we also have a duty to meet the challenges it presents. Those challenges should not be seen as problems to be solved so much as opportunities to be grasped and it behoves us all to approach this relatively new phenomenon of net inward migration with a combination of common sense and vision.

It has been abundantly clear for some time that the foundation of immigration law in the State, the Aliens Act 1935, is no longer capable of providing the Government with the tools it needs for the job of managing modern migration. The changes to immigration law that have been made in the past ten years have been acknowledged by my predecessors as interim in character. Even as those adjustments to existing statutes were being put in place, considerable work was being undertaken on the development of a new legislative basis that would give a framework within which policies to suit Ireland's evolving needs could be developed and implemented. We need efficiency, consistency and transparency in the management of our immigration policy and the legislative basis to manage migration in the best interests of the Irish economy while treating those who come here fairly and reasonably.

A basic tenet of any immigration policy is that it is about choices made by or on behalf of the State. The State must choose who should or should not be allowed to enter and stay within its sovereign borders. This choice is not unfettered. For example, our membership of the European Union brings with it freedom of movement for our citizens and the citizens of every other member state throughout the territory of all member states.

Ireland is a party to the Refugee Convention of 1951 and its associated Protocol of 1967. The parties to that convention commit themselves to offering protection to anyone who has a well-founded fear of persecution in their home country in accordance with the convention. Ireland's commitment to the principles of refugee protection were set out in statutory form in the Refugee Act 1996, and this Bill restates those principles and integrates the protection process into the main channel of immigration law in a way that will be more efficient and effective.

Apart from these and similar exceptions, there is in principle no generalised right for foreign nationals to enter or be in Ireland. The State can decide, just like all other independent states, which foreign nationals to admit, for what purpose to admit them and the duration of their stay. The State also decides when and in what circumstances a foreign national must leave. That is the position at its principled starkest.

The power of the Executive to control the entry, residency and exit of foreign nationals was confirmed by the Supreme Court last December in the Bode case. The significance of this judgment is that it allows me, on behalf of the State, to introduce schemes under which certain categories of migrants can have their case considered even where they may not have any statutory entitlement, but the case goes further than that. It confirms the fundamental functions of the Executive in this area. My view, in the light of the Bode case, is that it would be constitutionally questionable to divest the Minister or the Government of the powers they must necessarily exercise in this area.

I am aware of calls to deal with immigration entirely in primarily legislation. That cannot be done. We need flexibility to deal with immigration and it is the right and duty of the Government to make policy in the national interest in this area. That policy can be given effect through secondary legislation on foot of this Bill and also on foot of administrative schemes. The position has been made crystal clear in the decision of the Supreme Court and I recommend that Deputies participating in this debate examine the judgment of the Supreme Court with care. It delineates clearly the responsibilities and duties of the Government in this area.

It is important that we remind ourselves that Ireland does not owe a duty to the world to admit all comers. We must make choices to protect the interests of our own citizens and in the interests of our migrant population. The making of those choices is a function of the Government, exercised through the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform of the day. There is nothing unusual about that. Irish people who have emigrated for generations know well the limitations on the freedom of movement that exist in other states. All states control entry to their territory: that is a feature of the sovereign power of states.

We are proud of our humanitarian traditions. There must be compassion but we cannot allow those considerations to outweigh the primary responsibility of any Government to care for the welfare of those who reside here. That is not to say the two are mutually exclusive. It is possible to devise immigration policies which achieve a balance between these considerations, and that is what I intend to do.

An Agreed Programme for Government contains detailed commitments relating to immigration and asylum matters. This Bill, when implemented, will meet many of those commitments and will lay the foundation for meeting the remainder.

One of the programme's commitments is the development of a single procedure for those who apply for protection. This Bill proposes a streamlined process which will ensure the present high quality of protection decisions, a quality recognised internationally, will be maintained while at the same time providing a more speedy determination to those seeking asylum.

There has been a suggestion that the Bill allows for the detention of asylum seekers. That is not the case but there is a provision which allows a person who turns up in any part of the State seeking asylum to be held until he or she can be issued with a temporary resident's permit. The detention is for the minimum amount of time needed to issue the card, in most cases no more than a matter of hours. That arrangement does not amount to the introduction of detention. I want to state clearly that detention could only be introduced on foot of a Government decision and primary legislation.

Another commitment in the agreed programme for Government is for an independent appeals process. I wish to signal my intention to introduce an appeals mechanism along the lines of the system used in the Department of Social and Family Affairs. This will operate on an administrative basis at first and, once developed, may be put on a statutory footing.

See this speech in context