Dáil debates

Tuesday, 30 September 2014

Direct Provision for Asylum Seekers: Motion [Private Members]

 

9:25 pm

Photo of Niall CollinsNiall Collins (Limerick, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to discuss the motion and the issues surrounding direct provision in Ireland. Fianna Fáil shares a number of concerns surrounding the policy of direct provision, in particular the excessively long waiting time before an asylum application has been decided. It is clear to all of us that there is a significant problem surrounding the length of time a person spends in direct provision. Current statistics show that 46% of residents are there for three years or more and a further 14% have been there for seven years or more. This is clearly unacceptable, in particular for children whose earlier years are being impacted by the unsuitable living conditions of the direct provision facilities for families.

Fianna Fáil sought to pass legislation in 2010 - the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill 2010 - which allowed for a new single, integrated process of application for protection which would replace applications for refugee status, subsidiary protection and leave to remain. This legislative provision has yet to be implemented. The Department of Justice and Equality has stated that the main factor that contributes to upward trends in waiting time "is the length of time in the protection-humanitarian leave determining process", including legal proceedings. We know that one of the biggest factors affecting the time delay in the direct provision system is the lack of a single application process for asylum. It would seem obvious to us that the bringing forward of the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill 2010, or a similar Bill, would go some way towards reducing the delay currently experienced in the direct provision system.

I believe we in this House would all agree with reform of the current system. What we need is a system which is humane, fair, time-efficient and effective in dealing with applications. We need to ensure that Ireland is not seen as a soft target for people who have spurious claims for asylum, in order to protect against people who would seek to abuse our system. Equally, we need to ensure that those with a genuine application are dealt with and granted asylum with speed. We also need to ensure that those who seek to undermine our application system, who are not genuine in their approach and who deliberately abuse the processes laid down by the system, are dealt with in equal speed.

We have a duty, as Members of this House, to protect the interests, safety and well-being of the Irish people while also seeking to fulfil our international duties and obligations by offering our State as a safe haven for those who are persecuted in their own countries. In previous centuries, it was Irish people who sought asylum in other countries at a time when being a member of a particular faith or political outlook resulted in persecution. As a country and a people which has experienced political persecution and mass emigration, we must address this issue with the urgency and seriousness required, informed by our own history. We can only fulfil those duties by putting in place a robust system for dealing with asylum applications and guaranteeing as best we can its integrity and efficiency.

The current system, I believe, falls significantly short in fulfilling those duties despite significant expenditure on direct provision by the Department of Justice and Equality. Although there have been reductions in expenditure, in what I assume is in line with declining numbers in direct provision centres over the past five years, the State still spends over €50 million on accommodation costs for this system. The legal costs per year still exceed €6 million, with judicial review alone costing approximately €2.2 million this year. Yet, the fact our system currently has an average length of stay of 48 months, and that a total of 1,686 people have spent a minimum of five years in the system, is extremely concerning. We also have a situation where approximately 604 people have been in direct provision for seven years or more. This is an outrageous figure and shows there is a failure arising in the State's legal mechanisms to deal with these cases in a manner which is in any way effective, humane or fair.

One thing we must ensure is that any change or reform to the system as it currently stands must also deal with the people who are currently in the system. We cannot allow a situation arise where those who are currently engaged in the direct provision system today will not benefit from any proposed reforms of the system. That would be grossly unfair and something my party could not support. I hope the Minister might be able to give a commitment in this regard.

I also put forward that priority should be given to families in direct provision who have been waiting inordinate amounts of time for their applications to be decided. We cannot allow further delay which may result in young children growing up in Ireland, being educated and making friends here, only to be deported at some unknown date in the future. That is quite simply playing games with people's lives and is just not acceptable. The Minister should have some discretion in this regard and be conscious of the impact such a decision would have on any young family in that situation.

The conditions at direct provision centres for families in general are also a concern. At a recent protest at a direct provision centre in Cork, a number of mothers who have been living there for periods reaching up to nine years stated they had serious concerns about food but also about the effect on people's mental well-being. The indefinite duration of the review of their applications served to create great instability and fear in their lives. While I understand the public finances have been under strain for the past number of years, I consider that proper food should be able to be provided to those in direct provision, given this country's ability to produce some of the best food in the world.

I want it noted too that the budget of the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service, INIS, has been cut by €5 million since 2011, which may have resulted in further waiting and delay for many in the direct provision system. The budget allocation, including Supplementary Estimate adjustments as appropriate, for the operation of INIS, including wages and salaries and running costs, was €52.5 million, €43.5 million, €49.5 million and €47.5 million respectively for the years 2011 to 2014. In response to a recent parliamentary question which I submitted, it was outlined that the staffing levels of INIS, which forms part of the Department of Justice and Equality, ranged from 615 in 2011 to its current level of 519 full-time equivalents.

That is a loss of almost 100 staff in the space of three years, which is bound to have a significant impact on the processing times INIS is able to provide. The equivalent budget allocations for the direct provision system ranged from €67.5 million in 2011 to €47.5 million this year. I put it to the Minister of State that the cuts to the budgets of both INIS and the direct provision system have resulted in a slowdown in the advancement of applications for asylum, which has resulted in many of the protests we see at centres across the country.

I urge the Minister of State to introduce legislation to create a system for dealing with asylum applications that will be fair, fast and robust. The current waiting times for decisions with regard to these applications are embarrassing and must be addressed immediately. We in Fianna Fáil will support proposals from the Government which will address these issues if they are fair, reasonable and robust. I hope the Minister of State will be able to bring legislation before this House quite quickly.

My party and I are very concerned about this issue. I raised it last week with the Minister as a priority question. In fairness, she is minded to deal with the issue. I also articulated my opinion that HIQA and the Ombudsman for Children should have oversight capacity in terms of reviewing standards. I also mentioned the two direct provision centres in my part of the country. There is one in Mount Trenchard in my constituency and another on the outskirts of Limerick city in Knockalisheen, which is technically in county Clare but is part of Limerick city. Those people have been engaged in protests recently in Limerick to articulate their concerns. I am sure the Minister of State is aware of Doras Luimní, which acts as a support and advocacy agency. I take the opportunity to compliment Doras Luimní because I work with it as much as I can. It refers people to my advice centre. It is a truly fantastic organisation that works not only with refugees and asylum seekers but also with those trapped in prostitution and those who have been trafficked into this country. It is a truly outstanding organisation and I am sure that when the Minister of State visits Limerick, he will meet it. I know he has indicated that he intends to visit Limerick in the near future and I would be glad to accompany him to either of the direct provision centres in the Limerick area when he does so.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.