Thursday, 24 Sep 2026

Social Welfare Eligibility

Questions (370)

Ciarán Ahern

Question:

370. Deputy Ciarán Ahern asked the Minister for Social Protection the reason a person aged under 66 years-of-age who moved from receiving an invalidity pension to a bereaved partners contributory pension is no longer eligible to receive the living alone increase; whether this distinction has been reviewed for fairness and equality; if he will consider amending legislation to include widows and widowers under 66 years-of-age who live alone and are in receipt of a bereaved partners contributory pension as eligible to receive the living alone increase; and the additional measures he is considering to support widows and widowers under 66 who live alone. [67747/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister for Social Protection

The Living Alone Increase (LAI) is a supplementary payment to those who are aged 66 and over living alone and in receipt of a State Pension (Contributory), State Pension (Non-Contributory), Bereaved Partner’s (Contributory) Pension, Bereaved Partner's Pension under the Occupational Injuries Benefit Scheme, an Incapacity Supplement under the Occupational Injuries Benefit Scheme or a Deserted Wife's Benefit. It is also payable to people aged under 66 who live alone and are in receipt of a Disability Allowance, Invalidity Pension, Incapacity Supplement or Blind Pension.

The LAI is not a stand-alone payment. Entitlement is linked to receipt of one of the qualifying schemes specified in legislation. Accordingly, where a person under age 66 moves from Invalidity Pension to Bereaved Partner's (Contributory) Pension, they no longer satisfy the qualifying conditions for the LAI, notwithstanding that they may continue to live alone. This arises because Invalidity Pension is a qualifying payment for the increase for people aged under 66 whereas Bereaved Partner’s (Contributory) Pension is a qualifying payment only where the recipient is aged 66 or over. It is not a consequence of any determination that the person no longer lives alone.

Invalidity Pension is provided in recognition of a person’s long-term incapacity for work. The Bereaved Partner's (Contributory) Pension is available to eligible surviving spouses, civil partners and qualifying cohabitants who satisfy the relevant social insurance conditions. Unlike Invalidity Pension, it is not a payment based on incapacity for work and recipients may have earnings from employment or self-employment. Entitlement is not dependent on living alone, as recipients may live alone, with dependent children, with family members or with other people, provided they are not cohabiting with a partner.

Any extension of the Living Alone Increase to recipients of a Bereaved Partner’s (Contributory) Pension who are under 66 would require an amendment to the current eligibility conditions and would give rise to an additional Exchequer cost. Such a change would have to be considered in the context of the overall objectives of the payment, the position of other people under 66 who live alone, and the resources available to the Department.

A bereaved person may also have access to other supports, depending on their individual circumstances. These may include Fuel Allowance, where the relevant household and means conditions are satisfied, and supports under the Supplementary Welfare Allowance scheme, including Additional Needs Payments for essential expenses that a person cannot meet from their own resources. My Department’s Intreo offices and Community Welfare Service can provide advice on the supports that may be available in an individual case.

I trust that this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.

Pension Provisions

Questions (371)

John McGuinness

Question:

371. Deputy John McGuinness asked the Minister for Social Protection the final number of participants in MyFutureFund who were eligible to opt out during the first opt-out window ending on 31 August 2026; the number and percentage who opted out; the number who subsequently cancelled an opt-out request during the cooling-off period; the total value of employee contributions refunded; the corresponding value of employer and State contributions retained in participants’ funds (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [67997/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister for Social Protection

The Programme for Government contained a commitment to introduce the Automatic Enrolment Retirement Savings System (AE). The aim of introducing AE was to address the pension coverage gap that exists in Ireland and to provide workers with greater comfort and security regarding their retirement income.

The new system - known as MyFutureFund - commenced on the 1 January 2026 and it is overseen by the National Automatic Enrolment Retirement Savings Authority (NAERSA), which is a separate statutory body, independent of my Department and directly responsible for all operational elements of MyFutureFund. There are currently over 835,000 participants in MyFutureFund.

I have been advised by NAERSA that during the month of August, there were 847,743 participants in MyFutureFund. By the end of August, 29,352 participants had opted out. As the Deputy will be aware, opt outs were facilitated in July as well and so not all of those participants opted out during August. The opt-out rate as a percentage of the number of eligible participants is less than 4 percent which it should be noted is substantially below international comparators such as the UK where the opt rate was approximately 10 percent and New Zealand where it was approximately 12 percent.

On the basis of refunds that have been fully processed, the average refund to employees who opted out was €331 while the average left in their fund was €440.

In relation to your request for a figure for those who subsequently cancelled their request, NAERSA has advised me that it is not possible to give a figure for this but they understand that those who made opt- out requests generally did not cancel them.

The other data you have requested is outlined in tabular below with the exception of annual earnings band, which NARESA has not been able to provide.

Tables

NAERSA advises me that the difference in the count by NACE versus total participant opted out is due to multiple employments.

Also the high numbers of participants and low opt out rate demonstrates the great level of success that MyFutureFund has achieved since its commencement, and I am extremely proud as Minister to have led on the transformational reform that is MyFutureFund as I believe it will have a positive and lasting impact on peoples’ lives in Ireland for generations to come.

I hope this clarifies matters for the Deputy.

Pension Provisions

Questions (372)

Charles Ward

Question:

372. Deputy Charles Ward asked the Minister for Social Protection if he is aware of reports from employers participating in the My Future Fund auto-enrolment pension initiative regarding significant delays in the processing and reimbursement of payments due to businesses; if his Department has assessed the impact such delays are having on the cash flow of small and micro-enterprises; the average waiting time currently being experienced for reimbursement; and the measures being taken to improve response times and communication with participating employers. [67985/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister for Social Protection

The Programme for Government contained a commitment to introduce the Automatic Enrolment Retirement Savings System (AE). The aim of introducing AE was to address the pension coverage gap that exists in Ireland and to provide workers with greater comfort and security regarding their retirement income.

The new system - known as MyFutureFund - commenced on the 1 January 2026 and it is overseen by the National Automatic Enrolment Retirement Savings Authority (NAERSA), which is a separate statutory body, independent of my Department and directly responsible for all operational elements of MyFutureFund. There are approximately 835,000 participants in MyFutureFund.

I have been advised by NAERSA that they have successfully processed more than 30,000 refunds with a value of over €10 million to date, including refunds to participants who have opted out of MyFutureFund. The vast majority of refunds are processed within 15 days of authorisation.

I am further advised by NAERSA that In a small number of cases, employers have requested a review where they believe they may have overpaid contributions to MyFutureFund as result of an employer payroll error. Each request must be assessed by an Authorised Officer to establish whether an overpayment has occurred before any associated funds can be disinvested from the employee’s MyFutureFund pot. Where an overpayment is approved by an authorised officer, the appropriate amount will be refunded to the employer. There are approximately 500 such refunds on hand at present.

NAERSA advises me that it continues to prioritise outstanding requests and is working to ensure refunds are processed as efficiently as possible while maintaining the necessary checks to protect participants’ MyFutureFund savings.

NAERSA recognises that an overpayment can have a short-term impact on an employer’s cash flow. However, as contributions are invested on behalf of individual employees, it is important that each request is fully assessed and validated before funds are disinvested and any refund is issued. This process helps to ensure that both employers’ and employees’ interests are appropriately protected.

As a new organisation, NAERSA advises me that it is committed to working closely with employers to support them in making accurate MyFutureFund returns. It continues to monitor scheme activity, respond to emerging issues and use the experience gained during MyFutureFund’s first year to improve their processes and services.

While the successful introduction of MyFutureFund represents a significant achievement, NAERSA assures me that it is continuing to develop and enhance its services to ensure that participants and employers receive a consistently high standard of customer service.

Employers have played a vital part in the rollout and early success of MyFutureFund, and I want to take this opportunity to again reiterate my gratitude to those employers the length and breadth of the country. That is why I have asked NAERSA that engagement with employers in relation to issues raised is done as efficiently as is practically possible.

I hope this clarifies matters for the Deputy.

School Funding

Questions (373, 374)

Barry Ward

Question:

373. Deputy Barry Ward asked the Minister for Social Protection if a school (details supplied) can qualify for funding to support the provision of a breakfast club in the school which is currently provided using funds from an organisation (details supplied). [67696/26]

View answer

Barry Ward

Question:

374. Deputy Barry Ward asked the Minister for Social Protection the position regarding funding for breakfast clubs for non DEIS schools; and if there is a scheme for schools in this position to apply for. [67695/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister for Social Protection

I propose to take Questions Nos. 373 and 374 together.

The Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools (DEIS) programme aims to reduce educational disadvantage and is a Department of Education and Youth policy. That department is responsible for decisions regarding DEIS status. All DEIS secondary schools have access to a meal at lunch time.

The Department of Education and Youth has classified Rockfort Manor Secondary School as a non-DEIS Secondary School and therefore it has no entitlement to a breakfast club funding under the School Meals Programme, nor has it ever received breakfast club funding.

Any expansion of the breakfast clubs to non DEIS Secondary Schools would have to be considered in a Budgetary context.

I trust this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.

Question No. 374 answered with Question No. 373.

Citizenship Applications

Questions (375, 402)

Robert Troy

Question:

375. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration under the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Bill 2026, if any person who holds any period of reckonable residence on the day the act commences, continues to be assessed under the residence conditions in force on that day (details supplied). [67694/26]

View answer

Eamon Scanlon

Question:

402. Deputy Eamon Scanlon asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration if he will provide a grandfather clause in the Irish Nationality and Citizenship (Amendment) Bill 2026 to ensure that marriages entered into before 2025 remain subject to the existing three-year residency requirement for spouses of Irish citizens. [67762/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration

I propose to take Questions Nos. 375 and 402 together.

The Government recognises and values the significant contribution that migrants make to Irish society, communities and the economy.

The Programme for Government contains a commitment to continue to implement a firmer and more sustainable migration system which protects the integrity of the State's immigration framework. In that context, the General Scheme of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Bill 2026 proposes a number of reforms to the citizenship process

Citizenship represents the fullest expression of membership of Irish society and it is important that the legislative framework governing access to citizenship is robust, fair and sustainable. The proposed changes do not seek to restrict integration or exclude migrants from Irish society. Rather, they are intended to ensure that citizenship reflects a genuine and lasting connection to Ireland, an understanding of the State and its institutions, and an ongoing commitment to Irish society.

The proposed amendments relate to the conditions for acquiring citizenship and do not affect a person's entitlement to reside, work, study, establish a business or build a life in Ireland in accordance with the terms of their immigration permission.

The Government recognises that some individuals may be relatively close to meeting the current residence requirements and may be disappointed by the proposed changes. Any legislative reform requires a commencement date and, inevitably, there will be cases where individuals fall on one side or the other of that date.

As provided for in the General Scheme, the revised citizenship provisions are intended to apply following enactment and commencement of the legislation. Accordingly, citizenship applications made following commencement will be assessed under the legislative framework then in force

The Government is aware of the concerns expressed by a range of stakeholders. Those views have been noted and will form part of the wider public and parliamentary consideration of the legislation as it progresses through the Oireachtas.

International Protection

Questions (376)

Gary Gannon

Question:

376. Deputy Gary Gannon asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration to provide the recognition or appeal-success rate for international protection appeals to date in 2026, by year, nationality, application procedure; and whether an oral hearing was held and, where legally permissible, with an individual Tribunal member or Appeals Officer. [67711/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration

It is a central priority for me that Ireland’s immigration system is robust and rules based.

There has been a significant increase in investment in the international protection system over the last number of years which, combined with digitisation and process re-engineering, has facilitated a major increase in processing capacity and demonstrates a strong commitment to reducing cases on hand.

In 2025, the International Protection Office (IPO) delivered over 20,200 first instance decisions compared to approximately 14,100 in 2024: a 44% increase. IPAT more than doubled the number of appeals closed from 3,100 in 2024 to nearly 6,300 in 2025. This year, as of 20 September, IPAT has already closed 6,693 appeals and is on track to significantly exceed the number of appeals closed in 2025.

All applicants refused international protection have a right to appeal under the International Protection Act 2015 to the International Protection Appeals Tribunal who must then consider if the earlier International Protection Office determinations on refugee status and subsidiary protection should be affirmed or set aside.

The table below shows appeal decisions by IPAT from 2022 to 20 September 2026.

Appeal decisions	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026*
Granted/set aside	496	446	819	1,488	1,670
Percentage	31.67%	26.31%	26.58%	24.74%	25.40%
Refused / Affirmed / Withdrawn / Deemed Withdrawn	1,070	1,249	2,262	4,527	4,904
Percentage	68.33%	73.69%	73.42%	75.26%	74.60%
Total	1,566	1,695	3,081	6,015	6,574

*to 20 September 2026

The table below shows IPAT Decisions by Country Of Nationality in 2025.

Nationality	Grand Total	Granted/Set Aside	Refused/Affirmed	Set Aside % of Total Decisions	Affirmed % of Total Decisions
Georgia	1501	292	1209	19%	81%
Nigeria	614	196	418	32%	68%
Algeria	581	101	480	17%	83%
South Africa	348	98	250	28%	72%
Zimbabwe	265	154	111	58%	42%
Somalia	162	118	44	73%	27%
Botswana	162	71	91	44%	56%
Egypt	128	10	118	8%	92%
Albania	106	28	78	26%	74%
Pakistan	96	29	67	30%	70%
Other	594	177	417	30%	70%
Total	4557	1274	3283	28%	72%

Whether an appeal is determined on the papers or following an oral hearing depends primarily on whether the applicant is subject to the Accelerated Appeals Process provided for under the International Protection Act 2015.

Applicants may submit reasons as to why they believe an oral hearing should be held in their case. Each such request is considered on a case-by-case basis.

The table below sets out the number of decisions issued by IPAT following an oral hearing from 2022 to 20 September 2026.

2022	2023	2024	2025	2026*
1183	1141	1782	2665	3010

*To 20 September 2026

As the Deputy will be aware, the International Protection Act 2026 came into effect on 12 June 2026 and gives effect to the EU Migration and Asylum Pact.

A new international protection appeals body, the Tribunal for Asylum and Returns Appeals (TARA) was established on June 12 to process all appeals received under the International Protection Act 2026. IPAT will continue to process appeals arising under the International Protection Act 2015 (as amended).

TARA will determine appeals without an oral hearing, except where an Appeals Officer considers one necessary to ensure a full examination of the facts and points of law. Standardised processing timeframes apply across a wide range of protection and appeal pathways:

Appeal Pathway	Timeframe
Standard Procedure	6 Months
Accelerated Procedure	3 Months
Border Procedure	3 Months
AMMR (Applicants who previously applied for protection elsewhere in Europe)	2 Months

There were 272 appeals currently pending with TARA and 69 appeals have been completed as of 20 September 2026, two of which followed an oral hearing.

Please note, figures are correct at time of issue, however, all statistics may be subject to data cleansing.

International Protection

Questions (377)

Gary Gannon

Question:

377. Deputy Gary Gannon asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the guidelines, practice directions, training materials and country-of-origin information provided to members of the International Protection Appeals Tribunal and Appeals Officers of the Tribunal for Asylum and Returns Appeals when determining international protection appeals; whether these materials are publicly available; and if he will publish any that are not currently available. [67705/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration

As the Deputy will be aware, the International Protection Act 2026 entered into effect on 12 June 2026 and gives effect to the EU Migration and Asylum Pact.

As part of these new measures a new international protection appeals body, the Tribunal for Asylum and Returns Appeals (TARA) was established on the 12 June which will process all appeals made under the International Protection 2026 Act. The International Protection Appeals Tribunal (IPAT) will continue to process appeals arising under the International Protection Act 2015.

The training materials of IPAT and TARA are not publicly available to safeguard the independence of the Tribunal as the equivalent of a ‘court or tribunal’ for the purposes of EU law.

As noted in part 4.1. of the Annual Report of the International Protection Appeals Tribunal (IPAT), the training of Tribunal Members is of central importance in the Tribunal. Training is delivered formally through dedicated in-person training sessions and informally through Lunch and Learn meetings which are held online to facilitate attendance by as many Members as possible.

As well as the usual internal training for Members, induction trainings were held for new Members. Tribunal Members also had the opportunity to avail of external training provided by the European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA), the European Judicial Training Network (EJTN) and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

A number of Members of the Tribunal are also members of the EUAA Judicial Experts’ Pool, and they too deliver training to their colleagues. The pool consists of judicial experts from 16 EU+ countries and reflects the diversity of members of courts and tribunals working in the field of international protection, from all levels of the judiciary.

The Tribunal is a collegiate body and new Tribunal Members benefitted significantly from mentoring they received from more experienced Members. Mentors shared insights on best practice in oral hearings and in writing decisions. The Tribunal also issues an internal journal, the Tribunal Quarterly, to all Members.

The journal includes articles by Tribunal Members, updates on country information and a summary of caselaw from the Irish Superior Courts, the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights, and relevant judgments from the courts of other Member States and the UK.

The Tribunal is bound by the Qualification Regulation (EU) 2024/1347 and the EUAA Regulation (EU) 2021/2303 and in that regard, must take into account precise and up-to-date information on countries of origin obtained from relevant and available national, Union and international sources and, where available, the common analysis on the situation in specific countries of origin and the guidance notes referred to in Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2303.

Information on the Tribunal’s practices and procedures, including www.protectionappeals.ie/chairpersons-guidelines

www.protectionappeals.ie/administrative-practice-note/and

www.protectionappeals.ie/other-practices-and-procedures/are available on www.protectionappeals.ie/

TARA was established on 12 June 2026 and, as a new body, onboarding of administrative staff and Appeals Officers is still underway. This includes considerable levels of formal training courses, alongside peer to peer knowledge exchange.

The Chief Appeals Officer, along with her team, are progressing training for new appeal officers, which will be enhanced and provided on an ongoing basis in TARA, inter alia, the legal framework and jurisprudence to enable them to determine appeals on issues of fact and law.

Once the onboarding process has been completed the Appeals Officers will also be given the opportunity to avail of external training provided by the European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA), the European Judicial Training Network (EJTN) and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

Deportation Orders

Questions (378)

Paul Lawless

Question:

378. Deputy Paul Lawless asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the number of deportation orders that have been revoked by his Department in each of the past ten years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [67703/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration

It is a central priority for me that Ireland’s immigration system is robust and rules based. The enforcement aspects of our laws, including deportation orders, are an essential requirement for the system to work effectively and to ensure that there is confidence in the application of our legislation in this area.

Deportation orders may be revoked or amended. A deportation order remains in effect unless it has been revoked. People subject to a deportation order, remain legally obliged to comply with any reporting requirements placed on them by the Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB), are residing illegally in the State and have no right to work.

It is open to individuals to bring the attention of my Department new information or changes in their circumstances that they believe may warrant examination in this regard. Such information will be considered by my Department, though it is important to note that such ongoing consideration will not in itself act to stop the effecting of a Deportation Order. Many of the cases that are considered are in respect of people who have already been removed from the jurisdiction.

The table below details the number of deportation orders revoked under Section 3(11) of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended.

Year	Deportation Orders revoked
2016	360
2017	163
2018	318
2019	340
2020	301
2021	232
2022	586
2023	416
2024	524
2025	520
2026 (16/09/26)	281

* Please note, figures are correct at time of issue, however, all statistics may be subject to data cleansing.

Peace Commissioners

Questions (379)

Johnny Guirke

Question:

379. Deputy Johnny Guirke asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration to provide a list of all Peace Commissioners appointed from 20 June 2024 to date in 2026; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [67702/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration

In line with the provisions of section 88 of the Courts of Justice Act 1924, Peace Commissioners are appointed, and may be removed from that appointment, by the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration.

While my Department maintains the Roll of Peace Commissioners and every effort is made to keep it accurate, the data may include Peace Commissioners who are no longer active. My Department relies on Peace Commissioners themselves, or others (such as family members) who are familiar with them, to let us know of any significant changes in their circumstances. A review of the Roll is currently ongoing, with the objective of having a list that is up-to-date and reliable and good progress has been made to date in this regard.

There are currently just over 4,000 individuals whose names appear on the Roll of Peace Commissioners. My officials are currently compiling a list of the individuals who were appointed as Peace Commissioners in the period from 20 June 2024 to date. Those details will be forwarded directly to the Deputy shortly.

Visa Applications

Questions (380)

Mairéad Farrell

Question:

380. Deputy Mairéad Farrell asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration to provide an update on current processing times for stamp 0 permissions; if he is aware that there is a person (details supplied) who is currently waiting six months to renew their Stamp 0 permission, which has to be renewed on an annual basis; and the steps his Department is taking to address the delays. [67701/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration

This application referred to by the Deputy has been forwarded to the relevant Case Processing team and is awaiting consideration.

The application will be processed as quickly as possible, considering current application volumes and operational capacity. Application processing times vary depending on the level of complexity involved and whether further information is required.

As an Oireachtas member, you can also request the status of individual immigration cases by e-mail, using the Oireachtas Mail facility at: IMoireachtasmail@justice.ie, which has been specifically established for this purpose. This service enables up to date information on such cases to be obtained without the need to seek information by way of the Parliamentary Question process.

International Protection

Questions (381)

Paul Lawless

Question:

381. Deputy Paul Lawless asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the number of judicial reviews that were undertaken by asylum seekers against IPAT rulings for each of the past five years; the cost to the State in terms of free legal aid for those taking the judicial reviews and also for those defending against these judicial reviews, for each of the past five years. [67700/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration

It is a central priority for me that Ireland's immigration system is robust and rules-based.

In 2025, the International Protection Office (IPO) delivered over 20,200 first-instance decisions, compared to approximately 14,100 in 2024, representing a 44% increase. The International Protection Appeals Tribunal (IPAT) more than doubled the number of appeals closed, from 3,100 in 2024 to nearly 6,300 in 2025. This year, as of 20 September 2026, IPAT has already closed 6,693 appeals and is on track to significantly exceed the number of appeals closed in 2025.

The table below shows the appeals completed by year since 2021.

Year	Total Completed
2021	1228
2022	1571
2023	1701
2024	3098
2025	6254
2026 YTD*	6693

*as at 20/09/2026

The table below shows the number of Judicial Reviews taken against decisions of the IPAT from 2021 to 21 September 2026.

Year	Judicial Reviews taken against decisions of IPAT
2021	59
2022	42
2023	156
2024	200
2025	383
2026 YTD*	412
Total	1252

* as of 21/09/2026

Legal representation costs incurred in defending Judicial Reviews taken against decisions made by State entities, such as IPAT, are the responsibility of the Chief State Solicitor's Office and are not charged to the Department's Vote.

The Legal Aid Board (LAB) is the statutory independent body responsible for the provision of civil legal aid and advice to persons of modest means. Legal aid and advice are provided to international protection applicants under the International Protection Act 2015 and the International Protection Act 2026, including where an applicant seeks legal aid to bring Judicial Review proceedings against a negative decision of IPAT, the Minister, or the Tribunal for Asylum and Returns Appeals (TARA).

To assist the Deputy, I have made enquiries with the Legal Aid Board and have been provided with the following information.

Where an applicant seeks legal aid to bring Judicial Review proceedings against a negative decision of IPAT, the Minister, or TARA, legal aid may be granted for such proceedings. Unlike the earlier stages of the international protection process, Judicial Review proceedings are not covered by the International Protection Private Practitioners Panel and, therefore, where legal aid is granted for Judicial Review proceedings, the matter must be dealt with internally by a law centre.

The applicant must make a further application for legal services to the LAB. The applicant must satisfy the means and merits tests that apply to the grant of legal aid under the Civil Legal Aid Act 1995. The applicant must be financially eligible, with a disposable income of €18,000 or less and disposable capital of €100,000 or less. The applicant's case must also satisfy the merits test that applies under sections 24 and 28 of the Civil Legal Aid Act 1995, namely:

• Whether a reasonable person of average means would pay for the proceedings with their own money;

• Whether a solicitor or barrister would advise them to do so;

• Whether there are reasonable grounds in law to institute or defend the matter;

• Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success in the matter;

• Whether the legal proceedings contemplated are the most appropriate method by which the matter can be resolved; and

• Whether the matter meets a cost-benefit analysis, balancing the likely costs involved against the benefit to the applicant.

Generally speaking, where legal services for international protection in connection with the IPO, IPAT or TARA have been provided by a private practitioner on foot of a legal aid certificate, and where grounds for judicial review have been identified by the private practitioner and the private practitioner considers the matter has reasonable prospects of success, it will usually be taken on by the private practitioner on a no fault, no fee basis.

One of the matters that LAB must also consider in assessing an application for legal services is the possibility that the legal representation sought may be obtained from a private solicitor and applicants are advised of the possibility that a private solicitor may take the matter on. However, if an applicant advises that he/she has been unable to secure representation privately then, due to the short time frames within which judicial review proceedings may be instituted, the application for legal services is accepted and the application is processed and a submission for a legal aid certificate is made on the basis of the above outlined merits criteria.

In the event that a legal aid certificate is refused, then that decision is subject to the usual right of review/appeal. From January 2021 to date, the Legal Aid Board have only issued one legal aid certificate to institute Judicial Review proceedings in international protection matters.

The LAB have provided a breakdown of the annual expenditure from 2020 to 2026 YTD in relation to the provision of legal aid and advice in international protection. The Legal Aid Board has advised that it is not possible to provide a breakdown of expenditure by application stage as this information is not recorded in a manner which allows for the collation of data as requested along the lines sought by the Deputy. As such, it is not possible for the Legal Aid Board to provide a breakdown of expenditure for international protection and immigration related judicial review and other court proceedings although, as noted above, there has only been one legal aid certificate issued to institute such proceedings since January 2021.

They have indicated that the annual expenditure in this table does not include pay or operational costs, as International Protection is one of many services provided by law centres and therefore the expenditure on International Protection cannot be extracted from the overall pay and operational costs for law centres.

The table is broken down by expenditure for private solicitors contracted through the Legal Aid Board’s Solicitors Panel for International Protection Matters and for barristers retained from the International Protection Barristers Sub-panel, as well as related service delivery costs such as expert medical reports, translations and interpreter services.

	2021	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026 *
	€	€	€	€	€	€
International Protection
Counsel Fees	1,569	2,702	64,518	178,141	241,503	161,675
Medical Fees	34,183	52,814	83,258	176,092	116,446	50,495
Other Fees	1,857	344	385	83	385	86
Translations	10,763	56,986	55,172	121,700	132,577	62,003
Interpretation	116,628	541,627	1,326,651	1,319,805	1,145,784	772,151
Private Practitioners	823,873	1,412,658	2,600,253	3,902,575	4,953,527	2,849,916
TOTAL	988,873	2,067,131	4,130,237	5,698,396	6,590,222	3,896,326

* Up to 31 August 2026

All data is correct at time of issue and may be subject to data cleansing.

Visa Applications

Questions (382)

Shay Brennan

Question:

382. Deputy Shay Brennan asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the position regarding join family visa applications (details supplied). [67813/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration

I can advise the Deputy that the Join Family visa applications referred to were created on 28 July and 1 August 2025. Supporting documentation was received in the Dublin Visa Office on 8 August 2025 where they await examination and processing.

My Department's business target for join family visa applications is 12 months. It must be made clear that these are business targets for the immigration service and some applications can take longer than others. The business target reflects the detailed and often complex assessment that is required to be carried out in relation to applications for family reunification.

While I acknowledge the personal difficulties an applicant might be experiencing; it is not possible to give a definitive date as to when these applications will be finalised. All applications are processed in chronological order, based on date order of receipt.

While every effort is made to process applications as soon as possible, processing times will vary having regard to the volume and complexity of applications, the possible need for the Immigration Service Delivery function of my Department to investigate, inquire into, or seek further information, and the resources available.

The current processing times for Dublin visa decisions is available here:

www.irishimmigration.ie/visa-decisions/

The date published on the website is the oldest date of application currently being processed under a given category. However, it should be noted that the Visa team continue to process and make decisions on applications received after the published processing date. If a particular application takes longer to consider this may result in the published processing date remaining unchanged. I can assure you that this does not indicate the processing of these applications has halted overall.

I am acutely aware that join family applications are very important for the people impacted. I understand that people are eager to have their families join them in Ireland, and I am committed to improving the service my Department provides.

The applicants concerned can now directly check the status of their visa applications on the Immigration Service’s Customer Service Portal. They can register for, or log in to their existing accounts, at: portal.irishimmigration.ie

As an Oireachtas member, you can also request the status of individual immigration cases by e-mail, using the Oireachtas Mail facility at: IMoireachtasmail@justice.ie, which has been specifically established for this purpose. This service enables up to date information on such cases to be obtained without the need to seek information by way of the Parliamentary Question process.

An Garda Síochána

Questions (383)

Paul Lawless

Question:

383. Deputy Paul Lawless asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the current Garda strength assigned to the Mayo Garda Division, including community policing personnel; the number of Garda vacancies in the division; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [67828/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration

The Garda Commissioner is responsible for the management and administration of An Garda Síochána under Section 33 of the Policing, Security and Community Safety Act 2024, which includes the recruitment and training of, and distribution and stationing of Garda personnel throughout the State.

I am informed by Garda Authorities that there is no 'sanctioned strength' for Garda Divisions. However I am assured by the Commissioner that when allocating Garda resources, consideration is given to commitments and undertakings outlined in the Annual Policing Plan. The requirements of all Garda Divisions nationwide are also taken into account, which include:

• Local and national crime trends and workloads

• Policing arrangements and operational strategies

• Local population and trends, geographical area and size

• Transfer applications, including welfare, personnel issues and concerns.

Information on Garda strengths nationally, including the number of community Gardaí assigned to each division is available on the Garda website, is regularly updated and can be accessed at the following link:

www.garda.ie/en/information-centre/garda-statistics/human%20resources/

Antisocial Behaviour

Questions (384)

Paul Lawless

Question:

384. Deputy Paul Lawless asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the measures being taken to address repeat offending and anti social behaviour in towns and rural communities; the number of persons convicted of repeat theft and public order offences in each of the past five years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [67827/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration

This Government is committed to building stronger, safer communities across the country.

As Minister, my role is to ensure that the Garda Commissioner has the resources that he needs to tackle crime and this is reflected in the allocation of over €2.74 billion in Budget 2026. With three recruitment competitions held since February 2025 and a strong pipeline of recruits regularly entering and attesting from the Garda College, the Garda Commissioner has additional resources available for deployment across divisions nationwide.

I can assure the Deputy that I will continue to engage with the Commissioner to ensure that he has the resources that he needs to tackle crime in all of our communities.

The Deputy may also be aware that the Policing, Security and Community Safety Act 2024, which I commenced in April 2025, provides for the establishment of 36 Local Community Safety Partnerships (Safety Partnerships) within each local authority area. Each Safety Partnership is mandated to consult with their community in the development of a local community safety plan to improve community safety in the relevant area. These plans will prioritise issues of importance to the community and develop collaborative responses to these issues.

Along with the introduction of Safety Partnerships, the Government is taking a range of measures to tackle antisocial behaviour and public safety, including;

• Continued expansion of youth justice and youth diversion measures to reduce youth offending and improve safety for everyone in the community

• Strengthening the laws around Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs) to enable swifter action by Gardaí in such cases

• The deployment of body-worn cameras for Gardaí in Dublin, Waterford and Limerick on a pilot basis with nationwide rollout to follow.

This Government remains focused on reducing re-offending, including by diverting people, where appropriate, away from the criminal justice system and ensuring the underlying causes of offending behaviour are addressed.

The Irish Prison Service and my Department continue to focus on maximising opportunities for rehabilitation in order to reduce reoffending. A range of policies have been developed to achieve this, including through the Review of Policy Options for Prison and Penal Reform, which includes increasing the use of alternatives to custodial sanctions where appropriate, and the recommendations of the High-Level Taskforce to consider the mental health and addiction challenges of those who come into contact with the criminal justice sector.

The Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration does not collate or publish data on crime statistics or criminal convictions. In this regard the Deputy wish to note that information in respect of convictions is recorded by the courts service while data on crime statistics and rates of re-offending are published by the Central Statistics Office (CSO) and can be accessed on the CSO website at: www.cso.ie/en/statistics/crimeandjustice/

Northern Ireland

Questions (385)

Emer Currie

Question:

385. Deputy Emer Currie asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the reason the Garda vetting process does not allow for Northern Ireland to be selected as a birthplace, given Northern Ireland is recognised as an identity in the Northern Ireland census; whether he will change it for persons who do not consider themselves as primarily Irish or British but Northern Irish; whether this has changed since the introduction of the ECRIS (European Criminal Records Information System); and whether he considers it acceptable that 20 additional days are required in the vetting process for people who include an address for Northern Ireland. [67898/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration

The Garda Commissioner is responsible for the management and administration of An Garda Síochána under section 33 of the Policing, Security and Community Safety Act 2024. Accordingly, the operation of the Garda vetting system by the Garda National Vetting Bureau (GNVB), including processing procedures and system functionality, is an operational matter for the Garda Commissioner and the GNVB.

Under the Good Friday Agreement, persons born in Northern Ireland have the right to identify as British, Irish, or both. Accordingly, I am advised by the Garda authorities that when completing a vetting application, an individual born in Northern Ireland may select either Ireland or the United Kingdom (UK) in response to the birthplace question, and either option will be accepted.

I am further informed that the Garda National Vetting Bureau (GNVB) use the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) list of country names. The ISO standard-setting process defers to the United Nations (UN) Terminology Bulletin for country and territory names. The GNVB uses this internationally recognised standard. Northern Ireland is not recognised as an independent entity on this list.

The introduction of the ECRIS (European Criminal Records Information System) has not impacted on the birthplace field on a vetting application.

In relation to processing times, the service level agreement between EU member States for ECRIS checks is 10 days, however through the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) signed on 30 December 2020, the UK agreed a 20-day service level agreement with the EU for checks. As Northern Ireland addresses are in the UK, checks through ECRIS can take up to 20 days in respect of these addresses. These timelines are outside the control of the GNVB.

International Protection

Questions (386)

Paul Lawless

Question:

386. Deputy Paul Lawless asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration To ask the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration if the Department, or any agency under the Department's aegis, funds, part-funds, or reimburses driving lessons, driving instructor fees, or driving test fees for asylum seekers or refugees; if so, the name of the scheme, its eligibility criteria, the total spend in each year since the scheme began, and the number of individuals assisted in each year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [67734/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration

The Department provides accommodation and other supports to people who are fleeing the war in Ukraine and are Beneficiaries of Temporary Protection, and to International Protection applicants, in line with Government policy.

The services mentioned in the question are not provided or funded by this Department to people in either group referenced.

Drug Dealing

Questions (387)

391. Deputy Ken O'Flynn asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the arrangements in place to ensure that every arriving international flight at airports outside Dublin is met by an immigration officer; the number of arriving international flights at Kerry Airport in 2025 and to date in 2026 that were not met by an immigration officer; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [67934/26]

View answer

Ken O'Flynn

Question:

392. Deputy Ken O'Flynn asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the number of Garda National Immigration Bureau immigration officers assigned to each airport in the State outside Dublin Airport, namely Cork, Shannon, Kerry, Knock and Donegal; if each of these airports has immigration officer coverage for all arriving international flights; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [67933/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration

I propose to take Questions Nos. 389, 391 and 392 together.

Immigration officials at ports and airports conduct passport checks, and run operations as required, to ensure passengers arriving in the State are properly documented in accordance with Section 11 of the Immigration Act 2004.

I can advise the Deputy that the Immigration Act 2004 (Approved Ports) Regulations 2004 designate nine airports and nine ports for people arriving by air and sea into the State, including Dublin Airport, Rosslare Harbour and Dublin Port among others.

The Border Management Unit (BMU) of my Department has responsibility for frontline immigration duties at Dublin Airport only. Frontline immigration duties at other airports and ports of entry are the responsibility of An Garda Síochána. An Garda Síochána also conduct immigration operations on passengers travelling from Northern Ireland across the land border to prevent abuse of the Common Travel Area.

The Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB) is a national Bureau that is responsible for the prevention, detection and investigation of illegal immigration. They are responsible for the enforcement of deportation and removal orders.

Additionally, there are members of Gardaí around the country who undertake immigration control duties at ports, airports and at the land border with Northern Ireland who are not members of GNIB but are assigned from their local districts.

An Garda Síochána have full time Immigration Units established in Dublin Port, Cork City (Cork Airport), Rosslare Europort, Clare/Tipperary (Shannon Airport), and Kerry (Farranfore Airport).

I am advised that other ports of entry such as, Donegal Airport, Tramore Airport, Ireland West Airport, Belview Port, Dunmore East Port do not require full time Immigration Officers permanently based at these locations. However, when the need arises Garda members, who are certified Immigration Officers, are deployed from Garda Stations within these Districts.

I am advised by the Garda Commissioner that providing information on resources and security arrangements at the State's ports and airports is operationally sensitive.

An Garda Síochána have provided the following table, which captures Refused Leave to Land (RLTLs) figures at all ports excluding Dublin Airport as requested by Deputy. The data refers to the number of refusals and not the number of individuals refused.

Table 1: Breakdown by Port of Entry of RLTLs 2024-2026 Q2 (excluding Dublin Airport)

	2024	2025	2026*
Border with Northern Ireland	203	162	76
Cobh Port	<10	<10	<10
Cork Airport	124	129	61
Cork Port	<10	<10	<10
Drogheda Port		<10
Dublin Port	224	158	69
Kerry Airport	21	26	<10
Knock International Airport	13	30	<10
Rosslare Port	86	68	24
Shannon Airport	61	90	56
Waterford Port			<10

All figures include Section 14(1) refusals but exclude phone and email refusals, minors and record only refusals.

*2026 figures are only up to 30th June 2026

An Garda Síochána

Questions (390, 393)

Ken O'Flynn

Question:

390. Deputy Ken O'Flynn asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the current whole-time-equivalent strength of the divisional drugs units in the Cork City and Cork/Kerry divisions in each of the years 2021 to 2025 and to date in 2026; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [67944/26]

View answer

Ken O'Flynn

Question:

393. Deputy Ken O'Flynn asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the number of nominated Garda Inspectors currently assigned to the Drug Related Intimidation Reporting Programme in the Cork City and Cork/Kerry divisions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [67942/26]

View answer

Written answers

Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration

I propose to take Questions Nos. 390 and 393 together.

Tackling the scourge of drug dealing and targeting the actions of organised crime groups that inflict intimidation, violence and misery on families and communities across Ireland remains a top priority for the Government and my Department.

An Garda Síochána continues to operate the Drugs Related Intimidation Reporting Programme with nominated Inspectors in each Division throughout the country, including the Cork City, Cork County and Kerry Divisions, to support victims of drug-related intimidation.

An Garda Síochána have published contact details for nominated Inspectors under the Drug Related Intimidation Reporting Programme, at the following link: www.garda.ie/en/crime/drugs/drug-related-intimidation-reporting-programme-inspectors-june-2026.pdf

I am advised that An Garda Síochána maintains a coordinated and effective approach in protecting communities, individuals and their families from the harm and pain caused by drug abuse, associated violence and intimidation. I can assure the Deputy that I will continue to support Gardaí in their efforts in this regard.

The Garda authorities have provided the following table detailing the strength of the Divisional Drug Units for Cork City, Cork County and Kerry Divisions from 2021 to 31 August 2026:

Division	2021	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026
Cork City	23	19	17	23	26	21
Cork County	-	-	-	17	19	22
Cork North	8	8	7	-	-	-
Cork West	7	7	6	-	-	-
Kerry	15	15	12	11	11	10