David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Thank you very much, a Leas-Chathaoirligh. I wanted to be clear on that. I spend a lot of my time working with asylum seekers and refugees. In fact, I have spent almost all day today on this particular area dealing with people on the ground so I am very aware of the pressures, problems and issues that arise, as are colleagues here. I respect the genuine concern Senators have, in particular that of Senator Colette Kelleher, but I must caution that there are times when one could have unintended consequences and in working to make something better one could make it infinitely worse. I am genuine about that and advise caution.

Section 2, for example, proposes the deletion of section 56(8) of the International Protection Act 2015, which introduces a 12-month time limit from the making of a family reunification application after the granting of international protection status. Section 56(9) of the International Act 2015 already includes the text proposed in section 56(8)(a) to (d) in this Private Member's Bill. A new paragraph (e) is to be inserted to broaden the scope of the definition of family members eligible to include a grandparent, parent, brother, sister, child, grandchild, ward or guardian of the sponsor who is dependent on the sponsor - essentially reinstating section 18(4) under the repealed Refugee Act 1996, but without the discretionary element for the Minister.

The Minister, Deputy Flanagan, and I announced last November a family reunification humanitarian admissions programme, which will cover many of the family members proposed for inclusion under paragraph (e) of subsection (8) of this Bill. We will shortly be opening the applications process for the programme. It will prioritise applications from beneficiaries of international protection here who have the capacity to offer accommodation to their family member, thus not increasing demand on limited housing supply, particularly in small communities. This is a quicker, fairer and less cumbersome process than the measure proposed. Therefore the Government opposes the section. Subsection (8), paragraphs (a) to (d) of the Bill are already found in section 56(9) of the International Protection Act 2015, which means there is an element of duplication and that complicates matters.

The removal of a time limit for the making of an application once international protection status has been granted, which is an established practice under EU law, would lead to an open-ended family reunification process. This is counter to the practice of our fellow EU member states. It would also substantially curtail the State's ability to respond to ongoing and future crises by way of resettlement and other forms of humanitarian admission because we could not provide certainty in numbers for service providers and the openended approach here may result in a shortfall in offers which would have serious consequences for those families hoping to be resettled as soon as possible under the IRPP. It is also contrary to the principle of family reunification, which should be to ensure that families are reunited as soon as possible.

As I have previously stated, our priority is to ensure that we can support a maximum number of families, rather than having a smaller number of families being able to admit larger numbers of extended family members to the disadvantage of others. The provisions of the International Protection Act 2015 provide specific rights for family reunification and a pathway to reunification for family members of those granted international protection, which is less restrictive in terms of both the application time limits and the economic conditions which may be imposed by other EU member states. The EU family reunification directive provides for a similar definition of eligible family members as is found in the International Protection Act 2015. In addition, persons granted subsidiary protection status, as opposed to refugee status, are excluded from the right to family reunification under the EU directive. That is not the case in our legislation where those granted subsidiary protection are treated in the same way as those with refugee status. The Government is determined to maintain this broader facility at a time when some member states are restricting numbers arising from heavy demand.

In subsection 8 paragraph (e), it is unclear how the nature of the dependency of the family member on the sponsor can be assessed or verified. We do not need opaque measures being brought into law.

I also wish to note that the Report on Immigration, Asylum and the Refugee Crisis produced by the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice and Equality last year did not recommend widening the scope of the definition of member of the family in sections 56 and 57 of the International Protection Act, nor the removal of the 12-month time limit for a sponsor to make an application for a family member to enter and reside in the State. It did recommend that the Government would introduce a humanitarian admission programme for beneficiaries of international protection with family members living in conflict zones. In response, as I have already mentioned, last November, the Minister, Deputy Flanagan, and I announced the establishment of a family reunification humanitarian admission programme. Since then, the Department of Justice and Equality has been working closely with UNHCR Ireland to refine the operational details of the programme. I am pleased to say that those have now been finalised and the first call for applications under the scheme will open in April.