Ireland needs an international protection system that is fair, efficient and enforced. That means being fair to those coming here fleeing war and persecution. We have to respect and protect their dignity and provide clarity and timely decisions. It must always be fair to communities as well by providing resources and supports to them when additional people come.
The system also has to be efficient. It has been accepted by the Government that the system has not been as efficient as it should be. We have not been managing migration or the efficiency of the system because we all know it still takes far too long for decisions to be made. That is not in anyone’s interests. It is not in the interests of the people who come here or the State that, in some instances, it can take years for an application for asylum to be processed. Everything that can be done to speed up that process is in everyone’s interests, most especially those of the State.
Of course, it must be enforced. When we say the system has to be enforced, we have to stand by that. If it is the case that someone applies for asylum and is refused, there is an obligation on the State and the Minister to enforce that. I support that because it is the only way to ensure we have a rules-based system that works. I say that because in a lot of the discussion and debate on migration over the last number of years, there has been, in my view, a quick reach to label anyone who talks about managed migration as racist, and that is simply not the case. There are racists in Ireland. Sometimes, we see them on the streets. We see them on the extremes of politics but the vast majority of Irish people are decent and fair-minded people who want a fair, efficient and enforced system. Talking about these issues and wanting to see the system enforced makes perfect sense. It is what any state should do.
Communities have also felt aggrieved because of poor decision-making and communication. We always hear about communities looking for a veto, but I have never experienced that. While I may have seen some instances where some individuals demand it, in most cases what communities want is better communication and fair treatment. For example, the Minister has acknowledged in recent times that using the only hotel in a community for international protection, when the community is saying alternative accommodation and options should be looked at, creates problems and tensions. If there is poor communication with communities about additional resources and supports, including for those people coming here who need to be supported, it raises tensions and creates problems.
We always have to learn from mistakes that were made and improve. We cannot ignore people's lived reality. We must accept where they are at. We must accept what they see. As I said, people are fair-minded. They want a managed migration system. They want to support people who are fleeing war and persecution and are coming here to make a life. They support that, but they want the system to be managed.
They also know the difference between people who come here seeking employment and people who come seeking international protection. There are instances in which people use the international protection system to come here as economic migrants. There are, of course, options available to people through work permits. That is what should be done. That is why we need a system that is enforced and that can make decisions quickly. What really upsets and challenges people is when they see situations where it takes three or four years, or longer, for a decision to be made. I know the Minister has looked to tighten up on that and to make the process much more efficient and quicker, and I accept that.
I also believe that balance is essential. Humanity in order together must be the foundation of any migration policy. The primary issue I have with this Bill relates to what it is designed to do. It is about giving Irish sovereignty on migration to the European Union. Deputy Carthy has already set out Sinn Féin's position on this issue very clearly. The Bill legislates for the EU migration and asylum pact and replaces the International Protection Act 2015. It introduces new processes for screening and biometrics; application procedures, including age assessments; first-instance decisions and returns; decisions made by ministerial officers; a new appeals structure via the tribunal for asylum and returns appeals, TARA, with tight appeal timelines; expanded return and entry ban provisions; and an independent monitoring mechanism via a chief inspector for asylum border procedures.
The problems in our current system are real. I spoke about some of them already and there are others. Fixing them does not require signing up wholesale to a pact that does not reflect Ireland's circumstances. Not every country is the same. Every country has different issues and problems. We must have flexibility and be nimble enough to respond to issues that happen in Ireland, which may be different from those in other countries and unique to us.
Sinn Féin's position is clear: the majority of this pact is not in Ireland's interests. It undermines Irish sovereignty by handing over more power to the EU and limiting our ability to make decisions in an area that must remain responsive to Irish realities. Ireland is in the EU but is not in the Schengen area. We operate a common travel area with Britain, which is a state outside the European Union. These are crucial detriments to how migration flow works in Ireland, as the Minister knows. We should retain the flexibility to respond, including retaining the ability to legislate in a bilateral way, where necessary. We should not tie the hands of future Irish Governments to EU policy.
The Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice recommended that the Government should reconsider opting into the majority of the pact. I take the view that where it suits us and where it is in Ireland's interests, there must, of course, be co-operation and there can be mutual arrangements and obligations. However, where it does not suit us, if it is possible for us to opt out we should do so if it is in the interests of this State. Unfortunately, the Government has ignored that recommendation, which is a serious failure of judgment and accountability.
The same committee raised concerns that the State might not be able to meet the commitments it is making under the pact, which may result in failure-to-comply risks, infringement proceedings and heavy fines. We have seen that in other areas where targets are set. Everybody knows the targets are not going to be met and we end up having to pay fines because the targets that were set in the first place were unrealistic. I do not want to see us paying fines and chasing them in this situation, rather than putting in place proper rules, procedures and processes that have a real impact and better equip this State to operate the rules-based system that exists. The Government should not sign up to obligations that the State is not capable of delivering because it leads to more dysfunction and public mistrust. There are deep concerns about the impact on the civil legal aid scheme and Tusla, both of which are already stretched. If the Government expands legal and procedural obligations without resourcing these services the outcomes are predictable: more delay, more frustration and less fairness for applicants and wider communities.
Sinn Féin supported the parts of the pact that are clearly in Ireland's interests. That is obviously the right thing to do. We support the asylum and migration management regulation, which determines responsibility and allows applications to be processed in the correct member state, supporting a fairer sharing of responsibility. That makes sense. We support participation in Eurodac to improve consistent access to appropriate biometric data to support vetting and checks. That makes sense to help tackle trafficking, which needs to be tackled, and to support returns, where appropriate. However, Sinn Féin is opposed to opting wholesale into all of the measures that reduce Ireland's sovereignty, control and flexibility.
We also have serious concerns about whether deadlines for the pact can be met without undermining fairness and robust decision-making. The Minister has indicated proposed changes to restrict or delay family reunification. That is a distraction from the real problems, which are delay, backlog and a failure to enforce outcomes. That is where people see the problems and challenges in our migration system. They want the Minister to spend his energy to resolve those issues and resource the system to ensure quicker decision-making. We must deal with the delays and enforce outcomes much faster so we can avoid the unnecessary detentions that can develop if cases are not dealt with as quickly as they should be. Where protection is granted, integration must be real. Family reunification is part of integration, especially for parents and children. We have seen that play out in the United States and we certainly do not want anything like that in this State. Any policy must be sustainable, but must also be fair and humane.
Public confidence depends on rules being followed at every stage. At every stage of the process, we need fair processing and protection, where justified. We have all agreed, or most of us in the Chamber have agreed, what that means, what is justified and what the rules are. Once we agree on the rules and have a rules-based system, enforcement is the most important part because in any situation, if you develop and put in place rules but then ignore or do not enforce them, you do not have rules at all. That will be exploited. It makes no sense to the communities who watch on and see it. They support fairness and efficiency but also want to see this State and the Minister doing more to ensure that the rules which we have agreed to put in place are enforced. Otherwise, public confidence is low. It has been low because our system is operating in crisis mode. We can see that in communities. We can see that in relation to how applicants who come here are treated. It is because there has been systemic Government failure for too long. Decisions and appeals take too long. Enforcement is inconsistent. Accommodation policy has been driven by private interests and profiteering rather than public planning. The reality is that we have made a small number of people very wealthy on the back of international protection accommodation. When communities see that, and particularly when they see vital amenities being used when they could point to alternatives in the communities, it creates upset, anger and challenges we do not need and would not have if we had better public planning and resourcing of accommodation in these areas. Transparency and accountability around contracts are essential. The approach to locating accommodation must be based on community capacity and service availability and not on who can profit the most and the fastest.
We are calling on the Government to end planning exemptions for this type of accommodation, to access local services and to engage properly with communities. Ireland must support integration properly from the ground up through community-based supports. There must also be zero tolerance of racism. Everybody in this House should state that clearly because we have seen examples of it and it is wrong. As the health spokesperson for Sinn Féin, and as someone who has visited hospitals the length and breadth of this country, I am proud that people of so many different nationalities work in our health service. I ended up in the eye casualty department of a hospital a number of weeks ago. I was struck by the number of doctors from outside the country. They do wonderful and fantastic work, and without them, our health services would not work.
There are challenges whereby people who want to work in our health service and train here cannot get into hospitals because of employment barriers.
They are issues that need to be resolved. If we do not resolve those types of issue they will create tensions that are unnecessary. Some of the racism we have seen is obviously ugly and has to be faced down. The best way to do that is for us to agree what the rules are, put in place a system that is fair and efficient and then enforce it. If we do that, we will get the confidence of the vast majority in this State and that is what I want to do. I cannot support this Bill for the reasons I have outlined.
