Sharon Keogan (Independent)

I thank my colleague for bringing this Private Members' motion this evening and I rise to speak on my first amendment because I believe, if we centre this debate, it is an open statement of principle that focuses on the positive rather than the negative and is a discussion that cuts to the very deep question about who we are and what we must do. This debate is not, and should never be, about hatred of the other. It is about love for ourselves and for our identity as a unique people and nation. That love often forces us to find balance between contradictory things. We must acknowledge that we as a people can and will change, but we must also preserve those essential things that make us who we are: our culture, language and the remembrance of our history and heritage.

Part of what makes us Irish is that we are a welcoming people. Throughout our history we have brought others into our nation, from the Norse to the Norsemen. We must also acknowledge two truths. First, these assimilations were often long and sometimes conflict-filled processes. Second, migration today is on a scale never seen before. Poorly managed mass migration into a country that does not believe in itself can turn a nation into a divided land of strangers. We are a welcoming people but we must be prudent and fair in whom we welcome and ensure our welcome is not abused, because if we lose that welcome, we lose part of who we are as a people.

That is why this amendment matters. It affirms that the Irish people, through the democratic process, have the right to shape migration policy in a way that protects both our openness and our identity. It is a statement of confidence in who we are and a call to act wisely so we remain who we are and we remain fair to those who come to our nation in good faith.

Principle must be matched with practical action. That is why I am also proposing amendments that deal with the realities we face today. First, we urge the Government to seek flexibility with the EU migration pact to address migratory pressures, and, if that flexibility cannot be found, to give due consideration to an opt-out. Ireland must retain the ability to act in its own best interest when circumstances demand it. While I personally believe we should pursue an opt-out, I would like the Minister of State to know I will be closely following the new international protection Bill 2025, which aims to bring us into line with the pact, and I look forward to the debates and discussions which will follow.

In light of the UK's situation, I also personally urge the Department to take a look at whether the European Court of Human Rights is having any unintended impact on Ireland's ability to enforce its migration laws. If it is not the ECHR, then we must ask whether our own domestic laws need to be reformed, just as the UK has recently done, to ensure our system is fair, efficient and sustainable.

Above all, I urge the Government to upgrade Ireland's domestic capacity with more resources for processing, enforcement and accommodation so that our policies are not just words on paper but actions in practice. I acknowledge the work the Minister of State and his team have done so far under immense pressure, but as they say, "lots done, more to do".

Second, we urge a review of deportation policies for international protection applicants convicted of criminal offences and, in particular, to consider immediate deportations for those found guilty of serious crimes. Our compassion must never come at the expense of public safety.

Third, we call for an examination of citizenship criteria to ensure a meaningful contribution to society such as a requirement for five years of employment contributions. Citizenship is not just a legal status; it is a shared commitment to the common good.

We urge the Government to ensure unaccompanied minors whose ages cannot be verified are not accommodated with verified minors and that placement decisions take account of cultural and religious sensitivities to prevent potential conflicts. Protecting the vulnerable means protecting all minors from harm. These amendments are not about closing doors. They are about keeping Ireland open but in a way that is fair, safe and sustainable. They are about ensuring our welcome remains strong because it is grounded in confidence, prudence and respect for our own identity.

While I have the Minister of State's attention, I ask him to share with this House Government statistics on interview attendance rates so we can have an informed debate based on facts. I also ask the Minister of State to consider reviewing procedures for applicants who fail to attend interviews - I speak in particular of their section 35 or substantive interview - including consideration of stricter consequences, such as the cutting of supports or issuing of deportation orders, if they do not turn up for that interview. There have to be consequences and I want the Minister of State to take those considerations into practice.