Dáil debates

Wednesday, 9 October 2013

Topical Issue Debate

Asylum Seeker Accommodation

3:20 pm

Photo of Alan ShatterAlan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies for raising what is an important issue. The first thing to be highlighted about yesterday's report in The Irish Times, which has been missed, is that it shows that the inspection regime put in place by the Reception and Integration Agency, RIA, of my Department is working. Finding things which are wrong and having them fixed is the purpose of a good inspection regime. This is not in any way to seek to minimise the contents of the reports which of course are treated with the utmost seriousness by the staff of my Department who have the difficult job of operating the direct provision system.

The Reception and Integration Agency is responsible for the accommodation of 4,400 asylum seekers in 34 centres throughout 17 counties. When the Government took up office in March 2011 that number was 5,900. There has been a reduction of 25% over the past two and a half years. RIA centres are occupied on a 24 hour, seven day a week basis. The report in TheIrish Times was based on all inspection reports for seven specified centres over the course of 12 months and involved the release of 95 documents under freedom of information provisions. While, naturally, the worst elements of these reports were highlighted, in fact most inspection reports are positive. Again, this is not to minimise the content but to point out that they do not tell the full story.

Contractors have an important duty to comply with the terms of contracts they enter into with the Reception and Integration Agency. Some of the issues raised in these reports arise as a result of some residents unintentionally blocking fire exits, leaving children unattended, using rice cookers, etc. The responsibility to look after the children rests in fact with the parents who are in the centres and they have responsibilities in this area. I am not blaming the residents - far from it - but we should acknowledge that this is an ongoing challenge for staff working in the centres.

All 34 asylum accommodation centres in the direct provision system are subject to a minimum of three unannounced inspections a year, one by an independent company, QTS Limited, under contract to the RIA and two by RIA officials. In two serious cases 30-day notices were issued in which the contractor was told that the contract would be ended if problems were not rectified. In both cases the problems were addressed within 48 hours, requiring the lifting of the 30-day notice. Centres are also subject to inspection by fire officers and, in respect of food issues, to unannounced inspections by environmental health officers. It is incorrect to say that staff are not vetted; they are vetted. As part of their contractual obligations each centre must be inspected annually by a qualified and competent person with professional indemnity who must issue a certificate of compliance with regard to fire safety.

Reference was made to overcrowding. All RIA centres are subject to the requirements of the Housing Acts from 1996 to 2002. Where a family increases in size to the point that these requirements are no longer met, alternative suitable accommodation is offered. However, some families decline these offers and may decide to stay where they are until more spacious accommodation within an existing centre becomes available.

The RIA has a robust child protection system. The instances of children being left alone were dealt with immediately and education of parents and guardians with reference to their responsibilities is a key feature of any follow up. In all cases, the primary carers for children are their parents.

There was mention in the article of suicides being covered up. That is untrue. In the 14 years of RIA's existence only one person, a newly-arrived asylum seeker, can with certainty be said to have committed suicide and that happened while the individual was being detained in hospital. It did not happen in one of the centres.

Inspection templates have been changed and new training for staff took place earlier this year. All completed inspections carried out from 1 October 2013 will be published on the RIA's website. Transparency is important. By "completed" I mean the inclusion of responses by contractors to the report's findings. The RIA believes, as do I, that transparency is the key to maintaining standards. Residents have been assured time and again that complaints under the RIA house rules are legitimate and will not adversely affect their protection claims or lead to unwanted transfers. Any suggestions to the contrary are simply untrue and, unfortunately, may have the effect of dissuading residents from using the complaints mechanism in the way intended.

The direct provision system seeks to ensure that the accommodation and ancillary services provided by the State meet the requirements of asylum seekers while their applications for international protection are being processed. It is essentially a cashless system which provides them with full board accommodation free of utility or other costs. While accommodation services are provided by RIA, other State supports are provided by the appropriate Department or agency. For example, health services are provided through the HSE, social welfare supports through the Department of Social Protection and education through the Department of Education and Skills and so on. Except in exceptional circumstances-----

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.