Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Ba mhaith liom fáilte a chur roimh an Aire Stáit agus comhghairdeas a dhéanamh leis as a cheapachán. Fáiltím go mór leis na ráitis atá déanta aige maidir leis an ábhar seo ón am a cheapadh é. Mar a deirimid i nGaeilge, ní ionann caint agus gníomh. Beimid ag súíl leis na gníomhartha réasúnta luath.

I want to acknowledge the great people I have met since I started campaigning on this issue and welcome all those present in the Gallery for this debate. I have met astrophysicists, doctors, nurses, scientists, musicians, hairdressers - not that I need one - mechanics, carpenters, bakers, teachers, businesspeople, lawyers, etc.

A few red herrings have been thrown into the debate. The direct provision system is not acceptable for anyone. The Minister of State is a former school principal. Imagine if he found himself sharing a room with four other males of the same age from different backgrounds for nine years, not knowing when he would get out. This is simply unacceptable.

It is important he clarifies the Government’s policy on this issue. We are hearing mixed messages, even today, from several spokespersons. For example, we referred to amending the Ombudsman Act. Sinn Féin brought the amendments to the House when this legislation was recently debated so that the oversight issues, raised by Emily O’Reilly and her successor, Peter Tyndall, could be addressed. However, they were opposed by the Minister responsible, Deputy Howlin, and Labour Party Members. I hope this has changed and the Minister of State can clarify the Government’s policy on the oversight issue.

Claiming this issue can only be dealt with by the IRP, immigration and residency protection, Bill is a red herring. Obviously, there is a need to reorganise the law around asylum-seeking. However, there are two different issues at stake. There needs to be a legal basis for dealing with those seeking asylum in this country. Second to that, there needs to be a system of accommodating those people while they are here. This is the issue that needs to be reformed immediately. The IRP Bill will take time but I understand the Minister can change the direct provision system quickly because it has no legislative basis. Direct provision, from my understanding, was a Fianna Fáil Government solution, done on the back of an envelope to deal with an asylum situation in which it found itself. It is a privatised system. Private companies, some of them cleaning companies, are making millions of euro out of this system. Up to €53 million a year is spent on the direct provision system when the refugee accommodation system in Portugal only costs a fraction of that, €2 million a year. How many houses could be built for €53 million a year? What kind of mortgage could the Government leverage to build social housing with such funds? I wager it would be more than enough to house the numbers seeking asylum in this country.

There is also an issue around the contracts for providing direct provision services and their procurement. We need clarification on how often they are done. Is it by public tender? How come it seems to go to the same companies all the time? There is the possibility of non-governmental organisations teaming up to provide a new accommodation system which needs to be addressed too.

The conditions of the direct provision system are unacceptable for the majority of people in it. We do not have to wait for the IRP legislation to determine the legal status to reform direct provision. I welcome the Minister of State’s earlier comments on that. The privatisation of the system from day one was the wrong approach to this issue. There are good people running the centres. I have met many of the managers, good people trying to do a good day’s work. However, they are only there to put a roof over people’s heads and feed them. The food in many centres is totally unsuitable and many are not allowed cook for themselves. There is also an issue of the training of those running these centres. Many of those in the system have come from traumatic experiences and could have severe mental health issues. Those who run the centres do not have specific training in dealing with such issues which is unacceptable.

We saw much unrest over the summer in centres in Foynes, Athlone and Cork. The right for those in direct provision to work should be an absolute right that should be put in place. I was taken aback by the statement over the summer by the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, that she was surprised there was a prostitution issue in some of these centres. This has been brought to attention in the Seanad and the Dáil previously.

On the topic of education, there have been issues around school books being provided for children and grants being made available for children who have done the leaving certificate examination but what about the adults in the system who want to further themselves in education? They must be dealt with also.

How much has it cost to fight legal cases over the years? How much has the State paid to fight the asylum seekers in the courts and who has profited? That is a huge question that needs to be answered. What about the funding for support groups which has been systematically reduced? Those in direct provision are not looking for anything extra. The argument is often put forward that they are trying to cream the system and take things away from the Irish. That is a spurious argument and is unacceptable. What these people are looking for is a right to dignity, a right to parent their children and a right to fulfil their own potential. I will support the Minister of State - we do not always agree on everything - if he fights for that objective.