Niall Collins (Limerick County, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves the exercise by the State of the option or discretion under Protocol No. 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, to take part in the adoption and application of the following proposed measure: Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Union support for asylum, migration and integration for the period from 2028 to 2034, a copy of which was laid before Dáil Éireann on 14th August, 2025.

My thanks to the House for facilitating these motions, which were debated in the Seanad earlier. The Government today approved the request of the Minister, Deputy O’Callaghan, request to seek the approval of this House to opt in to these EU Commission proposals. They are being taken together as they form part of the multi-annual financial framework, MFF, package. The MFF is the European Union's long-term budget plan that sets the annual spending limits for various policy areas over a seven-year period. The motions today relate to proposals on justice and home affairs financial instruments, namely, the asylum, migration and integration fund, the internal security fund and the justice programme fund. These funding streams are already in existence and the proposed regulations will extend them for the period 2028 to 2034. Protocol 21 applies as the measures have Title V legal bases and an opt-in under Article 3 is recommended so Ireland can continue to utilise funding made available under the programmes.

On the proposals themselves, the asylum, migration and integration fund proposal will establish a new asylum, migration and integration fund for 2028-2034. It provides for a total amount of €11.9 billion in EU funding, which represents a significant increase from the €6.2 billion provided under the fund between 2021 and 2027. This increase reflects the aim for a collective response on asylum and migration across the Union. Funding can be drawn down to support member states' implementation of the EU pact on asylum and migration and to support member states’ capacity to manage and respond to asylum, migration and integration challenges. Ireland participated in the previous two iterations of the fund, covering the periods 2014 to 2020 and 2021 to 2027, as well as in the two comparable funds that preceded it, namely, the European Integration Fund and the European Refugee Fund. Under the current programme the fund provides a range of supports for international protection applicants, programme refugees, beneficiaries of temporary protection and other third country nationals arriving in Ireland. This funding assistance also supports the State’s ability to fund a wide range of NGO-led migrant integration programmes and funding also covers certain aspects of the Irish refugee protection programme and the returns programme, which are managed by our Department. In line with work progressing on asylum and migration issues at EU level, the new fund will contribute to the specific objectives including enhancing effective, safe and dignified return and readmission and strengthening and developing legal migration to member states. It will also contribute to enhancing solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility between the member states, including through practical co-operation, innovative methods and new technologies.

In a similar vein, Ireland has benefited from participation in previous iterations of the EU internal security fund and the proposed regulation is to establish that fund for the 2028-2034 period. It provides for an indicative amount of €6.8 billion, which is a significant increase from the €1.9 billion provided under the current internal security fund running from 2021 to 2027. As this House will know, in recent years geopolitical instability has impacted greatly on the EU and the threat picture facing the EU is stark. Security threats continue to evolve and such threats are increasingly cross-border in nature, which necessitates closer co-operation between member states. In its conclusions in June this year, the European Council recalled that serious and organised crime, terrorism, radicalisation and violent extremism - both online and offline - represent a major threat to European citizens and the security of member states. As we know only too well, Ireland is not immune to this. The European Council also called on EU institutions and the member states to mobilise all available resources at national and EU level and to take further action to strengthen law enforcement and judicial co-operation. The indicative increase for this fund reflects the priority afforded to protecting the Union’s internal security. Informed by ProtectEU, the European Commission’s new internal security strategy, the overarching objective of the internal security fund is to ensure a high level of internal security in the EU by enhancing operational law enforcement co-operation and the exchange of information between member states and relevant EU agencies such as Europol. Grants may be provided for activities that include development of national and EU-wide information systems, joint operations between cross-border and national authorities and training, education and acquisition of equipment and support in the development of new technologies and processes. Examples of beneficiaries of the programmes implemented under the fund may include national police, customs and other specialised law enforcement services, non-governmental organisations and local public bodies. Any measures with a military or defence purpose are not eligible for support under the internal security fund. Funding provided under the current Internal Security Fund has enabled investments in IT systems from which Ireland has benefited including, among other things, Ireland's connection to the Schengen information system, the establishment of Ireland's passenger information unit and the enhancement of the automatic number plate reading system in Garda vehicles.

The third fund listed for this debate is the justice programme fund. As with the two previous proposals, this proposal is a continuation of previous iterations of the programme, namely, 2014 to 2021 and 2021 to 2027. The programme intends to establish a fund of a total of €798 million over seven years. Member states can draw down from the fund for transnational projects which promote the adherence to the rule of law and fundamental rights, support and improve access to justice, support judicial training, and support the proper funding of independent judicial systems. Some examples of Irish projects that have been funded under this stream include a Tusla project to improve access to child-friendly justice, protection and recovery for child victims and their families through Barnahus - the child-friendly, multidisciplinary model to support children who may have experienced sexual abuse - and a court-based victim and witness support services project to build knowledge and provide tools to deliver quality court-based support services for victims and witnesses of crime. Funding for these types of projects should continue under the new programme and it is important Ireland continues to support and participate in these programmes. The European Judicial Training Network, of which the Judicial Council of Ireland is a member, is funded under the justice programme. This network brings together judicial training institutions from around Europe to develop and implement training for judiciaries. It is important Ireland continues to support the work of this independent training institution. Furthermore, the programme aims to support projects improving efficient civil and criminal procedures and funding may be made available in relation to procedural safeguards in European arrest warrant proceedings.

I am strongly of the view that Ireland should participate in the adoption and application of these proposed measures. In doing so, Ireland will continue to benefit from financial assistance in order to have funding available for projects supporting the implementation of the EU pact on asylum and migration, for enhancing law enforcement co-operation between EU member states, and for projects which seek to improve access to justice for all citizens and businesses. From a procedural point of view, our agreement to participate in these measures will also enable Ireland to have a say in their final content. Participation will lend weight to any policy positions that we may take during the negotiation process and allow us to maximise our influence on the final shape of these proposals.

I commend the motions to the House.

Mark Ward (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State has spoken about the asylum, migration and integration fund supporting the implementation of the EU migration and asylum pact. The Government's decision to sign up to this pact is highly contentious. In Sinn Féin's view, the vast majority of measures contained in the EU's asylum and migration pact are not in Ireland's best interests because we must retain sovereignty over these matters if we are to have an immigration system where decisions are made quickly and those decisions are enforced. Decisions are still taking too long and, despite some high-profile flights, deportation orders are not being enforced as they should be. These are all issues that can be sorted by the Irish Government and which do not require us to sign up to the pact. There has been a lot of talk and repeated announcements on issues such as asking those in the international protection system who are also in work to pay towards their accommodation but nothing has actually happened. On migration more generally, nothing has been done to cap the number of international students, something I have raised with the Minister on a number of occasions.

While Government signed up to all aspects of the EU pact, it is not prepared for implementation. Sinn Féin supported a number of aspects of the pact because they were in Ireland's interest. We supported opting in to the asylum and migration management regulation and the Eurodac regulation but we opposed opting in to all other measures. As each day passes, it becomes clearer that it was a mistake to sign up to the EU migration and asylum pact and that it is not right for Ireland.

It is time the Minister of State and his Government acknowledged that the EU migration and asylum pact is not in Ireland's best interests and that it does not take into account Ireland's unique challenges as a member state that is part of a common travel area with a state outside of the EU. Unfortunately, there was no sense of this being recognised when the Minister met with the EU Commissioner for Internal Affairs and Migration, Magnus Brunner, to discuss the pact this week. By failing to recognise the realities of the challenges we are facing as a result of our membership of the common travel area, failing to recognise that the people of Ireland are best placed to make decisions in relation to migration and failing to prioritise the achievement of a bilateral agreement on returns, the Government has left the State in an unacceptable situation in terms of the management of migration.

It is also time for the Government, including the Taoiseach, Deputy Micheál Martin, who appears to have a particular reluctance in this regard, to admit that, as with many other challenges faced in Ireland, having two states on the island of Ireland impedes our ability to deal with migration properly. Brexit added another layer of complexity to this situation. It goes without saying that the management of migration will be simplified when there is one state on the island of Ireland. For this reason and many others, it is time to start making unity a reality.

On numerous occasions, I have raised the need for a secure bilateral agreement with Britain to ensure that those international protection applicants who should be processed in Britain can be returned there promptly. It would be helpful if the Minister of State could outline to the Dáil the progress that has been made in this regard.

We should not be opting into proposals under Article 3 by way of motions put before the House. In an earlier debate, I made points to the Minister of State about the flexibility we have as a result of Protocol No. 21. It is madness not to avail of this flexibility. For example, the regulation establishing Union support for internal security is informed by the EU's new internal security strategy, ProtectEU. There are serious concerns about ProtectEU with respect to its chat control proposals and the consequences of undermining encryption for personal data. It has been argued that any attempt to weaken encryption weakens everyone's security and that it has the effect of weakening cybersecurity and leaving systems vulnerable to attack.

For Sinn Féin, the issue of sovereignty is paramount in considering these types of motions, which regularly come before the Oireachtas. Handing sovereignty over to the EU in constant drips undermines democracy and our ability as a country to act in the best interests of the Irish people. Unless there is a compelling reason to act to the contrary, Ireland should be making its own decisions on issues in the areas of freedom, security and justice. Ireland has the option to opt in to these regulations at a later stage under Article 4 of Protocol No. 21. This would allow us to do so at a time when we have more clarity as to whether they are in Ireland's best interests.

Duncan Smith (Dublin Fingal East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the motion to opt into the regulation establishing the asylum, migration and integration fund, we should be clear about what we are discussing. This is a motion to give our assent to a package of nearly €12 billion to underpin the implementation of the EU migration pact. Along with others, we in the Labour Party have significant difficulties with that pact. Measures will be funded with this money. One of the objectives mentioned in the regulation is promoting and contributing to the effective integration and social inclusion of migrants. Previous iterations of the AMIF have played an important part in funding integration programmes and supports for international protection applicants but we should be very clear-eyed about this motion and the regulation behind it. It arises from a deeply flawed EU migration pact. We in the Labour Party fully endorse the idea that there is a need for a cross-EU approach to migration and migration policy but we had strong differences with elements of this pact. In particular, we felt that the pact would see the introduction of an asylum procedure that does not reflect basic rights or contain safeguards for vulnerable applicants. It could certainly lead to a worsening of conditions in both reception and detention centres, impacting directly on the dignity of human life and on human rights.

As we know, the pact is the result of a move to the right in EU migration policy that risks undermining the right to claim asylum itself. In recent weeks, we have unfortunately seen this Government attempt a similar move. It has appealed to fears and prejudices rather than putting forward a positive case for migration or focusing on working towards a system that is fair, effective and humane. We have seen a concerted effort from Government involving negative messaging, symbolic exclusion and deterrence theatre on migration and the system of international protection. Concerns have been raised that the Government's legislation to transpose the pact goes further than it needs to. There is a risk that, in its efforts to follow populist rhetoric with ill-thought-through and rushed policy, the Government will go through the same process the EU has gone through and will arrive at a position where asylum is undermined and those with valid claims see their rights curtailed.

What is more, as Ministers fall over each other to follow the lead of the UK Government with the greatest enthusiasm, they are feeding into the othering of migrants in Ireland. That puts people at greater risk of attack and it undermines community solidarity. If we lose that community cohesion and our reputation as a welcoming and open society, it will have really negative impacts. We all know how much Ireland relies on workers from abroad to support our infrastructure and housing investment plans, our foreign direct investment and multinational corporation sectors, our hospitality sector and particularly our health and social care systems. When leaders choose to cynically play politics on this issue rather than to lead, it puts all of that at risk. This Government should choose to lead.

The Government's actions are having a very real impact. Two days ago, I spoke to a young woman who came to this country eight years ago to flee persecution for being a member of the LGBTQI community in her home country. She came here, she studied and she worked. She fell ill and is currently in receipt of illness benefit while she undergoes very serious medical treatment. With the right help and support, she will get through that treatment and return to work. She is a young woman with an awful lot to give. She is also a young woman with a letter stating that her status in this country is now in doubt and that she may have to leave and return to the country where she was persecuted. That is an Ireland I did not think existed last year, the year before or the year before that, but it is certainly the Ireland of November 2025, the Ireland this Government is shaping with its policies and actions.

This Government should choose to lead and to proactively put forward a case for migration that not only acknowledges the positive impacts that it has had on this country, but that also acknowledges the realities. That would be an approach that recognises that immigration to this country is overwhelmingly regular migration, with international protection accounting for one in ten migrants.

It would be an approach that would leave the tough-guy posturing at the door and an abandonment of mean-spirited efforts such as the Minister's proposed changes to citizenship and family reunification rules. The Labour Party, and I am sure others in opposition, have little faith that this approach will be taken given the actions, motions and direction this Government is taking. It is bringing Ireland to a more dangerous and unsympathetic country with less compassion. It is not the Ireland I want to live in.

Gary Gannon (Dublin Central, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will be voting against this motion for a variety of reasons, but first when it comes to the transposition of the asylum and migration pact into Irish law through the International Protection Bill 2025. Anybody at the justice committee a month ago when this was going through pre-legislative scrutiny could not in good conscience agree to advance it one Stage further. Heads of the Bill were missing. Vital aspects of the Bill fundamentally change who we are as a country. The Bill pertains to how we allow the detention of children, how we screen adolescents and how we change the nature of access to legal rights to an undefined reference to legal counsel. There is so much wrong with the Bill that we could not in good conscience allow ourselves to be a participant in its advancement in any form.

These motions are not abstract measures. They are the kinds of decisions that shape how the EU, and Ireland within it, treats people seeking protection, people coming here to work and people simply trying to live their lives with dignity as well as people trying to reclaim their lives from a terror they may have experienced someplace else, such as is part of all of our history here in Ireland.

We have seen over the past number of years a real tightening of rhetoric and a hardening of action when it comes to migration and asylum across the EU. The Bill is effectively a response to that. Instead of providing a clear counterbalance and being a rights-based voice at that table, the Government has chosen at every step to mirror that tightening and to follow the EU's lead even when it runs contrary even to our own stated values. Worse still, the Government has chosen to follow the path of the United Kingdom. That has been very clear in the rhetoric of recent days. I will repeat what I said to the Taoiseach today for anyone who wishes to hear it. For the life of me, I cannot understand how anybody who aspires to Irish republicanism could follow the lead of the UK and the influence of Nigel Farage. We see that very clearly. It is as if the Government woke up and discovered recently that there is a shared common travel area. These issues were raised last year when the pact was going through the justice committee. The Government seems immune to the fact it was raised then. We are being asked to do this today through three separate motions, each of which is significant and linked to wider EU trends of locking down migration and deepening security powers, yet all we are told is that they warrant no further scrutiny. I simply do not accept that, nor do I have trust in the Government.

We are told the motion on the justice programme is harmless and simply a continuation of an existing programme that funds judicial co-operation, access to justice and the digitalisation of courts. However, every time we expand EU-level justice mechanisms, we need to be certain they are not being used to underpin policies that diminish rights, reduce procedural safeguards, or push member states into accelerated processes that undermine fairness. We do not have that here.

Neither is the motion for internal security a small measure. This is about billions being devoted to policing, surveillance, data-sharing, cybercrime capabilities, intelligence exchange and operational co-operation between police forces across the EU. We are being asked to endorse a massive new security funding structure without knowing, first, what specific Irish systems it will integrate into, second, what data will be shared, and third, what oversight exists. On that basis, I will be voting against the motion.

Given the current climate, the EU asylum, migration and integration fund, AMIF, is clearly the most important of the three, and the one that most clearly demonstrates why we cannot keep rubber-stamping these proposals. The AMIF is being sold as a benign pot of money for integration projects, NGO supports and aspects of the refugee programme. We know what is left unsaid. We know what AMIF funds have been used for across Europe - detention facilities, returns programmes, border enforcement and the hardening of asylum procedures.

We know what Ireland is doing right now domestically. It is increasing citizenship residency requirements from three years to five years, narrowing family reunification and introducing charges on people in IPAS accommodation. I will come back to the latter point if I have time. These are political choices that mirror the EU's direction of travel. The Government wants to opt into a funding framework that will reinforce and accelerate those choices without explaining how the money will be used, what conditions it carries, or what rights-based safeguards will exist. What is happening here is a very familiar pattern. This is the exact same language we were given before the EU migration pact. We all know now how significant that package was and will be as we transpose the International Protection Bill. We cannot keep legislating like this. We cannot keep allowing opt-ins.

I wish to talk about some of the measures that were introduced today because they are important in the context of what we are being asked to vote on here. When it comes to family reunification, the Government has chosen to allow it only for the most wealthy - those who have accumulated enough funds. It has set a new standard that is remarkable. It has introduced a condition whereby access to welfare would somehow diminish a person's right to citizenship. Nobody has told me whether, for example, a person who lost an arm in a conflict and needs a disability payment will remove the person's right to citizenship. These ridiculously cruel measures are now being put in statutory form to the effect that access to welfare entitlements somehow diminishes the right to citizenship. It is Thatcherite in all but name. We are making people who earn a paltry wage pay for substandard accommodation, which sets the bar that somehow those people should be grateful for the opportunity. A person earning €150 for doing whatever job he or she has been able to get has to give up €15. This is not a cost-saving measure to the State. It actually costs the State money to initiate this level of cruelty. We are being told that this is fair and is in keeping with what other EU countries are doing and there is nothing to see here. We will not be supporting this motion. The International Protection Bill, as it is currently being transposed, is an absolute shame on anybody who believes that such legislation can be brought to pre-legislative scrutiny without heads of the Bill or answers to vital questions. There is no trust when it comes to the Government's treatment of integration. It is a descent not only into far-right narrative but also policy. We are at a crossroads in terms of how we treat people in this country. For a country with a history such as ours of enforced incarceration, monetising oppression and poverty and imprisoning people who have committed no crime, be it in Magdalen laundries or mother and baby homes, the idea that we would initiate detention facilities for children is an affront to our history.

John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputies Coppinger and Paul Murphy are sharing time. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Ruth Coppinger (Dublin West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will divide it between us. This is a very important debate because all around the world we are seeing an increase in violence, genocide, brutality and gross inequality. That is the reason people are fleeing the countries they are from and that we are discussing tonight the measures the Government is taking, which very much fall in line with the British Labour Government and other governments around the world. Some of the things that are happening are very similar to what Trump is talking about. We do not have Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ICE, yet going around the streets, but we have pictures of people being pushed onto planes. Charter flights are being commissioned at huge cost to the taxpayer so the Minister can tweet about them the next day.

I want to make some points about the EU migration pact, which is part of the vote we will have tonight. It is opposed by 160 different organisations including Amnesty, Human Rights Watch, the ICCL and the Irish Refugee Council. These policies are fundamentally racist. People go on marches in support of Palestine yet disseminate the idea that people should have their rights taken away. I have been contacted by loads of Palestinian people who are looking for asylum and for family reunification. We know there is genocide in Sudan and in Congo. Our office is inundated with people in need of help in these situations who are trying to get their family members out of conflict zones.

You cannot go on a march and the propagate this nonsense as well.

The pact would set up detention centres; speedy deportation; no right to an in-person appeal; limitations on legal representation; a process where asylum seekers would be sent to third countries that are deemed safe - the Tories were doing that in Britain - biometric data; face scans; fingerprints, including of children; and restricting access to the asylum process, particularly for those who are vulnerable. Anybody going along with and leaning into this is just leaning into more racism in society.

I refer to some of the things that the Cabinet is proposing. It is a racist myth that people are shopping around for countries to go to. People flee wars. People flee persecution, as we know. Forcing asylum seekers to pay for unsafe substandard accommodation, with people baying for their blood outside in some cases, is wrong. It will not bring in any money either. We have all said that this is virtue signalling and it ignores the context of the housing crisis. It was reported on "Morning Ireland" that, in Belgium, the Flemish Government tried this in 2014. It pushed asylum seekers onto the streets into homelessness and that was all it did.

On the proposal to require five years of residency, loads of people I know and loads of people I have made representations about are trying to get their status. They are working here, they have got degrees and they have all sorts of qualifications that we need, and now the Minister is going to make it more difficult for them to lead a decent life here. It is shameful that anyone is going along with this.

On the proposal to not count time on welfare if you are disabled, many people have disabilities when they come here and have very sick relatives as well. This is Dickensian and Victorian.

We are a wealthy country but the wealth is in very few hands. We also have massive labour shortages.

There are real effects from this nonsense for every migrant in this country. They are living in fear because the Minister is stoking up racism and he is encouraging and creating oxygen for the far right.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What we are talking about here is a €12 billion fund to effectively raise the walls of Fortress Europe. Fortress Europe, with its militarised borders, plans to spend some of that money to pay so-called third countries with dubious human rights records and records of repression of opponents, such as the repression of the Kurds in the case of Turkey, to take some asylum seekers that come to Europe.

Fortress Europe is a system that was responsible last year for the death of over 2,000 people. Over 2,000 people died in the Mediterranean. I hope we all remember the picture of the two-year-old boy, Aylan Kurdi, washed up on a beach. People saw in him their own children and thought this was horrific and we could not allow this to happen. Not only is it continuing to happen, but it is getting worse and it is funded by our public money.

What we are seeing, in Europe and in this country, is a ramping up of anti-migrant policies and anti-migrant and racist rhetoric, to be clear, not policies that would make the lives of any ordinary person here any better. It is purely performative cruelty.

You almost cannot turn on the radio these days without hearing the Government announce some new policy to attack migrants to make their lives harder. We now have embedded journalists on deportation charter flights. There has not been a single deportation flight that the Minister for justice has not tweeted gleefully about. It is disgusting. There is policy after policy to make people's lives harder: cutting the accommodation recognition payment, cutting the accommodation for Ukrainians, leaving asylum seekers on the streets while there were and continue to be empty beds in the system, snatching families for deportation and now making asylum seekers pay up to €1,000 a month for completely inadequate accommodation. What is all this about? John Deasy, in the Business Post at the weekend, gave the game away. People should be aware about this. People should go and read this article. The article, by John Deasy, a former Fine Gael TD, is entitled, "Opposition parties bet on housing backlash, yet voters keep calling their bluff". It states:

People certainly don't become indifferent to society's most pressing problems that continue to cause huge pain, but they do become less politically responsive when they've heard the same thing said over and over again. Other issues invariably come to the fore and compete for their attention.

The issue of immigration is doing just that. By the time the next election rolls around, housing could find itself on a par with immigration as the big concern in conservative Ireland.

If that happens, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael will be in a better position to muffle the inevitable accusations of failure on housing and infrastructure.

There you have it, in black and white. The Government is implementing cruel policies against migrants because it wants to problematise the issue of immigration. The Government wants people to think that there is a flood of asylum seekers coming into this country when, in reality, the numbers have come down and down. In 2022, asylum seekers and refugees numbered about 80,000. That was halved the next year. It was almost halved the following year. It will be just over 20,000 this year. They are not the cause of the housing crisis. This is a trick that Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the establishment parties, assisted by lots of the media, are trying to pull on people. People should not fall for it. The problems remain the same, as they were before. Those responsible remain the same as those that were before, namely, those who profit from these crises and the Government that facilitates.

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

We are being asked to opt into three EU programmes: the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund; the Internal Security Fund; and the justice programme. Combined, these would unlock over €100 million for Ireland between now and 2035. On paper, that sounds positive - funding for asylum supports, Garda ICT upgrades and justice co-operation - but let us talk about reality. In west Cork, we have no CCTV in many towns and basic security infrastructure is missing, yet we are signing up for EU money that will fund biometric systems and cross-border policing. Where is the investment in local safety? Where is the fairness in rural Ireland?

While we pour millions of euro into asylum and migration projects, we have a record 15,199 people homeless in Ireland, including 4,658 children, as of November this year. That is a 76% increase in child homelessness since 2020. Families are living in emergency accommodation while the Government quietly signs off on more spending for migration and asylum supports. Meanwhile, the cost of living is crushing ordinary people. A family of four now needs €3,500 a month just to get by and rents have hit €2,500 for a one-bedroom unit in Dublin, yet the European Commissioner for migration comes here and says that Ireland's and Citywest's are the best practices, an example for Europe. To be honest, that was a farcical statement when I saw it the other day. When Irish families are sleeping in cars, when rural communities have no Garda presence and no CCTV, this is not best practice. This is a slap in the face to every struggling family in this country. I will not go into the devastating attack on a young girl recently in Citywest. It is not best practice at all. Maybe the Commissioner should talk to the people who live there. I am not against EU co-operation but I am against hypocrisy.

We cannot keep writing blank cheques for migration while communities in west Cork and across Ireland are left without basic services. If we opt in, let us demand accountability. Let us ensure this money is spent where it matters, on security in rural areas as well, on integration that works, and on protection of our own people from poverty and homelessness.

Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Aontú)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Aontú believes that we as a country should do our best to help those who are fleeing war and violence. We believe that there are many people who come to Ireland and make a really valuable contribution to our society and that there are many essential sectors that would not function properly if we did not have these people here. We believe that everybody who is here should be treated with respect if they are here legally and we believe that the colour of a person's skin is of no more significance than the colour of their eyes.

Six years ago, we in Aontú called for a respectful conversation on the issue of immigration and we were slammed by every other political party here in the Dáil. We were accused of damaging cohesion. We stated that if we did not have a respectful conversation on the issue of immigration, that conversation would not disappear. It would just get pushed underground and be used by bad actors for damaging reasons in this country.

Now we see that Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and Sinn Féin have done a significant U-turn on the issue and are calling for change, and we welcome that. However, there are four other political parties in this Chamber that continuously seek to shut down conversations around this issue. There are conversations happening on immigration in nearly every house in the country, in every pub, in every sports ground and in every workplace at present. How can it be that there are going to be conversations about this important issue practically everywhere except in the democratically elected Parliament? It does not make sense. We need to have an open and respectful conversation about this issue. We need to give leadership to people on this issue.

The Government's handling of this has been chaotic so far. We have a common travel area with Britain.

Under the current situation, that means we cannot have a big disparity between the regulations in this State and the regulations in Britain. If we have a big disparity, the movement of people will then follow the path of least resistance in terms of regulations. Aontú believes there should be an Irish sea border in relation to the movement of people in the same way there is an Irish sea border with regard to the movement of goods. We believe an Irish or British citizen should be able to travel on both sides of these islands with freedom, but if people are coming to these countries to seek asylum, they should apply when they move from one island to another. Right now, the Government does not know how many people are coming from Britain through the North of Ireland into the South, or how many people are leaving because there are no exit checks. The situation is in chaos, unfortunately.

Paul Gogarty (Dublin Mid West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I said it to the Taoiseach and Tánaiste and will say it to the Minister of State: it is about time we had a citizens' convention on immigration and asylum policy that would include a lot of people who are now Irish citizens who came from elsewhere for a better life. We need to have this because the debate is not a zero-sum game in terms of extreme left to right ideology. It is about trying to see what best practice for us in Ireland is and for people who are coming to this country fleeing persecution.

It is absolutely insane to decide, if someone is here after five years, that they do not have leave to remain and should leave this country after building up links. It is cruel and unjust. There should be an amnesty for people in that situation. Equally, as the Minister, Deputy Jim O'Callaghan, said, if we are trying to get decisions made within six months, including appeals, that is a good thing because, right now, 80% of applications for asylum are turned down and only a third are granted on leave to appeal. A lot of economic migrants, all of whom are decent people, are abusing the asylum process and should not be permitted to do so. Meanwhile, we have people fleeing persecution who need to get accommodation. As others said, we should not conflate inaction on constructing housing with the immigration situation. It is also fair to say that at least 30,000 people are coming from within the EU and another 30,000 are coming into Ireland legally every year. We do not have the capacity right now to provide housing, so we have to look at where our industrial policy goes, where people should be working and what kinds of job are needed. We certainly need a lot of immigrants for jobs.

I may have mentioned previously that when I was mayor, a Nigerian evangelical church celebrated St. Patrick's Day. Its members sang the national anthem in Irish and English and spoke about how proud they were to be Irish citizens. They are 100% Irish. They will always have Nigerian heritage and are proud of that as well. Newcomers make a hugely positive contribution to our country. That does not mean we cannot have a proper, respectful conversation, as others mentioned. We need to. What constitutes Irish cultural norms? I may be talking about the elephant in the room but in the UK, some nationalities were found to be convicted or arrested for sexual offences 30 times more than English citizens. Some of that may be racial profiling, but you cannot hide the fact there are different cultural norms. We need an education system so that if people do not follow our cultural norms, they are not welcome in this country. That is a fair comment. Let us have that conversation.

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

I am glad to get the opportunity to talk in this very important debate. Ireland, for its size, has done more for asylum seekers and refugees than any other country in Europe. That is a fact. We have to realise it. We are a small country that spent €1.2 billion last year on refugees. It is fine and we are glad to have done that, but how long can this continue? We have a lot of our own people who have competing demands for houses, health, social welfare and all the different things. We do not have the leprechaun's purse. That is the fact about it.

I will commend Jim O'Callaghan on extraditing people who do not have a right to be here. That is what we want him to do. If they do not have a permit and are not legally here, we cannot support them. We do not have goldmines, diamonds or oil, or maybe we have, but we will be not let drill for it. We do not have any of those natural resources or an endless amount of money. We welcome all the different nationalities of people who are working here, who are legally here and have permits. They work in our hospitals and do fierce work all over the country. We are very grateful for all they do and the expertise they divulge in our country, but we have to be honest. We must have some controls.

I heard a Deputy mention people who were here five years. I know people who have been in America for 20 years and cannot get a green card to stay there. We have to be truthful and know what is going on in the rest of the world as well. Poland is the nearest country to Ukraine and it is not taking anything like the amount we are.

Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am also delighted to speak on this. When I went for election this time last year, I was one of the only TDs in north Dublin who mentioned immigration and migration on my leaflets. In that, and the mandate I was elected on, was a fair, compassionate immigration system that led communication with communities and the Government and had no tolerance for racism. The people of north Dublin elected me on that mandate and I have continuously worked on it.

Ireland has always participated in these funds. They have helped us fulfil our humanitarian commitment while reducing the financial burden on the State. We should support this because it will give better services to vulnerable people and stronger communities, and Europe will help us pay for it. These supports mean a much safer Ireland as part of Europe's security framework. The funding can also be given towards technology and upgrades for our security measures.

I will also mention that this funding could strengthen Garda capacity and enhance co-operation on anything that could go wrong in that sense. The reason I say we should be going towards this is if and when we opt in, it will ensure Ireland keeps influence over the EU's justice and migration policy rather than just being a spectator. As everyone in this House will know from me over the last year, I would much rather be on the pitch than shouting from the sidelines. In light of us drawing down the hundreds of millions of euro that would otherwise go elsewhere, opting in is the smart and responsible choice. It supports vulnerable people, strengthens national security and protects democratic values.

I will also mention I have visited some of the refugee centres and spoken to refugees. I urge the Government to enable refugees to get their work permits and work. They want to work. We should allow them to do so.

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

I, too, am glad to speak on this issue. It is timely that we have a debate on it. As we know, the migration pact has been signed and there was no debate. For the last five years, certainly over the last three years since the war broke out in Ukraine, and with the other issues all over the world, we could not have a debate here. I stood up at meeting after meeting of the Business Committee for a year and a half. We finally got a debate. The Government did not even have to come in. The Minister came in to introduce it, but the parties of the left attacked me, my colleagues and anybody who wanted to debate this. We could not do it. The debate was shut down, the same as it is in the media, with Gaza and everything else; they own it. I heard someone mention people who marched for Gaza and they could not do something else, so they have control now over what they want to do. We could not speak about it; it was hear no evil, see no evil and there is no evil. All I wanted was a reasonable, calm debate without being dog-whistled at, jeered, humiliated or God knows what else. They tried to humiliate me - I was not. I was just saying that we have to cut our cloth according to our measure. We can take so many. We are known for the Ireland of the welcomes but we cannot have a walkover.

I warmly welcome the change in the integration Department through the Minister, Deputy Jim O'Callaghan, his immediate and ongoing work, and the proposals I understand he brought to the Cabinet today to try to have some common sense brought in.

6 o’clock

Anybody who is here, has gone through the system and has failed should not be here, full stop. One of the NGOs - it could be the Irish Refugee Council but I could be wrong - well paid with taxpayers' money is contesting, supporting and going to the High Court with persons, God help us, who have failed all the tests and are being deported. There is something badly wrong in the State of Ireland when these Government-funded and taxpayer-funded NGOs are going against the Government and the people. These people have gone through the system, got a fair trial and everything else. Then they take court cases. It is time we copped on here and turned the tap off on these NGOs which are bleeding the taxpayer dry. Any time I turn on RTÉ there is one or other of them on and they are supported here by the left cabal. They are not in government and probably will not be in government but they want to control everything else and control what I say and when I speak for the people I represent in Tipperary. I will represent my people fearlessly while they give me a mandate to be in here. I will be as welcoming as anybody else. I had people up here last week from Bridgewater House in Carrick - a wonderful group of people are doing great work there. They are from several different countries all over the world. Of course, I am not a racist, a bigot or anything else. Fair play is fine play with me, and I support the Government.

This debate has a long way to go, so I have an open mind on it. We should take the funding but we cannot give up our sovereignty. It is important that we have a debate and that we are allowed to have a debate and are not shouted down. It has changed now with all the mood noises but the left of course does not like it. It wants to be running the country while shouting from the Opposition.

Niall Collins (Limerick County, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank all speakers who contributed to this debate. If you listen to the range of contributions, you will hear wide and varied differences in the views and opinions being offered. For me that reflects the complexity of the whole issue of immigration and migration. There are very little solutions and lots of criticisms, which I can accept but it is the job of Government to try to manage migration and immigration.

Before doing so, I restate that immigration has had positive benefits for Ireland. Both I and the Government acknowledge the great contribution migrants have made to Irish society. I reject some of the characterisations of actions and decisions by Government to try to deal with and manage the issues. Our strategy will have to look at our future needs over the coming decade but we still want to see people migrating to Ireland.

We cannot ignore that our population is increasing at a significant rate. Our population is growing at approximately 1.6% per annum, which is seven times the EU average. We need to try to slow down that rate of increase. Last year about 185,000 people entered the country. They entered the country, migrated into our country or returned to our country. I will give a breakdown. Approximately 12,000 of the 185,000 were on employment visas, 32,000 were people who came to work here from other EU countries or the United Kingdom and 60,000 people entered on student permits. We had approximately 23,000 people through family reunification. We had 18,500 people who claimed international protection. We had another 10,000 who claimed temporary protection and we had approximately 30,000 people who were Irish citizens returning from abroad. That is just to give context and a backdrop.

On the three motions I moved and spoke to earlier, we are already participating in and benefitting from these EU funding streams. Government has no hesitation commending the motions that we opt into these proposals which are laid before the House. By doing so, under an Article 3 opt-in it will ensure that we are at the table with our European partners involved in the detailed discussions from the beginning. I remind any Deputy with reservations on parts of these measures that they are at the initial stages of discussion. Officials from my Department will be working closely with their counterparts as the work progresses to tweak aspects to better fit with our system. I commend the three motions to the House.

John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In accordance with Standing Order 85(2), the division is postponed until the weekly division time on Wednesday, 26 November 2025.

Niall Collins (Limerick County, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves the exercise by the State of the option or discretion under Protocol No. 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, to take part in the adoption and application of the following proposed measure: Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Union support for internal security for the period from 2028 to 2034, a copy of which was laid before Dáil Éireann on 14th August, 2025.

John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In accordance with Standing Order 85(2), the division is postponed until the weekly division time on Wednesday, 26 November 2025.

Niall Collins (Limerick County, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves the exercise by the State of the option or discretion under Protocol No. 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, to take part in the adoption and application of the following proposed measure: Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Justice programme for the period 2028-2034 and repealing Regulation (EU) 2021/693, a copy of which was laid before Dáil Éireann on 29th September, 2025.

John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In accordance with Standing Order 85(2), the division is postponed until the weekly division time on Wednesday, 26 November 2025.