Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)

Nothing could be further from the truth.

In recent years, the issues of immigration and citizenship have assumed a new prominence in public debate. Ireland is experiencing the broader impact of an interdependent world where mass communication and transportation, geographical position, political instability and, indeed, organised crime impact upon the movement of people. We have become a modern and thriving economy, increasingly integrated with world markets and trends, and a participant in European integration. Ireland was for a century and a half a country of emigration and relative domestic homogeneity. It was focused on the struggles of economic development. We are now experiencing the ever increasing forces of migration in a completely new and, in many respects, wonderful way. We are challenging long-held certainties and assumptions. The debate which is under way challenges one of those assumptions which holds that everyone born in Ireland should be entitled to Irish citizenship solely on that basis alone and without further connection to this society or State.

It is a legitimate aspect of public governance to hold this debate given the considerable evidence which suggests that the unique nature of Irish citizenship law among the European Union and candidate states has given rise to serious abuse. It is the duty of the Government and the Oireachtas to address such matters. We have a duty not to be intimidated into ignoring them for fear of being targeted with ill-founded allegations of racism. We can all agree that the proponents of any change on this issue leave themselves open to charges of racism. We have had evidence to that effect. However, I acknowledge the onus on those who propose change to ensure that such changes are legitimate requirements of the common good and are neither overtly nor covertly racist in intent. I am confident that the Government's proposals will achieve that aim. A great deal of work has been done to ensure they will be acceptable to Irish citizens and members of our immigrant community alike.

Our immigrant community, of course, consists of a widely divergent group of persons from various social and economic backgrounds. It includes visitors, students, refugees, skilled and unskilled workers, business people and retired people who wish to see out their days in the State. It also includes asylum seekers, United Kingdom nationals who have been coming here for many years, nationals of European Economic Area countries who have in large part free movement entitlements, persons from developed countries such as the United States of America and persons from poorer countries. The vast majority in all those categories are legally present in the State and are welcome. They play a very important role in our society and economy. They enrich this country by their diversity and efforts to become part of our community. While a certain number, of course, are here illegally, the great majority are not.

The needs and expectations of immigrants vary greatly depending on their individual circumstances. In many instances, those needs have more in common with Irish citizens of a similar socio-economic background than with other categories of non-nationals. It is wrong to view all such persons as a separate, generic group whose views on Ireland, or more particularly Irish citizenship entitlements, can be neatly pigeonholed and unified into a single view. The vast majority of members of our immigrant community come from countries where the citizenship laws do not confer citizenship by place of birth alone.

How many of them would describe the laws in the countries from which they come, which do not have this jus soli element, as being bastions of racism as a result? I would say very few indeed. I fail to see, therefore, how persons could justifiably argue in good faith, and I believe many of the arguments are in bad faith, that a proposal of this nature is racist in intent. Any objective analysis, having regard to the situation throughout the world, would prove otherwise. It is open to any member of our immigrant community to apply for naturalisation after five years' residence in the State and indeed to continue to be a citizen of their own country thereafter. We allow people to be jointly a citizen of Ireland and a citizen of the State from which they have come after five years. That is not a paper right. This is a right that is accorded to people day in, day out. After five years, unless they have grievously misbehaved, they are entitled to apply for Irish citizenship and are granted it as a matter of course. As a regime, that is remarkably liberal by any standards and will continue to be the case after this referendum is passed, if that is the choice of the people. We have one of the most generous naturalisation laws in Europe, if not the most generous, and notions that we are turning into some kind of fortress Ireland are entirely false, misconceived and based on a completely failed analysis of the situation.

The acceptance of dual citizenship, a feature of our citizenship regime which will remain unchanged, is the hallmark of our open and inclusive citizenship policy. In many other states if somebody wants to become a citizen under their naturalisation law, he or she must extinguish their pre-existing citizenship. Ireland never does that.

I am well aware of the fact that any debate on these issues is capable of being distorted by those with racist intent but it is equally capable of being distorted, and I regret to say has been already, by those who criticise proposals as being racist when they patently are not. This plays into the hands of those with racist or fascist tendencies because it reduces the focus of debate from the merit or otherwise of the proposal and engenders a confrontational and simplistic approach to what are serious issues.

It behoves us all, therefore, to acknowledge that citizenship of a country is of its very nature selective. The task of the genuine contributor to this debate will be to determine whether the changes proposed are proportionate and balanced and to ensure that debate on the subject is well informed and constructive. I do not accept, however, that we should be intimidated out of discussing these fundamental issues for fear that persons with ulterior motives might wish to exploit any discussion which occurs.

If the fear were such to prevent people from debating these issues during the course of the local and European elections in June, then democracy would be in a very sorry state. I would ask Senators to consider the point that the very fact that the referendum will take place in a wider context will serve to diffuse or dilute the type of intensity that could arise in a single issue campaign and as a consequence reduce the scope for exploitation by persons with malevolent intent. I do not believe people will vote for councillors or aspiring councillors on one side or the other of this issue. I do not believe that people in Mullinahone, Pembroke Ward or anywhere else——