Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

7. To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of persons in the direct provision system; the total cost to the Exchequer of the current system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9469/14]

Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

33. To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of asylum seekers who have been naturalised since March 2011; the number of asylum seekers currently living in direct provision; and the way in which the direct provision system may be reformed in the coming years. [9466/14]

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Twelve months ago, the Taoiseach described the Catholic-run workhouses as the nation's shame. I am firmly of the view that the current operation of the direct provision system is the Magdalen laundries scandal of this generation. Some day, a Taoiseach will have to come before the Dáil and make a similar apology to Irish citizens whose lives have been destroyed by these modern day workhouses.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 and 33 together.

The direct provision system is managed by the Reception and Integration Agency, RIA, of my Department. Its function is to provide accommodation and related services to those who have sought international protection and who have no means of supporting themselves otherwise. More than 53,000 such persons have availed of RIA's services to date. Currently, there are over 4,300 residents in 34 centres across the State under contract to RIA. The numbers of asylum seekers residing in direct provision has reduced significantly in the past five years. In the period end December 2008 to end December 2013, the number of persons being accommodated by RIA declined by 37%. Expenditure by RIA in 2013 was €55.2 million. A breakdown of this expenditure, as well as for preceding years, is available in the RIA annual reports which are published on its website.

The operation of the direct provision system is kept under review and I have consistently acknowledged that the length of time that residents spend in direct provision is an issue to be addressed. I have no desire to have applicants remain in the protection system any longer than the minimum period it takes to process their case. The direct provision system is not ideal, but it is a system which facilitates the State providing a roof over the head of those seeking asylum or seeking other grounds to be allowed, on a humanitarian basis, to stay in the State. It allows the State to do it in a manner that facilitates resources being used economically in circumstances where the State is under financial difficulty.

A comprehensive review on the operation of the asylum seeker accommodation programme was carried out and the subsequent report, Value for Money and Policy Review - Asylum Seeker Accommodation Programme, which was published in May 2010, found that there are no cheaper alternatives to the direct provision system.

No Government can afford to ignore the likely consequences of any change to the system. The system cannot exist solely in its own context. It is inextricably linked to the surrounding international protection process. By its nature, the processing of applications for international protection is a solemn and complex task which does not always lend itself to achieving speedy outcomes. The time needed to determine the outcome of any legal proceedings also impacts on the length of the process. A substantial proportion of cases - this may not be understood - in the High Court relate to judicial review proceedings taken or decisions reached in the international protection area and a substantial number of those in direct provision are engaged in such cases having failed in their applications to be granted asylum or to be allowed to remain in the State for other reasons.

My resolve is to deal with the factors which lead to delays in the processing of cases so that asylum seekers spend as little time as is necessary in the direct provision system. To that end, the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill 2010, which I will re-publish in a reformed draft later this year, should substantially simplify and streamline the existing arrangements for asylum, subsidiary protection and leave-to-remain applications. Recently, I also signed into law new regulations relating to the processing of subsidiary protection applications which aim to ensure that applications are processed to finality by the statutory bodies concerned in the shortest possible timeframe consistent with quality and fair assessment of all cases and, of course, subject to the co-operation of applicants and no further legal impediments arising.

In relation to the naturalisation aspect of this query, it should be noted that asylum seekers do not satisfy the residency requirements for naturalisation as their residency is not deemed reckonable. If a person is successful in the asylum process, he or she may apply for a certificate of naturalisation when he or she is in a position to meet the statutory residency requirements. The number of refugees naturalised since March 2011 is approximately 3,200.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

At the outset, I accept that the Minister acknowledges that there is a problem with the existing system. Would he reiterate his view that the direct provision system is unsuitable for long-term residency?

In light of the ESRI report published last week which highlighted that six out of ten in the direct provision system are in it for over three years and one third are in it for over five years, and taking into account that four out of ten in the direct provision system are children, what specific practical steps can the Minister take to expedite the existing system by reducing the delays in processing the various stages involved?

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

First, I will deal with the issue in relation to children. I have recounted in detail to the Oireachtas on numerous occasions the ways in which RIA affords the highest priority to the safeguarding and protection of children. These include the full implementation of the Children First guidelines as well as Garda vetting of all RIA staff. RIA has a fully staffed child and family service unit, the head of which is seconded from the HSE. Moreover, details of the types of facilities and supports available to children are provided in RIA's annual report of 2012 which can be found on the website. The annual report of 2013 will be published by the end of March 2014.

More generally, the operation of the direct provision system is kept under constant review and I have consistently acknowledged that the length of time the residents spend in direct provision is an issue to be addressed. I have no desire to have applicants remain in the protection system any longer than the minimum period it takes to process their cases.

I acknowledge that the system is not ideal but the difficulty is that a substantial number of those in direct provision are engaged in court proceedings. Before I am misinterpreted or there is any accusation made, I want make it clear that any individual is entitled to properly bring any application before the courts he or she deems appropriate. Some of these challenges may be completely appropriate and, indeed, over the years some have been successful. However, one of the reasons persons are so long in direct provision is because when they go through the initial decision-making process they challenge outcomes when they are not granted the application they seek. There is a substantial backlog of cases in the courts in this area. It is my hope that once we enact the new legislation, which I expect to have before the House this year, we will be in a different space and issues can be addressed in an appropriate manner.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will revisit the courts issue. On the legislation, as the Minister will be aware, the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill passed Committee Stage on 11 November 2008. It was subsequently withdrawn and we have been told since that it will be reintroduced. Since 11 November 2008, the Exchequer has spent over €1 billion on the asylum system in this country. I accept that we need to reform the asylum system and the new immigration Bill will introduce a single processing system which will significantly expedite the issue and abolish the current four stages of appeal and involve one appeal. Realistically, when does the Minister expect to have that legislation enacted and what specific practical measures can he take to expedite the existing system in the interim?

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I understand the Deputy's genuine interest in the matter but he is mistaken on one issue. The last Bill was published in 2010, at which time I was Opposition spokesperson. It was the third Bill in this area and despite that it was a much better Bill than its predecessor there were still very substantial defects in it. Deputy Rabbitte, who was then Labour Party spokesperson on justice, and I tabled substantial amendments to the Bill on Committee Stage. On taking up office as Minister for Justice, Equality and Minister for Defence I had the Bill as previously published reviewed. More than 300 amendments were required. It was decided that rather than retabling the old Bill a new Bill incorporating all the necessary changes would be published. I had hoped the Bill would have been published sooner but because of the priority which the troika required that we give to other legislation, personnel were not available within the Attorney General's office to do the necessary work. I am assured that work on the Bill is now taking place and that it will be published during the course of the year. It is my objective to have it enacted before the end of the year. It will do exactly what the Deputy says in that there will be a one-stop decision system where all applications can be dealt with. It is designed to facilitate applications being dealt with quicker.

On the direct provision issue, substantial sums of money have been spent by the State on direct provision. The alternative to direct provision would be the provision by the State of individual housing for every asylum applicant.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We must move on to the next question.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Some of those houses could be provided to those who are not entitled to asylum. The State cannot afford to do that. We are not in a position, having regard to the current finances of the State, to provide appropriate local authority or social housing for many of those born in this country who are currently in need of housing. We are constrained in terms of the amount of money available to us for housing purposes.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sorry, Minister. We must move on.

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have to deal with these matters realistically.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is another alternative, namely, to deal with these applications in an expeditious manner. The Minister will be aware of the decision last week of Mrs. Justice Maureen Harding Clark in regard to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal in which she said that the only reason the person had not been granted asylum was because the tribunal's member did not like the applicant. There are fundamental problems with the current system that can be addressed, including the nine and 33 week delays, respectively, in the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and Refugee Appeals Tribunal, and the 27 months it is taking for a judicial review, only to get decisions of the type I mentioned earlier.

What practical measures will the Minister put in place to deal with the two-year delays in processing subsidiary protection applications until such time as that legislation has been enacted?

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is an independent structure to deal with appeals in this area. I note the judgment to which the Deputy referred. As I said, people are entitled to have access to the courts. It is not the function or role of the Minister to deal with the hearings of these cases. There is a structure in place to do that, which is independent. If there is a procedural or substantive failure, the individuals concerned are entitled to draw the matter to the attention of the High Court. There have been cases taken in the High Court in which applicants have been successful. There have also been cases taken which have been unsuccessful.

As I understand it, there are currently more than 1,000 cases awaiting hearing in the High Court. The courts are independent of the Minister. It is for them to determine how they cope and deal with the number of cases awaiting hearing. I cannot interfere in that process. I agree that the number of cases awaiting hearing is a matter of concern. I do not want to say anything that would prejudice in any way the outcome of a single case. I am sure that in some of those cases the applicants will be successful and in others they will be unsuccessful. That will derive from issues that have arisen out of the current statutory structure that exists to deal with these matters. I want to get on with the reform we need. I would much prefer it the legislation had been enacted by now. Unfortunately, that has not proved possible. However, it will come before the House this year.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are more cases outside the courts than inside.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Questions Nos. 8 and 38 will be taken together by agreement.