Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State and thank him for taking this important Adjournment debate on direct provision for asylum seekers. As he will be aware, decisive action is required on the current structures of the direct provision system, which have been criticised at home and abroad. An independent appeals mechanism is needed, as is legislation to ensure a fairer system for those seeking asylum. I thank the students of Pobalscoil Inbhear Sceíne and their teacher, Lisa Sanford, for inviting me to the school to debate this issue about which they are very concerned. The students are involved in a project to highlight this issue.

People seeking asylum, some of whom will become citizens, are being treated appallingly. The Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, has the ability to change the direct provision system which he regarded as flawed when he was an Opposition spokesperson. After two and a half years in Government, he and the Labour Party, which was also critical of the system when in opposition, have not shown any urgency in addressing the issue.

The former Ombudsman, Emily O'Reilly, who is now the European Ombudsman, brought a number of reports to government on direct provision and raised concerns about asylum seekers. At the time, two thirds of asylum seekers had been in direct provision for approximately three years. Government policy, as enunciated by the current Minister and his predecessor, is that the period spent in direct provision should not exceed six months. The former Ombudsman raised the possibility that the circumstances in which people were living, for example, in very close quarters, were having negative mental and physical health effects and could constitute child abuse. The Council of Europe warned about the asylum process here in 2012 when it referred to negative consequences on mental health, family ties and integration prospects.

This returns me to the point that direct provision is the first port of call for many asylum seekers who will subsequently become citizens. It beggars belief that the Government has not taken any action on direct provision in the past three years despite the criticism levelled at the system by organisations at home and abroad. Ultimate responsibility lies with the Minister for Justice and Equality. I am disappointed he is not present. I could cite some of the criticism he made of the direct provision system while an Opposition Deputy. As the person with power to change the system, I ask him to explain the reasons he has not tackled the issue. I hope he will listen to the campaign of the students of Pobalscoil Inbhear Sceíne and others who are trying to highlight this issue.

Asylum seekers do not have a vote and asking politicians, notably those in government who were critical of the direct provision system while in Opposition, to tackle the issue does not seem to be bearing fruit.

Will the Minister read the reply he has from the Minister for Justice and Equality to ascertain whether we can make progress on this important issue?

Dinny McGinley (Donegal South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am responding on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Justice and Equality, who is in Templemore to announce the new recruitment drive for the Garda.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That announcement has been made a few times. Is it official this time?

Dinny McGinley (Donegal South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sure the Senator will welcome the move.

The Minister has responded this year to more than 50 parliamentary questions in the Dáil on direct provision and has addressed this subject in this House several times, most extensively in response to a Private Members' motion on 23 October 2013. Much of what I have to say, therefore, has been said previously. In addition, legal challenges to the direct provision system are likely to litigated in the High Court next year.

Currently 4,381 persons reside in 34 accommodation centres managed under contract to the Reception and Integration Agency, RIA, of the Department of Justice and Equality. At the end of 2009, 6,494 were persons residing in 54 centres. The number of centres and the number of persons residing in them have decreased by a third in the space of three years. The Minister is not saying this issue will disappear over time but it is being managed and controlled. The efforts of the Minister and his Department will continue to further reduce the numbers of persons in direct provision. He hopes that the new arrangements he recently introduced to deal with outstanding subsidiary protection applications will contribute to this. He equally hopes that the passage of an amended immigration and residence Bill next year and the introduction of a single procedure will make for a more efficient and effective procedure.

The Minister is aware of the proposals of the Irish Refugee Council, IRC, on an alternative reception system for people seeking international protection. The RIA will shortly meet IRC representatives at their request to enable them to elaborate on their proposals. It is notable that the document states that the proposals "are addressed on the basis that Ireland is now receiving less than 1,000 new asylum claims a year". The reality is asylum trends can fluctuate and we cannot assume that this will remain the case. Moreover changes to the asylum system, including reception conditions, can and do impact on the number of asylum claims that are made and that this also needs to be borne in mind. It would be wrong therefore to ignore this "pull factor". While the State has an important obligation to provide refuge for those in genuine need of protection and asylum and it is crucial that we comply with our international obligations in this regard, it is also appropriate to acknowledge that a significant number of those who have during the years sought asylum here have been economic migrants evading our immigration and visa requirements whose personal narratives have ultimately proved to be both untrue and unreliable. The State at this time cannot afford to provide supports and accommodation for individuals who so behave.

I would also like to reiterate a number of points about the direct provision system and how it has operated. It is important to note that not once has an asylum seeker arriving in this State been left homeless. That cannot be said for several other EU states. The Minister has said on several occasions that while the direct provision system is not ideal, it facilitates the State in providing a roof over the heads of those seeking asylum or seeking to be allowed on humanitarian grounds to stay in the State. It allows the State to do this in a manner that facilitates resources being used economically in circumstances where it is under financial difficulty.

If the State was to permit all asylum seekers to avail of full social welfare supports, including rent supplement, the immediate impact would be that every asylum seeker, including those not currently in accommodation provided by the RIA, would avail of this financial support. Every asylum seeker does not live in direct provision accommodation, as they are not compelled to do so. Accommodation is provided for those who cannot provide accommodation for themselves and do not have friends, family or others in the State who are willing to provide accommodation for them. Some asylum seekers live with friends or family or provide from their own resources for their accommodation needs.

The accommodation system cannot be in place solely in its own context. It is inextricably linked with the surrounding international protection process. An amended immigration, residence and protection Bill will be published next year, the purpose of which will be to substantially simplify and streamline the existing arrangements for asylum, subsidiary protection and leave to remain applications by making provision for the establishment of a single application procedure in order that applicants can be provided with a final decision on all aspects of their protection application in a more straightforward and timely fashion.

The direct provision system remains an important element of the State's asylum and immigration system and the Minister has no plans to end it at this time. The Minister accepts, however, that the time spent in direct provision accommodation and the complexity of the asylum process are issues that need to be addressed. His resolve, therefore, is to deal with the factors that lead to delays in the processing of cases in order that asylum seekers spend as little time as is necessary in the accommodation system.

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am disappointed with the reply and, in particular, the comment that the Minister has no plans to end this system at this time. When he was in opposition, he had plans and energy and what he was not going to do was not wroth mentioning, yet when he is in a position to make a change he is not willing or able to make it.

I note a hint of sarcasm in the Minister of State's comment that the Minister has replied to 50 parliamentary questions and addressed the House on the direct provision issue. It is amazing, however, that despite all the replies and debates on the issue that his new proposals to amend the reception system and the IRC's alternative proposals will only be discussed by the RIA and the IRC in 2014. It is amazing that a man who has answered a question about this issue 50 times and has participated in a debate in this House has not instructed the RIA to meet the IRC prior to now.

I thank the Minister of State for coming to the House. I hope some more time in opposition might help the Minister for Justice and Equality to regain his enthusiasm. He might be able to find the notes he used previously to outline how he would change the direct provision system when he got into power.

Dinny McGinley (Donegal South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There has been an improvement in direct provision in recent years and I have outlined the figures relating to the reduction in the number of applications and centres. Deputy Shatter is one of the most reforming Ministers we have had in this Department for many generations. Between legislation and everything else, he will go down in history as one of the most reforming, imaginative and creative Ministers.