Northern Ireland Issues.

Mr. Kirk

The murder of the late Mr. Séamus Ludlow in May 1976 was a brutal slaying of a decent law-abiding citizen. His family and relatives have long sought the truth about his murder. His nephew, Mr. Jimmy Sharkey, Mr. Ed Moloney, a journalist based in Belfast and a number of others have undertaken painstaking research. They have relentlessly pursued this case to build up a picture of what happened on that fateful May night at Thistle Cross North, Dundalk.

It is vitally important that the truth should be established as quickly as possible in this case. The report by Judge Henry Barron is clearly a major step forward. What happens to the report and whether we should have a public inquiry is the issue that now arises. Those issues must be considered. The extended Ludlow family is more than anxious that the truth should be established in this case. I thank the Minister of State for taking this matter and I await his response.

Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Mr. Kitt)

In May 1998, following the signing of the Good Friday Agreement, the Government asked the former Tánaiste, Mr. John Wilson, to conduct a review of the services and arrangements in place in this jurisdiction to meet the needs of those who suffered as a result of violent action associated with the conflict in Northern Ireland.

As part of that review, Mr. Wilson was asked to include consideration of the needs and concerns of people who sustained serious injuries and family members of those who died or sustained serious injuries as a consequence of violent acts ensuing from the conflict.

Mr. Séamus Ludlow was an unassuming, ordinary working man who on the night of 1 May 1976 was murdered on his way home from a pub in Dundalk. Séamus Ludlow's life revolved around his work and home. He was known in Dundalk for his charitable work and he had no political affiliations.

The case of Séamus Ludlow and the concerns of the Ludlow family were specifically referred to by Mr. Wilson in the report of the Victims' Commission, entitled "A Place and a Name", which was published in August 1999. Mr. Wilson found the allegations about the conduct of certain gardaí and about the conduct of the investigation of the crime itself, very disturbing.

Arising from the recommendations of the Victims' Commission, in September 1999 the Government established an independent commission of inquiry, initially with the former Chief Justice, Mr. Liam Hamilton, as the sole member. Subsequently, on his resignation due to ill health, the former Supreme Court Judge, Mr. Henry Barron, succeeded him. The independent commission of inquiry was asked to undertake a thorough examination, involving fact finding and assessment, of all aspects of the killing of Séamus Ludlow, including the facts, circumstances, causes and perpetrators of the killing; the nature, extent and adequacy of Garda investigations, including co-operation with and from relevant authorities in Northern Ireland; the reasons no prosecutions took place including whether, and if so by whom and to what extent, the possibility of the initiation of criminal proceedings was impeded; and the material information and evidence presented at the inquest into Mr. Ludlow's death and the circumstances relating to the non-attendance of relatives of Mr. Ludlow at the inquest.

Mr. Justice Barron presented his report on the murder of Séamus Ludlow to the Taoiseach on Wednesday of last week. The Taoiseach would again like to thank the judge and his team for all their work in preparing the report and for their commitment and dedication to this difficult task. While Mr. Justice Barron's report into the murder of Séamus Ludlow is receiving the necessary consideration by relevant Departments and the Attorney General, it is clear that he has in his comprehensive report given thorough and meticulous consideration to all aspects of the terms of reference given to the inquiry.

The report will be brought to the Government as soon as possible. It would be the Taoiseach's intention to have the report referred to the Oireachtas for consideration by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights when it is intended the report would be published and considered in public session, in a process similar to that which was put in place for consideration of the independent commission's report into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 1974. The Taoiseach also hopes that it would be possible to refer the complete report to the committee only with necessary protections in the interest of the preservation of life and the constitutional right to one's good name.

This is Mr. Justice Barron's third report. Previously he reported on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 1974. The Government has considered the report of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights into the bombings and its recommendations are being implemented. The Taoiseach received Mr. Justice Barron's report into the Dublin bombings of 1972 and 1973 at the end of June and it is expected that it will be considered by the Government shortly. The Taoiseach expects to receive Mr. Justice Barron's fourth and final report into the Dundalk bombing and other incidents before the end of the year.

As I said, the establishment of the independent commission of inquiry followed on from the recommendations of the report of the Victims Commissioner, Mr. John Wilson. The report also made recommendations regarding payments to victims of the conflict in Northern Ireland in this jurisdiction. The commission to administer the remembrance fund has now been established and is in the process of disbursing funding of €9 million to victims over the next two to three years.

Flood Relief.

Mr. Healy

This matter relates to the Clonmel flood alleviation scheme. As I left Clonmel today it was pouring with rain and it is still pouring down there. I am not sure whether tonight is an appropriate night to discuss this matter. While I appreciate a senior Minister is present, I am disappointed that the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, is not here to respond to the debate. The Minister of State came to Clonmel last April and dealt with this question.

The problem of flooding in Clonmel goes back over many years. In February 1995 when I was mayor of the town, we had serious flooding and this has been repeated on numerous occasions since then, with the most serious flooding in November 2001 when homes and businesses were flooded for a number of days and hundreds of thousands of euro damage was done to stock in business premises and to homes. People had to leave their homes.

We have been waiting for the flood alleviation scheme to start for many years. The public consultation was carried out, the drawings etc. were with the Office of Public Works, numerous deputations took place and it was apparently ready to start. Last April, just before the local elections, the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, came to Clonmel to tell us that while the scheme was to be somewhat different, it was about to start. We were happy that the scheme was to start and that we had a definite timetable for it. On that occasion the Minister of State told us that a new type of scheme with demountable defences to bring the level of protection against flooding to one in 100 years would commence this year.

The first phase this year was to cover a flood warning scheme and a clearing of various streams which contributed to the most recent devastating flooding in the area. None of that has happened and in a reply to a parliamentary question last week the Minister of State advised it would not happen this year but that he hoped it would happen next year. Last April he also promised that the scheme would be completed in four years, starting this year, with a major part next year and two further parts of the scheme in the two following years. Now I am told it will take place over a period of four to six years, depending on availability of funding, which could mean anything. We have already been waiting ten years for the scheme and we are disappointed that the Minister of State has placed the scheme on the long finger and that the consultation procedure which had been promised to be completed by September 2004 will now not take place until the spring of 2005. With various processes to follow that, it is most likely that this scheme will not start until 2006 at the earliest.

The town has experienced serious flooding over many years and we have been waiting for this scheme. I hope the Minister will be able to tell me tonight that the schedule set out by the Minister of State last April will be adhered to, that the scheme will start this year, that the €1 million, which is a small amount, will be spent on the scheme this year and that the scheme will start properly next year and will be completed within a four year period.

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. McDowell)

I am very grateful to the Deputy for raising the issue. Like him, I am concerned about this matter. My constituency of Dublin South-East has serious flood implications, especially with the high tides and meteorological circumstances in which we find ourselves this evening. I made it my business today to visit two areas in my constituency that are vulnerable to flooding and noticed special works which had been carried out by OPW in one of them and which look as if they will be very effective, and in another area Dublin City Council was deploying temporary structures to prevent flooding in these circumstances. I know what it is like to represent an area subject to flooding. I know that Clonmel has had a long-standing chronic problem with flooding and I fully appreciate the Deputy's concerns.

The House will be aware that following severe flooding in the late 1990s in Clonmel a flood alleviation scheme was developed by the OPW and was publicly exhibited, as required under the Arterial Drainage Acts, in December 2001 and January 2002. Concerns were raised by Waterford and South Tipperary County Councils that there might be contaminated material in the riverbed, which was due to be dredged as part of the alleviation measures and which would therefore have major environmental implications.

As a result of these concerns, the proposed scheme was re-examined and a revised scheme was proposed earlier this year, which included the use of demountable defences, to which the Deputy referred. That technology had developed greatly in recent years. This revised scheme has the advantage of not requiring dredging of the river, along with increasing the level of protection against flooding from a level of one in 50 years to a level of one in 100 years.

In April of this year the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, attended a meeting with the elected members of Clonmel Borough Council where he outlined the revised scheme and the way in which it was to be implemented. He explained to the members that it was hoped to implement the scheme in a phased manner over a period of four to six years depending on available funding.

Mr. Healy

Four years.

Mr. McDowell

The first phase included the development of a flood warning system and the clearing of debris from streams and culverts in the town. This had been estimated to cost in the region of €1 million by the consultants, as it had been anticipated that the flood warning system would be developed outside of the OPW. The next step in the process would be the formal public exhibition of the scheme, which it is hoped to have in the spring of 2005.

The development of the flood warning system has already begun and is now being carried out in-house by the OPW rather than by consultants as originally envisaged. It is hoped that the installation of data-gathering equipment will commence in the next two months, with a report due in January 2005 containing the recommended system.

Alongside this work, additional river modelling is being carried out by the OPW's consultants arising out of the proposed changes in this scheme and it is therefore felt that the clearing of the various streams and culverts might be best carried out when this is completed. It is now anticipated that this work will take place shortly before or during the major construction works.

Subject to a successful public exhibition next spring, the scheme will be submitted to the Minister for Finance for confirmation in accordance with the Arterial Drainage Acts. Detailed design and construction would follow, subject to availability of funding.

Deportation Orders.

Mr. Howlin

I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle and the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this important issue and I am grateful to the Minister for making himself available to the House at this late hour. It underscores the importance of this matter.

Earlier today, the Minister introduced the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Bill, on which I will comment in due course. I do not intend to re-run the arguments on the referendum. They were well aired at the time.

There are, however, outstanding issues and I wish to bring to the Minister's attention one compelling issue where a clear answer will give comfort to people in the most dire circumstances. These are families who have been resident in this State for up to five or more years and have established themselves as members of Irish communities. They have roots here and their children are entirely assimilated. There was an expectation that once the referendum was dealt with by the people and legislation introduced, their circumstances would be regularised. Will the Minister use this opportunity to give comfort to those families?

I will raise three cases from my constituency. The first concerns the family of Ivalina and Kamen Kaltchev. A constituent wrote to me about this, only one letter of many, stating that Kamen has become a provider for the family and that Ivalina has used her artistic ability to have works shown in exhibitions at the Wexford Opera Festival, showing more initiative in becoming involved in community affairs than many people who have lived their whole lives in the area. Their oldest son Stefan is a remarkably bright young man who speaks fluent English and receives top grades in his school subjects. He is a member of Wexford soccer team, is taking computer classes, enrolling for other classes and has a wide circle of Irish friends, including the writer's son. The letter describes their friendships and their roots in the town. That family is, unfortunately, the subject of a deportation order.

I tabled a parliamentary question on this. This family has been in Ireland for five years and the youngest son has received all of his primary education here. They have deep roots in Wexford and are welcome members of the community. In light of the parliamentary question, the Minister has undertaken to review the situation. I invite him to do so with compassion.

The second case is that of a Nigerian woman in my constituency, Oluwadolapo Adebiyi. This is a worrying situation. When this woman presented herself to the national immigration bureau, she was arrested and brought to Mountjoy Prison, where she spent some weeks, and her child was put in foster care in the midlands. We would not like Irish nationals to be treated like that in any country. Will the Minister re-examine this? The answer to my parliamentary question about this case stated that the Minister is satisfied this person is being treated in a fair and humane manner in all respects. I do not agree. The Minister did not have time to reflect on all the factors of that case where a woman has been separated from her child and incarcerated in the Dóchas centre in Mountjoy Jail while her child has been put into care. It is inhumane.

The final example is the Lishenko family who are originally from the Ukraine and who now live in my constituency. They are immersed in the community, having been there for five years. They came here with two children and a third daughter was born here. The children have no recollection of any other life. The oldest daughter has a relationship with a young Wexford man and has a daughter by him. They are all subject to deportation notices.

I will happily discuss the individual cases with the Minister and I understand the difficulty he faces and the tough job he has making these decisions. Can we make the decision as a people that we will put clear and swift immigration procedures in place to process all new asylum cases? It would be unforgivable that those who have built up relationships over time, who have been here for many years and who are immersed in society would be uprooted and sent back to a place that the children of the families would regard as an alien land.

Mr. McDowell

I am grateful to Deputy Howlin for raising these particular cases. I did not know that he proposed to raise these three cases and I would have been able to study them more carefully if I had been aware. I was told that he would raise the policy of the Government in deporting families with Irish-born children who have established long-term residence and deep ties in Ireland. Whatever the case, I do not comment on individual cases in public because I do not know the facts off the top of my head and I ask people to bear in mind that not everything asserted on behalf of people in Ireland is true. I must look at both sides of the equation privately and decide where justice lies.

The category of cases to which the Deputy refers comprises approximately 11,000 persons who made applications prior to 19 February 2003 for permission to remain on the basis of Irish-born children.

Mr. Howlin

I am talking about families that have been here long term.

Mr. McDowell

I do not know what the Deputy means by long term.

Mr. Howlin

I mean people who have been here for five years.

Mr. McDowell

It is not a handful.

Mr. Justice Hardiman in the Supreme Court in the L&O case aptly set out the position of people born in Ireland before that case. He stated: "it seems to me that the existence of an Irish born child does not fundamentally transform the rights of the parents, though [these are the important questions] it requires the specific consideration of the Minister who must reasonably be satisfied of the existence of a grave and substantial reason favouring deportation". Therefore, it is clear that each of these cases demands a rigorous and labour intensive scrutiny with a view to ensuring that the principles set out in the Supreme 'ourt's decision are complied with. As a consequence, this is necessarily more time consuming than if the child was not a citizen.

The constitutional rights of the child within the family unit must be taken into account. The issue of refoulement, as set out in section 5 of the Refugee Act 1996, must be taken into account and 11 separate grounds, which are set out in statutory form in section 3(6) of the Immigration Act 1999, must also be taken into account. These grounds include duration of residence in the State and humanitarian considerations. They also require consideration of the common good.

A file on every case is brought to my office and I make a decision in respect of each case on the basis of the material available to me, including the recommendations of my officers.

We are now faced with the outcome of the Chen judgment. The European Court of Justice has determined the Chen case and ruled in favour of Mrs. Chen. The European Court of Justice upheld the right of Mrs. Chen to deliberately create a situation in which her child would acquire Irish citizenship through birth in Northern Ireland in order to secure long-term residence for both herself and her child in the United Kingdom. My officials in consultation with the Office of the Attorney General are studying its implications. A period of time will be necessary in order to facilitate adequate consideration. Those who have accused me of rushing to judgment on the referendum issue would do well to heed their own advice in this instance and give me some time to consider a decision given eight days ago. It is clear that at this stage the prior existing policy of a constitutional entitlement to citizenship for every child born in the island of Ireland had major implications for the State. The Irish Nationality and Citizenship Bill 2004, which we debated today, will give effect to a change in the law following the enactment of the constitutional amendment in June. The type of circumstances contemplated by the Deputy's Adjournment matter will no longer arise once that Bill is enacted.

Dáil Éireann debate - Wednesday, 27 Oct 2004