Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

As far back as September 2015 the UN High Commissioner for Refugees said the current situation was primarily a refugee crisis. Notwithstanding that, today we have a mixture of talk about migration and refugees. The Commissioner said the vast majority of those arriving in Greece come from conflict zones such as Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan and they are simply running for their lives. All people on the move in these tragic circumstances deserve to have their human rights and dignity fully respected, independently of their legal status. The Commissioner went on to say that thousands of refugee parents are risking the lives of their children on unsafe smuggling boats primarily because they have no other choice.

Figures compiled by the United Nations High Commissioner for refugees and the Turkish Government show the number of Syrians who have sought refuge in Turkey, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan and north Africa is 4.1 million and rising, a figure that has been mentioned many times in this debate. The number of Syrian refugees registered in the region now stands at 17.5% of the Syrian population. On top of this, 7.6 million people are estimated to be displaced within Syria. There are 1.3 million Syrian refugees in Lebanon, 20% of the population, and this is the equivalent of Europe playing host to 100 million refugees. Pakistan and Iran have each taken over 1 million refugees. What seems to be happening is that the poorest countries in the world already bear the greatest burden when it comes to housing refugees or helping them. If these countries were to adopt the attitude that fortress Europe has adopted we would have an enormous humanitarian catastrophe on our hands. This is the most immoral aspect of the EU's policy because at its heart it says the poorer countries should deal with it.

I will come back to the question of criticism of Turkey, but the sordid deal agreed with that country in March of this year is appalling. Despite being a country that has only a seventh of the EU population, it is taking in 3 million refugees so that we do not have to deal with them. Not only that, we are going to pay them for it - €3 billion to be followed by another €3 billion at a later stage. However, the only comment from the Minister on this matter was to correct a Deputy on the other side who said it was €6 billion altogether, rather than explain to us how this sordid and reprehensible agreement was carried out in our name. That is the least I would have expected from a reformed Dáil.

What have we done in addition to that deal? We have colluded with Shannon Airport, and I agree totally with Deputy Wallace on the misuse and abuse of Shannon in our name. We allow American troops to go through on a daily basis, carrying arms to carry out wars in other countries but there is not one word of it in this Chamber. We passed the International Protection Act 2015, which was guillotined through the Dáil to replace the Refugee Act of earlier times and which the Irish Refugee Council described as a step backwards. We have stood over direct provision since 2000. The McMahon report lies somewhere but it was not mentioned today by any Minister. Where is that report, a Cheann Comhairle? You might have heard of it. It has been out for nine months and nobody has seen fit to raise it or talk about it.

The executive summary of the report of the working group on the protection process is before me, which is very interesting. It set out some basic facts and recommendations relating to direct provision. Under the new politics and our new approach, I would have thought one Minister would have outlined the inadequacies of direct provision and how they were being addressed. The Tánaiste, and leader of what was once a proud Labour Party, came into the House and told us that refugees really wanted to go back home and we should recognise that. She said we should also look to bring peace to the area but that we should not look at Shannon or the EU's role in standing by nations which are actively creating war and, therefore, refugees.

I would have thought somebody would have referred to the summary document, the recommendations contained therein and the facts. Direct provision was set up in 2000 as a temporary measure. Sixteen years later we have over 7,000 in direct provision, effectively imprisoned and cut off from the community so that they cannot learn from the community and the community cannot learn from them. Some 55% of the total have been in direct provision for more than five years and 21% are children. Even those who have acquired status remain in direct provision for up to ten months because the Department of Social Protection does not recognise the address of a direct provision hostel as a suitable address for obtaining State benefits. This document has come up with cost-saving recommendations that would save the Government money on direct provision, notwithstanding that the criteria set for the report were very limited and the people who worked on it were not allowed to consider other ways of dealing with asylum seekers in this country. The measures they came up with included increasing the amount of money given to a child, looking at adult education and different types of provision within the system but nobody has mentioned their proposals today.

This House should stand together and deplore the deal that has been done in our name with Turkey. Turkey has not complied with all its obligations under the convention on refugees. Amnesty International, the Irish Refugee Council and many other organisations have raised concerns about Turkey's human rights record and we should come together now to ask how this agreement could be made in our name. Why did no Minister come to the House today to explain what role we had in the deal and what we have learned from it? This deal will certainly not resolve the refugee crisis or the migrant crisis. It is time for us to lead.

This is only a small country. We say we are playing our part, but the figures for what the country has taken are minimal. The acting Tánaiste has not looked at our fault in taking in such a minimal amount. She criticised the organisations involved and the slow process, as if the Government had nothing to do with it. Because of our history most people in Ireland have an open heart about the acceptance of refugees and it is time we led and built on this. It is also time we stopped direct provision. It is not good for the people in the system, this country or the image portrayed of people caught in direct provision centres who do not work. None of this is of their making. All of it is contained in the document that was not discussed or referred to today. It absolutely beggars belief.

See this speech in context