Anne Ferris (Wicklow, Labour) | Oireachtas source

There is a story we have all heard before. It is about a little blonde boy with no name, although in some stories he is referred to as Peter and in others he is called Hans. The little boy lived in The Netherlands where, as we know, the land is permanently under sea level and is spared flooding only by an elaborate series of dams or dykes. The little boy, we are told, was walking home from school one day when he saw water trickling through a hole in the dyke wall. He immediately realised that if the hole was not plugged, the water would eventually breach the dam, causing death and catastrophe across The Netherlands. The story goes that the boy put his chubby little finger in the hole and saved the day. The Minister of State will no doubt forgive me for pointing out the obvious here. In terms of the issue before the House today, the Minister of State is the little boy with his finger in the dam, as his predecessors have been for decades.

When it comes to European immigration the European Union is well below sea level. The opportunities and protections offered to those lucky enough to be deemed citizens of Europe are desired and envied throughout the world. At any given time, millions of people outside the Europe Union are desperately trying to get in. As a member of this club of 28 countries, Ireland shares border control obligations with other member states. We are used to thinking of the word "border" in the context of Northern Ireland. In European terms, however, our entire coastline and airports are our border. Being a member of the European club in effect means that our country is surrounded by a large legislative dyke, designed for controlling floods of immigration into Europe.

The difference between Ireland and the little Dutch boy is that in the fable the people in charge eventually come along to save the boy and fix the structural deficiencies in the dam. The European Union, on the other hand, has failed to address adequately the serious structural inadequacies in its immigration policy. The most tragic aspect of this is that hundreds of thousands of people who desperately need the safety and sanctuary of the European Union to escape political and social persecution in other countries have been abandoned on the high seas, sometimes literally.

Under the terms of the unfortunately named European Union regulation, Dublin III, an application for asylum must be processed by the member state where the applicant first entered Europe. For example, if an asylum seeker arrived here via Northern Ireland, Britain or a French port, he or she must be sent back to the country in which he or she first set foot in Europe, whether the United Kingdom, France or another member state. This system causes much upset and frustration to vulnerable people in need of assistance. It is also a source of potential legal challenge and delay.

All decisions made by the Irish authorities on applications for asylum are made by the public service and, therefore, open to full judicial review by the courts. Many legal challenges can take years to make their way through our clogged up courts system. Perhaps our new court of appeal will help resolve this problem. For most asylum seekers, however, both adults and children, the wait has been too long.

One significant problem is that a common Europe-wide approach is not being applied to the assessment of asylum seeker applications for residency. Each country is expected to manage its own hole in the dam wall. The Opposition motion would merely have us cover the hole with sticking plaster. New European legislation is needed to allow national authorities and courts to fast-track applications using a common EU-wide methodology. Courtesy of Europe, we have a new fast-track system for processing applications for huge wind farms but no such system is in place for asylum seekers. It is time something was done to help all those in direct provision.

See this speech in context