Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I am glad to hear it. With regard to the exclusion grounds, the Bill automatically excludes people who should have an opportunity to be considered. These include, but are not limited to, an immediate family member of the applicant who is subject to a deportation order. Such exclusion could potentially lead to the anomalous situation of a family being separated within Ireland or between countries and could potentially breach their right to family life. A provision should be included to enable a review of the applicable groups in order to extend them, without restricting the categories of persons already outlined in the Bill.

The Bill gives powers to the Minister to revoke a residence permit issued in accordance with the Bill, if enacted, and to make a deportation order. A number of NGOs are concerned that the circumstances in which the permit can be revoked and a deportation order issued are too wide under the Bill. There is also no right of appeal against revocation and the issue of a deportation order. For example, revocation followed by a deportation order can occur when there has been falsified or concealed information in an application made under section 6, in an application for asylum, an application for subsidiary protection or an application for leave to remain. This appears to apply regardless of whether that information is material which is decisive to the granting of the residency and without any regard to circumstances in which that may occur, particularly for people who have fled, or fear return to, persecution or serious harm. The terms of procedural rights under a revocation procedure guidance could be taken from the revocation provision under the International Protection Act 2015, which enables the applicant to provide representations in writing in advance of the issuing of a revocation order and enables the Circuit Court to examine an appeal.

They are my points on the Bill before us. However, I also have concerns about the Government's approach in its amendment. I have been very critical of the implementation of the working group report. The working group was hampered in its approach and in what it could examine. I note that Mr. Justice Bryan MacMahon recently stated that he has concerns about the implementation of the working group's recommendations and the length of time it is taking to implement them. A number is being thrown about for the number of measures that have been implemented from the working group's report but many of the NGOs in this area and people in the system tell me that the big ticket items have simply been dodged, particularly the right to work and the right to education. That must be addressed. It is pointless to say we will sign up to certain EU directives, but not all of them. That is a concern.

Many of the working group's recommendations that have been implemented are somewhat linked to the International Protection Act, which has not commenced, but some, such as the right to work, have not been implemented.It is unclear whether these will be implemented in the future. The recommendation in the working group report was to ensure access to the labour market for first-time applicants awaiting a first instance decision. I could go on all night about this.