Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 68: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on the calls by the Catholic and Protestant Archbishops of Dublin to regularise the status of asylum seekers who have been five years or more in the asylum process; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3561/06]

Paudge Connolly (Cavan-Monaghan, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 167: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on the recent calls by both Roman Catholic and Church of Ireland Archbishops of Dublin for an amnesty for asylum seekers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3715/06]

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 68 and 167 together.

I have noted the comments made in early January by Archbishop John Neill and Archbishop Diarmuid Martin on issues concerning immigrants and I appreciate the sincerity with which their comments were made. I do not, however, agree with the suggestion that, as the Deputy puts it, we should "regularise the status of asylum seekers who have been five years or more in the asylum process".

The proposal from the two archbishops would appear to be even wider in scope in that it refers to immigrants generally who are here longer than five years being permitted to remain in the State.

In the case of asylum applicants, I would point out to the Deputies that due to the comprehensive Government investment in staff and resources in the asylum determination agencies over recent years, there are now only 433 applicants in the asylum system for more than six months, with many of these being at an advanced stage of processing. This compares to some 6,500 cases over six months old, which were outstanding in September 2001.

"Regularising" the status of asylum seekers on the basis suggested would have a negative impact on asylum applications, which fell by some 40% in 2004 and a further 9% in 2005. Indeed, it would act as a pull factor in terms of the number of unfounded applications being received. Such a move would also impact negatively on the considerable progress which has been made in reducing timescales for processing applications and on our ability to accommodate the individuals concerned.

By way of illustration concerning pull factors, I would refer the Deputies to the fact that a considerable increase in asylum numbers was experienced in the aftermath of the July 1999 decision to allow asylum seekers access to the labour market. This led to a three-fold increase in the average number of applications per month, rising to 1,217 applications in December 1999 compared to an average of 364 per month for the period January to July 1999.

Our asylum processing agencies now operate accelerated processing arrangements for nationals of those states which are subject to ministerial prioritisation directions, namely, Nigeria, Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia and South Africa. Under these arrangements, applications are processed at the initial stage in ORAC in an average of 16 working days, and for appeal determinations in RAT in an average of 14 working days. These five nationalities currently account for almost 40% of all asylum applications.

All asylum applications are now allocated an interview date on the day on which they apply for refugee status to ORAC. This means that an interview is normally scheduled within 20 working days from the date of the initial application with cases in the prioritised caseload being interviewed within nine to 12 days.

The greatest service we can provide to those who should be recognised as refugees is to ensure that their claims are decided speedily, and that nothing is done which undermines this policy priority by attracting large numbers of non-genuine applicants to the detriment of genuine applicants. The structures currently in place provide the State with an asylum system that meets the highest international standards and fulfils our international obligations under the 1951 Geneva Convention on the status of refugees to those seeking asylum. Overloading the process with large numbers of new applicants would be totally contrary to these obligations and could completely negate the major investment in effort, time and resources which has gone into bringing our overall strategy to its current status.

As regards immigration generally, the Government has already responded generously through the Irish-born child scheme 2005, which has resulted so far in 16,696 applicants being granted leave to remain out of a total of 17,907 applications received. The IBC-05 scheme has also had an impact on other areas of the asylum and immigration processes as, for example, many of those successful applicants might otherwise have been considered for leave to remain in the context of the deportation system.

Following the ending of that scheme, an analysis is being carried out to determine the number and nature of the remaining cases and to establish a reasonable view of the number that are still in the State. This will facilitate the normal ongoing review of approaches taken to particular caseloads within the immigration system having regard to the reality of the circumstances which exist at the time.

This year, I will also be bringing forward legislation in the form of an immigration and residence Bill with a view to providing a comprehensive legislative base for such areas as visas, border controls, admissions of non-nationals and residence status, as well as action to address illegal immigration. A key part of the Bill will include proposals for a new streamlined removals system for persons not entitled or no longer entitled to be in the State. Legislation will also be brought forward to assist in tackling people trafficking and smuggling.