Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 124: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will lift the restrictions on the right to work within the asylum system here in order to end the marginalisation of those who seek refuge. [21340/06]

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

Under Section 9 of the Refugee Act 1996, an asylum applicant shall not seek or enter employment before the final determination of his or her application for a declaration of refugee status. It is not proposed to allow asylum applicants take up paid employment pending a final decision being made on their applications.

I am convinced that any extension of the right to work generally to asylum applicants would greatly undermine the considerable progress which has been made at both first instance and appeals in relation to the processing of asylum applications arising from the Government's asylum strategy, which has resulted in more speedy decisions in relation to applications. All applicants are notified of their interview date by ORAC at the time they make their application. The interview appointment is normally within 20 days of the application date. However, for applications within the prioritised category, interviews in ORAC are held more speedily, within 9-12 days. The number of applications over six months in the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal at the end of April 2006 stood at 524 as compared to some 6500 at the end of September 2001.

I believe that granting asylum seekers access to the labour market would have a negative impact on asylum applications, which fell by some 40% in 2004 and a further 9% in 2005 and indeed would act as a pull factor. In terms of the number of unfounded applications being received, such a move would also increase pressure on the capacity of the Reception and Integration Agency to accommodate asylum seekers.

By way of illustration in relation to 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 as compared to an average of 364 per month for the period January to July 1999.

Any proposal to grant asylum seekers access to the labour market would also undermine the current and effective work permit system which provides a comprehensive channel for legal migration, for economic or other reasons, to the State.

It is a well established fact that those engaged in trafficking and those seeking to access the labour market without going through the appropriate legal channels are very quick to identify any perceived attractiveness of a country as a preferred or easily accessed destination. It is my very strong belief that any extension of the right to work to asylum applicants would be portrayed abroad by people traffickers to potential victims as a guarantee of an attractive job in Ireland.

I firmly believe that 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. Overloading the process with large numbers of new applicants who come here under the misguided expectation that they will be able to work could completely undermine the major investment of resources which has gone into bringing our overall system to its current status.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 125: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if the asylum system here lacks fairness and transparency; and if he will reform same. [21341/06]

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

I do not accept that the Irish asylum system lacks fairness and transparency.

As the Deputy is aware, there is a transparent statutory framework governing the asylum determination process in Ireland set out in the Refugee Act 1996. The 1996 Act established two independent statutory offices to consider applications and appeals in respect of refugee status and to make recommendations to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on whether such status should be granted. These offices are the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner (ORAC) and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal (RAT). The asylum process now in place in this State is comprehensive and compares well with other industrialised countries. Indeed this fact was recently acknowledged by a former UNHCR Representative to Ireland who is quoted as stating that Ireland is now a model for the new Member States of the European Union and that "we now have a system which, in many respects, is one of the best in Europe".

Both agencies are highly resourced and staff members receive specialised, UNHCR-based training before processing cases. Due regard is also had to particularly vulnerable applicants, such as minors or victims of trauma, and appropriate training is given towards the sensitive processing of such claims.

When an applicant claims asylum, that applicant is provided with all the necessary information governing the asylum process, including a detailed information leaflet which is available in 31 languages.

Every asylum applicant is guaranteed an investigation and determination of his or her claim at first instance by the Refugee Applications Commissioner. Each application is assessed on the basis of the circumstances of the individual case and having regard to both the subjective elements (the applicant's own account or personal history) and objective elements (up-to-date information on the applicant's country or place of origin). This country of origin information comes from a wide variety of objective and respected sources, including organisations such as the UNHCR, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, UK Home Office, Canadian International Refugee Board, US State Department and other EU member states as well as media and internet sources.

In the event of a negative recommendation at first instance, our system also guarantees every asylum applicant a right of appeal to the independent Refugee Appeals Tribunal. Every appellant is furnished with a copy (in a language of their own country where possible) of the Tribunal's information leaflet, which sets out the appeals process in full.

It is important to note that under section 13 of the Refugee Act 1996, a copy of the Refugee Applications Commissioner's report, containing the findings and recommendation of the Commissioner, is sent to the applicant concerned and his or her solicitor (if known). The applicant, prior to submitting an appeal, is also furnished with all other relevant ORAC papers, such as the notes of the first instance interview. Similarly, under section 16 of the 1996 Act, the decision of the RAT is communicated to the applicant concerned and his or her solicitor. This indicates all the relevant papers which have been taken into account (and evidence adduced at the oral hearing where relevant) in reaching the decision, which also sets out the reasons for either affirming or setting aside the Commissioner's recommendation.

The transparency of the appeals process was enhanced on 31 March this year when a selection of decisions of the RAT were published, pursuant to section 19 of the 1996 Act. It is the intention of the Chairperson of RAT to publish further decisions on an ongoing basis into the future.

Also important to note in terms of fairness is that access to legal assistance at all stages of the process is provided by the Refugee Legal Service and, under the provisions of the Refugee Act 1996, UNHCR is given full access to our refugee determination process.

In addition to a comprehensive first instance determination and an appeal, applicants have the opportunity to access the courts by seeking judicial review on procedural aspects of the decision-making.

Over recent years, very considerable work has been undertaken in ORAC and the RAT to deal with applications for asylum and to speed up processing times. The work involved has resulted in a situation where: Processing has continued to move strongly in both ORAC and RAT. At the end of April 2006 there were 2,593 cases on hand in both agencies compared to some 5,542 cases on hand at the end of April 2004. The number of applications over six months in ORAC and RAT at the end of April 2006 stood at 524 as compared to some 6,500 at the end of September 2001. The backlog of applications has been effectively eliminated in ORAC with only 55 cases on hand over six months at the end of April 2006 and some 469 in RAT; a significant number of which are at an advanced stage of processing. There is continued momentum in processing timescales for asylum applications with arrangements for the speedier processing of prioritised asylum applications (from nationals of Nigeria, Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia and South Africa) introduced in January 2005, with an 18 working day processing time at first instance in ORAC and 15 working days at appeals stage in RAT. Currently, approximately 40% of total applications fall into the prioritised category. With effect from 1 November 2005, all applicants for asylum are notified of their interview date by ORAC at the time they make their applications. The interview appointment is normally within 20 working days of application. However, for those applicants within the prioritised category, interviews in ORAC are held, more speedily, within 9 to 12 days. The typical processing time in the ORAC for non-prioritised cases is in the region of 8-9 weeks. The average length of time taken to process and complete substantive appeals in the RAT is approximately 14 weeks.

In April 2005, I published a public Consultation Document setting out outline policy proposals for an Immigration and Residence Bill. This document noted that the State is required to introduce a subsidiary protection regime under EU law later this year. This provides an opportunity of which I intend to avail to re-examine, in the light of the experience of the last decade, how protection claims are dealt with under present law including at appeals stage. I will be bringing proposals to Government in this regard in the coming weeks.