Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I very much welcome the Bill and congratulate the Civil Engagement group in the Seanad. I see Senators Kelleher and Higgins are present, who I assume are the architects of this Bill. I feel proud that I am in a Parliament that gives a damn, tries to make things better for refugees and feels and sees that in very humane terms.

The measure is very simple. I thought this would be totally unnecessary before I read the Bill properly. The definition of family, as understood by most people, is not limited to one's wife and kids under 18, but extends to one's sisters, brothers, grandparents and adult children. That does not apply for refugees coming into the country. There is a different definition for their families. When we impose that different definition of what a family means on others who have settled here after fleeing war and persecution, we tell them their families mean less and their presence is, at best, tolerated here but is not really welcome and we do not want their grandparents, sisters and brothers joining them. This Bill is a necessary correction to previous legislation and a positive signal as to how we should treat migrants and others.

In war and incidents of catastrophe, such as great floods and droughts that usually emanate from climate change and global warming, which force people to get out of a country, the parents often are the first to die or to go missing. As they often are the first to be shot, killed or arrested, children are very often left in the care of grandparents and the parents' siblings. It is cruel and blinkered to disregard that.

I have just come from outside the gates of the Dáil where, for the first time in many decades, we have seen organised fascists on the street. The message on their placards, make no mistake about it, is that this is our country, our land in our lifetime. They are all white, male, Irish people who do not want to recognise refugees and want them off the streets and out of the country.

They are whipping up exaggerated panic here and across Europe about the UN compact on global migration, which is due to be signed in Marrakesh tomorrow. Like all fascists, they are doing this in an organised way on social media. What is being shared and put about on social media across Europe is, more or less, that the global migration pact is a threat to national culture, that it will end nations' sovereignty and that it will give 59 million migrants free access to Europe. It is being suggested that they will be coming into Dublin Airport tomorrow to demand housing and social welfare benefits. It is being stated that this is a giant plot by George Soros to liquidate our culture and our country - hence the slogan "Our country, our land, our culture in our lifetime". It is being suggested that the UN compact on global migration will prevent people from criticising any immigration policy under pain of jail and that free speech will be denied to those who are brave enough to speak out against the flood that is coming.

What does this compact actually do? I have explained the scaremongering that is going on. It is flying across Europe. There are Nazis outside the gates of this Parliament tonight. I want to analyse what the compact actually does. We need to listen to what others are saying about it. It does absolutely nothing for migrants. It is not legally binding. It imposes no obligation on any state. It confers no rights on any immigrants. It does not concede immigration policy to the UN, least of all to George Soros. The only reason it has been brought about is to co-ordinate a response to the crisis of people drowning in the Mediterranean or being humped off back to slave camps and detained in desperate conditions in Libya. It is being advanced by those who want a proper co-ordinated global response to this crisis. This does not mean that the response is about welcoming migrants, treating them well, giving them homes, giving them education or understanding that with every hungry belly comes a pair of hands and a brain. I think the latter point is a crucial argument that was missing from the Minister of State's response. We need more workers in this country.

Deputy Wallace referred to money that went missing from NAMA. There is no more knowledgeable source in this House on what could be done - and what needs to be done - regarding the housing crisis than Deputy Wallace. I was shocked to hear the Minister of State respond to the Deputy by expressing his opposition to this instrument on the basis that "local authorities, which are already feeling the strain of providing permanent housing for refugees in the midst of a national housing crisis, would be required to provide additional houses in their areas for the extended family members proposed under the Bill even while we are struggling to identify and share these potential resources throughout the country for those in immediate danger". He said that this "would have significant and unquantifiable impacts on the provision of housing, healthcare, education, welfare payments and other State supports". This sort of rhetoric feeds into the organisation of nasty right-wing racists in countries across Europe. I know the Minister of State is not a Nazi. I know he is a decent man. I am not accusing him of being a racist. However, I think it is dangerous that the signal being sent by the Government in this context is that we cannot look after our own. We have to start asking who "our own" are.

See this speech in context