Hildegarde Naughton (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and I welcome this debate. My overwhelming reaction is that it is incredible that our system operates at such a snail’s pace and that it takes such a long time for someone to come out the other end. I note that the Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, given the fall in numbers in recent years, are processing cases rather speedily. I note also, however, that asylum applications are up 40% in the year to date. The difficulty arises it appears both from judicial reviews of decisions made and applications for subsidiary protection and appeals through the courts. In the circumstances it is quite understandable that there is disquiet among support organisations involved about the mental and physical well-being of the people who spend such a long time in the system. Nobody can say there are no problems. The Government accepts there are and the Minister of State will tomorrow host a round table with officials and non-governmental organisations, NGOs, working in the asylum field. They will discuss the matter and allow the working party’s terms of reference to be set in light of the NGOs’ concerns.

Senator Mullen’s motion is not being acceded to as it seeks to pre-empt the working party’s deliberations. In order, however, to properly assess the issue it is necessary to consider some facts. The appeals refused figure from the Refugee Appeals Tribunal has hovered around 90% for the past ten years. Sometimes the impression is given that we are discussing actual refugees when the majority of cases are those of economic migrants or those applying for some other form of leave to remain. Additional to this is the fact that over 50% of those in direct provision have judicial review proceedings pending or in train, have deportation orders pending or are applying for leave to remain for non-protection reasons. It is also the case that of those in the system longer than four years, the overwhelming majority, be it the applicant or a family member have legal proceedings pending either because they have been ordered to be deported or are appealing decisions not to grant them leave to remain.

In response to the specifics of the motion I do not believe that we should allow those who claim asylum as opposed to those who are granted asylum the right to work. It is important to consider this matter carefully before accepting such suggestions. This would have the effect of adding several thousand to our dole queues.

As regards accommodating those seeking asylum or protection in centres, I very much welcome the required improvements. The current conditions are unacceptable and I cannot support them. The simple solution to these issues which we have never managed to grasp is that we should provide a simple, fair and quick system for determining applications for both asylum and subsidiary protection. During the time they spend here, people should be treated humanely in appropriate accommodation, the lack of which seems to be the main bone of contention. The Government is committed to providing such a system and will do so. It will introduce a protection Bill by the middle of next year. This new legislation will provide a single application procedure which will be more simple and streamlined than the current multi-faceted and complicated system. Additional to the institutional reforms in the application and decision-making process, there are continual delays in our court system which increases the problem. I have mentioned the long delays in the superior court and it is to be hoped that the new court of appeal will assist greatly in that regard although it is something that we should discuss in this House as a single topic at a future date.

We can all agree that anyone who has been granted refugee status or another form of protection in this jurisdiction should be welcomed into our communities and those awaiting a decision should get it in the shortest time possible and should be treated humanely in the interim. The system is at fault and needs to be urgently fixed. I welcome the decision of the new Minister of State to establish a review group and his wish to provide a process that takes no more than 12 months from beginning to end. That is far too long. Six months should be sufficient. That can be discussed when the Bill comes before the House.