Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 17 May 2006

Vol. 619 No. 5

Adjournment Debate.

Mental Health Services.

I am grateful for the opportunity to raise the important issue of early intervention in psychosis. This issue arises out of a number of Government strategies and research that has taken place over the last ten to 15 years. Psychosis is an illness that affects 5% of our population. It involves detachment from reality and often leads to schizophrenia. Approximately 75,000 people in this country suffer from psychosis.

The DETECT project serves Dublin and the south-east region. It aims to reduce the period of undetected psychosis to the minimum possible time. Usually there is a delay of about two years in the detection of psychosis. The challenge is to shorten this to six months, in line with international best practice. If that is done, the chances of recovery are significantly heightened.

DETECT is a new multi-agency approach to early detection. Funding comes from the HSE but it is only 10% of what is required. The balance is being provided by the St. John of God Brothers. The HSE has provided a minimal amount of funding but statistics show there are 1,000 new cases of psychosis every year. People with psychosis are at extremely high risk of suicide; the rate is 25 times higher than in the general population. It is also a widely-known fact that this illness most commonly affects young people. Everybody is keen to reduce the incidence of suicide as it is the main cause of death among the young population.

These facts are lamented widely, and rightly so. However, according to research, there is a solution. It is early intervention and means providing services at a very early stage of psychosis. In Norway, psychosis is, on average, detected six months after a first episode; in Ireland, it takes two years. For so long as that remains the case, only crocodile tears will be shed for those who are suffering from psychosis.

I can give an example of the gap in the service. A parent telephoned DETECT from Shankill in County Dublin. She expressed her concern about her son's behaviour. Teenagers can be moody and it is sometimes hard for a parent to distinguish between a moody teenager and early evidence of psychosis. It is mainly young males who suffer from this illness. DETECT told her it could do little for her and recommended that she go to her general practitioner. However, many general practitioners in Ireland know nothing about the illness. In addition, it would be extremely difficult for this mother to persuade her son to visit a general practitioner because of a perceived mental illness.

The key is to provide funding to extend the pilot scheme, DETECT. Over three years it will cost approximately €15 million to roll out a proper programme. DETECT can reduce the stigma associated with attending services for mental illness. For example, in the CSPE course in secondary school, pupils are presented with information about physical illnesses they could suffer as teenagers but there is no information on mental illnesses. This huge gap adds to the stigma and fear associated with engaging with available services for mental illnesses. DETECT must be established on a national basis and the programme must be given the resources to provide information, inpatient care and treatment in the community. I urge the Minister of State to seriously consider these matters.

I thank Deputy Andrews for raising this matter. The World Health Organisation's 2001 mental health report confirms psychoses represent a major public health problem. Psychotic disorders include schizophrenia, drug-induced psychosis, some forms of bipolar disorder, depression and psychotic symptoms associated with epilepsy and other organic conditions. Worldwide, psychosis ranks as the third most disabling condition and poses an enormous burden in human suffering and economic cost.

Psychosis affects approximately 75,000 people, some 3% of the population. It is characterised by a loss of contact with reality leading to disturbances in perception, cognition, feeling and behaviour. Although psychosis can be a result of multiple factors including stress, withdrawal or intoxication with substances, medical conditions and mood disorders, most commonly it signals the onset of schizophrenia.

Each year more than 800 people, mainly young people, develop schizophrenia, the most common psychosis. The experience of psychosis has a profound impact on the individual, their family members and friends. A first episode of psychosis most often occurs in adolescence or early adult life, a critical period in human development and has great potential to derail education, work and social goals. The early identification and appropriate treatment of psychotic illness is the key to success of treatment and long-term prognosis.

To address the need for early diagnosis of serious mental illness in young people, DETECT, the first pilot project for early intervention in psychosis assessment was established. The service is provided in the south Dublin-east Wicklow area by the Health Service Executive, HSE, in collaboration with the St. John of God Hospital in Stillorgan. The pilot project began with an allocation of €500,000 from the 2005 HSE development funding for mental health services. The model offers an intensive multidisciplinary-based mental health assessment to confirm the diagnosis of psychotic illness.

Preventive interventions in psychotic disorders are now a realistic proposition. The approach of DETECT is consistent with the recently launched report of the expert group on mental health policy, A Vision for Change. This report is the first comprehensive review of mental health policy since Planning for the Future, and has been accepted by Government as the basis for the future development of mental health policy. A Vision for Change acknowledges the relationship between the length of time it takes to respond to an individual's first experience of psychosis and the long-term outcome for that service user. It recommends that, in addition to the DETECT project, a second early intervention service pilot project should be undertaken with a population characterised by a different socio-demographic profile. This will be undertaken with a view to establishing the efficacy of early intervention service for the mental health service.

The provision of early intervention services is also in accordance with Reach Out: The National Strategy for Action on Suicide Prevention 2005-2014. The strategy includes the development of a fast-track priority system from primary care and early intervention services to community-based mental health services. It also commits to further funding and evaluation of pilot service initiatives which aim to improve the early detection of psychological distress and mental health problems through community outreach work. This year an additional €1.2 million was allocated to the national office for suicide prevention. In 2006, €25 million was allocated to the HSE for the further development of our mental health services. In accordance with the HSE's functions under the Health Act 2004, the HSE's strategic planning and reform implementation innovation fund is considering the extension of funding for this project and a decision is expected by the end of May.

The Government is fully committed to funding a comprehensive early intervention service for psychosis which will improve the recovery prospects of service users and form part of our efforts to tackle the rate of suicide among young people.

Farm Household Incomes.

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me the opportunity to raise this important matter. I also thank the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food, Deputy Brendan Smith, for attending the House to reply. I take it then it will not be the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell.

I am sorry to disappoint the Deputy.

Farming for many is at a crossroads. With no leadership or support, its outlook is serious. The beet industry is finished. The mushroom industry is on its knees. Poultry units lie empty while dairying, the lead sector, is now experiencing serious problems. Dairy farmers in trouble are now turning in frustration to co-operative societies. The decisions taken at EU level by the then Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy Walsh, who was in charge of Ireland's EU negotiations, with the Taoiseach present, are now coming home to roost.

The export of skimmed milk powder to countries outside the EU has become uncompetitive by up to $300 per tonne, given the weakening dollar, the reduction in export refunds and the increased competitiveness from the US and Oceania. The competitors from some of those countries have a different quality control for their products. The Fischler reforms of Agenda 2000 and the mid-term review in 2003 are taking effect, with more to come on 1 July. This year sales of butter into intervention are higher than last year. It will soon reach the reduced quota limit of 50,000 tonnes. As the outlook is not good, some of the biggest and best dairy farmers are simply getting out of the sector.

Last week, the Agriculture and Rural Development Commissioner, Mariann Fischer Boel, made it clear in the Chamber that she is not aware of the seriousness of the problem. Action must be taken. We cannot allow the bureaucrats from Brussels to end the livelihoods of our farmers. The Government must also take action as it has some leeway. Even removing the disease and the dairy inspection levies would mean €600 to €800 to the average dairy farmer, a small goodwill gesture when the State's coffers are awash with money. There is no reason the levies cannot be abolished as they do not exist in Northern Ireland.

Poultry farmers are at the end of their tether, with many units closed and others partially filled, resulting in no profits. Yesterday I spoke to a poultry breeder whose hens were slaughtered because the hatchery does not want the eggs. This will head up through the system, causing changes at the factory end in the next several weeks. The problem was caused by news reporting of avian flu. It cannot be ignored by the Government as it was outside farmers' hands.

Mushroom growing was once a thriving national industry with two thirds of it based in counties Cavan and Monaghan. It has since been reduced to a small number of growers. Many of those left have made major investments in their operations with Government supports. However, if no real action is taken soon, the industry will be gone. How can a farmer be expected to sell mushrooms at less than 70 cent a pound when production costs stand at 75 cent a pound? Are farmers supposed to give a service, create employment, provide the raw materials for industry and then receive no return for their labour or investment and lose money?

When the BSE crisis broke out, the then Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry, Ivan Yates, was brought to his knees in the House. The IFA walked out of meetings. The then Government fought the case at Brussels and got improvements for Irish beef exports. The Minister for Agriculture and Food must highlight the crisis for farming at Cabinet and in Brussels to secure as much support as possible for hard-pressed farmers before it is too late. The nitrates directive has still not been imposed, something else they will have to bear. A Minister of State, a former president of the IFA when some of the negotiations took place, admitted in this House to Commissioner Fischer Boel that he can no longer afford a farm manager to run his farm. Other farm leaders are leaving farming and instead going into industry. The biggest and best are selling out and the industry is in crisis. The beet industry has gone. Do not let the others follow.

I thank Deputy Crawford for raising this issue and welcome the opportunity to outline the facts.

By any measure, 2005 was an exceptional year for the farming sector with the introduction of the single payment scheme. Aggregate farm income reached a record level of €2,765 million. This was a 24% increase on 2004, reflecting a once-off overlap in direct payments, as farmers received over €1 billion under the single payment schemes as well as almost €620 million in payments due on the old premia schemes. In addition, these farmers also received almost €570 million in rural development measures such as REPS, compensatory allowances and forestry premia. These measures brought total direct payments to €2,280 million, the highest amount ever in the history of Irish farming. These exceptionally figures fully justify the decision to decouple payments from production.

While the overlap between the single payment scheme and the old premia scheme will not be repeated in 2006, direct payments are expected to exceed 2004 levels, with increased expenditure provided for under the single payment scheme and rural development measures. It should also be remembered that expenditure by the Department this year will be over €3 billion. This level of spending is testament to this Government's commitment to Irish agriculture and our confidence in this sector's future.

This motion speaks of the need to protect farmers' incomes. This is precisely the intention of Government policy and the measures we have taken at both national and international level. Even before the exceptional increase in farm incomes in 2005, the national farm survey estimated that income on full-time family farms was €30,650. The average industrial wage, although not directly comparable, was lower at €29,620 in 2004. These figures were compiled before the exceptional increase in 2005 incomes and I very much look forward to seeing the income figures for full-time farms when they are published shortly. They will show significant further increases and will bear full testimony to the policies being followed by this Government in encouraging the development of the agricultural sector.

The Government's objective is to develop a competitive mushroom sector for the maximum number of producers. This sector accounted for over 38% of horticultural production in 2005. The funding provided by the Department is making a major contribution to the development of the mushroom sector. The scheme of investment aid for the development of commercial horticulture assists capital investment in specialised plant and equipment by mushroom producers. For the period 2000-06, mushroom producers have been approved grant aid under this scheme of approximately €6 million to support investments in the industry to the value of some €17 million. Under the marketing and processing scheme, a total of €1.62 million has been approved in grant aid to support investments to the value of €4.6 million. In addition to this, the aid paid to the mushroom producer organisations in 2005 amounted to €5 million. As Deputy Crawford said, the number of growers has reduced but the output has not decreased. The sector is worth almost €100 million in exports to the economy.

Over the last six months some parts of the European poultry industry have been experiencing market difficulties arising from the publicity surrounding avian influenza. The problem has been felt acutely in Mediterranean countries, while more northerly countries have encountered far fewer problems. In Ireland demand has improved in recent weeks and is now approximately 10% down on normal. The rates of export refunds have already been increased to extraordinarily high levels but their impact has been limited due to low third country demand.

The EU has also decided that exceptional support measures may be considered for the poultry industry. Measures under this framework will be co-funded on a 50:50 basis by the EU and the individual member states. We will shortly propose a package of support measures to the EU Commission for approval and co-funding. At political and official level, we will work to achieve the best possible outcome on the introduction of the most useful special support measures to meet the particular needs of the Irish poultry sector. The Minister and I have had constant contact with this sector and know the difficulties it has encountered. We are determined to support it.

Following a number of successful years for the Irish dairy industry on international and EU markets, 2006 is proving to be more challenging. As the situation developed over recent months, we urged the Commission on several occasions to use the market management tools in a more effective manner to ensure the overall stability of the milk sector. I was, therefore, pleased that the Commission responded to developments on the international markets by increasing export refunds for butter and whole milk powder at the end of April and again at the last milk management committee, when the tender refunds were accepted at a higher level for butter and butter oil.

Since the Luxembourg agreement of 2003 the dairy sector is operating in a new policy framework, where market forces have an even greater influence on the price paid for milk. It is critical that the sector as a whole maintains relative competitiveness and focuses on managing the transition to the next stage of intervention price reductions in July with the aim of maintaining and enhancing industry competitiveness and ultimately farm incomes.

Overall, it is clear that the range of measures taken in the specific sectors mentioned in the motion, as well as the overall results in terms of farm income, show the determination of the Government to underpin the income and viability of our farm families.

Asylum Applications.

I wish to raise the need for the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to take urgent measures to resolve the hunger strike by 41 Afghans in St. Patrick's Cathedral.

The Minister and the Government should pro-actively seek to resolve the hunger strike by the 41 Afghan men in the cathedral. To do that, there must be communication and engagement. The decision by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to approach the Department is both welcome and significant. While the Minister may not be prepared to negotiate directly with the hunger strikers, he should be prepared to accept the offer and good offices of the UNHCR in seeking a resolution to the hunger and thirst strike. I am glad he has availed of the office's services.

The hunger strike is now in its fourth day in St. Patrick's Cathedral. Eight of the hunger strikers are minors, some of whom are unaccompanied and have been in the care of the HSE for up to two years and more. A number of them have been taken to hospital, including three today, one with a suspected heart attack. The human body deteriorates rapidly without food and water.

Dean Robert McCartney, Canon Pierpoint and their staff at the cathedral have handled the hunger strikers with great consideration and sympathy, providing sanctuary in the age-old tradition of the Christian churches. The situation, however, is totally unsatisfactory and worsening rapidly. I was there until 8.25 p.m. and my colleague, Deputy Michael Higgins, has been down a number of times and we have urged them to end the hunger and thirst strike.

There are avenues that can be pursued. A window of opportunity exists because none of them have been served with deportation orders and that offers room for flexibility. The men are not attacking the Minister's officials or saying the process is wrong; they are concerned that it does not take into consideration the needs of Afghan people in their situation. As a result, their applications are refused and they have no choice but to engage private legal representation and engage in judicial proceedings in the High Court because the process has not been properly dealt with. However, they have no money to do this.

This case has brought certain issues into the open which the Minister has scope to deal with if negotiations between him and the UNHCR are maintained. Having set the process in motion with the UNHCR, which unfortunately has not answered any questions, the Minister must open up the scope of the discussions and negotiations and allow these men's direct concerns to be articulated. There is scope for a solution but communication must be maintained. The Minister and his Government must be willing to seek and ensure that a solution is found.

Lives, including those of minors and those in the care of the State, are at stake. As far as I can gather, the HSE has not received the resources necessary to deal properly with some of these young people. A total of 20% of those on hunger strike, some of whom have been on thirst strike for four days, are minors. The Minister should also take into consideration these aspects of the case.

I commend the clergymen, Residents Against Racism and the Dublin Fire Brigade for the excellent work they have carried out over the four days to ensure the men involved in this protest are looked after as much as possible. Over 40 men and teenagers are engaged in this protest. They are tired, some are very ill and some of them have, regretfully, resigned themselves to their fate. Nobody undertakes a hunger strike lightly, much less sticks with it as long as these men have done, unless he or she is convinced of the correctness and justice of the case.

This protest was brought about by the failure of the asylum system in Ireland to take cognisance of these men's case, the lack of compassion in the system, the prejudicial assumption of illegality against applicants, the blind adherence to the Fortress Europe doctrine and the failure to introduce complementary protections for individuals who fall outside the narrow convention criteria for refugee status but who may still be in grave danger should they be forced to return to their country of origin.

I call on the Minister to declare Afghanistan an unsafe destination, as the Ministers for Foreign Affairs and Defence have done by sending peacekeeping forces there. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform should also declare that nobody who fails his draconian asylum process will be returned to a war zone or an unsafe country. I doubt if Afghanistan makes the dubious EU white list of safe countries. The Minister should either meet the men or send an official from his Department to meet them. They are in his constituency, their case should be listened to and they should be granted the right to remain until, at very least, the ongoing war in Afghanistan ends.

I am grateful for the opportunity to raise this very important matter. I welcome the intervention today by the UNHCR and ask the Minister to undertake an urgent review of the entire asylum process. I visited St. Patrick's Cathedral yesterday to discover why 44 Afghans were on hunger and thirst strike. These men must be assured that the asylum process will be fully transparent so that they know exactly what is going on at all times. They also need to be reassured that a decision has not already been made to deport the group en masse and that individual cases will be given proper consideration. They also need a translator who has no difficulty with the English language.

I was horrified to discover boys, some as young as 15, pupils at Terenure College in Dublin, who were on hunger and thirst strike. I visited them with Deputy Joe Higgins and we implored them to begin drinking again. They did so while we were there because they had received news that their representatives would meet Department officials. I understand that, unfortunately, some of them have resumed their thirst strike, which I very much regret.

The men were very upset that the system did not display the transparency they expected and hoped for. They were given no explanation as to why certain decisions were being made. Someone who had been guaranteed a response within three weeks would receive it one year later. They experienced difficulties with the Department translators who did not appear to have a full knowledge of English. These difficulties are compounding the situation in which they find themselves.

They deserve a fair hearing. I saw scars resulting from abuse on some of them. Space must be created to ensure that dialogue and justice can be achieved and seen to be achieved by the Irish people. This country prides itself on its compassion and I acknowledge the compassion shown by the courageous churchmen who, although they do not approve of the hunger strike, are treating the men with compassion; Dr. Austin O'Carroll; paramedics; ambulance staff who have tended to them; and the solidarity groups who are with them.

Most of all, I ask the Minister to extend the same humanitarian concern to these men that the Taoiseach asked to be extended to Irish people without proper documentation in the US. I hope the Minister acts in this regard. This problem can be easily resolved.

I compliment all those who have given assistance to the men and children in St. Patrick's Cathedral. I have concerns about the Refugee Appeals Tribunal and the men, whom I call upon to give up their hunger strike. I call on the Minister to do what he can either to meet with these men or facilitate a further meeting between them or their representatives and his Department.

My concerns about the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, which I have previously raised, still remain. The Minister appoints the members of the tribunal, there is no independent selection or interview and I have heard that at least one member has never granted leave to remain to any individual with whose case he has dealt. I do not know if the latter assertion is true but I do know that the process is at variance with international norms.

I make a direct appeal to the men and children to give up their hunger strike. I want them to go through the full legal process which remains available to them. It is crucial that they avail of this process and do not turn away from the agencies offering help.

I call on the Minister either to meet the men or facilitate a process of discussion with them. I am heartened by the fact that some meetings have taken place to date but there are real concerns about the process. Four out of every five applicants from Afghanistan have been refused. There are concerns about delays since some of the men have been waiting for decisions for many years, concerns that their stories are not being listened to by those they meet in the Refugee Appeals Tribunal and very simple concerns about translation and their inability to make themselves clear. The desperate measures they have taken are a reflection of the desperate situation which exists in the system, which needs radical reform. It does not simply concern the problems of Afghanistan; it also concerns the problems of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. I ask the Minister to assess carefully any application made to him under section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999.

On Sunday, 14 May 2006, 34 individuals claiming to be Afghan nationals entered St. Patrick's Cathedral in Dublin and commenced a hunger strike, which they stated would not end until they were granted asylum or leave to remain in Ireland. There are approximately 40 such persons in the cathedral at the present time. No request has been received from the dean or chaplain of the cathedral for any form of State intervention to remove them. It is not true to suggest, as has been suggested in the House this evening, that some form of sanctuary has been offered or afforded to them.

I am advised that in respect of the individuals concerned, one person made an asylum application in late 2003, 18 people made asylum applications in 2004, 17 people made asylum applications in 2005 and four applications were made this year, one as recently as late March. Based on the information available, the Garda National Immigration Bureau believes that one individual in the cathedral may have been awarded refugee status and that one person may have been awarded leave to remain. As the majority of the cases in question are either in the asylum or leave to remain process, I am advised that on the basis of the names available to my Department at this stage, no individual has been issued with a deportation order.

It is important that I preface my remarks by pointing out that it has been the policy of successive Ministers for Justice, Equality and Law Reform not to comment on individual applications or groups of asylum claims from particular nationalities. That said, there are two fundamental principles underlying the asylum process. First, when asylum seekers come here and seek our protection, their cases are fairly and independently examined. Second, a deportation process after a person's case has been dealt with fairly and subject to the relevant statutory safeguards is central to the proper running of any immigration and asylum system.

Therefore, the task for the independent refugee determination agencies in the case of each individual asylum seeker is to determine whether, following investigation, he or she is deemed to fall within the terms of the refugee definition in the Refugee Act 1996 on the basis of all the information gleaned. As Deputies are aware, two independent statutory offices consider applications or appeals for refugee status, namely, the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner, known as ORAC, and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, known as the RAT. The United Nations High Commission for Refugees is given full access to the refugee determination process and can examine any case at any time to ensure that fair procedures and our Geneva Convention obligations are complied with.

The asylum process in place in the State is comprehensive and compares well to many other countries, particularly our EU partners. This fact was recently acknowledged by a former UNHCR representative to Ireland who is quoted as stating that Ireland is now a model for the new member states of the European Union and that we now have "a system which in many respects is one of the best in Europe".

Every asylum application is considered on its merits. Not only is the case tabled by the applicant considered, but a wide variety of sources are also consulted by ORAC and the RAT before making a recommendation, including information from organisations such as the UNHCR, Amnesty International, other EU member states and media and Internet sources. The assessment carried out includes determining whether an applicant has a well-founded fear of persecution, whether the persecution is related to a Geneva Convention reason, whether the applicant is unable or unwilling to return to his or her own country, what internal protection alternative, if any, might be available within that country and credibility issues, which it is extremely important to consider.

Every asylum applicant is guaranteed a right of appeal to a statutorily independent and separate body, the RAT. Every asylum applicant is also guaranteed access to legal assistance provided by the Refugee Legal Service and to interpretation services. Therefore, I find it difficult to accept the suggestion that money is an issue for these asylum seekers. There is a legal service that provides assistance to all persons with stateable cases.

It is an issue.

Under the provisions of section 17(1) of the Refugee Act 1996, the final decision in respect of an asylum application is a matter for the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform based on the recommendation of the Commissioner or the decision of the tribunal. However, under the legislation scheme, the Minister is obliged except in exceptional circumstances to accept a recommendation that a person should be given refugee status.

Regarding the processing of claims from unaccompanied minors for asylum, strong safeguards are in place, including assistance from a representative of the Health Service Executive in each case and comprehensive access to the Refugee Legal Service. Comprehensive training is provided to specialist case workers who deal with unaccompanied minors in ORAC and members of the RAT. This training, in conjunction with the training in the asylum process, has been provided in co-operation and consultation with the UNHCR.

In the course of contributions, reference has been made to the presence of minors among the group in question. While some people refer to them as children, they seem to be between the ages of 16 years and 18 years.

Or 15 years.

Whether it is permissible or appropriate for an unaccompanied minor to be allowed by adults to participate in a hunger strike or threaten self-harm as part of an organised protest is a matter not merely for those adults but also the HSE, which must form a judgment in the interests of that minor and take whatever action is appropriate to protect the minor. I wish coldly and rationally to emphasise this point.

The HSE is doing that. It is in the cathedral.

We must consider the minors' interests separately. No adult of any kind or from anywhere has the right to organise a protest in which self-harm or hunger striking is encouraged on the part of a child. There is no walking away from this. We will not be manipulated by people who are attempting to exploit minors and put them in the way of danger.

The Minister should not blame the HSE.

I am not blaming the HSE in the slightest. I have full confidence that the HSE will take every step in accordance with its statutory duty to protect minors. Others, particularly support groups, should see the wood from the trees. No group of adults or political lobby has the right to take children or minors and put them in the way of self-harm. It is fundamentally wrong and must be condemned out of hand.

Asylum applicants from Afghanistan amounted to 24 people in 2003, 106 in 2004, 142 in 2005 and 40 to the end of April of this year. After a fair and comprehensive determination process at first instance in ORAC, there were 30 grant applications, which is more than 10%, in the period 2003-06 to date. This compares to 232 refusals during the same period. At appeal stage in the RAT, the number of Afghan refugees granted status was 23 in the same period. In total, there were 53 grant applications, an undeniably high recognition rate. The number refused status at appeal was 76 during the same period. It is emphatically not the case that anyone who travelled from Afghanistan to Ireland by whatever means — there are no direct flights — can demand to remain in Ireland simply by pointing to the disturbed or dangerous conditions that may obtain in parts of that country. If that were the case, the State would be obliged to accommodate any person claiming to be an Afghan.

In accordance with section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended, a person who has failed the asylum process and been refused refugee status in the State is entitled to make representations to the Minister within 15 working days setting out reasons as to why he or she should not be deported, voluntarily leave the State or consent to deportation. This is colloquially referred to as the humanitarian leave to remain phase.

Following consideration of each case, a decision is taken on whether to deport or grant temporary leave to remain. Section 3(6) of the Act requires the Minister to consider 11 factors, including representations received by or on behalf of the person, family and domestic circumstances, humanitarian considerations etc. The safety of returning a person, or refoulement as it is referred to, is fully considered in every case when deciding whether to make a deportation order. This means that a person shall not be expelled from the State or returned in any manner whatsoever to a state where, in the opinion of the Minister, the life or freedom of that person would be threatened on account of his or her race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform uses extensive country of origin information drawn from different independent sources, including the UNHCR, in evaluating the safety of making returns to third countries. I am satisfied that the procedures followed in all cases ensure that all asylum requests are considered in a comprehensive and fair manner.

At the request of the individuals concerned, a meeting was held with senior officials of my Department on Tuesday afternoon at the headquarters of the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service. The meeting was attended by some of the persons in the cathedral, representatives of the Church of Ireland and the chairperson of the Afghan Social Cultural Centre and the Afghan Society of Ireland. Absolutely no negotiations took place at this meeting. It presented an opportunity for the individuals in question to communicate their issues and concerns to the Department.

At the meeting my officials, while clarifying that they were not in a position to speak about individual cases, took the opportunity to outline the comprehensive statutory framework and procedures governing the asylum and leave to remain process, which I have just explained to this House yet again. It was also pointed out at the meeting that the Government is not in a position to concede to demands from the protestors with regard to the awarding of residency status in this State. No decision will be taken, except in the context of the normal statutory framework governing the asylum and leave to remain process.

It was further pointed out that concessions of the sort demanded would have major negative consequences for the asylum process. At times there can be over 100 nationalities in our asylum system and to concede to such group demands from the protestors would have inevitable negative consequences for the entire refugee determination process. There is no doubt that it would also act as a pull factor in terms of a major increase in asylum applicants on the basis of a perception that they would benefit from similar action. I am not going down that road and the Belgian experience is warning enough for me and the Government of the consequences of making bad decisions in the face of such tactics.

The UNHCR representative in Ireland offered to meet a representative group of the protestors this evening. That meeting has taken place and I am grateful to the representative for the intervention.

I reiterate what the Taoiseach said in this House yesterday, that we simply cannot operate our asylum and leave to remain process on the basis of caving in to threats of hunger strikes or the occupation of historical buildings. I have, in the past, been confronted with threats of hunger strike by people who have sewn their mouths shut to demonstrate their determination. I have been confronted with threats of suicide, self-harm and so forth. It has been our invariable practice to refuse to be influenced by such tactics. No democratic society can do business on that basis and the Irish people would not tolerate us capitulating in such a fashion.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.45 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 18 May 2006.
Top
Share