Niall Ó Donnghaile (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State to the Seanad.

I listened with interest to the Minister when he addressed the House and I agreed with quite a lot of what he said. His comments were very important in terms of intervention. He expressed his position in a clear and coherent fashion. I took a great degree of political heart from a lot of what he said in terms of facing up and facing down.

Another word for what Senator Conway termed as "racial tendancies" is racism. There is a duty and obligation on us to face down racism and challenge it where it exists in society. We must also call out and face down the groups and organisations, whom I would call fascists and racists, as they are exploiting the misfortune in which many people find themselves.

I acknowledge that the Minister has left the Chamber. Therefore, I do not expect an answer to my query and shall make a point. Senators have come into this Chamber to challenge the very clear, stark failings in the direct provision system. The system is inhumane, puts people in jeopardy, and they face extreme marginalisation and isolation. We are not saying so to amplify the sentiments of some of these characters who are trying to exploit racism but because we have visited the centres, met the inhabitants and heard their stories. I believe there is an obligation on us. For all of the sentiments expressed by the Minister, we have a duty and obligation to articulate here that experience and views. It is also because we do have a vested interest in the experience of these people coming to Ireland, and we want that on the record and addressed. It is not necessarily like what Senator Conway talked about where people want a replacement and he challenged us to outline an alternative to direct provision. If direct provision has to exist then that is fair enough but the current system of direct provision is broken and must be fixed. The Minister of State may shake his head but Senator Conway and others were with me, as members of the Joint Committee on Justice and Equality, when we visited some of centres. I acknowledge and fully accept that some of the centres functioned appropriately and well. However, at some of the centres the inhabitants suffered terribly and disproportionately. Of course the system is broken when there is a stark obvious imbalance between the type and standard of care that is provided between one centre and another, and there is fluctuation and variation across this State.

Another big concern is emergency accommodation, which was clearly expressed at a number of recent hearings by the Joint Committee on Justice and Equality. I accept that the Minister gave us fair warning, which I believe came from a genuine place, but I shall unashamedly say the following. If people are in emergency accommodation and they can face a situation where because a hotel - a private interest - has a previous booking for a wedding, function or whatever and people are put on buses to be relocated and scattered across this State and put into bedsits, bed and breakfast accommodation or hotels without knowing where they are going, when they are coming back and not know if they will be housed with their family then that is an inhumane situation. I do not say that to take a potshot at the Minister, the Minister of State or anyone else but simply to point out a fact of life. It is incumbent on the Minister, the Minister of State and the Department not to act defensively on this matter. If they throw down a challenge to us that is fair enough, right and legitimate but then, equally, we can throw down a challenge to them as well.

The scariest thing for me was what I was told when I asked the deputy secretary general of the Department of Justice and Equality a question at the committee meeting. I was told that direct provision standards could not be imposed in emergency accommodation situations. I asked the deputy secretary general if the situation could happen again and it was conceded that it could, which indicates to me that the system is broken. I do not take great delight in saying that and it is not a political point scoring exercise against Fine Gael. We are here to talk about direct provision. We asked for the debate a number of weeks ago so let us have a full and open debate now.

The direct provision system is 20 years old and to say its history has been controversial would be an understatement. At all times when we are dealing with the issue of direct provision one must remember that we are dealing with human beings who, in many instances, are very vulnerable and have fled persecution.They have been uprooted from their country, from their families, from their communities, from a familiar, if difficult, way of life and are in shock about the circumstances of their lives. They are facing an uncertain future in a strange country and in many cases cannot speak English. If it is very difficult for adults to manage the circumstances they face as asylum seekers, as it is, how much more difficult is it for their children to manage the upheaval in their lives?

Let compassion and concern be the governing considerations as we reflect on the last 20 years and plan for providing assistance for asylum seekers and refugees in future. I remind those people protesting about accommodating asylum seekers that their protests, behaviour and attitude are adding to the stress and difficulties these vulnerable people are already experiencing.

Racism and fascism have no place in Irish society or on the streets of Ireland. As Senator Lawless rightly said, for centuries Irish people have travelled the globe looking for refuge and a temporary home away from Ireland, whether as economic or political migrants. This State has an obligation to welcome, receive and support asylum seekers. The State's response has been inadequate at times and has failed many asylum seekers. However, that does not mean that direct provision is a bad thing in itself. We must acknowledge that the previous model is broken. We require and can deliver a new model which does not repeat the institutionalised mistakes of the past.

Asylum seekers need the direct support of the Government and the various agencies to assist them in their efforts to reside permanently in Ireland. The Government needs to introduce a new system which at its heart has an ethos that does not criminalise, demean or create suspicion about asylum seekers. We need a new system which dramatically reduces the length of time people are in the system while their applications are processed. The system should permit them to work, study, cook their own meals and have own-door accommodation for each family. This is a basic standard of living that is reflective of the values of Irish society and more broadly a system rooted in human rights.

Due to the housing crisis, caused by Government policy, there is a severe shortage of houses. Therefore, some short-term measures, such as the use of former hotels or schools may be necessary. However, these facilities should be owned and managed by the State and should also be own-door accommodation with access to healthcare, education, training and all the supports which people coming out of traumatic situations need.

The current arrangements with private companies running the direct provision accommodation are open to abuse, where profit may override care and compassion. That system is potentially open to being broken further. We support the use of State-owned land and buildings to house asylum seekers. We support Mr. Justice McMahon's recommendations especially regarding speeding up the application process and own-door accommodation. A better system is urgently required. In that regard I commend the Minister of State, Deputy Stanton, on trying to change a broken system and make it better.

We will continue to work with refugees, people in the community, NGOs and the Minister of State to help implement a credible and viable system which treats asylum seekers with respect. It needs to be a system grounded in a human rights approach, ending in the full integration of those who receive refugee status and remain to live among us.