Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I will reluctantly support the motion. The fund is very positive, although I have the greatest reservations about the regulation on which it is based and, like my colleague, about the theory behind it. It seems to be the building-up of a fortress Europe while giving a little money this way to calm the masses and dissent. In that context, I will support it.

I have a number of questions about the fund. This is our third time getting it. How was the money broken down on the previous occasion? I have some concern also about the money being used for the return of people to other countries. I would love to see the breakdown of that if one exists. I could not see it but that might be my fault.

The undocumented scheme is very positive. It was developed as a result of organisations on the ground pointing out the necessity for it. The Minister acted on that, and I am delighted. Nevertheless, there seem to be two parallel processes in being. Those under the undocumented scheme will get a stamp 4 visa after having been here for two years, and there is also the group of asylum seekers. Those under the undocumented scheme can come forward and apply, whereas for asylum seekers, it rests with the Department of Justice to come forward and tell people who are resident in the various institutions. There are two such places in Galway. The power, therefore, does not rest with those seeking benefit under this. The Minister might clarify that, as well as whether the six-month supply exists for asylum seekers living in those institutions.

The Minister might clarify also the contradiction in the Catherine Day report. Those under the asylum seeker process must wait for the Department of Justice to come forward, at which point they can get their stamp 4 visa for two years. The report of the Catherine Day advisory group called for a once-off simplified case-processing approach applying to all applicants who have been in the system for two years or more. It recommended they get five years. There are so many different recommendations and systems that run parallel here that it is utterly confusing. We put great store in the Catherine Day report, and the only difficulty I had related to the proposal for housing, as Deputy Martin Kenny outlined, and the reliance on the private market, which was always going to be a disaster. Other than that, Catherine Day and the report have got unanimous support and praise.

The case-processing approach was one of the strong recommendations in the report, and there was also a recommendation to address the practical problems such as the cost of applying and so on. In addition, other groups have been excluded from the scheme. I do not expect one scheme to sort out all the problems, but it is important that the Department would conduct an analysis of those affected by exclusion. We are looking after one group, of approximately 17,000, including 3,000 children, but we are excluding other groups, such as people who have lost their status under non-EU rules. Such persons, if they are married to someone in the EU, are no longer able to get what they used to. Different groups are always excluded and there is an onus on the Department to analyse that. When there is one positive outcome, the Department must ask what the problems with that are. I will stop there because I am out of time.

See this speech in context