Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for coming to the House and Senator Norris for tabling this important Bill. When I returned here from being an emigrant in America in 2004, it was to a context in which racism was rising. We had seen the introduction of the direct provision system as a very negative response to what was in the global sphere a negligible increase in the number of refugees and migrants and we were told that it was a temporary arrangement. Even at the time, it was clearly a dangerous and badly thought through arrangement. We had to produce information leaflets on myths and facts about refugees and asylum seekers as the divisions between communities and asylum seekers and refugees grew as they were warehoused into the direct provision system. Since that the system has remained largely stationary, even to the point where the €19.10, the desultory payment made to those trying to maintain individual dignity, has remained unchanged, even in the last Social Protection Act and the publication of the McMahon report.

I recognise and welcome the McMahon report, which is important. While I would like to see the dismantling of the direct provision system as I believe it is a dangerous system that builds division within society, I welcome the recommitment from the Minister of State, Deputy Stanton, in terms of implementation of the McMahon report. There are areas on which I believe the McMahon report fell short, particularly around the protection and guarding of rights of women and full due process in regard to that. That is an issue we would have critiqued. Nonetheless, while the McMahon report moves ahead, the kernel of the problem, as identified by colleagues in Fine Gael, is still the long waiting time. There are still 3,500 people within the system. There are families within the system. There are children who have spent their whole school-going lives in a direct provision system, a system which is unsafe. As has been acknowledged by both sides of the House, we may be vulnerable to future claims of redress and recrimination as we have placed people in institutionally unacceptable situations. Nonetheless, the 3,500 cases have been moving forward.

This modest and reasonable Bill simply puts into effect the idea that we would move forward towards a reasonable timeline of four years to process claims. We must bear in mind that this Bill would only take effect for those whose claims have not been processed in due time of four years and that we were told originally that the direct provision system would last for six months. That is a stated goal.

I support the Bill but I recognise the concerns expressed by the Irish Refugee Council and others in regard to the use of the term "regularisation", the need for legal assistance, the need for a wider recognition of family rights and reunification rights and, of course, the question of revocation. These can all be dealt with on Committee Stage. I recognise that it would be a small and symbolic step we could take, recognising the concern expressed by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the EU Commission against Racism and Intolerance. Surely, we must be aware of the dangers of racism and intolerance.

I recognise those in our society who have reached out to those in the asylum system to create meals together and to bring dignity to the experience.