Carol Nolan (Laois-Offaly, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move:

That Dáil Éireann: notes that:

- Ireland requires a migration system that is not only well-managed and fair, but also stringent, efficient, and effectively enforced to safeguard our borders and our communities;

- the Government imposing large-scale immigration on a local population without consultation is inappropriate, considering the complexity and potential instability of the absorption process, and the necessity of local support for sustainable and successful integration;

- Ireland, already at a tipping point with an enormous number of international protection applicants (28,875 at 282 centres as of 17th April, 2024), is grappling with an exacerbated housing crisis and strained public services, leading to unsustainable conditions such as migrants resorting to living in tents on the streets, a shortage of housing for citizens, and a lack of tourist accommodation;

- the cost of International Protection Accommodation Services (IPAS) alone, as distinct from Ukrainian refugee costs, has skyrocketed from €191 million in 2021, to a staggering €653 million in 2023, and is projected to impose a colossal €1 billion burden on Irish taxpayers in 2024, as a consequence of the Government's steadfast adherence to an open-door asylum seeker policy, which is being enforced without taxpayer consultation or input, thereby raising serious democratic and financial concerns;

- the Government, which withheld the Attorney General's opinion and interdepartmental advice on the detrimental repercussions of a Yes vote in the March 8th Referendums, cannot be fully trusted to be transparent on the ramifications and financial costs associated with opting-into the European Union (EU) Migration and Asylum Pact;

- alongside Denmark, Ireland is the only country with the legal right to remain outside all or some of the Pact's measures, and we should use that ability to opt-out;

- there is absolutely no rational or logical reason why Ireland should opt-in to the EU Migration and Asylum Pact, which will require us to receive relocated quotas of asylum seeker applicants in addition to the already massive influx of International Protection applicants entering our country, especially as we have no legal obligation to do so;

- the EU Migration and Asylum Pact allows the EU to make immigration decisions for Ireland, and if Ireland opts-into the Pact, it would be binding and come with severe ramifications;

- if ratified by Ireland, the EU Migration and Asylum Pact would arguably represent the single greatest transfer of Irish constitutional sovereignty from Dublin to Brussels in the history of the State;

- opting-into the radical EU Migration and Asylum Pact means being forced to accept, in perpetuity, decisions made in the EU and abandoning any right to veto future changes to the Pact, including dramatic revisions upwards of migrant relocation quotas, as they will be determined by qualified majority voting;

- Ireland has a unique legal basis to opt-out of the EU Migration and Asylum Pact, embedded under Protocol No. 21 annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in the Treaty of Lisbon, which provides an opt-in or opt-out clause on individual proposals in the areas of freedom, security, and justice; and

- not a single Irish voter has been consulted by the Government, or asked at the last election nor in any subsequent vote whether they wished to transfer national sovereignty on immigration matters to the EU;

further notes that:

- the Asylum and Migration Management Regulation (AMMR), one of the five legislative files that constitute the Pact, would override Ireland's sovereignty as enshrined in Articles 6.1 and 15.2.1^o of the Constitution of Ireland, by surrendering power to the EU Commission to determine how many relocated asylum seekers from countries under "migratory pressure" Ireland must receive, and the minimum level of financial contributions per asylum seeker our taxpayers must pay;

- the AMMR currently mandates an annual distribution of a minimum of 30,000 asylum seekers throughout the bloc, with member states obligated to pay a minimum compensation of €20,000 for each rejected migrant, and the power to increase these numbers and costs at any point lies solely with the EU;

- the formula used for the distribution of relocated asylum seeker applications under Article 44R of the AMMR means that Ireland will be required to accept more relocated asylum seekers than most other EU member states because of our overinflated gross domestic product as a result of the presence of the multinational sector;

- if Ireland opts-into the Pact, we are then also subject to infringement proceedings if we do not comply with relocated asylum seeker quotas;

- even Polish Prime Minister, Donald Tusk, a renowned pro-European and centre-left on a range of social issues, declared that his government would refuse to accept any relocated asylum seekers under the Pact;

- this pact is a serious violation of our national sovereignty and the decision about who we want to accept would be made neither by Irish authorities nor by Irish law, but rather by non-elected people in EU headquarters;

- in simple terms, this Pact is an invitation to millions of migrants to come to Europe;

- the Government claims that the new rules contained within the Pact are an attempt to conduct more effective checks on migrants, as well as a goal of more rapidly returning unapproved asylum seekers to their countries of origin, yet these dual attributes are a member state competency and therefore can be implemented immediately without the need to opt-into this Pact;

- for Ireland to legally opt-into the obligations contained in the regulatory framework underpinning the Pact, the matter has to be the subject of independent decisions by Resolution separately taken by each House of the Oireachtas under Article 29 of the Constitution, yet the Government appears intent on forcing this Pact through with no proper scrutiny or public debate, which only serves to undermine our democracy and Constitution;

- the envisioned "new normal" of Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, Roderic O'Gorman TD, of annually accepting 15,000 to 20,000 asylum and international protection seekers is not only unsustainable but could potentially skyrocket if this Pact is ratified; and

- the Government lacks a public mandate for such a significant decision, which was not outlined in any of the Government parties' 2020 election manifestos; and

calls on the Government:

- to accept that signing the EU Migration and Asylum Pact is not only irresponsible and completely intolerant to the concerns of the Irish electorate, but a significant infringement on our constitutional sovereignty and democratic principles;

- to refrain from leveraging their majority in the Houses of the Oireachtas to expedite and unilaterally approve the EU Migration and Asylum Pact, when it contradicts the best interests of Ireland and its citizens;

- to acknowledge that the approval of the EU Migration and Asylum Pact is akin to signing a blank cheque for every year into perpetuity; and

- not to seek the approval of both Houses of the Oireachtas for the EU Migration and Asylum Pact without first:

(a) publishing the Attorney General's advice;

(b) conducting an independent financial assessment of the financial burden on the State (taxpayers) of opting-in;

(c) committing to an open, fair, transparent national debate on the ramifications of the Pact on the indefeasible rights and constitutional sovereignty, and the question of the necessity for a people's Referendum; and

(d) following steps (a), (b) and (c), to facilitate an informed debate without a guillotine in each House of the Oireachtas before any vote is cast.

I welcome the opportunity to open this debate on an issue that is front and centre in the minds of the vast majority of the Irish population. Issues regarding asylum and migration, legal and illegal, have now politicised and woken up entire generations that were detached or indifferent to the political process. Entire communities are now alert to the policy trajectory in this area and what they are seeing frightens them. These communities feel an absolute sense of loss of control. They feel that even their most peaceful efforts to ask questions and raise concerns are being framed as borderline criminal and a stealth form of cultural anarchy. Some members of the Garda wonder how normalised community relations can return in the context of an expected influx of between 15,000 and 20,000 international protection applicants annually over the next few years.

The EU pact we will attempt to debate today is the result of a long and contentious process. Some see this as evidence or confirmation of the allegedly democratic nature of the agreement. This presupposes the existence of European Union structures that care about what ordinary people think. This is a highly debatable contention. If anything, the EU and its endless procession of directives and regulations have smothered democracy in this State. We know this because, as one of the Minister of State's own MEPs put it, at least 70% of Irish legislation now comes from the EU.

We are, in effect, a colonial outpost of an EU regulatory empire whose sole function in many regards is simply to transpose those EU laws while giving the process a veneer of democratic legitimacy. Nowhere is this seen more clearly than in this pact. Does this pact contain some useful principles? Yes, it does and we all want more effective processes. None of us, I hope, support the idea that our country's generosity should be abused or trampled upon under the guise of some mistaken concept of political virtue.

The crux issues revolve around the cost. What is the cost politically? What is the cost in terms of the constitutional principles around sovereignty? What is the financial cost? What is the social and cultural cost? There is an old saying that the cure must not be worse than the disease itself. This is a sound principle in all areas of life and not just in political areas. In light of this, I genuinely feel that the pact, when seen in the round, will make things worse for Ireland. This is my only concern. It may, through its so-called solidarity mechanisms, support EU member states such as Italy and Greece but what will be the overall impact on Ireland and our people?

I am here to stand up and give voice to the concerned Irish people. The majority of these people have made their feelings known in poll after poll, which the Government has refused to listen to. I am here to put these views first and foremost. We have all been here before, of course. We all remember the endless chatter about the importance of EU solidarity mechanisms during the financial crash of 2008. Tell me, who ended up on the hook for billions when our so-called EU partners forced us to bail out the EU banking system? Who is still paying the cost for this 16 years later? We are. I say this not to rehash history. I say it because it is incidents like these that should alert us to be ultra cautious whenever EU elites bang the solidarity drum and expect us all to get in line. Some of us will not get in line because we have the interests of the Irish people first and foremost and we deserve to have these interests respected at all times and not have our sovereignty and voice stifled. I say this because it is of concern to the majority of people in the State.

This week alone we have all seen ample evidence of how handing over our immigration policy to the EU has stymied any chance of resolving such issues bilaterally with our neighbours in the United Kingdom. They will not assist us in returning asylum applicants because they say they will only deal with the EU as an entire entity and not us individually. This demonstrates the unwieldy and, frankly, stupid policy requirements at work. These are requirements we will be embedding even further on acceptance of the EU pact.

We have also seen reports from Fionnán Sheahan that the Minister, Deputy McEntee, is not receiving support from the Government and that she is being hung out to dry. In this regard I am reminded of what Winston Churchill once said about the Opposition occupying the benches in front of you but your enemies sitting behind you. This points to the disarray and division between the Government and its own members on this very issue, not to mention the Irish public.

For the better part of two years, we have had unnamed Government TDs expressing their rising anger and frustration at the level of Government disconnect on the asylum issue. Why are these voices not being heard? Indeed, 22 months ago I told the Minister, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, how one Fine Gael TD described the UK's Rwanda plan as a train coming down the tracks that we had no way to stop. What has happened since that time? What has the Minister been doing in the intervening 22 months to try to address this issue? It was entirely foreseeable. Government TDs saw it would happen and sure enough it is happening. Why is it only that in the past week the issue has returned to sour Irish-UK relations?

It is clear to everyone that the Government is desperately searching for a scapegoat on which it can load the sins of its own incompetence and lack of action. We have seen through freedom of information data obtained by Gary Kavanagh at Gript Media that even departmental officials were expressing unprecedented alarm at the proposals that would have destabilised our entire immigration system. These concerns may have been part of a scoping exercise prior to the referendums but it is undeniable that officials in the Department have significant concerns about decisions or agreements that remove their capacity to act with discretion. We will find out in six months' time, I am sure, when another FOI request goes in, that the officials are also expressing horror and alarm at the impact of the EU pact. It is not right that this should be the way. Will the Minister of State tell us now whether the immigration units in the Department have expressed some concerns about this pact? The people need honesty. They are asking for leadership. They need to be able to trust the Government. Unfortunately, there is a lot of mistrust.

One understanding of a pact is that it is a covenant between people. What I hear on the ground, however, is that the sacred covenant between the Government and the Irish people has been broken and there is no trust left. People do not believe what the Government is saying. It speaks about listening and consultation but its actions say otherwise. Its MEPs have the gall to tell people that protecting our borders and talk of sovereignty is far-right rhetoric. It is not. On this, as on so much else, the Government is now bankrupt of whatever political capital it had to bring people with it. We need to opt out. We also need a general election to allow people the opportunity to opt out of the Government's mandate to govern. The sooner both of these happen, the better.

Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for being here. It is very disappointing, however, that a senior Minister is not present to discuss this issue. I mean no disrespect to the Minister of State, but surely an issue as important as this deserves having a senior Minister before us. When it comes to this issue of an asylum pact, it is a deal done by a dirty Government and it will not be forgotten by the people. Ireland is at a critical point, with a huge number - 28,875 - of international protection applicants living in 282 centres as of 17 April 2024. The country is struggling with a severe lack of housing and overstretched public services, leading to unacceptable circumstances such as migrants living in tents on the streets. There is not enough housing for citizens and there are not enough places for tourists to stay. The cost of IPAS, not including the cost of Ukrainian refugees, jumped from €191 million in 2021 to a shocking €653 million in 2023. It is expected to put a massive €1 billion burden on Irish taxpayers in 2024 because of the Government's unwavering commitment to a policy of welcoming all asylum seekers without asking taxpayers, which raises big democratic and financial worries.

The Government is not sharing the Attorney General's opinion and the Department's advice on the negative effects of a "Yes" vote in the referendums held on 8 March. This makes people doubt if the Government is being open about the consequences and costs of joining the EU migration and asylum pact. Ireland, like Denmark, has a special legal right to opt out of some parts of the pact. There is no good reason for Ireland to join the EU migration and asylum pact, which would force the country to accept more asylum seekers on top of the many international protection applicants already coming in, especially when there is no legal requirement to do so. The pact would let the EU make immigration decisions for Ireland. If it is ratified, it would be the biggest transfer of Irish constitutional powers from Ireland to Brussels in the country's history. Joining this extreme pact would mean giving up any right to block future changes, including possible increases in migrant relocation quotas decided by majority vote.

Ireland has a special legal right to opt out at the EU migration and asylum pact under Protocol 21 of the Treaty of Lisbon. This gives an opt-in or opt-out choice on individual proposals in the areas of freedom, security and justice. However, Irish voters have not been asked if they want to transfer national power on immigration matters to the EU. The asylum and migration management regulation, AMMR, a main part of the pact, threatens to override Ireland's power as outlined in the Constitution by giving the European Commission the power to decide the number of relocated asylum seekers and the financial contributions Ireland must take from taxpayers.

The AMMR requires at least 30,000 asylum seekers to be distributed across the bloc each year, with member states forced to pay €20,000 for each rejected migrant. The EU has the power to increase these figures. The formula for distributing relocated asylum seekers application under Article 44k of the AMMR means that Ireland would have to accept more relocated asylum seekers than most of the EU member states because of its high gross domestic product, GDP, rate, which can be attributed to the multinational sector.

If Ireland does not comply with these quotas, it could face legal actions. The Polish Prime Minister, Donald Tusk, refuses to accept any relocated asylum seekers under the pact. This pact takes away national power, with the decisions made by unelected EU officials, not Irish authorities. The Government's claim that the pact's new rules will improve migrant checks and speed up the return of unapproved asylum seekers is misleading. These tasks can be done immediately without joining the pact. The Minister, Deputy Roderic O'Gorman, plans to accept between 15,000 and 20,000 asylum and international protection seekers every year. This plan is unsustainable and the position could get worse if the pact is ratified. The Government does not have public support for this decision, which was not mentioned in any of the Government parties' 2020 election manifestoes. The Government needs to realise that the signing of the EU migration and asylum pact is irresponsible and a big infringement of constitutional sovereignty and democratic principles. It should not use its majority in the Houses of the Oireachtas to approve the pact against Ireland's best interests.

Handling of the immigration issue has become an international embarrassment, with Dublin and Cork turned into tent cities as people wait for unavailable accommodation. This crisis is hurting community spirit, especially in small rural villages. The responsible Ministers, the Ministers for Justice, Deputy Helen McEntee, and Minister for children, Deputy Roderic O'Gorman, must admit to their loss of control and make way for real action and strict border controls. Staff must be hired to prioritise processing and fast-tracking for those who are already here. Let us support genuine asylum seekers and deport those who do not qualify, while ignoring State-funded NGOs.

Dublin city has become a tent city for thousands of people waiting for housing due to the international immigration crisis. This shows the Government's failure to manage immigration. Its silence has made a humanitarian crisis worse and left our communities feeling helpless. This lack of leadership has created uncertainty, affecting our communities' safety and sense of belonging. If the Government does not address this crisis, the country could face social and economic instability. The Government is unfairly blaming Britain while ignoring the influx of asylum seekers from other EU countries. It needs to take a comprehensive approach to the asylum seeker crisis, no matter where people are coming from. The Government's refusal to admit its poor handling of the immigration crisis has disrupted small communities, businesses and tourism.

Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chair and the Minister of State. I also thank the staff in Deputy Mattie McGrath's office who did a lot of work and research in putting forward this very important motion. I also want to address people who are critical of the Rural Independent Group and say we are trying to be inflammatory with this motion. They are wrong. What we are trying to do is hold the Government to account. Any time money is being spent, be it millions or, as in this case, billions of euro, our job as legislators is to question that. Our job is to question Government policy and hold it to account, and rightfully so. I believe the Government has gone from crisis to chaos and chaos to crisis in its handling of this situation.

I will give some frightening statistics. At present, there are between 700,000 and 1.2 million undocumented migrants in Britain. If only a fraction of these were to relocate to this State, it would collapse the Irish immigration system and completely collapse our education and healthcare services as well as all the other wraparound services that are involved in catering for people. When we speak about people it is not just about a house or place to stay, it is also about all the other services that have to be put in place to take care of those people. The Government is failing dramatically in this job.

Our concerns have been thoughtfully put together in every aspect of what we say. We are questioning the migration and asylum pact and the fact that the Government wants to railroad it through the House. We are questioning the fact that the Government seems to be walking blindly, and taking the people of this State blindly, into the unknown. We have seen what has happened in communities where there is no consultation with TDs or Senators. The world does not revolve politically around TDs or senators. We have a very important group of people, namely, our county councillors. I do not care whether they Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael or independents; they deserve to be treated with respect. If people are being moved into their communities, they should be notified at the exact same time or even before we here in Dáil Éireann are notified because they are working on the ground in those communities. They know the concerns the locals have.

I know from canvassing very diligently for the local elections in all parts of Kerry that people are raising the issue of the Government's policies. These people are not racist. They are not saying anything against individuals. They are not nasty people and they are not the people who went up to a member of An Garda Síochána and spat in his face because he was doing his duty in a place where he was called out to keep law and order. They are not that type of person but people are entitled to ask questions. It is taxpayers' money that is paying for the health service and accommodation. They are the people who fill the coffers of the State and we are answerable to them, whether we are county councillors, TDs or Senators. They are our bosses. We are the servants of those people when we come here and question the Government. How dare people criticise members of the Rural Independent Group and say there is something wrong with us because we voice our concerns in a well thought-out and considered way.

We are perfectly entitled to do that, and I will never apologise for doing it. Maybe they are wrong, because if they are willing to blindly support the Government and what I would call its failed joined-up thinking, it is their wrong and not ours. We are only doing our duty. It is time to give the people a chance and an opportunity by means of a referendum on the whole migration issue. They should be asked questions and they should then tell the Government what they want and how they want to go forward. We have to do something to tighten our controls.

James Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "Dáil Eireann" and substitute the following: "notes that:

- migration is a European challenge that requires a European response, which should include comprehensive policies in relation to both the internal and external dimensions of migration, with full and due respect for fundamental rights under European Union (EU) and international law;

- Ireland has a firm rules-based immigration system where rules are in place and where rules are enforced;

- the European Union Asylum and Migration Pact sets out a comprehensive new approach to migration, bringing together policy in the areas of migration, asylum, integration and border management;

- Ireland is already a member of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS);

- it has always been recognised that coordinated action between member states, where possible, is the most effective way of dealing with the transnational challenges of migration and asylum;

- the EU Migration and Asylum Pact aims, through legislative measures, to reform the CEAS to further the implementation of EU asylum and migration policy, address some inefficiencies in national migration and asylum management systems, establish a broader mechanism for solidarity, deal with inefficiencies in the current EU returns system, and introduce mechanisms to address extreme crisis situations;

- the Pact will enable Ireland to benefit from enhanced screening and asylum procedures across the EU, greater data and situational awareness, improved transfers to member states responsible, and avenues to obtain support in situations of migratory pressure or crisis;

- the Pact represents a positive development in Ireland's participation in the CEAS which will ensure a faster, fairer and more robust asylum system;

- not opting-in to the Pact and continuing to operate under existing systems will likely result in Ireland becoming a more attractive destination for individuals seeking protection, which would mean more people in the reception system for longer periods of time;

- the European Parliament approved all of the Pact elements on 10th April, and it is expected that the Pact will be formally adopted by the European Council in May 2024, becoming fully applicable across the EU two years after, around June 2026;

- opting-in to the Pact will introduce new and enhanced screening, asylum and reception processes, with mandatory timelines and a greater emphasis on returns; and

- 70 - 80 per cent of applications will receive a first instance decision within three months and the remainder within six months, which will lead to a reduction in the time applicants spend in State-provided accommodation;

- the Pact will introduce a new system to identify the member state responsible for examining an international protection application, and that will enable greater levels of transfers to that country where applicants move from one member state to another;

- the Pact will ensure that those who are entitled to international protection will get a swift decision and that those not entitled will be refused;

- the Asylum Migration and Management Regulation (AMMR), one of the measures contained in the Pact, will establish a mandatory solidarity mechanism to assist member states under migratory pressure, and the solidarity pool currently consists of 30,000 relocations or €600,000,000 in financial contributions from all member states on an annual basis;

- the solidarity pool under the AMMR may be subject to revision in the future by way of a European Commission proposal for a Council Implementing Act which must be voted upon by a majority of member states before it can be revised;

- the strategic risks of not opting-in to the Pact are significant, as the reforms will greatly impact the current protection procedures of member states, should Ireland decide not to opt-in, continuing to operate under existing Irish systems will result in Ireland being precluded from accessing solidarity and burden sharing mechanisms;

- the question of ceding sovereignty to the EU by opting into the Pact measures does not arise;

- the EU clearly has competence in the area of asylum and migration under the Lisbon Treaty, which was endorsed by the people in the Referendum on the 28th Amendment of the Constitution; and

- Cabinet approved opting-in to seven measures of the Pact on 27th March, 2024, and that motions approving an opt-in to the seven measures will be put before the Dáil and the Seanad in May 2024, for debate and approval in accordance with Article 29.7.4 of the Constitution of Ireland;

also notes that:

- seeking asylum is a fundamental right under the 1951 United Nations (UN) Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;

- every person's right to seek asylum in a safe country is enshrined in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights;

- further progress is needed to address the root causes of irregular migration in order to deter people from undertaking perilous journeys to reach the EU, to prevent loss of life and to reduce pressure on reception capacities across member states of the EU;

- a whole-of-Government approach is needed within both EU member states and EU institutions, to effectively address the challenges posed by irregular migration; and

- Ireland stands firm in our commitment to respecting and upholding the fundamental rights of those in need of international protection, in full compliance with our obligations under domestic, EU and international law;

further notes:

- the significant increase in processing in the International Protection Office, rising from 4,404 in 2021, to 8,409 in 2023, with a target of 14,000 in 2024;

- the introduction of accelerated processing in November 2022, which has resulted in the number of applications from those designated safe countries dropping by 50 per cent since it was introduced;

- the further expansion of accelerated processing with the designation of two further countries as safe in early 2024;

- the inclusion of the country which has the highest number of applications in accelerated processing as of April 2024;

- the steps being taken to reduce the numbers arriving without documents, with a 34 per cent reduction recorded;

- the review of airline fines which is underway;

- that operations continue to run in Dublin airport with a view to swiftly identifying irregular arrivals into Ireland; and

- the introduction of visa controls in a number of additional countries with further countries under review; and

calls on the Government to:

- continue to cooperate with the European Commission and the European Council to ensure successful implementation of the EU Asylum and Migration Pact, once it is adopted;

- continue to work with the European Commission and the European Council, to develop and further develop the comprehensive approach to migration policy, which includes increased action in the external dimension alongside a more harmonised approach to internal aspects, in full compliance with EU principles and values, EU and international law, and with due respect for fundamental rights;

- contribute to the development and implementation of EU Action Plans for priority third countries across all migratory routes, to effectively address the root causes of migration;

- continue to engage with EU member states and EU institutions, to ensure coordinated engagement with countries of origin and transit, with a view to developing mutually beneficial partnerships to promote safe, regular and orderly migration;

- contribute to the development of greater situational awareness of migratory flows and trends both into and within the EU, as well as reception capacities in member states; and

- continue to engage constructively with the Government of the United Kingdom, to prevent abuse of the Common Travel Area.".

Before I say anything about the issue of international protection and the motion before the House, I point out that general migration plays an essential role in our society and economy. Without it, key roles in healthcare, hospitality, the tech sector, agriculture and, indeed, every sector of our economy would not be filled.

Moreover, our participation in the European Union has been vital to our success as a country. Our economy thrives because we are able to attract investment from throughout the world. We attract that investment because we have a highly educated and dynamic workforce. We attract it because, for our tech sector, our pharmaceuticals and our beef and dairy produce, we have direct and unhindered access to the EU Single Market. Being at the heart of the European Union has driven the growth in Ireland's economy and seen Ireland move to the top end of the international indices of economic and social well-being. Cutting ourselves off from the benefits of European Union membership makes no sense whatsoever.

Equally, as participation in Europe has been key to our success, so has our ability to meet the challenges presented by migration and asylum been strengthened by working together with our European partners. The European Union asylum and migration pact will establish a more coherent approach throughout the EU to migration, asylum, integration and border management that is fit for the 21st century. Following intensive negotiations over almost eight years, agreement has been reached on the asylum and migration pact. Ireland was involved throughout the negotiations on these measures, and the Government fully supports the outcome, which we believe will produce a fair, sustainable and efficient asylum procedure in full compliance with fundamental rights. The pact will enhance the common European asylum system, in which we already participate. It aims to make it a stronger and more cohesive and comprehensive solution to the challenges presented by migration. Its strength lies in its holistic, rather than selective, approach. It brings together policy in the areas of migration, asylum, integration and border management, recognising that the overall effectiveness depends on progress on all fronts. The word "common" does not mean "the same". Flexibility has been built into this pact for each country to address the issues in its own way as it sees fit. This common response also reflects the European Union's partnerships with third countries to address the root causes of irregular migration, combat migrant smuggling and support an effective returns policy and well-managed legal migration.

I will now give a brief overview of the pact's measures we intend to opt in to, as well as some related measures we will not be opting in to because they are Schengen measures. The screening regulation will apply where a person first enters the European Union irregularly. They will undergo a screening procedure involving an identity check, a security check, a health and vulnerability check, fingerprinting and registration on the Eurodac database. Following screening, the person will be directed to the relevant procedure, whether that is asylum or return. If the person moves to another member state, that member state will have access to the identity and security information. This is a Schengen measure, but Ireland will align with these provisions in national law insofar as possible.

The Eurodac regulation will be important for Ireland as a country that experiences high levels of secondary movement. Eurodac is an IT system that allows us to check whether someone has lodged an application for asylum in another EU country in order that they can be returned to that country to be processed. The new regulation will collect more information and enhance the sharing of information between EU countries on irregular arrivals. This includes fingerprinting and facial recognition technology. In essence, we are moving from an applications-based process that each country is carrying out in and of itself to a process, based on the applicant, that will apply throughout the European Union. This empowers Ireland rather than disenfranchises it.

The asylum procedures regulation provides for faster and fairer processing of asylum applications throughout the European Union. It provides for accelerated asylum and inadmissibility decisions to be taken in three and two months, respectively. The longest timeframe for a first-instance decision is six months for the ordinary procedure. This will mean people will spend less time in State-provided accommodation and, ultimately, unsuccessful applicants will be more likely to be returned to their country of origin. Appeals are provided for, as are safeguards in the form of vulnerability checks, legal assistance and interpretation. There are also greater safeguards for minors. In short, this regulation will ensure people get a quicker decision, whether positive or negative, on their claim.

The asylum qualification regulation provides for some small refinements to the criteria to qualify for asylum and subsidiary protection and the rights of persons who benefit from these statuses. Harmonisation reduces the incentive for applicants to move from one member state to another, which is positive for Ireland.

The return border procedure regulation is a Schengen measure, of which Ireland is not part. It requires member states to effect the return of those who were refused status under the border procedure within a prescribed period of 12 weeks. Nevertheless, it is proposed to provide for similar provisions in Irish law insofar as is possible.

The asylum and migration management regulation, AMMR, is aimed at dealing with the imbalance between responsibility and solidarity across the Union on migration and reducing secondary movement, that is, where a person moves from the country in which they first arrived to seek asylum in another. This type of movement accounts for a significant proportion of applications in Ireland at any given time. This will be done by replacing the current system for determining which member state is responsible for an asylum application, known as the Dublin III regulation. The AMMR will replace Dublin III, which is not operating efficiently or really to any effect. It will replace the current take-back request with a simpler take-back notification, which will reduce the administrative burden of the current system. This means that instead of requesting a state to take back somebody, we will simplify notify it that the person is being sent back and it will have to take them back, under these regulations. Ireland will directly benefit from a more effective system and process, allowing us to identify and return secondary movers to the correct member state responsible, freeing up our own system to assist those seeking international protection swiftly and efficiently.

To balance this responsibility, which will largely fall to so-called front-line member states such as Italy, Greece and Cyprus, the AMMR also introduces a mandatory solidarity mechanism to assist member states that are under migratory pressure or are at risk of coming under migratory pressure. It is important member states can support one another when there is a time of significant pressure. A solidarity pool will be established under the regulation, from which affected member states can draw, and all member states will contribute on a fair-share basis. Ireland’s fair share of the solidarity pool would be 2.16%, based on current figures, which would translate to 648 relocations per annum, or €12.96 million by way of a financial contribution.

To be clear, we will decide how we want to contribute based on our capacity at the time. This may take the form of relocations, a financial contribution, offsetting against cases not returned under take-back processes or a combination of these. If Ireland were to come under migratory pressure, we too would have access to the solidarity mechanism to assist us.

The reception conditions directive will further harmonise reception conditions among member states, such as accommodation, means of subsistence, access to the labour market and detention. Harmonising the rules on reception conditions will reduce the incentives for asylum seekers to move from one member state to another, which is important for Ireland.

The crisis and force majeure regulation provides for specific rules that can be applied in cases of migratory crisis and force majeure, which are defined in the regulation. Member states can employ certain measures to respond to an increase in applications as a result of crisis situations.

The resettlement regulation establishes a Union resettlement framework for the yearly resettlement of a certain number of third country nationals to member states. While member states are required to pledge the number of persons they will resettle each year, it is possible to make a pledge of zero. It is estimated the reduction in overall costs, including processing and accommodation, in comparison with the current system would be in the region of 25% to 30%. That is if we opt in. If we do not opt in, it is estimated the overall costs, including processing and accommodation, in comparison with the current system would be at least 20% greater than current costs.

I hope I have outlined the main benefits of opting in to the comprehensive suite of pact measures.

The Minister, Deputy McEntee, will address in more detail the issues raised during the debate, including sovereignty and the risks of going it alone. On the idea of going it alone, we do not have to guess what that would look like. The United Kingdom has gone down that route. It went down that rabbit hole for about 20 years and it eventually led it to Brexit. The British were going to take back control of their borders and go it alone. What happened? They got more migration than ever. Migration went up. Why? It was because other European Union countries have no particular interest in helping the United Kingdom. We are a Republic of 5.5 million people, while the UK has a population of 60 million. If we go it alone, what will be the incentive? We will become the release valve for migration problems in the European Union. That is what will happen. Anybody who is serious about controlling migration in this country should be in favour of this EU pact. People are being sold a pup by the Rural Independent Group.

Richard O'Donoghue (Limerick County, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

People in this country are scared. They are scared about what the Government has done and about the lack of information available to them. This pact signs Ireland up to have almost 30,000 migrants coming into this country and if we do not accept these migrants, there is a clause that says it will cost €20,000 for each persons we do not accept. If we do not accept 30,000 migrants, that equates to €600 million in fines. That is what it comes down to for this country.

When it came to the Ukrainian crisis, this brilliant country of ours took in the most Ukrainians per capita, up to 86,000 people. People opened the doors of their houses, gave them rooms and accommodated them wherever they could. We are a small but great island and people wore their hearts on their sleeves, put their arms around the Ukrainian people and welcomed them into their homes. Many of them are working and making a life here, while some have gone home. Ireland has always been a place where people came to further their careers, and we welcome that. They work in hospitality businesses, hospitals and other businesses throughout the country. I have worked with people who wanted to further their careers by coming here, and I welcome that. Irish people went to other countries and did the same. In every sector of the workforce, we have people who migrated here for work.

The problem we have is that for decades, the Government has not invested in infrastructure. When people came here the Government told the people of Ireland it would provide services, such as GP and recreational services, and would support people in Ireland so that we could welcome people here. The problem, however, is that the infrastructure of this country is not capable of taking the number of people we have coming in. That is why there are, at this very minute, people living in tents on streets.

As I said, Irish people welcome people when we can accommodate them. At the moment, however, as a result of the failure of the Minister of State's Government and previous Governments to provide infrastructure in towns, villages and cities, we have no infrastructure for people. We have a massive number of people coming into our towns and villages. The Government says there are 200 people in to a town or village where there are no adequate bus or GP services and not enough accommodation in the schools. That is where the problem lies, and the Government does not even tell people they are coming. That is all that is wrong.

The package the Government is proposing includes an opt-out. Europe makes 70% of the rules for Ireland, so 70% of our laws are now being made in Europe. The failure of our representatives in Europe to protect Ireland is showing. They have sat on their hands and never opened their mouths. Now that election time is coming, they are everywhere but there is a change coming for them too. It is like this Government. In the two recent referendums, 70% of the people voted against the Government because they did not believe it. They do not believe in the people in Europe now, and they do not believe in the Government. That is what is wrong. I have an opinion and other people in this House have a different opinion from me. That is fine but I am standing up for the people in Ireland who would welcome everyone if there was proper infrastructure in place and the Government had lived up to the promises it has been making for years.

A councillor in Limerick has retired after 39 years. When he was first elected 39 years ago, his manifesto stated that the sewerage pipe in Askeaton would be upgraded. That has still not been done. That is what is wrong with this country. It has no infrastructure. Now we have a Government where everything it says is because it is in election mode. People do not believe it any more. The Government has forgotten the people of Ireland. It forgot to invest in infrastructure. Irish people would welcome everyone if the Government had done what it promised for decades.

Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am glad to get the opportunity to talk on this very important topic. It is one that everyone is talking about where I come from. The people I represent are very worried about opting in to this new migration pact. They are asking why Denmark is not opting in. We are an island nation and we do not have much natural resources. Working people working, including farmers and businesspeople, are paying 40%, 50% or 52% tax and 4.5% USC on top of that. Before the Government, in its dying days, drives this pact through, it should have a referendum on this issue and see where it gets with it. That would be fair to the people. Do not do this over the people's heads or behind their backs. I am asking the Government to call a referendum on this very important issue.

We have a scenario these days whereby the Minister for Justice is proposing to put in some clause where she can send asylum seekers or whatever back to the UK. What facilities does the Garda National Immigration Bureau have? It is responsible for deportations, border control and investigations relating to illegal immigration. The GNIB is very thin on the ground. The Government does not know when there is a court order to deport people. It does not know whether people have left or stayed, or where they have gone. It has no control whatsoever in the world. These illegal immigrants are actually playing pooh-pah with our system. The only way that I see that we can have some control is to reduce the level of payments if they do not show they are here legally or waiting for assessment. If they are here illegally, they should not get any payments. We have trouble enough getting payments for our own.

People in Killarney and Kerry have been adversely affected because 36% of our hospitality beds in Killarney are taken up by refugees and asylum seekers. This has meant that many restaurants, cafés and other tourism-related businesses have closed, and more are near to closing in Killarney, Killorglin and Kenmare. After two years, no alternative accommodation is being made available, only hotels and guesthouses. Many people are angry about the impact on our services, with GPs, dental services and accident and emergency departments overcrowded.

There are a lot of inconsistencies. I do not mind what other people of any origin get but we need to be fair to our own people and ensure we get the same for them. If a local family becomes homeless in Killarney, there is no homeless centre in the town. They have to go to the homeless centre in Tralee and their children miss out on school. They are not offered rooms locally in a hotel. Then we have a system where, if you house Ukrainian refugees, it is grand.

If a landlord rents out to them, he or she gets €800 tax free. I want that same benefit to be offered to people who are renting out to local people. We have a scenario in Killarney where the children of refugees get free transport from inside whatever limit, yet Killarney children going to school in Killorglin do not get any free transport. That is not fair. I have nothing against any people from any country. We welcomed the Bangladeshi people with open arms and we appreciate them working. I have no problem with people coming working here from any part of the world, whether they are from Ukraine or elsewhere. I have no problem in the world but we have to be fair to our own people and give the same benefits to our own people because our people are providing the money for this by way of taxes.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The core of the issue we are discussing is the Government’s shambolic approach to the asylum issue from the outset. The Government is now attempting to present the EU migration pact as a catch-all solution to the current crisis, the root of which lies in the Government’s failure to develop a coherent plan. Ultimately, it is operating a reactionary approach to events as they develop. If the Government had a fair, efficient and enforced system where the rules were actually implemented, we would not be in the situation we are today. The vast majority of measures in the EU asylum and migration pact do not serve Ireland’s interests. Ireland’s sovereignty cannot be impeded in the development of a fair, efficient and enforced system and this can only be done by exercising our opt-out from a majority of the pact’s proposals. The Government must retain the capacity to make its own decisions regarding key aspects of the asylum system. This includes faster processing of applicants, compiling its own list of safe countries so those who are not genuine asylum seekers can be returned to their safe country of origin. The Government’s approach is completely wrong. We will oppose opting into the measures that are unhelpful, give power to the EU and that will tie the hands of future governments. Because the Government has failed to implement its own rules, the asylum system is completely overwhelmed with bottlenecks at every level. Sinn Féin will vote "No" to the Government’s proposal to opt Ireland fully into the EU migration pact because we must retain our sovereignty over these matters if we are to have an immigration system that is fair, efficient and enforced.

The reactionary approach by the Government, without a plan, has absolutely failed. It has absolutely failed to engage meaningfully with local communities, which has resulted in a shambolic system and an shambolic approach that has given rise to unrest within communities where trust has broken down. It has alienated communities right across the State. They have been bounced from one crisis to another, leaving a trail of civil disharmony in the Government's wake. There has been no consistency in its approach. There has been no effort whatsoever to work with local communities or, indeed, public representatives in those communities.

Some, including myself, found ourselves actively lied to by the Department There was deceit about Government moves regarding IPAS accommodation in Newtownmountkennedy in my constituency of Wicklow where myself and the community were lied to about the true intentions for the use of River Lodge House at Trudder. The Government’s inexplicable mismanagement undermined public representatives in the area contributing to the chaos that has ensue, which has been replicated in communities across the State. Communities have been treated to meaningless promises by the Government, including the previous Taoiseach who promised that funding for local services would be made available to the ten areas hosting the most refugees. Notwithstanding the fact the Government has yet to deliver on this, this illustrates its failure to understand the pressure that communities across the State face because of its abandonment of its social responsibilities. The reality for people in local communities who are not thugs, far right or racists is that successive Governments have overseen the decline of their local services and amenities. They have genuine concerns. Under the current system, it takes years to process applications. The average processing time is currently more than 12 months with many applications taking three to four years. At the end, there is zero enforcement. Even when a decision is made to refuse an application, it is not enforced. Only 80 deportation orders were enforced in 2023 out of 734 that were signed. A total of 29,283 international protection applicants have claimed asylum in this State. More than 10,800 of them have been left waiting for a decision for 16 months or longer. That is 37% of applications. That is why there are bottlenecks in the system.

We need a fair, efficient and enforced asylum system to be put in place immediately. By ceding our sovereignty to the EU, we are undermining our own capacity to deal effectively with this issue. That is why Sinn Féin will vote against the migration pact, and we call on the Government to do so too.

Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We believe the Government is taking the wrong approach on this migration compact. We believe Ireland is in a unique position. It has a unique opportunity. Ourselves and Denmark are the only countries that have the flexibility to opt out. We have that flexibility going back to recognition of the fact that Ireland is in a common travel area with Britain. There are a number of reasons the Government is wrong to sign up to every element of the migration compact and, for that reason, we will vote against the Government amendment and against its proposition on the formal migration pact.

The point about the common travel area has been particularly relevant in the past few days. It demonstrates very clearly that we are in a unique position and we need to have flexibility to respond to situations in Britain, given our very particular circumstances. It was extraordinary last week when the Minister, Deputy McEntee confirmed to the justice committee that she did not even consider whether it was wise to select measures that might be beneficial to Ireland and to choose to avoid measures that might not be in Ireland’s interests. It is our view that there are decisions that are better taken at national level. We recognise circumstances where there are benefits from international co-operation and where it is in Ireland’s interest and where it would be impossible to achieve things without international organisation but in opting into the whole pact, the vast majority of which Sinn Féin disagrees with, it greatly ties the hands of future Irish governments and cedes power to the EU.

A great deal has been said about communication and resources. All that needs to be recognised. We believe in a system that is efficient, enforced, fair and decent. That is where a great deal of the Irish people are. It must be efficient and enforced because if we do not have rules or the rules are not applied, the system will collapse. Not only that but resources that need to be prioritised for those who need it most are used for those who are not applying based on true need to seek protection from oppression and conflict. It needs to be fair and decent because we must remember that we are talking about human beings here. Whether they are successful in their application or whether they are to be returned safely home, as they should be, they need to be treated with dignity and human respect. That needs to be at the heart of every decision we make. In the past few days, the Taoiseach has spent a lot of time talking about the fact that Ireland must have control of its own migration policy.

I do not understand how he can square that with opting into absolutely every element of this proposal given the extent to which it reduces our flexibility and given the potential grounds it creates for further divergence from Britain and the complications that can create for us in our very particular circumstances.

The past few days have been absolutely shambolic. At a time when we need calm, we have had absolute panic. The needless escalation of this by the Tánaiste was extremely unwise and has made this a much more challenging issue. I do not downplay for one minute that it was always a serious issue and it is still a serious issue. However, it was escalated to the point of an international row which showed a serious lack of wisdom. Two senior Ministers, the Tánaiste and the Minister for Justice have contradicted each other. The Minister of State has tried to reconcile this and he is shaking his head. I do not know how the Government is standing over this line in suggesting there is no contradiction. They are putting out press releases contradicting each other. It is absolutely absurd.

The British Government claims it has no legal obligations and there was no agreement; it is saying there is an administrative arrangement. The Irish Government says it has an agreement and Britain should be held to it. What is it? What does it look like? What are the terms of it? We need to know that because with the common travel area whether it is a hard border, soft border or middling border, there must be a policy for returns from Ireland to Britain. We need to know what the terms of that are and whether it can be enforced after the passing of the legislation.

Paul Donnelly (Dublin West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Irish people are good, decent and caring people. There are thousands of examples of where we have welcomed people seeking asylum into our country. That needs to be acknowledged. I broadly welcome the movement today of migrants who have been living in tents along Mount Street. The situation is not tenable due to the appalling conditions for the migrants and the serious disruptions to the community surrounding Mount Street. We simply cannot have tented camps in our towns and cities. People entitled to asylum should be provided with shelter.

We can create a fair, efficient and enforced immigration system by exercising the opt-out from a majority of the pact's proposals. It is our view that the majority of measures contained in the EU's migration and asylum pact are not in Ireland's interests. Some decisions are better taken locally and one size does not fit all. Communication is the key. Honest and open dialogue is critical when decisions are being made on centres being opened in communities but unfortunately that is not always the case. It must be for an Irish Government to decide on key aspects of our immigration system, including rejecting unsuccessful applicants sooner, compiling our list of safe countries and deciding the countries from which Ireland should take refugees.

It is remarkable that the Minister, Deputy McEntee, has confirmed that she did not even consider whether Ireland might adopt some parts and not other parts of this agreement. This approach is reckless and not thought through. It is a mistake that the Government has decided on an all-or-nothing approach. We need to protect migrant workers. We must ensure that all people coming to work and contribute to our country do so in the correct manner. Claiming asylum should not and cannot be a backdoor into our country for whatever reasons.

We would support measures that are in the interests of Ireland where international co-operation makes sense, such as the use of a database and in returning those, who seek to make an asylum application here, to the first country where an international protection applicant has made the application. Sinn Féin will be voting "No" to the Government's proposal to sign up fully into the EU migration and asylum pact because we must retain our sovereignty over these matters if we are to have an immigration system that is fair, efficient and enforced.

Simon Harris along with other Ministers kept repeating the line that Ireland has a right to set its own immigration policy, yet next week it plans to give away that power. Given that we share the common travel area with Britain, which is no longer an EU member, this approach is absolute madness.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sinn Féin believes that Ireland can better create a fair, efficient and enforced immigration system by exercising its rights to opt out of a majority of the EU pact's proposals. Sinn Féin opposed the migration and asylum pact for very good reasons. First, it undermines human rights. At the justice committee yesterday, several human rights organisations outlined a number of provisions in this pact that would infringe on human rights.

Second, it will make no practical difference to the number of asylum seekers arriving here. War, poverty and climate change are the main drivers of immigration. If European states were serious about reducing the number of people arriving, they would stop selling arms to dictators and oppressive regimes. They would review all EU trade deals that disadvantage poor countries and keep them poor. They would tackle illicit financial flows to stop hundreds of billions of euro flowing out of poorer countries into European banks.

The pact is nothing more than a cynical political fix designed to help political parties across the Continent ahead of the European elections so they can say they are doing something. Co-operation with EU member states is important but people want decisions on asylum made by the government that they elect. The EU pact does not mean anything to communities that see more and more of their hotels become unavailable for tourist accommodation or to people who have seen the neglect of services and resources in their towns.

In my own county of Mayo there is genuine concern in Ballina about the use of a hotel for families seeking asylum - concerns about the needs of the people who will be arriving, concerns about the availability of healthcare, education and other services. We have asked time and time again for assessment of needs for those coming to towns and villages and for resources and services to be front-loaded. Communities deserve respectful communication. A total of 407 asylum seekers including Ukrainians are happily living in Ballina. I commend those in the local community and voluntary organisations who have made these families so welcome and those who continue to work for an inclusive, tolerant, compassionate society where all human rights are upheld.

Many people I speak to value the richness and diversity, and businesses welcome the extra workers. However, we need to end the practice of taking hotel beds out of communities. This cannot happen when the situation is being driven by private interests looking to make huge profits from the Government's absolute failure to do anything other than to take more and more hotels out of the system. The number of people in State-funded accommodation has been stable for seven months, but still the Government is scrambling. We still have people sleeping on the streets. People can accept the use of hotels as an emergency response but the Government is building an industry around it. We must remember that problems in health and housing existed long before the invasion of Ukraine and the increase in asylum seekers.

The challenges that are faced by this country are not insurmountable. The Government should not let them be exploited by extreme agendas. We are better than that. We can work with communities. We can embrace communities.

Earlier today the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach talked about the Ballyhaunis primary care centre and I absolutely agree with him. The Government has failed to deliver in a community like Ballyhaunis which I would say has done more than any other community in the State to include people and to embrace people from all over the world. That is an example of how this Government has failed to help communities and to help those arriving in communities.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Much as I agree with the Deputy, I must call Deputy Martin Browne.

Martin Browne (Tipperary, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would have been happy to allow Deputy Conway-Walsh speak for another minute if she wanted.

As has been said, the Government is taking the wrong path here. The majority of measures in the EU's migration and asylum pact are not in Ireland's interests. Through its determination to bind itself to every element of this pact, the Government believes it can distance itself from its own failings by convincing us that the powers to build a better immigration system just were not there.

A few years ago, direct provision centres were filled with people who had fled horror only to find themselves waiting years for the system to work in what were often unacceptable situations. Fine Gael, which has been in government for 13 years supported my Fianna Fáil for eight of those years, has failed to introduce a well-managed, fair, efficient and enforced asylum system. This Government has continued in that vein and through its unconditional acceptance of this pact seeks to tie the hands of future governments.

Our international protection system is in a mess not because of the absence of this pact, but because of the Government's lack of a proper plan which led to reliance on private operators. Communities are left feeling neglected and ignored. We definitely need co-operation with the EU and internationally; nobody is arguing with that. Ultimately, it will be still for the Government to develop a fair, enforced and functioning system.

Enhancing the ability to return people who seek to make an asylum application here to the country where they first made a claim will benefit us, as will opting into the Eurodac regulation.

There will be times scenarios will present themselves in which we will need the flexibility to respond ourselves. We simply do not know what the situation will be like in five or ten years. One such scenario involves a common travel area we share with Britain. This is a situation where bilateral legislation may be needed so to limit the flexibility to respond would be a mistake. The number of people presenting is also unanticipated. Our IPAS system is overwhelmed. While elements of this pact can assist, the lion's share of the responsibility to develop a proper system is, and always will be, with the Government. No pact will change that reality. Indeed, a number of human rights organisations have voiced their concerns that several of the measures do not even meet adequate human rights standards. Sinn Féin is opposed to the vast majority of provisions in the migration pact and we will vote against the Government's proposal for a full opt-in. Under-resourced communities need the confidence that we can adapt in their interest, not sideline them in favour of a binding agreement with the EU that may limit our ability to respond to the realities we face.

We will not support the Government's proposal to fully opt-in to the migration pact. It is reckless, limits our sovereignty, ties the hands of future governments and limits our ability to adapt to our own unique challenges. A lot of the fear that is out there needs to be and can be replaced if the Government would only communicate with communities.

Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin Bay North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On behalf of the Labour Party, we want to show solidarity with the Minister of Justice and with her family, after the difficulties she went through last week, and indeed, with the Minister, Deputy O'Gorman. This is the inevitable consequence of people in political life and people with influence not tempering their language and making their case or arguments in a more restrained manner. Over the recent time, it is quite clear that there is an impression that the Government is making this up as it goes along. At the Oireachtas justice committee last week, the Minister made the contention that 80% of all asylum seekers coming into the State are coming via the North. The Tánaiste has flatly contradicted her on that and we cannot seem to get any sort of figures or evidence or data to back up what she has said. Regarding the EU migration and asylum pact, as was said again at yesterday's Oireachtas justice committee meeting, quite a number of NGOs are outlining their difficulty with the pact on the fact that they believe it will undermine some of the human rights implications of the pact and the basic ability of individuals to seek asylum. Approximately 160 human rights organisations across Europe have difficulties with this pact.

There is no more clear illustration of the failure of Government policy that what has happened on Mount Street. It is impossible not to come to the conclusion that what happened on St. Patrick's weekend was a PR stunt. Again, today, we have something similar. The language being used by the Taoiseach is so unfortunate; he called it "an illegal encampment". That is not in anyway the type of phraseology he should use. If the Taoiseach or the Minister were to spend some time down there, they would have a sense of the appalling conditions that are evident on Mount Street. I spent a good bit of time myself down there. There was a movement of individuals around St. Patrick's weekend but there were more tents there up until this morning than there had been previously.

The Labour Party finds it very difficult to support the EU migration pact on the basis of the undermining of the basic ability of individuals to claim asylum and the fact that this has come from the more right-wing viewpoint within the European Union.

The Minister's job has not been made easier because of people in the political system who are the raising the temperature, tension and fear. I refer in particular to the Rural Independent Group who consistently try to equate migration with crime. They attempt it at every chance they possibly can get. We had the appalling spectacle of one Deputy from the group making a speech to a number of people at a protest who said we were being colonised. Then, even yesterday, the same Deputy managed to equate An Garda Síochána with the B Specials in respect of a protest that happened in Newtownmountkennedy recently. I did not hear anything from this group, or see anything in the motion, that spoke to attacks on An Garda Síochána or on other elements within society that are trying to uphold the law, including politicians. I find it frankly hilarious. This is same bunch who wear their religion on their sleeves but I grew up with the tale of the good Samaritan when we were told to believe in and instinctively understand the humanity of people whom we do not know or who are strangers to us. I find it hilarious to hear Deputy Michael Healy-Rae complain about the millions of euro that are being spent on the system when he personally has gained €660,000 for the accommodation of Ukrainian refugees over the past number of years, and that was not declared to this House before his contribution.

I was also pretty disappointed again in contributions of Sinn Féin Members today. I have noticed a shift to the right from Sinn Féin when it comes to the issue of migration, which has previously presented itself to the people as a party on the left. What it has attempted to do in this Parliament is to go to the right of Government when it comes to supports for Ukrainian refugees and to change its view on hate crime legislation on a whim, which, in fairness to the Minister, she has told me she is intending to pursue, despite the fact that there have been 23 arson attacks against accommodation centres over the past number of years and, indeed, a Croatian man was beaten to death only a number of weeks ago because apparently his assailants viewed his non-speaking of English as being cause enough to attack him. Of course, members of the LGBT community are in constant fear because apparently they are now open game in this new anti-woke culture that is being propagated by many Members in this Oireachtas and beyond. Much of the rhetoric from Sinn Féin regarding the EU migration pact comes straight out of the far-right copybook across Europe. Everybody in this House needs to reflect on what kind of road they want to walk Irish politics down over the next number of years because if the atmosphere, anger, tension and violence I have witnessed over the past months is anything to go by, we are facing a very dark chapter in Irish politics. While it is completely legitimate to raise issues about the immigration system and to talk about a rules-based system, it is not legitimate to dehumanise those who come here seeking sanctuary, it is not legitimate to link criminality with immigration or to talk about loss of culture or about colonisation, it is not legitimate to equate An Garda Síochána with the B Specials and it is not legitimate to stand here and talk about the millions of euro that are being spent on the system when you have gained €660,000 over the past number of years for accommodating Ukrainian refugees.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy. Deputy Catherine Murphy is next.

Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On a brief point of order that is not a response to any comment, the Minister was not present when I spoke and I also want to be associated with the expression of solidarity and to express my regret about what happened to her family, which was terrible.

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We all agree with the Deputy but that is not a point of order.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I too express solidarity with the Minister and her family. There has been discussion in this House over the past few years about the coarsening of debate. We are seeing that going to another level now where we are seeing things falling into the criminal code. There is a real need for leadership right across the House on that.

We need a well-managed asylum system, irrespective of the EU migration pact, for people who have left their own countries and arrived in Ireland, often in a chaotic way. They have a right to seek asylum or international protection here. There are people in this country who think you can just put someone back on a plane or a boat. The reality is that seeking asylum is a human right, and when it is claimed it must be processed.

While the international protection applicant awaits a decision on his or her claim, the Irish State is required to provide accommodation, food and medical care. Applicants are also entitled to legal aid throughout the process. Having gone through the process, there are several reasons someone will be given the right to remain. The first is the very obvious one, that is, that he or she will get refugee status. An applicant may be awarded subsidiary protection, which means the applicant cannot be returned to his or her country because of the fact that he or she faces serious harm or worse. There is no dispute in any of this. It can also be decided that an applicant can remain for humanitarian reasons. We have seen cases of that in the past. We do not know how many people have applied for that. Irrespective of the EU migration pact, people who fall into these three categories should have the right to remain.

The migration pact does not guarantee legal aid. There is a very short turnaround time and there is a real risk of people being returned to harm. The final category, after the process is exhausted, is where an applicant can be refused protection. He or she is then required to leave or is subject to deportation. That aspect of the process has to work in order to have an effective system, but none of this happens in two hours in Dublin Airport or in the International Protection Office. It takes time, and if Ireland signs up to the EU migration pact, it will still take time, but there are a lot of unknowns as to how the pact would work in reality. We in the Social Democrats see that there is merit in some of what has been proposed but we have serious concerns about aspects of the migration pact and how it might work in practice.

The Government announced that Ireland will opt in in advance of any discussion in the Dáil or the justice committee. It has made it clear that when it comes to the Dáil, there will be just one vote, which is not the way it was handled in the European Parliament. If this country opts into the migration pact, we have been told by the Taoiseach that it will have to be legislated for at some point in the future and before 2026, and the Dáil will have a vote on each piece of legislation. The problem is that those separate pieces of legislation will be about the detail but not about the principle if we have already opted into the remaining aspects of the pact.

The chaotic way the Government has been dealing with the migration issue has opened the door for some very nasty forces that have made it much more difficult to have a rational debate about the migration system both now and into the future. The direct provision system, together with the length of time it takes for an applicant to get through the system, was a significant issue before the war in Ukraine. Then we have seen a steady increase in the numbers seeking asylum, with nowhere to provide accommodation. The world is a chaotic place and has been for several years. Places such as Afghanistan, Syria, South Sudan, Gaza and the West Bank are particular flashpoints at the moment. Wars, together with the climate crisis, are displacing people. That is the reason so many people are on the move. Many people have no real choice.

As regards the direct provision system, thousands of people who have been granted the right to remain are unable to move on because of the housing crisis. There is simply nowhere for them to move on to, and that is not a problem of their making. Really inappropriate accommodation is being used. One Department has been overloaded. Many of us have been saying there needs to be a whole-of-government approach. The kinds of checks and balances that are usual and needed around the provision of accommodation have been absent, and we seem to be in a state of permanent emergency. There is also a feeling that the situation is in chaos. I have no doubt that there is also profiteering happening. We have seen some evidence of that at the public accounts committee. That chaos is causing legitimate concerns but there are also malign forces inserting themselves into this issue.

The pact is composed of five separate regulations and would require several different pieces of legislation into the future, as I have said. The screening regulation would create a uniform set of rules concerning the identification of non-EU nationals upon their arrival. We have been told that this will increase security in the Schengen area. Of course, we are not in the Schengen area and are unlikely to be into the future. We are in a unique position in having a common travel area between us and a third country, and one size for all the EU does not fit all circumstances. We in the Social Democrats have concerns about that as a consequence.

The Eurodac regulation seeks to develop a common database gathering more accurate and complete data to detect unauthorised movements. We believe that this is a reasonable thing to do.

The third one is the asylum procedures regulation. This, we are told, will make the return of asylum seekers and border procedures quicker. Again, the devil will be in the detail. One of our concerns is whether the quicker procedures would be fair procedures. The common travel area, again, is an issue of not insignificant detail. We have seen huge detention camps in countries such as Italy, Greece and Cyprus. Reassurances of something like that where it is happening elsewhere do not really sit well. How would that work? I have serious concerns about that and that we would see detention camps here.

The asylum migration management regulation would establish a new solidarity mechanism among member states to balance the current system, whereby a few countries are responsible for the vast majority of asylum applications and clear rules on responsibility for asylum applicants. Yes, we are members of the European Union, and that aspect of it has merit. Under the crisis and force majeureregulation, the concept of instrumentalisation, a new word for me, has been introduced, allowing a member state to derogate from its obligations. It aims to prevent and address situations such as the border tensions between Greece and Turkey in 2020 or the sudden influx of migrants from Belarus, for example, to eastern European countries in 2021.

As I said, we in the Social Democrats see merit in some of what is proposed, but there are aspects that cause us real concern. We do not know how this would be implemented or the difficulties it would cause into the future.

Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Solidarity to the Minister for the threats and the disturbance she and her family have suffered this week. I also express my solidarity to Deputy Paul Murphy, who also this week received death threats from the same sources.

I have read over the motion from the Rural Independent Group. It consists of nearly three pages about the migration pact and there is not a single mention of the causes of the movement of people or the reasons they move. Somebody recently described the movement of people across the planet at the moment as being like water: no matter what happens, it will find a way to go somewhere. That is exactly what is happening with migrants across the planet. Millions of them are being displaced because of climate change, which causes droughts, floods and economic catastrophe. Millions of them are being displaced because of war, famine and persecution over their personal conditions in life, whether that is their religion, their ethnicity or their sexual orientation. This is the reality of the world we live in, yet there is not one mention of that depth of cruelty and depravity taking place on the globe that is causing people to come here.

This is from a group of Deputies who uphold their Christian values constantly in this House. They are against, for example, improving abortion laws and were against repeal. In the past, they were probably against divorce. They pride themselves on being Christians. They possibly go to mass every Sunday. I do not. I am an atheist. However, I grew up valuing humanity and human beings and the people we are talking about are human beings. They are not cargo.

Even when the Minister moves to change the laws on the safe nature of Britain and the need to return migrants to Britain, she treats them as if they were cargo. All these people are capable of making a contribution to society. With every hungry belly there is a pair of hands and a brain. However, neither this Government nor the Tories want to recognise these people as human beings.

They are all looking at the elections to see what support they may use. Rishi Sunak is in real trouble in terms of the electoral possibilities for the Tory party and he is scapegoating refugees to win back voters and curry favour. There is a huge element of that happening right across this House at the moment. We need people to stand up to say that what is going on here is scaremongering, that is, scaremongering that men of colour who come to this country are a danger to women and children. That is a huge factor in why communities say they are worried and frightened. Yes, there is a shortage of resources and houses and a shortage of dentists and doctors. However, if any of you think that if we deported every single one of them in the morning the housing crisis would go away, that we would have enough dentists, doctors and crèche places, and enough room in our hospitals, then you are mad. These crises were not created by refugees or asylum seekers. They are the product of continual rule in this State dominated by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, which favour the rich and the elites and which have made this country one of the third wealthiest on the planet but ordinary people do not see the benefit of that.

For Deputies to say things like plantations, colonisations and invasions are taking place and that old and young women are fearful for their safety because of the number of asylum seeker men living near them is outrageous. It leads to dangerous behaviour, thoughts and speech by many people in this country. I will reiterate something the Minister knows well because it is also in her Department, which is that the vast majority of sexual and domestic violence is perpetrated on women in this country by men in their lives, that is, by their partners, ex-partners, relatives, husbands, etc. To put the story about that the big danger to women is men of colour is a real danger to those men of colour. It is high time that the world started to see people as a resource for one another rather than a threat to one another. I repeat that with every hungry belly is a pair of hands and a brain. We need workers in this country. One of the Deputies on this side of the House said, "We welcome workers". Well then, welcome them and let them work. That is a big part of the solution both here and in Europe.

There is much more in the European pact that we are opposed to, which is more spaces like Libya, where we create slave camps and pay countries to hold onto migrants to stop them crossing the Mediterranean and then allow them to be raped, abused and treated as slaves in camps where we are paying countries to do that. That is why we are opposed to the pact.

Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will make some comments about the EU migration and asylum pact. This pact strengthens fortress Europe, and what has fortress Europe done? More than 3,000 human beings lost their lives in the Mediterranean last year. Between the years 1993 and 2023 there were more than 50,000 documented refugee deaths as a direct result of fortress Europe, which the Government and its allies in Europe now want to strengthen. Why do people flee their homelands and travel often dangerous journeys to come here and to other European countries? It is because of war, extreme climate situations and extreme poverty. I saw a brilliant film recently called "Io Capitano" in which two young Senegalese lads leave their home village to try to get to Europe. It really gave an insight into the journey and the traumas people have to go through. The EU migration and asylum pact will not stop refugees from coming to Europe. It will just make it harder for them to do so, and it will strengthen the illegal traffickers. While I object to the pact as a whole, I want to raise some specific points I object to. Refugees will be forced to stay in, or be sent to, so-called safe third countries. These externalisation policies have already led to migrants being abused in Tunisia and tortured in Libya. The pact allows for extended periods of detention of between three and six months prior to deportation and in some circumstances, even up to 12 months. An increase in the use of biometrics and surveillance will even include fingerprinting children as young as six years of age. These are measures that have been adopted to placate the European far right and far-right voters in advance of the European elections. Europe's so-called centre parties are adopting important parts of the programme of the far right and handing a victory to the far right in that regard.

As I am caught for time, I will finish with a question. They are not in the House but they will be watching and I think they need to answer it. The Socialists and Democrats group in the European Parliament not only overwhelmingly voted for this pact, it played a key role in negotiating and drafting it. How can the Labour Party stand over that and defend that kind of capitulation to a racist agenda?

Michael Lowry (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

People's confidence in the Government's handling of migration was low before they learned that newly-arrived asylum seekers to Ireland were escaping deportation from the UK to Rwanda. It was a shocking and worrying revelation that raises serious questions. People immediately wanted to know how suddenly this detailed information had become available. How do we determine the number of secondary arrivals from the UK? What will be the process of tracking and detecting arrivals from the UK? How long has this exodus from the UK to Ireland been going on? Where are these people originally from and where are they currently located in this country? Did they originally arrive illegally in the UK? Have they been vetted? Have they been health screened and, crucially, what is the actual number we are talking about? We are talking about percentages for the past number of days. What are the numbers we are talking about? No-one in this country seems to understand the procedures and outcomes of a convoluted asylum vetting system. We do know that the system is broken. We do not have a proper asylum system. People have become increasingly wary and suspicious of matters surrounding migration, which has become one of the biggest issues of recent times. It is an issue that impacts everyone in some way, whether it is in the fact that our health services cannot cope with our significantly increased population, or that communities are seeing vital amenities such as hotels and former nursing homes used to house new arrivals into the country. Public unease is such that vacant properties in every part of the country are now closely watched. People are questioning property owners and public representatives about plans for the use of such premises. Every suspicion is investigated.

This is the situation across our country at present and the Government only has itself to blame. The Government's lack of transparency is a major issue but the lack of engagement with local people has been and will continue to be the straw that breaks public trust. Communities across the country, including in my own constituency have sought information from the Department without receiving even the courtesy of an acknowledgement. Information, if it is forthcoming through public representatives, is sparse and generic. People whose families have lived in towns for generations have not only been denied information, they have been rudely dismissed as though their opinions do not matter. Without actually hearing the words, people are being told to shut up and put up with Government decisions. Regardless of whether there are adequate vital services in place to meet the needs of the existing local community, the Government will jump on any opportunity that becomes available to house asylum seekers. I forewarned that Roscrea town in County Tipperary was overburdened and had accepted its fair share. My concerns and those of the community were ignored and dismissed, leading to public unrest. A similar situation is emerging in nearby Rathcabbin, where a nursing home that struggled to survive due to a lack of Government support is now earmarked for asylum seekers. It was conveyed to the local community that the former nursing home would accommodate Ukrainian refugees. Local organisations rallied and offered welcome and support. That trust was suddenly shattered as the Department has reneged and now proposes to house IPAS applicants. This kind of deceitful communication breaches any accepted standard. It is totally unsatisfactory and has alienated the community. Refusing to engage with local people in an honest and open manner creates suspicion and resentment. Suspicion fosters fear and it is this fear that results in the growing number of protests. Communities are entitled to protest about legitimate concerns.

Unfortunately, some peaceful protests are hijacked and fuelled by organised groups of antagonists.

Seán Canney (Galway East, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on what is a very emotive subject whether people are directly affected by it or not.

One of the issues that has manifested in recent days is the total confusion in the Government about numbers and percentages. This is leading to more fodder and ammunition for those termed right-wing groups that are trying to put the fear of God into people. It is high time the Government gave us a factual account of how people are coming into the country, what numbers are coming through Northern Ireland and how we are dealing with that. I am concerned because a few weeks ago, when Deputy Tóibín asked a question there were no answers. He was told that the Department did not hold records of who is coming in and so forth and all of a sudden percentages are being bandied about. It is creating uncertainty and a lack of trust.

That lack of trust has permeated its way into communities where proposals are being made to put asylum seekers into buildings in places we know are not suitable. It is being done under a cloak and dagger approach, with very little information and when there is no information the void that is left is filled with false information by people who want to do that to create instability. To be honest, right now the Government is not doing anything to stabilise things and get out the facts.

Last week, I raised the issue of Grattan Court and how the residents and businesses have suffered so much. They have been prisoners in their own properties. I saw that the asylum seekers in the camps are being shifted this morning. When they are taken from there, where are they going? They are human beings, as was said earlier. None of the residents want to see them just being hurled off to some other place, thereby moving the problem to some other place. What protections are being put in place in order that the campsite does not resurrect itself again in a few weeks' time outside the IPAS offices?

It is high time that we decided. If we want to help asylum seekers, why can we not allow them to work? One of the biggest fears I hear from people is that grown men have nothing to do all day and are sitting around, hanging around and things will go wrong. Why can we not allow people to work? We need workers. Everyone is looking for workers. Why can we not have a plan to make sure that if we have asylum seekers here, we deal with them and if they remain in the country, we allow them to work? That is what we need. We need workers at the moment for the economy to develop and these are people who can work, we hope. We would be able to test the market to see what kind of asset we have in these people.

We have always been seen as a country of 1,000 welcomes, but our tourism industry is being destroyed in places at the moment because hotels are being taken over in places where they were available to tourists previously.

A lot of issues are going on and it seems to be rumbling on. I plead with the Government to make sure it gets its act together and gives us the facts as they are.

Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I express my solidarity with the Minister and her family. It is an appalling situation and should not continue anywhere.

Although I am against the introduction of the European migration and asylum pact, it is not for the reasons the Rural Independent Group outlined in the motion, so I will not support that motion. The Government will probably bring forward an amendment, which I will be happy not to support because I do not expect it to go anywhere near satisfying the concerns I have.

I am disappointed at some of the language in this motion. It is purposely misleading. Language such "large-scale immigration" and "open-door asylum seeker policy" is extremely deceiving and factually incorrect. It is dangerous to suggest we have an open-door policy or that we are seeing large-scale immigration when this is clearly not the case.

The motion claims we have no legal obligation to take in asylum seekers. What about our human rights obligations? When did we become so cold and unfeeling to those seeking protection and people seeking our help in their time of need? How dare we condemn those faced with desperate situations while we sit in our positions of immense privilege?

We would do well to remember that we were not always in this situation and that many other generations before us turned to other countries for help and protection in the past. There may come a time in the future when we are once again forced to turn to other countries for assistance. Can you imagine how it would feel to have your presence debated and your human rights debased? This is exactly what motions like this one do. The motion completely ignores the human rights at the centre of this conversation and even worse, seeks to blame them for issues such as housing, issues that were present long before this debate and would still be present if every immigrant left tomorrow.

The motion acknowledges strained public services but fails to recognise how many of those services rely on immigration. Immigrants have filled many gaps in our health and hospitality sectors. Last night, we were told that 20% of the staff who work in our hospitals are from India. That is the kind of positive impact immigration has on Irish society. The most recent census showed that labour force participation among non-Irish citizens was higher than among Irish citizens. Claiming that immigrants only exacerbate our issues and strain our services is not only extremely hurtful, but factually incorrect. Immigrants enrich and contribute to our society and do not deserve to be talked about in this way.

They also do not deserve to be treated in the way they have been by the Government or the European Union. We have seen a concerning shift in EU border policy in recent years away from humanitarian aid and towards hostile policies of surveillance and detention. This shift continues in the EU migration and asylum pact, which is an incredibly cruel pact that will only lead to more suffering and death for innocent people seeking asylum. The pact seeks to subject children to fingerprinting, thereby profiling them at a young age. This is wrong and a total violation of human dignity. More than 160 organisations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have expressed concern about this pact. I strongly urge the Government to listen to and act on these concerns and protect the rights of those coming to Europe, but that will hardly happen.

Marian Harkin (Sligo-Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for her attendance. It is not often that we have a senior Minister at this point of a Private Members' debate. I am glad to see her here. I also give her my personal support in light of the completely unacceptable attacks on her family home.

This morning we are discussing the issue of migration. It is a difficult and delicate discussion. On the one hand, we have those seeking asylum and they are not a homogenous group. Some are fleeing war and persecution. Others are seeking a better life, they are economic migrants. Others are people who have been trafficked. Others have paid large sums of money to arrive here on the promise of a better place to live. Others have been to the UK or other European countries and have decided to travel to Ireland because they believe it will be a better place for them to pursue their asylum applications. Those who try to portray all asylum seekers as people fleeing war and persecution are simply not telling the truth but then there is the other side of it in that those who portray asylum seekers as mainly opportunists and use some of the awful language we hear are also not telling the truth.

Part of the problem around asylum seeking is that people put themselves in one camp or the other. I am right and you are wrong. That leads to many negative outcomes. It splits communities and engenders anger, which can lead to hatred. I am afraid we are drifting towards a situation where we are being told that good people are those who welcome all asylum seekers regardless of whether they are genuine asylum seekers and the others - and there are many in that group - are pushed and told they are right wing, far right or the latest term is populist right. Many of those people want a robust, firm and fair asylum system, a smaller number oppose all asylum seekers and there are lots of shades between but they all seem to be lumped into a group of what we might call the deplorables. We cannot make progress in this way. We have to find a middle ground with a rules-enforced system.

Equally, we cannot make progress with a Government that has basically lost control of the asylum procedure because that adds to the pressure and it builds up to intolerable levels, as we have seen on Mount Street and in other communities throughout the country.

Last week, at a meeting of the Joint Committee on Justice, the Minister revealed that approximately 80% of asylum seekers were now coming across the Border. I asked her whether we had sent anybody back to the UK under the current agreement in place with the UK. The Minister's response to me was, "I do not have those figures to hand". Yet, according to newspaper reports of what the Minister and Taoiseach have said, it turns out that nobody has been returned under that agreement, which has been in place since 2000. I know it has not always been the case that 80% of asylum seekers were coming across the Border but even if the figure was 8%, if the system was working and operational, the Minister would have ensured that some people were, rightly, returned. We hear the lame excuse of Covid. The pandemic finished nearly two years ago. The court decision was not made until March 2024. What was supposed to happen during most of 2022, all of 2023 and part of 2024 to operationalise that agreement? Nothing happened. Nobody was sent back.

My colleague, Deputy McNamara, raised the issue of Dublin III and compared the tiny numbers being returned from Ireland, which stood at two in 2022, with the numbers returned from Germany, which stood at more than 4,000 in 2022. That displays an astonishing level of incompetence in enforcing the legislation and agreements that are in place. The Minister is now asking us to sign up to a pact when she is not doing the business. We cannot trust her.

Violet-Anne Wynne (Clare, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the debate in the House on this particular issue, especially considering there has been a major reluctance on the part of the Government to debate such matters. Instead, it has exuded fear, which is hugely disappointing. Political debates should not be avoided, especially on contentious issues. Nothing positive comes form that.

In the short time available to me, I will point to the clear mishandling of the migration issue thus far and the disagreements within the coalition on even the basic details of statistics. This is not helping with the already precarious situation we have now faced for the last two years. The referendum showed that the public do not trust this Government. The message was sent loud and clear that the Government has lost the trust and confidence of the people.

Information has not been forthcoming. Actions have been taken that would be deemed underhanded, such as moving people into communities in the middle of the night. There is not a clear plan or implementation of a plan, and this has all added to the issue at hand. The Government has looked for sympathy for the challenges it is meant to lead us through, and that has also had a detrimental effect.

Accommodation for international protection applicants who are currently here is failing HIQA inspections, including the Knockalisheen direct provision centre where there are currently 52 men accommodated in tents. Because they are not on Mount Street, that story is not making it into the media. I know from a response to a parliamentary question that there is no short- or long-term strategy for accommodation in place. A questionnaire circulated during an inspection found that half of respondents did not feel safe or happy and did not want to leave their rooms at night. The Government has refused to communicate and engage with communities, as has been pointed out left, right and centre. It has also failed to ensure a regional balance when it comes to securing accommodation centres. As a result, counties such as Clare have gone above and beyond.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies for their contributions. With regard to a point made by the previous speaker, my understanding is that this is the third, if not fourth, debate on migration, specifically immigration and the pact, I have attended in the House in as many months. We had a three-hour debate in the committee last week and it is open to any Deputy at any time to raise the matter as a Topical Issue, in a Private Members' motion or at the Business Committee. The pact has been discussed at European level for eight years and nearly every aspect of it has been available for people to engage with. With regard to any suggestion that this matter has been rushed, there has been no debate on it or the Government has refused to debate it, I have come to the House every time I have been asked to debate it. As I said, this is the third or fourth debate on it in recent months.

I also want to state a really important fact. Migration is good for this country. It is has always been really positive for this country. As a people who have travelled to the four corners of the earth to seek solace and in search of a better life, we know how important it is to be welcoming and to support people. We, as a people, have always been welcoming to those who seek asylum and help. Some 20% of people who live here were not born here. Just under 500,000 people in our workforce were not born here. It is not just that their culture and traditions enrich our society, but they also pay taxes and ensure our schools, hospitals and building sites operate. So much of the commentary we hear in this House feeds into the hatred, division and blatant racism we see right across the country at the moment. As for attacks on gardaí, a Deputy who is now leaving the House referred to our gardaí as "gangs". That is completely unacceptable behaviour. We all need to understand the responsibility we in this House have when we talk about people and the huge contribution so many of them make and will make to this country.

The Minister of State, Deputy Browne, has given a comprehensive overview of the measures I propose we opt in to and the benefits of working together at a European level. European countries will be working together to implement a new, enhanced and better system than the one we have now. There is nothing in this pact that does not benefit Ireland. I am absolutely steadfast in that view. From faster processing and appeals, enhanced data-sharing, new rules and responsibilities and a greater emphasis on returns, the pact will address the key inefficiencies that are in our system. We have a system that does not work as it should because it was built for far fewer people.

The benefits have been outlined clearly today but I also think we need to be frank and talk about the risks of not opting in and of staying outside the EU-wide system that has been developed over many years of negotiations, with us. Ireland has been around the table and has been part of these negotiations for eight years. Nothing has been forced on us. If we do not work together with our EU partners inside the pact, we will be a more attractive destination to those who seek solace and protection. Numbers would most certainly increase and we would be prevented from accessing solidarity and burden-sharing mechanisms. Our ability to send people back to wherever they came from would also be severely limited. The structure we have does not work, which is why we want to improve it. If we are not part of the improved system, how do we think other countries will take people back? This would mean more people in the reception system for longer periods of time, at a much greater cost. It is essential that we have a firm and fair system. What do we mean by that? We need a fair system for those who genuinely need protection and our help and who are fleeing starvation, persecution and war, but one that is firm to those who do not. Economic migrants who should be coming here by a different route should get a negative decision and leave immediately.

I have introduced a number of measures to make our immigration system fair so we can get to the stage that when we opt in to the pact we are ready for it. That includes increased resourcing for the International Protection Office. That has resulted in a more than doubling of the number of staff in two years alone. We processed 4,404 people in 2021. We were able to 8,409 people in 2023 and we will reach and, I have no doubt, exceed our target of processing 14,000 applications this year. We have supplied the International Protection Office with €34 million in funding this year alone to help increase those numbers and invest in technology. The quicker we invest in technology, the more we will move applications online and the easier we will process them.

The introduction of accelerated processing for safe third countries in November 2022 resulted in the number of applications from those designated countries dropping by 50%. What we mean by "safe countries" are countries where people are coming from where we deem there is not a risk and therefore people should not generally be seeking protection. The accelerated process means their applications are heard much more quickly. Again, the less time people spend in accommodation, the more it benefits everyone. The further expansion of accelerated processing with the designation of two further countries took place earlier in 2024. Just last week, I included the country which has the highest number of applications in accelerated processing. Currently, that country is Nigeria but if that changes, the country will change also.

Steps have also been taken to reduce the numbers of people arriving without documents and because of those changes - checks of planes, airline fines and training of staff - we have seen a 34% reduction of people arriving at our airports with false documents or getting rid of their documents after they have travelled. We continue to review the level of fines for airline carriers which bring people without documentation or with false documentation. Operations continue to run in Dublin Airport with a view to swiftly identifying irregular arrivals into Ireland.

We continue to train airline staff and have introduced visas in a number of additional countries, with further countries under review. I and my Department will leave no stone unturned in making sure that we have the most effective immigration system Ireland. I firmly believe that a key part of that is our joining our EU counterparts in implementing the migration and asylum pact.

The 2015 International Protection Act, which is the current law that governs our international protection system, was enacted at a time when, as I said, we had fewer people coming here, that is, 3,500 applicants a year, whereas last year we had 13,000 people applying for international protection. We are scaling up as quickly as possible. It is not realistic to present this as an issue which will simply disappear if we choose not to engage with it or, indeed, not to opt in to the pact.

We must recognise that the challenges presented by migration and asylum exist. They are not going away. They cannot be wished away. They have to be addressed. They cannot be addressed in a globalised world by any state acting alone. That is why we need to move without further delay. In order for Ireland to effectively align its law and systems with other member states by 2026, a decision on opting in has to be taken now. Such a decision would send a very clear message to our fellow member states and the European Commission that Ireland is committed to working in harmony and solidarity with them on migration. More importantly, it would ensure that we can avail of the necessary supports to implement the changes and the necessary financial supports required to comply with the pact. This will include a substantial EU implementation budget which will be distributed by the Commission.

There are those who would like to suggest that the pact involves some unlawful or undemocratic transfer of sovereignty. There is no basis for this in reality. It represents an attempt by some to cast doubt on the legitimacy of Ireland's participation in EU measures. Let me bust a few myths. It sounds like Deputies opposite, in particular, want to take back control. They have spoken of closed borders which, as we all know, is pretty ironic given the current situation. As we all know, taking back control in the UK has meant a higher level of migration and international protection applications.

We cannot do this on our own. We need co-operation. We need other countries to be willing to accept people who should not be processed here. That does not mean that the EU will make decisions for us. Rather, this pact offers us in Europe a real opportunity to work together to design a system that is firm but fair, makes sure there is a fair sharing of responsibilities and works for everyone. We cannot do this alone.

Those who have gone it alone have tried and failed. The pact updates an existing common European asylum system, in which we already participate. For those who have said we can go it alone and make our own rules, I advise them that we have already signed into many different asylum measures at a European level. This pact is simply about updating and improving them. Why would we not continue to improve our systems and align with the EU? That does not make sense.

The EU has competence in the area of asylum and migration under the Lisbon treaty, which was endorsed by the people in a referendum on the twenty-eighth amendment of the Constitution. What we sought and agreed as part of that referendum was that for any measure of migration, we would have the choice to opt in. Even though we voted on the Lisbon treaty, we still have the choice to opt in to these measures. These measures have to be agreed by both Houses, which is exactly what we are talking about here. Votes in this House and the Seanad are required.

There has also been a suggestion that there has been insufficient debate. That is not correct. For those who suggest opting in to just some of the measures, my advice is that the pact provides a comprehensive approach to the challenges. To use an analogy, if what we need is a vehicle to move us forward, why would we buy just a clutch and handbrake and leave behind the engine, the steering wheel and the rest of the car? That makes absolutely no sense.

I will respond to some of the questions and queries that have been raised. Deputy Danny Healy-Rae referred to Denmark. We are not the same as Denmark. Denmark does not have an opt-in; rather, it has an opt-out in respect of certain measures. It is part of Schengen and is not moving away from any of the Schengen measures. Denmark essentially incarcerates people. When people come in, they do not have a choice of where to go or to leave. We are not talking about having such a system here. We have a very different system and structure.

On the figure of 80%, this is based on the clear evidence and information my team has given me. We know how many people have come here through the airports and ports. We know how many people turn up at the office. We are talking about how we verify evidence or information in cases where someone claims asylum and says they have come across the Border. We ask people where they have come from, and they tell us. If they do not have a bus or plane ticket, we cannot verify their story, but we know the information that is being provided to our teams.

Similarly, if someone says they have come directly from Nigeria, there are no direct flights from Nigeria. We cannot confirm or deny that. People have to look at the information they have. People are interviewing these applicants and know where they come from. They are able to give me that information and that is where the figures come from. I stand over that. There are many other questions, on which I would be happy to respond to Deputies individually.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ar an gcéad dul síos, gabhaim buíochas le Brian Ó Domhnaill and Triona in my office and my colleagues for putting down this motion. On behalf of the Rural Independent Group, I make no apologies to anyone for putting this motion forward. The Minister mentioned that a number of debates have been held. I think three of them were forced by us, after months of begging. We have used our Private Members' time for debates; Government time has not been used. On my behalf and that of the Rural Independent Group, I want to totally condemn any threats or intimidation of any politician, including the Minister, or interference in anybody's house, property or anything like that. We hold no truck with that.

As I said, the Government amendment is something I have simple points about. It refers to ceding sovereignty to the EU by opting in to the pact and says this does not arise. However, it fails to provide a detailed explanation as to why this is the case, leaving many unconvinced. There is no clarification regarding the advice from the Attorney General. On the volume of migration, the amendment does not address concerns about the potential increase in the number of migrants coming to Ireland and suggests that not opting in to the pact could make Ireland a more attractive destination for individuals. That is just nonsense. The amendment also does not provide a clear breakdown of the costs associated with, or address the potential long-term consequences of, opting in to the pact. The amendment totally disregards the potential costs and future consequences. The text could be seen as dismissive of concerns about the potential costs. I hope people will read and understand the amendment and vote accordingly.

This debate comes at a critical juncture, as the Government's gross incompetence in addressing immigration has become an international embarrassment, making headlines worldwide. We have initiated this debate because the Government has, thus far, prevented it from taking place in the Dáil, referring it instead to the obscurity of committee hearings where, as the Minister knows, the Government has a contrived majority.

The tendency of the Government to blame others and gaslight the public who have genuine concerns is evident. Over the past week, the Government has once again demonstrated a glaring lack of competence by attempting to blame the UK Government for the consequences of its Rwanda policy, leading to disillusionment among the Irish people, who feel their concerns are not being listened to.

Ireland stands at a critical juncture, with a staggering 28,875 international protection applicants housed in 202 centres as of 17 April 2024. This is happening as the nation grapples with an exacerbated housing shortage and overstretched public services, leading to untenable conditions such as migrants living in tents. The State tried to remove those tents this morning. We make no apology for raising these issues. We have not said we did not have a housing crisis or other problems before the migration issue. Of course we had, but it is the ineptitude that is the issue. Fine Gael has been in government for 11 years and has had all that time to deal with the housing crisis and many other problems, including health and education. That is what is causing the problem.

The financial burden of the International Protection Accommodation Services, separate from Ukrainian refugees, has soared from over €100 million in 2021 to an alarming €653 million in 2023 and is predicted to rise to a colossal €1 billion by 2025. This is untenable. I do not see how the Minister can continue with this, refuse to have debates and gaslight anybody who says anything else.

The Government's withholding of the Attorney General's opinion and interdepartmental advice on the adverse effects of the "Yes" vote in the 8 March referendums casts doubt on its willingness to be transparent about the ramifications and financial implications of opting in to the European pact. That is stark and simple. The Government would not release the information and again gaslighted anybody who questioned it, and it got its answer but níl an tAire ná an Taoiseach ag éisteacht. No one in the Government is listening to the people's concerns. As Teachta Dálaí, we are privileged to be elected to this House and to do our duty under the Constitution to bring the concerns, worries and issues of the day to the floor of the Dáil.

The Minister criticised me for leaving a minute ago. I thought there was permission to get a toilet break if in the House all morning. The Minister was not here to listen to our debate. She was not here for the contributions of any of my five colleagues. A practice that has crept in here involves Ministers not listening to people they do not want to listen to and showing disdain for raising issues we are supposed to raise in the House. It is our solemn duty to raise them – it will be mine while I continue – in fairness and recognising and understanding the complexity of the issues and other points of view.

The Labour Party was founded in Clonmel, my home town, over 100 years ago by great, noble men like James Larkin. I will not even mention the name of the Teachta Dála who lectured us about our faith or beliefs. He was the only Deputy here so there is no need. Our beliefs are our entitlement. Are we going to be in a communist state in which we cannot practise whatever faith we wish? We had a very wonderful function last night, compliments of the Ceann Comhairle and Peter Finnegan, and it involved people of all faiths and none from all over the country and the rest of the world. There was very interesting dialogue. We need more of that, not the gaslighting of people like members of the Rural Independent Group and others who challenge issues and ask questions. Speakers from across the House have supported us today because they know now what is happening is impacting them and that communities are being misled.

In north Tipperary, a centre supported by the community was set up to bring in Ukrainians but now there is a double-edged sword in that Ukrainians are not coming at all; rather, it is IPAS people. The Government must not do that to the public. It will not and should not get away with it. It is not fair, right or reasonable. European colleagues of members of parties like the Labour Party and the Social Democrats have voted every bit of the pact through over the past eight years and have supported it, and then the parties come in criticising certain aspects, for different reasons than ours. They cannot have their cake and eat it. It is because there is a European election very soon. The pressure is on. When I knock on doors, I note that the people have issues. I am sure the Government members knock on the same doors, unless they are totally different. The people have issues concerning health, housing and immigration, in addition to roads and public transport. There are many issues and the Government has to listen to them as well. It is our duty to do so, so we will not be lectured by any parties on what we can say here. There is oppression here that is unhealthy for democracy.

I raised yesterday the issues in Newtownmountkennedy. I have supported An Garda Síochána 100% all my life, and I support the work of community gardaí. Damage was done through heavy-handed tactics at Newtownmountkennedy, where ordinary people were trying to get answers and protect themselves.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Setting places on fire is not raising an issue.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Again, I condemn the burning of any building or any arson attempt. A burnt building is no good to anybody. I did not see any places on fire but I am just saying that there were heavy-handed tactics. The community gardaí have to go back to the location today to pick up the pieces. I praise the community gardaí in all our communities, including in Tipperary, for the work they do. They are excellent people, along with other members of An Garda Síochána. Neither I nor my colleagues will be accused of not supporting the Garda. We are 100% in support of the organisation, but it must not use the tactics in question.

In Roscrea, the “soft caps”, as they are called, came in and literally destroyed grandmothers, children and anyone else who was there. It was a totally staged operation for the cameras to further the narrative of the Minister’s friends in the media. The Government has more media advisers now. These people were media people a short time ago but are now with the Government. I do not know where they are going to go when the Government is out of office – perhaps back into the media. It makes a farce of the concept of independent media, and this is another problem. We need the media to report. Thankfully, one or two outlets do. I could not say enough about my local stations in Tipperary but the national media has one narrative, namely to switch people off as they do not matter. The Government will find out that the people matter. They really matter and our solemn duty is to represent them. The Government will find out the reality as soon as it goes to the country. It could bring in more legislation, based on more imaginary problems and unsafeness, to postpone the election. I would not be one bit surprised by such tactics.

The Government has sold our sovereignty to Europe. It has totally abandoned it. The Tánaiste, Deputy Martin, wants to re-examine neutrality and change the triple lock. It is one thing after another and the people can see through it. The Government members seem to have a major dislike of the electorate that elected them, albeit on the 15th or 16th count in some cases. The people are sovereign and thankfully have the ballot box that was fought for by our forefathers to give them the freedom to vote. They cannot and will not be suppressed. We in the Rural Independent Group will not be bullied or intimidated in tabling motions for reasonable debate. There was not even a quorum here this morning. Six Deputies were here. That shows the contempt the Government has for the motions we table.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The vote is deferred until the voting block this evening. We shall now proceed, later than usual, to Leaders’ Questions under Standing Order 36. I apologise to everyone.