Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 9:

In page 11, between lines 35 and 36, to insert the following: “(4) The Minister may provide for regulations on Reception Conditions and Facilities for persons subject to this Act.”.

This amendment links direct provision to the Bill. The Committee on Public Service Oversight and Petitions considered the issue of direct provision over a considerable period of time. We visited and met asylum seekers in different centres across the State and we came to the conclusion that the system is not fit for purpose. Deputy Boyd Barrett is also a member of the committee and he worked hard on our report.

On Second Stage, I said that over the past 15 years, our approach to asylum seekers is in contradiction to our international responsibilities. It is almost as is we are schizophrenic in our approach. In terms of overseas development aid, we have been world leaders and have the highest per capitacontribution to it. We are respected across many countries and regions, in north Africa, sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East, for our contribution to peacekeeping as part of our overseas development aid. However, when it comes to our approach to asylum seekers, we just have not managed to align it properly with our responsibilities. This is a collective failing of the Irish people.

On the other hand, we campaign for the rights of the undocumented Irish. We are economic migrants, not asylum seekers. I am a west of Ireland man, a Donegal man. Significant numbers of my people, including members of my family and myself, had to emigrate as economic migrants. Asylum seekers are people who come here alleging - in most cases they are genuine - they are leaving war-torn, desperate situations to try to form a new life. We have international obligations towards them and yet we have failed them for long periods. The single application procedure will speed up the application process, which means people will not be stuck in direct provision centres. However, we need to address the issue of the centres.

The working group made many recommendations for improvement. I believe that imperfect as this amendment is, it is necessary. While the principle of the Bill is fine, we believe it needs significant amendment. It needs to be aligned with a proper reception and integration strategy for asylum seekers who come here. They need dignity. Ours is the only State in Europe that has opted out of the European directive that says that after nine months as an asylum seeker, a person is entitled to work. That is shameful and there is no other way to describe it considering our history. We are the only country in the world today that has a population lower than we had in the 1800s. We have a history of mass emigration, with 500,000 leaving in the past number of years - economic migrants to Australia, Canada and around the world.

I am not talking about an open door policy, but about a policy that meets our international responsibilities and that gives people dignity while we decide swiftly and fairly on their applications. That is what we want to achieve. We have not reached that point and that is the reason I want this amendment accepted. I want it to link these policies together. I appreciate the amendment may not be accepted and normally in that situation I would call a vote but I do not want to waste debating time. I call on the Minister of State to respond to my points and to give some assurance about how he will implement the issues raised.

See this speech in context