Mary Upton (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 217: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to the report, One Size Doesn't Fit All, prepared by an organisation (details supplied); if he plans to implement any of the recommendations in this document; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11835/10]

Mary Upton (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 218: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his plans to carry out an audit on his policy of direct provision and dispersal of asylum seekers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11837/10]

Mary Upton (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 219: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the way he plans to give asylum seekers a more direct input into any review of the direct provision and dispersal system for asylum seekers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11838/10]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 217 to 219, inclusive, together.

These questions relate to a publication issued recently by the Free Legal Advice Centre (FLAC) on the Government's direct provision system, the means by which the State discharges its obligations to provide accommodation and sustenance to asylum seekers while their applications are considered. The Reception and Integration Agency (RIA) of my Department is responsible for the accommodation of asylum seekers. The State, through RIA, assumes responsibility for providing suitable accommodation and certain other services on a full board basis. All accommodation costs, together with the costs of meals, heat, light, laundry and maintenance are paid directly by the State. Asylum seekers in direct provision accommodation also receive a weekly cash allowance which has been assessed on the basis of normal social welfare allowance, reduced to take account of board and lodgings and other ancillary benefits provided through the direct provision system.

At end February, 2010, RIA's accommodation portfolio comprised 53 accommodation units across 21 counties accommodating 6,358 persons representing 94 different nationalities. I do not propose to outline here the historical background to the setting up of the direct provision system in 1999, other than to reiterate that it is one of the central features of the Government's response to persons who choose to seek asylum here. I am satisfied that the treatment of asylum seekers in this country is, at a minimum, on a par with the best on offer in this context anywhere in the EU, and that the direct provision system delivers a high standard of service and value for money to the taxpayer through coordinated service delivery to asylum seekers.

One of the recommendations put forward by FLAC is that an audit of the direct provision and dispersal system should be carried out to ensure that the State meets the human rights obligations placed on it by domestic and international law. I am satisfied that the system is in compliance with all such obligations. Nothing in the report would lead me to conclude that such an audit is warranted.

Forty seven specific recommendations are made by FLAC. Many of these recommendations are fundamentally contrary to long standing Government policy. In relation to other recommendations, I should say that a review has recently been completed of the House Rules and Procedures for asylum seekers in direct provision, incorporating a complaints procedure, which govern the day to day operation of asylum accommodation centres and which clearly outline the obligations placed both upon residents and centre management. This review involved, inter alia, RIA, representatives of centre managers, the Refugee Information Service and the Irish Refugee Council. I believe that the Rules have to be given time to operate before considering any further changes.

One of the criticisms made by FLAC is to the effect that families can have their living and education arrangements abruptly disturbed by transfers between centres. Generally, this does not happen. Transfers are never made for arbitrary or capricious reasons. Indeed, where possible, residents in asylum centres are not transferred to other centres against their wishes but, on occasion, this simply has to happen. This may arise from, for example, the closing down of centres, medical emergencies or, as in certain cases, instances of personal conflict where there is a danger that keeping one or more of the involved parties in the centre could lead to serious trouble.