Niall Ó Donnghaile (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim buíochas leis an tAire as an deis an t-ábhar tábhachtach seo a phlé inniu.

I welcome the motion before the House and the opportunity to speak to it, although we have reservations and concerns about how the Government may interpret obligations it is required to meet in line with the directive.

The recast reception conditions directive introduces several changes which, if correctly implemented in practice, will lead to improved and equal reception standards and treatment for many applicants for international protection throughout the European Union. The recast reception conditions directive encourages member states to interpret the provisions included in the directive positively and in accordance with obligations under instruments of international law. The concerns outlined in a letter received by Members today from MASI highlight the severe restrictions - what it calls impossible restrictions - which are worth the Government's consideration before moving forward.

There is recognition that detention is an exceptional measure which is to be used as a last resort and can only be justified for a legitimate purpose on six defined grounds and after alternative measures have been explored. This is a point with which the Government will struggle. The exclusion of unaccompanied married children whose spouses are not present in a EU member state from the definition of family members may, in certain cases, run contrary to the best interests of the child principle in Article 3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, especially where a child is dependent on his or her family for support.I am aware that a further directive with similar intentions is going through the relevant processes in Brussels and hope it will address issues such as the one I have just highlighted.

I will speak about the current situation and the abhorrent treatment of refugees and those seeking asylum in Ireland. On 10 April 2000 Ireland entered its next dark period in its treatment of the most vulnerable within Irish society. The then Fianna Fáil Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, John O’Donoghue, had commenced a new programme aimed at tackling the issue of the State’s dealings with refugees who had come here to seek asylum. These refugees, many of whom were fleeing wartorn areas that had been savaged by so-called western intervention, had come to Ireland in search of safety and in the hope of escaping persecution in their countries of origin. The system known as direct provision was seen as a way of housing them and providing them with the basics they needed to survive while their asylum applications were being processed. I hope the then Minister did not envisage what was to come, as the direct provision system had been set up with the intention of being a short-term measure. Today in the Twenty-six Counties 35 direct provision centres are active. It is estimated that they house a very diverse group of 4,500 people who have a very wide range of needs in terms of support and attention.

In the past seven years more than €400 million has been paid to private companies for operating the network of direct provision centres for asylum seekers across the State. The Minister said these firms had been paid more than €57.7 million in the 11 months to the end of November last year, giving an average figure of some €1.2 million per week. In a written reply to my party colleague Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire the Minister said the figure for this year included €48.7 million for commercial contracts or, in other words, imprisonment for profit, which is certainly not a contentious implication, given the amounts of money involved. Direct provision has become a viable business, with the majority of the centres being run on a for profit basis, which, to me, is galling. To have a profit, one must also have a deficit and it is the deficits seen within this so-called business venture that truly gall me. Like many private companies and much like the private prison system in the United States today, their business models do not seem to centre on ethics or morals but rather on how much milk can be squeezed from the cash cow. Many of the people in question arrived in this country to seek asylum but also a new life in which they could rear their children knowing that they would be able to tuck them into bed every evening and in which dignity would not have to be fought for tooth and nail and that would allow them to live rather than merely exist, for which they would be very grateful.

Senator David Norris has referred to the letter received from the Movement of Asylum Seekers in Ireland, MASI. We also received a letter today from colleagues on behalf of Doras Luimní in Limerick. They have asked us to ask the Minister a number of questions on their behalf, specifically about the proposals concerning the right to work being considered. They ask if those already in the system will be included in the proposals or whether the right to work will only be afforded to new applicants. They also ask that there be no restrictions on the professions and sectors in which asylum seekers will be able to seek work, that they continue to be allowed to reside in their current direct provision accommodation and that they be allowed to claim their full social welfare entitlements after working for a period, just like other workers from other countries.

As we know, in the past 17 years Ireland has not had a shining record in its treatment of asylum seekers. To some extent, we all bear a collective responsibility for this in terms of the culture that has prevailed where it is seen as acceptable to allow people to move into direct provision accommodation and be forgotten about. I hope the directive, if passed, will go some way towards changing the negative experience for the people in question.