Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 130: To ask the Minister for Justice and Law Reform the position regarding the residency status in respect of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 22; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16255/10]

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

I wish to refer the Deputy to the reply to Parliamentary Question No. 510 of Tuesday, 20 April, 2010. The position in relation to the person concerned as set out in that reply remains unchanged.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 131: To ask the Minister for Justice and Law Reform the reason stamp four has not been renewed in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare. [16256/10]

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

I am informed that the person concerned presented at Maynooth Garda Station on 24 March of this year and was granted an extension of her permission to remain in the State in line with that granted to her mother. The person in question currently has permission to remain in the State under Stamp 4 conditions valid until 23 March, 2013.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 132: To ask the Minister for Justice and Law Reform the position regarding residency in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Cork. [16257/10]

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

The person concerned was granted Leave to Remain in the State for a six month period to 5 January 2010. This decision was conveyed in writing to the person concerned by letter dated 3 July 2009. This communication also set out the conditions attached to this permission to remain in the State which included a requirement that the person concerned would obey the laws of the State.

On 4 January 2010, the person concerned was notified in writing that due to his convictions for road traffic offences in the State, the Minister was of the opinion that he had not adhered to the conditions attached to his Leave to Remain in the State and was therefore proposing to revoke his permission to remain in the State. The person concerned was invited to submit a written response to the Minister's proposal within a period of 15 working days.

The person concerned has submitted a response to the proposal to revoke his Leave to Remain and this submission is under consideration at present. Once a decision has been made, this decision, and the consequences of the decision, will be conveyed in writing to the person concerned.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 133: To ask the Minister for Justice and Law Reform further to Parliamentary Question No 140 of 11 February 2010 and No 140 of 8 October 2009 the position regarding the application for residency in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Laois; the extent of the examination of eligibility for residency that has taken place to date; the degree to which the various procedures have been exhausted; the procedures if any outstanding; if in the interim subsistence payments are being made in respect of institutional accommodation pending an eventual decision in respect of residency; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16258/10]

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

The position in the State of the person concerned is that his asylum claims have been investigated by both the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, both of whom have concluded that the person concerned did not meet the criteria for recognition as a refugee. As a result, the person concerned was issued with a notification of intention to deport letter, dated 21 March 2006, which advised him of his options vis a vis his position in the State at that point in time and the person concerned has availed of the option to submit written representations for consideration under Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended).

It would appear also that the person concerned would be entitled to submit an application for Subsidiary Protection in the State in accordance with the European Communities (Eligibility for Protection) Regulations 2006 which came into force on 10 October 2006. To this end, I have asked Department Officials to write to the person concerned regarding this option and I expect this communication to issue to the person concerned by the end of this week. No further consideration will be given to the case of the person concerned until such time as he's had a reasonable opportunity to consider this option.

In the event that an application for Subsidiary Protection is submitted by the person concerned, this application will be considered first and a decision issued. If the application is successful then no further consideration will have to be given to his case. If, however, his application for Subsidiary Protection is refused, or if no such application is lodged, his position in the State will be decided by reference to the provisions of Section 3 (6) of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended) and Section 5 of the Refugee Act 1996 (as amended) on the prohibition of refoulement at which point all representations submitted will be considered before the file is passed to me for decision. Once a decision has been made, this decision and the consequences of the decision will be conveyed in writing to the person concerned.

As the Deputy will see from the above, the asylum elements of the case of the person concerned have been exhausted while the elements relating to Subsidiary Protection and Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended) remain to be determined.

In relation to the 'subsistence payments' aspect of the Deputy's Question, the position is that the Reception and Integration Agency (RIA) of my Department is responsible for the accommodation of asylum seekers through the policy of direct provision. Direct provision is the means by which the State discharges its obligations to provide for the basic requirements of asylum seekers. For the most part, this represents a cashless system with the State assuming responsibility for providing suitable accommodation on a full board basis.

Asylum seekers in direct provision are paid a Direct Provision Allowance of €19.10 per adult and €9.60 per child per week through Community Welfare Officers (CWOs). I am informed that the person concerned is currently not in receipt of this allowance as the CWO concerned is awaiting documentation on bank accounts etc. relating to possible other means which may not have been disclosed. I am informed that his case will be reviewed by the CWO concerned on receipt of the documentation requested.