Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on behalf of the Labour Party in this debate. Recent debates on immigration have been dominated by disinformation. This is regrettable because it is essential we stick to the facts. It is important to state unequivocally that seeking asylum is a human right and that under international law, everyone has the right to apply for asylum if they are fleeing conflict or persecution nor can any state opt out of that fundamental international legal obligation. One might not think this was the case listening to some electioneering and scaremongering in recent weeks but that is the fact.

A further fact is that when we talk about immigration and the right to seek asylum, we are speaking about people - human beings like us who are seeking refuge here. Ours is a welcoming country. Sometimes the bad news stories dominate. Across the country, communities have welcomed and offered huge supports to those who have come here fleeing the war in Ukraine and war and persecution elsewhere. In my constituency, I have been proud to work with residents' groups and committed volunteers through Dublin 6 and Dublin 4 for all groups. It has been really emotional to meet with some of those who sought asylum here. These are people who when I first met them six or eight months ago knew nobody but are now embedded in their community such as the young man in Rathmines I met this morning who came here fleeing persecution and who now has a job and is embedded in sports clubs. Knowing and befriending many of those who have come to seek refuge has deepened my own dismay at the toxicity of this debate. I acknowledge the very positive messages and speeches from the Government side on the benefits of inward migration for Ireland. My own family is a testament to that. My grandfather sought refuge here with his young family after the horrors of the Second World War and built up Waterford Glass. Those are the sort of positive benefits we have seen. All of us must stand firm against racism and anti-migrant sentiments. We have seen far too much of that in the recent elections, particularly directed against candidates from ethnic minority backgrounds, which was appalling to witness.

We in Labour agree with the need for a cross-EU approach to migration and migration policy. We cannot pretend that this is something that any EU state can go it alone on because people will always be forced to leave their homes to go somewhere safer. As global conflicts worsen, the climate crisis deepens and as we see appalling horrors in Gaza and so many other countries such as Afghanistan, we know people are fleeing their homes for safer places. That trend will not reverse so the notion that we can go it alone when this is a global issue does not hold water. I do not agree with those in opposition who suggest that this is the case. Even this pact has many positive aspects such as measures to speed up the processes because long delays in our own asylum system have been chronic and the effects of those delays on the welfare of individuals and families have been well-documented by many journalists such as Shamim Malekmian of the Dublin Inquirer. We also need measures like the Eurodac regulation because we know the status quo in Ireland is not working and is failing those trapped for too long in the international protection system and those being moved along in tents in my constituency and elsewhere without any adequate provision of accommodation. We agree in principle with a cross-European approach. I am a committed European as are my Labour colleagues. I believe that the EU, founded as a peace project, can be a social Europe that protects and bolsters human rights across the continent but this involves solidarity with the global south and persecuted peoples around the world. Unfortunately, what we are seeing is a hardening of attitudes against those from the global south. This has been well documented by Irish writers. In her amazing book My Fourth Time, We Drowned: Seeking Refuge on the World's Deadliest Migration Route, Sally Hayden charted the unthinkable human cost of detention camps in other countries that are operated in complicity with the EU.

She spoke so eloquently about EU complicity with human rights abuses in the Mediterranean Sea where so many people have tragically met their deaths while attempting to enter Europe. I am thinking of the Irish writer Paul Lynch, whose Booker winning Prophet Songsets out in articulate detail how families can get to a point where they are forced to put to an unsafe sea to seek a better life for themselves and their children. Warsan Shire, a British Somali poet, wrote "[N]no one leaves home unless home is the mouth of a shark ... you have to understand, that no one puts their children in a boat unless the water is safer than the land". That is the crux of this issue when we debate migration.

Seeking asylum, fleeing one's home and risking one's personal and family safety is not something anyone does lightly. Asylum seekers and those who seek refuge should be treated with dignity because all people should be treated with dignity. We are fortunate that we are in a safe and peaceful country, but many others are not. The EU should, therefore, be able to devise a more humane approach in solidarity with those who flee persecution. What we should be seeing from the EU is a greater commitment to establishing cross-European legal pathways for those who wish to bring their families here, and bring their skills and expertise and forge a better life. Why not an EU-wide or Donnelly visa approach which operated successfully for so many Irish people in the US? That is the sort of solidarity mechanism the EU should develop.

Instead, in other aspects of the migration pact, beyond those I have mentioned, we are seeing, unfortunately, a worsening of human rights standards. That is why we in Labour have strong objections to elements of the pact, while acknowledging that the principle of co-operation is necessary. As I said, we have seen the hardening position on migrant rights across Europe and elements of the pact bear out that. We have strong misgivings about the impact of some elements of the pact on the right to claim asylum and the potential for worsening conditions in detention and reception centres.

As I said, our current lack of capacity to accommodate those who seek refuge here is already untenable. It is indefensible that the Government has not implemented the Catherine Day report and put in place the necessary capacities. It is unsustainable and inhumane to keep putting up barriers to prevent people from sleeping in public places, and yet not providing them with anywhere else to go. We are seeing that daily on the canals and in public parks a stone's throw from here.

Our current system is not sustainable, but there are worse systems already in place in other countries. Detention measures have been implemented in other countries such as Italy, where Giorgia Meloni's far right government is in situ. We are concerned that mechanisms such as the asylum procedure regulation, APR, will render Ireland in a position whereby we are taking steps that are incompatible with human rights protections. The APR contains a border procedure which could block the entry of asylum seekers to member states, thereby creating a legal fiction of non-entry where a person is physically in a country but not legally regarded as being present in that country with, therefore, an erosion of human rights. This could impact in particular on survivors of human trafficking with limited access to legal representation.

We will also see a worsening of the conditions in which people may be detained. In Ireland, we have correctly criticised that sort of mechanism where it has happened elsewhere, such as on the border in the US or in Russia. Yet, there is no clarity as to how this measure will be implemented here. We need clarity. I am mindful that organisations like the Irish Refugee Council have warned that the migration pact, if implemented here, will lead to fewer safeguards and increased levels of detention and destitution among people seeking protection in Ireland.

We must also recall that there has been a lot of discussion about illegal entry to the country, without document or passports. We have to recall that there are countries like Afghanistan from where so many people have been forced to flee. Most who manage to get out of Afghanistan have no alternative but to travel without a passport or any legal document. Those without documentation are being unnecessarily disparaged in public discourse.

Under the APR, it is not those without documentation who would potentially be subject to a lessening of human rights protection; those arriving from countries with a recognition rate of 20% or less would also be affected. The APR procedure, coupled with limited vulnerability assessments, make up a dangerous combination when it comes to ensuring the continued human rights protections of those who are among the most vulnerable on earth.

As a former legal practitioner, I want to close by mentioning my concerns in respect of people's recourse to the courts under aspects of the pact. When we opt into a discretionary EU measure, we vote to suspend the application of the Constitution to that. While the EU charter on human rights will continue to apply, our courts will lose the ability to apply Irish constitutional principles. That is not to be taken lightly. It makes it all the more regrettable that we have not been provided with the opportunity to debate each aspect of the pact in the Oireachtas, as we sought. Instead, we are being given the opportunity to vote on a take-it-or-leave-it approach. That is a mistake and it is regrettable that we will be forced to vote against the Government motion tomorrow.

As I said, we are concerned about aspects of the pact and that some measures of the package will result in a deterioration in standards and the introduction of an asylum procedure which does not respect basic rights or contain safeguards for vulnerable applicants. We are concerned that, just as occurs currently with our emissions targets and other legal limits, the solidarity measures in the pact may see Ireland simply paying out from a budget surplus rather than offering support to our fair share of those who need help. While the Government has provided assurances that our way of implementing this pact will be more humane than other countries, nonetheless there are aspects of the pact that raise serious concerns about human rights protections.

See this speech in context