Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on this matter. Over the past number of months, several of my colleagues and I have been the subjects of a campaign by a number of people to discredit us and twist our words for their own gain. I respect their right to free speech, outlined in Article 40.6.1° of the Irish Constitution. I also ask those people to respect our rights. I assure the House I am not trying to undermine public order, or morality, or the authority of the State and I would hold these people to the same standards.

In 2019, it is expected that this Government will spend €120 million on direct provision, an increase of €78 million on 2018. As with many other endeavours undertaken by the Government, there is nothing to show for the amount of money being spent. A large portion of this money will be spent on people seeking international protection who must be housed in emergency accommodation due to the lack of direct provision centres. This is currently costing the Irish taxpayer €500,000 per week. The many genuine cases for asylum that are being housed in direct provision centres have inadequate facilities where overcrowding is the norm. Direct provision is not a natural family environment. Residents live in confined spaces. Children often have to share communal bathrooms with grown men and women. Staying for long periods in a confined living space can lead to depression and mental health problems. The Government seems to think, in all aspects of Irish society, it is okay to cram people into a system that is bursting at the seams, from direct provision centres to our overcrowded schools and hospitals.

Recent statistics show that over half of all asylum applications are from people who come from safe countries. The Department of Justice and Equality is concerned that many of those who are making asylum claims in this State are from safe countries. A spokesperson from the Georgian Embassy has said that Georgia is safe and stable. Asylum applicants from such safe and stable countries are overstretching the direct provision system. In 2016, the then vice-president of the EU Commission, Frans Timmermans, confirmed that 60% of migrants to Europe come for economic reasons and are not fleeing war or persecution. He also stated that, as a way of ensuring genuine asylum seekers and refugees are supported, economic migrants should be returned as quickly as possible. These people should be applying for work visas. They should go through the proper channels as Irish people do when they are travelling abroad for work.

The Minister indicated that he welcomes this debate. He has appealed for it to be thoughtful, respectful and factual. Most of all, he is asking for these matters to be debated in a spirit of compassion and understanding. We have to be compassionate. We have to understand the concerns of communities where it is proposed to locate direct provision centres, for example with regard to the strain that is being put on local services like schools and GP practices. These issues need to be addressed during a period of consultation with local communities in order to find a solution that is acceptable for everyone in the community and for those who may be joining the community through direct provision. As public transport is a significant issue in rural Ireland, it should be one of the major factors when a decision is being made on whether to open a direct provision centre. People who are seeking asylum in this country must have their needs cared for adequately. At a time when many GP practices and schools are turning people away because of staff and funding shortages, it should possible to identify immediately those areas that are unsuitable for direct provision centres. The Government needs to give the people in the centres the support they need.

The Minister of State with responsibility for equality and integration, Deputy Stanton, visited an accommodation centre in Clonakilty recently to get a sense of how the centre is working and to see, inter alia, how the new on-site shop is operating. His visit resulted in a protest because the people who live in the centre were not informed that it was happening. They wanted to discuss several issues with the Minister of State. Could a meeting not have been planned with the people who live there? Could the Minister of State not have taken the time to listen to their concerns? If not, what was the point of the visit in the first instance?

See this speech in context