Tom Fleming (Kerry South, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I congratulate our two new Ministers of State and wish them well in their new roles. On 24 July 2014, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concern about the length of time people must stay in direct provision and the lack of an independent complaints mechanism in Ireland. The Government has given some commitments and in particular, the Minister of State at the Department of Justice and Equality appears minded to reform or reconstruct the manner in which asylum seekers are hosted in Ireland. The European Migration Network study on the organisation of reception facilities for asylum seekers which was published last May notes the varied nature of supports provided to asylum seekers across the EU. The reports note the wide disparities in provision of accommodation with some countries operating systems similar to direct provision, others permitting asylum seekers to find their own accommodation and some countries not providing any or minimal financial allowances.

Others set allowances near the same level as those available to citizens to ensure a dignified level of subsistence. The other important element is the complicated network of appeals systems and reviews they have to go through. There appears to be a lack of Judiciary and there is an urgent need to correct the situation, and get things moving in a better manner than is currently the case.

Given the past record of the country on how we institutionalised individuals in industrial schools, Magdalen laundries, mental hospitals, borstals etc., we should wonder to what extent we are serious about approaching proper reform of the system rather than permitting the warehousing of asylum applicants. There is an urgent need for an in-depth review to determine what can be reasonably done to ensure respectful protection of the core social and economic rights of people who are awaiting their determination for refugee status.

When direct provision was introduced in 1999 it was initially meant to provide shelter for six months until such time as applicants were granted refugee status or deported. The system has been unbelievably slow, dysfunctional and fragmented, and the legal process is drawn out. The average length of time for a stay in the direct provision system is three years and eight months. The statistics show that over 1,000 people have spent five years or more in the system, over 600 people have been in the system for seven years or more and a number of people have spent 13 or 14 years in the system.

The reality is that these people are living in conditions which are damaging to their health, welfare and general well-being. There is a need for a consultation process for all stakeholders, in particular asylum seekers currently in the system and those who were in it in the past. Children should be included in the process and we should get their opinions. It would be very interesting to hear the responses, and we may learn from them and get a better insight into the ridiculous conditions in which they live. We could see what can be done to ensure respect for and protection of the core social and economic rights of people who are awaiting the determination of their refugee claims.

The Ombudsman for Children, Emily Logan, has stated that the treatment of children living in direct provision centres for asylum seekers is an issue of ongoing concern and needs to be addressed urgently. She said, "[I]t was wrong children in many cases were spending their lives growing up in a system that is often inappropriate accommodation intended as a short-term solution." The reality is that over 1,600 children now reside in direct provision, sharing single rooms with their families in situations often in unacceptable situations whereby they have to share bathrooms with complete strangers.

A major factor which is detrimental to asylum seekers who are students is that they are practically prohibited from participating in third level education. This is serious discrimination because as a result of their financial situation they cannot further their education. We should never lose sight of the fact that these young children are, in many cases, resident in Ireland for their lifetimes and will be citizens of the country. It is very negligent of us to give them a start in life in a manner such as this. We may have to bear the cost of this at a later date, psychologically and otherwise. It may cost the State millions of euro and it is wrong from a human rights perspective.

See this speech in context