Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 24 Nov 1999

Vol. 511 No. 4

Private Members' Business. - Confidence in Minister: Motion (Resumed).

The following motion was moved by Deputy Howlin on Tuesday, 23 November 1999:
That Dáil Éireann, deploring:
the total inadequacy of his policy on asylum seekers, which has been described by a Minister of State in the Government as a "doom-ladenad hoc policy”, “chaos” and “a shambles”;
–his failure to ensure that adequate procedures are in place to allow applications for asylum to be processed effectively and efficiently and the consequent hardship caused to many applicants;
–his failure to bring forward any comprehensive immigration policy;
–his action in officially opening Clover Hill Prison and the Mountjoy Women's Prison when neither of these jails were in a position to take inmates due to serious flaws in the construction process;
–the continued overcrowding in prisons, particularly in Mountjoy Prison where almost twice the official numbers have, on recent occasions, been detained overnight;
–the death of five prisoners in apparent suicides in prisons since the beginning of 1999;
–the renewed spate of armed robberies;
–the failure to provide adequate protection for communities continuing to suffer severe problems from crime and vandalism;
–the ongoing industrial relations and morale problems in the Garda Síochána;
–the unacceptable waiting lists for appointments with solicitors at legal aid centres, which in some cases have increased to almost two years;
–his failure to deal with the shortages of resources and over-heavy workload in the Chief State Solicitor's office, which were identified by the Director of Public Prosecutions as having contributed to errors made in the prosecution of the Nora Wall case; and
–his failure to introduce necessary legislation to regulate the private security industry,
has no confidence in the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann" and substitute:
–commends and supports the commitment of the Government, as laid out in the policy agreement "An Action Programme for the Millennium", to improve and enhance the effectiveness of the criminal justice system;
–mindful of the backlog of applications inherited by this Government, and the significant strain placed on the asylum process and services by the escalating number of applicants; acknowledging the need for a fair and streamlined process that will eliminate lengthy delays; and acknowledging the urgent need to promote tolerance and respect for diversity in our society; and recognising the need for a comprehensive and multifaceted strategy to deal with all these issues, reaffirms its fullest confidence in the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and notes the positive measures taken by the Minister to put resources in place to ensure that all asylum applications are dealt with in an efficient and effective manner;
–notes that this has included the provision of 144 additional staff, the establishment of the Refugee Applications Centre and the development of fair and effective procedures and notes also the Minister's plan to provide the further resources now required;
–notes that the Minister has established the Refugee Legal Service to ensure that independent legal advice is available to asylum seekers at all stages of the asylum process and an independent monitoring committee to ensure that a quality legal service is provided to asylum seekers;
–notes that the Minister brought forward amendments to the Refugee Act, 1996, to make that Act workable, thus providing for a refugee applications commissioner with power to delegate and the establishment of a refugee advisory board and is currently working on regulations to ensure that the Refugee Act, 1996, as amended by the Immigration Act, 1999, is implemented as soon as possible;
–notes that the Minister is committed to ensuring that those who are found to be genuine refugees are fully integrated and enjoy all the rights that go with that status and that immigrants generally, irrespective of their status, also have their human rights fully respected;
–notes the measures taken by the Minister and the Government in response to the current high level of asylum applications, including the establishment of a directorate to co-ordinate the dispersal of asylum seekers throughout the country to ensure that all asylum seekers are provided with accommodation;
–notes that the Minister's Department, in conjunction with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment as appropriate, operates a system under which persons can immigrate legally to Ireland for employment and other purposes;
–notes that the Minister has stated on a number of occasions his commitment to review immigration policy, in particular, to facilitate the entry of persons for the purpose of employment and that this matter is the subject of consideration by his Department and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment;
–notes the Minister's plans to bring forward a comprehensive modern code of immigration and residence law which will provide a solid framework for the development and implementation of fair and sensible immigration policies to meet the changing needs of Irish society, while at the same time respecting the rights of non-nationals in their dealings with the law;
–commends and supports the Minister's ongoing regeneration of the prison system and the establishment of an independent prison's authority, which will contribute to a modernised penal system playing a pivotal role in protecting the community and reducing offending;
–notes the progress made by him in finalising the construction of an unprecedented 1,000 new additional prison spaces as set out in the programme for Government to tackle overcrowding and other deficiencies in the prison system;
–notes the Minister's efforts to reduce the incidence of suicide in Irish prisons while not compromising the human rights of all prisoners to a reasonable degree of privacy;
–notes the Minister's success in establishing on a statutory basis an independent and integrated Courts Service;
–notes the continuing unparalleled and unprecedented reduction of up to 20 per cent in all serious crime, including armed robberies and public order type offences since the Government came to office;
–supports the Minister's commitment to maintaining the momentum of the fight against organised crime by providing the Garda Síochána with the legislative backing and the necessary resources required to deal with the issue;
–notes the Minister's efforts to bring about an acceptable resolution to all sides in the pay and productivity discussions with the Garda Síochána;
–commends the Minister's proactive policies for dealing with both the supply and demand reduction sides of the drugs problem;
–notes the achievement of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform in securing funding from the national development plan to develop crime prevention measures to reduce youth crime;
–recognises the Minister's establishment of the National Crime Forum in 1998 and the National Crime Council recently as landmarks in the criminal justice sector;
–acknowledges the Minister's commitment to reducing sexual offences by commissioning a significant piece of research into the reason there are such high attrition rates in bringing prosecutions in rape cases and by bringing forward legislation to provide for the establishment of a register of sex offenders and also for the separate legal representation of victims in rape cases;
–recognises the Minister's determination to assist the Legal Aid Board in addressing the issue of waiting lists by substantially increasing the staff of the board in the period 1996 to 1999, and by increasing grant-in-aid by 84 per cent from £6.5 million to £11.953 million in the same period;
–notes the comprehensive and unprecedented programme of legislation he continues to bring forward and his intention to bring forward new legislation to regulate the private security industry as soon as other priorities allow;
–notes that the Minister has no function whatsoever in relation to the development of policy or the provision of resources to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions or the Office of the Chief State Solicitor, but is nevertheless concerned to ensure that appropriate procedures, properly resourced, are put in place to avoid a reoccurrence of the errors in the trial referred to, and
–notes that since he took up office, the criminal justice system has never been better resourced and equipped to tackle the incidence of crime in society.
–(Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform).

Deputy Ulick Burke was in possession. There are 23 minutes remaining in this time slot.

I wish to share my remaining time with Deputies Belton, Crawford, Ó Caoláin, Fitzgerald and Neville.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Last night I acknowledged the contribution of Irish emigrants over many decades to the development of various economies throughout the world. I asked if we expected the refugees coming to this country to make a similar contribution. We can expect such a contribution if we give them the opportunity. It is a sad reflection on the Government's mishandling of procedures that only 40 of the more than 3,000 eligible persons have been granted work permits.

We must not view refugees and asylum seekers in the same way as the Government, as a problem or a difficulty, people who will take our jobs and eventually cause economic upheaval. This appears to be Government's current thinking, particularly in light of the vicious comments of some Government backbenchers. We cannot allow the Government to treat refugees and asylum seekers like the Jews and gypsies who were expelled from Europe during past decades. Everyday one can see racism in action in this country. It is still a fact of life for travellers. They have poor access to housing, education and health services.

The Government does not have a policy to solve the problems of refugees. It is a "shambles" and "totally unsatisfactory", to quote the Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell. Last night the Minister said we must have a system in place to ensure that all applicants for asylum are dealt with in an efficient and effective manner. How can that be justified, given that only 40 of the more than 3,000 applicants have been given work permits?

There is the continued sniping, heard again yesterday, of Deputy Noel Ahern with regard to the merit of introducing immigrant workers into the economy. He seeks the selection of skills levels for immigrant workers to secure work permits. This would prove difficult to operate at this time.

The Minister has failed in his areas of responsibility. The elderly are terrorised in their homes by the zero tolerance policy and he has failed to tackle the courts system.

I wish to concentrate on public order, a matter of grave concern for citizens. In the early hours of the morning in the streets of towns and cities there are scenes of violence in which people terrorise others, often the elderly, in their houses. I am sure these people have come to the Minister about this problem as well as to other Members of the House. They are genuinely afraid.

There is no force within the Garda Síochána to deal with the problem. It would be worthwhile for the Minister to conduct a study of other countries where the police forces have special task forces to deal with disorder. These problems must be tackled beforehand. There is no point in one or two gardaí arriving after they occur when it is too late. That is a waste of time. People know this matter must be dealt with. I am sure there are examples in other countries where substantial police forces are deployed in numbers. People know they are there and that they will not get away with disorderly behaviour. That is an area to which the Minister must give his attention.

I welcome the introduction of the inland waterways patrol. It is an important step by the Minister and the Garda Síochána is pleased with the addition of this asset. The area I come from lies along the Shannon, a vast area of water. It is a busy place during the summer months with people visiting the islands and so forth. However, it could be used as a gateway for drug peddlars. The Minister has dealt with an important issue and I wish the new force every success. I take this opportunity to congratulate the Garda Síochána on its recent successes in drugs seizures and dealing with terrorism. People thought the threat of terrorism had passed but, unfortunately, it has not. The Garda and security forces must always be vigilant.

There is much criticism of the Minister's handling of refugees. It is not an easy task for any Minister. The numbers have increased and the State's services are under severe pressure. I hope the Minister will take on board the points I raised.

I acknowledge the Minister's many successes in the Border area in the context of arms finds and other matters. As a supporter of law and order, it is important that I give such recognition.

When the Minister was on this side of the House he had the answers to all problems but, as today's newspapers demonstrate, there are many people living in fear and trepidation of being robbed and so forth. In the short time available to me, I wish to bring one issue to the Minister's attention. Is he aware that a sexual abuse case taken by the Director of Public Prosecutions against a County Monaghan man has been before the courts for the past five years? I only learned about the serious ongoing delays in this case at the weekend.

The initial complaint was made on 25 February 1995 and related to a period in the mid-1980s. For the first three years every legal avenue, up to the Supreme Court, was used by the defendant to avoid being brought to trial. Since then medical reasons have been given despite the fact that the defendant appears to be carrying on his normal everyday activities. There have been 31 court appearances and 19 adjournments.

Does the Minister accept that cases such as this are examples of "justice delayed is justice denied"? It is outrageous that such defendants are living and continuing to work among the public who have no knowledge of the serious offences with which they are charged. Has the State no responsibility, legal or moral, to protect people, including children, from sex offenders who are charged and awaiting trial? Many victims believe that defendants should be named in cases such as this, as happens in other serious cases, except where the victims express an opinion otherwise.

In cases such as these, where technically the victim is only a witness, there must be a system whereby the victim is in consultation with the State's counsel rather than the current system of isolation and non-communication. In this case there has been no consultation with the victim since the case was sent for trial. The institutions of the State have been flaunted and the victim, who continues to suffer and is deeply traumatised, believes the Minister, the State and the judicial system have failed to make every effort to bring this case to trial and to see justice done.

The victim was advised that the case would be dealt with within six to 12 months after she initially brought it to the notice of the authorities. Can the Minister imagine what this victim and her family have suffered over the past four years? If cases such as this arose outside this State, we would ask probing questions about them.

This is not the only case of this type that has been delayed and it does not encourage victims to bring their cases to the attention of the Garda or other authorities. The Garda and social workers are committed to justice being done. The Minister must make sure that whatever steps need to be taken to avoid such unnecessary delay are put in place now. Should the State not demand consultants' medical evidence rather than that of a family doctor as to the defendant's ability to attend court? In the case of a claim for damages, more than one consultant would be required. I ask the Minister to make sure this type of case never happens again.

I support this motion. I agree with the Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell, that the Government's policy on asylum seekers is chaotic and a shambles. It is worse, it is an international disgrace to this country. The shameful scenes at the Refugee Applications Centre in Dublin have been reminiscent of the experience of the huddled masses of Irish emigrants of the past at Ellis Island in New York.

The case is attributable totally to the failure of the Government to address the issue of asylum seekers and immigration in a courageous and comprehensive manner. I say courageous because what is needed is political leadership. What have we instead? We have had the deportation Bill. We have had the unworkable and strictly limited work permit procedures, which have failed to operate. We have had the outrageous proposal to mimic the British Government and introduce a degrading voucher scheme to replace welfare payments to asylum seekers, and we have had the statements of Deputy Callely.

Deputy Callely, as chairperson of a health board charged with the welfare of asylum seekers and as a public representative, has acted with great irresponsibility. Equally unacceptable are the comments of Deputy Noel Ahearn about people "rightly or wrongly who feel threatened by them and who feel they are in competition with them for housing and jobs". This is cynical playing to a gallery of prejudice. It is the opposite of political leadership. The Minister, too, has made his contribution with his repeated references to waves of refugees and the danger of our being overwhelmed. Language such as this serves to confirm prejudices based on ignorance, which are growing like weeds in our midst.

This State needs a fair immigration policy which gives access to people of diverse geographical, social, economic and ethnic origins to come and work in our economy where their skills and labour are needed. Instead of this we have a woefully inadequate asylum policy and no immigration policy.

The responsibility for failure to address this worsening problem must lie squarely with the Minister. There can be no excuse for this failure after over three years of this Administration. The Minister would have the full support of all parties in this House if he brought forward humane and just policies and legislation to deal comprehensively with immigration and asylum. He has not done so and he shows no signs of doing so. I have no option, therefore, but to support this motion of no confidence.

I cannot ignore the other areas of justifiable criticism that this motion places at the Minister's door. However, it should bring the Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, no solace that the unacceptable conditions in Mountjoy Prison were a cold reality during the terms of office of both of the chief proponents of this motion of no confidence. The disgraceful overcrowding, the epidemic drug scene and the repeating tragedy of coffin after coffin being brought through its gates make Mountjoy a sentinel to this State's shameful record in prison administration.

I remember very well, and refuse to forget, the tragic death of Michael Lynagh in Mountjoy Prison, a young man from my home town. He was hounded to his death by the forces of this State. Michael did not deserve to die as he did. Neither did the five unfortunates who found themselves in this hell hole in the heart of the city who died in equally tragic circumstances during this year alone. How many lives lost will it take before this Government or any Government acts as it must? It is too late for too many. I appeal to the Minister to stop prevaricating and act now.

The Celtic tiger and the Celtic economy are phrases very familiar to us now, but how will this Celtic economy be judged in years to come? Will it be judged by the implementation of the national development plan, by the investment in bricks and mortar, roads and bridges or, more likely, will it be judged by the quality of life our country will offer to all our citizens? It will be judged by the quality of life we will offer to immigrants, refugees, those who are disadvan taged, those who are marginalised and those who, for a variety of reasons, cannot benefit from the economic boom. This is the real challenge, this is the challenge of the politics of prosperity.

We have an emerging new social issue and the omens are not good on how we are dealing with it. The divisiveness of the Government sends out a message couched in ambivalence and ambiguity, a message that seeks to appease all opinion from extreme racist to extreme liberal, and it does not show leadership. The challenge is there and it must be met in a rational, reasonable and humanitarian way that takes full account of our prosperous situation vis-à-vis many in the world.

Queues in Mount Street, lack of toilet facilities for those waiting in queues, women going into labour while waiting in queues, which has happened, and heavily pregnant women queuing outside for hours clearly indicate we are not coping. Legislation, when it is introduced, is often of the emergency variety and, in some ways, guaranteed to increase fears of hoards descending on us as opposed to a realistic outline of how we should be fulfilling our international obligations and a series of plans for integration. Make no mistake, the challenge of integration is the real one, and this has many major aspects, including cultural, educational, housing and medical, to name but a few.

As a nation which depended on the generous humanitarian approach of other countries, the US, England and Australia, to take our workforce who were emigrating, today's scenes on Mount Street are a sad spectacle. The racist and xenophobic comments of some who should be leaders in recent days to a small but respective audience are very worrying. I call on the Taoiseach, as the leader of all the people, to reject fully these racist comments and reflect the wider, humanitarian view of the general public. We can afford to look after 5,000, 8,000, 10,000 or more people who need to come into this country. Part of the problem is that we have no realistic overall assessment of the numbers we can cope with and the services that are needed. It is clear we badly need the services of many of these people, some of whom are already trained and ready for work and others who need training, particularly in the English language.

Sadly, again it is the failure of the system, or the absence of a system, to cope with the current situation that is worrying. Until the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs finally got up and said "enough is enough", the Government was prepared to let the situation drag on without the will or the interest to prepare a proper logistical plan for the efficient handling of the situation. More staff could be drafted in once the ministerial will is there to effect it.

I take this opportunity to compliment the Minister, Deputy O'Donnell, on her stand. I pay tribute to the staff in Mount Street, in my constituency of Dublin South-East, who have worked under extreme conditions in sometimes quite dangerous, volatile circumstances that could eas ily have got out of hand and could still easily get out of hand if we do not make the proper decisions and put the necessary resources in place to try to sort out the difficult, demanding situation that has arisen there. I hope the Minister will implement genuine reform of the existing system rather than a half-baked scheme drafted for the sole purpose of political expediency.

I wish to speak to the section of the motion that refers to the failure of the Minister to adopt a more humane approach to the administration of our prison service. In particular, I wish to refer to the tragic death of five prisoners in apparent suicides in prison since the beginning of 1999. It is obvious the prison regime is not responding to those who are in deep despair because of their circumstances and other aspects of their lives and who feel the only solution to their difficulty is to take their own lives. The number of prison suicides is far too high – one suicide death is far too high. The Minister has failed to provide the resources to ensure proper psychiatric and psychological services are available to prisoners. In the United States it was found that one out of every 12 prisoners on average suffer from a serious psychiatric illness. The Minister must introduce, as a matter of urgency, suicide prevention programmes in the Prisons Service.

The Minister informed me on 21 October, following another tragic death, that preventative measures were under review. What was the outcome of that review? What training is given to staff in the implementation of suicide prevention programmes?

A key area is the determination of a person's mental and social profile on entering prison. I understand there is a only a brief medical examination of all new prisoners. We need to complete a psychological and social profile of each prisoner. I understand from the Minister's reply in the House recently that the authorities were unaware that one of the suicide victims was an alcoholic. A person with this condition needs help to overcome it, to dry out and to deal with life afterwards. It is not enough to lock them up and to leave them to look after themselves. Prison medical officers should access all medical records of prisoners in custody. A health management programme should be introduced for each prisoner, with the necessary medical, psychological and psychiatric backup, to ensure they are healthy and also as a rehabilitative exercise which will have a positive effect on recidivism.

Prisoners are at high risk of suicide. On 21 October I raised the possibility of introducing psychiatric technicians to the prisons, which is similar to what happens in California. Has the Minister examined this programme? The programme is administered by technicians and includes crisis intervention, mental health screening, patient assessment, implementing treatment programmes, supervising suicide risks, administering medication and maintaining medical records and quality assurance. Another function involves parole programmes which prepare inmates for productive lives after release.

The national task force on suicide published its recommendations in a report in January 1998. Perhaps the Minister could outline his response to developments in relation to those recommendations. The report stated that the national task force on suicide was concerned about the level and organisation of mental health services provided in the prison system. It stated that there is a need to augment significantly existing provisions of what could be considered the caring services in the prison environment, for example, the medical service which includes psychiatric and psychological services. The task force endorsed the recommendations of the report of the advisory group on prison deaths which was published in August 1991. The Minister recently informed us that while some of the recommendations have been introduced, not all of them have.

Is the Minister aware of the microwave breathing detector system which has been developed in Hertfordshire and which identifies prisoners when they stop breathing in their cells?

I wish to share my time with Deputies McGuinness, Kenneally, O'Donnell, Dermot Ahern, Martin, Cowen and Conor Lenihan.

I do not support the motion. My initial reaction on reading it was that those who signed it must have omitted other misdeeds for which they could hold the Minister responsible. The signatories plumbed the depths when looking for items to include in the list. If we were in the last century, they would have blamed the Minister for the great fire of Chicago in 1871. That would have let Mrs. O'Leary's cow off the hook. The Opposition is looking for a head on a plate and, in this case, it is the head of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. However, no head will be taken tonight.

The Opposition wants to blame the Minister for all the ills which have beset the nation since it left public office. It shows a remarkable lack of judgment and a deficient memory. It has chosen to forget the days of the last coalition Government when crime was completely out of hand and the Government's total inaction in providing additional prison spaces. To blame the Minister for the sad deaths from suicide of those in prison is unfair, unwarranted and in poor taste.

The Opposition mentioned the crimes and vandalism which continue to bedevil communities throughout the State. However, it lost power on the law and order platform. The Minister's performance in this field enjoys the support of the public. He has recruited additional gardaí and provided the force with advanced technology to fight the sophisticated criminals. The Minister fully recognises the outstanding work being done by the gardaí. He will listen to the force's concerns and its legitimate viewpoints on any issue at the appropriate forum.

There were waiting lists for free legal aid between 1995 and 1997. Why wait until 1999 to voice concerns?

Because the number has quadrupled.

The problems in relation to staffing in the Chief State Solicitor's Office are being addressed. The Minister was further attacked for his failure to regularise the private security industry. What relevant legislation did the Opposition enact between 1995 and 1997?

The Minister was unfairly attacked for his policy on asylum seekers. We must not go down the road of political opportunism travelled by the Opposition. We need objective and balanced debate. The immigration issue must be regulated.

I fully support the Minister who has done an outstanding job over the past two and a half years. I ask the Opposition to give him credit for that.

It will be clear to anyone listening to this debate that the Opposition parties are united by the fact they do not have a policy to deal with immigration. They did not have a policy in Government, so it is hardly surprising they do not have one now. They have sought to use this issue to attack the record of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. All the fine words and high blown rhetoric about the duties of the State in relation to asylum seekers are being used as little more than a cloak to vent their spleen against a member of the Government. It must be a source of puzzlement to asylum seekers to see their plight exploited in this way.

The type of scattergun motion tabled by the Opposition parties says it all. The House is being asked to express no confidence in a Minister who has presided over a reduction of approximately 25 per cent in the crime rate, who has introduced more legislation than any of his predecessors and who has faced up honestly and fairly to issues which the previous Government allowed to fester until they got out of control. It is worth reminding the House that all the successful anti-crime policies introduced by the previous Government were only accepted after unrelenting pressure from the Minister when he was the Opposition spokesman. He introduced legislation for a referendum on bail which the then Government at first rejected and then scurried to introduce when it realised there was a crime problem.

It has not been introduced yet.

Two and a half years later.

Something similar happened with the drug trafficking legislation and the legislation dealing with the proceeds of crime, which formed the basis of the Criminal Assets Bureau Act, 1996, which was introduced by the Minister.

That is not true.

Can Deputy McGuinness not at least be truthful?

I ask Deputies to allow the speaker to continue because there is limited time.

It was supported by the Government of the day only because it was embarrassed by the number of times it had rejected his policies and then had to pilfer them. Legislative kleptomania passed for an anti-crime policy in those days. Judging from the Opposition parties' record in Government, they have more confidence in failure than in success.

A measure of the tardiness of the motion is that it seeks to traduce the Minister for his failure to provide sufficient staff for the Chief State Solicitor's office for which the Minister has no responsibility. This indicates either a profound level of ignorance about the structures and administration of Government, which cannot be ruled out fully, or the movers of the motion have decided that if they cannot blame the Minister for how he carries out his responsibilities they should blame him for matters which are not his responsibility. The motion says more about the Opposition than it says about the Minister. I support the Minister.

I am appalled and disgusted at the effrontery of the Opposition to table a motion of no confidence in the best Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform we have seen in recent times. The Minister has been proactive in solving long standing problems in our community. He has projected a positive, no nonsense image which people find reassuring and refreshing after the bland lacklustre performance of his predecessor.

The Minister has achieved a great deal in his relatively short time in office. If he attracts the ire of the Opposition, it is because he has chosen to be a Minister with profile, a parliamentarian with policies and a leader in his Department. He is a Minister who is active and innovative and he is not afraid to keep his head above the parapet and to keep in touch with the people.

He has great tolerance.

Included in the laughable list of so-called indictments put forward by the Opposition is the charge about prisons. When he came to office the Minister inherited a revolving door system of imprisonment which brought the penal system into disrepute. In his short time in office he has slowed that door considerably with the inevitable result of overcrowding in our prisons. This will be relieved when the new institutions are opened and meanwhile, if there is discomfort or even hardship in keeping prisoners in jail that is better than having convicted people terrorise society. I regret the inconvenience but it is inevitable and is the proper course.

The support for the Minister, for his positive approach and for his considerable achievements which has been made known to me in my constituency confirms my belief that the Minister is on the right track. He has my full and unquestioned support. I note the reference to Nora Wall who comes from my constituency and whose case I have followed quite closely. I sympathise with Nora Wall and her family who have suffered trauma and tension but it is ludicrous to blame the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform for what has transpired in the courts. The principle of the separation of powers must be considered and even if this were not a factor, the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions was distanced from the Minister and from the influence of this House by the last incumbent of his office.

The current debate about illegal immigrants is characterised by a great deal of hype, hypocrisy and a hidden agenda. Those who suggest that we should willy-nilly accept every person who presents himself on our shores regardless of the method of his arrival, background or history are deluding themselves. The Minister is holding a very firm stance on this universal problem and as the one with responsibility, is resisting taking precipitate action which, while it might prove popular in the short-term, would ultimately cause major problems.

Deputy O'Donoghue is an effective and hard-working Minister whose record of legislation is very impressive. We have a competent and capable Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I propose to vote confidence in him and I exhort the House to acknowledge his work and to do likewise.

I acknowledge, as the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has outlined, the progress made by the Government to date in putting in place, for the first time ever, a fair and UNHCR compliant asylum process in line with out international obligations. He has done so from a very weak administrative base involving huge backlogs inherited from the previous Government which clearly experienced its own problems in dealing with this issue.

The Government fully acknowledges that current demands on this system have presented real difficulties in service provision for asylum seekers and the Minister has outlined his plans to put more resources in place to deal with both the backlog of applicants and the new applications at the earliest possible date. We are in agreement on all sides of the House that a credible and efficient asylum process is urgently needed to avoid intolerable strains on staff and clients alike. In publicly expressing my concerns about the current difficulties I had no wish to inflame public debate or cause insult to any person, not least the Mini ster for Justice, Equality and Law Reform who I acknowledge is working in very difficult circumstances.

There is much misunderstanding among our people on this issue and it is the task of Government to lead an enlightened debate. I appeal to all Members of the House to be responsible in their statements and to avoid a polarised and acrimonious debate which could lead in turn to division among our people. It behoves all of us, as real republicans, to foster tolerance of diversity among our people and to frame policies which are tailored so as not to impose intolerable demands on services and already stretched communities marginalised by poverty. A well-thought out settlement policy for asylum seekers would avoid many of the difficulties presented in terms of service provision and I am confident that an energetic and focused effort by the relevant Ministers, co-ordinated by the Taoiseach, will effectively deal with this issue which we must accept is not a temporary challenge. I am confident that our policies and procedures will be informed by human rights considerations and will be fully respectful of the dignity of vulnerable individuals.

The best outcome of this debate would be to have a reasonable, responsible and rights based approach, kind to the needy and firm with the law-breaker. Trafficking must be tackled and our borders must be controlled to deter illegal immigration. All states have an obligation to deter illegal immigration. Nobody is in favour of an open door policy. I welcome the fact that a modern and coherent immigration policy linked to the needs of our economy is being formulated.

Given the rapid pace of social and economic development in Ireland, we must be prepared to tackle the unfamiliar situations and challenges which come with it. Harking back to the past as many have done will not serve us and new realities are not always welcome to us. Ireland has a noble record on social justice in the world. Generations of Irish people have served to improve the lives of the poor in the Third World and this continues in our ODA programme.

Notwithstanding much social change, we are culturally a Christian society embracing certain tenets of morality and social justice. We have suffered from colonisation and oppression and economic deprivation in our own history. We are very well placed to formulate a compassionate and enlightened response to this phenomenon of migration by the poor and dispossessed of the world. It would be incompatible with all we stand for as a people to allow the abuse of asylum by some to diminish our asylum and immigration policies.

I hope Members on all sides of the House will not suspect my motives in publicly expressing my genuinely held beliefs and concerns as Minister of State with responsibility for this area of human rights. My criticisms were at all times of defects in the systems and administration and were not personalised against any group of workers or any individual. I fully accept that all my ministerial colleagues are well motivated in dealing with this issue and I intend to work in solidarity with them on this and other areas of policy.

I support Deputy John O'Donoghue, Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Deputy O'Donoghue has a longstanding commitment to justice. Whether in Government or opposition no one in this House has a better record on justice. In opposition he made more contributions to the justice policy issue than the then incumbent, Deputy Owen. He brought forward the legislation which broke the backs of the criminal gangs which were terrorising sections of the community. In Private Members' time he brought forward the Proceeds of Crime Bill which became the backbone of the policy of the Government from then until it left office as it took the Bill and changed the Title and a few sections. When Deputy Owen castigated Deputy O'Donoghue, claiming that his Bill was unconstitutional, the Bill was proved constitutional.

In Government Deputy O'Donoghue has delivered on the commitments in our action programme. Crime has fallen by 25 per cent, he has put in 1,000 additional prison spaces, increased legal aid by 84 per cent and increased Garda strength to an all-time high. He has produced action rather than the inaction which was the hallmark of the previous Government. He has put in place 144 additional staff to deal with asylum seekers, in contrast with the eight staff that were there in the Rainbow Coalition era. He has brought forward refugee legislation in stark contrast to the unworkable legislation of the previous Government. Procedures have been put in place to allow 2,500 asylum seekers to work while the previous Government outlawed work for asylum seekers in 1996. I remind the Labour Party that it was part of the coalition Government which introduced legislation to outlaw asylum seekers working. The Labour Party seems to have some difficulty in remembering that fact. The very people who brought forward that legislation now criticise the Government on this issue. In contrast, the Government has provided significant resources to support asylum seekers through welfare, health, housing and education systems. They are treated on exactly the same basis as any other person in this society who has insufficient means to meet his needs. Almost 6,000 asylum seeker households receive supplementary welfare allowance. This amounted to £35 million in 1999 and £22 million in 1998. The Government recently announced that it would bring forward direct provision for the needs of asylum seekers. Meanwhile, the basic needs of asylum seekers will continue to be met by the social welfare system. Not only are we supporting individual asylum seekers but, through my Department, we are also supporting a wide range of groups who support asylum seekers.

I support Deputy O'Donoghue and the Government's view in this area. We will continue to meet the challenges that are ahead and we will make this country a better place for all people. As for the Opposition I can do no better than repeat the words of the Reverend John Dunlop on "Questions and Answers" last Monday evening when he said that Deputy Owen's and her party's position of moral superiority seemed not to be appropriate in this instance.

There are many important areas where the legacy of inaction of the last Government has led to problems being much worse than they needed to be. The Labour Party was in charge of housing policy for years but did not plan or provide for the emerging scale of need. Fine Gael's undistinguished record in charge of transport policy provides a fine backdrop to Deputy Yates's frequent tirades. I particularly find the Opposition's new-found devotion to education to be almost amusing, in light of the Labour Party's 1997 freeze on school funding and its attempts to cut back teacher numbers. In addition to these general areas, the specific issue of refugees and asylum seekers is another area where the Opposition did little or nothing when in charge of public policy. In contrast, a wide range of actions have been undertaken over the past two years. A new series of resources had to be put in place. The ever changing nature and scale of the issue has required a rapid evolution of policies. This challenge is being met.

Perhaps the Opposition knew a few months ago that the number of asylum applications would double, but it did not tell anyone. This increase has caused a range of pressures to which the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Government continue to respond. The crass stereotyping of the actions of the Minister and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform does nothing to inform a constructive debate on this issue.

Responses to the processing, support and housing of asylum seekers and refugees are developing to meet the new needs. This action is ongoing. In my area, for example, we are reviewing the supports we provided last year for schools catering for the children involved and will shortly announce advances to meet new needs. We are also supporting multicultural and anti-racism initiatives, some in conjunction with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

An increasing number of people are casually bandying around the word "racist". This does nothing to foster an informed and balanced discussion of the issues.

The Minister should talk to Deputy Callely.

There should also be no place in our debates for the naive extremes of those who think we can have completely open borders and manage any number of refugees, or those who would exclude all non-EU immigrants.

Any objective assessment reveals a Minister who has succeeded across the range of issues for which he is responsible. Crime has decreased significantly throughout the country. There are more gardaí than ever before and their physical facilities are benefiting from the largest ever programme of investment. The Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, has also worked to bring the issue of crime into a wider context. We all know the Opposition Front Benches are full of people still smarting from the way he exposed their mishandlings and wholesale inadequacies. Theirs is a record of a rejected Administration which left behind nothing but a catalogue of unequalled disarray in this vital area. In contrast, the Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, has delivered concrete action and he deserves the confidence and thanks of this House.

I join with previous speakers in congratulating the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on his speech last night, which cogently put forward a very comprehensive, reasoned, balanced argument. It was very informative for Members who have been quick to criticise him and the public. I can say, as his colleague, that no Minister has been more active in seeking to come to terms with this relatively recent phenomenon in Irish society, resulting from the greatest movement of people in Europe since the Second World War. This is an international phenomenon which has come to our shores and which we must cope and deal with in a comprehensive and balanced way.

The Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, has taken actions in this area, rather than just talking about it. The record of the last Government in relation to this matter does not crown it in glory. The Minister came to this problem in June 1997 and has taken many proactive steps which have confirmed his humanitarian approach to this issue, in terms of providing independent appeals mechanisms and staff to process the applications, which had mounted and were unattended to under the previous Administration. He has taken a series of steps to ensure the dignity of individuals is upheld.

Due to the unpredictability of the numbers arriving every week, it is difficult to meet the critical service pressures that can sometimes arise, as happened recently. However, I want to make it very clear that the Minister's commitment to this issue over the past two and a half years has been consistent and, without wishing any disrespect to anyone else, greater than anyone else's. He is the front line Minister who has to deal with this issue, in terms of how we meet our international law obligations. He has been in constant contact with the international personages who have been interacting with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to ensure the basic rights of asylum seekers and immigrants. He has made the very clear point that these are not interchangeable terms but have distinct definitional values and require distinct responses under international law.

There is not a great deal of difference between Members in relation to these fundamental matters. There is a tendency to fall into the trap of political stereotyping for the purposes of trying to provide a very facile analysis. It has been unjustifiably said that the groups debating this issue can be divided into people who believe in immigration and those who do not. That is a very unfair analysis of the situation. What we are talking about – and what was the policy being pursued in the latter days of the rainbow coalition, in terms of its decision of 25 June – is the need to provide immigration control so that we can uphold the definite public policy criteria that apply here, to ensure the rights of people who come to this country are upheld, regardless of whether they are here legally or illegally under our present laws.

The Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, has made a commitment over many months to bring forward updated immigration and asylum laws, which are a subset of immigration law, in view of the recent phenomenon which did not apply when the primary legislation, such as the Aliens Act and other legislation referring to this matter, were enacted. Unfortunately, the changing situation means that the procedures laid down in the Refugee Act, 1996, are inadequate, despite what I am sure were the best intentions of the then Government to bring forward a legislative response which it believed was adequate.

Let us be fair and tolerant in relation to the complexity of this issue. Let us give credit where it is due to this Government, in all its manifestations, and the chairmanship of the Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, of the interdepartmental committee. I welcome the directorate which has just been set up under the auspices of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. The Government is totally committed to seeking to deal with this problem in a proper and dignified way.

I concur with the contributions of both Ministers who spoke before me. There is a danger, on the cusp of the new millennium, that we will use or give in to illiberal or intemperate comments on this issue. It is a tragedy that the Opposition has chosen to play politics with this issue.

The Deputy should include the Progressive Democrats.

We are talking about migrants to our country who are extremely vulnerable and deserve better from the Opposition. I condemn the knee-jerk reactions by both liberals and illib erals. I object vociferously to the use of the word "racism", which is being pinned on people as a label. That is wrong and is not the spirit of Ireland.

Irish people have migrated to many other countries. We would expect to be able to accord the welcome we received in those countries over the centuries to people who come here. However, the reality is that the debate has been debased somewhat by this motion. The Minister is doing all the responsible acts required of a Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. However, we must distinguish between the role of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform as it applies to refugee, asylum and immigration policy and as it applies to the skills shortages we face.

Government policy, to date, has focused on the notion of dispersal of asylum seekers in an even way around the country, rapid integration of genuine political refugees and a move towards direct provision for the needs of those awaiting a decision on their asylum status. A clear distinction must be drawn between the position of the genuine political refugee, who enjoys protection under the UN charter, and the position of an economic migrant. The challenge for the Government is how it should provide for the economic migrant and establish a policy that helps industry meet the skills shortages that are there for everyone to see. The responsibility for drawing up such a policy lies squarely within the Tánaiste's remit, given that her Department, not that of the Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, is responsible for filling the skill gaps facing Irish businesses. Those clear distinctions must be drawn in this debate.

Unfortunately, there has been a confusion in this debate between three very important terms – asylum seeker, refugee and economic migrant. A clear distinction must be drawn between those three categories. I am confident the Government, including the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy O'Donoghue, and the Tánaiste, will fulfil the needs of both those seeking legitimate asylum from political persecution and economic migrants, by matching those migrants with the demonstrable skills shortages in our economy.

It is a pleasure to work with Deputy O'Donoghue, one of the most hardworking and effective Ministers for justice that we have had for a long time. He has been reforming, progressive and enlightened as evidenced by the legislation placed on the Statute Book during the past two and a half years. There is no question or doubt that the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has performed much better under his leadership. He has introduced more legislation than any of his predecessors. He has introduced legislation dealing with such matters as witness protection and human rights, the first Bill of its kind to be introduced in the State. More than £1 billion has been spent in the past year, by far the largest amount ever spent. The number of serious crimes committed has fallen by 25 per cent or 20,000.

The Opposition should be fair and straight as regards the Minister's performance. There is no doubt that he has a safe pair of hands. His work rate was unmatched by any of his predecessors. A record number of Bills, 28 in total, have been introduced in the past two years. A total of 11 Bills are currently before the Oireachtas. A further 28 Bills are at various stages of preparation.

I was pleased to work with the Minister on the Children Bill, one of the most revolutionary Bills ever introduced and in which I tried to be radical but he was even more radical. That legislation alone shows the kind of politician and legislator the Minister is. He was aggressive and a tough opponent in opposition but since taking office he has been much maligned and unfairly treated.

On asylum seekers and refugees, as the Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell said, problems are being experienced but given the numbers turning up at our doorstep any Minister would have problems. Deputy O'Donoghue is the best Minister for Justice we have had in the past ten years and I am proud to support him.

What about Máire?

I understand Deputy Joe Higgins is sharing time with Deputies De Rossa, Michael D. Higgins, O'Sullivan and Broughan.

(Dublin West): As a Socialist Party Deputy I co-sponsored the motion expressing no confidence in the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and, by extension, the Government since he merely expresses Government policy. There is a two tier system of justice. On that basis alone the Minister and Government stand condemned. While the poor continue to be criminalised and go to jail, the rich continue to defraud with abandon and go free. A poor man was driven to his death in recent weeks having been sent to prison for stealing a coat while a heroin addict was condemned to six years in prison for stealing a handbag. At the same time the most powerful institutions in the State, the banks and financial institutions, have defrauded the tax system with abandon to the tune of hundreds of millions of pounds. Has the chairman of a major bank or a prominent director darkened the doorway of a courthouse to answer for this grotesque fraud on the people? Has even a charge been laid? The Minister and the Government protect the criminal rich. That is the reality as long as they form part of the elite of this society.

Heroin is as common inside our prisons as outside. What hope does that give us that the Minister and the Government can solve this horrific problem which is preying on working-class communities? There is no chance that they will get to the root of the problems in our inner cities and outer suburbs causing this terrible tragedy.

On those seeking refuge, the Minister and the Government stand condemned. Two years ago the Minister said that 90 per cent of asylum applications were bogus even before hearings were held. The principle of natural justice went out the window. No Minister condemned the hardnosed comments of the hardnecked Deputy Callely, a Fianna Fáil Deputy treading the well worn path of cynical bigotry and opportunism, targeting a minority, the defenceless and the weak, and flying in the face of our history.

Over the top.

(Dublin West): In recent months the Irish Episcopal Commission for Emigrants stated that 1,287,987 people born in this country are living outside its borders. A total of 8,000 are seeking refuge which is considered a crisis by the Minister and the Government. Fianna Fáil Deputies are stirring up the politics of resentment by suggesting to the poor in desperate need of a home and living in poverty that somehow refugees are responsible. That is despicable beyond belief. The land speculators, racketeers, house builders and developers who back, support and finance Fianna Fáil are responsible for the housing crisis and the fact that rents have gone through the roof. Yet, there has not been one word of condemnation against a Deputy stirring up such hatred. The Minister and the Government stand condemned.

Of all the members of the Cabinet, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy O'Donoghue, has proved to be the most incompetent and inept. He is the one who promised most and delivered least. He was the man who in opposition had all the answers but in government can provide none of the solutions. The litany of his failures has been well documented in this debate, from his failure to deal with industrial relations and morale problems in the Garda Siochána – he has presided over the first Garda strike in the history of the State – to his failure to ensure communities, particularly in urban areas, are provided with adequate protection against the continuing problems of crime and vandalism. If anyone thought that the problem of crime was being adequately dealt with they must have had their illusions shattered by the CSO figures published in the newspapers today which show a huge level of unreported crime and a worrying gap between official Garda statistics and the actual level of crime experienced.

Nowhere have the Minister's failings been more obvious or stark than in regard to asylum seekers. The advocate of tolerance and understanding in opposition seems to have become a prisoner of the most conservative forces within Fianna Fáil and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, an advocate of a severe and an inflexible approach to this issue.

The way in which we respond to the problem of asylum seekers and immigrants will be a measure of our maturity as a society. We have two clear choices: we can go the road of prejudice, ignorance and intolerance as advocated by Deputy Callely who believes in nothing, who does not believe what he is saying and who is a cynical, opportunist politician of the worst kind or we can go the way proposed by Deputy Noel Ahern. I have drawn a distinction previously in this House between what I regard as Deputy Callely's opportunism and Deputy Ahern's honest conservatism but the net result is the same: a heightened prejudice against and fear of those who are different in our society.

We can look for a way to deal with the challenge in a civilised and humane way which allows us as a relatively wealthy and developed country, to meet our obligations to those who are less fortunate. It is important to remind the House that this is a Europe-wide problem which has touched Ireland only relatively slightly and then only in recent years. Around 450,000 sought asylum in 29 industrialised countries last year. Some European countries have been struggling with this problem for years. Figures quoted last night by my colleague, Deputy Howlin, show that the scale of the problem in most of our European neighbours is far more severe than anything we have experienced. The number of asylum seekers and immigrants is entirely manageable if we have the will and determination to take the actions required.

The refusal to allow asylum seekers to work is a form of double discrimination. It discriminates against them by compelling them to remain on the lowest levels of social welfare payments. This means that they have no independent income of their own and they must depend on the State for basic services such as housing and health. Given the time it takes to determine the status, this can go on for years. It also discriminates against them because it leaves them open to the perception that they are spongers who want to live off the State when we know that this is far from the truth. It also leaves them subject to exploitation by unscrupulous elements in our society.

What did the Deputy do in 1996?

The changes announced in July, which were supposed to open the door to work for asylum seekers, are so bureaucratic that they have proven to be worse than useless. Those who, for whatever reason, find themselves in this country and who want to play a constructive part in its social and economic life should be allowed to do so.

From time to time the Minister has referred to the orderly return of persons to their country of origin. This is a polite way of saying "forcible deportation". A policy of forcible deportation will involve reluctant, fearful men, women and children, possibly screaming and fighting, handcuffed to gardaí or immigration officers, being forced onto planes—

What did the Deputy do when in office?

—or ferries. Such a policy would be unthinkable and would bring shame on Ireland throughout the international community. If, by his question, the Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, is advocating such a policy—

When the Deputy was in office he advocated such a policy.

I am asking what did the Deputy do.

—shame on him as Minister with responsibility for children.

He is not.

We know what the Deputy is against, we do not know what he is for.

When I spoke on this subject on related legislation in February, when we were dealing with the Immigration Bill, I referred to Ireland's historic experience of sending people abroad. Perhaps in the 1950s it was at its most extreme since the Famine, with 55,000 people emigrating in 1955. During that decade and the decade that went before, it was never less than 35,000 people. It was a time in England when signs in windows read "No dogs, blacks or Irish". There is probably no country in Europe or the world which should be more cognisant of the marginalisation of migrants, not just in Britain but in America, Australia and elsewhere.

What we have been debating last night and today are the messages that are being sent, and some appalling messages are being sent. Even in the Minister's contribution last night there is reference to the treatment of migrants and of the rest of the members of the Irish population. He stated:

We most certainly do not assist the process of integration or help to avoid the evils of racism by blurring the legal distinctions to which I have already referred. The general public is not impressed, and many are angered, when they hear comments, the general import of which is that a blurred application of the law is to be supported or at least tolerated when one is dealing with the problem of illegal immigration, but not when one is dealing with breaches of other laws. Suggestions to the effect that immigrants deserve preferential treatment when it comes to enforcement of the law, feeds into the hands of those whose basic tendencies are racist.

I am appalled by the inclusion of that paragraph in a speech written for a Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform because what we are discussing is all about messages. Two messages have consistently come from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. It has exaggerated the problem out of all proportion and it has insisted on writing, in replies to Minister's questions and in speeches, the suggestion that unless we are careful we are about to be overwhelmed by an enormous flood of immigrants. Those in the Department have consistently sent a message abroad that we must appear to be tough, but at home they dance on the legal distinctions in regard to who is a refugee, a migrant or an economic refugee.

The use of language is an appalling abuse. There is no point in putting a tooth in it. Deputies Callely Ahern, Flood and others know what they are saying. What we say in this House can contribute to or answer the fear that has been created by imprecise policy. What have these people said? They said that migrants are in competition with the poorest, the people waiting for houses and the unemployed. This is to inculcate and spread fear among the areas of the population in which it can do the most damage. That is cheap and ugly populism.

On another matter, the manner in which it has been repeated here that the legislation passed by the House can be ignored, is little less than outrageous and indeed unconstitutional. The Refugee Act, 1996, is the law of the land, and if the Minister does not like it, he should repeal it. While it is the law of the land, the Minister has responsibility of providing the resources to implement it. Why should he listen to hostile comments from an Administration that opposed it from the very beginning?

We need to remain calm, as we have been encouraged to do by the Government, but if the Government is interested in keeping calm, why did Deputy O'Flynn, speaking in the House earlier today, talk about 2,000 people in 1992 and the great flood that was beginning, when in answering a question on 12 October 1999 the Minister gave a figure of 31 for 1994? The 1992 figures which Deputy O'Flynn quoted were 39 applications, three of which were withdrawn before a decision was made, seven were recognised as refugees and 29 were refused. There is a myth being built that the flood has begun and a message must be sent abroad that will not be misinterpreted. Tens of thousands of agricultural benefits have to be administered for farmers and it does not affect the existence of the State, but 900 refugees a month arrive here and the State goes into a crisis. That is incredible.

As someone who has been interested in the issue of prisons for 20 years, I sat and listened last night to a disgraceful litany of more prison places when there are three to four times the European average of young people under the age of 13 in our prisons who should not be there. It is a scandal that there were no non-prison options in a long contribution by the Minister. Those two issues, refugee policy and prisons, are the reason the Minister should call it a day.

How we speak about and interact with asylum seekers at this critical time will determine to a large extent whether we become a cohesive, intercultural society or one which is torn by mistrust, division and racism. I completely concur with what my colleague, Deputy Higgins, has just said about the importance of the language we use when we talk about this issue. We can set the seeds now for the growth of far right fascist politics, the type that has taken hold in France, Austria, Denmark and other EU countries, or we can take the other route. We can use the experience of our collective history to adapt to the change which is inevitable in a global economy in which we are a successful player.

We have and will continue to have immigrants of different race, colour and creed living here. That is an undisputed fact. The question is how we manage it. We need clear Government policies which are efficiently implemented so that the process runs smoothly. What is Government policy on immigration? There have been a number of reactive statements from various Government Deputies, from the Tánaiste down, but there is no policy or coherent plan of action. On the Order of Business this morning the Taoiseach indicated that there is no new legislation promised until late next year. Last night the Minister belatedly acknowledged that the Refugee Act introduced by the former Minister of State, Joan Burton, is good legislation, yet he has refused to provide one intelligent, honest explanation as to why that legislation effectively has been shelved.

Last week members of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality and Women's Rights visited the Mount Street centre. We could see that the staff were doing their best to deliver a good service but there simply were not enough people to deliver the service. The number of asylum seekers coming to our shores to seek shelter is relatively small in comparison with other EU countries. The increase this year was predictable. The likelihood that they will continue to increase is predictable. It should not be too much to expect decent conditions in the delivery of services to which people are entitled in times of economic plenty. It is our obligation under international law. While politics and administration eventually comes to grips with the challenges of immigration, it is imperative that we do not use language or repeat mistruths which only serve to fuel the intolerant and racist attitudes which have grown in recent years.

Using words such as "influx" and "swamped" only serves to further marginalise immigrants. It dehumanises people and portrays their plight as problems for society. Giving credence to the erroneous claims that asylum seekers are respon sible in part for our housing, homelessness or unemployment problems, is also unworthy of Members. These problems are of our own making and we now have the resources to address them. Pointing the finger at asylum seekers is nothing more or less than scapegoating. Insisting on the marginalisation of asylum seekers creates divisions and tensions.

In his contribution to the Immigration Bill this afternoon, Deputy Noel Ahern referred to the fact that refugees are already working in the black economy, and stated: "I have no objection to that. People are obviously being paid out of the till. That goes on and it is good and proper".

Is there any logic behind these comments? Why do some on the Government benches want and approve of asylum seekers working in the black economy? They hold that view because it will keep asylum seekers on the margins of society, and always ensure that they are outside the law and subject to a crackdown when someone believes fit. We must be careful in the language we use so that we do not legitimise intolerance and racism. I would like to address other issues but I do not have the time. However, on this and many other issues, the Minister has shown that he is not capable of doing the job properly.

It is clear that the Minister has failed to provide adequate protection for communities, particularly deprived and disadvantaged communities who have continued to suffer from crime and vandalism during the past two and a half years. When in Opposition the Minister promised zero tolerance but he has failed to deliver, particularly for the most deprived in society. In each of the past three years, the Garda Commissioner has trumpeted the continuing fall in crime statistics which are down to 86,000 indictable crimes this year. However, the reality is different, particularly in areas on the north and west sides of Dublin, the north side of Cork, Limerick and other urban areas, where communities are constantly plagued by car theft, drugs, including a new heroin epidemic, and vandalism. If every family affected by crime over the past year had reported the grave inconvenience or upset, the Minister's figures would be doubled, at least.

Most people would accept the CSO study published in the Irish Independent today which recorded 154,600 households drastically affected by crime, 115,00 crimes against motor vehicles, 16,500 car thefts, almost 100,000 acts of vandalism, 48,000 personal thefts and 17,000 assaults. This is an accurate measure of the real crime statistics. I have tabled several parliamentary questions to the Minister asking whether we need an independent audit or some sort of liaison between the CSO and the Garda Síochána to produce the true level of crime.

On eleven occasions I have asked the Minister and the Taoiseach to face up to the serious issue of car theft, joyriding and related crimes. A few days ago I raised the situation on the north side of Dublin where, night after night, there is continuous turmoil with five or six cars in action, where there have been ten or 12 fatalities in recent years, injuries to pedestrians and gardaí, and where children returning home from school have to scamper out of the way of these criminals. We need urgent action. I asked the Minister to support the north side task force and to meet them, but he still does not seem prepared to do so. The task force comprises gardaí, public representatives and the local community. I also asked the Minister to set up a dedicated Garda joyriding unit because of the threat posed to gardaí by these criminals.

During his statement last night, the Minister referred to fact that Garda strength would rise to 12,000. However, as many people are leaving the force as are joining. Deputy Howlin's motion is accurate in that the force is demoralised and the Minister is responsible. He should provide protection for the most deprived communities.

I wish to share my time with Deputy Howlin.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

I have no faith or confidence in this Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. That is not a personal observation. I remind the Government that it has been in office for the same length of time as the rainbow coalition. It cannot hide behind the fact that it has only just arrived – it must stand by its own record. It stands by that record against an unprecedented degree of wealth which no previous Administration has ever had. To put it in a capsule, the Minister for Finance has, in cash, the same amount of money we received during the previous six years in Structural Funds. No previous Administration had the resources this Government has had over the past three budgets.

We witnessed a sad and pathetic spectacle in the House earlier, and I am glad for her sake that she is not in the House. The Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell, who made wonderful statements about a "shambles" and other assertions outside the House, made a humiliating surrender to superior Fianna Fáil numbers in the coalition.

Shameful.

The late Jim Kemmy once remarked on the bravery of Deputy O'Dea when he famously described him as being ‘Mighty Mouse' on the issue of Barrington's Hospital in Limerick but ‘Mickey Mouse' in this Chamber. Sadly we now have a ‘Minnie Mouse' in the Progressive Democrats on this issue. Anyone who reads her pathetic "mea culpa, I succumb, this is a wonderful Minister”, cannot but feel saddened for her in light of what she has consistently said in recent days and weeks.

There are many issues for which the Minister should feel compelled to resign and many issues on which we have no confidence in him. I wish to rise above those issues because they have been well addressed, and to deal with something far more fundamental which concerns all Members. Each decade of our time has been defined by a particular social issue in the modernisation of this nation. In the 1960s and 1970s it was about the liberalisation of society – the removal of the shackles of conservatism which went into the privacy of people's bedrooms, denied them the right to express their sexual orientation and refused to recognise the pluralism of different belief systems on this island within our Constitution. During all of that period of struggle for change, Fianna Fáil was consistently aligned with the forces of conservatism.

There are people younger than me in the gallery and people yet to come, and the defining issue they will face as they come of age going into the first decade of the next millennium is how we come to terms with the reality that this country is irrevocably and totally changed, and that the reality of pluralism is here. It is on our streets – one only has to go into any pub or restaurant or look at the numbers of people coming into this island, legally and illegally. The issue we have to face is whether we can learn from our historical experience of colonisation and humiliation on the one hand, and from the dreadful lessons that were not learnt by countries in Europe who have produced within their ranks at the moment the nightmare of organised and orchestrated racism.

I appeal to Fianna Fáil in particular to deal with the message coming out of the words which have not yet been condemned or disowned by the Taoiseach. How, in a population of 3.6 million, predicted to grow to 4 million, can one talk about a problem of 8,000 people as "swamping" the country?

It is a disgrace.

How can one live with the idea that people have to be "kicked out", as distinct from being deported? Deputy Callely knew exactly what he was saying last week. Two years ago, on 26 November, he used precisely the same language. Deputy Noel Ahern knew precisely what he meant when he said that illegal immigrants or asylum seekers were in competition with people in his constituency for jobs and houses. My constituency colleague, Deputy Eoin Ryan, knows that is not true. The Eastern Health Board does not house people on the corporation housing list. If we have failed collectively to house those on the housing lists, let us not confuse that and tell them the reason they do not have a house is that a dark alien person is living nearby. Can we learn anything from the rise of Le Pen in France or Haider in Austria?

When our forefathers and mothers landed on the shores of an America which was devotedly Protestant, they were an alien Catholic people and therefore suspect. The ignorance of the settled community led to the racism which our grandfathers and great grandfathers endured. It is fear and ignorance that feed racism in any society. We are no worse, but we are certainly no better than elsewhere. Those messages and that language and vagueness, couched in terms such as "we might be swamped" and "they are in competition for jobs" are lies from the mouths of public representatives from the largest party in the State. Not one member of the party has denounced such lies. Neither the Taoiseach, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, nor colleagues on the Eastern Health Board have said that Deputy Callely was wrong, that asylum seekers are not in competition for jobs. Where is the condemnation? Then, of course, they did not condemn Mr. Haughey, so perhaps we cannot hope for too much.

Just as the Labour Party led the struggle for the progressive modernisation of the country in the 1970s and 1980s, we will continue to do so in the 1990s and into the next century. We have the resources and it is not necessary for us to be mean – we can afford to be generous. The reality is that in every country to which Irish people were forced to emigrate and where we made a contribution, we enriched the country and ourselves. The people who are knocking on the shores of this island will do precisely the same for us. Of course there has to be an immigration policy, regulation, control and all the things Deputy Howlin has been saying repeatedly—

That is the point.

However, we should not throw all that away by saying, as the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform said from the security of south Kerry, that we are being swamped.

It is time for every Member to make up their minds. In five or six minutes we will all vote either for a progressive pluralist Ireland which allows for difference and diversity or for confidence in what a member of the Government has described as the shambles of a failed policy.

The Deputy is losing the run of himself.

Once we vote we each take ownership and responsibility for the outcome. Those who endorse the Government fiasco on emigration policy and vote with the Government tonight need no longer pay lip service to the reform of policy or promise substantive change. It is for us to decide whether the utterances and voice of the backwoods men reflect the authentic voice of the House, described by the Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell, and not by me or Deputy Quinn, as xenophobic and intolerant, or whether the national Parliament demands better. I firmly believe that a majority of Members believes and knows we can and must do better.

Many in the Fianna Fáil Party and certainly in the Progressive Democrats are shamed by the Government's policy on immigration. They are privately horrified by the remarks of certain Government backbenchers and it is shameful that they are acquiescent and therefore complicit. Last Sunday a national paper contained a declaration that the Taoiseach stood by the remarks of Deputy Callely. Either that is a fact or the Taoiseach has a responsibility to disown it. Each of us has a responsibility to either match principled talk with principled action or accept that the backwoods men really are the people who reflect our views and the views of the Parliament.

The failures of the Minister have been well rehearsed over an hour and a half of debate. Prisons, which have been officially opened, are without prisoners. In answer to a parliamentary question today it was stated that the cost to the taxpayer of the opening of these non-prisons is £20,000. To add pantomime to fiasco we have a situation where two prisoners have already escaped from a prison which is yet to house inmates. In that fiasco we have a situation where overcrowding and unacceptable conditions remain. It is not good enough to say after two and a half years in Government that it was the same under the previous regime. Responsibility must be taken at some time. How many years will the Government be in office before it accepts responsibility?

There is little treatment and huge rates of re-offending with virtually no treatment for serious sex offenders. There are ongoing IR problems in the Garda Síochána which as of now is back to Victorian work practices. There is an unacceptable waiting list for legal aid, which has quadrupled since the Government took office. There are major problems in the prosecution service as identified in the report of the Director of Public Prosecutions on the Wall case. The long list of broken promises goes on and on and the buck stops at the door of the Minister. Last night I said we would judge him solely on the criteria he himself set down. The man who daily demanded accountability must now be called to account. By any standards, and certainly by his own, he has failed.

The House is a Chamber of discussion. Some would say talk is cheap, but in some issues words matter and have enormous consequences. The fuelling of base and racist tendencies is one area where words have weight and impact. In another time in this Chamber a prominent Parliamen tarian pledged to stand by the Republic. The principles of republicanism as I know them are based fundamentally on the dignity and equality of all people. We will see tonight who stands by a pluralist Republic.

Amendment put.

Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Blaney, Harry.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Matt.Brennan, Séamus.Briscoe, Ben.Browne, John (Wexford).Byrne, Hugh.Callely, Ivor.Carey, Pat.Collins, Michael.Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.Coughlan, Mary.Cowen, Brian.Cullen, Martin.Daly, Brendan.Davern, Noel.de Valera, Síle.Dennehy, John.Doherty, Seán.Ellis, John.Fahey, Frank.Fleming, Seán.Flood, Chris.Foley, Denis.Fox, Mildred.Gildea, Thomas.Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Healy-Rae, Jackie.Jacob, Joe.Keaveney, Cecilia.Kelleher, Billy.

Kenneally, Brendan.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Séamus.Kitt, Michael.Kitt, Tom.Lawlor, Liam.Lenihan, Brian.Lenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie.McDaid, James.McGuinness, John.Martin, Micheál.Moffatt, Thomas.Molloy, Robert.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan, Michael.Ó Cuív, Éamon.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donnell, Liz.O'Donoghue, John.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Hanlon, Rory.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Keeffe, Ned.O'Kennedy, Michael.O'Rourke, Mary.Power, Seán.Reynolds, Albert.Roche, Dick.Ryan, Eoin.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wade, Eddie.Wallace, Dan.Walsh, Joe.Woods, Michael.Wright, G. V.

Níl

Allen, Bernard.Barnes, Monica.Barrett, Seán.Bell, Michael.Belton, Louis.Boylan, Andrew.Bradford, Paul.Broughan, Thomas.Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).Bruton, John.Burke, Liam.Burke, Ulick.Carey, Donal.Connaughton, Paul.Cosgrave, Michael.Coveney, Simon.Crawford, Seymour.Creed, Michael.Currie, Austin.

D'Arcy, Michael.De Rossa, Proinsias.Deenihan, Jimmy.Dukes, Alan.Durkan, Bernard.Enright, Thomas.Farrelly, John.Ferris, Michael.Finucane, Michael.Fitzgerald, Frances.Flanagan, Charles.Gilmore, Éamon.Gormley, John.Gregory, Tony.Hayes, Brian.Higgins, Jim.Higgins, Joe.Higgins, Michael. Howlin, Brendan.

Níl–continued

Kenny, Enda.Lowry, Michael.McCormack, Pádraic.McDowell, Derek.McGinley, Dinny.McGrath, Paul.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Gay.Mitchell, Jim.Mitchell, Olivia.Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.Naughten, Denis.Neville, Dan.Noonan, Michael.Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.O'Keeffe, Jim.O'Shea, Brian.O'Sullivan, Jan.

Owen, Nora.Penrose, William.Perry, John.Quinn, Ruairí.Rabbitte, Pat.Reynolds, Gerard.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Seán.Sargent, Trevor.Sheehan, Patrick.Shortall, Róisín.Spring, Dick.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.Timmins, Billy.Upton, Mary.Wall, Jack.Yates, Ivan.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies S.Brennan and Power; Níl, Deputies Barrett and Stagg.
Amendment declared carried.
Question put: "That the motion, as amended, be agreed to."

I point out to Members that the vote cannot commence until all Members are in the lobby on the correct side of the barrier. Members must be on the inside of the barrier for the vote to commence.

Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Blaney, Harry.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Matt.Brennan, Séamus.Briscoe, Ben.Browne, John (Wexford).Byrne, Hugh.Callely, Ivor.Carey, Pat.Collins, Michael.Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.Coughlan, Mary.Cowen, Brian.Cullen, Martin.Daly, Brendan.Davern, Noel.de Valera, Síle.Dennehy, John.Doherty, Seán.Ellis, John.Fahey, Frank.Fleming, Seán.Flood, Chris.Foley, Denis.Fox, Mildred.Gildea, Thomas.Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Healy-Rae, Jackie.Jacob, Joe.

Keaveney, Cecilia.Kelleher, Billy.Kenneally, Brendan.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Séamus.Kitt, Michael.Kitt, Tom.Lawlor, Liam.Lenihan, Brian.Lenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie.McDaid, James.McGuinness, John.Martin, Micheál.Moffatt, Thomas.Molloy, Robert.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan, Michael.Ó Cuív, Éamon.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donnell, Liz.O'Donoghue, John.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Hanlon, Rory.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Keeffe, Ned.O'Kennedy, Michael.O'Rourke, Mary.Power, Seán.Reynolds, Albert.Roche, Dick.Ryan, Eoin.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wade, Eddie. Tá–continued

Wallace, Dan.Walsh, Joe.

Woods, Michael.Wright, G. V.

Níl

Allen, Bernard.Barnes, Monica.Barrett, Seán.Bell, Michael.Belton, Louis.Boylan, Andrew.Bradford, Paul.Broughan, Thomas.Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).Bruton, John.Burke, Liam.Burke, Ulick.Carey, Donal.Connaughton, Paul.Cosgrave, Michael.Coveney, Simon.Crawford, Seymour.Creed, Michael.Currie, Austin.D'Arcy, Michael.De Rossa, Proinsias.Deenihan, Jimmy.Dukes, Alan.Durkan, Bernard.Enright, Thomas.Farrelly, John.Ferris, Michael.Finucane, Michael.Fitzgerald, Frances.Flanagan, Charles.Gilmore, Éamon.Gormley, John.Gregory, Tony.Hayes, Brian.Higgins, Jim.Higgins, Joe.Higgins, Michael.

Howlin, Brendan.Kenny, Enda.Lowry, Michael.McCormack, Pádraic.McDowell, Derek.McGinley, Dinny.McGrath, Paul.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Gay.Mitchell, Jim.Mitchell, Olivia.Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.Naughten, Denis.Neville, Dan.Noonan, Michael.Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.O'Keeffe, Jim.O'Shea, Brian.O'Sullivan, Jan.Owen, Nora.Penrose, William.Perry, John.Quinn, Ruairí.Rabbitte, Pat.Reynolds, Gerard.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Seán.Sargent, Trevor.Sheehan, Patrick.Shortall, Róisín.Spring, Dick.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.Timmins, Billy.Upton, Mary.Wall, Jack.Yates, Ivan.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies S.Brennan and Power; Níl, Deputies Barrett and Stagg.

Motion, as amended, agreed to.
Top
Share