Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

For the past six years, when Fianna Fáil has been asked to condemn the direct provision system, it has not done so. I would like to be constructive because we need to work together to get this system scrapped and I welcome the change in tone.

An injustice has been done to Mr. Justice McMahon. The terms of reference for his report were limited. They precluded an examination to institute changes to the direct provision system. In a way, he was used to justify the system on behalf of the Government. He did an interview with The Irish Timesin July. It was reported:

Former judge Dr Bryan McMahon said anyone forced to live in a system that denied them the right to work or study and determined almost every aspect of their life without any indication as to when their circumstances might change "would go mad".

Dr McMahon, who chaired the review group which published a landmark report on the system more than two years ago, said people were effectively being "incarcerated, locked away and [left] in a limbo of sorts". More needed to be done to expedite cases, he said.

He should not be heralded as a great supporter of this system as that does him an injustice. That does not reflect the opinion of those in the system, those working with NGOs, etc. They feel circumstances have not improved that much because the fundamental structure is wrong and needs to be changed.

Around this time last year the country looked on both shocked and appalled at Donald Trump's election campaign, and the discriminatory policies emanating from it. The Muslim ban was a vile tool, which gave licence and free rein to the American Administration to blatantly marginalise foreign nationals travelling to their country. We watch idly by as America burns the ideals of freedom and liberty that it claims to have been founded on. We condemn these practices, rightly so, and we speak against such utter discrimination, again, rightly so.

On 10 April 2000, Ireland embarked on its next dark period of the treatment of the most vulnerable within society. The then Fianna Fáil Minister for Justice, Mr. John O’Donoghue, had commenced a new programme aimed at tackling the issue of the country’s dealings with refugees who had come here seeking asylum. These refugees, many of whom are fleeing war torn areas that were savaged by "western intervention", came to Ireland in search of safety, in the hope of escaping persecution in their country of origin. The system known as direct provision was seen as a way of housing these people and providing them with the basics they needed to survive while their asylum application was being processed. I doubt the then Minister envisaged what was to come, as it was set up with the intention of being a short-term measure. Today, 35 of these centres are active throughout the State. It Is estimated that these centres house 4,500 people - young and old, rich and poor, and followers of many different creeds.

Much like Mary Shelley’s depiction of Dr. Frankenstein’s monster, this creation has grown to the point of being uncontrolled; a system which has now become a horrific mess. It has developed into a system that I believe to be much more sinister than was first intended. It has become an institution of the State, and like many State institutions, it fails in its aims to benefit those who most rely on it. We need look no further than the 1990s, and to mother and baby homes and county homes, to recall failings in State institutions, where civil liberties were placed on the back burner, as if they did not apply to those coming to our shores seeking refuge.

I welcome recent comments by the Minister of State, Deputy Stanton, and his commitments to the resettlement programmes as well as the promise of the Minister and the Government to admit 520 refugees in this calendar year. I understand that the process of resettlement cannot necessarily be circumvented, although it could be more efficient, despite the intricacies and complexity of such processes. Resettlement, in so far as is possible, is a viable way to approach the treatment of asylum and refuge. Integration into communities is an option that should be explored, with direct provision being phased out with a new and more humane system replacing it.

The Minister mentioned that no other models had been put to him over the years. I disagree with that because the Irish Refugee Council produced a lengthy paper on the options for a different process while Senator Conway and I visited a Portuguese centre. We do not say that he can adopt such a model and put it to work here but it seems to be much more humane than ours. I have mentioned the Portuguese model repeatedly over the years but no report was done on it. Perhaps a working group is needed to scrap direct provision. Let us get heads together with the NGOs and the Movement of Asylum Seekers in Ireland, MASI, which is the organisation representing asylum seekers, and put forward an NGO-based model, which would provide proper services. It would be a much better use of the €50 million being spent on the system currently on private companies, some of which do not even disclose the profit they make. It would be much better to follow such a model and I urge the Minister to establish a working group. Perhaps Dr. McMahon could outline his thoughts on that.

Direct provision has become a viable business with the majority of these centres being run on a for-profit basis, which at least seems unusual. To have profit, there must also be a deficit, and the deficits within this so-called business venture truly gall me. Like many private companies, and much like the private prison system in the US today, their business models do not seem to centre around ethics nor morals, but rather how much milk can be squeezed from this cash cow. To the best of my knowledge, some of the companies that hold the contracts for private prisons in the US are also in receipt of moneys here for what is effectively the same service. I was speaking to a colleague of mine recently and he told me that despite FOI requests, none of the contracts that these companies hold is available to be scrutinised. Perhaps the Minister could clarify that. I understand the premise of commercial sensitivity, but I question whether these contractual obligations are being met, given some of the horror stories coming from some centres.

I welcome the fact the Ombudsman now has oversight of the direct provision system but HIQA oversight is also needed. The Minister needs to make a clear statement as to how he will implement the right to work decision of the Supreme Court. The right to education also needs to be implemented. The new single procedure has not been resourced properly to support people to fill in their application forms. Absolute consternation was created by those forms. There was a lack of legal support, translation services, etc. Family reunification remains a significant issue for people within the asylum system and it has to be addressed. I would welcome a response to the issues I have raised.There is a direct provision group within the Houses of the Oireachtas again. Perhaps the Minister and his officials could sit down with us, talk with us and have a look at some of the options we are putting to him.